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

Do you believe the deal will be approved?


  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
In the slightest? Like no possibility at all?

Why would that be?

I mean in an absolute extreme. Why wouldn't it be a possibility? I'm just interested because I'm clueless and the lawyer I was speaking to said it was a possibility....as a last resort. But who really knows lol

Doubt CMA and EC differ much in their conclusions.

That guy who works in Brussels highlighting COD as a point of contention didn't come out of thin air.

And yes I've seen Americans in the purple forum writing fan fiction about MS going through and leaving EU and UK behind. Is it possible? Sure. Would MS shareholders agree with it? Aahhahahahaba
 
No the FTC are just stalling things by going through an internal judge. The same judge who Microsoft informed that they would consummate the deal should it be approved elsewhere before it even goes before him.

The FTC needs to go to a federal court and win to block anything. They were just stalling in the hope that other regulators block it so that they wouldn't even need to go to a federal court.

But other regulators did block it unless concessions are made. Its pretty obvious that Microsoft won't get what they expected. Basically a clean acquisition with no concessions required.
 
Doubt CMA and EC differ much in their conclusions.

That guy who works in Brussels highlighting COD as a point of contention didn't come out of thin air.

And yes I've seen Americans in the purple forum writing fan fiction about MS going through and leaving EU and UK behind. Is it possible? Sure. Would MS shareholders agree with it? Aahhahahahaba
I post on the purple forum and have never seen any fanfiction like you just mentioned. Are you sure that you didn't just make that up?
 
I post on the purple forum and have never seen any fanfiction like you just mentioned. Are you sure that you didn't just make that up?
I'd be surprised if there isn't a fringe element saying that, considering people have touted it on here and over there they are even more militant about this going through.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone know if and when the EU will publish their concerns? If they don't I'm really surprised by that lack of transparency.

As I understand it the EU keeps its stuff confidential from it's side - it would be up to MS to publish the objections.

I don't know if there is a public bit at the end of the process though.
 
Just curious. What concessions does the EC want?

As for the FTC they just blocked it if I'm understanding the situation correctly.
They didn't block
They brought to court and is fucked there. EU didn't ask for any concession and probably will approve.

The only thing i hope microsoft does it is to absorb playstation studios the day sony is fucked.
 
But other regulators did block it unless concessions are made. Its pretty obvious that Microsoft won't get what they expected. Basically a clean acquisition with no concessions required.
Nothing is blocked yet! It's still in the air until the final decisions have been made. Although I still think that the deal is deader that the dodo

Plus, I was replying to your post where you said that the FTC has already blocked it when they haven't. Yes they want to block it, but they haven't yet blocked it or have the power to block it. That's all.
 
In the slightest? Like no possibility at all?

Why would that be?

I mean in an absolute extreme. Why wouldn't it be a possibility? I'm just interested because I'm clueless and the lawyer I was speaking to said it was a possibility....as a last resort. But who really knows lol

2 reasons:
  • Microsoft would need to exit the UK market entirely.
  • As per the terms of the deal set out to shareholders it is contingent on getting approval in a number of key regions/countries and the UK is one of those that was set out in writing.
 
I'd be surprised if there isn't a fringe element saying that, considering people have touted it on here and over there they are even more militant about this going through.
There's fringe elements everywhere. Just like the fanfiction in this thread where Microsoft are going to abandon the console business.

People only mention nonsense when they are console warring
 
The FTC hasn't blocked anything yet. Microsoft has already said that they will complete the deal if it is approved everywhere else. The FTC needs to file in a federal court and win in order for the deal to be blocked.

It's pretty much the CMA who is the most concerning for Microsoft

FTC has a court injunction that MS will have to get overturned.

But with the CMA ruling it seems unlikely it ever gets to court in the US now.

MS pull out, or they concede to the CMA, neuter the deal and the FTC approve the new arrangement. I suppose there's an outside chance the FTC thinks the concessions MS must make don't go far enough and press on with legal action despite CMA green lights - but courts are a roll of the dice.

EDIT : Oh welcome. Enjoy Hogwarts 👍
 
Last edited:
They didn't block
They brought to court and is fucked there. EU didn't ask for any concession and probably will approve.

