barcodefield.com

auctions in .NET Include barcode 3/9 in .NET auctions




How to generate, print barcode using .NET, Java sdk library control with example project source code free download:
auctions generate, create barcode 39 none for .net projects Viual Cshap How should you bid in eac .net framework 3 of 9 h of the following situations In each case, provide an explanation for your answer; a formal proof is not necessary. (a) You know that a group of the bidders will collude on bids.

This group will choose one bidder to submit a real bid of v and the others will all submit bids of 0. You are not a member of this collusive group, and you cannot collude with any other bidder. (b) You, and all of the other bidders, have just learned that this seller will collect bids but won t actually sell the wine according to the rules of a second-price auction.

Instead, after collecting the bids the seller will tell all of the bidders that some other ctional bidder actually submitted the highest bid and so won the auction. This bidder, of course, doesn t exist, so the seller will still have the wine after the auction is over. The seller plans to privately contact the highest actual bidder and tell him or her that the ctional high bidder defaulted (he didn t buy the wine after all) and that this bidder can buy the wine for the price he or she bid in the auction.

You cannot collude with any bidder. (You do not have to derive an optimal bidding strategy. It is enough to explain whether your bid would differ from your value and if so in what direction.

). 8. In this problem we ask how irrational behavior on the part of one bidder affects optimal behavior for the other bidders in an auction. In this auction the seller has one unit of a good which will be sold using a second-price, sealed-bid auction.

Assume that there are three bidders who have independent, private values for the good, v1 , v2 , and v3 , which are uniformly distributed on the interval [0, 1]. (a) Suppose rst that all bidders behave rationally; that is, they submit optimal bids. Which bidder (in terms of values) wins the auction and how much does this bidder pay (again in terms of the bidder s values) (b) Suppose now that bidder 3 irrationally bids more than his true value for the object; in particular, bidder 3 s bid is (v3 + 1)/2.

All other bidders know that bidder 3 is irrational in this way, although they do not know bidder 3 s actual value for the object. How does this affect the behavior of the other bidders (c) What effect does bidder 3 s irrational behavior have on the expected payoffs of bidder 1 Here the expectation is over the values of v2 and v3 , which bidder 1 does not know. You do not have to provide an explicit solution or write a proof for your answer; an intuitive explanation of the effect is ne.

(Remember that a bidder s payoff is the bidder s value for the object minus the price, if the bidder wins the auction, or 0, if the bidder does not win the auction.) 9. In this problem we ask how much a seller can expect to receive for his object in a second-price, sealed-bid auction.

Assume that there are two bidders who have independent, private values vi , which are either 1 or 2. For each bidder, the probabilities of vi = 1 and vi = 2 are each 1 . Assume that if there is a tie at a bid of x 2 for the highest bid the winner is selected at random from among the highest bidders and the price is x.

We also assume that the value of the object to the seller is 0. (a) Show that the seller s expected revenue is 5 . 4 (b) Now let s suppose that the seller sets a reserve price of R, where 1 < R < 2; that is, the object is sold to the highest bidder if her bid is at least R, and the.

Copyright © barcodefield.com . All rights reserved.