You're the one who threw in the word "intent", not TorKlingberg. I would further assume that by "colluding", he didn't necessarily mean explicit cartel behavior, but more typical oligopolistic behavior where the "competitors" inexplicably keep prices stable (or increasing) despite the supposed competition.

I also disagree that limited competitors is the same as limited competition. The two may often be related but don't have to be. When two competitors have razor-thin margins because they're competing aggressively, there isn't a lack of competition. When 10 competitors somehow manage to keep their prices in sync and increase their margins over time, there is a lack of competition even though the number of competitors is high.

But I really don't care to debate definitions further. I chimed in to explain the disconnect between these two views on the meaning of the word "oligopoly". I don't personally care which you prefer.

If one doesn’t believe that a market with only two companies could be competitive, they should consider Uber and Lyft. I wouldn’t be surprised if employees from each dressed up in war paint and brawled a la The Warriors.