Answer:
Option (d) 7 times
Explanation:
Data provided in the question:
Net income = $250,000
Dividends paid to common stockholders = $50,000
Common stock outstanding = 50,000
Selling price of the common stocks = $35
Now,
The price-earnings ratio is calculated as:
⇒ ( Stock price ) ÷ ( Earnings per share )
also,
Earnings per share = ( Net income ) ÷ ( common stock outstanding )
= $250,000 ÷ 50,000
= $5
or
Price-earnings ratio = $35 ÷ $5
or
Price-earnings ratio = 7 times
Option (d) 7 times
Answer:
You may get a better job, or it may make you more responsible. The money is the main thing, you will get paid better, so you wont have to worry abt money i guess.
Explanation:
Answer:
alitalia should do the forward hedge to hedge its transaction exposure
Explanation:
Alitalia can construct the money market hedge as follows
1. borrow Euro whose present value is equal to the amount to be paid.
2. convert it to foreign currency at the current spot rate.
3. place it in a deposit
4. make the payment when the deposit reaches maturity
PV of payment = 10000000/1.05
= 9523809.525
converting in to Euro at the spot rate we get 6802721.09 Euros
so Alitalia has to borrow the above amount and convert it and invest it at 5%.
now the payable amount from the loan is 6802721.09(1+0.03) = 7006802.72 Euros
Hence Alitalia has effective managed to locl in a forward rate of 1.427$/euros (10000000/7006802.72)$/euros
Therefore, alitalia should do the forward hedge to hedge its transaction exposure
Answer:
B. Investors´ perceptions change, making a fixed exchange rate untenable.
Explanation:
A speculative attack happens when a lot of untrustworthy assets are sold by many investors and with that sale, they buy valuable assets.
In currency, it occurs when the national currency is sold massively and suddenly by national and foreign investors. These types of speculative attacks are seen especially on currencies that use a fixed exchange rate. They have the value of it tightened to a foreign currency.
I hope this answer helps you.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Unfortunately, the question is incomplete. Indeed, there is no question at all, just a series of statements.
What we can do is to comment on this case.
We are talking about the story of Bob Bell and Michael Sharpe.
Royalties were the main reason for this dispute. Bob Bell was the engineer that invented the bicycle trailer. Michale Sharpe would focus on Marketing the product due to his experience with computers and sales. Sharpe wanted both to share the financial risks but Bell considered it hos invention and wanted more royalties. Things went in the wrong direction, the situation got worse and they both hired lawyers in Toronto, Canada.
After disputes and legal actions, Bell won the case and he could expanse his business nationwide and signed an agreement with a Chinese company to sell the product. On the other hand, Sharpe made a 180-degree turn and started a fitness business.
