This is a really good point, and I think some countries actions are certainly (as you say) blocking innovation - Australia's moves around getting search engines

This is a really good point, and I think some countries actions are certainly (as you say) blocking innovation - Australia's moves around getting search engines to "bail out" the media is one example. Clearly an independent (high quality) press is important, but a "search engine pays" system is far from independent! RE WhatsApp, I don't disagree it has done a world of good in disrupting the telcos. RE the CMA (the example from before), they definitely dont' give entrenched interests like telcos an easy ride (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cellnex-and-ck-hutchison-deal-raises-competition-concerns https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cellnex-and-ck-hutchison-... for one that looks to be blocked from selling their tower assets to Cellnex). They're not afraid of shying away from big interests like in pharma either (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-fines-pharma-firm-over-pricing-of-crucial-thyroid-drug https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-fines-pharma-firm-ove...) I definitely think WhatsApp has moved the needle and been a genuine power for good for disrupting meaningless usage-based billing. You can see this in mobile networks - at least in the UK, many don't even bother to meter and bill for calls and SMS now, since WhatsApp has utterly disrupted anything other than "unlimited". By eliminating the billing systems for most use, you also cut costs of running the network! I think the question for competition regulators comes down to whether or not it's "healthy" (from a competition/societal perspective) for WhatsApp to be bought by Facebook, the owner of FB, Instagram and Giphy. And to then be able to acquire anyone else that emerges. It's interesting to see the CMA focus on Giphy's advertising offering being withdrawn post-acquisition, and suggests to me they might be focusing on tangible "acquire-to-disrupt". As an innovator, acquisitions are obviously an important exit route to create a liquidity event, but I do fear that the market focuses too much on acquisitions from a limited pool of companies, and that we need to see a broader spectrum of acquirers, so we don't end up with a "Standard Oil" type situation. Acquisitions aren't the only exit route, though any move to limit acquisitions will (at least for the short term) likely reduce late-stage company valuations due to fewer options for founders. It seems likely that restrictions or increased scrutiny on M&A would likely lead to more tech IPOs down the line.