Marketing Contributor

The uniqueness of the structure and the market power of the companies that make up oligopoly helps to explain why one company in the U.S. has the economic power to make or break the entire industry, because the market is so fragmented and the company has so much power as a result.

The concept of “uniqueness” is actually a fallacy. There are times when “unique” is really just “good”. One example of this is the fact that a company with a unique product or service is likely to be very successful, but a company with good products but a small market share is likely to be successful.

It is true that one company is likely to be more successful than another in certain situations. A company with a unique product is likely to be more successful in the short term, but less so in the long term because they have only a small market share. In contrast, a company with good products, but limited market share, has a very good chance of success because they can maintain a large market share for years to come.

I was always a bit skeptical of a company that had a market share of 40% to 70% when it launched, but I have never been a fan of a company that had a market share of less than 40%.

The unique feature is an advantage for a company that can maintain a large market share that will persist after the company has launched. This is because a company that has a limited market share will also have difficulty gaining market share. This is because there is more competition for the same product or service. This is why in the early days of the company, the more expensive the stock price for each new company member, the more difficult it was for the company to gain market share.

The only company with an advantage over other companies is the one that can maintain a large market share. If a company is competing for the same product or service, it is not because it has a unique feature but because it has the largest market share in the market today.

The current oligopoly in the software industry is called “oligopoly” because it is simply competitive for the same product or service. It’s not a monopoly because the companies are not monopolistic. The reason the software companies are not monopolistic is because they have more than just one product. They have a product and they have more products than any other company in the market. They have more products than the software giant Microsoft or the phone giant Apple.

The share in the market today is the same for each company in the market. Each company (and the companies that they represent) is competing for the same share in the market, which is why no one company has a monopoly. The reason that no one company has a monopoly is because each company has more than they need. If the companies were monopolistic today, each company would have a monopoly.

It’s a funny thing. When you look at the list of companies in the market today, you see that the number of companies will be the same next year, but the number of consumers will be even larger. Thus, there will be more people buying more products, which means that every other company has less product to sell than they did before.

It’s a good analogy. Suppose you have a monopoly in the market for your favorite toy. You can’t just buy a rival product, but you can buy the same toy without a competitor. The more the same toy, the bigger your toy company will be. But if your rival’s toy is half as good, you’ll have to buy a rival toy, which you can’t do because you’re competing with a competitor who’s buying half the toy.