6 ms·
Seems like a "I'll know when I see it" situation. In that, if the FTC thinks they are anti-competitive, they probably are and at least should be blocked from ac
by madamelic 4y ago
Seems like a "I'll know when I see it" situation. In that, if the FTC thinks they are anti-competitive, they probably are and at least should be blocked from acquiring their competition.
Breaking them up or taking actual action against them would require deeper investigation with FTC taking the lead rather than potentially handing sensitive documents over to the offending company.
If the company wants to fight the block of acquisitions would foot the bill for everyone being supeonaed along with the FTC's expenses regardless of the case's success.
- nordsieck 4y ago> In that, if the FTC thinks they are anti-competitive, they probably are Wait? What? It seems like a pretty strange position to just assume that the government is always right. I mean, if I said, all people the police arrest are probably guilty and should go to jail, I would hope you'd disagree.
- jlarocco 4y ago> It seems like a pretty strange position to just assume that the government is always right. Big cases against big companies are different. Since the company will have (nearly) unlimited resources to fight, the FTC will only bring a case if they're pretty sure they can win, otherwise it will be a big waste of money all around. It's really not anything like the police arresting people.
- zeroonetwothree 4y agoThe government has lost many antitrust cases. In fact, they often do them for political reasons, not because they actually care about the outcome.
- piggybox 4y agoBy the same logic: if FTC thinks net neutrality is bad, it probably is...