SOC Investment Group opposes the agreement between Activision Blizzard and Microsoft

SOC Investment Group si oppone all'accordo tra Activision Blizzard e Microsoft thumbnail

L’agreement between Activision Blizzard e Microsoft does not like to SOC Investment Group. It seems in fact that the group is opposing to the purchase made in January 2022 – whose negotiations they are still ongoing. Let’s find out the details together.

SOC Investment Group doesn’t like the deal between Activision Blizzard and Microsoft

Before going into detail, let’s make a brief summary; in the January 2022Microsoft bought developer Activision Blizzard for just under 69 billion dollarsgiving life to what, probably, turns out to be one of the larger acquisitions of the last years (se not the largest).

However, the acquisition of the game developer is still ongoing at the current state.

And that’s where the SOC Investment Group. The group recently sent a letter to Activision Blizzard shareholders, essentially urging them to vote against the purchase of Microsoft. The shareholders’ meeting to discuss the matter is expected in two weeks, on April 28, 2022.

In the letter, the SOC states:

This transaction fails to properly assess Activision and its future earnings potential, in part significant because it ignores the role that the sexual harassment crisis – and the incompetent management of Activision’s board – has played in delaying product releases and depressing. the share price.

The SOC also mentions that the deal it shouldn’t go through because of the workplace allegations that the gaming company has dealt with and that we have long talked about during the second half of 2021.

The SOC concludes like this:

We don’t believe that Activision shareholders need to look to a transaction to rebuild the value lost by Activision’s management’s failure to ensure workplace safety and equity.

This is not the first time that the SOC has commented on the state of the developer, who is currently in trouble. Last year the group also said that the publisher’s executives must be held responsible for the crisis of misconduct of last year.