Rumour: Vivendi To "Accelerate Expansion" In Video Games, Ubisoft The Main Target

Well I think everyone saw this coming regarding ubisoft. I assume they have plans to acquire other gaming developers/publishers too then? That is kinda worrying.

I think it could be bad news should Vivendi acquire Ubisoft.

Even if i recognise this could not be good, i'm not really interested in the developments of the matter since i don't like Ubisoft games at all.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE So they'll go from being #3 on the worst developer list to maybe #2 or #1? Could also improve them since Ubisoft have been putting out trash for years now

Crazy you can lose something you started to the Stock Market just because someone has more money then you. Doesn't sound right to me....

@Menchi187 Why would it improve Ubisoft? Vivendi aren't in this to make quality games. They are in it for pure money. That is all. Remember they are the ones that created Activision Blizzard as a single company and ran it for several years.

@Spoony_Tech Welcome to the world of business. It's not a nice place, but if you don't want to lose your company there is one simple solution. Don't put it on the stock exchange. Simple.

I love scrambled eggs

@Spoony_Tech it ceases to be yours when you sell it to the public.

And then this, which is an object lesson for anyone clamoring for Nintendo to buy 'x' publisher or developer:

"Chairman Vincent Bollore has spent nearly 15 billion Euros ($16 billion) on acquisitions recently, including purchasing large stakes in Italian firms Telecom Italia and Mediaset. Despite this, Vivendi's share value has fallen by roughly 3 percent over this period, apparently due to doubts over how Bollore's strategy will pan out."

The doubts are spawned from the fact that it is an ironclad law of business that 90% of M&As end up being net losses within 5-years, even when there are apparent synergies involved (just ask MS, who has spent untold billions acquiring companies over the past 30-years that have amounted to nothing--even better--or is it worse?--ask Yahoo.)

@FragRed Yeah I know but tell that to greedy board members.

My problem with takeovers like this is that most of the time the Bigwigs in charge have no idea what the consumer wants. All they'll focus on is the profit margin, which will mean more rushed games and more DLC and increased badwill towards the companies involved.
And to be honest Ubisoft needs all the goodwill it can get at the moment.

Wheres Microsoft to save the day. Why can't microsoft save Ubisoft like they did with Rare?

Hope that ubisoft don't get taken over by videnti. Especially when it just a takeover ease investors .

If this does go through, can't Ubisoft do an Activision Blizzard and purchase back the majority of their shares in the future?

@AlphaJaguar sure, if they're willing to pay the asking price.

Well, they don't own activision anymore. So we don't have to worry about the potential for Actiblizzubi or Blizzubivision to dominate the entirety of gaming.

I almost feel bad for the guillemot family. Then I think of all the crappy moves they have made and don't care. I still have not bought rayman legends. I'm tempted to buy the switch version. Maybe.

Well the rate that Ubisoft have been churning out substandard games recently they've become a Vivending machine.

@FragRed Activison and Blizzard have gone through a lot of pains and struggle to rid themselves from Vivendi.

Vivendi is a terrible company. They just suck the money dry out of good performing units, crippling them, just to satisfy their own stakeholders.

Activision and Blizzard were crippled and suffocating under Vivendi ownership for years.

So I totally understand the Guillemot family trying to prevent any form of hostile takeover by Vivendi.

I think Vivendi needs to keep their dirty, greedy hands out of Ubisoft. Ubisoft doesn't want it and should this happen there goes one of the few remaining quality third parties we still have.

I wish you all the luck you need ubisoft. I like your games. And of course i want it to stay that way.

@Yorumi Blame the customers for buying their games if you disagree with their business practises. They can churn out another recycled broken open world game with micro transactions and it'll still sell millions. Who's to blame here?

Look, it's been ages since I've bought one of their games with their always online DRM policy, but the last thing they need is a hostile takeover.

That's worrying. I know Ubisoft hasn't always had the best track record but that's rare for any company. They make some awesome games and every company stumbles at one point or another. Wishing you luck Ubisoft!

I didn't know Vivendi had actually managed to snatch up the majority share of Gameloft.

Hostile take-overs like that are not really good form, but the Guillemot brothers are VERY wealthy, and they know how public trading works, so I can't really feel bad for them either.

I like Ubisoft and know they release a lot of samey games and milk AC far too much. But Ubisoft do make the odd unique game that other developers wouldn't dream of making (for example For Honor)

@FragRed So you're against a company that could potentially bring a change to an awful company already? Got it

It's to be expected though, Nintendo fans are usually the only one to jump to their defense since they're basically the only 3rd party support they get.

@Menchi187 You should read what @Jeronan said to me earlier in the comments if you think Vivendi will do good for Ubisoft before bashing me or Nintendo fans for jumping to 3rd party defence.

This is bad news, but I'm not surprised.

This would be a very serious blow to the gaming market in general. As many mentioned above, Vivendi formerly owned Activision, and Sierra, two once great publishers. They ran Sierra into near bankruptcy, merged it with Activision briefly before liquidating it, bought Blizzard, merged it into Activision, and bled them deep, deep, deep into debt before being cast off/bailing, and Activision working hard (and cutting most of their assets) to stabilize after nearly shuttering.

Vivendi is not simply corporate bureaucracy that crushes creativity like Konami. They're simply a leach looking for sustenance for whatever brief time they can suckle from the host before detaching and seeking a new host. Even from this report, their position is that of a failing company, losing value, with no long term plan, and managerial chaos, seeking to rapidly expand their media empire for the sole purpose of appeasing jittery shareholders so they don't throw the management overboard. They want Ubi for image and cash, so they can drain it, milk it, and then dispose of it. And then there will be TWO major publishers.

In all likelihood the Guillemots would bail instantly, half the creative staff would bail as well, they may start a new company, smaller, probably better, and that company would be the real Ubisoft (creatively, but without the IPs), while Vivendi would have all the IP and milk them in the style of old school film license games.

You can't buy success...errr...can you?

Hope they don't screw with the games or something worse. Ubi isn't exactly the best at releasing their games without glitches and bugs, but I have a few favorites from them.

Ubi isn't my favorite dev in the world, but Vivendi is practically a death sentence for any company they take over. I wouldn't even wish them upon EA.

Ugh. Vivendi acquiring Ubisoft would be horrible. Ubi isn't my favorite company by any means, but at least some of their games have a little soul. I had a blast playing ACIV last year.

I read the article, the bollore group owns vivendi, a news corp wannabe, and havas a advertiser. VIVENDI owns canal+ a cable company like Foxtel, they also own 2 telcos Orange and one other, they almost got italiatel but the regulators stepped in, Vivendi manage Daily motion, a youtube alternative, Universal music and 67% of Gameloft, a mobile developer... Ubisoft is only the next victim in a long list of defunct games developers and publishers.
Sierra was killed after a merger with Activision Blizzard (only Activision, Blizzard and universal got under vivendis thumb.

Vivendi was loading up Activision Blizzard with debt to shift the debts off their ballance sheet, they have shown to be toxic to the games industry.

Even I wouldn't wish this to my worst enemy.

How can Vivendi trigger a takeover bid at 30%, they would still be a minority shareholder, how much of the company do the Guillemots own?

@Morph The Guillemots have a 9% share and 15% voting rights. Vivendi has been the majority shareholder for a while

Business is business. The Guillemots have various strategys to defend themselves if Vivendi keeps planning on a takeover bid, like the good ol' poison pill.
Anyway, the guys should have seen this coming and they haven't tried to rebuy Ubi's stock to strengthen their position, which is usually what people try to do to avoid a takeover. They could have rebought the stock and then unlisted - Dell did it on 2013.

@Destron When you get to 30% you have to make an offer to buy the remaining 70%. It doesn't mean that a takeover bid would be successful or even that everyone has to accept your bid.

Of course if you refuse but enough of your fellow shareholders accept then you find yourself in a position where the bidder (Vivendi in this case) owns the majority of shares and is effectively running the company. So you as a minority shareholder might still own shares but are likely to have little influence on the actual management of the company.

The point of the rules is to stop the likes of Vivendi slowly creeping up their stake past 50% and never offering the minority shareholders a fair option to get out.

A lot of times investors get to 29% and stop for various reasons. You can yield significant influence on the operation of the business at that point and your very presence on the threshold of the trigger for takeover can keep the share price high.