In Las Vegas, roulette is played on a wheel with 38 slots, of which 18 are black, 18 are red, and 2 are green (zero and double-zero). Your friend impulsively takes all $361 out of his pocket and bets it on black, which pays 1 for 1. This means that if the ball lands on one of the 18 black slots, he ends up with $722, and if it doesn't, he ends up with nothing. Once the croupier releases the ball, your friend panics; it turns out that the $361 he bet was literally all the money he has. While he is risk-averse - his utility function is u(x) =, where x is his roulette payoff — you are effectively risk neutral over such small stakes. a. When the ball is still spinning, what is the expected profit for the casino? b. When the ball is still spinning, what is the expected value of your friend's wealth? c. When the ball is still spinning, what is your friend's certainty equivalent (i.e., how much money would he accept with certainty to walk away from his bet). Say you propose the following transaction: while the ball is still spinning, you pay your friend $300 in exchange for the rights to the roulette winnings. d. Is this bet worthwhile for you to offer? Why or why not?

In Las Vegas, roulette is played on a wheel with 38 slots, of which 18 are black, 18 are red, and 2 are green (zero and double-zero). Your friend impulsively takes all $361 out of his pocket and bets it on black, which pays 1 for 1. This means that if the ball lands on one of the 18 black slots, he ends up with $722, and if it doesn't, he ends up with nothing. Once the croupier releases the ball, your friend panics; it turns out that the $361 he bet was literally all the money he has. While he is risk-averse - his utility function is u(x) =, where x is his roulette payoff — you are effectively risk neutral over such small stakes. a. When the ball is still spinning, what is the expected profit for the casino? b. When the ball is still spinning, what is the expected value of your friend's wealth? c. When the ball is still spinning, what is your friend's certainty equivalent (i.e., how much money would he accept with certainty to walk away from his bet). Say you propose the following transaction: while the ball is still spinning, you pay your friend $300 in exchange for the rights to the roulette winnings. d. Is this bet worthwhile for you to offer? Why or why not?

ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

14th Edition

ISBN:9780190931919

Author:NEWNAN

Publisher:NEWNAN

Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1QTC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

