• 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?

  • 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.
T

Three

Member
mrmustard said:
Yeah, but the Switch wasn't sold out all the time. PS5 games from release to end of 2022 are very bad examples. Yoshida could have rubbed every PS5 in shit and they would have been sold out.
Click to expand...
I don't think shortages were bad during Ragnarok release. PS5s were in stock so they were meeting demand pretty well with the boost in sales taken into account.
 
drganon

drganon

Member
SoloKingRobert said:
Microsoft will be acquiring Activision Blizzard in late July to early August.
Click to expand...
IekUbmw.jpg
 
MistBreeze

MistBreeze

Member
The thing that I will not understand why some people root for a trillion dollars company to continue gobbling up publishers to content starve competition while they have failed to produce compelling content with 25 studios

What will change after Acquiring Activision?

7 studios working on 1 game such a waste

Call of duty exclusive to xbox?

Take that PlayStation u have 10 years to make your own cod …

This is pathetic …

Let them have it … it will change nothing

They already devalued their brand since their consumers expect every AAA game to be free

Halo is free ,, gears is free ,, forza is free these were selling millions of copies in 360s era

Matter of fact cod being free is best to everyone

Games do not sell in their platform and data packs this up

Phill said it all gamepass reached saturation and they cornered themselves badly tbh
 
mrmustard

mrmustard

Banned
Three said:
I don't think shortages were bad during Ragnarok release. PS5s were in stock so they were meeting demand pretty well with the boost in sales taken into account.
Click to expand...
Was still scalped around Christmas, but i think we shouldn't discuss this more than we alredy have. We agree that big games can sell consoles. We don't know how much, but they sure can. Especially Nintendo games with some being owned by around 40% of all Switch owners.
 
Topher

Topher

Identifies as young
POKEYCLYDE said:
It is in a case of proving irrationality.

Many of you are pointing to the fact that the EU has similar concerns around cloud and saying that kills the chance of appeal. But then turn around and say other regulators decisions have no bearing on the CMA's appeal process.
Click to expand...

Not sure who is saying that "kills the chance of appeal", but I don't agree with that. It does follow that the EC having the exact same concerns does not help in saying the basis of the CMA decision is irrational, but that is from us on the outside looking in. Does that play a part with the CAT? No idea.
 
Dick Jones

Dick Jones

Banned
noise36 said:
Because its very narrow, designed to be difficult to win, and only sends it back to the same zealots that made the initial decision.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the world of the Civil Service. It's not designed to be difficult to win, it's designed that the staff are following the legislation and not acting in a manner that would misinterpret the law or make decisions that have no basis in reality.

The fact that government employees are hired and not appointed by government officials is not a negative. To have the government make individual decisions on every hire in the civil service would leave no time to carry out the actual work they are meant to do.

So if the CAT side with MS that the CMA acted irrationally, and you don't want it to go back to the CMA (who have experience in the field of Mergers and Acquisitions), where would you like to send it to? The Department of Agriculture, the Department of Foreign Affairs, the government to overturn without any specialist knowledge of M&A?

You are deluded by your lack of the most basic knowledge of the civil service that you think there is a big anti MS conspiracy going on by the CMA. Spoiler: There fucking is not.

You are annoyed the CMA made a decision correctly and this makes MS' appeal harder to win. Tough titties.
 
Last edited:
Ogbert

Ogbert

Member
Topher said:
Not sure who is saying that "kills the chance of appeal", but I don't agree with that. It does follow that the EC having the exact same concerns does not help in saying the basis of the CMA decision is irrational, but that is from us on the outside looking in. Does that play a part with the CAT? No idea.
Click to expand...
What is interesting about the difference between the CMA and EU decisions is that they agree on the potential for anti-competitive activity, but the EU accepts MS’ proposed remedy - the ten year licensing deal. And that those 10 years represent sufficient time for any given competitor to find / develop an alternative product.

This is important because it’s a commercial distinction rather than a legal one. It’s not a point of legal difference.

I have no idea if it will change the CMA process. I suspect not. But at appeal, it gives MS the chance to challenge whether their conclusion was a reasonable one. Again, I don’t think it will change the decision as the appeal process is more a judicial review, as opposed to challenging conclusions.

To put my cards on the table, I don’t give a flying fuck about CoD or MS or Sony. I’ll buy anything and everything offered to me, as I see fit. I personally believe that the 10 year licensing commitment is a reasonable one. And I think the CMA’s decision is too risk aversed.
 
LordCBH

LordCBH

Member
Bernoulli

Bernoulli

M2 slut
I think shareholders won't accept to extend the deal unless Microsoft increases the price to 105 or 115
Activision is in a much better place compared to when they got bought and can easily get 90 or 100 Billions now
 
N

noise36

Member
Dick Jones said:
You are deluded by your lack of the most basic knowledge of the civil service that you think there is a big anti MS conspiracy going on by the CMA. Spoiler: There fucking is not.
Click to expand...
Conspiracy is your words not mine, its just incompetence! CMA doesn't understand the gaming market, cant predict the future and have used a comically inaccurate modelling as the basis for their decision. They are zealots, they made up their mind then manufactured a narrative to fit.

EC seems to at least understand they have no idea what they are doing and decided it was best let the market work it out.
 
Last edited:
PaintTinJr

PaintTinJr

Member
POKEYCLYDE said:
It is in a case of proving irrationality.

Many of you are pointing to the fact that the EU has similar concerns around cloud and saying that kills the chance of appeal. But then turn around and say other regulators decisions have no bearing on the CMA's appeal process.

I'm not saying there's hope for a successful appeal, I personally think that ABK will bounce out with their $3B come July.

But there are avenues Microsoft can take if ABK decides to extend and see the appeal process through. Barring a bomb shell illegality accusation, arguing irrationality is Microsoft's best chance at winning their appeal. EU having the same concerns around cloud and FTC suing to block lessens the chance at a successful appeal. But if the US courts decide a block isn't appropriate and every other regulator decides that no concessions or behavioral remedies are sufficient, that's something Microsoft can use to say the severity of CMA's remedy is irrational.
Click to expand...
They have no bearing on winning the appeal part of the problem - that is the prerequisite for it to get sent back to the CMA for another review, with that as a new (weak) argument.

The "irrationality" appeal has nothing to do with the remedy chosen, the CAT aren't interested in those specifics, merely whether the CMA did the job they are legally charged to do in assessing mergers and acquisitions, whether they need to send them back to do the process again without errors. The EC process being similar - but using EU data/concerns, rather than UK data and concerns - supports the argument by the CMA that the process they used met all the required standards and is immune to " I don't like the result" appeal challenges.

This is all explained on the CMA or CAT website.
 
feynoob

feynoob

Banned
noise36 said:
Conspiracy is your words not mine, its just incompetence! CMA doesn't understand the gaming market, cant predict the future and have used a comically inaccurate modelling as the basis for their decision. They are zealots, they made up their mind then manufactured a narrative to fit.

EC seems to at least understand they have no idea what they are doing and decided it was best let the market work it out.
Click to expand...
Is that you SenjutsuSage SenjutsuSage ?
 
Last edited:
adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
www.reuters.com

UK regulators must understand need to promote growth, Hunt says

British regulators should understand the need to promote growth, finance minister Jeremy Hunt said on Wednesday when asked about the UK's antitrust watchdog's decision to block Microsoft's $69 billion acquisition of Activision .
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com


LONDON, May 17 (Reuters) - British regulators should understand the need to promote growth, finance minister Jeremy Hunt said on Wednesday when asked about the UK's antitrust watchdog's decision to block Microsoft's (MSFT.O) $69 billion acquisition of Activision (ATVI.O).

"One of the reasons that companies like Microsoft and Google want to invest in the UK is because we have independent regulators that aren't controlled by politicians," Hunt told a business conference.

"I would not want to undermine that at all, but I do think it's important all our regulators understand their wider responsibilities for economic growth."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Makoto-Yuki

Makoto-Yuki

Gold Member
I think this will get scrapped in July. The UK CMA don't seem to be backing down and if Microsoft need their approval for this to go ahead then it's dead even with the EU approval.

Some people like to suggest that Microsoft would consider abandoning the UK market but that is never going to happen. Microsoft could hint at doing that which would be an advantage for them but they will never actually leave because if Microsoft did threaten to leave the UK then the government would step in and overrule the CMA in a heartbeat. The entire country literally runs on Microsoft products such as Windows, Office, Teams, Outlook, etc. The NHS for example runs on Microsoft products and it would collapse overnight if it had to move everything over to a non Microsoft system. I work in IT for a major UK company and the thought of having to ditch Microsoft is pure nightmare fuel. Of course the UK isn't the only major country that relies on Microsoft so it could do more harm to Microsoft to make such a threat. I just can't see them going far enough to threaten the UK.

Microsoft will need to put in a good argument as to why the CMA's decision is unfair and hope that they change their mind. They could threaten the UK government but the best option I think is to call it quits on the deal and suck up the $3 billion they need to pay Activision.
 
ReBurn

ReBurn

Gold Member
Heisenberg007 said:
There are 4 regulators that are big and actually matter enough for Microsoft and ABK to mention by name. The approval of this merger depended on their unanimous approval.
  • FTC = Has blocked ❌
  • CMA = Has blocked ❌
  • EU = Behavioral remedies ✅
  • China (?) = No decision yet. ⚠️
So as of now, EU is in the minority as both the FTC and CMA have blocked this acquisition. Even if China approves, it'll only be balanced.
Click to expand...
FTC hasn't blocked the deal, though. Not yet. The FTC intends to block the deal but they haven't completed their process. To prevent Microsoft from closing the deal before they finish their process they would have to get an injunction from a federal court. I'm sure if they get word that Microsoft is making moves to close they will seek one but so far they have not. So you should change your red x to a yellow triangle for that one.
 
TheRedRiders

TheRedRiders

Member
I think we need to be careful about reading too much into what the politicians are saying... I have a flying pig to sell to anyone who thinks the UK's current cabinet can somehow overrule the CMA's judgement.

Sunak already seems to be in favor of the CMA decision, and is even trying to grant them more power. However Sunak, Hunt and the rest of the current Tory cabinet are already on thin ice.

So it's pretty much meaningless.
 
Topher

Topher

Identifies as young
Ogbert said:
What is interesting about the difference between the CMA and EU decisions is that they agree on the potential for anti-competitive activity, but the EU accepts MS’ proposed remedy - the ten year licensing deal. And that those 10 years represent sufficient time for any given competitor to find / develop an alternative product.

This is important because it’s a commercial distinction rather than a legal one. It’s not a point of legal difference.

I have no idea if it will change the CMA process. I suspect not. But at appeal, it gives MS the chance to challenge whether their conclusion was a reasonable one. Again, I don’t think it will change the decision as the appeal process is more a judicial review, as opposed to challenging conclusions.

To put my cards on the table, I don’t give a flying fuck about CoD or MS or Sony. I’ll buy anything and everything offered to me, as I see fit. I personally believe that the 10 year licensing commitment is a reasonable one. And I think the CMA’s decision is too risk aversed.
Click to expand...

I pretty much made the same point earlier that the only real difference between the EC and CMA is the remedy. CMA does not agree that the 10 year license solves the issue. Primarily because the entirety of the solution still flows through Microsoft via licensing. Essentially still handing Microsoft a considerable amount of control, even if monitored, that extends past the 10 year period. There are valid, rational reasons, imo, for not believing it will work. Like you say, unlikely a judicial review is going overturn that decision unless CAT finds significant legal errors.

Not the same scenario at all, but I do think it is interesting thinking back that Microsoft became a monopoly in operating systems via licensing.
 
PaintTinJr

PaintTinJr

Member
Bernoulli said:
I think shareholders won't accept to extend the deal unless Microsoft increases the price to 105 or 115
Activision is in a much better place compared to when they got bought and can easily get 90 or 100 Billions now
Click to expand...
As I said yesterday, I'm not even sure how that process would work.

To extend they need to inform ATVI the merger as-is has failed before the merger cutoff date is reached to avoid the CMA appeal collapsing, and triggering the 10year block on trying again and 3rd party ownership bypass.
Telling ATVI the merger as-is has failed is a break from making "best efforts" to have the merger(this current process) succeed. Which then suggests ATVI at that point can unilaterally decide to cash-out and take the penalty money, without any levers for Microsoft left to pull and just relying on hopium that ATVI's Bobby stays-in long enough - assuming that is legal to do without shareholder consultation - to ballot ATVI shareholders to extend on new terms.

But even thinking about that, only the penalty could be raised IMHO without needing a new SEC filing, surely? I suspect they can't offer more for ATVI without a new SEC filing, and they can't fight the CMA appeal if they relinquish the existing SEC filing.

Unless someone with contract knowledge can cite the part in this M&A contract where ATVI and Microsoft can renegotiate without a new SEC filing in this deal, I think Microsoft have no way to fight the appeal, and no way to keep the deal going without the CMA giving them authority to do so - which they wouldn't.
 
jm89

jm89

Member
adamsapple said:
www.reuters.com

UK regulators must understand need to promote growth, Hunt says

British regulators should understand the need to promote growth, finance minister Jeremy Hunt said on Wednesday when asked about the UK's antitrust watchdog's decision to block Microsoft's $69 billion acquisition of Activision .
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...
Lol that's it?

Yeah that is all MS will ever be getting from the top politicians in the UK.

Hunt and co. know the repercussions of pressuring the CMA anymore as they are an independent body.

This will strengthen the CMA resolve if anything.
 
Last edited:
Bernoulli

Bernoulli

M2 slut
Topher said:
I pretty much made the same point earlier that the only real difference between the EC and CMA is the remedy. CMA does not agree that the 10 year license solves the issue. Primarily because the entirety of the solution still flows through Microsoft via licensing. Essentially still handing Microsoft a considerable amount of control, even if monitored, that extends past the 10 year period. There are valid, rational reasons, imo, for not believing it will work. Like you say, unlikely a judicial review is going overturn that decision unless CAT finds significant legal errors.

Not the same scenario at all, but I do think it is interesting thinking back that Microsoft became a monopoly in operating systems via licensing.
Click to expand...
Even if the CAT find some big legal error the CMA will just have to to the investigation again but will come to the same conclusion

And it will be worse because with the release of Iphone sideloading on IOS17 Microsoft will have more Xcloud devices
 
Ogbert

Ogbert

Member
TheRedRiders said:
I think we need to be careful about reading too much into what the politicians are saying... I have a flying pig to sell to anyone who thinks the UK's current cabinet can somehow overrule the CMA's judgement.

Sunak already seems to be in favor of the CMA decision, and is even trying to grant them more power. However Sunak, Hunt and the rest of the current Tory cabinet are already on thin ice.

So it's pretty much meaningless.
Click to expand...
How is Sunak in favour of it?

Not a dig. Genuine question. Has he commented on the case?

There was the recent stuff about the Edinburgh Reforms, but those are more financial services related.
 
Bernoulli

Bernoulli

M2 slut
PaintTinJr said:
As I said yesterday, I'm not even sure how that process would work.

To extend they need to inform ATVI the merger as-is has failed before the merger cutoff date is reached to avoid the CMA appeal collapsing, and triggering the 10year block on trying again and 3rd party ownership bypass.
Telling ATVI the merger as-is has failed is a break from making "best efforts" to have the merger(this current process) succeed. Which then suggests ATVI at that point can unilaterally decide to cash-out and take the penalty money, without any levers for Microsoft left to pull and just relying on hopium that ATVI's Bobby stays-in long enough - assuming that is legal to do without shareholder consultation - to ballot ATVI shareholders to extend on new terms.

But even thinking about that, only the penalty could be raised IMHO without needing a new SEC filing, surely? I suspect they can't offer more for ATVI without a new SEC filing, and they can't fight the CMA appeal if they relinquish the existing SEC filing.

Unless someone with contract knowledge can cite the part in this M&A contract where ATVI and Microsoft can renegotiate without a new SEC filing in this deal, I think Microsoft have no way to fight the appeal, and no way to keep the deal going without the CMA giving them authority to do so - which they wouldn't.
Click to expand...
There is 100% no way Activision shareholders will extend after july if they don't get more money
 
Edmund

Edmund

is waiting for Starfield 7
kraspkibble said:
They could threaten the UK government but the best option I think is to call it quits on the deal and suck up the $3 billion they need to pay Activision.
Click to expand...

Never have I ever thought that a corporation can threaten another country's government. I thought this only existed in books/movies or videogames. It's mind-blowing. If you don't think this is incredulous and scary, I don't know what to say.
 
Last edited:
Topher

Topher

Identifies as young
British regulators should consider their “responsibilities for economic growth”, said Chancellor Jeremy Hunt, after the UK’s competition watchdog blocked the merger between Microsoft and gaming giant Activision Blizzard.

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) halted the 68.7 billion dollar (£55 billion) deal by the tech giant to take over Activision, the company behind Call Of Duty and other games, due to concerns over the cloud gaming market.

On Monday, European regulators approved the move after they accepted commitments offered by Microsoft designed to ensure that the deal does not lessen competition.

Microsoft’s vice chair and president Brad Smith said the UK regulatory environment compared unfavourably with the EU and warned the “English Channel has never seemed wider” after the decision.

For our tech sector, it isn’t just about being able to get through big deals, competition really matters

Speaking at the British Chambers of Commerce’s annual conference, he said: “When it comes to Microsoft, there was a merger between two American companies that the US regulator is seeking to block, and the UK regulator took the same view.

“I think one of the reasons that companies like Microsoft and Google want to invest in the UK is because we have independent regulators that are not controlled by politicians and therefore they can be confident there will be a level playing field.

“I would not want to undermine that at all, but I do think it’s important all our regulators understand their wider responsibilities for economic growth.

“But for our tech sector, it isn’t just about being able to get through big deals, competition really matters.”
Click to expand...

www.independent.co.uk

UK regulators should consider need for economic growth, warns Chancellor

It comes weeks after the UK competition watchdog halted the 68.7 billion dollar (£55 billion) deal by Microsoft to buy Activision Blizzard.
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk


Since when does the CMA regulate investment in the UK?

Obama Reaction GIF
 
jm89

jm89

Member
Edmund said:
Never have I ever thought that a corporation can threaten another country's government. I thought this only existed in books/movies or videogames. It's mind-blowing.
Click to expand...
Day by day i grow convinced the survival of xbox will depend on ABK, or atleast xbox in it's current form.

I would never have said this a few months ago, but the sheer desperation is convincing me.
 
Last edited:
feynoob

feynoob

Banned
Edmund said:
Never have I ever thought that a corporation can threaten another country's government. I thought this only existed in books/movies or videogames. It's mind-blowing. If you don't think this is incredulous and scary, I don't know what to say.
Click to expand...
That is what happens, when you dont regulate the market very well.
MS, google, amazon and apple are the result of weak regulation from US.
 
OmegaSupreme

OmegaSupreme

advanced basic bitch
Oh hell. Someone with the skills needs to edit a gif of ed 209 blowing away that dude in the office and put a caption of cma over him :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Microsoft has Closed the Activision Blizzard King Deal
22 23 24 25 26
1K
93K
MasterCornholio replied
Microsoft now says the CMA was ‘tough and fair’ over Activision Blizzard deal
Opinion Business Game Dev
17
3K
SportsFan581 replied
FTC appeals to block already-completed Microsoft-Activision deal
2
63
7K
Mythoclast replied
  • Locked
UK minister defends CMA's decision to block MS/ABK
News
0
1K
Daniel_Mallorca1985 replied
  • Locked
Microsoft to sell off Activision cloud gaming rights to Ubisoft in bid for UK approval
News Business 2 3 4
154
17K
Spyxos replied
Top Bottom