Misplaced Pages

#415584

104-572: The major benefit of the Herfindahl index in relation to measures such as the concentration ratio is that the HHI gives more weight to larger firms. Other advantages of the HHI include its simple calculation method and the small amount of often easily obtainable data required for the calculation. The HHI has the same formula as the Simpson diversity index , which is a diversity index used in ecology;

208-497: A factor of production , it can also be viewed a return to capital for investors including the entrepreneur, equivalent to the return the capital owner could have expected (in a safe investment), plus compensation for risk. In other words, the cost of normal profit varies both within and across industries; it is commensurate with the riskiness associated with each type of investment, as per the risk–return spectrum . In circumstances of perfect competition, only normal profits arise when

312-400: A perfect market , also known as an atomistic market , is defined by several idealizing conditions, collectively called perfect competition , or atomistic competition . In theoretical models where conditions of perfect competition hold, it has been demonstrated that a market will reach an equilibrium in which the quantity supplied for every product or service , including labor , equals

416-607: A Pareto improvement could be achieved by transferring a small amount of the factor to the use where it yields a higher marginal utility). A simple proof assuming differentiable utility functions and production functions is the following. Let w j {\displaystyle w_{j}} be the 'price' (the rental) of a certain factor j {\displaystyle j} , let MP j 1 {\displaystyle {\text{MP}}_{j1}} and MP j 2 {\displaystyle {\text{MP}}_{j2}} be its marginal product in

520-421: A decrease of wages as long as there were unemployment, and would finally ensure the full employment of labour: labour unemployment is due to absence of perfect competition in labour markets. Most non-neoclassical economists deny that a full flexibility of wages would ensure the full employment of labour and find a stickiness of wages an indispensable component of a market economy, without which the economy would lack

624-406: A firm operates they should not be considered in deciding whether to produce or shut down. Thus in determining whether to shut down a firm should compare total revenue to total variable costs ( VC {\displaystyle {\text{VC}}} ) rather than total costs ( FC + VC {\displaystyle {\text{FC}}+{\text{VC}}} ). If the revenue the firm is receiving

728-468: A firm's cost-curve under perfect competition is for the slope to move upwards after a certain amount is produced. This amount is small enough to leave a sufficiently large number of firms in the field (for any given total outputs in the industry) for the conditions of perfect competition to be preserved. For the short-run, the supply of some factors are assumed to be fixed and as the price of the other factors are given, costs per unit must necessarily rise after

832-524: A given industry. A concentration ratio (CR) is the sum of the percentage market shares of (a pre-specified number of) the largest firms in an industry. An n -firm concentration ratio is a common measure of market structure and shows the combined market share of the n largest firms in the market. For example, if n = 5, CR 5 defines the combined market share of the five largest firms in an industry. Competition economists and competition authorities typically employ concentration ratios (CR n ) and

936-596: A loss, in and of itself constitutes a barrier to entry. In a single-goods case, a positive economic profit happens when the firm's average cost is less than the price of the product or service at the profit-maximizing output. The economic profit is equal to the quantity of output multiplied by the difference between the average cost and the price. Often, governments will try to intervene in uncompetitive markets to make them more competitive. Antitrust (US) or competition (elsewhere) laws were created to prevent powerful firms from using their economic power to artificially create

1040-792: A natural consequence of assuming that a given market's structure is described by Cournot competition . Suppose that we have a Cournot model for competition between n {\displaystyle n} firms with different linear marginal costs and a homogeneous product. Then the profit of the i {\displaystyle i} -th firm π i {\displaystyle \pi _{i}} is: π i = P ( Q ) q i − c i q i , Q = ∑ i = 1 n q i {\displaystyle \pi _{i}=P(Q)q_{i}-c_{i}q_{i},\quad Q=\sum _{i=1}^{n}q_{i}} where q i {\displaystyle q_{i}}

1144-620: A necessary condition. Laboratory experiments in which participants have significant price setting power and little or no information about their counterparts consistently produce efficient results given the proper trading institutions. In the short run, a firm operating at a loss [ R < TC {\displaystyle {\text{R}}<{\text{TC}}} (revenue less than total cost) or P < ATC {\displaystyle P<{\text{ATC}}} (price less than unit cost)] must decide whether to continue to operate or temporarily shut down. The shutdown rule states "in

SECTION 10

#1732793990416

1248-599: A portfolio with N eff = 50 {\displaystyle N_{\text{eff}}=50} equally weighted positions. The H-index has been shown to be one of the most efficient measures of portfolio diversification. It may also be used as a constraint to force a portfolio to hold a minimum number of effective assets: ‖ w ‖ 2 ≤ N eff − 1 {\displaystyle \|w\|^{2}\leq N_{\text{eff}}^{-1}} For commonly used portfolio optimization techniques, such as mean-variance and CVaR ,

1352-402: A portfolio, where H = ∑ ‖ w ‖ 2 {\textstyle H=\sum \|w\|^{2}} is computed as the sum of the squares of the proportion of market value invested in each security. A low H-index implies a very diversified portfolio: as an example, a portfolio with H = 0.02 {\displaystyle H=0.02} is equivalent to

1456-494: A settlement with the Department of Justice in which they were faced with stringent oversight procedures and explicit requirements designed to prevent this predatory behaviour. With lower barriers, new firms can enter the market again, making the long run equilibrium more like that of a competitive industry, with no economic profit for firms. If a government feels it is impractical to have a competitive market – such as in

1560-537: A share of less than 10%. It is evident from these figures that Industry B is more concentrated than Industry A, since the market share is distributed more heavily towards the more dominant firms. However, Industry A and Industry B both have CR 4 ratios of 80%. This shows that the CR ratio does not fully take into account the distribution of market share amongst the most dominant firms. Perfect competition In economics , specifically general equilibrium theory ,

1664-518: A simplistic, single parameter statistic. They can be used to quantify market concentration in a given industry in a relevant and succinct manner, but do not capture all available information about the distribution of market shares. In particular, the definition of the concentration ratio does not use the market shares of all the firms in the industry and does not account for the distribution of firm size. Also, it does not provide much detail about competitiveness of an industry. The following example exposes

1768-439: A situation with three players and again an equally distributed market share; H = 1 N = 1 3 ≈ 0. 333 ¯ {\displaystyle H={\dfrac {1}{N}}={\frac {1}{3}}\approx 0.{\overline {333}}} , note that H ∗ = 0 {\displaystyle H^{*}=0} like the situation with two players. The market with three players

1872-513: A tendency to equality of wages for similar work, but the level of wages is necessarily determined by complex sociopolitical elements; custom, feelings of justice, informal allegiances to classes, as well as overt coalitions such as trade unions, far from being impediments to a smooth working of labour markets that would be able to determine wages even without these elements, are on the contrary indispensable because without them there would be no way to determine wages. Equilibrium in perfect competition

1976-483: A worsening of the utility of some other consumer. This is called the First Theorem of Welfare Economics . The basic reason is that no productive factor with a non-zero marginal product is left unutilized, and the units of each factor are so allocated as to yield the same indirect marginal utility in all uses, a basic efficiency condition (if this indirect marginal utility were higher in one use than in other ones,

2080-415: Is MP j 2 MU 2 = MP j 2 p 2 = w j {\displaystyle {\text{MP}}_{j2}{\text{MU}}_{2}={\text{MP}}_{j2}p_{2}=w_{j}} again. With our choice of units the marginal utility of the amount of the factor consumed directly by the optimizing consumer is again w, so the amount supplied of the factor too satisfies

2184-574: Is R ≥ VC {\displaystyle {\text{R}}\geq {\text{VC}}} . The difference between revenue, R {\displaystyle {\text{R}}} , and variable costs, VC {\displaystyle {\text{VC}}} , is the contribution to fixed costs and any contribution is better than none. Thus, if R ≥ VC {\displaystyle {\text{R}}\geq {\text{VC}}} then firm should operate. If R < VC {\displaystyle {\text{R}}<{\text{VC}}}

SECTION 20

#1732793990416

2288-420: Is approximated only by markets of homogeneous products produced and purchased by very many sellers and buyers, usually organized markets for agricultural products or raw materials. In real-world markets, assumptions such as perfect information cannot be verified and are only approximated in organized double-auction markets where most agents wait and observe the behaviour of prices before deciding to exchange (but in

2392-415: Is correlated with the number of firms in an industry because its lower bound when there are N firms is 1/ N . In the more general case of unequal market share, 1/ H is called "equivalent (or effective) number of firms in the industry", N eqi or N eff . An industry with 3 firms cannot have a lower Herfindahl than an industry with 20 firms when firms have equal market shares. But as market shares of

2496-456: Is different with respect to factor markets. Here the acceptance or denial of perfect competition in labour markets does make a big difference to the view of the working of market economies. One must distinguish neoclassical from non-neoclassical economists. For the former, absence of perfect competition in labour markets , e.g. due to the existence of trade unions , impedes the smooth working of competition, which if left free to operate would cause

2600-399: Is due to active reactions of entry or exit. Some economists have a different kind of criticism concerning perfect competition model. They are not criticizing the price taker assumption because it makes economic agents too "passive", but because it then raises the question of who sets the prices. Indeed, if everyone is price taker, there is the need for a benevolent planner who gives and sets

2704-448: Is esteemed to be fundamentally correct. Some non-neoclassical schools, like Post-Keynesians , reject the neoclassical approach to value and distribution, but not because of their rejection of perfect competition as a reasonable approximation to the working of most product markets; the reasons for rejection of the neoclassical 'vision' are different views of the determinants of income distribution and of aggregated demand. In particular,

2808-403: Is even more valid today; and the reason why General Motors , Exxon or Nestlé do not enter the computers or pharmaceutical industries is not insurmountable barriers to entry but rather that the rate of return in the latter industries is already sufficiently in line with the average rate of return elsewhere as not to justify entry. On this few economists, it would seem, would disagree, even among

