Question

In: Accounting

Exercise 1 The production department of Alpha Ltd. normally operates at a capacity of 5 000...

Exercise 1

The production department of Alpha Ltd. normally operates at a capacity of 5 000 direct labor hours (DLH) per production period. In the coming production period (April-May) orders equivalent to only 3 000 DLH have been received. Even though direct labor is hired/paid on an hourly basis, Alpha Ltd. wants to deploy the available 2 000 DLH and considers two alternatives:

First alternative: advancing the production of an anticipated future order that consumes             2 000 DLH (delivery date end of July). Alpha Ltd. expects a very busy period in June-July, so by producing the future order in April-May, the production department avoids performing and paying 2 000 DLH in overtime in June-July. Overtime is paid by adding a 30% premium on the normal wage of 4 EUR/DLH. The longer storage of the early production in Alpha’s inventory does not cause incremental costs.

Second alternative: deploying the 2 000 DLH by accepting an exceptional, one-time order to be produced in April-May. The following resources are needed to produce the order:

Materials:

960kg of resource X. Resource X is currently in inventory with an average cost of 3.02 EUR/kg (average book value/kg). The current market price (replacement cost) of resource X equals 3.10 EUR/kg. Resource X is commonly used in the production department.

570kg of resource Y. Resource Y is currently in inventory with an average cost of 5.26 EUR/kg (average book value/kg). The replacement cost is 5.85 EUR/kg. Resource Y has no other application, but can be sold at 2.30 EUR/kg.

Other resources. These resources are not in inventory but can be bought at 3 360 EUR.

Direct labor: 2 200 DLH

Indirect costs (e.g. depreciation machines, maintenance machines, electricity costs,…) are attributed to the different departments at 6 EUR/DLH. 40% of these indirect costs are variable, and consequently really vary with the number of DLH performed (e.g. if DLH are performed, machines run and maintenance and electricity costs are incurred). The other 60% of the indirect costs are fixed (e.g. depreciation costs).

QUESTIONS:

Determine the one-time offer’s minimal price that allows Alpha to increase profit in comparison with the other alternative (do not consider the possible interest costs and revenues as a result of different cash flow timings).

(Theory) Give, based on this specific situation, a description of the following concepts:

Sunk costs, b. Opportunity costs, c. Incremental costs

Solutions

Expert Solution

We have to find out the minimal price of one time offer so that alpha will not loose on the part of profit in comparison to other alternative that is by not applying the labour to overtime work.

In such a case we are also required to consider opportunity cost of first alternative i.e. overtime premium on DLH of 2000.

Opportunity cost = 2000x4x30% = 2400

Calculation of minimal price for one time offer

Resource x (960kgx3.10*) 2976
Resource y (570kgx2.3**) 1311
Other material 3360
Direct labour (2200x4) 8800
Variable indirect cost (2200x2.4) 5280
Opportunity cost (from above) 2400
Minimal price 24127

* Resource x is currently in inventory and is regularly used in the production thus any use of it will require an immediate replacement with the new quantity and thus replacement cost is taken as cost of resource x

Average cost of inventory shall be ignored as it is sunk cost and ignored from decision making perspective.

** Resource y is also in stock but is not used and has no use except for resale thus resale value of 2.30 is considered as value of resource y.

It is to be noted that for decision making perspective only variable cost is considered and fixed cost is ignored because fixed cost will continue to occur whether or not we choose any alternative thus it is totally ignored from decision making perspective.

Sunk cost => sunk cost is the cost which has already been in urred or the obligation of which has already been decided. These costs are ignored for decision making purpose. For eg. To find out the demand of a product that the company is contemplating to produce, it has undertaken market survey for 2000, now this 2000 is a sunk cost as it has already been incurred and will not have any bearing on decision to make product.

Opportunity cost => It is the value that the company has foregone by not accepting the next best alternative by choosing a particular alternative. For eg. Businessman decided to do a business by investing a capital of 10000. Bank interest rates are 4% here if businessman by deciding to do business has foregone int. That he could have earned from bank int. I.e.10000x4%=400.

Incremental cost => It is the cost which is incurred only when we choose a particular alternative. For eg. If we make a product we have to take machinery on rent for 2000 here incremental cost = 2000.


Related Solutions

1. Alpha Ltd has appointed you as a manager in the budgeting department. The company has...
1. Alpha Ltd has appointed you as a manager in the budgeting department. The company has provided the following information to prepare a cash flow budget for the six months from the 1 January 2021 to 30 June 2021. Alpha Ltd produces only one type of product and the projected selling price of the product is £2 for January and February and after that will be fixed at £3 for the foreseeable future.     For the first three months of the...
On 1 July 2018 Alto Ltd purchased land for $4 000 000, in cash. Alto Ltd...
On 1 July 2018 Alto Ltd purchased land for $4 000 000, in cash. Alto Ltd uses the cost model to account for land. On 1 July 2018 Alto Ltd purchased equipment for $1 000 000, in cash. Alto Ltd uses the revaluation model to account for equipment and depreciates the asset over its estimated useful life of 5 years using the straight-line method. The disposal value at the end of 5 years was assessed as zero. The following information...
Alpha Ltd operates a share option plan for its officers, employees and consultants for up to...
Alpha Ltd operates a share option plan for its officers, employees and consultants for up to 10% of its outstanding shares. Under this plan, the exercise price of each option equals the closing market price of the shares on the day before the grant. Each option has a term of 5 years and vests one-third on each of the 3 years following grant date. Before this financial period, Alpha Ltd has accounted for its share option plan on settlement date...
. Alpha Ltd has appointed you as a manager in the budgeting department. The company has...
. Alpha Ltd has appointed you as a manager in the budgeting department. The company has provided the following information to prepare a cash flow budget for the six months from the 1 January 2021 to 30 June 2021. Alpha Ltd produces only one type of product and the projected selling price of the product is £2 for January and February and after that will be fixed at £3 for the foreseeable future.       For the first three months of the...
Siya-So Ltd erected a number of buildings at a cost of $1 000 000 which was...
Siya-So Ltd erected a number of buildings at a cost of $1 000 000 which was settled on 1 January 2007 in cash. These buildings have a useful life of 10 years and were completed and put into use on 1 January 2007.Siya-So Ltd received a government grant of $100 000 on 1 January 2007, which the national government regards it as a priority to provide houses to all citizens.Assume a profit before tax prior to the above transactions of...
JCX Ltd operates in a highly competitive market and is involved in the production of parts...
JCX Ltd operates in a highly competitive market and is involved in the production of parts for the farming industry. It has plants in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin. One of its plants, the Wellington Plant, specialises in the production of two parts: JCX-1 and JCX-2. Part JCX-1 produced the highest volume of activity, and for many years, it was the only part produced by the plant. Five years ago, Part JCX-2 was added. Profits increased for the first few...
Karantika Ltd operates at capacity and makes glass-topped coffee table. At the end of 2019, Karantika...
Karantika Ltd operates at capacity and makes glass-topped coffee table. At the end of 2019, Karantika Ltd’s management accountant gathered the following data to prepare budgets for the first six months 2020: Units sales per quarter and the selling price per unit are estimated as follows: Unit sales Price per unit January 2,700 $400 February 2,600 $400 March 2,800 $550 April 2,600 $550 May 2,650 $500 June 2,600 $500 July 3,000 $500 August 3,000 $550 Sales on November 2019 were...
Karantika Ltd operates at capacity and makes glass-topped coffee table. At the end of 2019, Karantika...
Karantika Ltd operates at capacity and makes glass-topped coffee table. At the end of 2019, Karantika Ltd’s management accountant gathered the following data to prepare budgets for the first six months 2020: Units sales per quarter and the selling price per unit are estimated as follows: Unit sales Price per unit January 2,700 $400 February 2,600 $400 March 2,800 $550 April 2,600 $550 May 2,650 $500 June 2,600 $500 July 3,000 $500 August 3,000 $550 Sales on November 2019 were...
Karantika Ltd operates at capacity and makes glass-topped coffee table. At the end of 2019, Karantika...
Karantika Ltd operates at capacity and makes glass-topped coffee table. At the end of 2019, Karantika Ltd’s management accountant gathered the following data to prepare budgets for the first six months 2020: Units sales per quarter and the selling price per unit are estimated as follows: Unit sales Price per unit January 2,700 $400 February 2,600 $400 March 2,800 $550 April 2,600 $550 May 2,650 $500 June 2,600 $500 July 3,000 $500 August 3,000 $550 Sales on November 2019 were...
AX Development Ltd purchased land on 1 April 2016 at a cost of $3 000 000....
AX Development Ltd purchased land on 1 April 2016 at a cost of $3 000 000. The cost model was used for the land. On 31 March 2017, AX Development Ltd switched to the revaluation model for the land. A revaluation was performed on the 31 March 2017; this resulted in a downward revaluation of $400 000 for the land. On the 30 September 2018, the fair value of the land was reassessed by an independent valuer to be $3...
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT