Market Structures (Edexcel A Level Economics A): Exam Questions

According to the Royal Mail, more hair and beauty salons opened on UK high streets last year than any other type of independent business, with a net increase of 10%, representing 626 new salons.

(Source:  adapted  from https://www.theguardian.com)

Figure 1

Extract A

Supermarket price war puts pressure on their food suppliers

The number of food suppliers (to supermarkets) struggling to remain in business has increased by more than 50% over the past year as supermarkets engage in an intense price war. It has never been tougher for the UK’s food suppliers according to a study by accountants Begbies Traynor. It blames aggressive price-cutting by the supermarkets and delays in payments to food suppliers as the main causes of the difficulties. Further problems include food suppliers being forced to pay excessive amounts for packaging specified by supermarkets and funding in-store promotions. Almost 90% of struggling food suppliers are small and medium-sized businesses.

The price war has contributed to food prices paid by consumers falling by 1.7% over the past two years. The market shares of the big four supermarkets – Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons – are under pressure as shopping habits change. Many consumers are switching from one main weekly shop to shopping more frequently at local discount stores such as Aldi and Lidl or purchasing goods online from other grocery retailers. The big four supermarkets have responded by putting more pressure on their suppliers despite an investigation by the Groceries Code Adjudicator (GCA). The GCA has the power to fine supermarkets up to 1% of their annual sales revenue if they break the Groceries Code of Conduct.

A YouGov study found considerable differences between the supermarkets in meeting the Code with Aldi performing well but Tesco badly. Despite the Groceries Code, many food suppliers are reluctant to complain for fear of losing contracts with the supermarkets.

(Source: adapted from The Guardian, 20th July 2015)

Markets for food and drinks high in fat, salt or sugar (HFSS)

Figure 1: UK market share of potato crisps, 2017

(Source: adapted from https://academic.oup.com)

Extract A

The effects of a total ban on advertising of HFSS foods

Food and drinks which are high in fat, salt or sugar (HFSS) tend to be sold in highly concentrated markets. Tough new rules banning advertisements for HFSS products, such as those for confectionery, fizzy drinks and potato crisps, come into effect in July 2017 as a means to reduce consumption. The rules apply to media targeted at under-16s and will mean a major reduction in the number of advertisements children see for HFSS products in posters near schools, in films targeted at children, on catch-up television and in social media if it is directed at children.

There are three main factors that will determine the effectiveness of the intervention: first, whether advertising acts to expand the market share or steal rivals’ market share. Secondly, how firms in the market adapt their behaviour in response to the ban. Thirdly, what substitute products do consumers turn to if they opted out of the targeted market.

Results from a recent survey in the UK suggest that the total quantity of crisps sold would fall by around 15% in the presence of an advertising ban, or by 10% if firms respond with price cuts, since the ban acts to make the market more competitive and firms respond to the ban by, on average, lowering their prices. The survey showed that following a ban, consumers are more likely to switch to another junk food than to a healthy food, which (in addition to the pricing response of firms) acts to partially offset any health gains from the policy.

(Source: adapted from https://academic.oup.com and https://www.asa.org.uk)

River Island is a clothing retailer. Students are offered a River Island student discount code to benefit from a 10% price reduction as an attempt by the firm to increase profit.

In Sicily, many households can grow lemons of the same quality as each other. Chiara decides to sell lemons at her local market, expecting to make a normal profit. She notices that all of the many lemon sellers are charging exactly the same price.

Hand car wash (HCW) firms in the UK

Extract A

What is the true human cost of your £5 hand car wash (HCW)?

The UK’s hand car washes (HCWs) are extremely price competitive, but they have also been linked to modern slavery. Are they ever fair for workers?

There is little agreement about how many HCWs there are in the UK. Estimates range from 10000 to 20000. This lack of accurate information about the industry makes government regulation very difficult. Automated car washes, with their fierce rotating bristles, used to be the first option for drivers in a hurry. Now there is more choice. While the economy slows and incomes fail to keep up with inflation, demand for HCWs has grown. Many people see paying £5 for a car washed by someone else, rather than cleaning it at home, as a small expense which yields a high utility. But what is the true cost of a £5 car wash – and what should we be paying?

The growth of HCWs is partly the result of changes in the structure of industry in the UK. Many petrol stations have closed as drivers fill up at supermarkets. Garages and their forecourts have closed as cars become more reliable and locked into service agreements. The available sites for HCWs have therefore increased significantly and rents have fallen.

