It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 17:17

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Companies considering new cost-cutting manufacturing

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Aug 2005
Posts: 409

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 0

Companies considering new cost-cutting manufacturing [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Oct 2005, 17:34
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

. Companies considering new cost-cutting manufacturing processes often compare the projected results of making the investment against the alternative of not making the investment with costs, selling prices, and share of market remaining constant.
Which of the following, assuming that each is a realistic possibility, constitutes the most serious disadvantage for companies of using the method above for evaluating the financial benefit of new manufacturing processes?
(A) The costs of materials required by the new process might not be known with certainty.
(B) In several years interest rates might go down, reducing the interest costs of borrowing money to pay for the investment.
(C) Some cost-cutting processes might require such expensive investments that there would be no net gain for many years, until the investment was paid for by savings in the manufacturing process.
(D) Competitors that do invest in a new process might reduce their selling prices and thus take market share away from companies that do not.
(E) The period of year chosen for averaging out the cost of the investment might be somewhat longer or shorter, thus affecting the result.

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 21 Aug 2005
Posts: 786

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Oct 2005, 17:47
C

If projecting the results can be made difficult as in C, it is a disadvantageous to measure the fiscal effectiveness of the new process in the given way.

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 453

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 0

Location: New York

### Show Tags

14 Oct 2005, 20:17
I would go with A.

what is they are wrong in keeping costs constant? say for example, there is a spike in oil, then the new process may not be good compared to the old.

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1708

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Oct 2005, 21:34
D is most serious in damaging the conclusion.

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 10 Sep 2005
Posts: 162

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Oct 2005, 00:27
costs, selling prices, and share of market remaining constant...its B or C

i go for C...pls post the OA

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 984

Kudos [?]: 215 [0], given: 0

Location: South Korea

### Show Tags

22 Oct 2005, 01:12
When they do the comparison, they suppose that costs, selling prices, and market share remain constant.

Therefore, to attack this comparison, we have to show that costs, selling prices, and market share do not remain constant.

(B) Not relevant

(C) Some processes require big investments, and those "some cases" are not important.

(D) Yeah, this is the best answer. Selling prices and market share change!

(E) Not relevant
_________________

Auge um Auge, Zahn um Zahn !

Kudos [?]: 215 [0], given: 0

22 Oct 2005, 01:12
Display posts from previous: Sort by