Failed Takeover Creates Conflict between Online Casino Groups
The traditionally tense relationship between online casino groups Empire Online and Party Gaming is more loaded than ever following a failed takeover bid. Empire Online recently confirmed reports that it rejected a takeover bid initiated by fellow online casino group Party Gaming. Empire Online’s decision was made public after Party Gaming submitted a second takeover proposal differing substantially from the original. The first round of negotiations between the two online casino groups was subsequently terminated.
According to analysts who have followed the deal between the online casinos with interest, the original offer to Empire Online was made prior to the recent peak online casino experienced. At this time the company’s valuation stood at 400 million pounds. Subsequently shares in online casinos declined in value, resulting in Empire Online’s current valuation of 260 million pounds. In a recent statement, Empire Online claimed that Party Gaming’s second proposal failed to include specific clauses outlined in its first takeover proposal. Empire Online stated that the new proposal differed substantially from the original “both in terms of the price and structure and at a level that cannot be recommended”.
The tense relationship between the two online casino sites has also been exacerbated by Party Gaming’s decision to adopt software that excludes Empire Online casino fans. As a result, Empire Online has stated that the directors of the firm intend to institute and vigorously pursue legal proceedings as soon as possible. The controversy surrounding Party Gaming’s new software implementation and its failure to include Empire Online casino players has far-reaching implications for online casinos in general. Party Gaming’s new policy means Empire Online casino fans will no longer be able to access the firm’s operating system unless they register directly with Party Gaming, depriving Empire Online of its commission. Party Gaming’s response to the news of legal proceedings stated that the company was “highly confident” of success.