Should CAG take an official stance against EA?

[quote name='Gothic_Walrus']Well...that was probably the one reaction that I wasn't expecting Cheapy to have.

Thank you for not calling us idiots for starting this thread. :)

Now that we've got our answer, I see this thread either dying or devolving into OTT-style madness.
[/quote]

I just got a new Puppy, I named her Zelda
 
[quote name='punqsux'][quote name='CheapyD']Any game company that had the opportunity to grab such a juicy license would jump on this deal in 2 seconds, if it made financial sense. [/quote]

while i agree with the statement, you have to wonder if this was actully put up for bids, or if ea made them an offer.

say ea offered the nfl more than the nfl gets fron madden and 2k combined per year. they would be stupid to say no to that

given ea's current track record, i would tend to believe the latter.[/quote]

My guess is that there are very few (or no other) publishers (outside of Msoft/Sony) that have the financial resources available to structure such a large deal.

Still, the ball (no pun intended...well maybe a little) was completely in the NFL's hands. It was up to them to decide to put this out to bid, or perhaps decide that the extra money generated by this deal was not worth the elimination of gamers' options.

If Sega/Take Two could score an exclusive license like EB did, they would.
 
Cheapy,

Why would you think that the NFL would care about gamers? They only care about their fans who buy tickets.

It is EA's responsibility to worry about gamers not the NFL's. EA is in the videogame business NOT the NFL.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']Cheapy,

Why would you think that the NFL would care about gamers? They only care about their fans who buy tickets.

It is EA's responsibility to worry about gamers not the NFL's. EA is in the videogame business NOT the NFL.[/quote]

Isn't it touching that there might be a person in a company that is worrying about you right now? "Man I really hope Mr.Answer is ok, the weather up there is so cold, who knows what the road conditions are like, I just worry about mrAnswer."

:)
 
[quote name='CheapyD']Any game company that had the opportunity to grab such a juicy license would jump on this deal in 2 seconds, if it made financial sense.[/quote]

yea but the question is who came first to the table? i agree that any company wouldve grabbed that deal given that they had the funds to back it up. but did the nfl offer the contract or did EA make an offer they couldnt refuse?

just like the video game companies the NFL is also interested in making money, so it took the most favorable deal for them.

i however might have missed some details... does anyone know for sure who started the deal in the first place?
 
i however might have missed some details... does anyone know for sure who started the deal in the first place?
Click to expand...

EA had been harassing the NFL for a long time to get this deal. Finally EA waived enough money in their face so they "put it up for bid" and made the deal with EA.

- according to biz.gamedaily.com
 
[quote name='Scrubking']Cheapy,
Why would you think that the NFL would care about gamers? They only care about their fans who buy tickets.
[/quote]
I feel that most people who purchase football video games are the very same people who support the NFL through buying tickets, purchasing NFL merchandise or are part of their TV audience.

No matter how you slice it, it was the NFL's license to do with as they please and they chose to go the EA exclusive route.

[quote name='Scrubking']It is EA's responsibility to worry about gamers not the NFL's. EA is in the videogame business NOT the NFL.[/quote]

I disagree. The NFL is definitely in the videogame business.
If a company makes significant money from video games, they are in the video game business, even if its not the primary source of revenue.

You wouldn't think that George Lucas (and his Star Wars franchise) is just in the movie business, would you? He licenses that shit out to anything and everything that even remotely makes sense to have a Star Wars logo on it.
 
Scrub, I hope CAG takes an official stance against Take Two for tryign to get exclusive MLB rights. There will be no competition now!
 
[quote name='RichD1']Scrub, I hope CAG takes an official stance against Take Two for tryign to get exclusive MLB rights. There will be no competition now![/quote]

Why do you think they tried to do that? It wouldn't happen to be because EA is swallowing up every other sports name. No couldn't be. :roll:

And for you people wondering how EA could influence the rest of the industry - here you go.
 
[quote name='Scrubking'][quote name='RichD1']Scrub, I hope CAG takes an official stance against Take Two for tryign to get exclusive MLB rights. There will be no competition now![/quote]

Why do you think they tried to do that? It wouldn't happen to be because EA is swallowing up every other sports name. No couldn't be. :roll:

And for you people wondering how EA could influence the rest of the industry - here you go.[/quote]

The motivation doesn't matter. They're trying to get a "monopoly" too. Why aren't you complaining about it?
 
[quote name='Scrubking'][quote name='RichD1']Scrub, I hope CAG takes an official stance against Take Two for tryign to get exclusive MLB rights. There will be no competition now![/quote]

Why do you think they tried to do that? It wouldn't happen to be because EA is swallowing up every other sports name. No couldn't be. :roll:

And for you people wondering how EA could influence the rest of the industry - here you go.[/quote]

Oh, so because EA did it first, it's ok for VC.
Gotchya.

