<span>The question is incomplete, here is the complete question which I previously came across;</span>
When Janice went to work as a hair stylist in Rick's beauty shop, she entered into an agreement with Rick, whereby, if she left she would not work for another beauty shop within 50 miles for 2 years. Rick trained Janice in a number of new techniques. After nine months, Janice was offered a great job down the street at a new beauty shop, quit Rick, and had a number of customers follow her down the street to her new job. Rick claimed that she had signed a contract and had no right to go to work at the new shop. Janice disagreed and told Rick that no judge in the country would enforce such an agreement. Janice told Rick that she was more worried about a customer, Treena, who was threatening to sue her because her hair turned green after Janice worked on it. Janice agreed that Treena's hair was damaged. Janice pointed out, however, that she told Treena that odd results could result from a dye attempt, and she required that Treena sign a contract releasing Janice from all liabilities before she did anything with Treena's hair. Treena, however, sued anyway. The agreement Rick and Janice entered into is referred to as?
The answer is, the agreement Rick and Janice entered into is referred to as "<span>covenant not to compete".</span>
<span>
</span>
It is hard
to decide if a judge will implement a non-competition agreement. While the privileged insights of a business are important,
the law additionally puts value to a person's opportunity to seek after other
work. To be enforceable Courts more often than not require that a contract not
to compete be sensible. In California, non-competes are adequately unlawful
except if you are selling a business. Different states will implement a few provisions,
as a rule the trade secret protection, however not the work limitations.
Requesting an interview during a telephone call to the employer.
Answer:
Net income = $169.2
Growth in dividend = 76.25%
Explanation:
The projected figures are as below:
Sales = $700 x (1 + 15%) = $805 <em>(15% increase in sales)</em>
Operating costs including depreciation = $805 x 60% = $483 <em>(60% of sales)</em>
Interest expense = 40 <em>(remain constant)</em>
EBIT = Sales - Operating costs including depreciation = $805 - $483 = $322
EBT = EBIT - Interest expense = $322 - $40 = $282
Net income = EBT x (1 - Tax rate) = $282 x (1 - 40$) = $169.2
Dividend = Net income x Dividend payout ratio = $169.2 x (32/96) = $56.4
Growth in dividend = $56.4/$32 = 76.25%
<em />
Capital structure increases the ability of the company to find new wealth- creating investment opportunities.
When setting the price of a product, a company needs to take into account the costs of producing, distributing and promoting the product, as well as a profit margin.
<h3>How to set the product price correctly?</h3>
It is essential that the company align its needs and objectives with the characteristics of the market and its business, in order to define a compatible and competitive price. It is essential to analyze income and expenses to establish an optimal balance in the pricing process, revising the strategy whenever necessary.
Therefore, it is essential that pricing is aligned to the market, to the fixed and variable costs of the business, considering its needs and goals for the business to be well positioned in the market.
Find out more about pricing here:
brainly.com/question/7452044
#SPJ1
