This scenario best illustrate Backward vertical integration
Explanation:
Backward integration is a vertical integration that extends the role of a organization to perform roles traditionally performed by firms in the supply chain.
In other terms, backward integration is where an enterprise imports another company providing the necessary goods or services for production.
For examples, an company might purchase the product or raw materials manufacturer. Businesses often complete retrograde incorporation of these other businesses or combine of them. However, they may set up their own divisions to perform this mission.
Answer:
No, Jim is not correct.
Explanation:
Betty will win this case.
Generally, the law encourages marriage as its policy. If there is any contract that prevent or restrict marriage in whatever way, such contract would be considered null and void because it is against the public policy.
Despite the above, contracts will be generally considered valid when they place reasonable restrictions on marriage. In this question, the restriction placed on Betty that she should get married until after her 22nd birthday is reasonable and has to be considered to be valid. Based on this, Betty has to be paid the $25,000 as laid down in the binding contract between the two parties.
Therefore, Jim is not correct.
Answer:
the cost of goods sold is $5,940
Explanation:
The computation of the cost of goods sold is shown below:
As we know that
Cost of goods sold is
= beginning inventory + purchase made - ending inventory
= $4,860 + $10,080 - $9,000
= $5,940
Hence, the cost of goods sold is $5,940
We simply applied the above formula so that the correct value could come
And, the same is to be considered
Answer:
B)tie-in sales.
Explanation:
Theses are the options for the question;
A. misrepresentation.
B. tie-in sales.
C. reciprocity.
D. price discrimination.
E. kickbacks
From the question, we are informed about a statement ""I'll let you sell the Harley-Davidson designer clothes only if you'll also sell a new line of clothes designed by Paula Abdul, too."
This statement made by a salesperson to a specialty retailer is potentially an example of tie- sales and may be in violation of the Clayton Act prohibition if the action substantially lessens competition.
It should be noted that tie - in sales in finance means that when a cusumer buys a goods he/she must buy the other product, it simply means the products are tied, and this is opposite of Clayton Act which was set up to bring end to transactions that can lead to monopolies.
