Nachbesprechung Gesamtprüfung 15.02.2011

Zitat:

---

Zitat von ChristianB

please Pavlo, enlight us with correct answers ..

---

ok, here is what I and my assistants think are the correct solutions:
1a never a NE because second bidder pays €19 and gets nothing. so it is better for him to bid zero
1b could be a NE if nobody except for the highest bidder has T-shirt valuation higher than €20. This task was inspired by real events :)

2. 10, correct solution was already posted.
3. 100% because (1+R)^6=64 Sorry if some of you took this question personally. Es war nicht böse gemeint!
4a 2200 , correct solution was already posted
5. in pooled equilibrium both earn 15000, zero education
in separating equilibrium contracts are (10000,0) and (20000,e) where e is between 5 and 10
low productivity type is better off when there is no uni
high productivity type is exactly indifferent with or without uni because 20000-5*1000=15 000, his salary in pooled equilibrium
6. income effect is stronger (labor supply decreases with a higher wage)

Zitat:

---

Zitat von blapaul

3. 100% because (1+R)^6=64 Sorry if some of you took this question personally. Es war nicht böse gemeint!

---

I considered this task very unfair since you need to know the "potenzen" of 2 up to ^6, it took me some time to figure that out

Zitat:

---

Zitat von blapaul

high productivity type is exactly indifferent with or without uni because 20000-5*1000=15 000, his salary in pooled equilibrium

---

hmm..i was wondering why this task was worth 2 instead of one point like the previous one for the low capability, too bad i didn't double check that

Zitat:

---

Zitat von I_am_the_Highway

I considered this task very unfair since you need to know the "potenzen" of 2 up to ^6, it took me some time to figure that out

---

yeah, but everyone knows that 8^2=64 and 2^3=8 so 2^6=64...

Zitat:

---

Zitat von I_am_the_Highway

hmm..i was wondering why this task was worth 2 instead of one point like the previous one for the low capability, too bad i didn't double check that

---

ROFL :) of course, there is a reason for an extra point :)

I was not kidding about beer. but it has to wait 3 more weeks (I lay in bed with a ski accident)

and if you want to work as a student assistant for Mikro2 next semester, just drop me e-mail with your name/ Matr. nummer. I think you show a great talent for mikro and awesome sense of humor. Both are in deficit in Innsbruck :)

Some more questions:

6.) is the substitution effect definitly stronger?
3.) and is it ok if we wrote i > or = (1+i)^6

:)

Zitat:

---

Zitat von juzz

Hallooooo!?!
Mit abstand schwerste mikro2 klausur bis jetzt! Die 3 alten klausuren waren ja regelrecht einfach dagegen!!!
Hoffe dass er die quote auf 20% runtersetzt, dann besteht vielleicht noch eine winzige chanze

---

by the time you see the solution, you would say it was as easy as all previous exams.
20%? you are kidding, right? maybe this semester we start to move up from 50%... :)

Zitat:

---

Zitat von k_jasmin

Some more questions:

6.) is the substitution effect definitly stronger?
3.) and is it ok if we wrote i > or = (1+i)^6

:)

---

6) sorry, i do not remember the exam question... if you post the exam question, i will give a definite answer.
3) well, it is correct, but we will substract 0.5 or 1 point. Because some people, like highway, got it completely right. so they deserve a full credit for hard work.

Zitat:

---

Zitat von csam1658

Thanks pavlo you made my day!
i think score has to be updated now: PAVLO 4 : STUDENTS 0

---

exam is a festival of knowledge, not a battle field :)

Zitat:

---

Zitat von I_am_the_Highway

I considered this task very unfair since you need to know the "potenzen" of 2 up to ^6, it took me some time to figure that out

---

Still, the calculator is my best friend - it should become yours as well ;)

Beim zweiteiligen Tarif war ich mir nicht ganz sicher.

T = (P*Q1)/2
wobei ich für Q1 einfach (4,5 - P) eingesetzt hab (da die indirekte Nachfrage ja (4,5 - Q) ist -> 3,5: 1 Kaffee; 2,5: 2 Kaffee etc.

Ein T deckt ja dann natürlich nur einen Kunden ab, deshalb muss die Gewinnfunktion doch so lauten - preis bekomm ich irgend was bei 1,65 raus!?)

Pi = 1100*T + (P-0,5) * (TassenProf*100 + TassenStud*1000) = hab ich vergessen :D

Thanks for the answers...

I think the example started with a wage of 20€/hour and the skiing instructor worked 4 hours a day,
then the wage got up to 30€/hour and he only worked 3 hours a day after that....

Zitat:

---

Zitat von k_jasmin

Thanks for the answers...

I think the example started with a wage of 20€/hour and the skiing instructor worked 4 hours a day,
then the wage got up to 30€/hour and he only worked 3 hours a day after that....

---

oh, in this case income effect is greater :)