text:
Perfect competition
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Economics
A supply and demand diagram, illustrating
the effects of an increase in demand.
Index
Outline
Category
History
Types
Classification
History of economics
Economic history (academic study)
Schools of economics
Microeconomics
Macroeconomics
Methodology
Heterodox economics
JEL classification codes
Concepts
Theory
Techniques
Econometrics
Economic growth
Economic system
Experimental economics
Mathematical economics
Game theory
Post-scarcity
Market
National accounting
By application
Agricultural
Behavioral
Business
Computational
Cultural
Demographic
Development
Digitization
Ecological
Education
Engineering
Environmental
Evolutionary
Expeditionary
Geography
Health
Industrial organization
Information
International
Knowledge
Labour
Law
Managerial
Monetary / Financial
Natural resource
Organizational
Personnel
Public / Welfare economics
Regional
Rural
Service
Social
Urban
Welfare
Lists
Economists
Publications (journals)
Glossary
Glossary of economics
Business and economics portal
v
t
e
In economics, specifically general equilibrium theory, a perfect market is defined by several idealizing conditions, collectively called perfect competition. In theoretical models where conditions of perfect competition hold, it has been theoretically demonstrated that a market will reach an equilibrium in which the quantity supplied for every product or service, including labor, equals the quantity demanded at the current price. This equilibrium will be a Pareto optimum, meaning that nobody can be made better off by exchange without making someone else worse off.[1]
Perfect competition provides both allocative efficiency and productive efficiency:
Such markets are allocatively efficient, as output will always occur where marginal cost is equal to marginal revenue (MC = MR). In perfect competition, any profit-maximizing producer faces a market price equal to its marginal cost (P = MC). This implies that a factor's price equals the factor's marginal revenue product. It allows for derivation of the supply curve on which the neoclassical approach is based. This is also the reason why "a monopoly does not have a supply curve". The abandonment of price taking creates considerable difficulties for the demonstration of a general equilibrium except under other, very specific conditions such as that of monopolistic competition.
In the short-run, perfectly competitive markets are not necessarily productively efficient as output will not always occur where marginal cost is equal to average cost (MC = AC). However, in long-run, productive efficiency occurs as new firms enter the industry. Competition reduces price and cost to the minimum of the long run average costs. At this point, price equals both the marginal cost and the average total cost for each good (P = MC = AC).
The theory of perfect competition has its roots in late-19th century economic thought. Léon Walras gave the first rigorous definition of perfect competition and derived some of its main results. In the 1950s, the theory was further formalized by Kenneth Arrow and Gérard Debreu. Real markets are never perfect. Those economists who believe that in perfect competition as a useful approximation to real markets may classify those as ranging from close-to-perfect to very imperfect. Share and foreign exchange markets are commonly said to be the most similar to the perfect market. The real estate market is an example of a very imperfect market. In such markets, the theory of the second best proves that if one optimality condition in an economic model cannot be satisfied, it is possible that the next-best solution involves changing other variables away from the values that would otherwise be optimal.[2]
Contents
[hide]
1 Idealizing conditions of perfect competition
2 Normal profit
2.1 In competitive and contestable markets
2.2 In uncompetitive markets
2.3 Government intervention
3 Results
3.1 Profit
4 The shutdown point
5 Short-run supply curve
6 Examples
7 Criticisms
8 Equilibrium in perfect competition
9 See also
10 References
11 External links
Idealizing conditions of perfect competition[edit]
There is a set of market conditions which are assumed to prevail in the discussion of what perfect competition might be if it were theoretically possible to ever obtain such perfect market conditions. These conditions include:[3]
A large number of buyers and sellers – A large number of consumers with the willingness and ability to buy the product at a certain price, and a large number of producers with the willingness and ability to supply the product at a certain price.
Perfect information – All consumers and producers know all prices of products and utilities each person would get from owning each product.
Homogeneous products – The products are perfect substitutes for each other, (i.e., the qualities and characteristics of a market good or service do not vary between different suppliers).
Well defined property rights – These determine what may be sold, as well as what rights are conferred on the buyer.
No barriers to entry or exit
Every participant is a price taker – No participant with market power to set prices
Perfect factor mobility – In the long run factors of production are perfectly mobile, allowing free long term adjustments to changing market conditions.
Profit maximization of sellers – Firms sell where the most profit is generated, where marginal costs meet marginal revenue.
Rational buyers: Buyers make all trades that increase their economic utility and make no trades that do not increase their utility.
No externalities – Costs or benefits of an activity do not affect third parties. This criteria also excludes any government intervention.
Zero transaction costs – Buyers and sellers do not incur costs in making an exchange of goods in a perfectly competitive market.
Non-increasing returns to scale and no network effects – The lack of economies of scale or network effects ensures that there will always be a sufficient number of firms in the industry.
Anti-competitive regulation - It is assumed that a market of perfect competition shall provide the regulations and protections implicit in the control of and elimination of anti-competitive activity in the market place.
Normal profit[edit]
In a perfect market the sellers operate at zero economic surplus: sellers make a level of return on investment known as normal profits.
Normal profit is a component of (implicit) costs and not a component of business profit at all. It represents the opportunity cost, as the time that the owner spends running the firm could be spent on running a different firm. The enterprise component of normal profit is thus the profit that a business owner considers necessary to make running the business worth her or his while i.e. it is comparable to the next best amount the entrepreneur could earn doing another job.[4] Particularly if enterprise is not included as a factor of production, it can also be viewed a return to capital for investors including the entrepreneur, equivalent to the return the capital owner could have expected (in a safe investment), plus compensation for risk.[5] In other words, the cost of normal profit varies both within and across industries; it is commensurate with the riskiness associated with each type of investment, as per the risk-return spectrum.
Only normal profits arise in circumstances of perfect competition when long run economic equilibrium is reached; there is no incentive for firms to either enter or leave the industry.[6]
In competitive and contestable markets[edit]
Only in the short run can a firm in a perfectly competitive market make an economic profit.
Economic profit does not occur in perfect competition in long run equilibrium; if it did, there would be an incentive for new firms to enter the industry, aided by a lack of barriers to entry until there was no longer any economic profit.[5] As new firms enter the industry, they increase the supply of the product available in the market, and these new firms are forced to charge a lower price to entice consumers to buy the additional supply these new firms are supplying as the firms all compete for customers (See "Persistence" in the Monopoly Profit discussion).[7][8][9][10] Incumbent firms within the industry face losing their existing customers to the new firms entering the industry, and are therefore forced to lower their prices to match the lower prices set by the new firms. New firms will continue to enter the industry until the price of the product is lowered to the point that it is the same as the average cost of producing the product, and all of the economic profit disappears.[7][8] When this happens, economic agents outside of the industry find no advantage to forming new firms that enter into the industry, the supply of the product stops increasing, and the price charged for the product stabilizes, settling into an equilibrium.[7][8][9]
The same is likewise true of the long run equilibria of monopolistically competitive industries and, more generally, any market which is held to be contestable. Normally, a firm that introduces a differentiated product can initially secure a temporary market power for a short while (See "Persistence" in Monopoly Profit). At this stage, the initial price the consumer must pay for the product is high, and the demand for, as well as the availability of the product in the market, will be limited. In the long run, however, when the profitability of the product is well established, and because there are few barriers to entry,[7][8][9] the number of firms that produce this product will increase until the available supply of the product eventually becomes relatively large, the price of the product shrinks down to the level of the average cost of producing the product. When this finally occurs, all monopoly profit associated with producing and selling the product disappears, and the initial monopoly turns into a competitive industry.[7][8][9] In the case of contestable markets, the cycle is often ended with the departure of the former "hit and run" entrants to the market, returning the industry to its previous state, just with a lower price and no economic profit for the incumbent firms.
Profit can, however, occur in competitive and contestable markets in the short run, as firms jostle for market position. Once risk is accounted for, long-lasting economic profit in a competitive market is thus viewed as the result of constant cost-cutting and performance improvement ahead of industry competitors, allowing costs to be below the market-set price.
In uncompetitive markets[edit]
A monopolist can set a price in excess of costs, making an economic profit (shaded). The above Picture shows a Monopolist (only 1 Firm in the Industry/Market) that obtains a (Monopoly) Economic Profit. An Oligopoly usually has "Economic Profit" also, but usually faces an Industry/Market with more than just 1 Firm (they must share available Demand at the Market Price).
Economic profit is, however, much more prevalent in uncompetitive markets such as in a perfect monopoly or oligopoly situation. In these scenarios, individual firms have some element of market power: Though monopolists are constrained by consumer demand, they are not price takers, but instead either price-setters or quantity setters. This allows the firm to set a price which is higher than that which would be found in a similar but more competitive industry, allowing them economic profit in both the long and short run.[7][8]
The existence of economic profits depends on the prevalence of barriers to entry: these stop other firms from entering into the industry and sapping away profits,[10] like they would in a more competitive market. In cases where barriers are present, but more than one firm, firms can collude to limit production, thereby restricting supply in order to ensure the price of the product remains high enough to ensure all of the firms in the industry achieve an economic profit.[7][10][11]
However, some economists, for instance Steve Keen, a professor at the University of Western Sydney, argue that even an infinitesimal amount of market power can allow a firm to produce a profit and that the absence of economic profit in an industry, or even merely that some production occurs at a loss, in and of itself constitutes a barrier to entry.
In a single-goods case, a positive economic profit happens when the firm's average cost is less than the price of the product or service at the profit-maximizing output. The economic profit is equal to the quantity of output multiplied by the difference between the average cost and the price.
Government intervention[edit]
Often, governments will try to intervene in uncompetitive markets to make them more competitive. Antitrust (US) or competition (elsewhere) laws were created to prevent powerful firms from using their economic power to artificially create the barriers to entry they need to protect their economic profits.[8][9][10] This includes the use of predatory pricing toward smaller competitors.[7][10][11] For example, in the United States, Microsoft Corporation was initially convicted of breaking Anti-Trust Law and engaging in anti-competitive behavior in order to form one such barrier in United States v. Microsoft; after a successful appeal on technical grounds, Microsoft agreed to a settlement with the Department of Justice in which they were faced with stringent oversight procedures and explicit requirements[12] designed to prevent this predatory behaviour. With lower barriers, new firms can enter the market again, making the long run equilibrium much more like that of a competitive industry, with no economic profit for firms.
In a regulated industry, the government examines firms' marginal cost structure and allows them to charge a price that is no greater than this marginal cost. This does not necessarily ensure zero Economic profit for the firm, but eliminates a "Pure Monopoly" Profit.
If a government feels it is impractical to have a competitive market – such as in the case of a natural monopoly – it will sometimes try to regulate the existing uncompetitive market by controlling the price firms charge for their product.[8][9] For example, the old AT&T (regulated) monopoly, which existed before the courts ordered its breakup, had to get government approval to raise its prices. The government examined the monopoly's costs, and determined whether or not the monopoly should be able raise its price and if the government felt that the cost did not justify a higher price, it rejected the monopoly's application for a higher price. Although a regulated firm will not have an economic profit as large as it would in an unregulated situation, it can still make profits well above a competitive firm in a truly competitive market.[9]
Results[edit]
In the short run, it is possible for an individual firm to make an economic profit. This situation is shown in this diagram, as the price or average revenue, denoted by P, is above the average cost denoted by C .
However, in the long run, economic profit cannot be sustained. The arrival of new firms or expansion of existing firms (if returns to scale are constant) in the market causes the (horizontal) demand curve of each individual firm to shift downward, bringing down at the same time the price, the average revenue and marginal revenue curve. The final outcome is that, in the long run, the firm will make only normal profit (zero economic profit). Its horizontal demand curve will touch its average total cost curve at its lowest point. (See cost curve.)
In a perfectly competitive market, the demand curve facing a firm is perfectly elastic.
As mentioned above, the perfect competition model, if interpreted as applying also to short-period or very-short-period behaviour, is approximated only by markets of homogeneous products produced and purchased by very many sellers and buyers, usually organized markets for agricultural products or raw materials. In real-world markets, assumptions such as perfect information cannot be verified and are only approximated in organized double-auction markets where most agents wait and observe the behaviour of prices before deciding to exchange (but in the long-period interpretation perfect information is not necessary, the analysis only aims at determining the average around which market prices gravitate, and for gravitation to operate one does not need perfect information).
In the absence of externalities and public goods, perfectly competitive equilibria are Pareto-efficient, i.e. no improvement in the utility of a consumer is possible without a worsening of the utility of some other consumer. This is called the First Theorem of Welfare Economics. The basic reason is that no productive factor with a non-zero marginal product is left unutilized, and the units of each factor are so allocated as to yield the same indirect marginal utility in all uses, a basic efficiency condition (if this indirect marginal utility were higher in one use than in other ones, a Pareto improvement could be achieved by transferring a small amount of the factor to the use where it yields a higher marginal utility).
A simple proof assuming differentiable utility functions and production functions is the following. Let wj be the 'price' (the rental) of a certain factor j, let MPj1 and MPj2 be its marginal product in the production of goods 1 and 2, and let p1 and p2 be these goods' prices. In equilibrium these prices must equal the respective marginal costs MC1 and MC2; remember that marginal cost equals factor 'price' divided by factor marginal productivity (because increasing the production of good by one very small unit through an increase of the employment of factor j requires increasing the factor employment by 1/MPji and thus increasing the cost by wj/MPji, and through the condition of cost minimization that marginal products must be proportional to factor 'prices' it can be shown that the cost increase is the same if the output increase is obtained by optimally varying all factors). Optimal factor employment by a price-taking firm requires equality of factor rental and factor marginal revenue product, wj=piMPji, so we obtain p1=MC1=wj/MPj1, p2=MCj2=wj/MPj2.
Now choose any consumer purchasing both goods, and measure his utility in such units that in equilibrium his marginal utility of money (the increase in utility due to the last unit of money spent on each good), MU1/p1=MU2/p2, is 1. Then p1=MU1, p2=MU2. The indirect marginal utility of the factor is the increase in the utility of our consumer achieved by an increase in the employment of the factor by one (very small) unit; this increase in utility through allocating the small increase in factor utilization to good 1 is MPj1MU1=MPj1p1=wj, and through allocating it to good 2 it is MPj2MU2=MPj2p2=wj again. With our choice of units the marginal utility of the amount of the factor consumed directly by the optimizing consumer is again w, so the amount supplied of the factor too satisfies the condition of optimal allocation.
Monopoly violates this optimal allocation condition, because in a monopolized industry market price is above marginal cost, and this means that factors are underutilized in the monopolized industry, they have a higher indirect marginal utility than in their uses in competitive industries. Of course this theorem is considered irrelevant by economists who do not believe that general equilibrium theory correctly predicts the functioning of market economies; but it is given great importance by neoclassical economists and it is the theoretical reason given by them for combating monopolies and for antitrust legislation.
Profit[edit]
