Court Exhibit·11 DEC 2019
Bundling Deals Can Backfire When Your Counterparty Wants Simplicity
When you stack asks to justify a payment, the other side sees complexity — and offers you a simpler exit.
Source document — ABK Update — Dec 11 Call with Armin · In re Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (Epic v. Google) · 3:21-md-02981 (CAND), Doc. 509-47, filed 2023-05-18 (page 1)
Excerpt · In Karen Aviram Beatty & Lawrence Koh's own words
Based on the latest feedback from Armin, below is what I think would get the ABK xPA deal done. Knowing that BC approval is ultimately needed, are Play, Cloud, YT, and Ads (and finance!) comfortable with these asks?
Just spoke to Armin. I 'soft floated' the current proposal by him, which has been coming together for BC review. He did not react well. He did not like our new 5 year Cloud commit ask in order to fund the exclusive eSports license. He strongly prefers a 3 year construct across the board.
He continues to be consistent that without a $100M/year credits/cash payment, there is no deal ($100M = 10% rev share off $1B/year Play consumer spend base). Armin is specifically pushing for $130M in credits/cash for each of 3 years.
ABK is getting a ton of pressure from Amazon/Twitch to agree to a deal with them ASAP. Another option we have is to remove the eSports Licensing altogether. In this case, ABK would commit to a much smaller Cloud deal (e.g. $20–40M commit) and still require $100M in credits. If this deal falls through, he claims that they will launch their own mobile distribution platform (partnering with another 'major mobile company' — presume Epic), double down with Amazon/Twitch (or MSFT) for Cloud/eSports, and pull away from Stadia.
All this being said, I do think they really want to do this deal with Google (vs competition) and vastly expand the partnership between our companies.
The daily letter · Free
This edition is for members — but the daily letter is free.
One real corporate email, and the lesson it teaches, in your inbox every weekday morning. Free. Unsubscribe in one click.
How this surfaced
- Source type
- Court Exhibit
- Case / record
- In re Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (Epic v. Google)
- Citation
- 3:21-md-02981 (CAND), Doc. 509-47, filed 2023-05-18
- Date authored
- December 11, 2019
- License
- Public domain
- Original
- View the primary source →
Shanna Velez & Mike Marchak & Purnima Kochikar & Alyssa Ablao & Josh Kim & Randy Gelber ·Google ·15 DEC 2021
Discounts Are Cheaper Than Exceptions to Your Pricing Rule
When you can't grant a carveout, invent a program — same economics, but the rule stays intact.
Don ·Google ·14 MAR 2023
Bundle Deals Across Divisions to Save a Weak Position
When one business unit can't justify the check alone, stack the strategic value across the whole company — or lose the partner entirely.
Johan Heurlin & Lawrence Koh & Jamie Rosenberg ·Google ·27 MAR 2019
When a Big Partner Asks for a Discount, Reframe the Deal
The smartest concessions look like co-investment, not subsidies — same money, very different risk.