Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)

Do you believe the deal will be approved?

  • Yes, will be approved without changes.

    Votes: 221 24.9%

  • Yes, will be approved but with structural changes to ABK.

    Votes: 102 11.5%

  • Yes, will be approved but only with behavioral concessions.

    Votes: 262 29.6%

  • No, will not be approved.

    Votes: 301 34.0%
  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is just pretty normal, considering MS doesnt want to have any concessions, in which EU and UK want from MS. Its why this deal is having a problem with those regulators.
But Microsoft has declined to offer EU regulators any legal remedies ahead of an expected full-scale probe that could kick off on Nov. 8, Reuters reported last week. Microsoft had the option of offering the EU so-called behavioral remedies, such as a formal promise to keep "Call of Duty on PlayStation," but declined to do so. The company could still do so later on during a full-scale probe.

Bobby Kotick-led Activision would prefer that Microsoft take a more accommodating stance with regulators now, since the game-maker's shareholders will get paid out regardless of whether Microsoft makes concessions, Activision insiders and analysts said.

"If you're Activision, you want Microsoft to offer everything forever for free," a hedge fund analyst closely following the deal told The Post. "But that obviously destroys the economics of the deal."
Click to expand...

In a statement to The Post a spokesman for Activision said "We're very appreciative of our close working relationship with Microsoft. We're confident in the deal and its progress, and we know Microsoft is working diligently to get it done. Any suggestion to the contrary is false."
Click to expand...
 
Eddie-Griffin said:
Article is indicating there is internal panic behind the assuring faces of executives on both sides of the deal, and that the easy path to approval will be a lot bumpier than expected, especially since regulators likely don't have much knowledge of the industry involved, and the lack of Microsoft providing any concessions.
Click to expand...
Read the article very well. MS and activision are confident the deal would go through.

The issue is concessions, which MS doesnt want to make.
 
lh032 said:
ngl, i hope this go through, otherwise Microsoft would use the 70bil on something else
Click to expand...
6rALdWS.gif
 
VAVA Mk2 said:
It is a shit tabloid paper owned by Rupert Murdoch, though.
Click to expand...

It's owned by Murdoch, but that doesn't automatically mean it's a shit tabloid. They've often broken news stories that other "reputable" publications ignored, like the Hunter Biden laptop stuff, which the NY Times and Washington Post sneered at and labeled a product of a Russian smear campaign. Flash forward 2 years later and Hunter Biden is about ready to be indicted.

I'll grant you that it's right of center and leans more toward the USA Today style of news, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.
 
Last edited:
Chiggs said:
It's owned by Murdoch, but that doesn't automatically mean it's a shit tabloid. They've often broken news stories that other "reputable" publications ignored, like the Hunter Biden laptop stuff, which the NY Times and Washington Post sneered at and labeled a product of a Russian smear campaign. Flash forward 2 years later and Hunter Biden is about ready to be indicted.

I'll grant you that it's right of center and leans more toward the USA Today style of news, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.
Click to expand...
LOL. It is a shit news source. No dodging it.
 
Edit: People are taking ideas from this report.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/dea...ust-review-activision-deal-source-2022-10-31/

BRUSSELS, Oct 31 (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp's (MSFT.O) has not offered any remedies to EU antitrust regulators reviewing its proposed $69 billion bid for "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard (ATVI.O) ahead of an expected full-scale EU probe, a person familiar with the matter said on Monday.
Click to expand...
Microsoft said it continues to work with the Commission on the next steps and to address any valid marketplace concerns, such as those voiced by Sony.

"Sony, as the industry leader, says it is worried about Call of Duty, but we've said we are committed to making the same game available on the same day on both Xbox and PlayStation," Microsoft said in a statement.

Companies typically do not offer remedies during the EU preliminary review when they know regulators subsequently intend to open a four-month long investigation.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
... if Microsoft didn't expect this level of scrutiny, why did they announce they didn't expect the deal to clear regulators and close until the middle of 2023 at the earliest?
 
ZehDon said:
... if Microsoft didn't expect this level of scrutiny, why did they announce they didn't expect the deal to clear regulators and close until the middle of 2023 at the earliest?
Click to expand...
Because they expected.
This is just for clicks.

Speaking during the Wall Street Journal Tech Live event this week, Xbox head Phil Spencer said he believed scrutiny around such a significant deal was warranted and revealed that he had been meeting regularly with regulators around the world.
Click to expand...
"It might be surprising to people, but I'm not an expert on doing 70 billion dollar deals," he said. "But I do know that we're very focused on getting approval in the major jurisdictions, and I'm spending a lot of time in Brussels, London and with the FTC here in the US
Click to expand...
 
Interesting days to mark from Idas.
- First impressions from the European Commission (November 8th) and the beginning of Phase 2.
- Decision from New Zealand (November 11th), although there could be a new delay.
- Canada usually updates each 10th calendar day with the completed merger reviews (by time the ABK deal could be one of them).
Click to expand...
And the usual suspects (China, Japan or South Korea, for example) could publish an announcement about the merger at any time.
Click to expand...
 
adamsapple said:
But the article in OP is not under your AP authored links ..
Click to expand...

Right, but his statement is that the New York Post is a "shit" news source. My rebuttal is that the New York Post heavily leverages the AP, which most newspapers in this country do. So then are all the newspapers shit news sources?

Or is it...."I don't agree with one article I read on the New York Post," therefore the entire newspaper is a shit news source?

What's the measurement here?

Edit:

"Microsoft's decision to buy Activision is all about exclusivity," Wedbush Securities managing director Dan Ives told The Post. "If giving up exclusivity is one of the required concessions, Microsoft is going to have to think long and hard if this is still the right deal."
Click to expand...

So are we mad at the shitty New York Post, or are we mad at Wedbush Securities or one of the many analysts quoted in the story?
 
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin said:
nypost.com

Activision insiders fret $69B Microsoft merger could fall apart: sources

Microsoft’s $69 billion Activision buyout is facing heightened scrutiny from regulators — and some insiders at the game studio behind “Call of Duty” are worried that the Xbox maker could …
nypost.com nypost.com


Article is indicating there is internal panic behind the assuring faces of executives on both sides of the deal, and that the easy path to approval will be a lot bumpier than expected, especially since regulators likely don't have much knowledge of the industry involved, and the lack of Microsoft providing any concessions.
Click to expand...
zOADqXS.gif
 
Chiggs said:
So are we mad at the shitty New York Post, or are we mad at Wedbush Securities or one of the many analysts quoted in the story?
Click to expand...

That quote isn't saying anything they haven't said already. "If it's about exclusivity" - they've said just a few days ago that as long as there's playstations, they'll keep publishing CoD games for it.

This article just seems like a round up of last month's news with some 'insider' commentary.
 
adamsapple said:
That quote isn't saying anything they haven't said already. "If it's about exclusivity" - they've said just a few days ago that as long as there's playstations, they'll keep publishing CoD games for it.

This article just seems like a round up of last month's news with some 'insider' commentary.
Click to expand...
Its not some insider. Its related to article on post #24
 
Very little chance of it not going through.
But on the off chance it crumbles, that same money could be used to buy a lot of other companies.
 
THE DUCK said:
Very little chance of it not going through.
But on the off chance it crumbles, that same money could be used to buy a lot of other companies.
Click to expand...

If the deal falls through, it's because MS pulled out due to poison pills. And honestly, that's not the worst thing ever, because they'd just:
  • Continue to swallow up moderate-sized dev houses.
and
  • Throw a fit whenever Sony attempts to do anything even closely-resembling a large acquisition.
 
lh032 said:
ngl, i hope this go through, otherwise Microsoft would use the 70bil on something else
Click to expand...
It doesn't work quite like that, but yes, they'll look into buying a lot of smaller assets which will be more disruptive to the industry.

{insert code here} said:
If the deal falls apart, and as a result ABK shares fall off a cliff, and they do mass layoffs, spending cuts, studio spinoffs... If all that happened and MS stepped in to buy at a lower price would regulators still say No?
Click to expand...

They'll still say no as long as it is tied to Call of Duty.

GhostOfTsu said:
Activision don't need MS. Their latest game broke records and Blizzard is finally releasing games again.

They panicked and sold for no reason.
Click to expand...

This is laughable... Their stock price is entirely being held up by this deal and they're facing a mass exodus from employees either way.


Ultimately there is a very real chance that this deal gets blocked, but I think the deal being blocked is bad for Microsoft, bad for Sony, bad for Activision, and bad for the industry.
 
Author probably trying to make people dump the stock so they can buy cheap and make more money when the deal closes. :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Last edited:
Sony must know that this deal not going forward will hurt them in the long run. My guess is they've taken an antagonistic approach to the deal with the hopes of weakening the deal enough to get concessions or flat or killing the deal to buy them time to shore themselves up.

Sony has to ask itself if this deal fails, what is next for Microsoft? Who else would they look to purchase?

They could try to buy EA, but EA doesn't really have a major franchise like CoD. And Sony's response would be to buy T2. EA could also be blocked.

Microsoft could buy T2, which I think would be sum of all fears for Sony. There is no counter or remedy to this. I think they would be the obvious alternative target. My guess is Sony has reached out to T2 to ensure the next "X number of GTA games are on PS" already and probably the same for Red Dead and maybe 2K sports.

Japanese companies get a bit more complicated since Japanese regulators could help block the purchase of major Japanese publishers. There may also be less willing to sell to Microsoft, but Square Enix could certainly be a target if the deal for Activision fails.

There really aren't that many companies worth buying to make a large impact. You could probably buy Ubi Soft, but what does that do short/long term.
 
I didnt foresee so much chatter about this. I figured this deal would go through no problem.

Everyone celebrating this deal falling through is going to be in for a rude awakening when MS goes and buys franchises we actually give a shit about. Like Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, GTA, Red Dead, and yes Assassins Creed. You dont want Ubisoft getting bought out by Microsoft. They make like 50% of the games released every year.
 
Hendrick's said:
Main take away:

Activision wants MS to bend over and offer every concession to get the deal done and save their share price while MS is looking to limit concessions as much as possible. This may be causing some tension between the two companies, but MS is not going to go through with the deal if the concessions are too large.
Click to expand...
Or MS will not offer concessions during a preliminary review of the acquisition. They'd essentially be negotiating with themselves. MS offered no concessions to Brazilian CADE either and we a saw how that turned out. Once the full review is done they can offer a set of general concessions if necessary that all regulators will accept and complete the purchase. MS never claimed this would be a quick a easy purchase no 70 billion acquisition is. June '23 is the expected completion date. Worry if that date passes and there has been no word on the deal.
 
Mibu no ookami said:
Anyone who tells you there is a zero chance this gets blocked is entirely delusional.

CMA, EU, and FTC are all likely to take a strong look at this and any one of them could block the deal.
Click to expand...
They need a tangable reason to block it. Even then, they have to prepare for the court, since MS would take them there. and prepare strong argument, as to why the deal should be blocked.

In any case, the regulators wants a concession, but MS doesnt want to give one. Either one of them would give up.
 
feynoob said:
They need a tangable reason to block it. Even then, they have to prepare for the court, since MS would take them there. and prepare strong argument, as to why the deal should be blocked.

In any case, the regulators wants a concession, but MS doesnt want to give one. Either one of them would give up.
Click to expand...

What was the "tangible" reason to block the Nvidia Arm deal?

These regulators have pretty far reach in terms of blocking deals on antitrust grounds. If they conclude Microsoft buying the largest 3rd party publisher in the games industry would result in reduced competition, the courts aren't going to side with Microsoft.

Microsoft is really shooting for the moon here in this attempt and there really isn't any precedent for this happening.
 
GametimeUK said:
It's going to go through no issue. I'm looking forward to Microsoft securing these franchises and adding more value to their eco system. It's going to be a hell of a time to be a MS fan.

I wouldn't worry about these articles. It's a done deal. You'll see.
Click to expand...
Microsoft does not have the best track record with Studios they acquire. Outside of maybe getting the older Activison games in game pass I don't see what's really exciting about this deal. COD may not even be in game pass for a few years because of the contracts with Sony.

This deal just feels like a big waste of time but I guess someone had to buy them and Xbox game pass needs content… whatever.
 
Del_X said:
I guess they'll have to buy Asobo and CDPR if this falls through.
Click to expand...

They should try to grab Asobo regardless of anything else they have going on. Solid studio that does great work. And they have a close working relationship with them, I always hear that is important.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MS/ABK is advertising games that don't exist for data collection
46
2K
POKEYCLYDE replied
My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games
2 3 4
156
6K
MDSLKTR replied
Microsoft, Activision Deny Report Regarding Financial Performance
Business Hardware  2 3
131
11K
Jaybe replied
What happened to all the people that were cheering over that MS Activision acquisition?
Drama  5 6 7 8 9
414
18K
GateofD replied
Microsoft has Closed the Activision Blizzard King Deal
22 23 24 25 26
1K
99K
MasterCornholio replied
Top Bottom