Linked by Kroc on Thu 30th Aug 2007 13:03 UTC
Editorial I hear often that when something new appears that "competition is good". The primary reasons competition is seen as good, are: it drives down prices; it gives consumers more choice; it pushes technology forward, quicker. Competition is not good because: competition is why consumers have to choose between HD-DVD and BluRay; competition is why DRM exists; and more. In this article, each of the supposed benefits of competition will be looked at in more detail.
Permalink for comment 267063
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
bad analogy
by Hae-Yu on Thu 30th Aug 2007 17:20 UTC
Member since:

There are many cases where this is evidently true. Car manufacturers compete for better price points and deals...

However price != TCO.
The constant battle for lower prices has pushed quality and reliability to absolute lows.

You're obviously not a car person.

Car quality is at the highest it's ever been. The number of major defects/ 1000 vehicles is far lower overall decade over decade despite the complexity of the vehicles. There's no way you can cite a statistic to back your statement. Individual models vary year over year, but the average car today is far safer, more reliable and performs better than what was on the road 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 50 years ago.

Whether we like the styles or prefer heavy steel to plastic and fiberglass is another conversation.

Every single component has grown in reliability and performance. Cars are far safer than they ever were and fatalities are far lower despite more being on the roads. All of that is due to competition. Regulations merely condify industry practices & innovations after they've been proven.

Reply Score: 2