Answer: Transformational advertising
Explanation:
From the given case/scenario, we can state that this approach is an example of Transformational advertising. Transformational advertisement is referred to as or known as advertising which tends to associate experience of consuming advertised brand in association with unique parts of the psychological characteristics that are not typically associated with brand or the experience.
The auditor's count of the client's cash should be coordinated to coincide with the ''count of investment securities'' since both mean counting/managing money.
Answer:
The person with Absolute advantage is the one that produces more of a good than the other.
<em><u>Dina </u></em><em>has an absolute advantage in the production of alfalfa, and </em><em><u>Charles</u></em><em> has an absolute advantage in the production of barley. </em>
The person with Comparative Advantage is the person who produces something at a lower opportunity cost.
Charles Opportunity Costs
Producing Alfalfa gives 12 bushels per acre instead of 6 bushels for Barley.
Producing 1 Alfalfa means 6/12 = 0.5 bushels Barley is given up
Producing 1 bushel of Barley means 12/6 = 2 bushels Alfalfa is given up.
Dina Opportunity Costs
Producing Alfalfa gives 15 bushels per acre instead of 5 bushels for Barley.
Producing 1 Alfalfa means 5/15 = 0.33 bushels of Barley is given up
Producing 1 bushel of Barley means 15/5 = 3 bushels of Alfalfa is given up.
<em>Charles's opportunity cost of producing 1 bushel of barley is </em><em><u>2</u></em><em> bushels of alfalfa, whereas Dina's opportunity cost of producing 1 bushel of barley is </em><em><u>3</u></em><em> bushels of alfalfa. Because Charles has </em><em><u>lower</u></em><em> a opportunity cost of producing barley than Dina, </em><em><u>Charlie</u></em><em> has a comparative advantage in the production of barley, and </em><em><u>Dina</u></em><em> has a comparative advantage in the production of alfalfa.</em>
Answer:
U.S. households or firms wishing to purchase foreign goods or assets.
Answer:
$546,750
Explanation:
Sales 2,498,000
COGS (1,376,000)
gross profit 1, 112,000
S&A salaries (219,000)
other S&A (346,000)
underapplied MO (10,250) *
net income 536.750
*we need to compare the actual voerhead with the applied overhead:
<u>actual overhead:</u> 176,000 + 420,000 = 596,000
<u>applied overhead:</u>
overhead rate:

568,000 / 32,000 = 17.75
33,000 x 17.75 = 585.750
overhead
<u>debit credit</u>
596,000 585,750
10,250 underapplied overhead
As the applied was lower it is underapplied we need to recognzie more cot thus, the net income decrease.