Hacker News Reader

Comment by sealeck | Hacker News Reader

That if Amazon acquired it, this would enable it to horizontally integrate and take control of yet another market? This, eventually, woudl lead to lower prices for consumers...

View on HN

> This, eventually, woudl lead to lower prices for consumers...

What incentive would Amazon have to drop prices after vertical integration is done?

Economies of scope are the common claim.

No, that's what lowers Amazon's costs.

Why would Amazon, having lowered their costs, pass that savings on to the consumer when they could simply profit more?

Are you asking about supply and demand?

The context of the conversation is one of a horizontal monopoly, in a market that's near saturation, operated by a megacorporation that could afford to ignore profits or losses indefinitely, in the specific industry of robot vaccuums. So maybe the question is "why on earth would someone think supply and demand does apply here?"

I believe he’s asking why the parent poster was suggesting monopolistic consolidation would be good for the consumer, contrary to what all theory and experience would suggest.

*shrug* I gave him the argument baseline argument commonly known because it claims that costs become lower (and thus the merged entity claims to pass lower costs to the consumer) that normally flies at the FTC.

With respect to Amazon? Give us all a break.

This is sarcasm, right? The “eventually,” the ellipses, and the underlying ridiculousness lead me to believe it is sarcasm.

Yes

Reply on news.ycombinator.com