feynoob
Banned
Anything can change. Nothing is guarentee.Idas expects CMA to approve without remedies.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/th...e-right-to-put-cod-on-ps.633344/post-98577454
Anything can change. Nothing is guarentee.Idas expects CMA to approve without remedies.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/th...e-right-to-put-cod-on-ps.633344/post-98577454
Any GAF members actually believe these e-mails are legit or in any way representative of public opinion please PM me, I've got some great time shares in Arizona you might be interested in.
You're the only one who seems to be doing that to justify something worse.I'll concede here. PUBG was a real get.
No one better bitch about moneyhat again though![]()
Idas expects CMA to approve without remedies.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/th...e-right-to-put-cod-on-ps.633344/post-98577454
Anything can change. Nothing is guarentee.
You're the only one who seems to be doing that to justify something worse.
A lawyer who is covering for Era about this deal.who is he? why he getting quoted here?
Actually a little salt can cut the bitterness of coffee. Butter coffee is great if you've never tried!Do you take salt with your coffee?
Who and why is this any more important of an analysis?
You speak like Nintendo and Sony weren't pushing traditional consoles along with their hand held efforts. Nintendo would have preferred you buy a GameCube or Wii of you wanted to play on a television. They never argued you should buy DS over a GameCube. Just like Sony didn't argue for you buy a Vita over a PlayStation. The Switch is a hybrid and is absolutely competitive with the Xbox and PlayStation today in the ways the hand helds were not.Brilliant. All Nintendo needed to do to convince potential xbox and PS2 owners to buy a DS instead was include a hdmi out and ability to use an external controller then took out an ad in the newspaper. Think of all the PS2 and xbox users who would have migrated to it instead. That's all that mattered, performance for game development and audience is completely irrelevant after all. Just that one feature and the little library crossover that existed would have made them a viable competitor. Should have told them not to bother with the gamecube.
Who cares? It doesn't change the reality that the Switch is in direct competition with the Xbox and PlayStation. There is still plenty of cross over right now with that new Final Fantasy game hitting Switch along with the new Minecraft Legends game.I like the fact that you broadly say xbox and playstation too instead of Xbox Series and PS5 because little to no games that are next gen exclusives have that library crossover with switch (like PS5 and Xbox Series do) due to that growing power difference.
Sensue is getting happy for his stock.Who and why is this any more important of an analysis?
These Arizona Time Shares are 100% guaranteed 'bird' free.
Why do you sound like the guy who is handing out free candies?These Arizona Time Shares are 100% guaranteed 'bird' free.
Companies can get creative when they want to fend off a government challenge to an illegal merger. As chair of the Federal Trade Commission, I’ve heard would-be merging parties make all sorts of commitments to be better corporate citizens if only we would back off from a lawsuit. If only we hold off on suing to block the merger, they promise they will reduce their carbon footprints, give back to the community and so on. These commitments sometimes fall under the heading of ESG, for environmental, social and corporate governance factors. Some in corporate America seem to think that the FTC won’t challenge an otherwise illegal deal if we approve of its ESG impact.
They are mistaken. The antitrust laws don’t permit us to turn a blind eye to an illegal deal just because the parties commit to some unrelated social benefit. The laws we enforce are explicit: They prohibit mergers that “may substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly.” They don’t ask us to pick between good and bad monopolies. Our statutory mandate is to halt a lessening of competition “in any line of commerce.” So we can’t act as deal makers, allowing reduced competition in one market in exchange for some unrelated commitment or benefit in another.
Because, like your intuition tells you, somethings are too good to be true. Truth is these time shares are fuckin riddled with birds, birds as far as the eye can see, and similarly Microsoft isn't your friend or some altruistic underdog. It's total bullshit. Anyways moving on.Why do you sound like the guy who is handing out free candies?![]()
MS were never my friend. They never send me money at all. Who does that to their friend.Because, like your intuition tells you, somethings are too good to be true. Truth is these time shares are fuckin riddled with birds, birds as far as the eye can see, and similarly Microsoft isn't your friend or some altruistic underdog. It's total bullshit. Anyways moving on.
