Lunch And Game Theory

By Spencer Ackerman

Picture 1If you don’t know, well now you know. I had little choice but to reply.

Picture 2

Interesting lunch/game theory question. On the one hand, sharing these tweets with you might lead you to get the Fojol crew over to your neighborhood. But on the other hand, the fusillade of tweets that can be reasonably expected to result from this post might instruct Fojol about a variety of destinations that want to be blessed by their cart, leading them to see that a robust lunch business can be yielded and we can all get our Fojolia. Yet that conjecture still makes posting a risky strategy if the desired result is me having my Fojol today. But is the prospect of Fojol yields in the future — a potentially recursive phenomenon — more valuable than Fojol yields on any given day? Gaming out lunch is a knife’s-edge exercise.


2 responses to “Lunch And Game Theory

  1. Risky! Presumably there will be first mover advantages that acrue to the first destination and affect subsequent iterations of the game. Consider:

    1. If the first destination proves profitable (likely, given the tweet campaign), the brothers will have less incentive to try an unproven (ergo riskier) destination in subsequent rounds.

    2. The brothers will likely desire to exploit their first mover advantages by repeatedly defending profitable “turf” from potential competitors (which, admittedly, are limited due to the short supply of vendor licenses).

  2. Pingback: The Success of Food Cart Deregulation |

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s