This clip? I can't believe an actual journalist for Windows Central would say this
Man if city wins the treble this yearI am shamelessly gonna banter myself today. Team went to beach and stopped giving a crap.
![]()
The cloud thing was basically the CMA being cunning. They waited for Microsoft to have their say when it came to the cloud and then used their logic against them. Microsoft would cum in their pants whenever the word cloud was mentioned and couldn't shut up about how many billions they've invested into it & how they were willing to push those Activision games to more devices using the cloud (to 180 million more people). Whether through their own service or through the cloud services they penciled their insufficient and inadequate 10 year deals with, which the CMA is also now using as an argument against them(what happens when that 10 year grace period is over?).Time to pump the brakes, man. The cloud aspect of the CMA ruling was there all along. This narrative that you are pitching that they somehow used that to "save face" isn't accurate. The EC and CMA were in lockstep about their cloud concerns and diverged only in the remedy. So for consistency sake, why not lambast the EC for requiring any remedies of Microsoft at all based on future "theoretical possibilities"? I think if you have more than one regulator coming to the same concerns then perhaps not throw it under the bus so quickly. And we all know full well that no other company in gaming will have the combined infrastructure of Azure, the base of Xbox and now the potentially the addition of Activision Blizzard King with Call of Duty, Diablo and the rest and that combination will have the power to yank every and all "licenses" at the end of those 10 years that you believe "any other company" could step and challenge.
And no one at the CMA has said anything remotely similar to "don't worry guys I work for the CMA and looking forward to continuing playing COD on my playstation". You are demonizing the wrong regulatory body there, I'm afraid.
China just approved the deal
You guys are our final hope.Man if city wins the treble this year
Please inter save the human race from this imminent disaster
Please![]()
If people had some patience it would be perfect.Sports, food, acquisitions
Best thread of all time
![]()
I need to drink some milk nowU forgot 1 thing
![]()
and here the EU didn't even make a decision it was blocked just by the FTCFrom IDAS on 29 april
But some of the statements from MS/ABK these days remind me of the ones from Nvidia/ARM in very late January 2022, when they said that they were expecting the acquisition to be approved (the FTC blocked it in December 2021). Then, 10 days later (early February 2022) they announced that the deal was abandoned (and in that case the outside date was September 2022, 2 years since the announcement).
You can even start to see the first sings of doubt with the statements from Booby Kotick yesterday or on Wednesday, as well as the report from Bloomberg about MS/Phil Spencer.
it's too long to explain
I need to drink some milk now
For my health ofcourse
what the fuck happened with this thread?
let me do my 1%Shits dead so it’s 33% copium, 33% calling out the idiots high on copium, and 33% entertaining bullshit.
Let me tell you what I think:
You desperately need to reassure yourself that everything's fine. That's why it feels so comfortable for you to tell me something that I already know.
Shits dead so it’s 33% copium, 33% calling out the idiots high on copium, and 33% entertaining bullshit.
The court case hasn't happened. Do they have a time machine like my neighbour called Peter and his flux capacitor, he told me he built a time machine like one in a film I've seen, yeah.Seems like 90 percent of lawyers think this merger will happen only because the ftc arguments against is so weak it’s laughable.
Seems like 90 percent of lawyers think this merger will happen only because the ftc arguments against is so weak it’s laughable.
The court case hasn't happened. Do they have a time machine like my neighbour called Peter and his flux capacitor, he told me he built a time machine like one in a film I've seen, yeah.
Where are those 90% of lawyers ?Seems like 90 percent of lawyers think this merger will happen only because the ftc arguments against is so weak it’s laughable.
Where are those 90% of lawyers ?
Why the Activision stock didn't move if it was a slam dunk ?
I said my neighbour called Peter and his flux capacitor. I don't have one.You have a time machine? Why are wasting your time on a forum ?![]()
I wish they were that stupid. Talk about watching decades unravel in a matter of weeks.Wow, this guy is beyond ridiculous.
Microsoft are trying to expand their Xbox business, they have zero reason to halt any other, unrelated to Xbox business they have there. If the deal fails, then it will fail and that's it.
And it would be a massive fail for MS to win using such methods, by the way. It would instantly kill any goodwill they actually had. People are way too "passionate" about this.
Exactly. Threatening to use your monopoly powers in a tantrum over not being granted more monopoly powers is not a good look.This sounds like someone stating very clearly why not only should this deal be blocked, but why there is probably a decent argument to be made for breaking up MS - something MS already flirted with - on the grounds of national security.
Is that what he is trying to tell us? That MS is such a powerful corporation now, people through their national governments no longer have the right to enforce laws?
Literally telling us MS is holding western governments hostage… if ever there was a reason to break up mega corps that is it.
Still no explanation how MS will close this deal with a CMA block when their own documents explicitly say they need approval from all 4 major markets to do so.
The linked article does not point to MP being paid by lobbying on behalf of MS.There was only this guy, who’s being paid £2k per month by a lobbying firm on behalf of Microsoft.
Cut the shit.![]()
Revealed: senior Tory MP was paid £2,000 a month by lobbying firm
Bim Afolami ran a group calling for Rishi Sunak to overhaul the UK’s regulatory systemamp.theguardian.com
Warning: for people that say ringfencing and changing the deal isnt possible please ignore this post and don't quote as that will just waste people's time and space in the thread. I am just going by what lawyers and financial analysts on TV have said and I know I am not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine because I believe the professionals.
To answer your question. The deal can be changed. Hoeg said they can change the terms of the deal to not include the UK. Then MS would have to sell activision UK assets or spin them off as a seperate company in the UK. If that happens the UK cannot sue MS and Activision for NOT merging in their country.
Its not like UK gamers would be left out though. Even if that happens it just means MS would have to pay this seperate company to get CoD and other ABK games on Game Pass in the UK. Which i am sure they would do unless they really want to make the CMA look bad.
And what would this mean exactly? That Activision would remain independent and exist only in the UK? Who would own the IP rights in the global context? What about the studios? Would the shareholders then need to do what's best for "Activision UK" and again not go to any subscription services because it didn’t want to due to lost sales? I thought going to subscriptions was only possible if they were a part of MS and it wasn’t in their interests, why would lost sales all of a sudden be beneficial again?Warning: for people that say ringfencing and changing the deal isnt possible please ignore this post and don't quote as that will just waste people's time and space in the thread. I am just going by what lawyers and financial analysts on TV have said and I know I am not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine because I believe the professionals.
To answer your question. The deal can be changed. Hoeg said they can change the terms of the deal to not include the UK. Then MS would have to sell activision UK assets or spin them off as a seperate company in the UK. If that happens the UK cannot sue MS and Activision for NOT merging in their country.
Its not like UK gamers would be left out though. Even if that happens it just means MS would have to pay this seperate company to get CoD and other ABK games on Game Pass in the UK. Which i am sure they would do unless they really want to make the CMA look bad.
Warning: for people that say ringfencing and changing the deal isnt possible please ignore this post and don't quote as that will just waste people's time and space in the thread. I am just going by what lawyers and financial analysts on TV have said and I know I am not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine because I believe the professionals.
To answer your question. The deal can be changed. Hoeg said they can change the terms of the deal to not include the UK. Then MS would have to sell activision UK assets or spin them off as a seperate company in the UK. If that happens the UK cannot sue MS and Activision for NOT merging in their country.
Its not like UK gamers would be left out though. Even if that happens it just means MS would have to pay this seperate company to get CoD and other ABK games on Game Pass in the UK. Which i am sure they would do unless they really want to make the CMA look bad.
Gaz had a M&A UK lawyer on his weekly podcast. Not some pretend TV expert. He was asked about what can Microsoft do. K Kenshin775 you should watch this.
Effectively, this acquisitions fate is in the hands of the CAT. If the CAT sends this back to the CMA then CMA will have to address the issue and Microsoft can then offer new remedies. That's it. None of this bullshit about creating some other company or carving out cloud will work.
Man sees himself as some sort of videogame forum batman LMAONo my friend, these are the words of salt and insecurity:
Seek professional help.
Sadly, this is the only thing that I managed to get.Got a picture of Phil Spender singing to the cma
![]()
So if this is the case, why are approvals and updates still news at this point? Why not just call it a day?Both CMA appeal and FTC hearings are beyond the current deal deadline regardless, so it's as good as dead at this point.
So if this is the case, why are approvals and updates still news at this point? Why not just call it a day?
The so called professionals you are listening to are idiots. Hoeg especially.Warning: for people that say ringfencing and changing the deal isnt possible please ignore this post and don't quote as that will just waste people's time and space in the thread. I am just going by what lawyers and financial analysts on TV have said and I know I am not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine because I believe the professionals.
To answer your question. The deal can be changed. Hoeg said they can change the terms of the deal to not include the UK. Then MS would have to sell activision UK assets or spin them off as a seperate company in the UK. If that happens the UK cannot sue MS and Activision for NOT merging in their country.
Its not like UK gamers would be left out though. Even if that happens it just means MS would have to pay this seperate company to get CoD and other ABK games on Game Pass in the UK. Which i am sure they would do unless they really want to make the CMA look bad.
This answer is...unsatisfactory...mainly because this would suggest there is a chance that the CMA could reverse the decision. Far as I understand this would only happen if the appeal reveals some flaw in the CMA's reasoning or if they were being less than genuine in some way. So as other territories approve, most notably the EU...there appears to be more nuance to this. I'm seeing a lot of folks on here looking at this in black or white though.There are obligations that those other approvals are still going to move forward until the deal is officially cancelled or the CAT sends it back to the CMA and they reverse their decision.
As for why some make it big news...
![]()
Did you put on your red slippers and click your heels three times with your eyes closed while saying this like Dorothy in Wizard Of Oz?Nothing is a slam dunk. Not win nor a block. All up still for grabs.
I had originally put "in the off chance" before it going back to the CMA but removed it. I understand that it is unlikely (but still not impossible).This answer is...unsatisfactory...mainly because this would suggest there is a chance that the CMA could reverse the decision. Far as I understand this would only happen if the appeal reveals some flaw in the CMA's reasoning or if they were being less than genuine in some way. So as other territories approve, most notably the EU...there appears to be more nuance to this. I'm seeing a lot of folks on here looking at this in black or white though.
That being said, I will address the other part of the answer. Who decides whether the deal is officially done or not. Microsoft? The regulators? How is the end determined?
This answer is...unsatisfactory...mainly because this would suggest there is a chance that the CMA could reverse the decision. Far as I understand this would only happen if the appeal reveals some flaw in the CMA's reasoning or if they were being less than genuine in some way. So as other territories approve, most notably the EU...there appears to be more nuance to this. I'm seeing a lot of folks on here looking at this in black or white though.
That being said, I will address the other part of the answer. Who decides whether the deal is officially done or not. Microsoft? The regulators? How is the end determined?
What in the world is going on with the Xbox reporting audience? It's not just guys like Senju talking about "working around the UK", it's also people like Grubb and the Xcast crew.
Why do they somehow believe that they can simply "work around" the UK? It is stipulated in the contract Activision signed than the CMA must approve the deal. For this imagined scenario to even be a reality, Activision must come to a new agreement with Microsoft rather than taking the $3B. Even assuming that they agree to a new contract, it's still a legal nightmare to believe you can "work around the UK" - in effect, you can't simply say you are going to not offer Activision products in the UK, the rammifications in terms of legal issues go much broader than that as it would be in violation of UK securities laws.