5 ms·

> I don't know what Nintendo would get out of being acquired, Money. Old companies are merged, acquired, or spun-off all the time. It's completely possible th

> I don't know what Nintendo would get out of being acquired, Money. Old companies are merged, acquired, or spun-off all the time. It's completely possible that Nintendo would prefer to spin off portions of their business which, while profitable, no longer align with their primary markets. Consider companies like General Electric; they started off producing equipment around electric power generation, installation, and use (lightbulbs and appliances), then they got into television, radio, computing, jet engines, health insurance, etc. Over the years they've spun off many of these divisions and today's GE looks nothing like OG GE.

nolok 6y ago
You might want to check the "portions" of Nintendo business to realize why not. Even in core console gaming, they're notorious for not actually owning many studios, including some you would assume they do given how long they're worked together. Notoriously, Nintendo didn't own Rare (who was a big studio for Nintendo bound games), didn't want to buy when they wanted to sold, and they ended up at Microsoft which is an acquisition that's very hard to spin as a success.
- Danieru 6y ago
  No kidding, Nintedo doesn't even own Intelligent Systems and those guys used to develop the Devkit tooling. Get this: IS used to work from inside Nitendo's own factory. Granted, while Nintendo does not own these companies they have strong control. Just last year Nintendo moved all their developers in Tokyo into a single tower.
  - imbnwa 6y ago
    I wonder if this is related to what someone mentioned above in the thread whereby Japanese firms seem to value implicit, mutually beneficial behavior
    - MichaelZuo 6y ago
      Likely a lot of old school politicking behind the scenes too. Especially as they’re a Kyoto company.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Is this why Game Freak is not part of Nintendo?
sfifs 6y ago
> Over the years they've spun off many of these divisions and today's GE looks nothing like OG GE. That's why today's GE is close to bankruptcy and easily threatened by corporate raiders. Arguably if they has stayed focused on their core competency of high quality cutting edge engineering instead of stupid financial engineering, they'd have stayed releva6ans powerful.
stakkur 6y ago
Japanese corporate operations are quite different, historically, than the US. For example, Japan has over 33,000 companies that are over 100 years old. Many are several hundred years old. The oldest is around 1300 years old, I think. Continuously operating. Obviously most of these are not 'technology' companies, but the culture of corporate creation/destruction/merger is somewhat different.
- SEJeff 6y ago
  One of the things that really sets them apart is Keiretsu[1]. Seemingly competing firms often work together for their common benefit in the name of Keiretsu. It is very "foreign" and strange from a US cultural standpoint, but it is also why so many Japanese companies last as long as they do. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keiretsu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keiretsu
  - Danieru 6y ago
    It is important to note that the Keiretsu are split vertically, no two companies within a keiretsu should be direct competitors. At least such was the case. A major counter example is Mitsui and Sumitomo. The Mitsui and Sumitomo banks merged, which triggered partial merges of other Keiretsu companies: except the real estate. Mitsui Real Estate and Sumitomo Real Estate still operate as competitors. Both developing new housing complexes and office towers.
Impossible 6y ago
Nintendo did sell a business that didn't align with their primary markets, Rare. Rare generated hits for Nintendo (like Donkey Kong Country), but iirc, Miyamoto never liked them. From the DKC wikipedia entry: In the years following the game's release, rumours spread that Miyamoto disliked Donkey Kong Country and found it amateurish, provoking him to create the hand-drawn art style of Yoshi's Island. He was allegedly quoted as telling Electronic Games magazine in 1995 that "Donkey Kong Country proves that players will put up with mediocre gameplay as long as the art is good". Again according to wikipedia, DKC was one of the top selling SNES games, only Super Mario World and Super Mario All-Stars are higher on the list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Super_Nintendo_Entertainment_System_video_games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Super_Nin....
- esperent 6y ago
  Rare was funded by Nintendo but I don't think it was ever owned by them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_(company) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_(company)
- atdrummond 6y ago
  Rare was never owned by Nintendo - they were only ever a second party developer. Nintendo did provide them with significant financial resources and autonomy, however.
  - erk__ 6y ago
    Another example of a company could be Game Freak and Creatures, the developers of Pokémon. Though it is now created with a joint-venture like company "The Pokémon Company" that is owned mostly by those three companies, with Nintendo owning 32%.
    - nineteen999 6y ago
      Interestingly enough, Nintendo studio acquisitions seem to be "rare" enough that they make news headlines, like the recent acquision of Next Level Games (makes of Luigi's Mansion 2 & 3), which will move from second-party to first-party: https://micky.com.au/nintendo-acquires-bc-video-game-development-company/ https://micky.com.au/nintendo-acquires-bc-video-game-develop...

nolok 6y ago

You might want to check the "portions" of Nintendo business to realize why not. Even in core console gaming, they're notorious for not actually owning many studios, including some you would assume they do given how long they're worked together. Notoriously, Nintendo didn't own Rare (who was a big studio for Nintendo bound games), didn't want to buy when they wanted to sold, and they ended up at Microsoft which is an acquisition that's very hard to spin as a success.

Danieru 6y ago
No kidding, Nintedo doesn't even own Intelligent Systems and those guys used to develop the Devkit tooling. Get this: IS used to work from inside Nitendo's own factory. Granted, while Nintendo does not own these companies they have strong control. Just last year Nintendo moved all their developers in Tokyo into a single tower.
- imbnwa 6y ago
  I wonder if this is related to what someone mentioned above in the thread whereby Japanese firms seem to value implicit, mutually beneficial behavior
  - MichaelZuo 6y ago
    Likely a lot of old school politicking behind the scenes too. Especially as they’re a Kyoto company.
saagarjha 6y ago
Is this why Game Freak is not part of Nintendo?

sfifs 6y ago

> Over the years they've spun off many of these divisions and today's GE looks nothing like OG GE. That's why today's GE is close to bankruptcy and easily threatened by corporate raiders. Arguably if they has stayed focused on their core competency of high quality cutting edge engineering instead of stupid financial engineering, they'd have stayed releva6ans powerful.

stakkur 6y ago

Japanese corporate operations are quite different, historically, than the US. For example, Japan has over 33,000 companies that are over 100 years old. Many are several hundred years old. The oldest is around 1300 years old, I think. Continuously operating. Obviously most of these are not 'technology' companies, but the culture of corporate creation/destruction/merger is somewhat different.

SEJeff 6y ago
One of the things that really sets them apart is Keiretsu[1]. Seemingly competing firms often work together for their common benefit in the name of Keiretsu. It is very "foreign" and strange from a US cultural standpoint, but it is also why so many Japanese companies last as long as they do. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keiretsu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keiretsu
- Danieru 6y ago
  It is important to note that the Keiretsu are split vertically, no two companies within a keiretsu should be direct competitors. At least such was the case. A major counter example is Mitsui and Sumitomo. The Mitsui and Sumitomo banks merged, which triggered partial merges of other Keiretsu companies: except the real estate. Mitsui Real Estate and Sumitomo Real Estate still operate as competitors. Both developing new housing complexes and office towers.

Impossible 6y ago

Nintendo did sell a business that didn't align with their primary markets, Rare. Rare generated hits for Nintendo (like Donkey Kong Country), but iirc, Miyamoto never liked them. From the DKC wikipedia entry: In the years following the game's release, rumours spread that Miyamoto disliked Donkey Kong Country and found it amateurish, provoking him to create the hand-drawn art style of Yoshi's Island. He was allegedly quoted as telling Electronic Games magazine in 1995 that "Donkey Kong Country proves that players will put up with mediocre gameplay as long as the art is good". Again according to wikipedia, DKC was one of the top selling SNES games, only Super Mario World and Super Mario All-Stars are higher on the list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Super_Nintendo_Entertainment_System_video_games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Super_Nin....

esperent 6y ago
Rare was funded by Nintendo but I don't think it was ever owned by them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_(company) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_(company)
atdrummond 6y ago
Rare was never owned by Nintendo - they were only ever a second party developer. Nintendo did provide them with significant financial resources and autonomy, however.
- erk__ 6y ago
  Another example of a company could be Game Freak and Creatures, the developers of Pokémon. Though it is now created with a joint-venture like company "The Pokémon Company" that is owned mostly by those three companies, with Nintendo owning 32%.
  - nineteen999 6y ago
    Interestingly enough, Nintendo studio acquisitions seem to be "rare" enough that they make news headlines, like the recent acquision of Next Level Games (makes of Luigi's Mansion 2 & 3), which will move from second-party to first-party: https://micky.com.au/nintendo-acquires-bc-video-game-development-company/ https://micky.com.au/nintendo-acquires-bc-video-game-develop...