摘要
In this paper we reanalyze Said’s(2011) work by retaining all his assumptions except that we use the first-price auction to sell differentiated goods to buyers in dynamic markets instead of the second-price auction. We conclude that except for the expression of the equilibrium bidding strategy, all the results for the first-price auction are exactly the same as the corresponding ones for the second-price auction established by Said(2011). This implies that the well-known "revenue equivalence theorem"holds true for Said’s(2011) dynamic model setting.
In this paper we reanalyze Said’s(2011) work by retaining all his assumptions except that we use the first-price auction to sell differentiated goods to buyers in dynamic markets instead of the second-price auction. We conclude that except for the expression of the equilibrium bidding strategy, all the results for the first-price auction are exactly the same as the corresponding ones for the second-price auction established by Said(2011). This implies that the well-known "revenue equivalence theorem"holds true for Said’s(2011) dynamic model setting.
基金
Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(71171052)
