She said they only block rarely, in about 1% of cases. Well, they do it about 5 times a year, the EC only about once a year.
So this makes it ok because they don’t do it often? I’d love to see if they’ve done this sort of defending of their decision in past blocks. It’s funny seeing them be weirdly defensive when clearly a lot of people think they’re wrong both in legal crowds and just common sense people.
She certainly sounds stubborn just like Lina Khan.
This is not acceptable behaviour from a publicly funded body.
I fear it’s at a point where there is no route for her to backdown. They’ve dug in too far now.
I suspect they are regretting their decision but I don’t see a viable unwind for them. They can’t in reality just overturn a decision made by their independent panel. They can’t realistically discuss remedies again as it’s out of process.
I think the only way out for them is via a massive loss in the CAT. They can then hide behind their legal loss. But other than that I don’t see them being able to change bar resignations….
Just buy CMA Bruce Wayne style and get this done!
Some people across the gaming community like to think they KNOW exactly what’s going on and speak in absolutes. This is despite this whole thing proving that no one really has a clue what’s going on.
When something they said absolutely could not happen, happens or the opposite it makes no difference they just continue on doing the same thing with the next step in the process and will likely do it until MS close or walk away.
These are public officials. Following process. If they were to turn round and say ‘hey sorry we got it wrong’ in essence a number of them will have to resign.
There isn’t any physical obstacle to stop them changing their mind it’s just hard to see realistically in the context of where we are and their role and remit how they could without massively damaging their credibility and in effect needing new leadership.
For example the decision was made by their independent expert panel. In the U.K. it would be somewhat shocking for the CMA to just override that at a whim and reverse it. It’s not how our public sector works.
yeah i actually agree with you to a certain extent. It seems like Sarah Caldwell is in a similar boat to Lina Khan in the US FTC. Where they are just going to go down the with ship as they think they have no other choice.
Although I do think the CMA could still adjust course and not lose face. However, I don’t see the CAT tribunal going well for them. There arguments for cloud just aren’t defensible.
I think Sarah Caldwell has to much pride and will inevitably lose her job. Not immediately but someone is going to have to fall on the sword as this is way to political and MS isn’t going to drop it. Even the UK government isn’t backing the CMA really.
I agree they can and should change, but at this point you have the head of cma reassuring their position even after all the discussion of the baseless block. So what is this? A sign that they are going to die in this hill?shouldnt she had been adapted her speech if they want to solve the issue?
That is why I think if talks with gov fails they should just close it regardless to see at how far CMA is going, and let the appeal running in parallel. This is probably the most scrutinized deal ever, accepted over 40 jurisdictions and only blocked by a single regulator based on a big nothing burger. Ms should just call a day on CMA and pay to see.
Well the US system is way easier as Lina Khan will lose the injunction and that will be it. It won’t ever go to trial. As US ftc has the same issues as the CMA legally speaking the arguments just aren’t sound or good arguments. A high school debate student could poke holes in them. The high paid lawayers MS and ABK use are going to have a field day as we saw at the first hearing for the tribunal
You can always admit you made a mistake and work to correct it. Always.
It takes a really weak person to be unable to do that.
I was unsure before, but I believe now that Microsoft will close this deal one way or another. The only way this deal fall through is if Activision back out, and I doubt they will either. I think they will follow procedure and wait for CAT if they don’t make some kind of deal this week(likely scenario as Caldwell is as stubborn as Lina Khan), but if CAT rules against them( which I think they won’t, but you never know), they will still close it by doing the nuclear option(pulling out activison out of the U.K.). Microsoft is aware of the lukewarm support the UK government have for the CMA, and how this can cause political/economic (in terms of portraying itself as a business friendly country) issues that the UK doesn’t want to deal with right now. Approvals from the EC and SAMR really gave them the leverage/advantage as of this moment.
Read my post again. Nowhere do I say what you claim.
I’m talking about the fact they have dug in too far. Of course in theory they can reverse the decision. But I can’t viably see a route for them to do that to save their face. That’s my point.
At this point nobody knows what’s gonna happen. The CMA could fold or they could stand on their decision.
First I’ve seen the letter Foss mentioned.
That’s bonkers from Cardell. A free and open market is ABK controlling their content vs Microsoft? What?
That doesn’t make sense. If you apply that then the CMA can’t accept any merger or acquisition ever because a free and open market (which is meaningless) is the opposite of that.
However, reinforces my point. CMA aren’t going to voluntarily change anything. They’ve made their decisions and are just going to bat for it.
Honestly to me, this mostly just feels like she is setting the table to just let the cards fall as they may.
It feels like momentum is swinging toward the CAT overturning it and it being over with, so why tip your hand either way. You hold your position, it gets overturned and the system “works”. You dont admit defeat, you dont admit mistakes, and business continues as usual. People will forget about all of this in a month because the deal went through and no one cares anymore.
Straying from the path you set yourself down does more damage to their credibility than just letting it play out.
This sounds like
The heads of CMA come off as very insecure about their decision. First going after EU, then Bokkerink writing his opinion piece in Telegraph and now this.
Massively so. They are sounding ridiculous with each defence of their decision.