Talk:Duopoly

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Duopoly article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Coke vs Pepsi

Isn't Pepsi vs. Coke the biggest duopoly ever? DevastatorIIC 02:53, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, there's plenty of other suppliers of softdrinks worldwide. -- KarlHallowell 22:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

web browsers: IE and FF = duopoly?

I don't know if Microsoft Internet Explorer vs. Mozilla Firefox in Web browser market really qualifies as a duopoly. -Grick(^{talk to me!}) 02:46, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, as Opera is a great browswer, but reports itself as Internet Explorer for compatibility. So usage stats show 87% Internet Explorer, 9% Firefox/Mozilla/Netscape (note most stats don't split), ~1% Opera (w/o those included in IE stats), and ~2% Safari. If anything I'd say IE has a monopoly, or there's alot of players not just 2. I vote for removing IE vs. Firefox. - --Bwave 05:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and removed it; if anybody disagrees, please add a comment here. -Grick(^{talk to me!}) 22:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since the major browsers are either bundled with operating systems or free to download, I'm not sure "market" would even be the correct term. Stebbins 01:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American TV stations

Do we really need a list of American TV stations considered to be duopolies? It seems rather arbitrary to me - why not a list of Venezuelan duopolies as well? It doesn't make much sense to me, and I think the existing examples in the article are fine. Johnleemk | Talk 10:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They don't belong here. American TV and radio seem to be using the term "duopoly" to mean something utterly incompatible with duopoly (economics) - they're most often referring to a twinstick operation by which two of the various multiple stations in a market are controlled by the same entity. That mess has been moved to duopoly (broadcasting) aka television duopoly, although there are still many individual TV/radio station articles linking here which need to be disambiguated to point to twinstick or duopoly (broadcasting). --66.102.80.212 (talk) 05:46, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fedex, UPS, Nasdaq, NYSE

Could someone please add FedEx Vs UPS and NYSE Vs NASDAQ ? Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.197.158.115 (talk) 05:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Australian telecommunications market

I think this example should be removed. In fact Telstra is by far the largest supplier of telecommunications products in Australia with up to and often over 50% of the market for all telco products. While Optus is distinctly the second largest supplier (particularly in areas such as land lines) it does not possess nearly enough of a market share to be considered comparable to Telstra and therefore create a duopoly. Collectively alternate telecommunications providers possess more of a market share than Optus does alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.131.226.194 (talk) 08:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split the American TV stations off

It's a pretty messy section and could probably do with it's own article, or be incorporated into some related article about US TV stations (I'm sure there is one somewhre). It's just kinda out of place here —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.210.9 (talk) 09:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try twinstick or duopoly (broadcasting). The Mexican de-facto duopoly of Televisa/TV Azteca probably still belongs here in duopoly (economics) as most stations in México just rebroadcast one of the various México City stations controlled by these two groups (cadenatres, multimedios and a few educational stations being the rare exceptions - see Televisa Law). --66.102.80.212 (talk) 05:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

Article contains many critical allegations without any sources at all.--Kozuch (talk) 08:41, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ATI and nvidia

...was mentioned twice in the list of examples. Removed one if them

Verizon/AT&T

I'm not sure that this is a duopoly, if it really is then this example should be cited. Competitors to Verizon and AT&T include Sprint, Alltel, and T-Mobile (which recently was ruled as being too big to merge with them). Gatonom Nyan 21:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I'm removing it.Chessofnerd (talk) 03:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

iOS vs. Android

I've removed this entry because I don't think it qualifies (anymore?) as a duopoly. They are the two most popular operating systems, but there are also Blackberry OS and Windows Phone. I'm not too familiar with BB, but Windows Phone -- from an objective point of view -- is a perfectly legitimate competitor to iOS/Android. It is not too expensive, there are plenty of devices, it does apps, it has similar capabilities, it's just not very popular. 83.84.253.178 (talk) 19:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apple vs. Microsoft

This is a quintessential duopoly that appears to be absent from this discussion. 174.77.158.50 (talk) 02:05, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Airbus and Boeing?

Airbus and Boeing also have a duopoly in the large jet liner market. It was absent in this article so I added it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:ff10:4170:f050:b6b1:2234:24f (talk) 01:08, September 6, 2020 (UTC)

Although I share your opinion, we need more than Wikipedia editors' opinions. Unless a reliable third-party source is characterizing it as a duopoly, it should not be added to the article. That's what we call "original research" and is not allowed. Bottom line: Wikipedia article content should not be based on its editors' opinions.

If you have a citation for an authoritative RS calling it a duopoly, go ahead and readd it -- but only with a citation to the RS. TJRC (talk) 02:33, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]