Connect with us

Published

on

In this article

San Francisco
Compassandcamera | Getty Images

Many lawmakers are eager to rein in the power of the largest tech companies: Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google.

But some of their proposals could actually hurt the smaller companies they’re meant to protect, venture capitalists warned CNBC.

VCs are particularly concerned about efforts in Congress to restrict mergers and acquisitions by dominant platforms. Some of those proposals would work by shifting the burden of proof onto those firms in merger cases to show their deals would not harm competition.

While proponents argue such bills would prevent so-called killer acquisitions where big companies scoop up potential rivals before they can grow — Facebook’s $1 billion acquisition of Instagram is a common example — tech investors say they’re more concerned with how the bills could squash the buying market for start-ups and discourage further innovation.

Of course, venture capitalists and the groups that represent them have an interest in maintaining a relatively easy route to exiting their investments. A trade group representing VCs, the National Venture Capital Association, counts venture arms of several Big Tech firms among its members. (Comcast, the owner of CNBC parent company NBCUniversal, is also a member.)

But their concerns highlight how changes to antitrust law will have an impact far beyond the largest companies and how smaller players may have to adjust if they’re passed.

Why start-ups get acquired

When venture capitalists invest in a start-up, their goal is to make a large return on their spend. While most start-ups fail, VCs bank on the minority having large enough exits to justify their rest of their investments.

An exit can occur through one of two means: through an acquisition or by going public. When either of these events occurs, investors are able to recoup at least some of their money, and in the best case scenario, reap major windfalls.

About ten times as many start-ups exit through acquisitions as through going public, according to the NVCA. Venture capitalists say that number shows just how important it is to keep the merger path clear.

The top five tech firms aren’t the only ones scooping up tech deals. Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft have accounted for about 4.5% of the value of all tech deals in the U.S. since 2010, according to public data compiled by Dealogic.

Reform advocates have pointed to some acquisitions, like that of Instagram by Facebook, as examples of companies selling before they have the chance to become standalone rivals to larger firms. But VCs say that’s often not the case.

“They all think they could be public companies one day, but the realities are, it’s not realistic for most of these companies to achieve the size and scale to survive the public markets as of today,” said Michael Brown, general partner at Battery Ventures.

While going public is a often the goal, VCs say it can be impractical for start-ups for various reasons.

First, some start-ups may simply not have a product or service that works long-term as a standalone business. That doesn’t mean their technology or talent isn’t valuable, but just means it could be most successful within a larger business.

Kate Mitchell, co-founder and partner at Scale Venture Partners, gave the example of a company called Pavilion Technologies that made predictive technology for manufacturers and agriculture, which sold to manufacturing company Rockwell Automation in 2007.

“That’s a company that just couldn’t get to escape velocity,” she said of Pavilion. “Because they were selling globally to large plants, we couldn’t figure out how to sell the technology cost effectively.”

It was still a useful technology, but needed the infrastructure of a larger business to accelerate further, she said. After Rockwell acquired it, it became incorporated into its offerings and several employees stayed for years.

Sometimes, she said, an acquisition is a last resort before bankruptcy, and at least helps investors get some of their money back.

“It is better that they’re sold for even 80 cents on the dollar than that they go bankrupt,” she said.

In addition, going public can be difficult. The IPO process is expensive and VCs said that small cap companies often struggle on the public market in part because of the lack of analyst coverage of such businesses.

Clate Mask, co-founder and CEO of venture-funded email marketing and sales platform Keap, said greater merger restrictions on the largest companies would likely “change the calculus” for start-ups. But the shift would not be between getting and acquired and going public. Instead, he said, it could make entrepreneurs think harder about whether to raise venture funding at all.

“When you have capital behind you, you can think and operate differently,” he said, adding that entrepreneurs can take more risks with that backing.

Loss of investment and innovation

Several VCs told CNBC they were worried about the trickle-down effect that merger restrictions on the largest firms would have on the entire entrepreneurial ecosystem.

Their fear is that if companies no longer have enough viable exit paths, institutional investors that back VCs — like endowments and pension funds — will shift their money elsewhere. In turn, VCs will have fewer funds to dole out to entrepreneurs, who may see less reason to take the risk of starting a new company.

The ultimate concern is for a loss of innovation, they say, which is exactly what lawmakers are hoping to fend off with merger restrictions on the largest buyers.

“If you restrict the potential to generate exciting rewards and returns from investment, entrepreneurs could find other things to do with their time,” said Patricia Nakache, general partner at Trinity Ventures.

Nakache said placing restrictions on the largest tech firms’ ability to make acquisitions could actually discourage entrepreneurs from building companies that compete with their core businesses. That’s because many entrepreneurs like having a back-up plan incorporating possible acquirers if they can’t go public. With greater uncertainty about whether the Big Tech companies could be potential buyers, they may seek to build businesses outside of the largest players’ core offerings, she said.

VCs also warned that without the biggest players in the mix, sale prices for start-ups would drop significantly.

But outside the industry, some believe these concerns won’t be as bad as VCs fear.

“These sorts of laws, if they work as intended, you’re going to have a more competitive marketplace generally, so there’s going to be more potential buyers,” said Michael Kades, director of markets and competition policy at the non-profit Washington Center for Equitable Growth. “I get it if you’re at the VC today, what you’re concerned about is the next couple of years or what your company can get, but increasing the number of potential buyers for firms … also means that there’s still a very thriving market for these sorts of acquisitions, just not by dominant firms.”

Bhaskar Chakravorti, dean of global business at Tufts University’s Fletcher School, said while venture capitalists are probably right that acquisition prices could slide under new merger restrictions, entrepreneurs will still have a drive to innovate.

“Ultimately people are going to adapt and yes, some of the valuations, some of the bidding may be stunted. Some of the acquisitions may go for ten, 20% less,” he said. “But ultimately, I don’t think it’s going to make that much of a difference because entrepreneurs are going to go after ideas, they’re going to build them, they’re going to put together teams, and venture money needs a place to invest.”

Kades agreed that good ideas will still likely get funding even if the largest firms can’t bid on them or would have a harder time completing an acquisition. Restricting mergers from those companies is about “trying to limit the anticompetitive premium,” he said.

Shifting capital

VCs are also concerned the new rules could accelerate the shift of venture investment outside the U.S.

Mitchell said while other countries including Canada have been adding incentives for entrepreneurs to come and stay in their borders, regulations under consideration in the U.S. will push them away.

“We would be making it difficult just at a time when everyone else is trying to make it attractive” to be an entrepreneur in their country, she said.

According to the NVCA, the U.S. has seen its share of global venture capital fall from 84% to 52% in the last 15 years. That’s why lawmakers shouldn’t rest on their laurels that U.S. venture capital can keep up with the rest of the world under new arduous regulations, VCs contend.

But Chakravorti disagreed the merger laws would push investment outside the U.S., as many alternatives are worse.

“There are very few alternative locations,” he said. Exits in China would come with heightened scrutiny, and Europe is known for a more heavy-handed approach on business regulation.

Still, Brown said, should stricter merger laws pass, he would have to consider casting a wider net for potential buyers when it comes time to exit an investment. That could include more international buyers than he’d otherwise consider.

Nakache said should merger reforms pass, she may consider investing more heavily in start-ups whose potential acquirers wouldn’t be impacted by the laws. For example, if enterprise platforms like Salesforce or Oracle didn’t meet the threshold for stricter merger enforcement, VCs might shift spending from areas like search and social media to software as a service.

Open to some reforms

Some of the VCs interviewed by CNBC felt existing antitrust laws were adequate, but others acknowledged that reforms outside of mergers could be beneficial.

Restrictions on platforms leveraging data they collect to compete with businesses that rely on them is one example that could help level the playing field if done correctly, Nakache suggested.

Mitchell said the most helpful change would be to create more consistency in enforcement of the antitrust laws, particularly from one administration to the next.

Mask, the Keap CEO, said he’s not opposed to Congress taking some action to curb Big Tech companies’ power, but that most entrepreneurs recognize those firms overall “are good for the ecosystem.”

“Those Big Tech companies are helpful in driving a lot of the momentum of the overall sector,” he said. “And I think to have them broken up in some kind of extreme aggressive way I’m not sure is a great thing either.”

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

WATCH: Facebook takes on Substack with newsletter tool

Continue Reading

Technology

Elon Musk ratchets up attacks on Navarro as Tesla shares slump for fourth day

Published

on

By

Elon Musk ratchets up attacks on Navarro as Tesla shares slump for fourth day

Elon Musk (L), and Peter Navarro (R).

Reuters

As Tesla shares plummeted for a fourth straight day, CEO Elon Musk let loose on President Donald Trump’s top trade advisor Peter Navarro.

Musk, the world’s richest person, started going after Navarro over the weekend, posting on X that a “PhD in econ from Harvard is a bad thing, not a good thing,” a reference to Navarro’s degree. Whatever subtlety remained at the beginning of the week has since vanished.

On Tuesday, Musk wrote that “Navarro is truly a moron,” noting that his comments about Tesla being a “car assembler,” as much are “demonstrably false.” Musk called Navarro “dumber than a sack of bricks,” before later apologizing to bricks. Musk also called Navarro “dangerously dumb.”

Musk’s attacks on Navarro represent the most public spat between members of President Trump’s inner circle since the term began in January, and show that the steep tariffs announced last week on more than 180 countries and territories don’t have universal approval in the administration.

When asked about the feud in a briefing on Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, “Look, these are obviously two individuals who have very different views on trade and on tariffs.”

“Boys will be boys, and we will let their public sparring continue,” she said.

For Musk, whose younger brother Kimbal — a restaurant owner, entrepreneur and Tesla board member — has joined in on the action, the name-calling appears to be tied to business conditions.

Tesla’s stock is down 22% in the past four trading sessions and 45% for the year. Tesla has lost more tha $585 billion in value since the calendar turned, equaling tens of billions of dollars in paper losses for Musk, who is also CEO of SpaceX and the owner of xAI and social network X.

Even before President Trump detailed his plan for widespread tariffs, he’d already placed a 25% tariff on vehicles not assembled in the U.S. Many analysts said Tesla could withstand those tariffs better than competitors because its vehicles sold in the U.S. are assembled domestically.

But the company’s production costs are poised to increase because of the tariffs on materials and parts from foreign suppliers. Canada and Mexico are among the leading sources of U.S. steel imports, and Canada is the nation’s largest supplier of aluminum, while China and Mexico are home to major suppliers of printed circuit boards to the automotive industry.

At a recent an event hosted by right-wing Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, Musk said, “Both Europe and the United States should move, ideally, in my view, to a zero-tariff situation, effectively creating a free trade zone between Europe and North America.”

Musk, whose view on trade relations with Europe stands in stark contrast to the policies implemented by the president, has a vested interest in the region. Tesla has a large car factory outside of Berlin, and the European Commission previously turned to SpaceX for launches.

Even before the tariffs, Tesla’s business was faltering. Last week, the company reported a 13% year-over-year decline in first-quarter deliveries, missing analysts’ estimates. That report that landed days after Tesla’s stock price wrapped up its worst quarter since 2022.

Musk, who spent roughly $290 billion to help return Trump to the White House, is now leading the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, which has slashed costs, eliminated regulations and cut tens of thousands of federal jobs. In the first quarter, Tesla was hit with waves of protests, boycotts and some criminal activity that targeted vehicles and facilities in response to Musk’s political rhetoric and his work in the White House.

WATCH: Brad Gerstner explains his Tesla position

Brad Gerstner explains his Tesla position

Continue Reading

Technology

Apple’s 4-day slide puts Microsoft back on top as most valuable company

Published

on

By

Apple's 4-day slide puts Microsoft back on top as most valuable company

Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, laughs as he attends a session at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 23, 2020.

Denis Balibouse | Reuters

Apple‘s 23% plunge over the past four trading sessions has again turned Microsoft into the world’s most valuable public company.

As of Tuesday’s close, Microsoft is worth $2.64 trillion, while Apple’s market cap stands at $2.59 trillion.

While the market broadly is getting hammered by President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff plan, Apple is getting hit the hardest among tech’s megacap companies due to the iPhone maker’s reliance on China.

The Nasdaq is down 13% over the past four trading days, as President Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on imports from more than 100 countries has sparked fears of a recession brought on by rising prices. UBS analysts on Monday predicted that the price of the iPhone 16 Pro Max could jump as much as $350 in the U.S.

Both Apple and Microsoft, along with chipmaker Nvidia, were previously valued at upward of $3 trillion before the recent sell-off.

In January, Microsoft issued disappointing revenue guidance. Nevertheless, last week, as Jefferies analysts reduced their price targets on many software stocks, they wrote Microsoft was among the “companies who we view as more insulated” from tariff uncertainty.

Microsoft also had the highest market capitalization of any public company in early 2024, but Apple soon reclaimed the title.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Tech stocks struggle with intraday gains amid tariff uncertainty

Continue Reading

Technology

Tech, semiconductor stocks bounce on tariff optimism, Nvidia jumps 7%

Published

on

By

Tech, semiconductor stocks bounce on tariff optimism, Nvidia jumps 7%

Technology stocks bounced Tuesday after three rocky trading sessions, spurred by rising optimism that President Donald Trump could potentially negotiate tariff deals with world leaders.

Nvidia led the Magnificent Seven group’s gains, rallying about 7%. Meta Platforms, Amazon, Tesla, Apple and Microsoft jumped at least 4% each. Alphabet rose about 3%.

The sector is coming off a wild trading session after speculation that the White House could potentially delay tariffs fueled volatile swings. Alphabet, Meta Platforms, Amazon and Nvidia finished higher, while Apple, Microsoft and Tesla posted losses.

Trump’s wide-sweeping tariff plans have sparked violent turbulence over the last three trading sessions. Trading volume on Monday hit its highest in nearly two decades. Technology stocks gyrated after the Nasdaq Composite posted its worst week in five years and the Magnificent Seven group lost $1.8 trillion in market value over two trading sessions.

Semiconductor stocks also rebounded Tuesday, with the VanEck Semiconductor ETF jumping more than 5% to build on a more than 2% gain from the previous session. Advanced Micro Devices, Lam Research and Micron Technology jumped about 6%.

Chipmakers were excluded from the recent tariffs, but have come under pressure on worries that higher duties could diminish demand for products they are used in and slow the economy. The sector is also expected to see tariffs further down the road.

Elsewhere, Broadcom surged 9% after announcing a $10 billion share buyback plan through the end of the year. Marvell Technology also bounced more than 9% after agreeing to sell its auto ethernet business for $2.5 billion in cash to Infineon Technologies.

WATCH: Tariff volatility erases majority of AI stock gains

Continue Reading

Trending