Thirty7ven
Banned
Today things got fun again I see.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
tmlDan
Member
omfg LOL
As soon as i saw that ugly Destin face i turned it off, i cant with that dude.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Listened to a bit of this. He thinks MSFT will be able to go to court over this, ignoring that that isn't how the UK courts work, but I digress. He says Amazon being able to buy MGM is analogous to this.
First Amazon wasn't a primary player in video content. There is way more competition in video streaming.
You have Amazon, Netflix, Apple, Disney, HBO Max, Hulu, Paramount+
The market for CoD is pretty simple. Microsoft and Sony and most of the customers are on Sony's platform.
MGM's worth is 1/12th of Activision's and their individual brands aren't as tied to one IP like CoD
The most analogous one here was when Disney was allowed to buy Fox, but they were also forced to divest some of those assets.
Varteras
Member
So the new shit goin down since last night is; Pachter once again makes a fool out of himself, Douchestin Legarie was all too happy to ride his dick on it, and Microsoft demanded redactions in publicly available details over the deal with Sony that they publicly complained about because Sony said "no". Am I caught up?
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Late next month.
Depends on who you ask.
I'd say less than 15% based on the current situation. Other Xbox fans might say it's pretty much a done deal.
El Pistolero
Banned
Your analogy is weird. Sony is opposing it because the decision will impact their business, on account of them having had access to AB IPs since times immemorial, with a specific focus on COD.
You want them not to exercise their duty towards their shareholder when a competitor is trying to buy out the market, literally? Plus, as I wrote, the important thing is for Sony to shoot for the highest possible outcome (blocking the deal) so that they would still be offered satisfactory concessions should the attempt to void the transaction fail. Pretty obvious stuff, really...
Last edited:
DrFigs
Member
it does seem like people are focusing on the cma (and an alleged softening on the behavioral remedies). but as far as i know, the ftc isn't any more for this deal than they were 3 months ago.
Last edited:
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Imagine for every user who downloads cod on PS+ they want 50 dollars, leaving Sony with 50 dollars left out of 100.
That doesn't even include the cost of including their own games (forgone sales) or other 3rd party games.
This is what they mean by they'd have to increase prices or not have CoD at all.
Meanwhile with Microsoft's internal financing, CoD wouldn't cost GamePass anything along those same lines, so they can price it as they want.
They call out there is no regulator or price monitor in gaming to say, CoD is worth X. So there is no way to get fair market value with Microsoft holding the lever, whereas Activision independently has an incentive to negotiate fairly with both companies.
I'm 95% sure the CMA will rule against microsoft here.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
FTC's time will come later, but they won't be as big of a threat as CMA is. The CMA was always going to be the biggest threat.
And if the CMA blocks it, it is blocked. It won't need to come down to the FTC.
You do have to jump over the first hurdle before you get the last one.
Separately its generally believed that the UK system is the hardest one.
Thirty7ven
Banned
People focus on the CMA because if they don't change their stance the deal is over. FTC will also use CMA's decision to support their theories.
USA and UK are where the market is more competitive and MS's arguments to the EC about market share will fall flat on their face.
If CMA does a 180 and accepts behavioral remedies then that's that too.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
My guess is late march early april. Their deadline is april 26th, but I'd be surprised if they wait until the deadline to publish their report.
I have 95% confidence that the CMA rules against the deal going through.
No, that's not an option. The CMA looks at global impact to the UK. So even if COD wasn't published in the UK at all, they could still block this.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
enough to make an avatar bet.
I didn't say that they didn't have a point about the pricing, but I believe that if the cost of COD on PS plus was a single digital figure of the ps plus revenue amount then Sony would still have fundamentally have an issue with the deal. Have been doing some fun whatifs in my head.
But I rather not speculate on unknown information and am unable to say whether the licensing agreement would be 'fair and reasonable'.
I do believe that a legally empowered and secure third party could deal with it but we may have to agree to disagree with that point.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
They would need to sell the brand and the businesses related to its production. If carving up CoD isn't realistic to create its own entity the only other choice is to divest from Activision and keep BK.
Microsoft did not entertain any divestiture in their response, so not sure how the CMA will take that and move to block or maintain sale of Activision at least.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
How does a 3rd party deal with circumvention or distortion and did Microsoft acknowledge that in their response?
graywolf323
Member
good write-up about everything
open.substack.com
Discover Substack Newsletters
Find great things to read on Substack. Browse top publications, find writers you follow, or search by topic.
open.substack.com
Last edited:
Unfortunately there is a number of redaction points in their response re their belief that they can satisfy the risk of circumvention or distortion.
Unfortunately whether these redacted points are meaningful, no clue.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
good write-up about everything
Discover Substack Newsletters
Find great things to read on Substack. Browse top publications, find writers you follow, or search by topic.
Is this the article that Lulu mentioned? She said there was going to be a new article from someone who can't handle her sodium inducing tweets lol
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Yeah. But it is telling that Sony presented those calculations to the CMA, while Microsoft didn't. They only said that they have offered Sony a deal, but Sony was the only one that showed CMA the numbers that this PS+ deal is not a practical one based on its asking price and PS+ current revenue.
