Critique of Underwater Plane

The article I chose to critique is the Underwater Airplane article. The article talks about Necker Island located in the British Virgin Islands and a new invention that was to be released in February of this year. The new invention that is creating a lot of hype is an underwater airplane. The airplane is extremely eco-friendly. According to Virgin (the creators of the plane) the underwater plane has virtually no impact on the waters it will be running in. The underwater plane cost an extremely high amount of money to ride. The underwater plane costs 25,000 dollars for one week’s worth of usage. To stay of Necker Island it cost 300,000 so actually in comparison it is a reasonable cost for those who are wealthy enough to stay on this island.

The problem with this new form of travel/amusement is that it is brand new so there are no competitors. Because the underwater plane has no competitors it is a monopoly. There are several problems with the underwater plane, You have to be able to not only afford the 25,000 to ride it for a week but also a mere 300,000 to vacation at the Island that enables you to ride. Virgin can charge whatever they would like for people to come stay at their private island because there are many other options for people to visit. On the other hand there is only one under water airplane, which will draw a crowd to that island. The underwater plane is able to charge whatever they would like to ride it because there are no competitors and it is a monopoly. Whether or not the price is reasonable/fair for covering research and development, Virgin is able to charge whatever they would like because of the imperfect competition.

In the author of the original post’s evaluation of the article she is very thorough and does a good job of discussing all of the points of the monopoly. She talks about how it is a monopoly and Virgin is able to set the price at whatever they please. She also talks about how hard it would be for other competitors to break into the market. This is because the amount of money it cost to research and develop the product, as well as the cost of the materials. There is also the issue of a very small consumer population. She makes it clear that there are not too many people that are able to spend 325,000 dollars to ride in an underwater plane for a week and vacation. Overall the evaluation of the article is very complete and concepts that we have learned in class are nicely related to the Underwater Plane article.