Why Electronic Arts Is Leaving the Stock Market — Experts' Opinions
It has been confirmed that Electronic Arts (EA) will be leaving the stock market. The company will soon return to being private. App2Top discussed why EA might have made this decision with market experts Dmitri Burkovsky, Roman Safiulin, and Nikolai Shubin.
1. EA is leaving the stock market. Why do you think this decision was made?
Dmitri Burkovsky — Chief Investment Officer — Xsolla
What’s important about this news is not so much EA leaving the stock exchange, but the identity of the main buyer — the Sovereign Wealth Fund of Saudi Arabia. Under the leadership of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, the kingdom is actively diversifying its assets. Shifting from oil to entertainment assets, from sports to video games, is part of the country's development program, Vision 2030. Considering the popularity of sports events under the Riyadh Season umbrella, from boxing and WWE to tennis and the 2034 FIFA World Cup, acquiring Electronic Arts following Scopley is entirely logical. After all, EA Sports remains the largest sports brand in video games.
Roman Safiulin — Chief Corporate Development Officer — GDEV
EA aims to leave the stock market by attracting around $55 billion to gain strategic freedom and access to "long" money. As a private company, it can pursue ambitious plans (growing its audience to 1 billion players, advancing AI and service models) without the pressure of quarterly reports. Additionally, the decision is linked to EA's high attractiveness to major investors and the overall wave of industry consolidation: this allows it to secure a favorable valuation and avoid unwanted takeovers. In other words, it’s a step not due to problems but to accelerate long-term growth and innovation.
Nikolai Shubin — Co-owner — INFUSION GAMES
More than 90% of EA’s shares are in free float, which makes EA an attractive target for a consortium of investors. Over the past years, the public market has been more of a hindrance than a help for such a setup: the pressure of quarterly reporting forces management to optimize products and processes for short-term horizons. This is compounded by past scandals involving reduced bonuses for executives. Going private removes this "volatility tax" and allows for the smooth implementation of multi-year AAA development strategies.
2. How common is it for successful companies with high stock values to leave the stock market?
Dmitri Burkovsky — Chief Investment Officer — Xsolla
For a stable, growing business, it is always just a question of making an offer more attractive than maintaining public company status. An IPO is not a business's ultimate goal; it's simply a very handy tool for achieving specific objectives like accelerating growth through M&A and providing liquidity to early investors and founders. Returning to private ownership, as well as a potential future public offering of a new combined structure, are cycles in a company's development.
Roman Safiulin — Chief Corporate Development Officer — GDEV
For successful high-capitalization companies, leaving the stock exchange is extremely rare. The EA case will become the largest deal of its kind in history, highlighting its uniqueness. EA is not in crisis: the company is profitable and is worth nearly $48 billion. Leaving the market is not a rescue mission but a strategic move: investors and management believe that without the pressure of quarterly reports, long-term projects can be realized more rapidly.
Nikolai Shubin — Co-owner — INFUSION GAMES
This is not a widespread phenomenon. Delisting is just another investment mechanism like an IPO; it's simply another format for investors to exit. At any stage of business development, the key is the strategic investors' "exit." For some companies, it's logical to seek liquidity through an IPO, for others, through a buyout by a private equity consortium. It’s not directly linked to game development itself; it's a financial market instrument, not an industry trend.
3. Given that the video game market is high-risk and many gaming companies have lost value in the past 2-3 years after going public, could EA's move signal a new trend of withdrawing from the stock market?
Dmitri Burkovsky — Chief Investment Officer — Xsolla
Quite the opposite. After Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard and the upcoming delisting of EA, there will be very few publicly traded gaming companies in the U.S., which new players will take advantage of. Many of these companies will enter the public market not through a traditional IPO but through direct listing, selling to a SPAC, or acquiring an existing non-core public company. Basically, they will leverage their strong points: retail investors on Robinhood know video games much better than institutional and other professional market players.
Roman Safiulin — Chief Corporate Development Officer — GDEV
EA's decision might spur a rethinking of the stock market's role in gaming, but it doesn't yet look like a full-fledged "trend." It’s more about strengthening two already existing processes: consolidation and a focus on long-term private capital. For the industry, it means that access to significant resources will increasingly occur outside the stock market.
Nikolai Shubin — Co-owner — INFUSION GAMES
No, it’s a singular case. As I mentioned, EA is the only large publicly traded gaming company with such a high free float (over 90%) and stable, predictable service model revenues. It’s an ideal profile for an LBO, but not all gaming studios can boast such parameters. For most public companies in the industry, a take-private scenario is unrealistic.
4. There’s a widespread viewpoint in the press that the stock market and the gaming industry are incompatible. One harms the other, forcing top management to seek short-term efficiency through layoffs and release products not when they're ready, but in time for quarterly reports. What do you think about this perspective?
Dmitri Burkovsky — Chief Investment Officer — Xsolla
The unpopularity of traditional investment tools in the gaming industry is both a problem and an opportunity. At Xsolla, for instance, we will soon present a solution for universal (not just user acquisition-related) debt finance, which we aim to make accessible to any game studio regardless of location. The same will eventually happen with the public market, following the trend towards simplifying access to it globally.
Roman Safiulin — Chief Corporate Development Officer — GDEV
The stock market and gaming industry are not "incompatible," but the conflict in objectives is apparent: investors expect stability, while games are inherently risky and time-consuming. EA’s decision to leave the stock exchange acknowledges this tension. However, it more accurately reflects the notion that there is no perfect ownership model for games: it depends on how willing the owners are to sacrifice short-term results for long-term quality and innovation.
Nikolai Shubin — Co-owner — INFUSION GAMES
I think it’s nonsense typically spread by non-professionals. I managed hedge fund assets for over 12 years and clearly understand that the stock market, in this context, is merely a tool. It doesn’t inherently "harm" the gaming industry. Yes, the KPI pressure of quarterly reporting can indeed lead to imbalances, but it's an issue of corporate governance quality, not a fundamental incompatibility between the entire sector and the stock market. A competent board of directors can balance strategy and short-term reporting, as successful public companies in other high-risk sectors have repeatedly proven.