The booking process.
I hope this helps and have a good night! :D
Answer:
Flashfone and Pictech
The Nash equilibrium is achieved when Pictech and Flashfone price their smartphones high without the other party changing their strategy.
Explanation:
a) Data and Calculations:
Pictech
High Low
High 8 8 3 10
Flashfone
Low 10 3 5 5
b) By acting at the Nash equilibrium and pricing their smartphones high, Pictech and Flashfone achieve a payoff of $8 million respectively. This payoff level does not put any of the two firms at a disadvantage.
Answer:
dependable suppliers who are willing to deliver on short notice
Explanation:
I will first try to explain what the concept means. just in time processing is an inventory strategy that has to do with the ordering of materials at short notice and receiving these items just in time for the production process. It decreases inventory costs and waste and also raises efficiency since goods are only going to be received as they are needed for production.
Therefore the correct answer is: dependable suppliers who are willing to deliver on short notice.
The answer is $3,480,817.37 The contract is worth <span>$3,480,817.37 today at a discount rate of 8.7 percent.
</span>PV = $1.1M + ($1.3M/1.087) + ($1.4M/1.087 square<span>) = $3,480,817.37</span>
Answer:
Consider the following explanation
Explanation:
Context
Game theory involves two players. They have more than one option to decide. Pay off from each options adopted by two players are available. They have to select a strategy which will maximize their own return. But for optimizing their decision, they have to consider the action of his rival.
In this problem, two players are firm A and firm B. They have two strategies low output and high output. The strategies of firm a are measured in rows and for firm B in columns. They have to select a strategy which will maximize their payy off. Each cell has two pay offs. First one is for Firm A and second one is for firm B.
1. Dominant strategy is a strategy which will always give higher payoffs in comparison with pay off of other strategies. Consider first strategy of firm 1. If it adopts strategy of low output, then firm 2 can also adopt either strategy of low output or high output. In that case pay off of firm 1 will be 300 or 200.
Alteratively if firm 1 adopts high output then pay offs are 200 or 75. 200 is earned if firm B also go for low productivity. It is 75 if firm B adopts high productivity.
Now compare two payoffs side by side. Note that firm A has higher pay off in low output [300,200] in comparison with the pay off of high output [200,75]. So whatever strategy firm B adopts, Firm A will always go for low production. So low production strategy of firm A dominates high production strategy.
Same result is not observed for firm B. Pay off from low production strategy of firm B is [ 250,75]. Pay off from high production strategy are [100,100]. Now compare the two. If Firm A go for low production, then firm B will select low production. It will give pay off 250. Similarly when firm A decides for high production, then firm will also decide for high production. It will maximize its pay off. Amount is 100. Thus no strategy dominates for firm B.
