• 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.

GHG

Gold Member


8675309.jpg
 

jm89

Member

Imo sarah did worse then booty.

She basically got exposed for saying they didn't plan for a seperate xcloud product and but actually did in sept 2022.

Can't argue cloud is just part of the console market when your lying ass was planning on a seperate product for just cloud, and conveiently dropped it as regulators started knocking on your door soon after.
 
Last edited:

Shanomatic

Member
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.
 
Last edited:

Elios83

Member
I don't know who the believe.

Era: "Well that was a disaster for the FTC."
GAF: "Well that was a disaster for Microsoft."

90 Day Fiance Idk GIF by TLC
Isn't there enough info to not believe anyone and form your own opinion?
Which company was exposed doing anticompetitive practices, with mails talking internally about killing the competition, paying to change already made contracts to foreclose contents to competition, contradicting themselves over the importance of COD that is both not critical content and at the same time worth of allowing Kotick to dictate a 80:20 revenues split, making 10 years contracts where they can do whatever they want at any time?

Is this what Microsoft wanted to be exposed today?
 

Gone

Banned
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?
I already answered your question.
It's not that hard to read.

 

GHG

Gold Member
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.

They are not there to "build" anything yet. That comes later.



Can anyone confirm that this really happened because Holy Shit.


Jesus christ so many first timers. Welcome to a court of law.
 
Last edited:

Banjo64

cumsessed
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.
64 messages since 2020.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
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.

Yeah, but she is not under trial. Having to be reminded of something you said months ago is probably pretty common. In any case, after referring to her previous testimony, I felt she rebounded well. I don't think the FTC got any major gotchas out of Bond today.

Unless I missed it.
 

Elios83

Member
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.
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.
They reached that goal.

The fun will be when they start leveraging what the CMA has done, when they'll ask them what they plan to do if the injunction in not granted, what is their comment on the reports about them trying to bypass regulators who have blocked the deal.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
I already answered your question.
It's not that hard to read.


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.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
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


This is exactly how I see it going down. I think you are 100% right here.
 

Gone

Banned
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.
Nope.
Microsoft has to offer CoD on other cloud services. They can't simply say no the agreement isn't valid anymore.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
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.

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.
 

Nydius

Member
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.

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.
 

Shanomatic

Member
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.
Well, Activision’s share price certainly doesn’t reflect that.

Besides that, making exclusive content isn’t anticompetitive, that’s not the standard trying to be reached here.
 

tmlDan

Member
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.
You can't say that for certain at all.

It's just day one, nobody is winning.

The FTC's goal today was to show how untrustworthy MS is and they showed that but MS didn't reveal anything anti-competitive that would force the deal to get blocked
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom