Answer:
The value of the option to wait is $0.70,option A.
Explanation:
In calculating the value of the option to wait,I discounted all cash flows under both alternatives, using the discount rate of 12% as given in the question.
Option to start now gives net present value(positive return ) of $360.64 while the other one gives $361.34,invariably option to wait one year gives $0.70($361.34-$360.64) more than the option to start now.
The formula used in the calculating present value is PV=FV(1+r)^n
Where PV=present value
FV=future value
r=rate of interest
n=number of year
Find attached spreadsheet for detailed calculations.
Like toys r us it failed because they always had low costs and low profits from their toys.
Answer:
A.
Explanation:
Guanxi is the system of social networks and influential relationships to establish trust which in turn facilitates business dealings.
Japanese youth display extremely positive attitudes toward Western goods, from popular music to Louis Vuitton haute couture and Nike sneakers.
To counter the influence of Mattel's Barbie and Ken dolls on Iranian values, Iran's ministry of educations marketed its own Dara and Sara dolls. Also, one toy seller explained that playing with Mattel's golden-haired, skimpily dressed Barbie may lead girls to grow up into women who reject Iranian values.
So, B, C, and D are true.
Therefore, the answer is option A.
Answer:
The definition becomes defined in the clarification paragraph below, according to the particular circumstance.
Explanation:
- As either the engineering boss, I believe Sally knows her technical employees better upon where people choose and hate about either the meetings that have been taking place. She understands that her workers like freedom but also that requesting them should report periodically or daily will potentially hinder their efficiency, and also some waste work and attention.
- Therefore, Sally can find some middle ground path somewhere, practically. She might make an option in which those her boss, Mark Hayes, the director of engineering, including her staff should be satisfied with the conclusion reached. Sally would invite Mark please hold a regular meeting to provide a more excellent method rather than just group communication. Any efficiency improvements barely alter a day, cost too much, and often waste precious time. She should indeed, lift all the questions concerning her workers as well as the negatives involved with either the regular interactions.
- She could also ensure fine to measure throughout her workers to hold regular sessions because it will encourage the business to always have a daily transcript of the conversation the week before and whether performance might be enhanced within this meeting can already be covered.
1) Town of Bayport:
We have that the residents value the fireworks at
a total of 50+100+300=450$. That is the utility they gain. But they
would also have to pay 360$ for the fireworks. The total outcome is
450$+(-360$)=90$. Hence, the outcome is positive and the fireworks pass
the cost benefit analysis.
If the fireworks' cost is to be split
equally, we have that each of the 3 residents has to pay 360/3=120$. Let
us now do the cost-benefit analysis for everyone.
Jacques stands to gain 50$ from the fireworks but would have to pay 120$. He will vote against it.
Also, Kyoko will gain 100$ but would have to pay 120$. He will lose utility/money from this so he will vote against.
Musashi on the other hand, would gain 300$ and only pay 120$. He is largely benefitted by this measure. Only he would
We have that 2 out of the 3 would vote against the fireworks, so that the fireworks will not be bought. The vote does not yield the same answer as the benefit-cost analysis.
2) Town of River Heights:
We have that the total value of the fireworks to the community
is 20+140+160=320$. The total value of the fireworks is lower than
their cost so their cost benefit analysis yields that they should not be
bought.
However, let's see what each resident says. The cost to each resident is 360/3=120$. Rina is against the fireworks since she will only gain 20$. Sean and Yvette are for the fireworks since they gain 140$ and 160$ respectively, which are larger than the cost of the fireworks to each of them (120$). Hence, 2 will vote for the fireworks and one will vote against and fireworks will be bought.
Again, the vote clashes with the cost-benefit analysis.
3) The first choice is wrong. It is very difficult for a government to provide the exact types of public goods that everyone wants because that would be too costly; one cannot have a public good that everyone pays for so that only a couple of people enjoy it. In our example, we saw that in every case, a public good and its production would have sime supporters and some adversaries.
Majority rule is not always the most efficient way to decide public goods; as we have seen in the second case, the cost-benefit analysis yields that the fireworks are not worth it but they are approved by the majority nonetheless.
The final sentence is correct. The differing preferences of the people make a clearcut choice impossible and the government has to take into account various tradeoffs and compromises in order to determine which public goods to provide.
