3 ms·
This is pretty consumer-unfriendly. Users are forced to use a different app if their chosen app has 30% market share?
by blueblisters 6y ago
This is pretty consumer-unfriendly. Users are forced to use a different app if their chosen app has 30% market share?
- janaagaard 6y agoAgree, that this sounds pretty consumer-unfriendly on the surface. But I think the law is fascinating, because of how effective it (might) be in limiting monopolies. Applying the same law to online advertisement or search engine market share would probably be a benefit for the consumers.
- _jgdh 6y agoHow?! After reaching 100 million searches in a month, Google should stop serving search queries? How weird would that be? If you’ve already reached your 30% cap, what incentive do you have to improve your service?
- ImprobableTruth 6y ago>If you’ve already reached your 30% cap, what incentive do you have to improve your service? By having to compete with other services who are trying to get your share?
- oefrha 6y agoThis doesn’t sound very enforceable. Say users flock to WhatsApp. “Sorry, we can’t process your payment because people like you aren’t using competitor services enough. Please try again next month.” ???
- JumpCrisscross 6y agoCouldn’t they process the payment on someone else’s rails?
- ImprobableTruth 6y agoI'd assume they'd just have to throttle users.
- blocked_again 6y agoI would prefer opening a different app to complete the payment than living in a society where payment space is completely dominated by one company