Chapter 28
Working Capital Management: Extensions
ANSWERS TO END-OF-CHAPTER QUESTIONS



28-1 a. The Baumol model is a model for establishing the firm's target cash balance that closely resembles the EOQ model used for inventory. The model assumes (1) that the firm uses cash at a steady, predictable rate, (2) that the firm's cash inflows from operations also occur at a steady, predictable rate, and (3) that its net cash outflows therefore also occur at a steady rate. The model balances the opportunity cost of holding cash against the transactions costs associated with replenishing the cash account.


b. Carrying costs are the costs of carrying inventory. Ordering costs are the costs of ordering inventory. Total inventory costs are the sum of ordering and carrying costs.

c. The Economic Ordering Quantity (EOQ) is the order quantity which minimizes the costs of ordering and carrying inventories. The EOQ model is the equation used to find the EOQ. The range around the optimal ordering quantity that may be ordered without significantly affecting total inventory costs is the EOQ range.

d. The reorder point is the inventory level at which a new order is placed. Safety stock is inventory held to guard against larger-than-normal sales and/or shipping delays.

e. An aging schedule breaks down accounts receivable according to how long they have been outstanding. This gives the firm a more complete picture of the structure of accounts receivable than that provided by days sales outstanding. Days sales outstanding (DSO) is a measure of the average length of time it takes a firm's customers to pay off their credit purchases.

f. The payments pattern approach is a procedure which measures any changes that might occur in customers' payment behavior. The advantage of this approach is that it is not affected by changes in sales levels due to cyclical or seasonal factors. The uncollected balances schedule, which is an integral part of the payments pattern approach, helps a firm monitor its receivables better and also forecast future receivables balances.

28-2 a. Our suppliers switch from delivering -
by train to air freight. (a below)

b. We change from producing just in time to
meet seasonal sales to steady, year-round +
production.

c. Competition in the markets in which 0
we sell increases. (c below)

d. The rate of general inflation increases. 0

e. Interest rates rise; other things -
are constant. (e below)

(a) Lower safety stock will be required because delivery time is shortened.

(c) On the one hand, the need to stay competitive may require large inventories, but if the market gets competitive, sales may fall off and the need for inventories may diminish.

(e) EOQ and inventories are lower, since carrying costs are higher.


SOLUTIONS TO END-OF-CHAPTER PROBLEMS


28-1 Analysis of change:
Projected Income Projected Income
Statement Effect of Statement
Under Current Credit Policy Under New
Credit Policy Change Credit Policy
Gross sales $1,600,000 +$ 25,000 $1,625,000
Less: Discounts 0 0 0
Net sales $1,600,000 +$ 25,000 $1,625,000
Variable costs 1,200,000 + 18,750 1,218,750
Profit before
credit costs
and taxes $ 400,000 +$ 6,250 $ 406,250
Credit-related costs:
Cost of carrying
receivables* 16,000 + 8,375 24,375
Collection expense 35,000 - 13,000 22,000
Bad debt losses 24,000 + 16,625 40,625
Profit before taxes $ 325,000 -$ 5,750 $ 319,250
Taxes (40%) 130,000 - 2,300 127,700
Net income $ 195,000 -$ 3,450 $ 191,550

*Cost of carrying receivables:

.

Current policy = (30) (0.75)(0.16) = $16,000.

New policy = (45) (0.75)(0.16) = $24,375.

Since the change in profitability is negative, the firm should not relax its collection efforts.

28-2 a. EOQ = = = = 3,000 bags per order.

b. The maximum inventory, which is on hand immediately after a new order is received, is 4,000 bags (3,000 + 1,000 safety stock). At $1.50 per bag the dollar cost is $6,000.

c. = + 1,000 = 1,500 + 1,000 = 2,500 bags or $3,750.

d. = 30 orders per year. = 12 days.

The company must place an order every 12 days.


28-3 Analysis of change:
Projected Income Projected Income
Statement Effect of Statement
Under Current Credit Policy Under New
Credit Policy Change Credit Policy
Gross sales $2,500,000 -$125,000 $2,375,000
Less: Discounts 0 0 0
Net sales $2,500,000 -$125,000 $2,375,000
Variable costs 2,125,000 - 106,250 2,018,750
Profit before
credit costs
and taxes $ 375,000 -$ 18,750 $ 356,250
Credit-related costs:
Cost of carrying
receivables* 100,938 - 65,609 35,328
Bad debt losses 0 0 0
Profit before taxes $ 274,062 +$ 46,859 $ 320,922
Taxes (40%) 109,625 + 18,744 128,369
Net income $ 164,437 +$ 28,115 $ 192,553

*Cost of carrying receivables:

.

Current policy = (95) (0.85)(0.18) = $100,938.

New policy = (35) (0.85)(0.18) = $35,328.

The firm should change its credit terms since the change in profitability is positive.

28-4 a. March receivables = $120,000(0.8) + $100,000(0.5) = $146,000.
June receivables = $160,000(0.8) + $140,000(0.5) = $198,000.

b. 1st Quarter: ADS = ($50,000 + $100,000 + $120,000)/90 = $3,000.
DSO = $146,000/$3,000 = 48.7 days.

2nd Quarter: ADS = ($105,000 + $140,000 + $160,000)/90 = $4,500.
DSO = $198,000/$4,500 = 44.0 days.

Cumulative: ADS = ($50,000 + $100,000 + $120,000
+ $105,000 + $140,000 + $160,000)/180 = $3,750,

or ADS = ($3,000 + $4,500)/2 = $3,750.
DSO = $198,000/$3,750 = 52.8 days.

c. Age of Accounts Dollar Value Percent of Total
0 - 30 days $128,000 65%
31 - 60 70,000 35
61 - 90 0 0
$198,000 100%

d. Month Sales Receivables Receivables/Sales
April $105,000 $ 0 0%
May 140,000 70,000 50
June 160,000 128,000 80
$198,000 130%


28-5 a. C* = = . F = $27; T = $4,500,000; k = 12%.

C* = = $45,000.

b. Average cash balance = $45,000/2 = $22,500.

c. Transfers per year = $4,500,000/$45,000 = 100, or one approximately every 3.6 » 4 days.

d. Total cost = (k) + (F)
= (0.12) + ($27)
= $2,700 + $2,700 = $5,400.

If it maintained an average balance of $50,000, this would mean transfers of $100,000. There would be $4,500,000/$100,000 = 45 transfers per year. The cost would be 0.12($50,000) + 45($27) = $7,215. If it maintained a zero balance, it would have to make 360 transfers per year, so its cost would be 360($27) = $9,720.

SOLUTIONS TO SPREADSHEET PROBLEMS

28-6 The detailed solution for the problem is available both on the instructor’s resource CD-ROM (in the file Solution for Ch 28-6 Build a Model.xls) and on the instructor’s side of the Harcourt College Publishers’ web site,
http://www.harcourtcollege.com/finance/theory.



28-7 a. DSOO = (0.60)(15) + (0.20)(30) + (0.20)(40) = 23 days.
DSON = (0.70)(10) + (0.15)(30) + (0.15)(40) = 17.5 days.

b. Old discounts = (0.60)(0.02)($1,000,000)(1 - 0.02) = $11,760.
New discounts = (0.70)(0.03)($1,200,000)(1 - 0.02) = $24,696.

Note that the discounts taken must include the term (1 - bad debt losses), otherwise the bad debt customers would also be credited with taking discounts.

c. = (DSO) .

Sales at $1 million:

= (23)($1,000,000/360)(0.75)(0.12) = $5,750.

