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.
The craziest aspect of this whole thing for me is that there is NO consensus or general agreed upon line of thinking as to whether or not this deal will go through.


Whether you're referencing legal experts, market analysts, game industry insiders, highly respected journalists, etc.. etc.. there is NO AGREEMENT on whether or not this deal has a good chance of being approved or not. For every expert that leans towards the deal being shut down you have another that leans towards it going through.


Literally no one has any fucking idea and that's weird to me.
 
Last edited:
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.
Not sure MS would have the information to work through the calculations re the impact on Sony's MGS service. They could probably guess the impact though so maybe that was something they should have added but we only have
Subscription and streaming rights: Any CoD Game in a Microsoft multi-game subscription is eligible for inclusion in Sony's multi-game subscription service, at the same time and for the same duration. [Redacted]. [Redacted].
What [Redacted] is unknown

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.
What we are looking for a Microsoft to say that we are going to pay upto X% for breaching the agreement? I am not seeing that in the Bauer response on the
20th Jan 2019 (https://assets.publishing.service.g...onse_to_remedies_notice__for_publication_.pdf).
 
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.
that isn't at all true

As such, our provisional view is that it is appropriate to assess the effects of the Merger on the supply of console game publishing and PC game publishing services globally, while taking account of any regional or UKspecific differences where relevant in the competitive assessment. In any event, we consider that our competitive assessment and its provisional conclusions would not materially change if we were to consider a narrower geographic frame of reference (eg UK or EEA countries). - CMA

Provisional Findings Report
 
The craziest aspect of this whole thing for me is that there is NO consensus or general agreed upon line of thinking as to whether or not this deal will go through.


Whether you're referencing legal experts, market analysts, game industry insiders, highly respected journalists, etc.. etc.. there is NO AGREEMENT on whether or not this deal has a good chance of being approved or not. For every expert that leans towards the deal being shut down you have another that leans towards it going through.


Literally no one has any fucking idea and that's weird to me.
Biggest deal in gaming. 69 billions wich is more than enough to buy Nintendo and Take Two together. But yes I think that most people would believe that Microsoft would have made the move only after being sure that it would go without incidents.
 
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.
Except this is a contract that was the subject of a lot of theatrics, like MSFT's chairman doing the "I've got the contract in my hand!" bit.

Either reveal your hand fully or don't.
 
Not sure MS would have the information to work through the calculations re the impact on Sony's MGS service. They could probably guess the impact though so maybe that was something they should have added but we only have

What [Redacted] is unknown


What we are looking for a Microsoft to say that we are going to pay upto X% for breaching the agreement? I am not seeing that in the Bauer response on the
20th Jan 2019 (https://assets.publishing.service.g...onse_to_remedies_notice__for_publication_.pdf).

2.32.1 Specification risk. As detailed above, Bauer's proposed remedy is clear and simple being based on existing FRS terms and precisely addresses the Representation SLC as formulated in the Provisional Findings. The MRG means that Third Party Stations have a clear baseline against which they can measure the revenues delivered by Bauer.


2.32.2 Circumvention risk. The CMA's concern is that Bauer could circumvent the remedy and offer worse terms and conditions than the Third Party Stations had from FRS prior to the Transactions. The basic design of Bauer's proposed remedy avoids this, the terms the Third Party Stations currently have with FRS will remain available to them as a backstop option throughout the life of the remedy. These terms are supplemented by the MRG which means that the national advertising revenue currently achieved by Third Party Stations (subject to adjustments) is guaranteed. In any case, Bauer has strong commercial incentives through commission income and competition with Global to perform as effectively as FRS (if not more so) and this is underpinned by the obligations set out above and further supported by the dispute resolution mechanism.

2.32.3 Distortion risk. Bauer's remedy does not give rise to any risk of market distortion. It remains in place for a short and targeted period. It is based on existing market based terms of representation and any amendments/new agreements can be reached only by mutual agreement. Changes in the market such as changes in listening hours and overall market growth will have the same effect as they would absent the remedy.

2.32.4 Monitoring and enforcement risk. Bauer has included specific mechanisms to allow for monitoring and dispute resolution. The remedies take place in a highly transparent marketplace and the Third Party Stations are long-term and experienced users of FRS and will have all of the information they need to detect potential breaches of Bauer's obligations and bring a dispute before the adjudicator. The MRG is easily monitored and Bauer will periodically provide the Monitoring Trustee with the information it requires in order to certify compliance with the remedy (including the MRG).

The key differences between Bauer and Microsoft are that
1) FRS was going out of business
2) It was much easier to see distortions or circumvention with less impact due to timing

It was beneficial for the other radio stations to keep FRS going for at least another 10 years at the current rates.

Moving forward, the marketplace was not a dynamic one like Video Games.

As for enforcement

Bauer's remedy will include the following mechanisms for monitoring compliance and dispute resolution: 2.26.1 A monitoring trustee will be appointed to monitor Bauer's compliance with the remedy (including the MRG), and to report to the CMA on a periodic basis. The identity of the monitoring trustee will be agreed with the CMA. The monitoring trustee will be remunerated by Bauer. 2.26.2 Third Party Stations who consider Bauer has not complied with the remedy will be able to refer disputes to an independent adjudicator with the power to obtain information from Bauer / the Third Party Station as may be reasonably required and to resolve disputes. Bauer and the Third Party Station would commit to be bound by the decisions of this adjudicator. Bauer is considering potential candidates and can propose a shortlist to the CMA in due course. Bauer considers that the chosen candidate should have experience in dispute resolution and/or the radio industry. 2.26.3 The dispute resolution mechanism, in summary would operate as follows: (A) Bauer would offer, by way of undertaking, a dispute resolution mechanism – the Third Party Stations would be free to decide whether or not to accept, and therefore be bound by, this mechanism; (B) the dispute resolution mechanism would apply to all disputes between Bauer and a Third Party Station regarding the remedy; and (C) Bauer and the relevant Third Party Station would be required to seek to reach a negotiated outcome prior to either party referring any dispute to the adjudicator – this would involve Bauer and the Third Party Station seeking to resolve the dispute through cooperation. 2.26.4 Bauer considers that this dispute resolution mechanism is effective and proportionate given the limited number of instances in which a dispute could arise and the likely limited financial value of any such disputes.
 
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.
Its MS own fault it seems they shoot themselves in their feet
 
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?
I've seen this point parroted several times here as if there's some higher authority that dictates as such. MS/ABK could decide that the deal is no longer contingent on the CMA within minutes if they felt the need to do so.

Basically what you're claiming is a roadblock is nothing of the sort.
 
I've seen this point parroted several times here as if there's some higher authority that dictates as such. MS/ABK could decide that the deal is no longer contingent on the CMA within minutes if they felt the need to do so.

Basically what you're claiming is a roadblock is nothing of the sort.
You said a lot of nothing.
 
I've seen this point parroted several times here as if there's some higher authority that dictates as such. MS/ABK could decide that the deal is no longer contingent on the CMA within minutes if they felt the need to do so.

Basically what you're claiming is a roadblock is nothing of the sort.
Good luck operating in the UK without massive fines.
 
Listen to what Pachter said.
no-i-dont-think.gif
 
I've seen this point parroted several times here as if there's some higher authority that dictates as such. MS/ABK could decide that the deal is no longer contingent on the CMA within minutes if they felt the need to do so.

Basically what you're claiming is a roadblock is nothing of the sort.

It's the deal between both parties. Holy shit man, why is it so hard for some people?
 
I've seen this point parroted several times here as if there's some higher authority that dictates as such. MS/ABK could decide that the deal is no longer contingent on the CMA within minutes if they felt the need to do so.

Basically what you're claiming is a roadblock is nothing of the sort.
Sell that fanfic to netflix so no one can watch it and it gets cancelled after season 1
 
.....

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.
It wouldn't have changed their stance one bit, as it would have just been a FU money to damage the market and market leader in the UK, result in far less money generated in the UK economy.

It hasn't been discussed AFAIK in this thread, but the CMA blocking the deal might in part be related to hedge fund complaints, because currently ATVI, MSFT and Sony are all viable companies for hedge funds to invest in with expectation of yearly returns for their pension pot stakeholder's money they invest. Should MSFT acquire ATVI, then despite the dividened, those fund investors would need to find a new home for that investment with similarly good returns, and would be expecting to take a slight hair cut on MSFT that had spent $70b to give away CoD on gamepass, which in turn would damage PlayStation and Sony's finances for investors in the coming years. Anyone investing in these companies for long-term returns was unlikely to be in favour of this deal's final impact on the market, even if they were for it in the short-term for the buyout bonus on the shares IMO.
 
Biggest deal in gaming. 69 billions wich is more than enough to buy Nintendo and Take Two together. But yes I think that most people would believe that Microsoft would have made the move only after being sure that it would go without incidents.
What large company would make a move if they were not sure it would go without incidents? Shit happens. If Zenimax did not get acquired this deal would probably be in a much different place. There's no way to really know that until after the process has started. Lawyers and M&A people do a ton of due diligence but they do not have a crystal ball.
 
Way to show how stupid you are by not countering the arguments made.

When you appeal to authority in your argument, you need to at least point to someone who has a proven track record of knowing what they're talking about. When you end your point like that it really drags down what you're saying. I'd recommend never doing that again.
 
Way to show how stupid you are by not countering the arguments made.
We've already countered them. You just choose to mental gymnastics around them for a guy who represents hedge funds that have a vested interest in getting a return on their stock for this deal going through. He will say anything, no matter how BS, as their representative. Guy didn't even know who sold ABK prior, just some massive entity that is world renowned in the stonk sphere.
 


when the bending over backwards is this strong you know there are some ulterior motives.

I like it. cannot wait for this deal to be approved.

When it comes to ulterior motives it's not about the deal. It's about enforcement. Sony has already called that out in their response.

Sony and the CMA know that enforcement is going to be almost impossible when Microsoft is usually willing to risk being fined to do what they want.
 
When it comes to ulterior motives it's not about the deal. It's about enforcement. Sony has already called that out in their response.

Sony and the CMA know that enforcement is going to be almost impossible when Microsoft is usually willing to risk being fined to do what they want.
awesome
 
Now that I think about it… MS could just use their trillions of dollars and dump them all on the Bermuda Triangle. The sheer weight of their war chest will plow a hole through the space time continuum, open the gates to earth 41 where the UK is still in the Yurop, and then replace the entire population of the UK in this earth with 41.
 
I've seen this point parroted several times here as if there's some higher authority that dictates as such. MS/ABK could decide that the deal is no longer contingent on the CMA within minutes if they felt the need to do so.

Basically what you're claiming is a roadblock is nothing of the sort.

Sure, they can merge despite CMA's decision but they would meet eternal fines and would probably be forced by court to separate both companies again. Like recently happened with Facebook and Giphy.

 
Last edited:
Now that I think about it… MS could just use their trillions of dollars and dump them all on the Bermuda Triangle. The sheer weight of their war chest will plow a hole through the space time continuum, open the gates to earth 41 where the UK is still in the Yurop, and then replace the entire population of the UK in this earth with 41.
"They could just buy the UK."

Checkmate, mates!
 
Now that I think about it… MS could just use their trillions of dollars and dump them all on the Bermuda Triangle. The sheer weight of their war chest will plow a hole through the space time continuum, open the gates to earth 41 where the UK is still in the Yurop, and then replace the entire population of the UK in this earth with 41.
That already happened and the only thing we got back from earth 41 was SenjutsuSage SenjutsuSage
 
In the event this deal gets blocked I wonder if it will encourage other large to medium sized companies s to enter the gaming sphere knowing that this deal failing represents a protection of access to important cross platform content, and that every move a mega company would make like this would carry greater scrutiny, and be at higher risk of getting blocked, and retrospectively might have seen Mojang and ZeniMax, and maybe even the Bungie deal blocked or still passed but with constraints.
 
People keep going on about CMA as though the EC and FTC have already approved. What makes anyone so sure that they will approve? Microsoft are still up against all three of them. I don't see why the EC is any more likely to approve than the CMA.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom