What underlies the classification of monopolies? On what principle should they be classified?

Bourgeois propagandists never dare to turn to such an obvious fact that today in the socialist community the working people are much better informed about the achievements of the capitalist countries in the field of industry, science and culture than the population of these countries is about life in the Soviet Union or, for example, in Poland or Czechoslovakia. Yes, they don't care. Imperialist propaganda concentrates its efforts on achieving intensive ideological penetration into the states of the socialist community under the guise of "free exchange of information, ideas and people". 

The tireless, well-reasoned exposure of the content and methods of imperialist propaganda, the resolute rebuff to anti-communist and anti-Soviet speeches, is an important and urgent task for all those who value the cause of easing international tension and developing friendship and mutual understanding among peoples. Those who engage in ideological sabotage against socialism are counting on the insidious tactics of undermining our ideological, political and moral foundations by intensified smuggling of reactionary bourgeois theories, hoping that they can in some cases cause harm, disorient primarily young people, in their opinion, poorly prepared in theoretical and political. That is why you, young citizens, are required to actively, aggressively and effectively fight against all encroachments of anti-communism and anti-Sovietism. The prospects for the development of mankind depend to a large extent on the outcome of the great battle for the minds and hearts of people. 

As will be shown below, the classification is based mainly on the type and nature of monopolization.

This is what distinguishes some types of monopolies from others. So, for example, syndicates differ from cartels in that they deprive the participants of independence in the field of marketing. Trusts also deprive them of their independence both in the field of production and in the field of marketing, uniting property in enterprises. It would be wrong to build a classification in terms of differences in the strength of Monopolization. Strength is generally relative, since it depends on the development of competition and other complex circumstances. 

The main types of monopolies, qualitatively different from each other and marking different stages and forms of the monopolization process, are four: cartel, syndicate, trust, concern. If the first three types of monopolies found wide development even before the general crisis of capitalism, then the fourth - the concern - represents a specific type for this period. 

A cartel is such a monopolistic agreement between enterprises (often also companies) of a certain industry, in which the independence of the uniting enterprises and companies in the field of production and in the sales area. 

Cartel members enter into an agreement on the conditions for the release of goods or the division of sales areas, the establishment of the total number of products and quotas (i.e., shares of production), the establishment of prices, the distribution of profits, etc. 

It is by no means necessary that the cartel agreement covers all these points and even several of them. An agreement on any of these points is enough to have a cartel. Although agreements on such matters undoubtedly limit in a certain way the independence of the cartel participants (and not only in the field of marketing, but to a greater or lesser extent also in the field of production), nevertheless this independence is not eliminated either in the field of production or in marketing areas, since cartel members retain ownership of their enterprises and the right to directly control their production and marketing activities. This feature of the cartel form of monopolies facilitates its rapid spread in those countries where the capitalists are more interested in this kind of partial agreement. 

The syndicate, unlike the cartel, organizes a single bureau to sell the products of its members, and sometimes to supply them with raw materials. Thus, the syndicate deprives its participants of independence in the field of marketing, and if there is of the corresponding agreement - and in the field of raw materials procurement. Consequently, they lose their independence in one way or another, parts of the business. Since, however, the members of the syndicate retain the right of ownership of their enterprises and the right to dispose of their production activities, the independence of the members of the syndicate in the field of production is still not eliminated.

The syndicate marks a higher stage, a more mature form of the process of monopolization. Since only one, single marketing organization enters the market with this product, the monopoly becomes much more tangible and more effective. At the same time, the syndicate breaks the direct connection of the enterprises it unites with the market, with the “client”. Therefore, leaving a syndicate is not as easy as leaving a cartel: it is often necessary to restore the sales apparatus and market relations, to regain a place in the market, etc.