You mean to tell me that everyone who wasn't copy pasting resetera, Hoe law, and idas... And actually looked at the documents for themselves, had a point?
How good of a point will any of it have been if you all actually turn out wrong in the end once all the final decisions are in? I really don't believe any major regulator has taken Sony's claims as seriously as some have believed throughout this whole process. Everything that has gone to a final decision thus far has gone in the deal's favor. What some seem to be celebrating are delays at best. What if the CMA and European Commission approves the deal with no conditions? What then? It all rests on the FTC, right? A reminder that nearly every company currently engaged with the FTC in the same internal ALJ proceedings has closed their transactions. There's also a significant Supreme Court case, with direct implications for these very FTC ALJ proceedings, that has already been argued before the court and is due for a decision May or June next year.
Perhaps another time, in another decade, with different antitrust laws and a different Supreme Court makeup, the FTC might have prevailed in blocking this deal.
And remember I said this part; some will celebrate when they hear that the FTC files for a preliminary injunction in federal court (a preliminary injunction the FTC would likely win and an appeals court would likely affirm 6-7 months later) without understanding the kind of injunction they've filed for. The FTC wouldn't be requesting an injunction to permanently block the deal as illegal (Microsoft would welcome that, as it's exactly the fight they want to have in a federal court), but instead an injunction to halt, and thus delay/prevent, Microsoft and Activision Blizzard from closing
while administrative proceedings can be allowed to take place and conclude. In other words, such a decision in the FTC's favor wouldn't be a sign that they've somehow won in their effort to block the deal and so it's over.
Some would view such a preliminary injunction as a sign of the confidence from FTC. When in fact it would only reinforce the FTC's lack of confidence in its ability to truly block the deal as illegal via Federal District Court. Therefore, that is why it could make sense for them to try for such a lower risk/higher reward maneuver that could help them stall for more time with a significantly reduced chance of a major blowback in the other direction. However, Federal Judges carry significant power. Such a could very easily carry a major risk if brought against a corporation with the means and willingness to fight like Microsoft clearly is.
And not a single bit of any of my hypothetical (but strongly suspected) preliminary injunction theory would protect the FTC from the impending Supreme Court decision in Axon Enterprises vs FTC in May or June next year.
TLDR - The ball isn't in the FTC's court and they know it. They're praying for an inside straight delivered via CMA and/or The European Commission. I don't think they get it. The Supreme Court decision in the Axon case presents a game over scenario for FTC. Doesn't mean Microsoft wins the moment the Supreme Court rules against the FTC (and they likely will), but it would mean Microsoft is ultimately going to win when the Supreme Court rules against the FTC in the Axon case.
www.tweaktown.com
