• 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.

The FTC has reportedly stepped in to review Microsoft Activision Blizzard deal

IbizaPocholo

NeoGAFs Kent Brockman

As reported by Bloomberg, the FTC will investigate the deal to determine whether the takeover of the publishing giant constitutes unfair competition, according to a person speaking to the organisation anonymously.

It is understood that the deal will not be reviewed by the Justice Department, which typically works with the FTC to rule on similar cases.

Microsoft declined to comment about the review when reached out to by Bloomberg. The FTC also didn’t respond to a request for comment.
 

lh032

I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
Sony, time for shopping spree

kiefer sutherland fangirl challenge GIF
 

As reported by Bloomberg, the FTC will investigate the deal to determine whether the takeover of the publishing giant constitutes unfair competition, according to a person speaking to the organisation anonymously.

It is understood that the deal will not be reviewed by the Justice Department, which typically works with the FTC to rule on similar cases.

Microsoft declined to comment about the review when reached out to by Bloomberg. The FTC also didn’t respond to a request for comment.
That was expected. It’s a big acquisition but there’s no case to argument monopolistic practices.
 

reksveks

Member
Alot of different threads on this acquisition but going to add this here for some interesting context.


The decision not to sue — without even a vote on the issue — is a major setback for the antitrust agenda of FTC Chair Lina Khan, an Amazon critic who had been urged by fellow anti-monopolists to block the online giant from buying the storied film and television studio.



And it may not be the last such frustration: Khan has lacked a Democratic majority on the five-person commission since October, and solid GOP opposition in the Senate has blocked confirmation of President Joe Biden’s nominee to fill the FTC’s vacant seat.https://t.co/NCBeo4L4PZ
 
Last edited:

Chiggs

Member
Alot of different threads on this acquisition but going to add this here for some interesting context.


Khan getting a taste of how the real world works.

She always struck me as an ideologue blowhard who is more interested in being right than effective. The turnstile keeps on turning.
 

kingfey

Banned
Khan getting a taste of how the real world works.

She always struck me as an ideologue blowhard who is more interested in being right than effective. The turnstile keeps on turning.
That is what happens, when you try to BR your way to position.
These guys have resources, which her department doesnt have. Not to mention, they control her superiors.
 

Magic Carpet

Gold Member
I read something about elizabeth warren making 5 billion the cap on tech acquisition In the future.
 
Last edited:

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
Ok, let’s get this moving now I want more games On me game pass please uncy Phil. I’ll blast through a few cod campaigns and play some Diablo 2 remake thanks again.
 

kingfey

Banned
I hope your right. It reads like they could bust anything at any time even after the fact.
They are toothless. It's political BR.

There is still Pelosi and Schumer, who are in bed with these guys. Losing these money, means the other party will have strong chance to take the charge next election.
 

reksveks

Member
I hope your right. It reads like they could bust anything at any time even after the fact.
The FTC can split up anything at the moment but its a pain in the arse.

Looking into the actual bill here : https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/SIL22464.pdf
The purposes of this Act are to
(1) ban the most anticompetitive acquisitions;
(2) restore and protect the competitive process;
(3) amend section 7A to empower the antitrust agencies to reject acquisitions before consummation through agency action
(4) reduce the burdens of contemporary merger litigation placed on Federal and State officials;
(5) establish a greater role for Federal agencies and State attorneys general in the merger-review process;
(6) establish procedures for retrospective
It looks like its about reversing who is actually litigating allowing the FTC block deals first and then it gets reviewed.
DOMINANT FIRM.—The term ‘dominant firm’ means a person that
(A) has annual revenues exceeding $5,000,000,000 (as adjusted and published for each fiscal year beginning after September 30, 2022, in the same manner as provided in section 8(a)(5) to reflect the percentage change in the gross national product for such fiscal year compared to the gross national product for the year ending September 30, 2021)
(B) is a financial institution, an equity fund, or a registered investment adviser under section 203 of the Investment Advisers Act of 21 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b–3), if the party or the ultimate parent entity of such party has greater than $10,000,000,000 (as so adjusted and published) in capitalization, commitments, or assets under management; or
(C) has greater than 20 percent of any relevant market.

This is the bit about the size of the company.
- 5bn in annual revenue
- Effectively Market Cap or assets of greater than 10bn
- 20% of the market

Sony, MS, Google, Apple, Amazon, Meta would all be above this AFAIK.

I think it would be great to Hoeglaw to run through it on a YT video.

Generally think this bill probably won't go through, i still have faith in the Open App Market Act though, there is divisions in "Big Tech" on that one.
 
That bill won't pass. For one it's Elizabeth Warren. For two, it's Elizabeth Warren.

Beyond that, some of the terms there seem almost too strict and punitive. Rolling back previous mergers & acquisitions almost feels like a case of double jeopardy (or some equivalent), especially when they don't seem to state what conditions would determine a merger or acquisition is now "harmful".

Even more importantly, none of this really means that much when a handful of investment firms own stock in like 99% of all of these companies anyway, and a lot of these companies own stock in each other! Going back and breaking up a merger or acquisition isn't going to change either of those things.

And I hate to be that guy, but we already know that a lot of politicians (regardless of party) are compromised and would have no issue weakening the financial power of Western tech organizations if that makes it easier for investors and companies of foreign government to buy up shares or buy them outright. Especially considering that certain countries are allowed to buy and invest into American corporations, assets, real estate etc. but the inverse for whatever reason is not allowed (when you think it would be, all things being fair).

Basically this stuff needs to be very carefully looked at by parties with more neutral stakes, to determine if things are far, not overzealous, etc.
 

ManaByte

Member
That bill won't pass. For one it's Elizabeth Warren. For two, it's Elizabeth Warren.

Beyond that, some of the terms there seem almost too strict and punitive. Rolling back previous mergers & acquisitions almost feels like a case of double jeopardy (or some equivalent), especially when they don't seem to state what conditions would determine a merger or acquisition is now "harmful".

Also her definition of "harmful" is likely vastly different than people wanting to stop the merger to keep COD off Gamepass.
 

As reported by Bloomberg, the FTC will investigate the deal to determine whether the takeover of the publishing giant constitutes unfair competition, according to a person speaking to the organisation anonymously.

It is understood that the deal will not be reviewed by the Justice Department, which typically works with the FTC to rule on similar cases.

Microsoft declined to comment about the review when reached out to by Bloomberg. The FTC also didn’t respond to a request for comment.
It is interesting how gamers tend to not know how processes work. The FTC nor the DOJ just steps in. They actually have a formal way of communicating on who will handle a case, neither of them actually can just step in and take over a case. From what they look at, to how an agency takes a case.... so much misinformation for a process that the DOJ and FTC specifically lists how and what they look for.
 
And I hate to be that guy, but we already know that a lot of politicians (regardless of party) are compromised and would have no issue weakening the financial power of Western tech organizations if that makes it easier for investors and companies of foreign government to buy up shares or buy them outright. Especially considering that certain countries are allowed to buy and invest into American corporations, assets, real estate etc. but the inverse for whatever reason is not allowed (when you think it would be, all things being fair).
It actually kinda annoys me that I can buy stock in Activision, Microsoft and Gamestop, but not Nintendo, Konami, or Namco-Bandai on seemingly-similar but apparently distinct markets. (Yet someone who has way more money than I do will just work around Wall Street's arbitrary limitations just so they can try shorting Nintendo and fail, losing money on a ridiculous gamble betting millions of dollars on a dumb bet on Nintendo sales.)

Anyway, I doubt the FTC will stop this merger after Disney-FOX went by without a hitch.
 
Top Bottom