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.
ReBurn said:
It doesn't mean Khan is winning. Khan lost against Meta in real court and didn't appeal because she knew she couldn't win. Chances are better than not that she'll lose to Microsoft in district court as well unless she can prove that the merger would be illegal.

The remaining republican commissioner quitting is not surprising. Republicans are going to want to make sure it's Khan standing alone against the law when the Supreme Court digs in to their administrative process this year so there's nobody but her to blame for any fallout.
Click to expand...

She knows whatever waits for her better than you ever could. The mandate is the mandate. What you think this her plan or something? Get a clue.
 
Hendrick's said:
So console warriors define a market now?
Click to expand...
When I walk into a games store and look at consoles I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go to an online store and select by console I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go read an online gaming forum they discuss consoles they discuss Xbox, PlayStation and Switch.

When I read an NPD sales report on consoles it includes PS, Xbox and Switch.

Yet for some reason when it comes to defining the video game console market, one of those gets omitted?

I find it very strange tbh.
 
Hero of Spielberg said:
When I walk into a games store and look at consoles I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go to an online store and select by console I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go read an online gaming forum they discuss consoles they discuss Xbox, PlayStation and Switch.

When I read an NPD sales report on consoles it includes PS, Xbox and Switch.

Yet for some reason when it comes to defining the video game console market, one of those gets omitted?

I find it very strange tbh.
Click to expand...
One gets omitted yet Xbox remains in third place too. Strange times.
 
Ass of Can Whooping said:
They were part of the conversation by virtue of being a console manufacturer. Not when it came to PS3 vs 360 or PS4 vs the One.
Click to expand...

Or when it comes to most games. Switch is about games, just not the same ones. The biggest game of the year last year was Elden Ring, but not to Switch gamers. Bayonetta 3, Xenoblade Chronicles 3, Splatoon 3, Triangle Strategy, etc. Different conversations entirely and yet still about video games.

Will Smith Reaction GIF
 
Hero of Spielberg said:
When I walk into a games store and look at consoles I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go to an online store and select by console I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go read an online gaming forum they discuss consoles they discuss Xbox, PlayStation and Switch.

When I read an NPD sales report on consoles it includes PS, Xbox and Switch.

Yet for some reason when it comes to defining the video game console market, one of those gets omitted?

I find it very strange tbh.
Click to expand...

When I walk into a computer store I see a laptop and a phone

Are they in the same market too?
 
FBeeEye said:
This deal needs to get done. They need it, not to compete with Sony but to position themselves against the company that will eventually buy Sony or the PlayStation business. The more I think about it. Apple makes the most sense. I expect to see this within the next 10 years.
Click to expand...
Captain America Lol GIF by mtv


:messenger_tears_of_joy: What a joke. No one is buying Sony, it's not even remotely possible.
 
GHG said:
Let me give you a tip. Hook that PC of yours directly up to your LG C2, get a comfy loveseat/armchair and plonk it in front of it.

I promise you you'll never cry about xbox again.
Click to expand...
I've been gaming like that for over a decade and I have been crying about PlayStation because I hate switching inputs. But yeah, I really appreciate not having to buy an Xbox for exclusives and PC gamepass is great.

I do think MS getting AB would be good for me because it would result in some AA games from AB studios coming to Gamepass. I also have never played COD and even have the 2020 one installed.
SneakersSO said:
Should this deal not go through, its highly unlikely anyone else will want to buy them.

MS honestly ignored a lot of fundamental problems with the ATVI deal, all so they could get the revenue stream and added Azure business; other big tech players will not do this, no matter how attractive the prospect of owning CoD is.

On the flip side, a lot of the reasons as to why Kotick moved to sell at the end of 2021 are no longer factors; CoD is back to doing well, Blizzard has/will release(d) some of their stronger forecasted items, ATVI is now back in active development on new AAA IPS (new IW offshoot in Texas/Blizzard Survival Game), and Kotick has taken ATVI through the bulk of the scandals and investigations and suits that were threatening him in the 2nd half of 2021.

Also, MS has no court they can take the CMA to in order to bypass them; they can claim impropriety, and the UK court simply kicks it back to the CMA for re-review. This, along with ATVI now hiring outside banks to act as Activist Investor protection is probably all we need to know to get an idea on where this is likely headed (vacating the purchase agreement).
Click to expand...
Why does procuring activist protection signal that the deal is more likely to fail than pass? Risk management doesn't work that way. A risk is analyzed for probability of occurring and cost of it should it occur. In many cases it makes sense to start spending on plan B because the cost of the risk is high and the probability of it occurring is high enough that it is very possible.