The only thing i hope microsoft does it is to absorb playstation studios the day sony is fucked.

We might need to add a new category to the Kubler Ross cycle once all is said and done.
 
Last edited:
They didn't block
They brought to court and is fucked there. EU didn't ask for any concession and probably will approve.

The only thing i hope microsoft does it is to absorb playstation studios the day sony is fucked.
The only thing I hope is to collect all your salt if the deal doesn't get approved as MS wanted it.
 
FTC has a court injunction that MS will have to get overturned.

But with the CMA ruling it seems unlikely it ever gets to court in the US now.

MS pull out, or they concede to the CMA, neuter the deal and the FTC approve the new arrangement. I suppose there's an outside chance the FTC thinks the concessions MS mist make don't go far enough and press on with legal action - but courts are a roll of the dice.
Their injunction is with an internal administrative judge. The same judge who Microsoft informed that they would consummate the deal is everything goes well with the other regulators before it even goes before him in August. The FTC still needs to get the deal blocked in a federal court.

But imo the FTC knew beforehand which way the CMA would go, so pretty much knew that Microsoft would abandon the merger long before it would go to court.

It's fucking dead Jim
 
So now we're back to circle jerking the lustful idea of Microsoft/Xbox dying? Wtf is wrong with people... ahhh whatevs

No. That would be the biggest XBOX Sycophant with the most read dedicated XBOX site on the internet. A narrative he introduced when the CMA didn't go the way he thought it would.

 
Last edited:
Whether their market share is tiny or not , they still have their own cloud and could "potentially" withhold access to cod. Which is a no-go.
How though?

They are not incentivized to withhold the game on consoles because they don't have one. They have no PC storefront so they aren't necessarily incentivized to do that to Steam (and even then it's not as big of a deal because Activision always had Battle.net). And their position on Cloud streaming is not nearly as robust as Microsoft, so them having cloud doesn't really lessen competition on there either (in fact it increases it because now you have a reason to sub there instead of MS's offering).

Their incentives and market strength just do not make the move monopolistic in the way it would be for Sony/Microsoft.

You gotta keep in mind that the idea that this move is solely being blocked because of Big Tech is not true, big tech is not equal across varying acquisitions of varying sectors, Microsoft would not be barred from buying say, Newegg the way Amazon might be.
 
No. That would be the biggest XBOX Sycophant with the most read dedicated XBOX site on the internet. A narrative he introduced when the CMA did go the way he thought it would.



I'm talking about on this forum, not twitterverse. It's a whole different level of wacky out there.
 
Their injunction is with an internal administrative judge. The same judge who Microsoft informed that they would consummate the deal is everything goes well with the other regulators before it even goes before him in August. The FTC still needs to get the deal blocked in a federal court.

But imo the FTC knew beforehand which way the CMA would go, so pretty much knew that Microsoft would abandon the merger long before it would go to court.

It's fucking dead Jim
Sounds like you swallowed the Ree pill about the FTC internal court.

But whatever, you are right about the final part.

<hes_dead_jim.gif>
 
Last edited:
The only thing I hope is to collect all your salt if the deal doesn't get approved as MS wanted it.
Lol do you think I want this deal approved? Microsoft is the last company I would want to monopoly this industry. Their backlog in 22 year show their incompetence to manage studios.

But we know money is king.
 
So now we're back to circle jerking the lustful idea of Microsoft/Xbox dying? Wtf is wrong with people... ahhh whatevs

it could happen though. microsoft dont want to get their ass kicked over and over again. they've had discussions about it before according to phil spencer. were they "lusting" too? keep in mind the fact that recent NPD leaks have shown us that PS5 is outselling XBOX series 2 to 1. not only that but sony are more ahead now in the US then they were at the same point in time last generation! so XBOX has not only not gained any ground but have slipped further behind too.

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020...andoned-xbox-brand-after-the-xbox-one-launch/
 
Last edited:
They didn't block
They brought to court and is fucked there. EU didn't ask for any concession and probably will approve.

The only thing i hope microsoft does it is to absorb playstation studios the day sony is fucked.
This is were the EU are right now in regard to this deal. They have said that their decision will be made before the deadline of 11 of April.
If I have to make a comparison, they are like the CMA was on phase 1. We will see what their decision is in time but the CMA will go first as their deadline is in Febuary if I remember right.
 
How though?

They are not incentivized to withhold the game on consoles because they don't have one. They have no PC storefront so they aren't necessarily incentivized to do that to Steam (and even then it's not as big of a deal because Activision always had Battle.net). And their position on Cloud streaming is not nearly as robust as Microsoft, so them having cloud doesn't really lessen competition on there either (in fact it increases it because now you have a reason to sub there instead of MS's offering).

Their incentives and market strength just do not make the move monopolistic in the way it would be for Sony/Microsoft.

You gotta keep in mind that the idea that this move is solely being blocked because of Big Tech is not true, big tech is not equal across varying acquisitions of varying sectors, Microsoft would not be barred from buying say, Newegg the way Amazon might be.
The CMAs conclusions were chock full of potentials, maybes and what ifs. They could easily turn around and say that Amazon could withhold access.

After not because they are big tech, but because they would have the incentive seeing as they have their own cloud streaming platform.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, but after the what the CMA wrote, I get the impression that anyone with their own platform, hardware or cloud tech would not be allowed to purchase acti
 
Without cod as a platform? Almost 70% of players buy a playstation on UK only for cod. Imagine us, eu and uk. Now you know why. Without cod playstation as a platform can't stand. They are not Nintendo.

Microsoft said they would release COD on PlayStation as long as it exists. They shouldn't have an issue meeting CMAs requirements since making COD exclusive was never a priority for them.
 
Without cod as a platform? Almost 70% of players buy a playstation on UK only for cod. Imagine us, eu and uk. Now you know why. Without cod playstation as a platform can't stand. They are not Nintendo.
They can make a partnership with EA to help improve Battlefield and create real competition for COD. They also have Bungie working on a multiplatform game (besides Destiny).
 
Sounds like you swallowed the Ree pill about the FTC internal court.

But whatever, you are right about the final part.

<hes_dead_jim.gif>
The ree pill? Or just stating the way that it works?!

If the internal court was the final arbiter in the decision, why did Microsoft confirm that they would consummate the deal before the process had even started?
 
Cma said that to us on their report. It is not my statistics.

Where did the CMA say that?

If Call of Duty was a full Xbox & PC exclusive:

7.173 Results indicated that 24% of respondents would have bought an Xbox, a PC, or no gaming device at all instead of a PlayStation.

If Call of Duty was a partial Xbox & PC exclusive (e.g. exclusive content):

7.177 ... Results indicated 16% of our survey respondents, ie --% of UK PlayStation users move away from PlayStation in the event of a specific type of partial foreclosure strategy (ie content exclusivity).

That is a far cry from "almost 70% of players buy a playstation on UK only for cod".
 
The transaction goes ahead as planned.

Microsoft then have to sell off the element that they've agreed to with the CMA. It's yet to be determined what that would look like.

Hypothetically, they could come to an agreement to sell off the CoD IP, Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Sledgehammer and Raven.

This collective would then be sold by Microsoft to another company. Microsoft are not allowed to own this collective.

Could the new collective voluntarily choose to only make Xbox games? I don't know. It wouldn't make much sense for the future acquirer to ignore Sony so it's something that's extremely unlikely in my opinion.

Other people here know more than me so please feel free to chime in if I've got anything wrong.
I asked because I had no idea if the regulator imposes a rule in that transaction to make sure it blocks the issue (in this case to make CoD exclusive for MS console and cloud gaming platforms).

Because if it's only to sell these things, maybe Phillipa Spencer (Phil wearing a wig and red lipstick) could create a company named MacroSoft, buy that and still make CoD exclusive for MS console and cloud gaming.

I assume the regulator may somewhat control who buys that and verifies that what they wanted to avoid gets avoided.
 
The ree pill? Or just stating the way that it works?!

If the internal court was the final arbiter in the decision, why did Microsoft confirm that they would consummate the deal before the process had even started?

Who knows or cares. MS can't just side step the FTC or adjudicative court if the judge agrees there is a case to answer.

Assuming the case is brought (and as I mentioned the CMA finding is probably enough ensure the deal never sees a courtroom), when the adjudicative court finds against MS (I say "when" because it has a 100% record - of course it does, its the FTC's court) then its up to MS to get it overturned in federal court.

That takes years and most companies just back out. By the time a decision is made, the reasons for the acquisition are gone.
 
That takes years and most companies just back out. By the time a decision is made, the reasons for the acquisition are gone.

I'm just going to make a guess here.

I'm assuming that Microsoft is doing this because they need to make these acquisitions. And it seems to me they need this done quickly. I'm not sure if they will spend years fighting this acquisition in court rooms. Maybe it will be too late for them if they so that.

Not saying Xbox is doomed but it seems they want to get an many aquitions done ASAP.
 
Doubt CMA and EC differ much in their conclusions.

That guy who works in Brussels highlighting COD as a point of contention didn't come out of thin air.

And yes I've seen Americans in the purple forum writing fan fiction about MS going through and leaving EU and UK behind. Is it possible? Sure. Would MS shareholders agree with it? Aahhahahahaba

That itself would kill COD and Xbox.

Imagine a scenario in which Sony focused all of its attention on the american market knowing they didn't have to compete at all in Europe...
 
I'm just going to make a guess here.

I'm assuming that Microsoft is doing this because they need to make these acquisitions. And it seems to me they need this done quickly. I'm not sure if they will spend years fighting this acquisition in court rooms. Maybe it will be too late for them if they so that.

Not saying Xbox is doomed but it seems they want to get an many aquitions done ASAP.

Its a lot of time to tie up $69bn and be in limbo wondering whether the deal will go through.

MS originally tried to claim the FTC court proceedings were unconstitutional - perhaps they have a point - but then they quickly retracted those claims as errors on their part.

Either way, good start by telling the institution about to bring you to trial that you don't respect their authority.

Anyway that happened, but the FTC just dropped out of the court trial against Meta for example. If the FTC gets to "their" court they invariably win - the question is if it gets that far now.
 
Last edited:
Anyway that happened, but the FTC just dropped out of the court trial against Meta for example. If the FTC gets to "their" court they invariably win - the question is if it gets that far now.
Not sure that's the way it works,

FTC has to sue in Federal Court to block the deal. MS can close the deal and force the FTC to sue MS.

"When challenging mergers, the FTC files an administrative complaint and often concurrently goes to federal district court to obtain a preliminary injunction to prevent the parties from consummating the deal before the completion of the administrative process."

Back to watching Nope.
 
Not sure that's the way it works,

FTC has to sue in Federal Court to block the deal. MS can close the deal and force the FTC to sue MS.

"When challenging mergers, the FTC files an administrative complaint and often concurrently goes to federal district court to obtain a preliminary injunction to prevent the parties from consummating the deal before the completion of the administrative process."

Back to watching Nope.

And if they close the deal before agreeing to the concessions by the other regulators?

I honestly don't know what will happen in this situation.
 
And if they close the deal before agreeing to the concessions by the other regulators?

I honestly don't know what will happen in this situation.
They ain't going to close before agreeing deals with the EC and CMA, they can face much more hefty penalties.

Both the EC and CMA should be finalised one way or another by June at the latest. The FTC can try and drag this out if they want but MS could force their hand a bit.
 
Last edited:
Another way MS could look at this is whats COD worth VS the rest of ABK. They could just sell off COD, IW and treyarch, and have everything else. I know CODs a big earner but, whos to say that will be the case in ten years. It could fall from grace by its own design before then or something bigger newer and better comes along. I would imagine all this has probably motivated sony to push for their own flagship shooter, later down the line. They certainly have the talent to pull a COD rival these days with bungie around. and they will have that as an exclusive. So there's always that too. how will COD fair against these factors in a few years is any bodies guess, and given the recent massacre of live service games, maybe we are going to see some shift in gamers habits...who knows? and what of IW and treyarch...how much more enthusiasm do they have for making nothing but COD...being the COD studio. the creative fatigue must be soul destroying! Maybe some of them saw a glimmer a hope in the idea of a creating some passion projects under MS umbrella alongside COD. Maybe they leave post acquisition led divestment and do their own things.


