Enterprise

Nvidia’s bold bid for Arm is in big trouble

Nvidia's Jensen Huang wanted to upend the chip industry with its Arm bid. Regulators think it's too much.

Nvidia and Arm getting glued together

Nvidia's $40 billion bid to acquire Arm faces regulatory challenges.

Image: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Nvidia's Jensen Huang and Arm's Simon Segars — two of the most important CEOs in the chip industry — are a study in contrasts.

The British-born Segars exudes a "can-I-hold-the-door-for-you" politeness. Huang is audacious, known for sporting a trademark leather jacket at public events and forging Nvidia's play-to-win culture.

Huang's bold vision for Nvidia's future centers on absorbing Segars' diplomatic strategy for Arm through a $40 billion bid to acquire the chip designer. It's a transformative deal for both companies that would reshape the semiconductor industry: not just in terms of what it would mean for Nvidia, but also in the implications for the thousands of businesses around the world that rely on Arm's technologies to make chips.

For Nvidia, the ambition is clear. If the deal closes, the company aims to sell Nvidia's technology through Arm's network of partners, create a full data-center platform that combines ARM server chip tech with Nvidia's own data-center products and participate in "inventing the future" of cloud-to-edge computing, Huang said last year in an investor conference call.

"We've invested so much across all of these different areas that we felt that we really had to take the opportunity to own the company and collaborate deeply as we invent the future," Huang said.

But more than a year after Nvidia announced the acquisition, the deal remains mired in regulatory limbo. And on Wednesday, Nvidia received some unwelcome news.

The European Commission said that it plans to initiate an in-depth probe of the deal's implications that could last months. Other competition authorities in the U.S., U.K. and China are still chewing over the potential drawbacks and benefits of putting Arm's valuable chip designs in Nvidia's hands.

A Nvidia spokesman said that regulatory processes are confidential but that the deal will boost competition and innovation, and transform Arm. They also said Nvidia plans to work with EU regulators to address the specific concerns raised Wednesday.

Those discussions with regulators are evidently not going as well as executives had hoped: Nvidia has had to push back its early 2022 timeline for the deal closing, and if the deal doesn't close by September 2022, SoftBank gets to keep a $1.3 billion breakup fee. Nvidia CFO Colette Kress has said before that the deal would be delayed, but hasn't issued a fresh estimate.

An arm and a leg

Attempting to secure the blessing of four governments sometimes at odds with one another was always going to be a tough fight.

The issues that Europe's competition regulator articulated echo what industry insiders have said publicly and privately about the potential pitfalls of giving Huang and Nvidia control over the Arm designs. Those designs power billions of mobile devices, autos, laptops, data centers, video game consoles and the dozens of other products that now rely on chips.

The major fear is that should the deal close, Nvidia would have the theoretical ability to raise the prices of Arm's core designs, or choke off access for Nvidia's competitors to Arm's tech altogether.

"It represents a huge transfer of intellectual property," VLSI Research's Risto Puhakka told Protocol. "The reason is that the Arm intellectual property is used by every company in every industry. Any piece of electronics you pick uses Arm."

Concerns over Arm's independence — historically one of the selling points of the company's technology — are also shared by big tech companies based in the U.S. Cristiano Amon of Qualcomm, which has designed chips based on Arm's technology used in many popular smartphones, has opposed the deal. Alphabet and Microsoft, both of which also license Arm designs, have voiced opposition too, among others.

Big Tech companies take issue with Nvidia's ownership because it would theoretically get a first look at whatever technology Arm develops, giving it an edge over the competition, Bernstein chips analyst Stacy Rasgon told Protocol. Nvidia would also theoretically have a much better idea of the future plans of many of its competitors that also use Arm's technology.

"So what you have is a lot of global licensees who would not be terribly thrilled to see Nvidia, or, frankly, any current licensee buy it," Rasgon said. "[Arm] is valuable because it is independent."

'An era of techno-nationalism'

The deal does have some supporters among big companies: Infrastructure chip makers Broadcom and Marvell Technology have come out in favor, as has smart home device company MediaTek. But those companies are clearly outnumbered by the deal's detractors.

Beyond corporate interests, the EU also said it is concerned with whether a Nvidia-owned Arm would alter its research and development focus toward whatever is most profitable for Nvidia, leaving Arm's ecosystem by the wayside.

The U.K. has raised a separate set of concerns. Former digital secretary Oliver Dowden is worried about national security — a consistent refrain when discussing chips amid global buyers of semiconductors, whose demand vastly outnumbers the available chip supply. The U.K.'s Competition and Markets Authority has also said it wants an in-depth probe of the deal.

Several industry watchers have pointed out, however, that national security concerns don't necessarily make sense because Japan-based SoftBank already owns Arm.

"Having them in separate countries is a good thing when people are anxious about the idea that countries actually might restrict access to technology as a part of this big geopolitical concept of having them under control," said Steven Weber, a professor at UC Berkeley. Arm is one of the tech giants of the U.K., and he thinks it is unlikely that the country would be willing to let an American business buy it because "we're living in an era of techno-nationalism."

Should Huang and Nvidia find a way to get the deal over the finish line, it would transform the company from one that generates $17 billion a year in revenue into a business that could challenge Intel's $78 billion in annual sales.

The combination of its graphics processors (increasingly used in artificial intelligence applications), Arm's central processor designs and the company's recent acquisition of the Mellanox networking business would give it the tech needed to challenge Intel. Combine that intellectual property with the manufacturing prowess of key partner TSMC and Intel's recent struggles, and Huang's bold bet is at least within the realm of possibility.

But according to Rasgon and several other industry experts interviewed by Protocol, the deal isn't plausible.

Nvidia needs to overcome too many interests working against it to realize the changes it wants to see in the semiconductor industry. And should the U.K., EU and the U.S. regulators all somehow sign off on the transaction, the deal would still need approval in China as well. There, geopolitical interests could trump concerns over business, and a yet unresolved conflict with former Arm China CEO Allen Wu may throw a wrench into its plans. Wu didn't respond to a request for comment.

"I don't think it closes," Rasgon said. "I don't think anybody really believes they're going to close it."

Policy

Musk’s texts reveal what tech’s most powerful people really want

From Jack Dorsey to Joe Rogan, Musk’s texts are chock-full of überpowerful people, bending a knee to Twitter’s once and (still maybe?) future king.

“Maybe Oprah would be interested in joining the Twitter board if my bid succeeds,” one text reads.

Photo illustration: Patrick Pleul/picture alliance via Getty Images; Protocol

Elon Musk’s text inbox is a rarefied space. It’s a place where tech’s wealthiest casually commit to spending billions of dollars with little more than a thumbs-up emoji and trade tips on how to rewrite the rules for how hundreds of millions of people around the world communicate.

Now, Musk’s ongoing legal battle with Twitter is giving the rest of us a fleeting glimpse into that world. The collection of Musk’s private texts that was made public this week is chock-full of tech power brokers. While the messages are meant to reveal something about Musk’s motivations — and they do — they also say a lot about how things get done and deals get made among some of the most powerful people in the world.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.
Fintech

Circle’s CEO: This is not the time to ‘go crazy’

Jeremy Allaire is leading the stablecoin powerhouse in a time of heightened regulation.

“It’s a complex environment. So every CEO and every board has to be a little bit cautious, because there’s a lot of uncertainty,” Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire told Protocol at Converge22.

Photo: Circle

Sitting solo on a San Francisco stage, Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire asked tennis superstar Serena Williams what it’s like to face “unrelenting skepticism.”

“What do you do when someone says you can’t do this?” Allaire asked the athlete turned VC, who was beaming into Circle’s Converge22 convention by video.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.

Enterprise

Is Salesforce still a growth company? Investors are skeptical

Salesforce is betting that customer data platform Genie and new Slack features can push the company to $50 billion in revenue by 2026. But investors are skeptical about the company’s ability to deliver.

Photo: Marlena Sloss/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Salesforce has long been enterprise tech’s golden child. The company said everything customers wanted to hear and did everything investors wanted to see: It produced robust, consistent growth from groundbreaking products combined with an aggressive M&A strategy and a cherished culture, all operating under the helm of a bombastic, but respected, CEO and team of well-coiffed executives.

Dreamforce is the embodiment of that success. Every year, alongside frustrating San Francisco residents, the over-the-top celebration serves as a battle cry to the enterprise software industry, reminding everyone that Marc Benioff’s mighty fiefdom is poised to expand even deeper into your corporate IT stack.

Keep Reading Show less
Joe Williams

Joe Williams is a writer-at-large at Protocol. He previously covered enterprise software for Protocol, Bloomberg and Business Insider. Joe can be reached at JoeWilliams@Protocol.com. To share information confidentially, he can also be contacted on a non-work device via Signal (+1-309-265-6120) or JPW53189@protonmail.com.

Policy

The US and EU are splitting on tech policy. That’s putting the web at risk.

A conversation with Cédric O, the former French minister of state for digital.

“With the difficulty of the U.S. in finding political agreement or political basis to legislate more, we are facing a risk of decoupling in the long term between the EU and the U.S.”

Photo: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Cédric O, France’s former minister of state for digital, has been an advocate of Europe’s approach to tech and at the forefront of the continent’s relations with U.S. giants. Protocol caught up with O last week at a conference in New York focusing on social media’s negative effects on society and the possibilities of blockchain-based protocols for alternative networks.

O said watching the U.S. lag in tech policy — even as some states pass their own measures and federal bills gain momentum — has made him worry about the EU and U.S. decoupling. While not as drastic as a disentangling of economic fortunes between the West and China, such a divergence, as O describes it, could still make it functionally impossible for companies to serve users on both sides of the Atlantic with the same product.

Keep Reading Show less
Ben Brody

Ben Brody (@ BenBrodyDC) is a senior reporter at Protocol focusing on how Congress, courts and agencies affect the online world we live in. He formerly covered tech policy and lobbying (including antitrust, Section 230 and privacy) at Bloomberg News, where he previously reported on the influence industry, government ethics and the 2016 presidential election. Before that, Ben covered business news at CNNMoney and AdAge, and all manner of stories in and around New York. He still loves appearing on the New York news radio he grew up with.

Latest Stories
Bulletins