modiz
Member
A matter of when, not ifI am still watching, has this all been approved yet?.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
Tomeru
Member
Yes, and what I said still stands imho. Enticing to think what a 70$ bill can do for your company and what it can do for your position in a market (obviously). Its just how these things work. I was just ranting
Varteras
Gold Member
I am still watching, has this all been approved yet?.
Mr.ODST
Member
Agree with this that MS wouldn't be able to make big massive purchases like this anymore.
Think if MS wanted the Japanese market they need to invest in new studios making their own games for Xbox sort of like Mistwalker, there was some amazing exclusive JRPGs for the Xbox like Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey
PaintTinJr
Member
Really? Nvidia go from being either 1 or 2 provider of gaming specific 3D accelerators in Windows at a time of around 5 other providers, around the time of them getting massive financial support with a first refusal contract from the OS monopolist that has a well documented strategy for DirectX (by Ian St John and was quoted over 400 pages ago) and then Nvidia put the number 1 or 2 accelerator provider out of business, and acquire them and others for patents - killing the PC's market leading Glide Api for PC games - and then DirectX is reborn with a Nvidia Cg for Xbox/Windows and massively changed silicon.
The final 3dfx cards prior to Nvidia's silicon change(Voodoo 4500/5500) had scalar programmable engines used by the driver in fixed path mode and just never got the software for a new graphics programming paradigm, and this was long before hardware accelerated shading was mainstream technology for gaming, and may even have beaten 3DLabs world first certified GLSL accelerator card to market, but I'd have to check that.
According to the internet(I linked in a previous post) Nvidia go on to buy up lots of important graphics patents from most of the top 5 providers from 2000, with the market left with just ATI - that had decent market share from iGPUs to expand more in the 3D accelerator market - and Intel's iGPUs gaining entry level acceleration features (Matrox were mostly a 2D accelerator focus IIRC), and very soon the market becomes a two horse race between discrete GPUs by ATI(then bought by AMD) and Nvidia. Nvidia's partnering with Microsoft for DirectX replaces both Glide and Opengl as the leading graphics apis for games on Windows(Turok, Quake, Tomb Raider got retrospective support for DirectX IIRC), and both companies(MSFT, NVDA) go on to massive market cap valuations over the next 2 decades, with constant up trajectories - unless I read the graphs wrong. Even the Windows Vista debacle was all about Microsoft removing direct GPU access - installing a HAL that is opaque to the APIs and can't be debugged by the world's programming community, even Opengl/vulkan run are mere clients to the HAL.
If you don't think there is even a hint of causation in all of that, and it is all conspiracy despite what Ian St John has said over the years, then I would be surprised.
Goalus
Member
The only big (western) publisher (that is valuable) left is Take Two anyway. MS could simply start buying TTWO shares at an exchange in order to drive up the price so that no one else can acquire them.
roosnam1980
Member
it is over , MS has finally left the console market and are on board with sony as exclusive developers for playstation consoles , that includes all studios owned by ms including bethesda and activision/blizzard
kidding its april 1
kidding its april 1
Varteras
Gold Member
Phil looks like he just farted in the middle of Jim's speech and now he's whispering that he's an asshole.it is over , MS has finally left the console market and are on board with sony as exclusive developers for playstation consoles , that includes all studios owned by ms including bethesda and activision/blizzard
kidding its april 1
harry mason 1989
Banned
1was busy with work in the last few days
So what happened now with the deal
Can you guys give me some updates?
So what happened now with the deal
Can you guys give me some updates?
Varteras
Gold Member
Bernardougf
Member
Yes! MS got the deal approved and now all the games including and especially COD are going to be multiplayer forever ... Furthermore none of the franchises will suffer under MS mismanagement of their studios because they are as of now restructuring the hole Xbox division the biggest in gaming history into a well oiled machine of games... Phil kept his promises and gaming is for everyone ,,, the days of trying to monopolize industries is over in MS HQ and they are now consumer and business friendly... and of course none of this was to the ultimate goal of luring people to the unsustainable gamepass business for eventually upping the prices once the industry is firmly in their hands because they froze GP forever and games now are basically free...
Happy April's fools day everyone and be nice
ReBurn
Gold Member
Start reading from here and you should be caught up:
https://www.reuters.com/technology/...on-investigate-its-mobile-browser-2023-03-31/
Ahh.... Guess we still have the investigation into the app store distribution
https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/investigation-into-apple-appstore
Ahh.... Guess we still have the investigation into the app store distribution
https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/investigation-into-apple-appstore
Last edited:
PaintTinJr
Member
That's interesting but suspect it is an own goal long-term for Apple contesting it on the letter of the law and having the CAT agree with them - in effect batting it back to parliament/lords to upgrade/review the law which they can and will do quickly for something like a powerful smartphone duopoly IMHO.
If the CMA get upgraded powers from this Apple are unlikely to get an easier time from the CMA when they do get to fix martet issues IMO.
I've seen people post MBG and the red dragon as credible sources in this thread lol, but we draw the line with Destin Lmao. Fanboy or not, he actually does his research and that's more than I can say for 90% of the content creators following this topic.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Bernardougf
Member
" the future"
solidus12
Member
I'd say all three, MS must compete after all…
Don't think it (CAT appealling the investigation) matters too much, the CMA still has the app store distribution in investigation and the UK government already put forward proposals (last autumn) for the DMU which will give them a lot more power over companies that are defined as having strategic market status.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
While CMA indeed has some things to investigate there (I do believe that sooner or later Apple and Google will be forced to drop 30% cut), it is a blow to "CMA is invincible" believers
Last edited:
Varteras
Gold Member
Should Jez Cordon acquire a shred of journalistic integrity?
1. Nah, diabetes is better
2. Purple
Tomeru
Member
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
HAS been pretty constant.
But that's in the past. One question to ask yourself - why are shareholders selling if prospects are so great? There seems to be massive internal issues that stem from their entire studio focus on CoD. So far it has held up, but it's an enormous risk of concentration should that IP stagnate. The growth rates of the past may not apply to the future.
Of course the opposite could be true, in which case the opportunities are just as good but that then requires MS to not pull CoD from Playstation.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
I don't think there is a better way of using the money they have. Microsoft has traditionally had a high P/E ratio, and multiples have come down significantly from last year (around 40). So would be buying at a discount for a big tech growth company.
Microsoft is learning the wrong lesson, that you can simply compete by buying out the industry rather than doing anything novel yourself by growing the industry organically. And usually buying out major industry partners just makes their output worse over time and it's not a good deal compared to leaving the companies separate.
They had two bad quarters where Q2 and Q3 2021 where the margins went down 25-29% range and it's has largely recovered, still a bit down from normal, but nothing too worrying. I do think ABK growth is going to be decreasing in comparison to previous years.
Re: COD, i really don't expect them to pull it from PS. I still think they don't want to get anyone else the space to fill in with their own GAAS. Obviously Sony/others may still grow and take that marketshare anyways but there is no point in giving it away.
PaintTinJr
Member
Not really. The CAT being pedantic about the legislation will be the reason why the CMA do have an air of invincibility in things they block. The CAT forcing the government to keep the laws and remit of the CMA formally defined in law avoids a scenario of the CAT making a ruling that sets precedence that might later negatively impact the CMA's ability to regulate. If this was the US I suspect the problem is that with legalised lobbying it would be impossible to get the law changed - as easily as the UK - and such a decision would be a loophole by which a big business - Apple in this case - with possibly massive lobbying power could escape regulation enforcement on something that is causing a SLC in a market.While CMA indeed has some things to investigate there (I do believe that sooner or later Apple and Google will be forced to drop 30% cut), it is a blow to "CMA is invincible" believers
POKEYCLYDE
Member
No doubt ABK would have recovered past the $95/share that Microsoft is offering. But at the time ABK's share price was around $65/share.
Shareholders think about more than just ROI. They also think about lost opportunity costs. If ABK's Shareholders said no to the acquisition, who knows how long it would take for ABK's share price to surpass the $95 mark.
It's still up in the air if we are heading into a recession, but the market is down. Having cash not be tied up in ABK, and being able to invest that into something that will yield a greater return is something that Shareholders will think about.
As for Microsoft, they're spending $70B on an asset. An asset that generates billions in profit every year. Which is much preferable than leaving that cash in the bank to depreciate in value because of inflation.
You may argue that stock buy backs or dividends would be smarter/more valuable, but you have to look at Microsoft's long term goals. Microsoft wants some form of Gamepass to reach billions of people. These acquisitions are a step toward that. Stock buy backs and dividends don't propel Microsoft's gaming division forward. They want Gamepass to be as ubiquitous as Office.
Snake29
Banned
Jup, so that they can compete with.......themselves.
phil_t98
#SonyToo
well if the prospects aint so great why would Sony be so against COD going off playstation
aries_71
Junior Member
Why only those three, though?
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Microsoft is being novel by trying to create the Netflix of games. The content is just a means to an end. If they just wanted to buy up the industry they could've done that a long time ago.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
aries_71
Junior Member
True… a few weeks ago the general Gaf consensus was that the CMA was as ancient god that nobody could ever dream to defy. All our hopes were shattered. How the mighty have fallen.While CMA indeed has some things to investigate there (I do believe that sooner or later Apple and Google will be forced to drop 30% cut), it is a blow to "CMA is invincible" believers
feynoob
Banned
That is the issue with putting all your eggs in one basket.
The rest of activision is diminishing due to this focus. And since their studios are helping COD, that means less new IPs.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
As I said, the shareholders want to get paid a guaranteed amount in an uncertain environment, but looking at Activision's history, they have shown pretty robust growth in the gaming industry. Short-term thinking isn't uncommon on wallstreet, at the detriment to the long-term sustainability of the business.
I never said they weren't great now. The issue is more of the long-term prospect once Activision gets integrated into Microsoft management.
Bundling content with a sub is not a novel concept. It's well established at this point. Other companies have been doing it for ages, and in recent years Netflix, Disney, etc. have seen this model come under scrutiny because the cost of acquiring content is significant and it has proven to not be as profitable once there's significant competition.
What Microsoft is doing isn't some novel concept. It's just something they are uniquely positioned to bleed money on to try and take complete control of an emerging method of distribution. I am doubtful that this strategy will prove successful from a profitability standpoint, similar to what we are seeing now in the Streaming market for TV/Movie content and companies laying people off as a result.
Last edited:
Unknown Soldier
Member
You mean MS is going back to the 1990's playbook when all efforts to complete legitimately failed. Their backup plan is always to try and monopolize as a last resort. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. The only saving grace of this acquisition is that it doesn't guarantee the destruction of the gaming industry. MS spent big money to buy companies out in the mobile phones industry to try and compete and were driven out by Apple and Google. This is why Sony's best chance for survival is to be gobbled up by one of the tech megacaps MS competes with like Apple or Amazon. Sony is too small to survive as an independent company if MS continues to buy up the entire industry. But as a subsidiary of Apple or Amazon? They can not only survive, they can win, just as Apple and Google did in phones.
Last edited:
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
If the Activision acquisition goes through, I don't think MS has the ability to acquire anything of a similar scale due to increasing regulatory concerns. With that acquisition in place, they are essentially the largest single gaming company in the traditional console business.
Goalus
Member
I don't agree. In the current climate, a P/E ratio of 30 is not a discount. It's about the same as 40 two years ago.
With regards to "buying the industry" I don't agree either. Sony has been buying the industry for the past ten years and was pretty successful at that. For them it was quite cheap to exclude Xbox, but for MS it is much more expensive to exclude Playstation to the point of being unsustainable. So they did the math and came to the conclusion that buying the entire company makes a lot more sense.
Unknown Soldier
Member
We will see. The regulators barely made any effort to scrutinize the acquisitions of both Bethesda and Activision-Blizzard. I don't really think they would blink twice if they went after a Japanese publisher next. They could get Capcom and switch Street Fighter from being PS exclusive to Xbox exclusive.
They could also try to go big again and try to swallow EA or Take 2. I think they would find it hard to go after a European company like Ubisoft, Rockstar, or CDPR because the EU would be loathe to let yet another European company fall under American control.
If MS does try to continue acquisitions, I do think that Sony will have to push the panic button and put themselves up for sale. They won't have a choice if MS continues to buy up the industry.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Going after a Japanese publisher will be incredibly difficult by a western company. It's likely not going to happen. Shareholders won't sell out, Japanese security laws would heavily scrutinize it.
The bigger risk is someone like EA, Take 2, Ubisoft, etc. I think the former two companies are too large, but Ubisoft is a possibility, it just doesn't go anywhere near your doomsday scenario of Sony needing to press the panic button.
And yet noone else has been successful doing. Yes they are uniquely positioned because they took the time, planning, effort and money to get to this position. Let's not act like it was simple or easy. Out of the big 4 capable of pushing Cloud gaming (Apple, Google, Amazon, MS) who else is more deserving of success?
Warablo
Member
I don't think that is true, wouldn't they still be 3rd in profits in terms of publishers? No doubt with future titles they could jump up a spot or two though.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
The new nerd e-celebrity persona around her now is super cringe.
Last edited:
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Profits arent the relevant metric.
The market cap of Activision + Bethesda +Xbox Division is collectively bigger than the entirety of Sony and Nintendo
The more she was vilified by a certain segment of the gaming population only made her persona bigger.
Varteras
Gold Member
Shoot your shot, baby boy
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked