Can Monopoly power be beneficial

Monopoly power can both be argued to be good to consumers while others criticize companies with such power. Monopoly can be describes as a individual manufacturer in a market where their merchandise or services has no close replacements. The monopolies have power to put monetary values and prevent competition. There are besides barrier to forestall houses from viing with monopolies which are big fiscal demands, Torahs, limited supply of natural stuffs and extremely proficient capital resources.

Natural monopolies are a chief type of monopoly. Natural monopolies may originate because a service may hold high fixed cost attached with it is non profitable for a 2nd house to come in. It can besides originate due to provide of geographical country. For illustration, the supply of diamond in the Western ‘s universe is chiefly controlled by South Africa and in Trinidad and Tobago, WASA.

There are ways consumers benefit form monopolies. Some are indicated by Hosein and Stanlake:

Monopolies are normally big dominant house which allows them to accomplish economic systems of graduated table as comparison to little houses. Therefore, monopolies are able to bring forth at low costs which later could be lower monetary values for consumers.

In some industries, such as H2O and electricity, if there is competition it would take to duplicate of capital equipment. Besides, in those industries the fixed costs are high so costs that it has to distribute over a big geographical country. If there is competition, most consumers would non be able to pay for such services. Therefore, consumers benefit from low monetary values.

Monopolies normally achieve supranormal net incomes.

Fig 1.1

This shows that their mean cost are lower than their mean gross. Hence, supranormal net incomes are obtained. Supernormal net incomes may be used in research and development which would assist make more technological advanced merchandises and in the long tally would profit the consumers.

Although consumers may profit from monopolistic houses, sometimes monopolies may mistreat their power and exploit consumers. Some disadvantages of monopolies identified by Pearly are:

Monopolies have control over the full market and may sell at higher monetary values by restrict supply of some goods and services which has an inelastic demand. This consequences in addition monetary values of merchandises and services. This therefore takes advantage of the consumer.

Merchandises tend to be standardized and mass produced in monopolistic competition which limits the pick of consumers. This limits the freedom of consumers since they can merely purchase goods and services available to them. Whereas if there was competition, there would hold been assortment of goods and services offered by viing houses.

There are so many barriers curtailing competition.This encourages inefficiency in monopolies since there are no inducements for them. Since there is no competition, monopolies do non bring forth at minimal cost. If there were competition, houses try to maintain cost down and better quality of merchandise which would profit the client. Therefore, monopolies are less efficient than houses where there is competition.


Figure 1.2 – Monopolies vs Perfect Competition

This shows that monopolies restrict end product and rise monetary values so the monopolizer takes advantage of society. Monopoly is an inefficient construction because it passes cost to consumers. It is both allocatively and fruitfully inefficient. It consequences in a loss to public assistance of the society.

In monopolistic competition, there is monetary value favoritism. Price favoritism can be described as the sale of the same merchandise or services but are charged otherwise harmonizing to client. For illustration, electricity rate for commercial usage are higher than domestic usage. Consumers whose demand is inelastic would pay a higher monetary value. Therefore, consumers are exploited.

Government intercession is needed to forestall monopolies from taking advantage of consumers. Therefore, they develop policies to cover with these jobs.

In the United States, there are many policies to antagonize the monopolies from mistreating consumers. Some of the policies which they use are:

By seeking to make more competition in monopolized industry – For illustration, if Sprite and Coca Cola wanted to unify, it would be closely examine to find if it would do the industry in the US less competitory and if it would do any decrease in the economic public assistance of the state. If it would, it would be placed in tribunal by Department of Justice and if the justice agrees they would non be able to unify. They promote competition via Anti trust Laws. It allows authorities to forestall amalgamations, interrupt up houses and forestalling companies from activities that can do the industry less competitory.

By modulating monopolies – authorities may take to let monopolies to go on but forestall it from mistreating their power and moving against the public involvement. In instances of natural monopolies, authorities regulates their monetary values. They are non allowed to put their monetary values. For illustration, public-service corporations such as H2O and electricity. Government determines rates of these services. Therefore, authorities would forestall consumers from being abused.

To take over monopolies – For illustration, the postal service in the United States. The authorities may take over a monopoly in order to profit the state. Government took over many monopolies with their nonsubjective being to command the monopolies power.

To forbid monopolies – The authorities may take to censor the formation of monopolies.

These positions are supported by Beardshaw ( 1998 ) .

In decision, monopolies have a considerable sum of power. This power can profit the consumer but in most instances abuse consumers. Therefore, the authorities formulates policies to forestall consumer from the maltreatment by monopolies. There are policies such as making more competition in monopolized industry, by modulating industry, take over monopolies, and forestalling the formation of monopolies.