Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 5883836" data-attributes="member: 19675">In my own metropolitan area, Amazon's rise has led to the demise of almost all of the major local booksellers and the retreat of many of the major chains- we still have B&N and Books-A-Million, but that's about it.No, but you can see throughout the history of their dominance the trail of failed companies that couldn't weather the storm of their annual ultra-crossover series flooding the market with titles.  There is a reason why companies like Aardvark-Vanaheim are rightfully considered exceptional.Most of which- if you trace their corporate ownership vertically- are owned by Coke and Pepsi.  Coke, for instance, has 450 brands offering something like 3500 different beverages...not including their non-beverage holdings..#3 in the world?  Dr. Pepper/Snapple, with just 50 brands.Except that the cross-subdidized sales cannibalized the sales of the same books at other retailers (as the publishers themselves point out in both of those stories), leading to fewer outlets available to the publishers besides Amazon.  That is classic monopsonistic predatory pricing, and is illegal if done as a method of gaining market share.Which has been the result- I don't see how you missed that.The reality is that, more and more people do their book shopping at Amazon, which has artificially low prices.I don't know where you're getting that from- IPG's sales have dropped 50% since Amazon dropped them.<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/business/media/amazons-e-book-pricing-a-constant-thorn-for-publishers.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hpw" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/business/media/amazons-e-book-pricing-a-constant-thorn-for-publishers.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hpw</a>. All Wal-mart does is shift costs to us in other ways.  There are reasons California and other states keep investigating the chain- like the fact that their wages are so low that their employees often qualify for government assistance programs.  The money you're saving on a TV there, you're losing by subsidizing their workers with tax dollars supporting welfare programs.And quickly exit or get bought out...There was an explosion of companies doing superhero comics in the late 1980s and early 1990s- I believe of those, only Dark Horse, Valiant and Image remain.And but for a few titles, their sales don't match up favorably with the big 2, who control in excess of 65% of the market- #3 on that list has less than 8%.  That's not competition, that's hanging around hoping not to get squashed.<a href="http://www.statisticbrain.com/comic-book-statistics/" target="_blank">http://www.statisticbrain.com/comic-book-statistics/</a>Predatory pricing is an amazing thing, and there's a reason it's illegal.OPEC nations that ignore the cartels demands get dinged along the road, and the top-tier producers like Saudi Arabia can- and have- reduced their production to keep prices high.If you don't think OPEC harms consumers with price manipulation...well, I can't help you.They only dodged a judgement of monopoly by dint of investing in Apple at one point.Can't get it for free all the time, either.  If I want to run Windows in my Apple- which may be required to operate a few things (though I havent had to yet)- I would have to buy a new copy of it...if I wanted to be legal about it, that is.The biggest 4 are oligopsonies that are big enough to be effectively monopsonistic.GM's typical tactic was this: find an auto-parts maker capable of meeting it's needs for a particular design and make a contract with them.  Because of their size, they would get a bulk discount...while simultaneously making the producer devote 90% pluss of capacity to meeting the contract due to its sheer size.  The industry standard was that the auto maker would then have 60 days to pay.  The deadline would pass without payment by GM.  When the parts maker complained because they had no income and almost no other jobs, GM would offer  the maker a cash settlement of, perhaps 65-75% of what they owed (effectively getting GM a further discount).  This would be enough to keep the parts maker in business, but not give them enough money to expand their physical plant or increase wages.  Then they had the choice of retooling their shop to satisfy other customers or keep doing business with GM.Of course, the other major car companies were doing the exact same thing.Which is why, when those plants closed, so did their suppliers.  There's a reason why large sections of Detroit and East Chicago look like sets for post-apocalyptic movies.No argument there, really.  The issue of whether they fixed prices is one of fact...However, wether the price fixing was actually illegal will depend on if the price set was at variance with the market rate- IOW, was there actual harm?  If not, the best the DOJ may be able to do is get an injunction to go forth and sin no more, leaving the agency model intact.If, OTOH, they set the price artificially high, there are all kinds of remedies, including, but not limited to, fines and regulating their agency model.Amazon still controls 80%+ of the eBook market.  At best, Apple is a distant #2.</blockquote>

Verification