Answer: evoked set
Explanation:
In simple words, evoked set refers to the collection of brands that initially comes in the mind of the consumer when he or she is willing to buy a product in market. These are the brands that are of high significance to the customer and that individual customer completely trust such brand.
Every producer in the market wants to be in the evoked set of the consumer as there is a high probability that customer will choose to buy their willing commodity form such a set. However, positioning in evoked set cannot be marked quickly as it depends on various factors such as duration, quality and price etc.
Answer:
See below
Explanation:
Per the above information,
Ending account receivable balance = Beginning account receivable + Credit sales - Collections - Written off amount
$93,000 = Beginning account receivable + $108,000 - $142,000 - $130
$93,000 = Beginning accounts receivable - $34,130
Beginning accounts receivable = $93,000 + $34,130 = $127,130
So, the beginning account receivable would be;
The ending accounts receivable is computed as;
= $930 ÷ 1%
= $93,000
Answer:
Option (B) is correct.
Explanation:
Total cash collections in June:
= Cash sales + (62 percent of June credit sales) + (30 percent of May credit sales) + (5 percent of April credit sales)
= $60,000 + ($51,000 × 0.62) + ($37,000 × 0.30) + ($11,000 × 0.05)
= $103,270
Therefore, the total cash collections in June at Feeney Furniture is $103,270.
A brownfield (also known as "brown-field") investment is when a company or government entity purchases or leases existing production facilities to launch a new production activity. This is one strategy used in foreign-direct investment.
Answer:
Jill cannot hold the manufacturer responsible for her injury.
Explanation:
The above question is incomplete as there are several answer options which are listed below;
• Jill can hold the manufacturer liable for her injury as long as Lexi was in the room when she got
• Jill can hold the manufacturer liable for her injury
• Jill cannot hold the manufacturer responsible for her injury
• Lexi can hold the manufacturer liable for Jill's injury.
The above answer - Jill cannot hold the manufacturer responsible for her injury, is true according to the rule of privity of contract. The rule states that a person who is not a party to a contract does not have right to sue or be sued and to enforce the obligations arising from the contract, unlike a person who is a party to the contract.
With regards to the above scenario, Lexi, who buys a food processor is the party to the contract here, hence can sue and be sued in case of any injury suffered by her, however, Jill whom food processor was loaned to, is the third party here, hence not covered by the rule of privity of contract.
