2024

[a fan]

Old Salt was just off camera. Couldn’t get a word in edgewise….he came to Fanlax to prosecute his case. Skadden wanted no part of him….anyone hear that Biden blocked the acquisition?

a merger challenge unlike any other she had seen in her career -- I'll say. That's my point.

her takeaway -- "...this just adds to the uncertainties that US companies face."

No. It's adds to the uncertainty that MONOPOLIES face, OS. Regular ol' businesses like mine will NEVER have to deal with the FTC. I can't even picture what it would look like if an alcohol company owned 80% of the market. But I do know if that ever happened, my 25 year old successful business would disappear, along with all the jobs we've created.

So yes, the FTC is FINALLY trying to keep the very monopolies that your family face every freaking day, from getting bigger. Past FTC's have waved these monopolies through, because the US Senate is on the take, as is our POTUS, as is the FTC itself.

She's trying to change that. Something that you already admitted that you support, complaining about monopolies hurting your family's biz....just not here, because you own stock.

M&A at this level? NEVER means good things for anyone but stockholders. Fewer jobs. Less competition. Higher prices.

[a fan]

I wonder who Trump's prospective FTC chairperson is ? Elections certainly do have consequences.

That's easy. Whoever donates the most and gets to his boot to lick it fastest.

Which is reason 1,304 why you support Trump, but tell the forum you don't. Every day, the list of Trump policies you like grows longer.


Yet you won't vote for him. Sure you won't.

[old salt]

You simply want more money, and don't care how it happens......I want innovation and fair competition in our markets. Big difference.

I want groundbreaking, innovation companies to be allowed to grow & develop without arbitrary & capricious govt interference, which stifles & delays innovation & growth.

If Illumina's acquisition had gone through without delay, the cancer test would have FDA approval by now & would be widely available covered by Medicare, Medicaid & Health Insurers. On their own, Grail is hoping for FDA approval by 2026, at the earliest. Grail would not exist had Illumina not founded it then spun it off.

How. Tell the forum what the firetruck an acquisition has ANYTHING to do with FDA approval. You still haven't told us how it is you think that works. You're telling us that 1+1= elephant.

And again: if it's THAT important to acquire Grail? Sell of other sectors. You are GASLIGHTING, and want your money. No one is buying it, not matter how many times you try this sales pitch.

3 year delay due to litigation

Yeah, that's not an answer. Sorry. Try again. If you believe this stuff, it should be EASY to make your case. A paragraph at best.

Litigation has nothing to do with FDA approval process...unless the litigation was about the safety and efficacy of a drug under review it wouldn't remotely matter to the FDA who was going to end up owning the drug.

Likewise, only an idiot would stall from the corporate side of a pending FDA approval. That would hurt valuation and any other metric shareholders care about and reward CEO's for accomplishing. Not a chance.

You're right, a fan, Salty's gaslighting here again.

Question is, why?

Because I believe what the FTC Judge said when he first examined the case, before Khan overruled him.
Grail wanted the merger & argued that it would help them get a MCED test to market sooner.

https://globalcompetitionreview.com/gcr ... down-grail
ALJ asks if FTC is trying to slow down Grail

by Ben Remaly, 09 June 2022

The administrative law judge overseeing the Federal Trade Commission’s challenge to Illumina/Grail has questioned if the government is looking to stymie Grail and allow other cancer-screening tests to reach the market.

During closing arguments of the full hearing on Wednesday, FTC administrative law judge D Michael Chappell said that Grail is currently far ahead of the competition because it is the only company selling multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood tests.

“The government's position is we need to hold back Grail and let these others come around the track and catch them,'' Chappell said. “Is that not what you're trying to do with this case?”

Illumina and Grail say their tie-up will help the latter clear obstacles to production scale-up, regulatory approval and insurance reimbursement.

They contend the commission’s definition of a relevant antitrust market is far too speculative, urging Judge Chappell to limit his analysis to Galleri because it is the only one actually being sold.

Judge Chappell pushed FTC counsel on its market definition on Wednesday, asking how it could still be a “level playing field” if Grail has already run halfway around the track. He questioned why Grail must now stop after it was the one that got to the market first.

