Jump to content

Microsoft is buying Activision Blizzard for $68.7 billion [FTC sues to stop - CMA issues updated preliminary findings]


waltdisneypixar

Recommended Posts

https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/activision-blizzard-ceo-addresses-toxic-workforce-claims-microsoft-deal-1235628361/

 

Puff piece for Bobby Kotick. As I said, if the workers wanted him gone then the time was at the start of this when the heat was high on him. Letting themselves be fooled by Microsoft has allowed him to reach this point where he gets to go on TV without issues and gets puff pieces written about him in the media, the big boy media that matters far more than the gaming media.

 

Don't be fooled by Microsoft's astroturfers that Microsoft would have totally removed him if the deal doesn't get through and Kotick stays on. Microsoft is who is responsible for him surviving and would I have no doubt have kept him on. They like their "talented jerks" as they say.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bobby should have gone back in 2009, you know when he threatened to not make PS3 games? What else did this parasite achieve in 2009? Let's just say it really does reflect on the British response to the MS Deal. And that is NOTHING in comparison to the later years, he feels he is god.

 

In the meantime every COD is hacked and unsafe to play online with PC or Console, even the newest piece of shit game. This is what happens when you shut down fan made projects, lose the player base and get kicked in the ass in return by unpaid devs who actually know what they are doing. What is Activision doing? Nothing.

 

Microsoft knows their player base though frequently ignore feedback, Bobby on the other hand is not a problem that can be ignored so we'll see what happens.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ftc-chair-khan-accused-abuse-power-new-us-house-probe-2023-06-01/

https://www.ft.com/content/b72bd1d8-8a92-47ec-b9fb-a4d415bcab03

 

Two new pieces out attacking the FTC and CMA. While politicians being bought and paid for is obvious to most people, I will note again to not trust these "independents" when they come out to attack regulators for Microsoft. As is written in Microsoft's known playbook, such people are agents of theirs used to mislead the public, regulators, and opponents, that the popular opinion is on Microsoft's side.

 

Quote

From MLex

- Microsoft executives are actively looking at ways to close the acquisition despite a UK veto on the deal, MLex has learned.
 

- The CMA currently has an interim order in place preventing Microsoft from acquiring "an interest in Activision or any of its subsidiaries." It is likely to make that permanent very soon.
 

- The surprise speed of the CAT appeal process may dampen any calls within the company for it to close the deal regardless of the UK block.
 

- "Our priority is pursuing the appeal process in the UK, and we remain committed to constructive dialogue and solutions to address regulatory concerns," a Microsoft spokesperson said today.
 

- Microsoft has hired extra lawyers and has tasked some with examining how it could close the Activision deal, MLex understands.
 

- One option could include Activision exiting the UK for another European country in a bid to remove itself from the CMA's jurisdiction. Its games could continue to be sold via a distributor. One rub is that any such decision must be taken by Activision to avoid breaching merger laws that stipulate that merging companies must be managed separately and independently until they actually close.
 

- Another option could see Microsoft extend remedies given to and accepted by the European Commission to the UK unilaterally, even though they were rejected as insufficient by the CMA.
 

- The company is also actively contesting the CMA's draft order that would give effect to its veto, banning Microsoft from acquiring an interest in Activision for several years, and vice versa. The ability of the UK watchdog to impose a global ban solely to address concerns relating to the UK market is at the center of that, MLex understands. Microsoft could challenge the final order in court to seek to narrow its scope, to potentially allow it to close elsewhere in the world.
 

- Alternatively, Microsoft could seek to close the transaction and argue that the order was illegal in its defense when sued by the CMA.
 

- In mid-May, a reporter for CNBC asked Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella whether the company could close the deal and just stop selling Activision's products in the UK. The CEO responded: "Let's wait for it all to play out." Asked by MLex on May 12 whether it could close around the UK, a representative of Microsoft said it was a "complicated question," but "at some point we may need to think about it." A spokesperson from Microsoft advised against reading too much into the comments.

 

This has also come out and it is getting a lot of play. Straight away something that has to be stated is that all of this stuff, be this here or stuff about how things were going with the regulators, all of it is leaked by Microsoft itself. Why leak this nonsense when there seems to be no gain in it? Remember that the people they had reviewing Redfall told them that everything was excellent. Likewise in the leaks Microsoft puts out they're always on top.

 

As for the news here itself. I can buy that executives are demanding their army of lawyers finds some way for them to close the deal over the CMA if it comes to it, but these things getting raised as possibilities? I don't buy them.

 

The Activision leaving UK angle - the idea being that Activision will cease existing in the UK and so Microsoft can buy without any issue, then Microsoft can simply make Activision stuff available in the UK again and man, how easy is it to get around regulation right. The first problem with that is the Meta case that the CMA wrecked? Company being bought had no business in the UK and it didn't matter. However, let us say it does work. It has to be done before Activision is actually bought, and during this period before they are bought Microsoft cannot command their business. So what reason would Activision have to rapidly pull out all their business from the UK? Why would a company sabotage itself like that? The answer would obviously be to get this deal done and at Microsoft's behest. There is no way to explain away such moves. As such the CMA would I'm sure attack such an obviously corrupt action.

 

The putting in court the order that Microsoft cannot buy any interest in Activision for the next 10 years angle - I can't speak to the odds of succeeding on this, so perhaps possible but... isn't such a restriction not all that strange on merger failures? Arguing that you can't impose such an order because it has a global effect essentially renders such orders worthless, and while that may work in America, not so sure they'd get it done in the UK.

 

Buying Activision anyway and going to court with the CMA saying what the CMA is doing is illegal angle - If Microsoft does this that means they have failed with the CAT. They then ignore their loss and do the buying anyway and get sued. Why would a court then side with Microsoft who has shown behaviour that amounts to them believing they are above the law?

 

Conclusion. This is Microsoft as ever throwing out nonsense for their astroturfers to push and to give off the appearance of them being confident and ready to do anything to get what they want, so you better surrender now CMA. Don't you dare keep opposing Microsoft. They'll shoot themselves in the head if you don't stop blocking.

 

 

The typical Microsoft nerve of attacking and disrespecting others constantly and then putting on this act that they're all about being positive and respectful.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-02/microsoft-s-smith-set-for-talks-with-uk-chancellor-over-deal-ban#xj4y7vzkg

 

It does seem that Brad Smith is once again calm, collected, and back to his usual corrupt self. A few problems. Politicians meddling with an independent body like the CMA is a no no in Britain, especially when the government is in a weak state, something that Microsoft apparently has had a hard time comprehending. Second... Brad Smith is on record saying that Britain is closed for business and that the EU is better. That is a cardinal sin in itself in Britain to many and certainly with right wingers.

 

Something I find interesting by the way is they keep going after Jeremy Hunt even though he doesn't hold the position that is actually relevant to all of this. Chancellor is an important position obviously, but the Business Secretary would be more who to try and go for so... why? Well, Hunt was involved in some corruption with Murdoch however long ago it was so I suppose that would tell Microsoft that he can be bought and used for their efforts... but on the other hand if he has been caught before then that might itself make him unable to help them much even if they can buy him off. Kemi Badenoch would be who to actually go after, but we've yet to see a single peep from Microsoft in her direction. Ideally it would be because Microsoft can't get at her... but a more likely reason would be Brad Smith is who heads the political corruption wing of Microsoft and while I don't know the full breadth of his operation (who can but the man himself), doesn't he favour the more established and long term politicians? After all you get them on side and you got people in your pocket for 20-30 years. Perhaps he doesn't bother because she is relatively new and also a known firebrand/radical (who certainly won't have appreciated Smith's EU comments) who could well fall from grace in a few years (could also be a future PM though).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.ft.com/content/4b410761-78d8-4bec-a48b-79f1373d42e1

 

A big deal is getting made out of this where Sony's boss states that getting Cloud gaming going successfully is a tricky business. According to the astroturfing this is a great reversal, and now even Sony is going against the CMA. No. Sony was involved in the console SLC and when the CMA scrapped that they argued that the CMA had been mislead by Microsoft on the numbers. When the CMA blocked on the Cloud SLC Sony put in no word. This CAT appeal? Again, Sony has done nothing.

