Monopoly Sources for your Essay

Monopoly and Oligopoly Pattern Changes


The effects of the Microsoft case are still noticeable in the organization today. 2011 some Microsoft lose its top position in terms of software and operating system products to its long-term competitor Apple (Bott 2011)

Monopoly and Oligopoly Pattern Changes


It held the most prominent position within the OS market, and was connected to every new product being launched. Microsoft was one of the first companies to produce an effective and cost-efficient OS system that was incredibly popular within the consumer and business marketplace (Fisher 2000)

Monopoly and Oligopoly Pattern Changes


Yet Microsoft never was forced to fully break up, although it significantly had to reduce practices that were associated with its monopolistic position before the judgment. Moreover, Microsoft's stock fell dramatically after the judgment was placed against the organization and the company was forced to cease its aggressive practices to keep down competitors (Kleinbard & Richtmyer 2000)

Monopoly and Oligopoly Pattern Changes


federal court. In the 1990s, Microsoft clearly dominated the computer operating systems industry (Wilcox 1999)

Microsoft Monopoly Since Feudalism Gave Way to


De Beers is a monopoly for the diamond industry since 1890 and has controlled the industry since 1890, and its vested interest is to do two things: 1) reduce the quantity available to make the public believe diamonds are still rare (done by De Beers Chairman Ernest Oppenheimer in the 1920s), and 2) spend almost $200 million annual to advertise cut diamonds (a product it does not even sell), to convince the public that there is nothing like a diamond; continually playing into the psycho-social issue that without a diamond a woman cannot be whole. Yet, because of this monopoly, millions are employed in the industry, the industry remains robust, and demand continues to rise (Hart, 2002)

Microsoft Monopoly Assessment of Microsoft\'s Monopoly Microsoft


This had the long-term effect of creating an oligopolistic market and the short-term immediate effect of driving smaller, less-capitalized competitors out of the market. Microsoft also did this with their bundling strategies with Internet Explorer and was ordered by the EU to unbundle the browser from the operating system and allow for a greater level of free market dynamics, thereby making the demand curve for elastic (Gisser, Allen, 2001)

Microsoft Monopoly Assessment of Microsoft\'s Monopoly Microsoft


At this same time Microsoft also devised a pricing strategy that made it economically impossible for its OEM customers including Dell, Gateway, IBM and many others from installing or even supporting any other operating system. Most recently Microsoft was fined by the European Union (EU) for bundling its Internet browser, Internet Explorer, with the Windows XP and later Windows 7 operating systems (Meese, 1999)

Microsoft Monopoly Assessment of Microsoft\'s Monopoly Microsoft


Customers seek out alternatives, looking to drive down costs and increase the number of options they have for solving their problems. A monopoly can unleash a level of creativity and innovation that would otherwise not happen in a market without the artificial constraints monopolistic conditions provide (Stucke, 2012)

Microsoft Monopoly Assessment of Microsoft\'s Monopoly Microsoft


While Microsoft has long asserted it is one of the most efficient competitors there are in an oligopolistically-based market of enterprise and consumer software, in reality its strategies and tactics show a pattern of deliberate monopolistic behavior (Information Management, 2009). Microsoft initially used complex contracts that defied legal interpretation to limit their Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) from installing any other operating system besides MS-DOS and later Microsoft Windows (Werden, 2001)

Monopoly and Imperfect Competition Form


Impact of monopolies When discussing about the impact of monopolies it is usually common to lay much emphasis on the effects on the consumers rather than on other businesses in the market, this usually brings one question; are monopolies good or bad to consumers? Given the several negative aspects associated with monopolies I would argue that monopolies are generally bad not only for the consumers but to the economy at large since they have a general outcome of restricting free trade which is the only way that prices can be set. It is very possible for large monopolies to damage not only economies but also democratic governments with the full extent of damage not being very obvious to the general public, who are also the consumers, who in most cases just see the seemingly beneficial effects (Belk, 1975)

Monopoly and Imperfect Competition Form


water, and a popular trademark that ensures customer loyalty e.g. Pepsi (Dick and Basu, 1994)

Monopoly and Imperfect Competition Form


It can also refer to a situation where a good or service has only one provider and is usually common with large corporations such as Microsoft. Such a market is characterized by many buyers and consumers being supplied by one firm, the product being sold by the firm being unique and with no close substitutes, the firm enjoys market power, and a restriction in market entry (Gabszewicz, 2000)

Monopoly and Imperfect Competition Form


These characteristics are significant to both economics and marketing and play a direct role in strategic decision making. The choice behavior of market actors is affected by the characteristics and extent of competition in the market (Kirzner, 1973)

Monopoly and Imperfect Competition Form


This drop in output levels will create an artificial scarcity of the product concerned which impacts negatively on the consumers since they have neither alternative sources nor substitutes for that particular product. Another possible outcome of a monopolistic market is a lower level of product quality than would otherwise be experienced in a competitive market (Mussa and Rosen, 1978)

Monopoly and Imperfect Competition Form


Such lower level quality will also extend to the quality of related goods and services. What this implies to the consumer is that his needs for the right quality of products will not be met and he will have no choice but to go for the lower quality product (Pacheo, 1989)

Monopoly and Imperfect Competition Form


Since monopolists have the power to control the prices of their products/services in the market they may decide to raise them so high that the consumers will not be able to comfortably buy, this is contrary to a situation where the market competition is perfect and the prices are controlled by the market forces of demand and supply. For instance when Microsoft was still a monopoly in all segments of the computer market the prices were so high but when this monopoly ended in certain segments the prices came down by almost half (Painter, 2003)

Monopoly and Imperfect Competition Form


Monopoly and Imperfect Competition form part of the market taxonomy and in order to understand them then what a market structure refers to should be understood first. A market structure can be simple defined as the organizational and operational characteristics of a market which have an influence on the competition and pricing (Riley, 2006)

Monopoly and Imperfect Competition Form


In extreme cases these harmful effects are successfully hidden by the monopolists. One of the ways that monopolists can harm consumers is by causing substantially higher prices for the products and/or services that they provide (Schwartzman, 1959)

De Beer\'s International Diamond Monopoly


The strategy included highlithing social challenges and a focus on innovation. Relation to Christianity In 2000, a document called the Fowler Report was issued by a body of UN experts, implicating "two current African presidents as well as the government of Bulgaria and the world's largest diamond exchange, in Antwerp, Belgium, in the methods that rebels have used to smuggle Angolan diamonds out for sale, enabling them to buy weapons to sustain decades of civil war" (Crossette, 2000)

De Beer\'s International Diamond Monopoly


Nowadays, De Beers' business conduct follows the so called best practice principles. These principles implies that both De Beers and the companies they work with comply with a number of standards regarding three main areas: business, social and environmental responsabilities (De Beers corporate website, Accessed March 09)