Maximin and minimax strategies in asymmetric duopoly: Cournot and Bertrand

Similar documents
License and Entry Decisions for a Firm with a Cost Advantage in an International Duopoly under Convex Cost Functions

Volume 29, Issue 2. Equilibrium Location and Economic Welfare in Delivered Pricing Oligopoly

Relative Performance and Stability of Collusive Behavior

Title: The Relative-Profit-Maximization Objective of Private Firms and Endogenous Timing in a Mixed Oligopoly

Long run equilibria in an asymmetric oligopoly

On supply function competition in a mixed oligopoly

Mixed Motives of Simultaneous-move Games in a Mixed Duopoly. Abstract

Welfare and Profit Comparison between Quantity and Price Competition in Stackelberg Mixed Duopolies

Mixed Duopoly with Price Competition

Strategic export policy, monopoly carrier, and product differentiation

The Timing of Endogenous Wage Setting under Bertrand Competition in a Unionized Mixed Duopoly

Switching Costs and the foreign Firm s Entry

Microeconomics III. Oligopoly prefacetogametheory (Mar 11, 2012) School of Economics The Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzliya

Lecture 9: Basic Oligopoly Models

Privatization and government preference. Abstract

Optimal Trade Policies for Exporting Countries under the Stackelberg Type of Competition between Firms

Mixed Oligopoly, Partial Privatization and Subsidization. Abstract

Partial privatization as a source of trade gains

UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Fall 2012

Export Taxes under Bertrand Duopoly. Abstract

Price versus Quantity in a Mixed Duopoly under Uncertainty

Endogenous choice of decision variables

Advertisement Competition in a Differentiated Mixed Duopoly: Bertrand vs. Cournot

Cournot-Bertrand competition in a unionized mixed duopoly

Price discrimination in asymmetric Cournot oligopoly

When one firm considers changing its price or output level, it must make assumptions about the reactions of its rivals.

All Equilibrium Revenues in Buy Price Auctions

Trading Company and Indirect Exports

On Forchheimer s Model of Dominant Firm Price Leadership

Research Article Welfare Comparison of Leader-Follower Models in a Mixed Duopoly

X. Henry Wang Bill Yang. Abstract

Exercises Solutions: Oligopoly

Powered by TCPDF (

Is a Threat of Countervailing Duties Effective in Reducing Illegal Export Subsidies?

Regional restriction, strategic commitment, and welfare

Export subsidies, countervailing duties, and welfare

Volume 29, Issue 1. Second-mover advantage under strategic subsidy policy in a third market model

Profitable Mergers. in Cournot and Stackelberg Markets:

A monopoly is an industry consisting a single. A duopoly is an industry consisting of two. An oligopoly is an industry consisting of a few

MODELING THE ELECTRICITY SPOT MARKETS

MICROECONOMICS AND POLICY ANALYSIS - U8213 Professor Rajeev H. Dehejia Class Notes - Spring 2001

Endogenous Choice of Price or Quantity Contract with Upstream R&D Investment: Linear Pricing and Two-part Tariff Contract with Bargaining

Cournot-Bertrand Comparison in a Mixed Oligopoly

Trading Company and Indirect Exports

ECO410H: Practice Questions 2 SOLUTIONS

Welfare in a Unionized Bertrand Duopoly. Subhayu Bandyopadhyay* and Sudeshna C. Bandyopadhyay

The Effects of Specific Commodity Taxes on Output and Location of Free Entry Oligopoly

Estimating Market Power in Differentiated Product Markets

A Note on the Solow Growth Model with a CES Production Function and Declining Population

Incomplete contracts and optimal ownership of public goods

Long-Run Evaluation of Cost-Reducing Public Infrastructure Investment

Revisiting Cournot and Bertrand in the presence of income effects

Challenge to Hotelling s Principle of Minimum

IMPERFECT COMPETITION AND TRADE POLICY

Analysis of a highly migratory fish stocks fishery: a game theoretic approach

Fee versus royalty licensing in a Cournot duopoly model

Name: Midterm #1 EconS 425 (February 20 th, 2015)

