Maritime Enterprises and Regulated competition.(Instructor's Note)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
CASE DESCRIPTION The primary subject matter of this case concerns two U.S. domestic maritime enterprises engaged in liner shipping and interacting in a regulated market. Secondary issues examined include U.S. Cabotage Laws, market contestability, government regulation and potential domestic entrants. The case has a difficulty level of four, appropriate for senior level. The case is designed to be taught in one class hour and is expected to require three hours of outside preparation by students. The case is designed for use in either the Managerial Economics or Business Policy and Strategy (otherwise entitled Corporate Strategy or Strategic Management) course. CASE SYNOPSIS Two U.S. domestic maritime enterprises are profiled. Students are asked to advise the Chief Strategy Officer for each of the two firms identified in the case study in terms of price and freight carrying (shipping) capacity competition. The students are required to formulate and justify their recommendations for each firm's strategic actions regarding price adjustments, shipping capacity adjustments or some combination of the two. The recommendation should consider the rivals' past behaviors and likely future responses. INSTRUCTORS' NOTES Learning Outcomes Students will understand the: * microeconomic framework for price and capacity competition; * implications of government regulation on the strategic decision making of enterprises; * strategic interrelatedness of firms within an industry sector that accounts for the majority of the market share; * implications of price competition; * implications of capacity competition; and * the strict dichotomy between an enterprise's strategic short-run and long-run imperatives. Appropriate Case Context This case can be used to provide a real-world scenario for strategic decisions within the context of the microeconomic framework of price and capacity considerations in a government regulated industry sector. Two competing firms are faced with price and capacity decisions that are critical to their future operations. Although, the context is the marine transportation sector; the issues are faced by senior management teams in many industry sectors that are typical of a small number of producers enjoying a collective high market share; e.g., ethical pharmaceutical and telephone enterprises on the national level and banking and electrical power generating enterprises on a regional level. Students are assigned roles as the advisors to the Chief Strategy Officer of each company as they formulate and justify their recommendations for a strategy regarding price and capacity competition for their assigned enterprise and assess the competitor's strategic response. Theoretical Considerations Earlier research has been helpful in understanding liner shipping competition with respect to pricing and shipping capacity. Bergantino and Veenstra (2002) researched liner shipping competition in terms of network theory. Panayides and Cullinane (2002) investigated competitive advantage and Fusillo (2003) examined the role of excess capacity in deterring entry. Song and Panayides (2002) researched cooperative game theory and Brooks (2002) analyzed regulation in North America from a Canadian perspective. Frankel (2004) estimates that U.S. Cabotage Laws, by shielding U.S. firms from lower-cost international competitors, impose direct costs of $3 billion on the U.S. economy, and indirect costs of $6 billion. In the United States, the Jones Act requires all vessels operating between U.S. ports to be domestically built, owned, operated, and staffed (Lombardo, 2004) thus increasing freight costs. This section reviews the basic microeconomic theory relevant to understanding the competitive nature of maritime firm behavior. Maritime firms maximize profit rather than revenue. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».