3 ms·
Again, it depends on how you define the market. They have fewer devices, fewer apps, fewer app downloads, and more revenue. You just picked the one that they ha
by st1x7 6y ago
Again, it depends on how you define the market. They have fewer devices, fewer apps, fewer app downloads, and more revenue. You just picked the one that they have the biggest share in. And even 60% of revenue isn't enough to determine a monopoly depending on other market dynamics.
- inopinatus 6y agoThere are no goalposts to move around here in some PR flack's hapless dream of muddying the issue. The market in question is the mobile applications market. It is one that is separately analyzed, well reported, clearly delineated, demonstrably an arena of choice, and significant to the consumer. This makes it difficult to ignore on any taxonomic basis of irrelevance. No threshold is itself enough, since there's no strict liability; generally speaking, it's not unlawful to have market power, it's unlawful to abuse it. Any regulatory or private action has to make a qualified case. But as far as thresholds go: that 60%, plus Apple's contractual requirement for market participants to actively mislead the consumer, is pretty terminal.
- st1x7 6y ago> There are no goalposts to move around here in some PR flack's hapless dream of muddying the issue. It's specifically about the goalposts, that's my entire point. It's not as straightforward and clear-cut as you're suggesting. Even saying something like "mobile applications market" doesn't make it clear whether we're talking about number of users, revenue, number of apps, number of app downloads, which mobile devices and so on.
- inopinatus 6y agoMarketplaces are quantified by economic value, there being no other universal unit. There's an arrogance in tech that we can make up definitions to suit ourselves. I guess it's related to the fallacy that the law is some kind of programming language.
- st1x7 6y ago> Marketplaces are quantified by economic value So if Apple had 100% of all phone users and 100% of all apps but the apps were entirely free, that wouldn't be a monopoly? > there being no other universal unit. I suggested a number of other units above. > There's an arrogance in tech that we can make up definitions to suit ourselves. The question of defining the market is the basis of how the decision is made in court and the biggest point of argument between the legal teams. This isn't about tech arrogance. I also feel like this back-and-forth isn't constructuve so I'll stop here.
- mdoms 6y agoJust take the L and move on, dude. This is getting embarrassing.
- jbverschoor 6y agoWell only if it’s not good for the consumer. Amazon is bad for suppliers, but good for consumers.
- mthoms 6y agoPerhaps in the short term. But having fewer, less profitable suppliers can hamper innovation, and lead to less consumer choice in the long term.