What would be a free market solution to this problem?

[messana]

If a large manufacture makes backroom deals with large retail corporations to sell their products exclusively.

Yes, the retailers has the right to sell what they want, but if you start your own manufacturing company, you'll never compete with the larger ones with these kind of roadblocks in the way - even if your product is superior.

[DamianTV]

Then dont buy those products or from those large retail corporations.

[messana]

Does that plan ever work? Large corporations are successful for a reason.

[libertybrewcity]

a large manufacturer is looking to stay large. It will sell to whoever will buy its products. If there product is not superior, another manufacturer will step and be larger.

[cubical]

If you offer the corporation a lower price they would dumb not to sell your product(assuming its the same). Someone else would step up and buy your products at a lower price and beat out that other corporation with your product.

[micahnelson]

There isn't a problem, so it doesn't need a solution. This happens quite often and it tends to not work out for the people who do it.

If a product is popular enough (iphone) that some group wants it to be exclusive (att)- other groups will get their own version (android phones). Consumers end up getting more choices.

It would be nice to buy everything you want anywhere you want, but I wouldn't say its an economic problem if you don't have that ability.

[CableNewsJunkie]

Did these large companies receive government subsidies/tax breaks (that allowed them to obtain their status) to the exclusion of other competing businesses?

[Kludge]

Something similar was done in the computer hardware industry not too long ago.

Intel offers large discounts on chips to OEM PC manufacturers but only if they sell Intel-powered PCs exclusively and comply with other aspects of Intel's will. This was a particularly large load of bull$#@! because these OEM PC manufacturers didn't just produce desktop PCs, but also netbooks, laptops, HTPCs, etc. so even though there would be better-suited chips from AMD, VIA, or whoever, they'd still stick with plopping in an Intel chip because if they let any of their products use a non-Intel CPU, they'd lose their discount in a particular market where they needed Intel's chips at a discount.


So what's the free market solution? Continue going about your business. When the deals become too inefficient, buyers will leave the manufacturers altogether.

[Fox McCloud]

Something similar was done in the computer hardware industry not too long ago.

Intel offers large discounts on chips to OEM PC manufacturers but only if they sell Intel-powered PCs exclusively and comply with other aspects of Intel's will. This was a particularly large load of bull$#@! because these OEM PC manufacturers didn't just produce desktop PCs, but also netbooks, laptops, HTPCs, etc. so even though there would be better-suited chips from AMD, VIA, or whoever, they'd still stick with plopping in an Intel chip because if they let any of their products use a non-Intel CPU, they'd lose their discount in a particular market where they needed Intel's chips at a discount.


So what's the free market solution? Continue going about your business. When the deals become too inefficient, buyers will leave the manufacturers altogether.

one particular reason, also, the market isn't "clearing" or trying to clear in this situation isn't just the nature of the free market; when Intel and AMD hold patents to chip fabrication methodologies, designs, and standards, it stifles innovation and prevents someone from making chips that are effectively the same thing, but not produced by the same company.

Take the ION2, for instance--it's a wonderful little platform that's quite powerful, for its energy consumption and size; you can couple it with the likes of a D525 Atom processor and have the potential for a decent gaming laptop. There's only one problem; because of licensing (which, again, is very very likely the result of IP) the ION2 can only communicate with the processor via the sluggish PCI-E x1 (if it was x16, we wouldn't be complaining) instead of via DMI. Intel does this because they want to define what range a netbook should be and how powerful a notebook should be; if the ION2 had access via DMI, it would be an incredibly powerful machine for its size and price range, which could potentially cut into notebook sales, and thus, the sales of Intel's higher end and more expensive processors. We often talk about, on Ron Paul forums, just how much money are we losing each year due to taxes? I've always stated that it's probably far more phenomenal than any of us could possibly imagine, because regulations or laws can create very technical and hidden taxes, such as this--it's a tax on consumers that effectively goes directly to Intel (and to a lesser degree, AMD); how much cost has this imposed on all of us or the economy? Who knows, but it'd be a lot...and this is just processors.

The computer and software industry are both really murky, really nasty companies, that, sadly, get far too much credit, by a lot of economist for being paragons of the free market. In one light, they are--they're hyper-competitive and extremely innovative...to the point that things are getting better while prices are coming down (to the point of outpacing even inflation); the only issue is they don't always know the full details, which may change their minds a bit; at the end of the day, they're like most other industries in the US; not afraid to use the power of the state to seek economic advantages over competitors--in this case, more often than not, it's IP law that's the tool used.

[psi2941]

If a large manufacture makes backroom deals with large retail corporations to sell their products exclusively.

Yes, the retailers has the right to sell what they want, but if you start your own manufacturing company, you'll never compete with the larger ones with these kind of roadblocks in the way - even if your product is superior.

little off topic but i might also add, it doesn't matter if the product is superior. "superior products" does not guarantee success, superior products at the right price point and business execution

Something similar was done in the computer hardware industry not too long ago.

Intel offers large discounts on chips to OEM PC manufacturers but only if they sell Intel-powered PCs exclusively and comply with other aspects of Intel's will. This was a particularly large load of bull$#@! because these OEM PC manufacturers didn't just produce desktop PCs, but also netbooks, laptops, HTPCs, etc. so even though there would be better-suited chips from AMD, VIA, or whoever, they'd still stick with plopping in an Intel chip because if they let any of their products use a non-Intel CPU, they'd lose their discount in a particular market where they needed Intel's chips at a discount.


So what's the free market solution? Continue going about your business. When the deals become too inefficient, buyers will leave the manufacturers altogether.

also i don't support any, any patient/copyright laws at most i might support 1-2 year copyright/patient laws. so you would not have to worry about manufactures only selling intel-powered pc because if theres no patients any company can make the identical product.

[Kludge]

also i don't support any, any patient/copyright laws at most i might support 1-2 year copyright/patient laws. so you would not have to worry about manufactures only selling intel-powered pc because if theres no patients any company can make the identical product.

Very unlikely someone could copy something that technical in any reasonable amount of time. More likely would be companies which tried to fill AMD's old role of making better versions of Intel chips and releasing them on the same platform, which still wouldn't solve the problem.

[Fox McCloud]

Very unlikely someone could copy something that technical in any reasonable amount of time. More likely would be companies which tried to fill AMD's old role of making better versions of Intel chips and releasing them on the same platform, which still wouldn't solve the problem.

difficult to say, really; it's impossible to calculate or know how many chip manufacturers haven't entered the market thanks to patents, could be none, could be twenty.