[libertine]

I didn't say we shouldn't have criterias.

I said that the "50% market share" seems to have flaws. Why not look at market caps?

Well, the last monopoly was broken in 1982, isn't odd that since then no other monopoly has ever existed?

You currently have monopolies that serve political agendas, that's a better stick I guess.

[enitihas]

What does monopoly have to do with market cap? Market cap is an abstract concept on how much the market values something, and doesn't have much concrete stuff to be based on. Market cap goes way up during bubbles. If companies were to be broken for profits, there are so many companies ahead of Amazon.

>Well, the last monopoly was broken in 1982, isn't odd that since then no other monopoly has ever existed?

Many monopolies have existed, like Microsoft for the most famous example. But there is no industry in which Amazon is a monopoly. Unless we were playing a witch hunt where we had to create a monopoly by thin air, I don't know what makes Amazon qualify as one.

[libertine]

>What does monopoly have to do with market cap?

Well my point is that 50% of a 100 million USD market is different from 50% of 1 trillion USD market. On the later you don't that much market share to pull your weight on the market.

>If companies were to be broken for profits, there are so many companies ahead of Amazon.

That wouldn't work, specially with the gymnastics that's done.

>But there is no industry in which Amazon is a monopoly.

Not even AWS?

[enitihas]

How is AWS a monopoly? There are several competitors, two with similar market cap as Amazon and likely more cash in the bank. AWS neither builds on any pre existing monopoly, not is being used to push another product.

Contrast this with Azure, which greatly benefited from the Windows and Office monopoly. I am pretty sure the Windows, AD, Office monopoly is the prime reason Azure is where it is today.