Right, the only thing that could do it is a firesale attack

Die hard style

And that would only be a real issue if everyone did it or if a large amount of an industry was monopolized. @Orson Krennic

And even then the financial leaders of the companies would know better when their profits are insured by the federal government.

Monopolies aren't even that big of a problem most times

Natural monopolies are perfectly fine

But most monopolies are created by the government

@Orson Krennic The kind that exist because of government interaction or the kind that were originally started by the government?

Natural monopolies exist because of high operation or start causes in an industry

But large conglomerations are made rich because they get money and contracts from the government

can we just take voting rights away from women? that will solve 90% of issues

so true

@CUNT How?

Dude also wants to take voting rights away from everyone who doesn’t own property

So yea

@Orson Krennic Monopolies can stifle free markets. It’s like a massive oak tree preventing anything from growing under it. Sometimes the government needs to cut it down and let the rest of the market grow.

Regardless if it grew on its own or if the government planted it.

Natural monopolies operate differently

It's like a local cable company

Not to mention if it falls by itself very bad things can happen like the market collapsing and prices skyrocketing because supply can’t meet demand.

That's a natural monopoly

Because the operating costs of operating another cable company are too high

@Orson Krennic Local cable companies aren’t good. It stifles competition which takes away much of the incentive to provide good deals and better technology.

Natural monoplies aren't necessarily bad

They provide services at a low cost to consumers

What’s keeping them from raising the cost?

It would be competition, but they don’t have any because the startup costs aren’t worth the profit. @Orson Krennic

The only alternative I see is regulation, local or otherwise.

@DrRisen if they did raise costs then it would be economically profitable for a new company to start up

But if they offer good service and keep their prices stable then there's no profitability

@Orson Krennic If a new company starts up its economically feasible for the already established company to temporarily lower their prices far enough that the startup, which will have a smaller customer base and ergo need a higher price line to stay in business, will be forced to sell or go bankrupt, then the monopoly can raise its prices right back up.

Consumer confidence

You're ignoring the opinions of the consumers

Sure they can do that

Monopolies are ecvil

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