Seven firms provide mobile communication services in Estara, but the four largest firms dominate the market. Consumer groups claim that prices remain high because firms avoid aggressive price competition. The competition authority has found evidence that the two largest firms discussed coordinating prices.
Table 1 shows each firm’s market share.
Market shares of mobile communication firms in Estara.
| Firm | Market share / % |
|---|---|
| Alpha | 38 |
| Beta | 27 |
| Connect | 15 |
| Datalink | 8 |
| E-Mobile | 5 |
| FastCall | 4 |
| G-Net | 3 |
Table 2 shows annual profits for firms Alpha and Beta under two pricing strategies. Alpha’s payoff is shown first in each cell. All profits are measured in millions of estaras.
Annual profit payoffs for Alpha and Beta (Alpha listed first; millions of estaras).
| Alpha strategy / Beta strategy | Keep price high | Cut price |
|---|---|---|
| Keep price high | ||
| Cut price |
The authority detects unlawful coordination with a probability of 25%. It is considering a fine of 160 million estaras for each participating firm.
Calculate the four-firm concentration ratio in Estara’s mobile communication market.
Explain what the concentration ratio suggests about the structure of this market.
Using Table 2, determine the dominant strategy for each firm and the resulting non-collusive equilibrium.
Calculate the increase in combined annual profit if Alpha and Beta successfully coordinate on keeping prices high rather than both cutting prices.
Calculate the expected financial cost of the proposed fine for each colluding firm and explain its effect on the payoff from keeping prices high.
Draw a diagram showing a successful collusive oligopoly acting as a monopoly.
Explain two possible effects of successful price coordination on stakeholders in Estara.
Using the text/data provided and your knowledge of economics, recommend a policy to reduce the harm caused by coordination in Estara’s mobile communication market.
Many small boutique fitness studios operate in Arandia’s capital. They offer differentiated classes based on location, teaching style, branding and equipment. Entry was previously relatively easy, but a new licensing rule requires each studio to pay a large non-refundable application fee.
Table 1 gives short-run information for one representative studio. Output is measured in thousands of memberships per year, while revenue and cost are measured in thousands of arans.
Short-run revenue and cost information for a representative fitness studio.
| Output / thousand memberships per year | Price / arans per membership | Total revenue / thousand arans | Total economic cost / thousand arans |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 26 | 104 | 100 |
| 5 | 25 | 125 | 112 |
| 6 | 24 | 144 | 126 |
| 7 | 23 | 161 | 143 |
| 8 | 22 | 176 | 164 |
Consumer groups argue that the licensing rule will reduce entry and allow existing studios to maintain higher prices.
Define the term product differentiation.
Calculate marginal revenue and marginal cost as output increases from 6 hundred to 7 hundred memberships.
Determine the studio’s profit-maximizing output and price.
Calculate the studio’s economic profit at the profit-maximizing output.
Explain how entry would affect the representative studio if the licensing rule were removed.
Draw a diagram showing the long-run equilibrium of a firm in monopolistic competition.
Explain why long-run monopolistic competition may involve both a benefit and a market failure.
Using the text/data provided and your knowledge of economics, recommend whether the government of Arandia should retain, reform or remove the licensing rule for fitness studios.
Explain how entry and exit lead a perfectly competitive firm towards normal profit in the long run.
Using real-world examples, evaluate the view that perfect competition produces outcomes that are more desirable than those produced by markets with significant market power.
Explain how barriers to entry enable a monopolist to maintain abnormal profit in the long run.
Using real-world examples, discuss whether reducing barriers to entry is the most effective way to limit monopoly power.
Build a Practice Exam — Economics HL
Test your knowledge with a custom paper containing questions from selected topics.


Explain why the profit-maximizing output of a monopoly is allocatively inefficient.
Using real-world examples, evaluate the view that the welfare loss caused by monopoly is always greater than any benefits generated by a monopolist.
Explain why oligopolistic firms may prefer non-price competition to price competition.
Using real-world examples, evaluate the view that non-price competition in oligopolistic markets mainly benefits consumers.
Explain how a concentration ratio may be used to assess the degree of market power in an industry.
Using real-world examples, evaluate whether a high concentration ratio is sufficient evidence that government intervention is required.
Explain how entry and exit establish long-run equilibrium for a firm in monopolistic competition.
