Professional Documents
Culture Documents
BY ZUJAJA KHAWAR
INTRODUCTION
Within a particular market or industry, a pure monopoly is defined as a
single supplier. In this circumstance, the firm effectively serves as the
industry. Because of the nature of the market, there are no close competitors
or substitutes. When one company has a market share of more than 90%, it
is considered a near-pure monopoly.
Monopoly power is the extent to which a firm can influence and even ‘set’
the market price or influence the quantity supplied to the market, and also
the extent to which conditions of business are influenced by a single firm.
Barriers to Entry
Barriers to entry are obstacles that prevent firms from entering a market. A
monopoly is created when the barriers are steep. When barriers are not so
steep, then an oligopoly results. When there are few or no barriers to entry,
then either monopolistic competition results, if the product can be
differentiated to some degree from close substitutes, or pure competition
results when there is no significant difference among the products sold by
many suppliers, which is the case for most commodities.
Natural barriers to entry arise from the nature of the enterprise, the quality of
its workforce, or its position in the industry, rather than from legal barriers.
However, the most common natural barrier to entry is when the production
of a product exhibits large economies of scale.
Economies of Scale
When average total cost declines over the entire market, then a natural
monopoly exists. The best examples of natural monopolies are software and
digital editions of media, such as movies, TV shows, music, magazines, and
books, because the cost of producing additional items decreases continually.
A pure monopoly has pricing power within the market. There is only one
supplier who has significant market power and determines the price of its
product. A pure monopoly faces little competition because of high barriers
to entry, such as high initial costs, or because the company has acquired
significant market influence through network effects, such as facebook , for
instance.
There shall not be any close substitutes for the product sold by the
monopolist. The cross elasticity of demand between the product of the
monopolist and others must be negligible or zero.
There are either natural or artificial restrictions on the entry of firms into the
industry, even when the firm is making abnormal profits.
4. Monopoly is also an Industry:
Under monopoly there is only one firm which constitutes the industry.
Difference between firm and industry comes to an end.
5. Price Maker:
Under monopoly, monopolist has full control over the supply of the
commodity. But due to large number of buyers, demand of any one buyer
constitutes an infinitely small part of the total demand. Therefore, buyers
have to pay the price fixed by the monopolist.
Luxottica
Luxottica – A Company that owns all the major brands of sunglasses. The
Company has bought almost all the major eyewear brands however, they are
still named differently. This creates an illusion in the mind of the customer
that they have a variety of sunglasses to choose from although they are all
manufactured by one Company. Luxottica produces more than 80% of the
eyewear worldwide.
Microsoft
Microsoft – Microsoft is a Computer and software manufacturing Company.
It holds more than 75% market share and is the market leader and virtual
monopolist in the tech space.
WAPDA
WAPDA has monopoly of producing electricity. WAPDA`s Power Wing is
responsible for the planning, construction and operation of power
generation, transmission and distribution facilities throughout the country,
except Karachi area which is served by KESC (Karachi Electricity Supply
Corporation.
DeBeers diamond
From its inception in 1888 until the start of the 21st century, De
Beers controlled 80% to 85% of rough diamond distribution and was
considered a monopoly. De Beers' most famous ad campaign marked the
entire diamond industry. In 1947, De Beers completely changed
the diamond world. Their slogan 'A diamond is forever,' was and is still
revolutionary and relevant.
CONCLUSION:
REFERENCES:
Olson, M. and McFarland, D., 1972. The Restoration of Pure Monopoly and
the Concept of the Industry. In Readings in Industrial Economics (pp. 236-
256). Palgrave Macmillan, London.