So in a way, big advertisers that are leaders in their markets would be favorable to adblockers, because they free them of the need to do defensive advertising.
One could argue that no advertising is hard for the challengers, but in today's situation they are outspent anyway, so what do they have to lose?
The conclusion is that both incumbents and challengers would be better off in a world where no advertising exists.
Yeah, it's mostly a prisoner's dilemma where if someone spends on ads then their competitors also have to spend. The only one really profiting in the end are the ad companies.
One could argue that no advertising is hard for the challengers, but in today's situation they are outspent anyway, so what do they have to lose?
The conclusion is that both incumbents and challengers would be better off in a world where no advertising exists.