Dumping.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are some people against dumping? How is it unfair competiiton?
If person B sells ham at 10 dollars, and I sell my ham at 5 dollars , make the other guy go broke then sell my ham at 15 dollars I will atract competition. I dont see how the price of my ham will stay at 15 dollars on the long run, am I overlooking something obvious?

[/ QUOTE ]

In the real world, developing a product costs a lot more than getting a pig and slaughtering it. If it costs millions or even billions of dollars to develop something, and there is a great likelyhood that someone will undercut my prices, why would I enter such a market?

[/ QUOTE ]

because I can buy the stuff of person B at a very low cost because it will go on auction?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea what you are talking about here. Why would someone invest millions of dollars into developing a product that a well-established competitor will simply drop the price of their product and prevent me from making any money? What does this have to do with auctions?

[valenzuela]

When B goes broke, the factories will still be there, those facotries will go on auction. Thereby if C buys that factory he will be in condition to compete with me , in spite of me deciding to lower my prices.
Do you have any example where a company used predatory pricing and then the raised the prices affecting the consumers?

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
When B goes broke, the factories will still be there, those facotries will go on auction. Thereby if C buys that factory he will be in condition to compete with me , in spite of me deciding to lower my prices.
Do you have any example where a company used predatory pricing and then the raised the prices affecting the consumers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would C buy the factories if you're just going to undercut him? Obviously the factory is capable of producing ham at $10 and not lower, otherwise B wouldn't be out of business.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When B goes broke, the factories will still be there, those facotries will go on auction. Thereby if C buys that factory he will be in condition to compete with me , in spite of me deciding to lower my prices.
Do you have any example where a company used predatory pricing and then the raised the prices affecting the consumers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would C buy the factories if you're just going to undercut him? Obviously the factory is capable of producing ham at $10 and not lower, otherwise B wouldn't be out of business.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, is someone actually arguing that there's a problem with the less efficient competitor being put out of business?

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When B goes broke, the factories will still be there, those facotries will go on auction. Thereby if C buys that factory he will be in condition to compete with me , in spite of me deciding to lower my prices.
Do you have any example where a company used predatory pricing and then the raised the prices affecting the consumers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would C buy the factories if you're just going to undercut him? Obviously the factory is capable of producing ham at $10 and not lower, otherwise B wouldn't be out of business.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, is someone actually arguing that there's a problem with the less efficient competitor being put out of business?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said it was a problem, Mr. Inferences? Do you disagree that it discourages competition, though?

[ojc02]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When B goes broke, the factories will still be there, those facotries will go on auction. Thereby if C buys that factory he will be in condition to compete with me , in spite of me deciding to lower my prices.
Do you have any example where a company used predatory pricing and then the raised the prices affecting the consumers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would C buy the factories if you're just going to undercut him? Obviously the factory is capable of producing ham at $10 and not lower, otherwise B wouldn't be out of business.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, is someone actually arguing that there's a problem with the less efficient competitor being put out of business?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said it was a problem, Mr. Inferences? Do you disagree that it discourages competition, though?

[/ QUOTE ]

Less efficient competitors going out of business is competition, they're not having a tickle fight.

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When B goes broke, the factories will still be there, those facotries will go on auction. Thereby if C buys that factory he will be in condition to compete with me , in spite of me deciding to lower my prices.
Do you have any example where a company used predatory pricing and then the raised the prices affecting the consumers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would C buy the factories if you're just going to undercut him? Obviously the factory is capable of producing ham at $10 and not lower, otherwise B wouldn't be out of business.

[/ QUOTE ]

Company A cannot undercut everyone forever, they have to to turn a profit before their capital supply runs out, and that profit must be more than the regular profit they would make from normal competitive pricing in the market. By enacting "predatory" pricing company A has effectively increased its costs for all units sold after they raise the prices again, so in reality they have simply encouraged (not discouraged) competition since factory owner C can now gain all of A's market share just by producing at the normal $10 per unit price which A can no longer match.

[Rev. Good Will]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When B goes broke, the factories will still be there, those facotries will go on auction. Thereby if C buys that factory he will be in condition to compete with me , in spite of me deciding to lower my prices.
Do you have any example where a company used predatory pricing and then the raised the prices affecting the consumers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would C buy the factories if you're just going to undercut him? Obviously the factory is capable of producing ham at $10 and not lower, otherwise B wouldn't be out of business.

[/ QUOTE ]

Company A cannot undercut everyone forever, they have to to turn a profit before their capital supply runs out, and that profit must be more than the regular profit they would make from normal competitive pricing in the market. By enacting "predatory" pricing company A has effectively increased its costs for all units sold after they raise the prices again, so in reality they have simply encouraged (not discouraged) competition since factory owner C can now gain all of A's market share just by producing at the normal $10 per unit price which A can no longer match.

[/ QUOTE ]

Usually the dumper has a protected home market, and dumps their product to foreign markets. They just undercut as long as they need to, as even while taking a slight loss in the foreign market, the money gained home market > money lost in foreign market.

So in some cases, they can undercut forever.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
Usually the dumper has a protected home market, and dumps their product to foreign markets. They just undercut as long as they need to, as even while taking a slight loss in the foreign market, the money gained home market > money lost in foreign market.

So in some cases, they can undercut forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

So in this case, the people living in the unregulated market gain at the expense of those in the regulated market. Sounds like an argument *for* AC to me.

[Rev. Good Will]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Usually the dumper has a protected home market, and dumps their product to foreign markets. They just undercut as long as they need to, as even while taking a slight loss in the foreign market, the money gained home market > money lost in foreign market.

So in some cases, they can undercut forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

So in this case, the people living in the unregulated market gain at the expense of those in the regulated market. Sounds like an argument *for* AC to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

...No, not at all.

The company in the unregulated market cannot enter the regulated market, where the local company in the regulated market have no foreign competition. The company in the regulated market can enter the unregulated market and sell at a slight loss until the it knocks out the competition, than it is just business as usual. The undercutting done by the company from the regulated market is sustainable because the money lost in the unregulated market is less than the money made in the regulated market where they have no competition.

So how do the people in the unregulated market gain?