The Meta antitrust case goes to court, with the split of Instagram and WhatsApp as the focus

Meta's antitrust re-examination faces a life-and-death decision, with the fate of Instagram and WhatsApp in focus.

On April 14th, Eastern Time, it was reported that Meta's antitrust lawsuit with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) officially opened in court. This protracted legal battle will determine whether the tech giant can retain its most important assets. The FTC accuses Meta of holding an illegal monopoly in the social media sector and demands the divestiture of Instagram and WhatsApp.

The FTC's case against Meta began during Trump's first term, initially filed at the end of 2020, but was dismissed by Judge Boasberg due to insufficient evidence. During the Biden administration, the FTC submitted a revised complaint, which Boasberg found addressed the deficiencies, bringing the case back on track. Current Republican FTC Chair Ferguson has stated that he will push the case to a ruling.

If Meta is forced to divest Instagram and WhatsApp, its advertising business would suffer a devastating blow, posing significant risks to investors. Notably, Instagram is expected to contribute about 50% of Meta's U.S. revenue this year.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg will appear as the "first witness" at Meta's trial. Reports indicate that in recent weeks, Zuckerberg has been lobbying Trump to reach a settlement to avoid trial, but no agreement has been reached. Meta's stock price fell today, down 1.61% as of the time of publication, after briefly rising over 2%.

Market Definition Becomes the Core of the Dispute: Is TikTok a Competitor or a Differentiated Service?

The case will largely depend on the FTC's determination of whether Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp dominate the "personal social networking" market. FTC Chair Ferguson stated that they believe Meta is certainly a monopoly.

The FTC believes that consumers use these applications primarily to stay connected with friends and family. According to the FTC's definition, Snap falls within this market, but TikTok, YouTube, X, and Pinterest do not, as they are entertainment or "shared interest" applications, differing from the purpose of personal social networking.

The FTC is expected to heavily cite Zuckerberg's communications from years ago to argue the anti-competitive nature of the acquisitions. FTC lawyer Daniel Matheson stated in the opening remarks of the antitrust case: “Meta was prepared to acquire Snap for $6 billion in 2013.” Matheson directly criticized Meta's acquisition strategy:

They believed competition was too tough, and buying competitors was easier than competing with them.

Matheson emphasized an email Zuckerberg sent to colleagues in 2012, in which he stated that Instagram could be "very disruptive" to Facebook Zuckerberg wrote at the time: “One way to look at this is that we are actually buying time.”

Meta insists that the core premise of the FTC case is flawed, namely that Instagram and WhatsApp were destined to succeed and compete with Facebook. In fact, Meta's lawyer Hansen argued in the opening statement that Zuckerberg took risks when acquiring these services and then elevated them to new heights:

From any perspective, consumers are the biggest winners.

Instagram is crucial to Meta: A split would severely damage the business

According to research firm eMarketer, advertising on Instagram is expected to account for about 50% of Meta's U.S. sales this year. eMarketer's chief analyst Jasmine Enberg stated:

Losing Instagram would be a huge blow to Meta's business.

Enberg pointed out that Instagram continues to grow among younger users compared to Facebook, which is expected to see a 2% decline in users aged 18-24 this year. "In many ways, Meta needs Instagram to maintain user engagement and continue attracting advertisers," Enberg added.

Reports indicate that this case also illustrates the difficulty of challenging tech giants. Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp are all free to use, so Meta has never raised prices, which is the most obvious way monopolists exercise power.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission claims that Meta has raised "quality-adjusted prices"—referring to Meta using its market power to do things consumers dislike, such as showing more ads on the screen or not providing strong privacy protections.

This trial, expected to last about 8 weeks, will be presided over by Judge James Boasberg. If Boasberg finds that Meta violated antitrust laws, he will subsequently rule on remedies such as a split to restore market competition.

For investors, the outcome of this trial will directly determine the sustainability of Meta's future business model and the reasonableness of its market valuation