If I owned the only bridge in town, I'd be giving lots of money to the people that had the power to authorize new bridges; they may even be personal friends or current employees of mine (who better to call the shots on the bridge than someone who has already built one).
I'd also sign near perpetuity contracts with all the shipping firms offering them lower rates for exclusivity of my bridge.
I'd push for tougher building and environmental standards so that any would-be competitor would have a larger barrier to entry and have to go through a longer approval and vetting process than I ever did.
My bridge would be the one with the proximity of gas stations, factories and major roads simply because it was there first.
Other bridges then wouldn't be built not because I'm offering a better service, not because the patrons are charged fair tolls, and not because the roads are clean and well maintained.
No. Other bridges wouldn't be built because my friends wouldn't approve them; they would be further away from the major roads, they would have to go out and pitch to each shipping client, and face a substantially higher cost of constructions. Additionally, they would have to deal with the arguments "We already have a bridge" and all the NIMBY lawsuits that comes with it. Hell, I'd even pay for their lawyers.
I'd focus on maximizing profit and making sure I remain the only game in town.
When someone has the capital and motivation to effectively stop the competition from ever forming it's in their interest to do everything they can to pre-emptively do so from the start.
Heck, it's probably even outlined in the initial business proposal given that addressing potential competition is such standard practice.
I'd also sign near perpetuity contracts with all the shipping firms offering them lower rates for exclusivity of my bridge.
I'd push for tougher building and environmental standards so that any would-be competitor would have a larger barrier to entry and have to go through a longer approval and vetting process than I ever did.
My bridge would be the one with the proximity of gas stations, factories and major roads simply because it was there first.
Other bridges then wouldn't be built not because I'm offering a better service, not because the patrons are charged fair tolls, and not because the roads are clean and well maintained.
No. Other bridges wouldn't be built because my friends wouldn't approve them; they would be further away from the major roads, they would have to go out and pitch to each shipping client, and face a substantially higher cost of constructions. Additionally, they would have to deal with the arguments "We already have a bridge" and all the NIMBY lawsuits that comes with it. Hell, I'd even pay for their lawyers.
I'd focus on maximizing profit and making sure I remain the only game in town.
When someone has the capital and motivation to effectively stop the competition from ever forming it's in their interest to do everything they can to pre-emptively do so from the start.
Heck, it's probably even outlined in the initial business proposal given that addressing potential competition is such standard practice.