FTC

brokenaglets

> sell it in heaps as big as he can get away with, which will hit the price for the stockholders who just had their shares diluted Strangely, I don't think he'd do that and I wouldn't call Musk tight on funds either. His companies might be but prefucking up that's actually by design. Everything he runs is ran on bare bone expenses and employees that take some form of salary in the sense that they feel like they're doing something positive. Also, he's the richest man in the world and could get a line of credit literally anywhere. You can look at past data to how announcements from Tesla affected doge and btc both leading up to and afterwards. It seems obvious that Musk is the force driving those prices but they're unregulated. He can't do the same thing with tesla stocks. That's FTC territory and he's already had to deal with them in the past.

McKoijion

Lmao, now the FTC wants to block the Michael Kors and Coach merger deal because they would have an illegal monopoly on bags to hold things? 

MotoTrojan

Solid option. My main gripe with VT is that for US based taxable investors, you do not get the FTC (foreign tax credit) like you would if you held VTI/VXUS. Personally I recommend using AVGE (or AVGV if you are okay with all-value) for single ticker, globally diversified, tax-efficient (ETF-of-ETF structure does get the FTC) with a modest tilt to size/value/profitability factors. AVGE is 70/30 US/ex, AVGV is 60/40 and all value.

Jinncawni

I was noticing that too. And my interpretation is hedges don't see Walmart as a risk, so they keep their bags. Due to the seasons, I anticipate their demand rising given the data. Though, I am cautious of FTC and their want to know if retailers are artificially inflating products. I'd wager they'll find they have to to comply with other regulatory requirement impositions they face that the 'tech' era of business haven't had to deal until recently.

Tangentkoala

It will definitely be investigated and fined by the FTC. Lower interest rates mean less money investing in banks. So it's the opposite of your thought process.

ThinkingOfTheOldDays

RSI is 14, Consensus EPS CAGR into EOY 2026 of 13%, forward p/e is \~16 vs. an expected forward p/e of \~26 (2x EPS growth), the stock is down 16.1% on the year in a generally bullish uptrend. healthcare is generally regarded as a recession pivot, has no exposure to international risk, and very little competition imo. downsides are that negotations with gov reduced payout rate vs 2023 (to my knowledge, unsure what % of revenue that covers), antitrust regulatory inquiry by FTC, ongoing fallout from cyber breach (which I imagine they won't fuck up again for a while, a good thing), and expectations of politician jawboning into the election, and rising medical care side costs due to wage & cost input inflation.

88crypto

it would be awesome for us, but money draining for Amazon, imo. Makes no sense after all the cost cuts moves they've been doing. In addition to that - all the headache with FTC they'll have to go through just to bleed money

aiorion

In August 2023, Tapestry (TPR / owner of Coach, Kate Spade / Stuart Weitzman) announced their proposed acquisition of Capri Holdings (CPRI / owner of Michael Kors, Versace, Jimmy Choo) Why does this trade so poorly given $57 acquisition price by Tapestry? At $42, CPRI has 35% unlevered upside to acquisition price. EU will likely decide by 4/15 which seems likely to go through given (1) Tapestry’s limited Europe presence (2) significantly lower combined market share in Europe to its large competitors (LVMH/Richemont/Kering/Hermes).. There is no indication that the EU would pursue a breakup of those luxury conglomerates so unlikely to rule adversely in this merger. Why wouldn’t the US FTC approve the deal? FTC closed door meeting was removed from site and there are several articles/research with supportive opinions from antitrust attorneys. How does this harm consumers? There were additional reports that Bates White was hired to consult on blocking this deal, but there are no sign they are hired for this deal as they have no meaningful relevant experience on luxury goods / handbags… Merger agreement allows for regulatory approval process to stretch into 2025. Even if they received adverse opposition from the FTC, why wouldn’t they win in court? Again, how does this merger harm US consumers? Meanwhile Tapestry has completed issuance of the debt and received the cash required to complete the acquisition. All executive statements around earnings call infer no major road bumps and if there was new news on where the FTC was leaning, wouldn’t either company need to disclose in an 8K (if negative) or it’d leak? What am I missing?

Herban_Myth

FTC?

Euro347

These numbers will go down when they break up Instagram and whats app. The FTC has a strong case.

