While this is only a case study, and not a comprehensive analysis of all cases, past, present and future, it illustrates what a creative entrepreneur can do in the face of great challenges.

To paraphrase Milton Friedman, I challenge you to name ONE company that has held a successful monopoly WITHOUT government intervention.

Friedman was referring to tariffs, trade barriers, regulatory hurdles, government contracts, etc when he spoke of intervention. With a long-term view, one cannot find such an example.

From a more common-sense perspective, let us examine the difficulty with monopolies. Besides the negative public image, monopolies also charge higher prices than the market would normally support. This is one major force in incentivizing newcomers. Obviously, there is a lot of money to be made if you can break in to the market.

Some would counter this with the observation that those small companies are often bought out. While this is true, a grand premium is paid for the entrepreneur to forgo potential future profits. Simultaneously, the entrepreneur does not face the risks associated with starting a business. The high costs of repeatedly buying out your competition will become prohibitive.

Additionally, consumption will be reduced if the commodity is overpriced, further reducing profits.

Finally, much like a bloated governmental bureaucracy, a corporation which faces no stiff competition becomes lethargic, loses creativity and a desire to hone its processes. When this happens, the end is near for the monopoly.