The Microsoft / Activision Blizzard acquisition |OT| Antitrust Simulator (completed; discussing post-merger issues)

[Mmmmmkay]

It's interesting how the two dichotomies regarding subscription services are positions Sony and Microsoft both take. Sony believes subscription services are their own market and are addictive, Microsoft believes subscription services are the same market as purchasing and disruptive. Considering how many companies have said that putting their games day one on a subscription service doesn't make sense for them, I'm going to say Microsoft's position is more correct. Hopefully the CMA understand that.

Click to shrink...

Actually during the Brazil regulatory process, Sony had told that regulatory body that subscription was not a separate market from pay to play. Everyone was kind of surprised they took that stance given that was probably their best argument against when this whole thing started.

 

[DopeyFish]

I was mostly referring to Parliament's ability to intervene rather than the CMA itself bowing down to political pressure. I just have to wonder if Parliament itself would want to discourage foreign investment by blocking two American companies from merging based on wild speculation about the future. I really doubt that MS itself would cease operations in the UK or anything, but why would any foreign company want to invest more money into a company that acts in an arbitrary and capricious manner?

Click to shrink...

but what does it really change in the end?

stopping 2 USA companies still doesn't change the fact that if you want to do business within the borders, you must abide by their rules and regulations and respect the authorities which power is placed. Plus these aren't technically american companies, they are multinational corporations. It's always going to be a risk.

How the UK acts in this regard isn't going to change investment of multinational corporations.

 

[T0kenAussie]

I was mostly referring to Parliament's ability to intervene rather than the CMA itself bowing down to political pressure. I just have to wonder if Parliament itself would want to discourage foreign investment by blocking two American companies from merging based on wild speculation about the future. I really doubt that MS itself would cease operations in the UK or anything, but why would any foreign company want to invest more money into a company that acts in an arbitrary and capricious manner?

Click to shrink...

Yeah this is where I'm at

MS is never pulling out of a country and specifically not a 5 eyes nation but the UK will face pressure to encourage investment given their whole plan post brexit is to seemingly try to do a 5 eyes trade pacts (even though it's speculative at best that they could do this as effectively as they were during their EU days)

 

[BlackheartVinyl]

Actually during the Brazil regulatory process, Sony had told that regulatory body that subscription was not a separate market from pay to play. Everyone was kind of surprised they took that stance given that was probably their best argument against when this whole thing started.

Click to shrink...

They did? Jesus, that feels like it should have ended the whole thing!

 

[Deleted member 93062]

Actually during the Brazil regulatory process, Sony had told that regulatory body that subscription was not a separate market from pay to play. Everyone was kind of surprised they took that stance given that was probably their best argument against when this whole thing started.

Click to shrink...

I wonder if Microsoft presented that to the CMA.

 

[Tovarisc]

Blood in the water.

Click to shrink...

More like "I wish there was blood in the water, but meanwhile I project my personal feelings to deeply vague speculation" thinking.

I just wish mods would stomp on that irrelevant console warring crap and let this thread be genuine feed for news about acquisition.

 

[cyrribrae]

Yeah that is why everything rides on then pretty much. If they decide that the subscription market is a separate market from boxed products then they could easily conclude MS already has an overwhelming lead and owning COD will make them unchallengeable. If that is the case MS wouldn't be able to fight it.

Click to shrink...

Though, we're skipping a step here, which is that we're waiting on CMA's provisional findings which is also where they will set out any potential remedies. Unless they basically pull a FTC this week and totally block any possibility of negotiating with them, MS still has time to work with CMA and try to find that middle ground. Of course, even if there's room but it's exceedingly narrow, we will know that it's probably done at that point. But just because they don't approve it fully tomorrow doesn't mean that it's over.

But yes, if we get to the final decision and they haven't approved, then that's a block that likely isn't going to change - even if MS were "close".

 

[Mmmmmkay]

I wonder if Microsoft presented that to the CMA.

Click to shrink...

I don't know but I can't remember Sony voicing anything about it other than it possibly exclusive to GP which they said would be unfair. I don't believe anyone has made the argument publicly yet that it is a separate market.

 

[Mmmmmkay]

Though, we're skipping a step here, which is that we're waiting on CMA's provisional findings which is also where they will set out any potential remedies. Unless they basically pull a FTC this week and totally block any possibility of negotiating with them, MS still has time to work with CMA and try to find that middle ground. Of course, even if there's room but it's exceedingly narrow, we will know that it's probably done at that point. But just because they don't approve it fully tomorrow doesn't mean that it's over.

But yes, if we get to the final decision and they haven't approved, then that's a block that likely isn't going to change - even if MS were "close".

Click to shrink...

I know I'm speaking about something out of our control and probably irrelevant but it seems strange that they wouldn't have a definition for "separate market". Different country but in the US it's more or less defined as a product or service not available in equal context or quality by another means (that's not a literal definition). Meaning let's say a title was only available through subscription and not available to purchase digitally or physically.


Edit: just looked up the CMA's market definition perimeters, yeah it's kind of confusing to say the least 😂

 

[Alcander]

Stay on topic, please. 10 year old beefs with Xbox is not.

Click to shrink...

Thank you.

 

[BobLoblaw]

I was mostly referring to Parliament's ability to intervene rather than the CMA itself bowing down to political pressure. I just have to wonder if Parliament itself would want to discourage foreign investment by blocking two American companies from merging based on wild speculation about the future. I really doubt that MS itself would cease operations in the UK or anything, but why would any foreign company want to invest more money into a company that acts in an arbitrary and capricious manner?

Click to shrink...

Microsoft did invest $2 billion in the London stock exchange a few months ago. There's like a 0% chance that whatever the CMA's investigation finds would impact that, but it might make them second guess any investments there in the future (depending on whether or not they wanted to be petty).

 

[Outrun]

The lawyers sure are enjoying the protracted process.

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

The lawyers sure are enjoying the protracted process.

Click to shrink...

LOL, I know this to be true but honestly, they shouldn't be. This case has been won 4 times unconditionally already by establishments without axes to grind, public images to portray or overcorrections of past failings. There isn't anything left to prove. Microsoft has the winning hand in this game of poker and logically speaking, has always had it. We are just waiting to see if the CMA is going to pull some cards from their sleeve because what's on the table already isn't going to win anything for them.

 

[supercommodore]

I was mostly referring to Parliament's ability to intervene rather than the CMA itself bowing down to political pressure. I just have to wonder if Parliament itself would want to discourage foreign investment by blocking two American companies from merging based on wild speculation about the future. I really doubt that MS itself would cease operations in the UK or anything, but why would any foreign company want to invest more money into a company that acts in an arbitrary and capricious manner?

Click to shrink...

Outside of new legislation, government will only intervene in "public interest" mergers. Those are defined as

1. Media concerns
2. Stability of U.K. financial system
3. Need to combat public health emergency

They are also allowed to intervene for national security reasons but not relevant here.

From this Ashurst article from May 22.

The EA 2002 also contains provisions allowing political involvement in certain limited categories of merger which have the potential to raise wider public interest concerns. In such cases, the Secretary of State is able to intervene and can impose additional conditions on a merger to address such public interest concerns. Where the merger is felt to be in the public interest overall, notwithstanding any competition concerns, the Secretary of State can even "trump" the competition assessment and clear a merger which has been identified as potentially anti-competitive (as seen for example in the case of the Lloyds/HBOSmerger in 2008). Currently, the specified considerations in respect of which the Secretary of State is able to make a public interest intervention are limited to media concerns such as media plurality, accuracy and quality, (since the financial crisis of autumn 2008) the stability of the UK financial system, and (since 23 June 2020, as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak) the need to combat public health emergencies. To date, public interest interventions under the EA 2002 have been relatively rare.

Click to shrink...

 

[Deleted member 98695]

but what does it really change in the end?

stopping 2 USA companies still doesn't change the fact that if you want to do business within the borders, you must abide by their rules and regulations and respect the authorities which power is placed. Plus these aren't technically american companies, they are multinational corporations. It's always going to be a risk.

How the UK acts in this regard isn't going to change investment of multinational corporations.

Click to shrink...

Multi-national corporations will absolutely tend to invest more heavily in countries that have more predictable, business friendly governments. For example, most US businesses incorporate in Delaware because their courts are the most predictable and most experienced courts in the US with regards to businesses. That stability has not prevented businesses from operating elsewhere, but it has driven tax revenue to Delaware beyond what it would have gotten otherwise.

MS might just be one company, but every large company will have to deal with the fear that the CMA will disregard existing jurisprudence and act without fear of judicial review. While many corporations currently have operations in the UK, why would they invest further there if the British Government has an unaccountable regulator that bases its decisions on wild speculation to attack unpopular businesses? I doubt MS or any Multi-national immediately pulls out, but they can absolutely limit their risk by not investing further.

I also do not understand the sentiment that Multi-nationals cannot influence the policy of nations when the entire point of this anti-trust debate is the idea that these large companies have too much power. If they could not influence decisions by investing their money elsewhere, they would not have this immense power that people are afraid of in the first place.

 

[Terbinator]

Schrödinger's deal - it is simultaneously getting approved and blocked.

Click to shrink...

AlwaysHasBeen.jpg

 

[Vince Death]

Did anything ever come out from the ECs statement of concerns?

 

[DopeyFish]

Did anything ever come out from the ECs statement of concerns?

Click to shrink...

we will find out when either

a) the deadline is suspended (meaning they came to an agreement and the deal is approved)

or

b) when April 11th comes around lol

Microsoft is waiting for CMA in order to figure out what concessions they have to give and if it's something they can work around, they'll try to make concessions that apply to all. But that's why it depends on the CMA. CMA can block which fucks it. They can ask for something ridiculous which fucks it. Their remedy in combination with what the EC is asking for could fuck it. We won't know what the EU wanted until it leaks out or it resolves itself. (or possibly the deal is abandoned)

 

[Idas]

New article from Bloomberg, although nothing really new beyond a couple of opinions and a new statement from MS:

Why Microsoft’s $69 Billion Activision Deal Hinges on London Not Washington

Microsoft Corp.’s $69 billion Activision Blizzard Inc. takeover faces a key decision in Britain as the nation’s merger watchdog marks its arrival as a global regulator with findings that could set the trajectory to the mega deal finalizing — or falling apart.

www.bloomberg.com

Click to shrink...

"The CMA's decision is key because if it chooses to block the deal, there is little recourse for the companies — UK courts rarely overturn a CMA merger decision," said Jennifer Rie, an analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence. "Conditions will have to be thorough, beyond just licenses for Call of Duty," she said, adding that "an unconditional clearance is unlikely."

"The FTC may rely on the CMA to block it," said Anne C Witt, a professor of law at EDHEC Business School. "The European Commission just sent out a statement of objections, so there's no way they can get there before the CMA. The CMA is going to win this one and it will be interesting."

"To advance the gaming market to the benefit of all stakeholders, we believe it is important to consider clear and easily enforceable solutions to potential competition concerns," a Microsoft spokesperson said.

"Our commitment to grant long-term access to Call of Duty to Sony, as well as Nintendo and Steam, accomplishes this be preserving the deal's benefits to consumers and developers and promoting competition in the market," they said.

Click to shrink...

Strauss Zelnick, CEO of Take-Two Interactive, talks about cloud gaming and subscription services:

Take-Two CEO addresses potential disruption from new business models, distribution and tech

Strauss Zelnick talked how Take-Two approaches new technologies and potential disruption from changes in gaming.

venturebeat.com

Click to shrink...

"We're believers in cloud gaming. We were one of the first licensors, if not the first licensor for Google Stadia to support that product."

"But remember, cloud gaming is a technology. It's not a business model. It's a distribution technology. And our view is broader distribution is always a good thing in the entertainment business. If we can reach more consumers with our properties, we're happy to do it as long as the terms make sense," he said. "I think broader distribution over time probably benefits us in any number of ways, including the cost of distribution, which I believe will go down over time. That said, never felt like cloud gaming would represent a seismic change because I think if you're prepared to pay $60 or $70 for a frontline title, you're also prepared to buy a console. And I think Stadia found that out."

He added, "So bringing high-quality titles to consumers who don't own consoles will probably have an effect around the edges, but I don't think it'll be hard revolution in the business. I think it will be more and the evolution of the business, and there's still technical challenges to be addressed."

Asked if subscriptions are taking a toll on sales of individual games and changing the way people engage with new titles, Zelnick said he is thrilled to be in the subscription business for catalog titles at the appropriate time.

"We think that is the right way to support subscription," he said. "I think the last announcement was that Game Pass was 25 million subscribers. We're not talking a huge broad-based business yet. I don't believe that businesses cannibalizing our business."

Click to shrink...

Great post. I have a feeling the PF from CMA will be more than 150 pages haha
Idas what do u think

Click to shrink...

Yes, Geradin Partners is a well known legal boutique about competition law in Brussels. I think that they make some very good points.

Okay so I just went on the CMA's website and you're correct but with a caveat. Seems that pretty much any merger decision can be challenged based on procedural improprieties. Wether or not there is one is up to the CAT to decide. What I did find interesting is tha it seems MS is not beholden to a decision. Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it looks like hey can ignore an unfavorable decision and close overtop. The CMA then must take the business to court. This quote below is from their site. Maybe Idas can give some insight.

"Anti-competitive mergers are those that make one player too dominant in a market. UK companies are not required to notify or seek pre-approval from the CMA of their intention to merge (as is the case in the EU), so if the CMA concludes that doing so will have an adverse effect on competition it can agree remedies with the buyer, impose orders on them or block the transaction. If a business doesn't comply and the CMA seeks to take action, it must take the business to court."

Click to shrink...

Notification is voluntary in UK and a transaction can be completed before clearance has been obtained, but not if it has been referred for a Phase 2 investigation. So, MS has to wait.

Did anything ever come out from the ECs statement of concerns?

Click to shrink...

Nothing yet! It has been a week already. I guess that as soon as we have provisional findings we'll have more info about how the concerns from the SO and the PF compare.

 

[Tigerfish419]

Idas

If CMA come out and seems like they block it, do you think we'll see Microsoft pull away from the deal quickly or will they run it down to the deadline for their response and try and change their mind or whatever haha.

 

[Guerrilla]

I have no idea how these things are handled, though shouldn't Microsoft have a good idea already of what's coming? I'm sure they had a ton of talks with the deciding parties at the CMA already, right?

 

[reksveks]

But remember, cloud gaming is a technology. It's not a business model. It's a distribution technology.

Click to shrink...

I would be interested to see the rational behind making cloud streaming (if the CMA does) a new market when T2, Sony and others have kinda said it isnt.

 

[Tigerfish419]

I have no idea how these things are handled, though shouldn't Microsoft have a good idea already of what's coming? I'm sure they had a ton of talks with the deciding parties at the CMA already, right?

Click to shrink...

They would but I don't think this is an easy thing with an extremely obvious reasoning/outcome, it's not like Microsoft is market leader in all countries, 1# on revenue and #1 on every stat and tried to do this, I think it's complex. With that said they should have a general vibe by the questions being asked how it's going but it doesn't always mean a certain direction.

 

[DopeyFish]

I would be interested to see the rational behind making cloud streaming (if the CMA does) a new market when T2, Sony and others have kinda said it isnt.

Click to shrink...

the way i see it, fundamentally cloud streaming would only be a market if it is something that is self-sustaining. if game sales didn't exist, would cloud gaming be able to exist with profit and be able to fund the same projects on it's own?

I do not think in any realm of reality one would be able to say definitively yes to this question. it exists entirely as an extension of product that already exists.

 

[pappacone]

I would be interested to see the rational behind making cloud streaming (if the CMA does) a new market when T2, Sony and others have kinda said it isnt.

Click to shrink...

"cloud gaming" is a thing, subscription services are another.
T2 here is saying that they support cloud gaming, for example Stadia, because you can purchase the game without the need of a console.

 

[Idas]

Idas

If CMA come out and seems like they block it, do you think we'll see Microsoft pull away from the deal quickly or will they run it down to the deadline for their response and try and change their mind or whatever haha.

Click to shrink...

Until April 18th there is no new extension of the merger agreement (and new termination fee). So, I think that they'll keep pushing until then even if the CMA blocks it. And the EC has to decide before April 11th, so they should fight that one until the new extension at least.

 

[cyrribrae]

I have no idea how these things are handled, though shouldn't Microsoft have a good idea already of what's coming? I'm sure they had a ton of talks with the deciding parties at the CMA already, right?

Click to shrink...

They may know generally about some of the issues that CMA cares about, but there's all the difference in how they approach and frame those concerns. Which remedies they suggest, if any, how they approach those concerns, who they call in to corroborate. All those details make a ton of difference and it's quite likely that MS doesn't have any of that information. We'll see. From the outside, truly anything is yet possible.

"cloud gaming" is a thing, subscription services are another.
T2 here is saying that they support cloud gaming, for example Stadia, because you can purchase the game without the need of a console.

Click to shrink...

That's not what he said at all. It's not even close.. What?

 

[reksveks]

"cloud gaming" is a thing, subscription services are another.
T2 here is saying that they support cloud gaming, for example Stadia, because you can purchase the game without the need of a console.

Click to shrink...

'A thing' isn't the same as a 'new market'.

I do agree that there is a difference between distribution method and payment model, the EC also said that previously and it makes sense.

 

[Tigerfish419]

Until April 18th there is no new extension of the merger agreement (and new termination fee). So, I think that they'll keep pushing until then even if the CMA blocks it. And the EC has to decide before April 11th, so they should fight that one until the new extension at least.

Click to shrink...

Ah ok, I thought they'll probably think it's over because how hard it would be to either change CMA's mind or do anything to go over them, but yeah if there is nothing really there to stop them like the next phase fee and deadline for the agreement then it makes sense to keep at it until they hit one of those roadbumps then take note.

I know you've said it many times before that they don't like behaviour remedies, but do you think if Microsoft does enough where it could be so ironclad for maybe a long time that they could bend to it? let's say they do something crazy that Microsoft will support every platform including new platforms for the next 20 years, they allow it on all subscription services, all cloud gaming subscription services, just everything that it could push them over the edge. To that point do you think Microsoft would do something that crazy haha, I just wonder if Microsoft really has zero plans to remove it of anything is there really anything going to prove that, I know regulators will always think that the company will do the opposite of what they say which is probably fair because most do but I really do feel like here MS will actually not remove support and I guess it's hard for them to be taken seriously because big tech corps always lie.

 

[Trup1aya]

I would be interested to see the rational behind making cloud streaming (if the CMA does) a new market when T2, Sony and others have kinda said it isnt.

Click to shrink...

I feel like cloud gaming could only really be a new market if the experiences it offers were fundamentally different and thus segmented from the offerings elsewhere.

When I play Hi-fi rush via xcloud- it's the exact same game I could have gotten via download. I just to pay for it via subscription fees rather than buying it. It's being distributed to me via as a stream rather than an install.

 

[AImalexia]

Outside of new legislation, government will only intervene in "public interest" mergers. Those are defined as

1. Media concerns
2. Stability of U.K. financial system
3. Need to combat public health emergency

They are also allowed interventions for national security interest but not relevant here.

From this Ashurst article from May 22.

Click to shrink...

so all we need for the deal to pass/not pass is for UK gamers to riot so hard that it becomes a matter of national security!! lets goooooo

 

[T0kenAussie]

I have no idea how these things are handled, though shouldn't Microsoft have a good idea already of what's coming? I'm sure they had a ton of talks with the deciding parties at the CMA already, right?

Click to shrink...

Brad smith pointed out if this process started in 2019 or 2020 they would probably have had less regulatory scuttlebutt than now

They may have not read the tea leaves on the regulators bucking the trend of conventional vertical integration mergers

 

[Miniature Kaiju]

In business, a market is a group of addressable (i.e. has interest, resources and is legally allowed to acquire the product) consumers. Cloud gaming has a group of consumers that overlaps console/PC gamers to an extent, but also theoretically addresses people outside of those groups, so it's definitely a market in and of itself.

Likewise for subscription services vs. upfront purchases.

 

[reksveks]

Was more talking about the definition of markets when looking at anti-trust issues, market has different definitions in different context.

