Why Regulators Allow Monopolies Like Boeing While Attacking Microsoft and Amazon
Often, misconceptions arise when discussing monopolistic practices in the technology and aerospace industries. While the term 'dominant' is frequently used to describe companies such as Boeing, it is essential to distinguish between having a dominant market share and maintaining an illegal monopoly. Let's explore these concepts and why regulators may have different approaches to companies like Boeing, Microsoft, and Amazon.
Understanding Monopoly and Market Dominance
A monopoly is an illegal act meant to prevent competition by exclusive control of a commodity or service, which is far from the case for Boeing. Entering the aviation and aerospace sectors is complex and requires significant technical, financial, and regulatory expertise. Boeing’s success in these areas is due to its expertise and market demand, not any unlawful suppression of competition.
Historically, entering markets like car manufacturing or the web browser industry seemed insurmountable, yet the dynamics have shifted. For instance, in the electric vehicle market, 19 companies are now vying for a share of the growing market. This shift underscores the fact that once a sector appears saturated, it can become more accessible to new entrants than originally thought.
Evaluation of Monopoly Practices
Being a dominant player in the market is not inherently illegal. For instance, the USA and Europe have not banned dominant market players. However, engaging in monopolistic practices by leveraging market power to create monopolies in other markets is a different story.
Regulators must scrutinize how companies like Microsoft and Amazon use their market dominance to potentially stifle competition in other sectors. In contrast, Boeing does not engage in such practices. For example, Boeing has never written a web browser, opened an online shopping experience, or attempted to buy a grocery chain. They have never threatened companies that use Android with the promise of exclusivity or financial penalties.
Examining Current Regulatory Actions
Regulatory investigations into tech giants like Microsoft and Amazon are justified. If the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) deems that these companies have engaged in monopolistic behavior, they may face consequences. Microsoft and Google have history; they were involved in anti-trust suits decades ago, similar to the current scrutiny of Amazon and others.
It is imperative to understand that tech companies like Microsoft, Amazon, and Google often share a common culture of seeking to expand their market influence in areas not related to their core expertise. This practice can lead to monopolistic behaviors, which regulators are rightly scrutinizing.
The Impact of Cultural Norms in Tech
In the tech industry, there is a culture of cross-pollination, where one company's moves can influence others. Over time, this can blur the line between behavior and create a perception that one tech company's actions are mirrored by others. This cultural aspect plays a significant role in why regulators and the public perceive certain tech companies as behaving in monopolistic ways.
Final Thoughts
While Boeing has a dominant market position in the aerospace industry, which is challenging but legitimate, competitors like Microsoft and Amazon have been under scrutiny for potential monopolistic behaviors. These companies have engaged in practices that use their market power to gain control in other areas, which is what regulators are looking to stop. It is vital to distinguish between holding a dominant market share through legitimate means and engaging in illegal monopolistic behavior.
As a tech industry individual, my opinions remain my own and are not representative of any employer, regardless of the content of this or other answers.