Tesla had entered the automobile market forcefully and, with energetic leadership, smart marketing, and high-quality products, carved a considerable share for itself. It inevitably puts the company at odds with other auto dealers, including the giants like Volkswagen and Toyota, who use a different retail model. While the competition and increased supply impact the range of choices that people have positively, monopolization still remains a possibility, driven by the same sinful nature that was already recognized in biblical times.
Overall, Tesla’s entry into the automobile market impacted the situation for the better insofar as the ordinary customer is concerned. On the one hand, it added another car manufacturer to the list of those to choose from and, therefore, increased the range of options available to the customers. Apart from that, its emphasis on direct sales, as opposed to franchising, creates a different buying experience, which also facilitates choice.
In terms of natural market forces, increased supply represented by Tesla’s entry into the market is also a positive factor. The dynamics of the economy ensure that, with an increased supply and roughly stable demand, the price equilibrium point will gradually move down, thus, making the goods more accessible. In this respect, increased competition also impacts the range of choices for the better, albeit indirectly, as lower prices ensure there can be more options for the same spending level.
That being said, the drive toward monopolization, with all its detrimental effects for the consumer, still remains. The simplest biblical explanation for this drive is, of course, the sin of greed that drives people to obtain more than they can possibly need. By eliminating competition and dominating the market, monopolist suppliers seek to increase their wealth at the expense of the consumers by depriving them of alternatives, which is hardly Christian.
To summarize, Tesla’s competition with traditional auto dealers impacts the range of choices positively insofar as the consumer is concerned. Increased supply and competition ensure that, at least theoretically, there should be more options available. Still, there is no doubt that any large company in the industry would favor the opportunity to monopolize the market by eliminating competition to satisfy its greed.
The person I interviewed for this assignment was my mother, a pious and conservative christen woman. She does not have that much interest in the automobile market, and her answers were largely influenced by the common sense perspective on the matter. She posited that the entry of a new company into the market is generally good because it would give people more choice options. She did not have much to say about the natural market forces shaping the supply-demand mechanics in the automobile market but assumed that competition was good as long as the companies competed honestly. She even quoted Proverbs 1:11 – “The Lord detests dishonest scales, but the accurate weights find favor with him.” That was the way of expressing her distaste for the dishonest and corrupt competition practices.
Speaking of the desire to monopolize the market and eliminate competition, she likened it to the Pharaoh lending grain to the Jews, as described in Genesis 47. From her perspective, it is not mere greed that drives the desire toward monopolization but the lust for power and control. According to her, creating a situation when people cannot choose and only buy from a single supplier means making servants of people, like the Pharaoh would make servants of Jacob’s sons, if not for Joseph.