“America’s Antimonopoly Debate” by Lina Khan

(March 2018)

Over the last two years, a growing number in America have concluded that the United States has a monopoly problem. The Obama Administration’s Council of Economic Advisers linked rising market power with inequality and other ills, top Senators have called for reinvigorating competition policy, and the Democratic Party has identified antitrust enforcement as a key pillar of its economic agenda.

Source: New Brandeis Movement: America’s Antimonopoly Debate | Journal of European Competition Law & Practice | Oxford Academic

Special-purpose acquisition company (SPAC)

A special purpose acquisition company (SPAC), also known as a “blank check company” is a shell corporation listed on a stock exchange with the purpose of acquiring a private company, thus making it public without going through the traditional initial public offering process.  According to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), “A SPAC is created specifically to pool funds in order to finance a merger or acquisition opportunity within a set timeframe.

Source: Special-purpose acquisition company – Wikipedia

Neeva — led by Google vets — raises $40m to build an ad-free search engine

Sridhar Ramaswamy spent 15 years building Google’s ad division. Vivek Raghunathan spent about a dozen monetizing Google Search and YouTube. The guys are Google legends…

… And competitors, too.

Their startup Neeva — fresh off a $40m Series B — is building a subscription-based, ad-free search engine from the ground up.

This time around, they’re focused on 3 things…

… Privacy, privacy, and — no, not privacy — a better user experience.

Ramaswamy believes ad-supported search pushes relevant results down the page and pressures companies to value profit over privacy.

So for $5 to $10 a month, Neeva offers ad-free search across the web and connected accounts, and promises to prioritize site users’ trust.

Source: Neeva — led by Google vets — raises $40m to build an ad-free search engine

Sunk cost fallacy

Individuals commit the sunk cost fallacy when they continue a behavior or endeavor as a result of previously invested resources (time, money or effort) (Arkes & Blumer, 1985). This fallacy, which is related to loss aversion and status quo bias, can also be viewed as bias resulting from an ongoing commitment.

For example, individuals sometimes order too much food and then over-eat just to “get their money’s worth”.

Source: Sunk cost fallacy | BehavioralEconomics.com | The BE Hub