In September 2025, a group consisting of Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF), Silver Lake Partners, and Affinity Partners, a private equity firm led by Jared Kushner, decided to acquire and take private the American video game giant Electronic Arts (EA).
Financial Aspect
The deal, valued at roughly $55 billion, represents one of the most significant leveraged buyouts (LBO) (when a company buys another company mostly using borrowed money instead of own cash) in the history of both the entertainment and technology sectors, exceeding the 2022 acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk, now X ($44 billion). With this transaction, according to EA’s official statement and the consortium’s joint press release, shareholders will be provided, with $210 per share in cash, representing roughly a 25 percent premium over EA’s share price prior to the announcement and almost 15 percent above its 2025 annual average. The consortium decided to offer this meaningful premium to incentivize shareholders to sell their shares. Despite market fluctuations and the slowdown in the global gaming industry, this premium, combined with the all-cash structure, reflects investors’ confidence in EA’s long-term growth potential. The all-cash structure was chosen, over the all-stock structure or the mixed structure, because it gives shareholders immediate and guaranteed value, making it easier to win shareholders’ approval, especially when the target’s stock has been volatile, avoiding fluctuations in the stock prices. Once the deal is approved by shareholders and regulators, EA, after nearly forty years as a publicly traded firm, will be delisted from the NASDAQ stock market. In 1989, EA became publicly listed and has since grown into one of the most profitable video game publishers worldwide. Its delisting and shift under the management of private equity and sovereign capital, will mark a crucial point for the gaming industry.
FIFA (currently FC 26), Madden NFL, The Sims, Battlefield, Apex Legends, and Need for Speed, are some just some examples of EA’s portfolio of intellectual properties (IP) which is internationally acknowledged. These franchises, combined, generate billions in annual revenue from total game sales, live-service models, and microtransactions. In 2024, EA achieved net revenue exceeding $7.4 billion, with almost 75% coming from ongoing digital income streams. EA, thanks to its reliable cash flow, became particularly appealing to private investors seeking consistent returns in a decelerating global economy.
The LBO selected by the consortium, aimed at creating value through operational optimization instead of drastic restructuring, involves approximately $36 billion in equity and $20 billion in debt, arranged by JPMorgan Chase Bank, of which $18 billion is expected to be funded at closing.
With cross-platform growth, media integration, and innovative monetization strategies, the investors are confident that EA’s current intellectual property can generate significant returns. The Public Investment Fund’s participation aligns with Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030, aiming to diversify the country’s economy and reduce its reliance on oil by making significant investments in technology, entertainment, and sports. With the acquisition of major stakes in Activision Blizzard, Take-Two Interactive, and Nintendo, PIF became a leading global entity in digital culture and esports. EA, with its globally dominant sports franchise and extensive presence in both Western and Asian markets, fits perfectly with this approach. So far, the antitrust regulators haven’t intervened in PIF’s acquisitions because it spreads its investments across different companies and industries without taking control or limiting competition. Even though PIF owns parts of Activision, Take-Two, and Nintendo, it doesn’t control them or coordinate their actions.
Since the companies still compete freely, there’s no antitrust violation; PIF is simply seen as a passive investor, not a market consolidator. Silver Lake Partners, a private equity firm experienced in technology and media investments, will provide financial oversight and strategic guidance, while Affinity Partners willfocus on bringing regional partnerships and international licensing opportunities. This collaboration aims to unlock the next generation of digital entertainment, combining capital depth, global reach, and long-term strategic focus. Under the new structure, EA will be reorganized as a private company headquartered in California, maintaining its current CEO, Andrew Wilson, and most of its senior management team. A new private board of directors responsible for overseeing corporate strategy, capital allocation, and long-term investment planning, will be appointed by the members of the consortium. The publication of quarterly earnings reports, filing 10-K (annual report containing a detailed overview of the company’s financial performance and operations over the past year) and 10-Q (quarterly report and lighter version of the 10-K) disclosures with the SEC (the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) or complying with Sarbanes–Oxley (SOX) internal control certifications (to prevent fraud and ensure accurate financial reporting), will no longer be of EA’s concern, thanks to its privatization. This will grant management greater strategic flexibility but also remove many transparency safeguards, such as the 10-K and 10-Q disclosures and SOX certifications. One of the most important governance challenges EA faces in the years ahead will be the trade-off between operational autonomy and public accountability. EA, with the private ownership, will be allowed to pursue long-term investments such as building proprietary gaming engines, expanding into VR/AR (virtual reality/augmented reality), or acquiring emerging studios, without being penalized by short-term market expectations. However, a substantial leverage risk will be introduced by the $20 billion in debt. The company could face financial strain if cash flows weaken or if interest rates rise, forcing cost reductions, workforce downsizing, or intensified monetization strategies. Furthermore, the involvement of a sovereign wealth fund introduces both political and regulatory considerations. Due to potential national-security implications, the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment (CFIUS) is expected to review the transaction, especially given EA’s control over user data, esports infrastructure, and online social platforms. The case will likely test how American law reconciles foreign capital participation with domestic regulatory oversight in the digital economy. Critics are concerned about creative independence under private-equity ownership. The seeking of faster returns by the investors could be intensified due to EA’s past reliance on controversial monetization practices, such as loot boxes and micro-transactions. As industry analysts indicate, comparable LBOs in the gaming sector frequently prioritized short-term profitability over innovation. The shift of its cultural role, from a creative studio balancing innovation and artistry to a data-driven entertainment conglomerate focused primarily on revenue optimization, concerns EA’s transformation into a privately held entity.
