1 / 11

MBA 299 – Section Notes

MBA 299 – Section Notes. 4/11/03 Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley Rawley. AGENDA. Administrative Exercises Finish off Exercises from Introduction to Game Theory & The Bertrand Trap Problem 2 (see last weeks section notes) Problem 5 d. Problem 6 Problem 7 (done on the board)

gabrielle-moreau
Télécharger la présentation

MBA 299 – Section Notes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MBA 299 – Section Notes 4/11/03 Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley Rawley

  2. AGENDA • Administrative • Exercises • Finish off Exercises from Introduction to Game Theory & The Bertrand Trap • Problem 2 (see last weeks section notes) • Problem 5 d. • Problem 6 • Problem 7 (done on the board) • Cournot duopoly • Backwards induction problems

  3. ADMINISTRATIVE • In response to your feedback • Slides in section • More math • CSG entries due Tuesday and Friday at midnight each week • Contact info: • rawley@haas.berkeley.edu • Office hours Room F535 • Monday 1-2pm • Friday 2-3pm

  4. PROOF THAT ALL IDSDS ARE NE (PROBLEM #5D) • Proof by contraction: • 1. Assume not => a NE strategy is eliminated by IDSDS • 2. Suppose in a two player game strategies s1, s2 are a NE • 3. WOLOG Let s1 be the first of the strategies to be eliminated by IDSDS • 4. Then there must exist a strategy si that has not yet been eliminated from the strategy set that strictly dominates s1 • 5. Therefore U(s1,s2) < U(si,s2) • 6. A contradiction of the definition of NE since s1 must be a best response to s2 (Q.E.D.) • Source: Robert Gibbons, “Game Theory for Applied Economists” (1992) p. 13

  5. BERTRAND TRAP PROBLEM 6 (I)Parts a and b • Part a.) K1=K2=50 • 0 if pn>$5 • dn = 50 if pn=$5,n=1,2 • 50 if pn<$5 • profit = 50*(pn-1) • max profit by choosing pn=$5 (no game) • Part b.) K1=K2=100 • 0 if pn> pmin • dn = 50 if pn= pmin • 100 if pn< pmin • profit = X*(pn-1) • max profit by choosing pn=C=$1 . . .

  6. BERTRAND TRAP PROBLEM 6Part b continued and Part c • Part b. • Why does P=C in party b, where K1=K2=100? • Because 50*(P-delta)+50*(P-delta) > 50*P if delta is small • Therefore “defecting” is always the rule until P=C • Part c. • K1=100, K2=50 => there is no pure strategy NE • Why? • If player 2 charges P2=C (and earns zero), player 1 can charge C<P1<=$5 and earn 50*(P1-C) • But if player 1 charges P1>C then player 2 will want to increase his price to P2 = P1 –e earning 50*(P2-C) . . . • But now, if P2>C, player 1 will want to charge P1=P2 –e earning 100*(P1-C) • And so and on . . .

  7. COURNOT DUOPOLYMath • Solution • Profit i (q1,q2) = qi[P(qi+qj)-c] • =qi[a-(qi+qj)-c] • Recall NE => max profit for i given j’s best play • So F.O.C. for qi, assuming qj<a-c • qi*=1/2(a-qj*-c) • Solving the pair of equations • q1=q2=(a-c)/3 • Note that qj < a – c as we assumed • Set-up • P(Q) = a – Q (inverse demand) • Q = q1 + q2 • Ci(qi) = cqi (no fixed costs) • Assume c < a • Firms choose their q simultaneously

  8. COURNOT DUOPOLYIntuition • Observe that the monopoly outcome is • qm=(a-c)/2 • profit m = (a-c)2/4 • The optimal outcome for the two firms would be to divide the market at the monopoly output level (for example qi=qj=qm/2) • But each firm has a strong incentive to deviate at this qm • Check: qm/2 is not firm 2’s best response to qm/2 by firm 1

  9. BACKWARDS INDUCTION (I)Monk’s Cerecloth 1 • What are the BI outcome when a=4? • R = (6,8) L R 2 l r • What is the BI outcome when a = 8? • R = (6,8) a -6 3 2 6 8

  10. BACKWARDS INDUCTION (II)Shoved Environment 1 • What are the BI strategies for each player? • {L1, L2} • {r1, l2, r3} L1 R1 2 1 r1 2 1 2 2 L2 R2 2 l2 r2 3 1 2 1 3 3 1 l3 r3 4 6 2 7 • What is the BI outcome? • L1, r1 = (2,2)

  11. A MAJOR MEDIA COMPANY’S ACQUISITION OF A P2P FILE SHARING COMPANYA Simplified Model of How the Acquisition Was Analyzed 6,6,6,6,6 1=B 2=U 3=T 4=S 5=E Join 5 Join Abstain 4 Join 4,4,4,4,0 Abstain 3 Join 2,2,2,0,0 Abstain 2 Buy 0,0,0,0,0 Abstain 1 -10,0,0,0,0 Don’t buy What do you think happened? What are the limits of BI? 0,0,0,0,0

More Related