-
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.
FTC Seeks to Block Microsoft Corp’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard
- Thread starter kyliethicc
- Start date
Last edited:
ReBurn
Gold Member
People are going ape over the FTC filing suit but it's not really all that surprising. Considering it's the only tool they have what else could they do if they wanted to block or modify the deal? EU and UK regulators have sharper teeth than the FTC because acquisitions require the express approval of the UK and EU commissions. The only options the FTC have at this stage are to either file a lawsuit or do nothing.
The FTC have become more litigious in general since Lina Khan took over, opting to file more lawsuits so they can try to inject consent orders into settlements, giving them more power over companies after merger deals are final. They have also been losing a lot of the time when companies choose to not settle and go to trial.
There are a couple of things of note in the FTC action taken today. First, a hearing has been set for after the expected closing date. Second, so far the FTC have not filed for an injunction to try to prevent the deal from closing. At this stage it's likely that the FTC are trying to use the timing of the hearing in their administrative court to pressure Microsoft into a settlement that modifies the deal to their liking. If Microsoft refuses to settle the FTC will probably file for the injunction.
Microsoft could just abandon the deal as well, but there's enough money on the line with the breakup fee for it to be worth it to take their chances and go to court, and probably also appeal if they lose in the FTC's administrative court. The administrative court doesn't always side with the commissioners, though. Should be interesting to watch.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It hasn't nor has FTC filed for any injunctions so far
-
Please don't spent too much on the celebrations just yet, this might come back to bite you
Last edited:
Because nobody will need a console to play any of those games. Or even to pay 70$. Anybody will be able to play any of those games on the devices they already have and for the cost of a sandwich.
You’re too allergic to the name Microsoft to see it but it’s the simple truth. The ABK deal is extremely good for consumers.
Ezekiel_
Banned
Marketshare should be earned, not bought.
Let them compete on their merits, and not their balance sheets.
In Cold Blood
Banned
To the courts bitches.
Courts will rule as per law and facts, not by the crying of the market leader that they might not be the market leader.
The FTCs job isn't to protect the dominant company from competition.
Courts will rule as per law and facts, not by the crying of the market leader that they might not be the market leader.
The FTCs job isn't to protect the dominant company from competition.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Lying shits.
reinking
Gold Member
I agree that it is good if it goes to court. I also agree with this statement. It is the FTC's job to protect competition. We'll have to see what the courts determine is best for competition if it goes to court. Neither side should be celebrating anything. We should all strive for a healthy industry instead of slobbing knob on our favorite multimillionaire CEO.
bentanchorbolt
Banned
it isn’t a monopoly. Don’t pretend like I said something else. You can’t even quote me and reply without pretending I said something different. That’s wild to me. Like you can read what I said a million times if you chose to and you’re insinuating I think MS are the good guys. Come on dude. Don’t waste my time here.
ReBurn
Gold Member
Happens when you drink too much coffeeI know one thing for sure I had a call of duty this morning
OsirisBlack
Banned
How many gamers own an actual gaming pc. Some of you guys arguments are ridiculous.it’s cool just get a CAPABLE gaming pc and pray to god it works out. I own every system and a monster PC sir this shit doesn’t affect me at all. It’s just obviously anti consumer. You trying to paint me as anti any console is funny.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
This is just scummy behavior. Absolutely disgusting.
Lying through their teeth. I am glad no one is buying it. TBH, they should be taken to court over Starfield and Elder Scrolls being made exclusive.
Lying through their teeth. I am glad no one is buying it. TBH, they should be taken to court over Starfield and Elder Scrolls being made exclusive.
Have you never heard of the cloud or you’re just really that disingenuous ?
All I need to play Doom Eternal right now is a phone or tablet. Not a high end PC. I also don’t need 80$. You can call good bad and pro anti but it doesn’t change the meaning of any of those words.
The ABK deal is the most pro consumer merger I’ve seen in recent times. Ask Nintendo, valve or the millions of people with a tablet or a Samsung tv. Sony doesn’t have to call it pro consumer for it to be pro consumer.
after reading some things, it seems the FTC didnt file a preliminary injuction , and the hearing is set for after the deal is supposed to close. it seems like this is nothing but the FTC trying to squeeze MS for more concessions to try look strong, but MS is not budging. right now its essentially a game of chicken.
And this complaint is very weak because the FTC didn't do their research. Acting like making starfield exclusive is a sin when the thing is a standard industry practice.
If it does goes to court, Sony will get subpoena'd for their exclusivity contracts and communications with devs, showing the very same things the FTC is saying MS will do, and maybe even worse. Lets see how that looks. Is the FTC going to file an antitrust case against Sony? When MS said its war, its war.
And this complaint is very weak because the FTC didn't do their research. Acting like making starfield exclusive is a sin when the thing is a standard industry practice.
If it does goes to court, Sony will get subpoena'd for their exclusivity contracts and communications with devs, showing the very same things the FTC is saying MS will do, and maybe even worse. Lets see how that looks. Is the FTC going to file an antitrust case against Sony? When MS said its war, its war.
Last edited:
OsirisBlack
Banned
You’re quoting one game, who the bell wants to play an actual game on a phone? I’m sure god of war on phone would be fun as hell or maybe gears v on phone. Get out of here with that bs. You’re arguing to argue not really stating anything of value outside of Monopoly good buying all companies good. So at this point I’ll just ignore you unless a valid argument is made.
SkyHighTrees
Member
ms maybe get fuckd damn
bentanchorbolt
Banned
It’s not a monopoly tho. Stop throwing that word around.
OsirisBlack
Banned
Microsoft had a monopoly in PC operating systems 90%market share. They are attempting to do the same thing in video games. They are literally trying to buy the competition out and own the market. It’s not difficult to see. If Sony or Nintendo attempted the same bull shit I’d still be against it.
Hawking Radiation
Member
bentanchorbolt
Banned
Now try and say this again but you can’t speculate this time.
CLW
Gold Member
Where did you receive your Juris Doctorate from? And how long have you practiced antitrust?LOL I didn't think they would be this stupid. Now watch them get their asses handed to them in Court and Microsoft will win the approval for its deal.
I was wrong, I thought they wouldn't try this, but they won't actually win because the facts just aren't on their side.
OsirisBlack
Banned
Easy they just bought zenimax and all of its studios and are trying g to buy activision. No speculation on that statement. Now try again without being a jerk.
bentanchorbolt
Banned
They don’t have a monopoly tho. And you can’t prove their goal is to just buy up everything. You’re being hyperbolic and speculating way beyond the info you have available.
OsirisBlack
Banned
Is it speculation that they are buying publishers and not just single studios? Just answer that question and kill your argument.
I’ll even expand on it to help you out. Did those TWO purchases just give them control over the single biggest selling shooting game franchise and over 20 other ips?
It’s not rocket science
Last edited:
Cheezewizz
Banned
Good god man, just go read the actual report. The person making that tweet is cherry picking content.
The only disgusting thing here is how gullible you are.
gothmog
Gold Member
The hyperbolic part is pretending that you need to be a monopoly to be anti-competitive.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I honestly think the FTC suing is more dangerous for MS in the sense that it gives a nod to the other regulators that the US authorities are against the merger.
diffusionx
Gold Member
It wouldn’t surprise me if MS just cancels the deal and both sides walk away, that’s what I’ve seen whenever the FTC makes this decision. It’s probably over.
diffusionx
Gold Member
lol what
the fact is for better or worse the government can take on any company they want, in fact this very same government took on MS in the 1990s.
bentanchorbolt
Banned
He kept saying they were a monopoly tho. I was responding to that specifically. If you want to take what I said and bend it to something you want to argue against, be my guest.
TheDarkPhantom
Member
Edit:
Wrong thread
Wrong thread
Last edited:
bentanchorbolt
Banned
They sure did, gained a metric ton of intellectual property and talent, both established franchises and new ones in the future. It gives them a massive leg up but they still aren’t a monopoly.
OsirisBlack
Banned
My argument is that they are anti consumer and attempting to build a monopoly. If you think that’s speculative on my part then we aren’t watching the same movie.
