What would you want Sony to trade for CoD on PlayStation?

[DonFerrari]

aTokenYeti said:

DonFerrari said:

You do know that it was claimed and accepted that Bobby and other high level execs were the core of the problem, and also aware that MS said they would approach Acti in a different manner right?

And sure I do know that there are documents that aren't released. It isn't even uncommon for a deal of this size to have had a NDA signed several months or even year in advance with a MOU and action plan.

Also not questioning the internet outrage. My question is, do you believe that if MS wanted Bobby and other high level execs fired right away the moment the deal was made public (or even before) could they demand it? And do you you believe that they could have demanded that games released before the deal was approved be released only on Xbox and PC?

If you believe they could, then why didn't MS demand the solution of the first problem?

Not the guy you were asking, but Microsoft is legally not able to make any demands of Activison’s board until they take full control of the company. The board has a fiduciary responsibility to respond to the shareholders until the deal is complete, which is why both parties are remaining extremely vague about the post merger plans. 

That is my understanding as well. If MS demanded that Bobby or however is fired before the deal is approved (having a commitment to fire him when the deal is closed is fine though) or to release certain games or hold releases isn't acceptable.