đ
Game Theory and Oligopoly: Crash Course Economics #26 - YouTube
Channel: CrashCourse
[0]
Jacob: Welcome to Crash Course Economics,
Iâm Jacob Clifford
[3]
Adriene: and Iâm Adriene Hill, and today
weâre talking about competition and game theory.
[7]
Jacob: Games? Like board games or video games?
I can beat my seven year old at Call of Duty.
[11]
Adriene: No, not quite like that. In this
kind of game, if you lose, youâre bankrupt.
[15]
[Theme Music]
[24]
Jacob: So when we talk about markets, there are
basically four different types, or market structures.
[29]
They vary based on things like
number of producers, control over prices,
[32]
and barriers to entry -- how hard it is for
new businesses to jump in the market.
[36]
Most agricultural products, like strawberries,
are in a type of market called perfect competition.
[40]
There are thousands of farmers all growing
identical strawberries and it's pretty easy
[44]
to get in the market. You just plant strawberries.
Individual businesses don't have control over prices.
[49]
One farmer canât convince you to pay $10,
if you can it buy from other farmers for $4.
[53]
A monopoly is on the other end of the spectrum.
There is one large company that produces a
[57]
product with few substitutes. And
because high barriers prevent competition,
[61]
a monopoly has a lot of control over price.
[63]
There are two types of markets in between
these extremes. Monopolistic competition is
[67]
a market with many producers and relatively
low barriers; their products are very similar
[70]
but not identical. This could be something
like furniture stores or fast food. McDonald's
[75]
and Burger King do have noticeably different
products.
[77]
One might be able to charge a slightly higher
price if, for whatever reason, consumers prefer
[81]
that type of burger. But, if either tried
to increase their prices a lot, everyone would
[85]
just go to their competitor. And, if McDonalds
and Burger King both tried to raise prices
[89]
at the same time, some other company would
enter the market since the barriers are relatively
[93]
low. Taco Bell would start selling hamburguesas.
[95]
The last type are Oligopolies and that's what
we're gonna focus on today. Oligopolies are
[99]
markets that have high barriers to entry and
are controlled by a few large companies.
[103]
Oligopolies are all over the place. In fact
their products are likely in front of you
[106]
right now. The laptop computer market is dominated
by companies like HP, Dell, and Apple. And
[112]
the majority of mobile phones are produced
by Apple, Samsung, and LG.
[115]
You also see this type of thing in markets for cars,
air travel, movies, candy, and game consoles.
[119]
Adriene: Like monopolistic competition, oligopolies
often sell products that are similar but not
[125]
identical and this gives them some control
over their prices. But how much? You might
[130]
love your iPhone, but if Apple raised the price of
a phone to $3,000 you might switch to Android.
[136]
But the price of an iPhone is pretty close to the
price of a high-end Android. So how do they compete?
[141]
The answer is non-price competition and, as you might
guess, it's competing without changing the price.
[147]
This happens in a lot of industries. Companies
focus on things like style, quality, location, or service.
[153]
The goal is to distinguish
their product from their competitors.
[157]
Like, the jeans that one company sells might
be virtually identical to everyone elseâs
[161]
in terms of quality, but if they can convince
consumers that having a designer label on
[166]
their butt is cool, buyers might pay much
much more. The same logic holds true if a
[172]
company has better customer service or has
more convenient locations.
[176]
The most recognizable form of non-price competition
is advertising. Companies spend billions of
[182]
dollars each year introducing new products
or services and differentiating themselves
[187]
from their competitors. And despite all that
spending, most of the time, advertising just
[191]
kind of fades into the background. Can you remember the ad that ran before this video? No? Me neither.
[197]
Don Draper might tell you, âhalf the money
spent on advertising is wasted; the trouble
[201]
is, you don't know which half.â Itâs clear
that not every advertisement sticks, but advertising
[206]
can work to help a brand stand out.
[209]
Jacob: So, those ads that run before YouTube
videos? Some are for products sold in monopolistically
[213]
competitive markets, but the majority are
probably from oligopolies. I mean, think of
[216]
car companies -- they advertise A LOT.
[218]
Generally, monopolies donât bother advertising
because they have no competition, and firms
[222]
in perfectly competitive markets donât run
ads because their products are identical.
[226]
Advertising just increases their costs and drives up the prices, which means customers go to their competitors.
[231]
So oligopolies sound like they operate pretty
much like monopolistic competition but the
[234]
big difference between the two is that oligopolies
are made up of a few large companies. This
[238]
means that each company makes decisions with
the actions of their competitors in mind.
[242]
They use game theory -- the study of strategic
decision making. Letâs go to the Thought Bubble.
[246]
Adriene: Letâs start with a classic of game
theory, something called the âprisonerâs dilemma.â
[250]
Suppose Stan and I are arrested for scrawling
in wet cement outside the YouTube studios.
[255]
Weâre being interviewed separately.
If we both confess, weâll both have to pay
[258]
a $10,000 fine. If neither of us confesses,
weâll get off scot free. And If I take a
[264]
deal and confess, but Stan doesnât -- Iâll walk away
and Stan will owe $20,000. And vice versa.
[271]
So what do we do? Because we canât discuss
it, we both confess, and both end up owing
[275]
$10,000. This is Game Theory: even if people
or companies rationally follow their own self-interest,
[282]
the best outcome is hard to reach when they
canât or donât cooperate.
[286]
Game theory helps explain why you get drug
stores and coffee shops next to each other.
[290]
Letâs say that Craig and Phil both start
selling tchotchkes on the Coney Island Boardwalk.
[295]
At first they start on opposite sides of the
strip -- sharing customers equally. Phil realizes
[301]
that if he gets closer to Craig, heâll retain
all of his old customers...and snag some of
[305]
Craigâs. But Craigâs no dummy; he moves
his cart closer to Philâs.
[310]
This continues until they both wind up right
in the middle of the boardwalk, sharing customers
[314]
equally--and unable to improve their position.
[318]
This also plays out with pricing. If Craig
lowers his price on Crash Course nesting dolls,
[323]
Phil will likely compete by dropping his prices
as well. In the end theyâre gonna continue
[328]
to share customers equally, and earn less
money.
[331]
If Craig understands game theory, he knows
thereâs no reason to change his price. Instead
[336]
he focuses on providing knick-knacks that
differentiate his kiosk from Philâs. This
[342]
can help explain why prices in oligopolies
tend to get stuck and why companies focus
[347]
so much on non-price competition.
[350]
Thanks Thought Bubble. So, What if Craig and
Phil donât compete at all? What if instead,
[354]
they agree to charge the same high price,
conspiring to form what economists call a cartel?
[361]
Again they split the customers 50/50,
but now they make even more profit --
[366]
benefiting at the expense of consumers.
[368]
This is called COLLUSION, and itâs illegal
in the US. There are strict antitrust laws
[373]
designed to prevent it. But that doesnât mean companies donât figure out other ways to raise prices.
[379]
Price leadership is when one company changes
its prices, and its competitors have to decide
[383]
if theyâre going to follow suit. Since they're
not actively colluding, itâs technically legal.
[389]
But it can be hard to tell the difference.
Look at airline baggage fees.
[393]
When some airlines started charging fees for
checked bags, other airlines quickly joined them.
[398]
And when one big airline changes their baggage fee,
the others tend move to the same price point.
[404]
Are they colluding, or is this
a case of price leadership?
[407]
Well, the Justice Departmentâs looking into it.
[409]
Other countriesâ laws differ, and cartels
do exist. The best example is OPEC -- The
[414]
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.
Itâs an international cartel made up of
[419]
12 oil-producing countries that manipulate
oil supplies to control prices. They control
[425]
80% of the worldâs known oil reserves and
nearly half of the worldâs crude oil production.
[432]
Jacob: Economists like to explain oligopolies and game theory by creating something called a payoff matrix.
[436]
Letâs say Stan and Brandon have competing companies.
Each can set prices high or low.
[442]
The numbers in the boxes represent the amount of profit each company will earn in different situations.
[446]
The profit on the left in each cell is for Stan and
the numbers on the right are for Brandon.
[450]
So if Stan has a low price and Brandon has a high price, Stan earns $300 and Brandon earns $50.
[456]
Now, payoff scenarios for companies are never
this transparent, but the matrix says a lot
[460]
about oligopolies. The optimal outcome is for each business to charge high prices so they both get $200.
[467]
Stan knows this, but he also recognizes that
there could be even more profit by charging
[471]
a lower price. Brandon comes to the same conclusion,
so they both price low and they end up in
[476]
the worst combined outcome with each only
making $80 profit.
[479]
Even if they collude and agree to price high, they
both have an incentive to cheat on that agreement.
[484]
So collusion and cartels are often unstable. They can only last if the agreement is monitored and strictly enforced.
[489]
A lot of times, it's possible to predict the
final outcome based on the information in
[493]
the payoff matrix. The best outcome for Stan, when Brandon makes a move, is called Stanâs best response.
[499]
So, if Brandon prices high, Stanâs best
response is to price low and if Brandon prices
[503]
low than Stanâs best response is, again,
to price low. Thatâs called having a dominant
[508]
strategy: it always gives the best available
outcome, no matter what the other guy does.
[512]
For Brandon, pricing low is his dominant strategy
too: regardless of what Stan does, pricing
[517]
low always results in a better outcome.
[518]
Adriene: Game theory helps companies make
decisions, but, potential payoffs are never
[522]
easy to predict and there are many situations
where there's no clear dominant strategy.
[527]
Sometimes, the best response changes depending
on what competitors do.
[532]
Those that donât keep up or are slow to
adapt are pushed aside. Itâs called Game
[536]
Theory, but to former industry leaders like
Pan American Airways, Atari, and Research
[541]
In Motion -- that made Blackberry phones,
the end of the game was not that fun.
[546]
In any game, there are winners and losers,
unless itâs some lame co-op thing. But at
[551]
its best, healthy competition promotes innovation
which, in the end, makes us all better off.
[556]
Jacob: And ideally we get cheaper air fares,
constantly improving cell phones, and amazing
[560]
video game consoles. Thanks for watching,
weâll see you next week.
[563]
Thanks for watching Crash Course Economics, which is made with the help of all these awesome people.
[568]
You can help keep Crash Course free, for everyone,
forever, by supporting the show at Patreon.
[573]
Patreon is a voluntary subscription service where you can help support the show by giving a monthly contribution.
You can go back to the homepage right here: Homepage





