How should rapidly evolving technology factor into merger analysis?

How should rapidly evolving technology factor into merger analysis? The DOJ's recent review of the proposed Seismic-Highspot merger provides an interesting example.
 
Both companies offer sales enablement software, and the DOJ investigated whether their combination could harm competition. One of the key questions was whether emerging AI-native firms could provide a meaningful competitive constraint on established providers.

The economic question goes beyond whether new competitors simply exist. Entry must be timely, likely, and sufficient to constrain the merged firm.
 
In closing its investigation, the DOJ pointed to multiple forms of evidence indicating that AI-native firms were growing quickly, winning customers, and increasing competitive pressure on legacy providers.
 
The case highlights a broader challenge for competition economics: in rapidly evolving markets, historical market shares may not fully capture future competitive conditions. At the same time, predictions of technological disruption need to be tested against real-world evidence.
 
Evaluating customer switching, entry and expansion, pricing, win-loss data, internal forecasts, and other market evidence can help distinguish credible competitive threats from speculative ones.
 
Read the DOJ's statement here.