Your argument makes the common mistake to look at these companies as abstract entities competing based on economic theory instead of groups of humans doing what

Your argument makes the common mistake to look at these companies as abstract entities competing based on economic theory instead of groups of humans doing what humans do in businesses. In most cases, the decisions come from middle management that operate based on a mix of competition and what gets them a bonus. Cutting costs or increasing profit within a manager's personal area of responsibility is often a bonus (or promotion) metric. So, many of them keep damaging their own companies to try to get their bonus or promotion. Such companies usually have endless discussions, meetings, and politicking where they explain away their bullshit hoping it will work. This should be a factor in every discussion of why companies are doing what they're doing. Will the CEO or any managers doing it get an easier bonus or transition for it with minimal liability within whatever period they're working? Well, there you go. That's economic self-interest in the real world.