Support NeoGAF

[L*][*N*K]

They could try again in 10 years but I doubt it’ll help.

We’ll see, I feel like people who call it “dead” this much don’t actually know what they are talking about.

 

[bitbydeath]

We’ll see, I feel like people who call it “dead” this much don’t actually know what they are talking about.

We don’t have to use that word.
It’s over, kaput, not happening, finished, concluded, terminated, doneski.

 

[L*][*N*K]

We don’t have to use that word.
It’s over, kaput, not happening, finished, concluded, terminated, doneski.

Chill man, it’s cool I believe you.

 

[MasterCornholio]

I feel like we are saying “its dead” too much

I look at it as the probabilities of it happening are very small. No sane person is going to give this close to a 100% chance of it happening at this point. Just going off what experts are saying in regards to this.

 

[POKEYCLYDE]

I look at it as the probabilities of it happening are very small. No sane person is going to give this close to a 100% chance of it happening at this point. Just going off what experts are saying in regards to this.

Leading up until July 18, the remaining regulators should make their decisions. If any of them block, it is well and truly dead. Any irrationality argument designed for the CMA appeal would be out the window.

If all remaining regulators let it pass then it comes down to ABK deciding if they want to renegotiate the deal and extend it to see the appeal process through. This will be the biggest hurdle.

There are a couple reasons why they would renegotiate;

1) ABK receiving more money (be it a higher break up fee or price per share).

2) Microsoft/ABK like their chances at winning the appeal. I doubt Microsoft would renegotiate if they didn't believe they had an avenue forward.

ABK's greed puts this at a near zero chance I'd say, but that would go up slightly if they negotiate past July 18.

 

[SixPin]

ABK is on a way better position compared to late 2021 - early 2022, both financially and in terms of reputation.

I would be very surprised if they don't ask for a higher price. ($100-105 per share)

 

[The Tourmaline Gorilla]

I think after thousands upon thousands of replies and literally a thousand pages of banter, and back and forth, it's safe to say that 99% of you (myself included) truly doesn't have any real clue what we're talking about, and most of our speculations and arguments are primarily built on what we personally want to happen. We just take the bits of info that support our biases and build our arguments/points around those pieces of information, at any given time.

That said, I think most of the people commenting here are silly, and I'm not exempt from that either.

So I'll keep it really simple and real honest, and not feign any expertise or even deeper knowledge/understanding about this; I want this deal to go through and my only argument(s) is that it will make the console space more competitive by perhaps putting some pressure on Sony, disrupting the status quo, and bolster Xbox's offerings, which is my preferred platform to game. And anyone or any governing body who is against that or rules against that, I think is wrong because it's fucking with my preferred platform. There!

 

[Ronin_7]

ABK is on a way better position compared to late 2021 - early 2022, both financially and in terms of reputation.

I would be very surprised if they don't ask for a higher price. ($100-105 per share)

That's what I'm thinking as well.

105-110 even, how many billions would the New deal be Worth?

 

[PaintTinJr]

I feel like we are saying “its dead” too much

All the things needed to happen for the deal to be alive (not to be dead) are a massive AND gate in binary logic. Even if you assume the CMA did a full U-turn the gamers' lawsuit is still active and doesn't even need to be a win in court to stop this deal by delaying closing - via prolonging litigation tactics.

There are still so many mutually independent avenues this deal can fail, and it is running out of air almost as quick as ALT accounts on GAF are trying to feed a narrative that it is alive and well.

Here is a partial quote from my chances estimate yesterday showing how the deal can fail in an AND gate. Feel free to fill out the numbers any way you feel is realistic without using 100% (x1.0) to show the deal even has a 25% chance of success if you think saying it is dead is too harsh. I haven't even added in the other condition where a renegotiation happens and Microsoft refuse a higher valuation like Ronin_7 's comment directly above this post is discussing.

At the CAT appeal I think there is a 10:1 chance the appeal succeeds and sends it back to the CMA (x0.1)

Then I think there is a 10:1 chance the CMA would drop the remedies(x0.1)

I then think there is a 1:10 chance the FTC block the deal if the CMA approves (x0.9)
I then think there is a 1:10 chance the China regulator blocks the deal (x0.9)
I then think there is a 1:10 chance the gamers lawsuit blocks or delays the deal with litigation if the CMA approves(x0.9)

= 0.000729 or

0.0729% as a percentage of success

=0.729% chance.

