3 ms·
But why couldn't that be a monopolistic practice? For example, let’s say Apple is getting more than 100% of the ad revenue Google earns from iPhones, but it’s s
by arijun 3y ago
But why couldn't that be a monopolistic practice? For example, let’s say Apple is getting more than 100% of the ad revenue Google earns from iPhones, but it’s still worth it for Google only because it doesn’t have iPhone users start thinking about other search engines (thereby maintaining the monopoly). That seems pretty similar to standard oil pricing below market value to get its competitors out of business.
- reaperman 3y ago> That seems pretty similar to standard oil pricing below market value to get its competitors out of business. Not quite. In economic terms, if: > Apple is getting more than 100% of the ad revenue Google earns from iPhones This would mean that Google is pricing it not just "below market value", but also "below marginal cost of production". You can price below market value and still make a small profit. But in your hypothetical it's literally bleeding money. I don't think it invalidates your point that "it could qualify as a monopolistic practice". But it's an important distinction because generally selling your goods/services below the supplier's marginal cost is inherently unsustainable.
- yetanotherasian 3y agoPlaying for placement is common (not saying it's right, nor am I saying it's wrong) https://thecounter.org/coca-cola-frito-lay-mars-real-estate-grocery-stores-end-cap-trade-promotions/ https://thecounter.org/coca-cola-frito-lay-mars-real-estate-... https://www.vox.com/2016/11/22/13707022/grocery-store-slotting-fees-slotting-allowances https://www.vox.com/2016/11/22/13707022/grocery-store-slotti...