1. Short thread on Google/Fitbit. Uncut version of what I said to @frogontheroof yesterday. https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-gives-google-a-christmas-gift-clears-fitbit-deal/

2. The first Q was "is this paradoxical given the US wants 2 dismantle Facebook?" I say the optics are paradoxical. But a reasoned analysis says it's not. The US case against Facebook concerns a neater case of horizontal competition than Google/Fitbit. And Fitbit is no startup.

3. Moreover, this is consistent from an EU standpoint. The interoperability remedies in #DMA suggest that Google should keep its core platform open to other smart watches and wearable applications. Vestager yesterday gave the example of payment apps.

4. The silo-ing remedies make even more sense if Google’s core platform is to become a popular hub for multiple interoperable smart watches, so as to curb value capture from increased data extraction points.

5. Second Q was "are behavioral remedies sufficient to resolve the issues identified in the case?". Short answer =>> behavioral remedies are conventional in conglomerate merger cases. Unfortunately, they’re hard to monitor.

6. But they don’t sacrifice the efficiencies from integration. On that, recall that Google has a credible track record of research in medical science, healthcare and biology. The acquisition is a credible addition to pre existing capabilities.

7. And there’s lots of competition in smart watches and wearables, so Google’s incumbency in an adjacent market is no recipe for success.

8. Third Q was "could the new tools proposed in #DSA/ #DMA serve as a safety net if the EC got it wrong here?". Here goes my take on this. The new tools could help monitor and remedy some potential failures of merger remedies. But not the privacy concerns. And this is normal.

9. More generally, I believe this case raises important privacy concerns, and I expect, and hope, this will be dealt with under dedicated instruments if they arise.

10. The EC did the right thing to stick to its competition mandate under applicable merger law, and to refuse (i) to pursue objectives alien to economic competition or (ii) to preempt the DMA.

11. All the more so at a time where it champions application of the rule of law against some central European countries.

12. Some additions since yesterday. Don't get me wrong. I find creepy that my data could be *resold* to health insurance providers and co. But I believe the standard MO, and one that is more efficient and legitimate, is to deal with it under privacy and health industry regulation

13. I don't find compelling the G talking point whereby the acquisition is about device not data is. The acquisition is a mix of both. Smartwatches, fitness trackers and wearables are data sensors as I wrote elsewhere.

14. Conclusion: you can think about this acquisition with your guts or do this with your reason. When I use the latter, I don't find as many problematic issues as meets the eye.