And making sure things stay way is good for competition because?Because Xbox only has power in US and UK?
Considering the others were booty and pete, she did good job covering her arse. Cant say the same for the rest.
What were the remedies? I ask this the second time since the only regulator that failed to disclose their full report, was the EC. So, people are repeating this. What are the remedies?The EU made those remedies enforceable tho. It isn't that hard to understand.
Boom!!!!!So Call of Duty is critical content then
Not sure what you want but I won't go for this on this evening. Your argument will be that Sony is evil because they made deals and so on...And making sure things stay way is good for competition because?
Isn't there enough info to not believe anyone and form your own opinion?I don't know who the believe.
Era: "Well that was a disaster for the FTC."
GAF: "Well that was a disaster for Microsoft."
![]()
Really mate? I thought she was dog shit.I'd agree with that. She held her own.
Can anyone confirm that this really happened because Holy Shit.
Can anyone confirm that this really happened because Holy Shit.
I already answered your question.What were the remedies? I ask this the second time since the only regulator that failed to disclose their full report, was the EC. So, people are repeating this. What are the remedies?
That was a pretty poor showing by the FTC in my opinion. Their lawyers are just having trouble creating a clear thread line or narrative to their case. They keep jumping around and fishing for gotchas without any thought as to how to build on what they actually get. This was particularly clear with Bond.
Can anyone confirm that this really happened because Holy Shit.
64 messages since 2020.That was a pretty poor showing by the FTC in my opinion. Their lawyers are just having trouble creating a clear thread line or narrative to their case. They keep jumping around and fishing for gotchas without any thought as to how to build on what they actually get. This was particularly clear with Bond.
Also lol at going on break and the FTC immediately passing the witness. That is not something you do when things are going well, they very clearly had some discussions during that 15 minutes and decided it’d be better to just drop it.
Can anyone confirm that this really happened because Holy Shit.
Really mate? I thought she was dog shit.
Answering ‘I guess’ during a cross examination, being referred to her own prior testimony 3 times because she gave a conflicting answer. Just poor.
Sony is the saviour of gaming. That's what gaf believes so I'll go with that.Not sure what you want but I won't go for this on this evening. Your argument will be that Sony is evil because they made deals and so on...
Not what happened.
But it's common in court, so that they have it on record who they're referring to
64 messages since 2020.
What exactly are you trying to imply with this?64 messages since 2020.
Yes. We know Activision is evil. Both can be right at the same time. They're not your friends.Evil Microsoft..
![]()
The thread line is evident. They wanted to paint the picture of a company that has lied a lot and has used past acquisitions in anticompetitive ways.That was a pretty poor showing by the FTC in my opinion. Their lawyers are just having trouble creating a clear thread line or narrative to their case. They keep jumping around and fishing for gotchas without any thought as to how to build on what they actually get. This was particularly clear with Bond.
Also lol at going on break and the FTC immediately passing the witness. That is not something you do when things are going well, they very clearly had some discussions during that 15 minutes and decided it’d be better to just drop it.
I already answered your question.
It's not that hard to read.
![]()
Mergers: Commission clears acquisition of Activision Blizzard by Microsoft, subject to conditions
The European Commission has approved, under the EU Merger Regulation, the proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard (‘Activision') by Microsoft.ec.europa.eu
I’m just highlighting for every body that you’ve made 64 contributions to this forum in the past 3 years, and that you’re not posting in good faithW
What exactly are you trying to imply with this?
If i had to guess the timeline would be something like this:
0. Acquisition gets announced
1. MS contacts Sony:
2. Jim Ryan sends the mail that was revealed today
3. Further contact between MS and Sony where the 3 year part comes into play
4. Jimbo goes public after seeing Phil go public
5. MS ups it to 10 years and somehow Phil talks about CoD being on PS as long as a PS console exists
Nice, now go say that to twitter if you want to go 1 v 100.Sony is the saviour of gaming. That's what gaf believes so I'll go with that.
Nope.Yeah.....you've got two bullets there that basically go back to what I've been saying. Microsoft has to honor their agreements to other cloud streaming providers. Those agreements have clauses that allow Microsoft to back out.
Side note: it's actually amazing how the two groups (people for and against the deal) are reacting to the hearing. Each group claims that their side is "winning".
We'll See how things turn out soon enough.
That was a pretty poor showing by the FTC in my opinion. Their lawyers are just having trouble creating a clear thread line or narrative to their case. They keep jumping around and fishing for gotchas without any thought as to how to build on what they actually get. This was particularly clear with Bond.
Also lol at going on break and the FTC immediately passing the witness. That is not something you do when things are going well, they very clearly had some discussions during that 15 minutes and decided it’d be better to just drop it.
Even when the FTC gets something that looks like it might help them, on cross Microsoft’s lawyers do a pretty impressive job of targeting and dismantling them. This was especially clear with Hines’ testimony.
FTC was really trying to hammer in on the Cataclysm clause making the signed agreements unreliable. I don’t think the judge is going to take too kindly to this line of thinking, considering that would render most contracts in the US unreliable.
But I mean, this was to be expected right? Pretty much ever public comment on this case from people much more educated than anyone here basically said that the FTC was gonna struggle here, and considering they asked a 2 day hearing, have to cope with 5, and bowed out early here, I’m having a hard time believing it’s going to get any better, but we’ll see.
Nice, now go say that to twitter if you want to go 1 v 100.
Side note: it's actually amazing how the two groups (people for and against the deal) are reacting to the hearing. Each group claims that their side is "winning".
We'll See how things turn out soon enough.
I didn’t realize you were the authority on what is good faith here.I’m just highlighting for every body that you’ve made 64 contributions to this forum in the past 3 years, and that you’re not posting in good faith![]()
Well, now you know.I didn’t realize you were the authority on what is good faith here.
Well, Activision’s share price certainly doesn’t reflect that.Looks like we‘ve got another Florian alt, boys!
Microsoft got their shit punched in today. Booty and Hines got wrecked on examination, every single one of Microsoft’s public statements were exposed as lies by their internal emails and testimony by both Hines and Bond.
Anyone trying to spin this as a win for Microsoft lives in an alternate reality or is a paid shill. They absolutely got exposed on EVERY account as being anti-competitive with only one goal in mind: Shutting out everyone else.
You can't say that for certain at all.Microsoft is going to win against the FTC. That means every day they have to testify and reveal shit they don't want to reveal is automatically a loss for Microsoft.
Nope.
Microsoft has to offer CoD on other cloud services. They can't simply say no the agreement isn't valid anymore.