This is a well rehearsed segmentation game that market leaders like to play until even the biggest companies on earth no longer appear to be dominant in any specific segment.
I don't buy it. It's not just about indvidual verticals in their current state. For these conglomerates it's always about buying rising competitors out of the market before they can become a strategic threat.
Figma could have expanded beyond any particular vertical they are currently in. Figma could have been bought buy a stronger competitor from outside the graphics space (such as Microsoft). Adobe didn't want to let that happen.
We should block all of these defensive acquisitions. And we should block all acquisitions that help an already big conglomerate capture the next neighboring vertical without doing any actual engineering work (except for small acqui-hires perhaps)
>You don't have to buy it. That's the reality. [...] You guys are simply factually wrong.
It's the argument and the conclusion that I don't buy, not your (and Adobe's) carefully selected set of facts.
Here's a very big player in the graphics software market that tried to buy a potential strategic threat out of the market. This is the fact that matters in my view.
I wouldn't let the top 5 in any market buy another company that is or could soon become a significant competitor in that or a closely related market.
Again that's not how antitrust regulation works. I am not sure why you keep repeating the same mistake.
Figma have 3 million users. In what world would a purchase of them be dominating Canva with 135 million monthly users and with 16 million paying subscribers.
You are confusing Adobe being a big company with why they are a big company.
Apparently anti-trust regulators disagree. They put up enough of a fight to at least give Adobe an excuse for letting the deal fall through.
>You are confusing Adobe being a big company with why they are a big company.
I have heard your argument and I understand what you are saying. Unfortunately, you're not responding to my counter arguments, which makes this not a very interesting debate.
No they don't and both the US and EU had approved it. The UK is using a novel theory that have no basis in reality where they are claiming to be able to predict the future.
You don't have a counter argument, you just have your own opinion on how it should be done. Antitrust is not being done that way you seem to think it's not the reason why the UK didn't allow it.
I don't buy it. It's not just about indvidual verticals in their current state. For these conglomerates it's always about buying rising competitors out of the market before they can become a strategic threat.
Figma could have expanded beyond any particular vertical they are currently in. Figma could have been bought buy a stronger competitor from outside the graphics space (such as Microsoft). Adobe didn't want to let that happen.
We should block all of these defensive acquisitions. And we should block all acquisitions that help an already big conglomerate capture the next neighboring vertical without doing any actual engineering work (except for small acqui-hires perhaps)