Answer:
R is a better alternative because it has a higher NPV than Q.
Explanation:
Machines Q R
First costs $380,000 $395,000
Net annual revenue $150,000 in year 1, $152,500
increasing by $500
per year thereafter
Salvage value $4,000 0
Life, years 8 10
MACRS 7 year recovery:
year % Q R
1 14.29% 54,302 56,445.50
2 24.49% 93,062 96,735.50
3 17.49% 66,462 69,085.50
4 12.49% 47,462 49,335.50
5 8.93% 33,934 35,273.50
6 8.92% 33,896 35,234.00
7 8.93% 33,934 35,273.50
8 4.46% 16,948 17,617.00
net cash flow
year Q R
1 116,505.70 118,880.93
2 130,396.70 132,982.43
3 121,411.70 123,304.93
4 115,086.70 116,392.43
5 110,676.90 111,470.73
6 110,930.10 111,456.90
7 111,326.90 111,470.73
8 108,306.80 105,290.95
9 99,125
10 99,125
Using a financial calculator, I calculated the NPV using a 12% discount rate:
- Q's NPV = $200,636.15
- R's NPV = $259,221.01
Answer:
- <em><u>C. Drive at the posted speed limit</u></em>
Explanation:
The answer choices for this question are:
- A. Keep alert and watch out for construction barrels or cones
- B. Slow down even if you don't think you'll hit a road worker
- C. Drive at the posted speed limit
- D. Keep as much distance as you can while navigating around them
Since the conditions of the road are not the best, you should drive below the posted speed of limit.
The only presence of workers on the road represent a risk for them and for you.
The number of lanes are reduced, the road could present potholes, dirt, stones, or even some substances that make the pavement slippery. You could not have good visibility.
All those risks make that you have to be extremely careful, reduce your speed, lower than than the posted speed limit.
Thus, you should:
- A. Keep alert and watch out for construction barrels or cones
- B. Slow down even if you don't think you'll hit a road worker
- C. <u>NOT </u>drive at the posted speed limit
- D. Keep as much distance as you can while navigating around them
Answer:
Without cafeteria plan Karen taxable income is 2250 dollars and with cafeteria plan the taxable income is $2135.
Without cafeteria plan Katie taxable income is 2075 dollars and with cafeteria plan the taxable income is $1960.
Explanation:
A married women Karen earns = $2250
Katie single women earn = $2075
Employee contribution to health care = $115
If the Karen decline to participate in the cafeteria then her taxable income is $2250 (wages).
If the Karen accept to participate in the cafeteria then her taxable income is $2250 - $115 (contribution) = $2135
If Katie declined to participate in the cafeteria then her taxable income is $2075 (wages).
If Katie accept to participate in the cafeteria then her taxable income is $2075 - $115 (contribution) = $1960
Answer:
Monopolist can charge a higher price from women.
Explanation:
A monopolist is producing 100,000 units of a product.
The price of the product is $5 per unit.
The price elasticity of demand for men at this price is -3.5.
The price elasticity for women, on the other hand, is -0.8.
This means that the men have a relatively elastic demand for the product. While on the other hand, women have relatively inelastic demand. This implies that if the price is increased the demand from women will not change by a greater proportion.
While demand from men can change to a greater proportion because of a change in price.
In this situation, the firm can charge a higher price from women. This is an example of third-degree price discrimination.
The option that will be best in this scenario would be a <span>Parallel test.
In a parallel test, same input will be entered in two different version of simulation. By doing this, we could create multiple simulations to test several possibilities and reducing the total time needed at the same time. The downside is that this test exposes the tester to a high risk of making a mistake.</span>