16 ms·
I'm not seeing how is this relevant. You were arguing that anyone else can decide to ignore the law and provide taxi services without the proper licenses. This
by cygx 12y ago
I'm not seeing how is this relevant.
You were arguing that anyone else can decide to ignore the law and provide taxi services without the proper licenses. This obviously only works if you avoid getting caught, but Uber did not exactly fly under the radar. What they had going for themselves was an unusual entrance to the market, but that only kept them safe until their competitors complained to the authorities.
Convincing me is not a very good use of anyone's time
I did not say that. But it's not hard to do this 'research' by looking at Wikipedia or Google. Some examples I dug up in the last 30 seconds:
Tchibo/Melitta/Dallmayr (coffee), Südzucker/Nordzucker/Pfeifer & Langen (sugar, the one I was talking about), Unilever/Procter & Gamble (washing powder), De Beers (diamonds), possibly your friendly neighbourhood drug dealer (hey, I can watch TV with the best of them ;)).
As long as you don't get caught, it's good business sense - at least for a time. And that's why it will happen, time and again - no extra-market processes necessary.
- icebraining 12y agoYeah, but for example, calling the sugar production market in Germany "free" is absurd. Agriculture subsidies and quotas are the core of the EU. You can't blame the market for working incorrectly when you heavily restrict its most important mechanism - competition. De Beers is also a good example - how can it be a free market participant when its biggest mines are joint ventures with the States of Namibia and Botswana? I haven't looked at the other examples yet, but I find these frankly unconvincing.