Answer:
Risk and Return
1. Joe is an average investor. His financial advisor gave him options of investing in stock A, with a σ of 12%, and stock B, with a σ of 9%. Both stocks have the same expected return of 16%. Joe can pick only one stock and decides to invest in stock B.
Good Financial Decision?
Yes
No
2. Marcie works for an educational technology firm that recently launched its employee stock option plan (ESOP). Marcie allocated all her investments in the ESOP.
Good Financial Decision?
Yes
No
3. rin wants to invest in a hedge fund that has had a very strong performance track record. The hedge fund has given its investors a return of over 60% for the past five years. Although Erin is tempted to put her money in the fund, she decides to conduct due diligence on the hedge fund’s assets, because she is aware that past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Good Financial Decision?
Yes
No
Explanation:
1. Joe's decision to invest in stock B is a good financial decision. Since both investments have the same returns, the decision on which investment to take shifts to the standard deviation of the returns, which specifies the variability of the returns. Invariably, the investment with less standard deviation should win the vote. Therefore, Joe's decision is a good financial decision because investment in B has a standard deviation of 9% unlike A's 12%.
2. Putting all eggs in one market as Marcie had done by allocating all her investments in the ESOP is not a good financial decision, theoretically. It is always best to spread the risks, though higher-yielding investments (returns) bear higher risks.
3. The decision of Erin to conduct due diligence on the hedge fund's assets, despite its past performance is a good financial decision. Due diligence reveals some behind-the-scene information that are instrumental in making sound business decisions. Who are the present managers of the fund? What systems are in place in the entity to guarantee similar future performance, all things being equal? What market's sentiments and information are available for consideration? These questions, and many others can be answered through a due diligence. Surely, "past performance is no guarantee of future results."
If Inez is not satisfied with the painting by Josh, Inez does not have to accept the portrait or pay Josh any money. Inez does not have to pay Josh at all.
Answer:
b. $3,000
Explanation:
According to the above information, the following data are given
Credit sales = $100,000
Uncollectible percentage = 3%
So, after the adjustment by using allowance method, Bad debt expense can be calculated as;
Bad debt expense = Credit sales × Uncollectible percentage
= $100,000 × 3%
= $3,000
Answer:
Everyone involved in the transaction
Explanation:
As an agent of the seller, the broker has a fiduciary duty with the seller (principal) to act of behalf of his/her best interest.
But the broker must also act honestly with the buyer, if the broker closes a deal using dishonest or unfair practices, e.g. forging documents, then the buyer might claim damages from both the broker and the seller.
And of course the broker should also make sure that his/her own rights are respected and his/her work is properly paid.
Answer:
<h2>In this case,visit to the Butchart Garden is an excludable and non-rivalrous good and is an example of a Club Good.</h2>
Explanation:
First,since the Burchart Gardens charges an admission fee of $30 for each visitor,anyone who has not paid the fee cannot or will not be able to have access inside the garden.Therefore,it is currently not a free service for all the visitors.In this sense,a visit to the Butchart Garden is excludable.It can be assumed that any visitor who wishes to come inside the garden and have a visit will have to mandatorily pay the admission fee.
Secondly,as Butchart Garden is a public area and anyone who pays the admission fee can officially gain access to the garden,enjoyment of the natural and aesthetic beauty of the garden by any one visitor does not reduce the simultaneous enjoyment of any other visitor who has paid the admission fee and hence,gained access to the garden.In economic language,if we consider the garden visit as a particular commodity,then the consumption of the commodity by any one visitor or consumer does not reduce the simultaneous consumption of any other visitor/s or consumer/s,provided that they have all paid the admission fee to gain access to the commodity or garden in this case.Therefore,visits to the Butchart Garden can be considered as non-rivalrous.
Now,since the visit to the Butchart garden is both excludable and non-rivalrous in nature,it can be considered as an example of a Club Good.
