Answer:
1- Walmart wanted global expansion and it availed the opportunity to expand its business by entering Indian market, however the Indian market is far different than the US market that is why a joint-venture was required to enter the different market as Bharti Enterprises was already operating in Indian market.
2- To enter a new market Joint-venture will be suitable because:
In acquisition the investor acquires all the shares of an existing organisation in this way the investor will not be able to operate with the same name as in other markets as the organisation whose shares are purchased already will have a name which if changed all the goodwill will be lost. In a Joint venture the investor and a local investor invests together to form a different organisation, in this method the organisations jointly own a newly formed organisation in which they both jointly decide the name and the local investor have knowledge about the local market which can be helpful if the customer taste is different than the investors market. In a Greenfield investment the investor purchases shares and bonds of an organisation already operating in the targeted market, in this way the investor will not be able to operate with the same name as in other markets as the organisation whose shares are purchased already will have a name which if changed all the goodwill will be lost.
Explanation:
1- Walmart wanted global expansion and it availed the opportunity to expand its business by entering Indian market, however the Indian market is far different than the US market that is why a joint-venture was required to enter the different market as Bharti Enterprises was already operating in Indian market.
2- To enter a new market Joint-venture will be suitable because:
In acquisition the investor acquires all the shares of an existing organisation in this way the investor will not be able to operate with the same name as in other markets as the organisation whose shares are purchased already will have a name which if changed all the goodwill will be lost. In a Joint venture the investor and a local investor invests together to form a different organisation, in this method the organisations jointly own a newly formed organisation in which they both jointly decide the name and the local investor have knowledge about the local market which can be helpful if the customer taste is different than the investors market. In a Greenfield investment the investor purchases shares and bonds of an organisation already operating in the targeted market, in this way the investor will not be able to operate with the same name as in other markets as the organisation whose shares are purchased already will have a name which if changed all the goodwill will be lost.
Answer:
d. $75,000
Explanation:
Minimum Claim value to claim in the court for a federal diversity suit is $75,000. It is also called the amount in controversy. For example federal court diversity suit requires a minimum value of claim is $75,000. So, The minimum amount required for a federal diversity suit is $75,000 in the court.
It is true because a country that imports a tariff on shoes buyers of shoes in that country don’t do well so the answer would be True
Answer:
Year Cash Flow (A) Cash Flow (B)
0 -37,500 -37,500
1 17,300 5,700
2 16,200 12,900
3 13,800 16,300
4 7,600 27,500
1) Using an excel spreadsheet and the IRR function:
IRR project A = 20%
IRR project B = 19%
2) Using the IRR decision rule, Bruin should choose project A.
3) In this case, since the length of the projects is only 4 years, then there should be no problem with the IRR decision rule, but for projects with longer time lengths, the discounts rates might vary and the best option is to use the modified internal rate of return (MIRR). But in this case the NPV of project B is higher, then Bruin should probably project B because it has a higher NPV. The NPV is always more important then the IRR.
4) Again using an excel spreadsheet and the NPV function:
NPV project A = $6,331
NPV project B = $8,139
5) first we must subtract cash flows from A by the cash flows from B:
1 $11,600
2 $3,300
3 -$2,500
4 -$19,900
then we calculate the IRR = 16%
Bruin should be indifferent between the two projects at a 16% discount rate. That means that at discount rates above 16%, you should choose project A, but at discount rates below 16%, you should choose project B
Given:
<span>Fact 1: During contract negotiations, BB’s sales representative promised that the system was “A-1” and “perfect.”
</span><span>Fact 2: The written contract, which the parties later signed, disclaimed all warranties, express and implied.
</span><span>Fact 3: After installation the computer produced only random numbers and letters, rather than the desired accounting information
The express warranty is given in Fact 1 where the Sales Rep promised that the system was "A-1" and "perfect". There is a breach in express warranty here IF the written contract also expresses the same promises.
However, the written contract </span>disclaimed all warranties, express and implied. AND BOTH PARTIES SIGNED THIS CONTRACT. It implies that the buyer has read through the contract and has agreed with what is written in the contract. Thus, they can't file a suit against BB for breaching an express warranty since the written and signed contract has already disclaimed all warranties.
