FTC

Nice-Sandwich-9338

Ellisons ties to Trump will have the FTC nix the Netflix deal or have them donate 1billion to Trump's retirement to go through. Tiktok deal with Ellison netted Trump big time. Donations are legal tender vs a bribe.

TasteTop3717

I have 16% of my portfolio to individual stocks: VRT, GDWN, FTC, AXON, FIX, NVDA, ORCL, PLTR. The rest is in multiple ETF’s/ETC’s to diversify myself. So far I’m doing 15% in 6 months so I couldn’t recommend it enough!

Financial_Memory5183

are you not afraid that the FTC could come after reddit? #1 election interference (banning certain threads for the current president in 2020 and 2) hosting adult people with very little safeguards against children.

Ward-Ranger

lina khan aint the FTC anymore. DJT just merged with a nuclear company. I think we're good

kohadaa

The FTC simply won't approve a sale to Netflix. They might win the bid, but they won't get the regulatory approval for the deal to actually finalize.

AlexFromRomania

The reason Jensen is saying that is because they are purposefully doing this to avoid any mandatory anti-trust review by the FTC. This is a somewhat recent trend that companies have started doing to get around monopoly and anti-trust regulations. Instead of buying the entire company, they enter into an agreement where they take all the valuable pieces, employees, and/or assets of the company that they actually want or need, and leave anything else behind basically as a complete useless shell of itself. By not officially acquiring the entire business, they avoid triggering the mandatory review by the FTC mandated by a specific law (the name of which I'd have to look up). It's still an acquisition in all but name though. Now my understanding is that the FTC can likely still review these agreements under the current law, but they are choosing not to, which is obviously on brand for its current incarnation. As I mentioned, this is something that has gotten super popular with mainly tech companies in the past few years as a way to avoid the badly needed antitrust policing by the actually effective and super based Lina Khan FTC administration. Iirc, Microsoft, Apple, and Meta have all also used this exact same tactic in the past 2-3 years, along with lots of other companies as well I'm sure.

AlexFromRomania

So the shady part about this is that they are purposefully avoiding mandatory anti-trust review by "not acquiring Groq as a company," as Jensen is quoted in the article. This is a somewhat recent trend that companies have started doing to get around monopoly and anti-trust regulations. Instead of buying the entire company, they enter into an agreement where they take all the valuable pieces, employees, and/or assets of the company that they actually want or need, and leave anything else behind basically as a complete useless shell of itself. By not officially acquiring the entire business, they avoid triggering the mandatory review by the FTC mandated by a specific law (the name of which I'd have to look up). Now my understanding is that the FTC can technically still review these agreements under the current law, but they are choosing not to, which is obviously on brand for its current incarnation. As I mentioned, this is something that has gotten super popular with mainly tech companies in the past few years as a way to avoid the badly needed antitrust policing by the actually effective and super based Lina Khan FTC administration. Iirc, Microsoft, Apple, and Meta have all also used this exact same tactic in the past 2-3 years, along with lots of other companies as well I'm sure.

AlexFromRomania

So the shady part about this is that they are purposefully avoiding mandatory anti-trust review by "not acquiring Groq as a company," as Jensen is quoted in the article. This is a somewhat recent trend that companies have started doing to get around monopoly and anti-trust regulations. Instead of buying the entire company, they enter into an agreement where they take all the valuable pieces, employees, and/or assets of the company that they actually want or need, and leave anything else behind basically as a complete useless shell of itself. By not officially acquiring the entire business, they avoid triggering the mandatory review by the FTC mandated by a specific law (the name of which I'd have to look up). Now my understanding is that the FTC can technically still review these agreements under the current law, but they are choosing not to, which is obviously on brand for its current incarnation. As I mentioned, this is something that has gotten super popular with mainly tech companies in the past few years as a way to avoid the badly needed antitrust policing by the actually effective and super based Lina Khan FTC administration. Iirc, Microsoft, Apple, and Meta have all also used this exact same tactic in the past 2-3 years, along with lots of other companies as well I'm sure.

Dismal_Pension866

It’s not a play against their current business but rather risks of the future with this large acquisition Markets do not like large acquisitions and uncertainty. Everyone is very short sighted and bullish but do not realize, FTC regulatory+ hostile bid+ trump = lower stock price If they miss earnings again then bears have full control

SuitsOverSwag

I think they’re a great company with a great product. However, the stock is questionable in my mind until the WB thing is over. Because the Ellisons are involved, there’s going to be a lot of Trumpian fuckery going on in this whole saga. I’m waiting for the Trump FTC/DOJ to reject the sale to NFLX so Ellisons can take over CNN. After that, NFLX may be an upside stock again.

