Let us talk about Collector's Edition but this time...

[ArcherofAiur]

Thats what I thought. In that case all they need to do is march down into the basement and ask Blizzard what he thinks the game should be priced at.

[newcomplex]

Quick question. Who is "Blizzard"?

My guess would be Micheal Morhaine, Rob Pardo and Frank pierce as the main shareholders.

The only power Bobby has that blizz doesn't is he is prez of the Actiblizzions shareholders board. However, that position gives him very little power in terms of telling his company what to do, instead, most of his exec power comes from his CEO (of activision, not actiblizzion) status.

[Neon]

My guess would be Micheal Morhaine, Rob Pardo and Frank pierce as the main shareholders.

The only power Bobby has that blizz doesn't is he is prez of the Actiblizzions shareholders board. However, that position gives him very little power in terms of telling his company what to do, instead, most of his exec power comes from his CEO (of activision, not actiblizzion) status.

As far as I know, Blizzard Entertainment Inc. is wholly owned by Activision Blizzard Inc.

Blizzard may enjoy a certain amount of autonomy, but only as long as they are doing good financially.

I have some fears regarding the CE. Until now Blizzard's CEs were a way better deal than most other CEs out there, more intended to building a fanbase than to maximizing profit. I can imagine Activision might want to change that and I would not expect too much resistance from Blizzard itself.

[Kacaier]

What the heck are you guys talking about?

Blizzard's handler, media giant Vivendi, bought majority share of Activision (with their consent), and then merged Activision with Vivendi Games, which includes Blizzard. I suppose since the deal was primarily between Blizzard and Activision rather than Vivendi Games, they chose the combined name of Activision Blizzard and Vivendi then proceeded to collate all their gaming assets under that Activision Blizzard.

This merger, however, is merely for finance. Both Activision and Blizzard still work separately with their own hierarchy. While true, Activision does have control over Activision Blizzard, this is only for the overall company in managing shares ONLY. Activision Blizzard is a holding company, in that its role is owning the stocks of Activision and Blizzard. Fortunately, that does not include managing Blizzard itself (though, I believe the rest of Vivendi Games or Sierra was placed into Activision's control). The big kahuna is Vivendi, with majority shares in Activision Blizzard, making it Vivendi's b****, aka subsidiary.

So, Blizzard still has the same boss as it did before the merger, just with an additional middle man of Activision Blizzard. And man, was that a mouthful.

[newcomplex]

http://kotaku.com/5426474/report-mod...00-in-november

Just found that. Was semi relevant. It doesn't include steam sales though.

[Triceron]

http://kotaku.com/5426474/report-mod...00-in-november

Just found that. Was semi relevant. It doesn't include steam sales though.

Dedicated Servers.

[Neon]

What the heck are you guys talking about?

There is not separate Hierarchy of Activision and Blizzard as part of the a Holding Company named Activision Blizzard. Activision and Vivendi Games became Activision Blizzard, a company that owns Blizzard Entertainment. The executives of that company grant Blizzard a degree of autonomy that certainly ends if Blizzard became financially unsuccessful. AB's CEO Bobby Kotick does not restrict himself to "managing shares", but actively controls the companys operations, management decisions, corporate culture, etc, as has become obvious in several news he produced lately.

[Kacaier]

There is not separate Hierarchy of Activision and Blizzard as part of the a Holding Company named Activision Blizzard. Activision and Vivendi Games became Activision Blizzard, a company that owns Blizzard Entertainment. The executives of that company grant Blizzard a degree of autonomy that certainly ends if Blizzard became financially unsuccessful. AB's CEO Bobby Kotick does not restrict himself to "managing shares", but actively controls the companys operations, management decisions, corporate culture, etc, as has become obvious in several news he produced lately.

As much as I'd like to indulge in your doomsday cries, I won't. You're using news bits as factual information, which is wholly silly.

While Wikipedia is not an academic source, it is still quite reputable, especially against libel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activision_Blizzard

Activision Blizzard is a holding company. Be sure to look up what a holding company is before you jump conclusions.

Activision and Blizzard Entertainment still exist as separate entities. The holding company does not publish games under its central name and instead uses its subsidiaries to publish games, similar to how Vivendi Games operated before the merger.

While Blizzard retained its autonomy and corporate leadership, other Vivendi Games divisions were not so fortunate.

Blizzard still retained every single one of their employees in regards to their governance and direction. While sure, Kotick still has some say in the financial direction of company, it has nothing to do with Blizzard's day-to-day operations. Vivendi is still the boss, and I doubt they'd let Kotick control Blizzard, considering it was successful beforehand. If Blizzard starts bankrupting, then yes. But we don't have to worry about that, and if we do, then Blizzard sucking isn't something I'd support anyhow (like how I stopped caring about Flagship Studios).

-------

[Neon]

As much as I'd like to indulge in your doomsday cries, I won't. You're using news bits as factual information, which is wholly silly.

My statements are not supposed to be doomsday cries, but facts.

I am not sure if the term 'holding' is legaly defined in the USA. But if it supposed to describe a company whose whole purpose it is own stocks of other companies, wikipedia is probably wrong.

From the official press release:

On closing of the transaction, Activision will be renamed Activision Blizzard and will continue to operate as a public company traded on NASDAQ under the ticker ATVI.

[...]

Structure & Terms of Transaction

Under the terms of the agreement, Vivendi Games will be merged with a wholly owned subsidiary of Activision. In the merger, shares of Vivendi Games will be converted into 295.3 million new shares of Activision common stock. Based on the transaction price of $27.50 per share of Activision common stock, this implies a value of approximately $8.1 billion for Vivendi Games. Concurrently with the merger, Vivendi will purchase 62.9 million newly issued shares of Activision common stock at a price of $27.50 per share - a premium of 31% to Activision's average closing price over the past 20 trading days - for a total of $1.7 billion in cash. As a result of these transactions, Vivendi will own an approximate 52% ownership stake in Activision Blizzard on a fully diluted basis.

http://investor.activision.com/relea...leaseid=279372

In Short: Activision was renamed to Activision Blizzard. Vivendi games became an subsidiary of Activision Blizzard. Since Blizzard was a subsidiary of Vivendi Games it is now a subsidiary of Activision Blizzard. Vivendi owns 52% of Activision Blizzard.

So Activision Blizzard is no company that simply owns shares of Activision, Blizzard and Vivendi Games, but the games publisher it used to be before it was renamed. It is Vivendi which is now merely a shareholder, while managing is done by the Activision Blizzard executives.

[Kacaier]

So Activision Blizzard is no company that simply owns shares of Activision, Blizzard and Vivendi Games, but the games publisher it used to be before it was renamed. It is Vivendi which is now merely a shareholder, while managing is done by the Activision Blizzard executives.

You've still yet to address my point in which Blizzard kept its organizational structure. Yes, most of Vivendi Games went under Activision, but as stated in the Wiki, Blizzard kept its operations separate, while the rest of Vivendi Games (Sierra & co) specifically went under Activision itself. Activision Blizzard has two subsidiaries, Activision and Blizzard. There is no such thing as Vivendi Games or Sierra Online anymore, but Blizzard still exists. Remember, it was a merger, not an acquisition.

http://www.activisionblizzard.com/co...se_English.pdf

Both Activision and Blizzard Entertainment’s businesses have maintained their momentum[...]

Blizzard Entertainment cofounder, Mike Morhaime, will continue to serve as President and Chief Executive Officer of Blizzard Entertainment.

Why, oh why, would there still exist a CEO for Blizzard Entertainment if Kotick was in control?