Asset Management Parts Inventory Turnover in Days is higher than the industry average as a large proportion of parts must still be sourced from Asia due to lack of North American suppliers. Transportation raises the cost, and additional stock must be carried to guard against interruptions in the longer supply chain. This should improve in the future as the more local suppliers are developed and JIT principles are applied. WP Inventory Turnover in days is lower than industry average due to the modern, highly automated assembly line. FG Inventory Turnover in days is much lower than industry average due to the flexible nature of the assembly lines that allows it to quickly switch between the products. Also inventory can be delivered quickly …show more content…
Expanding into the production of home, auto and personal (MP3) sound system or licensing their technology to other manufacture may be an option. The acquisition of Bose, a privately held U.S. company, should be considered.
Exhibit TN-1 RATIO TABLE 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Industry Average 2.84 0.05 32.26 7.89 188.33 30.44 66.11 192.81 2.42 1.00 0.50
Current ratio Cash Ratio Parts Inventory Turnover in Days WP Inventory Turnover in Days FG Inventory Turnover in Days A/R Turnover in Days A/P Turnover in Days Cash Conversion Cycle Fixed Assets Turnover Total assets Turnover Debt Ratio LT Debt total Capitalization Times Interest Earned Cash Flow Coverage Gross profit Margin Operating profit Margin Net Profit Margin Return on Assets Return on Equity
2.22 0.54 69.91 7.39 99.07 54.00 116.51 113.84 3.01 1.03 0.63 0.54 6.32 1.49 38.21% 15.70% 8.59% 10.50% 23.85%
2.34 0.58 71.03 5.31 112.33 51.17 118.39 121.45 6.66 1.23 0.70 0.61 6.87 1.67 42.37% 18.46% 10.25% 14.81% 41.85%
2.68 0.75 69.69 4.83 105.26 50.56 94.69 135.65 6.58 1.24 0.71 0.64 4.84 1.30 41.97% 16.13% 8.32% 12.99% 35.22%
2.52 0.63 49.19 3.50 74.31 39.83 69.86 96.97 5.34 1.46 0.65 0.57 5.73 1.47 35.22% 13.06% 7.01% 12.42% 29.41%
2.56 0.60 48.86 3.64 73.43 40.16 63.63 102.47 4.06 1.37 0.63 0.56 4.63 1.25 34.33% 11.19% 5.70% 9.98% 21.17%
3.21
38.00% 7.41% 3.32% 2.16%
For problems requiring computations, please ensure that your Excel file includes the associated cell computations and/or statistics output; this information is needed in order to receive full credit on these
b. It should be split between the right and left tails, with .025 appearing in each tail.
Therefore, the arithmetic mean is not useful for evaluating distributions. Conversely, the expected value 14.69 calculated above is an average possible outcome and is weighted by probability, and is a more accurate tool in evaluating
7. The data set for this problem can be found through the Pearson Materials in the Student Textbook Resource Access link,
2 3 175 0.080 951 0.43 195 245 658 335 170 3.4 0.9 57.0 9.2 0.21 61.4 1,718 530 1.1 2,520 92,000 583 14 22 6 19 15 927 765 12,280 22
7.5 7.5 5 6 6 8 7.5 9 8 10 10.5 10 10 10 12 11 11 10 12 12
stuck at 15% (Dorning, 2012), and for children it is 21% (NCCP, 2012). Stated a different way
| | | |Geometric Mean |5.07619 |Percentile 75% (Q2) |7. | | | |Harmonic Mean |4.53768 |IQR |3.
From the data obtained from the survey, we have identified 50 non users and 39 users. Thus substituting n1= 52 and n2=39, Y1= - 1.029 and Y2= 1.373, we get C to be 0.34357.
The test was done several times, I have rewritten my results into a clearer table, this can bee seen on a the next separate sheet.
0.18 0.23 0.23 0.27 0.28 0.3 0.3 0.31 0.31 0.34 0.35 0.39 0.42 0.45 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
(EURm) (%) 4,161 35 11.11 3,518 23 9.40 2,922 18 7.80 2,909 20 7.77 1,820 16 4.86 37,441 88 100 2013 Target Position: Top 5
17:3%. Later, A.-S. Chen, Leung, and Daouk (2003) predicted the direction of the return on the
Fcst 1 Fcst 2 223 289 430 134 190 550 210 320 390 112 150 490