Answer:
Dynamic Weight Loss Co.
DYNAMIC WEIGHT LOSS CO.
Classified Balance Sheet as of June 30, 20Y7
Assets
Current Assets:
Cash $119,630
Accounts Receivable 26,100
Prepaid Insurance 8,400
Prepaid Rent 6,000
Supplies 11,200
Total current assets $171,330
Long-term Assets:
Land 375,000
Equipment 325,900
Accumulated Depreciation (32,600) 293,300
Total long-term assets $668,300
Total assets $839,630
Liabilities and Equity
Current Liabilities:
Accounts Payable $10,830
Salaries Payable 7,500
Unearned Fees 21,000
Total current liabilities $39,330
Equity:
Common Stock 180,000
Retained Earnings 620,300
Total equity $800,300
Total liabilities and equity $839,630
Explanation:
a) Data and Calculations:
Trial Balance as of June 30, 20Y7
Account Titles Debit Credit
Cash $119,630
Accounts Receivable 26,100
Prepaid Insurance 8,400
Prepaid Rent 6,000
Supplies 11,200
Land 375,000
Equipment 325,900
Accumulated Depreciation - Equipment $32,600
Accounts Payable 10,830
Salaries Payable 7,500
Unearned Fees 21,000
Common Stock 180,000
Retained Earnings 620,300
Total $872,230 $872,230
Answer:
The answer is B: At the midpoint of the project, members realize that their behavior pattern must change in order to complete the project on time.
Explanation:
Punctuated equilibrium is a concept in both biology and business where long periods of relative stability are often followed by growth spurts.
The punctuated-equilibrium model argues that groups usually move forward during bursts of change after going for long periods without change.
In the answer B, this concept is captured as group members of a project realise somewhere at the midpoint, that their behavior pattern must change in order to complete the project on time.
This shows that a period of relative stability was observed and then a short period of growth will be observed during the project lifecycle. This agrees with the development pattern known as punctuated equilibrium.
Answer:
The correct answer is Inductive reasoning.
Explanation:
Inductive reasoning is a form of reasoning in which the truth of the premises supports the conclusion, but does not guarantee it. A classic example of inductive reasoning is:
- All the crows observed so far have been black
- Therefore, all crows are black
In principle, it could be that the next crow observed is not black. In contrast to deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning has the advantage of being expansive, that is, the conclusion contains more information than is contained in the premises. Given its expansive nature, inductive reasoning is very useful and frequent in science and in everyday life. However, given its fallible nature, its justification is problematic. When are we justified in making an inductive inference, and concluding, for example, that all crows are black from a limited sample of them? What distinguishes a good inductive argument from a bad one? These and other related problems give rise to the problem of induction, whose validity and importance has continued for centuries.
Answer:
<u>Favourable Changes:</u>
Sales
Gross Profit
Operating Income
Interest Expense
Net Income
<u>Unfavourable Changes:</u>
Cost Of Sales
Selling Expenses
General Expenses
Other Revenue
Income Taxes
Explanation:
Observe Movement from 2018 results to 2019 results
Erie Corp
Vertical Analysis of Income Statement
2019 2018
Sales 1,397 1,122
Less Cost Of Sales 935 814
Gross Profit 462 308
<u>Less Operating Expenses</u>
Selling Expenses 154 121
General Expenses 88 77
Operating Income 220 110
<u>Less Non- Operating Expenses</u>
Other Revenue 4 7
Interest Expense 2 9
Income Taxes 134 66
Net Income 88 42
