= SS _—_sUNIVERSITAS TERBUKA. AZ UPBJJ JEMBER UNIVERSITAS TERBUKA Unit Program Belajar Jarak Jauh (UPBJJ-UT) Jember Jalan Kaliurang No. 2A Sumbersari, Jember, Jawa Timur, 68121 () Email : jember@ecampus.ut.ac.id Website : www jember.ut.ac.id Website UT : www.ut.ac.id TUGAS TUTORIAL KE-1 ‘ADBI4201, bahasa Ingaris Niaga, dan 2 SKS PROGRAM STUDI Administrasi Bisnis Tutor: Fathur Rozi, S.S.,, M.Pa. Name : Ahmad Jamaruddin: Semester _: 1 (Administrasi Bisnis) |. Read the text and answer the questions. Government policy for dealing with monopoly. Antitrust laws aim to stop abuses of market power by big companies and, sometimes, to prevent corporate mergers and acquisitions that would create or strengthen a monopolist. There have been big differences in antitrust policies both among countries and within the same country over time. This has reflected different ideas about what constitutes a monopoly and, where there is one, what sorts of behaviour are abusive In the United States, monopoly policy has been built on the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. This prohibited contracts or conspiracies to restrain trade or, in the words of a later act, to monopolise commerce. In the early 20th century this law was used to reduce the economic power wielded by so-called "robber barons", such as JP Morgan and John D. Rockefeller, who dominated much of American industry through huge trusts that controlled companies’ voting shares. Du Pont chemicals, the railroad companies and Rockefeller's Standard Oil, among others, were broken up. In the 1970s the Sherman Act was turned (ultimately without success) against IBM, and in 1982 it secured the break-up of AT&T's nationwide telecoms monopoly. In the 1980s a more laissez-faire approach was adopted, underpinned by economic theories from the Chicago school. These theories said that the only justification for antitrust intervention should be that a lack of competition harmed consumers, and not that a firm had become, in some illdefined sense, too big. Some monopolistic activities previously targeted by antitrust authorities, such as predatory pricing and exclusive marketing agreements, were much less harmful to consumers than had been thought in the past. They also criticised the traditional method of identifying a monopoly, which was based on looking at what percentage of a market was served by the biggest firm or firms, using a measure known as the herfindaht-hirschman index. instead, they argued that even a market dominated by one firm need not be a matter of antitrust concern, provided it was a contestable market. In the 1990s American antitrust policy became somewhat more interventionist. A high- profile lawsuit was launched against Microsoft in 1998. The giant software company was found guilty of anti-competitive behaviour, which was said to slow the pace of innovation. However, fears that the firm would be broken up, signalling a far more interventionalist American antitrust policy, proved misplaced. The firm was not severely punished. In the UK, antitrust policy was long judged according to what policymakers decided was in the public interest. At times this approach was comparatively permissive of mergers and acquisitions; at others it was less so. However, in the mid-1980s the UK followed the American lead in basing antitrust policy on whether changes in competition harmed consumers. Within the rest of the European union several big countries pursued policies of building up national champions, allowing chosen firms to enjoy some monopoly power at home which could be used to make them more effective competitors abroad. However, during the 1990s the European Commission became increasingly active in antitrust policy, mostly seeking to promote competition within the EU. 1. Whatis the suitable title for the text above?2. What is antitrust? And what for? 3. ...who dominated much of American industry through huge trusts that controlled companies’ voting shares What is the synonym for the word trust? 4, Please describe the traditional method of identifying a monopoly! 5. According to the text, is there any misplaced of antitrust? Explain? I. What do you know of the following Economics terms? Explain them briefly in English and bahasa Indonesia. a. Adaptive Expectation b. Advertising c. Agency Cost d, Arbitrage e. Amortisation IIL Choose 3 of the economics terms above and write a sentence using those terms.lama: Ahmoet! Jamarvedin ve Kelor= 1a Admini Ha Bicnis x} antwer dhe queshon hai fhe suitable Pot the tex} hove 7 Ant curt E Whol. 1s antitrust J and what for i L = Apkierot te goverment policy for dealing with ronppoly Antivst (aw aim fe thy Bbuies of marks} powet by Compangy BeIGnA Sometimes. (o preven) corporate mergers ond acquisitions Ha) Be oouls Creole or Strengthen CG meropolis « ie a Who donated much o¢ American jndvites Howl huge Emest thal controlled Compane: vokng shares i What tt the synonym forthe word drott - ) = | fruah _\¢ cong; dence - Synonym for thr desert Hraditional _mathed of cent: Gymng o mon fen Wins pared on locking at what per canto go-op “yorlsh wor served by the bigest firm or Primi - G& Mmeajore prowh As the herpindabl — hie gchman- D Fhe tex, 5 there any muplac of antitnst 7 xploin) re is © mipplace tn the (9905 american anftrwt policy aha! more interuenhonist - A high progile tawrit wo! Ginst Mitewfoet in 19978 Uhe giant roplware » nd Quilty Of antr~Compettive behaviour w the pace of innovation ~ However. fears ould be ron wp. Cignalling O far m“a | ADAPTIVE Ex pee TATIONS J | _Ineronomies , adaytive oxpeclation preont fiat ‘pestle form their lexgectation: avout what will haypen tn the folvre Loared oh thal I Wha! do You _fenow og ie. fellowing Bosom demi) Eee _|> Adaptive Er pectations (Bkopebton Adaptive! menye tarbon TE Adoptive Expectation sail scuah deori fenteng bagaimans dhem brieply tn Bnolith and Bohara —Indonen> ‘bil hay hoppaned tn the post. Tor example ie inglation hey hroher thon expected inthe pari «people would fevise Cxpectationr- WMengenoi dimana : Blow slmvetonow bahwa serevron _mernben- | HeE/membual etypetas: fentans apa Yans fered’ cli tnaia dapan bordarrton 9 (a mility dimare (alu - OFONy~oreng Mmembentuk pandangan merets dentang mose dopay a ang merganpomsieon mereta melakubonnya ongan monggu- Makan fren masa lal. don eyciahan dalam _prediee’ fnereba Sendirt Sebelvimnye._ Cfumber tnternel) ° jy The activily of al racking public attention fs a product PADWERTUNC > CiktaN)- has or busthers ay by pars amnouncemenl th the prin} ~ Vroadcul wor alectranic. media \ 2. The busters of dejgning ant wrikns” a. ver tye mint « 2. Adverpmont Con srdred OF G Oroup. This paper fates po Aad pertTing JS Adverksing Clieton). dinena one athuibas Yar3 Japal menar- _Wpetraton publi ‘one: toad produt Yyatonge \elan ii daytt dilthay dy elon? mavyvh Staran oii tide Malco _| Inve Yoite fervor onlvk trempromelipan VOIana = | : Se a |ey cost” (Braye Aznh ) ee Aves 66 inferna! cont thal case!’ from, OF re pa 4 an Open} cichng on herole of a principal: Aen tgp fue peawse of core problems ui as conelncts \Opy Ween Share holders and nmnagemen’ ; = agent mney peran” pray” intonal Perak aah yang Mort agen 7 hertindat “akets nama _prinsiPal (Poni) Ogenk_ muncel selelah neprienk (pensgu naan flap Patamn atov fejalitan an’ efitren ) Int, beldab A? Seperhi fone lit bepen bn gar anlore perajany ym dan Mmonogement = ih : Ko ——_ dilannaung ol _pamagans sham -pemilit (pring Monmjemon perosahoan agen) puembel’ Porssahoan lain Mrmperlval ferraraannyc «ajay _mmengha brstan von mye — proyek yang lebih divveat bvkanny< momoty’- hilar pervishaan - ‘ Asse} tn one market ond simu)taneo sly celling wel in ahother markt at a. highr price. aMSO sfuem pO an0KO Taf 14/0104 Auipofitsbed waar is shied He Seon wolNM OLS snd vebute aatlild wo ela oedema