Ryuu96 said: The Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice said Wednesday that their new focus when evaluating mergers will include the impact a deal will have on competition for workers along with how a series of acquisitions, rather than one-offs, could result in harmful effects on the market. In the new guidelines, they outlined 13 points they will use to evaluate whether a merger should be blocked: 1. Mergers should not significantly increase concentration in highly concentrated markets. FTC and DOJ lay out rules for merger review to reflect digital economy (cnbc.com) |
I was thinking before that 1 ground where I could have seen legit concern with the ABK deal is that the Bethesda deal was too recent to have an effective impact on markets making it harder to judge subsequent acquisition.
So to me, those new guidelines totally make sense on what they are trying to achieve, like if MS were to announce buying Take 2 the day they complete ABK they would create a context where the market did not still properly adjust to the new context so reviewing the deal notwithstanding the previous one would skew the result to the same conclusion in most case.
However, those guidelines are too vague,
- What is the timeframe to be considered part of the same series of acquisitions?
- What are the common characteristics that would make them so?
- Like if MS buys a dev $500m dev can it be considered in the same series as a $70B publisher?
- Would the FTC need to do a pre-investigation to assess what is the series?
- Would the FTC offer the acquirer entity possibility to declare themselves a transaction as a part of a series in the notice of acquisition?
- Would the FTC need to do a pre-investigation identifying the series it's a part of and be open to challenging those findings?
- Wouldn't this cause judge to adjudicate on the same transaction twice or would the judgement be made on the series but affect the last entry?
- If a buyer acquisitions multiple smaller targets at once (like Xbox in 2018) will the transactions be judged independently but considering they're part of the same series?
- If so what happens if a Judge issues a block for an acquisition by considering it part of a series and judging the series to give rise to an SLC, while another judge allows another transaction with the same series by Judging it isn't causing an SLC?