You are equating “monopoly” with “abusive monopoly.”

No, I’m not. I’m saying they aren’t a monopoly by the simple fact that they aren’t the only providers of the service they sell. And while they are currently in a position to use their power to make themselves a monopoly, they are not doing that and instead are playing fair with their competition.

Buddy. Take a breath for a moment. I mean this constructively; it’s an opportunity to learn.

What you’ve just said here is essentially this:

1. Some journalists sometimes make errors.
2. Therefore I choose to make an interpretive error.

Please remember, we all make errors (myself included). The best of us learn from them.

If I remember correctly they have performance based bonuses

Not just that but I mean journalism geez. I can’t think of a profession that has had more of a fall from grace in the last 20 years. Furthermore the implication here is video game journalism, which has always been the lowest form of Journalism.

You could defend Amazon with that logic. the fact that the barrier of entry is high is exactly what let’s Steam, Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo abuse of their soft monopoly.

Nothing justifies owning a billion dollars worth of of boats.

Amazon doesn’t either. Most of the arguments defending Steam can easily apply to every other “bad” company.

The only thing that differentiates steam is their marketing budget targeting small forums and Reddit.

Nah he’s right. Nobody buys a widget for 5 bucks and sells it for 10 bucks and says, “I made 10 bucks”. By your rational I could buy a car new for 25 grand, sell it 10 years later for 12 grand and say I “made” 12 grand off it.
“Make” has typically implied profit for as long as I can remember.

I wouldn’t describe it as a “monopoly” per say. I’d describe it as “all of the competition is filled with idiots”:

I never mentioned Amazon, but it’s really no comparison, even the FTC in the USA has filed suits against them for monopolistic and illegal behaviour.

Ive never seen an advert for Steam myself, outside of on their own platform or a video on their own YouTube channel. They sell largely through word of mouth. I suppose recently they offered journalists to visit their HQ to show off their new hardware.

Is this fun for you?

People are the biggest cost for sure. Then servers probably.

Valve has lawsuits in the work, although not from the FTC. The fact is Valve is just slightly above the other companies, but it’s a very low bar and that doesn’t negate their very real effect on the industry.

I bring up Amazon because your arguments apply to them. If I told you Bezos deserves all his wealth because he has a better platform then his competitors (all three of them) and offers an easy to use website with cheap delivery, you would probably call me a bootlicker.

All billionaires and their profit making machines are bad, no exceptions imo.

The business hive mind cannot comprehend a company making so much money without shareholders demanding line go up every hour

I “make” my gross pay. I don’t really talk about “making” my net pay. I don’t much think about my net pay, outside of actual budgeting.

Valve employees aren’t pissing in bottles. Amazon also does a bunch of shitty things on their marketplace (Amazon basics) and killed all the competition.

There’s a huge difference in ethics here.

Now include consoles and phones.

There is a difference in the problematic being caused, not the ethics. The soft monopoly they all enjoy together as a group (Valve, Microsoft, etc) is having an effect on the industry. We as consumers get worst quality games in the end, because 30% of profits go directly to a few hosting companies. A lot of indie companies would still be around if the game store club wasn’t insanely greedy and artificially keeping such a huge part of the pie.

If it wasn’t the same, Gaben wouldn’t own a handful of boats worth a combined 1 000 000 000 $. That is 9 zeros for boats.

You are arguing something different. We all agree billionaires shouldn’t exist. You don’t need to try to topic flip to try and let us know. This was simply a discussion about the term monopoly and it’s definition.

Paying people to promote your stuff is not an abuse of monopoly position, because Duckduckgo is perfectly capable of doing the same thing.

Abuse of monopoly position would be leaning on search results to promote Chrome or Android (for example). And they have been caught doing some anti-competitive shit.

You can analyse markets at different levels.