Using real-world examples, discuss whether the product variety provided by monopolistic competition outweighs its allocative inefficiency.
Build a Practice Exam — Economics HL
Test your knowledge with a custom paper containing questions from selected topics.


Explain how economies of scale and abnormal profit may enable a large firm with significant market power to benefit consumers.
Using real-world examples, discuss whether innovation is more likely when a market is dominated by a few large firms than when it contains many small firms.
Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
Belland Rail is the only operator of passenger trains on Belland’s national rail network. Constructing parallel tracks would involve extremely high fixed costs, while the cost of carrying an additional passenger is low. Economists therefore describe the network as a natural monopoly.
Belland Rail is privately owned and protected by a 20-year operating licence. Passenger groups claim that fares are high, services are overcrowded and the firm restricts output to increase profit. The firm argues that its abnormal profit finances safer trains and research into lower-energy technology.
The government is considering a maximum fare and minimum service-quality standards. It may also require Belland Rail to give other operators access to its tracks. Regulation could protect passengers, although the regulator does not have complete information about the firm’s costs.
Alternatively, the government could purchase Belland Rail. Supporters of government ownership expect greater access for rural passengers, while opponents fear political interference and weak cost control.
Belland Rail annual revenue and cost data
| Annual journeys / million | Average fare / bellars per journey | Average economic cost / bellars per journey |
|---|---|---|
| 8 | 24 | 17 |
Annual passenger rail journeys under current monopoly output and estimated allocatively efficient output.
| Output measure | Annual journeys / million |
|---|---|
| Current monopoly output | 8 |
| Estimated allocatively efficient output | 12 |
Define the term natural monopoly indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 1).
Define the term regulation indicated in bold (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using Table 1, calculate Belland Rail’s annual economic profit. Show your working.
Using Table 2, calculate the percentage increase in journeys required to reach the allocatively efficient output.
Using a natural monopoly diagram, explain why one rail operator may have lower average costs than competing rail networks (Text A, paragraph 1).
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how Belland Rail determines its profit-maximizing fare and output (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain why Belland Rail may be allocatively inefficient (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how a maximum fare could affect Belland Rail’s price and output (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, evaluate whether government ownership is preferable to regulation of Belland Rail.
Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
Three firms supply almost all mobile services in Caruba. Entry requires a government spectrum licence and a nationwide network. The firms are interdependent because each pricing decision affects the sales of its rivals.
Following several years of stable prices, the competition authority found messages suggesting that the firms had agreed not to offer monthly contracts below 30 carubs. The firms deny collusion, claiming that similar costs explain similar prices.
A new virtual-network operator entered by renting access to an existing network and charging lower prices. The three established firms responded with temporary discounts, raising the possibility of a price war.
The authority may impose fines and require network access on fair terms. Consumer groups support intervention, but the firms argue that high profits finance fifth-generation network investment in remote regions.
Mobile market shares in Caruba
| Mobile provider | Market share / % |
|---|---|
| Alpha | 38 |
| Beta | 31 |
| Connect | 24 |
| All other firms | 7 |
Uncompleted two-firm payoff matrix for price strategies.
| Firm A / Firm B | High price | Low price |
|---|---|---|
| High price | ||
| Low price |
Define the term interdependent indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 1).
Define the term collusion indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using Table 1, calculate the three-firm concentration ratio in Caruba’s mobile market.
Using Table 2, calculate the price elasticity of demand for mobile contracts using the initial values. Show your working.
Using a collusive oligopoly diagram, explain how the three established firms could jointly determine price and output (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain how successful collusion could create allocative inefficiency (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how entry by the virtual-network operator could affect mobile-contract prices (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using a payoff matrix, explain why two mobile firms may have an incentive to keep prices high but nevertheless both cut prices.
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, discuss whether fines and compulsory network access are likely to improve outcomes in Caruba’s mobile market.
Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
Medica developed a treatment for a rare disease. A patent prevents other firms from producing the medicine for 12 years, creating a significant barrier to entry. Patients have no close substitute, and the national health service purchases nearly all doses.
Medica states that its abnormal profit rewards risky research and finances trials for new treatments. Patient groups argue that the high price limits access and transfers public funds to Medica’s shareholders.
The government is considering a maximum price, compulsory licensing to generic producers, or a fine if Medica is found to have charged an excessive price. Medica warns that compulsory licensing would weaken future innovation incentives.
The health ministry could instead negotiate a price linked to treatment outcomes. However, the ministry has less information than Medica about development costs and clinical effectiveness.
Medica's annual output, price and average economic cost.
| Annual output / doses | Price / noras per dose | Average economic cost / noras per dose |
|---|---|---|
| 200000 | 90 | 50 |
Medica’s annual research expenditure before and after patent approval.
| Period | Annual research expenditure / million noras |
|---|---|
| Before patent approval | 3 |
| After patent approval | 8 |
Define the term barrier to entry indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 1).
Define the term abnormal profit indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using Table 1, calculate Medica’s annual abnormal profit. Show your working.
Using Table 2, calculate the percentage increase in Medica’s annual research expenditure.
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how Medica determines the profit-maximizing price and quantity of doses (Text A).
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how Medica can earn abnormal profit (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain how the patent may cause allocative inefficiency (Text A, paragraph 1).
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how compulsory licensing could affect the market price and quantity of the medicine (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, discuss whether compulsory licensing is the best government response to Medica’s market power.
Build a Practice Exam — Economics HL
Test your knowledge with a custom paper containing questions from selected topics.


Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
Four supermarket chains account for most grocery sales in Estara. Their large distribution centres permit bulk purchasing and specialized logistics. Independent shops claim that the chains use below-cost introductory prices to discourage entry.
The chains compete through loyalty schemes, home delivery and own-brand products. This non-price competition has increased convenience, but consumer groups argue that apparent variety hides similar products supplied by the same large firms.
FreshWay wants to acquire DailyBasket. The merger would increase concentration and might reduce competition in smaller towns. FreshWay claims that greater economies of scale would lower average costs and food prices.
The competition authority may block the merger, require the sale of some stores or impose conditions protecting suppliers. It must decide whether expected efficiencies are likely to reach consumers.
Grocery market shares before the proposed merger; independent retailers are shown as an aggregate.
| Retailer or group | Market share / % |
|---|---|
| FreshWay | 29 |
| ValueMart | 24 |
| ShopHub | 18 |
| DailyBasket | 12 |
| Independent retailers (aggregate) | 17 |
FreshWay projected cost and price per basket before and after the proposed merger.
| Projection | Average cost / estrellas per basket | Price / estrellas per basket |
|---|---|---|
| Before merger | 42 | 48 |
| After merger | 37 | 46 |
Define the term non-price competition indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Define the term economies of scale indicated in bold (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using Table 1, calculate the four-firm concentration ratio before and after the proposed merger.
Using Table 2, calculate how much of the projected average-cost saving per basket is passed to consumers through a lower price.
Using a long-run average cost diagram, explain how the merger could reduce FreshWay’s average costs (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how increased market power could prevent all merger cost savings from reaching consumers (Text B, paragraph 2).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain how reduced competition after the merger could affect allocative efficiency.
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how requiring FreshWay to sell some stores could affect grocery prices in local markets (Text B, paragraph 2).
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, evaluate whether Estara’s competition authority should block the FreshWay–DailyBasket merger.
Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
Lydora has hundreds of independently owned cafés. Entry requires limited capital, but cafés differentiate themselves through location, menus, décor and service. The market therefore resembles monopolistic competition.
BeanHouse introduced a distinctive menu and earned high profit during its first year. Several similar cafés then entered nearby. BeanHouse’s demand fell and became more price elastic as consumers gained additional substitutes.
BeanHouse now earns normal profit. Its owner nevertheless receives an income because the opportunity cost of the owner’s time and capital is included in economic cost.
Some economists criticize duplicated advertising and unused seating capacity. Others argue that product variety allows consumers to choose cafés that better match their preferences.
BeanHouse short-run daily data
| Daily output / drinks | Average price / lydors per drink | Average economic cost / lydors per drink |
|---|---|---|
| 400 | 6.00 | 4.50 |
Market entry and BeanHouse daily sales
| Nearby cafés | BeanHouse daily sales / drinks |
|---|---|
| 20 | 400 |
| 25 | 320 |
Define the term monopolistic competition indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 1).
Define the term normal profit indicated in bold (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using Table 1, calculate BeanHouse’s daily economic profit. Show your working.
