The defining difference between rent and profit is vulnerability to market competition.

Evidence

Arithmetically, there is no difference: both rent and profit amount to money left over once costs are paid for. The difference is subtler, qualitative, almost abstract: profit is vulnerable to market competition, rent is not. The reason is their different origins. Rent flows from privileged access to things in fixed supply, like fertile soil or land containing fossil fuels; you cannot produce more of these resources, however much money you might invest in them. Profit, in contrast, flows into the pockets of entrepreneurial people who have invested in things that would not have otherwise existed – things like Edison’s light bulb or Jobs’s iPhone. It is this fact – that these commodities were invented and created and so can be invented and created again but better by someone else – that renders profit vulnerable to competition. — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism, 467

Categorization

  • DEFINE: A clean, exact distinction between rent and profit — rent from fixed-supply privileged access, profit from creating what someone else could recreate better. The whole book’s thesis hangs on this definition.
  • XREF: Directly answers the reader’s stated goal of distinguishing digital feudalism from platform capitalism — this is the conceptual spine for that provocation. — connects to: The defining shift to technofeudalism is rent defeating profit. — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism, 458; Market competition erodes profits but increases rents. — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism, 468; Monopoly rent arises from low competition, not production cost — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism, 803 (+2 more)
  • corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism, 467

Broader Connections