WSJ has now reported Facebook and Google’s sketchy price fixing deal terms. Alleges the “duopoly” allocated their surveillance advertising biz and this sure seems to back it up. https://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-the-google-facebook-ad-deal-at-the-heart-of-a-price-fixing-lawsuit-11609254758

If you can reduce the fees on your bid, you have an inherent advantage in an auction to reach the exact same surveillance target.

And of course, the advent of “header bidding” created material risk to Google’s advantage in data surveillance and its gatekeeper role over the advertising supply chain. Evidence appears to show they knew this. “FAN” = Facebook.

Facebook clearly understood this. Dan Rose wisely moved on as Facebook’s repeated scandals broke and no one ever told the rest of the market about this concerning behavior only possible because of Google’s opaque gatekeeper role.

Kicker: hence the section one case. “Unlike other types of antitrust cases, agreements to fix prices or rig auctions are inherently illegal, said Harry First, a NYU antitrust law prof and former head of NY state’s antitrust enforcement bureau.”