Hello,
A fact is something that has been learned.
I think, Im not 100% sure!
Solution :
It is given that Fizzo and Pop Hop sells orange soda. Fizzo advertises about his drinks while Pop Hop does not advertises.
According to the matrix provided we can conclude that :
-- If Fizzo wishes to advertise about his soda drinks, he will earn a profit of 8 million dollar and if Pop Hop do advertises and a 15 million dollar if Pop Hop does not advertises.
-- If Fizzo does not advertise, it will earn profit of about 2 million dollar if Pop Hop advertises and 9 million dollar if Pop Hop does not advertises.
-- When Pop Hop wished to advertise , Fizzo will make a higher profit if he chooses to advertise.
-- When Pop Hop do not advertise, Fizzo will make a higher profit when it chooses to advertise.
And if both the firms acts independently and they start off not advertising, then --- both firms will advertise as both of them will earn highest profits each.
If both the firms collude and both firms start off not advertising, the strategies they will end up is that both the firms will not advertise as the joint profit will be maximized.
Answer:
Option (b) is correct.
Explanation:
Contribution margin ratio is the difference between the selling price of the product and the variable cost of the product.
Contribution margin ratio = Selling price - Variable cost
Now, if there is a decrease in the fixed costs and variable costs of the product then as a result contribution margin ratio increases because of the fall in variable cost.
Break even point = (Fixed expense ÷ Contribution margin ratio)
If there is an increase in the contribution margin ration and a reduction in the fixed expense then as a result break even point decreases.
Increased; Decreased
Answer:
1. Per se application - US Competition law
Justification: It is a provision of US competition law
2. Misuse of activity - EU Competition law
Justification: It is a provision of EU competition law
3. Extraterritoriality - US and EU
Justification: It is a provision of US and EU antitrust and competition law
4. Trade obstacle, non-tariff - France
Justification: These are considered to be part of the France trade system
5. Strict liability - U.S. Tort Law
Justification: It is part of the U.S. Tort Law and depends on intent to harm liability
6. Punitive damages - U.S. Product Liability Law
Justification: It is a provision of U.S. Product Liability Law
Answer:
$582,100
Explanation:
Cost of land $570,000
Less;Salvage parts sold ($23,000)
Demolition of old building $33,000
Land preparation and leveling $2,100
Total cost of land $582,100
The ground breaking ceremony expenses are not capital expenditures therefore ignored in above working.
