[HN Gopher] FTC chair Lina Khan takes victory lap on blocking Nv...
___________________________________________________________________
FTC chair Lina Khan takes victory lap on blocking Nvidia-Arm merger
Author : moose_man
Score : 46 points
Date : 2024-02-27 19:01 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.cnbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.cnbc.com)
| granzymes wrote:
| Did the FTC actually... do... anything in this merger? My
| understanding is that Nvidia called it off because there was no
| way the UK was going to let their one national champion in chip
| design be subsumed into an existing American giant. My
| recollection is that the FTC didn't even file for a preliminary
| injunction in this case.
| pvg wrote:
| They sued
|
| https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2021/12/...
| granzymes wrote:
| That's an in-house complaint before the FTC's own judge. I'm
| talking about a request for a preliminary injunction in
| Federal district court in front of a real judge. The FTC
| doesn't have the authority to block a transaction unless
| they're in an Article III court; their in-house proceedings
| can only unwind a transaction after it closes.
| pvg wrote:
| Well, you asked if the FTC did anything and they definitely
| did something. What credit they can claim for the eventual
| outcome is a different discussion but the answer to 'did
| they do anything' appears to be 'yes'.
| granzymes wrote:
| Sorry, I should have made clear I meant "do anything to
| block the merger." That's what my reference to a
| preliminary injunction was about, but I realize this is a
| tech forum and not a law forum so I should have
| clarified.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| The FTC's action certainly deters behavior. You don't
| need an actual court order and armed marshalls.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Did the FTC actually... do... anything_
|
| No.
|
| I'm increasingly convinced putting someone as inexperienced as
| Khan in the seat was a savvy way to throw a bone to anti-merger
| activist types, who like tough talk more than compromise, while
| placating the pro-merger donor ones, who are more pragmatic if
| less principled.
| moose_man wrote:
| I expect that they coordinate or communicate, so we have no
| idea what her influence was on the UK initiative. But also the
| big moves to control the market power of tech has it's critics,
| this is a victory lap for the idea.
| addicted wrote:
| I see nothing in the article that suggests Lina Khan claiming
| that the FTC blocked, or even played a role in blocking, the
| NVIDIA-ARM merger.
|
| To the extent the headline is making all the commenters here
| believe that to be the case the headline is clearly incorrect.
|
| Here's what Lina Khan actually says.
|
| > Khan said that when the $40 billion merger was called off due
| to "significant regulatory challenges" in 2022, it forced both
| companies to innovate and create new products.
|
| > "The trajectories of both companies in the wake of this
| action has illustrated how organic growth and competition can
| spur firms to further innovate in ways that benefit the
| business and public alike," Khan said at the conference.
|
| > The evidence, Khan said, is in the company stock prices.
|
| > "Not only has Nvidia remained the leading AI chipmaker in the
| AI chip arms race, with a surging stock valuation, but Arm
| ended up going public and has a forward earnings multiple that
| is more than double Nvidia's," Khan said.
|
| Lina Khan is clearly making the case that regulatory action is
| actually good for investors and not claiming any sort of credit
| to the FTC specifically.
|
| What all these comments here only go to show is how few people
| actually read the articles before commenting on the headlines.
| pm90 wrote:
| The headline is quite sensationalist... but it is the headline
| used by the source.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-02-27 23:01 UTC)