Nodulous

Fun fact, they were about to buy ARM for 40 billion a few years ago until the FTC blocked the acquisition.

wareagle2009-20013

Monopolistic tactics. Last time anyone any work at the FTC they blocked AT&T from buying T Mobile who then turned around and bought Sprint

debtmagnet

If this is real, it will be interesting to see what the FTC and DoJ think of the buyout. The legal basis of whether they block the deal as monopolistic will be contingent on whether they lump all "AI chips" together, or whether they discriminate between GPUs, ASICs, and FPGAs. The decision will probably come down to how the executive branch wants to shape the AI chip national strategy: let a few national champions carve out a killzone, or foster a competitive ecosystem.

depkentew

You’re still not understanding. I’m not talking about reversing the merger, I’m talking about criminally prosecuting law-breaking executives. I’m talking about Netflix executives going to prison if they bribe the FTC to push a merger through. In the same way Trump can promise not to prosecute FCPA violators, he can also promise not to prosecute a Netflix executive who bribes the FTC to get a merger through. Neither promise is very valuable, because the executive doesn’t believe Trump’s successor will honor it. The executive has reason to be skeptical, because we don’t know who the successor will be. The fear is that, if you bribe the FTC, Trump’s successor sends you to prison. I’m trying to figure out how to convey this. A bribe offers a temporary suspension of the law. The problem with a bribe is that *it doesn’t change the underlying law*. Thus, even if you can bribe a temporary office holder to get a merger through, you usually won’t, because the enforcement of the law will likely resume when the bribee leaves office, and thus the briber will go to prison. It’s the same dynamic as the FCPA suspension. Executives aren’t putting much stock in a *temporary suspension of the law* because they’re afraid of what the bribee’s unbribed successor will do. A temporary suspension isn’t a guarantee of safety.

TheScourgeOfHumanity

got my Amazon FTC settlement check. LFG! What should i throw my $28 into?

depkentew

Regarding the valuation issue - I see your point. You could be right that Netflix is offering the better valuation. I take a dim view of the cable news wing, which is why I lean towards Paramount’s offer, but I could easily be wrong about that. Regarding the guarantee - I absolutely disagree with you. The personal guarantee plus the promise to retain assets within the family trust is a huge deal. Previously, Warner Bros scorned Paramount because of concerns about Paramount’s ability to actually come up with the financing. This deal will leave Paramount massively over-leveraged, quite frankly. The huge concern was that Warner Bros would agree to a sale to Paramount, then banks would refuse to lend enough to Paramount, and this deal would collapse. Now, loans won’t be an issue. Paramount can borrow enough. Warner Bros has to take them seriously. The negotiations will take a very different tone and Paramount could win. As for FTC approval - The Trump administration is corrupt, but it’s not *that* corrupt. If you think Netflix can just write a $100mil bribe to the FTC, you’re spending too much time on reddit. (For that matter, even if they could, they wouldn’t. Netflix executives would be too afraid of prosecution once Trump leaves office. For an example of a similar dynamic, see the FCPA. Trump has openly and proudly suspended enforcement of the FCPA, yet S&P 500 companies are still overwhelmingly complying because they’re afraid Trump’s successor will resume enforcement. Trump can’t give established, risk-averse businessmen the guarantees they want.)

vile_lullaby

This would get them in trouble with the FTC fairly quickly. The kids would all come over from pump fun and it would end up like an old fashioned Boiler room, but theres more regulations on actual securities than meme coins.

Put_Er_There_Sport

FTC cleared NVDA and Intel transaction

TomatoSpecialist6879

That's back when FTC and DOJ are governmental but independent hawkish regulatory body, the deal will go through with no strings attached if NFLX decide to do a revenue share for a set period with white house or promise perpetual Netflix subscription for Trump family or some shit.

graps2

FTC will block the WB purchase. So says ZOG 

wtf_is_up

>Robot Vacuum Roomba Maker Files for Bankruptcy After 35 Years FTC blocked a proposed acquisition by AMZN for $1.4 billion. Thank you Sen Warren for protecting all of those consumers.

berticusberticus

It actually is trying to state that state laws are void despite not having legal ability to do so. Section 7 specifically states they think their policy can be used to preempt state laws under the FTC’s UDAP authority.

sundaypleas

I'm shocked at the idea there's no one at the SEC or FTC with the specific job of monitoring the chat groups and Twitter.

