This is a Chinese version of Competitive Strategy. You can find the original course in English from our course catalog. 此版本是Coursera首次尝试推出的中文翻译版。课程视频为英文原版附中文字幕，课程页面和测验已译成中文，帮助中心提供中文支持。 在本课程（共六个模块）中，你将了解企业在战略决策相互依存的情况下如何行事。例如，你的行动会如何影响竞争对手的利润，反之亦然。我们将会借助博弈论的基本工具分析企业如何选择策略以获得竞争优势。
垄断者对新入者的威胁 Monopolist with Threat of Entry
Loading...
En provenance du cours de Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU)
竞争策略（中文版）
436 notes
À partir de la leçon
为何要关注研发？Why Worry About Research and Development
在探讨研发的时候，一些重要的策略问题会反复出现。我们将通过本模块仔细研究这些问题。不少创新的诞生的确是源自好运气，但似乎毋庸置疑——大部分时候是因为创新者积极努力实现某个具体的发明。
Rencontrer les enseignants
Tobias KretschmerProfessor
Institute for Strategy, Technology and Organization
So in the previous two videos we've looked at a firm coming out of a
competitive situation, and a monopolist with no threat of entry.
In this one we're going to combine the two to some extent, and look at a
monopolist, and a potential entrant as well.
So there is a threat of entry, meaning that if the monopolist doesn't innovate,
then the entrant will. We'll take exactly the same set up.
100 consumers, 60, high willingness to pay, 40, low willingness to pay.
A current technology of 300 Euros per motorbike, and a new technology of 200
Euros per motorbike, right? So the only difference now is in the
competitive setting. So we can compare what the incentives to
innovate or the value of innovation is to each of those firms.
We currently are looking out on a monopolist.
This monopolist is the only firm producing and selling motorbikes and that
firm, you could think has a patent on the old production technology.
So it's the only firm that can produce at 300 Euros per bike.
The potential entrant is interested in innovating because you know that, or he
knows that, he can't produce at 300 Euros so if anything he could only get the
innovation and produce at 200 Euros. So, with innovation, let's first have a
quick look at the in video quiz to make sure that you're still with me.
I hope that was fairly easy for you, so let's just repeat the entrants staying
out of the market means that there are production costs now of 200 euros for the
monopolists. The entrant plays no role here in this
setting, monopolists again faces the choices of setting a price of 500 Euros,
and making a profit of 18,000 or setting a price of 400 Euros and making profits
of 20,000. So therefore, the best outcome is
going to be to set a price of 400 Euros and making profits of 20,000.
Things get a bit more tricky if we look at the case without innovation, so if the
monopolist does not innovate. What's going to happen? The entrant is
going to jump into the market. So, the entrant entering the market.
Could mean that the monopolist and the entrant agree on a price of 400 Euros.
The market then is shared equally because they both produce the same motorcycle,
it's just that the entrant can produce it at 200 Euros a piece and the monopolist
or former monopolist can produce it at 300 a piece.
So they share the market equally, and sell to 50 consumers each, and there's
going to be production cost of 300 Euros for the monopolist who's stuck with the
old technology. And of 200 Euros for entrant who more or
less leap frogged the current monopolist. We could, of course, now figure out what
the profits are, first for the monopolist and then for the entrant.
So, the monopolist sells to 50 consumers. He sells at a price of 400 Euros, and he
has production costs of 300. So, that means that it's going to be 50
times 100, that's his profit margin. So, overall
profits are going to be 500 Euros. Profits from the entrant again are going
to be 50, because the entrant also sells to half of the market.
The price is the same, so it's again 400 but the production costs are
200. So, this means that he's going to sell to
50 consumers and have a profit margin of 200.
So, overall profits are going to be 10,000 for the entrant.
So, from that we can derive what the value of innovation is.
