Answer:
one should go to buy a car for $8000
Explanation:
given data
car = $8,000
price down = $6,500
solution
As here Implied Warranty is the sale contract environment oral or written that provides some assurance that the products sold are suitable for trade and purpose. It arises from the operation of the law.
- Disclaimer is a statement that order are used to prevent the creation of a warranty or contract.
- After learning about the implied warranty and disclaimer, I was not going through the items sold.
- For someone who does not offer special consumer protection, they should go to buy a car for $8000.
Answer:
The correct answer is all of the above
Explanation:
Scrap or the rework costs are the costs which is incurred in order to repair the items that are defective. And the decision to rework or scrap an item or product, ground on the benefits or advantage of the incremental costs.
If the reworked units generate or yield greater advantage or benefit rather than the selling them as scrap, then the decision to rework will be considered.
And if the decision of rework is taken, then the management should consider the incremental costs, revenue or profit from selling the defective units as scarp and the lost profit on selling and making the new units while the rework is performed.
The answer is <u>"Analyzing the organization and the environment".</u>
<u></u>
SWOT analysis refers to an important tool that helps organizations or businesses in the assessment and revelation period of strategic planning. Since it gives an inside and out perspective on the present and forward-looking circumstance of a business, the term SWOT is frequently connected with strategic planning. Both assume a vital job in the high-level planning of businesses as they include imperative information, which once recognized and analyzed, can accomplish long term business development and achievement. However, they are connected, the two ideas are distinctive components during the process of business planning.
Answer:
Please consider the following explanation.
Explanation:
Bob is correct in this case as Penny didn't make a claim that the goods were non-conforming. Penny is incorrect. Since there was no claim of non conformance, Bob doesn't have to refund the $3.000.
