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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8678787" data-attributes="member: 16814">Nope.  No gotchas.  The market is providing a service of convenience to the farmer, just like OBS.  That it's actually largely true in my town is a bonus. DTRPG creates no meaningful barriers to market entry.  You can completely ignore them.  You can ignore the farmer's market.You are confusing "my business is not viable without using DTRPG" with a barrier to entry.  There's a difference between enabling marginal businesses and being an actual barrier to entry.If, instead, you mean a barrier to entry in the market of providing the same services to RPG companies?  Again, DTRPG doesn't do this. They have no aggressive practices that burden competition in their field of service.  It's just too small a market to really support competition.  DTRPG didn't acquire OBS in a hostile takeover to secure dominance of the digital indie RPG and small company RPG market.  They consolidated because there wasn't enough market to support both.That's really just defining monopoly.  Monopoly power is not something non-monopolies possess.  The only distinction is between a pure monopoly and an effective monopoly.  However, the market for RPGs is vaster than the segment that DTRPG has any control over.  You have to artificially limit the market to get to where DTRPG has significant sway, and that sway is really in the realm of enabling small and marginal companies the ability to engage in the market at all.  Let me put it this way.  DTRPG dropping a product does not provide a barrier to entry for that product into the wider RPG market.  If DTRPG did not exist, those products would not become more viable in the marketplace.  DTRPG isn't a monopoly here, because they're enabling businesses that otherwise would not exist.  You can't claim that a choice by DTRPG to not enable a business that otherwise would not exist is providing a barrier to entry.  If anything, they provide a footstool to entry, by bringing to market products that would not otherwise exist.  This isn't a reversable analysis, where you can say that since they bootstrap companies into being viable that failure to bootstrap is creating a barrier to entry.  Like, if there's a fence, and I offer you a ladder to get over it, not offering the ladder is not the same thing as pushing you back off the top of the fence or building the fence higher.Scale is exactly the point, actually.  Looking at a market and the players in it does not care if the market is large or small.  The analysis is the same.</blockquote>

Verification