How does a monopoly "reverse"?

Wen/Dai

In the expectation of countless people, with China's "economic constitution" known as the "People's Republic of China http://www.aliyun.com/zixun/aggregation/11868.html" > Anti-Monopoly Law ("Anti-Monopoly Law"), August 1, officially "Walking" in our economic life.

What is your first reaction when you bring up a monopoly? Microsoft, Intel? ...... Yes, perhaps in the near future, you will find these often in Europe and America familiar with the lawsuit, suddenly also played in China.

"Anti-" monopoly, which is actually a very interesting topic. Because, this involves two aspects:

The infringement of monopoly behavior on free competition in the industry;

Second, the monopoly itself on consumer interests damage;

The first aspect, about the industry free competition this part, has talked about is a very big topic. "Antitrust first case: CITIC State Inspection of the electronic supervision Network" is a very interesting thing-because this site is my team, from the Department of credit in the outsourcing contract, the entire construction and early operation. Frankly speaking, I have no good impression of this company, a rotten state-owned enterprise problem. I will keep a close eye on the progress of this lawsuit and reveal more about it in another article.

The second aspect, "the damage of the monopoly itself to the interests of consumers", is the point I particularly want to say in this article.

Because the current Qunar in the industry second position, eldest brother Ctrip more or less always and Qunar carry out "contest-shake hands-again contest-again shake hands" process. Therefore, any industry field, the eldest brother and second active war, competition handshake, antitrust and so on, I am very concerned about-the focus of concern is the "consumer interests damage."

"Global Entrepreneur" magazine has interviewed Ruiz, about the competition there is a link between the cast: Intel hopes to use the price of products and subsidies to the channel to compete with AMD, to bring AMD into a price-fighting cycle. The long-term goal is: if AMD is stuck in the chip field, with only one Intel, Intel will be able to raise prices at any time, firmly grasp the right to speak, to maximize profits ...

This is the biggest damage to "consumer interests"!

So, anti-Microsoft is antitrust, anti-Intel is also antitrust! It's just that they've grown to a point where it's useless to rely on huge fines and need more means and more robust laws to restrain and sanction.

On "The damage of the monopoly itself to the interests of consumers", it can also extend to a deeper level of interpretation-that is, the boss usually plays "for the consumer" in the guise of shouting "consumer-friendly" slogan, to carry out unfair competition and maintain its own monopoly status, and thus maintain its long-term high profit income.

The European Commission, on July 21 this year, accused Intel of abusing its monopoly market, and Intel argued that offering discounts to computer makers would, in fact, reduce the price of computers to the benefit of consumers.

And in fact? "Consumer" name for monopoly purposes, will only make more people see more clearly--European consumer Union general Monique Goyens in a statement issued July 18, said: "We are shocked by Intel's response, it is trying to convince us that its price-cutting behavior is good for consumers." In contrast, the main effect of these actions is to squeeze competitors out of the market, which is not good for consumers. ”

So, how does a monopoly "reverse"? Don't be blinded by the petty of the eyes-hope "anti-monopoly law" of the introduction of the market can also be a fair environment, create a fair competition. More hope that there are more Citic state inspection, Microsoft, Intel's lawsuit, in China, the vigorous fight!