 

For a long time they've put forward the idea that Sony is leading a conspiracy against Microsoft and is behind the FTC/CMA going against Microsoft, so this has to be framed as Sony betraying the CMA and abandoning them because, yes you guessed it, Microsoft is poised to overwhelmingly win as always.

 

Anyway, two weeks left for that deal timeframe to end. With the EU I stated that all things considered them passing the deal was likely better as it'd lead to Microsoft wasting even more time, but I'm wary of gambling too much on these things. A successful appeal at the CAT doesn't give Microsoft a victory as the CMA can then just reject them again which means even more wasted time... but while the CMA has never gave in on these matters to anyone in the past... that doesn't mean it can't happen. The console SLC turnaround lets not forget was a near impossible thing that happened. Additionally as cool as extra wasted time for Microsoft is... perhaps unneeded at this point. The energy coming out of Microsoft is that their "accelerant" talk is a lie and they see their position in gaming as hopeless without this deal going through. After all, failure will mean that Microsoft will have to rely on making really good games and as we heard from Spencer himself, they have no belief in that doing the job.

 

Something which would be fun to witness would be if Microsoft attempts to avoid paying the 3 billion by citing Activision as the reason it failed (I'd say it is unlikely). As I've said in the past, Microsoft outside that moment where Brad Smith went insane, has largely used Activision to say the real aggressive stuff while they are more reserved. Activision in such a scenario would naturally cite Brad Smith and claim that Microsoft put them up to it. Would give us a good court case that we'd be missing if we never get the CAT appeal. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/microsoft-searching-solutions-over-uk-block-activision-deal-president-2023-06-06/

 

Isn't it wonderful that Sony meeting with the CMA the times they did (as is normal as they were involved in the case) was always met with big calls of corruption going down, but Microsoft doing this with a government minister is apparently all good and dandy. Oddly, going by this article it seems that the CMA weren't present as it was said they would be and instead Smith will be meeting with them separately. That seems shifty, but it likely shouldn't matter. For those unaware, Hunt even if Microsoft get him on side shouldn't be able to force anything so if the CMA stands firm then that is that. The CMA being civil service is likely going to have the same view much of the civil service has about ministers, which is that they're fools they have to tolerate and work around.

 

Quote

British competition authorities blocked the takeover in April in a shock decision which jeopardises gaming's biggest-ever deal, drawing a furious response from the two groups who questioned whether the country remained open to tech firms.

 

Questioned? 

 

Quote

Brad Smith: “The report’s conclusions are a disservice to UK citizens, who face increasingly dire economic prospects. We will reassess our growth plans for the UK. Global innovators large and small will take note that – despite all its rhetoric – the UK is clearly closed for business.”

 

That is pretty direct.

 

Quote

He said he had always been "bullish on the United Kingdom as a great place to live, to learn, to build".

 

Ah right, he has always loved the UK and seen it as a great place to do business. Please forget him saying it was closed for business before. Please forget all that talk before also about "death valley".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/global-britain-is-closed-for-business/

https://www.cityam.com/the-cma-decision-to-block-microsofts-activision-deal-could-cost-us-dearly-in-the-uk/

 

Isn't it strange how we see so many of these pro-Microsoft articles with all their narratives and yet very rarely do we see articles against the deal. As we know, it is one of Microsoft's tactics. Have some ghouls write "independent" articles, have the astroturfers spread them, and then trick people into thinking that public opinion is with Microsoft and against their opponents.

 

In the past these articles have given a glimpse into what Microsoft is about to do, but with these... Microsoft surely won't attempt to cut out the UK so... I suppose increase the hate against the CMA and try to smear them even more? Possible, though irrelevant.

 

Anyway, something else I've seen come up is apparently at a certain point Microsoft/Activision revoked waivers that allowed the FTC and CMA to talk more freely. The explanation seems to be them suspecting that the FTC and CMA were plotting their demise together, but might be one of those procedural traps. The FTC and CMA can still talk with that removed you see, but in a more limited fashion. So if they get evidence of it going beyond those limitations then the FTC/CMA did something wrong and they can go full force with the corruption angle. Considering the FTC/CMA have shown themselves to be wise to Microsoft's dirty tricks, I would think they were careful about that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just putting this in here for a laugh.

 

I saw an advertisement for Diablo 4 on a bus this morning that now reads "Fight against evil Activision". I won't be buying this game, the view from above is as bad as Persona 3 portable

 

Rozalia1? Back to you, a person in their spare time who gives us these incredible posts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/06/08/microsoft-activision-britain-competition-jeremy-hunt/

 

Quote

It’s truly desperate stuff from an organisation used to throwing its weight around and getting its own way. Fresh from trying to paint the UK as some sort of anti-business backwater, and threatening to cut jobs here, Smith has had a dramatic change of heart.
 

Having successfully navigated an English channel that had “never seemed wider”, as he put it last month, Smith is back in London sheepishly “in search of solutions”.
 

As for these shores, he has always been “bullish on the United Kingdom as a great place to live, to learn, to build”, he told a conference of industry figures.
 

What twaddle. In backpedalling so quickly, it reinforces how unconvincing his outburst was in the first place.

If Smith really seeks some form of détente, then he should show some true contrition and issue an apology to the CMA for the attempts of both Microsoft and Activision to undermine its authority. Only then does he deserve a second hearing.

 

Exactly right. Brad Smith with his drastic change in attitude only shows how dishonest he is. If he wants his new tune to be respected as an honest change then he needs to apologise, and the apology has to be as public as the disrespect. 

 

Quote

Or as CMA chairman Marcus Bokkerink succinctly put it: “I would challenge the premise that there is an impact on international confidence in doing business in the UK and that the best way that confidence is served is by turning a blind eye to anti-competitive mergers.”
 

Similarly, when Smith complains that the regulator’s decision “discourages innovation”, what could be less innovative than buying growth rather than trying to create it?

 

Describes Microsoft completely. Why create growth when you can just buy it.

 

Quote

In the meantime, as an alternative to spending £55bn on Activision, Microsoft could set up a live stream into Smith’s office and charge people to watch his tantrums. They could make millions from that sort of entertainment.

 

As I've said. If the gaming media wasn't so cowardly they'd all have mocked Brad Smith and by extension Microsoft into oblivion. It is incredible to me that Brad Smith has acted so incompetently thus far when he has been in charge of Microsoft's political corruption for like two decades now, and is the architect of Microsoft's strategy of fooling people into thinking they're the "good guys of tech" while using their influence to get other big tech companies screwed over. The most likely reason is that he has been so successful that he became unable to handle being told no, leading to the disastrous responses he has made.

 

Something to always keep in mind with all this by the way. The CMA has been incredibly transparent and respectful the whole way through. People don't have to agree with their decision, but you simply cannot take that away from them. Anyone who claims otherwise is either taken in by misinformation, knowingly lying, or an astroturfer. These same people as we know, of course take no issue with how Microsoft/Activision have acted.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The second CAT hearing has concluded. The CAT has allowed Microsoft to put forward their shills, sorry, experts, to provide evidence on specific narrow and quick grounds. The CMA had argued that what Microsoft is trying to argue shouldn't require these experts, and these experts and Microsoft didn't disclose their connection (Microsoft loves to present people as independent when they are in fact paid shills). The CMA will be able to bring their own experts to counter and Microsoft will be paying for all this also, though obviously spending money isn't an issue for Microsoft.

