MANAGERIAL/ECON+BUS/STR CONNECT ACCESS
9th Edition
ISBN: 2810022149537
Author: Baye
Publisher: MCG
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 12, Problem 2CACQ
(A)
To determine
Whether the decision maker is risk neutral, risk averse or risk loving is to be ascertained.
(B)
To determine
Whether the decision maker is risk neutral, risk averse or risk loving is to be ascertained.
(C)
To determine
Whether the decision maker is risk neutral, risk averse or risk loving is to be ascertained.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
For each of the following scenarios, determine whether the decision maker is risk neutral, risk averse, or risk loving.a) A manager prefers a 10 percent chance of receiving $1,000 and a 90 percent chance of receiving $100 to receiving $190 for sure.b) A shareholder prefers receiving $775 with certainty to a 75 percent chance of receiving $1,000 and a 25 percent chance of receiving $100.c) A consumer is indifferent between receiving $550 for sure and a lottery that pays $1,000 half of the time and $100 half of the time.
You are considering a $500,000 investment in the fast-food industry and have narrowed your choice to either a
McDonald's or a Penn Station East Coast Subs franchise. McDonald's indicates that, based on the location where you
are proposing to open a new restaurant, there is a 25 percent probability that aggregate 10-year profits (net of the
initial investment) will be $16 million, a 50 percent probability that profits will be $8 million, and a 25 percent
probability that profits will be -$1.6 million. The aggregate 10-year profit projections (net of the initial investment) for
a Penn Station East Coast Subs franchise is $48 million with a 2.5 percent probability, $8 million with a 95 percent
probability, and -$48 million with a 2.5 percent probability. Considering both the risk and expected profitability of
these two investment opportunities, which is the better investment? Explain carefully.
You take a position with a large real estate development company as your first job after graduation. Your first big assignment is to sell an office building – you have been informed the company’s cost into the building (and the bottom line price it is willing to accept) is $400,000. You have identified a likely buyer and you assess that his top price is either $500,000 with a probability of .3, $600,000 with a probability of .5, or $1,000,000 with a probability of .2. You have to commit to a posted price – what price will maximize your profitability?
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Question I am in possession of two coins. One is fair so that it lands heads (H) and tails (T) with equal probability while the other coin is weighted so that it always lands H. Both coins are magical: if either is flipped and lands H then a $1 bill appears in your wallet, but when it lands T nothing happens. You may only flip a coin once per period. The interest rate is i per period. You are risk-neutral and thus only concern yourself with expected values (and not variance). For simplicity, in the questions below assume you will live forever. 1. How much are you willing to pay for such a coin that you know is fair? 2. How much are you willing to pay for such a coin that you know is weighted? 3. I currently own the coins and know which is fair and which is weighted, but you cannot tell which is which. You may make an offer to purchase a coin of your choosing, which I am free to accept or reject. What is the most you are willing to offer? Explain how you arrived at this answer. 4.…arrow_forwardIf a risk‐neutral individual owns a home worth $200,000 and there is a three percent chance the home will be destroyed by fire in the next year, then we know that:a) He is willing to pay much more than $6,000 for full cover.b) He is willing to pay much less than $6,000 for full cover.c) He is willing to pay at most $6,000 for full cover.d) None of the above are correct.e) All of the above are correct.arrow_forwardA Bank has foreclosed on a home mortgage and is selling the house at auction. There are two bidders for the house, Zeke and Heidi. The bank does not know the willingness to pay of these three bidders for the house, but on the basis of its previous experience, the bank believes that each of these bidders has a probability of 1/3 of valuing it at $800,000, a probability of 1/3 of valuing at $600,000, and a probability of 1/3 of valuing it at $300,000. The bank believes that these probabilities are independent among buyers. If the bank sells the house by means of a second- bidder, sealed-bid auction, what will be the bank’s expected revenue from the sale? The answer is 455, 556. Please show the steps in details thank you!arrow_forward
- You are attempting to establish the utility that your boss assigns to a payoff of $1,100. You have established that the utility for a payoff of $0 is zero and the utility for a payoff of $10,000 is one. Your boss has just told you that they would be indifferent between a payoff of $1,100 and a lottery which has a payoff of $10,000 where the probability of losing is 0.4. What is your boss' utility for $1,100? (Round your answer to 1 decimal place.) Utility of $1,100arrow_forwardUtility functions incorporate a decision maker’s attitude towards risk. Let’s assume that the following utilities were assessed for Danica Wary. x u(x) -$2,000 0 -$500 62 $0 75 $400 80 $5,000 100 Would a risk neutral decision maker be willing to take the following deal: 30% chance of winning $5,000, 40% chance of winning $400 and a 30% chance of losing $2,000? Using the utilities given in the table above, determine whether Danica would be willing to take the deal described in part a? Is Danica risk averse or is she a risk taker? What is her risk premium for this deal?arrow_forwardPriyanka has an income of £90,000 and is a von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility maximiser with von Neumann-Morgenstern utility index u(x) = square root x . There is a 1 % probability that there is flooding damage at her house. The repair of the damage would cost £80,000 which would reduce the income to £10,000. a) Would Priyanka be willing to spend £500 to purchase an insurance policy that would fully insure her against this loss? Explainarrow_forward
- Jamal has a utility function U = W1/2, where W is his wealth in millions of dollars and U is the utility he obtains from that wealth. In the final stage of a game show, the host offers Jamal a choice between (A) $4 million for sure, or (B) a gamble that pays $1 million with probability 0.6 and $9 million with probability 0.4. (1) Does A or B offer Jamal a higher expected utility? Explain your reasoning with calculations. (2) Should Jamal pick A or B? Why? I would like help with the unanswered last parts of the questions.arrow_forwardMicroeconomics Wilfred’s expected utility function is px1^0.5+(1−p)x2^0.5, where p is the probability that he consumes x1 and 1 - p is the probability that he consumes x2. Wilfred is offered a choice between getting a sure payment of $Z or a lottery in which he receives $2500 with probability p = 0.4 and $3700 with probability 1 - p. Wilfred will choose the sure payment if Z > CE and the lottery if Z < CE, where the value of CE is equal to ___ (please round your final answer to two decimal places if necessary)arrow_forwardSuppose you have a house worth $200,000 (wealth). Your utility of wealth is given by U(w) = ln(w). There is a small chance that a fire will damage your house causing a loss of $75,000. You estimate there is a 2% chance of fire. a) What is your expected wealth? b) What is your expected utility from owning the house? c) Suppose you can add a fire detection/prevention system to your house. This would reduce the chance of a bad event to 0 but it would cost you $C to install. What is the most you are willing to pay for the security system? (Here is an identity you will find usefularrow_forward
- QUESTION 2 An expected utility maximiser owns a car worth £60 000 and has a bank account with £20 000. The money in the bank is safe, but there is a 50% probability that the car will be stolen. The utility of wealth for the agent is u(y) = In(3) and they have no other assets. A risk-neutral insurance company is willing to insure the car at the premium of 7 = £2/3 for every one pound of coverage. How much insurance coverage will the individual choose to buy? Suppose that the firm is not charging the agent per unit of indemnity. Instead, it can propose to give the agent the total wealth æ1 in the 'good state' and the total wealth xz in the 'bad state' in return for the agents entire wealth W = 60 000 + 20000 = 80 000 and W – L = 80 000 – 60 000 = 20 000, respectively. Below, we shall refer to the pair (21, 12) as a contract. Given the coverage chosen by the individual in Question 2, which of the following statements is correct? O a. There is a contract that is preferable to the outcome…arrow_forwardSuppose that you graduate from college next year and you have two career options: 1) You will start a job in an investment bank paying a $100,000 annual salary. 2) You will start a Ph.D. in economics and, as a student, you will receive a $20,000 salary. You are bad with decisions, so you are letting a friend of yours decide for you by flipping a coin. The probabilities of options 1 and 2 are, therefore, each 50%. a) Illustrate, using indifference curves, your preferences regarding consumption choices in the two different states of the world. Assume that you are risk-averse. [Include also the 45 degrees line in your figure] b) Now show how the indifference curves would change if you were substantially more risk averse than before. Explain. c) Now show the indifference curves if you are risk neutral and if you are risk loving. d) Show your expected utility preferences from point a) mathematically.arrow_forwardthe video link is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqEz6kvXhc8please give me detailed solutions and calculations, thank you!arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)EconomicsISBN:9780134078779Author:Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. OsterPublisher:PEARSON
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)EconomicsISBN:9780134870069Author:William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick KoellingPublisher:PEARSON
Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781305585126Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-...EconomicsISBN:9781259290619Author:Michael Baye, Jeff PrincePublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:9780134078779
Author:Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. Oster
Publisher:PEARSON
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:9780134870069
Author:William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick Koelling
Publisher:PEARSON
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
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-...
Economics
ISBN:9781259290619
Author:Michael Baye, Jeff Prince
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education