Slate Money – "The Mobile Monopoly Edition" (July 21, 2018)

Episode Overview

This episode of Slate Money, hosted by Felix Salmon, with regulars Anna Szymanski and Emily Peck, delves into three major topics in business and finance:

1. The European Union’s record $5 billion antitrust fine against Google for its practices with Android and mobile search—raising larger questions about digital monopoly power.
2. The chronic problems of the New York subway system, whether a new leader can fix it, and the complex political and economic roots of the mess.
3. WeWork’s new policy banning meat in all company-catered events and food reimbursements, exploring the line between corporate virtue signaling and meaningful change.

The episode’s tone was conversational, energetic, skeptical of both corporate and government actions, and often laced with humor and personal anecdotes.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The EU’s Antitrust Case and Google’s Mobile Monopoly

Background and Issue

• The EU fined Google $5 billion, having investigated how Google requires phone makers using Android to install Google’s search and Chrome apps by default (01:54).
• Android is open-source, but manufacturers must follow certain restrictions if they want Google’s services, leading to Google dominating mobile searches—well over 90% market share.

Quotes & Insights

• Felix Salmon:
  “Why would Google be giving away this incredibly valuable operating system for free? ... they bundle it with their search product.” (02:27)
• Anna Szymanski:
  "The problem ... is not just they control a lot of the market. The problem ... is that they are actually harming consumers, that this tends to be in the US that we don't regulate monopolies unless we see that consumers are being hurt ..." (03:54)

Market Share Versus Actual Harm

• The hosts move beyond market share as the sole definition of monopoly, emphasizing how Google’s control over user data creates insurmountable barriers for competitors (04:58).

EU vs. US Regulatory Attitudes

• The EU is becoming a world leader in regulating tech giants, contrasting—sometimes scathingly—with a more “toothless” U.S. approach (05:27).
• The EU’s action comes with a consent decree—Google must change its practices within 90 days or face further penalties (06:02).

2. The Difficulties of Regulating Tech Giants

Complexity of Regulation

• Regulation is complicated: Overzealous rules can hinder competition by making compliance too expensive for challengers (06:49).
• Felix Salmon:
  “Instead of trying to regulate the industry ... regulate the handful of tech giants individually.” (08:10)

Comparisons with Microsoft Antitrust Case

• The Microsoft case in the 1990s set a precedent but also had unintended positive effects: innovation and new competition flourished afterwards (08:47).

Calls for Sensible, Embedded Regulation

• Simply investigating and fining is slow; embedding regulators into large companies could be more proactive (10:15).

Rethinking Antitrust Tools

• Old antitrust tools might be inadequate; potential solutions include more aggressive actions like breaking up Google or forcing data-sharing to level the playing field (13:51).

Quote

• Felix Salmon:
  "If you broke Google up ... there are possible spinoffs and breakups which ... people should be taking seriously." (13:51)

3. The New York Subway Crisis: Can It Be Fixed?

Degradation of Service

• Anna, the most frequent subway commuter in the group, describes steady decline that accelerated into crisis over the last year (15:51).
• Personal anecdote: “You’d have to be walked off the train because it could only go halfway into the station ... absurd things that we've never had to deal with before.” (16:04)

Causes of the Crisis

• Main factors: chronic underfunding, mismanagement, union and contractor inefficiency, and lack of political will.
• The state government has siphoned funds from MTA to other projects, including upstate ski resorts (17:15), especially after the 2008 crash and Superstorm Sandy.
• Lack of incentives to control costs: ballooning labor and project expenses compared to other world cities (20:25).

Power Structure and Politics

• State vs. city authority creates confusion; political capital spent elsewhere; unions heavily influence cost structures (22:46).

Complex Solutions, Modest Optimism

• Fixing the system will require action on multiple fronts—money alone isn’t enough.
• Even consumers (New Yorkers) complicate solutions by resisting shutdowns for repairs: “Once you give people something, you can't take it away.” (25:36)
• New MTA chief Andy Byford is experienced, seems competent, but faces daunting structural problems.

Notable Moment

• Felix notes the irony of NYC’s mayor, Bill de Blasio, only contacting the new subway chief after a major New Yorker profile came out (27:25).

4. WeWork’s "No Meat" Policy: Corporate Virtue Signaling or Change?

Policy Details & Critique

• WeWork’s new global policy bans meat, poultry, and pork from all company-paid events, allowing fish and eggs (27:41).
• Seen by the hosts as performative, complicated to enforce, and unlikely to significantly benefit the environment.
• Emily Peck:
  “It's a marketing move. It's virtue signaling ... Part of our brand is that we're Hip and cool in this very specific enviro way ... it's not really going to help the environment in any way.” (29:19)

Impractical & Paternalistic

• The logistics are muddled—for instance, reimbursing clients who order a burger—creating awkwardness (30:01).
• Decision seen as top-down and arbitrary, typical of "fake tech companies" and founder egotism (31:16); WeWork’s other questionable moves (e.g., building a pre-K run by the founder’s spouse) are cited as examples (31:51).

Vegetarians Weigh In

• Felix shares that most vegetarians he heard from dislike the policy, seeing it as likely to create resentment and bad PR (32:42).
• Anna Szymanski (as resident vegetarian):
  “I felt exactly the same way. ... Imposing this on people ... just creates resentment.” (33:24)

Corporate Virtue Signaling as a Trend

• Broader conversation about how corporations attempt to project ethical or green credentials, often ineffectively or hypocritically (34:22).

5. Numbers Round (Selected Timestamps)

• Emily’s Number: $25 (per hour)—intern pay in a widely discussed Refinery 29 “Money Diary,” provoking debate about privilege and NYC’s cost of living (36:27).
• Felix’s Number: 260,000—bronze coins found in a 15th-century Samurai’s house, leading to reflections on the shifting value of money (37:52).
• Anna’s Number: 5,988—the per-metric-ton price of copper, a market measure of global economic outlook, dropping below $6,000 (39:27).

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Felix, on Google’s defense:
  “They've come out with statements saying we're not anti-competitive ... because other search engines are only a download away.”
  —"Oh, that's like, come on." (Emily) (12:17)

• On regulating tech giants:
  "Embed some regulators in these companies and just say, listen, let's just make sure you don't do really dumb thing[s]."
  —Felix (10:15)

• On New York Subway:
  “New Yorkers are used to ... the air conditioning never works or the fact that you will see rats on the platform. Like, these things aren't great ... but you at least expect the train to be there.”
  —Anna (16:04)

• On WeWork’s meat ban:
  “If your client gets a burger, they have to pay for it out of their own pocket or you wind up paying for it out of, God forbid, your own pocket.”
  —Emily (30:01)

• Anna, summarizing the MTA crisis:
  “What caused this is it was a team effort. ... Politicians, state, city ... the unions, the construction companies, and you even had customers.” (19:10)

Segment Timestamps

• Introduction & Google antitrust case: [00:10]–[13:51]
• Regulating tech and monopolies: [13:51]–[15:39]
• New York subway problems: [15:39]–[27:41]
• WeWork’s meat ban: [27:41]–[34:22]
• Corporate virtue signaling: [34:22]–[36:19]
• Numbers round: [36:27]–[40:42]

Conclusion

This episode of Slate Money brings together major stories about the power and limits of regulation—from Google’s control of our digital lives to the decaying arteries of New York, and the strange world of posturing corporations. It is rich with sharp critique, humor, and real-world understanding of how finance, policy, tech, and culture intersect.