The Nation's Financial Condition

[Typical Lax Dad]

[Farfromgeneva]

Let’s see the financials or at least the profitability.

There is not enough competition in the economy. Adam Smith would be appalled. Events like this are intended to lessen competition and are bad for a capitalist system which assumes there will be competition.

Yep. It's why I keep saying: these aren't capitalists. These are members of selfish-ocracy. Whatever make them more money? That's what they're for.

Well actually individual actors within a capitalist system quite often seek anticompetitive goals but that doesn’t make them outside the capitalist system. Even with perfect complement and substitute products or services each business is still striving to maximize profits. It’s just the half asse letistlatige code with far too many distortions

[a fan]

Pivotal Week Ahead in Kroger-Albertsons Case After FTC Lands Early Blows
Kroger says it plans to lower prices by $1 billion if it completes the deal.

The company says it needs more scale to compete with Walmart and against a swarm of newer food retailers, including Trader Joe’s, discount chains such as Aldi and Lidl, and club stores such as Costco.

That is also the position of my brother's co-op, AWG, which is the largest co-op of independent grocers in the US.
Walmart, the big box stores & the case cutters are the monopolistic threat.

That's right. And we have Republicans screaming at her, calling her a DEI hire, DEMANDING that sh stop breaking up monopolies like WalMart.

Remember?

Or are you going to call her up and tell her just "not to break up the monopolies that Old Salt owns stock in".

Because what you are asking for here makes total sense.

You're misinformed. She's not going after Walmart.

I know. She would have if she was in charge 4o years ago when these monopolies were green lit by Reagan's deregulation spree.

You've already copped and agreed that these monopolies are bad for everyone by the top .01%er like you.

Leave it at that. Drop it. You're pretending to believe in stuff that you don't believe in because you want to argue.

[a fan]

Let’s see the financials or at least the profitability.

There is not enough competition in the economy. Adam Smith would be appalled. Events like this are intended to lessen competition and are bad for a capitalist system which assumes there will be competition.

Yep. It's why I keep saying: these aren't capitalists. These are members of selfish-ocracy. Whatever make them more money? That's what they're for.

Well actually individual actors within a capitalist system quite often seek anticompetitive goals but that doesn’t make them outside the capitalist system. Even with perfect complement and substitute products or services each business is still striving to maximize profits. It’s just the half asse letistlatige code with far too many distortions

The ENTIRE point to Capitalism is competition. It has no other feature.

If competition isn't needed, or leads to garbage outcomes? Then make it a government function.

[old salt]

Pivotal Week Ahead in Kroger-Albertsons Case After FTC Lands Early Blows
Kroger says it plans to lower prices by $1 billion if it completes the deal.

The company says it needs more scale to compete with Walmart and against a swarm of newer food retailers, including Trader Joe’s, discount chains such as Aldi and Lidl, and club stores such as Costco.

That is also the position of my brother's co-op, AWG, which is the largest co-op of independent grocers in the US.
Walmart, the big box stores & the case cutters are the monopolistic threat.

That's right. And we have Republicans screaming at her, calling her a DEI hire, DEMANDING that sh stop breaking up monopolies like WalMart.

Remember?

Or are you going to call her up and tell her just "not to break up the monopolies that Old Salt owns stock in".

Because what you are asking for here makes total sense.

You're misinformed. She's not going after Walmart.

I know. She would have if she was in charge 4o years ago when these monopolies were green lit by Reagan's deregulation spree.

You've already copped and agreed that these monopolies are bad for everyone by the top .01%er like you.

Leave it at that. Drop it. You're pretending to believe in stuff that you don't believe in because you want to argue.

No. I'm criticizing Khan for going after the wrong companies as monopolistic.
She should be going after Walmart & Sam's Club instead of Kroger & Albertsons / Pfizer & Moderna instead of Illumina & Grail.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/illumina-gr ... x_artPos=1

Illumina’s Antitrust Vindication

Europe’s high court rebukes regulators who blocked the Grail merger. Lina Khan, take note.

By The Editorial Board, Sept. 4, 2024

Mark another defeat for Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan, but this time it’s in Europe. Her scheme of enlisting foreign governments to stop U.S. mergers suffered a blow Tuesday when Europe’s high court ruled that regulators in Brussels exceeded their authority by blocking Illumina’s acquisition of cancer testing startup Grail.

