Answer:
Instructions are listed below.
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
A machine costing $251,800 was purchased May 1. The machine should be obsolete after three years and, therefore, no longer useful to the company. The estimated salvage value is $3,400.
A) Straight-line:
Annual depreciation= (original cost - salvage value)/estimated life (years)
Annual depreciation= (251,800 - 3,400)/3= $82,800
B) Double declining balance:
Annual depreciation= 2*[(original cost - residual value)/estimated life (years)]
Year 1= (248,400/3)*2= 165,600
Year 2= 55,200
Year 3= 18,400
Answer:
MIRR = 4.32%
Explanation:
year cash flow
0 -$795,000
1 $375,000
2 -$500,000
3 $600,000
4 $400,000
Since there are 2 cash outflows, the IRR calculation would result in two different answers (1 for every cash outflow), that is why we use the MIRR function in excel.
=MIRR (cash flows, finance rate, reinvestment rate)
=MIRR (-795000 to 400000, 5.5%, 5.5%)
Since we are only given one interest rate, we will use it as our finance rate and our reinvestment rate.
MIRR = 4.32%
Answer:
The test statistic t of the sample is -0.804.
There is sufficient evidence to ascertain that the average number of years of work experience of MBA applicants is less than 3 years.
Explanation:
Null hypothesis: The average number of years of work experience of MBA applicants is 3 years.
Alternate hypothesis: The average number of yet of work experience of MBA applicants is less than 3 years.
Test statistic (t) = (sample mean - population mean) ÷ sd/√n
sample mean = 2.57
population mean = 3
sd = 3.67
n = 47
t = (2.57 - 3) ÷ 3.67/√47 = -0.43 ÷ 0.535 = -0.804
Assuming a 5% significance level
degree of freedom = n - 1 = 47 - 1 = 46
The critical value corresponding to 46 degrees of freedom and 5% significance level is 2.013.
Conclusion:
Reject the null hypothesis because the test statistic -0.804 is less than the critical value 2.013.
The years of work experience of MBA applicants is less than 3.
Answer:
Procedural justice
Explanation:
Procedural justice is centered on the idea that there should be fairness in the process used in making decision or resolving disputes in a transparent way without being impartial, to ensure the process brings out the right outcomes.
Jessica believes that there’s a problem with the firm’s procedural justice as she believes her firm’s process and methods in determining increase in her salary is not fair enough.