 

[Bernoulli]

From Idas

New report from MLex:

- MLex has learned that the FTC is still not interested in having behavioral-remedy discussions with Microsoft and Activision on their proposed deal.

- Behavioural commitments that were offered in Europe and in the UK were expected to be given to the FTC as well, but a proposal hasn't been presented yet. A formal offer wouldn't be made if there are no discussions with staff and/or the commission that give the impression of the agency's likelihood to accept the offer.

- Microsoft has communicated again to the FTC that it would consider behavioral-style remedies, but the FTC thus far has signaled it isn't interested in that.

- The parties can offer the remedies directly to the agency's administrative law judge, if necessary. Although Chappell doesn't have the authority to settle the case, he could make a recommendation to the commission in favor of a settlement.

- Discovery is expected to conclude by the end of June and it would make sense for the parties to wait to offer any remedies to Chappell for consideration, even though an offer can be presented at any time.

- The FTC is likely still waiting to see how the appeals process for the block of the transaction in the UK will unfold. If the ALJ rules for or against the companies, that decision can still be appealed to the full commission, and if the commission finds against the parties, they can then appeal to a federal appeals court.

- Consequently, a final decision in the US is likely to take even longer than in the UK.


It's unlikely that the FTC accepts any (behavioural) remedies right now, they don't have any reason to do so. But I guess that MS/ABK will still try before the outside date (July 18th).

 

[jm89]

From Idas

Consequently, a final decision in the US is likely to take even longer than in the UK.

Oof. That $3 billion sounding really good right about now bob.

 

[wolffy66]

With the Overwatch team proving to be absolute disaster and basically ruining the OW ip, warzone 2 being hot trash, should MS still being willing to pay this high of a price?

Honestly what Activision have done to the OW team should be a crime. OW2 launching a f2p model on pve then canceling the entire pve is one of the biggest screws ups ever. That team is in shambles.

 

[Ar¢tos]

I feel like we are saying “its dead” too much

It's terminally ill on life support with zero probability of recovery.
Better?

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

Better?

'Deal's not pinin'! 'Deal's passed on! This deal is no more! It has ceased to be! Deal's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! Deal is a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed Activision to the perch it'd be pushing up the daisies! Microsoft's metabolic processes are now 'istory! Deal's off the twig! 'D's kicked the bucket, 'D's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-DEAL!!

 

[SoloKingRobert]

CMA can absolutley block this again just alone for their concerns of cloud gaming being an emerging market and microsofts huge advantage through various means in the future.

No one knows what the future will be like though... Sony shouldn't be allowed to acquire Game Studios because they currently dominate the console market. In the Future they might own 70%

CMA and your logic.

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

No one knows what the future will be like though... Sony shouldn't be allowed to acquire Game Studios because they currently dominate the console market. In the Future they might own 70%

CMA and your logic.

It's all about Azuer i.e. cloud infrastructure. Both Sony and Nin rent their clouds from big-tech so they are in the loosing position price-wise from the start. Unlike, say, MS or Amazon.

 

[Three]

No one knows what the future will be like though... Sony shouldn't be allowed to acquire Game Studios because they currently dominate the console market. In the Future they might own 70%

CMA and your logic.

Yes, if they tried to buy one of the biggest publishers let alone the biggest like MS is they would face regulatory concerns. What's wrong with that logic?

 

[Elios83]

From Idas

The most likely outcome in my opinion is the deal falling apart at the end of July.
Two big companies cannot afford to stay blocked for years in a legal limbo without taking important if not vital business decisions for the future years.
There is also no guarantee of success so for the risks involved the breakup fee and the $/share asked will become insane if an extension is requested.
It's illogical to go this route for a deal that is not vital for either company.

But we'll see how things go, in the meantime if I remember correctly Microsoft has until next monday to formally open an "appeal" procedure with CAT.

 

[jm89]

No one knows what the future will be like though... Sony shouldn't be allowed to acquire Game Studios because they currently dominate the console market. In the Future they might own 70%

CMA and your logic.

Sure big acquisitions from sony would raise concerns from regulators, as it should.

But acquisitions aren't completely off the table, sony just bough firewalk.

Folks seem to be trying to push this narrative that CMA are completely blocking any acquisitions, when that isn't the case.

 

[Astray]

Folks seem to be trying to push this narrative that CMA are completely blocking any acquisitions, when that isn't the case.

There's a threshold of deal value that makes it so the CMA can get involved. Most of the smaller deals don't hit that threshold.

Microsoft not getting in on the western Squeenix studios is a major blunder because it surely wouldn't be anywhere near hitting that threshold (sold for 300mln).

 

[Three]

Sure big acquisitions from sony would raise concerns from regulators, as it should.

But acquisitions aren't completely off the table, sony just bough firewalk.

Folks seem to be trying to push this narrative that CMA are completely blocking any acquisitions, when that isn't the case.

Exactly, Firewalk probably doesn't even cross the threshold for it to go to the regulators for investigation:

A merger usually only qualifies for a CMA investigation if either: the business being taken over has a UK annual turnover of at least £70 million. the combined businesses have at least a 25% share of any reasonable market.

 

[Edmund]

I feel like we are saying “its dead” too much

Funeral March by Chopin dedicated to the MS-ATVI merger.

 

[Kenshin775]

Leading up until July 18, the remaining regulators should make their decisions. If any of them block, it is well and truly dead. Any irrationality argument designed for the CMA appeal would be out the window.

If all remaining regulators let it pass then it comes down to ABK deciding if they want to renegotiate the deal and extend it to see the appeal process through. This will be the biggest hurdle.

There are a couple reasons why they would renegotiate;

1) ABK receiving more money (be it a higher break up fee or price per share).

2) Microsoft/ABK like their chances at winning the appeal. I doubt Microsoft would renegotiate if they didn't believe they had an avenue forward.

ABK's greed puts this at a near zero chance I'd say, but that would go up slightly if they negotiate past July 18.

Wouldn't it just be delayed if any other remaining country were to block. I would just assume MS would fight them in court like the FTC and win an appeal. From what I understand only the UK has a unique structure where even if MS wins the appeal with CAT then it goes back to the CMA for review again.

So Even if MS gets blocked I think they would just keep winning appeals until the UK is isolated. If the CMA blocks again or CAT upholds the CMA decision then MS can just close everywhere but the UK and pay any fines just like Ben Affleck and Matt Damon did in that movie about basketball shoes.

Why do you think it would be a hurdle for ATVI?. I am sure MS will increase the breakup fee.

 

[Clear]

The main difference between the CMA and EU is the former's unwillingness to monitor and police MS for 10 years!

Its all very well demanding behavioural remedies, but if they aren't seen to be obeyed and enforced when necessary... The whole point of regulation is based on the premise that business cannot be trusted to act in good faith, only self-interest.

 

[Banjo64]

So Even if MS gets blocked I think they would just keep winning appeals until the UK is isolated. If the CMA blocks again or CAT upholds the CMA decision then MS can just close everywhere but the UK and pay any fines just like Ben Affleck and Matt Damon did in that movie about basketball shoes.

The CMA would have the power to fine Microsoft up to 10% of their global revenue. Close to $20b.

Also, the agreement stated that the 4 major regulators had to approve the deal.

 

[Sanepar]

Wouldn't it just be delayed if any other remaining country were to block. I would just assume MS would fight them in court like the FTC and win an appeal. From what I understand only the UK has a unique structure where even if MS wins the appeal with CAT then it goes back to the CMA for review again.

So Even if MS gets blocked I think they would just keep winning appeals until the UK is isolated. If the CMA blocks again or CAT upholds the CMA decision then MS can just close everywhere but the UK and pay any fines just like Ben Affleck and Matt Damon did in that movie about basketball shoes.

Why do you think it would be a hurdle for ATVI?. I am sure MS will increase the breakup fee.

$20bn per year to do that.

 

[Three]

The main difference between the CMA and EU is the former's unwillingness to monitor and police MS for 10 years!

Its all very well demanding behavioural remedies, but if they aren't seen to be obeyed and enforced when necessary... The whole point of regulation is based on the premise that business cannot be trusted to act in good faith, only self-interest.

AFAIK the EU were unwilling to monitor or police too. Their reason being that MS convinced them the free licence to stream to current and future licence owners wouldn't require monitoring if it's free. The CMA disagrees and is of the belief that this gives MS control of the market. I've got to agree there. MS can make it prohibitively expensive to gain a licence outside of their subscription service to begin with, can push only windows server support in cloud and can still make the content exclusive or better on their platforms. The EU would not be monitoring that, but they believe MS would not have an effect or incentive on platform support and the inability of MS to reject a licence for competing cloud providers would suffice even with their subscription bundling. I personally don't think it's going to play out how the EC hopes.

 

[Kenshin775]

The CMA would have the power to fine Microsoft up to 10% of their global revenue. Close to $20b.

Also, the agreement stated that the 4 major regulators had to approve the deal.

Hoeg said the deal can be re-written to exclude the UK.

Also any excessive fine would force MS to leave the UK and would make the UK look anti business. 20 billion is never going to happen. I'd guess any fine would be less than the MS annual profit in the UK, anything more than that would give incentive for MS to leave the UK. Besides even if the CMA did try to issue a fine that huge would the UK goverment really allow it?

Also there is another route where MS could just spin off there gaming business in the UK. Pachter mentioned this and I know he is always wrong. So I will wait to see what Hoeg says about this option if he hasn't commented on it already.

 

[Thirty7ven]

If the CMA doesn’t approve then their SEC submitted contract clauses aren’t met. If they miss the deadline, they have to pay 3B.

For any of that to change ABK and MS will have to renegotiate, and shareholders will have to agree. And shareholders will agree the price of the brick just went up.

 

[Banjo64]

Hoeg said the deal can be re-written to exclude the UK.

Hoeg also said this was in the bag for MS prior to the CMA’s ruling.

Also any excessive fine would force MS to leave the UK and would make the UK look anti business. 20 billion is never going to happen. I'd guess any fine would be less than the MS annual profit in the UK, anything more than that would give incentive for MS to leave the UK. Besides even if the CMA did try to issue a fine that huge would the UK goverment really allow it?

Fining a company for ignoring the regulator is not excessive. No matter the amount.

Do you understand the reputational and financial damage that Microsoft would suffer from pulling all services from the UK? Every single government in the world would evaluate their use of Microsoft’s products if they show themselves to be that fragile and volatile.

I think you should re-consider ever saying that again, even as a hypothetical, as it is not based in reality.

Also there is another route where MS could just spin off their gaming business in the UK. Pachter mentioned this and I know he is always wrong. So I will wait to see what Hoeg says about this option if he hasn't commented on it already.

No, they can’t.

 

[Bernoulli]

Hoeg said the deal can be re-written to exclude the UK.

Also any excessive fine would force MS to leave the UK and would make the UK look anti business. 20 billion is never going to happen. I'd guess any fine would be less than the MS annual profit in the UK, anything more than that would give incentive for MS to leave the UK. Besides even if the CMA did try to issue a fine that huge would the UK goverment really allow it?

Also there is another route where MS could just spin off there gaming business in the UK. Pachter mentioned this and I know he is always wrong. So I will wait to see what Hoeg says about this option if he hasn't commented on it already.

Epic reeeee moment right here

 

[zapper]

Also there is another route where MS could just spin off there gaming business in the UK. Pachter mentioned this and I know he is always wrong. So I will wait to see what Hoeg says about this option if he hasn't commented on it already.

splitting off the gaming division in the uk would mean closing all the studios in the uk and relocating them to other territories, generating a multitude of layoffs, exorbitant costs and endless delays, without even having the certainty that they will reopen quickly and in full operation .

I also believe that it would be very inconvenient for future acquisitions or investments if a company allows itself to circumvent the law in this way

imo

 

[drganon]

Hoeg should be taken about as seriously as foss.

 

[zapper]

Hoeg should be taken about as seriously as foss.

hoeg law? the guy lost credibility when he equated the exclusivity of third parties like ff16 and the acquisition of a publisher like activision. i stopped following him when he proved to be blindly biased.

 

[Ogbert]

No one knows what the future will be like though... Sony shouldn't be allowed to acquire Game Studios because they currently dominate the console market. In the Future they might own 70%

CMA and your logic.

If Sony’s success continues then yes, they will come under even closer scrutiny.

Thresholds will be lowered and their acquisitions will be subject to even more consideration. Same with any market leader.

 

[Kenshin775]

Hoeg also said this was in the bag for MS prior to the CMA’s ruling.


Fining a company for ignoring the regulator is not excessive. No matter the amount.

Do you understand the reputational and financial damage that Microsoft would suffer from pulling all services from the UK? Every single government in the world would evaluate their use of Microsoft’s products if they show themselves to be that fragile and volatile.

I think you should re-consider ever saying that again, even as a hypothetical, as it is not based in reality.


No, they can’t.

Your disagree with hoeg. that's fine but he is well educated on these matters.

Not even going to waste time discussing if MS would leave the UK or UK would force MS out, not going to happen. you're right you have a point in principal any country can determine what is excessive. but it doesn't matter what you or I think is excessive. The question is would the UK government feel its excessive and even allow it? also i am not suggesting that MS would leave the UK or the UK would levy a fine so large that it would force MS to leave the UK. it seems like you do think that the UK would allow a huge fine?

And yes i do think MS would go against regulators in this situation. Why would other countries have a problem when every other country has no problem with how MS does business and MS doesnt have a problem with how every other country regulates? sounds like wishful thinking. also every country in the world can choose to not do business with MS if they want to or MS can choose not to do business with other countries.

as for ringfencing the uk Idas on era actually said it is possible too.

 

[Kenshin775]

Epic reeeee moment right here

Nobody gives a flying fuck what i say or what you say. if lawyers and financial analysts on TV are saying its possible then why would you not trust them if its actually what they do for a living and they are well educated on these matters.

 

[IFireflyl]

Nobody gives a flying fuck what i say or what you say. if lawyers and financial analysts on TV are saying its possible then why would you not trust them if its actually what they do for a living and they are well educated on these matters.

Possible =/= Probable

 

[sainraja]

I don't think it's any coincidence that Sony announced the Playstation Showcase for end of May, immediately after they have confirmation from the CMA and EU regarding the Activision/Microsoft deal. I really do think the primary reason we have not seen a showcase is due to this acquisition, as Sony did not want to weaken their position with a strong games showing for the future.

Now that the CMA has said that their concerns are unrelated to console competition, but ended up ruling in favor of blocking the deal for Cloud related reasons, and the EU has approved the deal despite having the same concerns as the CMA, Sony now knows the major regulatory impact direction and there's simply no need to withold their plans any longer. Them having a showcase won't weaken their position for the Activision/Microsoft deal in the future.

It's why I also think the claim that Jim Ryan is now focused on "Total Mindshare' and "Make a Statement and Make Noise" may have some truth as Jim has likely specifically withheld a significant portion of their long-term plans as a result of that merger.

Yeah, but that doesn't really make sense. If you are able to call out this behavior (withholding games due to the Activision deal), do you think the regulators would be blind to that?

I don't think the regulators will base their understanding of the industry on observing the behavior of each company during the time they are investigating or while the deal is "pending". They'd look at each company's output overall. So that doesn't make much sense to me, even if that was their reason to hold back.

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

Nobody gives a flying fuck what i say or what you say. if lawyers and financial analysts on TV are saying its possible then why would you not trust them if its actually what they do for a living and they are well educated on these matters.

*laughs in Pachter*

 

[gothmog]

The CMA would have the power to fine Microsoft up to 10% of their global revenue. Close to $20b.

Also, the agreement stated that the 4 major regulators had to approve the deal.

Yeah but free games. Worth it.

 

[Thirty7ven]

If Sony’s success continues then yes, they will come under even closer scrutiny.

Thresholds will be lowered and their acquisitions will be subject to even more consideration. Same with any market leader.

Considering the CMA dismissed console concerns on a market where there isn’t much difference in market share, in a case where the biggest third party publisher was being acquired I don’t know where are you getting this from.

 

[Kenshin775]

Possible =/= Probable

You're right we will have to see what happens if we get to that point in the process. still i trust the experts on what is possible. unless the only expert this reporter talked to was Pacther

 

[Ogbert]

I don't think it's any coincidence that Sony announced the Playstation Showcase for end of May, immediately after they have confirmation from the CMA and EU regarding the Activision/Microsoft deal. I really do think the primary reason we have not seen a showcase is due to this acquisition, as Sony did not want to weaken their position with a strong games showing for the future.

Now that the CMA has said that their concerns are unrelated to console competition, but ended up ruling in favor of blocking the deal for Cloud related reasons, and the EU has approved the deal despite having the same concerns as the CMA, Sony now knows the major regulatory impact direction and there's simply no need to withold their plans any longer. Them having a showcase won't weaken their position for the Activision/Microsoft deal in the future.

It's why I also think the claim that Jim Ryan is now focused on "Total Mindshare' and "Make a Statement and Make Noise" may have some truth as Jim has likely specifically withheld a significant portion of their long-term plans as a result of that merger.

You fellas really are letting your imaginations run wild on this one.

 

[Banjo64]

Your disagree with hoeg. that's fine but he is well educated on these matters.

Hoeg is American and from his bio: attended the world-renowned University of Michigan Law School. Richard graduated in the top five of his class while focusing on corporate governance and transactional law.

Unless there is any evidence that he’s had direct experience of dealing with UK law/regulation (I don’t know if he has), then I don’t see him as being an expert.

Not even going to waste time discussing if MS would leave the UK or UK would force MS out, not going to happen. you're right you have a point in principal any country can determine what is excessive. but it doesn't matter what you or I think is excessive. The question is would the UK government feel it’s excessive and even allow it? also i am not suggesting that MS would leave the UK or the UK would levy a fine so large that it would force MS to leave the UK. it seems like you do think that the UK would allow a huge fine?

And yes i do think MS would go against regulators in this situation. Why would other countries have a problem when every other country has no problem with how MS does business and MS doesnt have a problem with how every other country regulates? sounds like wishful thinking. also every country in the world can choose to not do business with MS if they want to or MS can choose not to do business with other countries.

Regulation isn’t done on a consensus basis. It doesn’t matter if 99% of countries pass it, that’s no justification for Microsoft to ignore the opposing regulators.

as for ringfencing the uk Idas on era actually said it is possible too.

I don’t care for Idas either but I don’t read his posts to be fair. Has he has any profound insight or knowledge about this deal that he displayed before the fact? e.g did he predict the CMA would block the merger due to the cloud concerns?

 

[Ogbert]

Considering the CMA dismissed console concerns on a market where there isn’t much difference in market share, in a case where the biggest third party publisher was being acquired I don’t know where are you getting this from.

I was responding to the speculation (more than likely) that Sony will become the dominant console in most major markets.

If you’re in a position of dominance, your moves are subject to more exacting scrutiny. That’s not in the least surprising.

 

[Three]

I was responding to the speculation (more than likely) that Sony will become the dominant console in most major markets.

If you’re in a position of dominance, your moves are subject to more exacting scrutiny. That’s not in the least surprising.

Where have you heard they will lower thresholds though?

 

[Ogbert]

Where have you heard they will lower thresholds though?

Apologies, we’re talking at cross purposes. I wasn’t referring to CMA thresholds (for an individual regulator). Rather, that when you’re in a position of dominance any acquisition or move you make is up for scrutiny.

 

[reksveks]

https://seekingalpha.com/news/39734...purchase-gets-china-antitrust-approval-report

Seekingalpha.com sourcing a dealreporter article on the SAMR approving the deal. Obviously still dead as a dodo.

 

[GHG]

https://seekingalpha.com/news/39734...purchase-gets-china-antitrust-approval-report

Seekingalpha.com sourcing a dealreporter article on the SAMR approving the deal. Obviously still dead as a dodo.

So, "we love China now" incoming?