To be fair, an objective person might prefer to have _no_ "big players"

Whether a biased or self-interested commenter on the subject believes this is possible or not doesn't eliminate the possibilty of this preference

It is like asking whether a voter would prefer to have the "biggest players" giving funds to X candidate or Y candidate, ignoring whether the voter would actually prefer campaign finance reform instead

It is not idealistic to phrase the choice as something like "Assuming investor-financed commercial spyware must exist, would you rather the biggest players be X, Y or Z", it's just common sense