HCW entrepreneurs have identified available land and have benefitted from changes in the labour market, partly as a result of EU migration. UK drivers are now able to obtain cheap and effective hand car washing. For many migrants, car washes are a first job. “They accept car washing for a short period while they improve their language skills and move into other industries,” says Ian Clark, a professor of work and employment at Nottingham Business School. “But there are also car-wash workers without networks who are in a dead end, working there for long periods.”

Many drivers are only interested in getting the cheapest wash. If the price is very low, it probably means that workers are receiving less than the minimum wage and working in poor conditions. Crude calculations illustrate the problem. A £5 HCW employing five workers for 10 hours a day would need to wash 79 cars a day to just cover the wage costs. This assumes the workers are paid the minimum wage. This is one car every seven and a half minutes. Even if the profit can be higher on valet services, the price of which can be as little as £12 for a full inside-and-out clean, it’s hard to see how a car wash price as low as £5 pays a living wage. This ignores all other costs which HCWs incur such as business rates and rent.

Evidence from car-wash workers is limited but Clark and others have been able to build a picture of some of the tougher conditions on drenched forecourts. “Like nail bars and small garment manufacturers, car washes are what we call ‘hard-to-reach places,’” Clark 5 10 15 20 25 30 P65667A0336 Turn over 3 explains. As part of the research, Clark and his team spoke to workers from 45 HCWs in the Midlands. Clark and his team met and observed workers who lacked waterproof boots or trousers, or hi-vis jackets and gloves. “They’re spraying around hydrochloric acid solution for alloy wheels, breathing in the vapour and fumes,” Clark says. Some workers were paid a little over half the minimum wage.

(Source adapted from: https://www.theguardian.com)

Pilgrim’s Pride is the second-largest chicken supplier in the US. It will pay a $107.9 million fine for price fixing with Tyson Foods and other chicken suppliers. The firms limited production to force prices higher and harm major customers, including KFC. Pilgrim’s Pride is thought to have gained at least $361 million in total revenue from the collusion.

(Source: adapted from https://www.drovers.com)

Figure 1: Branded coffee shops by number of shops in the UK in 2021

(Source: adapted from https://www.statista.com)

Small local bakeries have many of the characteristics of monopolistic competition.

Figure 1: Market share of UK online streaming services

(Source adapted from: Kantar, Worldpanel Division Geotech 2022)

A UK electricity supplier controls 75% of the domestic market. Managers are not minimising costs, resulting in an average cost (AC) of £60 per unit, while the minimum AC is £50. The government is considering a price cap of £55 per unit to protect consumers.

In 2025, fuel suppliers PowerFuel and GreenPetro were investigated by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) for suspected price fixing.

The UK Energy Drinks Market

Figure 1: Market share of energy drink brands (2024)

Source: UK Beverage Association, 2024

Figure 2: UK Energy Drink Consumer Survey (2024)

Survey of 1,200 UK consumers aged 16–25

Extract A: Marketing activities

Energy drink brands in the UK have increased spending on marketing and sponsorship over the past five years. Red Bull and Pulse Energy sponsor large-scale events such as international esports tournaments, extreme sports, and music festivals. Volt and Atomic Rush focus on smaller regional sponsorships and university-level sports partnerships.

Marketing campaigns often use short-form video content on TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram, featuring athletes, musicians, and online personalities popular with young adults. Retailers confirm that Red Bull and Pulse Energy benefit from prominent in-store displays and greater online visibility through delivery apps and supermarket websites. Smaller brands typically rely on local advertising and word-of-mouth promotion.

Consumer interviews suggest that while some buyers are influenced by advertising and limited-edition product launches, others prioritise taste, caffeine strength, or packaging convenience. Some respondents said they try new products when they appear in stores or when friends recommend them.

Extract B: Production, distribution and packaging

Most energy drink manufacturers in the UK import ingredients such as caffeine and taurine, though bottling and packaging are mainly carried out domestically. Red Bull and Pulse Energy have expanded UK-based facilities in recent years, whereas Volt and Atomic Rush use third-party production. Analysts note that fluctuating aluminium and transport costs have affected packaging prices, putting pressure on profit margins.

