• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT|

He might stay, he might leave. People are just guessing. It is perfectly normal to part ways after something this big though, whether it’s a success or not. See Tretton leaving Sony after the PS4 launch. It’s also fair to say that Spencer is a bit more of a company man for MS than most other people at his level though. Personally I think he’s staying anyway. This deal succeeding or failing isn’t on him. It’s on MS’s legal team and Nadella. Phil has commented on the deal throughout, but legal are there to advise and obviously haven’t told him to stop.

Can you find me a CEO of a company that is still at their company 2 years after a failed M&A and that CEO isn't the founder/owner of the company?
 

X-Wing

Member
3WD7Zpi.jpg


things are getting messed-up.

i know we have a lot of Playstations fans here.

I have to ask something.

How can you not see all the mental/emotional damage PlayStation is exerting to gamers around the world?.

even Pacther said he was pissed of at PlayStation's behavior...i swear i heard his voice cracking up a bit when he said sony are acting little whiny babies.

having a mental breakdown is not fun. I wonder if some of those people will hate PlayStation even more after all this circus is over.

Please tell me this is satire.
 
Their biggest mistake was forclosing Elder Scrolls and Starfield. Hell they could have closed on this deal and THEN made Starfield and Elders Scrolls exclusive...

Ultimately, Microsoft has really bad management and strategy, which is why they find themselves where they are at the moment.

They've spent so much time and resources on getting this ABK deal rather than getting units produced and distributed around the world and any short term exclusive games.

They should have gone after Elden Ring and Hogwarts Legacy as exclusive titles when they knew they didn't have anything of their own.
I still can't believe someone thought it was a smart strategy to acquire Bethesda, immediately announce everything was going Xbox exclusive, AND THEN try to acquire ATVI while pretending they didn't just do what they did with Bethesda. They must think everyone has the memory of a goldfish.
 
Can you provide me with a list of failed M&As were the CEO of the acquiring party isn’t the founder or owner? It’s Friday night and I’m not spending my time doing that.
Pfizer and Allergan -- Deal announce Nov 2015, terminated April 2016, October 2018, Ian Read announced to step down as CEO
Kraft Unilver - February 2017, Februray 2017 they pull out, ceo out by april 2019
Honeywell and United Tech - Talks in 2016 CEO out march 2017
Mondelez International and hershey. - failed in 2016, ceo out in 2017
 

DrFigs

Member
Log off the internet for a while.

Pachter represents hedge funds that he had invest into ABK stock for this merger. Of course he is sweating right now.
do you think this will finally be what makes his employers realize he doesn't know what he's talking about?
 
I still can't believe someone thought it was a smart strategy to acquire Bethesda, immediately announce everything was going Xbox exclusive, AND THEN try to acquire ATVI while pretending they didn't just do what they did with Bethesda. They must think everyone has the memory of a goldfish.

I believe the thought process was that the Bethesda deal hadn't quite worked out, so they convinced the board to double down on gamepass via CoD
 

Pelta88

Member
The last Randalthor vid I watched, was him crying about the emergence of this guy. He cares more about being able to say he gamed with Phil Spencer than actual gaming.

hqdefault.jpg
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
Pfizer and Allergan -- Deal announce Nov 2015, terminated April 2016, October 2018, Ian Read announced to step down as CEO
Kraft Unilver - February 2017, Februray 2017 they pull out, ceo out by april 2019
Honeywell and United Tech - Talks in 2016 CEO out march 2017
Mondelez International and hershey. - failed in 2016, ceo out in 2017
Thank you. If it’s a sample size of 4 I wouldn’t read to much in to it though. As I said, he may or may not go. Him leaving would be normal. He’s more of a company man than most though, so it’ll be one sided if he’s out.
 
Thank you. If it’s a sample size of 4 I wouldn’t read to much in to it though. As I said, he may or may not go. Him leaving would be normal. He’s more of a company man than most though, so it’ll be one sided if he’s out.

I mean I can keep going, but I've done more to give you information that you could easily have looked up yourself.

It's definitely not going to be his choice.

He's held up 70 billion dollars for which they've received no return on investment for over a year. At 6 minimum % ROI, you'd want to be at 74 billion... add in the 3 billion lost to Activision and that's -7 billion dollars...

That combined with the failures I've mentioned around 343, Coalition, and Bethesda, and the failure to procure Xbox production for this year... These are SIGNIFICANT failures for a leader and long term failures at that... that's years of failure.
 
3WD7Zpi.jpg


things are getting messed-up.

i know we have a lot of Playstations fans here.

I have to ask something.

How can you not see all the mental/emotional damage PlayStation is exerting to gamers around the world?.

even Pacther said he was pissed of at PlayStation's behavior...i swear i heard his voice cracking up a bit when he said sony are acting little whiny babies.

having a mental breakdown is not fun. I wonder if some of those people will hate PlayStation even more after all this circus is over.
If someone is having a mental breakdown over videogames then they have much bigger problems that should be addressed by a professional.
 

