Zoë Schiffer: I laughed when you talked about it only because the definition of this market seems a bit absurd to me. The idea that Tiktok is not a competitor seems to be something that only FTC can believe.
Paresh Dave: Yes, but FTC points to these E -Maile from the early days on Facebook, as soon as Mark Zuckerberg created it, where he says that Facebook concerns a connection with family and friends. The argument is that Facebook has changed and evolved because he had no competition. And this is also blurred, because we also know that Facebook has copied many of other companies, but now the judge decides about the proper definition of the market. It was skeptical early when the case was first submitted by FTC and FTC had to change it. But if we land on these personal social services in the USA, Facebook commands 80 percent of this market in the opinion of FTC.
Zoë Schiffer: Intriguing. And what is the Meta argument? What is his imprint in the FTC case?
Paresh Dave: Well, the first is what we have just talked about. FTC defines this market too narrowly, and Facebook is in the face of a lot of competition, including in particular Tiktok, and when Tiktok fell in January as a result of Tiktok Ban and the Biden-Trump transition, and there is a period of 12 to 14 hours in which the thicket disappeared. And yes, Facebook is a substitute, and therefore they are competitors. Another argument is that consumers are not in a worse situation that Instagram and WhatsApp would not be what they are today without the aid of the finish, that they were these miniature startups with a very miniature number of employees. Facebook showered them with millions of dollars a year, potentially in the amount of over billion dollars, and that these services could not develop to such an extent that they are with billions of users today. And that E -Mail, in which Zuckerberg says that Facebook concerns joining with friends and family, that these acquisitions concerned competition, that they are all irrelevant, because the intention does not matter. What matters is whether the market has less competition, and Facebook’s argument is that the market does not have less competition, that there are many of these competitions.
Zoë Schiffer: And we expect the founder of Instagram, Kevin Systrom, at some point testimony, right?
Paresh Dave: Yes. It is on the list of witnesses, like some of the investment capital involved, who supported Instagram and WhatsApp early.
Zoë Schiffer: We know that Mark Zuckerberg really tried to do, it seemed that everything in his power to make sure that this process would not happen. Apparently, he tried to conclude a contract with President Trump and hugged Trump in recent months. What did it look like?
Paresh Dave: You can imagine that of course he wants to conclude a contract because we are talking about two crucial resources on Facebook. Imagine you lose it. He tries to do everything in his power, just save his face and does not have to broadcast your sullied laundry during a great process, but also save these two elements of his empire. Zuckerberg, we saw how he relaxes on Facebook and the meta policy, which was criticized by Republicans. Personally, he became involved in the resolution of this process, which Trump submitted against the company after banned his account in 2021, and then the finish, which did not transfer the first inaugural fund of Trump, transferred the second inauguration fund in the Trump inauguration in January. He made all these overtures to try to sultry up this relationship, and they met several times in recent months, but it does not seem that no agreement has been reached since the trial.