Suppose Always There Wireless serves 100 high-demand wireless consumers, who each have a monthly demand curve for wireless minutes of QdH = 200 - 100P, and 300 low-demand consumers, who each have a monthly demand curve for wireless minutes of QdL = 100 - 100P, where P is the per-minute price in dollars. The marginal cost is $0.25 per minute. Suppose Always There Wireless charges $0.35 per minute. What is the highest fixed fee Always There Wireless can charge without losing the low-demand consumers?
A. $21.13
B. $42.25
C. $28.13
D. $136.13
A. $21.13
You might also like to view...
According to the bounded rationality hypothesis, an individual confronting a large number of complicated choices is most likely to respond by
A) using a simple rule of thumb to choose among a subset of easiest-to-evaluate options. B) using the ceteris paribus assumption to assist in simplifying and examining each of the possible options. C) utilizing readily available empirical evidence to assist in evaluating every option. D) assessing every available choice by developing sophisticated theories regarding each option.
The management function of a sufficiently large firm should be separated from finance and residual claimancy because of:
a. differences in skill requirements and opportunity costs. b. differences in attitudes towards risk. c. differences in investment choices and responsibilities. d. differences in beliefs about a new strategy's probability of success.
Suppose thatthere are 10 million sport fishermenalong the East coast for each type of fish identified in the study, and that each fisherman makes 3 sportfishing trips per year.If an efficient number of fishing trips is achieved in each category, what would be the total costs for each fish category, assuming the 20 percent increase in the catch rate?
HOW MUCH IS CLEANER WATER WORTH TO MARINE SPORTFISHING? Most water quality research focuses on a particular water body or region for the context of its analysis. Such is the case for a University of Maryland study supported by the EPA that analyzed the coastal region from New York to south Florida (excluding the Florida Keys). The location was motivated by the economic activity being studied: marine sportfishing. Eighty percent of all East Coast marine sportfishing takes place in the area targeted by the study. Furthermore, the region is one where there are active pollution control initiatives and where management plans for recreational fisheries are in place. The objective of this university research was to develop a database and a procedure that can be used to estimate the economic value of two related factors: access to marine sportfishing and changes in the catch rate of various species, where the catch rate is the average number of fish caught per fishing trip at a given site. The link between these two factors and economic benefits is a logical one. Water quality policy reform can improve the catch rate, which in turn will affect fishermen's decisions about where to fish, what species they fish for, whether they fish from the shore or from a boat (called the fishing mode), and even how often they go fishing. By measuring these changes in fishermen's behavior, researchers can make the link to a monetized benefit measure of improved fishing conditions that can be achieved through tougher pollution controls. To determine catch rates, the analysis used survey data collected by the National Marine Fisheries Service. Three categories of catch rates are defined by type of fish: big game fish (e.g., marlin and tuna), small game fish (e.g., bluefish and mackerel), and bottom fish (e.g., snapper and grouper). Three different preliminary benefit estimates were reported by the EPA: • A 20 percent increase in the catch rate of small game fish for both fishing modes at all sites would increase the average benefit of each fishing trip by $0.33. • A 20 percent increase in the catch rate of bottom fish by boat would increase the average benefit per trip by $1.27. • A 20 percent increase in the catch rate of large game fish would yield an increase in benefits of $1.56 per trip.
Budget projections for 2014-2020 indicate both higher levels of government spending and large budget deficits. Non-Keynesian economists argue that this will lead to
a. lower taxes, which will reduce aggregate supply and retard long-term growth. b. growth rates above the historic average for the decade. c. an increase in aggregate demand and real output. d. higher interest rates, higher taxes, and sluggish future growth.