Microsoft acquired Activision Blizzard King for $69 Billion on 2023-10-13

[Nesh]

Then you should go back and review my original post

you used the word forced
You quoted Tom Warren on his usage of the word force
You claimed MS said themselves that they were forced


Tell me who used the word forced

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658126474543607808

Vestager did not use the word force
Brad Smith did not use the word force

I'm not hung up on the word force, you could have easily have solved this by saying ok, they weren't forced, they had to agree to, they had to compromise to, they had to add an additional concession that by not giving this up they were being anti-competitive. Instead you chose to alter the definition to win the argument. Force is not a concession. Concession is admission, adminssion of the reality that they cannot get what they want because it is not realistic or logistically possible if everyone is doing their jobs correctly. In admission of reality they signed the concession because this still works for them. According to you there is no grey area, "there is YES they were forced or NO they were not forced".

They said no to divestiture of COD when the CMA requested that for them to continue without blocking.
now you know what force means. Saying no means having a choice.

In this case, they were not forced. Thank you.

Do you realise how much you are making a big fuss out of nothing?

 

[eastmen]

I think the hypothetical that was being discussed was how would Sony handle a user on their streaming service wanting to stream a game that they own on PC that may or may not exist on console/PlayStation ... I believe World of Warcraft was the example being used.

Regards,
SB

Yes I was asking about wow because there is no native playstation version. I am not sure how sony has their cloud set up. Is it running off playstations or pcs ?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658408320057630721

I am sure the CMA loves being told how wrong it was in its assessment

Hour long video of the UK Parliament session and FM's thread about it:

Parliamentlive.tv

Business and Trade Committee

parliamentlive.tv

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658411152487993345

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658426963025862657

CMA seems like it wants to dig in here but the problem for the CMA is MS taking the FTC to court and they can force out whatever happened behind the closed doors meeting between the FTC and CMA. Both agencies are going to look very bad. The UK is closed for business and worse its going to be the FTC's enforcer.


Found these comments interesting

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658489799244939267

 

[Inuhanyou]

Microsoft definitely made sure EU didn't block the deal after the CMA fiasco, and after Sunaks comments, the CMA will probably be under a lot of pressure as well

If the deal eventually does get fully approved, I wonder what Sony's response will be. Hopefully not something reactionary like buying square enix or something. But by then the floodgates will have fully been opened. Am not anticipating positive outcomes

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Microsoft definitely made sure EU didn't block the deal after the CMA fiasco, and after Sunaks comments, the CMA will probably be under a lot of pressure as well

Under pressure from whom? UK Ministers and the Prime Minster have endorsed the decision as being right for the UK. There is zero political interest in the decision. Nobody is pressuring the CMA. Microsoft and Activision-Blizzard aren't happy but business is rarely supporting of regulatory processes.

There are clear grounds for appeal, so the parties can pursue that and see if there are any procedural issues that might provide leverage here, but as been established, the few times that the CMA was changed a position on a reversal, have came with heavy remedies that were as unappealing as the original rejection.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Under pressure from whom? UK Ministers and the Prime Minster have endorsed the decision as being right for the UK. There is zero political interest in the decision. Nobody is pressuring the CMA. Microsoft and Activision-Blizzard aren't happy but business is rarely supporting of regulatory processes.

There are clear grounds for appeal, so the parties can pursue that and see if there are any procedural issues that might provide leverage here, but as been established, the few times that the CMA was changed a position on a reversal, have came with heavy remedies that were as unappealing as the original rejection.

I could have sworn I saw an article stating that Sunak was "going to make sure" the CMA stayed out of the way of controversial business oriented decisions. Maybe I misunderstood the article itself although it was linked from Twitter so maybe that's what I get for trusting it

 

[stu11]

Microsoft definitely made sure EU didn't block the deal after the CMA fiasco, and after Sunaks comments, the CMA will probably be under a lot of pressure as well

If the deal eventually does get fully approved, I wonder what Sony's response will be. Hopefully not something reactionary like buying square enix or something. But by then the floodgates will have fully been opened. Am not anticipating positive outcomes

I think we may see other tech companies like Amazon and Apple buying up publishers, there has already been rumors that both Apple and Amazon had been sniffing around the likes of EA. Amazon also seemed to have gotten quite cozy with Embracer lately, first announcing the Tomb Raider deal and then the new Lord of the Rings MMO. I could see Amazon just snapping up Embracer quite easily, which would get them Crystal Dynamics, this of course could snag MS's development plans since Crystal Dynamics is currently helping out on the development of the Perfect Dark reboot after the studio mismanagement over at The Initiative. It would give Amazon and Luna a ready-made network of studios for making exclusive content for Luna. My only doubts are whether Amazon how committed to Cloud Gaming are they and whether they are prepared to go "All In" and make that kind of investment.

As for Sony, I believe they would immediately work to lessen their reliance on the COD franchise to their platform, maybe cut all cross promotional material for the game regarding the PS5. Then work to build relationships with other companies and games, obviously push their own current/new live service games from Bungie, Firewalk Studios, Haven Studios and whatever (if anything at all) comes out of Deviation Games. They may make purchases in Japan, possibly Square Enix, but Nintendo might fight that. There was speculation that Take 2 could become an acquisition target for Sony, but that is probably unlikely, I'm sure they will just sign an exclusivity deal with them instead of buying outright.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I could have sworn I saw an article stating that Sunak was "going to make sure" the CMA stayed out of the way of controversial business oriented decisions. Maybe I misunderstood the article itself although it was linked from Twitter so maybe that's what I get for trusting it

You may well have read that statement but I find it hard to believe it would come from Number 10 because it's inconsistent with the CMA's role. The UK Prime Minister supported the CMA decision and rejected Microsoft hyperbolic take on the situation.

The parties involved can wail and complain, but that cuts no ice with politicians in the UK. Maybe if big tech companies paid more tax their opinions might resonate more..

 

[chris1515]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658537655939002369

 

[Newguy]

Thinking about the absurd amount of money $69b is, they could fund 14 new studios with an average budget of $100m each per year for the best part of 50 years before burning through it all. I get that it's much riskier instead of buying some of the largest, most established IP, studios etc in the industry that are guaranteed money makers but surely they could make a lot of really great new IP given those vast resources. Instead it's power consolodation and slowly seeing an industry get absorbed by a handful of companies which isn't the most exciting thing

 

[AlphaWolf]

Thinking about the absurd amount of money $69b is, they could fund 14 new studios with an average budget of $100m each per year for the best part of 50 years before burning through it all. I get that it's much riskier instead of buying some of the largest, most established IP, studios etc in the industry that are guaranteed money makers but surely they could make a lot of really great new IP given those vast resources. Instead it's power consolodation and slowly seeing an industry get absorbed by a handful of companies which isn't the most exciting thing

1. It's not as simple to set up a studio as spending the money.

2. It would be years to get ANY ROI from just funding new studios. Probably at least 3 years for any.

3. ABK is currently running 12 studios. And has annual revenue over 8 billion.

 

[wco81]

I wish Florian Mueller would separate his takes from the reporting of what happened. They should talk about the live stream of what happened of UK Parlaiment and then have a section of how he views it. Not intermixing the two within the same tweet.

When did a supposed open source guy take a pro MS position in anything?

 

[wco81]

You may well have read that statement but I find it hard to believe it would come from Number 10 because it's inconsistent with the CMA's role. The UK Prime Minister supported the CMA decision and rejected Microsoft hyperbolic take on the situation.

The parties involved can wail and complain, but that cuts no ice with politicians in the UK. Maybe if big tech companies paid more tax their opinions might resonate more..

Sunak has his own issues right?

His party is expected to lose the next election? Thought it may be a couple of years out.

 

[Sonic]

Thinking about the absurd amount of money $69b is, they could fund 14 new studios with an average budget of $100m each per year for the best part of 50 years before burning through it all. I get that it's much riskier instead of buying some of the largest, most established IP, studios etc in the industry that are guaranteed money makers but surely they could make a lot of really great new IP given those vast resources. Instead it's power consolodation and slowly seeing an industry get absorbed by a handful of companies which isn't the most exciting thing

This isn't the easiest thing to do. It would be awesome if it was the route MS wanted to take but it presents so many challenges that it just doesn't make much sense. If they were to do it they should start out small and build the teams up organically. That takes a long time if it even gets to that point. Go to SEGA or some other company not doing much with decent old IP and pay some indie devs to create games from it. Foster those relationships.


That's the real big thing though. It's the content that MS is after and it's what they need. A company as big as Activision has a huge past, current, and future library that will be a great addition to Xbox or GamePass. If the content and the dev teams are worth $70 billion seems to be a yes for MS.

Whether they can successfully execute on their acquired content and dev teams in the long term remains to be seen. I have hopes and doubts. It wouldn't shock me to see a few of these teams not last a full 10 years.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Whether they can successfully execute on their acquired content and dev teams in the long term remains to be seen. I have hopes and doubts. It wouldn't shock me to see a few of these teams not last a full 10 years.

Yeah, this is what we're all waiting to see. So far, everything that has been released by the acquired studios other than Hi Fi Rush started development prior to MS acquiring them, I believe.

It'll be interesting if the studios end up doing better with more creative freedom and funding, or if they'll dig themselves a big hole (like Lionhead ended up doing).

Regards,
SB

 

[stu11]

Yeah, this is what we're all waiting to see. So far, everything that has been released by the acquired studios other than Hi Fi Rush started development prior to MS acquiring them, I believe.

It'll be interesting if the studios end up doing better with more creative freedom and funding, or if they'll dig themselves a big hole (like Lionhead ended up doing).

Regards,
SB

Digging a big hole sounds like what has happened to Everwild at Rare.

"Everwild is a real mess. They try to talk diplomatically about it when they're in public, like 'people hear things about the creative director leaving and things getting rebooted and that's overstated' — it's not that overstated. They've rebooted that thing and they don't know exactly what the state of it... they are still figuring that out, and it's a mess."

"This is not me just using colourful descriptions — the people working on that game don't really know what's going on with that game. That's how much of a mess it is right now."

Sounds like they spent 10 years looking for a game.

"Everwild being bumped back to 2024 would mark a whole decade of development."

 

[fehu]

There's a date or a deadline for FTC to quote CMA's response?

 

[stu11]

It sounds like some people connected to the European Commission do not have much faith in MS's "committments" Not really surprising.
It also sounds like they think MS shouldn't be allowed to make shortcuts either.

Former Chief Competition Economist of the European Commission, Tommaso Valleti, responded to the division between the CMA and EU decisions by noting that “commitments don’t work generally, and in digital specifically,” because there is little incentive to follow up on the commitment after the deal is struck. He further noted that “Microsoft has spectacular financial and talent resources. They should make, not buy. Society would be better off by having Microsoft and Activision compete.”

Also it seems that Microsoft has more "influence" with the European Commission than perhaps they have with the UK's CMA, I guess they aren't paying their UK lobbyists enough ..lol

" According to a January 2023 report by Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), Big Tech is the biggest lobby sector in the EU, ahead of pharmaceuticals and fossil fuels. Google, Amazon, Meta (formerly Facebook), Apple, and Microsoft (known collectively as GAFAM), spends upwards of $28.8 million “on influencing EU institutions.” It calls for urgent scrutiny of “so-called economic consultancies, whose activities take place below the radar of public scrutiny.”

In a move that it calls “spamming the regulator”, consultants that are seen by regulators as neutral overwhelm regulators with studies and reports. CEO cites an interview between Valleti and the NGO Balanced Economy Project: “I saw the consultants hijack a certain way of doing economic work. They do this on a massive scale, to create doubt.They bombard you. They say ‘well, this merger could bring all these fantastic efficiencies: here is a possibility you should consider.’ You know that in practice this will not play a role, but then you have the burden of proof as an authority to dismiss those claims. It is a very dirty game.” [\QUOTE]

How many more "dirty games" are MS going to play ..lol

 

[Nisaaru]

You may well have read that statement but I find it hard to believe it would come from Number 10 because it's inconsistent with the CMA's role. The UK Prime Minister supported the CMA decision and rejected Microsoft hyperbolic take on the situation.

The parties involved can wail and complain, but that cuts no ice with politicians in the UK. Maybe if big tech companies paid more tax their opinions might resonate more..

As predicted it gets political. So the real question is what does the UK prime minister want from the US government/MS. The whole CMA thing is just a pretext for something else otherwise that new prime minister wouldn't openly support it.

"cuts no ice with politicians in the UK". You don't have a 7xx Million net worth like the current UK prime minister without using an ice breaker to cut through tax regulations. Come on

This isn't about MS or Sony anymore or the silly gaming/cloud market.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Hilarious that some people are pulling out 2 year old articles on Everwild as if they are telling the story of what's going on as MS Studios.

 

[eastmen]

1. It's not as simple to set up a studio as spending the money.

2. It would be years to get ANY ROI from just funding new studios. Probably at least 3 years for any.

3. ABK is currently running 12 studios. And has annual revenue over 8 billion.

3 years is overly generous. I think it be closer to 7 years for anything AAA size. First you need to hire the head developers , then you need to fill out a staff and then start development while growing out the staff. New triple A games that aren't direct sequels take 4 + years already. From a new studio it be closer to 7.

It's why MS's competitors buy studios and don't grow them from the ground up anymore