A firm claims on its website that it has been in the same location for over 50 years and has lower overhead than other firms because it bought the land 50 years ago when it was inexpensive. It also claims that it charges lower prices than competitors because of its lower overhead. Discuss the logic of these claims. From a short term perspective, the claim that lower overhead (from already owning the land) lowers the firm's prices is

Lower overhead leads to lower prices and higher profit margins. However, fixed costs of acquiring the land are just one of the components of total overhead.

Explanation:

Overhead costs are costs that are not directly associated with running a business, like accounting or legal costs or in this case costs of acquiring land. Since these indirect costs vary and are not the same in every period, they are supposed to be measured monthly. However, small overhead definitely places a business in better position than the competition, as it can charge fewer price for its products and could lead to increase of profit margin. Bought land is just one of the factors that is included in these indirect costs, however if total overhead is really lower, than the firm's claims can be perceived as true.

15 pounds of apples and 6 cups of flour

a

explanation:

i know