Alternative Strategies of a Public Enterprise in Oligopoly Revisited: An Extension of Stackelberg Competition

Noncooperative Oligopoly

ECON/MGMT 115. Industrial Organization

Online Shopping Intermediaries: The Strategic Design of Search Environments

VERTICAL RELATIONS AND DOWNSTREAM MARKET POWER by. Ioannis Pinopoulos 1. May, 2015 (PRELIMINARY AND INCOMPLETE) Abstract

EC 202. Lecture notes 14 Oligopoly I. George Symeonidis

Pure Strategies and Undeclared Labour in Unionized Oligopoly

Elements of Economic Analysis II Lecture XI: Oligopoly: Cournot and Bertrand Competition

Price Leadership in a Homogeneous Product Market

Ex-ante versus ex-post privatization policies with foreign penetration in free-entry mixed markets

Quantity Competition vs. Price Competition under Optimal Subsidy in a Mixed Duopoly. Marcella Scrimitore. EERI Research Paper Series No 15/2012

KIER DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES

GS/ECON 5010 Answers to Assignment 3 November 2005

Outsourcing under Incomplete Information

Endogenous Price Leadership and Technological Differences

Introduction to Industrial Organization Professor: Caixia Shen Fall 2014 Lecture Note 5 Games and Strategy (Ch. 4)

Market Structure and Privatization Policy under International Competition

Economics 101A (Lecture 21) Stefano DellaVigna

Oligopoly Games and Voting Games. Cournot s Model of Quantity Competition:

Competition and Growth in an Endogenous Growth Model with Expanding Product Variety without Scale Effects

Public Schemes for Efficiency in Oligopolistic Markets

Does Timing of Decisions in a Mixed Duopoly Matter?

Game Theory and Economics Prof. Dr. Debarshi Das Department of Humanities and Social Sciences Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati.

Econ 101A Final exam May 14, 2013.

Econ 101A Final exam Th 15 December. Do not turn the page until instructed to.

Environmental Tax Burden in a Vertical Relationship with Pollution-Abatement R&D

CUR 412: Game Theory and its Applications, Lecture 9

Wage-Rise Contract and Entry Deterrence: Bertrand and Cournot

Time-inconsistent environmental policies with a consumer-friendly firm: tradable permits versus emission tax

Trade Liberalization and Labor Unions

CUR 412: Game Theory and its Applications Final Exam Ronaldo Carpio Jan. 13, 2015

What Industry Should We Privatize?: Mixed Oligopoly and Externality

Capacity precommitment and price competition yield the Cournot outcome

AS/ECON 2350 S2 N Answers to Mid term Exam July time : 1 hour. Do all 4 questions. All count equally.

Economics 101A (Lecture 21) Stefano DellaVigna

Urban unemployment, privatization policy, and a differentiated mixed oligopoly

Patent strength and optimal two-part tariff licensing with a potential rival

1 Solutions to Homework 3

Coopetition in a Mixed Duopoly Mark. De Ngo, Duc; Okura, Mahito. Economics Bulletin, 12(20), pp.1-9; Issue Date

Answer Key. q C. Firm i s profit-maximization problem (PMP) is given by. }{{} i + γ(a q i q j c)q Firm j s profit

Competitiveness and Conjectural Variation in Duopoly Markets

Money Inventories in Search Equilibrium

DUOPOLY. MICROECONOMICS Principles and Analysis Frank Cowell. July 2017 Frank Cowell: Duopoly. Almost essential Monopoly

Transcription:

MPRA Munich Personal RePEc Archive Maximin and minimax strategies in asymmetric duopoly: Cournot and Bertrand Yasuhito Tanaka and Atsuhiro Satoh 22 September 2016 Online at https://mpraubuni-muenchende/73925/ MPRA Paper No 73925, posted 23 September 2016 09:19 UTC

