Enter The payoffs are represented in the game tree illustrated in the figure to the right What is the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium? -(450,125 Rival Small O A. The game does not have a Nash equililbrium. O B. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent produce the large quantity and for the rival to only enter if the (900,0) Don't enter incumbent produces the small quantity. Incumbent Enter OC. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent to produce the large quantity and for the rival to not enter regardless of the incumbent's quantity. (400, -2 Large Rival O D. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent produce the small quantity and for the rival to only enter if the incumbent produces the small quantity. (800,0) Don't enter O E. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent to produce the large quantity and for the rival to enter regardless of the incumbent's quantity.

Enter The payoffs are represented in the game tree illustrated in the figure to the right What is the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium? -(450,125 Rival Small O A. The game does not have a Nash equililbrium. O B. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent produce the large quantity and for the rival to only enter if the (900,0) Don't enter incumbent produces the small quantity. Incumbent Enter OC. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent to produce the large quantity and for the rival to not enter regardless of the incumbent's quantity. (400, -2 Large Rival O D. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent produce the small quantity and for the rival to only enter if the incumbent produces the small quantity. (800,0) Don't enter O E. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent to produce the large quantity and for the rival to enter regardless of the incumbent's quantity.

Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)

8th Edition

ISBN:9781305585126

Author:N. Gregory Mankiw

Publisher:N. Gregory Mankiw

Chapter17: Oligopoly

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 5CQQ

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Does each individual in a prisoners dilemma benefit more from cooperation or from pursuing self-interest? Explain briefly.
Sometimes oligopolies in the same industry are very different in size. Suppose we have a duopoly where one firm (Film A) is large and the other film (Film B) is small, as the prisoners dilemma box in Table 10.4 shows. Assuming that both films know the payoffs, what is the likely outcome in this case?
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?
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)?
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?
Consider the strategic voting game discussed at the endof this chapter, where we saw that the strategy profile (Bustamante, Schwarzenegger,Schwarzenegger) is a Nash equilibrium of the game. Show that (Bustamante, Schwarzeneg-ger, Schwarzenegger) is, in fact , the only rationalizable strategy profile. Do this by firstconsidering the dominated strategies of player L. (Basically, the question is asking youto find the outcome of the iterative elimination of strictly dominated strategies)
The prisoners' dilemma is a two-person game illus·trating thata. t he cooperative outcome could be worse for bothpeople than t he Nash equilibrium.b . even if the cooperative outcome is better than theNash equilibrium for one person, it might be worsefor the other.c. even if cooperation is better than the Nash equilibrium,each person might have an incentive not tocooperate.d . rational, seff·interested individuals will naturallyavoid the Nash equilibrium because it is worse forboth of them.
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.
12. Consider a game where each player picks a number from 0 to 60. The guess that is closest to half ofthe average of the chosen numbers wins a prize. If several peopleare equally close, then they share theprize. The game theory implies that (A) all players have dominant strategies to choose 0 (B) all players have dominant strategies to choose 30 (C) there is a Nash equilibrium where all players pick 0 (D) there is a Nash equilibrium where all players pick positive numbers 13. Behavioral data in such games suggests that (A) most subjects choose 0; (B) most subjects choose 30; (C) common answers include 30, 15, 7.5, and 0; (D) most subjects use randomization. Can you help me answer number 13 please?
Suppose we’ve modelled a firm’s entry decision with a one-shot, simultaneous move game, determined payoffs and found the Nash equilibrium. Suppose with the payoffs we came up with, both firms have a clear dominant strategy such that there is a Nash equilibrium in which both firms play their dominant strategy. However, when we observe the actual actions of the firms, we see that they don’t choose the strategy wepredicted and the outcome of the game doesn’t match the Nash equilibrium. What are 4 reasons this might be? (Hint: The firms are rational.)
Suppose O2 and Vodafone are the only two telecommunicationscompanies in UK. Both companies are considering whether ornot to stop offering unlimited data plans. Each company has twostrategies: stop or don’t stop. The first entry in the brackets is the payoffsof O2 and the second entry is the payoffs of Vodafone, both in $million.What will be the dominant strategies of O2 and Vodafone and what willbe the Nash equilibrium? Explain your answers.
1. Ten commuters must decide simultaneously in the morning to use route A or route B to go from home (same place for all) to work (ditto). If a of them use route A, each of them will travel for 10a + 40 minutes; if b of them use route B, each of them will travel for 10b minutes. Everyone wishes to minimize his/her commuting time. a) Describe the pure Nash equilibrium (or Nash equilibria) of this ten-person game. Compute the corresponding profile of commuting times. Explicitly list all equilibrium conditions that are satisfied.