Answer: (a) $295 million
(b) $326 million
Explanation:
Given that,
Sales = $900 million during 2016
Cash = $871 million
Cost of goods sold = $280 million
Expenses for the year totaled = $325 million
Paid for Inventory = $375 million
Paid for everything else = $285 million
Beginning cash = $115 million
(a) Net Income = Sales - Cost of goods sold - Expenses for the year totaled
= $900 - $280 - $325
= $295 million
(b) Carter's cash balance at the end of 2016:
= Cash + Beginning cash - Paid for Inventory - Paid for everything else
= $871 + $115 - $375 - $285
= $326 million
Answer:
1.5
Explanation:
Current ratio = current asset/current liabilities
This ratio is used to determine how quickly the current assets can be used to settle the current liabilities as they fall due.
current assets = $120,000
current liabilities = $80,000
The firm's current ratio = $120,000/$80,000
= 1.5
Answer:
1. Intensive Distribution
2. Selective Distribution
3. Intensive Distribution
4. Exclusive Distribution
5. Selective Distribution
6. Exclusive Distribution
Explanation:
Intensive Distribution is the one in which the product is available almost everywhere. That the product is easily available and the company ensures that it has a wide range of consumers.
Selective Distribution is the one in which the product is available only at some identified places, as for example the 5. point the apple phones are available usually at apple stores or some other specified mobile sellers, thus it is easily available yet at some limited shops only.
Exclusive Distribution is the one in which the product is available only at some exclusive shops, as in the 4th point and 6th point the luxury brand is not easily available and rather at only a few outlets of the company.
Currently, I would say LEAN and Six Sigma.
Answer:
Jill cannot hold the manufacturer responsible for her injury.
Explanation:
The above question is incomplete as there are several answer options which are listed below;
• Jill can hold the manufacturer liable for her injury as long as Lexi was in the room when she got
• Jill can hold the manufacturer liable for her injury
• Jill cannot hold the manufacturer responsible for her injury
• Lexi can hold the manufacturer liable for Jill's injury.
The above answer - Jill cannot hold the manufacturer responsible for her injury, is true according to the rule of privity of contract. The rule states that a person who is not a party to a contract does not have right to sue or be sued and to enforce the obligations arising from the contract, unlike a person who is a party to the contract.
With regards to the above scenario, Lexi, who buys a food processor is the party to the contract here, hence can sue and be sued in case of any injury suffered by her, however, Jill whom food processor was loaned to, is the third party here, hence not covered by the rule of privity of contract.
