Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)

Do you believe the deal will be approved?

  • Yes, will be approved without changes.

    Votes: 221 24.9%

  • Yes, will be approved but with structural changes to ABK.

    Votes: 102 11.5%

  • Yes, will be approved but only with behavioral concessions.

    Votes: 262 29.6%

  • No, will not be approved.

    Votes: 301 34.0%
  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
adamsapple said:
Click to expand...


nhfjUcD.jpg
 
Last edited:
On Era there's some incredible mental stretches, here's one of the best :

Oh, you're talking about if the deal gets completely blocked? Yeah, that's awful for the everyone involved except Sony.

  • Bad for ABK employees and their well-being.
  • Bad for anyone who wants Bobby Kotick out of games.
  • Bad for unionization of the industry.
  • Bad for Game Pass subscribers who'd like more content.
  • Bad for Switch players who were gonna get Call of Duty.
  • Bad for people who believe CoD would be healthier if it wasn't annual.
  • Bad for anyone who would like to have more ABK franchises than just CoD get made.
  • Bad for cloud gaming adoption overall.
  • Bad for individual customers of cloud gaming services, where not ABK games exist on any of the services today.
  • Bad for ending dumb exclusive content deals in multi platform games.
  • Bad for anyone who wants to see Apple & Google's duopoly on App Stores challenged.
  • Bad for anyone who wants to see Sony challenged more in the console space.
  • Bad for anyone who believe government agencies should be bound to following laws and facts, not ideology.
Look, I know we're supposed to pretend "all opinions on this are valid", but they simply aren't. It's been over a year and no one has put together a coherent argument on why this is bad. Just people putting their extreme personal politics (or worse, console warring) above all else. The facts do not support it and there's no reason to pretend otherwise.
Click to expand...
 
Heisenberg007 said:
It is different because your statements changed as the regulators kept tightening the noose around Microsoft. 😛 Before that, you were totally onboard the no-concession and no-multiplatform-beyond-three-years trains. 😛
Click to expand...

Whoda thunk that people can change opinions based on changing scenarios over a period of many months :messenger_expressionless:
 
Last edited:
POKEYCLYDE said:
To put in perspective how much this deal is worth, Microsoft could buy Kadokawa, Square Enix and Capcom at double what they're worth (a 100% premium) and ONLY reach 35 billion, roughly half of what this ABK deal is worth.

They said they were still looking to acquire after ABK, I don't see why they'd abandon the strategy. Even if they only kept 1/3 of the 70B for Xbox acquistions, they can do a lot with 22B.
Click to expand...

Yes. Microsoft is going to be savage and take revenge on Sony and go scorched earth by buying up everything. Another fantasy by Resetera members. You included. :messenger_winking::messenger_winking::messenger_winking:
 
Edmund said:
Yes. Microsoft is going to be savage and take revenge on Sony and go scorched earth by buying up everything. Another fantasy by Resetera members. You included. :messenger_winking::messenger_winking::messenger_winking:
Click to expand...
🙄 Yes, because that's what I said.

Microsoft has hit a road block in their strategy. You would be naive to think this road block means they'll give up on future acquistions. It's not like this acquistion being blocked means all future acquistions will be blocked. There is quite clearly a line being drawn at what acquisitions would and wouldn't stand a chance at going through.

Publishers with megalithic IP like Call of Duty, GTA, Fortnite, Fifa.. those are off the table. Smaller publishers that have a track record of engaging in exclusivity are on the table. That includes publishers like Square Enix. I don't exactly know what Microsoft will go for if this acquisition is successfully blocked, but they'll have at most 66B to shop around with.

I don't think this hurdle stops Microsoft in their tracks, if anything they'll be looking for content to fill the shoes Call of Duty would have.
 
POKEYCLYDE said:
🙄 Yes, because that's what I said.

Microsoft has hit a road block in their strategy. You would be naive to think this road block means they'll give up on future acquistions. It's not like this acquistion being blocked means all future acquistions will be blocked. There is quite clearly a line being drawn at what acquisitions would and wouldn't stand a chance at going through.

