The Economic Impact of Monopolistic Advantage: A Case Study of Microsoft

Fuqiang Shao

doi:10.54097/hbem.v8i.7190

Authors

Fuqiang Shao

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/hbem.v8i.7190

Keywords:

Microsoft Case, Product Quality, Customer Satisfaction, Economic Impact.

Abstract

As one of the largest company in the world, Microsoft is regarded as a monopolist because of its dominant position in operating system and software industry form 1990s till now, and this kind of monopoly is going to be sustained in the future. Under a such background above, it is important for customers to know what impacts do monopolist have on them. Is it benefit or doing more harm to customers when compared to competitive corporations. In this paper, we use Microsoft case analysis to discuss questions like product quality and customers’ economic burden of monopoly. Also, specific data such as customer satisfaction, income and expenditure are used to help solve the problems. We find that what really matters about the quality depends on the attitude and thoughts of customers who purchased and experienced the products since Microsoft’s main products had been recognized by public according to their significant market share. However, monopolist does has negative impact on customers in some way. After analysis, we offer some suggestions on how Microsoft or other monopoly companies can improve their customer satisfaction and what measurement can be used to change the present situation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Saleheen Khan, Faridul Islam, & Syed M Ahmed. Is Microsoft a Monopoly: An Empirical Test [J] American Business Review, 2004, 22(2): 130.

Jackson Thomas Penfield. THE “MICROSOFT” CASE: TRIAL COURT’S “FINDINGS OF FACT.” [J]. Antitrust Law & Economics Review, 2001, 30(3): 1-4.

Cusumano Michael A, Selby Richard W. How Microsoft Competes [J]. Research Technology Management, 1996, 39(1): 26-30.

Economides Nicholas. The Microsoft Antitrust Case: Rejoinder [J]. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 2001, 1(1): 71.

Acharyya Rajat. Monopoly and product quality: Separating or pooling menu? [J]. Economics Letters, 1998, 61(2): 187-194.

PR Newswire. Microsoft Ranks Highest in Tablet Satisfaction as Features, Design Shine: Microsoft Tablets Attract Higher Incidence of Early Adopters to Technology [N]. 2017

Mussa Michael, Rosen Sherwin. Monopoly and product quality [J]. Journal of Economic Theory, 1978, 18(2): 301-317.

Cowan Simon. Third-Degree Price Discrimination and Consumer Surplus [J]. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 2012, 60(2): 333-345.

Belleflamme Paul, Vergote Wouter. Monopoly price discrimination and privacy: The hidden cost of hiding [J]. Economics Letters, 2016, 149: 141–144.

Schrock Edward M, Lefevre Henry L. The good and the bad news about quality (First edition.) [M]. CRC Press, 2020

Arora Dhananjay. Guest Column : The Importance of User Experience for business you must know [N]. Indiantelevision.com, 2021

Xue Jiaolong, Liang Xinjian, Xie Tao, et al. See now, act now: How to interact with customers to enhance social commerce engagement? [J]. Information & Management, 2020, 57(6): 103324.

Dwyer Paul. Measuring the value of electronic word of mouth and its impact in consumer communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing [J]. Journal of interactive marketing, 2007, 21(2): 63-79.

PR Newswire. Microsoft boosts office solution accelerator for six sigma [N]. 2004: 1

Maiga, Adam S. The Effects of Information Technology Integration on Manufacturing Financial Performance: The Role of Cost Control Systems [M]. In Advances in Management Accounting, 2012, 21: 183-206.

Carstensen, Peter C. Remedying the Microsoft Monopoly: Monopoly Law, the Rights of Buyers, and the Enclosure Movement in Intellectual Property [J]. Antitrust Bulletin, 1999, 44(3): 577-617.