Answer:
<em>A. Cycle inventory exists to avoid customer service problems.</em>
<em></em>
Explanation:
Cycle inventory is the part of inventory kept by a supplier, that shows the amount of inventory available to satisfy demand. Cycle inventory allows the supplier to keep track of his available inventory so as to remove the problem of not meeting customers demand, which can led to loss of customers. And also to reduce the problem of over-storage that can lead to additional holding charge.
Answer:
1.37 - 1.90
Explanation:
Really hard to say a exact number but here's and idea.
Answer:
Scrap
Explanation:
The scrap material is that material that is not usable for the or the services are no longer available and these products are not used so far for the production process. It is totally and completely discarded and used as a by product production process
Hence, the correct option is scrap
And all other options are wrong and incorrect
Answer:
The aggregate demand will fall
Explanation:
The aggregate supply measures the quantity of real GDP that can be supplied by in the economy at different price levels. it measures planned output if both prices and average wage rates can change, the Long run aggregate supply curve is assumed to be vertical (this means it remains constant when the general price level changes).
The leftward shift in aggregate supply means that at the same price levels the quantity supplied of real GDP has decreased. This is mostly due to natural disasters or other supply shocks like economic depression, when there is leftward shift in aggregate there would be fewer workers available to produce goods at any given price.
Answer:
The answer is: C) lose because he will not be able to prove reliance on the misrepresentation.
Explanation:
In order for Larson to be able to rescind the contract, he would have to prove that he had reasonable reliance that Robert Redford owned that specific car. Reasonable reliance refers to a person believing something to be a fact, which any other person could reasonably believe in as well.
But exactly how could he prove that someone else might also believe that the car was previously owned by Robert Redford? I find it very doubtful that he can prove that.
