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.
FTC officially appeals. Circus continues.

0% chance the FTC gets an emergency stay. Too little time left and balance of equities is heavily against them, not to mention no evidence of imminent irreparable harm (COD is guaranteed to be on PS till end of 2024, consumers aren't losing access to COD in MGS and Cloud, no company has stepped forth under testimony to say that they'll enter the markets if it were not for the merger).
0% chance the FTC gets the PI overturned. The appellate court will have to go against its own past interpretation to change decades of precedents and case law. It might happen one day, but they're not going to do it in this particular case (too much risk the current Supreme Court will rule against merger arbitrage in its entirety if MS appeals the PI).

Edit: actually now that I think about it it's probably non-zero chance that the appellate judges extend the RTO to Sunday or Monday morning while they work the weekend on deciding the appeal.
 
Last edited:
Didn't the CMA literally just come out (like a few hours ago) and say they are still opposing the deal?
Yeah. But this listing news is still a heck of a coincidence for those of us who wondered if a handshake deal was already made. Wouldn't mean FTC couldn't still appeal and who knows what happens on a stay. Can't profess to believe an appeal stay is a sure thing though. Would actually lean the other way. Don't have much confidence the people who lost will win their last ditch effort.
 
Yeah. But this listing news is still a heck of a coincidence for those of us who wondered if a handshake deal was already made. Wouldn't mean FTC couldn't still appeal and who knows what happens on a stay. Can't profess to believe an appeal stay is a sure thing though. Would actually lean the other way. Don't have much confidence the people who lost will win their last ditch effort.
the appeal has a 5-10 percent chance of working. AND they have to race against time because Monday is likely when the deal will close. The PI had a higher shot and they got cooked. FTC is no longer a worry to me. Their dead. Their cooked.
 
This is nuts. This delisting news has Incredible timing for a coincidence. I have no idea what any of it really means. Sounds like something big happening If the sources are legit. But if you're saying stop Im wondering if you have insight I don't on whether it is coincidence?

Honest with you, I don't know what it fully means but Sanepar Sanepar is going nuts about it like it means the deal is closed, we still have the FTC appeal result, CMA etc to go through before that happens.
 
Honest with you, I don't know what it fully means but Sanepar Sanepar is going nuts about it like it means the deal is closed, we still have the FTC appeal result, CMA etc to go through before that happens.
Various people have been saying "the deal is done, pack it up guys" for literally months.

I'm personally going to wait for the fat lady to sing (or Sarah Bond, at least she's attractive)
 
Honest with you, I don't know what it fully means but Sanepar Sanepar is going nuts about it like it means the deal is closed, we still have the FTC appeal result, CMA etc to go through before that happens.
Can they be put back on the S&P if the deal remains blocked?

Why would they announce this unless they were planning on getting bought?

Does this mean the CMA has accepted the changes?

I dunno what to think anymore.
 
the appeal has a 5-10 percent chance of working.

There is maybe about 1% chance that a single judge on the panel would vote to overturn the PI. 1% is rounding up to the nearest percent. It takes two of three judges to vote to overturn.

Those odds are effectively zero because they're lower than MS deciding that Activision is worth shit now and it makes more sense to lose 3 billion than take them on.
 
Last edited:
Someone explain Trade Desk news like I'm a 5yo.

Nasdaq-100 is a set of 100 companies that form a composite index.

This news is saying they're removing ATVI from that index and replacing it with another stock.

They're probably doing that in expectation ATVI will be acquired but that's not the only reason they may do this.

Anyway it's not that ATVI stock is being delisted from the exchange, just removed from an index because the index managers don't feel ATVI meets the criteria for the index anymore.
 
Last edited:
Nasdaq-100 is a set of 100 companies that form a composite index.

This news is saying they're removing ATVI from that index and replacing it with another stock.

They're probably doing that in expectation ATVI will be acquired but that's not the only reason they may do this.

Anyway it's not that ATVI stock is being delisted from the exchange, just removed from an index because the index managers don't feel ATVI meets the criteria for the index anymore.
just more evidence its closing monday. All the signs point to this.
 
big cat GIF by BBC Earth
 
Nasdaq-100 is a set of 100 companies that form a composite index.

This news is saying they're removing ATVI from that index and replacing it with another stock.

They're probably doing that in expectation ATVI will be acquired but that's not the only reason they may do this.

Anyway it's not that ATVI stock is being delisted from the exchange, just removed from an index because the index managers don't feel ATVI meets the criteria for the index anymore.
What criteria?
 
Your argument ends there...
Not at all, that's why you had to cut out most of my post. I won't engage you further since you're clearly not interested in my actual arguments.
What is twitter fantasy is assuming that companies don't break promises they made during court hearings regarding antitrust suits ALL. THE. TIME.

And nothing happens. A slap on the wrist at most. That's the whole point of this charade, do whatever it takes, say whatever it takes, sign whatever it takes so that Microsoft can buy Activision. Once the genie is out of the bottle and the company has been acquired/integrated, you can't put it back in. Regulators are notoriously WEAK when it comes to enforcing statements/promises made YEARS AGO.

10 years from now, when Microsoft forecloses on CoD, they will simply say "we wanted to put it on Playstation but couldn't come to an agreement". Microsoft can shift the blame on Sony for wanting to maintain certain terms when Microsoft tries to strong arm them into something more aggresive.

And NOTHING will come of it when they do. That's why it's important to block acquisitions like this before they ever are consummated.
You're all over the page here. You're claiming Microsoft is a liar... for honouring its 10-year contracts and under-oath statements? What? Reading your post, it's pretty clear what you want: an indefinite agreement for PlayStation. You didn't list Nintendo, Steam, GeForce Now - any of the other parties who were offered 10-year deals and who took them (sans Steam, who said it didn't even need a contract). You should take a step back and actually understand what you're saying. In reality, when the 10-year deals expire, Microsoft can make Call of Duty exclusive to Xbox and not only is it legal, but I'd also argue it's actually pretty fair at that point. If the only party you clearly care about - PlayStation - is still irrecoverably damaged by one game going exclusive in 2033, its leadership should be fired with prejudice and PlayStation's customers and shareholders should be happy to see them go. They've had 10 years to prepare - 10 years you've already admitted you believe they'll get. After an entire decade of foreknowledge, that's on them.
just more evidence its closing monday. All the signs point to this.
A lot of the market runs on speculation. I wouldn't consider this move evidence - it's just speculators believing something is likely. They all thought the CMA would green light it, and they were blindsided by the CMA's block. It's not done until it's done.
 
Last edited:
The timing of this is no coincidence lol
Of course it isn't. They've been on the index for 18 years after all. It's likely anticipation of the merger closing and or volatility of the stock due to all this crap. Again, it's removal from an index, they aren't getting delisted as a tradable stock so I don't think it's 100% the sign of all signs. There really is no need to leap to this stuff, it's not going to be hidden when the merger closes.
 
That's why it's important to block acquisitions like this before they ever are consummated.

There's a very good chance the whole thing goes off the track, like AT&T and Time Warner.

I mean, MS killed Halo...that's like fucking up a pepperoni pizza.

And now, one of the best movie scenes of the past 20 years.

 
Of course it isn't. They've been on the index for 18 years after all. It's likely anticipation of the merger closing and or volatility of the stock due to all this crap. Again, it's removal from an index, they aren't getting delisted as a tradable stock so I don't think it's 100% the sign of all signs. There really is no need to leap to this stuff, it's not going to be hidden when the merger closes.
still evidence 😏
 
Their statement under oath never said ten years
The statement was to affirm that they'll continue to provide Call of Duty on PlayStation. Spencer made reference to the deals they've offered. Attempting to twist Nadella's temporally vague confirmation to the Judge's direct question into an outright promise of indefinite availability just reinforces my comment:
... it's pretty clear what you want: an indefinite agreement for PlayStation...
Sony doesn't have a right to Call of Duty. Microsoft has given them a decade, and the relevant regulatory bodies have all agreed that's enough time to satisfy that concern.
 
