[alephnerd]

Most of the Trump-sphere's donations and organization came from Andressen (the A in A16Z), David Sacks (especially during his fundraiser last year that was a who's who of YC and VCs), and Thiel.

They are all in support of Lina Khan's position on anti-trust, as it aligns closely with the vision of LTSE (YC S17) plus their grudge/annoyance at the fact that late stage acquisitions don't benefit early stage investors as much as an IPO or SPAC, plus their annoyance at how early stage investors can't take advantage of the IPO "Pop".

This has been a major fissure in the tech industry for almost a decade at this point.

To be fair, Horowitz (the Z in A16Z) donated to Harris's campaign to lobby for the same thing as well.

[jordanb]

Elon wants her gone:

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1851985438933668337

[alephnerd]

Musk is just one donor among dozens.

One of the biggest donor yes, but not enough to move the needle.

Also, the presidency is not enough to move the needle - you need down ballot support from both houses of Congress as well, which is a relationship Musk did not build unlike other donors.

[collingreen]

One donor, thanked at length by name in the president's acceptance speech, and immediately appointed over a brand new office about "efficiency" after yelling incessantly about deleting entire government departments.

Elon has a huge amount of influence over khan's future and the ftc's ability to continue in its recent push to actually protect the American consumers.

[alephnerd]

> brand new office

DOGE is a presidential task force. They are impotent like any other task force.

If you want something to worry about with the new administration, worry about the shitshow that Senate confirmation will be for much of 2025 as Senate Leadership and the Executive will clash

> the ftc's ability

The Khan style vision of antitrust (which I strongly oppose as well btw) will continue under Trump as it did under Biden.

It has bipartisan support because of bipartisan donor relations.

Oren Cass, Lina Khan, Matt Stoller, and Rohit Chopra are all cut from the same cloth.

[sumedh]

> worry about the shitshow that Senate confirmation will be for much of 2025 as Senate Leadership and the Executive will clash

Can they just get people on the Acting title and not worry about senate confirmation?

[alephnerd]

> Can they just get people on the Acting title and not worry about senate confirmation?

No.

The people who get "Acting" titles only have a lifespan of a couple months AND they need to be existing members of the bureaucracy who are 1 level below the senate appointed role.

The US is not a parliamentary system like India, UK, Canada, or Australia where the executive has power over cabinet nomination.

The US's system was explicitly built so that the president is hemmed in this manner.

[StackRanker3000]

”To move the needle” usually means to have a measurable/noticeable effect. It feels a bit weird to say that the presidency of the United States doesn’t have any effect on who the chair of the FTC is

[alephnerd]

> It feels a bit weird to say that the presidency of the United States doesn’t have any effect on who the chair of the FTC is

Because it requires Senate confirmation.

The US has one of the weakest presidencies globally for that reason.

Other than foreign policy, presidents are largely hemmed by that fact.

[sumedh]

> which is a relationship Musk did not build unlike other donors.

How do you know that?

[est31]

> late stage acquisitions don't benefit early stage investors as much as an IPO or SPAC

I've heard this repeated multiple times, but I wonder how the FTC's policies can influence this?

> how early stage investors can't take advantage of the IPO "Pop".

Could you explain this? By IPO pop do you mean the difference between what the bank underwrites and what the initial . By early vs late stage investors do you mean seed vs series G, or pre-IPO vs post-IPO? I've thought that seed vs series G investors get the same class of stock? Or is there some restriction encoded into the paperwork associated with the investment?

[alephnerd]

> how the FTC's policies can influence this

By de-incentivizing M&A, and checking larger competitors to VC darlings by hanging the Damcoles sword of antitrust.

A decade ago Marc Andressen was lobbying Obama to work on this [0][1]

In Andressen's and much of his peer's eyes, most mid-late stage startups should be IPOing sooner than they actually are. And to a certain extent he isn't wrong.

Personally, I don't buy Andressen's argument - there is a reason we added added checks and balances in the IPO process.

> Could you explain this

To go public (just like any other fundraising stage), early stage ownership stakes tend to be diluted in order to attract later investors.

IPOs are a fundraising technique like any other, but the benefits tends to bias towards funds that target late stage or roadshow investors at the expense of early investors.

In the eyes of Andressen and his peers the IPO process needs to be simplified in order to make it easier for mid-stage startups to go public AND the incentive structures need to be changed so early stage investors (read VCs like A16Z) get outsized benefit.

For most funds, this really doesn't matter, but for the mega funds like A16Z, YC, Founders Fund, etc this is a make-or-break policy as most of their portfolio are mid-late stage startups that have been pushing off IPOs because they are too small for the current market, and taking acquisitions at what a number of early stage investors view as a suboptimal price - doesn't matter to the founder because they have cash, but it does to large early stage investors.

A direct listing or SPAC would be the ideal "IPO" method envisioned, but that has been cracked down on as well (and rightfully so tbh)

[0] - https://www.cnbc.com/2013/07/11/andreessen-talks-tech-boom-b...

[1] - https://www.vox.com/2014/6/26/5837638/the-ipo-is-dying-marc-...

[est31]

Thank you! This is very informative.

[tgma]

Do you have any references for Thiel supporting Lina Khan's position on antitrust? Thiel does not appear to love Google and sees them as somewhat of a formidable opposing force, and that sometimes shows, so I can see he would enjoy his popcorn when Google is attacked by FTC, but it does not appear he would be aligned with Khan in principle.

[Epa095]

It's 'interesting' that the best way to to deduce a candidates policy in a topic is to map out what the billionaires paying them wants.