Sales at $1.2 million:

= (17.5)($1,200,000/360)(0.75)(0.12) = $5,250.

d. Bad debt lossO = 0.02($1,000,000) = $20,000.
Bad debt lossN = 0.02($1,200,000) = $24,000.

e. Analysis of change:a

Projected Income Projected Income
Statement Effect of Statement
Under Current Credit Policy Under New
Credit Policy Change Credit Policy
Gross sales $1,000,000 +$200,000 $1,200,000
Less: Discounts 11,760 + 12,936 24,696
Net sales $ 988,240 +$187,064 $1,175,304
Variable costs 750,000 + 150,000 900,000
Profit before
credit costs
and taxes $ 238,240 +$ 37,064 $ 275,304
Credit-related costs:
Cost of carrying
receivables 5,750 - 500 5,250
Bad debt losses 20,000 + 4,000 24,000
Profit before taxes $ 212,490 +$ 33,564 $ 246,054
Taxes (40%) 84,996 + 13,426 98,422
Net income $ 127,494 +$ 20,138 $ 147,632

Since the net profits increased $20,138, it is profitable for the firm to change its credit policy.

aWe realize that the income statements in this problem, and other similar problems in this chapter, do not reflect any fixed costs, which the firm would most likely incur. Regardless, the change in net income does accurately reflect the credit policy change.

f. 1. Change in after-tax profit = +$7,836. It is profitable for the firm to change its credit policy even with sales at $1,100,000. At sales of $1,036,310, there is no effect; that is a break-even sales level.

2. Change in after-tax profit = +$18,199.

MINI CASE


Section I: Receivables Management
RICH JACKSON, A RECENT FINANCE GRADUATE, IS PLANNING TO GO INTO THE WHOLESALE BUILDING SUPPLY BUSINESS WITH HIS BROTHER, JIM, WHO MAJORED IN BUILDING CONSTRUCTION. THE FIRM WOULD SELL PRIMARILY TO GENERAL CONTRACTORS, AND IT WOULD START OPERATING NEXT JANUARY. SALES WOULD BE SLOW DURING THE COLD MONTHS, RISE DURING THE SPRING, AND THEN FALL OFF AGAIN IN THE SUMMER, WHEN NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE AREA SLOWS. SALES ESTIMATES FOR THE FIRST 6 MONTHS ARE AS FOLLOWS (IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS):

JAN $100
FEB 200
MAR 300
APR 300
MAY 200
JUN 100

THE TERMS OF SALE ARE NET 30, BUT BECAUSE OF SPECIAL INCENTIVES, THE BROTHERS EXPECT 30 PERCENT OF THE CUSTOMERS (BY DOLLAR VALUE) TO PAY ON THE 10TH DAY FOLLOWING THE SALE, 50 PERCENT TO PAY ON THE 40TH DAY, AND THE REMAINING 20 PERCENT TO PAY ON THE 70TH DAY. NO BAD DEBT LOSSES ARE EXPECTED, BECAUSE JIM, THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION EXPERT, KNOWS WHICH CONTRACTORS ARE HAVING FINANCIAL PROBLEMS.

A. ASSUME THAT, ON AVERAGE, THE BROTHERS EXPECT ANNUAL SALES OF 18,000 ITEMS AT AN AVERAGE PRICE OF $100 PER ITEM. (USE A 360-DAY YEAR.)

1. WHAT IS THE FIRM’S EXPECTED DAYS SALES OUTSTANDING (DSO)?

ANSWER: DAYS SALES OUTSTANDING = DSO = 0.3(10) + 0.5(40) + 0.2(70) = 37 DAYS, VS. 30-DA7 CREDIT PERIOD. ONE WOULD EXPECT SOME CUSTOMERS TO PAY SOMEWHAT SLOWLY, SO A 37-DAY DSO IS PROBABLY NOT TOO BAD.


A. 2. WHAT IS ITS EXPECTED AVERAGE DAILY SALES (ADS)?

ANSWER: AVERAGE DAILY SALES = ADS = = $5,000 PER DAY.
A. 3. WHAT IS ITS EXPECTED AVERAGE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE LEVEL?

ANSWER: ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE (A/R) = (DSO)(ADS) = 37($5,000) = $185,000. THUS, $185,000 OF RECEIVABLES ARE OUTSTANDING, AND THE FIRM MUST RAISE CAPITAL TO CARRY RECEIVABLES. IF COLLECTIONS COULD BE SPEEDED UP, AND DSO REDUCED, THEN A/R, AND HENCE THE REQUIRED FINANCING, WOULD BE REDUCED.


A. 4. ASSUME THAT THE FIRM=S PROFIT MARGIN IS 25 PERCENT. HOW MUCH OF THE RECEIVABLES BALANCE MUST BE FINANCED? WHAT WOULD THE FIRM’S BALANCE SHEET FIGURES FOR ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE, NOTES PAYABLE, AND RETAINED EARNINGS BE AT THE END OF ONE YEAR IF NOTES PAYABLE ARE USED TO FINANCE THE INVESTMENT IN RECEIVABLES? ASSUME THAT THE COST OF CARRYING RECEIVABLES HAD BEEN DEDUCTED WHEN THE 25 PERCENT PROFIT MARGIN WAS CALCULATED.

ANSWER: ALTHOUGH THE FIRM HAS $185,000 IN RECEIVABLES, THE ENTIRE AMOUNT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE FINANCED, SINCE 25 PERCENT OF THE SALES PRICE IS PROFIT. THIS MEANS THAT 75 PERCENT OF THE PRICE REPRESENTS COSTS OF MATERIALS, LABOR, RENT, UTILITIES, INSURANCE, AND SO ON. THUS, THE FIRM MUST FINANCE ONLY 0.75($185,000) = $138,750 OF THE RECEIVABLES BALANCE. DISREGARDING OTHER ASSETS AND LIABILITIES, ITS BALANCE SHEET WOULD LOOK LIKE THIS IF NOTES PAYABLE ARE USED TO FINANCE RECEIVABLES:

ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE $185,000 NOTES PAYABLE $138,750
RETAINED EARNINGS 46,250
$185,000


A. 5. IF BANK LOANS HAVE A COST OF 12 PERCENT, WHAT IS THE ANNUAL DOLLAR COST OF CARRYING THE RECEIVABLES?

ANSWER: COST OF CARRYING RECEIVABLES = 0.12($138,750) = $16,650. IN ADDITION, THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY COST ASSOCIATED WITH NOT HAVING THE USE OF THE PROFIT COMPONENT OF THE RECEIVABLES.


B. WHAT ARE SOME FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE (1) A FIRM'S RECEIVABLES LEVEL
AND (2) THE DOLLAR COST OF CARRYING RECEIVABLES?

ANSWER: 1. AS SHOWN IN QUESTION A.3. ABOVE, RECEIVABLES ARE A FUNCTION OF THE AVERAGE DAILY SALES AND THE DAYS SALES OUTSTANDING. EXOGENOUS ECONOMIC FACTORS SUCH AS THE STATE OF THE ECONOMY AND COMPETITION WITHIN THE INDUSTRY AFFECT AVERAGE DAILY SALES, BUT SO DOES THE FIRM'S CREDIT POLICY. THE DAYS SALES OUTSTANDING DEPENDS MAINLY ON CREDIT POLICY, ALTHOUGH POOR ECONOMIC CONDITIONS CAN LEAD TO A REDUCTION IN CUSTOMERS' ABILITY TO MAKE PAYMENTS.

2. FOR A GIVEN LEVEL OF RECEIVABLES, THE LOWER THE PROFIT MARGIN, THE HIGHER THE COST OF CARRYING RECEIVABLES, BECAUSE THE GREATER THE PORTION OF EACH SALES DOLLAR THAT MUST ACTUALLY BE FINANCED. SIMILARLY, THE HIGHER THE COST OF THE FINANCING, THE HIGHER THE DOLLAR COST OF CARRYING THE RECEIVABLES.


C. ASSUMING THAT THE MONTHLY SALES FORECASTS GIVEN PREVIOUSLY ARE ACCURATE, AND THAT CUSTOMERS PAY EXACTLY AS WAS PREDICTED, WHAT WOULD THE RECEIVABLES LEVEL BE AT THE END OF EACH MONTH? TO REDUCE CALCULATIONS, ASSUME THAT 30 PERCENT OF THE FIRM'S CUSTOMERS PAY IN THE MONTH OF SALE, 50 PERCENT PAY IN THE MONTH FOLLOWING THE SALE, AND THE REMAINING 20 PERCENT PAY IN THE SECOND MONTH FOLLOWING THE SALE. NOTE THAT THIS IS A DIFFERENT ASSUMPTION THAN WAS MADE EARLIER. USE THE FOLLOWING FORMAT TO ANSWER PARTS C AND D:

E.O.M. QUARTERLY DSO =
MONTH SALES A/R SALES ADS (A/R)/(ADS)
JAN $100 $ 70
FEB 200 160
MAR 300 250 $600 $6.67 37.5

APR 300
MAY 200
JUN 100

ANSWER: (NOTE: FROM THIS POINT ON, THE SOLUTIONS ARE EXPRESSED IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. ALSO, THE TABLE GIVEN BELOW IS DEVELOPED IN THE SOLUTIONS TO PARTS C AND D.)
AT THE END OF JANUARY, 30 PERCENT OF THE $100 IN SALES WILL HAVE BEEN COLLECTED, SO (1 - 0.3)($100) = 0.7($100) = $70 WILL REMAIN OUTSTANDING, THAT IS, IN THE RECEIVABLES ACCOUNT. AT THE END OF FEBRUARY, 30% + 50% = 80% OF JANUARY'S SALES WILL HAVE BEEN COLLECTED, SO RECEIVABLES ASSOCIATED WITH JANUARY SALES WILL BE (1 - 0.3 - 0.5)($100) = 0.2($100) = $20. OF FEBRUARY'S $200 IN SALES, 30 PERCENT WILL HAVE BEEN COLLECTED, SO 0.7($200) = $140 WILL REMAIN OUTSTANDING. THUS, THE RECEIVABLES BALANCE AT THE END OF FEBRUARY WILL BE $20 FROM JANUARY'S SALES PLUS $140 FROM FEBRUARY'S SALES, FOR A TOTAL OF $160.
BY THE END OF MARCH, ALL OF JANUARY'S SALES WILL HAVE BEEN COLLECTED, BUT 20 PERCENT OF FEBRUARY'S SALES AND 70 PERCENT OF MARCH'S SALES WILL STILL BE OUTSTANDING, SO RECEIVABLES WILL EQUAL 0.2($200) + 0.7($300) = $250. FOLLOWING THIS LOGIC, THE RECEIVABLES BALANCE AT THE END OF ANY MONTH CAN BE ESTIMATED AS FOLLOWS:

A/R = 0.7(SALES IN THAT MONTH) + 0.2(SALES IN PREVIOUS MONTH).

E.O.M. QUARTERLY DSO =
MONTH SALES A/R SALES ADS (A/R)/(ADS)
JAN $100 $ 70
FEB 200 160
MAR 300 250 $600 $6.67 37.5

APR $300 $270
MAY 200 200
JUN 100 110 $600 $6.67 16.5


D. WHAT IS THE FIRM'S FORECASTED AVERAGE DAILY SALES FOR THE FIRST 3 MONTHS? FOR THE ENTIRE HALF-YEAR? THE DAYS SALES OUTSTANDING IS COMMONLY USED TO MEASURE RECEIVABLES PERFORMANCE. WHAT DSO IS EXPECTED AT THE END OF MARCH? AT THE END OF JUNE? WHAT DOES THE DSO INDICATE ABOUT CUSTOMERS' PAYMENTS? IS DSO A GOOD MANAGEMENT TOOL IN THIS SITUATION? IF NOT, WHY NOT?

ANSWER: FOR THE FIRST QUARTER, SALES TOTALED $100 + $200 + $300 = $600, SO ADS = $600/90 = $6.67. ALTHOUGH THE SALES PATTERN IS DIFFERENT, ADS FOR THE SECOND QUARTER, AND HENCE FOR THE FULL HALF-YEAR, IS ALSO $6.67. NOTE THAT WE CAN REARRANGE THE FORMULA FOR RECEIVABLES AS FOLLOWS:

A/R = (DSO)(ADS)
DSO = .

MARCH: DSO = = 37.5 DAYS; JUNE: DSO = = 16.5 DAYS.

THUS, AT THE END OF MARCH, DSO = 37.5 DAYS, WHILE AT THE END OF JUNE, DSO = 16.5 DAYS.
LOOKING AT THE DSO, IT APPEARS THAT CUSTOMERS ARE PAYING SIGNIFICANTLY FASTER IN THE SECOND QUARTER THAN IN THE FIRST. HOWEVER, THE RECEIVABLES BALANCES WERE CREATED ASSUMING A CONSTANT PAYMENT PATTERN, SO THE DSO IS GIVING A FALSE MEASURE OF CUSTOMERS' PAYMENT PERFORMANCE. THE UNDERLYING CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM WITH THE DSO IS THE SEASONAL VARIABILITY IN SALES. IF THERE WERE NO SEASONAL PATTERN, AND HENCE SALES WERE A CONSTANT $200 EACH MONTH, THEN THE DSO WOULD BE 27 DAYS IN BOTH MARCH AND JUNE, INDICATING THAT CUSTOMERS' PAYMENT PATTERNS HAD REMAINED STEADY.


E. CONSTRUCT AGING SCHEDULES FOR THE END OF MARCH AND THE END OF JUNE (USE THE FORMAT GIVEN BELOW). DO THESE SCHEDULES PROPERLY MEASURE CUSTOMERS’ PAYMENT PATTERNS? IF NOT WHY NOT?

AGE OF ACCOUNT MARCH JUNE
(DAYS) A/R % A/R %
0 – 30 $210 84%
31 – 60 40 16
61 – 90 0 0
$250 100%

ANSWER: AGING SCHEDULE:

AGE OF ACCOUNT MARCH JUNE
(DAYS) A/R % A/R %
0 – 30 $210 MAR 84% $ 70 JUN 64%
31 – 60 40 FEB 16 40 MAY 36
61 – 90 0 JAN 0 APR 0
$250 100% $110 100

TO SEE HOW THESE AGING SCHEDULES WERE CONSTRUCTED, CONSIDER FIRST THE END-OF-MARCH SCHEDULE. AT THAT TIME, 30 PERCENT OF MARCH'S SALES HAD BEEN COLLECTED, SO 70 PERCENT REMAINED UNCOLLECTED: 0.7($300) = $210. FEBRUARY'S CONTRIBUTION TO RECEIVABLES IS 0.2($200) = $40. FINALLY, BY THE END OF MARCH, ALL OF JANUARY'S SALES HAD BEEN COLLECTED, SO NONE OF JANUARY'S SALES REMAINED OUTSTANDING. THUS, THE RECEIVABLES ACCOUNT TOTALS $250 AT THE END OF MARCH, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ANSWER TO PART C.
NOTE THAT THE END-OF-JUNE AGING SCHEDULE SUGGESTS THAT CUSTOMERS ARE PAYING MORE SLOWLY THAN IN THE EARLIER QUARTER. HOWEVER, WE KNOW THAT THE PAYMENT PATTERN HAS REMAINED CONSTANT, SO THE FIRM'S CUSTOMERS' PAYMENT PERFORMANCE HAS NOT CHANGED. AGAIN, A SEASONALLY FLUCTUATING SALES LEVEL IS THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM: AGING SCHEDULES GIVE INCORRECT SIGNALS IF SALES ARE TRENDING UP OR DOWN. IF SALES WERE A CONSTANT $200 IN EACH MONTH, THEN BOTH AGING SCHEDULES WOULD INDICATE THAT 78 PERCENT OF RECEIVABLES WERE 0 – 30 DAYS OLD AND 22 PERCENT WERE 31 - 60 DAYS OLD.


