In this Decision Point activity, you began to explore game theory: specifically, how your outcomes are dependent not just on your own choices, but also on the reactions of competitors. Use what you learned from this decision point, and information from the chapter to answer the following question. Suppose Nike and Adidas are considering whether to develop new advertising campaigns. For each pair of strategies, the blue triangle shows Nike's payoff and the yellow triangle shows Adidas's payoff, in billions. Use this information to complete the sentences. Adidas's choices Advertise Do not advertise Advertise $6b Nike's choices -$3b $6b $14b Do not advertise $14b $10b -$3b $10b The best outcome for Nike is to choose not to advertise and for Adidas to choose to advertise If Adidas chooses not to advertise, their best result will happen if Nike chooses to advertise The Nash equilibrium for this advertising game is for Nike to choose to advertise and for Adidas to advertise Answer Bank

In this Decision Point activity, you began to explore game theory: specifically, how your outcomes are dependent not just on your own choices, but also on the reactions of competitors. Use what you learned from this decision point, and information from the chapter to answer the following question. Suppose Nike and Adidas are considering whether to develop new advertising campaigns. For each pair of strategies, the blue triangle shows Nike's payoff and the yellow triangle shows Adidas's payoff, in billions. Use this information to complete the sentences. Adidas's choices Advertise Do not advertise Advertise $6b Nike's choices -$3b $6b $14b Do not advertise $14b $10b -$3b $10b The best outcome for Nike is to choose not to advertise and for Adidas to choose to advertise If Adidas chooses not to advertise, their best result will happen if Nike chooses to advertise The Nash equilibrium for this advertising game is for Nike to choose to advertise and for Adidas to advertise Answer Bank

Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach

5th Edition

ISBN:9781337106665

Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Publisher:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Chapter15: Strategic Games

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 3MC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Consider the attached game depicted in Normal Form. Find one Nash equilibrium and verify that it is a Nash equilibrium. Note: 1. Remember to express the Nash equilibrium in the form of a strategy profile. 2. Use the definition of Nash equilibrium to verify that the strategy profile you find is really a Nash equilibrium.
Previous research suggests that many firms ‘over - invest’ in advertising - meaning spend beyond a point where advertising positively affects a firm’s bottom line (if interested see here: Advertising Effectiveness). Game Theory can explain some of this, but not all. What else can explain why many firms over invest in advertising? Are there are any reasons for firms to advertise beyond wanting to increase profits? Note: two recent Freakonomics on this topic can be found here: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/advertising-part-1 and https://freakonomics.com/podcast/advertising-part-2
II.2 Companies A and B can compete on advertising or R&D. The profits (in millions of $ million) of the two firms are given in the table below assumig that they play a one-shot simultancous mov game (the profit or firm A is listed first in every cell of the matrix, followed by the profit of firm B): Advertising R&D 50, 25 10, 70 20, 40 60, 35 1. Find the mixed strategy equilibrium. A\B Advertising R&D 2. What are the expected profits for both firms in this equilibrium?
A case study in the chapter describes a phone conversation between the presidents of American Airlines and Braniff Airways. Let's analyze the game between the two companies. Suppose that each company can charge either a high price for tickets or a low price. If one company charges $300, it cams low profit if the other company also charges $300 and high profit if the other company charges $600. On the other hand, if the company charges $600, it cams very low profit if the other company charges $300 and medium profit if the other company also charges $600. a. Draw the decision box for this game. b. What is the Nash equilibrium in this game? Explain. c. Is there an outcome that would be better than the Nash equilibrium for both airlines? How could it be achieved? Who would lose if it were achieved?
How many sellers/firms is a few? How would you define “strategic decision-making?” How does game theory relate to strategic decision-making?
QUESTION 14 Which of the following is the Nash equilibrium of the game in the picture? Du Q = 30 Q = 40 Q = 30 du's profit = 900 Etisalat du's profit = 1000 Etisalat's profit = 900 Etisalat's profit = $750 Q = 40 Etisalat's profit = 1000 du's profit = 750 a. Du chooses 30, Etisalat chooses 40. b. Du chooses 30, Etisalat chooses 30. C. Du chooses 40, Etisalat chooses 40. d. Du chooses 40, Etisalat chooses 30. du's profit = 800 Etisalat's profit = 800
C. Two airline companies decide to engage in collusive behaviour. Analyse the game between two such companies. Suppose that each company can charge either a high price for tickets or a low price. If one company charges €100, it earns low profits if the other company charges €100 also, and high profits if the other company charges €200. On the other hand, if the company charges €200, it earns very low profits if the other company charges €100, and medium profits if the other company charges €200 also. (i) Draw the payoff matrix for this game. Airline A's Decision Low Price High Price Low Price Airline A Airline A Airline B's Decision (ii) What is the Nash equilibrium in this game? Explain. Airline B Airline B High Price Airline B Airline A Airline A Airline B (iii) If a group of sellers could form a cartel, what quantity and price would they try to set?
Tucker and Eddie are playing the following game. Tucker can choose A or B and Eddie can choose C or D. The first payoff is for Tucker, the second for Eddie. Eddie Tucker C D A 3, 2 4, 3 B 4, 5 3, 4 Identify the Nash equilibrium(s) in this game. What rational game theoretic advice would you offer Tucker and Eddie on how to play this game? If Tucker and Eddie follow your advice, what payoff should each expect? Show your work.
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
Use the following payoff matrix to answer the following questions. Dave Party House Tom 4, 0 Party 10, 10 0, 4 6, 6 House Which player (if any) has a Dominant Strategy? I Select | What is the Nash Equilibrium of this game? [ Select ] Does this game satisfy the definition of a prisoner's dilemma? [Select]
Answer all the questions, show all the working. Consider the following game in normal form. Not cooperate Cooperate Not cooperate 20,20 50,0 Cooperate 0,50 40,40 What is Nash equilibrium? Is it efficient? Why? What needs to be complied with so that the players would like to cooperate? What happens when one of the players does not cooperate? Why? Define trigger strategy. Calculate the discount factor (δ) that would make both players decide to cooperate.
Who first established the basic principles of game theory? Select one: a. Nash b. Bernoulli с. Кеynes d. Savage e. von Neumann Who developed a duopoly model to show how two firms compete in the price of a good they supply? Select one: a. Cournot b. Keynes c. Bertrand d. Robinson e. Chamberlain What pair provided the most complete formula for options pricing? Select one: a. von-Neumann-Morgenstern b. Black-Scholes c. Fischer Black d. Cournot-Nash e. Modigliani-Miller