Answer:
B. who can immediately take over the family business
Explanation:
<em>Option A</em> is wrong because opportunity cost is not related to intelligence.
<em>Option C</em> is not correct because a high school graduate and a college attending student can access to student loans.
The family's wealth can not be a factor in terms of opportunity cost of attending college or a high school graduate. Therefore, <em>option D</em> is incorrect.
Option B is correct as a college attending student cannot take over the family business. So, it is his opportunity cost. On the other hand, a high school graduate can take over the business.
Answer:
D) all of the above
Explanation:
First find the present value for each alternative using PV of perpetual cashflow formula;
PV = CF / rate
CF = 50
If rate= 5%;
PV = 50/0.05 = $1,000
If rate = 2%;
PV = 50/0.02 = $2,500
With these two calculations, we see that;
-the bond price increased by $1,500
-you could sell this bond at a capital gain, meaning you can sell it a higher price that what you bought it for.
-at an interest rate of 2%, the speculative demand for money would increase
Hence , all these choices are correct!
Answer: C. it's a good time to buy the wood.
Explanation:
$500 = 738NZ dollars, therefore 738 NZ dollar ÷ $500 = 1.476NZ dollar
The current exchange rate is $1 = 1.476NZ dollar
10 foot slab costs $5000, Tee Golf Resort will pay $ 3387.53 ($5000/1.476NZ)
if they import wood from New Zealand. Tee Golf Resort will pay less than $5000 if they import Wood from New Zealand at the current exchange rate. This is a Good time for them to import woods
Answer:
B. Portfolio B with E(R)=13% and STD=18%
Explanation:
The computation is shown below;
Reward to risk ratio = (15% - 5%) ÷ 20% = 0.5
The porfolio should be in line i.e.
= 0.05 + 0.5 × standard deviation
For portfolio A
= 0.05 + 0.5 × 25
= 17.5%
For portfolio C
= 0.05 + 0.5 × 1
= 5.5%
Portfolio B, the std is 18%
So,
= 0.05 + 0.5 × 18%
= 14%
Answer: yes
Explanation: although the manager was aware of the weather condition, his negligence hampered him from posting a sign to caution incoming customers. This negligence had incurred a damage to his account and he is liable to compensate Kim for negligence