Connect with us

Business

Microsoft and Activision Chiefs Testify Merger Will Benefit Consumers

Published

on

Microsoft and Activision Chiefs Testify Merger Will Benefit Consumers

Satya Nadella, the chief executive of Microsoft, appeared in federal court on Wednesday to pledge his support for open platforms and consumer choice, underscoring the tech giant’s commitment to closing its $70 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard over regulators’ objections.

“If it was up to me, I would love to get rid of the entire ‘exclusives on consoles,’” Mr. Nadella testified, rebutting claims from tech regulators that Microsoft’s deal for the video game giant would curtail competition and restrict Activision’s games only to players on Microsoft’s Xbox console. “I have no love for that world.”

The fourth day of a hearing in U.S. District Court in San Francisco that could determine the deal’s outcome was the highest-profile session, with appearances by Mr. Nadella and Activision’s chief executive, Bobby Kotick.

The Federal Trade Commission’s challenge of the blockbuster acquisition, led by its chair, Lina Khan, is viewed as a test of whether more aggressive efforts to curb tech giants can be successful. The F.T.C. is seeking a preliminary injunction that would prohibit the companies from closing the deal before the agency has the chance to argue its case in its internal court.

Microsoft has said such a lengthy delay would most likely doom the deal, a perspective that Mr. Kotick shared in his testimony on Wednesday.

Advertisement

The F.TC. has argued that the merger would harm competition in the video game industry and hurt consumers, because Microsoft could pull Activision’s games, like Call of Duty, from its rival Sony’s PlayStation console. Mr. Kotick promised that he had no intention of doing so, though the decision will not ultimately be his if his company is acquired.

“You would have a revolt if you were to remove the game from one platform,” Mr. Kotick said. “It would cause reputational damage to the company.” Mr. Nadella likewise said he would not withhold Call of Duty.

Under Ms. Khan, the F.T.C. has sued Meta, Microsoft and Amazon, arguing that Big Tech’s immense power over communications, social media and online commerce allows the companies to build monopolies and harm consumers.

After Microsoft announced early last year that it intended to reshape its Xbox business by buying Activision, the company struck agreements with other video game companies, like Nintendo, to show regulators that the deal would benefit gamers and not curtail access to Activision’s games.

Most government agencies, including the European Commission, were convinced. But the F.T.C. and the Competition and Markets Authority in Britain are trying to block the deal.

Advertisement

Court arguments have focused on the practice of exclusivity — releasing a highly anticipated game only on one console. Microsoft has repeatedly promised it will not make Call of Duty exclusive to Xbox if it acquires Activision, and offered Sony a contract putting that guarantee in writing.

But the F.T.C. argued in court last week that Microsoft had moved swiftly to buy ZeniMax Media and its slate of gaming studios for $7.5 billion in 2020 when it realized that Sony might pay to make one of ZeniMax’s important upcoming games, Starfield, exclusive to PlayStation. New ZeniMax titles, including Starfield, are now exclusive to the Xbox.

Jim Ryan, the chief executive of Sony, testified in a recorded video deposition that he thought that even if Call of Duty remained on PlayStation, Microsoft would try to “drive PlayStation gamers to the Xbox platforms” by somehow degrading the Call of Duty experience on PlayStation.

“I believe that they’re going to use Call of Duty somehow to damage us,” Mr. Ryan said.

But Mr. Nadella testified that he opposed a walled-off approach to gaming.

Advertisement

“I grew up in a company that always believed that software should run on as many platforms as possible,” he said. “And I believe in that.”

Microsoft has sought to portray itself as a distant third in a three-player console market dominated by Nintendo and Sony. Phil Spencer, the head of Xbox, said that as a third-place competitor, Xbox was “not a robust business.”

Mr. Spencer did acknowledge that Microsoft has had discussions about potentially excluding Activision games other than Call of Duty from PlayStation.

The F.T.C. has argued that Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision would also give it an unfair advantage in gaming subscription services and the nascent market for cloud gaming.

Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley is expected to decide whether to grant the injunction before July 18, the date the deal is expected to close. At times, her courtroom questions have been skeptical of some of the F.T.C.’s arguments.

Advertisement

The F.T.C., for example, tried to get Mr. Spencer to swear he would put Call of Duty on PlayStation for at least 10 years, no matter what terms Sony requested as part of that agreement. Judge Corley seemed to feel that such a blanket promise was unrealistic, especially if Sony asked for something unreasonable, like receiving Call of Duty for free.

“Well, it’s not going to be for zero dollars,” Judge Corley said, sounding impatient. “That was understood.”

David McCabe contributed reporting from Washington.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Business

Edison stock turns volatile as growing blame for wildfires lands on the power company

Published

on

Edison stock turns volatile as growing blame for wildfires lands on the power company

Southern California’s catastrophic fires have rocked the stock of Edison International, the parent company of Southern California Edison, as accusations and lawsuits about the utility’s potential role in starting the fires mount.

Shares of Edison International closed up 5% at $61.30 on Wednesday after plunging 23% this month, making it one of the worst performers on the Standard & Poor’s 500. The rebound came after Ladenburg Thalmann analysts upgraded their rating of the stock to neutral from sell, saying that their target price of $56.50 a share reflected worst-case outcomes associated with the current wildfires.

“At this time, it is too early to discern what the outcomes will be with respect to the impact of the fires on the California Wildfire Insurance Fund solvency and/or the future earnings of Edison International,” the analysts wrote, according to Barron’s. “An initial assessment of SCE’s role in the start of the fires will likely not occur until the summer of 2025 at the earliest.”

State lawmakers established the wildfire fund in the wake of wildfires several years ago after Wall Street investors lost confidence and ratings agencies threatened to downgrade California’s investor-owned utilities.

Advertisement

Market analyst Zacks downgraded Edison International stock from outperform to neutral after the fires started last week. Zacks predicted Edison’s operating revenue would increase during 2025 and 2026, while acknowledging that “the company has been incurring significant wildfire-related costs” and that “higher-than-expected decommissioning costs could materially impact the company’s operating results.”

RBC Capital Markets, another analyst, had a loftier view of Edison as recently as October when it called the utility “a high quality operator, with investor confidence around wildfire risk improving from best in class mitigation efforts.”

The fallout from the fires is an abrupt disruption for a company that had been surging in recent months. In its most recent quarterly report, the company posted a profit of $516 million, or $1.33 per share, compared with $155 million, or 40 cent per share, in the third quarter of last year.

“Our team has achieved remarkable success over the last several years managing unprecedented climate challenges, making our operations more resilient and positioning us strongly for the growth ahead,” President Pedro J. Pizarro said in the report.

Fire agencies are investigating whether downed Southern California Edison utility equipment played a role in igniting the 800-acre Hurst fire near Sylmar, company officials have acknowledged.

Advertisement

The company issued a report Friday saying that a downed conductor was discovered at a tower in the vicinity of the Hurst fire, but that it “does not know whether the damage observed occurred before or after the start of the fire.” The fire is nearly fully contained, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

SCE is also under scrutiny for possibly being involved in sparking the Eaton fire that has burned 14,000 acres and destroyed thousands of structures, wiping out whole swaths of Altadena, where at least 16 people died in the blaze.

On Tuesday the Newport Beach law firm of Bridgford, Gleason & Artinian filed a mass action complaint in Los Angeles Superior Court against SCE regarding the Eaton fire on behalf of victims including Jeremy Gursey, whose Altadena property was destroyed in the fire.

“Based upon our investigation, our discussions with various consultants, the public statements of SCE, and the video evidence of the fire’s origin, we believe that the Eaton Fire was ignited because of SCE’s failure to de-energize its overhead wires which traverse Eaton Canyon—despite a red flag PDS wind warning issued by the national weather service the day before the ignition of the fire,” lawyer Richard Bridgford said in a statement.

The firm said it has represented more than 10,000 California fire victims in past suits against Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and SCE. Bridgford told Yahoo Finance that his inbox is full of Southern California residents seeking to participate in the Eaton fire lawsuit and that he anticipates “there’ll be hundreds joining.”

Advertisement

The most extreme level of a red flag fire warning, a “particularly dangerous situation,” returned to parts of Los Angeles and Ventura counties Wednesday morning, heightening concerns about the potential for new fires.

“The danger has not yet passed,” Los Angeles Fire Department Chief Kristin Crowley said during a news conference Wednesday. “So please prioritize your safety.”

Continue Reading

Business

Albania Gives Jared Kushner Hotel Project a Nod as Trump Returns

Published

on

Albania Gives Jared Kushner Hotel Project a Nod as Trump Returns

The government of Albania has given preliminary approval to a plan proposed by Jared Kushner, Donald J. Trump’s son-in-law, to build a $1.4 billion luxury hotel complex on a small abandoned military base off the coast of Albania.

The project is one of several involving Mr. Trump and his extended family that directly involve foreign government entities that will be moving ahead even while Mr. Trump will be in charge of foreign policy related to these same nations.

The approval by Albania’s Strategic Investment Committee — which is led by Prime Minister Edi Rama — gives Mr. Kushner and his business partners the right to move ahead with accelerated negotiations to build the luxury resort on a 111-acre section of the 2.2-square-mile island of Sazan that will be connected by ferry to the mainland.

Mr. Kushner and the Albanian government did not respond Wednesday to requests for comment. But when previously asked about this project, both have said that the evaluation is not being influenced by Mr. Kushner’s ties to Mr. Trump or any effort to try to seek favors from the U.S. government.

“The fact that such a renowned American entrepreneur shows his interest on investing in Albania makes us very proud and happy,” a spokesman for Mr. Rama said last year in a statement to The New York Times when asked about the projects.

