首页> 外文学位 >THE CREATION, MAINTENANCE, AND EROSION OF MARKET POWER: AN ANALYSIS OF THE DOMINANT FIRM.
【24h】

THE CREATION, MAINTENANCE, AND EROSION OF MARKET POWER: AN ANALYSIS OF THE DOMINANT FIRM.

机译:市场力量的创造,维护和侵蚀:对主导企业的分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This dissertation is a study of the phenomenon known as the "dominant firm." Described also as quasi- or partial monopoly, the dominant firm market structure is characterized by a single firm with a significant degree of market power. Like other large firms its actions shape the market outcome, but it is sizeable enough to be at least partially free from the constraints of oligopolistic interdependence.;The method of analysis includes a comparative case study of nine dominant firms and a statistical comparison of a sample of large nondominant firms with a sample of dominant firms. The firms included in the case study were United Shoe, Pullman, Coca-Cola, Eastman Kodak, Gillette, Campbell Soup, IBM, Boeing, and Procter & Gamble. They were chosen to provide a mixture of firms which had maintained and firms which had lost their market power as well as a mixture of product types.;The examination of the sample's origins of market power revealed that in no case was the dominant firm structure predetermined: every firm in this sample owed its market power to at least two factors or sources of dominance, and in no case were all of the factors passive, that is, technologically or legally determined and thus outside the control of the firm. In contrast to passive factors, active sources of dominance require that the firm make some competitive move; they include invention or innovation, merger, product loyalty, and predation. Two firm's positions were entirely the result of active factors. The remaining seven firms relied on a mixture of active and passive factors.;The importance of each source of market power varied with the type of product the firm made. Firms producing high technology products owed their position to invention or innovation, the realization of scale economies, and product loyalty. For firms producing branded consumer goods, product loyalty played a larger role, and patents and trade secrets replaced scale economies in importance. Innovation was of equal importance for firms of both product types.;Two broad issues are addressed throughout. First, what are the sources of a dominant firm's market power? Second, what forms of conduct characterize a dominant firm structure?;The examination of the conduct characteristic of dominant firms revealed that traditional dominant firm models such as price leadership or limit pricing models do not predict their behavior well. The only evidence of a form of price leadership behavior was that some fringe firms take the dominant firm's price as a guide and mark down from it. Likewise, there was no evidence of limit pricing.;The essence of dominant firm's market power is their ability to use non-price strategies. Dominant firm's products define the market, and they alter them as part of their competitive strategy. Non-price behavior examined in this dissertation included product policies, marketing devices, innovation, vertical integration, and diversification.;Product type determines which non-price strategies are available to a given dominant firm. Branded goods producers most often engaged in product proliferation strategies while producers of high technology items relied on marketing techniques such as leasing and systems introductions or on changes in the rate and manner of introduction of new or improved products.;The conduct of dominant firms is reflected in several observable firm characteristics. They have significantly higher profit rates than other large firms and more internal funds to use for investment. They also have higher rates of investment in research and development and advertising.;Just as firms played an active role in the creation of market power, they also played a role in its maintenance. The main reason for a decline in a firm's market power was its inability to determine the level and direction of demand growth through either its price or non-price strategies.
机译:本文是对被称为“主导企业”的现象的研究。占主导地位的公司市场结构也被描述为准或部分垄断,其特征是具有很大程度的市场力量的单个公司。像其他大型公司一样,其行为影响着市场结果,但它的规模足以至少部分摆脱寡头垄断的相互制约。分析方法包括对九个优势公司的比较案例研究和样本的统计比较。大型非主导性公司,并有一个主导性公司样本。案例研究中包括的公司包括联合鞋业,铂尔曼,可口可乐,伊士曼柯达,吉列,坎贝尔汤,IBM,波音和宝洁。选择它们是为了提供既有维持的公司又有失去市场支配力的公司以及产品类型的混合物。;对样本的市场支配力起源的检查表明,在任何情况下都没有预先确定主导的公司结构:样本中的每个公司都至少将其市场支配力归功于两个因素或支配地位,并且在所有情况下都不是所有因素都是被动的,即在技术上或法律上是确定的,因此不在企业的控制范围之内。与被动因素相反,主动的支配地位要求企业采取一些竞争性行动。它们包括发明或创新,合并,产品忠诚度和掠夺。两家公司的职位完全是积极因素的结果。其余七家公司依赖于主动和被动因素的混合。每个市场力量来源的重要性随公司生产产品的类型而变化。生产高科技产品的公司将自己的地位归功于发明或创新,实现规模经济以及产品忠诚度。对于生产品牌消费品的公司而言,产品忠诚度起着更大的作用,专利和商业机密已取代规模经济。创新对于这两种产品类型的公司都具有同等重要的意义。始终解决两个广泛的问题。首先,主导公司的市场力量的来源是什么?第二,什么形式的行为表征了主导性公司的结构?对主导性公司的行为特征的研究表明,传统的主导性公司模型(例如价格领导力或限价模型)不能很好地预测其行为。价格领导行为形式的唯一证据是,一些边缘公司将主导公司的价格作为指导,并以此为基础进行降价。同样,也没有限制定价的证据。优势公司的市场支配力的本质是他们使用非价格策略的能力。主导公司的产品定义了市场,并改变了它们作为竞争策略的一部分。本文研究的非价格行为包括产品政策,营销手段,创新,纵向整合和多元化。产品类型决定了给定主导公司可以采用哪些非价格策略。品牌产品生产商最常参与产品扩散战略,而高科技产品的生产商则依赖诸如租赁和系统引入之类的营销技术,或者依赖于新产品或改良产品的引入速度和方式的变化。具有几个可观察到的公司特征。他们的利润率比其他大公司高得多,并且有更多内部资金用于投资。他们在研发和广告方面的投资率也更高。就像企业在创造市场力量中发挥了积极作用一样,它们也在维护市场力量中也发挥了作用。公司市场支配力下降的主要原因是它无法通过其价格或非价格策略来确定需求增长的水平和方向。

著录项

  • 作者

    WHITE, ALICE PATRICIA.;

  • 作者单位

    Yale University.;

  • 授予单位 Yale University.;
  • 学科 Economics General.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1980
  • 页码 274 p.
  • 总页数 274
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号