So it signals a plan B, but it doesn't tell us what they think the probability of failure is, just that the cost times the probability is high enough that it makes sense to spend something to reduce the impact of the risk. Risk reduction is a game of probability. If the deal falls through then AB will lose money and could be susceptible to activists. Hiring lawyers now doesn't mean it is likely to fail, it just means that the probability of it failing and the probability of activism if it fails is high enough that it makes sense to spend some money protecting against it. Potential losses are on the order of Billions. If there is a 10% chance that it fails and activists make it worse then the cost of that risk is on the order of 100s of millions. So it makes sense to pay 10s of millions to be in a better position. Its likely significantly higher than 10%, but it doesn't need to be anywhere near 100% to start spending money on alternatives.
 
Hero of Spielberg said:
When I walk into a games store and look at consoles I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go to an online store and select by console I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go read an online gaming forum they discuss consoles they discuss Xbox, PlayStation and Switch.

When I read an NPD sales report on consoles it includes PS, Xbox and Switch.

Yet for some reason when it comes to defining the video game console market, one of those gets omitted?

I find it very strange tbh.
Click to expand...


When I walk into a games store and look at consoles I see Google Play, iOS, Roblox Netflix games, Riot Games, Steam gift cards, PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go to an online store and select by console I see Google Play, iOS, Roblox Netflix games, Riot Points, fortnite vbucks cards, Steam gift cards, PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go read an online gaming forum they discuss consoles they discuss fortnite, Google Play, iOS, Roblox ,Netflix games, Riot games, Steam , Xbox, PlayStation and Switch.

When I read an NPD sales report it includes PC, PS, Xbox and Switch.

Yet for some reason when it comes to defining the video game console market, one of some of those gets omitted? Hmmmmm

I find it very strange too tbh.
 
Last edited:
b6a6es said:
When I walk into a games store and look at consoles I see Google Play, iOS, Roblox Netflix games, Riot Games, Steam gift cards, PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go to an online store and select by console I see Google Play, iOS, Roblox Netflix games, Riot Points, fortnite vbucks cards, Steam gift cards, PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go read an online gaming forum they discuss consoles they discuss fortnite, Google Play, iOS, Roblox ,Netflix games, Riot games, Steam , Xbox, PlayStation and Switch.

When I read an NPD sales report it includes PC, PS, Xbox and Switch.

Yet for some reason when it comes to defining the video game console market, one of some of those gets omitted? Hmmmmm

I find it very strange too tbh.
Click to expand...

Ahh yes, the popular Riot Points console … wtf are you even talking about? Is this Google's new AI or something
 
Topher said:
The point has been lost in all these debates. Do you think Nintendo Switch gamers buy Switch to play the same games as those found on Xbox and PlayStation? As a Switch owner, I know I sure do not.
Click to expand...
The point is until this acquisition came about, there was no question who made up the console market.
 
I don't know but this tweet sounds like a threat to me. "IF YOU DON'T LET MICROSOFT BUY ATVI, KOTICK WILL REMAIN.". This reeks of desperation and trying to get the public to add pressure to allow the acquisition to go through.

 
Last edited:
Edmund said:
I don't know but this tweet sounds like a threat to me. "IF YOU DON'T LET MICROSOFT BUY ATVI, KOTICK WILL REMAIN.". This reeks of desperation and trying to get the public to add pressure to allow the acquisition to go through.

Click to expand...

He's staying regardless, idiots. The joke is on them.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Oh okay. But why would the investors do that? Are they expecting a price increase? Because that's not what the immediate future looks like.

Or are they banking on the $3 billion cash injunction from Microsoft if the acquisition fails?
Click to expand...

Well they were expecting $90 a share from MS and that looks like its not happening, so they're trying to elevate the share price by other means…
 
Last edited:
Gameplay Gods Bless said:
No I'm arguing facts corporations, governments and lawyers agree with. Meanwhile y'all are playing tribe battles. End of story.
Click to expand...

Nah man. Perpetuity is a financial term much like infinity is a mathematical one. They're both convenient concepts for abstracting reality but they're usually not reality.

Perpetuity is an assumption that a business entity will do something for an infinite amount of time for revenue stream calculation.

Acquisition is an in perpetuity arrangement. Yes in the real world the owner can also divest - but the point I was contrasting was content exclusivity deals vs acquisition.

Exclusivity is not an in perpetuity arrangement while acquisition is by the financial market definition.

Anyway - no need to get all combative about it dude. The deal isn't gonna shake out like that now so it doesn't matter.
 
Hero of Spielberg said:
When I walk into a games store and look at consoles I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go to an online store and select by console I see PS, Xbox and Switch.

When I go read an online gaming forum they discuss consoles they discuss Xbox, PlayStation and Switch.

When I read an NPD sales report on consoles it includes PS, Xbox and Switch.

Yet for some reason when it comes to defining the video game console market, one of those gets omitted?

I find it very strange tbh.
Click to expand...
The major contention point of this deal is Call of Duty, which is not currently available on Nintendo. So they don't have any negative impact if COD is taken away. That's why they are not a part of this conversation.

Also, as I told you, Microsoft themselves disregard Nintendo as a direct competitor and claims that they operate in a different market and target different types of games/consumers. This is similar to mobile gaming market -- which is also a part of the gaming industry but targets a different type of gamer.

Microsoft itself does not see Nintendo as a competitor. So how could the CMA?

lKHsM1X.jpg
 
Last edited:
Heisenberg007 said:
The major contention point of this deal is Call of Duty, which is not currently available on Nintendo. So they don't have any negative impact if COD is taken away. That's why they are not a part of this conversation.

Also, as I told you, Microsoft themselves disregard Nintendo as a direct competitor and claims that they operate in a different market and target different types of games/consumers. This is similar to mobile gaming market -- which is also a part of the gaming industry but targets a different type of gamer.

Microsoft itself does not see Nintendo as a competitor. So how could the CMA?

lKHsM1X.jpg
Click to expand...

I understand that COD affects Sony greater than Nintendo. Even if Nintendo stand to gain COD if it goes through, Sony still stands to lose more, I understand that.

Also, it doesn't say they operate in a different market, it just says they don't track Nintendo as closely as PS. That is to say, just because MS compete more closely with Sony, doesn't mean they don't compete in the same market as Nintendo. In my opinion.

Just to be clear, I don't question that the CMA and FTC have made these definitions as part of their decvisions, I just question how they arrived at them. It's just a discussion, the same way we would discuss the strategies of a CEO ... of course, I'm no CEO but does that mean I'm not able to question their actions?
 
Heisenberg007 said:
The major contention point of this deal is Call of Duty, which is not currently available on Nintendo. So they don't have any negative impact if COD is taken away. That's why they are not a part of this conversation.

Also, as I told you, Microsoft themselves disregard Nintendo as a direct competitor and claims that they operate in a different market and target different types of games/consumers. This is similar to mobile gaming market -- which is also a part of the gaming industry but targets a different type of gamer.

Microsoft itself does not see Nintendo as a competitor. So how could the CMA?


lKHsM1X.jpg
Click to expand...
Was that from the phase 1 findings?

PYFktEB.jpg


Phase 2 PF page 55: https://assets.publishing.service.g...ctivision_-_Provisional_Findings_Report_3.pdf

They seems to have decided there wasn't enough distinction between the Switch and the other two consoles.

Key line being "We don't consider it appropriate to further segment console market by console type"
 
Last edited:
Hendrick's said:
Yeah, a long time, but no one ever talked about it or created any metrics around it. It's invented and anyone saying otherwise is daft or disingenuous.
Click to expand...

I have to admit I tend to think of the gaming market as a single entity but most don't?

I mean VR, Mobile, portable, PC, console, Arcade, Streaming, Subscription, Platforms and Store fronts, publishers, studios, indies, multiplayer, single player and on and on

There are a lot of ways to slice the various segments. When it came to Meta and Within the FTC narrowed down their argument to the fitness VR market and excluded everything else.

What is switch? Mobile handheld or console - in the west we seem to view it as a handheld more than in the East. But even if it's console it has a clear technical shortcomings and differences compared to last gen, never mind this gen.

The regulators chose their distinction but MS decided Nintendo is not a competitor in their space - bearing in mind Nintendo has a much more rudimentary subscription service, no cloud service presence and switch isn't a competitor to Xbox custom hardware. It's difficult not to agree with MS here - Nintendo isn't really a direct competitor on the whole.

This raises a problem though - if Nintendo is not a competitor of MS, then a 10 year deal for COD on Nintendo is not mitigation for MS.

Anyway the CMA saw through this bait and switch, but I'm not surprised that MS apologists are trying to paint Nintendo as yet another threat to MS's apparently tenuous foothold in gaming because without that, the COD offer looks like what it is - nothing.
 
Hero of Spielberg said:
I understand that COD affects Sony greater than Nintendo. Even if Nintendo stand to gain COD if it goes through, Sony still stands to lose more, I understand that.

Also, it doesn't say they operate in a different market, it just says they don't track Nintendo as closely as PS. That is to say, just because MS compete more closely with Sony, doesn't mean they don't compete in the same market as Nintendo. In my opinion.

Just to be clear, I don't question that the CMA and FTC have made these definitions as part of their decvisions, I just question how they arrived at them. It's just a discussion, the same way we would discuss the strategies of a CEO ... of course, I'm no CEO but does that mean I'm not able to question their actions?
Click to expand...
You're fine to question that. We're a part of a discussion forum, after all.

The CMA still considers Sony, MS, and Nintendo as part of the gaming industry, and they don't create a separate distinction (like the FTC does). But they also appreciate the differences between Nintendo and PS/Xbox. And this stance is further validated by Microsoft's own documents, so there's no conflict between how Microsoft and the CMA perceive Nintendo.

Then add COD to the equation (which is not currently available on Nintendo and bears no impact), it makes even more sense to isolate Nintendo temporarily and focus only on PlayStation and Xbox, and their respective consumer bases.
 
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