Jim Barksdale Quotes

there are times when we need to step in to make sure that competition works the way it should. By doing that, we help the market to work fairly, because competition gives consumers the power to demand a fair deal. It means that companies know that if they cannot offer good prices or the service that's expected, well, the customers will go somewhere else.

Everybody agrees that you want competition. But you have to have rules of fair competition if you want to have competitors to enter the market.

Consolidating to the point of monopoly has never served the consumer - ever.

Advertising is the very essence of democracy.

Many of our constituents have one option for cable TV and one price. Our constituents desire choice.

Apple does great products, but at the end of the day we think consumers want choice, consumers want openness.

The limit is not as narrow as it might be. I do not claim for this action, as it now goes on, an ideal degree of efficiency. What I do claim is that this type of competition already reveals its nature and its ultimate power to hold seeming monopolies in check.

They will come to learn in the end, at their own expense, that it is better to endure competition for rich customers than to be invested with monopoly over impoverished customers.

I’m a big fan of the free market system but the free market system works [only] when you have robust competition.

No Citizen of the United States of North America Shall be obliged to purchase any Goods against his will but on the contrary shall be allowed to purchase whatever it Pleaseth him.

Theodore Roosevelt understood that unregulated monopoly could pose an even greater threat than unrestrained government.

Competition is good for consumers. It provides more choices at better prices.

Antitrust is the way that the government promotes markets when there are market failures. It has nothing to do with the idea of free information.

If a company is not a monopoly, then the law assumes market competition can restrain the company's actions. No problem. If a monopoly exists, but the monopoly does not engage in acts designed to destroy competition, then we can assume that it earned and is keeping its monopoly the pro-consumer way: by out-innovating its competitors.

I welcome Microsoft having a store on Windows; what I've always resisted was a push to close down Windows to competing stores.

The government has a key role in regulating and making sure there's an even playing field and protecting consumers. No question about it.

My worldview says that competition is the consumer's best friend.

Incumbents have long promoted regulation in the name of protecting consumers when their actual goal is to block new entrants and stifle competition.

Consumers fare best when the barriers to business entry are low, which helps ensure that the market - any market - becomes competitive and stays that way.

The mere possession of monopoly power, and the concomitant charging of monopoly prices, is not only not unlawful, it is an important element of the free-market system. The opportunity to charge monopoly prices - at least for a short period - is what attracts 'business acumen' in the first place; it induces risk taking that produces innovation and economic growth.

Beware of that profound enemy of the free enterprise system who pays lip-service to free competition, but also labels every antitrust prosecution as a persecution.

Consumers depend on us to make sure that competition is fair and open, and it's my responsibility to make that happen.

The history of antitrust law enforcement shows that successful antitrust prosecutions have often strengthened and brought vitality to extremely large companies and businesses.

Freedom of expression, innovation, and choice drive our economy.

Regardless of the industry, antitrust law is meant to benefit consumers - not competitors.