• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)

Do you believe the deal will be approved?


  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

PaintTinJr

Member
...
Page 43
03 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. (Pause).
04 MR WILLIAMS: Just as a matter of principle, to the extent that the evidence is relied
05 upon for the purposes of establishing a technical error or, indeed, an incontrovertible
06 technical error, clear authority there that that may well be an appropriate matter for
07 an authority in the position of CMA to have the opportunity to respond with its own
08 responsive expert evidence. I think Mr Beard has misread a point that we made in
09 our skeleton argument when we referred to the BGL case. What we were grappling
10 with in that reference was the question as to whether that evidence would come from
11 an independent expert or an internal expert, and I'll explain why that matters in
12 a minute. But the point we were making there is if one's dealing with the question as
13 to whether an error's been made, we will have to ask ourselves the question as to
14 whether that ought to be addressed by independent evidence rather than internal
15 evidence, because of the nature of the allegation. So we weren't relying on BGL --
16 THE CHAIRMAN: You weren't making an allegation in any --
17 MR WILLIAMS: The public law sense, yes.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: It's simply saying that the reasoning process in the decision
19 doesn't stack up. It's no more than that, isn't it?
20 MR WILLIAMS: Yes.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: I've had a note that we ought to rise for a transcriber break, and
22 I think we should do that shortly, but I think I am going to need to hear a little bit
23 more about why an independent expert economist could be needed. For my part,
24 I would rather hear from the economist whose reasoning has informed the panel, if it
25 isn't a panel member at all, in terms of how the decision has been put together. I am
26 conscious that it actually takes longer to put things in writing than actually to explain
Page 44

1 matters orally. I should, I think, make clear that this tribunal is quite prepared,
2 provided it is fair and consistent with the spirit of judicial review, to look at different
3 ways of dealing with these questions. For example, speaking entirely for myself,
4 I would not have an issue with the economist involved in the decision being called to
5 explain his or her take on the expert material that was produced, without necessarily
6 being admitted, by Microsoft. In other words, one has not an exchange of papers,
7 which the tribunal reads without being able to ask questions, but one has the person
8 whose thinking is, in part at least, incorporated in the decision, saying: well, I've read
9 the reports that Mr Beard's clients have produced, we disagree. The disagreement
10 is one which is within the reasonable range of experts to disagree, and on that basis,
11 of course, the CMA would prevail.
Now, that's something which I throw out there for
12 consideration, because I don't want the sheer burden of: this is the way we do things
13 normally, to derail better and quicker ways of doing things, if that is a better way of
14 doing it.
15 MR WILLIAMS: I didn't completely follow what you were putting to me, sir. Were
16 you effectively suggesting an appearance at the oral hearing to deal with these
17 matters?
...
The bold sentence lower down was the exact part of the CMC where the CMA second chair had to explain to the CMA first chair that the judge had said they (the CMA) would win arguments of disagreement between experts, even if Microsoft's new experts were included and took a different view to the CMA expert.
 
Last edited:

jm89

Member
If the EC sees mobile, pc, consoles and cloud as the same then asking for remedies is nonsense.
Vestegers comments were interesting, when she was talking about common concerns with the CMA.

Where we did have concerns was in cloud gaming - still a nascent market but one we expect to grow, because it offers many advantages for gamers. For one, it enables gamers to untie games from specific devices - that means more accessibility and lower cost. So cloud gaming deserved an in-depth assessment. This was a common concern because, like us, the CMA focused on this market.

We were worried that Microsoft would make Activision games exclusive to its own cloud gaming service. This would have restrained access to games and strengthened Window's position as an operating system.

 
Last edited:

sainraja

Member
That's fine. I was clarifying as well. 13 years after launch is quite a bit longer was all I was saying. 🤷‍♂️
Yeah, definitely but many things were getting reevaluated on mobile. Some things good and somethings not so good.

It doesn't matter on ipad and iphone because all the browsers are the same, they are all safari with a different theme
There is that too but Chrome is also webkit based and there is still sync/integration with their own desktop counterpart.
 
