Answer:
they are dependent on situational probabilities
Explanation:
Arturo's decision about which torch to purchase is being made under conditions of ambiguity , because: they are dependent on other factors.
The decision making is not certainty because his decision on which torch to buy is dependent on probabilities neither is it uncertain because we have information on probabilities of what the outcome might be.
Hence the decision making is ambiguous because it is between certain and uncertain and its outcome is dependent on the probabilities of having a discount or not.
Answer:
$441,000
Explanation:
The computation of the cost of merchandise sold is shown below:
Cost of merchandise sold = Opening inventory + net purchase - ending inventory
where,
Opening inventory = $14,500
Net purchase is
= $475,000 - $15,000 - $9,000 + $7,000
= $458,000
And, the ending inventory is $31,500
So, the cost of merchandise sold is
= $14,500 + $458,000 - $31,500
= $441,000
The answer is...
Liabilities
Answer:
Yes, Dealer could collect damages from GM because basically GM breached the contract. Any time a contract is breached, the non-breaching party can sue. But the real question here is what amount could the court assign to Dealer as compensation for damages incurred. If you want to rephrase this question, it would be: What damages did Dealer suffer due to GM's breach.
If the damages are not significant, then the court will probably assign some amount for nominal damages. To be honest, the greatest expenses here are actually the legal costs of the lawsuit. Unless Dealer can prove that assigning the contract actually hurt them (which I doubt), then the court will assign a small amount. Sometimes nominal damages can be very small and mostly symbolic, e.g. $1.
