1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
STatiana [176]
3 years ago
11

Hines Cosmetic Co. sold beauty preparations nationally to beauty shops at a standard or fixed- price schedule. Some of the shops

were also supplied with a free demonstrator and free advertising materials. The shops that were not supplied with them claimed that giving the free services and materials constituted unlawful price discrimination. Hines replied that there was no price discrimination because it charged everyone the same. What it was giving free was merely a promotional campaign that was not intended to discriminate against those who were not given anything free. Was Hines guilty of unlawful price discrimination? Explain.
Business
1 answer:
ZanzabumX [31]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:

No, Hines is not guilty of unlawful price descrimination

Explanation:

Hines actions has not meet the criteria for price discrimination which include giving different prices based on gender, race or religion and never prevented the resale of product and the product package for sale never indicated the inclusion of free demonstrator and free advertising material.

You might be interested in
A text only forum accessed through a bulletin board service (BBS) is known as a ____.
Vinvika [58]

Answer:

its B don't listen to stupid people

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
TB MC Qu. 1-150 Haack Inc. is a merchandising company ... Haack Inc. is a merchandising company. Last month the company's cost o
Sever21 [200]

Answer:

$87,200

Explanation:

The computation of the total amount of merchandise purchase is shown below:

As we know that

Cost of goods sold = Beginning merchandise inventory + purchase of merchandise - ending merchandise inventory

$69,400 = $11,600 +  purchase of merchandise - $29,400

$69,400 = -$17,800 + purchase of merchandise

So, purchase value of merchandise is

= $69,400 + $17,800

= $87,200

5 0
3 years ago
Ziva is an organic lettuce farmer, but she also spends part of her day as a professional organizing consultant. As a consultant,
Naddika [18.5K]

Answer:

$380

Explanation:

Ziva's total cost of farming is composed of two different costs: explicit and implicit costs.

Explicit cost is an out-of-pocket cost that a person incurs to carry out a particular business activity. It is sort of, a business-related expense for which the business pays. In Ziva's case, it is $130, the cost of the seeds

Implicit costs are opportunity costs. An opportunity cost refers the benefits an individual, investor or business misses out on when opting for one alternative in preference of another. In our case, it amounts to $250($25*10 hours)

Thus, Ziva's cost of farming

= $130 +( $25*10) = $130 +$250 = $380

5 0
3 years ago
Chuck Wagon Grills, Inc., makes a single product—a handmade specialty barbecue grill that it sells for $215. Data for last year’
Stella [2.4K]

Answer:

Instructions are listed below

Explanation:

Giving the following information:

Selling price= $215

Units in beginning inventory 0

Units produced 9,800

Units sold 9,300

Units in ending inventory 500

Variable costs per unit:

Direct materials $ 61

Direct labor 33

Variable manufacturing overhead 10

Variable selling and administrative 15

Total variable cost per unit $ 119

Fixed costs:

Fixed manufacturing overhead $ 274,400

Fixed selling and administrative 510,000

Total fixed costs $ 784,400

Absorption costing includes fixed manufacturing overhead in the cost per unit.

A) Unitary fixed manufacturing overhead= 274,400/9800 units= $28

Unitary cost= Direct materials + Direct labor + Variable manufacturing overhead + fixed manufacturing overhead

Unitary cost= 61 + 33 + 10 + 28= $132

B) Income statement:

Sales= 9300*215= $1,999,500

COGS= 132*9300=$1,227,600

Gross profit= $771,900

Total selling and administrative expense= 510,000 + 15*9300= 649,500

Net operating income= $122,400

4 0
3 years ago
Because risk is associated with the potential for higher profits, business persons are motivated to choose organizational forms
Lubov Fominskaja [6]

Answer:

True

Explanation:

The reason why every business exists is to make a profit. Hopefully businesses will be able to make a profit by selling products or services that satisfy the needs of their customers. The problem with higher profits is that they are always associated with higher risks, and business owners and investors are risk averse.

Business owners and managers will continually search for ways to increase their profits while keeping the risks as low as possible. This includes choosing organizational layouts and forms that might help them increase their profits while reducing risks or at least keeping them under a certain level.

8 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • In terms of the global value system, when Kodak shifted manufacturing to China, what position did China then take in the system,
    8·1 answer
  • A fundamental difference between regular marketing and global marketing is
    14·1 answer
  • If the actual price in this market were above the equilibrium price, quantity supplied would begreater than quantity demanded, s
    13·2 answers
  • Beverly works at a specialty kitchen store. The manufacturer of a brand of gourmet mustard that is sold through her store pays h
    5·1 answer
  • Which expression can be used to find the amount of tax
    12·1 answer
  • Studies show that Multiple Choice the more independent the central bank, the lower the average annual rate of inflation. the mor
    7·1 answer
  • What does respecting people’s privacy mean?<br> Which factor is a component of verbal communication?
    9·1 answer
  • During the current year, the company had the following summarized activities:
    13·1 answer
  • Nick and Matt are the partners in a local health food store. They
    10·1 answer
  • The potential exposure that any individual firm bears that the second party to any financial contract will be unable to fulfill
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!