4 ms·

I don't think I need to explain the myriad reasons MySpace lost.

• ci5er 10y ago
  You certainly do not. To your point, back in the day, I was having lunch with David Boies (yeah, I know, name dropping, but relevant) and re: Microsoft he said that his position was that EVERY company should have the opportunity to become a monopoly, but then to not be able to use that power of monopoly to deny that chance to others. My concern with regulatory or judicial constraints here is -- they're always too late. Be it IBM in the 60s or ATT in the 80s or Microsoft in the late-90s/early-2ks, by the time the government gets around to doing anything, the company is already being eroded from beneath. I think the only (national) example I can think of, in the US, is AT&T, which was able to keep their position because of government licensure. i.e. Natural monopolies don't occur as often as people claim. Incumbency buys patrimony. Maybe this should go to GP: IF a monopoly arises, AND that entity takes advantage of their monopoly position (reduced quality for price, outrageous margins) almost always, a challenger will appear. And get funded.