Economics For Managers And Busienss Administration Questions

timer Asked: Mar 29th, 2019
account_balance_wallet $40

Question Description

Using the attached 4 PDFs (Chapters 1-8) for reference, answer the questions in the attached Word document. Document your procedure in obtaining the answer(s.) You may type in the Word document or scan your handwritten answers. Please ensure that your responses are neat, well organized, and legible.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Give clear and detailed answers PART 1 1. Assume the price of product A increases from $1 to $1.50, while the price of competing product B increases from $1.50 to $2.00. Based on the information, what we can say about the absolute and relative price differences between the two products and the relative attractiveness of the two products to consumers. ANSWER: 2. Assume there is an increase in the price of electricity (which is the result of a decrease in the supply of electricity), and electricity and natural gas are substitutes. How would this affect the demand for natural gas, and what would happen to the equilibrium price and quantity of natural gas? ANSWER: 3. Using a change in supply and/or demand, explain the following phenomena: a. All else constant, gasoline prices are higher in summer than winter months. ANSWER: b. At the same time that the quality of personal computers has been increasing, the price of personal computers has been falling. ANSWER: 4. The demand and supply functions for sweatshirts (the basic grey kind) are as follows: Demand Quantity Demanded Price(per period) $10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 Supply Quantity Supplied Price (per period) 15,000 $10 22,000 15,500 9 19,000 16,000 8 16,000 16,500 7 13,000 17,000 6 10,000 17,500 5 7,000 18,000 4 4,000 18,500 3 1,000 2 19,000 2 0 a. Graph the demand and supply functions for sweatshirts and find the equilibrium price and quantity. ANSWER: b. What effect will an increase in the price of gym shoes (a complement) have on the equilibrium price and quantity of sweatshirts, all else constant? Illustrate the effect using your graph. ANSWER: c. What effect will a wage increase for workers in the sweatshirt industry have on the equilibrium price and quantity of sweatshirts, all else constant? Illustrate the effect using your graph. ANSWER: 5. Provide a definition of the price elasticity of demand and explain why knowing the price elasticity for her product is useful to the firm's manager. ANSWER: 6. Summarize the relationship between elasticity, price changes, and changes in total revenue. ANSWER: 7. Explain the difference between the short run and the long run as it relates to the firm's production function. Why is this distinction important to a firm's manager? ANSWER: 8. Use the following information on a hypothetical short-run production function to answer questions a-c. Units of Labor/Day Units of Output/Day 5 120 6 140 7 155 8 165 9 168 The price of labor is $20 per day. Ten units of capital are used each day, regardless of output level. The price of capital is $50 per unit. a. Calculate the marginal and average variable product of each unit of labor input. b. Calculate total, average total, average variable, and marginal costs. ANSWER FOR A & B: c. Can you tell where diminishing marginal returns sets in? ANSWER: 9. Complete the table below, which represents the production costs for a typical firm. (Round numbers to the nearest tenth.) TP 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TFC $20 ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ TVC $0 27.5 46.8 63.3 82.5 106.7 139.7 181 TC $__ ___ ___ ___ ___ 126.7 ___ ___ AFC --$__ ___ ___ 5.0 ___ ___ ___ AVC --$__ 23.4 ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ATC --$__ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 28.7 MC --$27.5 ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ At what level of output do diminishing returns set in? How do you know? ANSWER: 10. Economists describe short-run decisions as "constrained" decisions, while long-run decisions are described as "planning" decisions. Referring to a firm's short-run average cost function and long-run average cost function, explain this distinction. ANSWER: Part 2 (Chapter 1) 11. Explain the basic distinction between microeconomic analysis and macroeconomic analysis. Assume an individual is considering opening a new car dealership in a medium-sized metropolitan area (population = 200,000). Provide a list of economic variables you would recommend that the person consider in making his decision whether to open the business, and explain your rationale for including each variable. ANSWER: (Chapter 2) 12. Assume the current price of good X is too high, i.e., it is above the equilibrium price. Describe the changes that would occur in a market as a result, i.e., explain how the market would adjust to equilibrium. ANSWER: (Chapter 3) 13. Illustrate graphically the effect the credit market crisis in the United States in 2008 had in the market for existing single-family homes. Assuming the demand for existing single-family homes is relatively inelastic, what is likely to happen to the total revenues