Answer:
reduces; geographic diversification
Explanation:
In the above problem, the proposed new branch will economics reduces overall risk exposure and produce a geographic diversification effect.
Answer: option D
Explanation: Borrower or demander refers to the person who is asking and expecting some other party to give him some commodity with the arrangement that he or she will get that commodity back to the lender.
In the given case, Noberto has more outflows than the inflows hence he must be having shortage of fund. Thus, to cope with that shortage he can only borrow or demand the finds from any other entity.
Hence from the above we can conclude that the correct option is D.
Answer:
Just-in-time (JIT).
Explanation:
In this scenario, Crown Holdings Inc. manufactures a high-resolution, full-color digital inkjet printed cans that allows smaller beverage producers to label the cans as they are needed to be filled rather than keeping a stock of preprinted cans. This is an example of how a beverage company could use just-in-time.
Just-in-time (JIT) is an inventory management method used by a company wherein goods, products, components, and labor are made available exactly when needed or just few hours before they are needed in the production process.
It is an inventory management system that is adopted by companies to reduce wastage to the barest minimum and to increase operational efficiency as goods, materials and labor are scheduled for arrival when needed in the production line. Consequently, this would help to reduce or cut costs associated with storage of materials and inventory costs.
Between the 1960s and 1970s, The concept of just-in-time was developed by Toyota in Japan.
<em>Additionally, in order to maximize the benefits of the just-in-time method, it is very important and essential that their is a proper synchronization between the manufacturer (small beverage producers) and the supplier (Crown Holdings Inc.); manufacturing cycles and the delivery of goods, materials and labor. </em>
Answer:
1)Celia actually did charge $3,000 on her credit card and admitted such to the credit card company, but argued she only had $2,500 in her bank account to pay off the credit card.
Telling a bank or a credit card company that you do not have enough money top pay right now will not make them forgive the unpaid balance. They might offer you some type of agreement or schedule for you to pay for the remaining balance (in this case $500). A court will never rule in favor of a borrower just because they do not want to pay the whole balance and will not accept a payment schedule.
3) Celia and the credit card company agreed that Celia would pay $2,500 as full payment of the disputed debt, but Celia never paid the $2,500.
When Celia and the credit card company reached an agreement to settle their dispute, that agreement is binding on both parties. Celia must pay the $2,500 and the credit card company will not charge any more money. But if Celia doesn't make the payment, she is not performing her part and the credit card company can sue her for it, and will probably win.
Explanation:
the options are missing:
- Celia actually did charge $3,000 on her credit card and admitted such to the credit card company, but argued she only had $2,500 in her bank account to pay off the credit card.
- Celia actually did charge $3,000 on her credit card and admitted such to the credit card company. However, Celia had no money, so she offered the credit card company her car in exchange for full payment of the debt and the credit card company accepted. Celia turned over title to her car to the credit card company.
- Celia and the credit card company agreed that Celia would pay $2,500 as full payment of the disputed debt, but Celia never paid the $2,500.
- Celia believed she did not charge anything on her credit card during her trip to Las Vegas. The credit card company claims she charged $3,000 to the card while in Las Vegas.
