Baughn Corporation, which has only one product, has provided the following data concerning its most recent month of operations:

Selling price $ 115
Units in beginning inventory 0
Units produced 6,600
Units sold 6,400
Units in ending inventory 200

Variable costs per unit:

Direct materials $ 26
Direct labor $ 46
Variable manufacturing overhead $ 7
Variable selling and administrative expense $ 9
Fixed costs:

Fixed manufacturing overhead $ 105,600
Fixed selling and administrative expense $ 51,200

What is the unit product cost for the month under absorption costing?a. $79 per unitb. $95 per unitc. $104 per unitd. $88 per unit

Minolta inc. is considering a project that has the following cash flow and wacc data. what is the project's mirr? note that a project's projected mirr can be less than the wacc (and even negative), in which case it will be rejected. wacc: 10.00% year 0 1 2 3 4 cash flows -$850 300 $320 $340 $360

Alandowner entered into a written agreement with a real estate broker whereby the broker would receive a commission of 10% of the sale price if he procured a "ready, willing, and able buyer" for the landowner's property and if the sale actually proceeded through closing. the broker found a buyer who agreed in writing to buy the property from the landowner for $100,000, the landowner's asking price. the buyer put up $6,000 as a down payment. the agreement between the landowner and the buyer contained a liquidated damages clause providing that, if the buyer defaulted by failing to tender the balance due of $94,000 at the closing date, damages would be 10% of the purchase price. the landowner included that clause because she was counting on using the proceeds of the sale for a business venture that would likely net her at least $10,000. the buyer became seriously ill and defaulted. when he recovered, he demanded that the landowner return his $6,000, and the landowner refused. the broker also demanded the $6,000 from the landowner and was refused. the broker and the buyer filed separate suits against the landowner, with the buyer pleading impossibility of performance. the two cases are consolidated into a single case. how should the court rule as to the disposition of the $6,000?

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?