Bothequilibriaresultinthesameoutcomepath 1 1 b derive

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: e game itself. If IBM chooses to develop OS/2, then, as previously derived, company 1 develops an application and this induces both companies 2 and 3 to do so as well. Hence, IBM’s payoff is 5. It is then optimal for IBM to develop OS/2. There are then two subgame perfect Nash equilibria (where a strategy for company 2, as well as for company 3, is an action in response to company 1 choosing develop and an action in response to company 1 choosing do not develop): (develop OS/2, develop, develop/develop, develop/develop), (develop OS/2, develop, develop/do not develop, develop/do not develop). Both equilibria result in the same outcome path. 1 1 b. Derive a Nash equilibrium that is not a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium, and explain why it is not a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium. Consider any strategy profile in which IBM chooses do not develop OS/2and the other three companies’ strategies are such that at most one of them develops an a...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online