3 ms·

It appears that the crux of the article is that a lot of price fixing is going on through the use of programs that suggest or encourage pricing among a few play

It appears that the crux of the article is that a lot of price fixing is going on through the use of programs that suggest or encourage pricing among a few players, to the advantage of all the players and the disadvantage of the customer. Crackdowns do take time in the US but there is hope. See e.g.: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-realpage-algorithmic-pricing-scheme-harms-millions-american-renters https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-realp...

sega_sai 2y ago
There is zero chance that this kind of Justice department actions will be continued in the current administration
- eastbound 2y ago
  The previous administration didn’t do anything either. They, oh oops, studied for 3.5 years, and launched processes in the last 4 months of the 4 years. Oh my, I need to reelect them to see it happen!
- cudgy 2y ago
  Actually, there’s still a chance the current administration can do something about it. But there’s a zero chance the previous administration did anything about it.
  - dd36 2y ago
    Lina Khan did a ton of anti-trust but corporations seem to have realized Trump is transactional/pay to play. One can hope the strong antitrust continues but there’s little reason for optimism.
    - cudgy 2y ago
      Unfortunately, pay to play is better than no pay to play. Recently, Trump had the audacity to ask for half of TikTok for the government to approve the deal. That sounds like a lot more than Lina Khan or Biden would’ve demanded. By the way, I’m not condoning government ownership of corporations as the ideal solution, but I absolutely do not approve of huge corporate subsidies with no value in return for tax payers and handwaving small fine penalties for obvious monopoly behavior.
fny 2y ago
The current administration, however, plans to let M&A run wild. Oligopolies don’t need an app for uncoordinated price fixing. The fact that there’s a cartel that controls 97% of the frozen potato market is wild. This will only get worse without breakups.
- stickfigure 2y ago
  > cartel that controls 97% of the frozen potato market This is a weird and emotionally loaded statement. Properly stated, the top four frozen potato producers have 97% of the market share. That doesn't sound odd? In a mature market with very little technology innovation (potatoes) and very little geographic specificity (frozen), how many companies would you expect? How many laundry detergent companies are there? How many cereal companies are there? How was this different in the past, except going back to before the interstate highway system?
  - wat10000 2y ago
    Those statements are not equivalent. “Cartel” and “top four producers” mean very different things. I don’t know if there is in fact a cartel, but you’re missing the point.
  - pseudalopex 2y ago
    > This is a weird and emotionally loaded statement. Properly stated, the top four frozen potato producers have 97% of the market share. Properly stated they colluded to fix prices. This is the definition of a cartel.
  - ordinaryradical 2y ago
    It’s different because they are using data at scale to collectively decide on pricing via Potatotrac, ya know, the title of the article…? The issue of having four players is that it makes the coordination problem of colluding relatively easier, but they are price fixing via giant data warehouse which is algorithmically suggesting how to price. It’s like Real Pages for potatoes, or at least this is what the article claims and what is interesting. In an era where you can have a computer churn through a trillion datapoints to arrive at an optimal price, is it even possible to have competitive pricing as was once conceived of? The elements of uncertainty and risk have been so thoroughly eliminated that inflation seems almost unstoppable as you have such a strong signal for what the market will bear. It’s an interesting question for the nature of free markets but few seem to have caught on to this dynamic…
cpill 2y ago
The New Deal, which Bernie was resurrecting, was meant to break monopolies up, to promote completion and make price fixing impossible. the democrats voted against that as they are controlled by the big companies too. this is easy MAGA exists, and won.
- dralley 2y ago
  Lina Khan led the most antitrust-focused DoJ in a century, which went after Apple, Google, Nvidia, Realpage, airlines, and dozens of other companies. MAGA give zero fucks about antitrust, and antitrust or lack thereof has nothing to do with the creation of MAGA. That's such an absurd argument I have no idea how to even respond to it. The cornerstone of MAGA has always been nativism & reactionary politics. I'm very, very tired of leftists shamelessly lying about anything and everything they can just to smear the Democrats.
  - cudgy 2y ago
    What did Lena Kahn actually accomplish though? Maybe they had to pay some fines some traffic tickets essentially.
    - dd36 2y ago
      Many mergers were squashed. The M&A market shrank considerably. There’s only so much they can do as far as bringing and prosecuting cases in four years.
      - cudgy 2y ago
        M&A market shrink because interest rates went up drastically while expectations of companies remained in the stratosphere in my opinion. Lina Khan had little to do with it. What significant mergers were squashed that made a difference? What significant monopolies were busted?
        dd36 2y ago
        Doubtful. Most deals aren’t financed with debt. There are many but off the top of my head Kroger buying Safeway. Visa buying Plaid. Nvidia buying Arm. Didn't they block a cell phone merger? A mattress merger?

sega_sai 2y ago

There is zero chance that this kind of Justice department actions will be continued in the current administration

eastbound 2y ago
The previous administration didn’t do anything either. They, oh oops, studied for 3.5 years, and launched processes in the last 4 months of the 4 years. Oh my, I need to reelect them to see it happen!
cudgy 2y ago
Actually, there’s still a chance the current administration can do something about it. But there’s a zero chance the previous administration did anything about it.
- dd36 2y ago
  Lina Khan did a ton of anti-trust but corporations seem to have realized Trump is transactional/pay to play. One can hope the strong antitrust continues but there’s little reason for optimism.
  - cudgy 2y ago
    Unfortunately, pay to play is better than no pay to play. Recently, Trump had the audacity to ask for half of TikTok for the government to approve the deal. That sounds like a lot more than Lina Khan or Biden would’ve demanded. By the way, I’m not condoning government ownership of corporations as the ideal solution, but I absolutely do not approve of huge corporate subsidies with no value in return for tax payers and handwaving small fine penalties for obvious monopoly behavior.

fny 2y ago

The current administration, however, plans to let M&A run wild. Oligopolies don’t need an app for uncoordinated price fixing. The fact that there’s a cartel that controls 97% of the frozen potato market is wild. This will only get worse without breakups.

stickfigure 2y ago
> cartel that controls 97% of the frozen potato market This is a weird and emotionally loaded statement. Properly stated, the top four frozen potato producers have 97% of the market share. That doesn't sound odd? In a mature market with very little technology innovation (potatoes) and very little geographic specificity (frozen), how many companies would you expect? How many laundry detergent companies are there? How many cereal companies are there? How was this different in the past, except going back to before the interstate highway system?
- wat10000 2y ago
  Those statements are not equivalent. “Cartel” and “top four producers” mean very different things. I don’t know if there is in fact a cartel, but you’re missing the point.
- pseudalopex 2y ago
  > This is a weird and emotionally loaded statement. Properly stated, the top four frozen potato producers have 97% of the market share. Properly stated they colluded to fix prices. This is the definition of a cartel.
- ordinaryradical 2y ago
  It’s different because they are using data at scale to collectively decide on pricing via Potatotrac, ya know, the title of the article…? The issue of having four players is that it makes the coordination problem of colluding relatively easier, but they are price fixing via giant data warehouse which is algorithmically suggesting how to price. It’s like Real Pages for potatoes, or at least this is what the article claims and what is interesting. In an era where you can have a computer churn through a trillion datapoints to arrive at an optimal price, is it even possible to have competitive pricing as was once conceived of? The elements of uncertainty and risk have been so thoroughly eliminated that inflation seems almost unstoppable as you have such a strong signal for what the market will bear. It’s an interesting question for the nature of free markets but few seem to have caught on to this dynamic…

cpill 2y ago

The New Deal, which Bernie was resurrecting, was meant to break monopolies up, to promote completion and make price fixing impossible. the democrats voted against that as they are controlled by the big companies too. this is easy MAGA exists, and won.

dralley 2y ago
Lina Khan led the most antitrust-focused DoJ in a century, which went after Apple, Google, Nvidia, Realpage, airlines, and dozens of other companies. MAGA give zero fucks about antitrust, and antitrust or lack thereof has nothing to do with the creation of MAGA. That's such an absurd argument I have no idea how to even respond to it. The cornerstone of MAGA has always been nativism & reactionary politics. I'm very, very tired of leftists shamelessly lying about anything and everything they can just to smear the Democrats.
- cudgy 2y ago
  What did Lena Kahn actually accomplish though? Maybe they had to pay some fines some traffic tickets essentially.
  - dd36 2y ago
    Many mergers were squashed. The M&A market shrank considerably. There’s only so much they can do as far as bringing and prosecuting cases in four years.
    - cudgy 2y ago
      M&A market shrink because interest rates went up drastically while expectations of companies remained in the stratosphere in my opinion. Lina Khan had little to do with it. What significant mergers were squashed that made a difference? What significant monopolies were busted?
      - dd36 2y ago
        Doubtful. Most deals aren’t financed with debt. There are many but off the top of my head Kroger buying Safeway. Visa buying Plaid. Nvidia buying Arm. Didn't they block a cell phone merger? A mattress merger?