True actually because look in your text books !!
Answer:
C) It would allow them to look at the furniture products that the company offers.
Explanation:
Setting up a website would be beneficial to the company, which will have its products on display, and may even make online sales, but especially to consumers, who can observe the types of wood products that this company produces. This can make consumers analyze products without having to go to the store, which makes buying something more comfortable.
Closely associated with short-run ups and downs of economic
M1 and M2 are the 2 main official measure of money.
M1 measures more liquid assets that are easily accessible to the owner including cash and checking accounts. M2 measures all of M1 plus "near money" which is money tied up in investments like savings, mutual funds, and other investments.
Answer:
This was an actual court case that ended in the Court of Appeals of the First District of California. Initially a lower court had ruled against the Sharabianlous and set extremely high compensations for damages to Berenstein. I do not understand why the court did it since it was proven that the land was contaminated and couldn't be sold under unless cleaned.
Finally, the court of appeals ruled in favor of the Sharabianlous, not because they thought they were right, but due to errors in the original trial.
The big issue in this case was that the contract signed by the Sharabianlous wasn't clear enough about what would happen if the land was not suitable for sale and they also failed to seek a lawyer when the contamination issues became obvious. If you read the case, even the real estate broker acted against the Sharabianlous when the property was appraised since he didn't tell the appraiser about the contamination issues.
The final ruling was made in 2010, 8 years after the parties engaged in the transaction, which gives us an idea of how complicated things can get when legal procedures are not followed, even though the outcome should be obvious.
If I was part of a jury and the case was about property that couldn't be sold due to contamination, I would probably vote in favor of the buyer, not the seller. It's common sense, but sometimes it you do not follow the appropriate legal path, common sense makes no sense at all.