Fuji film sponsored a beach volleyball tournament in February in Laguna Beach, CA. They paid over $300,000 to be the official sponsor of the tournament and were extremely upset when Kodak, who was not an official sponsor, showed up right outside the venue and began marketing Kodak products. What made it even worse was that Kodak used unconventional marketing techniques that really caught people's attention. A group of Kodak employees painted their entire bodies yellow and wore Kodak shorts. Then, they offered people Kodak digital cameras and told them they could win a free Kodak camera if they took the goofiest picture. Kodak was using which two marketing techniques?

Which of the following best describes the economic effect that results when the government increases interest rates and restricts the lending of money? a. borrowing money becomes more expensive and there is less investment in production. b. the economy grows as investments result in larger profits. c. government spending drives up prices because of greater competition for goods and services. d. consumers save more money and spend less buying goods and services.

Alandowner entered into a written agreement with a real estate broker whereby the broker would receive a commission of 10% of the sale price if he procured a "ready, willing, and able buyer" for the landowner's property and if the sale actually proceeded through closing. the broker found a buyer who agreed in writing to buy the property from the landowner for $100,000, the landowner's asking price. the buyer put up $6,000 as a down payment. the agreement between the landowner and the buyer contained a liquidated damages clause providing that, if the buyer defaulted by failing to tender the balance due of $94,000 at the closing date, damages would be 10% of the purchase price. the landowner included that clause because she was counting on using the proceeds of the sale for a business venture that would likely net her at least $10,000. the buyer became seriously ill and defaulted. when he recovered, he demanded that the landowner return his $6,000, and the landowner refused. the broker also demanded the $6,000 from the landowner and was refused. the broker and the buyer filed separate suits against the landowner, with the buyer pleading impossibility of performance. the two cases are consolidated into a single case. how should the court rule as to the disposition of the $6,000?

What is the key to success in integrating both lethal and nonlethal activities during planning? including stakeholders once a comprehensive operational approach has been determined knowing the commander's decision making processes and "touch points" including stakeholders from the very beginning of the design and planning process including the liaison officers (lnos) in all the decision points?