Maximin and minimax strategies in asymmetric duopoly: Cournot and Bertrand Atsuhiro Satoh * Faculty of Economics, Doshisha University, Kamigyo-ku, Kyoto, 602-8580, Japan and Yasuhito Tanaka Faculty of Economics, Doshisha University, Kamigyo-ku, Kyoto, 602-8580, Japan September 14, 2016 Abstract We examine maximin and minimax strategies for firms in asymmetric duopoly with differentiated goods We consider two patterns of game; the Cournot game in which strategic variables of the firms are their outputs, and the Bertrand game in which strategic variables of the firms are the prices of their goods We call two firms Firm A and B, and will show that the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Cournot game, and the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Bertrand game are all equivalent for each firm However, the maximin strategy (or the minimax strategy) for Firm A and that for Firm B are not necessarily equivalent, and they are not necessarily equivalent to their Nash equilibrium strategies in the Cournot game nor the Bertrand game But, in a special case, where the objective function of Firm B is the opposite of the objective function of Firm A, the maximin strategy for Firm A and that for Firm B are equivalent, and they constitute the Nash equilibrium both in the Cournot game and the Bertrand game This special case corresponds to relative profit maximization by the firms keywords maximin strategy, minimax strategy, duopoly * atsato@maildoshishaacjp yasuhito@maildoshishaacjp (corresponding author) 1

1 Introduction We examine maximin and minimax strategies for firms in duopoly with differentiated goods We consider two patterns of game; the Cournot game in which strategic variables of the firms are their outputs, and the Bertrand game in which strategic variables of the firms are the prices of their goods The maximin strategy for a firm is its strategy which maximizes its objective function that is minimized by a strategy of its rival firm The minimax strategy for a firm is a strategy of its rival firm which minimizes its objective function that is maximized by its strategy The objective functions of the firms may be or may not be their absolute profits We call two firms Firm A and B, and will show the following results (1) The maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Cournot game, and the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Bertrand game for Firm A are all equivalent (2) The maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Cournot game, and the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Bertrand game for Firm B are all equivalent However, the maximin strategy (or the minimax strategy) for Firm A and that for Firm B are not necessarily equivalent (if the duopoly is not symmetric), and they are not necessarily equivalent to their Nash equilibrium strategies in the Cournot game nor the Bertrand game 1 But in a special case, where the objective function of Firm B is the opposite of the objective function of Firm A, the maximin strategy (or the minimax strategy) for Firm A and that for Firm B are equivalent, and they constitute the Nash equilibrium both in the Cournot game and the Bertrand game Thus, in the special case the Nash equilibrium in the Cournot game and that in the Bertrand game are equivalent This special case corresponds to relative profit maximization by the firms In the appendix we consider a mixed game in which one of the firms chooses the output and the other firm chooses the price as their strategic variables, and show that the maximin and minimax strategies for each firm in the mixed game are equivalent to those in the Cournot game 2 The model There are two firms, Firm A and B They produce differentiated goods The outputs and the prices of the goods are denoted by x A and p A for Firm A, and x B and p B for Firm B The inverse demand functions are p A = f A (x A, x B ), p B = f B (x A, x B ) (1) They are continuous, differentiable and invertible The inverses of them, that is, the direct demand functions are written as x A = g A (p A, p B ), x B = g B (p A, p B ) 1 If the duopoly is symmetric, the maximin strategy (or the minimax strategy) for Firm A and that for Firm B are equivalent But even if the duopoly is symmetric, they are not necessarily equivalent to their Nash equilibrium strategies 2

Differentiating (1) with respect to p A given p B yields From them we get + = 1, + Symmetrically, We assume = = f, A f, A = = (2) (3) 0, 0, 0, The objective functions of Firm A and B are f 0, A 0 (4) π A (x A, x B ), π B (x A, x B ) They are continuous and differentiable They may be or may not be the absolute profits of the firms We consider two patterns of game, the Cournot game and the Bertrand game In the Cournot game strategic variables of the firms are their outputs, and in the Bertrand game their strategic variables are the prices of their goods We do not consider simple maximization of their objective functions Instead we investigate maximin strategies and minimax strategies for the firms 3 Maximin and minimax strategies 31 Cournot game 311 Maximin strategy First consider the condition for minimization of π A with respect to x B It is (5) Depending on the value of x A we get the value of x B which satisfies (5) Denote it by x B (x A ) From (5) (x A ) = 2 π A 2 π A x 2 B 3

