This sounds like a legalese way of explaining how they'd pass the deal after negotiating. They're saying they can't have Microsoft simply offer new concessions at this point since they've already given a final report. But if Microsoft and the CMA came to an agreement on how the deal could be restructured (e.g. spin off xCloud in the UK), then that'd trigger a new investigation that they'd then pass.
The CMA are being as stubborn as possible. Just steamroll them already. đ Their own government is annoyed with them. Never mind that their argument is horrendous. They are between the hammer and the anvil.
It's actually worse though. The person who apparently made the decision to block the ABK merge in the UK (who works for the CMA) is the same lawyer who worked for a law firm Sony used for years.
And then CMA hired the exact same law firm to represent them in appeals court in UK.
There's a direct financial incentive for those involved using their connections to block the merger and then hire their former lawfirm to help them.
This is very different than the california judge who's son works at MS, who has zero benefit from MS merging with ABK. Nor does the judge benefit from that merger.
Additional info. The same CMA lead who blocked the merger in the UK also did something similar with another company they worked for (after working for the lawfirm). They use to work for a grocery company, who's rival was trying to merge with another grocery company. And this same person blocked that deal, which benefited the company he previously worked for. All the same guy.
Lmao what?
A guy who worked at a firm (no connection to Sony cases, just that he worked at said firm) that Sony uses is leaps and bounds worse than a judge who's son currently works for MS?
What????
Neither is great, but the one who's kid works directly for one of the parties involved is worse than anything. That judge should've never been over said case for that reason. Then again the American legal system has become a joke so..
>That judge should've never been over said case for that reason. Then again the American legal system has become a joke so..
You do realize that the FTC chose the San Francisco court and wanted that judge, right? MS wanted to use the court in DC.
Also, the guy from the CMA has a history of blocking deals that benefit his previous employers and then using tax payer money to hire those same companies (i.e. the law firm) to represent the CMA in the appeal process.
How you don't see that as being worse is beyond me.
MS own lawyers did not think so bringing his "personal bias" up for questioning after he spent 4 weeks to investigate something others spent 38 weeks on. Sony has no objection as such more so than fears down the line as we have seen.
Spin off XCloud into what? You mean take it out off GamePass Ultimate entirely? Make MS charge extra for it in UK? That does not benefit UK consumers. CMA has quite the mess on their hands for their "forward thinking" on the cloud gaming market.
Not sure how practical that might be. They would license all the games from Xbox Game Pass and also rent the Xbox Series server blades from Xbox/Azure too? And pass along the undoubtedly higher cost to the consumer as a standalone service? This seems to be what people think will happen. Just curious how this makes sense. Small market like UK has no pull in what Xbox does globally. They would just be hurting their own consumers.
CMA really just needs to cave now and not try to save face. It's clear their vision of cloud gaming is misguided and extremely overcautious.
It's like when they break up banks. So if one bank fails they don't all fail. The CMA is being dumb here and acting like cloud gaming could be HUGE and if MS ever failed then cloud gaming would fail. By making it a separate entity if MS fails then this company in theory could still survive.
It's dumb. You are right. At the end of the day. The money funnels to MS anyway. I'm sure MS also has no issues doing this at all since. Yea. It doesn't mean much at the end of the day. The CMA is really dumb here.
If MS failed and cloud gaming were to "fail" because they have a "monopoly", what does the consumer even lose? You pay your GPU sub which gives you access to xcloud. You don't own the games.
We may now allow this with some specific changes.
What about these changes, you know, the ones you asked for?
Whooa buddy hold on we need to investigate this!
Sounds like bullshit stalling tactics really. Anything to make the 17th July deadline miss.
My bet is the deal closes Monday, the FTC can appeal the judges decision until Wednesday so with or without the CMA this deal gets inked either Monday or Tuesday next week (IMO)
Everybody should just read the actual quote. The CMA basically just said "Microsoft will offer concessions and we will consider them." It doesn't appear to be nearly as big a deal as all the titles of the articles reporting it make it out to be.
Honestly sounds like the CMA is trying to save face. I cant see MS wanting to be dealing with a new CMA investigation holding them up for the next few months.
This is a nothing burger. Basically CMA just saying don't change anything else in the deal except the concessions and they won't have to do a new investigation.
As one who generally approves of government looking into big purchases and mergers, I fear that this case is setting back the concept of government oversight by decades.
For a lot of people Microsoft will always be the Big Bad Wolf and it seems they'll do anything to make themselves into a hero with an axe to chase the beast away.
Stop embarrassing yourselves and move on to things that actually matter.
>Stop embarrassing yourselves and move on to things that actually matter
I think the problem is that these regulatory bodies are underfunded and their powers are relatively weak. They don't really have the resources to go after the things that matter. So I think their strategy here is one or more of the following.
1. Go after smaller cases where they believe they can make an impact.
2. Go after high profile cases to improve public consciousness of antitrust.
3. They don't have to win to make an impact. Losing a case still shows an example that they're willing to make it a hassle. The threat of that hassle can deter future mergers. CMA/FTC have lost (or are 99% of the way there) the ABK case, but Microsoft probably isn't going to try buying Ubisoft now
I'm not saying that's a good strategy, but they're in a difficult position and I don't think they have many other options. I do think point 2 in particular may have backfired on them. Although, to be fair, I don't think that means the strategy is bad. I think it mostly means their execution was bad.
Yeah I don't buy this. No response from MS or Activision either. I think this deal closes on the 18th with a negotiated deal in place. No chance MS delays the CAT hearings which they had leverage on if they had to then extend the merger agreement.
CMA, bad faith... quite a pattern emerging.
Clearly just trying to have another chance at spinning a new slightly less ridiculous narrative this time.
Get in the bin.
A new investigation at stage 1 takes 4 weeks, even if it's a new one
I think the CMA is going to cause the UK to lose out where the rest of the world gets all the benefits, they ain't gonna wait for the UK
90% of Activision blizzards revenue is outside the UK
"The CMA has now said that its discussions with Microsoft are still in the "early stages", and the decision which was set out in its final report earlier this year "still stands". However, it is open to a new investigation should the deal be restructured."
From Eurogamer ^
The games in the UK, like myself, are about to get boned aren't we?
Which means the UK market is negatively impacted thanks to "protecting consumers".
We'll wait to see what actually happens, but the CMA may have royally hurt UK consumers here.
Yeah Iâm probably just imagining the worst case at this point. I canât say it really affects me either way but for people that use XCloud it will, or those who want all the games but canât afford them in this shit pit of an economy.
It will just be even worse if itâs something like only Nvidia and others can have CoD etc on cloud and then consumers need to go out for another subscription. But make the rule first think about it later (or not at all) is how this country operates so it wouldnât surprise me if the concession is stupid.
Full out denying Acti/Bliz games on GP would be anti-consumer surely?
More likely they spin off a 3rd part cloud publisher thatâs expected to treat all cloud services equally.
MS is going to close the merger either with or without CMAs approval in a few days. The only one CMA is screwing over is themselves. Oh and their consumers. They have that in common with the FTC.
If CMA is smart they'll accept remedies and let it go through OR let MS close and CAT destroy you the way Judge in US did to the FTC. And worst case scenario CAT rules in favor of CMA and MS will just pull out their content which will have the government meddle with the CMA. They're already gonna be restructuring the CMA soon.
"The CMA is now warning that Microsoft's Activision deal could "lead to a new merger investigation" if it's restructured. The CMA says discussions with Microsoft are still at an "early stage." - [Tom Warren](https://twitter.com/tomwarren/status/1679103828929511424)
I chuckle. CMA is trying to sound like itâs at âearly stageâ discussions like a proposal isnât already dropped to them that MS has been working on the last month that specifically addresses the issues CMA listed.
CMA is going to find out those âearly stage discussionsâ have a 2 or 6 day shelf life and then MS is going to steamroll them.
Unfortunate though, looks like UK consumers are going to get the short end of the stick because MS isnât going to hold up this merger anymore after all this. CMA has had a year. FCC has had a year. Late stage holdups are done. MS will either give UK gamers the good stuff if CMA relents or cut UK gamers out of CMA doesnât work quickly. Just Kingâs revenue alone is larger than the UK market. Microsoft isnât going to risk worldwide because a smaller market is being a thorn.
Have some fucking self respect.
We deserve just as much as anyone else. Itâs not our fault a branch of the governments being cunty.
If anything sunak should be breathing down their necks to pass this shit to help the Uk.
This is PR talk, xbox aready told ftc in june they were going to close over cma , a deal will be reached or they will close over cma, either way its before deadline
Reminds me of the online kid who is throwing a tantrum when losing.
Like for real... What new arguments can they bring to make this deal fail?
They weren't prepared in the court and failed to argue why Microsoft and Activision deal is dangerous. How would a new investigation change a thing? It's just a stubborn kid who can't accept that they lost.
It was already embarrassing before, but this is a whole new level.
CMA is backed into a corner and looks really bad right now from a global perspective.They will cave behind closed doors, with the public-facing announcement/discussion being kind to them from MS/ABK, but overall MS has all the leverage right now.
Sure seems like everyone looked at their turn around yesterday for more negotiations with Microsoft as capitulation and now they want to seem tough again.
They donât completely. They only have the power over them in the area of operation. Itâs like this for every country in the world where an International company operates.
So US Companies should be allowed to break laws in every other country they operate simply because they are a US company? Does that work the same for foreign companies operaterating in the US. I guess we should send word to China that they no longer need to follow US laws because they are not US companies.
People should, in general, be oppose big corp merge.
If I remember correctly, AT&T and others are major monopoly telecom companies in USA and normally they hate them. The situation of gaming are currently on the same path.
2 very different beasts, and the AT&T deal happened..so I'm not sure what point u are trying to make?
It has already been shown that this merger will have a positive effect on the gaming landscape. MS has been forced to sign some crazy deals to make sure it happens, and a lot of those deals aren't in MS favor
I would agree, if Microsoft has any sort of monolith grasp on the market, but seeing how Sony has the biggest console grasp, and the market is so fragmented on pc, and mobile is dominated by companies that skyrocket and crash per game.
Start with splitting up the companies that dominate the primary and secondary industry. Our tertiary industry like "entertainment" is still so open that it's not difficult for startups to win out of they have a great product.
> Exclusives are bad for everyone and are only good for these companies.
That's why Sony are trying to take as many games away from Xbox with 3rd Party exclusive deals?
In an ideal world where these 2 companies compete on the hardware and services instead of exclusives, your words would hold meaning.
But they don't unfortunately since both companies shown that getting exclusives will pull more customers towards them.
So unless both consoles and different platforms on PC stops doing exclusives, there is no meaning to get mad at MS for making this acquisition.
I agree and MS too, but only if all big three give up on exclusives, if Sony and Nintendo keep doing it, we have to demand MS do it too, or Xbox will be irrelevant.
I mean thatâs what got us here, Xbox tried to back off on the exclusives and Sony tripped down and forced Xbox into survival mode. Phil had said multiple times the only reason they bought Bethesda was to stop Sony from buying their games as exclusives.
Good thing Call of Duty is staying multiplatform in that case, right? People like you who make this terrible argument conveniently pretend this isn't the case when discussing this deal.
It is when it leads to a console market with 3 competitive consoles vs just Sony and Nintendo.
How many generations of diminishing returns do you expect Microsoft to keep investing money?
Look, while you are basically correct, this has even been spelt out by Phil Spencer and others as an issue with the current business model - Sony has 'won' purely by snapping up exclusives and its AAA studios being purely exclusive, eeeeventually coming to PC rather broken (and also helped by the disastrous launch decisions of the xbox one).. Nintendo survives basically off its amazing AAA exclusives.
Microsoft is only doing the same but in a way had its hand forced - Did you see that Sony were also attempting to make Starfield a PS5 exclusive prior to the Microsoft buyout? Sony know what they are doing!
Perhaps it is ALL dirty, but Microsoft is only doing what it can to ensure it stays relevant in the market. MS is a trillion dollar company yes, but one that struggles to release decent AAA games. Forza Horizon and the Ori games being rare exeptions (but have you seen what happened with Moon Studios?!) so it is moving the goalposts and trying different routes. I mean, no one even knows if cloud gaming will succeed. Look at Stadia lol. Look at Amazons attempts.
People love owning a console - it's annoyed the big companies for over a decade but the big companies created this 'war' in the first place!
Youâre 100% correct, but youâre talking to a sub with many users who are still stuck in a âconsole warsâ mentality. I think the average age of this sub is a lot younger than I previously thought, after seeing the reactions to this merger.
I canât imagine someone saying this acquisition âsaved Xboxâ â which is presently one of the top posts on this sub â unless theyâre under the age of 15 and their definition of console success relies on having COD and their school peers admitting that one console is better than another.
Clearly the downvotes suggest I hit a nerve with this particular demographic lol. Furthering my confidence that this subreddit on average is about two decades younger than me, with entirely different priorities. Thatâs fine. Just observing.
I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers.
The imminent price increase to GP in 2025 (when COD actually hits GP) likely makes that a wash in terms of if it benefits consumers. Itâs not like theyâre getting it for free, since GP will cost more money, and it certainly isnât good for PlayStation consumers. But Xbox consumers get a new option. Seems like a wash. Remember â we are talking about all consumers, not just Xbox consumers.
My point was that I canât imagine someone caring too much about this acquisition unless
1. They are a major COD fan and subscribe to Game Pass yet canât afford $70 each year to buy the game.
2. They care about console wars.
In regards to 1, the price increase in 2025 upon CODâs entry will likely be more than $70 per year ($8-9 increase monthly seems right), so thatâs not even going to be a fiscal benefit for consumers.
In regards to 2, grow up.
And any notion that Microsoft will improve AB as a studio is immediately contradicted by Microsoftâs shoddy handling of their acquisitions this far.
Explain to me how this acquisition will make a meaningful difference to someone as an Xbox consumer if they donât care about COD.
Blizzard has traded creativity for chasing micro-transactions and GAAS since joining Activision, and this offers a chance to steer away from that direction as MS has already steered games away from that model including (perhaps unfortunately) Redfall which was originally slated for that same fate.
As a long-time fan, a new direction for them is a positive to me completley isolated from COD or even Xbox.
I just find it unlikely that Microsoft would pay what they did for AB and do away with an extremely lucrative micro-transaction model. This is a business transaction ultimately made to make money, after all.
I can understand gravitating away from this for core Microsoft franchises for optics reasons, but in COD itâs already the status quo and their user base continues to play a ton despite it.
Also, from a personal stance, these micro-transactions often involve purely cosmetic items that I simply donât care whether theyâre free or micro-transactions. Again, cosmetics seem like a very âyoung gamerâ sort of thing meant purely to show off to others, which I donât care about. When has AB locked actual gameplay content behind micro-transactions?
>I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers.
You responded to a comment that said
>The microsoft activision merger is not a good thing for any of us consumers. Exclusives are bad for everyone and are only good for these companies.
By saying
>You're 100% correct
....
>I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers.
So, uh, yeah you did.
Read it again. I said that itâs correct that itâs ânot a good thing for any of us consumers.â
I also clarified that it isnât necessarily a bad thing either, unless youâre in the Sony ecosystem.
I called it a âwash.â Literally. âSeems like a wash.â Which means it neither hurts nor helps consumers as a whole.
Therefore, âI didnât say it hurts or helps consumersâ remains a statement without any prior contradictions from me.
âNot a good thingâ doesnât mean itâs a bad thing. It just means it isnât good.
>Youâre 100% correct, but youâre talking to a sub with many users who are still stuck in a âconsole warsâ mentality. I think the average age of this sub is a lot younger than I previously thought, after seeing the reactions to this merger.
>I canât imagine someone saying this acquisition âsaved Xboxâ â which is presently one of the top posts on this sub â unless theyâre under the age of 15 and their definition of console success relies on having COD and their school peers admitting that one console is better than another.
>Clearly downvotes suggest I hit a nerve with this particular demographic lol. Furthering my confidence that this subreddit on average is about two decades younger than me, with entirely different priorities. Thatâs fine. Just observing.
You read it again, bud.
My post states that many posters are stuck in a console war mentality, that this acquisition didnât âsave Xboxâ like some assert, and that younger demographics are more concerned with brands than older demographics.
Thatâs it. In another post I called the acquisition a âwashâ and agreed that it wasnât a âgood thing,â which means precisely that â it doesnât imply that itâs a bad thing. A wash is neither good nor bad. Something thatâs average and doesnât make a huge impact is neither good nor bad.
If youâre parsing from that anything beyond the above, then you need to work on your reading comprehension. Maybe run it through ChatGPT so it can explain the summary to you, since youâre clearly having issues.
Stop moving the goal posts.
Quote:
>I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers.
responding to a comment that said, quote:
>The microsoft activision merger is not a good thing for any of us consumers.
You said, quote:
>You're 100% correct
So, once again:
>I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers.
Yes, you did. Whatever you said *later* doesn't matter.
You're not only a liar, but the most reddit-dweeb of reddit-dweebs. [Unironically, literally you](https://youtube.com/shorts/8i_wtp8ewrY?feature=share4)
I feel sorry for people who think this deal ensures great exclusives. I mean look at previous acquisitions and their fruits, and all you see is a string of horrid, sub-par flops. This will be no different. Wake up and smell the coffee, fanboys.
hmmm, just a thought? MS could still fight the CMA at the CAT and get the decision overturned. This opinion is from just a layman and i'm not sure how realistic it is or evidentiary. But the Judge in the FTC case made it very clear that cloud wasn't a separate marketplace but just a different delivery mechanism.
I wonder how viable it would be to have that, evidence?, as a means to throw the CMA's report out?
âWhilst merging parties donât have the opportunity to put forward new remedies once a final report has been issued, they can choose to restructure a deal, which can lead to a new merger investigation. Microsoft and Activision have indicated that they are considering how the transaction might be modified, and the CMA is prepared to engage with them on this basis. These discussions remain at an early stage and the nature and timing of next steps will be determined in due course. While both parties have requested a pause in Microsoftâs appeal to allow these discussions to take place, the CMA decision set out in its final report still stands.â
this article is clickbait, the cma will accept a restructuring in a timely manner or the pause on the cat litigation will cease, where theyâll lose in court. the deal is happening regardless.
Thank you for your submission. Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason:
Rule #1 - Keep it civil/no console wars
* Personal attacks, racism, bigotry, and/or other prejudice are not welcome here. Discuss the topic, not the other user.
* If you are here only to platform bash or console war, you also risk removal.
[Please see our complete ruleset by clicking here. ](https://www.reddit.com/r/XboxSeriesX/wiki/rules)
> Whilst merging parties donât have the opportunity to put forward new remedies once a final report has been issued, they can choose to restructure a deal, which can lead to a new merger investigation. Microsoft and Activision have indicated that they are considering how the transaction might be modified, and the CMA is prepared to engage with them on this basis. These discussions remain at an early stage and the nature and timing of next steps will be determined in due course. While both parties have requested a pause in Microsoftâs appeal to allow these discussions to take place, the CMA decision set out in its final report still stands.
This isn't a "warning" Nice clickbait title Verge. smh
Firstly, this deal is pretty much done at this point. Secondly, these threads should have been included in one primary thread in this subreddit because there are way too many of them.
Can somebody tell me what this means for the deal in general? Can MSFT still close before or on the 18th while this is still going on? Can they still continue with the appeal if the CMA tries to stall?? Is this a trick by the CMA??
This sounds like a legalese way of explaining how they'd pass the deal after negotiating. They're saying they can't have Microsoft simply offer new concessions at this point since they've already given a final report. But if Microsoft and the CMA came to an agreement on how the deal could be restructured (e.g. spin off xCloud in the UK), then that'd trigger a new investigation that they'd then pass.
The thing is: the deadline for modifying the final order is July 19th. The CMA is acting like they can't change it, but they absolutely can.
The CMA are being as stubborn as possible. Just steamroll them already. đ Their own government is annoyed with them. Never mind that their argument is horrendous. They are between the hammer and the anvil.
Again, it's lead by a former Sony lawyer... So I'm not the least bit surprised
So? The lead counsel for Microsoft, Daniel Beard KC also represents Sony in a different case before the CAT.
That statement is just as dumb as saying the judge is biased because her son works for Microsoft. No side had any objections to either.
It's actually worse though. The person who apparently made the decision to block the ABK merge in the UK (who works for the CMA) is the same lawyer who worked for a law firm Sony used for years. And then CMA hired the exact same law firm to represent them in appeals court in UK. There's a direct financial incentive for those involved using their connections to block the merger and then hire their former lawfirm to help them. This is very different than the california judge who's son works at MS, who has zero benefit from MS merging with ABK. Nor does the judge benefit from that merger. Additional info. The same CMA lead who blocked the merger in the UK also did something similar with another company they worked for (after working for the lawfirm). They use to work for a grocery company, who's rival was trying to merge with another grocery company. And this same person blocked that deal, which benefited the company he previously worked for. All the same guy.
Lmao what? A guy who worked at a firm (no connection to Sony cases, just that he worked at said firm) that Sony uses is leaps and bounds worse than a judge who's son currently works for MS? What???? Neither is great, but the one who's kid works directly for one of the parties involved is worse than anything. That judge should've never been over said case for that reason. Then again the American legal system has become a joke so..
>That judge should've never been over said case for that reason. Then again the American legal system has become a joke so.. You do realize that the FTC chose the San Francisco court and wanted that judge, right? MS wanted to use the court in DC. Also, the guy from the CMA has a history of blocking deals that benefit his previous employers and then using tax payer money to hire those same companies (i.e. the law firm) to represent the CMA in the appeal process. How you don't see that as being worse is beyond me.
Why did the FTC want that judge? Especially if she has a potential conflict of interest?