F. CONSTRUCT THE UNCOLLECTED BALANCES SCHEDULES FOR THE END OF MARCH AND THE END OF JUNE. USE THE FORMAT GIVEN BELOW. DO THESE SCHEDULES PROPERLY MEASURE CUSTOMERS' PAYMENT PATTERNS?

MARCH JUNE
CONTRIBUTION A/R-TO- CONTRIBUTION A/R-TO-
MONTH SALES TO A/R SALES RATIO MONTH SALES TO A/R SALES RATIO
JAN $100 $ 0 0% APR
FEB 200 40 20 MAY
MAR 300 210 70 JUN



ANSWER: UNCOLLECTED BALANCES SCHEDULES:

CONTRIBUTION TO RATIO OF MONTH'S
MONTH SALES END-OF-PERIOD A/R A/R TO MONTH’S SALES
(1) (2) (3) (4)
JAN $100 $ 0 0%
FEB 200 40 20
MAR 300 210 70
END OF QUARTER A/R $250 90%

APR $300 $ 0 0%
MAY 200 40 20
JUN 100 70 70
END OF QUARTER A/R $110 90%

IN COLUMN 3 ABOVE, THE CONTRIBUTION OF EACH MONTH'S SALES TO THE FIRM'S RECEIVABLES BALANCE IS IDENTIFIED. TO ILLUSTRATE, AT THE END OF MARCH, ALL OF JANUARY'S SALES HAD BEEN COLLECTED, BUT ONLY 80 PERCENT OF FEBRUARY'S SALES HAD BEEN COLLECTED, SO $40 REMAINED OUTSTANDING. SIMILARLY, 70 PERCENT OF MARCH'S SALES WERE STILL OUTSTANDING, SO MARCH'S CONTRIBUTION TO RECEIVABLES WAS 0.7($300) = $210.
THE FOCAL POINT OF THE UNCOLLECTED BALANCES SCHEDULE IS COLUMN 4, THE RECEIVABLES-TO-SALES RATIO. WHEN WE COMPARE MARCH AND JUNE, WE SEE NO DIFFERENCE, WHICH IS WHAT WE SHOULD SEE, GIVEN THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO CHANGE IN THE PAYMENT PATTERN. THUS, THE UNCOLLECTED BALANCES SCHEDULE GIVES A TRUE PICTURE OF CUSTOMERS' PAYMENT PATTERNS, EVEN WHEN SALES FLUCTUATE. NOTE ALSO (1) THAT ANY INCREASE IN COLUMN 4 FROM A MONTH IN ONE QUARTER TO THE CORRESPONDING MONTH IN THE NEXT QUARTER IS "BAD" IN THE SENSE THAT IT INDICATES A SLOWDOWN IN PAYMENTS, AND (2) THAT THE BOTTOM LINE GIVES A SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES IN PAYMENT PATTERNS.


G. ASSUME THAT IT IS NOW JULY OF YEAR 1, AND THE BROTHERS ARE DEVELOPING PRO FORMA FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR. FURTHER, ASSUME THAT SALES AND COLLECTIONS IN THE FIRST HALF-YEAR MATCHED THE PREDICTED LEVELS. USING THE YEAR 2 SALES FORECASTS AS SHOWN NEXT, WHAT ARE NEXT YEAR'S PRO FORMA RECEIVABLES LEVELS FOR THE END OF MARCH AND FOR THE END OF JUNE?

PREDICTED PREDICTED PREDICTED CONTRIBUTION
MONTH SALES A/R-TO-SALES RATIO TO RECEIVABLES
JAN $150 0% $ 0
FEB 300 20 60
MAR 500 70 350
PROJECTED MARCH 31 A/R BALANCE = $410

APR $400
MAY 300
JUN 200
PROJECTED JUNE 30 A/R BALANCE =

ANSWER: THE UNCOLLECTED BALANCES SCHEDULE CAN BE USED TO FORECAST THE PRO FORMA RECEIVABLES BALANCE. FOR FORECASTING, THE HISTORICAL RECEIVABLES-TO- SALES RATIOS ARE GENERALLY ASSUMED TO BE GOOD PREDICTORS OF FUTURE PAYMENT PATTERNS, AND HENCE ARE APPLIED TO THE SALES FORECASTS TO DEVELOP THE EXPECTED RECEIVABLES:

PREDICTED PREDICTED PREDICTED CONTRIBUTION
MONTH SALES A/R-TO-SALES RATIO TO RECEIVABLES
JAN $150 0% $ 0
FEB 300 20 60
MAR 500 70 350
PROJECTED MARCH 31 A/R BALANCE = $410

APR $400 0% $ 0
MAY 300 20 60
JUN 200 70 140
PROJECTED JUNE 30 A/R BALANCE = $200


H. ASSUME NOW THAT IT IS SEVERAL YEARS LATER. THE BROTHERS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE FIRM'S CURRENT CREDIT TERMS, WHICH ARE NOW NET 30, WHICH MEANS THAT CONTRACTORS BUYING BUILDING PRODUCTS FROM THE FIRM ARE NOT OFFERED A DISCOUNT, AND THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO PAY THE FULL AMOUNT IN 30 DAYS. GROSS SALES ARE NOW RUNNING $1,000,000 A YEAR, AND 80 PERCENT (BY DOLLAR VOLUME) OF THE FIRM'S PAYING CUSTOMERS GENERALLY PAY THE FULL AMOUNT ON DAY 30, WHILE THE OTHER 20 PERCENT PAY, ON AVERAGE, ON DAY 40. TWO PERCENT OF THE FIRM'S GROSS SALES END UP AS BAD DEBT LOSSES.
BROTHERS ARE NOW CONSIDERING A CHANGE IN THE FIRM'S CREDIT POLICY. THE CHANGE WOULD ENTAIL (1) CHANGING THE CREDIT TERMS TO 2/10, NET 20, (2) EMPLOYING STRICTER CREDIT STANDARDS BEFORE GRANTING CREDIT, AND (3) ENFORCING COLLECTIONS WITH GREATER VIGOR THAN IN THE PAST. THUS, CASH CUSTOMERS AND THOSE PAYING WITHIN 10 DAYS WOULD RECEIVE A 2 PERCENT DISCOUNT, BUT ALL OTHERS WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE FULL AMOUNT AFTER ONLY 20 DAYS. THE BROTHERS BELIEVE THAT THE DISCOUNT WOULD BOTH ATTRACT ADDITIONAL CUSTOMERS AND ENCOURAGE SOME EXISTING CUSTOMERS TO PURCHASE MORE FROM THE FIRM--AFTER ALL, THE DISCOUNT AMOUNTS TO A PRICE REDUCTION. OF COURSE, THESE CUSTOMERS WOULD TAKE THE DISCOUNT AND, HENCE, WOULD PAY IN ONLY 10 DAYS. THE NET EXPECTED RESULT IS FOR SALES TO INCREASE TO $1,100,000; FOR 60 PERCENT OF THE PAYING CUSTOMERS TO TAKE THE DISCOUNT AND PAY ON THE 10TH DAY; FOR 30 PERCENT TO PAY THE FULL AMOUNT ON DAY 20; FOR 10 PERCENT TO PAY LATE ON DAY 30; AND FOR BAD DEBT LOSSES TO FALL FROM 2 PERCENT TO 1 PERCENT OF GROSS SALES.
THE FIRM'S OPERATING COST RATIO WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED AT 75 PERCENT, AND ITS COST OF CARRYING RECEIVABLES WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED AT 12 PERCENT.
TO BEGIN THE ANALYSIS, DESCRIBE THE FOUR VARIABLES WHICH MAKE UP A FIRM'S CREDIT POLICY, AND EXPLAIN HOW EACH OF THEM AFFECTS SALES AND COLLECTIONS. THEN USE THE INFORMATION GIVEN IN PART H TO ANSWER PARTS I THROUGH N.

