Title: Monopolistic Competition and Oligopoly
1Chapter 12
- Monopolistic Competition and Oligopoly
2Monopolistic Competition
- Characteristics
- Many firms
- Free entry and exit
- Differentiated product
3Monopolistic Competition
- The amount of monopoly power depends on the
degree of differentiation - Examples of this very common market structure
include - Toothpaste
- Soap
- Cold remedies
- Retail
4Monopolistic Competition
- Two important characteristics
- Differentiated but highly substitutable products
(cross-price elasticity of demand large) - Free entry and exit (keeps profits down)
5A Monopolistically CompetitiveFirm in the Short
and Long Run
/Q
/Q
Short Run
Long Run
Quantity
Quantity
6A 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
7A 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
8Monopolistically and Perfectly Competitive
Equilibrium (LR)
Monopolistic Competition
Perfect Competition
/Q
/Q
Quantity
Quantity
9Monopolistic 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.
10Monopolistic 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
11Excess Capacity
- The FIRMs output is inefficiently low less than
minimum ATC - Fewer total firms in the INDUSTRY would increase
the FIRMs demand and allow them to take
advantage of economies of scale and increase
output
12Monopolistic 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.
13Oligopoly Characteristics
- Small number of firms
- Product differentiation may or may not exist
- Barriers to entry
- Scale economies
- Patents
- Technology access ()
- Name recognition ()
- Strategic action
14Oligopoly
- Examples
- Automobiles
- Steel
- Aluminum
- Petrochemicals
- Electrical equipment
15Oligopoly
- 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
16Oligopoly 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
17Oligopoly 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
18Oligopoly
- 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 - Market price depends on the total output of both
firms - Firm will adjust its output based on what it
thinks the other firm will produce
19Firm 1s Output Decision
P1
Q1
20Oligopoly
- 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 - Different MC different reaction functions
21Reaction 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
22Reaction 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
23Cournot 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
24Oligopoly
- 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
25The Linear Demand Curve
- An Example of the Cournot Equilibrium
- Two firms face linear market demand curve
- We can compare competitive equilibrium, the
equilibrium resulting from collusion, and Cournot
Equilibrium - Market demand is P 30 - Q
- Q is total production of both firms
- Q Q1 Q2
- Both firms have MC1 MC2 0
26Oligopoly Example Cournot
- Firm 1s Reaction Curve ? MR MC
27Oligopoly Example
- An Example of the Cournot Equilibrium
28Oligopoly Example
- An Example of the Cournot Equilibrium
29Duopoly Example
Q1
The demand curve is P 30 - Q and both firms
have 0 marginal cost.
Q2
30Oligopoly Example
- Profit Maximization with Collusion
- Collusion implies industry profits maximized
31Profit 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
32Duopoly Example
Q1
For the firm, collusion is the best outcome
followed by the Cournot Equilibrium and then the
competitive equilibrium
30
Q2
30
33Review How to solve Cournot
- Begin with Total Revenue function
- Create by calculating P times Q1 and P is from
the demand function in terms of Q total - Must substitute Q1 Q2 for Q
- Result TR function in terms of Q1 and Q2
- Identify Marginal Revenue and set equal to
Marginal Cost - Solve this equality in terms of Q1 fn. Of Q2
34First 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
35First 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)
36First 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 .
37First Mover Advantage The Stackelberg Model
- Using Firm 2s Reaction Curve for Q2
38First 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.
39Price 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
40Price 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.
41Price 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 and each firm will
supply half the market
42Price Competition Bertrand Model
- Nash equilibrium is competitive equilibrium
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
43Price 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
44Bertrand 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 choose the same price, what
share of total sales will go to each one? - Probably not exactly half
45Competition 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?
46Competition 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 a payoff matrix to better understand
the firms choices
47Payoff Matrix for Pricing Game
Firm 2
Charge 4
Charge 6
Charge 4
Firm 1
Charge 6
48Competition 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
49Competition 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
50Payoff Matrix for Prisoners Dilemma
Prisoner B
Confess
Dont confess
Confess
Prisoner A
Would you choose to confess?
Dont confess
51Oligopolistic Markets
- Conclusions
- Collusion will lead to greater profits
- Explicit and implicit collusion is possible
- Reputations
- Short-lived gains from cheating
- Face retaliation
- Once collusion exists, the profit motive to break
and lower price is significant
52Price 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
53Price 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
54The Kinked Demand Curve
/Q
Quantity
MR
55Price 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 - How was price chosen to begin with?
56Price 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
57Cartels
- 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 - Most fail to maintain high prices
58Cartels
- Examples of successful cartels
- OPEC
- International Bauxite Association
- Mercurio Europeo
- Examples of unsuccessful cartels
- Copper
- Tin
- Coffee
- Tea
- Cocoa
59Cartels 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
60Cartels 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 - Low potential low incentive to work out
organizational problems
61Cartels
- To be successful
- Total demand must be fairly inelastic
- Either the cartel must control nearly all of the
worlds supply or the supply of noncartel
producers must also be inelastic
62The Cartelization of Intercollegiate Athletics
- Large number of firms (colleges)
- Large number of consumers (fans)
- Very high profits
63The 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
64The 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