F

F

F

F

F

how did u not get it even after watching 10s of videos at the very least💀

YaManPat It could, but they don't as the want to maximise profits

What has been lost cannot be recovered, think of burning paper: once burnt, you cannot recover it. However, if this firm was to adjust in the future to operate at the point you call 'PcQc', future losses will be prevented rather than past losses being recovered: like preventing future burning from occurring. Also, businesses that are able to charge high prices and also have low contestability are not going to operate at PcQc due to self-interest and the assumed aim of profit maximisation. But on the other hand, if forced to, say by competition policy, it is possible even a monopoly might operate nearer PcQc to reduce future deadweight loss even if efficiency loss has occured in the past.

@@callumjsc7244 You can wait for it to become a tree in 10 million years due to the long and short carbon cycle's and then cut it down again

A level but required knowledge of consumer and producer surplus from As

mat drav 1) assuming high barriers to entry. assuming low contestability because the monopolist isn't worried about new entrants and Thus produces at MC=MR and so a new firm may not be able to enter. 2) most likely long run 3) In PC normal profit is made as the firms cannot increase prices, they have to compete and so they're likely to be PE which lowers AVGC, output may increase if they all become technically efficient and PC firms have a perfectly elastic demand curve they'll be producing at MC=AR (AE) in the long run. monopolist's have a choice and the assumption is that they want to profit max so just because they CAN exploit the fullest extent of EOS doesn't mean they will because that forces prices down as output increase and so they'll work at MC= MR and not be productively efficient nor allocativelly efficient the assumption is all firms produce where MC = MR for PC firms that's also where AC = MC and AR = MC and so MC = AR = AC = MR. monopolist's only produce at MC = MR

cheers

2) The answer is short run and long run since in a monopoly, abnormal profits can be made both short run and long run so deadweight loss will be made SR and LR. This though assumes everything stays constant such as no competition policy or change in objective takes place or market characteristics adjustments. If it was only short run, then it would be a monopolistic. And no abnormal profit SR but abnormal profit long run doesn't exist in terms of a definite market structure. If you want though, you could argue the long run is more important since that's society's welfare in the long run.

@@callumjsc7244 your second comment where u explained it so well- its been 5 years since u were on this A2 video (last year of highschool) so im guessing you msut be done with ur bacehlors now? where'd you end up? kinda curious czu of how smart and well u explained it all - did u pursue economics or sumn

@@nawfaljafri Hi Nawfal, thank you very much! That's very kind of you. I was considering studying economics but I don't particularly enjoy writing. In the end I decided to study Management with Finance at Warwick, and got my first-class (only by making a ton of mistakes and learning from them!). Right now I'm a maths and IT/Computer Science teacher and it's going good. I'm still trying to find my preferred discipline / job, so will be taking some time out of teaching to try and search for the perfect fit. I hope everything is going well for you, are you studying A-levels at the moment?

Theo Smith it's just consumer surplus added to producer surplus

i.e. the sum of cs and ps

There always has to be a supply curve if firms are supplying something