Activision (ABK)

What IP Should MS/ABK Bring Back?


  • Total voters
    15
You are looking too much of a passing statement i made about size of my company. It was reference as I was surprise size is less than one company , amid a fairly huge one.

the underlying thing I was saying is i was surprise by the size of the game industry is in UK.
you could be right Uk has highest employment base on gaming. Again, I am pointing out i expect much bigger.

it’s not a negative point, it was an interesting observation.

You're right, 27,000 is rookie numbers, f***in step it up UK.
 
If anyone wants to delve deeper…

The CMA grants consent for Microsoft to acquire ABK (this was required due to the original deal being blocked):
The CMA accepts the remedies/undertakings offered by MS:

CMA getting kinda sassy…spicy, overdramatic?


Sarah Cardell, Chief Executive of the CMA said:

The CMA is resolute in its determination to prevent mergers that harm competition and deliver bad outcomes for consumers and businesses. We take our decisions free from political influence and we won't be swayed by corporate lobbying.

We delivered a clear message to Microsoft that the deal would be blocked unless they comprehensively addressed our concerns and stuck to our guns on that.

With the sale of Activision's cloud streaming rights to Ubisoft, we've made sure Microsoft can't have a stranglehold over this important and rapidly developing market. As cloud gaming grows, this intervention will ensure people get more competitive prices, better services and more choice. We are the only competition agency globally to have delivered this outcome.

But businesses and their advisors should be in no doubt that the tactics employed by Microsoft are no way to engage with the CMA
. Microsoft had the chance to restructure during our initial investigation but instead continued to insist on a package of measures that we told them simply wouldn't work. Dragging out proceedings in this way only wastes time and money.

Martin Coleman, Chair of the Independent Panel who reviewed the original Microsoft deal, said:

Cloud gaming is an important new way for gamers to access games and this deal could have seriously undermined its potential development. On that we, the European Commission and the US Federal Trade Commission are in full agreement. Where we differ is on how we solve that problem. We rejected a solution put to us by the parties which would have left Microsoft with too much control.

We now have a new transaction in which the cloud distribution of Activision games, old and new, is taken away from Microsoft and put into the hands of Ubisoft, an independent party who is committed to widening access to the games. That's better for competition, better for consumers and better for economic growth.
 

Microsoft said it was "grateful for the CMA's thorough review and decision".

"We have now crossed the final regulatory hurdle to close this acquisition, which we believe will benefit players and the gaming industry worldwide," Vice Chair and President Brad Smith said.

Activision Blizzard said: "The CMA's official approval is great news for our future with Microsoft, and we look forward to becoming part of the Xbox Team."

The European Commission said the new commitments given by Microsoft to the CMA did not interfere with its EU commitments.


The European Commission on Friday ruled out a review of the merger because, it said, it did not constitute a new deal.

"The CMA's official approval is great news for our future with Microsoft, and we look forward to becoming part of the Xbox Team," Activision said.

Despite the FTC proceedings, Microsoft and Activision are expected to close their transaction, which was first announced in January 2022, in the coming days and ahead of a final deadline on October 18.

"Clearly we are mindful of the global nature" of these deals, Cardell said in Friday's interview with the FT. "At the end of the day we will take the decisions we need to take for the UK."
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Swede
From the lawyer…

The merger is done and nothing will change that, but for those interested in the process and potentially getting more info and insights from the industry, there are still some interesting topics to follow during the next months:

- The FTC appeal in front of the Ninth Circuit: oral arguments are expected to happen in December 2023.

- The FTC resuming the administrative process in January/February 2024.

- The gamer's lawsuit: February 5th 2024 is the placeholder trial date for it.

- The implementation of the different remedies: the ECcommitments and the CMA undertakings, including the original cloud agreements (Ubitus, Nivida, Boosteroid and Nware) + the Ubisoft Agreement.

- The annual reports about the implementation of the corresponding remedies: we should get the first one on March 31st 2024 through the CMA.

- The execution of the Nintendo, Sony and CWAagreements.

- Any potential conflicts or issues that could arise due to all of the above.

Some of them are likely to be dropped (the FTC case or the gamers' lawsuit) but at least the first 6 months post transaction (probably more) could still be entertaining. :p
 

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission said on Friday it remained focused on its appeal opposing Xbox maker Microsoft's now-closed $69 billion deal to buy Activision but would "assess" the company's agreement with Ubisoft.

"Microsoft and Activision's new agreement with Ubisoft presents a whole new facet to the merger that will affect American consumers, which the FTC will assess as part of its ongoing administrative proceeding," added spokeswoman Victoria Graham. "The FTC continues to believe this deal is a threat to competition."
 


 
  • Agree
Reactions: karmakid

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission said on Friday it remained focused on its appeal opposing Xbox maker Microsoft's now-closed $69 billion deal to buy Activision but would "assess" the company's agreement with Ubisoft.

