Larkspur distributors, inc. had net sales in 2017 of $2,300,000. at december 31, 2017, before adjusting entries, the balances in selected accounts were accounts receivable $320,000 debit, and allowance for doubtful accounts $1,500 debit. if larkspur estimates that 6% of its receivables will prove to be uncollectible, prepare the december 31, 2017, journal entry to record bad debt expense. (credit account titles are automatically indented when the amount is entered. do not indent manually. if no entry is required, select "no entry" for the account titles and enter 0 for the amounts.)

1. the political environment in india has proven to be critical to company performance for both pepsico and coca-cola india. what specific aspects of the political environment have played key roles? could these effects have been anticipated prior to market entry? if not, could developments in the political arena have been handled better by each company? 2. timing of entry into the indian market brought different results for pepsico and coca-cola india. what benefits or disadvantages accrued as a result of earlier or later market entry? 3. the indian market is enormous in terms of population and geography. how have the two companies responded to the sheer scale of operations in india in terms of product policies, promotional activities, pricing policies, and distribution arrangements? 4. “global localization” (glocalization) is a policy that both companies have implemented successfully. give examples for each company from the case.

What would you do as ceo to support the goals of japan airlines during the challenging economics that airlines face?

Reliability and validity reliability and validity are two important considerations that must be made with any type of data collection. reliability refers to the ability to consistently produce a given result. in the context of psychological research, this would mean that any instruments or tools used to collect data do so in consistent, reproducible ways. unfortunately, being consistent in measurement does not necessarily mean that you have measured something correctly. to illustrate this concept, consider a kitchen scale that would be used to measure the weight of cereal that you eat in the morning. if the scale is not properly calibrated, it may consistently under- or overestimate the amount of cereal that’s being measured. while the scale is highly reliable in producing consistent results (e.g., the same amount of cereal poured onto the scale produces the same reading each time), those results are incorrect. this is where validity comes into play. validity refers to the extent to which a given instrument or tool accurately measures what it’s supposed to measure. while any valid measure is by necessity reliable, the reverse is not necessarily true. researchers strive to use instruments that are both highly reliable and valid.