“Google Is as Close to a Natural Monopoly as the Bell System Was in 1956″
It would be great to see more balanced discourse on monopolies, especially in a software-dominated world. Most analyses and articles fixate on the costs of monopolies.Let's assume the worst of Google and conclude they abused their search monopoly. Innovation in search was stifled. Competitors were damaged and achieved only a fraction of their potential. For instance, Yelp might be worth $15B instead of $3B in a world without "evil" Google.But Google's search monopoly and concomitant cash flows also gave society free worldwide communication, self-driving cars, cheaper smartphones, free digital maps, and countless other benefits.All policies hurt some and help others.Before supporting or rejecting a policy, it's wise to consider the overall benefits to society instead of focusing only on the injured parties. Why should thinking about monopolies differ?To reiterate, this is neither endorsing nor disparaging monopolies. It's a request for objective analysis and updated thinking to reflect the potential new realities of monopolies like Google that give products away for free.