Didn't the cases study say that they were cutting the workforce down to 60 people which is 75% less then the previous year, making the previous year have a total of 105 employees

Reply 245

Indigo69

Original post by amar360

I feel better know i got 32,200 units per employee or something around that

I think i messed up and said there was a 6.6% change between the two years? Is that defo wrong??

Reply 246

splashywill

Original post by Rosemw22

Didn't the cases study say that they were cutting the workforce down to 60 people which is 75% less then the previous year, making the previous year have a total of 105 employees

cutting the workforce by 75% to 60 workers. making it 80 workers previously

Reply 247

splashywill

Original post by amar360

What did everyone say for thr PED question and the sale and leaseback question?

PED was inelastic so if the raised the price the profits would increase. Application i put was the average price of platinum rings was £1000 but the average selling price was £1500, this means that customers are willing to pay more.

Reply 248

Rosemw22

im confused, isn't 75% increase of 60, 105? 1.75 times 60=105

Reply 249

splashywill

Original post by amar360

What did everyone say for thr PED question and the sale and leaseback question?

Sale and leaseback I put that was a short term solution to the cash flow problem and that the rent that would be payed adds to the outflows of the business, which could lead to more cash flow problems in the future.

Sorting out the credit given to customers and bargaining more credit from suppliers would help cash flow without having to sell any assets. This is also a long term solution and would be the favourable of the two.

Reply 250

Viableplayground

Anyone work out that there was a fall in productive capacity

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 251

imran_

If you got employees to be 105, it's probably wrong I did it too. You should lose 2 marks max

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 252

splashywill

Original post by Rosemw22

im confused, isn't 75% increase of 60, 105? 1.75 times 60=105

The question said that the workforce would be cut to 75% of its workforce leaving 60 workers. So, 60/0.75 = 80 original workers.

Reply 253

amar360

Original post by Rosemw22

im confused, isn't 75% increase of 60, 105? 1.75 times 60=105

The case study stated that the workforce is 75% of what it was prevosly and then tells you its 60 therefore 60+ the 25% is 80 as 25% of orginal is 20 60+20=80 the year before and the new year is 60. I hope that makes sense

Reply 254

lewisjoenes

Original post by amar360

What did everyone say for thr PED question and the sale and leaseback question?

Price inelastic meaning they could increase the price to increase sales revenue

Sale and leaseback, debt factoring would have been a better option as almost 20% of their sales was unpaid customers so getting an agent to instantly pay them 90% would help solve cash flow problems. Sale and leaseback means disowning assets which could create other problems like providing security for banks in order to get a bank loan if the business needed extra finance.