Hi yaswanth9215,Great question, and you're actually one substitution away from C. Let me point to the exact spot.
You wrote the combined expression as
(1.15F + 0.9L) / (10L + L). Notice what you already did in the
denominator: you replaced the old total F + L with
10L + L, using S2's fact that F =
10L. That's correct.
The fix is to be consistent - use F = 10L in the numerator too. That F inside
1.15F is the
same fixed cost S2 is talking about. S2 says that
before the March changes, fixed =
10 x line, i.e. F =
10L. S1 then scales
that same F up by
15%, giving new fixed =
1.15F. There aren't two different F's floating around - it's one F, and S2 pins it to L.
So substitute everywhere F appears:
- New fixed =
1.15 x (
10L) =
11.5L- New line =
0.9L- New total =
12.4L, old total =
11L- Percent change =
1.4 /
11 =
12.7% increase
The whole thing collapses to a number because the L cancels - once both costs are written in terms of L, the unknown disappears. That's the unique value, so it's
C, not E.
Quick sanity check with real numbers - say L =
1, so F =
10:
- Old total =
10 +
1 =
11- New fixed =
1.15 x
10 =
11.5; new line =
0.9- New total =
12.4 - change =
1.4/
11 =
12.7%Try L =
5, so F =
50: old =
55, new =
57.5 +
4.5 =
62, change =
7/
55 =
12.7%. Same answer every time - that's what makes the combination
sufficient.
The takeaway: when one statement gives you a
ratio and another gives you a
percent change on the same quantity, you can chain them - just substitute the ratio in
every place that variable appears.
Answer: Cyaswanth9215
S2 says " Before the changes in March, the fixed cost of manufacturing product P was 10 times the line cost of manufacturing product P". How are we assuming this relationship of F=10L in March? Shouldn't it be (1.15*F +0.9L)/(10L+L) so E?