A Comment On: "Revisiting Dynamic Duopoly with Consumer Switching Costs"

In this note, we prove that the equilibrium proposed by Padilla [1, Theorem 1] is not an equilibrium for c < c*. We then characterize a Markov Perfect Equilibrium (MPE) for all values of c and show that findings on the sustainability of tacit collusion [1, Theorem 3] are unchanged for this MPE. We further show that neither the equilibrium proposed by Padilla nor our MPE is an equilibrium if consumers are forward looking.