• 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.

feynoob

Banned
Really showing their ass, eh?
Screen-Shot-2014-09-23-at-08.35_620x349.jpg
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
You think if Microsoft want to call witnesses to testify based on certain evidence that the FTC should ‘get bent’ rather than get to see the evidence themselves first hand?

Interesting.

No, they should get bent because Derek's previous tweet when he was live tweeting said that 'they don't want it because they don't understand specific parts of it'.

JqDTUMZ.png




Them not understanding is not a basis for them having issues with potential testimony.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Banjo64

cumsessed
No, they should get bent because Derek's previous tweet when he was live tweeting said that 'they don't want it because they don't understand specific parts of it'.

JqDTUMZ.png




Them not understanding is not a basis for them having issues with potential testimony.
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Ok, makes more sense than what you quoted previously but sounds like typical wrangling to me. The CMA also told the CAT judge that if Microsoft want to start introducing witnesses the procedure will be slowed down, which I presumed would be because they’d need time to analyse what is being said and what the sources of information are behind it.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Ok, makes more sense than what you quoted previously but sounds like typical wrangling to me. The CMA also told the CAT judge that if Microsoft want to start introducing witnesses the procedure will be slowed down, which I presumed would be because they’d need time to analyse what is being said and what the sources of information are behind it.

I think I quoted the wrong Derek tweet in my first post. That's on me.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Not like MS doesn't have a history of being very convoluted.


The judge didn't make a ruling on that point one way or the other anyway, and it sounds like FTC didn't raise any issue about it a day before today either.

Microsoft's lawyer Beth Wilkinson explained that the FTC did not raise the issue of Microsoft having asserted privilege over some of those documents until yesterday.
 
nikolino840 nikolino840
At the moment both Democrats and Republicans want to get Big Tech. For different reasons sure, but their desired outcomes are the same. So really the political leanings won't matter much here.

However having a son who works for Microsoft, this is the Hunter Biden of video games I guess. How very mysterious that MS offers her son a job at this very coincidental point in time. I'm sure his salary was very generous too. And the more he can influence his mom, the more his salary goes up...
 
Last edited:

ZehDon

Member
... Them not understanding is not a basis for them having issues with potential testimony.
I think it is absolutely grounds for them having issues with the testimony. If someone wants to talk about "X and Y and Z" being the foundation for reason(s) that the FTC shouldn't block the merger, the FTC needs to understand those points in full to make a proper decision. I don't think anyone wants a legal system making rulings using information it doesn't understand. If the EC was happy with the remedies because it saw documents A and B and contract C, and Microsoft wants to use the EC's decision to convince the FTC, I think it's entirely fair that they should produce documents A and B and contract C and then draw out the EC's reasoning in crayon for the FTC. I don't really see why this is an issue, unless the FTC's lack of understanding is desired to push them toward ruling one way over another?
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Were they known about in advance?

I would imagine there would be some cross-communication between the involved parties about acceptable documents and who will be testifying or doing dispositions beforehand. I can't imagine all of this is sprung up on the day-of.

I think it is absolutely grounds for them having issues with the testimony. If someone wants to talk about "X and Y and Z" being the foundation for reason(s) that the FTC shouldn't block the merger, the FTC needs to understand those points in full to make a proper decision. I don't think anyone wants a legal system making rulings using information it doesn't understand. If the EC was happy with the remedies because it saw documents A and B and contract C, and Microsoft wants to use the EC's decision to convince the FTC, I think it's entirely fair that they should produce documents A and B and contract C and then draw out the EC's reasoning in crayon for the FTC. I don't really see why this is an issue, unless the FTC's lack of understanding is desired to push them toward ruling one way over another?


True, true.
 
Last edited:

CuNi

Member
It means that I simp for the merits, not for the company ;) All along this merger, I haven't seen any substansive arguments against it other than "MS shouldn't get bigger".

Nobody forbids you from rooting for it because of benefits to you. Hell, I'd be happy too if those games would get added to my GP PC subscription that I pay.

But you cannot just dismiss the single biggest argument like it's some arbitrary point for the sake of having one.
 

graywolf323

Member
Redfall/Starfield are Xbox/PC-only: "keeping with the need to offer some exclusive content while mitigating the economic costs and damage to its player-focused brand" - Redfall "generated minimal sales" - "many other" future ZeniMax titles will be shipped on PS/Nintendo

Laughable.
remember COD is too ‘big’ for Xbox to take exclusive yet somehow Elder Scrolls isn’t but other ‘smaller’ stuff is definitely going to not be exclusive 🙄 Microsoft’s even willing to pinky promise
 
Last edited:

graywolf323

Member
Smaller stuff like Quake remastered? Which released on everything after that acquisition went through?
it released in August just mere months after the acquisition was completed, likely it was too far along for them to cancel unlike everything since then

or else why did smaller stuff like Hi-Fi Rush not get released even on Switch which seems perfect for it? and we know they actually canceled Redfall for PS5 despite it being an online co-op focused game which could have benefitted from a larger install base
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom