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 267130
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Real, Fair Competition...
by tyrione on Thu 30th Aug 2007 20:53 UTC
Member since:

If it has ever existed works best when the standards of competition are high.

If the standard for DVD is set to a high mark and competition is let loose to reach that mark both the producer and consumer wins.

Take the US Auto Industry and Engine Efficiency [a sore subject being an M.E. in one field] where the standard is low.

When you are required to meet the minimum competition will only target the minimum.

We have had engine designs for decades [Department of Energy commissioned more than one project of Turbine Engine Design contests] that meet a minimum of 80 MPG.

Today's requirement is in the low 20s for MPG to sell on the US Market.

Raise the standard and let competition lose.

The one who develops the best fleet meeting this raised requirement first will have a distinct advantage of raking in the consumer dollars.

When Government makes the bar so damn low and then puts on a public show of how disgusted they are at their companies for only meeting the minimum I have to ask these leaders if they live in a fairy tale.

If you only need to get a D average to enter Harvard would you fight to achieve an A average?

Reply Score: 2