ChiefDada
Member
This idiot just compared video games and the gamepass vision/model to the commoditization of cell phone minutes. Aight, I'm out.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
I'm not referring to the points that are redacted.
Monitoring and enforcement are key to behavioral remedies and Microsoft's response was our behavioral remedy of access licensure is so simple that it is easy to monitor and enforced by the licensing agreement.
There is nothing in Microsoft's response as to what penalty they would pay for breaching said agreement or what that mechanism would even look like.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
MS doesn't want to show the CMA that they're loss-leading a sub service trying to change the shape of the industry with the race to the bottom pushing out lesser market cap companies in the high end console arena.
They did say they want "Sony to be like Nintendo and that Nintendo was not competition" after all. To be the sole high end at the top by making competition smaller.
In spite of what consumers have chosen the past 20+ years.
Last edited:
mansoor1980
Member
LULU under orbital bombardmentgood write-up about everything
Discover Substack Newsletters
Find great things to read on Substack. Browse top publications, find writers you follow, or search by topic.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
not really.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Yeah, enough
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Or like Blockbuster.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Because of its size and Call of Duty's market share, especially on PlayStation. All 3 regulatory bodies (US, UK, EU) have called this one anti-competitive. They didn't in the case of Zenimax.
DonJimbo
Member
Definitely
Its really anti competitive and anti consumer by MS to make COD exclusive
CODs impact and importance is bigger than any game in the whole gaming industry
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
I reluctantly watched more of Pacthers discussion..
He said the CMA is going to try to push their deadline up... he doesn't understand that their deadline isn't the day they actually announce. They were always going to announce before their deadline, as you can see in their historic reports.
But anyone who reads the CMA PF, Sony's remedy response, Microsoft's remedy response, looks at the phase 2 stats, and looks at some of the other findings will have a good read on this.
I recommend Bauer that went through behaviorally and Nvidia/Arm that did not
He said the CMA is going to try to push their deadline up... he doesn't understand that their deadline isn't the day they actually announce. They were always going to announce before their deadline, as you can see in their historic reports.
But anyone who reads the CMA PF, Sony's remedy response, Microsoft's remedy response, looks at the phase 2 stats, and looks at some of the other findings will have a good read on this.
I recommend Bauer that went through behaviorally and Nvidia/Arm that did not
graywolf323
Member
yep, Microsoft really has done themselves no favors in getting this deal through with all the shit they've been saying
people will point to the half-truths they told during the Bethesda acquisition but they've said plenty of stuff that raises red flags to regulators just regarding ABK as well
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Recommended Reading:
Microsoft/Activision
Microsoft response to CMA PF
Sony response to CMA PF
CMA Provisional Remedies
Bauer CMA
final report
Microsoft/Activision
Microsoft response to CMA PF
Sony response to CMA PF
CMA Provisional Remedies
Bauer CMA
final report
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
They've literally been PRing their goals/end game out in the open. Down to the "accusing the opposition of which you are guilty of yourselves."
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Wait so MS can just create a AKB UK branch and have them handle the UK version? Interesting. I guess it makes sense that the UK can't force their views worldwide.
Last edited:
How many contract deals do you see released to the public? The public is not making the decision. The CMA is and they obviously see the full contract.
DarkMage619
$MSFT
That would be a fantastic outcome to just compartmentalize CoD and Activision in the UK and have the rest of the world who do not have an issue with this deal allow things to proceed.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
No.
It's a stipulation in the original ABK contract that if just one of the 3 major bodies (FTC/CMA/EU) rejects the merger, the deal is completely dead. This has been covered in the thread already.
Last edited:
That can still happen if creating a seperate entity satisfies the CMA's requirements. And if that's not enough they would only have to sell off the UK company.
Daneel Elijah
Member
Microsoft made that more complex, in part because of how they handled the Zenimax acquisition in my opinion and this one. If they had done what they are doing now, last year, the deal would probably be already done. But Microsoft tried to have the merger done with no consideration at all for Sony ( the infamous 3 years deal) and only upped their offer when the CMA and the EU regulators said no. The funniest thing for me in all of this is that if they had done this before the Brexit, or in a few years they would have better chances for it to go throught. Microsoft seems to have made their deal with Nintendo and Nvidia for the EU, or at least they made that public in a way that maximise the impact in the EU instead of the CMA. I want the deal to fail, but recognise that a path to completion did exist. They just failed to accurately access it and even admitted that they should have used the procedure to better "teach" the CMA about the gaming market.
For me the best outcome would be to promise all COD free for all UK gamers, regardless of their medium, forever. That would made the CMA concerns void immediatly if Sony and all others cloud based services, existing or future, would have this product available and it would allow new start ups in the sector to easily be created in the UK. A man can dream.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It is in the MSFT/ABK purchase contract that if just one refuses to approve, the deal is completely dead. The merger is contingent on all 3 major bodies approving. What is so hard to understand?
Last edited:
What part of creating a seperate entity might meet the requirements for approval do you not understand?
El Pistolero
Banned
Does he work for MS?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
- Status