Answer:
The answer is: C) There is a valid contract
Explanation:
According to Appellate Court ruling in Steinberg v. Chicago Medical School;
The two parties (Joe and Sate University) entered a valid contract agreement upon receiving the $100 dollar application fee from Joe. State University´s catalog is considered to be the Offer part of this contract and the $100 application fee is considered the Consideration part of the contract.
Answer:
r = 0.080528395 = 8.05%
Winner's Prize at 2044: $ 15,215,114.02
Explanation:
Principal 160
Amount 1,610,000
time: 2015 - 1896 = 119
![160 \: (1+ r)^{119} = 1,610,000\\ r = \sqrt[119]{1,610,000 / 160} -1](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=160%20%5C%3A%20%281%2B%20r%29%5E%7B119%7D%20%3D%201%2C610%2C000%5C%5C%20r%20%3D%20%5Csqrt%5B119%5D%7B1%2C610%2C000%20%2F%20160%7D%20-1%20)
r = 0.080528395
If the same rate for the winner's prize is being keep by 2044 the winner will get:
Principal 1,610,000.00
time 29.00 (2044 - 2015)
rate 0.08053
Amount 15,215,114.02
It's a <span>partnership. I have to write more words but that's what that arrangement is.</span>
Answer:
Target costing
Explanation:
-High-low pricing is when companies initially establish a high price for a product and then, they decrease it when people are less willing to buy it.
-Everyday low pricing is when companies offer low prices on their products all the time.
-Cost-plus pricing is when companies determine the cost of the product and add the profit margin they need to establish the price of the product.
-Target costing is when companies establish a target cost for the product by taking the price and subtracting the margin they expect from it.
-Competition-based pricing is when companies use the price the competitors have for the same product to establish the price.
According to this, the answer is that the situation exemplifies target costing.
