In a Q+A session during Nintendo's financial results briefing for the year ending March 2019, shared today on Nintendo's website, company president Shuntaro Furukawa addressed a question which explored the possibility of a hostile takeover.
Just like the events of Ubisoft's recent battle against Vivendi, where the latter was aggressively seeking a controlling stake in Ubisoft by purchasing large quantities of shares, a hostile takeover describes the situation where one company acquires another against the wishes of the target company's directors.
Of all the big names in gaming, it could be argued that Nintendo is perhaps the most protective of its traditions, beliefs, and inner workings. Seeing control of the company be taken away from those who are at the centre of its operations could have hugely dramatic effects, and Furukawa has revealed that Nintendo has "systems in place" to deal with any threat.
What are your thoughts on the risk of a hostile takeover? Do you have any preventative measures or countermeasures against a takeover?
Furukawa: We have not adopted what is generally called anti-takeover measures. However, in the case that we face a malicious takeover which would damage the value of the company or the common interest of the companyʼs shareholders, we do have systems in place, both within the company and in connection with outside experts for such an occurrence, to take all legal and appropriate steps against it even if we have not proactively put preventive measures in place. This is a topic we will continue to investigate further.
Of course, you'd hope that these legal steps will never be needed, but it isn't surprising to see that Nintendo is aware of the threat.
In Ubisoft's case, the French studio eventually managed to fend off Vivendi's challenge - for now, at least - with the latter agreeing to sell all of its shares earlier this year.
[source nintendo.co.jp]
Comments 80
@ReaderRagfish lmaooo
"(...)we do have systems in place, both within the company and in connection with outside experts for such an occurrence(...)"
@ReaderRagfish with decent boards this time please
Also with a profile pic like that u better give us a new snowboard kids as well!
Isn't a hostile takeover how Sammy became owner of Sega? (I know I was surprised when I learned years later that Sammy continued to exist beyond the 8/16-bit era, barely heard their name anymore. )
@ReaderRagfish you monster!
This is legal?
Bet this is how epic games bought the company behind rocket league, using their fortnite monies
Please don't use a red picture with the Nintendo logo like that, I thought it was something else
@321gofast You're right, Nintendo's sacred logo should never be used to bring attention to an article about Nintendo. The gull of Nintendolife!! Are they even Nintendo fans at all?!
So Microsoft taking over Nintendo confirmed?
"...we do have systems in place, both within the company and in connection with outside experts for such an occurrence...". Isn't that the very description of "preventive measures" that Nintendo claims it doesn't have?
The thought of this happening gives me the fear
@TechaNinja so basically if a company is publicly traded, with stocks on the stock exchange, someone could buy a controlling share of the stock (51%)
Reggie isn't even retired. That was just a cover up; he's currently the CEO of their ninja division.
@frabbit you've got the F.E.A.R
@Octane Wouldn't that be their Ninjara division? Or their lesser-known, top-secret Kat/Ana corps?
@Janus1986 not really. Anti-takeover measures are typically formal bylaws adopted by the Board of Directors that trigger certain things in the event that a take over attempt is commenced.
The most famous is a "poison pill" that gives non-transferable warrants to purchase additional stock at a discount on the trading price of that share. This is triggered when an investor meets a threshold ownership and the triggering investor is not permitted to purchase the additional discounted shares. Because other shareholders will buy stock at a discount, the raider gets diluted and a hostile takeover becomes much more expensive and much less desirable.
Nintendo isn't being clear with what provisions it has in place. This isn't surprising because many company's keep their internal governance nonpublic, if possible.
So there keeping stuff more safe now?
Applying their stability tech to their actual company, eh?
@ShinyUmbreon That's why they finally started using cloud saves.
@delt75 True that finally they use there brains.. sorry if it's to harsh.
The day Nintendo gets taken over by, I dunno, Tencent or whatever and turns into yet another AAA "shove microtransactions into €70 games and screw quality because we got all the money to make" company I'm quitting gaming
Quick, give me a couple billion dollars and I'll buy Nintendo so that no one else can. This is 100% legit.
@CapricornDavid there are only 2 companies that might even remotely approach Nintendo for a takeover:
I read, "we don't have measures, but we'll have measures if it happens". Doesn't fill me with lots of confidence, lol, cause money talk and shareholders walk. Guess we'll all see if that bridge is crossed (or not if it takes place behind closed doors).
@Shiryu I'm dying!
@Nekonokatzen What in the world will you do with Nintendo Make cats??
@Octane so then that would mean that Reggie got really serious about kicking ass and taking names, wow! lol
why would anyone want to take Nintendo over. Just look at the average Nintendo Life comment section, who would want to be the direct target of all that nonsense?
@patbacknitro18 My answer might be one thing money..
NO ONE can buy Nintendo and ruin their business !!! 😤😠
From what I know of Nintendo's share distribution and shareholder clauses, I'd just like to say GOOD LUCK to anyone contemplating a hostile takeover.
@EmmatheBest lol you made me laugh so much.
@Octane robot ninjas. Not unlike Reggie Fils-a-Mech, the Reggienator.
"in the case that we face a malicious takeover"
Guess I'm just a jaded 'Murican b/c I read this as - Nintendo for sale, call first so we can work out my golden parachute retirement plan before the news goes public.
Why ask a question about a hostile takeover when you can just ask about mergers and acquisitions? Nintendo and Apple have gotten chummy over the years, Apple has billions of dollars, it's not necessarily a bad fit. Bad for gamers who want a console as it would be all iOS apps after that but the companies might merge OK.
I don't see Apple doing a hostile takeover though, here's a joke to illustrate.
Man - Would you sleep w/ me for $1,000?
Woman - No.
Man - Would you sleep w/ me for $10,000?
Woman - No.
Man - Would you sleep w/ me for $100,000?
Woman - No.
Man - Would you sleep w/ me for $1,000,000?
Woman - Yes.
Man - Would you sleep w/ me for $100?
Woman - What do you think I am?
Man - We've already established that, now we're just haggling over price.
Moral of the story - everything is for sale at the price Apple can pay.
@rjejr I agree. They sound open to multinational scale up. We'll see what happens though.
@Nekonokatzen Are you saying you already have the others 39 billion needed to buy it?
@Sleepwalkin9 - Glad to hear it, I try my best! ^^
@TechaNinja not only is it legal, it’s one of the unfortunate key traits of capitalism!
A good example is the streaming service Hulu. Disney and Fox both had a 30% stake in Hulu. After Disney bought Fox they have a 60% stake in Hulu and Disney now has the power to steer the service in any direction they please.
People are reading WAY too much in to this. Nintendo is not looking for a takeover, and they aren't in any danger of one either. That would be such shocking and big news, that it would already have been made public by now.
Furukawa just literally said that although they don't have any of the standard, well-known measures in place, they still have their own protection measures to take care of these things.
The news should NOT be read as "well, we have no solution for that, but we'll see how we will have to deal with it, whenever it happens", and as if they haven't got anything to defend against that at all, because from Furukawa's own words, that's clearly not the case.
And besides, Nintendo's team of company lawyers is one of the most tenacious and successful in the world, so no worries there either.
@Doktor-Mandrake
While fortnite is the primary reason for epics recent clout, the aggressive nature of buyouts and exclusivity deals are more likely because they were bought by the world's largest game company, a Chinese conglomerate.
I have no problems with Nintendo getting aggressively taken over. So many other companies would do a better job with their ips.
I thought it was a shame that vivendi didn't get Ubisoft. A takeover could have only made them better without the greedy frenchmen at the helm.
@ShinyUmbreon Hey, "Mario, but with CATS!" worked for Super Mario 3D World, so why not the whole company? Not to mention that cats are ruthless, which is important if you want to make it in corporate culture.
