Answer:
True.
Explanation:
In today's world it is a mistake to relate environmental and social sustainability to rising costs and altruism. It is a fact that consumers are more informed and have transformed their consumer relationship with companies, currently society demands organizational transparency and seeks to relate to entities that help in social and environmental development.
But more than altruism and improvement of the organizational image, companies that adopt an environmental and social management system achieve several strategic and economic benefits, which helps to reduce costs and waste, besides the possibility of market gain and increased customer satisfaction. stakelhoders, as the most important of the environmental and social management system, continuous process improvement, which in the long term becomes value for the organization.
Answer:
20 years (scenario A) and 16 years (scenario B)
Explanation:
The real GDP will double in "n" number of years, with "n" estimated by interpolation using the formula below.
In the solutions below, we assumed current GDP to be 1, and as a result, the GDP will double to 2.
Scenario A
When you substitute 20 for "n" in the left hand side (LHS) of the equation, you will arrive at 1.99 which is approximately equal to 2. Any number below 20 will result in a number less than 2.
Thus, with an average annual real GDP growth rate of 3.5%, real GDP will double in about 20 years.
Scenario B
When you substitute 16 for "n" in the left hand side (LHS) of the equation, you will arrive at 2.02 which is approximately equal to 2. Any number below 16 will result in a number less than 2.
Thus, with an average annual real GDP growth rate of 4.5%, real GDP will double in about 16 years.
Answer:
3.44%
Explanation:
The computation of the return if sold the fund at the year end is shown below:
= {[Price × (1 - Front End Load) × ((1 + fund increase percentage) -expense ratio)] - price} ÷ price
={[$20 per share × (1 - 5.75%) × ((1 + 11%) - 1.25%)] - 20} ÷ 20
= 3.44%
We simply applied the above formula so that the correct return could come
Answer:
$441,495
Explanation:
Since the information is incomplete, I looked for the missing part and found the attached information.
the current yield of a 1.5 years zero coupon bond = (100 / 89.9)¹/¹°⁵ - 1 = 0.0736 = 7.36%
the current yield of a 6 months zero coupon bond = (100 / 97.087)¹/⁰°⁵ - 1 = 0.0609 = 6.09%
now to calculate the future interest rate:
(1.0736²/1.0609) - 1 = 0.0865 = 8.65%
since we are told to determine the price of the bond:
(100/P)¹/¹°⁵ - 1 = 0.0865
(100/P)¹/¹°⁵ = 1.0865
100/P = 1.0865¹°⁵
100/P = 1.1325
100/1.1325 = P
P = 88.299
the expected price of the bond = 88.299% x $500,000 = $441,495
Answer:
The answer is D, the reporter is liable for a claim of libel
Explanation:
First of, we need to understand that libel in it self refers to a false statement or report published against an individual and of which the report has a very high tendency of tarnishing the individuals image. In order words, it can also be refereed to as the defamation of character where the victim in this case is refereed to as the character.
So, referring back to the question. As a reporter, it is assumed that proper diligence has been done in respect to investigation or investigative journalism as some like to call it before going before the public to declare such a defaming statement and in such a case where such sequentially, the statement comes to be a false statement, the reporter and in some cases the firm at large is liable for a claim of libel.
So as related to the question asked, the answer is D.
