Microsoft buys Activision Blizzard

[Spectacle]

Nobody gives a fuck about cloud gaming. This is boomers making rulings based on things they don't understand.

(Rulings that are however ultimately correct, again for reasons that boomers don't understand)

 

[lycanwarrior]

UK MPs grill regulator over Microsoft Activision Blizzard deal block, day after EU grants approval

"There are questions over whether the UK is open for business."

 

[abija]

It was a bribe request and they probably bribed above their heads.

 

[IDtenT]

EU dabs on Morgoth.

Where are your Overlords now?!

 

[RobotSquirrel]

Nobody gives a fuck about cloud gaming. This is boomers making rulings based on things they don't understand.

(Rulings that are however ultimately correct, again for reasons that boomers don't understand)

You're right, but at the same time anything that delays the buyout and turns Blizzard into a dumpster fire is a good thing. Its obvious things aren't going well over there.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/05/17/jeremy-hunt-competition-regulators-growth-microsoft/

Hunt urges competition chiefs to encourage growth after Microsoft deal blocked​

Chancellor says CMA must ‘understand wider responsibilities’ after £55bn takeover denied

Speaking at the British Chambers of Commerce conference Chancellor Jeremy Hunt said regulators need to focus on encouraging investment CREDIT: TOLGA AKMEN/Shutterstock

Jeremy Hunt has told competition chiefs that they must “understand their wider responsibilities” after the regulator was attacked by Microsoft for blocking a gaming mega-merger.

The Chancellor insisted that he did not want to undermine the independence of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), but said regulators also needed to focus on encouraging investment.

Microsoft and Activision have accused the UK of discouraging investment after the CMA blocked Microsoft’s $69bn (£55bn) takeover of Activision, the video games giant behind Call of Duty.

Speaking at the British Chambers of Commerce annual conference on Wednesday, Mr Hunt said: “When it comes to Microsoft, there was a merger between two American companies that the US regulator is seeking to block, and the UK regulator took the same view.

“I think one of the reasons that companies like Microsoft and Google want to invest in the UK is because we have independent regulators that are not controlled by politicians and therefore they can be confident there will be a level playing field.

“I would not want to undermine that at all, but I do think it’s important all our regulators understand their wider responsibilities for economic growth.

“But for our tech sector, it isn’t just about being able to get through big deals, competition really matters.”

The comments are the first Mr Hunt has made on the blocked takeover bid.

Last week the Government published a “strategic steer” document encouraging the CMA to take into account “the impact that [enforcement] has on economic growth”.

The CMA’s decision to block the deal was brought into focus earlier this week when EU regulators approved the takeover.

Microsoft’s Brad Smith has suggested that the CMA’s ruling means the EU is a more welcoming environment than Britain for technology companies.

When the deal was blocked, Activision said the decision meant the UK was “clearly closed for business” and said it would reconsider its investments in Britain.

The CMA’s leaders defended their decision on Tuesday, telling MPs that they had not created a “hostile environment” for tech businesses.

Sarah Cardell, the regulator’s chief executive, said that the decision to block Microsoft’s takeover of Activision was taken by an independent panel.

Microsoft is set to appeal the decision in the coming days.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.reuters.com/legal/micro...k-69-bln-activision-deal-us-court-2023-05-22/

Microsoft defeats gamers' bid to block $69 bln Activision deal in US court​

May 22 (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) evaded a potential early legal obstacle in its $69 billion deal to acquire "Call of Duty" videogame maker Activision Blizzard Inc (ATVI.O), when a U.S. judge on Friday refused to allow gamers in a private suit to preliminarily block the acquisition.

The private plaintiffs sued Microsoft in California federal court in December to enjoin the deal, which they called harmful to competition.

U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley in San Francisco federal court said in a ruling issued late on Friday night that the video gamers had not shown they would be "irreparably harmed" if the merger were allowed to proceed before she rules on the merits of their case.

Microsoft and its lawyers contend the acquisition would benefit consumers.

Corley pushed back on the gamers' allegation that Microsoft would limit availability of the game. The judge said there was no evidence Microsoft could make current versions of "Call of Duty" stop working after the planned merger, Corley wrote.

"The day after the merger they can play exactly the same way they played with their friends before the merger," Corley wrote. The judge also said "it is not likely" Microsoft will make any newer version of "Call of Duty" exclusive to the company's platform prior to a ruling on the merits of the deal.

A Microsoft spokesperson on Monday did not immediately respond to request for comment.

A lawyer for the gamers said on Monday they will press on with their challenge to the deal despite losing this preliminary round.

Joseph Alioto said the court concluded that a preliminary injunction "was not necessary at the moment," but said the "evidence is very strong" that the proposed acquisition violates U.S. antitrust law.

The court's order comes just days after Microsoft won EU antitrust approval. The deal faces regulatory scrutiny by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, and also in China and South Korea.

British competition authorities rejected the deal, which would be the largest-ever in the gaming industry. Microsoft faces a May 24 deadline to appeal the decision.

U.S. antitrust law allows private plaintiffs to sue over mergers and acquisitions.

Corley dismissed the gamers' first lawsuit in March, ruling that plaintiffs had not offered adequate factual support for claims that the deal would violate U.S. antitrust law.

She allowed the plaintiffs to bring an amended complaint. Microsoft's bid to dismiss the case is pending.

The case is DeMartini v. Microsoft Corp, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 3:22-cv-08991.

 

[Late Bloomer]

Not 100% sure where to put this. But the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has been blocking the Activision Blizzard Microsoft deal.

The Competition and Markets Authority ("CMA") announced on 26 April that it had blocked Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard, a US-based video game publisher, following a detailed "Phase 2" merger inquiry

And this today.

https://www.videogameschronicle.com...cision-to-block-its-activision-blizzard-deal/

Yesterday I read that the CMA ordered Meta to sell Giphy (at a loss).

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65684986

These are both American companies being blocked / told what to do by a UK body. How do they have power over another countries businesses? Does the FTC (I am guessing that is the US equivalent) do the same? Are there numerous countries that have this type of power? Has there ever been a case where it wasn't heeded?

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

These are both American companies being blocked / told what to do by a UK body. How do they have power over another countries businesses?

I explained briefly how the US became a British cryptocolony once https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/american-north-vs-south-conspiracy-theory.133588/
Britain controls half the world. Usually it doesn't show its head, though. Because it raises questions, like yours.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.eurogamer.net/microsoft...ion-blizzard-block-pencilled-in-for-late-july

Microsoft's appeal against UK Activision Blizzard block pencilled in for late July​

Tribunal recommending six-day hearing.

Microsoft's appeal against the UK Competition and Merger Authority's decision to reject its Activision Blizzard deal has been given a preliminary 24th July start date.

The CMA made the shock decision to block Microsoft proposed $69bn acquisition of Activision Blizzard in April, highlighting concerns relating to the burgeoning cloud gaming sector and arguing the deal would risk "stifling competition in this growing market".

And now, following the recent publication of Microsoft's summary of application to appeal the CMA's decision - in which it accused the UK regulator of making "fundamental errors in its assessment" - the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal has held a case management conference to iron out preliminary details of the hearing between Microsoft and the CMA.

Ultimately, despite Microsoft pushing for a June hearing and the CMA's legal representation arguing for a later date, the Honourable Mr Justice Marcus Smith, presiding for the CAT, moved to provisionally schedule the hearing for the ten working days beginning 24th July.

While the CAT acknowledged it was unlikely the appeal would require all ten days, it suggested six days - an increase on the four requested by Microsoft - might be a more appropriate timeframe for the hearing, encouraging both parties to consider longer rather than shorter oral submissions given the complexities of the case.

Before then, the CAT has scheduled a second case management conference for 12th June to discuss questions around factual and expert evidence, and if conversations during this meeting indicate the provisional hearing dates need to be adjourned, that remains a possibility.

If Microsoft's appeal is successful, it will still need to go back though the CMA for review.

 

[Infinitron]

https://variety.com/2023/digital/ne...c-workforce-claims-microsoft-deal-1235628361/

Bobby Kotick Breaks His Silence: Embattled Activision CEO Addresses Toxic Workforce Claims as Microsoft Deal Hangs in Balance​

Bobby Kotick has a secret: He was ready to buy Time Warner a few years ago. The CEO of Activision Blizzard drops this nugget early on while sitting at the company’s Santa Monica headquarters for his first extensive interview since 2012. It’s a Friday afternoon in mid-April, which means the office is mostly deserted. Huge replicas of characters and actual backdrops from the video game giant’s roster of franchises — including Call of Duty, Diablo, Overwatch and Candy Crush — dot the landscape of the open-architecture space. The quiet in the building and the low midafternoon light give the place a slightly spooky, fun house vibe.

