5 ms·

Softbank is invested in both – Grab and Uber. They weren't keen on losing money by competing against themselves.[1] So it wasn't 100% up to Uber to quit and ta

• Traster 7y ago
  Which really opens up questions into monopoly rules where a single entity owns significant stakes in all the biggest players in the market and can intervene to stop legitimate competition.
  • steve19 7y ago
    Matt Levine addresses this quite often and has been for years. Hedge funds often own some of all competitors in a market. There might one day be anti trust issues with this. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/opinion/articles/2016-04-04/shareholder-activism-might-have-antitrust-issues https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/opinion/a... (apologies for the amp link)
  • chanux 7y ago
    The authorities did find the deal to be anti-competitive https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/competition-watchdog-finds-grab-uber-deal-anti-competitive-lists-corrective https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/competition...
• Abishek_Muthian 7y ago
  Same happened in China with Didi & Uber. Softbank has investments in other major ride hailing services like Ola(India), 99 Taxis(Brazil) as well. Ola is now refusing to take further investments from Softbank as it had went behind Ola CEO's back to acquire its initial investors.