Audiiii personal page - To The Moon

Audiiii

No personal profile

24Follow

2Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-08-09

Goooo

2021-08-07

$XPeng Inc.(XPEV)$Oh no

2021-08-07

Like pls thanks

Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate

2021-08-02

Yes

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-08-01

Pls like me

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-07-31

Hello

Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First

2021-07-31

Yes

Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First

2021-07-23

Yes

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-07-23

Ya

Chinese education stocks are trading sharply lower Fridaya after Bloomberg report suggested...

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3586731542362850","uuid":"3586731542362850","gmtCreate":1623637518437,"gmtModify":1623637518437,"name":"Audiiii","pinyin":"audiiii","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":2,"headSize":24,"tweetSize":9,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-3","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":" Tiger Idol","description":"Join the tiger community for 1500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2025.09.17","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":898809865,"gmtCreate":1628481578957,"gmtModify":1703506798054,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Goooo","listText":"Goooo","text":"Goooo","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f5bb8d7c1893a738675aced83227a","width":"750","height":"2605"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/898809865","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3185,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":893240641,"gmtCreate":1628267187483,"gmtModify":1703504366132,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XPEV\">$XPeng Inc.(XPEV)$</a>Oh no","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XPEV\">$XPeng Inc.(XPEV)$</a>Oh no","text":"$XPeng Inc.(XPEV)$Oh no","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cacbf9d484f096b15cb5829c7c48c5cb","width":"828","height":"1434"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/893240641","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3562,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":893257354,"gmtCreate":1628267102478,"gmtModify":1703504364780,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like pls thanks&nbsp;","listText":"Like pls thanks&nbsp;","text":"Like pls thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/893257354","repostId":"1110501028","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1110501028","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1628260468,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1110501028?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-06 22:34","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1110501028","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"(Aug 6) Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate.","content":"<p>(Aug 6)&nbsp;Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-08-06 22:34</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(Aug 6)&nbsp;Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TCEHY":"腾讯控股ADR","00700":"腾讯控股"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1110501028","content_text":"(Aug 6) Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TCEHY":0.9,"00700":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1630,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":805779400,"gmtCreate":1627910220500,"gmtModify":1703497664441,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/805779400","repostId":"2156192895","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3466,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802489655,"gmtCreate":1627795317977,"gmtModify":1703496016951,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Pls like me","listText":"Pls like me","text":"Pls like me","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":11,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/802489655","repostId":"2155001152","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3904,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802114437,"gmtCreate":1627732803129,"gmtModify":1703495317784,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hello","listText":"Hello","text":"Hello","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/802114437","repostId":"1154216466","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1154216466","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627713678,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1154216466?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-31 14:41","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1154216466","media":"Barron's","summary":"About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson Unive","content":"<p><i>About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission.&nbsp;His latest book is</i>The Political Spectrum: The Tumultuous Liberation of Wireless Technologies, from Herbert Hoover to the Smartphone.</p>\n<p>Big Tech is in the antitrust hot seat. But before the Department of Justice tries to break up companies likeGoogleorApple,it should recall the history, and eventual outcome, of theAT&amp;T-Time Warner merger.</p>\n<p>The DOJ expended extensive time and resources to stop AT&amp;T’s acquisition of Time Warner, marking the department’s first challenge to a major vertical merger in over 40 years. The government was unsuccessful despite its best efforts, which included an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, and time reveals that its concerns were evidently misplaced all along. The merger did not result in higher prices, program blackouts, or even any appreciable advantage for the companies.</p>\n<p>In October 2016 AT&amp;Tannouncedits plan to buy Time Warner.&nbsp; Donald Trump’s presidential campaign trashed the merger in a statement: &nbsp;“AT&amp;T … is now trying to buy Time Warner and thus the wildly anti-Trump CNN. Donald Trump would never approve such a deal.”&nbsp; With Trump in office, the DOJ moved to block it.</p>\n<p>In 2017, the DOJ went to court tocomplainthat the merger would “substantially lessen competition in video” by allowing AT&amp;T to “use Time Warner’s ‘must have’” networks like CNN, TNT, TBS, and HBO to raise fees charged to rival cable TV distributors like Comcast or DISH. AT&amp;T, which had acquired national satellite operator DirecTV, could threaten “blackouts” depriving rival distributors of key programs—their subscribers would then quit and flock to DirecTV (AT&amp;T) so as to keep watching CNN or the NBA Playoffs on TNT. Not only would major TV and cable systems be hurt, but emerging online streaming services would be crushed.</p>\n<p>The government’s case focused on “vertical leveraging,” where a company uses two complementary products to make it more difficult for rivals to compete in the individual markets.&nbsp;Here, AT&amp;T was combining video content creation with video program distribution; the allegation was that competitors in either segment might be hurt.&nbsp;Yet there are clear efficiencies to be had, as widely found in studies of vertically integrated firms, with joint operations boosting consumer happiness. Buyers at Costco eagerly snap up Costco-supplied Kirkland products—which the retailer stocks in place of those of some independent producers—if they improve price or quality.&nbsp;So facts, not just a story, are needed.&nbsp; District Court Judge Richard J. Leonfoundthat the DOJ case “falls far short of establishing the validity of its… theory.”</p>\n<p>Aside from the political overtones of the case, there was good historical reason to doubt the official complaint. A cable TV programmer combined with (or split from) a video distributor several times in recent years.&nbsp;Vertical integration did not cause higher prices, as shown by econometric analysis. Nor did vertical integration lead to “blackouts,” as the DOJ conceded. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit confirmed Judge Leon’s opinion, finding that “the industry had become dynamic in recent years with the emergence, for example, of Netflix and Hulu.”</p>\n<p>Owning DirecTV and Time Warner together turned out to be not much advantage, let alone a monopoly. Despite a huge boost in pandemic demand for video content, rivals soon dined on AT&amp;T-Time Warner’s lunch. When AT&amp;T bought DirecTV in 2015, it paid $67 billion.&nbsp;In February 2021, with DirecTV’s satellite subscriber base collapsing, the spun-off operation wasvaluedat $16.3 billion.</p>\n<p>And AT&amp;Tthen unloaded the video assets of Time Warner. A new enterprise—Warner Bros. Discovery—is being spun off and merged with Discovery (Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, HGTV, the Food Networkand more). The content-only firm voluntarily severs the link the DOJ critiqued as easy monopoly money. With the allegations of anticompetitive bundling, it has been cast off as not worth the trouble.AT&amp;T shareholders receive $43 billion, less than half the $100 billion AT&amp;T expended (in debt and equity) for Time Warner three years ago. The government’s scenario of anti-competitive vertical integration proved a fantasy.</p>\n<p>AT&amp;T’s maneuvers deserve whatever scorn billions in shareholder losses can buy. A cynic might offer that antitrust laws be beefed up to protect against such corporate errors, ignoring that economic penalties—more reliable and harsher than whatever antitrust enforcers might deal—are visibly in place. But little note has been made of the ironic political saga. Policymakers are moving full throttle to enact statutes to beef up antitrust prosecution in tech for exactly what AT&amp;T so spectacularly failed to do in video.&nbsp; Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) introduced the “Ending Monopoly Platforms Act” that would restrict vertical mergers in online services, for example. At least five other bills for new antitrust rules have been introduced.</p>\n<p>Not only can such policies be expensive legal diversions, they can block the innovations igniting exciting new choices for customers. Netflix has integrated from streaming into movie production, after launching Roku. Hulu was created by News Corp. (Fox) and NBC-Universal (Comcast).&nbsp;Amazon Prime Video, Sling, YouTube TV, Apple TV, Disney Plus, HBO Max and Paramount Plus—each has extended a large media or e-commerce platform. Each evolved from a quest for better products. Treating entrepreneurship as suspect puts the screws to just the disruptions now roiling online entertainment markets. AT&amp;T learned the hard way that owning complementary products is no guarantee of success. </p>","source":"lsy1610680873436","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAntitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-31 14:41 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3><strong>Barron's</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission. His latest...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1154216466","content_text":"About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission. His latest book isThe Political Spectrum: The Tumultuous Liberation of Wireless Technologies, from Herbert Hoover to the Smartphone.\nBig Tech is in the antitrust hot seat. But before the Department of Justice tries to break up companies likeGoogleorApple,it should recall the history, and eventual outcome, of theAT&T-Time Warner merger.