Equilibrium with Monopolistic Competition Sample Clauses

Equilibrium with Monopolistic Competition. The key difference between monopolistic competition and the earlier case of pure monopoly is in the consumer’s reservation utility level. The pure monopolist had only to guarantee the consumer as much utility as she could derive without consuming any medical care goods. The monopolistic competitor, on the other hand, has to guarantee the utility she could derive from the competitor’s contract. As with most models of oligopoly, this reservation utility level depends on the absence, presence, and nature of strategic behavior between competitors. However, this does not affect the marginal valuation of goods, only the level of profit earned by the firm. The division of resources among the two firms and the set of consumers have no impact on efficiency. Indeed, if type j consumers own firm j , all profits extracted are returned to the consumers from which they were taken. The result is the same equilibrium observed under pure competition. Without loss of generality, we will demonstrate this reasoning for firm A . Define q BA (W − I B , m B , h) as the amount of good B that consumer A will use when offered the good B insurance contract. Firm A then solves: I A , Am max I A + (m A − MC)E(q A ) ∫
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Equilibrium with Monopolistic Competition. The key difference between monopolistic competition and the earlier case of pure monopoly is in the consumer’s reservation utility level. The pure monopolist had only to guarantee the consumer as much utility as she could derive without consuming any medical care goods. The monopolistic competitor, on the other hand, has to guarantee the utility she could derive from the competitor’s contract. As with most models of oligopoly, this reservation utility level depends on the absence, presence, and nature of strategic behavior between competitors. However, this does not affect the marginal valuation of goods, only the level of profit earned by the firm. The division of resources among the two firms and the set of consumers have no impact on efficiency. Indeed, if type j consumers own firm
Sample 1

Related to Equilibrium with Monopolistic Competition

  • Certification Regarding Prohibition of Boycotting Israel (Tex Gov. Code 2271) If (a) Vendor is not a sole proprietorship; (b) Vendor has ten (10) or more full-time employees; and (c) this Agreement or any agreement with a TIPS Member under this procurement has value of $100,000 or more, the following certification shall apply; otherwise, this certification is not required. Vendor certifies, where applicable, that neither the Vendor, nor any affiliate, subsidiary, or parent company of Vendor, if any, boycotts Israel, and Vendor agrees that Vendor and Vendor Companies will not boycott Israel during the term of this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, the term “boycott” shall mean and include refusing to deal with, terminating business activities with, or otherwise taking any action that is intended to penalize, inflict economic harm on, or limit commercial relations with Israel, or with a person or entity doing business in Israel or in an Israeli-controlled territory but does not include an action made for ordinary business purposes. When applicable, does Vendor certify? Yes

  • PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTS WITH COMPANIES BOYCOTTING ISRAEL CERTIFICATION As required by Chapter 2271 of the Texas Local Government Code the Contractor must verify that it 1) does not boycott Israel; and 2) will not boycott Israel during the term of the Contract. Pursuant to Section 2271.001, Texas Government Code:

  • XXXXXXXX ANTI-KICKBACK ACT (a) The Sub-Recipient hereby agrees that, unless exempt under Federal law, it will incorporate or cause to be incorporated into any contract for construction work, or modification thereof, the following clause:

  • Competitions (a) Competitions will be held for positions within the Bargaining Unit, which the Company wishes to fill, except for the following:

  • Prohibition on Contracts with Companies Boycotting Israel To the extent that Texas Government Code, Chapter 2271 applies to this Agreement, PROVIDER certifies that (a) it does not currently boycott Israel; and (b) it will not boycott Israel during the term of this Agreement. PROVIDER acknowledges this Agreement may be terminated and payment withheld if this certification is inaccurate.

  • Convicted, Discriminatory, Antitrust Violator, and Suspended Vendor Lists In accordance with sections 287.133, 287.134, and 287.137, F.S., the Contractor is hereby informed of the provisions of sections 287.133(2)(a), 287.134(2)(a), and 287.137(2)(a), F.S. For purposes of this Contract, a person or affiliate who is on the Convicted Vendor List, the Discriminatory Vendor List, or the Antitrust Violator Vendor List may not perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under the Contract. The Contractor must notify the Department if it or any of its suppliers, subcontractors, or consultants have been placed on the Convicted Vendor List, the Discriminatory Vendor List, or the Antitrust Violator Vendor List during the term of the Contract. In accordance with section 287.1351, F.S., a vendor placed on the Suspended Vendor List may not enter into or renew a contract to provide any goods or services to an agency after its placement on the Suspended Vendor List. A firm or individual placed on the Suspended Vendor List pursuant to section 287.1351, F.S., the Convicted Vendor List pursuant to section 287.133, F.S., the Antitrust Violator Vendor List pursuant to section 287.137, F.S., or the Discriminatory Vendor List pursuant to section 287.134, F.S., is immediately disqualified from Contract eligibility.

  • State Monopolies 1. The Parties shall progressively adjust any state monopoly of a commercial character so as to ensure that by the end of the fourth year following the entry into force of this Agreement, no discrimination regarding the conditions under which goods are procured and marketed will exist between nationals of the Parties.

  • Anti-Boycott Verification To the extent this Agreement constitutes a contract for goods or services within the meaning of Section 2270.002 of the Texas Government Code, as amended, solely for purposes of compliance with Chapter 2270 of the Texas Government Code, and subject to applicable Federal law, the Developer represents that neither the Developer nor any wholly owned subsidiary, majority-owned subsidiary, parent company or affiliate of Developer (i) boycotts Israel or (ii) will boycott Israel through the term of this Agreement. The terms “boycotts Israel” and “boycott Israel” as used in this paragraph have the meanings assigned to the term “boycott Israel” in Section 808.001 of the Texas Government Code, as amended.

  • No competition Employee's employment is subject to the condition that during the term of his employment hereunder and for the period specified in paragraph 8(c) below, Employee shall not, directly or indirectly, own, manage, operate, control or participate in the ownership, management, operation or control of, or be connected as an officer, employee, partner, director, individual proprietor, lender, consultant or otherwise with, or have any financial interest in, or aid or assist anyone else in the conduct of, any entity or business (a "Competitive Operation") which competes in the banking industry or with any other business conducted by Employer or by any group, affiliate, division or subsidiary of Employer, in the states of New York and Pennsylvania. Employee shall keep Employer fully advised as to any activity, interest, or investment Employee may have in any way related to the banking industry. It is understood and agreed that, for the purposes of the foregoing provisions of this paragraph, (i) no business shall be deemed to be a business conducted by Employer or any group, division, affiliate or subsidiary of Employer unless 5% or more of Employer's consolidated gross sales or operating revenues is derived from, or 5% or more of Employer's consolidated assets are devoted to, such business; (ii) no business conducted by any entity by which Employee is employed or in which he is interested or with which he is connected or associated shall be deemed competitive with any business conducted by Employer or any group, division or subsidiary of Employer unless it is one from which 2% or more of its consolidated gross sales or operating revenues is derived, or to which 2% or more of its consolidated assets are devoted; and (iii) no business which is conducted by Employer at the Date of Termination and which subsequently is sold by Employer shall, after such sale, be deemed to be a Competitive Operation within the meaning of this paragraph. Ownership of not more than 5% of the voting stock of any publicly held corporation shall not constitute a violation of this paragraph.

  • Competition By accepting this Contract, Contractor agrees that no collusion or other restraint of free competitive bidding, either directly or indirectly, has occurred in connection with this award by the Division of Purchases.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.