The Activision Blizzard conference call
Following yesterday's big Activision Blizzard news, executives from Activision and Vivendi Games held an 8:30am conference call explaining the merger, the product of over a year of discussion between the two companies. There are a few major takeaway points from the conference call, most of which involve Blizzard. Those worried that the merger could affect Blizzard's sterling reputation for quality -- and those still unconvinced despite Blizzard's FAQ on the topic yesterday -- will be pleased to know the company will operate as its own entity. The deference paid to Blizzard's properties throughout the call -- not to mention the new comapany's name itself -- serves as a testament to the value of Blizzard in the arrangement.
Will Blizzard make World of Warcraft for consoles? "There are no plans to release anything on the console side. Blizzard's focus is on the PC side. If we were to release anything on the console side, that would be managed by the Blizzard side of the business. At some point in the future, if it made sense to talk to the Activision side of the business about that, we would certainly do so. At this point, there are no plans to release any of the Blizzard franchises on the consoles," says Blizzard boss Mike Morhaime.
What about building new Blizzard titles using Activision IPs? In a very roundabout fashion, Morhaime essentially said, Not happening unless we want it to. What about Activision bringing their own properties online with a little encouragement from Blizz? Activision CEO Bobby Kotick said, "As far as our properties online for the future, I don't think we're comfortable commenting on what we intend to do with our properties in terms of the online exploitations today. Perhaps as we get closer to the closing, we'll provide some more visibility in that regard." Perhaps...
One of the key discussion points was Blizzard's huge success (revealed in yesterday's press release to be revenues of $1.1 billion in '07, operating margins of over 40% and approximately $520 million of operating profit). That success was previously hidden within Vivendi Games which was, in itself, buried within the enormous Vivendi company as a whole. The new entity puts Blizzard front and center. One financial analyst noted, "Most of the world that I follow materially underestimated the operating values of Blizzard, obviously. They were well-hidden."
Despite what would seem to be market saturation with over 9 million WoW subscribers, Morhaime says they continue to grow their subscriber base, citing nascent broadband penetration "in territories like Russia, Eastern Europe, and India." For those stats junkies out there, he cautions, "I don't think we're going to be in the habit of giving out future subscriber projections."
According to Kotick, the new company will employ "around 6000 and half of those will be engaged with product development." What about Sierra, Sierra Online, and Vivendi Mobile, the other more or less unsung components of Vivendi Games? Besides calling it a "significant investment," Kotick said they're "very confident and committed" to making those brands profitable.
So with Blizzard and Activision each sticking to their own specialty, what benefit will there be besides bragging rights? Figuring out how to break into the Asian markets. Morhaime: "Blizzard has developed great expertise over the years in both online gaming and really as the only Western publisher to achieve significant success in Asia. These are some areas that could potentially benefit Activision if, in no other way, simply having conversations on how we've achieved this." Kotick followed up that sentiment later, saying, "We think there's a tremendous opportunity to leverage the institutional expertise at Blizzard and at the Blizzard offices in Korea and China to our benefit."
And finally, when asked "Why now?" Kotick ended the Q&A portion of the call with the following explanation, which we've transcribed in its entirety: "When you think about the growth and opportunity for market expansion that are taking place today; when we think about the new hardware -- the Wii, the Xbox 360, the PlayStation 3; changes that are taking place online with broadband penetrations increasing at very rapid rates across all geographies, for the first time you can step back and honestly say that the mass market that we've all been looking for in interactive entertainment, is arriving. Things like physical interface, or better production values, or the transformation from a solitary experience to a more social gaming experience, these are all catalysts for much bigger and broader audiences than we've ever seen before. And it's best for us today to be, on a combined basis, to be the number one company in the category with the highest operating margins, the greatest portfolio of assets across all gaming platforms and all geographies, to take advantage of all those growth opportunities we see in the coming years."
Read - Activision Blizzard slideshow [Warning: PDF link]











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
gonk @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:16AM
diablo 3 on 360 and ps3 CONFIRMED
Jerk Face @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:23AM
LOL
I love when people do that.
Hack @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:23AM
The entire analysis makes perfect business, but isn't that the general problem with EA? Their games went from high-risk high-reward, to low-risk steady cash flow models that made better business sense. Given the massive success of WOW, it sounds like Blizzard is "buying an EPS blip" similar to the AOL Time Warner merger.
Robert Hackett
Games Product Manager
Panasonic Avionics Corporation
Zsavior @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:34AM
So basically you feel Vivendi dumped and investment into Activision do get continual earnings off of their mediocre but very popular franchises. Since they have so many share of Activision they get new revenue from games like COD or Guitar hero but it doesn't over shadow or interfere with Blizzard day to day.
May question is this, why would they need this EPS blip,WOW already rakes in the dough, couldn't they have just dumped that money into blizzard and created better IPs to make money off of rather than investments into Acitivision games? They put 18.5 billion dollars into the idea that activision will churn out more of the same and bring in steady profit. Rather than throwing 18 billion dollars at Blizzard who already have a willing and loyal audience why?
copa @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:45AM
"May question is this, why would they need this EPS blip, WOW already rakes in the dough, couldn't they have just dumped that money into blizzard and created better IPs to make money off of rather than investments into Acitivision games?"
That is exactly the question I have. Outside of Infinity Ward, there are no great sources of creativity under the Activision umbrella. With Blizzard execs at the helm and Blizzard money in the bank, I think Vivendi would have been better served taking the time to build rather than buy.
GRANTED @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:55AM
nothing lasts for ever. which is why when companies are flush with excess capital, they diversify. it's basic economics.
focusing on one product or product line is generally high-risk. activision has a number of great-selling franchises; a safe bet.
Sam @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:24AM
does this now mean that none of the classic blizzard games will never be on steam?
Intentless @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:26AM
You may want to restructure that statement... Double negatives and all... Are you saying 'Does that mean none of the classic blizzard IPs will ever be on Steam?' Or 'Does that mean the classic Blizzard IPs will never be on steam?'
Otherwise I'm confused as to what you mean.
Sam @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:31AM
oh em gee
I was ASKING if the Blizzard IPs(...) will ever be on Steam now that they've been bought out and Gabe Newell has been expressing his intent to add more and more older games to its downloadable library. Its probably unlikely with the feud Valve has with Vivendi. Christ.
Cabal @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:15PM
Actually, this probably won't have any effect on the chance of Blizzard games appearing on Steam since they were already owned by Vivendi before the merger. What this merger may cause is all future support from Activision on Steam to be cut off.
copa @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:26AM
N'Gai got further clarification that the Blizzard games will have the Blizzard label on them, and the other games will have the Activision label on them. So we don't have to worry about the name Blizzard showing up anywhere on Tony Hawk Twelve: Wanking on the Half-Pipe.
I still question this deal from Vivendi's point of view. It is entirely possible that Activision has peaked in value for the next several years, meaning that now is not the best time to buy.
What are Activision's premiere franchises? Guitar Hero and Call of Duty.
Activision is clearly stripmining the Guitar Hero franchise a la Tony Hawk, while the creative leadership has moved to Rock Band. I believe we will see declining sales numbers for subsequent iterations.
Call of Duty 4 is a phenomenal accomplishment. But we are probably two years away from Infinity Ward's next great feat, with a crap COD5 filler for the holidays.
In short, Activision will have a great holiday, but I'm not convinced they have WOW-type staying power to sustain this through the next year or two.
jsn @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:32AM
stripmining is a great term for what Activision is doing to Guitar Hero. GH3 will likely be the last for the series I purchase. Everything about the game screams cash-in. After playing Rock Band it's quite clear where the creativity and passion for that type of series is it.
elpmis @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:35AM
Is this truly a merger or is it merger like when Activision "merged" with Raven Software, CentreSoft, NBG, Neversoft, Expert Software, Treyarch, Z-Axis, Luxoflux, Infinity Ward, Shaba Games, Vicarious Visions, Toys for Bob, Beenox, and RedOctane. As far as I'm concerned Activision can't get anything out the door half decent without partnering up with another developer that will do all the hard work, or buying them out all together... oops, I mean "merge"
gonk @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:39AM
vivendo owns activision now
Christopher Grant @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:52AM
those weren't mergers, those were acquisitions.
elpmis @ Dec 3rd 2007 12:07PM
Christopher Grant: I know, hence the quotes around merged
gonk: thanks
WiNG @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:46AM
If WoW ever came to consoles, the world's economies would falter until all monies on Earth were controlled directly by Blizzard.
Blizzard would be making like, $666 billion a year.
WOOT! @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:51AM
You know who LOVES this news?
My stock portfolio.
I gained $1,000 in the first 5 minutes of the opening bell this morning thanks to this merger. THANK YOU ATVI!!!
Christopher Grant @ Dec 3rd 2007 11:53AM
i can haz ur munny?
larzini @ Dec 3rd 2007 12:44PM
How much longer does Activision have the rights to the Marvel franchises (Spider-Man, X-Men, etc)? Might the Blizzard braintrust be the best equipped to build an MMORPG containing those comic creations, and a good one at that? According to the Wikipedia entry for Marvel Universe Online, as of Nov. 13, 2007, "several sites...have indicated that the project is expected to be canceled within the next few weeks."
Hmmm...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Universe_Online
DCGaymer @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:42PM
So when the marketing people finally get their names on it....will they call the company,
ActiBlizzard?
Blizzavision?
ActiZard?
The Artist formally known as Jesus @ Dec 3rd 2007 1:51PM
I'm leaning toward Blizzavision right now