Principles of Economics, 7th Edition (MindTap Course List)
7th Edition
ISBN: 9781285165875
Author: N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher: Cengage Learning
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 17, Problem 9PA
Subpart (a):
To determine
The dominant strategy and Nash equilibrium.
Subpart (b):
To determine
The dominant strategy and Nash equilibrium.
Subpart (c):
To determine
The dominant strategy and Nash equilibrium.
Subpart (d):
To determine
The dominant strategy and Nash equilibrium.
Subpart (e):
To determine
The dominant strategy and Nash equilibrium.
Expert Solution & Answer
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Students have asked these similar questions
9. Little Kona is a small coffee company that is consider-
ing 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
Enter
Don't
Enter
High Price
Kona makes
$2 million
Kona makes
zero
Big Brew
Brew makes
$3 million
Brew makes
$7 million
Kona loses
$1 million
Low Price
Kona makes
zero
Brew makes
$1 million
Brew makes
$2 million
Suppose Proctor & Gamble (PG) and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) are simultaneously considering new advertising campaigns. Each firm may choose a high, medium or low level of advertising.
a. What are each firm’s best responses to its rival’s strategies?
b. Does either firm have a dominant strategy?
c. What is the Nash equilibrium in 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:
True or False: Only Little Kona has a dominant strategy in this game.
True or False
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 enters.
a.Big Brew maintains a low price and Little Kona enters.
b.Big Brew maintains a high price and Little Kona does not enter.
c.Big Brew maintains a low price and Little Kona does not enter.
Big Brew threatens Little Kona by saying, “If you enter, we're going to set a low price, so you had better stay out.”
True or False: Little Kona should not believe the threat.
True or False
If the two firms could collude and agree on how to split the total profits, what outcome would they…
Chapter 17 Solutions
Principles of Economics, 7th Edition (MindTap Course List)
Ch. 17.1 - Prob. 1QQCh. 17.2 - Prob. 2QQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 3QQCh. 17 - Prob. 1QRCh. 17 - Prob. 2QRCh. 17 - Prob. 3QRCh. 17 - Prob. 4QRCh. 17 - Prob. 5QRCh. 17 - Prob. 6QRCh. 17 - Prob. 7QR
Ch. 17 - Prob. 1QCMCCh. 17 - Prob. 2QCMCCh. 17 - Prob. 3QCMCCh. 17 - Prob. 4QCMCCh. 17 - Prob. 5QCMCCh. 17 - Prob. 6QCMCCh. 17 - Prob. 1PACh. 17 - Prob. 2PACh. 17 - Prob. 3PACh. 17 - Prob. 4PACh. 17 - Prob. 5PACh. 17 - Prob. 6PACh. 17 - A case study in the chapter describes a phone...Ch. 17 - Prob. 8PACh. 17 - Prob. 9PA
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- The above table shows the payoffs that either Darrin or Rob receive depending on whether they choose a high or a low price strategy. Who has a dominant strategy? A. Darrin. B. Rob. C. Darrin and Rob. D. Neither Darrin nor Rob.arrow_forwardA small town has a duopoly in its tattoo market. Two firms, "Thread the Needle" and "Ink about it" are both competitors. Daily profit is listed in the payoff matrix. The green payouts belong to "Thread the Needle" and the red, "Ink about it". In this game, what is the Nash Equilibrium? A Thread the Needle: don't advertise, Ink about it: don't advertise B Thread the Needle: don't advertise, Ink about it: advertise C Thread the Needle: advertise, Ink about it: advertise D Thread the Needle: advertise, Ink about it: don't advertisearrow_forward1. Two electricity firms compete in the same market and are deciding their level of advertising in order to increase customers and profits. The following matrix shows the profits (in millions) according to the strategy chosen: Firm 1 Strategies Low Advertising Aggressive Advertising Firm 2 Low Advertising 15, 15 20, -2 Aggressive Advertising -2, 20 5,5 a. Identify the one-shot Nash equilibrium. Comment. b. Suppose the players know this game will be repeated exactly 10 times. Can they achieve payoffs that are better than the one-shot Nash equilibrium? Explain. c. Suppose this game is infinitely repeated and the interest rate is 5%. Can the players achieve the collusive outcome? Explain.arrow_forward
- 3) Amazon and Target both sell the new Xbox, and have a choice whether to charge a high price or a low price. The payoff matrix identifies the profit either store can expect to make (in millions of dollars). Walmart High Price Low Price High Price b. Identify the Nash Equilibrium. 3,6 5,5 Amazon Low Price 2.8 4.3 a. Identify the Dominant Strategy for either player, or write "none" if there isn't one.arrow_forwardCOUNTRY B HIGH TARIFF LOW TARIFF HIGH TARIFF $1M $1 M $2M, $1.5 M COUNTRY A LOW $1.5 M, $ 2M $3м, $3 м TARIFF 1. What is the dominant strategy for: a. Country A b. Country B Is there an equilibrium dominant strategy for this game? 2. Find the Nash equilibrium a. Outcome = (High, high) b. Outcome = (High. Low) c. Outcome = (Low, high) d. Outcome = (Low, low) 3. What is the Maximin strategy for Country A and Country B? C.arrow_forwardAnswer the following questions: 1.What is the Nash Equilibrium of this game? 2. Does Starbucks have dominant pricing strategy, given these predicted payoffs? Does Dunkin' Donuts have a dominant pricing strategy, given these payoffs? Explain. 3. Is this game an example of a prisoner's dilemma? Why or why not?arrow_forward
- Game Theory. Consider the following scenario: Two cloth manufacturing companies, A and B. Firm A designs a few costumes, and they are confident enough that they will be sold quickly in the market, but after launching their designs, they make very little profit due to a lack of capital to promote their designs. Now firm B uses these designs and makes a significant profit due to its brand value. 1. Demonstrate that the situation IS a game (explain strategic interaction/conflict).arrow_forwardExercise A.2 . Sinergy and Dinaco are the only two companies in a high-tech industry. They are faced with the following matrix of results when deciding their research budget: After analizing the graph, answer the following questions... a) Does Sinergy have a dominant strategy? Reason your answer. b) Does Dinaco have a dominant strategy? Reason your answer. c) Is there a Nash equilibrium in this scenario? Reason your answer.arrow_forwardneed help to sovle for a,b, and c.arrow_forward
- Fill in the chart attached and answer the following questions: a) Bert's dominant strategy is to: (pick the correct answer below ) - no dominant strategy - fish for 20 hours per week -fish for 40 hours per week. b) Ernie's dominant strategy is to: ( pick the correct answer below) - no dominant strategy - fish for 20 hours per week -fish for 40 hours per week. c) Is there a Nash Equilibrium? ( pick the correct answer below) - No - Yes, both fish for 20 hours per week - Yes, one fisher for 40 and the other for 20. - Yes both fish for 30 hours per week. d) Is there an incentive for Bert and Ernie to collude? Why or why not?arrow_forward1##arrow_forward16. Boeing is considering whether it should develop its next aircraft with a wide body (WIDE) or whether it should make it a long aeroplane (LONG). Airbus, Boeing's competitor, also has a choice between choosing WIDE or LONG. The payoffs to the two companies are shown in the payoff matrix below. What are the (pure strategy) Nash equilibrium in this game? (The first action in the brackets is the strategy of Boeing, while the second is Airbus's strategy.) Airbus WIDE LONG WIDE 40 for Airbus Boeing 50 for Boeing O for Airbus 0 for Boeing LONG 0 for Airbus 0 for Boeing 50 for Airbus 40 for Boeing a. (WIDE, WIDE) for Boeing and Airbus respectively) and (WIDE, LONG) b. (LONG, WIDE) and (WIDE, LONG) c. (WIDE, WIDE) d. (LONG, LONG) e. (WIDE, WIDE) and (LONG, LONG)arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Principles of MicroeconomicsEconomicsISBN:9781305156050Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage Learning
Exploring EconomicsEconomicsISBN:9781544336329Author:Robert L. SextonPublisher:SAGE Publications, Inc
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher:Cengage Learning
Microeconomics: Principles & PolicyEconomicsISBN:9781337794992Author:William J. Baumol, Alan S. Blinder, John L. SolowPublisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Microeconomics
Economics
ISBN:9781305156050
Author:N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Exploring Economics
Economics
ISBN:9781544336329
Author:Robert L. Sexton
Publisher:SAGE Publications, Inc
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Economics
ISBN:9781337106665
Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Microeconomics: Principles & Policy
Economics
ISBN:9781337794992
Author:William J. Baumol, Alan S. Blinder, John L. Solow
Publisher:Cengage Learning