Skip to main content
Log in

Portfolio choice, transactions costs and monopoly power

  • Published:
Empirica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

By using optimal stochastic control, where risk can be reduced by appropriate efforts, monopoly power is shown to engender reduced efforts to lower risk. It therefore gives rise to a relatively high ratio of liquid assets to net wealth. Furthermore, a decline in demand is shown to generally elicit increased efforts to reduce risk and thus yields an augmented share of risk bearing assets in the portfolio. These predictions are corroborated by invoking empirical evidence that pertains to West German industries. It thus appears that a capitalist economy is characterized by a built-in-mechanism stabilizing macroeconomic activity. This mechanism, however, is attenuated by monopoly power. That provides an additional rationale for competition policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beach, C. and J. McKinnon (1978), ‘A Maximum Likelihood Procedure for Regression with Autocorrelated Errors’,Econometrica 46, 51–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caves, R.E. and B.S. Yamey (1971), ‘Risk and Corporate Rates of Return: Comment’,Quarterly Journal of Economics 85, 513–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain, T.W. und M.J. Gordon (1991), ‘The Financial Consequences of Monopoly Power’,The Manchester School 59, 244–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsche Bundesbank (1979),Monatsberichte der Deutschen Bundesbank, November 1979 ff., Frankfurt a.M.

  • Hurdle, G. (1974), ‘Leverage, Risk, Market Structure and Profitability’Review of Economics and Statistics 56, 478–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamien, M.I. and N.L. Schwartz (1981),Dynamic Optimization, New York: Elsevier (North Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, J.M. (1936),The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, J.M. (1937), ‘The General Theory of Employment’,Quarterly Journal of Economics 51, 209–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, F. (1921),Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malliaris, A.G. and W.A. Brock (1982),Stochastic Methods in Economics and Finance, Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R.C. (1969), ‘Lifetime Portfolio Selection under Uncertainty: The Continuous-Time Case’,Review of Economics and Statistics 51, 247–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuberger, D. (1989),Finanzstruktur, Wettbewerb und Kapitalakkumulation, Frankfurt a.M. und New York: Campus Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, M. (1989) ‘Market Size, Monopoly Power and Innovations under Uncertainty’, in D.B. Audretsch, L. Sleuwaegen, and H. Yamawaki (eds.),The Convergence of International and Domestic Markets, Amsterdam: Elsevier (North Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, M., I. Böbel, and A. Haid (1979), ‘Profitability, Risk, and Market Structure in West German Industries’,Journal of Industrial Economics 27, 227–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, M., I. Böbel, and A. Haid (1985), ‘Domestic Concentration, Foreign Trade and Economic Performance’,International Journal of Industrial Organization 3, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistisches Bundesamt (1979),Statistisches Jahrbuch für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, various issues, Stuttgart-Mainz: Verlag Kohlhammer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, T.G. (1974), ‘Market Power, Profitability and Financial Leverage’,Journal of Finance 29, 1407–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, T.G. (1978), ‘The Cost of Capital and the Market Power of Firms’,Review of Economics and Statistics 60, 209–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, J. (1985), ‘Liquidity Preference as a Behaviour Towards Risk’,Review of Economic Studies 25, 165–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winn, D.N. (1977), ‘On the Relation Between Rates of Return, Risk and Market Structure’,Quarterly Journal of Economics 91, 1157–63.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Helpful comments on previous drafts by Armin Frisch, Rainer Klump, Doris Neuberger, Karl W. Roskamp, and F.A. Schmid are gratefully acknowledged. Jürgen Weigand provided excellent research assistance. Remaining errors are due to the author.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Neumann, M. Portfolio choice, transactions costs and monopoly power. Empirica 20, 175–187 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01383980

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01383980

JEL codes

Key words

Navigation