Judge Chappell also questioned commission counsel on its contention that Illumina will be incentivised to harm Grail’s rivals if it is allowed to keep control of the smaller company. The commission has argued that, as a company designed to maximise profits for shareholders, Illumina will now have the incentive not to entirely deny its services to Grail’s competition, but to act as a clog.

Judge Chappell noted that Illumina already had a 12% stake – or “a pretty good chunk” – of Grail, but it has so far not been accused of clogging up its sequencing services for Grail’s rivals.

David Marriott, counsel to Illumina at Cravath Swaine & Moore, added to the race analogy during his closing by arguing that Grail is the only company on the track competing right now.
“The others are at home. They're in the practice field. They're stretching,” Marriott said.

Judge Chappell asked Marriott about FTC counsel’s argument that the race should include any company that is researching and developing MCED tests, not just selling them.
Marriott said that there is only one track and it is not clear if any other companies will ever join the race.
“The mere fact that people are working on it, while important in some sense, is not a thing of which antitrust markets are made,” he added.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Old Salt was just off camera. Couldn’t get a word in edgewise….he came to Fanlax to prosecute his case. Skadden wanted no part of him….anyone hear that Biden blocked the acquisition?

a merger challenge unlike any other she had seen in her career -- I'll say. That's my point.

her takeaway -- "...this just adds to the uncertainties that US companies face."

No. It's adds to the uncertainty that MONOPOLIES face, OS. Regular ol' businesses like mine will NEVER have to deal with the FTC. I can't even picture what it would look like if an alcohol company owned 80% of the market. But I do know if that ever happened, my 25 year old successful business would disappear, along with all the jobs we've created.

So yes, the FTC is FINALLY trying to keep the very monopolies that your family face every freaking day, from getting bigger. Past FTC's have waved these monopolies through, because the US Senate is on the take, as is our POTUS, as is the FTC itself.

She's trying to change that. Something that you already admitted that you support, complaining about monopolies hurting your family's biz....just not here, because you own stock.

M&A at this level? NEVER means good things for anyone but stockholders. Fewer jobs. Less competition. Higher prices.

Exactly. The deal that was in limbo for 18 months involved a company with a product and process that every semiconductor made on the planet uses. 100% of all semiconductors use its products. It got through the regulatory approval process. These things are often cases by case and are often things nobody has seen before that’s why both sides build and argue a case with supporting data and considerations. Illumina could very well stifle innovation and competition…..that is what the judges determined and the “fix” was not the answer this time.

[old salt]

Old Salt was just off camera. Couldn’t get a word in edgewise….he came to Fanlax to prosecute his case. Skadden wanted no part of him….anyone hear that Biden blocked the acquisition?

a merger challenge unlike any other she had seen in her career -- I'll say. That's my point.

her takeaway -- "...this just adds to the uncertainties that US companies face."

No. It's adds to the uncertainty that MONOPOLIES face, OS. Regular ol' businesses like mine will NEVER have to deal with the FTC. I can't even picture what it would look like if an alcohol company owned 80% of the market. But I do know if that ever happened, my 25 year old successful business would disappear, along with all the jobs we've created.

So yes, the FTC is FINALLY trying to keep the very monopolies that your family face every freaking day, from getting bigger. Past FTC's have waved these monopolies through, because the US Senate is on the take, as is our POTUS, as is the FTC itself.

She's trying to change that. Something that you already admitted that you support, complaining about monopolies hurting your family's biz....just not here, because you own stock.

M&A at this level? NEVER means good things for anyone but stockholders. Fewer jobs. Less competition. Higher prices.

Exactly. The deal that was in limbo for 18 months involved a company with a product and process that every semiconductor made on the planet uses. 100% of all semiconductors use its products. It got through the regulatory approval process. These things are often cases by case and are often things nobody has seen before that’s why both sides build and argue a case with supporting data and considerations. Illumina could very well stifle innovation and competition…..that is what the judges determined and the “fix” was not the answer this time.

Illumina had no incentive to inhibit other companies from developing MCED tests. Their remedy guaranteed open access to Grail's MCED technology. Illumina had incentive to sell their other equipment to all MCED users. The more the merrier for Illumina. The eventual global market would quickly become too large for just Grail-Illumina to supply.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Old Salt was just off camera. Couldn’t get a word in edgewise….he came to Fanlax to prosecute his case. Skadden wanted no part of him….anyone hear that Biden blocked the acquisition?

a merger challenge unlike any other she had seen in her career -- I'll say. That's my point.

her takeaway -- "...this just adds to the uncertainties that US companies face."

No. It's adds to the uncertainty that MONOPOLIES face, OS. Regular ol' businesses like mine will NEVER have to deal with the FTC. I can't even picture what it would look like if an alcohol company owned 80% of the market. But I do know if that ever happened, my 25 year old successful business would disappear, along with all the jobs we've created.

So yes, the FTC is FINALLY trying to keep the very monopolies that your family face every freaking day, from getting bigger. Past FTC's have waved these monopolies through, because the US Senate is on the take, as is our POTUS, as is the FTC itself.

She's trying to change that. Something that you already admitted that you support, complaining about monopolies hurting your family's biz....just not here, because you own stock.

M&A at this level? NEVER means good things for anyone but stockholders. Fewer jobs. Less competition. Higher prices.

Exactly. The deal that was in limbo for 18 months involved a company with a product and process that every semiconductor made on the planet uses. 100% of all semiconductors use its products. It got through the regulatory approval process. These things are often cases by case and are often things nobody has seen before that’s why both sides build and argue a case with supporting data and considerations. Illumina could very well stifle innovation and competition…..that is what the judges determined and the “fix” was not the answer this time.

Illumina had no incentive to inhibit other companies from developing MCED tests. Their remedy guaranteed open access to Grail's MCED technology. Illumina had incentive to sell their other equipment to all MCED users. The more the merrier for Illumina.

The judges didn’t agree with you.

[Typical Lax Dad]

[old salt]

Old Salt was just off camera. Couldn’t get a word in edgewise….he came to Fanlax to prosecute his case. Skadden wanted no part of him….anyone hear that Biden blocked the acquisition?

a merger challenge unlike any other she had seen in her career -- I'll say. That's my point.

her takeaway -- "...this just adds to the uncertainties that US companies face."

No. It's adds to the uncertainty that MONOPOLIES face, OS. Regular ol' businesses like mine will NEVER have to deal with the FTC. I can't even picture what it would look like if an alcohol company owned 80% of the market. But I do know if that ever happened, my 25 year old successful business would disappear, along with all the jobs we've created.

So yes, the FTC is FINALLY trying to keep the very monopolies that your family face every freaking day, from getting bigger. Past FTC's have waved these monopolies through, because the US Senate is on the take, as is our POTUS, as is the FTC itself.

She's trying to change that. Something that you already admitted that you support, complaining about monopolies hurting your family's biz....just not here, because you own stock.

M&A at this level? NEVER means good things for anyone but stockholders. Fewer jobs. Less competition. Higher prices.

Exactly. The deal that was in limbo for 18 months involved a company with a product and process that every semiconductor made on the planet uses. 100% of all semiconductors use its products. It got through the regulatory approval process. These things are often cases by case and are often things nobody has seen before that’s why both sides build and argue a case with supporting data and considerations. Illumina could very well stifle innovation and competition…..that is what the judges determined and the “fix” was not the answer this time.

Illumina had no incentive to inhibit other companies from developing MCED tests. Their remedy guaranteed open access to Grail's MCED technology. Illumina had incentive to sell their other equipment to all MCED users. The more the merrier for Illumina.

The judges didn’t agree with you.

The FTC (subject matter expert) Judge did.
The 5th Circuit (non-subject matter) Judge could not distinguish this product from widgets.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Old Salt was just off camera. Couldn’t get a word in edgewise….he came to Fanlax to prosecute his case. Skadden wanted no part of him….anyone hear that Biden blocked the acquisition?

a merger challenge unlike any other she had seen in her career -- I'll say. That's my point.

her takeaway -- "...this just adds to the uncertainties that US companies face."

No. It's adds to the uncertainty that MONOPOLIES face, OS. Regular ol' businesses like mine will NEVER have to deal with the FTC. I can't even picture what it would look like if an alcohol company owned 80% of the market. But I do know if that ever happened, my 25 year old successful business would disappear, along with all the jobs we've created.

So yes, the FTC is FINALLY trying to keep the very monopolies that your family face every freaking day, from getting bigger. Past FTC's have waved these monopolies through, because the US Senate is on the take, as is our POTUS, as is the FTC itself.

She's trying to change that. Something that you already admitted that you support, complaining about monopolies hurting your family's biz....just not here, because you own stock.

M&A at this level? NEVER means good things for anyone but stockholders. Fewer jobs. Less competition. Higher prices.

Exactly. The deal that was in limbo for 18 months involved a company with a product and process that every semiconductor made on the planet uses. 100% of all semiconductors use its products. It got through the regulatory approval process. These things are often cases by case and are often things nobody has seen before that’s why both sides build and argue a case with supporting data and considerations. Illumina could very well stifle innovation and competition…..that is what the judges determined and the “fix” was not the answer this time.

Illumina had no incentive to inhibit other companies from developing MCED tests. Their remedy guaranteed open access to Grail's MCED technology. Illumina had incentive to sell their other equipment to all MCED users. The more the merrier for Illumina.

The judges didn’t agree with you.

The FTC (subject matter expert) Judge did.
The 5th Circuit (non-subject matter) Judge could not distinguish this product from widgets.

So the acquisition was consummated?

[old salt]

Wow. That should make you & afan wonder how such a poorly run company can hold onto an 80% market share.
They're so inept, they're a threat to no one.

A lot has transpired in the 14 mos since that video was made -- Ichan's proxy takeover attempt failed. Only 1 of his 3 BoD candidates was elected.
The BoD still fired the CEO, but otherwise, Ichan's magic did not work.

Faced with dealing with the Biden/Khan FTC, do you agree with Ichan that inviting Obama & hiring DEI & ESG staff was counter-productive ?

[old salt]

Old Salt was just off camera. Couldn’t get a word in edgewise….he came to Fanlax to prosecute his case. Skadden wanted no part of him….anyone hear that Biden blocked the acquisition?

a merger challenge unlike any other she had seen in her career -- I'll say. That's my point.

her takeaway -- "...this just adds to the uncertainties that US companies face."

No. It's adds to the uncertainty that MONOPOLIES face, OS. Regular ol' businesses like mine will NEVER have to deal with the FTC. I can't even picture what it would look like if an alcohol company owned 80% of the market. But I do know if that ever happened, my 25 year old successful business would disappear, along with all the jobs we've created.

So yes, the FTC is FINALLY trying to keep the very monopolies that your family face every freaking day, from getting bigger. Past FTC's have waved these monopolies through, because the US Senate is on the take, as is our POTUS, as is the FTC itself.

She's trying to change that. Something that you already admitted that you support, complaining about monopolies hurting your family's biz....just not here, because you own stock.

M&A at this level? NEVER means good things for anyone but stockholders. Fewer jobs. Less competition. Higher prices.

Exactly. The deal that was in limbo for 18 months involved a company with a product and process that every semiconductor made on the planet uses. 100% of all semiconductors use its products. It got through the regulatory approval process. These things are often cases by case and are often things nobody has seen before that’s why both sides build and argue a case with supporting data and considerations. Illumina could very well stifle innovation and competition…..that is what the judges determined and the “fix” was not the answer this time.

Illumina had no incentive to inhibit other companies from developing MCED tests. Their remedy guaranteed open access to Grail's MCED technology. Illumina had incentive to sell their other equipment to all MCED users. The more the merrier for Illumina.

The judges didn’t agree with you.

The FTC (subject matter expert) Judge did.
The 5th Circuit (non-subject matter) Judge could not distinguish this product from widgets.

So the acquisition was consummated?

No. Grail is still slogging along on their own, waiting for some better connected competitor to gobble them up.

Illumina still owns a 14.5% stake in Grail, & we ILMN shareholders received 1 sh of GRAL for every 6 sh of ILMN we hold.

If the MCED test works, gets FDA & EC approval, then makes it to the global market --we'll recoup much of our lost valuation.

[old salt]

So yes, the FTC is FINALLY trying to keep the very monopolies that your family face every freaking day, from getting bigger. Past FTC's have waved these monopolies through, because the US Senate is on the take, as is our POTUS, as is the FTC itself.

She's trying to change that. Something that you already admitted that you support, complaining about monopolies hurting your family's biz....just not here, because you own stock.

M&A at this level? NEVER means good things for anyone but stockholders. Fewer jobs. Less competition. Higher prices.

Apples & Oranges. Hugely different markets. How many local family business Genomics companies exist ?

It's too late for the FTC to help the little guys like us. I showed you the 10 chains that already monopolize retail grocery.
The small Independent grocers don't stand a chance unless they have a niche & a long standing, loyal customer base.
The big chains have won. That's what coined the term "food deserts". How many small family independent grocers can you find ?

[old salt]

I wonder who Trump's prospective FTC chairperson is ? Elections certainly do have consequences.

That's easy. Whoever donates the most and gets to his boot to lick it fastest.

Which is reason 1,304 why you support Trump, but tell the forum you don't. Every day, the list of Trump policies you like grows longer.

Yet you won't vote for him. Sure you won't.

Yeah. I'm the first Conservative who wants less Fed govt regulation. Trump's the first (R) to champion that.

Now you'ii tell me about all the Trump regs that benefit the (R)'s. yada, yada, yada.

Somehow you'll work tariffs in. Which you should favor -- they're just your VAT applied to imports.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Any mention of that Jihadist Khan that you blame?

[old salt]

Yup. Flynn in charge of the military. Bannon as Sec’y of State (hey, I did my time; where’s my reward?)

While Trump will have immunity for all the crimes he commits, his underlings will not. But Trump can pardon anyone and everyone who works for him. It will simply be one of the forms you sign on your last day of employment – a blanket pardon from the dotard himself. Signed in illegible sharpie.

How will Flynn be in charge of the military ? What office will he hold ?

Senate confirmation for Bannon or Flynn ? Trump threw them both out of the WH early in his first term.

They are useless to him inside the govt. More useful in MAGA world.

Chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.

If the Republicans win the Senate, they will approve anyone Trump nominates.

Tell us exactly how Flynn would become CJCS. What would the process be ? Would Congress have to approve his 4rh star ?

Trump makes the appointment. The Senate approves. End of story.

Not sure what you are getting at re the 4th star. I see nothing that requires the individual have four stars.

CJCS is the highest-ranking and most senior military officer in the United States Armed Forces and the principal military advisor to the Presodent.
While The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff outranks all other commissioned officers, the chairman is prohibited by law from having operational command authority over the armed forces

[njbill]

The laws mean nothing to Trump or Flynn.

Alternatively, Trump could put Flynn in charge of a paramilitary force, like the Gestapo. In fact, I think Flynn would lead Trump’s Gestapo.

I know you think I am delusional and nuts to say this, but I really don’t think this is too far-fetched.

The good news (from my perspective) is that I still don’t think Trump is going to win. Yes, he has had a “good” week, but there is a long way to go in the campaign.

[SCLaxAttack]

It isn’t a long stretch to see where Trump would nominate LTG Michael Flynn, RET for SecDef and his younger brother GEN Charles Flynn for CJCS, placing the older Flynn in the chain of command directly under Trump and above all military branches, and the younger Flynn his top military adviser.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Good detail for anyone interested

[old salt]

It isn’t a long stretch to see where Trump would nominate LTG Michael Flynn, RET for SecDef and his younger brother GEN Charles Flynn for CJCS, placing the older Flynn in the chain of command directly under Trump and above all military branches, and the younger Flynn his top military adviser.

This is a joke, right ? Senate confirmation for SecDef would be impossible.

[old salt]

Good detail for anyone interested

This EC power grab should not just terrify any tech company. It should terrify any investor in any company the EC decides to go after, regardless of whether or not they even do business in the EU.