No, the interests of companies and customers are usually at odds with big mergers.

Competition is good for customers, it means different things get tried so there’s more diversity in products and pressure to compete on lower prices.

Figma is not selling to gain any efficiency or benefit from being included in Adobe, people are just looking for a pay day.

These kind of just payday mergers along with private equity profit by destruction mergers need a lot of regulatory backpressure because they simply aren’t in the interests of anybody but the people profiting from them.

Only if there is active competition between similarly sized companies with the customers able to move unhindered between them.

Antitrust regulators have long since been forbidden to use their diminishing powers to make that a reality.

Companies aren’t your friends. They exist to maximize what customers will pay in exchange for the minimum effort on their part.

This is super true. Also, the reverse relationship exists with the company and the workers, but we workers often imagine it's different.

what's truly been mind-boggling is how companies ARE made out of people... people who may well be your friends; and yet, what you said remains true, that the company wont be your friend.

It's good for adobe and figma employees/shareholders, but bad for figma as a product / new sub-business

Generally, companies obtaining a monopoly position is bad for consumers.

I agree so hard that I rage posted the same idea with less polite wording. Sorry for not reading your comment first.

If a company fires all human customer service and leaves you only with bots to interact with, it's a great saving for them, it's the worst case scenario for human customers.

Depends on the customer. The equity has customers too.