So one case to think about is what if the other firm, you're Coke, what if Pepsi is pricing below cost?

一种情况是如果另一家公司,假如说你是可口可乐,如果百事可乐定价低于成本怎么办

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

We're just producing Coca-Cola and Pepsi and for want of a better world, spewing it out into the market.

我们只是生产可口可乐和百事可乐,只是投入市场造福百姓而已

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

when I talked on the first day of class about my own boyhood experience when a Coca-Cola was an eight ounce glass or a Pepsi was an eight ounce bottle rather, that was a serving.

上课第一天,我讲了我少年时代的经历,那时可口可乐装在八盎司的玻璃瓶里,百事可乐也一样,那是一餐份量

耶鲁公开课 - 关于食物的心理学、生物学和政治学课程节选

So Patrick, our manager of Pepsi believes that Coca-Cola is going to produce this quantity and he's agreed to produce this quantity.

百事的经理帕特里克认为可口可乐,会按照协议产量来生产,他也会这么做

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Now be honest, how many of you in a blind taste test can taste the difference between ordinary Coke and ordinary Pepsi?

老老实实,你们谁能在不知道的情况下尝出,可口可乐和百事可乐的不同

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

We're Coca-Cola and Pepsi, so we really don't want to have to bring the mafia in, Although maybe we do, I don't know.

我们是可口可乐和百事可乐公司,我们都不想将黑手党卷进来,可能也希望他们介入吧,谁知道呢

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So the products we mentioned last time were Coke and Pepsi, but you could think of other products that are pretty much identical.

上次举例的产品是可口可乐和百事可乐,但你们可以把它想象成其他,同样的产品

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Let me take an example that I understand better than I understand Coke and Pepsi.

让我举一个,我比可口可乐和百事可乐了解更多的例子

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

There's also a part of the payoffs that's analogous to forcing me to drink Bud Light or forcing the forcing the Pepsi drinkers to drink Coca-Cola.

还有一部分类似于,强迫我喝百威淡啤酒或者,强迫喜欢喝百事的人去喝可口可乐

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So Patrick's response in Pepsi is to overproduce relative to the monopoly quantity, actually overproduce even relative to the Cournot quantity and produce all the way out here.

百事可乐公司面对垄断产量,采取的举措是增加产量,实际上增加产量就会导致,产量逐渐接近古诺产量

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

All right, so Patrick when he's in the when he's playing the manager of Pepsi he's going to produce more of this undrinkable liquid and produce this quantity here.

好的,帕特里克是,百事可乐公司的经理,他会生产更多这种难喝的饮料,产量是这么多

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So these are Coke and Pepsi, that will confuse me less.

那就可口可乐和百事可乐吧,这会更容易理解

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

in whatever it is you guys imagine makes Coke and Pepsi different, it could be that thing.

你们所认为的可口可乐和百事可乐的不同,它可以是那个不同

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Suppose the other guy didn't exist, Suppose Pepsi didn't exist, so Coke has the whole market, then we would solve out this problem.

假设对手不存在,假设百事可乐不存在,那么可口可乐占领整个市场,然后我们就可以解决这个问题

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

It's going to be /2 in the case where Coke and Pepsi cost exactly the same.

当可口可乐和百事可乐的价格一样时,销量将是/2

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So this is the total quantity of Coke plus Pepsi.

也就是可口可乐和百事可乐的总产量

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

If Pepsi is the low price then Coke sells nothing.

如果百事的价格低则可口可乐就卖不出去

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

When I was a boy the eight ounce Coke was the default serving, and when I was a child when it was time to have a Coke or a Pepsi you had eight ounces and the event was over.

当我还是个小男孩的时候,可口可乐,或是百事可乐都是八盎司装的,而且最多就只能喝一瓶

耶鲁公开课 - 关于食物的心理学、生物学和政治学课程节选

So I started off with an example that's pretty bad for this story, namely, Coke and Pepsi.

我以一个例子作为开始,一个不太恰当的例子,即,可口可乐和百事可乐

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Pepsi's pricing below cost, what's your best response?

百事可乐定价低于成本,你的最佳对策是什么

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Coke and Pepsi are producing this stuff.

公司分别生产可口可乐和百事可乐

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So Steve and Patrick are respectively the managers of Coca-Cola and Poland Spring and Patrick believes that the Coca-Cola manager is going to may be we should just make this Coke and Pepsi since two identical they're near enough and identical, right?

史蒂夫和帕特里克分别是,可口可乐和波兰泉的经理,帕特里克认为可口可乐的经理打算,或许该用可口可乐和百事可乐,他们俩才是对手是吧

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

This time, however, instead of setting quantities, instead of just deciding how much Coke and Pepsi to produce and spewing it out in the market and letting prices take care of themselves, this time the firms are going to set prices and let quantities take care of themselves.

这次不是规定产量,上次是确定,可口可乐和百事可乐的产量,运到市场上销售,并让价格自主的浮动,而这次,公司将要预先设定价格,并让产量自动调节

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Well, one thing that goes wrong is that suppose Coke and Pepsi were able to either to write a contract or whatever to sustain joint monopoly output at this high price, this price which is actually producing positive profits in the industry it is going to turn out, therefore the price is going to be above costs.

我来说吧,问题出在这里了,假设可口可乐和百事达成了协议,不管签的是协议还是合同,只要能通过协约维持垄断产出,通过制定高价来达到正的利润就行,这样价格是高于成本的

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So a number of you, even if the price was just a tiny bit different might have a preference for one rather than the other, so without getting in trouble by putting the camera on you, how many of you would have a preference, if the prices were essentially the same how many of you would have a strict preference for Pepsi?

那么你们中的很多人,尽管价格只有一点点不同,也许还是倾向于其中一个产品,不让你们上镜头而招来麻烦,你们谁会有倾向,如果价格差不多,谁会倾向选择百事可乐

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

There's no Pepsi in the market and 1-P1 quantity of Coke is sold.

百事可乐卖不出去,可口可乐的销量是1-P1

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选