Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now

Edexcel Economics: Unit 3 Business Economics and Economic Efficiency (June 2014) EC03 Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chelski2k8)
    Do you remember the exact wording of the question?
    No I don't remember the exact wording but it was something along the lines of: discuss ways other than price discrimination that high street retailers could use to increase profits against online retailers.

    I think...?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For the last question on 10 was it okay to talk about loyalty schemes, improving appearance, shops getting an online presence and predatory pricing the evaluate that? Really not sure how I did on the 12 or 16 markers!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by John_Boi)
    These are the past grade boundaries for an A:

    June 2013 - 56
    Jan 2013 - 56
    June 2012 - 55
    Jan 2012 - 54
    June 2011 - 56
    Jan 2011 - 53
    June 2010 - 55
    Jan 2010 - 53

    Average - 54.75

    So what do we think an A will be? Not higher than 56 right?
    I'd imagine so, which means you can afford to drop 16 marks, what do people think the A* was?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chelski2k8)
    I think I misread the question. I evaluated by saying Diseconomies of scale, legality of predatory pricing, how you sacrifice profits in limit pricing. For part C I put internet as inelastic and high street shops as elastic. Is that right?
    I went the other way because internet thought you had more choice meaning demand is elastic. For in-store, there making demand more inelastic through personal service and branding I went with, but who knows micro is my weakest I really dont want to F**K up this exam or I am screwed for uni.

    I agree with points you made for d, but hopefully we get the marks we need.

    P.S.- you draw a diagram ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry to ask again - was it cool for question 10 c and d to talk about other high street retailers and NOT just Jessops?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For those that did question 9, what did you write for the last question (16 marker)?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    for those that did question 9, what did you write for the first question on market structures?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sarah13579)
    For those that did question 9, what did you write for the last question (16 marker)?
    pricing strategies and non pricing e.g advertising and improving quality
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by peter qwert)
    you got 4 , 5 and 7 wrong.
    No he was right for 5 and 7
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rathani278)
    So what were ur other evaluation points???
    My point:

    A patent would increase the incentive to spend more in investing to produce new innovative products. As innovation creates unique products, this would increase consumer choice compared to a market where there is little differentiation between products.

    Evaluation:

    However, having a unique product protected by a patent would allow the firm to become a price-maker as they are the sole supplier of that product(it's unique). This means that they are able to control prices and therefore consumers may disbenefit from increased prices.

    2nd point:

    Patents would increase the amount of innovation of more efficient, cheaper-to-produce products compared to their former alternatives. Therefore, this lower cost of producing these new innovative products could be carried forward to lower prices for consumers. This would increase consumer welfare as consumer surplus would increase.

    Evaluation:

    This is entirely dependent on the firm's motives. We can assume that the majority of firms are aiming for profit maximisation. Therefore they would produce at MC=MR so consumers wouldn't exactly have optimised consumer surplus as MC=MR is allocatively and productively inefficient.


    All depends on the mark scheme though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I wrote about: Predatory Pricing, Mergers, Advertising, Branding.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Layla Gepghry)
    for those that did question 9, what did you write for the first question on market structures?
    limit pricing, advertising and loyalty scheme/offers
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Collusion, mergers, advertising, loyalty schemes
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RikhilRoss22)
    No he was right for 5 and 7
    Why is 4 wrong?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VinceVC)
    Read the paragraph above the first answer.

    http://www.edexcel.com/migrationdocu...c_20130815.pdf

    "Maximum mark for explanation is 2/3 if key is incorrect (that is 2/4 in total) for

    supported choice questions."
    No from 2013 you can still get 3 rejection marks even if u got the q wrong
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by John_Boi)
    No I don't remember the exact wording but it was something along the lines of: discuss ways other than price discrimination that high street retailers could use to increase profits against online retailers.

    I think...?
    Against online retailers? **** I didn't see that part. I didnt compare it to online retailers so my evaluation is down the drain.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i did collusion, predatory pricing, advertising and R&D for the q9 16 marker. would that be okay?
    i swear you can't have loyalty cards for a pack of gum??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 07mav)
    I went the other way because internet thought you had more choice meaning demand is elastic. For in-store, there making demand more inelastic through personal service and branding I went with, but who knows micro is my weakest I really dont want to F**K up this exam or I am screwed for uni.

    I agree with points you made for d, but hopefully we get the marks we need.

    P.S.- you draw a diagram ?
    Yh drew a diagram. Tbh you can go both ways as long as you explain it. I put how on the high street shops competing are next door so price is very elastic
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chelski2k8)
    Against online retailers? **** I didn't see that part. I didnt compare it to online retailers so my evaluation is down the drain.
    I don't know if it said "against" but the last 2 words said something about online retailers and at first I didn't pick it up - they really slyly added it in there.. And no don't say that you will be credited for evaluation!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dilzo999)
    I've done them previously but I'll do them again. I'm not 100% sure if they're right so people need to confirm. Also not sure about the order.

    1) Backwards vertical integration
    2) Perfect competition means AR=MR for all output
    3) Profit satisficing (Not sure on this)
    4) A decrease in contestability
    5) Sales maximisation occurs at AC=AR so 4 units.
    6) Oligopoly, the answer was A, not sure what it was though.
    7) Monopoly at output V it was allocatively efficient
    8) The government do not need to immediately borrow money. (Not sure on this either)
    I got exactly the same as you
    Profit satisficing because they gonna give lower profits to shareholders and concentrate on investment
    Oligopily was that the other supermarkets would be affected in they changed the price so you talk about interdependence
    For 8 that was the only one that worked for me too because the private sector funds it
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.