Beep boop - this is a robot. A new show has been posted to TWiT…
What are your thoughts about today’s show? We’d love to hear from you!
Speaking about 52:40 - - - Soo… some of Sony’s key points about Microsoft soon dominating the gaming industry in the FTC trail were… basically right. According to Microsoft, internally.
If I just remembered where I heard the most heartfelt, romantic, and colorful justifications that Microsoft was such a small and humble player in the gaming industry and that the takeover should really be a shoo-in without too much scrutiny by an American court… Cannot really put my finger on it. I thought it was a podcast somewhere. Ah well. I forgot.
That’s kind of the problem with the “show harm” way of antitrust: you can interpret “Show harm!”
-
as a request toward the complaining party bringing up the case to the courts OR as
-
cheering on the soon-to-be giant to really let its misuse of power rip a gash into the industry.
“Show harm”-antitrust culture just always seems to artificially dumb down courts in ways that disable them to look forward and arrive at nuanced solutions. Yes, the potential for harm matters, too - especially if the actor has clear motivation to pursue that path, even if that harm might be a few steps down the road.
Even though much is written in these types of boardroom presentations, some of it really does become true.
You could have led with that bit of information, though. Burying this lead behind a report on web latency and Bluetooth and several versions of random X-Boxes… I don’t know…
I can’t, but Sony could say: “Well - told ya so!”
Hmm. Maybe I am reading too much into it - maybe not.
It’s an interesting field of tension to report on one specific company. This love-hate relationship that emerges. You speak about it earlier in this episode, where Paul explains yelling at the company because you want it to be better - for its own sake. I wonder if that’s the same as critical distance or, what the analogy suggests, more of a family relationship.
I really do love listening to the podcast and have been for over 10 years now. Without any rhyme or reason really, since I try to avoid Microsoft and use as much open software as possible - to a small degree also thanks to Leo’s fascination with it. There is lot’s of entertainment in dark-humor-reporting on Microsoft and, usually, the critical (sometimes cynical) view is more than warranted. Which made the unequivocal siding with Microsoft on some external fights - like the FTC case on the acquisition - so… weird to listen to. Understandable, but still weird.
Ah well. Just some reflections on that wonderful timestamp 52:40 (club edition). I’m sure I am reading way too much into this. Titles on boardroom presentations that promise the moon are a dime a dozen. Keep rocking! But whenever Paul actually sides with Microsoft, I’ll be cautious… Maybe it’s a force of habit.
I don’t think so, and I was surprised Leo and Paul just dismissed the Nintendo stuff as a fantasy and Spencer gets a pass 'cos he’s a gamer.
1 Like
I’ve always been uncomfortable with the Microsoft Activision acquisition on the simple grounds that industry consolidation is usually bad for end users.
Unfortunately that’s not how capitalism or trust law works. But I still believe the merger is bad for gamers.
2 Likes