Answer:
$120
Explanation:
Given:
• Geometric growth rate of existing financial security:
$4 to $8 to $16 to $32 to $64 to $128
• Arithmetic growth rate of underlying assests:
$4 to $6 to $8 to $10 to $12 to $14
From the values, when the price of the underlying assests is $14, the price of the existing financial security is $128.
We are told to that when values of financial secrities increased from $4 to $128, that of underlying assests also increased from $4 to $14. If patterns hold for decreases as well as for increases. Therefore to get the value of financial securities decline if the value of underlying assests suddenly and unexpectedly fell by $6, we have:
Price of underlying assests when decreased by $6 =
$14-$6 = $8.
Therefore, price of existing financial security decline wil be:
$128-$8 = $120
Answer:
0.3797 or 37.97%
Explanation:
According to the scenario, computation of the given data are as follow:-
Wants Rate on return on investment = 50%
Expected value of return on investment = invested amount × (1+g)^t
= $1,000,000 × (1+50%)^5
= $1,000,000 × 7.59375
= $7,593,750
Similar venture would achieve valuation of $20,000,000 for $2,000,000. We can expect that company would achieve similar valuation of $20,000,000 in 5 years from now.
Investor’s share value at 5 years = $7,593,750 ÷ $20,000,000
= 0.3797 or 37.97%
Answer:
$2,553,191
Explanation:
The formula to compute the break even point in dollars amount is presented below:
= (Fixed cost ) ÷ (Profit volume ratio)
where,
Fixed cost = $300,000
And the profit volume ratio would be
= (Contribution margin) ÷ (Sales) × 100
We assume the sales be 100%
So, the variable cost is
= 88.25%
And, the contribution margin is
= 100 - 88.25
= 11.75%
So, the break even sales would be
= $300,000 ÷ 11.75%
= $2,553,191
Answer: The correct answer is "C. produce because revenue of $1 comma 000 is greater than fixed costs.".
Explanation: The firm should produce because the revenue of 1000 is enough to cover the fixed costs and part of the variables (1000 - 800 - 600 = (-400)) so that the loss is less than if it stopped producing despite the avoidable costs (800 - 350 = 450) since if it stopped producing it would have a loss of $ 450 and producing it would have a loss of $ 400.
Answer and Explanation:
A. Given that Design 1A will cost $1.7 million to build and $175,000 per year to maintain
Given that Design 1B will cost $3.6 million to build and $40,000 per year to maintain
Both designs are assumed to be permanent
To find ROR using AW based rate of return equation, we find present value of each design and equate them:
Each design is permanent so
Present value of perpetuity:
Design 1A= 1700000+175000/r
Design 1B = 3600000+40000/r
=1700000+175000/r=3600000+40000/r
135000/r=1900000
Cross multiply
r=135000/1900000
r= 0.0710
r=7.10%
B Given that ROR=7.10% and MARR is 25%
MARR>ROR
Hence we reject both designs
