[rcxdude]

Then another huge company grows out of the competitors and begins doing the same thing. Just because the company on top switches out occasionally (and during the transition there is a viable option which isn't abusive), doesn't mean the system is working.

[WalterBright]

People switching to another company means it works.

[rcxdude]

Just because the abuser eventually gets replaced, doesn't mean the abuse stops (as mentioned, the replacement then settles into the same behaviour until another competitor comes along). If there's a non-abusive option 20% of the time, and 80% of the time there's only an abusive option, that doesn't strike me as 'working'. I would say the ratio would need to be 90% to 10% (i.e. any company starting to abuse its position loses it very very quickly, and the replacement does not engage in such behaviour for a while), in order for such a system to be anywhere near acceptable.