Pursuing a Contested Acquisition: The Cost of Stance
Microsoft finalized its acquisition of Activision Blizzard for $69 billion on October 13, 2023. This came after initially defying regulators, then conceding on the deal's structure.
How do you manage a major acquisition in the face of strong regulatory opposition?
First, assess the cost of a rigid position against regulators before engaging in a costly standoff. When 42 simulated voices reacted to Microsoft's decision, about half declared against it. Their primary doubt focused on the ability to execute such a frontal strategy.
The context, in plain terms
On December 8, 2022, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an administrative complaint against Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard. The FTC feared Microsoft would have the ability and incentive to withhold key content, including the Call of Duty franchise, from rival consoles, cloud gaming services, and subscriptions.
On April 26, 2023, the UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) blocked the transaction. It cited concerns about competition in the cloud gaming sector. Despite these obstacles, Microsoft continued to push its deal. A U.S. federal court rejected the FTC's request for a preliminary injunction on July 10, 2023. A U.S. appeals court refused to halt the deal on July 14.
Facing the CMA's stance, Microsoft and Activision ultimately modified the deal's structure on August 22, 2023. They arranged the sale of Activision's streaming rights to Ubisoft. This restructuring allowed the British regulator to give its green light. Microsoft finalized the acquisition for $69 billion on October 13, 2023. Other sources mentioned a total cost of $75.4 billion.
A Regulatory Standoff Perceived as a Risky Maneuver
The finalization of Microsoft's Activision Blizzard acquisition in October 2023 marked the end of a long battle. The FTC's concern, raised in December 2022, had been access to Call of Duty for rival consoles.
Microsoft's initial decision to pursue the acquisition without restructuring, despite objections, drew mixed reactions. About half of the simulated voices declared against this approach. About one voice in seven remained unsure. About one voice in three supported it. In the panel, voices of customers, the public, and business partners received the decision less favorably than those of Microsoft employees, leadership, and internal bodies.
The Cost of an Inflexible Strategy Against Regulators
What holds it back first is doubt about the execution of this confrontational strategy. Objections focused on Microsoft's ability to navigate a hostile regulatory environment without compromising its long-term goals. The FTC, for its part, argued that Microsoft would have the ability and the incentive to withhold Call of Duty from rival consoles.
Holding a position has a price, in time and in room to maneuver, and that price has a name: the cost of stance. At Microsoft, the restructuring came in August 2023, after the FTC complaint and the British block.
The success of a major acquisition also depends on the ability to anticipate and integrate regulator concerns from the start of the process.
In the Panel, Microsoft's Leadership Splits
In the panel, even the voices from Microsoft's own leadership do not speak as one. A corporate development lead, within acquiring leadership, defended this approach. They stated: "This is the hill to die on, Activision’s IP is the missing piece for Game Pass dominance, and we’ve got the legal firepower to make it stick." This voice highlights the strategic value of the acquisition and confidence in the company's legal means.
However, a deputy general counsel for regulatory affairs, also from acquiring leadership, expressed strong opposition: "The FTC and EU are testing how far they can push Big Tech, and we’re the guinea pig, this could set a precedent that haunts us for a decade." This voice points to the risk of precedent and the long-term implications of such a standoff.
We ran the exercise three times: same answer. Opposition and doubt persist. This reveals that even with strong internal conviction, a direct approach impacts the perception of execution. An acquisition strategy must also integrate voices that warn of systemic risks.
Adapt Strategy Before Being Forced
For a leader facing similar regulatory opposition, the first step is to gauge what holding the stance would cost. Anticipate friction points. Consider proactive adaptation scenarios, rather than engaging in a costly legal battle. This involves constructive dialogue with regulators. Present solutions from the first objections.
Microsoft ultimately had to restructure the deal in August 2023. It arranged for Activision to sell its streaming rights to Ubisoft to gain British regulator approval. This adaptation, though late, unblocked the situation. It allowed the acquisition to close in October. The case does not say what the company would have done if U.S. courts had not rejected the FTC's requests.
The lesson from this journey is clear: anticipating regulatory compromises must precede a confrontational stance. The Cost of Stance can be mitigated by early strategic flexibility. A successful acquisition integrates regulatory requirements as an intrinsic component of its design.
What you just read comes from a rehearsal, not a report. On the Kapari test bench, we had a panel of 42 simulated voices react to Microsoft's decision to pursue its Activision Blizzard acquisition despite regulatory challenges. This exercise allowed us to hear the doubt about executing such a strategy. It also revealed the tension between strategic ambition and regulatory risks. The same exercise can be conducted on a decision your company has not yet announced. It shows the friction points in advance.
The questions readers ask
What is the impact of strong regulatory opposition on an acquisition timeline?
Regulatory opposition, like that from the FTC or CMA, can significantly extend an acquisition timeline. In the Microsoft and Activision Blizzard case, the FTC complaint in December 2022 and the CMA block in April 2023 were followed by months of legal battle and negotiations. The acquisition finalized in October 2023. This demonstrates the importance of integrating these potential delays into initial planning.
How do regulators perceive large acquisitions in the tech sector?
Regulators perceive large acquisitions in the tech sector, such as Microsoft and Activision's, with close scrutiny of competition risks. The FTC specifically raised concerns that Microsoft could deprive rivals of key content like Call of Duty.
Is this a poll or a prediction?
The voices cited in this article are from a panel of 42 simulated voices. They are not a poll or a prediction of public opinion. The numbers cited refer to this simulated panel, never a share of real opinion. All reported facts come from verified and dated sources, such as Reuters, CNBC, and Davis Polk. Kapari sheds light on the decision; it does not make it.
How Kapari computes and reads its signals: the method
Related cases
Your next decision deserves the same scrutiny.
Run it through the test bench before you announce it: a panel of voices reacts, you read the range and you see the frictions coming.
Start free