Holdup: Consider an ultimatum game (T = 1 bargaining game) in which before player 1 makes his offer to player 2, player 2 can invest in the size of the pie. If player 2 chooses a low level of investment (L) then the size of the pie is small, equal to vL, while if player 2 chooses a high level of investment (H) then the size of the pie is large, equal to VH. The cost to player 2 of choosing L is c1, while the cost of choosing H is CH. Assume that ví > V1 > 0, cH > CL > 0, and vH - CH > vL = CL· What is the unique subgame-perfect equilibrium of this game? Is it Pareto optimal? b. Can you find a Nash equilibrium of the game that results in an outcome that is better for both players as compared to the unique subgame- perfect equilibrium?

Holdup: Consider an ultimatum game (T = 1 bargaining game) in which before player 1 makes his offer to player 2, player 2 can invest in the size of the pie. If player 2 chooses a low level of investment (L) then the size of the pie is small, equal to vL, while if player 2 chooses a high level of investment (H) then the size of the pie is large, equal to VH. The cost to player 2 of choosing L is c1, while the cost of choosing H is CH. Assume that ví > V1 > 0, cH > CL > 0, and vH - CH > vL = CL· What is the unique subgame-perfect equilibrium of this game? Is it Pareto optimal? b. Can you find a Nash equilibrium of the game that results in an outcome that is better for both players as compared to the unique subgame- perfect equilibrium?

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

(b) Assume that utility U is a function of wealth X given by U = X.5 and that X = $1,000,000. In this part of the question, assume that the game ends if the first head has not occurred after 40 tosses of the coin. In that case, the payoff is 240 and the game is over. What is the expected payout of this game?
Consider the game in the image attached below, which is infinitely repeated at t = 1, 2, ... Both players discount the future at rate: delta E (0, 1). The stage game is in the image attached. "Grim Trigger" strategies: Describe the "Grim Trigger" strategy profile of this game. Draw the finite automata representation of this strategy profile. Find the lowest value of delta for this strategy profile to form a subgame perfect equilibrium.
When a famous painting becomes available for sale, it is often known which museum or collector will be the likely winner. Yet, the auctioneer actively woos representatives of other museums that have no chance of winning to attend anyway. Suppose a piece of art has recently become available for sale and will be auctioned off to the highest bidder, with the winner paying an amount equal to the second highest bid. Assume that most collectors know that Valerie places a value of $15,000 on the art piece and that she values this art piece more than any other collector. Suppose that if no one else shows up, Valerie simply bids $15,000/2=$7,500 and wins the piece of art. The expected price paid by Valerie, with no other bidders present, is $________.. Suppose the owner of the artwork manages to recruit another bidder, Antonio, to the auction. Antonio is known to value the art piece at $12,000. The expected price paid by Valerie, given the presence of the second bidder Antonio, is $_______. .
PLEASE CHECK THIS HOW TO SOLVE
Jane is interested in buying a car from a used car dealer. Her maximum willingness to pay for thecar is 12 ($12,000). Bo, the dealer, is willing to sell the car as long as he receives at least 9($9,000). What is the Nash bargaining solution to this game?
Olivia is thinking about opening a new bakery (the entrant). There is already a bakery open in her neighborhood (the incumbent), and the owner of the incumbent bakery makes it clear that if Olivia enters the market, they will cut their prices in an attempt to drive the new bakery out of business. Based on the payoff matrix below, is the incumbent’s threat credible? That is, if Olivia opens a new bakery, will the incumbent actually lower their prices? Note: the entrant chooses the row, the incumbent chooses the column High price Low price Enter 1, 2 -1, 1 Don’t enter 0, 10 0, 1 a. Yes, the threat is credible b. No, the threat is not credible
There are three bidders participating in a first-price auction for a painting. Each bidder has a private, independent value vi for such a painting that is drawn uniformly from [0,1] Assume that each bidder i has a linear bidding function bi=avi, where a>0. What is the bidding strategy of bidder i , namely bi in the Bayesian equilibrium?
Problem 4: Consider an infinitely repeated game, where the base game is the following 2-person 2x2 game: A A 0,0 10, 10 S1: choose A always S2: choose B always B 10, 10 0,0 Assume both players discount the future at the same rate of r, 0 < r < 1. Limiting each player's strategies to the following six possibilities, S3: Choose A then mimic the other player's previous choice S4: Choose B, then mimic the other player's previous choice S5: Choose A, then choose the opposite of the other player's previous choice S6: Choose B, then choose the opposite of the other player's previous choice a. present the strategic form of this game, b. identify all pure-strategy Nash equilibria c. does repetition with these strategies "solve" the coordination dilemma that confronts the players in the single play of the above game.
= a) Suppose x 4 and y = 3. After all strategies that are dominated by a pure strategy are iteratively deleted for both players, how many strategies remain for Player 1? b) Suppose x = 4 and y = 3. After all strategies that are dominated by a pure strategy are iteratively deleted for both players, how many strategies remain for Player 2? c) Suppose x = 4 and y = 3. What is the sum of both players' payoffs in all pure strategy Nash equilibria of the game? d) Suppose x = 4 and y = 11. After all strategies that are dominated by a pure strategy are iteratively deleted for both players, how many strategies remain for Player 1? e) Suppose x = 4 and y = 11. After all strategies that are dominated by a pure strategy are iteratively deleted for both players, how many strategies remain for Player 2? f) Suppose x = 4 and y = 11. What is the sum of both players' payoffs in all pure strategy Nash equilibria of the game?