Answer:
Accrued Loss on Purchase Commitments $2,000,000
Explanation:
December 31, (recognition of loss on purchase commitments)
- Dr Loss on Purchase Commitments account 2,000,000
- Cr Accrued Loss on Purchase Commitments account 2,000,000
Since the price of raw materials lowered by 2,000,000, the company lost money on its purchase commitments:
Purchase commitments loss = contracted price - market value = $5,000,000 - $3,000,000 = $2,000,000
The loss on purchase commitments is an expense, and accrued loss on purchase commitments is a liability.
Answer:
A. determining a few key ideas and how to best sequence them.
Explanation:
The effective communication is one in which the speaker is able to disseminate his ideas to the listener correctly. The panel of successful entrepreneur is interested in investing in the venture. The meeting is limited to 15 minutes so we should cover only key points and focus on their benefits of investing. The Entrepreneur has time to listen key ideas and its upon us to best sequence those ideas which leave a positive impact on the panel.
Answer:
On one hand, the principle of management which is being ignored in this case is that of Unity of Command.
Explanation:
The principle of Unity of Command stipulates all staff or employee, for sakes of clarity and avoidance of confusion, an abiguity, should take instructions from only one boss or line manager.
On the other hand, the principle of management that is being followed in the above case is that of Taylors Functional Foremanship.
The practice of this technique requires that planning and execution be seperated according to areas of specialisation. Specialisation is the primary logic or argument in the Taylors Functional Foremanship principle. Taylors advocates that each foreman needs to be highly proficient, possess special know-how and be capable of directing the staff with high exuberance and tact.
Cheers!
Answer:
Since the expected return and required return are different for both Stock X and Z, we say that they are not correctly priced
Explanation:
<em>To determine whether or not the stocks are correctly priced ,</em>
<em>we have to compare the r</em><em>equired return</em><em> and the </em><em>expected return on each of them.</em>
Required return = Rf +β (Rm-Rf)
Note that Rm-Rf is also known as market risk premium
<em>Stock Y Stock Z</em>
<em>Required return </em> 2.4% + 1.2(7.2%) 2.4% + 0.8(7.2%)
= 11% = 8.2%
<em>Expected return</em> <em>12.1% 7.85%</em>
Since the expected return and required return are different for both Stock X and Z, we say that they are not correctly priced
Answer:
The compensation to the fund manager is based on the performance of the pension fund. If the fund performs well and earns significant profit, then the compensation to the mangers should increase.
If it incurs losses, then the argument for capping the compensation of funds managers will gain ground. Note that the manager is being paid according to the pay-for-performance scheme. Thus it is unjustified that his compensation is reduced when there is no significant evidence that his performance was responsible for the poor performance of the fund. The manager has earned over $1.2 million last year. Hence fixing the compensation of managers to $100,000 should be considered only when the fund has under performed drastically. Without such evidence, such capping will only demoralize them and the profitability of the company will fall.
Explanation:
