In the lecture you said ‘full cost plus’ pricing has the advantage to guarantee the profitability. However, full costing method dose not address the importance of contribution. I would say without the guarantee of contribution, the profitability cannot be guarantee also. Should I assume full cost plus pricing cannot guarantee the profitability?
Full cost pricing doesn’t guarantee overall profitability because the actual sales may be different that budgeted.
However, the earlier part of what you have written is not true. If a profit were guaranteed then automatically contribution would be guaranteed – contribution is profit plus fixed overheads. (But the other way round is not true – making a total contribution does not guarantee a profit, because of fixed overheads).
There are problems with both approaches, mainly stemming from the fact that both ignore the affect of the selling price on the demand. Theoretically the best way of dealing with it is dealt with in the next lecture.
How is it u say maximum profit occurs when MR=MC, but in the example u did, optimum selling price is $15, MR IS 1,400 while MC is 1,360. They aren’t equal in anyway. Kindly shed more light(I think this is what fahim also meant to ask). Thanks.
You need to listen to the lecture more slowly. I say that when MR>MC then it is worth reducing the selling price because profit will increase. When MR<MC then it is not worth reducing because profit will fall. The maximum would occur when MR=MC which will be somewhere between 15 & 16, but in this question (when it is given as a table) then somewhere between 15 & 16 is not allowed, so the maximum is at 15. It seems that you have only watched part 1 of the lecture. If you watch part 2 then I draw a graph which might make it clearer for you.
Maximum profit is not equal to the other two! Maximum profit occurs when marginal revenue equals marginal cost.
If extra revenue is more than extra cost then it is possible to increase the profit. If MR < MC then the profit will decrease. Maximum profit is when the two are equal.
Superb! For us in the developing country in Africa, sharing the same knowledge with developed country, is amazing. Great project! You mean a lot to us… Tanzania.
Hi Sir, Firstly I will like to thank you and OT for these lovely lectures.Most days I work 13hrs a day and can only do studies after so going to classes is not an option so this is really a blessing for me. That said, I am using the BPP text book and I see they have a lengthly explaintion for “the profit-maximising price/output level” is this the same as the Optimal pricing method explained in this lecture. Forgive me if its a silly question but I would like to clarify this because I am not seeing the “Optimal Pricing” in the BPP text. Thank you kindly and do keep up the great work.:) Greatly appreciated.
It is relevant costing, which is part of Chapter 9 of the Course Notes.
Please realise that the Course Notes are not meant to be Study Texts – they are notes used with the lectures. The Course notes together with the lectures (and the Revision Lectures) cover more than enough to pass the exam well, provided that you also practice lots of past questions (preferably using an Exam/Revision Kit from one of the approved publishers).
In your lecture note shows optimal pricing – tabular approach but in BPP textbook the approach is not mentioned, can you tell me why we must know that? Is that this shows in past exam question? Can you tell me which year this approach uses?
The reason you should know it is that both the tabular and the algebraic methods are specifically included in the Paper F5 syllabus!!
If the BPP Study Text does not include it then I am surprised – the Kaplan Study Text certainly includes it.
The tabular method if certainly much less likely for the exam than the algebraic method, but (as I say in my free lecture) it is important not only because it is in the syllabus, but also because understanding it explains the logic behind the algebraic method and you could be asked to explain. 50% of the exam is writing and proving that you understand the techniques involved.
Where is “Pricing/Decisions to increase production and sales”- ( item B4(e) in F5 Study guide Syllabus: Evaluate a decision to increase production and sales levels, considering incremental costs, incremental revenues and other factors) showing up in your Lecture Note? I cant find where it is.
Im sorry if my question is silly but I just want to be guaranteed that your lecture note fully cover every knowledge in F5.
Hi Mr Moffat. Grand lecture as usual, thankyou. A question if I may. If we ignored the incremental drops to 15.5 and 15.0 and went straight from 16.0 to 14.5, marginal revenue ($4200) would then be higher than marginal cost ($4080). You could take 15.5 and 15.0 out of the equation altogether, the rest of the variables would be the same and a drop to 14.5 would appear to be justified using the optimal pricing approach. If you took out the variables when S.P. pu is 14.5, at an S.P. pu of 14.0, the drop from 16.0 pu would show both marginal revenue and marginal cost at $5400. What am I missing?
In anser to your question, think about the graph that I draw on the screen – the profit goes up initially and then it starts going down. We want maximum profit.
If I said to you which is better, a profit of 20 or a profit of 30, then obviously 30 is better. However if I then said to you than in between the two you could make a profit of 40, then what would you say then?
Thank you for taking the time to reply. What you’ve written makes sense, the point at which profit is at a maximum is clear based on the variables provided. I’ve revisited my workings and, although the sums appear to work when you apply the workings over a range of variables, e.g. 16.0 straight drop to 14.0 as opposed to 16.0 to 15.5 etc, I suspect that I’m overthinking it and comparing apples to oranges. Is it fair to say that the tabular approach only gives the ‘correct’ answer when all variables are treat as individuals (per SP) and not as an accumulation or over a range? Thanks again
You are correct in saying that the tabular approach only gives the correct answer when dealing with specific prices – not over a range. In the past both tabular and equation approaches have been examiner (separately – not together) with equations being the more common of the two. However it will be made very clear which approach is wanted.
I am not sure if I missed something, but when trying to find marginal revenue and marginal cost, you asked that we pretend that we didn’t know what total profit would be. Well then I started thinking that fixing the selling price at 15.50 would be the better option since marginal revenue of 1,500 exceeds marginal cost 1,380 by 120. When the selling price is fixed at 15, marginal revenue of 1,400 exceeds marginal cost of 1,360 by only 40. So what point did I fail to grasp?
Sir, I’m sorry but I didn’t understand the part where you said Maximum profit occurs when Marginal Revenue= Marginal Cost. If they are the same then we can’t be making profits? I’m a bit confused….
Dear John, I note your every lecture on my pc. But can you let me know which writing tablet and stylus(pen) you use to write on the screen? so I can write easily. The current one that I have is awful. Which software you use to record the screen??
There is a small description of opportunity cost plus in the notes, but it was nowhere to be found in the lecture. Sir can you please give a detailed explanation of what it is, accompanied with an example and its relevance in exams?
The idea is very simple. Suppose you are going to produce a new product and are trying to decide on a selling price. The materials used are in short supply and currently they are all used making another product which generates a contribution of $5 per unit. Each unit of the new product will use 2 kg of material, whereas the existing product uses 1 kg of material per unit.
If we make the new product then every unit produced will mean that we are unable to produce 2 units of the existing product (because of the short supply of material). Since the existing is generating $5 per unit and we will lost 2 units, each unit of the new product will have to generate $10 per unit.
Therefore the selling price will have to be at least the cost of production plus $10 for it to be worth producing.
(The extra $10 is an opportunity cost – we are not actually spending $10 but we would be losing $10 elsewhere.)
The idea is more relevant for other topics – for example in transfer pricing – and it is dealt with in more detail with examples in those chapters and lectures.
accakeisha says
JUst one tiny little question……variable overhead is 23…was it derived from deducting fixed o/h from fullcost?
John Moffat says
Yes 馃檪
accakeisha says
gr8
John Moffat says
You are welcome 馃檪
hosam21 says
Hi ,sir john Moffat excellent lecture,thank you for making hard topics easy and understood
acaqub says
Dear John,
In the lecture you said ‘full cost plus’ pricing has the advantage to guarantee the profitability. However, full costing method dose not address the importance of contribution. I would say without the guarantee of contribution, the profitability cannot be guarantee also. Should I assume full cost plus pricing cannot guarantee the profitability?
Thanks!
John Moffat says
Full cost pricing doesn’t guarantee overall profitability because the actual sales may be different that budgeted.
However, the earlier part of what you have written is not true. If a profit were guaranteed then automatically contribution would be guaranteed – contribution is profit plus fixed overheads. (But the other way round is not true – making a total contribution does not guarantee a profit, because of fixed overheads).
There are problems with both approaches, mainly stemming from the fact that both ignore the affect of the selling price on the demand. Theoretically the best way of dealing with it is dealt with in the next lecture.
acaqub says
Dear John,
Thanks a lot!
Susan says
How is it u say maximum profit occurs when MR=MC, but in the example u did, optimum selling price is $15, MR IS 1,400 while MC is 1,360. They aren’t equal in anyway. Kindly shed more light(I think this is what fahim also meant to ask). Thanks.
John Moffat says
You need to listen to the lecture more slowly. I say that when MR>MC then it is worth reducing the selling price because profit will increase. When MR<MC then it is not worth reducing because profit will fall.
The maximum would occur when MR=MC which will be somewhere between 15 & 16, but in this question (when it is given as a table) then somewhere between 15 & 16 is not allowed, so the maximum is at 15.
It seems that you have only watched part 1 of the lecture. If you watch part 2 then I draw a graph which might make it clearer for you.
(and it is not at all what fahim was asking! 馃檪 )
Susan says
Thanks, I appreciate the prompt response.
mayzin1707 says
Is it MR=MC which will be somewhere between 15 and 14.50?
John Moffat says
Sorry – you are right. It is somewhere between 15 and 14.50, but in a question of this sort it is not between the two – it is 15.
fahim231 says
Can someone explain why Maximum Profit = Marginal Revenue = Marginal Cost???
John Moffat says
Maximum profit is not equal to the other two!
Maximum profit occurs when marginal revenue equals marginal cost.
If extra revenue is more than extra cost then it is possible to increase the profit. If MR < MC then the profit will decrease. Maximum profit is when the two are equal.
Sarah says
MR=MC . is it a breakeven point where profit is zero and there is no gain no loss?
John Moffat says
No it is not.
If you read the previous post carefully, it says that when marginal revenue = marginal cost then it is where we get maximum profit.
OLUSHOLA says
pls how do i download this videos
John Moffat says
Lectures cannot be downloaded – they can only be watched online.
It is the only way that we can keep this website free of charge.
shobs4803 says
Thank you sir…you’re a life saver!
OCTAVIAN says
Superb! For us in the developing country in Africa, sharing the same knowledge with developed country, is amazing. Great project! You mean a lot to us… Tanzania.
Temperance says
@ John Moffat
Hi Sir, Firstly I will like to thank you and OT for these lovely lectures.Most days I work 13hrs a day and can only do studies after so going to classes is not an option so this is really a blessing for me. That said, I am using the BPP text book and I see they have a lengthly explaintion for “the profit-maximising price/output level” is this the same as the Optimal pricing method explained in this lecture. Forgive me if its a silly question but I would like to clarify this because I am not seeing the “Optimal Pricing” in the BPP text. Thank you kindly and do keep up the great work.:) Greatly appreciated.
John Moffat says
Yes – it is the same thing 馃檪
(and thank you for your comments 馃檪 )
Temperance says
Thanks Sir!
John Moffat says
It is relevant costing, which is part of Chapter 9 of the Course Notes.
Please realise that the Course Notes are not meant to be Study Texts – they are notes used with the lectures.
The Course notes together with the lectures (and the Revision Lectures) cover more than enough to pass the exam well, provided that you also practice lots of past questions (preferably using an Exam/Revision Kit from one of the approved publishers).
No way says
In your lecture note shows optimal pricing – tabular approach but in BPP textbook the approach is not mentioned, can you tell me why we must know that? Is that this shows in past exam question? Can you tell me which year this approach uses?
John Moffat says
The reason you should know it is that both the tabular and the algebraic methods are specifically included in the Paper F5 syllabus!!
If the BPP Study Text does not include it then I am surprised – the Kaplan Study Text certainly includes it.
The tabular method if certainly much less likely for the exam than the algebraic method, but (as I say in my free lecture) it is important not only because it is in the syllabus, but also because understanding it explains the logic behind the algebraic method and you could be asked to explain. 50% of the exam is writing and proving that you understand the techniques involved.
No way says
Thank you sir, maybe my text is out of date.
John Moffat says
No problem (although this part of the syllabus has not changed for many years, so it should be in the Study Text somewhere).
No way says
One more question sir,
Where is “Pricing/Decisions to increase production and sales”- ( item B4(e) in F5 Study guide Syllabus: Evaluate a decision to increase production and sales levels, considering incremental costs, incremental revenues and other factors) showing up in your Lecture Note? I cant find where it is.
Im sorry if my question is silly but I just want to be guaranteed that your lecture note fully cover every knowledge in F5.
Thank you.
seanduffy47 says
Hi Mr Moffat. Grand lecture as usual, thankyou.
A question if I may.
If we ignored the incremental drops to 15.5 and 15.0 and went straight from 16.0 to 14.5, marginal revenue ($4200) would then be higher than marginal cost ($4080). You could take 15.5 and 15.0 out of the equation altogether, the rest of the variables would be the same and a drop to 14.5 would appear to be justified using the optimal pricing approach.
If you took out the variables when S.P. pu is 14.5, at an S.P. pu of 14.0, the drop from 16.0 pu would show both marginal revenue and marginal cost at $5400.
What am I missing?
John Moffat says
Hi, and thank you for the compliment 馃檪
In anser to your question, think about the graph that I draw on the screen – the profit goes up initially and then it starts going down. We want maximum profit.
If I said to you which is better, a profit of 20 or a profit of 30, then obviously 30 is better.
However if I then said to you than in between the two you could make a profit of 40, then what would you say then?
馃檪
seanduffy47 says
Thank you for taking the time to reply.
What you’ve written makes sense, the point at which profit is at a maximum is clear based on the variables provided.
I’ve revisited my workings and, although the sums appear to work when you apply the workings over a range of variables, e.g. 16.0 straight drop to 14.0 as opposed to 16.0 to 15.5 etc, I suspect that I’m overthinking it and comparing apples to oranges.
Is it fair to say that the tabular approach only gives the ‘correct’ answer when all variables are treat as individuals (per SP) and not as an accumulation or over a range?
Thanks again
John Moffat says
You are correct in saying that the tabular approach only gives the correct answer when dealing with specific prices – not over a range.
In the past both tabular and equation approaches have been examiner (separately – not together) with equations being the more common of the two. However it will be made very clear which approach is wanted.
Shermaine says
I am not sure if I missed something, but when trying to find marginal revenue and marginal cost, you asked that we pretend that we didn’t know what total profit would be. Well then I started thinking that fixing the selling price at 15.50 would be the better option since marginal revenue of 1,500 exceeds marginal cost 1,380 by 120. When the selling price is fixed at 15, marginal revenue of 1,400 exceeds marginal cost of 1,360 by only 40. So what point did I fail to grasp?
John Moffat says
If marginal revenue is higher than marginal cost, the the difference is extra profit.
If you get 40 extra profit then it is worth dropping the selling price. (Even if it was just $2 extra then it would be worth it)
Tyler says
Sir, I’m sorry but I didn’t understand the part where you said Maximum profit occurs when Marginal Revenue= Marginal Cost. If they are the same then we can’t be making profits? I’m a bit confused….
Tyler says
Nevermind, I think I got it 馃檪
John Moffat says
That good 馃檪
(Remember that marginal means extra)
acca2050 says
Dear John,
I note your every lecture on my pc. But can you let me know which writing tablet and stylus(pen) you use to write on the screen? so I can write easily. The current one that I have is awful. Which software you use to record the screen??
Btw I am big fan of yours lectures 馃檪
Many Thanks
mario123 says
There is a small description of opportunity cost plus in the notes, but it was nowhere to be found in the lecture. Sir can you please give a detailed explanation of what it is, accompanied with an example and its relevance in exams?
mario123 says
About foregone opportunities in particular..
John Moffat says
The idea is very simple. Suppose you are going to produce a new product and are trying to decide on a selling price.
The materials used are in short supply and currently they are all used making another product which generates a contribution of $5 per unit.
Each unit of the new product will use 2 kg of material, whereas the existing product uses 1 kg of material per unit.
If we make the new product then every unit produced will mean that we are unable to produce 2 units of the existing product (because of the short supply of material).
Since the existing is generating $5 per unit and we will lost 2 units, each unit of the new product will have to generate $10 per unit.
Therefore the selling price will have to be at least the cost of production plus $10 for it to be worth producing.
(The extra $10 is an opportunity cost – we are not actually spending $10 but we would be losing $10 elsewhere.)
The idea is more relevant for other topics – for example in transfer pricing – and it is dealt with in more detail with examples in those chapters and lectures.
mario123 says
Awesome! Thank you 馃榾 Your way of explanation is very detailed and absolutely wonderful!
tauraiversatile says
Got it! Thanks Open Tuition.
haroula says
great lecture!
thank you!
James says
What questions on past papers should i look at for revision?
Thank you very much Jon for all your help. It means allot to all the students.
jay says
Thanks. Good and easy way to understand….
zmukhtar says
Wunderbar !!