Question 1: The following is the game of fighting entry. A new firm, referred to as the entrant, has to decide whether to enter the market or not. An established firm, referred to as firm 1, has then to decide given the actions of the new firm whether to lower the price (and hence fight the entrant) or keep its price high. The payoffs to each are shown below Entrant Enter Do not Enter a. Represent the game in extensive form. b. High price 60, 60 0, 100 Firm 1 Low price 0,0 0,0 Find the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium c. What can you say about the potential for firm 1 to fight the entrant? Firm 1 threatens to lower price if the entrant enters. What do you think of this threat?

Question 1: The following is the game of fighting entry. A new firm, referred to as the entrant, has to decide whether to enter the market or not. An established firm, referred to as firm 1, has then to decide given the actions of the new firm whether to lower the price (and hence fight the entrant) or keep its price high. The payoffs to each are shown below Entrant Enter Do not Enter a. Represent the game in extensive form. b. High price 60, 60 0, 100 Firm 1 Low price 0,0 0,0 Find the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium c. What can you say about the potential for firm 1 to fight the entrant? Firm 1 threatens to lower price if the entrant enters. What do you think of this threat?

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter8: Game Theory

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 8.9P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Q56 A Nash equilibrium is an outcome... a. Achieved by cooperation between players in the game. b. That is achieved by collusion where no party has an incentive to change their behaviour. c. Where each player's strategy depends on the behaviour of its opponents. d. That is achieved when players in the game have jointly maximized profits and divided those profits according to market share of each player. e. Where each player's best strategy is to maintain its present behaviour given the present behaviour of the other players.
Consider the “trust game” discussed in class. The first player starts with a $100 endowment and chooses how much to give to the second player. The gift triples in value (i.e. if $20 is given, the second player receives $60). The second player then chooses how much to give back. The first player receives exactly how much is returned (i.e. if $40 is returned, the first player receives $40). The Nash equilibrium of the game is: Group of answer choices: -First player gives $100, second player returns nothing. -First player gives $50, second player returns $50. -First player gives $100, second player returns $300. -There is no Nash equilibrium of this game. -First player gives nothing, second player returns nothing.
Youngstown-Warren Regional Airport (YNG) has had a difficult time securing passenger service from a commercial airline. a.) A few years ago, the Port Authority offered an incentive to United with guaranteed revenue equal to approximately $1.5 million, but United declined saying it was not sufficient. Suppose United anticipated that it would cost $1 million to offer flights from Youngstown, so with a guaranteed revenue of $1.5 million, their anticipated profit would equal $500,000. Given that they still chose to decline offering service from YNG, what do you know must be true? Put this in terms of implicit costs and economic profit. b.) In 2019, YNG’s only commercial carrier, Allegiant Air stopped offering service from YNG, despite the fact that it was known to be profitable. Allegiant Air’s service from YNG was known to be profitable. Why would Allegiant Air pull service from YNG even if it had been their service from YNG had been generating a profit? Note, Allegiant started…
lease find herewith a payoff matrix. In each cell you find the payoffs of the players associated with a particular strategy combination: The first entry is the payoff of player 1, the second entry is the payoff of player2. Player 2 t1 t2 t3 Player 1 S1 3, 4 1, 0 5, 3 S2 0, 12 8, 12 4, 20 S3 2, 0 2, 11 1, 0 Suppose both players select their strategies (S1, S2 or S3 for player 1 and t1, t2 or t3 for player 2) simultaneously and that the game is played once. In your explanation to the questions below, please do refer to the figures in the matrix. Does player 2 have a dominant strategy? If so, which one? Does player 1 have a dominant strategy? If so, which one? No explanation required. Is there one or more Nash equilibria in the game? If so, which one(s)?
Prove that in the variation on the centipede game given in figure 14.5(b) the unique sequential equilibrium described is, in fact, the unique Nash equilibrium. (Hint: Take some presumed Nash equilibrium and suppose information set 2n+ 1 [for player 2] is the first unreached information set. Derive an immediate contradiction. Then suppose that node (2n) t is the first unreached information set and derive a contradiction that is one degree removed from immediate.)
Suppose two bidders compete for a single indivisible item (e.g., a used car, a piece of art, etc.). We assume that bidder 1 values the item at $v1, and bidder 2 values the item at $v2. We assume that v1 > v2. In this problem we study a second price auction, which proceeds as follows. Each player i = 1, 2 simultaneously chooses a bid bi ≥ 0. The higher of the two bidders wins, and pays the second highest bid (in this case, the other player’s bid). In case of a tie, suppose the item goes to bidder 1. If a bidder does not win, their payoff is zero; if the bidder wins, their payoff is their value minus the second highest bid. a) Now suppose that player 1 bids b1 = v2 and player 2 bids b2 = v1, i.e., they both bid the value of the other player. (Note that in this case, player 2 is bidding above their value!) Show that this is a pure NE of the second price auction. (Note that in this pure NE the player with the lower value wins, while in the weak dominant strategy equilibrium where both…
5 Consider a first-price sealed-bid auction in which bidders valuations are independently and identically distributed according to the Uniform distribution on the interval [0, 1]. Explain what the rules of the First Price Sealed bid auction are. Set it up as a Bayesian game. Compute a symmetric Bayesian Nash equilibrium for the two bidder case.
Refer to the Ultimatum Game in Figure 17.7. Recall that the payoffs are monetary payoffs. a. Suppose that players only care about monetary payoffs, with $1 = 1 util. Find the subgame– perfect equilibrium. b. Suppose that players are imperfectly altruistic. They receive 1 util for each dollar they earn but = util for each dollar the other player earns.Write down the extensive form reflecting the new payoffs. Find the subgame–perfect equilibrium. c. Suppose that players are perfectly altruistic, receiving 1 util for each dollar in the sum of their earnings. Write down the extensive form reflecting the new payoffs. Find the subgame– perfect equilibrium. d. Suppose that players are perfectly selfless, getting 1 util for each dollar the other player earns but no utility for their own earnings. Write down the extensive form reflecting the newpayoffs. Find the subgame–perfect equilibrium. Does player 1 end up choosing the outcome that player 2 prefers?…
Q2.1 In the second round with two buyers remaining, the probability that a buyer with valuation v wins is vN-1, where N is the number of buyers in the first round. Use the revenue equivalence theorem to derive the symmetric equilibrium bidding function b(v) for the buyers in stage two. Show your work. Q2.2 At the end of the auction what is the value of the actual (not expected) revenue that the seller receives? Round your answer to at least three decimal spaces.
Consider two bidders – Alice and Bob who are bidding for a second-hand car. Each of them knows the private value she/he assigns to the car, but does not know the exact value of others. It is common knowledge that the value of other bidders is randomly drawn from a uniform distribution between 0 and $10000. Assume that Alice values the car at $8500 and Bob values the car at $4500. a) If Alice and Bob participated in the second-price sealed bid auction, what would they bid and what would be the result of the auction? Explain your answer. b) If they participate instead in a first-price sealed bid auction, what would they bid and what would be the result of the auction? Explain your answer. c) Calculate and compare the revenue of the seller in the above situations. Which type of auction should the seller use? Explain your answer
Consider a modified Traveler’s Dilemma. In terms of strategy options that the players have and the dollars they earn, it is like the standard Traveler’s Dilemma, but the players do not have endless appetite for money. Up to 100 dollars, each dollar feels like a dollar. But any moneybeyond 100 is psychologically like 100 dollars. Assuming that players are maximizers of ‘psychological’ dollars instead of real dollars, describe all the Nash equilibria of this modified Traveler’s Dilemma.
Explain the differce between oral auctions and second-price auctions