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.
Ar¢tos said:
Sure Jan.
MS already has talent, and IPs. They have more studios than Sony.
If the deal was about competing in mobile, they would buy just King.

But saying they are buying Activision to keep games multiplatform, when Activision already only does multiplatform games sounds like a big fat lie, just like when they said that they were keeping games multiplatform if they bought Zenimax.
Where are the Playstation versions of Redfall and Starfield they said they would do in the deal?
Click to expand...

Exactly, Phychonauts 2 ps5 version was canned due to MS.

Buying Betheada and cutting off PS5 games gives you the clue to what MS wants to do.

MS's goal is to take away 3rd party from Playstation which PS heavily relies on. SONY cannot survive only on first party stuff..they are not Nintendo. NINTENDO's franchines are now hooked in our brains and genes.
 
Ar¢tos said:
Sure Jan.
MS already has talent, and IPs. They have more studios than Sony.
If the deal was about competing in mobile, they would buy just King.

But saying they are buying Activision to keep games multiplatform, when Activision already only does multiplatform games sounds like a big fat lie, just like when they said that they were keeping games multiplatform if they bought Zenimax.
Where are the Playstation versions of Redfall and Starfield they said they would do in the deal?
Click to expand...

Nice reduction from a dozen facts I just laid down to one point about King, you say.

The deal has many facets and market segments, to oversimplify as you do is a strawman argument at best, and quite baseless.

There is nothing wrong with the majority of titles from this deal being multiplatform and some newer titles being exclusive. Even that phrase, exclusive...Sony and Nintendo just offer one platform, theirs. MS offers day one subs, purchases across PC, Xbox, xCloud/streaming.

How is Sony or Nintendo going there? Crickets.

I also put forth...would you like the deal to fail and $70Billion thrown around the industry in the same fashion Sony has for 10+ years? Or Xbox loss lead hardware to half its competitors pricing with such a warchest?

There are other options for MS if the deal fails, likely many of them worse for Sony than an industry first 10 year deal for parity day one and subs.
 
Last edited:
jm89 said:
They won't be taking CMA too court, so you can put that crackpot theory in the trash where it belongs.

The best they can do is appeal which will end up with the CMA to review. If CMA still aren't happy ms will be told to fuck off.

With FTC sure they can take them to court, but won't matter if CMA kill it.
Click to expand...

It's one market. Doesn't halt shit globally. There is also a large industry groundswell about to hit these regulators and their powers/rulings/interference.

Regulation is a good thing, a cowboy regulator is bad thing.

Here's a snippet for you about this backlash and abuse of due process by CMA, and thr legality appeals process being reviewed due to CMA abuse in the meta analysis.

As we expected, the CAT has now given the CMA the legal cover it needs to continue its interventionist merger control approach. However, the CAT's judgment has a sting in its tail. The CMA was found to have run an unfair process by failing to give Meta sufficient opportunity to see the relevant evidence and therefore defend itself. This will have ramifications for the CMA's merger processes in future.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
jm89 said:
They won't be taking CMA too court, so you can put that crackpot theory in the trash where it belongs.

The best they can do is appeal which will end up with the CMA to review. If CMA still aren't happy ms will be told to fuck off.

With FTC sure they can take them to court, but won't matter if CMA kill it.
Click to expand...

Looking at this it seems like Pfizer took the CMA to the Supreme Court over its findings and won on appeal.

Edit: Sorry they appealed to the competition tribunal and won then went to the Supreme Court about costs

www.supremecourt.uk

Competition and Markets Authority (Respondent) v Flynn Pharma Ltd and another (Appellants) - UK Supreme Court

When considering what costs to award following an appeal before the Competition Appeal Tribunal from an infringement decision of the Competition and Markets Authority, is there a starting point and if so, what is it? In particular, was the Court of Appeal correct to decide that there is a...
www.supremecourt.uk www.supremecourt.uk
 
Last edited:
Hero of Spielberg said:
Looking at this it seems like Pfizer took the CMA to the Supreme Court over its findings and won on appeal.

www.supremecourt.uk

Competition and Markets Authority (Respondent) v Flynn Pharma Ltd and another (Appellants) - UK Supreme Court

When considering what costs to award following an appeal before the Competition Appeal Tribunal from an infringement decision of the Competition and Markets Authority, is there a starting point and if so, what is it? In particular, was the Court of Appeal correct to decide that there is a...
www.supremecourt.uk www.supremecourt.uk
Click to expand...

Yep, there is a gamut of global rulings being overturned, meta was the biggest. It heavily favours MS post regulators sniffing their own farts.
 
Hero of Spielberg said:
Looking at this it seems like Pfizer took the CMA to the Supreme Court over its findings and won on appeal.

www.supremecourt.uk

Competition and Markets Authority (Respondent) v Flynn Pharma Ltd and another (Appellants) - UK Supreme Court

When considering what costs to award following an appeal before the Competition Appeal Tribunal from an infringement decision of the Competition and Markets Authority, is there a starting point and if so, what is it? In particular, was the Court of Appeal correct to decide that there is a...
www.supremecourt.uk www.supremecourt.uk
Click to expand...
Yes through an appeal. Not by taking them directly too court like they can with other regulators.
 
Ozzy Onya A2Z said:
It's one market. Doesn't halt shit globally. There is also a large industry groundswell about to hit these regulators and their powers/rulings/interference.

Regulation is a good thing, a cowboy regulator is bad thing.

Here's a snippet for you about this backlash and abuse of due process by CMA, and thr legality appeals process being reviewed due to CMA abuse in the meta analysis.
Click to expand...
CMA have killed big deals, you are fooling your self if ms are gonna continue without CMA apporval. Especially with UK market being very important for them.

I agree cowboys regulators are bad, that's why we have the CMA doing the work that other regulators don't do to keep companys in check.
 
Last edited:
Hero of Spielberg said:
So through appeal they can take the CMA to court?

Seems like it isn't as much of a crackpot theory as you made out.
Click to expand...
It is a crack pot theory when its clear you also thought with the Pfizer case that they took them to court when it was an appeal. They very link you posted disapproves what you said.
 
Last edited:
jm89 said:
CMA have killed big deals, you are fooling your self if ms are gonna continue without CMA apporval. Especially with UK market being very important for them.

I agree cowboys regulators are bad, that's why we have the CMA doing the work that other regulators don't do to keep companys in check.
Click to expand...

And you're kidding yourself if you think MS and Xbox have built this strategy for 5+ years to walk away from such a deal.

You're also not factoring in things like backlash from ActiBliz/shareholders or even if the stoxk crashes from MS and ActiBliz accepted high price. How many adverse issues could arise from the CMA and a total abandonment of this deal? Games cancelled, staff layoffs, backlash against Sony, less competiton against Apple/Google/Tencent.

The CMA/appeals have more to consider than just COD on Sony.
 
1077.jpg

You dont say.

If you ask Sony they will say yes we are trying to sabotage the deal.
 
I'm nobody said:
Imagine defending

Bobby Kotick

Click to expand...
Imagine looking at someone his explanation objectively.. even his .. I can . Doesn't mean I like him, I don't .

He is still right on this account btw.

Sony is market leader , they should work from their strengths ..

Create a better COD for example . But they don't seem confident they can take MS on, if they merge .. that is what this is ..
 
Last edited:
jm89 said:
It is a crack pot theory when its clear you also thought with the Pfizer case that they took them to court when it was an appeal. They very link you posted disapproves what you said.
Click to expand...
I edited my post. They appealed to the Competition Tribunal then took their fnding to the Supreme Court about their finding on payments / compensation . Regardless, despite what you suggest, CMA decisions can be appealed, it doesn't end with them and those appeals can then be taken to court.
 
Last edited:
Hero of Spielberg said:
I edited my post. They appealed to the Competition Tribunal then took their funding to the Supreme Court about their finding on payments. Regardless, despite what you suggest, CMA decisions can be appealed, it doesn't end with them and those appeals can then be taken to court.
Click to expand...
Despite what I suggested? I literally said they can appeal. You guys clearly thought ms can just waltz in and take CMA to court with their army of lawyers like with the FTC.
 
Last edited:
jm89 said:
I'm not saying they will back away from the deal. They will have to make some hard concessions if they want this going through.
Click to expand...

That I can agree with, but MS have always been prepared to be at the bargaining table. For me this is key why appeals and/or court heavily favour MS and this process abuse being reformed for CMA/FTC etc.
 
jm89 said:
Despite what I suggested? I literally said they can appeal. You guys clearly thought ms can just waltz in and take CMA to court with their army of lawyers like with the FTC.
Click to expand...
Haha, you said they wouldn't be taking them to court and any appeal ends up with the CMA and if they still don't agree they'll be told to fuck off.

I'm not assuming anything, I'm just pointing out you were mistaken.
 
Hero of Spielberg said:
Haha, you said they wouldn't be taking them to court and any appeal ends up with the CMA and if they still don't agree they'll be told to fuck off.

I'm not assuming anything, I'm just pointing out you were mistaken.
Click to expand...
Well ms won't be taking them to court that's my point, which you guys where clearly jumping up and down about.

Yeah there is an intermediate step with cat, that's part of the appeal process which can just end up them sending it back to CMA for review.
 
We should absolutely listen to what this man says. It's not like he stands to personally gain a huge amount from this deal financially or anything.
 
Cyberpunkd said:
1. He is a piece of shit
2. He is extremely good at his job
3. Sony is trying to sabotage the deal, no doubt about it. It was never about letting CoD on PlayStation, that was Sony's excuse. No matter the terms not letting the deal go through is much more preferable for Sony.
Click to expand...

Sony obviously object to the deal and it is absolutely within their right to do so, Sony's concern is their own interests and not Microsoft's. To call this "sabotage" is a bit out there.

"The whole idea that we are not going to support a PlayStation or that Microsoft would not support the PlayStation, it is absurd."

Is that really his argument? It's far from absurd, it's really only a matter of timeframe.
 
jm89 said:
Well ms won't be taking them to court that's my point, which you guys where clearly jumping up and down about.

Yeah there is an intermediate step with cat, that's part of the appeal process which can just end up them sending it back to CMA for review.
Click to expand...
'You guys'?

Anyway, it is possible that they could take them to court so it seems strange categorically deny that as a possibility and appeals can also be found against the CMAs decision, so it doesn't just end up with them to tell MS to fuck off?
 
I don't see an issue with what Sony is doing. Why would they want to be constructive to make a deal happen that they feel isn't beneficial for them?
 
If the deal doesn't go through then Bobby misses out on his big fat pay check, so where does this leave Sony's relationship with Activision once the dust has settled?

I wonder if Sony ever considered that Activision may make a CoD Game Pass deal down the line.
 
Of course Sony is sabotaging it. It's in their best interest.

Just like MS is saying anything to get this through Sony is using anything to get it stopped, and that golden bullet is call of duty.

Microsoft are constantly, publicly stating that they are wanting to talk and work things out I don't know what Sony are doing but can Bobby lie in this case?
 
Last edited:
Hero of Spielberg said:
Like assuming that MS will take COD exclusive after their agreement… everything that hasn't occurred yet is an assumption
Click to expand...
Precedence and evidence matter, however, and help us make informed predictions -- which are different from unfounded assumptions.

Just like the CMA made an informed evidence-based prediction regarding COD exclusivity.

wcj39s6.jpg
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Precedence and evidence matter, however, and help us make informed predictions -- which are different from unfounded assumptions.

Just like the CMA made an informed evidence-based prediction regarding COD exclusivity.

wcj39s6.jpg
Click to expand...
It is a consideration, but if every company has to go through a purity test prior to an acquisition there's be no deals done.

Edit: Which is also why contractual obligations occur in every business deal
 
Last edited:
The main goal with the Bethesda & Activision acquisitions (if it even goes through) are to foreclose Sony from big IPs permanently in the long term & kill their market share with huge buyouts like this cause they can't compete for shit with their current portfolio. It's good that regulators (especially the CMA) saw that & it's most likely looking like the deal only goes through without CoD, which is good. It's in Jimbo's & Sony's best interests to kill the deal lol, they're doing their jobs.
Little Chicken said:
I wonder if Sony ever considered that Activision may make a CoD Game Pass deal down the line.
Click to expand...
Jimbo knows what he's doing.

Fim31OJXgAEqydn
 
Last edited:
Ozzy Onya A2Z said:
Nice reduction from a dozen facts I just laid down to one point about King, you say.

The deal has many facets and market segments, to oversimplify as you do is a strawman argument at best, and quite baseless.

There is nothing wrong with the majority of titles from this deal being multiplatform and some newer titles being exclusive. Even that phrase, exclusive...Sony and Nintendo just offer one platform, theirs. MS offers day one subs, purchases across PC, Xbox, xCloud/streaming.

How is Sony or Nintendo going there? Crickets.

I also put forth...would you like the deal to fail and $70Billion thrown around the industry in the same fashion Sony has for 10+ years? Or Xbox loss lead hardware to half its competitors pricing with such a warchest?

There are other options for MS if the deal fails, likely many of them worse for Sony than an industry first 10 year deal for parity day one and subs.
Click to expand...
You conveniently ignored the part of Zenimax games no longer being multiplatform, against what MS said it would do.
After that you expect people to just believe they will let Activision games continue to be multiplatform?
If they lied once, what's stopping them from lying again?
 
I say good job to Sony fighting back.

This deal doesn't affect me at all since I own a high-end PC in addition to a PS5 so I will always have access to games wherever they go but if you think for one second this deal wasn't created to sabotage Sony in the first place, then I got a bridge to sell you.


This deal was created with the sole purpose of Microsoft taking games away from Playstation platform, especially the #1 game on Playstation (COD). Anyone who claims otherwise is a fucking liar. After two decades of competing and failing against Sony, MS saw their golden opportunity when Activision was looking for a buyer and they decided to swoop in. The deal isn't about mobile or King or even fucking Xcloud. It's about taking COD away from Playstation and putting it on GamePass and harming Sony in the process.

The regulators, Sony and even regular gamers know this. That's why the regulators called out MS' bluff. They weren't buying the bullshit that MS was buying the biggest 3rd party publisher on the planet for a record $69 billion just for access to King. If MS was truly interested in King they would have bought it easily before Activision did in 2016. Microsoft are fucking liars and lied about Bathesda's games remaining on Playstation in the past and no one believes them when they say they are gonna allow COD to remain on PS after buying Activision.

The piece of shit Bobby Kotick is just mad that Sony complaining got the CMA/FTC involved and fucked with his golden parachute and that's why he's complaining about sabotage.
 
Last edited:
Hero of Spielberg said:
It is a consideration, but if every company has to go through a purity test prior to an acquisition there's be no deals done.

Edit: Which is also why contractual obligations occur in every business deal
Click to expand...
But every company goes through it if the acquired property/company is big enough to cause market disruption -- which is the case here.

When MS acquired Zenimax, regulatory bodies didn't have this concern because the company/properties weren't big enough to cause this level of disruption.

H6qma7Q.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MS/ABK is advertising games that don't exist for data collection
46
2K
POKEYCLYDE replied
My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games
2 3 4
156
6K
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
18K
GateofD replied
Microsoft has Closed the Activision Blizzard King Deal
22 23 24 25 26
1K
99K
MasterCornholio replied
Top Bottom