A local barnes and noble bookstore ordered 80 marketing books but received 60 books. what percent of the order was missing?
To solve this question:
Take the 60 books received and divide them by the total 80 books they ordered.
60/80 = 75%
Barnes and Noble received 75% of the books they ordered so they are missing 25% of them.
The better the IRR, the better. but, a corporation may additionally decide on a mission with a decreased IRR as it has other intangible advantages, together with contributing to a larger strategic plan or impeding competition.
Solution:
NPV of Project S= -$1,000 +$895.03/(1+10.5%) + $250//(1+10.5%)^2 +$10//(1+10.5%)^3 +$5//(1+10.5%)^4 =25.49320776
IRR of Project S= -$1,000 +$895.03/(1+r%) + $250//(1+r%)^2 +$10//(1+r%)^3 +$5//(1+r%)^4 =0
IRR =12.80%
NPV of Project L = -$1,000+ $5/(1+10.5%) +$260/(1+10.5%)^2 + $420/(1+10.5%)^3 + $802.50/(1+10.5%)^4
=$67.01
IRR of Project L=
-$1,000+ $5/(1+r%) +$260/(1+r%)^2 + $420/(1+r%)^3 + $802.50/(1+r%)^4 =0
IRR =12.700%
Project L is better than Project S since L has higher NPV
IRR of Project L is 12.7%.
Learn more about IRR here:-brainly.com/question/28428807
#SPJ4
Answer:
The correct answer to the following question is negligent hiring .
Explanation:
Negligent claim can be defined as a legal claim made by an individual ( who can be an employee or customer ) against the employer, because the individual has been injured by the employee who has a history of doing such incidents with others. This hiring claim ( negligent ) argues that the employer should have know about the history of such employees who are threat to other employees and customers.
Answer:
b. 300,000 shares being sold is an issuer transaction and the 200,000 shares being sold is a non-issuer transaction.
Explanation:
A non-issuer transaction is a transaction that does not directly benefit an issuer or it was not directly executed to benefit an issuer.
According to the Uniform State Law, an entity involved in the sales of certificates of interest, leases, mining titles among others is officially exempted from being labelled as an issuer. Hence, the entity (officers of the firm) in the question are non-issuer brokers.
Specifically, when the sales of stock are carried out by someone or an individual who is not a registered stockbroker, that individual officially becomes what is called 'a non-issuer broker-dealer'. The implication is that such a transaction is to be exempted from the registration requirements of the Security Exchange Commission.
In this question, since the issuer newly issued 300,000 shares while the remaining 200,000 in the proposed combination was offered by Officers of the firm - non-issuer broker-dealers. The Law states that it must be separated to show that 300,000 shares are sold in an issuer transaction (Primary) directly involving an official issuer while 200,000 shares are sold in a non-issuer transaction (Secondary).
Answer:
huh.............................................................................................
