5 ms·

how is banking a monopoly? or Disney?

by xoxoy 6y ago

pb7 6y ago
How is Google or Amazon or Facebook a monopoly?
- xoxoy 6y ago
  The antitrust lawsuit is focused on Google’s dominance of search. The specific question is whether Google has a monopoly on search. I think the case is pretty strong that it does.
  - jaydz 6y ago
    Why is it dominant? Is Google is preventing competition from entering the market or is it because Google offers the superior product? Good luck with that in court.
    - _-david-_ 6y ago
      Just because they don't stop their competition from entering the market would not change whether or not something is a monopoly. They have 88% of the US search market share which is often consider to be in the monopoly territory. Of course it may not be prudent to go after a company that isn't doing any malicious against its competitors.
      - drusepth 6y ago
        How would a government even go after a monopoly that isn't doing anything malicious against its competitors? What would the punishment even be? Forcing adoption of other platforms to artificially inflate usage rates? Breaking Google Search into two competing Google Mini-Search products that aren't expected to cooperate and push search #3 and onward out of the market?
        xoxoy 6y ago
        I don’t think this is about search dominance. It’s probably about Google stifling competitors on their own search results page. Yelp has complained forever that Google ranks their own reviews above Yelp. Things like that.
        pb7 6y ago
        Yelp is a parasite that participates in extortion of small businesses. They need to be investigated themselves long before their word has any weight in this matter.
    - neotek 6y ago
      "Good luck with that in court" only means something if the courts haven't been stuffed full of incompetent and dangerously unqualified judges.
  - dimator 6y ago
    How though? It's trivially simple to change the default search engine. Just because a product is dominant doesn't mean it got that way nefariously. I'm sure if you added up all the R&D over the years in search, especially considering the lead time in market, Google's numbers dwarf others (I don't have a citation on that, but it stands to reason). Parallels could be drawn with Amazon and AWS's dominance.
    - aspenmayer 6y ago
      Why is nefarious intent necessary? The rules for monopoly and abuse of market power don’t presuppose such negative motivations, just negative market outcomes.
      - pb7 6y ago
        Why is Microsoft not fined and/or broken up for failing to maintain an appropriate search market share with Bing?
      - nemothekid 6y ago
        >The rules for monopoly and abuse of market power don’t presuppose such negative motivations, just negative market outcomes. Yes they do. The reason MS got put on the chopping block was because they began telling vendors that they would charge them more if they bundled Netscape or Java. Intel got slapped with a similar suite when they began telling vendors that they would charge more for their chips if they sold any configuration with AMD chips. Similarly Standard Oil did the same thing - once they began telling suppliers they would squeeze them out if they worked with any competitors they got broken up. It's simply not enough to have a dominant position - you have to abuse it to get slapped with an anti trust suite.
        aspenmayer 6y ago
        I agree that negative intent from a monopoly power is actionable. I merely point out that negative intent is not necessary prior to regulatory action against or upon a monopoly power. I refer to another comment on this post for further info. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23198343 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23198343 "Market Power" ‘Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.’ https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/monopolization-defined https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...
  - dredmorbius 6y ago
    The antitrust lawsuit is focused on Google’s dominance of search... Not principally: Much of the states’ investigation has focused on Google’s online advertising business. The company owns the dominant tool at every link in the complex chain between online publishers and advertisers. The Justice Department likewise is making Google’s ad technology one of its points of emphasis. But it is also focusing more broadly on concerns that Google uses its dominant search business to stifle competition, people familiar with the matter said. From TFA.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
    Nope. I use Google, Bing, and DuckDuckGo daily.
- _-david-_ 6y ago
  Google has an estimate 88% of the search market share in the US. (Its higher world wide if it matters.) Many people consider that to be getting into monopoly territory.
  - sidibe 6y ago
    > Its higher world wide if it matters That seems dubious when it's blocked for 20% of the world population.

how is banking a monopoly? or Disney?

by xoxoy 6y ago

how is banking a monopoly? or Disney?

pb7 6y ago

How is Google or Amazon or Facebook a monopoly?

xoxoy 6y ago
The antitrust lawsuit is focused on Google’s dominance of search. The specific question is whether Google has a monopoly on search. I think the case is pretty strong that it does.
- jaydz 6y ago
  Why is it dominant? Is Google is preventing competition from entering the market or is it because Google offers the superior product? Good luck with that in court.
  - _-david-_ 6y ago
    Just because they don't stop their competition from entering the market would not change whether or not something is a monopoly. They have 88% of the US search market share which is often consider to be in the monopoly territory. Of course it may not be prudent to go after a company that isn't doing any malicious against its competitors.
    - drusepth 6y ago
      How would a government even go after a monopoly that isn't doing anything malicious against its competitors? What would the punishment even be? Forcing adoption of other platforms to artificially inflate usage rates? Breaking Google Search into two competing Google Mini-Search products that aren't expected to cooperate and push search #3 and onward out of the market?
      - xoxoy 6y ago
        I don’t think this is about search dominance. It’s probably about Google stifling competitors on their own search results page. Yelp has complained forever that Google ranks their own reviews above Yelp. Things like that.
        pb7 6y ago
        Yelp is a parasite that participates in extortion of small businesses. They need to be investigated themselves long before their word has any weight in this matter.
  - neotek 6y ago
    "Good luck with that in court" only means something if the courts haven't been stuffed full of incompetent and dangerously unqualified judges.
- dimator 6y ago
  How though? It's trivially simple to change the default search engine. Just because a product is dominant doesn't mean it got that way nefariously. I'm sure if you added up all the R&D over the years in search, especially considering the lead time in market, Google's numbers dwarf others (I don't have a citation on that, but it stands to reason). Parallels could be drawn with Amazon and AWS's dominance.
  - aspenmayer 6y ago
    Why is nefarious intent necessary? The rules for monopoly and abuse of market power don’t presuppose such negative motivations, just negative market outcomes.
    - pb7 6y ago
      Why is Microsoft not fined and/or broken up for failing to maintain an appropriate search market share with Bing?
    - nemothekid 6y ago
      >The rules for monopoly and abuse of market power don’t presuppose such negative motivations, just negative market outcomes. Yes they do. The reason MS got put on the chopping block was because they began telling vendors that they would charge them more if they bundled Netscape or Java. Intel got slapped with a similar suite when they began telling vendors that they would charge more for their chips if they sold any configuration with AMD chips. Similarly Standard Oil did the same thing - once they began telling suppliers they would squeeze them out if they worked with any competitors they got broken up. It's simply not enough to have a dominant position - you have to abuse it to get slapped with an anti trust suite.
      - aspenmayer 6y ago
        I agree that negative intent from a monopoly power is actionable. I merely point out that negative intent is not necessary prior to regulatory action against or upon a monopoly power. I refer to another comment on this post for further info. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23198343 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23198343 "Market Power" ‘Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.’ https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/monopolization-defined https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...
- dredmorbius 6y ago
  The antitrust lawsuit is focused on Google’s dominance of search... Not principally: Much of the states’ investigation has focused on Google’s online advertising business. The company owns the dominant tool at every link in the complex chain between online publishers and advertisers. The Justice Department likewise is making Google’s ad technology one of its points of emphasis. But it is also focusing more broadly on concerns that Google uses its dominant search business to stifle competition, people familiar with the matter said. From TFA.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
  Nope. I use Google, Bing, and DuckDuckGo daily.
_-david-_ 6y ago
Google has an estimate 88% of the search market share in the US. (Its higher world wide if it matters.) Many people consider that to be getting into monopoly territory.
- sidibe 6y ago
  > Its higher world wide if it matters That seems dubious when it's blocked for 20% of the world population.