Answer:
The stock's new expected rate of return is 14%
Explanation:
Ke=Rf+beta(Mrp-Rf)
Ke is the cost of capital is 10.20%
Rf i the risk free rate which is unknown
beta is 1.00
(Mrp-Rf) is the market risk premium at 6%
10.20%=Rf+1.0(6%)
10.20%=Rf+6.0%
Rf=10.20-6.00%
Rf=4.20%
Beta for the risky asset is 1.00*130%=1.3
New risk rate is the old rate plus inflation rate of 2.00%
new risk free=4.2%+2%=6.2%
The expected return on the new asset is computed thus:
Ke=6.2%+1.3(6%)
Ke=6.2%+7.8%
Ke=14%
Answer:
The Question is Incomplete; Full Question is as follows;
Using variable costing, what is the contribution margin for last year?
<em>Contribution Margin = $362,900</em>
Explanation:
Computation of expenditure margin by differential costing;
<em>Sales </em><em>Minus </em><em>variable cost </em>
= $1,558,000
- Variable cost of Manufacturing(190,000 units *$1.84)
= $349,600
— variable sales and administrative costs(190,000 units *$4.45)
= $845,500
= contribution margin = $362,900
<em>Keep in mind that; </em><em>Set or Fixed expenses and overhead costs are not taken into account when trying to calculate the contribution margin.</em>
Answer:
$1,099,203.00
Explanation:
In this question we have to find out the future value that is shown in the attachment below:
Provided that
Present value = $0
Rate of interest = 8% ÷ 2 = 4%
NPER = 25 years × 2 = 50 years
PMT = $1,200 × 6 months = $7,200
The formula is shown below:
= -FV(Rate;NPER;PMT;PV;type)
So, after solving this, the future value is $1,099,203.00
How can I ensure that my coworkers and I are in a safe working environment. If your company has an industrial hygienist and also your safety officer can inspect.
Jill will not win because this is an illusory promise without consideration.
<u>Explanation:</u>
Even if Jill sues his boss Constance for not giving him the bonus that she had promised to give if her employee, Jill works with great focus and dedication, he will probably not win the case.
The reason for this is that it was just a promise and not a contract signed between that employer and that employee. It was just an illusory promise which is not enough to sue the person or the employer. So there was no benefit of doing it.
