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.
Elios83 said:
Lulu subpoenaed by the FTC is the next fitting event in this circus :messenger_tears_of_joy:

Modders need to trasform this thing into a Ace Attorney chapter :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Click to expand...
Video Game Judge GIF by CAPCOM
 
Dick Jones said:
I'll give credit where its due here. Tom Warren actually doing his job. Its a serious allegation to make so she better have something to back it up. She might be fridged ironically on International Women's Day.
Click to expand...

Is it a serious allegation?

I mean Sony have a document lodged with the CMA stating the same sentiment - prohibit the acquisition - in explicit terms too.

If Jim said this (or words to this effect), he was being very clear and honest about Sony's intentions. Perhaps he could be guilty of being too open and honest.

Anyway, clear and honest is not something MS has been guilty of lately.
 
Kenshin775 said:
oh wow I thought she was just paraphrasing what he said just to troll. But he really did say that. Is she allowed to reveal this info? and why would he outright say that.
Click to expand...

Sony have documented with the CMA that their opinion is to prohibit the acquisition.

He's right. He doesn't want to negotiate a new deal with MS, he's happy with the existing arrangements.

As Sony said in their CMA docs (I'll paraphrase) - new negotiations with MS-ABK aren't in the context of a first party and third party with the business incentives that implies, but with another first party which changes the incentives and outcomes of negotiation.

Blocking the acquisition is the way to maintain those arrangements as they are today.
 
Banjo64 said:
Kills her career more like (outside of woke) - I'd never hold a confidential discussion in this woman's presence ever again no matter what side of the fence. Dimwitted.
Click to expand...

Yeh she's fucked.

I know Elon has made it hip for executives/company owners to behave like this on twitter but what most don't seem to understand is that a) he runs his own businesses and b) he is the very definition of "fuck you" money.

Any serious business will be hesitant to put her in another board member position after all this. It's insane.
 
Ozriel said:
Explain again how making these purchases is part of a plan to extinguish the competition that's outselling them

Try me.
Click to expand...

1. We know that the gaming revenue generated by Microsoft's Xbox division is tiny compared to the revenue generated by other divisions within the company.

this is a liability that hurts MS Overall Performance. Thus, creates pressure to make it bigger or get rid of it.

2.Listening to Windows Weekly i learned MS's obsession to have a more "consumer appealing brand" (not enterprises)...Xbox fits this purpose.

3. The Gaming Industry/market can be categorized in four bubbles.
a)Consoles
b)Nintendo 😆
c)PC
d)Mobile
each of these have their own idiosyncrasies.

4. MS has a presence in two of those categories. One of which they have 70%+ of market share....(sounds familiar?) and yet; has failed to capitalize on it.

5.We know Xbox (hardware) has never being profitable and of course they haven't been able to significantly compete against PlayStation.

6. we also know MS (and sony) were competing in mobile but they lost that battle against Android.

7. what is the common denominator in each of those bubbles?...yep...The Digital Store.

So, here you have a fucking triple trillion dollar company as a sore loser in each of those bubbles.

8.A Digital Store can only thrive by the number of people who buys from it. This creates the crux of the situation for MS.

So, for Xbox is imperative to find a way to attract more consumers...Enter Game Pass.

and then you can say...MS doesn't care about consoles; its about subscribers....Well.... and how the fuck you grow subscribers when the only way is increasing your market share of hardware? (in the console market segment. aka taking market share from PlayStation).

9. "No one buys from an empty store"
Call Of Duty exists in three market bubbles (Consoles, PC, Mobile). you can't with a straight face tell me those bubbles have the same idiosyncrasies. From those three...Only Play Station has the incentive to compete...and they will....and they are...and who is PlayStation's main competitor?....yep, Xbox.

this creates a fascinating tug of war (in the console bubble) PlayStation CAN'T and WILL NOT remain idle. REGARDLESS of MS's acquisitions.

Therefore the only guarantee for PlayStation are structural remedies.

And here is where the rubber hits the road. the plan is not to extinguish no one. That's not what PARASITES do.
 
Badlucktroll said:
My guess is that if it goes through, Microsoft will have to put COD on Playstation Plus same day as Game Pass, and the versions must have complete parity. COD is going to be shackled.
Click to expand...
Sounds like some fantasy. Sony doesn't even put any of their own games on PS+ day 1.

The versions will have complete parity though, MS has even said as much.
 
Last edited:
Reading through Sony's CMA response, one thing that stood out to me was their thoughts on the licensing rate for COD on PS+. COD is a massive seller and would probably cost Sony $500M-$1B a year to have COD on PS+ day and date. While for Microsoft, the cost of putting COD on Gamepass is the cost of development and any revenue they lose from day 1 buyers. Such a significant cost difference makes it impossible for Sony to have COD on PS+ but relatively easy for MS. The question is, do regulators want parity across subscription platforms as well? I think that's a deal breaker for MS. How do regulators even structure a behavioural remedy that allows for fair access to COD on subscription platforms?
 
Last edited:
Wow if Jim really said this and there are receipts that's a super bad look for Sony.. the whole intent of complaint by Sony is they were scared of losing COD, if he actually said they don't care about COD they just want to fuck with Microsoft then this shit will sail through smoother than people are expecting and it's all Jim's fault.
 
I think Lulu is being sarcastic. The feb 21 thing is just the EU meeting date and she's probably just poking fun at the fact that they didn't sign their 10yr agreement there. She better be careful she doesn't run into libel charges.
 
Last edited:
Urban said:
isnt the game already on nearly every plattform? . How are they getting 150 million more players?
Click to expand...


I didn't know your TV or Mobile Phone could play the newest CoD.

They mean that by delivery through their cloud, you could play this game on Switch, any PC and Laptop as well as TVs and Mobile phones.
 
ToadMan said:
Sony have documented with the CMA that their opinion is to prohibit the acquisition.

He's right. He doesn't want to negotiate a new deal with MS, he's happy with the existing arrangements.

As Sony said in their CMA docs (I'll paraphrase) - new negotiations with MS-ABK aren't in the context of a first party and third party with the business incentives that implies, but with another first party which changes the incentives and outcomes of negotiation.

Blocking the acquisition is the way to maintain those arrangements as they are today.
Click to expand...

Sony just released a response to why the10 yr deal is bad. If this is true then it means Sony was arguing in bad faith the whole time. So no matter how good the deal was Sony was never going to accept it. this looks bad in the eyes of regulators. it doesn't make any sense to admit this.
 
Urban said:
Thx for clarification.
Click to expand...

It's a really weird argument if you think about it.

I don't think anyone interested in gaming, especially into games like CoD, would not have a console or PC capable of playing said games while at the same time the people that would use TVs or phones to play are most likely the very definition of "casual" and would rather play relaxing or easy games since this will most likely be their first contact with games at all.

So while technically most likely true, I still find it a weird argument to make when talking specifically about CoD.
 
Kenshin775 said:
Sony just released a response to why the10 yr deal is bad. If this is true then it means Sony was arguing in bad faith the whole time. So no matter how good the deal was Sony was never going to accept it. this looks bad in the eyes of regulators. it doesn't make any sense to admit this.
Click to expand...
Thinking Think GIF by Rodney Dangerfield
 
Three said:
I think Lulu is being sarcastic. The feb 21 thing is just the EU meeting date and she's probably just poking fun at the fact that they didn't sign their 10yr agreement there. She better be careful she doesn't run into libel charges.
Click to expand...

I think if she doesn't have a transcript or recording of that exact statement being said in a public setting then she's fucked.

But I don't think she cares at this point, it's last stand stuff. She wants the headlines to be written in the media as a result of her tweets, hopes it will influence the regulators and then will deal with the consequences after if she's simply paraphrasing in some way.

It's been pretty clear for some time she's desperate for the money that will come her way if the deal goes through.
 
CuNi said:
It's a really weird argument if you think about it.

I don't think anyone interested in gaming, especially into games like CoD, would not have a console or PC capable of playing said games while at the same time the people that would use TVs or phones to play are most likely the very definition of "casual" and would rather play relaxing or easy games since this will most likely be their first contact with games at all.

So while technically most likely true, I still find it a weird argument to make when talking specifically about CoD.
Click to expand...
COD mobile is already huge. Full COD on mobile will be even bigger, like Fortnite and mobile.
 
CuNi said:
It's a really weird argument if you think about it.

I don't think anyone interested in gaming, especially into games like CoD, would not have a console or PC capable of playing said games while at the same time the people that would use TVs or phones to play are most likely the very definition of "casual" and would rather play relaxing or easy games since this will most likely be their first contact with games at all.

So while technically most likely true, I still find it a weird argument to make when talking specifically about CoD.
Click to expand...
You should go see how many people download mobile versions of games like COD and PUBG. They even have massive tournaments.
 
Last edited:
GHG said:
Yeh she's fucked.

I know Elon has made it hip for executives/company owners to behave like this on twitter but what most don't seem to understand is that a) he runs his own businesses and b) he is the very definition of "fuck you" money.

Any serious business will be hesitant to put her in another board member position after all this. It's insane.
Click to expand...
You know what though, even though everyone makes fun of Elon he does come back and apologize if he made a mistake. (like recently with the disabled designer from Iceland)

he's willing to look like an idiot and admits wrong doing - something I can't say for any execs. Has Lulu ever done that? i doubt it.
 
ToTTenTranz said:
Phil Spencer has been leading Xbox Studios since March 2014. That's 9 years now.
When are you going to stop manufacturing apologies for almost a decade of Phil Spencer running the show on everything Xbox?

Let me guess, you think all the failures on Halo Infinite after being delayed for a full year, Fable being in development hell and having nothing to show after 5 years in the making, Perfect Dark having nothing to show 3 years after the first official teaser trailer, The Coalition not having anything to show 4 years after Gears 5, Starfield getting delayed by (at least) a year, etc. and Phil Spencer apologizing and promising "this year was bad but next year is going to be great" for 7 years straight.. was all Don Mattrick's fault.





No, you're missing the point. Throwing money is what Microsoft has been doing to buy new studios with established IPs, while being shit at managing their studios. They need to stop being shit at managing their studios because then they wouldn't even need to throw more money at new studios.

They'd stop being shit at managing their studios if they changed their culture of massive usage of subcontractors, which messes with task continuity and knowledge retention, and over-reliance on government subsidies / public funding which messes with milestones because they stall waiting for call results. This has been reported by several former developers that worked for Xbox Studios.
It's a corporate culture of maximizing returns on cheaper development (public funding) and low risk (subcontractors) that messes with any form of project management, and Phil Spencer is very much guilty of following that culture for 9 years.


And if you think this isn't going to infect Activision's studios the same way it's already begun infecting Bethesda's, because of all those "lifetime achievement awards" that Phil Spencer keeps buying I mean winning, I have a bridge to sell you.




Wow.. where is this paragraph coming from? I wouldn't think the CMA would use the term "dragging their feet" on any official note.





Yes, the wording was carefully chosen to appease twitter devotees and mainstream videogame media over regulators.
Click to expand...
Yawn
 
splattered said:
Wow if Jim really said this and there are receipts that's a super bad look for Sony.. the whole intent of complaint by Sony is they were scared of losing COD, if he actually said they don't care about COD they just want to fuck with Microsoft then this shit will sail through smoother than people are expecting and it's all Jim's fault.
Click to expand...

I think Sony has made it clear that they believe they are going to lose COD regardless of any deal MS offers. And let's not lose sight of the fact that the ONLY person quoting Jim Ryan as saying this works for ABK. It wasn't that long ago that Frank Shaw was tweeting shit he said he *heard* Sony had said in Brussels.
 
All I know is this.
None of us know how the CMA, EU or FTC is finally going to rule (No one fucking cares about how New Zealand rules).

I hope we get to see the juicy exclusive contracts that Sony has been sending out.

Microsoft could have sent 70B alot better than ABK (In my eyes). If MS is going to give everything to Sony from ABK anyway, then what's the point.
If MS had of bought a heap of other top line independent studios they could have done alot better.

MS is all in on gaming.

Sony is shit scared of MS being all in on gaming.

Fanboys can't keep their narratives straight.
 
Kenshin775 said:
Sony just released a response to why the10 yr deal is bad. If this is true then it means Sony was arguing in bad faith the whole time. So no matter how good the deal was Sony was never going to accept it. this looks bad in the eyes of regulators. it doesn't make any sense to admit this.
Click to expand...
Can someone explain this like I'm 5?
Why's it bad that Sony would never accept the deal?
 
Last edited:
Jim Ryan is an absolute badass. Stonecold.

Honestly, this is the kind of nakedly vicious corporate behavior I wish they would all cop to and say out loud.
 
Kenshin775 said:
oh wow I thought she was just paraphrasing what he said just to troll. But he really did say that. Is she allowed to reveal this info? and why would he outright say that.
Click to expand...

Looks like good old-fashioned bad faith to me, all the while claiming to CMA that it is Microsoft that has been a bad-faith actor and an obstacle to arriving at a deal? Sounds like Brussels went quite bad for Jim, which was obvious from being in the room, and the UK is about to follow right behind, especially with a remark like that.
 
The proposed content licensing remedy creates further RCBs including for cloud gaming providers (as a result of the absence of a licensing fees) and consumers (as a result of the increase in the number of cloud gaming providers which will have access to the PC Games
Click to expand...
The bit in the brackets is rather interesting if it's applicable to everyone but sounds like Shadow/GeForce/Other B2P streaming services won't have any additional licensing cost.

I still think the windows cost is going to be an issue re that market as well as MGS cloud services.
 
Last edited:
SenjutsuSage said:
Looks like good old-fashioned bad faith to me, all the while claiming to CMA that it is Microsoft that has been a bad-faith actor and an obstacle to arriving at a deal? Sounds like Brussels went quite bad for Jim, which was obvious from being in the room, and the UK is about to follow right behind, especially with a remark like that.
Click to expand...
I suppose those newspaper ads were really just MS way of thanking the CMA for letting 150 million more people play COD too, right?

Right?

:messenger_ok:
 
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