In a repeated game with private information, a perfect public equilibrium (PPE) can break down if communication is not necessarily simultaneous or if players can “spy” on each others’ information. An ex post perfect public equilibrium (EPPPE) is a PPE that is ex post incentive compatible in each stage game; unlike PPE, EPPPE is robust under to any communication protocol, and to spying. However, robustness comes at a cost to the players: in many games, efficient payoffs in the corresponding static mechanism design problem cannot be supported as average payoffs in an EPPPE, even when players are patient. In two- player repeated allocation games, an optimal EPPPE never employs a (static) efficient outcome function in any stage game. Instead, the players always prefer to give up some static efficiency by sometimes allocating to the player with the lower valuation. Under independent valuations, optimal equilibria are often stationary, but when valuations are globally interdependent, optimal equilibria are never stationary. Applied to the problem of collusion with hidden costs, these results yield new insights into the phenomenon of price wars in collusive equilibria.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Find related papers by JEL classification: C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Susan Athey & Kyle Bagwell & Chris Sanchirico, 1998.
"Collusion and Price Rigidity,"
Working papers
98-23, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
Other versions:
Philippe Jehiel & Moritz Meyer-ter-Vehn & Benny Moldovanu & William R. Zame, 2006.
"The Limits of ex post Implementation,"
Econometrica,
Econometric Society, vol. 74(3), pages 585-610, 05.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1995.
"Collusion Over the Business Cycle,"
Discussion Papers
1118, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
[Downloadable!]
McAfee, R Preston & McMillan, John, 1992.
"Bidding Rings,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 82(3), pages 579-99, June.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
McAfee, R. Preston & McMillan, John., 1990.
"Bidding Rings,"
Working Papers
726, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
[Downloadable!]
Andreas Blume & Paul Heidhues, 2003.
"Private Monitoring in Auctions,"
CIG Working Papers
SP II 2003-14, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
[Downloadable!]
Other versions:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)