If a company can subsidize a product or service (shipping, free maps so you make money off ads, etc) at a loss, this is anti-competitive. I'm not saying it is

If a company can subsidize a product or service (shipping, free maps so you make money off ads, etc) at a loss, this is anti-competitive. I'm not saying it is illegal or immoral. But it most certainly can be an effective anticompetitive approach. It is reasonable for people/companies/government to ask if society or their economy has crossed a line in terms of disabling competition. This is nothing new. The U.S. has/had anti-dumping laws, they just aren't used these days. Maybe the pendulum will swing back the other way, who knows. So when you say "It can't be good for innovation when you can sue your competitors simply for offering better value." Well it depends. What is value here? Subsidizing shipping can be seen as both offering value as well as using capital reserves to kill off competition.