• 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.

Lasha

Member
This. The CMA highlighted divestment and Microsoft ignored them and threw out 10 year deals that the CMA highlighted as inadequate. It's too late now.

The CMA also had to walk that back because of poor market analysis. Hinging a decision to protect a barely extant cloud gaming market on the divestment of a twitch shooter which plays like shit over streaming is an odd case to make. The CMA does not always win at the CAT. It will be interesting to see how the appeal plays out.
 

Guess no "press the red button" threats from Kotick today. He can kick back with his gold coins and side-eye the sexual harassment filings.

giphy-downsized-large.gif
 
Hi, Can someone tells me what The status IS concerning FTC and EU ? I Saw CMA ruling, but not thé FTC or EU.
If they haven't ruled yet, when are rulings are expected ?
 

Dick Jones

Banned
The CMA also had to walk that back because of poor market analysis. Hinging a decision to protect a barely extant cloud gaming market on the divestment of a twitch shooter which plays like shit over streaming is an odd case to make. The CMA does not always win at the CAT. It will be interesting to see how the appeal plays out.
You sure? They dropped divestment as an option as MS dropped it as a solution offered to them. Why waste time adding something that MS ignored? They dropped the console part as they were less sound on that section and dropped anything that could lead to the CAT overturning it. If anything Xbox and MS would have hoped the console aspect remained when appealing. The CMA future proofed their correct decision.

When the CMA dropped the console part, they reminded MS about the cloud issue. That should have rang alarm bells with MS lawyers to fucking fo something. It didn't, but you get what you pay for when they mix up the Man of Steel with Spider-Man.
 
Ah, and very satisfied with the CMA ruling. But those dumbass EU regulators, I'm afraid they don't see MS endgame. Lobbying is too intense from the big huperscalers... (I'm European fyi). And I don't expect anything good from the FTC (biden is so pro GAFAM).
 
The CMA also had to walk that back because of poor market analysis. Hinging a decision to protect a barely extant cloud gaming market on the divestment of a twitch shooter which plays like shit over streaming is an odd case to make. The CMA does not always win at the CAT. It will be interesting to see how the appeal plays out.
So you are pretending that CMA and EU didn't reach the same conclusions but only differed on the remedies? The CMA isn't going to walk anything back now that the EU agreed with them on the principles of the market action. The EU allowing the deal to go through with these shitty 10 year deals as remedies instead of just blocking is just EU corruption in action and that isn't going to win MS the case on appeal in the UK.
 

graywolf323

Member
Well well well, look who crawled out of a cave to post here after nearly 1 month of silence...
The fact that 1 regulator can block the deal is part of the acquisition contract, since it has to be approved by 4 specific regulators, so it was a known risk for both MS and ATK.
If MS didn't want the risk they could simply not go through the acquisition attempt.
not the only one, noticing a lot of users posting & reacting to posts that largely have been missing since the CMA decision until now
 

PaintTinJr

Member
They already could though.
Surely that depends on what gets admitted into evidence? If the EC report was admitted, but the CMA report denied - as it was currently under appeal - then the FTC can introduce the CMA report via the backdoor, by citing their response to the EC report, which then could lead to introducing the CMA report to back up the CMA citation - is what I was thinking.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
The CMA also had to walk that back because of poor market analysis. Hinging a decision to protect a barely extant cloud gaming market on the divestment of a twitch shooter which plays like shit over streaming is an odd case to make. The CMA does not always win at the CAT. It will be interesting to see how the appeal plays out.

That "twitch shooter" isn't available over streaming so how would you know it plays like shit?
 
Ah, and very satisfied with the CMA ruling. But those dumbass EU regulators, I'm afraid they don't see MS endgame. Lobbying is too intense from the big huperscalers... (I'm European fyi). And I don't expect anything good from the FTC (biden is so pro GAFAM).

I don't think Biden's preferences matter at all here; it's the FTC handling the acquisition here, not the DOJ.

parsec.app

3P app, very unreliable and results can vary highly from game to game.
 
Last edited:

Lasha

Member
A remote desktop app? Are you serious?

Download it and try it out. I know that you only took a cursory glance before firing that comment off. It's such a good "remote desktop app" that much of the creative industry adopted it during covid for editing and other low latency tasks.
 

Dick Jones

Banned
If Bobby Kotick doesn't call out the FTC and the EC talking, he is allowing the FTC and the CMA to have the chats. This will backfire on him now.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
Download it and try it out. I know that you only took a cursory glance before firing that comment off. It's such a good "remote desktop app" that much of the creative industry adopted it during covid for editing and other low latency tasks.

A cursory glance was all I needed to recognize an entirely anecdotal statement.
 

PaintTinJr

Member

It is quite telling that the interviewer understood the importance and dangers of the merger 10x more that the EC interviewee by her questioning.

The comment regarding cloud gaming being 1-3% of gaming implies that high-end gaming on console and cloud aren't uniquely different product offerings from the rest of the market, but there you see it first hand the interviewee knows nothing from a consumer perspective and is just quoting the stats like they actually mean anything.
 

Varteras

Member
what? why? they had a deadline, Microsoft only has themselves to blame for thumbing their noses at the CMA and thinking they could get it through without actually trying to address their concerns

Yeah. As if the CMA has nothing better to do than hear Microsoft out every time they have another idea for a remedy that still doesn't address their concerns. The CMA pretty much spelled it out. To them, there is no solution that addresses their concern about Microsoft dominating an emerging gaming market through this acquisition. The only course of action is to tell them no.
 

