3. Now consider the following twist on the previous problem: Suppose that player Bcannot verify the investment made by S. Therefore, in the first stage negotiationthey negotiate a single fee, p, which player B agrees to pay to S. The extensive formrepresentation now looks like this (again the payoffs to B are listed first):18 -P.P - 10RB. S-p.p - 107 -P.PDefaultR-p.p0, 0Assume both players have equal bargaining weights. Describe the negotiationequilibrium of this game. What happens to the hold-up problem once investmentbecomes unverifiable to player B? (in other words, does S choose a high level ofinvestment in the negotiation equilibrium of this game?).

Players ={S, B} Strategy of S ={H, L} Strategy of B ={A, R}

3. Now consider the following twist on the previous problem: Suppose that player B cannot verify the investment made by S. Therefore, in the first stage negotiation they negotiate a single fee, p, which player B agrees to pay to S. The extensive form representation now looks like this (again the payoffs to B are listed first): 18 -P.P - 10 R B, S -P.p - 10 A. 7-p.P L. Default R 0, 0 Assume both players have equal bargaining weights. Describe the negotiation equilibrium of this game. What happens to the hold-up problem once investment becomes unverifiable to player B'? (in other words, does S choose a high level of investment in the negotiation equilibrium of this game?).

3. Now consider the following twist on the previous problem: Suppose that player B cannot verify the investment made by S. Therefore, in the first stage negotiation they negotiate a single fee, p, which player B agrees to pay to S. The extensive form representation now looks like this (again the payoffs to B are listed first): 18 -P.P - 10 R B, S -P.p - 10 A. 7-p.P L. Default R 0, 0 Assume both players have equal bargaining weights. Describe the negotiation equilibrium of this game. What happens to the hold-up problem once investment becomes unverifiable to player B'? (in other words, does S choose a high level of investment in the negotiation equilibrium of this game?).

ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

14th Edition

ISBN:9780190931919

Author:NEWNAN

Publisher:NEWNAN

Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1QTC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

2. Consider a two-stage game of complete but imperfect information where players 1 and 2 simultaneously choose actions a₁ and a₂ in stage 1 and players 3 and 4 simultaneously choose actions a3 and a in stage 2. Provide the notation for the Nash equilibrium in stage 2. How come players 1 and 2 can anticipate this outcome in stage 2?
P1| P2 Left Middle Right Left 4,2 3,3 1,2 Middle 3,3 5,5 2,6 Right 2,1 6,2 3,3 Consider the simultaneous move game represented by this payoff matrix. Suppose that the game is repeated for two periods and the players know that the game will end at the end of two periods. They observe the first period outcome before they move to the second period. Assume that there is no discounting, i.e. 2nd period payoffs are not discounted, or the discount factor is equal to 1. Which of the following outcomes could occur in some subgame perfect equilibrium (SPE) of this repeated game? Choose True if you think the outcome can be a SPE, otherwise choose False. a) (Left, Left) is played in both periods. b) (Right, Right) is played in both periods. c) (Middle, Middle) is played in both periods. d) (Middle, Middle) is played in the first period, followed by (Left, Left). e) (Middle, Middle) is played in the first period, followed by (Right, Right).
Note:- Do not provide handwritten solution. Maintain accuracy and quality in your answer. Take care of plagiarism. Answer completely. You will get up vote for sure.
1. Use the following game tree to answer parts a & b. At a chance node (Nature's turn) or when a player is indifferent between strategies, each branch has equal likelihood (50% chance they take either path). Nature receives no payoff. Assume players are mistake proof. Use a complete strategy when discussing the results of this game and provide a payoff, even if that payoff is an expected one. Recall that an expected payoff is the "average" payoff: for example if with 50% chance we receive a payoff of 5 and with 50% chance we receive a payoff of 2, the expected payoff is .5 x 5+ .5 x 2 = 3.5 a. What is the outcome of the game? Assume players are risk neutral (i.e., they see no difference in getting a payoff of 5 vs an expected payoff of 5). Red 0, 1, 3, 3 3, 2, 3, 2 Dorothy Blue Top 1, 4, 3, 2 Scarecrow 50% Green Nature Right Bottom 0, 2, 3, 1 Lion 50% 1, 3, 4, 2 3, 4, 3, 2 50% Left Nature 3, 2, 1, 2 Up 50% Red. 1, 3, 4, 2 Down Tinman Blue 0, 3, 3, 3 Yellow Dorothy 4, 3, 4, 2…
Consider the following payoff matrix B R U 7, 7 4,17 A 17,4 6,6 Players A and B repeatedly play this game with an infinite horizon. Future payoffs are discounted with 1/(1+r), where r is the long-term interest rate. Determine the interval of r for which the Carrot-and-Stick strategy does form a Nash-equilibrium when the opponent can discover any deviation immediately. Remember the following relation TA+Lt-1 (14+t) TB TB = TA + O r>0.1 O r0.2 Or-1 O r1
Suppose the following game is repeated infinitely. The players have a common discount factor & E (0,1). C D 1 C3,2 0,5 D 5,0 1,1 For high enough values of 8, there is an equilibrium of the infinitely repeated game in which (C, C) is played in the first 4 periods followed by (D, D) in sub- sequent periods. Is this true or false? Explain carefully.
Consider the following game: p 2,10 0,5 5,2 0,5 5,10 Which of the following is FALSE for the SPE of this game? a. If p in [0.6, 1], then playing x is an equilibrim strategy for player 1 b. If p in [0, 0.6], then playing y is an equilibrim strategy for player 1 C. For all possible p values in [0,1], playing x is an equilibrium strategy for player 1 y y R Nature 1 2 1-p y R X 2,10
3. Repeated Game Consider the game in which the stage game depicted below is infinitely repeated and in which both players discount future payoffs with discount factor 6 € [0, 1]. Player 1 E S Player 2 E 3,3 4, -1 S -1.4 1,1 (a) Suppose that both players play the tit-for-tat strategy. This strategy is characterized by exerting effort (playing E) in the first round. Then in future rounds, a player copies the action chosen by his opponent in the previous period (i.e if Player 2 shirks (plays S) in period 2, then Player 1 plays S in period 3). Then, for what values of d can tit-for-tat be supported on the equilibrium path of play? (b) Suppose that both players play the perfect tit-for-tat strategy. This strategy is characterized by exerting effort (playing E) in the first round. Then in future rounds, a player plays E unless the actions are disagreed in the previous period. Then, for what values of d can perfect tit-for-tat be supported on the equilibrium path of play?
Paramter y = 0 If ⟨a, d⟩ is played in the first period and ⟨b, e⟩ is played in the second period, whatis the resulting (repeated game) payoff for the row player?