Hw2-key - 5.3(a 1 =(P1 1(10 P1 0.5P2 0 2 =(P2 2(12 P2 0.5P1 0 1 = 10 P1 0.5P2 P1 1 P1 B1(P2 = P1 = 5.5 0.25P2 Substituting P2 into the equation for

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
5.3 (a) 1 = (P 1 – 1)(10 – P 1 – 0.5P 2 ) 1 1 P Π = 10 – P 1 – 0.5P 2 – P 1 + 1 0 B 1 (P 2 ) = P 1 = 5.5 – 0.25P 2 Substituting P 2 into the equation for P 1 : 2 = (P 2 – 2)(12 – P 2 – 0.5P 1 ) 2 2 P Π = 12 – P 2 – 0.5P 1 – P 2 + 2 0 B 2 (P 1 ) = P 2 = 7 – 0.25P 1 P 1 = 5.5 – 0.25 (7 – 0.25P 1 ) (15/16)P 1 = 15/4 P 1 = 4 Plugging this back into the equation for P 2 : P 2 = 7 – 0.25(4) = 6 P 2 = 6 B1(P2) B2(P1) 4 6 P2 P1 (b) total = 1 + 2 = (P 1 – 1)(10 – P 1 – 0.5P 2 ) + (P 2 – 2)(12 – P 2 – 0.5P 1 ) 1 P total Π = 10 – P 1 – 0.5P 2 – P 1 + 1 – 0.5P 2 + 1 0 B 1 (P 2 ) = P 1 = 6 – 0.5P 2 2 P total Π = –0.5P 1 + 0.5 + 12 – P 2 – 0.5P 1 – P 2 + 2 0 B 2 (P 1 ) = P 2 = 7.25 – 0.5P 1 Substituting P 2 into the equation for P 1 : P 1 = 6 – 0.5 (7.25 – 0.5P 1 ) (3/4)P 1 = 19/8 P 1 = 19/6 3.17 Plugging this back into the equation for P 2 : P 2 = 7.25 – 0.5(19/6) = 17/3 P 2 = 17/3 5.67 (c) While the two firms do better by colluding (part (b)) than by competing (part (a)), this is not a Nash equilibrium because neither firm is playing a best response to the other’s price.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
(d) Because the goods are complements in this problem, the best response curves are negatively sloped (when the other firm cuts its prices, your demand goes up, giving you an incentive to raise your own prices somewhat); in the example in the text, the best response curves were upward sloping because the goods were substitutes (if the other firm cuts its prices, your demand goes down, so you lower your own prices to compensate). This also explains why the collusive prices are lower than the NE prices in this case, while the collusive prices were higher than the NE prices in the text example. 5.7 For player B, Right is strictly dominated by Left. Once Right is eliminated, Up is strictly dominated by Down for player A, leaving (Down, Left) as the Nash equilibrium. Since this is the only outcome that survived the iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies, it is the only rationalizable outcome. 6.2 The NE of the game are (Out, War) and (In, Peace). (Out, War) is not subgame perfect because War is not a credible threat for Boeing (Peace is the NE of the subgame occurring after Airbus enters). 6.5 (a) To find the payoffs in a given cell, start by identifying which clusters will purchase from each vendor (whichever is closer; if the vendors are equidistant from a cluster, they each get half of the customers who are willing to travel that distance from that cluster). For example, if Vendor 1 locates at A and Vendor 2 locates at D, 1 will get any customers from A and B (100 and 50, respectively, for a total of
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 10/15/2009 for the course ECON 122 taught by Professor Bonanno,g during the Summer '08 term at UC Davis.

Page1 / 7

Hw2-key - 5.3(a 1 =(P1 1(10 P1 0.5P2 0 2 =(P2 2(12 P2 0.5P1 0 1 = 10 P1 0.5P2 P1 1 P1 B1(P2 = P1 = 5.5 0.25P2 Substituting P2 into the equation for

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online