關於經濟訂購量(EOQ)-英文問題 - 會計

By Iris
at 2009-11-28T23:19
at 2009-11-28T23:19
Table of Contents
※ 引述《willie1987 (威力是也)》之銘言:
: 問題:
: X company has correctly computed its EOQ as 500 units however.management feels
: it would rather order in quantities of 400 units.How would X's total annual
: ordering costs and total annual carrying costs for an order quantity of 400
: units compare to the respective amounts for an order quantity of 500 units?
: (A)higher ordering cost and higher carrying cost.
: (B)lower ordering cost and lower carrying cost.
: (C)higher ordering cost and lower carrying cost.
: (D)lower ordering cost and higher carrying cost.
: 答案:C 我的問題是在於英文...
: 我不太懂他這題問的是以400單位為基礎去比較如果變成500單位的情況
: 還是以500單位為基礎去比較如果變成400單位的情況
: 小弟不才...請高手相助~感恩!!!
在此題目之中,X公司的EOQ為500 但X公司仍然決定以400單位為訂購量
在EOQ之下 X公司全年的訂購成本和儲存成本合計數會最低
因X公司仍然決定以400為訂購量 此舉將使訂購次數增加
導致訂購成本上升 而因為平均儲存單位下降
而使儲存成本下降
答案為C
但若以400為訂購量 全年訂購成本與儲存成本合計數
將會大於EOQ下的全年訂購成本與儲存成本合計數
--
: 問題:
: X company has correctly computed its EOQ as 500 units however.management feels
: it would rather order in quantities of 400 units.How would X's total annual
: ordering costs and total annual carrying costs for an order quantity of 400
: units compare to the respective amounts for an order quantity of 500 units?
: (A)higher ordering cost and higher carrying cost.
: (B)lower ordering cost and lower carrying cost.
: (C)higher ordering cost and lower carrying cost.
: (D)lower ordering cost and higher carrying cost.
: 答案:C 我的問題是在於英文...
: 我不太懂他這題問的是以400單位為基礎去比較如果變成500單位的情況
: 還是以500單位為基礎去比較如果變成400單位的情況
: 小弟不才...請高手相助~感恩!!!
在此題目之中,X公司的EOQ為500 但X公司仍然決定以400單位為訂購量
在EOQ之下 X公司全年的訂購成本和儲存成本合計數會最低
因X公司仍然決定以400為訂購量 此舉將使訂購次數增加
導致訂購成本上升 而因為平均儲存單位下降
而使儲存成本下降
答案為C
但若以400為訂購量 全年訂購成本與儲存成本合計數
將會大於EOQ下的全年訂購成本與儲存成本合計數
--
Tags:
會計
All Comments
Related Posts
王上達會計審計法規

By Joe
at 2009-11-28T21:00
at 2009-11-28T21:00
租賃會計

By Charlotte
at 2009-11-28T19:38
at 2009-11-28T19:38
高普考用書

By Oliver
at 2009-11-28T19:18
at 2009-11-28T19:18
40號公報

By Anonymous
at 2009-11-28T16:52
at 2009-11-28T16:52
售 98年度 財政學 DVD 函授

By Aaliyah
at 2009-11-28T15:49
at 2009-11-28T15:49