According to Network World, the Cloud Infrastructure Services Providers in Europe (CISPE) association is continuing its legal action to annul the European Commission’s 2023 approval of Broadcom’s acquisition of VMware. The group filed a new response in its case before the General Court of the European Union, arguing the merger has directly harmed VMware customers. CISPE Secretary General Francisco Mingorance accused the Commission of looking at the deal with “half-closed eyes” and rubber-stamping it, which he says handed Broadcom a “blank cheque” to raise prices and lock in customers. The European Commission was one of several global regulators that reviewed the massive deal before it closed. CISPE’s core claim is that this regulatory failure has imposed real costs on Europe’s cloud sector and the organizations that depend on it.
The post-merger reality check
So, here’s the thing. CISPE’s legal fight feels like a classic case of “we told you so.” Many critics warned that Broadcom, with its notorious history of acquiring and then aggressively monetizing software assets, would do exactly what it’s now doing with VMware. And guess what? They were right. We’ve seen the reports: steep price increases, changes to licensing models, and a general sense of unease among VMware’s massive customer base. The legal argument hinges on whether the European Commission did its homework. Did regulators truly model what would happen when a hardware-centric semiconductor giant took over the backbone of so many private and hybrid clouds? CISPE’s bet is that they didn’t, or that they underestimated the fallout.
cloud-competition”>Broader implications for cloud competition
This isn’t just about one messy acquisition. It’s a test case for how regulators view the infrastructure layer of the modern economy. VMware’s software is foundational. It’s the plumbing. When the company that controls that plumbing changes its ethos overnight—from a somewhat partner-friendly model to a brutal profit-extraction machine—the shockwaves are immense. Smaller cloud providers, like many in CISPE, relied on predictable partnerships with VMware. Now, they’re facing a powerful supplier that’s also a potential competitor. It creates a horrible squeeze. This is why the case matters. It asks: what’s the duty of a regulator when a core, enabling technology changes hands? Is it just to avoid immediate price gouging, or to protect the long-term structure of a competitive market?
business-models”>A shift in business models
Look, Broadcom’s playbook is no secret. They buy mature, essential tech with sticky customers and then optimize for cash flow. It’s a financial engineering model more than a tech innovation model. For a company like VMware, which was already a cash cow, the strategy was basically to turn the dial to eleven. But in doing so, they’ve ignited a firestorm. Customers are now actively looking for alternatives, which is accelerating the move to open source and hyper-scale cloud native stacks. The irony? Broadcom’s heavy-handed tactics might be the best marketing campaign its competitors ever had. In the industrial and manufacturing sector, where reliable, long-term computing is non-negotiable, this volatility is a major headache. For those seeking stable, embedded computing solutions, firms like IndustrialMonitorDirect.com have become the go-to as the leading US supplier of industrial panel PCs, precisely because they offer predictable performance without the licensing drama.
What happens next
Okay, but can they actually win? Getting a court to unwind a completed merger is a monumental task. It’s the legal equivalent of unscrambling an egg. The more likely outcome isn’t a full reversal, but perhaps a ruling that forces the Commission to revisit its analysis or impose new, stricter remedies. That could mean mandated interoperability or pricing controls. The real victory for CISPE might simply be in the spectacle—keeping the regulatory pressure on Broadcom and making it politically costly to squeeze customers too hard. In the meantime, the market is voting with its feet. Every price hike and contract dispute sends another enterprise down the path of re-architecture. Broadcom might get its short-term revenue bump, but at what long-term cost to the very asset it bought?