Spoiler: Well shared EC paragraph from the Zenimax deal

As regards a possible segmentation of a hypothetical digital distribution market
based on the payment model (upfront payment vs. subscription), the results of the
market investigation indicate that such a segmentation is not warranted, in particular
because digital payment models to a large extent are interchangeable.Similarly, the
results of the market investigation do not support segmenting the hypothetical digital
distribution market by types of players' access (download vs. streaming). A large
majority of respondents in the market investigation indicated that such a
segmentation is not appropriate in particular because different access does not
influence the players' purchasing behaviour and choices.On this basis, for the
purpose of this decision, the Commission will not distinguish different segments in
the digital distribution market, based on the payment model and on the types of
access.

 

[Dingo]

Was more talking about the definition of markets when looking at anti-trust issues, market has different definitions in different context.

Spoiler: Well shared EC paragraph from the Zenimax deal

As regards a possible segmentation of a hypothetical digital distribution market
based on the payment model (upfront payment vs. subscription), the results of the
market investigation indicate that such a segmentation is not warranted, in particular
because digital payment models to a large extent are interchangeable.Similarly, the
results of the market investigation do not support segmenting the hypothetical digital
distribution market by types of players' access (download vs. streaming). A large
majority of respondents in the market investigation indicated that such a
segmentation is not appropriate in particular because different access does not
influence the players' purchasing behaviour and choices.On this basis, for the
purpose of this decision, the Commission will not distinguish different segments in
the digital distribution market, based on the payment model and on the types of
access.

Click to shrink...

Never seen that. Interesting that investigating other companies led to that verdict.

 

[Ombretoile]

Apple: CMA remedies for cloud gaming on iOS are "plainly inappropriate and unreasonable"

Sign up for the GI Daily here to get the biggest news straight to your inbox Apple has taken issue with the remedies pr…

www.gamesindustry.biz

Gamepass on Apple Devices ?

 

[Windu]

Apple: CMA remedies for cloud gaming on iOS are "plainly inappropriate and unreasonable"

Sign up for the GI Daily here to get the biggest news straight to your inbox Apple has taken issue with the remedies pr…

www.gamesindustry.biz

Gamepass on Apple Devices ?

Click to shrink...

Apple with the "Think of the Children" defense. lol

 

[reksveks]

Apple with the "Think of the Children" defense. lol

Click to shrink...

No one told Tim Cook about the issues with Roblox.

Also funny as hell.

Games are software that is dynamic, reacting to user input as well as interaction between users, and games can be modified to include objectionable content very rapidly. The nature of games is therefore distinct from content creation apps such as Roblox, which provide users with a standardised and fixed toolkit

Click to shrink...

 

[T0kenAussie]

Apple: CMA remedies for cloud gaming on iOS are "plainly inappropriate and unreasonable"

Sign up for the GI Daily here to get the biggest news straight to your inbox Apple has taken issue with the remedies pr…

www.gamesindustry.biz

Gamepass on Apple Devices ?

Click to shrink...

This is the CMAs requests

• Compelling Apple, and other app store operators, to review and amend guidelines to ensure cloud gaming providers are not unduly impacted
• Allowing prompts that let users know when a cloud gaming app is available as a web app
• Making app store approval and rejection processes more transparent and consistent
• Enabling sideloading of native apps on iOS
• Enabling the distribution of web apps through Apple's App Store
• Enabling the installation of alternative app stores on iOS

If this happens I would be so goddamn happy but apple and google would pitch a right fit

 

[dude]

Apple: CMA remedies for cloud gaming on iOS are "plainly inappropriate and unreasonable"

Sign up for the GI Daily here to get the biggest news straight to your inbox Apple has taken issue with the remedies pr…

www.gamesindustry.biz

Gamepass on Apple Devices ?

Click to shrink...

Honestly, I'm amazed it took so long for regulators to look into iOS and the App Store. Finally!

 

[Trup1aya]

In business, a market is a group of addressable (i.e. has interest, resources and is legally allowed to acquire the product) consumers. Cloud gaming has a group of consumers that overlaps console/PC gamers to an extent, but also theoretically addresses people outside of those groups, so it's definitely a market in and of itself.

Likewise for subscription services vs. upfront purchases.

Click to shrink...

Does cloud gaming really address people outside of that group though? I think I just expands the group to include more people. Xcloud is playing games running on xbox console hardeware. GeForce is playing games designed for PCs, purchased on a PC storefront, running on remote PCs. Luna is also running PC games remotely.

Imo, Cloud gaming isn't addressing non-console/PC gamers a it's expanding the reach of console and PC gaming in order to reach to people who may have been previously unaddressable.

 

[Hasney]

This is the CMAs requests

• Compelling Apple, and other app store operators, to review and amend guidelines to ensure cloud gaming providers are not unduly impacted
• Allowing prompts that let users know when a cloud gaming app is available as a web app
• Making app store approval and rejection processes more transparent and consistent
• Enabling sideloading of native apps on iOS
• Enabling the distribution of web apps through Apple's App Store
• Enabling the installation of alternative app stores on iOS

If this happens I would be so goddamn happy but apple and google would pitch a right fit

Click to shrink...

So the sideloading and alt app stores on iOS are likely happening. The EU are also asking for the same things, so Apple are just going to do it in territories they're forced to, which thankfully includes us now as well https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...all-third-party-app-stores-sideload-in-europe

 

[Miniature Kaiju]

Does cloud gaming really address people outside of that group though?

Click to shrink...

it's expanding the reach of console and PC gaming to people who may have been previously unaddressable.

Click to shrink...

It doesn't matter what it's running on in the background, it's allowing unaddressable people outside of the original ecosystem to get in without having to get the "original" hardware. It's a new market.

 

[reksveks]

Honestly, I'm amazed it took so long for regulators to look into iOS and the App Store. Finally!

Click to shrink...

They have been looking into it for a while but it's just rather slow work and disparate between regulators.

Korea, EU, India, UK and others are all looking at the mobile duopoly.

 

[Synth]

It doesn't matter what it's running on in the background, it's allowing unaddressable people outside of the original ecosystem to get in without having to get the "original" hardware. It's a new market.

Click to shrink...

I don't think it really counts as a new market just because it reaches people previously unaddressable, because that would for example make any form of deferred payment option into a new market of whatever product it was used to purchase, because that also expands the reach to those that wouldn't be able to purchase in one lump.

I definitely do think that there is an argument to be made that cloud gaming can become a market of its own in the future, when it ceases to be restricted to the same hardware standards that local solutions use. For example it's theoretically possibly that higher-budget and higher-priced games could eventually make use of distributed computing resources far greater than any home PC is equipped for to offer games that are transformative over what it possible without (think like the arcade market, but in the cloud). The market as it current stands hasn't shown any signs of this yet however, and is simply an alternate payment model to access the exact same content.

 

[Trup1aya]

It doesn't matter what it's running on in the background, it's allowing unaddressable people outside of the original ecosystem to get in without having to get the "original" hardware. It's a new market.

Click to shrink...

Why doesn't it matter what's it running on in the background? These people ARE playing console/PC games, running on console/pc So how are they anything other than console/pc gamers?

How do you distinguish "expanding the market to addressed more people" from "creating a new market for previously unaddressable people" ?

We already have market authority rulings that determined that different types of access hasn't warranted segmented market distinction.

If we had cloud games that couldn't run on personal computers- then we could argue that there's a new market forming.

 

[Miniature Kaiju]

Why doesn't it matter what's it running on in the background? These people ARE playing console/PC games, running on console/pc So how are they anything other than console/pc gamers?

Click to shrink...

Is a person that doesn't have a PC but is playing streamed PC games on a TV a PC gamer? Would they go to Steam buy PC games?

 

[GifGafJef]

Kind of do hope the deal doesn't go through but its wild this is still being deliberated on.Wonder if this will have ramifications for future acquisitions in the field of this scale

 

[onesvenus]

it's allowing unaddressable people outside of the original ecosystem to get in without having to get the "original" hardware

Click to shrink...

Are you defining the market as the people who own an Xbox? Because I don't think it's addressing anyone who doesn't have an Xbox or PC

 

[Reckheim]

Kind of do hope the deal doesn't go through but its wild this is still being deliberated on.Wonder if this will have ramifications for future acquisitions in the field of this scale

Click to shrink...

Hopefully it does, regardless of the result of this case.