Activision CEO Bobby Kotick says the UK could lose out on thousands of jobs by blocking Microsoft's acquisition and accuses Sony of “trying to sabotage” the bid
Bobby Kotick appeals to ‘fragile’ government as video game maker awaits decision on $75bn sale
Context & Ripple Effects
Kotick's intervention extends Microsoft’s existing argument that Sony is defending its market position: Xbox chief Phil Spencer had already cast Sony’s opposition as an effort to protect its dominance. The CMA, meanwhile, had set out concerns that Microsoft could withhold games from rival platforms, making employment claims part of a broader fight over how the acquisition would change competition.
The later CMA decision to block the transaction shows that the UK review turned on competition and innovation rather than the companies’ public rhetoric. Kotick’s comments matter as a high-profile attempt to recast the review as a choice about UK investment and jobs.
First-order effects
- Activision and Microsoft gain a public argument aimed at UK policymakers: blocking the sale, Kotick says, would put prospective UK jobs at risk.
- Sony becomes the explicit target of Activision’s messaging, reinforcing Microsoft’s claim that the PlayStation owner is seeking to preserve its position rather than protect competition.
Second-order effects
- The CMA faces greater pressure to distinguish claimed employment and investment benefits from its stated concern that Microsoft could restrict rivals’ access to games.
- Sony’s opposition is likely to be assessed alongside Microsoft’s proposed safeguards and distribution commitments, because the dispute centers on access to major Activision titles rather than the deal’s price alone.
Third-order effects
- Large game acquisitions are increasingly judged through control of content distribution across competing platforms, with job and investment pledges becoming part of the political case rather than a substitute for competition analysis.
- If regulators continue to prioritize access and innovation concerns, platform owners will need remedies that address rivals’ game availability before acquisition narratives about scale or investment can carry the decision.
The trend: Gaming consolidation is moving from a question of franchise ownership to a regulatory test of whether platform operators can control access to essential content.