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.
thebigmanjosh said:
I think people are thinking too hard on this. MS/ATVI will just restructure the deal to remove the CMA as a required legislative approver and call it a day 🤷🏻‍♂️
Click to expand...
lol, it's not the deal between MS/ATVI being re-structured, it's the deal MS offered the CMA.

edit: Actually wait I'm dumb it totally would change the deal itself.

God I'm dumb this week.
 
Last edited:
Vox Machina said:
CNBC's assertion that MSFT "bet the future on Cloud Gaming" is altogether false. Xbox, the business, will actually keep MORE profit if xCloud were to be divested/scuttled. It's an unprofitable business as Sony has seen. If xCloud were to stop working THIS VERY SECOND then Xbox would continue to exist as a business and be better off for it. Both as a function of keeping more of their revenues AND as a function of being less at risk of regulatory overstep.

So, thanks for agreeing with me I guess.
Click to expand...

And yet Microsoft continues to shift their strategy from consoles to cloud.

"The email exchange references a tradeoff on spending money on Xbox console volume or content and cloud bets. "From a strategy perspective I believe in our tradeoffs for Cloud and Content in Gaming over console volume," says Spencer. "With our strategy and opportunity console volume will still be the thing we constrain to grow our long term ambition.""

www.theverge.com

Microsoft sacrificed Xbox Series X sales for “long term ambition” in the cloud

Microsoft has used custom Xbox Series X hardware for its cloud.
www.theverge.com www.theverge.com
 
POKEYCLYDE said:
Is it gonna pass? Is it gonna get blocked?
indecisive-i-dont-know.gif
Click to expand...
"Yes."
 
IntentionalPun said:
So MS approached CMA and said they'd re-structure the deal, to go back to the drawing board basically.. now 3 more months of talking.

This still feels like a long shot for MS. Or they truly are willing to do some serious divestiture.
Click to expand...
One of the two (CMA or MS) will have to back down for the deal to go through.

CMA's only concession was the divestiture of Activision and COD. Microsoft rejected divestment.

Possible that CMA now rejects Microsoft's supposed offer to remove xCloud from GPU in the UK. Or perhaps they back down and accept it. Either way, one party will have to leave their initial stance. Let's see how it turns out to be.
 
adamsapple said:
Like I said, make it look like they didn't buckle but find a way out as they're the only outlier now.
Click to expand...
I prefer to focus on the potential legal issues at play instead of an anonymous source, who asked not to be named, who did not even comment on the potential legal issues at play.

IntentionalPun said:
lol, it's not the deal between MS/ATVI being re-structured, it's the deal MS offered the CMA.
Click to expand...

Do you have support for that assertion? I have the opposite impression, but its just my impression.

As I read the CMA statements, I thought they said the time for new remedies is past, but reviewing a new deal is on the table.
 
After listening to the ex-CMA head, I was thinking of one more possibility:

Microsoft suggested restructuring the deal is within their legal rights. If the CMA did not say, "we're open to having that discussion," Microsoft/CAT could accuse the CMA that they acted unreasonably.

Perhaps that was the reason of yesterday's statement by the CMA.

(not huge chances of this but still technically a possibility).
 
Topher said:
Bloomberg saying FTC leaning towards appealing...

www.bloomberg.com

FTC Leaning Toward Appealing Microsoft-Activision Loss

The US Federal Trade Commission is leaning toward appealing a federal judge’s ruling against the agency’s bid to block Microsoft Corp.’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard Inc., according to a person familiar with the case.
www.bloomberg.com www.bloomberg.com



So you think Phil Spencer lied under oath?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't believe him if his tongue was notorised
Astray said:
Click to expand...

Satay Nutella and the board will have to draw from the Sony 2011 playbook.

 
Vox Machina said:
You've been following along with the same news I have. If you don't think the CAT has been overall deferential towards MSFT in it's (admittedly limited) decisions so far then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
Nope. I see the processes working as they always have. MSFT™ filed an appeal as they're allowed to, and the CAT is set to see if the CMA followed their proper protocols. But, Construct that Narrative™
 
Last edited:
IntentionalPun said:
lol, it's not the deal between MS/ATVI being re-structured, it's the deal MS offered the CMA.

edit: Actually wait I'm dumb it totally would change the deal itself.

God I'm dumb this week.
Click to expand...
Judging by the ban list this saga is making everyone dumb this week.

From Financial Times:

The Competition and Markets Authority said on Wednesday that the only way to return to the negotiating table would be to start from scratch with a new deal.
Click to expand...

One person familiar with the negotiations suggested that the CMA and the companies would now enter a three-month period of talks. The person said there was a period of time "to discuss what the CMA really wants", adding that it was "way too early to speculate what's on the table"
Click to expand...
 
Alex Scott said:
Do you have support for that assertion? I have the opposite impression, but its just my impression.

As I read the CMA statements, I thought they said the time for new remedies is past, but reviewing a new deal is on the table.
Click to expand...

Nah see my edit I was just wrong.
 
Woody337 said:
Can someone explain to me what the big deal about this is? I'm console neutral so either way im good but why is everyone so obsessed with microsoft buying them? It wont change a thing for xbox owners so what gives?
Click to expand...

Gamepass owners happy to add more games to their portfolio & have a weird fascination with a corporation owning new IPs. Sony fans pretending its the end of the world and are annoyed that they can no longer get PS CoD exclusive content. People who don't care about either one watching this thinking "what is wrong with these people".

10 years from now, a new batch of fun innovative revolutionary games will appear and no one will remember this deal.
 
Topher said:
And yet Microsoft continues to shift their strategy from consoles to cloud.

"The email exchange references a tradeoff on spending money on Xbox console volume or content and cloud bets. "From a strategy perspective I believe in our tradeoffs for Cloud and Content in Gaming over console volume," says Spencer. "With our strategy and opportunity console volume will still be the thing we constrain to grow our long term ambition.""

www.theverge.com

Microsoft sacrificed Xbox Series X sales for “long term ambition” in the cloud

Microsoft has used custom Xbox Series X hardware for its cloud.
www.theverge.com www.theverge.com
Click to expand...

Strategies change over time, clearly. I think if it literally came down to either acquiring Activision Blizzard or scuttling/divesting xCloud it would be a no-brainer decision for me. In fact if I were an institutional investor in MSFT I'd have been on the phone with Mr. Nadella the day after the CMA block stating as much. In actuality I think they've already begun this transition. When Phil Spencer announced at the latest Xbox/Bethesda showcase that they've "solved the Xbox Series X supply issues" I think that was the tell. Where do you think they're getting those extra Series X APU's? They're not going into xCloud blades.
 
Banjo64 said:
Can you please explain how allowing Microsoft to own ABK and removing xCloud from Game Pass in the UK market would be seen as a viable proposition from the CMA's POV? How does that alleviate their concerns?
Click to expand...

The block was on the grounds that the acquisition would give Microsoft a massive advantage due to its existing cloud business. The rest of the CMA's concerns were satisfied. Removing xCloud from game pass in the UK and spinning off its xCloud hardware into an independent company eliminates Microsoft as a cloud provider in the UK and leaves the space open for a UK business to fill the void.
 
ChiefDada said:
"Narrative about a narrative"? That's exactly what happened. David Faber got that talking angle from Microsoft. James Sawyer Ford James Sawyer Ford is right.




Plenty of evidence in this forum to suggest you're an intelligent guy, overall. Why does it seem to always go left whenever Microsoft gets caught with their pants down?
Click to expand...


David Faber from CNBC:

"Microsoft has offered a small discrete divestiture that will satisfy the CMA, or at least they believe will satisfy the CMA ... all of this will put it on the path to close"

Not only is David not a part of Microsoft, but his statement is pretty clear, he quickly corrects himself in the very next sentence.

But let's not let little details like that take us away from the Narrative™.
 
Microsoft and Activision Blizzard are exploring a restructured version of their proposed $75bn tie-up in a move that could trigger a fresh UK antitrust probe, according to the regulator that last month blocked the original deal. The Competition and Markets Authority said on Wednesday that the only way to return to the negotiating table would be to start from scratch with a new deal.

People close to the deal have suggested a divestiture could be a possible solution, but it is unclear what assets Microsoft would be willing to lose. Nonetheless, the proposed deadline for the deal closing on July 18 is unlikely to be met. Microsoft could pay a break fee of as much as $3bn if it falls apart.

The CMA and the companies involved have requested a stay in legal proceedings after the parties were due to appear in the UK's appeal court at the end of the month to challenge the decision. However, the court has to approve the request, and the FTC may still appeal against Tuesday's ruling by the US judge.

One person familiar with the negotiations suggested that the CMA and the companies would now enter a three-month period of talks. The person said there was a period of time "to discuss what the CMA really wants", adding that it was "way too early to speculate what's on the table".

The discussions over a new deal were instigated by Microsoft, according to one person familiar with the talks. A former CMA lawyer said it was unusual for companies to bring a reconstituted deal in front of the regulator to begin the process again.
Click to expand...


From idas on ree.

The 3 month talking period lines up with the october date the cma prefered.
 
adamsapple said:
David Faber from CNBC:

"Microsoft has offered a small discrete divestiture that will satisfy the CMA, or at least they believe will satisfy the CMA ... all of this will put it on the path to close"

Not only is David not a part of Microsoft, but his statement is pretty clear, he quickly corrects himself in the very next sentence.

But let's not let little details like that take us away from the Narrative™.
Click to expand...
So you think people pick up on these stories from thin air? Or was it someone from the CMA that told the media that they would accept this deal and then rejected it anyway?
 
Last edited:
Lasha said:
The block was on the grounds that the acquisition would give Microsoft a massive advantage due to its existing cloud business. The rest of the CMA's concerns were satisfied. Removing xCloud from game pass in the UK and spinning off its xCloud hardware into an independent company eliminates Microsoft as a cloud provider in the UK and leaves the space open for a UK business to fill the void.
Click to expand...
And, moreover, the opportunity for MS to reintegrate it, at a later stage, when the cloud market develops.
 
DrFigs said:
So you think people pick up on these stories from thin air? Or was it someone from the CMA that told them that they would accept this deal?
Click to expand...

The dude clearly says "or at least they believe will satisfy the CMA" in the time stamped clip. The 'they' in this is Microsoft, he's not talking about CMA accepting the divestiture.
 
Vox Machina said:
Strategies change over time, clearly. I think if it literally came down to either acquiring Activision Blizzard or scuttling/divesting xCloud it would be a no-brainer decision for me. In fact if I were an institutional investor in MSFT I'd have been on the phone with Mr. Nadella the day after the CMA block stating as much. In actuality I think they've already begun this transition. When Phil Spencer announced at the latest Xbox/Bethesda showcase that they've "solved the Xbox Series X supply issues" I think that was the tell. Where do you think they're getting those extra Series X APU's? They're not going into xCloud blades.
Click to expand...

Blades in datacenters are not constantly being replaced like consoles on store shelves. Seems pretty clear that MS' primary strategy has been to stock cloud and once that was done, they moved back to stocking shelves. Regardless, cloud has been the priority. And no, I don't think your theory that MS could "scuttle" or "divest" xCloud has any merit whatsoever.
 
Ogbert said:
And, moreover, the opportunity for MS to reintegrate it, at a later stage, when the cloud market develops.
Click to expand...
Probably not much of a concern considering Gamepass, games, and consoles could still be sold. Licensing its library to some player in the UK market is a reasonable concession to push Gamepass on the rest of the world.
 
DrFigs said:
So you think people pick up on these stories from thin air? Or was it someone from the CMA that told the media that they would accept this deal and then rejected it anyway?
Click to expand...
Nobody told anyone they would accept the deal. Faber mis-spoke and corrected himself, MS "believes" the deal will work.

And I don't think they can just "accept" a divestiture deal on the spot.

Entire thing needs to be re-examined.

What it sounds like:

MS instead of going to CAT put together a divestiture deal w/ ABK, and are going to offer it up to the CMA. The process for that involves them having to re-submit to the CMA, which could take months, but MS feels like it's going to work.

And of course if MS is offering a deal they think is going to work, they are going to.. tell the media that lol And if they don't think it's going to work, they'd never have stopped the CAT process to move forward with re-submitting.

It'd be gaslighting for MS to re-submit and go "We think they won't accept this deal, we are just doing this to waste millions of dollars."
 
Last edited:
adamsapple said:
The dude clearly says "or at least they believe will satisfy the CMA" in the time stamped clip. The 'they' in this is Microsoft, he's not talking about CMA accepting the divestiture.
Click to expand...
Of course Microsoft believe. Why would they suggest a remedy that they think the CMA will outright reject? Just for the kicks of it? lol. They also believed the 10-year deal would work with the CMA.
 
Last edited:
Topher said:
Blades in datacenters are not constantly being replaced like consoles on store shelves. Seems pretty clear that MS' primary strategy has been to stock cloud and once that was done, they moved back to stocking shelves. Regardless, cloud has been the priority. And no, I don't think your theory that MS could "scuttle" or "divest" xCloud has any merit whatsoever.
Click to expand...
FYI - Phil Spencer literally admitted it during the hearing, that he prioritized Cloud server blades instead of pushing Series X on the market for sale.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Of course Microsoft believe. Why would they suggest a remedy that they think the CMA will outright reject? Just for the kicks of it? lol. They also believed the 10-year deal would work with the CMA.
Click to expand...


That's besides the point, the time stamped comment directly contradicts what some users have said about MS gaslighting or controlling the narrative that the deal is already done.
 
xHunter said:

From idas on ree.

The 3 month talking period lines up with the october date the cma prefered.
Click to expand...
It doesn't show up in quotes, but from your quotes of the article:

"The discussions over a new deal were instigated by Microsoft, according to one person familiar with the talks. A former CMA lawyer said it was unusual for companies to bring a reconstituted deal in front of the regulator to begin the process again."

If that is accurate, there would have been ZERO reason for CMA to say no. They just asked for more time to prepare and got told no. Being offered a chance to spend more time preparing would be an offer they'd have no reason to refuse as it would be a gift horse without conditions.

Now I'm wondering if this was more of a power play that MS laid down against AB. Is there some clause in their deal requiring renegotiations before demanding a break up fee they are triggering?
 
adamsapple said:
That's besides the point, the time stamped comment directly contradicts what some users have said about MS gaslighting or controlling the narrative that the deal is already done.
Click to expand...
Ah well it just looks like some really bad reporting from Bloomberg anyway. It doesn't seem like any other outlet used the language they did, about "accepting the offer".

edit: i meant cnbc
 
Last edited:
NickFire said:
It doesn't show up in quotes, but from your quotes of the article:

"The discussions over a new deal were instigated by Microsoft, according to one person familiar with the talks. A former CMA lawyer said it was unusual for companies to bring a reconstituted deal in front of the regulator to begin the process again."

If that is accurate, there would have been ZERO reason for CMA to say no. They just asked for more time to prepare and got told no. Being offered a chance to spend more time preparing would be an offer they'd have no reason to refuse as it would be a gift horse without conditions.

Now I'm wondering if this was more of a power play that MS laid down against AB. Is there some clause in their deal requiring renegotiations before demanding a break up fee they are triggering?
Click to expand...
All scenarios are plausible.
  • Microsoft stringing along ABK to avoid paying the penalty
  • CMA stringing along Microsoft to get the 3-month extension they wanted from CAT
  • Microsoft/ABK/Journalists stringing along everyone so they could all profit from ABK stock price jump because of an "error" in the CNBC report. *wink wink*
 
So looks like what happened is MS and ABK came up with a divestiture plan they think will work.

There is no way to even get that in front of the CMA w/o re-submitting, so they talked to the CMA and the CMA agreed to pause the current proceedings so they can re-submit.

Hence why it was reported that MS has a divestiture plan they think will work. CNBC goofed and printed it DID work, when that is impossible anyways as the CMA can't "accept" a deal overnight.

MS/ABK can be dead wrong though, but that appears to be what is going down.

So now we wait more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
‘Microsoft’ said they were streamlining 9000 people across XGS/ABK/ZM
Rumor 
19
461
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