Really? Is that because Nintendo currently has more hardware sales than you and Sony combined? Is this an admission of basically a third party takeover attempt? I don't know that Nintendo would...
"It's just taking a long time for Nintendo to see that their future exists off of their own hardware..."
Really? Is that because Nintendo currently has more hardware sales than you and Sony combined?
I say "until recently" as our former MS BoD member ValueAct has been heavily acquiring shares of Nintendo and I've kept in touch with [ValueAct CEO] Mason Morfit as he's been acquiring. It's likely he will be pushing for more from Nintendo stock which could create opportunities for us.
Is this an admission of basically a third party takeover attempt? I don't know that Nintendo would take kindly to that.
I don't like the idea of Microsoft owning more of the gaming sphere.
This isn't the first time, and it won't be the last time either. Microsoft is such a "corporate" company it's frankly amazing that any of their consumer-facing efforts ever work. There is so much...
This isn't the first time, and it won't be the last time either. Microsoft is such a "corporate" company it's frankly amazing that any of their consumer-facing efforts ever work. There is so much Microsoft cringe out there it's practically a genre.
To be fair, devs are also kind of consumers, and they make some amazing developer tooling. They can make a solid product when they put their minds to it.
it's frankly amazing that any of their consumer-facing efforts ever work.
To be fair, devs are also kind of consumers, and they make some amazing developer tooling. They can make a solid product when they put their minds to it.
Wouldn't be the first time MS did that, anyone else remembers elop and Nokia? Dude was basically a MS installed CEO that made them only make Windows phones, when at the time even Samsung was doing...
Wouldn't be the first time MS did that, anyone else remembers elop and Nokia? Dude was basically a MS installed CEO that made them only make Windows phones, when at the time even Samsung was doing both Windows and Android phones.
if Nokia had made an android phone with how good their hardware design was at the time maybe it wouldn't have tank their stock leading to MS acquiring them.
Keep in mind this was in 2020 (likely before or during early Activision talks) and this happens all the time. Even pre-Xbox MSFT infamously tried to buy Nintendo back in 2000 and they were laughed...
Keep in mind this was in 2020 (likely before or during early Activision talks) and this happens all the time. Even pre-Xbox MSFT infamously tried to buy Nintendo back in 2000 and they were laughed out of the room (metaphorically. Maybe a bit literally too).
I wouldn't really be taht worried about Nintendo selling unless we get multiple Wii U generations in a row or a lot of the old guard dies off. TBH I'm betting the latter happens first, and that's still probably 20-30+ years out (hopefully. Miyamoto is 70 and Aonuma is 60. Meanwhile Sakurai is a mere 53 years old despite being a huge pioneer).
"The unfortunate (or fortunate for Nintendo) situation is that Nintendo is sitting on a big pile of cash, they have a [board of directors] that until recently has not pushed for further increases...
"The unfortunate (or fortunate for Nintendo) situation is that Nintendo is sitting on a big pile of cash, they have a [board of directors] that until recently has not pushed for further increases in market growth or stock appreciation."
This is very telling of Microsoft's strategy. The source below shows that not only is this guy talking about getting more aggressive with the growth and development strategies for Nintendo, but they also want the literal pile of cash Nintendo sits on:
"Buried in reams of financial data is the revelation that Nintendo have 812.8 billion Yen (£6.7/$10.5 billion) in the bank - enough for it to take a 20 billion Yen loss (£163/$257 million) every year until 2052. Then there's almost 469 billion Yen (£3.8/$6.0 billion) held in premises, equipment and investments. When that runs out - we're in the year 2075 by this point - they've got some of the most valuable intellectual property in gaming to sell off before the company goes out of business." https://www.gamesradar.com/nintendo-doomed-not-likely-just-take-look-how-much-money-its-got-bank/
I do think that Nintendo should possibly get a little more aggressive with their game and software development by updating some of their practices and designs, but I don't believe mixing with Microsoft would be the best way to do that. They should update their culture a bit, get some new people in, and make the change from the inside out. I am hopeful they will do that since this acquisition never happened.
I've heard about how Nintendo would be fine taking big losses for 50 years, so thank you for digging up an article with the actual numbers! It just hammers in why Nintendo would have to be foolish...
I've heard about how Nintendo would be fine taking big losses for 50 years, so thank you for digging up an article with the actual numbers! It just hammers in why Nintendo would have to be foolish to sell to Microsoft, or anyone else for that matter. They're financially set for decades to come, and at the current pace have years of guaranteed incoming revenue.
I would appreciate them updating some of their practices and culture, but at the same time, it works for them enough to be a major powerhouse and household name. If anything, I'd like them to return to some of their older practices in terms of hardware quality. The Switch is fun, but it's definitely not made of good old Nintendium and taking it outside feels risky at times.
Nintendo has a weird history with innovation. They've always been this weird mix of slow-moving and experimental. And they're way older than most people realize. Yesterday was the company's 134th...
Nintendo has a weird history with innovation. They've always been this weird mix of slow-moving and experimental.
And they're way older than most people realize. Yesterday was the company's 134th birthday. For 70% of the company's existence they didn't make video game consoles.
Yeah. While they're slow to adopt stronger hardware to match the standards of other current-gen consoles, they're generally more willing to do big experiments. Dual screens with the DS, motion...
Yeah. While they're slow to adopt stronger hardware to match the standards of other current-gen consoles, they're generally more willing to do big experiments. Dual screens with the DS, motion controls with the Wii, the hybrid format with the Switch... And can't forget the Virtual Boy, even though it flopped. Even the Wii U, while it also flopped, was also pretty high quality. Playing Nintendo Land showed a lot of potential. I think it was just too specialized and weak for most third party developers to bother unless developing directly for it.
I think they're able to be more experimental because they've cemented their place in the gaming industry. They don't actually care about the competition all that much, so they don't feel a need to constantly pander to consumers like Xbox and Playstation. It's both a strength and a weakness.
Also differences in economy. Some Japanese companies made heavy focuses on the west because the Yen was stagnant for 20+ years. Despite that globalization, there's a big incentive for JP companies...
Also differences in economy. Some Japanese companies made heavy focuses on the west because the Yen was stagnant for 20+ years. Despite that globalization, there's a big incentive for JP companies to hold their cash instead of investing a bunch into domestic stock. It also means that any domestic shareholders won't care about explosive growth over steady profits and slow rising; you need to play the long game there unlike all these US companies tripping over themselves.
They should update their culture a bit, get some new people in, and make the change from the inside out
They are slowly doing this too. Legends Arceus* was the supposed "B team" with a lot of new blood, and much of Kirby and the Forgotten Lands involved newer people, including the lead composer as a departure from Jun Ishikawa.
Nintendo has an absolutely amazing employee retention rate (even for Japan where the retention rates are absurdly high to begin with) so they clearly care about fostering future talent
*yes, I am aware that Pokemon is not fully owned by Nintendo, but I'm sure a 33% shareholder has some sway on what gets made and who is involved
Wow. Just, wow. I don't see Nintendo ever bothering to sell to Microsoft. Along with cultural differences in the Japanese corporate world versus American, Nintendo also has no reason to sell since...
Wow. Just, wow. I don't see Nintendo ever bothering to sell to Microsoft. Along with cultural differences in the Japanese corporate world versus American, Nintendo also has no reason to sell since it has so much money. It has a solid place in the market, selling it would just be a short-term profit that would be dwarfed by the guaranteed lifetime of income.
Also, I think they'll be deeply offended by the content of these emails. So if the possibility did exist before, it's gone now.
I'm reminded of that scene in Ford vs. Ferrari where Ford tries to purchase Ferrari. On another note, I really hope that Nintendo goes private in response to this, seeing as how Microsoft is using...
I'm reminded of that scene in Ford vs. Ferrari where Ford tries to purchase Ferrari.
On another note, I really hope that Nintendo goes private in response to this, seeing as how Microsoft is using ValueAct as a surrogate to try to push Nintendo into an acquisition.
Edwin Evans-Thirlwell In the latest unredacted document oopsie stemming from the US Federal Trade Commission's efforts to stop Microsoft acquiring Activision Blizzard, an email from then Microsoft...
Edwin Evans-Thirlwell
In the latest unredacted document oopsie stemming from the US Federal Trade Commission's efforts to stop Microsoft acquiring Activision Blizzard, an email from then Microsoft gaming CEO Phil Spencer has surfaced in which he discusses the idea of buying Nintendo.
Excerpts from the email
The email was sent 6th August 2020 to Microsoft's current chief marketing officer Chris Capossela and commercial chief marketing officer Takeshi Numoto.
It begins with Spencer speculating that Nintendo may be receptive to approaches, thanks to one of Microsoft's allies, San Fran investment fund ValueAct, buying up Nintendo stock and so, attempting to steer the company's board towards accepting an acquisition.
"Takesji, I totally agree that Nintendo is THE prime asset for us in Gaming and today Gaming is our most likely path to consumer relevance," the email begins.
"I've had numerous conversations with the LT of Nintendo about tighter collaboration and feel like if any US company would have a chance with Nintendo we are probably in the best position. The unfortunate (or fortunate for Nintendo) situation is that Nintendo is sitting on a big pile of cash, they have a [board of directors] that until recently has not pushed for further increases in market growth or stock appreciation.
"I say "until recently" as our former MS BoD member ValueAct has been heavily acquiring shares of Nintendo and I've kept in touch with [ValueAct CEO] Mason Morfit as he's been acquiring. It's likely he will be pushing for more from Nintendo stock which could create opportunities for us.
"Without that catalyst I don't see an angle to a near term mutually agreeable merger of Nintendo and MS and I don't think a hostile action would be a good move so we are playing the long game. But our BoD has seen the full writeup on Nintendo (and Valve) and they are fully supportive on either if opportunity arises as am I."
Yep, he just threw Valve and their multi-billion-dollar Steam platform in there too. The idea of Microsoft buying Valve has been much-bandied-about and rumour-mongered over the years. Gabe Newell brushed the idea off when RPS spoke to him about it back in 2007.
"I love this discussion and value you looking at the opportunities here. At some point, getting Nintendo would be a career moment and I honestly believe a good move for both companies. It's just taking a long time for Nintendo to see that their future exists off of their own hardware. A long time.... :-)"
The FTC-Microsoft proceedings have proven a treasure trove of revelations about the inner workings of vast corporations, from the release windows of future Elder Scrolls games to Microsoft's dislike of console exclusives. Kaan rounded up a few of them for posterity.
Imagine what it would actually look like if this happened. Your "Nintendo Switch by Microsoft" shitting out llm-derived pleasantries while it saves your thumbprint to the cloud. You boot and it...
Imagine what it would actually look like if this happened. Your "Nintendo Switch by Microsoft" shitting out llm-derived pleasantries while it saves your thumbprint to the cloud. You boot and it goes "it's a me, windows", and a little red hat constantly pings you to turn on One-Drive. Teams is integrated so you get to get work messages on your game console, a feature no one asked for. You have to constantly tell the thing not to activate like fifteen kinds of telemetry. An update comes out about once every two days and often takes about an hour to do. Then the product is scrapped two years in because the games blew and the marketing barely happened. The red hat pinging thing becomes a Windows feature.
The message is just so completely out of touch lol. "Oh hey Nintendo got lots of money, wouldn't it be cool if that was our money", with zero consideration of like, offering any new products or doing anything cool for their customers. Customers aren't part of the calculus. Nor is Nintendo, really - that bit about Nintendo not pursuing stock growth to me is very revealing of where ms' priorities are at. I wouldn't be looking at a company that behaved that way like they're ignorant or something - clearly they've got other priorities, is what that means, and there's no effort there at all to even recognize what those might be.
Dislikes console exclusive but just released a game as an Xbox PC exclusive. I don't trust they will let any big releases come out on anything other than their own console and PC Since it's not...
Dislikes console exclusive but just released a game as an Xbox PC exclusive. I don't trust they will let any big releases come out on anything other than their own console and PC Since it's not just on Xbox they will try to say it's not "console exclusive because it's on another platform as well" which while true it's still their own platform at the end of the day. I'm not fully against them buying Acti-blizz because they haven't really been doing that great as of late, most things are PC anyway other than CoD, so I'm kind of hoping they can get them back on track to where they used to be as a developer and not how they have been in more recent years I feel because of Activision. At the same time I don't trust they will put much on PlayStation or Nintendo because it's competition for their own platforms.
Please, no. Although, I suppose it would be better than EA acquiring Valve.
Yep, he just threw Valve and their multi-billion-dollar Steam platform in there too. The idea of Microsoft buying Valve has been much-bandied-about and rumour-mongered over the years. Gabe Newell brushed the idea off when RPS spoke to him about it back in 2007.
Please, no. Although, I suppose it would be better than EA acquiring Valve.
Really? Is that because Nintendo currently has more hardware sales than you and Sony combined?
Is this an admission of basically a third party takeover attempt? I don't know that Nintendo would take kindly to that.
I don't like the idea of Microsoft owning more of the gaming sphere.
I agree
This really screams of execs who understands nothing about what make Nintendo and also nothing about Japanese corporate culture.
This isn't the first time, and it won't be the last time either. Microsoft is such a "corporate" company it's frankly amazing that any of their consumer-facing efforts ever work. There is so much Microsoft cringe out there it's practically a genre.
My favourite MS cringe
To be fair, devs are also kind of consumers, and they make some amazing developer tooling. They can make a solid product when they put their minds to it.
Wouldn't be the first time MS did that, anyone else remembers elop and Nokia? Dude was basically a MS installed CEO that made them only make Windows phones, when at the time even Samsung was doing both Windows and Android phones.
if Nokia had made an android phone with how good their hardware design was at the time maybe it wouldn't have tank their stock leading to MS acquiring them.
Keep in mind this was in 2020 (likely before or during early Activision talks) and this happens all the time. Even pre-Xbox MSFT infamously tried to buy Nintendo back in 2000 and they were laughed out of the room (metaphorically. Maybe a bit literally too).
I wouldn't really be taht worried about Nintendo selling unless we get multiple Wii U generations in a row or a lot of the old guard dies off. TBH I'm betting the latter happens first, and that's still probably 20-30+ years out (hopefully. Miyamoto is 70 and Aonuma is 60. Meanwhile Sakurai is a mere 53 years old despite being a huge pioneer).
"The unfortunate (or fortunate for Nintendo) situation is that Nintendo is sitting on a big pile of cash, they have a [board of directors] that until recently has not pushed for further increases in market growth or stock appreciation."
This is very telling of Microsoft's strategy. The source below shows that not only is this guy talking about getting more aggressive with the growth and development strategies for Nintendo, but they also want the literal pile of cash Nintendo sits on:
"Buried in reams of financial data is the revelation that Nintendo have 812.8 billion Yen (£6.7/$10.5 billion) in the bank - enough for it to take a 20 billion Yen loss (£163/$257 million) every year until 2052. Then there's almost 469 billion Yen (£3.8/$6.0 billion) held in premises, equipment and investments. When that runs out - we're in the year 2075 by this point - they've got some of the most valuable intellectual property in gaming to sell off before the company goes out of business."
https://www.gamesradar.com/nintendo-doomed-not-likely-just-take-look-how-much-money-its-got-bank/
I do think that Nintendo should possibly get a little more aggressive with their game and software development by updating some of their practices and designs, but I don't believe mixing with Microsoft would be the best way to do that. They should update their culture a bit, get some new people in, and make the change from the inside out. I am hopeful they will do that since this acquisition never happened.
I've heard about how Nintendo would be fine taking big losses for 50 years, so thank you for digging up an article with the actual numbers! It just hammers in why Nintendo would have to be foolish to sell to Microsoft, or anyone else for that matter. They're financially set for decades to come, and at the current pace have years of guaranteed incoming revenue.
I would appreciate them updating some of their practices and culture, but at the same time, it works for them enough to be a major powerhouse and household name. If anything, I'd like them to return to some of their older practices in terms of hardware quality. The Switch is fun, but it's definitely not made of good old Nintendium and taking it outside feels risky at times.
Nintendo has a weird history with innovation. They've always been this weird mix of slow-moving and experimental.
And they're way older than most people realize. Yesterday was the company's 134th birthday. For 70% of the company's existence they didn't make video game consoles.
Yeah. While they're slow to adopt stronger hardware to match the standards of other current-gen consoles, they're generally more willing to do big experiments. Dual screens with the DS, motion controls with the Wii, the hybrid format with the Switch... And can't forget the Virtual Boy, even though it flopped. Even the Wii U, while it also flopped, was also pretty high quality. Playing Nintendo Land showed a lot of potential. I think it was just too specialized and weak for most third party developers to bother unless developing directly for it.
I think they're able to be more experimental because they've cemented their place in the gaming industry. They don't actually care about the competition all that much, so they don't feel a need to constantly pander to consumers like Xbox and Playstation. It's both a strength and a weakness.
Also differences in economy. Some Japanese companies made heavy focuses on the west because the Yen was stagnant for 20+ years. Despite that globalization, there's a big incentive for JP companies to hold their cash instead of investing a bunch into domestic stock. It also means that any domestic shareholders won't care about explosive growth over steady profits and slow rising; you need to play the long game there unlike all these US companies tripping over themselves.
They are slowly doing this too. Legends Arceus* was the supposed "B team" with a lot of new blood, and much of Kirby and the Forgotten Lands involved newer people, including the lead composer as a departure from Jun Ishikawa.
Nintendo has an absolutely amazing employee retention rate (even for Japan where the retention rates are absurdly high to begin with) so they clearly care about fostering future talent
*yes, I am aware that Pokemon is not fully owned by Nintendo, but I'm sure a 33% shareholder has some sway on what gets made and who is involved
Wow. Just, wow. I don't see Nintendo ever bothering to sell to Microsoft. Along with cultural differences in the Japanese corporate world versus American, Nintendo also has no reason to sell since it has so much money. It has a solid place in the market, selling it would just be a short-term profit that would be dwarfed by the guaranteed lifetime of income.
Also, I think they'll be deeply offended by the content of these emails. So if the possibility did exist before, it's gone now.
I'm reminded of that scene in Ford vs. Ferrari where Ford tries to purchase Ferrari.
On another note, I really hope that Nintendo goes private in response to this, seeing as how Microsoft is using ValueAct as a surrogate to try to push Nintendo into an acquisition.
Edwin Evans-Thirlwell
In the latest unredacted document oopsie stemming from the US Federal Trade Commission's efforts to stop Microsoft acquiring Activision Blizzard, an email from then Microsoft gaming CEO Phil Spencer has surfaced in which he discusses the idea of buying Nintendo.
Excerpts from the email
Author says: you can read the original email - brought to my attention by Tom Warren of the Verge twitter X link
The FTC-Microsoft proceedings have proven a treasure trove of revelations about the inner workings of vast corporations, from the release windows of future Elder Scrolls games to Microsoft's dislike of console exclusives. Kaan rounded up a few of them for posterity.
All the new things we've learned from Microsoft and the FTC's internal documents at court by Kaan Serin
Imagine what it would actually look like if this happened. Your "Nintendo Switch by Microsoft" shitting out llm-derived pleasantries while it saves your thumbprint to the cloud. You boot and it goes "it's a me, windows", and a little red hat constantly pings you to turn on One-Drive. Teams is integrated so you get to get work messages on your game console, a feature no one asked for. You have to constantly tell the thing not to activate like fifteen kinds of telemetry. An update comes out about once every two days and often takes about an hour to do. Then the product is scrapped two years in because the games blew and the marketing barely happened. The red hat pinging thing becomes a Windows feature.
The message is just so completely out of touch lol. "Oh hey Nintendo got lots of money, wouldn't it be cool if that was our money", with zero consideration of like, offering any new products or doing anything cool for their customers. Customers aren't part of the calculus. Nor is Nintendo, really - that bit about Nintendo not pursuing stock growth to me is very revealing of where ms' priorities are at. I wouldn't be looking at a company that behaved that way like they're ignorant or something - clearly they've got other priorities, is what that means, and there's no effort there at all to even recognize what those might be.
This kind of problem is not specific to Microsoft, but wow, did I feel that hypothetical. It's funny because it (would be) true.
Dislikes console exclusive but just released a game as an Xbox PC exclusive. I don't trust they will let any big releases come out on anything other than their own console and PC Since it's not just on Xbox they will try to say it's not "console exclusive because it's on another platform as well" which while true it's still their own platform at the end of the day. I'm not fully against them buying Acti-blizz because they haven't really been doing that great as of late, most things are PC anyway other than CoD, so I'm kind of hoping they can get them back on track to where they used to be as a developer and not how they have been in more recent years I feel because of Activision. At the same time I don't trust they will put much on PlayStation or Nintendo because it's competition for their own platforms.
Please, no. Although, I suppose it would be better than EA acquiring Valve.