Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   

   silverscarcat (profile), Mar 5th, 2013 @ 4:04pm

   
   

   Boardwalk? PAH!

   Real Monopoly players always strive for New York Avenue and the orange corner.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   

   A Dan (profile), Mar 5th, 2013 @ 5:14pm

   
   

   The beer merger

   If you listen to Planet Money's podcast on the potential beer merger, it's really interesting. Apparently the big two act together with price increases, and it's only the competition from Corona that keeps the beer prices down. It definitely sounds like it's anti-competitive, not an acquisition because they really like the company.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   

   Mike Masnick (profile), Mar 5th, 2013 @ 5:35pm

   
   

   Re: The beer merger

   If you listen to Planet Money's podcast on the potential beer merger, it's really interesting. Apparently the big two act together with price increases, and it's only the competition from Corona that keeps the beer prices down. It definitely sounds like it's anti-competitive, not an acquisition because they really like the company.
   
   Yes, was about to post the same basic comment. Here's the link: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/02/23/172724026/episode-438-mavericks-monopolies-and-beer
   
   The key point is not so much that they would control 46% of the market, but that the much smaller Grupo Modelo refuses to go alone with InBev and Miller raise prices, thus forcing them to keep their pricing lower. So the potential antitrust issue is not necessarily the size of the market, but the market harm that will result from wiping out the one player who seems willing to go against attempts to bump up prices.
   
   Really interesting stuff.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   

   Robin Townsend, Mar 5th, 2013 @ 6:44pm

   
   

   Stumbleupon

   Linking your readers to a previous techdirt article is cool. Sending us to another website to view it (stumbleupon), is not.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   

   Michael Ho (profile), Mar 5th, 2013 @ 8:42pm

   
   

   Re: Stumbleupon

   Really? We do it to promote our posts, obviously. You don't have to click on the link?

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   

   ShellMG, Mar 5th, 2013 @ 9:57pm

   
   

   The cost of eyewear...

   ...is a serious bummer when you need high index lenses, can't wear rimless frames and your eye doc keeps asking if you're ready for bifocals.
   
   i've worn glasses since I was 7. I will always be grateful for the invention of high index lenses but when you add on the cost of a decent pair of frames and Crizal...yeowch.
   
   I hope Google comes up with a way to add a script to their lenses. That would be crazy-cool.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   

   Robin Townsend, Mar 6th, 2013 @ 12:26am

   
   

   Re: Re: Stumbleupon

   It speaks to integrity. If you are going to send someone to another website -to view yours- tell them. In this case,you are not promoting techdirt (your readers are already here) you are promoting stumbleupon.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Mar 6th, 2013 @ 4:44am

   
   

   Re: The cost of eyewear...

   You tried zenni?

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Mar 6th, 2013 @ 5:03am

   
   

   Re: The cost of eyewear...

   meh - and I thought you were going for a beer goggle gag.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Mar 6th, 2013 @ 6:29am

    
    

    diamonds are not the most thermodynamically stable form of carbon by a long shot. that the hell are you talking about, where in that article does it talk about the thermodynamic stability of carbon ? or diamonds (which is just carbon).
    
    It's also been common knowledge for 20 years that if De Beers put all the diamonds they have in holding on the market it would result in the complete collapse of diamond prices.
    
    the biggest market by far for diamonds are for industrial use, not for gems.
    
    how much money would you spend in your life on diamonds (even if you marry hundreds of times) compared to how much money you would spend on electricity or fuel for your car !!
    
    if fact your car and it's fuel would cost a great deal more to product if diamonds were not cheaply available for industrial use. Try drilling for oil without a diamond drill bit !!!!

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    

    Pixelation, Mar 6th, 2013 @ 7:33am

    
    

    "...46% of the US beer market would be controlled by a single company."
    
    Now all they need to do is buy Hostess and make Twinkie beer.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    

    Ryan, Mar 6th, 2013 @ 10:27am

    
    

    "...46% of the US beer market would be controlled by a single company."
    
    Methinks you're playing fast and loose with the definition of the word 'beer'.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    

    Michael Ho (profile), Mar 6th, 2013 @ 12:53pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Stumbleupon

    Robin,
    
    Oh. you're actually totally right. The last line of our DailyDirt posts used to have a bit about StumbleUpon recommendations, but somehow (without thinking), I forgot about that part when I copy/pasted/edited... and I've been omitting our shout out to StumbleUpon by mistake.
    
    I'll add a "via StumbleUpon" to let people know that's where the link is taking them.... We're not trying to fool anyone or anything like that, the omission was an honest mistake.
    
    Apologies.
    
    Mike

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    

    Crashoverride (profile), Mar 6th, 2013 @ 3:44pm

    
    

    The seven page article on Diamonds was amazingly detailed. Even more fascinating was the fact that the article was written thirty years ago.... making all the more interesting the fact that a thirty year old article got posted to the internet.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment