Abstract
The paper shows that Corollary 10.3 in Muthoo’s book Bargaining Theory with Applications (Cambridge University Press, 1999) is incorrect and proves that patience increases a player’s equilibrium share in repeated bargaining situations. It clarifies why a tempting strategy of proof – replacing terms of an expression by approximations with identical limits, then doing comparative statics or taking limits – is flawed and will yield wrong conclusions in other contexts as well.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
