Answer:
d. Choose Option B because it has a higher NPV
Explanation:
The computation is shown below:
For Option A:
Investment = $10 million
Present Value of cash flows = Cash flow ÷ Discounting rate
= $2 ÷ 10%
= $20 million
Now
NPV = $20 - $10
= $10 million
We know that
IRR is the rate at which the NPV will be zero
So, 2 ÷ r - 10 = 0
r = 20%
For Option B:
Investment = $50 million
Present Value of cash flows = $6.5 ÷ 10% = $65 million
NPV = $65 - $50 = $15 million
we know that
IRR is the rate at which the NPV will be zero
So, 6.5÷ r -50 = 0
r = 13%
Based on NPV, Option B should be selected as it contains higher NPV as compared to option A.
However, Based on IRR, Option A should be chosen as it contains higher IRR and a higher IRR represent a higher profit percentage
Answer:
Weak because of proximate cause is difficult to prove in absence of other similarly affected individuals
Explanation:
Since in the question it is mentioned that the 60 year old man have a lung cancer so he sues the asbestos manufacturer also he trust that it is unsafe as her friend who use the alternative material has not have a lung cancer so here the case would be weak as of proximate cause as it is difficult for proving it
Therefore the same is to be considered
I see this job as a opportunity to contribute to an forward thinking industry. I feel that that my skills would be something great to share with the team .
Answer:
This is based on the micro-economics concept,
MRP=MRC
The principle states that in order to maximize profit a firm should employ the quantity of a resource at which its marginal revenue product (MRP) is equal to its marginal resource cost (MRC)
MRC is the wage rate in pure competition and in this case.
As each worker will bring in at least as much revenue as their wages cost. If the wage was $25, you would hire 4 workers. The MRC is 25 and MRP is 30, thus if a 5th worker would be hired, the amount paid would exceed the MRC, or what is coming in, thus you cannot increase to a fifth worker.
Answer:
Option 2 should be selected
Explanation:
Using a rational approach which option most benefit and have a minimum cost. We will use the break-even level here to decide which option should be selected.
Option 1
Price per call = $30
Variable cost per call = $18
Contribution = Sales - Variable cost = $30 - $18 = $12
Fixed Cost = $15,000
Break-even point = Fixed cost / Contribution per call = $15,000 / $12 = 1,250 calls
Option 2
Price per call = $30
Variable cost per call = $18 + ( $30 x 10% ) = $18 + $3 = $21
Contribution = Sales - Variable cost = $30 - $21 = $9
Fixed Cost = $9,000
Break-even point = Fixed cost / Contribution per call = $9,000 / $9 = 1,000 calls
Difference = 1,250 calls - 1,000 calls = 250 calls
Option 2 is better option because it take 250 less calls to reach at break-even in the month. It should be selected.
