Monopoly: one parrot.
A monopoly is the only supplier of a good for which there is no close substitute.
Monopolies have been common since ancient times. In the fifth century B.C., the
Greek philosopher Thales gained control of most of the olive presses during a year
of exceptionally productive harvests. Similarly, the ancient Egyptian pharaohs con-
trolled the sale of food. In England, until Parliament limited the practice in 1624,
kings granted monopoly rights called royal charters or patents to court favorites.
Today, virtually every country grants a patent—an exclusive right to sell that lasts
for a limited period of time—to an inventor of a new product, process, substance,
or design. Until 1999, the U.S. government gave one company the right to be the
sole registrar of Internet domain names.
A monopoly can set its price—it is not a price taker like a competitive firm. A
monopoly’s output is the market output, and the demand curve a monopoly faces is
the market demand curve. Because the market demand curve is downward sloping,
the monopoly (unlike a competitive firm) doesn’t lose all its sales if it raises its price.
As a consequence, the monopoly sets its price above marginal cost to maximize its
profit. Consumers buy less at this high monopoly price than they would at the com-
petitive price, which equals marginal cost.
In this chapter,
1. Monopoly profit maximization: Like all firms, a monopoly maximizes its profit by
setting its price or output so that its marginal revenue equals its marginal cost. we examine
2. Market power: How much the monopoly’s price is above its marginal cost depends
on the shape of the demand curve it faces.
3. Effects of a shift of the demand curve: A shift of the demand curve may have a topics
wider range of effects on a monopoly than on a competitive market.
4. Welfare effects of monopoly: By setting its price above marginal cost, a monopoly
creates a deadweight loss.
5. Cost advantages that create monopolies: A firm can use a cost advantage over other
firms (due, say, to control of a key input or economies of scale) to become a
6. Government actions that create monopolies: Governments create monopolies by
establishing government monopoly firms, limiting entry of other firms to create a
private monopoly, and issuing patents, which are temporary monopoly rights.
7. Government actions that reduce market power: The welfare loss of a monopoly can
be reduced or eliminated if the government regulates the price the monopoly charges
or allows other firms to enter the market.
344 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
11.1 MONOPOLY PROFIT MAXIMIZATION
All firms, including competitive firms and monopolies, maximize their profits by set-
ting marginal revenue equal to marginal cost (Chapter 8). We already know how to
derive the marginal cost curve of a monopoly from its cost curve (Chapter 7). We now
derive the monopoly’s marginal revenue curve and then use the marginal revenue and
marginal cost curves to examine the monopoly’s profit-maximizing behavior.
Marginal A firm’s marginal revenue curve depends on its demand curve. We will show that a
Revenue monopoly’s marginal revenue curve lies below its demand curve at any positive
quantity because its demand curve is downward sloping.
Marginal Revenue and Price. A firm’s demand curve shows the price, p, it receives for
selling a given quantity, q. The price is the average revenue the firm receives, so a
firm’s revenue is R = pq.
A firm’s marginal revenue, MR, is the change in its revenue from selling one more
unit. A firm that earns ∆R more revenue when it sells ∆q extra units of output has
a marginal revenue (Chapter 8) of
MR = ∆R/∆q.
If the firm sells exactly one more unit, ∆q = 1, its marginal revenue is MR = ∆R.
The marginal revenue of a monopoly differs from that of a competitive firm
because the monopoly faces a downward-sloping demand curve unlike the competi-
tive firm. The competitive firm in panel a of Figure 11.1 faces a horizontal demand
curve at the market price, p1. Because its demand curve is horizontal, the competi-
tive firm can sell another unit of output without dropping its price. As a result, the
marginal revenue it receives from selling the last unit of output is the market price.
Initially, the competitive firm sells q units of output at the market price of p1, so
its revenue, R1, is area A, which is a rectangle that is p1 × q. If the firm sells one
more unit, its revenue is R2 = A + B, where area B is p1 × 1 = p1. The competitive
firm’s marginal revenue equals the market price:
∆R = R2 – R1 = (A + B) – A = B = p1.
A monopoly faces a downward-sloping market demand curve, as in panel b of
Figure 11.1. (We’ve called the number of units of output a firm sells q and the
output of all the firms in a market, or market output, Q. Because a monopoly is
the only firm in the market, there is no distinction between q and Q, so we use
Q to describe both the firm’s and the market’s output.) The monopoly, which is
initially selling Q units at p1, can sell one extra unit only if the price falls to p2.
The monopoly’s initial revenue, p1 × Q, is R1 = A + C. When it sells the extra
unit, its revenue, p2 × (Q + 1), is R2 = A + B. Thus its marginal revenue is
∆R = R2 – R1 = (A + B) – (A + C) = B – C.
The monopoly sells the extra unit of output at the new price, p2, so its extra rev-
enue is B = p2 × 1 = p2. The monopoly loses the difference between the new price
Monopoly Profit Maximization 345
(a) Competitive Firm (b) Monopoly
Price, p, $ per unit
Price, p, $ per unit
q q +1 Q Q +1
Quantity, q, Units per year Quantity, Q, Units per year
Revenue with One
Initial Revenue, More Unit, Marginal Revenue,
R1 R2 R2 – R1
Competition A A+B B = p1
Monopoly A+C A+B B – C = p2 – C
Figure 11.1 Average and Marginal Revenue. The p1. (b) The monopoly’s marginal revenue is less
demand curve shows the average revenue or price than the price p2 by area C (the revenue lost due
per unit of output sold. (a) The competitive firm’s to a lower price on the Q units originally sold).
marginal revenue, area B, equals the market price,
and the original price, ∆p = (p2 – p1), on the Q units it originally sold: C = ∆p × Q.
Thus the monopoly’s marginal revenue, B – C = p2 – C, is less than the price it
charges by an amount equal to area C.
The competitive firm in panel a does not lose an area C from selling an extra unit
because its demand curve is horizontal. It is the downward slope of the monopoly’s
demand curve that causes its marginal revenue to be less than its price.
Marginal Revenue Curve. Thus the monopoly’s marginal revenue curve lies below the
demand curve at every positive quantity. In general, the relationship between the
marginal revenue and demand curves depends on the shape of the demand curve.
346 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
For all linear demand curves, the relationship between the marginal revenue and
demand curve is the same. The marginal revenue curve is a straight line that starts
at the same point on the vertical (price) axis as the demand curve but has twice the
slope of the demand curve, so the marginal revenue curve hits the horizontal (quan-
tity) axis at half the quantity as the demand curve (see Appendix 11A). In Figure
11.2, the demand curve has a slope of –1 and hits the horizontal axis at 24 units,
while the marginal revenue curve has a slope of –2 and hits the horizontal axis at
5 Deriving the Marginal Revenue Curve. To derive the monopoly’s marginal revenue curve,
we write an equation summarizing the relationship between price and marginal rev-
enue that panel b of Figure 11.1 illustrates. (Because we want this equation to hold
at all prices, we drop the subscripts from the prices.) For a monopoly to increase its
output by ∆Q, the monopoly lowers its price per unit by ∆p/∆Q, which is the slope
of the demand curve. By lowering its price, the monopoly loses (∆p/∆Q) × Q on the
units it originally sold at the higher price (area C), but it earns an additional p on the
extra output it now sells (area B). Thus the monopoly’s marginal revenue is1
MR = p + Q. (11.1)
Because the slope of the monopoly’s demand curve, ∆p/∆Q, is negative, the last
term in Equation 11.1, (∆p/∆Q)Q, is negative. Equation 11.1 confirms that the price
is greater than the marginal revenue, which equals p plus a negative term.
We now use Equation 11.1 to derive the marginal revenue curve when the
monopoly faces the linear inverse demand function,
p = 24 – Q, (11.2)
in Figure 11.2. Equation 11.2 shows that the price consumers are willing to pay falls
$1 if quantity increases by one unit. More generally, if quantity increases by ∆Q,
price falls by ∆p = –∆Q. Thus the slope of the demand curve is ∆p/∆Q = –1.
We obtain the marginal revenue function for this monopoly by substituting into
Equation 11.1 the actual slope of the demand function, ∆p/∆Q = –1, and replacing
p with 24 – Q (using Equation 11.2):
MR = p + Q = (24 − Q) + (−1)Q = 24 − 2Q. (11.3)
Figure 11.2 plots Equation 11.3. The slope of this marginal revenue curve is
∆MR/∆Q = –2, so the marginal revenue curve is twice as steeply sloped as is the
Marginal Revenue and Price Elasticity of Demand. The marginal revenue at any given
quantity depends on the demand curve’s height (the price) and shape. The shape of
1Revenue is R(Q) = p(Q)Q, where p(Q), the inverse demand function, shows how price changes
as quantity increases along the demand curve. Differentiating, we find that the marginal revenue is
MR = dR(Q)/dQ = p(Q) + [dp(Q)/dQ]Q.
Monopoly Profit Maximization 347
p, $ per unit 24 Perfectly elastic
Elastic, ε < –1
∆MR = – 2 ∆p = –1
∆Q = 1 ∆Q = 1
ε = –1
Inelastic, –1 < ε < 0
Demand (p = 24 – Q)
0 12 24
MR = 24 – 2Q Q, Units per day
Figure 11.2 Elasticity of Demand and Total, above the marginal revenue curve, MR = 24 – 2Q.
Average, and Marginal Revenue. The demand Where the marginal revenue equals zero, Q = 12,
curve (or average revenue curve), p = 24 – Q, lies the elasticity of demand is ε = –1.
the demand curve at a particular quantity is described by the price elasticity of
demand (Chapter 3), ε = (∆Q/Q)/(∆p/p), which tells us the percentage by which
quantity demanded falls as the price increases by 1%.
At a given quantity, the marginal revenue equals the price times a term involving
the elasticity of demand:2
MR = p 1 + 1 . (11.4)
According to Equation 11.4, marginal revenue is closer to price as demand
becomes more elastic. Where the demand curve hits the price axis (Q = 0), the
2By multiplying the last term in Equation 11.1 by p/p (=1) and using algebra, we can rewrite the
∆p Q 1
MR = p + p = p 1 + .
( ∆Q / ∆p)( p / Q)
The last term in this expression is 1/ε, because ε = (∆Q/∆p)(p/Q).
