Lina Khan, chair of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, and Jonathan Kanter, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s antitrust division, participate in a discussion on antitrust reforms at the Brookings Institution in Washington on Oct. 4, 2023. Khan assumed the role of FTC chair in June 2021 after being appointed by U.S. President Joe Biden and confirmed by the Senate.
Drew Angerer | Getty Images
Google had been in talks to acquire marketing software maker HubSpot earlier this year, but no deal took place. The company then made a run at cybersecurity startup Wiz. But that didn’t happen either.
Google took a different tactic in closing its one notable transaction of late. Following a model pursued by Amazon and Microsoft to lure experts in artificial intelligence, Google announced last month it was hiring the founders of generative AI startup Character.AI. Rather than buying Character outright and shutting it down — the standard acquihire playbook — Google kept the startup alive and entered into a licensing deal for its technology.
This is the new world of tech M&A. Under the Biden administration, and more specifically Federal Trade Commission head Lina Khan, the biggest companies have been thwarted from pursuing large deals. In some cases, they’ve even walked away from smaller deals. Amazon abandoned its $1.7 billion purchase of iRobot in January after the FTC and European regulators raised concerns.
Since peaking at $1.5 trillion in 2021, tech transaction volume has plummeted, dropping to $544 billion last year, according to Dealogic. So far in 2024, that number sits at $465 billion.
Within tech, private equity buyers are the ones keeping the market afloat. In July, BlackRock agreed to buy data provider Preqin for $3.2 billion, two months after Permira announced it was buying website-building platform Squarespace in a deal valued at almost $7 billion. Thoma Bravo, a leading tech buyout firm, said in July it was selling Instructure to KKR for $4.8 billion.
Don’t expect much to change for the rest of this year. With the presidential election coming in November, the regulatory environment could be poised for a shake-up, potentially leading to the removal of deal-making barriers.
However, neither party offers much clarity for what the future would bring. Sen. JD Vance, Donald Trump’s running mate on the Republican ticket, has praised Khan’s stricter rules on mergers, and he told CNBC last week that “there should be an antitrust solution” to some of the behaviors of large tech platforms.
“If Trump wins, I think that the regulatory environment will still be fairly challenging, and under a challenging regulatory environment, that just limits big deals,” said Andrew Luh, a partner at law firm Gunderson Dettmer who represents startups in mergers and acquisitions.
The Biden administration’s crackdown on Big Tech has gone well beyond squashing M&A.
Alphabet is in the midst of its second antitrust trial, following charges from the Justice Department that the company acted as a monopoly in search and advertising. The DOJ suedApple on antitrust grounds in March. The FTC has cases pending against Meta and Amazon.
Couple that with a similarly rigid environment in Europe, and no deal appears safe. In December, Adobe walked away from its $20 billion agreement to purchase design software startup Figma, and paid a $1 billion breakup fee. In a statement, the companies said, “there is no clear path to receive necessary regulatory approvals from the European Commission and the UK Competition and Markets Authority.”
In July, Figma said it had completed a tender offer valuing the design software startup at $12.5 billion. Figma is viewed as a strong IPO candidate when that market eventually reopens. But alongside a plummeting M&A market, initial public offerings are also in an extended drought as companies continue to adapt to drastically reduced valuations wrought by the economic slowdown starting in 2022.
A Figma spokesperson declined to comment on the company’s plans.
Dana Rao, who at the time was Adobe’s general counsel, announced his departure earlier this month after 12 years at the company. Rao said in a December interview that Adobe leadership felt justified in pursuing Figma after the failure of its competing product design program. But regulators were taking a different view.
“We’ve had a lot of interaction with the regulators, and they’ve been very focused on the newer doctrines of antitrust law that say that future competition is a critical part of the antitrust analysis,” he said.
Jonathan Kanter, head of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, said in a statement after Adobe backed down that the move “ensures that designers, creators, and consumers continue to get the benefit of the rivalry between the two companies going forward.”
‘Very, very disciplined’
There are still deals taking place, outside the watchful eye of regulators.
In those cases, management was less concerned about regulators and much more focused on how shareholders would respond due to the growing obsession with profitability, following the 2022 downturn.
US company Hewlett Packard Enterprise President and Chief Officer Executive Antonio Neri gives a conference at the Mobile World Congress (MWC), the telecom industry’s biggest annual gathering, in Barcelona on February 27, 2024.
Pau Barrena | AFP | Getty Images
HPE CEO Antonio Neri told CNBC that Juniper would add to non-GAAP earnings in year one.
“We have been very, very disciplined on returning invested capital, meaning every dollar spent has to deliver value to our shareholders,” Neri said in an interview. “And that’s why, in the case of Juniper, for example, we committed to a series of synergies that then more than pay for the cost of capital to make this acquisition.”
Neri told analysts in January that the two companies do business in some of the same markets, but in different verticals, and said that he didn’t anticipate protracted battles with regulators. In August, the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority approved the tie-up.
