Depends heavily on the assumptions. I think you could have a stable equilibrium with sufficient search costs or biased beliefs about one’s ability to optimize.

No pure strategy equilibrium, basically?  Like where the best responses result in cyclic behavior?

SimpleStacker

It’s been a while since I studied information and uncertainty stuff, but you can tell things will start breaking if competitors cause the population to sort by type.

The optimizers in a pool by themselves have no surplus to harvest, so they either try to eat each other or rewards die.

If the non-optimizers were split into their own pool, you’d expect those companies to take advantage of the unwillingness to optimize by introducing some sort of higher prices, which creates a new opportunity to sell rewards to the optimizers.

Politics_And_Law

Stacker_Stocks

econ

Loyalty/Rewards and Other Monetary Scams: The Points Guy (Net Interest)

denlillaapan

It’s been a while since I studied information and uncertainty stuff, but you can tell things will start breaking if competitors cause the population to sort by type. 

The optimizers in a pool by themselves have no surplus to harvest, so they either try to eat each other or rewards die. 

If the non-optimizers were split into their own pool, you’d expect those companies to take advantage of the unwillingness to optimize by introducing some sort of higher prices, which creates a new opportunity to sell rewards to the optimizers.