Publishers with megalithic IP like Call of Duty, GTA, Fortnite, Fifa.. those are off the table. Smaller publishers that have a track record of engaging in exclusivity are on the table. That includes publishers like Square Enix. I don't exactly know what Microsoft will go for if this acquisition is successfully blocked, but they'll have at most 66B to shop around with.

I don't think this hurdle stops Microsoft in their tracks, if anything they'll be looking for content to fill the shoes Call of Duty would have.
Click to expand...
GOODLUCK on square enix. Jesus that is some fanboy wetdream you got there. And no when this deal fails, the regulators will keep their eyes on ms for future acquisitions.
 
POKEYCLYDE said:
🙄 Yes, because that's what I said.

Microsoft has hit a road block in their strategy. You would be naive to think this road block means they'll give up on future acquistions. It's not like this acquistion being blocked means all future acquistions will be blocked. There is quite clearly a line being drawn at what acquisitions would and wouldn't stand a chance at going through.

Publishers with megalithic IP like Call of Duty, GTA, Fortnite, Fifa.. those are off the table. Smaller publishers that have a track record of engaging in exclusivity are on the table. That includes publishers like Square Enix. I don't exactly know what Microsoft will go for if this acquisition is successfully blocked, but they'll have at most 66B to shop around with.

I don't think this hurdle stops Microsoft in their tracks, if anything they'll be looking for content to fill the shoes Call of Duty would have.
Click to expand...
Who is left for Microsoft to buy in the West?
  • Take 2 - they will run into the same problems as ABK
  • EA - same issues + they'd be eliminating a competitor in the nascent cloud gaming segment.
  • Ubisoft - Good luck with that. Reportedly Ubisoft tried but everyone refused to buy it. No one wants 20K employees to layoff and manage and a failing business on top. Tencent now owns almost 49.9% shares.
  • Embracer -- that's an option, yes, but can Xbox really afford to manage 132 development studios when they couldn't manage 5?
Then everything else is in the East where (1) Xbox will face unprecedented pushback, and (2) it wouldn't even make financial sense because Xbox represents less than 10% to 20% of the consumer base and community of those publishers:
  • Square Enix
  • Capcom
  • Bandai Namco
  • Koei Tecmo
  • Sega
  • Konami
Besides, if they make even the smallest move on any of this, Sony would join the bidding competition and likely close the acquisition with ease.
 
Last edited:
Heisenberg007 said:
The $100-billion company fighting the anti-competitive acquisition is bad.

The $2,000-trillion company that's acquiring publishers and taking their multiplatform games off of other platforms is good.

0YVIE4N.png
Click to expand...

I'm actually surprised that John Linneman would think this way. Always thought that he's one of the guys who just enjoys gaming.

I'd also like to call out a Resetera member by the name of Elanarie. He/She is a developer at EA but is openly a MS/Xbox stan and pro-acquisition. Like how could you represent EA and yet stan for MS and the acquisition.
 
Hero of Spielberg said:
These sort of suggestions always sound strange to me. It implies some sort of 'sportsmanship' in business.
Click to expand...
I suppose "anticompetitive" and "unsportsmanlike" are synonymous in a way. Fair competition in business would be the same as expected fair competition in sport. So I would say that there is "sportsmanship" in business too except that 'fairness' comes with laws instead of rules.

Taking away something to cripple a competitor vs improving your own performance would be considered anticompetitive. It's not about favourites or bias like N noise36 is trying to suggest.
 
Edmund said:
I'm actually surprised that John Linneman would think this way. Always thought that he's one of the guys who just enjoys gaming.

I'd also like to call out a Resetera member by the name of Elanarie. He/She is a developer at EA but is openly a MS/Xbox stan and pro-acquisition. Like how could you represent EA and yet stan for MS and the acquisition.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, John/Alex/Richard are all the same.

