WEBVTT - Antitrust Under Trump – Post-Election View 0:00:15.280 --> 0:00:16.239 Hello and welcome. 0:00:16.360 --> 0:00:20.320 I'm justinterreesy litigation and policy analysts focused on anti trust 0:00:20.360 --> 0:00:23.520 with Bloomberg Intelligence, and joining me today is my colleague 0:00:23.600 --> 0:00:27.360 Jenniferree are senior anti trust litigation analysts and for both 0:00:27.400 --> 0:00:31.400 of us, our coverage really runs across all sectors. Today's 0:00:31.400 --> 0:00:34.199 webinar is part of a series of conversations among the 0:00:34.240 --> 0:00:37.560 litigation and policy team at BI taking a closer look 0:00:37.600 --> 0:00:40.479 at this year's election now that it's in the rearview mirror, 0:00:40.720 --> 0:00:43.440 and the consequences we think the results will have across 0:00:43.440 --> 0:00:47.320 several areas of the law and politics in the years ahead. Tomorrow, 0:00:47.479 --> 0:00:50.240 Gener will participate in a similar webinar with our colleague 0:00:50.280 --> 0:00:54.800 Matthew Shettenhelm to discuss election impacts on the TMT sector specifically, 0:00:55.200 --> 0:00:57.360 Our colleague Holley from will take a look at impacts 0:00:57.360 --> 0:01:00.600 on areas such as electric vehicles and industry is regulated 0:01:00.640 --> 0:01:03.160 by the EPA. But first a quick word on who 0:01:03.200 --> 0:01:07.080 we are. Bloomberg Intelligence is the investment research platform on 0:01:07.080 --> 0:01:10.840 the Bloomberg terminal, consisting of over five hundred professionals covering 0:01:10.840 --> 0:01:14.200 over two thousand companies. We cover companies from the perspective 0:01:14.240 --> 0:01:19.319 of equities, credit ESG Litigation and policy. Bloomberg Terminal clients 0:01:19.319 --> 0:01:22.120 can always reach out to us with questions about our research, 0:01:22.560 --> 0:01:25.160 and with that, let's get started. How we structure to 0:01:25.240 --> 0:01:28.360 this Today is a conversation between Jen and myself. First 0:01:28.360 --> 0:01:31.039 focused on some macro thoughts by Jen about the Federal 0:01:31.080 --> 0:01:34.720 Trade Commission and Antitrust Division at the Department of Justice. 0:01:34.880 --> 0:01:37.399 I'll then weigh in on some policy considerations for the 0:01:37.440 --> 0:01:39.920 next Congress and provide a quick rundown of what we 0:01:40.000 --> 0:01:43.360 might see across the States. So, Jen, how you doing? 0:01:43.480 --> 0:01:44.920 Jumping right in here? 0:01:44.959 --> 0:01:46.479 Good? Good, justin How are you? 0:01:46.959 --> 0:01:49.720 I'm good, I'm good, glad the election is overfilling a 0:01:49.720 --> 0:01:53.560 little bit to me too, Thank everybody is. Oftentimes it's 0:01:53.560 --> 0:01:56.440 said that personnel is policy, and that was certainly true 0:01:56.520 --> 0:02:00.680 during the Biden administration with respect to antitrust enforcement initiatives 0:02:01.000 --> 0:02:03.840 of Biden's assisted Attorney General in Charge of Anti Trust 0:02:03.920 --> 0:02:07.120 Jonathan Canter and the Chair of the FTC Lena Khan, 0:02:07.680 --> 0:02:10.280 in particular, many in the business community who will be 0:02:10.320 --> 0:02:13.399 glad to see when they see Lena Khan leave the FTC. 0:02:14.160 --> 0:02:16.400 What do you think when do you think these folks 0:02:16.400 --> 0:02:19.000 will be replaced by President Trump, and what impact do 0:02:19.040 --> 0:02:20.000 you think that'll. 0:02:19.680 --> 0:02:23.200 Have, Thanks Justin, I mean, it is true. I think 0:02:23.280 --> 0:02:27.520 the business community is really happy about the likely exit 0:02:27.960 --> 0:02:30.600 of Lena con from the FTC and Jonathan Cantor from 0:02:30.639 --> 0:02:34.520 the DJ as well. You know, it's true that President 0:02:34.520 --> 0:02:37.160 Biden's anti trust enforcers have really been a thorn in 0:02:37.200 --> 0:02:40.040 the side of businesses, and that's because they just ramped 0:02:40.080 --> 0:02:43.080 up anti trust enforcement across the board, right you know, 0:02:43.160 --> 0:02:45.040 they made it a point to use what they called 0:02:45.120 --> 0:02:49.160 every tool available to them to slow consolidation of industries 0:02:49.160 --> 0:02:51.520 and to try to curb the conduct of dominant firms. 0:02:51.560 --> 0:02:54.720 So that means that they challenged way more proposed deals 0:02:54.720 --> 0:02:58.200 than previous enforcers. And they filed or at least continued 0:02:58.280 --> 0:03:03.520 lawsuits over monopoly stick conduct against Alphabet, Apple, Amazon Meta, 0:03:03.560 --> 0:03:05.800 and Live Nation, among others. I mean, those are just 0:03:05.840 --> 0:03:08.880 the cases I'm following. I know you are following even 0:03:08.919 --> 0:03:14.359 others in other cases many So let's talk about what 0:03:14.639 --> 0:03:18.120 will happen now that Donald Trump's been elected. So Donald 0:03:18.160 --> 0:03:20.720 Trump President Trump two point zero. As we head in, 0:03:21.720 --> 0:03:24.240 I think it's a certainty that both Cohn and Cantor 0:03:24.280 --> 0:03:27.160 will be replaced, though right now, it's not clear at 0:03:27.160 --> 0:03:30.119 all who the new you know, antitrust decision makers will 0:03:30.120 --> 0:03:32.760 be or when they'll be installed. I just kind of 0:03:32.760 --> 0:03:35.520 want to dispel one thing that I've seen out there, 0:03:35.600 --> 0:03:38.120 this speculation that Trump would keep lean to Khan at 0:03:38.120 --> 0:03:41.400 the FDC, because his Vice president JD. Vance has really 0:03:41.400 --> 0:03:44.760 been quite vocal about his support for Khan. You know, one, Yeah, 0:03:44.800 --> 0:03:45.400 you know, I mean. 0:03:45.320 --> 0:03:46.680 A lot of conversation around this. 0:03:46.800 --> 0:03:49.000 Yeah, right, I mean, how weird that at one point 0:03:49.120 --> 0:03:51.440 here at Bloomberg, when he made a speech maybe a 0:03:51.520 --> 0:03:53.080 year ago or a year and a half ago, he 0:03:53.160 --> 0:03:56.040 said he thought the only person in the Biden administration 0:03:56.120 --> 0:03:57.880 who was doing a good job was Cohn. I was 0:03:57.880 --> 0:03:59.360 really surprised when I heard that. 0:03:59.600 --> 0:03:59.920 Total. 0:04:00.200 --> 0:04:04.160 Yeah, so he's aligned with this really aggressive enforcement approach 0:04:04.200 --> 0:04:06.800 that she's taken. But let's just say, I highly doubt 0:04:06.800 --> 0:04:07.880 that's going to occur. 0:04:08.280 --> 0:04:08.440 Now. 0:04:08.480 --> 0:04:10.800 First, it's not I don't think it's usual that a 0:04:10.800 --> 0:04:12.680 president is going to follow the advice of his vice 0:04:12.800 --> 0:04:15.440 president about who to appoint. And I think it's a 0:04:15.480 --> 0:04:17.960 near one hundred percent likelihood that Trump's going to install 0:04:17.960 --> 0:04:20.040 his own people. I mean, this is just the right 0:04:20.080 --> 0:04:22.520 of a new president. That's what they do. He's going 0:04:22.560 --> 0:04:24.680 to want his own people that will shape his policy 0:04:25.160 --> 0:04:29.520 loyalty aside. That's the loyalty aside exactly Now timing, I mean, 0:04:29.560 --> 0:04:32.279 this could be any time in the one Q next year, 0:04:32.480 --> 0:04:35.040 or even into the second. I suspect what's going to 0:04:35.120 --> 0:04:36.960 happen is that both Conna and Cantor are going to 0:04:37.000 --> 0:04:40.039 leave on their own once Trump is inaugurated, and it 0:04:40.040 --> 0:04:42.440 could take months before he names new people and they 0:04:42.480 --> 0:04:45.640 get confirmed by the Senate as needed. Now that's not 0:04:45.680 --> 0:04:47.840 because Trump is going to have any trouble finding anyone 0:04:47.920 --> 0:04:50.320 or getting the needed votes, right, He's got the solid 0:04:50.360 --> 0:04:52.960 GOP majority in the Senate. But it's really because there's 0:04:52.960 --> 0:04:54.680 a lot for a new president to do and for 0:04:54.760 --> 0:04:57.400 Senate to do. With the beginning of new term, other 0:04:57.960 --> 0:05:00.240 appointments are going to be a higher priority. So I 0:05:00.279 --> 0:05:03.560 look back at similar changes in party after an election, 0:05:03.680 --> 0:05:06.159 and I saw that the fastest replacement of a chair 0:05:06.160 --> 0:05:07.719 at the FDC was about six months. 