_CMDR_

SEC FTC this one right here.

Fit_Attitude_2781

I wonder what the hypothesis is here. The current situation with WB seems like a loose - loose. Either they "win" the bidding and buy its nice part for a price the market already deemed too high or they loose the bid which generally creates negative buzz and also doesn't benefit the stock. And those are the better possible outcomes, the worse are they try to go ahead with the merger and get blocked by the FTC which will be under a lot of pressure from Trump who wants Paramount Skydance to buy the company, whicht would be a desaster as they also agreed to pay 6 billion dollar if the deal falls trough for any reason, or they up their bid to beat out Paramount which will see the stock plummet even further. Frankly I don't see how NFLX would get any positive action before Q2 or Q3 next year.

iguessjustdont

Definitely not too late. FTC could step in anytime

TomatoSpecialist6879

Approval China sale because Jensen give 25% China sales revenue as tribute to Donkey, in-exchange Donkey lets NVDA make money without DoJ or FTC bothering them

Resquid

Prepare for a lot of M&A activity once this closes and everyone sees demonstrable evidence that an FTC decision is super affordable.

Wanderment

I'm pretty sure the breakup fee is to protect them from being sued over stock manipulation when these things fail. Which means that an FTC block is fair game.

Forte_12

Paramount is absolutely fucked if Netflix acquires WB so they view this as an existential threat. The FTC would likely not approve the deal on monopolistic grounds but you know Trump will put pressure on the FTC as well.

coke_and_coffee

So the Ellison’s are so corrupt and in bed with the FTC that they…have to overpay to acquire a new business???? You’re not making any sense. Where’s the corruption here?

hackingdreams

If the FTC stops this merger, they can't turn around and approve the Paramount merger either. It's an absolute non-starter. The court arguments would sound ridiculous: "No your honor, Walmart shouldn't be allowed to buy BestBuy because that would be too much consolidation of the marketplaces in the US. Yes your honor, Amazon should be allowed to buy BestBuy because they need *more* marketplace consolidation." Netflix would sue the government.

coke_and_coffee

If the FTC is just going to deny Netflix then WB doesn’t get to decide…

echino_derm

Under Biden they sued to stop the Microsoft Activision merger. He had appointed Lina Khan to head the FTC and she was the most anti corporate merger person we have had in a while. I really hope you don't approach all political issues by not paying any attention to the facts and just assuming what the sides support based on vibes.

_bobby_tables_

Trump will tell the FTC and DOJ to approve whichever deal pays him the most money.

brutinator

> 6B if the deal fails when Trump blocks it for his friend and then they can just sell to paramount anyway. I would almost guarantee that the FTC blocking a merger wouldn't trigger a breakup-fee, that seems like a pretty obvious exception as the FTC is entirely independent (usually).

inconsistentsavant

JPow is the only thing holding the US economy together rn. FTC independence is the only this keeping other countries from completely abandoning ship.

DoctorSchwifty

They should be disqualified from the sale as a conflict of interest by the FTC if Kushner is involved.

heybobson

Cause WB still gets to decide. Netflix is offering a more financially stable offer. The Ellisons, who just bought Paramount, are offering something way more but way riskier as their sheet is a mess from the Paramount buy. In a normal world, the FTC would tell Paramount no chance you’re doing this given your current situation, but Ellisons likely can say they have the inside with Donny and can get FTC approval. That’s what the corruption is.

userhwon

FTC needs to get in there with a hose.

kamdon68

That shipped sailed . If Lina Khan was still at the FTC all these mergers would have been reviewed and probably denied. It's anything goes now that will make companies money which will eventually hurt the consumer.

slimkay

While it’s fair, the FTC will rubber-stamp the Skydance bid (considering its being financed by Kushner and PIF), and Trump said last night that the Netflix bid would raise antitrust concerns.

heybobson

You are damn naive to think the Ellisons wouldn’t be doing this if they didn’t think they had the edge with the FTC for approval.

PrimeministerLOL

Wait til you hear about the FTC

so-whyareyouhere

Where is the FTC

Nuggis4life

It probably wont go through no. Paramount (Larry Ellisonk) is a big Trump donor and cheerleader so let the corruption begin. (this probably shouldn’t clear the FTC anyways due to monopoly reasons but that won’t be why it’s blocked).

