Content includes O making cold calls for sales.
O going to trade shows
O social media posts
O networking meetings.

Aprice ceiling is “binding” if the price ceiling is set below the equilibrium price. suppose that the equilibrium price is $5. if a price ceiling is set at $6, this will not affect the market in any way since $5 remains a legally allowable price (since $5 < $6). a price ceiling of $6 is called a “non-binding” price ceiling. on the other hand, if the price ceiling is set at $4, the price ceiling is “binding” because the natural equilibrium price is $5 but that is no longer allowed. what happens when there is a binding price ceiling? at a price below the equilibrium price, quantity demanded exceeds quantity supplied. there is a shortage. normally, price increases eliminate shortages by increasing quantity supplied and decreasing quantity demanded. in this case, however, price increases are not allowed past the price ceiling. we therefore predict that the observed market price will be right at the price ceiling and there will be a permanent shortage. the observed quantity bought and sold will be dictated by the quantity supplied at the price ceiling. although consumers would like to buy more, there are no more units for sale

Emery pharmaceutical uses an unstable chemical compound that must be kept in an environment where both temperature and humidity can be controlled. emery uses 825 pounds per month of the chemical, estimates the holding cost to be 50% of the purchase price (because of spoilage), and estimates order costs to be $48 per order. the cost schedules of two suppliers are as follows: vendor 1 vendor 2 quantity price/lb quantity price/lb 1-499 $17 1-399 $17.10 500-999 $16.75 400-799 $16.85 1000+ $16.50 800-1199 $16.60 1200+ $16.25 (a) what is the economic order quantity for each supplier? (b) what quantity should be ordered and which supplier should be used? (c) the total cost for the most economic order sire is $

David paid $975,000 for two beachfront lots in coastal south carolina, with the intention of building residential homes on each. two years later, the south carolina legislature passed the beachfront management act, barring any further development of the coast, including david's lots. when david files a complaint to seek compensation for his property, south carolina refuses, pointing to a passage in david's own complaint that states "the beachfront management act [was] properly and validly designed to south carolina's " is south carolina required to compensate david under the takings clause?