Answer:
a. 10.04%
b. $82.78
Explanation:
In this question, we apply the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) formula which is shown below
a. Expected rate of return or market capitalization = Risk-free rate of return + Beta × (Market rate of return - Risk-free rate of return)
= 5% + 0.72 × (12% - 5%)
= 5% + 0.72 × 7%
= 5% + 5.04%
= 10.04%
The Market rate of return - Risk-free rate of return) is also known as the market risk premium and the same is applied.
b. Now the intrinsic value would be
= Expected dividend ÷ (Required rate of return - growth rate)
= $5 ÷ (10.04% - 4%)
= $5 ÷ 6.04%
= $82.78
<span>As a social media user, Monette would best be characterized as the "Critic".
There are seven types of Social media user:
the creator, the conversationalist, the critic, the collector, the joiner, the spectator and the inactive.
Each user have their own functions. Critic refers to</span><span> the person who answers and responds to content that are posted by others, they also post reviews and comments about the products and services.</span>
Answer: In this particular case we can reason that this scenario represents <em><u>monopolistic-ally competitive market.</u></em>
Both coffee house are offering a similar product and commodity, with only little differentiation in their design.
i.e. The Starfire Coffee chain provided consumer with peppermint coffee and the experience of sitting in front of a roaring fire, chatting with friends.
whereas Reindeer provided consumer with a mug of hot cocoa and a similar community experience.
Answer:
(a) 
(b) profit = 95,683.33
Explanation:
C(x) = 5900 + 130 x
(a) Revenue, R(x) = Price × Quantity
(b) profit = R(x) - C(x)
At x = 1150
= 471,500 - 220,416.67 - 5,900 - 149,500
= 95,683.33
Hello There!
Your answer would be <u>C). A tortious act may also be a criminal act.</u>
The reason why C would be your answer is because a tortious act is something that harms someone in any way. The reason why it "may" be a criminal act is because determine if the tortious act is a criminal act really depends on the scenario that is occurring. For example, someone could cause a tortious act in a way of self defense, this scenario would be debatable because the person that committed the tortious act had a valid reason in doing so, and that was protecting themselves. But, if a person was to cause a tortious act by hurting someone to steal from them, then that would definitely be a criminal act because they are performing dangerous things to someone else, and the person could file a lawsuit against it.
Let's dive into why the other answer choices are incorrect. We can use the old fashion process of elimination:
Answer choice "A). A tortious act is always a criminal act" is incorrect because it is not always a criminal act, it depends on the scenario it's in. This is the reason why this answer choice would be eliminated.
Answer choice "B). A criminal act is always a tortious act" is incorrect because there are MANY criminal acts that doesn't harm anyone, for example, tax evasion (not paying taxes) is a criminal act, but does not cause any harm to anyone. This is the reason why this answer choice would be eliminated.
Answer choice "D). A tortious act is the same as a contract dispute" is incorrect because harming someone is not the same as not doing what a contract says. A contact dispute is when someone that's part of a contract did not do a duty that the contract says that they're suppose to do, and that usually doesn't have to be any harm to anyone. That would not be the same as a tortious act, harming someone. This is the reason why this answer choice would be eliminated.
