Yahoo! = Standard Oil

Discussion in 'iPod' started by SPUY767, May 29, 2005.

  1. SPUY767 macrumors 68000

    SPUY767

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    GA
    #1
    Yahoo is planning on running Napster and Real out of the music biz with artificially low prices. Once plan A is successful, plan B will be to up the prices to similar levels to Napster or perhaps even higher. All the while, I'm sure that the Anti-Trust division of the DOJ will be scrutinizing Apple for absolutely no reason and will ignore the transgressions of Yahoo! simply because Yahoo! will never have the market that Apple does. Apparently it's ok to be an *******, just as long as you're not the most successful *******.
     
  2. ColoJohnBoy macrumors 65816

    ColoJohnBoy

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    #2
    Weird. Though, in reality, anti-trust laws aren't considered breached unless a single company holds more than 80% of the market share. As Apple is just around the 3/4 mark, it's quite sensible to examine Apple's business practices. Of course, all they'll find is that Apple provides a product far superior to any other company. Yahoo! and the others simply must realize that undercutting prices and providing subscription services won't help them attract customers from Apple. They'll have to provide a product as easy, extensive, intuitive, and trendy as iTunes/iPod.
     
  3. Warbrain macrumors 603

    Warbrain

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #3
    Honestly, I don't think that the DoJ would even look at the iTunes Music Store and Apple at all. I'm sure that they don't consider digital music downloads a major industry and instead just group it in with all music sales, which when digital music sales and brick-and-mortar music sales are grouped together, Apple's share goes down a bit. That's why I see no reason for your worries of the DoJ coming and declaring Apple's iTMS a monopoly.

    And even if it were to happen, we know that anti-trust cases don't work in this country anymore (ATT, Microsoft).
     
  4. Veldek macrumors 68000

    Veldek

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Location:
    Germany
    #4
    One question: Aren't there laws in the US that prohibit "dumping" models, i.e. offering a product at a loss, so you get rid of all the others?
     
  5. GFLPraxis macrumors 604

    GFLPraxis

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    #5
    But Yahoo doesn't have the marketshare yet.
    At this point in time, Microsoft is the real Standard Oil. They have such a high marketshare they don't need to compete and can artificially inflate the prices as high as they want and customers will be forced to pay. And when they enter a market, they do the same thing you say Yahoo does. Look at the XBox. They sold a $400 (thats the cost to build) console for $300 at a $100 loss, bought Bungie, bought Rare, and a few other companies while they were at it. That's illegal dumping and buying a market share, both of which are considered monopolistic.
     
  6. GFLPraxis macrumors 604

    GFLPraxis

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    #6
    Yup. But they are very rarely enforced, otherwise Microsoft would have been punished for selling the XBox.
     
  7. quackattack macrumors 6502a

    quackattack

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Location:
    Boise, ID
    #7
    Yes, its called preditory pricing. You can get nailed for it even if you do not have a monopoly.
     
  8. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #8
    I think Microsoft was able to justify selling Xbox as a loss by saying it was still supposed to be profit-generating due to game sales.
     
  9. GFLPraxis macrumors 604

    GFLPraxis

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    #9
    Although -$1 billion a year losses sure kills that model :D

    They can say it was SUPPOSED to be profit generating, but when you have game sales like Halo 2 and STILL take several hundred million dollars in losses, you're obviously dumping it for WAY too much a loss.

    You're probably right in that being how they justified it though.
     
  10. russed macrumors 68000

    russed

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2004
    Location:
    London, England
    #10
    they will only get scrutinised once the companies market share gets above what that company believes to be a monopoly - so in the uk i believe it to be something like 65% (i cant rembmer off the top of my head- might even be 50%).

    up to that point they are not even looked at.
     

Share This Page