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.
Edmund said:
Lol John is trying to play pretend now huh.

Click to expand...

he got called out


IFireflyl said:
Xbox after this acquisition is approved:

F1v2FWyWAAApKLB
Click to expand...
that's legitimately insane, they can't even manage the ones they have now…
 
Last edited:
Topher said:
We were making fun of the "shit post". You talking about folks believing that nonsense on twitter or something?
Click to expand...
Yes, people in general not necessarily here. I mean, some probably do live or die by these "experts" leaking things that clearly anyone but lawyers and top executives would know. Those are stupid people.
 
mayham2199 said:
Yea Jim Ryan insinuated in one of his emails that it's going to be hell for MS to manage especially because he suspects most of the top talent will leave.
Click to expand...
Top talent typically gets a healthy incentive to stay as part of their retention plans. Of course, MS can't force them to stay, but it usually is in there pocketbooks interest to do so.
 
Last edited:
MarkMe2525 said:
Top talent typically gets a healthy incentive to stay as part of their retention plans. Of course, MS can't force them to stay, but it usually is in there pocketbooks interest to do so.
Click to expand...

Yes I remember Sony doing the same for Bungie and people thought they were insane for paying another billion just to keep the employees. I guess we will see what happens eventually.
 
MarkMe2525 said:
Top talent typically gets a healthy incentive to stay as part of their retention plans. Of course, MS can't force them to stay, but it usually is in there pocketbooks interest to do so.
Click to expand...

When dev cycles are 4+ years this simply does not work. Its just not economically viable to lock people in for this sort of time-scale, especially when all these newly acquired businesses absolutely will shrink as a consequence of them supporting a reduced number of SKU's.

The premiums MS is paying are for the IP and brand recognition, not for the talent anyway because there's no security in that. Even treated with the utmost consideration and top-tier compensation there will always be talent attrition because its the games industry.
 
MarkMe2525 said:
Top talent typically gets a healthy incentive to stay as part of their retention plans. Of course, MS can't force them to stay, but it usually is in there pocketbooks interest to do so.
Click to expand...
People will leave anyways. Recruiters know that the best time to try and acquire talent is when major changes are happening. It's also easier to get a much better salary and incentives when you switch jobs. People were getting 50 to 100% or more salary bumps leaving. That's hard to counter let alone offer proactively.
 
Clear said:
When dev cycles are 4+ years this simply does not work. Its just not economically viable to lock people in for this sort of time-scale, especially when all these newly acquired businesses absolutely will shrink as a consequence of them supporting a reduced number of SKU's.

The premiums MS is paying are for the IP and brand recognition, not for the talent anyway because there's no security in that. Even treated with the utmost consideration and top-tier compensation there will always be talent attrition because its the games industry.
Click to expand...
It does not work? It's established strategy when acquiring a business. To suggest that MS is going to make no effort to retain Activisions top talent just seems silly.
 
gothmog said:
People will leave anyways. Recruiters know that the best time to try and acquire talent is when major changes are happening. It's also easier to get a much better salary and incentives when you switch jobs. People were getting 50 to 100% or more salary bumps leaving. That's hard to counter let alone offer proactively.
Click to expand...
I mean, that certainly is a possibility if we are just speculating. I am just referring to a common business practice employed when a business is acquired. They trim the fat and focus attention on maintaining key positions. MS has a lot of recent experience in studio acquisitions, it isn't like they are stumbling their way through this.
 
MarkMe2525 said:
It does not work? It's established strategy when acquiring a business. To suggest that MS is going to make no effort to retain Activisions top talent just seems silly.
Click to expand...

Yep, there's no way to say how interested they'll be in retention one way or another.

Though, they have said Activision will operate independently, which implies the 'talent' will still be there per Activision's schedule.
 
graywolf323 said:
he got called out



that's legitimately insane, they can't even manage the ones they have now…
Click to expand...

Its a ticking time bomb. At this point you sell to MS if you just want a golden parachute out of the industry.
As for MS their plan is most likely just to use their huge ip library to hold platform holders hostage.
 
MarkMe2525 said:
It does not work? It's established strategy when acquiring a business. To suggest that MS is going to make no effort to retain Activisions top talent just seems silly.
Click to expand...

You might tie somebody in for a year, but you really think anyone with actual career aspirations is going to commit blindly upfront to a 5 year commitment under a new management regime?

And who defines "top talent" anyway? Its a subjective, often (office-)political designation! Phil and co don't have a magical fucking 8-ball that tells them which out of literally thousands of new employees are the ones really driving the ship forward? Stack rankings? Spare me!
 
Zok310 said:
Its a ticking time bomb. At this point you sell to MS if you just want a golden parachute out of the industry.
As for MS their plan is most likely just to use their huge ip library to hold platform holders hostage.
Click to expand...

Ah more hyperbole. Gotta love it. There are more studios, IPs, devs, artists, revenue, gamers, indies, subs, f2P, devices/platforms etc and generally releases from all genres these days than ever before in this industry.
 
Unknown Soldier said:
Too bad most developers are now making phone games, and nobody on GAF has phones
Click to expand...

Sure, if you're talking Apple or Google. It will be nice to have a major competitor shake that duopoly up. It will also be nice to see Xbox not hamstrung by Sony and pumping out direct "console games" too.

Here's a secret I installed 3 Netflix gaming > mobile games recently and actually had some fun playing them, so did my daughter. Spongebob, TMNT/shedder and Transformers; production quality is damned good. Given the quality in those titles I'll play those games on whatever platform from time to time.
 
Ozzy Onya A2Z said:
Sure, if you're talking Apple or Google. It will be nice to have a major competitor shake that duopoly up. It will also be nice to see Xbox not hamstrung by Sony and pumping out direct "console games" too.

Here's a secret I installed 3 Netflix gaming > mobile games recently and actually had some fun playing them, so did my daughter. Spongebob, TMNT/shedder and Transformers; production quality is damned good. Given the quality in those titles I'll play those games on whatever platform from time to time.
Click to expand...
If you're interested in some AAA quality mobile games, try out Genshin Impact and Honkai Star Rail
 
Bernoulli said:
and these same people are hyping that microsoft will bring back every old Activision games back like prototype ( wich i loved btw)

we saw with bethesda, they did nothing, just took games that were going to release and made them exclusive
Click to expand...
I think it is a little too early to make that call.
 
Last edited:
Clear said:
You might tie somebody in for a year, but you really think anyone with actual career aspirations is going to commit blindly upfront to a 5 year commitment under a new management regime?

And who defines "top talent" anyway? Its a subjective, often (office-)political designation! Phil and co don't have a magical fucking 8-ball that tells them which out of literally thousands of new employees are the ones really driving the ship forward? Stack rankings? Spare me!
Click to expand...
Are these real questions? First off, would you be surprised to learn that most companies have regular performance reviews? That department leaders typically have a grasp on who their strong performers are. You ask "who defines top-talent?", well they specifically track performance metrics, and get feedback from direct supervisors to take the guess work out of these questions (like every large company). Maybe in your field this isn't the norm, but in large corporations this is standard.

You may not be aware, but Activision is largely going to be ran independently. This means that people will still report to the same person in most situations. For the day to day, there is no new management regime that you are suggesting. If there are movers and shakers that leadership feels they need to keep on board, moves will be made to help facilitate that. This isn't unique, this isn't new, this is how business is done.

You also propose a false delima for employees when stated this, "you really think anyone with actual career aspirations is going to commit blindly upfront to a 5 year commitment under a new management regime?" First off, this 5 year number is just pulled from your ass. Second, can you not see that this "delima" is exactly the same for an employee looking to find a new place of work. If an employee signs a contract with another company, these exact same conditions you describe still apply (committing blindly upfront under a new management regime). In what way is going to a new company somehow less "blindly committing" or less of a "new management regime"? The suggestion is not self consistent

I don't hold a crystal ball. Maybe every decent employee forgoes any momentum or comfortableness they have established with Activision and leaves. Honestly though, I absolutely believe that your assertions are complete nonsense. I can't imagine anyone with any experience in the corporate world not understanding how a business keeps tabs on their employees, or how they identify their key players

Edit: or Phil has an 8-ball
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
‘Microsoft’ said they were streamlining 9000 people across XGS/ABK/ZM
Rumor 
19
451
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
HeisenbergFX4 replied
Top Bottom