Ask Paul: July 14 (Premium)

Happy Friday and Hola from Mexico City! We’re heading out to the canals of Xochimilco with friends this afternoon, but let’s first kick off the weekend with another great set of reader questions. After last week’s explosion of writing---sorry about that---I tried to rein it in this week. Tried.
Exclusivity
sabertooth920 asks:

I guess only Nintendo and Sony are supposed to have exclusive games.  Fortunately, the judge seemingly saw through it.  What do you foresee in Microsoft’s post-Activision-purchase road map?  Do you think anything changed based on any of the concessions Microsoft had to make?

I feel like Microsoft went well beyond what is reasonable when it comes to concessions. And that these concessions show its willingness to rise above the normal competitive politics that occur in this industry. Should this deal go through, critics are going to carp every single time a Microsoft game studio releases an Xbox exclusive. But it’s important to remember two things. One, what you wrote, is that the disparity between the number of exclusives that Sony and Nintendo have compared to Microsoft is overwhelming and always will be. And two, that Microsoft is allowed to compete against these businesses just like Sony and Microsoft do. This should be a level playing field.

Were you in favor of trading for Porzingis?

Yes. This is the missing piece for the Celtics, which got this close to the championship two years in a row. I cannot believe Dallas gave this guy up.
You put the futile in FTC
red.radar asks:

Just saw that The FTC is going to appeal Judge Corley's decision.  I am just flabbergasted.   I thought Judge Corley's decision was rock solid and a thorough evisceration of every claim of the FTC.  I just can't see how any regulator who values their career would throw their credibility away on such a prideful appeal.  What are your thoughts? 

So many thoughts. I will be brief.

The judge’s overall ruling is 100 percent correct. There are niggling issues that the FTC is seizing on. I wish it was more airtight.

I cannot believe the FTC is continuing this battle. That said, prolonging the case (delaying as a strategy) makes sense: after enough time, Microsoft and/or Activision Blizzard may finally say enough and move on.

There is a real risk here that this ridiculous rendition of the FTC will become seriously weakened by its ongoing losses taking on Big Tech and that this will embolden these rapacious companies to be even worse, knowing that the chance for punishment is small. A smart FTC would take on cases that make sense, not just every case, and lead by example. This would send a message to the industry regarding behavior. I just don’t understand or agree with the plan here (broadly, not just with Microsoft).

We need strong regulation of this crucial market and it’s not just the FTC that is screwing up here. We are basically offshoring Big Tech regulation to the EU, and that’s not j...