ANSWER: THE FOUR VARIABLES WHICH MAKE UP A FIRM'S CREDIT POLICY ARE (1) THE DISCOUNT OFFERED, INCLUDING THE AMOUNT AND PERIOD; (2) THE CREDIT PERIOD; (3) THE CREDIT STANDARDS USED WHEN DETERMINING WHO SHALL RECEIVE CREDIT, AND HOW MUCH CREDIT; AND (4) THE COLLECTION POLICY.
CASH DISCOUNTS GENERALLY PRODUCE TWO BENEFITS: (1) THEY ATTRACT BOTH NEW CUSTOMERS AND EXPANDED SALES FROM CURRENT CUSTOMERS, BECAUSE PEOPLE VIEW DISCOUNTS AS A PRICE REDUCTION, AND (2) DISCOUNTS CAUSE A REDUCTION IN THE DAYS SALES OUTSTANDING, SINCE BOTH NEW CUSTOMERS AND SOME ESTABLISHED CUSTOMERS WILL PAY MORE PROMPTLY IN ORDER TO GET THE DISCOUNT. OF COURSE, THESE BENEFITS ARE OFFSET TO SOME DEGREE BY THE DOLLAR COST OF THE DISCOUNTS THEMSELVES.
THE CREDIT PERIOD IS THE LENGTH OF TIME ALLOWED TO ALL "QUALIFIED" CUSTOMERS TO PAY FOR THEIR PURCHASES. IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR CREDIT IN THE FIRST PLACE, CUSTOMERS MUST MEET THE FIRM'S CREDIT STANDARDS. THESE DICTATE THE MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE FINANCIAL POSITION REQUIRED OF CUSTOMERS TO RECEIVE CREDIT. ALSO, A FIRM MAY IMPOSE DIFFERING CREDIT LIMITS DEPENDING ON THE CUSTOMER'S FINANCIAL STRENGTH AS JUDGED BY THE CREDIT DEPARTMENT.
FINALLY, COLLECTION POLICY REFERS TO THE PROCEDURES THAT THE FIRM FOLLOWS TO COLLECT PAST-DUE ACCOUNTS. THESE CAN RANGE FROM A SIMPLE LETTER OR PHONE CALL TO TURNING THE ACCOUNT OVER TO A COLLECTION AGENCY.
HOW THE FIRM HANDLES EACH ELEMENT OF CREDIT POLICY WILL HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON SALES, SPEED OF COLLECTIONS, AND BAD DEBT LOSSES. THE OBJECT IS TO BE TOUGH ENOUGH TO GET TIMELY PAYMENTS AND TO MINIMIZE BAD DEBT LOSSES, YET NOT TO CREATE ILL WILL AND THUS LOSE CUSTOMERS.


I. UNDER THE CURRENT CREDIT POLICY, WHAT IS THE FIRM'S DAYS SALES OUTSTANDING (DSO)? WHAT WOULD THE EXPECTED DSO BE IF THE CREDIT POLICY CHANGE WERE MADE?

ANSWER: OLD (CURRENT) SITUATION: DSO0 = 0.8(30) + 0.2(40) = 32 DAYS. NEW SITUATION: DSON = 0.6(10) + 0.3(20) + 0.1(30) = 15 DAYS. THUS, THE NEW CREDIT POLICY IS EXPECTED TO CUT THE DSO IN HALF.


J. WHAT IS THE DOLLAR AMOUNT OF THE FIRM'S CURRENT BAD DEBT LOSSES? WHAT LOSSES WOULD BE EXPECTED UNDER THE NEW POLICY?

ANSWER: OLD (CURRENT) SITUATION: BDLO = 0.02($1,000,000) = $20,000. NEW SITUATION: BDLN = 0.01($1,100,000) = $11,000. THUS, THE NEW POLICY IS EXPECTED TO CUT BAD DEBT LOSSES SHARPLY.


K. WHAT WOULD BE THE FIRM'S EXPECTED DOLLAR COST OF GRANTING DISCOUNTS UNDER THE NEW POLICY?

ANSWER: CURRENT SITUATION: UNDER THE CURRENT, NO DISCOUNT POLICY, THE COST OF DISCOUNTS IS $0.
NEW SITUATION: OF THE $1,100,000 GROSS SALES EXPECTED UNDER THE NEW POLICY, 1 PERCENT IS LOST TO BAD DEBTS, SO GOOD SALES = 0.99($1,100,000) = $1,089,000. SINCE 60 PERCENT OF THE GOOD SALES ARE DISCOUNT SALES, DISCOUNT SALES = 0.6($1,089,000) = $653,400. FINALLY, THE DISCOUNT IS 2 PERCENT, SO THE COST OF DISCOUNTS IS EXPECTED TO BE 0.02($653,400) = $13,068.


L. WHAT IS THE FIRM'S CURRENT DOLLAR COST OF CARRYING RECEIVABLES? WHAT WOULD IT BE AFTER THE PROPOSED CHANGE?

ANSWER: CURRENT SITUATION: THE FIRM'S AVERAGE DAILY SALES CURRENTLY AMOUNT TO $1,000,000/360 = $2,777.78. THE DSO IS 32 DAYS, SO ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AMOUNT TO 32($2,777.78) = $88,889. HOWEVER, ONLY 75 PERCENT OF THIS TOTAL REPRESENTS CASH COSTS--THE REMAINDER IS PROFIT--SO THE INVESTMENT IN RECEIVABLES (THE ACTUAL AMOUNT THAT MUST BE FINANCED) IS 0.75($88,889) = $66,667. AT A COST OF 12 PERCENT, THE ANNUAL COST OF CARRYING THE RECEIVABLES IS 0.12($66,667) = $8,000.
NEW SITUATION: THE COST OF CARRYING THE RECEIVABLES BALANCE UNDER THE NEW POLICY WOULD BE $4,125:

($1,100,000/360)(15)(0.75)(0.12) = $4,125.
M. WHAT IS THE INCREMENTAL AFTER-TAX PROFIT ASSOCIATED WITH THE CHANGE IN CREDIT TERMS? SHOULD THE COMPANY MAKE THE CHANGE? (ASSUME A TAX RATE OF 40 PERCENT.)

NEW OLD DIFFERENCE
GROSS SALES $1,000,000
LESS DISCOUNTS 0
NET SALES $1,000,000
PRODUCTION COSTS 750,000
PROFIT BEFORE CREDIT
COSTS AND TAXES $ 250,000
CREDIT-RELATED COSTS:
CARRYING COSTS 8,000
BAD DEBT LOSSES 20,000
PROFIT BEFORE TAXES $ 222,000
TAXES (40%) 88,800
NET INCOME $ 133,200


ANSWER: THE INCOME STATEMENTS AND DIFFERENTIALS UNDER THE TWO CREDIT POLICIES ARE SHOWN BELOW:

NEW OLD DIFFERENCE
GROSS SALES $1,100,000 $1,000,000 $100,000
LESS DISCOUNTS 13,068 0 13,068
NET SALES $1,086,932 $1,000,000 $ 86,932
PRODUCTION COSTS 825,000 750,000 75,000
PROFIT BEFORE CREDIT
COSTS AND TAXES $ 261,932 $ 250,000 $ 11,932
CREDIT-RELATED COSTS:
CARRYING COSTS 4,125 8,000 (3,875)
BAD DEBT LOSSES 11,000 20,000 (9,000)
PROFIT BEFORE TAXES $ 246,807 $ 222,000 $ 24,807
TAXES (40%) 98,723 88,800 9,923
NET INCOME $ 148,084 $ 133,200 $ 14,884

THUS, IF EXPECTATIONS ARE MET, THE CREDIT POLICY CHANGE WOULD INCREASE THE FIRM'S ANNUAL AFTER-TAX PROFIT BY $14,884. SINCE THERE ARE NO NON-CASH EXPENSES INVOLVED HERE, THE $14,884 IS ALSO THE INCREMENTAL CASH FLOW EXPECTED UNDER THE NEW POLICY.
HOWEVER, THE NEW POLICY IS NOT RISKLESS. IF THE FIRM'S CUSTOMERS DO NOT REACT AS PREDICTED, THEN THE FIRM'S PROFITS COULD ACTUALLY DECREASE AS A RESULT OF THE CHANGE. THE AMOUNT OF RISK INVOLVED IN THE DECISION DEPENDS ON THE UNCERTAINTY INHERENT IN THE ESTIMATES, ESPECIALLY THE SALES ESTIMATE. TYPICALLY, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO PREDICT CUSTOMERS' RESPONSES TO CREDIT POLICY CHANGES. FURTHER, A CREDIT POLICY CHANGE MAY PROMPT THE COMPANY'S COMPETITORS TO CHANGE THEIR OWN CREDIT TERMS, AND THIS COULD OFFSET THE EXPECTED INCREASE IN SALES. THUS, THE FINAL DECISION IS JUDGMENTAL. IF THE PROSPECT OF AN ANNUAL $14,884 INCREASE IN NET INCOME IS SUFFICIENT TO COMPENSATE FOR THE RISKS INVOLVED, THEN THE CHANGE SHOULD BE MADE. (NOTE: LARGE, NATIONAL COMPANIES OFTEN MAKE CREDIT POLICY CHANGES IN A GIVEN REGION IN AN EFFORT TO DETERMINE HOW CUSTOMERS AND COMPETITORS WILL REACT, AND THEN USE THE INFORMATION GAINED WHEN SETTING NATIONAL POLICY. NOTE ALSO THAT CREDIT POLICY CHANGES MAY NOT BE ANNOUNCED IN A "BROADCAST" SENSE SO AS TO SLOW DOWN COMPETITORS' REACTIONS.)


N. SUPPOSE THE FIRM MAKES THE CHANGE, BUT ITS COMPETITORS REACT BY MAKING SIMILAR CHANGES TO THEIR OWN CREDIT TERMS, WITH THE NET RESULT BEING THAT GROSS SALES REMAIN AT THE CURRENT $1,000,000 LEVEL. WHAT WOULD THE IMPACT BE ON THE FIRM'S POST-TAX PROFITABILITY?

ANSWER: IF SALES REMAIN AT $1,000,000 AFTER THE CHANGE IS MADE, THEN THE FOLLOWING SITUATION WOULD EXIST:

GROSS SALES $1,000,000
LESS DISCOUNTS 11,880
NET SALES $ 988,120
PRODUCTION COSTS 750,000
PROFIT BEFORE CREDIT
COSTS AND TAXES $ 238,120
CREDIT COSTS:
CARRYING COSTS 3,750
BAD DEBT LOSSES 10,000
PROFIT BEFORE TAXES $ 224,370
TAXES (40%) 89,748
NET INCOME $ 134,622

UNDER THE OLD TERMS THE NET INCOME WAS $133,200, SO THE POLICY CHANGE WOULD RESULT IN A SLIGHT INCREMENTAL GAIN OF $134,622 - $133,200 = $1,422.



Section II: Inventory Management
ANDRIA MULLINS, FINANCIAL MANAGER OF WEBSTER ELECTRONICS, HAS BEEN ASKED BY THE FIRM'S CEO, FRED WEYGANDT, TO EVALUATE THE COMPANY'S INVENTORY CONTROL TECHNIQUES AND TO LEAD A DISCUSSION OF THE SUBJECT WITH THE SENIOR EXECUTIVES. ANDRIA PLANS TO USE AS AN EXAMPLE ONE OF WEBSTER'S "BIG TICKET" ITEMS, A CUSTOMIZED COMPUTER MICROCHIP WHICH THE FIRM USES IN ITS LAPTOP COMPUTER. EACH CHIP COSTS WEBSTER $200, AND IN ADDITION IT MUST PAY ITS SUPPLIER A $1,000 SETUP FEE ON EACH ORDER. FURTHER, THE MINIMUM ORDER SIZE IS 250 UNITS; WEBSTER'S ANNUAL USAGE FORECAST IS 5,000 UNITS; AND THE ANNUAL CARRYING COST OF THIS ITEM IS ESTIMATED TO BE 20 PERCENT OF THE AVERAGE INVENTORY VALUE.
ANDRIA PLANS TO BEGIN HER SESSION WITH THE SENIOR EXECUTIVES BY REVIEWING SOME BASIC INVENTORY CONCEPTS, AFTER WHICH SHE WILL APPLY THE EOQ MODEL TO WEBSTER'S MICROCHIP INVENTORY. AS HER ASSISTANT, YOU HAVE BEEN ASKED TO HELP HER BY ANSWERING THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

A. WHY IS INVENTORY MANAGEMENT VITAL TO THE FINANCIAL HEALTH OF MOST FIRMS?

ANSWER: INVENTORY MANAGEMENT IS CRITICAL TO THE FINANCIAL SUCCESS OF MOST FIRMS. IF INSUFFICIENT INVENTORIES ARE CARRIED, A FIRM WILL LOSE SALES. CONVERSELY, IF EXCESS INVENTORIES ARE CARRIED, A FIRM WILL INCUR HIGHER COSTS THAN NECESSARY. WORST OF ALL, IF A FIRM CARRIES LARGE INVENTORIES, BUT OF THE WRONG ITEMS, IT WILL INCUR HIGH COSTS AND STILL LOSE SALES.


B. WHAT ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLIE THE EOQ MODEL?

ANSWER: THE STANDARD FORM OF THE EOQ MODEL REQUIRES THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS:

ALL VALUES ARE KNOWN WITH CERTAINTY AND CONSTANT OVER TIME.

INVENTORY USAGE IS UNIFORM OVER TIME. FOR EXAMPLE, A RETAILER WOULD SELL THE SAME NUMBER OF UNITS EACH DAY.

ALL CARRYING COSTS ARE VARIABLE, SO CARRYING COSTS CHANGE PROPOR-TIONALLY WITH CHANGES IN INVENTORY LEVELS.

ALL ORDERING COSTS ARE FIXED PER ORDER; THAT IS, THE COMPANY PAYS A FIXED AMOUNT TO ORDER AND RECEIVE EACH SHIPMENT OF INVENTORY, REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF UNITS ORDERED.
THESE ASSUMED CONDITIONS ARE NOT MET IN THE REAL WORLD, AND, AS A RESULT, SAFETY STOCKS ARE CARRIED, AND THESE STOCKS RAISE AVERAGE INVENTORY HOLDINGS ABOVE THE AMOUNTS THAT RESULT FROM THE "PURE" EOQ MODEL.


C. WRITE OUT THE FORMULA FOR THE TOTAL COSTS OF CARRYING AND ORDERING INVENTORY, AND THEN USE THE FORMULA TO DERIVE THE EOQ MODEL.

ANSWER: UNDER THE ASSUMPTIONS LISTED ABOVE, TOTAL INVENTORY COSTS (TIC) CAN BE EXPRESSED AS FOLLOWS:

TIC = TOTAL CARRYING COSTS + TOTAL ORDERING COSTS = CP(Q/2) + F(S/Q) (1)

HERE,

C = ANNUAL CARRYING COST AS A PERCENTAGE OF INVENTORY VALUE.
P = PURCHASE PRICE PER UNIT.
Q = NUMBER OF UNITS IN EACH ORDER.
F = FIXED COSTS PER ORDER.
S = ANNUAL USAGE IN UNITS.

NOTE THAT S/Q IS THE NUMBER OF ORDERS PLACED EACH YEAR, AND, IF NO SAFETY STOCKS ARE CARRIED, Q/2 IS THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF UNITS CARRIED IN INVENTORY DURING THE YEAR.
THE ECONOMIC (OPTIMAL) ORDER QUANTITY (EOQ) IS THAT ORDER QUANTITY WHICH MINIMIZES TOTAL INVENTORY COSTS. THUS, WE HAVE A STANDARD OPTIMIZATION PROBLEM, AND THE SOLUTION IS TO TAKE THE FIRST DERIVATIVE OF EQUATION 1 WITH RESPECT TO QUANTITY AND SET IT EQUAL TO ZERO:

.

NOW, SOLVING FOR Q, WE OBTAIN:


D. WHAT IS THE EOQ FOR CUSTOM MICROCHIPS? WHAT ARE TOTAL INVENTORY COSTS IF THE EOQ IS ORDERED?

ANSWER: EOQ = = = = 500 units.

WHEN 500 UNITS ARE ORDERED EACH TIME AN ORDER IS PLACED, TOTAL INVENTORY COSTS EQUAL $20,000:

TIC = CP(Q/2) + F(S/Q)
= 0.2($200)(500/2) + $1,000(5,000/500)
= $40(250) + $1,000(10) = $10,000 + $10,000 = $20,000.

NOTE THAT THE AVERAGE INVENTORY OF CUSTOM MICROCHIPS IS 250 UNITS, AND THAT 10 ORDERS ARE PLACED PER YEAR. ALSO, AT THE EOQ LEVEL, TOTAL CARRYING COSTS EQUAL TOTAL ORDERING COSTS.


E. WHAT IS WEBSTER'S ADDED COST IF IT ORDERS 400 UNITS AT A TIME RATHER THAN THE EOQ QUANTITY? WHAT IF IT ORDERS 600 PER ORDER?

ANSWER: 400 UNITS:

TIC = CP(Q/2) + F(S/Q) = 0.2($200)(400/2) + $1,000(5,000/400)
= $8,000 + $12,500 = $20,500.

ADDED COST = $20,500 - $20,000 = $500.

600 UNITS:

TIC = 0.2($200)(600/2) + $1,000(5,000/600)
= $12,000 + $8,333 = $20,333.

ADDED COST = $20,333 - $20,000 = $333.

NOTE THE FOLLOWING POINTS:

AT ANY ORDER QUANTITY OTHER THAN EOQ = 500 UNITS, TOTAL INVENTORY COSTS ARE HIGHER THAN THEY NEED BE.

THE ADDED COST OF NOT ORDERING THE EOQ AMOUNT IS NOT LARGE IF THE QUANTITY ORDERED IS CLOSE TO THE EOQ. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE ORDER SIZE IS 20 PERCENT ABOVE THE EOQ (600 UNITS), TIC INCREASES BY ONLY $333/$20,000 = 1.67%.

IF THE QUANTITY ORDERED IS LESS THAN THE EOQ, THEN TOTAL CARRYING COSTS DECREASE, BUT TOTAL ORDERING COSTS INCREASE. AT Q = 400 UNITS, CARRYING COSTS FALL BY $2,000 PER YEAR, BUT ORDERING COSTS INCREASE BY $2,500. THE NET RESULT IS AN INCREASE IN TOTAL COSTS.

IF THE QUANTITY ORDERED IS GREATER THAN THE EOQ, THEN TOTAL CARRYING COSTS INCREASE, BUT TOTAL ORDERING COSTS DECREASE. AT Q = 600 UNITS, CARRYING COSTS INCREASE BY $2,000, BUT ORDERING COSTS FALL BY ONLY $1,667, SO THE NET RESULT IS AN INCREASE IN TOTAL COSTS.


F. SUPPOSE IT TAKES 2 WEEKS FOR WEBSTER'S SUPPLIER TO SET UP PRODUCTION, MAKE AND TEST THE CHIPS, AND DELIVER THEM TO WEBSTER'S PLANT. ASSUMING CERTAINTY IN DELIVERY TIMES AND USAGE, AT WHAT INVENTORY LEVEL SHOULD WEBSTER REORDER? (ASSUME A 52-WEEK YEAR, AND ASSUME THAT WEBSTER ORDERS THE EOQ AMOUNT.)

ANSWER: WITH AN ANNUAL USAGE OF 5,000 UNITS, WEBSTER'S WEEKLY USAGE RATE IS 5,000/52 » 96 UNITS. IF THE ORDER LEAD TIME IS 2 WEEKS, THEN WEBSTER MUST REORDER EACH TIME ITS INVENTORY REACHES 2(96) = 192 UNITS. THEN, AFTER 2 WEEKS, AS IT USES ITS LAST MICROCHIP, THE NEW ORDER OF 500 CHIPS ARRIVES.


G. OF COURSE, THERE IS UNCERTAINTY IN WEBSTER'S USAGE RATE AS WELL AS IN DELIVERY TIMES, SO THE COMPANY MUST CARRY A SAFETY STOCK TO AVOID RUNNING OUT OF CHIPS AND HAVING TO HALT PRODUCTION. IF A 200-UNIT SAFETY STOCK IS CARRIED, WHAT EFFECT WOULD THIS HAVE ON TOTAL INVENTORY COSTS? WHAT IS THE NEW REORDER POINT? WHAT PROTECTION DOES THE SAFETY STOCK PROVIDE IF USAGE INCREASES, OR IF DELIVERY IS DELAYED?

ANSWER: THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO VIEW THE IMPACT OF SAFETY STOCKS ON TOTAL INVENTORY COSTS. WEBSTER'S TOTAL COST OF CARRYING THE OPERATING INVENTORY IS $20,000 (SEE PART D). NOW THE COST OF CARRYING AN ADDITIONAL 200 UNITS IS CP(SAFETY STOCK) = 0.2($200)(200) = $8,000. THUS, TOTAL INVENTORY COSTS ARE INCREASED BY $8,000, FOR A TOTAL OF $20,000 + $8,000 = $28,000.
ANOTHER APPROACH IS TO RECOGNIZE THAT, WITH A 200-UNIT SAFETY STOCK, WEBSTER'S AVERAGE INVENTORY IS NOW (500/2) + 200 = 450 UNITS. THUS, ITS TOTAL INVENTORY COST, INCLUDING SAFETY STOCK, IS $28,000:

TIC = CP(AVERAGE INVENTORY) + F(S/Q)
= 0.2($200)(450) + $1,000(5,000/500) = $18,000 + $10,000 = $28,000.

WEBSTER MUST STILL REORDER WHEN THE OPERATING INVENTORY REACHES 192 UNITS. HOWEVER, WITH A SAFETY STOCK OF 200 UNITS IN ADDITION TO THE OPERATING INVENTORY, THE REORDER POINT BECOMES 200 + 192 = 392 UNITS. SINCE WEBSTER WILL REORDER WHEN ITS MICROCHIP INVENTORY REACHES 392 UNITS, AND SINCE THE EXPECTED DELIVERY TIME IS 2 WEEKS, WEBSTER'S NORMAL 96 UNIT USAGE COULD RISE TO 392/2 = 196 UNITS PER WEEK OVER THE 2-WEEK DELIVERY PERIOD WITHOUT CAUSING A STOCKOUT. SIMILARLY, IF USAGE REMAINS AT THE EXPECTED 96 UNITS PER WEEK, WEBSTER COULD OPERATE FOR 392/96 » 4 WEEKS VERSUS THE NORMAL TWO WEEKS WHILE AWAITING DELIVERY OF AN ORDER.


H. NOW SUPPOSE WEBSTER'S SUPPLIER OFFERS A DISCOUNT OF 1 PERCENT ON ORDERS OF 1,000 OR MORE. SHOULD WEBSTER TAKE THE DISCOUNT? WHY OR WHY NOT?

ANSWER: FIRST, NOTE THAT SINCE THE DISCOUNT WILL ONLY AFFECT THE ORDERS FOR THE OPERATING INVENTORY, THE DISCOUNT DECISION NEED NOT TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE SAFETY STOCK. WEBSTER'S CURRENT TOTAL COST OF ITS OPERATING INVENTORY IS $20,000 (SEE PART D). IF WEBSTER INCREASES ITS ORDER QUANTITY TO 1,000 UNITS, THEN ITS TOTAL COSTS FOR THE OPERATING INVENTORY WOULD BE $24,800:

TIC = CP(Q/2) + F(S/Q)
= 0.2($198)(1,000/2) + $1,000(5,000/1,000) = $19,800 + $5,000
= $24,800.

NOTE THAT WE HAVE REDUCED THE UNIT PRICE BY THE AMOUNT OF THE DISCOUNT. SINCE TOTAL COSTS ARE $24,800 IF WEBSTER ORDERS 1,000 CHIPS AT A TIME, THE INCREMENTAL ANNUAL COST OF TAKING THE DISCOUNT IS $24,800 - $20,000 = $4,800. HOWEVER, WEBSTER WOULD SAVE 1 PERCENT ON EACH CHIP, FOR A TOTAL ANNUAL SAVINGS OF 0.01($200)(5,000) = $10,000. THUS, THE NET EFFECT IS THAT WEBSTER WOULD SAVE $10,000 - $4,800 = $5,200 IF IT TAKES THE DISCOUNT, AND HENCE IT SHOULD DO SO.


I. FOR MANY FIRMS, INVENTORY USAGE IS NOT UNIFORM THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, BUT, RATHER, FOLLOWS SOME SEASONAL PATTERN. CAN THE EOQ MODEL BE USED IN THIS SITUATION? IF SO, HOW?

ANSWER: THE EOQ MODEL CAN STILL BE USED IF THERE ARE SEASONAL VARIATIONS IN USAGE, BUT IT MUST BE APPLIED TO SHORTER PERIODS DURING WHICH USAGE IS APPROXIMATELY CONSTANT. FOR EXAMPLE, ASSUME THAT THE USAGE RATE IS CONSTANT, BUT DIFFERENT, DURING THE SUMMER AND WINTER PERIODS. THE EOQ MODEL COULD BE APPLIED SEPARATELY, USING THE APPROPRIATE ANNUAL USAGE RATE, TO EACH PERIOD, AND DURING THE TRANSITIONAL FALL AND SPRING SEASONS INVENTORIES WOULD BE EITHER RUN DOWN OR BUILT UP WITH SPECIAL SEASONAL ORDERS.


J. HOW WOULD THESE FACTORS AFFECT AN EOQ ANALYSIS?

1. THE USE OF JUST-IN-TIME PROCEDURES.

ANSWER: JUST-IN-TIME PROCEDURES ARE DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY TO REDUCE INVENTORIES. IF A JUST IN TIME SYSTEM WERE PUT IN PLACE, IT WOULD LARGELY OBVIATE THE NEED FOR USING THE EOQ MODEL.


J. 2. THE USE OF AIR FREIGHT FOR DELIVERIES.

ANSWER: AIR FREIGHT WOULD PRESUMABLY SHORTEN DELIVERY TIMES AND REDUCE THE NEED FOR SAFETY STOCKS. IT MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT AFFECT THE EOQ.


J. 3. THE USE OF A COMPUTERIZED INVENTORY CONTROL SYSTEM, WHEREIN AS UNITS WERE REMOVED FROM STOCK, AN ELECTRONIC SYSTEM AUTOMATICALLY REDUCED THE INVENTORY ACCOUNT AND, WHEN THE ORDER POINT WAS HIT, AUTOMATICALLY SENT AN ELECTRONIC MESSAGE TO THE SUPPLIER PLACING AN ORDER. THE ELECTRONIC SYSTEM ENSURES THAT INVENTORY RECORDS ARE ACCURATE, AND THAT ORDERS ARE PLACED PROMPTLY.
ANSWER: COMPUTERIZED CONTROL SYSTEMS WOULD, GENERALLY, ENABLE THE COMPANY TO KEEP BETTER TRACK OF ITS EXISTING INVENTORY. THIS WOULD PROBABLY REDUCE SAFETY STOCKS, AND IT MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT AFFECT THE EOQ.


J. 4. THE MANUFACTURING PLANT IS REDESIGNED AND AUTOMATED. COMPUTERIZED PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND STATE-OF-THE-ART ROBOTICS ARE INSTALLED, MAKING THE PLANT HIGHLY FLEXIBLE IN THE SENSE THAT THE COMPANY CAN SWITCH FROM THE PRODUCTION OF ONE ITEM TO ANOTHER AT A MINIMUM COST AND QUITE QUICKLY. THIS MAKES SHORT PRODUCTION RUNS MORE FEASIBLE THAN UNDER THE OLD PLANT SETUP.

ANSWER: THE TREND IN MANUFACTURING IS TOWARD FLEXIBLY DESIGNED PLANTS, WHICH PERMIT SMALL PRODUCTION RUNS WITHOUT HIGH SETUP COSTS. THIS REDUCES INVENTORY HOLDINGS OF FINAL GOODS.