iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Google's Motorola Takeover Bid To Draw Antitrust Scrutiny, Analysts Say


First Posted: 08/15/11 09:37 PM ET Updated: 10/15/11 06:12 AM ET

NEW YORK -- A move by Google to acquire mobile phone manufacturer Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion, announced early Monday, will likely draw sharp scrutiny from federal antitrust regulators already engaged in a probe of the search giant's business practices, analysts said.

Google's Android smartphone operating system, introduced in 2007, has been adopted by dozens of handset manufacturers and now commands a dominant share of the smartphone market. The purchase of Motorola positions Google as a major player in handset manufacturing for the first time.

"It will come under close scrutiny," Brian White, a technology analyst at Ticonderoga Securities, said of the deal. "It won't go through without a fight."

Federal regulators are expected to focus on whether Google's control of both hardware and software in the smartphone market would give the company an unfair competitive advantage in areas like mobile Web search. The takeover could also allow Google to outmaneuver other handset manufacturers currently using the Android system.

The Federal Trade Commission is currently investigating whether Google has used its dominance in Web search to unfairly or illegally promote its own online businesses at the expense of rivals. FTC investigators are also looking at whether Google pressured carriers of its Android system to give preference to the company's other mobile products and freeze out competitors. Google acknowledged the existence of the probe in June.

Google's high profile could lead regulators to demand concessions before the deal is approved, said Clayton Moran, a senior technology analyst for The Benchmark Company. Such concessions could include close federal monitoring of the Android marketplace for several years after the deal closes.

"The regulators could require a high level of ongoing monitoring," Moran said. "Google can live with that."

In a press release announcing the purchase bid, Google executives pledged that the Android system would remain open source and noted that the takeover of Motorola was a defensive move by the company. In a conference call following the announcement, David Drummond, Google's chief legal officer, said he was "quite confident" that the deal would ultimately be approved.

"We believe, very strongly, it is a pro-competitive transaction," Drummond said.

The purchase of Motorola will give Google more than 20,000 current and pending mobile phone patents, helping to protect the company from burdensome technology-licensing fees and a growing number of patent lawsuits against its Android system. In a blog post earlier this month, Drummond accused rival technology firms of using "bogus patents" to wage an "organized, hostile campaign" against the Android system.

Intense competition in the mobile handset market, and Google's pledge to keep Android open source, make it unlikely that the government will stop the deal, analysts said. Google has also touted the fact that all five of the largest handset manufacturers currently using the operating system have endorsed the deal.

"I think the government would be hard pressed to make the case that this is anti-competitive," Moran said.

Consumer advocates who have blasted other recent mergers in the telecommunications sector also held their fire on the Google-Motorola deal.

"I'm going to view it with interest, but at first glance I'm not overwhelmingly concerned," said Andrew Schwartzman, policy director for the Media Access Project, a public interest law firm and advocacy organization working in communications policy.

Others were more concerned. Gary Reback, a prominent Silicon Valley antitrust litigator, who has become a vocal critic of Google's business practices, said that the deal deserved to be closely scrutinized.

"You're dealing with a company that is already a monopolist, that is already under investigation for allegedly anti-competitive behavior," he said. "By buying this, they get a huge additional dose of market power."

At the very least, the Motorola takeover bid provides federal regulators probing Google yet another reason to subject the company to scrutiny.

"I think they'll see this as a good excuse to probe deeper into Google," White said.

If the deal ultimately falls apart, it could cost Google dearly, however. Bloomberg News reported that the purchase agreement includes a "busted deal" fee, requiring Google to pay Motorola $2.5 billion if the takeover is unsuccessful.

"Clearly, on Motorola Mobility's side," Reback said, "they're worried about something."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
NEW YORK -- A move by Google to acquire mobile phone manufacturer Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion, announced early Monday, will likely draw sharp scrutiny from federal antitrust regulators already...
NEW YORK -- A move by Google to acquire mobile phone manufacturer Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion, announced early Monday, will likely draw sharp scrutiny from federal antitrust regulators already...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 46
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
american-dolt
Divide and Conquer
09:38 AM on 08/16/2011
Antitrust? By looking around I didn't think that existed anymore.

I think Busting down big Corporations would Benefit Mankind.
08:53 AM on 08/16/2011
If the Google / Motorola Mobility merger happens the only thing that will come of it is they are able to control the hardware and software for what they manufacture. This should not draw any scrutiny in regards to the Anti-Trust Act. Look at Apple, they control both hardware and software on their devices. While I am sure that they engineer both, it is in essence no different.

This hardly gives Google an edge, with other companies competing such as HTC, Samsung, LG, and Research in Motion. In actually acquiring their own in-house hardware, Google may be able to make even more improvements to its OS and possibly give us even a better product.
photo
rich07
High Hopes Indeed...
11:27 PM on 08/16/2011
I thought the same thing...they would have to go after Apple on the same grounds.
alunsulen
Digging the liberal hatred!
08:40 AM on 08/16/2011
Keep interfering. That's all the libs can do. Can't wait for Sep 2012
09:34 AM on 08/16/2011
'interfering'? Who is interfering and with what?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sam-I-Am
Alive in the age of worry.
04:37 PM on 08/16/2011
Whining about liberals. That's all you can do. BTW, what's happening in Sep 2012? Obama won't be re-elected until November.
EndTheGOP
I stand with Bob Costas.
07:55 AM on 08/16/2011
Yeah, right, when was the last time the US blocked a major acquisition or merger due to that quaint little old thing called the law? That's just so 40 years ago, isn't it?
06:24 AM on 08/16/2011
For some reason my last comment didn't go through. If Google controls both hardware and search then they have found a way to win in the market. That is what capitalism is. It doesn't matter if the consumer suffers because that is the choice that Google has decided to provide for the customers that remain. If the customers are unhappy with that choice they can make phone calls on a phone that doesn't have internet access or use a land line from their house. Google buying Motorola at this phase of the evolution of technology is irrelevant for anti-competitive purposes. The initial goal of anti-trust was to prevent a lack of access to something that was NEEDED at a price that was unfair because it was controlled by a company on a TOTAL level. That standard means that it's impossible for a competitior to enter a market. It's not supposed to regulate the path toward that state of affairs so that it doesn't get there because by doing so it's trying to prevent a result that hasn't happened yet. Competition is the path that leads to that result. It means that all competitors have to lose before a trust can happen. The standard is far higher today. Monsanto's activitys should be focused on for anti-trust reasons because they are trying to control how food can be produced. Energy,food, telephone,money are the only areas that meet the standard for anti-trust and only met them at the beginning.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Uhgg
Just another Neanderthal
05:52 AM on 08/16/2011
So how does Apple pas anti trust they own os and hardware
EndTheGOP
I stand with Bob Costas.
07:58 AM on 08/16/2011
They didn't buy up and eliminate the market, it came from internal growth. Look at every other major corporation today, growth is by acquisition. Not exactly a "free market" at work, when the deepest pockets can buy up the market.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Burgess
George Bush. The Worst President Ever!
03:37 AM on 08/16/2011
Hasn't Gary Reback heard of Apple?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjb5406
01:50 AM on 08/16/2011
Prediction: HP will announce it will license WebOS to other manufacturers in order to give them a fallback if Google decides to stop other manufacturers from using Android. And Microsoft is clapping with joy because Windows Phone 7 will get a boost. And RIM... well, let's just say this isn't going to help them at all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Burgess
George Bush. The Worst President Ever!
03:39 AM on 08/16/2011
Stop others using Android? The Operating System is Open scource so that other phone companies can use it. You are confusing Android with Apple.
EndTheGOP
I stand with Bob Costas.
08:02 AM on 08/16/2011
No, this is a US corporation we're talking about. Google could easily pull back android. My beef is with Microsoft's incompetence with rolling out a tablet solution. Maybe they need to bring some of their jobs back to the US, scale down in their global size, get more focused and nimble. Look, Apple's almost into their 3rd generation of tablet, and we have yet to see a viable solution from the biggest operating system producer in the world. Big fail.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thomas Nagano
"TK" Copy to Come
01:41 AM on 08/16/2011
Smartist guys in the room...almost.




- " TK"
photo
Rootytootytoot
Defiance is not violence.
01:29 AM on 08/16/2011
Name one or two aquisitions that DID NOT go through due to anti trust laws.... Umm yeah, like I believe this one won't go through as well.... Send someone in charge a bagful of bills and all will be as they wish. That is the american way. Too big to fail? Who cares? Business in america gets exactly what they want.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
SitandStay
Lorenzo&BushH8ter
12:58 AM on 08/16/2011
Divest yourself of your conflicting interests that you hold or in honesty report them Brian White.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
anthonytaurus
don't f&f me. you dont' know what I'll say next
12:58 AM on 08/16/2011
Antitrust, no. Conflict of interest, perhaps. Google would be in direct competition with its partners like HTC and Samsung. However, there wouldn't be a conflict of interest IF Google had decided to somehow cancel manufacturing contracts since it would own Motorola.

However, actually reading the article, it clearly states why Google is purchasing Motorola: PATENTS.

It makes total sense strategically.

On the other hand, if Google were interested in getting into the manufacturing game, they'd set themselves up for a fail. The other manufacturers would probably drop Android in a heartbeat. Who's left as far as mobile OS's go? Windows Phone 7. That will increase competition across the board.

It will go through.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Burgess
George Bush. The Worst President Ever!
03:42 AM on 08/16/2011
Twittered F/F
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom95134
12:27 AM on 08/16/2011
"The takeover could also allow Google to outmaneuver other handset manufacturers currently using the Android system."

This is the same argument that was used against Microsoft for their Office Application and Windows OS. It is simple to overcome. You just make sure that you build a "Chinese Wall" between the two divisions.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sethplatt
Broward County, Florida, Environment, Politics, Ar
11:55 PM on 08/15/2011
It will pass scrutiny if for no other reason that the major competitors have already made these acquisitions or strategic partnerships.
I always thought Motorola products were well engineered until later models, hopefully Google can address this recent shortcoming and produce a quality product.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Burgess
George Bush. The Worst President Ever!
03:43 AM on 08/16/2011
Twittered F/F
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Yocepuc
Unapproved m-b's get by the new comment format.
11:38 PM on 08/15/2011
Goog should have went large, and gone for Nokia, the fast-falling star of the global market.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
BitJam
04:56 AM on 08/16/2011
Are you joking? Do you know why Nokia is tanking so badly? It is because they cut a billion dollar deal to use WP7 on their smartphones. Microsoft paid Nokia a billion dollars to use WP7. It would be stupid for Google to buy a company that is contractually obligated to use a competing OS. Not only that but the regulators would have fits, and rightly so, if Google tried to do what you suggest.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Yocepuc
Unapproved m-b's get by the new comment format.
06:22 AM on 08/16/2011
Yes, I was joking, but I did not know about the WP7 deal. That deal explains a lot. Thanks for the info.