Andrew is considering taking one of two jobs. The first job pays $90,000 as base pay, but there is a 25% chance of getting a further bonus of $54,400. The second job pays $102, 500 for sure. Andrew is risk averse, and his utility from income is v(I) = √I. (a) What is the lottery over income levels that Andrew faces if he takes the first job?

Andrew is considering taking one of two jobs. The first job pays $90,000 as base pay, but there is a 25% chance of getting a further bonus of $54,400. The second job pays $102, 500 for sure. Andrew is risk averse, and his utility from income is v(I) = √I. (a) What is the lottery over income levels that Andrew faces if he takes the first job?

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

Sadija has a concave utility function of U(W) = In(W). She has inherited a ring from a relative, but she is unsure about its value. She believes that it is worth £6,000 with a probability of 1/3 and £3,000 with a probability of 2/3. a. Ahmed would like to buy the ring from her. Which price would he need to offer for Sadija' utility to remain unchanged after the sale? b. In fact, Ahmed offers £4,000 for the ring. What can you infer about Ahmed?
Veer
The value of a successful project is $420,000; the probabilities of success are 1/2 with good supervision and 1/4 without. The manager is risk neutral, not risk averse as in the text, so his expected utility equals his expected income minus his disutility of effort. He can get other jobs paying $90,000, and his disutility for exerting the extra effort for good supervision on your project is $100,000. (a) Show that inducing high effort would require the firm to offer a compensation scheme with a negative base salary; that is, if the project fails, the manager pays the firm an amount stipulated in the scheme. (b) How might a negative base salary be implemented in reality? (c) Show that if a negative base salary is not feasible, then the firm does better to settle for the low-pay, low-effort situation.
PROBLEM (3) (Regret Aversion, Gale's Roulette Wheels) Consider the regret utility u(x, y) = {1 if x>y, 0 if x=y, and -1 if x
An individual is offered a choice of either $50 or a lottery which may result in $0 or $100, each with equal probability 1/2. If the individual has a utility function u(w) = w, which one would they choose? If the individual has a utility function u(w) =sqr(w)?
Suppose you manage a factory with ten workers. Each worker’s output is determined by the equation q = e. Output sells in the market for a price of 40. The firm has fixed cost equal to 800, and variable costs aside from labor are 8 per unit of output. Worker utility is U = w – e2. Suppose you are paying workers a wage equal to bq. What is the profit- maximizing value of b? Suppose that the probability of worker error increases as the worker increases effort, and that worker error results in unusable output. Suppose that the probability of worker error is Pr[Error] = e/10. Then for worker effort level e, expected (usable) output is now determined by the equation E[q] = (1-Pr[Error]) x e. However, the problem is that you cannot detect errors until after the product is shipped to customers, meaning you pay workers for output before you know whether it is usable or not, and you have to refund your customers for unusable output. Demonstrate why you should not pay your workers the same…
David is an expected-utility maximizer that likes to drive fast (and reckless at times), so his probability of an accident is 2/3. David's preferences over wealth are u(w) = vw. Suppose that David's initial wealth is $100. If David has an accident, he incurs a $51 loss. How much is the risk premium David willing to pay to be as well off in case of accident or not?
An investor has preferences represented by a utility function u(c) and initial wealth w > 0. Consider an asset that pays G with probability \pi and B with probability 1-\pi. 1.1 Suppose the investor owns this asset. What is the minimum price he would sell it for? (It is sufficient to formulate the condition that this price must satisfy). 1.2 Suppose he does not own it. What is the maximum price he would be willing to pay to buy it? (It is sufficient to formulate the condition that this price must satisfy). 1.3 Explain why (or under which conditions) the buy and sell prices you have found are or are not the same. 1.4 Suppose w = 10, G = 10, B = 5 and u(c) = √c. Compute the buy and sell prices.
1 Q1. Jerry has wealth of $60 and derives utility from this according to the utility function U(w) = 1 - Where w is his wealth. Jerry now finds a lottery ticket (the drawing takes place the next day) that offers a 50% chance of winning $5. W a) What is the expected value of Jerry if he takes the lottery ticket? (pay attention, it's not jerry's wealth) b) What is the minimum amount for which Jerry would be willing-to-sell the ticket? (Hint: sets a price of p, and at the minimum amount, the expected utility of selling and not selling should be the same) c) Which is bigger, your answer to (a) or (b), and suggest whether Jerry is a risk averse person based on the previous conclusion? d) If he does not sell the ticket, what is Jerry's cost of risk? (The cost of risk is the difference between the expected wealth and the certainty equivalence)
Priyanka has an income of £90,000 and is a von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility maximiser with von Neumann-Morgenstern utility index . 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? Explain. b) What would be the highest price (premium) that she would be willing to pay for an insurance policy that fully insures her against the flooding damage?
Max Pentridge is thinking of starting a pinball palace near a large Melbourne university. His utility is given by u(W) = 1 - (5,000/W), where W is his wealth. Max's total wealth is $15,000. With probability p = 0.9 the palace will succeed and Max's wealth will grow from $15,000 to $x. With probability 1 - p the palace will be a failure and he’ll lose $10,000, so that his wealth will be just $5,000. What is the smallest value of x that would be sufficient to make Max want to invest in the pinball palace rather than have a wealth of $15,000 with certainty? (Please round your final answer to the whole dollar, if necessary)