Minnesota prostate research labs, inc. (mprl), made an initial public offering of its shares in august 1998. it stated in its prospectus that research on laboratory animals indicated that the lab may have discovered a cure for prostate cancer in humans. mprl pointed out as well that results in animal testing did not necessarily mean that the same positive result would occur in humans. mprl shares initially traded at $10 per share in 1999 and rose to $18in august 2001,when the mprl prostate cancer drug was finally approved for sale to the public. tuttle reviewed the initial prospectus and analysts’ reports on the drug and purchased 10,000 shares at $18 per share on august 18, 2001. in september 2002, an independent study of the four leading prostate medicines indicated that mprls product was as effective as sugar pills in curing prostate cancer and other prostate symptoms. the price of mprl shares plummeted to $6 per share. tuttle is contemplating a rule 10b-5 securities fraud class-action lawsuit against mprl. advise him of his chances of success in this lawsuit and any expenses thathe would be exposed to other than the cost of his attorney.

Based on the supply and demand theory, why do medical doctors earn higher wages than child-care workers?

Oakmont company has an opportunity to manufacture and sell a new product for a four-year period. the company’s discount rate is 18%. after careful study, oakmont estimated the following costs and revenues for the new product: cost of equipment needed $ 230,000 working capital needed $ 84,000 overhaul of the equipment in year two $ 9,000 salvage value of the equipment in four years $ 12,000 annual revenues and costs: sales revenues $ 400,000 variable expenses $ 195,000 fixed out-of-pocket operating costs $ 85,000 when the project concludes in four years the working capital will be released for investment elsewhere within the company. click here to view exhibit 12b-1 and exhibit 12b-2, to determine the appropriate discount factor(s) using tables.

Reliability and validity reliability and validity are two important considerations that must be made with any type of data collection. reliability refers to the ability to consistently produce a given result. in the context of psychological research, this would mean that any instruments or tools used to collect data do so in consistent, reproducible ways. unfortunately, being consistent in measurement does not necessarily mean that you have measured something correctly. to illustrate this concept, consider a kitchen scale that would be used to measure the weight of cereal that you eat in the morning. if the scale is not properly calibrated, it may consistently under- or overestimate the amount of cereal that’s being measured. while the scale is highly reliable in producing consistent results (e.g., the same amount of cereal poured onto the scale produces the same reading each time), those results are incorrect. this is where validity comes into play. validity refers to the extent to which a given instrument or tool accurately measures what it’s supposed to measure. while any valid measure is by necessity reliable, the reverse is not necessarily true. researchers strive to use instruments that are both highly reliable and valid.