of home sellers as a result of the credit market crisis? ANSWER: (Chapter 4) 14. Briefly describe the three key points managers must consider when using expert opinion, consumer surveys, test marketing, and price experiments in analyzing consumer behavior. ANSWER: (Chapter 5) 15. Florence is considering going into business for herself and has developed the following estimates of monthly costs and revenues to aid her in her decision-making process. She has decided to house the business in a building that she already owns, although she could rent the building to someone else for $1,000 per month. Estimated payments for utilities (electricity, natural gas, water, and telephone) are $475 per month. She will hire one employee at a total cost of $1,100 per month. Inventory is estimated to cost $2,800 per month. Finally, Florence earns $3,000 a month in her current job. a. How much monthly revenue would Florence have to take in to earn 0 economic profit? ANSWER: b. Assume that Florence has estimated her monthly revenue to be $9,000. In this case, Florence would earn an accounting profit (loss) of ________, and an economic profit (loss) of ________. ANSWER: c. Assume instead that Florence does not own a building, and that she will have to rent a building for $1,000 per month (all other estimates remain the same). In this case (assuming estimated monthly revenue is still $9,000), Florence would earn an accounting profit (loss) of ________, and an economic profit (loss) of ________. ANSWER: (Chapter 6) 16. What are the two primary factors that influence a firm manager's choice between a laborintensive and a capital-intensive method of production? How does each factor influence the manager's choice. ANSWER:. (Chapter 7) 17. Explain why a firm should continue to operate in the short run so long as market price is greater the firm's average variable cost at the profit-maximizing level of output. ANSWER: (Chapter 8) 18. Describe the basic characteristics of the monopoly model and explain how these characteristics affect the ability of a monopolist to earn positive economic profits, both in the short run and over time. ANSWER: PART 1 Microeconomic Analysis 1 Managers and Economics W hy should managers study economics? Many of you are probably asking yourself this question as you open this text. Students in Master of Business Administration (MBA) and Executive MBA programs usually have some knowledge of the topics that will be covered in their accounting, marketing, finance, and management courses. You may have already used many of those skills on the job or have decided that you want to concentrate in one of those areas in your program of study. But economics is different. Although you may have taken one or two introductory economics courses at some point in the past, most of you are not going to become economists. From these economics classes, you probably have vague memories of different graphs, algebraic equations, and terms such as elasticity of demand and marginal propensity to consume. However, you may have never really understood how economics is relevant to managerial decision making. As you’ll learn in this chapter, managers need to understand the insights of both microeconomics, which focuses on the behavior of individual consumers, firms, and industries, and macroeconomics, which analyzes issues in the overall economic environment. Although these subjects are typically taught separately, this text presents the ideas from both approaches and then integrates them from a managerial decision-making perspective. As in all chapters in this text, we begin our analysis with a case study. The case in this chapter, which focuses on the global automobile industry, provides an overview of the issues we’ll discuss throughout this text. In particular, the case illustrates how the automobile industry is influenced by both the microeconomic issues related to production, cost, and consumer demand and the larger macroeconomic issues including the uncertainty in global economic activity, particularly in Europe, and the value of various countries’ currencies relative to the U.S. dollar. 32 M01_FARN0095_03_GE_C01.INDD 32 11/08/14 5:17 PM Case for Analysis Micro- and Macroeconomic Influences on the Global Automobile Industry In September 2012, U.S. automobile sales increased to 1.19 million cars and light trucks per month, a 12.8 percent increase from a year earlier. This increase represented an annualized rate of 14.94 million vehicles, the highest sales rate since March 2008 before the recession began in the United States. Much of the increase was driven by passenger car sales at Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co., and Chrysler Group LLC. There was a significant increase in sales for Toyota and Honda from the previous year, as both companies were recovering from the earthquake that hit Japan in March 2011.1 Analysts noted similar increases in August 2012 that were attributed to pent-up consumer demand for replacing aging vehicles and the lowinterest financing and other incentives Japanese auto makers offered to regain market share lost in 2011 due to the lack of availability of their cars.2 Automobile production in the United States had expanded in 2012, given favorable foreign exchange rates and a plentiful supply of affordable labor. Toyota, Honda, and Nissan Motor Co. all increased their production capacity in the United States with the goal of shipping automobiles to Europe, Korea, the Middle East, and other countries. The strong value of the yen, and conversely the weak U.S. dollar, gave Japanese producers the incentive to produce cars in the United States for export around the world. This investment by foreign automobile producers helped the U.S. economy that was still struggling to recover from the recession of 2007–2009. Automobile industry employment in the United States was estimated to increase from 566,400 in 2010 to 756,800 in 2015. Although these estimates were well below the 1.1 million automobile workers employed in 1999, they indicated that the economic recovery was moving forward. General Motors Co., which had once encouraged auto parts 1 Jeff Bennett, “Corporate News: Passenger Cars Lift U.S. Sales— Big Gains for Toyota, Honda, Chrysler: Pickup Weakness Weighs on GM, Ford,” Wall Street Journal (Online), October 3, 2012. 2 Christina Rogers, “August U.S. Car Sales Surge,” Wall Street Journal (Online), September 4, 2012. suppliers to relocate in low-wage countries, now encouraged them to locate near U.S. auto plants.3 U.S. auto producers, who had once essentially lost the competition to their Japanese rivals in the 1980s and 1990s and who went through government-backed (GM and Chrysler) or private (Ford) restructurings during the U.S. recession, regained profitability and invested in the engineering and redesign of their cars. Several Fords were designed with a voiceoperated Sync entertainment system, and the Chevrolet Cruze that was launched in 2010 came with 10 air bags compared with 6 for the Toyota Corolla. As the U.S. economy recovered, Americans also began purchasing more trucks and sport-utility vehicles (SUVs), which helped to restore profits and market share for the Detroit auto makers. Trucks and SUVs made up 47.3 percent of the U.S. market in 2009, 50.2 percent in 2010, and 50.8 percent in 2011. This segment of the market had been hit particularly hard during the U.S. recession.4 As the U.S. automobile industry revived, the competition between Ford and GM again became more intense. In 2008, Ford supported the government bailout for GM and Chrysler because Ford was worried that a collapse of these companies would also impact the auto parts industry. As the domestic auto industry recovered, Ford, which had often focused just on Toyota as its key competitor, began developing strategies to counter GM. Ford realized that customers who had long been loyal to Asian brands were again looking at U.S. cars, given the generally perceived quality increases in the U.S. auto industry.5 3 Joseph B. White, Jeff Bennett, and Lauren Weber, “Car Makers’ U-Turn Steers Job Gains,” Wall Street Journal (Online), January 23, 2012; Neal Boudette, “New U.S. Car Plants Signal Renewal for Manufacturing,” Wall Street Journal (Online), January 26, 2012. 4 Mike Ramsey and Sharon Terlep, “Americans Embrace SUVs Again,” Wall Street Journal (Online), December 2, 2011; Jeff Bennett and Neal E. Boudette, “Revitalized Detroit Makes Bold Bets on New Models,” Wall Street Journal (Online), January 9, 2012. 5 Sharon Terlep and Mike Ramsey, “Ford and GM Renew a Bitter Rivalry,” Wall Street Journal (Online), November 23, 2011. 33 M01_FARN0095_03_GE_C01.INDD 33 11/08/14 5:17 PM 34 PART 1 Microeconomic Analysis Japanese auto makers in 2011 and 2012 faced managerial decisions that were influenced both by the nature of the competition from their rivals and by macroeconomic conditions, most importantly the value of the exchange rate between the yen and the U.S. dollar.6 Production by both Toyota and Honda was hit by the earthquake and tsunami in Japan in March 2011 and by subsequent flooding in Thailand that disrupted the supply of electronics and other auto parts made there. Toyota sales were also influenced by the recall and quality issues in 2010 related to the gas pedal and floor mat design. Honda’s redesigned 2012 Civic was criticized for its technology and lessthan-luxurious interior. The car was dropped from Consumer Reports’ recommended list in August 2011. Honda officials acknowledged that they had underestimated the competition from U.S. producers. The strong yen, which made exports from Japan less price competitive, also gave the Japanese producers the incentive to produce their cars in the United States. Honda, which had produced 1.29 million vehicles in North America in 2010, planned to open a new plant in Mexico and expand production in all seven of its existing assembly plants to 2 million cars and trucks per year. Production abroad was a particular issue for Toyota, which made half of its automobiles in Japan, compared to Honda and Nissan, which produced about one-third of their output in Japan. The president of Toyota, Akio Toyoda, grandson of the company founder, had made a public commitment to build at least 3 million cars in Japan annually, half of which would be for export. Some company