UK CMA Delays Decision On Xbox ActiBlizz Deal Until August

So like the FTC tried to do, it looks like the CMA are trying to use the deadline against MS, hoping the renegotiation between MS and Activision fails and they don't have to deal with it anymore.

CMA are not acting in good faith. First they agree to renegotiate then they say a new investigation will launch.
Now they want to move everything past the 18th which they know is when MS would have to pay 3 bn out of pocket.
They tried to move the court date past July and weren't granted that so now they do it outside court.
MS probably shouldn't have agreed to this.
Then again, their lawyers know better.

Totally understandable that they can’t do it in 4 days… but 6 weeks seems a bit much (as like ‘everyone’ else on here not knowing what’s involved in the process). Still they do state they fully intend to finish well before that.

Can they close over in the interim? No one seems to know

@OrfeasDourvas Remember, it was Microsoft not the CMA who chose to go down the appeal process path, NOT to see if they could renegotiate a concession. None of us are privy to all the laws and regulations around the processes, but it does seem to me that MS could have tried to negotiate a new deal at anytime after the original one was rejected if they are able to do so now. Considering the deadline MS should have done this weeks ago.
But I expect MS will close the deal providing the FTC appeal fails of course before the 18th, otherwise the deals dead. MS will work around the CMA, they can’t work around the FTC.

They need 6 weeks haha...so basically they will make Thier mind up in a day(pass it they are just trying to save face) then just let it sit their collecting dust...then release a statement about they made concessions to appease Thier concerns bla bla

@S1ayeR74 Yeah, this is what we know for sure. As it stands:
1) MS can close the deal tomorrow if they so choose.
2) If they don't close by the 18th they pay an extra 3 billion.
3) It has already been reported that ABK stock is being removed from NASDAQ by Monday.
So, it's a certainty it's closing this weekend.

They will close regardless what the CMA timeline is, as long as the 9th circuit does not extend the temporary block in the US.

I agree with you, @S1ayeR74, undertaking this process within 4 days is probably too much, but that assumes that the remedies that Microsoft have proposed were submitted in the last couple of days. The strong likelihood is that the CMA are apparently now considering were submitted potentially months ago when they first announced their blocking of the deal. It seems highly improbable that Microsoft waited until they won the FTC case before submission of the remedies. If this is not the case, then Microsoft should consider getting new lawyers, as potential remedies should have been identified and submitted weeks ago.

Personally, I have little doubt that the CMA and the FTC are in cahoots, and have been all along. Truth be told, the CMA are likely to be doing the FTC's bidding, though quite why, I have never really understood, but the UK are often seen tugging at the coattails of the US, and I guess that might have something to do with it. And so, with the FTC's attempts to stall the case having been defeated in Court, it now falls to the CMA to stall the case beyond the 18th of July in the hope that Microsoft and ABK cannot come to terms, and they decide to walk away from the deal (which is not something that I foresee as both have invested time and money into this, and both want the deal to proceed (albeit for differing reasons)).

Now, I know I can be a cynic, but that is a life-learned experience, however, I have always felt that there was some collusion between the FTC and the CMA, something I have previously said, and which now appears maybe borne out by the twenty odd emails back and forth between the CMA and the FTC, something that is apparently not permitted once an investigation has been formally started. Fuller details of these communications may come out today at the Congressional hearing, but having seen Khan's obfuscation we may not get the details right away.

Regardless, I think that the deal will be finalised either this weekend or Monday morning. I think Microsoft will circumnavigate the UK if that is what is ultimately required, but I highly doubt that will end up being the case. If the deal is closed by next week, the CMA will have failed in their endeavours to scupper the deal, and so will capitulate and allow the deal to go through in the UK too. They will say it was just good prudence, and may even be able to claim that some (very minor) alteration to the deal is a victory for the consumer and is a consequence to their oversight, but in truth it will be about saving face, little more.

I'm hoping that we do get to see the contents of these emails between the FTC and the CMA though, because they could be very revealing indeed, and potentially they could be uncomfortable revelations for both Regulators...