You should at least mention that the article is an opinion piece written by Lina 'queen' Khan.![]()
As chair of the Federal Trade Commission
Actually a little salt can cut the bitterness of coffee. Butter coffee is great if you've never tried!
Also not really emotional or feeling 'salty' or having feelings about the whole thing. I personally wouldn't be surprised to see the purchase happen with little to no concessions based on how weak the FTC arguments are.
That said, I just don't trust Microsoft for shit and neither should anyone else. Their track record speaks for itself.
Not to say Nintendo or Sony are angels, but by comparison I'd take their vision of gaming over Microsoft's any day. Just my opinion.
Companies can get creative when they want to fend off a government challenge to an illegal merger. As chair of the Federal Trade Commission, I’ve heard would-be merging parties make all sorts of commitments to be better corporate citizens if only we would back off from a lawsuit. If only we hold off on suing to block the merger, they promise they will reduce their carbon footprints, give back to the community and so on. These commitments sometimes fall under the heading of ESG, for environmental, social and corporate governance factors. Some in corporate America seem to think that the FTC won’t challenge an otherwise illegal deal if we approve of its ESG impact.
They are mistaken. The antitrust laws don’t permit us to turn a blind eye to an illegal deal just because the parties commit to some unrelated social benefit. The laws we enforce are explicit: They prohibit mergers that “may substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly.” They don’t ask us to pick between good and bad monopolies. Our statutory mandate is to halt a lessening of competition “in any line of commerce.” So we can’t act as deal makers, allowing reduced competition in one market in exchange for some unrelated commitment or benefit in another.
I also invite you to tell me where they mention or "concern" about the interests of the workers.... A very important part after scandals of humiliating treatment and job security.
Nothing, they only show concern that Sony will affect their income and their leadership position. That this omission to other third parties more important than the benefits that Sony may lose is not relevant to you, of course, it is not surprising![]()
Again the fact that you believe the CMA should be looking at ABK workers conditions (as if that can't be resolved without a buyout and is in any way related to the Competition and Mergers Authority) shows me that it's you who has a "beloved", or is it arch-enemy, and enjoys deflection of the issue.
A lawyer who is covering for Era about this deal.
Lawyer is lawyer.Is he a good one though? Lol
Lawyer is lawyer.
They released a traditional console to compete with other high performance consoles. If sony had gone with your theory that performance is irrelevant to competing in the submarket, released PSP Go and advertised it as having the tv out and bluetooth controller support it would have completely given up competing for pretty much most third party game sales on the machine.You speak like Nintendo and Sony weren't pushing traditional consoles along with their hand held efforts. Nintendo would have preferred you buy a GameCube or Wii of you wanted to play on a television. They never argued you should buy DS over a GameCube. Just like Sony didn't argue for you buy a Vita over a PlayStation. The Switch is a hybrid and is absolutely competitive with the Xbox and PlayStation today in the ways the hand helds were not.
Him being lawyer, means he knows his stuff.we know not all are good. that's the thing, lets hope he's good though and knows his stuff
we know not all are good. that's the thing, lets hope he's good though and knows his stuff
He's the only one of his type that we have updating something like this, so it's a matter of beggars can't be choosers.
Only one aside Hoeg, that is.
Your way of misrepresenting is funny...FTC Head 21st December 2022:
Hmmm, I wonder where I've stumbled on that absolutely bonkers creativity before? Was it the Darsxx, Darkmage and catlady circlejerk trying to tell me regulators should care about social and corporate governance? Put down your corporate paintbrushes you creative lot:
Nintendo has always marched to the beat of their own drum. They stuck with cartridges even when other platforms abandoned them. They have always made moves to differentiate themselves on the market, every manufacturer does. The changes they made are a testament to the diversity in the industry. Just because they are doing something different doesn't mean they aren't competing. Again Sony does VR that mean it's not a game console anymore? Of course not.They released a traditional console to compete with other high performance consoled. If sony had gone with your theory that performance is irrelevant to competing in the submarket, released PSP Go and advertised it as having the tv out and bluetooth controller support it would have completely given up competing for pretty much most third party game sales on the machine.
This is what put Nintendo in a position to differentiate from that market and ultimately create a hybrid in the first place. They just streamilined their own first party output to one machine. A machine that wasn't competing in power or even for much third party multiplatform sales.
He's a lawyer with specific experience on mergers and acquisitions I believe, but don't quote me on that, but I'm pretty sure that's what I've read about him.
Ah but the DS/3DS and home consoles all had video games on them therefore they were all competing for your money and the same mindshare.You speak like Nintendo and Sony weren't pushing traditional consoles along with their hand held efforts. Nintendo would have preferred you buy a GameCube or Wii of you wanted to play on a television. They never argued you should buy DS over a GameCube. Just like Sony didn't argue for you buy a Vita over a PlayStation. The Switch is a hybrid and is absolutely competitive with the Xbox and PlayStation today in the ways the hand helds were not.
None of this has anything to do with the argument about high performance consoles market which was always complete nonsense. Not even sure what you are arguing anymore but the fundamentals have not changed no matter how you try to obfuscate the point. The Switch is in direct competition with the Xbox and PlayStation and high performance console stuff is a complete fabrication made by the FTC just like saying the Switch isn't for serious gamers.
Who cares? It doesn't change the reality that the Switch is in direct competition with the Xbox and PlayStation. There is still plenty of cross over right now with that new Final Fantasy game hitting Switch along with the new Minecraft Legends game.
Nintendo will release a new device and it most likely will also be in competition with traditional consoles just like the Switch is now. The fact that the Switch has an additional feature is no different than VR and multiple consoles at different performance levels. It doesn't change its place in the market.
Releasing video games.I have no idea what track record it is you're speaking of. Sony's vision of gaming over Microsoft's? What's that exactly?
It might come as a big surprise, but this has probably been Jez Corden's best take on the merger yet.
It might come as a big surprise, but this has probably been Jez Corden's best take on the merger yet.
It might come as a big surprise, but this has probably been Jez Corden's best take on the merger yet.
Which Gaffer is the sound guy for that channel here ?
All competing for the same money and time. Also where was all talk of 'high performance console' market nonsense then? I thought that was always how it was described. And which system was for serious gamers?Ah but the DS/3DS and home consoles all had video games on them therefore they were all competing for your money and the same mindshare.
All competing for the same money and time.
PC and console gaming markets are totally different. It's like comparing portable and home consoles.
PC and Console markets are different. He's not wrong about that.
Consoles = home devicesAll competing for the same money and time. Also where was all talk of 'high performance console' market nonsense then? I thought that was always how it was described. And which system was for serious gamers?
Thanks for the reply. Definitely happening, but these are AA and indies. Some gems in there but nothing like FF7R or Ghostwire, etc.
I don't think MS has grabbed a AAA exclusive for while. I don't think it's not for trying, but their position in the market doesn't make them too appealing for leading publishers to get in on a deal like that.
Money hatting for those games started before MS even got in to the business.Microsoft could outbid Sony for all the exclusives Sony bought. But ultimately Microsoft is guilty of moneyhatting just as Sony is. AAA's? No, not for quite some time I don't think. Have they? Of course. Does either have the moral high ground here? Of course not.
Money hatting for those games started before MS even got in to the business.
MS just took them to the next business.
Also for outbidding part, it's impossible.
You have to consider these formulas.
Platforms base plus lost sales from the other platform. MS has to pay a lot here, as they need to cover PS lost sales.
Then you get in to Japanese games, which costs a lot. Since MS has little presence in Japan, devs in that region would request more than regular western devs, as the game would flop hard in that region due to low sales.
Currently, Sony has huge advantage over MS in term of timed exclusives for AAA games.