Today, we have our own concentrations of economic power. Instead of Standard Oil, U.S. Steel, the Union Pacific Railroad, and J. P. Morgan and Company, we have Amazon, Google, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft.
If you have six corporate centres, six treasuries, six of everything, and then if you bring it down to one of everything, obviously there are some savings.
I talked about the barriers created by monopolies. I said that it was the role of government to break up these monopolies and that we couldn't do it alone.
I mean, I don't think the Facebook merger with WhatsApp and Instagram should have been approved. But I'm not for reflexively breaking up tech companies.
When you see a merger between two giants in a declining industry, it can look like the financial version of a couple having a baby to save a marriage.
John D. Rockefeller wanted to dominate oil, but Microsoft wants it all, you name it: cable, media, banking, car dealerships.
Financial "synergy" is a will-o'-the-wisp.It looks good on paper, but it fails to work out in practice.
As we've often said, to the world at large, Marvel looks like a giant octopus that's out to swallow the galaxy - which, by the way, we are. But we are, in fact, a rather small and intimate company.
Because of the failure of the federal government to enforce federal law, we now have 'banks too big to fail,' unregulated Internet monopoly, and the evisceration of a dispersed and independent media.
Theodore Roosevelt understood that unregulated monopoly could pose an even greater threat than unrestrained government.
Men will look back in amusement at the pretence that once caused people to refer to General Dynamics and North American Aviation and AT&T as private business.
There's been a growing dissatisfaction and distrust with the conventional publishing industry, in that you tend to have a lot of formerly reputable imprints now owned by big conglomerates.
If you're a large organization, you may welcome a bit of regulation to keep the small guys out.
Like many businessmen of genius he learned that free competition was wasteful, monopoly efficient. And so he simply set about achieving that efficient monopoly.
General Motors could buy Delaware if DuPont were willing to sell it.
By...WWII, I.G. Farben had become...part of the most gigantic and powerful cartel of all history...interlocking agreements...over 2,000 of them...In the US, the cartel had established important agreements with
I think we really have to take a good, hard look at our system of corporate consolidated press. We need to break them up.
The small and medium-sized capitalists, not being able to produce at the same price as the big capitalists, naturally succumb in the deadly struggle.
... the world's largest merger.
Referring to the European Economic Community:
I think the answer has to do with the fact that [Louis D.] Brandeis was a consistent critic of bigness in business and in government.
What if the slowdown in merger activity isn't cyclical, but secular? What if corporations have learned the lessons of so many companies before them that the odds of a successful merger are no better than 50-50 and probably less? Is it possible that the biggest deals have already been done?
A Microsoft-Yahoo merger is a deal only an investment banker could love.
Competition is the hallmark of a free enterprise economy. For the past thirty years, however, corporate America has been doing everything it can to cut competition, with major corporations merging and consolidating at every opportunity.
A dapper Canadian in his mid-fifties, Rob McEwen bought the disparate collection of gold mining companies known as Goldcorp in 1989. A decade later, he'd unified those companies and was ready for expansion - a process he wanted to start by building a new refinery.
I always said that mega-mergers were for megalomaniacs.