/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 9 New Entrants Pose a Challenge to... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

New Entrants Pose a Challenge to Boeing's Share of the Global Commercial Airplane Market Competition is going to get tougher for Boeing. Currently, the global commercial airplane market for airplanes with a seating capacity of over 100 passengers is lead by Boeing and Airbus. Last year, Boeing with 648 commercial airplane deliveries occupied 43 percent of this market. Airbus with 626 commercial airplane deliveries stood second. Source: Forbes, March 06,2014 a. According to Reuters, the market share of Boeing in the large commercial aircraft segment was above 75 percent before 1990 Describe how the structure of the airplane market has changed over the past few decades. b. If Boeing and Airbus formed a cartel, how would the price charged for airplanes and the profits made change?

Short Answer

Expert verified
Market shifted from Boeing's dominance to a competitive duopoly with Airbus. In a cartel, airplane prices and profits would rise.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding Market Share Change

In the past few decades, the structure of the market has shifted significantly. Before 1990, Boeing controlled over 75% of the market share in the large commercial aircraft segment. As of last year, Boeing's share dropped to 43%, while Airbus has gained a sizable portion, showing the increased competition.
02

Analyzing Current Shares

In the most recent year, Boeing had 648 deliveries, capturing 43% of the market, while Airbus had 626 deliveries. This indicates a near equal split in market share between the two companies, demonstrating a competitive duopoly.
03

Market Share Dynamics

The market shift signifies increased competition and a reduction in Boeing's dominance. This shift likely resulted from Airbus's strategic advancements, increased production, and successful market penetration.
04

Understanding Cartel Formation

If Boeing and Airbus formed a cartel, the dynamics would shift from competitive to cooperative. Both companies would agree on the price and output levels, which would likely result in higher prices for airplanes.
05

Impact on Prices

In a cartel, since the main objective is to maximize profits, the price charged for airplanes would increase above competitive levels. The reduced competition allows the cartel to set prices higher than they would be in a competitive market.
06

Impact on Profits

With higher prices, the profits for Boeing and Airbus would increase. Cartels reduce the price wars and ensure steady profit margins, leading to higher overall profitability for the participating firms.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Market Share
Market share represents the percentage of an industry's sales that a particular company controls. In the airplane market, Boeing held over 75% of the market share in the large commercial aircraft segment before 1990. However, due to competition from Airbus, Boeing's market share has decreased to 43%. This shift indicates significant changes in the market dynamics.
Airbus's rise in market share can be attributed to various factors, such as advancements in technology, improved manufacturing processes, and effective market strategies. As both companies now share a near-equal market share, it highlights the competitiveness of the industry.
Understanding market share is crucial for companies as it influences strategies and operational decisions. The shift from dominance to a more balanced market requires companies to continuously innovate and adapt.
Duopoly
A duopoly refers to a market structure dominated by two firms. In the commercial aircraft market, Boeing and Airbus represent a classic example of a duopoly. Both companies hold significant market shares, with Boeing at 43% and Airbus close behind.
In a duopoly, the actions of one firm directly impact the other. This includes strategies related to pricing, production, and innovation. The intense competition between Boeing and Airbus has led to advances in aircraft technology and efficiency, benefiting consumers.
The presence of a duopoly often results in strategic decision-making where each company must consider the potential responses of its competitor before implementing major changes.
Cartel Formation
Cartel formation occurs when competing firms in an industry collaborate to control prices and output. If Boeing and Airbus formed a cartel, they would agree on the prices and quantity of airplanes produced rather than competing against each other.
Cartels aim to maximize joint profits by reducing competitive pressures. However, they are often illegal because they manipulate market conditions, leading to higher prices and reduced consumer welfare.
In the context of Boeing and Airbus, forming a cartel would shift the competitive landscape to a more cooperative one. This would likely result in higher prices for airplanes, as the reduced competition allows the cartel to control the market more effectively.
Price Setting
Price setting in a competitive market depends on supply and demand dynamics. Companies like Boeing and Airbus determine prices based on production costs, market conditions, and competitive strategies.
In a competitive setting, prices tend to be lower as firms strive to gain market share by attracting customers with better deals. However, in a cartel, Boeing and Airbus would agree on higher price points to maximize profits.
This controlled price setting ensures that both companies benefit from reduced price competition. In the long run, though, such practices can harm consumers by limiting choices and increasing costs.
Profit Maximization
Profit maximization involves strategies aimed at achieving the highest possible profits. For Boeing and Airbus, this includes optimizing production, reducing costs, and setting competitive prices.
In a competitive market, profit maximization forces each firm to innovate and improve efficiency. However, in a cartel, the focus shifts to maintaining high prices and stable profit margins. By removing the cutthroat competition, a cartel guarantees higher profits for its members.
While profit maximization benefits companies by increasing revenues, it should balance with ethical practices and consumer interests to avoid long-term consequences such as market manipulation or reduced consumer trust.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

The Asian rice-exporting nations planned to discuss a proposal that they form a cartel. Ahead of the meeting, the countries said that the purpose of the rice cartel would be to contribute to ensuring food stability, not just in an individual country but also to address food shortages in the region and the world. The cartel will not hoard rice and raise prices when there are shortages. The Philippines says that it is a bad idea. It will create an oligopoly, and the cartel could price the grain out of reach for millions of people. Source: CNN, May 6,2008 a. Assuming the rice-exporting nations become a profit-maximizing colluding oligopoly, explain how they would influence the global market for rice and the world price of rice. b. Assuming the rice-exporting nations become a profit-maximizing colluding oligopoly, draw a graph to illustrate their influence on the global market for rice. c. Even in the absence of international antitrust laws, why might it be difficult for this cartel to successfully collude? Use the ideas of game theory to explain.

Consider a game with two players who cannot communicate, and in which each player is asked a question. The players can answer honestly or lie. If both answer honestly, each receives \(\$ 100\). If one player answers honestly and the other lies, the liar receives \(\$ 500\) and the honest player gets nothing. If both lie, then each receives \(\$ 50\). a. Describe the strategies and the payoffs. b. Construct the payoff matrix. c. What is the equilibrium of this game? d. Compare this game to the prisoners' dilemma. Are the games similar or different? Explain.

Soapy Inc. and Suddies Inc., the only soappowder producers, collude and agree to share the market equally. If neither firm cheats, each makes \(\$ 1\) million. If one firm cheats, it makes \(\$ 1.5\) million, while the complier incurs a loss of \(\$ 0.5\) million. If both cheat, they break even. Neither firm can monitor the other's actions. a. What are the strategies in this game? Construct the payoff matrix for this game. b. If the game is played only once what is the equilibrium? Is it a dominant- strategy equilibrium? Explain.

Gadgets for Sale \(\ldots\) or Not How come the prices of some gadgets, like the iPod, are the same no matter where you shop? No, the answer isn't that Apple illegally manages prices. In reality, Apple uses an accepted retail strategy called minimum advertised price to discourage resellers from discounting. The minimum advertised price \((\mathrm{MAP})\) is the absolute lowest price of a product that resellers can advertise. Marketing subsidies offered by a manufacturer to its resellers usually keep the price at or above the MAP. Stable prices are important to the company that is both a manufacturer and a retailer. If Apple resellers advertised the iPod below cost. they could squeeze the Apple Stores out of their own markets. The downside to the price stability is that by limiting how low sellers can go, MAP keeps prices artificially high (or at least higher than they might otherwise be with unfettered price competition). Source: Slate, December 22, 2006 a. Describe the practice of resale price maintenance that violates the Sherman Act. b. Describe the MAP strategy used by Apple and explain how it differs from a resale price maintenance agreement that would violate the Sherman Act.

United Airlines and Continental Airlines announced a \(\$ 3\) billion merger to create the world's biggest airline. The new airline will be able to better compete with low-cost domestic and foreign airlines. Travelers could face higher fares, although the merged airline has no such plans. But one rationale for any merger is to cut capacity. Source: The New York Times, June 7, 2010 a. Explain how this airline merger might (i) increase air travel prices or (ii) lower air travel production costs. b. Explain how cost savings arising from a cut in capacity might be passed on to travelers or boost producers' profits. Which might happen from this airline merger and why?

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.