Regulation of Market Structure, Supply, and Price - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 34
About This Presentation
Title:

Regulation of Market Structure, Supply, and Price

Description:

Northern Securities. Standard Oil. US Steel. Alcoa. United Shoe Machinery ... Antitrust Tools. incentive for private individuals to enforce the laws ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:77
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 35
Provided by: HCE
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Regulation of Market Structure, Supply, and Price


1
Regulation of Market Structure, Supply, and Price
2
Theoretical Background Concept of a MARKET
  • What is the relevant market?
  • A market is a collection of firms, each of which
    is supplying products that have some degree of
    substitutability to the same potential buyers

3
Theoretical BackgroundConcept of MARKET
  • Important characteristics
  • Product type and substitutability
  • practical nature of the good
  • substitutes
  • complements
  • cross-price elasticity of demand
  • change in Q of good 2 / change in P of good
    1
  • Geography
  • Time

4
Marginal Cost
  • Marginal cost per unit is a rough measure of the
    opportunity costs to society of the resources
    being used to produce that unit of a good
  • PMC
  • P
  • PMC

5
Model of Perfect Competition
  • Conditions that must hold
  • large of buyers and sellers
  • homeogeneous product
  • barriers to entry minimal or nonexistent (free
    entry and exit)
  • perfect mobility of resources
  • sellers and buyers have perfect information

6
Model of Pure Competition Short Run
Assumptions 1. price taker 2. D AR curve
and MR curve 3. Price dictated by interaction
of supply and demand forces
P
MC
AC
P1
DARMR
Q
7
Model of Pure Competition Short Run
  • Firm produces output that will maximize their
    profits
  • Marginal Costs Average Cost and thus firm earns
    an economic or abnormal profit
  • Economic profit is one that exceeds the costs of
    producing the good plus a fair rate of return
    to investors capital
  • If this occurs, over the long run, new firms are
    encouraged to enter the market

8
Perfect Competition Long Run
With an economic profit, other firms enter
market, increasing output to entire market and
lowering price. Reach a breakeven point
where firms earn a normal profit. PMC
P
LRAC
LRMC
P1
P2
DARMR
P3
Q
MRARLRMCLRAC
9
Perfect Monopoly
  • One seller in market
  • Ability to influence price quantity
  • Produces a differentiated product

10
Perfect Monopoly
SRMC LRMC
P
Short-run and long-run the same since there is
no entry MRMC downward sloping demand
curve PMC
A
P1
LRAC
B
C
D
MR
Q
Q1
Q2
11
Long Run Outcome under Perfect Monopoly
  • Three inefficiences
  • PMC underallocation of resources
  • operates a less than optimal scale of plant
  • Underutilizes that plant

12
Comparison between competition and monopoly
  • Compared to firms in a purely competitive
    industry, a monopolist will
  • produce a smaller level of output
  • charge a higher price for product
  • operate a less than optimal scale of plant
  • underutilize that plant
  • benefit from barriers to entry
  • underallocate resources

13
Monopolist Competition
  • Markets where rivals have some degree of control
    over price and quantity
  • Two important characteristics
  • product differentiation
  • ease of entry and exit

14
Oligopoly
  • Market with few sellers of the same product
  • Mutual interdependence
  • Product can be homogeneous or heterogeneous
  • Reaction to other sellers

15
Economic Effects of Market Power
  • Loss of Consumer Surplus
  • Nonallocative Inefficiency (X-inefficiency)
  • Redistribution of income and welfare

16
Consumer Surplus Loss
Consumer Surplus difference between what a
consumer would have been willing to pay for the
good and what he/she actually paid, added over
all consumers
P
A
B
PM
C
D
PC
MCAC S in C
D
MR
QC
QM
Q
17
Antitrust Protections
  • protect and preserve competition
  • lower prices and choice
  • fair competition

18
The Sherman Act of 1890
  • Section 1
  • Intended to make illegal arrangements that reduce
    competition or firms acting independently (trusts
    and cartels)
  • Section 2
  • Intended to punish attempts to gain control of
    market (monopoly)
  • Enforced by the Department of Justice