Using Table 2, calculate the percentage decrease in BeanHouse’s daily sales.
Using a monopolistic competition diagram, explain how BeanHouse earned abnormal profit in the short run (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a monopolistic competition diagram, explain how entry leads BeanHouse toward long-run normal profit (Texts A and B).
Using a monopolistic competition diagram, explain why BeanHouse remains allocatively inefficient in long-run equilibrium (Text B, paragraph 2).
Using a diagram comparing demand elasticity, explain why BeanHouse has less market power than a monopoly (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, discuss whether the product variety provided by Lydora’s cafés outweighs the market’s inefficiency.
Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
Meridian Grid owns the transmission lines linking generators to households. The network’s large fixed costs and falling long-run average cost make duplicate grids inefficient. The government therefore permits one supplier but controls its prices.
The regulator allows Meridian Grid to earn a specified return on capital and requires universal service. Critics argue that this form of price regulation gives the firm an incentive to exaggerate costs and invest in unnecessary capital.
Storm damage caused lengthy power cuts. Consumer groups claim that Meridian Grid reduced maintenance to increase economic profit. The firm says the regulated price was too low to finance resilient infrastructure.
The government is considering public ownership. This could prioritize reliability and access, but taxpayers would bear losses and political objectives might replace efficient management.
Meridian Grid annual finances
| Item | Annual value / million merids |
|---|---|
| Total revenue | 540 |
| Explicit costs | 430 |
| Implicit opportunity costs | 50 |
Meridian Grid reliability indicators for two periods.
| Reliability measure | Earlier period | Later period |
|---|---|---|
| Average annual outage time / hours per household | 3 | 7.5 |
| Maintenance expenditure / million merids | 90 | 72 |
Define the term price regulation indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Define the term economic profit indicated in bold (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using Table 1, calculate Meridian Grid’s annual economic profit. Show your working.
Using Table 2, calculate the percentage decrease in maintenance expenditure.
Using a natural monopoly diagram, explain why a single electricity grid may minimize average cost (Text A, paragraph 1).
Using a monopoly diagram, explain why an unregulated Meridian Grid might charge a price above marginal cost (Text B).
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how a maximum price set too low could affect Meridian Grid (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how a service-quality requirement could affect the market for reliable electricity distribution.
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, evaluate whether public ownership would improve Meridian Grid’s performance.
Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
Cement production requires expensive plants, access to limestone and extensive distribution networks. Four producers supply nearly the entire market. The government suspects that firms have divided customers geographically.
A high concentration ratio may indicate market power, but the producers argue that imported cement and potential entrants constrain their pricing. They also claim that large plants achieve technical economies of scale.
Construction companies report simultaneous cement-price increases despite falling energy costs. The competition authority is considering fines and individual penalties for managers if price fixing is proven.
Housing groups support strict enforcement because cement is an important input into construction. The firms warn that large fines could reduce investment and employment.
Annual cement sales by producer
| Producer | Annual sales / million tonnes |
|---|---|
| StoneCo | 4.2 |
| BuildCem | 3.1 |
| SolidMix | 1.8 |
| RockWorks | 0.9 |
| Importers | 1.0 |
Cement price and average energy cost per tonne.
| Period | Cement price / dars per tonne | Average energy cost / dars per tonne |
|---|---|---|
| Initial | 100 | 30 |
| Later | 125 | 24 |
Define the term concentration ratio indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Define the term price fixing indicated in bold (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using Table 1, calculate the four-firm concentration ratio for domestic cement producers. Show your working.
Using Table 2, calculate the percentage change in average energy cost per tonne.
Using a collusive oligopoly diagram, explain how geographic market sharing could affect cement price and output (Text A, paragraph 1).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain how price fixing could affect the construction market (Text B).
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how increased cement imports could constrain domestic producers’ market power (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a long-run average cost diagram, explain why large cement plants may have lower average costs (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, evaluate whether large fines are the most effective response to suspected price fixing in Darsana’s cement industry.
Build a Practice Exam — Economics HL
Test your knowledge with a custom paper containing questions from selected topics.


Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
AquaPel owns the reservoirs and pipe network supplying Pelago’s capital. No household has a close alternative to piped water. The firm’s licence and ownership of the network create high barriers to entry.
AquaPel has been accused of restricting output through underinvestment in leakage control. Water tariffs have risen while service interruptions have become more frequent.
The regulator proposes a five-year price cap that allows tariff increases only when economy-wide inflation exceeds expected productivity growth. AquaPel argues that the regulator has underestimated future maintenance costs.
Consumer groups support the cap but demand minimum quality standards as well. Economists warn that price regulation without quality monitoring may encourage further cost cutting.
AquaPel annual water sales, tariff and economic cost.
| Annual water sales / million | Average tariff / pelars per | Average economic cost / pelars per |
|---|---|---|
| 50 | 3.20 | 2.60 |
Water service indicators for AquaPel's network.
| Indicator / unit | Earlier value | Latest value |
|---|---|---|
| Network leakage rate / % | 18 | 27 |
| Average annual household interruptions / interruptions per household per year | 2 | 5 |
Define the term restricting output indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Define the term price cap indicated in bold (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using Table 1, calculate AquaPel’s annual economic profit. Show your working.
Using Table 2, calculate the percentage increase in the leakage rate.
Using a natural monopoly diagram, explain why one pipe network may supply Pelago at lower average cost than multiple networks (Text A).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain how AquaPel’s restricted output may cause market failure (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how a binding price cap could affect AquaPel’s tariff and output (Text B).
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how mandatory leakage-reduction investment could affect reliable water supply (Text B, paragraph 2).
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, discuss whether a price cap combined with quality standards is likely to improve welfare in Pelago.
NorlPharm is the only supplier of Cardiox, an essential medicine protected by a patent. No close substitutes are available. The government is concerned that the patent allows NorlPharm to restrict output and charge a price above marginal cost.
Assume that there are no externalities and that all monetary values are measured in Norland dollars. Table 1 gives the market demand and cost information.
Market demand and cost information for Cardiox in Norland.
| Relationship | Equation | Units |
|---|---|---|
| Inverse market demand | : Norland dollars per treatment; : thousand treatments per month | |
| Marginal revenue | Norland dollars per treatment | |
| Marginal cost | Norland dollars per treatment | |
| Total cost | : thousand Norland dollars per month | |
| Average cost | Norland dollars per treatment |
The government is considering a maximum price or a compulsory licence that would allow other qualified producers to manufacture Cardiox.
Define the term market power.
Calculate NorlPharm’s profit-maximizing output and price.
Calculate NorlPharm’s monthly economic profit at the profit-maximizing output.
Determine the allocatively efficient output and price.
Calculate the welfare loss resulting from NorlPharm’s profit-maximizing decision.
Using the information in Table 1, draw a diagram showing NorlPharm’s profit-maximizing equilibrium, abnormal profit and the welfare loss relative to the allocatively efficient output.
Explain how the patent creates market failure in the Cardiox market.
Using the text/data provided and your knowledge of economics, recommend a policy that the government of Norland should use to reduce the market failure in the Cardiox market.
AquaBell is the privately owned sole supplier of piped water in the city of Bellara. Constructing a second pipe network would require substantial duplication of fixed infrastructure. AquaBell’s annual total cost is given by , where output is measured in millions of cubic metres per year and total cost is measured in millions of bellars per year.
Table 1 shows three possible price and output outcomes considered by the water regulator. Values in Table 1 are rounded to two decimal places where applicable.
Possible regulated and unregulated outcomes for AquaBell.
| Outcome | Quantity / million m³ | Price / bellars per m³ | Marginal cost / bellars per m³ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unregulated profit maximization | 20 | 60 | 20 |
| Average-cost pricing | 34.14 | 31.72 | 20 |
| Marginal-cost pricing | 40 | 20 | 20 |
The regulator must balance affordable water, allocative efficiency, AquaBell’s financial sustainability and continued maintenance of the network.
Define the term natural monopoly.
Using AquaBell’s total cost equation, calculate its average cost when output is 20 million cubic metres and when output is 40 million cubic metres.
Calculate AquaBell’s economic profit under unregulated profit maximization.
Calculate AquaBell’s economic profit under average-cost pricing.
Calculate the annual subsidy required if the regulator imposes marginal-cost pricing and guarantees that AquaBell covers its total economic costs.
Draw a natural monopoly diagram showing unregulated profit maximization, average-cost pricing and marginal-cost pricing.