Euro347

These numbers will go down when they break up Instagram and whats app. The FTC has a strong case.

Previous_Lock_8772

Your analysis brings up several critical points about Meta's current state and its challenges ahead. The litigation issues you've mentioned are indeed significant concerns for Meta. The FTC's move to tighten privacy settlements, particularly concerning minors' data and facial recognition technology, alongside efforts to dismantle Meta's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, could indeed be a massive blow to the company's operations and public perception. Such regulatory pressures, coupled with the ongoing lawsuit from Twitter, underscore the legal hurdles Meta faces, which are not only financially burdensome but could also restrict its future business strategies and product offerings. The competition aspect, especially from TikTok, cannot be overstated. TikTok's explosive growth among the younger demographics represents a pivotal shift in social media consumption patterns, highlighting Meta's struggle to innovate and keep pace with emerging platforms. TikTok's ability to captivate and engage younger audiences, potentially at the expense of Meta's user base, is a testament to the dynamic and rapidly evolving nature of social media landscapes. The forthcoming TikTok app that aims to compete directly with Instagram and WhatsApp further intensifies this competitive threat, suggesting a significant shift in user preferences and platform loyalty. Regarding AI and the metaverse, your skepticism seems warranted given the enormous investment these ventures require, with uncertain returns. Meta's foray into designing its own AI chips and its metaverse ambitions indicate a search for new revenue streams and user engagement models. However, whether these investments will pay off remains to be seen, especially in a market that's increasingly wary of privacy concerns and is being courted by more nimble competitors. Lastly, the point about the dividend strategy is an interesting one. In a climate where investors are increasingly looking for stable returns amidst uncertainty, Meta's attempt to attract investors through dividends might not be as appealing compared to the more traditional and possibly safer investments like treasury bonds, especially considering the company's current challenges. In sum, while Meta has been a dominant force in the social media sphere, the array of challenges you've outlined—ranging from regulatory pressures and legal battles to stiff competition and strategic missteps—paints a picture of a company at a crossroads. The path forward will require not just navigating these immediate hurdles but also fundamentally rethinking its value proposition in an era where user preferences and the competitive landscape are shifting more rapidly than ever.

KeyCold7216

You're completely ignoring the biggest risk. The FTC is cracking down on "gig" type companies not paying their "contractors". The only reason they aren't completely out of business is because they pay their drivers almost nothing. The prices are also insane now, it's like $20 for a meal from mcdonalds after you add in the service fees, increased restaurant prices for being on the app in the first place, tips, and delivery fees.

istockusername

You’re making the same mistake that I used to make with Meta. No user and advertiser cares about all the legal or data scrutiny. If the FTC would split up Meta, that would actually be a net positive for investors. The sum of the parts is a lot more worth than what we currently see. TikTok is a fair competitor but yet still 30% of the teens between 14 and 19 use Instagram (compared to 35% TikTok) https://mms.businesswire.com/media/20240409532694/en/2092783/1/TSWT_Spring24_Infographic_4-8-24.pdf?download=1 Tiktok is more like entertainment app where you scroll through content that is made random people. It’s vastly different to a social network like Facebook, Instagram or WhatsApp where you mainly get in contact with people you know. Google has already failed to create a Social network platform it’s not easy to do that. Your weakest arguments are about political ads and AI. Meta has with Llama an open source LLM which I can see getting the same route as Android. Not every company or entity wants to build their own LLM or spend money on OpenAi or Microsoft so it’s legit alternative. Within Meta the AI will be used to optimize their ads and can be monetized to advertisers. I’m not going to spend a lot of time on political advertising. Just take a look at the development of where money is spent https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/midterm-moolah-tv-stations-cash-in-on-primary-season-1235153514/amp/

ndwillia

FTC most likely stops Amazon before china stops their exports, lmao

daytradingguy

He was sued because the FTC took issues with some wording in his advertising- that is all. Like a lot of things in government- a scam to shake him down for money. If he was fraudulent, YouTube would have shut him down and he would not be able to operate at all.

hankchipotle

I feel like it’s definitely a gamble, the ruling is going to lead to a price swing one way or the other. Long term I’m good with holding PECO and KR, but it may be a bumpy ride. Not sure if the FTC would take on a case that it has a chance of losing.

hankchipotle

Yeah I definitely can see both sides. This quote stood out to me: “Together, they would control around 13% of the U.S. grocery market; Walmart now controls 22%.” Even if they merge, they are still well below Walmart numbers. My biggest hesitancy is whether the FTC would take this on if they had any doubt that they would lose.

PuzzleheadedOffer749

i havent really read into this but the solid reasons behind why the FTC opposes the merger make sense but on the other hand, the answers that kroger provides to ease the worries of the FTC/shoppers are great. [Why could a Kroger-Albertsons merger be bad for customers? | AP News](https://apnews.com/article/kroger-albertsons-merger-federal-trade-commission-2fda44d9d8b82ef20d6c7e7cffb2ccc3)

No-Understanding9064

FTC girl is gonna be all over that like degens on 0dtes. Prob a good short

PortageLakes

Did you get in touch with FTC/SEC? If so, what was the experience like?

canobeano

Why aren't the SEC, FTC, and FEC investigating this entire enterprise and stopping it in its tracks?

UnhappyStorage9828

FTC, please take this subreddit away from me

the_potato_smuggler

Although it's not impossible, I would be quite surprised if Zyns were banned/ faced harsh government regulation. Camel snus pouches have been around since 2006 and their marketing is, reasonably, no more or less appealing to kids than Zyns. The reason I picked Camel as an example is because the US government came down on them HARD in 1997, forcing them to stop their advertisement campaign of "Joe Camel", as it was too effective at targeting kids. For reference, the FTC's main arguing point was a study known as "Trinkets and Trash: Joe Camel in Contemporary American Culture" where they surveyed kids aged 3-6 and found that almost as many kids could both recognize Joe Camel and associate him with cigarettes; in comparison to Mickey Mouse. Tl;dr Camel is our case study for tobacco+government regulation. They've been allowed to sell snus pouches (with actual tobacco) for almost 2 decades. Zyn will probably be fine, but nobody can be sure.

NotDrewBrees

SWN stock is currently trading at a 2% discount to CHK. An FTC announcement that it won’t intervene should close that gap. But those shares are going to be exchanged for CHK shares at closing, so not sure if your SWN leaps will get exchanged as well. I would’ve done this using the CHK shares. What sucks about this combined entity is that their entire business platform essentially has to be put on hold until: 1) The Permian Basin slows natural gas production 2) LNG terminals come online sooner than 2025. Neither of these options are happening any time soon, so a 31% run up by this coming January is unlikely, barring a major cold snap that drains our domestic gas inventory, or an LNG terminal starts operation sooner than expected. The Permian’s gas production has *grown* over the past few years at a faster clip than oil has because of the different completion methods and acreage exploited. Permian producers have to pay pipelines to take the gas off their hands rather than sell it. These days, Chesapeake makes bigger headlines by *shrinking* production rather than growing it. The only saving grace might be an incoming Trump admin announcement that loosens ESG standards placed on E&P firms. Those firms have to keep their standards high by refusing to flare (burn off) worthless natural gas. If those ESG requirements went away, the Permian would be burning methane all over the place. So the planet would continue to heat up, but your leaps would more likely print

N3RD_01

You teach nothing. You rake in hundreds of dollars from desperate people. Thank God your fake paper trades are all documented with your website and discord. Enjoy your FTC lawsuit.

UsuallylurknotToday

Apple could’ve done that for FTC related reasons. App marketplace, bank card, music and media, news, hardware that holds majority market share over essential tech, etc etc etc and then layer the most advanced driving tech on top of that portfolio technology? Trust bust overnight. They’ll still find a way to make money off of what they pursued, but they won’t be the ones to bring it to market.

FarrisAT

FTC says welcome back.

MFitz24

Have you not been paying attention to the FTC for the last 3 years? They've been incredibly active.

AverageAndNotJoe

The 50% number represents what portion of Home Depot’s business comes from Pros, not a representation of the market itself. I don’t think this acquisition will have an issue being approved by FTC. There are a lot of smaller and regional distributors of building materials for contractors.

margincall-mario

they own 50% of the pro market and they think regulators wont care if they add more concentration to that... I dont think the FTC will ike this but they are also pretty much useless.

Free_Management2894

The FTC won over 30 of the shots over the last few years. You just mostly hear about the ones they don't win.

Better-Suit6572

Not to split hairs but this is a Garland DOJ lawsuit. Is there a possibility the FTC joins?

Dismal_Storage

Exactly. The head of the FTC said force to close parts of their business. It won't be broken up. It will be partially destroyed.

hab365

NVDA predictions for end of week and end of April? FTC didn’t sustainably move it past its previous ATH so maybe we’ll have to wait till earnings hype to get close to $1,000?

iveseensomethings82

Next year we will see DJT vs FTC in court

Arkansasmyundies

The prevailing philosophy of European courts has been protect other businesses (European competitors). The prevailing philosophy of US courts has been to protect consumers. DoJ is making European like claims in a US court. Khan from the FTC has been as well, and hasn’t been particularly successful so far. We shall see.

Celodurismo

Honestly Tesla should've been utterly destroyed in court by the FTC for calling it full self driving. Shame there are zero consumer protections in this country.

AllShortTheRedditIPO

Maybe, but this is public domain now: analysts see right through those garbage accounting maneuvers that are clearly just intended to eek into profitability. The FTC investigation, the partial ownership by the CCP (TenCent), the election (scrutiny that all media and social media face for potential interference from foreign entities), NSFW subreddits, powertripping mods, etc. The list of potential downers is long, so be careful my friend!

mogambuu

Great job FTC

EatBaconDaily

FTC is just tryna give us a discount on AAPL, yet you guys are mad

MotoTrojan

Not great in taxable since you won’t get the foreign tax credit.  If you want 1 ticker global stocks I’d use AVGE which will get the FTC, and tilts modestly to size, value, and profitability. 70/30 US/ex. 

DavidRainsbergerII

Of all the companies to sue for monopoly control. Sure Apple may be in some sort of monopoly power, but have they looked at anything else in the country. 4 companies own all of the food production, 3 telecom companies, I’m sure there are a myriad of other examples. How about instead of suing we stop accepting the FTC being asleep at the wheel.

SirLeaf

That's a question which has several long answers. The current FTC chair has answered it before, and it could be argued that her answer is the reason she got the job as FTC chair. Short answer(s): \- Amazon does lower prices for consumers \- For much of their existence, they haven't really profited much (which indicates they aren't abusing any alleged monopoly power) \- Amazon doesn't have that much power over any particular product, and market power/product market are pretty big prefatory questions for getting scrutinized by the antitrust authorities. \- Chinese e-commerce platforms have so much market power that Amazon looks insignificant. Long answer: [https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/e.710.Khan.805\_zuvfyyeh.pdf](https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/e.710.Khan.805_zuvfyyeh.pdf)

skychief99

Apex IS in fact a scam. I have 2 funded accounts with Apex as of a few months back, and my strategy, just like in my real account funded with my own real money I've been trading for 7 years is to establish a position with micros at different levels and to add/subtract accordingly. Have been successful doing so for years. One of my Apex "funded" accounts is now up $6,700 and recently decided to request a $2,000 payout on that funded account and got denied due to "averaging into positions". No longer going to bother with them and am sending records of my experience with Apex to the several financial media outlets and to the FTC.

DisneyPandora

There’s a big difference between the DOJ and FTC

Ghost_Pains

If it was a PR stunt he would’ve had the FTC throw out another one of those useless crap cases. DOJ’s bar for this stuff is much higher.

andybmcc

Same thing still applies. If you have no income and 0% cap gains, then the FTC just doesn't have anything to offset. Foreign taxes would still be withheld, though.

bonelish-us

One explanation is that the break-up value of these companies (Google, for example) is more than the original company, so the threat of FTC action sends the stock up.

Better-Suit6572

This is pretty much a complete misrepresentation of antitrust law. The FTC under Khan would love nothing more than to take down as many powerful entities as possible. The reason they don't is because the jurisprudence is not on their side and they are already losing most of the cases they try. If you think judges are deciding against the FTC and DOJ because of lobbying, I have a tin foil hat for you. Your theory about the relevant market monopoly being the iOS platform has already been litigated and Apple won: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic\_Games\_v.\_Apple](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games_v._Apple)

triplevanos

MSFT went through 3 main regulators for Blizzard, wouldn’t call it bullying. The FTC is still trying to unwind that acquisition. There has been a revitalization of antitrust regulation across the western world, and everyone is at risk

LegacyAngel

Biden hasn't said anything, and the FTC isn't involved in this lawsuit.

