[cjy]

Actually, a monopoly should remove problems like these. If Amazon is the only firm, it will bear all the costs if fewer good books come out in the future. Therefore, it has an incentive to create an ecosystem that maximizes it's long term profit.

For example, think about fishing. If there are lots of fishing boats they will tend to overfish. They can't leave fish in the ocean to reproduce because other boats will catch them. If there is just one boat (or all boats are owned by the same company) it will take out the optimal number of fish so that the fishery remains healthy and pays the highest dividends in the future.

[SapphireSun]

w.r.t. fishing, I remember reading about this and while that approach works in theory, in practice people are subject to careerist tendencies. The fact that they will not be around as long as the company will be incentivizes them to extract wealth as fast as possible.

I tried looking for the article that talked about this, but I couldn't find it. The conclusion of the article was that some form of regulation was necessary.

My gut feeling is that the monopolist strategy can work, but only if the company's board implements strong internal controls and the executives don't get them changed. I feel that this is a bit of a gamble though as you have two powerful diametrically opposed forces. Also, members of the board could be looking for a quick exit from time to time as well.

On another note, while I was looking for the article, I found this interesting article on the necessary characteristics for a Marine Protected Area to work: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v506/n7487/full/nature1...

[stcredzero]

If Amazon is the only firm, it will bear all the costs if fewer good books come out in the future.

What are you saying? That media always tends towards higher quality, especially after consolidation?

Therefore, it has an incentive to create an ecosystem that maximizes it's long term profit.

There's no reason why this would preclude vast oceans of swill produced by isolated independent artists, from which a few mega-hits arise from time to time. (App Stores?)

For example, think about fishing. If there are lots of fishing boats they will tend to overfish.

The problem here, is that in this discussion it seems that fish correspond to authors. I don't think that's correct. Authors of a given "species" aren't a partially fungible resource that is "killed" when utilized. (Unless the authorial landscape turns into a vast ocean of swill from which a few megahit one-hit wonders sometimes arise.)

Please cite just one historical example where a media monopoly increased the quality of authorship in its domain.