Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
There are four types, or causes, of market failure. Monopolies exist where a single buyer or seller is able to exert significant influence over prices or output. To minimize such market failures, antitrust regulations are implemented. In recent years, Microsoft has been accused of violating antitrust regulations and thus being a monopoly. The accusation is that Microsoft, as a seller, is able to control the market place, thus reducing competition and creating a market failure.
Specifically, the decision of United States v. Microsoft, issued on April 3, 2000, called the company an "abusive monopoly." The suit arose out of the merging of Microsoft and Internet Explorer (created when the company bought out Netscape). The decision further required that the company split into two separate units, one for its windows-based features and one for its Internet-based features. However, part of this ruling was subsequently overturned by a federal appeals court and the case was eventually settled with the U.S. Department of Justice in 2001. The settlement requires Microsoft to share its appliation programming interfaces with third-party companies and appoint a panel of three individuals who will have full access to all the company's systems, records and source codes for a period of five years in order to ensure compliance. Interestingly, the settlement does not require Microsoft from refraining from tying its other software...
For one, many saw it as merely a slap on the wrist, believing that free market competition can only be restored with government intervention to breakup the Microsoft monopoly. These individuals argue that because Microsoft creates software only compatible with Windows, along with Internet services only compatible with Windows, they have created a monopoly in this area, essentially cutting off all roads for possible competition and therefore leading to a failure in the market. In fact, Andrew Chin said of the ruling gave Microsoft, "a special antitrust immunity to license Windows and other 'platform software' under contractual terms that destroy freedom of competition."
Specifically, Microsoft operates as a coercive monopoly under microeconomic principles, essentially able to influence the market through coercion. A coercive monopoly is one where a business is able to make pricing and production decision independent of competitive forces because all potential competition is barred from entering the market. According to the principles of microeconomics, a market depends on open competition in order to maintain the supply and demand balance and benefit the consumer. Because Microsoft has created a monopoly, the market principle as promoted by microeconomics, is failing.
Specifically, the decision of United States v. Microsoft, issued on April 3, 2000, called the company an "abusive monopoly." The suit arose out of the merging of Microsoft and Internet Explorer (created when the company bought out Netscape). The decision further required that the company split into two separate units, one for its windows-based features and one for its Internet-based features. However, part of this ruling was subsequently overturned by a federal appeals court and the case was eventually settled with the U.S. Department of Justice in 2001. The settlement requires Microsoft to share its appliation programming interfaces with third-party companies and appoint a panel of three individuals who will have full access to all the company's systems, records and source codes for a period of five years in order to ensure compliance. Interestingly, the settlement does not require Microsoft from refraining from tying its other software with Windows in the future.
The courts eventual approval of this settlement has been met with much criticism from the microeconomics sector. For one, many saw it as merely a slap on the wrist, believing that free market competition can only be restored with government intervention to breakup the Microsoft monopoly. These individuals argue that because Microsoft creates software only compatible with Windows, along with Internet services only compatible with Windows, they have created a monopoly in this area, essentially cutting off all roads for possible competition and therefore leading to a failure in the market. In fact, Andrew Chin said of the ruling gave Microsoft, "a special antitrust immunity to license Windows and other 'platform software' under contractual terms that destroy freedom of competition."
Specifically, Microsoft operates as a coercive monopoly under microeconomic principles, essentially able to influence the market through coercion. A coercive monopoly is one where a business is able to make pricing and production decision independent of competitive forces because all potential competition is barred from entering the market. According to the principles of microeconomics, a market depends on open competition in order to maintain the supply and demand balance and benefit the consumer. Because Microsoft has created a monopoly, the market principle as promoted by microeconomics, is failing.
Microeconomics Across the World Comparing the Economies of Two Countries with Regard to Pricing Structures With notable exceptions, such as Cuba and North Korea, most of the major global economic powers have within their national microeconomic or internal frameworks, some forms or a semblance of a competitive, capitalist economies. In other words, individual economic actors such as firms compete for the monetary confidence of consumers within particular industries, rather than having such
In addition to this, the company must continue to develop new products. This is because consumers' needs and requirements are in a continuous change process and the company's products will have to adapt to the requirements issued by customers. Reference list: 1. History (2008). CSC Brands. Retrieved March 19, 2010 from http://careers.campbellsoupcompany.com/History.aspx. 2. Strategies (2008). CSC Brands. Retrieved March 19, 2010 from http://careers.campbellsoupcompany.com/Strategies.aspx. 3. Annual Report (2009). CSC Brands. Retrieved March 19, 2010
Economics In basic terms, microeconomics and macroeconomics are both branches of economics. While one concerns itself with economic decisions undertaken at the household or individual level, the other explores the functioning of the economy in overall terms. In this discussion, I take into consideration the key differences between these two branches of economics. In so doing, I will give an example of each phenomenon and later highlight decisions made under both
Macroeconomic and Microeconomics Differences With Examples: Microeconomics and Macroeconomics are two separate branches of the same field, economics. Together they help us better understand the market dynamics and economic forces that shape them. Macroeconomics deals with the aggregate performance of the economy, the industries and discusses such serious issues as inflation, unemployment and growth. Microeconomics on the study hand is solely concerned with the smaller picture. It is mainly concerned with
Labor Market, Unemployment Defining and classifying Unemployment There is a level of unemployment in any economy, which is not automatically a bad thing, as most people would think. The presence of a level of unemployment, which usually is presented as a percentage, indicates that at any one given point in that economy, there are people looking for work and managers looking for better employees. In economics, the only important factor to look
Microeconomics is the branch of economics concerned with the behavior of individual entities such as markets, firms, and households. Analyzing HSBC Bank through the lens of microeconomic theory involves examining how the bank makes decisions about resource allocation, pricing, and strategy in response to market conditions and regulatory frameworks (Mankiw, 2014). HSBC, being one of the largest banking and financial services organizations in the world, offers a rich case study