Answer: the correct answer is $70000
Explanation: the fair value of the shares given plus the fair value of the contingent consideration is the total amount paid by the buyer which is (20000 shares * $10 price per share) = $200000+$10000= $210000.
The gain of the transaction is registered as the net fair value of the acquiree that is $350000-$70000= $280000 less the sum paid by the Acquirer that is $280000-$210000= $70000.
The $15000 in direct acquisition costs are registered as period expenses and not relevant for the calculation of the gain of the transaction.
i believe it is A, you’re welcome!
I guess the correct answer is the value of their time and energy.
Some discount stores put products in large bins and let consumers hunt and find bargains. The price these consumers pay includes the value of their time and energy.
Answer:
0.2 or 20%
Explanation:
The three possible outcomes, with respective probabilities and returns, as follows
Outcome 1: Probability (P) = 0.35, Return (R) = 0.20
Outcome 2: Probability = 0.25, Return = 0.36
Outcome 3: Probability = 0.40, Return = 0.10.
The expected return will be computed as follows.
Expected Return = 
= (0.35*0.20) + (0.25*0.36) + (0.40*0.10)
= 0.07 + 0.09 + 0.04
= 0.2
Therefore expected return = 0.2 or 20%
Answer:
The answer is: C) lose because he will not be able to prove reliance on the misrepresentation.
Explanation:
In order for Larson to be able to rescind the contract, he would have to prove that he had reasonable reliance that Robert Redford owned that specific car. Reasonable reliance refers to a person believing something to be a fact, which any other person could reasonably believe in as well.
But exactly how could he prove that someone else might also believe that the car was previously owned by Robert Redford? I find it very doubtful that he can prove that.
