As Apple has been accused of monopolising the mobile phone industry, one can see, that monopolies are, still a relevant political issue. Popular companies, such as Amazon and Meta, have been described, by the media, as monopolies.
Paradoxically, despite anti-monopoly legislation having existed for over 100 years, monopolies, in the tech industry, still exist.
I will, examine chief arguments, against monopolies, along with theoretical counterarguments, and historical examples.
Argument 1: Monopolies kill innovation
Multi-national companies such as Apple are filled with experience, innovation and, most importantly: money. Lots of dough. Consider the following: concentrated tech revenue into one company would harness major investments.
It would undoubtedly be more effective than small companies doing small investments.
Furthermore, large investments from a monopoly would be extremely effective in tackling tech-related problems such as the rise of AI. Monopolies can securely invest in their industry without fear of takeover or competition.
Massive investment from a tech monopoly, if controlled, can be a force for good.
Take, for example, Standard Oil, a former monopoly which wisely invested in extracting more kerosene from a barrel of oil. What was left was used as oil by-products such as tar, paint and varnish. A small company would not have been able to do that.
Argument 2: Monopolies greedily go against customer needs
Tech monopolies are, I guess, really customer-orientated. A tech monopoly, without any competitors, can invest more time into customer satisfaction. The monopoly can consult its customers on product improvement, pricing and customer service.
Larger research projects and expertise development are implemented by big monopolies. And, since there is a large quantity of revenue, the monopoly can invest to reflect the wants/needs of their customers, further growing their customer base.
Furthermore, tech monopolies, can set prices to match customer feedback, rather than focusing on matching, or outfoxing, their competitors. Who wouldn’t want better prices? Talk about a win-win situation!
Tech monopolies will have the autonomy to keep pricing consistent and reliable. Consistent and reliable pricing equals a wider customer base.
John D. Rockefeller, owner and creator of Standard Oil (A classic monopoly btw), was a lifelong philanthropist, going beyond customer needs by donating $550,000,000 to numerous health, educational and poor relief causes. This goes against the common misconception of monopoly owners being so-called robber Barons.
Argument 3: Products/services from monopolies are expensive and low-quality
Thirdly, and lastly, a tech monopoly will enjoy the benefit of economies of scale, being able to produce larger quantities of tech products or services for a smaller cost.
The products, due to greater innovation and customer consultation, will be of greater quality.
Monopolies easily form an international customer base, benefitting other nations’ economies and providing their global customers with constant and reliable pricing.
Closing thoughts
So, why are monopolies good? Well, because it can lead to more innovation, better pricing, and products for consumers, and a stronger, more centralised, international economy.
And hey, who wouldn’t want to live in a world where all the coolest tech products/ services are made by one super awesome company like Apple?
For further reading, go check out this Investopedia article detailing monopolies: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/monopoly.asp
Featured Image: Pexels Free Photos.
