All categories

3 years ago

Without a strong legal systems in a market economy:

Business

1 answer:

STALIN [3.7K]3 years ago

5 0

Answer:

<u>A) private-sector entrepreneurs can expropriate the profits generated by the efforts of private and public entities.</u>

Explanation:

As there exist four basic structures of the market economy in the form of perfect competition, imperfect competition, oligopoly, and monopoly.

Thus without any legal system of trade in the market economy, the profits that are generated by the public and private sectors can be taken away by these entities as a large number of small firms tends to compete in the market against each other with there homogenous products.

Thus under such circumstances, the market economy would deprive all the profits made by the other forms in the market and put barriers to entry for others. Buyers thus will be deprived of the quality products.

You might be interested in

Velocity, a consulting firm, enters into a contract to help Burger Boy, a fast-food restaurant, design a marketing strategy to c

madam [21]

Answer:

a. Accounts Receivable (Dr.) $93,000

Bonus Receivable (Dr.) $2,325

Service Revenue (Cr.) $95,325

b. Service Revenue (Dr.) $9,300

Bonus receivable (Cr.) $9,300

c. Accounts Receivable (Dr.) $93,775

Bonus Receivable (Dr.) $775

Service Revenue (Cr.) $93,000

d. Cash (Dr.) $29,000

Bonus Receivable (Cr.) $29,000

Explanation:

The contract between Burger Boy and Velocity is for eight months.

Expected value of the contract on 1st month is :

80% * [ $93,000 * 8 months + $31,000 ] + 20% [ $93,000 * 8 months - $31,000] = $762,600

The expected value per month is $762,600 / 8 months = $95,325 per month

Expected value of the contract 5th month with revised probability is :

60% * [ $93,000 * 8 months + $31,000 ] + 40% [ $93,000 * 8 months - $31,000] = $750,200

The expected value per month is $750,200 / 8 months = $93,775 per month.

5 0

3 years ago

The cash account shows a balance of $42,000 before reconciliation. The bank statement does not include a deposit of $9,200 made

Keith_Richards [23]

Answer:

$45,473

Explanation:

Base on the scenario been described in the question, we can use this method to solve the problem.

Solution:

$42,000 + $4,960 – $1,100 – ($1,830 – $1,380) + ($381 – $318)

= $46,960- $,1,100-$450-$63

=$45,473

As our answer

8 0

3 years ago

LO 7.1Which of the following is true in a bottom-up budgeting approach?

Sedbober [7]

Answer:

The correct answer is letter "D": Departments determine their needs and relate them to the overall goals.

Explanation:

The bottom-up budgeting approach consists in giving each department within a firm the power of setting and controlling their budget according to the projects the department intends to develop that matches with the ultimate goal of the organization as a whole. It might be beneficial because each department is likely to come up with a budget that adjusts better to their needs but it could represent a headache for the company when it comes to racking each expense for each area.

6 0

3 years ago

Assume that you hold a well-diversified portfolio that has an expected return of 11.0% and a beta of 1.20. The total value of yo

diamong [38]

Answer:

hope this helps

Assume that you hold a well-diversified portfolio that has an expected return of 11.0% and a beta of 1.20. You are in the process of buying 1,000 shares of Alpha Corp at $10 a share and adding it to your portfolio. Alpha has an expected return of 21.5% and a beta of 1.70. The total value of your current portfolio is $90,000. What will the expected return and beta on the portfolio be after the purchase of the Alpha stock? Do not round your intermediate calculations.

Old portfolio return

11.0%

Old portfolio beta

1.20

New stock return

21.5%

New stock beta

1.70

% of portfolio in new stock = $ in New / ($ in old + $ in new) = $10,000/$100,000=

10%

New expected portfolio return = rp = 0.1 × 21.5% + 0.9 × 11% =

12.05%

New expected portfolio beta = bp = 0.1 × 1.70 + 0.9 × 1.20 =

1.25

Explanation:

7 0

3 years ago

On October 1, 2009, the Nintendo Wii's Japanese price dropped from ¥25,000 to ¥20,000. In the three months after the price drop,

kykrilka [37]

Answer:

B) 0.7; inelastic

Explanation:

The computation of the absolute value of the price elasticity of demand is shown below:

Elasticity is

= [(Sales - prior sales) ÷ ( Sales + prior sales) ÷ 2] ÷ [(price - dropped price) ÷ (price - dropped price) ÷ 2

= [(1,040,000 - 890,000) ÷ (1,040,000 + 890,000) ÷ 2] ÷ [(25,000 - 20,000) ÷ (25,000 + 20,000) ÷ 2]

= (150,000 ÷ 965,000) ÷ (5,000 ÷ 22,500)

= 0.15 ÷ 0.22

= 0.7

It is less than one so the demand is inelastic

4 0

3 years ago