If its about COD and its assets, including the devs....Well lets be honest...that bottled lighting was west and Zempalla, who moved on to form respawn and make titanfall, and apex legends. COD is still at its core the same formula they put together all those years ago. The remaining staff have done a great job of keeping the wheels oiled but lets be honest, at this point its the brand strength that sustains it and that same formula. Its coke/pepsi. Except this is a game...which means somebody can come along and do it better. In some cases it already has... those games were just not as popular or died or in the case of halo infinite just didn't work out, due to poor project management. Not to play down the talent at IW and treyarch but they aint jordan and pippen. they left the franchise years ago...the franchise just keeps selling the jersey every year.

So maybe they would be better off not burdened with COD and all its strings attached. I think the idea of an FPS set in starcraft's universe or an action RPG series set in WoW would make great spin offs for exclusive content. not to mention starcraft and WoW xbox editions on gamepass (they could introduce a new tier to include games that have monthly subs) Make halo great again. plus they got Doom and quake. they could just as easily reboot quake wars as a battlefield/battlefront/ground war sized game..... They would still get ravenstoft...who they could then reuinte with their old IP currently owned by bethesda, the hexen and heretic series..make some cool souls style-FP-RPG. Sony will no doubt be working on a COD rival in the coming years and MS need to do the same, especially after infinite failed.


Im not downplaying the relevence or value of COD but in this instance the juice clearly aint worth the squeeze. Divest COD, IW and treyarch. They can maintain warzone between them. let it be somebody else problem. I still think its worth keeping the activision part just for the rest of ip, same with blizzard. and I guess king is good for whatever they want do in the mobile space. Collectively I think there is more value in a bunch of well known IP than just COD. cut it loose and get the deal done. and maximise the value of what you do aquire by making new exclusives with them...new banjo..could even do a wacky crossover game with conker...maybe a new pitfall game somewhere down the road and Ive already mentioned the game ideas and different game styles they could do in the WoW and starcraft universes. And let us not forget they still have 23+ studios. personally I love obsidians output right now. bethesda and all its teams make more intersting stuff to me than COD. Xbox does not need COD as an exclusive and MS do NOT need COD as revenue. They need to invest in their studios and get their shit in order. Close this deal minus COD and just get in the game. any acquisitions after this should just be devs. Maybe buy bioware from EA,or a few studios from tencent etc. stuff like that. Mind you we aint gonna see anything this big again. unless apple/google buys nintendo or sony or something overtly crazy like that.


question is...what would be the new price for ABK without COD, to MS? does ABK even want to be split up? are they willing to do so to make this go through? I think they should..... If I was in MS shoes all the other IPs would still be worth purchasing ABK but at a reduced price, without COD. I guess Ill still be buying those 100 buck editions every year at my friends insistence every year...because I dont want to be the only one with no fancy new battle pass weapons. at least not at launch :messenger_grinning_sweat::messenger_grinning_sweat:


So Who is allowed to buy COD and is willing to go with all the strings attached (you have to put it everywhere, every year, it has to run the same on everything )...Cant be amazon or google for the same reason as MS in the cloud space I guess....Cant be sony for the same reason as MS in the console space only more so because they are the leading console as far as sales... Nintendo have zero interest in COD, but I guess they would not be allowed anyway.... Can T2 afford it? that leaves tencent or embracer? or maybe some other billionaire investor group. SO IW and and treyarch end up being COD factories forever. everybody still gets COD...happy ending?
 
They ain't going to close before agreeing deals with the EC and CMA, they can face much more hefty penalties.

Both the EC and CMA should be finalised one way or another by June at the latest. The FTC can try and drag this out if they want but MS could force their hand a bit.

Basically Microsofts only choice is to concede or drop the deal. It doesn't sound like they can get ABK without any concessions.
 
Arent almost all of if not all of Activision core studios working on COD? And isn't that why the CMA says "divest COD and the dev structure" but how? All of these Activision studios work on it? "Divesting Activision is an option" but then it's almost worthless from a core gaming aspect! "Divesting AB also works for us" but then we only get mobile!? "Mr Phil Spencer?"
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom