Friend of our site


MMA Headlines


UFC HP


Bleacher Report


MMA Fighting


MMA Torch


MMA Weekly


Sherdog (News)


Sherdog (Articles)


Liver Kick


MMA Mania


Bloody Elbow


MMA Ratings


Rating Fights


Yahoo MMA Blog


Search this site



Latest Articles


News Corner


MMA Rising


Audio Corner


Oddscast


Sherdog Radio


Eddie Goldman


Video Corner


Fight Hub


Special thanks to...

Link Rolodex

Site Index


To access our list of posting topics and archives, click here.

Friend of our site


Buy and sell MMA photos at MMA Prints

Site feedback


Fox Sports: "Zach Arnold's Fight Opinion site is one of the best spots on the Web for thought-provoking MMA pieces."

« | Home | »

Mutually Exclusive Agreements

By Zach Arnold | April 10, 2021

Print Friendly and PDF

Mutually exclusive events are events that cannot happen at once, but should not be considered independent events. Independent events have no influence on the viability of other options. For a simple example, consider rolling cubes. You can`t roll both a five and a three at the same time on a single cube. The concept of mutual exclusivity is often used in capital budgeting. Companies may have to choose between several projects that add value to the company after completion. Some of these projects are mutually exclusive. The current value of money (TVM) and other factors make mutually exclusive analysis a little more complex. For a broader comparison, companies use net worth formulas (NPCs) and internal return formula (IRR) to mathematically determine which project is most advantageous to choose between two or more mutually exclusive options. Suppose a company has a budget of $50,000 for expansion projects. While projects A and B each cost $40,000 and Project C only $10,000, projects A and B are mutually exclusive.

If Company A follows, it cannot afford to sue B and vice versa. Project C can be considered independent. Whatever other project is being pursued, the company can still afford to follow Also C. Acceptance of A or B has no influence on the viability of C and the acceptance of C does not affect the viability of any of the other projects. Consider also the analysis of Projects A and B. Suppose Project A has a potential return of $100,000, while Project B yields only $80,000. As A and B are mutually exclusive, the opportunity costs of choosing B are the gain of the most lucrative option (in this case A) minus the gains generated by the selected option (B); That is, $100,000 – $80,000 – $20,000. As Option A is the most lucrative option, the opportunity cost of Option A is $0. Mutual exclusion is a statistical term that describes two or more events that cannot occur simultaneously.

It is often used to describe a situation where the appearance of one result replaces the other. When a company is faced with a choice between mutually exclusive options, it must consider opportunity costs, which the company would abandon to pursue each option. The notions of opportunity cost and reciprocal exclusivity are intrinsically linked, because any mutually exclusive option requires the sacrifice of all the gains that could have been achieved by choosing the alternative option. The 1994 GATT and the GATS provide separate multilateral rules for the exchange of goods and services. The question arises as to whether GATT 1994 and GATS are mutually exclusive. This paper argues that the 1994 GATT and the GATS should exclude each other in the application of their respective commitments to the specific aspects of a given measure. The document proposes, on the basis of a similar test applied under EU law, a test to determine which of the agreements should apply to the specific aspects of a particular measure when it appears to affect both trade in goods and trade in services. Views recorded on Cambridge Core between September 2016 and December 13, 2020. This data is updated every 24 hours.

– No HTML tags allowed – Website URLs are displayed as text – Lines and paragraphs break automatically – Attachments, images or tables are not allowed Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 March 2004 Please list all fees and grants from, job, advice for common property or any close relationship with , at any time in the last 36 months, any organization whose interests may be affected by the publication of the response.

Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Comments are closed.