unlike perfect competition, monopoly can actually exist
a pure monopoly is a single supplier that dominates the entire market - the market has 100% concentration e.g. London Underground
in reality, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) doesn't just look at 100% of the industry sales
what market share means that a firm has monopoly power
more than 25%
what market share means that a firm is dominant in a market
more than 40%
there is a distinction between a firm that is a monopoly and a firm that has monopoly power
a pure monopolist is more like to be exploitative than a firm with a working monopoly as these often exist in highly competitive oligopolies too
monopoly power
Costa is dominant in a competitive oligopoly
Tesco 30% market share
Pepsi and Coke dominate in a duopoly
Apple >50% market share in the UK
google 90% search engine traffic
London Underground is close to a pure monopoly
monopoly
UK vs Global - mobile phones
UK:
iOS 52%
Android 48%
Other (<1% combined)
Global:
iOS 26%
Android 73%
Other (<1% combined)
UK vs Global - Music Streaming
UK:
Spotify 62%
Global:
Spotify 35%
Apple 19%
Amazon 15%
Tencent 11%
Luxottica
designs/manufactures/distributes about 70% of big-name sunglasses
2016 39% of market share
AB InBev
account for nearly 30% of global beer sales
they own Stella Artois, Corona, Beck's and Bud light
headquarters are in Belgium, it is the world's largest beer brewer by both volume and revenue, operating more than 600 beer brands in 150 countries
characteristics of a monopoly
usually imperfect information
no competition
can use price discrimination
price making power
AR>MR
often high fixed costs
may involve a network
firm=market
barriers to entry and exit
only 1 firm
downward sloping demand curve
can set P or Q but not both
sources of monopoly power
economies of scale
capital requirements
technical superiority
no substitute goods
control of natural resources
legal barriers
key issues to thing about when looking at monopoly
scope/size of the market
case-by-case basis
global/regional/national/local?
industry by segment
natural monopolies
national grid
cable and internet services
state monopolies
London Underground
NHS
Railtrack in the UK
local monopolies
school uniform suppliers
water supply
motorway service stations
economic case against monopolies
prices are higher than under competitive conditions
leads to a loss of allocative efficiency (price>MC)
regressive effects on lower-income households
absence of genuine market competition may lead to production inefficiencies
X-inefficiencies such as wasteful production and advertising spending
higher prices can limit the final output in a market and lead to fewer economies of scale being exploited
monopoly may get too big - diseconomies of scale
protected markets - perhaps less drive to innovate
intervention in monopoly - tax on monopoly profits
reasoning: a one-off windfall tax on supernormal profits from monopoly power
evaluation: risk of tax avoidance/loss of capital investment spending
intervention in monopoly - liberalisation of markets
reasoning: break up monopolies - allow smaller businesses to enter and increased contestability
evaluation: smaller businesses may struggle to scale up and compete
intervention in monopoly - introduce price capping policies
reasoning: encourages cost efficiencies and increases consumer surplus
evaluation: monopolists may find revenues in other ways
intervention in monopoly - nationalisation
reasoning: take some monopoly utilities back into public ownership
evaluation: possible loss of productive efficiency
when answering questions: economic case against monopoly
SPEW
Service - does the lack of competition affect the quality of service to consumers?
Prices - how high are the prices compared to competitive/contestable market
Efficiency - productive, allocative and dynamic
Welfare - what are the overall welfare outcomes? Is there a net loss of welfare in markets dominated by businesses with monopoly power?
conduct in a monopoly
barriers to entry exist - help to maintain supernormal (monopoly) profits in the long run
imperfect information is assumed
profit maximisation is assumed b the actual conduct of firms with market power is often different especially in an oligopoly that has a dominant firm
often firms with market power do not profit maximise as one of their aims is to maintain their market share - e.g. CocaCola in the UK
economic case for monopoly power
high market concentration does not always signal absence of competition; can reflect the success of firms in providing better-quality products, more efficiently, than their rivals
profits used to fund research and development
natural monopolies - economies of scale
domestic monopoly faces global competition
monopoly firms can be regulated i.e. industry regulator acting as a proxy customer
price discrimination may help some consumers
monopoly diagram is the same in both the short run and the long run
AR is the demand curve for a price-making firm (downward sloping)
MR is always below AR because to sell an additional unit, the price of all units up to that point must also fall
the shape of AC and MC is the result of the law of diminishing marginal returns
profit maximisation - MC=MR
the difference between MC and MR is the marginal profit
monopoly price and output
the monopoly is a price-maker although it is also constrained by the demand curve
profit above minimum required to keep firm in business
monopoly and allocative inefficiency
main case against a monopoly is that it makes higher profits at the expense of a loss of allocative efficiency
monopolist will seek to extract a price from consumers above the cost of resources used in making the product
higher prices mean consumers' needs + wants are not satisfied, as products are under-consumed
higher prices cause loss of consumer surplus and welfare and will disproportionately affect lower income
X-inefficiency in imperfect competition
natural monopoly
occurs when one large business can supply a market at a lower price that smaller ones, there cannot be more than one productively efficient provider of a good
exists when there are huge sunk costs, sunk cost is incurred in order to enter the market and cannot be recovered, hence fixed costs are high
it is an industry where the minimum efficient scale is a large share of market demand, means there are increasing returns to scale at all levels of output, LRAC is falling as LRMC continues to fall, why there is room for only one supplier to fully exploit the economies of scale
minimum efficient scale (MES) - the scale of output where the internal economies of scale have been fully exploited
natural monopoly
where there are very high fixed costs involved in supplying a good or service so that the long run average cost curve may fall continuously as output increases in the long run
natural monopoly
profit maximising output likely to be highly allocatively inefficient as price is above MC + output is restricted
natural monopoly
monopoly is state-owned and prices capped at MC to increase supply/affordability, losses may be made
how is a natural monopoly different from other industries
a natural monopoly is a special case where one large business can supply the entire market at a lower unit cost than with multiple providers, due to the nature of costs in a natural monopoly industry, where there's high FC + low MC, FC are enormous but MC of adding on extra user is very low, ATC will continue to fall as extra users are added to the network (internal economy of scale), LRAC may fall across all ranges of output, only one firm might reach the minimum efficient scale
deadweight loss of welfare caused by monopoly
the effect of elasticity on a monopoly's profit
price discrimination
the practice of charging different prices to different customers for the same product
a monopoly can engage in price discrimination when it can identify different types of customers with different willingness to pay, price variations do not fully reflect the marginal cost of supplying a product e.g. higher costs for parcels delivered over short and long-haul distances in the UK and overseas
can increase economic efficiency by allowing the monopoly to sell more output at a lower average cost
not the same as product differentiation
1st degree (perfect) discrimination
charging different prices for each individual unit purchased - people pay their own individual willingness to pay