The statement the price of radio programming should fall is false.
<h3>What is Complements-in-consumption </h3>
Complements in consumption can be defined as the way in which two or more product complement each other when use of consume together or when use jointly.
Hence, Based on the scenario the statement is false because assuming the both music radio ,and concert are complements in consumption the price of radio programming will not fall.
Learn more about Complements in consumption here:brainly.com/question/12194202
#SPJ1
Answer:
Economic loss=$(28,000)
Explanation
Accounting profit is the difference between total revenue and explicit cost.
Explicit cost refers to all cash and non cash cost incurred to produce the goods and services
Economic profit = sales revenue - explicit cost - implicit cost
Implicit cost is the opportunity cost - the value of the next best alternative sacrificed to produce the product.
The opportunity cost in the case is the worth of the offer to work elsewhere which is equal to $25,000
Economic profit = (7,000× 6) - 45,000- 25,000=$ (28,000)
Economic loss=$(28,000)
Answer:
The answer is: B) a condition precedent
Explanation:
Condition precedents are things that must exist before something else occurs. In contract law, condition precedents must exist before any contractual obligations exists.
In this case, the condition precedent for Josh purchasing the property is that no environmental problems exist.
It seems fine to me at the part where it says when you work if you are going to abbreviate days then abbreviate them all and that's pretty much all I have to say