Legal Aspect
The acquisition faces review by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Act, as well as by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). The competitive effects and national-security risks will be assessed by these agencies, given the PIF’s foreign-government ownership. The leveraged buyout structure, as analysts warn, will expose EA to debt risks, especially if interest rates rise. Labor unions and consumer advocates have voiced concern about transparency and creative independence once EA becomes private. From a corporate-law perspective, the EA acquisition exemplifies key foundational principles Delaware corporate law and U.S. securities regulation. Under the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL § 251), mergers require both board and shareholder approval. Directors owe fiduciary duties of care and loyalty, reaffirmed in cases such as Smith v. Van Gorkom (1985) and Revlon v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings (1986). Directors, once a public company is being taken private, must demonstrate that the process was informed, independent, and fair to shareholders, particularly to minority investors who may lack bargaining power. Since the deal involves taking a public company private, EA must comply with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Rule 13e-3, and Regulation 14A, which require full disclosure of all material facts and the fairness of the transaction to minority shareholders. This includes independent fairness opinions by financial advisors and a description of the valuation methods to determine the purchase price. Such rules aim to prevent self-dealing and ensure that public investors receive adequate information before approving a going-private transaction. The antitrust and national-security oversight dimensions stem from the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act and the Defense Production Act (§ 721, CFIUS review), which empower the FTC, DOJ, and U.S. Treasury Department to evaluate whether foreign investment could threaten competition or national interests. Given the PIF’s status as a sovereign wealth fund, CFIUS will scrutinize the transaction for potential influence over data privacy, strategic content, and technology access. Once private, EA will no longer be subject to Sarbanes-Oxley or Dodd-Frank compliance requirements or to NASDAQ governance rules. This represents a significant shift from a regime of public accountability, where corporate actions are constrained by reporting standards, board independence requirements, and shareholder voting rights, to a regime of private autonomy, where managers and investors enjoy greater discretion over strategy, disclosure, and long-term planning. Private autonomy enables faster decision-making, confidential R&D investments, and operational flexibility without the pressure of quarterly earnings targets. However, it also reduces transparency for stakeholders such as employees, consumers, and the public. In this sense, EA’s privatization raises the question of how much society should allow large, influential corporations to operate outside the public eye when they control major cultural and digital assets. This tension between private autonomy and public accountability lies at the heart of modern corporate law. Historically, corporate law, in the United States, evolved to balance two values: the freedom of enterprise to organize efficiently and pursue innovation, and the protection of the public from the abuse of economic power. Public accountability is maintained through disclosure rules, fiduciary duties, and regulatory oversight; private autonomy is protected through limited liability, contractual freedom, and managerial discretion. When a company like EA transitions from public to private status, the balance tilts sharply toward autonomy, raising concerns about reduced transparency in areas with broad social impact such as gaming ethics, data collection, and monetization models. From a broader corporate-governance standpoint, the EA transaction illustrates how private equity ownership interacts with traditional Delaware principles. Delaware courts apply a “business judgment rule” that generally defers to board decisions if made in good faith and with reasonable information. However, to ensure procedural and substantive fairness, in a leveraged buyout or going-private context, courts may apply “enhanced scrutiny,” as in Revlon or Weinberger v. UOP, Inc. (1983). When existing insiders or foreign entities play a significant role in the buyout, independent board committees, fairness opinions, and disinterested shareholder votes are key safeguards against conflicts of interest. Ultimately, the EA acquisition and privatization mark a landmark moment in the evolution of corporate ownership. Financially, it demonstrates private equity’s capacity to control large creative enterprises through highly leveraged transactions. Legally, it challenges the adaptability of corporate law doctrines, fiduciary duties, disclosure, fairness, and regulatory balance, in an age when capital is global and ownership structures blur the line between commerce and geopolitics. EA’s case shows how Delaware law and U.S. securities regulations continue to shape, and be challenged by, the global, high-leverage world of digital entertainment.
Sources
Electronic Arts Inc. “EA Announces Agreement to be Acquired by PIF, Silver Lake, and Affinity Partners for $55 Billion.” Press release, EA Newsroom, September 29, 2025. https://news.ea.com/press-releases/press-releases-details/2025/EA-Announces-Agreement-to-be-Acquired-by-PIF-Silver-Lake-and-Affinity-Partners-for-55-Billion/default.aspx.
Electronic Arts. “Electronic Arts.” Wikipedia. Last modified January 26, 2026. Accessed February 12, 2026. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Arts.
Liedtke, Michael, and Michelle Chapman. “EA to Be Acquired for $52.5 Billion in Largest Buyout Ever of a Public Company Taken Private.” AP News. Accessed February 12, 2026. https://apnews.com/article/d17dc7dd3412a990d2c0a6758aaa6900.
Martin, Will. “Electronic Arts Is Going Private in a $55 Billion Deal — the Biggest of Its Kind.” Markets Insider (Business Insider), September 29, 2025. https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/electronic-arts-going-private-55-billion-cash-buyout-2025-9.
Roth, Emma. “$55 billion EA Buyout Hands Madden Over to Investors Including Saudi Arabia and Jared Kushner.” The Verge, September 29, 2025. https://www.theverge.com/news/787112/electronic-arts-55-billion-privacte-acquisition-pif-silver-lake-affinity-partners.
Shukla, Piyush. “Electronic Arts Stock Jumps After It Goes Private in $55 Billion Takeover by Saudi Arabia and Jared Kushner.” The Economic Times, last updated September 29, 2025. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/us/electronic-arts-stock-jumps-after-it-goes-private-in-55-billion-takeover-by-saudi-arabia-and-jared-kushner/articleshow/124215196.cms.
Silver Lake. “EA Announces Agreement to be Acquired by PIF, Silver Lake, and Affinity Partners for $55 Billion.” Press release, September 29, 2025. https://www.silverlake.com/ea-announces-agreement-to-be-acquired-by-pif-silver-lake-and-affinity-partners-for-55-billion/.
Stone, Daniel. “Private Equity’s EA Takeover: Corruption, Contradictions, and Exploitation.” Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), October 9, 2025. https://cepr.net/publications/electronic-arts-and-private-equity/.
Brooks, Harrison. “EA’s Strategic Acquisition by PIF, Silver Lake, and Affinity Partners: A New Era for Gaming and Entertainment.” AInvest, September 29, 2025. https://www.ainvest.com/news/ea-strategic-acquisition-pif-silver-lake-affinity-partners-era-gaming-entertainment-2509/.
Delaware General Corporation Law. Del. Code Ann. tit. 8, § 251 (Merger or consolidation of domestic corporations). Accessed February 12, 2026. https://delcode.delaware.gov/title8/c001/sc09/index.html.
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. “17 C.F.R. § 240.13e-3 (Going Private Transactions by Certain Issuers or Their Affiliates).” Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. Accessed February 12, 2026. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/17/240.13e-3.
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. “17 C.F.R. § 240.14a-101 (Schedule 14A. Information Required in Proxy Statement).” Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. Accessed February 12, 2026. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/17/240.14a-101.
Federal Trade Commission. “Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976.” Accessed February 12, 2026. https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/statutes/hart-scott-rodino-antitrust-improvements-act-1976.
U.S. Department of the Treasury. “The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).” Accessed February 12, 2026. https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/international/the-committee-on-foreign-investment-in-the-united-states-cfius.
United States Congress. Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107–204, 116 Stat. 745 (2002). Accessed February 12, 2026. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-107publ204/html/PLAW-107publ204.htm.
United States Congress. Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, H.R. 4173, 111th Cong. (2010). Accessed February 12, 2026. https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/4173.
Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc. 506 A.2d 173 (Del. 1986). https://law.justia.com/cases/delaware/supreme-court/1986/506-a-2d-173-1.html.
Smith v. Van Gorkom. 488 A.2d 858 (Del. 1985). https://law.justia.com/cases/delaware/supreme-court/1985/488-a-2d-858-4.html.
Weinberger v. UOP, Inc. 457 A.2d 701 (Del. 1983). https://law.justia.com/cases/delaware/supreme-court/1983/457-a-2d-701-4.html.