None BigBox and CheapStore are the only two firms in a market. Each firm must decidewhether to price high or price low. The payoffs from each strategy combination areshown to the right-in millions of dollars. The first number in each pairis BigBox's profit; the second is CheapStore's profit.Suppose that this is a repeated game; that is, the two firms must set pricesevery month, and thus they are interested in maximizing profits over time.If last month, BigBox set a high price, this month, CheapStore should set aThis is calledOA. a tit-for-tat strategy.B. a prisoners' dilemma.C. information products.OD. opportunistic behavior.Price Low Big Box-Price HighPrice High Cheap Store-Price Low$2750$4125$2750$138$138$4125$550$550

Answered: Image /qna-images/answer/5e2556c6-14b2-4c7b-8c7b-5846256d7233.jpg

Answered: BigBox and CheapStore are the only two…

Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach

5th Edition

ISBN:9781337106665

Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Publisher:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Chapter15: Strategic Games

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 9MC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Refer to the payoff matrix below. Assuming this is a sequential game with no collusion, what is the outcome if Firm A moves first to build a new type of commercial aircraft? Explain why fifi rst-mover strategies in the realworld are only as good as the profifit projections on which they are based. How could a supposed “win” from moving first turn out to be a big loss, whereas the “loss” of being preempted turn out to be a blessing in disguise?
Consider the following game: Player 2 In Out Player 1 In -2,-2 2, 0 Out 0, 2 0, 0 (a) What is the Nash equilibrium of this game, or what are the Nash equilibriaof this game? (b) Does either firm have a dominate strategy (a strategy that is always abest response)? Which? (c) Suppose Player 1 could move before Player 2 and Player 2 could observe Player 1’s move. What do you think would happen?
Two farmers have unlimited access to a common plot of land and can let their cows graze on it. The matrix below shows the benefits they get from grazing either 1 or 2+ cows on the land. Farmer 2 Farmer1 1 cow 2+ cows 1 cow 8,8 2,10 2+cows 10,2 4,4 What kind of game is this? What is/are the Nash equilibrium/equilibria? What is/are the Pareto efficient outcome(s) in this game? (Hint: Remember that Pareto efficiency occurs when no one person can be made better off without someone else being made worse off) The government offers a reward or subsidy for communities where farmers only allow 1 cow to graze on the common field, resulting in a new payoff matrix:…
Solve for the Nash equilibrium (or equilibria) in each of the following games. (a) The following two-by-two game is a little harder to solve since firm 2’spreferred strategy depends of what firm 1 does. But firm 1 has a dominantstrategy so this game has one Nash equilibrium. Firm 2 Launch Don’tFirm 1 Launch 60, -10 100, 0 Don’t 80, 30 120, 0 What is the Nash equilibrium of this simultaneous-move game? (b) What would the outcome of this game be if instead firm 1 moved first and then, after seeing what firm 1 chose, firm 2 chose it strategy? In this case firm 1 doesn’t necessarily need to choose a best response, but firm 2 must choose a best response since it moves second.
Consider the following price game: Firm 1 Firm 2 High Low High 20, 20 12, 24 Low 24, 12 14, 14 Remark: In simultaneous move games (games with rows and columns) theconvention is to write the row player’s payoff first and the column player’spayoff second. (a) What is the Nash equilibrium of this game? Recall that for each playeryou should find the best response to each of the opponents’ strategies andunderline the associated payoff. Then look for a cell where both strategiesare best responses to each other. This is a Nash equilibrium. (b) Does either firm have a dominate strategy (a strategy that is always abest response)?
Alice and Betsy are playing a game in which each can play either of two strategies, leave or stay. If both play the strategy leave, then each gets a payoff of $400. If both play the strategy stay, then each gets a payoff of $800. If one plays stay and the other plays leave, then the one who plays stay gets a payoff of $C and the one who plays leave gets a payoff of $D. When is the outcome where both play leave a Nash equilibrium? a) never, since 800 > 400 b) when 400 > C and D > 800 but not when 800 > D c) whenever 400 > C d) when D > C and C > 400 e) whenever d < 800
answer the ff: Suppose that each company cancharge either a high price for tickets or a low price. Ifone company charges $300, it earns low profit if theother company also charges $300 and high profit ifthe other company charges $600. On the other hand,if the company charges $600, it earns very low profit ifthe other company charges $300 and medium profitif the other company also charges $600.a. Draw the decision box for this game.b. What is the Nash equilibrium in this game?Explain.c. Is there an outcome that would be better than theNash equilibrium for both airlines? How could itbe achieved? Who would lose if it were achieved?
a) Find the Nash equilibria in the game (in pure and mixed strategies) and the associated payoffs for the players. b) Now assume that the game is extended in the following way: in the beginning Player 1 can decide whether to opt out (this choice is denoted by O) or whether to play the simultaneous-move game in a) (this choice is denoted by G). If Player 1 opts out (plays O) then both Player 1 and Player 2 get a payoff of 4 each and the game ends. If Player 1 decides to play G, then the simultaneous-move game is played. Find the pure-strategy Nash equilibria in this extended version of the game. (Hint: note that Player 1 now has 4 strategies and write the game up in a 4x2 matrix.) c) Write the game in (b) up in extensive form (a game tree). Identify the subgames of this game.
Consider the game shown below. In this game, players 1 and 2 must move at the same time without knowledge of the other player’s move. Player 1’s choices are shown in the row headings (A/B), Player 2’s choices are shown in the column headings (C/D). The first payoff is for the row player (Player1) and the second payoff is for the column player (Player 2). Player 2 Player 1 C D A 8, 3 2, 4 B 7, 4 3, 5 Pick the correct answer: Player 1: Has a dominant strategy to choose A Has a dominant strategy to choose B Has a dominant strategy to choose C Has a dominant strategy to choose D Does not have a dominant strategy Player 2: Has a dominant strategy to choose A Has a dominant strategy to choose B Has a dominant strategy to choose C Has a dominant strategy to choose D Does not have a dominant strategy The Nash equilibrium outcome to this game is: A/C A/D B/C B/D There is no pure strategy Nash equilibrium for this game
1. Consider the game where initially She chooses between "Stay Home" and "Go Out". If She chooses "Stay Home" then She gets 2 and He gets 0. If She chooses "Go Out" then they each simultaneously choose "Movie" or "Concert" where the payoffs are 0,1 or 3 as in the Battle of the Sexes Game. What are the subgame perfect Nash Equilibria of this game ?
Refer to the payoff matrix in question 8 at the end of this chapter. First, assume this is a one-time game. Explain how the $60/$57 outcome might be achieved through a credible threat. Next, assume this is a repeated game (rather than a one-time game) and that the interaction between the two firms occurs indefifi nitely. Why might collusion with a credible threat not be necessary to achieve the $60/$57 outcome?
Imagine two Pizzerias are playing a static game where the firms have to choose their strategies simultaneously, selecting a strategy that maximizes its profit given what it believes the other firm will do. Their decision is how many pizzas to produce. They can choose between producing 100, 150 or 200 pizzas each. The profit for respective firm is showed in the payoff matrix below. a) What is the solution (if there is one) and also describe the characteristic features of this game. b) If this game was played repeatedly, could that potentially change the outcome of the game? In your answer, you are expected to motivate and describe how.

SEE MORE QUESTIONS

Recommended textbooks for you

Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach

Economics

ISBN:

9781337106665

Author:

Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Microeconomic Theory

Economics

ISBN:

9781337517942

Author:

NICHOLSON

Publisher:

Cengage

Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)

Economics

ISBN:

9781305585126

Author:

N. Gregory Mankiw

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach

Economics

ISBN:

9781337106665

Author:

Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Microeconomic Theory

Economics

ISBN:

9781337517942

Author:

NICHOLSON

Publisher:

Cengage

Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)

Economics

ISBN:

9781305585126

Author:

N. Gregory Mankiw

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Principles of Economics, 7th Edition (MindTap Cou…

Economics

ISBN:

9781285165875

Author:

N. Gregory Mankiw

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Principles of Microeconomics (MindTap Course List)

Economics

ISBN:

9781305971493

Author:

N. Gregory Mankiw

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Exploring Economics

Economics

ISBN:

9781544336329

Author:

Robert L. Sexton

Publisher:

SAGE Publications, Inc

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS