> segment leaders can simply use their capital to prevent challengers instead of competing on product/service quality
This is done through regulations. If you are the market leader, you have the resources to comply with new bureaucracy (that you lobby for through standards organisations) and you don't really want to do much risky new development so ossifying your product is fine. That makes it really hard for new competitors to enter the sector.
Standards and regulations are simply one tool, and not even the most common one. In the US auto market for example, standards besides FMVSS (and IHS testing practically speaking) are purely optional. You can read FMVSS for free and compliance is self-certified. Emissions regs are slightly tighter, but not a hurdle for EVs.
And outside automotive there's plenty of leaders that don't dominate based on regulations. Google search doesn't dominate based on regulations. Spotify doesn't dominate because they enshrined themselves in copyright law.
I recently experienced this with CD from Karlovy Vary to Berlin. It was snowing that day and inside of the Czech Republic I was enjoying the scenic view of the Egerland without any delays.
But as soon as we pulled into Germany, the train came to a stop - problems with the rail security infrastructure, nothing the train operator has any influence on.
The problem is the infrastructure.
There is already the Generalsanierung under way, it will take a decade and secure the status quo.
A lot of delays are due to rail corridors being at capacity, but overboarding bureaucracy makes any improvement there a generational project.
Hamburg - Hanover has been discussed for decades with strong opposition from NIMBY groups with no solution in sight.
But even if there is no opposition things take ages.
E.g. for restoring the 2nd track and electrification between Cottbus and Görlitz the plan is now to finish the project by 2041.
This is absolutely insane for 100km of track that were removed as WW2 reparations.
And looking at previous projects it's unlikely to finish in time.
The new S-Bahn track in Berlin between the main station and Gesundbrunnen was supposed to open in 2017. It got delayed over and over and is now finally scheduled to open by the end of this month - just a delay of 9 years.
And that's with an interim station because the real station at Hauptbahnhof wasn't finished in time - and no intermediate stop, that's now also in the planning phase and will mean the line will have to be interrupted again in the near future
When Generalsanierung is over, they can start again right away. That's just the maintenance/running cost. What is needed is building turnout tracks and other stuff to avoid delays. The delays turn people away from riding trains, or buying tickets. We want to combat climate change, but our train service is so bad, that people prefer to drive 4-person cars, alone, for hours, during which they need to be paying attention to the road at all times, instead of sitting in a train and relaxing, or getting stuff done, that they can do during the ride. There is something fundamentally wrong.
The US also did annex large parts of what used to be Mexico in the 19th century, so you don't even technically have so be an immigrant to speak Spanish
Unless you're 126 years old, that excuse doesn't really hold up. Plenty of immigrants came from Italy, Poland, and Russia more recently than your mentioned time, but you don't hear Press 3 for Italian too often.
They didn't have to. But they also shouldn't expect the annexing government or populace to accommodate them.
Their country lost the war, lost the territory, and those that stayed and chose to take American citizenship should've learned English, the (de facto) language of the country they chose to join.
> Russian is another “difficult” language, but all the satellite nations had no problem picking it up.
Russian is not more difficult than English and a lot of the satellite states were speaking other Slavic languages.
If you already speak Spanish, it's less difficult to pick up Italian too.
This is done through regulations. If you are the market leader, you have the resources to comply with new bureaucracy (that you lobby for through standards organisations) and you don't really want to do much risky new development so ossifying your product is fine. That makes it really hard for new competitors to enter the sector.
reply