Are natural monopolies? No, and here's why, in reality this theory does not take into account the market dynamics factor, for example, innovation, optimization and more flexible business plans that are easier to change in new companies can reduce barriers to entry and help these companies cover the smaller effect of scale. Also, for example, economist Primo found out that in the conditions of a free electricity distribution market, duopolies would be more effective with an increase in the number of customers, with constant consumption, and less effective than monopolies with an unchanged number of customers and an increase in consumption, if we average the data, then a duopoly is on average no worse than a monopoly, but plus it eliminates x inefficiency in the long term due to competition and innovation. This is a strong argument in favor of introducing competition in these markets, and refutes the myth that LARC does not work in the electricity market, although it behaves quite unusually in different market conditions. Plus, the long-term benefits of competition and innovation also outweigh the costs and inconveniences of duplication in the short term. Let's look at another argument from the left, which is that a new company will not be able to enter the market because an established player can sharply reduce the price, and the company's sunk costs have not yet been covered. Firstly, this does not happen, a large player cannot instantly drop the price, this may take quite some time, in a free market, and the speed of entry of new players would be faster due to the lack of the need for licensing. Also, the absence of tariffs and licenses, the barriers to entry into a capital-intensive market were much lower, plus innovation, optimization and flexible business plans could also reduce the barriers, as I mentioned earlier, and a new company can be significantly supported by venture capitalists who provide the necessary capital and connections to finance innovation. Also, the ability to conclude a supply contract in advance could allow a new company to immediately cover all sunk costs plus make the attempts of an established player to oust it by dumping untenable. Baumel also wrote that to maintain competition in a natural monopoly market, it is enough that the barriers are low enough to give a new firm enough time to enter, and again the ability to strategically contract for supply in advance could effectively undermine the position of established players.