Answer:
A. Set above equilibrium price
Explanation:
A price ceiling is a mandatory maximum price that a seller is allowed to charge. Generally, a government may impose this in order to protect consumers, especially with regards to the purchase of essential goods.
If the price ceiling was set below the equilibrium price (option c) or if the equilibrium price is above the price ceiling (option b), it will immediately cause a shortage (option d) since the quantity demanded would be higher than the quantity supplied when the price falls. This is because people will be willing to purchase more since it is cheaper but suppliers will be willing to produce less due to lower profits. Hence, options b, c and d are eliminated.
Option A is correct because... (please refer attached diagram):
When the price ceiling is above the equilibrium price, suppliers are willing to supply more since they can make higher profits but consumers will reduce purchasing since it is expensive. However, it does not cause any immediate effect because it takes time for suppliers to be able to produce more and cannot be done immediately unless anticipated in advance. In the long run however, quantity demanded will fall from equilibrium quantity to D1 and quantity supplied will rise from equilibrium quantity to S1. Hence, causing a surplus between D1 - S1 in the long run.
Answer: Business case
Explanation: In other to eliminate the dilemma posed by having to allocate resources particularly in those which are not readily available in abundance or having to choose between two or more different options, tasks or projects, managers are often faced with a decision dilemma which are is usually analysed by making a business case in other to identify the modalities attached with each project or task on the basis of risk, benefit attached, cost, timing of such projects and so on. This will enable managers to arrive at a reasonable justification to choose an option over the other which will yield a longterm return or benefit to the organization.
I looked up the question, since this one is incomplete. I've attached an image of the correct chart. Elvis' marginal benefit of the fourth sandwich is his total benefit of eating 4 sandwich minus his total benefit from eating 3 sandwiches.
Looking at the chart, we see that this gives us 81-75 = 6.
Therefore, the Marginal Benefit of a fourth sandwich is 6.
Answer:
$60,000
Explanation:
Hansen's annual salary allowance= 30,000
Hernandez's annual salary allowance= 10,000
annual interest allowance of Hensen= 0.1 × 50,000= 5000
annual interest allowance of Hernandez= 0.1 × 50,000= 5000
Remaining balance=100000- 5000-5000-30000-10000= 50000
Share of each partner from remaining balance= 25000
Hensen's income= 25,000+ 5000+ 30000= 60,000
Answer:
the information is missing, so I looked for a similar question and found the attached image:
a) days inventory on hand = (average inventory / cost of goods sold) x 365 = ($14,000 / $120,000) x 365 = 42.58 days
b) inventory turnover ratio = cost of goods sold / average inventory = $120,000 / $14,000 = 8.57
I agree with Mr. David because the inventory turnover ratio of Golden Cup is already higher than the industry's average. That means that Golden Cup's current inventory level is appropriate and increasing it would only result in higher costs but would have very little influence on the company's sales.
