4 ms·

It would have been probably been rejected by anti-trust regulators.

sabujp 9y ago
what makes you think so? I mean it should be, but I don't think the govt is currently being run by a sane administration.
- yeukhon 9y ago
  Are Qualcomm and Broadcom subjected to EU antitrust laws when it comes to acquisitions? Or just limited to when one side is registered in a EU country?
  - danmaz74 9y ago
    I think that any acquisition between companies that have a relevant market in the EU may be subject to scrutiny.
  - wyldfire 9y ago
    Effectively both are in all jurisdictions because they sell their parts globally. So, the EU certainly would be able to reject the acquisition.
    - skinnymuch 9y ago
      What does that mean if the EU rejects it? They are American companies, no? If the US doesn't reject it, why can't they merge? Or can they, but the EU rejection means they can't sell things in the EU or other ramifications? It's curious to me because China does multiple things that wouldn't be allowed in the EU. Like working far too closely with the government can be allowed for Chinese companies, but mergers between them can still be rejected by the EU?
      - icebraining 9y ago
        The landmark case is the GE-Honeywell merger, which the EU blocked after the US DoJ had already approved. In it, the Commission said they had the authority it involved at least two "companies with a combined turnover worldwide in excess of €5,0 billion and European sales of at least €250 million". I'm not sure what would be the procedure if they went ahead anyway, but when you control €500M+ in sales in your jurisdiction, you have a strong position.
        wil421 9y ago
        Great article for anyone interested.[1]Thanks for making me aware of this. [1]http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,166732,00.html http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,166732,...
- tw04 9y ago
  Both of those companies are global and would need to pass antitrust in the EU, China, and Japan as well. I find it highly unlikely Europe would agree to it.
- nickik 9y ago
  Nothing to do with the administration. How the law is applied deepens on judges, we are not in the progressive area (they were far, far more racist then Trump).
gman83 9y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBu_FfPPTLw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBu_FfPPTLw I feel this might have something to do with the anti-trust case.
wyldfire 9y ago
It's far from over! Broadcom/AVGO likely assumes that their bid to takeover Qualcomm would not be met with smiles. Broadcom can convince Qualcomm shareholders to replace the board with one that will accept the offer (or subsequent offers). Once the friendly board is in place, they might halt the NXP acquisition (forfeiting some good-faith deposit to NXP) and convince regulators that they would divest Qualcomm's IP from their semiconductors. This would make regulators happy and it would set the stage for them to court AAPL for future design wins.
- colejohnson66 9y ago
  > Broadcom can convince Qualcomm shareholders to replace the board with one that will accept the offer (or subsequent offers). Is that even legal?
  - azernik 9y ago
    Totally. That's the definition of a hostile takeover. In principle, the board just represents the shareholders, and if they're not doing what the shareholders want then they have the absolute right to replace them.
nickik 9y ago
In the US? That would be very surprising. Anti-Trust law requires consumer damage under the modern interpretation and its hard to see how a globally competing business would satisfy that.
azernik 9y ago
Very possibly - and Qualcomm seemed to agree. They're board mentioned "regulatory uncertainty" in their reasoning.

what makes you think so? I mean it should be, but I don't think the govt is currently being run by a sane administration.

yeukhon 9y ago
Are Qualcomm and Broadcom subjected to EU antitrust laws when it comes to acquisitions? Or just limited to when one side is registered in a EU country?
- danmaz74 9y ago
  I think that any acquisition between companies that have a relevant market in the EU may be subject to scrutiny.
- wyldfire 9y ago
  Effectively both are in all jurisdictions because they sell their parts globally. So, the EU certainly would be able to reject the acquisition.
  - skinnymuch 9y ago
    What does that mean if the EU rejects it? They are American companies, no? If the US doesn't reject it, why can't they merge? Or can they, but the EU rejection means they can't sell things in the EU or other ramifications? It's curious to me because China does multiple things that wouldn't be allowed in the EU. Like working far too closely with the government can be allowed for Chinese companies, but mergers between them can still be rejected by the EU?
    - icebraining 9y ago
      The landmark case is the GE-Honeywell merger, which the EU blocked after the US DoJ had already approved. In it, the Commission said they had the authority it involved at least two "companies with a combined turnover worldwide in excess of €5,0 billion and European sales of at least €250 million". I'm not sure what would be the procedure if they went ahead anyway, but when you control €500M+ in sales in your jurisdiction, you have a strong position.
      - wil421 9y ago
        Great article for anyone interested.[1]Thanks for making me aware of this. [1]http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,166732,00.html http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,166732,...
tw04 9y ago
Both of those companies are global and would need to pass antitrust in the EU, China, and Japan as well. I find it highly unlikely Europe would agree to it.
nickik 9y ago
Nothing to do with the administration. How the law is applied deepens on judges, we are not in the progressive area (they were far, far more racist then Trump).

gman83 9y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBu_FfPPTLw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBu_FfPPTLw I feel this might have something to do with the anti-trust case.

wyldfire 9y ago

It's far from over! Broadcom/AVGO likely assumes that their bid to takeover Qualcomm would not be met with smiles. Broadcom can convince Qualcomm shareholders to replace the board with one that will accept the offer (or subsequent offers). Once the friendly board is in place, they might halt the NXP acquisition (forfeiting some good-faith deposit to NXP) and convince regulators that they would divest Qualcomm's IP from their semiconductors. This would make regulators happy and it would set the stage for them to court AAPL for future design wins.

colejohnson66 9y ago
> Broadcom can convince Qualcomm shareholders to replace the board with one that will accept the offer (or subsequent offers). Is that even legal?
- azernik 9y ago
  Totally. That's the definition of a hostile takeover. In principle, the board just represents the shareholders, and if they're not doing what the shareholders want then they have the absolute right to replace them.

nickik 9y ago

In the US? That would be very surprising. Anti-Trust law requires consumer damage under the modern interpretation and its hard to see how a globally competing business would satisfy that.

azernik 9y ago

Very possibly - and Qualcomm seemed to agree. They're board mentioned "regulatory uncertainty" in their reasoning.