[AlexanderTheGr8]

I would not be surprised if Adobe intentionally added monopolistic terms to their deal with Figma or acted that the deal was monopolistic in front of antitrust officials in the hope that they might block the deal, considering that they are paying $20B for something that, in today's market, is worth way less than that.

If I am not mistaken, the fact that DOJ is preparing a suit means that the deal will not go through for at least a year or more, so Adobe can delay paying. They can also, intentionally, perform poorly in court to let DOJ get an easy win and avoid paying Figma.

In my opinion, the only losing party in this story is Figma. Adobe gets a chance to back out and DOJ gets a chance at an easy win. I am surprised FTC didn't jump on this, considering they are looking for wins, after their weak lawsuit against Meta's acquisition of Within.

[outside1234]

Figma will get $1B in breakup fees. Not sure that's a loss.

[rvz]

That is a loss with crushed dreams and ruined hopes for a massive payout.

More likely that Figma will instead use that extra $1B to fund for an IPO to make it up for this blocked acquisition.

[tiffanyh]

What’s worse, overspending $20B or giving up $1B?

[arunkant]

Ask Elon

[jgalt212]

Not for Figma, but for the VC's who've already paid for new jets or 8 figure apartments.

[tyre]

Why would it not be for Figma? The VCs won’t get cash from selling shares in the acquisition because the acquisition won’t happen.

[jgalt212]

Well, I guess it depends on your goals as Figma employee. So yes, but probably a net negative but the situation for the Figman employees and company is muddier than it is for the VCs.

[senttoschool]

Figma will be fine but I'd rather have the deal go through if I worked at Figma.

[twhntwhntwhn]

Or even more sinister - they planned all of the above before doing the deal in an attempt to weaken Figma. Valuations were already way down when the deal was announced; this is one thing that stood out so much about the deal when it was announced.