Distribution networks are dominated by major supermarket chains, with convenience stores and petrol stations providing secondary outlets. Online grocery platforms have seen rapid growth since 2020, and many smaller companies use direct-to-consumer websites to reach niche markets. However, large retailers often charge listing fees or require promotional commitments that can be difficult for newer entrants to meet.

Product development has focused on sugar-free and low-calorie lines in response to shifting consumer tastes and public-health initiatives. Several companies have trialled recyclable packaging and smaller cans aimed at environmentally aware consumers. Manufacturers typically expand output in summer months to match higher demand linked to festivals and sporting events.

Extract C: Consumer behaviour, health and regulation

Surveys of young adults aged 16–25 show that energy drinks have become a regular feature of social and academic life. Many report drinking them during study sessions, part-time work, and social occasions. Some participants describe energy drinks as “essential” for concentration and staying awake during exams or night shifts, while others associate them with parties, gaming, and sporting activity.

Lifestyle patterns strongly influence brand choice. Products associated with gaming or music are especially popular among frequent consumers, while fitness-oriented individuals are more likely to select brands advertising “low sugar” or “natural” ingredients. Several respondents say they first tried a brand because of sponsorships at festivals or university events. Peer influence also matters: many consumers report choosing the brand their friends prefer, though some state that taste and perceived energy boost outweigh social factors.

Focus-group discussions highlight how consumption habits vary by gender and activity. Male respondents are more likely to purchase large cans before exercise or gaming sessions, whereas female consumers often prefer smaller cans or sugar-free options. Some mention switching brands when new flavours are released or when prices are discounted at convenience stores.

Health organisations, including the British Dietetic Association and the Royal Society for Public Health, have expressed concern about the growing consumption of high-caffeine, high-sugar drinks among young adults. Studies have linked frequent use to disrupted sleep patterns, anxiety, and cardiovascular strain. Several schools and universities have restricted sales on campus, citing wellbeing concerns.

Public debate has turned to possible government intervention. Suggested measures include clearer caffeine labelling, age restrictions on purchases, and limits on marketing directed at under-18s. Government bodies have also suggested introducing a tax on energy drinks to discourage overconsumption among young adults and to fund public health initiatives. Industry reactions vary: Red Bull has said its products are intended for adults and already meet existing guidelines, while Pulse Energy has stated that any new regulations would mainly affect advertising rather than production. Smaller brands argue that tighter advertising rules could reduce the dominance of the largest firms by giving newer entrants greater visibility.

Consumer groups have also called for educational campaigns about caffeine consumption, claiming that awareness is low among younger people. Surveys indicate that many consumers underestimate the caffeine content of energy drinks compared with coffee. Some analysts believe that long-term health campaigns could gradually shift demand toward low-sugar or functional beverages, reshaping the competitive landscape of the industry.

Extract B

Proposals to regulate profits in the UK energy market

Currently, energy retail companies make an average profit of 7% of total revenue. The Chairman of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) suggested that these profits are as much as five times higher than they should be, given the companies’ limited role in marketing, metering and billing customers. He recommended a profit cap of 1.25% of total revenue.

However, Scottish Power criticised proposals for regulating profits saying that it would reduce investment in the energy industry and undermine long-term energy provision. The firm claimed that such a low rate of return is below the profit margin made by supermarkets. All six large energy firms are vertically integrated – producing as well as distributing gas and electricity. This can provide efficiency benefits but also harm competition.

(Source: adapted from The Times, 19th September 2016)

Extract A

Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) report into the UK energy market

An investigation into the UK energy market by the CMA concluded that customers have been paying £1.4 billion a year more than they would in a fully competitive market. It found that 70% of domestic customers of the six largest energy firms were on an expensive standard rate. These customers could each save over £300 a year by switching to a cheaper deal but appear reluctant to do so.

However, the CMA investigation found no evidence of anti-competitive practices by firms. There has even been an increase in new entrant energy suppliers over recent years, and their combined market share has reached 12% in both gas and electricity supply.

To protect consumers, the CMA has introduced various measures to open up and increase competition in the UK energy market. These include: • the creation of a database designed to help consumers switch energy suppliers - rival suppliers can directly contact these customers; • the conversion of all homes to smart energy meters, making it easier for customers to measure energy consumption and switch supplier • new rules to protect the four million vulnerable customers using prepaid meters - this includes a temporary price cap until smart meters have been installed.

(Source: adapted from https://www.gov.uk/government/ news/cma-publishes-final-energy-report-in-full)

Extract C

What next for the high street?

