Repeated reputational bargaining with deadlines

We develop a two-sided reputational bargaining model with deadlines, and analyze the implications of linking a reputation for commitment on one bargaining issue, to reputation on future issues. The model is adapted from that of Abreu and Gul [2000], where some agents are committed to achieving a fixed share of any surplus available. Among the conclusions drawn are: the ordering of issues on the bargaining agenda may be of great importance; disagreement may arise even when the probability agents are commitment to demands is arbitrarily small when this is combined with uncertainty about future bargaining conditions; the right/obligation to make the first proposal in bargaining may have significant payoff implications when the reputational cost to backing down from an initial demand is large; long run agents typically have an advantage in bargaining over short run agents, but may in fact optimally moderate their demands.