Connect with us

Business

Visa, Google, JetBlue: A Guide to a New Era of Antitrust Action

Published

on

Visa, Google, JetBlue: A Guide to a New Era of Antitrust Action
The latest

The Justice Department accuses Visa of unfairly stifling competition in debit cards, claiming the company has maintained a monopoly by imposing or threatening to impose higher fees on merchants that also use other payment networks.

Read more ›

President Biden’s top antitrust enforcers have promised to sue monopolies and block big mergers — a cornerstone of the administration’s economic agenda to restore competition to the economy.

Below are 15 major cases brought by the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission since late 2020 (including cases against Google and Meta initially filed during the Trump administration just before Mr. Biden took office).

Advertisement

The government has won several but not all the cases. And with only a few months remaining for the current administration, the number of suits is climbing, as regulators go after dominant companies in tech, pharmaceuticals, finance and even groceries.

  1. In a lawsuit, the D.O.J. said that more than 60 percent of debit transactions in the United States run on Visa’s network, allowing it to charge over $7 billion in fees each year for processing those transactions. Government lawyers argued that Visa penalizes its customers when they try to use competing services and that it has built a monopoly around payment processing.

    1. The Justice Department accuses Visa of unfairly stifling competition in debit cards, claiming the company has maintained a monopoly by imposing or threatening to impose higher fees on merchants that also use other payment networks.

      Read more ›

  1. The F.T.C. accused three big prescription drug middlemen, known as pharmacy benefits managers, of artificially raising prices for insulin drugs and making it harder for individuals to obtain cheaper options. The legal action targeted CVS Health’s Caremark, Cigna’s Express Scripts and UnitedHealth’s Optum Rx and subsidiaries they’ve created to handle drug negotiations. The three companies collectively control 80 percent of prescriptions in the United States.

    1. The F.T.C. files an administrative complaint, which is not yet public, that seeks to prohibit pharmacy benefit managers from steering patients to drugs that make them more money.

      Read more ›

  1. The F.T.C. sued to block Kroger’s $24.6 billion acquisiton of Albertsons, which, if allowed to proceed, would be the biggest supermarket merger in U.S. history. The companies said the merger would bolster their leverage with suppliers; the government contended that it would drive up prices for shoppers and suppress worker wages.

    1. The hearing, a mini-trial, lasts just over three weeks. The judge in the case has yet to issue a decision.

    2. The trial begins in Oregon, where both grocery companies have a significant presence. The case enters the spotlight as high food prices become a critical focus in the presidential race.

      Read more ›

    3. The F.T.C. and eight states, plus the District of Columbia, sue to block Kroger from acquiring rival supermarket chain Albertsons. They say the deal would most likely result in higher prices for groceries and weakened bargaining power for unionized workers.

      Read more ›

  1. The D.O.J. alleged Google harmed competition over the technology used to place advertising on web sites. The department and eight states said Google acquired rivals through anticompetitive mergers and bullied publishers and advertisers into using the company’s ad technology.

    1. The trial is expected to take about a month. The government has asked for a breakup of the company, requiring Google to sell off some assets.

      Read more ›

    2. The Justice Department and a group of eight states accuse Google of abusing a monopoly over the technology that powers online advertising.

      Read more ›

  1. An F.T.C. lawsuit sought to block Tapestry’s $8.5 billion acquisition of Capri, a blockbuster fashion tie-up to bring together Coach, Kate Spade, Michael Kors and Versace. The suit was a rare move by the agency to block a fashion deal, given that the industry does not suffer from a lack of competition.

    1. A hearing, which effectively serves as a mini-trial, begins over whether the government should put a halt to the deal while the F.T.C. can mount a case against the merger.

    2. The F.T.C. sues to block a merger of two fashion companies, Tapestry and Capri Holdings, that would bring together brands like Coach, Michael Kors and Kate Spade. The agency says the deal could force millions of consumers to pay more for “accessible luxury” accessories — less expensive goods sold by high-end firms — because the combined company would no longer have the incentive to compete on price.

      Read more ›

  1. An antitrust lawsuit filed by the D.O.J. and several states against RealPage, a real estate software company, said its technology enabled landlords to collude to raise rents across the country. It was the first major civil antitrust lawsuit to centrally feature the role of an algorithm in pricing manipulation, D.O.J. officials said.

    1. In its complaint, the Justice Department accuses RealPage of enabling a price-fixing conspiracy that artificially raised rents for millions of people.

      Read more ›

  1. The D.O.J. accused Apple of using a monopoly in the smartphone market to stifle competition and inflate prices for consumers. In its suit, the department said Apple blocked companies from offering apps that competed with Apple versions, including Messages and Wallet.

    1. Apple files a motion to dismiss the case, saying its business decisions didn’t violate antitrust laws. It has argued that those decisions make the iPhone a better experience.

    2. The Justice Department and 16 states, plus the District of Columbia, file a challenge to the reach and influence of Apple, arguing that the company has used anticompetitive tactics to keep customers reliant on their iPhones.

      Read more ›

  1. Live Nation Entertainment, the concert giant that owns Ticketmaster, stands accused of illegally maintaining a monopoly in the live entertainment industry. The D.O.J. said Ticketmaster provided exclusive ticketing contracts with concert venues, which helped Live Nation shore up its dominance, depriving consumers of better prices and options.

    1. The Justice Department, joined by 29 states and the District of Columbia, accuses Live Nation of leveraging its sprawling empire to dominate the live music industry by locking venues into exclusive ticketing contracts, pressuring artists to use its services and threatening its rivals with financial retribution.

      Read more ›

  1. A merger between JetBlue and Spirit, which would have created the fifth-largest airline in the United States, was blocked by a federal judge after a D.O.J. challenge. Government lawyers argued that smaller, low-cost airlines like Spirit helped reduce fares and that allowing the company to be acquired by JetBlue, which tends to charge higher prices than Spirit, would have hurt consumers.

    1. JetBlue and Spirit announce that they will not seek to overturn a court ruling that blocked their planned $3.8 billion merger.

      Read more ›

    2. In a 109-page ruling siding with the government, the judge in the case says the merger would “likely incentivize JetBlue further to abandon its roots as a maverick, low-cost carrier.”

      Read more ›

    3. The Justice Department files a lawsuit seeking to stop JetBlue Airways from buying Spirit Airlines, arguing that the $3.8 billion deal would reduce competition.

      Read more ›

  1. A lawsuit filed by the F.T.C. and 17 states against Amazon accused the retail behemoth of squeezing merchants and favoring its own competing brands and services over third-party sellers. A trial date is set for 2026.

    1. Amazon asks the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that the F.T.C. failed to identify the harm consumers were experiencing. It says the agency confused “common retail practices” with monopolistic behavior.

    2. The F.T.C. and 17 states sue Amazon, contending its online store and merchant services illegally stifle competition. The lawsuit that raises the possibility of altering the company’s structure.

      Read more ›

  1. The F.T.C. sued to block Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard, which, if allowed to proceed, would be the largest consumer tech acquisition since AOL bought Time Warner more than two decades ago. The case follows scrutiny of the deal by regulators in Europe. Microsoft makes the consoles and platforms on which Activision’s games are played, and the merger of two companies that don’t directly compete is known as a vertical merger. Cases against vertical mergers have traditionally been difficult to win.

    1. Microsoft says it has closed its deal with Activision Blizzard, signaling that the tech industry’s giants are still free to use their cash hoards to get even bigger.

      Read more ›

    2. In a 53-page decision, a judge says the F.T.C. has failed to show the merger would result in a substantial reduction in competition that would harm consumers.

      Read more ›

    3. Advertisement
    4. The F.T.C. seeks a preliminary injunction to bar Microsoft from completing the deal before the F.T.C. has the chance to argue the case in its internal court. Microsoft argues a delay would essentially be killing the deal anyway.

      Read more ›

    5. In its suit, the F.T.C. says Microsoft’s proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard would harm consumers because Microsoft could use Activision’s blockbuster games like Call of Duty to lure gamers from rivals.

      Read more ›

  1. The Justice Department sought to block a proposed merger between the largest publisher in the United States and a key rival.

    1. In an order, a judge says that the government has demonstrated that the merger might “substantially” harm competition in the market for U.S. publishing rights to anticipated top-selling books.

      Read more ›

  1. The D.O.J. sued to block UnitedHealth Group’s $13 billion acquisition of health technology company Change Healthcare, arguing that a deal would give UnitedHealth sensitive data that it could wield against its competitors in the insurance business.

    1. After a trial over the summer, a judge says in a 58-page memo that UnitedHealth’s incentives to protect customer data as it grows its businesses outweigh motivations to misuse the information.

    2. In a lawsuit, the Justice Department argues UnitedHealth Group’s deal to acquire Change Healthcare, a health technology company, would give the giant insurer access to sensitive data that it could wield against its competitors.

      Read more ›

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Business

If your kid wants skin-care gifts for the holidays, here are some risks to consider

Published

on

If your kid wants skin-care gifts for the holidays, here are some risks to consider

As parents rush into malls for the final days of Christmas shopping, many will be armed with wishlists full of beauty products for their children.

Skin care is a fast-growing phenomenon among Gen Alpha, typically defined as those born from 2010 and on. Dubbed “Sephora kids,” the tweens and teens have been buying up products from buzzy brands including Drunk Elephant, Bubble and Glow Recipe and diligently following multistep, antiaging skin-care routines popularized on social media.

With kids becoming a powerful segment of the booming $164-billion global skin-care industry, brands have been catering to them with new products packaged in colorful, eye-catching bottles and jars.

Dermatologists say getting children into the habit of taking care of their skin is a good thing, but they’re urging parents to exercise caution as they splurge on holiday gifts.

“For pediatric dermatology, we always say to be very mindful and wary of active ingredients that are in products,” said Dr. Jayden Galamgam, a pediatric dermatologist at UCLA Health. “A lot of the time, simple is better.”

Advertisement

What products are OK for my kid to use?

A gentle cleanser, a hydrating moisturizer and a good sunscreen are recommended and appropriate for any age.

“You don’t need to be using all these products; you don’t need a 10-step routine,” Galamgam said. “Use three products. Most don’t need anything more than that.”

Look for broad-spectrum sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or higher; it should be worn daily and reapplied every couple of hours.

What products should I avoid?

Anti-wrinkle serums, exfoliants and peels are not appropriate for children. Avoid products containing potent alpha hydroxy acids, beta hydroxy acids and retinol, Galamgam said.

“I would definitely try to stay away from those, because they can cause a lot of irritation for kids,” he said.

Advertisement

Social media trends often encourage tweens to experiment with cosmetics that are inappropriate for their skin type or age, so parents need to look carefully at ingredient labels before buying, said Sam Cutler, founder of Beverly Hills-based tween skin-care brand Petite ’n Pretty.

“We want to caution parents about the growing trend of products marketed as ‘kid-friendly’ due to their bright, playful packaging, which can be misleading,” she said. “Many of these products are formulated for adults and contain harsh ingredients, such as hydroxy acids, retinoids and artificial fragrances, which are too aggressive for young, delicate skin and can cause irritation or long-term damage.”

My kid wants antiaging products anyway. What should I say?

You can talk to them them about the potential harmful side effects, and about the risks of following the advice of online “skinfluencers.”

“There are a lot of teens that are using these products inappropriately due to misinformation or wanting to fit in with their friends based on what they’re seeing on TikTok,” said Dr. Carol Cheng, a pediatric dermatologist and an assistant clinical professor of dermatology at UCLA.

“They’re easily susceptible. A lot of them don’t realize that these influencers are probably being paid to promote certain products.”

Advertisement

Is anything being done to protect kids from potentially harmful skin-care products?

In February, California Assemblymember Alex Lee introduced legislation to ban the sale of antiaging products to kids under the age of 13, but the bill failed to pass in the California Legislature.

Continue Reading

Business

Ivan Boesky Was Seen as Greed Incarnate, and Never Said Otherwise

Published

on

Ivan Boesky Was Seen as Greed Incarnate, and Never Said Otherwise

Before the answers to life’s questions fit in our pocket, you used to have to turn a dial. If you were lucky, Phil Donahue would be on, ready to guide you toward enlightenment. In a stroke of deluxe good fortune, Dr. Ruth Westheimer might have stopped by to be the enlightenment. He was the search engine. She was a trusted result.

Donahue hailed from Cleveland. The windshield glasses, increasingly snowy thatch of hair, marble eyes, occasional pair of suspenders and obvious geniality said “card catalog,” “manager of the ’79 Reds,” “Stage Manager in a Chevy Motors production of ‘Our Town.’” Dr. Ruth was Donahue’s antonym, a step stool to his straight ladder. She kept her hair in a butterscotch helmet, fancied a uniform of jacket-blouse-skirt and came to our aid, via Germany, with a voice of crinkled tissue paper. Not even eight years separated them, yet so boyish was he and so seasoned was she that he read as her grandson. (She maybe reached his armpit.) Together and apart, they were public servants, American utilities.

Donahue was a journalist. His forum was the talk show, but some new strain in which the main attraction bypassed celebrities. People — every kind of them — lined up to witness other people being human, to experience Donahue’s radical conduit of edification, identification, curiosity, shock, wonder, outrage, surprise and dispute, all visible in the show’s televisual jackpot: cutaways to us, reacting, taking it all in, nodding, gasping. When a celebrity made it to the “Donahue” stage — Bill Clinton, say, La Toya Jackson, the Judds — they were expected to be human, too, to be accountable for their own humanity. From 1967 to 1996, for more than 6,000 episodes, he permitted us to be accountable to ourselves. 

What Donahue knew was that we — women especially — were eager, desperate, to be understood, to learn and learn and learn. We call his job “host” when, really, the way he did it, running that microphone throughout the audience, racing up, down, around, sticking it here then here then over here, was closer to “switchboard operator.” It was “hot dog vendor at Madison Square Garden.” The man got his steps in. He let us do more of the questioning than he did — he would just edit, interpret, clarify. Egalitarianism ruled. Articulation, too. And anybody who needed the mic usually got it.

The show was about both what was on our mind and what had never once crossed it. Atheism. Naziism. Colorism. Childbirth. Prison. Rapists. AIDS. Chippendales, Chernobyl, Cher. Name a fetish, Phil Donahue tried to get to its bottom, sometimes by trying it himself. (Let us never forget the episode when he made his entrance in a long skirt, blouse and pussy bow for one of the show’s many cross-dressing studies.) Now’s the time to add that “Donahue” was a morning talk show. In Philadelphia, he arrived every weekday at 9 a.m., which meant that, in the summers, I could learn about compulsive shopping or shifting gender roles from the same kitchen TV set as my grandmother.

Advertisement

Sex and sexuality were the show’s prime subjects. There was so much that needed confessing, correction, corroboration, an ear lent. For that, Donahue needed an expert. Many times, the expert was Dr. Ruth, a godsend who didn’t land in this country until she was in her late 20s and didn’t land on television until she was in her 50s. Ruth Westheimer arrived to us from Germany, where she started as Karola Ruth Siegel and strapped in as her life corkscrewed, as it mocked fiction. Her family most likely perished in the Auschwitz death camps after she was whisked to the safety of a Swiss children’s home, where she was expected to clean. The twists include sniper training for one of the military outfits that would become the Israel Defense Forces, maiming by cannonball on her 20th birthday, doing research at a Planned Parenthood in Harlem, single motherhood and three husbands. She earned her doctorate from Columbia University, in education, and spent her postdoc researching human sexuality. And because her timing was perfect, she emerged at the dawn of the 1980s, an affable vector of an era’s craze for gnomic sages (Zelda Rubinstein, Linda Hunt, Yoda), masterpiece branding and the nasty.

Hers was the age of Mapplethorpe and Madonna, of Prince, Skinemax and 2 Live Crew. On her radio and television shows, in a raft of books and a Playgirl column and through her promiscuous approach to talk-show appearances, she aimed to purge sex of shame, to promote sexual literacy. Her feline accent and jolly innuendo pitched, among other stuff, the Honda Prelude, Pepsi, Sling TV and Herbal Essences. (“Hey!” she offers to a young elevator passenger. “This is where we get off.”) The instructions for Dr. Ruth’s Game of Good Sex says it can be played by up to four couples; the board is vulval and includes stops at “Yeast Infection,” “Chauvinism” and “Goose Him.”

On “Donahue,” she is direct, explicit, dispelling, humorous, clear, common-sensical, serious, vivid. A professional therapist. It was Donahue who handled the comedy. On one visit in 1987, a caller needs advice about a husband who cheats because he wants to have sex more often than she does. Dr. Ruth tells Donahue that if the caller wants to keep the marriage, and her husband wants to do it all the time, “then what she should do is to masturbate him. And it’s all right for him to masturbate himself also a few times.” The audience is hear-a-pin-drop rapt or maybe just squirmy. So Donahue reaches into his parochial-school-student war chest and pulls out the joke about the teacher who tells third-grade boys, “Don’t play with yourself, or you’ll go blind.” And Donahue raises his hand like a kid at the back of the classroom and asks, “Can I do it till I need glasses?” Westheimer giggles, maybe noticing the large pair on Donahue’s face. This was that day’s cold open.

They were children of salesmen, these two; his father was in the furniture business, hers sold what people in the garment industry call notions. They inherited a salesman’s facility for people and packaging. When a “Donahue” audience member asks Westheimer whether her own husband believes she practices what she preaches, she says this is why she never brings him anywhere. “He would tell you and Phil: ‘Do not listen to her. It’s all talk,’” which cracks the audience up.

But consider what she talked about — and consider how she said it. My favorite Dr. Ruth word was “pleasure.” From a German mouth, the word conveys what it lacks with an American tongue: sensual unfurling. She vowed to speak about sex to mass audiences using the proper terminology. Damn the euphemisms. People waited as long as a year and a half for tickets to “Donahue” so they could damn them, too. But of everything Westheimer pitched, of all the terms she precisely used, pleasure was her most cogent product, a gift she believed we could give to others, a gift she swore we owed ourselves.

Advertisement

I miss the talk show that Donahue reinvented. I miss the way Dr. Ruth talked about sex. It’s fitting somehow that this antidogmatic-yet-priestly Irish Catholic man would, on occasion, join forces with a carnal, lucky-to-be-alive Jew to urge the exploration of our bodies while demonstrating respect, civility, reciprocation. They believed in us, that we were all interesting, that we could be trustworthy panelists in the discourse of being alive. Trauma, triviality, tubal ligation: Let’s talk about it! Fear doesn’t seem to have occurred to them. Or if it did, it was never a deterrent. Boldly they went. — And with her encouragement, boldly we came.

Wesley Morris is a critic at large for The New York Times and a staff writer for the magazine.

Continue Reading

Business

Party City to shut down after nearly 40 years in business

Published

on

Party City to shut down after nearly 40 years in business

Party City, the party and costume supply chain with more than 70 locations in California including several in Los Angeles, is shutting down operations immediately and laying off its employees.

In an online meeting Friday viewed by Bloomberg News, Party City Chief Executive Barry Litwin told corporate employees that it would be their last day of work. CNN reported that employees would not receive severance pay.

“That is without question the most difficult message that I’ve ever had to deliver,” Litwin said in the video. The company will be “winding down” immediately, he said.

The chain, which has been in business for nearly 40 years and has around 700 locations, according to its website, could not handle a decrease in consumer spending triggered by everyday high prices, Litwin told employees.

Going-out-of-business sales began Friday, just 14 months after the company emerged from bankruptcy and four months after Litwin began as chief executive. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2023 with about $1.8 billion in debt and emerged from the restructuring process under a plan meant to ensure its viability.

Advertisement

The company, however, continued to struggle and was considering reentering bankruptcy earlier this month, Bloomberg reported. The New Jersey retailer was falling behind on rent at some locations and running out of cash, according to the report.

Several retailers and fast-casual restaurant chains have struggled this year amid rising operating costs and inflation-wary consumers, including Big Lots, which is preparing to sell its stores, and Red Lobster, which filed for bankruptcy in May. Bricks-and-mortar locations in particular are scrambling to keep up with online retailers and big-box chains.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending