Answer:
The first mover that creates a revolutionary product is in a monopoly position.
Explanation:
First Mover is the big initiator of a new product, which gains a competitive 'first mover advantage' for being the pioneer of the idea in the market.
- The first mover can be able to establish brand loyalty
- Being a first mover doesn't guarantee instant success
- The first mover can create switching costs for its customers to deter rivals.
The only apt statement is : The first mover that creates a revolutionary product is in a monopoly position. The first mover enters the market when there is no major supplier & the customer's demand is unmet. If it enables to leverage the potential huge unsatisfied market in a revolutionary way, it can be able to create unparalleled brand loyalty. And this can make it secure monopoly position in market
<span>Simply put ,this is a Submissive Symmetrical Relationship. This type of relationship happens when there are two partners but neither wants or is able to take complete control or make decisions. In this scenario, that is exactly what Sam and Bette are doing.</span>
Answer:
30,000 units
Explanation:
we can use the economic order quantity formula:
EOQ = √(2SD/H)
where:
- S = order cost (per purchase order) ≈ production run cost = $900
- D = demand in units (annual basis) ≈ production requirement = 1,500,000 units
- H = holding costs (per unit, per year) = $3 per item, per year
EOQ = √[(2 x $900 x 1,500,000) / $3] = 30,000 units
The answer for this question is True
Answer:
They should not make the change because the price of the stocks will decrease.
Explanation:
the current price of the stocks using the perpetuity formula = dividend / required rate of return
current price with current capital structure = $5.64 / 0.123 = $45.85
if the company changes its capital structure by increasing debt, the price of the stocks will be
$5.92 / 0.136 = $43.53
since the price of the stocks would actually decrease if the capital structure changes, the change should not be made. The stockholders' wealth is measured by the price of the stocks, and if the price of the stocks decreases, then the stockholders' wealth also decreases.