In contrast to a monopoly or oligopoly, in perfect competition it is impossible for a firm to earn economic profit in the long run, which is to say that a firm cannot make any more money than is necessary to cover its economic costs. In order not to misinterpret this zero-long-run-profits thesis, it must be remembered that the term 'profit' is used in different ways:
Neoclassical theory defines profit as what is left of revenue after all costs have been subtracted; including normal interest on capital plus the normal excess over it required to cover risk, and normal salary for managerial activity. This means that profit is calculated after the actors are compensated for their opportunity costs.[13]
Classical economists on the contrary define profit as what is left after subtracting costs except interest and risk coverage. Thus, the classical approach does not account for opportunity costs.[13]
Thus, if one leaves aside risk coverage for simplicity, the neoclassical zero-long-run-profit thesis would be re-expressed in classical parlance as profits coinciding with interest in the long period (i.e. the rate of profit tending to coincide with the rate of interest). Profits in the classical meaning do not necessarily disappear in the long period but tend to normal profit. With this terminology, if a firm is earning abnormal profit in the short term, this will act as a trigger for other firms to enter the market. As other firms enter the market, the market supply curve will shift out, causing prices to fall. Existing firms will react to this lower price by adjusting their capital stock downward.[14] This adjustment will cause their marginal cost to shift to the left causing the market supply curve to shift inward.[14] However, the net effect of entry by new firms and adjustment by existing firms will be to shift the supply curve outward.[14] The market price will be driven down until all firms are earning normal profit only.[15]
It is important to note that perfect competition is a sufficient condition for allocative and productive efficiency, but it is not a necessary condition. Laboratory experiments in which participants have significant price setting power and little or no information about their counterparts consistently produce efficient results given the proper trading institutions.[16]
The shutdown point[edit]
In the short run, a firm operating at a loss [R < TC (revenue less than total cost) or P < ATC (price less than unit cost)] must decide whether to continue to operate or temporarily shutdown.[17] The shutdown rule states "in the short run a firm should continue to operate if price exceeds average variable costs."[18] Restated, the rule is that for a firm to continue producing in the short run it must earn sufficient revenue to cover its variable costs.[19] The rationale for the rule is straightforward. By shutting down a firm avoids all variable costs.[20] However, the firm must still pay fixed costs.[21] Because fixed cost must be paid regardless of whether a firm operates they should not be considered in deciding whether to produce or shutdown. Thus in determining whether to shut down a firm should compare total revenue to total variable costs (VC) rather than total costs (FC + VC). If the revenue the firm is receiving is greater than its total variable cost (R > VC) then the firm is covering all variable cost plus there is additional revenue ("contribution"), which can be applied to fixed costs. (The size of the fixed costs is irrelevant as it is a sunk cost. The same consideration is used whether fixed costs are one dollar or one million dollars.) On the other hand, if VC > R then the firm is not even covering its production costs and it should immediately shut down. The rule is conventionally stated in terms of price (average revenue) and average variable costs. The rules are equivalent (If you divide both sides of inequality TR > TVC by Q gives P > AVC). If the firm decides to operate, the firm will continue to produce where marginal revenue equals marginal costs because these conditions insure not only profit maximization (loss minimization) but also maximum contribution.
Another way to state the rule is that a firm should compare the profits from operating to those realized if it shutdown and select the option that produces the greater profit.[22][23] A firm that is shutdown is generating zero revenue and incurring no variable costs. However, the firm still has to pay fixed cost. So the firm's profit equals fixed costs or −FC.[24] An operating firm is generating revenue, incurring variable costs and paying fixed costs. The operating firm's profit is R − VC − FC. The firm should continue to operate if R − VC − FC ≥ −FC, which simplified is R ≥ VC.[25][26] The difference between revenue, R, and variable costs, VC, is the contribution to fixed costs and any contribution is better than none. Thus, if R ≥ VC then firm should operate. If R < VC the firm should shut down.
A decision to shut down means that the firm is temporarily suspending production. It does not mean that the firm is going out of business (exiting the industry).[27] If market conditions improve, and prices increase, the firm can resume production. Shutting down is a short-run decision. A firm that has shut down is not producing. The firm still retains its capital assets; however, the firm cannot leave the industry or avoid its fixed costs in the short run. Exit is a long-term decision. A firm that has exited an industry has avoided all commitments and freed all capital for use in more profitable enterprises.[28]
However, a firm cannot continue to incur losses indefinitely. In the long run, the firm will have to earn sufficient revenue to cover all its expenses and must decide whether to continue in business or to leave the industry and pursue profits elsewhere. The long-run decision is based on the relationship of the price and long-run average costs. If P ≥ AC then the firm will not exit the industry. If P < AC, then the firm will exit the industry. These comparisons will be made after the firm has made the necessary and feasible long-term adjustments. In the long run a firm operates where marginal revenue equals long-run marginal costs.[29]
Short-run supply curve[edit]
The short run supply curve for a perfectly competitive firm is the marginal cost (MC) curve at and above the shutdown point. Portions of the marginal cost curve below the shut down point are not part of the SR supply curve because the firm is not producing in that range. Technically the SR supply curve is a discontinuous function composed of the segment of the MC curve at and above minimum of the average variable cost curve and a segment that runs with the vertical axis from the origin to but not including a point "parallel" to minimum average variable costs.[30]
Examples[edit]
Though there is no actual perfectly competitive market in the real world, a number of approximations exist:
An example is that of a large action of identical goods with all potential buyers and sellers present. By design, a stock exchange resembles this, not as a complete description (for no markets may satisfy all requirements of the model) but as an approximation. The flaw in considering the stock exchange as an example of Perfect Competition is the fact that large institutional investors (e.g. investment banks) may solely influence the market price. This, of course, violates the condition that "no one seller can influence market price".
Horse betting is also quite a close approximation. When placing bets, consumers can just look down the line to see who is offering the best odds, and so no one bookie can offer worse odds than those being offered by the market as a whole, since consumers will just go to another bookie. This makes the bookies price-takers. Furthermore, the product on offer is very homogeneous, with the only differences between individual bets being the pay-off and the horse. Of course, there are not an infinite amount of bookies, and some barriers to entry exist, such as a license and the capital required to set up.
Free software works along lines that approximate perfect competition as well. Anyone is free to enter and leave the market at no cost. All code is freely accessible and modifiable, and individuals are free to behave independently. Free software may be bought or sold at whatever price that the market may allow.
Criticisms[edit]
The use of the assumption of perfect competition as the foundation of price theory for product markets is often criticized as representing all agents as passive, thus removing the active attempts to increase one's welfare or profits by price undercutting, product design, advertising, innovation, activities that – the critics argue – characterize most industries and markets. These criticisms point to the frequent lack of realism of the assumptions of product homogeneity and impossibility to differentiate it, but apart from this the accusation of passivity appears correct only for short-period or very-short-period analyses, in long-period analyses the inability of price to diverge from the natural or long-period price is due to active reactions of entry or exit.
Some economists have a different kind of criticism concerning perfect competition model. They are not criticizing the price taker assumption because it makes economic agents too "passive", but because it then raises the question of who sets the prices. Indeed, if everyone is price taker, there is the need for a benevolent planner who gives and sets the prices, in other word, there is a need for a "price maker". Therefore, it makes the perfect competition model appropriate not to describe a decentralize "market" economy but a centralized one. This in turn means that such kind of model has more to do with communism than capitalism.[31]
Another frequent criticism is that it is often not true that in the short run differences between supply and demand cause changes in price; especially in manufacturing, the more common behaviour is alteration of production without nearly any alteration of price.[32]
The critics of the assumption of perfect competition in product markets seldom question the basic neoclassical view of the working of market economies for this reason. The Austrian School insists strongly on this criticism, and yet the neoclassical view of the working of market economies as fundamentally efficient, reflecting consumer choices and assigning to each agent his contribution to social welfare, is esteemed to be fundamentally correct.[33] Some non-neoclassical schools, like Post-Keynesians, reject the neoclassical approach to value and distribution, but not because of their rejection of perfect competition as a reasonable approximation to the working of most product markets; the reasons for rejection of the neoclassical 'vision' are different views of the determinants of income distribution and of aggregated demand.[34]
In particular, the rejection of perfect competition does not generally entail the rejection of free competition as characterizing most product markets; indeed it has been argued[35] that competition is stronger nowadays than in 19th century capitalism, owing to the increasing capacity of big conglomerate firms to enter any industry: therefore the classical idea of a tendency toward a uniform rate of return on investment in all industries owing to free entry is even more valid today; and the reason why General Motors, Exxon or Nestlé do not enter the computers or pharmaceutical industries is not insurmountable barriers to entry but rather that the rate of return in the latter industries is already sufficiently in line with the average rate of return elsewhere as not to justify entry. On this few economists, it would seem, would disagree, even among the neoclassical ones. Thus when the issue is normal, or long-period, product prices, differences on the validity of the perfect competition assumption do not appear to imply important differences on the existence or not of a tendency of rates of return toward uniformity as long as entry is possible, and what is found fundamentally lacking in the perfect competition model is the absence of marketing expenses and innovation as causes of costs that do enter normal average cost.
The issue is different with respect to factor markets. Here the acceptance or denial of perfect competition in labour markets does make a big difference to the view of the working of market economies. One must distinguish neoclassical from non-neoclassical economists. For the former, absence of perfect competition in labour markets, e.g. due to the existence of trade unions, impedes the smooth working of competition, which if left free to operate would cause a decrease of wages as long as there were unemployment, and would finally ensure the full employment of labour: labour unemployment is due to absence of perfect competition in labour markets. Most non-neoclassical economists deny that a full flexibility of wages would ensure the full employment of labour and find a stickiness of wages an indispensable component of a market economy, without which the economy would lack the regularity and persistence indispensable to its smooth working. This was, for example, John Maynard Keynes's opinion.
Particularly radical is the view of the Sraffian school on this issue: the labour demand curve cannot be determined hence a level of wages ensuring the equality between supply and demand for labour does not exist, and economics should resume the viewpoint of the classical economists, according to whom competition in labour markets does not and cannot mean indefinite price flexibility as long as supply and demand are unequal, it only means a tendency to equality of wages for similar work, but the level of wages is necessarily determined by complex sociopolitical elements; custom, feelings of justice, informal allegiances to classes, as well as overt coalitions such as trade unions, far from being impediments to a smooth working of labour markets that would be able to determine wages even without these elements, are on the contrary indispensable because without them there would be no way to determine wages.[36]
Equilibrium in perfect competition[edit]
Equilibrium in perfect competition is the point where market demands will be equal to market supply. A firm's price will be determined at this point. In the short run, equilibrium will be affected by demand. In the long run, both demand and supply of a product will affect the equilibrium in perfect competition. A firm will receive only normal profit in the long run at the equilibrium point.[37]
See also[edit]
Supply and demand
Contestable market
Imperfect competition
Monopolistic competition
Microeconomics
Bertrand competition
Cournot competition
Efficient-market hypothesis
References[edit]
Jump up ^ Gerard Debreu, Theory of Value: An Axiomatic Analysis of Economic Equilibrium, Yale University Press, New Haven CT (September 10, 1972). ISBN 0-300-01559-3
Jump up ^ Lipsey, R. G.; Lancaster, Kelvin (1956). "The General Theory of Second Best". Review of Economic Studies. 24 (1): 11–32. doi:10.2307/2296233. JSTOR 2296233.
Jump up ^ Bork, Robert H. (1993). The Antitrust Paradox (second edition). New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-02-904456-1.
Jump up ^ Carbaugh, 2006. p. 84.
^ Jump up to: a b Lipsey, 1975. p. 217.
Jump up ^ Lipsey, 1975. pp. 285–59.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Chiller, 1991.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Mansfield, 1979.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g LeRoy Miller, 1982.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e Tirole, 1988.
^ Jump up to: a b Black, 2003.
Jump up ^ "United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Microsoft Corporation, Defendant", Final Judgement, Civil Action No. 98-1232, November 12, 2002.
^ Jump up to: a b "Microeconomics – Zero Profit Equilibrium". Retrieved 2014-12-05.
^ Jump up to: a b c Frank (2008) 351.
Jump up ^ Profit equals (P − ATC) × Q.
Jump up ^ Smith (1987) 245.
Jump up ^ Perloff, J. (2009) p. 231.
Jump up ^ Lovell (2004) p. 243.
Jump up ^ Revenue, R, equals price, P, times quantity, Q.
Jump up ^ Samuelson, W & Marks, S (2003) p. 227.
Jump up ^ Melvin & Boyes, (2002) p. 222.
Jump up ^ Samuelson, W & Marks, S (2003) p. 296.
Jump up ^ Perloff, J. (2009) p. 237.
Jump up ^ Samuelson, W & Marks, S (2006) p. 286.
Jump up ^ Png, I: 1999. p. 102
Jump up ^ Landsburg, S (2002) p. 193.
Jump up ^ Bade and Parkin, pp. 353–54.
Jump up ^ Landsburg, S (2002) p. 193
Jump up ^ Landsburg, S (2002) p. 194
Jump up ^ Binger & Hoffman, Microeconomics with Calculus, 2nd ed. (Addison-Wesley 1998) at 312–14. A firm's production function may display diminishing marginal returns at all production levels. In that case both the MC curve and the AVC curve would originate at the origin and there would be no minimum avc )or min avc = 0) Consequently the entire MC curve would be the SR supply curve.
Jump up ^ This was the kind of criticism made by the "autisme economie" movement Example of this kind of criticisms: http://www.paecon.net/PAEtexts/Guerrien1.htm
Jump up ^ Lee (1998)
Jump up ^ Kirzner (1981)
Jump up ^ Petri (2004)
Jump up ^ Clifton (1977)
Jump up ^ Garegnani (1990)
Jump up ^ Video on YouTube
Arrow, K. J. (1959), "Toward a theory of price adjustment", in M. Abramovitz (ed.), The Allocation of Economic Resources, Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 41–51.
Aumann, R. J. (1964), "Markets with a Continuum of Traders", Econometrica, Vol. 32, No. 1/2, Jan.–Apr., pp. 39–50.
Frank, R., Microeconomics and Behavior 7th ed. (McGraw-Hill) ISBN 978-0-07-126349-8.
Garegnani, P. (1990), "Sraffa: classical versus marginalist analysis", in K. Bharadwaj and B. Schefold (eds), Essays on Piero Sraffa, London: Unwin and Hyman, pp. 112–40 (reprinted 1992 by Routledge, London).
Kirzner, I. (1981), "The 'Austrian' perspective on the crisis", in D. Bell and I. Kristol (eds), The Crisis in Economic Theory, New York: Basic Books, pp. 111–38.
Kreps, D. M. (1990), A Course in Microeconomic Theory, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Lee, F.S. (1998), Post-Keynesian Price Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McNulty, P. J. (1967), "A note on the history of perfect competition", Journal of Political Economy, vol. 75, no. 4 pt. 1, August, pp. 395–99
Novshek, W., and H. Sonnenschein (1987), "General Equilibrium with Free Entry: A Synthetic Approach to the Theory of Perfect Competition", Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 25, No. 3, September, pp. 1281–306.
Petri, F. (2004), General Equilibrium, Capital and Macroeconomics, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Roberts, J. (1987). "Perfectly and imperfectly competitive markets", The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, v. 3, pp. 837–41.
Smith V. L. (1987). "Experimental methods in economics", The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, v. 2, pp. 241–49.
Stigler J. G. (1987). "Competition", The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, Ist edition, vol. 3, pp. 531–46.
External links[edit]
The Perfect Market Economy
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perfect_competition&oldid=825119024"
Categories:
Competition (economics)
Market structure
General equilibrium theory
Perfect competition
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
Azərbaycanca
Беларуская
Български
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Español
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
ಕನ್ನಡ
Қазақша
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Magyar
മലയാളം
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Scots
Simple English
Slovenščina
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 11 February 2018, at 16:27.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

attrs: class style

values: padding:0.2em 0.4em 0.2em;font-size:145%;line-height:1.2em;background: none;

values: padding:0.3em 0.4em 0.3em;font-weight:bold;padding:0.15em 0.15em 0.25em; display:block; margin-bottom:0.55em; background-color: #efefef;

values: padding:0 0.1em 0.4em;padding:0.15em 0.25em 0.5em;

values: List of important publications in economics

values: padding:0.3em 0.4em 0.3em;font-weight:bold;background-color: #efefef;

values: float:right;clear:right;width:22.0em;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%

values:
/wiki/Pareto_optimum
mw-redirect
Pareto optimum

values:
/wiki/Price_taking
mw-redirect
Price taking

values: Edit section: Idealizing conditions of perfect competition

values:
/wiki/Homogeneous_products
mw-redirect
Homogeneous products

values:
/wiki/Price_taker
mw-redirect
Price taker

values:
/wiki/Factor_mobility
mw-redirect
Factor mobility

values:
/wiki/Marginal_costs
mw-redirect
Marginal costs

values:
/wiki/Normal_profits
mw-redirect
Normal profits

values:
/wiki/Factor_of_production
mw-redirect
Factor of production

values:
/wiki/Risk-return_spectrum
mw-redirect
Risk-return spectrum

values: Edit section: In competitive and contestable markets

values:
/wiki/Demand_(economics)
mw-redirect
Demand (economics)

values:
/wiki/Barrier_to_entry
mw-redirect
Barrier to entry

values:
/wiki/Microsoft_Corporation
mw-redirect
Microsoft Corporation

values:
/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft
mw-redirect
United States v. Microsoft

values:
/wiki/Economic_profit
mw-redirect
Economic profit

values:
/wiki/Demand_elasticity
mw-redirect
Demand elasticity

values:
/wiki/Normal_profit
mw-redirect
Normal profit

values:
/wiki/Price_theory
mw-redirect
Price theory

values: Product homogeneity (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Post_Keynesian_economics
mw-redirect
Post Keynesian economics

values:
/wiki/Labour_markets
mw-redirect
Labour markets

values:
/wiki/Trade_unions
mw-redirect
Trade unions

values: Edit section: Equilibrium in perfect competition

values:
/wiki/Review_of_Economic_Studies
mw-redirect
Review of Economic Studies

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F2296233

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/2296233

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.autisme-economie.org

values:
catlinks mw-normal-catlinks
catlinks mw-normal-catlinks
interface

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Perfect_competition
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values: Дасканалая канкурэнцыя – Belarusian

values: Съвършена конкуренция – Bulgarian

values: بازار رقابت کامل – Persian

values: Կատարյալ մրցակցություն – Armenian

values: पूर्ण प्रतियोगिता – Hindi

values: תחרות משוכללת – Hebrew

values: ಪರಿಪೂರ್ಣ ಪೈಪೋಟಿ – Kannada

values: Таза бәсеке – Kazakh

values: പൂർണ്ണ മത്സരകമ്പോളം – Malayalam

values: Совершенная конкуренция – Russian

values: நிறைவுப் போட்டி (பொருளியல்) – Tamil

values: Досконала конкуренція – Ukrainian

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Perfect_competition rootpage-Perfect_competition skin-vector action-view


text:
The Chocolate Touch
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Chocolate Touch
Author
Patrick Skene Catling
Illustrator
Mildred Coughlin McNutt
Country
United States
Language
English
Published
1952 by William Morrow
Pages
95
OCLC
1470182
The Chocolate Touch is a children's book by Patrick Skene Catling, first published in the USA in 1952. John Midas is delighted when, through a magical gift, everything his lips touch turns into chocolate. The story is patterned after the myth of King Midas, whose magic turned everything he touched into gold. The original illustrations were by Mildred Coughlin McNutt, but another edition in the same year, a "newly illustrated" edition, had illustrations by Margot Apple and more pages.[1]
Contents
[hide]
1 Summary
2 Themes
3 Significance
4 References
Summary[edit]
John is a young boy with an intense love of confectionery, especially chocolate. The family doctor warns John that his health is poor, and until further notice, he is to eat only those foods that are conducive to a healthy body, much to the boy's disgruntlement. The doctor's orders are backed by John's folks, who dispose of their son's entire candy stash and have control over his spending money. Angered at having his life micromanaged, John goes for a walk to clear his head.
Whilst on his excursion he sees a coin on the ground, and thinks his good fortune as a way to buy a quick fix of chocolate, only to be dismayed to think the coin must be a novelty, as it is engraved with the image of a fat boy and the letters JM. Even so, John remarks the coin is unique as JM stands for John Midas, and decides to hang on to it. Also on his walk he comes across a candy store he has never seen before. Even more odd is that the store is run by a shopkeeper whom John has never met before, but is friendly and refers to John by name and extols his chocolate as the finest ever. The confectioner offers John a box of his chocolates in exchange for the strange coin. That night before going to bed, John decides to have one final chocolate feast, only be dismayed to find the box contains nothing save for an ordinary chocolate ball, which does not taste overly different from most other types of chocolate.
The next morning, John is amazed to find everything he eats is chocolate. Then, the Chocolate Touch's effects go into full swing, and whatever touches his mouth turns to chocolate. However, he cannot properly hydrate himself this way. He then gets tired of eating chocolate and begins to view foods with nutrients as the tastiest delicacies on earth. He spoils a birthday party when bobbing for apples later in the day. John's dad asks where he got the chocolate, but both are dismayed when the candy store had mysteriously vanished. They go to Dr. Cranium, the family physician, who tries to give John a tonic - John promptly spits out chocolate syrup and a chocolate spoon. Dr. Cranium decides to name the disease "Cranium's disease" and Mrs. Midas cries when she finds out about the disease. In order to comfort her, John tries to kiss his mother, who also turns to chocolate. Horrified, he rushes to the candy store, which has now reappeared, and the chocolate vendor offers him a choice between removing the Chocolate Touch and restoring his mother: John asks the shopkeeper to help his mother and the shopkeeper forgives him. Everything returns to normal, including Mrs. Midas, and the candy store disappears once and for all.
Themes[edit]
The Chocolate Touch covers roughly the same narrative as the myth of King Midas, but in changing the object of its protagonist's desire, modifies its target in significant ways. The myth of King Midas, who loved gold above all things, targets greed as its main theme, while The Chocolate Touch highlights another of the Seven Deadly Sins, gluttony. Both stories deal with self-centeredness vs. compassion, though The Chocolate Touch does so in a manner accessible to children, although John's self-centeredness is unlike most other cases of self-centeredness that put other people at a disadvantage; in John's case he wants his family to stop telling him what he can and cannot eat.
Significance[edit]
The Chocolate Touch is still in print, and is often used in grade school curricula throughout the United States.[2][3] It won the Massachusetts Children's Book Award[4] in 1989, the Utah Children's Choice Honors Award in 1983,[5] and the Beehive Award[6] from the Children's Literature Association of Utah in 1983.
References[edit]
Jump up ^ The Chocolate Touch at WorldCat
Jump up ^ eMints National Center, "Literature: "The Chocolate Touch" by Patrick Catling", accessed 01-21-2009
Jump up ^ ksagclassroom.org, The Chocolate Touch in course material and lesson plan, accessed 01-21-2009
Jump up ^ The Massachusetts Children's Book Award, "1989 - The Chocolate Touch by Patrick Catling", accessed 01-21-2009
Jump up ^ Children's Choice Honors Award, "Utah Children's Choice, 1983, for The Chocolate Touch", accessed 01-21-2009
Jump up ^ The Utah Beehive Awards, "Utah Children's Fiction Book Award - The Chocolate Touch By Patrick Catling (1983)", accessed 01-21-2009
Children's literature portal
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Chocolate_Touch&oldid=787151011"
Categories:
1952 American novels
American children's novels
Greco-Roman mythology in popular culture
1952 children's books
Hidden categories:
Books with missing cover
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Add links
This page was last edited on 23 June 2017, at 19:02.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

value: i

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: caption

value: td

attrs: colspan style

value: tr

value: th

attrs: href title

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1470182

values:
/wiki/Seven_Deadly_Sins
mw-redirect
Seven Deadly Sins

values:
reflist mw-references-wrap
list-style-type: decimal;

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: display:table-cell;padding:0.2em 0.2em 0.2em 0.3em;vertical-align:middle

values: margin:0.5em 0 0.5em 1em;border:solid #aaa 1px

values: Category:Greco-Roman mythology in popular culture

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/The_Chocolate_Touch
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-The_Chocolate_Touch rootpage-The_Chocolate_Touch skin-vector action-view


text:
VidCon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
hideThis article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view. (June 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (August 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
(Learn how and when to remove this template message)
For the electronic camera tube, see Vidicon.
VidCon LLC
"For People who Love Online Video"
Status
Active
Genre
Online Video
Venue
Hyatt Regency Century Plaza (2010–11)
Anaheim Convention Center (2012–present)
Location(s)
Los Angeles, California (2010–11)
Anaheim, California (2012–present)
Country
United States
Inaugurated
July 9, 2010; 8 years ago (2010-07-09)
Most recent
June 20–23, 2018
Attendance
26,200 (2017)[1]
Organized by
Viacom
Website
vidcon.com
VidCon is a multi-genre online video conference, held annually in Southern California since 2010. Originally conceived by Hank and John Green of the Vlogbrothers YouTube channel, the convention is the largest of its kind in the world, gathering thousands of online video viewers, creators, and industry representatives worldwide.[2][3][4] In February 2018, Viacom acquired VidCon, although the conference remains a standalone subsidiary.[5] Its offices remain in Missoula, Montana, sharing a building with Complexly.
Contents
1 History
1.1 2010 (1st annual VidCon)
1.2 2011 (2nd annual VidCon)
1.3 2012 (3rd annual VidCon)
1.4 2013 (4th annual VidCon)
1.5 2014 (5th annual VidCon)
1.6 2015 (6th annual VidCon)
1.7 2016 (7th annual VidCon)
1.8 2017 (8th annual VidCon US, addition of other VidCons)
1.9 2018 (9th annual VidCon US, 2nd annual VidCon Europe/Australia)
1.10 Acquisition by Viacom
1.11 2019 (10th annual VidCon US, 3rd annual VidCon Europe/Australia)
2 Types of passes
3 Attendance
4 References
5 External links
History[edit]
VidCon founders Hank and John Green at VidCon 2014
2010 (1st annual VidCon)[edit]
The first VidCon was held in July 9–11, 2010 at the Hyatt Regency Century Plaza hotel in Los Angeles and sold out in advance[6] with over 1,400 people attending.[7] The first day featured industry panels and presentations by industry leaders and video creators. The second and third day featured main stage presentations by YouTube's content creators, breakout sessions and concerts featuring musicians who achieved success primarily by presenting their music via online videos.[8]
2011 (2nd annual VidCon)[edit]
VidCon 2011 was held in July 29–30, 2011, with an industry conference day on July 28, again at the Hyatt Regency Century Plaza hotel in Los Angeles. The event sold out sixty days prior to its opening,[9] with 2,500 people in attendance.[10][11]
2012 (3rd annual VidCon)[edit]
The Gregory Brothers at VidCon 2012
VidCon 2012, the third annual conference, was held in June 28–30, 2012 at the Anaheim Convention Center.[12] The new venue offered a much larger capacity with room for future expansion, with 7,000 people in attendance.[13][14]
2013 (4th annual VidCon)[edit]
VidCon 2013 was held in August 1–3, 2013 at the Anaheim Convention Center. The conference sold out a month in advance with attendance reaching 12,000 people.[15] YouTube signed a deal in 2013 to become the principal sponsor of VidCon for two years.[16]
2014 (5th annual VidCon)[edit]
Our2ndLife at VidCon 2014
VidCon 2014 was held in June 26–28, 2014 at the Anaheim Convention Center.[17]
The industry track featured talks given by YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, Dreamworks co-founder Jeffrey Katzenberg, and Fullscreen CEO George Strompolos, as well as VidCon cofounder John Green. Troye Sivan also announced his EP, TRXYE.
There were various concerts during the convention including We The Kings and Meghan Tonjes.
2015 (6th annual VidCon)[edit]
VidCon 2015 took place on July 23–25, 2015, at the Anaheim Convention Center. [18] The number of people attending was limited, so there would only be slightly more people than in 2014. However, the space was enlarged, with the convention taking up the entire Convention Center.[19] There were over 300 YouTube creators who performed, exhibited and connected with the attendees. Troye Sivan announced his new EP, WILD.
VidCon 2015 used a new system for fans to meet the creators, requiring Community members to sign up a month in advance to meet specific creators.[20]
2016 (7th annual VidCon)[edit]
VidCon 2016 was held from June 23-25 at the Anaheim Convention Center.[21] The convention announced plans to tighten security at its events in the wake of singer Christina Grimmie's shooting and the Orlando nightclub massacre. Security measures included the addition of metal detectors, enhancing the number of security officers and banning informal meet-and-greets between community members and YouTubers after panels.
2017 (8th annual VidCon US, addition of other VidCons)[edit]
VidCon Europe debuted from April 7-9, 2017, at the Amsterdam RAI Exhibition and Convention Centre in Amsterdam.[22]
VidCon US was held from June 21-24, 2017, at the Anaheim Convention Center.[23]
VidCon Australia debuted on September 9-10, 2017, at the Melbourne Convention & Exhibition Centre in Melbourne.[24]
2018 (9th annual VidCon US, 2nd annual VidCon Europe/Australia)[edit]
VidCon Europe was held from March 22-24, 2018, at the Mövenpick Hotel Amsterdam.[25] Unlike 2017, VidCon Europe 2018 did away with the Community badge, only selling Creator and Industry badges. This was the result of "evaluated feedback" of Community Track attendees from 2017. VidCon sought to "leverage [its] success with the creator and industry communities and continue to build an independent gathering to expand the cross-cultural YouTube and online video movement across Europe."[26]
VidCon US was held from June 20-23, 2018, at the Anaheim Convention Center.[27] This was the first year VidCon implemented the use of RFID wristbands.[28]
VidCon Australia will be held August 31-September 2, 2018, at the Melbourne Convention & Exhibition Centre.[29]
Acquisition by Viacom[edit]
In February 2018, Viacom (owner of the Viacom Media Networks and film studio Paramount Pictures) announced that they were acquiring VidCon, as part of its efforts to expand its live-events business, and to expand from TV programming to next-generation entertainment platforms. Jim Louderback will remain as the CEO of the convention, and co-founder Hank Green will continue be involved and work closely with the team. Its offices will also remain in Missoula, Montana.[30][31] Internet reception to this acquisition was mixed, with some noting the irony of Viacom acquiring VidCon a decade after their lawsuit against Google and YouTube for copyright infringement. Hank Green reassured fans that Viacom’s acquisition will allow the convention to flourish.[32]
2019 (10th annual VidCon US, 3rd annual VidCon Europe/Australia)[edit]
VidCon Europe will be held on February 14-17, 2019 at the ExCel London.[33]
Types of passes[edit]
VidCon attendees may purchase one of three types of passes, also called badges or tracks, a system rolled out during the 2015 VidCon. At the lowest price, the Community track allows access to the main floor of the Anaheim Convention Center, several stages, the signing and photo hall, the Expo Hall, and more. The second type is the Creator track, which is geared more toward members of the online video community who either produce content themselves or have an interest in doing so. This pass gives access to the main and second floor of the venue and creator lounges, which feature panels, workshops, and keynotes that focus on the specifics of creating and editing online video. The third and most expensive type is the Industry track, which gives attendees the chance to attend all VidCon events and enjoy the industry lounge. This badge is mainly designed for those in the online video business,[34] with access to keynote conversations, round-table discussions, hands-on training and platform and product demonstrations. Vidcon provided the industry members with a private zone to relax away from the attendees.[35]
VidCon has a list of featured creators who are invited to the convention and who participate in panels, concerts, and more.[36] These online content creators have access to all events at VidCon as well as the industry lounge, similarly to the Industry track.
People with disabilities are offered assistance throughout the convention. Special accessible seating is provided along with ASL interpreters present in the arena and main stage.[37]
Attendance[edit]
Year
Venue
Attendance
Source
2010 Hyatt Regency Century Plaza 1,400 [7]
2011 2,500 [10]
2012 Anaheim Convention Center 7,000 [13]
2013 12,000 [15]
2014 18,000 [38]
2015 19,500 [38]
2016 25,500 [1]
2017 30,000+ [39]
References[edit]
^ Jump up to: a b "VidCon Announces International Expansion for 2017". Streaming Media. June 23, 2016. Archived from the original on December 6, 2016. Retrieved December 6, 2016.
Jump up ^ Carrasco, Ed (February 5, 2013). "VidCon Returns To Anaheim August 1–3, Anticipates 10,000, Attendees". New Media Rockstars. Archived from the original on June 14, 2013. Retrieved May 14, 2013.
Jump up ^ "YouTube Blog: Our highlights from Vidcon". Archived from the original on October 15, 2010.
Jump up ^ Bascaramurty, Dakshana (July 2, 2010). "Meet your Vloggers – The Globe and Mail". Toronto. Archived from the original on March 29, 2012.
Jump up ^ "Viacom Acquires VidCon, Boosting Live Event and Digital Businesses". Viacom Corporate. 2018-02-07. Retrieved 2018-02-07.
Jump up ^ "Twitter / VidCon 2010". Archived from the original on April 5, 2017.
^ Jump up to: a b Pham, Alex (July 10, 2010). "Vidcon conference celebrates YouTube culture". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on October 6, 2014.
Jump up ^ Miller, Liz Shannon (July 5, 2010). "VidCon 2010 Promises a Celebration of Online Video". GigaOM. Archived from the original on October 14, 2012. Retrieved August 12, 2014.
Jump up ^ "Sold Out Event". Archived from the original on 2011-07-17.
^ Jump up to: a b Wallenstein, Andrew (August 1, 2011). "VidCon revels in YouTube". Variety. Archived from the original on October 31, 2011.
Jump up ^ "At VidCon, YouTube's evolution becomes clear". Reuters. July 31, 2011. Archived from the original on September 24, 2015.
Jump up ^ Lang, Derrik (June 30, 2012). "VidCon attracts online video makers, fans". USA Today. Archived from the original on July 2, 2012. Retrieved July 3, 2012.
^ Jump up to: a b Miller, Liz Shannon (July 1, 2012). "VidCon 2012: love, respect and double rainbows". GigaOM. Archived from the original on July 2, 2012. Retrieved July 3, 2012.
Jump up ^ Sullivan, James (June 30, 2012). "Third Annual VidCon Features Huge Growth, YouTube Upgrades". Rolling Stone. Archived from the original on July 3, 2012. Retrieved July 3, 2012.
^ Jump up to: a b Graham, Jefferson (August 4, 2013). "VidCon brings out YouTube fans". USA Today. Archived from the original on August 5, 2013. Retrieved August 6, 2013.
Jump up ^ Ed Carrasco (April 29, 2013). "YOUTUBE SIGNS DEAL TO BECOME PRINCIPAL SPONSOR OF VIDCON". New Media Rockstars. Archived from the original on May 2, 2013. Retrieved May 15, 2013.
Jump up ^ "VidCon 2014 dates". VidCon LLC. Archived from the original on August 5, 2013. Retrieved July 21, 2013.
Jump up ^ "VidCon 2015 dates". VidCon LLC. Archived from the original on November 19, 2014. Retrieved November 23, 2014.
Jump up ^ Announcing VidCon 2015!. YouTube. November 12, 2014. Archived from the original on February 19, 2015.
Jump up ^ "VidCon 2015 Agenda". VidCon LLC YouTube. Missing or empty |url= (help); |access-date= requires |url= (help)
Jump up ^ "VidCon Announces 2016 Dates, Adds More Events With A Focus On Gaming". Tubefilter. November 3, 2015. Archived from the original on June 20, 2016. Retrieved June 14, 2016.
Jump up ^ "VidCon Europe". VidCon Europe. Archived from the original on May 31, 2017. Retrieved June 22, 2017.
Jump up ^ "When is VidCon US?". VidCon. Archived from the original on June 7, 2017. Retrieved June 22, 2017.
Jump up ^ "VidCon Australia". VidCon Australia. Archived from the original on June 4, 2017. Retrieved June 22, 2017.
Jump up ^ "Hotels & Travel". VidCon Europe. VidCon. Retrieved 30 April 2018.
Jump up ^ "Why No Community Track at VidCon Europe 2018?". VidCon Europe. Retrieved 23 July 2018.
Jump up ^ "Home". VidCon. Retrieved 30 April 2018.
Jump up ^ "RFID". VidCon. Retrieved 23 July 2018.
Jump up ^ "Home". VidCon Australia. VidCon. Retrieved 30 April 2018.
Jump up ^ Lopez, Ricardo (February 5, 2018). "Viacom Acquiring VidCon (EXCLUSIVE)". Variety. Retrieved May 6, 2018.
Jump up ^ Spangler, Todd (February 7, 2018). "Viacom Announces Acquisition of VidCon Internet-Video Conference". Variety. Retrieved May 6, 2018.
Jump up ^ Spangler, Todd (February 9, 2018). "YouTubers React to Viacom's VidCon Acquisition". Variety. Retrieved May 6, 2018.
Jump up ^ "About". VidCon London. Retrieved 23 July 2018.
Jump up ^ "About VidCon". VidCon LLC YouTube. Missing or empty |url= (help); |access-date= requires |url= (help)
Jump up ^ Rosenbaum, Steve. "What Is Vidcon? And Why Did 20,000 Teens Show Up?" Archived July 30, 2015, at the Wayback Machine., Huffington Post, July 27, 2015
Jump up ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on March 19, 2016. Retrieved April 5, 2016.
Jump up ^ "What types of assistance are provided for attendees with disabilities at VidCon US? : VidCon US 2017". help.vidcon.com. Archived from the original on June 7, 2017. Retrieved May 19, 2017.
^ Jump up to: a b Hamedy, Saba (June 29, 2014). "VidCon 2014: 5 things you may have missed (picture 4 caption)". Archived from the original on August 11, 2014. Retrieved August 12, 2014.
Jump up ^ "About". VidCon US. Retrieved 2017-12-10.
External links[edit]
Media related to VidCon at Wikimedia Commons
Official website
hide
v
t
e
List of multigenre conventions in North and South America
North America (Countries listed from North to South)
Canada
Central Canada Comic Con (Manitoba)
ConBravo! (Ontario)
Fan Expo Canada (Ontario)
Hal-Con (Nova Scotia)
Montreal Comiccon (Quebec)
Pure Speculation (Alberta)
Sci-Fi on the Rock (Newfoundland and Labrador)
Toronto Comicon (Ontario)
VCON (British Columbia)
United States (Northeast)
CarnageCon (Vermont)
ConnectiCon (Connecticut)
Fan Expo Boston (Massachusetts)
Flame Con (New York)
Genericon (New York)
New York Comic Con (New York)
Sci-Fi Valley Con (Pennsylvania)
Thy Geekdom Con (Pennsylvania)
Zenkaikon (Pennsylvania)
United States (Midwest)
Archon (Illinois)
ConCoction (convention) (Ohio)
CONvergence (Minnesota)
Chicago Comic & Entertainment Expo (Illinois)
Daisho Con (Wisconsin)
Geek.Kon (Wisconsin)
Indy PopCon (Indiana)
Motor City Comic Con (Michigan)
Wizard World Chicago (Illinois)
United States (Southern)
AggieCon (Texas)
Alamo City Comic Con (Texas)
All-Con (Texas)
ApolloCon (Texas)
Blerdcon (Virginia)
BronyCon (Maryland)
Chattacon (Tennessee)
CoastCon (Mississippi)
Comicpalooza (Texas)
ConGlomeration (Kentucky)
Dragon Con (Georgia)
Fan Expo Dallas (Texas)
JordanCon (Georgia)
MegaCon (Florida)
MidSouthCon (Tennessee)
MOBICON (Alabama)
MomoCon (Georgia)
MystiCon (Virginia)
Pensacon (Florida)
RealmsCon (Texas)
United States (Western)
Comic-Con International (California)
Denver Comic Con (Colorado)
Emerald City Comic Con (Washington)
L.A. Comic Con (California)
Pacific Media Expo (California)
Phoenix Fan Fusion (Arizona)
FanX (Utah)
Silicon Valley Comic Con (California)
SpoCon (Washington)
VidCon (California)
WonderCon (California)
Mexico
Convención de Juegos de Mesa y Comics (Nuevo León)
South America (Countries listed from North to South)
Brazil
Comic Con Experience (São Paulo)
Uruguay
Continuará... (Montevideo Department)
Category
WikiProject "Comics"
WikiProject "Anime and manga"
show
v
t
e
The Green brothers
Hank Green
John Green
Online works
Complexly (The Art Assignment
Crash Course
SciShow)
Dear Hank & John
The Lizzie Bennet Diaries
Vlogbrothers
Community related
AFC Wimbledon
DFTBA Records
Nerdfighteria
Project for Awesome
VidCon
Associated people
Craig Benzine
Aaron Carroll
Emily Graslie
Esther Earl
Lindsey Doe
Maureen Johnson
Michael Aranda
Phil Plait
Rosianna Halse Rojas
Sabrina Cruz
Sarah Urist Green
T. Michael Martin
show
v
t
e
Viacom
Corporate directors
Bob Bakish (CEO)
Ellen V. Futter
Alan C. Greenberg
Charles Phillips
Sumner Redstone (Chairman Emeritus)
Shari Redstone
William Schwartz
Viacom Media Networks
Viacom International Media Networks
BET Networks
BET
BET Gospel
BET Her
BET Hip-Hop
BET Jams
BET Soul
Global Entertainment Group
CMT
CMT Music
Comedy Central
Comedy Central Extra
Logo TV
MTV
MTV2
MTVU
RateMyProfessors.com
MTV Classic
MTV Live
MTV Tres
Paramount Network
TV Land
VH1
VH1 Classic
Nickelodeon Group
Nickelodeon
Nick at Nite
Nick Jr.
NickMusic
Nicktoons
Noggin
TeenNick
Paramount Motion Pictures Group
Paramount Pictures Corporation
Paramount Pictures
Paramount Players
Paramount Animation
Paramount Television
Insurge Pictures
Republic Pictures
United International Pictures (50% ownership)
MTV branded labels
Comedy Central Films
MTV Films
Nickelodeon Movies
Television stations
KVMM-CD (part of Tres)
Music
Comedy Central Records
Nick Records
Miscellaneous assets
Viacom International
Viacom 18 (India)
Bellator Kickboxing
Bellator MMA
MovieTickets.com
Nickelodeon Kids & Family Virtual Worlds Group
Nickelodeon on Sunset
Nickelodeon Animation Studio
VidCon
Defunct properties
Paramount Vantage
Viacom Entertainment Store
See also
CBS Corporation
Gulf and Western Industries
National Amusements
Viacom (original)
Viacom criticisms and controversies
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=VidCon&oldid=853371460"
Categories:
Web-related conferences
Green brothers
Internet culture
Computer-related introductions in 2010
Recurring events established in 2010
Viacom
Hidden categories:
Pages using web citations with no URL
Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL
Webarchive template wayback links
Use mdy dates from January 2017
Articles with a promotional tone from June 2014
All articles with a promotional tone
Articles that may contain original research from August 2016
All articles that may contain original research
Articles with multiple maintenance issues
Use American English from March 2013
All Wikipedia articles written in American English
Pages using deprecated image syntax
Official website different in Wikidata and Wikipedia
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
Français
Suomi
Українська
Edit links
This page was last edited on 4 August 2018, at 08:40 (UTC).
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

attrs: class href

values: mw-jump-link #mw-head

values: mw-jump-link #p-search

value: p

value: img

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

value: span

attrs: class role tabindex

value: b

value: small

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Advert

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Original_research

values:
mw-collapsible mw-made-collapsible
width:95%; margin: 0.2em 0;

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-multiple_issues compact-ambox

values:
/wiki/Century_Plaza_Hotel
mw-redirect
Century Plaza Hotel

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.vidcon.com

values: checkbox button toctogglecheckbox toctogglecheckbox display:none

values:
/wiki/We_The_Kings
mw-redirect
We The Kings

values:
/wiki/Meghan_Tonjes
mw-redirect
Meghan Tonjes

values:
/wiki/2016_Orlando_nightclub_shooting
mw-redirect
2016 Orlando nightclub shooting

values: Edit section: 2017 (8th annual VidCon US, addition of other VidCons)

values: Melbourne Convention & Exhibition Centre

values: Edit section: 2018 (9th annual VidCon US, 2nd annual VidCon Europe/Australia)

values: Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc.

values: Edit section: 2019 (10th annual VidCon US, 3rd annual VidCon Europe/Australia)

values:
headerSort
0
columnheader button
Sort ascending

values:
/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_Century_Plaza
mw-redirect
Hyatt Regency Century Plaza

values:
wikitable sortable jquery-tablesorter
text-align:center

values:
nofollow
http://vidcon.com/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://vidconeurope.com/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://vidconaustralia.com/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://vidconeurope.com/hotels-travel/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://vidcon.com/rfid/
external text

values:
nofollow
https://vidconlondon.com/about/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://vidcon.com/featured-creators/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://vidcon.com/about/
external text

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values: Template:Multigenre conventions in North and South America

values: Template talk:Multigenre conventions in North and South America

attrs: alt src title width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
navbox-abovebelow hlist
2
font-weight:bold;

values: nowraplinks collapsible expanded navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-made-collapsible

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-made-collapsible mw-collapsed

values:
/wiki/BET_Hip-Hop
mw-redirect
BET Hip-Hop

values:
/wiki/Nicktoons_(TV_channel)
mw-redirect
Nicktoons (TV channel)

values: nowraplinks collapsible collapsed navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-collapsed mw-made-collapsible

values: Category:Computer-related introductions in 2010

values: Category:Recurring events established in 2010

values: Category:Pages using web citations with no URL

values: Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL

values: Category:Webarchive template wayback links

values: Category:Use mdy dates from January 2017

values: Category:Articles with a promotional tone from June 2014

values: Category:All articles with a promotional tone

values: Category:Articles that may contain original research from August 2016

values: Category:All articles that may contain original research

values: Category:Articles with multiple maintenance issues

values: Category:Use American English from March 2013

values: Category:All Wikipedia articles written in American English

values: Category:Pages using deprecated image syntax

values: Category:Official website different in Wikidata and Wikipedia

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values:
/wiki/VidCon
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values:
/w/index.php?title=VidCon&action=edit
Edit this page [ctrl-alt-e]
e

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values:
https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/VidCon
VidCon – Czech
cs
cs
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/VidCon
VidCon – German
de
de
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/VidCon
VidCon – Spanish
es
es
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/VidCon
VidCon – French
fr
fr
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/VidCon
VidCon – Finnish
fi
fi
interlanguage-link-target

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-VidCon rootpage-VidCon skin-vector action-view