Kinked Demand Curve2
Kinked Demand Curve2
Kinked Demand Curve2
The kinked demand curve of oligopoly was developed by Paul M. Sweezy in 1939.
One of the important features of Oligopoly market is price rigidity.
Change in price would not be profitable for an organization in oligopoly. In case, an organization reduces
its price, its rivals also reduce prices, which adversely affect the profits of the organization. In case, the
organization increases prices, it would lose buyers.
To explain the price rigidity under Oligopoly market, conventional demand curve cannot be used.
So Paul Sweezy in 1939 came with an idea of non-conventional demand curve to represent non-collusive
oligopoly. Sweezy uses a Kinked demand curve to describe price rigidity in Oligopoly market.
Assumptions
If 1 seller reduces the price below OP1, rival sellers will follow him. So that no one will lose their
customers.
This shows less response (in demand) towards a price reduction and there by the lower portion of the
demand curve is more steeper (shows less price elasticity of demand)
This behavioral pattern explains why prices are inflexible in the oligopoly market.
Equilibrium is achieved when MC curve passes through the discontinuous portion of the MR curve.
(where MC=MR). At this point organization would achieve maximum profit.
Equilibrium Output = OQ1
Equilibrium Price=OP1
Suppose cost rises, MC curve will shift up from MC2 to MC1 when cost lowers, MC curve will shift down
from MC2 to MC3.
The firm will produce output OQ1 at OP1 price, if the MC curve shift up or down on the vertical part of
MR curve, the firm will not change its price and output.
This facts explains oligopolistic price is more stable than cost.
Limitations
At first sight, the model seems to be attractive since it explains the behaviour of firms realistically. But
the model has certain limitations:
1. It does not explain how the ruling price is determined. It explains that the demand curve has a kink at
the ruling price.
2. Price rigidity conclusion is not always true. Rival organizations only follow price decrease, which does
not hold true empirically.
3. Ignores non-price competition among organizations. Non-price competition can be in terms of
product differentiation, advertising, and other tools used by organizations to promote their sales.