I can't imagine a reason for it to exit the nasdaq right on the day that a deal is expected to close.
than the closing of the deal itself
the question is how she would have done it with the cma still blocking. Did opt for the nuclear exit and leave the UK?
 
The statement was to affirm that they'll continue to provide Call of Duty on PlayStation.

Cool, so they can release 1 year of CoD and then foreclose because a timeframe wasn't stated?

No, the question made it appear that they *NEVER* have any intent to *EVER* pull CoD from playstation

But just wait and see. They'll do it. Consoles will be gone and they'll all be on the Cloud, and then they can say "well, the situation changed....there's no longer a physical playstation anymore"
 
Last edited:
Cool, so they can release 1 year of CoD and then foreclose because a timeframe wasn't stated?

No, the question made it appear that they *NEVER* have any intent to *EVER* pull CoD from playstation

But just wait and see. They'll do it. Consoles will be gone and they'll all be on the Cloud, and then they can say "well, the situation changed....there's no longer a physical playstation anymore"
No - Microsoft will honour the 10-year deal with PlayStation if PlayStation signs it. This includes version and content parity, and it even includes PS+ if they want it. Haven't you been following this matter? And if you think local compute is dead this decade, you're not following the development of streaming technology much at all. xCloud lags behind GeForce Now, which is apparently good - but I wouldn't know, because I live in Australia, where none of the cloud platforms actually function. Heck, the best PlayStation's engineers - and they have some impressive engineers - have come up with is just PS4 remote play, now via a dedicate device that streams from the PlayStation 5 you already own in your home. The idea that, on Tuesday, Microsoft springs a "cloud only" future on the world out of nowhere, kills all of its hardware offerings, pulls CoD from everywhere except xCloud, and cackles maniacally as we're all forced to don green jumpsuits with our Gamer Tags printed on the back is... not based in reality.
 
I still think the CMA and Microsoft already had an agreement in place. It is why the FTC filed for the injunction. When the FTC lost, the CMA responded right away they were willing to negotiate, and they immediately all agreed to stop the CAT Tribunal.

That is the only way I think the 18th closing could still happen. CMA agreed to allow them to close everywhere but in the UK with an agreement to close with Microsoft following a reworking in the UK.

Idk though. It's interesting to say the least.

Otherwise, the FTC filing the injunction doesn't really make sense because the CMA already had it blocked for the time being.
 
Just pure speculation (I said I would stop).

It's possible that the small divestiture was agreed upon and that's why it was reported by CNBC. However, the story was leaked early and now they have to pretend like they're still negotiating.

I know people are going to disagree and say "not possible" but I'm only speculating and it's my prediction.
 
That is the only way I think the 18th closing could still happen. CMA agreed to allow them to close everywhere but in the UK with an agreement to close with Microsoft following a reworking in the UK.

How?

The CMA requires a new evaluation of the divestment. That's not going to happen that quickly
 
I still think the CMA and Microsoft already had an agreement in place. It is why the FTC filed for the injunction. When the FTC lost, the CMA responded right away they were willing to negotiate, and they immediately all agreed to stop the CAT Tribunal.

That is the only way I think the 18th closing could still happen. CMA agreed to allow them to close everywhere but in the UK with an agreement to close with Microsoft following a reworking in the UK.

Idk though. It's interesting to say the least.

Otherwise, the FTC filing the injunction doesn't really make sense because the CMA already had it blocked for the time being.
It's since been discovered that it was MS who reached out to CMA, not the other way around.
 
Ignore him. He'll figure out the difference between a stock index and a stock exchange eventually.
I joined the thread late today and I'm so surprised that people are confusing between a stock index and a stock exchange.
  • ABK will be removed from the -100 index because it doesn't meet the criteria anymore (it's not as attractive to be in the top -100 index fund)
  • ABK is not being removed from the stock exchange (at least not yet) because nothing is official. They aren't gonna remove an entire public company from the stock exchange based on mere rumors lol. Imagine they removed it and the acquisition never closed. OMG! That'd be incredibly chaotic lol.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom