The answer is Conflict as the other be just don’t make any sense.
Answer:
C.
Explanation:
Based on the study being described it is not a valid claim because the stronger athletes were likely to drink the new sports drink whereas the weaker athletes were likely to drink flavored water. The companies need to sample athletes that are able to consistently lift a maximum of the same amount of weight. Once they have these participants they can then start the experiment. That way they know that the athletes are all on par with each other and if one is able to lift more than the other because they drank the energy drink they can isolate the drink as a cause.
Answer:
company B
company B
Explanation:
A company has comparative advantage in production if it produces at a lower opportunity cost when compared to other companies.
Opportunity cost of producing cell phones
company A = 100 / 50 = 2
company B = 200 / 150 = 1.3
The opportunity cost of company B is lower than that of company A. Company B has a comparative advantage in the production of cell phones
A company has absolute advantage in the production of a good or service if it produces more quantity of a good when compared to other countries
Company B produces 200 computers while company A produces 100 computer. Company B has an absolute advantage in the production of computers
The opportunity cost of computer chip production is 2.
<h3 /><h3>Definition of opportunity cost.</h3>
Opportunity cost of the next best option that is forgone when one option is chosen over other options. Opportunity cost is also known as implicit cost.
<h3>Calculation of opportunity cost</h3>
In order to determine the opportunity cost divide the number of potato chips by the number of computer chips that can be made.
Opportunity cost = number of potato chips / number of computer chips
50 / 25 = 2
Please find attached the complete question. To learn more about opportunity cost, please check: brainly.com/question/623811
It is the example of the decision of an arbitrator. At its
discretion, a court may grant the equitable remedy of injunction against breach
of a contractual duty where damages would be inadequate. When a breach of
contract occurs, the non-breaching party is required to take reasonable steps
to lessen or mitigate the damages that he may sustain.
