Who else would be more qualified to define ‘monopoly’ [mə nóppəlee]than Microsoft? According to MS Encarta, ‘monopoly’ is a situation in which one company controls an industry or is the only provider of a product or service.
We believe Lara would enlighten us more when she does the second of the young researcher lecture series scheduled for today (April 15, 2008) at 16:00 hours SLST. (10:30 hrs GMT)
Watch this space. The lecture will be blogged real time.
9 Comments
confab
good luck lara:D
muchas love from singapore:)
Deane
” ‘monopoly’ is a situation in which one company controls an industry or is the only provider of a product or service”
Right. so how can Microsoft be a monopoly?
Chanuka
Deane,
Did we say Microsoft is a monopoly? Please read carefully.
Still it is an interesting question. How many of us use anything other than Microsoft Office package? Or Outlook to check our mails?
Some Gen X still remember using Word Perfect 5.1, Lotus 123 and Harvard Graphics. May I know what happened to these products?
Donald Gaminitillake
Monopoly could be ‘International” or “National”
Or a govt could use it to protect the farmers or a certain group.
US govt protect over 14 types of agricultural products.
Sri Lanka cannot export peanuts to US.
Very debatable subject
If we talk of Lanka there is IT monopoly, Domain monopoly, Insurance monopoly, Technical monopoly at various institutions, etc etc
Punchi Putha
Or a govt could use it to protect the farmers or a certain group.
Donald uncle,
How a monopoly ‘protects’ famers? Do you refer to paddy marketing board?
I thought farmers are better off in competetive markets because they get a bargaining power. How can famers bargain with a monopolist?
Deane
Chanuka I thought when you said,
“who else would be more qualified to define ‘monopoly’ [mə nóppəlee]than Microsoft”
the implication was quite obvious. what is it then, specifically qualifies MS to define monopoly? :)
In any case, I for one use, explicitly, gmail for email. It’s surprising that Google rarely gets accused of being a search engine monopoly isn’t it?
I wouldn’t call either of them monopolies, if the consumer chooses to patronize that product/service overwhelmingly over the other. so be it.
Chanuka
Deane,
Interesting discussion. In fact the question you raised was somewhat discussed at the colloquium.
Rohan did mention that Google was a different kind of a monopoly. (I might not fully agree.) What is Google’s market? It earns revenue not directly from users (like Microsoft) but from the advertisers. So even if Google is a monopoly it is NOT in the search engine market. It does NOT sell search engine services. It only sells advertising space.
Perhaps Google, like flickr and even wikipedia, are ideal examples for natural monopolies. (I have no idea how wikipedia earns a revenue, but I guess it has to)
You seems to have the premonition that monopolies/oligopolies are always bad. Not necessary, as Joseph Schumpeter, said.
Put in a nut shell, I still follow PIPU’s motto still: ‘Competition wherever possible; regulation where necessary’.
Deane
I don’t think Google is a monopoly either, because we have choice. I can always ‘yahoo’ instead of ‘google’, lot of people do, I choose not to. I choose gmail over yahoo mail, and as a result choose Google docs, groups instead of Yahoo variants. because the ‘costs’ (defined as what i want to give up to get something) of using another service for these things would be high.
People don’t use Linux over Windows for the same reason. The cost, what we have to give up – re-training, familiarity, lack of familiar software support is just too high, even though Linux is essentially free, monetary wise.
So I think Google DOES sell search engine services, they sell it for free. Try asking google to shut down search enginge services, they obviously can’t coz that’s the core business. They got to keep selling it for free, and make it better. Coz’ even in the Advertising market, that’s essentially what advertisers buy from google – how many people use their service. So I should say, they sell the search engine services free to us, and at a fee to advertisers.
I think wikipedia functions on donations if I’m not mistaken, Flickr, again selling-for-free business model. Wired had an interesting articlesome time ago about this. I don’t agree with some parts, but it’s an interesting feed.
I struggle though, to find examples of actual monopolies created without the aid of government and regulation.
Chanuka
Deane,
Examples of actual monopolies created without the aid of government and regulation?
Your difficulty is because such monopolies;
(a) do not exist in developed competitive markets. The very existence of them suggest an inefficiency in system.
(b) temporary. Cannot survive for long without any govt intervention
Basically every market first starts as a monopoly. IBM was a monopoly in 1960s, Kodak was a monopoly in personal cameras for some time, TI had a monopoly for microprocessors in mid 1970s for a short period.
Both hotel and newspaper industries were natural oligopolies in Ceylon in the first half of 20th century. That had nothing to do with govt regulation.
Another example is Dialog offering telecom services to Jaffna in 2002. No restriction for others to enter market, but they did not for the high entry barriers.
Workshop: Digital Tools for Strengthening Public Discourse
Today, LIRNEasia hosted a workshop to launch digital tools created by Watchdog Sri Lanka, funded by GIZ’s Strengthening Social Cohesion and Peace in Sri Lanka (SCOPE) programme. Researchers, practitioners, activists and journalists attended to learn about these tools, and how they can potentially help them in their own lines of work.
Election Misinformation in Sri Lanka: Report Summary
Election misinformation poses a credible threat to Sri Lanka’s democracy. While it is expected that any electorate hardly operates with perfect information, our research finds that the presence of an election misinformation industry in Sri Lanka producing and disseminating viral false assertions has the potential to distort constituents’ information diets and sway their electoral choices.
Election Misinformation in South and South-East Asia: Report Summary
A powerful weapon in a time of global democratic backsliding, election misinformation may undermine democracy via a range of mechanisms. Election misinformation may influence an electorate to cast their ballots for candidates they otherwise might not have on the basis of incorrect information about a country’s economy, the candidates, or some other phenomenon.
Links
User Login
Themes
Social
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Contact
12, Balcombe Place, Colombo 08
Sri Lanka
+94 (0)11 267 1160
+94 (0)11 267 5212
info [at] lirneasia [dot] net
Copyright © 2024 LIRNEasia
a regional ICT policy and regulation think tank active across the Asia Pacific