My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player

[eatyum_PSN]

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

[BigDadT92_PSN]

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

Because it is a legal loophole for the government to call it a monopoly even though by actual definition it is not a monopoly. Not my fault our government doesn't actually read the dictionary to know what a monopoly actually is.

Again, it's on you for holding onto the antiquated idea of monopolies. It's not the 1800s anymore, please take some economic classes or even just read up on the subject.

If it's not a monopoly, why would the government care to call it one and then give it an exemption and do nothing anyway? That would be pointless

No I go by the literal definition of a monopoly. Not the loose definition of one nowadays.

Just because you deem it so does not make it the literal definition today, I think i'll stick with experts and the government in this case over someone who doesn't seem to grasp basic economic ideas and concepts.

I think I'll trust the only person I can not to manipulate the literal definition of something to fit my narrative and instead use it the way it was meant to be used. Me!

So just to be clear, you don't believe in words and languages evolving over time and carrying different meaning?

I don't believe in trusting anyone blindly and accept what they say with no questions because they're in a position of power. I believe in taking in information, processing that information and coming to my own conclusion. I believe in thinking for myself. I don't just accept that MLB is a monopoly just because our government says it is, when I can clearly see that it isnt with my own two eyes.

[eatyum_PSN]

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

Because it is a legal loophole for the government to call it a monopoly even though by actual definition it is not a monopoly. Not my fault our government doesn't actually read the dictionary to know what a monopoly actually is.

Again, it's on you for holding onto the antiquated idea of monopolies. It's not the 1800s anymore, please take some economic classes or even just read up on the subject.

If it's not a monopoly, why would the government care to call it one and then give it an exemption and do nothing anyway? That would be pointless

No I go by the literal definition of a monopoly. Not the loose definition of one nowadays.

Just because you deem it so does not make it the literal definition today, I think i'll stick with experts and the government in this case over someone who doesn't seem to grasp basic economic ideas and concepts.

I think I'll trust the only person I can not to manipulate the literal definition of something to fit my narrative and instead use it the way it was meant to be used. Me!

So just to be clear, you don't believe in words and languages evolving over time and carrying different meaning?

I don't believe in trusting anyone blindly and accept what they say with no questions because they're in a position of power. I believe in taking in information, processing that information and coming to my own conclusion. I believe in thinking for myself. I don't just accept that MLB is a monopoly just because our government says it is, when I can clearly see that it isnt with my own two eyes.

Neither do I trust anyone blindly without asking questions, that's why I read up on things like the anti-trust exemption and how modern economists discuss monopolies and then draw conclusions based on those experts who clearly do know more then me on those subjects and don't rely on simple antiquated definitions

Your sentences there are the classic case of "I'm wrong, but I'm just gonna say I think for myself implying everyone else doesn't hur durrrrrr"

[BigDadT92_PSN]

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

[eatyum_PSN]

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

Again, you don't even know what you are arguing, where did you say before

"Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption

[BigDadT92_PSN]

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

[eatyum_PSN]

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption. This is why WWE wasn't one, because others could viably enter the market

[BigDadT92_PSN]

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

Again, you don't even know what you are arguing, where did you say before

"Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption

But they already have....there are other baseball leagues.....sooooooooo again......not a monopoly.

[eatyum_PSN]

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

Again, you don't even know what you are arguing, where did you say before

"Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption

But they already have....there are other baseball leagues.....sooooooooo again......not a monopoly.

I've already been through that, there is nothing on the level of AEW because there can't be. And I've already explained that your simplistic view of monopoly doesn't mean what you think it means.

But I can repeat it all if you'd like

[BigDadT92_PSN]

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption. This is why WWE wasn't one, because others could viably enter the market

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption. This is why WWE wasn't one, because others could viably enter the market

You can do it all day. Doesn't make your argument valid. There are other Major League Baseball leagues. Just because the government says MLB is a monopoly, doesn't mean that it is lol.

[eatyum_PSN]

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption. This is why WWE wasn't one, because others could viably enter the market

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption. This is why WWE wasn't one, because others could viably enter the market

You can do it all day. Doesn't make your argument valid. There are other Major League Baseball leagues. Just because the government says MLB is a monopoly, doesn't mean that it is lol.

Ok, where are the other major league baseball leagues?

[BigDadT92_PSN]

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption. This is why WWE wasn't one, because others could viably enter the market

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption. This is why WWE wasn't one, because others could viably enter the market

You can do it all day. Doesn't make your argument valid. There are other Major League Baseball leagues. Just because the government says MLB is a monopoly, doesn't mean that it is lol.

Ok, where are the other major league baseball leagues?

American Association of Professional Baseball.
Atlantic League of Professional Baseball.
Empire Professional Baseball League.
Frontier League.
Pioneer League.
Pacific Association of Professional Baseball Clubs.
Pecos League.
United Shore Professional Baseball League.

Once again Professional Baseball is not related to MLB.

[BigDadT92_PSN]

This post is deleted!

[eatyum_PSN]

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption. This is why WWE wasn't one, because others could viably enter the market

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@eatyum_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

@bigdadt92_psn said in My thoughts on the hitting engine as a consistent World Series player:

A monopoly would imply it's the only league in the US [censored]...
You: "Point to the flaws in my argument"
Me: "Okay here's this, this and this"
You: "Okay, but point to where I had a flaw in my argument"

No, you just have a very simplistic view of a monopoly, while the word mono suggests one, it's really more complicated then that, I would suggest you to read up on the history and evolution of monopolies and the laws created around them.

Mono is literally the prefix for one.

mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

MLB the Show is the definition of a monopoly. MLB is not

Do you even read?

You are telling me what mono means when I literally said "while the word mono suggests one, "
and again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

Do you?

I did read, and I will repeat what I said regarding the definition you showed me

nd again, that is the simplistic view, the term and how it applies to businesses in today's world has evolved, both in terms of laws, (such as the anti-trust act that MLB is exempt from), The goverment has the authority to bust what it deems a monopoly, even if that business technically doesn't have SOLE position of all the resources it sells"

You are not the government though. So you do not deem MLB a monopoly. They do not deem it a monopoly either soooooooooo.....you're dumb?

I never claimed to be the goverment.

And the goverment actually does, why do you think they gave them an exemption from the anti-trust act? Why would you need an exemption if you weren't one?

You sure as hell claim to think MLB is a monopoly even though it clearly isn't though...lol

Why are you avoiding this exemption to the anti-trust act?

If the government and economic experts agree that MLB is a monopoly, I'm pretty safe in claiming that is in fact a monopoly.

You can hold onto your 1800's monopoly view, that's fine, but it's evolved beyond that.

So let me put it this way....if the government and economic "experts" agree that McDonalds was a monopoly right, would that make it one? No because we know that there's Burger King, Wendy's, In-N-Out, Checkers and plenty of other restaurants to choose from.

That it not comparable seeing that Mcdonalds marketshare is 21.4%, so give me a more reasonable analogy.

Fine. I can do this [censored] all day bud. If the government up and said WWE was a monopoly which by your loose definition it easily could've been because it makes a [censored] ton of money..doesn't mean it is. You have countless other wrestling promotions across the country and world.

Just because it makes a lot of money doesn't make it a monopoly in terms of the WWE, because it's competitors also make a lot of money to, so give me another reasonable analogy please.

Mcdonalds makes a lot of money to, so you are essentially just using the same argument repackaged.

Just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. WWE (before AEW) was the only wrestling promotion on national television. Still not a monopoly. It actually is a fair analogy. You're just too far gone up your own [censored] to admit you're wrong. MLB is the only consistently televised baseball league in the US...So was WWE. They had a stranglehold on the business and the government and your "economic experts" could've easily done the same thing, but they didn't, because it's not a monopoly. Just like MLB is not a monopoly.

So WAS WWE, is the key term. I thought you were talking about WWE now and as demonstrated, AEW came, because they could. Read up on MLB's exemption to the anti-trust law and realize why a AEW type thing could not spring up in baseball because of that exemption

According to your simple mind and logic, MLB is not a monopoly, so yes in your head MLB is not a monopoly.

But as I've already demonstrated, MLB is a monopoly, and you can try and reason with yourself all you want, it's ok, believe what makes you feel good. It won't change the real facts.

I never said WWE now. I said before. And regardless if AEW is here or not you can still apply your logic to WWE. If WWE wasn't a monopoly, then MLB sure as hell isn't

And if your argument is the government says it is, then by their own definition WWE would've fallen under that same umbrella.

How many times do I have to bring up the anti-trust exemption? An AEW thing couldn't happen to the sport of baseball because of that exemption. This is why WWE wasn't one, because others could viably enter the market

You can do it all day. Doesn't make your argument valid. There are other Major League Baseball leagues. Just because the government says MLB is a monopoly, doesn't mean that it is lol.

Ok, where are the other major league baseball leagues?

American Association of Professional Baseball.
Atlantic League of Professional Baseball.
Empire Professional Baseball League.
Frontier League.
Pioneer League.
Pacific Association of Professional Baseball Clubs.
Pecos League.
United Shore Professional Baseball League.

Once again Professional Baseball is not related to MLB.

Ok, you really want me to run through it again?

First of all those are not "major league" baseball leagues.

Second of all, MLB uses all of them as it's testing grounds, they are owned by MLB all but in name as I've said about 5 times.

Thirdly, those are not at all comparable to AEW, show me a comparable league to AEW, and you can't because of the ANTI-TRUST EXEMPTION ACT