Let's take a look at some winners in winner-take-all markets, Facebook, Google, and Amazon.
Is Facebook's dominance due to regulatory capture? No. (You could argue lack of adequate regulation, but that's not what we usually mean by "regulatory capture".) Is it due to bribery? No. Collusion? No.
Same with Google. No, no, and no. Amazon? No, no, and no.
(You could make a case for collusion with Microsoft...)
all of those companies, including ms, have faced numerous fines and sanctions for anti-trust/anti-competitive behavior. these are some of the worst examples you could have raised. they all cheated, heavily and brazenly.
Don't just claim. Prove. How, exactly, did Google cheat? What was their anti-trust behavior? Et cetera. (Don't bother trying to prove it with MS; I already know what they did.)
Google's golden goose is their tracking. Between their ad networks, Android, and Chrome, and their own search engine, they know every single page that most people view. They can then use that data to work out what to display for searches.
The reason that Google Search punishes slow loading sites, as proven by the AMP 'nice comparative boost' controversy, is because most of the time a page loads slowly is because it has multiple ad network trackers on it. Google will do anything to stop a page from doing that. The good news is this stuff is already being called out for anti-trust issues.
Is Facebook's dominance due to regulatory capture? No. (You could argue lack of adequate regulation, but that's not what we usually mean by "regulatory capture".) Is it due to bribery? No. Collusion? No.
Same with Google. No, no, and no. Amazon? No, no, and no.
(You could make a case for collusion with Microsoft...)