2912-425: Is greater than its total variable cost ( R > VC {\displaystyle {\text{R}}>{\text{VC}}} ), then the firm is covering all variable costs and there is additional revenue ("contribution"), which can be applied to fixed costs. (The size of the fixed costs is irrelevant as it is a sunk cost. The same consideration is used whether fixed costs are one dollar or one million dollars.) On

3016-511: Is higher than that which would be found in a similar but more competitive industry, allowing them economic profit in both the long and short run. The existence of economic profits depends on the prevalence of barriers to entry : these stop other firms from entering into the industry and sapping away profits, as they would in a more competitive market. In cases where barriers are present, but more than one firm, firms can collude to limit production, thereby restricting supply in order to ensure that

3120-438: Is less concentrated, but this is not obvious looking at just H* . Thus, the normalized Herfindahl index can serve as a measure for the equality of distributions, but is less suitable for concentration. The usefulness of this statistic to detect monopoly formation is directly dependent on a proper definition of a particular market (which hinges primarily on the notion of substitutability). The index fails to take into consideration

3224-432: Is necessary to cover its economic costs. In order not to misinterpret this zero-long-run-profits thesis, it must be remembered that the term 'profit' is used in different ways: Thus, if one leaves aside risk coverage for simplicity, the neoclassical zero-long-run-profit thesis would be re-expressed in classical parlance as profits coinciding with interest in the long period (i.e. the rate of profit tending to coincide with

Herfindahl–Hirschman index - Misplaced Pages Continue

3328-404: Is possible that the next-best solution involves changing other variables away from the values that would otherwise be optimal. In modern conditions, the theory of perfect competition has been modified from a quantitative assessment of competitors to a more natural atomic balance (equilibrium) in the market. There may be many competitors in the market, but if there is hidden collusion between them,

3432-729: Is shut down is generating zero revenue and incurring no variable costs. However, the firm still has to pay fixed cost. So the firm's profit equals fixed costs or − FC {\displaystyle -{\text{FC}}} . An operating firm is generating revenue, incurring variable costs and paying fixed costs. The operating firm's profit is R − VC − FC {\displaystyle {\text{R}}-{\text{VC}}-{\text{FC}}} . The firm should continue to operate if R − VC − FC ≥ − FC {\displaystyle {\text{R}}-{\text{VC}}-{\text{FC}}\geq -{\text{FC}}} , which simplified

3536-468: Is the Herfindahl index. Therefore, the Herfindahl index is directly related to the weighted average of the profit margins of firms under Cournot competition with linear marginal costs. The Herfindahl index is also a widely used metric for portfolio concentration. In portfolio theory, the Herfindahl index is related to the effective number of positions N eff = 1 / H {\displaystyle N_{\text{eff}}=1/H} held in

3640-710: Is the market share and η = − d log ⁡ Q / d log ⁡ P {\displaystyle \eta =-d\log Q/d\log P} is the price elasticity of demand . Multiplying each firm's profit margin by its market share gives us: s 1 ( P − c 1 P ) + ⋯ + s n ( P − c n P ) = H η {\displaystyle s_{1}\left({P-c_{1} \over {P}}\right)+\cdots +s_{n}\left({P-c_{n} \over {P}}\right)={H \over {\eta }}} where H {\displaystyle H}

3744-576: Is the market share of firm i {\displaystyle i} in the market, and N {\displaystyle N} is the number of firms. Therefore, in a market with 5 firms each producing 20%, the HHI would be 0.2 2 + 0.2 2 + 0.2 2 + 0.2 2 + 0.2 2 = 0.20 {\displaystyle 0.2^{2}+0.2^{2}+0.2^{2}+0.2^{2}+0.2^{2}=0.20} . The Herfindahl Index ( HHI ) ranges from 1/ N (in case of perfect competition ) to 1 (in case of monopoly ), where N

3848-455: Is the mean of participations. If all firms have equal (identical) shares (that is, if the market structure is completely symmetric , in which case s i = 1 / N {\displaystyle s_{i}=1/N} ) then σ 2 {\displaystyle \sigma ^{2}} is zero and H {\displaystyle H} equals 1 / N {\displaystyle 1/N} . If

3952-1057: Is the number of firms in the market. Equivalently, if percents are used as whole numbers, as in 75 instead of 0.75, the index can range up to 100, or 10,000. An HHI below 0.01 (or 100) indicates a highly competitive industry, Mergers and acquisitions with an increase of 100 points or less will usually not have any anti competitive effects and will require no further analysis. An HHI below 0.15 (or 1,500) indicates an unconcentrated industry. Mergers and acquisitions between 100 and 1500 points are unlikely to have anti-competitive effects and will most likely not need further analysis. An HHI between 0.15 and 0.25 (or 1,500 to 2,500) indicates moderate concentration. Mergers and acquisitions that result in moderate market concentration from HHI increases will raise anti-competitive concerns and will require further analysis. An HHI above 0.25 (above 2,500) indicates high concentration. Mergers and acquisitions with HHI scores of 2,500 or above will be considered anti competitive and an in-depth analysis produced, if

4056-399: Is the point where market demands will be equal to market supply. A firm's price will be determined at this point. In the short run, equilibrium will be affected by demand. In the long run, both demand and supply of a product will affect the equilibrium in perfect competition. A firm will receive only normal profit in the long run at the equilibrium point. As it is well known, requirements for

4160-1540: Is the quantity produced by each firm, c i {\displaystyle c_{i}} is the marginal cost of production for each firm, and P ( Q ) {\displaystyle P(Q)} is the price of the product. Taking the derivative of the firm's profit function with respect to its output to maximize its profit gives us: ∂ π i ∂ q i = 0 ⟹ P ′ ( Q ) q i + P ( Q ) − c i = 0 ⟹ − d P d Q q i = P − c i {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial \pi _{i}}{\partial q_{i}}}=0\implies P'(Q)q_{i}+P(Q)-c_{i}=0\implies -{\frac {dP}{dQ}}q_{i}=P-c_{i}} Dividing by P {\displaystyle P} gives us each firm's profit margin : P − c i P = − d P d Q q i P = − d P / P d Q / Q q i Q = s i η {\displaystyle {P-c_{i} \over {P}}=-{dP \over {dQ}}{q_{i} \over {P}}=-{dP/P \over {dQ/Q}}{q_{i} \over {Q}}={s_{i} \over {\eta }}} where s i = q i / Q {\displaystyle s_{i}=q_{i}/Q}

4264-574: The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) as measures of market concentration. The concentration ratio is calculated as follows: CR n = C 1 + C 2 + ⋯ + C n = ∑ i = 1 n C i {\displaystyle {\text{CR}}_{n}=C_{1}+C_{2}+\cdots +C_{n}=\sum \limits _{i=1}^{n}C_{i}} where C i {\displaystyle C_{i}} defines

Herfindahl–Hirschman index - Misplaced Pages Continue

4368-499: The inverse participation ratio (IPR) in physics; and the inverse of the effective number of parties index in political science. Consider an example of 3 firms before and after a merger, with the top 2 firms producing 40% of goods each, and the other firm producing 20%. Prior to Merger: 0.4 2 + 0.4 2 + 0.2 2 = 0.36 = 36 % {\displaystyle 0.4^{2}+0.4^{2}+0.2^{2}=0.36=36\%} Now let's consider

4472-407: The opportunity cost , as the time that the owner spends running the firm could be spent on running a different firm. The enterprise component of normal profit is thus the profit that a business owner considers necessary to make running the business worth while: that is, it is comparable to the next best amount the entrepreneur could earn doing another job. Particularly if enterprise is not included as

4576-404: The 20-firm industry diverge from equality the Herfindahl can exceed that of the equal-market-share 3-firm industry (e.g., if one firm has 81% of the market and the remaining 19 have 1% each, then H = 0.658 {\displaystyle H=0.658} ). A higher Herfindahl signifies a less competitive (i.e., more concentrated) industry. It can be shown that the Herfindahl index arises as

4680-565: The Department of Justice considers Herfindahl indices between 0.15 (1,500) and 0.25 (2,500) to be "moderately concentrated" and indices above 0.25 to be "highly concentrated". However, these indices scores are not rigid guidelines that must be followed, while high levels of concentration is concerning, they indices scores provide ways to identify which mergers and acquisitions are potentially noncompetitive. There are other factors that need to be considered that will either help reinforce or counter

4784-413: The HHI enables antitrust authorities to understand the impact that mergers have on the market. The index involves taking the market share of the respective market competitors, squaring it, and adding them together (e.g. in the market for X, company A has 30%, B, C, D, E and F have 10% each and G through to Z have 1% each). When calculating HHI the post merger level of the HHI score and the total increase of

4888-453: The HHI score are considered when reviewing the outcome. If the resulting figure is above a certain threshold then economists will consider the market to have a high concentration (e.g. market X's concentration is 0.142 or 14.2%). This threshold is considered to be 0.25 in the U.S., while the EU prefers to focus on the level of change, for instance that concern is raised if there is a 0.025 change when

4992-424: The aforementioned shortfalls of the concentration ratio. The table below shows the market shares of the largest firms in two different industries (Industry A and Industry B). Aside from the tabulated market shares for Industry A and Industry B, both industries are the same in terms of the number of firms operating in the industry and their respective market shares. In this example, in both cases, all other firms have

5096-497: The average variable cost curve and a segment that runs on the vertical axis from the origin to but not including a point at the height of the minimum average variable cost. The use of the assumption of perfect competition as the foundation of price theory for product markets is often criticized as representing all agents as passive, thus removing the active attempts to increase one's welfare or profits by price undercutting , product design , advertising, innovation, activities that –

5200-558: The barriers to entry they need to protect their economic profits. This includes the use of predatory pricing toward smaller competitors. For example, in the United States, Microsoft Corporation was initially convicted of breaking Anti-Trust Law and engaging in anti-competitive behavior in order to form one such barrier in United States v. Microsoft ; after a successful appeal on technical grounds, Microsoft agreed to

5304-455: The case of a natural monopoly  – it will sometimes try to regulate the existing uncompetitive market by controlling the price firms charge for their product. For example, the old AT&T (regulated) monopoly, which existed before the courts ordered its breakup , had to get government approval to raise its prices. The government examined the monopoly's costs to determine whether the monopoly should be able raise its price, and could reject

SECTION 50

#1732793990416

5408-425: The competition will not be maximally perfect. But if the principle of atomic balance operates in the market, then even between two equal forces perfect competition may arise. If we try to artificially increase the number of competitors and to reduce honest local big business to small size, we will open the way for unscrupulous monopolies from outside. There is a set of market conditions which are assumed to prevail in

5512-507: The complex nature of the market being tested. The United States federal anti-trust authorities such as the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission use the Herfindahl index as a screening tool to determine whether a proposed merger or acquisition is likely to raise antitrust concerns. Increases of over 0.01 (100) generally provoke scrutiny, although this varies from case to case. The Antitrust Division of

5616-1072: The condition of cost minimization that marginal products must be proportional to factor 'prices' it can be shown that the cost increase is the same if the output increase is obtained by optimally varying all factors). Optimal factor employment by a price-taking firm requires equality of factor rental and factor marginal revenue product, w j = p i MP j i {\displaystyle w_{j}=p_{i}{\text{MP}}_{ji}} , so we obtain p 1 = MC j 1 = w j MP j 1 {\displaystyle p_{1}={\text{MC}}_{j1}={\frac {w_{j}}{{\text{MP}}_{j1}}}} , p 2 = MC j 2 = w j MP j 2 {\displaystyle p_{2}={\text{MC}}_{j2}={\frac {w_{j}}{{\text{MP}}_{j2}}}} . Now choose any consumer purchasing both goods, and measure his utility in such units that in equilibrium his marginal utility of money (the increase in utility due to

5720-461: The condition of optimal allocation. Monopoly violates this optimal allocation condition, because in a monopolized industry market price is above marginal cost, and this means that factors are underutilized in the monopolized industry, they have a higher indirect marginal utility than in their uses in competitive industries. Of course, this theorem is considered irrelevant by economists who do not believe that general equilibrium theory correctly predicts

5824-413: The critics argue – characterize most industries and markets. These criticisms point to the frequent lack of realism of the assumptions of product homogeneity and impossibility to differentiate it, but apart from this, the accusation of passivity appears correct only for short-period or very-short-period analyses, in long-period analyses the inability of price to diverge from the natural or long-period price

5928-419: The discussion of what perfect competition might be if it were theoretically possible to ever obtain such perfect market conditions. These conditions include: In a perfect market the sellers operate at zero economic surplus : sellers make a level of return on investment known as normal profits . Normal profit is a component of (implicit) costs and not a component of business profit at all. It represents all

6032-406: The extent of largest firms' market shares in a given industry. Specifically, a concentration ratio close to 0% denotes a low concentration industry, and a concentration ratio near 100% shows that an industry has high concentration. Concentration ratios range from 0%–100%. Concentration levels are explained as follows: Concentration ratios can readily be calculated from industry data, but they are

6136-589: The factor is the increase in the utility of our consumer achieved by an increase in the employment of the factor by one (very small) unit; this increase in utility through allocating the small increase in factor utilization to good 1 {\displaystyle 1} is MP j 1 MU 1 = MP j 1 p 1 = w j {\displaystyle {\text{MP}}_{j1}{\text{MU}}_{1}={\text{MP}}_{j1}p_{1}=w_{j}} , and through allocating it to good 2 {\displaystyle 2} it

6240-446: The firm cannot leave the industry or avoid its fixed costs in the short run. Exit is a long-term decision. A firm that has exited an industry has avoided all commitments and freed all capital for use in more profitable enterprises. However, a firm cannot continue to incur losses indefinitely. In the long run, the firm will have to earn sufficient revenue to cover all its expenses and must decide whether to continue in business or to leave

6344-412: The firm decides to operate, the firm will continue to produce where marginal revenue equals marginal costs because these conditions insure not only profit maximization (loss minimization) but also maximum contribution. Another way to state the rule is that a firm should compare the profits from operating to those realized if it shut down and select the option that produces the greater profit. A firm that

SECTION 60

#1732793990416

6448-415: The firm has made the necessary and feasible long-term adjustments. In the long run a firm operates where marginal revenue equals long-run marginal costs. The short-run ( SR {\displaystyle {\text{SR}}} ) supply curve for a perfectly competitive firm is the marginal cost ( MC {\displaystyle {\text{MC}}} ) curve at and above the shutdown point. Portions of

6552-409: The firm should shut down. A decision to shut down means that the firm is temporarily suspending production. It does not mean that the firm is going out of business (exiting the industry). If market conditions improve, and prices increase, the firm can resume production. Shutting down is a short-run decision. A firm that has shut down is not producing. The firm still retains its capital assets; however,

6656-399: The functioning of market economies; but it is given great importance by neoclassical economists and it is the theoretical reason given by them for combating monopolies and for antitrust legislation. In contrast to a monopoly or oligopoly , in perfect competition it is impossible for a firm to earn economic profit in the long run, which is to say that a firm cannot make any more money than

6760-525: The harmful effects of higher market concentration. The Herfindahl-Hirschman index is used as a starting point to gauge initial market power and then determine if additional information is needed to conduct further analysis on any potential anti-competitive concerns. When all the firms in an industry have equal market shares, H = N ( 1 N ) 2 = 1 N {\textstyle H=N\left({\dfrac {1}{N}}\right)^{2}={\dfrac {1}{N}}} . The Herfindahl

6864-654: The index already shows a concentration of 0.1. So to take the example, if in market X company B (with 10% market share) suddenly bought out the shares of company C (with 10% also) then this new market concentration would make the index jump to 0.162. Here it can be seen that it would not be relevant for merger law in the U.S. (being under 0.18) or in the EU (because there is not a change over 0.025). H H I = ∑ i = 1 N ( M S i ) 2 {\displaystyle HHI=\sum _{i=1}^{N}(MS_{i})^{2}} where M S i {\textstyle MS_{i}}

6968-724: The index can be expressed as H = 1 N + ( N − 1 ) σ 2 {\textstyle H={\frac {1}{N}}+(N-1)\sigma ^{2}} , where σ 2 {\displaystyle \sigma ^{2}} is the statistical variance of the firm shares, defined as σ 2 = 1 N − 1 ∑ i = 1 N ( s i − μ ) 2 {\textstyle \sigma ^{2}={\frac {1}{N-1}}\sum _{i=1}^{N}\left(s_{i}-\mu \right)^{2}} where μ = 1 N {\textstyle \mu ={\frac {1}{N}}}

7072-413: The industry and pursue profits elsewhere. The long-run decision is based on the relationship of the price and long-run average costs. If P ≥ A C {\displaystyle P\geq AC} then the firm will not exit the industry. If P < AC {\displaystyle P<{\text{AC}}} , then the firm will exit the industry. These comparisons will be made after

7176-451: The industry to its previous state, just with a lower price and no economic profit for the incumbent firms. Profit can, however, occur in competitive and contestable markets in the short run, as firms jostle for market position. Once risk is accounted for, long-lasting economic profit in a competitive market is thus viewed as the result of constant cost-cutting and performance improvement ahead of industry competitors, allowing costs to be below

7280-435: The initial price the consumer must pay for the product is high, and the demand for, as well as the availability of the product in the market , will be limited. In the long run, however, when the profitability of the product is well established, and because there are few barriers to entry , the number of firms that produce this product will increase until the available supply of the product eventually becomes relatively large,

7384-512: The last unit of money spent on each good), MU 1 p 1 = MU 2 p 2 {\displaystyle {\frac {{\text{MU}}_{1}}{p_{1}}}={\frac {{\text{MU}}_{2}}{p_{2}}}} , is 1. Then p 1 = MU 1 {\displaystyle p_{1}={\text{MU}}_{1}} , p 2 = MU 2 {\displaystyle p_{2}={\text{MU}}_{2}} . The indirect marginal utility of

7488-400: The left causing the market supply curve to shift inward. However, the net effect of entry by new firms and adjustment by existing firms will be to shift the supply curve outward. The market price will be driven down until all firms are earning normal profit only. It is important to note that perfect competition is a sufficient condition for allocative and productive efficiency, but it is not

7592-412: The long run economic equilibrium is reached; there is no incentive for firms to either enter or leave the industry. Economic profit does not occur in perfect competition in long run equilibrium; if it did, there would be an incentive for new firms to enter the industry, aided by a lack of barriers to entry until there was no longer any economic profit. As new firms enter the industry, they increase

7696-403: The long-period interpretation perfect information is not necessary, the analysis only aims at determining the average around which market prices gravitate, and for gravitation to operate one does not need perfect information). In the absence of externalities and public goods, perfectly competitive equilibria are Pareto-efficient, i.e. no improvement in the utility of a consumer is possible without

7800-426: The lower prices set by the new firms. New firms will continue to enter the industry until the price of the product is lowered to the point that it is the same as the average cost of producing the product, and all of the economic profit disappears. When this happens, economic agents outside of the industry find no advantage to forming new firms that enter into the industry, the supply of the product stops increasing, and

7904-523: The marginal cost curve below the shutdown point are not part of the SR {\displaystyle {\text{SR}}} supply curve because the firm is not producing any positive quantity in that range. Technically the SR {\displaystyle {\text{SR}}} supply curve is a discontinuous function composed of the segment of the MC {\displaystyle {\text{MC}}} curve at and above minimum of

8008-506: The market share of the i {\displaystyle i} th largest firm in an industry as a percentage of total industry market share, and n {\displaystyle n} defines the number of firms included in the concentration ratio calculation. The CR 4 {\displaystyle {\text{CR}}_{4}} and CR 8 {\displaystyle {\text{CR}}_{8}} concentration ratios are commonly used. Concentration ratios show

8112-525: The market, and HHI is the usual Herfindahl Index, as above. Using the normalized Herfindahl index, information about the total number of players ( N ) is lost, as shown in the following example: Assume a market with two players and equally distributed market share; H = 1 N = 1 2 = 0.5 {\textstyle H={\dfrac {1}{N}}={\dfrac {1}{2}}=0.5} and H ∗ = 0 {\displaystyle H^{*}=0} . Now compare that to

8216-406: The market-set price. Economic profit is, however, much more prevalent in uncompetitive markets such as in a perfect monopoly or oligopoly situation. In these scenarios, individual firms have some element of market power: Though monopolists are constrained by consumer demand , they are not price takers, but instead either price-setters or quantity setters. This allows the firm to set a price that

8320-503: The monopoly's application for a higher price if the cost did not justify it. Although a regulated firm will not have an economic profit as large as it would in an unregulated situation, it can still make profits well above a competitive firm in a truly competitive market. In a perfectly competitive market, the demand curve facing a firm is perfectly elastic . As mentioned above, the perfect competition model, if interpreted as applying also to short-period or very-short-period behaviour,

8424-511: The more common behaviour is alteration of production without nearly any alteration of price. The critics of the assumption of perfect competition in product markets seldom question the basic neoclassical view of the working of market economies for this reason. The Austrian School insists strongly on this criticism, and yet the neoclassical view of the working of market economies as fundamentally efficient, reflecting consumer choices and assigning to each agent his contribution to social welfare,

8528-492: The neoclassical ones. Thus when the issue is normal, or long-period, product prices, differences on the validity of the perfect competition assumption do not appear to imply important differences on the existence or not of a tendency of rates of return toward uniformity as long as entry is possible, and what is found fundamentally lacking in the perfect competition model is the absence of marketing expenses and innovation as causes of costs that do enter normal average cost. The issue

8632-507: The number of firms in the market is held constant, then a higher variance due to a higher level of asymmetry between firms' shares (that is, a higher share dispersion ) will result in a higher index value. See the Brown and Warren-Boulton (1988) and Warren-Boulton (1990) texts cited below. Concentration ratio In economics , concentration ratios are used to quantify market concentration and are based on companies' market shares in

8736-465: The optimal solution may be found using second-order cone programming . Supposing that N {\displaystyle N} firms share all the market, each one with a participation of x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} and market share s i = x i / ∑ j = 1 N x j {\textstyle s_{i}=x_{i}/\sum _{j=1}^{N}x_{j}} , then

8840-599: The other hand, if VC > R {\displaystyle {\text{VC}}>{\text{R}}} then the firm is not covering its production costs and it should immediately shut down. The rule is conventionally stated in terms of price (average revenue) and average variable costs. The rules are equivalent (if one divides both sides of inequality TR > TVC {\displaystyle {\text{TR}}>{\text{TVC}}} by Q {\displaystyle Q} gives P > AVC {\displaystyle P>{\text{AVC}}} ). If

8944-592: The other" (Dewey,88.) In this book, and for much of his career, he "analyzed firms that do not produce identical goods, but goods that are close substitutes for one another" (Sandmo,300.) Another key player in understanding imperfect competition is Joan Robinson , who published her book "The Economics of Imperfect Competition" the same year Chamberlain published his. While Chamberlain focused much of his work on product development, Robinson focused heavily on price formation and discrimination (Sandmo,303.) The act of price discrimination under imperfect competition implies that

9048-498: The price charged for the product stabilizes, settling into an equilibrium . The same is likewise true of the long run equilibria of monopolistically competitive industries and, more generally, any market which is held to be contestable . Normally, a firm that introduces a differentiated product can initially secure a temporary market power for a short while (See "Persistence" in Monopoly Profit ). At this stage,

9152-466: The price of the product remains high enough for all firms in the industry to achieve an economic profit. However, some economists, for instance Steve Keen , a professor at the University of Western Sydney, argue that even an infinitesimal amount of market power can allow a firm to produce a profit and that the absence of economic profit in an industry, or even merely that some production occurs at

9256-411: The price of the product shrinks down to the level of the average cost of producing the product. When this finally occurs, all monopoly profit associated with producing and selling the product disappears, and the initial monopoly turns into a competitive industry. In the case of contestable markets, the cycle is often ended with the departure of the former "hit and run" entrants to the market, returning

9360-463: The prices, in other word, there is a need for a "price maker". Therefore, it makes the perfect competition model appropriate not to describe a decentralized "market" economy but a centralized one. This in turn means that such kind of model has more to do with communism than capitalism. Another frequent criticism is that it is often not true that in the short run differences between supply and demand cause changes in price; especially in manufacturing,

9464-466: The production of good by one very small unit through an increase of the employment of factor j {\displaystyle j} requires increasing the factor employment by 1 MP j i {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{{\text{MP}}_{ji}}}} and thus increasing the cost by w j MP j i {\displaystyle {\frac {w_{j}}{{\text{MP}}_{ji}}}} , and through

9568-624: The production of goods 1 {\displaystyle 1} and 2 {\displaystyle 2} , and let p 1 {\displaystyle p_{1}} and p 2 {\displaystyle p_{2}} be these goods' prices. In equilibrium these prices must equal the respective marginal costs MC 1 {\displaystyle {\text{MC}}_{1}} and MC 2 {\displaystyle {\text{MC}}_{2}} ; remember that marginal cost equals factor 'price' divided by factor marginal productivity (because increasing

9672-408: The quantity demanded at the current price . This equilibrium would be a Pareto optimum . Perfect competition provides both allocative efficiency and productive efficiency : The theory of perfect competition has its roots in late-19th century economic thought. Léon Walras gave the first rigorous definition of perfect competition and derived some of its main results. In the 1950s, the theory

9776-522: The rate of interest). Profits in the classical meaning do not necessarily disappear in the long period but tend to normal profit . With this terminology, if a firm is earning abnormal profit in the short term, this will act as a trigger for other firms to enter the market. As other firms enter the market, the market supply curve will shift out, causing prices to fall. Existing firms will react to this lower price by adjusting their capital stock downward. This adjustment will cause their marginal cost to shift to

9880-411: The reciprocal of the index indicates the "equivalent" number of firms in the industry. Using case 2, we find that the market structure is equivalent to having 1.55521 firms of the same size. There is also a normalized Herfindahl index. Whereas the Herfindahl index ranges from 1/ N to one, the normalized Herfindahl index ranges from 0 to 1. It is computed as: where again, N is the number of firms in

9984-625: The regularity and persistence indispensable to its smooth working. This was, for example, John Maynard Keynes 's opinion. Particularly radical is the view of the Sraffian school on this issue: the labour demand curve cannot be determined hence a level of wages ensuring the equality between supply and demand for labour does not exist, and economics should resume the viewpoint of the classical economists, according to whom competition in labour markets does not and cannot mean indefinite price flexibility as long as supply and demand are unequal, it only means

10088-445: The rejection of perfect competition does not generally entail the rejection of free competition as characterizing most product markets; indeed it has been argued that competition is stronger nowadays than in 19th century capitalism, owing to the increasing capacity of big conglomerate firms to enter any industry: therefore the classical idea of a tendency toward a uniform rate of return on investment in all industries owing to free entry

10192-421: The scores are well above 2,500 they are considered to enhance market power they may only be allowed to progress when significant evidence is shown that the merger or acquisition will not increase market power. A small index indicates a competitive industry with no dominant players. If all firms have an equal share the reciprocal of the index shows the number of firms in the industry. When firms have unequal shares,

10296-470: The seller would sell their goods at different prices depending on the characteristic of the buyer to increase revenue (Robinson,204.) Joan Robinson and Edward Chamberlain came to many of the same conclusions regarding imperfect competition while still adding a bit of their twist to the theory. Despite their similarities or disagreements about who discovered the idea, both were extremely helpful in allowing firms to understand better how to center their goods around

10400-430: The short run a firm should continue to operate if price exceeds average variable costs". Restated, the rule is that for a firm to continue producing in the short run it must earn sufficient revenue to cover its variable costs. The rationale for the rule is straightforward: By shutting down a firm avoids all variable costs. However, the firm must still pay fixed costs. Because fixed costs must be paid regardless of whether

10504-455: The supply of the product available in the market, and these new firms are forced to charge a lower price to entice consumers to buy the additional supply these new firms are supplying as the firms all compete for customers (See "Persistence" in the Monopoly Profit discussion ). Incumbent firms within the industry face losing their existing customers to the new firms entering the industry, and are therefore forced to lower their prices to match

10608-487: The top 2 firms merging. Post Merger: ( 0.4 + 0.4 ) 2 + 0.2 2 = 0.68 = 68 % {\displaystyle (0.4+0.4)^{2}+0.2^{2}=0.68=68\%} As can be seen prior to the merger, the HHI, while not low, is in a range that allows for strong competition. However, post merger the HHI reaches 68%, approaching a HHI consistent with monopolies. This high HHI would lead to weak competition. This demonstrates how

10712-476: The wants of the consumer to achieve the highest amount of revenue possible. Real markets are never perfect. Those economists who believe in perfect competition as a useful approximation to real markets may classify those as ranging from close-to-perfect to very imperfect. The real estate market is an example of a very imperfect market. In such markets, the theory of the second best proves that if one optimality condition in an economic model cannot be satisfied, it

10816-450: Was further formalized by Kenneth Arrow and Gérard Debreu . Imperfect competition was a theory created to explain the more realistic kind of market interaction that lies in between perfect competition and a monopoly. Edward Chamberlin wrote "Monopolistic Competition" in 1933 as "a challenge to the traditional viewpoint that competition and monopolies are alternatives and that individual prices are to be explained in either terms of one or

#415584