|
walsufnir said: No again, this is _leading_, not dominating. You defined it with the above number and from then on you were basing your arguments on this arbitrary number to reversely make your domination statement fitting. Dominating means you have full control and there is close to no competition even existing. To be clear: PS4 is selling better and so do the games but right now we aren't even close to a domination, we instead have a tough fighting competition between 2 companies. This wouldn't be possible if PS4 was dominating. |
You don't need to have full control of a market to have a dominance scenario... ask any ecomomist.
This is a example of two players scenario:
"There are several ways of calculating market dominance. The most direct is market share, discussed above. However, market share is not a perfect proxy of market dominance. The influences of customers, suppliers, competitors in related industries, and government regulations must be taken into account. Although there is no set relationship between dominance and market share, the following are general criteria: A company, brand, product, or service that has a combined market share exceeding 60% most probably has market power and market dominance. A market share of over 35% but less than 60% is an indicator of market strength but not necessarily dominance. A market share of less than 35% is not an indicator of strength or dominance and will not raise anti-competitive concerns by government regulators."
This is general criterica... it can chance in case to case.
