Blizzard entertainment and Activision to merge


Recommended Posts

SANTA MONICA, Calif. & PARIS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Activision, Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI) and Vivendi (Euronext Paris: VIV) today announced that they have signed a definitive agreement to combine Vivendi Games, Vivendi's interactive entertainment business -- which includes Blizzard Entertainment’s? World of Warcraft?, the world’s #1 multi-player online role-playing game franchise -- with Activision, creating the world’s largest pure-play online and console game publisher. The new company, Activision Blizzard, is expected to have approximately $3.8 billion in pro forma combined calendar 2007 revenues and the highest operating margins of any major third-party video game publisher. On closing of the transaction, Activision will be renamed Activision Blizzard and will continue to operate as a public company traded on NASDAQ under the ticker ATVI.

Activision, one of the world’s leading independent publishers of interactive entertainment, is best known for its top-selling franchises, including Guitar Hero?, Call of Duty? and the Tony Hawk series, as well as Spider-Man™, X-Men™, Shrek?, James Bond™ and TRANSFORMERS™. Blizzard Entertainment, a division of Vivendi Games, has projected calendar 2007 revenues of $1.1 billion, operating margins of over 40% and approximately $520 million of operating profit. Blizzard owns the #1 multi-player online role-playing game franchise, World of Warcraft, which currently has over 9.3 million subscribers worldwide. Blizzard’s World of Warcraft, Warcraft?, StarCraft? and Diablo? games account for four of the top-five best-selling PC game titles of all time. Vivendi Games also owns popular franchises, including Crash Bandicoot™ and Spyro™. Pro forma for calendar 2007, Activision Blizzard expects to generate approximately 70% of its revenues from owned franchises. As a result of the business combination, Activision Blizzard expects to have the most diversified and broadest portfolio of interactive entertainment assets in its industry, positioning the combined company to capitalize on the continued worldwide growth in interactive entertainment.

Source: Businesswire

Well, this can't be good.

The companies behind Call of Duty and World of Warcraft are merging in a deal which could shake up the global video games industry. Activision and Blizzard have said they will form "the world's most profitable games business" in a deal worth $18.8bn (?9.15bn).

US-based Activision also makes hit console games such as the Tony Hawk series and Guitar Hero.

Nine million people pay a monthly subscription to play World of Warcraft.

I dunno why you'd think that. Activision puts out some pretty great games. I'm actually less a fan of Blizzard than Activision, but only because I'm just not really interested in the games they create, not because I think they aren't a great quality developer.

-Spenser

I don't like this one bit. It's just one more step towards giant conglomerate companies monopolizing the gaming market. Too many smaller companies and games are going under because they don't have the money and resources to compete with companies like this. In the long run it only stifles competition and innovation.

I don't like this one bit. It's just one more step towards giant conglomerate companies monopolizing the gaming market. Too many smaller companies and games are going under because they don't have the money and resources to compete with companies like this. In the long run it only stifles competition and innovation.

I agree, it's getting tougher and tougher for companies to compete. It doesn't just take a good game anymore, but a massive marketing engine backing it, for example.

After reading that FAQ all I get out of it is, "Everything will stay the same".

What's the point?

What WILL it change?

Money.. Just means the money will go to 1 central pot. And activision can put their name on the game. Also Activision is HUGE as far as Publishing goes. Just means they can now Publish Blizzards' games.

lol World of Call of Duty anyone?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • add $200 and get DWARF 3 model add $2000 and visit scientists center in your town add $20000 and visit the biggest telescope in Chile
    • Guess it's one of those things best used by devs to thoroughly test stuff.
    • is it all upside down there? traffic lights reverted too?
    • Bluesky COO warns social media regulations could destroy competition from small startups by Paul Hill Fears that increasing government control of social media risks regulatory capture by the biggest social media firms were raised again recently. Bluesky’s chief operating officer said in an interview that social media bans for children and tighter regulations for social media firms risk creating a world where there are only a few social media platforms run by companies with the deepest pockets. Regulations on social media firms have been very lax since they appeared for mainstream users in the 2000’s. This gave Meta, Snapchat, and Google time to build up their user bases and get entrenched, with Meta being the most successful. Now that Meta has succeeded, it has been attempting regulatory capture. By pushing for more regulations of social media, Meta hopes to make it more difficult for rivals to challenge it. For its part, it doesn’t need to worry about the cost of regulation because it has a lot of money to spend, whereas startups do not. Speaking to CNBC, Rose Wang, Bluesky’s chief operating officer, said: “I support the protection and the safety of youth, the question that we have then is at what cost, because essentially what I’m scared of is in the long term, we’re headed to a world where there’s about three to five platforms, and extreme heavy regulation of those platforms, and basically the whole compliance teams of these platforms are 10 times the size of our entire team. So, basically, we’re living in a world where it’s almost impossible for smaller entrants to come in and build healthier spaces. These platforms have led to a place where the bottom line is the thing that drives what they do... so I understand why governments have to step in and regulate, because the platforms have done nothing right.” She said that while she is not against regulation, there needs to be more channels between the small to mid-sized players and regulators to help protect them. She says that big tech players, on the other hand, “who we know are circumventing regulation,” need to be regulated. Essentially, the Bluesky position is one of nuance, rather than absolutes. While Bluesky’s proposal may preserve competition in the social media space, it still doesn’t address the massive privacy implications these age verification measures introduce, such as handing over sensitive identity documents to access age-gated content. Source: CNBC
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      249
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      71
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      70
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!