As the article points out, divesting some stores in some locations isn't a long term solution that has worked in the past. I don't think it's in anyone's intere

As the article points out, divesting some stores in some locations isn't a long term solution that has worked in the past. I don't think it's in anyone's interests to have oligopolistic supply chains and grocery stores. If you look at the other related story on HN today, you'll see the top 4 grocers have jumped from 10-15% of the market share to ~35% and plenty of suburban and rural havoc caused by mergers. If the status quo is sustainable, which it seems like it is, then there is little reason to not consider these mergers monopolistic and stop them.