Answer
D) compared to the EOQ, the maximum inventory would be approx 30% lower.
Explanation
EOQ = √(2*Co*D/Cc)
EPQ= √ (2*Co*D/(Cc*(1-x)))
x=D/P
D = demand rate
P =production rate
Co=ordering cost
Cc=holding cost
1) The production rate would be about double the usage rate.
hence, P = 2D
x=D/2D=0.5
EPQ= √ (2*Co*D/((1-0.5)*Cc))
EPQ= √ (2*Co*D/0.5Cc)
EPQ=√ (1/0.5)*EOQ
EPQ=√ (2)*EOQ
EPQ=1.41*EOQ
Hence, EPQ is around 40% larger than EOQ.
Ans.: c) EPQ will be approximately 40% larger than the EOQ.
2) Compared to the EOQ, the maximum inventory would be
maximum inventory = Q
EPQ = 1.41 EOQ
EPQ = 1.41*Q
Q=EPQ/1.41
Q=0.71 EPQ
Hence, compared to EOQ, maximum inventory in EPQ is only 70% of that in EOQ model.
Answer:
NPV is $28.5 million
Payback is 4.31 years
IRR is 13.25%
MIRR is 12.51%
Explanation:
The NPV,payback period,Internal rate of return and modified internal rate of return were computed in the attached spreadsheet.
Payback period=the year of the first positive cumulative cash flow+the year cumulative cash flow/the next year cash flow
the year of first positive cumulative flow is year 4
the cumulative cash flow for year 4 is $66 m
the next year cash flow is(year 5) is $210
payback=4.31
Answer:
Option B
Explanation:
Both Nadia and Samantha have insured their cars and willing to pay $100 over the expected loss for insurance. If the car is stolen the company would pay expected loss and would earn nothing and if the car is not stolen the company would not be liable for any loss and would earn $200, Therefore the company would earn between $0 and $200.
Answer:
The indifference point is 1,410 units
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
Machine A:
Fixed costs= $160,000
Unitary variable cost= $80
Machine B:
Fixed costs= $270,000
Unitary variable cost= $2
<u>First, we need to structure the total cost formula for each machine:</u>
Machine A= 160,000 + 80x
Machine B= 270,000 + 2x
x= number of units
<u>Now, we equal both formulas and isolate x:</u>
160,000 + 80x = 270,000 + 2x
78x = 110,000
x= 110,000/78
x= 1,410 units
The indifference point is 1,410 units
Answer and Explanation:
In the given case, the second will would be destroyed non-intentionally by the testatrix that represent the person who writes the will. Also the second will would have be intended to revoke the first will
In addition to this, Testatrix intends the second will to be value also at the same time she dont want the first will to be probated
So the second will would be upheld because of testamentary motive.