This is true.
But MS and UK can also choose to close everywhere else except for the UK, and not conduct business as a combined entity in the UK.
ChatGPT4 validated this option. There is no power the CMA can have besides complaining to other regulators.
As soon as they merge, there will no legal entity known as ABK, including in the UK. As I said, a āfakeā ABK UK would only be a placeholder for MS in the UK and would not solve the SLC inherited from the fact that MS would control the fate of ABK IP.
King I believe
I understand. I just donāt see what the CMA can ultimately do about MS and ABK closing only in the EEA for example.
ChapGPT does not tell the truth. By essence. This is another topic, but this is frightening people use it as a validation tool, whereas it is just a probabilistic creative tool.
They can not close āonly somewhereā. They can cease to operate totally in the UK, nobody can force a company to sell or recruit or invest in some parts of the world. But you can not twist the rules to merge somewhere and not somewhere else.
From my experience, it makes stuff up to supply an answer if there is no answer, but if it has an answer, its usually on point .
Iāve being reading the law about mergers in the UK. If ABK and MS donāt merge in the UK, they donāt merge in the UK.
Also merger control test is different from what will hold up in court for a fine.
Legally speaking I am not seeing any law that can stop MS from merging in the EEA either through fines or incarceration of leadership.
Iāve read conflicting info. Wikipedia says they were founded in Sweden and their HQ is in Malta!
It always construct its answer based on a probabilistic evaluation of the next outcome. The system can be broken quite easily. It is a good tool to make drafts, but a sensible action is to check everything afterwards.
The problem is that it does not know if there is an answer. The truth does not exist for it.
The good thing we will know soon.
It doesnt matter, they have experts thatll give them options if the CMA doesnt reverse course. At worst the answer is they move forward and dare the UK to fine them more than the 3 billion dollar breakup fee plus lost profit from not having ABK under them.
Based on ABKs profits the fine would need to be at least in excess of 5 billion to make it monetarily diadvantageous.
The CMA hasnt even given a fine in excess of 1 billion before. There are also many more ways to fight fines in the UK with paths that do lead to and have led to the high court.
The CMA has never handled a big case before (before Brexit).
I agree the CMA will have huge problems with it. But Iāve been reading the law and Iām not seeing anything that prevents MS from closing the deal piece meal as the CMA can only file an injunction against the deal closing in the UK.
Good thing with China approval, a change in leadership at ABK will lead to better relations to China companies and WOW and other will be able to come back to China.
Apparently, they have 2 headquarters one in the UK and the other in Sweden where it seems they were founded.
Yes, but theyve handled anti-trust inveatigations that have had already harmed customers in significant ways and didnt penalize that much.
Theyd need to justify the size of the fine and there are ways they could compare it to fines that have harmed people and markets as opposed to speculative markets and harms.
CAT has full review of substance in fines and penalties cases.
Also I donāt see how the fines would hold up for a merger that didnāt even happen in the UK.
The law isnāt going to allow wiggle room like the CMA does. The exact reading of the law is that MS and ABK didnāt close in the UK.
That is quite easy considering the reason they block is the enormous size of the cloud market in 10 years. Based on such vague principles, they can assume that all UK people will be harmed.