C, Dancing. Have a good rest of your day!!
In one view, the asset prices are objectively based on fluctuating principles, whilst in the certain, psychological factors and prejudices play an important role.
Explanation:
As the rate of interest increases, the price of the investments declines because the yield on risk-free investing can sometimes be greater to buyers. On the other hand, the price of assets is rising as interest rates are falling.
This is usually the interest rate owed by small investors on an approved FDIC portfolio, checking account, term deposit acct or mutual fund of the monetary sector. This is now the so-called US "risk-free" limit for bigger creditors, companies and individuals. Bills for the Treasury.
Answer:
A bureaucracy
Explanation:
Bureaucracy is an organisational structure that is aimed at maintaining uniformity and control in an organisation.
This is achieved through established processes and ways of interaction between staff.
Bureaucracy is characterised by multiple layers and complex processes that makes actions and decisions slow.
This is exemplified in the given scenario where XYZ Corporation has a distinct division of labor, consistent rules, and a clear hierarchy. Managers maintain distance between themselves and subordinates, and promotions are awarded based on technical expertise.
Answer: charge a monopoly price
Explanation:
Patents provide an exclusive right to the firm in the production and sale of a drug. This provides the firm exclusive market power to decide the price and the quantity and therefore the firm is able to charge a monopoly price and also earn monopoly profits.
When an existing patent expires and the generic producers enter the market, the price reduces due to an increase in the supply of the erstwhile patented drug. This will reduce the monopoly profit of incumbent producers. Therefore, they will seek to deter the entry of generic drug makers in order to safeguard their monopoly profits and price.
Therefore, incumbents were willing to give enough to potential entrants so as to make them delay entry to charge a monopoly price.
The effect of the 2013 Supreme Court decision allowing legal action against these companies is increase in the cost of pay-for-delay agreements and also reduce incumbent profits from these agreements.