19
Monopolizing Sherman Act Section 2 Cases (pp.
87-92)
  • Northern Securities
  • Standard Oil
  • US Steel
  • Alcoa
  • United Shoe Machinery

20
Clayton Act of 1914 Outlawed four specific
practices
  • Section 2 price discrimination
  • Section 3 tying contracts
  • Section 7 mergers
  • None of the prohibitions were absolute only when
    their effect may be to substantially lessen
    competition or tend to create a monopoly
  • Section 8 interlocking directorates

21
Subsequent Antitrust Legislation
  • 1914 Federal Trade Commission Act
  • Section 5. Made illegal unfair methods of
    competition in commerce. (term unfair not
    defined)
  • 1936 Robinson-Patman Amendment to Clayton Act

22
Subsequent Antitrust Legislation
  • 1938 Wheeler - Lea Act
  • Section 3 Unfair and deceptive acts
  • 1950 Celler - Kefauver act
  • Section 1 Anti-merger
  • 1976 Hart-Scott-Rodino Act

23
Subsequent Antitrust Legislation
  • 1994 International Antitrust Enforcement
    Assistance Act
  • mutual assistance agreements with foreign
    antitrust authorities

24
Departures from Antitrust Exemptions
  • Much local and statewide activity
  • Labor unions
  • Local utilities and urban services
  • Social services and health services schools
  • Public enterprises
  • Farm and fishery cooperatives
  • Many military suppliers
  • Baseball, and to a lesser degree, other
    professional sports
  • Newspapers joint publishing arrangements in many
    cities

25
Departures from AntitrustPolicies that Reduce
Competition
  • Tariffs and other barriers to international trade
  • Patents
  • Banking regulation that prevent new entry in many
    banking markets
  • Price raising for certain farm products (USDA)
  • Shipbuilding and shipping (price fixing is
    permitted by the FMC

26
Antitrust Tools
  • incentive for private individuals to enforce the
    laws
  • breaking up firms that dominate an industry
  • preventing mergers that would adversely affect
    competition
  • government action against price-fixing
  • investigates
  • consent agreements - (cease and desist)
  • if do not cease and desist - lawsuit - fines and
    criminal sanctions

27
Monopolizing Sherman ActSection 2 cases (pp.
87-92)
  • First Wave -- 1904-1920 - Testing the Law
  • Standard Oil (85 of market)
  • US Steel (90 of market)
  • Second Wave --1938-1953 - Trying Again
  • Alcoa (90 of market)
  • United Shoe Machinery (95 of market)

28
Monopolizing Sherman ActSection 2 cases (pp.
87-92)
  • Third Wave -- 1968-1982 - Refining the Law
  • IBM (70 of market)
  • Cereals (collusion)
  • ATT (83 of market)
  • Antitrust virtually stops in the 1980s

29
The Microsoft Case
  • Charged with
  • unfairly bundling its products
  • unfairly extending its monopoly
  • polluted the Java programming language which
    poses the greatest current threat to Microsofts
    monopoly

30
Mergers Clayton Act, 1914 and Celler-Kefauver
  • Three types of mergers
  • Horizontal
  • Vertical
  • Conglomerate

31
Cases Mergers
  • Horizontal mergers
  • Du Pont-General Motors
  • Proposed AOL/Time Warner merger
  • Barnes Noble / Ingram Book
  • Conglomerate Mergers
  • Proctor Gamble (1967)

32
Herfindahl-Hirschman Index
  • Herfindahl-Hirschman Index
  • takes into the number and the inequality of
    market shares
  • sum of squares of individual market shares of
    firms in the market

33
Cases Price Fixing and Resale Price Maintenance
  • Price Fixing
  • Addyston Pipe and Steel Company (1899)
  • Trenton Potteries
  • Socony-Vacuum
  • Resale Price Maintenance (vertical price fixing)
  • Sharp

34
Criteria for Evaluating Firms Behavior
  • Defining the market
  • Do consumers have relevant substitutes?
  • Will firms gain dominant market share?
  • What is the geographic market?
  • Has there been abusive conduct?
  • Will there be efficiencies due to the merger?
  • Are there precedents?
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com