Answer: The Contract is valid.
Explanation:
Under the UCC’s Statute of Frauds, transactions above $500 for goods cannot be made orally alone and have to be written in writing as well. This is the law that Rosenfield relied on.
However, Fallsview can argue that the Passover Retreat is not a Good, but rather a Service in which case it does not fall under the Statute.
The main bone of contention thereby becomes, if indeed it is a service or a good.
If it is a Hybrid of both, then the Court needs to decide if the services outweigh the goods involved.
From the text we see that the following were included in the package, food, entertainment, and lectures on religious subjects.
Food is the only good there and is outweighed by Entertainment and lectures on religious subjects.
As such, the contract is valid as it is for more service than good.
Answer:
(b) The candidate will be involved in setting up an independent division with responsibility for robotic equipment production and marketing.
Explanation:
- As an area of global marketing deals with the setting up of strategies for the development of marketing plans for the company. By adjusting the strategies that are well suited to other countries form a global point of view.
- Hence the candidates that come from the different locations will be more interested in setting up divisions that look after the promotion and distribution of products, people and processes to deliver good results.
- As it lowers market casts, it has the ability to leverage ideas more easily and quickly and helps the company create an international customer base.
Answer: $53.94
Explanation:
Current share price is the present value of the dividends for the next 3 years and the terminal value in year 3.
Terminal value = D₄ / ( required return - growth rate)
= (2.35 * 1.22³ * 1.05) / (12 % - 5%)
= $64
D₁ = 2.35 * 1.22 = $2.867
D₂ = 2.867 * 1.22 = $3.49774
D₃ = 3.49774 * 1.22 = $4.2672428
Share price = (2.867 / (1 + 12%)) + (3.49774 / 1.12²) + (4.2672428 / 1.12³) + (64/1.12³)
= $53.94
Answer: Sell four December coffee future contracts at $2.00 per pound
Explanation:
Based on the scenario in the question, the number of contracts that is required for hedging the entire crop will be gotten by dividing the total number of crops by the pounds that are available in one contract. This will be:
= 150,000/37,500
= 4 contracts
Therefore, the answer will be for Jarvis to sell four December coffee future contracts at $2.00 per pound
Answer:
1. I feel like Pat's new strategy isn't ethical. Pat doesn't pay for the suits; he just buys them and then returns them. Pat benefits, but the store he gets the suits from doesn't. In fact, they are harmed from this transaction because they are unable to have the suit for others to buy while Pat has it. There could be consequences with this strategy. For example, the suit might be damaged, and Pat won't be able to return it. Another problem is that others might find out about Pat's strategy, and they might view them as unprofessional. This is a problem for Pat since the reason Pat wore those suits was to look professional.
2. The stores are harmed from this transaction. They are unable to sell the suits to other buyers. The stores lose potential customers, so the stores lose potential money.
3. The companies should record that Pat had bought the suit only to return it the next day, so that they can act accordingly when Pat or someone else comes back to "buy" a suit.
Explanation:
