Comment by heavyset_go | Hacker News Reader

Comment by heavyset_go | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Because they have tons of competition and don’t dominate the market. By revenue, android is way higher.

Apple has 60% of the mobile market in the US[1], and the App Store is responsible for more than 100% more revenue than the Play Store, too[2].

Regulatory bodies aren't concerned with layman definitions of monopoly[3]:

> Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.

[1] https://www.pcmag.com/news/ios-more-popular-in-japan-and-us-...

[2] https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/

[3] https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

They have a strong position, but I don’t think 60% is proof of any type of monopoly. I think people in this thread don’t 1) understand what monopoly means and 2) understand what US antitrust considers monopolies that damage consumers.

You forgot the rest of the quote from your 3rd source:

"Courts look at the firm's market share, but typically do not find monopoly power if the firm (or a group of firms acting in concert) has less than 50 percent of the sales of a particular product or service within a certain geographic area. Some courts have required much higher percentages."

Most anti-trust cases have historically been against companies with 90+% market share: Standard Oil, Bell Telephone, Microsoft. I'd love to see an example of a company that was found to have a monopoly with only 60% market share.

In fact I think Standard Oil wasn't far above that by the time action was taken. They were also cutting prices and modernizing heavily.

To get much beyond that I think you need some special advantage like govt protection. I suspect the patent system, which literally guarantees monopolies to companies in return for a fixed fee, creates a big advantage for the leaders in tech markets. Hence modern leaders last a lot longer with more market share (and way higher margins) than they should.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com