FTC sues to block Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard
The Federal Trade Commission said on Thursday it has filed an antitrust case against Microsoft to challenge the software maker’s attempt to acquire video game publisher Activision Blizzard, claiming it would violate U.S. law.
This isn’t Microsoft’s first time dealing with competitive pressure. In 1998 the U.S. Justice Department filed a broad antitrust case against the company. Microsoft changed some practices related to its Windows operating system business as a result. Regulators in the United Kingdom are looking into whether the Activision Blizzard acquisition would lessen competition in the country.
related investing news
Microsoft announced plans to acquire Activision Blizzard for $68.7 billion in January, with the goal of closing it by June 2023. The deal has come under pressure from Microsoft’s competitors in gaming, such as Sony. Microsoft has repeatedly said it won’t be the world’s leader in gaming if the deal were to close, and it has vowed to provide popular “Call of Duty” games on gaming platforms other than those owned by Microsoft.
“We continue to believe that this deal will expand competition and create more opportunities for gamers and game developers,” Brad Smith, Microsoft’s vice chair and president, said in a statement. “We have been committed since Day One to addressing competitive concerns, including by offering earlier this week proposed concessions to the FTC. While we believed in giving peace a chance, we have complete confidence in our case and welcome the opportunity to present our case in court.”
FTC commissioners voted 3-1 to move forward with the agency’s administrative complaint, which will go before the FTC’s internal administrative law judge. In that process, the ALJ makes an initial decision after a trial-like proceeding. The respondent or FTC staff serving as “complaint counsel” can choose to appeal the initial decision to the full commission for a vote. After that, the respondent could still ask a federal appeals court to review the commission’s order.
“With control of Activision’s content, Microsoft would have the ability and increased incentive to withhold or degrade Activision’s content in ways that substantially lessen competition — including competition on product quality, price, and innovation,” the FTC said in its complaint. “This loss of competition would likely result in significant harm to consumers in multiple markets at a pivotal time for the industry.”
In the statement, the FTC said Microsoft has a record, including with its 2021 ZeniMax deal, of buying games and using the moves to suppress competition from other companies that make consoles. Microsoft promised the European Commission antitrust officials that the company wouldn’t have an incentive to stop people from playin ZeniMax games on consoles other than the Xbox, but after the European Commission permitted the deal to proceed, Microsoft announced that it was making ZeniMax games such as Elder Scrolls VI, Redfall and Starfield into exclusives, the FTC said in its suit.
The FTC said Activision Blizzard has brought its games to a variety of devices, irrespective of their manufacturers, but that might change if Microsoft were to complete the deal. Microsoft could adjust prices or worsen the experience on competing hardware such as Sony PlayStation consoles, or keep Activision Blizzard consoles from reaching consoles other than Microsoft Xbox systems, the agency said.
Microsoft does offer titles that are exclusive to the Xbox, and in October Phil Spencer, CEO of gaming at Microsoft, pointed out that Sony has its own set of exclusive franchises, but over time Microsoft has brought games such as Minecraft to other devices. He argued that it’s important for more people, not less, to play games the company owns.
Microsoft is seeking to add subscribers to its Game Pass service that provides access to hundreds of games. The Game Pass Ultimate subscription tier also allows people to play games that stream from Microsoft data centers on a variety of devices, including smartphones.
The FTC said in its case that the proposed acquisition is reasonably likely to reduce competition or bring about monopolies in the markets for gaming subscription services, cloud gaming and high-performance consoles.
“We want Call of Duty to be enjoyed by more players around the world. That requires COD being on diverse platforms after the merger of Microsoft + Activision Blizzard,” Lulu Cheng Meservey, Activision’s executive vice president for corporate affairs and communications chief, said in a tweet.
The lawsuit represents a major milestone for FTC Chair Lina Khan, who has long signaled aggressive action on tech. While her tenure has included a lawsuit seeking to block Facebook owner Meta from acquiring a virtual reality fitness app developer, the lawsuit seeking to block the Microsoft-Activision deal is notable for its scale, as the largest technology transaction to date.
Khan and her counterpart at the Justice Department’s antitrust division, Jonathan Kanter, have said they want the agencies to become more comfortable with taking big swings, adding that a high win record in court likely means they aren’t challenging enough cases.
Federal enforcers have seen a string of losses in merger challenges in recent months, with the exception of one significant win by the Department of Justice in its case against Penguin Random House’s proposed acquisition of Simon & Schuster.
The FTC’s administrative law judge rejected the commission’s challenge of Illumina’s proposed acquisition of Grail in the biotech space, though the FTC said it will appeal that ruling. The Antitrust Division has also said it’s appealing or considering appealing the three merger cases it lost so far: UnitedHealth Group-Change Healthcare, US Sugar-Imperial Sugar and Booz Allen Hamilton-EverWatch.
Smith previewed Microsoft’s arguments against blocking the deal in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece published earlier this week, saying it would be a “huge mistake.”
“Microsoft faces huge challenges in the gaming industry,” Smith wrote, adding that its Xbox console gaming system is in third place behind Sony’s PlayStation and the Nintendo Switch. Microsoft also has “no meaningful presence in the mobile game industry,” he said. He pointed attention toward Apple and Google, saying that while mobile gaming is a fast growing and high revenue segment, those two app store operators take a “significant portion” of those earnings through their fees on developers.
Activision Blizzard does have a place on mobile devices thanks to its 2016 acquisition of King, which publishes the Candy Crush Saga game. The Candy Crush franchise has over 200 million monthly active users, Activision Blizzard said in November.
Smith noted that Microsoft’s purchase of Activision would let it compete effectively in the gaming industry, spurring innovation and helping customers. He downplayed concerns voiced by competitors such as Sony, saying the company is “as excited about this deal as Blockbuster was about the rise of Netflix.”
Activision Blizzard shares reached a session low of $73 per share after the FTC announced its case. Microsoft had agreed to pay $95 per share.
Bobby Kotick, Activision Blizzard’s CEO, told employees in a memo that the assertion that the deal is anti-competitive doesn’t match with the facts.
“Simply put, a combined Microsoft-ABK will be good for players, good for employees, good for competition and good for the industry,” he wrote. “Our players want choice, and this gives them exactly that.”
Politico reported last month that the FTC was likely to try to block the deal.
Technology
OpenAI dissolves team focused on long-term AI risks, less than one year after announcing it
Boaz Weinstein, founder and chief investment officer of Saba Capital Management, during the Bloomberg Invest event in New York, US, on Wednesday, June 7, 2023.
Jeenah Moon | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Boaz Weinstein, the hedge fund investor on the winning side of JPMorgan Chase’s $6.2 billion, “London Whale” trading loss in 2011, is now taking on index fund giant BlackRock.
On Friday, Weinstein‘s Saba Capital detailed in a presentation seen by CNBC its plans to push for change at 10 closed-end BlackRock funds that trade at a significant discount to the value of their underlying assets compared to their peers. Saba says the underperformance is a direct result of BlackRock’s management.
The hedge fund wants board control at three BlackRock funds and a minority slate at seven others. It also seeks to oust BlackRock as the manager of six of those ten funds.
“In the last three years, nine of the ten funds that we’re even talking about have lost money for investors,” Weinstein said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” earlier this week.
At the heart of Saba’s “Hey BlackRock” campaign is an argument around governance. Saba says in its presentation that BlackRock runs those closed-end funds the “exact opposite” way it expects companies to run themselves.
BlackRock “is talking out of both sides of its mouth” by doing this, Saba says. That’s cost retail investors $1.4 billion in discounts, by Saba’s math, on top of the management fees it charges.
BlackRock, Saba says in the deck, “considers itself a leader in governance, but is crushing shareholder rights.” At certain BlackRock funds, for example, if an investor doesn’t submit their vote in a shareholder meeting, their shares will automatically go to support BlackRock. Saba is suing to change that.
A BlackRock spokesperson called that assertion “very misleading” and said those funds “simply require that most shareholders vote affirmatively in favor.”
The index fund manager’s rebuttal, “Defend Your Fund,” describes Saba as an activist hedge fund seeking to “enrich itself.”
The problem and the solution
Closed-end funds have a finite number of shares. Investors who want to sell their positions have to find an interested buyer, which means they may not be able to sell at a price that reflects the value of a fund’s holdings.
In open-ended funds, by contrast, an investor can redeem its shares with the manager in exchange for cash. That’s how many index funds are structured, like those that track the S&P 500.
Saba says it has a solution. BlackRock should buy back shares from investors at the price they’re worth, not where they currently trade.
“Investors who want to come out come out, and those who want to stay will stay for a hundred years, if they want,” Weinstein told CNBC earlier this week.
Weinstein, who founded Saba in 2009, made a fortune two years later, when he noticed that a relatively obscure credit derivatives index was behaving abnormally. Saba began buying up the underlying derivatives that, unbeknownst to him, were being sold by JPMorgan’s Bruno Iksil. For a time, Saba took tremendous losses on the position, until Iksil’s bet turned sour on him, costing JPMorgan billions and netting Saba huge profits.
Saba said in its investor deck that the changes at BlackRock could take the form of a tender offer or a restructuring. The presentation noted that BlackRock previously cast its shares in support of a tender at another closed-end fund where an activist was pushing for similar change.
At the worst-performing funds relative to their peer group, Saba is seeking shareholder approval to fire the manager. In total, BlackRock wants new management at six funds, including the BlackRock California Municipal Income Trust (BFZ), the BlackRock Innovation and Growth Term Trust (BIGZ) and the BlackRock Health Sciences Term Trust (BMEZ).
“BlackRock is failing as a manager by delivering subpar performance compared to relevant benchmarks and worst-in-class corporate governance,” the deck says.
If Saba were to win shareholder approval to fire BlackRock as manager at the six funds, the newly constituted boards would then run a review process over at least six months. Saba says that in addition to offering liquidity to investors, its board nominees would push for reduced fees and for other unspecified governance fixes.
A BlackRock spokesperson told CNBC that the firm has historically taken steps to improve returns at closed-end funds when necessary.
“BlackRock’s closed-end funds welcome constructive engagement with thoughtful shareholders who act in good faith with the shared goal of enhancing long-term value for all,” the spokesperson said.
Weinstein said Saba has run similar campaigns at roughly 60 closed-end funds in the past decade but has only taken over a fund’s management twice. The hedge fund sued BlackRock last year to remove that so-called “vote-stripping provision” at certain funds and filed another lawsuit earlier this year.
BlackRock has pitched shareholders via mailings and advertisements. “Your dependable, income-paying investment,” BlackRock has told investors, is under threat from Saba.
Saba plans to host a webinar for shareholders on Monday but says BlackRock has refused to provide the shareholder list for several of the funds. The BlackRock spokesperson said that it has “always acted in accordance with all applicable laws” when providing shareholder information, and that it “never blocked Saba’s access to shareholders.”
“What we want is for shareholders, which we are the largest of but not in any way the majority, to make that $1.4 billion, which can be done at the press of a button,” Weinstein told CNBC earlier this week.
WATCH: CNBC’s full interview with Saba Capital’s Boaz Weinstein
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Environment12 months agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports1 month agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports7 months agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment1 year agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Environment1 year agoTesla advances Powerwall pilot project with German electric company