war on competition is costly

[Darker45]

I don't think so. It's actually competition that keeps them moving fast. The desire or the urge to innovate couldn't be as strong if there aren't any competitors they're up against. After all, it's a race. The fact that they don't want to be left behind means they need to step up the effort, the investment, the exploration, and so on. It's the competition that keeps them from being complacent.

In a very competitive market, you can't allow yourself to be always lagging behind. You could go obsolete very quickly. If there's no competition, there's much less or even no pressure at all. In such a market, there's lesser productivity.

[Cryptomultiplier]

I don't think so. It's actually competition that keeps them moving fast. The desire or the urge to innovate couldn't be as strong if there aren't any competitors they're up against. After all, it's a race. The fact that they don't want to be left behind means they need to step up the effort, the investment, the exploration, and so on. It's the competition that keeps them from being complacent.

In a very competitive market, you can't allow yourself to be always lagging behind. You could go obsolete very quickly. If there's no competition, there's much less or even no pressure at all. In such a market, there's lesser productivity.

Competition between two businesses offering same products and services could either be healthy or unhealthy. That is there is good competition allowing for growth and alternatives for consumers and there is the bad competition that makes such business produce failed products or services that aren't sustainable and cause more harm than good to both the economy and society at large.

Any competition that sees a similar business as a rival often focus their energy on our besting them and this reduces the drive for quality and better improved service.
In order to avoid unhealthy competitions that don't add profitable returns, a business can diversify into other arms and focus their energy and resources there and when the supposed competition sees this, they have no option than to find another competition or become clueless as to what their initial goals and vision of operations is and this is detrimental to the survival of such a business.

[Hanadawa]

Competition between two businesses offering same products and services could either be healthy or unhealthy. That is there is good competition allowing for growth and alternatives for consumers and there is the bad competition that makes such business produce failed products or services that aren't sustainable and cause more harm than good to both the economy and society at large.

Competition can increase productivity, entrepreneurs try harder to innovate and consumers get a fair price for a product. But the bad impact of competition is the emergence of manipulative unhealthy competition. I will give an example of unfair competition that is detrimental to consumers. For example, skincare companies A and B compete with each other to get lots of customers. They compete in providing good products at competitive prices. But company A, which competes unfairly, can commit fraud such as manipulating product content and avoiding taxes to get low production prices. Then they endorse influencers to promote their products. They deceive consumers about product content. But because they have lots of attractive promotions/discounts and are endorsed by influencers, people will be busy buying their products at prices that are actually very expensive for the production capital.

[Faisal2202]

This example explains the huge negative impact of competition or turning competition into rivalry or war, it eliminates focus and creates enemity in the mind, which is the creator of new ideas and knowledge, when in business build a strong edge on focus, stay active in giving the best, and abandon competition, it distracts the goals you've set and brings down the value the company once created, for focusing on a war that has no purpose or meaning. Think about this, and share your thoughts or experience.

I think competition is necassary, without it, an organization won't give good results and they won't force their creators to think beyond their creativity, I don't think so with this competition, any of them compromised on their creativity, everyone did great, so far all of them are successful just because of this competition, and maybe they are not actually that serious, like the employee of one organization after resignation can be employed by other organization, because everyone wants good creators on their side.

This increases the demand for creative people, thus employment increases. The emergence of AI is changing things now. I won't say why Apple is famous, why other companies are lacking. I don't know much about all this, but the discussion you raise is totally opposite to what I think.

I think competition what drives everyone, it is essential. War sometimes is essential too, unecessary one is not, of course.

[Accardo]

But the question is much broader. Why should everyone be the enemy of everyone? It would be understandable where there is not enough food. But in societies where there is abundance, the idea of unlimited consumption is instilled in universal hostility (competition). Divide and conquer...

When you think of it this way you'd get it clearer, all parts of the world goes about competing on irrelevant things, in school we get to compete on who's the brightest student, in families brothers compete on who accomplishes a certain goal; money, wife, house etc. Humans race steadily, even children compete on who's supreme, it's naturally instilled on people -  from toddlers down to grown people.

I could read responses saying that competition helps, but they're not getting the point right, it could only make them succeed in winning over one another, outpacing each other, yet the market cries for new ideas, competition is distraction it'll only make a company to copy one another and add new features from what other competitors has got.

[Darker45]

~snip~

Any competition that sees a similar business as a rival often focus their energy on our besting them and this reduces the drive for quality and better improved service.

And how would you best others if you don't strive to be the better service? Isn't it precisely the desire to beat their competitors that could drive companies to improve their own quality?

We're talking of Microsoft and Google and Apple. We're not talking of companies that are bombing each other's headquarters, sabotaging their operations, publicly destroying each other's reputation, and whatnot. The companies mentioned are offering better alternatives. They're trying to win over their competitors' clients not by badmouthing them but by providing more innovative options. And this is good.

[Shishir99]

Bing against Google? Does not work. Google wins here.
Explorer, aka Edge, against Google Chrome? Does not work; again, Google wins here.

Chrome OS against Windows? Does not work at all. Microsoft is the winner here.

I do not have a comment on the entire topic. However, I want to say that not everyone can do every business, even if they have millions of dollars. Surely Google has billions of dollars, but they won't be able to beat Windows. It won't be easy for Google to create an OS that can beat the Windows OS.

[Tmoonz]

I don't think so. It's actually competition that keeps them moving fast. The desire or the urge to innovate couldn't be as strong if there aren't any competitors they're up against. After all, it's a race. The fact that they don't want to be left behind means they need to step up the effort, the investment, the exploration, and so on. It's the competition that keeps them from being complacent.

In a very competitive market, you can't allow yourself to be always lagging behind. You could go obsolete very quickly. If there's no competition, there's much less or even no pressure at all. In such a market, there's lesser productivity.

Competition can bring variable solutions to demands which is positive in general sence of reasoning, every one would want to move forward, bring new ideas, sophisticated, efficient and what have you, if anyone can be comfortable being stagnated then such person is likely to be left behind because new ages of things will keep evolving from time to time till the end of time, there is more positivity than negativity competition can bring about, and the question is who wouldn't want to up their standard for quality and efficiency in life? Definitely no one, unless and ignorant person.

[o48o]

It's been more than a decade since Google and Microsoft turnedout to be rivals over market dominance; Chrome vs Explorer, Google search vs Bing, Google cloud vs Azure, Microsoft 365 vs Google Workspace, Windows vs Chrome Os, the both companies topped Apple in market cap, but war and competition made them lose focus to Apple, in 2013, when they were both surpassed by Apple with $500 billion, while Google and Microsoft combined had $467 billion. It remained that way, unless for 2019 for a short time, not until this January when Google for the first time surpassed Apple with $3.98 trillion while apple market cap is $3.76 trillion, which growth was drown to the AI race, giving google a much better dominance in the market.

This example explains the huge negative impact of competition or turning competition into rivalry or war, it eliminates focus and creates enemity in the mind, which is the creator of new ideas and knowledge, when in business build a strong edge on focus, stay active in giving the best, and abandon competition, it distracts the goals you've set and brings down the value the company once created, for focusing on a war that has no purpose or meaning. Think about this, and share your thoughts or experience.

I don't understand your point. You aren't talking normal competition (or war). You are talking about some company fighting for monopoly position.

That "war" has positive side effects for consumers only if no one wins the war, and you make it sound like a negative thing that they didn't win (correct me if i misunderstood).

That might be the case for some firm like google, but imagine a world without alternatives where one giant has a monopoly on everything. They would control both prices and the narrative about everything.