The legal vindication arrives too late for Illumina, the U.S. gene-sequencing powerhouse, which spun off Grail as a stand-alone public company this summer to comply with government orders. It also offers little consolation to former Illumina CEO Francis deSouza, who lost his job after championing the acquisition.

The FTC sued to block the deal in March 2021, dubiously claiming Illumina would use its dominant gene-sequencing platform to undercut Grail’s potential rivals. Illumina had committed to providing its gene-sequencing services to competing startups on equivalent terms as Grail.

Worried it would lose in federal court, the FTC moved to dismiss its lawsuit and adjudicate the case in its administrative tribunal. Meantime, records obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show that the agency colluded with competition regulators in Brussels, as we have reported.

Because Grail had no sales in the European Union, its member states lacked authority to review the merger under their own laws. Brussels regulators lacked jurisdiction for the same reason. Yet the European Commission ignored its own laws by inviting member states to refer the transaction for review under Article 22 of its merger regulations. Article 22 lets countries propose transactions to the commission for review when their own governments lack jurisdiction.

Illumina closed the $7.1 billion acquisition despite FTC and European opposition. Although an FTC in-house judge ruled for Illumina, the Commission overruled him last March and ordered the company to divest Grail. Regulators in Brussels followed.

Investor pressure to spin off Grail increased after the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the FTC order. Hence, Illumina’s surrender and Grail spinoff.

But miracle of miracles, the European Court of Justice this week decreed that regulators in Brussels lacked jurisdiction to review the Illumina-Grail deal. The ruling will spare Illumina a $478 million penalty for closing the acquisition before securing regulatory approval. It could also make it harder for Ms. Khan to persuade her friends in Brussels to thwart U.S. mergers.

The FTC lacks the resources to challenge every acquisition Ms. Khan dislikes, and she knows the agency would lose most lawsuits in court under today’s prevailing consumer welfare standard. But Europe’s antitrust standards focus more on business size and market power, which is why the FTC has been looking to Brussels to squash U.S. deals.

The European Commission last year also invoked Article 22 to investigate Qualcomm’s purchase of Israeli chipmaker Autotalks, which the U.S. chip giant called off this year. Why are Western regulators trying to handicap their own companies in a global technological battle with Huawei, the Chinese chip giant? Illumina’s top rival is China’s BGI.

As for Grail, its market cap is now roughly $430 million, a fraction of Illumina’s offer. As a stand-alone company, Grail may face a longer road to obtain insurance coverage for its test, which can detect the 12 most deadly cancers with 76% accuracy. Ms. Khan may have prevailed in this case, but patients will lose.

[a fan]

No. I'm criticizing Khan for going after the wrong companies as monopolistic.
She should be going after Walmart & Sam's Club instead of Kroger & Albertsons / Pfizer & Moderna instead of Illumina & Grail.

Buffalo bagels. She should go after all monopoly cases she thinks she can win. And you know it.

She can't go after all of them....but if you put me in charge? The FTC would have 1,000 of the best lawyers bringing WallMart, Facebook, and every other obvious monopoly down one by one, and bring us back to the Post WWII days of actual competition. And America would boom as a result.


This would NEVER have hit your radar if you didn't have a massive stock holding, OS. and you're wasting everyone's time saying otherwise.

What you are telling us should happen is that we should have the Federal Government buy Illumina and Grail.

If removing all competition is the only way to save lives as you're claiming? The obvious thing to do is have .gov labs run it.

Problem solved.

But that's not what you want. You want more money, and don't care how. Just like every other monopolist.

You're arguing just to argue.

[old salt]

No. I'm criticizing Khan for going after the wrong companies as monopolistic.
She should be going after Walmart & Sam's Club instead of Kroger & Albertsons / Pfizer & Moderna instead of Illumina & Grail.

Buffalo bagels. She should go after all monopoly cases she thinks she can win. And you know it.

She can't go after all of them....but if you put me in charge? The FTC would have 1,000 of the best lawyers bringing WallMart, Facebook, and every other obvious monopoly down one by one, and bring us back to the Post WWII days of actual competition. And America would boom as a result.

This would NEVER have hit your radar if you didn't have a massive stock holding, OS. and you're wasting everyone's time saying otherwise.

What you are telling us should happen is that we should have the Federal Government buy Illumina and Grail.

If removing all competition is the only way to save lives as you're claiming? The obvious thing to do is have .gov labs run it.

Problem solved.

But that's not what you want. You want more money, and don't care how. Just like every other monopolist.

You're arguing just to argue.

I've been following the Kroger-Albertsons merger in conversations with my brother separate & apart from the attack on Illumina.
You are aware that the European High Court just overturned the EC's meddling in the Illumina-Grail merger. Cancelling the $478 million fine & ordering the EC to pay Illumina's legal costs. The EUroburghers can choke that one down, while their citizens' cancers go undetected.
Illumina was prepared to invest the capital necessary to bring Grail's cancer test to market. Private capital has yet to step in.

[Farfromgeneva]

Let’s see the financials or at least the profitability.

There is not enough competition in the economy. Adam Smith would be appalled. Events like this are intended to lessen competition and are bad for a capitalist system which assumes there will be competition.

Yep. It's why I keep saying: these aren't capitalists. These are members of selfish-ocracy. Whatever make them more money? That's what they're for.

Well actually individual actors within a capitalist system quite often seek anticompetitive goals but that doesn’t make them outside the capitalist system. Even with perfect complement and substitute products or services each business is still striving to maximize profits. It’s just the half asse letistlatige code with far too many distortions

The ENTIRE point to Capitalism is competition. It has no other feature.

If competition isn't needed, or leads to garbage outcomes? Then make it a government function.

Yes but you seem to forget the mindset of the competitors in competitions. I never said competition isn’t needed in fact you can find numerous comments I’ve made here that one of our biggest failings is not enforcing antitrust for decades.

But…the idea that the actors need to agree to some social contract of fairness and avoiding dominance doesn’t make any sense/. The participants in this game of price discovery all want to have monopolies/. Surely you get this. Don’t get confused by the headline of the “free hand” that’s not what it means that everyone will have in the spirit it of absolute perpetual competition.

I think you need to refine your argument here quite a bit on this though. And particularly the binary demand for either your platonic theory of capitalism or absolute govt control is not realistic in general throughout time .

[MDlaxfan76]

Let’s see the financials or at least the profitability.

There is not enough competition in the economy. Adam Smith would be appalled. Events like this are intended to lessen competition and are bad for a capitalist system which assumes there will be competition.

Yep. It's why I keep saying: these aren't capitalists. These are members of selfish-ocracy. Whatever make them more money? That's what they're for.

Well actually individual actors within a capitalist system quite often seek anticompetitive goals but that doesn’t make them outside the capitalist system. Even with perfect complement and substitute products or services each business is still striving to maximize profits. It’s just the half asse letistlatige code with far too many distortions

The ENTIRE point to Capitalism is competition. It has no other feature.

If competition isn't needed, or leads to garbage outcomes? Then make it a government function.

Yes but you seem to forget the mindset of the competitors in competitions. I never said competition isn’t needed in fact you can find numerous comments I’ve made here that one of our biggest failings is not enforcing antitrust for decades.

But…the idea that the actors need to agree to some social contract of fairness and avoiding dominance doesn’t make any sense/. The participants in this game of price discovery all want to have monopolies/. Surely you get this. Don’t get confused by the headline of the “free hand” that’s not what it means that everyone will have in the spirit it of absolute perpetual competition.

I think you need to refine your argument here quite a bit on this though. And particularly the binary demand for either your platonic theory of capitalism or absolute govt control is not realistic in general throughout time .

Hang on, government regulation is not binary other than zero not zero.

Capitalism cannot thrive without government enforced 'rules of the road'.

Enforcement matters because you are correct, of course, that individual actors will nearly always seek optimal benefit to themselves. They "will" seek dominance.

Sure, regulations and enforcement are as well imperfect, but they are nevertheless essential.

Or am I missing the point of this discussion?

[Typical Lax Dad]

[Typical Lax Dad]

[a fan]

No. I'm criticizing Khan for going after the wrong companies as monopolistic.
She should be going after Walmart & Sam's Club instead of Kroger & Albertsons / Pfizer & Moderna instead of Illumina & Grail.

Buffalo bagels. She should go after all monopoly cases she thinks she can win. And you know it.

She can't go after all of them....but if you put me in charge? The FTC would have 1,000 of the best lawyers bringing WallMart, Facebook, and every other obvious monopoly down one by one, and bring us back to the Post WWII days of actual competition. And America would boom as a result.

This would NEVER have hit your radar if you didn't have a massive stock holding, OS. and you're wasting everyone's time saying otherwise.

What you are telling us should happen is that we should have the Federal Government buy Illumina and Grail.

If removing all competition is the only way to save lives as you're claiming? The obvious thing to do is have .gov labs run it.

Problem solved.

But that's not what you want. You want more money, and don't care how. Just like every other monopolist.

You're arguing just to argue.

I've been following the Kroger-Albertsons merger in conversations with my brother separate & apart from the attack on Illumina.
You are aware that the European High Court just overturned the EC's meddling in the Illumina-Grail merger. Cancelling the $478 million fine & ordering the EC to pay Illumina's legal costs. The EUroburghers can choke that one down, while their citizens' cancers go undetected.
Illumina was prepared to invest the capital necessary to bring Grail's cancer test to market. Private capital has yet to step in.

Great. Have the Government buy Illumina. Problem solved. We have government R&D labs working at State Universities all over America. Sell it to them, and they'll do the work since it's SO important to detect cancer. Now the market competition that you think is interfering in their work is removed....problem solved.

You don't want that, because your priority isn't saving lives as you claim.....you just want money.

And you know it.

[OCanada]

My first class at Uni was Economics 101. Monday @ 8:00 AM. It was taught by Christ. While sitting through the lecture i thought what i was hearing was not at all how decision making worked. I dropped the class that afternoon.

We do not have an economic system that optimizes choices that are representative of what the public wants. We have an economic based system that limits options etc. in any event competition is a hotly debated concept. One view of the current condition.

https://thinkr.org/newsletter/the-myth- ... ompetition

[old salt]

No. I'm criticizing Khan for going after the wrong companies as monopolistic.
She should be going after Walmart & Sam's Club instead of Kroger & Albertsons / Pfizer & Moderna instead of Illumina & Grail.

Buffalo bagels. She should go after all monopoly cases she thinks she can win. And you know it.

She can't go after all of them....but if you put me in charge? The FTC would have 1,000 of the best lawyers bringing WallMart, Facebook, and every other obvious monopoly down one by one, and bring us back to the Post WWII days of actual competition. And America would boom as a result.

This would NEVER have hit your radar if you didn't have a massive stock holding, OS. and you're wasting everyone's time saying otherwise.

What you are telling us should happen is that we should have the Federal Government buy Illumina and Grail.

If removing all competition is the only way to save lives as you're claiming? The obvious thing to do is have .gov labs run it.

Problem solved.

But that's not what you want. You want more money, and don't care how. Just like every other monopolist.

You're arguing just to argue.

I've been following the Kroger-Albertsons merger in conversations with my brother separate & apart from the attack on Illumina.
You are aware that the European High Court just overturned the EC's meddling in the Illumina-Grail merger. Cancelling the $478 million fine & ordering the EC to pay Illumina's legal costs. The EUroburghers can choke that one down, while their citizens' cancers go undetected.
Illumina was prepared to invest the capital necessary to bring Grail's cancer test to market. Private capital has yet to step in.

Great. Have the Government buy Illumina. Problem solved. We have government R&D labs working at State Universities all over America. Sell it to them, and they'll do the work since it's SO important to detect cancer. Now the market competition that you think is interfering in their work is removed....problem solved.

You don't want that, because your priority isn't saving lives as you claim.....you just want money.

And you know it.

...you don't even know the facts of the case. Grail is developing the cancer test, not Illumina.
No need for .govt to fund it. Private capital, in the form of Illumina was ready to fund it.
Illumina started Grail, then spun if off. It was logical for Grail to turn to Illumina when it needed the resources to bring the test to market asap.
This was the perfect case for .govt to maintain arms length & let the private sector work. .govt's role is to certify the test, not fund it's development.
Your Socialist instinct is to have .govt do everything. So much for Biden's cancer moonshot. Madame Khan shot it down.

[Typical Lax Dad]

No. I'm criticizing Khan for going after the wrong companies as monopolistic.
She should be going after Walmart & Sam's Club instead of Kroger & Albertsons / Pfizer & Moderna instead of Illumina & Grail.

Buffalo bagels. She should go after all monopoly cases she thinks she can win. And you know it.

She can't go after all of them....but if you put me in charge? The FTC would have 1,000 of the best lawyers bringing WallMart, Facebook, and every other obvious monopoly down one by one, and bring us back to the Post WWII days of actual competition. And America would boom as a result.

This would NEVER have hit your radar if you didn't have a massive stock holding, OS. and you're wasting everyone's time saying otherwise.

What you are telling us should happen is that we should have the Federal Government buy Illumina and Grail.

If removing all competition is the only way to save lives as you're claiming? The obvious thing to do is have .gov labs run it.

Problem solved.

But that's not what you want. You want more money, and don't care how. Just like every other monopolist.

You're arguing just to argue.

I've been following the Kroger-Albertsons merger in conversations with my brother separate & apart from the attack on Illumina.
You are aware that the European High Court just overturned the EC's meddling in the Illumina-Grail merger. Cancelling the $478 million fine & ordering the EC to pay Illumina's legal costs. The EUroburghers can choke that one down, while their citizens' cancers go undetected.
Illumina was prepared to invest the capital necessary to bring Grail's cancer test to market. Private capital has yet to step in.

Great. Have the Government buy Illumina. Problem solved. We have government R&D labs working at State Universities all over America. Sell it to them, and they'll do the work since it's SO important to detect cancer. Now the market competition that you think is interfering in their work is removed....problem solved.

You don't want that, because your priority isn't saving lives as you claim.....you just want money.

And you know it.

...you don't even know the facts of the case. Grail is developing the cancer test, not Illumina.
No need for .govt to fund it. Private capital, in the form of Illumina was ready to fund it.
Illumina started Grail, then spun if off. It was logical for Grail to turn to Illumina when it needed the resources to bring the test to market asap.
This was the perfect case for .govt to maintain arms length & let the private sector work. .govt's role is to certify the test, not fund it's development.
Your Socialist instinct is to have .govt do everything. So much for Biden's cancer moonshot. Madame Khan shot it down.

Grail isn’t doing research anymore?

[a fan]

...you don't even know the facts of the case. Grail is developing the cancer test, not Illumina.
No need for .govt to fund it. Private capital, in the form of Illumina was ready to fund it.
Illumina started Grail, then spun if off. It was logical for Grail to turn to Illumina when it needed the resources to bring the test to market asap.

We already asked this simple question, and you bailed from the conversation because you couldn't answer the question: what did the the prevented merger keep Illumina from doing? Or Grail?

You can't answer the question, other than to make unfounded claims. Grail can EASILY do what it needs to do on its own. So can Illumina. The idea that they simply can't function as a company UNLESS we let them command MORE than their already absurd 80% market ownership is absurd. If Grail needs money? Go get it, just like my company has to. Welcome to the free market.

What you are complaining about is your stock price. Transparently so. And I don't get why you think you're convincing anyone here (even yourself) that this conversation has anything to do with anything other than Old Salt's money. You're plenty rich. Let it go.

This was the perfect case for .govt to maintain arms length & let the private sector work. .govt's role is to certify the test, not fund it's development.
Your Socialist instinct is to have .govt do everything.

You're doing it again. Stop being rude, and stop lying.....you know I'm the private sector, and you are the socialist sector......your house, your job, your wife, your pension, your future, your legacy....all built on socialism.

You can play this game with your friends, OS. But everyone here knows you're the product of socialism. And for whatever reason, you're the ONLY poster here who is ashamed that Old Salt is a product of socialism. I think it's great. But your media feed has pumped so much hate and self-loathing into you, that you're on a forum telling us that socialism is evil. Stop wasting your time and mine with this stuff. Own your career and life decisions.

[a fan]

No. I'm criticizing Khan for going after the wrong companies as monopolistic.
She should be going after Walmart & Sam's Club instead of Kroger & Albertsons / Pfizer & Moderna instead of Illumina & Grail.

Buffalo bagels. She should go after all monopoly cases she thinks she can win. And you know it.

She can't go after all of them....but if you put me in charge? The FTC would have 1,000 of the best lawyers bringing WallMart, Facebook, and every other obvious monopoly down one by one, and bring us back to the Post WWII days of actual competition. And America would boom as a result.

This would NEVER have hit your radar if you didn't have a massive stock holding, OS. and you're wasting everyone's time saying otherwise.

What you are telling us should happen is that we should have the Federal Government buy Illumina and Grail.

If removing all competition is the only way to save lives as you're claiming? The obvious thing to do is have .gov labs run it.

Problem solved.

But that's not what you want. You want more money, and don't care how. Just like every other monopolist.

You're arguing just to argue.

I've been following the Kroger-Albertsons merger in conversations with my brother separate & apart from the attack on Illumina.
You are aware that the European High Court just overturned the EC's meddling in the Illumina-Grail merger. Cancelling the $478 million fine & ordering the EC to pay Illumina's legal costs. The EUroburghers can choke that one down, while their citizens' cancers go undetected.
Illumina was prepared to invest the capital necessary to bring Grail's cancer test to market. Private capital has yet to step in.

Great. Have the Government buy Illumina. Problem solved. We have government R&D labs working at State Universities all over America. Sell it to them, and they'll do the work since it's SO important to detect cancer. Now the market competition that you think is interfering in their work is removed....problem solved.

You don't want that, because your priority isn't saving lives as you claim.....you just want money.

And you know it.

...you don't even know the facts of the case. Grail is developing the cancer test, not Illumina.
No need for .govt to fund it. Private capital, in the form of Illumina was ready to fund it.
Illumina started Grail, then spun if off. It was logical for Grail to turn to Illumina when it needed the resources to bring the test to market asap.
This was the perfect case for .govt to maintain arms length & let the private sector work. .govt's role is to certify the test, not fund it's development.
Your Socialist instinct is to have .govt do everything. So much for Biden's cancer moonshot. Madame Khan shot it down.

Grail isn’t doing research anymore?

Oh, they shut down, and went home "because" of Khan. How can they possibly run a business UNLESS OS gets what he wants?

[old salt]

...you don't even know the facts of the case. Grail is developing the cancer test, not Illumina.
No need for .govt to fund it. Private capital, in the form of Illumina was ready to fund it.
Illumina started Grail, then spun if off. It was logical for Grail to turn to Illumina when it needed the resources to bring the test to market asap.

We already asked this simple question, and you bailed from the conversation because you couldn't answer the question: what did the the prevented merger keep Illumina from doing? Or Grail?

You can't answer the question, other than to make unfounded claims. Grail can EASILY do what it needs to do on its own. So can Illumina. The idea that they simply can't function as a company UNLESS we let them command MORE than their already absurd 80% market ownership is absurd. If Grail needs money? Go get it, just like my company has to. Welcome to the free market.

I trust the WSJ's opinion on this more than I trust your socialist interpretation.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/illumina-gr ... x_artPos=1

As for Grail, its market cap is now roughly $430 million, a fraction of Illumina’s offer. As a stand-alone company, Grail may face a longer road to obtain insurance coverage for its test, which can detect the 12 most deadly cancers with 76% accuracy. Ms. Khan may have prevailed in this case, but patients will lose.

[a fan]

...you don't even know the facts of the case. Grail is developing the cancer test, not Illumina.
No need for .govt to fund it. Private capital, in the form of Illumina was ready to fund it.
Illumina started Grail, then spun if off. It was logical for Grail to turn to Illumina when it needed the resources to bring the test to market asap.

We already asked this simple question, and you bailed from the conversation because you couldn't answer the question: what did the the prevented merger keep Illumina from doing? Or Grail?

You can't answer the question, other than to make unfounded claims. Grail can EASILY do what it needs to do on its own. So can Illumina. The idea that they simply can't function as a company UNLESS we let them command MORE than their already absurd 80% market ownership is absurd. If Grail needs money? Go get it, just like my company has to. Welcome to the free market.

I trust the WSJ's opinion on this more than I trust your socialist interpretation.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/illumina-gr ... x_artPos=1

As for Grail, its market cap is now roughly $430 million, a fraction of Illumina’s offer. As a stand-alone company, Grail may face a longer road to obtain insurance coverage for its test, which can detect the 12 most deadly cancers with 76% accuracy. Ms. Khan may have prevailed in this case, but patients will lose.

Last chance to be kind. I'm not going to offer again. Stop with the petty name calling, and just have an adult conversation.

The WSJ reps you and your rich buddies. OF COURSE they're going to whine about not allowing a monopoly. "We can't get insurance". THAT is the excuse for not running their company? What a bunch of nonsense.

You and the WSJ don't care about what monopolies do, and have made that clear. You plainly don't understand or value what competition does, and understand that it's the ENTIRE point to capitalism.

You don't care that allowing the merger stifles future innovation as the CEO will make different choices as to what to do as a company. When you have that marketshare? The incentive to innovate further goes away, and you're just interested in maintaining your monopoly position, bilking customers of more money than a competitive market would allow.

But you get all this, and understand what WalMart did to the grocery industry. In short: you're gaslighting.

[Typical Lax Dad]

...you don't even know the facts of the case. Grail is developing the cancer test, not Illumina.
No need for .govt to fund it. Private capital, in the form of Illumina was ready to fund it.
Illumina started Grail, then spun if off. It was logical for Grail to turn to Illumina when it needed the resources to bring the test to market asap.

We already asked this simple question, and you bailed from the conversation because you couldn't answer the question: what did the the prevented merger keep Illumina from doing? Or Grail?

You can't answer the question, other than to make unfounded claims. Grail can EASILY do what it needs to do on its own. So can Illumina. The idea that they simply can't function as a company UNLESS we let them command MORE than their already absurd 80% market ownership is absurd. If Grail needs money? Go get it, just like my company has to. Welcome to the free market.

I trust the WSJ's opinion on this more than I trust your socialist interpretation.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/illumina-gr ... x_artPos=1

As for Grail, its market cap is now roughly $430 million, a fraction of Illumina’s offer. As a stand-alone company, Grail may face a longer road to obtain insurance coverage for its test, which can detect the 12 most deadly cancers with 76% accuracy. Ms. Khan may have prevailed in this case, but patients will lose.

Last chance to be kind. I'm not going to offer again. Stop with the petty name calling, and just have an adult conversation.

The WSJ reps you and your rich buddies. OF COURSE they're going to whine about not allowing a monopoly. "We can't get insurance". THAT is the excuse for not running their company? What a bunch of nonsense.

You and the WSJ don't care about what monopolies do, and have made that clear. You plainly don't understand or value what competition does, and understand that it's the ENTIRE point to capitalism.

You don't care that allowing the merger stifles future innovation as the CEO will make different choices as to what to do as a company. When you have that marketshare? The incentive to innovate further goes away, and you're just interested in maintaining your monopoly position, bilking customers of more money than a competitive market would allow.

But you get all this, and understand what WalMart did to the grocery industry. In short: you're gaslighting.

The global headquarters of Illumina in San Diego. PHOTO: MIKE BLAKE/REUTERS

Mark another defeat for Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan, but this time it’s in Europe. Her scheme of enlisting foreign governments to stop U.S. mergers suffered a blow Tuesday when Europe’s high court ruled that regulators in Brussels exceeded their authority by blocking Illumina’s acquisition of cancer testing startup Grail.


I can’t believe all the loaded language but again, it’s an opinion article. This is typical of the WSJ opinion pages post Murdoch.

>>. There are two very distinct divisions of the Journal, as there have been for years. The news division is very respected, although you do want to factor in that it is pro-business. But that should not be a shock. Since it was founded back in 1889, the Journal has always been a pro-business publication. That said, the Journal’s reporters do a very commendable and generally accurate job of covering business, and also covering world news and current issues. I read the Journal regularly and find its news reporters are generally quite excellent. On the other hand, the opinion page is in fact what you’d expect from a Murdoch publication: hard-right, and overtly pro-Republican. To be honest, I tend to ignore it, since I pretty much know what their writers are going to say. To sum up, Mr Murdoch seems to have stayed out of the newsroom, and as a result, that part of the Journal remains credible. As for the opinion section, for those who want right-wing commentary, along with assorted Republican talking points, that’s one of many places where you can find it. <<