You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–] Aethos 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

For a price. Yes. Amazon's free shipping and deep discounting allows them to out-compete these options. Amazon has no local competition as a result.

You continue to ignore the horizontal integration argument, so I'm scoring that one as a point. Amazon's online retail integration is at the point where it can exert control on the price of goods delivery, thus exerting monopoloid power to set prices. You may also remember the November 2014 ebook anti-trust settlement, where amazon settled a price fixing allegation with credits to consumers.

Setting prices in the market in this way is one of the alternate definitions of a monopoly: "exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. " (emphasis mine)

[–] Men13 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

So you have an option, but Amazon is better.

Being better doesn't make your a Monopoly. Being the only option does.

The reason Comcast is a Monopoly (in my area) isn't because they have lower prices and better customer service than the competition. They are a Monopoly because there's no other option at all.

Words have meaning. Amazon isn't a Monopoly in your area.

[–] Aethos 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

And the fact that they are technically an oligopoly rather than a monopoly doesn't mean they shouldn't be regulated.

It doesn't mean they should have subsidies either, but hey-- ignore the rest of my points. It's worked well so far, right?