Title: Monopolistic Competition and Oligopoly
1Chapter 12
- Monopolistic Competition and Oligopoly
2Topics to be Discussed
- Monopolistic Competition
- Oligopoly
- Price Competition
- Competition Versus Collusion The Prisoners
Dilemma - Implications of the Prisoners Dilemma for
Oligopolistic Pricing - Cartels
3Monopolistic Competition
- Characteristics
- Many firms
- Free entry and exit
- Differentiated product
4Monopolistic Competition
- The amount of monopoly power depends on the
degree of differentiation - Examples of this very common market structure
include - Toothpaste
- Soap
- Cold remedies
5Monopolistic Competition
- Toothpaste
- Crest and monopoly power
- Procter Gamble is the sole producer of Crest
- Consumers can have a preference for Crest
taste, reputation, decay-preventing efficacy - The greater the preference (differentiation) the
higher the price
6Monopolistic Competition
- Two important characteristics
- Differentiated but highly substitutable products
- Free entry and exit
7A Monopolistically CompetitiveFirm in the Short
and Long Run
/Q
/Q
Short Run
Long Run
Quantity
Quantity
8A Monopolistically CompetitiveFirm in the Short
and Long Run
- Short run
- Downward sloping demand differentiated product
- Demand is relatively elastic good substitutes
- MR lt P
- Profits are maximized when MR MC
- This firm is making economic profits
9A Monopolistically CompetitiveFirm in the Short
and Long Run
- Long run
- Profits will attract new firms to the industry
(no barriers to entry) - The old firms demand will decrease to DLR
- Firms output and price will fall
- Industry output will rise
- No economic profit (P AC)
- P gt MC ? some monopoly power
10Monopolistically and Perfectly Competitive
Equilibrium (LR)
Monopolistic Competition
Perfect Competition
/Q
/Q
Quantity
Quantity
11Monopolistic Competition and Economic Efficiency
- The monopoly power yields a higher price than
perfect competition. If price was lowered to the
point where MC D, consumer surplus would
increase by the yellow triangle deadweight
loss. - With no economic profits in the long run, the
firm is still not producing at minimum AC and
excess capacity exists.
12Monopolistic Competition and Economic Efficiency
- Firm faces downward sloping demand so zero profit
point is to the left of minimum average cost - Excess capacity is inefficient because average
cost would be lower with fewer firms - Inefficiencies would make consumers worse off
13Monopolistic Competition
- If inefficiency is bad for consumers, should
monopolistic competition be regulated? - Market power is relatively small. Usually there
are enough firms to compete with enough
substitutability between firms deadweight loss
small. - Inefficiency is balanced by benefit of increased
product diversity may easily outweigh
deadweight loss.
14The Market for Colas and Coffee
- Each market has much differentiation in products
and tries to gain consumers through that
differentiation - Coke vs. Pepsi
- Maxwell House vs. Folgers
- How much monopoly power do each of these
producers have? - How elastic is demand for each brand?
15Elasticities of Demand forBrands of Colas and
Coffee
16The Market for Colas and Coffee
- The demand for Royal Crown is more price
inelastic than for Coke - There is significant monopoly power in these two
markets - The greater the elasticity, the less monopoly
power and vice versa
17Oligopoly Characteristics
- Small number of firms
- Product differentiation may or may not exist
- Barriers to entry
- Scale economies
- Patents
- Technology
- Name recognition
- Strategic action
18Oligopoly
- Examples
- Automobiles
- Steel
- Aluminum
- Petrochemicals
- Electrical equipment
19Oligopoly
- Management Challenges
- Strategic actions to deter entry
- Threaten to decrease price against new
competitors by keeping excess capacity - Rival behavior
- Because only a few firms, each must consider how
its actions will affect its rivals and in turn
how their rivals will react
20Oligopoly Equilibrium
- If one firm decides to cut their price, they must
consider what the other firms in the industry
will do - Could cut price some, the same amount, or more
than firm - Could lead to price war and drastic fall in
profits for all - Actions and reactions are dynamic, evolving over
time
21Oligopoly Equilibrium
- Defining Equilibrium
- Firms are doing the best they can and have no
incentive to change their output or price - All firms assume competitors are taking rival
decisions into account - Nash Equilibrium
- Each firm is doing the best it can given what its
competitors are doing - We will focus on duopoly
- Markets in which two firms compete
22Oligopoly
- The Cournot Model
- Oligopoly model in which firms produce a
homogeneous good, each firm treats the output of
its competitors as fixed, and all firms decide
simultaneously how much to produce - Firm will adjust its output based on what it
thinks the other firm will produce
23Firm 1s Output Decision
P1
Q1
24Oligopoly
- The Reaction Curve
- The relationship between a firms
profit-maximizing output and the amount it thinks
its competitor will produce - A firms profit-maximizing output is a decreasing
schedule of the expected output of Firm 2
25Reaction Curves and Cournot Equilibrium
Q1
Firm 1s reaction curve shows how much it will
produce as a function of how much it thinks Firm
2 will produce. The xs correspond to the
previous model.
100
75
Firm 2s reaction curve shows how much it will
produce as a function of how much it thinks Firm
1 will produce.
50
x
x
25
x
x
Q2
25
50
75
100
26Reaction Curves and Cournot Equilibrium
Q1
100
In Cournot equilibrium, each firm correctly
assumes how much its competitors will produce and
thereby maximizes its own profits.
75
50
x
x
25
x
x
Q2
25
50
75
100
27Cournot Equilibrium
- Each firms reaction curve tells it how much to
produce given the output of its competitor - Equilibrium in the Cournot model, in which each
firm correctly assumes how much its competitor
will produce and sets its own production level
accordingly
28Oligopoly
- Cournot equilibrium is an example of a Nash
equilibrium (Cournot-Nash Equilibrium) - The Cournot equilibrium says nothing about the
dynamics of the adjustment process - Since both firms adjust their output, neither
output would be fixed
29The Linear Demand Curve
- An Example of the Cournot Equilibrium
- Two firms face linear market demand curve
- We can compare competitive equilibrium and the
equilibrium resulting from collusion - Market demand is P 30 - Q
- Q is total production of both firms
- Q Q1 Q2
- Both firms have MC1 MC2 0
30Oligopoly Example
- Firm 1s Reaction Curve ? MR MC
31Oligopoly Example
- An Example of the Cournot Equilibrium
32Oligopoly Example
- An Example of the Cournot Equilibrium
33Duopoly Example
Q1
The demand curve is P 30 - Q and both firms
have 0 marginal cost.
Q2
34Oligopoly Example
- Profit Maximization with Collusion
35Profit Maximization w/ Collusion
- Contract Curve
- Q1 Q2 15
- Shows all pairs of output Q1 and Q2 that maximize
total profits - Q1 Q2 7.5
- Less output and higher profits than the Cournot
equilibrium
36Duopoly Example
Q1
For the firm, collusion is the best outcome
followed by the Cournot Equilibrium and then the
competitive equilibrium
30
Q2
30
37First Mover Advantage The Stackelberg Model
- Oligopoly model in which one firm sets its output
before other firms do - Assumptions
- One firm can set output first
- MC 0
- Market demand is P 30 - Q where Q is total
output - Firm 1 sets output first and Firm 2 then makes an
output decision seeing Firm 1s output
38First Mover Advantage The Stackelberg Model
- Firm 1
- Must consider the reaction of Firm 2
- Firm 2
- Takes Firm 1s output as fixed and therefore
determines output with the Cournot reaction
curve Q2 15 - ½(Q1)
39First Mover Advantage The Stackelberg Model
- Firm 1
- Choose Q1 so that
- Firm 1 knows Firm 2 will choose output based on
its reaction curve. We can use Firm 2s reaction
curve as Q2 .
40First Mover Advantage The Stackelberg Model
- Using Firm 2s Reaction Curve for Q2
41First Mover Advantage The Stackelberg Model
- Conclusion
- Going first gives Firm 1 the advantage
- Firm 1s output is twice as large as Firm 2s
- Firm 1s profit is twice as large as Firm 2s
- Going first allows Firm 1 to produce a large
quantity. Firm 2 must take that into account and
produce less unless it wants to reduce profits
for everyone.
42Price Competition
- Competition in an oligopolistic industry may
occur with price instead of output - The Bertrand Model is used
- Oligopoly model in which firms produce a
homogeneous good, each firm treats the price of
its competitors as fixed, and all firms decide
simultaneously what price to charge
43Price Competition Bertrand Model
- Assumptions
- Homogenous good
- Market demand is P 30 - Q where
Q Q1 Q2 - MC1 MC2 3
- Can show the Cournot equilibrium if Q1 Q2 9
and market price is 12, giving each firm a
profit of 81.
44Price Competition Bertrand Model
- Assume here that the firms compete with price,
not quantity - Since good is homogeneous, consumers will buy
from lowest price seller - If firms charge different prices, consumers buy
from lowest priced firm only - If firms charge same price, consumers are
indifferent who they buy from
45Price Competition Bertrand Model
- Nash equilibrium is competitive output since have
incentive to cut prices - Both firms set price equal to MC
- P MC P1 P2 3
- Q 27 Q1 Q2 13.5
- Both firms earn zero profit
46Price Competition Bertrand Model
- Why not charge a different price?
- If charge more, sell nothing
- If charge less, lose money on each unit sold
- The Bertrand model demonstrates the importance of
the strategic variable - Price versus output
47Bertrand Model Criticisms
- When firms produce a homogenous good, it is more
natural to compete by setting quantities rather
than prices - Even if the firms do set prices and choose the
same price, what share of total sales will go to
each one? - It may not be equally divided
48Price Competition Differentiated Products
- Market shares are now determined not just by
prices, but by differences in the design,
performance, and durability of each firms
product - In these markets, more likely to compete using
price instead of quantity
49Price Competition Differentiated Products
- Example
- Duopoly with fixed costs of 20 but zero variable
costs - Firms face the same demand curves
- Firm 1s demand Q1 12 - 2P1 P2
- Firm 2s demand Q2 12 - 2P1 P2
- Quantity that each firm can sell decreases when
it raises its own price but increases when its
competitor charges a higher price
50Price Competition Differentiated Products
- Firms set prices at the same time
51Price Competition Differentiated Products
52Nash Equilibrium in Prices
- What if both firms collude?
- They both decide to charge the same price that
maximizes both of their profits - Firms will charge 6 and will be better off
colluding since they will earn a profit of 16
53Nash Equilibrium in Prices
P1
Equilibrium at price of 4 and profits of 12
P2
54Nash Equilibrium in Prices
- If Firm 1 sets price first and then Firm 2 makes
pricing decision - Firm 1 would be at a distinct disadvantage by
moving first - The firm that moves second has an opportunity to
undercut slightly and capture a larger market
share
55A Pricing Problem Procter Gamble
- Procter Gamble, Kao Soap, Ltd., and Unilever,
Ltd. were entering the market for Gypsy Moth Tape - All three would be choosing their prices at the
same time - Each firm was using same technology so had same
production costs - FC 480,000/month VC 1/unit
56A Pricing Problem Procter Gamble
- Procter Gamble had to consider competitors
prices when setting their price - PGs demand curve was
- Q 3,375P-3.5(PU)0.25(PK)0.25
- Where P, PU, PK are PGs, Unilevers, and Kaos
prices respectively
57A Pricing Problem Procter Gamble
- What price should PG choose and what is the
expected profit? - Can calculate profits by taking different
possibilities of prices you and the other
companies could charge - Nash equilibrium is at 1.40 the point where
competitors are doing the best they can as well
58PGs Profit (in thousands of per month)
59A Pricing Problem for Procter Gamble
- Collusion with competitors will give larger
profits - If all agree to charge 1.50, each earn profit of
20,000 - Collusion agreements are hard to enforce
60Competition Versus CollusionThe Prisoners
Dilemma
- Nash equilibrium is a noncooperative equilibrium
each firm makes decision that gives greatest
profit, given actions of competitors - Although collusion is illegal, why dont firms
cooperate without explicitly colluding? - Why not set profit maximizing collusion price and
hope others follow?
61Competition Versus CollusionThe Prisoners
Dilemma
- Competitor is not likely to follow
- Competitor can do better by choosing a lower
price, even if they know you will set the
collusive level price - We can use example from before to better
understand the firms choices
62Competition Versus CollusionThe Prisoners
Dilemma
63Competition Versus CollusionThe Prisoners
Dilemma
- Possible Pricing Outcomes
64Payoff Matrix for Pricing Game
Firm 2
Charge 4
Charge 6
Charge 4
Firm 1
Charge 6
65Competition Versus CollusionThe Prisoners
Dilemma
- We can now answer the question of why firm does
not choose cooperative price - Cooperating means both firms charging 6 instead
of 4 and earning 16 instead of 12 - Each firm always makes more money by charging 4,
no matter what its competitor does - Unless enforceable agreement to charge 6, will
be better off charging 4
66Competition Versus CollusionThe Prisoners
Dilemma
- An example in game theory, called the Prisoners
Dilemma, illustrates the problem oligopolistic
firms face - Two prisoners have been accused of collaborating
in a crime - They are in separate jail cells and cannot
communicate - Each has been asked to confess to the crime
67Payoff Matrix for Prisoners Dilemma
Prisoner B
Confess
Dont confess
Confess
Prisoner A
Would you choose to confess?
Dont confess
68Oligopolistic Markets
- Conclusions
- Collusion will lead to greater profits
- Explicit and implicit collusion is possible
- Once collusion exists, the profit motive to break
and lower price is significant
69Payoff Matrix for the PG Pricing Problem
Unilever and Kao
Charge 1.40
Charge 1.50
Charge 1.40
PG
What price should P G choose?
Charge 1.50
70Observations of Oligopoly Behavior
- In some oligopoly markets, pricing behavior in
time can create a predictable pricing environment
and implied collusion may occur - In other oligopoly markets, the firms are very
aggressive and collusion is not possible
71Observations of Oligopoly Behavior
- In other oligopoly markets, the firms are very
aggressive and collusion is not possible - Firms are reluctant to change price because of
the likely response of their competitors - In this case, prices tend to be relatively rigid
72Price Rigidity
- Firms have strong desire for stability
- Price rigidity characteristic of oligopolistic
markets by which firms are reluctant to change
prices even if costs or demands change - Fear lower prices will send wrong message to
competitors, leading to price war - Higher prices may cause competitors to raise
theirs
73Price Rigidity
- Basis of kinked demand curve model of oligopoly
- Each firm faces a demand curve kinked at the
current prevailing price, P - Above P, demand is very elastic
- If P gt P, other firms will not follow
- Below P, demand is very inelastic
- If P lt P, other firms will follow suit
74Price Rigidity
- With a kinked demand curve, marginal revenue
curve is discontinuous - Firms costs can change without resulting in a
change in price - Kinked demand curve does not really explain
oligopolistic pricing - Description of price rigidity rather than an
explanation of it
75The Kinked Demand Curve
/Q
Quantity
76The Kinked Demand Curve
/Q
Quantity
MR
77Price Signaling and Price Leadership
- Price Signaling
- Implicit collusion in which a firm announces a
price increase in the hope that other firms will
follow suit - Price Leadership
- Pattern of pricing in which one firm regularly
announces price changes that other firms then
match
78Price Signaling and Price Leadership
- The Dominant Firm Model
- In some oligopolistic markets, one large firm has
a major share of total sales, and a group of
smaller firms supplies the remainder of the
market - The large firm might then act as the dominant
firm, setting a price that maximizes its own
profits
79The Dominant Firm Model
- Dominant firm must determine its demand curve, DD
- Difference between market demand and supply of
fringe firms - To maximize profits, dominant firm produces QD
where MRD and MCD cross - At P, fringe firms sell QF and total quantity
sold is QT QD QF
80Price Setting by a Dominant Firm
Price
Quantity
81Cartels
- Producers in a cartel explicitly agree to
cooperate in setting prices and output - Typically only a subset of producers are part of
the cartel and others benefit from the choices of
the cartel - If demand is sufficiently inelastic and cartel is
enforceable, prices may be well above competitive
levels
82Cartels
- Examples of successful cartels
- OPEC
- International Bauxite Association
- Mercurio Europeo
- Examples of unsuccessful cartels
- Copper
- Tin
- Coffee
- Tea
- Cocoa
83Cartels Conditions for Success
- Stable cartel organization must be formed price
and quantity settled on and adhered to - Members have different costs, assessments of
demand and objectives - Tempting to cheat by lowering price to capture
larger market share
84Cartels Conditions for Success
- Potential for monopoly power
- Even if cartel can succeed, there might be little
room to raise prices if it faces highly elastic
demand - If potential gains from cooperation are large,
cartel members will have more incentive to make
the cartel work
85Analysis of Cartel Pricing
- Members of cartel must take into account the
actions of non-members when making pricing
decisions - Cartel pricing can be analyzed using the dominant
firm model - OPEC oil cartel successful
- CIPEC copper cartel unsuccessful
86The OPEC Oil Cartel
Price
Quantity
87Cartels
- About OPEC
- Very low MC
- TD is inelastic
- Non-OPEC supply is inelastic
- DOPEC is relatively inelastic
88The OPEC Oil Cartel
Price
P
QOPEC
Quantity
89The CIPEC Copper Cartel
Price
Quantity
90Cartels
- To be successful
- Total demand must not be very price elastic
- Either the cartel must control nearly all of the
worlds supply or the supply of noncartel
producers must not be price elastic
91The Cartelization of Intercollegiate Athletics
- Large number of firms (colleges)
- Large number of consumers (fans)
- Very high profits
92The Cartelization of Intercollegiate Athletics
- NCAA is the cartel
- Restricts competition
- Reduces bargaining power by athletes enforces
rules regarding eligibility and terms of
compensation - Reduces competition by universities limits
number of games played each season, number of
teams per division, etc. - Limits price competition sole negotiator for
all football television contracts
93The Cartelization of Intercollegiate Athletics
- Although members have occasionally broken rules
and regulations, has been a successful cartel - In 1984, Supreme Court ruled that the NCAAs
monopolization of football TV contracts was
illegal - Competition led to drop in contract fees
- More college football on TV, but lower revenues
to schools