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.
Bernoulli said:
New report from MLex (I told you that the EC wasn't going to be happy):

- Microsoft's restructuring of its acquisition of Activision Blizzard to win UK approval will see the European Commission assess whether a fresh EU notification is necessary.

- Microsoft believes the divestment of cloud-gaming rights to Ubisoft outside of Europe will allow it to respect EU commitments adopted in May, but officials are now studying if a new review by the EU merger regulator is needed. "The commission is carefully assessing whether the developments in the UK require another notification to the commission," a spokesperson for the EU authority said.


Are you ready for a new CMA and EC merger review? :p xD

MS says that everything is fine, but we'll see...


This Is Fine GIF
Click to expand...
Not a lawyer, but one possible reason for re-reviewing the deal is that now instead of Microsoft being the power that could monopolize the cloud market in the EU, now it could become Ubisoft (because they control ABK + their own sizeable trove of content for the next 15 years at least).

Microsoft agreed to the EU behavioral concessions, but Ubisoft did not do so yet.

Dragging in a 3rd party could get messy.

Finally, It's easy to forget this part, but we are already closing in on the 1st break-up fee milestone of the merger extension deal (3.5bn if the deal doesn't consummate by Aug 29th).

This new season is promising.

bitbydeath said:
They've already said they won't accept a deal like this previously, MS going to be ice skating uphill.
Click to expand...
 
Mr Reasonable said:
Surely the EC won't GAF since they'd already passed the deal? This version of it is less contentious, not more, right?

Interesting turn of events though, there endless ways for Microsoft to negotiate this element of the deal to not affect their plans in any meaningful way whatsoever. If it gets it over the line, the question must be, what was the point in the CMA's reservations?

It'll be a bit of a joke if Microsoft now turn around and say "Locally installed Call of Duty is exclusive to Xbox and PC." Could end up a worse deal for everyone.
Click to expand...
The problem is that Sony and Nintendo have already signed the deals and ensured native console COD 😄

As I said earlier, this is not the deal Microsoft wanted when they started with this, and I'm pretty sure they'd be extremely unhappy with how everything turned out to be.

They lost all the competitive advantages they could have got out of this deal -- except for maybe showing Call of Duty on the Xbox stage once a year. Which they could have done with a simple marketing deal with ABK that Microsoft themselves declined earlier.

The only reason MS isn't walking away at this point is because of the $4+ billion penalty fees.
 
Astray said:
Not a lawyer, but one possible reason for re-reviewing the deal is that now instead of Microsoft being the power that could monopolize the cloud market in the EU, now it could become Ubisoft (because they control ABK + their own sizeable trove of content for the next 15 years at least).

Microsoft agreed to the EU behavioral concessions, but Ubisoft did not do so yet.
Click to expand...
This is actually a very interesting point.
  • EC can reject this deal because Ubisoft hasn't promised the same deals (I don't think they have to because CMA's offer only applies to non-EU areas)
  • But the CMA can also reject the restructured deal as Ubisoft / Ubisoft+ can become with the ABK games what the CMA feared Xbox/xCloud would become.
 
Bernoulli said:
EU is jealous

they shouldn't have been scared by MS and blocked it instead
Click to expand...
I don't think they are jealous, maybe they have understood that they are seen as doormats by the big techs, unlike the cma and ftc (despite khan and co having done a miserable job in court). Of all the regulators that have been part of this takeover, the European Commission is the only one that has seemed embarrassing, with the sily remedies chosen, with the two-month silence on the rationale behind this takeover and with the fact that they were about to put an MS consultant on head of antitrust investigations.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
The problem is that Sony and Nintendo have already signed the deals and ensured native console COD 😄

As I said earlier, this is not the deal Microsoft wanted when they started with this, and I'm pretty sure they'd be extremely unhappy with how everything turned out to be.

They lost all the competitive advantages they could have got out of this deal -- except for maybe showing Call of Duty on the Xbox stage once a year. Which they could have done with a simple marketing deal with ABK that Microsoft themselves declined earlier.

The only reason MS isn't walking away at this point is because of the $4+ billion penalty fees.
Click to expand...
Pffft $4billion, merely a paltry sum for a company with INFINITE pockets.
 
alphachino said:
Pffft $4billion, merely a paltry sum for a company with INFINITE pockets.
Click to expand...
Nah, every $ hurts. Otherwise, MS wouldn't have laid off 11,000 people. Or they could have acquired so many other developers and publishers for $4 billion. Or subsidize Xbox Series X and sell it for $200 MSRP.

Or a bazillion other things.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
This is actually a very interesting point.
  • EC can reject this deal because Ubisoft hasn't promised the same deals (I don't think they have to because CMA's offer only applies to non-EU areas)
  • But the CMA can also reject the restructured deal as Ubisoft / Ubisoft+ can become with the ABK games what the CMA feared Xbox/xCloud would become.
Click to expand...
I think this has a stronger chance of being pushed through than the original deal, but time is a big factor again, and so is the level of cooperation that Ubisoft shows during all this.

I do agree with your point that this merger's benefit to Microsoft in any ecosystem wars has been thoroughly nerfed at this point, if anything, it pushes them further into 3rd party territory imo.

This is absolutely not what Spencer envisioned when he 1st came up with the idea.

alphachino said:
Pffft $4billion, merely a paltry sum for a company with INFINITE pockets.
Click to expand...
If Microsoft loses 4 billion over this without getting anything in return you will see heads of the Xbox division being delivered on a silver platter the next week.

No one loses a company 4 billion without major fucking reprecussions.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
This is actually a very interesting point.
  • EC can reject this deal because Ubisoft hasn't promised the same deals (I don't think they have to because CMA's offer only applies to non-EU areas)
  • But the CMA can also reject the restructured deal as Ubisoft / Ubisoft+ can become with the ABK games what the CMA feared Xbox/xCloud would become.
Click to expand...
The divestment will take place immediately before completion of Microsoft's acquisition of Activision. Ubisoft will also receive a non-exclusive licence for Activision's EEA cloud gaming rights to enable it to stream and sub-license streaming of Activision games in that region. At the same time, Microsoft will receive a non-exclusive licence from Ubisoft for cloud streaming rights to the extent necessary for Microsoft to fulfil its obligations under its commitments to the European Commission and certain existing third-party cloud streaming agreements.
Click to expand...
Source: https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/micros...zard-ex-cloud-streaming-rights-merger-inquiry

If you are a eea service provider, you have two options now instead of one. That's if the CMA still believes that the case at the end of the phase one investigation.
 
Last edited:
Heisenberg007 said:
Actually, it became slightly more likely that Sony will now buy Ubisoft. Microsoft will not be allowed to legally buy Ubisoft for at least 15 years.
Click to expand...
This. If the CMA has half a brain they will block MS from being able to purchase Ubisoft during this time period. Who knew Lulu's weird tweet was going to lead to something even more weird?
 
reinking said:
This. If the CMA has half a brain they will block MS from being able to purchase Ubisoft during this time period. Who knew Lulu's weird tweet was going to lead to something even more weird?
Click to expand...

abk buys ubisoft lol

joking aside, I've already read on the net about ms supporters who want ms to acquire ubisoft as well
 
Last edited:
Some sites seem to be reporting that they expect CMA will come to a conclusion by October 18, that date is in the OT title though and came long before this new deal was made.
 
Last edited:
Mr Reasonable said:
It'll be a bit of a joke if Microsoft now turn around and say "Locally installed Call of Duty is exclusive to Xbox and PC." Could end up a worse deal for everyone.
Click to expand...
Could see this happening, only offered via streaming for PS but allows local install for Xbox and PC. Being able to stream would ensure it is available on the console.
Heisenberg007 said:
The problem is that Sony and Nintendo have already signed the deals and ensured native console COD
Click to expand...
Can you provide a link, as I have not been able to find anything which explicitly states it will be available to PS natively, just mentions of being available on PS consoles (which streaming would still satisfy) and having parity (I recognise streaming vs local would be questionable with regards to parity, but provided content was the same MS could argue parity is maintained).
 
It is a true wrestling battle at this point. So many actors.


I do find it hilarious how cloud went from "nobody plays it" to "yeah it is actually a good alternative" overnight for some people :messenger_tears_of_joy: Schrödinger cloud gaming - "can't play cloud games / can play cloud games"
 
Last edited:
By the way, just thought of something.

The CMA's October 18 deadline is for Phase 1. October 18, 2023, is also the date when Microsoft and ABK renegotiated contract expires.

Although very unlikely, if the CMA decides this also requires a Phase 2 investigation, Microsoft and ABK will have to renegotiate again and set an even higher breakup fees 😄
 
Heisenberg007 said:
By the way, just thought of something.

The CMA's October 18 deadline is for Phase 1. October 18, 2023, is also the date when Microsoft and ABK renegotiated contract expires.

Although very unlikely, if the CMA decides this also requires a Phase 2 investigation, Microsoft and ABK will have to renegotiate again and set an even higher breakup fees 😄
Click to expand...
this won't have phase 2 , either blocked or approved on that date

this will be approved unless sony lawyers can make the CMA look again into console concerns after the FTC reveals

or another big party intervenes like amazon, google
 
bitbydeath said:
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.
Click to expand...
The FTC cannot block deals. Only federal courts have that power. They tried to block the original deal by suing to get a preliminary injunction and they failed. All they can do now is go through their administrative process and sue to unwind the deal if it closes.

If the FTC want to sue to try to get a preliminary injunction after this change they can certainly try, But what would they sue for and why would they succeed? An amendment to the deal that gives Microsoft less control over ABK games in the cloud market isn't likely going to be seen as lessening competition by a judge.
 
Mr Moose said:
Yes.
www.gov.uk

Microsoft submits new deal for review after CMA confirms original deal is blocked

The CMA has opened a new phase 1 investigation into a new, restructured deal by Microsoft to buy Activision.
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk
Click to expand...

Bernoulli said:
with the reveals during the FTC trial the CMA should bring back the consoles concern in this new phase 1 and block it again
Click to expand...

I'm glad that our system of government isn't so overtly influenced by corps. We have our problems. Shit... We have an incredibly inept leadership, exacerbating those problems. But our sovereignty remains our sovereignty. So when a huge whale like Microsoft proposed under handing of the UK market, our regulators were like...

hancock-throws-whale-into-the-ocean.gif
 
Last edited:
prinz_valium said:
Microsoft does not have to pay to put these games on Gamepass.
This is obviously only for cloud streaming.
Gamepass via local play is not affected. Microsoft owns those rights.
Click to expand...
At the minute the whole deal is dead worldwide so yes they would. When CMA approval happens then Microsoft can do what they like with subs.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Actually, it became slightly more likely that Sony will now buy Ubisoft. Microsoft will not be allowed to legally buy Ubisoft for at least 15 years.
Click to expand...
Yeah it was said tongue in cheek. But on a serious note. You make a good point with regards Sony.
 
Unknown Soldier said:
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??
Click to expand...
They are definitely buddy-buddy otherwise it doesn't make sense to me why MS would just give them control over ABK even if it is cloud only... this is such an odd type of deal to me.
 
Last edited:
Heisenberg007 said:
The problem is that Sony and Nintendo have already signed the deals and ensured native console COD 😄

As I said earlier, this is not the deal Microsoft wanted when they started with this, and I'm pretty sure they'd be extremely unhappy with how everything turned out to be.

They lost all the competitive advantages they could have got out of this deal -- except for maybe showing Call of Duty on the Xbox stage once a year. Which they could have done with a simple marketing deal with ABK that Microsoft themselves declined earlier.

The only reason MS isn't walking away at this point is because of the $4+ billion penalty fees.
Click to expand...
They're so far behind at this point they still think they have a stage to enter. They missed this boat when E3 died.
 
15 years to cloud gaming ROI is a drop in the bucket. The technology is still in it's infancy and consumers have yet to fully embrace it. It might take 15 years and an entire generation before consumers are convinced to abandon consoles and/or their local GPUs.

Considering the potential payoff in exclusives (with all of the agreements running out) and a hardware-less world in 2038. This deal is still a no brainer.

I know in human years it seems like a really long time. But in corporate years its nothing.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
‘Microsoft’ said they were streamlining 9000 people across XGS/ABK/ZM
Rumor 
19
445
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|  59 60 61 62 63
3K
5K
bighugeguns replied
Top Bottom