POKEYCLYDE

Member
The craziest aspect of this whole thing for me is that there is NO consensus or general agreed upon line of thinking as to whether or not this deal will go through.


Whether you're referencing legal experts, market analysts, game industry insiders, highly respected journalists, etc.. etc.. there is NO AGREEMENT on whether or not this deal has a good chance of being approved or not. For every expert that leans towards the deal being shut down you have another that leans towards it going through.


Literally no one has any fucking idea and that's weird to me.
There is so much to it that no one should have any certainty.

When the CMA gave their provisional findings and proposed remedies, divestment were the primary ones they would accept. From that, the deal is dead. However the CMA left the door open for behavioral remedies. The deal is alive! The EC is more likely to accept behavioral remedies and one of the CMA's issues with behavioral remedies is that they'd be tasked with enforcing these remedies. So if the EC accepts responsibility of enforcing the behavioral remedies, the CMA might be more willing to accept behavioral remedies. The deal is more alive than ever! The CMA says they are prepared to diverge from other regulators decisions. The deal is dead!

However, at the end of the day, Microsoft's remedy package is doing it's best to persuade the CMA. We see Sony adamantly oppose the deal and bring reasonable doubt as to whether or not Microsoft's remedy proposal is good enough/can be trusted. There are many benefits to consumers contingent on this deal going through that the CMA has noted themselves. But does the potential harm to other consumers outweigh any potential benefit? Does the remedy proposal mitigate that potential harm? The fact that there is only one major opponent of this acquisition and many in favour of it also speaks volumes. But there may also be political values underlying the regulators decisions (like a need to crack down on big tech).

There are so many variables that anyone claiming certainty one way or the other is arrogant. The shittiest part is that, depending on the outcome, a number of users will feel that they were right in claiming their certainty.
 

ChiefDada

Member
The craziest aspect of this whole thing for me is that there is NO consensus or general agreed upon line of thinking as to whether or not this deal will go through.


Whether you're referencing legal experts, market analysts, game industry insiders, highly respected journalists, etc.. etc.. there is NO AGREEMENT on whether or not this deal has a good chance of being approved or not. For every expert that leans towards the deal being shut down you have another that leans towards it going through.


Literally no one has any fucking idea and that's weird to me.

Why does this matter? The entity that is making the decision has communicated their concerns and laid out remedies they believe would sufficiently mitigate said concerns. And if you consider their position only and ignore the noise, you should have a solid idea of where this is going.
 

Alex Scott

Member
However, at the end of the day, Microsoft's remedy package is doing it's best to persuade the CMA. We see Sony adamantly oppose the deal and bring reasonable doubt as to whether or not Microsoft's remedy proposal is good enough/can be trusted. There are many benefits to consumers contingent on this deal going through that the CMA has noted themselves. But does the potential harm to other consumers outweigh any potential benefit? Does the remedy proposal mitigate that potential harm? The fact that there is only one major opponent of this acquisition and many in favour of it also speaks volumes. But there may also be political values underlying the regulators decisions (like a need to crack down on big tech).
What benefits to consumers has CMA noted?
 
I can't take Pachter seriously when he says that Sony's strategy of not accepting a deal is the wrong move to make for them, when it's been working this entire time to their favor and they now have a pretty good shot at this deal not going through at all.

of course its wrong. what sony should have done was sign that 3 year deal and let microsoft compete by making cod exclusive after that 3 years was up. thats what they should have done.
 

wolffy71

Member
CEOs don't survive failed M&A. Nadella isn't going to fall on the sword for this and his success elsewhere with O365 is going to save him, but it won't save Phil Spencer. Phil Spencer's failed M&A, his failure to improve XSX|S distribution, the failure of the XSS, the cannibalization of B2P games, and the absolute inability to produce and maintain IP.

He'll be gone before next March.
This isn't one of the most ridiculous things I've read on here.

Why don't you list all the failed M/A and give us proof that none survived? Should we just take ur word for it?

He's already acquired Bethesda, which will undoubtedly produce games. I wouldn't expect actual management at MS to have been unaware of what that pipelines timeframe looked like.

Distribution was obviously constrained by covid, and again I wouldn't expect MS management to be stupid enough to not realize the issues behind it.

Have the games delivered? No, not yet.

But I'm sure they were aware of what it was gonna be.

Gamepass has been huge. Game streaming is the right move for the future. Bethesda was brilliant. XSS was a smart idea. I just can't see them being anything less than encouraged.
 

wolffy71

Member
I can't take Pachter seriously when he says that Sony's strategy of not accepting a deal is the wrong move to make for them, when it's been working this entire time to their favor and they now have a pretty good shot at this deal not going through at all.
His reasoning is sound.

If they reject the deal, then the acquisition goes thru, will that deal still be there?

