By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ryuu96 on 27 March 2023
gtotheunit91 said:
shikamaru317 said:

10 US Representatives, both Republican and Democrat, have now joined Democrat Senator Maria Cantwell in asking US Trade Representative Katherine Tai and US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimonda to pressure Japan on why their regulatory agency is allowing Sony to participate in anti-competitive console exclusivity deals with Japanese developers and publishers, when Sony holds 98% of the "high-end console" marketshare in Japan. 

The letter sent by 4 Republicans states:

“The Japanese government’s effective policy of non-prosecution when it comes to Sony appears to be a serious barrier to U.S. exports, with real impacts for Microsoft and the many U.S. game developers and publishers that sell globally but see their earnings in Japan depressed by these practices,”

The letter sent by 6 Democrats contains similar messaging.

This is where bipartisan support is coming from?!?

Sony gonna be really pissed at the CMA and FTC for excluding Nintendo completely from their investigations lol. Not that this actually means anything and Japan is suddenly going to be like "damn, you're right." 

Sony themselves pushed to exclude and disregard Nintendo from all conversations during this as soon as Microsoft pointed out that Switch has survived without CoD because they didn't want evidence that a console can actually survive without CoD. So Sony has themselves to blame as well, although the CMA/FTC didn't have to go along with their market definition.

We've gone from Sony having Microsoft on the ropes to the Console SLC being dropped entirely and now things are quickly backfiring on Sony, Lol.

Wonder if Microsoft can use this argument to justify making a large Japanese acquisition, although, there is still the Cloud SLC.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 27 March 2023

Around the Network
Ryuu96 on 27 March 2023
  • "Sony's anti-competitive tactics deserve discussion, and we welcome further investigation to ensure a level playing field in the video game industry," Microsoft spokesperson David Cuddy told Axios.
  • While Microsoft isn't saying just how involved it was in orchestrating this push, its government affairs team has discussed these issues with members of Congress, Axios understands.

Jeez. Microsoft really getting the claws out...

Can we stop with the "fed up of Xbox being a nice guy" now?

Sony should maybe start considering dropping their opposition...The Console SLC is gone. Their argument is gone. Now they're being targeted by frigging Senators and House members and they're going to have to dump thousands of documents in the FTC case. I want this over with

CMA considers Sony a major competitor in Cloud but Sony has barely argued for that, it's too late in the game to change their entire argument I think and start saying "the deal should be blocked because PS Now won't be able to compete!"

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 27 March 2023

Ryuu96 on 27 March 2023

Hmh, I like the suggestion that all timed exclusives should have a maximum time limit which should be stated to consumers and that they should be transparent to all consumers, it should be announced from announcement how long the timed exclusivity period is for and for what platforms it is launching for when it's over. I think that is a nice middle-ground between timed exclusives and no timed exclusives which wouldn't ever be enforced.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 27 March 2023

Ryuu96 on 27 March 2023

Idas Said:

I posted this on page 167 in November 2022 :p (this thread moves fast xD).

I guess that now is a good time to post it again as a reminder:

I think that it's important to talk about third party strategies in mergers, what Sony is doing and (probably) why.

Third parties can oppose to a potential transaction in their industry taking proactive steps to challenge a deal: 1) encouraging the regulators to block it; 2) filing a private civil suit or 3)even lobbying politicians.

But first of all, what is a third party in this case?

  • Customers (Users from Xbox or ABK, for example)
  • Competitors (Sony or Nintendo)
  • Suppliers (Take-Two, Electronic Arts or any indie developer)
  • Distributors (From Steam in digital to GAME in retail)
  • Wholesalers (GameStop, for example)
  • Advocacy groups (the Communications Workers of America, for example)

Opposing a transaction has pros and cons, but more than once has been a successful strategy. For example, when in 2014 Comcast announced its intent to acquire Time Warner, Netlix (among others) opposed to it, influencing the DOJ very early. The transaction was finally abandoned.

When a third party complains to the regulator during the review process, it's mainly for 4 reasons.

- To influence the regulator to investigate particular aspects of a transaction
- To encourage regulators to make a formal legal challenge or reject the deal
- To help regulators to shape an eventual merger remedy
- To obtain the merging parties' divested assets

While the complaints that usually carry more weight are the ones from customers, the ones from competitors can also be relevant. In fact, even more in vertical mergers where foreclosure is a potential key issue (like this one). In any case, regulators are always skeptic about a competitor opposing a merger because their interests usually diverge from the interests of the consumer. But competitors can be helpful for regulators because they are well-placed to offer concrete, relevant and detailed facts that regulators may find useful in developing theories and arguments.

If a third party wants to oppose a transaction, they have to start as soon as possible. Early involvement can help set the tone for the investigation, including what the regulators view as key issues and whom the regulator approaches for information. It looks like Sony approached regulators in April - May (the start of the first review processes) and from the info shared by CADE and the CMA it's obvious that they tried to set the tone of the investigation.

Third parties usually provide things like internal documents, studies, pricing analyses, market research, customer surveys, face to face meetings with the CEO or knowledgeable representative, etc. Expert opinions from reputable economists are also useful.

Sony provided documents, studies, pricing analyses and market research to CADE and the CMA, Jim Ryan met with the European Commission (and the CMA) and they hired a team of economists for the deal. They have even lobbied politicians.

If a competitor decides to oppose a transaction, they'll highlight that the merger is likely to stop the competitor from competing effectively against the merged entity by:

- Foreclosing the competitor from access to a necessary market or input (Call of Duty)
- Foreclosing the competitor from specific and important market opportunities (ABK games in subscription services)
- Subjecting the competitor to higher costs (Gamepass negatively affecting the value of games)
- Subjecting the competitor to exclusionary conduct (raising barriers to entry in cloud gaming)

In addition, although regulators are generally skeptical of competitor complaints, if a regulator decides to oppose a transaction, a complaining competitor can be a valuable ally for the agency (for example in future litigation). This is way the FTC staff was probably getting third party signed declarations in October.

But complaining to the agencies also have risks:

- Third-party materials and testimonies that now are confidential could become public
- It's not cheap :p
- You are wasting time that could be spend on your business
- It's a one-way flow of information (the regulators will not provide a complaining third party with info about the investigation)
- It could affect future acquisitions: regulators could use arguments and information submitted by Sony in the future (market definitions, for example)

So, I understand what Sony is doing and it makes sense from their perspective. But if the trend of the industry is consolidation, they'll have to make more acquisitions too. And being so aggressive now could have unintended consequences in a few years...

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 27 March 2023

Angelus on 27 March 2023

That was a whole lot of text, just to say actions have consequences...



Around the Network
Ryuu96 on 27 March 2023

Idas insights have been great, I'll low-key miss them when this shit show is over.



Ryuu96 on 27 March 2023

Shika is brave for making a thread, I don't think I want to even bother with it, I know it'll be filled with hot takes, disinformation and people who haven't followed the acquisition at all not realising that it was actually FTC who created this dumb market definition in attempt to block the deal with Sony's support and Microsoft actually tried to include Nintendo at the start before their internal comments backfired on them, Lol. Both companies lobbied, one lobbied better than the other. Now that companies comments are backfiring on them. Tough breaks, I feel like things are about to become incredibly toxic across Twitter, Forums, etc.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 27 March 2023

Spade on 27 March 2023

^^Replies in that thread are the big reason why MS needs to buy up Japan.



https://www.trueachievements.com/gamercards/SliferCynDelta.png%5B/IMG%5D">https://www.trueachievements.com/gamer/SliferCynDelta"><img src="https://www.trueachievements.com/gamercards/SliferCynDelta.png

Spade on 27 March 2023
Ryuu96 said:

Shika is brave for making a thread, I don't think I want to even bother with it, I know it'll be filled with hot takes, disinformation and people who haven't followed the acquisition at all not realising that it was actually FTC/CMA who created this dumb market definition with Sony's support and Microsoft actually tried to include Nintendo at the start before their internal comments backfired on them, Lol. Both companies lobbied, one lobbied better than the other. Now that companies comments are backfiring on them. Tough breaks, I feel like things are about to become incredibly toxic across Twitter, Forums, etc.

Can't be much worse than people wishing diseases on people's kids' on twitter. 

Hope this deal closes sooner than later. 



https://www.trueachievements.com/gamercards/SliferCynDelta.png%5B/IMG%5D">https://www.trueachievements.com/gamer/SliferCynDelta"><img src="https://www.trueachievements.com/gamercards/SliferCynDelta.png

KazumaKiryu on 27 March 2023

Why is Shikamaru omitting the background and not mentioning Microsoft's payment for the US politician?
Microsoft pays American politicians to publish false government-level statistics and tries to weaken Sony.
Right? 500.000 Dollar for US-Senatorin Maria Cantwell, by Microsoft. Or is it not official ?
Instead of producing their own big, legendary games - the biggest publishers and brands (Minecraft, Call of Duty, ect) are bought by Microsoft.
PS5 games that were in production at Bethesda have been canceled, according to the developer. So Microsoft lie again.
Nintendo is completely excluded from the statistics because they are too unimportant according to Microsoft. When asked why PlayStation is so much more popular in Japan, the response was cautious. The interest of the Japanese people probably doesn't matter. Microsoft also criticizes the fact that so few Japanese developers want to work with their group. It is ironic that Microsoft accuses its competition of monopoly. Microsoft has bought more studios and ip's in recent years than Sony.
Sony could have bought maaaany the studios in the PS2 era, but didn't - because laws and rules come first in the world. the big US group Microsoft wants to take further steps to directly weaken Sony - even outside of America. Its easy to see. Only for fanboys is this cool, for all Gamer not. In my opinion, this is a scandal for microsoft, if this all true.