4 ms·

If the UK already blocked the deal, why does the US need to? I guess it is likely better for the companies involved to know they don't just need to appease the

If the UK already blocked the deal, why does the US need to? I guess it is likely better for the companies involved to know they don't just need to appease the UK but also others, but it seems like a non-story...

jacooper 3y ago
They are independent nations with independent ruling bodies, the UK banning the merger doesn't mean the J.S. shouldn't do anything.
- LatteLazy 3y ago
  I am just asking what the point is? Why bother with all the paperwork banning a merger that is not going to happen? The US (or UK or anyone else) has every RIGHT to book on it. But why spend time and energy exercising that right if it makes no difference and another country already vetoed it?
  - schnitzelstoat 3y ago
    They could proceed but cease operations in the UK, I'm not sure exactly what that would look like. I guess using a local distributor like they did with NetEase in China? It would be pretty crazy, but it's not impossible. They aren't going to pull out of the USA though.
  - frumper 3y ago
    Some other outlets reported that Microsoft and Activision were talking about completing the deal despite the UK regulator. The EU already gave it approval to happen, and the US hadn't specifically blocked it. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/12/technology/ftc-sue-microsoft-activision-deal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/12/technology/ftc-sue-micros...
    - LatteLazy 3y ago
      That's fine if both companies (or the one resulting company) never wants to do business in the UK again...
      - frumper 3y ago
        Or they think the UK citizens won't throw the regulators and their bosses out of a job. I doubt many citizens in the UK feel strongly enough about the merger to want access to neither if they merge. People don't particularly like when you take their toys away.
        worrycue 3y ago
        If all that ends up being blocked are consoles and games, there are plenty of substitutes - in some cases near perfect substitutes.
        frumper 3y ago
        It's a weird argument to block Microsoft and Activision merging in the name of competition and be ok with leaving less competition in it's wake.
        worrycue 3y ago
        MS could always just not merge with Activision.
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > fine if both companies (or the one resulting company) never wants to do business in the UK again There are loads of solutions to this problem, the most obvious one being pulling Activision titles out of the U.K. or spinning off independent distribution rights to that market.
  - topkai22 3y ago
    The UK blocking the merger doesn’t necessarily stop it. It could be overturned on appeal or the deal could be modified to suit the UK’s concerns. It’s also theoretically possible that the deal goes through despite the CMA not approving it. I’m not a lawyer and I don’t know if that looks like Microsoft no longer selling games and gaming in the UK (possible) or no longer doing business in the UK entirely (not likely). Besides, the US filed suit back in 2022.
    - 908B64B197 3y ago
      > or the deal could be modified to suit the UK’s concerns. The argument given by the UK's bureaucrats had something to do with cloud gaming. I guess they could make Activision's tittles available on competing cloud gaming platforms in the UK.
  - LikesPwsh 3y ago
    It saves MS from attempting to reverse the decision in British courts, so probably net saving of human time and effort all things considered.
- jacooper 3y ago
  Nation* / U.S.
anotherman554 3y ago
>>If the UK already blocked the deal, why does the US need to? The UK could reverse their position. It makes no sense for the US to rely on a foreign countries ruling, as they have no control over whether it changes.
IncandescentGas 3y ago
Because Microsoft may punish the UK’s ruling by ignoring it and halting game sales in the UK

jacooper 3y ago

They are independent nations with independent ruling bodies, the UK banning the merger doesn't mean the J.S. shouldn't do anything.

LatteLazy 3y ago
I am just asking what the point is? Why bother with all the paperwork banning a merger that is not going to happen? The US (or UK or anyone else) has every RIGHT to book on it. But why spend time and energy exercising that right if it makes no difference and another country already vetoed it?
- schnitzelstoat 3y ago
  They could proceed but cease operations in the UK, I'm not sure exactly what that would look like. I guess using a local distributor like they did with NetEase in China? It would be pretty crazy, but it's not impossible. They aren't going to pull out of the USA though.
- frumper 3y ago
  Some other outlets reported that Microsoft and Activision were talking about completing the deal despite the UK regulator. The EU already gave it approval to happen, and the US hadn't specifically blocked it. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/12/technology/ftc-sue-microsoft-activision-deal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/12/technology/ftc-sue-micros...
  - LatteLazy 3y ago
    That's fine if both companies (or the one resulting company) never wants to do business in the UK again...
    - frumper 3y ago
      Or they think the UK citizens won't throw the regulators and their bosses out of a job. I doubt many citizens in the UK feel strongly enough about the merger to want access to neither if they merge. People don't particularly like when you take their toys away.
      - worrycue 3y ago
        If all that ends up being blocked are consoles and games, there are plenty of substitutes - in some cases near perfect substitutes.
        frumper 3y ago
        It's a weird argument to block Microsoft and Activision merging in the name of competition and be ok with leaving less competition in it's wake.
        worrycue 3y ago
        MS could always just not merge with Activision.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > fine if both companies (or the one resulting company) never wants to do business in the UK again There are loads of solutions to this problem, the most obvious one being pulling Activision titles out of the U.K. or spinning off independent distribution rights to that market.
- topkai22 3y ago
  The UK blocking the merger doesn’t necessarily stop it. It could be overturned on appeal or the deal could be modified to suit the UK’s concerns. It’s also theoretically possible that the deal goes through despite the CMA not approving it. I’m not a lawyer and I don’t know if that looks like Microsoft no longer selling games and gaming in the UK (possible) or no longer doing business in the UK entirely (not likely). Besides, the US filed suit back in 2022.
  - 908B64B197 3y ago
    > or the deal could be modified to suit the UK’s concerns. The argument given by the UK's bureaucrats had something to do with cloud gaming. I guess they could make Activision's tittles available on competing cloud gaming platforms in the UK.
- LikesPwsh 3y ago
  It saves MS from attempting to reverse the decision in British courts, so probably net saving of human time and effort all things considered.
jacooper 3y ago
Nation* / U.S.

anotherman554 3y ago

>>If the UK already blocked the deal, why does the US need to? The UK could reverse their position. It makes no sense for the US to rely on a foreign countries ruling, as they have no control over whether it changes.

IncandescentGas 3y ago

Because Microsoft may punish the UK’s ruling by ignoring it and halting game sales in the UK