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.
kadab said:
week GIF
Click to expand...
What's happening?
 
Zok310 said:
Sony signed with MS, 24 hours later the CMA is fighting for MS, seems like sony and cma got a call from the same person to play ball this week?
This is all corruption across the board.

If the judge "take their word for it" it can only mean corruption.
Click to expand...

Liam-Neeson-Taken-2.jpg
 
feynoob said:
Yup, this is confirmation of my suspecious.
Something happened behind that scene that made CMA act like this.

Man, MS president is good at his job.
Click to expand...
Well done 🤣 I said this literally right after the FTC failed. Everything pointed to a behind closed doors deal. You have to remember this is an enormous global deal that could be scuppered by a relatively small UK regulatory body. That doesn't look good for the UK as a economic hotbed, further more the reason to block is weaker than a tetley teabag.
 
supernova8 said:
This is also speculation, but it could be that Microsoft has been lobbying the UK government for almost a year (I'd expect ever since the CMA initially rejected the merger), culminating in Brad Smith meeting UK chancellor (finance minister) Jeremy Hunt.

I understand what you're saying, but to me it still doesn't make sense for the CMA to be so against the deal and then suddenly be like "oh wait no it's fine forget it". I don't see how MS only just now offered CMA something they were willing to accept.
Click to expand...

It was more meant as a point, why the CMA changing their position the day the FTC lost is, IMHO, more of a coincidence than planned. I, too, am somewhat skeptical of the CMA going so far as to even forbid MS the acquisition through any means necessary just to go "nah, nvm!" shortly before the deadline. As you said, if Microsoft played its muscles and connections to change the CMA's decision, it was a process that was ongoing the whole time, maybe even doubled down after their denial this year, and exactly that is the reason why I think them changing minds on the day the FTC lost was rather coincidence. The coincidence is only on the timing, not them being strong-armed/persuaded into accepting the proposed remedies.

But like I replied to Topher, we will never really know the full story and can only speculate.
And while I will remain skeptical, I too want to believe in the "innocent until proven guilty" paradigm as if I ever should stand in trial for whatever reason, I hope the people judging me will do the same.
 
CuNi said:
It was more meant as a point, why the CMA changing their position the day the FTC lost is, IMHO, more of a coincidence than planned. I, too, am somewhat skeptical of the CMA going so far as to even forbid MS the acquisition through any means necessary just to go "nah, nvm!" shortly before the deadline. As you said, if Microsoft played its muscles and connections to change the CMA's decision, it was a process that was ongoing the whole time, maybe even doubled down after their denial this year, and exactly that is the reason why I think them changing minds on the day the FTC lost was rather coincidence. The coincidence is only on the timing, not them being strong-armed/persuaded into accepting the proposed remedies.

But like I replied to Topher, we will never really know the full story and can only speculate.
And while I will remain skeptical, I too want to believe in the "innocent until proven guilty" paradigm as if I ever should stand in trial for whatever reason, I hope the people judging me will do the same.
Click to expand...
Gigantic corporations should be constantly demonstrating to us that they are not "guilty." They don't benefit from the assumption of innocence - the historical precedent here, especially with Microsoft.
 
CuNi said:
But like I replied to Topher, we will never really know the full story and can only speculate.
And while I will remain skeptical, I too want to believe in the "innocent until proven guilty" paradigm as if I ever should stand in trial for whatever reason, I hope the people judging me will do the same.
Click to expand...
Makes sense, so basically they could have been strong-armed but the results/fruits of said strong-arming appearing now is probably just a coincidence.

Also while I agree in innocent until proven guilty, Microsoft has a rich history of being ACAF (anti-competitive-ass-fuck) so it doesn't exactly take a leap of faith. Besides, this is by far the largest (value terms) acquisition Microsoft has ever undertaken so we can be pretty confident the company is throwing the kitchen sink at this.
 
At the end of the day, all this for COD. Let's face it, this bickering had nothing to do with wow, Diablo, king etc…. But call of duty.

There's been more public eyes on this I bet than any giant grocery stores merging or telcom companies doing the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
‘Microsoft’ said they were streamlining 9000 people across XGS/ABK/ZM
Rumor 
19
454
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
A.Romero replied
Top Bottom