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.
So CMA has confirmed the block on the previous proposal with a final order which might be published by August 29th?

They're basically talking about a new probe with a October 18th deadline.
Also the divestiture to Ubisoft seems to be ww not limited to UK.

At this point between COD for Sony for 10 years and this it seems the impact of the acquisition is strongly neutralized for MS whatever happens.
 
So CMA has confirmed the block on the previous proposal with a final order which might be published by August 29th?

They're basically talking about a new probe with a October 18th deadline.
Also the divestiture to Ubisoft seems to be ww not limited to UK.

At this point between COD for Sony for 10 years and this it seems the impact of the acquisition is strongly neutralized for MS whatever happens.
Think you're right, and CMA said any new proposals will take everything back to step 1…
 
Is this an acceptable remedy at this point or should a new investigation be initiated by the CMA? however I don't remember ubisoft among the providers listed by the cma, but maybe I remember it wrong. I remember that amazon luna was on the list for example, ms continues to offer deals to providers that will never be competitors

if I base myself on the logic used by the cma until yesterday, even with a deal with ubisoft it seems insufficient to me, it must necessarily also favor others in the cloud sector such as amazon.

edit: wait, maybe i read it wrong and I underestimated the deal, this means worldwide will ubisoft have the cloud rights to activision blizzard games? i.e. they practically do with it what they want with acti blizz catalogue?!
Was this the grant in ms mind? that would be huge stuff
 
Last edited:
So either the UK is (surprise surprise) not just some "random irrelevant island in the middle nowhere that we can all ignore pfft" (paraphrasing but that's what a lot of the gaslighting crew are getting at, really) and that's why Microsoft proposed a materially new deal OR the new deal is not really all that new and materially means nothing in the grand scheme of things and Microsoft has played everyone.
 
Last edited:
So in other words:

For the next 10 years, Call of Duty will be on PlayStation. For the next 15 years, all ABK games, even those Microsoft has made Xbox console exclusive, will be able to be on PS+ streaming and in perpetuity. Meaning no completely exclusive ABK games until after 2038.
 
So in other words:

For the next 10 years, Call of Duty will be on PlayStation. For the next 15 years, all ABK games, even those Microsoft has made Xbox console exclusive, will be able to be on PS+ streaming and in perpetuity. Meaning no completely exclusive ABK games until after 2038.
Only if Sony pays Microsoft for it, no?
 
They're still honouring the deals with those companies
How do you honor a contract for something you no longer have the ability to enforce in said regions if ubisoft now is the one with the controlling rights for streaming? If ubisoft stops nvidia from having the free license to stream if the user has a license and want nvidia to pay who do they sue for breach of contract? they don't have one with ubisoft so they sue ms?

Also I find it amusing people are overlooking some rather big things here. Say ms makes some exclusive with abk, there is a pc/xbox version only made so it's running on x86 and using directx. Now is sonys cloud streaming capable of streaming this if they get cloud streamin g right from ubisoft? Are they gonna stick some xbox cloud blades in their data centres so people can stream this exclusive? hmmmmmmmm.
 
How do you honor a contract for something you no longer have the ability to enforce in said regions if ubisoft now is the one with the controlling rights for streaming? If ubisoft stops nvidia from having the free license to stream if the user has a license and want nvidia to pay who do they sue for breach of contract? they don't have one with ubisoft so they sue ms?

Also I find it amusing people are overlooking some rather big things here. Say ms makes some exclusive with abk, there is a pc/xbox version only made so it's running on x86 and using directx. Now is sonys cloud streaming capable of streaming this if they get cloud streamin g right from ubisoft? Are they gonna stick some xbox cloud blades in their data centres so people can stream this exclusive? hmmmmmmmm.

They obviously negotiated this with Ubisoft so they can honour said contracts. Can't believe this needs to be clarified
 
Last edited:
Here's the unity bond tweet... Now it make a bit more sense.... Btw ubi can set the price for the streaming rights I imagine
 
Wait I must have missed something. Where did Ubisoft come from?? Was that random tweet from Bond, Sarah Bond, not random after all?
 
