This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Economics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Game theory High‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Game theory, an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Wikipedia's articles related to Game theory. We need your help! Join in | Fix a red link | Add content | Weigh inGame theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Game theoryTemplate:WikiProject Game theorygame theory articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

The "equivalence" of a first-price sealed-bid auction and a dutch auction is stronger than revenue equivalence. I think it's usually called "strategic equivalence"--essentially meaning that modeling the two of them works out the same, and standard game theory would have people choosing the same strategies for each. Anyway, I'll try to source that soon. CRETOG8( t/ c) 04:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC) reply

In a case where two or more bidders make the same bid, and that bid wins, how is it decided who gets the item being bid on? Blozier2006 ( talk) 07:57, 25 February 2013 (UTC) reply

I am rediredting it to Auction. -- Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 05:22, 14 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Changed back. It is no longer a duplicate. -- Erel Segal ( talk) 08:51, 11 January 2016 (UTC) reply

The line * ${\displaystyle x\geq f(b)}$. Then Alice wins and enjoys a net gain of ${\displaystyle a-x}$. This happens with probability ${\displaystyle f^{-1}(x)=2x}$. is not clear for ${\displaystyle 2x\geq 1}$ — Preceding unsigned comment added by PSAfrance ( talk • contribs) 09:21, 7 September 2017 (UTC) reply