Both the FTC by 'appealing' the decision, and the CMA by effectively sitting back and saying 'we can't decide in that time' are looking at that deadline and knowing that, unless Microsoft can get an extension, which they more than likely WILL, due to the fact it's obvious the regulators are stalling due to the fact the date isn't indefinite, they can just wait a week and then 'apologize' as they finally get their finger out of their ear and "approve" the deal too late.

What Microsoft did with Canada during the court case proved what the FTC/CMA are doing. The CMA keep pushing 'Not until August', 'It'll take too long' etc, since, and I'll be honest, if the deal falls through on the 18th, I bet you 10 of anyone's money they'll have a 'decision' come the 19th, and apologize for the delay.

I predict the appeal in thr USA has a 65% chance of being denied and 35% chance thr appeal is granted. Just a little under 50/50.

The FTCs main weapon will be confusion, hence the many points of appeal. Usually you stick to one or two rock solid issues and drill them home so there is no doubt at all you are correct. Not the scattergun approach the FTC have took.

Confusion can win as a tactic for appeal, as the judges only have a few hours to decide.

Today should be interesting.

The CMA I honestly have no idea what it means. Maybe they have a gentleman's agreement to close. If not, I can't see the deal closing this weekend or Monday.

A short 6 week extension to the merger agreement seems more likely, if the CMA have signalled they are likely to approve the new concessions. But who knows at this point lol

@S1ayeR74 MS could not negotiate directly with the CMA due to their decision to issue a formal blockage of the deal. Their only legal option available was to appeal to the CAT.

@Fiendish-Beaver An awful lot of assumptions all round. All we can go on are the facts which are that MS and the CMA announced they agreed ‘this’ week to halt the appeals process to look into new concessions, and they have 4 days including a weekend to do it.
And yes you are being incredibly cynical if you truly be,I’ve the CMA and FTC are in cahoots to stall the deal? For what purpose? As I’ve said a hundred times, all THREE of the biggest regulators had concerns of a monopoly over cloud gaming. They didn’t state that for fun or to block the deal out of spite, well maybe the FTC did, no they said it because that was what they concluded from all the evidence given. So then processes had to be followed, EU came up with a concession for ‘their’ market and structure that MS accepted and improved on, the CMA has agreed to investigate a new deal with concessions for ‘their’ market and structure, and the FTC just seems to want to block the deal. People need to remember whilst they are regulators, they do have different laws and regulations and processes to follow in each country.

This is NO conspiracy in Europe, just what happens for a 70 billion dollar merger. There is no colluding. As for America it is different as they don’t seem to want to look into any concessions, I understand they have a political angle there with the head of the FTC. So I’m not sure what game is being played but I know that is the one regulator who will kill the deal if successful.

@S1ayeR74 "...they can’t work around the FTC."

Is that true? If the FTC appeal to Judge Corley's decision is granted, MS would be blocked from closing until the August FTC trial. MS says they would abandon the deal if July 18 is missed, but who knows. If MS loses the FTC trial, they can take it to federal court. If the FTC loses their in-house trial, apparently, they can ignore the decision.

@Balta666 Thank you for that, but how does that give them an option to halt the appeals process and look into a new deal now? Could they not have done that a few weeks back when the appeals process was started? Did they need to wait for the CAT to make any ruling before a new deal was discussed?

UK about to get screwed over the only way we know how - pay the price rise…get non of the benefits… celebrate like we won🥳

@theduckofdeath As I understand no, because it’s in the courts, everyone expects the injunction appeal to be denied today or over the weekend but I think if it’s in the court it’s a big risk to go above that? If there wasn’t an appeal going through it would be plain sailing for them to ignore the FTC I believe.

People think if it’s not done by the 18th ActiBlizz will walk away. It would need renegotiating and gong back to the share holders I’m guessing otherwise?

@abe_hikura I hope MS has a solution worked out with the CMA, and that is why they entered into this pause. The CAT was not impressed by the CMA and MS had the upper hand. The delay is what the CMA wanted. This could be the CMA publicly saving face while accepting a solution.

@theduckofdeath Most likely, but I would much rather they follow this process as then it’s done and dusted approved and all legal, and us folk in the UK will get the same benefits, apart from what ever could concessions are made. It Acti Blizzard games in Game Pass! That’s the real goal we want.

