Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Suppose that in panel (a) of Figure 27-2, the vertical distances to points F and A are \(10per unit and \)2per unit, and Qm is 1,000units. To measure the degree of monopoly power, economists often examine the differential between price and marginal cost as a percentage of the price. What would be the value of this measure of monopoly power for the natural monopolist depicted in panel (a) of the figure?

Short Answer

Expert verified

The monopoly power for the natural monopolist is80%

Step by step solution

01

Given Information

Natural Monopoly alludes to a market where there should exist just a single dealer. In certain business sectors, a solitary dealer is expected for proficient creation since that one firm can deliver the complete result at a lower cost than a few firms could.

02

Explanation

Assuming the long-run normal expense bend of the restraining infrastructure is constantly falling over the whole scope of market interest, then, at that point, it demonstrates that only one firm can serve the market.

Hence,

Qm=1000P=10MC=2

Monopoly power

PMCP=10210×100=80%

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Consider the following fictitious sales data (in thousands of dollars) for both e-books and physical books. Firms have numbers instead of names, and Firm 1generates only e-book sales. Suppose that antitrust authorities' initial evaluation of whether a single firm may possess "monopoly power" is whether its share of sales in the relevant market exceeds 70percent.

a. Suppose that the antitrust authorities determine that selling physical books and e-book selling are individually separate relevant markets. Does an initial evaluation suggest that any single firm has monopoly power, as defined by the antitrust authorities?

b. Suppose that in fact there is really only a single book industry, in which firms compete in selling both physical books and e-books. According to the antitrust authorities' initial test of the potential for monopoly power, is there actually cause for concern?

Consider the data from Problem 27-11. Suppose that antitrust authorities have determined that there are separate relevant markets for e-books and physical books. In addition, these authorities perceive that a monopoly situation exists that can be challenged on legal grounds if the value of the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index exceeds 5000 . On the basis of this criterion, do the antitrust authorities conclude that there are grounds for a legal challenge in either market? Explain.

Suppose that a firm's self-interested owners or managers have no moral or ethical qualms and do not anticipate being caught if they agree to participate in a collusive conspiracy. Why might they still decide not to do so if only a moderate revenue gain would result? (Hint: How would engaging in the collusion techniques listed in Figure 27-4affect a conspiring firm's total costs?)

Recently, a food retailer called Whole Foods sought to purchase Wild Oats, a competitor in the market for organic foods. When the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sought to block this merger on antitrust grounds, FTC officials argued that such a merger would dramatically increase concentration in the market for "premium organic foods." Whole Foods' counterargument was that it considered itself to be part of the broadly defined supermarket industry that includes retailers such as Albert sons, Kroger, and Safeway. What key issue of antitrust regulation was involved in this dispute? Explain.

Are lemons problems likely to be more common in some industries and less common in others? Based on your answer to this question, should government regulatory activities designed to reduce the scope of lemons problems take the form of economic regulation or social regulation? Take a stand, and support your reasoning.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free