Table of Contents
MS’s market share is so massive that it can behave like a monopoly
When there are similar businesses that provide the same service in the market, consumers and customers have a larger base of choice; these tone down the pricing, service deliver, and quality production of enterprises and companies to customers. The competition brought about by competing companies which produce the same goods and services to the market helps in setting standard prices in the market. However, in the event that only one business enterprise dominates the market without competition, the business would easily adopt any price; produce any quality of goods and services to the market. In such a case, there cannot be standard pricing in the market. The existing business would set its prices as it wills. In the case of MS, monopoly exists because its market share is so massive that no significant competitor can outshine it in the market. For that reason, their software is expensive and their software developers are expensive to higher. This is a scenario that would not be witnessed if there were major competitors. There is a further likelihood of MS to behave as a monopoly since it is so stable in the market that for another software company to penetrate would be very difficult. The company also has developed partnership with other firms. This gives it an advantage over other software companies that may want to penetrate the market.Want an expert to write a paper for you Talk to an operator now
MS is a good example of dead weight loss to its economy
The emergence of software developers is currently providing a significant competition age for Microsoft. Other companies which are coming up also see a steady shift of customers’ preferences. However, MS still dominates the market. The imposture of the tax by the government has seen the raising of the MS price. Also their high prices on their products, goods and services has made people to shy away from purchasing their expensive staff since they can find alternative in other upcoming companies. The deadweight loss is true since people distribute resources in accordance to the inducement of prices based on the taxes levied upon them by the government. The more the MS maintain its prices to sustain the taxes to the government; people shy off thereby the government losing revenue significantly.
Jackson’s argument is valid
For any business which is established in the market with the public good will, it is not easy for any company to come up and replace it in the market. It is also not easy for an upcoming company to be trusted in the market. Jackson’s first argument is valid. MS’s market share for Intel-compatible PC operating system is extremely large and stable has truth value. This gives an advantage over other companies which may want to enter the market. MS may lower its prices and employ other marketing strategies to maintain its popularity in the market. Secondly, MS’s dominant market share is highly protected by barrier to entry. They have developed mechanisms that always give them an advantage over the competitors. The upcoming companies may not hold significant competition against MS effectively. They would always outshine them in all aspects of business competition. The third claim also holds true. MS’s customers lack a commercial viable alternative to windows. This subjects them to any mistreatment and high prices that may be imposed in them by the company. The company may also use its financial power to frustrate any company that would pose major competition to them.
The industrial trend in the software industry is steadily growing. The onset and the emergence of Macitosh and other software developers have contributed significantly in reducing the monopoly of MS. This increasing trend has reduced the monopoly of MS in dominating the market.