Xbox |OT|

[EpicRandy]

Ryuu96 said:

I'm sure our esteemed regulators could conceivably sound more like the mafia, but certainly "A court decision can still help us as enforcers notwithstanding the results" leaves very little room. https://t.co/fD9nRSqvKQ

— Richard Hoeg (@HoegLaw) March 31, 2023

I think it’s relatively clear that the FTC wants even embarrassing losses used as marketing for new antitrust laws. Not really the way an agency *should* behave (they have only the power granted to them), but certainly in line with what we’ve seen and heard from them.

— Richard Hoeg (@HoegLaw) March 31, 2023

Remember I said a couple weeks ago that I heard someone say this, now Hoeg is essentially saying the same. Basically the FTC doesn't care about losing in court, they're using the losses to build a narrative that they can't get anything done without changes to the law, a loss in court is still a win in their view.

it's unfortunate for sure the MS/ABK transaction are stuck in a political play. It actually may lead the FTC do actually do the exact opposite of what they're supposed to do.

However if I remove myself and my pro gaming bias from the case to see the bigger picture I'm not sure I actually disagree with the FTC position. I mean big lobby reduce fundings for things like the FTC and IRS, so using the small funding you have to actually target those who are responsible may not be without merits. The IRS is so underfunded that they only target normal individual for easiness, if they were to say, guess what, we wont review smaller income individual we will use the funding to target wealthy individual and corporation, the system would be so out of whack they would have no choice but to fix it quick.