Two brothers, Josh and Nathan, play a game in which actions are Left and Right. The payoff matrix is as follows. Nathan Left Right Josh Left 5,2 5,6 Right 2,4 3,6 Which of the following is true? A) Josh has a dominant strategy to go left and Nathan has a dominant strategy to go right O B) Neither Josh nor Nathan has a dominant strategy. o 9 Josh has a dominant strategy to go right and Nathan has a dominant strategy to go right O D) Josh has a dominant strategy to go right and Nathan has a dominant strategy to go left O E) Josh has a dominant strategy to go left and Nathan has a dominant strategy to go left

Two brothers, Josh and Nathan, play a game in which actions are Left and Right. The payoff matrix is as follows. Nathan Left Right Josh Left 5,2 5,6 Right 2,4 3,6 Which of the following is true? A) Josh has a dominant strategy to go left and Nathan has a dominant strategy to go right O B) Neither Josh nor Nathan has a dominant strategy. o 9 Josh has a dominant strategy to go right and Nathan has a dominant strategy to go right O D) Josh has a dominant strategy to go right and Nathan has a dominant strategy to go left O E) Josh has a dominant strategy to go left and Nathan has a dominant strategy to go left

Exploring Economics

8th Edition

ISBN:9781544336329

Author:Robert L. Sexton

Publisher:Robert L. Sexton

Chapter15: Oligopoly And Strategic Behavior

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 17P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

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?
A game is played as follows: First Player 1 decides (Y or N) whether or not to play.If she chooses N, the game ends. If she chooses Y, then Player 2 decides (Y or N) whetheror not to play. If he chooses N the game ends. If he chooses Y, then they go ahead and playanother game with the payoffs shown below. A player who opts out by choosing N gets 2 andthe other player gets 0. Draw the tree of this game and then find the two subgame-perfect Nashequilibria.
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)
What is the payoff for player 1 in the normal form game below: O. 3 O. 1 O. 0 O. 4
Use the following payoff matrix to answer the following questions. (LO2) Player 2 Strategies C D Player 1 A −10, −10 200, −100 B −100, 220 140, 180cSuppose this is a one-shot game: a. Determine the dominant strategy for each player. If such strategies do not exist, explain why not. b. Determine the secure strategy for each player. If such strategies do not exist, explain why not. c. Determine the Nash equilibrium of this game. If such an equilibrium does not exist, explain why not.
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.
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?
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.
True or False?: (Recall that a strategic game is called Dominance Solvable if and only if exactlyone action profile remains after iteratively eliminating all strictly dominated actions.)If a strategic game is dominance solvable, it can have at most one Nash equilibrium.
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?
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 that there are two firms in a market, firm 1 and firm 2. The marketis declining in size. The game starts in period 0, and the firms can compete in periods 0, 1,2, 3, ... (i.e., indefinitely) if they so choose. Duopoly profits in period t for firm 1 are equalto 105 −10t, and they are 10.5 −t for firm 2. Monopoly profits (those if a firm is the onlyone left in the market) are 510 −25t for firm 1 and 51 −2t for firm 2. At the start of eachperiod, each firm must decide either to “stay in” or “exit” if it is still active (they do sosimultaneously if both are still active). Once a firm exits, it is out of the market forever andearns zero in each period thereafter. Firms maximize their (undiscounted) sum of profits.What is this game’s subgame perfect Nash equilibrium?