Support NeoGAF

[splattered]

It would never be enough for the SLC, if the CMA are actually doing their job right and pushing back correctly.

Cloud game providers aren't specific to nations because they have to scale at a international level, so Azure still being able to lever all of the ABK content in the rest of the world and become a defacto cloud game monopoly outside the UK would have identical harm.

It would still prevent anyone else from being able to compete on an international scale, even if they innovated, they would be drowned out by the content they could never offer on equal terms.

It has to be more than that, or the CMA should all be looking for new jobs IMO.

Maybe they were just acting tough in hopes that the FTC could pull it off so they weren't the only regulatory body full on blocking the acquisition? Maybe they received a shit ton of concern mail from potential businesses looking to invest in the UK? We will probably never know why they changed their minds. If you are hoping MS has to sell off Activision/Call of Duty to get this done i don't think that is in any universe a possibility. This whole thing has been made to be been ABOUT Call of Duty, they won't be giving it up to acquire the rest of the pie.

 

[Topher]

Accepting an invitation to negotiate is not caving. If they accept remedies that don't address their concerns, that would be caving. They have a duty to try and come to an amicable resolution, and to show willing to engage openly and honestly up until the final whistle.

I disagree my friend. CMA prohibited the acquisition. Anything less than that is caving, imo.

I'll not argue further with you, bud. We can just disagree.

 

[mayham2199]

Not only should they lose, but they should pay a price as well.

You do realize you are saying you should pay the cost right? The FTC gets it's money from tax payers.

 

[In Cold Blood]

You clearly missed the mark there bud. I'm making the point they rightly got called out for not bringing the games to, being lazy and just buying half the industry.

But don't spunk in your pants too hard.

Spunk in my pants? How old are you?
Sony got where it is today by buying studios, publishers and paying money to keep games off Xbox.
You clearly missed everything.

 

[GHG]

There is nothing to suggest the CMA caved though, and all logic suggests that once Microsoft knew the US was in the bag they asked the CMA to come back to the table to try and thrash out an agreement.

The stance from the CMA now is very different to what they were saying after the EU made their ruling.

Unless this is some elaborate form of 4D chess ultimate, they are caving.

 

[Alex Scott]

Unless (the UK)we've imported some US money wins regulation to the CMA, I can't see the divested parts of the deal being anything short of what is needed to satisfy their SLC. How they can achieve that without Microsoft divesting Activision and its entire library is a conundrum IMO. Unless Microsoft's idea of small investment is different to the regular meaning of the word small.

MS can share some revenue with these small cloud companies. IDK if that makes sense or not, but it could be a possible remedy.

 

[In Cold Blood]

You do realize you are saying you should pay the cost right? The FTC gets it's money from tax payers.

I'm not a US citizen, so it's not costing me a cent.
If the government fucks up and costs a corporation, or a person Money in a frivolous court case then they have to pay the price. Yes, the tax payers pay the bill, and if they don't like it they can vote that same government out at the next election.

 

[Chiggs]

Tweet from FTC Public Affairs Director. It ain't over yet boys.

I think it's over. And the percentage I will give the certainty of it being over is 80%.

FTC would face tough appeal of Microsoft-Activision order, experts say

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission would face hurdles in any appeal of a court's order on Tuesday that said Microsoft could move forward with its $69 billion acquisition of "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard , legal experts who specialize in competition law said.

www.reuters.com

 

[Varteras]

Considering the average age of posters here I think we are all too old for that.

Well maybe not Varteras . Mr Ohio needs to be thrown a spare bone from time to time.

I'll take all the bones I can get.

 

[GHG]

I think it's over. And the percentage I will give the certainty of it being over is 80%.

FTC would face tough appeal of Microsoft-Activision order, experts say

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission would face hurdles in any appeal of a court's order on Tuesday that said Microsoft could move forward with its $69 billion acquisition of "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard , legal experts who specialize in competition law said.

www.reuters.com

Based on the current stock movement and options market it's about 87% at the moment. Well that's what wall street are saying with their actions anyway.

 

[Not_A-Cop_Maybe]

Did she really say that?

Yup.

becuase the FTC lawyer kept saying something along the lines of "sony users would miss out things like exclusive skins..etc" - im paraphrasing of course, but the line about not protecting sony was spot on.

Also, thrilled to reply to Gaf Royalty.
Long time lurker but always enjoy your posts

 

[PaintTinJr]

Maybe they were just acting tough in hopes that the FTC could pull it off so they weren't the only regulatory body full on blocking the acquisition? Maybe they received a shit ton of concern mail from potential businesses looking to invest in the UK? We will probably never know why they changed their minds. If you are hoping MS has to sell off Activision/Call of Duty to get this done i don't think that is in any universe a possibility. This whole thing has been made to be been ABOUT Call of Duty, they won't be giving it up to acquire the rest of the pie.

Well then I might be writing a letter of complaint to the CMA in the future about them failing to do the job they are entrusted to do, if that is now off the table, which I'm still not convinced until they say that's what they've done.

If Meta are looking on, they would have every right to sue the CMA for their case and 50m loss if the CMA have rolled over for Microsoft on this one, as is being rumoured.

 

[Banjo64]

I disagree my friend. CMA prohibited the acquisition. Anything less than that is caving, imo.

I'll not argue further with you, bud. We can just disagree.

That's fine, I see your POV.

In my opinion though the role of government should not be punitive, even to corporations, and if an acceptable resolution can be reached that should be the goal even at the 11th hour.

 

[In Cold Blood]

PlayStation is being tapped to fuel their entertainment arm in general. It's why they have been so adamant about transmedia with their IP. They've said very little about TVs and phones. There isn't much to invest in or acquire there. It's clear that entertainment, mostly gaming, is their biggest growth vector. Even the head of Sony Pictures said that the real growth opportunity is in gaming. They're not planning to spin off their financial arm for shits and giggles. They already spoke about the industry consolidation and how they "won't be left behind". Such a move is to make a big investment push. Doing so leaves PlayStation as their biggest moneymaker and they really need it to grow to offset the loss of their finance revenue and profits.

You're also way too stuck on relative market value. T2 was willing to spend $12 billion to buy Zynga. Which was approaching 2/3 of T2's market value. That's still half of it today. T2 didn't even have the cash for that. They still had to borrow some cash and then pay for the other half in a stock swap. You're grossly underestimating what a company will do when it really wants something.

Merger vs Aquisition.
Two different things.

 

[C2brixx]

Tweet from FTC Public Affairs Director. It ain't over yet boys.



Here's to another 1,385 pages of silliness/

I see that he states his tweets are his own opinion. I would be shocked if the FTC decided to appeal over a Judge's interpretation of substantially lessen. Seems pretty self explanatory.

 

[adamsapple]

Did she really say that?

Yep, she said that after the lawyer made one too many mentions of how the merger will effect Sony's revenue and market share.

 

[GHG]

Banjo64 the only way this deal hits the buffers again is if the FTC file an appeal and it's successful.

So in summary.

And to be honest it has been since the day of the closing arguments in the FTC case. The FTC lawyer literally stood there and said "we lost" to the judge.

 

[Varteras]

Merger vs Aquisition.
Two different things.

They own Zynga. T2 is the parent company. It was a ton of money to fuse two companies together. You're being obtuse now.

 

[TrueGrime]

Yup.

becuase the FTC lawyer kept saying something along the lines of "sony users would miss out things like exclusive skins..etc" - im paraphrasing of course, but the line about not protecting sony was spot on.

People probably have forgotten this, but Brazil laid it out perfectly for all regulatory bodies to follow:

"Furthermore, it is important to highlight that the central objective of CADE's activities is the protection of competition as a means of promoting the well-being of Brazilian consumers, and not the defense of the particular interests of specific competitors…

 

[Not_A-Cop_Maybe]

Which was an inappropriate response to make when considering the potential violations and legal statutes the FTC is citing. I know NeoGAF won't/don't understand why that is so, but as a federal judge overseeing an antitrust case, she should.

I dont think it was. I think it was a valid point in line of the FTC's framing of their reasoning.

Several of the FTC's reasons were "but Sony this" and "Sony that". If they had replace the word sony with consumer, perhaps we wouldnt be here.

 

[NickFire]

I think it's over. And the percentage I will give the certainty of it being over is 80%.

FTC would face tough appeal of Microsoft-Activision order, experts say

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission would face hurdles in any appeal of a court's order on Tuesday that said Microsoft could move forward with its $69 billion acquisition of "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard , legal experts who specialize in competition law said.

www.reuters.com

If the judge actually used the wrong standard like some allegedly knowledgeable people claim they did in that article, then FTC would probably have a decent chance at a stay of the order dissolving the injunction pending the appeal.

For clarity - I am not saying the allegedly knowledgeable people are correct. Only that it would not be unrealistic for an appellate court to stay an order while they review everything if they believe a judge applied the wrong standard.

 

[aliadiere25]

Spunk in my pants? How old are you?
Sony got where it is today by buying studios, publishers and paying money to keep games off Xbox.
You clearly missed everything.

Sony basically bought start-up companies that weren't really established and helped companies that were struggling financially. Microsoft has been buying really big and established companies that sold millions and millions of games. The funny thing is, they will class them as Xbox Studios titles when all the hard work was done for them.

If Microsoft still can't compete after all of this, they honestly should move away from gaming and call it a day.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Where's his CMA video?

 

[Banjo64]

The stance from the CMA now is very different to what they were saying after the EU made their ruling.

Unless this is some elaborate form of 4D chess ultimate, they are caving.

The response to the EU was just that.

If Microsoft have approached the CMA with a view to proposing further remedies that do address the concerns, the CMA are duty bound to hear it (in my opinion).

The CMA were not at war with M$. The CMA wanted to do what all UK government agencies try to do, work in partnership to come to an acceptable resolution.

 

[Slicker than your average]

Spunk in my pants? How old are you?
Sony got where it is today by buying studios, publishers and paying money to keep games off Xbox.
You clearly missed everything.

You're absolutely right Sony got where they got today by paying games not to be on Xbox.. you ask me age, but you must be 10 if you believe that logic.

The guys ignores everytime Xbox did it and all those console launch exclusives from E3 lmao.

I can't seem to find a single time Sony paid 100 million dollars for a game not to release on Xbox though.. did you forget Xbox and tomb raider? Not once did sony do anything close to that.

This is why you rats can't have reasonable conversations about it, it's all scream Sony that Sony did all these evil things, when MS self screwed themselves half the time.

 

[HoofHearted]

All this happened so fast today

At this rate - I wouldn't be surprised this gets officially closed tomorrow.

 

[Topher]

Where's his CMA video?

yeah.....he pops up when he likes what he is talking about. Lost my respect in all this.

 

[GHG]

Where's his CMA video?

The same place that DarkMage619 went.

 

[DeepEnigma]

yeah.....he pops up when he likes what he is talking about. Lost my respect in all this.

Just another trying to make a name for himself and get those MS crumbs.

 

[Chiggs]

If the judge actually used the wrong standard like some allegedly knowledgeable people claim they did in that article, then FTC would probably have a decent chance at a stay of the order dissolving the injunction pending the appeal.

For clarity - I am not saying the allegedly knowledgeable people are correct. Only that it would not be unrealistic for an appellate court to stay an order while they review everything if they believe a judge applied the wrong standard.

I'm not a legal eagle but this comment from the Reuters story tells me it's probably over:

"A lot of the power of the opinion on appeal comes down to an analysis of the factual record," said antitrust scholar Daniel Crane of University of Michigan Law School.

Corley found there was no record contradicting Microsoft's vow that it would not make "Call of Duty" exclusive to the company's Xbox platform.

"The FTC may have difficulty on appeal establishing that fact - without which the case as they framed it goes away," Crane said.

There are some other comments in that story that say what you're saying...but an appeal win has to be incredibly solid, or the judge has to be completely ridiculous. Not sure I buy some of the complaints against her.

 

[HoofHearted]

Honestly have zero idea what the remedies will be

We need a new poll...

 

[GHG]

We need a new poll...

The current poll is still very much relevant.

Team "structural changes" might come through with a last minute win dependant on what is being agreed with the CMA.

 

[Banjo64]

Banjo64 the only way this deal hits the buffers again is if the FTC file an appeal and it's successful.

So in summary.

And to be honest it has been since the day of the closing arguments in the FTC case. The FTC lawyer literally stood there and said "we lost" to the judge.

We'll know by the original deadline.

I still won't bet either way, because I don't know how serious Microsoft is in terms of offering acceptable remedies.

The reaction tonight reminds me of the console SLC premature celebrations. Microsoft still have to offer the CMA something that they've been unwilling to do so far (up until the final week).

 

[PaintTinJr]

We need a new poll...

Can everyone that said it would be structural remedies get a winners lolly now - that a divestment offer was confirmed, even if the acceptance wasn't confirmed ?

 

[Ogbert]

The response to the EU was just that.

If Microsoft have approached the CMA with a view to proposing further remedies that do address the concerns, the CMA are duty bound to hear it (in my opinion).

The CMA were not at war with M$. The CMA wanted to do what all UK government agencies try to do, work in partnership to come to an acceptable resolution.

The CMA wasn't actually under any obligation to consider further remedies. They had made their decision and it was down to CAT to consider if they had arrived at the position in a legally sound manner.

So something has gone on.

The conspiracy theories will be that money has changed hands, or a Tory has done something, but it might be as simple as the CMA looking at the grounds of MS' appeal and deciding that their initial judgement was onerous. Obviously they didn't have to reach out to MS, but if they felt there was a good chance that CAT might have found substance in the first ground of appeal, which was the market definition, then they might have reopened the discussions.

 

[aliadiere25]

Yep, she said that after the lawyer made one too many mentions of how the merger will effect Sony's revenue and market share.

But doesn't that harm consumers by taking those titles away (that have always been multiplatform) and making them Xbox exclusive?

 

[Varteras]

The CMA were not at war with M$. The CMA wanted to do what all UK government agencies try to do, work in partnership to come to an acceptable resolution.

This is where I get a good laugh. Any implications that the CMA was "being a dick" to Microsoft. They are a highly professional and respected body. This wasn't a competition. They were fighting Microsoft about as much as someone who uses the toilet to take a shit instead of drinking out of it to be different. They were doing their job and coming to what they felt was the best, most accurate conclusion.

 

[adamsapple]

But doesn't that harm consumers by taking those titles away (that have always been multiplatform) and making them Xbox exclusive?

The whole argument was about them (Xbox) not making those games exclusive after the acquisition though .

 

[Not_A-Cop_Maybe]

People probably have forgotten this, but Brazil laid it out perfectly for all regulatory bodies to follow:

a lot of people here are complaining about how this is bad for Sony.

That's the exact mentality and argument case that got the FTC's case thrown out.
I'm no lawyer by any means, but i would have loved to read the paperwork analysis that the FTC had, because their oral statments in the closing were just "sony players this" and "unfair to competition because it'll go on gamepass on day 1, and thats one less PS user" meant nothing other than, the current market leader may be affected by this, while giving MORE consumers a chance to play Call of Duty.

There are a lot of points that are valid and to be concerned about over the consolidation of the Video Game market.
Saying "its bad for Sony" is not one of them. Thats the whole premise of competition and innovation.

 

[GHG]

We'll know by the original deadline.

I still won't bet either way, because I don't know how serious Microsoft is in terms of offering acceptable remedies.

The reaction tonight reminds me of the console SLC premature celebrations. Microsoft still have to offer the CMA something that they've been unwilling to do so far (up until the final week).

Personally I put more stock in what picture the markets are painting and that has always underpinned my stance at various stages throughout this process. Hence when everyone was saying this deal wouldn't have any issues from a regulatory standpoint I felt like one of the few people on here who was saying otherwise, and again after the CMA announced they were no longer looking at the console market the data told me things were far from over.

Looking at the data now, it looks done. It would be one of the all time shocks if it didn't go through at this point. And considering the amount of money that's now on the line, I don't think it will be allowed to not go through.

 

[In Cold Blood]

They own Zynga. T2 is the parent company. It was a ton of money to fuse two companies together. You're being obtuse now.

Don't believe me, read it from Take Two themselves.
"NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 23, 2022-- Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. (NASDAQ: TTWO) ("Take-Two" or the "Company") announced today the completion of its combination with Zynga Inc. ("Zynga"). Under the terms of the merger agreement, Zynga stockholders received $3.50 in cash and 0.0406 shares of Take-Two common stock per share of Zynga common stock."

Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. Completes Combination with Zynga Inc. | Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.

The Investor Relations website contains information about Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.'s business for stockholders, potential investors, and financial analysts.

www.take2games.com

Learn what the difference is between a merger and an aquisition.

 

[HoofHearted]

The current poll is still very much relevant.

Team "structural changes" might come through with a last minute win dependant on what is being agreed with the CMA.

Agreed - I meant a new poll on what the potential agreement will be (assuming there will be one..)...

I'm still waiting for someone to update the poll on this thread to include "I don't care - I'm here for the popcorn and bourbon..." though so I can cast my official vote ..

 

[Astray]

The tweeter is not wrong in his point but like a said before the check cleared which makes it easier to looked past such emails.

There are issues with the FTC's arguing of their case, but I don't think their chance would be absolute zero if they try and appeal.

They actually might have to appeal because the precedent here can make their future cases extremely painful, especially when it comes to Corley's interpretation of the Clayton act and how she basically told them they needed to factor in the deals in their case logic.

 

[RoadHazard]

At this rate - I wouldn't be surprised this gets officially closed tomorrow.

Are they gonna leave the UK market then? CMA still hasn't approved right?

 

[Timberwolf25]

Regarding the poll, it would seem to be approved without changes in all regions except EU/UK? Assuming it gets completed.

 

[Banjo64]

The CMA wasn't actually under any obligation to consider further remedies. They had made their decision and it was down to CAT to consider if they had arrived at the position in a legally sound manner.

But they don't engage in dialogue based on obligation. They engage in dialogue based on good faith. Engaging in months long litigation at the expense of the tax payer is not a good strategy when an agreement can be amicably reached.

So something has gone on.

The conspiracy theories will be that money has changed hands, or a Tory has done something, but it might be as simple as the CMA looking at the grounds of MS' appeal and deciding that their initial judgement was onerous. Obviously they didn't have to reach out to MS, but if they felt there was a good chance that CAT might have found substance in the first ground of appeal, which was the market definition, then they might have reopened the discussions.

The only thing the CMA have said is that they are open to hearing new remedies that address the concerns laid out in their final report.

That is quite a strong, direct statement, similar to when they dropped the console SLC but said 'this has no bearing on our cloud concerns'. If the CMA realised they had made an erroneous judgement they would announce the fact and allow Microsoft to close the transaction.

 

[Vognerful]

The current poll is still very much relevant.

Team "structural changes" might come through with a last minute win dependant on what is being agreed with the CMA.

Can someone help me understand the difference between structural and behavioral? maybe some examples

I voted behavioral by the way.

 

[HoofHearted]

Are they gonna leave the UK market then? CMA still hasn't approved right?

No clue - That's the $3 billion question...

 

[TrueGrime]

a lot of people here are complaining about how this is bad for Sony.

That's the exact mentality that got the FTC's case thrown out.

There are a lot of points that are valid and to be concerned about over the consolidation of the Video Game market.
Saying "its bad for Sony" is not one of them.

Right. Even the CMA dropped that weak shit and just focused on the cloud (which I thought was weak shit too, but that's just my opinion). For the FTC to continue the argument that the merger would hurt Sony's bottom line and not argue for consumers (All consumers, not just gamers that just own a Playstation) was probably one of the dumbest things the FTC could've done. If they would've joined with the CMA and focused more on cloud gaming, MAYBE a unified front had a chance.

 

[adamsapple]

Can someone help me understand the difference between structural and behavioral? maybe some examples

I voted behavioral by the way.

behavioral = we promise to abide
structural = we are literally selling a part of the division off to appease


to my understanding.