"Microsoft and Activision's new agreement with Ubisoft presents a whole new facet to the merger that will affect American consumers, which the FTC will assess as part of its ongoing administrative proceeding," added spokeswoman Victoria Graham. "The FTC continues to believe this deal is a threat to competition."
Looking like clowns the first time round wasn't enough. Lol.
 



The United Kingdom's decision to greenlight Microsoft's $68.7 billion deal with Activision Blizzard is reason enough to stop the Ninth Circuit from reviving a failed bid to pause the merger while it's being challenged by gamers and the Federal Trade Commission, the tech behemoth has argued.
 

- Phil Spencer, who joined Microsoft as an intern in 1988 and rose up to lead the games business, was instrumental in the Activision Blizzard purchase.

- Gaming has long been a secondary business for Microsoft, which dominates in PC software.

- "It is an extraordinary amount of money for Microsoft, whose core business is not gaming," said Don Coyner, who was the first person to work on marketing inside the company's Xbox unit.
 

Nadella discussed his thought process for acquisitions while speaking at the Axel Springer Award ceremony in Berlin on Tuesday. Axel Springer is Insider's parent company.

"To me there are a couple of criteria," Nadella said. "First thing is, is this something that Microsoft can add real value to? If you take LinkedIn or GitHub or Activision or Mojang or what have you, they all have to make sense that Microsoft has some unique contribution that we can make both because of our technology, our brand, our go-to-market to the asset. Otherwise, why do it? And then of course at the end of the day, it has to make financial sense as well."

Nadella has spoken before about the importance of gaming to Microsoft's future.

"As a large company, I think it's critical to define the core, but it's important to make smart choices on other businesses in which we can have fundamental impact and success," he wrote in a memo to employees a few months after he became CEO in 2014. "The single biggest digital life category, measured in both time and money spent, in a mobile-first world is gaming"
 
Am I the only one who thinks this will have a lot less impact than most people think?

It will help MS sell tons more Game Pass subs and probably some hardware. They'll also own a cash cow, which is a big win. Meanwhile, team blue can go about their lives without any real change. They can buy COD and other games and play them on PS hardware.

It is a smart move by MS and will help them, but I don't see it completely changing the console wars.
 
Am I the only one who thinks this will have a lot less impact than most people think?

It will help MS sell tons more Game Pass subs and probably some hardware. They'll also own a cash cow, which is a big win. Meanwhile, team blue can go about their lives without any real change. They can buy COD and other games and play them on PS hardware.

It is a smart move by MS and will help them, but I don't see it completely changing the console wars.
I don’t see many games from their catalog mentioned by anyone or hype for them. Like it’s cool to get cod on GP, definetly Tony Hawk for sure, but I can’t see a new crash game, like the only jewel of creativeness would be that one dev that make it takes two
 
Am I the only one who thinks this will have a lot less impact than most people think?

It will help MS sell tons more Game Pass subs and probably some hardware. They'll also own a cash cow, which is a big win. Meanwhile, team blue can go about their lives without any real change. They can buy COD and other games and play them on PS hardware.

It is a smart move by MS and will help them, but I don't see it completely changing the console wars.

I agree but I don't think the acquisition was made "win a console war". Personally, I think the King part of the acquisition was their main goal. MS wanted a larger presence in mobile and boy did they get it. Plus King is meg profitable.

 
  • Agree
Reactions: Kerosene31
I agree but I don't think the acquisition was made "win a console war". Personally, I think the King part of the acquisition was their main goal. MS wanted a larger presence in mobile and boy did they get it. Plus King is meg profitable.

That and COD mobile. Warzone Mobile will also be huge.
 
I agree but I don't think the acquisition was made "win a console war". Personally, I think the King part of the acquisition was their main goal. MS wanted a larger presence in mobile and boy did they get it. Plus King is meg profitable.

And still COD dwarfs it.
 
Am I the only one who thinks this will have a lot less impact than most people think?

It will help MS sell tons more Game Pass subs and probably some hardware. They'll also own a cash cow, which is a big win. Meanwhile, team blue can go about their lives without any real change. They can buy COD and other games and play them on PS hardware.

It is a smart move by MS and will help them, but I don't see it completely changing the console wars.
Maybe... but considering how scared Sony got, I'd think it's a much bigger deal than what playstation fans care to admit... or maybe Sony miscalculated the danger in the acquisition idk
 
Am I the only one who thinks this will have a lot less impact than most people think?

It will help MS sell tons more Game Pass subs and probably some hardware. They'll also own a cash cow, which is a big win. Meanwhile, team blue can go about their lives without any real change. They can buy COD and other games and play them on PS hardware.

It is a smart move by MS and will help them, but I don't see it completely changing the console wars.
Guess it depends what impact people think it will have. Can't say I have seen much "Playstation is dead" or "console war over" type of stuff.

Most of what I have seen has been about the Acti games coming to GP and the buzz that has generated.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: karmakid and Kvally