From: Adam Flinton 

Geo. wrote:
> "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
> news:3ecccb16$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>
>>>A dominant Telco is another good example where because they are making
>>>money from say local calls where they may have an effective monopoly,
>>>they are able to use this to create a dominant position in say broadband
>>>internet access.
>
>
> Telcos do that every day, but not in the way you might think. What they do
> is sell DSL lines to ISP's and their own ISP service, except if you only buy
> a few they are very expensive but if you purchase volume (like more than any
> local ISP will ever do) then they get very cheap. Because their own service
> covers the whole telco area, they have the capability to order much larger
> numbers than a small regional ISP, and because they are the phone company
> they are located in the telco building so there is no transport lines
> charges. This way they can charge ISP's 2x what they charge themselves.
>
> What I'm saying is don't let MS play that sort of game, make them charge the
> same price to everyone, however if they want to lower that price to be more
> competitive with other products then that's not a problem as long as they
> are not undercutting the competition to try and starve them out.
>
> Stop the unfair stuff, but allow honest competition.
>

But why would offering the same price with the same incentive in mind (i.e.
to drive out competition ("Don't lose to Linux") be any fairer if
applied to all?

OK MS might have Windows + Office as their main/only cash cow & thus
might be pricing it "too high" for you, but that is the price
which the market will stand/pay. If these "discounts" become
widely known then it is possible that everyone may ask for them as a
condidtion of further sales of MS s/w & thus Ms will end up with a new
lower price in effect.

What the law is there to stop is not people charging what the market will
stand but to stop people abusing a dominant market position.

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4