They also own Excel. And who cares? It isn't relevant at all with gaming, or in this case cloud gaming.
Even if they own Azure, MS still has to pay the by far largest cost of cloud gaming: the bandwith and electricity. They can't use the Azure servers for xCloud or PS cloud gaming because they use (patented by Sony too) special server racks that use console hardware, so are different than the normal PC/server hardware of the typical server rack that Azure and everyone else uses for other things.
Owning a CLOUD service provider is inconsequential for CLOUD gaming? Your attempts of Reductio ad absurdum fail straight away. Costs have no bearing in the business size, and Intelligent Cloud has a profitability of about 10B per quarter. PER QUARTER. That's about the same profit as Sony has PER YEAR.
Additionally, while XCloud uses different server racks, the business scope is the same. Like, you're trying to find excuses for something that's so in your face a blind man could see.
In UK, not worldwide. Worldwide Sony has twice the subs and generates way more money from them than MS.
XCloud is the biggest console Cloud service provider. Playstation Plus is not the same kind of service, and you, as someone that things they're so smart, should know this. Also, the UK not being the world has no relevance as a counter for my argument. Stop throwing shit in the hopes it sticks.
The entire ABK generates only 4% of the global gaming market revenue. The cloud gaming generates very likely way under 1% of the global gaming market revenue. In addition to this, the total cloud gaming market may have being ultra optimistic to the point of being unrealistic what, 10M active users, 20M worldwide maybe? It is nothing compared to the over 3B gamers population.
Irrelevant. Cloud marketing is a nascent market, with low barrier of entry. Allowing consolidation this early on will lead (if the market segment is successful) to less competition going forward. This shit is economics 101. Go back to school.
Over/around 90%+ of the PS userbase don't buy yearly CoD, and according to a CMA poll only around a quarter (according to a CMA poll) of the ones who buy it in UK would consider to leave PS if goes console exclusive.
Yes, CoD sells a lot but it isn't that important or decisive for the gaming market and even PlayStation. It's a tiny portion of the game sales in PS.
Irrelevant. The deal was cancelled not because of the Console SLC, but because of the Cloud SLC.
MS cloud gaming having a few million users is nothing compared to the global cloud market. There's a lot of porn out there.
Another Reductio ad absurdum and Strawman? Fantastic. You should not only try and learn basic economic theory, but also philosophy.
Nah, I only like facts and I can be convinced with them. I simply don't buy fanboy wishes and wrong informations like yours. The market data is the one I mentioned, that's a fact.
Tesla has almost 4% of the car market share. Florida is the biggest banana exporter in the US. Both of those are facts. They are also fucking irrelevant to this discussion.
Instead of attacking me or posting funny gifs, I'd suggest you to research factual data to back your opinion, in this case that cloud gaming is relevant to the market, or that at least game subs (including non-cloud gaming) are a relevant portion of the gaming revenue (like at least being something better than having a single digit market share), or that MS generates more money or has more users than Sony with cloud gaming or at least game subs world.
It's because I not only studied this whole case from the beginning, but also because I have an interest, daily contact, and a background that overlaps with finance, that I can actually make an informed comment.
But you won't because it isn't the case. You'll keep posting wrong or unrelated stuff, like that they released a Halo Cookbook.
Did they? I wasn't aware, but seems to me that you are. Good for you. Ah, sorry, here's a funny gif that describes what you are