(04-13-2018 12:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  Wouldn't an arrangement like that be considered monopolistic, and therefore not pass regulatory muster?

I think it's safe to assume that the lawyers already considered that when structuring the Disney-Fox deal, and are satisfied that it's not a monopoly problem. The Murdochs will not have any control over Disney, and while they will be the largest shareholder it's still a relatively small percentage. The only "conflict" is that, in their operation of Fox, they won't be motivated to take actions (such as making TV rights more expensive for ESPN) that could harm the value of their Disney shares. AFAIK that's not any kind of legal violation, but if someone can cite a law that makes it a violation, feel free to post a link here.