7 ms·

So, I think you're putting words in his mouth suggesting these comments are anti-monopoly in this sense. I don't think in the abstract he's saying he's against

So, I think you're putting words in his mouth suggesting these comments are anti-monopoly in this sense. I don't think in the abstract he's saying he's against a company like Uber striving for market domination.. he's just saying they crossed a line in that pursuit. As for AirBnB I think the Uber vs AirBnB comparison is a really fair one. AirBnB is a very similar example of a company doing serious disruption and facing pretty severe friction in the form of established lobbies and laws... but they've not been accused of threatening journalists, hoteliers, or anyone else who's challenged them. That's the distinction being made here. There are lots of startups that appear to be really riding the line that I think Thiel is identifying here (AirBnB, Tesla, and 23andMe come to mind) by taking risks in the name of getting innovative services to customers, not in the name of providing air-cover for cashing in at the expense of their users.

jboy 12y ago
I don't think that I'm putting words in his mouth. He's become famous recently for beating the "Monopoly good, competition bad" drum, but he's never really laid out a path to get to monopoly (other than "compete effectively, eg, win a niche and expand in concentric circles"). I suspect that a lot of people have (like myself) fit his comments into a larger patchwork of contrarian startup advice, which also includes suggestions to be mischievous (PG), move fast enough to risk breaking things (Facebook), etc. It's interesting to me (and yes, it seems slightly ironic) that he has now, when discussing a competitor to one of his portfolio companies, discovered a second dimension of what's most important in his worldview. "Two! Two most important things for a startup! Monopoly and ethics!" (Surely you would agree that he's never previously said "Monopoly is a virtue, BUT ...")
- famousactress 12y ago
  When discussing becoming a successful company lots of us don't consider it obligatory to mention that you also shouldn't threaten people. I tend to suspect that he was comfortable with the idea that some limits to what's ethically reasonable were assumed. For lots of us the fact that ethics are a given is what makes them ethics.
- 001sky 12y ago
  Get a patent. Become a monopolist. Is that unethical? No. Build a great product that everyone uses volunatrily. Is that unethical? No. Commandeer the bay bridge and charge tolls. Is that unethical? Sure None of that is relevant to Uber. Uber is involved in regulated businesses. Those are monopolies by law (eg, taxi medalions in nYc) the monopoly nature is not by choice of lyft or uber. the issues about ethics involve how the process to enter those markets is being pursued. That is not just a business question, but one of pr, lobbying, and legislative changes. The process is what it is. Has nothing to do with Thiel. How the game is played is another matter-- that's what he's commenting on.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

jboy 12y ago

I don't think that I'm putting words in his mouth. He's become famous recently for beating the "Monopoly good, competition bad" drum, but he's never really laid out a path to get to monopoly (other than "compete effectively, eg, win a niche and expand in concentric circles"). I suspect that a lot of people have (like myself) fit his comments into a larger patchwork of contrarian startup advice, which also includes suggestions to be mischievous (PG), move fast enough to risk breaking things (Facebook), etc. It's interesting to me (and yes, it seems slightly ironic) that he has now, when discussing a competitor to one of his portfolio companies, discovered a second dimension of what's most important in his worldview. "Two! Two most important things for a startup! Monopoly and ethics!" (Surely you would agree that he's never previously said "Monopoly is a virtue, BUT ...")

famousactress 12y ago
When discussing becoming a successful company lots of us don't consider it obligatory to mention that you also shouldn't threaten people. I tend to suspect that he was comfortable with the idea that some limits to what's ethically reasonable were assumed. For lots of us the fact that ethics are a given is what makes them ethics.
001sky 12y ago
Get a patent. Become a monopolist. Is that unethical? No. Build a great product that everyone uses volunatrily. Is that unethical? No. Commandeer the bay bridge and charge tolls. Is that unethical? Sure None of that is relevant to Uber. Uber is involved in regulated businesses. Those are monopolies by law (eg, taxi medalions in nYc) the monopoly nature is not by choice of lyft or uber. the issues about ethics involve how the process to enter those markets is being pursued. That is not just a business question, but one of pr, lobbying, and legislative changes. The process is what it is. Has nothing to do with Thiel. How the game is played is another matter-- that's what he's commenting on.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]