I do not think you can say Apple has a monopoly over iOS as it is a product not a market. Would be equivalent to saying Tesla has a monopoly over Tesla infotainment software, ignoring that they are only a small part of the larger automobile market.
Looking at the overall phone market Apple has around 50% share in the US but only 20% globally. This is not high enough to constitute a monopoly especially when there are clearly competitors in the space.
Apple has 60% of the mobile market in the US[1], and more than double the revenue from their dominant stake in the mobile app distribution market than Google[2], both off which make up over 99% of that market.
Also, our layman definitions of monopoly do not matter when it comes to antitrust laws[3]:
> Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.
Monopoly laws are country specific. It doesn't matter if Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the world. It only matter that they have one in a specific country and that that country decides to enforce.
In the US, the iPhone has very close to a 50% market share. A majority market share is not strictly required to be considered a monopoly. Power over an entire market is the quality that is under consideration.
Can you have a successful app business in the US without being in Apple’s app store? I doubt it.
The rules are different in the EU and so is Apple’s market share over there, but since I live in the US I’m hoping that the Apple monopoly will be broken up over here as well.
Apple isn't just Macs. iPhone has 50% or greater market share in the USA. iPad has 65% or market share as well. Apple certainly does exploit a monopoly in various different ways. One is their monopoly on browser engines in iOS that lets them dictate web standards because if they don't implement something then the 1.5 billion iSO devices don't get it period.
You can’t have a successful mobile app business without being on the iPhone. So, I say Apple has just as effective control over the market as a straight monopoly.
As a matter of fact in the US you do not strictly need greater than a 50% market share to even be considered a monopoly. You just need to have market control.However Apple’s iPhone is hovering just around 50% in the United States.
They have close to 50% of the market in the US and I don't think a strict majority is required to be judged a monopoly.
You simply can't ignore iOS if you want to have a successful smartphone app business. That fact alone is enough in my opinion to consider Apple a monopoly and to take action to force them to play fair on their own platform.
iPhone market share is very close to 50% in the US. You can't have a successful app launch in the US without making your app available on the iPhone. Apples policies affect the entire market, especially in the US.
If they're not already a monopoly in the US, then they might as well be since they have the same market control as a monopoly player. Also, a strict majority market share is not required for a company to be considered a monopoly. It's up to the courts to decide. [1] [2] [3]
> Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors.
> In determining whether a competitor possesses monopoly power in a relevant market, courts typically begin by looking at the firm's market share.(18) Although the courts "have not yet identified a precise level at which monopoly power will be inferred," they have demanded a dominant market share.
> The plaintiffs, meanwhile, will argue that these alternatives don’t matter. “The fact that they have a [less than] 50 percent market share of smartphones doesn’t mean they don’t have a 100 percent share of the distribution of iPhone apps — which they absolutely do,” says Rifkin.
I'm seeing a lot of replies about Apple not having a majority market share in devices, so therefor they can't be considered a monopoly.
I'm curious about if Apple did have a majority market share, would they then be classified as monopolistic?
I understand Apple's point in terms of securing the OS, but allowing mobile safari to have higher access privileges over 3rd party browsers seems unfair, no?
Copyright on macOS, and patents makes Apple phones the products of a company with a legal monopoly.
Are they an illegal monopoly in the US? Well, that's trickier. There are several reasons for and against. There are lots of phone brands, hundreds worldwide depending on how you count, and Apple are the are the largest phone and tablet brand with almost 50% of the US market.
Only Samsung is even close when it comes to phones, but afaik they have nowhere near the same profit margins.
Whether they are monopolistic or not, both Apple and Google has shown clear monopolistic behavior regarding their respective app stores, with Apple seemingly the more egregious.
https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/united-sta...
And 66% of the tablet market share in the USA
https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/tablet/united-sta...
So yes, Apple can easily be considered a monopoly in the USA. Monopolies are regulated by countries.
reply