Answer: Participation strategy
Explanation: Participation strategy refers to the strategy in which the management tries to make all the individuals in a group to collectively work for the accomplishment of a goal. It refers to associate the workers in an objective to give them a sense of superiority and belongingness towards that goal.
In the given case, Gilbert is trying to make the employees to fell the awareness towards the project by taking their ideas ans suggestions into consideration.
Hence from the above we can conclude that the correct option is E.
It seems that you have missed the necessary options to answer this question, but anyway, here is the answer. <span>A net worth statement, insurance plan, and a budget are all part of a SAVING AND INVESTING PLAN. Hope this is the answer that you are looking for. </span>
Answer: $329.75
Explanation:
The one year subscription is $40 per year. It is estimated that the average age of current subscribers is 38 and they will leave on average to 78. This means that they will leave for,
= 78 - 38
= 40 years
Evans Ltd average interest rate on long-term debt is 12% so this means that we can use that 12% as a discount rate for the cash-flow expected.
I have attached a Present Value Interest Factor of an Annuity table to this question. It helps calculate annuities faster.
The above can be treated as an annuity because the $40 is constant every year.
The present value of the $40 over 40 years can be calculated by,
= $40 * present value Interest Factor of an Annuity for 40 years at 12% (look at the table for where 40 years on the y axis intersects with 12% on the x axis)
= $40 * 8.2438 (this is the figure when it is not rounded off to 3 dp)
= $329.752
= $329.75
This shows that the lifetime flat fee of $480 is more profitable for Evans Ltd as opposed to the yearly subscription. They should therefore try to sell more of the lifetime contract with the flat fee.
Answer:
$30,000
Explanation:
Oriole Corporation purchased the painting five years ago for $10,000. In the current year, the cost of the same painting is $30,000. Oriole Corporation donated this painting to the Texas Art Museum.
So, Oriole’s charitable contribution deduction is <u>$30,000</u> as the current value of the painting is $30,000.
1) Town of Bayport:
We have that the residents value the fireworks at
a total of 50+100+300=450$. That is the utility they gain. But they
would also have to pay 360$ for the fireworks. The total outcome is
450$+(-360$)=90$. Hence, the outcome is positive and the fireworks pass
the cost benefit analysis.
If the fireworks' cost is to be split
equally, we have that each of the 3 residents has to pay 360/3=120$. Let
us now do the cost-benefit analysis for everyone.
Jacques stands to gain 50$ from the fireworks but would have to pay 120$. He will vote against it.
Also, Kyoko will gain 100$ but would have to pay 120$. He will lose utility/money from this so he will vote against.
Musashi on the other hand, would gain 300$ and only pay 120$. He is largely benefitted by this measure. Only he would
We have that 2 out of the 3 would vote against the fireworks, so that the fireworks will not be bought. The vote does not yield the same answer as the benefit-cost analysis.
2) Town of River Heights:
We have that the total value of the fireworks to the community
is 20+140+160=320$. The total value of the fireworks is lower than
their cost so their cost benefit analysis yields that they should not be
bought.
However, let's see what each resident says. The cost to each resident is 360/3=120$. Rina is against the fireworks since she will only gain 20$. Sean and Yvette are for the fireworks since they gain 140$ and 160$ respectively, which are larger than the cost of the fireworks to each of them (120$). Hence, 2 will vote for the fireworks and one will vote against and fireworks will be bought.
Again, the vote clashes with the cost-benefit analysis.
3) The first choice is wrong. It is very difficult for a government to provide the exact types of public goods that everyone wants because that would be too costly; one cannot have a public good that everyone pays for so that only a couple of people enjoy it. In our example, we saw that in every case, a public good and its production would have sime supporters and some adversaries.
Majority rule is not always the most efficient way to decide public goods; as we have seen in the second case, the cost-benefit analysis yields that the fireworks are not worth it but they are approved by the majority nonetheless.
The final sentence is correct. The differing preferences of the people make a clearcut choice impossible and the government has to take into account various tradeoffs and compromises in order to determine which public goods to provide.
