Answer:
Because the shares price of that company will be reduced that gives shareholders to own more thus owning a greater percentage of the company
Explanation:
Let's say <em>Washer</em><em> </em><em>Ltd</em><em> </em>is high-risk and they have taken a stand to reduce their ordinary share price in order to attract investors, from <em>R</em><em>6,90</em> to <em>R3</em><em>,</em><em> </em><em>90</em><em> </em>per share
Instead of the shareholder paying the full price for less shares, he can buy more share for half the amount of money
Answer:
The answer is "
".
Explanation:
Variable cost net income 
Less: Fixed overhead start 
Add: Fixed overhead termination 
Net revenue at cost of absorption 
Answer:
$677,000,000
Explanation:
The computation of pension expenses is shown below:-
Pension expenses = Service cost + Interest on PBO - Return on plan assets + Amortization of prior service cost - Amortization of net loss
= $366,000,000 + $737,000,000 - $593,000,000 + $13,000,000 - $154,000,000
= $677,000,000
Therefore for computing the pension expenses we simply applied the above formula so that the correct amount could come
Answer: counselors
Explanation:
References that employers trust for the most accurate reporting include counselors. Employers don't trust the friends, relatives and parents of the prospective employees or employees for an accurate report because employers believe that they're not professional enough and due to their closeness to the employee, they may give false information in order to put the employee at an advantage. Employers see counselors as being more professional and will give the right informations.
It should be noted that in a case whereby a candidate performs well in his or her job tests and interviews and has a positive recommendation from his or her references together, the person has a high chance of being employed.
Answer:
Weak because of proximate cause is difficult to prove in absence of other similarly affected individuals
Explanation:
Since in the question it is mentioned that the 60 year old man have a lung cancer so he sues the asbestos manufacturer also he trust that it is unsafe as her friend who use the alternative material has not have a lung cancer so here the case would be weak as of proximate cause as it is difficult for proving it
Therefore the same is to be considered
