Apple must have accidentally hired someone with foresight.
This kind of move is way overdue.
This kind of move is way overdue.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple is involved in negotiations to acquire EA...and they should buy them.
- Thread starter Imhotep397
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What move? EA made the move and tried to sell itself to Amazon, Disney, Apple and a couple of others. This wasn't initiated by Apple. It would also mean Tim Cook saying goodbye as CEO... fat chance that's going to happen. Case (thread) closed, Apple won't buy EA.
Having major titles in macOS will be very helpful to gain the gaming market especially with killer titles available only on macOS. But Apple is more interested in a mobile gaming market tho...
Apple is not involved in negotiation. Apple WAS involved in negotiations. And, “involved in negotiations” doesn’t have to mean anything other than “EA sent Apple a letter”.
That’s not representative of what I said. What I said: “Sony and Nintendo are small companies in the grand scheme of things.”
Relatively, would you put Sony and Nintendo at par with Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon and Facebook?
The app post purchase money is as good as gone... continued aggression with with Epic will just lose more money with no potential to save or generate new revenue.
If Apple does end up acquiring EA and jumps headfirst into gaming, if only primarily to bolster their VR product category, the people that don't want Apple pursuing this have a great hack...don't buy the games.
Epic sued Apple (kinda think you know that) the outcome was that Apple can no longer collect it's customary 30% of ALL iOS app purchases exclusively and developers/users are free to seek credit issuers in competitive third party spaces to use in their iOS apps with Apple getting none of that money.
The iOS money is Apple's claim to financial fame right now given all that it contributes to the bottom line. The only thing stopping that from going toes up is an appeal on a prayer that some judge will find some procedural flaw made by the previous judge in the Epic vs. Apple case to overturn the decision...that ain't happening.
The point is that it's in Apple's best interest to find a new cash cow or two before Epic vs. Apple verdict is finalized.
(This is even before considering the fact that Apple has neglected supporting 3D development/developers /broadly/ while 3D has been moving at warp speed for the last twenty years)
Last edited:
Apple currently still charges 15 and 30%, so I don’t believe that’s what the outcome says
The gaming market is like iPod to iPhone. Tho Apple already gains a lot of money from iOS gaming, they really need to acquire a game company in order to compete with MS, Sony, and more. Look what MS did with Activision/Blizzard. So who knows? In future, Apple might not be able to compete in a gaming industry as they invested nothing in gaming.
This is a chance.
This is a chance.
Pretty sure that's what it says while it's being appealed it's not settled so Apple's making sure to collect the in-app purchase money while they still can. That's why Apple is still bitterly blocking Fortnite from iOS.Apple currently still charges 15 and 30%, so I don’t believe that’s what the outcome says
-businessinsider.com
In a response, Apple's attorney said the company isn't even considering that reinstatement until the legal spat between the two companies, "becomes final and nonappealable."
And that may not be for another five years, Sweeney said.
"'Fortnite' will be blacklisted from the Apple ecosystem until the exhaustion of all court appeals," he tweeted on Wednesday, "which could be as long as a 5-year process.""
Apple won the part of the case that says they have the right to charge a commission for the service. Which was an assumed outcome because if Apple can’t charge a commission, that would have brought challenges against every other company that charges commissions.
Well, Apple has enough cash on hand to buy Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo. Sometimes, buying all of your competitors doesn’t make sense, because it puts you under insane regulatory attention.
And, Unity post-WETA acquisition is really interesting. But, I have often wondered how closely they’re holding their cards to their vest, when evangelizing to potential developers and publishers and storefronts?
Last edited:
Sure in the "grand scheme" of market value they might be overshadowed by other companies, heck even oil companies could be larger then Sony, so what does that metric prove, not much. But in terms of gaming they are the largest studio and this is an area they are above anyone else. Just because some other larger company could buy them or buy themselves into the gaming market doesn't mean they could be successful.
This is detached. Why is it relevant? Because microsoft, a very real, non oil (god only knows why you found this relevant) multi-trillion dollar company is actively buying the largest independent third party publishers, studios, and engines, whilst disproportionately buying up manufacturing capabilities for systems and already monopolizes the operating system market, to further isolate the market and remove competition. This is a monopolistic approach that smaller companies, I.e. Sony and Nintendo, can’t compete against. If left unregulated this will require another multi-trillion dollar company to thwart. Success can absolutely be bought, especially when you’re sleazy enough to deprive your competitors of resources. Ideally, they’d be stopped from buying up the market, but that seems unlikely.
Why because you are alluding, even though vaguely, to any sizable company can just buy into the gaming market and what be successful, that is why I mentioned oil companies. Get it?
Sure MS is a threat to Sony and the rest of the players in the gaming market, but they already have their foot into it. There is no surprise here, just smart business, and no they didn't just buy that success they built it up. Unlike Apple who has no idea what to do with the game market and AAA games on it's own platform. So in that context there is no fit for EA and Apple.
The rest of your reply just reeks of Apple Fanboi protectionism who can't seem to grasp the ying and yang of what the computer tech industry is like. Yes you are very detached, good luck to you!
Please cite any pro apple agenda of any kind that I have alluded to here. Cite it.
My reasons are purely anti-monopolistic. Period. I don’t care who, at all, stops microsoft.
How did they not buy it up their success? Their success begins almost exclusively from buying bungie, to now the largest publisher in the industry. Their history in all branches are from consumption of competition. Christ they’ve been in court over it. Your baseless blind defense wreaks of projection.
Edit: You admit it’s bad for Sony and Nintendo. So emerged does that leave competition unless Google, Apple, Facebook or Amazon join? Hypocrisy.
If anything How MS managed Bungie and Rare (compared to Zenimax) should show that MS has figured the studios are better off with light touches in recent years.
I don't really get why they would. I guess to get EA games in the Apple Arcade or something? Apple's computers barely run basic games, so unless they plan to dive deep into Mac gaming, I don't see it happening.
We can go back and forth, but in the end whatever the commission rate will be it will net nowhere near 30% percent per transaction they've been getting which means they will be needing to find a new cash cow.
Well, as long as you don’t consider 27% close.
As the market rate of transaction processing is 3%, for developers making more than 1 million a year Apple can just remove the processing fee and is still free to charge 27%.