Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
In “Tech’s Frightful Five: They’ve Got Us,” by Manjoo (2017), the author gives their opinion concerning the so-called monopoly in the modern world, which is represented by five major and internationally renowned companies—Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google. He groups these corporations under one name, the “Frightful Five,” and claims that these companies are the flagships in their spheres to such an extent that they virtually exclude competition in the market (Manjoo, 2017). When attempting to place the aforementioned corporations in personal rank, Manjoo (2017) notes that he can live without social networking or special modern electronic devices. However, daily activities would become more boring since many gadgets have already made their way into usual daily life. The Frightful Five largely shapes the modern world economy and influences the development of certain trends. Nevertheless, while considering the activities of these corporations in terms of innovation, some controversial nuances may arise; in particular, the uniformity of goods produced. Based on the opinions of other researchers, it is possible to assess the prospects of the Frightful Five companies and analyze their work about innovative advancement.
Compare and Contrast Analysis
The theories of the various approaches to innovation are described by many authors, but the works of Schumpeter (1942) and Thiel (2014) are particularly significant studies. Schumpeter (1942) argues that any attempt to introduce new technologies and products leads to economic distress and, as a result, creative destruction. The opening of new markets and the promotion of current trends through the creation of innovative products is a business strategy that is doomed to bring down existing competitive links. According to the author, monopolization methods in the business environment adversely affect the development of the economy and do not allow the allocation of resources efficiently among all market participants (Schumpeter, 1942). Thiel (2014) presents a different opinion on innovation, arguing that the term monopolization can be viewed from different angles. According to the author, companies with monopolies—for example, Google—can own large assets in one area but do not dominate in other areas (Thiel, 2014). Creative monopolists form the modern market and provide consumers with relevant goods, thereby ensuring a stable demand. It is the concept of Thiel (2014) who insists on supporting such a business approach.
About Manjoo’s (2017) description of the Frightful Five, Thiel’s theory (2014) looks more appropriate. Even though both Schumpeter (1942) and Thiel (2014) assess a monopolistic approach to innovation as one aspect of the market, the latter’s work is aimed at encouraging the elimination of competition. Unlike Schumpeter (1942), Thiel (2014) approves of the lack of competition and is not against the domination of some corporations. Manjoo (2017) notes that, despite some controversial approaches to innovation and promotion in the market, the five corporations that he described have almost no analogs in the world in terms of the power of influence they wield. Schumpeter’s argument (1942) suggests that such a situation inhibits natural economic growth and prevents the normal development of business ties between buyers and sellers. Thiel (2014), on the contrary, encourages this concept and strives to emphasize that flagship companies knowingly occupy a leading position because they have authority among consumers. Accordingly, concerning the similarity of opinions, Thiel’s ideas (2014) are more consistent with Manjoo’s (2017) arguments than the theories of Schumpeter (1942), and it seems as though the modern market is moving towards creative monopolies rather than destruction.
Conclusion
Based on all the facts presented, the position held by Thiel (2014) fits better with Manjoo’s (2017) thoughts concerning the Frightful Five. Despite fears that the dominance of certain corporations in the market may cause a complete loss of competition, consumers have a right to choose those companies that they are willing to trust independently. If buyers are ready to purchase the goods of specific manufacturers, it means that they are satisfied with the quality of products. Moreover, according to Thiel’s (2014) assumptions, participation in different spheres of the market is not proof of monopoly in each of them, and competition is still possible. Therefore, the accompanying development of companies is possible, though today it is the aforementioned corporations that lead in their fields.
References
Manjoo, F. (2017). Tech’s frightful five: They’ve got us.The New York Times. Web.
Schumpeter, J. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York, NY: Harper.
Thiel, P. (2014). Competition is for losers.The Wall Street Journal. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.