Continue your blind EA hate.
 
I believe the point he's trying to make is that other studios will attempt to get exclusive licensing rights to prevent OTHER companies from doing so first, thus locking them out. In other words, the question is would Take Two pursue exclusive MLB rights if EA had not gone after NFL/NBA rights?
 
[quote name='PsyClerk']I believe the point he's trying to make is that other studios will attempt to get exclusive licensing rights to prevent OTHER companies from doing so first, thus locking them out. In other words, the question is would Take Two pursue exclusive MLB rights if EA had not gone after NFL/NBA rights?[/quote]

No. But does that make it any more noble? Do 2 wrongs make a right? If EA was the one countering VC, would this be an issue?
 
[quote name='Scrubking']
i however might have missed some details... does anyone know for sure who started the deal in the first place?
Click to expand...

EA had been harassing the NFL for a long time to get this deal. Finally EA waived enough money in their face so they "put it up for bid" and made the deal with EA.

- according to biz.gamedaily.com[/quote]

While it is true that EA has proposed exclusivity a few times before, this one was started by the NFL as many articles have reported. Several companies made bids and EA was chosen. The NFL chose to make the license exclusive, the NFL picked a bid from a company to give exclusivity to, and EA managed to get it.

A source close to the negotiations said it was at a spring 2004 off-site meeting attended by top NFL officials that the league determined it would take the league license exclusive. GameSpot was told the league put the license up for bid and that EA was among as many as five software publishers competing for it. An EA spokesperson said today, "Obviously, exclusives are more expensive. We are most certainly paying a premium."

"We (EA) have proposed exclusivity several times in the past, but this year, in the spring the NFL had an off-site meeting, and they decided to consider bids for exclusivity," Brown told IGN in an exclusive interview. "Several bids were submitted but they accepted EA's. I cannot tell you how much this cost, but exclusivity is expensive, we are paying a premium. It wasn't cheap. I can tell you this, though, all parties all happy with this agreement, and Wall Street seems happy with it too."
 
[quote name='"RichD1"']No. But does that make it any more noble? Do 2 wrongs make a right?[\quote]

No and no. As the MLB deal is ALSO bad, yet the speculation is that it's a result (response?) of EA's deals. Thus you can pin that on EA indirectly.

[quote name='RichD1']If EA was the one countering VC, would this be an issue?[/quote]

It would be a slightly different situation. VC does not have anywhere near the market share of EA. Therein lies the issue that a lot of people have with EA. They are already so big that they can flex financial muscle other game companies can't hope to match. What might be good for EA might not be good for we the players.
 
Why bother?

EArEVIL.gif
 
[quote name='"PsyClerk"'][quote name='RichD1']No. But does that make it any more noble? Do 2 wrongs make a right?[\quote]

No and no. As the MLB deal is ALSO bad, yet the speculation is that it's a result (response?) of EA's deals. Thus you can pin that on EA indirectly.

[/quote]

Or maybe we can pin it on VC indirectly for lowering their prices to $20 and trying to steal markershare from EA.

For the records, I hate EA Sports games and have all the ESPN games, but the EA hate is unfair considering it's just good business and if it wasn't EA, it wouldn't be an issue. People are being too hypocritical.
 
Why not? CAG is definetely a popular site and EA would lose a lot of customers from it. It'll bring up awareness and hopefully, EA will give Sega back their fucking right to make good football games!
 
[quote name='CrimsonGeist']Why not? CAG is definetely a popular site and EA would lose a lot of customers from it. It'll bring up awareness and hopefully, EA will give Sega back their shaq-fuing right to make good football games![/quote]

You and scrub must live in the same dreamworld.
 
[quote name='CrimsonGeist']Why not? CAG is definetely a popular site and EA would lose a lot of customers from it. It'll bring up awareness and hopefully, EA will give Sega back their shaq-fuing right to make good football games![/quote]

What has there been 10 people maybe who don't like the deal so much that they said they won't buy anymore games from EA? Hey thats their right and power to them, but I don't see how the small number who have voiced their opinion and displeasure with the deal can be equated with EA losing "a lot of customers from it'.

Change of direction-- Can someone tell me what is the duration of EA/NFL 's licensing agreement? I've not seen that info.
 
If every single CAGer bought EA games in the past and completely went cold turkey, that would take 25,000 sales off the table. Madden sold what, 5 million this year? Oh yeah. Fear the CAG EA, FEAR THE CAG!!!!!!
 
Here's the question:
Will exclusive licensing generate new gamers (people that would have not bought the sport titles) or make current sport gamers buy the latest greatest edition?

Will EA break even?
 