\nThe DOJ expended extensive time and resources to stop AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner, marking the department’s first challenge to a major vertical merger in over 40 years. The government was unsuccessful despite its best efforts, which included an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, and time reveals that its concerns were evidently misplaced all along. The merger did not result in higher prices, program blackouts, or even any appreciable advantage for the companies.\nIn October 2016 AT&Tannouncedits plan to buy Time Warner.  Donald Trump’s presidential campaign trashed the merger in a statement:  “AT&T … is now trying to buy Time Warner and thus the wildly anti-Trump CNN. Donald Trump would never approve such a deal.”  With Trump in office, the DOJ moved to block it.\nIn 2017, the DOJ went to court tocomplainthat the merger would “substantially lessen competition in video” by allowing AT&T to “use Time Warner’s ‘must have’” networks like CNN, TNT, TBS, and HBO to raise fees charged to rival cable TV distributors like Comcast or DISH. AT&T, which had acquired national satellite operator DirecTV, could threaten “blackouts” depriving rival distributors of key programs—their subscribers would then quit and flock to DirecTV (AT&T) so as to keep watching CNN or the NBA Playoffs on TNT. Not only would major TV and cable systems be hurt, but emerging online streaming services would be crushed.\nThe government’s case focused on “vertical leveraging,” where a company uses two complementary products to make it more difficult for rivals to compete in the individual markets. Here, AT&T was combining video content creation with video program distribution; the allegation was that competitors in either segment might be hurt. Yet there are clear efficiencies to be had, as widely found in studies of vertically integrated firms, with joint operations boosting consumer happiness. Buyers at Costco eagerly snap up Costco-supplied Kirkland products—which the retailer stocks in place of those of some independent producers—if they improve price or quality. So facts, not just a story, are needed.  District Court Judge Richard J. Leonfoundthat the DOJ case “falls far short of establishing the validity of its… theory.”\nAside from the political overtones of the case, there was good historical reason to doubt the official complaint. A cable TV programmer combined with (or split from) a video distributor several times in recent years. Vertical integration did not cause higher prices, as shown by econometric analysis. Nor did vertical integration lead to “blackouts,” as the DOJ conceded. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit confirmed Judge Leon’s opinion, finding that “the industry had become dynamic in recent years with the emergence, for example, of Netflix and Hulu.”\nOwning DirecTV and Time Warner together turned out to be not much advantage, let alone a monopoly. Despite a huge boost in pandemic demand for video content, rivals soon dined on AT&T-Time Warner’s lunch. When AT&T bought DirecTV in 2015, it paid $67 billion. In February 2021, with DirecTV’s satellite subscriber base collapsing, the spun-off operation wasvaluedat $16.3 billion.\nAnd AT&Tthen unloaded the video assets of Time Warner. A new enterprise—Warner Bros. Discovery—is being spun off and merged with Discovery (Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, HGTV, the Food Networkand more). The content-only firm voluntarily severs the link the DOJ critiqued as easy monopoly money. With the allegations of anticompetitive bundling, it has been cast off as not worth the trouble.AT&T shareholders receive $43 billion, less than half the $100 billion AT&T expended (in debt and equity) for Time Warner three years ago. The government’s scenario of anti-competitive vertical integration proved a fantasy.\nAT&T’s maneuvers deserve whatever scorn billions in shareholder losses can buy. A cynic might offer that antitrust laws be beefed up to protect against such corporate errors, ignoring that economic penalties—more reliable and harsher than whatever antitrust enforcers might deal—are visibly in place. But little note has been made of the ironic political saga. Policymakers are moving full throttle to enact statutes to beef up antitrust prosecution in tech for exactly what AT&T so spectacularly failed to do in video.  Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) introduced the “Ending Monopoly Platforms Act” that would restrict vertical mergers in online services, for example. At least five other bills for new antitrust rules have been introduced.\nNot only can such policies be expensive legal diversions, they can block the innovations igniting exciting new choices for customers. Netflix has integrated from streaming into movie production, after launching Roku. Hulu was created by News Corp. (Fox) and NBC-Universal (Comcast). Amazon Prime Video, Sling, YouTube TV, Apple TV, Disney Plus, HBO Max and Paramount Plus—each has extended a large media or e-commerce platform. Each evolved from a quest for better products. Treating entrepreneurship as suspect puts the screws to just the disruptions now roiling online entertainment markets. AT&T learned the hard way that owning complementary products is no guarantee of success.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3605,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802114252,"gmtCreate":1627732761876,"gmtModify":1703495317298,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/802114252","repostId":"1154216466","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1154216466","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627713678,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1154216466?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-31 14:41","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1154216466","media":"Barron's","summary":"About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson Unive","content":"<p><i>About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission.&nbsp;His latest book is</i>The Political Spectrum: The Tumultuous Liberation of Wireless Technologies, from Herbert Hoover to the Smartphone.</p>\n<p>Big Tech is in the antitrust hot seat. But before the Department of Justice tries to break up companies likeGoogleorApple,it should recall the history, and eventual outcome, of theAT&amp;T-Time Warner merger.</p>\n<p>The DOJ expended extensive time and resources to stop AT&amp;T’s acquisition of Time Warner, marking the department’s first challenge to a major vertical merger in over 40 years. The government was unsuccessful despite its best efforts, which included an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, and time reveals that its concerns were evidently misplaced all along. The merger did not result in higher prices, program blackouts, or even any appreciable advantage for the companies.</p>\n<p>In October 2016 AT&amp;Tannouncedits plan to buy Time Warner.&nbsp; Donald Trump’s presidential campaign trashed the merger in a statement: &nbsp;“AT&amp;T … is now trying to buy Time Warner and thus the wildly anti-Trump CNN. Donald Trump would never approve such a deal.”&nbsp; With Trump in office, the DOJ moved to block it.</p>\n<p>In 2017, the DOJ went to court tocomplainthat the merger would “substantially lessen competition in video” by allowing AT&amp;T to “use Time Warner’s ‘must have’” networks like CNN, TNT, TBS, and HBO to raise fees charged to rival cable TV distributors like Comcast or DISH. AT&amp;T, which had acquired national satellite operator DirecTV, could threaten “blackouts” depriving rival distributors of key programs—their subscribers would then quit and flock to DirecTV (AT&amp;T) so as to keep watching CNN or the NBA Playoffs on TNT. Not only would major TV and cable systems be hurt, but emerging online streaming services would be crushed.</p>\n<p>The government’s case focused on “vertical leveraging,” where a company uses two complementary products to make it more difficult for rivals to compete in the individual markets.&nbsp;Here, AT&amp;T was combining video content creation with video program distribution; the allegation was that competitors in either segment might be hurt.&nbsp;Yet there are clear efficiencies to be had, as widely found in studies of vertically integrated firms, with joint operations boosting consumer happiness. Buyers at Costco eagerly snap up Costco-supplied Kirkland products—which the retailer stocks in place of those of some independent producers—if they improve price or quality.&nbsp;So facts, not just a story, are needed.&nbsp; District Court Judge Richard J. Leonfoundthat the DOJ case “falls far short of establishing the validity of its… theory.”</p>\n<p>Aside from the political overtones of the case, there was good historical reason to doubt the official complaint. A cable TV programmer combined with (or split from) a video distributor several times in recent years.&nbsp;Vertical integration did not cause higher prices, as shown by econometric analysis. Nor did vertical integration lead to “blackouts,” as the DOJ conceded. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit confirmed Judge Leon’s opinion, finding that “the industry had become dynamic in recent years with the emergence, for example, of Netflix and Hulu.”</p>\n<p>Owning DirecTV and Time Warner together turned out to be not much advantage, let alone a monopoly. Despite a huge boost in pandemic demand for video content, rivals soon dined on AT&amp;T-Time Warner’s lunch. When AT&amp;T bought DirecTV in 2015, it paid $67 billion.&nbsp;In February 2021, with DirecTV’s satellite subscriber base collapsing, the spun-off operation wasvaluedat $16.3 billion.</p>\n<p>And AT&amp;Tthen unloaded the video assets of Time Warner. A new enterprise—Warner Bros. Discovery—is being spun off and merged with Discovery (Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, HGTV, the Food Networkand more). The content-only firm voluntarily severs the link the DOJ critiqued as easy monopoly money. With the allegations of anticompetitive bundling, it has been cast off as not worth the trouble.AT&amp;T shareholders receive $43 billion, less than half the $100 billion AT&amp;T expended (in debt and equity) for Time Warner three years ago. The government’s scenario of anti-competitive vertical integration proved a fantasy.</p>\n<p>AT&amp;T’s maneuvers deserve whatever scorn billions in shareholder losses can buy. A cynic might offer that antitrust laws be beefed up to protect against such corporate errors, ignoring that economic penalties—more reliable and harsher than whatever antitrust enforcers might deal—are visibly in place. But little note has been made of the ironic political saga. Policymakers are moving full throttle to enact statutes to beef up antitrust prosecution in tech for exactly what AT&amp;T so spectacularly failed to do in video.&nbsp; Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) introduced the “Ending Monopoly Platforms Act” that would restrict vertical mergers in online services, for example. At least five other bills for new antitrust rules have been introduced.</p>\n<p>Not only can such policies be expensive legal diversions, they can block the innovations igniting exciting new choices for customers. Netflix has integrated from streaming into movie production, after launching Roku. Hulu was created by News Corp. (Fox) and NBC-Universal (Comcast).&nbsp;Amazon Prime Video, Sling, YouTube TV, Apple TV, Disney Plus, HBO Max and Paramount Plus—each has extended a large media or e-commerce platform. Each evolved from a quest for better products. Treating entrepreneurship as suspect puts the screws to just the disruptions now roiling online entertainment markets. AT&amp;T learned the hard way that owning complementary products is no guarantee of success. </p>","source":"lsy1610680873436","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAntitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-31 14:41 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3><strong>Barron's</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission. His latest...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1154216466","content_text":"About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission. His latest book isThe Political Spectrum: The Tumultuous Liberation of Wireless Technologies, from Herbert Hoover to the Smartphone.\nBig Tech is in the antitrust hot seat. But before the Department of Justice tries to break up companies likeGoogleorApple,it should recall the history, and eventual outcome, of theAT&T-Time Warner merger.\nThe DOJ expended extensive time and resources to stop AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner, marking the department’s first challenge to a major vertical merger in over 40 years. The government was unsuccessful despite its best efforts, which included an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, and time reveals that its concerns were evidently misplaced all along. The merger did not result in higher prices, program blackouts, or even any appreciable advantage for the companies.\nIn October 2016 AT&Tannouncedits plan to buy Time Warner.  Donald Trump’s presidential campaign trashed the merger in a statement:  “AT&T … is now trying to buy Time Warner and thus the wildly anti-Trump CNN. Donald Trump would never approve such a deal.”  With Trump in office, the DOJ moved to block it.\nIn 2017, the DOJ went to court tocomplainthat the merger would “substantially lessen competition in video” by allowing AT&T to “use Time Warner’s ‘must have’” networks like CNN, TNT, TBS, and HBO to raise fees charged to rival cable TV distributors like Comcast or DISH. AT&T, which had acquired national satellite operator DirecTV, could threaten “blackouts” depriving rival distributors of key programs—their subscribers would then quit and flock to DirecTV (AT&T) so as to keep watching CNN or the NBA Playoffs on TNT. Not only would major TV and cable systems be hurt, but emerging online streaming services would be crushed.\nThe government’s case focused on “vertical leveraging,” where a company uses two complementary products to make it more difficult for rivals to compete in the individual markets. Here, AT&T was combining video content creation with video program distribution; the allegation was that competitors in either segment might be hurt. Yet there are clear efficiencies to be had, as widely found in studies of vertically integrated firms, with joint operations boosting consumer happiness. Buyers at Costco eagerly snap up Costco-supplied Kirkland products—which the retailer stocks in place of those of some independent producers—if they improve price or quality. So facts, not just a story, are needed.  District Court Judge Richard J. Leonfoundthat the DOJ case “falls far short of establishing the validity of its… theory.”\nAside from the political overtones of the case, there was good historical reason to doubt the official complaint. A cable TV programmer combined with (or split from) a video distributor several times in recent years. Vertical integration did not cause higher prices, as shown by econometric analysis. Nor did vertical integration lead to “blackouts,” as the DOJ conceded. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit confirmed Judge Leon’s opinion, finding that “the industry had become dynamic in recent years with the emergence, for example, of Netflix and Hulu.”\nOwning DirecTV and Time Warner together turned out to be not much advantage, let alone a monopoly. Despite a huge boost in pandemic demand for video content, rivals soon dined on AT&T-Time Warner’s lunch. When AT&T bought DirecTV in 2015, it paid $67 billion. In February 2021, with DirecTV’s satellite subscriber base collapsing, the spun-off operation wasvaluedat $16.3 billion.\nAnd AT&Tthen unloaded the video assets of Time Warner. A new enterprise—Warner Bros. Discovery—is being spun off and merged with Discovery (Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, HGTV, the Food Networkand more). The content-only firm voluntarily severs the link the DOJ critiqued as easy monopoly money. With the allegations of anticompetitive bundling, it has been cast off as not worth the trouble.AT&T shareholders receive $43 billion, less than half the $100 billion AT&T expended (in debt and equity) for Time Warner three years ago. The government’s scenario of anti-competitive vertical integration proved a fantasy.\nAT&T’s maneuvers deserve whatever scorn billions in shareholder losses can buy. A cynic might offer that antitrust laws be beefed up to protect against such corporate errors, ignoring that economic penalties—more reliable and harsher than whatever antitrust enforcers might deal—are visibly in place. But little note has been made of the ironic political saga. Policymakers are moving full throttle to enact statutes to beef up antitrust prosecution in tech for exactly what AT&T so spectacularly failed to do in video.  Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) introduced the “Ending Monopoly Platforms Act” that would restrict vertical mergers in online services, for example. At least five other bills for new antitrust rules have been introduced.\nNot only can such policies be expensive legal diversions, they can block the innovations igniting exciting new choices for customers. Netflix has integrated from streaming into movie production, after launching Roku. Hulu was created by News Corp. (Fox) and NBC-Universal (Comcast). Amazon Prime Video, Sling, YouTube TV, Apple TV, Disney Plus, HBO Max and Paramount Plus—each has extended a large media or e-commerce platform. Each evolved from a quest for better products. Treating entrepreneurship as suspect puts the screws to just the disruptions now roiling online entertainment markets. AT&T learned the hard way that owning complementary products is no guarantee of success.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3347,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":175753187,"gmtCreate":1627050114549,"gmtModify":1703483367229,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/175753187","repostId":"1152547448","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3467,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":175750512,"gmtCreate":1627050020936,"gmtModify":1703483365739,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ya","listText":"Ya","text":"Ya","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/175750512","repostId":"1112567098","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1112567098","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1627048219,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1112567098?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-23 21:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chinese education stocks are trading sharply lower Fridaya after Bloomberg report suggested...","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1112567098","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"(July 23) Chinese education stocks plunged in morning trading. Bloomberg report that, China consider","content":"<p>(July 23)&nbsp;Chinese education stocks plunged in morning trading.&nbsp;Bloomberg&nbsp;report&nbsp;that,&nbsp;China considers turning tutoring companies into Non-Profits.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e2b057d861059cc83420bcf9edf2a465\" tg-width=\"370\" tg-height=\"246\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>China is considering asking companies that offer tutoring on the school curriculum to go non-profit, according to people familiar with the matter, as part of a sweeping set of constraints that could decimate the country’s $100 billion education tech industry.</p>\n<p>In rules currently being mulled, the platforms will likely no longer be allowed to raise capital or go public, the people said, asking to not be identified because the information is not public. Listed firms will also probably no longer be allowed to invest in or acquire education firms teaching school subjects while foreign capital will also be barred from the sector, <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of the people said.</p>\n<p>Local regulators will stop approving new after-school education firms seeking to offer tutoring on China’s compulsory syllabus and require extra scrutiny of existing online platforms, the people said. Vacation and weekend tutoring on school subjects will also be banned, they said. Changes may still occur as the rules haven’t been published. The 21st Century Business Herald earlier reported the bans on IPOs and investments by listed firms.</p>\n<p>The new set of regulations, devised and overseen by a dedicated branch set up just last month to regulate the industry, could wipe out the enormous growth that made stock market darlings of TAL Education Group and Gaotu Techedu Inc. The regulatory assault mirrors a broader campaign against the growing heft of Chinese internet companies from Didi Global Inc. to Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.</p>\n<p>“Making the sector non-profit is just as good as eradicating the industry all together,” said Wu Yuefeng, a fund manager at Funding Capital Management (Beijing) Co. “The regulations on financing are a major surprise and shows that to the authorities, this is a matter of no small importance. In the short term for the sector, any news will be bad news.”</p>\n<p>New Oriental Education &amp; Technology Group sank as much as 50% in Hong Kong Friday, while Koolearn Technology Holding Ltd. tumbled 31%.</p>\n<p>Beijing is coming down hard on the sector as excessive tutoring anguishes young pupils and burdens parents with expensive tutoring fees. It’s also regarded as an impediment to one of the country’s top priorities, boosting a declining birth rate. Last month, China said it will allow a couple to have three children and released a slew of support measures to encourage births and lower child expenses.</p>\n<p>Making the whole sector go non-profit “would make being a listed entity meaningless,” said Justin Tang, head of Asian research at United First Partners. “Investors are selling out first and asking questions later. It’s all being done to reduce cost of education and motivate citizens to raise kids.”</p>\n<p>Education technology had emerged as one of the hottest investment plays in China in recent years, with $10 billion of venture capital money pouring into the sector last year alone. Alibaba, Tencent Holdings Ltd. and ByteDance Ltd. all entered the arena, seeking to capitalize on Chinese parents’ desires to give their children every academic advantage. A spokesman from the education ministry said relevant polices are still being formulated and declined to provide more details.</p>\n<p>Beijing is taking issue with for-profit companies for stressing out kids while enriching investors and startup founders. In May, President Xi Jinping chaired a meeting with top officials where they approved a new set of rules to ease the burden of homework and after-school training for primary and secondary school students.</p>\n<p>Last month, China’s education ministry created a dedicated division to oversee all private education platforms for the first time. That followed a plethora of restrictions, including caps on fees firms can charge and time limits on after-school programs. Regulators have fined two of the biggest startups for false advertising: Alibaba-backed Zuoyebang and Tencent-investee Yuanfudao. A new law on minor protection, which went into effect June 1, also bans kindergarten and private institutions from teaching the primary-school curriculum to pre-schoolers -- not uncommon previously.</p>\n<p>Several high-profile startups in the sector -- including Yuanfudao, which at $15.5 billion is the most valuable of the lot -- are likely to have to put initial public offering plans on hold because of the crackdown.</p>\n<p>Shares of China’s largest private education companies are among the world’s worst performers in recent months, with New Oriental Education, TAL Education and Gaotu Techedu together shedding nearly $100 billion of value from their highs reached earlier this year.</p>\n<p>Gaotu, New Oriental, Zuoyebang, Yuanfudao and TAL didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Chinese education stocks are trading sharply lower Fridaya after Bloomberg report suggested...</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nChinese education stocks are trading sharply lower Fridaya after Bloomberg report suggested...\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-07-23 21:50</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(July 23)&nbsp;Chinese education stocks plunged in morning trading.&nbsp;Bloomberg&nbsp;report&nbsp;that,&nbsp;China considers turning tutoring companies into Non-Profits.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e2b057d861059cc83420bcf9edf2a465\" tg-width=\"370\" tg-height=\"246\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>China is considering asking companies that offer tutoring on the school curriculum to go non-profit, according to people familiar with the matter, as part of a sweeping set of constraints that could decimate the country’s $100 billion education tech industry.</p>\n<p>In rules currently being mulled, the platforms will likely no longer be allowed to raise capital or go public, the people said, asking to not be identified because the information is not public. Listed firms will also probably no longer be allowed to invest in or acquire education firms teaching school subjects while foreign capital will also be barred from the sector, <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of the people said.</p>\n<p>Local regulators will stop approving new after-school education firms seeking to offer tutoring on China’s compulsory syllabus and require extra scrutiny of existing online platforms, the people said. Vacation and weekend tutoring on school subjects will also be banned, they said. Changes may still occur as the rules haven’t been published. The 21st Century Business Herald earlier reported the bans on IPOs and investments by listed firms.</p>\n<p>The new set of regulations, devised and overseen by a dedicated branch set up just last month to regulate the industry, could wipe out the enormous growth that made stock market darlings of TAL Education Group and Gaotu Techedu Inc. The regulatory assault mirrors a broader campaign against the growing heft of Chinese internet companies from Didi Global Inc. to Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.</p>\n<p>“Making the sector non-profit is just as good as eradicating the industry all together,” said Wu Yuefeng, a fund manager at Funding Capital Management (Beijing) Co. “The regulations on financing are a major surprise and shows that to the authorities, this is a matter of no small importance. In the short term for the sector, any news will be bad news.”</p>\n<p>New Oriental Education &amp; Technology Group sank as much as 50% in Hong Kong Friday, while Koolearn Technology Holding Ltd. tumbled 31%.</p>\n<p>Beijing is coming down hard on the sector as excessive tutoring anguishes young pupils and burdens parents with expensive tutoring fees. It’s also regarded as an impediment to one of the country’s top priorities, boosting a declining birth rate. Last month, China said it will allow a couple to have three children and released a slew of support measures to encourage births and lower child expenses.</p>\n<p>Making the whole sector go non-profit “would make being a listed entity meaningless,” said Justin Tang, head of Asian research at United First Partners. “Investors are selling out first and asking questions later. It’s all being done to reduce cost of education and motivate citizens to raise kids.”</p>\n<p>Education technology had emerged as one of the hottest investment plays in China in recent years, with $10 billion of venture capital money pouring into the sector last year alone. Alibaba, Tencent Holdings Ltd. and ByteDance Ltd. all entered the arena, seeking to capitalize on Chinese parents’ desires to give their children every academic advantage. A spokesman from the education ministry said relevant polices are still being formulated and declined to provide more details.</p>\n<p>Beijing is taking issue with for-profit companies for stressing out kids while enriching investors and startup founders. In May, President Xi Jinping chaired a meeting with top officials where they approved a new set of rules to ease the burden of homework and after-school training for primary and secondary school students.</p>\n<p>Last month, China’s education ministry created a dedicated division to oversee all private education platforms for the first time. That followed a plethora of restrictions, including caps on fees firms can charge and time limits on after-school programs. Regulators have fined two of the biggest startups for false advertising: Alibaba-backed Zuoyebang and Tencent-investee Yuanfudao. A new law on minor protection, which went into effect June 1, also bans kindergarten and private institutions from teaching the primary-school curriculum to pre-schoolers -- not uncommon previously.</p>\n<p>Several high-profile startups in the sector -- including Yuanfudao, which at $15.5 billion is the most valuable of the lot -- are likely to have to put initial public offering plans on hold because of the crackdown.</p>\n<p>Shares of China’s largest private education companies are among the world’s worst performers in recent months, with New Oriental Education, TAL Education and Gaotu Techedu together shedding nearly $100 billion of value from their highs reached earlier this year.</p>\n<p>Gaotu, New Oriental, Zuoyebang, Yuanfudao and TAL didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GOTU":"高途","EDU":"新东方","TAL":"好未来"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1112567098","content_text":"(July 23) Chinese education stocks plunged in morning trading. Bloomberg report that, China considers turning tutoring companies into Non-Profits.\n\nChina is considering asking companies that offer tutoring on the school curriculum to go non-profit, according to people familiar with the matter, as part of a sweeping set of constraints that could decimate the country’s $100 billion education tech industry.\nIn rules currently being mulled, the platforms will likely no longer be allowed to raise capital or go public, the people said, asking to not be identified because the information is not public. Listed firms will also probably no longer be allowed to invest in or acquire education firms teaching school subjects while foreign capital will also be barred from the sector, one of the people said.\nLocal regulators will stop approving new after-school education firms seeking to offer tutoring on China’s compulsory syllabus and require extra scrutiny of existing online platforms, the people said. Vacation and weekend tutoring on school subjects will also be banned, they said. Changes may still occur as the rules haven’t been published. The 21st Century Business Herald earlier reported the bans on IPOs and investments by listed firms.\nThe new set of regulations, devised and overseen by a dedicated branch set up just last month to regulate the industry, could wipe out the enormous growth that made stock market darlings of TAL Education Group and Gaotu Techedu Inc. The regulatory assault mirrors a broader campaign against the growing heft of Chinese internet companies from Didi Global Inc. to Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.\n“Making the sector non-profit is just as good as eradicating the industry all together,” said Wu Yuefeng, a fund manager at Funding Capital Management (Beijing) Co. “The regulations on financing are a major surprise and shows that to the authorities, this is a matter of no small importance. In the short term for the sector, any news will be bad news.”\nNew Oriental Education & Technology Group sank as much as 50% in Hong Kong Friday, while Koolearn Technology Holding Ltd. tumbled 31%.\nBeijing is coming down hard on the sector as excessive tutoring anguishes young pupils and burdens parents with expensive tutoring fees. It’s also regarded as an impediment to one of the country’s top priorities, boosting a declining birth rate. Last month, China said it will allow a couple to have three children and released a slew of support measures to encourage births and lower child expenses.\nMaking the whole sector go non-profit “would make being a listed entity meaningless,” said Justin Tang, head of Asian research at United First Partners. “Investors are selling out first and asking questions later. It’s all being done to reduce cost of education and motivate citizens to raise kids.”\nEducation technology had emerged as one of the hottest investment plays in China in recent years, with $10 billion of venture capital money pouring into the sector last year alone. Alibaba, Tencent Holdings Ltd. and ByteDance Ltd. all entered the arena, seeking to capitalize on Chinese parents’ desires to give their children every academic advantage. A spokesman from the education ministry said relevant polices are still being formulated and declined to provide more details.\nBeijing is taking issue with for-profit companies for stressing out kids while enriching investors and startup founders. In May, President Xi Jinping chaired a meeting with top officials where they approved a new set of rules to ease the burden of homework and after-school training for primary and secondary school students.\nLast month, China’s education ministry created a dedicated division to oversee all private education platforms for the first time. That followed a plethora of restrictions, including caps on fees firms can charge and time limits on after-school programs. Regulators have fined two of the biggest startups for false advertising: Alibaba-backed Zuoyebang and Tencent-investee Yuanfudao. A new law on minor protection, which went into effect June 1, also bans kindergarten and private institutions from teaching the primary-school curriculum to pre-schoolers -- not uncommon previously.\nSeveral high-profile startups in the sector -- including Yuanfudao, which at $15.5 billion is the most valuable of the lot -- are likely to have to put initial public offering plans on hold because of the crackdown.\nShares of China’s largest private education companies are among the world’s worst performers in recent months, with New Oriental Education, TAL Education and Gaotu Techedu together shedding nearly $100 billion of value from their highs reached earlier this year.\nGaotu, New Oriental, Zuoyebang, Yuanfudao and TAL didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"GOTU":0.9,"EDU":0.9,"TAL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3800,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":802489655,"gmtCreate":1627795317977,"gmtModify":1703496016951,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Pls like me","listText":"Pls like me","text":"Pls like me","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":11,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/802489655","repostId":"2155001152","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3904,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":893257354,"gmtCreate":1628267102478,"gmtModify":1703504364780,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like pls thanks&nbsp;","listText":"Like pls thanks&nbsp;","text":"Like pls thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/893257354","repostId":"1110501028","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1110501028","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1628260468,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1110501028?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-06 22:34","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1110501028","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"(Aug 6) Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate.","content":"<p>(Aug 6)&nbsp;Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-08-06 22:34</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(Aug 6)&nbsp;Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TCEHY":"腾讯控股ADR","00700":"腾讯控股"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1110501028","content_text":"(Aug 6) Tencent sued by the Haidian District Procuratorate.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TCEHY":0.9,"00700":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1630,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":805779400,"gmtCreate":1627910220500,"gmtModify":1703497664441,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/805779400","repostId":"2156192895","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3466,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":893240641,"gmtCreate":1628267187483,"gmtModify":1703504366132,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XPEV\">$XPeng Inc.(XPEV)$</a>Oh no","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XPEV\">$XPeng Inc.(XPEV)$</a>Oh no","text":"$XPeng Inc.(XPEV)$Oh no","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cacbf9d484f096b15cb5829c7c48c5cb","width":"828","height":"1434"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/893240641","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3562,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":175753187,"gmtCreate":1627050114549,"gmtModify":1703483367229,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/175753187","repostId":"1152547448","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3467,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":175750512,"gmtCreate":1627050020936,"gmtModify":1703483365739,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ya","listText":"Ya","text":"Ya","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/175750512","repostId":"1112567098","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1112567098","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1627048219,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1112567098?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-23 21:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chinese education stocks are trading sharply lower Fridaya after Bloomberg report suggested...","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1112567098","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"(July 23) Chinese education stocks plunged in morning trading. Bloomberg report that, China consider","content":"<p>(July 23)&nbsp;Chinese education stocks plunged in morning trading.&nbsp;Bloomberg&nbsp;report&nbsp;that,&nbsp;China considers turning tutoring companies into Non-Profits.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e2b057d861059cc83420bcf9edf2a465\" tg-width=\"370\" tg-height=\"246\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>China is considering asking companies that offer tutoring on the school curriculum to go non-profit, according to people familiar with the matter, as part of a sweeping set of constraints that could decimate the country’s $100 billion education tech industry.</p>\n<p>In rules currently being mulled, the platforms will likely no longer be allowed to raise capital or go public, the people said, asking to not be identified because the information is not public. Listed firms will also probably no longer be allowed to invest in or acquire education firms teaching school subjects while foreign capital will also be barred from the sector, <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of the people said.</p>\n<p>Local regulators will stop approving new after-school education firms seeking to offer tutoring on China’s compulsory syllabus and require extra scrutiny of existing online platforms, the people said. Vacation and weekend tutoring on school subjects will also be banned, they said. Changes may still occur as the rules haven’t been published. The 21st Century Business Herald earlier reported the bans on IPOs and investments by listed firms.</p>\n<p>The new set of regulations, devised and overseen by a dedicated branch set up just last month to regulate the industry, could wipe out the enormous growth that made stock market darlings of TAL Education Group and Gaotu Techedu Inc. The regulatory assault mirrors a broader campaign against the growing heft of Chinese internet companies from Didi Global Inc. to Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.</p>\n<p>“Making the sector non-profit is just as good as eradicating the industry all together,” said Wu Yuefeng, a fund manager at Funding Capital Management (Beijing) Co. “The regulations on financing are a major surprise and shows that to the authorities, this is a matter of no small importance. In the short term for the sector, any news will be bad news.”</p>\n<p>New Oriental Education &amp; Technology Group sank as much as 50% in Hong Kong Friday, while Koolearn Technology Holding Ltd. tumbled 31%.</p>\n<p>Beijing is coming down hard on the sector as excessive tutoring anguishes young pupils and burdens parents with expensive tutoring fees. It’s also regarded as an impediment to one of the country’s top priorities, boosting a declining birth rate. Last month, China said it will allow a couple to have three children and released a slew of support measures to encourage births and lower child expenses.</p>\n<p>Making the whole sector go non-profit “would make being a listed entity meaningless,” said Justin Tang, head of Asian research at United First Partners. “Investors are selling out first and asking questions later. It’s all being done to reduce cost of education and motivate citizens to raise kids.”</p>\n<p>Education technology had emerged as one of the hottest investment plays in China in recent years, with $10 billion of venture capital money pouring into the sector last year alone. Alibaba, Tencent Holdings Ltd. and ByteDance Ltd. all entered the arena, seeking to capitalize on Chinese parents’ desires to give their children every academic advantage. A spokesman from the education ministry said relevant polices are still being formulated and declined to provide more details.</p>\n<p>Beijing is taking issue with for-profit companies for stressing out kids while enriching investors and startup founders. In May, President Xi Jinping chaired a meeting with top officials where they approved a new set of rules to ease the burden of homework and after-school training for primary and secondary school students.</p>\n<p>Last month, China’s education ministry created a dedicated division to oversee all private education platforms for the first time. That followed a plethora of restrictions, including caps on fees firms can charge and time limits on after-school programs. Regulators have fined two of the biggest startups for false advertising: Alibaba-backed Zuoyebang and Tencent-investee Yuanfudao. A new law on minor protection, which went into effect June 1, also bans kindergarten and private institutions from teaching the primary-school curriculum to pre-schoolers -- not uncommon previously.</p>\n<p>Several high-profile startups in the sector -- including Yuanfudao, which at $15.5 billion is the most valuable of the lot -- are likely to have to put initial public offering plans on hold because of the crackdown.</p>\n<p>Shares of China’s largest private education companies are among the world’s worst performers in recent months, with New Oriental Education, TAL Education and Gaotu Techedu together shedding nearly $100 billion of value from their highs reached earlier this year.</p>\n<p>Gaotu, New Oriental, Zuoyebang, Yuanfudao and TAL didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Chinese education stocks are trading sharply lower Fridaya after Bloomberg report suggested...</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nChinese education stocks are trading sharply lower Fridaya after Bloomberg report suggested...\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-07-23 21:50</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(July 23)&nbsp;Chinese education stocks plunged in morning trading.&nbsp;Bloomberg&nbsp;report&nbsp;that,&nbsp;China considers turning tutoring companies into Non-Profits.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e2b057d861059cc83420bcf9edf2a465\" tg-width=\"370\" tg-height=\"246\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>China is considering asking companies that offer tutoring on the school curriculum to go non-profit, according to people familiar with the matter, as part of a sweeping set of constraints that could decimate the country’s $100 billion education tech industry.</p>\n<p>In rules currently being mulled, the platforms will likely no longer be allowed to raise capital or go public, the people said, asking to not be identified because the information is not public. Listed firms will also probably no longer be allowed to invest in or acquire education firms teaching school subjects while foreign capital will also be barred from the sector, <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of the people said.</p>\n<p>Local regulators will stop approving new after-school education firms seeking to offer tutoring on China’s compulsory syllabus and require extra scrutiny of existing online platforms, the people said. Vacation and weekend tutoring on school subjects will also be banned, they said. Changes may still occur as the rules haven’t been published. The 21st Century Business Herald earlier reported the bans on IPOs and investments by listed firms.</p>\n<p>The new set of regulations, devised and overseen by a dedicated branch set up just last month to regulate the industry, could wipe out the enormous growth that made stock market darlings of TAL Education Group and Gaotu Techedu Inc. The regulatory assault mirrors a broader campaign against the growing heft of Chinese internet companies from Didi Global Inc. to Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.</p>\n<p>“Making the sector non-profit is just as good as eradicating the industry all together,” said Wu Yuefeng, a fund manager at Funding Capital Management (Beijing) Co. “The regulations on financing are a major surprise and shows that to the authorities, this is a matter of no small importance. In the short term for the sector, any news will be bad news.”</p>\n<p>New Oriental Education &amp; Technology Group sank as much as 50% in Hong Kong Friday, while Koolearn Technology Holding Ltd. tumbled 31%.</p>\n<p>Beijing is coming down hard on the sector as excessive tutoring anguishes young pupils and burdens parents with expensive tutoring fees. It’s also regarded as an impediment to one of the country’s top priorities, boosting a declining birth rate. Last month, China said it will allow a couple to have three children and released a slew of support measures to encourage births and lower child expenses.</p>\n<p>Making the whole sector go non-profit “would make being a listed entity meaningless,” said Justin Tang, head of Asian research at United First Partners. “Investors are selling out first and asking questions later. It’s all being done to reduce cost of education and motivate citizens to raise kids.”</p>\n<p>Education technology had emerged as one of the hottest investment plays in China in recent years, with $10 billion of venture capital money pouring into the sector last year alone. Alibaba, Tencent Holdings Ltd. and ByteDance Ltd. all entered the arena, seeking to capitalize on Chinese parents’ desires to give their children every academic advantage. A spokesman from the education ministry said relevant polices are still being formulated and declined to provide more details.</p>\n<p>Beijing is taking issue with for-profit companies for stressing out kids while enriching investors and startup founders. In May, President Xi Jinping chaired a meeting with top officials where they approved a new set of rules to ease the burden of homework and after-school training for primary and secondary school students.</p>\n<p>Last month, China’s education ministry created a dedicated division to oversee all private education platforms for the first time. That followed a plethora of restrictions, including caps on fees firms can charge and time limits on after-school programs. Regulators have fined two of the biggest startups for false advertising: Alibaba-backed Zuoyebang and Tencent-investee Yuanfudao. A new law on minor protection, which went into effect June 1, also bans kindergarten and private institutions from teaching the primary-school curriculum to pre-schoolers -- not uncommon previously.</p>\n<p>Several high-profile startups in the sector -- including Yuanfudao, which at $15.5 billion is the most valuable of the lot -- are likely to have to put initial public offering plans on hold because of the crackdown.</p>\n<p>Shares of China’s largest private education companies are among the world’s worst performers in recent months, with New Oriental Education, TAL Education and Gaotu Techedu together shedding nearly $100 billion of value from their highs reached earlier this year.</p>\n<p>Gaotu, New Oriental, Zuoyebang, Yuanfudao and TAL didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GOTU":"高途","EDU":"新东方","TAL":"好未来"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1112567098","content_text":"(July 23) Chinese education stocks plunged in morning trading. Bloomberg report that, China considers turning tutoring companies into Non-Profits.\n\nChina is considering asking companies that offer tutoring on the school curriculum to go non-profit, according to people familiar with the matter, as part of a sweeping set of constraints that could decimate the country’s $100 billion education tech industry.\nIn rules currently being mulled, the platforms will likely no longer be allowed to raise capital or go public, the people said, asking to not be identified because the information is not public. Listed firms will also probably no longer be allowed to invest in or acquire education firms teaching school subjects while foreign capital will also be barred from the sector, one of the people said.\nLocal regulators will stop approving new after-school education firms seeking to offer tutoring on China’s compulsory syllabus and require extra scrutiny of existing online platforms, the people said. Vacation and weekend tutoring on school subjects will also be banned, they said. Changes may still occur as the rules haven’t been published. The 21st Century Business Herald earlier reported the bans on IPOs and investments by listed firms.\nThe new set of regulations, devised and overseen by a dedicated branch set up just last month to regulate the industry, could wipe out the enormous growth that made stock market darlings of TAL Education Group and Gaotu Techedu Inc. The regulatory assault mirrors a broader campaign against the growing heft of Chinese internet companies from Didi Global Inc. to Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.\n“Making the sector non-profit is just as good as eradicating the industry all together,” said Wu Yuefeng, a fund manager at Funding Capital Management (Beijing) Co. “The regulations on financing are a major surprise and shows that to the authorities, this is a matter of no small importance. In the short term for the sector, any news will be bad news.”\nNew Oriental Education & Technology Group sank as much as 50% in Hong Kong Friday, while Koolearn Technology Holding Ltd. tumbled 31%.\nBeijing is coming down hard on the sector as excessive tutoring anguishes young pupils and burdens parents with expensive tutoring fees. It’s also regarded as an impediment to one of the country’s top priorities, boosting a declining birth rate. Last month, China said it will allow a couple to have three children and released a slew of support measures to encourage births and lower child expenses.\nMaking the whole sector go non-profit “would make being a listed entity meaningless,” said Justin Tang, head of Asian research at United First Partners. “Investors are selling out first and asking questions later. It’s all being done to reduce cost of education and motivate citizens to raise kids.”\nEducation technology had emerged as one of the hottest investment plays in China in recent years, with $10 billion of venture capital money pouring into the sector last year alone. Alibaba, Tencent Holdings Ltd. and ByteDance Ltd. all entered the arena, seeking to capitalize on Chinese parents’ desires to give their children every academic advantage. A spokesman from the education ministry said relevant polices are still being formulated and declined to provide more details.\nBeijing is taking issue with for-profit companies for stressing out kids while enriching investors and startup founders. In May, President Xi Jinping chaired a meeting with top officials where they approved a new set of rules to ease the burden of homework and after-school training for primary and secondary school students.\nLast month, China’s education ministry created a dedicated division to oversee all private education platforms for the first time. That followed a plethora of restrictions, including caps on fees firms can charge and time limits on after-school programs. Regulators have fined two of the biggest startups for false advertising: Alibaba-backed Zuoyebang and Tencent-investee Yuanfudao. A new law on minor protection, which went into effect June 1, also bans kindergarten and private institutions from teaching the primary-school curriculum to pre-schoolers -- not uncommon previously.\nSeveral high-profile startups in the sector -- including Yuanfudao, which at $15.5 billion is the most valuable of the lot -- are likely to have to put initial public offering plans on hold because of the crackdown.\nShares of China’s largest private education companies are among the world’s worst performers in recent months, with New Oriental Education, TAL Education and Gaotu Techedu together shedding nearly $100 billion of value from their highs reached earlier this year.\nGaotu, New Oriental, Zuoyebang, Yuanfudao and TAL didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"GOTU":0.9,"EDU":0.9,"TAL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3800,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":898809865,"gmtCreate":1628481578957,"gmtModify":1703506798054,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Goooo","listText":"Goooo","text":"Goooo","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f5bb8d7c1893a738675aced83227a","width":"750","height":"2605"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/898809865","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3185,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802114437,"gmtCreate":1627732803129,"gmtModify":1703495317784,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hello","listText":"Hello","text":"Hello","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/802114437","repostId":"1154216466","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1154216466","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627713678,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1154216466?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-31 14:41","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1154216466","media":"Barron's","summary":"About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson Unive","content":"<p><i>About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission.&nbsp;His latest book is</i>The Political Spectrum: The Tumultuous Liberation of Wireless Technologies, from Herbert Hoover to the Smartphone.</p>\n<p>Big Tech is in the antitrust hot seat. But before the Department of Justice tries to break up companies likeGoogleorApple,it should recall the history, and eventual outcome, of theAT&amp;T-Time Warner merger.</p>\n<p>The DOJ expended extensive time and resources to stop AT&amp;T’s acquisition of Time Warner, marking the department’s first challenge to a major vertical merger in over 40 years. The government was unsuccessful despite its best efforts, which included an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, and time reveals that its concerns were evidently misplaced all along. The merger did not result in higher prices, program blackouts, or even any appreciable advantage for the companies.</p>\n<p>In October 2016 AT&amp;Tannouncedits plan to buy Time Warner.&nbsp; Donald Trump’s presidential campaign trashed the merger in a statement: &nbsp;“AT&amp;T … is now trying to buy Time Warner and thus the wildly anti-Trump CNN. Donald Trump would never approve such a deal.”&nbsp; With Trump in office, the DOJ moved to block it.</p>\n<p>In 2017, the DOJ went to court tocomplainthat the merger would “substantially lessen competition in video” by allowing AT&amp;T to “use Time Warner’s ‘must have’” networks like CNN, TNT, TBS, and HBO to raise fees charged to rival cable TV distributors like Comcast or DISH. AT&amp;T, which had acquired national satellite operator DirecTV, could threaten “blackouts” depriving rival distributors of key programs—their subscribers would then quit and flock to DirecTV (AT&amp;T) so as to keep watching CNN or the NBA Playoffs on TNT. Not only would major TV and cable systems be hurt, but emerging online streaming services would be crushed.</p>\n<p>The government’s case focused on “vertical leveraging,” where a company uses two complementary products to make it more difficult for rivals to compete in the individual markets.&nbsp;Here, AT&amp;T was combining video content creation with video program distribution; the allegation was that competitors in either segment might be hurt.