Sergio Letelier, HPE’s head of corporate development, said that when he and his team members advise Neri on a potential deal, they always discuss how regulators might treat it. While some transactions are taking longer to close than they would have previously, “the fundamentals of what is a problematic deal vs. what is not a problematic deal hasn’t changed,” Letelier said.
At Salesforce, CEO Marc Benioff said that Own should bolster free cash flow in the second year after the deal closed. It’s Benioff’s first billion-dollar-plus acquisition since 2021, when the cloud software vendor paid $27 billion for Slack, its largest purchase ever. The DOJ’s Antitrust Division asked for additional information on that deal before clearing it.
In an interview last week, Benioff called U.S. regulators “somewhat dysfunctional” but applauded Europe for recognizing where competition really is being harmed. He specifically pointed to a recent finding by the European Commission, the executive body of the European Union, that Microsoft had breached antitrust rules by tying Teams, its Slack competitor, to its core Office productivity applications.
“They’re the ones who are actually functional and who are doing serious work,” Benioff said, referring to the EU and U.K. “I think that it’s a big story that we’re following the Europeans in this regulatory environment.”
Since the Slack purchase, Salesforce has pursued only smaller deals, particularly after facing off with activist investors who pressured the company to put a renewed focus on profitability. Salesforce landed AI talent from buying Airkit and a Sales Cloud software add-on from Spiff.
“We’ve done more than 60 acquisitions,” Benioff said. “We’ve tried and failed a lot in M&A, but we have also succeeded in quite a few of them, especially the big ones.” Before Slack, Salesforce acquired Tableau Software and MuleSoft.
Hard to be confident
At Cisco, one of the first questions executives ask when evaluating a potential deal is how certain they are it will close, said Derek Idemoto, the networking hardware company’s head of corporate development.
“The question is, How much risk are you willing to take on the regulatory side, given how hard things are at this time and how litigious things could be,” said Idemoto, who’s worked on more than 100 deals in his nearly 17 years at the company.
Idemoto said that’s made Cisco more selective these days. Before the company announced its $27 billion purchase of data analytics software company Splunk last September, he said he viewed the risk as absolutely worth taking. Splunk sat comfortably outside Cisco’s core of networking equipment.
“Certainly it’s an offensive play for us,” Idemoto said.
The deal sailed through, even closing in March, six months ahead of schedule.
“Having a high confidence level when you sign something — that’s the Cisco way,” Idemoto said.
That level of confidence would be difficult for the megacap companies as long as the FTC and DOJ are aggressively watching them. Alphabet’s last big deal was its $5.4 billion purchase of cybersecurity company Mandiant in 2022. Microsoft closed its massive $75 billion purchase of Activision in October, but it took 20 months and a protracted fight with U.S. and European regulators. Amazon hasn’t had a billion-dollar-plus deal since closing the $3.9 billion acquisition of One Medical in early 2023.
Last month, Amazon announced it was hiring a quarter of staffers from Covariant, which builds AI models for robots. It was the company’s second AI deal in the acquihire vein, following a similar agreement with Adept in June. Even that deal attracted an informal FTC inquiry.
Amazon didn’t provide a specific comment for this story, but said acquisitions are still part of its growth strategy and “are a critical and healthy part of an innovation economy.” Microsoft and Google declined to comment.
HPE’s Letelier said that any tech company considering its acquisition strategy will have a difficult time forecasting for the future because it’s not clear what changes Vice President Harris might make if she wins in November or what Trump would do if he returns to the White House.
Trump as president blocked some deals on national security grounds, following recommendations from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Regulators under President Joe Biden, meanwhile, have filed a record number of merger enforcement actions, Bloomberg reported.
“We’re at a crossroads here, and we don’t know which side of the fork the policy is going to go,” Letelier said.
Apple is losing market share in China due to declining iPhone shipments, supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote in a report on Friday. The stock slid 2.4%.
“Apple has adopted a cautious stance when discussing 2025 iPhone production plans with key suppliers,” Kuo, an analyst at TF Securities, wrote in the post. He added that despite the expected launch of the new iPhone SE 4, shipments are expected to decline 6% year over year for the first half of 2025.
Kuo expects Apple’s market share to continue to slide, as two of the coming iPhones are so thin that they likely will only support eSIM, which the Chinese market currently does not promote.
“These two models could face shipping momentum challenges unless their design is modified,” he wrote.
Kuo wrote that in December, overall smartphone shipments in China were flat from a year earlier, but iPhone shipments dropped 10% to 12%.
There is also “no evidence” that Apple Intelligence, the company’s on-device artificial intelligence offering, is driving hardware upgrades or services revenue, according to Kuo. He wrote that the feature “has not boosted iPhone replacement demand,” according to a supply chain survey he conducted, and added that in his view, the feature’s appeal “has significantly declined compared to cloud-based AI services, which have advanced rapidly in subsequent months.”
Apple’s estimated iPhone shipments total about 220 million units for 2024 and between about 220 million and 225 million for this year, Kuo wrote. That is “below the market consensus of 240 million or more,” he wrote.
Apple did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
Amazon said it is halting some of its diversity and inclusion initiatives, joining a growing list of major corporations that have made similar moves in the face of increasing public and legal scrutiny.
In a Dec. 16 internal note to staffers that was obtained by CNBC, Candi Castleberry, Amazon’s VP of inclusive experiences and technology, said the company was in the process of “winding down outdated programs and materials” as part of a broader review of hundreds of initiatives.
“Rather than have individual groups build programs, we are focusing on programs with proven outcomes — and we also aim to foster a more truly inclusive culture,” Castleberry wrote in the note, which was first reported by Bloomberg.
Castleberry’s memo doesn’t say which programs the company is dropping as a result of its review. The company typically releases annual data on the racial and gender makeup of its workforce, and it also operates Black, LGBTQ+, indigenous and veteran employee resource groups, among others.
In 2020, Amazon set a goal of doubling the number of Black employees in vice president and director roles. It announced the same goal in 2021 and also pledged to hire 30% more Black employees for product manager, engineer and other corporate roles.
Meta on Friday made a similar retreat from its diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. The social media company said it’s ending its approach of considering qualified candidates from underrepresented groups for open roles and its equity and inclusion training programs. The decision drew backlash from Meta employees, including one staffer who wrote, “If you don’t stand by your principles when things get difficult, they aren’t values. They’re hobbies.”
Amazon, which is the nation’s second-largest private employer behind Walmart, also recently made changes to its “Our Positions” webpage, which lays out the company’s stance on a variety of policy issues. Previously, there were separate sections dedicated to “Equity for Black people,” “Diversity, equity and inclusion” and “LGBTQ+ rights,” according to records from the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine.
The current webpage has streamlined those sections into a single paragraph. The section says that Amazon believes in creating a diverse and inclusive company and that inequitable treatment of anyone is unacceptable. The Information earlier reported the changes.
Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel told CNBC in a statement: “We update this page from time to time to ensure that it reflects updates we’ve made to various programs and positions.”
Read the full memo from Amazon’s Castleberry:
Team,
As we head toward the end of the year, I want to give another update on the work we’ve been doing around representation and inclusion.
As a large, global company that operates in different countries and industries, we serve hundreds of millions of customers from a range of backgrounds and globally diverse communities. To serve them effectively, we need millions of employees and partners that reflect our customers and communities. We strive to be representative of those customers and build a culture that’s inclusive for everyone.
In the last few years we took a new approach, reviewing hundreds of programs across the company, using science to evaluate their effectiveness, impact, and ROI — identifying the ones we believed should continue. Each one of these addresses a specific disparity, and is designed to end when that disparity is eliminated. In parallel, we worked to unify employee groups together under one umbrella, and build programs that are open to all. Rather than have individual groups build programs, we are focusing on programs with proven outcomes — and we also aim to foster a more truly inclusive culture. You can read more about this on our Together at Amazon page on A to Z.
This approach — where we move away from programs that were separate from our existing processes, and instead integrating our work into existing processes so they become durable — is the evolution to “built in” and “born inclusive,” instead of “bolted on.” As part of this evolution, we’ve been winding down outdated programs and materials, and we’re aiming to complete that by the end of 2024. We also know there will always be individuals or teams who continue to do well-intentioned things that don’t align with our company-wide approach, and we might not always see those right away. But we’ll keep at it.
We’ll continue to share ongoing updates, and appreciate your hard work in driving this progress. We believe this is important work, so we’ll keep investing in programs that help us reflect those audiences, help employees grow, thrive, and connect, and we remain dedicated to delivering inclusive experiences for customers, employees, and communities around the world.
New Tesla Model 3 vehicles on a truck at a logistics drop zone in Seattle, Washington, on Aug. 22, 2024.
M. Scott Brauer | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Tesla is voluntarily recalling about 239,000 of its electric vehicles in the U.S. to fix an issue that can cause its rearview cameras to fail, the company disclosed in filings posted Friday to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s website.
“A rearview camera that does not display an image reduces the driver’s rear view, increasing the risk of a crash,” Tesla wrote in a letter to the regulator. The recall applies to Tesla’s 2024-2025 Model 3 and Model S sedans, and to its 2023-2025 Model X and Model Y SUVs.
The company also said in the acknowledgement letter that it has already “released an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge” that can fix some of the vehicles’ camera issues.
In 2024, Tesla issued 16 recalls in the U.S. that applied to 5.14 million of its EVs, according to NHTSA data. The recall remedies included a mix of over-the-air software updates and parts replacements. More than 40% of last year’s recalls pertained to issues with the newest vehicle in the company’s lineup, the Cybertruck, an angular steel pickup that Tesla began delivering to customers in late 2023.
Regarding the latest recall, the company said it had received 887 warranty claims and dozens of field reports but told the NHTSA that it was not aware of any injurious, fatal or other collisions resulting from the rearview camera failures.
Other customers with vehicles that “experienced a circuit board failure or stress that may lead to a circuit board failure,” which cause the backup camera failures, can have their vehicles’ computers replaced by Tesla, free of charge, the company said.
Tesla did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.