Capcom lost its takeover defense

[DarkMatt]

I'm going to ask again.

Why? Why Nintendo? Why even?

Why would they even do that?

[Garro]

^
Yeah yeah I'm pretty sure the first thing you said is exactly right. Because of that, though, couldn't Microsoft take control of Capcom anyways by buying 51% of of its stocks? Like you said, it wouldn't technically be buying the company. Of course, I really have little to no understanding of these laws but it seems like it could be a loophole.

Sorry, I said purchase but the actual law says it doesn't allow international companies to takeover japanese companies. My bad.

[Mikepjr]

I'm going to ask again.

Why? Why Nintendo? Why even?

Why would they even do that?

While i don't know why they would, i know why they should.
They could benefit a great deal in the long run.
There are plenty of good IPs under Capcom's belt.. but they just need to be in the right hands.
Let's put it like this though.. if not Nintendo.. then who? I don't trust a lot of companies to do those IPs any justice.

[Megar]

I personally feel Sony would do a fine job with Capcom's IPs but I also think it's just better for Nintendo. Most people care about Capcom for Megaman, Street Fighter and Ace Attorney and Nintendo would be able to handle those the best.

[Julia Pseudo]

^
Yeah yeah I'm pretty sure the first thing you said is exactly right. Because of that, though, couldn't Microsoft take control of Capcom anyways by buying 51% of of its stocks? Like you said, it wouldn't technically be buying the company. Of course, I really have little to no understanding of these laws but it seems like it could be a loophole.

Sorry, I said purchase but the actual law says it doesn't allow international companies to takeover japanese companies. My bad.

Oh fair enough then. I guess that puts Microsoft and any other American companies out of the picture, then.

[Mable]

I personally feel Sony would do a fine job with Capcom's IPs but I also think it's just better for Nintendo. Most people care about Capcom for Megaman, Street Fighter and Ace Attorney and Nintendo would be able to handle those the best.

IIRC i saw a video in youtube from Nintendo showing of Ace Attorney Trilogy which features the 3 first games from it. So yeah Nintendo would be good.

[Raster]

Nintendo or other Japanese companies wouldn't have to buy the entire company but only 51%. That way they can make Capcom games exclusive to their hardware.

[Magician]

Hypothetically if I were to get an item for 49% off without realizing it was 3 times overpriced before the price cut, I'm still not getting a bargain. Percentages couldn't be enough to determine whether taking over Capcom is really profitable, and how much of the company is really worth taking.

I'm skeptical about the possibility that any company would want to inherit a company that loses money. People keep blaming Capcom's incompetence alone, but it seems to me that it's not just an easy fix for another company to just come in and take over. It's quite possibly a very complex and intricate problem that might yet take years to solve and more losses incurred before MAYBE seeing a profit.

Wishful thinking suggests to me that Nintendo's OWN development teams would do well with Capcom franchises, but Capcom is much more than just its franchises. That leads me to wonder if they'd fire the previous developers or if that's even an ethical decision or if that would itself cause negative PR and bad business for them.

[Raster]

I don't think they can acquire the IP's alone without buying a percentage of the company itself. With that said, maybe Nintendo can do what Microsoft did with Rare and only buy more than 50% of Capcom and make their IP's exclusive to Wii/DS hardware.

Anyway, you can't just select Capcom IP's and buy them because that's not how it works. Nintendo would have to hire previous Capcom developers.

[Magician]

I don't think they can acquire the IP's alone without buying a percentage of the company itself.

When I questioned how much of the company is really worth taking, I was saying that the potential sum for 51% of the company's shares might not be worth only a fraction of Capcom's desirable operations because it would also inherit the undesirable ones. I was not saying that the alternative of only acquiring the desirable parts was even possible, except with regards to firing employees (which I pointed out could itself be undesirable).

Nintendo would have to hire previous Capcom developers.

Feel free to call my my knowledge of businesses and public corporations into question, as I'm not exactly a guru on the subject, but you aren't phrasing this in a way that suggests (to me) that you understand what I'm saying. By my understanding, the developers would still be employees of Capcom, which would be under control by the largest shareholder who, with 51% of the company's stocks, would be capable of vetoing every decision by the other shareholders, which suggests to me that the developers could be fired by that majority shareholder. I strongly doubt that this would be a good decision, but I only perceive that it's possible.

For the sake of clarity, everything in my post was intended to point out why I feel this whole idea of Nintendo taking over Capcom is not likely. Even the part of my post regarding Nintendo's development teams and Capcom franchises, I attributed to "wishful thinking" to suggest I believe it's a fantasy that relies on huge leaps in logic.

With that said, maybe Nintendo can do what Microsoft did with Rare and only buy more than 50% of Capcom and make their IP's exclusive to Wii/DS hardware.

If there is any evidence that what Microsoft did with Rare is a good example for how companies can handle takeovers, I might as well just fall on my sword, right now, and leak the juices of my people.

JOKING ASIDE, you do mean Wii/DS as in their subsequent incarnations, right? How do you figure that selling Capcom games on Wii and DS would be a good idea?

[Raster]

which suggests to me that the developers could be fired by that majority shareholder. I strongly doubt that this would be a good decision, but I only perceive that it's possible.

It would only be ethical not to fire those developers who probably have WIP projects on their hands and experience with their franchises. Perhaps they can make Capcom a developer ala Retro Studios? They release their games on Nintendo platforms exclusively but their development team is still the same, 'detached' from Nintendo's in-house development teams. So basically Capcom would become a second-party for Nintendo.

If there is any evidence that what Microsoft did with Rare is a good example for how companies can handle takeovers, I might as well just fall on my sword, right now, and leak the juices of my people.

I'm not really going to advocate Microsoft's takeover of Rare, because that was done really poorly, but I brought up the takeover plan because that's basically what Nintendo can do.

JOKING ASIDE, you do mean Wii/DS as in their subsequent incarnations, right? How do you figure that selling Capcom games on Wii and DS would be a good idea?

By Wii/DS hardware I meant Wii U/3DS and all branches of the Wii/DS brands.
Nintendo's game library needs a breath of fresh air, and IP's like Megaman and even Resident Evil would be great additions. Plus it would help boost Nintendo hardware sales if they make the Capcom games exclusive.

And I wasn't necessarily directing that post at yours, so I'm sorry for the misunderstandings.

[DarkMatt]

I'm going to ask again.

Why? Why Nintendo? Why even?

Why would they even do that?

While i don't know why they would, i know why they should.
They could benefit a great deal in the long run.
There are plenty of good IPs under Capcom's belt.. but they just need to be in the right hands.
Let's put it like this though.. if not Nintendo.. then who? I don't trust a lot of companies to do those IPs any justice.

Real life isn't like Monopoly.