And them adding over 20 ips would be a great thing for gamers if they created those ips and didn’t buy the publishers and plan on keeping them away from consumers.
Are you being purposefully obtuse? Not a rhetorical question.
Last edited:
thismeinteil
Member
Probably explains the mismanagement of their studios.
Swift_Star
Banned
As usual, green rats don’t like facts
Cheezewizz
Banned
The ftc doesn't have the authority to just outright block this deal. They're suing MS, but only within the confines of their commission. There's nothing here actually stopping MS from closing. The ftc would have to file an injunction for that, which would be decided by the legit legal courts.
Also, he stated that the ftc has lost most of it's cases recently when the companies actually went to court. Not sure why you'd bring up them taking on MS in the 1990's, when the government lost that case too. You're just proving his point.
Lol what
If MS just cancels and walks away, they immediately lose over $3 billion. So no, both sides don't just get to "walk away". What "you've seen" apparently isn't what everyone else has.
Hawking Radiation
Member
bentanchorbolt
Banned
You flat out said the were already a monopoly. Many times. Don’t change what you said in order to better fit your argument. At any rate, we don’t agree and I’m happy to leave it there.
diffusionx
Gold Member
The most recent prominent tech acquisition that the FTC got involved in was the Nvidia-ARM deal. That deal didn’t go through, they walked away after the FTC sued to block it. This is very common.
Also - the government didn’t lose the MS case in the 90s. Quite the opposite. The court held that they were a monopolist. MS managed to avoid a full breakup in the settlement process with the DOJ but this is after the courts held that they were engaging in anticompetitive behavior in violation of the law.
OsirisBlack
Banned
You knew exactly what I was saying you took it out of context to fit your argument. I have repeatedly stated that they are trying to create a monopoly by buying up everything and forcing their competitors out of business but I digress. Let’s just leave it there on the floor. Good night
Cheezewizz
Banned
Can't speak for anyone else, but I've seen that movie about a million times the past couple of weeks. It's a poorly produced film, that has no imagination, and that's chock full of bad acting.
So let's break this down.
First, they're not "keeping" them away from consumers. They've gone as far as they can legally go to demonstrate that, and yet here you are. Still not only perpetuating this fud, but passing it off as if it were common knowledge.
So with that little falsehood out of the way. That just leaves us with the first part of your claim. "That adding 20 ip would be a great thing for gamers if they created those ip and didn't buy them from publishers." Why does it matter where the ip come from, so long as they get added? When you decide whether a game is good, is there 'wholesome goodness' factor that you consider that is dependent on whether the ip was bought or created?
Considering you're the one that's not basing your opinion on the reality of the situation, nor the facts related to it... That is perhaps the most ridiculous question you could've asked.
gothmog
Gold Member
I get it. I think you're arguing the word while they were arguing something else around Microsoft having abused their OS monopoly and the effects of benefiting from that. Pretty easy to draw a line from Windows to DirectX which is Microsoft's monopolistic hug around graphics APIs. The Xbox started life as literally the DirectX box and I'm pretty sure Microsoft meant for it to be as dominant in the console world as Windows is in the OS world. Things didn't exactly work out that way but now that desktop OSes are declining in popularity Microsoft is looking to take some of that monopoly money and spend it on another market.
Anyways I apologize as you are right about the usage of the word but I was more speaking from the back and forth between you two.
OsirisBlack
Banned
Good try. The exact reason they are being taken to court you know the facts are opposed to your breakdown. I’ll let you look that up.this shit is genuinely funny.
Last edited:
Captain Toad
Banned
Oddvintagechap
Member
it’s gonna get spicy.
like Disney had to give away like 15% of Fox away.
Can you be my sugar mommy?
it can still go thur, just needs to have a concession,
like Disney had to give away like 15% of Fox away.
Captain Toad
Banned
They've spent, what, 75 billion dollars so far on previously third-party publishers?
If that doesn't raise monoplization red flags, I don't know what would.
gothmog
Gold Member
I have a hard time believing that Activision is going to have a rough time figuring out what to do with some of the hottest studios in the world.
Similar threads
- Locked