The demand equation for a certain product is 6p2 + q2 = 1000, where p is the price per unit in dollars and q is the number of units demanded. Find dq/dp.

Burke enterprises is considering a machine costing $30 billion that will result in initial after-tax cash savings of $3.7 billion at the end of the first year, and these savings will grow at a rate of 2 percent per year for 11 years. after 11 years, the company can sell the parts for $5 billion. burke has a target debt/equity ratio of 1.2, a beta of 1.79. you estimate that the return on the market is 7.5% and t-bills are currently yielding 2.5%. burke has two issuances of bonds outstanding. the first has 200,000 bonds trading at 98% of par, with coupons of 5%, face of $1000, and maturity of 5 years. the second has 500,000 bonds trading at par, with coupons of 7.5%, face of $1000, and maturity of 12 years. kate, the ceo, usually applies an adjustment factor to the discount rate of +2 for such highly innovative projects. should the company take on the project?

Henry crouch's law office has traditionally ordered ink refills 55 units at a time. the firm estimates that carrying cost is 35% of the $11 unit cost and that annual demand is about 240 units per year. the assumptions of the basic eoq model are thought to apply. for what value of ordering cost would its action be optimal? a) for what value of ordering cost would its action be optimal?

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.