Simultaneous/Sequential

Games — in markets, negotiations, or competition — are either simultaneous (players act without knowing others' choices) or sequential (players move in order, observing earlier moves). The distinction matters because optimal strategy differs sharply. In simultaneous games, you reason about what opponents will do without seeing it; equilibrium concepts like Nash apply. In sequential games, you can observe and respond; backward induction (reasoning from the end) is the key tool. Many real situations blend both: some moves are simultaneous (pricing), others sequential (market entry after a competitor). Founders benefit from classifying the game correctly — the right framework prevents strategic errors that come from applying simultaneous logic to sequential settings, or vice versa.

Classify the competitive interaction: are you committing blind (simultaneous) or observing before acting (sequential)? In simultaneous settings, choose robust strategies that perform well across opponent actions. In sequential settings, use backward induction — start from the end and reason backward to the optimal first move. If you can convert a simultaneous game into a sequential one (by moving first and making your commitment visible), you may gain advantage.

Simultaneous vs sequential: the structure of who moves when determines optimal strategy. In simultaneous settings, reason about best responses. In sequential settings, reason backward from the end. Classify the game correctly before choosing your move.