Frank, a rational investor, has $2,000 to invest for one year while she completes her professional accounting designation. She is contemplating investing the full amount in shares of Northern Oil & Gas Ltd. (a_1) or in a risk-free government bond yielding an annual return of 3.2% (a_2). Frank identifies two states of nature: State H: Northern has high future cash flow. State L: Northern has low future cash flow. On the basis of her prior information about Northern, Frank assesses the following subjective prior state probabilities: State H: 0.4 State L: 0.6 The following is the payoff table for these two investments. Payoffs from Northern shares include dividends and estimated capital gain for the year. Capital gain is based on the average analyst forecast for Norther's share price. Payoffs are net of (i.e., they exclude) the original investment. The investor is risk adverse, with utility equal to the squareroot of the net dollar payoff. On the basis of her prior probabilities, which act should Frank take? Show calculations. Instead of acting now, Frank decides to obtain more about Northern by reading its annual report. He knows that financial statements are based on a mixed measurement model. Also, he is a student of financial accounting theory, and estimates the quality of financial statements prepared according to these standards by the following information system: Good evidence means that a company reports profits that are higher than the average analyst forecast. Bad evidence means that the company's profits are less than forecast. Upon reading the current annual report, Frank finds it is good. Which act should Frank take now? Show calculations. After buying Northern shares, Frank is disappointed to note that the market price of its shares begins to fall, despite the good news in its earnings report. She now suspects that the good news in Norther's financial statements was not as good as she originally believed. Is this possible? Give reasons why or why not