Maybe, maybe not.

I really don't see MS walking away from Sony money for COD. Especially since warzone is f2p and that kinda fits with ESO reasoning.
 
His reasoning is sound.

If they reject the deal, then the acquisition goes thru, will that deal still be there?

Maybe, maybe not.

I really don't see MS walking away from Sony money for COD. Especially since warzone is f2p and that kinda fits with ESO reasoning.

The CMA has already ruled that the acquisition won't go through without divesting CoD, or they need to enact remedies above and beyond what they've already publicly offered to Sony for their 10 year deal.

There's no way it can get WORSE from here by rejecting the current deal on the table. The optics of Microsoft offerring Sony a deal and then them backing out of it after an Acquisition gets approved would look really bad to future regulators as well.

So yeah, what Sony is doing right now is completely sound from their vantage point, and Pachter (as usual) is bonkers with his takes.
 

Varteras

Member
I can't take Pachter seriously when he says that Sony's strategy of not accepting a deal is the wrong move to make for them, when it's been working this entire time to their favor and they now have a pretty good shot at this deal not going through at all.

He's an idiot. He's been an idiot. Sony has no reason to accept a deal that regulators will force at a minimum anyways. Accepting any deal puts pressure on regulators for anything they might pursue beyond the terms.

The EC is likely to demand CoD on all platforms for 10 years. Possibly all ABK games. Possibly still requiring that they can't go on GamePass for that time or that they have to go on all services at fair rates.

The CMA? They're looking at divestment unless Microsoft can propose something very effective to address concerns. In the way divestment would. Which means whatever that is, Microsoft would never be able to leverage CoD to gain market share even if they own it.

So far, Sony has played their hand perfectly and continue to find themselves in a better position for whatever the outcome is.
 
Last edited:

wolffy71

Member
The CMA has already ruled that the acquisition won't go through without divesting CoD, or they need to enact remedies above and beyond what they've already publicly offered to Sony for their 10 year deal.

There's no way it can get WORSE from here by rejecting the current deal on the table. The optics of Microsoft offerring Sony a deal and then them backing out of it after an Acquisition gets approved would look really bad to future regulators as well.

So yeah, what Sony is doing right now is completely sound from their vantage point, and Pachter (as usual) is bonkers with his takes.
It can definitely get worse. MS can simply work around the CMA. Sony is definitely rolling the dice a little but they know MS doesn't want to pull COD anyway as it makes big bucks on Sony.
 

jm89

Member
If they reject the deal, then the acquisition goes thru, will that deal still be there?
Well everything MS is throwing out right now is trying to appease the regulators, so if the regulators are happy with what they offer then yes that deal will be there.

And sony did everything right by not signing to anything, if the deal goes through they will get more from MS then they originally tried to offer.
 

wolffy71

Member
Pfizer and Allergan -- Deal announce Nov 2015, terminated April 2016, October 2018, Ian Read announced to step down as CEO
Kraft Unilver - February 2017, Februray 2017 they pull out, ceo out by april 2019
Honeywell and United Tech - Talks in 2016 CEO out march 2017
Mondelez International and hershey. - failed in 2016, ceo out in 2017
Are you trying to prove its rare or common?
 

Wulfer

Member
The CMA has already ruled that the acquisition won't go through without divesting CoD, or they need to enact remedies above and beyond what they've already publicly offered to Sony for their 10 year deal.

There's no way it can get WORSE from here by rejecting the current deal on the table. The optics of Microsoft offerring Sony a deal and then them backing out of it after an Acquisition gets approved would look really bad to future regulators as well.

So yeah, what Sony is doing right now is completely sound from their vantage point, and Pachter (as usual) is bonkers with his takes.
Yeah they've done right all right if you wanted to paint the brightest target ever on your back! Sure they've done right! Sony should just forget purchasing a publisher now. MS has made sure all these regulators see Sony in a different light and that they control 80% of the gaming market share! Also, for icing on the cake they've upset two possible potential future partners. Yea your right, Sony's done a bang up job trying to get this deal to fail. Oh and did I forget to say MS will willingly try to block any future Sony merger/purchase. Yep bang up job Jim!
 
Last edited:
Yeah they've done right all right if you wanted to paint the brightest target ever on your back! Sure they've done right! Sony should just forget purchasing a publisher now. MS has made sure all these regulators see Sony in a different light and that they control 80% of the gaming market share! Also, for icing on the cake they've upset two possible potential future partners. Yea your right, Sony's done a bang it job trying to get this deal to fail.

Sony is not in a position to buy a company like Activision, lol. So why would they care?

As for upsetting future partners, if the deal fails then the current leadership at Activision is going to go back to what they always do - chase profits. They don't care if it's Microsoft or Sony. Their business currently depends on both. They won't somehow spite Sony after this should it not go through. That's just bad business.
 
Top Bottom