“We’d take their IP and turn it into games. They’d take our IP and turn it into film and television, and we’d have an extraordinary company,” Kotick says, sketching out his vision for a deal in an alternate universe in which AT&T never bought Time Warner and Activision took it on instead. In reality, the Justice Department lost its lawsuit to block the sale of Time Warner to AT&T. But during the first half of 2018, when the fate of the $85.4 billion Time Warner purchase hung in the balance, Activision Blizzard took a cue from its “Call of Duty” commandos: It stockpiled financial ammunition and waited patiently for an opening to pounce.




“We raised all the capital and were ready to go in the event that AT&T couldn’t get the deal done,” Kotick says with a grin. He claims to be dispassionate about the missed moment with Time Warner, but his excited vision of what might have been suggests otherwise.

Mike McQuade for Variety
Kotick, 60, is remarkably sanguine for a CEO fighting battles on multiple fronts. He’s in a similar predicament to the one that AT&T and Time Warner were five years ago, as he’s spent the past 18 months (and counting) lobbying regulators to approve the sale of Activision Blizzard to Microsoft for $69 billion in cash.

What’s more, Activision Blizzard over the past five years has been the focus of harassment and gender equality probes from an alphabet soup of federal and state agencies, from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to the Securities and Exchange Commission to California’s Civil Rights Department. Kotick has been accused of turning a blind eye and failing to act to address internal culture issues, particularly at the Blizzard unit.

In a lawsuit filed against Activision in 2021, California’s Civil Rights Department alleges that “women were subjected to constant sexual harassment, including groping, comments, and advances, and that the company’s executives and human resources personnel knew of the harassment and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the unlawful conduct, and instead retaliated against women who complained.” The complaint also accused Activision of having “fostered a sexist culture and paid women less than men, and assigned women to lower level jobs than men.” Last year, Activision filed a counterclaim against the Civil Rights Department, accusing it of ethical lapses in its investigation and of attempting to interfere with the separate EEOC investigation and $18 million settlement reached in September 2021.



The executive says he has been both humbled and outraged by what he considers malicious distortions about the company that he has taken to great heights over 32 years. He makes no apologies for Activision or its culture. He says that the company is preparing to release a slew of data drawn from the EEOC investigation that he hopes will combat the perception that Activision was run as a “frat house.”

For a company with 17,000 employees worldwide, Kotick asserts, Activision has had a relatively low level of harassment and assault complaints. Though he says he’ll release a transparency report that will provide exculpatory data from outside entities, he acknowledges that the stain left by the sweeping allegations will be hard to combat with pie charts and statistical tables.

“We’ve had every possible form of investigation done. And we did not have a systemic issue with harassment — ever. We didn’t have any of what were mischaracterizations reported in the media,” Kotick asserts. “But what we did have was a very aggressive labor movement working hard to try and destabilize the company.”

Kotick places the blame for most of Activision’s image problems on what he calls “outside forces” and labor activity around the company. The Communications Workers of America and Activision employees have filed a stream of complaints against the company with the National Labor Relations Board. Kotick believes labor organizers are influencing the state and federal investigations into harassment and gender discrimination claims, as well as the Activision employee walkouts that have been staged periodically since 2021.

“Corporations choose to be disruptive when they run anti-union campaigns,” says Beth Allen, communications director for the CWA. “Workers who join together to improve their workplaces intend to make constructive changes for the benefit of all. When employers voluntarily recognize unions and engage in good faith contract bargaining, it builds trust and strengthens companies.”

In fact, the heat between Activision and the CWA has cooled a bit of late. The CWA successfully organized workers at Activision’s Raven Software division earlier this month, while the CWA-backed Game Workers Alliance organized workers at an Activision unit in Albany , N.Y., in December. Contract talks for those workers begin next week. “Over the last few months, we worked thoughtfully and productively with the CWA,” Kotick explains, “and we’ve engaged in a dialogue that will be beneficial for our people, the union and the company.”

Dan Doperalski for Variety
In November 2021, after allegations about the company were reported in depth by The Wall Street Journal, about 1,000 employees signed a public petition urging Kotick to resign as CEO. Again, Kotick sees regulators fanning the flames that led to the Journal’s exposés. He believes his biggest mistake was failing to forcefully defend the company and his legacy to the Journal and in his public statements.



“I wouldn’t be sitting here talking to you if any of what you read in the inflammatory narrative was truthful,” Kotick says. Although he has become synonymous with Activision, he’s quick to point out that he does not have control of the company through voting rights — as some media moguls do — and that he owns less than 5% of its shares. “No board of directors in a noncontrolled company is going to allow the CEO of an enterprise to stay running the enterprise if those things were truthful,” he says of Activision’s spree of bad press and investigations.

In a statement, a Wall Street Journal spokeswoman told Variety: “We stand by our fair and accurate reporting on Activision.”

---

Kotick didn’t launch Activision. But as a young investor who was drawn to the 1980s tech boom, he acquired the company that was near bankruptcy in late 1990 and became CEO in February 1991. Under Kotick’s leadership, Activision has more than doubled its market value since 2009. It has grown significantly through savvy acquisitions. Today, Activision Blizzard is the world’s fifth-largest maker of video games, with a balance sheet and loyal customer base that any Hollywood studio would envy. (In Kotick’s view, Hollywood is only now starting to catch up on building the kind of fandoms and franchises that power the $200 billion global video game industry.)

Michael Pachter, media analyst at Wedbush Securities, who has covered Activision since 2002, says Kotick is a force-of-nature leader who has proven his ability to galvanize teams to take massive swings on properties that take years and many millions of dollars to develop and produce. One of Activision’s hallmarks has been a willingness to delay planned releases if the company doesn’t feel that a new edition of Call of Duty or World of Warcraft or another franchise title is worthy of its predecessors. More than a decade ago, Kotick also bucked the trend by opting to double and triple down on upgrades and new iterations of its biggest-selling titles rather than diversify along a wider range of properties. In 2022, Call of Duty, World of Warcraft and Candy Crush accounted for 79% of the company’s $7.5 billion in annual net revenue. The company is eagerly awaiting next week’s global launch of a next-generation installment of Blizzard’s Diablo franchise, Diablo IV.

“The basis of his success is that he’s a really good judge of game talent,” Pachter says. “He gives his people enough authority to make good decisions, and he backs them up. What Activision did better than anyone else was to focus on fewer and bigger. Activision did to games what Disney did to movies. Disney said, ‘We’re not going to make 50 movies a year; we’re going to make 20.’ Activision used to make 30 to 40 games a year. Now they make five.”

That said, serious problems within Activision’s workplace culture were also Kotick’s responsibility — and on those issues the CEO fell short, Pachter says. He believes the Microsoft transaction was spurred in part by Activision being on the ropes in late 2021 and Kotick being ready to move on after three decades at the helm. “Bobby inherited and allowed to thrive a culture of male domination. He presided over a culture that was toxic at times — that is bad,” Pachter says. “Ultimately, he’s relieved that Microsoft came along.”

---

Kotick’s current contract as Activision CEO runs through March 2024. Two more key dates on the horizon are July 18 — when the initial Microsoft acquisition agreement expires (which can be extended if both companies agree) — and Aug. 2, when an evidentiary hearing will be held in the Federal Trade Commission’s lawsuit to nix the Microsoft-Activision nuptials. The Justice Department and the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority are both raising objections to the transaction. Both say it would give Microsoft too much control of the global gaming marketplace — a fear that Activision and Microsoft both say is off base for where the market is today and misses the competitive threat posed by overseas tech giants including China’s Tencent and ByteDance.



Activision has operated mostly on the fringes of traditional Hollywood. Kotick grew up in Roslyn, N.Y., and has the kind of Long Island street smarts that have helped many East Coast expats in Hollywood. He’s well liked among the showbiz elite with whom he has rubbed elbows for many years. Despite the severity of allegations around the company, Kotick has not been drummed out of the in-crowd. He has many defenders who feel the company, its influence in pop culture and Kotick’s role in building it have never been appreciated by mainstream Hollywood.

“Activision is a creative company through and through,” says Dawn Ostroff, a TV and digital veteran who has known Kotick for years and joined Activision’s board in 2020. “They’re so protective of the creative process. He really believes in allowing his creators to get the games right, and to make sure the players are first and foremost in their minds. They know their consumers so well.”

That fealty to cutting-edge technology and games that consistently wow hardcore gamers is what sets Activision apart from other gaming giants, including Electronic Arts, Take-Two Interactive and Ubisoft.

“Bobby as a leader is someone who is very creative. He’s not just a CEO who is brilliant in business; he respects the creative producer and developers in all of his different divisions, and he supports them to deliver the very best games,” Ostroff says.

---

The public and private personas of Kotick are hard to square. Ask many of his C-suite counterparts in Hollywood and the first words blurted out are usually, “Bobby’s done a great job with Activision.” But there is no disputing that Kotick has long been a favorite punching bag of a key constituency in the video game universe: hardcore gamers. As The New York Times observed in a 2012 profile, “The disdain heaped on Mr. Kotick in video game blogs is second only to the admiration for him on Wall Street.”

The rap against Kotick has been that he’s bought his way to video game success. Most recently, he made a savvy deal in 2016 to acquire King, the U.K.-based maker of addictive mobile games such as Candy Crush, for $5.9 billion in cash. That made Activision well positioned to ride the mobile-gaming wave that accelerated during the pandemic.

As Activision has grown, Kotick has become a handy villain, depicted as the rich suit who lives off the money that gamers shell out on their favorite pastime. The slogging on video game-centric social media platform has taken its toll on Kotick, and his family.

“The hatred has turned into a lot of antisemitism,” Kotick says. “When you look at images of me are on the internet, there are these antisemitic undertones. My kids have gotten death threats.”

Longtime Kotick colleagues and competitors say he is exacting but Activision’s results and track record speak for themselves. The company has been able to keep growing by prioritizing quality over quantity and setting a high bar for improving the gaming experience.

Employees demonstrate outside Activision Blizzard offices in Irvine, Calif., in July 2021Los Angeles Times via Getty Imag
Larry Kasanoff, a film producer who has worked with game content for years, including the enduring “Mortal Kombat” film franchise, says Activision’s growth on Kotick’s watch is no accident. “They have really held everyone to a higher technological standard,” Kasanoff says. “There are a lot of games like Candy Crush and Call of Duty, but none of them are as good. There’s something about the playability and technicality to them. They’re always at the top.”

Kasanoff observes that traditional Hollywood still struggles to grasp what makes the creative essence of a video game different from a movie or TV show. “The game community is different than the movie community. You have a hit movie, and you get people in and out in two hours,” Kasanoff says. “With games, people want to play them for a long time. You don’t spend 60 bucks to play for two hours. You’re looking to play for 60 to 80 hours. Your game has got to be good.”

In one-on-one conversation, Kotick can be disarmingly funny and warm, with a Mickey Rooney-like air of can-do energy. He’s soft-spoken, even when wound up about a particular subject. He lights up when talking about Activision’s strengths and future plans. During a tour of Activision’s motion-capture production space in Playa del Rey, for example, he is easily conversant on the specifics of the technology and how improving the company’s motion-capture tech elevated the experience of playing Call of Duty and other immersive titles. He proudly shows off a bit of expensive production tech that looks like a jungle gym made of cameras, sensors and wires. He oohs and aahs as a technician demonstrates how the device works when a person wearing a motion-capture skullcap steps inside. It’s all in service of allowing Activision artists and engineers to bring an ever-more-photorealistic look to games.

“Playing games is such a visceral experience,” Kotick explains. “We’re getting to the point that the game itself is able to create its own content in real time. That will be exquisite.”

Kotick has a lot on his mind about recent events. But if there’s one thing he wants to make crystal clear, it’s that this son of a teacher is not anti-union. In fact, he is a member of a prominent union: SAG-AFTRA. He joined when he was cast in a small role in Bennett Miller’s 2011 baseball drama “Moneyball,” starring Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill. Kotick played the tightfisted owner of the Oakland A’s.

“I am not like other CEOs that are anti-union,” Kotick insists. “I’m the only Fortune 500 CEO who’s a member of a union. If we have employees who want a union to represent them, and they believe that that union is going to be able to provide them with opportunities and enhancements to their work experience, I’m all for it. I have a mother who was a teacher. I have no aversion to a union. What I do have an aversion to is a union that doesn’t play by the rules,” he says.

---

The year 2021 was Activision’s annus horribilis. By its end, Activision’s stock had plum meted 35%. The confluence of disturbing headlines, delayed games and a lukewarm fan response to the latest iteration of Call of Duty was taking its toll.

“These guys were on their asses,” says Clay Griffin, video game analyst for MoffettNathanson Research. “All these negative headlines about sexual harassment. The new Call of Duty came out, and it flopped. The stock was weak; some Blizzard titles were delayed.”



