EA's shareholders had earlier voted.Adoption of resolutionsThey agreed to a total price of $550 billion (approximately $210 per share).sellThe investment alliance comprises the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF), Silver Lake, and Affinity Partners. This means that, barring the approval of regulatory bodies in various countries (such as the US FTC and the European Commission), this long-established game company, which owns well-known IPs such as Apex Legends, EA Sports FC, and The Sims, will officially transform into a private company.
The list of donors is impressive: the Saudi Crown Prince and Trump's son-in-law are among them.
This deal has attracted much attention not only because of its staggering amount of money, but also because the buyer's background is heavily influenced by politics and geopolitics.
Although nominally a three-way alliance, the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) will actually be the dominant force in this acquisition, expected to effectively control up to 93% of EA's shares in the future. Furthermore, the founder of Affinity Partners is Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of US President-elect Trump, a connection that adds considerable room for regulatory scrutiny to this cross-border acquisition.
If all goes well, the entire acquisition process is expected to be completed in early 2027, and EA anticipates delisting and privatization in the second half of 2027.
• Hidden concern 1: $20 billion in leveraged debt
While shareholders happily cashed out and left with the premium, for EA employees and players, this could be the beginning of a nightmare.
The report indicates that approximately $550 billion of the $200 billion deal was financed through a leveraged buyout (LBO). In other words, this massive debt will be directly credited to EA's books after the acquisition is completed.
Historical experience tells us that when a game company is burdened with huge debts, management often resorts to aggressive measures to repay interest and principal:
Layoffs and downsizing: Cutting unprofitable departments or experimental projects.
Monetization pressure: Add more aggressive (even more greedy) microtransactions or live services to the game.
• Second hidden concern: Clash of values
Another thing that made the development team "get goosebumps" was the cultural censorship from the big spender.
Given that PIF originates from Saudi Arabia, a country with a relatively conservative culture and holds a staggering 93% controlling stake, there are widespread concerns that the diverse gender (LGBTQ+) or open-minded content commonly found in EA games (such as The Sims and Age of the Dark) might be censored or subject to self-censorship in the future due to "not aligning with the values of its sponsors." This will be EA's biggest challenge for its creative team going forward.
Analysis: The Era of "Oil-Based" Gaming Has Arrived
In my opinion, EA's privatization is almost a done deal. For shareholders, the price of $210 per share is quite attractive, and there is no reason to refuse.
But for gamers, this may not be good news. Unlike Microsoft's acquisition of Blizzard, which was part of an "ecosystem strategy" to enrich the Game Pass content library, PIF's acquisition of EA is more like a "national-level asset allocation." When game companies become investment targets of sovereign wealth funds and are burdened with huge debts, "profit efficiency" will take precedence over "game enjoyment."
In the future, we may see EA release more "annual" games or more aggressive gacha systems to pay off its debts. As for those critically acclaimed but commercially unsuccessful single-player masterpieces? In the new EA empire, their space for survival will likely shrink.
