All categories

3 years ago

Lantz Company has provided the following information:

Business

1 answer:

Ber [7]3 years ago

6 0

Answer:

The answer is "$272,000"

Explanation:

$\text{Operating revenues}$ $= \$ 280,000 + \$ 488,000 = \$ 786,000$

$\text{Operating expenses}$ $= \$ 350,000 + \$ 38,000 + \$ 48,000 + \$ 78,000 = \$ 514,000$

$\text{Operating income = Operating revenues- Operating expenses}$

$= \$ 786,000 - \$ 514,000\\\\ = \$ 272,000$

You might be interested in

Mortgages, loans taken to purchase a property, involve regular payments at fixed intervals and are treated as reverse annuities.

storchak [24]

Answer:

Ans. your monthly payment, for 30 years is $9,257.51 if you buy a property worth $1,000,000 and you make a down payment of $100,000

Explanation:

Hi, first we have to change the fixed rate in terms of an effective monthly rate, which is 1% effective monthly (12% nominal interest/12 =1% effective monthly). After that, take into account that the property is going to be paid in 30 years, but since the payments are going to be made in a montlhly basis, we have to turn years into months (30 years * 12 = 360 months).

After all that is done, all we have to do is to solve the following equiation for "A".

$PresentValue=\frac{A((1+r)^{n} -1)}{r(1+r)^{n} }$

Where:

A= Annuity or monthly payment

r= Rate (effective monthly, in our case)

n= Periods to pay (360 months)

Everything should look like this.

$900,000=\frac{A((1+0.01)^{360} -1}{0.01(1+0.0.1)^{360} }$

$900,000=A(97.2183311)$

$\frac{900,000}{97.2183311} =A$

$A=9,257.51$

Best of luck.

6 0

3 years ago

In a process costing system, which of the following would be TRUE?a.There is no need to track materials to processes.b.There is

Allushta [10]

Answer:

d.All of these choices are true.

Explanation:

In a process costing system, a.There is no need to track materials to processes.b.There is no need to use time tickets to assign costs to processes.c.A process costing system is more expensive to maintain because it has more work-in-process accounts.d.All of these choices are true . All of the choices given are true .

3 0

2 years ago

Continuing the analysis of Ginnie's Gym Refreshment Bar:

IrinaVladis [17]

The bundle prices for Hydration Power Drink and Satisfying Smoothie are given below.

<h3>What is Contribution Margin?</h3>

The contribution margin (CM), also known as the dollar contribution per unit, is the difference between the selling price and the variable cost per unit.

Because 100% is the best contribution margin, the closer the contribution margin is to 100%, the better. The greater the figure, the better a company's ability to meet its overhead expenditures with cash on hand.

The contribution margin =

Unit Margin (Profit) = Unit Revenue - Unit Variable Cost (Marginal Cost)

<h3>What is the bundle prices and Net Profit?</h3>

For Hydration Power Drink:

High 7 -1 = 6

Low: 6 - 1 = 5

Total = 11

For Satisfying Smoothie:

High: 10 -4 = 6

Low: 5-4 = 1

Total = 7

High Bundle Price for both products:
6 + 6 = 12

Low Bundle price for both products:
5 + 1 = 6

From the above information, it is clear that the Bundle Price that will maximize profit is the High Bundle Price.

The product that will yield the most profit is: The Hydration Power Drink.

Learn more about bundle price:
brainly.com/question/23175408
#SPJ1

7 0

1 year ago

Consider a town in which only two residents, Kevin and Maria, own wells that produce water safe for drinking. Kevin and Maria ca

jarptica [38.1K]

Answer:

Monopolist profit maximizing price

A: $3 per gallon , total output =270 Kelvins profit = $810(801/7/2 = $405

Maria's profit = $405

B. $2.5 per gallon . Kelvin's profit =$450 Maria's profit = 337.5

C = False. At the same quantity , fall in price brings fall in revenue

Cournot Nash equilibrium

Explanation:

In a monopolist market system , price are set higher than the marginal cost as the producer enjoy the dominance of the market through the production of a unique good.

At the price of $3 , change in demand =(270-225) =45 , change in revenue = ($810-$787.50)22.5 and marginal revenue = (45/22,5) = 0.5. That forms the maximizing price for a monopolist.

On the new arrangement , price drops to $2.5 , Maria's profit =(315-45/2)2.5 = $337.5 and Kelvin's = ($787.5-337.5) = $450

Cournot Nash equilibrium is business model that explains the competition among rival companies producing similar product on the level of output produced independently.

6 0

3 years ago

Mark Johnson saves a fixed percentage of his salary at the end of each year. This year he saved $2,000. For each of the next 5 y

adell [148]

Answer:

The correct answer is:

$17,437.28

Explanation:

First of all, let us lay out the particulars that will aid us in our calculations:

Amount saved in year 1 = $2000

Number of years saved in total = 6 years

annual rate of savings increase = 10% increase on the amount for that year to the next year

Annual return on investment = 13%.

Next, let us calculate the 10% increase in savings from years 2 to 6.

Year 1 investment = $ 2000

Year 2 investment = Year 1 saving + 10% of year one saving

hence, investment 2 saving = 2000 + (10/100 × 2000) = 2000 + (0.1 × 2000)

Year 2 investment = 2000 +200 = $2,200.

Year 3 investment = year 2 saving + (0.1 × year 2 saving) = 2200 + (0.1 × 2200)

year 3 investment = 2200 + 220 = $2,420

Year 4 investment = 2420 + (0.1 × 2420) = 2420 + 242 = $2,662

Year 5 investment = 2662 + (0.1 × 2662) = 2662 + 266.2 = $2928.2

Year 6 investment = 2928.2 + (0.1 × 2928.2) = 2928.2 + 292.82 = $3,221.02

Next, let us create a table to show the total amount for each year.

Note, to determine the 13% annual investment return on each year:

13% = 13/100 = 0.13. So, we will multiply the investment for each year with 0.13 to get the annual investment. It is shown hence:

Year Investment (I) ($) Annual return (AR) ($) Total amount (I + AR) ($)

1 2000 260 2260

2 2200 286 2486

3 2420 314.6 2734.6

4 2662 346.06 3008.06

5 2928.2 380.67 3308.87

6 3221.02 418.73 3639.75

Total 17,437.28

Therefore, at the end of 6 years mark would have $17,437.28 (approx. $17,437)

3 0

3 years ago