Monopoly Flashcards
A monopoly is where:
there’s only one firm in the market
What assumptions do economists make to model monopolies?
3 assumptions:
Firstly, there’s only one firm in the market
Secondly, they want to maximise profit
Thirdly, there are high barriers to entry
Monopoly
When there’s only one dominant firm in a market. Legally, a monopoly is a firm with over 25% market share.
E.g. Microsoft, who owned 90% of the operating system market.
Why are sunk costs a barrier to entry?
Sunk costs are costs that cannot be recovered (e.g. advertising).
High sunk costs are a barrier to entry: they deter new firms from entering because firms know that if they fail, they won’t be able to recover any of their sunk costs.
If an electricity-producer acquires the power grid, this is an example of what sort of inorganic growth:
If an electricity-producer buys a power grid, this is an example of forward vertical integration. Because the electricity producer is moving forward, acquiring a firm closer to the consumer.
And this means the electricity-producer can now prevent competitor firms from entering the market, by refusing to let them use the power grid.
Explain how vertical integration can be an anti-competitive practice:
Firms can vertically integrate to take control of scarce resources (like the power grid or the oil extraction firm); and then refuse to let new firms use these scarce resources, stopping them from entering the market.
Incumbent firm
A firm currently in the market.
Legal barriers
Legal barriers include patents, trademarks and copyright. They enable incumbent firms to legally prevent new firms from stealing their ideas and entering their market.
Sunk costs
Costs that cannot be recovered.
E.g. advertising - once you’ve paid for a TV ad, you can’t get that money back
High sunk costs
High sunk deter new firms from entering because firms know that if they fail, they won’t be able to recover any of their sunk costs.
Economies of scale
Economies of scale mean incumbent firms can keep their costs and prices low, creating a barrier to entry because smaller new firms without economies of scale can’t compete on price.
Brand loyalty
Strong branding from incumbent firms makes it hard for new entrants, with weaker branding, to make any sales.
Anti-competitive practices
Anti-competitive (or restrictive) practices include anything a firm might do, to restrict competition.
E.g. vertical integration: firms can vertically integrate to take control of scarce resources (like the power grid); and then refuse to let new firms use these scarce resources, stopping them from entering the market.
Example of Anti-competitive practices
E.g. vertical integration: firms can vertically integrate to take control of scarce resources (like the power grid); and then refuse to let new firms use these scarce resources, stopping them from entering the market.
We now know that a monopoly is:
A pure monopoly is when there’s only one firm in market. A legal monopoly is when a firm has over 25% market share.
But… when economists are modelling a monopoly, we assume that:
3 assumptions:
Only one firm in the market
They want to maximise profit
There are high barriers to entry
Let’s start with productive efficiency, which is when:
Average total cost is at its lowest, where MC = AC
Next we have allocative efficiency which is when:
Welfare is maximised where MC = Price (AR).
X-inefficiency is when:
X-inefficiency is when a firm is producing above its average cost curve for a given level of output.
Dynamic efficiency occurs when:
AR > ATC
a monopoly is: (in terms of efficiency)
Productively inefficient, allocatively inefficient, possibly dynamically inefficient, X-inefficient
So why does the government support and own monopolies, if we know monopolies are productively, allocatively and X-inefficient?
There are lots of arguments but one of the most important arguments behind why the government supports certain monopolies is the natural monopoly argument.
A natural monopoly is when it’s naturally most efficient if only one firm is in the market.
E.g. with public transport, it would be very inefficient if London had multiple transport networks, it’s most efficient to have just one (like TFL) in control of everything…we’ll see exactly why next!
Explain two economies of scale TFL can exploit to reduce their LRAC.
TFL could use technical economies to invest in specialist technology like the oyster card system and self-service ticket stations to replace staff, and reduce wage costs.
TFL could also use purchasing economies to buy fuel in bulk to power their trains and buses at lower costs
So, in summary, a natural monopoly is when:
A natural monopoly is when it’s naturally most efficient if only one firm is in the market.