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.”
Leveraged buyouts are so stupid to me. “Hi, I’d like to buy this company, but since it will be my company, the company needs to have the debt, not me. So if it goes wrong, well, that’s the company’s fault, not mine.” Should be illegal.
It’s like buying a house, and then expecting the house to pay the mortgage.
I mean,isn’t that what a foreclosure sale is?
I’m honestly asking. The world of corporate raiding is a foreign and distasteful place to my arts and sciences brain. The world of home buying is also foreign to my arts and sciences brain, but that’s cause I leaned more into arts than sciences.
That being said, you put up 20 grand of your money for a down payment. The bank loans you 200k. You fail to make your payments. Bank forecloses and sells off the property to cover the remaining debt, or at least claw back whatever they can get from it. Would that be so different than what’s likely to happen if EA fails to pay JP Morgan back? Is it the liability of Kushner et al vs the liability of a homeowner that is the primary difference?