4 ms·
> If Coca Cola pays for all the shelf-space in all the leading supermarkets, how is society ever going to experience my super-cola made from unicorn tears and s
by ucaetano 8y ago
> If Coca Cola pays for all the shelf-space in all the leading supermarkets, how is society ever going to experience my super-cola made from unicorn tears and sun-drops?
Who cares? Antitrust doesn't exists to protect companies, it exists to protect consumers.
Cola is just a flavor of soda, which is just a type of drink, and can be easily interchangeable with an enormous number of drinks: water, juices, teas, etc.
As long as Coke's actions are not stopping competition in that larger market with the result of harming consumers, why should anyone care?
- smt88 8y ago> As long as Coke's actions are not stopping competition in that larger market with the result of harming consumers, why should anyone care? This makes sense as a theory, but in practice, monopolies never exist without abuse/harm. It's likely the only way to sell a single brand to wildly varying customers with different tastes.
- ucaetano 8y agoBut that isn't a monopoly. Imagine Coca-Cola creates a new flavor, with a taste so unique that nobody else is able to replicate it. Is that a monopoly? Is Coca-Cola abusing its power? No, and no.
- smt88 8y agoAs others have pointed out, you just seem to be using a different definition than the rest of us are. A single, unreplicated product is never considered a monopoly. A monopoly implies that customers don't have an alternative.
- ucaetano 8y ago> As others have pointed out, you just seem to be using a different definition than the rest of us are. The Supreme Court has defined market power as "the ability to raise prices above those that would be charged in a competitive market,"(8) and monopoly power as "the power to control prices or exclude competition." You can use whatever definition you want, doesn't make it right or useful. HN readers talking about economics is largely like economists talking about computer science.
- dageshi 8y agoGoogle has a single unique flavour of search engine, it's very popular, it's not the only one but it's the one people prefer... How is it any different?
- smt88 8y agoGoogle abuses its power, similar to what a monopoly can/does do, without strictly being a monopoly. That's part of what the original article is discussing.
- ucaetano 8y agoThat doesn't make any sense...
- treis 8y agoGoogle used it's search engine dominance to expand into analytics, advertising, e-mail, maps, mobile apps, browser, and probably more things I can't think of off the top of my head. Take maps for example. They drove (or bought) their competitors out of business to become the dominant player and then dramatically raised the cost of their API. That's classic abusive monopolistic behavior. Or look at the browser. Adblockers have been the number 1 extension since browser extensions were a thing. It doesn't take a genius to see why they aren't built into Chrome/FF. It's another classic abuse of a monopoly. They used search to bully their way into being the dominant browser and they use that dominance to protect their ad business.
- ucaetano 8y ago> They drove (or bought) their competitors out of business to become the dominant player and then dramatically raised the cost of their API. You mean maps? The Maps API is still far cheaper than what you'd have to pay to license and deploy maps from a 3rd party before them. Hard to argue that things are worse now... PS: Even then, there are a lot of other map APIs available in the market, and users have been switching. That is literally the antithesis of a monopoly...
- Vinnl 8y ago> Who cares? Antitrust doesn't exists to protect companies, it exists to protect consumers. Is that not exactly what that example is about? I, as a consumer, will not be able to experience their super-cola.
- ucaetano 8y agoAgain, who cares? Consumer protection isn't about letting you taste some weird cola. It is about price. Read the Supreme Court's definition.