Oligopoly: Monopoly and Demand Curve

An oligopolistic market is one that has several dominant firms with the power to influence the market they are in; an example of this could be the supermarket industry which is dominated by several firms such as Tesco, Sainsbury’s, and Waitrose etc... Furthermore an oligopolistic market can be defined in terms of its structure and its conduct, which involve various different aspects of economics.

As a matter of legal and economic fact, Microsoft is at least ‘monopolistic’. It has such a commanding share of the operating systems market that it can, in many respects, behave like a monopoly.

An oligopoly is a market structure in which a few firms or producers dominate, with each recognizing their interdependence. Under perfect competition or monopolistic competition, there are many firms in the industry. Each firm can ignore the effects of its own actions on rival firms. However, the key to an oligopolistic industry is the need for each firm to consider how its own actions affect the decisions of its relatively few competitors. In an oligopolistic market structure, the consideration of pricing behaviour and actions of one firm to its rival firms is of

Microsoft has their dominance of the industry at stake. They could potentially come out on top if left to continue their current tactics. They are masterfully “marketing their products” and it is paying off for them (Love, 1997).

A monopoly is distinguished from a monopsony, in which there is only one buyer of a product or service; a monopoly may also have monopsony control of a sector of a market. Likewise, a monopoly should be distinguished from a cartel (a form of oligopoly), in which several providers act together to coordinate services, prices or sale of goods. Monopolies, monopsonies and oligopolies are all situations such that one or a few of the entities have market power and therefore interact with their customers (monopoly), suppliers (monopsony) and

An oligopoly is “a market situation in which relatively few sellers [like Burger King, McDonald’s] compete and high start-up costs form barriers to keep out new competitors [like Five Guys Burgers and Fries]” (Boone and Kurtz, 2012, p. 80). Within this competitive fast food burger industry, the main product being offered is a hamburger.

Over the past few years the economy in the United States has taken a downturn. It has been so bad, that some businesses were not able to survive. However, Microsoft Corporation (Microsoft) was not one of those companies. The fiscal strength of Microsoft played a large part in providing the company with the ability and resources to survive the difficult financial markets (Microsoft Corporation, 2009). As a

America's century-old antitrust law is increasingly irrelevant to our current worldwide information technology market. This law is outdated, in accordance to the modern Microsoft situation, because in the past there wasn't technology as there is now. Recently the government has been accusing Microsoft as being a monopoly. "Techno-Optimists" claim that "efforts by government to promote competition by restraining high-tech firms that acquire market power will only stifle competition." Some analysts disagree. They concede that dynamic technology makes it tough to sustain market power. Still, consumers will want compatible equipment, which will lead them to buy whatever product other consumers are using,

The case against Microsoft was brought buy the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as several state Attorneys General. Microsoft is accused of using and maintaining monopoly power to gain an unfair advantage in the market. The case has been under observation for a long time, but the Justice department is having trouble coming up with substantial evidence against Microsoft. Specifically, the Department must prove:That Microsoft has monopoly power and is using it to gain unfair leverage in the market.And that Microsoft has maintained this monopoly power through "exclusionary" or "predatory" acts(Rule).Some say that Microsoft is only taking advantage of its position in the market and using innovative marketing strategies

Since the early 1990s, Microsoft has been charged with attempting to monopolize the computer operating system market (cite). The U.S. government believes that Microsoft tried to do this by integrating Internet Explorer into the operating system in an attempt to eliminate all other competition (cite).

in the most part, states that Microsoft is truly dismantling the competitive market. IBM and Apple created OS/2 and the Mac OS, respectively. Because of this “barrier of entry,” these top companies have not been able to “compete effectively with

Microsoft and its supporter’s claims that they are not breaking any laws, and are just

The patterns I see with Microsoft’s reactions to competition is that they rely heavily on the fact that they are leaders in the field of operating systems and they use this monopoly as leverage on what they give out to their consumers with their “bundling capabilities” (Rivkin 4). In the past I believe they have been successful against competitors even though they have gotten into legal trouble while doing it. This is because even after the law suits they still remained ahead of the pack in market shares.

Microsoft (MS) is a multinational computer technology corporation that develops, manufactures, licenses, and supports a wide range of software products for computing devices. In the mid 1990’s, Microsoft held the monopoly in the production of Operating Systems (OS) for personal computers (PC). When their monopoly was threatened by Netscape, MS began bundling the Internet Explorer (IE) web browser with Windows, using cross-promotional deals with internet service providers (ISP), and prevented PC makers from customizing the opening screen showing Microsoft. These actions, which some view as illegal and unethical, dissolved any competition, raised the barriers of entry and inhibited

An oligopoly, is when there are only a few number of companies that control a specific market. The barriers to entry can be both legal/political (ie. number of licenses awarded to cell phone operators) to the fact that the companies themselves create a "cartel like" attitude effectively brushing of the market new entrants through aggressive measures like undercutting pricing on new smaller entrants, controlling inputs for production, etc.