Answer:
Answer to each part of the question is given below separately under specific headings with detailed explanation.
Explanation:
<u>a) Branding strategy recommendation</u>
The branding strategy they should opt is a multi-branding strategy, in which a company's objective is to market more than one product and/or brand under the same hood in order to increase their overall market share. This strategy is somewhat used by other known car manufacturers such as Toyota (Lexus), Honda (Acura) etc.
<u></u>
<u>b) Branding strategy trade-offs</u>
The trade-off with this strategy is that the attention of Ferrari would be diverted from their main market segment and therefore, they will not be providing new products to the luxury market.
This will give the other companies in the same market segment the opportunity to increase their market share in the same segment.
<u>c) Opinion on the trading-down strategy</u>
It is fairly a risk for Ferrari to opt for the trading down strategy. This is due to the fact that their main market and objective is the luxury market to buy their expensive cars. Focusing on the new strategy could hurt their brand equity and this may impact their loyal buyers.
However, such could be avoided if they market this strategy with a foreign brand name and promote the name under the Ferrari hood by saying that the foreign brand has been designed by the Ferrari. Keeping the original Ferrari name and objective separate from this brand.
Answer:
(B) a cash cow
Explanation:
Based on the information provided within the question it can be said that in this scenario AI Rubber would be considered a cash cow. This term refers to a business and/or product that generates a steady revenue or profit for the owning company or individual. Since AI Rubber has a 45% market share we can say that they are the cash cow of the corporation.
Answer:
The forecast for the year 2012 with an alpha value of 0.20 = 366.04.
Explanation:
The first step in order to solve this question/problem is to calculate or determine the Exponentially smoothed forecast for a period of time, t using the values of average demand for 2005 through 2007, that is to say;
Exponentially smoothed forecast for a period of time, t using the values of average demand for 2005 through 2007 = [actual sales in 2005 + actual sales in 2006 + actual sales in 2007]/ 3.
Therefore, Exponentially smoothed forecast for a period of time, t using the values of average demand for 2005 through 2007 =[ 281 + 367 + 409]/3 = 1057/3 = 352.3.
Since we are asked to use the smoothed value calculated as of the end of 2012. Use the average demand for 2005 through 2007 as your initial forecast for 2008, then, we have that for 2008 the forecast = 352.3.
Therefore, the forecast from the year 2009 through to the year 2012 can be calculated as given below;
The forecast for the year 2009 with an alpha value of 0.20 = 0.2 × 467 + [1 - 0.2] × 352.3 = 375.24.
The forecast for the year 2010 with an alpha value of 0.20 = 0.2 × 369 + [1 - 0.2] × 352.3 = 355.64.
The forecast for the year 2011 with an alpha value of 0.20 = 0.2 × 511 + [1 - 0.2] × 352.3 = 384.04.
The forecast for the year 2012 with an alpha value of 0.20 = 0.2 × 421 + [1 - 0.2] × 352.3 = 366.04.
Answer:
a. "Not deductible"
b. "Not deductible"
c. "Not deductible"
d. "Deductible"
e. "Not deductible"
f. "Not deductible"
Explanation:
Expenses to be deductible ( especially for tax purposes) must pass the WREN test where;
W stands for wholly
R stands for reasonably
E stands for exclusively
N stands for necessarily
Looking at the expenses incurred and paid for by Doug during the year, the $50 ticket for running a red light is not a necessary expense as an adherence to traffic signs would have prevented such an expense. it can also be said that the expense was not reasonably incurred. This also applies to options b and c. Parking at the handicapped space is completely avoidable (necessity test) and as such the $100 would not have been incurred. While the $200 paid to the attorney for representation in court is an offshoot of options a and b. This would not have been incurred if the first two incidences were avoided.
Option c is deductible as the $500 paid is wholly for the business, reasonable, exclusive and necessary. As such, the expense is deductible or allowable. Options e and f are not related to business and are incurred on personal grounds which are avoidable hence, these expenses would not pass the WREN test.
Answer:
The correct answer is option C.
Explanation:
A rightward shift in the demand curve means that at the same price levels, the consumers are demanding more of the commodity. A rightward shift in the demand curve causes it to intersect with the supply curve at a higher point.
The equilibrium point shifts upward. This causes both equilibrium quantity and price level to increase.
A leftward shift, on the other hand, causes the equilibrium price and quantity to decrease.
