It most likely lead to prior hypothesis, reasoning by analogy, representative, ivory tower planning , and escalating commitment. :)
Employment, produce preference, current and past loans, bankruptcy histroy and debt
Explanation:
According to the question , the reward - to - risk ratio for the stock A is lesser than that of the Stock B .
The beta values for both the stock is given as -
Stock A = 0.82
and ,
Stock B = 1.29 ,
From the above information , it can be implied that either stock B is under price or the stock A is overpriced, or both .
Since , in the above case the absolute sense can not be determined and only the judgement can be made .
Answer:
It is not advisable to buy the food truck, since over the 4 years of investment it will show a loss of $ 40,000.
Explanation:
Since Eat at State is considering buying a new food truck, and it will cost $ 65,000, but is expected to generate $ 20,000 in sales over the next 4 years, and at the end of the 4th year, the truck will be sold to Eat Like a Wolverine in Ann Arbor for $ 10,000 (after taxes), and it will require $ 5,000 in additional Net Working capital that will not be recovered when the truck is sold, and the Dean of Food Services will only authorize the purchase if it is cash positive by the end of the 4th year, to determine, using the payback period method if the truck should be purchased and why, the following calculation must be performed:
-65,000 + 20,000 + 10,000 - 5,000 = X
-70,000 + 30,000 = X
-40,000 = X
Therefore, it is not advisable to buy the food truck, since over the 4 years of investment it will show a loss of $ 40,000.
Because firm (A,B, C) has the highest cost of reducing pollution by 1 unit, it would like to (sell 30 permits to, buy 30 permits from) another firm.
