So Patrick, our manager of Pepsi believes that Coca-Cola is going to produce this quantity and he's agreed to produce this quantity.

百事的经理帕特里克认为可口可乐,会按照协议产量来生产,他也会这么做

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

We're Coca-Cola and Pepsi, so we really don't want to have to bring the mafia in, Although maybe we do, I don't know.

我们是可口可乐和百事可乐公司,我们都不想将黑手党卷进来,可能也希望他们介入吧,谁知道呢

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So Coca-Cola and Poland Spring could just agree to produce half the quantity of water each.

假如可口可乐和波兰泉达成默契了,同意各产垄断产量的一半

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

There's also a part of the payoffs that's analogous to forcing me to drink Bud Light or forcing the forcing the Pepsi drinkers to drink Coca-Cola.

还有一部分类似于,强迫我喝百威淡啤酒或者,强迫喜欢喝百事的人去喝可口可乐

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Someone else is going to come in and produce cola in this industry and that's exactly what happened in the U.S. At the turn of the last century.

其他公司会参与进来也生产可乐,这就是上个世纪末在美国发生的事情

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

They're two water companies, so they're Poland Spring and Coca-Cola I guess these days, sign this agreement saying that each one's going to produce half monopoly quantity and what's going to go wrong with that agreement?

有两家瓶装水公司,比如说波兰泉和可口可乐,他们签署了协议规定,每家都只生产垄断产量的一半,这个协议有什么问题吗

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So Steve and Patrick are respectively the managers of Coca-Cola and Poland Spring and Patrick believes that the Coca-Cola manager is going to may be we should just make this Coke and Pepsi since two identical they're near enough and identical, right?

史蒂夫和帕特里克分别是,可口可乐和波兰泉的经理,帕特里克认为可口可乐的经理打算,或许该用可口可乐和百事可乐,他们俩才是对手是吧

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

But Patrick knows Steven pretty well; he knows those guys who run Coca-Cola are pretty smart guys, so Patrick knows that the guy who runs Coca-Cola is going to anticipate that the guy who runs Pepsi is gonna cheat on the guy who runs Coca-Cola, and hence the guy who runs Coca-Cola is going to play a best response to Patrick's cheat on quantity.

但是帕特里克也很了解史蒂文,他知道可口可乐的经理都很精明,帕特里克知道可口可乐的经理会预料到,帕特里克会违约,因此可口可乐的经理就会寻找最佳对策,因为帕特里克违约在先

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选