| >The counterargument is that Apple is not at fault for its own success No it isn't a counterargument unless you think it's success is solely the consequence of it's anticompetitive market practices...in which case yes it's definitely at fault for it's own success. >so what exactly is the reason that Apple can't try to convert its platform into a conduit for services revenue? They can charge high rates by virtue of having created a monopsony in what's essentially a duopoly.
This is bad for the consumer. This is bad for competition. This is bad for capitalism. It's entrenched enough and able enough to extract this way that it's value soared to more than the GDP of a host of countries including Italy, Brazil, Canada and Russia and still there's plenty licking their boot because their product is good. If a water utility country delivers the freshest and well filtered water to your home if it does so at ridiculous rates because it pushes legislature in it's favour and stomps on the competition using it's clout then that's still a shit state of affair The fact that there's an alternative option in a duopoly rolling with these high rates protecting both from being called out and split up doesn't matter much. Especially if they only deliver sparkling water which you happen to dislike.
Looking back it's a bad analogy because these companies would do a whole host more than just water and interconnect their services. |