If you feel like EdTech options are shrinking in front of your eyes, you’re not just imagining it. According to HolonIQ, global edtech venture funding has dropped approximately 90% from 2021 to 2024, forcing many small companies to exit, consolidate, or be acquired. This consolidation is often framed as a path toward stability and scale. But for many institutions, it brings the opposite: disruption.
As colleges and universities navigate transformation enrollment shifts, rising costs, and evolving student expectations, the vendors they partner with play an outsized role in shaping the learning—not just for the institution, but for students themselves. From content delivery to learning management systems, institutions depend heavily on platforms and third parties to support instructional quality and student success.
In a recent analysis, Forbes called this sweeping trend “The Great Consolidation,” describing how mergers across the software and SaaS industries are limiting customer choice, stifling innovation, and reducing service accountability. The parallels in higher ed are striking and potentially more consequential.
Consolidation in edtech doesn’t just limit product diversity—it actively shifts bargaining power away from institutions. As argued by the Economic Opportunity Institute, shrinking markets in any industry undermine consumer power. This rule applies to higher education institutions looking to procure partners as well.
Large providers with majority market share can dictate everything from pricing and rollout timelines to platform functionality and integration policies. For institutions, this may result in rigid contracts with limited flexibility and little room for negotiation.
This erosion of bargaining power isn’t a new concern. In fact, higher ed leaders have been raising the alarm for more than a decade. A 2011 article from Inside Higher Ed noted that CIOs were already concerned about being “over a barrel” when negotiating with dominant vendors, a warning that has only grown more urgent.
And when institutions lose the ability to demand more, it’s students who ultimately receive less.
One of the less visible—but equally as damaging—consequences of vendor consolidation in higher education is its quiet erosion of innovation.
Research from the American Antitrust Institute suggests this isn’t a coincidence and that consolidated markets across industries are a threat to innovative progress. In education, this can translate to fewer enhancements in areas like accessibility, analytics, and adaptive learning—technologies that students increasingly rely on.
We’ve seen this play out similarly in the Learning Management System (LMS) space, as patent wars made institutions fear for the loss of innovation. Blackboard’s aggressive acquisition strategy led to near-monopoly status and some institutions reporting stagnant development and limited adaptability. This environment ultimately created space for platforms like Canvas, which disrupted the market by offering more user-friendly, innovative, and service-driven alternatives.
This principle is what Forbes Business Council’s analysis of mergers warns about when it speaks on “Reduced Competition And Choice.” Stagnation can not only hamper the quality of education but also place institutions at a disadvantage in attracting and retaining students who expect modern, flexible, and efficient learning environments.
The effects of consolidation can extend beyond higher ed leaders and throughout campus. A 2025 article from EDUCAUSE Review warns thatEdTech vendor acquisitions can trigger rapid changes in service agreements, pricing structures, and product functionality.
Disruptions ripple across campus can include:
Kim Fahey, CEO of Collegis Education, confirms the additional challenges this could bring in the EdTech Chronicle: “Aligning disparate systems, software applications, and hardware platforms is no easy task. Potential pitfalls include data integration issues and the need for extensive training on new systems.”
According to a recent study, 70% of in-person students and 79% of online students already say that technical issues, including software problems, have impacted their learning. Of those students, an alarming 41% shared that this disruption could even impact their decision to enroll for another term.
Higher ed bookstores have faced similar upheaval. Nebraska Book Company (NBC), a major player in campus retail, closed its doors in 2023 after 108 years of service, with local news coverage citing market disruption from companies like Amazon. Additionally, over the past decade, dozens of independent campus bookstores have been acquired by big-box vendors—replacing tailored, local solutions with standardized, less adaptable models.
Companies partaking in this consolidation potentially invite more complications for institutions. And when it comes to the importance of retention in this delicate era of higher education, institutional leaders can’t afford to take those risks.
But not all consolidation is inherently negative. Strategic growth, when done transparently and with institutional needs at the center, can bring real value, from reduced operational costs to increased productivity.
When BibliU acquired Texas Book Company (TBC) in 2023, rather than simply increasing scale, we focused on enhancing our bookstore capabilities while upholding our core values: transparent pricing, flexible delivery, and strong institutional partnership. This is strategic integration done right—growth without compromise.
This year, dozens of acquisitions have already taken place across the EdTech ecosystem—including several high-profile consolidations that made headlines. While many were driven by goals like valuation growth and operational efficiency, they often lacked a clear focus on improving outcomes for students and educators.
By contrast, BibliU’s approach demonstrates how expansion can be mission-driven rather than margin-driven. Forward-thinking institutions are shifting their procurement priorities to place greater value on partnership, adaptability, long-term stability, and student-centered design rather than brand recognition or size.
The real question isn’t, “Is your provider big enough?”
It’s “Are they built to serve you?”
At BibliU, we’re not aiming to be the biggest provider in the market; we’re committed to being the most responsive and mission-aligned. Unlike others that may have prioritized scale over service, we’ve continued to center our work on access, outcomes, and long-term success for our 150+ partners. We’ve built our approach around service-oriented support and transformative collaboration. Whether that means helping Jackson College boost its retention rate or working with Florida SouthWestern State College to reimagine their campus stores, our focus remains the same: delivering real impact through collaborative, student-first solutions.
In a rapidly consolidating landscape, institutions don’t just need another vendor—they need a true partner.
While this blog explores the broader market forces at play, stay tuned for a follow-up piece where we’ll dive deeper into how we approached our own acquisition differently and what others can learn from a mission-first model of growth.
Building on a recent Campus Convos episode with N2N Services CEO Kiran Kodithala, this blog dives into how AI-driven tools are helping institutions detect financial fraud early and protect valuable resources—safeguarding access for real learners, especially at open-access institutions.
In celebration of Community College Month, this blog spotlights how community colleges are not only champions of access and affordability but also leaders in educational innovation, reshaping the future of higher ed from the ground up.
In a recent episode of Campus Convos, BibliU CEO Dave Sherwood and IWCC President Dr. Dan Kinney dive into the complexities of large-scale fundraising in higher ed. Building on that conversation, this article explores ways institutions can increase donor engagement and fundraising success.
