Answer:
B. The denial is justifiable given the level of interbrand competition.
Explanation:
Anti trust law only applicable if you can proof that two or more producers in the same industry work together in order to assert their control over the market. They can do this through price fixing, controlling the amount of supply, etc.
This condition<em> can't be found</em> in the scenario above.
The denial that done by PepsiCo is justifiable because in a really competitive market, a company need to impose a strict requirement on which entities they should form a dealership relation with. If PepsiCo choose the wrong dealers, Its competitors could easily taken over the market and resulted in a huge amount of loss for the company.
Answer:
d. $970.36
Explanation:
The market price of the bond (Pv) can be calculated as follows :
Pmt = ($1,000 × 6.5%) ÷ 2 = $32.50
P/yr = 2
i = 6.99%
n = 8 × 2 = 16
Fv = $1,000
Pv = ?
Using a Financial calculator to enter the values as above, the market price of the bond (Pv) is $970.3583 or $970.36.
Answer:
Option D. All of the above
Explanation:
The reason is that on a fixed income investment, there are periodic income payments with agreed fixed interest rate. So the borrower also promise to make the full repayment of the principal in most of the cases and there are sometimes (not always) option to convert the amount lent into shares. The principal payment always fixed because the investor receives it either in the form of greater rate of returns or all of it in the form of principal repayment. This is agreed with the lender, So all the options are correct here. Option D is the right answer.
