RE: "All the things that connect the cpu to the useful world are applications and third party vendors are out there hawking them." thriving in spite of Microsoft's commanding market position.
The Point:
What you say is partially true, for now ... A snake will let its mouse dinner walk all over it until it gets hungry. But these tidbits are NOT what Microsoft is ultimately after or what all the tumult is all about.
Comment:
IMHO, the Netscape issue is just a test case. Alarmingly, it is only one of many on the way to come. This is an inescapable fact. It is totally and completely irrelevant whether or not the cause of a monopoly is accidental or is the result of the abuse of market powers. A monopoly is inherently suspect under well established Sherman anti-trust principles dating back to 1893. The principle here is that even a well earned monopoly is not able to police itself to avoid creating for itself unearned additional monopolies.
Think like the government and the people for a moment. Imagine that there is only one Rail Road (RR) coming into a town. Who would be comfortable if the RR would only accept grain for shipment from RR owned silos, putting local silos out of business, then buying up their ruined assets at fire-sale prices, then assembling yet another monopoly by combining all their exclusive local silo operations into a regional or national economic power in a related industry?
This would be a case where one monopoly (honestly earned or otherwise) leads to another monopoly earned without competition. Additional unearned daisy chained monopolies follow in related industries until they bump into monopolies coming from other groups. All the smaller independent innovators are preempted. The monopolists collude to prevent the dangers of real competition amongst themselves. They start socializing together. Ships sail, palaces are built in Newport ... been there, done that.
Usually, monopolies, being under public scrutiny, are a bit more discrete, but not by much and not for long. What if the RR said that they would accept farmer's grain from local silos but that the farmer shipping his grain had to also pay the RR silo's storage fee, even though the RR silo was never actually used? What if RR workers would only be reimbursed for overnight stays in RR hotels? What if the local freight company was excluded from knowing what parcels were coming in on the trains, that information being reserved for the exclusive advantage of the RR's own delivery service. What if the RR delivery service provided free local delivery, at least until the local delivery service went out of business thus eliminating the competition or was bought up at an artificially reduced price? Monopolies naturally tend to lead to more monopolies. Human nature being what it is, what's to stop the RR from doing what comes naturally?
The answer of course is Public Policy. Think Magna Carta, Constitution, Congress, Anti-trust, DOJ. Its not Microsoft, but Microsoft's unique position in the market place that is bringing public scrutiny to bear. This problem will remain, grow, and eventually climax over the next few years.
Bill Gates' uneducated, arrogant, & unprofessional attitude aggravates the situation for shareholders immensely. This is not something that sharp marketing practices and public relations alone can solve. In the end Bill will bend, be inexorably broken, or be replaced. This is serious stuff.
Wake up. This is all part of owning Microsoft shares. Standard Oil, US Steel, ATT etc. have all prospered. Learn to live with it.
Cheer up. No mater how society limits its exercise of power, this company has a first of a kind World-Wide-Monopoly in a world civilized enough to enforce it. There is an historically unique potential for reward here for shareholders over the coming years.
HR
PS: Love is just so blind. I find I must constantly remind myself that the center of focus is my money, and not to fall blindly in love with any stock, especially this one. HR |
