Answer:
C. They can effectively leverage the national and local advertising programs sponsored by the franchiser.
Explanation:
If Sarah and Candice obtain the franchise rights from an already established designer brand, they will have lesser freedom to make business-related decisions as they would have to be accountable to the designer brand based on the terms & conditions which they agreed to. <u>Hence, option A is not a valid argument</u>
If Sarah and Candice obtain the franchise rights from an already established designer brand, they will have lesser flexibility to add or delete a product from the existing line because they do not have an exclusive right to the franchise. Such decision falls uner the jurisiction of Monarch. <u>Hence, option B is not a valid argument</u>
If Sarah and Candice were to purchase the franchise rights of Monarch, they would have to share a portion of their good revenues & share profits with the franchiser since they enjoy the publicity associated with the brand name. <u>Hence, option D is not a valid argument</u>
If Sarah and Candice were to purchase the franchise rights of Monarch, they cannot commercialize their creativity and ideas without facing any restrictions from the franchiser. Any such creative ideas has to be endorse by Monarch. <u>Hence, option E is not a valid argument</u>
<u />
If Sarah and Candice were to purchase the franchise rights of Monarch, they stand to benefit from the publicity & advertisements of Monarch at no extra cost to their startup. They can effectively leverage the national and local advertising programs sponsored by the franchiser. <u>Hence, option C is the valid argument to convince Sarah</u>
An inferior good is a type of welfare whose demand decreases when consumer income increases or demand increases when consumer income decreases. Therefore, if a consumer considers shirts to be inferior goods, the way he will stop consuming it will be when there is a real increase in his income.
In the case narrated, Alex had an increase in salary and remained working for the same number of hours. This means that with the same job, he will have a higher income, meaning there was a real increase in Alex's income. If he considers the $ 3 shirts a much lower asset, he will lessen the demand for it.
Answer:
B.
C.
Explanation:
Option A is incorrect because; it is not clear who is he and what he grabbed form the air. Further, it is also not clear who's her.
Option D is incorrect because; it is not clear who are they. And it is a grammar rule that, do not use “they” when referring to unspecified persons.
Answer:
(A) Operating income expense 103,530
(B) Bonds income tax expense 5,880
(C) Dividends income tax expense 2,940
(D)
The dividends come from earnings of another ifrn, which had been taxes already, so this exclusion decreases the double taxation.
While the bonds income are entirely subject to taxes as they haven't been taxed before.
(E) no tax liability, as his is a pernament difference it will not be reverse.
Explanation:
493,000 operating
28,000 bonds
28,000 dividends
<u>The firm tax on operating earnings only:</u>
493,000 x 21% = 103,530
<u>bonds</u>:
28,000 x 21% = 5,880
<u>DIvidends</u>
28,000 - 50% = 14,000
14,000 x 21% = 2,940