The 360 outsold the PS3 in 2 markets, maybe more but if they are confirmed I don’t know but those 2 confirmed ones were the UK and USA and in both of those markets the 360 not only outsold but also dominated the PS3, 360 sold 49 million consoles in the US and the PS3 sold 27-29 million and the 360 sold 8.5 million consoles in the UK and the PS3 sold around 5 or 5.5 million (maybe more but I’m certain of the other numbers).
Due to that generation is why Xbox still has a decent market share and the Xbox One still had very respectable numbers in the UK and US by the way, PS4 was dominating the Xbox One in every market but the UK and US last gen but it didn’t reach the 360’s dominance in the UK and US, if that were to happen that would be a disaster for Xbox, Xbox needs those markets far more than PlayStation does, who has the European market pretty much locked, that is what Microsoft should be aiming for with the UK and US IMO because as history shows they can be evenly with PlayStation when they dominate those 2 markets (hell the USA alone would suffice) but that’s gonna be tough these days with how much stronger PlayStation now is.
And about COD, it’s not like I think Xbox would dominate in the UK and US if it was exclusive, even the CMA agrees, the market share would just be like 55/45 in Xbox’s favor, probably the same in the US, PS’s numbers would still be greater than Xbox’s worldwide.
I think these deals should always be looked into very seriously, on the outside the CMA appears to be doing a good job but I think they’ve shown they just want to block and aren’t being reasonable, if COD is so important, will ABK themselves be forced to have to offer it on all other streaming services if they themselves decide to make their own? I don’t get it.
All of the recent facts in this thing, including the 100% support by everyone but the freaking current market leader Sony, totally point to either the CMA doing the right thing or embarrassing themselves with an appeal/overturn by the CAT or another government ministry avenue. There is no way that there is prior precedent of something being blocked where the objective current sales facts of the participants and the support of basically all other industry participants except the market leader makes this logically a deal to pass even with some remedies. Let alone the fact that Sony has done plenty to “foreclose” access to Xbox for certain 3rd party games/content while they sit as the current market leader. The CMA would be wise to choose the path of least resistance by passing this because I think they sit on a throne of lies that will crumble in any other appeal setting, with real questions of what type of influence Sony has with the CMA behind the scenes even coming into play for example as they should.
I’m honestly starting to doubt the CMA’s objectivity about this merger, feels like they were out for blood from the very beginning , and the “divestiture” stuff or the possible behavioral remedy “considerations” are just for show so they can look “objective and fair” before they bring the hammer down. And they are not subjected to any judicial review. I’m all for extra scrutiny with big mergers to prevent actual anticompetitive or monopolistic behavior. But I want it to be objective, backed by facts, and be consistent with the law (sherman act, Clayton act, or the enterprise act in the UK).
MLex reports that the lawsuit from gamers has been dismissed and they’ll need to redraft their complaint.
Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley raised concerns about a lack of evidence/numbers, precise argument about the harm arising from the deal and the definition of the relevant markets.
$10,000 down the drain because they decided to identify with a corporation that doesn’t give two shits about them.
I honestly dont know what would happens in the US when a lawsuit is dismissed. It would be a good lesson to pay the fees of the other party to educate them to dont act stupid with justice system.
I know that a lot of people like to give the benefit of the doubt but anyone who isn’t straight out hostility opposed to the deal has to see that from the start that the CMA were always arguing in bad faith based off of every reason they have put forth in opposition to it.
Despite the irrationality of doing so, I expect them to go through with the block, taking the chance that those above them won’t overturn their decision.
Here’s the thing, these regulatory bodies should have a duty to understand each and every market they get involved in. They shouldn’t be judging every deal with some broad brush, they should be attempting to be experts in whatever they are regulating before they pass judgement. There is no excuse, this is their job. They have access to near unlimited amounts of information to facilitate learning on how a particular market operates. They should not be less informed than a bunch of people on a gaming forum who scrape together information from press releases and social media.
Now that I think about it, have any of these regulators actually requested data directly from market research firms like NPD? I’d imagine some of that info could be included in response paperwork, but have they actually brought in any independent experts to weigh in?
The more they chase big tech bad drama, the less good they do, the FTC needs to get their priorities sorted. Yeah, big tech is bad, but every other industry is more heavily entrenched without any or very little competition.