[quote name='supadupacheap']If every single CAGer bought EA games in the past and completely went cold turkey, that would take 25,000 sales off the table. Madden sold what, 5 million this year? Oh yeah. Fear the CAG EA, FEAR THE CAG!!!!!![/quote]

Methinks that would be a pretty big IF.
 
[quote name='Mr.Answer'][quote name='supadupacheap']If every single CAGer bought EA games in the past and completely went cold turkey, that would take 25,000 sales off the table. Madden sold what, 5 million this year? Oh yeah. Fear the CAG EA, FEAR THE CAG!!!!!![/quote]

Methinks that would be a pretty big IF.[/quote]

There is no if. We dont matter. Most dyed in the wool videogamers dont matter. Guys (and gals) who dont play videogames will buy madden. I have friends who bought the ps2 JUST for madden each year. Its not a game, its really a branded bit of merchandise that HAPPENS to be a videogame. They could sell madden 2003 as maddens 2006 and 2007 and many people would still buy it since its all they know.
 
"NFL will authorize video games from only one company, Electronic Arts. The league's move to give EA Sports an exclusive license, in a deal said to be worth $300 million, is a first for a major-league sport - and one with uncertain consequences for fans."

$20 million per year for exclusivity (15 years)
5 million units of Madden 2005 sold.

So, if they pass the costs down to the retailers, they will pay $4 more per game unit. WHich means Madden 2006 will cost $8 - $12 more.

Great.

Definitely not for this CAG.
 
[quote name='CrashSpyro123'][quote name='Scrubking']
i however might have missed some details... does anyone know for sure who started the deal in the first place?
Click to expand...

EA had been harassing the NFL for a long time to get this deal. Finally EA waived enough money in their face so they "put it up for bid" and made the deal with EA.

- according to biz.gamedaily.com[/quote]

While it is true that EA has proposed exclusivity a few times before, this one was started by the NFL as many articles have reported. Several companies made bids and EA was chosen. The NFL chose to make the license exclusive, the NFL picked a bid from a company to give exclusivity to, and EA managed to get it.
[/quote]

That changes my opinion. Ha - the NFL already gets no cash from me. I only catch playoffs and the superbowl party at a buddy's place.

You suckers need to stop buying those NFL camper tents and $16 stadium beers.
 
some of the bitterness in this thread needs to be gotten over....EA made a smart business move that anyone on here would have also made if they were in the same shoes....as Cheapy stated, noone put a gun to the NFLs head telling them to make the deal with EA, the decision was 100% in their hands...hate the NFL, not EA....

:twoguns: haters

by the way, i liked segas nfl games as much as anyone else did...so just so you know, none of this is coming from a biased madden freak
 
EA made a smart business move that anyone on here would have also made if they were in the same shoes....
Click to expand...

That is what you people can't get through your thick heads.

Yeah, it was a smart business move for M$ to monopolize pc os, but was it good for the consumer? You people mistakenly believe that just because it's legal to bully other companies, throw your weight around and destroy others for the sake of greed that it's okay.

I wish I had a company that could legally take peoples property from them for no reason so I could go around saying I am making "good business moves". I would then laugh in your misery under the pretence that I am making "good business moves".

:twoguns: Ignorant, pro EA idiots
 
I can't believe everyone is forgetting about the other people on the end of the deals. The NFL and ESPN signed the contracts too. EA is making a business move.
 
[quote name='alfonsosoriano']I can't believe everyone is forgetting about the other people on the end of the deals. The NFL and ESPN signed the contracts too. EA is making a business move.[/quote]

I can't believe you and everyone else are still hammering away that point. Then again, this thread lost all rationality days ago; so go ahead, keep beating that horse.
 
[quote name='Ledhed'][quote name='alfonsosoriano']I can't believe everyone is forgetting about the other people on the end of the deals. The NFL and ESPN signed the contracts too. EA is making a business move.[/quote]

I can't believe you and everyone else are still hammering away that point. Then again, this thread lost all rationality days ago; so go ahead, keep beating that horse.[/quote]

Oh, I think a certain somebody brought an X Files level of irrationality to this thread early on. Very early on.
 
[quote name='epobirs'][quote name='Ledhed'][quote name='alfonsosoriano']I can't believe everyone is forgetting about the other people on the end of the deals. The NFL and ESPN signed the contracts too. EA is making a business move.[/quote]

I can't believe you and everyone else are still hammering away that point. Then again, this thread lost all rationality days ago; so go ahead, keep beating that horse.[/quote]

Oh, I think a certain somebody brought an X Files level of irrationality to this thread early on. Very early on.[/quote]

Yuo=cigeret smocking man!1!!1
 
[quote name='"Scrubking']I wish I had a company that could legally take peoples property from them for no reason so I could go around saying I am making "good business moves". I would then laugh in your misery under the pretence that I am making "good business moves".
[/quote]

LOL, then you should buy SCO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top