In regards to a UK exit I don’t even know what that would look like or to what extent would be necessary. I’d imagine MS would push it back to the CMA or CAT and be like “We will cease whatever operations in the UK you deem necessary, choose.”
Just theoretical now, what would “the world” have to say if the UK says MS has to cease every single operation in the UK or else? Who looks worse when this comes under global scrutiny? Keep in mind this is over cloud gaming and a video game. Are the CMA’s findings going to hold up with the world’s eyes on it? We can assume it would only get to this point with a EU pass w/ all other regulators except the FTC passing it (FTC losing in court?). Now angering the US would be a thing but how much can they do with the collusion thing hanging in the background? Republicans would jump at the chance to strip power from the FTC if the US went to bat for the UK on this.
It’s wild how they took every comment by those against the deal at face value while hand waving anyone who was for it, I also feel bad for the small streamers they signed the 10 year deals with, they did it because this was the only way to have some success and get big games on their service, the moment Sony enters Cloud they will automatically be on top in terms of market share and a lot of these smaller providers will die out.
But anyway, if deal doesn’t happen, will be interesting to see how Microsoft chooses to compete and I’m hoping they choose the nuclear option
Go after most major AAA games in development right now and get some spin-off COD exclusive games lol, just pay these studios and ABK well for them, maybe if Microsoft does this then regulators will start to care about moneyhats in the console market
Weakening and crippling big tech with hardline regulations won’t work in the long run. In the end of the day, money talks. These companies are too important as our sort of leverage against geopolitical rivals. There will be political push backs eventually, and the tide will change again, but for now, we are at the stage of “big tech bad”. Microsoft has to figure out how to navigate through these times.
I guess they can just continue to operate just like they currently are, they’re making like 16 billion dollars a quarter if I’m correct, I just hope Xbox doesn’t become a non factor to them again and maybe take consoles a bit more seriously, take a good look at what worked during the 360 days and maybe try to replicate that while also doing what they’re currently doing.
Gaming will always be one of the core pillars of Microsoft. Xbox is the only mainstream entertainment brand they have and they need it to appeal to the more “hip” crowd. Plus gaming is one of the areas where they can demonstrate the advancement of AI. As long as Satya and Phil are there, gaming will continue to get investments, im not worried about that. Microsoft has a ton of cash and they need to diversify their business and not rely on AI or cloud.
I hope if Microsoft continue to push the deal in the UK they don’t use the stick option. Can’t see it working as we’ve seen with everything that happened during brexit. The carrot would be a much better option
Well that is the remedy guidelines. Written in 2018. They didn’t invent them for this deal. They are tough and that’s what they require. It’s not like this wasn’t pointed out for ages. MS seem to be well short in addressing them . It’s slightly surprising but like I say it seems they expected the CMA to blink inspite of all the evidence they wouldn’t.
It’s interesting that of the five analysts polled three said it should have gone through, one thought it wouldn’t, the last that cloud will take years to get there and that gaming is constantly evolving that the market is so dynamic there’s no way to predict it. This was my biggest critic of the ruling, the CMA have blocked on the most tenuous of suppositions in a tiny market with no clear outcome
The CMA is also supposed to compare RCB to any SLC, and in this case it’s clear RCB far and away outweigh any current and future SLC in theb cloud gaming matket.
The problem is and again this is all documented in 2018 the RCBs need to be a direct result of the merger. And in this instance they are all a byproduct of it. There is in theory nothing to stop them happening now. There is no structural reason the deal is required for the RCBs to occur.
One could indeed say that MS and ABK could deliver those benefits without introducing the SLC.
The fact is they won’t. And it’s true that the CMA have ignored them. I think it’s also true that those RCBs were all incentives for regulators rather than genuine outcomes of the deal itself.
The guidelines do not call for the CMA to analyze whether the RCBs *could happen without the acquisition going through. Their guidelines are just to compare the RCBs against the SLC which the CMA has refused to do. The CMA selectively refuses to perform the job that they have been outlined to do. You cant just point to their guidelines from 2018 and say “well they did their job” when they ignored 3/4 of their job.
Microsoft wouldnt know they were necessary until the findings and waited for the CMA and other regulators to advise. Its on them to identify the issues and Microsoft to act.
Since January 2022 they negotiated with Sony for PSN+ until they stopped talking in September.
They also made the offer to Nintendo in January.
Then they spoke to Nvidia, Steam and then everyone else.
Theres a clear timeline. They’ve been talking to parties all year.
When you have their level of power, activist employees with an agenda and want to show the world that power nothing was stopping them from blocking, still real interested in knowing what the FTC and the CMA talked about prior to the CMA’s decision but of course in their view nobodies like us shouldn’t know the details of that meeting.
I have no idea if the person assigned is a good or bad sign. I do like that someone was assigned in a timely manner. We’ll also get to see him rule for or against big tech very soon in that Apple case
