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.
The stock price dropped a bit when the CMA said no. Effectively ending the deal by most estimates. Then it went back up. The reason the stock price plummeted in the first place was because of the massive legal issues. When they started talking to Microsoft, they were at the tail end of a 6-month nose dive. Before the deal was announced, their stocks were going back up. But there was a lot of uncertainty. The deal announcement washed away many of the concerns that caused the price drop. Since then, the legal issues have largely faded.

ABK is also enjoying a great release with Diablo 4, which at the time the talks started was still years away. Overwatch 2 was still a year away by that point. BlizzCon is coming back this year as an in-person event for the first time since COVID hit. Dragonflight, the latest WoW expansion, was a success. It managed to win back some good faith and help slow the bleeding from the previous two expansions. Though they still have a lot of work to do.

Call of Duty is still bringing in a lot of money. Though the latest Warzone seems like it's having trouble. All in all, ABK is in a much better position now than they were a couple years ago. There is no reason to believe that their stocks, without the deal, aren't at least stable now.
I agree. it must be added that another reason why the value of activision has dropped is cod vanguard which has gone far below expectations.
today there is no possibility that activision, even with a negative outcome, falls to the values of the end of 2021. in addition to the results you mention, if it drops a bit due to the merger it would rise again in a very short time with the official announcement of the new premium cod, the new partnership with sony or microsoft or others, cod mobile, blizzcon etc.

edit: ah, I wanted to add that another reason why activision was in trouble at the end of 2021 was also due to sony and microsoft which had declared that they "wanted to rethink their relationship with activision" after the scandals...
 
Last edited:
has that happened in this thread at all? Also, how do you all figure out people are alts?

Yes.

I don't remember whereabouts but that has happened in this thread. Also, when some take it too far and get permed, they log directly into their alt account. The mods spot this, and perm the second account under "alt evasion" or something like that. Which further reveals the account switching 'Conversation with myself behaviour.'
 
Last edited:
crushed noo GIF


Ah yes, the slacktivism when it comes to separating the non-approved narrative artists have from their work. I guess he would have been better off in Pedowood.

Shocked Drag Race GIF by Robert E Blackmon

I mean, funny enough, Notch would have been largely at home here and in many gaming circles, actually. Ultimately, the things he said are a reflection of how many straight guys feel about how society has overemphasized anything that isn't them, while talking down to them at every turn. Doubly so if you're white. Shit, even asian dudes are feeling it.
 
So I haven't read much about this in a long while and I've tried to go through a bunch of posts here, but there is just so many!

What is everyone here's consensus now on this merger happening? 50% it goes through, 50% not?
Going by the poll at the top of the post, seems like most still think it wil go though in some form or another. I myself voted, 'yes with behavioural concessions'. because of the options thats the one I still feel is most likely.



in reality...I dont like to try to predict the future. But at the same time I think it should go through too. business is war, and people get serious when money is involved so the gloves are off, and they wanna spend money....so let em. I dont care for the ethics. business is business and between companies...business is war. people can cry 'consolidation is evil' all they want but sony already played a part in consolidating the music biz into three players and they do their fair share in the movie space. and there is nothing wrong with that....its what happens in big business, eventually...inevitably. And it might offend some people here, when I say this but there is nothing sacred or special about the gaming biz, machine that makes it exempt from this inevitability. Its a big business with a lot of money up for grabs and the big players will try to grab as much of that pie as they can. their are no 'sweet heart' or 'gentlemens' agreements in place between these comapanies to not take things from each other, or to get an advantage over each other in whatever way that may be. whether it be by brand power or sheer brute financial force, somebody has to be number one and that means somebody end up being number two..or third place.....



And who can really say consoles will be the main way of gaming in ten years time. the younger generations prefer tablets and phones. consoles will become as niche as graphics cards....or...... maybe By then apple vision-style headsets will be mass market and that may be the next form of the games console as we know it. tech will change and this industry will change to reflect new advances and the newer ways of consuming entertainment.


And gaming subscription services are not going anywhere. I think sooner or later it will reach a critical mass and be the norm in the way that digital download sales are right now. we are moving towards it. this is kind of how it happened in the music biz and the film biz. and can be applied to any form of media ...especially gaming, which is perhaps the best of all mediums suited to it.


Funny thing is..I subscribe to multiple companies for software plugs ins (I work in music and media, so I need them..and its cheaper than buying all the latest software mxing tools all the time) . probably to the tune of 150 bucks a month, but they pay for themselves anyway. these 10 dollar-20 dollar subs are cheap for working people and will replace the habit of spending 70 bucks a time on a one-and done AAA game. for the average joe, thats where its gonna be at. in the same way it made sense to consumers to just get a spotify account instead of buying albums, or getting a netflix account and cutting the cord for that old cable TV sub. they will dump the idea of buying games. even if there is a niche few million who still will. they will be part of a dying breed. the world is changing. consumer habits are changing. and right now we are just seeing these companies position themselves for that future.
 
I think chances of the deal going through are a bit higher than that. It is going to come down to a few individuals making some extremely key decisions, primarily the judges of the CAT. Based on what I heard from Judge Corley, I just don't see her granting the PI. The big question in my mind is what will Microsoft do if the PI is not granted. Will they actually defy the CMA's order as some have suggested? That still seems incredibly unlikely to me, but like you say we only have 12 days left.

Bumpy ride ahead

Very bumpy indeed.

shupepper.gif
 
I mean, funny enough, Notch would have been largely at home here and in many gaming circles, actually. Ultimately, the things he said are a reflection of how many straight guys feel about how society has overemphasized anything that isn't them, while talking down to them at every turn. Doubly so if you're white. Shit, even asian dudes are feeling it.
Asians are the now white people. Welcome to the culture war idiocy the overseers constantly keep us distracted with as they fleece us with sandpaper and no lube at every turn. After thousands, if not millions of years, the human psyche is still in it's juvenile infancy. Where they can manipulate so easily through immutable characteristics. They have those tribal recesses (where cognitive dissonance is a part of, ironically) psychology down to a perfected science.
 
Last edited:
Exactly what I posted. No commitment to Nintendo yet from Activision. Microsoft gave a definite yes to making COD. available for Switch.
It's likely MS was bullshitting about putting Call of Duty natively on Switch in order to get the deal passed. Activision can put COD on the new Switch.

No matter how you spin it, they're looking at the market and they don't need MS to do it.

MS didn't even consider Switch until regulators started breathing down their necks. It's all for show.
 
Last edited:
It's likely MS was bullshitting about putting Call of Duty natively on Switch in order to get the deal passed. Activision can put COD on the new Switch.

No matter how you spin it, they're looking at the market and they don't need MS to do it.

MS didn't even consider Switch until regulators started breathing down their necks. It's all for show.
Considering Microsoft did not even tell Activision, let alone consult them, about putting Call of Duty on Nintendo Switch ... yes, they were bullshiting.

Many of us said the same thing when they announced the Nintendo deal, i.e., that ABK could do this on their own. They aren't doing it, most likely, because Nintendo Switch is not powerful enough. But a Switch 2 will likely change that.

And Kottick pretty much confirmed that COD will be available on Switch 2 now.
 
Last edited:
It's likely MS was bullshitting about putting Call of Duty natively on Switch in order to get the deal passed. Activision can put COD on the new Switch.

No matter how you spin it, they're looking at the market and they don't need MS to do it.

MS didn't even consider Switch until regulators started breathing down their necks. It's all for show.
Everyone and their mother (besides intellectually dishonest brand fans) called them out about it being the fullfat native app with all the works. That shit is like 300GB+ on consoles alone.

You would have gotten the mobile version and like it.

Activision themselves will do a Switch 2 port of CoD, regardless of MS.
 
Last edited:
Everyone and their mother (besides intellectually dishonest brand fans) called them out about it being the fullfat native app with all the works. That shit is like 300GB+ on consoles alone.

You would have gotten the mobile version and like it.

Activision themselves will do a Switch 2 port of CoD, regardless of MS.
It's gonna depend on the specs of Switch 2 all day long. If they can maintain their usual cadence and turn in a decent port, yes. But those specs are still a wild card.

Just because BK said he regrets lack of switch, during a trial where the purchaser claims they would bring it to switch, does not mean they actually plan to make a significantly compromised port.
 
We went lot back n forth over his. Now i want to ask you. Honest question, what do you think will be the decision?
Approve with concessions or blocked for good? If approved then what concessions will MS will be asked to give to sony?
This case is nothing to do with Sony. Microsoft and Xbox are the main protagonists here as they decided to splurge $69billion on an acquisition. The only reason Sony is involved is because the FTC and CMA etc asked them (along with other industry peers) what they thought of the acquisition.

That's it, Microsoft have been waving around deals as a PR exercise to convince regulators to pass the deal. Or course they are trying to get Sony to sign something in the course of pushing their narrative.

Concessions asked from Microsoft will be in the context of the marketplace, not a single console manufacturer that lives in your head rent free.

We already know what the CMA asked for, divesture, that has nothing to do with Sony and is entirely a structural remedy for Microsoft.

It's like talking to a brick wall sometimes
 
So Mark Kern is getting death threats for his opinion on the MS FTC case and i saw this:



This is certainly a take, sad senjutsusage ain't here to somehow defend this

I think it's evidence that GAF made the right choice making the split permanent.

Fucking Twitter, Jesus Christ how useless are they?
 
So Mark Kern is getting death threats for his opinion on the MS FTC case and i saw this:



This is certainly a take, sad senjutsusage ain't here to somehow defend this

I mean, not condoning, but welcome to the internet.

As far as Setjutsu, it goes along with his ideology and whom he also supports outside of gaming. Seems to be a pattern with that brain wiring.
 
So Mark Kern is getting death threats for his opinion on the MS FTC case and i saw this:



This is certainly a take, sad senjutsusage ain't here to somehow defend this


At Ree they post shit written by pro slavery think tanks, and when called out on it they act like it's not a big deal and the person who got upset is overreacting and being aggressive.

Gaming has the most lunatic fanboys, and throughout this whole shit show we have seen one camp divorce itself from values or political consistency in the name of a two trillion dollar company.
 
At Ree they post shit written by pro slavery think tanks, and when called out on it they act like it's not a big deal and the person who got upset is overreacting and being aggressive.

Gaming has the most lunatic fanboys, and throughout this whole shit show we have seen one camp divorce itself from values or political consistency in the name of a two trillion dollar company.
is ree super pro acquisition or something?
 
At this point I just want this to be over. Win or Lose.

I'm exhausted, reading all this and watching all these videos and news stories. Hell and I haven't even been paying attention as long as most have.

Much more interested in playing the games coming out over the next 2-3 months. Talking about those.
 
This case is nothing to do with Sony. Microsoft and Xbox are the main protagonists here as they decided to splurge $69billion on an acquisition. The only reason Sony is involved is because the FTC and CMA etc asked them (along with other industry peers) what they thought of the acquisition.

That's it, Microsoft have been waving around deals as a PR exercise to convince regulators to pass the deal. Or course they are trying to get Sony to sign something in the course of pushing their narrative.

Concessions asked from Microsoft will be in the context of the marketplace, not a single console manufacturer that lives in your head rent free.

We already know what the CMA asked for, divesture, that has nothing to do with Sony and is entirely a structural remedy for Microsoft.

It's like talking to a brick wall sometimes
Well Sony got involved on this on their own

 
Well Sony got involved on this on their own


Nobody said Sony doesn't want this acquisition to go through. They said the acquisition isn't about Sony. What Sony does or doesn't do is irrelevant.
 
Wouldn't the stock prices plummet if the deal doesn't go through, because the assumption is the price is higher due to the acquisition getting closer and closer? I mean, that is my assumption based off the fact it was lower before the initial purchase, rose a bit after and has sat relatively at the same point for some time.

Well here's my flippant analysis - I haven't looked at ATVI's actual financials to arrive at a conclusion on where their share price would be outwith the acquisition - this is more finger in the air stuff.

With that in mind, back towards the end of 2021 before the merger was announced, ATVI was riding quite high - above $100.

But the combination of the smell around the allegations of misconduct and misogyny by ATVI staff which Bobby had failed to address, coupled with the crashing tech market, caused their share price to tank all the way into the $50 range before settling around $60 when the acquisition was announced.

Since then the price has hovered at various levels below $95. But here's the thing - ATVI is not currently a viable investment because there is no growth potential.

MS has the purchase option at $95 - as long as that option is valid the price will not exceed $95 (except potentially if people believe the deal is about to be cancelled - that could lead to the price exceeding $95). It is effectively capped no matter what ATVI does prior to the transaction concluding now.

So the question is what would happen to the ATVI stock price if that $95 cap was removed by cancelling the acquisition?

Here we'd need to look at earnings and consider any other relevant information.

For example

1) The investigation into Bobby has been settled. In legal terms at least, the misconduct and misogyny allegations are dealt with.

2) Diablo 4 just successfully launched and ATVI will presumably present strong earnings on the back of that in the next few weeks. I'd ordinarily expect a price spike as a result.

3) The stock market has turned around and is in a growth spurt again. A rising tide lifts all ships.


So given the above relevant changes the question becomes - what would ATVI's share price be today but for the acquisition? And to understand that we need to consider whether ATVI is a wise investment with growth potential.

We accept that MS bought ATVI at a low point on the stock price - personally I believe that if this acquisition is cancelled, ATVI suffers a short term sell off by those who just wanted to cash in on risk free money and panic, but swiftly swings north and heads back above $100.

In fact, if the acquisition does fall through I think I'd break my personal rule about avoiding gaming companies, and invest in some ATVI shares because I think they'll come back stronger over the next few years. I think the $95 transaction point is artificially holding ATVI shares down right now.
 
Last edited:
At Ree they post shit written by pro slavery think tanks, and when called out on it they act like it's not a big deal and the person who got upset is overreacting and being aggressive.

Gaming has the most lunatic fanboys, and throughout this whole shit show we have seen one camp divorce itself from values or political consistency in the name of a two trillion dollar company.
Steve Bannon Bingo GIF


Well Sony got involved on this on their own

He's doing his job beholden to the company and shareholders. It would be a derelict of duty otherwise, and the same thing would happen if the script were flipped with MS doing what Sony doing, only a hell of a lot more lobbying and palm greasing than they already do. As would a lot of people's criticisms and egg on their faces.

Nobody said Sony doesn't want this acquisition to go through. They said the acquisition isn't about Sony. What Sony does or doesn't do is irrelevant.
This too.
 
Last edited:
Here's another older source from same court case. 1.6- 2.3 in 2019.
Edit: I have no idea how he knows blocked out portion.


He doesn't know the blocked out portion exactly but since the numbers are listed in descending order, he is saying Microsoft's profit is somewhere between Nintendo's and Activision Blizzard's. If that's what you were not sure about anyway.
 
Last edited:
I didn't know about this. Thank you, that is exactly the information I was looking for.

So, based on precedence, it seems like there will be an appeal period in which MS will not be allowed to close the acquisition -- unless the FTC decides to walk away. But I don't see why the FTC would walk away considering the CMA situation that would also be preventing MS from closing the acquisition.

In this context, I don't see a way this acquisition could close before July 18, is it? The only light at the end of the tunnel for Microsoft would be if the ABK shareholders extend the contract's deadline and sign off on it once more.

So far, there is no evidence that there has been any renegotiation, is there?

Personally I don't believe there is any way a final judgement gets made in time for the deal to close before the 18th now.

But MS will hope for a win in this hearing and use that to try and convince Bobby to stick with it for another 6 weeks or so.

Just to talk about the Gamer's case - that is still ongoing but the Judge still hasn't heard the case yet. It's mostly been that the gamer's haven't brought enough arguments to have a case to hear.

However the last judgement from June 27 did give quite a lot of weight to the gamer's case …

1) MS tried to say private citizens couldn't bring an injunction and instead had to sue for reparations after the acquisition had closed. The Judge disagreed.

2) MS argued that while the gamers may have bought ABK titles in the past there was no guarantee they'd make similar purchases in future. However she accepted the testimony of one gamer who played ABK stuff on PS and subscribed to PS Plus who said he would have to switch platforms.

3) The judge agreed with the gamers concept of a vertical merger injury but concluded it would need to be fully heard on merits to actually judge on.

4) The judge though disagreed with the horizontal merger concept (this would be that MS is buying a competing publisher of games) because the gamers didn't adequately show how they defined the AAA gaming market in which MS and ABK operate, or where they got their percentage of ABK + MS impact on that market.

EDiT to add
5) The judge accepted the idea that while MS claimed they would not make CoD exclusive so there was no injury to the gamers, that MS had previously taken games they claimed there was no incentive to make exclusive and made them exclusive. The Judge accepted this argument as indicating potential for harm and past behavior.

So the Judge has been open to the gamer's lawsuit and continues to leave the door open for them.
 
Last edited:
has that happened in this thread at all? Also, how do you all figure out people are alts?

You can search for SoloKingRobert in this thread. That was an amusing unmasking leading to a ban.

Or just read through the ban page and look for "Alt" as the reason. There are a lot and many of them dropped in here.
 
Last edited:
Why are we talking about the profitability of the platform holders? Is there any relevance to the acquisition at hand that we need to argue if Microsoft is or is not making money from the Xbox division?

This is of paramount importance for a healthy market. You know, one in which every gamer has access and options for the kind of games they want to play.

Companies that can afford to lose money while putting their competitors out of business, are dangerous for consumers - us - in the medium to long term.

Here's an example from an unrelated market about how these tech giants will take losses to kill competition and then penalise the customers when they're the only option left.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...to-crush-a-startup-rival-with-price-cuts/amp/
 
This case is nothing to do with Sony. Microsoft and Xbox are the main protagonists here as they decided to splurge $69billion on an acquisition. The only reason Sony is involved is because the FTC and CMA etc asked them (along with other industry peers) what they thought of the acquisition.

That's it, Microsoft have been waving around deals as a PR exercise to convince regulators to pass the deal. Or course they are trying to get Sony to sign something in the course of pushing their narrative.

Concessions asked from Microsoft will be in the context of the marketplace, not a single console manufacturer that lives in your head rent free.

We already know what the CMA asked for, divesture, that has nothing to do with Sony and is entirely a structural remedy for Microsoft.

It's like talking to a brick wall sometimes
Jimbo was flying all over the world crying before he was even asked about his opinion on the deal. He went to all major regulators on his own just to block the deal and wasn't invited. Were you paying attention to any news that time?





And yes, we all know its FTC vs MS, but the trial kinda revealed how FTC was trying really hard to protect Sony. So it definitely felt like Sony vs MS. :p
FTC was clearly not trying to protect the consumers, they failed to prove theory of harm and just kept bringing harm to PS over and over again during proceedings. Few journalists even said on twitter, it felt like they were trying to sign deals or agreement on Sony's behalf Lol. I mean It got so bad that Judge herself interrupted FTC multiple times. There is a reason Judge told them directly that its about protecting consumers not Sony, you really need to stop protecting Sony, Judge said it on record. I mean FTC did such horrible job presenting their case, i will be shocked if they were granted PI. Lets see what happens. :)


One last thing ,You know its funny, almost all countries including EU approved the deal. So whole world is stupid, only Britishers and Americans smart and care about consumers lol.
 
Last edited:
One last thing ,You know its funny, almost all countries including EU approved the deal. So whole world is stupid, only Britishers and Americans smart and care about consumers lol.

Microsoft and ABK highlighted only four regulators as possibly being significant enough to block this acquisition. EU, CMA, FTC and China. 2 of those are attempting to block. Another had problems with the acquisition and required remedies. Only one expressed no concerns and approved.

Outside of those four, the rest of the world knows full well that attempting to block is just pointless so no need to even bother.
 
Last edited:
Microsoft and ABK highlighted only four regulators as possibly being significant enough to block this acquisition. EU, CMA, FTC and China. 2 of those are attempting to block. Another had problems with the acquisition and required remedies. Only one expressed no concerns and approved.

Outside of those four, the rest of the world knows full well that attempting to block is just pointless so no need to even bother.
CADE being the most important. Oh, and the countries that don't even sell Xbox products nor have plumbing in most of their homes. Those are top-tiered confirmation!
 
This is of paramount importance for a healthy market. You know, one in which every gamer has access and options for the kind of games they want to play.

Companies that can afford to lose money while putting their competitors out of business, are dangerous for consumers - us - in the medium to long term.

Here's an example from an unrelated market about how these tech giants will take losses to kill competition and then penalise the customers when they're the only option left.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...to-crush-a-startup-rival-with-price-cuts/amp/
But how sure are you that Sony isn't Amazon in this scenario?
 
Nobody said Sony doesn't want this acquisition to go through. They said the acquisition isn't about Sony. What Sony does or doesn't do is irrelevant.
That leaky cup just doesn't hold water!

Sony made it about them when they vocally stated they wanted the deal to fail. They're the market share majority and their words and actions affect others. This is very much about Sony, don't deny it!
 
Last edited:
Sony isn't slashing prices on anything though.
No, but, their attempting to be a Apple clone. Better to just have Apple buying them now and get it over with. They both have the walled in garden figured out. Apple has the phones and Music. Sony has the electronics and games. Them together would very much make Sony a Amazon competitor!
 
That leaky cup just doesn't hold water!

Sony made it about them when they vocally stated they wanted the deal to fail. They are the market share majority and their words and actions affect others. This is very much about Sony, don't deny it!
Sony has a vested interest. It's still not about them in the this process, any more than it is about any other company for or against. Regulators will take other company's feedback and information, as they've asked a myriad of them to provide, since this impacts regional and global markets. Sony, like Apple, Google, Nintendo, etc., represent consumers they provide products for.

MS would have done the same, only brand fanatic opinions would flip flop with the mental gymnastics. This is normal business and procedures in the M&A world. Especially when the 2nd richest company in the world is trying to make you smaller when you already are smaller by far as a market cap entity.

No, but, their attempting to be a Apple clone. Better to just have Apple buying them now and get it over with. They both have the walled in garden figured out. Apple has the phones and Music. Sony has the electronics and games. Them together would very much make Sony a Amazon competitor!
TIL, XBL or Nintendo doesn't exist and only Sony and Apple have walled gardens. 🙃

What an utter tripe of a mental gymnastics statement you just made.
 
That leaky cup just doesn't hold water!

Sony made it about them when they vocally stated they wanted the deal to fail. They're the market share majority and their words and actions affect others. This is very much about Sony, don't deny it!
I want the deal to fail is this aquisition about me?
 
Sony has a vested interest. It's still not about them in the this process, any more than it is about any other company for or against. Regulators will take other company's feedback and information, as they've asked a myriad of them to provide, since this impacts regional and global markets. Sony, like Apple, Google, Nintendo, etc., represent consumers they provide products for.

MS would have done the same, only brand fanatic opinions would flip flop with the mental gymnastics. This is normal business and procedures in the M&A world. Especially when the 2nd richest company in the world is trying to make you smaller when you already are smaller by far as a market cap entity.


TIL, XBL or Nintendo doesn't exist and only Sony and Apple have walled gardens. 🙃
You didn't listen to what I said. What did I say?

They both have the walled in garden figured out. Apple has the phones and Music. Sony has the electronics and games. Them together would very much make Sony a Amazon competitor!

They both have the parts to make them bigger than Amazon in all 4 of these markets. Sony wants to be a true player well, they're going to join will someone at some point. Cost of developing games isn't going down, it's going up. We all know the videogame world changes. We just lose our minds when it does and act like we didn't know it was coming. This happened in the 70's, 80, 90's and 2000's. Change will come, question is who will it be?
 
Last edited:
No, but, their attempting to be a Apple clone. Better to just have Apple buying them now and get it over with. They both have the walled in garden figured out. Apple has the phones and Music. Sony has the electronics and games. Them together would very much make Sony a Amazon competitor!

Sony is not attempting to be an Apple clone. Apple trying to buy Sony would get shot down as quick as Nvidia buying ARM.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom