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

[Tsundokuist]

51 minutes ago, Rozalia1 said:

Beyond that though... I notice he seems positive when it comes to Xbox but negative towards PlayStation... ummm... it's sad but with how deceptive Microsoft is my first thought is they're likely paying him as a "consultant" for him to talk them up and spread FUD about PlayStation.

Unlikely, they’d be seriously running afoul of SEC/FCA regulations with the topics he covers. More likely he’s just drinking buddies/plays Golf with people over at MS or he has some cognitive bias from going to an event at Microsoft that had good catering or a pretty PR girl who spoke with him for 20 mins.
 

The whole gaming press is generally an unreliable, semi-incestuous hall of smoke and mirrors though. Just look at all the people reviewing Playstation games 9 or 10/10 at IGN then landing jobs at Playstation, more than half the legacy cast of their flagship Playstation podcast now work marketing/PR/comms at Naughty Dog/Sucker Punch/Sony Santa Monica. I think Tina Amini left IGN to head up an entire marketing/events team at Xbox as well.

Edited May 8, 2023 by Tsundokuist

[ZitMeatloaf]

I first heard of Michael Pachter about 5 years ago. Whatever he says, you can count on the exact opposite happening about 90% of the time.

 

And @Rozalia1 you are correct, he generally has very favorable views of anything MS does. Leading up to this generation, he couldn't stop praising all of MS's moves and opining that they were setting themselves up to be the dominant platform holder.

[TJ_Solo]

Quote

The whole gaming press is generally an unreliable, semi-incestuous hall of smoke and mirrors though. Just look at all the people reviewing Playstation games 9 or 10/10 at IGN then landing jobs at Playstation, more than half the legacy cast of their flagship Playstation podcast now work marketing/PR/comms at Naughty Dog/Sucker Punch/Sony Santa Monica. I think Tina Amini left IGN to head up an entire marketing/events team at Xbox as well.

 

Well if you are a journalist with experience and want another job within video games then it is pretty likely that you can go from IGN to one of the console maker's PR/Media teams. Seems natural to me.

 

I can't even think of a huge number that did that. I guess Ryan Clements and Alanah Pearce? Hell, Clements was laid off from IGN for a couple years before getting hired by Sony but conspiracies are going to conspiracy

 

[majob]

1 minute ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

Well if you are a journalist with experience and want another job within video games then it is pretty likely that you can go from IGN to one of the console maker's PR/Media teams. Seems natural to me.

 

 

Pretty much this and it's the same in white collar business. People jump from company to company all the time so they like to keep things chummy in case they decide to look for new "opportunities".

 

1 hour ago, Tsundokuist said:

Unlikely, they’d be seriously running afoul of SEC/FCA regulations with the topics he covers. More likely he’s just drinking buddies/plays Golf with people over at MS or he has some cognitive bias from going to an event at Microsoft that had good catering or a pretty PR girl who spoke with him for 20 mins.

There's plenty of ways to skirt those regulations like "investments", "gifts", and what not and they're done on an individual basis so the company can be mum about it.

[Tsundokuist]

1 hour ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

Well if you are a journalist with experience and want another job within video games then it is pretty likely that you can go from IGN to one of the console maker's PR/Media teams. Seems natural to me.

 

I can't even think of a huge number that did that. I guess Ryan Clements and Alanah Pearce? Hell, Clements was laid off from IGN for a couple years before getting hired by Sony but conspiracies are going to conspiracy

 

Well I’m no authority on IGN personnel, I just casually listen to their podcasts but there’s a guy on this week’s “Beyond!” (their Playstation podcast) who announced it’s his penultimate episode as he’s leaving for a role at Sony in June (I forget which studio, quickly looking at the episode notes I think the guy’s name is Josh Du). From the top of my head/big names I do remember, other examples are:

 

- Jonathan Dornbush left hosting Beyond! to take Editorial Content Manager at Naughty Dog.
- Andrew Goldfarb was another Beyond! mainstay, he’s now Communication Manager at Sucker Punch.

- Jose Otero hosted their Nintendo podcast and left directly for Nintendo.

 

There are certainly others I recall hearing over the years, two left for insomniac in the same month once. I’m not criticising anyone for it, just saying it’s an established career path and as a reader/listener surely we have to wonder how objective people are willing to be about prospective employers? Of course, there are cases we can point of people who don’t seem to have that in mind, older heads like Sam Claiborne, Max Scoville, Ryan McCaffery and others outside IGN like Gene Park and Jeremy Parish etc come across to me as 100% objective/serious journalists. Equally, with others I often feel like I’m listening to/reading a “fluffer” for a big publishers’ Marketing Departments and wonder if these “opportunities” are the root of that.

