The relevance of a disaster recovery plan (DRP) to a financial statement audit is a matter of debate. Some argue that the existence of a DPR is irrelevant to the audit. Others argue that it is an important control that needs to be considered in the assessment of internal control. Required: Argue both side of this debate. 1) Provide a logical argument why a DRP should not be considered in the audit. 2) Argue why a DRP is an important control and should be reviewed within the conduct of a financial audit.

1. all other things equal, according to the law of demand, when the price of a good falls, the demand for the good falls the demand for the good rises the quantity demanded of the good falls the quantity demanded of the good rises 2. when a market is in equilibrium, the quantity of the good that buyers are willing and able to buy exactly equals the quantity that sellers are willing and able to sell cannot be determined is less than the quantity that sellers are willing and able to sell is greater than the quantity that sellers are willing and able to sell 3. which of the following factors does not influence the demand for a good or service? consumer (buyer) income the price of related goods the number of sellers buyer expectations 4. when the number of sellers in a market increases, demand rises supply rises the price rises, all else equal the number of buyers falls

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.

This problem has been solved! see the answercompute and interpret altman's z-scoresfollowing is selected financial information for ebay, for its fiscal years 2005 and 2006.(in millions, except per share data) 2006 2005current assets $ 4,970.59 $ 3,183.24current liabilities 2,518.39 1,484.93total assets 13,494.01 11,788.99total liabilities 2,589.38 1,741.00shares outstanding 1,368.51 1,404.18retained earnings 4,538.35 2,819.64stock price per share 30.07 43.22sales 5,969.74 4,552.40earnings before interest and taxes 1,439.77 1,445.18compute and interpret altman z-scores for the company for both years. (do not round until your final answer; then round your answers to two decimal places.)2006 z-score = answer2005 z-score = answerwhich of the following best describes the company's likelihood to go bankrupt given the z-score in 2006 compared to 2007.the z-score in 2006 is half of the 2005 score. both z-scores are well above the score that represents a healthy company.the z-score in 2006 is double the 2005 score. the z-score has increased sharply, which suggests the company has greatly increased the risk of bankruptcy.the z-score in 2006 is half of the 2005 score. the z-score has decreased sharply, which suggests the company is in financial distress.the z-score in 2006 is double the 2005 score. the z-score has increased sharply, which suggests the company has greatly lowered the risk of bankruptcy.