That's the dumbest possible interpretation of what I said.
Not all monopolies have bad CR: see Amazon.
But every single company I've had bad CR experiences with with, I would venture many people would agree, is a monopoly. Google, Utilities, Cell phones, Internet, etc.
Any upstart company typically HAS to have good CR because keeping customers is valuable to them.
Now this is anecdotal, and I'm not going to provide papers or scientific studies because I don't care enough about this conversation to do that, but where there's smoke there's fire, and I've seen this pattern repeated over and over in the past decade or so, and some one who cares more than me should look further into this.
> provide government help to the competition
This is just paying for CR with extra steps.
> remove whatever government policies are giving them an advantage
At least we can agree on something :)
Woo hoo! So happy!
Which monopoly?
>The reason they can have such bad CR is because their marketshare is leaps and bounds beyond the competition so they CAN.
Defining monopolies by "has bad customer service" is certainly a unique and interesting take. Almost borders on the "no true scotsman" fallacy.
Of course, the real irony that you don't understand is that this would entrench monopolies: they're the ones with the resources to hire peons in third world countries to provide bare minimum support. Forcing startups to do the same kills them right out the gate.