Answer:
There dodo brains -_- obviously
Explanation:
Answer and Explanation:
The computation is shown below:
The following formula should be used
= P/E ratio × EPS × (1 + growth rate)^n
umber of years
a. The stock price in four years is
= $19.35 × $2.22 × (1 + .06)^4
= $54.23
b. The stock price in four years in the case when the P/E ratio fall to 16
= $16 × $2.22 × (1 + .06)^4
= $44.84
We simply applied the above formula so that the correct price could come
And, the same is to be considered
Answer: D. decreases by less than $100 billion because the tax multiplier is negative
Explanation:
If the Government were to increase taxes then it would reduce the amount of money for spending (disposable income) that people have to be able to buy goods and services.
As a result they will buy less goods and services but this would be less than the $100 billion tax imposed on them because the effect of the tax multiplier is negative.
Tax Multiplier = -Marginal Propensity to Consume / (1 - MPC)
Answer:
<u>less profit per unit</u>
Explanation:
- If a customer normally orders 1,000 units, then total profit = $100-$60 * 1000 units = <u>$40,000.</u> (i.e we subtracted cost from selling price to determine profit per unit, and then multiply by the total unit ordered to get total profit)
- If you drop the price 20% out of $100 ($100 -
$80) for the order of 2000 units, then profit = $80-$60 * 2000 = <u>$40,000.</u> (i.e we reduced selling price by 20% and then substracted cost, $60 from selling price to determine profit per unit, and then multiply by the total unit ordered to get total profit)
Although the total profit is the same, we observe that the profit per unit is lesser on the larger order, which has a profit per unit of $20 ($80-$60), while the smaller order has $40 ($100-$60) per unit profit.
Answer:
<em>Speech and debate question Which of the following would not be considered a part of a good closing</em><em> </em><em>Saying</em><em> </em><em>that's </em><em>it</em>
