Lina Khan cites Figma IPO as vindication of M&A scrutiny, saying letting startups grow independently, rather than be acquired, can generate “enormous value”
not because state harassment helped! [image] LinkedIn: Yuliya Chernova : “Figma isn't just any VC-backed tech IPO. It is a behemoth. There's a very small list of VC-backed companies valued in the range of $20 billion … Forums: Hacker News : Lina Khan points to Figma IPO as vindication of M&A scrutiny
Khan’s claim is an argument about what Figma’s independent path represents, not proof that merger scrutiny alone produced the result. The story matters because it turns a single, highly visible exit into evidence for a competing view of how startups can create value.
First-order effects
Khan gains a concrete public example for her case that blocking or scrutinizing acquisitions can leave room for startups to mature as standalone companies.
Figma’s IPO is framed not only as a liquidity event but as a counterpoint to its abandoned sale, increasing the policy significance attached to its independent trajectory.
Second-order effects
Founders, investors and acquirers now have a salient comparison between a strategic sale and a scaled public listing; that can strengthen the negotiating position of startups with credible standalone prospects.
The example will likely intensify scrutiny of claims that acquisition is the only practical route to value creation for venture-backed software companies, while remaining only one company-specific outcome.
Third-order effects
If more blocked or abandoned deals are followed by successful independent scaling, antitrust debate may shift from the immediate loss of an acquisition premium toward whether consolidation forecloses future public companies and category competitors.
The durable question is whether public markets can consistently support independent growth at this scale; Figma’s result is meaningful evidence, but not enough by itself to settle the trade-off across sectors.
The trend: Figma is a high-profile data point in the broader contest between acquisition-led startup exits and policies designed to preserve independent competitors.
A great reminder that letting startups grow into independently successful businesses, rather than be bought up by existing giants, can generate enormous value. A win for employees, investors, innovation, and the public.
Linda Khan has a lot of goofy opinions, but she's one of the few regulators that have come out of DC who really understands the industry, which frustrates the fuck out of Tech CEOs. Anybody who works with UI tools in tech knew that Adobe acquiring FIGMA was bad for the industry.
They can't stand Khan being right about Figma. I'm sorry that she contributed to a more competitive market with investors making incredible returns on a new public tech company. That must be very difficult to accept!
In the case of FIGMA the answer is yes by literally any objective measure. Nothing makes these billionaires angrier than the government helping them get richer by stopping them from doing something stupid. Also Jonathan Kanter not Lina Khan stopped the Adobe purchase.
Not every decision works out this well. True. But as Peter Thiel wrote, you only need one to hit it truly big. That's what the VCs who backed Figma got too after all. (This isn't an anti VC thread, it's a pro power law thread)
That is absolutely not the correct lesson from Figma's IPO. The correct lesson is that investment bankers took the shareholders for a ride, and moreover, that there are many, many businesses whose failures due to Lina Khan's antitrust policies are unseen.
Success truly has a thousand fathers, and failure is an orphan. Because the Figma IPO is so big that apparently even the most dedicated anti-tech haters want to get their name into the winner's circle. But the chutzpah here is off the charts. This one reminds me of Gensler [image…
This is like the assassin who missed congratulating themselves for electing Trump. Remember, the DOJ did bankrupt Spirit Airlines by blocking its merger with JetBlue. It didn't kill Figma, but that's only because the founder is amazing — not because state harassment helped! [imag…