When you ask the controller to look into federal reimbursements to see if he can find the cause of the reduction, how might he respond? (Select all that apply) Federal reimbursements are not part of the revenue cycle, the problem lies in revenue. Since federal reimbursements are part of the revenue cycle, we might find the problem there. The problem lies in revenue so it’s possible that charges are not being generated. The problem lies in revenue so there could be a problem in claims.

Pennewell publishing inc. (pp) is a zero growth company. it currently has zero debt and its earnings before interest and taxes (ebit) are $80,000. pp's current cost of equity is 10%, and its tax rate is 40%. the firm has 10,000 shares of common stock outstanding selling at a price per share of $48.00. refer to the data for pennewell publishing inc. (pp). pp is considering changing its capital structure to one with 30% debt and 70% equity, based on market values. the debt would have an interest rate of 8%. the new funds would be used to repurchase stock. it is estimated that the increase in risk resulting from the added leverage would cause the required rate of return on equity to rise to 12%. if this plan were carried out, what would be pp's new value of operations? a. $484,359 b. $521,173 c. $584,653 d. $560,748 e. $487,805

In december of 2004, the company you own entered into a 20-year contract with a grain supplier for daily deliveries of grain to its hot dog bun manufacturing facility. the contract called for "10,000 pounds of grain" to be delivered to the facility at the price of $100,000 per day. until february 2017, the supplier provided processed grain which could easily be used in your manufacturing process. however, no longer wanting to absorb the cost of having the grain processed, the supplier began delivering whole grain. the supplier is arguing that the contract does not specify the type of grain that would be supplied and that it has not breached the contract. your company is arguing that the supplier has an onsite processing plant and processed grain was implicit to the terms of the contract. over the remaining term of the contract, reshipping and having the grain processed would cost your company approximately $10,000,000, opposed to a cost of around $1,000,000 to the supplier. after speaking with in-house counsel, it was estimated that litigation would cost the company several million dollars and last for years. weighing the costs of litigation, along with possible ambiguity in the contract, what are three options you could take to resolve the dispute? which would be the best option for your business and why?

(a) what was the opportunity cost of non-gm food for many buyers before 2008? (b) why did they prefer the alternative? (c) what was the opportunity cost in 2008? (d) why did it change?