Answer:
a. Whataburger is not using the optimal cost-minimizaing mix of cashier and kiosks.
b. Whataburger should hire more cashier and rent fewer kiosks in order to improve its mix of inputs and minimize the cost
Explanation:
a. According to the given data we have the following:
Let "C" is a cashier.
"K" is a kiosk
MPC = 48 (Marginal Product of Cashier)
MPK = 32 (Marginal Product of Kiosk)
PC = $15 (cashier can be hired for a wage of $15)
PK = $12 (Kiosk rents for $12)
At optimal cost minimization point, (MPC / MPK) = (PC / PK)
(MPC / PC) = (MPK / PK)
(MPC / PC) = (48 / 15) = 3.2
(MPK / PK) = (32 / 12) = 2.67
Since the (MPC / PC) and (MPK / PK) is not equal. It implies Whataburger is not using the optimal cost-minimizaing mix of cashier and kiosks.
b. We have to use the following:
(MPC / PC) > (MPK / PK)
i.e., 3.2 > 2.67
It means Whataburger hire more cashier and rent fewer kiosks in order to improve its mix of inputs and minimize the cost.
Answer:
A. planning, scheduling, and controlling.
Explanation:
The phases of project management are -
1. Initiation
2. Planning
3. Execution - Scheduling
4. Control
5. Close
Option A is correct because the answer includes the 2nd, 3rd, and fourth phases of project management.
Option B is wrong because programming is not a phase of project management. Option C is a combination of management functions. Therefore, it is incorrect. Option D is not correct as the service project is not different from the manufacturing project. Option E is the project management technique.
Answer:
$202,137.90
Explanation:
Year Annual payment Discount factor Present value
1 $28,000 0.965250965 $27,027.03
2 $32,000 0.931709426 $29,814.70
3 $66,000 0.899333423 $59,356.01
4 $99,000 0.868082454 $85,940.16
Total present value $202,137.90
The discount factor should be computed by
= 1 ÷ (1 + interest rate)^years
where,
rate is 3.6%
Year = 0,1,2,3,4 and so on
Answer:
Answer explained
Explanation:
The case is about the defamation claimed by plaintiff on the defendant on the basis of race remark of g a y or bisexual by third party information. This ultimately broken the relationship of two person.
I think that court should ultimately found that the accusations of homosexuality or bisexuality amounted to defamation per se because of the following reason:
- The Race Remark on the plaintiff by the defendant.
- It is a slander per se.
- This remark impute to the commission of the crime of sodomy.
- It is implying Unchastity that means Exposing Plaintiff to Public Hatred. This spoils the life of the plaintiff.
The product of drugs and alchohol has the tendenancy to demotivate you and lead to unproductive activities.
