Samsung is in bed with MS and shows latent interest in the gaming market. They are also a hardware manufacturer. It seems totally reasonable that Samsung is in a prime position to take over the Xbox hardware properties should MS bow out of the market.
2027: MS stops making Xbox consoles
2029: Samsung starts making Xbox consoles
j/k
Institutions and empires can fall. It just might take some time and competition from new ideas.
He must be referring to middle-ware, macros, and other support tools.
As much as I am not a fan of Kotick, you should at least state the facts of his compensation correctly. In a public company, the board of directors draws up the contracts for C-suite personnel. CEOs cannot generally decide their own pay unless they are also own the majority of the shares of the company. Even then, the board of directors may balk at this. Kotick did not unilaterally give himself a $200M bonus. A clause was triggered in his contract because the Activision share price doubled an...
The vast majority of third-party content is already not exclusive to one platform. Leading a market does not necessarily mean monopolizing it, especially when the content is generally available on several platforms. What is your evidence for monopoly?
Won't this be the 7th GoW game?
Lenovo makes shitty hardware. They took IBM's PC business and butchered it to death. Their handling of service and warranties is atrocious. Avoid!
Nothing's more popular lately than "gig" business models---enlisting everyday people to do the work while siphoning your finders fee from the transaction. Uber types, GrubHub types, YouTube types, and now game software development... Bonus: you don't have to pay livable wages, offer job security, or provide benefits!
Disc is a coaster. I guess they don't want my money.
You can't police how any company chooses to spend its own money when the market is rich with product from other companies. Acquisitions are an exception because they may constrain the market of the product.
Epic's claim had nothing to do with market competition. They simply wanted to circumvent the 30% publishing royalty for their own benefit. It is laughable if you think they would pass that savings to the customer.
Videogame console and computer platforms together form a market. Games are not utilities (e.g. phones) or a basic need. No court is going to meddle in the royalty structure of an entertainment industry.
There are some poor comparisons made between this and the Epic v. Apple case. This suit appears to focus on consumer-facing pricing. I don't see any reason why a platform's ecosystem can't be closed. You can choose to buy and play 3rd-party titles on other platforms; therein lies the market element of competition.
Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.
That's untrue. I have only one account!
Yeah---all of my above comments were deleted too (marked as spam)! WTF.
It's pretty clear that you know nothing about corporate finance and accounting. The leaked FTC slides showed no metric of net income. "Accountability margin" is a made-up term that MS uses for their own intenal purposes, but has no meaning or relevance in the real world, as in, to stockholders or financial analysts. In particular, that margin does NOT take into account fixed costs of operation. There has not been a single documented record of income from the Xbox business, only ...
Sure it is. But for how long will MS continue to bail out an unprofitable business before shutting it down?
No sheriff or judge in his/her right mind will repossess said media. Therefore, without enforcement, it doesn't matter what the TOS states regarding ownership. In fact, such TOS are on shaky legal ground, anyway, because it is completely reasonable that one would expect to own the copy of the disc contents as part of the purchase. The purchaser has de facto ownership. Why you can't wrap your head around this is beyond me.