|
walsufnir said: Huh? It can't fit as there is no definition in there: " In defining market dominance, you must see to what extent a product, brand, or firm controls a product category in a given geographic area." And what do we see now? There is no "if your sales ratio is above x % higher than the other one, you dominate". |
Because the % of sales ration variates in case to case.
Exemple:
A (40%), B (10%), C (15%), D (15%), E (20%) = Case of dominance.
A (50%) B (40%), C (5%), D (3%), E (2%) = No dominance.
If it is a two product scenario... the dominance can be defined by:
"A company, brand, product, or service that has a combined market share exceeding 60% most probably has market power and market dominance."
So if you think about two players you have PS (49%) and Xbox (42%) and a cleary case of non dominance.
But when you add the fact there are 5 players:
PS4 (42%), XB1 (30%), 360 (12%), PC (9%), PS3 (6%)
You start to see some kind of dominance and it is more evident when 360 was the dominated console until a year ago.
Yeap I used the DA:I example because it is a subjective case of dominance... so if you can understand this case then you will see why the others case are cleary objective dominances:
Far Cry 4
50% PS4
30% XB1
11% 360
6% PS3
GTA V (this case it missed by 2% the 60% of the market)
58% PS4
41% XB1
