• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Microsoft lawyers respond to CMA by offering no remedies/commitments

Status
Not open for further replies.

Infamy v1

Member
Some big dick energy right there. They seem pretty confident the deal would move to phase 2 regardless, like any other big M&A, and the CMA is just posturing (which is what credible people have said all along).

Microsoft's $75bn acquisition of video game maker Activision Blizzard faces in-depth probes in Brussels and the UK following growing concerns the deal is anti-competitive and will exclude rivals from accessing the blockbuster game Call of Duty.

It comes as the UK's Competition and Markets Authority is expected to launch an in-depth investigation this week after Microsoft decided not to offer any remedies at this stage, according to two individuals with knowledge of the situation.
Microsoft opted not to offer any remedies to the CMA at this stage because there were no obvious commitments the UK regulator would be likely to accept, according to people with knowledge of the situation.

The watchdog does not generally accept behavioural remedies, such as commitments to maintain access to a product or service, at the end of a phase 1 probe apart from in rare circumstances.

One competition lawyer with knowledge of the case said it was "almost impossible" for Microsoft to offer a remedy that would prevent the investigation moving to an in-depth antitrust probe.

https://www.ft.com/content/a55cc28e-3092-4725-a1a0-97c1bf6eed0f
 
Sony and others want the commission to force Microsoft to offer guarantees that they will be able to access all games “on equal terms and in perpetuity”.
Cant Believe It Series 2 GIF by BBC Three
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
Interesting. The most obvious remedy wouldve been the guarantee that CoD would never become exclusive, but clearly they dont want to do that. This was never a Minecraft style acquisition. Their objective wasnt to be this pro-consumer company offering CoD on gamepass for free. It was always about putting Sony either out of business or getting Sony to put gamepass on playstation. No one spends $75 billion just to get a gamepass title. They couldve had it for a couple of hundred million max every year if they really cared about being pro-consumer and putting cod on gamepass.
 

reksveks

Member
Interesting. The most obvious remedy wouldve been the guarantee that CoD would never become exclusive, but clearly they dont want to do that. This was never a Minecraft style acquisition. Their objective wasnt to be this pro-consumer company offering CoD on gamepass for free. It was always about putting Sony either out of business or getting Sony to put gamepass on playstation. No one spends $75 billion just to get a gamepass title. They couldve had it for a couple of hundred million max every year if they really cared about being pro-consumer and putting cod on gamepass.
Or they are just waiting to see what the CMA were going to say in Phase 2 before making concessions.

No point over-promising now.
 

Interfectum

Member
Jim Messed up here, wasted some political pull for absolutely nothing in the long term.
Nah. He's simply tossing a wrench in the works to kick the can down the road. Maybe this will buy Sony another year or two of COD which gives them time for their own multiplayer titles to take off and/or for COD fever to finally die out.

This seems like a pretty basic strategy but console warriors are taking it personally.
 
Last edited:
Interesting. The most obvious remedy wouldve been the guarantee that CoD would never become exclusive, but clearly they dont want to do that. This was never a Minecraft style acquisition. Their objective wasnt to be this pro-consumer company offering CoD on gamepass for free. It was always about putting Sony either out of business or getting Sony to put gamepass on playstation. No one spends $75 billion just to get a gamepass title. They couldve had it for a couple of hundred million max every year if they really cared about being pro-consumer and putting cod on gamepass.

Exactly. They didn't spend all that just for gamepass. They wanted to own the cod ip, remove it off PlayStation and really hurt the brand. Same for the Bethesda acquisition. It makes Microsoft instantly stronger, while weakening their competition. If there was a guarantee that cod stays on Playstation, it would be a massive waste of 70b.
 

Infamy v1

Member
Interesting. The most obvious remedy wouldve been the guarantee that CoD would never become exclusive, but clearly they dont want to do that. This was never a Minecraft style acquisition. Their objective wasnt to be this pro-consumer company offering CoD on gamepass for free. It was always about putting Sony either out of business or getting Sony to put gamepass on playstation. No one spends $75 billion just to get a gamepass title. They couldve had it for a couple of hundred million max every year if they really cared about being pro-consumer and putting cod on gamepass.

Or, if you didn't view the world in fanboy goggles, no company in their right mind would offer an agreement to their rival for permanent support in perpetuity, especially after spending so much money, and especially after said rival has tried to put them out of business with practices that make their outcries sound incredibly hypocritial and laughable.
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
I wonder if Phil loses credibility with the MS top brass if this deal ends up failing.
This is a Microsoft purchase, not just Xbox - and MS will just be following the guidance of their legal counsel, as every company does. They think it’ll go through, but they won’t be stupid enough to think it’s guaranteed, as nothing is in life. So no, it won’t have any impact on Phil’s standing.
 
Last edited:

ChiefDada

Gold Member
Some big dick energy right there. They seem pretty confident the deal would move to phase 2 regardless, like any other big M&A, and the CMA is just posturing (which is what credible people have said all along).

They shouldn't have to so they didn't.


How did you all get to this conclusion, especially OP since he posted exact verbiage from article?


"Microsoft opted not to offer any remedies to the CMA at this stage because there were no obvious commitments the UK regulator would be likely to accept, according to people with knowledge of the situation.


Meaning Microsoft understood there was nothing they could offer that would prevent regulators from proceeding with their investigation. If anything it is UK regulators with "big dick energy" or "based". Lol, children.
 

GHG

Member
Or they are just waiting to see what the CMA were going to say in Phase 2 before making concessions.

No point over-promising now.

Yeh it's literally spelt out in the article:

The watchdog does not generally accept behavioural remedies, such as commitments to maintain access to a product or service, at the end of a phase 1 probe apart from in rare circumstances.

One competition lawyer with knowledge of the case said it was "almost impossible" for Microsoft to offer a remedy that would prevent the investigation moving to an in-depth antitrust probe.


The drama continues, buckle up everyone.
 

Elios83

Member
As the article's title states:
Microsoft’s Activision deal faces in-depth probes in Brussels and London

So Europe is expected to take the same position as UK, this will go through a long second phase investigation process and Microsoft is risking that the terms will be dictated by regulators at a later stage instead of trying to smooth things now by their own will.
But I guess it's part of a gambling game of trying to make this pass without restrictions and no clear indications by CMA at this stage as the article explains.
We'll see what happens, certainly this is not going as smoothly as some people expected.
 
Last edited:

Infamy v1

Member
How did you all get to this conclusion, especially OP since he posted exact verbiage from article?


"Microsoft opted not to offer any remedies to the CMA at this stage because there were no obvious commitments the UK regulator would be likely to accept, according to people with knowledge of the situation.


Meaning Microsoft understood there was nothing they could offer that would prevent regulators from proceeding with their investigation. If anything it is UK regulators with "big dick energy" or "based". Lol, children.

They were literally told, in public, to offer a remedy and given a timeline or else this goes to phase 2. Microsoft didn't budge for the reasons stated. CMA were posturing. Even Hoeg was confused by their tweets.
 
Last edited:
How did you all get to this conclusion, especially OP since he posted exact verbiage from article?


"Microsoft opted not to offer any remedies to the CMA at this stage because there were no obvious commitments the UK regulator would be likely to accept, according to people with knowledge of the situation.


Meaning Microsoft understood there was nothing they could offer that would prevent regulators from proceeding with their investigation. If anything it is UK regulators with "big dick energy" or "based". Lol, children.
My conclusion is that MS is doing nothing wrong in trying to acquire Activision whether they intend to ever make CoD exclusive or not. Acquiring ABK and even other big dev studios later down the line does not constitute a monopoly when you have other big players in the market.
 

DForce

NaughtyDog Defense Force
How did you all get to this conclusion, especially OP since he posted exact verbiage from article?


"Microsoft opted not to offer any remedies to the CMA at this stage because there were no obvious commitments the UK regulator would be likely to accept, according to people with knowledge of the situation.


Meaning Microsoft understood there was nothing they could offer that would prevent regulators from proceeding with their investigation. If anything it is UK regulators with "big dick energy" or "based". Lol, children.
They believe everything that MS says is gangsta shit.
 
This is what I thought MS should do about the CoD existing contract.
I thought the 3 years past the contract showed that MS thinks they need to make some concession, instead of just sticking to the legal contract.
 
How did you all get to this conclusion, especially OP since he posted exact verbiage from article?


"Microsoft opted not to offer any remedies to the CMA at this stage because there were no obvious commitments the UK regulator would be likely to accept, according to people with knowledge of the situation.


Meaning Microsoft understood there was nothing they could offer that would prevent regulators from proceeding with their investigation. If anything it is UK regulators with "big dick energy" or "based". Lol, children.

This. lol.
 
The real plot twist will be if COD shrinks and becomes irrelevant before the deal can even be finished
It'll happen eventually (who knows exactly when), it's currently on the decline and nothing stays on top forever.

A new "formula" will come out of nowhere and become the new hotness.
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
This has nothing to do with "big dick energy". They're not offering any remedies because these agencies don't accept concessions at the end of Phase 1.
They know it's going to phase 2 regardless, afterwards concessions can be made while the deal is investigated more.
No playa dis shit gangsta as fuck Phil Dog himself just hung up da phone when da britbong said please
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom