3 ms·

> quasi-monopoly AKA, not a monopoly. Monopoly is such a funny buzzword to me because it's both wildly misused and completely misunderstood to be an inherentl

> quasi-monopoly AKA, not a monopoly. Monopoly is such a funny buzzword to me because it's both wildly misused and completely misunderstood to be an inherently bad thing. In reality, there is rarely a true monopoly and the only bad thing about them is that they enable anti-competitive behavior and that's the thing that's illegal and bad. Amazon "quasi-monopoly" comes from having the best service. Great service is good for consumers.

Vt71fcAqt7 3y ago
Agreed. Products/companies can be anticompetitive even if they are not a monopoly. Products can also contain their own submarket in which they achieved a monopoly through anticompetitive practices. For example ios on Iphones. That last bit is somewhat controversial but is the opinion of the current justice department of the executive branch of the government and seems to be the correct reading of the Kodak case[0]. In any event I don't think Prime video is anticompetitive except in as much as it can take losses for years to price others out of the market but that doesn't seem to be happening. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Technical_Services,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Tec....
mrcrumb1 3y ago
No true Scotsman argument aside, anti-competitive practices by very powerful firms are a bad thing, even if the firm got the market power because they have or had the best product.
- parineum 3y ago
  > No true Scotsman argument I was wary of the phrasing when I was writing it because of that but I don't think it's a "no true scotsman" argument because there is a real legal definition of monopoly that they clearly don't even come close to satisfying. I probably should have replaced the word "true" with "real" or "legal".
  - mrcrumb1 3y ago
    The FTC disagrees with you: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/ftc-sues-amazon-illegally-maintaining-monopoly-power https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/...

Vt71fcAqt7 3y ago

Agreed. Products/companies can be anticompetitive even if they are not a monopoly. Products can also contain their own submarket in which they achieved a monopoly through anticompetitive practices. For example ios on Iphones. That last bit is somewhat controversial but is the opinion of the current justice department of the executive branch of the government and seems to be the correct reading of the Kodak case[0]. In any event I don't think Prime video is anticompetitive except in as much as it can take losses for years to price others out of the market but that doesn't seem to be happening. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Technical_Services,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Tec....

mrcrumb1 3y ago

No true Scotsman argument aside, anti-competitive practices by very powerful firms are a bad thing, even if the firm got the market power because they have or had the best product.

parineum 3y ago
> No true Scotsman argument I was wary of the phrasing when I was writing it because of that but I don't think it's a "no true scotsman" argument because there is a real legal definition of monopoly that they clearly don't even come close to satisfying. I probably should have replaced the word "true" with "real" or "legal".
- mrcrumb1 3y ago
  The FTC disagrees with you: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/ftc-sues-amazon-illegally-maintaining-monopoly-power https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/...