@PerséfoneLo primero, agradecería que dejes el victimismo y de juzgar o criticar a la gente si no te gusta lo que lees. Ya llevas aqui un tiempo y he visto tus tonos, por favor, ten una conversación normal 🤗
Tu link
31. In relation to ability, the CMA found that: (a) The Merged Entity would have significant upstream market power in publishing of games for consoles.
21 (b) Activision’s content is an important input for PlayStation. An economically significant number of PlayStation gamers could switch to Xbox if Activision’s content were no longer available (or not available on equal terms) on PlayStation.
22 (c) There are few, if any, alternative franchises with CoD’s level of brand awareness and popularity amongst gamers.
23 (d) Sony is Microsoft’s closest competitor in gaming consoles. By contrast, Nintendo offers differentiated hardware and content aimed primarily at a different (eg, more ‘family-friendly’) customer segment.
24 (e) Sony’s existing contractual protections (from existing arrangements with Activision) would not undermine Microsoft’s ability to engage in partial or total foreclosure because (i) they may not account for all the possible foreclosure mechanisms that could be available to the Merged Entity, (ii) they could be renegotiated or terminated early, and (iii) they may not be enforced depending on the respective parties’ respective bargaining positions.
25 In relation to incentive, the CMA found that: (a) Financial modelling of the Merger suggests that the Merged Entity’s incentive to foreclose Sony may be considerably stronger than suggested by the Parties.
26 (b) Microsoft’s past business practices suggest that it may be willing to make losses in the short term in order to build scale and increase its user base. In particular, (i) Microsoft has previously acquired publishers and made their upcoming games exclusive to Xbox, even when those publishers had previously made their content available to all consoles, and (ii) Microsoft has
pursued this strategy when acquiring content that is far less valuable than
Activision’s games, and hence far less likely to divert customers to its
console.
27
(c) Microsoft could engage in a partial foreclosure strategy, which would allow it
to capture the most dedicated CoD gamers—those who would switch to Xbox
to benefit from enhanced content, interoperability, or earlier releases —whilst
continuing to generate revenues from less dedicated PlayStation CoD
gamers who may not have switched to Xbox in response to a total
foreclosure strategy.
28
(d) The CMA did not identify any persuasive evidence that Microsoft would be
deterred from engaging in total or partial foreclosure strategies by the
prospect of reputational damage to Xbox or CoD.
29
In relation to effect, the CMA focused on the impact of the Merger on competition
in the market for gaming consoles generally, not just on its impact on any specific
competitor (eg, Sony). However, since the CMA found that Sony is Microsoft’s
closest rival in a highly concentrated market for gaming consoles, the CMA
considered carefully the impact of the Merger on Sony’s competitiveness. The
CMA found that, given the importance of CoD to Sony PlayStation and the
existence of strong direct and indirect network effects, any foreclosure strategy
could have a significant impact on Sony’s revenues and user base.
30 The impact
of any foreclosure strategy on Sony may be particularly strong at the launch of the
next generation of consoles, when both new and existing users decide which
console to buy.
31 The CMA found, therefore, that a material impact on Sony’s
ability to compete would have a detrimental impact on overall competition in the
market and ultimately harm consumers (eg through higher prices, reduced quality,
or reduced innovation in games and gaming consoles).
Este primer punto de los tres que trata es lo que decía al principio en mi comentario, que me lo has querido desviar. Si la cma cancela la compra por estos argumentos ÚNICAMENTE O MAYORMENTE, me parece que no tiene una base real y en mi parecer se equivocan. Al final cuando se compra una empresa buscas posicionarte mejor, como ha hecho sony con naughty dog, bungie o.... Como ha hecho Microsoft con zenimax, mahjong,...
Y los otros dos puntos que trata es:
-
game pass se haría demasiado bueno.
Que aquí puedo llegar a entender lo que dicen, al final game pass es lider. Pero no creo que tampoco sea muy justo la comparación cuando sony tiene el mismo servicio pero cuesta más caro y sin juegos first día 1. Al final xbox no lidera y busca ser más agresivo y a sony no le hace falta y busca máxima rentabilidad.
-
Microsoft tiene Windows y azureEsto es mezclar peras con sandias, no tiene nada que ver con este sector, es más, sony usa azure... No sé qué pinta
![[beer]](/images/smilies/nuevos2/brindando.gif "brindis")
![[360º]](/images/smilies/nuevos/vueltas.gif "como la niña del exorcista")
![[666]](/images/smilies/nuevos2/masmalo.gif "maloso")
![[qmparto]](/images/smilies/net_quemeparto.gif "Que me parto!")
![[poraki]](/images/smilies/nuevos/dedos.gif "por aquí!")