[Rozalia1]

I don't really see it with Sony/Nintendo. Sony does have some seemingly favoured people in the media yes, but that seems more a consequence of them minimising if not outright blacklisting the Microsoft shills who Microsoft has successfully bribed with access and goodies that Sony/Nintendo doesn't give them. Nintendo meanwhile is ruthless and not someone you want to cross so I imagine that alone keeps most people nice. Microsoft is the only one that is blatantly obvious on this matter, for all the good it has done them considering even their PR seems to have collapsed and even people who don't want to attack them have to if they don't want to lose all credibility (though most will be overly nice about it).

 

As for Pachter and Microsoft. Companies do these things in manners that get it excused if found out, and even if they've not get him onboard officially they can certainly gift him payments in other ways.

 

17 hours ago, ZitMeatloaf said:

I first heard of Michael Pachter about 5 years ago. Whatever he says, you can count on the exact opposite happening about 90% of the time.

 

And @Rozalia1 you are correct, he generally has very favorable views of anything MS does. Leading up to this generation, he couldn't stop praising all of MS's moves and opining that they were setting themselves up to be the dominant platform holder.

 

Yeah. Microsoft always invests heavily in FUD against PlayStation, especially at the start of new generations. An attempt at making perception reality and all that. Pachter I'm sure is quite the premium agent to bring on board as you simply aren't going to bribe him with gamepass coupons or whatever.

 

---

 

 

This is why I don't really take much issue with Jim Ryan. It is really obvious that Microsoft uses its astroturfing machine to drive and amplify hate towards the man.

 

 

And yet he had no problem with Microsoft citing IGN top 10 lists, twitter posts of their shills, and the like. Always making it about Sony also naturally.

 

Speaking of Lulu... there is actually a detail that is interesting with her and Kotick. It is unlikely to matter as it would be a stupid business decision for Xbox... though that is all they seem to do so perhaps it is indeed possible. What I'm referring to is who would be to blame for the deal failing. As things stand Microsoft will get the blame and will have to pay Activision 3 billion, however, Microsoft can certainly attempt to put Activision in court and claim that the words of Lulu and Kotick are what killed the deal going through. Not only could that get them a settlement where they don't have to pay, but a full on success would cause Activision to pay Microsoft from what I recall around 2 billion.

 

As I said, I doubt they'd try that as it would instantly obliterate their relationship with Activision even if Kotick stops being the boss. I doubt they could win either at this point due to the insanity of Brad Smith. For much of the proceedings Microsoft played the good cop to Activision's bad cop, so they could certainly claim that Activision was overly offensive/aggressive/whatever. However all of that went out of the window due to how Brad Smith acted.

[majob]

42 minutes ago, Rozalia1 said:

 

Mueller is a "former" consultant for Activision/Blizzard so we can hazard a guess as to why he's  so pro microsoft

[Rozalia1]

4 hours ago, majob said:

Mueller is a "former" consultant for Activision/Blizzard so we can hazard a guess as to why he's  so pro microsoft

 

For Microsoft also. Presenting guys you own as independents and have them support you and spread FUD about your opponents is a key element of Microsoft's playbook. Outside of people growing up with the 360 which admittedly was real hot in the 1st part of that generation and having fondness towards Xbox as a result, I don't see how Xbox even gets fans. To anyone not easily tricked by PR they are so obviously such a dirty and soulless company.

 

Back to this Mueller guy it literally states on his blog (granted, many will just view stuff on twitter and miss it) that he until recently (obviously a lie, though he might be getting paid off the record so to speak just in case a judge embarrass Microsoft by exposing the guy again) worked for Microsoft and before that Activision, both companies involved in this, and we're supposed to accept him as an independent?

 

 

[Rozalia1]

https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2023/05/10/microsoft-no-salary-increase-layoffs.html

 

It is almost like Microsoft realises that they've been taking nothing but losses on the PR front lately so they're just getting as many things in now. Remember that narrative that Microsoft was going to turn Activision into a house of bliss? Oh how great they are to the workers. Meanwhile Microsoft functionally gives their workers a pay cut while naturally the bosses are getting sizable increases. They're also cutting more workers on top of the 10k layoffs they announced in January, though not a huge number more to be fair.

