Of course not.
I’m saying appeal to cat on grounds that their view that ABK games will go to cloud is irrational in light of the evidence.
Then when it’s remitted the CMA’s whole SLC can only be that MS + ABK will be advantaged for having ABK on Xcloud / Gamepass Ultimate. That SLC is effectively removed with behavioural commitment to not put ABK games on Xcloud / GPU for X years.
Yeah yeah I know haha I’m just being silly, I think maybe it could be a good idea to pull out now and come back later and push when internet backbone worldwide is better and the Xbox division is in a better state, but I obviously don’t have any data like MS.
The reason ABK were talking about their games not coming to cloud is for MS to argue that by bringing them to cloud they’d be offering huge consumer benefit.
The point isn’t that they wouldn’t be brought to cloud by MS but that they would. That’s how MS were trying to argue the RCB. Not the other way round.
Hadn’t read the previous place (do you call it a “thread”?) where this was talked about for a few weeks, and there was over 1,000 new messages.
Skipped them all and found that 10,000+ messages had been reached for the previous place. I see why now…
The CMA are such a pain…
And to think we’re going to have to listen to all of this stuff for even longer now… 
. I’m so fed up with the comments from Xbox haters.
Can’t do this as CMA says independent ABK is necessary for the nascent cloud market to develop naturally. You have to appeal on the basis that CMA thinks ABK games will be on cloud despite contrary evidence.
Then you can offer that as a behavioral remedy.
shinobi’s tweet basically saying “you are allowed to compete but at the same time you must follow Sony’s ‘style’ just because”. yeah sure.
I removed the part about the RCB from my post. It was erroneously added.
At the end of the day I find it insane that 1 country can block a deal like this and that’s it, here’s me in Australia not being able to get benefits from this because another country says no. What happens if EU/US/China eventually approve/allow/don’t sue and UK is the only one, that would be stupid if it takes just 1 country to block it.
But it’s not about what you like it’s about what’s best for the business. ABK is best for Xbox & Microsoft’s business.
You should want them to fight tooth and nail because it makes Xbox stronger.
It’s not about your gaming preferences. A stronger Xbox in the long run is better for your gaming preferences.
1 country hasn’t stopped the deal. This would be a bigger issue if the USA FTC or whatever is called had blocked it. If the EU and the USA pass it then I think MS will push ahead regardless
And before anyone says I’m not a legal expert, I see no reason why MS couldn’t just then ban all sales of Activision games either physical or on the UK digital stores fronts. Show the UK and CMA up and see how the UK fans then react, to the CMA decision to protect the cloud.
UK will fine MS 10-20 billion a year.
It doesn’t work like that. If they merge without the CMA approval then they are liable for a fine equivalent to 10% of their global turnover per annum.
It would also mean MS would not ever be able to complete a merger again as they’d lose any regulatory trust worldwide.
Their argument for an appeal beyond the CAT or an appeal to uk politicians might be that the CMA are overreaching by blocking a global deal on the basis of a nascent market. It’s a logical argument but they’d have to win that argument and that is probably years away in the court of appeal.
How if you’re not selling the product in the UK and the UK is no longer part of the Single market. I’m not being cocky just don’t see how the CMA can reach outside the UK
Because the approval required from a regulator is to allow a merger and continued trade in that market. MS as an entity could pull all their trade from the U.K. market. But that’s 20-30% of their revenue gone and obviously a complete mess for them for other reasons.
Or they could close and ignore the cma and take the 10% revenue fine on an annual basis and accept they can’t ever complete a merger again. Which obviously isn’t an option either.
You aren’t asking for permission to sell ABK products in the U.K. you are asking for permission to merge and continue trading period.
Like I say there is a longer argument about this. There is maybe even some way they could try and argue they could hive off ABK in some way to protect uk cloud consumers in a way the cma are comfortable with. But the latter requires a new cma process and agreement. The former argument will need to go to a higher court than the CAT and will be long - very long. Without guarantee.
A second avenue of appeal is CMA ignoring RCBS.
Both with Nintendo, which was hand waved away, and also failure to acknowledge that Xbox games will also come to Boosteroid and Nvidia as a result of the deal.
We found that most of these did not amount to RCBs under the Enterprise Act 2002 (the Act). In relation to the agreements with Nintendo and cloud gaming services providers, we found that nothing about the Merger—such as any potential changes in the market structure or commercial incentives that arise from Microsoft and Activision ceasing to be distinct—would increase Activision’s incentive to enter into these agreements relative to the situation pre-Merger. To the contrary, being part of a corporate group that owns a competing console (Xbox) and cloud gaming service (Xbox Cloud Gaming) would suggest that Activision’s incentive to enter into these agreements would be significantly reduced post-Merger. There is also considerable uncertainty in the scope, enforceability, and potential benefits brought about by these agreements. Microsoft itself acknowledged in the context of its agreements with cloud gaming platforms that such a rapidly evolving market could give rise to unanticipated and unforeseeable future events over a ten-year period beyond its control.
Xbox games being on Boosteroid and Geforce Now is a RCB that would 100% not be there in the counter factual. Also since CMA themselves said that COD is not for Switch, the contract with Nintendo is 100% a RCB that’s not present in the counter factual.
Also the mobile app store is a RCB, but since that’s a promise without a contract, it’s unlikely to be held up in an appeal.
Yeah - MS here we have all these 10 year contracts. CMA - you don’t need a merger for that. ABK - yes we do. CMA - don’t believe you.
It’s an absolute nonsense position from the cma to suggest that the benefits offered by the deal that they acknowledge aren’t happening now - could just happen anyway.
A clear lack of understanding. Cloud brings the game to switch - I doubt there is any plan for a native version. But clearly ABK won’t do that unless they are part of MS as they don’t have the incentive.
Bottom line for me is that the CMA had to overlook RCBs to outright refuse the deal and that’s what they have done. But it’s a weak argument. The problem is that I don’t think it meets the irrationality definition for CAT.
I wish it didn’t, but with recent developments looks like it does…zzzzz
Thanks for explaining , but I still think MS should push ahead, to use Cloud as means to block the deal in the UK is a joke and we all know it
Its like the Arron Banks libel case when everyone could see the initial judgment was a joke
Yes the system is completely corrupt. But I think some commentators are overlooking the fact this is Microsoft, not some nobody company easily bullied by British civil servants who’ve abused their power.
The CMA’s ruling is very serious & undermines the entire system of regulatory approval. If you go back & view the CMA’s origins & how they got to their position as ‘kingmakers’ in global deals, it would never ever had happened had they been equally obtuse & outright corrupt in their rulings from minute one.
American companies would have used typical British lingua aka ‘bugger off’.
So my position is “wait & see” because this is a 70 billion dollar deal between two American companies in a post-Brexit & what increasingly is starting to appear like a post-Globalist world.
I mean when people state China’s regulators also need to give approval, it really lays out the fundamentally flawed & antiquated system which Microsoft has to navigate through. Times have changed so I wouldn’t be surprised if we see some ‘unthinkable’ yet actually logical developments in the coming months. Such as Microsoft making decisions specific to the UK.
People who shout down such possibilities don’t quite grasp how big this deal is & how important it is for Microsoft & tech in general.
So we know they’re gonna appeal and everyone is talking about what they can do, but I would love to know what is the first step now? submit something along the lines of here’s why this is wrong xyz to appeal I assume and how long does that take and is it public.