&nbsp;Yet there are clear efficiencies to be had, as widely found in studies of vertically integrated firms, with joint operations boosting consumer happiness. Buyers at Costco eagerly snap up Costco-supplied Kirkland products—which the retailer stocks in place of those of some independent producers—if they improve price or quality.&nbsp;So facts, not just a story, are needed.&nbsp; District Court Judge Richard J. Leonfoundthat the DOJ case “falls far short of establishing the validity of its… theory.”</p>\n<p>Aside from the political overtones of the case, there was good historical reason to doubt the official complaint. A cable TV programmer combined with (or split from) a video distributor several times in recent years.&nbsp;Vertical integration did not cause higher prices, as shown by econometric analysis. Nor did vertical integration lead to “blackouts,” as the DOJ conceded. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit confirmed Judge Leon’s opinion, finding that “the industry had become dynamic in recent years with the emergence, for example, of Netflix and Hulu.”</p>\n<p>Owning DirecTV and Time Warner together turned out to be not much advantage, let alone a monopoly. Despite a huge boost in pandemic demand for video content, rivals soon dined on AT&amp;T-Time Warner’s lunch. When AT&amp;T bought DirecTV in 2015, it paid $67 billion.&nbsp;In February 2021, with DirecTV’s satellite subscriber base collapsing, the spun-off operation wasvaluedat $16.3 billion.</p>\n<p>And AT&amp;Tthen unloaded the video assets of Time Warner. A new enterprise—Warner Bros. Discovery—is being spun off and merged with Discovery (Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, HGTV, the Food Networkand more). The content-only firm voluntarily severs the link the DOJ critiqued as easy monopoly money. With the allegations of anticompetitive bundling, it has been cast off as not worth the trouble.AT&amp;T shareholders receive $43 billion, less than half the $100 billion AT&amp;T expended (in debt and equity) for Time Warner three years ago. The government’s scenario of anti-competitive vertical integration proved a fantasy.</p>\n<p>AT&amp;T’s maneuvers deserve whatever scorn billions in shareholder losses can buy. A cynic might offer that antitrust laws be beefed up to protect against such corporate errors, ignoring that economic penalties—more reliable and harsher than whatever antitrust enforcers might deal—are visibly in place. But little note has been made of the ironic political saga. Policymakers are moving full throttle to enact statutes to beef up antitrust prosecution in tech for exactly what AT&amp;T so spectacularly failed to do in video.&nbsp; Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) introduced the “Ending Monopoly Platforms Act” that would restrict vertical mergers in online services, for example. At least five other bills for new antitrust rules have been introduced.</p>\n<p>Not only can such policies be expensive legal diversions, they can block the innovations igniting exciting new choices for customers. Netflix has integrated from streaming into movie production, after launching Roku. Hulu was created by News Corp. (Fox) and NBC-Universal (Comcast).&nbsp;Amazon Prime Video, Sling, YouTube TV, Apple TV, Disney Plus, HBO Max and Paramount Plus—each has extended a large media or e-commerce platform. Each evolved from a quest for better products. Treating entrepreneurship as suspect puts the screws to just the disruptions now roiling online entertainment markets. AT&amp;T learned the hard way that owning complementary products is no guarantee of success. </p>","source":"lsy1610680873436","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAntitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-31 14:41 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3><strong>Barron's</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission. His latest...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1154216466","content_text":"About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission. His latest book isThe Political Spectrum: The Tumultuous Liberation of Wireless Technologies, from Herbert Hoover to the Smartphone.\nBig Tech is in the antitrust hot seat. But before the Department of Justice tries to break up companies likeGoogleorApple,it should recall the history, and eventual outcome, of theAT&T-Time Warner merger.\nThe DOJ expended extensive time and resources to stop AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner, marking the department’s first challenge to a major vertical merger in over 40 years. The government was unsuccessful despite its best efforts, which included an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, and time reveals that its concerns were evidently misplaced all along. The merger did not result in higher prices, program blackouts, or even any appreciable advantage for the companies.\nIn October 2016 AT&Tannouncedits plan to buy Time Warner.  Donald Trump’s presidential campaign trashed the merger in a statement:  “AT&T … is now trying to buy Time Warner and thus the wildly anti-Trump CNN. Donald Trump would never approve such a deal.”  With Trump in office, the DOJ moved to block it.\nIn 2017, the DOJ went to court tocomplainthat the merger would “substantially lessen competition in video” by allowing AT&T to “use Time Warner’s ‘must have’” networks like CNN, TNT, TBS, and HBO to raise fees charged to rival cable TV distributors like Comcast or DISH. AT&T, which had acquired national satellite operator DirecTV, could threaten “blackouts” depriving rival distributors of key programs—their subscribers would then quit and flock to DirecTV (AT&T) so as to keep watching CNN or the NBA Playoffs on TNT. Not only would major TV and cable systems be hurt, but emerging online streaming services would be crushed.\nThe government’s case focused on “vertical leveraging,” where a company uses two complementary products to make it more difficult for rivals to compete in the individual markets. Here, AT&T was combining video content creation with video program distribution; the allegation was that competitors in either segment might be hurt. Yet there are clear efficiencies to be had, as widely found in studies of vertically integrated firms, with joint operations boosting consumer happiness. Buyers at Costco eagerly snap up Costco-supplied Kirkland products—which the retailer stocks in place of those of some independent producers—if they improve price or quality. So facts, not just a story, are needed.  District Court Judge Richard J. Leonfoundthat the DOJ case “falls far short of establishing the validity of its… theory.”\nAside from the political overtones of the case, there was good historical reason to doubt the official complaint. A cable TV programmer combined with (or split from) a video distributor several times in recent years. Vertical integration did not cause higher prices, as shown by econometric analysis. Nor did vertical integration lead to “blackouts,” as the DOJ conceded. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit confirmed Judge Leon’s opinion, finding that “the industry had become dynamic in recent years with the emergence, for example, of Netflix and Hulu.”\nOwning DirecTV and Time Warner together turned out to be not much advantage, let alone a monopoly. Despite a huge boost in pandemic demand for video content, rivals soon dined on AT&T-Time Warner’s lunch. When AT&T bought DirecTV in 2015, it paid $67 billion. In February 2021, with DirecTV’s satellite subscriber base collapsing, the spun-off operation wasvaluedat $16.3 billion.\nAnd AT&Tthen unloaded the video assets of Time Warner. A new enterprise—Warner Bros. Discovery—is being spun off and merged with Discovery (Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, HGTV, the Food Networkand more). The content-only firm voluntarily severs the link the DOJ critiqued as easy monopoly money. With the allegations of anticompetitive bundling, it has been cast off as not worth the trouble.AT&T shareholders receive $43 billion, less than half the $100 billion AT&T expended (in debt and equity) for Time Warner three years ago. The government’s scenario of anti-competitive vertical integration proved a fantasy.\nAT&T’s maneuvers deserve whatever scorn billions in shareholder losses can buy. A cynic might offer that antitrust laws be beefed up to protect against such corporate errors, ignoring that economic penalties—more reliable and harsher than whatever antitrust enforcers might deal—are visibly in place. But little note has been made of the ironic political saga. Policymakers are moving full throttle to enact statutes to beef up antitrust prosecution in tech for exactly what AT&T so spectacularly failed to do in video.  Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) introduced the “Ending Monopoly Platforms Act” that would restrict vertical mergers in online services, for example. At least five other bills for new antitrust rules have been introduced.\nNot only can such policies be expensive legal diversions, they can block the innovations igniting exciting new choices for customers. Netflix has integrated from streaming into movie production, after launching Roku. Hulu was created by News Corp. (Fox) and NBC-Universal (Comcast). Amazon Prime Video, Sling, YouTube TV, Apple TV, Disney Plus, HBO Max and Paramount Plus—each has extended a large media or e-commerce platform. Each evolved from a quest for better products. Treating entrepreneurship as suspect puts the screws to just the disruptions now roiling online entertainment markets. AT&T learned the hard way that owning complementary products is no guarantee of success.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3605,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802114252,"gmtCreate":1627732761876,"gmtModify":1703495317298,"author":{"id":"3586731542362850","authorId":"3586731542362850","name":"Audiiii","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586731542362850","idStr":"3586731542362850"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/802114252","repostId":"1154216466","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1154216466","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627713678,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1154216466?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-31 14:41","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1154216466","media":"Barron's","summary":"About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson Unive","content":"<p><i>About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission.&nbsp;His latest book is</i>The Political Spectrum: The Tumultuous Liberation of Wireless Technologies, from Herbert Hoover to the Smartphone.</p>\n<p>Big Tech is in the antitrust hot seat. But before the Department of Justice tries to break up companies likeGoogleorApple,it should recall the history, and eventual outcome, of theAT&amp;T-Time Warner merger.</p>\n<p>The DOJ expended extensive time and resources to stop AT&amp;T’s acquisition of Time Warner, marking the department’s first challenge to a major vertical merger in over 40 years. The government was unsuccessful despite its best efforts, which included an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, and time reveals that its concerns were evidently misplaced all along. The merger did not result in higher prices, program blackouts, or even any appreciable advantage for the companies.</p>\n<p>In October 2016 AT&amp;Tannouncedits plan to buy Time Warner.&nbsp; Donald Trump’s presidential campaign trashed the merger in a statement: &nbsp;“AT&amp;T … is now trying to buy Time Warner and thus the wildly anti-Trump CNN. Donald Trump would never approve such a deal.”&nbsp; With Trump in office, the DOJ moved to block it.</p>\n<p>In 2017, the DOJ went to court tocomplainthat the merger would “substantially lessen competition in video” by allowing AT&amp;T to “use Time Warner’s ‘must have’” networks like CNN, TNT, TBS, and HBO to raise fees charged to rival cable TV distributors like Comcast or DISH. AT&amp;T, which had acquired national satellite operator DirecTV, could threaten “blackouts” depriving rival distributors of key programs—their subscribers would then quit and flock to DirecTV (AT&amp;T) so as to keep watching CNN or the NBA Playoffs on TNT. Not only would major TV and cable systems be hurt, but emerging online streaming services would be crushed.</p>\n<p>The government’s case focused on “vertical leveraging,” where a company uses two complementary products to make it more difficult for rivals to compete in the individual markets.&nbsp;Here, AT&amp;T was combining video content creation with video program distribution; the allegation was that competitors in either segment might be hurt.&nbsp;Yet there are clear efficiencies to be had, as widely found in studies of vertically integrated firms, with joint operations boosting consumer happiness. Buyers at Costco eagerly snap up Costco-supplied Kirkland products—which the retailer stocks in place of those of some independent producers—if they improve price or quality.&nbsp;So facts, not just a story, are needed.&nbsp; District Court Judge Richard J. Leonfoundthat the DOJ case “falls far short of establishing the validity of its… theory.”</p>\n<p>Aside from the political overtones of the case, there was good historical reason to doubt the official complaint. A cable TV programmer combined with (or split from) a video distributor several times in recent years.&nbsp;Vertical integration did not cause higher prices, as shown by econometric analysis. Nor did vertical integration lead to “blackouts,” as the DOJ conceded. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit confirmed Judge Leon’s opinion, finding that “the industry had become dynamic in recent years with the emergence, for example, of Netflix and Hulu.”</p>\n<p>Owning DirecTV and Time Warner together turned out to be not much advantage, let alone a monopoly. Despite a huge boost in pandemic demand for video content, rivals soon dined on AT&amp;T-Time Warner’s lunch. When AT&amp;T bought DirecTV in 2015, it paid $67 billion.&nbsp;In February 2021, with DirecTV’s satellite subscriber base collapsing, the spun-off operation wasvaluedat $16.3 billion.</p>\n<p>And AT&amp;Tthen unloaded the video assets of Time Warner. A new enterprise—Warner Bros. Discovery—is being spun off and merged with Discovery (Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, HGTV, the Food Networkand more). The content-only firm voluntarily severs the link the DOJ critiqued as easy monopoly money. With the allegations of anticompetitive bundling, it has been cast off as not worth the trouble.AT&amp;T shareholders receive $43 billion, less than half the $100 billion AT&amp;T expended (in debt and equity) for Time Warner three years ago. The government’s scenario of anti-competitive vertical integration proved a fantasy.</p>\n<p>AT&amp;T’s maneuvers deserve whatever scorn billions in shareholder losses can buy. A cynic might offer that antitrust laws be beefed up to protect against such corporate errors, ignoring that economic penalties—more reliable and harsher than whatever antitrust enforcers might deal—are visibly in place. But little note has been made of the ironic political saga. Policymakers are moving full throttle to enact statutes to beef up antitrust prosecution in tech for exactly what AT&amp;T so spectacularly failed to do in video.&nbsp; Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) introduced the “Ending Monopoly Platforms Act” that would restrict vertical mergers in online services, for example. At least five other bills for new antitrust rules have been introduced.</p>\n<p>Not only can such policies be expensive legal diversions, they can block the innovations igniting exciting new choices for customers. Netflix has integrated from streaming into movie production, after launching Roku. Hulu was created by News Corp. (Fox) and NBC-Universal (Comcast).&nbsp;Amazon Prime Video, Sling, YouTube TV, Apple TV, Disney Plus, HBO Max and Paramount Plus—each has extended a large media or e-commerce platform. Each evolved from a quest for better products. Treating entrepreneurship as suspect puts the screws to just the disruptions now roiling online entertainment markets. AT&amp;T learned the hard way that owning complementary products is no guarantee of success. </p>","source":"lsy1610680873436","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Antitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAntitrust Activists Want to Go Full Throttle. Here’s a Lesson They Should Consider First\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-31 14:41 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3><strong>Barron's</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission. His latest...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/antitrust-activists-want-to-go-full-throttle-heres-a-lesson-they-should-consider-first-51627509048?mod=hp_COMMENTARY_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1154216466","content_text":"About the author: Thomas W. Hazlett is H.H. Macaulay endowed professor of economics at Clemson University, and previously served as chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission. His latest book isThe Political Spectrum: The Tumultuous Liberation of Wireless Technologies, from Herbert Hoover to the Smartphone.\nBig Tech is in the antitrust hot seat. But before the Department of Justice tries to break up companies likeGoogleorApple,it should recall the history, and eventual outcome, of theAT&T-Time Warner merger.\nThe DOJ expended extensive time and resources to stop AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner, marking the department’s first challenge to a major vertical merger in over 40 years. The government was unsuccessful despite its best efforts, which included an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, and time reveals that its concerns were evidently misplaced all along. The merger did not result in higher prices, program blackouts, or even any appreciable advantage for the companies.\nIn October 2016 AT&Tannouncedits plan to buy Time Warner.  Donald Trump’s presidential campaign trashed the merger in a statement:  “AT&T … is now trying to buy Time Warner and thus the wildly anti-Trump CNN. Donald Trump would never approve such a deal.”  With Trump in office, the DOJ moved to block it.\nIn 2017, the DOJ went to court tocomplainthat the merger would “substantially lessen competition in video” by allowing AT&T to “use Time Warner’s ‘must have’” networks like CNN, TNT, TBS, and HBO to raise fees charged to rival cable TV distributors like Comcast or DISH. AT&T, which had acquired national satellite operator DirecTV, could threaten “blackouts” depriving rival distributors of key programs—their subscribers would then quit and flock to DirecTV (AT&T) so as to keep watching CNN or the NBA Playoffs on TNT. Not only would major TV and cable systems be hurt, but emerging online streaming services would be crushed.\nThe government’s case focused on “vertical leveraging,” where a company uses two complementary products to make it more difficult for rivals to compete in the individual markets. Here, AT&T was combining video content creation with video program distribution; the allegation was that competitors in either segment might be hurt. Yet there are clear efficiencies to be had, as widely found in studies of vertically integrated firms, with joint operations boosting consumer happiness. Buyers at Costco eagerly snap up Costco-supplied Kirkland products—which the retailer stocks in place of those of some independent producers—if they improve price or quality. So facts, not just a story, are needed.  District Court Judge Richard J. Leonfoundthat the DOJ case “falls far short of establishing the validity of its… theory.”\nAside from the political overtones of the case, there was good historical reason to doubt the official complaint. A cable TV programmer combined with (or split from) a video distributor several times in recent years. Vertical integration did not cause higher prices, as shown by econometric analysis. Nor did vertical integration lead to “blackouts,” as the DOJ conceded. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit confirmed Judge Leon’s opinion, finding that “the industry had become dynamic in recent years with the emergence, for example, of Netflix and Hulu.”\nOwning DirecTV and Time Warner together turned out to be not much advantage, let alone a monopoly. Despite a huge boost in pandemic demand for video content, rivals soon dined on AT&T-Time Warner’s lunch. When AT&T bought DirecTV in 2015, it paid $67 billion. In February 2021, with DirecTV’s satellite subscriber base collapsing, the spun-off operation wasvaluedat $16.3 billion.\nAnd AT&Tthen unloaded the video assets of Time Warner. A new enterprise—Warner Bros. Discovery—is being spun off and merged with Discovery (Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, HGTV, the Food Networkand more). The content-only firm voluntarily severs the link the DOJ critiqued as easy monopoly money. With the allegations of anticompetitive bundling, it has been cast off as not worth the trouble.AT&T shareholders receive $43 billion, less than half the $100 billion AT&T expended (in debt and equity) for Time Warner three years ago. The government’s scenario of anti-competitive vertical integration proved a fantasy.\nAT&T’s maneuvers deserve whatever scorn billions in shareholder losses can buy. A cynic might offer that antitrust laws be beefed up to protect against such corporate errors, ignoring that economic penalties—more reliable and harsher than whatever antitrust enforcers might deal—are visibly in place. But little note has been made of the ironic political saga. Policymakers are moving full throttle to enact statutes to beef up antitrust prosecution in tech for exactly what AT&T so spectacularly failed to do in video.  Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) introduced the “Ending Monopoly Platforms Act” that would restrict vertical mergers in online services, for example. At least five other bills for new antitrust rules have been introduced.\nNot only can such policies be expensive legal diversions, they can block the innovations igniting exciting new choices for customers. Netflix has integrated from streaming into movie production, after launching Roku. Hulu was created by News Corp. (Fox) and NBC-Universal (Comcast). Amazon Prime Video, Sling, YouTube TV, Apple TV, Disney Plus, HBO Max and Paramount Plus—each has extended a large media or e-commerce platform. Each evolved from a quest for better products. Treating entrepreneurship as suspect puts the screws to just the disruptions now roiling online entertainment markets. AT&T learned the hard way that owning complementary products is no guarantee of success.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3347,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}