feynoob
Gold Member
Regulatory News & Reports
Market insight & analysis on regulatory risk for law firms, corporations, hedge funds
-
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
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
[/QUOTE]
I'm glad we are finally getting some agreement across the board in this war.
I'm glad we are finally getting some agreement across the board in this war.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It's a paywalled website
Microsoft agrees to make Call of Duty available on Nintendo for a decade | MLex Market Insight
Microsoft has struck a deal with Nintendo to make Call of Duty available on its console if Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard is approved by regulators
mlexmarketinsight.com
But this is the part in question:
feynoob
Gold Member
It
Was covered that yesterday.It's a paywalled website
Microsoft agrees to make Call of Duty available on Nintendo for a decade | MLex Market Insight
Microsoft has struck a deal with Nintendo to make Call of Duty available on its console if Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard is approved by regulators
But this is the part in question:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Yes, I think Topher missed it. Sharing for him.
Topher
Gold Member
It's a paywalled website
Microsoft agrees to make Call of Duty available on Nintendo for a decade | MLex Market Insight
Microsoft has struck a deal with Nintendo to make Call of Duty available on its console if Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard is approved by regulators
But this is the part in question:
I don't agree with characterizing Nintendo's audience as "younger" as plenty of older gamers play on Switch. But other than that, I agree with what is said about . I've been making similar arguments for a while.
Of course, I have no idea who is actually saying this. Someone paraphrasing something someone allegedly said internally at Sony matters......why?
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Younger as in : immature old folks.
Topher
Gold Member
Oh.....so they are talking about me. Gotcha.
STARSBarry
Gold Member
ChorizoPicozo
Member
twilo99
Member
Not on gamepass which I already pay for.
Microsoft is trying to give me more for my money, and instead I gotta pay $70 for CoD because Sony needs to be protected.
Topher
Gold Member
mansoor1980
Gold Member
so jim ryan wants to destroy the acquisition deal and game pass at the same time.
killing two birds with one stone
mastermind devil this guy
killing two birds with one stone
mastermind devil this guy
twilo99
Member
Which Americans you commie… because I would actually be paying less for my games if this deal goes through , just like millions of other Xbox players in America.
Last edited:
Thirty7ven
Banned
You don’t have to pay 70$ for COD. And COD isn’t being taken away from MS.
There’s really no further point to this conversation, MS are not entitled to buying the market just because you feel entitled to having more games on gamepass. MS can go out there and strike a deal for the game to come out on GP without it meaning they own AB.
You saving a couple of dollars isn’t more important than the integrity of the market.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Ok.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
He sounds like someone who paid full 3 years for game pass before being told about the conversion process.
feynoob
Gold Member
Turds crying for a trillion dollars. Dude needs to get a reality check.
MS doesn't care about him, only his money.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
He was asked about that. It seems he has no idea what a Game Pass is.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
DarkMage619
$MSFT
I'm sure you actually believe what you wrote but Sony isn't a charitable organization going around helping risky projects for the good of the industry. MS was not 'buying the industry'. It is cold hard business.
Sony uses their stronger market position, that they have had since before MS even got in to the console gaming industry, to secure favorable deals to hurt other console makers. They did it to Nintendo first and after Nintendo adapted to the current conditions they did it to MS.
MS because of their superior financial resources was able to also adapt to the market with moves like Game pass. Now Game pass is being used against them and they are also being told they cannot make major non-monopolistic purchases.
In the end Sony has provided a blueprint where they can use money to secure 3rd party content. MS should clearly do the same thing. As long as they don't own the company they can use money to get content. It's business after all.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
If this isn't a clear endorsement for the deal going through I don't know what is. This political posturing is gross.
Last edited:
ChorizoPicozo
Member
I don't know I am not from United States. I kown this young lad was popular against Trump or some shit like that.
HoofHearted
Member
LMFAO - You know it's mainstream news when Bernie and Elizabeth come out of the woodwork to get their PR comments out..
Last edited:
ReBurn
Gold Member
That's not entirely accurate. You don't have to pay $70 for CoD because Sony needs to be protected. You have to pay $70 for CoD because you need to be protected.
CoD wasn't going to come to game pass for at least a few years anyway, so either way you were going to pay $70.
feynoob
Gold Member
Look at my pfp.
HoofHearted
Member
Thirty7ven
Banned
Not even going to bother with the rest, Sony got their rewards but they still committed to a risk. Your constant conflation with third party deals and buying publishers wholesale is also just myopic as fuck so I’m done arguing with you.
The only reason you’re a Xbox fan is because of the 360.
HoofHearted
Member
I seriously doubt he even knows or fully understands what the FTC is suing Microsoft about here... or even owns a console or gaming PC.
Pretty sure it went like this -> "FTC is suing big bad company? Holy Batshit! - Quick! to the political bandwagon Batman!"
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
the fuck is a pfp lol
feynoob
Gold Member
The lady that is holding the apple.
Neither you nor the FTC has demonstrated how the birth of the 3rd biggest player in an industry threatens the industry of the market. It's a catchy virtue signalling punchline I do admit but it's harder to find an actual consumer that says "I don't want to pay 10 bucks and not need a console or a gaming PC to play COD, I want to pay 70 bucks and also buy a machine". Except on GAF of course.
FalsettoVibe
Member
Some tidbits from user Idas on the other site..........
FUTURE SCENARIOS AND RELEVANT DATES:
Early January 2023
Provisional findings from the CMA, it's like a draft of the final decision. That should give us a pretty good idea of what the CMA believes right now. The arguments from the FTC in December 2022 are very similar to the arguments from the CMA in September 2022 at the end of Phase 1.
Does that mean that the CMA is still following that line of thinking? Maybe or maybe not, the CMA is full of surprises
We'll have to wait.
January 18th 2023 (termination fee $2,000,000,000)
Original outside date (when the parties expected the merger to be done). If MS quits before that date, they "only" have to pay 2 billion. If the provisional findings from the CMA are really negative, that's a serious possibility.
If the decision is positive and the remedies reasonable, I think that MS will extend the outside date to April 18th 2023.
March 1st 2023
This is when the CMA has to publish the final report (final version of the draft from January after the feedback from the parties). If the decision is negative for MS, I think that the deal is done. If it's positive and they can close the deal there, even with concessions, they'll keep going on.
April 11th 2023
This is when the European Commission has to publish a decision about the case. But it could happen sooner if the remedies offered by MS solve all the concerns that the EC may have. In fact, I think that MS is going to push really hard to close the EC before the end of 2022.
If MS doesn't accelerate the process, and the decision from the CMA is positive in March, I think that they'll wait until this moment to get the deal approved in Europe.
April 18th 2023 (termination fee $2,500,000,000)
The end of the first extension of the original outside date.
By then they should know the outcomes from the CMA and EC. If the CMA has been negative and they expect something similar from the EC, I think that they'll quit before that date.
If by then both the EC and CMA have approved the deal, from then the FTC is going to be the main goal.
April - May 2023
The decision from China should happen around those dates. If MS is still pushing and both the CMA and EC went ahead with the deal, the most likely scenario is that SAMR goes ahead too.
July 18th 2023 (termination fee $3,000,000,000)
The end of the second extension and final outside date in the merger agreement. If by then the CMA, EC and SMAR have approved the deal, I think that the parties will renegotiate the outside date to have enough time to go against the FTC. That should add at least an extra year.
August 2nd 2023
This is when the FTC has scheduled its in-house trial to begin, but if MS can close the deal in Europe or UK before that date, this is likely to change and it could happen earlier and maybe in federal court because then the parties could close the deal.
It could also change depending on the outcome from two cases in the Supreme Court and even the outcome from the Meta - Within case.
Lots of IFs in this case.
Early 2024
If the deal is approved in UK and Europe, but MS has to wait until the finish line in every case and for some reason the beginning of the FTC in-house trial hasn't changed, early 2024 is when the FTC Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell would likely put a decision :s
After that, Microsoft or the FTC could appeal his ruling to the agency's commissioners. And after that MS or the FTC could go to federal court. That could be around the end of 2024, early 2025.
I don't think that MS/ABK would wait until then, but it's a possibility right now.
---
So, now I think that MS will try to fast track the decision from the EU while they finish the review process with the CMA until provisional findings in January 2023.
If both outcomes are positive (specially the CMA), they'll go ahead and the FTC scenario will probably accelerate. If both outcomes are negative (specially the CMA), the deal will be abandoned as soon as January 2023 or as late as April 2023.
FUTURE SCENARIOS AND RELEVANT DATES:
Early January 2023
Provisional findings from the CMA, it's like a draft of the final decision. That should give us a pretty good idea of what the CMA believes right now. The arguments from the FTC in December 2022 are very similar to the arguments from the CMA in September 2022 at the end of Phase 1.
Does that mean that the CMA is still following that line of thinking? Maybe or maybe not, the CMA is full of surprises
We'll have to wait.
January 18th 2023 (termination fee $2,000,000,000)
Original outside date (when the parties expected the merger to be done). If MS quits before that date, they "only" have to pay 2 billion. If the provisional findings from the CMA are really negative, that's a serious possibility.
If the decision is positive and the remedies reasonable, I think that MS will extend the outside date to April 18th 2023.
March 1st 2023
This is when the CMA has to publish the final report (final version of the draft from January after the feedback from the parties). If the decision is negative for MS, I think that the deal is done. If it's positive and they can close the deal there, even with concessions, they'll keep going on.
April 11th 2023
This is when the European Commission has to publish a decision about the case. But it could happen sooner if the remedies offered by MS solve all the concerns that the EC may have. In fact, I think that MS is going to push really hard to close the EC before the end of 2022.
If MS doesn't accelerate the process, and the decision from the CMA is positive in March, I think that they'll wait until this moment to get the deal approved in Europe.
April 18th 2023 (termination fee $2,500,000,000)
The end of the first extension of the original outside date.
By then they should know the outcomes from the CMA and EC. If the CMA has been negative and they expect something similar from the EC, I think that they'll quit before that date.
If by then both the EC and CMA have approved the deal, from then the FTC is going to be the main goal.
April - May 2023
The decision from China should happen around those dates. If MS is still pushing and both the CMA and EC went ahead with the deal, the most likely scenario is that SAMR goes ahead too.
July 18th 2023 (termination fee $3,000,000,000)
The end of the second extension and final outside date in the merger agreement. If by then the CMA, EC and SMAR have approved the deal, I think that the parties will renegotiate the outside date to have enough time to go against the FTC. That should add at least an extra year.
August 2nd 2023
This is when the FTC has scheduled its in-house trial to begin, but if MS can close the deal in Europe or UK before that date, this is likely to change and it could happen earlier and maybe in federal court because then the parties could close the deal.
It could also change depending on the outcome from two cases in the Supreme Court and even the outcome from the Meta - Within case.
Lots of IFs in this case.
Early 2024
If the deal is approved in UK and Europe, but MS has to wait until the finish line in every case and for some reason the beginning of the FTC in-house trial hasn't changed, early 2024 is when the FTC Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell would likely put a decision :s
After that, Microsoft or the FTC could appeal his ruling to the agency's commissioners. And after that MS or the FTC could go to federal court.
That could be around the end of 2024, early 2025.I don't think that MS/ABK would wait until then, but it's a possibility right now.
---
So, now I think that MS will try to fast track the decision from the EU while they finish the review process with the CMA until provisional findings in January 2023.
If both outcomes are positive (specially the CMA), they'll go ahead and the FTC scenario will probably accelerate. If both outcomes are negative (specially the CMA), the deal will be abandoned as soon as January 2023 or as late as April 2023.
Last edited:
Rivet
Member
You can't seriously think MS is trying to "give you more for your money" on the long run. That's so naive and short-sighted.
Every monopoly, every corporation getting a huge share of the market has always ended with higher prices and / or lower quality for the consumers. We should all fight concentration, not praise it.
They're here to make money like every corp ever. They're not your friend.
Pelta88
Member
Me when someone conflates a marketing deal for timed content, a practice Microsoft introduced with GTA, with buying a publisher outright
There are people who are genuinely interested in this merger and others who just came to cheerlead their favourite piece of plastic. Which is why you'll find people trying to qualify false equivalencies.
Punished Miku
Human Rights Subscription Service
He's not aware of the dynamics of this industry and is defaulting to typical progressive anti-monopolistic practices that I often agree with. In this case though he's wrong. Sony is so dominant that almost no one can enter the gaming industry successfully as a console provider besides someone as rich as MS. There will not be other companies able to compete; even Apple and Google. Sub services like GP are even more difficult to enter into and require even more capital. Nintendo still fluctuates between dominant and on the ropes from generation to generation as well. Add to that, Series S and GP both being cost-saving measures for consumers, let alone the ability to play cloud without a console at all if you choose. He's just way off. I agree with him on a lot, but not this one.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Pelta88
Member
Looks like someone isn't aware of how current marketing deals in the console space began. But that's ok lol.
Topher
Gold Member
Does it matter? It has been a thing for so long that I see no merit to the whole "who started it" argument regardless of who it was.
Respectfully sir, Sony just bought a publisher this year to absolutely no contest in the industry. Nintendo did not come out and said "We will never be able to catch up with Sony because they already have third party deals on games that don't even come to our devices and now they're buying publishers". Neither did YOU make that argument but correct me if I'm wrong.
Your reasoning basically amounts to the following:
Sony gives the measure of the size of what's an acceptable deal in this industry. Only Sony. Sony bought Bungie, so Microsoft is allowed to buy a publisher the size of Bungie because it's "comparable". MS cannot buy ABK because it's bigger than anything Sony ever bought. We have to ask Sony if it's fair first. But Sony is allowed to buy whatever they can afford.
Then you go on about how people who disagree with that are fanboys because of the 360. Get some self awareness please.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Pelta88
Member
I've heard him on a podcast before. If memory serves me correctly, he's dyslexic. Making fun of him or his statements on social media isn't something I'd encourage, personally.
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
Because of dyslexia? Seriously?
Pelta88
Member
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Watch the
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
You're so bad at this.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked