Answer:
D
Explanation:
Profit is Maximize when MR = MC
since MR=40 - 0.5Q
and MC= 4
Therefore:
40-0.5Q = 4
-0.5Q = 4 - 40
-0.5Q= -36
divide through by -0.5
Q = 72
since Q = 72
from Q = 160 - 4p
72 = 160 - 4P
-4p = 72 - 160
-4P = -88
divide through by -4
P = 22
Answer:
A). The demand curve looked by the flawlessly serious firms are splendidly versatile this is a result of the items selling in the ideal rivalry. The items are indistinguishable so no firm has power over the market cost, in the event that one firm builds the cost of the item the purchasers will quickly move to the result of different firms on the grounds that the items are indistinguishable. No firm has the motivator lessen the cost of their item. So the interest bend would be a level straight line corresponding to the X pivot, this demonstrates the interest is splendidly versatile. A cost increment will bring the amount requested to zero.
B). The monopolists is just the single vendor in the market, so he can charge any value he needs, yet the amount requested will be relied on the value he charges. For instance in the event that he charges a significant expense the amount demanded will be very less and the other way around. So the monopolist is capable sell more at lower costs just, the descending inclining request bend shows the negative connection between the cost and the amount requested.
C). In the ideal rivalry there is consummately flexible interest so the MR curve is likewise the interest curve of the firm. For the monopolist the MR curve lies underneath the interest curve, as the costs go bring down the MR decreases.
Answer:
Void
Explanation:
As long as the seller made a counter offer, this counter offer made by the seller automatically leads to the rejection of the original offer from the buyer. In this light, as long as the original contract has been rejected by the seller, it is impossible for the seller to then change his mind and make a decision to accepting the original contract because at this point, the contract is void.
Answer:
B)tie-in sales.
Explanation:
Theses are the options for the question;
A. misrepresentation.
B. tie-in sales.
C. reciprocity.
D. price discrimination.
E. kickbacks
From the question, we are informed about a statement ""I'll let you sell the Harley-Davidson designer clothes only if you'll also sell a new line of clothes designed by Paula Abdul, too."
This statement made by a salesperson to a specialty retailer is potentially an example of tie- sales and may be in violation of the Clayton Act prohibition if the action substantially lessens competition.
It should be noted that tie - in sales in finance means that when a cusumer buys a goods he/she must buy the other product, it simply means the products are tied, and this is opposite of Clayton Act which was set up to bring end to transactions that can lead to monopolies.
