That's where the first party exclusives come into play, enough quality and people will consider it and next gen we start from 0 again. Ecosystems matter less when you can sun and play it all.
I don't want this deal to go through, but MS has really done a good job of poking holes in a lot of Sony's claims. I think by the time it comes down for CMA to make the decision they might realize that something can be done without divestment.
Ya I mean this is clear? Is this not saying they still won't accept behavioral remedies no matter what?
CMA are hell or high water sticking to their guns it seems, so we can take that as we will
No, the CMA left the door open to discuss behavioral remedies with MS and that's exactly what they're doing right now. It looks like MS were very successful negotiating with the EC to get them to change their stance, so it's a real possibility that they'll do the same with the CMA, especially considering how flimsy the CMA's arguments are.
Where are you getting that from? There's no new info from the CMA in this new report.
Not official but just based on what we know from other marketing deals, in this case it'd be exclusivity deals.
After all the EC has always been much more open to this kind of solution, therefore much easier to convince.
It's not the same, but it's still a positive development and a good sign for MS.
Except that the CMA made it clear that this SLC was not limited in time and therefore what happens after 10 years
As Sheepinator says there is no good documentation on it. Bing AI and my google gift were only able to find the numbers I used. I tried to include the source of the numbers
Agreed. I guess they just used Sony telemetry data. 40% feels very high, from my napkin math, SO that would just mean an even smaller % diversion rate. Which then just causes me to shake my head. Is the CMA intentionally making it look bad to try to 1) justify blocking it or 2) to strong arm and get stronger concessions.
Microsoft definitely is laying the ground work for an irrantionality claim to the CAT. But lets hope it doesn't get to that! I just want this over!
The report doesn't say anything new about the CMA. Feels like half the whiplash is from conjecture a lot of the time.
Not sure CMA is allowed to speculate into the distant future like that. We're taking about a popular videogame that will not be popular or even made for eternity. I find it baffling that the CMA is apparently treating CoD like an essential asset.
That quote was from the provisional findings. A lot has transpired since then so we really don't know where the CMA is at this point and how Microsoft's response has influenced their stance given all of the inaccuracies in their methodology and conflicting statements they brought up. Those undoubtedly vastly weakened the CMA's case for divesture and prohibition. The other thing that the CMA has to be considering is if the deal is cleared in all other markets, they would be ripe for an irrationality appeal in CAT.
Without that metric, you can make anything seem like an essential input.
Conjecture by some in here over the same reporting. Nothing has moved one way or another with the CMA. Who knows where they are at with everything that has transpired over the last couple weeks.
Actually this is old news and is based on the CMA's PF which is based entirely on everything submitted prior to Microsoft's 10-year contracts with Nintendo, Nvidia, Boosteroid, etc. At the time of the CMA's PF, Microsoft had only committed to having Call of Duty on Nintendo, PlayStation and Steam, without any formal contract signed. Roughly two weeks after the CMA's PF, Microsoft signed deals with Nintendo and Nvidia, following that up with recent deals with Boosteroid and Ubitus.
For some reason MLex cut off the bolded bit.
Is there a difference between behavioral remedy and a behavioral access remedy? If so, I wonder how many mergers in the past that the CMA "blocked" were more related towards behavioral remedy instead of an access remedy. The way they're separated in that quote makes me feel like the CMA views them as different things.
Eh. Given paragraph 7.339 of the CMA's response, even if Microsoft is correct and the CMA's analysis is incorrect (not to mention, that's only 2 of the analyses that they examined, I would bet Sony's financial modeling does not agree with Microsoft's), they can still assess the incentive to foreclose to exist.
There isn't anything new from the CMA other than MS being encouraged by how their talks are going. So no reason for whiplash lol.
Well previously the EC report would come the day before the CMAs so I doubt it wouldve helped
The report also says that the EC needs to have a draft decision ready soon, so I'm sure the CMA will see that too.
Yeah I don't think It would have really helped either, maybe with CAT if they wanted to file an appeal as quick as possible.
I think it's very likely that the CMA will get that draft or at least know what it says.
If the games industry leaves the UK and moves to the EU because the business community is more friendly there it would be a huge black eye politically
