Technology

Today the number of VPNs grows extensively, but most of them don’t have any unique feature. In the nearest future, the number of unspecific services will go down as the biggest players on the market will be able to lower the prices on the privacy protection services. 

At the same time, these solutions will become more focused and avoid the

Uber and Grab have been hit with combined fines of $9.5 million after their merger deal was found to have violated Singaporeanti-competition laws.

Grab acquired (and then merged/closed) UberSoutheast Asia business in March, but the Competition Commission of Singapore today declared the deal is &anti-competitive& following a months-long investigation into its impact on Singapore.

The CCCS levied an SG$6,582,055 (US$4.8 million) fine on Uber and an SG$6,419,647 (US$4.7 million) fine on Grab, but it won&t unwind the deal, which had been an option. The fines relate only to the businesses in Singapore, which is just one of eight marketswhere Uber and Grab competed. Grab has raised $6 billion from investors so it shouldn&t have an issue paying that back.

Chiefly, the CCCS found that Grab had raised prices by 10-15 percent following the deal, whilst its market share grew to 80 percent. Thatdespite Grab co-founder Hooi Ling Tan claiming that there is still plenty of competition across Southeast Asia.

&At the conclusion of its investigation, CCCS has found that the Transaction is anti-competitive, having been carried into effect, and has infringed section 54 of the Competition Act by substantially lessening competition in the ride-hailing platform market in Singapore,& the agency wrote.

Grab, which is valued at $11 billion and is pushing itself as an all-in-one ‘super app,&wasn&t legally compelled to notify the CCCS of its deal with Uber. But the commission does warn companies to consider reaching out it if the deal in question leaves the merged entity with upwards of 40 percent market share, orthe post-merger combined market share of the three largest firms is 70 percent or higher. Grab contacted the CCCS only after the deal was announced.

Itworth noting that the Philippines, the only other Southeast Asia country to launch an investigation into the deal, approved the merger without repercussions last month.

Through its investigation, the CCCS engaged with Grab to make a number of requests on its business, they included restoring its pre-deal pricing and commission rates, cutting exclusivity agreements with taxi operators, and removing lock-in for drivers that use its rental partners or UberLion City Rentals business. Those are broadly the same again — and the commission did note that Grab had changed its loyalty program post deal.

&Mergers that substantially lessen competition are prohibited and CCCS has taken action against the Grab-Uber merger because it removed Grabclosest rival, to the detriment of Singapore drivers and riders. Companies can continue to innovate in this market, through means other than anti-competitive mergers,& CCCS chief executive Toh Han Li said in a statement.

In keeping with recent traditional around CCCS statements, Grab produced a lengthy response of its own. One part to highlight is its apparent insistence that the merger deal did not significantly impact competition.

&Grab had, with its advisers, assessed that the transaction would not result in a substantial lessening of competition,& so saidDaren Shiau, who is co-head ofAllen - GledhillCompetition - Antitrust practice, one of the firmthat Grab retained.

Shiaustatement is something that the 80 percent market share stat suggests is untrue. No doubt many consumers and drivers, who today have fewer options,will also disagree with.

HereGrabfull statement in all of its glory:

We have been working with the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) during its review over the past few months. Today, we are glad that the CCCS has completed its investigations on the Grab-Uber transaction and did not require the transaction to be unwound. Grab completed the Transaction within its legal rights, and still maintains we did not intentionally or negligently breach competition laws.

Grab agrees that keeping the market open and contestable is best for consumers and drivers, and we will abide by the remedies set out by the CCCS. However, it is unfortunate that the CCCS is taking a very narrow market definition in arriving at its conclusion that the Transaction has led to a substantial lessening of competition. Commuters are free to choose between street-hail taxis and private hire cars, and it is a fact that private-hire car drivers& incomes are directly impacted by intense competition with street-hail taxis.

We recognise that the CCCSposition on non-exclusivity arrangements is to set the right tone for the transport industry. Grab agrees with, and has long advocated for, industry-wide regulations that allow drivers to freely choose which platform or operator they wish to drive with. For drivers to have full maximum choice, all transport players, including taxi operators, should also be subjected to nonexclusivity conditions. Grab should not be the only transport player subjected to non-exclusivity conditions. This is inconsistent with taxi industry practices and we will continue our dialogue with the CCCS and the Land Transport Authority (LTA) to create a level playing field for all. In this respect, we welcome CCCSwillingness to review the remedial measures as market conditions change. We also note that the LTA is reviewing the regulatory framework for the point-to-point transportation sector, which we hope will address non-exclusivity across the industry.

Grab is committed to fair pricing and has not raised fares since the Transaction. Grab will continue to adhere to our pre-transaction pricing model, pricing policies and driver commissions. We have been and will continue to submit weekly pricing data to the CCCS for monitoring.

Grab is making every effort to serve our customers better and we are adding more app features that will improve the user experience for customers and drivers. We want to contribute meaningfully to Singaporesolutions to enhance urban liveability.

For example, we are studying data and vehiclesharing services to play our part to optimise Singaporeoverall transport network. As one of the biggest tech employers in the country, Grab is making significant contributions to Singaporeeconomic development and we will continue to develop Singaporetalent in product development and design, data science, artificial intelligence, machine learning, and engineering.

Grab is heartened to receive the support of governments across Southeast Asia to enable us to serve Southeast Asians better. The recent decisions by Philippine Competition Commission and CCCS in not pursuing the route of unwinding the Transaction demonstrate a deeper appreciation of Grabpotential to serve the region.

Last year, an investor projected that Apple would be spendingup to $4.2 billionon original content by 2022, but if the reports coming out now about what that content will look like are correct, the company may want its money back.

A newWall Street Journalarticlehighlights some of the tensions that Apple faces as it looks to create a streaming media service in the age ofHandmaidTale,House of Cards,Orange is the New Black,Game of Thrones, and evenThe Marvelous Mrs. Maisel.

To set the table,The Journal walked readers through some of the issues Tim Cook apparently had withVital Signs, a title the company had acquired loosely based on the biography of rap legend (and former head of the billion dollar Apple acquisition, Beats) Dr. Dre.

Reportedly, after Cook saw scenes including a mansion orgy, white lines, and drawn guns the Apple chief put the kibosh on the whole production saying it was too violent and not something that Apple can air.

For Applecontent business, gratuitous profanity, sex or violence are all verboten as the company tries to thread the needle between being a widely beloved producer of high quality consumer goods and purveyor of paid entertainment to a public thatincreasingly enthralled with blood and gore at its circuses.

In other words, Applemores seem a little misplaced.

Therea problem for Apple as it tries to stitch together a studio while limiting itself to the entertainment equivalent of cream of wheat. Plenty of other other technology companies are gunning for that number one slot and studios are fighting for their very survival.

Money may talk in Hollywood, but creative control, ensuring an audience for a show, and the continued viability of programming also have their place. Creators may find that they&re far more comfortable wrapped in a quilt that has more varied programming where their shows may be buoyed by the success of other, darker programming that appeals to a broader audience.

If Appleaversion to potentially scandalous storylines is as extreme asThe Wall Street Journalarticle makes it seem — requesting the removal of crucifixes from a set to avoid offending religious sensibilities in an M. Night Shyamalan drama; parting ways with show-runners because of the &dark tone& they were taking in a reboot of Steven SpielbergAmazing Storiesand the big budget vehicle for Jennifer Aniston and Reese Witherspoon; spiking the Dr. Dre show entirely — it may not even be able to field series as enjoyable as reported Cook favorite Friday Night Lights (which featured teenage sex, underage drinking, abortion, and extreme religiosity alongside the familial and football foibles of Eric and Tammy Taylor).

Appleambitions to be the go to spot for family friendly fare also risks being thwarted by the only studio thatmanaged to fend off the tech giants encroaching on the entertainment world — Disney. The mighty mouse house has plans for its own streaming service (and already has a place for more mature content to reside). A bundled package that includes discounts could be an unbeatable option for would-be subscribers — and makes up for the fact that Disneyown streaming service won&t have R-rated films.

With competition so fierce it doesn&t make much sense for Apple to box its own content service into a corner just as itstruggling to get its footing the ring.

All that said, having a roughly $200 billion pile of cash sitting in the corner definitely gives Applestreaming contender a fighting chance. The question is whether an audience will stick around to watch whatlikely to be a bloodless fight.