Advertisement

Mr. Kushner’s Affinity Partners, a private equity company backed with about $4.6 billion in money mostly from Saudi Arabia and other Middle East sovereign wealth funds, is pursuing the Albania project along with Asher Abehsera, a real-estate executive that Mr. Kushner has previously teamed up with to build projects in Brooklyn, N.Y.

The Albanian government, according to an official document recently posted online, will now work with their American partners to clear the proposed hotel site of any potential buried munitions and to examine any other environmental or legal concerns that need to be resolved before the project can move ahead.

The document, dated Dec. 30, notes that the government “has the right to revoke the decision,” depending on the final project negotiations.

Mr. Kushner’s firm has said the plan is to build a five-star “eco-resort community” on the island by turning a “former military base into a vibrant international destination for hospitality and wellness.”

Ivanka Trump, Mr. Trump’s daughter, has said she is helping with the project as well. “We will execute on it,” she said about the project, during a podcast last year.

Advertisement

This project is just one of two major real-estate deals that Mr. Kushner is pursuing along with Mr. Abehsera that involve foreign governments.

Separately, the partnership received preliminary approval last year to build a luxury hotel complex in Belgrade, Serbia, in the former ministry of defense building, which has sat empty for decades after it was bombed by NATO in 1999 during a war there.

Serbia and Albania have foreign policy matters pending with the United States, as both countries seek continued U.S. support for their long-stalled efforts to join the European Union, and officials in Washington are trying to convince Serbia to tighten ties with the United States, instead of Russia.

Virginia Canter, who served as White House ethics lawyer during the Obama and Clinton administrations and also an ethics adviser to the International Monetary Fund, said even if there was no attempt to gain influence with Mr. Trump, any government deal involving his family creates that impression.

“It all looks like favoritism, like they are providing access to Kushner because they want to be on the good side of Trump,” Ms. Canter said, now with State Democracy Defenders Fund, a group that tracks federal government corruption and ethics issues.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Craft supplies retailer Joann declares bankruptcy for the second time in a year

Published

on

Craft supplies retailer Joann declares bankruptcy for the second time in a year

The craft supplies and fabric retailer Joann filed for bankruptcy for the second time in less than a year, as the chain wrestles with declining sales and inventory shortages, the company said Wednesday.

The retailer emerged from a previous Chapter 11 bankruptcy process last April after eliminating $505 million in debt. Now, with $615 million in liabilities, the company will begin a court-supervised sale of its assets to repay creditors. The company owes an additional $133 million to its suppliers.

“We hope that this process enables us to find a path that would allow Joann to continue operating,” said interim Chief Executive Michael Prendergast in a statement. “The last several years have presented significant and lasting challenges in the retail environment, which, coupled with our current financial position and constrained inventory levels, forced us to take this step.”

Joann’s more than 800 stores and websites will remain open throughout the bankruptcy process, the company said, and employees will continue to receive pay and benefits. The Hudson, Ohio-based company was founded in 1943 and has stores in 49 states, including several in Southern California.

Advertisement

According to court documents, Joann began receiving unpredictable and inconsistent deliveries of yarn and sewing items from its suppliers, making it difficult to keep its shelves stocked. Joann’s suppliers also discontinued certain items the retailer relied on.

Along with the “unanticipated inventory challenges,” Joann and other retailers face pressure from inflation-wary consumers and interest rates that were for a time the highest in decades. The crafts supplier has also been hindered by competition from others in the space, including Michael’s, Etsy and Hobby Lobby, said Retail Wire Chief Executive Dominick Miserandino.

“It did not necessarily learn to evolve like its nearby competitors,” Miserandino said of Joann. “Not many people have heard of Joann in the way they’ve heard of Michael’s.”

Joann is not the first retailer to continue to struggle after going through bankruptcy. The party supply chain Party City announced last month it would be shutting down operations, after filing for and emerging from Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2023.

Over the last two years, more than 60 companies have filed for bankruptcy for a second or third time, Bloomberg reported, based on information from BankruptcyData. That’s the most over a comparable period since 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic kept shoppers home.

Advertisement

Discount chain Big Lots filed for bankruptcy last September, and the Container Store, a retailer offering storage and organization products, declared bankruptcy last month. Companies that rely heavily on brick-and-mortar locations are scrambling to keep up with online retailers and big-box chains. Fast-casual restaurants such as Red Lobster and Rubio’s Coastal Grill have also struggled.

High prices have prompted consumers to pull back on discretionary spending, while rising operating and labor costs put additional pressure on businesses, experts said. The U.S. annual inflation rate for 2024 was 2.9%, down from 3.4% in 2023. But inflation has been on the rise since September and remains above the Federal Reserve’s goal of 2%.

If a sale process for Joann is approved, Gordon Brothers Retail Partners would serve as the stalking-horse bidder and set the floor for the auction.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending