this deal is going to benefit consumers, players, and DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS.
OP
OP
Smith and a small group of his attorneys are slated to meet individually with FTC Chair Lina Khan — who is said to be skeptical of the tie-up and who this summer pledged to scrutinize the deal over its impact on workers — as well as Democratic commissioners Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya, according to sources close to the situation.
On Sunday, The Post exclusively reported that at least one Democrat on the four-member panel has recently taken a sympathetic view of the merger — with insiders speculating it might be Slaughter — potentially paving the way for it to get approved. Republican FTC Commissioner Christine Wilson has already voiced support of the deal.
Sources said Microsoft's Smith is scrambling to win over the powerful panel in a hurry — partly because Khan is pregnant and expected to go on maternity leave next month.
"Chair Khan is expecting a baby in January and will take a short parental leave before quickly returning to her duties," FTC spokesperson Douglas Farrar said. "The idea that any possible law enforcement actions by the Commission could be affected by her pregnancy is sexist and absurd speculation with absolutely no basis in reality."
The FTC's commissioners are slated for a closed-door meeting on Thursday to discuss the merger and there's an outside chance they could vote on it, sources said.
The panel also could meet to vote on the deal later this month. Microsoft had believed the FTC would make its final ruling in the first quarter of 2023 but the FTC review has lately moved at a faster pace than it expected, the source said.
———
I thought that the FTC had interpreted the Sunshine Act in a way that precluded meetings with more than one commissioner at a time, but maybe they are doing an exception in this case.
Anyway, this sounds like it could be done (one way or another) as soon as this week or as late as the end of December 😬
On Sunday, The Post exclusively reported that at least one Democrat on the four-member panel has recently taken a sympathetic view of the merger — with insiders speculating it might be Slaughter — potentially paving the way for it to get approved. Republican FTC Commissioner Christine Wilson has already voiced support of the deal.
Sources said Microsoft's Smith is scrambling to win over the powerful panel in a hurry — partly because Khan is pregnant and expected to go on maternity leave next month.
"Chair Khan is expecting a baby in January and will take a short parental leave before quickly returning to her duties," FTC spokesperson Douglas Farrar said. "The idea that any possible law enforcement actions by the Commission could be affected by her pregnancy is sexist and absurd speculation with absolutely no basis in reality."
The FTC's commissioners are slated for a closed-door meeting on Thursday to discuss the merger and there's an outside chance they could vote on it, sources said.
The panel also could meet to vote on the deal later this month. Microsoft had believed the FTC would make its final ruling in the first quarter of 2023 but the FTC review has lately moved at a faster pace than it expected, the source said.
———
I thought that the FTC had interpreted the Sunshine Act in a way that precluded meetings with more than one commissioner at a time, but maybe they are doing an exception in this case.
Anyway, this sounds like it could be done (one way or another) as soon as this week or as late as the end of December 😬
Wait, this confuses me, then. "A so-called last rites meeting between the companies and the FTC's commissioners –- who make the final call and vote on any agency actions -– is often one of the last steps before either a lawsuit or a settlement are filed. Microsoft President Brad Smith and other company executives are expected to attend the meetings, the person said, asking not to be named discussing the confidential probe." This is from the Bloomberg article, right vixolus?
So is this normal for the parties to meet with FTC commissioners as a group or not? XD. Meanwhile, if it was a final step before something seemingly so consequential, feels like you would have everyone there (sorry I can't seem to let this go LOL).
Iono.
LOL in Hoeg's video today talking about the MS PR blitz.
Commenting on MS saying, "MS made a similar commitment to the EC when we acquired LinkedIn in 2016, ensuring access to key tech for competing services.", he says:
"That sounds like exactly what the FTC or DoJ are having issues with re Ticketmaster... If I would have said at the beginning of the year that Taylor Swift would have a big impact on this, you wouldn't have believed me, and yet here we are."
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpFjbYJJOOc
Commenting on MS saying, "MS made a similar commitment to the EC when we acquired LinkedIn in 2016, ensuring access to key tech for competing services.", he says:
"That sounds like exactly what the FTC or DoJ are having issues with re Ticketmaster... If I would have said at the beginning of the year that Taylor Swift would have a big impact on this, you wouldn't have believed me, and yet here we are."
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpFjbYJJOOc
I meant in relation to this comment Idas made: "I thought that the FTC had interpreted the Sunshine Act in a way that precluded meetings with more than one commissioner at a time, but maybe they are doing an exception in this case."
If that's what they've been doing, then doesn't it kinda conflict with how normal Bloomberg makes it sound? "A so-called last rites meeting [...] is often one of the last steps before either a lawsuit or a settlement are filed". Just stood out to me is all.
OP
OP
Yes, I quoted part of the new NY Post article.
It's normal to meet with the commissioners + some attorney advisors + some FTC Staff. But usually one by one.
But maybe they have scheduling problems to organise all the meetings these weeks and that's why they are doing a group meeting.
I am curious as to if the FTC cares about the optics of blocking a deal that is backed by the labor interested when in the past they have being pro-labor.
I think in hindsight the Meta Within case was very damaging to the FTC. They can't approve or deny this deal without looking like hypocrites one way or another.
I think the best outcome for the FTC is a 2-2 split and Lina can point to this deal as divisive and warranting revisiting should MS reneges on promises.
I think in hindsight the Meta Within case was very damaging to the FTC. They can't approve or deny this deal without looking like hypocrites one way or another.
I think the best outcome for the FTC is a 2-2 split and Lina can point to this deal as divisive and warranting revisiting should MS reneges on promises.
Which if it's a split vote, if I were Lina I would want undertakings signed that have severe penalties if broken. Make it so suing them post-merger for misconduct is as ironclad as it could be.
This is somewhat a misquote, he clearly states that ticketmaster breached that agreement.
Well, I didn't feel like transcribing the whole section, point is he worked in Taylor Swift to the commentary.
48 mins in for anyone curious.
optics? FTC doesn't look bad at all if they block this acquisition, not in the eyes of regular people anyways. people of all political stripes do not want to see big tech get bigger, although for differing reasons. this thread is an anomalous bubble in that sense.
It's not illegal for a big company to get bigger though. A taxpayer funded entity shouldn't be pursuing an agenda that is both outside its own mission statement and also the law.
You call it an agenda like it's a loaded term, like it's frivolous. They're pursuing an interest on behalf of the consumer. It's an interest of market fairness. But I'm sure those are the exact words Microsoft is honeying regulators with. But the process of legality involves the regulators, and ultimately they shape the outcome.
blocking a move for a company that can benefit from a union especially since Activision was sued by the state of California for their negligence in regards to their employee well being. Yeah it's a bad look.
Knowing how this country operates, I'd say the chances of it passing have decreased.
If this is the primary basis for scrutiny then MS must be pretty happy with the news and opinions regarding unions (the timing of which was obviously well coordinated):
Smith and a small group of his attorneys are slated to meet individually with FTC Chair Lina Khan — who is said to be skeptical of the tie-up and who this summer pledged to scrutinize the deal over its impact on workers
Smith and a small group of his attorneys are slated to meet individually with FTC Chair Lina Khan — who is said to be skeptical of the tie-up and who this summer pledged to scrutinize the deal over its impact on workers
It'd be great if they announce that they've come to some kind of agreement tomorrow to let the deal go through. Maybe highlighting Microsoft's commitment to its workers and their ability to unionize.
That's the thing, Brad Smith's opinion piece should have been about the unions. Instead it came off like
I couldn't help but read that like damn man rein it in a bit.
Safe to say that big tech forwarding labor rights was not in Lina's bingo cards. Wonder what the FTc decision will be. MS has a chance to avoid a court battle with the FTC here.
MS has been playing the long game the whole time wouldn't be surprised if everything in the article has purpose.
MS has been playing the long game the whole time wouldn't be surprised if everything in the article has purpose.
Last edited:
No doubt, it's like a friendly reminder that I'm still thinking in checkers strategy and they are thinking in chess moves.
Gotcha. Huh guess they're really on a time crunch. Ok, not sure why I'm being extra nitpicky today haha.
My impression is Khan avoids perception of public disagreement if it's going to deadlock. They can revisit the case regardless (especially if they have stuff in writing to point to), I don't think they need to prove justification in court or anything. The perception of a divided panel that isn't on board with her mission is probably way more damaging than the idea that they didn't take any specific case to court. The strategy there is probably just to trumpet the concessions they get as major wins and move on.
But then again, her words in recent weeks suggests that she wants to signal that she's not afraid of taking hard fights. But... on the other hand, she did emphasize "prioritization" in the WSJ talk. Which could just as easily be a signal for business as usual, stay the course as it is well, there are other targets we would rather focus on now than MS who have largely acceded to our wishes (kinda..). Eh. Iono.
As for optics, I personally feel like the labor argument is gonna be more minor than suggested. Like people have paid lip service to it, but I don't think the case revolves around it, regardless of which way it goes. Even with the CWA coming out for it, Khan can still easily say "eh, we don't take companies at their word" and that would be politically acceptable (assuming no one randomly makes it the centerpiece of their rant against regulators or something). And ultimately, they could pass the deal by talking about the COD concessions. Or they could sue over the deal by talking about cloud and Game Pass. These are all sufficient, even without appealing or making a big deal out of labor concerns (which they've not really emphasized in this case over the last several months). That's what I think anyway.
Re last para, I'm not sure about thinking the labor argument is minor. Khan is on record advocating for labor rights, so is Biden, and that very public commentary by the CWA looked directed at the WH. She has to be thinking about the politics of taking on a dubious court challenge and effectively leading the Biden admin into a fight against unions mere days after the poor PR of the rail workers.
This, definitely this.
I think that she's seeing what it is and the rail stuff might have been a boon that fell in Microsoft's lap. The tea leaves are saying don't stand diametrically opposed to a lot of things that a lot of people are cool with and/or are for the sake of doing it and with the tenor of the rail workers and the CMA coming out hard with this, it's basically charge ahead at your peril.
That's awesome news. And completely unsurprising given MS' penchant for making lots of money and their history with Minecraft. Good to see CoD returning to Nintendo.
View: https://twitter.com/jeffgrubb/status/1600343409054588929?s=46&t=uJjqU00vvVSIF-JqK9fuYg
Agree with grubb. It's all pressure to make Sony look bad compared to *checks notes* every other major platform competitor in the industry, despite them being the lead
Honestly there's literally no reason to even think of blocking this deal at this point.
Yeah, gut punch to Sony and at the same time pointing out to the CMA that there is more to the world than Sony vs Microsoft when it comes to CoD. Honestly, using COD as a reason to block now is problematic because it technically would be reducing consumer options/competition by keeping the status quo. Going to be a hard hill to fight on.
FTC is going to approve this, probably without a recorded vote for many reasons. Most likely the EU is going to follow suit with the stated public concessions. Momentum is getting critical fast.
Just want to point out again that every single one of these people are saying COD specifically. No mention whatsoever of any other Actiblizz titles staying multi.
I'd like someone to ask them but I bet they dodge it because they have other plans for a lot of these IP.
I'd like someone to ask them but I bet they dodge it because they have other plans for a lot of these IP.
Cool. Very VERY interested to see what their technical solution for bringing COD to Switch will be. Wonder if this will be their inroads to bringing xCloud (or perhaps a white label version of it) to Switch. Would be wild if they supported Switch for Game Pass streaming the way they "support" xCloud streaming on Steam Deck. (Would probably take some backend work from MS to upgrade their browser or a special app.
Or if they go the native route, it'll be REALLY interesting to see how they pull it off. Well. it'll be doable, just a question of how it will run. Also, Switch holding back COD, calling it now. Write the headlines.
Or if they go the native route, it'll be REALLY interesting to see how they pull it off. Well. it'll be doable, just a question of how it will run. Also, Switch holding back COD, calling it now. Write the headlines.
Good* Cop/Bad Cop routine? lol...