FTC

getbent9977

Haha yep. You can also hit your state regulator and the FTC. Throw enough keywords onto an email and the filters will go brrrrr.

AFisch00

Keep in mind, the only reason these people hold office is because they are good salesmen. As long as they appeal to their constituents, they will continue to get elected, inside trade, and fuck us all. Fuck politicians, fuck the FTC, and most importantly bless the folks who track Congress trades.

DiligentConnection32

No shit It's gonna get crushed. I'm shorting on #META FTC is gonna fck them hard [https://bytepost.news/news.php?id=882](https://bytepost.news/news.php?id=882)

DiligentConnection32

I'm shorting #META and already +2% :) They're gonna get fcked by FTC so beware [https://bytepost.news/news.php?id=882](https://bytepost.news/news.php?id=882)

Joker-Faced

This deal will not go through prior to midterms. Guaranteed. Still an FTC audit and court process to consider.

lurkANDorganize

Lmao WHAT the FTC is pushing for this lol. This isnt a business deal this is a propaganda deal.

kim82352

> Japan's Fair Trade Commission (FTC) conducted raids on Microsoft's Tokyo offices (reported February 25–26, 2026), investigating whether Microsoft is using anti-competitive practices with Azure cloud services. > Specifically, probes focus on allegations that Microsoft restricts customers from using rival cloud platforms (e.g., by tying Microsoft 365/Office software tightly to Azure or limiting interoperability), potentially violating competition laws. > Microsoft's Japan chief responded by stressing full compliance and cooperation, but the news sparked renewed concerns about regulatory risks to the company's cloud/AI dominance—especially amid ongoing global scrutiny (e.g., U.S. FTC probes into similar cloud licensing practices).

InvestigatorPlus3229

Masterclass by netflix. Gets 2 Billion, and makes paramount overpay so they'll probably fail and get bought for pennies on the dollar in a few years. Plus there was no way that was gonna pass trumps anti woke FTC.

zetstar

Their tech industries are hyper capitalist, massive competition to find the best which is part of why they’ve gained so much ground. People will just say they stole IP or live in delusion and say their tech isn’t that good but they’ve spent two decades cornering the manufacturing market, massively incentivizing tech company development and becoming the only country with real expertise in many of the new fields. They do some stupid shot after they have a clear winner company like make a party diplomat part of their board at the best companies but up until that point it is basically pure capitalism and competition which America has basically abandoned with their allowance of huge companies to just buy out all competition and gutting of the FTC.

InternetImportant911

Harris could have won the race by just talking about the achievements of Lina Khan, yet she did not even commit to keep her as FTC Chairman.

flumydumdum

You should send Trump a letter to ask him to drop the FTC and SEC investigations. I mean Novo is a danish company... the same peeps who refuse to sell us Greenland. Now they're suing an American company? Plenty of outrage opportunity here.

duddnddkslsep

FTC won't be blinking an eye

Late-Tadpole-2318

SENIOR DOJ OFFICIAL: FTC AND DOJ TO OPEN INQUIRY TO CONSIDER NEW GUIDANCE ON COLLABORATION AMONG COMPETITORS. Oh fuck this

krakends

There is a reason the FTC commissioners were fired.

Unlucky-Prize

Most of this goes through the FTC, which is where most of the discretion and problems happen. I don't think DOJ has much weight here. But yeah, DOJ definitely shouldn't be getting used here at all.

Pete26l96

Just saw a video / discussion that showcased how Warren Buffett's annualized returns were double the S&P 500's, only before the FTC made it illegal for CFO's to discuss their company performance privately with institutional investors. Since then (Like the year 2000 or something), Warren Buffett's returns have lagged behind the S&P 500 on an annualized basis. I still think he's one of the greatest investors of all time due to his framework and mindset, but I can't wrap my head around the worship and attention paid to his trade. Go to value investing and people are actually selling AMZN / APPL because Buffett did lol.

Logicalraisan

Ha ha I work in this industry and Google is going well but so is OpenAI. No one is getting clobbered, they have faced a few headwinds but there will not be one AI provider. There will be several and the FTC will require it.

GhostHashira427

Can’t wait for the FTC to approve 24 hour trading.

DropoutDreamer

If you’re a Netflix shareholder, when do all 3 become a win? 1. Netflix gets FTC approval and buys WBD 2. WBD goes to PSKY and Netflix gets $5bn 3. Deal gets rejected by FTC.

Smart-Customer7503

close the fucking FTC.

roboboom

First of all, specificity in prompting makes a massive difference. But as an experiment I typed your prompt word for word into Claude and got this back in about 3 seconds: The Kroger (KR) – Albertsons (ACI) merger collapsed in December 2024 after a combination of regulatory opposition and internal disagreements between the parties. Here’s the breakdown: Regulatory Block In February 2024, the FTC filed a lawsuit to block the merger, arguing the deal would raise prices, lower quality, limit choices for consumers, and harm workers.  Nine state attorneys general joined the effort. On December 10, 2024, a U.S. district judge agreed with the FTC, and separately a Washington state judge also ruled the merger violated consumer-protection laws. Both companies terminated the deal following these rulings.  Why courts rejected it: The core issue was that Kroger and Albertsons are direct head-to-head competitors in many markets, and the proposed remedy — divesting 579 stores to C&S Wholesale Grocers — wasn’t credible. Both courts found that C&S, primarily a wholesale supplier with limited retail experience, would not be able to sufficiently replace the lost competition. The courts also noted that Kroger appeared to set C&S up to fail by not providing adequate capabilities like data analytics, pricing tools, and loyalty data, and by selecting weaker banners (QFC, Haggen) for divestiture while retaining stronger ones like Safeway.  Past attempts at similar grocery store divestitures had all failed, including ones involving C&S.  Internal Finger-Pointing This is where it gets messy, and both sides tell a very different story: ∙ Albertsons alleges Kroger experienced “buyer’s remorse” after seeing its post-pandemic profits fall and the stock market react negatively to the deal, and that Kroger then pursued a strategy that served its own financial interests rather than doing what was needed to get regulatory approval.  ∙ Kroger counters that Albertsons became significantly less cooperative after naming a new general counsel in mid-2023, and that Albertsons was secretly pursuing its own regulatory strategy with C&S that undermined Kroger’s efforts.  ∙ Even the termination is disputed — Albertsons pulled the plug the day after the court rulings, but Kroger claims it was planning to appeal and believed a more merger-friendly Trump administration could have negotiated a resolution.  Financial Fallout Kroger spent over $1 billion in total merger-related costs.  Albertsons is seeking a $600 million termination fee plus billions in additional damages.  C&S also sued Kroger for a $125 million termination fee.  These lawsuits are still playing out in Delaware Court of Chancery. In short: regulators successfully argued the deal was anticompetitive, the proposed fix (divesting to C&S) wasn’t credible, and the two companies are now blaming each other for the failure.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

AntoniaFauci

All of Tim Cook’s shameless sucking up appears to have been futile. MAGA FTC now hassling Apple over “fake news.”

ProfessionalStart461

They delayed their Siri upgrade by a bit and lil Timmy received a personal letter from the FTC.

No_Current3675

Dude can choke on a fat dick. What kind of bullshit is this? >Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson [issued a letter](https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/warning-letters/apple-inc) to Apple CEO Tim Cook, reminding him of Apple’s obligations to its customers. The letter follows reports that Apple News systematically boosts left-wing sources and suppresses right-wing sources. The letter points out that if Apple misrepresents Apple News or violates its terms of service, it could be violating the FTC Act.

DisgrunltedDan

FTC tells Tim Cook to look into reports Apple News is censoring conservatives

DisgrunltedDan

FTC tells Tim Cook to look into reports Apple News is censoring conservatives

DisgrunltedDan

Why apple tanking ? FTC tells Tim Cook to look into reports Apple News is censoring conservatives

Cardiologist_Actual

$snap - someone call the FTC or SEC - this is illegal

thugtronic

It was announced today that META is building a snapchat clone since they unofficially can't buy anything without the FTC coming for them. We love a good underdog story but I think snap is just a dog

I-IV-I64-V-I

a step they take to avoid an SEC FTC insider trading charge

fallcreek1234

Who have I hated on? I'm generally quite positive and supportive of people on here unless they are being snarky snowflakes like you appear to be. All I am saying; just seems super suspect that you signed up for Reddit a day after the Lawsuit against RR was filed, and all you have done is post in its defense? Seems like something a desperate small corporation might do to keep it's stock from plummeting even further or have the Reddit masses shorting it. I'll be happy to pass along your handle to the FTC so they can look into it though. Cheers

Initial_Ad_9250

We have concepts of a SEC and FTC

Budget-Duty5096

If they get hit with an FTC recall or class action suit on all the dangerous batteries they have been selling for years (which seems inevitable at this point), it will be game over. They are already negative cash flow and almost no cash on hand.

itsthewolfe

Would this even be approved by the FTC?

Brokenandburnt

The administration does most of the shit openly. The FTC, SEC and IRS have had their budgets and headcounts slashed so much they _can't_ keep up and find proof.  A case at the SEC takes a lot of people a lot of time, lots of data to crunch. Not enough agents, no crimes investigated.

Brokenandburnt

ICE is currently fulfilling the role of stopping, detaining, kidnapping and abusing immigrants, citizens and even some foreign visitors.  Mr. Trump has in the first year increased his _official_ net worth by $3B. That is not counting the Jet, the gold bribes, the vanished Venezuela oil money or any under the table bribes. When Elon ran rampant through the bureaucracy a number of investigations and 'suits against his companies miraculously vanished. Trump tweeted out it's a good time to buy, and then invited a couple of friends and bragged how much money they had made. Taking stake in a number of companies. INTC, USAR, MP, LAC, TMC and a "golden share", whatever that is, of US steel. States and companies alike around the world are hurriedly forging new trade alliances excluding the US. No one is looking to decouple completely, but no one trusts the US enough not to have a lot of other options. Not even the oldest and staunchest allies the Europeans trusts the US. All this and more in a single year. And this only what's _**blatantly visible**_. The FTC and SEC has had both their budget and headcount slashed. They couldn't control the markets even if the administration wanted them to.

fuckthis_job

Sure but very rarely does the FTC vote for something that is against the Fed chair

AFisch00

FTC this man right here

deviltrombone

It means the FTC won't put up any obstacles. Marvell was down today because of Intel and the sector in general.

elonzucks

It's weird that it's not easy to find From what I understand, Marvell requested to close the transaction earlier than originally estimated and the FTC approved it. "Marvell Technology (MRVL) has received early termination approval from the Federal Trade Commission for its acquisition of Celestial AI, a move valued at approximately $3.25 billion. The transaction includes $1 billion in cash and 27.2 million shares of Marvell stock, valued at $2.25 billion. Additional shares may be issued if Celestial AI achieves specific revenue milestones by fiscal 2029. The acquisition is anticipated to finalize in early 2026, pending regulatory conditions. Following the announcement, Marvell's stock saw a 1% increase."

insaneHoshi

> control of the media? Does using the FTC to investigate late night shows count?

GeoLogic23

The Consumer Brands Association represents many of the [largest CPG companies](https://consumerbrandsassociation.org/membership-benefits/membership-list/) in the country. They lobbied for cannabis/hemp in 2021/2022, but not since. Their final disclosure mentioning hemp/cannabis in 2022 added one extra topic, which was working on the [draft for Schumer's CAOA legalization bill](https://lda.senate.gov/filings/public/filing/a3d7475c-2a60-4461-ba7f-720ff47aa58f/print/). >Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act (Discussion Draft) They were spending close to $500k a quarter in lobbying back then. They have gradually been increasing their spending, but have not gone over $1M in a decade. Once Trump took office in 2025 their quarters went like this: * $0.7M in 2025Q1 * $1.4M in 2025Q2 * $1.6M in 2025Q3 * $3.2M in 2025Q4 So as they are dropping like 4x what they normally spend, they also added a [few new topics to 2025Q4](https://lda.senate.gov/filings/public/filing/a140a0f0-f8d7-4d2b-8b10-9f20ee8d911b/print/). * **Issues relating to hemp** * Issues relating to federal preemption for dietary supplements. * Issues relating to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans * Issues related to regenerative agriculture. * Discuss issues related to the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) Green Guides and consumer labeling. So they added hemp back to their lobbying, and all the other stuff they added is very much in the same category as hemp topics. Right now the government is updating the Dietary Guidelines, where they tell us how much of substances like alcohol are safe to consumer per day. The CBA is also lobbying on the [Green Guides](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/truth-advertising/green-guides), which instruct companies how to market environmentally friendly products. This includes stuff like carbon offset claims. For hemp, both the dietary guidelines and the green guides are very relevant. We need to know how much THCCBD the government considers safe per day if they want to sell it as supplements or in beverages. And hemp companies want to market their products nationwide, promoting hemp's great environmental benefits, including fantastic carbon sequestration. Going back to Schumer's bill. I still think the only reason to write such a long bill that never had any chance of passing was to just have the tax scheme already written for when CPG wants to move in. I feel like it would be very easy to just apply parts of Schumer's bill to low dose hemp products. These are the types of products CPG companies want to sell. So Schumer can signal that he supports cannabis, while "compromising" to allow his bill to be used for hemp products. Which was likely the plan all along.

Beneficial-Age-9293

I've been thinking he "bought" (was given) bonds to side with Netflix.  What's the FTC guy he nominated going do, nothing.

toolbelt10

> Why is it bad that a crooked cop got prosecuted for once? What's bad is there are no cops in MLM-land, because the FTC allows that industry to self-regulate.

Commercial_Leek6987

FTC (Filtronic PLC)

Adept_Papaya927

Trading Academy, previously known as Online Trading Academy, continues to misrepresent their trades/success and have taken away tools that were once a part of the paid program but then just disappeared. The new owner is very condescending. Customer service has been non existent. Follow up from your original recruiter has been non existent. I would look up the FTC lawsuit from 2020....this company just continues to plod along in, what I consider to be a deceptive and unethical fashion

AFisch00

FTC this man...right here

Fiscal_Fidel

Good stuff. That's the way to lead a company so large and so dependent on regulations being in your favour. Same reason apple gave trump a plaque and everyone is signaling nonsense U.S investment. You have to cater to the leadership in charge, especially with Trump. The orange monkey has the SEC and FTC under the whitehouse's influence. No reason to let politics get in the way of making money when you know this administration is so easily swayed by cheap compliments and meaningless accolades and positions.

Fiscal_Fidel

Good stuff. That's the way to lead a company so large and so dependent on regulations being in your favour. Same reason apple gave trump a plaque and everyone is signaling nonsense U.S investment. You have to cater to the leadership in charge, especially with Trump. The orange cunt has the SEC and FTC under the whitehouse's influence. No reason to let politics get in the way of making money when you know this administration is so easily swayed by cheap compliments and meaningless accolades and positions.

Apex-Editor

Living abroad and not closely studying the difference between filing taxes using the FEIE and FTC while trying to contribute to a Roth IRA. Learned about PFICs as well, which I thankfully never bought because of the aforementioned lessons.

deathhand

The FTC, and SEC should get off their asses and do their jobs. If they did America would be a lot more economicslly diverse and robust. They need to bust up monopolies and esure a transparent/fair stock market. Thats whats holding us back.

Splurch

The only risk with buying Warner Bros. is if they don't pay enough to Trump over it so he has the FTC/DOJ stop it. I assume they've already set up whatever "this isn't a bribe" value transfer they have to, otherwise they wouldn't be promising Warner Bros. 5 billion if the government stops the deal. The DC franchise could rival what Disney has with Marvel if whoever ends up in charge of the DC IP actually treats it like a franchise and builds it up right instead of just putting out cashgrabs and constant reboots.

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