| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "MONOPOLIES": |
|
|
Monopolies, 2004.
This paper studies monopolies from a microeconomic standpoint.
2,475 words (approx. 9.9 pages), 11 sources, APA, £ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper defines monopolies. The author states that monopolies are not outlawed in the U.S. and names several public and private monopolies. The paper examines various microeconomic issues relating to monopolies such as the existence of natural monopolies, near monopolies, monopoly power, oligopolies, legal monopolies, government sponsored monopolies and the proper role of government.
From the Paper
"The concept of a monopoly is not merely an economic theoretical possibility. Monopolies exist in the United States. Monopolies were not declared illegal under any of the federal antitrust laws including the Sherman Act the Clayton Act the Robinson-Patman Act or the Federal Trade Commission Act. A few of the many monopolies that currently exist are the U. S .Postal Service, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, various public utilities, Microsoft Corporation, Major League Baseball, Intel Corporation and the International Long-shore Warehouse Union. A monopoly involves artificial restriction of production ..."
| |
|
For and Against Monopolies, 2005.
A look at the role of monopolies.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 6 sources, £ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the role and character of monopolies in the truly capitalist free-market economy. The general nature of monopolies is examined followed by the relative positives and negatives. The paper also analyzes the relevance of monopolies in today's global economy. The final conclusion is that monopolies are more relevant today than previously given the current trends towards consolidation across all industries.
From the Paper
"Monopolies, in one form or another, have been around as long as man has engaged in organized business. Businesses have always attempted to capture the market for themselves and the ones that are successful are, justifiably or not, invariably accused of monopolistic practices. Statt defines a monopoly as: A situation in which a MARKET is under the CONTROL or domination of a single ORGANIZATION. This condition is generally considered to be met at one-quarter to one-third of the market in question. A monopoly is contrary to the ideal of the FREE MARKET and is therefore subject to legal sanctions in all industrialized countries with a capitalist or MIXED ECONOMY. (99) While this definition seems fairly straight-forward and one would think that therefore classifying a company as a monopoly or monopolistic should be a relatively easy task. Yet, in a true free market environment where the market is in a constant state of flux..."
| |
|
Monopolies, 2007.
A comparison of the benefits of pure monopolies versus oligopolies.
745 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the issues surrounding monopolies of various markets. It gives examples of some monopolies that have existed for decades, such as the government-mandated divisions of the Bell System telecommunications provider. It describes the different benefits of pure monopolies versus oligopolies and suggests that a pure monopoly may be the most successful choice for a new business venture.
From the Paper
"In assessing which of these models of a market would be most beneficial to the interest of a business, the most obvious choice is a pure monopoly. Although this model does not necessarily provide the best option for operations in terms of many aspects regarding society as a whole, in terms of business sense, it is the most beneficial and profitable model for a firm to operate in. As a business owner, if the product or service provided by a firm does not face competition from any other firm, the costs of providing the product can be lowered, supply can be determined at the full discretion of the firm, and pricing can also be fully left up to the firm."
| |
|
Monopolies, Monopolistic Competition and Oligopolies, 2001.
This paper answers five questions on monopolies, monopolistic competition, and oligopolies in terms of the Microsoft case based on the text by Schiller "The Macro Economy Today".
1,505 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is structured as five questions about monopolies, monopolistic competition, and oligopolies, based on the Microsoft situation, and whether or not it is a monopoly. The required text is "The Macro Economy Today", by Bradley R. Schiller. The first question covers the Microsoft current situation and its history. The second question defines a monopoly, the third question covers the situation of oligopoly as applied to the Microsoft situation, and the fourth question pertains to the condition of monopolistic competition as relevant to the Microsoft case. Finally, the fifth question looks at deregulation of the Microsoft. This paper is a useful resource material on the subject of Microsoft and monopolies.
Table of contents
I. Introduction
II. Answer 1: Microsoft?s history and current situation regarding the monopoly issue.
III. Answer 3: A concept from the chapter Oligopoly? to the Microsoft situation:
IV. Answer 4: Monopolistic competition in Microsoft?s situation
V. Answer 5: Deregulation of businesses in Microsoft?s situation:
From the Paper
"Answer 1: Microsoft?s history and current situation regarding the monopoly issue.
The case against Microsoft started back in the early 1990. The first major issue, which started it all, was the fact that Microsoft was that Microsoft had been using its powers in the operating system market to force computer manufacturers to put its Internet Explorer on all personal computers on which they installed the windows operating system. This was making it very hard for other smaller players, such as Netscape, who also had an Internet browser to compete. This was just one of the many things that Microsoft was said to be doing wrong. The antitrust case by the US Department of Justice against Microsoft was accusing Microsoft of firstly, thwarting competitors in the operating system market, by making banners of entry in the market. These include exclusive bargain purchase agreements with all, or most major computer manufacturers. It also accused Microsoft of using its monopoly position in the marketplace to gain unfair advantages in the marketplace. Also, a trend was that Microsoft was also accused in this case of buying out competitors. "
| |
|
Monopolies: Antitrust or Anti-Capitalism?, 2002.
This paper discusses why monopolies are bad for the economy and how antitrust laws are the only effective way to maintain the "American Dream".
4,700 words (approx. 18.8 pages), 12 sources, MLA, £ 84.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In discussing the disadvantages of monopolies and antitrust versus anticapitalism, this paper examines the history of antitrust laws, the anatomy of a monopoly, how monopolies effect the economy, the politics of antitrust, the role and opinion of the Federal Trade Commission and the Microsoft case.
From the Paper
"America was founded on the idea that everyone had an equal chance to achieve financial success. If a person had a dream, they could follow that dream and get their piece of the pie. Coming from a weighted and disproportionate system, America?s founders wished to form a country in which everyone had a chance. In England, one was born into their station in life. The rich would always be rich and a poor person had no chance of rising from the ranks to become wealthy. Antitrust laws were originally designed to keep the playing field even and give everyone and equal chance at achieving the American Dream (Mueller, 1997b). Their purpose was to assure that the old bourgeoisie class system that existed in Europe did not become a reality in the New World. Therefore many states adopted antitrust laws to assure that capitalism thrived and no one became so rich and powerful that the old class system, that they so loathed, developed."
| |
|
A Defense of Monopolies, 2005.
A defensive look at monopolies, using the anti-trust case against Microsoft as a primary example.
2,252 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 14 sources, MLA, £ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how there has always been a certain degree of mistrust against monopolistic corporate powers. Because of this mistrust, the federal government has passed many laws meant to prevent the formation of monopolies; however, these laws have unfortunately ignored the many benefits that monopoly powers often carry. The paper points out that Microsoft, for example, is a company that stimulated the economy beyond measure--yet they've been persecuted more than many companies. The writer takes a look at why monopolies like Microsoft are good, not bad, for the United States.
From the Paper
"Uttering the word "monopoly" is sure to illicit a positive response--because that word will unequivocally bring to mind the famous Parker Brothers board game which bears that name. However, if one were to clarify that they were in fact not referring to the beloved game but rather to a real-life monopoly--say, a gargantuan corporate power like Microsoft--then suddenly that grin of nostalgic delight will be replaced by a sneer of unbridled disgust. Indeed, it's a safe bet to say that monopolies engender the worst possible connotations among the minds of the general populace. Images will immediately come to mind of sneaky-looking CEOs with moneybags in each hand, a cigar sticking out either side of their mouth, and dollar bills bursting out their pockets. The natural assumption is that these corporate fat cats have earned their dirty money by exploiting consumers and forcing out all the good little entrepreneurs just trying to bring some honest competition to the table. Even though the public perception is that monopolies are overly greedy, bad for the economy, and just plain evil in general, the fact is that monopolies are often not inherently evil, but are rather pioneers in their respective industries that provide invaluable jobs, stimulate economic growth, and simply do not deserve the bad wrap that they so often get."
| |
|
Monopolies and Mergers, 2004.
This paper discusses that monopolies and mergers are different, but they have many similarities in their negative effect on competition, pricing, suppliers, product quality, innovation, and the general economy.
3,165 words (approx. 12.7 pages), 9 sources, APA, £ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that a monopoly is a situation within a given market where there is a single supplier of a good or service; a merger is the union of two or more corporations or commercial interests. The author points out that a major ethical concern about both monopolies and mergers is the forced manner in which they conduct business with suppliers. In both cases, the firms have enough buying power to force producers to sell components or goods at a lower margin, as in the case of Wal-Mart. The paper relates that the anticompetitive atmosphere in both monopolies and mergers can lead to a stagnant market because there is little marketplace incentive for innovation and advancement.