They won’t wait 6 weeks, I expect it’ll be approved next week or the week after, I don’t expect it to be done this weekend as not everyone will want to work over the weekend. The CMA FTC and EU regulators do lease with each other, but their primary objectives are to protect their own markets and consumers, so the CMA won’t really take into account what the FTC is doing as they lost the first case. I hope. Fingers crossed.

I learnt from the CMA's last statements that they were being unprofessional and purposely obstructing the acquisition due to their ill-will. They are very quickly to react to anything that anybody says about the acquisition but they are prolonging the process with the only intention of benefiting Sony and hurting Microsoft. Since they can't prevent the acquisition from completing, Microsoft should do it on Saturday. After all is done, ask the CMA what the heck they want for Xbox Cloud in UK, since their last official decision could only use the cloud market as an excuse for disapproval. If they are still not reasonable, sue the CMA in UK.

The whole thing is just out of control. Pathetic it really is.

Would that mean gamepass ultimate price being reduced if xcloud isn't available? Also if I have to pay for a separate subscription for it how is that beneficial to the consumer!?

Let me start off by saying that my cynicism is borne of a long life and more than 28 years in Law Enforcement, @S1ayeR74. I guess very often I see ulterior motives, and I've carried out numerous investigations in which I have seen the deceptive ways of people in this World.

The timeline is potentially interesting in that Microsoft and the CMA put out a statement that they were in talks. Then the CMA put out a statement saying that they may need to restart the investigatory process, and then a further statement in which they said they needed up to 6 weeks to make a decision (and that is without a new investigation). So, with that in mind, it is entirely possible that Microsoft were not party to the two further statements made by the CMA, and that they were not anticipating such a move. Now, I get that I could be entirely wrong about that, but the timings of the latter two CMA statements seems odd as if they were 'in talks' with Microsoft but needed up to 6 weeks to carry out their inquiries, firstly, why would Microsoft stop the appeals process? That seems entirely counter-productive. And secondly, Microsoft are well aware that allowing a further 6 weeks would take the process well beyond the July 18th deadline. It just makes no sense. I get the feeling that the CMA blindsided Microsoft. They got Microsoft to agree to stopping the appeal, on the proviso of further talks, and then having attained that agreement, said, oh, and by the way, we need a further 6 weeks. I just don't see Microsoft agreeing to that.

Also, is it just pure coincidence that the FTC wanted to have the hearing with the Court to be heard in August, and have the appeal allow a stay on Microsoft and ABK closing the deal until then, and then the CMA also say they need a further 6 weeks, which would take the matter through towards the end of August?

One of my favourite sayings is that there is no such thing as coincidence, and here we are faced with two Regulatory bodies who have been shown to be in regular contact (potentially illegally) coming to the same determination that the matter should be delayed until late August, which conveniently may mean that the deal does not come to fruition at all. Colour me sceptical.

You ask for what purpose would the CMA and the FTC seek to delay the process, and it is quite simply because after the 18th of July, the deal has to be renegotiated, and there is always the slimmest of chances that the deal cannot be struck for a second time, or indeed, one of the parties chooses to simply walk away. There is no 100% guarantee that the two companies will come to terms once again. A lot has happened in the past 12 months, including Sony cementing their dominant position in the gaming market, which ABK shareholders may feel is going to assure them a better return on their investment in the long run than outright selling to Microsoft. Or indeed, ABK may just choose to walk away with the 3 billion that Microsoft have to pay them should the deal fail, and be content with that. There simply is no certainty that the deal will be restruck, and that is what I think the FTC and the CMA are banking on.

1/2

2/2

On the point of different Countries having different regulations, you are entirely correct. They do. The one thing that I would point out though is that until January 2020 the United Kingdom was part of the European Union and so had this decision been made back then, we would have towed the line with the rest of the EU. And whilst I get that we are now not part of the geopolitical union, we do in fact have very, very few divergences from the EU, partly because they are our closest trading partner, and if we change our rules too drastically, we risk damaging our trade with them. On that basis, I would be very sceptical that things are so different in the UK that this deal would be fine for the EU (after remedies), but not for the UK (after the same or slightly different remedies).

@S1ayeR74 if they renegotiation the deal the process in all of the countries starts again and we go through this for another two years. As for the CMA needing more time. They’ve already had a year and half. Literally they had all that time to look over and come up with concessions then. Instead of coming up with concessions they just blocked it only for CAT to say you have to look and this better. That was last month.

@mousieone Wong, it is only the deal in the UK, not the rest of the world, concessions for the UK market only. And the facts are clear, it was announced this week that MS and the CMA had agreed to halt the appeals process for now to look into concessions. Leaving them with 4 days to approve including a weekend. Why are you ignoring this? MS had a year and a half to come up with a concession to work with the CMA, why didn't they? All I read was that the EU came up with one, which was pretty generous of them, and that wouldn't work in the UK market with our mechanisms. I didn't hear much of MS working on concessions, maybe they did but I didn't read that.

@S1ayeR74 MS had multiple close door meetings with the CMA for concessions. The CMA didn’t try to come up with concessions earlier this year when they had ample time. Sorry no your arguments do not stand. They had plenty of time. And that’s a fact.

@S1ayeR74 The CMA, and to a lesser degree, the FTC, are bending the law as much as possible to make it look like they're going with legal means. However, as said further up, the CMA are literally going 'OK, We'll talk with you, see if you have a hail mary idea... but we're not going to lift the block and we're not going to allow anything until August'.

The CMA could go the extra-ordinary length, and prove their block is anti-consumer, and say 'Oh, and by the way? Renegotiating the deal also breaches the block. Toodles.'
Effectively telling Microsoft and ABK they need to pay the penalty fees and let the deal die, or the CMA will force the issue.

Now, if they did that, Microsoft can, and would, have a good reason to sue, for the entire cost of the penalty fee, especially if they DO say that they would have been willing to accept concession X or Y if Microsoft had been 'more willing'.

It's been two years, and the CMA are, right now, umm-ing and ahh-ing and finding every reason to make sure they can't close in any way next week.

Discharge of duty, discharge of duty, discharge of duty.....

Both governments are openly wielding tort as a filibuster in civil court. Fans of neither console should celebrate the fact that the US and UK governments are demonstrating they see as valid using inaction as a weapon against anyone. No rulings, no decisions, simply stalling everything out indefinitely until whatever they oppose dies. If they can do it to MS, they can do it to us, too.

As others pointed out, by Monday, there will be NO temporary restraining order in effect halting them from proceeding. Nothing stops them from closing the deal and delisting ABK monday, legally, as the courts will not be applying a new restraining order until after that if they do at all. (And would it even be possible if it's already signed? The entity in question would not exist anymore officially.)

The FTC would not be able to do anything. The CMA however are trying to do a very insidious thing in HOW they blocked the deal. The fact they declared intent to block, THEN trotted out a regulatory statement that the CMA would find Microsoft (and ABK) in breach of said intent if they made any motions to acquire part of the other, which is both incredibly broad and incredibly narrow.

The CMA could literally take Microsoft to court for the act of withdrawing ABK games from the UK, because it's in breach of that regulatory order, which is, in reality, purely the CMA throwing an epic tantrum that Microsoft, otherwise, has the deal in the bag, since their case could easily, without that order, be thrown out as 'Not related to the acquisition'.

Wow this thing has more ups and downs than a alton towers rollercoaster

@mousieone How do you know those meetings were for concessions? You just said yourself ‘closed doors’ as in details were not released to the public, it’s all hypothetical here say.

@S1ayeR74 you’re right I guess they were just flying over there to have afternoon tea.

Pretty sure this is a way for the CMA to save face here. MS will close the deal over the weekend/Monday and CMA will determine that the additional remedies that they strongarmed MS into make the deal viable. They got a victory for consumers....CMA rules!

@Moonglow To be honest, that's the only explanation I could find.

@S1ayeR74 not an option my Microsoft, only the CMA itself could do that. In the end it looks like they had a change of mind and agreed to reopen the case and asked MS to halt the process at the CAT

Activision/Blizzard is getting removed from the stock exchange. This is over. The UK CMA will have to just deal with it, they are only hurting the UK with this nonsense.

@OrfeasDourvas they are negotiating. I get its frustrating but its not feasible for them to reach a resolution in 5 days.

@elpardo1984 Just like it wasn't 'feasible' for them to reach a resolution in nearly two years other than 'No, because Cloud', when every other regulatory body has already said 'Yes' well within the deadline?

The FTC already lost the case, they're pulling at straws to try to force a last minute appeal. The CMA, in declaring 'We need more time' is exactly the same thing as they said to the court during the FTC case, and the judge went 'No you don't, motion denied'.

The CMA want to make their resolution in 6-7 days, and declare that renewing the deal counts as a forbidden action according to their block, as is removing ABK from the UK 'pending a resolution', effectively killing the deal stone dead by litigating it out of existence. And Microsoft likely are ready, in 4 days, to tell the CMA to shut the f- up or just let them do either of them or settle.

You got completely the wrong end of the stick when it comes to concessions, @S1ayeR74. The CMA do not offer them. Microsoft do. It is then for the CMA to either accept or reject those concessions. The CMA will perhaps give a broad scope of what needs to be worked on; Cloud for example, however the precise details are for Microsoft to come up with. This is also what happened in the EU. The EU said there were certain areas of concern, which Microsoft then offered remedies for, and that were then accepted by the EU.

It's also the case that Microsoft went down the route of appealing the ruling of the CMA because the CMA said no to the deal. They did not say no, but we may reconsider if you offer any remedies. They outright blocked the deal, which is why so many people thought the deal was dead in the dirt at that time. Microsoft's only solution was to seek a CAT appeal because the CMA had already made up their minds. It's like going before a Judge here in the UK; once they had decided that you are guilty, that's it. You are guilty. At that point, your only option is to appeal, but you remain guilty until the appeal is heard. That is the situation that Microsoft found themselves in. No option but to appeal to a different authority.

You also say that Microsoft have had months to come up with remedies. And you are absolutely correct. They have had an extended period of time. However, we do not know when those remedies were proposed by Microsoft. They could have been worked on months ago. However, the CMA have blocked the deal, as I said above. Microsoft could not return to them after that point and offer remedies, firstly because, as far as the CMA were concerned, that was that, they had made their decision, but secondly because Microsoft had filed an appeal to CAT. So Microsoft were awaiting the result of that appeal.

Now, there is a question over why Microsoft agreed to stop the appeal. I can only presume that the CMA, having seen the FTC defeated in Court, approached Microsoft and said that they were open to remedies, but that Microsoft had to stop the appeals process for those talks to take place. Clearly, it would seem that the CMA outplayed Microsoft's lawyers at this point because those lawyers obviously assumed the proposed remedies would be decided on quickly, and in time for the deal to pass before July the 18th. Obviously that has turned out not to be the case, and so I have a feeling that the CMA have effectively tricked Microsoft into cancelling the appeal. I am unsure whether Microsoft can actually restart the appeal, unless they are able to show that the CMA have acted in bad faith...

There's a rumour that they will close today at 12 ( Thier time ) a hour and half from not in the UK and the UK won't b part of it till they have the CMA hearing

@Fiendish-Beaver My own opinion on that is that MS really had to pause (notice the language is pause, not remove, so there is low risk to them in that if the CMA talks are a sham they can simply resume the appeal, albeit after their own deadline), because if the CMA offered to reconsider with concessions and Microsoft did not accept that opportunity it would harm their arguments to CAT that the CMA operated in bad faith and against their own rules, which is their principal argument. They can't argue that CMA did not properly consider their remedies as stated to the CAT if CMA has an offer to reconsider them on the table and they just refused it. So they had to accept the reconsideration. If CMA is playing games with that offer, they could resume the appeal with even more ammo that the CMA continues to ignore their own rules and is operating in bad faith, including disingenuous delay tactics to interfere with the appeal process. If they refused to return to the table, CAT could easily shoot MS down that they weren't accepting CMA's offers to negotiate remedies.

So entrapment by the CMA, but one that only works if ABK does not agree to extend the deadline to accommodate it which, at this point, if they're closing trading, seems to be an answered question. You don't delist from the market if you plan to walk away. And if they extend their deadline, and if CMA is being disingenuous, they simply strengthened MS's CAT case.

@ValentineMeikin " regulatory body has already said 'Yes' well within the deadline?"

It's easy to forget Canada, everyone forgets Canada exists, but don't forget Canada that managed to neither say "yes" nor "no" at all within their own deadline, but then randomly tried to lobby a "no" out of Corley in what would otherwise be considered an "international incident" were it not coming from Canada.

If there's one good thing that's come out of this process it's that we've learned which governments are hopelessly debilitated bureaucracies that would make the Soviets proud. And China is surprisingly not among them.

The CMA seem to be pushing HARD for the divestiture strategy, despite the only people it benefits at this point being Sony, while being aware, from the FTC's loss, that any court case would result in them losing big.

This will be closed this weekend, and the CMA, when they try to use the courts to break them apart, will end up in a worse state than the FTC.

The CMAs only job is to protect the UK market in the long and short term. A bunch of “gamers” can’t really be taken seriously just because they want a few extra games on GamePass or to stick it to rival platforms.

(Breaking) Ninth Circuit has denied the FTC’s request for a further pause on Microsoft’s Activision deal

Microsoft is now free to close its Activision Blizzard deal after 11:59PM PT today

The CMA is now the only thing barring closing

It makes sense for Microsoft to just close the deal now and deal with these regulators after. The regulators have no valid case so it's open and shut, they are simply doing everything they can to stall and delay in hope of forcing renegotiation.

@Martsmall Wow, that's gotta be a real embarrassment for the FTC. First they get their budget slashed by the house, now this. Not a good look for their leadership, a true failure on their end, and they look embarrassingly unprofessional and biased as well. They have had a bad week.

@ValentineMeikin @NEStalgia That's the strategy I would choose. The CMA is obstructing the acquisition with excuses based on air and get away with it, so complete the acquisition and prove them wrong at the trials. In the meantime, perhaps no Xbox Cloud in UK but Microsoft could sue the CMA because they are hampering their business activities in UK based on nothing. Nothing = we believe that everyone else is wrong and that we are right and that Microsoft will lessen the competition and the innovation if they include ABK in Game Pass because it's the conclusion we have reached based on... nothing. It's the opposite, Microsoft is giving tools and content to cloud competitors.

The CMA could say, "I didn't say no to the merger" but Microsoft could prove that they didn't accept the concessions and delayed the agreements unnecessarily. It's a joke that now they can't answer until August (almost September) after over a year of reviewing the merger. The concessions are not rocket science. See how fast the EU reviewed and replied.

@Moonglow Haha someone calls out your BS conspiracy theories and call them damage controlling. Grow up. And you can confront me directly if you have accusations.

Just close and cut the UK out. Small market.

@Fiendish-Beaver Whilst I would naturally agree on who makes the concessions, this tweet from Microsoft’s President would imply differently hence my comment:

http://www.pcgamer.com/microsoft-president-clarifies-eu-cloud-agreement-popular-games-will-be-automatically-licensed-to-competitors-and-this-will-apply-globally/

This lead to my thought process on this as it isn’t specifically clear. I do remember reading even in comments on this site that the EU came up with the concession and Microsoft extended it to be global, which is what this report as many others seem to conclude.
Also if you look at the CMA guidance here: http://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1044636/CMA2_guidance.pdf

Page 90 point 12.14 ‘Notice Of Possible Remedies’, it states that the CMA will publish a notice of possible remedies which will act as a formal starting point of discussion of remedies. Thus implying again the regulator can suggest concessions to be looked at, that’s how I’m reading it anyway. Also it does highlight how there are several opportunities in the process to give remedies or discuss them before the final verdict is given, so MS did have the opportunity to do so including once the preliminary report had been concluded. It as we know the CMA rejected the remedies MS offered as not resolving the concerns they had.

I cannot concur your assumption of your last paragraph, that the CMA approached Microsoft, only a joint request from the CMA, Microsoft and Activision was sent to the courts to request the appeal to be halted. The rest of your comment in the last paragraph is pure conspiracy theory, I don’t know why you keep on following this thought process. You really seem to believe the CMA are out to block this merger no matter what. Like many on here seem to have this out going urge to believe in conspiracy’s as opposed to fact foe some very odd reason? That toxic gamers mentality coming to light.

So, like I said before, @S1ayeR74, Regulators will give guidance to Microsoft about what areas they see as problematic, and will for example, say, "Cloud is the problem, sell off that area of the business, and we can come to terms." That is not concessions. That is for Microsoft to then negotiate on, which is then termed as concessions. Basically, the Regulators are just indicating where they want to see movement before such time as they will agree the deal. You cannot expect a Regulator to simply say "No!", without giving Microsoft an idea of what needs to be altered in order to get them to say, "Yes!". That is not the same as concessions. It is known as scoping.

Now, I am not a conspiracy theorist, I am simply very suspicious of the actions of the CMA and the FTC. I simply feel that the CMA are doing the bidding of the FTC. My reasoning is this;

Colin Raftery is the Senior Director of Mergers at the CMA and is a lawyer that worked for a company that used to represent Sony. There is therefore a potential inherent bias. It was being widely reported that the CMA were going to approve the deal, then in April, much to everyone's surprise, the CMA blocked the deal. The FTC had announced their intentions to take the deal to Court last year, so well prior to the CMA blocking the deal. Rules state that once the FTC have announced their intention to challenge the deal, that they must not correspond with outside agencies regarding the deal. I believe the only thing they are allowed to discuss is the Court date. It then transpired at the Congressional hearing that 24 emails had been sent by the FTC to the CMA since the FTC announced their intention to attempt to block the deal. Personally, I find it difficult to believe that the FTC needed to tell the CMA the Court date on 24 occasions. Hence I suspect there is stuff going on behind the scenes that we are yet to find out about but is potentially illegal.

It is also worth noting that the FTC had their allocated budget slashed by 25% on Friday as a direct response to the manner in which they had dealt with Microsoft. Khan is on a crusade. She is trying to make a name for herself. And I do not think she can be trusted...

@Fiendish-Beaver Firstly as said that’s not how the CMA guidance reads, and the EU offered the idea for the concession to. Microsoft.
Secondly that is complete conspiracy theory, nothing more nothing less, no evidence, also any conflicts of interest would have been declared and all parties given the opportunity to object, and it’s also utterly ridiculous to suggest anyone cannot leave one job to go to another, and then cross paths again with a previous employer and be anything other then impartial. The CMA had valid concerns, were not offered any working remedies from Microsoft, so blocked the deal.

The even more galling thing...
The CMA were already investigating Microsoft over the cloud monopoly. There's a Ofcom probe going on into Amazon, Google and Microsoft having almost absolute control over it.
They just jeopardized the Ofcom probe to do a hail mary play to get Microsoft to choose divestiture.

Damn, you just love the notion of conspiracy theories, @S1ayeR74. How do you think investigations are carried out? So if someone steals something from a supermarket, when the Police investigate, it is not classed as a conspiracy theory, it is an examination of the facts. You start out suspecting a crime has been committed, and through looking at the evidence, you zero in on a culprit. I spent more than 28 years doing precisely that, much of it on the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).

Here, only two Regulators have actively sought to block the deal. One is for ideological reasons (Khan at the FTC) which leaves just one in the CMA. And so the question then becomes why? The same remedies were offered to the CMA as were to the EU, and yet the CMA decided not to accept them. Why were they the only ones on the entire planet to not do so? Bear in mind that they had released a tweet at the outset of their investigation that many had seen as both unprofessional and potentially biased, and then the issue of potential bias with their Director of Mergers. Then factor in that the CMA have calculated the number of people using Cloud as being the same number of people as those that use Game Pass. That is how they have determined Microsoft's dominance, yet we all know the vast majority of people, who use Game Pass, do not use Cloud. Indeed, if calculations were to be based this way, Sony would be the ones with more using Cloud as they have more people subscribed to their services than Microsoft do theirs.

It is not a case of one individual things that is said or done, but a case of building a picture. It is exactly the same with a criminal investigation. You put the pieces together to build your case. All of the initial parts are minor, I agree, but you cannot simply ignore them. They have to be taken into account.

The part that we don't yet know, but may well do so at some point is the content of the 24 emails that were sent between the FTC and the CMA after the FTC's investigation was announced. Once the investigation has been launched, such emails are prohibited my law. The only thing they are allowed to discuss is the Court date. So, whilst that might account for one email, what could possibly in the other 23?

Is this a conspiracy theory? No. Because it is a matter of putting the pieces together to understand what has happened. Do I think that something untoward has gone on? Yes. Why? Because it is illogical to think that only one Country has come to the conclusion that the rest of the World has not. Equally, the same remedies were offered to the EU and the UK, yet the UK said no.

At the moment, there is no smoking gun, however, that maybe revealed when the emails come out in Congress. Until then we are left with an incomplete picture, and more might come out with the passage of time. But to simply dismiss it as conspiracy theories is disingenuous given what we do already know...

No update today yet from Microsoft? All in suspense now lol.

@Fiendish-Beaver TLDR, when you have actual evidence come back, until then it's a complete personal opinion or conspiracy theory no matter what you state. They blocked it for what they felt were valid reasons, not out of spite or to protect Sonys profits, and not because the FTC told them to.
Also the EU and the FTC both also highlighted cloud gaming as creating a monopoly from this deal, I've said that several times, otherwise regulators tend to follow the EU, UK and US regulator leads, because they are by far the biggest markets for Microsoft.

Well if you cannot be bothered to read what I say, @S1ayeR74, then what's the point in discussing it? I actually set out what could be deemed evidence, in my last post. Clearly though, you have no interest in having a sensible conversation, and are happy to believe that everyone acts with the best of intentions and never have ulterior motives. I guess that shows our different lived experiences. Oh well.

I never suggested that the CMA were doing what the FTC told them to. However, that does not mean that they did not speak and decide what they would do as a consequence.

Finally, I've read through the EU's findings in relation to this acquisition, but am unable to locate the part that you refer to in which they speak of a monopoly.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_2705

Perhaps you could enlighten me?

@Fiendish-Beaver “ 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.

Where we diverged with the CMA was on remedies. We accepted a 10-year free license to consumers to allow them to stream all Activision games for which they have a license via any cloud service. And why did we do this instead of blocking the merger? Well, to us, this solution fully addressed our concerns. And on top of that, it had significant procompetitive effects.”

http://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_23_2923

— from the horses mouth and wasn’t hard to find.

And no you haven’t provided any evidence, just personal opinion and seeing things that don’t exist. Anything else I have to say I’ve already said multiple times now.

Well, @S1ayeR74, I guess you just want to see what you want to see, or rather don't. However, I do agree that we are just repeating ourselves, and neither is convinced by the others arguments.

As for the concern of monopoly; I read what you wrote above, and I had already read the article you linked in, and the word simply does not appear. It would seem to be far from being from the 'horses mouth' and more like you putting words in their mouth.

I get that some people are against the deal, and I can entirely understand why. What I don't understand, though, is why people need to make up facts to back up their arguments. Were the European commission concerned regarding the potential for the likes of CoD to give Microsoft a huge advantage in Cloud gaming? Yes. Did they say it would cause a monopoly? No. Why not? Because they understand what a monopoly is;

Monopoly: the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

The key word there is exclusive. Even were CoD to be made available on Cloud, there would still be other companies offering the service. Therefore it could not be a monopoly.

@Fiendish-Beaver Give up, you don’t know what regulators are there for then. Of course they won’t state the word ‘monopoly’ but instead spell it our in a full explanation which they did.

Also:

“ Monopoly: the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.”

Read the second paragraph of the quote I posted as it seems to answer that directly?

You just believe what ever you like, it’s your right to do so and make your own opinions up. I am just not seeing any of it I’m afraid.

On an other note, it’s not mentioned here yet but most now are fully expecting MS and Activision to announce a delay in the deal closing till most likely September 1st, as reported before they will allow time to have the deal approved by the CMA, a judge yesterday said they most likely won’t be able to close the deal in the UK today as it’s too soon.