Refrained from making commitments to its partners and ensured that they do the same.
A strategic alliance is supposed to be two or more companies working together to achieve a common goal while still maintaining their independent company identity, but if they fail to manage that relationship then the should refrain from making promises or goals they cannot keep.
Answer:
B) not likely to have jurisdiction over the case because QuickAds is based in Georgia.
Explanation:
US laws do not recognize the legal existence of foreign or out of state companies, a company only exists in the state at which it was chartered. Although the internet has complicated things, since boundaries have faded, but some conditions must be met before a state court can serve a foreign company.
For a foreign company to be served by a state court, it must carry on “continuous and systematic” affiliations with residents of the state which makes them “essentially at home”. The company's operations must be substantial enough to make the company at home, i.e. it must carry a significant amount of business within the states boundaries.
Apparently this is not the case with QuickAds, so Alabama state courts will not have jurisdiction over it.
B.
b. Because some are getting more money, while others still get low income. Which means it is unequal.
Hope it helped!
I don’t get it umm maybe try explaining it more
Answer:
See attachment for 1 and 2
Explanation:
Number 2 (continuation)
ISP should process the soy meal into soy cookies because that increases profit by $263. However, ISP should sell the soy oil as is, without processing it into the form of Soyola, because profit will be $56 higher if they do. Since the total joint cost is the same under both allocation methods, it is not a relevant cost to the decision to sell at splitoff or process further.
