[nl]

1) ARM doesn't manufacture any chips. They licence their designs to chip makers. That means they are in the chip design market, and there is no way they have a monopoly there, so I find it extremely unlikely that the takeover would be blocked on those grounds.

2) Antitrust problems generally happen when you coerce a company into something using your monopoly power - not when you close down a business (if you believe the bit about them closing ARM down - which I don't). If Apple tried to force ARM licencees to forbid the use of Android (or Flash! :)) on the chips, then maybe there would be a concern (abuse of market power etc).

[gonzo]

They don't have to 'force' it, they just have to make it very expensive.

ARM has a three-tier licensing model (http://www.arm.com/products/buying-guide/licensing/index.php...)

If you believe the wikipedia entry on ARM licensing costs, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture#ARM_licensees), then the average cost (in 2006) was $0.11 per core, averaged across all cores.

At at 50M iPhones, thats $5.5M (USD). Even if Apple is paying $2/core in licensing costs (effective, the A4 is the first non-Samsung part used by iPhone OS), thats still $100M, so $8B doesn't pencil out.

I do find it incredibly likely though that Apple would 'buy out' their license(s), and negotiate to have a minimal (maybe even zero) cost license to all future ARM IP.

Or they could just buy a controlling interest (probably wouldn't take 51%) and frighten off everyone who competes with Apple.

Just the slow-down for the rest of the market alone (Atom isn't anywhere close to ARM in terms of functionality/watt), it might be worth it.

[nl]

I don't disagree with your point, except this:

Just the slow-down for the rest of the market alone (Atom isn't anywhere close to ARM in terms of functionality/watt), it might be worth it.

ARM licencees already have next-gen (Cortex-A9; ie: Tegra-2 etc) chips coming this year. Any slow down in new designs from ARM won't effect the market for a couple of years as these chips are much faster than the current designs (Cortex-A8; ie: Snapdragon, TI OMAP 3000, Apple A4)

[bad_user]

> Antitrust problems generally happen when you coerce a company into something using your monopoly power

So Microsoft buying Intel wouldn't generate antitrust problems?

[nl]

Microsoft is a special case because of their previous antitrust problems. I'm sure it would be investigated, and with a merger of companies that big I suspect lobbying and politics will have as much effect as the law itself.

But at a very superficial level: MS & Intel are in different markets, so there is no obvious objection.

IANAL etc etc