We assume that it is not zero The maximin strategy for Firm A is its strategy which maximizes π A (x A, x B (x A )) The condition for maximization of π A (x A, x B (x A )) with respect to x A is By (5) it is reduced to + (x A ) Thus, the conditions for the maximin strategy for Firm A are 312 Minimax strategy (6) Consider the condition for maximization of π A with respect to x A It is (7) Depending on the value of x B we get the value of x A which satisfies (7) Denote it by x A (x B ) From (7) we obtain (x B ) = 2 π A We assume that it is not zero The minimax strategy for Firm A is a strategy of Firm B which minimizes π A (x A (x B ), x B ) The condition for minimization of π A (x A (x B ), x B ) with respect to x B is (x B ) + By (7) it is reduced to 2 π A x 2 A Thus, the conditions for the maximin strategy for Firm A are They are the same as conditions in (6) Similarly, we can show that the conditions for the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy for Firm B are (8) 4

32 Bertrand game The objective functions of Firm A and B in the Bertrand game are written as follows We can write them as π A (x A (p A, p B ), x B (p A, p B )), π B (x A (p A, p B ), x B (p A, p B )) π A (p A, p B ), π B (p A, p B ), because π A (x A (p A, p B ), x B (p A, p B )) and π B (x A (p A, p B ), x B (p A, p B )) are functions of p A and p B Exchanging x A and x B by p A and p B in the arguments in the previous subsection, we can show that the conditions for the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy for Firm A in the Bertrand game are as follows π A (9) p A p B We can rewrite them as follows + + By (2) and (3) and the assumptions in (4), they are further rewritten as Again by the assumptions in (4), we obtain They are the same as conditions in (6) The conditions for the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy for Firm B in the Bertrand game are π B p B p A They are rewritten as + + By (2) and (3) and the assumptions in (4), they are further rewritten as Again by the assumptions in (4), we obtain They are the same as conditions in (8) We have proved the following proposition 5

Proposition 1 (1) The maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Cournot game, and the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Bertrand game for Firm A are all equivalent (2) The maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Cournot game, and the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Bertrand game for Firm B are all equivalent 4 Special case The results in the previous section do not imply that the maximin strategy (or the minimax strategy) for Firm A and that for Firm B are equivalent (if the duopoly is not symmetric), and they are equivalent to their Nash equilibrium strategies in the Cournot game nor the Bertrand game But in a special case the maximin strategy (or the minimax strategy) for Firm A and that for Firm B are equivalent, and they constitute the Nash equilibrium both in the Cournot game and the Bertrand game The conditions for the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy for Firm A are Those for Firm B are (6) (8) (6) and (8) are not necessarily equivalent The conditions for Nash equilibrium in the Cournot game are π B (10) (6) and (10) are not necessarily equivalent The conditions for Nash equilibrium in the Bertrand game are π B (11) p A p B (9) and (11) are not necessarily equivalent However, in a special case those conditions are all equivalent We assume Then, (8) is rewritten as π B = π A or π A + π B (12) (13) They are equivalent to (6) Therefore, the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy for Firm π A and those for Firm B are equivalent B = 0 and = 0 in (8) mean, respectively, minimization of π B with respect to x A and maximization of π B with respect to x B On the other hand, = 0 and = 0 in (6) and (13) mean, respectively, maximization of π A with respect to x A and minimization of π A with respect to x B 6

