News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend. Parent comment

Re:Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their... by ABeeSea on Sunday January 03, 2021 @05:34PM (#25625862)
Restaurants only pay because consumers demand it and would not visit the restaurant otherwise. That’s not rent seeking. That’s market forces. And what they pay correlates with how much their customers demand coke/Pepsi.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their... by treis on Sunday January 03, 2021 @06:30PM (#25626317)
The rent seeking is buying up competitors until its a duopoly and then protecting that through shenanigans like exclusive agreements. It has nothing to do with consumer demand.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their... by ksec on Monday January 04, 2021 @07:58AM (#25630714)
Buying up competitor does not immediately make it a monopoly or duopoly. Especially in industry where barrier of entry are low.

Exclusive / Special agreement with serving only one kind of Soda ( or no Pepsi where there is Coke ) are Anti-Competitive arrangement. Not Rent Seeking.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their... by deelowe on Monday January 04, 2021 @02:43AM (#25628679)
The exclusivity contracts are what some consider to be rent seeking. I don't know if this is the correct term, but I do believe they are anti-capitalist and shouldn't be allowed in a capitalist economy. If freedom of choice is so important, than large businesses shouldn't be able to use their ability to corner the market to force you into exclusivity agreements.
[ Parent | on HN ]