Smed Denies False Story about SOE being sold to Indian Company - Page 6

Calthine · 12-24-2007, 03:27 AM

The Value of Intellectual Property, Intangible Assets and Goodwill - Thomson Scientific

dawy · 12-24-2007, 08:55 AM

I notice the same storys back with a more up to date date if you will 23 rd of dec as opposed to the 17th or whatever it was of novmember..time will tell i suppose.

Dasturminator · 12-24-2007, 11:23 AM

Ok, so enough about whether or not it's going to happen. How exactly do you think it will affect us the players and EQ2?. ATM SoE is a company staffed by Americans based in San Diego, SoE is owned by a company that's owned by some Japanese guys.

If this deal goes through SoE will be a company staffed by some Americans based in San Diego, owned by a company that's owned by some Indian guys.

In my experience most Indian businessmen are extremely shrewd and able at what they do. This guy is apparently running one of the most successful corporations in India.

Maybe we'll see SoE go for the MMOG market more aggressively than before with adverts on TV and such?.

LFG · 12-24-2007, 11:50 AM

I need to say something else also.

I've been accused, both on the FoH site and the official forums, of falsifying the posts on this site by John Smedley, including the one in this thread.

The FoH post is now locked so I couldn't respond to it, but I did respond to the one on the official forums:

SOE Selling to India? How will this affect us?

Quote:

Unlike what was alleged on the FoH forums and now above, I've personally confirmed that the person who posted as "Smed" on my site was the actual, real John Smedley. He registered from and posted from an internal SOE IP number that could not be spoofed, and confirmed his registration from an email sent to his official, actual email address. That was John Smedley who posted, and not someone else. I have a very strong rule against imposter posting on my site, and it is strictly and frequently enforced to prevent people from impersonating SOE employees and well known players on my site.

I'm not sure what else I could do to prove this. Actually, when Smed posted, I'd been in game for many hours, and it was Niber who first noticed it. Smed posted from an internal IP at SOE that matches all the IP of all other SOE posters on this site. I wouldn't destroy my reputation by making something like this up.

Thanks

Kenji · 12-24-2007, 12:44 PM

300 million for a company with revenues of 150 million? Not going to happen. That's not even in the ballpark.

If Sony was even considering selling at that price they would have bidders lining up and raising the price.

Imagine a Wii line @ Best Buy or Toys R Us on a Sunday morning.

Jalathan · 12-24-2007, 12:51 PM

ok, people seem to have no clue on Revenues... A company can have revenues of 150 million and be losing money.

Revenue != profit

Most companies sell on some multiple of book value (and revenues are rarely considered, other than for possibly supporting debt to acquire). I'd give you the exact forumla, but my worksheets are at work and its been far too long since I had to calculate it by hand ;)

Calthine · 12-24-2007, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFG

I've been accused, both on the FoH site and the official forums, of falsifying the posts on this site by John Smedley, including the one in this thread.

The tinfoil hat people will believe what they want to, no matter what anyone says. But you can also point them to this post on the Station forums by Grimwell referencing Smed's denial:

Breaking News?

Or the Reuter's article in which SOE denies the allegation:

Sony Online denies firm for sale report | Reuters

Or have them take Smed up on his offer and e-mail him at the address he posted.

tomthumb · 12-24-2007, 04:17 PM

Quote:

300 million for a company with revenues of 150 million? Not going to happen. That's not even in the ballpark.

"Young men should learn accounting"

Warren Buffet

dawy · 12-24-2007, 04:19 PM

It does seem to me at least $300 million dollars is not much cash MS paid nintendo $250 million for Rare and comeon they last made a good game 10 years ago.

But it doesnt look like this story is going away anytime soon does it

Jalathan · 12-24-2007, 04:34 PM

oh, I'm not saying it isn't low (IMO) but the logical basis some people used to come to their conclusions was the issue at question ;) Revenue is never a good way to measure up an acquisition target, market value and book value are far better measures.