Chapter 10 Solutions to Monopolistic Competition
Prices, Output, and Strategy: Pure and Monopolistic Competition
Solutions to Exercises
1. Pepsi and Coca-Cola bottlers face enormous supplier power from the syrup manufacturers, sell primarily to concentrated grocery store chains, and are constantly presented with many substitute firms who could provide their role in the value chain. Thus, despite high barriers to entry from high capital requirements, high switching costs, and closed distribution channels, their sustainable profitability is lower than Coca-Cola and Pepsi. The latter face almost no supplier power, few close substitutes as perceived by loyal customers, very high barriers to effective entry, low intensity of rivalry from concentrated markets, non-price tactics, and low cost-fixity with fast growing demand especially overseas. 2. MTV operates in a highly concentrated near-monopoly market where fixed costs are low and hence intensity of rivalry is reduced. MTV also faces little supplier power from numerous nonunique musical groups. The networks, in contrast, face the much greater supplier power of the NFL, NBA and Professional Baseball. MTV has few substitutes whereas the networks now face 150 channels of substitutes for each type of programming. 3. Reduced capital requirements and diminished scale economies will increase the threat of entry and reduce the sustainable industry profitability.
4. By increasing the demand for corn, the price of corn could be expected to rise in the short run. As corn becomes relatively more expensive as a feed grain, wheat and soybeans would be in more demand for feed grain purposes, also resulting in some price increases for these commodities. In the long run, given that there is excess productive agricultural capacity in the U.S., the price effects could be wiped out by supply increases.
This edition is intended for use outside of the U.S. only, with content that may be different from the U.S. Edition. This may not be resold, copied, or distributed