4 ms·

Out of fairness, the DoJ reviewed both the Instagram [0] and WhatsApp [1] acquisitions for competitive impact prior to acquisition completion as is generally re

Out of fairness, the DoJ reviewed both the Instagram [0] and WhatsApp [1] acquisitions for competitive impact prior to acquisition completion as is generally required for deals of this size [2]. It's not like the DoJ has been waiting on the sidelines unable to stop Facebook from buying smaller companies. They looked at it and concluded it wasn't an issue. Remember: the Instagram acquisition came ~1 yr after Google+ was launched and everyone was sure that Facebook was toast. [0] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2012/08/ftc-closes-its-investigation-facebooks-proposed-acquisition https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2012/08/ftc-c... [1] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/04/ftc-notifies-facebook-whatsapp-privacy-obligations-light-proposed https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/04/ftc-n... [2] https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/premerger-notification-program/hsr-resources/steps-determining-whether-hsr-filing https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/premerger-notification-progr...

mtgx 7y ago
That doesn't say much considering we've been living in an era of tons of corporate consolidation/no antitrust actions whatsoever. Honestly, I think the vast majority of $1+ billion acquisitions should be rejected by default. I think in almost all such cases it involves one large incumbent buying out the competition = terrible for consumers. If companies have $1+ billion to buy out other companies they should also have the money to create their own competitor to that company that is worth $1+ billion and they are trying to buy. And that would be much better for the consumer, too, as it would lead to more competition/faster rate of improvement for products.
icebraining 7y ago
> Google+ was launched and everyone was sure that Facebook was toast. I think that was just your bubble :) The media coverage was decided lukewarm, with "10 Reasons Facebook Will Wipe The Floor With Google+" (business insider), "Why Google+ can never compete with Facebook" (NetworkWorld), "Why Google+ won't hurt Facebook" (Gigaom). Slate actually declared "Google+ Is Dead" in November 2011(!)
- perpetualpatzer 7y ago
  That's fair. The hype cycle may have died down faster than I remember. Not a big user of either service.
bduerst 7y ago
Pretty much. In Facebook's defense, they did grow Instragram from the small app startup it was to the size it is today. Also while Google+ is a bad example, Snapchat is one where a new entrant to the market was able to grow quickly and go IPO.

mtgx 7y ago

That doesn't say much considering we've been living in an era of tons of corporate consolidation/no antitrust actions whatsoever. Honestly, I think the vast majority of $1+ billion acquisitions should be rejected by default. I think in almost all such cases it involves one large incumbent buying out the competition = terrible for consumers. If companies have $1+ billion to buy out other companies they should also have the money to create their own competitor to that company that is worth $1+ billion and they are trying to buy. And that would be much better for the consumer, too, as it would lead to more competition/faster rate of improvement for products.

icebraining 7y ago

> Google+ was launched and everyone was sure that Facebook was toast. I think that was just your bubble :) The media coverage was decided lukewarm, with "10 Reasons Facebook Will Wipe The Floor With Google+" (business insider), "Why Google+ can never compete with Facebook" (NetworkWorld), "Why Google+ won't hurt Facebook" (Gigaom). Slate actually declared "Google+ Is Dead" in November 2011(!)

perpetualpatzer 7y ago
That's fair. The hype cycle may have died down faster than I remember. Not a big user of either service.

bduerst 7y ago

Pretty much. In Facebook's defense, they did grow Instragram from the small app startup it was to the size it is today. Also while Google+ is a bad example, Snapchat is one where a new entrant to the market was able to grow quickly and go IPO.