4 ms·
Because they don't have a monopoly in any of those things. Vertical integration should be pursued by any and every company.
by nojito 4y ago
Because they don't have a monopoly in any of those things.
Vertical integration should be pursued by any and every company.
- feanaro 4y agoWhy? I'd argue a world in which succeed to make vertical integration minimal would be a better one, with less manipulation and corporations vying to become states.
- scrollaway 4y agoA word with minimal vertical integration is a world filled with middlemen and rent seekers. The alternative to VI is every single piece of your stack is another company seeking its own piece of whatever pie you’re building (and that company in turn facing the exact same dilemma — nobody builds original things anymore, it’s b2b saas Lego all the way down)
- feanaro 4y agoThere's quite a lot of legroom between a moderate amount of vertical integration where you attempt to own key parts of your supply chain and being a megacorporation which owns absolutely every piece of your stack, including towns for your employees. I'm suggesting the optimum for human freedom, welfare and prosperity is achieved when striving closer to the former rather than the latter, not that companies should strive to depend on others as much as possible. (Though my use of "minimal" in the original post might've been misleading.)
- InsomniacL 4y agoAnti-competitive practices are business practices that prevent or reduce competition in a market.
- nojito 4y agoOnly if you undertake them to protect a monopoly.
- InsomniacL 4y agonot at all... It is illegal for businesses to act together in ways that can limit competition, lead to higher prices, or hinder other businesses from entering the market. That's from the FTC.