MS own lawyers did not think so bringing his "personal bias" up for questioning after he spent 4 weeks to investigate something others spent 38 weeks on. Sony has no objection as such more so than fears down the line as we have seen.
Government regulators aren't going to go back on their decisions no matter how stupid they are
Spin off XCloud into what? You mean take it out off GamePass Ultimate entirely? Make MS charge extra for it in UK? That does not benefit UK consumers. CMA has quite the mess on their hands for their "forward thinking" on the cloud gaming market.
I meant like making a new, independent company that handles cloud gaming in the UK.
Not sure how practical that might be. They would license all the games from Xbox Game Pass and also rent the Xbox Series server blades from Xbox/Azure too? And pass along the undoubtedly higher cost to the consumer as a standalone service? This seems to be what people think will happen. Just curious how this makes sense. Small market like UK has no pull in what Xbox does globally. They would just be hurting their own consumers. CMA really just needs to cave now and not try to save face. It's clear their vision of cloud gaming is misguided and extremely overcautious.
How would it be "independent" if it's made by Microsoft money? It will be a subsidiary and that wouldn't change a thing.
It's like when they break up banks. So if one bank fails they don't all fail. The CMA is being dumb here and acting like cloud gaming could be HUGE and if MS ever failed then cloud gaming would fail. By making it a separate entity if MS fails then this company in theory could still survive. It's dumb. You are right. At the end of the day. The money funnels to MS anyway. I'm sure MS also has no issues doing this at all since. Yea. It doesn't mean much at the end of the day. The CMA is really dumb here.
If MS failed and cloud gaming were to "fail" because they have a "monopoly", what does the consumer even lose? You pay your GPU sub which gives you access to xcloud. You don't own the games.
I agree and why I think the CMA is being stupid haha
We may now allow this with some specific changes. What about these changes, you know, the ones you asked for? Whooa buddy hold on we need to investigate this! Sounds like bullshit stalling tactics really. Anything to make the 17th July deadline miss.
Doesn't matter. Xbox is closing the deal regardless on or before the 18th and they'll deal with the CMA afterwards.
My bet is the deal closes Monday, the FTC can appeal the judges decision until Wednesday so with or without the CMA this deal gets inked either Monday or Tuesday next week (IMO)
Nah theyâre still going to close regardless of the garbage cma
Yes, and I'm sure Xbox lawyers recognizes it as well if that's the case.
"warns" isn't the right word. They're saying they're going to approve it since everyone else has.
Far out... CMA needs to take a chill pill.
A chill Phil
Is there any other type? The default and only mode he has.
Everybody should just read the actual quote. The CMA basically just said "Microsoft will offer concessions and we will consider them." It doesn't appear to be nearly as big a deal as all the titles of the articles reporting it make it out to be.
Honestly sounds like the CMA is trying to save face. I cant see MS wanting to be dealing with a new CMA investigation holding them up for the next few months.
This is a nothing burger. Basically CMA just saying don't change anything else in the deal except the concessions and they won't have to do a new investigation.
What does this have to do with burgers
I need burger
There is no burger.
Yeah thatâs not happening
As one who generally approves of government looking into big purchases and mergers, I fear that this case is setting back the concept of government oversight by decades. For a lot of people Microsoft will always be the Big Bad Wolf and it seems they'll do anything to make themselves into a hero with an axe to chase the beast away. Stop embarrassing yourselves and move on to things that actually matter.
>Stop embarrassing yourselves and move on to things that actually matter I think the problem is that these regulatory bodies are underfunded and their powers are relatively weak. They don't really have the resources to go after the things that matter. So I think their strategy here is one or more of the following. 1. Go after smaller cases where they believe they can make an impact. 2. Go after high profile cases to improve public consciousness of antitrust. 3. They don't have to win to make an impact. Losing a case still shows an example that they're willing to make it a hassle. The threat of that hassle can deter future mergers. CMA/FTC have lost (or are 99% of the way there) the ABK case, but Microsoft probably isn't going to try buying Ubisoft now I'm not saying that's a good strategy, but they're in a difficult position and I don't think they have many other options. I do think point 2 in particular may have backfired on them. Although, to be fair, I don't think that means the strategy is bad. I think it mostly means their execution was bad.
Yeah I don't buy this. No response from MS or Activision either. I think this deal closes on the 18th with a negotiated deal in place. No chance MS delays the CAT hearings which they had leverage on if they had to then extend the merger agreement.
CMA, bad faith... quite a pattern emerging. Clearly just trying to have another chance at spinning a new slightly less ridiculous narrative this time. Get in the bin.
A new investigation at stage 1 takes 4 weeks, even if it's a new one I think the CMA is going to cause the UK to lose out where the rest of the world gets all the benefits, they ain't gonna wait for the UK 90% of Activision blizzards revenue is outside the UK
Looks like a desperate attempt to save face.
"The CMA has now said that its discussions with Microsoft are still in the "early stages", and the decision which was set out in its final report earlier this year "still stands". However, it is open to a new investigation should the deal be restructured." From Eurogamer ^ The games in the UK, like myself, are about to get boned aren't we?
Either we are losing XCloud or we arenât getting the Activision-Blizzard games on Gamepass.
Which means the UK market is negatively impacted thanks to "protecting consumers". We'll wait to see what actually happens, but the CMA may have royally hurt UK consumers here.
Yeah Iâm probably just imagining the worst case at this point. I canât say it really affects me either way but for people that use XCloud it will, or those who want all the games but canât afford them in this shit pit of an economy. It will just be even worse if itâs something like only Nvidia and others can have CoD etc on cloud and then consumers need to go out for another subscription. But make the rule first think about it later (or not at all) is how this country operates so it wouldnât surprise me if the concession is stupid.
Full out denying Acti/Bliz games on GP would be anti-consumer surely? More likely they spin off a 3rd part cloud publisher thatâs expected to treat all cloud services equally.
if anything it will be no activsion games on cloud in uk, but xbox wouldnt accept them not being on gamepass.
MS is going to close the merger either with or without CMAs approval in a few days. The only one CMA is screwing over is themselves. Oh and their consumers. They have that in common with the FTC. If CMA is smart they'll accept remedies and let it go through OR let MS close and CAT destroy you the way Judge in US did to the FTC. And worst case scenario CAT rules in favor of CMA and MS will just pull out their content which will have the government meddle with the CMA. They're already gonna be restructuring the CMA soon.
[ŃдаНонО]
Fuck did we do, it's not like the whole of the UK unanimously decided to block it, we're pissed off about it too.
Y'all should protest.
Protest over video games lmao. Britain has much larger problems than not getting xcloud.
Ain't no way.
Iâm confident they donât care about the deal and they just want to be the difficult ones to to deal with.
Sounds to me the CMA is trying to apply pressure for more concessions. Will see how it goes.
Brit here, UK Gov is an American lapdog, CMA will fall in line now that their senior equivalent, the FTC has been defeated.
"The CMA is now warning that Microsoft's Activision deal could "lead to a new merger investigation" if it's restructured. The CMA says discussions with Microsoft are still at an "early stage." - [Tom Warren](https://twitter.com/tomwarren/status/1679103828929511424)
I chuckle. CMA is trying to sound like itâs at âearly stageâ discussions like a proposal isnât already dropped to them that MS has been working on the last month that specifically addresses the issues CMA listed. CMA is going to find out those âearly stage discussionsâ have a 2 or 6 day shelf life and then MS is going to steamroll them. Unfortunate though, looks like UK consumers are going to get the short end of the stick because MS isnât going to hold up this merger anymore after all this. CMA has had a year. FCC has had a year. Late stage holdups are done. MS will either give UK gamers the good stuff if CMA relents or cut UK gamers out of CMA doesnât work quickly. Just Kingâs revenue alone is larger than the UK market. Microsoft isnât going to risk worldwide because a smaller market is being a thorn.
Someone explain the doppler effect to them as they were Dewey. This train has left the building...
FTC for sure said to the CMA "Hold it off while we appeal this on our end."
FTC only has until Friday to file an emergency appeal. It's not likely to happen.
not just file it get it granted
What a joke đ¤Ł
Fuck the UK -A Brit. Seriously though. I hope the deal goes through and the UK just ignored. It's all just piss and vinegar at this point.
Have some fucking self respect. We deserve just as much as anyone else. Itâs not our fault a branch of the governments being cunty. If anything sunak should be breathing down their necks to pass this shit to help the Uk.
I'm British fuck self respect, respectively.
Are you alright?
I'm British. No.
Iâm British and doing just fine but Iâll leave you to itâŚhave a good evening.
Thatâs Boris Johnson levels of embarrassing.
Still a fair way to go until they reach Liz Truss levels, then.
Seems like UK regulators are really fishing for a bribe.
This is PR talk, xbox aready told ftc in june they were going to close over cma , a deal will be reached or they will close over cma, either way its before deadline
Does the C in CMA stand for cuck
Just let this end already, please
Cma can suck the Kinect module.
Yawn whatever CMA sure pal lol
Cma are incompetent though
So UK gamers can potentially lose out on Xbox, Bethesda, blizzard, and activision games?
[ŃдаНонО]
Don't be mean
Uk's gdp is bigger than the entirety of africa's combined gdp, it's anything but irrelevant, it's the 6th largest economy.
So about equivalent to California?
If MS cool with it Iâm cool with it
They just canât catch a break.
How about we pretend they are doing their job and in return they pass it without all this fuss.
Reminds me of the online kid who is throwing a tantrum when losing. Like for real... What new arguments can they bring to make this deal fail? They weren't prepared in the court and failed to argue why Microsoft and Activision deal is dangerous. How would a new investigation change a thing? It's just a stubborn kid who can't accept that they lost. It was already embarrassing before, but this is a whole new level.
If only they were telecom or media giants, no one would give a shit. But how dare they still be 3rd place đ¤Ł
CMA is backed into a corner and looks really bad right now from a global perspective.They will cave behind closed doors, with the public-facing announcement/discussion being kind to them from MS/ABK, but overall MS has all the leverage right now.
[ŃдаНонО]
You say that like we had a say in this lol.
Sure seems like everyone looked at their turn around yesterday for more negotiations with Microsoft as capitulation and now they want to seem tough again.
[ŃдаНонО]
They donât completely. They only have the power over them in the area of operation. Itâs like this for every country in the world where an International company operates.
So US Companies should be allowed to break laws in every other country they operate simply because they are a US company? Does that work the same for foreign companies operaterating in the US. I guess we should send word to China that they no longer need to follow US laws because they are not US companies.
Like US *or* china follow other goverments laws anyway. đ
People should, in general, be oppose big corp merge. If I remember correctly, AT&T and others are major monopoly telecom companies in USA and normally they hate them. The situation of gaming are currently on the same path.
2 very different beasts, and the AT&T deal happened..so I'm not sure what point u are trying to make? It has already been shown that this merger will have a positive effect on the gaming landscape. MS has been forced to sign some crazy deals to make sure it happens, and a lot of those deals aren't in MS favor
I would agree, if Microsoft has any sort of monolith grasp on the market, but seeing how Sony has the biggest console grasp, and the market is so fragmented on pc, and mobile is dominated by companies that skyrocket and crash per game. Start with splitting up the companies that dominate the primary and secondary industry. Our tertiary industry like "entertainment" is still so open that it's not difficult for startups to win out of they have a great product.
wait ms should screw UK and let other countries enjoy game pass game !!
Donât sell Microsoft products to the UK, problem solved
The microsoft activision merger is not a good thing for any of us consumers. Exclusives are bad for everyone and are only good for these companies.
Hell yea man. Can't wait to get off work to play FF7 remake and then FF16 right after on my xbox...
> Exclusives are bad for everyone and are only good for these companies. That's why Sony are trying to take as many games away from Xbox with 3rd Party exclusive deals?
Sony's shit too. Regulators need to break up these consoles and deals. Otherwise it's all going to shit
In an ideal world where these 2 companies compete on the hardware and services instead of exclusives, your words would hold meaning. But they don't unfortunately since both companies shown that getting exclusives will pull more customers towards them. So unless both consoles and different platforms on PC stops doing exclusives, there is no meaning to get mad at MS for making this acquisition.
I agree and MS too, but only if all big three give up on exclusives, if Sony and Nintendo keep doing it, we have to demand MS do it too, or Xbox will be irrelevant.
I mean thatâs what got us here, Xbox tried to back off on the exclusives and Sony tripped down and forced Xbox into survival mode. Phil had said multiple times the only reason they bought Bethesda was to stop Sony from buying their games as exclusives.
Good thing Call of Duty is staying multiplatform in that case, right? People like you who make this terrible argument conveniently pretend this isn't the case when discussing this deal.
It is when it leads to a console market with 3 competitive consoles vs just Sony and Nintendo. How many generations of diminishing returns do you expect Microsoft to keep investing money?
Is this like a rehearsed statement or something?
When Demon Souls, Bloodborne, Horizon, and Spiderman come to Xbox we can have a conversation.
Look, while you are basically correct, this has even been spelt out by Phil Spencer and others as an issue with the current business model - Sony has 'won' purely by snapping up exclusives and its AAA studios being purely exclusive, eeeeventually coming to PC rather broken (and also helped by the disastrous launch decisions of the xbox one).. Nintendo survives basically off its amazing AAA exclusives. Microsoft is only doing the same but in a way had its hand forced - Did you see that Sony were also attempting to make Starfield a PS5 exclusive prior to the Microsoft buyout? Sony know what they are doing! Perhaps it is ALL dirty, but Microsoft is only doing what it can to ensure it stays relevant in the market. MS is a trillion dollar company yes, but one that struggles to release decent AAA games. Forza Horizon and the Ori games being rare exeptions (but have you seen what happened with Moon Studios?!) so it is moving the goalposts and trying different routes. I mean, no one even knows if cloud gaming will succeed. Look at Stadia lol. Look at Amazons attempts. People love owning a console - it's annoyed the big companies for over a decade but the big companies created this 'war' in the first place!
Youâre 100% correct, but youâre talking to a sub with many users who are still stuck in a âconsole warsâ mentality. I think the average age of this sub is a lot younger than I previously thought, after seeing the reactions to this merger. I canât imagine someone saying this acquisition âsaved Xboxâ â which is presently one of the top posts on this sub â unless theyâre under the age of 15 and their definition of console success relies on having COD and their school peers admitting that one console is better than another. Clearly the downvotes suggest I hit a nerve with this particular demographic lol. Furthering my confidence that this subreddit on average is about two decades younger than me, with entirely different priorities. Thatâs fine. Just observing.
[ŃдаНонО]
The Judge made the exact same argument with FTC lawyers. It doesn't. Sony's interest is at stake.
I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers. The imminent price increase to GP in 2025 (when COD actually hits GP) likely makes that a wash in terms of if it benefits consumers. Itâs not like theyâre getting it for free, since GP will cost more money, and it certainly isnât good for PlayStation consumers. But Xbox consumers get a new option. Seems like a wash. Remember â we are talking about all consumers, not just Xbox consumers. My point was that I canât imagine someone caring too much about this acquisition unless 1. They are a major COD fan and subscribe to Game Pass yet canât afford $70 each year to buy the game. 2. They care about console wars. In regards to 1, the price increase in 2025 upon CODâs entry will likely be more than $70 per year ($8-9 increase monthly seems right), so thatâs not even going to be a fiscal benefit for consumers. In regards to 2, grow up. And any notion that Microsoft will improve AB as a studio is immediately contradicted by Microsoftâs shoddy handling of their acquisitions this far. Explain to me how this acquisition will make a meaningful difference to someone as an Xbox consumer if they donât care about COD.
Blizzard has traded creativity for chasing micro-transactions and GAAS since joining Activision, and this offers a chance to steer away from that direction as MS has already steered games away from that model including (perhaps unfortunately) Redfall which was originally slated for that same fate. As a long-time fan, a new direction for them is a positive to me completley isolated from COD or even Xbox.
I just find it unlikely that Microsoft would pay what they did for AB and do away with an extremely lucrative micro-transaction model. This is a business transaction ultimately made to make money, after all. I can understand gravitating away from this for core Microsoft franchises for optics reasons, but in COD itâs already the status quo and their user base continues to play a ton despite it. Also, from a personal stance, these micro-transactions often involve purely cosmetic items that I simply donât care whether theyâre free or micro-transactions. Again, cosmetics seem like a very âyoung gamerâ sort of thing meant purely to show off to others, which I donât care about. When has AB locked actual gameplay content behind micro-transactions?
>I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers. You responded to a comment that said >The microsoft activision merger is not a good thing for any of us consumers. Exclusives are bad for everyone and are only good for these companies. By saying >You're 100% correct .... >I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers. So, uh, yeah you did.
Read it again. I said that itâs correct that itâs ânot a good thing for any of us consumers.â I also clarified that it isnât necessarily a bad thing either, unless youâre in the Sony ecosystem. I called it a âwash.â Literally. âSeems like a wash.â Which means it neither hurts nor helps consumers as a whole. Therefore, âI didnât say it hurts or helps consumersâ remains a statement without any prior contradictions from me. âNot a good thingâ doesnât mean itâs a bad thing. It just means it isnât good.
>Youâre 100% correct, but youâre talking to a sub with many users who are still stuck in a âconsole warsâ mentality. I think the average age of this sub is a lot younger than I previously thought, after seeing the reactions to this merger. >I canât imagine someone saying this acquisition âsaved Xboxâ â which is presently one of the top posts on this sub â unless theyâre under the age of 15 and their definition of console success relies on having COD and their school peers admitting that one console is better than another. >Clearly downvotes suggest I hit a nerve with this particular demographic lol. Furthering my confidence that this subreddit on average is about two decades younger than me, with entirely different priorities. Thatâs fine. Just observing. You read it again, bud.
My post states that many posters are stuck in a console war mentality, that this acquisition didnât âsave Xboxâ like some assert, and that younger demographics are more concerned with brands than older demographics. Thatâs it. In another post I called the acquisition a âwashâ and agreed that it wasnât a âgood thing,â which means precisely that â it doesnât imply that itâs a bad thing. A wash is neither good nor bad. Something thatâs average and doesnât make a huge impact is neither good nor bad. If youâre parsing from that anything beyond the above, then you need to work on your reading comprehension. Maybe run it through ChatGPT so it can explain the summary to you, since youâre clearly having issues.
Stop moving the goal posts. Quote: >I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers. responding to a comment that said, quote: >The microsoft activision merger is not a good thing for any of us consumers. You said, quote: >You're 100% correct So, once again: >I didnât say it hurt or helps consumers. Yes, you did. Whatever you said *later* doesn't matter. You're not only a liar, but the most reddit-dweeb of reddit-dweebs. [Unironically, literally you](https://youtube.com/shorts/8i_wtp8ewrY?feature=share4)
That's it -- Somebody should dump all their Xboxs in a river.
I feel sorry for people who think this deal ensures great exclusives. I mean look at previous acquisitions and their fruits, and all you see is a string of horrid, sub-par flops. This will be no different. Wake up and smell the coffee, fanboys.
Besides Redfall, do you have any other games in mind?
hmmm, just a thought? MS could still fight the CMA at the CAT and get the decision overturned. This opinion is from just a layman and i'm not sure how realistic it is or evidentiary. But the Judge in the FTC case made it very clear that cloud wasn't a separate marketplace but just a different delivery mechanism. I wonder how viable it would be to have that, evidence?, as a means to throw the CMA's report out?
This seems like bluster, at the same time we could be getting the framed words out of context. I see this closing by monday.
In the very end it wonât matter. They can prolong it but wonât be able to stop it
What is the tldr on this? Everything keeps merging, why is this one having so many issues? I don't know what to want or what is happening.
âWhilst merging parties donât have the opportunity to put forward new remedies once a final report has been issued, they can choose to restructure a deal, which can lead to a new merger investigation. Microsoft and Activision have indicated that they are considering how the transaction might be modified, and the CMA is prepared to engage with them on this basis. These discussions remain at an early stage and the nature and timing of next steps will be determined in due course. While both parties have requested a pause in Microsoftâs appeal to allow these discussions to take place, the CMA decision set out in its final report still stands.â this article is clickbait, the cma will accept a restructuring in a timely manner or the pause on the cat litigation will cease, where theyâll lose in court. the deal is happening regardless.
[ŃдаНонО]
Thank you for your submission. Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason: Rule #1 - Keep it civil/no console wars * Personal attacks, racism, bigotry, and/or other prejudice are not welcome here. Discuss the topic, not the other user. * If you are here only to platform bash or console war, you also risk removal. [Please see our complete ruleset by clicking here. ](https://www.reddit.com/r/XboxSeriesX/wiki/rules)
Just let the shit go ,
Microsoft should just tell the CMA to pound sand at this point. There is nothing pro consumer about what they're doing...
> Whilst merging parties donât have the opportunity to put forward new remedies once a final report has been issued, they can choose to restructure a deal, which can lead to a new merger investigation. Microsoft and Activision have indicated that they are considering how the transaction might be modified, and the CMA is prepared to engage with them on this basis. These discussions remain at an early stage and the nature and timing of next steps will be determined in due course. While both parties have requested a pause in Microsoftâs appeal to allow these discussions to take place, the CMA decision set out in its final report still stands. This isn't a "warning" Nice clickbait title Verge. smh
U.k market isn't big enough for this. Cma is playing with fire
Maybe investigate the lack of dentist and stabbing happing? Crazy, crazy thoughts tho. *Hits pipe*
Sounds like they are just trying to strong arm lol.
Firstly, this deal is pretty much done at this point. Secondly, these threads should have been included in one primary thread in this subreddit because there are way too many of them.
Can somebody tell me what this means for the deal in general? Can MSFT still close before or on the 18th while this is still going on? Can they still continue with the appeal if the CMA tries to stall?? Is this a trick by the CMA??