 

Considering his statement of being "overpaid anyway" I wonder if Spencer will be one of the few bosses to get a paycut. How embarrassing.

[MidnightDragon]

Once again, it’s being reported the EU will say yes to this next week. Still, they said the same about the CMA and we all saw how that went. Definitely feel like anything goes now. So we shall see. I’m hoping MS and Activision’s tantrums with the UK did have some sway. I’ll be glad when this is over, but it’s still gonna be a while.

Edited May 11, 2023 by MidnightDragon

[Z1MZUM]

I think the UK should focus on seasoning their foods before interfering with this.

[Rozalia1]

 

 

I love how blatant all of this is. Yay, we think that Microsoft put the pressure on the government to defang the CMA, yay corruption. Obviously a guy like Florian is whatever, literally being paid to have the views he has, but the Xbox fans who are actually real and not Xbots/Shills should try and have some self respect.

 

As for the matter at hand. The PM is saying all of that and on top of it he is doing it on the Microsoft owned LinkedIn, oh ho, sending a message to Microsoft he is on side. He does only mention British businesses, but as Florian says, that is just for the voter rubes, he really means big tech companies like Microsoft. 

 

Amazing stuff. Microsoft doesn't just hire incompetent management for the gaming division, they hire incompetent shills/experts/analysts/consultants too. Always treating this like this is all going on in America where such issues can be easily overcome. Straight up is the government in the UK corrupt? Of course, but that in itself means little as basically every government is corrupt to varying degrees. What matters is the level of corruption and if there are other factors which can help reduce the impact of the corruption. In the UK the civil service (which the CMA belongs to) is extremely powerful and has been for a long time. This can of course be bad as the civil service can resist/reject positive changes meaning good and positive change fails to happen, but it can also be good as it has the capacity to fight off an attempt at a bad policy coming from corruption.

 

On top of what I've said, which is that it ain't a simple matter to overcome the civil service, the claims made here are a joke. He posted it on LinkedIn? And? LinkedIn is considered the business social media and if you're going to message people working in business then that is considered the place to do it. It doesn't have to mean any more than that. The post mentions financial services and then goes on to talk about anti-competes, reducing requirements that force people to report stuff, and that regulation should be the last course taken and not the first. Where does any of this apply to the CMA blocking the Activision deal? Is the idea that the message here is that the CMA would get changed to the point where they'd say no thanks for checking a deal like the Activision one and just wave it through? Not what I'm seeing in the text. Ah, but the "steer". Surely that means that the government will tell the CMA to pass the deal and that will be that. There is a reason the word "steer" is used and not a firmer one. They will suggest the direction for the CMA to take who will certainly work with them on that, but that doesn't mean the government gets to tell them what to pass and not to pass.

 

There is of course also the teeny little detail that even if these delusions were accurate, it'd all come too late for the Activision deal anyway. The CMA blocked the deal because Microsoft refused to do structural remedies, in fact even worse than that Microsoft didn't (wouldn't) provide certain information to allow the CMA to best determine what would be acceptable for a structural deal. Why didn't they? Because they knew that it wouldn't have looked good for them. So now in their arrogance they'll be appealing, citing the CMA blocking on cloud grounds as nonsense. Note that Brad Smith is on record saying the deal is about the cloud and basically finishing up their stack as they believe their current line up of games/studios was insufficient. Spencer meanwhile is on record stating that Sony/Nintendo are basically irrelevant because Cloud is the future and they don't have the capacity for that so gaming in the future is going to be Microsoft/Google/Amazon. To not even get into the decade+ that Microsoft has been bleating about the cloud in general.

 

8 hours ago, Z1MZUM said:

I think the UK should focus on seasoning their foods before interfering with this.

 

Its just the local flavour. 

 

With the EU being as corrupt as it is and the FTC basically irrelevant as companies can just put it in front of a corrupt pro-business judge, it is very good for everybody that the CMA is around. 

[TheRetroManiac]

Yeah, I have seen that the EU is expected to pass the deal as reported by Reuters and many others well let's hope it goes the same way as the CMA decision, but I guess it comes down to how much will Microsoft bribe them with as we all know business decisions in many places are corrupt and this is no different guess we will find out soon.

[Rozalia1]

19 hours ago, TheRetroManiac said:

Yeah, I have seen that the EU is expected to pass the deal as reported by Reuters and many others well let's hope it goes the same way as the CMA decision, but I guess it comes down to how much will Microsoft bribe them with as we all know business decisions in many places are corrupt and this is no different guess we will find out soon.

 

Honestly, it might be best if they do pass it at this point. Microsoft is apparently fully willing to go another year in the CAT which very likely ends in failure so we get bonus time where Microsoft is tied up and failing in their buy out efforts. If they then, and I doubt this due to it being insanity but it is what some of their gamepass coupon paid shills are saying, they then go through with pulling out of the UK then that is another massive bonus right there. That'll heavily damage Microsoft and could possibly lead to them being broken up which is only a good thing.

 

To most people the above is less likely if the EU says no... though, maybe not. The EU decisions unlike the CMA's can actually be overruled at a good rate and their current top lawyer's claim to fame is beating the EU, so it certainly ain't impossible that Microsoft declares that they will take on all three major regulators. Of course that could then expand as many minor regulators, and the sometimes considered major one in China, have been said to be waiting on the decisions of the CMA/EU before they make their decisions so they might then also say no. It is known that in China NetEase, who is a big deal there, have been pushing for the deal to be rejected due to Kotick running his mouth about them.

 

As I said, it would be insanity, and even serious business people who were on their side previously are currently telling Microsoft to pack it in so why continue? Well, think about it. The hardcore shills for Microsoft aren't wrong on the point that Microsoft grows (and competes) through buyouts. Microsoft might view failure on this deal, in essence on speculation of the future, as simply the start and they'd run into failures on future buyouts too on the same grounds. If Microsoft bosses don't believe they can compete (just like Spencer) if they have to do things somewhat honestly (they still have the massive funds from their ill-gotten monopolies) then they must get this deal through at any cost. I imagine someone in the room will convince them to you know, actually have a go at it before they all blow their own brains out, but we'll see.

---

 

 

The constant targeting of Jim Ryan is just outright pathetic from Microsoft. The comment being made is redacted yes but isn't new because Jim Ryan... a year ago? Is on record stating that Microsoft is a monopoliser who can't be trusted on these things and the like. At the time Microsoft's PR machine was working really well so we got a lot of online chatter about "how dare mean old Jim Ryan say this about good boy Microsoft, doesn't he know Microsoft is a changed company these days". This pathetic shill of theirs will know this so why present it as new information? Because Microsoft's PR machine isn't doing so good these days and so the full comment would be taken much more positively these days, so its better to not state what the redacted bit obviously is so people can be left to imagine Jim Ryan was saying some real offensive stuff.

[Dark_Overlord]

EU approved it

 

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_2705

[The_Kopite]

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/european-commission-approves-microsoft-activision-blizzard-deal

 

With amendments like the 10 year deals for cloud gaming where anyone can play the ABK games they have the licence for on any cloud gaming/streaming service, the EU has approved the deal. A massive win for Microsoft given after 10 years they can change their strategy completely in this regard, and now the EU has made the UK look quite foolish in ways and surely the US will look at what the EU has done and go with it as well. Like a lot of people have been thinking, eventually this deal will go through with those 10 year concessions. Microsoft will be very much looking forward to 10 years down the road. The potential for them is huge.

[Rozalia1]

And the results are in. The EU approves because of course they were going to. As I said, in the long run it is likely for the best as long as we don't get a shock and the CMA does a 180. Historically they shouldn't as the CMA and EU have butted heads on these things before and the CMA hasn't relented. The FTC will also continue to offer support to the CMA by continuing to want the deal killed.

 

The most notable thing and is basically their sole remedy is that they have to license Activision's games to others to stream for free. However what about microtransactions that we know Microsoft wants 100% of? Nothing. This decision also heavily promotes Microsoft making all of Activision's games exclusive natively and only allowing PlayStation to have cloud versions, which they don't have the capacity to do to any degree anyway. Reminds me of those redacted sections that had native and cloud versions of CoD listed separately implying that there were different details for both.

 

Expect Microsoft to be reinvigorated from this and to PR hard against the CMA/UK and try to bully a success for themselves. The good news is their chances continue to be low as they were before this result and tying themselves up further will only hurt Xbox more. They will have to also renegotiate with Activision who'll have the choice of either taking the 3 billion and running, or considering they know how unlikely the deal passing still is, accept a renegotiating as long as they get even more money on the failure of the deal. It is also possible that we'll not be talking about a 69 billion deal for much longer either, because if Activision plays hardball on it they can likely push it up further to 80+ billion. After all the company's current worth is actually significantly above the point when Microsoft put in their current bid and Activision is doing better business than they were at that time.

 

29 minutes ago, The_Kopite said:

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/european-commission-approves-microsoft-activision-blizzard-deal

 

With amendments like the 10 year deals for cloud gaming where anyone can play the ABK games they have the licence for on any cloud gaming/streaming service, the EU has approved the deal. A massive win for Microsoft given after 10 years they can change their strategy completely in this regard, and now the EU has made the UK look quite foolish in ways and surely the US will look at what the EU has done and go with it as well. Like a lot of people have been thinking, eventually this deal will go through with those 10 year concessions. Microsoft will be very much looking forward to 10 years down the road. The potential for them is huge.

 

Speaking of those, Microsoft yesterday got a new 10 year deal with some Chinese company.

 

I wouldn't be so hasty to think that this will change things with the CMA. As I said, the CMA and the EU have disagree before and it changed nothing when it came to the CMA's decision. Can't also forget that the last thing you want to do with the British is said to be to tell them that the Europeans disagree so they should reconsider, that is more a point towards the CMA continuing to hold their position. Another detail is one of Microsoft's areas of attack towards the CMA was to argue that the Cloud was not a distinct market and all of that is out of the window as the EU has agreed that it is. Another is that the CMA is wrong for believing this would harm the Cloud market as the EU has agreed with that, the difference is the EU believe that these 10 year deals would work to cover the issue (ridiculous).

 

https://twitter.com/CMAgovUK/status/1658131200181952516

 

The CMA has already put out that they disagree with the EU's decision and stand by their own.

 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Rozalia1

[MidnightDragon]

Disappointing, but the CMA denial was just delaying the inevitable. Not stupid. 

[Oberlin1694]

46 minutes ago, The_Kopite said:

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/european-commission-approves-microsoft-activision-blizzard-deal

 

With amendments like the 10 year deals for cloud gaming where anyone can play the ABK games they have the licence for on any cloud gaming/streaming service, the EU has approved the deal. A massive win for Microsoft given after 10 years they can change their strategy completely in this regard, and now the EU has made the UK look quite foolish in ways and surely the US will look at what the EU has done and go with it as well. Like a lot of people have been thinking, eventually this deal will go through with those 10 year concessions. Microsoft will be very much looking forward to 10 years down the road. The potential for them is huge.

I don’t think the deal will go through though, at all.

 

Its currently blocked because of the UK ruling and the UK ruling board is notorious for sticking to their decisions.

 

Unless Microsoft can outright disprove everything the UK is worried about and for an indefinite amount of time (10 years won’t over/rule it, as once that 10 years is up the UK regulator will just argue Microsoft will renege on its promises and being market domination), they won’t change their decision.

 

It doesn’t matter if both Blozzard and Microsoft are appealing it and have heavyweight lawyers, the UK regulator has NEVER changed a decision due to an appeal. So their decision is set in stone, the merger is blocked and can’t go ahead.

 

I don’t see why it keeps being posted as news honestly, when the UK rejected it, it was done. They can’t do the deal as they’d have to forgo the UK market for any Xbox/Microsoft/ABK products in the future and they’ll be losing far too much money if they do.

 

In all honesty Microsoft needs to just stop now, this entire thing is pathetic. If they put all of this time, effort and money into their pre-existing studio’s maybe they’d actually manage a single good release since the current generation began rather than releasing critically bombing flops like Redfall, which is one of the lowest rated AAA games in a decade 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Oberlin1694

[TheRetroManiac]

Yup as expected we all knew the EU would approve this deal it has come as no surprise to all of us that's been following this whole thing. Well it just means Microsoft will be burning more money in the long run and i very much doubt they will just pull out of the UK and not want that money as that would be very stupid from a business point of view. Now we wait for the next decision and see how this plays out.

 

I don't see this deal going through myself, and all they are doing is burning money down the endless money pit. All they had to do from 10 years ago was invest and make quality first party games and things would be so much different for them and people would want to actually invest in their console if they have decent exclusives instead of just trying to buy existing games that are third party and making them exclusive in the end as that's surely the goal.

[Rozalia1]

For those unaware there was a case where the CAT appeal against the CMA was successful three times and it didn't change a thing as the CMA still won in the end. Microsoft can try and find some small errors here and there to win appeals all they like, but unless they have something serious like the CMA being ruled insane, being found to have been paid off by Sony, something really major like that, they can't do anything if the CMA stick to their guns. At the end of the day the deal has been rejected because of speculation about the future, speculation that the EU agrees with but thinks that these 10 year deals address (CMA disagrees). Even if Microsoft has these magical high powered lawyers that can destroy everything else, they can't do away with that.

 

https://twitter.com/HoegLaw/status/1658123186024640514

 

Going to link this shill here because he was of the more undercover ones for Microsoft that managed to trick some people into thinking he was independent. Accidentally as the man had a stroke that allowed him to fob off not talking/making videos on the CMA blocking the deal as being because he was recovering from his stroke. Thankfully it appears that the EU clearing the deal is like a magical elixir and his health is returning to him.

 

As I've said, unless they have somehow broken it considering how MIA it has been lately, the Microsoft PR machine will go hard now. Expect a lot of "experts" putting out stuff that the EU is sensible, the CMA is incompetent, that Microsoft is the goodest of boys, so on.

[The_Kopite]

58 minutes ago, Rozalia1 said:

The CMA has already put out that they disagree with the EU's decision and stand by their own.

Fair enough. This surprises me but it's good to see the CMA sticking to their decision. It's logical to stand by the decision that they took a long time in making and were very thorough about considering the pages and pages of documents they published. Still think that the US will end up following suit and giving Microsoft the yes with the same concessions, considering Microsoft is an American company.

 

28 minutes ago, Oberlin1694 said:

don’t see why it keeps being posted as news honestly, when the UK rejected it, it was done. They can’t do the deal as they’d have to forgo the UK market for any Xbox/Microsoft/ABK products in the future and they’ll be losing far too much money if they do.

The UK has a big video games market, but it's a comparatively small slice of the overall pie and Microsoft could take the hit in order to have the rest of the world the way they want to have it with this ABK deal. 

 

I'm not saying I think it will happen, but if Microsoft eventually get approval from the US they might be willing to do it. 

 

I don't want it to go through personally but if it does, then I'm just glad it isn't Capcom, Sega or Square Enix. 

[Rozalia1]

1 minute ago, The_Kopite said:

Fair enough. This surprises me but it's good to see the CMA sticking to their decision. It's logical to stand by the decision that they took a long time in making and were very thorough about considering the pages and pages of documents they published. Still think that the US will end up following suit and giving Microsoft the yes with the same concessions, considering Microsoft is an American company.

 

Only because in America the regulator can be easily overruled. The FTC actually very quickly in essence blocked the deal, but due to how America works Microsoft only responded with a boast that they'll clear it in the CMA/EU and then close the deal without the FTC's approval because they're 100% certain a judge in court will side with big business over the regulator.

 

3 minutes ago, The_Kopite said:

The UK has a big video games market, but it's a comparatively small slice of the overall pie and Microsoft could take the hit in order to have the rest of the world the way they want to have it with this ABK deal. 

 

I'm not saying I think it will happen, but if Microsoft eventually get approval from the US they might be willing to do it. 

 

I don't want it to go through personally but if it does, then I'm just glad it isn't Capcom, Sega or Square Enix. 

 

The issue isn't the videogames, it is that it'd take everything else such as Azure, Office, Windows, so forth. Microsoft can of course certainly take the monetary blow, but the issues it would cause would go beyond the simple loss of money. Spitting in the face of a minor regulator in the Congo or whatever is one thing, doing it to a major one is a very different affair. Microsoft will be looked at as a rogue company that decided to harm a major country for daring to stand up to them. On top of that, as a country do you want to having your country making use of Azure, having your schools/government offices/so forth running windows/office, if you know that if you don't kowtow to Microsoft then they will pull out of your country in an effort to hurt you? It is a massive advertisement for all of Microsoft's competitors across every single market they're in.

 

We can only hope Microsoft is actually stupid enough to act in that way because it'd start them on the path to being broken up which will only be a good thing.

[The_Kopite]

1 minute ago, Rozalia1 said:

We can only hope Microsoft is actually stupid enough to act in that way because it'd start them on the path to being broken up which will only be a good thing.

Maybe they have already read this forum and relayed the information back to the higher ups lol

[Rozalia1]

12 minutes ago, The_Kopite said:

Maybe they have already read this forum and relayed the information back to the higher ups lol

 

As I said, I don't expect them to be that stupid as you trust that these experienced and highly paid people would know that such a thing would be waiting for them... but they certainly don't always. People are human and will make massive blunders. The Xbox management team is very highly payed, supposedly know what they're doing, and have Microsoft's essentially unlimited money behind them, and yet two generations in a row they've only destroyed their own business more and more. People like ourselves told them what they're doing would result in, and they did it anyway. Sometimes the common person on the street does indeed know better than the experts for a number of reasons.