> Problem is, by the time she got into power, everyone had consolidated so icing the transaction market was pretty much only outcome.

That's the talking point, but it doesn't survive even 30 seconds of thought. Yes, the biggest tech companies are very big -- debatably too big! -- but there are easily hundreds of smaller cap companies that you probably haven't heard of who are big enough to acquire startups. If anything those companies are the bulk of the M&A market, and the FTCs actions shut it all down [1].

The problem with the Khan view of the world (IMO) is that it was so fixated on the killing the whales that it didn't realize it was killing the other fish.

[1] By way of explanation: just by the nature of software economics, if you're big enough to make acquisitions in some niche industry, you probably own that industry (or are at least a duopoly player) and are therefore concerned that the FTC will target you.

What is your argument? That smaller roll ups could not happen and that was bad? Alot of smaller M&A in tech space was bad, it just was not Figma buying Adobe bad.

I think startups exiting via M&A is part of the problem. It creates perverse incentives which is basically fuck profits, squash all competition while lighting money on fire and THEN when you are so embedded, sell the company so original investors get their money back and new owners screw over everyone knowing there tunneling out of your really thick walls is going to be extremely difficult.

In a model where company had to turn a profit and investors would slowly make their money back, it would probably be net win.

> Alot of smaller M&A in tech space was bad, it just was not Figma buying Adobe bad.

Yeah, you're gonna have to defend that assertion.

> I think startups exiting via M&A is part of the problem. It creates perverse incentives which is basically fuck profits, squash all competition while lighting money on fire and THEN when you are so embedded, screw over everyone knowing there tunneling out of your really thick walls is going to be extremely difficult.

I hate to burst your bubble, but the chances of a small startup getting acquired while "lighting money on fire" is basically zero. You have a particularly narrow-focused lens on startups that is driven by a few high profile stories. When you're on that sort of YOLO rocket ship, you're not looking for acquisition -- if it happens, something went wrong.

So yes, part of my argument is that smaller roll ups could not happen, and that market looks nothing like what you're describing.