Answer:
Total Research Spending = $20,000 + $10,000 = $30,000
Amortization Rate = 1/5years = 20%
Expense in Year 1, 2 and 3 = $30,000 X 20% = $6,000 Each year
Explanation:
Answer and Explanation:
An increase in the number of firms increases the demand elasticity. As the demand elasticity increases from 2 to 3 it means you could encounter less demand if product prices are increased. At a demand elasticity of -3, it is regarded as inelastic demand and a change in price will not affect the demand for the product as customers are still likely to patronize the product example gasoline. Due to its high demand, an increase in price will not readily affect the demand for it. Therefore if you are to change the price from $10 at 2 to 3 demand elasticity increase, the percentage of increase from 2 to 3 is given as.
3-2/2 X 100 = 50%
The new charge (x) at -3 demand elasticity = 50%/3 = 0.66666666
The increase in the new charge is therefore $10 + $10x = $10 + $10(0.166666) = $11.67
I would say d because that’s a product which is also a supply
Answer:
The given scenario highlights that Mr. B has submitted a financial report which possess some irregularities. According to the budget Mr. B has to provide the finance to the purchase department rather than the facilitating department. Even though the facilitating department is operating successfully, it is unethical to divert the finance to the other department rather than to the specified one.
Thinking ethically, Mr. R who is operating in the middle management of the organization has the responsibility to report this unethical act for the proper operations of the organization. Some of the individuals or positions who can be interested in this problem can be the Human resource manager or the public relations manager who can handle the issue in a diplomatic manner. As a middle manager he can also highlight the issue to the account team and also to his direct manager.
Mr. R can face the legal implications as he is misusing his authority. It is legally punishable If someone one in the managerial position is misusing his authority.
One of the ethical models which can be applied here can be Utilitarianism. This model suggests that the action will be considered as good if the result or the outcome is good. According to this model if the diversion of the finance to the sustainability initiative produces good results for the company then it can be considered as a right act rather than considering unethical.
Next ethical model can be the moral relativism. According to this model the people from outside circle cannot judge the activities of the people considering ethical or unethical. Here Mr. B is the boss of Mr. R who is the top manager of the organization. He can posses some strategies and authorities to make the operations of the organization sustainable. Hence Mr. R may not hold the right to judge his actions.
When making decision regarding the present scenario, Mr. R should consider both the ethical models. If the outcome is good and the manager is having the authority to make critical decisions like mentioned in the scenario then the activity cannot be considered as unethical.
Considering the scenario and the ethical models the middle manager Mr. R can conduct a research for identifying the outcome of Mr. B’s action. If he identifies good outcome then he can leave the issue. If there is any personal interest for MR. B and not positive outcome for the company then he can highlight this issue.
Explanation:
Answer:
TRUE
Explanation:
A potential obligation that depends on the future outcome of past events is a contingent liability!
- An obligation is something that is to be done
- A potential obligation is a thing or activity that is among the options of stuff that can be done
- When something depends on the future outcome of past events, it introduces or carries with it, the cost of waiting (for future outcomes)
- A contingent liability is something that poses probability of loss instead of gain. The opposite of liability is asset.
So in business, a potential obligation or action that depends on the future outcome of past events is a contingent loss rather than gain.