Solution:
Barnes Corporation purchased 75 percent of Nobles’ common stock
During the year, Nobles reports net income of $40,000.
Hence, 75% of net income of Nobbles is attributable to Barnes Corporation.
Barnes reports for income from subsidiary prior to consolidation
= 40,000 x 75%
= $30,000
Answer:
The correct answer is straight rebuy.
Explanation:
The straight buyback is a routine, low participation purchase. A minimum of information is needed and consideration of alternatives is not necessary. This type of purchase is handled by the purchasing department and is usually acquired from a list of approved suppliers. Examples of straight repurchase are repeating purchases of office supplies, and small parts.
Answer:Local content requirements (LCRs
Explanation: This refers to policy measures which expects a particular certain intermediate goods to be produced from domestic manufactures. This means for a company to operate in a particular state they need to produce some of their product from that state , use domestic manufacturing this ensure they don't take everything for themselves but are actual contributing to that state deeply.
b.) The Value added to a product by transferring ownership to the customer.
is the answer
<u>Explanation:</u>
Possession utility explains and possibly contains the gratification that arises from owning a product or using a service. Buying and selling of anything include the change of ownership from one to another. Possession utility is what lets customers asses what they purchased. Having versatile choices for payment is one way to make possession simple for customers. Other methods can be how the product is delivered, how quickly it is delivered. Possession utility gets down to knowing how people relish what they have and what they give others. Although possession utility is peculiar, it is also significant and usually results after some kind of legal exchange.
Answer:
C) One worker can easily sabotage the productivity of other workers.
Explanation:
This is a form of compensation by merit that comprises the performance of a team as a whole, so this is a way of motivating both group work and individual work.
In the scenario above, we can see that this compensation plan would be effective in leveraging the performance of individual workers, and of teams, because if each member of the team is more productive, it will benefit the team as a whole. And this method will not affect the productivity of other teams, as each team will be encouraged and engaged to do the best job possible to achieve merit pay.
The alternative that does not correspond to the question that this incentive may be better than other methods to motivate workers to work harder, is the one that says that a worker can sabotage the productivity of other workers, as that worker is also likely to be engaged in not sabotaging the work of other team members, as the remuneration bonuses depend on the effort of the entire team to work together, and not just one employee.