Explain the trade-off faced by the regulator when choosing between average-cost pricing and marginal-cost pricing.
Using the text/data provided and your knowledge of economics, recommend how the government of Bellara should regulate or organize the piped-water industry.
Several firms operate online marketplaces in Tazbek. MarketHub proposes to acquire ShopLink. The competition authority is concerned that network effects, control of transaction data and high switching costs already protect the largest platforms.
Table 1 shows market shares before the proposed acquisition.
Online-marketplace market shares before and after the proposed acquisition.
| Platform | Before acquisition / % | After acquisition / % |
|---|---|---|
| MarketHub | 28 | 46 |
| TradeZone | 22 | 22 |
| ShopLink | 18 | — |
| QuickCart | 12 | 12 |
| Bazaar | 8 | 8 |
| LocalList | 7 | 7 |
| Other platforms | 5 | 5 |
Table 2 gives price, revenue and total economic cost information for MarketHub’s premium seller service. Quantities are measured in millions of subscriptions per year and monetary values are in millions of taz.
MarketHub premium seller service: revenue and cost data
| Quantity / million subscriptions per year | Price / taz per subscription | Total revenue / million taz | Total economic cost / million taz |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | — | 0 | 4 |
| 1 | 14 | 14 | 8 |
| 2 | 12 | 24 | 13 |
| 3 | 10 | 30 | 19 |
| 4 | 8 | 32 | 27 |
| 5 | 6 | 30 | 38 |
Define the term barrier to entry.
Calculate the four-firm concentration ratio before and after the proposed acquisition.
Using Table 2, calculate marginal revenue and marginal cost as output increases from 2 million to 3 million subscriptions.
Determine MarketHub’s profit-maximizing output and price for its premium seller service.
Calculate MarketHub’s economic profit at the profit-maximizing output.
Draw a diagram showing a price-making firm earning abnormal profit at the profit-maximizing output.
Explain how network effects and switching costs may strengthen MarketHub’s market power following the acquisition.
Using the text/data provided and your knowledge of economics, recommend how the Tazbek competition authority should respond to the proposed acquisition.
Build a Practice Exam — Economics HL
Test your knowledge with a custom paper containing questions from selected topics.


The semiconductor industry in Carinth is dominated by a small number of firms. NanoCore, the largest producer, proposes acquiring a smaller competitor. NanoCore argues that its scale and abnormal profit allow it to finance risky research and development.
Table 1 shows firms’ current market shares.
Semiconductor firms’ market shares before the proposed acquisition.
| Firm | Market share / % |
|---|---|
| NanoCore | 36 |
| Silica | 24 |
| QuantumChip | 17 |
| MicroPeak (acquisition target) | 9 |
| LogicWorks | 6 |
| Other firms | 8 |
Table 2 gives information about a process innovation recently developed by NanoCore. Output is measured in millions of chips and monetary amounts in millions of carins unless otherwise stated.
NanoCore process innovation data
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Annual output | 30 million chips |
| R&D expenditure | 120 million carins |
| Marginal cost before innovation | 25 carins per chip |
| Marginal cost after innovation | 19 carins per chip |
| Price before innovation | 50 carins per chip |
| Price after innovation | 48 carins per chip |
| Cost basis | Marginal cost applies to each chip produced; all other costs unchanged |
| First-year R&D treatment | R&D expenditure is charged in the first year |
The competition authority must decide whether to prohibit the acquisition, approve it, or approve it subject to conditions.
Calculate the four-firm concentration ratio before the proposed acquisition.
Calculate the annual reduction in NanoCore’s production costs resulting from the innovation, assuming output remains unchanged.
Calculate the first-year rate of return on NanoCore’s R&D expenditure before accounting for the change in price.
Calculate the overall first-year change in NanoCore’s economic profit resulting from the innovation and the price reduction, assuming output remains at 30 million chips.
Calculate NanoCore’s price-cost margin after the innovation as a percentage of price, using marginal cost as the relevant unit cost.
Draw a monopoly diagram showing how a successful process innovation that lowers marginal and average costs may affect price, output and abnormal profit.
Explain one potential benefit and one potential risk of allowing NanoCore to increase its market power.
Using the text/data provided and your knowledge of economics, recommend how Carinth’s competition authority should respond to NanoCore’s proposed acquisition.
Explain why a natural monopoly can supply a market at a lower average cost than two or more competing firms.
Using real-world examples, evaluate whether government ownership is the best response to the market failure associated with natural monopoly.
Explain why firms in an oligopoly may have both an incentive to collude and an incentive to cheat on a collusive agreement.
Using real-world examples, discuss the effectiveness of competition legislation and fines in preventing collusion in oligopolistic markets.
Explain how a price-making firm determines its profit-maximizing output and whether it earns abnormal profit, normal profit or a loss.
Using real-world examples, evaluate the view that profit-maximizing behaviour by firms with significant market power necessarily harms consumers.
Build a Practice Exam — Economics HL
Test your knowledge with a custom paper containing questions from selected topics.


Explain how the availability of substitutes and the height of barriers to entry affect a firm’s degree of market power.
Using real-world examples, evaluate whether the number of firms in a market is a reliable guide to the extent of market failure caused by market power.
Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
ShopLink connects consumers with independent online retailers. As more buyers join, more sellers find the platform attractive, which attracts still more buyers. ShopLink also controls extensive purchasing data and makes transferring reviews to rival platforms difficult.
ShopLink is a price maker in the market for marketplace services. It increased the commission paid by retailers and began placing its own products above rival products in search results. Small retailers claim that they cannot reach enough customers without using ShopLink.
The competition authority states that ShopLink may be abusing its market power. It proposes requiring equal search treatment, allowing users to transfer data and preventing ShopLink from buying a new rival.
ShopLink argues that integration reduces costs, improves delivery and finances research into fraud detection. It warns that strict rules could reduce innovation and free services for consumers.
ShopLink commission and annual transaction data before and after the change.
| Period | Commission / lumens per transaction | Annual transactions / million |
|---|---|---|
| Before change | 4 | 120 |
| After change | 6 | 108 |
Online marketplace shares
| Online marketplace | Market share / % |
|---|---|
| ShopLink | 68 |
| MarketSquare | 14 |
| BuyLocal | 10 |
| OpenCart | 5 |
| Other platforms | 3 |
Define the term price maker indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Define the term market power indicated in bold (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using Table 1, calculate the percentage change in ShopLink’s total commission revenue. Show your working.
Using Table 2, calculate the four-firm concentration ratio for online marketplaces.
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how ShopLink could use its market power to determine commission and transaction quantity (Text A).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain how ShopLink’s higher commission could reduce total social surplus (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how requiring data portability could affect the market for rival marketplace services (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using a perfect competition firm diagram, explain how ShopLink’s outcome differs from that of a price-taking marketplace provider.
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, evaluate the proposed restrictions on ShopLink’s conduct and acquisition of a rival.
Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
AeroTor and SkyPath dominate domestic air travel. Airport slots, safety certification and aircraft costs create high entry barriers. Each airline anticipates the other’s response when changing fares, indicating an oligopoly.
Both firms previously maintained high fares. SkyPath then cut fares to gain market share, and AeroTor responded. The resulting price war increased passenger numbers but sharply reduced profit.
The airlines now share some airport lounges and coordinate schedules. The competition authority is investigating whether this cooperation has extended to illegal fare fixing.
The firms argue that cooperation reduces duplicated costs and supports routes to remote regions. Consumer groups fear that tacit coordination will raise fares once the price war ends.
Average domestic air fare and annual passenger journeys during the price war.
| Period | Average fare / torins | Passenger journeys / million per year |
|---|---|---|
| Before price war | 250 | 2.0 |
| During price war | 200 | 2.6 |
Airline strategy payoffs, in millions of torins.
| Profit payoffs (AeroTor, SkyPath) / million torins | SkyPath: high fares | SkyPath: low fares |
|---|---|---|
| AeroTor: high fares | ||
| AeroTor: low fares |
Define the term oligopoly indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 1).
Define the term price war indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using Table 1, calculate the price elasticity of demand for domestic air journeys using the initial values. Show your working.
Using Table 2, determine the combined profit when both airlines choose high fares and when both choose low fares.
Using the payoff matrix in Table 2, explain why both airlines cut fares even though mutual high fares produce greater combined profit.
Using a collusive oligopoly diagram, explain how fare fixing could raise the airlines’ joint profit (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain the market failure that could result from successful fare fixing.
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how sharing airport facilities could affect the market for domestic flights (Text B, paragraph 2).
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, discuss whether cooperation between AeroTor and SkyPath should be prohibited.
Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
GeneGrow supplies patented drought-resistant seeds. Farmers must purchase new seeds each year and may not reproduce them. Patents, specialist research and control of distribution protect GeneGrow from entry.
GeneGrow’s seeds raise yields during droughts, but their prices have increased. Farmers argue that the absence of a close substitute gives GeneGrow excessive control over price.
GeneGrow spends part of its profit on research and development (R&D). It claims that large, uncertain research projects would not occur without patent protection and the possibility of abnormal profit.
The government is considering compulsory licensing, a maximum seed price and publicly funded agricultural research. It must balance farmer access against future innovation.
GeneGrow production data
| Output / million seed packs | Total revenue / million arins | Total cost / million arins |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 50 | 34 |
| 1.2 | 58 | 40 |
Research expenditure and drought-year crop yield data for GeneGrow.
| Measure | Year 1 | Year 2 |
|---|---|---|
| R&D expenditure / million arins | 6 | 9 |
| Average drought-year crop yield / tonnes per hectare | 2.5 | 3.0 |
Define the term close substitute indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Define the term research and development (R&D) indicated in bold (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using Table 1, calculate marginal revenue and marginal cost when output rises from 1.0 million to 1.2 million seed packs.
Using Table 2, calculate the percentage increase in average drought-year crop yield.
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how GeneGrow determines its profit-maximizing seed output (Text A).
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how patent protection could allow GeneGrow to maintain abnormal profit (Texts A and B).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain the possible allocative inefficiency in the seed market (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how compulsory licensing could affect the commercial seed market (Text B, paragraph 2).
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, evaluate whether stronger competition in Arandia’s seed market would necessarily benefit society.
Build a Practice Exam — Economics HL
Test your knowledge with a custom paper containing questions from selected topics.


Read the extracts and answer the questions that follow.
Four major platforms dominate Vestalia’s video-streaming market. They differentiate their services through exclusive programmes, recommendation systems and subscription bundles. Consumers often subscribe to more than one platform.
ViewNow has acquired several independent studios and made their programmes exclusive. Rival platforms claim that vertical integration reduces their access to content and strengthens ViewNow’s market dominance.
ViewNow argues that its scale finances expensive original programmes and gives viewers greater product variety. Consumer groups respond that repeated subscription-price increases and incompatible user profiles make switching costly.
The competition authority is considering preventing further studio acquisitions and requiring platforms to make user profiles portable. It could also require some programmes to be licensed to rivals.
Streaming market shares in Vestalia.
| Platform | Market share / % |
|---|---|
| ViewNow | 46 |
| ScreenBox | 23 |
| VistaPlay | 16 |
| CinemaCloud | 9 |
| Other services | 6 |
ViewNow monthly subscription data before and after a price increase.
| Measure | Initial value | New value |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly price / vestars | 10 | 12 |
| Subscriptions / million | 15 | 14.1 |
Define the term market dominance indicated in bold (Text A, paragraph 2).
Define the term product variety indicated in bold (Text B, paragraph 1).
Using Table 1, calculate the four-firm concentration ratio in Vestalia’s streaming market.
Using Table 2, calculate the price elasticity of demand for ViewNow subscriptions using the initial values. Show your working.
Using a monopoly diagram, explain how ViewNow could determine its profit-maximizing subscription price and quantity (Text A).
Using a diagram comparing demand elasticity, explain how exclusive programmes may increase ViewNow’s market power (Texts A and B).
Using a monopoly welfare-loss diagram, explain how ViewNow’s dominance could reduce allocative efficiency (Text A, paragraph 2).
Using a demand and supply diagram, explain how mandatory licensing of programmes could affect rival streaming services (Text B, paragraph 2).
Using information from the texts/data and your knowledge of economics, discuss whether preventing further studio acquisitions is the most appropriate response to ViewNow’s market power.
Explain how network effects, control of data and switching costs can create and reinforce market power for a digital platform.
Using real-world examples, evaluate the effectiveness of government policies intended to prevent the abuse of market power by dominant digital platforms.