Bubble-up, inc., is a small manufacturer of educational toys for children under age 10. it has co-existed with three other competitors in the educational toy industry for over 20 years, each of them maintaining a stable market share. there is a widespread rumor that mega-toy, inc., the market leader in the broad children's toy market, has decided to target educational toys. which of the following statements is most likely true? a. the owners of bubble-up are unconcerned about mega-toy's entry to the market because of the resource dissimilarity between the firms.
b. bubble-up's greater organizational slack will allow it to aggressively attack mega-toy.
c. bubble-up's smaller size may make it more flexible in introducing innovations than mega-toy.
d. competitive rivalry will not increase for bubble-up because mega-toy is not dependent on the educational toy market.

Answer the following questions using the data given below. annual percent return on mutual funds (n = 17) last year (x) this year (y) 11.9 15.4 19.5 26.7 11.2 18.2 14.1 16.7 14.2 13.2 5.2 16.4 20.7 21.1 11.3 12.0 –1.1 12.1 3.9 7.4 12.9 11.5 12.4 23.0 12.5 12.7 2.7 15.1 8.8 18.7 7.2 9.9 5.9 18.9

In a macroeconomic context, what are implicit liabilities? money owed to people possessing government issued bonds. the amount of money that firms collectively owe to shareholders. money that the government has promised to pay in the future. payments that the federal government undertakes only during periods of recession. which of the choices is a significant implicit liability in the united states? military spending education spending national science foundation spending social security

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?