They are more interested in getting their exclusive previews, insider access, and flight tickets to events from Microsoft over the sanctity of the "hobby" they so claim to love.
 
azertydu91 said:
Pachter is the kind of guy that can't even predicts the color of the socks he'll wear tomorrow, even if he has only black socks.
Click to expand...
It's incredible how the guy's been calling himself a "videogame industry analyst" for 2 decades, yet he still manages to miss the mark in almost all his predictions.

One would have thought he'd gotten a little better at it but nope, he's still terrible.
 
POKEYCLYDE said:
🙄 Yes, because that's what I said.

Microsoft has hit a road block in their strategy. You would be naive to think this road block means they'll give up on future acquistions. It's not like this acquistion being blocked means all future acquistions will be blocked. There is quite clearly a line being drawn at what acquisitions would and wouldn't stand a chance at going through.

Publishers with megalithic IP like Call of Duty, GTA, Fortnite, Fifa.. those are off the table. Smaller publishers that have a track record of engaging in exclusivity are on the table. That includes publishers like Square Enix. I don't exactly know what Microsoft will go for if this acquisition is successfully blocked, but they'll have at most 66B to shop around with.

I don't think this hurdle stops Microsoft in their tracks, if anything they'll be looking for content to fill the shoes Call of Duty would have.
Click to expand...
Let them have Square Enix. Have you seen Forspoken? :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Unfortunately, John/Alex/Richard are all the same.

They are more interested in getting their exclusive previews, insider access, and flight tickets to events from Microsoft over the sanctity of the "hobby" they so claim to love.
Click to expand...
I mean most people that want this deal to pass want it for the "free" games so it's not surprising.
 
ToTTenTranz said:
It's incredible how the guy's been calling himself a "videogame industry analyst" for 2 decades, yet he still manages to miss the mark in almost all his predictions.

One would have thought he'd gotten a little better at it but nope, he's still terrible.
Click to expand...
Who pays him? Is this his main "job" / source of income?
 
Whether this deal goes through or not I do actually want to see a bunch of dirty laundry aired by both Microsoft and Sony. I don't understand why some of you keep saying "but this has nothing to do with Sony!" When at this point I think it's obvious it 1,000% does. I wanna see a bunch of info revealed that we would never otherwise have the chance to see.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Who is left for Microsoft to buy in the West?
  • Take 2 - they will run into the same problems as ABK
  • EA - same issues + they'd be eliminating a competitor in the nascent cloud gaming segment.
  • Ubisoft - Good luck with that. Reportedly Ubisoft tried but everyone refused to buy it. No one wants 20K employees to layoff and manage and a failing business on top. Tencent now owns almost 49.9% shares.
  • Embracer -- that's an option, yes, but can Xbox really afford to manage 132 development studios when they couldn't manage 5?
Then everything else is in the East where (1) Xbox will face unprecedented pushback, and (2) it wouldn't even make financial sense because Xbox represents less than 10% to 20% of the consumer base and community of those publishers:
  • Square Enix
  • Capcom
  • Bandai Namco
  • Koei Tecmo
  • Sega
  • Konami
Besides, if they make even the smallest move on any of this, Sony would join the bidding competition and likely close the acquisition with ease.
Click to expand...
I don't think that MS has 69b for anything else but the Activision acquisition. If this fails (likely), any other acquisition would have to undergo a new BuCa approval process. There's not such thing as a 69b bag of money for expenses.
 
gothmog said:
I mean most people that want this deal to pass want it for the "free" games so it's not surprising.
Click to expand...
And trust me when I say these people don't give a shit about unions or Bobby Kotick staying or leaving. These are just convenient excuses to use to justify more free games for them.

Makes them sound morally superior too. 😉😉
 
One of the things in the recent report is that supposedly over 25% of Playstation owners would defect to Xbox if COD is on Game Pass.

I really doubt that. The Sony fanboys are so brand loyal that they would gladly pay the $70 when it would still be on PS5, rather than defect.

But I guess most of these fans are too broke to buy both systems.
 
The Japanese publishers will not push Game Pass subs like ABK and EA would. COD, Madden and FIFA are on another level to most other gaming releases in terms of sales.
 
DenchDeckard said:
How is there tweets saying Sony look bad, and are acting bad etc?

I don't get it. Someone please explain to me?
Click to expand...
Just people being irrationally hurt at the prospect of not getting ABK games on GP.

3 regulatory bodies have confirmed that this is an anti-competitive acquisition. In other words, a bad thing for the industry. Sony is fighting this acquisition (or this bad thing).

And they are calling Sony bad lol.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Who is left for Microsoft to buy in the West?
  • Take 2 - they will run into the same problems as ABK
  • EA - same issues + they'd be eliminating a competitor in the nascent cloud gaming segment.
  • Ubisoft - Good luck with that. Reportedly Ubisoft tried but everyone refused to buy it. No one wants 20K employees to layoff and manage and a failing business on top. Tencent now owns almost 49.9% shares.
  • Embracer -- that's an option, yes, but can Xbox really afford to manage 132 development studios when they couldn't manage 5?
Then everything else is in the East where (1) Xbox will face unprecedented pushback, and (2) it wouldn't even make financial sense because Xbox represents less than 10% to 20% of the consumer base and community of those publishers:
  • Square Enix
  • Capcom
  • Bandai Namco
  • Koei Tecmo
  • Sega
  • Konami
Besides, if they make even the smallest move on any of this, Sony would join the bidding competition and likely close the acquisition with ease.
Click to expand...
No regulator would have reason to block an Eastern developer or publisher because Microsoft trails so heavily behind Sony and Nintendo in those markets. Plus, those games going exclusive wouldn't have a material impact in the west (where Sony and Microsoft are closer, which is why this acquisition is running into trouble).

For example, let's say Square was being acquired, and their flagship IP is Final Fantasy. Even if 50% of Final Fantasy gamers on Playstation would abandon the Playstation for the Xbox, that would only amount to a small percentage of actual Playstation players, therefore it wouldn't have a material impact on Sony. Especially since Final Fantasy has MANY competitors at the same quality of Final Fantasy.

You're right that Sony would probably want to bid on any east publisher Microsoft wants to acquire, but a publicly traded company has to do their fiduciary duty and get their shareholders the best possible price. And as many have pointed out, that 2 trillion dollar company was willing to spend almost as much as Sony's entire market cap on this one acquisition, I think they'd outbid Sony within reason. Publisher's personal feelings on who they think would be a good steward for their IP wouldn't be relevant either as it would really come down to shareholders wanting to maximize the profit on their investment.
 
Banjo64 said:
Make big tech stand down… by settling?

I think that's a big misreading of the situation.

Big tech will get the message when, as with the ARM deal, they are told NO.
Click to expand...

I honestly think that the ARM deal was way dangerous than this, especially under nVidia. Glad there are some regulators who give a fuck or two about fair markets.
 
POKEYCLYDE said:
No regulator would have reason to block an Eastern developer or publisher because Microsoft trails so heavily behind Sony and Nintendo in those markets. Plus, those games going exclusive wouldn't have a material impact in the west (where Sony and Microsoft are closer, which is why this acquisition is running into trouble).

For example, let's say Square was being acquired, and their flagship IP is Final Fantasy. Even if 50% of Final Fantasy gamers on Playstation would abandon the Playstation for the Xbox, that would only amount to a small percentage of actual Playstation players, therefore it wouldn't have a material impact on Sony. Especially since Final Fantasy has MANY competitors at the same quality of Final Fantasy.

You're right that Sony would probably want to bid on any east publisher Microsoft wants to acquire, but a publicly traded company has to do their fiduciary duty and get their shareholders the best possible price. And as many have pointed out, that 2 trillion dollar company was willing to spend almost as much as Sony's entire market cap on this one acquisition, I think they'd outbid Sony within reason. Publisher's personal feelings on who they think would be a good steward for their IP wouldn't be relevant either as it would really come down to shareholders wanting to maximize the profit on their investment.
Click to expand...
You ignored the most important point -- these Japanese pubs community and game sales on Xbox.

Think it through: what happens after the acquisition?

There is no audience for JRPG games on Xbox. If, say, Octopath Traveler or Nier Automata or Valkyrie Elysium becomes an Xbox exclusive, it'd hardly sell a few hundred thousand copies on Xbox.

If those games were put on Game Pass, they won't move the needle there either. JRPG games are not popular on Xbox for a reason. That's why Xbox will almost never make a move on these publishers -- because it just doesn't make business sense.

But it does make a lot of business sense for Sony. Because the revenue potential is there for Sony, they will be able to bid a higher amount than Microsoft would be willing to for these publishers. Sony can easily outbid Microsoft for these Japanese devs and publishers.
 
Evil Calvin said:
One of the things in the recent report is that supposedly over 25% of Playstation owners would defect to Xbox if COD is on Game Pass.

I really doubt that. The Sony fanboys are so brand loyal that they would gladly pay the $70 when it would still be on PS5, rather than defect.

But I guess most of these fans are too broke to buy both systems.
Click to expand...
The super hardcore COD fans do not give a shit about what platform they play on

They care about an extra skin or extra gun or anything extra that they can get by playing on a specific platform

adamsapple said:
Click to expand...

A lot of people behind the scenes are still very confident its going through as well
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
The super hardcore COD fans do not give a shit about what platform they play on

They care about an extra skin or extra gun or anything extra that they can get by playing on a specific platform


A lot of people behind the scenes are still very confident its going through as well
Click to expand...
I mean, sure it can go through. The CMA even laid out a path that MS can take to close the acquisition.

But does only closing the acquisition mean anything if MS has to let go of COD and/or Activision? That wasn't the intention at the start, so this won't be a win or success for Microsoft even if it closes like that.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
You ignored the most important point -- these Japanese pubs community and game sales on Xbox.

Think it through: what happens after the acquisition?

There is no audience for JRPG games on Xbox. If, say, Octopath Traveler or Nier Automata or Valkyrie Elysium becomes an Xbox exclusive, it'd hardly sell a few hundred thousand copies on Xbox.

If those games were put on Game Pass, they won't move the needle there either. JRPG games are not popular on Xbox for a reason. That's why Xbox will almost never make a move on these publishers -- because it just doesn't make business sense.

But it does make a lot of business sense for Sony. Because the revenue potential is there for Sony, they will be able to bid a higher amount than Microsoft would be willing to for these publishers. Sony can easily outbid Microsoft for these Japanese devs and publishers.
Click to expand...
Microsoft has said they want to break into the Japanese market. They can't do that without the games that that market gravitates towards. The Publisher selling doesn't care about their protifitability after the sale, that would be Microsoft's problem.

You're acting as if it's an impossibility. I'm not saying it's likely, but I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft pucks up a eastern publisher. Also there are plenty other "western" devs that could be up for grabs.
 
Maybe this has been covered, but what are the odds for the Call of Duty studios to survive on their own?

  • No funding from ATVI for projects
  • CoD tech, engine, and assets will belong to ATVI
  • They will be in competition with ATVI, who most likely will use all of the CoD assets in a new game.
  • The whole idea about structural remedies being easier to manage doesnt really work if the divested studio makes an exclusive deal years later, f ex with a platform holder. Back to square one.
It looks to me like the CMA threw the CoD developers under a bus, I mean they are going to have to start from scratch just like any other new studio. Or will the divested studios also own all of the tech and assets related to CoD? How is anyone going to decide what they can keep or not. It sounds like a mess to figure out.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Microsoft wins FTC appeal challenging $69 billion Activision Blizzard deal
News Business  2 3
125
928
Unknown? replied
MS/ABK is advertising games that don't exist for data collection
46
3K
POKEYCLYDE replied
My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games
2 3 4
156
7K
MDSLKTR replied
Microsoft, Activision Deny Report Regarding Financial Performance
Business Hardware  2 3
131
11K
Jaybe replied
What happened to all the people that were cheering over that MS Activision acquisition?
Drama  5 6 7 8 9
414
19K
GateofD replied
Top Bottom