Business Help Thread (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter scaryshark09
- Start date
@carrotsss what are 3 negatives of a business having a short warranty
scaryshark09
∞∆ who let 'em cook dis long ∆∞
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2022
- Messages
- 1,618
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 1999
No @its_ace21 i was about to put a also for the same reason. I spent 3 mins debating what to put and I put b luckily. How does carrots even know this tho??? Like we are both mid band 6 students and we are getting thrashed by someone who doesn’t do the subject
synthesisFR
afterhscivemostlybeentrollingdonttakeitsrsly
As I always say stop gaslighting urself
scaryshark09
∞∆ who let 'em cook dis long ∆∞
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2022
- Messages
- 1,618
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 1999
Wait no I didn’t do for the same reason. I did because you need funds to open 5 new stores. Seriously why isn’t it A
scaryshark09
∞∆ who let 'em cook dis long ∆∞
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2022
- Messages
- 1,618
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 1999
Carrots I’m certain you could sit the busienss paper rn with not study and get band 6. That’s Better than your sor mark even
A business needs to reduce its workforce for financial reasons. All its employees are equally skilled and have 3 years of service. Which staff member should be dismissed first?
(A) A casual employee
(B) A pregnant employee
(C) A part-time employee
(D) A 66-year-old employee
If its for financial reasons shouldn't it be A bc u dont need to pay like sick leave and other stuff??
(A) A casual employee
(B) A pregnant employee
(C) A part-time employee
(D) A 66-year-old employee
If its for financial reasons shouldn't it be A bc u dont need to pay like sick leave and other stuff??
i cant answer with all the specific bs terminology business studies requires but generally
1. it decreases the direct value of your product to your consumers
2. it decreases the perceived quality and life-span of your product. if customers see a lifetime warranty they'll assume its not going to break down.
3. it may present issues with the Australia Consumer Law if you try to enforce shorter warranty restrictions on customers - businesses are legally required to provide a choice of a refund, replacement or repair if a product experiences a major failure within the life-span that a 'reasonable customer would expect' (or a specified refund/replacement/repair for a minor failure). this can obviously be mitigated by not enforcing it or maintaining a warranty above the legal (very broad) definition though
4. for fun, it also decreases the broader word-of-mouth around your business when a product breaks down out of warranty as opposed to the good word-of-mouth that you'll receive if you offer a quick remedy. prob wouldnt answer this within the business syllabus though
not rlly, i could probably get the case studies off the top of my head, but i dont think id have all of the terminology and specific style for business.
scaryshark09
∞∆ who let 'em cook dis long ∆∞
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2022
- Messages
- 1,618
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 1999
The answer is A
LMFAO i was comparing answers with my friend and man really tried to gaslight me into thinking hes right
scaryshark09
∞∆ who let 'em cook dis long ∆∞
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2022
- Messages
- 1,618
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 1999
Honestly not bad at all
2. Is a good answer, and same with most of the others
yo man i reckon call nesa and ask em if u can add an extra 2 units
the question doesnt have anything to do with finance lol what, the situation is not demonstrating any sort of finance link - if anything its the opposite because you might have limited cash flow after opening that many stores, so you wont be able to afford to increase production
casual employees cost 25% more but you dont need to pay sick leave and the like for them so it sorta balances out. financially there isnt much point in dismissing them bc you can just reduce their hours, i dont think itd be A. from a short term perspective the pregnant employee is kinda smart (and unethical) bc like theyre gonna go on leave soon and be useless
wait wait I READ THE WHOLE THING WRONG. I was meant to ask why would it be A? keeping the causal is smartercasual employees cost 25% more but you dont need to pay sick leave and the like for them so it sorta balances out. financially there isnt much point in dismissing them bc you can just reduce their hours, i dont think itd be A. from a short term perspective the pregnant employee is kinda smart (and unethical) bc like theyre gonna go on leave soon and be useless
synthesisFR
afterhscivemostlybeentrollingdonttakeitsrsly
Wait what how it get leaked
And the guy who leaked it is dumb they shoulda kept it to themselves and state ranked
They just inspect elemented this page:
Put your best foot forward: the essentials for tackling the HSC
Be organised, know the rules, and get those dates in your calendars.
LMAOOThey just inspect elemented this page:
Put your best foot forward: the essentials for tackling the HSC
Be organised, know the rules, and get those dates in your calendars.www.smh.com.au
who tf has time to do that and why
