Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
5th Edition
ISBN: 9781337106665
Author: Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher: Cengage Learning
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 18, Problem 3MC
To determine
Winning bid.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
10
Use the expected value information to illustrate how having more bidders in an oral auction will likely result in a higher winning bid.
Which of the following gambles is “unfair”?
a.
A game that promises to pay you $1 if a coin comes up head and cost you $1 if a coin comes up tail, with no entry fee.
b.
A game that promises to pay you $10 if a coin comes up head and cost you $1 if a coin comes up tail, with no entry fee.
c.
A game that promises to pay you $10 if a coin comes up head and cost you $1 if a coin comes up tail, with an entry fee of $4.50 for the right to play.
d.
All of the above.
Explain why a player in a sealed-bid, second-price auction would never submit a bid that exceeds his or her true value of the object being sold. (Hint: What if all players submitted bids greater than their valuations of the object?)
Chapter 18 Solutions
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- a) How many players does this game have? What are the strategies of each player? (b) What are the Nash equilibria of this game? (c) What are the Pareto Efficient outcomes?arrow_forwardSuppose 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…arrow_forwardQuestion 2 This is game theory. (c,c), (c,d), (d,c) are efficient, why? Definition:An outcome is Pareto efficient if there is no other outcome that increases at least one player's payoff without decreasing anyone else's Full explain this question and text typing work only We should answer our question within 2 hours takes more time then we will reduce Rating Dont ignore this linearrow_forward
- Imagine that two firms in two different countries want to bring a new product to market. Due to economies of scale, if both firms do this, they will both lose £50 million. But if only one firm does this, it will gain £300 million. (a) What is the best strategy for firm A, if firm B has not yet entered the market, and why? (b) Illustrate this with a game theory diagram, showing appropriate payouts. (c) What is the welfare-maximising strategy for a government, and why?arrow_forwardSomeone at a party pulls out a $100 bill and announces that he is going to auction it off. There are n=10 people at the partywho are potential bidders. The owner of the $100 bill puts forth the following procedure: All bidders simultaneously submit a written bid. Only the highest bidders pay their bid (assuming that the highest bid is positive). If m people submit the highest bid, then each receives 1/m of the $100. Each person’s strategy set is {0,1,2,...,1000}{0,1,2,...,1000} so bidding can go as high as $1,000. The payoff of a player bidding bi is:0 if bi < max{b1,b2,…,bn},and 100/m − bi if bi = max {b1,b2,…,bn}where,m is the number of bidders whose bid equals max{b1,...,bn}. How many pure-strategy Nash equilibria does this game have? 1) 0 2) 1 3) 4 4) More than 4.arrow_forwardCameron and Luke are playing a game called ”Race to 10”. Cameron goes first, and the players take turns choosing either 1 or 2. In each turn, they add the new number to a running total. The player who brings the total to exactly 10 wins the game. a) If both Cameron and Luke play optimally, who will win the game? Does the game have a first-mover advantage or a second-mover advantage? b) Suppose the game is modified to ”Race to 11” (i.e, the player who reaches 11 first wins). Who will win the game if both players play their optimal strategies? What if the game is ”Race to 12”? Does the result change? c) Consider the general version of the game called ”Race to n,” where n is a positive integer greater than 0. What are the conditions on n such that the game has a first mover advantage? What are the conditions on n such that the game has a second mover advantage?arrow_forward
- Player B Strategy 1 2 Player A Strategy 1 $2,400, $1,200 -$1,200, -$2,400 2 -$2,400, -$1,200 $1,200, $2,400 Does Player A have a dominant strategy? Yes or no? Does player B have a dominant startegy? Yes or No?arrow_forwardSuppose there is a second price sealed bid auction in which the players have the following values: v1=15, v2=4, v3=6, v4=8, v5=10, v6=6. In the symmetric equilibrium, what bid will bidder 4 submit? a. 10 b. 15 c. 4 d. 8arrow_forwardPJ has been owning a City Golf, model 2004 for the past 15 years and now plans to sell it. Town auctioneers has offered to sell his car at their next auction. This is the first time PJ is hearing at an auction. PJ has approached you to explain to him what auction means and asked you if he should sell his car on auction or not. Briefly explain to PJarrow_forward
- Question 1 Consider a first-price sealed bid auction of a single object with two biddersj = 1,2 and no reservation price. Bidder 1′s valuation is v1 = 2, and bidder 2′s valuation isv1 = 5. Both v1 and v2 are known to both bidders. Bids must be in whole dollar amounts.In the event of a tie, the object is awarded by a flip of a fair coin.(a) Find an equilibrium of this game.(b) Is the allocation of your answer to (a) efficient?arrow_forwardSay that you are bidding in a sealed-bid auction and that you really want the item being auctioned. Winning it would be worth $500 to you. Say you expect the next-highest bidder to bid $300.a. In a standard “highest-bid” auction, what bid would a rational person make? The rational choice is to bid $500 since that is what the item is worth to you. The rational choice is to bid a little bit more than $300 because that is the expected next-highest bid. The rational choice is to bid just under $500 so that you have a higher chance of winning the auction and would still have a net benefit. The rational choice is to bid over $500 to guarantee that you win the item. b. In a Vickrey auction, what bid would he make? The rational choice is to bid slightly more than $500. The rational choice is to bid $500. The rational choice is to bid slightly less than $500. The rational choice is to bid slightly more than $300.arrow_forwardAnswer all the questions, show all the working. Consider the following game in normal form. Not cooperate Cooperate Not cooperate 20,20 50,0 Cooperate 0,50 40,40 What is Nash equilibrium? Is it efficient? Why? What needs to be complied with so that the players would like to cooperate? What happens when one of the players does not cooperate? Why? Define trigger strategy. Calculate the discount factor (δ) that would make both players decide to cooperate.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher: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