• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Bradbatross

Member
Mar 17, 2018
14,195
MLex has a brief report about the meeting:

- Different executives from Sony met Verstager.

- Sony's delegation was led by Jim Ryan.

- Sony pressed again their case for a block.

- Same old arguments: 1) MS could withhold Call of Duty from other consoles or platforms; 2) MS might degrade how Call of Duty works with other gaming platforms.

- Statement of Objections coming this week (it has to be tomorrow).
Those arguments are so weak and they just don't hold much water. I'm so interested in seeing what if any concerns the EC has tomorrow. The meeting also seems very late in the process with the Statement of Objections coming tomorrow... Again, to me it seems like a last ditch effort to stop a deal that's about to go through.
 

BobLoblaw

This Guy Helps
Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,288
MLex has a brief report about the meeting:

- Different executives from Sony met Verstager.

- Sony's delegation was led by Jim Ryan.

- Sony pressed again their case for a block.

- Same old arguments: 1) MS could withhold Call of Duty from other consoles or platforms; 2) MS might degrade how Call of Duty works with other gaming platforms.

- Statement of Objections coming this week (it has to be tomorrow).
Tomorrow would be perfect. I'm clearing my work calendar. Sony still using the same arguments even though the EC has more than enough info by now to know what's what.
 

The Lord of Cereal

#REFANTAZIO SWEEP
Member
Jan 9, 2020
9,616
MLex has a brief report about the meeting:

- Different executives from Sony met Verstager.

- Sony's delegation was led by Jim Ryan.

- Sony pressed again their case for a block.

- Same old arguments: 1) MS could withhold Call of Duty from other consoles or platforms; 2) MS might degrade how Call of Duty works with other gaming platforms.

- Statement of Objections coming this week (it has to be tomorrow).
If MS gets the Statement of Objections tomorrow, do you think we would get media reports already by the end of the day, particularly in the US? Or would it have to wait until Monday?

Also, should we expect the CMA's decision next Friday or later than that?
 

jelly

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
33,841
Those arguments are so weak and they just don't hold much water. I'm so interested in seeing what if any concerns the EC has tomorrow. The meeting also seems very late in the process with the Statement of Objections coming tomorrow... Again, to me it seems like a last ditch effort to stop a deal that's about to go through.

Yeah, I would have thought they could come up with better doom arguments than that but I suppose speculative doom isn't very factual so you have to lean into things that might happen with the product rather than broad strokes of Microsoft buying loads of companies with lots of money. Still could have said 69 billion dollars and not stopping! We want the status quo doesn't rub much though which is probably where they come unstuck.
 
Sep 13, 2022
6,523
Traveling back to NY tomorrow on a flight with no Wi-Fi, I will take note of the page number before lift off and see how much we jumped when I land.
 

YozoraXV

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,974
MLex has a brief report about the meeting:

- Different executives from Sony met Verstager.

- Sony's delegation was led by Jim Ryan.

- Sony pressed again their case for a block.

- Same old arguments: 1) MS could withhold Call of Duty from other consoles or platforms; 2) MS might degrade how Call of Duty works with other gaming platforms.

- Statement of Objections coming this week (it has to be tomorrow).

At least Sony is sticking to only COD and no other ABK games. Don't see how this argument can work when MS already offered 10 year deals.
 

christocolus

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,932
Those arguments are so weak and they just don't hold much water. I'm so interested in seeing what if any concerns the EC has tomorrow. The meeting also seems very late in the process with the Statement of Objections coming tomorrow... Again, to me it seems like a last ditch effort to stop a deal that's about to go through.
I'm surprised Sony is still using these feeble arguments.
 

Ombretoile

Banned
Sep 8, 2022
713
How these "arguments" could work when Microsoft offered a 10-years contract to Sony and Call Of Duty to Steam and Nintendo platforms ?

If the EC blocks the deal, i'm gonna snap lol
 

Wereroku

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,201
How these "arguments" could work when Microsoft offered a 10-years contract to Sony and Call Of Duty to Steam and Nintendo platforms ?

If the EC blocks the deal, i'm gonna snap lol
I mean if I was Sony I would be showing how the 10-year consent decree with Ticketmaster did nothing to stop that mess from happening and that behavioral remedies are worthless. I would think that would be a better argument. However the market control of Ticketmaster is not even close to comparable but arguing for the EC to block it outright seems impossible at this point versus trying to make the remedies so bad for MS that they will want to drop it anyway.
 

Native_Vel

Member
Jun 5, 2022
1,179
Making the same claims that were levied months ago and I'm sure have been discussed between regulators and Microsoft ad nauseam, is certainly a choice.

Are these the settlement details?
 

Casa

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,501
Sony's arguments are laughable and embarrassing but seem to be landing at least with the FTC. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if they work with the other big regulators as well.

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows how absurd the idea of MS telling Activision to make the PS versions of CoD worse than the Xbox versions Is. Even more absurd than the thought of MS eventually pulling CoD from its biggest platform and making it exclusive.

These are things that we all know will never, EVER happen and yet they're concerns that the FTC expressed.
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,237
Toronto
Those arguments are so weak and they just don't hold much water. I'm so interested in seeing what if any concerns the EC has tomorrow. The meeting also seems very late in the process with the Statement of Objections coming tomorrow... Again, to me it seems like a last ditch effort to stop a deal that's about to go through.
What ticks me off the most is Sony is telling the EC exactly what they are doing. Like Sony is already doing every single thing they are claiming Microsoft will do, with Call of Duty against Xbox. They literally pay Activision to nerf the Xbox Version, and yet now they have the gall to come in here and bitch about it? They can get lost with that nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Sep 13, 2022
6,523
"They may do what we do to them currently and make sure Xbox has less content in COD"

That's all I hear in their concerns.
Microsoft loves money too much to take any sort of chance of even less people on PlayStation buying their product.

It will be parity
 

BobLoblaw

This Guy Helps
Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,288
Sony's arguments are laughable and embarrassing but seem to be landing at least with the FTC. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if they work with the other big regulators as well.

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows how absurd the idea of MS telling Activision to make the PS versions of CoD worse than the Xbox versions Is. Even more absurd than the thought of MS eventually pulling CoD from its biggest platform and making it exclusive.

These are things that we all know will never, EVER happen and yet they're concerns that the FTC expressed.
The FTC lost all credibility after yesterday's report. I mean, some of us knew, but that pretty much confirmed it. Their "argument" holds no water and is pure politics.
 

LilScooby77

Member
Dec 11, 2019
11,100
I mean if I was Sony I would be showing how the 10-year consent decree with Ticketmaster did nothing to stop that mess from happening and that behavioral remedies are worthless. I would think that would be a better argument. However the market control of Ticketmaster is not even close to comparable but arguing for the EC to block it outright seems impossible at this point versus trying to make the remedies so bad for MS that they will want to drop it anyway.
If I was Sony I'd talk about the IP strength of all ABK.
 

Yerffej

Prophet of Regret
Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,496
!0 year deals but every protagonist on the covers wears an xbox logo. Even the duder from Vietnam in Black Ops 16 or whatever.

Sony: :/
 

Kill3r7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,397
Yeah I don't see why they wouldn't at this point. Just a matter of whether it's something regulators are even concerned about, the controversy seems surprisingly CoD-focused so far

It's not surprising at all. It's the best selling game like 12 out of the last 15 years or something insane like that. There is a reason why Sony has led with COD. They couldn't make the same case with other ABK franchises.
 

jelly

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
33,841
The funny thing is Microsoft would basically add the ACB profit to their own, it's a win regardless of 10 year deal. The line goes up, well done Phil 😂
 

The Lord of Cereal

#REFANTAZIO SWEEP
Member
Jan 9, 2020
9,616

I mean realistically, why wouldn't they accept that as a concession?

A big part of the deal isn't just Game Pass and getting the library of content/IPs, but also mobile and having several GAAS games. Blizzard probably isn't making a non-GAAS game any time soon and ABK pretty much exclusively has multiplayer stuff these days. Sure some of those MS would probably want to make exclusive, but if a PS version is required it wouldn't be the end of the world
 

Wereroku

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,201
I mean realistically, why wouldn't they accept that as a concession?

A big part of the deal isn't just Game Pass and getting the library of content/IPs, but also mobile and having several GAAS games. Blizzard probably isn't making a non-GAAS game any time soon and ABK pretty much exclusively has multiplayer stuff these days. Sure some of those MS would probably want to make exclusive, but if a PS version is required it wouldn't be the end of the world
The only thing MS would have trouble with concession wise is if they are structural. I think any behavioral remedy would be easily accepted.
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,321
Seattle
What franchises would even be right for a "10 year agreement"?

COD is an economy in and of itself with it's yearly releases.

There won't be another Diablo probably for 10 years.

Overwatch 2 has a chance of being "it" for that series for a long, long time.
 

Ratuso

Member
Nov 27, 2021
1,194
I'm very much interested in subs and Cloud services remedies because I feel like they will be they key to get the deal approved or blocked.
 

Wereroku

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,201
I am not even sure they have any strong objections to structural remedies per se but I imagine ABK shareholders might object to that.
The ABK shareholders would be fine. Say the structural remedy is that MS has to sell the Activision studios. Then I believe the sale would go through as proposed then MS would have to turn around and sale just that portion in a separate sale. I believe that is how it worked with Disney and the Fox sports stuff.

Edit: I should mention in my opinion I think MS would drop the sale if this was required. Even if King is a major want for them I don't know if they would be willing to pay that much just for it and Blizzard since they would not contribute to Gamepass immediately like Activision would. There is no downplaying just how valuable getting Activision's back catalogue on Gamepass would be. There are some that wouldn't go like COD because of contract stuff but there are still quite a few good games.
 
Last edited:

MaulerX

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,691
So, our speculation was right:

- MS delayed in November the deadline with the EC to avoid the SO and close the deal by the end of 2022/early 2023
- That's why Reuters reported in mid November that MS was going to offer remedies to the EC
- MS was probably expecting the challenge from the FTC (in early 2023) and that was a defensive move against them
- That way, if the FTC wanted to block, they would have to go to federal court and not the administrative one
- That move would also help with the CMA, putting pressure on them
- But the FTC rushed the process just to be the first to challenge the deal, avoid federal court and set the tone for the rest

No wonder that the EC responded so quickly to the FTC arguing that MS lied to the EC with the Zenimax case.

I don't know, this sounds a bit unprofessional to me. No doubt that the legal teams from MS weren't very happy with the FTC acting this way.



What we speculated and pretty much knew from the beginning.

The FTC has no case. They didn't throw a pancake at the ceiling hoping it sticks. They threw a pancake at the air. It will most definitely come down.
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,237
Toronto
I mean realistically, why wouldn't they accept that as a concession?

The only thing I could see being an issue is surrounding brand new IP. Like if Microsoft was to set the Call of Duty Support Studios free, which is something they said they want to do, if those studies go out and create new IP, why shouldn't it be allowed to be Exclusive? Activision as it stands wasn't going to free those studios so those games wouldn't exist had not been for the deal.

Or, what if an Activision Studio wants to create a Halo or Gears of War Game? Does Microsoft tell them no because they'd be forced to put it on PlayStation as well? What if Microsoft takes those Call of Duty Support Studios and has them be general support studios for all of Microsoft? So they would help with Halo Infinite, Call of Duty, Sea of Theaves... do those games have to go multiplatform now?

It just gets real tricky real fast. And I think it's one thing to offer any traditional Activision franchises be multiplatform for 10 years, its another to say everything they touch has to be multiplatform.
 
OP
OP
Idas

Idas

Antitrusting By Keyboard
Member
Mar 20, 2022
2,023
If MS gets the Statement of Objections tomorrow, do you think we would get media reports already by the end of the day, particularly in the US? Or would it have to wait until Monday?

Also, should we expect the CMA's decision next Friday or later than that?

Yes, my guess is that by midday (in Europe) MS should already have the Statement of Objections (SO). Even if it comes later, still plenty of time to get reports by the end of the day, in Europe and the US.

I also think that it's quite likely that we'll have provisional findings (PF) from the CMA next week:

- It would fit the new administrative timetable (late January, 30-31, early February, 1-3).

- One of the reasons for the extension was to get more time to respond to what the parties could say to the PF and then write the final report. So, the sooner the PF are published, the better for the CMA.

- Both the SO and PF mean the formal opening of remedy talks. With the SO coming tomorrow, and if the CMA is willing to talk about remedies, it makes a lot of sense that the two big regulators in Europe for the case start remedy talks almost at the same time.

- If the CMA goes for a block, it would also make sense to publish the PF almost at the same time as the SO to avoid inconvenient scenarios where the EC and MS quickly agree on remedies that could solve anticompetitive concerns, but weeks later the CMA (under the same markets, facts and theories) goes on a totally different direction. If they are going to block it I think that it would be better to do it almost at the same time that the EC states their concerns.

My personal bet is that we'll have provisional findings on Tuesday 31st :p
 
Sep 7, 2020
2,340
Yes, my guess is that by midday (in Europe) MS should already have the Statement of Objections (SO). Even if it comes later, still plenty of time to get reports by the end of the day, in Europe and the US.

I also think that it's quite likely that we'll have provisional findings (PF) from the CMA next week:

- It would fit the new administrative timetable (late January, 30-31, early February, 1-3).

- One of the reasons for the extension was to get more time to respond to what the parties could say to the PF and then write the final report. So, the sooner the PF are published, the better for the CMA.

- Both the SO and PF mean the formal opening of remedy talks. With the SO coming tomorrow, and if the CMA is willing to talk about remedies, it makes a lot of sense that the two big regulators in Europe for the case start remedy talks almost at the same time.

- If the CMA goes for a block, it would also make sense to publish the PF almost at the same time as the SO to avoid inconvenient scenarios where the EC and MS quickly agree on remedies that could solve anticompetitive concerns, but weeks later the CMA (under the same markets, facts and theories) goes on a totally different direction. If they are going to block it I think that it would be better to do it almost at the same time that the EC states their concerns.

My personal bet is that we'll have provisional findings on Tuesday 31st :p
Overall thoughts on likelihood this deal goes through?
 

Kill3r7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,397
The ABK shareholders would be fine. Say the structural remedy is that MS has to sell the Activision studios. Then I believe the sale would go through as proposed then MS would have to turn around and sale just that portion in a separate sale. I believe that is how it worked with Disney and the Fox sports stuff.

Edit: I should mention in my opinion I think MS would drop the sale if this was required. Even if King is a major want for them I don't know if they would be willing to pay that much just for it and Blizzard since they would not contribute to Gamepass immediately like Activision would. There is no downplaying just how valuable getting Activision's back catalogue on Gamepass would be. There are some that wouldn't go like COD because of contract stuff but there are still quite a few good games.

Selling Activision to a third party is not as easy as Fox Sports to Sinclair Group and even that had its own issues. Like how many buyers would get regulatory approval and be interested in buying Activision by itself knowing full well that COD is likely coming off the annual release schedule. Also what is Activision worth?