The correct answer is 11 1/3. Hope this helps.<span>
The mixed number would be 11 1/3. This is because 3 goes into 34 11 times. 3 multiplied by 11 would equal 33. You have 1/3 left over after , so you get 1/3.</span>
Solution:
Assume:
A=0
B=1
C=2
D=3
Formula:
185X - (10X * 2)/60 * 21 * 22 = ?
Cost Savings:
Apartment A = $0.00
Apartment B = $23.00
Apartment C = $46.00
Apartment D = $69.00
According to the time value, Apartment D provides the most savings.
Renting, which is three times less than Apartment A, compensates for 30 minutes each way (or 1 hour per day at $22/hr for 21 days). The rate of net income $405 is $336.
Answer:
Stock out costs increase
Carrying costs decrease
Explanation:
Just in time (JIT) decreases total inventory and increases the number of deliveries made by the company's vendors.
Since the company is going to hold fewer materials and components, then the risk of an stock out increases, resulting in higher stock out costs.
The total inventory will decrease, therefore, the carrying costs will also decrease.
Answer:
$24,000 ordinary income
$1,600 interest income
$20,000 guaranteed payment.
Explanation:
Calculation for what how much income will Percy report for the year and what is its character
Calculation for Percy Ordinary income: 120,000 - 40,000 - 20,000
= 60,000 x 40%
= 24,000.
Calculation for Percy Interest income:
4,000 x 40%
= 1,600
Guaranteed Payment: 20,000
Therefore what Percy will report will be: $24,000 ordinary income
$1,600 interest income
$20,000 guaranteed payment.
<u>Answer:</u>
<em>Sold product liability suit against the maker, alleging a design defect, the court may consider an available alternative design
</em>
<em></em>
<u>Explanation:</u>
At the core of the idea of faulty item configuration exemplified in the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Product Liability is the accessibility of a sensible elective plan that could have diminished or kept away from the danger of mischief. In any case, a product might be defective, regardless of whether no sensible elective plan exists, if it neglects to give possible directions or warnings of a predictable danger of damage. An ongoing choice of the Massachusetts Appeals Court represents the use of these standards.
