Take care of plagiarism. Two firms face the following payoff matrix shown to the right. Given these profits,Firm 2 wants to match Firm 1's price, but Firm 1 does not want to match Firm 2'sprice.Does either firm have a dominant strategy?Firm 1's dominant strategy does not existdoes not existand Firm 2's dominant strategyDoes this game have a unique, pure-strategy Nash equilibrium?O A. The Nash equilibrium is for Firm 1 to pick the high price and for Firm 2 topick the low price.B. The Nash equilibrium is for Firm 1 to pick the low price and for Firm 2 topick the high price.C. The Nash equilibrium is for both firms to pick the low price.D. The game does not have a pure-strategy Nash equilibrium.E. The Nash equilibrium is for both firms to pick the high price.

let's analyze each firm's possible strategies. Firm 1's payoff is highest when it chooses a high…

Answered: Does either firm have a dominant…

Does either firm have a dominant strategy? Firm 1's dominant strategy does not exist does not exist and Firm 2's do Does this game have a unique, pure-strategy Nash equilibrium?

Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)

8th Edition

ISBN:9781305585126

Author:N. Gregory Mankiw

Publisher:N. Gregory Mankiw

Chapter17: Oligopoly

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 5CQQ

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

20) Given the payoff matrix in the figure, the Nash equilibrium outcome of this game is for: Ajinomoto Produce 30 Produce 40 million pounds million pounds Ajinomoto makes $180 million Ajinomoto makes $200 million Produce 30 million ADM makes $180 million ADM makes $150 million pounds Ajinomoto makes $150 million Ajinomoto makes $160 million Produce 40 million ADM makes $200 million ADM makes $160 million pounds O A. each firm to produce 30 million pounds. B. each firm to produce 40 million pounds. C. ADM to produce 30 million pounds and for Ajinomoto to produce 40 million pounds. D. ADM to produce 40 million pounds and for Ajinomoto to produce 30 million pounds. ADM
Mark and Bevis play a static game. Mark chooses x and Bevis chooses y. Mark's payoff is 16 - (x- y)2, and Bevis' payoff is 16 - (x-0.5)2 - (y-0.5)2. Then O a. both Mark and Bevis have dominant strategies O b. Mark has a dominant strategy, but Bevis does not O c. Bevis has a dominant strategy, but Mark does not O d. neither Mark or Bevis have dominant strategies
Which of the following accurately describes a player's strictly dominant strategy? O It is a strategy that is better than all the player's other strategies, no matter what the other players do. There is always at least one player who has one in every game.. O It is the strategy a player uses in the Nash equilibrium of a game. Since a Nash equilibrium always exists, players always have a strictly dominant strategy. O It is a strategy that is better than all the player's other strategies, no matter what the other players do. A player may or may not have one. O It is a strategy that is better than all the player's other strategies, no matter what the other players do. Every player has a dominant strategy in every game.. O It is the strategy a player uses in the Nash equilibrium of a game. Since a Nash equilibrium may not exist, players may not always have a strictly dominant strategy.
Which of the following statements about Nash Equilibria in a two-player one-shot simultaneous game is FALSE? If one player has a dominant strategy, a Nash Equilibrium is guaranteed. O If both players have a dominant strategy, a Nash Equilibrium is guaranteed. A Nash Equilibrium is conditional on at least one player having a dominant strategy. Click So
Which of the following statements about Nash Equilibria in a two-player one-shot simultaneous game is FALSE? O If one player has a dominant strategy, a Nash Equilibrium is guaranteed. O If both players have a dominant strategy, a Nash Equilibrium is guaranteed. O A Nash Equilibrium is conditional on at least one player having a dominant strategy. O It is possible for a game in pure strategies to not have a Nash Equilibrium. It is possible for a two-person game to have more than two Nash Equilibria.
Can you assist with all questions please?
Enter The payoffs are represented in the game tree illustrated in the figure to the right What is the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium? -(450,125 Rival Small O A. The game does not have a Nash equililbrium. O B. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent produce the large quantity and for the rival to only enter if the (900,0) Don't enter incumbent produces the small quantity. Incumbent Enter OC. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent to produce the large quantity and for the rival to not enter regardless of the incumbent's quantity. (400, -2 Large Rival O D. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent produce the small quantity and for the rival to only enter if the incumbent produces the small quantity. (800,0) Don't enter O E. The Nash equilibrium is for the incumbent to produce the large quantity and for the rival to enter regardless of the incumbent's quantity.
Wal-Mart's dominant strategy is to pick a price of $. Target Price = $30 Price = $17 %3D What is the Nash equilibrium for this game? $6,000 $1,500 O A. The Nash equilibrium is for Target to choose a price of $17 and Wal-Mart to choose a price of $30. Price = $30 $6,000 $11,000 O B. The Nash equilibrium is for Target and Wal-Mart to both choose a price of $30. Wal - Mart C. The Nash equilibrium is for Target to choose a price of $30 and Wal-Mart to choose a price of $17. $11,000 $4,500 Price = $17 %3D $1,500 $4,500 O D. The Nash equilibrium is for Target and Wal-Mart to both choose a price of $17. South OE. O E. A Nash equilibrium does not exist for this game.
Little Kona is a small coffee company that is considering entering a market dominated by Big Brew. Each company's profit depends on whether Little Kona enters and whether Big Brew sets a high price or a low price: Little Kona True True or False: Only Little Kona has a dominant strategy in this game. False Big Brew High Price Low Price Enter $2 million, $3 million $2 million, $1 million Don't Enter 50, 58 million $0, $3 million Which of the following outcomes represent a Nash equilibrium in this case? Check all that apply. Big Brew maintains a high price and Little Kona does not enter. Big Brew maintains a low price and Little Kona does not enter. Big Brew maintains a high price and Little Kona enters. Big Brew maintains a low price and Little Kona enters. Big Brew threatens Little Kona by saying, "If you enter, we're going to set a low price, so you had better stay out." Thin True or False: Little Kona should believe the threat.
Please no written by hand and no emage
Solve for the Nash equilibrium (or equilibria) in each of the following games. (a) The following two-by-two game is a little harder to solve since firm 2’spreferred strategy depends of what firm 1 does. But firm 1 has a dominantstrategy so this game has one Nash equilibrium. Firm 2 Launch Don’tFirm 1 Launch 60, -10 100, 0 Don’t 80, 30 120, 0 What is the Nash equilibrium of this simultaneous-move game? (b) What would the outcome of this game be if instead firm 1 moved first and then, after seeing what firm 1 chose, firm 2 chose it strategy? In this case firm 1 doesn’t necessarily need to choose a best response, but firm 2 must choose a best response since it moves second.
Consider the following simultaneous move game: Player 1 \ Player 2 Top Bottom Select one: Left Right 5,3 4,1 2,0 0,2 Player 2 has a dominant strategy in this game. Player 1 has a dominant strategy in this game. O This game has a Nash equilibrium in dominant strategies. This game does not have a Nash equilibrium in pure strategies. None of the statements is correct. O