Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I did Unit 4, and Unit 5 Development Economics. Both were really hard for me too

    Correct me if I am wrong... but someone below posted that perfectly competitive firms are only allocatively efficient in the long run. I thought that they are allocatively efficient in both the long and short run, as P=MC for both the short and long run. No?

    Oh yeh. The price discrimination one was to maximise consumer surplus - drew a diagram.

    The first question was about revenue. Umm.. I can't remember the exact answer but it was the price (looking at MC=MR quantity and reading from the AR) times the profit maximisation quantity. Basically the rectangle.

    OH YEH! Then the Competition Committee for Viveldi acting in public interest.

    I can't remember the rest. We're only 2 short of the entire paper.

    I screwed up one of my diagrams for Reuters though. I forgot to shift MR with the fall in demand. ARGH! Which was a huge mistake. Oh well.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i did development economics too
    anyone do the question on aids in africa? seems like im in the minority
    at the time i thought i was doing ok but then i got into a panic coz i was running out of time and totally messed up the last 10 marker. also wasnt sure on part b..what were the implications of smth..cant remember what now :eek: plus i just kept on writing...dun even know if it made sense, was too panicked to think straight really
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingAS)
    i did development economics too
    anyone do the question on aids in africa? seems like im in the minority
    at the time i thought i was doing ok but then i got into a panic coz i was running out of time and totally messed up the last 10 marker. also wasnt sure on part b..what were the implications of smth..cant remember what now :eek: plus i just kept on writing...dun even know if it made sense, was too panicked to think straight really
    I did the Africa one. It was the implications of different sectors of the economy developing at different rates. I just linked it to the theory stuff....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lilsunflower)
    I did Unit 4, and Unit 5 Development Economics. Both were really hard for me too

    Correct me if I am wrong... but someone below posted that perfectly competitive firms are only allocatively efficient in the long run. I thought that they are allocatively efficient in both the long and short run, as P=MC for both the short and long run. No?

    Oh yeh. The price discrimination one was to maximise consumer surplus - drew a diagram.

    The first question was about revenue. Umm.. I can't remember the exact answer but it was the price (looking at MC=MR quantity and reading from the AR) times the profit maximisation quantity. Basically the rectangle.

    OH YEH! Then the Competition Committee for Viveldi acting in public interest.

    I can't remember the rest. We're only 2 short of the entire paper.

    I screwed up one of my diagrams for Reuters though. I forgot to shift MR with the fall in demand. ARGH! Which was a huge mistake. Oh well.
    Wasnt the price discrimination one to increases profits. Dont firms aim to extract consumer surplus not maximise it, mite be wrong.

    Also i think ur definetely rite about the long and short run allocative efficiency.

    I still cant get over how much of a ***** that paper was!!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    did anyone do labour economics question 1 (talks about german's unemployment) that q seemed easier then wage differentials for women
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lilsunflower)
    I did Unit 4, and Unit 5 Development Economics. Both were really hard for me too

    Correct me if I am wrong... but someone below posted that perfectly competitive firms are only allocatively efficient in the long run. I thought that they are allocatively efficient in both the long and short run, as P=MC for both the short and long run. No?

    Oh yeh. The price discrimination one was to maximise consumer surplus - drew a diagram.

    The first question was about revenue. Umm.. I can't remember the exact answer but it was the price (looking at MC=MR quantity and reading from the AR) times the profit maximisation quantity. Basically the rectangle.

    OH YEH! Then the Competition Committee for Viveldi acting in public interest.

    I can't remember the rest. We're only 2 short of the entire paper.

    I screwed up one of my diagrams for Reuters though. I forgot to shift MR with the fall in demand. ARGH! Which was a huge mistake. Oh well.

    In the short run a perfectly competitive may opt to maximise sales, I've attached a diagram. Since P != MC it's not allocatively efficient, right?

    Here's the Qs and my answers I can remember so far: (not necessarily in order)

    1) Total revenue was the price * quantity rectangle.
    2) Hotels was horizontal integration since they were both hotel firms.
    3) RPI - 1.5% meant they could keep efficiency savings above 1.5% for profit.
    4) Advertising in the chewing gum market made it less contestable.
    5) Oligopolist with constant average costs used cost plus pricing to keep prices the same even if output changed.
    6) A firm under perfect competition was allocatively efficient only in the long run.
    7) When the monopolist was taxed to increase only average costs then price/output remained constant while profits fell.
    8) Competition comittee acting in public interest.
    9) Price descrimination question, price descrimination reduces consumer surplus, and increases profits.

    I'm going to try and get a copy of the Unit 4 and 5b papers, I'll try to post them here later.
    Attached Images
     
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamas)
    In the short run a perfectly competitive may opt to maximise sales, I've attached a diagram. Since P != MC it's not allocatively efficient, right?

    Here's the Qs and my answers I can remember so far: (not necessarily in order)

    1) Total revenue was the price * quantity rectangle.
    2) Hotels was horizontal integration since they were both hotel firms.
    3) RPI - 1.5% meant they could keep efficiency savings above 1.5% for profit.
    4) Advertising in the chewing gum market made it less contestable.
    5) Oligopolist with constant average costs used cost plus pricing to keep prices the same even if output changed.
    6) A firm under perfect competition was allocatively efficient only in the long run.
    7) When the monopolist was taxed to increase only average costs then price/output remained constant while profits fell.
    8) Competition comittee acting in public interest.
    9) Price descrimination question, price descrimination reduces consumer surplus, and increases profits.

    I'm going to try and get a copy of the Unit 4 and 5b papers, I'll try to post them here later.
    Nice 2 c that most of ur answers match my ones!!

    However, u say a perfectly competitive mite opt to maximise sales, but arent we always meant to assume that a firm aims to maximise profit and therefore produce at where MR=MC
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by watford110)
    Nice 2 c that most of ur answers match my ones!!

    However, u say a perfectly competitive mite opt to maximise sales, but arent we always meant to assume that a firm aims to maximise profit and therefore produce at where MR=MC
    Why should we always assume that? You can say that the firm could be allocatively efficient but it will only always be alloc. effic. in the long run. I think the only unreasonable answer would be one that proposed the firm make subnormal profits.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamas)
    Why should we always assume that? You can say that the firm could be allocatively efficient but it will only always be alloc. effic. in the long run. I think the only unreasonable answer would be one that proposed the firm make subnormal profits.
    ur rite, unit 1 and 4 r both very objective papers coz there can be more than one answer to a multiple choice question. i spose its the way u justify the answer they are not lookin 4 in order to grab some marks atleast!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by watford110)
    ur rite, unit 1 and 4 r both very objective papers coz there can be more than one answer to a multiple choice question. i spose its the way u justify the answer they are not lookin 4 in order to grab some marks atleast!
    Unfortunately I didn't put down about sales maximisation in the actual exam, I'll probably only get one explanation mark for what I put :/

    The reason I was sure of my answer in the exam was because there was a very similar question in one of the past papers which I got wrong because I put it was both short and long run.
 
 
 

University open days

  1. University of Cambridge
    Christ's College Undergraduate
    Wed, 26 Sep '18
  2. Norwich University of the Arts
    Undergraduate Open Days Undergraduate
    Fri, 28 Sep '18
  3. Edge Hill University
    Faculty of Health and Social Care Undergraduate
    Sat, 29 Sep '18
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?

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

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