malfist literally wrote "near monopoly power", which is not the same thing as claiming that "Amazon is a monopoly".
You asked malfist 'In what sense does Amazon have “near monopoly power”?'
I answered that question. The state of California claims Amazon has enough market share to dictate prices, making it a near monopoly, and it abuses those near monopoly powers in violation of California anti-trust laws. California doesn't need to demonstrate that Amazon is a pure monopoly because that is irrelevant, and not true.
I farther pointed out that even using the term "monopoly" without the "near" qualifier can mean "There are many buyers or sellers, but one actor has enough market share to dictate prices (near monopolies)", with citation.
Which means your statement "Amazon is a monopoly" is a correct summary of the issue, even if those injunction request and complaint don't use those terms.
It seems you think the term "monopoly" can only ever be applied to pure monopolies. You seem to be confusing the economic and legal definitions. Quoting the introduction paragraph from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
> In economics, a monopoly is a single seller. In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power to charge overly high prices, which is associated with unfair price raises.
This thread concerns a lawsuit, so the legal definition is the most relevant.
Is Walmart a “near monopoly”? How about Costco? They both have significant pricing power over their suppliers. How would you differential them from Amazon, if at all?
If we’re using your definition and not anything directly alleged in the CA complaint…
eesmith|1 day ago
You asked malfist 'In what sense does Amazon have “near monopoly power”?'
I answered that question. The state of California claims Amazon has enough market share to dictate prices, making it a near monopoly, and it abuses those near monopoly powers in violation of California anti-trust laws. California doesn't need to demonstrate that Amazon is a pure monopoly because that is irrelevant, and not true.
I farther pointed out that even using the term "monopoly" without the "near" qualifier can mean "There are many buyers or sellers, but one actor has enough market share to dictate prices (near monopolies)", with citation.
Which means your statement "Amazon is a monopoly" is a correct summary of the issue, even if those injunction request and complaint don't use those terms.
It seems you think the term "monopoly" can only ever be applied to pure monopolies. You seem to be confusing the economic and legal definitions. Quoting the introduction paragraph from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
> In economics, a monopoly is a single seller. In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power to charge overly high prices, which is associated with unfair price raises.
This thread concerns a lawsuit, so the legal definition is the most relevant.
twoodfin|1 day ago
If we’re using your definition and not anything directly alleged in the CA complaint…