Comment by llmslave2
1 day ago
Something can be both flawed and hated, yet still useful, and still good enough.
There is also a cost to switching products, and that has nothing to do with monopolies. Unfortunately the M word is thrown around to describe basically any company with a significant market share and it totally dilutes the meaning of the term.
This is fascinating - your complaint appears to be that someone used the term "near-monopoly" and you claim that its being used to describe companies with a "significant market share" - which is the actual definition of the term.
> This is actually textbook monopoly stuff
?
> monopoly: the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.
???
A monopoly in an economic sense is clearly defined. It is not "significant market share". The person who started this discussion claimed it was "textbook monopoly stuff".
In an economic sense, any company with enough market share and control to manipulate market prices or limit its own competition has monopoly power and a pure monopoly is the sort of 100% absolute monopoly that people like to derail conversations over.
The actual words said were
"Near monopoly"
Why the dishonest misrepresentation?
1 reply →