Angry Birds Maker Says It's Worth More Than PopCap

Whatever Electronic Arts is spending to acquire PopCap, its casual gaming rival Rovio, the maker of Angry Birds, would cost more. That's according to ... well, Rovio.

"The valuation from our point of view is somewhere, I dunno, maybe north of PopCap," Ville Heijari, the vice president of franchise development, told Eurogamer. Let's remember that PopCap's deal is $US1.3 billion, and Rovio is identified with just one (1) franchise.

"A lot of people look at our game and say, 'Who do these guys think they are with their one title?'" Heijari added. He noted that in addition to the PopCap deal, another Rovio peer, Zynga is "aiming for a $US1 billion [initial public offering.] " The implication is an opinion of one's self soaring into nine figures isn't necessarily inflated.

Heijari said last summer, Rovio fielded "a lot of inquiries from many, many different parties," i.e., regarding an acquisition, but "I don't think there's ever been a really relevant discussion of whether somebody is going to buy us."

Last year EA acquired Chillingo, the publisher of Angry Birds.

Rovio Values Self 'North of PopCap' [Eurogamer]


Comments

    Rovio are very vocal for a pony that has only demonstrated one half-stolen trick.

    They have a VP of franchise development, and they only have one 'franchise', itself a ripoff of various flash games. Rovio sure can talk out of their ass at times.

    The more I hear from these guys the more I wish for nothing but to see them crash and burn in a most epic fashion.

      problem is they aren't even driving anymore so they cant possibly crash.

      there just sitting in park while the money rolls in.

      To me a company should only be worth money if they can continue to innovate.

      Rovio at this point are like a one hit wonder band that have somehow convinced people to buy multiple remix's of the same song

    Big talk from a one-hit wonder.
    PopCap has the better portfolio.

    Theirs will be the most delicious of car crashes upon which to gaze.

    Who DO they think they are with one title? And not even an original title, but just a reskin of numerous Flash games?

    Rovio love to talk, but if they brought out a game that backs up what they say they mightn't come across as morons.

      Really? 250 million downloads doesn't 'back up' what he's saying? Wow.

      I think The Da Vinci Code is a pile of shit but Dan Brown is entitled to talk the talk, because he's sold a shit load more books than I have.

      I barrack for Geelong, and two weeks ago we were beaten by Essendon. My plethora of Essendon supporting friends had open season on me. Despite my keen awareness of our actual superiority I had to sit there and take it, because, really, they beat us. Don't know what made me think of that...

        No, it doesn't. I don't know about you but to me, marketing and borderline plagiarism and doesn't make a company talented. If Dan Brown had released only one novel and it was a ripoff, your analogy might work.

          Let's agree to disagree. I reckon anyone who moves 250 million units of a product is entitled to think their brand is worth something. Maybe not as much as he seems to think it's worth, but something.

        poor analogy.

        First Dan brown has multiple books.

        secondly the Da Vinchi code wasn't his first book.

        third he hasn't just gone and cruised off of the success of the Da Vinchi code ever since.

        Football fan analogy is different again. because it's temporary success. And B) you've probably been giving them shit for the last 2 years anyway.

        No one came out and said anything about Rovio.

        In fact Rovio had no meaningful reason to comment on this. but as usual they stick their heads out saying we are awesome everyone else sucks balls

          What does the Da Vinchi [sic] Code being his first book have to do with my analogy? I don't think the fact that Angry Birds is Rovio's first game has any bearing on anything, except as a comparison to the breadth of titles in PopCaps library. My point there was that if I or anyone else had moved 250 million copies of my product I'd be entitled to think my brand was worth something. Exactly what it's worth the market will decide. But just like if I'm selling my house and my unused tool shed suddenly becomes a fully-appointed bungalow in the adverts, he's entitled to spruik his wares.

          And for what it's worth it's been more than 2 years. :p

    This is fan-f**king-tastic to see everyone having the same sentiment as me. I thought I was alone in thinking Rovio are a bunch of arrogant dicks.

    The reason PopCap got bought out is they have a great portfolio of NUMEROUS hits. Not ONE. NUMEROUS. They have proved they are worth buying.

    I'm really quite angry now. I need a cup of tea and a massage.

    When we were kids my brother and I used to split his Castle Grayskull playset in half and, at opposite ends of the room, establish bases populated by Star Wars figures and Masters of the Universe 'bosses' (they were bigger). Then we would spend hours chucking a marble at each installation until someone's forces were obliterated. Hmm, good times.

    The point is that I do not feel the Rovio has in any way infringed upon my intellectual property. What they have used is an established gameplay mechanic, and built their own IP from that. The consistent, snipey suggestion that they have stolen their idea is one born simply of jealousy and, as always, tall-poppy syndrome. I wish they'd shut the fuck up too, and whilst I enjoy the occasional train-bound session of Angry Birds I also agree that PopCap's output is superior, and certainly broader. I just think they gay abandon with which words like 'stolen' are thrown around feeds into the kind of retardedly litigious culture that US extreme right capitalism has propagated. And that's not good for anyone in the long run.

      Fair enough, imitation is an established part of video game development. I only find it acceptable, however, when there is innovation coupled with it - something that defines a game as distinct from it's inspiration. Angry Birds does not do this. It was a quick cash-in on existing flash games with no new ideas (other than using birds instead of rocks) that has somehow reached disproportionate levels of sales for the content offered. Not only that, but Rovio have been arrogant and vocal about their success, which further turns hearts and minds away from them.

    I could list a heap of popcap games off my the top of my head, Rovio.... well I never actually knew who made angry birds until this article lol

    Angry Birds is old news. They need to make something new, because let's face it, Bejewelled is bigger than Angry Birds, and they have tonnes of other titles too.

    Plus, Angry Birds isn't even that good compared to some Popcap games like Plants Vs Zombies/Zuma.

    Can't tell if Rovio's trolling, jelly or both.

    Lol they're a one hit wonder. Popcap has a ton of good games. Rovio needs to stop blowing itself....

    Angry Birds wasn't even very good... I don't get it.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now