Cooperative Microeconomics Game Theoretic

Question: Discuss about the Cooperative Microeconomics for Game Theoretic. Answer: Behavioural economics deals with the economic decisions made by an individual because of certain psychological, social, cognitive and emotional factors (Rader 2014). In the provided case study, my friend, Joe and I, have similar tastes. I had already booked for AFL ticket from the local Ticketmaster in advance. This would provide me with the incentive of getting good seats (Rios, McConnell and Brue 2013). Yet, my friend Joe planned to attend the same game whereas, would buy the ticket at the game itself. He did not want to pay extra money for advance bookings. This shows that my friend Joe is not inclined to obtain the tickets for the match as much as I do. It does not matter to Joe whether he gets the seats for the match or not. The news of an unexpected hailstorm would on the day of the game to be held, would instigate a feeling of not attending the match in Joe. As he had not booked his tickets in advance, it would not lead to any loss for him. Moreover, I would be more affected. Hence, among the two of us, I am more likely to attend the game than Joe. According to the case study provided, Nancy and Lucy are the two candidates who are studying economics. They either indulge themselves in writing an assignment or complete set of tutorial questions. According to the time taken by both the candidates referred to in the case study, a table could be created as follows: Candidates Assignment Tutorial questions Nancy 4 hours 2 hours Lucy 6 hours 2 hours According to the above-mentioned table, it could be stated that both Nancy has an absolute advantage in making assignments as she uses less number of hours to complete one assignment than Lucy. Whereas, both Nancy and Lucy are indifferent in solving tutorial questions as both of them take 2 hours in solving the questions. From the above table it could be stated that for nancy, in an hour she can either make of the assignment or solve of the tutorial questions. Hence, it could be stated that in order to complete one assignment nancy has to sacrifice solving 2 tutorial questions whereas, in order to complete one tutorial assignment, she has to sacrifice half of her assignment. Hence, nancy has a comparative advantage in solving tutorial questions. In the case of lucy, it could be stated that in an hour lucy can complete 1/6 of her assignment or of her tutorial questions. Hence, it could be stated that in making one assignment, lucy has to sacrifice 3 tutorial question, whereas, in solving a tutorial question, she would just sacrifice 1/6th of her assignment. Hence, lucy has a comparative advantage in solving tutorial questions. In both the cases, both lucy and nancy has a comparative advantage in solving tutorial questions, hence, it would not be wise enough for the candidates to specialise in one product and exchange the other. croissant is = 2*12000 = $24000 The revenue attained by the producers at price 3 per croissant is = 3*9000 = $18000 Hence, it could be stated that when the producers raise the price of per croissant from $2 to $3, then their revenues fall by $6000. Among the two options of restaurants that has been presented to us, one is a expensive gourmet and the other is an inexpensive cafe. Both the restaurants provides two kinds of products, one is food and the other is service. Food is a necessity good, hence it could be stated that food would be indifferent to price of the product (Norman et al. 2013). Hence, the food in both the restaurants would be closely related to each other. Yet, services are considered as normal goods. When the income of the consumer increases, the demand for normal good among the consumer also increases. Hence, people get attracted towards products that are more expensive (Moulin 2014). From the above explanation its could be concluded that among the two restaurants, the service provided by the expensive gourmet restaurant would be better than that of an inexpensive cafe as it would be more costlier than the cafe. Reference Moulin, H., 2014.Cooperative microeconomics: a game-theoretic introduction. Princeton University Press. Norman, S., Schlaudraff, J., White, K. and Wills, D., 2013. Deriving the Dividend Discount Model in the Intermediate Microeconomics Class.The Journal of Economic Education,44(1), pp.58-63. Rader, T., 2014.Theory of microeconomics. Academic Press. Rios, M.C., McConnell, C.R. and Brue, S.L., 2013.Economics: Principles, problems, and policies. McGraw-Hill.