348 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
Table 11.1 Quantity, Price, Marginal Revenue, and Elasticity for
the Linear Inverse Demand Curve p = 24 – Q
Quantity, Price, Marginal Revenue, Elasticity of Demand,
Q p MR ε = –p/Q
0 24 24 –∞
1 23 22 –23
2 22 20 –11
3 21 18 –7
4 20 16 –5
5 19 14 –3.8
6 18 12 –3
7 17 10 –2.43
8 16 8 –2
9 15 6 –1.67
10 14 4 –1.4
11 13 2 –1.18
12 12 0 –1
13 11 –2 –0.85
14 10 –4 –0.71
... ... ... ...
23 1 –22 –0.043
24 0 –24 0
demand curve is perfectly elastic, so the marginal revenue equals price: MR = p.3
Where the demand elasticity is unitary, ε = –1, marginal revenue is zero:
MR = p[1 + 1/(–1)] = 0. Marginal revenue is negative where the demand curve is
inelastic, –1 < ε ≤ 0.
With the demand function in Equation 11.2, ∆Q/∆p = –1, so the elasticity of
demand is ε = (∆Q/∆p)(p/Q) = –p/Q. Table 11.1 shows the relationship among
quantity, price, marginal revenue, and elasticity of demand for this linear example.
As Q approaches 24, ε approaches 0, and marginal revenue is negative. As Q
approaches zero, the demand becomes increasingly elastic, and marginal revenue
approaches the price.
Choosing Price Any firm maximizes its profit by operating where its marginal revenue equals its
or Quantity marginal cost. Unlike a competitive firm, a monopoly can adjust its price, so it has
a choice of setting its price or its quantity to maximize its profit. (A competitive firm
sets its quantity to maximize profit because it cannot affect market price.)
The monopoly is constrained by the market demand curve. Because the demand
curve slopes downward, the monopoly faces a trade-off between a higher price and
a lower quantity or a lower price and a higher quantity. The monopoly chooses the
3As ε approaches –∞ (perfectly elastic demand), the 1/ε term approaches zero, so MR = p(1 + 1/ε)
Monopoly Profit Maximization 349
point on the demand curve that maximizes its profit. Unfortunately for the
monopoly, it cannot set both its quantity and its price—thereby picking a point that
is above the demand curve. If it could do so, the monopoly would choose an
extremely high price and an extremely high output level and would become exceed-
If the monopoly sets its price, the demand curve determines how much output it
sells. If the monopoly picks an output level, the demand curve determines the price.
Because the monopoly wants to operate at the price and output at which its profit
is maximized, it chooses the same profit-maximizing solution whether it sets the
price or output. In the following, we assume that the monopoly sets quantity.
Graphical All firms, including monopolies, use a two-step analysis to determine the output
Approach level that maximizes its profit (Chapter 8). First, the firm determines the output,
Q*, at which it makes the highest possible profit—the output at which its marginal
revenue equals its marginal cost. Second, the firm decides whether to produce Q*
or shut down.
Profit-Maximizing Output. To illustrate how a monopoly chooses its output to maxi-
mize its profit, we continue to use the same linear demand and marginal revenue
curves but add a linear marginal cost curve in panel a of Figure 11.3. Panel b shows
the corresponding profit curve. The profit curve reaches its maximum at 6 units of
output, where marginal profit—the slope of the profit curve—is zero. Because
marginal profit is marginal revenue minus marginal cost (Chapter 8), marginal
profit is zero where marginal revenue equals marginal cost. In panel a, marginal rev-
enue equals marginal cost at 6 units. The price on the demand curve at that quan-
tity is $18. Thus the monopoly maximizes its profit at point e, where it sells 6 units
per day for $18 each.
Why does the monopoly maximize its profit by producing 6 units where its
marginal revenue equals its marginal cost? At smaller quantities, the monopoly’s
marginal revenue is greater than its marginal cost, so its marginal profit is positive.
By increasing its output, it raises its profit. Similarly, at quantities greater than 6
units, the monopoly’s marginal cost is greater than its marginal revenue, so it can
increase its profit by reducing its output.
The profit-maximizing quantity is smaller than the revenue-maximizing quantity.
The revenue curve reaches its maximum at Q = 12, where the slope of the revenue
curve, the marginal revenue, is zero (panel a). In contrast, the profit curve reaches
its maximum at Q = 6, where marginal revenue equals marginal cost. Because
marginal cost is positive, marginal revenue must be positive where profit is maxi-
mized. Because the marginal revenue curve has a negative slope, marginal revenue
is positive at a smaller quantity than where it equals zero. Thus the profit curve must
reach a maximum at a smaller quantity, 6, than the revenue curve, 12.
As we already know, marginal revenue equals zero at the quantity where the
demand curve has a unitary elasticity. Because a linear demand curve is more elastic at
smaller quantities, monopoly profit is maximized in the elastic portion of the demand
curve. (Here profit is maximized at Q = 6 where the elasticity of demand is –3.)
Equivalently, a monopoly never operates in the inelastic portion of its demand curve.
350 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
Shutdown Decision. A monopoly shuts down to avoid making a loss in the long run
if the monopoly-optimal price is below its average cost. In the short run, the
monopoly shuts down if the monopoly-optimal price is less than its average variable
cost. In our short-run example in Figure 11.3, the average variable cost, AVC = $6,
is less than the price, p = $18, at the profit-maximizing output, Q = 6, so the firm
chooses to produce.
Price is also above average cost at Q = 6, so the monopoly makes a positive
profit.4 At the profit-maximizing quantity of 6 units, the price is p(6) = $18 and the
average cost is AC(6) = $8. As a result, the profit, π = $60, is the shaded rectangle
with a height equal to the average profit per unit, p(6) – AC(6) = $18 – $8 = $10,
and a width of 6 units.
Mathematical We can also solve for the profit-maximizing quantity mathematically. We already
Approach know the demand and marginal revenue functions for this monopoly. We need to
determine its marginal cost curve. The monopoly’s cost is a function of its output,
C(Q). In Figure 11.3, we assume that the monopoly faces a short-run cost func-
C(Q) = Q2 + 12, (11.5)
where Q2 is the monopoly’s variable cost as a function of output and $12 is its
fixed cost (Chapter 7). Given this cost function, the monopoly’s marginal cost func-
MC = 2Q. (11.6)
This marginal cost curve is a straight line through the origin with a slope of 2 in panel
a. The average variable cost is AVC = Q2/Q = Q, so it is a straight line through the
origin with a slope of 1. The average cost is AC = C/Q = (Q2 + 12)/Q = Q + 12/Q,
which is U-shaped.
We determine the profit-maximizing output by equating the marginal revenue
(Equation 11.3) and marginal cost (Equation 11.6) functions:
MR = 24 – 2Q = 2Q = MC.
Solving for Q, we find that Q = 6. Substituting Q = 6 into the inverse demand func-
tion (Equation 11.2), we find that the profit-maximizing price is
p = 24 – Q = 24 – 6 = $18.
At that quantity, the average variable cost is AVC = $6, which is less than the price,
so the firm does not shut down. The average cost is AC = $(6 + 12/6) = $8, which
is less than the price, so the firm makes a profit.
4Because profit is π = p(Q)Q – C(Q), average profit is π/Q = p(Q) – C(Q)/Q = p(Q) – AC. Thus
average profit (and hence profit) is positive only if price is above average cost.
5Bydifferentiating Equation 11.5 with respect to output, we find that the marginal cost is MC =
dC(Q)/dQ = 2Q.
Monopoly Profit Maximization 351
(a) Monopolized Market
p, $ per unit
π = 60
0 6 12 24
Q, Units per day
(b) Profit, Revenue
R, π, $
60 Profit, π
0 6 12 24
Q, Units per day
Figure 11.3 Maximizing Profit. (a) At Q = 6, where marginal revenue, MR, equals
marginal cost, MC, profit is maximized. The rectangle showing the maximum profit
$60 is average profit per unit, p – AC = $18 – $8 = $10, times the number of units,
6. (b) Profit is maximized at a smaller quantity, Q = 6 (where marginal revenue
equals marginal cost), than is revenue, Q = 12 (where marginal revenue is zero).
352 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
11.2 MARKET POWER
A monopoly has market power: the ability of a firm to charge a price above
marginal cost and earn a positive profit. We now examine the factors that determine
how much above its marginal cost a monopoly sets its price.
Market Power The degree to which the monopoly raises its price above its marginal cost depends
and the Shape on the shape of the demand curve at the profit-maximizing quantity. If the monopoly
of the Demand faces a highly elastic—nearly flat—demand curve at the profit-maximizing quantity,
Curve it would lose substantial sales if it raised its price by even a small amount. Conversely,
if the demand curve is not very elastic (relatively steep) at that quantity, the
monopoly would lose fewer sales from raising its price by the same amount.
We can derive the relationship between market power and the elasticity of
demand at the profit-maximizing quantity using the expression for marginal rev-
enue in Equation 11.4 and the firm’s profit-maximizing condition that marginal rev-
enue equals marginal cost:
MR = p 1 + 1 = MC. (11.7)
By rearranging terms, we can rewrite Equation 11.7 as
= . (11.8)
MC 1 + (1 / ε)
Equation 11.8 says that the ratio of the price to marginal cost depends only on the
elasticity of demand at the profit-maximizing quantity.
In our linear demand example in panel a of Figure 11.3, the elasticity of demand
is ε = –3 at the monopoly optimum where Q = 6. As a result, the ratio of price to
marginal cost is p/MC = 1/[1 + 1/(–3)] = 1.5, or p = 1.5MC. The profit-maximizing
price, $18, in panel a is 1.5 times the marginal cost of $12.
Table 11.2 illustrates how the ratio of price to marginal cost varies with the elas-
ticity of demand. When the elasticity is –1.01, only slightly elastic, the monopoly’s
profit-maximizing price is 101 times larger than its marginal cost: p/MC =
1/[1 + 1/(–1.01)] ≈ 101. As the elasticity of demand approaches negative infinity
(becomes perfectly elastic), the ratio of price to marginal cost shrinks to p/MC = 1.6
This table illustrates that not all monopolies can set high prices. A monopoly that
faces a horizontal, perfectly elastic demand curve, sets its price equal to its marginal
cost—just like a price-taking, competitive firm. If this monopoly were to raise its
price, it would lose all its sales, so it maximizes its profit by setting its price equal
to its marginal cost.
The more elastic the demand curve, the less a monopoly can raise its price with-
out losing sales. All else the same, the more close substitutes for the monopoly’s
good there are, the more elastic the demand the monopoly faces. For example,
6As the elasticity approaches negative infinity, 1/ε approaches zero, so 1/(1 + 1/ε) approaches 1/1 = 1.