 

One of the main points Microsoft is going for is that the CMA when deciding that the 10 year deals were a joke... were making that decision by looking at the contracts as if they were UK contracts. As such if the CMA didn't bring in an American contract expert then their decision was wrong. Seems desperate to me, but lawyering involves a lot of these annoying attacks as we know.

 

Quote

MLex reports that Microsoft and Activision can expect the FTC injunction request in federal court today!

- The Federal Trade Commission is planning to file a preliminary injunction request in federal court today to stop the deal from closing.

- The FTC anticipates that the parties are moving to speed up the closing date of the transaction, that's why the FTC will seek a temporary order in federal court preventing that from happening. The agency would need to act before the companies close the transaction, which would otherwise make a preliminary injunction moot.

- The FTC wants to avoid another Illumina-Grail case, where it filed a preliminary injunction request and a complaint at its administrative court, but later dropped the preliminary injunction because the European Commission was still reviewing the deal. Then Illumina ended up closing the deal.

- In order to be granted a preliminary injunction from a judge, the FTC needs to show that there's an imminent risk that the companies would close the deal.

- In the gamer's lawsuit, a federal judge in California declined to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the deal from closing.

 

The FTC is making a move apparently. Might be another case of Microsoft's boasts to look tough coming back to bite them. Microsoft has leaked it out that they are looking into closing the deal even if the CMA is blocking it. Will they do that? Unlikely. However, by putting it out there as they have the FTC might have judged it grounds enough to make this move.

 

Of course, Microsoft's army is putting forward the idea that the CMA has colluded with the FTC and told them about that, hence the FTC coming to their aid with the injunction.

Edited by Rozalia1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2023 at 3:59 PM, Z1MZUM said:

Just putting this in here for a laugh.

 

I saw an advertisement for Diablo 4 on a bus this morning that now reads "Fight against evil Activision". I won't be buying this game, the view from above is as bad as Persona 3 portable

 

Rozalia1? Back to you, a person in their spare time who gives us these incredible posts.

 

Got the same bus today and must correct myself, it  says "Rise against evil Activision". Bobby must have allot of power as we had a blowout.

 

My loving partner bought me Diablo 4, So I know own it.

 

Have you all been following the demise of COD? Things are dire. They can't be bothered with a proper cheat engine and frankly I don't want to see PC ever involved with Crossplay, conclusion is that the PS version of D4 will be safer. Unless some of you want some free hacked trophies? So by all means play with PC people.

 

Bobby's interview re allegations of rape and suicide with Activision was brushed off by him like the souless creep he is. He sounded like Luther from the original warriors movie.

 

I don't post political information, I post the general disgust and loss that is Activision and wonder why anyone would miss them. The concept of what MS is doing is wrong in general sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Z1MZUM said:

 

Bobby's interview re allegations of rape and suicide with Activision was brushed off by him like the souless creep he is. He sounded like Luther from the original warriors movie.

I still honestly think the best chance of getting rid of him is if the deal fails and the Activision board has to offer up Kotick as a sacrificial lamb to make nice with Sony

 

BTW, I can't find my source, but there was an analyst stating the deal still has a 50/50 chance to fail

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, majob said:

It's funny regardless because now their boast has bitten them in the ass and now they'll be tied up in court even longer.

 

Naturally Microsoft and their supporters are framing it as a win. I can't recall a single time that their supporters have thought of an event as being bad for Microsoft. Even the CMA block got downplayed because obviously Microsoft will just overcome it with corruption. Corruption which apparently was a big deal when Sony was supposedly puppeteering the regulators, but dandy if Microsoft does it.

 

6 hours ago, AJ_-_808 said:

I still honestly think the best chance of getting rid of him is if the deal fails and the Activision board has to offer up Kotick as a sacrificial lamb to make nice with Sony

 

BTW, I can't find my source, but there was an analyst stating the deal still has a 50/50 chance to fail

 

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/91814/jefferies-analyst-microsoft-activision-merger-has-less-than-50-chance-being-approved/index.html

 

Less than 50%, but more than 0%. Certainly a smarter statement than anyone who puts it above 50% (Florian gave it what? 92% with his dishonest math?), but it is so wide to the point of being pointless. My view, as a random internet person and not a hot shot analyst for investors, is that the % at this point is in the single digits. Talk of this carve out or whatever has been talked about for months and if they had found something that would have worked I think we would have heard about it as Microsoft would have leaked it, rather then them leaking that they're "investigating ways". With that off the table you have the CAT tribunal where their odds are so so in winning sure... but as has been shown in previous cases involving the CMA and mergers, winning those has thus far been meaningless. At best Microsoft can reset things to where they are given the choice again to accept the CMA's proposed concessions. The proposed concessions were varying levels of divestment with even the lightest one (divesting Activision and CoD) being deemed unacceptable by Microsoft. Considering CMA's comments when they blocked it seems they believe the lightest divestment wouldn't have worked anyway, though if Microsoft finally submits to divestment they could possibly argue otherwise of course.

 

As for Kotick. That has been my view of the situation yeah. With Microsoft's assistance the heat has gone away and Activision has already prepared themselves to pay the 3 billion to shareholders to keep them happy. CoD, Diablo, so forth have all been doing really well and it is clear that there no longer is any level of consumer backlash to support what workers against Activision remain. The only issue with Sony putting pressure on Activision is I doubt Microsoft will instantly pull all support from Kotick and they'll be all too happy to have their astroturfing army and compliant media run pieces against Sony for being evil for trying to force Activision to change its management (ignore that it is Kotick). The only other way to do it would be to reheat the scandals by revealing new ones, but if parties against Activision had some you'd think they'd have released them already, so if someone has information on new ones then it'd be Microsoft who'll have no reason to release them and screw over their guy Kotick.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FTC has gained a temporary restraining order. Microsoft cannot close the Activision deal until the court hears the matter. 

 

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/13/23760192/microsoft-activision-blizzard-tro-granted-ftc-injunction

 

I honestly thought it’d be denied. MS did, too, since they were all,”Bring it on” when they heard that the FTC was trying.

Edited by MidnightDragon
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, MidnightDragon said:

The FTC has gained a temporary restraining order. Microsoft cannot close the Activision deal until the court hears the matter. 

 

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/13/23760192/microsoft-activision-blizzard-tro-granted-ftc-injunction

 

I honestly thought it’d be denied. MS did, too, since they were all,”Bring it on” when they heard that the FTC was trying.

 

It was actually very unlikely it'd get denied. What Microsoft's supporters have spread about is that after this point, there would be a hearing 2 weeks after, and a judge would then strike it down and thereby the FTC would be finished. The truth however is like the whole CAT overruling CMA thing, which while possible... only on certain matters and NOT when it comes to mergers. The 14 day thing applies to another situation which doesn't apply here so the date for the thing will be whenever the judge deems it so which could potentially be months. The only "win" that can be claimed is that this "speeds things up", but with the CAT/CMA business going on the FTC no longer needs to stall further for time so they can go in now and support the CMA by extension. No guarantee that Microsoft can defeat the FTC (who I believe can appeal afterwards also) before the CAT business, and even if they do I find this notion that it would support an argument of comity with the CAT I personally feel is nonsense.

 

Long story short the idea is if the FTC is defeated then they go in the "supports Microsoft" column and thus the CMA is the lone star against mighty Microsoft. The CAT judge will in their minds completely ignore that the FTC has been the biggest opponent of this deal and will mark them down as supporters, when it only got through America because of being overruled by America's infamous corrupt pro-business judges. On top of that however... why does comity suddenly matter? It didn't when the CMA was the only one against Meta so why is it now going to matter against Microsoft? The CMA has judged that the deal is wrong going by their law. Who cares if the Congo, France, and whoever else gave an okay?

 

Anyway, the FTC is I think trying to save Microsoft from themselves in wanting them to not close the deal. Talk that has been coming out is that Microsoft believes that it would be better to close now, not pay the 3 billion, and then take whatever fees might come in the future even if they fail. Believing that regulators wouldn't dare punish them with fees larger than 3 billion. On top of that as they'll have closed the deal they can if they wish do as they did with Redfall/Starfield and tell Activision to cancel in development PlayStation versions of everything not CoD which would mean even if Microsoft is later stopped, they'd still hurt PlayStation by doing do that as PlayStation development would have to be restarted and be behind. Though of course Sony themselves can deal with such an issue easily by only allowing such Activision games on PlayStation if they're all delayed back 6 months so the PlayStation version can come out at parity with the Xbox version. Xbox can also loot some talent during this period if they wish by moving it around... though as Xbox has shown little care for talent they might not bother.

 

The problems with all that are quite heavy however, if that is the intention which I simply can't accept as it surely is far too risky for Microsoft to attempt. For a start Redfall showed that even Microsoft's massive astroturfing army can be overwhelmed and this would I think be an even bigger mess. There is no defence here, Microsoft if they do this will believe that they are above the law. The CMA meanwhile can dish out some absolutely horrifically large fines far more than 3 billion, and it'd also give the FTC a case to present to the Democrats of a company going rogue, seemingly without fear of the law, showing that changes need to happen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://twitter.com/stephentotilo/status/1669065215353167889?s=20

https://twitter.com/MActon93/status/1669059912192917504?s=20

 

Microsoft is asking for the judge overseeing the preliminary injunction to speed things up heavily and states that if the FTC is successful in getting a preliminary then the deal is dead because 'no substantial business transaction could ever survive' the FTC process. That is... interesting, and goes counter to their whole "we're unbeatable" narrative against the FTC. The FTC who they've always said is irrelevant and can in no way stop them, now apparently can stop them with not even an injunction, even a preliminary one is enough. Obviously Microsoft has no problem saying one thing and then saying the opposite so this is quite obviously a pressure tactic on the judge. Think of it this way. The FTC has okay goods at winning a preliminary, but likely loses in the end which the judge will know. Microsoft tells them that if the preliminary goes through then the deal is dead. The judge deems it not really fair to have a deal that Microsoft would likely win in the end against the FTC killed like that, so they deny the preliminary.

 

What I'm wondering is... could Microsoft close the deal before June 18th to not pay the 3 billion and then on a successful FTC preliminary injunction then reverse it, citing it as a kiss of death? Does that get them out of the 3 billion? Surely Activision would have no choice but to put Microsoft in court if that were to happen, not to mention even if Microsoft were to get away with it they'll have scammed Activision out of 3 billion. Activision was already going to have beg forgiveness to Sony and Microsoft doing that would only make things worse. I suppose if they do indeed happen to have dirt on Kotick then that could always be used against Activision to make them forget about the 3 billion.

 

Speaking of Activision, if Microsoft is resorting to this type of pressure tactic, a departure from their usual style, then the talk regarding the extension is likely not going well. So much for the narrative being put out there that everything the FTC did was all according to Microsoft's plans. As I said previously, these people, real or otherwise, hold Microsoft as this all conquering hero who is constantly winning and... they just ain't. Let us not forget that at the start of this Microsoft boasted that the deal was not only not just going through easily, but they had no need to make any concessions at all. They have been taking losses constantly, but within the narrative everything is all according to their masterplan. Just completely delusional, which to be fair is how Microsoft have worked people to be. It seems to have worked so well that even Microsoft itself seem to have bought into their own lies. They should have desisted from this deal already, but they continue because it appears that with people like Brad Smith in power they really do believe they can just use corruption and bullying tactics to get anything they want without limit.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...