3 ms·

Don't quite follow, are you saying that there are too many players for there to be `*opolies`? The FBI seems to disagree, right?

by dpflan 2y ago

gruez 2y ago
"*opolies" =/= price fixing/collusion, which is what the FBI is investigating them for. Even if you don't have a monopoly but you agree to fix prices with a competitor, it's still illegal.
- guerrilla 2y ago
  This is syntax. The original cause and practical effect are identical. The point stands.
- WhatIsDukkha 2y ago
  "encompassing 70% of multi-family apartment buildings" The hair splitting meme around "monopoly" and effective monopoly power (and the common meaning of these terms) is just ugly.
  - gruez 2y ago
    >"encompassing 70% of multi-family apartment buildings" You conveniently left out the part before: "at least 21 large landlords and institutional investors [...]". Wikipedia says the definition of oligopoly is: "An oligopoly (from Ancient Greek ὀλίγος (olígos) 'few', and πωλέω (pōléō) 'to sell') is a market in which control over an industry lies in the hands of a few large sellers who own a dominant share of the market." "at least 21" is not "a few" by any stretch of the imagination.
    - dpflan 2y ago
      21 is too many? Is it not relative to the market size and ownership of the "product"/"service" for the market? How many landlords are there and much of the market do they own?
      - gruez 2y ago
        Yes? At some point you have to draw the line between "oligopoly" and "normal market". I don't know what the number is, but it's safe to say that for most industries "at least 21" would make up the majority of market share and therefore it would be absurd to call that "oligopoly".
- dpflan 2y ago
  An oligopoly does not imply price fixing, but does a monopoly imply price fixing/collusion because the entity group is size 1, an entity colludes with itself, always?
  - ameister14 2y ago
    No. A single entity setting prices is not collusion, collusion requires multiple parties.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- margalabargala 2y ago
  Agree with you fully on this. As far as the rental.market being an oligopoly, there's an argument to be made that the existence of things like RealPage makes large sections of the market act as it would with an oligopoly, even if it doesn't quite meet the definition. That is an interesting conversation to have, separate from the illegal price fixing.
sokoloff 2y ago
I think this is more correctly described as cartel behavior (also illegal under anti-trust laws and likely what the FBI is investigating here). I do think there are far too many players involved for it to fit the reasonable description of an oligopoly. (I am not the upthread objector to the use of that word, though I think the objection is valid.)

Don't quite follow, are you saying that there are too many players for there to be `*opolies`? The FBI seems to disagree, right?

by dpflan 2y ago

Don't quite follow, are you saying that there are too many players for there to be `*opolies`? The FBI seems to disagree, right?

gruez 2y ago

"*opolies" =/= price fixing/collusion, which is what the FBI is investigating them for. Even if you don't have a monopoly but you agree to fix prices with a competitor, it's still illegal.

guerrilla 2y ago
This is syntax. The original cause and practical effect are identical. The point stands.
WhatIsDukkha 2y ago
"encompassing 70% of multi-family apartment buildings" The hair splitting meme around "monopoly" and effective monopoly power (and the common meaning of these terms) is just ugly.
- gruez 2y ago
  >"encompassing 70% of multi-family apartment buildings" You conveniently left out the part before: "at least 21 large landlords and institutional investors [...]". Wikipedia says the definition of oligopoly is: "An oligopoly (from Ancient Greek ὀλίγος (olígos) 'few', and πωλέω (pōléō) 'to sell') is a market in which control over an industry lies in the hands of a few large sellers who own a dominant share of the market." "at least 21" is not "a few" by any stretch of the imagination.
  - dpflan 2y ago
    21 is too many? Is it not relative to the market size and ownership of the "product"/"service" for the market? How many landlords are there and much of the market do they own?
    - gruez 2y ago
      Yes? At some point you have to draw the line between "oligopoly" and "normal market". I don't know what the number is, but it's safe to say that for most industries "at least 21" would make up the majority of market share and therefore it would be absurd to call that "oligopoly".
dpflan 2y ago
An oligopoly does not imply price fixing, but does a monopoly imply price fixing/collusion because the entity group is size 1, an entity colludes with itself, always?
- ameister14 2y ago
  No. A single entity setting prices is not collusion, collusion requires multiple parties.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
margalabargala 2y ago
Agree with you fully on this. As far as the rental.market being an oligopoly, there's an argument to be made that the existence of things like RealPage makes large sections of the market act as it would with an oligopoly, even if it doesn't quite meet the definition. That is an interesting conversation to have, separate from the illegal price fixing.

sokoloff 2y ago

I think this is more correctly described as cartel behavior (also illegal under anti-trust laws and likely what the FBI is investigating here). I do think there are far too many players involved for it to fit the reasonable description of an oligopoly. (I am not the upthread objector to the use of that word, though I think the objection is valid.)