<span>the industry-low, industry-average, and industry-high cost benchmarks on pp. 5-6 of the latest issue of the glo-bus statistical review
ANSWER:
</span><span>are worth careful scrutiny by the managers of all companies because when a company's costs for one or more of the cost benchmarks are deemed "out-of-line," managers need to initiate corrective actions in the next decision round. </span>
Answer:
A. 125 Egyptian pounds
Explanation:
Let’s create a proportion using the following setup.
pounds/dollars=pounds/dollars
We know that 5 Egyptian pounds is equal to 1 dollar.
5 pounds/ 1 dollar= pounds/dollars
We don’t know how many pounds are in 25 dollars. We can say x pounds are in 25 dollars.
5 pounds / 1 dollar = x pounds/ 25 dollars
5/1=x/25
We want to find out what x is, so we need to get x by itself.
x is being divided by 25. The inverse of division is multiplication. Multiply both sides of the equation by 25.
25*(5/1)=(x/25)*25
25*5/1=x
25*5=x
125=x
$25 US dollars are equal to 125 Egyptian pounds. Therefore, the watch will cost 125 Egyptian pounds and choice A is correct.
Answer:
7.92%
Explanation:
The computation of the return on total assets is shown below:
Return on assets = (Net income) ÷ (average of total assets)
where,
Net income is $2,100
Average total assets = (Beginning total assets + ending total assets) ÷ 2
= ($33,500 + $19,500) ÷ 2
= $26,500
Now put these values to the above formula
So, the ratio would equal to
= $2,100 ÷ $26,500
= 7.92%
Answer:
Investors use income statements to determine the profitability of a company over time. ... This is the amount that a company would pay shareholders, per share, if the company paid out all of its net income as dividends.
Explanation:
This can indicate fraud, duress, or undue influence.
In contracts, "consideration" is the things of value each side gives up in an exchange. So if one side gives $1 for a cup of coffee, that might be ok. Now, consider if the contract was to sell your entire house for $1! That would be a shockingly inadequate exchange because even the cheapest home is worth way more than $1.
In that case, the judge might look at <em><u>why</u></em> someone would be willing to give up so much for so little. Were they falsely told there home was worth nothing or maybe told that they would get $1 upfront and more later? That would be <u>fraud</u>. Were they told to sign the contract with a gun pointed at their head? That is an example of <u>duress</u>. Finally, did the person helping them with the contract have undue influence? If your boss, parent, or favorite celebrity advises you to do something that you don't want to do, but you worry about what they will thing if you don't, then you were a victim of their <u>undue influence. </u>