Answer:
The boy: 8 years old
The sister: 11 years old
Explanation:
We assume that the age at present of the boy is x (years old).
As he is younger than his sister 3 years, so that his sister's present age is great than x 3 years
=> Her present age is: x + 3 (years old)
Two years ago, the boy is younger than present two years
=> The boy's age two years ago is: x - 2 (years old)
Similarly, the sister's age two years ago is: (x+3)-2 = x + 1 (years old)
As given, two years ago he was two-thirds of his sister's age, so that we have:
<em>The boy's age two years ago = </em>
<em> × the sister's age two years ago</em>
⇒ 
⇒ 
⇒ 
⇒ 
⇒ 
=> x + 3 = 8 + 3 = 11
So the present age of the boy is 8 years old, of the sister is 11 years old
The candidate with 6 months of experience shall be hired by the department for the position as an entry-level cashier.
<h3>Who is cashier?</h3>
A cashier is a professional who has expertise in managing the cash inflows and outflows of an organization and deal with the cash transactions of an organization on a daily basis.
A cashier who has 6 months of experience be more suitable for such role in the department, and will also take lesser pay than the one with 30 years of experience.
Hence, it may be concluded that the cashier with less experience will be a suitable one to be hired at the position as such.
Learn more about cashier here:
brainly.com/question/27622487
#SPJ1
Answer:
The stockholder's equity will be increased by $500
Explanation:
While stockholders equity is the amount of assets available to shareholders after all liabilities have been settled , treasury stock is the stock that is bought back by the issuing organisation with the aim of reducing the number of outstanding stock in the open market.
Looking at the scenario given , it was an indirect way of raising fund and increasing the equity of the stockholders equity as the treasury stock was later resold at a higher price.
Therefore , the stockholder's equity increases by 3,000- 2500 = 500
Answer:
Explanation:
Issue: Will the court rule in support of Daniel’s argument that Nintendo breached the warranty based on reasonable expectation on the performance of an expensive system and statements made while selling the gaming system?
Rule: There is a creation of express warranty when a seller makes a description of the statement quality, condition or performance of goods sold. This warranty is created by the statement of facts and if the seller uses words to designate the value of the supposed goods, it will only be considered as an opinion that does not create any express warranty.
The customer’s reasonable expectation of the existence of the gaming system based on the price leads to implied warranty. The goods sold should be logically fit for the general purpose for which it is sold. It should be of proper quality to satisfy the implied warranty of merchantability and the goods should fit the particular purpose for which the buyer will use the goods to satisfy the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
Analysis: Here, the argument of Daniel that Nintendo’s description of the gaming system as “most reliable”, and “durable” asserted that the quality and performance of the gaming system will not stay because these words create general statements that are made as part of sale or seller’s opinion about the goods. These words would be considered as puffery and do not create any express warranty. The higher price of the gaming system would create an implied warranty about the performance of the system, but the switch failed only after the warranty period. When the seller has expressly stated the warranty period as one year, any defects that occur after the warranty period will not breach the implied warranty.
Moreover, the gaming system was reasonably fit for Daniel’s business purpose and worked well during the warranty period. Hence Daniel’s arguments will not stay in front of the court.
Conclusion: The court will not rule in favor of Daniel and Daniel will not be able to recover against Nintendo because no breach of warranty had occurred.
Answer:
The answer is 3.3%
Explanation:
Percentage growth rate is
New figure - Old figure /old figure x 100%
Real GDP in 2011 is $15.5 trillion
Real GDP in 2010 is $15 trillion
So we have $15.5 - $15/$15 x 100%
$0.5/$15 x 100%
0.033 x 100%
3.3% is the growth rate between 2011 and 2010.
Alternatively, new figure - old figure - 1
$15.5/15 - 1
1.033 - 1
0.033
Expressed as a percentage
0.033 x 100%
3.3%
