Answer:
The yield to call for this bond is 9.30%
Explanation:
Yield to call
The rate of return bondholders receives on a callable bond until the call date is called Yield to call.
Now use the following formula to calculate the Yield to call
Yield to Call = [ C + ( F - P ) / n ] / [ ( F + P ) / 2 ]
Where
F = Face value = $1,000 ( Assumed )
C = Coupon Payment = Face value x Coupon rate = $1,000 x 10.4% = $104
P = Call price of the bond = Face value + Call Premium = $1,000 + $75 = $1,075
n = Numbers of years to call = 10 years
Placing vlaues in the formula
Yield to Call = [ $104 + ( $1,000 - $1,075 ) / 10 years ] / [ ( $1,000 + $1,075 ) / 2 ]
Yield to Call = 0.0930
Yield to Call = 9.30%
Answer:
They should operate Mine 1 for 1 hour and Mine 2 for 3 hours to meet the contractual obligations and minimize cost.
Explanation:
The formulation of the linear programming is:
Objective function:
![C=200M_1+160M_2](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=C%3D200M_1%2B160M_2)
Restrictions:
- High-grade ore: ![6M_1+2M_2\geq12](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=6M_1%2B2M_2%5Cgeq12)
- Medium-grade ore: ![2M_1+2M_2\geq8](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=2M_1%2B2M_2%5Cgeq8)
- Low-grade ore: ![4M_1+12M_2\geq24](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=4M_1%2B12M_2%5Cgeq24)
- No negative hours: ![M_1,M_2\geq0](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=M_1%2CM_2%5Cgeq0)
We start graphing the restrictions in a M1-M2 plane.
In the figure attached, we have the feasible region, where all the restrictions are validated, and the four points of intersection of 2 restrictions.
In one of this four points lies the minimum cost.
Graphically, we can graph the cost function over this feasible region, with different cost levels. When the line cost intersects one of the four points with the lowest level of cost, this is the optimum combination.
(NOTE: it is best to start with a low guessing of the cost and going up until it reaches one point in the feasible region).
The solution is for the point (M1=1, M2=3), with a cost of C=$680.
The cost function graph is attached.
Answer:
Jun's pressure and influence has invalidated Mika's consent.
Explanation:
By threatening Mika with prosecution if she doesn't set a discount for the sale of her house on the grounds of her debt to her, she has influenced Jun's consent or rather coerced it and therefore Mika's consent is invalidated in the agreement. Consent is free under law if contract and should be given under undue influence, duress or any other vitiating factor that will render the contract null and void such as the example above