8 ms·

God damn man. How is this not an antitrust violation? The only answer is that we live in truly corrupt times. What is our answer to this?

spacephysics 3y ago
I’m convinced we’ve always had corruption, it’s just seeing more of the light today. I mention this to my Eastern European friends and they laugh at the level of corruption the US complains about (compared to what they’ve had for decades+)
- ffgjgf1 3y ago
  > this to my Eastern European friends and they laugh at the level of corruption the US These days I’m not that sure that the case (only talking about the Eastern European countries in the US)
- xxpor 3y ago
  But that's a big part of why the US is as successful as it is. A culture against corruption. It's very hard to get rid of it once it entrenches itself, which is why people complain about it.
- e63f67dd-065b 3y ago
  Where is the corruption here? I agree that there are many corrupt parts of government, especially in procurement, and especially in regional and local governments, but in this specific case it's pretty clear that the law is on the side of Microsoft here.
VirusNewbie 3y ago
What is the antitrust behavior here?
- gainda 3y ago
  the antitrust behavior is two of the largest players in the gaming space combining. how is that going to promote competition? it's just going to make it easier for them to outspend and outlast and eventually ingest it's competition Sony's gaming revenue is ~26 B 8 % of MSFT's revenue is from gaming = ~15 B Nintendo 12 B ABK 8 B EA 7.5 B ( and that isn't including tencent and netease. i didn't bother trying to find figures for them but they are in the running here too )
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    So you're worried about them selling games at a loss until the other game studios go out of business?
  - MikusR 3y ago
    Number 4 and 6 are merging to become number 3.
- georgeecollins 3y ago
  Microsoft has one of the two biggest gaming subscription services. They would like to see gaming be a subscription business. When they say, we will still sell Call of Duty on other platforms they don't say that they will give it away on GamePass. What's wrong with subscriptions? It lets a distributor scrape off the excess profit. Games are a hit driven business. It sounds great when a platoform offers two or three times the cost of development to a developer, but the model won't really work unless some titles make like 10x. Listen to Jason Blum explain why Netfilx is terrible for independent film. You will just see a lot less independent developers (not hobbyists) and small publishers. Maybe no one cares. I will probably be retired by then.
hipadev23 3y ago
Microsoft produces video games. They acquired another company that produces video games. How is this antitrust?
- delecti 3y ago
  The merger of two large entities in the same market is a pretty clear example of something that should raise antitrust concerns.
  - hipadev23 3y ago
    I disagree because Microsoft doesn't hold some unique barrier to entry into video game production the way they do an operating system.
    - delecti 3y ago
      You can argue that this specific case doesn't rise to the level that would actually result in anti-competitive results. My point was just that the merger of two large companies is the kind of thing that deserves scrutiny, because your comment implied that it couldn't even in theory have antitrust concerns.
  - throwaway5959 3y ago
    Why? Two large corporations merging isn’t in itself antitrust. In some cases an industry is in decline and it makes a lot of sense for large companies to merge otherwise both might go out of business (clearly not what’s going on here, but just an example).
  - DashAnimal 3y ago
    It did raise concerns and it was reviewed by multiple bodies around the world, with many concessions made. Do you believe every single review body got it wrong on the facts?
logicchains 3y ago
Microsoft doesn't have anything close to a monopoly on games. In terms of sales and reviewer scores, most of the top games weren't produced by Activision or other Microsoft studios. The only recent release I'm aware of was Starfield, and that was panned for failing to meet expectations, achieving under 88 on Metacritic.
- edgyquant 3y ago
  How is buying up two of the biggest game studios not anti-competitive behavior? The apologism in this comment is hilarious. I hope your getting paid for shilling this hard.
  - fernandotakai 3y ago
    i mean, europe didn't think it was a monopoly or close to anti-trust. same with all other countries. hell, CMA only complained about the cloud business. FTC tried to do something, but failed so spectacularly that even the judge had to say "you have to defend customers, not sony".
  - stale2002 3y ago
    Because the person you responded to just answered that question? It is because Microsoft isn't anywhere close to being a monopoly in games. You could have just read the comment to get the answer to your question.
    - micromacrofoot 3y ago
      It's not a monopoly but I think it's fair to express frustration towards the lack of legislation preventing what's clearly anti-competitive behavior. It doesn't seem very helpful for people to continually state what the current laws are as if that makes this better somehow.
      - s1artibartfast 3y ago
        How is it stopping anyone from coming in and competing? It's not like they're selling games at a loss to kill the competition.
mr_tristan 3y ago
Because it really isn't a violation of antitrust as is currently defined. Linda Khan's article here is, IMO, one of the best overviews of why: https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-paradox https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-parado... What's frustrating is that this requires legislative change, which, given the current political climate, seems like a sisyphean task.
- koromak 3y ago
  We'll just keep rolling through the 21st century with horribly outdated laws on every front, because the government can't function well enough to change them

spacephysics 3y ago

I’m convinced we’ve always had corruption, it’s just seeing more of the light today. I mention this to my Eastern European friends and they laugh at the level of corruption the US complains about (compared to what they’ve had for decades+)

ffgjgf1 3y ago
> this to my Eastern European friends and they laugh at the level of corruption the US These days I’m not that sure that the case (only talking about the Eastern European countries in the US)
xxpor 3y ago
But that's a big part of why the US is as successful as it is. A culture against corruption. It's very hard to get rid of it once it entrenches itself, which is why people complain about it.
e63f67dd-065b 3y ago
Where is the corruption here? I agree that there are many corrupt parts of government, especially in procurement, and especially in regional and local governments, but in this specific case it's pretty clear that the law is on the side of Microsoft here.

VirusNewbie 3y ago

What is the antitrust behavior here?

gainda 3y ago
the antitrust behavior is two of the largest players in the gaming space combining. how is that going to promote competition? it's just going to make it easier for them to outspend and outlast and eventually ingest it's competition Sony's gaming revenue is ~26 B 8 % of MSFT's revenue is from gaming = ~15 B Nintendo 12 B ABK 8 B EA 7.5 B ( and that isn't including tencent and netease. i didn't bother trying to find figures for them but they are in the running here too )
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  So you're worried about them selling games at a loss until the other game studios go out of business?
- MikusR 3y ago
  Number 4 and 6 are merging to become number 3.
georgeecollins 3y ago
Microsoft has one of the two biggest gaming subscription services. They would like to see gaming be a subscription business. When they say, we will still sell Call of Duty on other platforms they don't say that they will give it away on GamePass. What's wrong with subscriptions? It lets a distributor scrape off the excess profit. Games are a hit driven business. It sounds great when a platoform offers two or three times the cost of development to a developer, but the model won't really work unless some titles make like 10x. Listen to Jason Blum explain why Netfilx is terrible for independent film. You will just see a lot less independent developers (not hobbyists) and small publishers. Maybe no one cares. I will probably be retired by then.

hipadev23 3y ago

Microsoft produces video games. They acquired another company that produces video games. How is this antitrust?

delecti 3y ago
The merger of two large entities in the same market is a pretty clear example of something that should raise antitrust concerns.
- hipadev23 3y ago
  I disagree because Microsoft doesn't hold some unique barrier to entry into video game production the way they do an operating system.
  - delecti 3y ago
    You can argue that this specific case doesn't rise to the level that would actually result in anti-competitive results. My point was just that the merger of two large companies is the kind of thing that deserves scrutiny, because your comment implied that it couldn't even in theory have antitrust concerns.
- throwaway5959 3y ago
  Why? Two large corporations merging isn’t in itself antitrust. In some cases an industry is in decline and it makes a lot of sense for large companies to merge otherwise both might go out of business (clearly not what’s going on here, but just an example).
- DashAnimal 3y ago
  It did raise concerns and it was reviewed by multiple bodies around the world, with many concessions made. Do you believe every single review body got it wrong on the facts?

logicchains 3y ago

Microsoft doesn't have anything close to a monopoly on games. In terms of sales and reviewer scores, most of the top games weren't produced by Activision or other Microsoft studios. The only recent release I'm aware of was Starfield, and that was panned for failing to meet expectations, achieving under 88 on Metacritic.

edgyquant 3y ago
How is buying up two of the biggest game studios not anti-competitive behavior? The apologism in this comment is hilarious. I hope your getting paid for shilling this hard.
- fernandotakai 3y ago
  i mean, europe didn't think it was a monopoly or close to anti-trust. same with all other countries. hell, CMA only complained about the cloud business. FTC tried to do something, but failed so spectacularly that even the judge had to say "you have to defend customers, not sony".
- stale2002 3y ago
  Because the person you responded to just answered that question? It is because Microsoft isn't anywhere close to being a monopoly in games. You could have just read the comment to get the answer to your question.
  - micromacrofoot 3y ago
    It's not a monopoly but I think it's fair to express frustration towards the lack of legislation preventing what's clearly anti-competitive behavior. It doesn't seem very helpful for people to continually state what the current laws are as if that makes this better somehow.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      How is it stopping anyone from coming in and competing? It's not like they're selling games at a loss to kill the competition.

mr_tristan 3y ago

Because it really isn't a violation of antitrust as is currently defined. Linda Khan's article here is, IMO, one of the best overviews of why: https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-paradox https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-parado... What's frustrating is that this requires legislative change, which, given the current political climate, seems like a sisyphean task.

koromak 3y ago
We'll just keep rolling through the 21st century with horribly outdated laws on every front, because the government can't function well enough to change them