Yes indeed. Thank you college economics! And this is a prime example of why Monopolies are great for business but bad for consumers, not that Newegg is necessarily a monopoly.
Remember this the next time you wish doom on AMD and root for Intel. If AMD loses their competitive edge, Intel can use any excuse to demand outrageous prices on their products. No competition makes a fat and lazy cat.
My question is which would be a better political policy...1. Let monopolies flourish until competitors naturally take back market share... or 2. Legally restrict the operation of Monopolies by forcing price ceilings, fines, settlements, etc
I would probably vote for the first policy because it would spur innovation and business start ups in the long term... I imagine option 2 would be a temporary relief for consumers but would ultimately stunt economic development within an industry. I guess this outlook is what makes me a "smaller governement" type of person and typically Republican, but I'd like to hear your views.
What do you all think?