this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
230 points (99.6% liked)

Games

21532 readers
474 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The buyers are committing $36 billion of their own equity (briefly and inexpertly, "equity" is the value of your assets after you deduct anything you owe), including the value of the PIF's existing investments in EA. They're making up the rest of the total thanks to a $20 billion loan from JPMorgan Chase Bank. How will they manage that massive debt? According to the Financial Times, who cite unnamed insiders, they're gambling on the deployment of generative AI tools as a gigantic cost-saving measure.

"The investors are betting that AI-based cost cuts will significantly boost EA's profits in the coming years, people involved in the transaction told the Financial Times," the paper wrote (paywall) in their own coverage of the story. The FT elsewhere commented that the acquisition "is a huge bet that artificial intelligence can significantly cut EA's operating costs, allowing the equity consortium to manage a large debt load on a company that historically carried limited net debt."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

No? JPMorgam Chase wrote a loan, right? Don’t they win no matter what, so long as the company doesn’t go under? They’re getting interest no?

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, it's a loan so big that normal personal finance "savings and loans" rules don't really apply. This loan is 3X EA's entire revenue, 2X Nintendo's entire revenue. Basically an entire new game-publisher's worth of money flowed into the gaming industry to exert dictatorial control over EA. JPMorgan Chase just have to make sure that they get their money back from the EA employees they just helped the Saudis buy.

[–] Nerdulous@lemmy.zip 2 points 10 hours ago

They actually don't even have to do that. They get the money off the fees and limited interest on the transaction and sell the debt as a "prime" investment to your retirement fund or pension. Leaving the common people to hold the bag while they receive millions in fees and no liability

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 20 hours ago

At this level, maybe not. When you owe the bank $10k and can't pay it back, it's your problem. When you owe the bank $20B and can't pay it back, it's the bank's problem.

This is how 2008 happened.