In its failed merger attempt, Cisco argued its market competitors included Sam's Club, a claim regulators rejected. This illustrates that the core of an antitrust case is often not the raw market share number, but the highly debatable and often opaque definition of the market itself, which can be skewed by paid economists.
Related Insights
When evaluating a media merger, regulators should narrowly define the market as "premium streaming platforms." Including user-generated content like YouTube or TikTok creates a misleadingly broad market definition that understates a company's true dominance, similar to a chicken producer claiming competition from pistachio farmers.
Platforms grew dominant by acquiring competitors, a direct result of failed antitrust enforcement. Cory Doctorow argues debates over intermediary liability (e.g., Section 230) are a distraction from the core issue: a decades-long drawdown of anti-monopoly law.
The economy is controlled by powerful 'middleman' companies that consumers have never heard of. Food distributor Cisco, for example, has a dominant position supplying nearly all sit-down chain restaurants, shaping food quality and prices across the country from behind the scenes.
As traditional economic-based antitrust enforcement weakens, a new gatekeeper for M&A has emerged: political cronyism. A deal's approval may now hinge less on market concentration analysis and more on a political leader’s personal sentiment towards the acquiring CEO, fundamentally changing the risk calculus for corporate strategists.
An antitrust case against a Netflix-Warner Bros. merger is weak if the market is defined as all consumer 'eyeballs,' not just paid streaming. Including massive platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram, where most people spend their time, creates a landscape of intense competition, undermining monopoly claims.
The primary concern for creators regarding a Netflix-Warner Bros. merger isn't consumer price-gouging (monopoly). It's that Netflix would become the single dominant buyer of content (monopsony), giving it immense leverage to suppress creator pay and control.
A company's monopoly power can be measured not just by its pricing power, but by the 'noneconomic costs' it imposes on society. Dominant platforms can ignore negative externalities, like their product's impact on teen mental health, because their market position insulates them from accountability and user churn.
After regulators blocked Amazon’s $1.7B acquisition of iRobot, the robotics company went bankrupt. Its assets and IP were then acquired by its Chinese contract manufacturer, illustrating how antitrust actions intended to protect competition can inadvertently destroy American companies and cede technology to foreign entities.
While its attempt to buy a major competitor was blocked, food distributor Cisco achieved market dominance through a "roll-up" strategy. It acquired over 200 smaller, local, and specialty providers, a tactic that often flies under the radar of regulators who focus on large, single M&A deals.
The FTC's failure to prove Meta held a monopoly set a powerful legal precedent, signaling that regulators face a high burden of proof. This has effectively given a green light to large-scale acquisitions, kicking off a "golden age of M&A" as companies feel emboldened to pursue mega-deals without fear of being blocked.
