No, Luz is incorrect. Marta's quantity demanded has decreased, but her demand has stayed <span>the same. It is true that </span>As a price for a product increases, the demand for that product will be most likely to decrease because consumers have to make more sacrifice without any additional income.
But, if you pay attention to the case above, you can see the total value of demand that marta has is still the same, which is $ 60
Answer: B. to prove Stew-topia engaged in predatory pricing, you would need to prove that Stewtopia priced stew below average variable cost with the specific intention of driving 2 Live Stew out of business
Explanation:
Predatory pricing is the pricing of goods in such a way that it is so low that it is even below average variable cost. The logic being that in the Shortrun, if a firm cannot cover it's variable cost, it would have to shutdown.
Larry would therefore be correct in saying that to prove Stew-topia engaged in predatory pricing, it would need to proven that Stewtopia priced stew below average variable cost with the specific intention of driving 2 Live Stew out of business.
I think that the answer is True, because this is a good schedule to these people
Answer:
28%
Explanation:
let X = the percentage of ownership of Clor Confectionery
the investment account balance = $150,150 - X$20,500 + X75,650 = $165,550
$150,150 + X$55,150 = $165,550
X$55,150 = $15,400
X = $15,400 / $55,150 = 0.2792 = 27.92% ≈ 28%
Sensitivity analysis. Where one variable is being tweaked a little to see the NPV, that is always sensitivity analysis.