From the Paper
"Again, how drastically competition is affected by a merger is dependant on the type of merger. In a horizontal merger, the acquisition of competitors often leaves the market concentration far higher for the merged company, and may even completely eliminate competition in the area of the merger. In a vertical merger, competition can be drastically affected by the merged company?s ability to reduce or even eliminate the competitor?s access to an important component or channel of distribution for the product. This ?vertical foreclosure? can cause competitors to be unable to continue their business. Finally, the potential-competition merger is perhaps the most dangerous for competition. In this merger, not only is the large firm eliminating their smaller competitors, but they are also contributing to the idea that any future potential competitor will also be forced to merge. The merged company thwarts competition through the threat of a forced merger."
| |
|
Monopolies and John Stuart Mills' Philosophy, 2002.
This is a paper on Mills' opposition to monopolies in society as well as his reflections on commercial life in the past and the present.
620 words (approx. 2.5 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 15.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The following paper discusses the culmination of Mill's beliefs regarding Monopolies. After looking at a dearth of theories that help people realize what factors constitute success, this paper contends that monopolies can be advantageous; it all depends on the manner in which they are run.
From the Paper
"John Stuart Mill wrote in his Autobiography: "The social problem of the future we considered to be, how to unite the greatest individual liberty of action, with a common ownership in the raw material of the globe, and an equal participation of all in the benefits of combined labor." It was his philosophy that the individual should be free and have the greatest amount of control in the society. A monopoly of any kind would limit the individual power and thus create a barrier to the growth of society as a whole. Believing in the concept of the greatest good, Mills theory of Utilitarian thus,, opposed any sort of monopoly in society."
| |
|
An Analysis of Monopolies, 2002.
This paper discusses monopolies and their abuse of power including excerpts from the Microsoft case.
4,750 words (approx. 19.0 pages), 15 sources, MLA, £ 84.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses who is to have power in our democratic society, and to what extent money will matter. It discusses the Justice Department's case against Microsoft and its consequences. It discusses the views of such classical thinkers on these ethical issues such as: Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Kant, John Rawls and Bruce Ackerman. It examines the economy's situation and how monopolies have changed it. This paper tries to explain the Microsoft antitrust case in respect to society, while examining its effect on millions of computer users.
From the Paper
"The Justice Department?s attempt to use the power of the federal government to prevent Microsoft from using monopolistic practices is a case that has been met with a great deal of emotional heat, suggesting that people at large care about such a case deeply. This is, perhaps, simply because so many people have found themselves staring one too many times at the blue screen of death on their computers and see the DOJ?s actions as an act of revenge on the part of the rest of us. But it seems more likely that large antitrust suits such as this one arouse so much passion in people who are otherwise not deeply engaged in legal issues because they speak to our inherent sense of justice and our understanding of the complex ways in which capitalism and democracy must be balanced. Thus while the antitrust moves against Microsoft are, in some sense, all about Sun Microsystems and Netscape and Java, they are much more fundamentally about who is to have how much power in our democratic society, and to what extent money will matter. These are profound issues, and so we must look in trying to understand them to profound sources, from the classical thinkers on ethics such as Plato and Aristotle through the great thinkers of the Renaissance and Enlightenment like Machiavelli and Kant through modern writers on social justice such as John Rawls and Bruce Ackerman. This paper blends the concepts of these philosophers and social critics to create a perspective that will help us understand the Microsoft antitrust case in its larger social context, examining why it matters in a fundamental ethical sense to all of us whether it is Microsoft or Sun Microsystems ? or Linux ? that greets us when we turn on our computers each morning."
| |
|
Coffee Cartels and Monopolies, 2002.
A look at how the coffee cartels and monopolies have affected the economy.
2,400 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 6 sources, £ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This ten page undergraduate essay explains what a cartel is and analyses how such an organisation might have prevented the fluctuations in the world price of coffee experienced during the 1990s. The author also explains how the principal buyers of coffee exercise monopoly power, examines the relationship between the wholesale and retail price of coffee, and shows how supernormal profits are generated and sustained.
| |
|
Economic Monopolies, 2007.
An examination of the arguments suggesting that Microsoft enjoys an illegal monopoly.
1,255 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 5 sources, APA, £ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the definition of an economic monopoly and discusses whether Microsoft fits into this definition. The paper examines the three main facts that seem to indicate that Microsoft enjoys illegal monopoly power in the personal computer and software market and discusses whether anti-trust laws have been broken by Microsoft. The paper then discusses the arguments of the defenders of Microsoft.
From the Paper
"Postrel (1998) notes that both Microsoft and the Justice Department appealed Judge Sporkin's ruling against the Consent Decree. This may seem odd since normally a ruling in favor of one party would be appealed by the other party. In this case, however, both parties wanted the Decree to be admitted, so it became the government and Microsoft fighting the court. The appeals court overturned Judge Sporkin's ruling, arguing that he overstepped his bounds. They felt his desire for additional information and for the proposed decree to be broader was beyond the scope of the Tunney Act, under which a court should only consider matters contained in the proposed consent decree. The appeals court mandated that the Consent Decree be allowed."
| |
|
Monopolies and Antitrust, 2003.
An explanation of antitrust and monopoly laws using a specific example from the media industry.
3,104 words (approx. 12.4 pages), 11 sources, MLA, £ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An analysis of whether a single company should be allowed to own a television station and a newspaper in the same geographic market. This paper examines this issue from the perspective of the company, the industry as a whole, and the consumer in the market.
Contents
Introduction
Review and Discussion
Economic Considerations
Discussion of the Problem
Public Policy Interest
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The Sherman Antitrust Act was the key legislation in the United States effort to maintain by a competitive economic playing field by law. This act, which outlawed any ?combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade,? has been reinforced by other legislation aimed at specific practices that serve to lessen competition. In 1914 the U.S. Congress passed the Clayton Antitrust Act and also established the Federal Trade Commission. The Clayton Antitrust Act made illegal such practices as price discrimination and tying contracts, which forced a buyer or seller to deal exclusively with a specific firm for the provision of a good or service. More recently, the Celler-Kefauver Act (1950) attempted to prevent mergers through the acquisition of the assets of competing firms if the effect is to substantially lessen competition. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 also influenced this merger."
| |
|
Monopolies Vs. Competition, 2007.
This paper discusses market structures and presents an argument against government market regulation.
1,043 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 3 sources, APA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper relates that market structures vary in degrees of competition, from a monopoly or a single supplier in the market to an oligopoly where there are a few competing firms. The paper considers the argument of proponents of government regulation that the government has a responsibility to ensure the market is competitive. The paper disputes this by illustrating what happened to monopolies such as Microsoft, IBM and the airline industry. The paper maintains that the government should not interfere with market structures.
From the Paper
"In a perfectly competitive market, price is determined by the true forces of market supply and demand; the seller can only control the quantity of goods it produces. In the long run, the firm maximizes profit or minimizes loss by producing the output where marginal revenue equals marginal cost. A competitive firm's marginal revenue is the given market price. However, barriers to entry (i.e. legal, sociological, natural, technology factors) prevent perfect competition and create alternative market structures, namely monopolies, oligopolies and monopolistic competition as summarized in Figure 1."
| |
|
Monopolies and U.S. Anti-Trust Policy, 2006.
Discusses the U.S. government's response to Verizon Communications, Inc.'s and MCI Inc's intentions to merge into a single telecommunications provider.
1,387 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 5 sources, MLA, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper begins with a discussion of the potential monopolistic practices that could arise from a merger between telecommunications providers Verizon Communications Inc and MCI Inc. The paper then examines the U.S. government response to such a merger and why the government is correctly concerned about preventing a monopoly in the telecommunications industry.
From the Paper
"When Verizon Communications, Inc. ("Verizon") and MCI, Inc. ("MCI") announced their intentions to merge into a single telecommunications provider, the Federal Communications Commission and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice took immediate notice. The government's quick response to such potential threats to competitive markets is perhaps due in part to the history of the telecommunications industry and, in particular, the role of the government in allowing the monopoly to continue for so long. Beginning in 1907, AT&T operated as a legally sanctioned monopoly. AT&T's then-president Theodore Vail argued that due to AT&T's advanced technology, it would be the most efficient provider of telecommunications services and would thus emerge as a natural monopoly. The government was convinced by this argument until 1974, when the United States filed a suit that was settled eight years later and required AT&T to divest itself of the Bell operating companies that provided local phone service."
|
|
|
