Answer:
To support a high stock price, to support a bond or stock offering, or to increase the company's stock price.
Explanation:
The motivation to publish fraudulent financial statements varies depending on the situation. A common theme in many cases of fraud is the attempt to improve the reported financial information to maintain high stock prices, support bonds or stock quotes, or raise a company's stock price. In many companies that published fraudulent financial statements, senior executives held significant stocks or stock options, and lowering the price of the stock would significantly reduce personal net worth or make worthless options. As a result, senior management had to maintain the high share price and therefore needed high returns to maintain the high share price. Investors value reports that increase profits each year. Indeed, the decline in earnings can significantly lower a company's stock price. Sometimes fraudulent financial reports cause line managers to exaggerate the results to meet the company or other expectations. Sometimes the cost of failure in corporate governance is high, and when it comes to choosing between failure and fraud, some managers quickly turn to fraud.
Explanation:
I would say may 6th because Sam didn't know Ralph was going to revoke until May 5th and that only makes it half final because Ralph wouldn't know in anyway except through a letter that Sam has received his letter and agreed or disagreed.
May 6th is when he gets the confirmation. So both people know on May 6th.
If this is too confusing ( like it was for me I had to read it 6 times ) then think about it this way. if you make a deal with a fisherman to buy fish on Wednesday and you send him a lettering sunday that arrives a day later, the fisherman won't know until a day later (Monday) and on that day he receives it you don't know if he got it. That's why it's half official. when he send a letter that arrives the day after he got your letter (tuesday) then you know that he understood you won't make it on Wednesday making it fully official.
does this make sense? if so hope it helps.
Answer:
Beta= 1.5
Explanation:
<u>First, we need to calculate the proportional investment of each asset:</u>
Total investment= $100,000
BOA= 30,000/100,000= 0.3
Best Buy= 20,000/100,000= 0.2
Harley-Davidson= 50,000/100,000= 0.5
<u>To calculate the beta of the portfolio, we need to use the following formula:</u>
Beta= (proportion of investment A*beta A) + (proportion of investment B*beta B)...
Beta= (0.3*1.8) + (0.2*1.05) + (0.5*1.5)
Beta= 1.5
Answer:
The closest answer is 49.
Explanation:
Given that,
Annual demand, D = 43,000 units
Ordering cost, O = $200
Per unit cost of the item = $50
Annual holding cost, H = annual holding rate × Per unit cost of the item
= 35% × $50
= $17.5
= 991.39
= 992 units
Therefore,
Number of orders per year = Annual demand ÷ EOQ
= 43,000 ÷ 992
= 43.34
Hence, the closest answer is 49 and this is not given in the question.
Answer:
The answer is: A) $0
Explanation:
I am assuming Stuart's stock is part of his retirement account. If this is true, then the stock dividends and stock splits are not taxed as they are earned (but they will be taxed later when Stuart starts receiving his distributions).
If Stuart's stock was not part of his retirement account, then he would have to pay taxes (usually a 15% tax rate applies).
