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.
Banjo64 said:
Just clicked Brad's Twitter and the header is 'Tools and Weapons'. Both are slang terms for penis in the UK. Which funnily enough, Brad is.
Click to expand...

Animated GIF
 

For anyone that didn't get to watch the recent CAT CMC from the other day, or is foggy on decision, this is well worth a read.

My favourite part is this from page 12 regarding Sony, and his judgement without a statement.

16. I consider that the CMA would be assisted if there could be a form of backward looking statement from Microsoft, explaining the significance of the Sony transaction that has been reported in the press over the last weekend. I want to stress that I do not want this statement to trespass into any confidential, still less any privileged, materials. But it does seem to me that if one can articulate what has caused the position to change in relation to this deal since the Final Report, that will make Mr Prevett's job of identifying a material change of circumstance or a special reason under section 41(3) that much easier. This is not a precondition of my granting the order adjourning, but it is something which I consider the parties should, since they want an adjournment, consider quite carefully because in my judgment, it will make the decision that I am going to make that much more robust.
Click to expand...
 
This piece from page 11 also seems quite important.
Secondly, there is an important need for a clear statement of the consultation process that the CMA is going to embark upon from here on in. I say this not because I question that the CMA will not embark upon a proper consultation process, I am sure that it will, but I have well in mind that this is a process that is principally involving Microsoft and the CMA. Activision clearly are involved, but there are or may be third parties who need to be heard. One of the fragilities of the section 41(3) process is that there is only a form of mandatory consultation once a final order in draft has been approved by the CMA. There is therefore going to be a gap between the point of consultation in relation to the final order and the discussions between the CMA and Microsoft which will ante-date this. This process will need very careful handling in terms of how third parties are to be engaged with. It seems to me important that that is a matter that is dealt with in Mr Prevett's statement, so that any third party will know, if they come to seek to challenge a final order in draft, precisely what has been going on. This evidence is relevant to Stage 4.
Click to expand...
 
It occurs to me reading parts of the decision, having watched it, that because of the pink elephant in the room of 30-40 barristers all in agreement and no argument to be had in tribunal hearing, the judge did the most rational thing and became the devils advocate for those without representation in the room, fearing that if justice was being subverted it was his responsibility to hold everyone to account, and ironically, going into the next decision, the judge will once again be the representation for the masses in the world against this merger, even if he won't be examining more than an outline argument for flaws.
 
FoxMcChief said:
I think my biggest complaint about this acquisition is that it's slowing down further acquisitions.
Click to expand...
I agreed. MS already has both companies I enjoy games the most Bethesda and Activision. EA would next for me. Maybe MS could inject some money into NHL so we arent playing the same game since NHL 12, where the biggest difference is HUT cards and new play by play commentators every once in a while.
 
StreetsofBeige said:
I agreed. MS already has both companies I enjoy games the most Bethesda and Activision. EA would next for me. Maybe MS could inject some money into NHL so we arent playing the same game since NHL 12, where the biggest difference is HUT cards and new play by play commentators every once in a while.
Click to expand...
I want NHL Hitz back
 
adamsapple said:
I shared a Florian Miller tweet which is why I deleted it since i knew it was a banned source.
Click to expand...

No because he's banned.

"After some deliberations with the mod team/admins, we will remove continued posts of Florian in this thread. Please find and utilize other sources of information.

Thank You."
 
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige said:
So what's this FTC PDF file all about? What's the recap in layman's terms legal eagles?!?!
Click to expand...

They (FTC) have just published the official notice from Microsoft and Activision to put their (FTC's) upcoming case on hold. They are required to by law since it was a formal request from MS/Activision.



MasterCornholio said:
Ask Faust Faust about that.
Click to expand...

The tweet is removed, you can remove it from your quoted post as well.
 
StreetsofBeige said:
So what's this FTC PDF file all about? What's the recap in layman's terms legal eagles?!?!
Click to expand...

It's Microsoft notifying the FTC that they are withdrawing from the case, nothing more than a formality in principle due to the fact that the PI has been concluded in their favour, although it might offer up some further details that we are not yet aware of.

Basically they are shutting the door in the FTC's face and seeing how they respond.
 
Last edited:
GHG said:
It's Microsoft notifying the FTC that they are withdrawing from the case, nothing more than a formality in principle due to the fact that the PI has been concluded in their favour, although it might offer up some further details that we are not yet aware of.
Click to expand...
MS is teabagging them now
 
adamsapple said:
They (FTC) have just published the official notice from Microsoft and Activision to put their (FTC's) upcoming case on hold. They are required to by law since it was a formal request from MS/Activision.





The tweet is removed, you can remove it from your quoted post as well.
Click to expand...

Well that's your responsibility not mine.
 
havoc00 said:
MS is teabagging them now
Click to expand...

Yeh I'm interested to see how the FTC respond to this, if at all. But Microsoft are now really pushing for them to not go ahead with the administrative case. They are in a position of strength so can't let it go to waste.
 
MasterCornholio said:
Well that's your responsibility not mine.
Click to expand...


what ? I can't edit your posts for you. I'm saying I have removed the tweet from my post, feel free to remove it from the quote you made, I can't edit it from your post.

GHG said:
It's Microsoft notifying the FTC that they are withdrawing from the case, nothing more than a formality in principle due to the fact that the PI has been concluded in their favour, although it might offer up some further details that we are not yet aware of.

Basically they are shutting the door in the FTC's face and seeing how they respond.
Click to expand...

I thought it means they are formally requesting the FTC to hold their case ? that's what the conclusion reads like to me at least.


CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, Respondents respectfully request that the Commission grant
their motion for withdrawal of this matter from adjudication in order to consider whether the
public interest warrants further litigation.
 
adamsapple said:
I thought it means they are formally requesting the FTC to hold their case ? that's what the conclusion reads like to me at least.


CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, Respondents respectfully request that the Commission grant
their motion for withdrawal of this matter from adjudication in order to consider whether the
public interest warrants further litigation.
Click to expand...

The way I read it, they are requesting to withdraw from the case on the basis that the FTC don't have a case to move forward with:

"Withdrawal would advance the public interest and the core purpose of Rule 3.26(c). After a five-day evidentiary hearing, the district court found that the FTC is unlikely to succeed on any of the theories of competitive harm advanced in its Complaint for multiple, independently sufficient reasons. In addition, in the wake of the district court's findings and the court of appeals' denial of injunctive relief pending appeal, Microsoft signed a 10-year, binding agreement with Sony, the principal complainant against the transaction, to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation following the acquisition of Activision Blizzard. Under these circumstances, withdrawal from adjudication is not only mandated by regulation, but would enable the Commission to make a reasoned determination whether to proceed without the ordinary adjudicative constraints of Part 3, including the ban on ex parte communications between the Commission and Complaint or Respondents' Counsel."

And I told you all Jimbo should never have signed that deal.
 
Last edited:
GHG said:
The way I read it, they are requesting to withdraw from the case on the basis that the FTC don't have a case to move forward with:

"Withdrawal would advance the public interest and the core purpose of Rule 3.26(c). After a five-day evidentiary hearing, the district court found that the FTC is unlikely to succeed on any of the theories of competitive harm advanced in its Complaint for multiple, independently sufficient reasons. In addition, in the wake of the district court's findings and the court of appeals' denial of injunctive relief pending appeal, Microsoft signed a 10-year, binding agreement with Sony, the principal complainant against the transaction, to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation following the acquisition of Activision Blizzard. Under these circumstances, withdrawal from adjudication is not only mandated by regulation, but would enable the Commission to make a reasoned determination whether to proceed without the ordinary adjudicative constraints of Part 3, including the ban on ex parte communications between the Commission and Complaint or Respondents' Counsel."

And I told you all Jimbo should never have signed that deal.
Click to expand...

FTC should have went with the cloud argument. Seems like there was more there than the console one.
 
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
Sanepar replied
Top Bottom