Explanation:
Earned income consists of income you earn while you are working a full-time job or running a business.
Passive income is income earned from rents, royalties, and stakes in limited partnerships.
Portfolio income is income from dividends, interest, and capital gains from stock sales.
Answer: product differentiation
Explanation:
From the question, we are informed that Intel achieved success by using the "Intel Inside" advertising campaign and logo that appears on many brands of PCs.
This is an example of a barrier to entry which is known as product differentiation. Poduct differentiation is when a company makes its product different from other similar products so that the product will be more attractive and unique from others.
However, unlike exchanges, ATS has no members (ATS has "subscribers") and has no regulatory liability. An ATS can trade listed stocks like a stock exchange, but unlike a stock exchange, an ATS can also trade unlisted stocks (also known as OTC stocks) and fixed income securities such as bonds.
The main similarity between broker-dealer networks, alternative trading systems, and registered stock exchanges is that they are all some kind of market for buying and selling securities, either stocks or bonds.
What are alternative trading systems(ATS)?
An Alternative Trading System (ATS) is an SEC-regulated electronic trading system that matches orders between buyers and sellers of securities. ATS is not a domestic stock exchange. However, ATS can apply to the SEC to become a domestic stock exchange.
What is a registered stock exchange?
A registered stock exchange that has filed and approved a registration statement with the SEC. All major US stock exchanges are registered with the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
To know more about ATS and Registered stock exchange visit here:
brainly.com/question/17320981
#SPJ4
Answer: C. The court concluded that Microsoft violated the Sherman Act
Explanation: The case between United States v. Microsoft Corporation which took place at the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit during the period February 26–27, 2001 and was finally decided June 28, 2001.
It was decided by the District Court that Microsoft violated the Sharma Antitrust Act of 1890.