Market Power 353
Table 11.2 Elasticity of Demand, Price, and Marginal Cost
Elasticity of Demand, Price/Marginal Cost Ratio, Lerner Index,
ε p/MC = 1/[1 + (1/ε)] (p – MC)/p = –1/ε
–1.01 101 0.99
←more elastic less elastic→
–1.1 11 0.91
–2 2 0.5
–3 1.5 0.33
–5 1.25 0.2
–10 1.11 0.1
–100 1.01 0.01
–∞ 1 0
Addison Wesley Longman has the monopoly right to produce and sell this textbook.
Many other publishers, however, have the rights to produce and sell similar microe-
conomics textbooks (though you wouldn’t like them as much). The demand
Addison Wesley Longman faces is much more elastic than it would be if no substi-
tutes were available. If you think this textbook is expensive, imagine what it would
cost if no substitutes were published!
Lerner Index Another way to show how the elasticity of demand affects a monopoly’s price rela-
tive to its marginal cost is to look at the firm’s Lerner Index (or price markup):7 the
ratio of the difference between price and marginal cost to the price: (p – MC)/p. This
measure is zero for a competitive firm because a competitive firm cannot raise its
price above its marginal cost. The greater the difference between price and marginal
cost, the larger the Lerner Index and the greater the monopoly’s ability to set price
above marginal cost.
We can express the Lerner Index in terms of the elasticity of demand by rearrang-
ing Equation 11.8:
p − MC
= − 1. (11.9)
Because MC ≥ 0 and p ≥ MC, 0 ≤ p – MC ≤ p, so the Lerner Index ranges from 0
to 1 for a profit-maximizing firm.8 Equation 11.9 confirms that a competitive firm
has a Lerner Index of zero because its demand curve is perfectly elastic.9 As Table
7This index is named after Abba Lerner, the economist who invented it.
8For the Lerner Index to be above 1, ε would have to be a negative fraction, indicating that the
demand curve was inelastic at the monopoly optimum. However, a profit-maximizing monopoly
never operates in the inelastic portion of its demand curve.
9As the elasticity of demand approaches negative infinity, the Lerner Index, –1/ε, approaches zero.
354 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
11.2 illustrates, the Lerner Index for a monopoly increases as the demand becomes
less elastic. If ε = –5, the monopoly’s markup (Lerner Index) is 1/5 = 0.2; if ε = –2,
the markup is 1/2 = 0.5; and if ε = –1.01, the markup is 0.99. Monopolies that face
demand curves that are only slightly elastic set prices that are multiples of their
marginal cost and have Lerner Indexes close to 1.
Application HUMANA HOSPITALS
As the table shows, Humana hospitals in 1991 had very large price–marginal cost
ratios and Lerner Indexes close to 1 on many supplies they sell to patients, appar-
ently because they faced elasticities of demand close to –1. For example,
Price Charged Hospitals’ Marginal Implicit Demand Lerner
Patients, p Cost, MC p/MC Elasticity, ε Index
Saline solution $44.90 $0.81 55.4 –1.02 0.98
Rubber arm pads for crutches $23.75 $0.90 26.4 –1.04 0.96
Rubber tips for crutches $15.95 $0.71 22.5 –1.05 0.96
Heating pad $118.00 $5.74 20.6 –1.05 0.95
Pair of crutches $103.65 $8.35 12.4 –1.09 0.92
Esophagus tube $1,205.50 $151.98 7.9 –1.14 0.87
Average, all supplies 2.3 –1.77 0.57
Humana’s Suburban Hospital in Louisville charges patients $44.90 for a con-
tainer of saline solution (salt water) that costs the hospital 81¢, so its price is
more than 55 times higher than its marginal cost, implying a price elasticity of
–1.02 and a Lerner Index of 0.98, which is close to the theoretical maximum.
Although the table highlights some of the extreme cases—the price–marginal cost
ratio for supplies averages “only” 227%—at least it doesn’t show the markups
at some of their hospitals on $9 Tylenol tablets and $455 nursing bras.
Sources of When will a monopoly face a relatively elastic demand curve and hence have little mar-
Market Power ket power? Ultimately, the elasticity of demand of the market demand curve depends
on consumers’ tastes and options. The more consumers want a good—the more will-
ing they are to pay “virtually anything” for it—the less elastic is the demand curve.
All else the same, the demand curve a firm (not necessarily a monopoly) faces
becomes more elastic as better substitutes for the firm’s product are introduced, more
firms enter the market selling the same product, or firms that provide the same service
locate closer to this firm. The demand curves for Xerox, the U.S. Postal Service, and
McDonald’s have become more elastic in recent decades for these three reasons.
When Xerox started selling its plain-paper copier, no other firm sold a close sub-
stitute. Other companies’ machines produced copies on special slimy paper that
yellowed quickly. As other firms developed plain-paper copiers, the demand curve
that Xerox faced became more elastic.
Market Power 355
The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) has a monopoly in first-class mail service. Today,
phone calls, faxes, and e-mail are excellent substitutes for many types of first-class
mail. The USPS had a monopoly in overnight delivery services until 1979. Now
Federal Express, United Parcel Service, and many other firms compete with the
USPS in providing overnight deliveries. Because of this new competition, the USPS’s
share of business and personal correspondence fell from 77% in 1988 to 59% in
1996, and its overnight-mail market fell to 4%.10 Thus over time the demand curves
the USPS faces for first-class mail and overnight service have shifted downward and
become more elastic.
As you drive down a highway, you may notice that McDonald’s restaurants are
spaced miles apart. The purpose of this spacing is to reduce the likelihood that two
McDonald’s outlets will compete for the same customer. Although McDonald’s can
prevent its own restaurants from competing with each other, it cannot prevent
Wendy’s or Burger King from locating near its restaurants. As other fast-food
restaurants open near a McDonald’s, that restaurant faces a more elastic demand.
What happens as a profit-maximizing monopoly faces more elastic demand? It
has to lower its price. The next application illustrates how a monopoly adjusts its
price as it changes its beliefs about the elasticity of demand it faces.
Application AIRPORT MONOPOLIES
Most airports grant a single firm monopoly rights to sell food and other
goods, a practice that evokes the oft-expressed sentiment that “the best way to
avoid being robbed in an airport is to bring your own food.” Host Marriott
Corporation has had a monopoly on concessions at the San Francisco
International Airport for 40 years. In 1995, however, it reduced its prices on
hundreds of items. One interpretation of this cut is that Marriott changed its
estimate of the elasticity of demand, ε, it faces for each of these goods.
We know Marriott’s price and the corresponding prices at a 7-Eleven.
Convenience stores like 7-Eleven typically charge more than grocery and other
stores for the items they sell. Thus the 7-Eleven prices are probably above
Marriott’s marginal cost, MC. Nonetheless, we use the 7-Eleven prices as a
conservative estimate of the true MC to calculate ε. (As a consequence, our
estimates of the elasticities of demand in the table are too high in absolute
7-Eleven Original New Airport
Price Airport Price εo Price εn
Bottled water 0.49 1.69 –1.4 1.49 –1.5
Kodak FunSaver Camera (24) 9.99 14.95 –3.0 10.99 –11.0
Life Savers 0.59 0.85 –3.3 0.69 –6.9
Snapple 0.99 2.25 –1.8 1.59 –2.7
10Passell, Peter, “Battered by Its Rivals,” New York Times, May 15, 1997:C1.
356 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
value—Marriott has more market power than our estimates indicate.) The table
shows estimates of the original elasticity, εo, and the new elasticity, εn, of demand
for several goods. Apparently Marriott decided that the demand curves for most
of these goods were substantially more elastic than it previously believed.
Why does the airport grant a monopoly to a single firm? The airport
authority captures these monopoly profits for itself by charging high rents.
Marriott pays $48 per square foot per month for its space, while retail space
in surrounding areas rents for as low as $1 to $3 per square foot. Though
Marriott charges high prices, it may not make positive economic profits if the
airport charges a high enough rent.
511.3 EFFECTS OF A SHIFT OF THE DEMAND CURVE
Shifts in the demand curve or marginal cost curve affect the monopoly optimum and
can have a wider variety of effects in a monopolized market than in a competitive
market. In a competitive market, the effect of a shift in demand on a competitive
firm’s output depends only on the shape of the marginal cost curve (Chapter 8). In
contrast, the effect of a shift in demand on a monopoly’s output depends on the
shapes of both the marginal cost curve and the demand curve.
As we saw in Chapter 8, a competitive firm’s marginal cost curve tells us every-
thing we need to know about the amount that firm will supply at any given market
price. The competitive firm’s supply curve is its upward-sloping marginal cost curve
(above its minimum average variable cost). A competitive firm’s supply behavior
does not depend on the shape of the market demand curve because it always faces
a horizontal demand curve at the market price. Thus if you know a competitive
firm’s marginal cost curve, you can predict how much that firm will produce at any
given market price.
In contrast, a monopoly’s output decision depends on the shapes of its marginal
cost curve and its demand curve. Unlike a competitive firm, a monopoly does not
have a supply curve. Knowing the monopoly’s marginal cost curve is not enough for
us to predict how much a monopoly will sell at any given price.
Figure 11.4 illustrates that the relationship between price and quantity is unique
in a competitive market but not in a monopoly market. If the market is competitive,
the initial equilibrium is e1 in panel a, where the original demand curve D1 inter-
sects the supply curve, MC, which is the sum of the marginal cost curves of a large
number of competitive firms. When the demand curve shifts to D2, the new com-
petitive equilibrium, e2, has a higher price and quantity. A shift of the demand curve
maps out competitive equilibria along the marginal cost curve, so for every equilib-
rium quantity, there is a single corresponding equilibrium price.
Now suppose there is a monopoly. As demand shifts from D1 to D2, the monopoly
optimum shifts from E1 to E2 in panel b, so the price rises but the quantity stays con-
stant, Q1 = Q2. Thus a given quantity can correspond to more than one monopoly-
optimal price. A shift in the demand curve may cause the monopoly-optimal price to
stay constant and the quantity to change or both price and quantity to change.
Welfare Effects of Monopoly 357
p, $ per unit (b) Monopoly
p, $ per unit
MC, Supply curve
D2 D1 D2 D1
Q1 Q2 Q, Units per year Q1= Q2 Q, Units per year
Figure 11.4 Effects of a Shift of the Demand price. (b) With a monopoly, this same shift of
Curve. (a) A shift of the demand curve from D1 demand causes the monopoly optimum to change
to D2 causes the competitive equilibrium to move from E1 to E2. The monopoly quantity stays the
from e1 to e2 along the supply curve (the horizon- same, but the monopoly price rises. Thus a shift
tal sum of the marginal cost curves of all the com- in demand does not map out a unique relation-
petitive firms). Because the competitive ship between price and quantity in a monopolized
equilibrium lies on the supply curve, each quantity market: The same quantity, Q1 = Q2, is associated
corresponds to only one possible equilibrium with two different prices, p1 and p2.
