It currently produces and sells 80,000 units per annum, with production of them being restricted by the short supply of labour. Each control panel includes two main components – one key pad and one display screen. At present, Robber Co manufactures both of these components in-house. However, the company is currently considering outsourcing the production of keypads and/or display screens. A newly established company based in Burgistan is keen to secure a place in the market, and has offered to supply the keypads for the equivalent of $4·10 per unit and the display screens for the equivalent of $4·30 per unit. This price has been guaranteed for two years.
The current total annual costs of producing the keypads and the display screens are:
Notes:
1. Materials costs for keypads are expected to increase by 5% in six months’ time; materials costs for display screens are only expected to increase by 2%, but with immediate effect.
2. Direct labour costs are purely variable and not expected to change over the next year.
3. Heat and power costs include an apportionment of the general factory overhead for heat and power as well as the costs of heat and power directly used for the production of keypads and display screens. The general apportionment included is calculated using 50% of the direct labour cost for each component and would be incurred irrespective of whether the components are manufactured in-house or not.
4. Machine costs are semi-variable; the variable element relates to set up costs, which are based upon the number of batches made. The keypads’ machine has fixed costs of $4,000 per annum and the display screens’ machine has fixed costs of $6,000 per annum. Whilst both components are currently made in batches of 500, this would need to change, with immediate effect, to batches of 400.
5. 60% of depreciation and insurance costs relate to an apportionment of the general factory depreciation and insurance costs; the remaining 40% is specific to the manufacture of keypads and display screens.
Required:
(a) Advise Robber Co whether it should continue to manufacture the keypads and display screens in-house or whether it should outsource their manufacture to the supplier in Burgistan, assuming it continues to adopt a policy to limit manufacture and sales to 80,000 control panels in the coming year. (8 marks)
(b) Robber Co takes 0·5 labour hours to produce a keypad and 0·75 labour hours to produce a display screen. Labour hours are restricted to 100,000 hours and labour is paid at $1 per hour. Robber Co wishes to increase its supply to 100,000 control panels (i.e. 100,000 each of keypads and display screens). Advise Robber Co as to how many units of keypads and display panels they should either manufacture and/or outsource in order to minimise their costs. (7 marks)
(c) Discuss the non-financial factors that Robber Co should consider when making a decision about outsourcing the manufacture of keypads and display screens. (5 marks)
(a) The proposed joint stock company would be invested by nine sponsors, four sponsors from China and five sponsors from other Asian countries. Such arrangements would be of benefit to expand the Asian market. (3 marks)
(b) The registered capital of the company would be RMB 100 million yuan, among which RMB 30 million yuan would be subscribed by nine sponsors and the remaining RMB 70 million yuan would be subscribed through an initial public offering (IPO). (4 marks)
(c) All capital contributions by sponsors must be made in the form. of currency, as the joint stock company is to be incorporated through IPO. (3 marks)
Required:
Explain whether the above items (a), (b) and (c) are in conformity with the relevant provisions of the Company Law.
Note: The mark allocation is shown against each item.
下列哪一项是多发性骨髓瘤的突出症
A. 骨骼疼痛
B. 病理性骨折
C. 广泛性出血
D. 反复感染
E. 贫血
Buyer and Seller entered into a sales contract to buy 10,000 kg chemical products at a price of RMB 200 yuan/kg, totalling RMB 2 million yuan. Among other things, the sales contract stipulated the following terms and conditions: within 10 days after the conclusion of the contract Buyer would make the advance payment of RMB 500,000 yuan and Seller was to deliver all the goods to the place of Buyer; the remaining price of RMB 1·5 million yuan should be paid within five days upon the delivery of goods; any breach of contract should be subject to the liquidated damages equivalent to 20% of the total price.
Buyer made the advance payment, but Seller did not deliver any goods. Buyer urged Seller to deliver the goods immediately, as its production would be seriously affected by the short supply of the goods. However, Seller declared force majeure as the reason for non-delivery. Seller insisted that it was only a trading company, not a producer of the chemical products. Seller alleged that upon the conclusion of the contract, it entered into a purchase agreement with a producer to buy the goods from the latter. Due to a fire accident, the producer could not supply the goods under the purchase agreement; Seller therefore could not deliver the goods to Buyer. Non-delivery of goods was due to force majeure that caused the failure to supply the goods by the producer to Seller.
Buyer refused to accept Seller’s argument and bought 10,000 kg of the same products for replacement at a price of RMB 220 yuan/kg, resulting in a total extra cost of RMB 200,000 yuan. Meanwhile it filed a lawsuit against Seller in the court, requesting liquidated damages of RMB 400,000 yuan (20% of the total price) and the damages of RMB 200,000 yuan for extra price caused for the urgent purchase.
Required:
Answer the following questions in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Contract Law, and give your reasons for your answer:
(a) state whether Seller’s argument of force majeure can be established; (5 marks)
(b) state whether Buyer’s claims for liquidated damages and damages should be supported by the court. (5 marks)