Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. P. who wrote (17927)	3/6/1998 10:27:00 AM
From: Dermot Burke	Respond to of 24154

JP-that flatulance you posted suggests what? That it can't be a monopoly because the guy isn't flagrantly price gouging? A monopoly late in the 20th century would not normally wear the garb of an oil or steel monopolist from the steam age. In case you are unaware many Irish descendants consider 100 years ago recent history, as in yesterday.The potatoe famine is an insensitive analogy to support an argument for no government intervention, wouldn't you think?

To: J. P. who wrote (17927)	3/6/1998 10:34:00 AM
From: Thure Meyer	Respond to of 24154

J.P. What a simplistic view of history. The historical setting for the potato famine is of great importance here. It was the occupation of Ireland by the English that led to the monoculture conditions. It was precisely that locked in condition that led to a "no exit" condition for the famine. And it is that no exit that we would like to avoid with Microsoft, Intel and Cisco for that matter. Supply and demand is not isolated from history or culture. Most commodities that we demand are culturally conditioned. The valuation of something changes from culture to culture and that in turn will dovetail into supply and demand curves. What is critical however is that some lateral choices exist (which didn't in Ireland at the time), so that a new equilibrium can be reached. Today's issue is Microsoft: No one is begrudging them their success I hope. The issue is to allow fair competition which should accelerate innovation. Oh, and by the way. Show me one "free" market in the world, all markets are regulated (and should be), this is yet another popular buzz term that is a myth unless defined in the historical/cultural context we live in. Thure

To: J. P. who wrote (17927)	3/6/1998 1:29:00 PM
From: Bearded One	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Peter Huber must have taken Econ 101, but missed Econ 102. The supply/demand curve is a macroeconomic curve. It represents the supply by a multitude of suppliers. As the demand for anything rises, the number of potential suppliers rise. Thus, the cost of manufacturing the last potato is more than the cost of making the first potato because the high price draws in less efficient suppliers. Yet all businesses have fixed costs and variable costs. The cost of the first potato is more than the cost for the last potato for a single business. So each individual business has an inverted supply curve, but the conglomeration of all the supply curves of all the businesses is upward. Thus, an inverted supply curve overall only occurs when there aren't many businesses to supply things. In other words, a monopoly. Today's issue is the monopolization of desktops by Microsoft and Intel. These companies are said to operate businesses in which the supply curve takes on a strange slant, so that greater supplies are associated with lower prices. Why should this be so? Because of the huge fixed costs in the business. If it costs you $1 billion to create a new operating system, and nothing to make copies of that software, then the usual rule about more supply requiring higher prices simply doesn't apply...