At the same time, Microsoft’s Xbox video game operation was sinking further behind its largest competitors, Sony PlayStation and Nintendo. “Microsoft needed to do something bold for Xbox. It was a really serendipitous moment for both sides to say, ‘Hey, what’s a fair price and can we get this done?’” Griffin says.

With Activision in a stronger place these days, though, there have been whispers in the industry about whether Kotick might be having second thoughts about hitching the company’s wagon to Microsoft. But Kotick, who stands to make a not-so-small fortune in the sale, says he is only focused on guiding the deal through the regulatory roadblocks. He’s exasperated by the public debate on whether Microsoft, in combination with Activision, will have too much sway over the nascent cloud-gaming sector. In his view, the real threat is that U.S. firms fall behind not only China’s Tencent, ByteDance and Alibaba but also Japan’s Sony and Nintendo as leaders and innovators in the AI, streaming and mobile technologies needed to power the next generation of immersive video games. The non-U.S. tech giants have tens of thousands of engineers focused on research and development in these emerging arenas.

Kotick emphasizes that he thinks Microsoft is a perfect fit for Activision. The company has the financial resources and infrastructure to support the kind of investment that will be needed to remain competitive in the space that Activision has helped define over the past 30 years. “I think Microsoft is by far the best place for us to be,” he says.

That said, if the deal doesn’t go through, Activision will soldier on with a balance sheet that is bolstered by $12.6 billion in cash on the books. That amount will grow by nearly $3 billion if Microsoft has to pay Activision the deal breakup fee negotiated as part of the transaction. That’s a lot of cash to wield, should Kotick decide to go shopping for other companies.

As Kotick talks up the virtues of the Microsoft deal for Activision at the close of a nearly two-hour conversation, though, it’s clear he’s thinking about both his next moves and his legacy. Handing Activision to a new owner will be hard, but perhaps made easier by Kotick’s long-standing relationships with Phil Spencer, CEO of Microsoft Gaming, and Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella. “I like the company,” Kotick says of Microsoft. “I like the culture. I’m really scared about the economy — compensation for talent has been ratcheting up in ways that are complex for us to deal with. So this deal made a lot of sense.”

Kotick sounds like he’s still a little unconvinced himself. But even amid the ongoing litigation over harassment claims, Activision is in the fortunate position of having options.

“We have a great company. We have an enormous amount of momentum, and we have an extraordinary balance sheet,” Kotick says. “And we can continue to be successful alone like we have been for the last 30 years. But it’ll be great if the deal goes through because I think it’s the right thing for our industry.”

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

I've never seen a guy with such demonic eyes as his. Some really weird shit.

 

[whydoibother]

WHERE *clap* IS *clap* THE *clap* PRIDE *clap* FLAG????

This is NOT okay!!!!!!!!

BOBBY, YOU ARE LITERALLY KILLING PEOPLE!!!!

reminder

 

[Late Bloomer]

Has similar energy to Jonah Hill in The Wolf of Wall Street. Pretty good movie if you haven't watched it.

 

[Skorpion]

Has similar energy to Jonah Hill in The Wolf of Wall Street. Pretty good movie if you haven't watched it.

Hah I never noticed the similarity but that is spot on!

 

[Infinitron]

Kotick himself appeared alongside Jonah Hill in the Brad Pitt baseball movie Moneyball:

 

[lycanwarrior]

Microsoft Might Be Preparing to Close ActiBlizz Deal Despite UK Opposition​

https://wccftech.com/microsoft-might-be-preparing-to-close-actiblizz-deal-despite-uk-opposition/

According to a paywalled report from MLex (via ResetEra's Ida), Microsoft might be exploring legal options to close its groundbreaking $68.7 billion deal to acquire Activision Blizzard even if it cannot overturn the UK regulator's opposition.

 

[Infinitron]

Microsoft Might Be Preparing to Close ActiBlizz Deal Despite UK Opposition​

https://wccftech.com/microsoft-might-be-preparing-to-close-actiblizz-deal-despite-uk-opposition/

According to a paywalled report from MLex (via ResetEra's Ida), Microsoft might be exploring legal options to close its groundbreaking $68.7 billion deal to acquire Activision Blizzard even if it cannot overturn the UK regulator's opposition.

SCORCHED EARTH MOTHERFUCKERS: https://www.videogameschronicle.com...-uk-to-counter-acquisition-block-its-claimed/

Microsoft ‘could withdraw Activision from the UK’ to counter acquisition block, it’s claimed​

MICROSOFT’S PRESIDENT IS REPORTEDLY SET TO MEET WITH GOVERNMENT MINISTERS NEXT WEEK

Microsoft could consider pulling Activision from the UK market as one extreme option to bypass the country’s block of its proposed $69bn acquisition.

That’s according to a new Bloomberg report, which states that Microsoft president Brad Smith will meet with UK Chancellor Jeremy Hunt next week to voice his frustration over the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) decision to block the deal.

Microsoft confirmed to the publication that Smith will be in London, where he’s giving a “scheduled talk about the potential of AI and the need for thoughtful regulation of it.”

He’ll also hold private discussions on other issues, “including the proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard as we remain committed to finding creative and constructive ways to address remaining regulatory concerns,” a spokesperson said.

Hunt previously criticized the CMA’s veto, telling a business conference recently that competition watchdogs must “understand their wider responsibilities.”

However, Bloomberg claims that government ministers are also unhappy with some of Smith’s public criticism of the CMA, including stating that he believed the EU was a better place to do business than the UK.

It’s claimed that Smith will meet with Microsoft’s legal representatives to discuss the firm’s strategy to counter the CMA decision this week, including “extreme” options such as withdrawing Activision from the UK market, or bypassing the UK order and pressing ahead with the deal.

In theory, if Activision’s operation were moved to another European country outside of the CMA’s jurisdiction, its games could then continue to be sold via a distributor.

Microsoft’s appeal against the UK competition watchdog’s decision to block its acquisition of Activision Blizzard will be heard in court in July.

Microsoft, which is challenging the decision on five grounds, officially lodged its appeal against the CMA’s decision last week, and the case is set to be reviewed by the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT).

The Activision Blizzard deal has been cleared in almost 40 countries, including the European Union and most recently in South Korea.

 

[ScarredBushido]

consoles aren't region locked anymore so dudes could import like weebs had to back in the day.

 

[ArchAngel]

Good, then they can put that trash D4 on Gamepass so people can play it for it real worth of 10$.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.pcgamer.com/xbox-boss-p...ivision-blizzard-acquisition-will-go-through/

Xbox boss Phil Spencer is 'confident' that the Activision Blizzard acquisition will go through​

"We're out there to find solutions with the regulators," says Xbox Game Studios CEO Phil Spencer.

Xbox's Phil Spencer is staying the course: Microsoft's long-delayed acquisition of Activision Blizzard will happen, he said on Sunday.

Spencer made the comment at an Xbox event called What's Next For Gaming today, where he emphasized that "Microsoft is very committed, we're very committed" to the acquisition. The current major hurdle for the acquisition is the United Kingdom's Competition and Market Authority, which has blocked the deal. Both Microsoft and Activision are appealing the authority's decision. The FTC in the US has also not yet approved the deal.

"We're out there to find solutions with the regulators that have questions, and that's what we're actively doing," said Spencer, following up that regulators had problems in many different areas, but that Microsoft had spent significant time on the deal. "We're trying to get to solutions. We did that with the European Commission. I'm confident we'll find solutions in the other areas as well. It's taking time, it's taking focus, but I'm confident."

It's a characteristically unruffled response from Spencer, who hasn't publicly wavered on his enthusiasm for the Microsoft-Activision acquisition since it was announced some 18 months ago, setting the gaming, finance, and media worlds abuzz with its record high numbers. If approved, Microsoft's deal to wholly acquire Activision-Blizzard would be by some metrics the largest acquisition of a media corporation in history—almost as much money as Disney paid to acquire 21st Century Fox, for example. It'll certainly be the largest gaming-related acquisition by an outrageous degree.

Phil Spencer is not the only person who thinks there's a chance. Just this week, a gaming industry analyst with prominent investment bank Jeffries noted that Microsoft does have a real chance of closing the acquisition deal. As reported by SeekingAlpha, Jefferies analyst Andrew Uerkwitz thinks there's a "more than zero" but "less than half" chance the acquisition gets approved.

That assessment came after rumors said that it was possible Microsoft would simply pull Activision out of the UK market to circumvent the deal, letting a local partner take over publishing for Activision and Blizzard games there—an arrangement much like what Blizzard currently has in China. "We don't believe Microsoft should go this far or necessarily will go this far, but based on the commentary from Microsoft, it seems plausible," said Uerkwitz.

Of course, if Phil Spencer gets his way, that won't be needed at all. That's all part of the plan for him, with this year's Xbox showcase emphasizing that Microsoft is on track to become the PC game publishing giant it probably always should have been.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.eurogamer.net/microsoft-says-we-have-lost-the-console-waras-ftc-hearing-gets-underway

Microsoft says 'we have lost the console wars' as FTC hearing gets underway​

US agency seeking injunction to block Activision Blizzard deal.

Microsoft says it has "lost the console wars" in a court filing ahead of its legal battle with US antitrust agency the Federal Trade Commission.

The Xbox maker is currently in court to defend its $69bn USD Activision Blizzard acquisition, which the FTC is fighting to block through an injunction ahead of its own internal deliberations.

As part of a (heavily redacted) court filing intended to supplement the five-day case, Microsoft has once again attempted to portray itself the underdog in the console market.

"Xbox's console has consistently ranked third (of three) behind PlayStation in sales," Microsoft wrote in its filing (thanks The Verge). It added Xbox only has a 16 percent market share, and "trails" with 21 percent of console revenues and shares of consoles currently in use by gamers.

"Xbox has lost the console wars," Microsoft continued, "and its rivals are positioned to continue to dominate, including by leveraging exclusive content. Xbox has consistently ranked third in consoles behind PlayStation and Nintendo".

The strategy to paint itself as an underdog is one Microsoft has deployed previously, with varying degrees of success, in its battle with other regulators around the world - most notably in its discussions with the EU, which approved the Activision Blizzard deal in May, and with the UK's Competition and Markets Authority, which did not.

Microsoft is currently set to appeal the CMA's surprise decision with the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal in a hearing expected to take place in July. The FTC isn't due to hold its own internal hearing on the acquisition until 2nd August - the injunction is intended to block Microsoft from finalising the deal ahead of that time - but Microsoft has indicated it could walk away from the acquisition if the FTC"s injunction is granted.

 

[Abu Antar]

I've been laughing at all the different things Microsoft are saying. It's hilarious that a multi billion dollar company are spewing this bullshit. Not that the deal won't go through, mind you.

 

[lycanwarrior]

 

[Infinitron]

Deathloop - Bethesda's most profitable game ever: https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/23/...a-acquisition-starfield-playstation-exclusive

Microsoft acquired Bethesda after hearing Starfield would be exclusive to PlayStation​

Microsoft saw Sony paying Bethesda to keep games off Xbox and decided to do something drastic about it.​

Microsoft’s Xbox chief has revealed one of the key reasons behind the acquisition of Bethesda parent company ZeniMax: potential Starfield PlayStation exclusivity. Speaking at the FTC v. Microsoft hearing today, Phil Spencer revealed that Sony regularly pays competitors to “skip our platform” and Microsoft felt it needed to own Bethesda to compete.

“When we acquired ZeniMax one of the impetus for that is that Sony had done a deal for Deathloop and Ghostwire... to pay Bethesda to not ship those games on Xbox,” said Spencer. “So the discussion about Starfield when we heard that Starfield was potentially also going to end up skipping Xbox, we can’t be in a position as a third-place console where we fall further behind on our content ownership so we’ve had to secure content to remain viable in the business.”

Microsoft spent $7.5 billion to acquire ZeniMax Media, the parent company of Elder Scrolls and Fallout studio Bethesda Softworks. At the close of the deal, Microsoft promised Xbox and PC exclusives and it has so far shipped Redfall with Starfield set for a September 6th debut. Bethesda’s upcoming Indiana Jones game is also an exclusive for Xbox and PC.

Later in his testimony, Spencer refused to confirm whether Elder Scrolls VI is an Xbox exclusive or not. “I think we’ve been a little unclear on what platforms it’s launching on, given how far out the game is,” said Spencer. “It’s difficult for us right now to nail down.” Spencer did previously hint that Elder Scrolls VI would be an Xbox exclusive, but the game is still years away.

A big part of Spencer’s testimony today has been around painting Sony as an aggressive and hostile competitor. “Every time we ship a game on PlayStation... Sony captures 30 percent of the revenue that we do on their platform and then they use that money among other revenue that they have to do things to try to reduce Xbox’s survival on the market,” said Spencer. “We try to compete, but as I said, over the last 20 years we’ve failed to do that effectively.”

Buying up Bethesda and trying to acquire Activision Blizzard is, Spencer argues, a way to compete with Sony. Microsoft sure is spending a lot of cash to compete here, though. The proposed Activision Blizzard deal is valued at $68.7 billion.