Topic: Blizzard Entertainment & Bitcoins - page 2. (Read 11669 times)

Wait, are you saying Blizzard should stop accepting cash?


You got it the wrong way around. The most likely reason they aren't going to support Bitcoin is because credit card companies will threaten to make life difficult for them if they do.

Yep, and thats why I said it would not be a stockholders level decision and no need to sell them on it.  We both agree blizzard is not going to do this at this time.  Let's say they do though,   and lets say it does not work out well for them.  It would have been started out and used on such a small scale, they they would end if before most stockholders even knew it started.

Well that's why I said indirectly.  A shareholder speaks with their wallet.  If I disagree with ATVI's vision, I sell.  Same as any other shareholder, institutional or otherwise.  

They would have to address the conversions issues.  They would put contract in place to handle that, and it would behave just like another payment method to them.   If they can't get those in place,  they would not accept it.  It would never rise to a board level decision, unless some board member became obsessed with it to push it top down instead.   It would be dropped if they could not get the contracts for the volumes they want not made a board level issue for a gaming company, too far afield for that to be allowed to become such.

Here's one.

If Bitcoin was just a payment method (which it's not, but I'll get on to that in a second) it would probably go to multiple department heads (finance, legal, customer services) I suspect.

We're talking however of Blizzard taking payments in an unproven, highly volatile currency with limited ability to guarantee they can get their money back out again, or use the currency in any straight forward manner (e.g. to pay staff). Yes, that would probably go to the board if a case could be made for it, and it's difficult to see the advantage to them at this point.

Depends on the size of the company.  

Since you own stock in them, tell me when is the last time they asked you to vote for much of anything more then the board members?
Do you remember seeing the vote to add the phone bill payment method for example?  How much of a say did you have with the negotiations  with thenine and/or netease, which have a far bigger impact on the company and revenues then adding a payment method.

So adding a payment method is not a decision made by the owners of a Company?  It affects revenues.  Maybe if Bitcoins only added users but you have to take into account existing users switching from their current form of payment to Bitcoin.  Now you're talking about switching relatively stable revenues to relatively volatile revenues.  Management's main concern with a public company is the preservation of their stock so it is indirectly a shareholder decision.  Everything is.

We can go back and forth on this but I don't think it's worth the effort.  The ironic thing is I'm an owner of both Bitcoin and ATVI, believe it or not.  I'm just trying to look at this objectively.  

Well at least you are open about being close minded.



How you get them is irrelevant if I am only adding to the options and not taking ones away.  Those like you who can't figure it out just keep using the old methods to pay.   

Now the merchant does need to know how to convert the payment into forms that let them pay their bills.  Since it is being used as a medium of exchange you probably already know you use of the term 'real' is misleading.   However anyone that is going to take bitcoin on anyscale needs to have that answered for themselves before doing so.

No,  that is not the target.... at all....    since when is adding a payment method a board/shareholder level decision?

The stock holders are not the target.    They would not be involved in this or the board any more then they would be been when the phone bill option was added.   I think you are overstating what it takes to add a new payment option.   The shareholders are not going to notice or care any more then then did when the phone pay was added or the zeevox points got added to RoM etc. (different company but same point).


However I do agree completely with your last paragraph.  I think targeting Blizzard right now is tilting at windmills.  Though the cost is low enough that it does not hurt anything really either for them to be trying.

The average adult is absolutely your target.  Your average adult is the one with a brokerage account, 401(k), IRA, etc. etc.

You seem to be forgetting who the owners of the Company are.  Senior management is not answering to "precocious kids" they're answering to shareholders.  You know, the average adult?

I do agree with this, Blizzard is very unlikely to be an early adapter, only way it would happen is if it happened to tickle the fancy of someone very high up somehow.

Another issue besides volatility is the fact that only a very small fraction of the populace has even heard of Bitcoin at this point.  Forget about the kids playing the games because they're not the ones that matter.  They don't own the stock and they're already paying to play right now so the current options have to be working to some degree.

So now Activision-Blizzard comes out and announces Bitcoin adoption.  Lets be REALLY generous and say 10% of outstanding shareholders have heard of Bitcoin.  The rest are finding out through disclosures in Blizzard's 10-K, press release, or other medium.  Okay so now Blizzard has introduced a new exposure risk that 90% of their shareholders have never heard of.  Obviously, they're going to do some research.  We already know how the media has painted Bitcoin.  You think these shareholders are going to be thrilled reading these articles with keywords like "drugs" "guns" and "child pornography?"

And Blizzard is going to take all of this risk because of credit card transaction fees?  Beyond delusional.

Look, I'm not saying what the OP is doing is bad.  It's just wasted effort.  Blizzard is the wrong type of company to be aiming for right now.  Bitcoin is in its infancy and people have to come to grips that a company like Blizzard is not going to be an early adopter.  You need to focus your efforts on a company that has a minority amount of shareholders that is willing to take some risks.  Not a company worried about their stock plummeting on the NASDAQ.  

Right,  but creating it would not take long if a large enough company provided a demand for it. 

The target for this is not yet the average adult anyway.   Target would be precocious kids.


You sure like to take your staw men and run with them don't you.   No, they have no reason to make sure as hell you know how to utilize every option they make available.  They would only need to do this if it became the only payment options.  Most would continue to do what they do now, and not even really notice if at a conscious level.   Some would notice and shrug it off as probably some regional debit card network or a new value card from the local stores.  Some especially those damn precocious kids would become curious and go learn about it.  


So are the rent to own places and they are popular to a similar demographic of those cut out of the current banking credit system.

By selling them to idiots like me.

Oh, I just took a look at this and I knew enough... Waste of time...

http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?action=profile;u=21610;sa=showPosts

Psst...it's because you can't.


Ahh excellent...and how do I get those bitcoins exactly?  And how does the merchant turn those bitcoins into real money?

I'm assuming you mean border.  And Blizzard is not in the business of trading.  If you meant hedging foreign currency exposure then yes that problem has been solved in a derivatives market for which one does not exist (on the proper scale) for Bitcoins. 

I am guessing most of the people who keep harping on the volatility issue have never done any cross boarder trading.  It is a long solved problem.