$11. Anne and Bruce would like to rent a movie, but they can't decide what kind of movie to get: Anne wants to rent a comedy, and Bruce wants to watch a drama. They decide to choose randomly by playing "Evens or Odds." On the count of three, each of them shows one or two fingers. If the sum is even, Anne wins and they rent the comedy; if the sum is odd, Bruce wins and they rent the drama. Each of them earns a payoff of 1 for winning and 0 for losing "Evens or Odds." (a) Draw the game table for "Evens or Odds." (b) Demonstrate that this game has no Nash equilibrium in pure strategies.
Consider a game in which there is $4 to be divided, and the first mover is only permitted to make one of three proposals: (a) $3 for the first mover and $1 for the second mover, (b) $2 for each, or (c) $1 for the first movier and $3 for the second mover. The second mover is shown the proposal and can either accept, in which case it is implemented, or reject and cause each to earn $0. Show this game in extensive (tree) form. Be sure to show the payoffs for each person, with the first mover listed on the left, for each of the six terminal nodes.
Game Theory Question A non-profit firm is on a local community online donation platform for a community event it wants to hold (only community members can donate via the website). The event will be held only if the non-profit firm collects $20,000 total from members of the community. Each member values the event at $500. Suppose that there are 100 community members. Community members can only donate by purchasing a lottery ticket from the firm. Each ticket costs $200 and only one ticket can be purchased per member. The proceeds will be collected by the firm. The lottery winner gets a premier meal at a local restaurant that's worth $100. Remember, the firm keeps all the donated money. If the amount of donations is less than $20,000, then the firm returns the donated money to the community members (since there'll be no event held but the lottery winner still gets to eat that fancy meal). If the donations sum up to $20,000, the community event will take place. What are the Nash…
Suppose you have $35,000 in wealth. You have the opportunity to play a game called "Big Bet/Small Bet." In this game, you first choose whether you would like to make a big bet of $15,000 of a small bet of $5,000. You then roll a fair die. If you roll a 4, 5, or 6, you win the game and earn $15,000 for the big bet or $5,000 for the small bet. If you roll a 1, 2, or 3, you lose and lose $15,000 for the big bet and $5,000 for the small bet the game Utility U₂ U₁ BEL 0 11 LATE EE ARTE Are the Small Bet and Big Bet considered fair bets? O Big Bet is fair, but Small Bet is not. No, both are not fair. Yes, both are fair. 20 OSmall Bet is fair, but Big Bet is not. G HA 1 35 D E 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 U 50 Income (thousands of dollars)
In 'the dictator' game, one player (the dictator) chooses how to divide a pot of $10 between herself and another player (the recipient). The recipient does not have an opportunity to reject the proposed distribution. As such, if the dictator only cares about how much money she makes, she should keep all $10 for herself and give the recipient nothing. However, when economists conduct experiments with the dictator game, they find that dictators often offer strictly positive amounts to the recipients. Are dictators behaving irrationally in these experiments? Whether you think they are or not, your response should try to provide an explanation for the behavior.
Suppose Antonio and Trinity are playing a game that requires both to simultaneously choose an action: Up or Down. The payoff matrix that follows shows the earnings of each person as a function of both of their choices. For example, the upper-right cell shows that if Antonio chooses Up and Trinity chooses Down, Antonio will receive a payoff of 7 and Trinity will receive a payoff of 5. Trinity Up Down Up 4,8 7,5 Antonio Down 3,2 5,6 In this game, the only dominant strategy is for to choose The outcome reflecting the unique Nash equilibrium in this game is as follows: Antonio chooses, and Trinity chooses Grade It Now Save & Continue Continue without saving @ 2 F2 #3 80 Q F3 MacBook Air 44 F7 Dll F8 44 F10 74 $ 4 05 Λ & % 5 6 7 8 * 0 Q W E R T Y U 1 A N S X 9 0 -O O D F G H J K L on را H command C > B N M Λ - - P [ H Λ command opti
Is life a non-zero sum game?
So imagine you are playing this game as the second player and you are both given a 10 dollars and the dictator decides to offer you 25 cents and that she/he will keep $9.25. Your only choice is to accept the 25 cents or reject the offer and get no money at all. What would you do? What would be considered ‘rational’ from the perspective of utility maximization? What would you do if this is a continued game and the same scenario will happen multiple times not just once? Do you think others will react the same way you would?
Jane is interested in buying a car from a used car dealer. Her maximum willingness to pay for thecar is 12 ($12,000). Bo, the dealer, is willing to sell the car as long as he receives at least 9($9,000). What is the Nash bargaining solution to this game?
Suppose Edison and Hilary are playing a game in which both must simultaneously choose the action Left or Right. The payoff matrix that follows shows the payoff each person will earn as a function of both of their choices. For example, the lower-right cell shows that Edison chooses Right and Hilary chooses Right, Edison will receive a payoff of 3 and Hilary will receive a payoff of 7. Hilary Left Right Left 4, 6 6, 8 Edison Right 7, 5 3, 7 The only dominant strategy in this game is for to choose The outcome reflecting the unique Nash equilibrium in this game is as follows: Edison chooses and Hilary chooses
3. Three politicians are voting on whether to allow themselves a salary increase of $ 3,500 per year. If they vote in favour of a raise, then they lose some public support, costing them each $ 1,500 per year. The salary increase passes if two or more politicians vote in favour of it. What is this game’s Nash equilibrium (or equilibria)? Explain. There is no need to draw a payoff matrix. (20%
. Find the Nash equilibrium of the following modified Rock-Paper-Scissors game: • When rock (R) beats scissors (S), the winner’s payoff is 10 and the loser’s payoff is −10. • When paper (P) beats rock, the winner’s payoff is 5 and the loser’s payoff is −5. • When scissors beats paper, the winner’s payoff is 2 and the loser’s payoff is −2. • In case of ties, both players receive 0 payoff. You are suposed to create a system of equations and then solve for them and find 3 probabilities- please show how to do that