Last edited:

jm89

Member
The bold sentence lower down was the exact part of the CMC where the CMA second chair had to explain to the CMA first chair that the judge had said they (the CMA) would win arguments of disagreement between experts, even if Microsoft's new experts were included and took a different view to the CMA expert.
The disagreement is one which is within the reasonable range of experts to disagree, and on that basis, of course, the CMA would prevail

CMA:
barack-obama-president-obama.gif
 

Bernoulli

M2 slut
It is hard to know the reasoning behind the EC's decision since we don't have the transparency that the CMA gives us. The Financial Times reported that EC officials said they didn't see cloud gaming as separate from other forms of gaming. That seems damn strange considering they wanted remedies for cloud gaming but nothing else.
EC is known for approving mergers then giving huge fines
Vince Mcmahon Money GIF
 

feynoob

Banned
Last Stand Media is a weird place. Colin creates it and Sacred Symbols to be this different, non pr extension, no buddy buddy with pr, and then they have Defining Duke who is hosted by basically two guys that work for MS pr.
Its all about the money.
None of these big creators about this shit, as long as they get the money.

Its sad, but that is the reality. Money rules.
 

Iced Arcade

Member
IP ban is terrible tbh.

Even ignoring the VPN to workaround, most people have dynamic ip addresses assigned to them and it's not hard getting a different IP address. Sometimes as simple as restarting your router.

Also if the IP address pool is shared between a large population, you could end up banning someone else inadvertently.
oh yeah for sure. just stating there are lots options to moderations. (and this was years ago)
 

jm89

Member
What does this have to do with console warring? They're just hanging out enjoying breakfast... show me the clip where they go key Jim Ryan's car together before lunch :p
Yeah the pic itself isn't console warring.

But just look at the guys there.

You have colteastwood(need i say more?) and the guy in the blue t shirt i've seen him on several xbox podcasts dude has a massive hate boner for playstation.

They are basically embolding these guys buy interacting with them.
 
Last edited:

feynoob

Banned
Yeah the pic itself isn't console warring.

But just look at the guys there.

You have colteastwood(need i say more?) and the guy in the blue t shirt i've seen him on several xbox podcasts dude has a massive hate boner for playstation.

They are basically embolding these guys buy interacting with them.
These are the guys that bring people who spend money on your system.

They are essentially being used as a free advertisement.
 

mckmas8808

Banned
Last Stand Media is a weird place. Colin creates it and Sacred Symbols to be this different, non pr extension, no buddy buddy with pr, and then they have Defining Duke who is hosted by basically two guys that work for MS pr.

Yeah I was shocked to see Defining Duke in there. I had to do a double take.
 

splattered

Member
Yeah the pic itself isn't console warring.

But just look at the guys there.

You have colteastwood(need i say more?) and the guy in the blue t shirt i've seen him on several xbox podcasts dude has a massive hate boner for playstation.

They are basically embolding these guys buy interacting with them.

IMO shouldn't get too invested in what fans of either system say or do... not really worth it. This picture doesn't bother me at all... in fact i wish Sony did the same thing with its fanbase. Not to "embolden" anyone but rather just connect and have friendly dialogue about the industry. I don't think it's a bad thing personally *shrug*
 

Pelta88

Member
The Red Dragon's and Colt Eastwood's out there are over the top annoying, but they enjoy towing the company line. Just ignore them.

Red Dragon used to be a die hard XBOX fan. Colt before Colt bought an XBOX One (His first xb btw) and started shilling.

The difference between them? Red got tired of waiting and started going at XB for wasting his time.
 

Topher

Gold Member
IMO shouldn't get too invested in what fans of either system say or do... not really worth it. This picture doesn't bother me at all... in fact i wish Sony did the same thing with its fanbase. Not to "embolden" anyone but rather just connect and have friendly dialogue about the industry. I don't think it's a bad thing personally *shrug*

I don't see that picture as MS engaging with their fanbase. More like influencing the influencers.

Show me a picture of Greenberg taking feynoob feynoob out to dinner then I'll be impressed. :messenger_beaming:
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
If it’s the case that you can only play cloud games if you own a console, then sure enough cloud is just an extension of that platform. But if you don’t need the console and you can just subscribe to a streaming service and play on your tablet, how is that not a different market? And why is this hard?
MS would likely argue that cloud gaming excluding consoles are a small percentage for their userbase and that it isn't a distinct market. That people switch between local console and cloud. they are likely to have a hard time convincing them that it should be separated like that though. After all they can't argue that it is both different when streaming on console so their share should be lower but also simultaneously argue cloud is the same as the console market. It's either one cloud market that includes console or it's a separate market from console.
 

feynoob

Banned
lol Red Dragon is absolutely just as ridiculous as Colt. both are trash.
Both are top tier clown.
Colt with his click baited video and high praise for xsx power rdna bulshit shit. He looks like someone that is very versed in botlicking competition. then there is the red dragon who consistantantly shits on Xbox like the guy has no life.

On the other hand, you get guys like crapgamers who has no idea what is legion is.
 

Warablo

Member
The vast majority of people don't buy Game Pass Ultimate for the cloud. They do it to have Game Pass on PC AND Xbox.

I personally don't think cloud is its own market right now, but it doesn't matter what I think. Its what the judge and regulators think.
 
Last edited:

Kilau

Gold Member
Everyone knows I love Lulu and want her to take charge of me MS, but her joke tweet wasn’t funny, appropriate or necessary.
 
EC is known for approving mergers then giving huge fines
Vince Mcmahon Money GIF
Yeah, EU antitrust views monopolies as revenue sources, not actual threats to be controlled or prevented. They love getting free money from US tech companies every few years in the form of fines.

Europe is increasingly uncompetitive and sandwiched between the the US and China. And they seem powerless to do anything about it.
 

Astray

Gold Member
Last Stand Media is a weird place. Colin creates it and Sacred Symbols to be this different, non pr extension, no buddy buddy with pr, and then they have Defining Duke who is hosted by basically two guys that work for MS pr.
You can make a playstation or Nintendo-centric show and attract viewers without engaging with their PR depts. Those brands have actual relevance and people who want to discuss their moves and view other people's discussions.

That job is basically impossible for an Xbox-centric podcast. Everyone else is tapped into that pr pipeline of leaks etc and your show would lose by default. Not to mention that for the last few years, the brand has been steadily losing relevance (even their good-to-great games get completely forgotten within weeks). You simply need that connection to survive.

Having viewed the show a few times, Matt and Cog tend to go for a more chill vibe that isn't console war-y, so I'd consider it vastly better than most other Xbox podcasts in that regard.
 

PaintTinJr

Member
1 THE CHAIRMAN: And I think it is appropriate to put on the record that this entire
2 hearing, in terms of what the CMA may or may not do in the future with regard to
3 objecting to the material that Microsoft is relying upon, you have the full reservation
4 of rights in relation to that. You're not going to be shut out from making any points
5 that you appropriately can make now, because we all recognise that this is
6 an attempt to get a grip on an important hearing that, for the reasons I've given, if it
7 can appropriately take place when I would like it to, is what we're trying to achieve.
8 So just one point on the expert evidence. For my part, and I put down my own
9 marker here, I would take some persuading that an independent expert would be
10 appropriate in the circumstances of this case. It seems to me, and the reservation
11 that I just articulated applies in spades, but it seems to me that it would be positively
12 counterproductive to have someone coming in afresh to say: well, here's a decision
13 which I had nothing to do with, but it seems right to me. What we want is someone
14 who can say: this is what the decision was. It was based, as you can see from the
15 terms of the decision, on this material. Here's what it means. The tribunal will be
16 very astute to prevent a back filling of a decision, to articulate that which was not
17 there, to say that it always was. But, frankly, it is either a panel member with the
18 economic credentials or an in-house economist, who can explain what's going on
19 under the bonnet, that this case I suspect needs, if it needs reply economic evidence
20 at all. So again, that's something you will, I'm sure, want to push back on, if so
21 advised in the future, but it seems appropriate that I put down my own marker in
22 regard to the quality of economic evidence that is required if Microsoft's evidence
23 comes in and if the CMA gets the right of reply.
24 MR WILLIAMS: Yes, we've all heard what you've said.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: It's on the record. You don't need to respond.
26 MR WILLIAMS: We were on the subject of steps that we've suggested that
page 55

At the time, I thought Microsoft did okay and held their own, but reading back parts of the transcript I needed verified - to check I'd remembered correctly - the Judge really stacked the deck for the CMA with the comments I've put in bold IMO.
 

PaintTinJr

Member
It is hard to know the reasoning behind the EC's decision since we don't have the transparency that the CMA gives us. The Financial Times reported that EC officials said they didn't see cloud gaming as separate from other forms of gaming. That seems damn strange considering they wanted remedies for cloud gaming but nothing else.
We recently found out that Microsoft withdrew their waiver from the CMA, and it is possible IMO that in doing so the EC might be unable to publish because they are no longer covered by the waiver for CMA info or ...maybe the CMA removed their own waiver from the EC when they heard which way they were leaning, so that Microsoft couldn't get hold of the EC's published document and then use the shared CMA parts as basis for the CAT appeal.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom