Answer:
B) High, low
Firms and brands that continually attempt to operate in the <u>HIGH</u> price / <u>LOW</u> benefits quadrant do not survive over the long run as customer trust is Damaged.
Explanation:
Many times new products have a very short life because companies believe that they can charge very high prices because they are innovations, but they forget to provide the corresponding benefits of a very high price. Usually short living fads result from this strategy, because the customers will demand more for their money and if the product doesn't satisfy them, they wouldn't purchase it again. And with all the social networks we have today, gossip (and videos) about bad products travel extremely fast.
Answer:
Prosecutors of this case can use the net worth method to determine the extent these executives have been receiving illegal incomes by computing their wealth at the beginning and at the end of the period under investigation.
There will be an increase in the executives wealth, and since this increase cannot be traced to any legal income source, it will become taxable income, with the calculated penalties and fines.
Explanation:
The net worth method specifies that any increase in wealth, which is not traced to non-taxable sources, should be determined as a taxable income for the period under review. Ordinarily, the net worth is the difference between assets and liabilities. Since the executives use the money personally at their convenience, this will increase their personal wealth.
Answer:
Part 1: Valerie takes home $3750 per month
Part 2: $750
Part 3: $515
Part 4: 20% of Valerie's monthly take-home pay
Part 5: No
Explanation:
Part 1:
Monthly take-home pay = yearly take-home pay/12 = $45,000/12 = $3750
Part 2: 20% of Valerie's monthly take-home pay = 20/100 × $3750 = $759
Part 3
Total expenditure every month = car loan payment + credit card payment = $405 + $110 = $515
Part 4
20% of Valerie's monthly take-home pay is $750
Total expenditure every month towards paying her debt is $515
20% of Valerie's monthly take-home pay is greater than her monthly expenditure in paying her debt
Part 5
She is not in danger of credit overload because her monthly take-home pay ($3750) far outweighs her monthly total expenditure ($515)
Answer
The answer and procedures of the exercise are attached in the following archives.
Explanation
You will find the procedures, formulas or necessary explanations in the archive attached below. If you have any question ask and I will aclare your doubts kindly.
Answer:
Explanation:
this problem can be solved applying the concept of annuity, keep in mind that an annuity is a formula which allows you to calculate the future value of future payments affected by an interest rate.by definition the future value of an annuity is given by:
where is the future value of the annuity, is the interest rate for every period payment, n is the number of payments, and P is the regular amount paid
But there is an special thing to keep in mind and is the initial payment so we must to calculate the 4,000 in the future so we have: