"Fox should have never been able to be bought. And now that the industry is being consolidated, its been a red flag for Government regulatory bodies.
Under trump we had a bad time with companies specifically ISP providers able to buy large companies and now the ISP landscape is complete shit and will be for a long time. Unlike in UK who have highest speeds and lowest prices for Internet. At&T bought one of the largest ISP providers.
ANd we literally now only have 2 large providers who cover the US.
Thank god of Starlink. But even still its expensive to get setup.
This deal being scrutinized is good. No company should be able to buy a player as large as Activision/Blizzard, EA, Take2.
If Microsoft owns that amount of content, only a matter of time before they buy more or other companies start buying up the rest.
And lets say MS really doesn't want to impede where you get access to those titles?
But another company does if they buy lets say EA, or Take two? Thats what Regulators are really is fighting. Look at the current landscape of Entertainment with streaming services. No one even disney who owns all the content on their services are making money from streaming. They have over 200 Million subs, and just raised prices again, and still wont make profit until 2024 according to them? Netflix is the largest and most expensive and still not turning a profit?
So whats the deal?
I believe Sony as a entertainment company is the only one that has not built a movie/TV streaming service. And the reason why is theres no money in it. It's a growth sector market but not one that makes money in terms of raw profit. Which is why Sony sold streaming rights for Uncharted, Spider-Man: No way home, No Time To Die, to three different streaming services and made 3 billion dollars. They know they can make more money actual money from selling the streaming rights of their properties rather than lose shit tons of money getting into the streaming game.
So if they know this as a entertainment entity thats been around as long as most tv/film companies, then dont you think they know where game streaming/sub services are going?
They know they are added value, and if done correctly can bring in growth market, but to think that a streaming/subscription service for games should be the new way to distribute games, I think they know its not great for the industry in long term when sub numbers get to a certain saturation point. Which is why MS has said their goal is mobile. I think they know as well. But their response to saying "Playstation should become like Nintendo" tells me their Ulterior motive is to out bid/out maneuver the competition. If you make youself the go to place for the biggest third party titles and the most convenient it basically prices Sony out to rely on first party. Which would make them not direct competitors and MS would go unchallenged. Basically through this buyout, over time MS would push Sony out, by making them look like the more expensive option. Which in raw dollars spent by the consumer is correct."