|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I added the section discrete goods and tried making it as clear and pedagogical as possible. I failed in the making of a graph of sufficient aesthetics and exactness. I hope somebody can improve the section because even though it requires some improvement I believe that discrete goods have a place in this article. Masalih (talk) 22:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Shifted Demand curve does not represent same demand equation
PC Firms have a "little" market power Note that if a firm has market power, even a "little bit" then it faces a negatively sloped demand curve rather than the perfectly elastic curve assumed by PC theory = which means the firm would not produce where P equals marginal revenue but would follow the conventional rule produce where MR = MC. As Kreps notes in one of the leading texts on microeconomic theory "firms assume they have no market power when in fact they have a litte bit." Kreps, A Course in Microeconomic Theory (Princeton 1990) at 292. Kreps goes on to note that the perfectly competitive model should be viewed as a first approximation of firms that have and realize they have a small amount of market power." Kreps at 292. Again market power means that the firms face a negatively sloped and highly elastic demand curve it also means that there is a marginal revenue curve at the firm and industry level.--Jgard5000 (talk) 10:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)jgard5000--Jgard5000 (talk) 10:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Price Elasticity of Demand (PED) - Determinants of PED
I suggested it should read:
Duration: The longer a price change is going to last the more inclinded a consumer is to search for substitutes. Thus elasticity increases with the duration of the price change.
- Here's the change: . The previous version said, "The more time a consumer has to search for substitute goods, the more elastic the demand." I don't have the reference thats given handy, but this is standard, and it means something different than what you wrote. The standard interpretation is something like this: If your landlord tells you 6 months before the lease is up that the rent is increasing, then your PED is fairly high because you have more time to search for alternative housing. If your landlord tells you two weeks before the lease is up, then your PED is fairly low because you're not in a good position to conduct a thorough search. So, "duration" is more about how the consumer interacts with the product. What you wrote does sense in terms of demand generally, but requires a very different way of looking at things because it's considering multiple price changes (the immediate one plus some future change back). I'm guessing you won't find a reference for that and elasticity. CRETOG8(t/c) 03:19, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, that makes sense of course. The problem is that the article Price elasticity of demand also has a list of determinants, among which you'll find duration. The description there is the one I wanted to incorporate in this article. However, I believe they are two different concepts bearing the same name. The description of duration on the linked article applies when a price change is believed to be only temporary. Different from the description on this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StatisticSammy (talk • contribs) 21:49, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
- Oi. Hmmm. Again, I don't have handy the references used over at that article. The one which is hyper-linked (to some online lecture notes which probably don't qualify as a reliable source, but anyway...) seems to be slightly mis-interpreted in the article. The link isn't really talking about the duration of the price change. It's more talking about the duration of time the analyst is looking at: Is the economist studying how much quantity demand falls in a week, or how much it falls in a year? I should go fix it, but I'm not going to right now and might forget... CRETOG8(t/c) 08:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
what is pinus?
Please change "demand pinus in the discrete goods case" to demand CURVE. What is pinus? I tried changing it but inadvertently messed up the wiki syntax. Please help. Thanks Abhilasha369 (talk) 15:21, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Definition of demand
I believe the definition of demand in the first paragraph is incorrect. This definition defines demand in terms of utility, which is an indexing of preferences and is therefore unit-less. Demand has units of quantity, and the definition should reflect that.
The necessity of adding reliable sources
Unfortunately, there are several editors, even administrators, who feel that they can bypass Wikepedia's strict policiy of Verifiability by repeatedly adding unsourced material in the very first sentence of this article. Please refrain from adding unsourced material into this article. Also, please spare us the unnecessary lecturing of how the lead section of an article should be. WP:LEAD is very clear: "As a general rule of thumb, a lead section should .... be carefully sourced as appropriate". Please add your sources or refrain from re-adding this unsourced material". Thank you. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 18:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)