Square-Enix in bid for Eidos.

[Dan]

Article: http://kotaku.com/5152117/square-enix-t ... omb-raider

Eidos still has the IP rights to the Thief series, so I'm a bit worried I'll never see another Thief game again. Not that I care to after the last one, but still...

[ainsoph9]

I can just imagine it: Hitman as drawn by Amano Yoshitaka and scored by Uematsu Nobuo (who a friend of mine will incidentally see in concert in a couple of months). Then, the next Kingdom Hearts will have Lara Croft in it, which will thus effectively get Mickey Mouse drooling over her. Minnie will get jealous, go yandere in the process, and make the game rated "M" for "Mature."

[b0mb3r]

my fantasy why Eidos?!

[Dan]

DAMN! Eidos stock doubled overnight! Now they're worth almost as much as the Square bid.

[Darklor]

Square-Enix in bid for Eidos.

Is that bad? At least a win for Square-Enix wouldnt be as bad as a win for EA... or?

[Dan]

Eidos is know for FPS/cpmbat oriented games, Square produces mostly RPGs. I can't see that kind of experience helping my beloved Thief franchise.

[ainsoph9]

DAMN! Eidos stock doubled overnight! Now they're worth almost as much as the Square bid.

Here is something about trading stocks that most people probably do not know. When companies go out of business, you will generally see their stock drop like a sack of potatoes on Jupiter. However, some time before they actually do go out of business, you will generally see the value of the stock rise in a spike. Many traders will use this to their advantage to cash out on a dying dinosaur, so to speak. This way, they can recoup any losses they have as investors and potentially make a profit. After this final spike, you can generally kiss the company goodbye...unless you are an American automaker. In which case, you just beg the government for money to bail your butt out. Do I sound bitter? Am I bitter? YES!!! However, in the case of a buyout, I just find it more fun to watch people run around with their money like chickens with their heads cut off.

[Beware the talking cat]

Well, this is a special case; since a buyout has been announced, anyone who can buy a piece of that stock and expect to sell it for a lot more than they paid--the only way to lose money is if the buyout doesn't go through--which is all the more unlikely because a large number of people just bought this stock for the sake of selling it in they buyout.

[Rectifier]

Here is something about trading stocks that most people probably do not know. When companies go out of business, you will generally see their stock drop like a sack of potatoes on Jupiter. However, some time before they actually do go out of business, you will generally see the value of the stock rise in a spike. Many traders will use this to their advantage to cash out on a dying dinosaur, so to speak. This way, they can recoup any losses they have as investors and potentially make a profit. After this final spike, you can generally kiss the company goodbye...unless you are an American automaker. In which case, you just beg the government for money to bail your butt out. Do I sound bitter? Am I bitter? YES!!! However, in the case of a buyout, I just find it more fun to watch people run around with their money like chickens with their heads cut off.

Yeah...my dad works for a auto parts manufacturing firm that supplies parts for GM. Thanks for hating me and my family for having financial troubles.



*Do you have any idea how many people work in the auto manufacturing sector who would lose their jobs if those firms went under? No? Then shut the poke up.

[ainsoph9]

Here is something about trading stocks that most people probably do not know. When companies go out of business, you will generally see their stock drop like a sack of potatoes on Jupiter. However, some time before they actually do go out of business, you will generally see the value of the stock rise in a spike. Many traders will use this to their advantage to cash out on a dying dinosaur, so to speak. This way, they can recoup any losses they have as investors and potentially make a profit. After this final spike, you can generally kiss the company goodbye...unless you are an American automaker. In which case, you just beg the government for money to bail your butt out. Do I sound bitter? Am I bitter? YES!!! However, in the case of a buyout, I just find it more fun to watch people run around with their money like chickens with their heads cut off.

Yeah...my dad works for a auto parts manufacturing firm that supplies parts for GM. Thanks for hating me and my family for having financial troubles.



*Do you have any idea how many people work in the auto manufacturing sector who would lose their jobs if those firms went under? No? Then shut the poke up.

I do not hate you nor your family nor your financial troubles. Being fresh out of college, I understand financial woes all too well because of the fact I have a mountain of debt gained from almost no financial support.

In addition, practically all of my mother's side of the family either works for GM or has worked for GM. My uncle on my father's side is a mechanic as well. I am all too familiar with the financial woes of the auto workers from having them as family members. I also currently work with people who have worked for GM or other auto makers.

Also, I lived in the Flint, Michigan area for the past 24 years, where that moron Michael Moore supposedly hails from. I know what happens to places where businesses go under - they become slums if no other businesses come into town. So, I do understand what happens when people lose their jobs and how many people this would effect, especially after having this issue shoved down my throat constantly by the news. Frankly, I blame the news for over-hyping the issue on the economy, which has caused people to overreact and make trades based on emotions, not intellect.

Despite all of this, I simply just do not agree with the way that the situation is being handled. Frankly, what makes the auto makers in the United States that special? In other words, I see no reason at all that they should get special treatment. If you run your business poorly and mismanage it with mass incompetence, why should the government and essentially the taxpayers have to bail your butt out of bankruptcy? Any other business that fails such as the mom and pop dry cleaner down the street goes out of business. It does not matter what the circumstances are. This is one of the most basic rules of business and economics. However, somehow the American auto industry does not apply here because they are the American auto industry! Perfect circular logic, right? If this trend of bailing everybody out of debt continues, I would like to know how the government is going to pay for my college loans and any other debt I will acquire.

I believe that right now that everyone is being affected by this recession (at least in the United States). Personally, I was supposed to be hired onto a company for a permanent job. Now, I will lose that employment in a few months tops. So, I know what it is like to have your job security and finances threatened. I have been in this situation for probably the past five years or so. I can empathize with you on a certain level. However, I do not think that I should receive special treatment for it. I also think that it does not help our situations either to point fingers at one another and saying who has it worse. Rather, I believe that it is through hard work and smart work that we will make through this recession, not by looking to the government for a savior.

[Dan]

I agree with anisoph. However, the way I see it, if you're bailing out a company, they have to make serious changes and concessions. I believe the auto industries got themselves into this mess in the first place. If American companies produced cars that people wanted and didn't pay their workers so much, things definetly would not have ended up like this.

[Rectifier]

Ok, let's say you're right.

Go find multiple people with enough capital and balls to enough fill the void of the major American automakers.

The immediate answer is: You can't.

[ainsoph9]

Actually, it would not surprise me if Japanese automakers like Toyota and Honda would move in on that market. To be perfectly honest, I have not heard a single person say that they want to buy a domestically made car in a long time. The general public consensus that I have found is that domestic cars are just not well-made.

Also, in all truth, I think that instead of throwing a bone to the automakers here for the short term, it would be much wiser to re-invest that money elsewhere for the long term. Here is my prediction: the automakers will waste the money. It would not surprise me, given their history, that they will either use it to line the pockets of company executives or throw a bone to the union. If the automakers here wanted to truly fix their problems, they would tell the unions off. I believe that paying for unionized retirees is a significant percentage of the cost per car. Not only this, it is practically a joke among the general public about how shiftless and lazy your average unionized worker in the auto industry is. Now, I am not saying that they are all this way, but I do not think that the general perception is that far off here. So, if these companies want to survive, they need to battle a mindset, not their competitors. The mindset seems to be: "Since we are a major automaker in the United States, we deserve everything on a golden platter for no effort or cost at all to us." If companies like GM can break away from this mindset, then they might learn a little about how to manage themselves correctly.

When you compare this mindset to other companies, especially foreign automakers, you will find a huge difference in the costs and mindsets. The foreign automakers are much more ambitious overall. Given that tenacity, I do not think that it is far off to say that they eventually would fill the void. If not them, maybe another industry would come through. You would be amazed at the power of venture capitalists. Now, I am not saying that such people could bring the economy back to where it was: an over-inflated balloon. However, they would do the nation justice in the long run. You are right. In the short term, almost nobody could fill the supposed "void." Yet, the short term is only part of the picture. In the short term, giving huge government bailouts to companies who have failed big-time is a good idea. In the long term, it is a huge mistake because many of these companies will not learn from their mistakes. Also, in the long term, other smaller businesses will come in and stimulate the economy. One of the beautiful things about the economy is that it is most self-correcting. It just needs time. The government is not the answer to this correction nor are corporate bailouts.

[Dan]

Your two points, brand reliability and overpaid unions (translating to a higher price for an automobile) are exactly was I was thinking of when I said serious changes need to be made. Unions were made long ago to protect the workers, but now those are unnecessary. As for reliability, I did my research and I've decided a Toyota Camery is actually pretty reliable and is a decent price. Win-win, which is what everyone wants, right?

[Rectifier]

You can debate those issues as long as you want, it does not change the fact that right now America needs the Big Three to stay afloat.