The available options are the following:
-Board members serve on multiple boards
-People with knowledge of the firm's history are replaced with those who may not know as much information
-Less frequent board meetings
-Better decisions about important issues
Answer:
-People with knowledge of the firm's history are replaced with those who may not know as much information
Explanation:
Considering the available options, the option that appears negative and related to the point being discussed is
"People with knowledge of the firm's history are replaced with those who may not know as much information."
It is straightforward, as changing the board of directors will at some point lead to a time where the new member in the board of directors will just be a competent worker but has no history with the company.
This website would not exist. Social lives would improve because everyone would actually hang out with people. We would not be able to get places fast because cars would not be developed.
Answer: Yes they did.
Explanation:
Apparent Authority refers to a scenario where a Agent is assumed to have the power to act on behalf of a Principal regardless of if said authority had not being expressly given whether implicitly or otherwise.
It is worthy of note that this power is only valid if the third party in the transaction assumes from the conduct of the agent, that they have such powers to act.
It is stated in the text that there was no question that the brokers had the actual or implied authority to sell the stock meaning that the Principal had not done enough to show that the agents did not have the Authority to act as they did. For this reason, they can indeed be sued under the Principle of Apparent Authority.
