By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Machiavellian on 09 December 2022
Edit Thread
Ryuu96 said:
Machiavellian said:

No, they are not betting on another country nixing the deal, instead this is all about personal careers.  It does not matter if MS succeeds or not, instead it's a high-profile deal where someone wants on their record of standing up to big tech. You can tell by how weak the whole arguments are.  This is for show and nothing else.  I just believe you have an inflated opinion of US government officials.  If you asked them what the EU is they would tell you it's a candy bar.

Of course it matters if Microsoft succeeds, are you really suggesting that they genuinely want on their career "we stood up to Microsoft and completely failed" Lol. That does not help their career at all. They want this deal blocked because that is what proves that they've stood up to big tech and won, standing up to big tech and failing is irrelevant.

Their arguments are weak on purpose, it's a delay tactic, instead of skipping straight to federal courts they are using their internal courts who firstly have to approve their blocking the deal, then Microsoft can take it to federal courts but only after FTC's internal courts have decided, the argument is weak so that when FTC commission brings it to their internal courts, they will send it back to FTC commissioners to re-do it, then it goes back to the internal court, they approve or deny the block and then Microsoft can take it to federal courts.

It's all a delay tactic and why? Because FTC either wants someone outside to block the deal (CMA) which would kill the deal completely or they want to delay it long enough for Microsoft to abandon the deal (the court case is August at minimum and that's for the internal procedure, Microsoft needs to get through that before they can take it to federal courts).

This is precisely why companies have brought a case to the Supreme Court to allow companies to force FTC out of this internal court process and skip straight to federal courts, because this tactic is a very real tactic that FTC employs to try to get deals scuttled.

This is all stuff that I've read/listened to from lawyers...

Their arguments are weak because their position is weak.  It's no complicated tactic it's just more posturing.  You are right they will play it for all its worth but at the end of the day it's just a tactic to prop up a few people who are looking to push their career.

This tactic only strengthens MS position as I continue to state.  If the FTC position is that MS could harm the industry by keeping COD from competitions platform, well MS has already shone they are more than willing to make concessions on that front.  This plays more into MS hands then it does the FTC and it gives MS the ability to deal and take away those arguments.  As I pointed out, this is what actually makes me believe that MS will land this deal above 90% because it really seems like everything is played exactly as MS would want.