3 ms·
> monopolist Are they crippling their competitors or gimping their market somehow? Why the accusation? What do you know? This later thread asks the right que
by robocat 3y ago
> monopolist
Are they crippling their competitors or gimping their market somehow?
Why the accusation? What do you know?
This later thread asks the right question and gets some good answers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38486689 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38486689
The clearest example of why they are not a monopolist is that the Chinese haven't been able to copy the technology - ASML has zero monopoly power over China and China in theory has the motivation and resources to copy, but hasn't so far. Because the technology is fundamentally hard - not because of backroom tricks.
- skrebbel 3y agoMeh most people at ASML that I know (admittedly only engineers) consider it a monopolist. Tbf I wasn’t aware that it was an accusation. They acquired a monopoly position through hard work and risky investments, not through anticompetitive behavior. And ok they’re not strictly a monopoly because there are other litho makers but if you need the precision of an ASML EUV then there’s no other vendor. Isn’t that kind of the definition of being a monopolist?
- atonse 3y agoWith no skin in the game, I’d say “monopoly” would seem less accusatory (in that it meets the definition) but “monopolist” seems more negative (in that it acts like one, which has negative connotations)
- falserum 3y agoI think it’s just description of “absence of competition”. Reasons for lack of it, are orthogonal to the term. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly > Are they crippling their competitors or gimping their market somehow? Anticompetitive behaviour and monopoly are separate. You can have the 2nd one without the first one.