4 ms·
You don't get it, what you describe is not necessarily a monopoly.
by TheRealNGenius 5y ago
You don't get it, what you describe is not necessarily a monopoly.
- echelon 5y agoYou don't need to be a monopoly to be a cartel or take part in anticompetitive behavior that would draw the ire of Congress or the DOJ. I think we've seen sufficient evidence in this to call for having both Google and Apple split up. Famgopoly is just a play on words to describe these never before seen emergent phenomena. You're right - they're not monopolies. They're something new the world has never seen before. Famgopolies.
- TheRealNGenius 5y agoSure, but the examples you gave were not examples of this. Just because they are in different markets doesn't mean monopoly; only when they have overwhelming influence on a certain market would they qualify as such. Of which you rightly point out they most likely do in certain cases.
- jhrmnn 5y agoThere are many huge corporations involved in hundreds of different markets that no one is concerned about because they don’t dominate (and skew) those markets. Corporations spread over many markets is not a problem, a corporation (or a cartel) dominating a single market is.
- tomnipotent 5y ago> monopoly Most anti-trust actions have nothing to do with monopolies.
- TheRealNGenius 5y ago> monopolies ok that's fine