officials argued for streamlining production in Japan by decreasing production without raising costs, essentially redefining the economies of scale in the company’s production process. These officials believed the company could meet domestic goals with high-precision production, cost-cutting, and collaboration on new technology with parts suppliers. Auto producers also focused on China during this period, although there was concern about the slowing Chinese economy.7 Auto sales in China increased only 2.5 percent in 2011 compared with increases of 46 percent in 2009 and 32 percent 6 The following discussion is based on Jeff Bennett and Neal E. Boudette, “Revitalized Detroit Makes Bold Bets on New Models”; Mike Ramsey and Yoshio Takahashi, “Car Wreck: Honda and Toyota,” Wall Street Journal (Online), November 1, 2011; Chester Dawson, “For Toyota, Patriotism and Profits May Not Mix,” Wall Street Journal (Online), November 29, 2011; Mike Ramsey and Neal E. Boudette, “Honda Revs Up Outside Japan,” Wall Street Journal (Online), December 21, 2011; and Yoshio Takahashi and Chester Dawson, “Japan Auto Makers on a Roll,” Wall Street Journal (Online), April 22, 2012. 7 This discussion is based on Andrew Galbraith, “Car Makers Still Look to China,” Wall Street Journal (Online), April 19, 2012; Sharon Terlep and Mike Ramsey, “Ford Bets $5 Billion on Made in China,” Wall Street Journal (Online), April 20, 2012; Chester Dawson and Sharon Terlep, “China Ramps Up Auto Exports,” Wall Street Journal (Online), April 24, 2012; and Sharon Terlep, “Balancing the Give and Take in GM’s Chinese Partnership,” Wall Street Journal (Online), August 19, 2012. M01_FARN0095_03_GE_C01.INDD 34 in 2010. However, the size of the Chinese economy continued to be the major incentive for expansion in that country. In April 2012, Ford announced that it would build its fifth factory in eastern China as part of its plan to double its production capacity and sales outlets in the country by 2015. This production increase would make the company capable of producing 1.2 million passenger cars in China, approximately half of the number of cars it built in North America in 2011. Ford lagged behind other major auto producers in entering the world’s largest car market. Ford’s strategy was to build cars from platforms developed elsewhere to minimize costs. However, these platforms might not provide enough space in the back seats to appeal to affluent Chinese, who often employed drivers. General Motors developed a partnership with Chinese SAIC Motor Corp. to become the dominant foreign competitor in China. This partnership resulted in production changes such as designing Cadillacs with softer corners, dashboards with more gadgets, and increasing the comfort of the rear seats to appeal to Chinese consumers. The challenge for GM was that SAIC could also use GM’s expertise and technology to make itself a major competitor with the U.S. company. In 2012, the Chinese automobile industry began increasing exports, although these were not thought to be a threat in developed markets in the United States and Europe, given perceived quality issues including lack of air-conditioning and power windows. However, Chinese producers were making inroads into emerging markets in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The other major influence on the global auto industry in 2011 and 2012 was the recession and economic crisis in Europe.8 In October 2012, Ford announced a plan to cut its operating losses in Europe by closing three auto-assembly and parts factories in the region, reduce its workforce by 13 percent, and decrease automobile production by 18 percent. Ford predicted a loss of $1.5 billion in Europe in 2012 and a similar loss in 2013. The cost-cutting in Europe was combined with the introduction of several new commercial vans and SUVs and the introduction of the Mustang sports car for the first time. All European auto makers faced decreased car sales and chronic overcapacity at this time. Daimler AG, maker of MercedesBenz automobiles, announced that it would not achieve its profit targets, while PSA Peugeot Citroen SA announced a government bailout of its financing arm and a cost-sharing pact with General Motors. There had been a smaller decrease in auto-producing capacity in Europe since the 2008 financial crisis compared with that during the restructuring of the U.S. auto industry that was influenced by the federal government bailout. 8 This discussion is based on Sharon Terlep and Sam Schechner, “GM, Peugeot Take Aim at Europe Woes,” Wall Street Journal (Online), July 12, 2012; Mike Ramsey, David Pearson, and Matthew Curtin, “Daimler Warns as Europe Car Makers Cut Back,” Wall Street Journal (Online), October 24, 2012; and Marietta Cauchi and Mike Ramsey, “Ford to Shut 3 Europe Plants,” Wall Street Journal (Online), October 25, 2012. 11/08/14 5:17 PM CHAPTER 1 Managers and Economics 35 Two Perspectives: Microeconomics and Macroeconomics ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

School: University of Virginia


flag Report DMCA

Thanks, good work

Similar Questions
Related Tags

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors