
handle: 10016/46355 , 10481/111987
Traditional collusion models typically assume that players coordinatetheir actions actively during the competition process to influence the outcomes.In contrast, we consider a repeated interaction setting betweentwo players where collusion occurs through well-defined strategies: theplayers take turns, with one holding monopoly power while the other eitherrefrains from participating or behaves as if absent. We provide afull characterization of when taking turns constitutes a subgame perfectNash equilibrium in repeated games. By allowing players to discount timedifferently, we uncover a novel, non-monotonic condition on the discountfactor that sustains collusion. We apply our findings to three specificcontexts: contests, duopoly, and political competition.
Take-turns, C62, C73, D72, Taking turns, Folk theorem, Collusion, Political competition, Repeated games, D43, Subgame perfect Nash equilibrium, Economía
Take-turns, C62, C73, D72, Taking turns, Folk theorem, Collusion, Political competition, Repeated games, D43, Subgame perfect Nash equilibrium, Economía
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
