Daneel Elijah
Member
The CMA have made a 277 pages document presenting theirs conclusions. We use snippets of those to discuss the deal here. A legal document is not like a normal discussion, but when done correctly can be easy to read and understand.
During the process Microsoft presented their case and answered questions. They did it with the idea to have the deal done with basically no change or limitations to the deal. So that they can do whatever they want with ABK when they finish the merger. It worked with Zenimax. The same questions were asked then and Microsoft was noncomital about things like exclusivity.
The CMA refutes some of Microsoft claims. Says that there is clear possibility of harming consumers if the deal is made as it is. Says that remedies that are not structurals are hard to enforce, not really effective, and ripe with abuse( they had a 15 years study about behavioural remedies)It even says that nothing presented at this point would be acceptable as a remedy.
Then it suggest divesture as a way to accept the deal. But says that Microsoft can still propose what it wans and that they will look out. Compare and contrast that with Sony acquisition of Bungie: they put in writing that Bungie would remain independent. The CMA and others organisations let it pass fast. If microsoft were serious about it they would have done the same. And it would have put a lot of the CMA concerns to rest.
But they didn't and Sony publicly declared that the offer they got from Microsoft was only 3 years, and not adequate a all. It is easy to say things but put them in enforcable documents is different. Look at the "10 years deal" that Microsoft is said to have made with Nintendo. It will depend at the minimum on how the merger works. If divesture is made, how can they honor that deal if they do not have control of COD?
Can the deal happens? Of course. Can it be with remedials instead of a divesture? Yes. But the snippets shown here made some of us think that a remedial could be worse than symply making COD independent. It all depends on what Microsoft wants. But they failed to anticipate the CMA concerns at the least. And dit not respond to them in a manner that made behavioural remedies easy to accept: we are in the phase 2 of the process and the answer is no for the moment.
Microsoft HAS to change its proposition and cannot do the merger like they did with Zenimax. The question is what do they want? And what are they ready to do to have what they want? We will see that in the coming months.
The EU has made a statement of objection to the deal and we do not know what will be their opinion on this yet.
