Answer:
The investment will grow to $20,497 in four years if interest is compounded annually.
On other hand, the investment will grow to $20,684 if interest is compounded at 10% semi-annually
Explanation:
Using compound interest formula below the,the total investment after four years:
A=P(1+r/n)^nt
A=Future value
P=Principal amount invested
n=number of time interest is paid per time period
t=number of time period
First question:
P=$14000
r=10%
n=4 years
t=1 period
A=$14000*(1+0.1)^4
A=$20497.4
Second question
P=$14000
r=10%
n=4years
t=2 times
A=$14000*(1+0.1/2)^4*2
A=$20684.38
In short , the investment grows better if the interest is compounded at 10% semi-annually.
Answer:
$26,000
Explanation:
The calculation of Net increase or decrease in income on replacement is shown below:-
Net savings in Variable cost for 4 years = Variable manufacturing costs × Life
= $19,800 × 4
= $79,200
Net Investment to be made in New machine = Initial investment of new machine - Traded in value of old machine
= $128,000 - $22,800
= $105,200
Net financial disadvantage of replacement = Net savings in Variable cost for 4 years - Net Investment to be made in New machine
= $79,200 - $105,200
= $26,000
So, for computing the net financial disadvantage of replacement we simply applied the above formula.
<span>The contract Henry entered into to sell his farm is void and not enforceable. Henry is not mentally competent to enter into such arrangements and the courts will not uphold the sale.</span>
A definitive objective or reason behind mishap examination is to discover the underlying drivers of why the mischance happened so that if comparative examples happen later on viable controls or techniques can be set up to keep a reoccurrence of the mishap. Rodrigues and Cusic portray the reason behind mischance examinations as, "To help counteract mishaps, the NTSB creates and issues security proposals to other government offices, industry, and associations that are in a position to enhance transportation wellbeing."
Answer:
The statement is true
Explanation:
As a fact, I agree that with large sample sizes, even the small differences between the null value and the observed point estimate can be statistically significant.
To put it differently, any differences between the null value and the observed point estimate will be material and/or significant if the samples are large in shape and form.
It's also established that point estimate get more clearer and understandable, and the difference between the mean and the null value can be easily singled out if the sample size is bigger.
Suffix to say, however, while the difference may connote a statistical importance, the practical implication notwithstanding, will be looked and studied on a different set of rules and procedures, beyond the statistical relevance.
