Consider a remote town in which two restaurants, All-You-Can-Eat Café and GoodGrub Diner, operate in a duopoly. Both restaurants disregard health and safety regulations, but they continue to have customers because they are the only restaurants within 80 miles of town. Both restaurants know that if they clean up, they will attract more customers, but this also means that they will have to pay workers to do the cleaning. If neither restaurant cleans, each will earn $13,000; alternatively, if they both hire workers to clean, each will earn only $10,000. However, if one cleans and the other doesn't, more customers will choose the cleaner restaurant; the cleaner restaurant will make $18,000, and the other restaurant will make only $6,000.

Consider a remote town in which two restaurants, All-You-Can-Eat Café and GoodGrub Diner, operate in a duopoly. Both restaurants disregard health and safety regulations, but they continue to have customers because they are the only restaurants within 80 miles of town. Both restaurants know that if they clean up, they will attract more customers, but this also means that they will have to pay workers to do the cleaning. If neither restaurant cleans, each will earn $13,000; alternatively, if they both hire workers to clean, each will earn only $10,000. However, if one cleans and the other doesn't, more customers will choose the cleaner restaurant; the cleaner restaurant will make $18,000, and the other restaurant will make only $6,000.

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

Consider a Stackelberg game played by 3 firms: firm 1 moves first, then firm 2, and finally firm 3. Inverse demand is p = 11 – Q where Q = 91 +92 +93. All firms face the same constant marginal costs c = = 1. Identify the SPE of this game. ○ (2.5, 2.5, 2.5) (10, 5, 2.5) (10-22-22 10-4-23 10-4-42) 2 9 2 10-91 5, 2 9 10-91-92 2 10-91 5, 3 10-9₁1 3 O (5,2.5, 1.25)
Two firms produce goods that are imperfect substitutes. If firm 1 charges price p1 and firm 2 charges price p2, then their respective demands are q1 = 12 - 2p1 + p2 and q2 = 12 + p1 - 2p2 So this is like Bertrand competition, except that when p1 > p2, firm 1 still gets a positive demand for its product. Regulation does not allow either firm to charge a price higher than 20. Both firms have a constant marginal cost c = 4. (a) Construct the best reply function BR1(p2) for firm 1. That is, p1 = BR1(p2) is the optimal price for firm 1 if it is known that firm 2 charges a price p2. Construct a Nash equilibrium in pure strategies for this game. Are there any Nash equilibria in mixed strategies? If yes, construct one; if no provide a justification. (b) Notice that for any given price p1, firm 1’s demand increases with p2, so firm 1 is better off when firm 2 charges a high price p2. What is the best reply to p2 = 20? What is the best reply to p2 = 0 (c) What prices for firm 1 are…
Boulder has several ski and snowboard retailers that sell similar brands. Prices across these retails are relatively stable during preseason (ski/snowboard season) and midseason, but become volatile postseason. For the past few years, when one retailer slashed prices (especially postseason), other retailers followed suit. All retailers behave as oligopolists. Suppose that retailer A faces an inverse demand of p = 1,500 – 1.5Q, when the other retailers match retailer A’s price changes, and p=1200 – 0.7Q, when the other retailers don't match retailer A’s price changes. Suppose also that retailer A's cost function is C(Q) = 20,000 + 10Q + 0.8Q2. Question: Under these conditions, what is the most profit retailer A can make?
The dropdown options are "Cleans" or "Does not clean." thank you!
Janeek and Raj are the only two growers who provide organically grown com to a local grocery store. They know that if they cooperated and produced less com, they could raise the price of the corn. If they work independently, they will each earn $100. If they decide to work together and both lower their output, they can each earn $150. if one person lowers output and the other does not, the person who lowers output will earn $0 and the other person will capture the entire market and will earn $200. Reference the game illustrated below where the first payout in each cell is for Janeek and the second is for Raj. (J.R) Independent Cooperate Independent ($100, $100) ($0, $200) What is the Nash Equilibrium for this game? Ⓒ(Cooperate, Cooperate) (Cooperate, Independent) (Independent, Cooperate) (Independent, Independent) Cooperate ($200, 50) ($150, $150)
Megan and Martha own competing hair salons that are in the same neighborhood. They are both considering offering their clients discounts in order to increase business. The payoff matrix shows their yearly incomes in thousands of dollars if they offer and do not offer discounts to their customers. Martha Megan Discount No Discount Discount $50, $75 $75, $60 No Discount $35, $90 $70, $85 If both Megan and Martha did not discount, what would each earn in yearly income? Megan would earn $50,000; Martha would earn $75,000. Megan would earn $75,000; Martha would earn $60,000. Megan would earn $35,000; Martha would earn $90,000. Megan would earn $70,000; Martha would earn $85,000. Megan would earn $35,000; Martha would earn $85,000.
Consider the case of global environmental problems that spill across international borders as a prisoner’s dilemma of the sort studied in Monopolistic Competition and Oligopoly. Say that there are two countries, A and B. Each country can choose whether to protect the environment, at a cost of 10, or not to protect it, at a cost of zero. If one country decides to protect the environment, there is a benefit of 16, but the benefit is divided equally between the two countries. If both countries decide to protect the environment, there is a benefit of 32, which is divided equally between the two countries. a. In Table, fill in the costs, benefits, and total payoffs to the countries of the following decisions. Explain why, without some international agreement, they are likely to end up with neither country acting to protect the environment.
Two firms produce goods that are imperfect substitutes. If firm 1 charges price p1 and firm 2 charges price p2, then their respective demands are q1 = 12 - 2p1 + p2 and q2 = 12 + p1 - 2p2 So this is like Bertrand competition, except that when p1 > p2, firm 1 still gets a positive demand for its product. Regulation does not allow either firm to charge a price higher than 20. Both firms have a constant marginal cost c = 4. (a) Construct the best reply function BR1(p2) for firm 1. That is, p1 = BR1(p2) is the optimal price for firm 1 if it is known that firm 2 charges a price p2. Construct a Nash equilibrium in pure strategies for this game. Are there any Nash equilibria in mixed strategies? If yes, construct one; if no provide a justification. (b) Notice that for any given price p1, firm 1’s demand increases with p2, so firm 1 is better off when firm 2 charges a high price p2. What is the best reply to p2 = 20? What is the best reply to p2 = 0 (c) What prices for firm 1 are…
Two gas stations in a rural town can engage in collusion over pricing. Because drivers often just stop at the first station they see as they go through town, price competition is not that severe in the first place. Assume either station can price gas at $0.30 above average total cost or $0.50 above average total cost. If they have equal prices, they split the market. If they have unequal prices, the lower price station gets 75% of the market (assume for simplicity no change in the size of the market; price elasticity of demand is very low for short term changes in the price of oil).a. Draw the normal form representation of this game. Identify the key aspects of the game.b. Identify the dominant strategy, if any, for each player.c. Identify any Nash equilibria.
Two Bertrand competitors sell identical products. Each firm is located at either end of a one-mile street. Both firms have marginal costs equal to 10 per unit and no fixed costs. There are 1000 consumers located evenly along the one-mile street who incur (there-and-back) travel costs of 5 per mile. Consumers share a common valuation of 20 for the product and purchase the product so long as this value exceeds the effective price (i.e. price plus travel costs). Suppose the firms set prices sequentially (with firm 1 moving first), what is the combined total profit of both firms?
There are two oil producers, Saudi Arabia and Iran (these are countries which we are treating as players in this example). The market price will be $60/barrel if the total volume of sales is 9 million barrels daily, $50 if the total volume of sales is 11 million barrels daily, and $35 if the total volume of sales is 13 million barrels daily. Saudi Arabia has two strategies; either produce 8 million barrels daily or 6 million. Iran has two strategies; either produce 3 million barrels daily or 5 million. Assume for simplicity that marginal cost of production is zero for both countries. Here is the normal form representation of this game (where Saudi Arabia and Iran are players, they can choose strategies over what quantity to produce and they face payoffs in terms of profits). Note that the following paragraph is simply an explanation of this representation of the game. If you are already comfortable with the structure, feel free to skip to the questions below the horizontal line…
16-1. Two equal sized newspaper have an overlap in circulation of 10% (10% of the subscribers subscribe to both newspaper). Advertisers are willing to pay $10 to advertise in one newspaper but only $19 to advertise in both , because they’re are unwilling to pay twice to reach the same subscribers. What’s the likely bargaining negotiation outcome if the advertisers bargain by telling each newspaper that they’re going to reach an agreement with the other newspaper so the gains to reaching agreement are only $9? Suppose the two newspaper merge. What is the likely post merger bargaining outcome?