Stackelberg Competition | Microeconomics by Game Theory 101

[@jamesjasso6002]

Love your work! My wargaming strategy skills skyrocketed from studiying your vids

[@Taengoofang]

This helped me so much in my uni work, thank you!

[@georgebarber3280]

At 4:25 why is it not AC x Quantity? You said MC but can't understand why it would be this? Edit: is it because MC are constant in stackelberg model? So MC = AC?

[@timoli6132]

thanks for saving my semester senpai

[@kallzvx858]

I think the simplification at 7:17 from 2nd point to 3rd point is not correct

[@Gametheory101]

Hmm, it looks good to me. One reason for the discrepancy might be following where the parentheses are paired with, and certainly the formatting of the notation is not making that easy.

[@randomplayer8864]

I thought the same but, after calculated myself, he is right.

[@ianlourenco4801]

I agree that it is incorrect, I think there is not supposed to be the c1q1 at the end, can someone explain?

[@ianlourenco4801]

Never mind, Mr Spaniel is right

[@PunmasterSTP]

Stackelberg? More like “stuff I’ve never heard” before, but it’s fascinating. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us!

[@rinkisawant835]

Plz tell me the limitation of stackelberg model

[@mervecorduk9663]

No jokes, you're saving my ass. Thank you.

[@charming.amiiii]

very helpful video! thank you very much

[@sarvarabdullaev3197]

Will you also cover Bertrand competition?

[@Gametheory101]

Yep, that will be after the Stackelberg stuff is done.

[@zahra_az]

that was so nice!

[@abba5.n]

banging

[@verschlusssache6283]

You lost me several sessions ago. I think I need more visual incentive to keep focus.