Sweeney isn’t anti-monopoly, he’s pro-Sweeney. He sees an opportunity to let others do the work and investment to build platforms, then selectively swoop in to compete once the risk and investment pay off.
It’s not a bad business model if he can get the courts on his side: let others spend billions and take risks, then cherry pick the successful platforms and compete with their distribution using a cost basis that doesn’t have those up-front costs and risks.
> He sees an opportunity to let others do the work and investment to build platforms, then selectively swoop in to compete once the risk and investment pay off.
Sure. Just as long as you agree Google and Apple let others do the work and investment to develop new games, apps and media, then swoop in and demand a cut if the risk and investment pay off.
They don't automatically take a cut, they only take a cut when you want to sell to their captive audience, on their hardware, using their distribution system.
Wait until you hear about how the entire entertainment industry has always worked!
He sees an opportunity to let others do the work and investment to build platforms^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H apps, then selectively swoop in to compete once the risk and investment pay off.
If that's not a flawless description of a walled-garden app store, I can't imagine what would be.
It’s not a bad business model if he can get the courts on his side: let others spend billions and take risks, then cherry pick the successful platforms and compete with their distribution using a cost basis that doesn’t have those up-front costs and risks.