@Nekonokatzen Oof to shay you got me there.
@RadioHedgeFund probably wouldn't be looking at a publicly traded company, which would need to approval of it's own shareholders for a purchase that massive. Likely looking at a series of investment funds to put something like this together.
I’m no expert in stock but didn’t they buy up a bunch of their own shares awhile ago for this reason?
@Itzdmo You might wanna do a little more research next time.
You DO know that Vivendi is French as well, right?
And also a FAR bigger and far greedier company, or rather: mass media conglomerate than Ubisoft will ever be.
And considering the massive success of the Switch and its games, I also don't think that Nintendo needs any help from outsiders to "improve" upon the things that they are doing with their own IP right now.
Only Nintendo could make these games as they are and as they need to be, some outsiders would never understand all the factors needed, and Nintendo games would lose that always present, and yet somehow still quite intangible Nintendo 'feel' that no other company so far has been able to reproduce.
I've had this concern for a while because of how investors aggressively insist that Nintendo focus on mobile gaming and games-as-a-service. Chinese companies like Tencent are the biggest threat because they've exploded recently.
@ThanosReXXX "People are reading WAY too much in to this. Nintendo is not looking for a takeover, and they aren't in any danger of one either. That would be such shocking and big news, that it would already have been made public by now."
The question was asked during an official Q&A meeting discussing financial results, so yeah, somebody is thinking about it or it wouldn't have been brought up in that setting. This isn't some random forum thread some Sony fanboy started. Yes, it would be shocking, but no, it also wouldn't. I mean would it really be any more shocking than the DeNA deal announcement after all those years of "mobile over my dead body" comments?
First sentence: "Nintendo shook the gaming world today..."
https://www.theverge.com/2015/3/17/8230767/nintendo-smartphone-games-with-dena-make-sense
@erv Well, I'm not predicting it will happen anytime soon, but in a world where Disney owns everything, Amazon is buying up stuff, MS is buying up 3rd party game devs, Sony was already big and multinational, well it would only make sense somebody buys up Nintnedo eventually. Maybe not for another 20 years, but the gaming industry is changing so quickly - X1 SAD released this week, EA Access on PS4 - Nintendo as a 1 trick pony is ripe for the picking. At the right price of course. Even if every single person quit their job the IP alone - Zelda, Mario, Pokemon et al - has to be worth a pretty penny.
Personally if I'm Nintendo I entertain offers now while Miyamoto is still alive and kicking b/c their stock value plummets overnight should anything disastrous happen to him.
don't really understand why people think disney or nintendo are that interested in selling to each other. it's sort of apples to oranges.
I also remember bob iger saying somewhere that the company wasn't confident in their ability to develop games in-house anymore anyway. remember epic mickey 2?
@patbacknitro18 fortunately Nintendo isn’t the direct target of this nonsense. Sites like these are. Look at the amount of people who think they’re complaining directly to Nintendo in here. 😄
I trust Nintendo has enough legal savvy and financial defenses to send these people packing. Make em sorry Ninty!
@Shiryu
That would be a movie about the videogames industry I would watch.
@Shiryu No one gets past Nintendo Ninja!
so they don't have a poison pill in place.
'Furukawa has revealed that Nintendo has "systems in place" to deal with any threat.'
John Wick
Connections to the Japanese Mafia confirmed!
I've got an excellent system for preventing hostile takeovers if anyone is interested. It's called, "staying private".
I wish Nintendo would "hostile takeover" Sega.
I think Furukawa is gonna be such a good president for Nintendo.
Nintendo selling out would actually be a smart move for them. Especially now while their high up. We dont know if the Switch will continue selling well, and will the next successor?
Apple can make a tablet and throw joycons on them. It'll just be $1000.
I really hope they don't, but from a business perspective...
@Trajan Nintendo's whole strategy so far has been surviving a flopped generation or two. The Switch has raked in enough cash they can deal with it dropping off or its successor failing.
