Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 735 posts

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#321

Post by notatoad »

apcragg wrote: post #142
basch wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. But if we are going to split up the store platform and the store brands, now youre going to have to split up Target, Walmart etc. Anyone besides Ikea who sells their own store brand and runs as a platform for others to sell their products. Any grocery store can do the same thing amazon is doing, use data about sales to push clones and store brands of popular products. What percent of products at Target are s…

The difference is that none of those examples dominate their market. The problem isn't "Amazon uses their platform to promote their own products" it's "Amazon uses their market dominance to promote their own products which might not otherwise be competitive"

dominating the market and holding a monopoly are not the same thing. Amazon has a dominant position in many markets, but are not a monopoly on any market unless you re-define the market to be amazon's portion of it.

Does amazon have a retail monopoly? absolutely not. An online retail monopoly? still no. An online book selling monopoly? okay, now we're getting closer but still not a monopoly. A kindle books monopoly? yeah, by definition.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#322

Post by sonnyblarney »

basch wrote: post #311
sonnyblarney wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Predatory pricing to push companies out of business is absolutely illegal" It's impossible to prove in most cases because it may have nothing to do with intent. Amazon's advantage in 'groceries' is inherently structural. They can sell bananas for 10 cents less than Safeway because their opex may be subsidized, or they can transport cheaper, not 'because they are acting predatorily'. The nature of this value chain ov…

I really like Stratechery's analysis of Whole Foods as an amazon customer. https://stratechery.com/2017/amazons-new-customer/ specifcally https://stratechery.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/strateche... In this model, Amazon WANTS grocery stores to stick around, and buy groceries from Amazon wholesale grocery. The same way that amazon wants AWS to be everyones platform, and for their business to flourish.

Yes, in that model, they want 'other grocery makers to exist'

But Amazon is going to open a regular grocery store chain soon, so it won't be just Whole Foods.

What Amazon 'wants' is to make money. If they can control all of the food distribution in the US, they will make not only all the profits from that market - they'll make a 'monopolizers surplus' from having the power to charge higher prices in the long run.

That cash-cow is much bigger than the partial cash-cow of owning only an intermediary layer.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#323

Post by e1ven »

Bhilai wrote: post #318

What about closing Tax loopholes, such that Apple and Amazon pay their fair share and Netflix does not pay zero tax ?

There are a million other things which should also be done.

Saying "What about these other things?" isn't particularly constructive to the discussion of this proposal.

There's nothing in it which precludes changes to the tax structure as a separate proposal.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#324

Post by renholder »

pitaj wrote: post #288
baskint wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

agree, ISPs, cable-providers and wireless carriers should also be on the top of the list. Same here, there is no alternate to Comcast in where I live offering a similar service. They have been doing very slight improvements in service while almost doubling their prices. Paying $110/month for a business line with 50 down / 10 up, while recently i was offered then refused a promotion upgrade to $140/month with 150 down…

On the other hand, the reasons that ISPs are territorial monopolies (local, state, and federal regulatory capture) are hard to address. Splitting territorial monopolies into smaller territorial monopolies is unlikely to help.

>Splitting territorial monopolies into smaller territorial monopolies is unlikely to help.

It seemed have helped in the Ma Bell[0] days[1].

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_System

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#325

Post by Apocryphon »

Bhilai wrote: post #316
pradn wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how Microsoft isn't mentioned in the same breath as FAANG companies. It's in the top 3 companies by market cap, has a dozen billion-dollar businesses, does really well in enterprise, is aggressive in the cloud and hardware, has a large seat at the open-source table these days, and has a large set of older products that keep generating billions. If Apple is in there, why not Microsoft? Both are heavily conc…

Microsoft is pretty big in consumer space as well - Xbox, Skype, Bing ...I think its Silicon Valley vs not in Silicon Valley thing. Microsoft is counted out because of not being physically located in SV. Thats my theory.

I’m pretty sure it’s because people assume after the antitrust case in the 90s that Microsoft is compliant now.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#326

Post by will_brown »

psadauskas wrote: post #211

How about going after Comcast and Verizon first, the actual tech monopolies ? I already don’t use Facebook, I buy things online from places other than Amazon, and have email accounts that aren’t hosted by Google. However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service. Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for…

>But no, because Comcast has -bribed- donated to way more congresspeople than Google...

Lobbying is tracked and google spent over 33% more than Comcast - in your own words - bribing members of Congress.

The bulk of Google’s lobbying expenditure was for immigration, tax reform and antitrust. I’d say Google’s far better “at playing the game” after all no one is randomly sticking up for Comcast.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#327

Post by psadauskas »

rayiner wrote: post #292
psadauskas wrote: post #211

How about going after Comcast and Verizon first, the actual tech monopolies ? I already don’t use Facebook, I buy things online from places other than Amazon, and have email accounts that aren’t hosted by Google. However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service. Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for…

That odd SV myopia. The trend in broadband has been more competition. Verizon competes with Comcast in almost its entire FiOS service area. These days it also competes with cellular—15% (and growing) of households have abandoned wired broadband in favor of cellular. There are four major cellular providers. In tech, the trend has been in the other direction. If you don’t consider Sprint a viable competitor to AT&T, wh…

It would be odd if it were SV myopia, since I'm 1000 miles from there. In 90% of Denver Metro, your choice is Comcast or 1.5mbit CenturyLink. I just bought a house in a new neighborhood, and one of the major selling points was that both CenturyLink and Comcast offer 1gbit service. CenturyLink's service costs about 3/4 of Comcast, and Comcast's service here is already about 1/2 of what they change for gigabit in other areas that don't have competition.

Sure, Google has the search monopoly, but they don't actively squash (or try to get laws made against) any other company trying to build an alternative search engine. I use DDG for most things, but occasionally have to repeat the search on Google because its just better.

Also, my point isn't that FAANG are perfect citizens and don't need any regulation at all, its that the Telecom companies are far worse If we're gearing up enough citizenry outrage to do some monopoly busting, lets start with them instead.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#328

Post by geofft »

BurningFrog wrote: post #170
geofft wrote: post #58

This is an excellent goal, and Paul Graham has articulated the reasoning pretty clearly: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/886953410356011008 > Here's how to explain to people the distinction between fighting poverty and fighting economic inequality. If you're fighting poverty, you might say "Let's have universal health care." If you're fighting economic inequality, you have to say "Let's have universal health care. A…

But Google (the search engine) is one of the greatest gifts to humanity that ever existed! That some people made a few $100B on it is nothing compared to the value it's given humanity.

Was it necessary to make $100B on it? Remember that Google started as a grad school project. Could it have continued and still been the same gift to the world? (Could it have been better?)

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#329

Post by Apocryphon »

logicchains wrote: post #75
dnissley wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would also give other companies in the US a better shot at the same goal. The focus on China seems unwarranted.

But presumably if other companies in the US got as powerful as Facebook/Google, they'd just be broken up too, for the same reasons, no? And if they weren't that big/powerful, they'd lack the economies of scale to do what Google and Facebook are doing now. So any other country with giant technology companies (which in practice right now is just China) would have an advantage.

There are industry consortiums and partnerships and the like. Surely some of these companies could find a way to work together. And surely the U.S. with the NSA could initiate its own Manhattan Project for A.I.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#330

Post by mushufasa »

fanzhang wrote: post #247
psadauskas wrote: post #211

How about going after Comcast and Verizon first, the actual tech monopolies ? I already don’t use Facebook, I buy things online from places other than Amazon, and have email accounts that aren’t hosted by Google. However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service. Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for…

Also, does the public have the image of Comcast and Verizon CEOs as being specific people who are really rich and dislikable? So that taking them down a notch will make the public happy? And so taking them down a notch is a good political stance? To be fair, I think there is some argument that some of the larger tech giants would benefit consumer welfare by being broken up. Facebook probably less so since people alre…

In the past couple years, a new legal theory proposed that the definition of monopoloy needs to be updated for the 21st century.

Instead of focusing on consumer welfare, antitrust law should focus on 'anticompetitive behavior'. In this argument, amazon is the platform through which all other online sellers go to market, like railroads in the late 19th century. Behaving as both a platform and participant is anticompetitive, regardless of whether programs like 'amazon basics' make consumers happy.

NYT article about the author of the original law paper https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/07/technology/monopoly-antit...

I don't have strong feelings on the issue, but this may help explain warren's stance, which isn't directly related to consumer choice.

Post reply on HN