What did you think of the PCR exam

Options
12467

Comments

  • *hayley-may08*
    *hayley-may08* Registered Posts: 43 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    cookymonstar wrote: »
    i think i suggested that labour efficiency had improved - so more produced for less hrs - so less cost? maybe or am i mental!!!

    Thats what I put... and put as the problem quality...! I think its wrong (like the rest of my answers now though!!!)

    xx
  • ^Joe
    ^Joe Registered Posts: 35 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    Staffz wrote: »
    The reason I had 130,000 was because the company you are sub-contracting to only accepts multiples of 10,000
    Yes :D
    elnino2201 wrote: »
    Did anyone have £96,005 as the additional cost of subcontracting - 130,000 x £1.40 = £182,000
    Less Overtime Saved - 6,500 x £13.23 =(£85,995)

    Additonal Cost £96,005

    Yes , well, I did the same, can't remember the figures :)
  • Staffz
    Staffz Registered Posts: 40 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    Staffz wrote: »
    The reason I had 130,000 was because the company you are sub-contracting to only accepts multiples of 10,000
    Please somebody tell me I read this right, I understood that they could only test so many, and for some reason I ended up with 125,000 not possible to test, so rounded up in 10,000 multiple to be 130,000??? I can't remember the question now!
  • cookymonstar
    cookymonstar Registered Posts: 32 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    i had the £ 182000 but didnt deduct for overtime :(
  • cookymonstar
    cookymonstar Registered Posts: 32 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    Staffz wrote: »
    Please somebody tell me I read this right, I understood that they could only test so many, and for some reason I ended up with 125,000 not possible to test, so rounded up in 10,000 multiple to be 130,000??? I can't remember the question now!

    you are totally right - i remember this part well - 125000 had to be 130000
  • Staffz
    Staffz Registered Posts: 40 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    elnino2201 wrote: »
    i said PEST and as soon as left i was like grrrr linear regression! Did anyone have £96,005 as the additional cost of subcontracting - 130,000 x £1.40 = £182,000
    Less Overtime Saved - 6,500 x £13.23 =(£85,995)

    Additonal Cost £96,005
    Those figures are ringing a bell for me
  • ^Joe
    ^Joe Registered Posts: 35 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    cookymonstar wrote: »
    you are totally right - i remember this part well - 125000 had to be 130000

    +1 :d
  • andrewtdk
    andrewtdk Registered Posts: 150 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Options
    i said 6250 hours because youre not saving time for 130000 units just 125000 units, its just you have to pay for 130000 units, or so i thought
  • Shiv
    Shiv Registered Posts: 3 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    elnino2201 wrote: »
    i said PEST and as soon as left i was like grrrr linear regression! Did anyone have £96,005 as the additional cost of subcontracting - 130,000 x £1.40 = £182,000
    Less Overtime Saved - 6,500 x £13.23 =(£85,995)

    Additonal Cost £96,005

    I also calculated that there would be money saved in the variable overheads as 6,500 less hours were being worked??
  • Pigpen
    Pigpen Registered Posts: 331 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Options
    I did remember to reduce the Labour variable overhead on the saved overtime labour hours as well as the standard cost of the overtime hours - That was a tricksy bit that I think will have tripped some folk up
  • jh999
    jh999 Registered Posts: 17 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    Staffz wrote: »
    Those figures are ringing a bell for me

    Figures dont ring a bell, but i deducted overtime saved at overtime rate and variable overheads at £1.40(?) an hour for each hour of overtime saved iirc.
  • elnino2201
    elnino2201 Registered Posts: 11 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    Good good,sounds like a good few have the smae figures, so thats good, i messed up in the mail, i said employ extra staff, but the limitation was the machine hours! Doh!!
  • Staffz
    Staffz Registered Posts: 40 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    Staffz wrote: »
    Those figures are ringing a bell for me
    Good you put PEST too, I only got that in to the answer (I knew the concepts but not term) as people were talking about the theory prior to going in the exam, and I hadn't bothered with theory - logical thinking not a strong point considering! Hehe!
  • Staffz
    Staffz Registered Posts: 40 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    andrewtdk wrote: »
    i said 6250 hours because youre not saving time for 130000 units just 125000 units, its just you have to pay for 130000 units, or so i thought
    No, you deduct the full 6500. As the extra means staff can do less overtime because overtime exceeds 6500
  • TonyW
    TonyW Registered Posts: 3 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    When working out how much more subcontracting would be, did people include variable overhead that would be saved by the labour hours not worked as well as the actual overtime cost? I did, but I'm not sure if I was right to.

    Also, did anyone suggest 'shift working' as a possible way to meet the capacity problem of the quality control testing? I got the impression that the problem was not having enough testing machines, so working shifts day and night would help this?

    Tony
  • Pigpen
    Pigpen Registered Posts: 331 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Options
    Staffz wrote: »
    The reason I had 130,000 was because the company you are sub-contracting to only accepts multiples of 10,000

    Yeah thats right I did round up to 130,000 just pleased people were coming out with the same figure
  • jh999
    jh999 Registered Posts: 17 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    Staffz wrote: »
    No, you deduct the full 6500. As the extra means staff can do less overtime because overtime exceeds 6500

    I just clicked that, but Im not sure which i used :ohmy: Im sure if you use either you'll get marks for theory anyway :laugh:

    I think i used the 6500 as 85995 rings a bell.
  • ^Joe
    ^Joe Registered Posts: 35 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    TonyW wrote: »
    When working out how much more subcontracting would be, did people include variable overhead that would be saved by the labour hours not worked as well as the actual overtime cost? I did, but I'm not sure if I was right to.

    Tony

    That's a very good point, I didn't, but surely time would be saved there!!
  • andrewtdk
    andrewtdk Registered Posts: 150 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Options
    can someone explain the 6500 hours to me please, as 125000 no longer need to be produced these take 3 minutes each which takes 6250 hours? if you deduct 6500 surely it does not leave enough time make the required units.

    I can see that 130000 would take 6500 hours but you are not subcontracting 130000 units just 125000 units?
  • Staffz
    Staffz Registered Posts: 40 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    TonyW wrote: »
    When working out how much more subcontracting would be, did people include variable overhead that would be saved by the labour hours not worked as well as the actual overtime cost? I did, but I'm not sure if I was right to.

    Also, did anyone suggest 'shift working' as a possible way to meet the capacity problem of the quality control testing? I got the impression that the problem was not having enough testing machines, so working shifts day and night would help this?

    Tony
    Oooh, that is a good thought. I didn't think of that!!! Shift wages wouldbe a hassle to calculate, but reduces need for extra machines or subcontracting! Bet you get a onus point!
  • oxongirl78
    oxongirl78 Registered Posts: 13 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    I suggested revising the quality control measures so that not all instruments were tested, but were tested based on sampling.
    No initial cost to production, but could cause additional quality associated costs further down the line etc. etc.

    I figured because they kept harping on about quality I should put something about that rather than suggesting they bought another machine or something
  • ^Joe
    ^Joe Registered Posts: 35 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    I don't know why we read this, it makes us feel more worried than we were earlier :laugh:

    Best of luck everyone :)
  • GreenTea
    GreenTea Registered Posts: 13 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    Staffz wrote: »
    No, you deduct the full 6500. As the extra means staff can do less overtime because overtime exceeds 6500

    Arrrrh I forgot to remove the o/time from the recalculation :001_wub:
  • jh999
    jh999 Registered Posts: 17 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    andrewtdk wrote: »
    can someone explain the 6500 hours to me please, as 125000 no longer need to be produced these take 3 minutes each which takes 6250 hours? if you deduct 6500 surely it does not leave enough time make the required units.

    I can see that 130000 would take 6500 hours but you are not subcontracting 130000 units just 125000 units?

    Since you need to make the order in multiple of 10000s you wont stop short of that, and will outsource the further 5000 you are paying for anyway, saving overtime hours.
  • Staffz
    Staffz Registered Posts: 40 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    andrewtdk wrote: »
    can someone explain the 6500 hours to me please, as 125000 no longer need to be produced these take 3 minutes each which takes 6250 hours? if you deduct 6500 surely it does not leave enough time make the required units.

    I can see that 130000 would take 6500 hours but you are not subcontracting 130000 units just 125000 units?
    the 6500h is the cost of 130,000 testing minutes (@3mins/unit) and the 130,000 is the rounded up 125,000 to closest 10,000 multiple (as to do less you would have 120,000 but be left with 5,000 you still didn't have machine time to test)
  • elnino2201
    elnino2201 Registered Posts: 11 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    the company that we were subcontracting to would only take untis of 10,000 so i rounded up 125,000 to 130,000
  • sleepysophie
    sleepysophie Registered Posts: 17 New contributor 🐸
    Options
    Oxongirl78 -
    I said sampling too - I still think this was one of many possible right answers.
  • Pigpen
    Pigpen Registered Posts: 331 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Options
    In section 1 - Did you base the material required calculation on the production units figure calculated before or after the reject stock? - i.e. All of production stock produced or sales forecast plus/minus op/clos stock?
  • Staffz
    Staffz Registered Posts: 40 Regular contributor ⭐
    Options
    Pigpen wrote: »
    In section 1 - Did you base the material required calculation on the production units figure calculated before or after the reject stock? - i.e. All of production stock produced or sales forecast plus/minus op/clos stock?
    I did salesforcast - O.S. + C.S. = /85 *100
  • andrewtdk
    andrewtdk Registered Posts: 150 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Options
    i thought the question was how much extra was the subcontracting? so i did 1.4 x 130000 for the subcontract and then deducting the original cost before we knew of the limit and the original cost had nothing to do with 130000 units?

Categories

Privacy Policy