- This topic has 688 replies, 98 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
- Posts
It seems like most of us were on the right track but went wrong at different stages. Hopefully we get method marks and that pushes all to a pass.
As for variances, i got 5k something adverse mix, 9900 favorable yield. Commenting on sales manager, i assumed him to be wrong, adverse mix means higher quality and favorable yield, customers would buy more soaps if sales manager performed well
Yeap, and we fell of track in different questions 😀 i think they generally award partial points
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 62
- ☆☆
It was 10369 plus 10% which I believe the difference between my answer and yours would be the 750 from the overheads and the 20 units of material
Hello mates! What about the last McQ about price penetration ? Or another one is about efficiency economy effectiveness ??
For the sales manager I thought he may in fact be justified as there was customer feedback on the drop in quality and more expensive materials doesn’t guarantee better quality, despite the adverse mix suggesting an improvement.
Regarding penetration, that was economies of scale and demotivation of competitors. Regarding 3es, that was d: first economy, then effiviency, last one was effectivness
@Chris: “Defo on feed forward. Some of those answers were crazy ‘double loop back something’!!!!”
Double feedback loops means to change your plan depending on feedback. This was mentioned at least in the BPP study guide.
I think there are various perspectives up here..what is inconsistent is the fact that adverse mix actually resulted in favorable yield, which means that efficiency and productivity increased
What about elasticity for penetration? A small drop in price leads to a large increase in demand. Or have a got it the wrong way round.
@Chris: “Ps the $56 someone answered above ignores the $2 cost so $16 Is right!”
Why do you have to take the $2 cost into consideration? Wasn’t this the cost the labour normally costs? i.e. iirc labour was at normal rate, not normal rate plus $2.
Yeap, mate, sorry, elasticity in place of competition. There was nothing about competition
The $2 was the cost of the material so contribution was essentially 2.8-2.0 x the number of kgs (think it was 20)
@icedgod2002 said:
What about elasticity for penetration? A small drop in price leads to a large increase in demand. Or have a got it the wrong way round.I think the question mentioned inelasticity, in which case penetration pricing would not be good. (If demand doesn’t change much when the price changes, it’s good to charge a high price, i.e. market skimming).
Penetration is good to keep competitors out.
It’s bad when there’s a short life cycle.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 62
- ☆☆
Price penetration was 2nd & 3rd options – economies of scale and discourage new entrsnts
Bah genuinely can’t remember if it was relatively elastic or inelastic but I agree with what you say
3 senior stylist, 2 junior stylist, 2 assistant
bottleneck senior stylist: 2400 * 3 = 7200 hours
TFC: 200,000 for salary; about 106,400 for other. 306400 / 7200
= 42.56 per factory hour.Treatment: (110 – 8.0) / 1.5 = 68 throuput per hour
TA: 68 / 42.56 = 1.60Cut: (50? – 0.60 ) 1 / = 5x.xx throuput per hour
Did not multiply by 3 and took material cost for cuts as 8. I hope they will award me with some credits
- The topic ‘*** F5 December 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***’ is closed to new replies.