Companies that have prided themselves on their independence for this long aren't planning on selling high and getting out.
@rjejr Miyamoto gone means a chance of a new, good Paper Mario; a new F-Zero; a new Starfox with good controls...
He's significant as the last of the big three left, but I think his importance these days is sometimes overstated, and the negative impacts of the older Nintendo sensibilities aren't stated nearly enough.
And while the question being asked is significant, it's also possible the question could've been posed by a "smaller" investor wary of a hostile takeover, since that could destroy the value of their own shares, particularly if the new owners just don't get it and tank the company.
@Shiryu hahaha love it!
@RadioHedgeFund You've got it in one. Apple and Disney are also both special companies with a creative heart. And there aren't many of them about!
@RadioHedgeFund if I have to choose between the two, I prefer Apple over Disney to buy them
But the best is that they will stay independent
@RadioHedgeFund I really don't think Apple is a potential buyer. They haven't shown great interest in gaming for decades, they've literally let Windows run away with that market without lifting much of a finger.
Nintendo is pretty old school and much of their focus for the time being will rely on hardware. Given Apple has cross domain products in computers, tablets, mobile devices and TV Media Boxes, the current shift towards gaming over cloud services makes more sense and while Nintendo's gaming IP would be valuable in such a situation, their hardware and services devision (which hasn't shown much in the way of cloud gaming aspirations) wouldn't be. As soon as xCloud and Stadia hit the market, all those Apple products overnight become viable gaming platforms.
If Apple wants to build a games lineup I'm not sure buying Nintendo is the way to go as your paying a big premium for a company dealing in hardware that I honestly don't think fits Apples ecosystem, and they then still need to actually build the cloud services. It probably makes more sense to wait for the next big indie game and to just buy them out before MS, Sony, EA, Google etc do so. Rinse and repeat a few times and they can quickly build a very strong catalog without needing to spend the huge volumes on Nintendo, and they can still attract third parties to any service.
That approach also doesn't exclude them buying established companies or entering partnerships. It also dodges a LOT of headaches that will be created by the cultural differences between Apple and Nintendo. We've seen how MS absolutely failed to make the Xbox work in Japan and there's a high risk that an Apple and Nintendo partnership could sour for similarly not being able to hit that cultural balance correctly.
@CoastersPaul I'm not a huge fan of Miyamoto's more recent work and personally would be fine if he retired and let Sakurai and the Spaltoon folk move up the ranks, but I think the day he retires the stock price drops. Which, I suppose if you are a company like Disney who only wants the IP for movies and merchandising then you don't really need him and are waiting for that day to come to buy the company on the cheap.
"the question could've been posed by a "smaller" investor"
Doesn't really matter who asked the question, somebody did, and he answered it quickly and adeptly, which means to me the thought had crossed his mind. If it was compeltly out of the blue he would have just laughed it off or looked stunned. But it sounded to me like he was ready for the question and had prepared an answer, so he's smart enough to know the current realities of companies being bought and sold. So my reply, which was to somebody saying we were all making something out of nothing, is within that context - if you own a well known company you are always a target and should be prepared.
@Itzdmo nintendo have made alot of mistakes over the years and I have a love/hate relationship with them too but a take-over wouldnt be a good thing, that sort of thing would leave to heavy amount of micro transactions in first party nintendo games, rushed out buggy content and who knows what else
I think if they got taken over they would end up like rareware when they had to make kinect games for microsh!t
@rjejr Just because one of the investors (or was it a reporter?) asked Furukawa that question, that doesn't mean that the initiative is there on Nintendo's part at this point in time, so yes, that is indeed reading WAY too much in to it.
He also could have said 'no comment', which would have probably incited even more "oh my God, someone is going to take over Nintendo' rumors, but instead, he kindly and rather patiently and reasonably elaborate (for someone in the higher echelons of management) explained that they have measures in place, in case something like this MIGHT happen.
It's the anonymous asker's question that is apparently more leading and interesting to commenters here, because that's the one that sparks the most rumors, while Furukawa's reply to it, is basically saying that there's nothing going on, just that they are indeed prepared, IF the need to defend themselves from it would ever arise.
Simply put: just because you've got a spare tire in the back of your car, doesn't mean that you're definitely going to need it, somewhere in the (near) future. And of course they're always prepared: any company should, but that's mostly just a precaution, not something that's definitely going to happen at some point.
But then again: what was I to expect? This is an internet forum after all, and people like to go all wild and stuff, while (especially in Nintendo's case) there usually is nothing spectacular going on, unless Nintendo actually reveals something themselves.
I think the results in this comments section would have been the same either way: now he answered it, and people are seeing a possible takeover, but if he wouldn't have answered it, people would have probably seen that as him trying to hide something, which would then of course also be proof of an imminent takeover.
Sometimes, as a public figure or manager of a large company, you just can't win, no matter what your reaction or reply to a question is...
@ThanosReXXX "initiative"
It's nto about initiative, it's about preparedness, like you said. They do have a spare tire in the trunk, they are expecting a flat at some point. They are preparing for it.
The difference between his answer and a no comment is that a no comment means something is imminent but his answer means it's probably still a few years out at least. And I think the comments took those differences into account. People would have FREAKED OUT if he said no comment. Had he laughed it off people would have said he wasn't fit to be President. So I think it's all good. Maybe I'm just so used to the insanity on twitter - 1 million times worse than this - that this place looks good in comparison.
@rjejr Well, while we agree that people, aka clueless idiots, would have gone to town with a "no comment" reply (one that previous Nintendo CEO's actually might have given), I don't agree that the reply that he has given now means that something is up. Quite the contrary. I'd like to point out my earlier spare tire comparison: just because there are measures in place, it doesn't mean that we have to connect any dots to it about any possible hostile takeover.
There's not going to be one, and IF it comes, Nintendo has taken precautions to fend it off. And THAT is really all that his reply meant.
I've done this dance myself: not in upper echelon management, obviously, but in my field, I've led teams, done public speaking and answered similar kinds of questions. People ALWAYS make their own story from it, hearing what they want to hear or what they want it to mean, but I've always been to the point, and straight forward. I'm the WYSIWYG guy (what you see is what you get), so no ambiguity or reading between the lines here.
From that point of view, and looking at this specific case, I literally see NOTHING that even remotely points at them being in danger of any takeover, nor did he say anything that might make me suspect that he's hinting at it. They are NOT preparing because something is about to happen, they're just prepared for any event, just in case it might ever happen, like any smart company worth its salt would be.
In fact: them having branched out not just into mobile games but also into amusement parks, only strengthens the idea that they've got nothing to fear for decades to come, so yeah...
Something about guns, and sticking to them.
@ThanosReXXX "Something about guns, and sticking to them."
Nintnedo never sticks to it's guns though does it?
Nintneod - No remodeled 3DS in the works.
1 week later
Nintneod - New 3DS model
Nintnedo - never on mobile
2 years later
Deal w/ DeNA, Super Mario Run. Not just some AC spin-off, Mario in a platformer of all things. Next up, there biggest selling console series, Mario Kart.
"them having branched out not just into mobile games but also into amusement parks,"
This is the part that makes me think they are even more likely to have a merger, just not a hostile one. Disney buys everything it sees. Universal might want a piece of the action. Or again, Apple had a timed exclusive w/ SMR. And I'm sure Apple has enough money to buy Nintneod if they want to. Apple is worth $1 trillion with a T w/ about $225 billion w/ a B cash on hand. Nintnedo is worth about $40B so it's manageable.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/apples-next-big-move-it-should-buy-nintendo-51547257452
Doesn't mean it's going to happen any time soon, but I don't have a problem w/ people talking about it.
@rjejr I should have elaborated: I wasn't talking about Nintendo sticking to its guns, I meant ME sticking to my guns. I believe I'm right, so I will not be convinced otherwise, unless information comes straight from the horse's mouth, that proves me wrong.
But I do find it interesting, funny, and weirdly fascinating how each person interprets the exact same text in a completely different way, even though in a lot of cases, such as this one as well in my humble opinion, there is no hidden message, reading between the lines or usage of diversion tactics.
And Apple and Nintendo would be an absolutely horrible fit, so that has even less of a chance of actually happening than Disney, which also isn't going to happen. Disney might take over Sony, if they keep giving them crap about the Marvel stuff, but Sony is already completely Westernized, so there would be zero difference in the kinds of games that they would then put out.
In Nintendo's case, any and all takers would completely destroy or at the very least severely damage Nintendo's IP's, their legacy and their ideologies, so in no scenario imaginable in this universe or any possible other, would it be a good idea.
As for branching out being an indication of it: no to that as well. A company that branches out, is either already very certain of itself, and not afraid to venture into new things, risking its own capital in the process (although 9 out of 10 times, it's a calculated risk), or they are preemptively busy with creating a bigger, more stable foundation, in order to be able to better safeguard their future.
In either case, that is just smart business, and has nothing to do with reactionary measures towards any hostile outsiders. In fact, Nintendo may even have taken its cues from Sony here, seeing as they've already diversified their business long ago, and regardless of considerable losses over the last decade, they were still able to right the ship again, so let's just for the sake of argument imagine that this got Nintendo thinking that they should also stop betting on a single horse, which might be the very reason they backpedaled on the mobile games department, and added amusement park ventures to the list as well.
On a side note: I don't have a problem with people talking about it either, but I do think that it's kind of weird to make baseless assumptions coming from a question that someone outside of Nintendo asked.
If we exaggerate the example a bit, then that would mean that if someone would ask Furukawa if he sleeps in red Nintendo pajamas, and he would answer "well, I don't have a red pajama, but I do have Nintendo pajamas", that the layman's conclusion would then be: "oh my god, Furukawa only sleeps in Nintendo-themed pajamas".
That's NOT what he said, that's NOT what he meant, and as such there are NO definite conclusions that we can draw from that.
As my mentor always hammered into my brain: assumptions are deadly...
Why would it be so hard, difficult or impossible to just accept that the man said what he said, without having to find some extra meaning to it?
If you ask me, you could almost say that he was lead/goaded into that answer, in which case I can reiterate what I said before, which basically comes down to that whatever answer he would have given, the exact same ridiculous conspiracy theories would have arisen.
In my strong opinion, nowadays, it's like the word "business man" or "CEO" is almost synonymous with someone who is either always lying, or at the very least always ambiguous, and that is just not always the case.
And in closing, as I often do, where it concerns Nintendo, we must not forget that, contrary to Sony, they are still a VERY traditional, and honor-bound company, so perhaps their word really IS their word.
Would be very nice if the world would agree with that for once, instead of always questioning or suspecting...
@ThanosReXXX "how each person interprets the exact same text in a completely different way"
Why does that surprise you? We've already had the "glass half empty" vs "glass half full" discussion. Some people are just going to see the worst possible meaning in something, some are just going to see the best possible meaning, some are just going to see the words. So with every sentence ever uttered there are 3 possible interpretations right from the get go before you even look to see what was said.
Ever go to a Seder? A Passpover dinner where you spend 2 hours reading a book, the same book every year, before you can eat. One of the many stories is of 4 children, smart, evil, simple, non-aware. Each questions the world differently and things need to be explained to them differently. People are like that.
Or, as the social psychologist in me might say - there is no reality except the reality we create in our minds based on our own experiences. So somebody who has had a lot of good experiences is more likely to see the good in something than someone who has had a lot of bad experiences. It really is difficult is say something beyond straight up facts - sky is blue, 2+2=4 - that people are going to observe the same way.
@rjejr Well, "we have measures in place for such an event" can, in my humble opinion, only sound and be interpreted as "we are prepared for it (in case it ever happens)", not as if they are either not protected enough or as if they are about to be taken over by some other company.
As for the psychology bit: what you mentioned about reality, made me think of Greek philosopher Plato's "Allegory of the Cave". Ever heard of that one?
It's actually kind of relevant as well, concerning the topic of individual interpretation.
Just in case you've never heard of it, here it is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave
EDIT:
The different interpretations do not surprise me as much as they fascinate me, because of the in my mind both objective and logical interpretation of what I'm reading. If someone says he's done something to prevent something, why question it or connect some invisible dots to completely rip it out of context? That just makes no sense to me, even though it is completely human in some ways. Some people just can't accept that things are sometimes really as simple as they seem, and HAVE to make something out of it, so that it makes sense to them.
And no, I've never been to a Seder. As you may remember, I'm not a religious man, nor do I have any family members or friends that are, at least not to such a degree that I would (be invited to) go with them to a church, synagogue or any other religious establishment or event.
@forgottenarctic Thanks, and you're welcome.
@ThanosReXXX I learned about "the cave" in philosophy class in college but I have to say the stupider and stupider the world gets the more I find myself making use of it these days.
I didn't think you''d been to a seder but you've never been to ancient Greece yet you know about Plato. I was a commuter college student but when I went away to grad school I was exposed to alot of things I wouldn't have been had I stayed in NY. My first girlfriend in Kentucky was a self proclaimed hillbilly from Appalchia. She got her doctorate a few years later and has taught at several universities since. My next girlfriend was a Jewish woman from Philadelphia. I also joined a Unitarian church for a bit due to a woman I was dating from Kentucky. And I spent last weekend at my 5th bar mitzvah in 5 years. I still don't consider myself Jewish, b/c I'm not, but I've learned a lot raising Jewish kids.
There may have been a point to that paragraph when it started but it's long gone now.
@rjejr "But you know about Plato" Well, that's obviously a remnant from my school days. And I may never have been to ancient Greece, but I've been to Greece multiple times, and I've seen plenty of ancient things and learned about them, and the people that were involved.
And ancient Greece is in my short list of things that interest me the most. Religion in and of itself, or rather: modern day religion doesn't interest me at all, no offense. I'm more of a myths and legends guy: far more interesting and inspiring...
But no worries about losing your own point, I think I got it regardless. Guess we're on the same page, more or less, give or take a few minor differences. I might have known about a Seder, since I did have Jewish friends once, but I don't think I'd ever go to one, unless of course I was invited.
I do still have some Christian friends, but they never invite me to go to church either. Maybe because they're not sure if I'd appreciate them asking, or maybe because they've already made up my mind for me, seeing as they know how I feel about religion...
Far as philosophy goes, I've kinda been inspired by our little chat, and so I did some more digging and searching, and came across Marcus Aurelius' Meditations and collected quotes under the title "The Key to Happiness".
Interesting stuff, and even more interesting how it has stood the test of time. And sometimes even a bit sad, to see that unfortunately, some things have apparently always been the same, but I guess that's the human race for ya...
@forgottenarctic Well, if you keep saying thanks, I'm going to have to keep saying "you're welcome"...
But in all seriousness: I can understand. Most you can do is either ignore it/let it be, or say thanks. There aren't that many other choices, far as I know.
Far as I'm concerned, you already thanked me, so no additional thank you's are necessary.
Hint: you don't HAVE to reply, if you're all out of things to say.
I won't hold it against you.
I find it weird that they don't already have proactive, preventive measures in place. Unless he's bluffing.
Late comment here but one thing they have been doing constantly are "buybacks" when stock gets low. Gives Nintendo more control and also inflates the stock value back up cuz the public ends up owning less of Nintendo, which means any individuals owning parts of Nintendo see their stock rise relative to the amount bought back. I think their biggest anit-takeover defense is the MASSIVE amount of money Nintendo literally sits on and does nothing with.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...