Answer
The answer and procedures of the exercise are attached in the following archives.
Step-by-step explanation:
You will find the procedures, formulas or necessary explanations in the archive attached below. If you have any question ask and I will aclare your doubts kindly.
Answer:
Consider a Caribbean cruise route served by two cruise lines, Carnival and Royal Caribbean. Both lines must choose whether to charge a high price ($320) or a low price ($300) to vacationers. These price strategies with corresponding profits are illustrated in the payoff matrix to the right. Carnival's profits are in red and Royal Caribbean's are in blue. Suppose the cruise lines decide to collude. At which outcome are joint profits maximized?
Joint profits are maximized when Carnival picks $320 and Royal Caribbean picks $320.
Explanation:
When Carnival picks $320 and Royal Caribbean picks $320, then joint profits are maximized.
Nash equilibrium would exist only when Royal chooses $300 and the carnival chooses $300.
However, if both Carnival and Royal Caribbean charge a lower price, both of them can earn a higher profit.
Answer:
The production exhibit both scope economics and scale economics. They are not mutually exclusive.
Explanation:
Looking at the scenario critically, we will clearly see the tendency of a scope economics. Scope economics basically hinges on getting a competitive advantage, essentially because of producing in large quantities and numbers. Riverside Ranger logo T-shirts exhibits this as it produce its products in large numbers, producing 1000 pieces of a particular design in 1 hour.
In same breath, we also have the scale economics exhibited by the organization. Taking a deeper look at the cost representation, we will see that the average cost tend to reduce as the production increases. Thus, an economic of scale is achieved here by leveraging on the mass and swift production style of Riverside Rangers logo T-shirts.
Answer: If the material is reworked and sold, Hodge Inc. has a financial disadvantage of (- 4500).
Let's see why:
1) If we sell the material at its disposal value: We have a cost of $ 74600 and the income from sale would be $ 57400 =
57400 - 74600 = (-17200). We have a loss of $17200.
2) If we rework the material we will have an original cost of $ 74600, an additional cost for reworking of $ 1500 and the income from its sale would be $ 54400 =
54400 - (74600 + 1500) = (-21700) We have a loss of $ 21700.
Then comparing the 2 situations =
(-21700) - (-17200) = -4500. There is a financial disadvantage of $4,500 if the material is reworked instead of selling it as scrap.
Answer:
He should pay = $270,000
Explanation:
<em>The amount he should pay for the investment is the present value of he net income discounted at the rate of return of 12%</em>
The occupancy rate = 100 -5= 95%
The net income = occupancy rate × income - expenses
= 95%× 3,600× 12 - 8,640= 32400
If we assume that the income is earned forever, then the Present value of the income will be
PV of net income = A/r
A-32400
, r -12%
= 32400/0.12
=$270000
He should pay = $270,000