Wait I must have missed something. Where did Ubisoft come from?? Was that random tweet from Bond, Sarah Bond, not random after all?

Lol we've been talking about it bud. Go back to the last page. Microsoft has proposed to the CMA that Ubisoft has worldwide streaming rights to all current ABK games and all future ABK games released in the next 15 years. Ubisoft will permanently maintain streaming rights to all of those games. After 15 years, any ABK games made belong to MS for streaming rights. Meaning the door is open for any ABK games that are console exclusive to Xbox over the next 15 years to actually be on PlayStation via streaming.
 
Last edited:
if it is a new deal yes
The new deal was only presented to the CMA -- why would other countries (who allowed) then re-review? It's not adding, it's agreeing to change something after the fact. Other parties that already approved would not need to review again, since they already approved regardless of this
 
15 years, should be rejected again if the CMA haven't been influenced.
yes, in fact they had requested a definitive divestment if I remember correctly and in any case more impactful than just the streaming rights. better than nothing anyway, even if they go down in history as idiots
 
15 years, should be rejected again if the CMA haven't been influenced.

Oh she's definitely be influenced

0zHoXwx.jpg
 
CMA finalises decision to block original merger after rejecting submissions by Microsoft to revisit its original decision;
Microsoft submits new, restructured deal for review, triggering a fresh Phase 1 investigation by CMA;
Under the new deal, Microsoft will not acquire the cloud streaming rights to all current and future Activision games released during the next 15 years (excluding in the EEA)
The new deal follows confirmation by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) that the original deal would be blocked to protect innovation and choice in cloud gaming. In an unusual step, Microsoft had sought to revisit the CMA's original prohibition decision, arguing that blocking the original deal was no longer appropriate in light of developments since the CMA issued its Final Report in April, including the acceptance of binding commitments by the European Commission and a licensing deal agreed between Sony and Microsoft.

The independent group which took the original decision reviewed these submissions and decided that they did not provide any basis for a change to the original prohibition decision. To give final legal effect to that decision, the CMA has today imposed a Final Order which prohibits the original deal on a worldwide basis.

Separately, Microsoft and Activision have agreed a new, restructured deal, which has been submitted to the CMA to review in a new investigation.

This new investigation will be carried out in line with the CMA's usual Phase 1 processes and the statutory deadline for a decision is 18 October 2023.

Under the restructured deal, Microsoft will not acquire cloud rights for existing Activision PC and console games, or for new games released by Activision during the next 15 years (this excludes the European Economic Area). Instead, these rights will be divested to Ubisoft Entertainment SA (Ubisoft) prior to Microsoft's acquisition of Activision.

Microsoft has stated that the restructured deal is intended to address the concerns set out in the CMA's Final Report in April. In particular, the transaction is intended to provide an independent third-party content supplier, Ubisoft, with the ability to supply Activision's gaming content to all cloud gaming service providers (including to Microsoft itself). Ubisoft will be able to license out Activision's content under different business models, including subscription services. The deal also proposes that Ubisoft would have the ability to require Microsoft to provide versions of games on operating systems other than Windows.

Sarah Cardell, Chief Executive of the CMA, said:

The CMA has today confirmed that Microsoft's acquisition of Activision, as originally proposed, cannot proceed.
Separately, Microsoft has notified a new and restructured deal, which is substantially different from what was put on the table previously. As part of this new deal, Activision's cloud streaming rights outside of the EEA will be sold to a rival, Ubisoft, who will be able to license out Activision's content to any cloud gaming provider. This will allow gamers to access Activision's games in different ways, including through cloud-based multigame subscription services. We will now consider this deal under a new Phase 1 investigation.
This is not a green light. We will carefully and objectively assess the details of the restructured deal and its impact on competition, including in light of third-party comments. Our goal has not changed – any future decision on this new deal will ensure that the growing cloud gaming market continues to benefit from open and effective competition driving innovation and choice.
The CMA is inviting comments from any interested party on the impact that the newly structured merger could have on competition in the UK.

More information on the restructured transaction, the new Phase 1 investigation and how to submit comments is available on the Microsoft / Activision Blizzard (ex-cloud streaming rights) merger inquiry.

Notes to Editors

  1. Prior to the new deal being submitted, Microsoft made submissions that the final order to block the original merger should not be imposed. Microsoft argued that, for various reasons, there had been a material change of circumstances since the original decision. After careful consideration, this was rejected by the independent inquiry group.
  2. More information on the original deal that the CMA reviewed is available on the case page.
  3. Ubisoft will compensate Microsoft for the cloud streaming rights to Activision's games through a one-off payment and through a market-based wholesale pricing mechanism, including an option that supports pricing based on usage. The terms of the transaction will allow Ubisoft to commercialise these rights to any other cloud gaming services provider (including to Microsoft itself). Ubisoft will have the ability to license out to third parties the cloud streaming rights to Activision's games under any business model of its choosing, including buy-to-play, multigame subscription services, or any other model that may arise. Ubisoft will also be able, for a fee, to require Microsoft to adapt Activision's titles to operating systems other than Windows, such as Linux, if it decides to use or license out the cloud streaming rights to Activision's titles to a cloud gaming service that runs a non-Windows operating system.
 
The new deal was only presented to the CMA -- why would other countries (who allowed) then re-review? It's not adding, it's agreeing to change something after the fact. Other parties that already approved would not need to review again, since they already approved regardless of this
The FTC is still blocking deal 1 as well. If deal 1 is now over then they will likely need to also reassess deal 2.

I don't think we have the full picture yet.
 
CMA finalises decision to block original merger after rejecting submissions by Microsoft to revisit its original decision;
Microsoft submits new, restructured deal for review, triggering a fresh Phase 1 investigation by CMA;
Under the new deal, Microsoft will not acquire the cloud streaming rights to all current and future Activision games released during the next 15 years (excluding in the EEA)
The new deal follows confirmation by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) that the original deal would be blocked to protect innovation and choice in cloud gaming. In an unusual step, Microsoft had sought to revisit the CMA's original prohibition decision, arguing that blocking the original deal was no longer appropriate in light of developments since the CMA issued its Final Report in April, including the acceptance of binding commitments by the European Commission and a licensing deal agreed between Sony and Microsoft.

The independent group which took the original decision reviewed these submissions and decided that they did not provide any basis for a change to the original prohibition decision. To give final legal effect to that decision, the CMA has today imposed a Final Order which prohibits the original deal on a worldwide basis.

Separately, Microsoft and Activision have agreed a new, restructured deal, which has been submitted to the CMA to review in a new investigation.

This new investigation will be carried out in line with the CMA's usual Phase 1 processes and the statutory deadline for a decision is 18 October 2023.

Under the restructured deal, Microsoft will not acquire cloud rights for existing Activision PC and console games, or for new games released by Activision during the next 15 years (this excludes the European Economic Area). Instead, these rights will be divested to Ubisoft Entertainment SA (Ubisoft) prior to Microsoft's acquisition of Activision.

Microsoft has stated that the restructured deal is intended to address the concerns set out in the CMA's Final Report in April. In particular, the transaction is intended to provide an independent third-party content supplier, Ubisoft, with the ability to supply Activision's gaming content to all cloud gaming service providers (including to Microsoft itself). Ubisoft will be able to license out Activision's content under different business models, including subscription services. The deal also proposes that Ubisoft would have the ability to require Microsoft to provide versions of games on operating systems other than Windows.

Sarah Cardell, Chief Executive of the CMA, said:


The CMA is inviting comments from any interested party on the impact that the newly structured merger could have on competition in the UK.

More information on the restructured transaction, the new Phase 1 investigation and how to submit comments is available on the Microsoft / Activision Blizzard (ex-cloud streaming rights) merger inquiry.

Notes to Editors

  1. Prior to the new deal being submitted, Microsoft made submissions that the final order to block the original merger should not be imposed. Microsoft argued that, for various reasons, there had been a material change of circumstances since the original decision. After careful consideration, this was rejected by the independent inquiry group.
  2. More information on the original deal that the CMA reviewed is available on the case page.
  3. Ubisoft will compensate Microsoft for the cloud streaming rights to Activision's games through a one-off payment and through a market-based wholesale pricing mechanism, including an option that supports pricing based on usage. The terms of the transaction will allow Ubisoft to commercialise these rights to any other cloud gaming services provider (including to Microsoft itself). Ubisoft will have the ability to license out to third parties the cloud streaming rights to Activision's games under any business model of its choosing, including buy-to-play, multigame subscription services, or any other model that may arise. Ubisoft will also be able, for a fee, to require Microsoft to adapt Activision's titles to operating systems other than Windows, such as Linux, if it decides to use or license out the cloud streaming rights to Activision's titles to a cloud gaming service that runs a non-Windows operating system.
Prior to the new deal being submitted, Microsoft made submissions that the final order to block the original merger should not be imposed. Microsoft argued that, for various reasons, there had been a material change of circumstances since the original decision. After careful consideration, this was rejected by the independent inquiry group.



Good
 
Only for 15 years of content, after that all future content is 100% MS's.
Yeah I mis-read that initially. However for all current content (so Diablo 1->4, WoW etc) + the next 15 years, Ubisoft have in perpetuity license to stream any of that content.

What's strange to me is that Microsoft are now using this consolidation with ABK to decide that Ubisoft (should be a competitor) is going to have this massive in-flux of IP all of a sudden. I would think that going down this route of opening up the ABK IP, that a better solution would be open bidding, allow EA, Ubi, Tencent etc to have a look in rather than just handing the whole plate to Ubi.

Just my 2p
 
Microsoft should walk away and just sell the gaming division for parts lol there is no point anymore at all, they got played and they have no shot of ever catching up anyway so this Hail Mary is pointless especially now, horrific deal for them lol.
 
Last edited:
I love how MS solution to everything is just "add 5 more years to the deal" and hope this time it gets through

Interesting that they chose Ubisoft specifically, is this because their next planned acquisition just happens to be... Ubisoft??
 
Last edited:
They obviously negotiated this with Unisoft so they can honour said contracts. Can't believe this needs to be clarified
Well I'm wrong, they bought the rights back from ubisoft they need to honor those contracts but this whole thing is gonna end up a shitshow because my point under the quote.

"Of importance, Microsoft's obligations to provide cloud streaming rights in the European Economic Area remain in place, in full compliance with Microsoft's commitments to the European Commission. The agreement with Ubisoft has been structured so that Microsoft will still acquire the rights needed to honor fully its legal obligations under its commitments to the European Commission, as well as its existing contractual obligations to other cloud game streaming providers, including Nvidia, Boosteroid, Ubitus, and Nware. Microsoft is engaging closely with the European Commission to support the EC's assessment of the agreement and confirmation that the commitments remain undisturbed.'

My other point still stands, what happens with an exclusive ABK game that only has a windows/directx version ever made and sony/amazon/netflix/meta or whoever else want to license it to stream on their service?

This is gonna be an absolute shitshow down the track, do the cma/eu fine ubisoft for not being able to provide a license to stream something because a compatible version of the game/software/program for rivals cloud infrastructure doesn't exist, or is it fine to say they should just put some windows vm's online? Is the solution that microsoft can't stream these titles on xcloud so then they are not exclusive to xcloud and ubisoft can't license them? Can microsoft transition all logins to microsoft accounts so no matter where you play from your going to have to login to an xbox account instead of a blizzard/acti one? So many questions that probably wont be answered because the regulators will be asking if sony will get a santa skin in cod.

The only things this deal does is tell us all microsoft doesn't see cloud really taking off for at least 15 years, or they intend on buying ubisoft at some point.
 
The only things this deal does is tell us all microsoft doesn't see cloud really taking off for at least 15 years, or they intend on buying ubisoft at some point.
I'm 99% sure this is the plan. They'll kick the can down the road a few years and then try to acquire Ubisoft in 2027 or something and hope this time they'll be able to get by without regulator issues.
 
I'm 99% sure this is the plan. They'll kick the can down the road a few years and then try to acquire Ubisoft in 2027 or something and hope this time they'll be able to get by without regulator issues.
Ultimate twist.

Sony buy Ubisoft, launch their streaming service worldwide, do what they want with COD streaming.

Bet there's a clause that prevents that haha
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom