Competing mechanisms and folk theorems: Two examples

In competing-mechanism games under exclusivity, principals simultaneously post mechanisms, and agents then participate communicate with at most one principal. this setting, we develop two complete-information examples that question the folk theorems established in literature. first example, there exist equilibria which some principal obtains less than her min-max payoff, computed over all players' actions. Thus must involve bounds on principals' payoffs depend messages available to agents, not only The second example shows even nonintrinsic approach is misleading: incentive-feasible allocations obtain more their payoffs, arbitrary spaces of but cannot be supported equilibrium. Key these results standard requirement agents' participation communication decisions are tied together.