Answer: A. the 99 principle
Explanation:
This strategy, often called "charm pricing," involves using pricing that ends in "9" and "99."
With charm pricing, the left digit is reduced from a round number by one cent. We come across this technique every time we make purchases but don’t pay attention. For example, your brain processes $3.00 and $2.99 as different values: To your brain $2.99 is $2.00, which is cheaper than $3.00.
How is this technique effective? It all boils down to how a brand converts numerical values. In 2005, Thomas and Morwitz conducted research they called "the left-digit effect in price cognition." They explained that, “Nine-ending prices will be perceived to be smaller than a price one cent higher if the left-most digit changes to a lower level (e.g., $3.00 to $2.99), but not if the left-most digit remains unchanged (e.g., $3.60 to $3.59).”
Well it raises the price of goods such as a juice bottle costing 3.00 dollars and adding a 4% increase to that price. also another aim is better jobs for people, making sure that everyone can find a job
Answer: To remove bias when estimating the proportion of working adults living in urban, suburban, and rural areas.
Explanation: In simple words, stratification refers to the process in which different sections of the society are grouped on the basis of one or more general factors.
In the given case, the company wants to estimate the minutes of working adults in the region and the region is grouped into urban, suburban and rural.
Thus, the random selection from different regions is done so that no bias takes place regarding the number of adult working in these three different areas.
Answer:
a. 1, 5 and 7
b. Resources will be allocated inefficiently
c. Differing sizes and capacities
d. Benefits due to economies of scale
e. Reduce prices and improve resource allocation.
Explanation:
The correct combination is 1, 5 and 7. The price of a pure monopoly firm is much higher than that of purely competitive firm because the later is a price taker while the former is a price fixer. Because of this, output of monopoly is lower while the profit margin is higher than that of competitive firm.
Assuming that a pure monopolist and a purely competitive firm have the same unit costs. In the case of a pure monopolist, resources will be allocated inefficiently because the monopolist does not produce at the point of minimum Average Total Cost and does not equate price and Marginal cost.
Even though both monopolists and competitive firms follow the MC = MR rule in maximizing profits, there are differences in the economic outcomes because pure competitors lack capacity and are smaller in size while the monopolist has the capacity to expand inorder to maximize profits.
The costs of a purely competitive firm and a monopoly may be different because the monopolist is capable of taking advantage of cost reduction arising from economics of scale. Pure competitors does not experience economies of scale due to their small sizes.
If a monopoly can experience economies of scale, it can reduce prices beyond that of the pure competitor thereby ensuring a more efficient resource allocation.
<span>The court should rule in favor of the company, given clearly outlined policies and a counseling session. Documentation and expectations were stated, and the behavior continued beyond the counseling session. Monitoring her behavior as indicated seemed within the company's discretion.</span>
