Monopoly

First, note that the rapid change of telecommunications technology and regulations makes it virtually impossible to keep a book fully up-to-date. Brock's book brings us up to 1994, and there have been significant changes since then. This immediately noticeable shortcoming is true with every book in this field, so we will not address it further.

Brock paints a very readable and generally clear idea of telecommunications regulation, starting with a few chapters on theory. The philosophical underpinnings of regulation are of some interest, but we know that regulators do not study philosophy before making decisions. The concept that the U.S. system is set up so that there are many "regulators" often acting at cross purposes is an amazing one, given the incredible success of telecommunications in the U.S. The idea that such a successful system could appear so chaotic is worth noting, and Brock is the first author I have seen that praises the current system.

Brock's presentation of history to about 1980 is just wonderful. You will gain a real feeling for why the U.S. system operates the way it does.

Information after 1980 is not presented as clearly. In part, I think this is because Brock personally remembers what happened then, and has difficulty editing out the less significant events of that period.

Overall, the reader is advised to develop a timeline of events to reduce confusion. Brock should include one, but does not.

Brock also addresses in a very limited fashion how things should work with data traffic greater than voice traffic. It was easier to get away with that in 1994 when data traffic was still much less than voice traffic, but impossible to avoid seven years later in 2001.

With all that said, there is no book that presents this information more clearly. It just needs some editing of events from 1980 to 1994, an update into the 21st century, a timeline, and more consideration of regulations for data traffic.

This book is the ultimate strategy guide. Kaz had a personal computer play hundreds of thousands of game of Monopoly and analyzed them. The book is about what a saw and how to use this to win. There is a great amount of tips in this book. Mr. Darzinskis goes into extensive detail. This book is designed for the die-hard Monopoly fanatic.

In the guise of objective social science Inglis has written a one-sided diatribe that makes no attempt at presenting a fair and balenced analysis. He refers to Catholics as having "silenced, repressed egos" and as being led around and virtually enslved by a closed totalitarian institutional structure. Anyone who knows real catholics couldn't possibily describe them that way. They certainly have exeerted a lot of influence on the world (both good and bad) for being such timid people who are afraid to express themselves or act in accord with their consciences.

On the other hand this book will have great appeal to the conspiracy minded, especially as it's biases are hidden beneath the veneer of objective social science.

The Irish RC church did its level best to become a dictatorship. And came close to achieving that goal for some time. With power came corruption, and the closer to absolute power the closer to absolute corruption.

The book examines how the church first subverted the religious role of men in the family, and then gained a hold on the minds of Irish women. It goes on to detail the church's unique contribution to Irish alcoholism.

From there we get to the persent day, when people are objecting to child abuse by priests and nuns and the church is responding by saying that if people won't play the church's way, then the church is going to take its football and go home.

This book is a good detailing of an organization that's received a well-deserved comeuppance.

First things first: since the vocabulary of sociology is one of the more tooth-grinding known to man, this is not the most elegantly written book in the world.

My five stars go this book because it is, so far as I know, the first real attempt to document the mechanics by which that great social and political experiment, the Holy Catholic Ireland of the post-independence period, was put into place and controlled.

Inglis frankly admits his own difficulty in separating his genuine religious impulse from the arid clericalism of the resulting system for long enough to gauge that system impartially, and the tension sometimes shows. But on the whole Inglis has begun a much-needed and long-overdue analysis of the control mechanisms which made such a sociological and psychological disaster-area of the Irish Free State and later Republic, and with whose wreckage Ireland's citizens still live. Hopefully others will continue the work: in the meantime, in spite of its occasional difficulty, this is an excellent place to start for those who wonder how the Catholic Church in Ireland got away with so much for so long.

In Monopolies In America, Charles R. Geisst gives a fair overview of US antitrust issues from a historical point of view. Readers who are not familiar at all with the development, interpretation, and application of antitrust are introduced to the ambivalence about bigness in American thought over time. However, Monopolies In America is not an easy read because of a lack of coherence in the narration. Only a well-informed audience cognizant of the legal, economic, and social ramifications of antitrust can easily surf through the book and fully grasp the conflicting forces coming into play. Furthermore, Monopolies In America is a misnomer. Antitrust (law) issues cover a lot more than abuse of monopoly position. The Antitrust Paradox. A Policy At War With Itself by Judge Robert H. Bork is the definitive authority on the subject. His account is both comprehensive and scathing about the shared sub-optimal performance of the legislative, executive and judiciary branches of power as well as the practicing bar in making, interpreting, and applying antitrust rules. Judge Bork rightly attributes that shared sub-optimal performance to the too-often absence of a rudimentary understanding of market economics among the above-mentioned players.

