5 ms·

Because she thinks she can predict the future in a way that she believes she knows what is the best for the market in the long term.

ceejayoz 4y ago
That sounds like a criticism of economists, not lawyers.
- mrkramer 4y ago
  If you are a neoliberal economist that's not bad criticism because less government intervention the better for the market.
morelisp 4y ago
To be clear, this is an incredibly non-specific (neither her nor the merger in question) criticism, so you are proposing that no merger should ever be blocked for any reason?
- mrkramer 4y ago
  Scrutinize big mergers don't block smaller acquisitions because you think you know that sometime in the future the smaller company will become big healthy competitor.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    That's not what they think they know. They think they know Facebook has the financial resources to buy out anyone with even a slight chance of becoming a competitor, and are leveraging that in an anti-competitive fashion.
    - mrkramer 4y ago
      >They think they know Facebook has the financial resources to buy out anyone with even a slight chance of becoming a competitor, and are leveraging that in an anti-competitive fashion. Ofc they know it; Facebook/Meta is a public company with a huge cash pile and the pressure from investors to spend that cash is only increasing. They already spend billions for R&D just like their tech peers and the best way to spend the rest of the cash is apparently acquisitions.
AlexandrB 4y ago
That's what VCs do every day by picking winners and losers. Companies like Uber would not have made it (and still might not make it) without massive cash injections. In practice, how is VCs choosing winners different than the FTC doing so?
- mrkramer 4y ago
  VCs are private companies which invest and manage private money and they are not regulating anything. FTC is a government entity which is required by law to regulate markets. That is my layman understanding. And there are hundreds of VCs so if one VC does not believe in your mission and vision find another one but there is only one FTC.

ceejayoz 4y ago

That sounds like a criticism of economists, not lawyers.

mrkramer 4y ago
If you are a neoliberal economist that's not bad criticism because less government intervention the better for the market.

morelisp 4y ago

To be clear, this is an incredibly non-specific (neither her nor the merger in question) criticism, so you are proposing that no merger should ever be blocked for any reason?

mrkramer 4y ago
Scrutinize big mergers don't block smaller acquisitions because you think you know that sometime in the future the smaller company will become big healthy competitor.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  That's not what they think they know. They think they know Facebook has the financial resources to buy out anyone with even a slight chance of becoming a competitor, and are leveraging that in an anti-competitive fashion.
  - mrkramer 4y ago
    >They think they know Facebook has the financial resources to buy out anyone with even a slight chance of becoming a competitor, and are leveraging that in an anti-competitive fashion. Ofc they know it; Facebook/Meta is a public company with a huge cash pile and the pressure from investors to spend that cash is only increasing. They already spend billions for R&D just like their tech peers and the best way to spend the rest of the cash is apparently acquisitions.

AlexandrB 4y ago

That's what VCs do every day by picking winners and losers. Companies like Uber would not have made it (and still might not make it) without massive cash injections. In practice, how is VCs choosing winners different than the FTC doing so?

mrkramer 4y ago
VCs are private companies which invest and manage private money and they are not regulating anything. FTC is a government entity which is required by law to regulate markets. That is my layman understanding. And there are hundreds of VCs so if one VC does not believe in your mission and vision find another one but there is only one FTC.