11.4 WELFARE EFFECTS OF MONOPOLY
Welfare, W (here defined as the sum of consumer surplus, CS, and producer surplus,
PS), is lower under monopoly than under competition. Chapter 9 showed that com-
petition maximizes welfare because price equals marginal cost. By setting its price
above its marginal cost, a monopoly causes consumers to buy less than the compet-
itive level of the good, so a deadweight loss to society occurs.
Graphing the We illustrate this loss using our continuing example. If the monopoly were to act
Welfare Loss like a competitive market and operate where its inverse demand curve, Equation
11.2, intersects its marginal cost (supply) curve, Equation 11.6,
p = 24 – Q = 2Q = MC,
it would sell Qc = 8 units of output at a price of $16, as in Figure 11.5. At this com-
petitive price, consumer surplus is area A + B + C and producer surplus is D + E.
If the firm acts like a monopoly and operates where its marginal revenue equals
its marginal cost, only 6 units are sold at the monopoly price of $18, and consumer
surplus is only A. Part of the lost consumer surplus, B, goes to the monopoly; but
the rest, C, is lost.
By charging the monopoly price of $18 instead of the competitive price of $16,
the monopoly receives $2 more per unit and earns an extra profit of area B = $12
358 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
p, $ per unit 24
A = $18 em
pm = 18 C = $2
B = $12
pc = 16 ec
MR = MC = 12 D = $60 E = $4
0 Qm = 6 Qc = 8 12 24
Q, Units per day
Competition Monopoly Change
Consumer Surplus, CS A+B+C A –B – C = ∆CS
Producer Surplus, PS D+E B+D B – E = ∆PS
Welfare, W = CS + PS A+B+C+D+E A+B+D –C – E = ∆W = DWL
Figure 11.5 Deadweight Loss of Monopoly. A marginal revenue curve intersects the marginal
competitive market would produce Qc = 8 at pc = cost curve. Under monopoly, consumer surplus is
$16, where the demand curve intersects the A, producer surplus is B + D, and the lost welfare
marginal cost (supply) curve. A monopoly pro- or deadweight loss of monopoly is –C – E.
duces only Qm = 6 at pm = $18, where the
on the Qm = 6 units it sells. The monopoly loses area E, however, because it sells
less than the competitive output. Consequently, the monopoly’s producer surplus
increases by B – E over the competitive level. (We know that its producer surplus
increases, B – E > 0, because the monopoly had the option of producing at the com-
petitive level and chose not to do so.)
Welfare Effects of Monopoly 359
Monopoly welfare is lower than competitive welfare. The deadweight loss of
monopoly is –C – E, which represents the consumer surplus and producer surplus
lost because less than the competitive output is produced. As in the analysis of a tax
in Chapter 9, the deadweight loss is due to the gap between price and marginal cost
at the monopoly output. At Qm = 6, the price, $18, is above the marginal cost, $12,
so consumers are willing to pay more for the last unit of output than it costs to
Application DEADWEIGHT LOSS OF THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
Lenard (1994) calculated the welfare losses from the monopoly of the USPS in
delivering third-class mail, which includes advertising circulars and mail-order
catalogs. The welfare cost of the postal service monopoly depends on how
much higher the price is above the USPS’s marginal cost and whether the USPS
produces inefficiently. If the USPS produces efficiently, the deadweight loss is
the reduction in consumer surplus not offset by a gain to the USPS or others.
If the USPS is inefficient, the deadweight loss is even greater.
Private mail carriers may deliver fliers and other pieces of mail that do not
have an individual’s name in the address, but they may not deliver addressed
mail such as third-class letters. On the basis of a survey of private mail carri-
ers, Lenard calculated that the private companies could deliver third-class mail
at a constant price of pc = 12.3¢ per piece in 1992. Assuming that the private
mail carriers are price takers, that price equals the marginal cost. This
marginal cost was only about three-quarters of the USPS monopoly price for
third-class mail, pm = 16.7¢.
The USPS delivered Qm = 49.8 billion pieces of mail in 1992. On the basis
of the USPS estimate of the elasticity of demand for third-class mail of –0.625,
Qc = 60.4 billion pieces would have been delivered at the competitive price.
Because the USPS is operating where demand is inelastic, ε = –0.625, its price
is less than the profit-maximizing level.
On the basis of these numbers, customers lose consumer surplus of $2.46 bil-
lion dollars, which is 30% of the $8.3 billion they spend on third-class bulk mail.
Of this lost consumer surplus, $237 million, the loss of area B in the graph, is a
deadweight loss—a loss to customers that is not gained by the USPS—and the
remaining $2.22 billion, area A, is the excess payment, (pm – pc)Qm, the USPS
gets by charging the monopoly price instead of the competitive price.
The USPS is obligated by statute to break even. Thus the $2.22 billion
transferred from customers to the USPS due to the high price of mail is
either wasted on inefficient production, used to subsidize other types of
mail, or transferred to postal workers through high wages. Knowing that
postal workers earn 21% more than comparable private-sector employees,
Lenard calculated that postal workers get up to $1.51 billion of the third-
class mail “profit.” He inferred that $0.95 billion (= $2.46 billion – $1.51
billion) is wasted through inefficient production. Much of this inefficiency
is due to the existence of post offices—especially in rural areas—that are
360 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
p, ¢ per piece of mail
pm = 16.7
A = $2.22 billion
pc = 12.3
0 Qm = 49.8 Qc = 60.4
Q, Billion pieces of third-class mail per year
too small to use optical character readers and barcode sorters, so workers
must sort by hand.
If the USPS produced efficiently, the deadweight loss would be B = $237 mil-
lion, the amount customers lose that is not transferred to the USPS. Because the
USPS produces inefficiently, however, the true deadweight loss to society is $1.19
billion: the sum of B and the $0.95 billion lost from production inefficiency.
Solved Problem 11.1 In our linear example, how does charging the monopoly a specific tax of τ = $8
per unit affect the monopoly optimum and the welfare of consumers, the monopoly,
and society (where society’s welfare includes the tax revenue)? What is the incidence
of the tax on consumers?
1. Determine how imposing the tax affects the monopoly optimum: In the
accompanying graph, the intersection of the marginal revenue curve, MR,
and the before-tax marginal cost curve, MC1, determines the monopoly
optimum quantity, Q1 = 6. At the before-tax optimum, e1, the price is
p1 = $18. The specific tax causes the monopoly’s before-tax marginal cost
curve, MC1 = 2Q, to shift upward by $8 to MC2 = MC1 + 8 = 2Q + 8.
After the tax is applied, the monopoly operates where MR = 24 – 2Q =
2Q + 8 = MC2. In the after-tax monopoly optimum, e2, the quantity is
Welfare Effects of Monopoly 361
p, $ per unit
MC 2 (after tax)
MC 1 (before tax)
p 2 = 20 τ = $8
B C e1
p 1 = 18
0 Q 2 = 4 Q1 = 6 12 24
Q, Units per day
Monopoly Before Tax Monopoly After Tax Change
Consumer Surplus, CS A+B+C A –B – C = ∆CS
Producer Surplus, PS D+E+G B+D B – E – G = ∆PS
Tax Revenues, T = τQ 0 G G = ∆T
Welfare, W = CS + PS + T A+B+C+D+E+G A+B+D+G –C – E = ∆W
Deadweight Loss, DWL –F –C – E – F –C – E = ∆DWL
Q2 = 4 and the price is p2 = $20. Thus output falls by ∆Q = 2 units and
the price increases by ∆p = $2.
2. Calculate the change in the various welfare measures: The graph shows
how the welfare measures change. Area G is the tax revenue collected by
the government, τQ = $32, because its height is the distance between the
two marginal cost curves, τ = $8, and its width is the output the monopoly
produces after the tax is imposed, Q = 4. The tax reduces consumer and
producer surplus and increases the deadweight loss. We know that pro-
ducer surplus falls because (a) the monopoly could have produced this
reduced output level in the absence of the tax but did not because it was
362 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
not the profit-maximizing output, so its before-tax profit falls, and (b) the
monopoly must now pay taxes. The before-tax deadweight loss from
monopoly is –F. The after-tax deadweight loss is –C – E – F, so the
increase in deadweight loss due to the tax is –C – E. The table below the
graph shows that consumer surplus changes by –B – C and producer sur-
plus by B – E – G.
3. Calculate the incidence of the tax: Because the tax goes from $0 to $8, the
change in the tax is ∆τ = $8. The incidence of the tax (Chapter 3) on con-
sumers is ∆p/∆τ = $2/$8 = 1. (The monopoly absorbs $6 of the tax and
passes on only $2.)11
5 Welfare Effects Solved Problem 11.1 illustrates that a specific sales tax (the monopoly pays the gov-
of Ad Valorem ernment τ dollars per unit sold) provides tax revenue but reduces welfare below
Versus even the monopoly level. Governments use ad valorem taxes more often than spe-
Specific Taxes cific taxes. Is there an advantage to using an ad valorem sales tax (the monopoly
pays αp per unit of output, where α is a fraction and p is the price charged)? The
answer is that a government raises more tax revenue with an ad valorem tax applied
to a monopoly than with a specific tax when α and τ are set so that the after-tax
output is the same with either tax, as we now show.12
In Figure 11.6, the before-tax market demand curve is D, and the corresponding
marginal revenue is MR. The before-tax monopoly optimum is e1. The MR curve
intersects the MC curve at Q1 units, which sell at a price of p1.
If the government imposes a specific tax τ, the monopoly’s after-tax demand
curve is Ds, which is the market demand curve D shifted downward by τ dollars.13
The corresponding marginal revenue curve, MRs, intersects the marginal cost
curve at Q2. In this after-tax equilibrium, e2, consumers pay p2 and the
monopoly receives ps = p2 – τ per unit. The government’s revenue from the spe-
cific tax is area A = τQ2.
If the government imposes an ad valorem tax α, the demand curve facing the
monopoly is Da. The gap between Da and D, which is the tax per unit, αp, is greater
at higher prices. By setting α appropriately, the corresponding marginal revenue
11In contrast to a competitive market, when a monopoly is taxed, the incidence of the tax on
consumers can exceed 100%, as Appendix 11B demonstrates.
