But at that point public opinion would be negative towards the company

And what will that do, make them stop needing phones?

No, they'll be less apt to stay with the company overcharging

Or they'll find a substitute

Which consumers are very good at doing

monopolies will attempt to entrench themselves by using temporary charging reductions

They don’t have an alternative option when there’s no other companies around.

In this scenario the likely outcome would be that another cable service would expand into the area to meet the demand of the consumers

But with startup costs and a smaller initial customer base for the opposing company the monopolized company can simply discount their prices to a point at which the other company cannot keep their doors open in the area. @Orson Krennic

But then operating costs for the first company would be greater because they're not bringing in enough revenue to pay for them

@Orson Krennic Clarified. Meant to refer to the incoming company for startup and operations cost.

If they keep going through a cyclical price system, the consumers would have no incentive to stay with them, so when another company did come into the area the consumers would switch

@DrRisen that's short term

Long term, it would be a good investment for the incoming company

Especially if they're already established

@Orson Krennic Switching takes time, especially if the initial company had an exclusivity clause in place.

Time that the startup doesn’t have.

Companies change prices all the time without losing public support

It’s a stamina game, and the home field team will always have more of it.

Again, it's a long term good investment

Short term, the costs are expensive

Long term, it's a good investment

Especially because of the demand for cheaper prices

If you’re a startup, you can’t afford long term because you have bills and loans to pay *now*.

That's not what I've been saying

I explicitly said what would be probable is for an existing company to move into the area and expand their business

Which doesn’t solve the problem of stifling new growth.

It’s just another big tree taking up even more of the forest.

If the other company offers lower prices then it would solve the problem you detailed

And eventually these trees merge or go bankrupt making it even more centralized

But often times, companies don't do this

So it's not a realistic scenario

@Orson Krennic And that breaches the problems of corporate conspiracy, in the sense of conspiracy meaning conspiring and cooperating together.

I can’t think of the proper word for it in financial terminology, though there probably is one.

@Orson Krennic Collusion, that’s the word.

@DrRisen R A I S I N

@Maksim W A T

Combination of cultural warfare, the sanctity of marriage and a lot of rope, some assembly required

@everyone Question Of The Day:

You're the infamous epic hacker 4chan and you've just stolen all of the world's nukes; problem is which country do you nuke first?

The United States

Denmark