In: Economics
In the normal form above, each cell represents the payoffs/profits
that can be earned by each firm. The strategies in this game
consist of the choice of sinking a wide well or a narrow well.
2) Consider TEXplor first. If Clampett chooses to sink a wide
well, TEXplor earns a higher payoff by sinking a wide well ( 1>
-1). Similarly, if Clampett chooses to sink a narrow well, TEXplor
earns a higher payoff by sinking a wide well. Thus, irrespective of
what Clampett chooses to do, TEXplor sinks a wide well, making it
its dominant strategy.
Next consider Ctampett. Following the same argument as above,
Ctampett also always chooses to sink a wide well, irrespective of
what TEXplor does. Thus, sinking a wide well is its dominant
strategy.
3) Both firms will adopt the strategy of sinking a wide well, since it yields a higher payoff irrespective of the strategy adopted by the other firm.
4) Yes, this game has a Nash equilibrium where both firms follow their dominant strategies, Thus, (wide well, wide well) is the Nash equilibrium of this game, yielding a payoff of GHC 1 Million for each of the firms.
5) Collusion is possible in this game since it will bring a
larger payoff to both the firms. If both the firms choose to
collude and sink narrow wells, both will get a payoff of GHC 14
Million, which is much larger than the equilibrium payoff of GHC 1
Million. Thus, if there's a high probability of future interaction
between the two firms, collusion can be sustained.