“This is perhaps the most consequential aspect of this case, and I think the European Commission got it exactly right. Last year in Antitrust and Aggregation I explained why the unique dynamics of the Internet push towards dominant players that look very different from the monopolies of the past:

A Teoria da Agregação trata da forma como as empresas funcionam num mundo com custos de distribuição nulos e custos de transação nulos; os consumidores são atraídos para um agregador através da oferta de uma experiência superior, que atrai fornecedores modulares, que melhoram a experiência e, assim, atraem mais consumidores e, consequentemente, mais fornecedores no ciclo virtuoso acima referido. Trata-se de um fenómeno que se verifica em vários sectores, incluindo a pesquisa (Google e páginas Web), os feeds (Facebook e conteúdos), as compras (Amazon e produtos de retalho), o vídeo (Netflix/YouTube e criadores de conteúdos), os transportes (Uber/Didi e condutores) e o alojamento (Airbnb e quartos, Booking/Expedia e hotéis).

The first key antitrust implication of Aggregation Theory is that, thanks to these virtuous cycles, the big get bigger; indeed, all things being equal the equilibrium state in a market covered by Aggregation Theory is monopoly: one aggregator that has captured all of the consumers and all of the suppliers. This monopoly, though, is a lot different than the monopolies of yesteryear: aggregators aren’t limiting consumer choice by controlling supply (like oil) or distribution (like railroads) or infrastructure (like telephone wires); rather, consumers are self-selecting onto the Aggregator’s platform because it’s a better experience.”

Fins, meios e antitrust
https://stratechery.com/2017/ends-means-and-antitrust/
via Instapaper