8 ms·
Are you being facetious? If they can't innovate and they are losing customers, how does that support breaking them up? It seems to make the opposite point.
by pwned1 5y ago
Are you being facetious? If they can't innovate and they are losing customers, how does that support breaking them up? It seems to make the opposite point.
- mike00632 5y agoBecause a company should be able to stand on its own merit, not be sustained through entrenched monopoly power.
- munk-a 5y agoLots of monopolies suck at their core business - because they've lost the need to compete due to either suffocating the competition or growing into adjacent markets to lock down their user base. Facebook can both be incompetent and an economic danger.
- joe_the_user 5y agoBut FB loses eyeballs when it fails to innovate, which is kind of a demonstration that it doesn't have monopoly power.
- munk-a 5y agoSo if, when Standard Oil was still operating as a monopoly, a single well had decided to refuse to sell to them - or even a dozen wells - or a conglomerate of wells - that means they'd no longer be a monopoly? Just because you don't own 100% of a market doesn't mean you don't have a commanding position.
- joe_the_user 5y ago1) Comparing Tik Tok to a single oil well is laughable. 2) If someone who owned a single oil well in time of Standard Oil could get their oil to consumers and profitably sell it, then however big Standard Oil might be, then it didn't have a standard monopoly. Of course, that's not how things work back then. Standard Oil controlled the refineries and so well owners were over a barrel. Facebook has tried to control the Internet pipes but basically failed everywhere.