In the late 80s my grandfather had built a hotel on an interstate exit and wanted to put up a billboard a few miles north of it. Our state had passed just such a "beautification" law that required approval by a state committee before any new billboard signs could be approved. He submitted an application to the state and waited and waited and waited some more ... crickets! A friend of his who owned a motel in a more rural setting suggested that he knew precisely how to move his billboard application along. They drove to the state capitol, found one of the committee members who approved such applications, took them out for a really nice lunch and greased their palms under the table. Voila! Billboard sign approved!
He doesn't mention the main argument against monopolies, which is that "By lowering prices, they're driving out competitors, which allows them to later increase the prices."
@@yuvalbreitgand6082 The smartest answer I found from another lecturer of Misses University. The argument was that if a company sells below cost, their competitors can buy the product, re-package it and sell it back to the market. Sometimes they don't even have to repackage it. Another answer would be that competitors will specialize in something close, but not identical to the monopoly's product.
@@عبدالقادر-س8ب6ض No because but they can lower them again. It is easier to lower prices for a time period rather than setting up a company, so the monopoly has the advantage.
DiLorenzo is awesome. He also sounds like Ray Romano.
lmao
That's who it is!
In the late 80s my grandfather had built a hotel on an interstate exit and wanted to put up a billboard a few miles north of it. Our state had passed just such a "beautification" law that required approval by a state committee before any new billboard signs could be approved. He submitted an application to the state and waited and waited and waited some more ... crickets! A friend of his who owned a motel in a more rural setting suggested that he knew precisely how to move his billboard application along. They drove to the state capitol, found one of the committee members who approved such applications, took them out for a really nice lunch and greased their palms under the table. Voila! Billboard sign approved!
Could hear it every night
Too short!!! Make me so angry though hearing again about all the businesses destroyed by stupidity envy.
I wish there was somewhere i could go to feel better
He doesn't mention the main argument against monopolies, which is that "By lowering prices, they're driving out competitors, which allows them to later increase the prices."
What would you answer?
@@yuvalbreitgand6082 The smartest answer I found from another lecturer of Misses University. The argument was that if a company sells below cost, their competitors can buy the product, re-package it and sell it back to the market. Sometimes they don't even have to repackage it. Another answer would be that competitors will specialize in something close, but not identical to the monopoly's product.
Once they increase the prices wouldn't the competition come back?
@@عبدالقادر-س8ب6ض No because but they can lower them again. It is easier to lower prices for a time period rather than setting up a company, so the monopoly has the advantage.