A high street is typically found in all UK towns and cities. Shops normally encountered in a typical UK high street can include successful small firms such as independent food retailers, cafés, nail and beauty salons, restaurants and charity shops. They differ from out-of-town shopping centres by being more diverse, family-run and offering local or personalised services. Customers are often very loyal. However, the high street may often have limited access by car or expensive parking facilities.

The rise of online retailers such as Amazon and eBay have placed huge pressures on UK high streets, with many well-known shops – and even successful retail chains – forced to close due to lost business. Many high street firms cannot compete on price with online retailers who – because they frequently have very low fixed costs – can significantly undercut the high street shops on price.

Even before online shopping, competition was eroding high street activity, with out-of-town retail parks that were not necessarily cheaper but provide a larger range of shops and offer plentiful parking. They offer a shopping experience that other retailing cannot match – pleasant, safe pedestrian shopping, a clean environment, fun activities for children and spend-the-day-there potential.

While the list of retail and leisure failures might suggest that the high street does not have a future, some analysts argue the opposite. Many believe that the high street is ideally placed to reinvent itself in response to the structural shift in working and shopping patterns that has resulted from the global health crisis 2020–22. The perceived weaknesses of the high street model – its fragmented ownership, lack of centralised coordination and high vacancy rates – become strengths as they lower the barriers to entry for new concepts and operators. They also enable risk taking and innovation that will ultimately lead to a more flourishing and diverse environment on our local high streets.

It should be possible for small firms to flourish even when staff shortages are pushing up wages in the high street, and house price falls damage consumer confidence and spending on perceived luxuries.

(Source: adapted from https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk and https://www2.deloitte. com)

Extract A

The case for nationalisation

Privatisation has not made the rail industry cheaper to operate, despite the promise from one government source that it would see private companies bringing: “more competition, greater efficiency and a wider choice of services”.

One reason, suggest the critics, is fragmentation. Instead of pushing British Rail into the private sector as a single supplier the government chose to break it into three components of track, train operators and rolling stock i.e. the trains and carriages. This has encouraged each part of the rail industry to prioritise its own profits rather than collaborating to improve the system.

Privatisation, meanwhile, never really worked. The rail network of 2 500 stations and 32 000 km of tracks was renationalised in 2001. This has encouraged the government’s transport secretary, a supporter of private sector involvement, to argue that the state Network Rail monopoly should be removed so that companies can bid to build new rail lines to upgrade the railway.

The privately-owned train operators are now the subject of fierce criticism, due to overcrowding and cancelled services. Private companies are supposed to compete to win a bid to be the train operator for a region for a short number of years. However in recent years the number of private companies bidding or renewing their contract as rail operators has fallen. In May 2018 the government rescued the East Coast line by renationalising it. The line had been run by the private rail operator Virgin Rail, which was suffering lower passenger numbers and revenue than forecast.

Some argue that there is a simple solution: reunite track and train in the only feasible manner, nationalisation.

Markets for food and drinks high in fat, salt or sugar (HFSS)

Figure 1: UK market share of potato crisps, 2017

(Source: adapted from https://academic.oup.com/restud/article/3108825/ The-Effects-of-Banning-Advertising-in-Junk-Food 6 April 2017)

Extract A

The effects of a total ban on advertising of HFSS foods

Food and drinks which are high in fat, salt or sugar (HFSS) tend to be sold in highly concentrated markets. Tough new rules banning advertisements for HFSS products, such as those for confectionery, fizzy drinks and potato crisps, come into effect in July 2017 as a means to reduce consumption. The rules apply to media targeted at under-16s and will mean a major reduction in the number of advertisements children see for HFSS products in posters near schools, in films targeted at children, on catch-up television and in social media if it is directed at children. There are three main factors that will determine the effectiveness of the intervention: first, whether advertising acts to expand the market share or steal rivals’ market share. Secondly, how firms in the market adapt their behaviour in response to the ban. Thirdly, what substitute products do consumers turn to if they opted out of the targeted market. Results from a recent survey in the UK suggest that the total quantity of crisps sold would fall by around 15% in the presence of an advertising ban, or by 10% if firms respond with price cuts, since the ban acts to make the market more competitive and firms respond to the ban by, on average, lowering their prices. The survey showed that following a ban, consumers are more likely to switch to another junk food than to a healthy food, which (in addition to the pricing response of firms) acts to partially offset any health gains from the policy.

(Source: adapted from The Effects of Banning Advertising in Junk Food Markets, Dubois, Pierre; Griffith, Rachel, Review of Economic Studies)

Vodafone–Three UK Merger

Figure 1 — Market shares before merger (2024)

S&P Global Market Intelligence Report

Extract A — Company perspective (2024)

In December 2024, Vodafone and Three UK announced their merger, aiming to combine resources and strengthen their position in the UK mobile market. Company executives highlighted plans to invest heavily in 5G networks, promising faster speeds and wider coverage, including in rural areas. They also stated that joining forces would help reduce duplicated costs, allowing the combined company to offer more reliable services to customers.

Industry observers noted that fewer large providers could change the way consumers experience the market. While some welcomed the potential for improved coverage and new service options, others worried that fewer big players might influence the prices customers pay or slow the introduction of new features. Vodafone–Three assured the public that they would maintain competitive pricing and keep agreements with smaller mobile operators to provide access to their network.

Analysts suggested that the merger could reshape customer choices. With fewer big providers, some consumers might find it harder to switch operators quickly, especially in areas with limited coverage. On the other hand, the company argued that investment in technology would lead to faster, more reliable services, which could benefit everyone. The impact on prices, however, remained uncertain, with potential differences between urban and rural areas.

Extract B — Regulator perspective (CMA, 2025)

The CMA carefully reviewed the Vodafone–Three merger, focusing on how the change might affect consumers and smaller providers. Officials noted that mobile phones are essential services, and significant changes in the number of big providers could influence what customers pay and how quickly new services appear. The review included customer surveys, market data, and discussions with smaller companies that rely on the larger networks to operate.

To address concerns, the CMA required Vodafone–Three to commit to specific measures. These included limits on certain tariff increases, guarantees that smaller operators could continue to access their network, and a major investment plan to improve 5G coverage. Regulators said these measures would help ensure customers benefit from better services while still allowing the company to operate efficiently and cover its costs.

Officials emphasised the ongoing importance of monitoring the market. They noted that even with the commitments in place, some areas could see slower changes or smaller improvements than others. Customers might notice differences in service quality depending on location, and pricing decisions by Vodafone–Three would continue to be watched closely. Analysts commented that how the company balances its investments with day-to-day operations would determine whether consumers see noticeable benefits over the next few years.

Extract C — Consumer and analyst perspectives (2025)

Consumer reactions to the merger were mixed. Some welcomed the promise of faster networks and better coverage, especially in cities where signal strength had previously been a problem. University students and young professionals expressed optimism that faster, more reliable services would make online study and work easier, with fewer interruptions during calls or streaming.

Some local communities have expressed concern that additional mobile masts needed for the merger’s 5G expansion may affect landscapes, create noise during construction, and raise worries about environmental and health impacts.

Other consumers expressed concern that with one fewer major provider, prices could rise and switching options might become more limited. Advocacy groups noted that while some households might see little change, customers in areas served mainly by the two largest providers could face fewer alternatives. Analysts pointed out that even modest price increases could affect low-income users more than others, highlighting regional differences in service experience and affordability.

Economic commentators suggested that the long-term effects of the merger would depend on how the company balances its expansion plans with day-to-day operations. While new 5G infrastructure might improve quality, the reduction in major competitors could subtly influence customer choices and pricing. Smaller operators struggle to enter or expand due to high network costs, but some niche providers continue to compete using existing infrastructure through leasing agreementsConsumers and smaller companies would need to watch whether promised improvements actually materialise across the country or remain concentrated in certain areas.

Extract A

The case for nationalisation

Privatisation has not made the rail industry cheaper to operate, despite the promise from one government source that it would see private companies bringing: “more competition, greater efficiency and a wider choice of services”.

One reason, suggest the critics, is fragmentation. Instead of pushing British Rail into the private sector as a single supplier the government chose to break it into three components of track, train operators and rolling stock i.e. the trains and carriages. This has encouraged each part of the rail industry to prioritise its own profits rather than collaborating to improve the system.

Privatisation, meanwhile, never really worked. The rail network of 2 500 stations and 32 000 km of tracks was renationalised in 2001. This has encouraged the government’s transport secretary, a supporter of private sector involvement, to argue that the state Network Rail monopoly should be removed so that companies can bid to build new rail lines to upgrade the railway.

The privately-owned train operators are now the subject of fierce criticism, due to overcrowding and cancelled services. Private companies are supposed to compete to win a bid to be the train operator for a region for a short number of years. However in recent years the number of private companies bidding or renewing their contract as rail operators has fallen. In May 2018 the government rescued the East Coast line by renationalising it. The line had been run by the private rail operator Virgin Rail, which was suffering lower passenger numbers and revenue than forecast.

Some argue that there is a simple solution: reunite track and train in the only feasible manner, nationalisation.

Figure 3: Price of a single off-peak train journey, Edinburgh to Leeds Saturday 22nd December 2018 19:00 hours.

Amazon.com, the giant online retailer, has too much power’. It uses its market power to put a squeeze on publishers, in effect driving down the prices it pays for books. If a publisher refuses, Amazon may take action by ‘delaying their delivery, raising their prices, and steering customers to other publishers’.

(Source adapted from: https://www.nytimes.com)

In October 2017 Scania, the Volkswagen-owned truck maker, was fined €880 million (£771 million) by the European Commission for colluding with five other truck manufacturers over a 14-year period. The firms had agreed to coordinate prices after experiencing additional costs of meeting emission regulations.

The travel and tourism industry

Figure 1: Package holiday market share of the six largest providers, booked by UK residents, 2019

(Source adapted from: https://knowledge.sharescope.co.uk)

Figure 2: Jet2 package holiday prices to Sorrento

In many industries, such as banking, health insurance, internet search engines, pharmaceuticals, social media and telecommunications, there have been increases in market concentration.

Extract A
What is the true human cost of your £5 hand car wash (HCW)?

The UK’s hand car washes (HCWs) are extremely price competitive, but they have also been linked to modern slavery. Are they ever fair for workers? There is little agreement about how many HCWs there are in the UK. Estimates range from 10000 to 20000. This lack of accurate information about the industry makes government regulation very difficult. Automated car washes, with their fierce rotating bristles, used to be the first option for drivers in a hurry. Now there is more choice. While the economy slows and incomes fail to keep up with inflation, demand for HCWs has grown.

Many people see paying £5 for a car washed by someone else, rather than cleaning it at home, as a small expense which yields a high utility. But what is the true cost of a £5 car wash – and what should we be paying? The growth of HCWs is partly the result of changes in the structure of industry in the UK. Many petrol stations have closed as drivers fill up at supermarkets. Garages and their forecourts have closed as cars become more reliable and locked into service agreements. The available sites for HCWs have therefore increased significantly and rents have fallen.

HCW entrepreneurs have identified available land and have benefitted from changes in the labour market, partly as a result of EU migration. UK drivers are now able to obtain cheap and effective hand car washing. For many migrants, car washes are a first job. “They accept car washing for a short period while they improve their language skills and move into other industries,” says Ian Clark, a professor of work and employment at Nottingham Business School. “But there are also car-wash workers without networks who are in a dead end, working there for long periods.”

Many drivers are only interested in getting the cheapest wash. If the price is very low, it probably means that workers are receiving less than the minimum wage and working in poor conditions. Crude calculations illustrate the problem. A £5 HCW employing five workers for 10 hours a day would need to wash 79 cars a day to just cover the wage costs. This assumes the workers are paid the minimum wage. This is one car every seven and a half minutes. Even if the profit can be higher on valet services, the price of which can be as little as £12 for a full inside-and-out clean, it’s hard to see how a car wash price as low as £5 pays a living wage. This ignores all other costs which HCWs incur such as business rates and rent.

Evidence from car-wash workers is limited but Clark and others have been able to build a picture of some of the tougher conditions on drenched forecourts. “Like nail bars and small garment manufacturers, car washes are what we call ‘hard-to-reach places,’” Clark explains. As part of the research, Clark and his team spoke to workers from 45 HCWs in the Midlands. Clark and his team met and observed workers who lacked waterproof boots or trousers, or hi-vis jackets and gloves. “They’re spraying around hydrochloric acid solution for alloy wheels, breathing in the vapour and fumes,” Clark says. Some workers were paid a little over half the minimum wage.

Extract B
Government intervention in the HCW industry

There are three main areas of government intervention that might impact on labour intensive firms such as HCWs:

First, there is the planning issue which focuses on the impact on the environment, for example, the disposal and recycling of waste water and chemicals. There could be planning regulations to prevent the use of tarmac rather than concrete on forecourts. Tarmac allows waste water and chemicals to seep into the sub soil. It could also be a requirement to have a sludge trap to stop the waste entering waterways.

Second, there is the health and safety issue for workers. Prolonged exposure to chemicals and lack of protective clothing puts the health of workers at risk. Performance targets could involve minimum levels of protective clothing and rest breaks for the workers.

Third, there is the issue of tax. The informal nature of the business type makes tax evasion easier.

Not all UK HCWs violate regulations. There are legitimate, regulated HCW firms as well as examples of good practice by independent outlets. One national supermarket, Tesco, has banned all independent hand car washes from its car parks. It is now in a partnership agreement with national car wash operator Waves. It uses a WashMark certificate of quality and compliance which was introduced by the industry to improve working conditions. Other major supermarkets are considering similar changes. One adviser believes £9 is a reasonable minimum price for a basic wash. Some pressure groups have developed a mobile phone app where evidence of unreasonable conditions can be reported by drivers.

Involving drivers in the issue, and making them demand fairer car washes, creates an incentive for good businesses to improve practices and come forward to get a WashMark certificate.

(Source adapted from: https://www.parliament.uk/)

Extract A

Tough market conditions for coffee shops – but coffee quality is king

UK coffee shop chains have experienced slow growth opportunities and rising costs. In 2019 the UK market leader, Costa Coffee, opened over 60% fewer stores than in 2018, while Starbucks opened just three new stores overall in 2019.

By 2020, many costs were rising: staff shortages meant rising wages for baristas (trained coffeemakers), a 6.2% National Minimum Wage increase for over 25-year-olds and rising rents.

In a challenging UK economy, consumers placed coffee quality ahead of convenient location when choosing a coffee shop. This demonstrates the need for coffee shops to match rising expectations in the UK’s increasingly crowded coffee shop market in order to stay competitive. Independent coffee shops (total 25892 shops in 2020) remain a threat to the branded coffee shops as they pursue a unique luxury experience for customers. This will often focus on the atmosphere and customer service, luxury food and drink ranges and being a part of the local community. Independent coffee shops run on average profit as low as 2% of revenue, and many go out of business as new chains arrive in a locality.

In January 2020, Coca-Cola finalised its £3.9 billion takeover of market leader, Costa Coffee. The Coca-Cola company’s stated aims are to maximise long-term returns to shareholders while being mindful of overall responsibilities such as supporting sustainable communities. Major brands, such as Costa, continue to lead coffee shop expansion in 2020 as competition intensifies.

(Source: adapted from https://www.worldcoffeeportal.com/Latest/InsightAnalysis/2020/)

Extract B

Greggs aiming for ‘coffee shop experience’

Greggs is looking to increase its branded coffee shop market share after the British bakery chain achieved record profits and overtook Starbucks in the amount of coffee it served in the UK. Although Greggs will continue to focus on the food-to-go market, it will be investing in better coffee machines and providing WiFi. It wants one in three new outlets to have more seating. The company believes that it has the ability to take market share in two ways, by expanding its coffee range and at the same time enhancing the coffee shop experience. Greggs is modelling its plan on rival chain Pret A Manger, which has changed from focusing on food-to-go sales to mainly eating in. Greggs has transformed itself from an unremarkable seller of bread and pastries into one of the UK’s most popular food-on-the-go chains, in part thanks to its embrace of vegan, gluten-free and healthy options as well as clever marketing that have changed its image.

(Source: adapted from Financial Times, 3 March 2020 https://www.ft.com/ content/6fb6d73a-5d24-11ea-8033-fa40a0d65a98)

Tesla held an 82% market share of the electric vehicle market in the United States during the first half of 2020.

(Source: adapted from https://electrek.co)

Figure 2: UK online streaming services

Extract B

The economics of price discrimination

Throughout 2022, Netflix, a 100-billion-dollar company, increased prices in the US, Canada, the UK and Ireland (most of which saw similar price increases in 2021, too). In sharp contrast, Netflix recently announced it was reducing its prices in India (standard/2-user 499 rupees a month, equivalent to £5.42) in a bid to compete with Disney+ and Prime.

UK students currently enrolled in a college or university who have a valid student email address can join Prime Student through the Amazon website. This gives them nearly 50% off a standard Prime membership and many other exclusive benefits.

(Source adapted from: https://help.netflix.com/en/node/24926/in)