Answer:
4/11 and 6/15 dressers.
Explanation:
Absolute advantage is the ability of a country to produce more of a product given the same resources than another country per unit time. It also applies when a country is able to produce same amount of goods with another country given less inputs.
So a country that produces more goods uses a more efficient process to get more output.
In this scenario a worker in Peru can produce 11 lamps or 4 dressers in a day and a worker in Canada can produce 15 lamps or 6 dressers in a day. Canada has absolute advantage in producing lamps and dressers, so importing these items will not be beneficial.
To get a balance where both countries will benefit a lamp will have to go for a ratio of each countrie's product to the opportunity cost.
That is for Peru to produce 4 dressers it will have opportunity cost of 11 lamps. So the ratio is 4/11.
Also for Canada to produce 6 dressers it will have opportunity cost of 15 lamps. So the ratio is 6/15.
Lamp should trade for between 4/11 to 6/15 dressers for both countries to benefit.
Solution:
Differential Analysis:
Continue Eliminate Net income
Inc/Dec
Sales 201000 0 -201000
variable cost 176000 0 176000
Contribution margin 25000 0 -25000
Fixed cost 30000 20300 9700
Net income / (loss) -5000 -20300 -15300
No, The Product line shall not be eliminated
Answer:
Explanation:
Interest Factors
<u>Periods 6% 7% 8% 9% 10% 11
%</u>
1 1.0600 1.0700 1.0800 1.0900 1.1000 1.1100
2 1.1236 1.1449 1.1664 1.1881 1.2100 1.2321
3 1.1910 1.2250 1.2597 1.2950 1.3310 1.3676
4 1.2625 1.3108 1.3605 1.4116 1.4641 1.5181
1)
Future value paying simple interest = Principal + [( principal * interest) * investment period]
Future value paying simple interest = $2,000 + [ ( $2,000 * 9%) * 3]
Future value paying simple interest = $2,000 + 540
Future value paying simple interest = $2,540
2)
Future value paying compound interest = Present value * ( 1 + interest)n
Future value paying compound interest = $2,000 * ( 1 + 0.09)3
Future value paying compound interest = $2,000 * 1.295029
Future value paying compound interest = $2,590.058
3)
Difference = $2,590.058 - 2,540
Difference = $50.058
Answer:
Ball can certainly hold Sullivan to a contract for sale of the land. Sullivan in his reply to Ball's enquiry offered to sell the forty-acre tract of land at $60,000 and nothing less. Ball accepted this offer by Sullivan by stating his acceptance.
These exchanges of offer and acceptance meet the terms of a valid contract. Therefore, Ball can always hold Sullivan for contract enforcement.
Explanation:
In making a valid contract, offer and acceptance are key ingredients, with specific consideration. Since the two parties, Ball and Sullivan are agreed on the consideration and have exchanged offer and acceptance, the validity of the contract is enhanced thereupon.
In this situation when the seller has filed for bankruptcy then Broker Joe has to terminate the contract. Therefore, Option B is the correct statement.
<h3>What do you mean by contract?</h3>
A legally enforceable agreement that creates, defines, and regulates mutual rights and obligations between its parties is called a contract.
An agreement usually involves the exchange of goods, services, money, or the promise to change any of these at a later date.
Therefore, Option B is the correct statement.
Learn more about contract here:
brainly.com/question/5746834
#SPJ1
