美国经济学论文代写：霍特林的空间竞争模型
观察分析人士和人类学家指出，销售类似产品的零售商店通常集中在同一地点或附近。他们在竞争同一类型的目标人口统计学，产品交付也被发现是相似的。这个分析的目的是了解这种形成结构背后的细微差别和理论。这一点已在下文加以说明。
根据霍特林局部模型理论，零售店之间的距离越近越好。固定长度的概念已在这一理论中阐明。期望在一个期望所有利益相关者都能受益的环境中，消费者被均匀地分散，产品需求和消费者需求得到满足(Eiselt, 2011)。然而，在现实中，这并没有发生。目前存在着一种激烈的竞争，基于这种竞争，这些商店发现，当它们在临近的区域运营时，为了争夺同样的消费者群体，在功能上是有益的。
美国经济学论文代写：霍特林的空间竞争模型
空间竞争的霍特林模型导致了社会最优解的发展。然而，这一理论在现实中并不适用。研究发现，零售商将彼此视为具有侵略性的竞争对手，并达到纳什均衡。
纳什均衡是零售商非合作博弈的最终解。它们都试图达到均衡策略，而另一方无法通过改变策略获得收益。换句话说，零售商试图保持他们的竞争接近了解他们的营销策略，并试图开发他们的交付物，以增加竞争优势(Eiselt, 2011)。纳什均衡导致了囚徒困境。囚徒困境是指两个被告分别被关在不同的牢房里。他们每个人都想维持和发展某种形式的杠杆来维持。纳什均衡还导致了一种囚徒困境，即关注于提高可交付成果。
竞争对手试图通过改变营销策略和产品差异化来获得消费者的惠顾。在这个过程中，消费者觉得他们从竞争对手那里得到了最好的交易，而竞争对手也会制定创新策略来销售相同的产品或交付品。
美国经济学论文代写：霍特林的空间竞争模型
Observational analysts and anthropologists note that retail stores that sell similar products are often clustered in and around the same location. They are competing for the same kind of target demography and the product deliverable is also found to be similar. The purpose of this analysis is to understand the nuances and the theory behind this formative structure. This has been elucidated in the following.
Retail stores will be benefitted if they are located at proximal distance from each other according to the Hotelling local model theory. The notion of fixed length has been elucidated in this theory. The consumers are expected to be evenly dispersed and the product demand and the consumer requirements are met in an environment where all the stakeholders are expected to be benefitted (Eiselt, 2011). However, in reality, this does not occur. There is ongoing aggressive competition, based on which the stores find it to be functionally beneficial when they operate in close proximal zones competing for the same kind of consumer demographic.
美国经济学论文代写：霍特林的空间竞争模型
In the Hotelling model of spatial competition leads to the development of the socially optimal solution. However, this does not function according to the theory in reality. It has been found that the retailers consider each other to be an aggressive competitor and they reach Nash equilibrium.
Nash equilibrium is the final solution that arrives based on the non-cooperative game of the retailers. They each try to reach equilibrium strategies where the other player cannot gain by the change of their strategy. In other words, the retailers try to keep their competition close to understand their marketing strategies and try to develop their deliverables to increase competitive advantage (Eiselt, 2011). Nash equilibrium develops a prisoner’s dilemma. The prisoner’s dilemma is the position where two accused individuals are placed in different cells. They each want to sustain and develop some form of leverage to sustain. Nash equilibrium also leads to a form of prisoner’s dilemma, where there is focus given to improving the deliverables.
The competitors try to gain consumer patronage by changing their marketing strategies and product differentiation. In this process the consumer feels that they receive the best possible deal from the competitors and the competitors also develop innovative strategies to sell the same product or deliverables.
