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.
ShaiKhulud1989 said:
You can't 'win' against CMA, the best-case scenario for MS is that CMA will re-review the whole thing (and that will take months) and still comes to the same basic conclusion only from the better position.

I've skimmed through the dociment and if anything, I have an impression that the CAT is just fed up with this drama and seek to end this buzz as fast as possible.
Click to expand...

Can't blame 'em; it's quite tiring at this point but it was worth dragging out this long for the juicy MS info from the FTC trail 😁
 
Darsxx82 said:
Isn't that email referring to the Bethesda-Zenimax acquisition deal?

I understand what the FTC's strategy is, to try to show that with Activision the intentions are the same. But the judge already has Spencer and Nadella's oath that COD will continue to launch on PS5 and future PS. Not to mention that the SLC in consoles has already been denied by all regulators based on market share and financial reports.

The FTC should be focusing in this process on the cloudgamind and is only tiptoeing in that regard.



But there are already Zenimax games that have continued to come out on PS5 and surely there are more .....You can say that "case by case" was PR and a lie, but the facts are what show the reality and the upcoming releases.
Click to expand...
Some people are saying that Microsoft lied in their filing to acquire zenimax. Not sure what the lie they say it was but it could be something like "they promised not to make all games exclusive" I think?
 
Vognerful said:
Some people are saying that Microsoft lied in their filing to acquire zenimax. Not sure what the lie they say it was but it could be something like "they promised not to make all games exclusive" I think?
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, the lie was that they didn't have an incentive to make zenimax games exclusive. And yet here we are, with all new Zenimax games being exclusive.
 
So discussion on the exclusivity of Bethesda titles started in November 2020 (5 months before the acquisition even closed).

In between that period:
  • Microsoft submitted to EC that they have no financial incentive to make Zenimax games exclusive.
  • And Phil Spencer gave interviews that the Zenimax deal is not about exclusivity.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
This is a damning testimony! Very significant.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it is "damning" i think this is normal and what i expected to be the case with exclusivity... they are discussing possibilities, testing the water with different options, looking to see if exclusives of the newly acquired content makes sense in the long run etc etc
 
Vognerful said:
Some people are saying that Microsoft lied in their filing to acquire zenimax. Not sure what the lie they say it was but it could be something like "they promised not to make all games exclusive" I think?
Click to expand...
They claimed it would not make economic sense (words to that effect) to make Bethesda exclusive. They fucking did lie with this new evidence.
 
ShaiKhulud1989 said:
You can't 'win' against CMA, the best-case scenario for MS is that CMA will re-review the whole thing (and that will take months) and still comes to the same basic conclusion only from the better position.
Click to expand...

Not true, if the CAT throws it back the CMA will need a new angle and they have already thrown the console angle out.

"The Enterprise Act clearly says that the CMA must "make a new decision in accordance with the ruling of the Competition Appeal Tribunal"

That's why they are trying to stall for time and hope the deal dies on deadlines because they don't have a prayer if this gets thrown back.
 


"case by case".

apparently it is from november 2020. spencer said "case by case" in march 2021 if i remember correctly
 
Last edited:
Heisenberg007 said:
MS established a baseline model and then later altered it because they wanted to make Zenimax games exclusive.

FTC is trying to establish that they can do the same after acquiring ABK, i.e., now it has become financially profitable to make those games exclusive. 💯





Click to expand...

So why is Starfield and Redfall exclusive?
 
Vognerful said:
Some people are saying that Microsoft lied in their filing to acquire zenimax. Not sure what the lie they say it was but it could be something like "they promised not to make all games exclusive" I think?
Click to expand...
They lied that MS has no financial incentive to make Zenimax games exclusive -- until Xbox grew by X% and Game Pass grew by X%, which Microsoft said was implausible.

But they made games exclusive without Xbox hitting those growth targets. So that was a lie.

Moreover, these internal emails show that exclusivity was already planned before they submitted to EC that they have no incentives to make Zenimax games exclusive.
 
Riky said:
Not true, if the CAT throws it back the CMA will need a new angle and they have already thrown the console angle out.

"The Enterprise Act clearly says that the CMA must "make a new decision in accordance with the ruling of the Competition Appeal Tribunal"

That's why they are trying to stall for time and hope the deal dies on deadlines because they don't have a prayer if this gets thrown back.
Click to expand...

Oh Riky my misguided child
 
They are who everyone thought. I don't know that people in this thread are legitimately surprised by this.

Look--has Sony snaked around? Yeah, but to my recollection outside of Bungie, most everything has been synonymous with Sony brand before acquisition?

It's funny that I'm so much older now and I remember Xbox coming out in 2001 and thinking to myself "These guys are new, but they have the potential to just buy everyone out if they want to".

Here we are..
 
