 The FTC makes a lot of claims about different types of different types of activities of Amazon Basically exclusion of competition by monopoly However, many of them lacks facts Okay, so there is a huge difference between How we as people perceive powerful companies and what it takes to win in court To me they might have a few points there that can be good Some of the points I think just lack any factual Substantiation including market definition and I think at the court will They're going to have the first outcome will be a blow in the mind of Luna Khan Amazon Prime is a crime and it is really important to understand how these Digital ecosystems operate what digital ecosystems do is they try to capture us in to concentrate menu for activities in it within the ecosystem and They have to have some kind of temptation to get us in in Amazon Prime in Amazon Amazon Prime is the glue that we are attracted to prime and it works well now You could say well, that's really unfair for Amazon competitor because we go to the ecosystem in which state We went between and we choose to stay in But the question is is it bad for us? And it would be really difficult to say that our choices to get into the ecosystems are bad I look every year when I every in January I look how many transactions Amazon transactions our household has had over the past year and In recent years has been over 300 a year which you know, we have a line basically and And It has been working for us really well And now what harm Amazon has caused do they now the prices are low. This is why we are with them so if the traditional monopoly was bad service high prices low quality products and As you know as a loyal customer you actually you are loyal because of the convenience and prices So there is something highly patronistic or highly condescending in the claim that The FTC a few bureaucrats this side tell us that what we we are victims and They might have a good theory, but they should persuade us first that we are victims If we had the options, but we feel that we get the convenience and low price the gist of the argument is the convenience and low prices are wrong and That's we'll conflict with the public sentiments. I think we like we like low prices and convenience They are not going to win with this. They might be winning on some points. They have a lot of work ahead of them Okay, and I think that the well the points where they can win is that the Amazon probably engage in some practices that a Suppressed competition in the marketplace This identified those you can win. Okay, so for example the DOJ action against Google had a very interesting point They found out that Google pays Apple 18 billion dollars a year to have Google as The default search engine that you have a fact you have a legal claim exclusion of competition Amazon will probably allege there is no distinct market for the online sale of goods It's just an overall market for the sale of goods and the same thing for about Services for the sale of online goods. They'll say even if there is a distinct market for online goods It shouldn't be just platforms like Amazon that should be in this market Should be any seller of online goods and and finally they'll say even if there is such a market as Platforms for the online sale of goods and services. They have no monopoly power in this market Going back to the moon to visit we're going back to the moon to stay Some people called Microsoft World War three and I don't know maybe Google is World War four And if that's true, then this is World War five the other events who are just little skirmishes This is the big one. This is the one we'll be talking about for years