I believe the answer is: inductive reasoning
In inductive reasoning, the premises would be viewed as some sort of supply of evidence for the general conclusion. In the example above,
"all professional athletes earn a lot of money" is the premise that is used as some sort of evidence for " wes makes a lot of money", which is the speaker's conclusion.
Answer:
The answer is "1.1"
Explanation:
In the case of a single Interest, the principal value is determined as follows:
![\ I = Prt \\\ A = P + I\\A = P(1+rt) \\\\A = amount \\P= principle\\r = rate\\t= time](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5C%20I%20%3D%20Prt%20%5C%5C%5C%20A%20%3D%20P%20%2B%20I%5C%5CA%20%3D%20P%281%2Brt%29%20%5C%5C%5C%5CA%20%3D%20amount%20%5C%5CP%3D%20principle%5C%5Cr%20%3D%20rate%5C%5Ct%3D%20time)
In case of discount:
![D = Mrt \\P = M - D \\P = M(1-rt)\\\\Where, D= discount \\M =\ Maturity \ value \\](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=D%20%3D%20Mrt%20%5C%5CP%20%3D%20M%20-%20D%20%5C%5CP%20%3D%20M%281-rt%29%5C%5C%5C%5CWhere%2C%20%20D%3D%20discount%20%5C%5CM%20%3D%5C%20%20Maturity%20%20%5C%20value%20%5C%5C)
Let income amount = 100, time = 1.5 years, and rate =20 %.
Formula:
A = P(1+rt)
A =P+I
by putting vale in the above formula we get the value that is = 76.92, thus method A will give 76.92 value.
If we calculate discount then the formula is:
P = M(1-rt)
M = 100 rate and time is same as above.
![P = 100(1-0.2 \times 1.5) \\P = 100 \times \frac{70}{100} \\P = 70](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=P%20%3D%20100%281-0.2%20%5Ctimes%201.5%29%20%5C%5CP%20%3D%20100%20%5Ctimes%20%5Cfrac%7B70%7D%7B100%7D%20%5C%5CP%20%3D%2070)
Thus Method B will give the value that is 70
calculating ratio value:
![ratio = \frac{\ method\ A \ value} {\ method \ B \ value}\\\\\Rightarrow ratio = \frac{76.92}{70}\\\\\Rightarrow ratio = \frac{7692}{7000}\\\\\Rightarrow ratio = 1.098 \ \ \ \ or \ \ \ \ 1.](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=ratio%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B%5C%20method%5C%20%20A%20%5C%20value%7D%20%7B%5C%20method%20%5C%20B%20%5C%20value%7D%5C%5C%5C%5C%5CRightarrow%20ratio%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B76.92%7D%7B70%7D%5C%5C%5C%5C%5CRightarrow%20ratio%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B7692%7D%7B7000%7D%5C%5C%5C%5C%5CRightarrow%20ratio%20%3D%201.098%20%5C%20%5C%20%5C%20%5C%20%20or%20%5C%20%5C%20%5C%20%5C%20%201.)
Answer:
b. could be low because people might adjust their expectations quickly if they found anti-inflation policy credible
Explanation:
In the given situation, it is mentioned that the rational expectations proponets said that the sacrified ratio would be lesser as the people wants to adjust their expectations in a fastest way in the case when they found that the anti-inflation policy is credible
Therefore as per the given situation, the option b is correct
Answer:
Dividend yield=10.3%
Explanation:
Mv=Do(1+g)/(Ke-g)
MV=?
Do=2.27
g=2.1%
Ke=14.56%
Mv=2.27(1+2.1%)/(14.56%-2.1%)
MV=2.75/(12.46%)
MV=$22.1
Dividend yield=dividend per share/share price per share
Dividend yield=2.27/22.1
Dividend yield=10.3%
Strategic alliances are generally meant to increase the business strength. Most of the cooperative strategies aim at drawing upon the individual strengths of partners to be more competitive as a single unified unit.
There are a lot of challenges in getting cooperative strategies to work as envisaged during the planning phases. When corporate companies seek cooperation strategies, the hindsight which comes is that most of them compete against each other).
Hence, it is natural that such companies will seek to fulfill their interests first before considering the interests of their partnerships. Then, some companies seek cooperative partnerships with partners who are already having other collaborators.
It also follows that such cooperation lacks commitment. There is also a lack of detailing the operational structure by which operational strategy will be a great success.
To know more about Strategic alliance here:
brainly.com/question/14014533
#SPJ4