A California judge is reportedly allowing Meta to close its acquisition of virtual reality fitness startup Within, despite an ongoing antitrust case by the Federal Trade Commission. Bloomberg reports that a pair of sealed orders deny the FTC’s request to block the deal but with a one-week delay that will give the FTC time to appeal. The orders were posted yesterday, and a status hearing on the case is set for February 7th.
The FTC sued in July of 2022 to stop Meta’s acquisition of Within, which makes the popular VR app Supernatural. The agency argued that Meta’s purchase would expand its dominance in the consumer VR market, where Meta has staked many of its resources in recent years. The commission highlighted Meta’s previous merger with the company behind Beat Saber in 2019, claiming that the addition of Within would eliminate a “beneficial rivalry” between the two companies.
Related: Snap Ordered To Hand Over Emails In Meta FTC Antitrust Case
Meta fought the decision, but in December, it agreed to delay its Within acquisition until January 31st — although Meta CTO Andrew Bosworth said in a hearing that the company might drop the deal if it “doesn’t close in a timely manner.” Meta declined to discuss the decision at this point.
The FTC apparently faced internal disagreements over whether to intervene in Meta and Within’s deal, and its pursuit of the case stands in stark contrast to several relatively smooth Meta (formerly Facebook) acquisitions, including its purchase of VR startup Oculus in 2014. “Out of respect for the court’s orders, the FTC is not in a position to comment at this time,” FTC director of public affairs Douglas Farrar told The Verge in response to a request for comment.
Featured News
CVS Health Explores Potential Breakup Amid Investor Pressure: Report
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
DirecTV Acquires Dish TV, Creating 20 Million-Subscriber Powerhouse
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
South Korea Fines Kakao Mobility $54.8 Million for Anti-Competitive Practices
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Google Offers Settlement in India’s Antitrust Case Regarding Smart TVs
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Attorney Challenges NCAA’s $2.78 Billion Settlement in Landmark Antitrust Cases
Oct 3, 2024 by
nhoch@pymnts.com
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh