Answer: 1. Large
2. Abnormal
3. True
Explanation:
1. At any level, a market’s informational efficiency is likely to be stronger when there is a <u>Large</u> number of market participants.
When there is a larger number of participants, this means that there is a large number of people able to acquire and analyse information about securities and the financial markets.
As a result of this, information is more wide ranging and easily available such that they market has very good information efficiency.
2. The potential for a security to generate <u>Abnormal</u> returns is what generates a profitable investment.
When a security is potentially able to generate abnormal returns, there is a chance of making very profitable returns if those returns are higher or lower than estimated. When returns are estimated, these are usually reflected in the market price already because they are expected, when the returns are better or worse than expected though, this means that the prices were wrong therefore giving a chance of a positive gain on the security.
3. True.
Information efficiency is very important in the market. It can mean the difference between the market being manipulated and used for unfair gains and the market being used fairly by all. Information efficiency gives every market player the same Opportunity to find out about a security and act accordingly instead of select people taking advantage of hidden Opportunities.
Answer:
It will be better to produce all the units of Plain we can sell, then use any remaining machine hours to produce Fancy. This is because Plain, generated more contribution per hour than Fancy.
Explanation:
We have to calculate the Contribution Margin per machine hours
This means check which product makes a better use of the scarse resourse
It will be better to produce all the units of Plain we can sell, then use any remaining machine hours to produce Fancy
Answer:
a.The efficiency of the WiFi system will depend upon the usage and the speed of internet provided by the ISP (Internet Service Provider). Keeping in mind that the town have 1,000 households the network to choose will need to be fast and reliable also each household should be allowed to download a certain amount of DATA via internet so that the each household can get benefit from the WiFi System.
b. If each household is willing to pay $50 per year the contribution received will be $50×1,000 = $50,000. So the cost of WiFi system will be recovered.
c. If the town keeps tracks of the contributions and ask the household to contribute at least $20 per year so yes the total cost of WiFi system will be recovered. $20× 1,000= $20,000
Explanation:
The creation of report with the report wizard differs from creating one with the report button because the report wizard allows the user to have more options and flexibility in the design.
<h3>What is a
report wizard?</h3>
This refers to the self-service reporting solution that enables users to create business reports quickly and efficiently.
However, the creation of report with the report wizard differs from creating one with the report button because the report wizard allows the user to have more options and flexibility in the design.
Read more about report wizard
<em>brainly.com/question/14363909</em>
#SPJ1
1) Town of Bayport:
We have that the residents value the fireworks at
a total of 50+100+300=450$. That is the utility they gain. But they
would also have to pay 360$ for the fireworks. The total outcome is
450$+(-360$)=90$. Hence, the outcome is positive and the fireworks pass
the cost benefit analysis.
If the fireworks' cost is to be split
equally, we have that each of the 3 residents has to pay 360/3=120$. Let
us now do the cost-benefit analysis for everyone.
Jacques stands to gain 50$ from the fireworks but would have to pay 120$. He will vote against it.
Also, Kyoko will gain 100$ but would have to pay 120$. He will lose utility/money from this so he will vote against.
Musashi on the other hand, would gain 300$ and only pay 120$. He is largely benefitted by this measure. Only he would
We have that 2 out of the 3 would vote against the fireworks, so that the fireworks will not be bought. The vote does not yield the same answer as the benefit-cost analysis.
2) Town of River Heights:
We have that the total value of the fireworks to the community
is 20+140+160=320$. The total value of the fireworks is lower than
their cost so their cost benefit analysis yields that they should not be
bought.
However, let's see what each resident says. The cost to each resident is 360/3=120$. Rina is against the fireworks since she will only gain 20$. Sean and Yvette are for the fireworks since they gain 140$ and 160$ respectively, which are larger than the cost of the fireworks to each of them (120$). Hence, 2 will vote for the fireworks and one will vote against and fireworks will be bought.
Again, the vote clashes with the cost-benefit analysis.
3) The first choice is wrong. It is very difficult for a government to provide the exact types of public goods that everyone wants because that would be too costly; one cannot have a public good that everyone pays for so that only a couple of people enjoy it. In our example, we saw that in every case, a public good and its production would have sime supporters and some adversaries.
Majority rule is not always the most efficient way to decide public goods; as we have seen in the second case, the cost-benefit analysis yields that the fireworks are not worth it but they are approved by the majority nonetheless.
The final sentence is correct. The differing preferences of the people make a clearcut choice impossible and the government has to take into account various tradeoffs and compromises in order to determine which public goods to provide.
