All categories

2 years ago

Due to a downturn the wage of entry level workers has declined by 10 per cent, as a

1 answer:

8 0

The cross elasticity of demand for senior workers is 1.5. Senior workers and entry-level workers are gross complements.

The scale effect dominates in this example.

If the wage of the entry level workers increase, the demand curve would shift to the right.

<h3>What is the crosss price elasticity?</h3>

Cross price elasticity of demand measures the responsiveness of quantity demanded of good A to changes in price of good B.

Cross price elasticity = 15% / 10 = 1.5

Complement goods are goods or resources that are used together. As a result of the decline in wages, senior workers would be laid off. This means that senior workers and entry level workers work together.

<h3>What is the effect on the demand curve if the wages of entry level workers increase?</h3>

If the wage of the entry level workers increase, the demand for senior workers wouuld increase. This would lead to a shift to the right of the demand curve for senior workers.

To learn more about cross price elasticity, please check: brainly.com/question/26054575

You might be interested in

"A customer owns 1,000 shares of XYZZ stock, purchased at $40 per share. The stock is now at $45, and the customer has become ex

Alika [10]

Answer:

Sell 1,000 shares of XXYZZ and buy 10 XYZZ put contracts

Explanation:

In the stock markets a bullish trend is when the price of the stock increases, while a bearish market is when the stock price decreases.

In this scenario the customer owns 1,000 shares of stock XYZZ stock that have been in a bullish trend rising from $40 to $45.

Usually a bullish trend is followed by a bearish trend.

If the customer is sure there will be a bear on the stock them he should sell or make a put trade.

On sale of the 1,000 shares the customer will make $5 per share, and enter a put option since the market is going bearish.

7 0

3 years ago

Paar Corporation bought 100 percent of Kimmel, Inc., on January 1, 2012. On that date, Paar's equipment (10-year life) has a boo

RoseWind [281]

Answer:

B) 574,000

Explanation:

Equipment book of Paar value on december 31/14 of $294,000.-

Add Kimmels equipment book value on december 31/14 of $190,00

Add original acquisition-date allocation to Kimmel´s equipment of ($400,000 - $272,000) = $128,000

Less Amortization of alloction ($128,000 / 10 years for 3 years) = (38,400)

Eqcuals consolidated equipment of $574,000

8 0

3 years ago

A risk of marketing myopia is that sellers pay more attention to

vitfil [10]

The correct answer is: [D]:

________________________________________________

" their products than to customer needs. "

________________________________________________

Hope this helps!

Best wishes!

________________________________________________

5 0

3 years ago

A major drawback with lot-for-lot sizing is?

tankabanditka [31]

Answer:

c is the answer I think because I just think

6 0

1 year ago

Christie temporarily lends her car to her friend, Matt. Subsequently, Matt is involved in an accident while driving Christie’s c

Llana [10]

Answer:

The correct approach will be Option A.

Explanation:

Liability insurance on something like a subjective insurance plan implements the driver no matter with whom the automobile would be conducted, actually given it's an allowed to sign up the vehicle. Liability insurance safeguards insurance premiums whenever an automobile controlled by somebody else is operated either by the insured. They would also normally be compensated according to their car insurance policies in a somewhat circumstance.
Besides, the compensation he maintains through his automobile is liability coverage for such a covered by insurance operating everyone else's vehicle. In many of these instances, even before driving on a highway, he doesn't own the subjective coverage could very well be implemented by the driver. Throughout the scenario mentioned, Matt was indeed killed in an accident whilst also trying to drive his friend's Christie vehicle.
Hence, Matt's homeowner's insurance liability coverage would then kick through first. The gross amount of liabilities is $80,000, according to the verdict. The personal injury allowance of Matt becomes limited to $200,000, adequate to be insured.

The latter choice does not fit the instance in question. So, "A. Matt's premium is primary and therefore will cover the full $80,000," is the right response.

3 0

3 years ago