That's now two major markets that have delayed the deal.
Following the lead of the US Federal Trade Commission, a second regulator has said the deal cannot go through. Microsoft is appealing the decision.
In a statement, the Competition and Markets Authority of the UK said that the deal was being blocked on the grounds that it would prevent competition in game streaming. "The cloud allows UK gamers to avoid buying expensive gaming consoles and PCs and gives them much more flexibility and choice as to how they play. Allowing Microsoft to take such a strong position in the cloud gaming market just as it begins to grow rapidly would risk undermining the innovation that is crucial to the development of these opportunities."
After a preliminary finding in February by the CMA, Microsoft announced a series of ten year content deals with cloud gaming providers including Ubitus (who produces the technology the Switch uses), though this was not enough for the UK authority. Concerns raised about access to Call of Duty on other console platforms were addressed by previous ten-year deal announcements.
Microsoft have issued a statement indicating they would appeal:
We remain fully committed to our acquisition with @ATVI_AB and will appeal today's determination by the CMA. Here's our statement. pic.twitter.com/ylvDP5RUqQ
— Brad Smith (@BradSmi) April 26, 2023
The next step for Microsoft will be an appeal to the Competition Appeal Tribunal, a special judiciary body who will review the case.
In theory, what's stopping Microsoft from signing an exclusivity deal with Activision similar to what Sony does all the time? Say, for $69B, all future titles are Microsoft exclusive?
It'd be hard to block that deal as Sony has been signing exclusives for so long. And, like, you can't *make* Activision make Sony games. Hell, if I were Activision leadership wanting this deal to go through, I'd stop supporting Sony systems out of spite. "We offered you CoD for ten years. That wasn't good enough. Now, you get nothing. Good day, sir."
I still don't care, as the last Activision game I purchased was Skylanders... but Microsoft mentioned the Hexen franchise, something Activision hasn't done in years, so the chance to get another entry into that would be great.
>The Activision Blizzard stockholders would revolt at shutting out the most popular consoles on the market and the board of directors would probably fire the leadership at the next stockholder's meeting, but it would be perfectly legal albeit still subject to scrutiny from the various governments for potential antitrust violations.
Why would Activision shareholders be okay with selling to Microsoft for $69B, but not signing an exclusive agreement with them for $69B?
