In: Math
Forecasting labour costs is a key aspect of hotel revenue management that enables hoteliers to appropriately allocate hotel resources and fix pricing strategies. Mary, the President of Hellenic Hoteliers Federation (HHF) is interested in investigating how labour costs (variable L_COST) relate to the number of rooms in a hotel (variable Total_Rooms). Suppose that HHF has hired you as a business analyst to develop a linear model to predict hotel labour costs based on the total number of rooms per hotel using the data provided.
3.1 Use the least squares method to estimate the regression coefficients b0 and b1
3.2 State the regression equation
3.3 Plot on the same graph, the scatter diagram and the regression line
3.4 Give the interpretation of the regression coefficients b0 and b1 as well as the result of the t-test on the individual variables (assume a significance level of 5%)
3.5 Determine the correlation coefficient of the two variables and provide an interpretation of its meaning in the context of this problem 3.6 Check statistically, at the 0.05 level of significance whether there is any evidence of a linear relationship between labour cost and total number of rooms per hotel
I need only the 3.4 and 3.5 questions.
Total_Rooms L_COST
412 2.165.000
313 2.214.985
265 1.393.550
204 2.460.634
172 1.151.600
133 801.469
127 1.072.000
322 1.608.013
241 793.009
172 1.383.854
121 494.566
70 437.684
65 83.000
93 626.000
75 37.735
69 256.658
66 230.000
54 200.000
68 199.000
57 11.720
38 59.200
27 130.000
47 255.020
32 3.500
27 20.906
48 284.569
39 107.447
35 64.702
23 6.500
25 156.316
10 15.950
18 722.069
17 6.121
29 30.000
21 5.700
23 50.237
15 19.670
8 7.888
20
11
15 3.500
18 112.181
23
10 30.000
26 3.575
306 2.074.000
240 1.312.601
330 434.237
139 495.000
353 1.511.457
324 1.800.000
276 2.050.000
221 623.117
200 796.026
117 360.000
170 538.848
122 568.536
57 300.000
62 249.205
98 150.000
75 220.000
62 50.302
50 517.729
27 51.000
44 75.704
33 271.724
25 118.049
42
30 40.000
44
10 10.000
18 10.000
18
73 70.000
21 12.000
22 20.000
25 36.277
25 36.277
31 10.450
16 14.300
15 4.296
12
11
16 379.498
22 1.520
12 45.000
34 96.619
37 270.000
25 60.000
10 12.500
270 1.934.820
261 3.000.000
219 1.675.995
280 903.000
378 2.429.367
181 1.143.850
166 900.000
119 600.000
174 2.500.000
124 1.103.939
112 363.825
227 1.538.000
161 1.370.968
216 1.339.903
102 173.481
96 210.000
97 441.737
56 96.000
72 177.833
62 252.390
78 377.182
74 111.000
33 238.000
30 45.000
39 50.000
32 40.000
25 61.766
41 166.903
24 116.056
49 41.000
43 195.821
9
20 96.713
32 6.500
14 5.500
14 4.000
13 15.000
13 9.500
53 48.200
11 3.000
16 27.084
21 30.000
21 20.000
46 43.549
21 10.000
In: Statistics and Probability
Forecasting labour costs is a key aspect of hotel revenue management that enables hoteliers to appropriately allocate hotel resources and fix pricing strategies. Mary, the President of Hellenic Hoteliers Federation (HHF) is interested in investigating how labour costs (variable L_COST) relate to the number of rooms in a hotel (variable Total_Rooms). Suppose that HHF has hired you as a business analyst to develop a linear model to predict hotel labour costs based on the total number of rooms per hotel using the data provided.
3.1 Use the least squares method to estimate the regression coefficients b0 and b1
3.2 State the regression equation
3.3 Plot on the same graph, the scatter diagram and the regression line
3.4 Give the interpretation of the regression coefficients b0 and b1 as well as the result of the t-test on the individual variables (assume a significance level of 5%)
3.5 Determine the correlation coefficient of the two variables and provide an interpretation of its meaning in the context of this problem 3.6 Check statistically, at the 0.05 level of significance whether there is any evidence of a linear relationship between labour cost and total number of rooms per hotel
Total_Rooms L_COST
412 2.165.000
313 2.214.985
265 1.393.550
204 2.460.634
172 1.151.600
133 801.469
127 1.072.000
322 1.608.013
241 793.009
172 1.383.854
121 494.566
70 437.684
65 83.000
93 626.000
75 37.735
69 256.658
66 230.000
54 200.000
68 199.000
57 11.720
38 59.200
27 130.000
47 255.020
32 3.500
27 20.906
48 284.569
39 107.447
35 64.702
23 6.500
25 156.316
10 15.950
18 722.069
17 6.121
29 30.000
21 5.700
23 50.237
15 19.670
8 7.888
20
11
15 3.500
18 112.181
23
10 30.000
26 3.575
306 2.074.000
240 1.312.601
330 434.237
139 495.000
353 1.511.457
324 1.800.000
276 2.050.000
221 623.117
200 796.026
117 360.000
170 538.848
122 568.536
57 300.000
62 249.205
98 150.000
75 220.000
62 50.302
50 517.729
27 51.000
44 75.704
33 271.724
25 118.049
42
30 40.000
44
10 10.000
18 10.000
18
73 70.000
21 12.000
22 20.000
25 36.277
25 36.277
31 10.450
16 14.300
15 4.296
12
11
16 379.498
22 1.520
12 45.000
34 96.619
37 270.000
25 60.000
10 12.500
270 1.934.820
261 3.000.000
219 1.675.995
280 903.000
378 2.429.367
181 1.143.850
166 900.000
119 600.000
174 2.500.000
124 1.103.939
112 363.825
227 1.538.000
161 1.370.968
216 1.339.903
102 173.481
96 210.000
97 441.737
56 96.000
72 177.833
62 252.390
78 377.182
74 111.000
33 238.000
30 45.000
39 50.000
32 40.000
25 61.766
41 166.903
24 116.056
49 41.000
43 195.821
9
20 96.713
32 6.500
14 5.500
14 4.000
13 15.000
13 9.500
53 48.200
11 3.000
16 27.084
21 30.000
21 20.000
46 43.549
21 10.000
In: Statistics and Probability
|
Case Study |
CEMEX: A Model Multinational from an Unusual Place |
|
Our discussion in the text stresses that multinationals succeed by using their firm-specific advantages throughout their global operations. We have also noted that most foreign direct investments are made by firms based in the industrialized countries. This is the story of CEMEX, a firm that rapidly has become multinational since 1990. The reasons for its multinational success fit very well with the advantages stressed in the eclectic approach. What makes the firm unusual is that it is based in Mexico. CEMEX is an example of a growing group of multinationals based in developing countries.
CEMEX began business in 1906. For most of its life this cement company focused on selling in the Mexican market. Cement is a product that is expensive to ship, especially overland, so cement plants ship mostly to customers within 300 miles of a plant. Shipment by water is moderately (but not prohibitively) expensive. Most cement producers in the 1980s were local producers with traditional business practices. New managers at CEMEX broke with tradition by introducing extensive use of automation, information technology, and a satellite-based communication network into CEMEX operations. They used the technology to improve quality control and to provide detailed information on production, sales, and distribution to top managers in real time. Delivery of ready-mix concrete is particularly challenging in cities. Traditionally, cement firms could ensure delivery only within a time period of about three hours. CEMEX pioneered the use of computers and a global positioning system to guarantee delivery to construction sites within a 20-minute window. These innovations became the company's firm-specific advantages.
Also in the 1980s CEMEX began to export more aggressively to the United States using sea transport, and it was increasingly successful. However, competing U.S. cement producers complained to the U.S. government, and in 1990 CEMEX exports to the United States were hit by a 58 percent antidumping duty. With exporting to the United States limited by the antidumping order, CEMEX looked for other foreign opportunities.
In 1991, it began exporting to Spain, and in 1992 it made its first foreign direct investment by acquiring two Spanish cement producers. CEMEX minimized its inherent disadvantages by investing first in a foreign country with the same language as the firm's home country and a similar culture. In addition, CEMEX used its expansion into Europe as a competitive response to the previous move by the Swiss-based firm Holcim into the Mexican cement industry.
The management team sent by CEMEX to reorganize the acquired companies was amazed to find companies that kept handwritten records and used almost no personal computers. They upgraded the Spanish affiliates to CEMEX technology and management practices. The improvement in affiliate operations from this internal transfer of CEMEX's intangible assets was remarkable—profit margins improved from 7 percent to 24 percent in two years.
Since then, CEMEX has made a series of foreign direct investments by acquiring cement producers in Latin America (including Venezuela, Panama, the Dominican Republic, Colombia, and Costa Rica), the United States, Britain, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Egypt. CEMEX used the same type of process that it used in Spain to bring its technology and management practices into its new foreign affiliates, and generally achieved similarly impressive improvements in performance.
By 2000, CEMEX was the third largest cement producer in the world, behind Lafarge of France and Holcim. More than 60 percent of its physical assets were in its foreign affiliates. It was also the largest exporter of cement in the world (a fact consistent with the proposition discussed in the text that FDI and trade are often complementary). CEMEX is considered one of the best networked companies globally by computer industry experts, well ahead of its rivals. Its investments in developing and enhancing its firm-specific advantages have been paying off globally.
CEMEX is a great example of a domestic firm becoming a multi-national giant by a clever interplay of technology, foreign direct investment and innovation. Please spell out the experience of another company in a different industry that had similar success. For all of his success, what can Cemex learn from your company?
In: Economics
CASE Warkworth Furniture
Warkworth Furniture specializes in environmentally friendly and sustainable furniture. One of its products, the TePaki desk, uses bamboo for the surface and recycled aluminum for the supports. The desk is made in its factory in Vietnam and shipped to all of its 30 stores throughout the United States, primarily in the large urban areas on either coast. Karen Williamson, the owner of Warkworth Furniture, is struggling with how it should organize its supply chain.
Currently, it ships the desks from Vietnam to the United States via ocean carrier. Once they arrive in the United States, they are shipped via a third-party carrier to each store. It usually takes 10 weeks between when an order is placed with the factory and when the product is received in a store.
The TePaki desk may be eco-friendly, but it isn’t wallet friendly: Each desk costs Warkworth $325 to make and it sells the desk for $850. Nevertheless, Warkworth has been able to identify a market segment of customers that value the look of the desk and what it represents. Across its stores, it sells six desks per week, or 0.2 desk per week per store.
Given the upscale nature of its business, Warkworth’s stores are located in nice areas that unfortunately have high rents. Consequently, between the opportunity cost of capital and the cost of physical space, Karen estimates that it costs Warkworth $150 to hold each TePaki desk in one of Page 483its stores for one year. It would be a financial disaster if each desk actually spent the entire year in inventory in a store, but the $150 does represent the true cost of holding a desk in a store for that period of time.
Shipping a TePaki desk from Vietnam to a store costs Warkworth $80 per desk, about $40 for the ocean portion of the journey and $40 for the land portion within the United States.
Andy Philpot, Warkworth’s director of operations, has been arguing for some time that Warkworth should set up a distribution center in southern California to receive products from Asia, and from there distribute them to its various stores. Warehouse space is much cheaper than prime retail space. Hence, the holding cost per TePaki desk per year in a warehouse would only be $60. The only problem with this approach, according to Andy, is that the total shipping cost from factory to store could increase by $8 per desk due to the extra handling and shipping distance once all of the desks are routed through a distribution center.
Karen understands why the distribution center approach could make sense, but she worries about getting all of the execution done right. Instead, she suggests that it ship all of the desks directly to the stores as it currently does, but then ship product between stores as needed. The only problem with that approach is that it probably will cost it about $40 per desk to ship from one store to another.
To add to the discussion, Kathy White, Warkworth’s marketing director, is concerned with how these ideas will affect the desks’ in-store availability. She proudly reminds everyone that Warkworth currently has a .99 in-stock probability for the TePaki desk. Andy, a typical ops guy, quips that it could save a ton if it were willing to make its customers wait a week or so to get their desk delivered to the store from a distribution center.
1.How much does Warkworth incur in holding costs each year with its current system of delivering directly from the factory to its stores?
2.Say Warkworth opens a distribution center in southern California. How much would it incur in holding costs each year with that strategy?
3. Say Warkworth opens a distribution center in southern California. How much does it incur in holding costs per desk?
4. Would you recommend that it consider Karen’s idea of holding all inventory at the stores but shipping between stores as needed?
5. Say Warkworth listened to Andy and didn’t hold inventory at the stores. Instead, inventory would be held in a distribution center and shipped to the stores as needed. How much would it save in inventory holding costs with this strategy?
In: Operations Management
Subaru’s Sales Boom Thanks to the Weaker Yen
For the Japanese carmaker Subaru, a sharp fall in the value of the
yen against the U.S. dollar has turned a problem—the lack of U.S.
production—into an unexpected sales boom. Subaru, which is a niche
player in the global auto industry, has long bucked the trend among
its Japanese rivals of establishing significant manufacturing
facilities in the North American market. Instead, the company has
chosen to concentrate most of its manufacturing in Japan in order
to achieve economies of scale at its home plants, exporting its
production to the United States. Subaru still makes 80 percent of
its vehicles at home, compared with 21 percent for Honda.
Back in 2012, this strategy was viewed as something of a liability. In those days, 1 U.S. dollar bought only 80 Japanese yen. The strong yen meant that Subaru cars were being priced out of the U.S. market. Japanese companies like Honda and Toyota, which had substantial production in the United States, gained business at Subaru’s expense. But from 2012 onward, with Japan mired in recession and consumer prices falling, the country’s central bank repeatedly cut interest rates in an attempt to stimulate the economy. As interest rates fell in Japan, investors moved money out of the country, selling yen and buying the U.S. dollar. They used those dollars to invest in U.S. stocks and bonds, where they anticipated a greater return. As a consequence, the price of yen in terms of dollars fell. By December 2015, 1 dollar bought 120 yen, representing a 50 percent fall in the value of the yen against the U.S. dollar since 2012.
For Subaru, the depreciation in the value of the yen has given it a pricing advantage and driven a sales boom. Demand for Subaru cars in the United States has been so strong that the automaker has been struggling to keep up. The profits of Subaru’s parent company, Fuji Heavy Industries, have surged. In February 2015, Fuji announced that it would earn record operating profits of around ¥410 billion ($3.5 billion U.S.) for the financial year ending March 2015. Subaru’s profit margin has increased to 14.4 percent, compared with 5.6 percent for Honda, a company that is heavily dependent on U.S. production. The good times continued in 2015, with Subaru posting record profits in the quarter ending December 31, 2015.
Despite its current pricing advantage, Subaru is moving to increase its U.S. production. It plans to expand its sole plant in the United States, in Indiana, by March 2017, with a goal of making 310,000 a year, up from 200,000 currently. When asked why it is doing this, Subaru’s management notes that the yen will not stay weak against the dollar forever, and it is wise to expand local production as a hedge against future increases in the value of the yen. Indeed, when the Bank of Japan decided to set a key interest rate below zero in early February 2016, the yen started to appreciate against the U.S. dollar, presumably on expectations that negative interest rates would finally help stimulate Japan’s sluggish economy. By late March 2016, the yen had appreciated against the dollar and was trading at $1 = ¥112.
Question 1: As Subaru expands into different countries, we will face increased foreign currency risk. Discuss different modes of currency risk and how each should be managed.
Question 2: When evaluating which foreign markets to serve, Subaru must consider certain variables that influence the location-specific costs and benefits of serving those markets. Identify several of the most important variables to consider and the implications of each on potential profitability.
Question 3: As Subaru implements it international operations, we will need to consider to what degree we delegate decision making to our foreign subsidiaries. Explain several advantages and disadvantages of centralized versus decentralized decision making.
Question 4: What are some of the most important considerations we should evaluate to best configure our production and supply chain operations. Provide specific details for each consideration.
Question 5: Discuss political, economic and legal criteria to
assess the attractiveness of doing business in different
country-specific locations.
In: Operations Management
CHOOSE ONE of the political parties to write on: either the Federalists OR theRepublicans. Choose whichever party interests you, or choose a party that you don’t know much about. Once you choose your party, you will assume the role of a member from that party – pretend that you are either a Federalist or Republican from the 1790s.
write a minimum of three paragraphs
discussing the political, economic, and diplomatic views of your
political party . Your political
views will include your perspective on state and national
government (how strong or weak should they be);
your economic views will include your perspective
on economic directions that the nations should take (or not take);
your diplomatic viewswill include your perspective on
France and England (which nation do you support? why?).
- If you are a Federalist, you will explain what
the Alien and Sedition Acts are and give examples
from the Acts that you think are necessary to support your position
(ex: what parts of the Alien Acts are necessary for the survival of
the United States?).
-If you are a Republican, you will explain what
theKentucky Resolutions are and give examples from the
Resolutions that you think are necessary to support your position
(ex: what role should states play when the national government
oversteps its authority?).
In: Economics
Suppose that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reported the following sulphur dioxide emissions (in tons) for the 48 states in the continental United States for a particular year.
| State | SO2 Emissions |
State | SO2 Emissions |
State | SO2 Emissions |
State | SO2 Emissions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AL | 106,169 | IN | 268,231 | NC | 48,168 | RI | 30 |
| AR | 73,592 | KS | 30,035 | ND | 55,217 | SC | 26,793 |
| AZ | 23,703 | KY | 188,129 | NE | 65,838 | SD | 15,356 |
| CA | 241 | LA | 80,147 | NH | 3,181 | TN | 56,419 |
| CO | 38,301 | MA | 10,855 | NJ | 2,446 | TX | 365,521 |
| CT | 1,121 | MD | 25,131 | NM | 17,749 | UT | 21,158 |
| DE | 2,254 | ME | 887 | NV | 7,441 | VA | 38,792 |
| FL | 89,079 | MI | 194,404 | NY | 17,811 | VT | 16 |
| GA | 80,963 | MN | 24,380 | OH | 282,000 | WA | 2,873 |
| IA | 76,858 | MO | 141,444 | OK | 74,439 | WI | 62,448 |
| ID | 21 | MS | 77,500 | OR | 14,018 | WV | 86,215 |
| IL | 135,880 | MT | 16,230 | PA | 252,092 | WY | 40,685 |
Use these data to calculate the values (in tons) in the five-number summary. (Hint: See Example 3.13.)
smallest observation
slower quartile
median
upper quartile
Largest observation tons
In: Statistics and Probability
In 2006, the top ten nations with the highest HDI rating are listed below. Each observation shows a country and in parentheses the proportion of women in that country’s parliament and the HDI Score (% women, HDI Score). Norway (38, .94), Iceland (33, .90), Australia (28, .93) Ireland (14, .92), Sweden (45, .91), Canada (24, .91), Japan (11, .89), United States (15, .92), Switzerland (25, .93), Netherlands (34, .92). (i.e. the US had 15 percent of seats held by women and an HDI score of .92)
a) Calculate the mean and the standard deviation for the percentage of seats in parliament held by women in these states.
b) Calculate the mean and the standard deviation for HDI index and interpret your results.
c) Calculate the correlation between the HDI index score and the percentage of seats in the country’s parliament held by women.
d) Calculate the coefficient on the HDI score of a regression in which the HDI score is the independent variable and the proportion of seats held by women is the dependent variable.
e) Calculate the r2 from this simple regression model.
f) Input these observations into Stata and show (simply circle or highlight) where the answers to (c), (d), and (e) appear in the regression output. (Here it is ok to paste Stata output into your answer.)
In: Statistics and Probability
Yes, it needs to be written in essay format. During the final week of the course, you will submit a paper that will be written as if you were making recommendations to a member of Congress. Imagine that the United States Congress was considering sweeping legislation that would provide intensive regulation of nonprofit fundraising, including the imposition of more filing requirements to the Internal Revenue Service for nonprofits, as well as more active obligations on the part of nonprofit leaders to explain in detail their fundraising strategies, marketing, and fundraising efforts. Imagine also that such legislation would provide greater public oversight of the nonprofit fundraising process, but would also burden nonprofits with significant paperwork and accountability requirements. In your paper, discuss your views on whether or not the federal government should play a much larger role in regulating nonprofits and especially how nonprofits identify donors, collect funds, and spend fundraising dollars. Remember that there are only forty states that have state regulations while ten states have no state regulations at all. For example, there was a significant controversy after 9/11 regarding the American Red Cross because they collected fundraising monies and did not use those funds for the victims of 9/11 -- they instead diverted those funds to other projects of the Red Cross. Here are four questions to help frame your discussion. • Do you believe that government has a strong role to play in the regulation of nonprofit fundraising? • Do you think that states should play a role in regulating nonprofit fundraising? • Should there be a Sarbanes-Oxley-type legislation regarding nonprofit fundraising? • If so, what values should guide politicians as they attempt to set up regulatory systems to ensure that nonprofit fundraising is done in an ethical fashion? Would stronger regulation of nonprofits have a chilling effect by decreasing contributions to nonprofits and diminishing the willingness of individuals to create nonprofits to address serious public crises and controversies? It needs to be in essay-type format.
In: Economics