2 ms·

I know that it isn't binart but I can't help but note the irony: if they don't last forever and their demise isn't from obsolescence but a competitor isn't that

I know that it isn't binart but I can't help but note the irony: if they don't last forever and their demise isn't from obsolescence but a competitor isn't that a statement contradicting preventing competition? One could be technically more precise and limit prevention to "full effectiveness in all in their domain" or use it loosely enough that simply making one potential competitor unable to set up due to lower margins or investment in efficency is not wrong in a pendantic sense separate from the legal definitions.

rifung 7y ago
> I know that it isn't binart but I can't help but note the irony: if they don't last forever and their demise isn't from obsolescence but a competitor isn't that a statement contradicting preventing competition? You're right and I also mispoke when I said monopolies cause harm in and of themselves. The issue isn't monopolies but when companies use their position as a monopoly in an anticompetitive way.