This book taught me more about the topic than anything else I ever read. It is well written and very informative and doesn't use any jargon. This is a very ideological topic but the book avoids that trap and informs. It doesn't preach to the reader. I would recommend it to anyone who wants to know more about the topic.

Geisst has written a valuable study that puts the topic into great perspective. The topic is diverse and dominated by lawyers but this treatment is well written and entertaining as well as being highly informative. Highly recommended.

The opening sentence of Acknowledgements succinctly summarizes this book: "The papers in this volume are from the . . . conference . . . held December 2, 1998." Well, a lot has changed since then. Most importantly, the USPS surpluses of that time have turned into severe deficits. Therefore, If you're not familiar with USPS issues, do read this. If you are, for example, if you have read Hudgin's previous book on USPS, this contains little that is new.

Have you ever wondered why the cost of stamps keeps going up, even as technology brings the cost of so many other goods and services down?

Have you wondered why, at so many post offices, service is poor and employees have a surly attitude?

The simple answer is that the USPS is a monopoly. This book does a good job of explaining the problems of this government monopoly, why a private mail carrier would do the work more efficiently and at less cost, and how to get from here to there.

Highly recommended by this reader.

If you really want to show historians how useless economic history is, write a book like this one. To Ekelund and Tollison, the mercantile era is the rent seeking model, and nothing more. If you get the model, you get 200 years of history in a graph. If you are unconvinced, you must be a moron, according to these gentlemen. Ignorance about history is a virtue, one suspects.

Most economic historians still believe that "history happens." This is most obvious in contemporary Swedish writings on mercantilism. Axelaxe must not have read this book -- it offers evidence (which real economic historians use) that mercantile states WERE rent-seeking societies. Perhaps the success of this idea is what upsets Axelaxe!

It was a great torture to plow through Braverman's Marxist diatribes. An example: "...the detailed division of labor subdivides humans, and while the subdivision of society may enhance the individual and the species, the subdivision of the individual, when carried on without regard to human capabilities and needs, is a crime against the person and against humanity." Wow. If you enjoyed that passage, this book may be for you.

It is Braverman's opinion that the poor fellow who works to make straight pins would be oh so much more happy if he was capable of making the entire straight pin instead of just knowing how to put the head on the pin. It seems that in breaking his job down industry has robbed him of the glory of producing an entire straight pin. The fulfillment of creating the entire pin is lost to him forever because of the evil, dehumanizing, capitalistic management. Woe to the worker.

It's the same old story. Leftists complain and complain about the state of things but cannot offer a better alternative. My favorite current day lament: Jobs have been "dumbed-down" too much, but oh no, these dumbed-down jobs are being outsourced to other countries. Woe. Woe. Woe.

Unless you have no choice and this book is assigned to you by a marxist professor, my advice is RUN AWAY!

This book is the classic in the field of labor process. Marx put the labor process at the center of his masterpiece, ¡®The Capital¡¯. But since then, not much, if any, studies were done in Marxist schools. This book filled the temporal gap between Marx and the 20th century in the Marxist tradition. The author focused on the labor process under the Fordism. Braverman illustrates convincingly how the work, under the discipline of scientific management or Taylorism, becomes fragmented, dull, and repetitive tasks. The work is degraded. There has been not much objection to this argument. But when it comes to technology, things are different. His argument has too much smell of determinism. The theme of this book could put in this way: how the peculiar technological change in Fordism affected the feature of work and the differentiation of working class. No dispute. But his prophecy on technological change seems to go too far: every new technology just destroys our jobs and degrades the work. This kind of grim image has proliferated with the high-tech wave of the 1990s. Should we listen to such a forecast? I don¡¯t think so.
Braverman made a wrong calculation. In the larger picture, technological innovations, driven towards cost-saving and enhancing efficiency, bring job growth with revamped competitiveness of the industry and economy-wide. For example, in the US economy, when the IT investment leaped up in service sector during the 1980s, unemployment rate skyrocketed. But despite continuous downsizing and rapid diffusion of IT, unemployment rate fell sharply in the 1990s. High rates in EU area and Japan should be attributed to the factors of business cycle or rigid labor market. If Harry Braverman took the helm, the economy would end up in bankruptcy to nobody¡¯s interest. It¡¯s the picture of France or Spain, Italy. Even in Italy, the technologically innovative north faces labor shortage not unemployment. Here we can hardly see any relationship between new technology and overall unemployment rate.
Sure. Every new technology makes old one obsolete, so it lead to deskilling of labor. But in turn, it entails its own skilled labor. Since the 1970s, the manufacturing sector experienced substantial technological upgrading. It resulted in the shift of labor market composition: jobs in manufacturing, less-educated work declined. Investment in earlier technologies negatively impacted mainly low-skilled production workers, particularly in the 1970s and early 1980s, whereas investment in IT negatively impacted mainly low-skilled white-collar workers in the 1980s and 1990s. Resulting bloody downsizing and restructuring have decimated so many middle-paying jobs in factories and offices. Workers who lost those jobs, especially older workers, are likely fall into lower-paying jobs or, facing long-term unemployment, retire from the labor force. But all kinds of new jobs are being created as the old ones disappear, although the new jobs go to new entrants or younger workers moving up the job ladder.
Technophobe alarmists gain popularity because whatever the effect of creative destruction might be, the impact on employment is hardly painless. Technology is important. However, what is technology at all? It made no sense, were it not run by people. The impacts of technology on work are not simple, not necessarily direct, and cannot be considered in isolation. As seen above, their relation is not clear but spurious at best. The real mechanism lies in political and economic contexts that govern the conditions of work. Thus, when we talk about technology, we cannot forget about all those other human factors affect its use and what it does to the lives of workers, employers and citizens

Labor and Monopoly Power, by Harry Braverman, brings basic Marxist labor theory up to date for the modern age. Though written 25 years ago, Braverman's work is the ideal guideline to understanding the age of information technology. Braverman expertly explodes the smug myths of "knowledge age" boosters by drawing the parallels to earlier industrial technology. The major misapprehension exploded is the one that says workplace automation demands higher skills and upgrades jobs. Braverman, through developing and applying the ideas not only of Marx, but of management proponents such as Babbage, Taylor and Bright, makes a convincing case for the opposite. Computers, like other technology before them, are being applied in ways that expose two objectives: (1) the reduction of the absolute numbers of workers, and (2) the reduction of skills among the remaining workers. Braverman's 1974 book was prophetic in that it described longstanding capitalist relationships that, applied vigorously since that time, have led to increasing income inequality in America.

This book lacked a lot of focus in what it wanted to accomplish. Was it trying to give tips on how to win at Monopoly or trying to show how the game teaches lessons to be applied to real life? In both cases, it came up lacking. The tips it gave were rather common-sensical, the stories it shared didn't really give any insight into how the game applies to business, and to top it off, it didn't not give accurate rules to the game. For example, the book said that you couldn't collect rent while in jail, so you should always try to stay out of jail and in the game, just like in life. That's a nice maxim to live by, but you CAN collect rent while in jail and every good business person knows that there are times to be aggressive and times to be conservative. Overall, the book was very disappointing and I hope only to spare others from making the same mistake of wasting time reading it.

In the "real world" it is quite difficult to accurately assess all of the conditions that lead to a venture's success or failure. There are myriad reasons why the information needed to do so is simply not available which range from disclosure restrictions for a continuing business to fear of suit by the principals of a failed business. As such, it is, as a rule, quite difficult to completely analyze the success or failure of a real enterprise - though many have tried.

In Everything I Know About Business I Learned From Monopoly, Axelrod tries to impart business wisdom through a mechanism that can be completely analyzed, the game of Monopoly. As such, he provides insightful commentary on how the game and the "real world" are both similar and different. He illustrates, for example, how in business watching for industry or customer-base changes is similar to watching for the change of game phases in Monopoly, and how both are critical to the decisions that you make to ensure continued prosperity.

Over all, the book is very specific on Monopoly-playing suggestions (mentioning the probabilities attached to rolling dice and landing on properties many times) and somewhat vague on the specifics of applying these principals in business. This is to be expected, though, as the book is clearly about analyzing the game and applying the lessons learned to the business world. Within that context, it does its job quite well.

This book is basically a simulation and, like any simulation, its value is determined by the reader's ability to apply its lessons to reality. At the very least, you will get to read a variety of interesting quotations by industry-leaders; for the more attentive and imaginative readers, the game of Monopoly will provide a whole new mechanism for testing strategies for business in general.

After buying the rights from creator Charles Darrow, Parker Brothers introduced the board game Monopoly® in 1935. It soon became an American icon of capitalism in its most competitive form. Popular estimates claim that nearly 1 billion people have played the game. Ironically, the game flourished during a time when the Great Depression still held its sway on the American psyche. Author Alan Axelrod attributes this odd phenomenon to the cathartic affect the game had on people. Still, many attribute its success more to its ability to mirror real life. Monopoly as a metaphor for business serves as the impetuous for this book.

Axelrod fills his book generously with quotes from leaders of industry. While the board game differs considerably from real life in some substantive areas, such as starting out on a level playing field, the game compensates for these few exceptions by creating a playing environment that relies more on skill and attitude. The author emphasizes this important lesson, "...our own fates are in large part decided by our actions and not completely by our starting points" (28). The book primarily aims to distill the practical lessons learned from playing the game, but at the same time teaches you many of the skills needed to become a better game player.

The chief contribution Monopoly® makes to the business world is to expound the point that passing "GO" and collecting a $200 income will not win the game. A winning strategy necessitates aggressive play in analyzing, buying, selling, and trading properties. Axelrod believes that players must be bifocal, keeping an eye on both strategy and tactics, "To be sure, the business of business is making money, but it is also managing and manipulating money" (63). An important component in accumulating properties includes the willingness to leverage your buying power by taking on debt and mortgaging auxiliary properties.

Player psychology also figures in prominently. By better understanding yourself and your opponents you can make better decisions. Successful deals require both players to feel that they gained something from the trade. When negotiating Axelrod reminds us what is most important to keep in mind, "The rookie salesman makes the mistake of selling price rather than value" (99). To improve your own playing build a healthy tolerance for taking calculated risks. Eliminate chance from the equation by "doing the math" and basing decisions on facts.

Finally, the better players build on their investing and psychological advantages by exploiting market conditions, such as economic scarcity. The natural shortage of houses and hotels in the game teaches us that it pays to take advantage of market inefficiencies. This extends to finding deals by picking up properties at auction. Vigilance and preparation rule the day.

This book is to assist you with the COMPUTER GAME, "Monopoly Tycoon", not the board game "Monopoly". I bought the book for assistance with the board game, being misled by the editorial description.

I'm an adult--agewise. This book will not be much help beyond the game guide that came with the game software. The basic strategy recommendation for single player was made obsolete by a software patch released after the strategy guide was published. One or two minor points were in the strategy guide that I did not pick up from the game documentation. The game website has better strategy hints for free! Save your money for something better or an updated edition. The multiplayer strategy said than human players were unpredictable and most of the single player strategies were not appropriate. There's a news flash for the cable news channels!!!

This book explains the intricate yet intriging game very well. By explaining some of the petty confusion they are able to clear up the game. For people who have this game wouldn't it be nice to have the upper hand constantly? With this guide you are able to comprehend the game more and also have a more tricks, and stradegy. So, if you would like to have the upper hand and have power/hegemony over what happens in this game then why are you reading this you should be out there buying the guide!!

This guy is an embarrassmant to the publisher. His brainless rantings may be the result of rage fueled by something in his personal life perhaps?

I'm not a great fan of Microsofts business ethic, but the author is narrow minded, unable to reason or dicuss. Like most folk who rant over anything, the text isn't worth reading. I binned the book.

The author should focus more on what makes Linux a good OS rather than his rantings about Microsoft. This book was a waste of time. I took it back for a refund.

This book reads like the mad rantings of a very PO-ed former Microsoft employee. My feelings about the company have only become more solidified since the time I read this book nearly 4 years ago - a nasty monopolist that gives new meaning to the word "compete." But don't be fooled by either the company or the dope who started crying wolf after he likely profited and now has no other Microsoft to latch onto. Read this book only if you appreciate the rights of both sides to air their story and then you can make up your mind.