A product that represents a clear technological advance over competing products can generally command a high price. Because technological advances tend to be quickly surpassed and companies want to make large profits while they still can, many companies charge the maximum possible price for such a product. But large profits on the new product will give competitors a strong incentive to quickly match the new product’s capabilities. Consequently, the strategy to maximize overall profit from a new product is to charge less than the greatest possible price.

Refer to the payoff matrix. suppose that speedy bike and power bike are the only two bicycle manufacturing firms serving the market. both can choose large or small advertising budgets. is there a nash equilibrium solution to this game?

Read the following scenario and answer the question in 5-10 sentences. you are the owner of a small business that is a defendant in a lawsuit in federal court. you received bad news from your lawyer that the judge did not allow certain documents to be admitted as evidence in court and that the jury reached a $50,000 verdict in favor of the plaintiff. your lawyer tells you that it is within your legal right to hire him to file an appeal with the united states court of appeals. if the appellate court rules in your favor, you may be able to avoid paying part or all of the $50,000. evaluate your lawyer’s suggestion about appealing the decision.

In december of 2004, the company you own entered into a 20-year contract with a grain supplier for daily deliveries of grain to its hot dog bun manufacturing facility. the contract called for "10,000 pounds of grain" to be delivered to the facility at the price of $100,000 per day. until february 2017, the supplier provided processed grain which could easily be used in your manufacturing process. however, no longer wanting to absorb the cost of having the grain processed, the supplier began delivering whole grain. the supplier is arguing that the contract does not specify the type of grain that would be supplied and that it has not breached the contract. your company is arguing that the supplier has an onsite processing plant and processed grain was implicit to the terms of the contract. over the remaining term of the contract, reshipping and having the grain processed would cost your company approximately $10,000,000, opposed to a cost of around $1,000,000 to the supplier. after speaking with in-house counsel, it was estimated that litigation would cost the company several million dollars and last for years. weighing the costs of litigation, along with possible ambiguity in the contract, what are three options you could take to resolve the dispute? which would be the best option for your business and why?