本文指出，黃、潘 (1986 )對一階解與二階解均衡值異同之討論，並沒有抓到問題的重心。以賽局理論的觀點來看，獨佔廠商的模型對應的是一個退化的賽局，而雙佔模型對應的是一個正常的賽局；退化的賽局沒有情報區隔的自由度，而正常的賽局卻有。在雙佔時，一階與二階解事實上是因為情報區隔立不同而有異。因此，當我們把模型由獨佔推展到雙佔時，事實上是把情報區隔的自由度從無推展到有。如此的推展而造成一階與二階解之不同只能算是一個「全真論點 (Tautology)」。

We point out that the discussion on the possible differences between one-stage and two-stage solutions by Pan and Hwang (1986) is misleading and meaningless. In terms of game theory, the duopoly model corresponds to a 2x2 standard game whereas the monpoly model corresponds to a degenerated single-player game. We do (do not) have the degree of freedom to form different information partitions in a standard (degenerated) game. Since different information partitions yield different solutions, it is tautologically true that there is some (no) difference between the solutions obtained from duopoly (monopoly) models. As long as “proving” a tautology is not a satisfactory point, there is really no point in their paper.