Lasha

Member
A cursory glance was all I needed to recognize an entirely anecdotal statement.

Confidently ignorant is a bad look. All streaming boils down to "remote desktop applications optimized for latency". I've played COD streaming over parsec from both my home and AWS. Your accusation should be satisfied.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It is quite telling that the interviewer understood the importance and dangers of the merger 10x more that the EC interviewee by her questioning.

The comment regarding cloud gaming being 1-3% of gaming implies that high-end gaming on console and cloud aren't uniquely different product offerings from the rest of the market, but there you see it first hand the interviewee knows nothing from a consumer perspective and is just quoting the stats like they actually mean anything.

What, pray tell, is the 'consumer perspective' here that you're referring to ?
 

Elios83

Member
So MS is now going to spin their wheels for the next year in courts trying to get this deal to pass?
The legal posturing will continue until July. Then we'll know how serious MS and Activision are and what they truly think of their chances.
Market conditions around the deal have totally changed for both.
 

JackMcGunns

Member
“Let us have competition” he says. LOL

It’s like the rich kid that brings his expensive toys to school just to brag.

One thing is to make competition, another thing entirely is to buy the entire industry because you don’t know how to make good games. If only all that money was used to create their own studios and their own IPs, Xbox would be huge. if they wanted competition they would do that, and maybe buy a couple of studios to complement it.

What they are doing is just trying to own the industry. Nintendo is successful doing their own thing, Sony too, but Microsoft just can’t.

I still can believe Ganepass is profitable. It’s just a pipe dream for them that they make work only because they can afford to hemorrhage money into it. Any other business would be bankrupt with a GamePass model.

It would be a shame if this deal pass. I know it will because there is a lot of money involve and they will be able to “convince” everyone involved in the decision.

As I said, they should use the money to create their own studios. Look how much Sony paid for Insomniac and they do amazing games.


I'm confused by this comment. Insomniac was NOT a Sony studio, so they didn't "create their own" they used money to purchase it. If you combine all the studios that Sony has purchased over the years, that adds up to more than Activision/Blizzard. MS vs Sony acquisitions is the same frog in the pot scenario, except one increased the temperature slowly.
 

NickFire

Member
So MS is now going to spin their wheels for the next year in courts trying to get this deal to pass?
It's a good question. My initial understanding was that if it does not close by sometime in summer Activision can demand break up fee. But it's hard to know what is and is not speculation / conjecture. And Activision might have obligations or incentive to extend deadlines for all I know.
 

gothmog

Gold Member
The legal posturing will continue until July. Then we'll know how serious MS and Activision are and what they truly think of their chances.
Market conditions around the deal have totally changed for both.
Yep. Most of these mergers that do fail are because it's not worth continuing, not because they exhausted every avenue to succeed.
 

dotnotbot

Member
I'm confused by this comment. Insomniac was NOT a Sony studio, so they didn't "create their own" they used money to purchase it. If you combine all the studios that Sony has purchased over the years, that adds up to more than Activision/Blizzard. MS vs Sony acquisitions is the same frog in the pot scenario, except one increased the temperature slowly.

Why should we add them up if Microsoft has already bought more studios in the past 10 years then Sony? MS also did a lot of acquisitions.
 
Last edited:

Thirty7ven

Banned
Honestly i think they may have given the CMA more ammunition on how bad these deals are.

Their whole buy COD on Xbox and have a license to stream it on Luna is jokes too. You are giving MS free license to set pricing terms.

Basically you have to buy the game first, and then all microtransaction money is 100% MS’s. Which means competing services won’t get ANY revenue from COD which is NOT an industry standard.
 

Lasha

Member
It is quite telling that the interviewer understood the importance and dangers of the merger 10x more that the EC interviewee by her questioning.

The comment regarding cloud gaming being 1-3% of gaming implies that high-end gaming on console and cloud aren't uniquely different product offerings from the rest of the market, but there you see it first hand the interviewee knows nothing from a consumer perspective and is just quoting the stats like they actually mean anything.

Are you watching a different video than the one linked? That's a wild conclusion to draw based on what was said.
 

PaintTinJr

Member
What, pray tell, is the 'consumer perspective' here that you're referring to ?
The perspective that most of what the 97% of gaming (smartphones, jigsaw on PC, Tetris, etc) has no bearing on the dangers and anti-competitive shenanigans of the acquisition of ATVIs high-end console gaming catalogue of games being bought by Microsoft.
 
Last edited:

Mr Moose

Member
Dunno... aint over till it's over i suppose.

People on here thought for SURE EU was also gonna block it, so i guess now in Microsoft's eyes there's still hope.

And they have more than enough cash and time to burn trying to turn it around.
4 big ones have to approve it, if any one of them don't, it's over. One of them has said no.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
The perspective that most of what the 97% of gaming (smartphones, jigsaw on PC, Tetris, etc) has no bearing on the dangers and anti-competitive shenanigans of the acquisition of ATVIs high-end console gaming catalogue of games being bought by Microsoft.

That may be a point of discussion but EU's main concern was cloud and CMA blocked for the reason of cloud, the '1 to 3 %' market is the focal point here.


-


Pachter was right, what a time to be alive.

 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
That may be a point of discussion but EU's main concern was cloud and CMA blocked for the reason of cloud, the '1 to 3 %' market is the focal point here.
It's not about today, you know this. It's about in 10 years.

Especially when today owns 70% of cloud infrastructure in the word. The EU are licking their chops at the fines they will levy in 10 years.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom