4 ms·

Continued antitrust enforcement. how would you demonstrate consumer harm when youtube was giving away the product for free?...or instagram...or whatsapp..

by nova22033 6y ago

mmcconnell1618 6y ago
The enforcement of antitrust changed from market share to consumer harm. There is nothing stopping a court from changing the definition back. NPR has a really good 3 part podcast on the history of this and future implications: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/03/20/704426033/antitrust-in-america https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/03/20/704426033/anti...
nitrogen 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy) (the wiki article is [currently] written about foreign markets, but the concept applies equally to domestic competition)
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
It's not free. "You're not the customer, you're the product," right? So the cost is the terms under which the product is offered, e.g. the conditions under which you can be excluded at the behest of advertiser sensibilities. If those conditions aren't that nobody is ever banned for any reason then the cost is higher than it could be in a more competitive market. You also have similar costs as a result of algorithmic recommendation algorithms that promote things that aren't you over things that are you at the behest of the monopolist, and the amount content providers get paid by the platform (it could be higher or you could be not demonetized for nonsense reasons) etc.
- stiray 6y ago
  Let me add the little detail as no one ever finished the sentence and I believe a lot of people are struggling with. "You are not the customer, you're the product. The customers are advertisers, that are buying YOUR data from the google." That should make it clearer, right?

4 ms·

Continued antitrust enforcement. how would you demonstrate consumer harm when youtube was giving away the product for free?...or instagram...or whatsapp..

by nova22033 6y ago

Continued antitrust enforcement. how would you demonstrate consumer harm when youtube was giving away the product for free?...or instagram...or whatsapp..

mmcconnell1618 6y ago
The enforcement of antitrust changed from market share to consumer harm. There is nothing stopping a court from changing the definition back. NPR has a really good 3 part podcast on the history of this and future implications: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/03/20/704426033/antitrust-in-america https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/03/20/704426033/anti...
nitrogen 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy) (the wiki article is [currently] written about foreign markets, but the concept applies equally to domestic competition)
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
It's not free. "You're not the customer, you're the product," right? So the cost is the terms under which the product is offered, e.g. the conditions under which you can be excluded at the behest of advertiser sensibilities. If those conditions aren't that nobody is ever banned for any reason then the cost is higher than it could be in a more competitive market. You also have similar costs as a result of algorithmic recommendation algorithms that promote things that aren't you over things that are you at the behest of the monopolist, and the amount content providers get paid by the platform (it could be higher or you could be not demonetized for nonsense reasons) etc.
- stiray 6y ago
  Let me add the little detail as no one ever finished the sentence and I believe a lot of people are struggling with. "You are not the customer, you're the product. The customers are advertisers, that are buying YOUR data from the google." That should make it clearer, right?