TRUE
<u>Explanation:</u>
The correct answer is true as the independent projects are selected based on the net present worth and the rate of return and do nothing alternative. In the independent projects, there is no need for the incremental B/C analysis. Simple B/C ratio will do it. If the B/C > 1, benefits outweigh the costs and the project is selected provided that there is no budget limitation. Thus, the given statement is absolutely the true one.
Answer: Please refer to Explanation
Explanation:
The Dominant Strategy in a game is the strategy that a player will choose that will provide them with the highest payoff regardless of what the other player does.
In the above, the dominant strategy will be for RAPHAEL to choose LEFT.
By choosing left Raphael makes a payoff of 4 if Susan picks Left as well and a Payoff of 6 if Sudan picks Right. This is better than him picking Right and he will get a Payoff of 3 if Susan chooses Right as well.
The Nash Equilibrium is the strategy where both are making the best that they can given the strategy of the other player and deviating from it will give them less pay out.
The dominant strategy therefore is for RAPHAEL to choose LEFT and for SUSAN to choose RIGHT.
This is because Raphael will pick Left as it maximises their payoff and Susan will then pick a strategy that gives her the highest payoff based on Raphael's decision which is to go RIGHT.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
The business decision based on the company where you work would be this. To open a new small branch of the fast-food restaurant as a concession in the municipal stadium.
The incremental cost is the future costs as a result of this business decision. This means that we have to consider extra money on a monthly basis to pay for the rent of the concession booth at the Municipal stadium.
The opportunity cost is that instead of opening our branch in the new downtown mall, we decided to move with the stadium option. Having decided to be at the mall could have allowed us to have more clients on a daily basis, especially on weekends.
The sunk cost is a cost from the past, an historical cost that really is not important in the present time to make a decision. Maybe, just a reference to a case in the past. And that's it.
Here we can refer to a cost when we opened the first location of the restaurant, but it was five years ago. Those were different situations, necessities, and conditions.
