The @CMAgovUK's chairman and CEO have to testify tomorrow before the Business and Trade Committee of the UK Parliament on "the work of the Competition and Markets Authority".
I haven't talked to him in a while, but I actually know the Chief Whip of the Conservative Party in the UK Parliament personally. We worked together in 2007 on an EU competition policy issue related to soccer broadcasting rights, and won a parliamentary majority for an amendment.
Richard Corbett (Labour) accused Chris Heaton-Harris in an EP debate of having proposed the amendment at my "behest", which was wrong. We just had a meeting about an EU Parliament resolution on sports policy and realized we shared the same perspective on how to confront an issue.
Despite that claim (just party politics), I always got along well with Richard Corbett.
That sports policy topic in 2007 was the last occasion on which I engaged in "lobbying". It was an honor to represent the world's #1 soccer club vis-à-vis the EU Commission and Parliament.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The public part of the UK parliamentary oversight hearing on CMA's work has finally started.
Chair says "we're gonna ask about some topical cases ... most widely covered news is Microsoft-ActivisionBlizzard, please give us a quick summary"
🧵1/X
Sarah Cardell says decisions are taken by "independent" inquiry groups. But it is well-known that she very much pushed for the blockind decision. Also, "independent" doesn't necessarily mean that they make the right call.
🧵2/X
Mentions remedy proposed by Microsoft and now explains UK position: legislation required remedy to be comprehensive and effective. Well, same basically in the EU, but the Commission is not as unreasonable as the CMA, more pragmatic and consumer-focused.
The question came up what the #FTC would have to do to prevent the consummation #Microsoft's acquisition of #ActivisionBlizzard in a scenario where UK & EU cleared.
Due to a Twitter issue I have to post this thread tweet-by-tweet (publishing whole thread failed before).
🧵1/X
The FTC's in-house court can't prevent the consummation of the merger. The FTC needs to ask a United States District Court to enjoin (= bar) Microsoft.
It hasn't gone to such a federal court yet because prerequisite foreign approvals (especially UK & EU) are outstanding.
🧵2/X
Assuming UK approves in April, EU on May 22., the first question is whether the FTC will wait until the EC has formally decided (huge hurry then) or run to a federal court on the basis of an MLex or similar report that the EC is inclined to clear the deal.
(1) For the reasons I explained in my latest post, I have to focus on my own #AppStore issue and other priorities and obligations, so to my dismay can't follow the #EpicGames v. #Apple trial in real time because it's huge. This is likely my final thread on the topic for a month.
(2) #Antitrust has a vivid and at times "sensationalist" side, but the actual decisions are based on rather abstract elements -- and the rulings tend to be dry. #Apple won't look good when all the evidence is presented, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll lose the case.
(3) #EpicGames is heroic. I really mean it. I'm not saying I agree with them, their priorities, jurisdictional choices etc. 100%--the issue is too complex for that. But probably > 95%. I can't read minds, but an #antitrust plaintiff can't be more principled than @TimSweeneyEpic.