Free market & Monopolies

>>1016924
You're oversimplifying the issues

>>1016924
It isn't a problem, it's the whole point.

Well, your example with the Saudis and American Midwest companies holds little ground. If a government regulates something, it is by all definitions, not a free market. And besides, many Saudi companies are in bed with the Saudi government, which would not happen in a free market. Basically, your example only works if the barrier to entry is harder then the barrier to continue, which we have currently, because of government laws. Would not happen in a free market.

Of all examples to pull you picked the worst. The USA and Saudi Arabias relationship is one that truly demonstrates the power of a free market.

America is never at risk because of low oil prices. Investment just pours into other sectors and we keep on rolling. Then when price comes back up we will continue to have the most innovative and prolific energy sector. They literally cannot win in the long term. As soon as they think they have defeated american producers and try to cut production/raise prices, money will flood back into energy and the very same people are going to go back to work leaner and meaner and under different names and organizations. \

Even right now most investors have it quite wrong on the break-even price for american producers. The newest wells being drilled are closer to 20$/bbl break even price.

Why do we never see or hear about monopolies? It seems like it would be really easy for warren buffet to come in buy all the rental properties in a small city and double the rents. Make big money and create an artifical real estate evalution bubble in which he could then start selling the houses off at huge profits.

Or shit find a small town with a hand full of gas stations. Why dont those gas station owners get together and agree to charge high gasoline prices it would be really easy and could work for years before a competitor comes to bust it up.

>>1017515

>Why dont those gas station owners get together and agree to charge high gasoline prices it would be really easy and could work for years

thats illegal

You fail to take into account that a monopoly in of itself is not a bad thing.

Socialism, for instance, relies upon having the monopoly on the means of production.

>>1017533
>thinks illegal means doesn't happen
>thinks media will report on real economic problems instead of fantasies about gays/feminists/commies/etc

Welcome to /pol/

Whats wrong with having a voluntary monopoly?

>>1017539

>implying socialism works

Kek

>>1017515
>Why dont those gas station owners get together and agree to charge high gasoline prices

that's fucking illegal

>>1016924
>Company A has a monopoly
>Startup B challenges the monopoly
>Company A drops their prices and floods the market. Startup B fails

Or, instead of failing, Startup B buys up all of company A's goods off the market until company A can no longer afford to throw away money?

>>1017578
youre on /biz/

its called collusion and yes price fixing happens all the time

especially when you consider union workers are literally trying to monopolize the labor force and 'price fix' their wages.

If you're going to be challenging the monopoly, you need to be bringing something fresh to the game. Something that people will be willing to pay you more for, or to buy your product instead of the monopolies.

If the monopoly does try to drop their price in order to flood you out, then you weren't innovative enough to begin with. Otherwise people would still be buying your product, even if the alternative was cheaper.

Basically, you deserve to fail.

>>1017533
>>1017599

Not disagreeing but I'm curious, by which law is it illegal?

>>1017693
its called a cartel

>>1017711

Cartels aren't illegal though? They are everywhere. National association of X is usually some kind cartel.

>>1016924
>finance would be on the side of the monopoly
what is a venture capitalist

also you have it backwards, shareholders would be out for blood if a public company cut its prices. it's startups abusing pricing to drive monopolies down, not vice versa.

on the other hand you cannot solve this with government:
>large company sucks
>startup does same thing better/cheaper
>large company lobbies for new regulations because think of the consumers!
>large company hires massive bureaucracy to manage avalanche of paperwork while startup fails because it was too busy getting shit done

Thanks for telling me about this OP.

I'm going to start up a business to compete with Company A right now! Since he's guaranteed to buy me out, I'll just charge him 10x what my company is worth.

Easiest free money of my life.

>>1017693
>>1017711
>>1017721

Collusion to fix prices is illegal.

Although, as a free marketer, I don't think it should be illegal. That's just free association. It's basically a union of businesses. If workers can do it, why not business?

File: 02836508625.jpg (325KB, 1566x1110px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 1566x1110px

>>1016924
>monopoly in socialist America
>white ppl have become 100% closet faggots to not realize they've dug themselves a glory hole grave

>>1017744

Exactly. Op doesn't account for company C or D or E...

>>1016924
Startup B either creates a higher quality, innovates a product to replace ones supplied by company A, or maintains a niche market share. A monopoly is almost guaranteed to be less efficient than competing companies.

It's tough to say when government is not involved as patents rights are maintained by the government, yet the monopoly wouldn't be able to exist either without some form of governance (eg., shooting the board members and conquering company A by force).

You example of the Saudis vs the Midwest only exists because of technology improvements to make the Midwest even a viable competitor to the Saudis. They cannot reign supreme forever as people naturally get lazy.

>>1017748
>corporations are people

>>1017828

No, people are people, and they should be allowed to associate however they please.

There is no sound reason not to allow collusion or price fixing.

>>1016924
I don't drink because im lonely, im lonely because I drink.

it's a sick cruel world, better be on your toes

>>1017480
What if the barrier to continue is harder than the barrier to entry?