Business, 23.09.2019 11:00 Richelleypinelley

What is seen as a major downfall to pepfar funding?

Answers: 2

Show answers

Another question on Business

Business, 21.06.2019 19:40

Uppose stanley's office supply purchases 50,000 boxes of pens every year. ordering costs are $100 per order and carrying costs are $0.40 per box. moreover, management has determined that the eoq is 5,000 boxes. the vendor now offers a quantity discount of $0.20 per box if the company buys pens in order sizes of 10,000 boxes. determine the before-tax benefit or loss of accepting the quantity discount. (assume the carrying cost remains at $0.40 per box whether or not the discount is taken.)

Answers: 1

Answer

Business, 22.06.2019 11:30

11. before adding cream to a simmering soup, you need to a. simmer the cream. b. chill the cream. c. strain the cream through cheesecloth. d. allow the cream reach room temperature. student d incorrect which answer is right?

Answers: 2

Answer

Business, 23.06.2019 03:10

Wisconsin snowmobile corp. is considering a switch to level production. cost efficiencies would occur under level production, and after tax costs would decline by $36,000, but inventory would increase by $300,000. wisconsin snowmobile would have to finance the extra inventory at a cost of 13.5 percent.a. determine the extra cost or savings of switching over to level production. should the company go ahead and switch to level production? b how low would interest rates need to fall before level production would be feasible?

Answers: 1

Answer

Business, 23.06.2019 15:00

How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project? the environmental effects should be ignored since the plant is legal without mitigation. the environmental effects should be treated as a sunk cost and therefore ignored. if the utility mitigates for the environmental effects, the project is not acceptable. however, before the company chooses to do the project without mitigation, it needs to make sure that any costs of "ill will" for not mitigating for the environmental effects have been considered in the original analysis. the environmental effects should be treated as a remote possibility and should only be considered at the time in which they actually occur. the environmental effects if not mitigated would result in additional cash flows. therefore, since the plant is legal without mitigation, there are no benefits to performing a "no mitigation" analysis.