Microeconomics
10th Edition
ISBN: 9781259655500
Author: David C Colander
Publisher: McGraw-Hill Education
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 20, Problem 14QE
(a)
To determine
A rational person’s achievement in a standard highest bid auction.
(b)
To determine
The bid made by him in a Vickrey auction.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
Say that you are bidding in a sealed-bid auction and that you really want the item being auctioned. Winning it would be worth $500 to you. Say you expect the next-highest bidder to bid $300.a. In a standard “highest-bid” auction, what bid would a rational person make?
The rational choice is to bid $500 since that is what the item is worth to you.
The rational choice is to bid a little bit more than $300 because that is the expected next-highest bid.
The rational choice is to bid just under $500 so that you have a higher chance of winning the auction and would still have a net benefit.
The rational choice is to bid over $500 to guarantee that you win the item.
b. In a Vickrey auction, what bid would he make?
The rational choice is to bid slightly more than $500.
The rational choice is to bid $500.
The rational choice is to bid slightly less than $500.
The rational choice is to bid slightly more than $300.
Hey expert please do it for me asap
In 'the dictator' game, one player (the dictator) chooses how to divide a pot of $10 between herself and another player (the recipient). The recipient does not have an opportunity to reject the proposed distribution. As such, if the dictator only cares about how much money she makes, she should keep all $10 for herself and give the recipient nothing. However, when economists conduct experiments with the dictator game, they find that dictators often offer strictly positive amounts to the recipients.
Are dictators behaving irrationally in these experiments? Whether you think they are or not, your response should try to provide an explanation for the behavior.
Chapter 20 Solutions
Microeconomics
Ch. 20.1 - Prob. 1QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 2QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 3QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 4QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 5QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 6QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 7QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 8QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 9QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 10Q
Ch. 20.A - Netflix and Hulu each expects profit to rise by...Ch. 20.A - Prob. 2QECh. 20 - Prob. 1QECh. 20 - Prob. 2QECh. 20 - Prob. 3QECh. 20 - Prob. 4QECh. 20 - Prob. 5QECh. 20 - Prob. 6QECh. 20 - Prob. 7QECh. 20 - Prob. 8QECh. 20 - Prob. 9QECh. 20 - Prob. 10QECh. 20 - Prob. 11QECh. 20 - Prob. 12QECh. 20 - Prob. 13QECh. 20 - Prob. 14QECh. 20 - Prob. 15QECh. 20 - Prob. 16QECh. 20 - Prob. 1QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 2QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 3QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 4QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 5QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 6QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 1IPCh. 20 - Prob. 2IPCh. 20 - Prob. 3IPCh. 20 - Prob. 4IPCh. 20 - Prob. 5IPCh. 20 - Prob. 6IPCh. 20 - Prob. 7IP
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Q2. The Prisoners' Dilemma: Jill Confess Remain Silent Confess Bob: 8 years Jill: 8 years Bob: Free Jill: 20 years Bob Remain Silent Bob: 20 years Jill: Free Bob: 1 year Jill: 1 year 2A: Find Nash equilibrium? 28. Is the Nash equilibrium best outcome for them? 2C. If your answer of Q2 is 'No', then why they choose an outcome which is not best for them.arrow_forwardGame theory problemarrow_forwardEconomics Consider the ultimatum and dictator games. a) Briefly explain the general experimental findings about how individuals play these games. How do they compare with the game theoretic predictions? b) How do social preferences explain behavior in these experiments? c) Real world experiences have an impact on experimental behavior. Explain how real world experiences could affect behavior in each of theses experiments. d) Suppose that you would like to increase the amount that is sent in these experiments. Can you think of a way to to this? e) Suppose that individuals play first a dictator game and then an ultimatum game with the roles reversed, i.e. the sender in the dictator game is the receiver in the ultimatum game. Given what you know about individuals' behavior, how do think that players will play? Explain. youarrow_forward
- You have just played rock, paper, scissors with your friend. You chose scissors and he chose paper, so you won. Is this a Nash equilibrium? Explain why or why not.arrow_forwardSuppose players A and B play a discrete ultimatum game where A proposes to split a $5 surplus and B responds by either accepting the offer or rejecting it. The offer can only be made in $1 increments. If the offer is accepted, the players' payoffs resemble the terms of the offer while if the offer is rejected, both players get zero. Also assume that players always use the strategy that all strictly positive offers are accepted, but an offer of $0 is rejected. A. What is the solution to the game in terms of player strategies and payoffs? Explain or demonstrate your answer. B. Suppose the ultimatum game is played twice if player B rejects A's initial offer. If so, then B is allowed to make a counter offer to split the $5, and if A rejects, both players get zero dollars at the end of the second round. What is the solution to this bargaining game in terms of player strategies and payoffs? Explain/demonstrate your answer. C. Suppose the ultimatum game is played twice as in (B) but now there…arrow_forward100 people are choosing between two beaches to go to in the Florida Keys. Beach L is big and never gets crowded, but it is not very nice; the utility from going to Beach L is u(L) = 60. Beach M is much nicer but very small, so it gets crowded; the utility from going to Beach M is u(M) = 100-NM ; NM is the number of people that %3D go to Beach M. 5) The Nash equilibrium number of people that go to Beach L is A) 20 B) 40 C) 60 D) 80 E) 100 5).arrow_forward
- please if you can teach explainarrow_forwardplease if you can teach explainarrow_forwardYou could choose any position A (the first mover) or B (the second mover) in the following three bargaining games. For each game (I, II, or III), explain which player (A or B) you would pick in order to maximize your expected payoff? 1. Game I (one stage): A will make the first move and offer her partner a portion of 6 dollars. If the offer is accepted, the bargain is complete and each player gets an amount determined by the offer. If the offer is declined, each player gets nothing. 2. Game II (two stages): A will make the first move and offer her partner a portion of 12 dollars. If the offer is accepted, the bargain is complete and each player gets an amount determined by the offer. If the offer is declined, the 12 shrinks to 5 and B then gets a turn to make an offer. Again, the bargain is complete if A accepts and the division is made according to the terms of the offer. If player A declines the offer, each player gets nothing. 3. Game III (three stages): A will make the first move…arrow_forward
- So imagine you are playing this game as the second player and you are both given a 10 dollars and the dictator decides to offer you 25 cents and that she/he will keep $9.25. Your only choice is to accept the 25 cents or reject the offer and get no money at all. What would you do? What would be considered ‘rational’ from the perspective of utility maximization? What would you do if this is a continued game and the same scenario will happen multiple times not just once? Do you think others will react the same way you would?arrow_forwardNote: this is an economics question. Game theory and Nash equilibria section. *Discuss the attached case in terms of eBay's strategic move.arrow_forwardSee attachments for question context. Question: Some people advocated the following modifiction of the auction rule. A bidder cannot bid for only one object, i.e., if at some point in time he withdraws from the bidding race for one object, he automatically withdraws the race for the other object. Every other aspect of the auction, including how prices increase over time, does not change. What should a bidder do if his valuation for the two objects are 50 and 60, respectively? Explain. Does the auction lead to an efficient allocation? Explain.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Economics
ISBN:9781337106665
Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:Cengage Learning