Thirty7ven
Banned
Biden has that dog in him
Last edited:
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
Biden has that dog in him
Pelta88
Member
He was on CNBC today saying that FTC wouldn't take MS to court. Let that sink in for a moment... I'm just stating facts when I say some of these analysts are uninformed and usually talk for the sake of talking.
Also Hoeng, regurgitated posts from resetera / idas and all those other analysts who were hyping this deal for their own person ego or youtube algo.
graywolf323
Member
there's more spin in this thread than in a laundromat right now
The difference with Embracer is they don't have a horse in other markets like consoles or subs and aren't even that big (they own a lot of smaller studio names and are consolidating them) . MS themselves are using Embracer studios right now for their upcoming games. They don't hinder competition in anything I'm aware of but maybe there is a case that could be made there too if they bought big publishers too. As much as you can complain about China and possible censorship the studios Tencent own fully or partially like Epic aren't being used to harm competition in any sector either.
Even then in that horizontal acquisition there is a possibility that it could be blocked too anyway. Tencent was just recently blocked from a merger. so if it harms competition when/if they start buying big publishers, why not the same for Tencent? What makes you think it will pass for them?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Literally them,
He was on CNBC today saying that FTC wouldn't take MS to court. Let that sink in for a moment... I'm just stating facts when I say some of these analysts are uninformed and usually talk for the sake of talking.
Also Hoeng, regurgitated posts from resetera / idas and all those other analysts who were hyping this deal for their own person ego or youtube algo.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
WTF is she talking about? How does this benefit gamers?
- 55% of PS5 gamers play COD. They wont be able to play CoD anymore. If not today then in 3 years or in 10 years. How does this benefit them?
- How does this benefit Xbox owners? They lose access to a gigantic PS userbase for crossplay.
- MS just signed a 10 year contract with Nintendo which means CoD will be tied to last gen hardware for at least the next 10 years. Fucking switch cant run COD. Thats why Nintendo hasnt bothered porting CoD on there since Blops 2 in 2012. Even if they target Switch 2 specs, thats a 1.3 tflops handheld version, which is basically an xbox one. So PS5 and XSX owners will benefit from a COD franchise thats tied to last gen hardware? How?
Absolute nonsense. Getting the game for free on gamepass is the only benefit to Xbox owners and MS can make that happen as soon as Sonys current marketing deal expires. you dont need to spend $75 billion to get games on gamepass a few hundred million a year would do. CoD made a billion in the first week right? lets assume 55% is PS, 10% PC and 35% Xbox. Thats $350 million. Sign them that check. Activision will take it an a heartbeat.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It benefits her and her partner's wallets.
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
Don't give a shit about any Activision games but I'd love to see the US government cock block corporations for once instead of blowing them.
Although I'm sure it's only a matter of time for a Republican in the white house again.
Although I'm sure it's only a matter of time for a Republican in the white house again.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
GHG
Gold Member
Disregard any comments from the individuals listed here (including
SenjutsuSage
):https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/atvi/insider-activity
Of course it's not. But please go back to some of the early threads regarding this deal where I was saying this would be far from straight-forward due to a number of reasons. Then look at the reactions those posts got from the usual suspects. It must hurt so much for some people to always be wrong. At this stage it's an artform.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
You don't need to file injunctions right away. They just got out of their meetings with MS today.
You can file an injunction during the court case if what they deem favorable concessions are not met.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Sony can and will participate. It's just the judge is going to find its arguments laughable come the end.
The FTC basically decided to make a show trial of this. The case has no legal grounds to stand on. For those hoping the deal would close, here's the good news.
Microsoft refused to have this deal hamstrung on the game pass front. That's what it probably boils down to. And rather than kill the deal's value altogether, they let the FTC know what its redlines were. The FTC has its own redlines, only its redlines aren't built on anything much solid.
If it goes to a DC court, possibly June or July trial. FTC loses in 6-8 week trial, they don't appeal if they have some sense of shame. But if they don't, then they appeal, which then takes the appeal to 2024, possibly by April May, and then they lose the appeal and the acquisition closes fully April May 2024. The only thing the FTC would have changed is that they would have successfully delayed it enough to prevent any Activision Blizzard additions to Game Pass in 2023. But Sony's contract with Activision is still in effect all of 2024 anyway. And no new COD could go into Game Pass in 2023 either because Sony has a deal against that too.
So, translation, they're delaying the inevitable.
On the pure merits of monopoly and market power, the law is clearly on Microsoft's side here. Alarmingly so. Seems this was more about Lina Khan's reputation rather than any legal credibility. If this were to go to the FTC's internal administrative court, it may fail even worse, which is why their best shot would be to go to DC court.
But as I already mentioned, they (the FTC) best pray they get a judge who is at least tolerant of what they're attempting to do, which is to rewrite US law without any legislation backing it up.
GHG
Gold Member
Key takeaways at this point:
- Whatever concessions Microsoft are currently offering are not enough in any of the key regions (US, EU, UK and China)
- The UK and EU will both be doing thorough investigations
- The FTC will have outlined what concessions will be required to Microsoft, if not promptly dealt with to the appropriate degree then injunctions will get filed.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Favorable Conce$$ions no doubt.
freefornow
Member
You do realise that Gamepass actually costs us green rats money to subscribe to? And no, it's not perpetually $1.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I mean, I don't disagree. Nor should you cheerlead the broken system because you love a brand and want what some perceive as "free" stuff in the short term.
GHG
Gold Member
That's not going to fly in the UK and EU so good luck. Whatever they offer needs to be enough to satisfy everyone, not just the FTC. So no, more of daddys cash will not suffice.
Ezekiel_
Banned
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
no just pointing out the very logical outcome we can all see possibly happening here
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I would not use the word "logical" with that broken system status quo.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
If MS wants to own Activision and Zenimax and Ubisoft, they should just go third party. Get out of the console business, and just make games like a third party publisher. If that is indeed their end game. We all know its not. It's to dominate the console market, but the solution here is so simple. Promise CoD for life. Release Starfield day one on PS5. Same with Elder Scrolls. Stop trying to pretend you are for gamers, and actually show it.
MS is basically a software company. I dont know why they keep trying to mess with hardware only to push subscriptions.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
TBH, Im surprised too. Of course I never left you a LOL reaction, but this push back from regulatory industries is surprising to see after they bent over backwards and let similar deals go through a few years. Disney + FOX, AT&T and Time Warner. Then Discovery and Time Warner. I think the only recent merger that fell through was the Nvidia ARM deal but that was mostly because it was a UK company. I wonder whats different this time around especially since MS has always been very chummy with these regulators.Disregard any comments from the individuals listed here (including
https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/atvi/insider-activity
Of course it's not. But please go back to some of the early threads regarding this deal where I was saying this would be far from straight-forward due to a number of reasons. Then look at the reactions those posts got from the usual suspects. It must hurt so much for some people to always be wrong. At this stage it's an artform.
Part of it could be Dark Brandon or Lina Khan, but CMA is also fighting this over in UK.
Sanepar
Member
Dumb Xbox fanboys think this benefits gamers because on their dumb minds gamepass will be $15 forever.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
There's no injunction attempt because they must feel they have a weak case. Either way, I hope they try that injunction, it can only help Microsoft.
They filed no immediate injunction at all, making this look entirely like a show trial they know they'll lose. Crazy. And they're using an internal administrative law judge - aka they were too afraid to file it in DC District court afraid it would be tossed out as nonsense.
100% delaying the inevitable. If they were truly confident they wouldn't have taken these steps imo.
ChiefDada
Member
Bro, still???
Exactly. MS apparently burned goodwill with their behavior post Bethesda deal with broken assurances. The FTC will only take formal concessions that would prevent the concerns listed in twitter post. They are essentially requiring them to step in the shoes of Activision and provide not even an ounce of ownership benefit for xbox players/gamepass subscribers. The deal isn't worth $69b if they have to concede to all of this. They may go to court but imo the deal will ultimately fall through.
Topher
Identifies as young
Or there is no need. Not like the acquisition is going be finalized in the next few weeks.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Again, that's not what it means.
Pelta88
Member
Disregard any comments from the individuals listed here (including
https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/atvi/insider-activity
You're on a forum where members, just a few pages back, claimed that people wouldn't dare, couldn't, or would be stupid to short sell Microsoft stock.
Last edited:
ChiefDada
Member
Ah yes! That's why they voted 3-1 in favor to sue! It all makes sense now!
Indeed.
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
Sorry for your loss
GHG
Gold Member
Over longer term timeframes I'm inclined to agree but for a swing trade here and there when the technicals make it clear there's an opportunity, why not.
That said, it's still grossly overvalued at current levels so I'm sure there will be some hedgefunds who will be short, and will remain short until the valuations say otherwise.
Last edited:
freefornow
Member
This post has level of irony to it. Just can't quite put my finger on it....................................
HoofHearted
Member
Rivet
Member
Which is the ultimate irony. They're cheerleading for something that has zero chance of benefiting them on the long run.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
The biggest fall at the end of this process will be this fella here. You're celebrating like you think you've won and the deal has been stopped. Do you realize how many cases the FTC lost just recently? It's a show trial at best. US law is crystal clear.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
If Microsoft gave assurances to EU regulators that it wasn't going to make Bethesda games exclusive and then did... That's going to be problematic to say the least.
They didn't. It's a much longer submission by Microsoft where they mentioned various scenarios. The exclusivity itself isn't the issue, especially in the case of Bethesda. It's the exclusivity's impact on the market and competition. And Microsoft went into detail on those very things explaining the what ifs of hypothetical exclusives for bethesda's games. The biggest commitments they made were to not remove games that were already on Playstation, a promise they have indeed kept.
There was no commitment at all ever that every future Bethesda game will be on Playstation.
TheAmazingSpiderMan
Member
From armchair analysts to armchair lawyers now 
SenjutsuSage
Banned
You file an injunction to express your seriousness to stop something that could be harmful. The CMA and EU, though their deadlines are what they are, could easily rule in favor or signal it will close in some fashion before the end of the year. A serious case would seek any injunction against any such possibility.
The impression of many professionals thus far is the FTC is afraid of it going into DC Federal court, where their challenge could be torn up.
Topher
Identifies as young
No, you don't. You file an injunction to ensure nothing changes before a ruling can be made. Isn't about "expressing your seriousness".
Which "professionals"?
Last edited:
R3claimer117
Member
Either way they aren't trying to stop it now. They know they'll lose. They're punting to eu and cma to save them from that prospect. I sure hope they know what a gambit that is.
Topher
Identifies as young
If they were punting then they would have just approved the thing.
Instead.....
FTC Seeks to Block Microsoft Corp.'s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard, Inc.
FTC Seeks to Block Microsoft Corp.’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard, Inc.
The Federal Trade Commission is seeking to block technology giant Microsoft Corp. from acquiring leading video game developer Activision Blizzard, Inc.
Sounds like they are trying to stop it to me.
Last edited:
digoutyoursoul
Member
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
Michael Pachter
- Status