Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella arrives at the U.S. DIstrict Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco on June 28, 2023.
Philip Pacheco | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Microsoft and its current major acquisition target, video game publisher Activision Blizzard, have wrapped up their five days in court in San Francisco as the Federal Trade Commission sought to stop the deal from closing, but not without several fascinating facts coming to light.
And not only about games. Information on Microsoft’s business ambitions, its process for okaying acquisitions, and its most critical rivals in cybersecurity was revealed as part of the hearing process, thanks to documents and testimony from executives. Large releases like this don’t happen every day, and in the past several years Microsoft has avoided prominent trials that can result in several notable disclosures at once.
The FTC had originally planned to bring its case against the deal before an administrative law judge in August but then opted to seek a preliminary injunction in federal court as the agency became worried that Microsoft would try to close, even though some jurisdictions had not cleared the purchase.
In addition to regulators in the U.S. and the United Kingdom, Sony also opposes the deal. Its PlayStation 5 console competes with the Xbox Series S and X consoles, and the company has said that anticompetitive effects would arise if Microsoft were to take control of Activision Blizzard.
Here’s a rundown of notable facts that have trickled out in recent days and are still lingering after both parties presented their closing arguments on Thursday.
Mobile, mobile, mobile. The impulse to expand Microsoft’s gaming business on mobile devices at least in part inspired the Activision acquisition. “It was very imperative to us if we were going to remain [relevant and] grow relevance in the market, we were going to have to find mobile customers for Xbox,” Phil Spencer, Microsoft’s CEO of gaming, said last Friday. Revenue from mobile gaming is growing faster than revenue from gaming on PCs or consoles, and Microsoft executives repeatedly said in the hearings that the company has made little progress on building key mobile gaming content.
Several earlier mobile targets. Microsoft considered several other companies before choosing to buy Activision Blizzard, including FarmVille publisher Zynga, Pokemon Go developer Niantic and Japanese digital entertainment mainstays Sega Sammy and Square Enix, according to testimony and documents released in the case.
Interest in Asia. While Xbox consoles have a respectable market share in the U.S., they’re less popular in Japan, where Nintendo and Sony rule. A 2019 analysis Microsoft produced for a possible Square Enix bid said that “acquiring Square Enix would provide Gaming with market relevance in a region that currently lacks a meaningful Xbox presence, allowing us to reach more gamers in more geographies.”
Valuable incentives. Sony has paid game developers fees to discourage them from shipping games such as “Ghostwire: Tokyo” and “Deathloop” on Xbox, Microsoft executives said. Microsoft pays its own fees, and Spencer said that buying Activision Blizzard would mean Microsoft wouldn’t have to spend as much on incentives.
Many games under consideration. One of the more dramatic moments in the five days of hearings was when the FTC’s lead lawyer, James Weingarten, sought to push Spencer to make certain commitments on Microsoft’s part. Weingarten got Spencer to say he would not pull any future Call of Duty game from PlayStation consoles, a statement that was in keeping with what Microsoft has said for months. Then Weingarten went further, asking Spencer to do the same thing with all Activision content. Spencer did not immediately agree. Activision Blizzard publishes many other games besides Call of Duty, such as those in the Diablo and Overwatch franchises, but the bulk of the attention was on Call of Duty. Jim Ryan, CEO of Sony Interactive Entertainment, wasn’t happy with a Microsoft-generated list of Activision Blizzard games that would remain accessible on the PlayStation after the acquisition closes. “Overwatch is there, but Overwatch 2 is not on there, which is the current version of the game,” he said.
Microsoft’s long-range ambitions. The FTC managed to get ahold of documents Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella sent to top executives and fellow board members that laid out Microsoft’s financial goals for the current decade. The documents showed that Nadella is aiming for Microsoft to generate $500 billion by the 2030 fiscal year, with at least 10% year-over-year revenue growth. One document said Microsoft’s Security, Compliance, Identity and Management business could reach $100 billion in revenue by the 2030 fiscal year, while the company wants its Teams communication app to reach 1 billion monthly active users by then.
Weak hardware access. Spencer said during his testimony that Sony was reluctant to send Microsoft development kits for the PlayStation 5 before its 2020 release, and that prevented Microsoft from optimizing its Minecraft game for Sony’s current console. That put the game at a disadvantage compared with other developers, Spencer said. Ryan, from Sony, explained why his company provides development kits to Microsoft later than it does for other studios. “The commercial risks associated with this knowledge of those feature sets leaking to our principal competitor is not something that we would choose to rely on any contract to enforce,” Ryan said. Gamers can find an older version of Minecraft on the PlayStation 5.
Deal threshold. Amy Hood, Microsoft’s finance chief, said in written testimony for the hearing that she provides final approval for proposed deals under a certain dollar amount, but Microsoft’s board must sign off on deals valued above $500 million. Microsoft had $104 billion in cash and equivalents at the end of March, and 2022 revenue exceeded $204 billion.
Negotiating leverage. Microsoft was determined to ensure that Activision Blizzard’s Call of Duty games remain on Xbox for its current generation, which debuted in 2020. Bobby Kotick, Activision Blizzard’s CEO, conveyed that if Microsoft refused to provide a more favorable revenue share than the usual 70-30 split, then the games would not continue to be available, Microsoft executive Sarah Bond said. An FTC lawyer accidentally mentioned that Microsoft agreed to accept 20% instead of the typical 30%.
Sony’s altered expectations. In early 2022, two days after Microsoft announced its plan to buy Activision Blizzard, Ryan wrote in an email to another Sony Group executive that he was “pretty sure” Call of Duty would be available on PlayStation consoles for many years. But he appeared to lose confidence in that belief. In videotaped testimony, Ryan said he had “significant concerns” as to whether Call of Duty and other Activision Blizzard games would continue to be available on PlayStation after the transaction.
Kotick’s console mistake. Kotick has been in video games for decades, and he fumbled when he looked for the first time at the Nintendo Switch console and decided that it would not be successful. He had been more impressed with Nintendo’s earlier Wii console. The Switch became the third best-selling console of all time. When an FTC lawyer asked Kotick if Activision Blizzard would produce a Call of Duty game for a future Nintendo console, he said, “We missed out on the opportunity for the past generation of Switch, so I would like to think we would be able to do that, but we’d have to look.”
Game Pass opposition. Kotick made it clear that while Activision Blizzard has experimented with putting games in subscription libraries, he didn’t think they would lead to “sustainable long-term business.” He said he considered putting games on Game Pass in 2020 during negotiations with Microsoft over Activision Blizzard’s most recent licensing agreement, but ultimately the company decided not to go forward with it, he said. He couldn’t imagine anyone offering commercial terms that would be favorable, he said.
Whither Amazon? Weingarten pointed out that while Microsoft agreed to provide Call of Duty to small cloud gaming players such as Boosteroid and Ubitus, it has not done the same with Amazon, which fields the Luna cloud gaming service. Amazon is among Microsoft’s most prominent competitors in the cloud-computing business.
Cloud flop. Microsoft has sought to supplement PC and console gaming with a cloud-based streaming option, which is included with the Game Pass Ultimate service, along with a library of games to download and play for a monthly fee. Microsoft began testing cloud gaming with consumers in 2019. Bond testified that gamers mainly use the cloud option not with their phones but with their consoles, while they wait for downloads to finish. At that point, they switch to playing games locally, she said. The cloud gaming option is not growing and is unprofitable, Tim Stuart, finance chief for Microsoft’s Xbox division, said during his testimony. “The feedback to date is that it’s just not good enough as a — you know, definitely as a substitute to any of the current platforms,” Nadella said. “But you know, it can break through at some point, on something new, but it’s not yet happened, both on the economics as well as the content side.”
Sizing up cloud infrastructure. The big-picture memos from Nadella contained figures for the scale of various businesses across Microsoft, and one is more important than the others for the company’s investors. Perhaps the most closely tracked number in Microsoft’s earnings report after revenue and earnings is the growth of the Azure public cloud, because the software maker doesn’t disclose Azure revenue in dollars. One of the Nadella memos said Microsoft’s “infrastructure” revenue in the 2022 fiscal year was $34 billion. The tally was “very close to our estimates,” Bernstein Research analysts led by Mark Moerdler, with the equivalent of a buy rating on Microsoft stock, said in a Thursday note.
Critical security rivals. One of the documents that became publicly available as part of the hearing identified four security companies that Microsoft used to track its sprawling cybersecurity operation. The results contributed to a scorecard to assess performance among Microsoft’s top executives. Scorecard metrics included the percentage of “managed accounts with at least one Okta detection,” the percentage of “commercial Windows 10/11 MAD [monthly active devices] that have CrowdStrike components detected,” the percentage of “mail recipients that are protected by Proofpoint,” and percentage of “Commercial Windows 10/11 MAD that have Symantec DLP components detected.”
Exclusive exploration. Microsoft has argued that it would keep Call of Duty on PlayStation and make games in that franchise available on multiple cloud streaming services for a decade. “The acquisition’s strategic rationale and financial valuation are both aligned toward making Activision games more widely available, not less,” Hood said in written testimony. But on the fifth and final day of hearings, the FTC succeeded in getting witnesses to show that Microsoft did evaluate ways of trying to reduce the availability of Activision Blizzard content on the Sony PlayStation. Stuart confirmed that in preparation for a Microsoft board meeting, executives examined a scenario of lower sales of Activision Blizzard games on the PlayStation and ways of making up for the shortfall with sales of more Xbox consoles and Game Pass subscriptions.
Activision Blizzard and Microsoft have agreed to terminate the deal if it’s not done by July 18. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley said on Thursday that she isn’t sure when she’ll decide on the preliminary injunction. “But obviously, I’m mindful,” she said.
Mark Zuckerberg’s announcement this week that Meta would pivot its moderation policies to allow more “free expression” was widely viewed as the company’s latest effort to appease President-elect Donald Trump.
More than any of its Silicon Valley peers, Meta has taken numerous public steps to make amends with Trump since his election victory in November.
That follows a highly contentious four years between the two during Trump’s first term in office, which ended with Facebook — similar to other social media companies — banning Trump from its platform.
As recently as March, Trump was using his preferred nickname of “Zuckerschmuck” when talking about Meta’s CEO and declaring that Facebook was an “enemy of the people.”
With Meta now positioning itself to be a key player in artificial intelligence, Zuckerberg recognizes the need for White House support as his company builds data centers and pursues policies that will allow it to fulfill its lofty ambitions, according to people familiar with the company’s plans who asked not to be named because they weren’t authorized to speak on the matter.
“Even though Facebook is as powerful as it is, it still had to bend the knee to Trump,” said Brian Boland, a former Facebook vice president, who left the company in 2020.
Meta declined to comment for this article.
In Tuesday’s announcement, Zuckerberg said Meta will end third-party fact-checking, remove restrictions on topics such as immigration and gender identity and bring political content back to users’ feeds. Zuckerberg pitched the sweeping policy changes as key to stabilizing Meta’s content-moderation apparatus, which he said had “reached a point where it’s just too many mistakes and too much censorship.”
The policy change was the latest strategic shift Meta has taken to buddy up with Trump and Republicans since Election Day.
A day earlier, Meta announced that UFC CEO Dana White, a longtime Trump friend, is joining the company’s board.
And last week, Meta announced that it was replacing Nick Clegg, its president of global affairs, with Joel Kaplan, who had been the company’s policy vice president. Clegg previously had a career in British politics with the Liberal Democrats party, including as a deputy prime minister, while Kaplan was a White House deputy chief of staff under former President George W. Bush.
Kaplan, who joined Meta in 2011 when it was still known as Facebook, has longstanding ties to the Republican Party and once worked as a law clerk for the late conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. In December, Kaplan posted photos on Facebook of himself with Vice President-elect JD Vance and Trump during their visit to the New York Stock Exchange.
Joel Kaplan, Facebook’s vice president of global policy, on April 17, 2018.
Niall Carson | PA Images | Getty Images
Many Meta employees criticized the policy change internally, with some saying the company is absolving itself of its responsibility to create a safe platform. Current and former employees also expressed concern that marginalized communities could face more online abuse due to the new policy, which is set to take effect over the coming weeks.
Despite the backlash from employees, people familiar with the company’s thinking said Meta is more willing to make these kinds of moves after laying off 21,000 employees, or nearly a quarter of its workforce, in 2022 and 2023.
Those cuts affected much of Meta’s civic integrity and trust and safety teams. The civic integrity group was the closest thing the company had to a white-collar union, with members willing to push back against certain policy decisions, former employees said. Since the job cuts, Zuckerberg faces less friction when making broad policy changes, the people said.
Zuckerberg’s overtures to Trump began in the months leading up to the election.
Following the first assassination attempt on Trump in July, Zuckerberg called the photo of Trump raising his fist with blood running down his face “one of the most badass things I’ve ever seen in my life.”
A month later, Zuckerberg penned a letter to the House Judiciary Committee alleging that the Biden administration had pressured Meta’s teams to censor certain Covid-19 content.
“I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it,” he wrote.
After Trump’s presidential victory, Zuckerberg joined several other technology executives who visited the president-elect’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. Meta also donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund.
On Friday, Meta revealed to its workforce in a memo obtained by CNBC that it intends to shutter several internal programs related to diversity and inclusion in its hiring process, representing another Trump-friendly move.
The previous day, some details of the company’s new relaxed content-moderation guidelines were published by the news site The Intercept, showing the kind of offensive rhetoric that Meta’s new policy would now allow, including statements such as “Migrants are no better than vomit” and “I bet Jorge’s the one who stole my backpack after track practice today. Immigrants are all thieves.”
Recalibrating for Trump
Zuckerberg, who has been dragged to Washington eight times to testify before congressional committees during the last two administrations, wants to be perceived as someone who can work with Trump and the Republican Party, people familiar with the matter said.
Though Meta’s content-policy updates caught many of its employees and fact-checking partners by surprise, a small group of executives were formulating the plans in the aftermath of the U.S. election results. By New Year’s Day, leadership began planning the public announcements of its policy change, the people said.
Meta typically undergoes major “recalibrations” after prominent U.S. elections, said Katie Harbath, a former Facebook policy director and CEO of tech consulting firm Anchor Change. When the country undergoes a change in power, Meta adjusts its policies to best suit its business and reputational needs based on the political landscape, Harbath said.
“In 2028, they’ll recalibrate again,” she said.
After the 2016 election and Trump’s first victory, for example, Zuckerberg toured the U.S. to meet people in states he hadn’t previously visited. He published a 6,000-word manifesto emphasizing the need for Facebook to build more community.
The social media company faced harsh criticism about fake news and Russian election interference on its platforms after the 2016 election.
Following the 2020 election, during the heart of the pandemic, Meta took a harder stand on Covid-19 content, with a policy executive saying in 2021 that the “amount of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation that violates our policies is too much by our standards.” Those efforts may have appeased the Biden administration, but it drew the ire of Republicans.
Meta is once again reacting to the moment, Harbath said.
“There wasn’t a business risk here in Silicon Valley to be more right-leaning,” Harbath said.
While Trump has offered few specific policy proposals for his second administration, Meta has plenty at stake.
The White House could create more relaxed AI regulations compared with those in the European Union, where Meta says harsh restrictions have resulted in the company not releasing some of its more advanced AI technologies. Meta, like other tech giants, also needs more massive data centers and cutting-edge computer chips to help train and run their advanced AI models.
“There’s a business benefit to having Republicans win, because they are traditionally less regulatory,” Harbath said.
Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg reacts as he testifies during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on online child sexual exploitation at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., January 31, 2024.
Evelyn Hockstein | Reuters
Meta isn’t alone in trying to cozy up to Trump. But the extreme measures the company is taking reflects a particular level of animus expressed by Trump over the years.
Trump has accused Meta of censorship and has expressed resentment over the company’s two-year suspension of his Facebook and Instagram accounts following the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
In July 2024, Trump posted on Truth Social that he intended to “pursue Election Fraudsters at levels never seen before, and they will be sent to prison for long periods of time,” adding “ZUCKERBUCKS, be careful!” Trump reiterated that statement in his book, “Save America,” writing that Zuckerberg plotted against him during the 2020 election and that the Meta CEO would “spend the rest of his life in prison” if it happened again.
Meta spends $14 million annually on providing personal security for Zuckerberg and his family, according to the company’s 2024 proxy statement. As part of that security, the company analyzes any threats or perceived threats against its CEO, according to a person familiar with the matter. Those threats are cataloged, analyzed and dissected by Meta’s multitude of security teams.
After Trump’s comments, Meta’s security teams analyzed how Trump could weaponize the Justice Department and the country’s intelligence agencies against Zuckerberg and what it would cost the company to defend its CEO against a sitting president, said the person, who asked not to be named because of confidentiality.
Meta’s efforts to appease the incoming president bring their own risks.
After Zuckerberg announced the new speech policy Tuesday, Boland, the former executive, was among a number of users who took to Meta’s Threads service to tell their followers that they were quitting Facebook.
“Last post before deleting,” Boland wrote in his post.
Before the post could be seen by any of his Threads followers, Meta’s content moderation system had taken it down, citing cybersecurity reasons.
Boland told CNBC in an interview that he couldn’t help but chuckle at the situation.
“It’s deeply ironic,” Boland said.
— CNBC’s Salvador Rodriguez contributed to this report.
Apple is losing market share in China due to declining iPhone shipments, supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote in a report on Friday. The stock slid 2.4%.
“Apple has adopted a cautious stance when discussing 2025 iPhone production plans with key suppliers,” Kuo, an analyst at TF Securities, wrote in the post. He added that despite the expected launch of the new iPhone SE 4, shipments are expected to decline 6% year over year for the first half of 2025.
Kuo expects Apple’s market share to continue to slide, as two of the coming iPhones are so thin that they likely will only support eSIM, which the Chinese market currently does not promote.
“These two models could face shipping momentum challenges unless their design is modified,” he wrote.
Kuo wrote that in December, overall smartphone shipments in China were flat from a year earlier, but iPhone shipments dropped 10% to 12%.
There is also “no evidence” that Apple Intelligence, the company’s on-device artificial intelligence offering, is driving hardware upgrades or services revenue, according to Kuo. He wrote that the feature “has not boosted iPhone replacement demand,” according to a supply chain survey he conducted, and added that in his view, the feature’s appeal “has significantly declined compared to cloud-based AI services, which have advanced rapidly in subsequent months.”
Apple’s estimated iPhone shipments total about 220 million units for 2024 and between about 220 million and 225 million for this year, Kuo wrote. That is “below the market consensus of 240 million or more,” he wrote.
Apple did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
Amazon said it is halting some of its diversity and inclusion initiatives, joining a growing list of major corporations that have made similar moves in the face of increasing public and legal scrutiny.
In a Dec. 16 internal note to staffers that was obtained by CNBC, Candi Castleberry, Amazon’s VP of inclusive experiences and technology, said the company was in the process of “winding down outdated programs and materials” as part of a broader review of hundreds of initiatives.
“Rather than have individual groups build programs, we are focusing on programs with proven outcomes — and we also aim to foster a more truly inclusive culture,” Castleberry wrote in the note, which was first reported by Bloomberg.
Castleberry’s memo doesn’t say which programs the company is dropping as a result of its review. The company typically releases annual data on the racial and gender makeup of its workforce, and it also operates Black, LGBTQ+, indigenous and veteran employee resource groups, among others.
In 2020, Amazon set a goal of doubling the number of Black employees in vice president and director roles. It announced the same goal in 2021 and also pledged to hire 30% more Black employees for product manager, engineer and other corporate roles.
Meta on Friday made a similar retreat from its diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. The social media company said it’s ending its approach of considering qualified candidates from underrepresented groups for open roles and its equity and inclusion training programs. The decision drew backlash from Meta employees, including one staffer who wrote, “If you don’t stand by your principles when things get difficult, they aren’t values. They’re hobbies.”
Amazon, which is the nation’s second-largest private employer behind Walmart, also recently made changes to its “Our Positions” webpage, which lays out the company’s stance on a variety of policy issues. Previously, there were separate sections dedicated to “Equity for Black people,” “Diversity, equity and inclusion” and “LGBTQ+ rights,” according to records from the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine.
The current webpage has streamlined those sections into a single paragraph. The section says that Amazon believes in creating a diverse and inclusive company and that inequitable treatment of anyone is unacceptable. The Information earlier reported the changes.
Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel told CNBC in a statement: “We update this page from time to time to ensure that it reflects updates we’ve made to various programs and positions.”
Read the full memo from Amazon’s Castleberry:
Team,
As we head toward the end of the year, I want to give another update on the work we’ve been doing around representation and inclusion.
As a large, global company that operates in different countries and industries, we serve hundreds of millions of customers from a range of backgrounds and globally diverse communities. To serve them effectively, we need millions of employees and partners that reflect our customers and communities. We strive to be representative of those customers and build a culture that’s inclusive for everyone.
In the last few years we took a new approach, reviewing hundreds of programs across the company, using science to evaluate their effectiveness, impact, and ROI — identifying the ones we believed should continue. Each one of these addresses a specific disparity, and is designed to end when that disparity is eliminated. In parallel, we worked to unify employee groups together under one umbrella, and build programs that are open to all. Rather than have individual groups build programs, we are focusing on programs with proven outcomes — and we also aim to foster a more truly inclusive culture. You can read more about this on our Together at Amazon page on A to Z.
This approach — where we move away from programs that were separate from our existing processes, and instead integrating our work into existing processes so they become durable — is the evolution to “built in” and “born inclusive,” instead of “bolted on.” As part of this evolution, we’ve been winding down outdated programs and materials, and we’re aiming to complete that by the end of 2024. We also know there will always be individuals or teams who continue to do well-intentioned things that don’t align with our company-wide approach, and we might not always see those right away. But we’ll keep at it.
We’ll continue to share ongoing updates, and appreciate your hard work in driving this progress. We believe this is important work, so we’ll keep investing in programs that help us reflect those audiences, help employees grow, thrive, and connect, and we remain dedicated to delivering inclusive experiences for customers, employees, and communities around the world.