Soup,
I think you're defining the the consequences of an effective monopoly too narrowly.
If I had not received an education in economics in business school,then I might feel more comfortable playing fast and loose with a pop cultural understanding of monopoly. But since I did, I don't.
Droogies,
In today's world, the concept of monopoly is in need of revision.
There's a process for that. Write it up, send it to a scholarly journal, and see if anybody agrees with you.
one company can gain market hegemony and therefore dominate an industry by using less than legal practices, and that is the best definition of the term monopoly today.
Why describe a behavior that has nothing to do with monopoly and then call it monopoly? Rest assured that there is no shortage of terminology in economics.
WebDrone,
Jon, it's a monopoly. Microsoft has shown time and again that they will use the threat of witholding one portion of their business to force the acceptance of another.
What you are describing is not related to the concept of monopoly.
To understand what monopoly means, to believe MSFT has one, and yet still hold AAPL shares would be... well... a not so bright idea.
Jon Bird |