Affectionate-Tax9885

folks dumping AAPL because of the FTC suit: how is this at all surprising?

95Daphne

Think it's been the FTC on Meta and Amazon's tail, not the DoJ. Supposedly, the DoJ will be suing Google, but it hasn't been filed yet. It's probably why it's acting very heavy here.

davewashere

It was all connected to an original FTC inquiry in 1990. The DOJ took up the investigation and settled with Microsoft in 1994, and at that point Microsoft agreed not to tie Microsoft products to the sale of Microsoft operating systems. The issue with IE came about because Microsoft believed it could get away with considering it a "feature" of Windows and not a standalone product. Keep in mind that while Microsoft was giving away IE as a feature of the OS competing browsers like Netscape Navigator were being sold as installable software for a retail price of $49 (adjusted for inflation that's about $100 today). While consumers may have appreciated getting their browser for "free," they were also paying $210 retail for Windows 95 and certainly some of the browser development cost went in to that OS price.

BayesBestFriend

I mean, FTC should've sued them over imessage ages ago. "Hey, what if we locked our customers out of the full suite of messaging features they paid for unless they're texting someone who also bought one of our devices?" - totally not anti consumer behavior The funniest part is they have such a grip on the us consumer market that this blatantly anti consumer bullshit is seen positively, and manufacturers like Samsung that use RCS messaging (which allows 99% of the same features and is manufacturer agnostic) are seen as somehow being "behind" for supporting open standards.

Luka77GOATic

To be fair she is busy with FTC vs Meta and FTC vs Amazon as the big statement case’s of her time as head of the FTC. The Department of Justice is going after Google and Apple.

Luka77GOATic

The DOJ and FTC are on a war path currently against Google, Amazon, Meta and Apple. Seems to be something that both Democrats and Republicans both hate now is big tech.

AllShortTheRedditIPO

If the FTC doesn’t cancel that pact after they finish the investigation….not saying they will, but the chance of them doing it is probably spooking investors and will impact the stock price

turkeychicken

Well this is interesting. Reddit just updated a couple documents with the SEC which relate to: 1 - Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation regarding using user generated text, images and videos for AI training. > On March 14, 2024, we received a letter from the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) advising us that the FTC’s staff is conducting a non-public inquiry focused on our sale, licensing, or sharing of user-generated content with third parties to train AI models. Given the novel nature of these technologies and commercial arrangements, we are not surprised that the FTC has expressed interest in this area. We do not believe that we have engaged in any unfair or deceptive trade practice. The letter indicated that the FTC staff was interested in meeting with us to learn more about our plans and that the FTC intended to request information and documents from us as its inquiry continues. Regulatory engagements can be lengthy and unpredictable. Any regulatory engagement may cause us to incur substantial costs, and it is possible for any regulatory engagement to result in reputational harm or fines, cause us to discontinue or modify our products, services, features, or functionalities, require us to change our policies or practices, divert management and other resources from our business, or otherwise adversely impact our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects. 2 - Nokia sent a letter saying Reddit infringes on some of their patents. > On March 18, 2024, Nokia Technologies sent us a letter indicating they believed that Reddit infringes certain of their patents. We will evaluate their claims.

bagehis

Assuming the FTC doesn't Standard Oil them in the next few decades. But even then, you'll probably still come out ahead.

bdh2067

It’s any relevant doc or info that was not included in the original prospectus but would be if the timing were different. In this case, Reddit disclosed that the FTC is curious about the Google data deal. They go on to say they’re up to nothing shift or anti-competitive. The FTC inquiry was already known and announced last week but it was after the IPO prospectus was filed

AlfredoAllenPoe

The myth of consensual business relationships Google: I consent Apple: I consent The FTC: I don’t Isn’t there someone you forgot to ask?

CharlieTrees916

Not too confident with Reddit based on them not turning a profit and also now being investigated by the FTC over their AI data licensing

BagofBabbish

This is a really misleading headline. Valuations were totally different in 2021 and primarily future revenue based. Bankers were targeting a $10B valuation for Reddit at a time when they had even lower sales and worse margins for this reason. Also this was the time where you had DASH, AI, and ABNB closing their first days on the market up 200%. Wouldn’t be inconceivable Reddit would hit $25B in that scenario. Today, things are different. I think best case we see Reddit near $8B or $9B on the end of the first day and likely flat to down from that a year later. The real question mark is this FTC probe.

jwrig

This is going to have a lot of pain for them. Through their aquistions they have something like 75% of the clearing house market. I don't see how the FTC doesn't start to scrutinize them more. Health and Human Services is sending in their Office for Civil Rights to assess their compliance with the various Healthcare related regulations and they will find things, they always will. It will lead to a corrective action plan that could lead to them divest some of their business or risk not being able to process CMS patients and billing.

DamnMyAPGoinCrazy

“FTC launches inquiry into Reddit’s AI deals days before IPO” Send it lower

mywilliswell95

**TL;DR - Adobe has not established enough adoption for AI capabilities to monetize or create new demand; Adobe has increased subscription costs; Adobe has introduced cancelation costs to subscriptions thus frustrating users and customers which I think is worse for the longer outlook; & I saw a lot of insider trading over the past 2 quarters.** Well I sound smart in retrospect, but I hope my positions prove my merit. At first I bought a long call (which I closed Wednesday, because I did further research into their AI capabilities.) I looked on r/Adobe forums & other website reviews to see how creators felt about things like Adobe Sensei & Firefly. The sentiment was pretty weak - which implies adoption is low. And if adoption is low then that means they are still testing concepts out with AI. With this, I wasn't confident that there would be any impact on financials because they can't even monetize it yet. Adobe has also stated in their 2023 Annual report that, they will need to raise prices to help contribute to developing their AI capabilities. So it just seems like they are so far away from seeing any positive financial impact from it. * Adobe also increased their subscription prices and was facing a probe by the FTC about how Adobe handles disclosures and subscription cancellations. *"Adobe's subscription rules are under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission. It could end up paying significant penalties in a settlement, it added. A subscription to Photoshop and the rest of Adobe's creative applications will run you around $700 a year. Unless you cancel within two weeks, you'll have to pay 50% of the remaining annual contract value to end it. That's in contrast with services like Spotify or Netflix which don't charge those fees."* Bad looks all around there\^ Lastly, in the past 12 months, [there had been 103 Total Insider Trades](https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/adbe/insider-activity) - 98% of them were on sell side. mainly direct shares too.

SheepherderSea2775

Very cool AI take. Unfortunately, any action against the market is just like the Fed. It’ll affect any and everyone taking a particular action, institutional action is no different from a mom and pop doing it; if all is doing in unison that inflates the prices and decreases supply. If the FTC action against the App that is supposedly keeping rental prices high is actionable and goes through as part of anti-trust, it will definitely affect the market, but only a small problem that was caused by free money at no interest rate.

elgrandorado

Market finally realized how far FICO is willing to go to exert it's pricing power. I was arguing with a user a while back about it. They raised prices on mortgage scoring around 400% and matched soft credit score pulls with hard credit score pulls. All of this still amounts to a negligible consumer cost so it's really hard to see the FTC or Congress going after them, especially with the existence of VantageScore.

GenericUcsdusername

MSFT vs FTC round 2: TikTok Time

VeterinarianNo3321

They got insta though. With FTC being spineless, they might...

thejumpingsheep2

You are correct that ultimately it will be "SSB"s in the cars but they are still in testing phase. We are probably 4-5 years out and about 7-8 from mass production. You are also correct that Tesla cannot reconfigure their factories easily to the new tech. In fact, the new tech might be patented thus Tesla wont be able to make them at all. They would need to buy out a company that has a stable battery but good luck with that... this would effectively give them a near monopoly with the battery and the FTC will likely not allow it given Tesla's size. The only issue I have is bringing Toyota into this. Those idiots still think hauling around an engine to burn low density hydrogen is a good idea. Its hard to take anything they say seriously give that stance...

ComprehensivePaint48

It's like kids exchanging pokemon trading cards on their own little playground. Then, when market opens the trades get finalized/registered as per FTC regulations.

Valuable-Army-1914

Complain to FTC and SEC. Got my account restricted and they can’t tell me why.

Nblearchangel

Who is competing with them in any meaningful way? The only hope for the competition at this point is the FTC breaking them up for some reason

skilliard7

>AI is the future, we are at the starting line. There's are few precedents for this, so everyone saying it's over bought are missing a key element. The limit is unknown. NVDA very well could be the most valuable company on the planet. 4T market cap is not unreasonable, on continued growth as shown over the last several ERs. We've really just started to scratch the surface. Nvidia is not the only company that can sell AI products. Right now they are at an advantage, hence their high sales and profit margins, but that won't last. >Everyone needs AI chips. They need them because customers are demanding AI, and thus more h100s need to be bought. The demand for AI hasnt slowed. It remains and is accelerating daily. NVDA will continue to make record profits for the foreseeable future as the only real game in time to provide the chips requires to build this new industry. Lead times on H100s have declined, suggesting that demand has peaked. No one "needs" AI, it's just right now a lot of companies are buying AI chips becuase they're scared of being left behind. I can see a few more quarters of elevated profits, but after 1-2 years they will probably start dropping. >NVDA competition is non -existent. If you are paying attention to the AI market you'll notice that Nvidia is needing to ban the use of translation layers to run CUDA on other brands GPUs. If the FTC sues them for this for anti-competitive practices, they are fucked. Their margins won't last.

981flacht6

Apple is not growing anymore. Their Services sector is the only area they are legitimately growing and it's under fire with the FTC and EU. Google..well have you used Gemni? It fucking sucks compared to ChatGPT. Microsoft is going to put a bullet in Google's head.

noizey65

If anything Amazon needs some serious antitrust breaking up and surely the FTC’s lawsuit is going to get whittled down to a paltry settlement. Had a bit of a dystopian moment yesterday, watching a fire tv with ads for new shows on prime, scannable grocery shopping thru Whole Foods, and a range of other Amazon led products

ElectSamsepi0l

Its not confirmed they actually paid the $22M , it’s speculation from a bitcoin deposit.Even if it’s accurate they paid, we’d have to believe other claim that the affiliate hacker didn’t receive the ransom money this no data has been wiped. Google “ALPHV exit scam” As far as the money they’re losing. Here’s a list of things that could impact Q1 earnings. 1- Lawsuits (Five are active since Feb 23rd) 2- Potential SEC Non-Disclosures under new cyber security guidelines (hence why a incident 8-K dropped Feb 21st) 3- FTC proposal for Medicare Medicaid increased from 20 to 50 negotiated drugs 4- 15 Days of Outage client base switching to competitors. HHS and CMS took 14 day but finally revealed they’re assisting in helping clients get paid and switch vendors. Something going on for 14 days but now you’re going to have a bailout essentially. I remember those great terms for banks in 2008! 5- Unknown amount of reimbursements to pharmacies, patients and providers. They just don’t know right now outside of individual processing paper claims. Imagine counting 500M+ by hand through data entry. 6- They’ve been misleading on timelines and standing up services. Last Friday they said setup a new instance for pharmacies, six days later news station are still reporting people can’t schedule surgeries or get meds. 7- Competitors are significantly strengthened. If Walmart was closed 15 days how much more money would Target make?

msau2

Remember Amazon is getting sued by the FTC. If they prevail this will all be undone

pitchfork_2000

That’s why Amazon is getting sued by the FTC for this exact reason. Amazon has starting dumping their Essentials and Basics products sticking to only the very top 1% moverd.

MaestroOfFunk

Never be approved by the FTC or EU or Britain, but that doesn't mean there isn't money to be made on the attempt.

pitchfork_2000

65% of shoppers buy from third party sellers whether they know it or not. Amazon stocks very little of their own merchandise and in fact, they are facing lawsuits from the FTC for Amazon Basics and other merchandise they sell directly. When consumers start to notice the things you buy on Amazon are costing 30%+ more than at Target, Walmart, and other retailers, it will matter.

cbusoh66

Google Linda Khan (FTC chair appointed by Biden) who shot down acquisition of ARM. Do you think she stays if Trump is elected?

cbusoh66

Elections can absolutely influence the makeup and leadership of the FTC. Generally, Republicans are pro big corporations so there's a possibility if Jensen makes another move, the FTC may not sue this time.

cbusoh66

No I didn't. I said take a stake, acquisition not likely until there's a change in FTC leadership if Republicans win.

El_Zorro09

And it was mostly due to European objections. The American FTC is a bunch of pencil pushers compared to their British/European counterparts. Those guys are actual regulators.

cbusoh66

Merger, but not take a big stake and wait for change of the guard at the FTC.

freeslurpee

If Trump wins election and FTC changes leadership, Nvidia will likely try to acquire ARM outright. this one hurts

Jupman

Like if the banks are got in late it's not them. I don't know FTC or government sold off the Silk Road's stash yet. Satoshi's original wallet has like 2mill in it. So like, When Dump?

Tim_Riggins_

Are you worried about the FTC lawsuit on their merger?

Aetius454

Nah Lina Khan’s FTC just very anti merger, in this case it was very misguided

Jerome-T

A monopoly is definitely not considered over 50% in US court. Give me one single example where a company had 50% and was convicted of abusing monopoly power. As far as the benefits of killing the merger now vs later, that's FTC policy and your reasoning is why many people disagree with Lina Khan. Khan's approach is unprecedented. And for Pelosi, I mean just randomly grasping at straws to criticize politicians is a child's argument. It's how teenagers on Instagram dunk on each other. You're more than welcome to dislike Pelosi (I do) but I'm just saying that the random quips diminish the other points being made.

GOATnamedFields

Yeah JetBlue paying sticker price to Spirit to buy them is bullying vs Delta, United, and AA buying pieces of Spirit for pennies on the dollar after they go bankrupt. FTC has already sued Amazon for being a monopoly and 90% is a joke. Monopoly is widely considered over 50%. As long as Pelosi and her husband have better returns than the best investment groups in the world off insider info, they deserve to be a punchline.

pml1990

I am just seeing this post now, so this is going to sound like Monday-morning quarterbacking but here is my 2-cent anyhow. I think your analysis is heavy on the law but light on the economics of the deal. Namely, it's not clear that JetBlue was ever that thrilled about the prospect of acquiring Spirit, JetBlue's shareholders certainly weren't. Second, the borrowing and dilution that JetBlue would have incurred just to acquire a marginal business like Spirit makes this deal unattractive to begin with. I believe every time there was an update that makes the deal more likely to go through, JetBlue's share price tanked. With that backdrop in mind, it's no a surprise that there wasn't a lot of desire on the part of JetBlue to continue the legal fight to the appellate level to try to consummate this deal. As of this morning (3/4/2024) when the airlines announced the deal was scraped, I'm sure JetBlue shareholders were breathing a collective sigh of relief, and probably a few of its executives were too. Compare this deal to MSFT acquiring ATVI, where the FTC and its European counterparts were also putting up significant barriers to the acquisition, MSFT however had the money and the desire to acquire ATVI, so it fought all the legal battles needed to ultimately acquire ATVI. The same cannot be said for JetBlue.

m0m0porkerburgerpie

Yah, FTC is not going to investigate, as long as Amazon is putting goods coming out of China at a disadvantage since according to your post most of the sellers are from China. I however agree they are charging too much. Bought a book from Japan they charged 25% of the book cost as handling charges. Ridiculous.

gopoohgo

>UNH. This maybe existential shit for them. Their plan on vertically integration of insurance, PBM, and ownership of medical practices may get a big FU from the FTC. Would not underestimate the repercussions for long term valuation

The_Pink_Bull

Fair, aside from random complaints on Reddit, did you think the striking employees and FTC blocking the merger were relevant, or the chart? Is there anything to any of that? I wasn’t really worried about what customers and employees say on Reddit.

AZRepub4lif

"On top of all that people didn’t seem to appreciate the CEO’s comment about eating cereal for dinner if prices are too high. " That was Kellogg's CEO dude.....All kinds of misinfo here. FTC suing Kroger to block Merger with Albertsons/Safeway