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.
Topher said:
That's not accurate. Microsoft is still in the UK and the CMA has prohibited MS from acquiring ABK. If MS closes the deal then they will be sued by CMA. ABK not being in the UK anymore does not matter (just like Giphy and Meta), but there is no indication that MS is considering that as an option at all. MS is rumored to be looking into ways of closing despite the CMA, but whether they have actually found a path forward then they are willing to consider is unknown.
Click to expand...
Microsoft being in the UK doesn't affect their ability to successfully close. The issue is ABK and it's assets not MS.
 
Gameplay Gods Bless said:
Microsoft being in the UK doesn't affect their ability to successfully close. The issue is ABK and it's assets not MS.
Click to expand...

Youre Wrong John C Mcginley GIF
 
Corrik said:
Figured Microsoft would always close the deal, but it might be happening a lot faster than I assumed. Impressive.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of this thread, only for it to get blocked by the FTC in December.

Thread 'Microsoft and Activision Blizzard: The FTC could approve the acquisition in August'
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/micr...ld-approve-the-acquisition-in-august.1639176/

Same thing with the CMA, once console concerns were removed, certain people thought it would get approved by them with concessions, only for it to be blocked. How you guys keep shooting yourselves in the foot like this over & over again blows my mind.
 
Last edited:
Gameplay Gods Bless said:
Cool I'll take an actual merger and acquisitions lawyer and journalists over randoms on Gaf.
Click to expand...
You mentioned a journalist from Forbes who didn't know what they were talking about.

So just because they're a journalist, that doesn't mean they automatically have credibility.

Richard Hoeg is the same person who believed one of the main reasons why Sega failed is because of exclusive deals. He also follows a lot of the major Xbox fanboys on Twitter.....and let's not get started on the CMA proceeding which he also thought was week and went almost completely silent and refused to go into detail about the case when it was blocked.

Actual journalists report specifics of the case without taking a side.
 
Wulfer said:
Varteras I'm going to say you nailed a lot of good points. However, you failed to nail the obvious points going against the FTC (and or Sony). The simple reasons MS was pushed against the wall to purchase Bethesda and ABK in the first place.

  • Sony already knew how to put leverage on MS with Bethesda because Sony was already using the same tactic with ABK. We just learned how ABK kept asking for more and more money just to keep games on Xbox. - Wrong or Right? Yea I'm right!
  • "Sony only asked for 2 timed exclusives" from Bethesda. Why did Sony do that, have you asked yourself that question? (Here's the answer) - Sony was trying to cozy up to MS's biggest ally and scoop them away from Xbox. Deathloop and Ghostwire was just the beginning. Sony's real eyes were on Starfield and Bethesda's future games!
  • Its easy to see where this was headed. MS loosing ABK and Bethesda and MS takes Xbox out of the game! FTC might not look so, friendly on Sony if they saw the big picture? Which was to get Microsoft and Xbox out of console gaming at all costs.
  • Nothing has changed since Xbox entered the race. Sony said from the very beginning the only endgame for them was no MS in gaming period and they're still trying... Need proof of that how about from this very forum going way back to Nov. 2005!


Thanks Mrbob - The interview article is long toasted but, the facts are still preserved!


When dirt is on the other player things aren't so cut and dry. Wonder if the FTC has seen or knew about this interview?
Click to expand...

I can see where you're trying to go with this. While I appreciate the effort, I think you are missing some very important points.

The struggle that Xbox is experiencing today is a direct result of incompetence, hubris, and a lack of desire to put in the work to regain lost ground. Shifting an ill-advised amount of focus to Kinect gaming, at the expense of the core audience, during the latter half of Xbox 360. Foolishly prohibiting used games, requiring 24-hour check-ins, and charging $100 more for Xbox One than PlayStation 4, at a time when physical games were the majority of sales and digital rights management was a dirty phrase to most consumers. Damn near throwing in the towel and shutting down a huge portion of their first-party studios, putting Xbox One in an even more difficult situation where exclusive games were few and far between. Which continues to harm their output even to this day. Then they went full-steam with their GamePass strategy, which has had the consequence of training its users to not buy games. Thus greatly reducing the revenue third-parties can expect from the Xbox version of their games. Generally making PlayStation or Nintendo even more attractive options.

Zenimax shopped its games out because it needed money. They weren't doing so hot. From what we can tell, had they still been independent today, we'd probably be seeing mass layoffs and studio closures if they couldn't secure deals. Sony wasn't buying them. Nor were they paying for full exclusivity. They paid for timed exclusivity of two games before Microsoft offered to buy them. Microsoft was in the running for those deals. So how did a company like Sony outbid a company like Microsoft, who makes 10 times more profit? Simple. They didn't want to pay what it would take. Undoubtedly needing to pay more than it would cost Sony to make up for lost sales. That is a consequence of their repeated bungles. Which is not Sony's fault. It is the reason why ABK was squeezing them. It was becoming decreasingly desirable to go through the trouble of putting games on Xbox. Not to mention, the fact that they had to design games for the growing myriad of Xbox hardware. GamePass, which Phil sold as their golden ticket, looks increasingly like an expensive invitation to disaster.

There should be no delusion that these companies are cool with each other and want the other to stick around for the good of the consumer. Every company dreams of a day when they are the only ones. Atari, Microsoft, Nintendo, Sega, and Sony were never supposed to be buddies. They're supposed to try and one-up the other. Get creative. Strike deals. Leverage market advantages. They've been doing that since the start of the industry. Whoever failed too hard, too often, had to bow out. The ones who outmaneuvered got to stay. What no one in the industry has done is go the nuclear option and do what Microsoft is attempting. It is little more than them refusing to put in the work and just looking for a shortcut to wash away their fuck ups. Sony was playing the game everyone else had been playing, until Microsoft decided that they didn't want to play anymore. They could have struck deals and got external studios to make new games for them. Potentially great games that would move the needle. They could have paid for exclusives of big franchises. Instead, they just decided to buy huge companies. Sony and Nintendo do not have the financial means to kill Microsoft if they decide they want them out. Microsoft, if left unchecked, absolutely does. That makes all the difference when talking about intent. Capability.
 
Unknown Soldier said:
I'm anti-deal and I think FTC are clowns, what does that make me?
Click to expand...
Not blinded by your preference I guess? From what I'm reading around the internet the FTC is on track to loose this, but I have not watched the trial nor am I a lawyer so what do I know?

I'm primarily a PC gamer so either way no skin off my back, the only real benefit to this deal getting approved is that MS might bring all of Blizzards game to Steam but that's about it.
 
Zathalus said:
Not blinded by your preference I guess? From what I'm reading around the internet the FTC is on track to loose this, but I have not watched the trial nor am I a lawyer so what do I know?

I'm primarily a PC gamer so either way no skin off my back, the only real benefit to this deal getting approved is that MS might bring all of Blizzards game to Steam but that's about it.
Click to expand...
I think both sides have some hyperbolic takes at this point, and my belief is that it's way too soon to say anything at this point.

Both sides are building arguments for and against this PI. However, the real deal would be the closing arguments. That'll seal the deal.

For example, if the FTC has been establishing the precedence of Microsoft's miscommitments, misrepresentation, and an incentive to make games exclusive post-acquisition. But they kept leaving it at that. They didn't push those points further (because the judge would intervene).

However, if they manage to get a long list of all such precedence and then weave a flowing narrative touching all those points in their closing argument, they can end up with a solid case and may even win. But that last closing argument segment will be the most important one, regardless of the arguments right now from either parties.
 
Kutaragi looked him squarely in the eyes. No, Bernie, you are wrong, he said. It is Microsoft. And I will kill them.

satya nadella should use this statement in court , (if all else fails)

maxresdefault.jpg
 
Last edited:
Kilau said:
Wait, if this happening a lot faster than you assumed, did you assume it was going to happen after the mid July deadline?
Click to expand...
Um, yes? Most people thought 6 month timeline for CAT was a quick trial. Many had it at 9-12 months.

Them getting the FTC to try to get an injunction, FTC losing, and them closing over the CMA all by July 15th? Yeah, thats way quicker than I expected. Microsoft forced FTCs hand hard.
 
Corrik said:
Um, yes? Most people thought 6 month timeline for CAT was a quick trial. Many had it at 9-12 months.

Them getting the FTC to try to get an injunction, FTC losing, and them closing over the CMA all by July 15th? Yeah, thats way quicker than I expected. Microsoft forced FTCs hand hard.
Click to expand...
Alright champ, care to place a bet?
 
Heisenberg007 said:
I think both sides have some hyperbolic takes at this point, and my belief is that it's way too soon to say anything at this point.

Both sides are building arguments for and against this PI. However, the real deal would be the closing arguments. That'll seal the deal.

For example, if the FTC has been establishing the precedence of Microsoft's miscommitments, misrepresentation, and an incentive to make games exclusive post-acquisition. But they kept leaving it at that. They didn't push those points further (because the judge would intervene).

However, if they manage to get a long list of all such precedence and then weave a flowing narrative touching all those points in their closing argument, they can end up with a solid case and may even win. But that last closing argument segment will be the most important one, regardless of the arguments right now from either parties.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I still think the single most important thing the FTC can do is ask Nadella what Microsoft plans to do if the injunction is denied. Trapping him to either admit that Microsoft plans to push through despite a UK authority telling them no, which looks incredibly bad and alerts the UK, or say that they have no plans to do so and get asked what the harm is then in having a preliminary injunction. Since he still needs a deal extension anyways. Plus, opening up Microsoft to serious litigation in both countries if they try.
 
The thing with the UK is not as big of a deal as some people want it to be. Microsoft just can license their distribution to another third-party, for example to Embracer, and let them distribute Microsoft games until the CMA approves.
 
Varteras said:
Honestly, I still think the single most important thing the FTC can do is ask Nadella what Microsoft plans to do if the injunction is denied. Trapping him to either admit that Microsoft plans to push through despite a UK authority telling them no, which looks incredibly bad and alerts the UK, or say that they have no plans to do so and get asked what the harm is then in having a preliminary injunction. Since he still needs a deal extension anyways. Plus, opening up Microsoft to serious litigation in both countries if they try.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%. And I've also been wondering why it hasn't been brought up yet.
 
Hudo said:
The thing with the UK is not as big of a deal as some people want it to be. Microsoft just can license their distribution to another third-party, for example to Embracer, and let them distribute Microsoft games until the CMA approves.
Click to expand...
Yeah, nah, doesn't work like that.
 
nikolino840 said:
www.economist.com

Blocking the Microsoft-Activision deal would harm consumers

The tie-up promises new kinds of competition in gaming
www.economist.com www.economist.com

www.forbes.com

The FTC-Sony Case Against The Microsoft Activision Deal Is Very Bad

If Sony and the FTC are doing everything they can to block the Microsoft Activision acquisition, they are doing a very, very bad job of it, as evidenced by this week’s hearings.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Click to expand...
AcmkAoL.jpg

"Not letting this deal go through would harm consumers......." RRRRRRRIIIIIIGGGGGHHHHHHTTTT.
 
Hudo said:
why not?
Click to expand...
Because (1) that is the equivalent of Microsoft making a mockery of UK regulators by bypassing via loopholes, which is unacceptable, and (2) this will lead to Microsoft bearing heavy fines (think more than $10 billion) from the CMA.

The CMA did not just put a ban on Microsoft from publishing ABK games in the UK. The CMA blocked Microsoft from acquiring ABK. If Microsoft does it anyway, they breach the UK law, and the CMA will incur a fine that is the equivalent of 10% of Microsoft's global revenue.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Because (1) that is the equivalent of Microsoft making a mockery of UK regulators by bypassing via loopholes, which is unacceptable, and (2) this will lead to Microsoft bearing heavy fines (think more than $10 billion) from the CMA.

The CMA did not just put a ban on Microsoft from publishing ABK games in the UK. The CMA blocked Microsoft from acquiring ABK. If Microsoft does it anyway, they breach the UK law, and the CMA will incur a fine that is the equivalent of 10% of Microsoft's global revenue.
Click to expand...
Well the first point, I don't think a non-British company gives a shit about that. And the second point, the CMA and its rulings only has jurisdiction over the British market, right? Why would that have any effect of acquiring ABK globally?
 
Hudo said:
Well the first point, I don't think a non-British company gives a shit about that. And the second point, the CMA and its rulings only has jurisdiction over the British market, right? Why would that have any effect of acquiring ABK globally?
Click to expand...

The CMA also imposed a 10-year ban on Microsoft and Activision investing in each other. Meaning even if Microsoft pulls ABK from the UK completely, Microsoft itself is still operating in the UK. So they would still be subject to UK laws and rulings. The only option for them would be to pull all of Microsoft from the UK.
 
Hudo said:
Well the first point, I don't think a non-British company gives a shit about that. And the second point, the CMA and its rulings only has jurisdiction over the British market, right? Why would that have any effect of acquiring ABK globally?
Click to expand...
That's just how merger regulations work.

ABK and MS operate in the UK. The CMA says you cannot merge. They are not imposing their decision in the EU or USA, or Korea, for example. They are banning them from the merger because they represent one of the markets these two companies operate in.

And a non-British company that does operate on British soil does give a shit about that. Otherwise, Microsoft would not be (legally) filing an appeal to CAT.
 
Last edited:
demigod said:
The trial served its purpose. It exposed good guy ms and exposed phils lies.
Click to expand...


Unfortunately the Xbox fans won't budge. Just ask people like Riky/Adamsapple, Resetera and journalists like Tom Warren/Jez/Destin etc.

They believe that it was Sony who forced Microsoft's hand and Microsoft is justified for doing all these.

I don't blame them. Phil is THE grandmaster of PR and he knows how to manipulate people with words.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Heisenberg007 said:
That's just how merger regulations work.

ABK and MS operate in the UK. The CMA says you cannot merge. They are not imposing their decision in the EU or USA, or Korea, for example. They are banning them from the merger because they represent one of the markets these two companies operate in.

And a non-British company that does operate on British soil does give a shit about that. Otherwise, Microsoft would not be (legally) filing an appeal to CAT.
Click to expand...

Right. Between their ban of the merger now and for the next 10 years, in addition to neither company being allowed to invest in each other, even by proxy, without CMA consent, there is just no way around it without appeal or both companies leaving the UK entirely.
 
Last edited:
Hudo said:
Well the first point, I don't think a non-British company gives a shit about that. And the second point, the CMA and its rulings only has jurisdiction over the British market, right? Why would that have any effect of acquiring ABK globally?
Click to expand...
You do know the UK is xboxes 2nd biggest market? It would be huge for Microsoft to lose one of the few markets where they actually sell.
 
Edmund said:
Unfortunately the Xbox fans won't budge. Just ask people like Riky/Adamsapple, Resetera and journalists like Tom Warren/Jez/Destin etc.

They believe that it was Sony who forced Microsoft's hand and Microsoft is justified for doing all these.

I don't blame them. Phil is THE grandmaster of PR and he knows how to manipulate people with words.
Click to expand...

The whole "this is Sony's fault" narrative is ridiculous. It attempts to absolve Microsoft of their own abject failures. Any company that has screwed the pooch as often as they have deserve to be in a difficult situation. It completely neglects the fact that Microsoft has a ton of money but simply refuses to pay up in order to get the deals they need. Instead, deciding to spend even more money to outright own big companies so they can permanently be in control of everything they make. It pretends that Sony has not been engaging in business as usual for the industry and somehow cornered half the market of third-party games. When reality is quite different from this particular fantasy land.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ic3man said:
Can't wait till this gets approved, want to see the meltdown of the Sony snowflakes
Click to expand...
A new alt has emerged!
Your post history is quite weak for a 3 year old account (mostly one liners shitting on PlayStation related threads) and your posts in this thread are just to say "it will be approved" with no contribution to the thread.

Let the game of "Whose alt is this?" begin!
 
Hudo said:
Well the first point, I don't think a non-British company gives a shit about that. And the second point, the CMA and its rulings only has jurisdiction over the British market, right? Why would that have any effect of acquiring ABK globally?
Click to expand...

I thought the agreement between Acti/MS had written clauses that various regulatory bodies, including the CMA, had to accept the merger for it to go through?
 
Ar¢tos said:
A new alt has emerged!
Your post history is quite weak for a 3 year old account (mostly one liners shitting on PlayStation related threads) and your posts in this thread are just to say "it will be approved" with no contribution to the thread.

Let the game of "Whose alt is this?" begin!
Click to expand...
Who are you?
 
Ic3man said:
Can't wait till this gets approved, want to see the meltdown of the Sony snowflakes
Click to expand...

You should've checked all the meltdowns here when the CMA dropped the console slc and the deal seems like it was going for an easy approval... was quite horrible ... sony fans accounts been banned , accounts suicides... cats and dogs living together, mass hysteria
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
‘Microsoft’ said they were streamlining 9000 people across XGS/ABK/ZM
Rumor 
19
467
Topher replied
Microsoft wins FTC appeal challenging $69 billion Activision Blizzard deal
News Business  2 3
125
3K
Unknown? replied
MS/ABK is advertising games that don't exist for data collection
46
3K
POKEYCLYDE replied
My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games
2 3 4
156
8K
MDSLKTR replied
Battlefield 6 Beta |OT| Open Beta/Closed Weapons.
|OT|  60 61 62 63 64
3K
5K
Branded replied
Top Bottom