Answer:
$4,550
Explanation:
First, we need to calculate the product cost per unit
Product cost per unit = Total production costs / Units produced
= ($15,085 + $10,200 + $9,200) / 6,050 units
= $5.7 per unit
Cost of goods sold = $5.7 × 3,700 units
= $21,090
Net income = Sales - Cost of goods sold - Operating expenses
= ($8.2 × 3,700) - $21,090 - $4,700
= $30,340 - $21,090 - $4,700
= $4,550
Answer:For example, the Ricardian model of trade, which incorporates differences in technologies between countries, concludes that everyone benefits from trade, whereas the Heckscher-Ohlin model, which incorporates endowment differences, concludes that there will be winners and losers from trade.
Investment banks help companies to purchase, sell and make investments using bonds while commercial banks are concerned on managing deposits on both savings and checking account.
Investment banks aid companies on bringing their investments on public offers; commercial banks are focused on providing security for the clienteles money.
Investment banks have some degree of freedom in choosing their own strategies while commercial banks have more risks because they are open to public transactions.
Answer:
From this information one can conclude that last period the variable overhead efficiency (quantity) variance was <u>unfavorable.</u>
Explanation:
The variable overhead efficiency variance measures the difference between the actual and budgeted hours worked with respect to standard variable overhead rate per hour.
Variable overhead efficiency variance can be calculated thus:
Actual labor hours less budgeted labor hours x Hourly rate for standard variable overhead
If the time it takes to manufacture a product and the time budgeted for it matches or performs well, the labor efficiency is favorable.
Variable overhead efficiency variance is deemed unfavorable when it takes the company more time than budgeted to produce. This also shows labor efficiency variance was unfavorable.
Answer:
No, their economic cost of enrolling in the business program is not the same for both,
Explanation:
The explicit costs of going back to college are the same for Walter and Jesse, e.g. they might be $20,000 per year, or even $30,000 doesn't matter for this analysis. But Walter is currently working as a teacher and that means taht if he decides to go to college, his implicit costs will include the forgone salary as a teacher which is $50,000 per year. Implicit costs are opportunity costs, i.e. additional costs or benefits lost from choosing one activity or investment instead of another alternative.
Since Jesse is not working, whether she goes back to college or not will not affect her income, it will still be $0, but if Walter goes back to college he will lose his salary.
