Answers: 2
Other questions on the subject: Business
Business, 22.06.2019 11:20, angeline2004
Stock a has a beta of 1.2 and a standard deviation of 20%. stock b has a beta of 0.8 and a standard deviation of 25%. portfolio p has $200,000 consisting of $100,000 invested in stock a and $100,000 in stock b. which of the following statements is correct? (assume that the stocks are in equilibrium.) (a) stock b has a higher required rate of return than stock a. (b) portfolio p has a standard deviation of 22.5%. (c) portfolio p has a beta equal to 1.0. (d) more information is needed to determine the portfolio's beta. (e) stock a's returns are less highly correlated with the returns on most other stocks than are b's returns.
Answers: 3
Business, 22.06.2019 16:50, taylorb9893
According to ceo heidi ganahl, camp bow wow requires a strong and consistent corporate culture to keep all local franchise owners "on the same page" and to follow a common template for the business and brand. this culture could become detrimental over time because: (a) strong consistent cultures are inflexible and incapable of adapting to environmental change (b) strong consistent cultures are too flexible and capable of adapting to environmental change (c) strong consistent cultures don’t perform well in any environment (d) the passing of time provides stability and predictability for businesses
Answers: 2
Business, 23.06.2019 07:50, erinolson07cats
Suppose for a consumer the marginal utility (mu) of bread is 20 utils and the mu of milk is 10 utils; the price of bread is $3 and the price of milk is $1. given this, a. more utility per dollar is gained from consuming bread than milk. b. more utility per dollar is gained from consuming milk than bread. c. the same amount of utility per dollar is gained from consuming milk as bread. d. the consumer is in consumer equilibrium.
Answers: 1
Business, 23.06.2019 15:00, Osorio5116
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.
Answers: 1
You know the right answer?
In risk management, what does risk control include?...
Questions in other subjects:
Business, 03.10.2019 00:30
Computers and Technology, 03.10.2019 00:30
Social Studies, 03.10.2019 00:30
Mathematics, 03.10.2019 00:30