TooBoredToLiveLife

I mean he should have said FTC not DOJ, odds of blocking the merger is much higher with FTC then DOJ

shasta747

Wonder if they will use their influence to have FTC blocks the deal

tragedy_strikes

I've been swayed on the idea that the tech companies are chasing the dragons of the iPhone/smartphone sales for physical hardware and SAAS for software. Wallstreet wants to see continual growth except the tech sector had already saturated both hardware and software markets around 2015. They had 2 non-shitty (for consumer) options, expand the customer base (think Google Fiber, Google Fi, Facebook Zero) or deploy new consumer hardware (Metaverse, Apple Vision Pro). Those were expensive and/or time consuming so they gave up and pivoted to enshittification. Degrade the product experience to get more money out of their existing product or service; more ads (all social media), worse search results (Google search), ignore recommendation for product safety (17 strikes on Instagram for human trafficking, Roblox ignoring pedophiles using their service), turn everything into a ponzi scheme (crypto, NFTs) or gambling. They're only able to do this because they've achieved regulatory capture and should have been broken up already by the FTC. Facebook shouldn't have been allowed to buy Instagram or WhatsApp, Google search is absolutely a monopoly and should have a bunch of their divisions spun off (Chrome, Gmail, AdSense) or forced open (Playstore was but App store should be as well).

DopeBook

Calls through the FTC approval date?

BosSF82

The 'Flix-Warner deal is no done deal, from a government approval standpoint. Larry Ellison had been whispering into Mungo's ear how Paramount would use CNN as a new propaganda arm for Trump (see article), and now that won't happen, cuz his bratty son got cucked by David Zaslav. President Parasite could very well tell his culties, now serving in the FTC or DOJ, to block it. On the other hand, regulators in Europe could be more willing to approve than they otherwise would, given that CNN would remain independent, even though in normal times that probably wouldn't even be taken into consideration. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/20/warner-bros-discovery-takeover-paramount-skydance-larry-ellison

sd42790

Off the top of my head…Capri and Tapestry was blocked by FTC earlier this year. Obviously not as big as Netflix/Warner, but significant at $8.5bn. Also Albertsons/Kroger was blocked, which was a $25bn deal.

Kotschcus_Domesticus

FTC where?

Wiestie

But the CEO gets a massive payout from this deal after year of mismanagement anyway yaaaay corporations Barely a prayer the FTC blocks this on merit but maybe someone will bribe them enough to stop it.

Th3HappyCamper

I’m anticipating the FTC blocking it somehow since the merger would be a huge blow to the Heritage Foundation

Wyldefire6

Absolutely not with this administration. Netflix can easily “make it worth their while” to expedite to the head of the line. I’d say 12-18 mo is accurate if only just to iron out the details. I doubt we’ll hear any pushback from the FTC or SEC.

SecretaryAncient8923

FTC will likely not allow the sale, so be careful about buying the stock based on that information alone.

hamsterkill

The Microsoft-Activision merger had a weaker anti-competitive argument than this would. But you're right, this one would probably make it through a court challenge too. Streaming market consolidation, I imagine, would be the main anti-competition concern and Disney existing would be the counter. That said, a Democratic FTC would likely be able to at least extract more concessions and divestments from the companies in the process.

Infinite-4-a-moment

>FTC will likely tie up in litigation for years Doubt. There will be a convenient civil suit between Trump and Netflix for some bullshit. Netflix will pay Trump $50m and then the deal will get rubber stamped the next month.

ThatsTodd

So does NFLX stock go up or down when the FTC announces they are challenging the acquisition?

Suitable_Air_2686

Me thinks people are too pessimistic about this. Netflix can probably spin off the shit out of Game of Thrones, Sopranos, True Detective, Hary Potter, Friends, DC, etc. The only hurdle I see is regulatory approval. Elison has the presidency in pocket so it’s not totally inconceivable that he gives a call to Donnie and FTC goes ahead and blocks this deal.

baseballer213

Zaslav securing $30 a share for just the studio and streaming assets is a masterclass in failing upwards. This effectively creates a content monopoly that the FTC will likely tie up in litigation for years. Don’t hold your breath for that combined library; Reed just bought himself a regulatory nightmare.

_BreakingGood_

They do need to pretend that there won't be job cuts anymore, the current FTC gets hard over the idea of ultra-mega-corporations that control entire industries

DropoutDreamer

To talk about Trump appearing in Rush Hour 4 right? Nothing improper like asking him to tell FTC to block the merger?

JerrySeinfred

Lina Khan isn't head of the FTC anymore. 

