Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

figma.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 1001 posts

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#551

Post by lhnz »

yandie wrote: post #543
lhnz wrote: post #534

Counterintuitively this will lead to more monopolies since with less likelihood of "exiting" startups via mergers and acquisitions there'll be reduced interest in venture capital and therefore fewer startups capitalised to the extent that they can compete against large monopolies.

If you think VCs are rational, you’d be in for a fun ride.

I don't think that you need VCs to be rational for what I'm saying to be true.

LPs will see this as reducing the likelihood of making their money back via investing in VCs -- or at least, this is a reasonable theses, and those that grow their customer's funds the most might make this assessment. In the long-term this would transform the landscape of VC which is downstream from institutional investors.

It can also have a cascading effect due to how reports and disclosures over investment strategies get shared and firms benchmark themselves against leading firms.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#552

Post by cipheredStones »

shostack wrote: post #519
sowbug wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with selling goods and services for more than they cost?

Well, if you're an employee joining because the stated path is to find a successful exit vs build a sustainable business, your comp expectations may have reflected that and been lower than normal.

Stocks of successful companies typically pay dividends. That's what makes them valuable in the first place. Not being able to sell them just means you can't get the value up front as a lump sum.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#553

Post by true_religion »

camhart wrote: post #548
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That’s an absurdly long time to be operating a business in limbo, and I have to assume it’s the regulators dragging their feet since the companies have every incentive to move quickly. Your understanding here is fundamentally wrong. Regulators in the US said very early on they were against this merger and were going to fight it. So most of what goes on in the meantime is Adobe and Figma (a) seeing if they can give…

It seems wrong/illegal that they can just "decide they're against the merger" and sink it by dragging their feet. Its either legal or not. I haven't dug into the details, but based on this one line alone it sounds like this is abuse of power.

It seems they are saying the merger as is will be illegal, however they give both companies some time to do something that will make the deal work. 15 months is a short time if you have to sell enterprise assets or let competition emerge to show the merger isn’t a danger to the market.

If companies want a fast answer they can ask for one and it will be no.

All said I do not worry about if billion dollar companies are being fairly treated. They have the capital and expertise to protect their own interests and it’s not worth it to preemptively fight on their behalf.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#554

Post by matthewowen »

Bjorkbat wrote: post #473
fairity wrote: post #392

> Fifteen months into the regulatory review process, Figma and Adobe no longer see a path toward regulatory approval How in the world did it take fifteen months for regulators to reject this? That’s an absurdly long time to be operating a business in limbo, and I have to assume it’s the regulators dragging their feet since the companies have every incentive to move quickly. I don’t have an opinion on whether or not t…

I would argue that the regulators made their point pretty clear early on when the DOJ opened a lawsuit against Adobe. The people most responsible for keeping this in limbo were Adobe’s lawyers.

This is just straight up factually incorrect: the DOJ never filed a lawsuit to block this deal.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#556

Post by vishnugupta »

GenerWork wrote: post #474
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incredible that they have $1b sitting around in cash. Wouldn't you at least put it into a bond or treasury?

It probably is in a bond or treasury note. The "within 3 days" probably covers the selling of the bond/treasury, waiting for the funds to clear, and then sending it over to Figma's account.

Or transfer the bonds/treasury to Figma directly? Why go through the hoop when Figma too will just covert it to bond/treasury anyway?

Is that allowed?

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#557

Post by matthewowen »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #492
fairity wrote: post #392

> Fifteen months into the regulatory review process, Figma and Adobe no longer see a path toward regulatory approval How in the world did it take fifteen months for regulators to reject this? That’s an absurdly long time to be operating a business in limbo, and I have to assume it’s the regulators dragging their feet since the companies have every incentive to move quickly. I don’t have an opinion on whether or not t…

> That’s an absurdly long time to be operating a business in limbo, and I have to assume it’s the regulators dragging their feet since the companies have every incentive to move quickly. Your understanding here is fundamentally wrong. Regulators in the US said very early on they were against this merger and were going to fight it. So most of what goes on in the meantime is Adobe and Figma (a) seeing if they can give…

This is a really inaccurate factual understanding of the sequence of events here: I would urge you to look at the actual timeline of events around the CMA and the DOJ before you keep spreading it.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#558

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

tsunamifury wrote: post #513
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in the USA, the backoffice won't approve it without one-on-one interaction For a business like Adobe, yes. They’ll probably want a verification call. Plenty of funds, however, handle similarly-sized transactions with completely electronic verifications.

Yea I mean how do people think large companies do things like payroll which is easily more than this monthly.

Payroll is done with ACH, not wire transfer. ACH is reversible so it has fewer controls. Wires are not (generally) reversable.

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#559

Post by jzl »

microtherion wrote: post #539
reustle wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Company will make a cash payment to Figma in the previously agreed amount of one billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) (the “Termination Fee”) within three business days following the date thereof Three business days to wire $1b, the week before Christmas. That has to be a fun phone call with the bank.

Bank is going to have to dip deep into their swear jar to come up with the money.

Hah, reminds me of this:

https://youtu.be/7C1Zaqu0wrw

Re: Figma and Adobe abandon proposed merger

#560

Post by SomeCallMeTim »

camhart wrote: post #548
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That’s an absurdly long time to be operating a business in limbo, and I have to assume it’s the regulators dragging their feet since the companies have every incentive to move quickly. Your understanding here is fundamentally wrong. Regulators in the US said very early on they were against this merger and were going to fight it. So most of what goes on in the meantime is Adobe and Figma (a) seeing if they can give…

It seems wrong/illegal that they can just "decide they're against the merger" and sink it by dragging their feet. Its either legal or not. I haven't dug into the details, but based on this one line alone it sounds like this is abuse of power.

Another way to say "decide they're against the merger" is "evaluate the situation and make a timely ruling that they oppose the merger as illegal."

Which is exactly what they were supposed to do. Adobe and Figma tried to argue with the regulators or find a compromise, but couldn't come up with a solution that satisfied all parties.

If you try to extract subtle implications from the phrasing of a commenter on HN, you're likely to jump to the wrong conclusion.

Post reply on HN