We model a dynamic, competitive market, where in every period, risk-neutral traders trade a one-period bond against an infinitely lived asset, with limited short-selling of the long-term asset. Traders lack structural knowledge and use different “incomplete theories,” all of which give statistically correct beliefs about next period's market price of the long-term asset. The more theories there are in the market, the higher is the equilibrium price of the long-term asset. Investors with more complete theories do not necessarily earn higher returns than those with less complete ones, who can earn above the risk-free rate. We provide two necessary conditions for a trader to earn above the risk-free rate.

We explore sequential voting in symmetric two‐option environments. We show that the (informative) symmetric equilibria of the simultancous voting game are also equilibria in any sequential voting structure. In unanimity games, (essentially) the whole set of equilibria is the same in all sequential structures. We also explore the relationship between simultaneous and sequential voting in other contexts. We illustrate several instances in which sequential voting does no better at aggregating information than simultaneous voting. The inability of the sequential structure to use additional information in voting models is distinct from that in the herd‐cascade literature.

In this paper, we study the optimization problem of an unregulated air carrier which is given the exclusive right to satisfy demand for air travel between any pair of cities. It chooses a network of connections and a set of prices to maximize profits. Thus, both network design and prices are endogenous. We characterize the solution to this optimization problem when demands and costs are symmetric. Our main result is that, if there are economies of density in the number of individuals travelling between two directly connected cities, the optimal network is either a hub of size n − 1 or one in which every pair of cities is connected directly.

We study a model in which two carriers choose networks to connect cities and compete for customers. We show that if carriers compete aggressively (e.g., Bertrand-like behavior), one carrier operating a single hub-spoke network is an equilibrium outcome. Competing hub-spoke networks are not an equilibrium outcome, although duopoly equilibria in nonhub networks can exist. If carriers do not compete aggressively, an equilibrium with competing hub-spoke networks exists as long as the number of cities is not too small. We provide conditions under which all equilibria consist of hub-spoke networks.

We present a decision-theoretic analysis of an agent's understanding of the interdependencies in her choices. We provide the foundations for a simple and flexible model that allows the misperception of correlated risks. We introduce a framework in which the decision maker chooses a portfolio of assets among which she may misperceive the joint returns, and present simple axioms equivalent to a representation in which she attaches a probability to each possible joint distribution over returns and then maximizes subjective expected utility using her ( possibly misspecified) beliefs.