Robert, who lives in ohio, files a lawsuit against trading post, a washington company, in an ohio state court. the trading post's only sales activity outside the state of washington occurs via its web site. according to the sliding-scale standard, the ohio court can always exercise personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants based on internet transactions if the court finds that the defendant has:

Daniel owns 100 shares of abc corporation's common stock. abc uses the fair value option, and recent declines in the firm's credit rating have caused the value of the firm's outstanding bonds payable to drop by 10%. daniel feels this is good news, but he wants to know what you think about the situation. which of the following represents your best response? a : "this situation may be positive for you in that the change in abc's credit standing indicates that the value of the firm's assets is likely increasing. however, the drop in bond value may negate any positive effects on your bottom line, because it means your claim on the firm's assets is simultaneously decreasing." b : "actually, this is bad news all around. the drop in the value of abc's bonds payable means shareholders' claims on the firm's assets have decreased. moreover, abc's declining credit rating means that the firm's assets are probably also dropping in value, thus magnifying your losses even more." c : "on the surface, this seems like good news because it means your claim on the firm's assets has increased. however, the drop in creditworthiness may also indicate that abc's assets are declining in value, thus offsetting any gains associated with the drop in bonds payable." d : "you're right! this is good news because it means that abc's debtholders have a decreased claim on the firm's assets. as a result, the firm's existing shareholders"like you"have seen their claim on the firm's assets increase."

What is the relationship among market segmentation, target markts, and consumer profiles?

Suppose a mutual fund qualifies as having moderate risk if the standard deviation of its monthly rate of return is less than 3%. a mutual-fund rating agency randomly selects 27 months and determines the rate of return for a certain fund. the standard deviation of the rate of return is computed to be 2.19%. is there sufficient evidence to conclude that the fund has moderate risk at the alpha equals 0.05 level of significance? a normal probability plot indicates that the monthly rates of return are normally distributed.