Answer:
a.
Explanation:
Based on all the answers that were provided the statement that is correct is that the bid price in a hostile takeover is generally above the price before the takeover attempt is announced, because otherwise there would be no incentive for the stockholders to sell to the hostile bidder and the takeover attempt would probably fail. Which pretty much explains itself, except for that a hostile takeover is when a person or another business tries to purchase a business by going directly to the shareholders themselves.
I hope this answered your question. If you have any more questions feel free to ask away at Brainly.
Answer:
The stock price would be higher by $7.37
Explanation:
Free cash flow to equity = 195 million with a growth rate of 2% in perpetuity
Value of equity = Free cash flow to equity ÷ (Ce -g) = 195 million ÷ (13% - 2%)
= 190 ÷ 0.11 = $1,772,727,272.73 = $1,773 million
If growth rate is 3%, value of equity = 195 ÷ (13%-3%) = 195 ÷ 0.1 = $1,950 million
a. Value of stock = (1,773 + 15) million ÷ 22 = $81.27
b. Value of stock with 3% = 1,950 ÷ 22 = $88.64
Thus stock price would be higher by = b-a = $7.37
Conducting yourself ethically and legally could have examples of: making products that are trustworthy, don't false advertise (yes, you can legally do things like endorsements and bandwagons, but you can't say "If you buy this product, you will be elected to a high office!".