[Majestic-milf]

 That's business for you. Some business owners feel that in order to remain relevant in the market, a little competition won't hurt and I'm all for competitiveness as it helps to make those who prefer to be average would desire to pick up and do better since they won't want to give up their position in the economy but then again it becomes a disease when some of them take these things too seriously and instead of focusing on growth and expansion, they become hell bent on making the next business go under and won't mind how much expenses that act incurs. Some will call it market strategy of eliminating the competition, but deep down, it has become something else.
 At the end of the day, worrying about these things won't change anything because to them, they call the shots and it's not like the consumers have much say in it though.

[aylabadia05]

The world economy would be a big mess if companies continue to copy what already works instead of working on what hasn't been existing or created by another company. Google and Microsoft dropped in market cap because they never tried to build something new, they copied one another, which wasnt healthy to the market until Apple gave the people a much better way to spend big on a mobile phone which skyrocket their market cap. The context here isn't about succeeding financially, but doing so with new great ideas, which helps the world economy grow.

This global business competition has sparked global tensions between countries.
I once read in a book that the world will always be in turmoil because of business competition. From a positive perspective, competition among large companies, as mentioned above, can have a positive impact on consumers in terms of receiving better products because what is being sold is not only products but also ideas and other things of higher value. However, when chaos ensues, it has a negative impact.

[Cheema02]

Competition is one of the quiet distraction anyone can have, whether on company/business level or on a personal level. Competition will make you not to accept ideas that are general but produced by opponents to talk of going to them for help even if it's crystal clear that they can afford the best help ever (as in going to self made opponents for help is a forbidden move). Competition can even set siblings/relatives apart making them to fight against each other.
When self induced competition is the order hatred becomes so cool that people don't mind making sure others loss their life for nothing talkless of belongings. for me I think competition should remain natural as in not acknowledged or induced or self made when I say natural, I am referring to the fact that even in Bitcoin investment we all can't really have the same numbers of Bitcoin so why hate others for nothing. One of the company will definitely take the top, so why the unquenchable useless distraction in the name of competition?

Your thoughts is right and its a rational truth about competition and true that when in competition ego is enterned then it converts into a distraction rather than motivation. People with ego rejectes even beneficial ideas the reason because its come from there precieved opponents. And this mindset gradually slow down there personal growth and ethics and its destroy relationships and pushing your favourits into conflicts. And competition should be natural not be inflated. As in Bitcoins deficiency exist by design and not every individual can be number one and its normal in digital market. So the learning point is that progress and improvment comes with self decipline not trying to teasing others.

[Nuel0717]

no, competition makes you more motivated. to improve, to innovate, to be better. without threats, there will be complacency. there’s some healthy competition in having rivals or enemies

Obviously, a person would grow but would do better when they're in a competition. People tend to forget that there's also a benefit for having rivalries when it comes to business, especially in pushing efficiency and speed.
But after reading OP’s thought I realized that the disadvantages may be higher than the advantages. Yes, competition motivated you, but it can also restrict you from thinking further in development, because the focus slowly shifts from long-term creativity to short-term reactions.

It's just like Microsoft and Google as OP said. Instead of focusing on themselves and newer things they could build on their own back then, they focused on copying and making of a gadget, adding less thought or new style than they should. Over time, rivalry can turn innovation into imitation, especially when compared to how things used to be back then, when both companies were still striving, experimenting, and producing stronger original ideas before the rivalry became dominant.

[SUPERSAIAN]

Competition isn't always good. Imagine two food shops on the same street. Normally, one would be more profitable, but having two reduces the profits of both. In this situation, perhaps the best solution would be for one to buy the other. Sometimes, the battle in competition harms the competitors, and the longer this continues, the deeper the problems become.

[icebar]

Excessive competition means developing a relationship with the competitor where one does not try to know the other well. Their goals will be specific only. If both make mistakes but due to unhealthy competition, those mistakes will not be noticed. Just as there are some advantages in competing, there are also some disadvantages. If someone blindly participates in competition, then they will definitely suffer. As a result, others can take advantage of that opportunity. There should be competition, but if it is positive, then they will move forward and if they try to achieve different goals, then they will definitely suffer.