Answer:
mid-calorie soft drinks such as Pepsi Next (2012) have not been successful in the past.
Explanation:
The new Pespsi true is a great product that offers the advantage of having the same flavor as Pepsi but lower calorie content of only 60 calories. This should sell well with consumers that are looking for lower calorie options.
However if there was a similar product like Pepsi True called Pepsi Next in 2012 that was mid-calories and was not successful, this could be a show stopper. People's perceptions of Pepsi Next will affect Pepsi True as they will feel it is just a repackaged Pepsi Next.
This will most likely lead to failure of the product similar to what happened with Pepsi Next.
Answer:
Quik Furniture Company
Production cost report - Sanding department
Month ended on March 31, 2020
Units Physical units Equivalent units
Materials Conversion
Units started 9,240
<u>in production </u>
Completed and 6,240
transferred out
<u>Work in progress 3,000 600 </u>
Total units 6,240 3,000 600
accounted for
Costs Direct Conversion Total
materials costs
Beginning WIP $0 $0 $0
Costs added during $36,960 $51,642 $88,602
<u>period </u>
Total costs $36,960 $51,642 $88,602
Cost per unit $4 $7.55 $11.55
(9,240 u.) (6,840 u.) (finished u.)
Answer:
Consider the following explanation
Explanation:
Context
Game theory involves two players. They have more than one option to decide. Pay off from each options adopted by two players are available. They have to select a strategy which will maximize their own return. But for optimizing their decision, they have to consider the action of his rival.
In this problem, two players are firm A and firm B. They have two strategies low output and high output. The strategies of firm a are measured in rows and for firm B in columns. They have to select a strategy which will maximize their payy off. Each cell has two pay offs. First one is for Firm A and second one is for firm B.
1. Dominant strategy is a strategy which will always give higher payoffs in comparison with pay off of other strategies. Consider first strategy of firm 1. If it adopts strategy of low output, then firm 2 can also adopt either strategy of low output or high output. In that case pay off of firm 1 will be 300 or 200.
Alteratively if firm 1 adopts high output then pay offs are 200 or 75. 200 is earned if firm B also go for low productivity. It is 75 if firm B adopts high productivity.
Now compare two payoffs side by side. Note that firm A has higher pay off in low output [300,200] in comparison with the pay off of high output [200,75]. So whatever strategy firm B adopts, Firm A will always go for low production. So low production strategy of firm A dominates high production strategy.
Same result is not observed for firm B. Pay off from low production strategy of firm B is [ 250,75]. Pay off from high production strategy are [100,100]. Now compare the two. If Firm A go for low production, then firm B will select low production. It will give pay off 250. Similarly when firm A decides for high production, then firm will also decide for high production. It will maximize its pay off. Amount is 100. Thus no strategy dominates for firm B.
Answer:
$1,500
Explanation:
Given that,
A man wishes to purchase a life insurance policy that will pay the beneficiary $25,000 if the man's death occurs in the next year.
The probability that the company pays nothing is 0.94 and there is 0.06 probability that the company pays $25,000.
So, on an average expected loss is as follows:
= 0.94 × $0 + 0.06 × $25,000
= $1,500
Hence, the minimum amount that he can expect to pay for his premium is $1,500.