0:05:07.960 --> 0:05:10.600 Wow, Wow, I'm left then, yeah, right. 0:05:10.520 --> 0:05:12.240 But the process can take a year or more. 0:05:12.279 --> 0:05:12.359 So. 0:05:12.440 --> 0:05:14.440 The thing the question I have is is con going 0:05:14.520 --> 0:05:16.560 to leave on her own in January? Which I suspect 0:05:16.600 --> 0:05:18.680 the most likely outcome or is she going to stick 0:05:18.680 --> 0:05:21.039 around till she's replaced, because if she does, it means 0:05:21.080 --> 0:05:24.159 it's about another six months before we're going to see 0:05:24.160 --> 0:05:27.160 some change. But I do think she'll leave and what'll 0:05:27.200 --> 0:05:30.120 But one thing that will happen immediately justin is that 0:05:30.160 --> 0:05:32.200 Trump can name his acting chair one of the two 0:05:32.240 --> 0:05:35.120 current Republicans, So that would be either Melissa Holyoake or 0:05:35.160 --> 0:05:39.640 Andrew Ferguson right sow. So once new people are in 0:05:39.720 --> 0:05:42.200 and the agencies are kind of rolling along, a new 0:05:42.320 --> 0:05:45.880 Republican majority of the FTC, a new Assistant Attorney General 0:05:45.880 --> 0:05:47.760 in charge of anti trust who is a Republican at 0:05:47.800 --> 0:05:49.880 the Department of Justice, I do think there's going to 0:05:49.880 --> 0:05:52.479 be a pretty significant impact from the changes, and I 0:05:52.480 --> 0:05:55.200 think the first evident impact will be on M and A. 0:05:56.320 --> 0:05:59.400 And mostly that's because the current FTC and DJ are 0:05:59.440 --> 0:06:03.080 really generally unwilling to settle deals. What that means is 0:06:03.240 --> 0:06:06.400 before these two current and Biden enforcers, it used to 0:06:06.480 --> 0:06:09.880 be that most deals that raised antitrust issues could still close, 0:06:10.360 --> 0:06:12.520 but the companies would have to agree with the relevant 0:06:12.520 --> 0:06:15.720 agency either to sell off certain assets or make commitments 0:06:15.720 --> 0:06:17.960 as to their post merger behavior in the market are 0:06:18.000 --> 0:06:21.280 both right, but con and Kanter are the first that 0:06:21.320 --> 0:06:23.760 are of the view that problematic deals should just be 0:06:23.839 --> 0:06:27.040 prevented wholesale. So what that meant was that under their 0:06:27.080 --> 0:06:30.640 watch way more deals than before were either abandoned or 0:06:30.680 --> 0:06:32.359 had to go to court to defend the deal and 0:06:32.400 --> 0:06:34.360 had to win a court in order to be able 0:06:34.400 --> 0:06:37.480 to close the deal. And we have very very few settlements. 0:06:37.520 --> 0:06:39.560 So I think one main thing that the trump enforcers 0:06:39.560 --> 0:06:41.640 are going to bring us is back to a place 0:06:41.640 --> 0:06:44.520 where settlements are more commonplace, and so that means more 0:06:44.560 --> 0:06:48.440 deals closing than being abandoned or blocked in court. And 0:06:48.480 --> 0:06:51.120 I also think the new GOP majority of the FTC 0:06:51.200 --> 0:06:54.039 and the Republican AAG at the DOJ will make some 0:06:54.160 --> 0:06:57.120 changes we'll talk about later to internal guidance issued by 0:06:57.200 --> 0:07:00.600 Biden's FDC and DOJ. So just really quickly before we 0:07:00.640 --> 0:07:03.839 move on, before I go on too long about this. Also, 0:07:03.880 --> 0:07:07.320 there are ongoing lawsuits against dominant companies. I would say 0:07:07.320 --> 0:07:10.000 there's going to be no major impact on those litigations 0:07:10.040 --> 0:07:12.760 in the short run. They are ongoing, They're going to 0:07:12.760 --> 0:07:16.080 continue their courses in court. It's certainly possible that the 0:07:16.120 --> 0:07:18.880 new DOJ or FDC may be more amenable to a settlement, 0:07:19.040 --> 0:07:20.600 but I think that's going to be way down the road. 0:07:21.320 --> 0:07:23.200 All right, makes sense, makes sense, sounds like it might 0:07:23.200 --> 0:07:26.240 be a bit more of a collaborative relationship with participants 0:07:26.280 --> 0:07:29.080 in the FTC exactly what we've seen most recently. 0:07:29.400 --> 0:07:30.800 Exactly makes sense. 0:07:30.840 --> 0:07:34.320 So you've mentioned some certain initiatives there and activities at 0:07:34.320 --> 0:07:37.560 the FTC and DOJ that you think Trump personnel might 0:07:37.640 --> 0:07:40.160 alter or resin. Do you have some specific examples you're 0:07:40.160 --> 0:07:41.360 thinking of on that front. 0:07:41.440 --> 0:07:42.240 Yeah, very much. 0:07:42.280 --> 0:07:42.360 So. 0:07:42.800 --> 0:07:45.680 What I'm specifically thinking about are the FTCs and DOJ's 0:07:45.760 --> 0:07:48.960 joint Merger Guidelines. So these guidelines have been around for 0:07:49.080 --> 0:07:52.040 years and they're meant to outline how the agencies are 0:07:52.040 --> 0:07:55.600 going to assess proposed deals, and the guidelines also set 0:07:55.640 --> 0:07:57.840 thresholds for when a deal may be presumed to be 0:07:57.880 --> 0:08:01.320 anti competitive. Now, they're not binding the judges, but they 0:08:01.360 --> 0:08:04.440 have historically been adopted by judges that preside over merger 0:08:04.520 --> 0:08:07.440 challenges in court, so they are useful. And in late 0:08:07.480 --> 0:08:11.080 twenty twenty three, the DOJ and FDC revised the guidelines, 0:08:11.120 --> 0:08:14.960 making several changes that collectively all made it such that 0:08:15.040 --> 0:08:17.520 a larger number of deals ended up sort of falling 0:08:17.560 --> 0:08:20.720 into the trap. They were considered at the outset to 0:08:20.760 --> 0:08:23.440 be anti competitive, which set them up for this agency 0:08:23.480 --> 0:08:26.480 for a challenge, right because they weren't going to settle, 0:08:27.720 --> 0:08:30.400 And it just means more deals fell fell under those 0:08:30.400 --> 0:08:32.720 thresholds and got challenged. And I think one of the 0:08:32.760 --> 0:08:37.319 first things that a new Republican DOJ and FTC will 0:08:37.360 --> 0:08:40.600 do is change these and probably scale them back. Both 0:08:40.640 --> 0:08:43.320 of the current Republican commissioners at the FTC have said 0:08:43.360 --> 0:08:45.920 they would revise the guidelines, so they haven't really elaborated 0:08:45.960 --> 0:08:48.440 on how or how much, but there's no doubt to 0:08:48.480 --> 0:08:50.199 me that if they revise them, it's going to be 0:08:50.320 --> 0:08:52.520 to pull back on some of the more novel or 0:08:52.640 --> 0:08:56.800 radical new aspects that were instituted in twenty twenty three, 0:08:57.200 --> 0:08:59.720 and that it will probably result in fewer deals being 0:08:59.720 --> 0:09:01.920 concer it or anti competitive at the outset. 0:09:02.360 --> 0:09:05.000 Got it, Got it so turning a little bit here too. 0:09:05.040 --> 0:09:06.839 And I know I've heard so much from clients and 0:09:06.880 --> 0:09:09.520 other folks about this too, But I know you've focused 0:09:09.520 --> 0:09:13.480 for years now on the investigations and now lawsuits by 0:09:13.559 --> 0:09:16.400 government plaintiffs in the big tech space. So there's a 0:09:16.480 --> 0:09:19.040 number of these going ongoing right now. Do you see 0:09:19.120 --> 0:09:21.640 changes at the FTC and c OJ having any impact 0:09:21.720 --> 0:09:23.880 on those suits? And if you do, what do you 0:09:23.880 --> 0:09:24.640 think might happen? 0:09:25.240 --> 0:09:27.000 You know, it's a funny thing. I've seen a lot 0:09:27.000 --> 0:09:29.960 of elation by companies and oh, everything's going to be 0:09:30.000 --> 0:09:32.680 so much EASi. Yeah, I've been you know everything, So 0:09:32.720 --> 0:09:35.040 all these problems are going to go away. You know 0:09:35.120 --> 0:09:37.360 that's not the case. I think that we need to 0:09:37.400 --> 0:09:41.400 remember that now. Specifically, the big tech cases I follow 0:09:41.480 --> 0:09:44.800 are our Department of Justice has two monopolization suits against Google, 0:09:45.160 --> 0:09:47.640 one against Apple, one against Live Nation, and then the 0:09:47.720 --> 0:09:50.440 FTC has two one against Meta and Amazon. There are 0:09:50.480 --> 0:09:52.280 others that you're going to talk about, but these are 0:09:52.320 --> 0:09:55.160 the ones I'm following, sort of focused in the TMT space, 0:09:55.679 --> 0:09:58.240 And I think what people have to remember is that 0:09:58.320 --> 0:10:01.360 two of these suits were started by Trump's enforcers, and 0:10:01.559 --> 0:10:06.360 all of these investigations were launched by Trump's enforcers. So 0:10:06.400 --> 0:10:09.559 it doesn't necessarily mean that new Trump enforcers are suddenly 0:10:09.559 --> 0:10:11.679 going to go easy on these companies. I don't think 0:10:11.760 --> 0:10:13.520 that's going to happen. No, there's a lot of history 0:10:13.559 --> 0:10:16.600 there absolutely a lot, you know, and I don't really 0:10:16.679 --> 0:10:18.760 know why there'd be such an a doubt about face. 0:10:18.840 --> 0:10:20.840 I mean, we've heard that Trump is no big fan 0:10:21.040 --> 0:10:25.160 of Meta and no big fan of Google. Now, certainly 0:10:25.640 --> 0:10:28.839 you might have the possibility that they'd be more amenable 0:10:28.840 --> 0:10:31.600 to settlements down the road for some of these cases. 0:10:31.880 --> 0:10:34.080 If we look at the Google cases first, they're just 0:10:34.160 --> 0:10:36.840 too far along. I mean, in Google Search, we already 0:10:36.840 --> 0:10:39.760 have had a trial, we have a liability decision against Google, 0:10:39.800 --> 0:10:41.480 and now what the judge is trying to figure out 0:10:41.640 --> 0:10:44.520 are the appropriate remedies. And in this case, the DJ 0:10:44.640 --> 0:10:47.240 has said maybe not for sure, but maybe they would 0:10:47.320 --> 0:10:50.520 ask the judge for a structural remedy, in other words, 0:10:50.559 --> 0:10:53.800 a breakup of Google. We have said, and we have 0:10:53.880 --> 0:10:56.520 said now for a couple of years that we highly 0:10:56.600 --> 0:10:59.200 doubt that would be the case here. Right, just because 0:10:59.240 --> 0:11:01.319 the DOJ asked for it doesn't mean the judge is 0:11:01.320 --> 0:11:04.040 going to order it. I think there's a very low 0:11:04.160 --> 0:11:07.040 chance below ten percent that the judge would order this. 0:11:07.120 --> 0:11:09.320 And everybody I'm seeing in the news people saying, well, 0:11:09.320 --> 0:11:11.360 now that it's going to be Trump's people, it definitely 0:11:11.360 --> 0:11:13.120 won't be broken up. But you know, at the end 0:11:13.160 --> 0:11:15.480 of the day, it's got a little meaningless because maybe 0:11:15.480 --> 0:11:17.520 it drops the chance from ten percent to eight percent. 0:11:18.200 --> 0:11:18.880 It's all numbers. 0:11:18.960 --> 0:11:20.320 Yeah, yeah, I don't think it was going to happen 0:11:20.320 --> 0:11:22.960 to begin with now ad Tech suit, which of course 0:11:23.040 --> 0:11:24.200 that was a trial you attended. 0:11:24.440 --> 0:11:26.080 Yeah, yeah, And you've been. 0:11:25.960 --> 0:11:27.720 Thinking about that and writing about that, And what you've 0:11:27.720 --> 0:11:29.640 told me is that you think there could be a 0:11:29.679 --> 0:11:33.200 liability decision there also against Google and I just from 0:11:33.200 --> 0:11:35.520 the complaint and having looked at the case myself, I 0:11:35.800 --> 0:11:38.840 would agree, But you also think it's unlikely that there'd 0:11:38.840 --> 0:11:40.559 be any breakup, right I do. 0:11:40.679 --> 0:11:42.559 I do base on what happened a trial. That seems 0:11:42.559 --> 0:11:45.920 to be the outcome we're looking at already pre trub relection. 0:11:46.200 --> 0:11:49.520 Yeah, yeah, so the Trump election doesn't really have that 0:11:49.640 --> 0:11:52.320 much impact on that. To me, where there might be 0:11:52.360 --> 0:11:55.400 some impact is the FTC suit against Amazon and the 0:11:55.480 --> 0:11:58.760 DOJ suit against Apple. I think of all of these suits, 0:11:58.800 --> 0:12:01.080 to me, at least those may be two of the weakest, 0:12:01.440 --> 0:12:04.600 and I do think especially the actually both of those 0:12:04.760 --> 0:12:07.280 really lend themselves to settlements. You know, it's kind of 0:12:07.320 --> 0:12:10.400 based on the allegations, it's kind of easy fixes, and 0:12:10.440 --> 0:12:14.160 the FTC has settled suits against it or allegations against 0:12:14.200 --> 0:12:16.840 it in the UK and EU with respect to Amazon, 0:12:16.880 --> 0:12:19.880 and that we're very similar to the lawsuit that's ongoing here. 0:12:20.360 --> 0:12:24.560 They offered up some of these behavioral changes to this 0:12:24.720 --> 0:12:28.320 FTC and those offers were rejected. And it's perhaps the 0:12:28.400 --> 0:12:31.480 current FTC, as this litigation goes on, may be more 0:12:31.480 --> 0:12:34.160 willing to open up the door again to settlement talks. 0:12:34.200 --> 0:12:37.559 There makes sense, makes sense, got in on it all. 0:12:37.600 --> 0:12:39.839 Right, So justin before I go on too long, I 0:12:39.960 --> 0:12:40.480 talk too much. 0:12:40.559 --> 0:12:42.839 Last You're too great, Not too long at all. 0:12:42.920 --> 0:12:45.240 That's a lot of good stuff there, and that's what's 0:12:45.280 --> 0:12:46.199 we've been chatting. 0:12:46.520 --> 0:12:48.280 I guess, I guess. Before I move on to some 0:12:48.400 --> 0:12:50.120 questions for you, the one thing I do want to 0:12:50.160 --> 0:12:54.400 say is that there's been so much jubilation in the 0:12:54.440 --> 0:12:58.720 market about deals and the deal floodgates opening up, and 0:12:58.760 --> 0:13:01.320 I do think deals will get signed. In terms of 0:13:01.360 --> 0:13:04.000 deals getting signed and deals ramping up again, I do 0:13:04.040 --> 0:13:05.800 think the floodgates are going to open a little. But 0:13:05.840 --> 0:13:08.160 I don't necessarily think every single deal is going to 0:13:08.160 --> 0:13:11.080 get green lighted, you know, just because these are Republicans 0:13:11.080 --> 0:13:13.840 and maybe might tend to be more business friendly. It 0:13:13.880 --> 0:13:16.600 doesn't mean that they don't challenge deals that are problematic 0:13:16.679 --> 0:13:19.559 and don't have an appropriate remedy, right, I think that's right, Yeah, 0:13:19.559 --> 0:13:22.559 exactly right. So I don't think people should think every big, 0:13:22.640 --> 0:13:25.280 huge deals can get signed now that are super problematic 0:13:25.320 --> 0:13:27.440 and that they're going to go through. There will still 0:13:27.480 --> 0:13:30.760 be deal challenges. The difference is there will be more settlements. 0:13:30.880 --> 0:13:35.000 But let's move on to some other industries and which 0:13:35.000 --> 0:13:38.040 agencies have lawsuits or investigations that I know you're following, 0:13:38.160 --> 0:13:41.360 justin so tell us about the cases you're tracking and 0:13:41.760 --> 0:13:44.240 how you think they could be impacted by the election results. 0:13:44.559 --> 0:13:44.839 Yeah. 0:13:44.880 --> 0:13:46.880 Sure, So I here really looking at more of those 0:13:47.000 --> 0:13:49.920 enforcement actions brought up by the FTC and TOOJ versus 0:13:50.000 --> 0:13:52.360 those kind of merger reviews. Right, And I think kind 0:13:52.360 --> 0:13:54.120 of part of parcels to what you were saying, Jen, 0:13:54.160 --> 0:13:56.040 You know, I think the big themes here that we're 0:13:56.080 --> 0:13:59.199 watching are a whether there'll be a greater appetite for 0:13:59.320 --> 0:14:02.880 settlement with the well, there's a greater appetite for settlement 0:14:03.160 --> 0:14:06.559 with the FTC and DJ under the Trump administration, or 0:14:06.600 --> 0:14:09.480 you know, perhaps maybe there's a more restrictive approach to 0:14:09.559 --> 0:14:11.560 to how these cases are brought if there's not a 0:14:11.559 --> 0:14:14.600 straight reduction in the number of suits in and of itself. 0:14:14.679 --> 0:14:14.880 Right. 0:14:14.960 --> 0:14:17.319 So the first one that really comes to mind here 0:14:17.600 --> 0:14:20.600 is the case that the FTC brought in September against 0:14:20.640 --> 0:14:23.120 pharmacy benefit managers. And who do I mean there, I'm 0:14:23.120 --> 0:14:26.880 talking about United Health Optimum talking about CVS care Mark 0:14:27.840 --> 0:14:30.840 express Scripts, right. And when they brought that case, you know, 0:14:30.840 --> 0:14:32.880 they brought chose to bring that as a Section five 0:14:32.960 --> 0:14:36.240 proceeding under the FTC Act. And this followed an interim 0:14:36.280 --> 0:14:38.720 report by the FTC that they put out in July. 0:14:39.280 --> 0:14:41.360 In that report, there was a lot there, right. They're 0:14:41.400 --> 0:14:45.120 talking about whether these these pharmacy benefit managers or PBMs 0:14:45.160 --> 0:14:49.080 are taking drug rebates from drug manufacturers, essentially pocketing those 0:14:49.120 --> 0:14:52.040 rebates or or you know, downstream the customers paying more 0:14:52.120 --> 0:14:54.680 money as a result of those rebates. That's a central 0:14:54.720 --> 0:14:56.880 allegation in these kinds of cases, right. And there's a 0:14:56.880 --> 0:15:00.600 whole lot of vertical consolidation that's happened in the healthcare 0:15:00.800 --> 0:15:04.120 space outside of just PBMs too. But in July when 0:15:04.120 --> 0:15:06.440 this report came out, you know, they really the FTC 0:15:06.560 --> 0:15:08.720 focused on all of these things that were both anti 0:15:08.720 --> 0:15:11.800 trust issues and consumer protection issues. There were there was 0:15:11.800 --> 0:15:15.320 a discussion of how that practice might be affecting groups 0:15:15.320 --> 0:15:18.400 like local or independent pharmacies down at the consumer level, 0:15:18.440 --> 0:15:21.280 and you know that that really raised some anti trust concerns. 0:15:21.320 --> 0:15:23.840 But when they brought this student September again, it was 0:15:23.880 --> 0:15:27.160 really crafted as this section five proceeding under the FTC Act, 0:15:27.360 --> 0:15:30.000 and really rang more like a consumer protection action than 0:15:30.040 --> 0:15:31.640 it did an anti trust case. 0:15:31.720 --> 0:15:33.240 So that in and of. 0:15:33.200 --> 0:15:37.040 Itself begs the question would a new FTC have brought 0:15:37.080 --> 0:15:39.960 that case that way? And we know that Commissioners Holyoake 0:15:40.000 --> 0:15:43.920 and Fergus and the Republican Commissioners commissioners there now refuse 0:15:44.000 --> 0:15:47.240 themselves from the vote to authorize that lawsuit. So that 0:15:47.280 --> 0:15:49.520 makes us scratcher heads a little bit here, and you know, 0:15:49.600 --> 0:15:52.400 it makes us wonder is that suit a mended perhaps 0:15:52.400 --> 0:15:52.920 in some way? 0:15:53.040 --> 0:15:56.560 Is it settled in some way? You know that that that. 0:15:56.600 --> 0:15:58.840 Is different than the course that's been plotted by Chair 0:15:58.960 --> 0:16:02.080 con and those voted in favor of the suit in September. 0:16:02.480 --> 0:16:04.080 It seems to be that could be the case. But 0:16:04.160 --> 0:16:07.560 you know, we know that that Commissioner Hollyoaks was supportive 0:16:07.640 --> 0:16:10.920 of action against PBMs when she was a solicitor general 0:16:10.960 --> 0:16:13.520 in Utah. That's not a not an issue that that 0:16:13.520 --> 0:16:17.080 that she's basically always a lot of support over FORPBM. 0:16:17.160 --> 0:16:20.720 She absolutely hasn't done that. So, you know, I think 0:16:20.720 --> 0:16:23.080 the question becomes, what does this suit look like as 0:16:23.080 --> 0:16:23.760 time goes on? 0:16:23.920 --> 0:16:24.200 Here? 0:16:24.760 --> 0:16:26.720 Is it something that maybe takes a new form at 0:16:26.760 --> 0:16:29.600 the FTC? Is it something that might be punted to Congress? 0:16:29.640 --> 0:16:32.080 You know, because there has been this bipartisan kind of 0:16:32.120 --> 0:16:35.160 feeling that PBMs aren't operating in a way that's good 0:16:35.200 --> 0:16:35.960 for consumers. 0:16:36.000 --> 0:16:37.480 So those are big questions. 0:16:37.480 --> 0:16:40.040 And we know DJ you know, they're they're looking at 0:16:40.120 --> 0:16:43.480 United Health, or had been for some time. News reports indicate, 0:16:43.560 --> 0:16:46.480 you know, so is that perhaps a reframing of things 0:16:46.520 --> 0:16:49.360 as an issue about vertical consolidation versus kind of this 0:16:49.440 --> 0:16:54.040 consumer protection guys that the suit was brought under in September, 0:16:54.160 --> 0:16:56.600 So that that's one instance, Jen, And you know, another 0:16:56.720 --> 0:16:59.120 you know, I'm coming to mind is the dog's recent 0:16:59.160 --> 0:17:01.960 action against v set too, where there's a ledge monopolization 0:17:02.040 --> 0:17:03.160 in the debit card space. 0:17:03.280 --> 0:17:07.440 So for years now, for years, for years, right, I was. 0:17:07.720 --> 0:17:09.560 Gonna say that Visa has been in and out of 0:17:09.600 --> 0:17:12.360 anti trust issues for at least two decades. 0:17:12.359 --> 0:17:12.760 At this point. 0:17:13.000 --> 0:17:15.760 When I started practicing, I was working on a credit card. 0:17:15.880 --> 0:17:20.480 Absolutely, and it's still going on in terms of damages. 0:17:20.600 --> 0:17:23.960 So you know that that to me, you know, really 0:17:24.040 --> 0:17:26.480 says that, you know, action in this space from an 0:17:26.480 --> 0:17:29.919 anti trust perspective. It's not a democratic or a Republican issue. 0:17:29.960 --> 0:17:34.040 It has happened under both sides of the aisle here, 0:17:34.080 --> 0:17:36.760 if you will. So you know whether again, whether or 0:17:36.800 --> 0:17:39.680 not there's an appetite to perhaps settle that case a 0:17:39.760 --> 0:17:42.160 little bit faster on the Trump administration, that's. 0:17:42.000 --> 0:17:42.680 A question mark. 0:17:42.680 --> 0:17:44.960 But we can't also forget that, you know, a move 0:17:45.040 --> 0:17:47.240 to block the proposed merger of Visa and Platt in 0:17:47.280 --> 0:17:50.640 twenty twenty that came from the Trump administration. So really, 0:17:50.720 --> 0:17:53.000 Visa is not on this favorites list there either, if 0:17:53.040 --> 0:17:55.120 you will, under a Trump two oh two point zero, 0:17:55.119 --> 0:17:57.440 we think. So that's just a couple of examples there 0:17:57.440 --> 0:17:58.440 that I think we're looking at. 0:17:58.520 --> 0:18:00.320 Yeah, now, I'll tell you it's so fun need to me, 0:18:00.400 --> 0:18:03.320 because they're both such complicated industries, meaning the way they 0:18:03.320 --> 0:18:06.520 operate credit cards aren't necessarily complicated to a consumer. But 0:18:06.600 --> 0:18:09.200 actually the way it all works, right is complicated. 0:18:09.240 --> 0:18:11.120 So many players. You don't see, so many. 0:18:10.920 --> 0:18:13.439 Players, and what PBMs do. Who knows what PBMs do? 0:18:13.560 --> 0:18:14.640 I still don't completely. 0:18:14.760 --> 0:18:17.120 I wish I could explain it all to you clearly right now, 0:18:17.160 --> 0:18:18.240 but I'm still working on it. 0:18:18.640 --> 0:18:21.040 When when it's so complicated, it seems to me is 0:18:21.080 --> 0:18:23.919 so susceptible to sort of bad practices, you know. 0:18:24.040 --> 0:18:28.959 Yes, Yes, it's intentionally opaque, is what I like to say, intentionally. 0:18:28.880 --> 0:18:29.840 Yeah, exactly. 0:18:30.640 --> 0:18:32.919 Well, let's talk about AI, because that's another area we 0:18:33.000 --> 0:18:35.520 hear about a lot these days. And I know you're 0:18:35.560 --> 0:18:38.159