(10) is rewritten as (14) (14) and (6) are equivalent Therefore, the maximin strategy (Firm A s strategy) and the minimax strategy (Firm B s strategy) for Firm A constitute the Nash equilibrium of the Cournot game = 0 in (10) means maximization of π B with respect to x B On the other hand, = 0 in (14) means minimization of π A with respect to x B (11) is rewritten as p A p B (15) (15) and (9) are equivalent Therefore, the maximin strategy (Firm A s strategy) and the minimax strategy (Firm B s strategy) for Firm A in the Bertrand game constitute the Nash equilibrium of the Bertrand game Since the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy for Firm A in the Cournot game and those in the Bertrand game are equivalent, the Nash equilibrium of the Cournot game and that of the Bertrand game are equivalent Summarizing the results, we get the following proposition Proposition 2 In the special case in which (12) is satisfied: (1) The maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Cournot game and the Bertrand game for Firm A and the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy in the Cournot game and the Bertrand game for Firm B are equivalent (2) These maximin and minimax strategies constitute the Nash equilibrium both in the Cournot game and the Bertrand game This special case corresponds to relative profit maximization 2 Let π A and π B be the absolute profits of Firm A and B, and denote their relative profits by π A and π B Then, π A = π A π B, π B = π B π A From them we can see π B = π A 5 Concluding Remark We have analyzed maximin and minimax strategies in Cournot and Bertrand games in duopoly We assumed differentiability of objective functions of firms In the future research we want to extend arguments of this paper to a case where we do not postulate differentiability of objective functions 3 and to a case of symmetric oligopoly with more than two firms 2 About relative profit maximization under imperfect competition please see Matsumura, Matsushima and Cato (2013), Satoh and Tanaka (2013), Satoh and Tanaka (2014a), Satoh and Tanaka (2014b), Tanaka (2013a), Tanaka (2013b) and Vega-Redondo (1997) 3 One attempt along this line is Satoh and Tanaka (2016) 7

Appendix: Mixed game We consider a case where Firm A s strategic variable is p A, and that of Firm B is x B Differentiating (1) with respect to p A given x B yields = 1, Differentiating (1) with respect to x B given p A yields From them we obtain + = + = = 1, dp A =, =, = We assume 0 and 0, and so 0 We write the objective functions of Firm A and B as follows Then, φ A (p A, x B ) = π A (x A (p A, p B ), x B ), φ B (p A, x B ) = π B (x A (p A, p B ), x B ) p A φ B p A =, =, φ B = +, = + By similar ways to arguments in Section 3, we can show that for Firm A the conditions for the maximin strategy and the conditions for the minimax strategy are equivalent, and they are p A (16) (17) For Firm B the conditions for the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy are By (16), (17) is rewritten as p A Similarly, (18) is rewritten as follows (18) + + 8

By the assumption 0 and 0, we obtain and They are the same as the conditions for the maximin and minimax strategies for Firm A and B in the Cournot game Therefore, the maximin strategy and the minimax strategy for each firm in the mixed game are equivalent to those in the Cournot game References Matsumura, T, Matsushima,N and Cato,S (2013), Competitiveness and R&D competition revisited Economic Modelling, 31, 541-547 Satoh, A and Tanaka, Y (2013), Relative profit maximization and Bertrand equilibrium with quadratic cost functions, Economics and Business Letters, 2, pp 134-139 Satoh, A and Tanaka, Y (2014a), Relative profit maximization and equivalence of Cournot and Bertrand equilibria in asymmetric duopoly, Economics Bulletin, 34, pp 819-827 Satoh, A and Tanaka, Y (2014b), Relative profit maximization in asymmetric oligopoly, Economics Bulletin, 34, 1653-1664 Satoh, A and Tanaka, Y (2016), Two person zero-sum game with two sets of strategic variables, MPRA Paper 73472, University Library of Munich, Germany Tanaka, Y (2013a), Equivalence of Cournot and Bertrand equilibria in differentiated duopoly under relative profit maximization with linear demand, Economics Bulletin, 33, 1479-1486 Tanaka, Y (2013b), Irrelevance of the choice of strategic variables in duopoly under relative profit maximization, Economics and Business Letters, 2, pp 75-83 Vega-Redondo, F (1997), The evolution of Walrasian behavior Econometrica 65, 375-384 9