Homework Help is Here – Start Your Trial Now!
Business
Economics
In a number of countries, government contracts are awarded by means auctions in which the winner is the bidder whose bid is closest to the average bid. Consider such an auction with

In a number of countries, government contracts are awarded by means auctions in which the winner is the bidder whose bid is closest to the average bid. Consider such an auction with

ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
14th Edition
ISBN:9780190931919
Author:NEWNAN
Publisher:NEWNAN
Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1QTC
See similar textbooks
icon
Related questions
Question

PLEASE CHECK THIS  HOW TO SOLVE

In a number of countries, government contracts are awarded by means auctions in which the winner is the bidder whose bid is closest to the average bid. Consider such an auction with three bidders competing to win a single object. Bidder i has a valuation vi for the object, where v₁ > V₂ > V3 > 0. Bidders simultaneously submit bids b; ≥ 0. The bidder whose bid is closest to the average of b₁,b2, and b3 wins the object and pays her own bid (thus if i is the winning bidder, her payoff is vi- bi). In case of a tie, the bidder with the highest valuation wins the object. Losing bidders receive a payoff of 0. (a) Find all (pure strategy) Nash equilibria of this game. Solution: Given by and b3, note that 1 can win the auction by bidding min{b2, b3}. If min{b2, b3} > v₁, then only losing bids are best responses for 1. Hence either 2 or 3 is winning and paying more than her valuation, which cannot be a best response. Hence we must have min{b₂2, b3} ≤ v₁. Similarly, min{b2, b3}: = v₁ can only be a best response for 2 and 3 if 1 is winning, which can only be a best response for 1 if b₁ = v₁. The profiles (v₁, 62, 63) such that min{b2,b3} = v₁ are indeed Nash equilibria. If min{b2, b3} < v₁, then the unique best response for 1 is to choose b = min{b2, b3}. If b₁ = b₂ = b3 < 1, then neither 2 nor 3 can win by deviating and if 1 deviates she loses. Therefore, these are Nash equilibria. If b₁ = min{b2, b3} <v₁ and b₂ < b3 then we have a Nash equilibrium if and only if b2 ≥ v₂. If b₁ = min{b2, b3} < v₁ and b3 < b2 then we have a Nash equilibrium if and only if b3 ≥ v3. (b) Show that in every Nash equilibrium in which the three players do not submit identical bids, at least one player plays a weakly dominated strategy. Solution: In any such Nash equilibrium, there is at least one player i who bids bį ≥ vį. A bid bi vi is weakly dominated by any bid b € (0, v₂).
Transcribed Image Text:In a number of countries, government contracts are awarded by means auctions in which the winner is the bidder whose bid is closest to the average bid. Consider such an auction with three bidders competing to win a single object. Bidder i has a valuation vi for the object, where v₁ > V₂ > V3 > 0. Bidders simultaneously submit bids b; ≥ 0. The bidder whose bid is closest to the average of b₁,b2, and b3 wins the object and pays her own bid (thus if i is the winning bidder, her payoff is vi- bi). In case of a tie, the bidder with the highest valuation wins the object. Losing bidders receive a payoff of 0. (a) Find all (pure strategy) Nash equilibria of this game. Solution: Given by and b3, note that 1 can win the auction by bidding min{b2, b3}. If min{b2, b3} > v₁, then only losing bids are best responses for 1. Hence either 2 or 3 is winning and paying more than her valuation, which cannot be a best response. Hence we must have min{b₂2, b3} ≤ v₁. Similarly, min{b2, b3}: = v₁ can only be a best response for 2 and 3 if 1 is winning, which can only be a best response for 1 if b₁ = v₁. The profiles (v₁, 62, 63) such that min{b2,b3} = v₁ are indeed Nash equilibria. If min{b2, b3} < v₁, then the unique best response for 1 is to choose b = min{b2, b3}. If b₁ = b₂ = b3 < 1, then neither 2 nor 3 can win by deviating and if 1 deviates she loses. Therefore, these are Nash equilibria. If b₁ = min{b2, b3} <v₁ and b₂ < b3 then we have a Nash equilibrium if and only if b2 ≥ v₂. If b₁ = min{b2, b3} < v₁ and b3 < b2 then we have a Nash equilibrium if and only if b3 ≥ v3. (b) Show that in every Nash equilibrium in which the three players do not submit identical bids, at least one player plays a weakly dominated strategy. Solution: In any such Nash equilibrium, there is at least one player i who bids bį ≥ vį. A bid bi vi is weakly dominated by any bid b € (0, v₂).
Expert Solution
steps

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

SEE SOLUTIONCheck out a sample Q&A here
Blurred answer
Knowledge Booster
Bayesian Probability Rule
Learn more about
Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, economics and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.
Recommended textbooks for you
ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Economics
ISBN:
9780190931919
Author:
NEWNAN
Publisher:
Oxford University Press
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134078779
Author:
Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. Oster
Publisher:
PEARSON
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134870069
Author:
William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick Koelling
Publisher:
PEARSON
Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)
Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:
9781305585126
Author:
N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Economics
ISBN:
9781337106665
Author:
Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-…
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-…
Economics
ISBN:
9781259290619
Author:
Michael Baye, Jeff Prince
Publisher:
McGraw-Hill Education
SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS