( ESNUG 497 Item 1 ) -------------------------------------------- [01/26/12]
Subject: The FTC Commissioners want you to speak up if SNPS goes monopoly
> Here's how the 208 EDA users responded:
>
> The SNPS-LAVA merger is
>
> BAD : ######################################### 81%
> GOOD : ##### 10%
> NEUTRAL : #### 9%
>
> And here's the breakout of how the users commented to the "Why?".
>
> This SNPS-LAVA merger is BAD overall because:
>
> SNPS-LAVA means less competition : ##################### 42%
> makes EDA pricing go up : ############## 27%
> SNPS sales is arrogant : # 2%
> has anti-trust concerns : #### 7%
> makes SNPS the Microsoft of EDA : ### 6%
> it gives SNPS niche tool monopolies : ######## 17%
> it kills innovation : #### 8%
>
> gives SNPS dominance in STA : ######## 16%
> gives SNPS dominance in digital P&R : ########## 19%
> gives SNPS dominance in synthesis : ## 4%
> gives SNPS strength in LVS/DRC : #### 7%
> gives SNPS dominance in SPICE : ##### 9%
> we depend on LAVA database : #### 7%
>
>: - from http://www.deepchip.com/items/0496-01.html
From: John Cooley <jcooley=user domain=zeroskew not calm>
In light of this strong negative EDA user reaction to the recently proposed
Magma-Synopsys merger, a few EDA old-timers (who wished to remain anonymous
for fear of SNPS retribution) called to remind me of what the three FTC
Commisioners had warned about in the 2002 Synopsys-Avanti merger:
"While I have decided to concur in the vote to close, I remain uneasy
about this transaction's potential impact on the EDA industry. I
write separately to highlight my concerns, and also to urge EDA
customers and competitors to keep the Commission fully appraised of
post-acquisition market developments, in case a future enforcement
action becomes necessary."
"My fellow Commissioners have indicated that they, too, will be on the
lookout for anticompetitive conduct stemming from this acquisition,
which could justify a future enforcement action against Synopsys. I
sincerely hope that no such conduct occurs, and that the parties'
promises of procompetitive benefits all come to pass. I do expect,
however, that the Commission will act swiftly and forcefully if we
detect any anticompetitive effects. Only a quick enforcement response
will prevent an unfortunate "too little, too late" situation in the
fast-moving EDA industry. Therefore, in this case even more so than
most, we must rely on knowledgeable industry participants to assist
us in our ongoing monitoring efforts."
- FTC Commissioner Sheila Anthony on Synopsys-Avanti
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2002/07/advantanthonystmnt.htm
"I remain concerned about Synopsys's future conduct and possible market
effects - as do my colleagues Commissioners Anthony and Leary, who vow
in their respective statements to keep watch for evidence that Synopsys
has improperly hindered rivals and brought anticompetitive effects to
the EDA industry. Accordingly, if sufficient evidence comes to light,
I expect that the Commission would promptly initiate appropriate action."
- FTC Commissioner Mozelle Thompson on Synopsys-Avanti
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2002/07/avantthompsonstmnt.htm
"I also agree that it is prudent to watch this market closely in the
future, to see whether our present views about incentives and intentions
prove to be accurate. If we are wrong, then it will be necessary to
inquire further about ultimate market effects and perhaps seek relief
that addresses the underlying transaction."
- FTC Commissioner Thomas Leary on Synopsys-Avanti
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2002/07/avantlearystmnt.htm
Long story short, since SNPS-AVNT merger in 2002 the FTC is directly asking
EDA users and/or EDA vendors to contact them if Synopsys starts looking
monopolistic to you.
- John Cooley
DeepChip.com Holliston, MA
P.S. And I want to thank the EDA old timers who pointed this out to me.
Join
Index
Next->Item
|
|