12Chapter 3 shows that both taxes raise the same tax revenue in a competitive market. The taxes
raise different amounts when applied to monopolies or other noncompetitive firms. See Delipalla
and Keen (1992), Skeath and Trandel (1994), and Hamilton (1999).
we could capture the effect of a specific tax by shifting the marginal cost curve
upward by τ, as in our answer to Solved Problem 11.1.
Welfare Effects of Monopoly 363
p, $ per unit
ps = p 2 – τ
pa = (1 – α)p 2
Q2 Q1 Q, Units per year
MR s MR a
Figure 11.6 Ad Valorem Versus Specific Tax. A specific tax (τ) and an ad valorem
tax (α) that reduce the monopoly output by the same amount (from Q1 to Q2) raise
different amounts of tax revenues for the government. The tax revenue from the spe-
cific tax is area A = τQ2. The tax revenue from the ad valorem tax is A + B = αp2Q2.
curve, MRa, intersects the marginal cost curve at Q2, where consumers again pay
p2. Although the ad valorem tax reduces output by the same amount as the specific
tax, the ad valorem tax raises more revenue, areas A + B = αp2Q2.
Both sales taxes harm consumers by the same amount because they raise the price
consumers pay from p1 to p2 and reduce the quantity purchased from Q1 to Q2. The
ad valorem tax transfers more revenue from the monopoly to the government, so
the government prefers the ad valorem tax and the monopoly prefers the specific
tax. (Equivalently, if the government set τ and α so that they raised the same amount
of tax revenue, the ad valorem tax would reduce output and consumer surplus less
than the specific tax.)
Isn’t that amazing! It makes sense for governments to employ an ad valorem tax
rather than a specific tax, and they usually apply the ad valorem tax.
364 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
11.5 COST ADVANTAGES THAT CREATE MONOPOLIES
Why are some markets monopolized? Two key reasons are that a firm has a cost
advantage over other firms or that a government created the monopoly.14 If a low-
cost firm profitably sells at a price so low that other potential competitors with
higher costs would make losses, no other firm enters the market.
Sources of A firm can have a cost advantage over potential rivals for a number of reasons. One
Cost reason is that the firm controls a key input.15 For example, a firm that owns the only
Advantages quarry in a region is the only firm that can profitably sell gravel to local construc-
A second important reason why a firm may have lower costs is that the firm uses
a superior technology or has a better way of organizing production. Henry Ford’s
methods of organizing production using assembly lines and standardization allowed
him to produce cars at lower cost than rival firms until they copied his organiza-
When a firm develops a better production method that provides an advantage—
possibly enough of an advantage for the firm to be a monopoly—the firm must
either keep the information secret or obtain a patent, which provides government
protection from imitation. According to a survey of 650 research and development
managers of U.S. firms (Levin, Klevorick, Nelson, and Winter, 1987), secrecy is
more commonly used than patents to prevent duplication of new or improved pro-
cesses by other firms but less commonly used to protect new products.
Natural A market has a natural monopoly if one firm can produce the total output of the mar-
Monopoly ket at lower cost than several firms could.16 With a natural monopoly, it is more effi-
cient to have only one firm produce than more firms. Believing that they are natural
monopolies, governments frequently grant monopoly rights to public utilities to pro-
vide essential goods or services such as water, gas, electric power, or mail delivery.
If a firm has economies of scale (Chapter 7) at all levels of output, its average cost
curve falls as output increases for any observed level of output. If all potential firms
14In later chapters, we discuss three other means by which monopolies are created. One method
is the merger of several firms into a single firm (Chapter 13). This method creates a monopoly if
new firms fail to enter the market. A second method is for firms to coordinate their activities and
set their prices as a monopoly would (Chapter 13). Firms that act collectively in this way are
called a cartel. A third method is for a monopoly to use strategies that discourage other firms
from entering the market (Chapter 14).
15Chapter 14 discusses in greater detail how one firm may control an essential facility: a scarce
resource that a rival needs to use to survive.
16If the cost for Firm i to produce qi is C(qi), the condition for a natural monopoly is
C(Q) < C(q1) + C(q2) + . . . + C(qn),
where Q = q1 + q2 + . . . + qn is the sum of the output of any n ≥ 2 firms.
Cost Advantages that Create Monopolies 365
have the same strictly declining average cost curve, this market has a natural
monopoly, as we now illustrate.17
A company that supplies water to homes incurs a high fixed cost, F, to build a
plant and connect houses to the plant. The firm’s marginal cost, m, of supplying
water is constant, so its marginal cost curve is horizontal and its average cost,
AC = m + F/Q, declines as output rises.
Figure 11.7 shows such marginal and average cost curves where m = $10 and F
= $60. If the market output is 12 units per day, one firm produces that output at an
average cost of $15, or a total cost of $180 (= $15 × 12). If two firms each produce
6 units, the average cost is $20 and the cost of producing the market output is $240
(= $20 × 12), which is greater than the cost with a single firm.
If the two firms divided total production in any other way, their cost of produc-
tion would still exceed the cost of a single firm (as the following question asks you
to prove). The reason is that the marginal cost per unit is the same no matter how
AC, MC, $ per unit
20 AC = 10 + 60/Q
MC = 10
0 6 12 15
Q, Units per day
Figure 11.7 Natural Monopoly. This natural monopoly has a strictly declining aver-
17A firm may be a natural monopoly even if its cost curve does not fall at all levels of output. If
a U-shaped average cost curve reaches its minimum at 100 units of output, it may be less costly
for only one firm to produce an output of 101 units even though average cost is rising at that
output. Thus a cost function with economies of scale everywhere is a sufficient but not a neces-
sary condition for natural monopoly.
366 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
many firms produce, but each additional firm adds a fixed cost, which raises the
cost of producing a given quantity. If only one firm provides water, the cost of build-
ing a second plant and a second set of pipes is avoided.
Solved Problem 11.2 A firm that delivers Q units of water to households has a total cost of C(Q) =
mQ + F. If any entrant would have the same cost, does this market have a natural
Determine whether costs rise if two firms produce a given quantity: Let q1
be the output of Firm 1 and q2 be the output of Firm 2. The combined cost of
these two firms producing Q = q1 + q2 is
C(q1) + C(q2) = (mq1 + F) + (mq2 + F) = m(q1 + q2) + 2F = mQ + 2F.
If a single firm produces Q, its cost is C(Q) = mQ + F. Thus the cost of pro-
ducing any given Q is greater with two firms than with one firm, so this mar-
ket has a natural monopoly.
Application ELECTRIC POWER UTILITIES
According to the estimates of Christensen and Greene (1976), the average cost
curve for U.S. electric-power-producing firms in 1970 was U-shaped, reaching
its minimum at 33 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year (see graph). Thus
Cost, $ per thousand kWh
0 33 66
Q, Billion kWh per year
Government Actions that Create Monopolies 367
whether an electric power utility was a natural monopoly depended on the
demand it faced.
For example, if the demand curve for an electric utility was D on the graph,
the quantity demanded was less than 33 billion kWh per year at any price, so
the electric utility operated in the strictly declining section of its average cost
curve and was a natural monopoly. In 1970, most electric companies were
operating in regions of substantial economies of scale. Newport Electric pro-
duced only 0.5 billion kWh per year, and Iowa Southern Utilities produced 1.3
billion kWh per year.
A few of these firms operated in the upward-sloping section of the average
cost curve and were not natural monopolies. The largest electric utility in
1970, Southern, produced 54 billion kWh per year. It was not a natural
monopoly because two firms could produce that quantity at 3¢ less per thou-
sand kWh than a single firm could. As the graph shows, two firms producing
33 billion kWh each have an average cost of $4.79 per thousand kWh, while
one firm producing 66 billion kWh has an average cost of $4.85, or 6¢ more
per thousand kWh.
11.6 GOVERNMENT ACTIONS THAT CREATE MONOPOLIES
Governments create many monopolies. Sometimes governments own and manage
monopolies. In the United States, as in most countries, the postal service is a govern-
ment monopoly. Indeed, the U.S. Constitution explicitly grants the government the
right to establish a postal service. Many local governments own and operate public
utility monopolies that provide garbage collection, electricity, water, gas, phone ser-
vices, and other utilities.
Frequently, however, governments create monopolies by preventing competing
firms from entering a market. For example, when a government grants a patent, it
limits entry and allows the patent-holding firm to earn a monopoly profit from an
invention—a reward for developing the new product.
Barriers to By preventing other firms from entering a market, governments create monopolies.
Entry Typically, governments create monopolies in one of three ways: by making it diffi-
cult for new firms to obtain a license to operate, by granting a firm the rights to be
a monopoly, or by auctioning the rights to be a monopoly.
Frequently, firms need government licenses to operate. If governments make it
difficult for new firms to obtain licenses, the first firm may maintain its monopoly.
Until recently, many U.S. cities required that new hospitals or other inpatient facil-
ities demonstrate the need for a new facility to obtain a certificate of need, which
allowed them to enter the market.
Government grants of monopoly rights have been common for public utilities.
Instead of running a public utility itself, a government gives a private company the
monopoly rights to operate the utility. As discussed in the application on airport
monopoly concessions, a government may capture some of the monopoly profits by
368 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
charging a high rent to the monopoly. Alternatively, government officials may cap-
ture the rents for monopoly rights by means of bribes.
Governments around the world have privatized many state-owned monopolies in the
past several decades. By selling its monopolies to private firms, a government can cap-
ture the value of future monopoly earnings today. However, for political or other rea-
sons, governments frequently sell at a lower price that does not capture all future profits.
Application GOVERNMENT SALES OF MONOPOLIES
Around the world, governments sell monopoly rights for money or promises
of service. In 1984, the British government sold $4.9 billion worth of shares
in British Telecom, the national telephone company. In 1995, France sold all
but 10% of its tobacco monopoly, Seita, which makes Gauloise and Gitane
cigarettes. In the United States, the Clinton administration auctioned off large
parts of the airwaves for new wireless phone services and other uses. Recently,
Mexico and Britain auctioned television stations.
Local governments frequently auction monopoly rights to the highest bidder.
San Francisco auctioned the monopoly rights to store cars towed for illegal
parking. The monopoly, City Tow, collects $40 per car, of which $15.03 goes to
the city (the losing company had proposed to give the city only $7.50). Similarly,
many localities award cable television monopolies to the highest bidder.
In recent years, nearly a dozen cities have sold a chosen cola company the
exclusive rights to vend its products in city parks and on other municipal prop-
erty. Huntington Beach, California, sold Coca-Cola 10 years of exclusive
rights for nearly $6 million in cash and services, and San Diego granted Pepsi
12 years of exclusive rights for $6.7 million.
Sometimes monopoly rights are granted in exchange for other commitments.
The United States granted a billionaire investor a 30-year monopoly on the
cruise business to Hawaii in exchange for a commitment to buy two U.S.-built
cruise ships for about $400 million each. In 1996, South Africa’s parliament
extended by five years the monopoly held by the telephone company Telkom
on the condition that the firm install 2.8 million new lines and greatly improve
service. If Telkom meets these goals, its reward is a sixth year of monopoly.
Patents If a firm cannot prevent imitation by keeping its discovery secret, it may obtain gov-
ernment protection to prevent other firms from duplicating its discovery and enter-
ing the market. Virtually all countries provide such protection through a patent: an
exclusive right granted to the inventor to sell a new and useful product, process,
substance, or design for a fixed period of time. A patent grants an inventor the right
to be the monopoly provider of the good for a number of years.
Patent Length. The length of a patent varies across countries. The U.S. Constitution
explicitly gives the government the right to grant authors and inventors exclusive
Government Actions that Create Monopolies 369
rights to their writings (copyrights) and to their discoveries (patents) for limited peri-
ods of time. Traditionally, U.S. patents lasted 17 years from the date they were granted,
but the United States agreed in 1995 to change its patent law as part of a GATT agree-
ment. Now U.S. patents last for 20 years after the date the inventor files for patent pro-
tection. The length of protection is likely to be shorter under the new rules, because it
frequently takes more than three years after filing to obtain final approval of a patent.
Many European countries granted patent protection for very short periods of
time, but these patents could be renewed upon the payment of a fee. The renewal
fee was due in two years in France, three in Germany, and five in the United
Kingdom. A patent could be renewed until it was 16 years old in Britain, 18 in
Germany, and 20 in France.
Patents Stimulate Research. A firm with a patent monopoly sets a high price that
results in deadweight loss. Why, then, do governments grant patent monopolies?
The main reason is that inventive activity would fall if there were no patent monop-
olies or other incentives to inventors. The costs of developing a new drug or new
computer chip are often hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. If anyone
could copy a new drug or chip and compete with the inventor, few individuals or
firms would undertake costly research. Thus the government is explicitly trading off
the long-run benefits of additional inventions against the shorter-term harms of
monopoly pricing during the period of patent protection.
Application A DRUG PATENT
In 1977, SmithKline Beckman (soon to be Glaxo-SmithKline) received a patent
for its revolutionary anti-ulcer drug, Tagamet, which gave it the monopoly
rights to sell Tagamet in the United States. It was sold as a prescription drug.
Tagamet blocks the histamine-2 (H2) receptor on the cells of the stomach
that produce gastric acid and thus reduces the amount of acid produced. This
drug is much more effective than previous anti-ulcer drugs, which neutralize
acids after they are produced. Three other H2 drugs entered the market from
1983 to 1988: Zantac in June 1983, Pepcid in October 1986, and Axid in
April 1988. After 1994, when Tagamet’s patent expired, other firms started
selling generic forms of Tagamet.
Thus from 1977 to late 1983, Tagamet was the only H2 drug on the mar-
ket and had no close substitute. From late 1983 to 1994, the market for H2
drugs was oligopolistic. Today, there is a more complex market structure in
which both branded goods (Tagamet, Zantac, Pepcid, and Axid) and
unbranded, generic Tagamet copies are sold. In addition, Tagamet, Zantac,
Pepcid, and Axid are now available without a prescription.
Using a few assumptions, we can calculate the pricing and welfare implica-
tions of SmithKline’s monopoly in early 1983, just before Tagamet lost its
monopoly. Before Zantac entered the market, about 1.3 million daily doses of
oral Tagamet were sold at pharmacies at a price of about 75¢ per daily dose
370 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
in 1983 dollars. Though the firm’s cost data are not publicly available, some
unofficial industry estimates put the marginal cost (and average variable cost)
of an H2 drug at about 10% of the price, or MC = AVC = 7.5¢. If we rear-
range Equation 11.9, we can use this relationship between marginal cost and
price to calculate the elasticity of demand that SmithKline faced if it were max-
imizing its short-run profits:
ε = − = − ≈ −1.11.
p − MC 0.75 − 0.075
The demand it faced was only slightly elastic: A 1% increase in price caused
quantity to fall by only a little more than 1%.
If we assume that the demand curve is linear and that the elasticity of
demand is –1.11 at the monopoly optimum (1.3 million daily doses sold at
75¢ a dose), then the inverse demand function is
p = 1.43 – 0.52Q.
p, ¢ per daily dose
A ≈ $0.44
B ≈ $0.88 million
C ≈ $0.44 million
ec MC = AVC
0 1.30 2.61 2.75
MR Q, Million daily doses of Tagamet
This demand curve (see graph) has a slope of –0.52, hits the price axis at $1.43
and the quantity axis at 2.75 million daily doses. The corresponding marginal
MR = 1.43 – 1.04Q,
strikes the price axis at $1.43 and has twice the slope, –1.04, as the demand
Government Actions that Create Monopolies 371
The marginal revenue and marginal cost curves intersect,
MR = 1.43 – 1.04Q = 0.075 = MC,
at the profit-maximizing quantity of about 1.3 million daily doses. The corre-
sponding price is 75¢.
Had Tagamet been sold at a price equal to its marginal cost, 7.5¢, consumer
surplus would have equaled areas A + B + C, which, given our linearity and
other assumptions, was about $1.77 million per day. At the higher monopoly
price of 75¢, consumer surplus was only A ≈ $0.44 million per day, so con-
sumers lost consumer surplus of B + C, or $1.33 million per day. Part of this
loss to consumers, B = ($0.75 – $0.075) × 1.3 million daily doses ≈ $0.88 mil-
lion per day, was a transfer from consumers to the firm, but the rest, C ≈
$0.44 million per day or $161 million per year, was the deadweight loss from
monopoly pricing. SmithKline’s profit was its producer surplus, B, minus its
SmithKline reported selling $14 billion of Tagamet during the 17 years
its patent was in force. The gigantic rewards to be had from a successful
drug provide a major incentive to firms to invest in developing new phar-
Were it not for patent protection, other companies could duplicate a new
drug—as illustrated by the entry of generic copies of Tagamet when its patent
expired—and competition would drive economic profits toward zero,
reducing the financial incentive to engage in research.
It is extremely expensive to bring a new drug to market. Firms must pay
for conducting research, winning patent approval, developing the product,
performing clinical trials, and obtaining final approval from the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) to sell the drug, based on a demonstration of effi-
cacy and safety. According to one U.S. government agency’s estimate, the
before-tax cost of developing a new pharmaceutical averages $359 million
per drug (the after-tax cost is $194 million). Moreover, there’s no guarantee
that a drug will be successful. Tagamet was one of the most profitable drugs
of all time; however, many other drugs, though costly to develop, produce
Thus the justification for letting patents create monopolies is that the
monopoly profits spur new research. Many people benefit greatly from a drug
like Tagamet. The monetary value of the relief from ulcers they received in the
short run, when they bought Tagamet at the monopoly price, is area A; the
value in the long run after the patent expired, when they buy the same drug at
marginal cost, is area A + B + C.18
18According to some estimates, the rate of surgical operations for ulcers dropped from 155,000
in 1977, when Tagamet was introduced, to around 16,000 per year by 1991. Given that ulcer
surgery costs $25,000 compared to H2 drugs’ cost of about $1,000, patients’ net savings in
out-of-pocket costs is over $3 billion per year.
372 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
Alternatives to Patents. Instead of using patents to spur research, the government
could give research grants or offer prizes. Rather than trying these alternative
approaches, Congress has modified the patent system. In the 1960s and 1970s, the
effective life of a patent on a drug shrank because of the additional time it took to
get FDA approval to sell the drug. By 1978, the average drug had patent protec-
tion for fewer than 10 years. The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term
Restoration Act of 1984 restored up to three years of the part of the patent life that
was lost while the firm demonstrated efficacy and safety to the FDA. At the same
time, the act made it easier for generic products to enter at the end of the patent
period. Thus the law aimed both to encourage the development of new drugs by
increasing the reward—the monopoly period—and to stimulate price competition
at the end of the period.
11.7 GOVERNMENT ACTIONS THAT REDUCE MARKET POWER
Some governments act to reduce or eliminate monopolies’ market power. Most
Western countries have laws forbidding a firm from driving other firms out of the
market so as to monopolize it. Many governments either regulate monopolies—
especially those that the government has created—or destroy monopolies by
breaking them up into smaller, independent firms or encouraging other firms to
enter the market.
Regulating Governments limit monopolies’ market power in a number of ways. Most utilities,
Monopolies for example, are subject to direct regulation. One method governments use to
limit the harms of monopoly is to place a ceiling on the price that a monopoly
Optimal Price Regulation. In some markets, the government can eliminate the dead-
weight loss of monopoly by requiring that a monopoly charge no more than the
competitive price. We use our earlier linear example to illustrate this type of regula-
tion in Figure 11.8.
If the government doesn’t regulate the profit-maximizing monopoly, the
monopoly optimum is em, at which 6 units are sold at the monopoly price of $18.
Suppose that the government sets a ceiling price of $16, the price at which the
marginal cost curve intersects the market demand curve. Because the monopoly can-
not charge more than $16 per unit, the monopoly’s regulated demand curve is hor-
izontal at $16 (up to 8 units) and is the same as the market demand curve at lower
prices. The marginal revenue, MRr, corresponding to the regulated demand curve is
horizontal where the regulated demand curve is horizontal (up to 8 units) and
equals the marginal revenue curve, MR, corresponding to the market demand curve
at larger quantities.
The regulated monopoly sets its output at 8 units, where MRr equals its marginal
cost, MC, and charges the maximum permitted price of $16. The regulated firm still
Government Actions that Reduce Market Power 373
p, $ per unit MC
A Regulated demand
0 6 8 12 24
Q, Units per day
Monopoly Without Monopoly with
Regulation Optimal Regulation Change
Consumer Surplus, CS A A+B+C B + C = ∆CS
Producer Surplus, PS B+D D+E E – B = ∆PS
Welfare, W = CS + PS A+B+D A+B+C+D+E C + E = ∆W
Deadweight Loss, DWL –C – E 0 C + E = ∆DWL
Figure 11.8 Optimal Price Regulation. If the where MRr = MC, selling the same quantity,
government sets a price ceiling at $16, where the 8 units, at the same price, $16, as a competitive
monopoly’s marginal cost curve hits the demand industry would. The regulation eliminates the
curve, the new demand curve the monopoly faces monopoly deadweight loss, C + E. Consumer
has a kink at 8 units, and the corresponding surplus, A + B + C, and producer surplus, D + E,
marginal revenue curve, MRr, “jumps” at that are the same as under competition.
quantity. The regulated monopoly sets its output
makes a profit, because its average cost is less than $16 at 8 units. The optimally reg-
ulated monopoly optimum, eo, is the same as the competitive equilibrium, where
marginal cost (supply) equals the market demand curve.19 Thus setting a price ceiling
374 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
where the MC curve and market demand curve intersect eliminates the deadweight
loss of monopoly.
How do we know that this regulation is optimal? The answer is that this regu-
lated outcome is the same as would occur if this market were competitive, where
welfare is maximized (Chapter 9). As the table accompanying Figure 11.8 shows,
the deadweight loss of monopoly, C + E, is eliminated by this optimal regulation.
Nonoptimal Price Regulation. Welfare is reduced if the government does not set the
price optimally. Suppose that the government sets the regulated price below the opti-
mal level, which is $16 in our example. If it sets the price below the firm’s minimum
average cost, the firm shuts down. If that happens, the deadweight loss equals the
sum of the consumer plus producer surplus under optimal regulation, A + B + C +
D + E.
If the government sets the price ceiling below the optimally regulated price but
high enough that the firm does not shut down, consumers who are lucky enough
to buy the good are better off because they can buy goods at a lower price than
with optimal regulation. Some customers, however, are frustrated because the
monopoly will not sell them the good, as we show next. There is a deadweight loss
because less output is sold than with optimal regulation. (Problem 10 at the end of
the chapter asks you to determine the effects of a regulated price that is above the
Solved Problem 11.3 Suppose that the government sets a price, p2, that is below the monopoly-
optimal level, p1, but above the monopoly’s minimum average cost. How do the price,
the quantity sold, the quantity demanded, and welfare under this regulation compare
to those under optimal regulation?
1. Describe the optimally regulated outcome: With optimal regulation, e1,
the price is set at p1, where the market demand curve intersects the
monopoly’s marginal cost curve on the accompanying graph. The opti-
mally regulated monopoly sells Q1 units.
2. Describe the outcome when the government regulates the price at p2:
Where the market demand is above p2, the regulated demand curve for the
19The monopoly produces at eo only if the regulated price is greater than its average variable
cost. Here the regulated price, $16, exceeds the average variable cost at 8 units of $8. Indeed, the
firm makes a profit because the average cost at 8 units is $9.50.
Government Actions that Reduce Market Power 375
p, $ per unit
Market demand MC
p1 e1 Regulated demand
Q 2 Q1 Qd Q, Units per day
Monopoly with Monopoly with a
Optimal Regulation Low Regulated Price Change
Consumer Surplus, CS A+B A+C C – B = ∆CS
Producer Surplus, PS C+D+E E –C – D = ∆PS
Welfare, W = CS + PS A+B+C+D+E A+C+E –B – D = ∆W = DWL
monopoly is horizontal at p2 (up to Qd). The corresponding marginal rev-
enue curve, MR r , is horizontal where the regulated demand curve is
horizontal and equals the marginal revenue curve corresponding to the
market demand curve, MR, where the regulated demand curve is down-
ward sloping. The monopoly maximizes its profit by selling Q2 units at p2.
The new regulated monopoly optimum is e2, where MRr intersects MC.
The firm does not shut down when regulated as long as its average vari-
able cost at Q2 is less than p2.
376 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
3. Compare the outcomes: The quantity that the monopoly sells falls from
Q1 to Q2 when the government lowers its price ceiling from p1 to p2. At
that low price, consumers want to buy Qd, so there is excess demand
equal to Qd – Q2. Compared to optimal regulation, welfare is lower by at
least B + D.20
Problems in Regulating. Governments face several problems in regulating monopo-
lies. First, because they do not know the actual demand and marginal cost curves,
governments may set the price at the wrong level. Second, many governments use
regulations that are less efficient than price regulation. Third, regulated firms may
bribe or otherwise influence government regulators to help the firms rather than
society as a whole.
Because of limited information about the demand and marginal cost curves, gov-
ernments may set a price ceiling above or below the competitive level. Moreover, a
regulatory agency may have to set the price higher than is optimal because it cannot
offer a subsidy.
If the regulatory agency were to set the price equal to a natural monopoly’s
marginal cost, the price would be below the firm’s average cost. The monopoly
would threaten to shut down unless the regulatory agency were to subsidize it or
raise the price.
To illustrate this problem, we calculate how setting the price too low would affect
the electric power monopoly in Kyushu, Japan.21 In the absence of regulation and
in light of the curves in Figure 11.9, this firm maximizes its profit by operating
where its marginal cost equals its marginal revenue, where it sells 23 billion kWh at
¥30.3 per hundred kWh and makes a profit equal to area A.
This firm would lose money if it faced a price ceiling of ¥19.5, where the demand
curve intersects the marginal cost curve at 34 billion kWh. At that quantity, its aver-
age cost of ¥21.9 is greater than the price ceiling, and the firm loses an amount equal
to area B. Thus if the government wants the firm to charge a price equal to marginal
cost, it would have to subsidize the firm by at least B to keep it from shutting down.
Typically, it is politically infeasible for a government regulatory agency to subsi-
dize a firm. Instead, the agency might set the price at ¥22.3, at which the demand
curve intersects the average cost curve and the monopoly breaks even. There is still
a deadweight loss because that price is above marginal cost, but the deadweight loss
is smaller than if the monopoly were unregulated.
Unfortunately, regulation is often not effective when regulators are captured:
influenced by the firms they regulate. Typically, this influence is more subtle than an
20The welfare loss is greater if unlucky consumers waste time trying to buy the good unsuccess-
fully or if goods are not allocated optimally among consumers. A consumer who values the good
at only p2 may be lucky enough to buy it, while a consumer who values the good at p1 or more
may not be able to obtain it.
21The cost curves in this example are based on the estimated short-run average cost curve in
Nemoto, Nakanishi, and Madono (1993). To create an example of a possible demand curve, we
assume that the demand is linear and that the electricity demand of Japanese consumers at the
observed output is the same as that of American consumers (Maddock, Castano, and Vella, 1992).
Government Actions that Reduce Market Power 377
p, Yen (¥) per hundred kWh 53
19.5 B e3
0 23 31 34 54
Q, Billion kWh per year
Figure 11.9 Regulating an Electric Utility. If the regulate price so that the utility breaks even, e2.
electric utility is an unregulated, profit-maximiz- Alternatively, the government may regulate the
ing monopoly, e1, it sets its output at 23 billion utility to behave like a price taker, e3. If so, the
kWh and charges ¥30.3 per hundred kWh and government must subsidize the utility by area B to
makes a profit of area A. The government may keep it from shutting down.
outright bribe. Many American regulators have worked in the industry before they
became regulators and hence are sympathetic to those firms.22 Many regulators
hope to obtain good jobs in the industry eventually, so they don’t want to offend
potential employers. Other regulators, relying on industry experts for their infor-
mation, may be misled or at least heavily influenced by the industry. For example,
the California Public Utilities Commission urged telephone and cable companies to
negotiate among themselves as to how they wanted to open local phone markets to
22For example, before his resignation in 1995, a California Public Utilities Commissioner (PUC)
enjoyed friendly games of racquetball with a lobbyist for Southern California Edison Company, a
utility that is regulated by the PUC. Another commissioner played golf with an Edison lobbyist
as the pair toured England with top energy lobbyists on a trip paid for by a foundation with
close ties to the California energy industry. California electricity rates were 50% above the
national average at the time. (Sandoval, Ricardo, “PUC, Utilities: Too Close for Comfort?” San
Francisco Examiner, March 26, 1995:B1.)
378 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
competition by 1997.23 Arguing that these influences are inherent, some economists
contend that price and other types of regulation are unlikely to result in efficiency.
Increasing Encouraging competition is an alternative to regulation as a means of reducing the
Competition harms of monopoly. When a government has created a monopoly by preventing
entry, it can quickly reduce the monopoly’s market power by allowing other firms
to enter. As new firms enter the market, the former monopoly must lower its price
to compete, so welfare rises. Many governments are actively encouraging entry into
telephone, electricity, and other utility markets that were formerly monopolized.
Similarly, a government may end a ban on imports so that a domestic monopoly
faces competition from foreign firms. If costs for the domestic firm are the same
as costs for the foreign firms and there are many foreign firms, the former
monopoly becomes just one of many competitive firms. As the market becomes
competitive, consumers pay the competitive price, and the deadweight loss of
monopoly is eliminated.
Governments around the world are increasing competition in formerly monopo-
lized markets. For example, many U.S. and European governments are forcing for-
mer telephone and energy monopolies to compete. See www.awlonline.com/perloff,
“Ending the Monopoly in Telephone Service” and “Deregulating Energy.”
Application MONOPOLY IN NAMES
The U.S. government established Network Solutions, Inc., as the exclusive reg-
istrar of Internet domain names in 1993. By 1999, this monopoly had regis-
tered 5 million names ending with .com, .net, and .org and was logging new
domain names at a rate of 400,000 per month. It made large profits each year.
In 1998 it posted an $11.2 million profit on revenue of almost $94 million. In
the first half of 1999, its net income increased 135%, and its estimated value
was $2.2 billion.
In the late 1990s, the U.S. government called for an end to this monopoly
so as to lower price. Network Solutions struck a deal with the U.S. govern-
ment whereby it retained control of the .com addresses, thought to be the
crown jewel of Internet domains. The firm also agreed to pay the government
$1.25 million, to reduce the wholesale price it charges rivals to enter new reg-
istrations into the Internet’s main database from $9 to $6, and to provide pub-
lic access to its directory.
In 1999, the U.S. government authorized some 70 registrar companies to
compete with the original monopoly. One, Ipderdome, announced that it
would charge $10 a year, well below Network Solutions’ $35 annual fee ($70
fee for an initial two-year registration). Thus competition is expected to lower
the monopoly pricing.
23Groves,Martha, “PUC Transfers Call on Open Phone Market,” Los Angeles Times, December
Government Actions that Reduce Market Power 379
In the United Kingdom, the comparable registrar is the nonprofit Nominet
(consisting of 1,000 members), which charges £80 per registration (about half
again as much as the U.S. price) that ends in co.uk. A debate is raging as to
whether to break up this organization and convert it to a competitive market.
How important is a domain name, and how much is the monopoly right to
use it worth? The right name is worth a lot. A 21-year-old named Eric MacIver,
registered the name Drugs.com. After intensive bidding in 1999, he sold the
name for $823,456. And the Internet search company AltaVista (owned by
Compaq Computers), which did not own the Web address www.altavista.com,
reportedly paid $3.3 million for that domain name in 1998.
Dominant Sometimes when a monopoly ends, the former monopoly maintains a cost advan-
Firm and tage over later entrants. Suppose that the government eliminates an import restric-
Competitive tion and a number of foreign firms enter the market. These firms have higher costs
Fringe than the domestic firm because of shipping costs. Each foreign firm is such a small
part of the market that it acts as a price-taking competitive firm.
The former monopoly becomes a dominant firm: a price-setting firm that com-
petes with price-taking firms. Small price-taking firms that compete with a domi-
nant firm are called the competitive fringe (or fringe).
The dominant firm maximizes its profit given its cost curves and the demand
curve it faces. Before the entry of the fringe, the monopoly faces the market demand
curve, D in Figure 11.10. The fringe takes some of the market demand from the for-
mer monopoly. As a result, the demand curve the dominant firm faces after the
fringe enters is a residual demand curve: the market demand that is not met by other
sellers (the competitive fringe) at any given price (see Chapter 8).
The residual demand curve for the dominant firm is the horizontal difference
between the market demand curve and the fringe supply curve: At any given price,
p, the residual demand for the dominant firm, Dr, is
Dr(p) = D(p) – Sf(p),
where Sf is the supply curve of the fringe. As Figure 11.10 shows, the fringe supplies
nothing at p1 or any lower price, so the residual demand is the same as the market
demand. At p*, the residual demand is q*, which equals the market demand, Q*,
minus the fringe supply, Q*. At p2, the fringe supplies as much as the market
demands (Sf intersects D at p2), so the residual demand is zero.
The dominant firm’s marginal revenue curve is MRr, which corresponds to the
residual demand curve, Dr. The dominant firm maximizes its profit at point d by
setting a price of p*, where it sells q* units—the quantity where MRr intersects its
marginal cost curve, MCd. The fringe sells Q* for p*, at point f. At the market equi-
librium, point e, the total amount that the dominant firm and the fringe sell, q* +
Q*, equals the quantity the market demands at that price, Q*, so neither consumers
nor producers want to change their behavior.
380 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
p, $ per unit
f d e MC d
Q, Units of output per year
Figure 11.10 Dominant Firm–Competitive Fringe Equilibrium. The residual demand
for the dominant firm, Dr, is the horizontal difference between the market demand
curve, D, and the supply curve of the fringe firms, Sf. The dominant firm maximizes
its profit at d by setting a price of p* and selling qd units where its residual demand
curve, MRr, intersects its marginal cost curve, MCd. The fringe operates at point f,
and the market equilibrium is point e.
Because of the upward-sloping supply curve of the fringe, the dominant firm’s
residual demand curve, Dr, lies below and is flatter than the market demand curve,
D, that the monopoly faced. As a result, the dominant firm faces a more elastic
demand than the monopoly did, which causes the dominant firm to set a lower
price. At this lower price, consumers demand more, and the dominant firm and the
fringe produce more collectively than the monopoly did alone. Thus the fringe
erodes but does not eliminate the dominant firm’s market power. Consumers bene-
fit from the entry of the fringe, and some, but not all, of the deadweight loss under
monopoly is eliminated.
1. Monopoly profit maximization: Like any firm, a price at the profit-maximizing output.
monopoly—a single seller—maximizes its profit 2. Market power: Market power is the ability of a
by setting its output so that its marginal revenue firm to charge a price above marginal cost and earn
equals its marginal cost. The monopoly makes a a positive profit. The more elastic the demand the
positive profit if its average cost is less than the monopoly faces at the quantity at which it maxi-
mizes its profit, the closer its price to its marginal In markets with substantial economies of scale, the
cost and the closer the Lerner Index or price single seller is called a natural monopoly because
markup, (p – MC)/p, to zero, the competitive level. total production costs would rise if more than one
3. Effects of a shift of the demand curve: Because a firm produced.
monopoly does not have a supply curve, the effect 6. Government actions that create monopolies: Govern-
of a shift in demand on a monopoly’s output ments may establish government-owned and -oper-
depends on the shapes of both its marginal cost ated monopolies. They may also create private
curve and its demand curve. As a monopoly’s monopolies by establishing barriers to entry that
demand curve shifts, price and output may change prevent other firms from competing. Nations grant
in the same direction or different directions. patents, which give inventors monopoly rights for a
4. Welfare effects of monopoly: Because a monop- limited period of time.
oly’s price is above its marginal cost, too little out- 7. Government actions that reduce market power: A
put is produced, and society suffers a deadweight government can eliminate the welfare harm of a
loss. The monopoly makes higher profit than it monopoly by forcing the firm to set its price at the
would if it acted as a price taker. Consumers are competitive level. If the government sets the price
worse off, buying less output at a higher price. at a different level or otherwise regulates nonopti-
5. Cost advantages that create monopolies: A firm mally, welfare at the regulated monopoly optimum
may be a monopoly if it controls a key input, has is lower than in the competitive equilibrium. A
superior knowledge about producing or distribut- government can eliminate or reduce the harms of
ing a good, or has substantial economies of scale. monopoly by allowing or facilitating entry.
1. Show that after a shift in the demand curve, a 7. Can a firm operating in the upward portion of its
monopoly’s price may remain constant but its out- average cost curve be a natural monopoly? Explain.
put may rise. 8. Review (Chapter 8): Show why a monopoly may
2. What is the effect of a franchise (lump-sum) tax on operate in the upward- or downward-sloping sec-
a monopoly? (Hint: Consider the possibility that tion of its long-run average cost curve but a com-
the firm may shut down.) petitive firm will operate only in the upward-
3. What is the effect of a profit tax on a monopoly?
Assume the government takes γ fraction of the 9. When will a monopoly set its price equal to its
before-tax economic profit, π, and the monopoly marginal cost?
maximizes the after-tax profit, (1 – γ)π. 10. Describe the effects on output and welfare if the
government regulates a monopoly so that it may
4. When is a monopoly unlikely to be profitable?
not charge a price above – , which lies between the
(Hint: Discuss the relationship between market
unregulated monopoly price and the optimally reg-
demand and average cost.)
ulated price (determined by the intersection of the
5. A monopoly has a constant marginal cost of pro- firm’s marginal cost and the market demand curve).
duction of $1 per unit and a fixed cost of $10. 511. Review (Chapter 10): Suppose that many similar
Draw the firm’s MC, AVC, and AC curves. Add a
price-taking consumers (like Denise in Chapter 10)
downward-sloping demand curve, and show the
have a single good (candy bars) and that Jane has a
profit-maximizing quantity and price. Indicate the
monopoly in wood. Thus Jane can set prices.
profit as an area on your diagram. Show the dead-
Assume that no production is possible. Using an
Edgeworth box, illustrate the monopoly optimum
6. Can a firm be a natural monopoly if it has a and show that it does not lie on the contract curve
U-shaped average cost curve? Why or why not? (isn’t Pareto efficient).
382 CHAPTER 11 Monopoly
12. A monopoly drug company produces a lifesaving example, GlaxoWellcome PLC, a pharmaceutical
medicine at a constant cost of $10 per dose. The giant, learned that its drug bupropion hydrochlo-
demand for this medicine is perfectly inelastic at ride is more effective than the nicotine patch for
prices less than or equal to the $100 (per day) people trying to quit smoking. That drug is now
income of the 100 patients who need to take this sold as Zyban, but it was introduced in 1997 as an
drug daily. At a higher price, nothing is bought. antidepressant, Wellbutrin. Projected 1999 sales
Show the equilibrium price and quantity and the were $250 million for Zyban and $590 million for
consumer and producer surplus in a graph. Now Wellbutrin. Using a graph, show the demand
the government imposes a price ceiling of $30. curves for Wellbutrin and Zyban and the aggre-
Show how the equilibrium, consumer surplus, and gate demand for this drug, buproprion hydrochlo-
producer surplus change. What is the deadweight ride. On the graph, indicate the quantity of pills
loss, if any, from this price control? sold for each use and total use at the current price.
13. The price of wholesale milk dropped by 30.3% in Why does Glaxo, the monopoly producer, set the
1999 as the Pennsylvania Milk Marketing Board same price, $1.16 a pill, for both drugs?
lowered the regulated price. The price to con- 15. Suppose that the competitive fringe’s supply curve
sumers fell by substantially less than 30.3% in is horizontal in the long run. Show and describe
Philadelphia. Why? (Hint: Show that a monopoly the resulting dominant firm–competitive fringe
will not necessarily lower its price by the same per- equilibrium.
centage as its constant marginal cost drops.) 16. Show that the deadweight loss is higher in a monop-
14. Today, drug companies spend large sums to deter- oly optimum than in a dominant firm–competitive
mine additional uses for their existing drugs. For fringe equilibrium.
517. Show mathematically that a monopoly may raise profit-maximizing solution?
the price to consumers by more than the specific 521. Review (Chapters 6 and 7): A monopoly’s produc-
tax imposed on it. (Hint: One approach is to con- tion function is Cobb-Douglas: Q = L ⁄2K ⁄2, where L
sider a monopoly facing a constant-elasticity is labor and K is capital. As a result, the marginal
demand curve and a constant marginal cost, m.) product functions are MPL = 1 K ⁄2/L ⁄2 and MPK =
1 1⁄2 1⁄2
18. The inverse demand curve a monopoly faces is 2 L /K . The demand function is p = 100 – Q. The
p = 100 – Q. wage, w, is $1 per hour, and the rental cost of cap-
ital, r, is $4.
The firm’s cost curve is C(Q) = 10 + 5Q. What is
a. What is the equation of the (long-run) expan-
the profit-maximizing solution?
sion path? Illustrate in a graph.
19. How does your answer to Problem 18 change if b. Derive the long-run total cost curve equation
C(Q) = 100 + 5Q? as a function of q.
20. The inverse demand curve a monopoly faces is c. What quantity maximizes this firm’s profit?
d. Find the optimal input combination that pro-
p = 10Q– ⁄2.
duces the profit-maximizing quantity. Illustrate
The firm’s cost curve is C(Q) = 5Q. What is the with a graph.