Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Wait, so is he implying that the documents they submitted to the courts, under oath, do not contain "REAL PLANS"?! Lmao wtf!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
Wait, so is he implying that the documents they submitted to the courts, under oath, do not contain "REAL PLANS"?! Lmao wtf!
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Buying up the industry for your failure to compete on a level playing field (one where MS helped establish in the PS360 era) is not "healthy competition." I don't need a mask, I said what I said, clown.
Last edited:
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
The industry that's bigger than ever with more devices, resources/devs and game releases than ever? As if MS could buy the whole show. Cut the hyperbole. Hope you take the same axe to grind with Sony. Nintendo didn't resort to shit business tactics.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
I love how everything dissolves into SonyToo™ -- even if there's no evidence.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Something something "mask is slipping mate"
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Yeah, and it is OUR mask that's slipping, not the guy's who has been parroting "gaming is for everyone" and "players should play the games they want to play on the devices they choose to play them on" talk about buying Nintendo by proxies and forcing their games off of their hardware.
Last edited:
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
That's your reduction not mine. I clearly spoke of Nintendo as well, seems missing from your quip. Sony are well documented about removing deals from the market/MS.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Third-party timed exclusives =/= buying publishers or trying to buy entire console manufacturers and storefronts by proxies.
Why would you even equate the two?
drganon
Member
Is this based on something real or his usual delusional guesswork? He expected Microsoft to close by July 18th, then it became August 29th...lol.
Ginzeen
Banned
He said a close source to the CMA told him that. Also this is just a preliminary decision not the final one.
FunkMiller
Banned
Yeah. If I'm the regulatory bodies involved in this deal, I'm asking what exactly he means by this.
Either he's lying in this tweet (most likely) and these plans are very much real... or he's telling the truth in the tweet and they've supplied false plans to the FTC.
Nice work, Phil.
Ginzeen
Banned
FTC case is over with. Let it go. FTC is out of the picture. They were fodderized.
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Member
I wonder how similar it will be to the last preliminary.
bitbydeath
Member
FTC appealed, and new documents were just uploaded? I think they’re just getting started again.
Sanepar
Member
Probably guesswork or he has information.
Ginzeen
Banned
Nah MS neutered them. Their finished. UK is the only hold up. Everywhere else has the green light
Jemm
Member
I understood that he meant that they are just plans from 2022 and they can change before (if) they publish anything officially.
They could change pricing details or cancel the console refreshes altogether, if they don't see point trying to compete with PS5 Slim/Pro.
Edit: Like they canceled the streaming-only box ("Keystone"), which was rumored, but never officially announced.
Last edited:
I know, right?
And some ppl are gonna eat that up as gospel.
This wasn't supposed to be public knowledge.
PaintTinJr
Member
It isn't the same as a standalone new acquisition preliminary decision. though. The block of the original merger was final, along with the order stating Microsoft couldn't attempt to acquire directly or by proxy an interest in ATVI without express permission by the CMA, so this new Ex-Cloud phase 1 is an extension of the blocked merger - and its decision as evidence as a starting point for consideration - so a decision to block this deal too has far less latitude to be appealed.
Last edited:
Aguero9320
Member
I'd imagine he's more likely implying plans have changed in the last two years, as they do in most businesses. Should probably have anticipated the spin though and said current or finalized (if they are).
Bernoulli
M2 slut
UK regulators likely to decide on Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard deal next week.
The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is expected to issue a preliminary decision on Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard deal next week, a source familiar with the situation tells The Verge. It follows Microsoft restructuring its deal — after the CMA blocked it over cloud gaming concerns — to transfer cloud gaming rights for current and new Activision Blizzard games to Ubisoft.
This preliminary decision will then be followed by a final one, due by October 18th. The UK is the final regulatory hurdle for Microsoft’s giant deal.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Unless the CMA decides that they would want a deeper investigation and are taking this to Phase 2.
UK regulators likely to decide on Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard deal next week.
The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is expected to issue a preliminary decision on Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard deal next week, a source familiar with the situation tells The Verge. It follows Microsoft restructuring its deal — after the CMA blocked it over cloud gaming concerns — to transfer cloud gaming rights for current and new Activision Blizzard games to Ubisoft.
This preliminary decision will then be followed by a final one, due by October 18th. The UK is the final regulatory hurdle for Microsoft’s giant deal.
reinking
Gold Member
Buying up the industry is healthy?
Bernoulli
M2 slut
No, if the notice is what's happening next week, the CMA will say that they accept the remedies offered by MS (the Ubisoft agreement) but before a final decision they want to hear from any potential third party.Unless the CMA decides that they would want a deeper investigation and are taking this to Phase 2.
Therefore, if the CMA is OK with the proposal from MS the public consultation stage is more like a formality.
means it got approved
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Is the bolded by Tom?
It does not necessarily mean that at all. It may very well happen (because that's what likely at this point), but a notice this week absolutely does not mean that.
The CMA can also block the acquisition and then ask for parties to submit their feedback in case they have any. They also did it exactly this way when they blocked the acquisition earlier this year.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Nah, healthy competition sometimes requires disruptive players. Otherwise it'll turn into a stale AT&T and Verizon situation where 2 monopolies will have their own carved out areas and stifle competition.
PaintTinJr
Member
I'm not so sure about that logic. I'm pretty sure there was a published preliminary decision with a period for feedback on the previous merger at phase 1, prior to it moving to a phase 2.
If anything, I would have thought this would only need a week of feedback consultation if it was being approved because it was an off shoot of the original merger with short periods of time. If we get a preliminary decision by next week, that would leave nearly 3 working weeks for feedback or time to launch a JR appeal, or would just save time before entering a phase 2 that can start 2 weeks into those 3.
I think the CMA wording starts from a position of blocking, because - as quoted in bold below - if the original analysis said block, and that is your starting point, then failing to do exactly as told - divest the actual Activision company with all its studios and IP - feels like it is already explained why the ex-cloud merger is inadequate and not a divestment that is absent of needing babysitting.
"The CMA has previously investigated the anticipated acquisition by Microsoft of (the entirety of) Activision, concluding, in its Final Report issued on 26 April 2023, that the creation of that relevant merger situation may be expected to result in a substantial lessening of competition (SLC) in the supply of cloud gaming services in the UK, and that prohibition of that transaction was an effective and proportionate remedy to address that SLC and any resulting adverse effects. On 22 August 2023, the CMA imposed a Final Order that prohibits Microsoft from acquiring an interest in Activision unless it obtains prior written consent to do so from the CMA.
The CMA is considering whether it is or may be the case that this merger, if carried into effect, will result in the creation of a relevant merger situation under the merger provisions of the Enterprise Act 2002 and, if so, whether the creation of that situation may be expected to result in an SLC within any market or markets in the United Kingdom for goods or services.
The CMA therefore invites comments from any interested party on the impact that the newly structured merger could have on competition in the UK. In light of the substantial overlap with the matters considered in the Final Report of 26 April 2023 and the matters at issue in this investigation, the CMA currently expects to rely heavily on the evidence and analysis undertaken for the purposes of that report in this investigation."
Microsoft / Activision Blizzard (ex-cloud streaming rights) merger inquiry
The CMA investigated the anticipated acquisition by Microsoft Corporation of Activision Blizzard, Inc. (excluding Activision Blizzard, Inc.’s non-EEA cloud streaming rights).
Last edited:
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
After all this time are we finally getting close one way or the other?
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Healthy competition is the opposite of consolidation and buying out competitors.
Healthy competition means creating high-quality stuff and being creative. Like Sony did when they were competing after the poor PS3 launch and like Nintendo did with Switch.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It is nothing of the sorts. The AT&T / Verizon analogy is exactly what this MS consolidation is.
Was this a new updated talking point? Because it sure is a derpy one.
Last edited:
Bernoulli
M2 slut
In my post that was from idosI'm not so sure about that logic. I'm pretty sure there was a published preliminary decision with a period for feedback on the previous merger at phase 1, prior to it moving to a phase 2.
If anything, I would have thought this would only need a week of feedback consultation if it was being approved because it was an off shoot of the original merger with short periods of time. If we get a preliminary decision by next week, that would leave nearly 3 working weeks for feedback or time to launch a JR appeal, or would just save time before entering a phase 2 that can start 2 weeks into those 3.
I think the CMA wording starts from a position of blocking, because - as quoted in bold below - if the original analysis said block, and that is your starting point, then failing to do exactly as told - divest the actual Activision company with all its studios and IP - feels like it is already explained why the ex-cloud merger is inadequate and not a divestment that is absent of needing babysitting.
"The CMA has previously investigated the anticipated acquisition by Microsoft of (the entirety of) Activision, concluding, in its Final Report issued on 26 April 2023, that the creation of that relevant merger situation may be expected to result in a substantial lessening of competition (SLC) in the supply of cloud gaming services in the UK, and that prohibition of that transaction was an effective and proportionate remedy to address that SLC and any resulting adverse effects. On 22 August 2023, the CMA imposed a Final Order that prohibits Microsoft from acquiring an interest in Activision unless it obtains prior written consent to do so from the CMA.
The CMA is considering whether it is or may be the case that this merger, if carried into effect, will result in the creation of a relevant merger situation under the merger provisions of the Enterprise Act 2002 and, if so, whether the creation of that situation may be expected to result in an SLC within any market or markets in the United Kingdom for goods or services.
The CMA therefore invites comments from any interested party on the impact that the newly structured merger could have on competition in the UK. In light of the substantial overlap with the matters considered in the Final Report of 26 April 2023 and the matters at issue in this investigation, the CMA currently expects to rely heavily on the evidence and analysis undertaken for the purposes of that report in this investigation."
Microsoft / Activision Blizzard (ex-cloud streaming rights) merger inquiry
The CMA investigated the anticipated acquisition by Microsoft Corporation of Activision Blizzard, Inc. (excluding Activision Blizzard, Inc.’s non-EEA cloud streaming rights).www.gov.uk
Thirty7ven
Banned
“Know what’s creative? Going to the super market.”
- Consumer of content
- Consumer of content
Bernoulli
M2 slut
Microsoft should know the outcome this week or days before the announcement ?After all this time are we finally getting close one way or the other?
Yes the competition only counts when it helps my box meme.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It's like how WWE became stagnant as fuck because there was no competition for them between 2001~2016/18.
I give up, the 'is this a new talking point?' meme is getting as bad as the 'everything I don't like is woke' meme now. Can't even post without without it being slung.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Dude, just accept the analogy was stupid. AT&T and Verizon got to that point due to CONSOLIDATING telecom industries. WWE got stagnant because they bought the WCW. Consolidation.It's like how WWE became stagnant as fuck because there was no competition for them between 2001~2016/18.
I give up, the 'is this a new talking point?' meme is getting as bad as the 'everything I don't like is woke' meme now. Can't even post without without it being slung.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
My point with that example was that it's 2 major companies who had strategically carved out areas in the US and because of that they were literally strong-arming and stopping any other competition from rising.
That's what will happen if MS bows out of gaming right now, there's very little overlap in the kind of content Sony and Nintendo put out natively.
Y'all need a big third party player like Microsoft.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
I don't understand people wanting MS out of the business but wanting healthy competition
Where does the healthy competition come from if MS bows out?
Where does the healthy competition come from if MS bows out?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
They're not going to "bow out of gaming." But at the same time, them wanting to consolidate all the biggest players is EXACTLY what ATT/Verizon/and WWE did. WCW was also on the verge of bankruptcy after the Time Warner AOL takeover and ran the brand into the ground. They did that to themselves.
Thirty7ven
Banned
But is MS trying to be an healthy competitor or just a wealthy competitor?
Because buying everything that moves and push PlayStation out of the market or into irrelevance by sheer force of spending, is not quite the future we should be pushing for.
Think that’s the problem.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Exactly.
Just look at the PS3 gen for a first-hand example of how complacent Sony had become and how a successful X360 lit a fire under their ass. Now imagine if the 360 never existed.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
I do agree buying everything is sight is not the answer but I don't agree with statement like this either
Image how arrogant Sony would be if no one pushed them or even a threat of being pushed
Topher
Identifies as young
Except Microsoft wants to own two thirds by obtaining Nintendo. I damn sure rather have independent Nintendo than a Microsoft that factually is not just satisfied with ABK, but has eyes on Nintendo and Valve as well.
That's not the "third party" we "need".
The problem is Microsoft doesn't want healthy competition.
Last edited:
GHG
Gold Member
The better question is what "healthy competition" are Microsoft bringing to the table?
I ask the same question regarding AMD's purpose in the GPU space.
These are businesses who should be competing in their respective spaces (given their resources and history) but for a number of reasons they aren't currently. If they aren't going to bother to effectively compete then it's better for the consumer for them to vacate the space and leave room for a new entrants.
It's important to remember that when Sega vacated the console space Microsoft stepped in. I'm certain that someone else would step in if Microsoft were to leave. Sony also effectively (albeit indirectly) replaced Atari.
It's not Microsoft or nothing as far as "competition" goes.
Last edited:
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
I doubt Sony really wants healthy competition either they are just doing it the right way pumping out great games keeping their mouths shut and winning in the process
Thirty7ven
Banned
While true at least you could say it was Xbox’s inability to create a great product that made MS part ways from the console business and not a consequence of Sony buying the market.
PC, Nintendo, would still remain competitors. And if mobile hardware keeps improving at the rate it is in terms of game performance, not long until Apple has a device out there that will compete.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked