In a recent court case, an expert witness defined a monopoly as a firm that can "raise price without reducing its total revenue"
What does this imply about the elasticity of demand? Would this definition hold for a profit-maximizing monopoly? Explain.
If the firm raises price, the quantity sold will decrease. If total revenue is not reduced by this, then marginal revenue is not positive. This implies demand either is price inelastic or has unitary elasticity. This would not hold for a profit-maximizing monopoly. A profit maximizer sets MR = MC. This definition implies that MR is zero or negative, and MC cannot be negative.
You might also like to view...
The quantity equation states that the
A) money supply times the velocity of money equals the price level times real output. B) money supply times the price level equals real output divided by the velocity of money. C) money supply divided by the velocity of money equals the price level divided by real output. D) money supply times the price level equals real output times the velocity of money.
The flaw of the original Keynesian model of the business cycle is that it
A) assumes away output fluctuations. B) assumes complete wage rigidity. C) assumes unrealistic fooling of workers. D) requires procyclical wage movements and continuous labor market equilibrium.
To have more consumer goods in the future, we must
A) produce more capital goods today. B) lower current income. C) get government involved in the production process. D) stop producing all goods today.
When interest rates in the U.S. increase, we can expect NCO to:
A. decrease, because capital inflow is increasing. B. increase, because capital inflow is increasing. C. decrease, because capital outflow is increasing. D. increase, because capital outflow is increasing.