Microsoft buys Activision Blizzard

[lukaszek]

cant wait for a wild spin where sony is forced to port its exclusives. Sort of like when mcdonald lost big mac trademark in EU

 

[Ravielsk]

cant wait for a wild spin where sony is forced to port its exclusives. Sort of like when mcdonald lost big mac trademark in EU

They are already dumping most of their games onto PC. All this would change is the speed and frequency of how they do it.

 

[JamesDixon]

cant wait for a wild spin where sony is forced to port its exclusives. Sort of like when mcdonald lost big mac trademark in EU

What happened there?

 

[lukaszek]

cant wait for a wild spin where sony is forced to port its exclusives. Sort of like when mcdonald lost big mac trademark in EU

What happened there?

random article
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...r-king-adds-like-big-mac-actually-big-burger/

 

[JamesDixon]

cant wait for a wild spin where sony is forced to port its exclusives. Sort of like when mcdonald lost big mac trademark in EU

What happened there?

random article
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...r-king-adds-like-big-mac-actually-big-burger/

Oh a Washington Compost article... Yeah going to use archive.ph on that bad boy. Fuck Bezos Compost. Thanks for the link though.

 

[Wirdschowerdn]

Bobby says the UK will become a Death Valley if regulators block the buyout. I think Brexit is already taking care of that on its own...

You can read more here:

Activision boss says UK blocking Microsoft deal would leave post-Brexit Britain looking like "Death Valley"​

Regulators don't understand video game industry, Kotick says.

News by Tom Phillips Deputy Editor

Published on 8 Feb 2023




Activision Blizzard boss Bobby Kotick has taken aim at post-Brexit Britain, as it looks increasingly likely the UK's anti-competition regulator will try and block Microsoft's ambitious $68.7bn buyout of the company.

The UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is due to weigh in imminently on the proposed deal, which has already seen objections from the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and regulators in the EU.

Activision's controversial CEO was asked by CNBC how he would react if the UK joined other regulators in opposing the deal - and Kotick did not hold back.
Watch on YouTube
Call of Duty Warzone 2.0's new season.

"You think about post-Brexit UK, it's probably the first country where you're seeing a recession and the real, severe consequences of a recession," Kotick said (thanks, GamesIndustry.biz).

"You have an incredibly educated workforce with a lot of technical talent, places like Cambridge where the best AI and machine learning is, I would think you'd want to embrace a transaction like this where you're going to see job creation and opportunity," he continued. "It really isn't at all about Sony or Microsoft's platform, it's really about the future of technology.

"Rishi Sunak has said they'd like to be the Silicon Valley of Europe or of the continent, and if deals like this can't get through, they're not going to be Silicon Valley, they'll be Death Valley."

It's unclear what job creation and opportunity the UK would see from Microsoft's buyout of Activision Blizzard going ahead, as the publisher does not operate any major development studios here.
Bobby Kotick weighs in on post-Brexit Britain.

Kotick went on to suggest that regulators simply did not understand the video games industry landscape, and that they should be more concerned with competition on a more global scale - in particular, western companies versus those already entrenched in Asia.

"The FTC, the CMA and the EU don't know our industry, so they're trying to come up to speed and fully understand the industry better," he concluded. "I don't think they fully understand it's a free-to-play business, that the Japanese and Chinese companies dominate the industry with Sony and Nintendo who have these huge libraries of intellectual property... I think [the regulators] are a little bit confused as to where competition is today."

Activision Blizzard recently ended its long-running relationship with NetEase, its Chinese partner which publishes games in the country, removing access to games such as World of Warcraft and Overwatch 2.

Microsoft and Activision have previously said they expect the proposed $69bn takeover bid to be finalised this summer. Microsoft is expected offer the FTC and EU as-yet undetailed concessions in order to try and smooth its passage.

 

[Caim]

Can't wait to see Bobby Kotick destroy the UK with his bare hands as punishment for defying him.

 

[Wirdschowerdn]

Can't wait to see Bobby Kotick destroy the UK with his bare hands as punishment for defying him.

Speaking of which...

 

[IDtenT]

Why does the UK matter again?

 

[Lyric Suite]

What innovation again?

 

[Wirdschowerdn]

What innovation again?

That's the thing where games sell based on quality criteria, not bugmen social-credit lootbox hoarding. Clearly, Bobby finds the former very perturbing.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Activision Blizzard will pay a $35 million fine to the SEC

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's investigation into Activision Blizzard has ended with a $35 million payment to the SEC to settle charges that Activision Blizzard violated government rules for the protection of whistleblowers and for failure to disclose information to investors. The settlement's terms state that it is neither an admission of guilt, nor a denial, by Activision Blizzard.

The SEC's investigation started in 2021, when the state of California's Civil Rights Department filed a lawsuit against Activision Blizzard (opens in new tab) over a pervasive culture of sexual harassment. That lawsuit's allegations prompted an investigation from both the SEC and the United States' Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The EEOC investigation ended in a lawsuit which was settled for $18 million in 2021.

The alleged behavior took place over years, from 2016 for the separation agreements which did not protect whistleblowers, and from 2017 for the information disclosures. Activision Blizzard changed those practices over the course of 2020 to 2022. The $35 million fine represents just over 0.5% of Activision Blizzard's 2022 gross profits (opens in new tab) of $6.486 billion, or 0.11% of its gross profits from 2016 to 2022.
...

Bobby Kotick is managing to settle investigations for fines that are essentially slaps on the wrist to such a large company as Activision.

 

[Baron Dupek]

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/phil-spencer-game-pass-leads-to-more-game-sales

When you put a game like Forza Horizon 4 on Game Pass, you instantly have more players of the game, which is actually leading to more sales of the game," he said.

"Some people have questioned that, but when State of Decay 2 launched, you saw if you looked in the US at the NPD you saw this game selling really well the month it launched on GamePass."

Well duh

 

[Infinitron]

Interesting tactic: https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets...stay-in-unlikely-event-microsoft-merger-fails

Activision CEO Kotick ‘will stay’ in unlikely event Microsoft merger fails: sources​

Microsoft announced its intention to acquire Activision Blizzard in January 2022​

Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick is in it to win it with the $69 billion merger with Microsoft, sources close to the situation tell FOX Business, but even if regulators were to derail the planned tie-up, he "will absolutely remain at the gaming giant to run the company."

The same sources said confidence remains high inside Activision that the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) – which sources told FOX Business is "the only regulatory body that really matters" in the merger case – will look at the numbers and realize the acquisition will not hurt gamers, despite what the CMA alleged on Wednesday.

The CMA released its provisional findings early Wednesday regarding the impact of the deal between Microsoft, which makes the Xbox gaming console, and Activision Blizzard, known for its wildly popular gaming franchises, including "Call of Duty," "World of Warcraft" and "Candy Crush." The CMA wrote that the merger "may be expected to result in a substantial lessening of competition (SLC) in gaming consoles and cloud gaming services in the UK."

CEO of Activision Blizzard Bobby Kotick speaks at the Vanity Fair New Establishment Summit on Oct. 19, 2016, in San Francisco, California. (Michael Kovac/Getty Images for Vanity Fair / Getty Images)

The 16-page document expressly notes concern about how Microsoft might wield outsized strength post-merger.

"In relation to gaming consoles, we provisionally found that Xbox and PlayStation compete closely with each other and that Activision’s Call of Duty (CoD) is important to the competitive offering of each. The evidence suggests that, after the Merger, Microsoft would find it commercially beneficial to make CoD exclusive to Xbox or available on Xbox on materially better terms than on PlayStation," the document read.

"We provisionally found that this would substantially reduce competition in gaming consoles to the detriment of gamers – Xbox and PlayStation gamers alike – which could result in higher prices, reduced range, lower quality, worse service, and/or reduced innovation," it continued.

Microsoft could be scratching its head at that one. In response to the CMA's provisional report, Microsoft issued a statement repeating its earlier pledge that it would grant "100% equal access to Call of Duty" across all major platforms, including PlayStation.

Rima Alaily, Microsoft's corporate vice president and deputy general counsel, told the videogame website Eurogamer, "What does 100% mean? When we say equal, we mean equal. Ten years of parity. On content. On pricing. On features. On quality. On playability."

Analysts also swiped at the CMA’s case. In outlining why Microsoft might still be in the pole position to win the merger fight, MoffettNathanson’s Clay Griffin, who has an outperform on Activision and a $95 price target, put out a note after the CMA released its initial findings which bluntly stated: "We certainly think the decision, on both accounts, is the wrong anti-trust conclusion" and that "structural remedies – i.e., divesting CoD (Call of Duty), divesting the Activision segment, and/or divesting the Activision segment and the Blizzard segment" in order to satisfy regulators is neither realistic nor necessary to ensure a fair and competitive gaming market. "We won’t spend much time here; this is a complete non-sequitur for obvious reasons."

Activision games "Call of Duty" in a store in Manhattan, Jan. 18, 2022. (Carlo Allegri/File Photo / Reuters Photos)

Griffin also noted Microsoft has communicated to the CMA that the tech giant has existing and potential contractual arrangements that ensure third-party platforms access to "Call of Duty."

"This is not new or controversial. Microsoft has committed to this from the very beginning," he wrote in the note.

Sources told FOX Business the reason the CMA is the "only real potential roadblock" among regulatory bodies is that once the U.K. regulator makes a decision, unlike the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, it offers companies no legal recourse such as a trial.

"Microsoft and Activision would win any U.S. litigation merely on the facts," the sources said.

The Activision Blizzard Booth during the Electronic Entertainment Expo in Los Angeles, June 13, 2013. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong / AP Images)

Sony’s PlayStation has a commanding lead in console market share in both the U.K. and Europe, and also leads in the U.S., according to both Ampere Analysis and Statista. Microsoft’s Xbox comes in second place followed by Nintendo’s Switch.

Sources tell FOX Business both Kotick and an as-yet-unnamed Microsoft executive – possibly Xbox chief Phil Spencer or Microsoft President Brad Smith (who earlier helmed the company’s defense against previous antitrust accusations by EU regulators) will "be on a plane by late February" to make the case before the CMA’s April deadline.

 

[Viata]

Sony is fucked. Simple as that. Nintendo is probably quite happy right now, if anything. It was never a competition for them. People would buy Nintendo to play Nintendo games, but for Sony/Microsoft, it was hardly to play their own game and just to play "current games".

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.pcgamer.com/activision-blizzard-ceo-bobby-kotick-says-sony-is-not-returning-our-calls/

Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick says Sony is 'not returning our calls'​

In an interview on Fox Business, the chief executive said his company doesn't appear to be as valuable as Sony makes it out to be.

With Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard continuing to run up against regulatory resistance, Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick is now taking to the airwaves to defend the deal. In a new interview with Fox Business(opens in new tab), Kotick said regulators are reluctant to approve the deal because they're not familiar with how the videogame industry works, and implied that the real anti-competitive behemoth in the market isn't Microsoft, but Sony.

"I think what we're experiencing right now are regulators who have very little experience with our industry," Kotick said. "There's probably a lot of consolidation that could happen over time. It's an extremely fragmented industry, and today the dominant players are Japanese and Chinese companies. And so I think as they're starting to learn about the industry, they're realizing that that's an unfounded concern.

"You start with, 'What even is Call of Duty?' It's a military simulation that's based on military experiences through the course of history. There is nothing proprietary about that as an idea. If Sony, for example, wanted to make games based on [the] military, they have a film studio and a library of television programs that are all inspired—like they've just done with The Last of Us, this fantastic new show that's on HBO. But they created this program from the ground up based on a videogame. So there's an enormous amount of competition. I think when regulators start to understand that, they'll actually think about this transaction differently."

This isn't the first time the success of The Last of Us has come up in discussions regarding the Microsoft—Activision deal: In January, chief communications officer Lulu Cheng Meservey said on Twitter(opens in new tab) that the success of the show reflects the depth of Sony's talent and resources "across gaming, TV, movies, and music," and proves that "they will be just fine without the FTC's protection."

My initial impression was that Meservey's tweets seemed like a real deviation from Microsoft's official position—that it will not make Call of Duty a console exclusive(opens in new tab).

But Kotick drilled down further on the point during the interview, implying that Sony isn't as worried about the future of CoD as it publicly presents.

"Sony's not on the phone to us. In fact, they're not returning our phone calls," Kotick said. "And so I think one of the things that's surprising to us is, this is the time where ordinarily we'd be talking about the future and new opportunities together for partnership, and they just haven't been returning our phone calls. And so I don't know that we're as valuable as maybe they've represented to the regulators that we are."

After reiterating that the business model embraced by both Microsoft and Activision Blizzard is getting their software "on every microprocessor that has a display," Kotick looped back around to The Last of Us to imply that Sony is the company regulators should be worried about, and that Microsoft needs to bag Activision Blizzard just to have a chance at keeping up.

"People have tried for years to create adaptations of videogames, and they have not done that successfully," Kotick said. "It's one of Sony's enormous competitive advantages, is that they have a television and film capability, and this rich library of intellectual property. And so they were able to do something that no other company has been able to do. And I think they did it because they have an extraordinarily talented group of people at the developer that made the game, and they were really able to take advantage of the resources of Sony.

"And this is something that we and Microsoft will have to compete against—and Microsoft doesn't have a film studio, they don't have a film library, they don't have a television division, they don't have a market share division of music that I think must be 35 or 40% market share of the music industry. [Sony] can use all of those assets in unique ways that Microsoft doesn't have the ability to do."

Kotick has been awfully quiet on the acquisition front until this week (he also spoke about the deal this week on CNBC), which could reflect growing concern at Microsoft and Activision Blizzard about the fate of the buyout. No final decisions have been made by any major regulator at this point, but the UK's Competition and Markets Authority recently signalled that it's ready to oppose the deal unless Activision Blizzard is broken up ahead of the merger—say, by spinning off the Call of Duty business completely, a move that I have to think would scupper the deal entirely. The FTC has also sued to stop the acquisition, and while there was some early expectation that lawsuit was more of an on-the-record registration of opposition than a real effort to end it, the longer this drags on the more it looks like heels could be digging in.

If nothing else, Kotick at least managed to convince Fox Business host Liz Claman of the rightness of his cause: After the interview was over, she said, "You kind of just made the case for why it's not negative for competition."

 

[Ryzer]

Sony is fucked. Simple as that. Nintendo is probably quite happy right now, if anything. It was never a competition for them. People would buy Nintendo to play Nintendo games, but for Sony/Microsoft, it was hardly to play their own game and just to play "current games".

For the PS4, you have Bloodborne and that's where the utility of the PS4 ends.
Back then, there used to be tremendous amount of PS exclusives, even back on the PS3.

 

[Hellraiser]

Sony is fucked. Simple as that. Nintendo is probably quite happy right now, if anything. It was never a competition for them. People would buy Nintendo to play Nintendo games, but for Sony/Microsoft, it was hardly to play their own game and just to play "current games".

For the PS4, you have Bloodborne and that's where the utility of the PS4 ends.
Back then, there used to be tremendous amount of PS exclusives, even back on the PS3.

Whether the amount was tremendous let alone worthwhile on the PS3 I have my doubts, the selection is decent, but so is the Dreamcast's or N64's. At least that was my impression when I got into the subject of PS3 games not that long ago. Although I guess it didn't look that bad back in the day before stuff got ports, remasters and re-releases to other/more current platforms over the years. xbawks 360 probably looks even worse after the years.

 

[KIss My Ass]

If M$ ever knocked Sony out of the console race I would just support Steam and Nintendo more LOL. I'll suck shit and die before I ever buy a faggy xbox console.

 

[lycanwarrior]

Xbox Game Pass Hurts Sales Admits Microsoft, Financial Compensation Used to Snag Publishers​

https://wccftech.com/xbox-game-pass-hurts-sales-microsoft-financial-compensation-lure-publishers/

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

Both could also be true. The quote they’re pulling is specifically about game sales 12 months into being on Game Pass. They could have a situation where on release, Game Pass can drive sales because of word of mouth from the people that have it for those people that don’t. When they say Game Pass helps sales, they always seem to be talking above the day it comes out, or within a month of hitting Game Pass; but here they’re talking 12 months later.

 

[lycanwarrior]

Both could also be true. The quote they’re pulling is specifically about game sales 12 months into being on Game Pass. They could have a situation where on release, Game Pass can drive sales because of word of mouth from the people that have it for those people that don’t. When they say Game Pass helps sales, they always seem to be talking above the day it comes out, or within a month of hitting Game Pass; but here they’re talking 12 months later.

Seems to depend on the game as well. Many indie games seem to benefit more from it than probably AAA titles.

 

[anvi]

UK Government talking about protecting gaming which has been raped into the ground for decades. Clueless fucking pricks.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/microsoft-defend-activision-deal-eu-hearing-feb-21-2023-02-14/

Microsoft to defend Activision deal at EU hearing on Feb. 21​

BRUSSELS, Feb 14 (Reuters) - Microsoft (MSFT.O) will make a last-ditch effort to defend its $69 billion bid for "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard (ATVI.O) in front of EU and national antitrust officials at a closed hearing on Feb. 21, the U.S. software company said on Tuesday.

The company asked for the hearing after receiving a statement of objections from the European Commission warning about the possible anti-competitive effects of the deal.

A Microsoft spokesperson confirmed the oral hearing.

The Xbox maker announced the Activision Blizzard acquisition in January last year to help it compete better with leaders Tencent (0700.HK) and Sony (6758.T), but has run into regulatory headwinds in Europe, Britain and the United States.

Microsoft is expected to offer remedies after the hearing.

It has reached a 10-year deal with Nintendo (7974.T) to make "Call of Duty" available on Nintendo consoles, a remedy aimed at convincing competition enforcers but which has been criticised by Sony, which wants the deal to be blocked.

 

[Infinitron]

Microsoft have their ducks in a row:



https://www.gamesindustry.biz/cwa-asks-european-commission-to-approve-microsoft-activision-merger

CWA asks European Commission to approve Microsoft-Activision merger​

Union president asks regulator to consider the potential for positive impact on the labour market and workers' rights to organise

Communications Workers of America president Chris Shelton has urged the European Commission to approve the proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard by Microsoft, saying it could positively influence the labour market.

Shelton's statement comes as Microsoft is attending a closed hearing with the European Commission in Brussels today. In a letter to the European Commission's executive vice president Margrethe Vestager, Shelton pointed to the several issues workers have encountered over the past couple of years, trying to unionise at Activision Blizzard.

"Since 2021, CWA has been supporting workers at Activision Blizzard to organise a union," the letter read. "They have faced management intransigence at every turn."

The CWA filed a complaint at the National Labor Relations Board back in September 2021, accusing Activision Blizzard of union busting. New allegations also emerged in August 2022, with the CWA saying that Activision Blizzard was illegally surveilling employees while protesting and preventing them from discussing labour issues.

The CWA initially had concerns about Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision due to its "potential for increased employer power over workers that could worsen labour monopsony," Shelton explained. However, Microsoft and the CWA entered a labour neutrality agreement in June 2022, which would provide Activision Blizzard's employees with a safe path to unionisation if the merger is approved.

"Microsoft’s binding commitments will give employees a seat at the table and ensure that the acquisition of Activision Blizzard benefits the company's workers and the broader video game labour market," Shelton continued.

"The European Commission has an opportunity in this case to take seriously the impact of a major transaction on the video game labour market. Given the clear pathway to enforceable behavioural remedies for potential consumer harms articulated by the European Commission and other regulators, we hope you will approve this merger and help make history in rebalancing power in labour markets."