Case study on birch paper company with regard to transfer pricing.

When it comes to pricing we always strived to provide one of the lowest prices in the market. We decreased product prices by $0.50 on each product each year to appeal to consumers. Since providing a low cost product was one of our strategic goals we did not stray from decreasing prices. Looking back, perhaps we shouldn’t have been so loyal to our strategy when we were unable to turn a profit. While a strategy is important to stick to, being a profitable company is the ultimate goal.

The most suitable costing method Yeltin should adopt is the practical capacity in order to remove the factor of uncertain budgeted sales figure. For this approach and the practical capacity of 65000-22000 units, then the revised overhead costs come out to be $30. With the inclusion of material and labor costs, the cost of the cartridge stand at $52 and the additional royalty expense of $10 raises the overall per unit cost to $62. The selling price of the cartridge is fixed at $150. With this selling price, the gross margin is equal to $88. The gross margin percentage is equal to 59%. In comparison to the budgeted volume, the gross margin has increased by 14%. See below

Regarding the markup price, the top management is not allowing to go below 33.3%. Though some of the other options to be consider like on basis of past good relations with Konig explain them the

Options:-Portion of debt through insurance company-Continue at 90 day terms-Factor receivables-Collateralize assets-Mortgage general purpose building-Independent Canadian Financing-Flat dividends-Payment Terms - accelerate receipt-LIFO / FIFOEvery available option has a positive and a negative aspect to it. Here we will decipher what option gives Padgett Paper Products the best financial structure, provides the most flexibility for continued growth, and reduces the risk for all parties involved.

17. St. Augustine Company is trying to decide which one of two contracts it will accept. The costs and revenues associated with

Pricing can play an important role in the success or disaster of any product. Too high a price and the product will fail; too low a price and not enough profits will be made to sustain business operations (Hisrich, Peters, & Shepherd, 2014). The key is to make the customer think that they are paying exactly the right price for the product. Anything else though in this regard means the product is not positioned well in the mind of the consumer. First of all, Gril-Kleen will have to decide on what sort of strategy it needs to pursue. This strategy is decided on three factors namely costs, margins and competition.

He argues that idle capacity is worse since it has no contribution to overheads whereas a lower price above variable costs would have some positive contribution to the fixed costs and therefore improve profitability for the division. He believes a price of $40 is insufficient to cover the total costs and that the systems division does not want to subsidize the overheads of outside buyers.

Although the West Paper Company looks at first to be the best choice, the truth is to be the Thompson Division as it has the lowest cost if we assume that all transfer prices within the company were calculated at costs. The lowest costs that associated within the company would make Birch Paper Company to earn the highest profits and revenues.

As a result we can see that only one of the four above criteria is met and it is a fixed price. Based on these findings we can advise to change WAG’s policy on revenue recognition upon the delivery of the product. This will lower the sales revenue by $50,000, as well as cost of goods sold and net income.

In a desire to increase the company’s working capital for the company’s future financial investment in a plant modernization and expansion program, Beauregard Textile Company increased the price of its Triaxx-30 product to bring its profit margins up to that of their other products. In a sequential-move game theory Calhoun & Pritchard, Beauregard’s primary rival, did not raise its price even though its costs were assumed to be similar. As a result, Beauregard’s unit sales dropped significantly as their customers purchased the cheaper competitor’s product, causing Beauregard’s profit contribution to decrease. A closer examination of Beauregard’s cost analysis revealed that it includes fixed costs, which when

First, we have identified if there is really an insufficiency in the amount of selling prices set by the Sales Department, in reference to Exhibit 1 of the case. We did this through identifying the maximum amount of overhead costs that the company can incur for the three products and comparing it with the total overhead costs. See Table 1 for details.

After analyzing the results from the previous quarter, it was determined that the prices set for each segment were not sufficient. Product sales priority were also not properly adjusted. With the R&D investments, sales priorities needed to be changed for the main focus to become the most profitable market segments. Prices were not competitive which in turned decreased revenue, market share, and profitability. To become more competitive we altered the prices in each market segment. The Workhorse product was the first to change, the price was lowered to $2500 in an attempt to increase sales; at this price Team 4 was still making a profit on this product, as well as making the price much more competitive. The Workhorse sales priority was also lowered to 3rd in Americas and 4th in APAC and EMEA. This product was not selling as well as we had hoped, and was no longer as profitable as it once was which led to this decision. Next, the Innovator product’s price was adjusted; this involved a price increase to $4100. This price was adjusted to include the new

Price is simply ‘the amount of money customers must pay to obtain a product’. BA’s price is generally higher than their competitors although this is because they believe they are offering higher quality. However, in recent times BA appear to be losing the price war against low cost

(1.98 is also reasonable select. Since there is no brand image or loyal customer, it's not big problem to price very low as long as defend VC. Profit is only $4000, but as long as the business continues it's better than nothing.)

In the meeting a new price of $475 was put forward by the design team. As Tony Barren didn’t want a situation to be like when he and his team launched sonar project, he thought the pricing was fair enough. But still difference of opinion prevailed. The sales team believed that the price was in the higher side and we wouldn’t be able to sell the product. They felt the price was not competitive and we would lose our market share. There were arguments that the product could be introduced into the market at $425 and further changes could be incorporated later. There were even suggestions of dropping the product. There prevailed a ‘go/no-go’ situation about the product launch.