[LatteLazy]

Like so many articles in this space, there is a lot of assumption, claims without evidence and vague assertions. The author doesn't seem to know what Predatory Pricing is. He also dismisses economics of scale as an accounting fiddle.

I sympathetize with his general position (as life gets complex, barriers to entry rise and markets of many small companies are replaced by one's of a few big companies.

But then he gets lost in his own prejudices/conspiracy theories about harvard, financial engineering etc. Not really helpful to his wider point...

[hash872]

If you're not broadly familiar with Matt Stoller- he's an ideologue. He is a far, far leftist on economic issues.

>He also dismisses economics of scale as an accounting fiddle

He proposed on Twitter to make bulk discounting illegal for the entire US economy, on the theory that any kind of discounting is just predatory pricing. In other words, whether you buy 1 computer server or 10,000, 2 avocados or 2 million, the price per unit would be exactly the same. He thinks this would harm large companies and help smaller ones

[LatteLazy]

So many people start with the result they want (more small companies) and then smash everything with a hammer pretending that is the sensible, justified way to get there with no side effects...

[maxsilver]

> He proposed on Twitter to make bulk discounting illegal for the entire US economy, on the theory that any kind of discounting is just predatory pricing.

Is this a real thing? I follow Stoller on Twitter, and have never heard him say anything like that. Just that predatory pricing is often snuck in under the guise of "discounting" (which is true).

He's definitely a centrist on economic policy, which turns a lot of people away (most Americans have never heard of a centrist view of any policy of any kind, and most Americans are far more conservative than they'd ever actually admit to). But nothing about him seems ideologue-ish, and he's certainly not anywhere near left-wing on economic policy.

[greenonions]

Could you provide any example where discounting was actually proved to be predatory pricing?

How is discounting not a valid method of pricing?

[maxsilver]

Flooding a market with below-cost goods (or "discounts"), to drive out competitors so that you can generate a monopoly, is predatory pricing -- literally by textbook definition. It's also illegal, it is a direct violation of US federal anti-trust law.

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

No one is against "discounting" (as in, coupons for Cheerios, or discounts for bulk orders). But illegal predatory pricing is often passed through the economy under the disguise of "a discount", and it's correct for people to challenge that.

[greenonions]

It most certainly is illegal, but can you find a definitive example of such behavior?

It's theoretically a highly illegal and unethical thing to do, but in reality, monopoly control of a market is highly unlikely.

[maxsilver]

I mean, one textbook example of that behaviour is late-90's-Microsoft --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

Amazon's behaviour today is another example of it, but since we haven't really enforced any anti-trust laws in the past decade, it would be easy for someone to claim Amazon "doesn't count".

[hash872]

I found 3 examples just using Twitter advanced search and 'discounts'.

The second paragraph is just word games, I see this argument from the left a lot. The perspective of non-Americans on US internal economic policy is irrelevant as they can't vote here- he's a far leftist for the US, and that's all that matters. (Actually he would be on the Corbyn left even for Europe)

[missedthecue]

What it would really do it hurt all consumers to the benefit of a very small interest group, small businesses.