This article talks about a merge between Comcast and Warner cable. Here is the link to the article: http://www.techhive.com/article/2097727/comcasts-time-warner-cable-purchase-is-a-merger-of-monopolies.html
The article does state that although this deal should be frowned upon as anti consumer it does also say that little would change as these two firms have been abusing their monopoly power for some time already.
The article mentions a few barriers of entry that these companies have put in place such as economies of scale, as the firm is capable of using its advertising power to push consumers to their service and the use of consumer loyalty through special package deals to encourage consumers to purchase multiple services at once in order to be ripped off by a smaller margin.
Though with there control of consumers internet access they can also throttle certain sites that threaten their services market share such as Netflix which many people are switching from cable to TV to and so the company uses there monopoly power to throttle streaming speeds to encourage people to switch back to their TV providing services, which stifles innovation. Many monopolies stifle innovation to eliminate competitors. They also have no incentive to provide high speed internet as they could easily slow down your internet to allow for a higher capacity.
This is also practiced by internet service providers in Malaysia such as Maxis and TM net which are both completely useless in almost every situation imaginable especially in the field of providing internet. TM net has a great amount of monopoly power in Malaysia as they are the only land line providing company and so they are able to provide internet services at a slow speed and high price.
Although in the case of a land line company a monopoly may be more efficient then perfect competition as coordinating the laying of land lines among many companies is very difficult but a monopoly with such power should be monitored to ensure it is providing its service efficiently and to avoid anti-consumer practices such as high prices and slow speeds, throttling and anti competitive actions.
The article does state that although this deal should be frowned upon as anti consumer it does also say that little would change as these two firms have been abusing their monopoly power for some time already.
The article mentions a few barriers of entry that these companies have put in place such as economies of scale, as the firm is capable of using its advertising power to push consumers to their service and the use of consumer loyalty through special package deals to encourage consumers to purchase multiple services at once in order to be ripped off by a smaller margin.
Though with there control of consumers internet access they can also throttle certain sites that threaten their services market share such as Netflix which many people are switching from cable to TV to and so the company uses there monopoly power to throttle streaming speeds to encourage people to switch back to their TV providing services, which stifles innovation. Many monopolies stifle innovation to eliminate competitors. They also have no incentive to provide high speed internet as they could easily slow down your internet to allow for a higher capacity.
This is also practiced by internet service providers in Malaysia such as Maxis and TM net which are both completely useless in almost every situation imaginable especially in the field of providing internet. TM net has a great amount of monopoly power in Malaysia as they are the only land line providing company and so they are able to provide internet services at a slow speed and high price.
Although in the case of a land line company a monopoly may be more efficient then perfect competition as coordinating the laying of land lines among many companies is very difficult but a monopoly with such power should be monitored to ensure it is providing its service efficiently and to avoid anti-consumer practices such as high prices and slow speeds, throttling and anti competitive actions.