Joint costs are irrelevant in decisions regarding what to do with a product after split-off.
The reason for this answer is because they are not relevant for the decision to either sell or to process further.
The costs are the same. It does not matter if you are to sell at a split off or not. We can then regard it as either a past or sunk cost. In summary it means that they have being paid off already.
Read more on brainly.com/question/14988439?referrer=searchResults
Answer:
The correct answer is option (A).
Explanation:
According to the scenario, the given data are as follows:
Salaries payable at the end of year 1 = $60,000
Salaries payable at the end of year 2 = $90,000
Salary expense in year 2 = $620,000
So, we can calculate the cash outflows for salaries in year 2 by using following formula:
Cash outflow = Salary recorded in year 2 + Salaries payable at the beginning of the year - Salaries payable at the end of year
= $620,000 + $60,000 - $90,000
= $590,000
Hence, the cash outflow for salaries in year 2 is $590,000.
Answer:
-1.83%
Explanation:
The closing price was 12,743.40, which was down by .
it means that the opening price was
$12,743.40 + $237.44 = $12,980.44.
The percentage return will be the
return/ original price x 100
=- - 237.44/12,980.44 x 100
= - 0.018291574 x 100
= - 1.83%
Answer:
A. Veto the research
Explanation:
The research should be vetoed or rejected because with the market research, estimated earnings becomes $10, 000 less than without market research. This is because when market research is done, estimated earnings becomes 330,000, but cost of market research is 40,000. This the company will have a net estimated earnings of $290,000.
Whereas, if they don't engaged in market research, they are expected to have an estimated earnings of $300,000.
Therefore, the market research should be vetoed.
Answer:
Comparative advantage.
Explanation:
Comparative advantage in economics is the ability of an individual or country to produce a specific good or service at a lower opportunity cost better than another individual or country.
The comparative advantage gives a country a stronger sales margin than their competitors as they are able to sell their specific products or render their peculiar services at a lower opportunity cost.
In 1817, David Ricardo who is an english political economist talked about the law of comparative advantage in his book “On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation." Also, the principle of comparative advantage states that, nations (countries) can become better off than their contemporaries through the process of specializing in what they know how to produce or do best.
This simply means that, any country applying the principle of comparative advantage, would enjoy an increase in output and consequently, a boost in their Gross Domestic Products (GDP).
In general, individuals and nations should specialize in producing those goods for which they have a comparative advantage.
