3 ms·
> Why isn't it illegal to disrupt a market by undercutting the competition in a long-term structural way? Because you can actually do what the competitor does
by kortilla 5y ago
> Why isn't it illegal to disrupt a market by undercutting the competition in a long-term structural way?
Because you can actually do what the competitor does for cheaper. It sounds like you’re arguing against companies being more efficient than others, which is strange.
If you’re saying companies shouldn’t be able to operate at a loss while competitors don’t, you’re arguing against companies that invest in improvements as well, which is also strange.
How would you structure the law in a way that allows better companies who invest in more efficient systems to win?
- nullc 5y agoIt's perfectly possible to back out the expenses that go into future improvements and ask if a company is selling a product at a loss. I haven't looked at the data lately, but not that long ago except in a few of the most established markets uber was paying drivers more than they were charging customers. This should be a violation of dumping laws-- but the laws are not enforced against large and highly aggressive entities.