>>723080486
I know exactly what a monopoly is, why are you trying to educate me in vain when there are literal illiterate fucktards around for you to teach English to?
One of the conditions you yourself outlined would cover something being a monopoly despite customers choosing to spend money there - undercutting all the competition in terms of price and offering better conditions that nobody else can afford to match.
Now in case you're illiterate too, I am not bold enough to assume you're not, I will say once more that I don't think Steam is a monopoly and never have stated otherwise. I'm replying to some fucktard that thinks a monopoly can't exist if all the customers choose to spend the money there instead of somewhere else. That's clearly not the case, a monopoly can exist in this scenario.
Also why the fuck are you retards so brain dead when involved in any discussions relating to monopolies in the first place? If a monopoly exists because it is offering such good deals that nobody can compete, then monopoly is a good thing. This is like speaking to children who have been gaslit by the government (a monopoly) into believing that monopolies are bad so they have to regulate them all. Absolutely idiotic. Steam might not be a monopoly, but if they were and it was because they were offering the best unmatched customer experience, then it'd be a good thing.
>>723078619
Yeah I know you didn't read, because you're a sub 50 IQ illiterate retard which I noticed much earlier. No need to brag about it.
