Ah, the age-old question of what makes an asset 'real' in the eyes of the economy. I'd go with D - all those criteria ensure it has substance, not just smoke and mirrors. Though I suppose you could argue intangible assets are just fancy vapor anyway.
Option D is the way to go. You need the full package - legal status, clear identification, and private ownership rights. Anything less and it's just a figment of your imagination. Or a government conspiracy, depending on how you look at it.
I think B is the key one. If you can't specifically identify and describe the asset, how can it be considered legitimate from an economic standpoint? Ownership and legal protection are important, but recognition is fundamental.
Definitely D - all those attributes are essential for an intangible asset to exist. You can't have an invisible, state-less asset, can you? That would be like trying to sell the air we breathe!
Amie
1 months agoCatina
22 hours agoElsa
3 days agoHubert
9 days agoGearldine
11 days agoTammy
26 days agoClarinda
1 months agoFrancesco
1 months agoKenny
3 days agoKattie
6 days agoLashawn
25 days agoLeonida
30 days agoHelaine
2 months agoEleni
6 days agoJaclyn
7 days agoApolonia
7 days agoJose
19 days agoMakeda
2 months agoBulah
2 months ago