Lt_Snuffles

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ceased its focus on structural issues and exclusively concentrated on the impact of price changes since the Reagan era. As long as they refrain from raising prices for the relevant services, they are good. you can read Lina Khan’s “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox.”

Waste-Milk2716

This idea that companies “don’t give 2 fucks about liability” is pure fantasy-level corporate ignorance. Liability is the one thing corporations obsess over because it can instantly wipe out every penny they’d save by firing workers. You don’t replace employees with automated systems and gamble the entire company on an AI hallucinating a fraud, misfiling a return, tanking a financial report, or violating a regulation. Corporations spend more on legal, compliance, internal audit, external audit, insurance, and risk management than on entire product lines. If they truly didn’t care about liability, those departments wouldn’t exist. They won’t trade predictable human error for unpredictable machine-generated legal exposure. That’s not ethics; it’s basic cost–risk analysis. The take also treats enterprise AI deployment like it’s as simple as slapping some RLHF and custom data on top and calling it a day. Real companies aren’t Kaggle competitions. They deal with compliance frameworks, audit trails, data provenance, cybersecurity risks, SOX controls, GDPR, industry-specific regulations, and the constant threat of regulators crawling up their spine if something goes wrong. You don’t just plug an LLM into accounting, HR, claims processing, procurement, or financial reporting and let it run. Enterprises need verifiable outputs, non-hallucinatory reasoning, version control, interpretability, and airtight monitoring systems. The engineering, integration, and compliance burden makes the “just replace everyone” fantasy collapse the moment it touches actual corporate infrastructure. And claiming liability only matters in law and medicine is hilariously disconnected from reality. Finance is full of fraud exposure and misstatement risk. HR has discrimination and wrongful-termination risk. Marketing deals with FTC violations. Insurance involves bad-faith claim exposure. Engineering has product safety and defect liability. Customer service can trigger misrepresentation lawsuits. Accounting deals with criminal and civil penalties for improper reporting. Every white-collar field is built on top of liability mines. Automating these roles doesn’t remove those mines; it puts a blindfolded robot in charge of stepping on all of them at once. AI will absolutely replace jobs over time, but pretending liability isn’t a major bottleneck is delusional. Liability, regulation, and risk management are the backbone of corporate decision-making, and current AI systems multiply those risks rather than reduce them. Companies aren’t hiding some secret plan to fire everyone. They’re just operating in the real world while Reddit commentators role-play as doomsday prophets.

JJgoodluck

They are doing that to avoid antitrust investigation from FTC, also to neutralize the bargaining power from hyperscalers. It’s obvious.

sun_not_cold

Yes. I sold at $165 during the FTC threats. Had to buy back in at $190. I’m dum.

moorhound

Gotta hit up your local plam-reading psychic lady. Every town has one, mandated by the FTC

Alarmed_Expression77

What happens when FTC/DOJ Antitrust decides they don’t like the amount of power GOOG has? You think it’s just like a $50 speeding ticket? I’m not talking about a fine, I’m talking about a DOJ that might be pissed at certain CEO’s tripping over themselves to appease the orange man.

caughtinthought

this was prior to FTC uncertainty collapsed, and 2.5 while good was still inferior to Sonnet and GPT.

Gom_KBull

(i wrote this on Nov 12) *✅ Market realizes there's no way to hide the fact that these absurd valuations are nothing but smoke and mirrors.* *✅ Market crashes either by total widespread liquidity crunch or through catalyst/smokescreen.* *3. Govt cant afford to lose AI race to China, so it bails out Scam Altman and everyone in the AI circlejerk with taxpayer money + emergency QE (further devaluing all cash by a metric assload)* *4. Jerome Powell hailed as a hero by Senate and House Representatives for "courageously" saving the economy when tech companies, through no fault of their own, fell into a crisis.* *5. Mainstream media blames the poor, blue collar workers, immigrants and teachers for what happened somehow.* *6. FTC, SEC, House Committee on Oversight and maybe DOJ want someone's head for all this.* *7. AI circlejerk companies single out a fall guy to serve time in prison while everyone else gets away richer.* *8. Mango takes credit for saving America.* *9. Govt swears fraud of this level will never ever happen again, pinky swear.*

flutasma

If it was useless under Obama and Biden (biden that actually appointed a kick ass FTC chair, I will give him that) why would you thik the SEC would do anything under Trump? lmao

blonde-bandit

And they JUST won an antitrust case against the FTC. The guardrails are nonexistent and the people in power dgaf

Leungal

I'm genuinely confused by this statement considering: A) Nvidia's rise had nothing to do with politics and everything to do with companies paying $30000 a pop for H100s in 2020. B) The FTC has never taken an enforcement action against Nvidia during any administration, the ARM acquisition wasn't really blocked on FTC grounds but rather just failed negotations. C) The only way politics have affected Nvidia whatsoever is Trump's trade war causing a pullback in Chinese purchases, something Jensen has repeatedly warned about.

Bloated_Plaid

Not sure if you know who the president is but Trump is the best President Nvidia could have asked for to help with the AI mission unlike Biden and Lina Khan at the FTC.

JefeDiez

I'm actually surprised it keeps dropping $10+/day. Even with the good news of winning FTC case. Not sure what's happening

Clear_Anything1232

FTC needs to be disbanded They are seriously hurting american economy and leadership And more importantly my leaps 😑 We already have the EU to do all this fining and stuff, no need for one more useless corporation

dapi331

I agree. The time to block the acquisitions was when the FTC decided to approve it. Not after the acquisitions became successful.

JefeDiez

MSFT acquired Blizzard though? And many more companies and wasn't at all involved in this trial, the FTC approved the sale of IG to Facebook at the time already, I'm actually surprised they even approved it to go to trial, but I don't think they had a case unfortunately.

Masterandcomman

Neo-Brandeisian anti-trust treats concentrated markets as inherently bad, even if consumers currently benefit. Lina Khan is probably the most famous adherent, and her paper on Amazon argued that consumer welfare disguises distortions in the market structure that prevent new entrants, and that reduce the bargaining powers of suppliers and workers. A company like Costco wouldn't be subject to mainstream anti-trust review, but would be viewed as a violator under neo-Brandeisian theory due to their use of market power to aggressively squeeze suppliers, including inducing suppliers to funnel their products through the Kirkland brand. The FTC tries to apply the Robinson-Patman act to prevent dominant sellers from bargaining idiosyncratically low prices, even to the consumer's benefit.

F705TY

This is less about Meta being right and more about Trump destroying the FTC.

copingstoic

I think buyers will come in tomorrow after the FTC news.

copingstoic

Man, if META had lost that FTC lawsuit, it would have true capitulation today.

dreggers

GOOG beats FTC and moons 80%, META beats FTC and is flat for the day

smellyfingernail

This was the stupidest antitrust case of all time. I cant believe the FTC tried to retroactively punish meta for buying instagram when everything was approved at the time of the purchase.

copingstoic

META defeats FTC. No movement in stock. What the fuck?

meltbox

YouTube and TikTok are alternatives to Facebook? Maybe you can argue TikTok and Instagram compete but that doesn’t preclude having outsized or even monopoly power in the market. It’s commonly understood monopoly power doesn’t necessitate a majority market share let alone complete domination. These judges are being thick or the FTC threw this case on purpose given their current priorities and the shit going on in Washington. But seriously anyone who says that Meta or Google don’t have essentially monopoly pricing power in the ad market are insane.

MajorLeeScrewed

Don’t think anyone thought the FTC would win this.

Amyndris

The real issue is because the FTC was so anti-merger, it caused a lot of acquihires where a big company like Google, Microsoft or Meta would just basically license the IP from a company, hire all of their senior staff and let the rest of the company die. This really fucked over most of the people at the startup who joined at low pay with the promise of a payout when the company got acquired or IPO'd.

IDFCommitsGenocide

it's not so much about zuck as it is about Linda Khan's FTC being overly prosecutorial

virtual_adam

So this Yale researcher wrote a cool white paper about how big tech evil. Let’s make her the head of the FTC Maybe another Yale researcher should write a paper about this failed excitement

JayWhizz007

$META going to pump. They just won the FTC ANTITRUST TRIAL OVER INSTAGRAM, WHATSAPP DEALS

Winning-Goal4484

Meta wins FTC antitrust trial that focused on WhatsApp, Instagram : CBNC

mrdethato

What’s the news? FTC trial?

HaveTwoBananas

Once the FTC trial decision drops for META it's going back above $700

Complex-Note-5274

at least financially. Doesnt matter the technology, their AI infrastructure has only one competitor, that's great for pricing power (especially the weak FTC antitrust enforcement - and by weak I mean bribe-able)

Long-Blood

No mention of the 10 billion meta made from fraud? How many big tech companies are making money from illegal activities right now?  How long will Trumps FTC just let this happen?

Consistent-Chapter-8

If Lina Khan were still at the FTC, she'd have a field day with this.