Minimum AC(q): market price of $6.00
At any market price below $6.00, firm earns losses
At any market price above $6.00, firm earns “supernormal” profits (>$0)
Short run: firms that shut down (q∗=0) are stuck in market, incur fixed costs π=−f
Long run: firms earning losses (π<0) can exit the market and earn π=0
Short run: firms that shut down (q∗=0) are stuck in market, incur fixed costs π=−f
Long run: firms earning losses (π<0) can exit the market and earn π=0
Entrepreneurs not currently in market can enter and produce, if entry would earn them π>0
When p<AVC
Profits are negative
Short run: shut down production
Long run: firms in industry exit the industry
When AVC<p<AC
Profits are negative
Short run: continue production
Long run: firms in industry exit the industry
When AC<p
Profits are positive
Short run: continue production
Long run: firms in industry stay in industry
1. Choose q∗ such that MR(q)=MC(q)
2. Profit π=q[p−AC(q)]
3. Shut down in short run if p<AVC(q)
4. Exit in long run if p<AC(q)
Now we must combine optimizing individual firms with market-wide adjustment to equilibrium
Since π=[p−AC(q)]q, in the long run, profit-seeking firms will:
Now we must combine optimizing individual firms with market-wide adjustment to equilibrium
Since π=[p−AC(q)]q, in the long run, profit-seeking firms will:
Now we must combine optimizing individual firms with market-wide adjustment to equilibrium
Since π=[p−AC(q)]q, in the long run, profit-seeking firms will:
Long-run equilibrium: entry and exit ceases when p=AC(q) for all firms, implying normal economic profits of π=0
More generally, no marginal firm can profitably enter the industry
Long run economic profits for all firms in a competitive industry are 0
Firms must earn an accounting profit to stay in business
Industry supply curve: horizontal sum of all individual firms' supply curves
To keep it simple on the following slides:
Short Run: each firm is earning profits p>AC(q)
Long run: induces entry by firm 3, firm 4, ⋯, firm n
Short Run: each firm is earning profits p>AC(q)
Long run: induces entry by firm 3, firm 4, ⋯, firm n
Short Run: each firm is earning profits p>AC(q)
Long run: induces entry by firm 3, firm 4, ⋯, firm n
Long run industry equilibrium: p=AC(q)min, π=0 at p= $6; supply becomes more elastic
q=f(L,K)
Zero long run economic profit ≠ industry disappears, just stops growing
Less attractive to entrepreneurs & start ups to enter than other, more profitable industries
These are mature industries (again, often commodities), the backbone of the economy, just not sexy!
p=MC
p=AC
p=MC=AC
But we’ve so far been imagining a market where every firm is identical, just a recipe “any idiot” can copy
What about if firms have different technologies or costs?
Firms have different technologies/costs due to relative differences in:
Let's derive industry supply curve again, and see how this may affect profits
Long-run equilibrium p=AC(q)min of the marginal (higher-cost) firm
A marginal firm cannot profitably enter
“Inframarginal” (lower-cost) firms are using resources that earn economic rents
Economic rents arise from relative differences between resources
Economic rent: a return or payment for a resource above its normal market return (opportunity cost)
Has no allocative effect on resources, entirely “inframarginal”
A windfall return that resource owners get for free
Inframarginal firms that employ these scarce factors gain a short-run profits from having lower costs/higher productivity
...But what will happen to the prices for their scarce factors over time?
In a competitive market, over the long run, profits are dissipated through competition
Competition over acquiring the scarce factors pushes up their prices
Rents are included in the opportunity cost (price) for inputs over long run
From the firm’s perspective, over the long-run, rents are included in the price (opportunity cost) of the scarce factor
Firm does not earn the rents, it raises firm’s costs and squeezes profits to zero!
Short Run: firm that possesses scarce rent-generating factors has lower costs, perhaps short-run profits
Long run: competition over those factors pushes up their prices, raising costs to firm, until its profits go to zero as well
Owners of scarce factors (workers, landowners, inventors, etc) earn the rents as higher income for their services (wages, land rent, interest, royalties, etc).
Often induces competition to supply alternative factors, which may dissipate the rents (to zero)
Recall “economic point of view”:
Producing your product pulls scarce resources out of other productive uses in the economy
Profits attract resources: pulled out of other (less valuable) uses
Losses repel resources: pulled away to other (more valuable) uses
Zero profits keep resources where they are
Example: q=2p−4
Example: p=2+0.5q
Example: p=2+0.5q
Example: p=2+0.5q
Slope: 0.5
Vertical intercept called the "Choke price": price where qS=0 ($2), just low enough to discourage any sales
Read two ways:
Horizontally: at any given price, how many units firm wants to sell
Vertically: at any given quantity, the minimum willingness to accept (WTA) for that quantity
εqS,p=%ΔqS%Δp
εqS,p=%ΔqS%Δp
“Elastic” | “Unit Elastic” | “Inelastic” | |
---|---|---|---|
Intuitively: | Large response | Proportionate response | Little response |
Mathematically: | εqs,p>1 | εqs,p=1 | εqs,p<1 |
Numerator > Denominator | Numerator = Denominator | Numerator < Denominator | |
1% change in p causes | More than 1% change in qs | Exactly 1% change in qs | Less than 1% change in qs |
Compare to price elasticity of demand
An identical 100% price increase on an:
“Inelastic” Supply Curve
“Elastic” Supply Curve
εq,p=1slope×pq
First term is the inverse of the slope of the inverse supply curve (that we graph)!
To find the elasticity at any point, we need 3 things:
Example: The supply of bicycle rentals in a small town is given by:
qS=10p−200
Find the inverse supply function.
What is the price elasticity of supply at a price of $25.00?
What is the price elasticity of supply at a price of $50.00?
εq,p=1slope×pq
Elasticity ≠ slope (but they are related)!
Elasticity changes along the supply curve
Often gets less elastic as ↑ price (↑ quantity)
What determines how responsive your selling behavior is to a price change?
The faster (slower) costs increase with output ⟹ less (more) elastic supply
Smaller (larger) share of market for inputs ⟹ more (less) elastic
What determines how responsive your selling behavior is to a price change?
Source: Washington Post (Oct 2, 2021): “Inside America’s Broken Supply Chain”
Keyboard shortcuts
↑, ←, Pg Up, k | Go to previous slide |
↓, →, Pg Dn, Space, j | Go to next slide |
Home | Go to first slide |
End | Go to last slide |
Number + Return | Go to specific slide |
b / m / f | Toggle blackout / mirrored / fullscreen mode |
c | Clone slideshow |
p | Toggle presenter mode |
t | Restart the presentation timer |
?, h | Toggle this help |
o | Tile View: Overview of Slides |
Esc | Back to slideshow |
Minimum AC(q): market price of $6.00
At any market price below $6.00, firm earns losses
At any market price above $6.00, firm earns “supernormal” profits (>$0)
Short run: firms that shut down (q∗=0) are stuck in market, incur fixed costs π=−f
Long run: firms earning losses (π<0) can exit the market and earn π=0
Short run: firms that shut down (q∗=0) are stuck in market, incur fixed costs π=−f
Long run: firms earning losses (π<0) can exit the market and earn π=0
Entrepreneurs not currently in market can enter and produce, if entry would earn them π>0
When p<AVC
Profits are negative
Short run: shut down production
Long run: firms in industry exit the industry
When AVC<p<AC
Profits are negative
Short run: continue production
Long run: firms in industry exit the industry
When AC<p
Profits are positive
Short run: continue production
Long run: firms in industry stay in industry
1. Choose q∗ such that MR(q)=MC(q)
2. Profit π=q[p−AC(q)]
3. Shut down in short run if p<AVC(q)
4. Exit in long run if p<AC(q)
Now we must combine optimizing individual firms with market-wide adjustment to equilibrium
Since π=[p−AC(q)]q, in the long run, profit-seeking firms will:
Now we must combine optimizing individual firms with market-wide adjustment to equilibrium
Since π=[p−AC(q)]q, in the long run, profit-seeking firms will:
Now we must combine optimizing individual firms with market-wide adjustment to equilibrium
Since π=[p−AC(q)]q, in the long run, profit-seeking firms will:
Long-run equilibrium: entry and exit ceases when p=AC(q) for all firms, implying normal economic profits of π=0
More generally, no marginal firm can profitably enter the industry
Long run economic profits for all firms in a competitive industry are 0
Firms must earn an accounting profit to stay in business
Industry supply curve: horizontal sum of all individual firms' supply curves
To keep it simple on the following slides:
Short Run: each firm is earning profits p>AC(q)
Long run: induces entry by firm 3, firm 4, ⋯, firm n
Short Run: each firm is earning profits p>AC(q)
Long run: induces entry by firm 3, firm 4, ⋯, firm n
Short Run: each firm is earning profits p>AC(q)
Long run: induces entry by firm 3, firm 4, ⋯, firm n
Long run industry equilibrium: p=AC(q)min, π=0 at p= $6; supply becomes more elastic
q=f(L,K)
Zero long run economic profit ≠ industry disappears, just stops growing
Less attractive to entrepreneurs & start ups to enter than other, more profitable industries
These are mature industries (again, often commodities), the backbone of the economy, just not sexy!
p=MC
p=AC
p=MC=AC
But we’ve so far been imagining a market where every firm is identical, just a recipe “any idiot” can copy
What about if firms have different technologies or costs?
Firms have different technologies/costs due to relative differences in:
Let's derive industry supply curve again, and see how this may affect profits
Long-run equilibrium p=AC(q)min of the marginal (higher-cost) firm
A marginal firm cannot profitably enter
“Inframarginal” (lower-cost) firms are using resources that earn economic rents
Economic rents arise from relative differences between resources
Economic rent: a return or payment for a resource above its normal market return (opportunity cost)
Has no allocative effect on resources, entirely “inframarginal”
A windfall return that resource owners get for free
Inframarginal firms that employ these scarce factors gain a short-run profits from having lower costs/higher productivity
...But what will happen to the prices for their scarce factors over time?
In a competitive market, over the long run, profits are dissipated through competition
Competition over acquiring the scarce factors pushes up their prices
Rents are included in the opportunity cost (price) for inputs over long run
From the firm’s perspective, over the long-run, rents are included in the price (opportunity cost) of the scarce factor
Firm does not earn the rents, it raises firm’s costs and squeezes profits to zero!
Short Run: firm that possesses scarce rent-generating factors has lower costs, perhaps short-run profits
Long run: competition over those factors pushes up their prices, raising costs to firm, until its profits go to zero as well
Owners of scarce factors (workers, landowners, inventors, etc) earn the rents as higher income for their services (wages, land rent, interest, royalties, etc).
Often induces competition to supply alternative factors, which may dissipate the rents (to zero)
Recall “economic point of view”:
Producing your product pulls scarce resources out of other productive uses in the economy
Profits attract resources: pulled out of other (less valuable) uses
Losses repel resources: pulled away to other (more valuable) uses
Zero profits keep resources where they are
Example: q=2p−4
Example: p=2+0.5q
Example: p=2+0.5q
Example: p=2+0.5q
Slope: 0.5
Vertical intercept called the "Choke price": price where qS=0 ($2), just low enough to discourage any sales
Read two ways:
Horizontally: at any given price, how many units firm wants to sell
Vertically: at any given quantity, the minimum willingness to accept (WTA) for that quantity
εqS,p=%ΔqS%Δp
εqS,p=%ΔqS%Δp
“Elastic” | “Unit Elastic” | “Inelastic” | |
---|---|---|---|
Intuitively: | Large response | Proportionate response | Little response |
Mathematically: | εqs,p>1 | εqs,p=1 | εqs,p<1 |
Numerator > Denominator | Numerator = Denominator | Numerator < Denominator | |
1% change in p causes | More than 1% change in qs | Exactly 1% change in qs | Less than 1% change in qs |
Compare to price elasticity of demand
An identical 100% price increase on an:
“Inelastic” Supply Curve
“Elastic” Supply Curve
εq,p=1slope×pq
First term is the inverse of the slope of the inverse supply curve (that we graph)!
To find the elasticity at any point, we need 3 things:
Example: The supply of bicycle rentals in a small town is given by:
qS=10p−200
Find the inverse supply function.
What is the price elasticity of supply at a price of $25.00?
What is the price elasticity of supply at a price of $50.00?
εq,p=1slope×pq
Elasticity ≠ slope (but they are related)!
Elasticity changes along the supply curve
Often gets less elastic as ↑ price (↑ quantity)
What determines how responsive your selling behavior is to a price change?
The faster (slower) costs increase with output ⟹ less (more) elastic supply
Smaller (larger) share of market for inputs ⟹ more (less) elastic
What determines how responsive your selling behavior is to a price change?
A report by @PIIE found an N-95 respirator mask still faces a 7% U.S. tariff.
— Chad P. Bown (@ChadBown) April 21, 2020
Remaining US duties include
• 5% on hand sanitizer
• 4.5% on protective medical clothing
• 2.5% on goggles
• 6.4-8.3% on other medical headwear
By @ABehsudi 1/https://t.co/LcxE0FFlXO
Source: Washington Post (Oct 2, 2021): “Inside America’s Broken Supply Chain”
Yesterday I rented a boat and took the leader of one of Flexport's partners in Long Beach on a 3 hour of the port complex. Here's a thread about what I learned.
— Ryan Petersen (@typesfast) October 22, 2021