Difference between revisions of "VC Bargaining"
imported>Ron |
imported>Ed |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | This page is for Ed and Ron to share their thoughts on VC Bargaining. Access is restricted to those with "Trusted" access | + | This page (and the discussion page) is for Ed and Ron to share their thoughts on VC Bargaining. Access is restricted to those with "Trusted" access. |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
==A Basic Model== | ==A Basic Model== | ||
Line 20: | Line 15: | ||
:<math>V_0=0, f(0)=0, f'>0, f''<0, k>0 \,</math> | :<math>V_0=0, f(0)=0, f'>0, f''<0, k>0 \,</math> | ||
− | + | Having <math>k>0\,</math> forces a finite number of rounds as the optimal solution providing there is a stopping constraint on <math>V_t\,</math> (so players don't invest forever). | |
− | + | One possible stopping constraint is: | |
:<math>V_t \ge \overline{V}\,</math> | :<math>V_t \ge \overline{V}\,</math> | ||
Line 32: | Line 27: | ||
where the distribution is known to both parties. | where the distribution is known to both parties. | ||
− | + | ===Bargaining=== | |
− | + | In each period there is Rubenstein finite bargaining, with potentially different patience, and one player designated as last. This will give a single period equilibrium outcome with the parties having different bargaining strength. | |
− | === | + | ===Simple First Steps=== |
− | + | Address the question: How does the optimal policy compare to the current way of calculating shares and values? | |
− | + | Assume a fixed number of rounds: t={1,2} | |
− | + | Assume a fixed total investment: \sum_t x_t = 1 | |
− | : | + | Assume a functional form for f(x_t): f(x_t) = ln (x_t) |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |
Revision as of 19:46, 25 May 2011
This page (and the discussion page) is for Ed and Ron to share their thoughts on VC Bargaining. Access is restricted to those with "Trusted" access.
Contents
A Basic Model
The players
The players are an Entrepreneur and a VC, both are risk neutral.
The Value Function
- [math]V_t=V_{t-1} + f(x_t) - k \,[/math]
with
- [math]V_0=0, f(0)=0, f'\gt 0, f''\lt 0, k\gt 0 \,[/math]
Having [math]k\gt 0\,[/math] forces a finite number of rounds as the optimal solution providing there is a stopping constraint on [math]V_t\,[/math] (so players don't invest forever).
One possible stopping constraint is:
- [math]V_t \ge \overline{V}\,[/math]
with
- [math]\overline{V} \sim F(V)\,[/math]
where the distribution is known to both parties.
Bargaining
In each period there is Rubenstein finite bargaining, with potentially different patience, and one player designated as last. This will give a single period equilibrium outcome with the parties having different bargaining strength.
Simple First Steps
Address the question: How does the optimal policy compare to the current way of calculating shares and values?
Assume a fixed number of rounds: t={1,2} Assume a fixed total investment: \sum_t x_t = 1 Assume a functional form for f(x_t): f(x_t) = ln (x_t)