• Primarily0617
    link
    fedilink
    12 years ago

    My point being that while a duopoly may seem like a worst case scenario, it very much isn’t.

    • Deceptichum
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      My point is that is isn’t any better or worse when there isn’t competition.

      You’re still a captive market being charged the highest costs possible.

      • Hello_there
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        So private telecoms frantically lowering their prices when a public-funded internet company launches is just a coincidence?

      • Primarily0617
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        The “highest cost possible” is higher in a monopoly than a duopoly.

            • Deceptichum
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              12 years ago

              The highest cost is hard set by what the consumer is able to spend.

              They cannot go higher.

              • Primarily0617
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                if that’s how you want to define “highest cost”, then goods absolutely aren’t priced at highest cost in a duopoly

                they aren’t even priced at highest cost in a monopoly, because “all the money a person has” is just cartoon logic

                • Deceptichum
                  cake
                  link
                  fedilink
                  12 years ago

                  Markets have a carrying capacity.

                  You cannot exceed this, it’s not a cartoonish “all the money you have”

                  • Primarily0617
                    link
                    fedilink
                    12 years ago

                    So “highest cost” isn’t set by “what the consumer is able to spend”? So what’s it set by?