• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

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.

reinking

Gold Member
Because he was talking about the current market, not the future market?
Which future market? Up until the CMA blocked the future market growth was streaming. You need to be honest with yourself, this acquisition is about growth by controlling more of the market and reducing options for the competition. This isn’t about more options for gamers. The only option gamers will have is to buy into the XB ecosystem.
 
How does Phil grow the industry by making all Bethesda games exclusive?

Addition by subtraction?
Explaining Fran Healy GIF by Travis
 

Varteras

Member
The data available suggests otherwise.

I've talked about this before here but beta (along with options IV) is the indicator to get a feel for what the concensus is on wall street in terms of how likely they feel an announced acquisition is to go through.

When everyone was convinced the deal was in the bag from a regulatory standpoint (April 2023) the stock's beta plummeted to <0.05 and the average daily range was ~$0.50. In other words the volatility collapsed out of the stock and what the general market was doing had no bearing on it at all - at that point it was seen as a low risk investment, particularly from an arbitrage standpoint.

To state there's no evidence regarding anything to do with the stock prices, trading patterns or readings such as beta is simply incorrect, everything available paints a picture and tells a story. I'm not going to share screenshots of exactly where I'm getting my data from because I pay a pretty penny for it but here are some tidbits that you can easily verify using publicly available information if you know how to calculate beta over any given time period:

  • ATVI beta - 2 week period prior to acquisition announcement (2022-01-03 - 2022-01-14) : 0.6755
  • ATVI beta - 1 week period after acquisition announcement (2022-01-18 - 2022-01-21, shorter trading week due to Martin Luther King Jr. Day, 4 days of data available): -4.5088
  • ATVI beta - 1 week period, 2 weeks prior to CMA block (lowest weekly beta on record) (2023-04-17 - 2023-04-21) : -0.00736
  • ATVI beta - 1 week period, first full trading week after CMA block announcement (2023-05-01 - 2023-05-05): 1.1455
All beta readings above are relative to the Nasdaq composite.

I also have scatter and line plots available at my disposable which show there is a clearly defined "before" and "after" period in terms of the beta readings (before being prior to any regulatory concern). If you want data (beta readings) for any particular timeframe then let me know, I'll share the data.

What is important to know as far as the deal is concerned:
  • Low beta (near zero) = good - lower volatility compared to the rest of the market, typically coincides with lower trading ranges, lower volume and narrower spreads, there is agreement on the current price and not many market participants are doing any kind of repositioning on the stock. The closer to zero the better, near zero readings signal little to no risk.
  • Market equal beta (1 or near to 1) = bad - the market is treating it like any other stock. This indicates confidence in the deal is low, participants are trading it in line with expectations for the general indexes.
  • High beta (far away from zero in either direction) = bad (unless it coincides with a big sudden move towards the agreed share purchase price of $95) - higher volatility compared to the rest of the market, higher trading ranges, higher volume, wider spreads, little agreement on what the current price should be, widespread repositioning.
Extra note: Negative beta readings mean the stock is moving in the opposite direction to the rest of the market for the period defined. This usually happens when good news for the stock is announced in a negative period for the general market or vice versa.

Goddamn. You single? I can cook and clean...

tumblr_mzqxgfBZAI1tqbigmo1_500.gif
 

RickMasters

Member
I of course have zero real insight, but I don't see any possibility of Microsoft spending this amount of money and then reducing the number of COD games they release.

Sure, there's a possibility that another of Microsoft's studios could be assigned to or even pitch to do something with some of Activision's IP, but doing it at the expense of fewer COD releases? No chance.
I agree completely. As much as I’d like to see it, I don’t think they want to slow down the revenue making machine that COD is, when they will benefit from its continued yearly releases.
 

PaintTinJr

Member
Yes. And beta right now has done very well over the last month

There’s a reason that the deal has a firm expiration date, because anything longer than a year or two stocks will tend to naturally rise (but not always) due to improving business environment.

