Answer:
A 7.3
Explanation:
Macaulay Convexity = 64, as about a single cash flow
Since it is a single cash flows, convexity is square the Macaulay duration of the bond.
Convexity = √Macaulay duration.
So, Macaulay duration = Convexity^(1/2)
Macaulay duration = Convexity^(0.5)
Macaulay duration = 64^0.5
Macaulay duration = 8
So, the Macaulay duration = 8 years
Now, Modified duration = Macaulay duration/(1+yield)
Modified duration = 8/(1+0.1)
Modified duration = 8/1.1
Modified duration = 7.27273
Modified duration = 7.3 years
Answer: Occupation or exploitation
Explanation:
Foreign business would find it differently difficult to break into the local market of a particular environment. One of the ways they can break into such market is by exploitation. They have to exploit the market by carrying out extraordinary deeds in what their products offer or how they intend selling their product to the local market they are approaching. They need to be creative with their plan and seek ways to capture the fancy of these market.
The ‘point in time detection technologies is considered to
be useless when the malicious files that are said to be present or being
investigated are not caught and there is no evidence or in other words, it is also
self-morphing after it has entered the certain environment.
The cengage learning for the mitigation is the difference between the agreed upon $72000 less what was earned from the $25000 position that barton managed to obtain
<u>Explanation</u>:
Mitigation of damages:
In the case of barton v. vanhorn a court would consider barton's attempts at findings similar employment a reasonable step in mitigating her damages.
Under the doctrine of damage mitigation, a wrongfully terminated employee must look for other compartable employment, and subtract whatever you make from that job from what you request in damages.
Damages in the case would be the difference between the agreed upon $72000 less what was earned from the $25000 position that barton managed to obtain.
Answer:
a) DuPont analysis for Johnson International
2013: 0.059 x 2.11 x 1.75 = 0.2179 = 21.79%
2014: 0.058 x 2.18 x 1.75 = 0.2213 = 22.13%
2015: 0.049 x 2.34 x 1.85 = 0.2121 = 21.21%
b) DuPont analysis for industry averages
2013: 0.054 x 2.05 x 1.67 = 0.2121 = 21.21%
2014: 0.047 x 2.13 x 1.69 = 0.1692 = 16.92%
2015: 0.041 x 2.15 x 1.64 = 0.1446 = 14.46%
c) Johnson International's drivers follow the same tendency as the industry's average, e.g. net profit margin decreased in a similar manner, and total asset turnover increased also in a similar manner to the industry's average. The only driver that doesn't follow the industry's trend is financial leverage. While other companies in the same industry decreased their financial leverage, Johnson increased it. You should further analyze why this happened and what are the potential consequences.
Explanation:
The DuPont analysis is used to break down ROE into 3 different components and that way you can analyze whether a company's high ROE comes along with a high risk. The following formula is used to calculate ROE based on 3 different factors:
R
OE = net pro
fit margin x total assets turnover x financial leverage
