Answer:
each firm simultaneously increased output above the Nash equilibrium level.
Explanation:
A French mathematician, Antoine Augustine Cournot developed the Cournot duopoly in his economic model “Researches into the mathematical principles of the theory of wealth”, of 1838.
Cournot duopoly also known as the Cournot competition, is an economic model where two (2) business firms having identical cost functions compete in a oligopolistic market of imperfect competition with homogeneous products.
Under the Cournot duopoly, the competing firms offer identical products and thus, choose an amount or quantity to produce independently and at the same time because they cannot collude.
Both firms in a Cournot duopoly would enjoy lower profits if each firm simultaneously increased output above the Nash equilibrium level.
Hence, the advantage of the Cournot duopoly is that, it inhibits competing firms from deviating unilaterally.
Answer:
The balance in ABC's Prepaid insurance-account as on Dec 31, 2018 is <em>$27,000</em>
Explanation:
Liability policy = ($54,000 / 18) × 6 months
Liability policy = $18,000
Crop damage policy = ($18,000 x 12 / 24)
Crop damage policy = $9,000
ABC's Prepaid insurance-account balance as on Dec 31, 2018 = $27,000
Thus,
Total Liability insurance period = 18
Now,
Expired period period - 12 months ( Jan 1, 2016 to Dec 31, 2016 )
Unexpired period = (18 - 12) months = 6 months
Answer:
scarcity
tradeoffs
Explanation:
Humans have unlimited wants and the resources available to satisfy this wants are limited. Thus, humans have to choose the most important wants and give up less important wants.
For example, if you have $20 and you want to buy a textbook , ice-cream or jeans. Each cost $20. If you need the textbook to study for a test, you would choose the book. Here $20 is the scarce resource. jeans and ice cream are what you traded off
You would need to be at least 18 years old to hold a valid Ontario licence
Based on the percentage of readers who own a particular make of the car and the random sample, we can infer that there is sufficient evidence at a 0.02 level to support the executive claim.
<h3>What is the evidence to support the executive's claim?</h3>
The hypothesis is:
Null hypothesis : P = 0.55
Alternate hypothesis : P ≠ 0.55
We then need to find the test statistic:
= (Probability found by marketing executive - Probability from publisher) / √( (Probability from publisher x (1 - Probability from publisher))/ number of people sampled
= (0.46 - 0.55) / √(( 0.55 x ( 1 - 0.55)) / 200
= -2.56
Using this z value as the test statistic, perform a two-tailed test to show:
= P( Z < -2.56) + P(Z > 2.56)
= 0.0052 + 0.0052
= 0.0104
The p-value is 0.0104 which is less than the significance level of 0.02. This means that we reject the null hypothesis.
The Marketing executive was correct.
Find out more on the null and alternate hypothesis at brainly.com/question/25263462
#SPJ1