A deal with a price in 2022 will require a higher price in 2024 and beyond if the underlying business has improved
It was mentioned in AT&T making an acquisition that their deal was extended twice and they didn't have to go back to the shareholders, but against the back drop of ATVI shares maybe being worth somewhere between $95-$150 per share if they were free of the acquisition and operating as normal, does it present a problem to the ATVI board to get what they want - the sale and their hundreds of millions in exit bonus - while having a legal obligation, with risk of going to jail for fraud if they renegotiate below a realistic value of ATVI shares today (+30% premium) ?

If that is the case, I see no way Microsoft can get an extension unless they are paying north of $136.5 per share, because anyone that bought in at $105 2years ago, could argue that without shareholders reapproving the acquisition - and them in the minority again - they were being defrauded by the ATVI company directors.
 
Last edited:

Corrik

Member
It was mentioned in AT&T making an acquisition that their deal was extended twice and they didn't have to go back to the shareholders, but against the back drop of ATVI shares maybe being worth somewhere between $95-$150 per share if they were free of the acquisition and operating as normal, does it present a problem to the ATVI board to get what they want - the sale and their hundreds of millions in exit bonus - while having a legal obligation, with risk of going to jail for fraud if they renegotiate below a realistic value of ATVI shares today (+30% premium) ?

If that is the case, I see no way Microsoft can get an extension unless they are paying north of $136.5 per share, because anyone that bought in at $105 2years ago, could argue that without shareholders reapproving the acquisition - and them in the minority again - they were being defrauded by the ATVI company directors.
You made a ton of numbers up out of nowhere. 😂
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
It was mentioned in AT&T making an acquisition that their deal was extended twice and they didn't have to go back to the shareholders, but against the back drop of ATVI shares maybe being worth somewhere between $95-$150 per share if they were free of the acquisition and operating as normal, does it present a problem to the ATVI board to get what they want - the sale and their hundreds of millions in exit bonus - while having a legal obligation, with risk of going to jail for fraud if they renegotiate below a realistic value of ATVI shares today (+30% premium) ?

If that is the case, I see no way Microsoft can get an extension unless they are paying north of $136.5 per share, because anyone that bought in at $105 2years ago, could argue that without shareholders reapproving the acquisition - and them in the minority again - they were being defrauded by the ATVI company directors.
Just because a company was at an all-time high in 2021 at about $104 doesn't mean a 2023 buyout has to be [all time high + 30% premium].
 
Last edited:

PaintTinJr

Member
Just because a company was at an all-time high in 2021 at about $104 doesn't mean a 2023 buyout has to be [all time high + 30% premium].
It doesn't have to be, but it isn't unrealistic (is it?) given all the issues have been resolved and they'll have another $3b to add to their existing $8-9b, and as GHG commented (IIRC) the whole market has improved in the 2years and something about the beta would make ATVI shares applicable for similar or better improvements with recent CoD, etc successes, no?
 

PaintTinJr

Member
You made a ton of numbers up out of nowhere. 😂
$95 is the offer IIRC
$104 is the previous max
$136.5 is $105 x 1.3 premium
And the $150 was a guestimate at $105 plus market gains specific to ATVI plus not wanting to undershoot.

They were merely to enable my question, I'm not set on the numbers and would prefer someone else with market knowledge to replace them with better guestimates.
 

Edmund

is waiting for Starfield 7
2.6 trillion dollar megacorp getting their shit pushed in in game development by Sony and Nintendo.


 
Last edited:

The Pleasure

Gold Member

Varteras

Member
2.6 trillion dollar megacorp getting their shit pushed in in game development by Sony and Nintendo.



Jesus Fuck. Apple is about to top $3 trillion. The market value of these companies are starting to surpass the GDP of some of the wealthiest countries in the world.
 

freefornow

Gold Member
2.6 trillion dollar megacorp getting their shit pushed in in game development by Sony and Nintendo.


No mention of gaming.
AI! AI! AI!
 
2.6 trillion dollar megacorp getting their shit pushed in in game development by Sony and Nintendo.


Guys guys you don't understand they just need to buy the entire industry to become competitive!
 

POKEYCLYDE

Member
It was mentioned in AT&T making an acquisition that their deal was extended twice and they didn't have to go back to the shareholders, but against the back drop of ATVI shares maybe being worth somewhere between $95-$150 per share if they were free of the acquisition and operating as normal, does it present a problem to the ATVI board to get what they want - the sale and their hundreds of millions in exit bonus - while having a legal obligation, with risk of going to jail for fraud if they renegotiate below a realistic value of ATVI shares today (+30% premium) ?

If that is the case, I see no way Microsoft can get an extension unless they are paying north of $136.5 per share, because anyone that bought in at $105 2years ago, could argue that without shareholders reapproving the acquisition - and them in the minority again - they were being defrauded by the ATVI company directors.

When the CMA block was announced, Activision's stock dropped. This deal isn't keeping Activision's stock price down, if anything it is keeping it up. It's holding pretty stable around $80/share. There is no evidence to suggest Activision's share price would be near $95-105 without this merger.

To think that a renegotiation would result in Microsoft agreeing to a price north of $136 is delusional. A 30% premium on the highest Activision's stock has ever been? Mental. If anything renegotiation would result in a 30% premium of what Activision's current stock price is. Which would roughly be $105 per share. If you were a stock holder, you'd be insane not to accept that. Those that did buy at the tippy top would have a way to get out of their stupid decision from 2 years ago at break even. They'd be absolutely brain dead to say no and assume that they could get a better deal OR make the assumption that Activision will eventually surpass that $105 point anytime soon, especially while articles of ABK's toxic work environment and lawsuits are resurfacing/haven't been dealt with.
 

Varteras

Member
When the CMA block was announced, Activision's stock dropped. This deal isn't keeping Activision's stock price down, if anything it is keeping it up. It's holding pretty stable around $80/share. There is no evidence to suggest Activision's share price would be near $95-105 without this merger.

To think that a renegotiation would result in Microsoft agreeing to a price north of $136 is delusional. A 30% premium on the highest Activision's stock has ever been? Mental. If anything renegotiation would result in a 30% premium of what Activision's current stock price is. Which would roughly be $105 per share. If you were a stock holder, you'd be insane not to accept that. Those that did buy at the tippy top would have a way to get out of their stupid decision from 2 years ago at break even. They'd be absolutely brain dead to say no and assume that they could get a better deal OR make the assumption that Activision will eventually surpass that $105 point anytime soon, especially while articles of ABK's toxic work environment and lawsuits are resurfacing/haven't been dealt with.

The overall pricetag and failure fee will be higher in a renegotiation. Both companies also have to consider the likelihood of overturning the CMA. Which just saw the Meta/Giphy deal get ended by them three years after the deal closed, even when their initial appeal succeeded. With Meta being forced to divest and taking an 87% loss on the sale. ABK will have to think about the loss of future deals, marketing and otherwise, while Microsoft battles the CMA for potentially years. ABK will likely be better off taking the $3 billion now and shopping themselves out to companies the regulators aren't likely to have a problem with. Will they get the same deal? Probably not. But it would be a deal that could actually go through. Assuming they are interested in selling anymore.
 
I still don't believe that ATVI management will think it's in the best interest for the company and shareholders to try and reup the acquisition. Having already had it blocked once before by regulators, what would make them think it's a good idea to continue to hold the company's normal business activities another 18+ months praying it will be different this time? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. I don't think ATVI management are insane, and I don't think shareholders would approve a reup even if ATVI management actually tried.
 

Corrik

Member
$95 is the offer IIRC
$104 is the previous max
$136.5 is $105 x 1.3 premium
And the $150 was a guestimate at $105 plus market gains specific to ATVI plus not wanting to undershoot.

They were merely to enable my question, I'm not set on the numbers and would prefer someone else with market knowledge to replace them with better guestimates.
104 is the covid tech inflation max, which most tech has fallen back from. Currently they are somewhere $82. It has the acquisition slightly baked in, which if it failed it would recede a little.

So let's say about $75-80 they are at now.


There could be some play room here... as if Microsoft is certain this deal will fly if they just have more time, they could easily add 3 billion to the deal to up the price, since they would just lose it for nothing if they walked away.

That said, anyone who says what will go on is lying. Activision could just as well agree to extend 3 months blanket. They could do 6 months and just add to the breakup fee. No one knows. But, what we do know, is the number you arrived at is absolutely not gonna happen. lol
 
Last edited:

PaintTinJr

Member
104 is the covid tech inflation max, which most tech has fallen back from. Currently they are somewhere $82. It has the acquisition slightly baked in, which if it failed it would recede a little.

So let's say about $75-80 they are at now.


There could be some play room here... as if Microsoft is certain this deal will fly if they just have more time, they could easily add 3 billion to the deal to up the price, since they would just lose it for nothing if they walked away.

That said, anyone who says what will go on is lying. Activision could just as well agree to extend 3 months blanket. They could do 6 months and just add to the breakup fee. No one knows. But, what we do know, is the number you arrived at is absolutely not gonna happen. lol
I don't quite follow, I was under the impression that a large part of the valuation of companies like ATVI are based on their expected future earnings potential and with Microsoft doubling down on the acquisition to extend and appeal, and potentially close the deal without CMA approval risking $20b in fines, we can surely agree that Microsoft's read of the ATVI is that they are worth $95 per share, yes? And would be worth about $100 per share when factoring in the $3b break up fee when the deal fails, which would mean in the paradox valuation in a renegotiation, that would be $100 per share plus a premium in the eyes of ATVI's shareholders because if say two out of Meta, Twitter, Tencent, Google or Amazon tried to buy them on July 19th, that would be the starting price IMO.

Currently, I suspect long term investors are staying away from ATVI, because it isn't a long term investment if the deal goes through, and even though it is illogical IMO based on ATVI's current position at the peak of a record breaking PlayStation/Series generation with $70 inflated games and all ATVI franchises seemingly back releasing as intended and selling well, the initial exit from the deal will probably see the ATVI share price fall as short term investors offload, with long term investors then buying the dip which IMO will lead to a stabilized ATVI share price north of the $95 per share offer within the same 6month time frame that Microsoft would seek to extend.

This whole debacle, assuming the deal dies by the 18th of July really has shown the importance of ATVI's key assets, both for current business and for the future of subs or cloud , which I again would say suggests their shares are currently undervalued in this deal.
 
Last edited:

Wulfer

Member
I don't quite follow, I was under the impression that a large part of the valuation of companies like ATVI are based on their expected future earnings potential and with Microsoft doubling down on the acquisition to extend and appeal, and potentially close the deal without CMA approval risking $20b in fines, we can surely agree that Microsoft's read of the ATVI is that they are worth $95 per share, yes? And would be worth about $100 per share when factoring in the $3b break up fee when the deal fails, which would mean in the paradox valuation in a renegotiation, that would be $100 per share plus a premium in the eyes of ATVI's shareholders because if say two out of Meta, Twitter, Tencent, Google or Amazon tried to buy them on July 19th, that would be the starting price IMO.

Currently, I suspect long term investors are staying away from ATVI, because it isn't a long term investment if the deal goes through, and even though it is illogical IMO based on ATVI's current position at the peak of a record breaking PlayStation/Series generation with $70 inflated games and all ATVI franchises seemingly back releasing as intended and selling well, the initial exit from the deal will probably see the ATVI share price fall as short term investors offload, with long term investors then buying the dip which IMO will lead to a stabilized ATVI share price north of the $95 per share offer within the same 6month time frame that Microsoft would seek to extend.

This whole debacle, assuming the deal dies by the 18th of July really has shown the importance of ATVI's key assets, both for current business and for the future of subs or cloud , which I again would say suggests their shares are currently undervalued in this deal.
Since, you've already got ABK already sold to someone else, let's not forget the reason MS wants ABK in the first place. Also, why the merger works so well for MS. What does MS have that none of those competitors need? Seven YEARS of marketing something like Gamepass! Oops game over. Even Sony opponents understand the marketing power of seven years of something like Gamepass. The sale of ABK is not so, simple!
 
Last edited:
104 is the covid tech inflation max, which most tech has fallen back from. Currently they are somewhere $82. It has the acquisition slightly baked in, which if it failed it would recede a little.

So let's say about $75-80 they are at now.


There could be some play room here... as if Microsoft is certain this deal will fly if they just have more time, they could easily add 3 billion to the deal to up the price, since they would just lose it for nothing if they walked away.

That said, anyone who says what will go on is lying. Activision could just as well agree to extend 3 months blanket. They could do 6 months and just add to the breakup fee. No one knows. But, what we do know, is the number you arrived at is absolutely not gonna happen. lol

When Microsoft announced the deal, Activision was going through a very rough patch. Their stock had plummeted from $100 to $64 a share. The share collapse is what led to Microsoft pursuing the deal, and Activision accepting.

Now after 18 months, things have settled down. Activision's cash flows seem to be doing quite well, there's less issues surrounding the harassment scandal, and the markets are pricing in higher valuations for companies over the past 6 months.

So looking at it from the lens, and realizing that ATVI is now trading more like a stock with high volatility instead of being anchored to the agreed price in 2022, a similar premium being placed at $82/share (as opposed to $64) would require MS to renegotiate @ $120 / share or even higher given the potential risks of dragging this ordeal out without signing a new marketing agreement with a big platform holder like Sony.
 

Wulfer

Member
When Microsoft announced the deal, Activision was going through a very rough patch. Their stock had plummeted from $100 to $64 a share. The share collapse is what led to Microsoft pursuing the deal, and Activision accepting.

Now after 18 months, things have settled down. Activision's cash flows seem to be doing quite well, there's less issues surrounding the harassment scandal, and the markets are pricing in higher valuations for companies over the past 6 months.

So looking at it from the lens, and realizing that ATVI is now trading more like a stock with high volatility instead of being anchored to the agreed price in 2022, a similar premium being placed at $82/share (as opposed to $64) would require MS to renegotiate @ $120 / share or even higher given the potential risks of dragging this ordeal out without signing a new marketing agreement with a big platform holder like Sony.
So, your suggestion is Sony will say no to COD if MS ends up buying ABK? You're acting like Sony wouldn't continue to support a contract and that's suicide on Sony's part given how big COD is for Sony. Jim is even quoted as stating MS won't pull COD from Playstation. MS getting a deal with Sony was never the big concern here.
 
Last edited:
So, your suggestion is Sony will say no to COD if MS ends up buying ABK? You're acting like Sony wouldn't continue to support a contract and that's suicide on Sony's part given how big COD is for Sony. Jim is even quoted as stating MS won't pull COD from Playstation. MS getting a deal with Sony was never the big concern here.

Why invest and market a game for the next 4+ years that has a very high chance of being pulled from your platform after 10?

Absolutely, if MS acquires Activision, the deals with Sony are done. That’s money better spent elsewhere
 
Last edited:

Wulfer

Member
Why invest and market a game for the next 4+ years that has a very high chance of being pulled from your platform after 10?

Absolutely, if MS acquires Activision, the deals with Sony are done. That’s money better spent elsewhere
So what does Sony invest in Battlefield? Sony's spent the last 5 years trying to bury that franchise... I disagree, I think your wrong on this one. I don't think MS wants to pull COD from anyone. They needed Bethesda can we agree on that? I mean they killed almost every first party studio they had except for: 343 Studios, RARE, Turn 10 and Coalition for a complete studio reset. Mojang came and then the studios of 2018 who mostly were starting new games. Bethesda added much needed IPs and some much needed exclusive games. COD exclusive hurts MS more than helps especially now. If the deal fails, I guess we'll never know the true outcome of this!
 
Last edited:
Good luck!

If MS was willing to go beyond 10 years in the contract, they would.

But they aren’t. Their goal is to foreclose on CoD. Period. Everyone with a brain knows this.

Sony’s best strategy is to market content they control and hope CoD becomes less relevant. Signing a marketing deal hyping a property that will be pulled in a few years is lunacy
 
Last edited:

hlm666

Member
Not sure using Australia as a point of potential problems is much of a blip on their radar, they care so much about our laws/country/market they don't even turn up to answer questions when summoned to federal hearings over software prices in australia. That's all of them, actually adobe turned up I think, google/ms/apple laughed and went to lunch. Also Valve wont even sell steamdecks to us lol.
 

Bojanglez

The Amiga Brotherhood
Not sure using Australia as a point of potential problems is much of a blip on their radar, they care so much about our laws/country/market they don't even turn up to answer questions when summoned to federal hearings over software prices in australia. That's all of them, actually adobe turned up I think, google/ms/apple laughed and went to lunch. Also Valve wont even sell steamdecks to us lol.
I doubt MS are concerned with AUS & NZ specifically, but it's more that CMA can point to other regulators that have similar concerns (even if they do accept different remedies), thus taking off the table certain arguments that may be used in the CAT route by MS.
 

hlm666

Member
I doubt MS are concerned with AUS & NZ specifically, but it's more that CMA can point to other regulators that have similar concerns (even if they do accept different remedies), thus taking off the table certain arguments that may be used in the CAT route by MS.
The fact that one side of government were rolling out fibre to the home then the other got into power and said copper can do 25mbps and is all australians would need a few years back and dialed back the rollout to only lay it to the exchanges and nodes shows just how in touch our politicians and government are with tech. If they cite cloud gaming as a reason to block in Aus it's pretty bloody funny when most people wont have the internet to use it seeing they recommend 40mbps and the gov has screwed over the broadband upgrade so bad people struggle to get 25mbps outside suburbs in a small ring around major cities.
 

PaintTinJr

Member
Since, you've already got ABK already sold to someone else, let's not forget the reason MS wants ABK in the first place. Also, why the merger works so well for MS. What does MS have that none of those competitors need? Seven YEARS of marketing something like Gamepass! Oops game over. Even Sony opponents understand the marketing power of seven years of something like Gamepass. The sale of ABK is not so, simple!
What has any of that got to do with what I wrote?

My starting point for this discussion of what ATVI is worth in a renegotiation was that it is very unclear, which I was angling towards would require the board to seek shareholder approval to avoid getting accused of defrauding shareholders; especially as Bobby and co are set to get what looks like 2.5years of salary exit payments, which has already been accused of being a conflict of interest when they aren't shareholders with that type of holding.

I think the discussion that followed has illustrated my point, that without ATVI getting shareholders to approve a reup offer or for the breakup to happen and to actually see where the ATVI stock lands in 6months, it is impossible to concluded that the board aren't acting in self interest(failing in their fiduciary responsibilities?) and getting the best for the shareholders via unilateral agreement to an extension, unless that reup offer was significantly better than than the $95 per share to the level that no group of shareholders could realistically claim they were defrauded.

I mentioned people that bought in at $104($110?). Say for argument sake, prior to the deal a long term investor bought in for the earnings per share, and despite the delay of Overwatch and Diablo sequels (according to Yahoo finance report at the time) the share price dropped heavily, as long term investors they saw these short term issues as blips and so retain their full holding. When the deal was announced they voted against - in a minority - and didn't jump ship with a loss, believing the deal would be blocked by Wall street's reaction, and in still looking to 10years of EPS and long term share value gains for their investment.

Why should those long term investors silently agree with a board of directors giving Microsoft an easy extension to sell their shares at $95 per share, without the board needing a new mandate to do so or concrete proof that the share price wouldn't fair better in that extension period absent the merger restrictions?
 

PaintTinJr

Member
The Nvidia Shield runs the bog standard Tegra X1, same exact chip as the Switch (although clocked a bit higher). It is also just running Android. It does 4k 60 just fine. There is no special sauce in it. Any modern smartphone is significantly faster.
Sorry had meant to reply to this about cloud hardware for those deals.

I looked into it and the maxwell Tegra X1 powered shield is effectively a laptop version of a GTX 950 with mains power and active cooling like a SFF PC. Keeping in mind the Switch comparison to Smartphones from 2019, the Shield has more than 3x the performance of the Switch on battery power,, because it has a clockspeed x3 higher - to raise all those boats.

The other comparison issue between even the Switch and a smartphone is that the Switch isn't passively cooled, and has a active fan. Only the other day I was using my phone with the Xperia's 3D creator app - that digitizes like megascans - and it got my Xperia 1 so hot after about 10mins that the app died, after a rebooting my phone for an hour my handset - not the sim - couldn't access the mobile network because it was still too hot - which I only discovered with CPUz showing 60degs on the main CPU core - which didn't fix itself until I powered the handset off for an hour and 30-40degs temps resumed.

Suggesting any Android 10 smartphone can do 4k60 like a Shield with GeforceNow doesn't sound credible if the Shield in reality is x3-4 the Switch on battery power.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom