Answer:
$34,000
Explanation:
Accounting profit = Total revenue - Explicit costs
i.e Total revenue = $50,000
Explicit costs = $12,000 + $1,000 + $3,000 = $16,000
Therefore; $50,000 - $16,000 = $34,000.
This is an example of <u>Competitor Analysis</u>
- An evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of present and future rivals is known as competitive analysis in marketing and strategic management. In order to recognize possibilities and risks, this analysis gives both an offensive and a defensive strategic perspective.
<h3><u>What information should a competitor analysis contain?</u></h3>
- A competitive study should look at the attributes, market share, prices, marketing, differentiators, strengths, and weaknesses of your rivals as well as their locations, cultures, and consumer feedback.
- This article is for small company owners, both new and experienced, who wish to research their rivals to enhance their goods or services.
To learn more about Competitor Analysis, Click the Links.
brainly.com/question/28090263
brainly.com/question/18685357
#SPJ4
Answer:
the estimation of the cost of equity is 7.4%
Explanation:
The computation of the estimation of the cost of equity is shown below:
Here we used the Capital Asset Pricing model formula i.e.
Cost of equity = Risk free rate + Beta × market risk premium
= 6% + 0.20 × 7%
= 6% + 1.4%
= 7.4%
Hence, the estimation of the cost of equity is 7.4%
We simply applied the above formula so that the correct value could come
And, the same is to be considered
Answer:
118%
Explanation:
Calculation for the M2 measure invested in the managed portfolio
Using this formula
M2 measure invested in the managed portfolio=Managed portfolio standard deviation standard deviation/Market portfolio's standard deviation
Let plug in the formula
M2 measure invested in the managed portfolio=26%/22%
M2 measure invested in the managed portfolio=118%
Therefore the adjusted portfolio P* needed to calculate the M2 measure will have 118% invested in the managed portfolio and the rest in T-bills
Answer: Bonds are generally a safer, or less risky, investment than are stocks
Explanation: The biggest pro of investing in stocks over bonds is that history shows, stocks tend to earn more than bonds - especially long term. Additionally, stocks can offer better returns if the company growth is exponential, earning the investor potentially millions on an originally minuscule investment.
Many investors are under the impression that bonds are automatically safer than stocks. After all, bonds pay investors a regular fixed income, and their prices are much less volatile than those of stocks. Conversely, a stock is low-risk for the issuing company, but it's high-risk for investors.