If you advertise and your rival advertises, you each will earn $4 million in profits. If neither of you advertises, you will each earn $10 million in profits. However, if one of you advertises and the other does not, the firm that advertises will earn $1 million and the non-advertising firm will earn $5 million. If you and your rival plan to be in business for 10 years, then the Nash equilibrium is Multiple Choice for each firm to advertise every year. for neither firm to advertise in early years but to advertise in later years.

If you advertise and your rival advertises, you each will earn $4 million in profits. If neither of you advertises, you will each earn $10 million in profits. However, if one of you advertises and the other does not, the firm that advertises will earn $1 million and the non-advertising firm will earn $5 million. If you and your rival plan to be in business for 10 years, then the Nash equilibrium is Multiple Choice for each firm to advertise every year. for neither firm to advertise in early years but to advertise in later years.

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

O Cell A O Cell C O Cell E O Cell I None of the above
q19 If you advertise and your rival advertises, you each will earn $4 million in profits. If neither of you advertises, you will each earn $10 million in profits. However, if one of you advertises and the other does not, the firm that advertises will earn $1 million and the non-advertising firm will earn $5 million. If you and your rival plan to be in business for 10 years, then the Nash equilibrium is a. for each firm to not advertise in any year. b. for neither firm to advertise in early years but to advertise in later years. c. for each firm to advertise every year. d. for each firm to advertise in early years but not advertise in later years.
Two firms, Tim Horbucks and Startons, consider enter the market for take-out coffee, or not. The profit each firm can make (in dollars) is indicated in the table below, where the fixed cost of producing is F dollars. What is the largest value of F below which the game has a UNIQUE Nash equilibrium in pure strategies? Startons Enter Not Enter Enter 400 - F, 400 - F 600 - F,0 Tim Horbucks Not Enter 0, 600 - F 0 ,0 Enter a positive number below, in dollars.
Two oligopolistic aluminium manufacturers are engaged in bitter competition with one another, Both firms, Big Aluminium Giant (BAG) and Little Aluminium Giant (LAG), are deciding whether to expand capacity or not. The table below shows payoffs for the firms under various scenarios. The first number in each cell is the payoff of LAG. Suppose the game is played once and each firm has to make its decision simultaneously. Does BAG have a dominant strategy? Explain clearly. Does LAG have a dominant strategy? Explain clearly. Big Aluminium Giant (BAG) Don't Expand 3, 4 4, 2 Еxpand Little Aluminium Giant Don't Expand 2, 3 Expand 1, 1 For the toolbar, press ALT+F10 (PC) or ALT+FN+F10 (Mac).
Construct the sequential game tree when Cable-net takes the first mover position by deciding whether to invest in infrastructure capacity expansion. Find the Nash equilibrium path by using the roll-back technique. How much profit does each firm earn? (Hint: the game tree will have three sequential decisions: Cable-net makes the decision first whether to invest in infrastructure capacity expansion, Peoplenet makes the entry decision, and Cable-net decides whether to lower the price.)
None
Once again, two ice cream truck vendors, A and B, are playing a simultaneous pricing game. If only one of the vendors prices low, he gets all the customers for a payoff of 12, while the other vendor gets no customers and a payoff of zero. If both vendors price high, they each get a payoff of 6. If both price low, they each get a payoff of 5. Suppose that the above game is repeated indefinitely, and together the vendors adopt a trigger strategy such that they would start charging the low price only if the other vendor charged a low price last time. Provided that the vendors stick to their new strategy, what would be the Nash equilibrium going forward? a) Both the vendors price high b) Both the vendors price low c) Vendor A prices high, vendor B prices low d) Vendor B prices high, vendor A prices low
Two firms are competing to establish one of two new wireless communication standards, A or B. A strategy is a choice of standard, and an outcome of this game is a choice of standard by each firm – for example, (A, B) represents the case where Firm 1 decides to develop standard A and Firm 2 develops standard B. Here, the first letter will always correspond to Firm 1’s decision, and the second letter to Firm 2’s decision. Firm 1 has the following preferences over outcomes, in order of highest to lowest preferred: it prefers (A, A) to (B, A) to (A, B) to (B, B). Firm 2 prefers (A, B) to (A, A) to (B, A) to (B, B). Suppose that firms simultaneously decide which standard to develop. What is the pure strategy Nash equilibrium?
Two firms, X and Y, are planning to market their new products. Each firm can develop TV, Laptop. Market research indicates that the resulting profits to each firm for the alternative strategies are given by the following payoff matrix : MATRIX IS ATTACHED Find the Nash equilibria for this game, assuming that both firms make their decisions at the same time. (explain the decision step by step) If each firm is risk averse and uses a maximin strategy, what will be the resulting equilibrium? (explain the decision step by step) What will be the equilibrium if Firm X makes its selection first? If Firm Y goes first?
In the collusion game, collusion was only sustainable in the infinite horizon repeated game. One Nash Equilibrium of that game can be found when all players play a “grim trigger” strategy, where they collude until an opponent chooses to compete, and then compete for all future rounds as a punishment. In such a game, if the one period bonus that comes from competing is low enough, firms always collude and the punishment is never triggered. Is the punishment (vowing to compete forever after one deviates) realistic, especially if firms can communicate freely? Why or why not? (Hint: Is a grim trigger Nash Equilibrium a Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium? What kinds of Nash Equilibria does Subgame erfection rule out in sequential games?)
On a duopolistic market, two tobacco firms are considering separately whether or not to engage in a marketing campaign. The market share gained from advertising will depend on whether the other competitor also advertises. The payoffs in millions of pounds for the firms are displayed in the following payoffs table where the first figure in the bracket denotes the payoff to A, and the second figure the payoff to B. Firm B\Firm A Firm A advertises Firm A no advertising Firm B advertises (60,75) (20,150) Firm B no advertising (120, 25) (100,120) a. Is there a dominant strategy? If so, what is the dominant strategy? Explain the meaning of a dominant strategy. b. Is there a Nash equilibrium? If so, what is it? Explain briefly what this implies. Explain the concept of Nash equilibrium. c. Does this advertising game pose a prisoners' dilemma? Justify your answer and explain what this means for the case of making advertising in cigarettes illegal.
Synergy and Dynaco are the only two firms in a specific high-tech industry. They face the following payoff matrix as they decide upon the size of their research budget: Dynaco's Decision Synergy's Decision Large Budget Large Budget $30 million, $20 million Small Budget $0, $30 million If Synergy believes Dynaco will go with a large budget, it will choose a budget. If Synergy believes Dynaco will go with a small budget, it will choose a budget. Therefore, Synergy a dominant strategy. O True Small Budget $70 million, $0 $50 million, $40 million If Dynaco believes Synergy will go with a large budget, it will choose a budget. If Dynaco believes Synergy will go with a small budget, it will choose a budget. Therefore, Dynaco a dominant strategy. O False True or False: There is a Nash equilibrium for this scenario. (Hint: Look closely at the definition of Nash equilibrium.)