Answer:
The correct answer is B.
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
Budgeted production TX500
May 20,000
June 32,000
July 39,000
August 46,000
TX500 should have 40% of next months sales in ending Inventory. On May 1, there were 9,000 units of TX500.
Production for June:
Sales= 32,000 units
Ending inventory= (39,000*0.40)= 15,600
Beginning inventory= (32,000*0.4)= 12,800 (-)
Total= 34,800 units
Answer:
a positive incentive I think
Explanation:
Answer:
B. The denial is justifiable given the level of interbrand competition.
Explanation:
Anti trust law only applicable if you can proof that two or more producers in the same industry work together in order to assert their control over the market. They can do this through price fixing, controlling the amount of supply, etc.
This condition<em> can't be found</em> in the scenario above.
The denial that done by PepsiCo is justifiable because in a really competitive market, a company need to impose a strict requirement on which entities they should form a dealership relation with. If PepsiCo choose the wrong dealers, Its competitors could easily taken over the market and resulted in a huge amount of loss for the company.
Given:
Cash = $316
Accounts receivable = $687
Accounts payable = $709 (Liabilities)
Inventory = $2,108 (Assets)
Total assets = Cash + Receivables
= 316 + 687 = $1,003
Liabilities = $709
By definition, the quick ratio is
QR = (Assets - Inventory) / Liabilities
= (1003 - 2108)/709
= -1.5585
This means that the gift barn is over-leveraged and struggling to grow.
Answer: -1.56
