Market Saturation

There are only so many logically possible ways to expand the success of a business.  Not only is there a finite amount of possible products or services to create and sell to begin with, and a fixed amount of physical resources with which to fashion tangible inventory, but there is a finite number of people on a world of a given size who have the capacity or desire to spend money on what a business offers at any moment.  All of this already means that limitless market growth is impossible because the markets are not infinite in scope.  There is even then still the issue of competitors having their own hold on whichever market is in question.

One competitor with a significant market share could hypothetically buy another with a similarly large market share to bring a merger into effect, thereby expanding the clientele to any consumers who stay with the latter after it is subsumed into the former.  There are still only so many competitors to buy, so this does not escape the inherent limitations of a finite consumer base for any industry.  A planet with a finite population could only have a finite number of competitors that in turn each have a finite number of loyal consumers, and there could not be an endless supply of uncommitted potential consumers who could be won over by marketing, product/service quality, or any other thing.

Given the time and resources to do so, one company could reach the maximum possible market share--100%--and would have no additional buyers to win over at a particular point.  This would still only be the case with a true sole monopoly or megacorporation of now-unprecedented size.  When split between multiple companies, a market has even less potential to be dominated.  It is possible for a time to come when every interested or willing consumer has given their money to a brand or a product and the company or line in view will nevertheless not be able to sustain constant, endless growth.  Technological and broader cultural shifts can also render an industry obsolete, as with the likes of online shopping and streaming websites/apps having an impact on exclusively brick and mortar businesses.

When market saturation, among other things like the aforementioned market evolution, curtails the financial growth of a company, irrational and immoral methods, desperate announcements to regain attention, or rebranded versions of the same basic things are what a company could rely on to continue boosting profitability or stock value from quarter to quarter.  It is absolutely asinine, on the level of both the highest, most abstract necessary truths of reason and its ramifications for more practical matters, to expect or chase after infinite growth from finite factors.  Whether that growth is more sales from the same consumers, who only have so much money they can spend regardless of their wealth, expansion of a market, or expansion into more markets, there is always a major limitation.

Striving for aimless or boundless growth can only be done for the sake of stupidity and greed and social approval anyway (the latter two are already stupid in themselves even aside from morality, for to live for them is to live for subjective gratification or social constructs instead of the inherent truths of reason like axioms).  For shareholders or executives irrational enough to commit to an impossible goal, however, they will not find themselves prospering forever.  For a season, they can provoke financial or market growth, but there are maximum boundaries even if they go unrecognized or unacknowledged.  Market saturation is just one of the ways that finite factors cannot spark infinite increases.