First, for the monopolists. Simply by comparing the profits with
innovation and the profits without. So with innovation we know that the
profits are going to be 20,000. Without innovation the entrant is going
to jump into the market, and the monopolist is going to be left with a
profit of 5,000. So if we then take the difference between
those two, that's 20,000 minus 5,000, leaves the monopolist with a value of
innovation of 15,000. So, how do things look for the entrant?
And we are comparing the profits with innovation and the profits without.
With innovation, of course, our profits are going to be 10,000 as we just
calculated. Without innovation our profits are
going to be 0, so the difference between the two is the value of innovation for
the firm who wants to enter a market that's currently occupied by a
monopolist. So the interesting bit now is that we can
compare with the two different scenarios, the monopolies with entry and the
monopolies without the threat of entry. And of course, we can also include the
competitive market, so the value of innovation in a competitive market is
9,900 Euros. The value of innovation for a monopolist
who is not threatened by an entrant is 8,000.
Once he gets threatened by entry his incentives to innovate shoot up to
15,000, and for the entrant it's 10,000. So just looking at these numbers we can
see what we call the efficiency effect. The efficiency effect suggests that
under the threat of entry, a monopolist has higher incentives to innovate than a
potential entrant in the market. So, 15,000 is more than 10,000, why?
Because he's interested in trying to predict his monopoly position.
So, this of course goes against what we saw previously where the firm coming out
of the competitive market had a higher incentive to innovate than the
monopolist. So, what is the trade-off that a
monopolist is facing. He's facing a trade-off between the
replacement effect and the efficiency effect.
The replacement effect suggests that there is less innovation by a monopolist
because he is replacing old profits with new ones.
The efficiency effect suggests that there is more innovation by the monopolist,
because he is concerned about protecting his own monopoly position.
And, of course, you might ask, well, when is one more realistic?
When is one more strong? When is one more relevant than the other?
When does replacement effect bite and when does the efficiency effect bite?
As we saw the main difference or the only difference between the second and the
third model that we looked at was the threat of entry, right?
So the probability of entry determines if the replacement effect or the efficiency
effect is more relevant. And we can generally say that the higher
the probability of entry, the more the efficiency effect is going to come into
play, and the lower the probability of entry the more the replacement effect is
going to bite. So now under the last three videos, in
the last three videos, we asked under which circumstances firms would innovate
the most. We started out looking at a competitive
market and we compared it to a monopolistic situation in the second video.
We figured that a monopolist has fewer incentives to innovate than a firm coming
out of a competitive situation. And we asked why?
Well, the reason was that by innovating the monopolist cannibalizes his own
profits from the old technology. This is what we call the replacement
effect, replacing old profits with new ones.
In the last model we looked at, we imagined that the monopolist fears the
threat of an entrant and being replaced as a monopolist.
So, there's now a potential innovation, that would make it easy for a firm to
actually enter the market. Under these circumstances, the monopolist
will put in lots of effort and lots of money into this innovation.
This is not necessarily, because he can increase profits with the innovation
itself. The idea is the monopolist can now keep
the entrant out of his own market by innovating and hence, securing his
monopoly profits. This is what we then called, the
efficiency effect. So, combining all this suggests that a
monopoly is maybe more innovative in some situations and in particular, in
situations where the threat of entry is particularly high.
Or, to put it differently, if we wanted to maximize the innovation efforts of firms,
there needs to be some degree of monopoly power to give firms a carrot of
innovating. But at the same time there has to be a
sufficient threat of entry which would work as a stick.
So, in the next couple of videos, we'll move on to another set of strategic
aspects of innovation. For now, though, stay tuned and I'll see
you very soon.
Explorer notre catalogue
Rejoignez-nous gratuitement et obtenez des recommendations, des mises à jour et des offres personnalisées.
Coursera propose un accès universel à la meilleure formation au monde,
en partenariat avec des universités et des organisations du plus haut niveau, pour proposer des cours en ligne.
© 2019 Coursera Inc. Tous droits réservés.
