3 ms·
Not at all. The majority of the profit of new-feudal companies come from a dominant position on the market. Same as rent-seeking when you own 80% of a city. Th
by goodpoint 5y ago
Not at all. The majority of the profit of new-feudal companies come from a dominant position on the market. Same as rent-seeking when you own 80% of a city.
The cost of the work required to provide those services is marginal - as clearly proven by the big profit margins.
Oh and those "free" services are paid by selling your privacy.
- simonh 5y agoI was addressing the actual example given, so yes, ‘at all’. The fact there are other companies that are rent seeking is a separate point. You’re seriously saying Apple specifically, the company called out, sells privacy? Do tell. As for Market dominance, since when was being popular and making products a lot of people like and value somehow abhorrent?
- goodpoint 5y ago> As for Market dominance, since when was being popular and making products a lot of people like and value somehow abhorrent? Please argue in good faith... https://www.oecd.org/competition/abuse/ https://www.oecd.org/competition/abuse/
- simonh 5y agoI am arguing in good faith. The example specifically called out, not by me, was Apple. If the majority of Apples profits come from market abuse, how do you explain the fact that their profit margins now are about the same as they were when they were a small minority player in markets? In fact they still are in most of the markets they compete in. Surely market abuse should allow them to significantly expand profitability, but it hasn’t. Overall profits yes, but that’s just because they have higher sales now. There are some companies I would agree do abuse their positions significantly to distort markets. Google and Facebook have been caught explicitly doing so.