<span>GDP = C + I + G + NX = $5.5 trillion + $1 trillion + $1.5 trillion + $.75 trillion - $1.25 trillion = $7.5 trillion</span>
Answer:
So after 5 year total amount will be $1781.529
So option (a) is correct option
Explanation:
We have given that JG Asset is recommending that you invest $1500 for 5 years at rate of 3.5%
So principle amount P = $1500
Rate of interest r = 3.5 %
Time n = 5 years
We know that when total amount is given by
, here r is rate of interest and n is time period
So amount after 5 years will be
So after 5 year total amount will be $1781.529
So option (a) is correct option
Answer:
$40 million
Explanation:
The computation of stock price is shown below:-
For computing the stock price first we need to compute the firm value which is below:-
Firm value = Free cash flow-1 ÷ (Weighted average cost of capital - Growth rate)
= $70.0 million ÷ (10% - 5%)
= $70.0 million ÷ 5%
= $1,400 million
Stock price = (Firm value - Debt) ÷ Number of shares
= ($1,400 million - $200 million) ÷ 30 million
= $1,200 million ÷ 30 million
= $40 million
Answer:
Instructions are below.
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
Martha receives $200 on the first of each month. Stewart receives $200 on the last day of each month. Both Martha and Stewart will receive payments for 30 years. The discount rate is 9 percent, compounded monthly.
To calculate the present value, first, we need to determine the final value.
i= 0.09/12= 0.0075
n= 30*12= 360
<u>Martha:</u>
FV= {A*[(1+i)^n-1]}/i + {[A*(1+i)^n]-A}
A= montlhy payment
FV= {200*[(1.0075^360)-1]}/0.0075 + {[200*(1.0075^360)]-200}
FV= 366,148.70 + 2,746.12
FV= 368,894.82
Now, the present value:
PV= FV/ (1+i)^n
PV= 368,894.82/ 1.0075^360
PV= $25,042.80
<u>Stewart:</u>
FV= {A*[(1+i)^n-1]}/i
A= monthly payment
FV= {200*[(1.0075^360)-1]}/0.0075
FV= 366,148.70
PV= 366,148.70/1.0075^360
PV= $24,856.37
Martha has a higher present value because the interest gest compounded for one more time.
Answer:
- I think Ben should encourage the Senior Management to call a multidisciplynary meeting and do some research.
Explanation:
<em>I think Ben is right</em>. Even though the statement is technically correct, it may mislead customers.
Customers may interpret the phrase "<em>no sugar added</em>" as if the product did not contain any sugar.
Thus, customers interested in drinking beverages without sugar at all might think they are "safe" consuming the smoothie beverage, when in reallity each <em>smoothie's bottle contains sugar 35 g of naturally occurring sugars from the fruit.</em>
Customers deserve to be certain on what they are buying, thus the labels must be a sincere help for them, and not ambiguos at all.
This is a "gray zone" and an example of what in ethics is called a dilema.
I think the decision should be shared by a wider team and based on some research.
I think Ben should encourage the Senior Management to call a multidisciplynary meeting, where the subject is widely discussed. Also, I would suggest Ben to do some research, look for precedents about labeling in the industry, and try to learn the opinion of the FDA about this sensitive matter.
