5 ms·

You mean they can't do things like slander competitors, disrupt supply chains through strategic purchases, strong arm vendors, and a whole host of other non-pro

You mean they can't do things like slander competitors, disrupt supply chains through strategic purchases, strong arm vendors, and a whole host of other non-product based tactics that do nothing to show out the best product based choice? edit: And I mean that's not getting into any of the ones that are currently illegal due to regulation. Ever heard of trusts?

p_nathan 16y ago
Clearly enough laws will solve the problem. Clearly.
- okaramian 16y ago
  Depends on the laws and regulations. A lot of things don't operate in black and white good and bad.
anamax 16y ago
> Ever heard of trusts? Yes, my grandparents had one. Oh, you were refering to the subject of "anti-trust". Name three bad monopolies that didn't depend on govt power for their monopoly status.
- jbooth 16y ago
  What does "depend on gov't power" have to do with it? If you monopoly is raking in billions and the cost of a congressional race is millions, then of course you're gonna get the government on your side a bunch of the time. The question is, is this a problem with "government" or a problem with "bribery".
  - anamax 16y ago
    > What does "depend on gov't power" have to do with it? It depends. Do you think that we should treat orphans who kill their parents different from other orphans?
- maxxxxx 16y ago
  Microsoft in the 90s Standard Oil
  - m_myers 16y ago
    > Microsoft in the 90s How long did the "monopoly" last? Were consumers injured by it? > Standard Oil Standard Oil was huge because they were cheaper than the competition. Kind of like how Wal-Mart did it. Is that a bad thing?
    - jacoblyles 16y ago
      It's surprisingly hard to find an example of the textbook monopoly where prices actually rise. Diamonds, maybe?
      - m_myers 16y ago
        The funny thing is that the high prices did drive competition -- modern synthetic diamonds are virtually identical to the naked eye and are just as good (if not better) for industrial machinery. But thanks to some really good marketing, people continue to pay a premium for the "real" thing.
      - mtviewdave 16y ago
        It's not just a question of prices rising. Failure of prices to drop to the level they would otherwise in a competitive environment is also damaging. AT&T is one example of such a situation. After the breakup of AT&T, long-distances prices dropped dramatically, and quality improved just as dramatically. And I'm not sure how far your definition of "textbook monopoly" stretches, but the concept of "antitrust" covers not just monopolies, but cartels and cartel-like activity (like secret price-fixing agreements). OPEC is an example of cartel that has been successful in keeping prices artificially high for probably a majority of its existence.
        anamax 16y ago
        > AT&T is one example of such a situation. After the breakup of AT&T, long-distances prices dropped dramatically Long distance prices dropped when the long distance monopoly ended, not when AT&T was broken up. That monopoly was a creature of law.
- notahacker 16y ago
  Illegal organisations quite literally fight for territorial monopolies. The problem lies with the desire of companies to maximise profits; governments' willingness to facilitate it on occasion is a symptom rather than the cause.

p_nathan 16y ago

Clearly enough laws will solve the problem. Clearly.

okaramian 16y ago
Depends on the laws and regulations. A lot of things don't operate in black and white good and bad.

anamax 16y ago

> Ever heard of trusts? Yes, my grandparents had one. Oh, you were refering to the subject of "anti-trust". Name three bad monopolies that didn't depend on govt power for their monopoly status.

jbooth 16y ago
What does "depend on gov't power" have to do with it? If you monopoly is raking in billions and the cost of a congressional race is millions, then of course you're gonna get the government on your side a bunch of the time. The question is, is this a problem with "government" or a problem with "bribery".
- anamax 16y ago
  > What does "depend on gov't power" have to do with it? It depends. Do you think that we should treat orphans who kill their parents different from other orphans?
maxxxxx 16y ago
Microsoft in the 90s Standard Oil
- m_myers 16y ago
  > Microsoft in the 90s How long did the "monopoly" last? Were consumers injured by it? > Standard Oil Standard Oil was huge because they were cheaper than the competition. Kind of like how Wal-Mart did it. Is that a bad thing?
  - jacoblyles 16y ago
    It's surprisingly hard to find an example of the textbook monopoly where prices actually rise. Diamonds, maybe?
    - m_myers 16y ago
      The funny thing is that the high prices did drive competition -- modern synthetic diamonds are virtually identical to the naked eye and are just as good (if not better) for industrial machinery. But thanks to some really good marketing, people continue to pay a premium for the "real" thing.
    - mtviewdave 16y ago
      It's not just a question of prices rising. Failure of prices to drop to the level they would otherwise in a competitive environment is also damaging. AT&T is one example of such a situation. After the breakup of AT&T, long-distances prices dropped dramatically, and quality improved just as dramatically. And I'm not sure how far your definition of "textbook monopoly" stretches, but the concept of "antitrust" covers not just monopolies, but cartels and cartel-like activity (like secret price-fixing agreements). OPEC is an example of cartel that has been successful in keeping prices artificially high for probably a majority of its existence.
      - anamax 16y ago
        > AT&T is one example of such a situation. After the breakup of AT&T, long-distances prices dropped dramatically Long distance prices dropped when the long distance monopoly ended, not when AT&T was broken up. That monopoly was a creature of law.
notahacker 16y ago
Illegal organisations quite literally fight for territorial monopolies. The problem lies with the desire of companies to maximise profits; governments' willingness to facilitate it on occasion is a symptom rather than the cause.