And manages to fail both the economics and the logic part of the paper:
Competition law is designed to protect us from monopolies – where there is only one seller but many buyers. Yet the big supermarkets also hold monopsonies; many sellers (such as farmers) and one buyer (the supermarket). As the only major purchaser of a product or service, the ‘monopsonist’ may dictate terms to its suppliers in the same manner that a monopolist controls the market for its buyers.
Between them, the Big Four – Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Morrisons and Asda – account for more than three quarters of the UK grocery market,
The logic failure? If there are four supermarkets competing with each other then there is not \”one buyer\” now, is there?
OK, maybe that\’s not a logic failure: maybe it\’s just numeracy she\’s lacking.
The economics fail? Yes, one seller many buyers is a monopoly. But several sellers with market power and many buyers without it is an \”oligopoly\”.
So the supermarkets are not monopsonists (note that in the plural they cannot be) or a monopsony, they are an oligopsony.
It just never works when these humanities folks (note that Dr. Lucas\’ Ph.D is in Elizabethan sonnets) try to deal with the sciences, does it?