3 ms·
> Rather, Doordash, in an attempt to claim a near monopoly on the food ordering market, chose to sell food at a loss. This is called price dumping for anyone t
by tpxl 4y ago
> Rather, Doordash, in an attempt to claim a near monopoly on the food ordering market, chose to sell food at a loss.
This is called price dumping for anyone that wants to read up on it.
- em-bee 4y agoand it's illegal in some places
- AlexandrB 4y agoUnfortunately it's usually only illegal when a monopoly or other dominant company does it. SV seems to have worked around this by funding "startups" so much that they have the capital to engage in dumping before becoming dominant in an industry.
- em-bee 4y agoat least in the US doordash already reached more than 50%. i believe if it can be argued that it was only able to achieve this through predatory pricing then at this point it should be possible to stop it from continuing that pricing strategy.
- falcor84 4y agoLink please
- em-bee 4y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing
- falcor84 4y agoI believe they only applies to a company in a "dominant" position
- mywittyname 4y agoGas stations have been successfully sued under such laws. So clearly, there's some flexibility when it comes to the definition of dominant.
- em-bee 4y agoi don't know the case behind this example, but i can imagine that if a small city only has a few gas stations, even just one undercutting all the others, forcing them to close would be a form of domination. so basically (and i am just guessing here) a company becomes dominant the moment its competitors start going out of business because of this companies predatory pricing.
- markvdb 4y agoAlso, https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/sales-at-a-loss-in-belgium-and-the-eu-46715 https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/sales-at-a-loss-in-belgium... .