Answer: 13.2%
Explanation:
Given data:
No of stores in the market = 5000
No. of store owners = 2000.
Allison charges = $8/month
Sam charges = $8/month.
Solution:
The market penetration rate would be calculated based on potential customers.
Using our general formula,
Market penetration=Numbers of customers who purchased Allison derived sales and Sam derived sales /Total potential population
Where,
Total potential population=1,500
•Allison derived sales = 129 customers
•Sam derived sales = 69 customers
•Numbers of customers who purchased Allison derived sales and Sam derived sales=129 customers+ 69 customers
•Numbers of customers who purchased Allison derived sales and Sam derived sales =198 customers
Let’s input this into our general formula.
Market penetration
= 169 customers/1,500
= 0.132*100
= 13.2%
The market penetration rate based on potential customers is 13.2%
Answer:
Desing A is a better deal as the equivalent annual cost is lower than desing B
Anywa, bot desing cost are above the city collections thus, it cannot afford the sanitary systems unless it raises taxes
Explanation:
<em><u>Desing A </u></em>
F0 405,000
operating and maintenance cost 51,000 for 14 years
Present value of the operating and maintenance cost:
C = $ 51,000.00
time = 14 years
rate = 0.07
PV $446,018.8673
net worth: $ 851,081.87
equivalent annual cost:
PV 851,082
time 14
rate 0.07
C $ 97,316.904
<u><em>Desing B</em></u>
F0 251,000
operating and maintenance cost 89,000 for 14 years
C 89,000.00
time 14
rate 0.07
PV $778,346.6507
net worth: $ 1,029,346.65
equivalent annual cost:
C $ 117,700.580
Answer:
Part a
Debit : Accounts Receivable $18,000
Debit : Cost of Sales $10,800
Credit : Sales Revenue $18,000
Credit : Inventory $10,800
Part b
Debit : Cash $16,200
Debit : Discount allowed $1,800
Credit : Accounts Receivable $18,000
Part c
Debit : Accounts Receivable $600
Credit : Cash $600
Explanation:
The perpetual method calculates the cost of sales for each transaction made.
See the journals prepared as above
Answer:
The correct answer is Inductive reasoning.
Explanation:
Inductive reasoning is a form of reasoning in which the truth of the premises supports the conclusion, but does not guarantee it. A classic example of inductive reasoning is:
- All the crows observed so far have been black
- Therefore, all crows are black
In principle, it could be that the next crow observed is not black. In contrast to deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning has the advantage of being expansive, that is, the conclusion contains more information than is contained in the premises. Given its expansive nature, inductive reasoning is very useful and frequent in science and in everyday life. However, given its fallible nature, its justification is problematic. When are we justified in making an inductive inference, and concluding, for example, that all crows are black from a limited sample of them? What distinguishes a good inductive argument from a bad one? These and other related problems give rise to the problem of induction, whose validity and importance has continued for centuries.
Answer:
The correct answer here is B) Transformational leader.
Explanation:
Transformational leadership style is a type of leadership, where a leader would work with its team so that a leader can identify changes that are needed, leader would create a vision to guide change through the inspiration and executes that change in tandem with committed team members. Transformational leader also helps in enhancing the motivation, job performance and morale of its team and followers through various mechanism like being a role model to others, connecting with teams sense of identity.