Vognerful said:
Some people are saying that Microsoft lied in their filing to acquire zenimax. Not sure what the lie they say it was but it could be something like "they promised not to make all games exclusive" I think?
Click to expand...
But we come back to the same thing. The only declaration was "case by case" and the acquisition was approved without conditions.... Relevance to Activision isn't facts, it's assumptions. Regarding Activision they already have the oath that COD (the only game that is considered can harm the competition on console) will come out on PS and even on Switch. They are spending too much time "testing" SLC on consoles when cloud gaming was their biggest asset if they wanted to win the PI
Heisenberg007 said:
This is a damning testimony! Very significant.
Click to expand...
Amy Hood's email is also significant confirming that with Activision there are no exclusivity plans and that the intention is to continue bringing the games to all platforms.... The fact that the FTC has stopped questioning Amy Hood should say it all.
 
adamsapple said:
RUMPPVw.jpg
Click to expand...
69 Metacritic. Unsubscribing. Terrible box art.
 


I'm following both, does anyone more knowledgeable know what he's talking about? it's important or a bunch of nothing?

aww
 
Last edited:
tmlDan said:



Was this already shared? cause im surprised, Canada allows monopolies or duopolies like crazy, thats why everything's expensive here
Click to expand...


News to me; I know it was...New Zealand and Australia IIRC, who voiced similar concerns recently. Haven't heard anything from Canada's regulatory body though, until this.

splattered said:
not listening to the audio, from what i'm reading it looks like internal discussions of possible directions... so dunno?
Click to expand...

Backed by emails dating back to 2019 expressing "competitive" intents, yeah.

But that's kind of the point: they're trying to show that Microsoft has a high degree of reasons to pursue full foreclosure options with ABK content, since they have considered doing exactly that with Zenimax content and have already made decisions to make various games exclusive (including some that by reasonings MS themselves provided to regulators, would have been expected to be console-multiplatform).
 
Last edited:
DrFigs said:
As far as I can tell, the lie was that they didn't have an incentive to make zenimax games exclusive. And yet here we are, with all new Zenimax games being exclusive.
Click to expand...
Heisenberg007 said:
They lied that MS has no financial incentive to make Zenimax games exclusive -- until Xbox grew by X% and Game Pass grew by X%, which Microsoft said was implausible.

But they made games exclusive without Xbox hitting those growth targets. So that was a lie.

Moreover, these internal emails show that exclusivity was already planned before they submitted to EC that they have no incentives to make Zenimax games exclusive.
Click to expand...


wait, that is not what being said here.

The model had variation on different scenarios of exclusivity. what changed that it went from exclusivity on new IPs only, to full exclusivity. Both models (the previous scenario and new scenario) had incentive go exclusive as stated in the testimony. Even the EC replied back to FTC saying that there was no commitment from Microsoft to make zenimax games multiplatform.
 
Solidus_T said:
Well, there it is
Click to expand...
Let's put aside that Phil's testimony about future plans means almost nothing for a second.

Instead, let's focus on this exchange. Cause it sounds to me like someone either lied in corporate email records, or lied under oath about Elder Scrolls plans being uncertain. Is there any reason my interpretation would be wrong?
 
I have not been able to keep up recently due to work obligations. I'm going to assume by the uptick in posting and emoji reactions by the usual Xbox fans things are going well for Xbox?
 
Vognerful said:
wait, that is not what being said here.

The model had variation on different scenarios of exclusivity. what changed that it went from exclusivity on new IPs only, to full exclusivity. Both models (the previous scenario and new scenario) had incentive go exclusive as stated in the testimony. Even the EC replied back to FTC saying that there was no commitment from Microsoft to make zenimax games multiplatform.
Click to expand...
MS did lie, it's just that they didn't have to lie as that acquisition would have been allowed. Still stupid to mislead as it weakens the word when you go for acquisitions in the future.
 
Vognerful said:
wait, that is not what being said here.

The model had variation on different scenarios of exclusivity. what changed that it went from exclusivity on new IPs only, to full exclusivity. Both models (the previous scenario and new scenario) had incentive go exclusive as stated in the testimony. Even the EC replied back to FTC saying that there was no commitment from Microsoft to make zenimax games multiplatform.
Click to expand...
1. Read my comment. I didn't say Microsoft made a commitment. I said they told EC that they have no financial incentive ... all the details are in my comment. And there is a clear lie.

2. The "new IPs only" argument has been just debunked.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
‘Microsoft’ said they were streamlining 9000 people across XGS/ABK/ZM
Rumor 
19
467
Topher replied
Microsoft wins FTC appeal challenging $69 billion Activision Blizzard deal
News Business  2 3
125
3K
Unknown? replied
MS/ABK is advertising games that don't exist for data collection
46
3K
POKEYCLYDE replied
My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games
2 3 4
156
8K
MDSLKTR replied
Battlefield 6 Beta |OT| Open Beta/Closed Weapons.
|OT|  60 61 62 63 64
3K
5K
Branded replied
Top Bottom