Support NeoGAF

[Mr Moose]

They buckled, the CMA have never looked to renegotiate before. I believe this will be passed before the deadline or Microsoft and Activision will set a new deadline but the CMA are passing this through 100%.

No, they didn't. If the deal is renegotiated they will look at the new deal. Their final report still stands, its blocked.

 

[GHG]

 

[splattered]

You guys? One guy said that my man. There ain't no "you guys" behind that at all. lol

GHG and someone else said it, i'm sure more will drive by and suggest it as well. Two people is technically "guys" right?

 

[Negotiator101]

CMA has always been open to their divestment terms. It's how these regulators work.

Most companies don't want or like it, so they end up blocking deals or forcing divestment (Facebook/Giphy).

Yes but this renegotiation timing is almost comical in relation to the FTC losing, given both were very much in bed with each other to block the deal.

We shall see come the deadline what happens.

 

[Lasha]

Another 4 months then?

How will the CMA accept anything less than divestment when that's the only option they said a few months ago?

Divesting streaming from Xbox in the UK is more tenable than divesting COD from Activision.

 

[Varteras]

What PR? sony doesn't have PR.

 

[zedinen]

With the current market share split and knowing that the budget of COD games already in production is accounting for a multiplatform release, blocking the release of the next COD on ps5 (or whichever COD releases after the current marketing deal ends) would be extremely damaging to the franchise and make MS lose some serious money (assuming the deal goes through).
As a revenge it would be effective, but it would also do big damages to Playstation finances.

Blocking COD on PS5 would be beyond stupid.

(Nov 20 - Jun 22)
21
14

Last 12 Months
21
7


Microsoft can only be successful if Sony bleeds money.

PlayStation will never lose money again for the simple reason that Microsoft's thought experiment is a nonsensical brain fart made on the wrong assumptions. Microsoft failed to anticipate:

-PlayStation revenue and Sony equity has doubled over the last five years.

FY17

FY22

-PS5 selling 7 million in the last 12 months in America, after claiming that Xbox Series was the market leader for 3 quarters in a row


-Sony generating enough cash flow to buy mid size publishers w/o breaking a sweat

-PlayStation revenue growth in the post pandemic world (Three months ended March 31, 2023)

PlayStation $8.11 bn
Microsoft $3.60 bn
ABK $1.76 bn

Microsoft's internal targets from June 2022 imply that Xbox gaming will be the market leader and achieve over $32 billion revenues by 2030 ... PlayStation is on track to achieve $32 billion in 2023.

No one gives a shit about Microsoft antics. They are the PSG of gaming. And Spencer, a real-life Michael Scott.

 

[ChiefDada]

This gonna get interesting in the UK cuz it really looks like MS is just gonna close anyway.

Consider what the lenient EU, which folded on Microsoft/Activision, said/did today in response to another merger initiating a close without their permission.




Now imagine what the CMA would do...

 

[Vognerful]

Time to update the thread title again?

Thread title tomorrow

 

[DeepEnigma]

Yes but this renegotiation timing is almost comical in relation to the FTC losing, given both were very much in bed with each other to block the deal.

We shall see come the deadline what happens.

Not comical at all. It's strategy.

Only comical if you're emotionally invested in brands. This is how these things play out, we as gamers are just not privy nor pay attention to this in the business world. But now we do/are.

 

[Topher]

GHG and someone else said it, i'm sure more will drive by and suggest it as well. Two people is technically "guys" right?

I didn't see GHG say that. But nobody listens to Florian anyway...

 

[Heisenberg007]

I wonder how long it's gonna take

That'd be really stupid by Microsoft.

They seem to have a real chance at this point. If they close, they will shut that door down permanently. The CMA will order divestment (like they did to Meta) and no court will by sympathetic to Microsoft.

 

[DeepEnigma]

That'd be really stupid by Microsoft.

They seem to have a real chance at this point. If they close, they will shut that door down permanently. The CMA will order divestment (like they did to Meta) and no court will by sympathetic to Microsoft.

 

[damiank]

What in the actual fuck? I get a few hours of sleep and wake up to what now??

Go back to sleep

 

[GHG]

I didn't see GHG say that. But nobody listens to Florian anyway...

I said it, and I speak for everyone.

 

[Varteras]

Go back to sleep

I said it, and I speak for everyone.

 

[adamsapple]

Reminder, this is MS's response to the CMA thing yesterday:

"While we ultimately disagree with the CMA's concerns, we are considering how the transaction might be modified in order to address those concerns in a way that is acceptable to the CMA"

 

[Heisenberg007]

Divesting streaming from Xbox in the UK is more tenable than divesting COD from Activision.

Going by the responses/statements so far, it seems like this is exactly what MS must have offered to them. Or even just separating xCloud from GPU in the UK.

Now the CMA may or may not agree to it because their original decision was (1) divestment of Activision or (2) prohibition.

At this point, though, seriously, who the fuck knows!

 

[Topher]

I said it, and I speak for everyone.

splattered usage of "you guys" is approved.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Reminder, this is MS's response to the CMA thing yesterday:

 

[NickFire]

Intersting. Former head of CMA suggesting that although this gives the CMA the appearance of listening, it could actually be a tactic to delay the CAT process to be closer to the original date they wanted (which was turned down).

The possibility that the CMA only agreed to buy more time is obvious. So much so that I completely dismissed it yesterday because I just don't think MS would agree without a back channel deal already in place. As interesting as this sudden change of events is, I still can't shake the feeling there was / is already a face saving deal in place.

But maybe, just maybe, perhaps it was MS who spearheaded the CMA litigation pause because they wanted more time. And if that was the case, then shit, who the hell knows where this train finally crashes.

 

[adamsapple]

Getting ahead of posts which say things like "MS tried to fool CMA ?"

 

[Greggy]

That's an interesting one considering Playstation haven't even bothered with PR for a while now.

When was the last time Jim Ryan even spoke to the media?

He certainly speaks to the regulators and "publishers".

 

[Chukhopops]

No, they didn't. If the deal is renegotiated they will look at the new deal. Their final report still stands, its blocked.

Why would MS/ABK agree to pause litigation if all it does is delay it further? Why would that happen instantly after Corley's decision if it doesn't impact the situation of the litigation itself?

I don't see why else MS/ABK would agree to it.

Edit: Corley's decision not the FTC's

 

[Vox Machina]

Consider what the lenient EU, which folded on Microsoft/Activision, said/did today in response to another merger initiating a close without their permission.




Now imagine what the CMA would do...

If MS/ATVI merge before the 18th then Microsoft will have $3 BILLION extra dollars in the bank to pay some fines while the process continues. Easy decision if I'm them.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Getting ahead of posts which say things like "MS tried to fool CMA ?"

Who's saying that?

Are you PR™?

 

[gothmog]

Gotta love the one sided media blitz after the judge's order got released. I voted long ago this would only go through with structural changes and I still stand by that.

 

[GHG]

He certainly speaks to the regulators and "publishers".

Yeh that's called doing his job, especially when most of those discussions are private and behind closed doors.

You might want to work on your definition of PR however.

 

[Punished Miku]

Why would MS/ABK agree to pause litigation if all it does is delay it further? Why would that happen instantly after the FTC's decision if it doesn't impact the situation of the litigation itself?

I don't see why else MS/ABK would agree to it.

Pretty much. And then if that's true, the articles / leaks yesterday may have been accurate while the public statements are face saving measures until its officially announced. But this is the CMA, so literally no one can use logic to predict anything they do.

 

[Heisenberg007]

The CMA be like:

 

[DeepEnigma]

If MS/ATVI merge before the 18th then Microsoft will have $3 BILLION extra dollars in the bank to pay some fines while the process continues. Easy decision if I'm them.

Oh yeah, "very easy..."

That'd be really stupid by Microsoft.

They seem to have a real chance at this point. If they close, they will shut that door down permanently. The CMA will order divestment (like they did to Meta) and no court will by sympathetic to Microsoft.

 

[ulantan]

He certainly speaks to the regulators and "publishers".

Damn mans not even allowed to do his job now.

 

[NickFire]

Why would MS/ABK agree to pause litigation if all it does is delay it further? Why would that happen instantly after the FTC's decision if it doesn't impact the situation of the litigation itself?

I don't see why else MS/ABK would agree to it.

I wouldn't spend much time thinking about why ABK would agree. They probably have to be "team players" at all times when the contract is still in place to avoid being accused of sabotaging it (and losing termination fee rights).

MS is the wild card here.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Pretty much. And then if that's true, the articles / leaks yesterday may have been accurate while the public statements are face saving measures until its officially announced. But this is the CMA, so literally no one can use logic to predict anything they do.

I see 3 scenarios here:

1. CMA fucked up and is now saving face.
2. Microsoft/ABK and their favorite "journalists" spun yesterday's news and presented in a way that implied the CMA has backed down, perhaps in a bid to raise stock prices and cut down everyone's losses (one can never forget about the money factor)
3. Or the CMA is using this as an excuse to get the extension in appeal that the CAT denied them.

 

[Varteras]

The CMA be like:

They can and have. They've spent years on situations just to say, "eh, no".

 

[adamsapple]

Who's saying that

So MS are spreading misinformation about the CMA? Would that be correct?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Damn mans not even allowed to do his job now.

No. Roll over and take it from global mega Corp #2, peasant.

 

[XXL]

Watching this situation from the sidelines has been hilarious.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

They're literally worse than the devil

 

[DeepEnigma]

So why didn't you quote that one person's question?

Instead you run narrative PR like a pittance depends on it.

 

[Topher]

He was asking a question.

 

[ulantan]

No. Roll over and take it from global mega Corp #2, peasant.

Phil would never talk to regulators.

 

[adamsapple]

So why didn't you quote his question?

Instead you run narrative PR like a pittance depends on it.

I already quoted it on a previous page, relax lol.

Me posting MS's actual statement on the matter instead of what various websites interpreted should not warrant this kind of response.

 

[Vox Machina]

Oh yeah, "very easy..."

Yep! The CAT already seems sympathetic to MSFT. So I disagree that closing would automatically render any future decisions dispositive to MSFT. Everyone on the planet earth knows the clock MSFT/ABK are working with.

 

[Heisenberg007]

They're literally worse than the devil

 

[Varteras]

I already quoted it on a previous page, relax lol.

Me posting MS's actual statement on the matter instead of what various websites interpreted should not warrant this kind of response.

 

[GHG]

I already quoted it on a previous page, relax lol.

Me posting MS's actual statement on the matter instead of what various websites interpreted should not warrant this kind of response.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I already quoted it on a previous page, relax lol.

Me posting MS's actual statement on the matter instead of what various websites interpreted should not warrant this kind of response.

Which websites? Which are the approved™ ones?

Seems to me the CMA has a more recent statement than MS PR.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Yep! The CAT already seems sympathetic to MSFT. So I disagree that closing would automatically render any future decisions dispositive to MSFT. Everyone on the planet earth knows the clock MSFT/ABK are working with.

Is that a regulatory body's concern or responsibility if their contract is about to expire? Especially when the CMA had shared their findings and reports months ago, including the concessions they wanted?

Microsoft rejected those concessions and just ignored them at that time.

 

[Chukhopops]

I wouldn't spend much time thinking about why ABK would agree. They probably have to be "team players" at all times when the contract is still in place to avoid being accused of sabotaging it (and losing termination fee rights).

MS is the wild card here.

Point still stands: MS would only agree to pause the litigation if negotiation is more attractive to them. And we can't forget the timing of the change, an hour after the US decision.

I don't believe this is a mastermind move by the CMA to delay a deal that was already delayed by their initial decision and the appeal process. To me it's a realization that MS' appeal might succeed and they have a better chance of getting concessions in a negotiation.