Bridgeton Industries: Automotive Component and Fabrication Plant By: Saurabh Saxena In 1985‚ Bridgeton Industries‚ a major supplier to Big-Three domestic automobile manufacturers‚ is facing a competitive environment with advent of foreign competition and rising gasoline prices‚ leading to shrinking pool of production contracts. Bridgeton reacts by closing ACF diesel engine plant and hiring strategic consulting firm to classify their products on competitive
Premium Profit Cost Price
change in overhead costs. According to the case‚ the decision to outsource Muffler-exhaust systems and oil pans was based on the model without overhead allocation. Overlooking the overhead allocation represented a nightmare in analysis and led Bridgeton face falling profits. To further explore the problems‚ we allocate overhead costs into each products for getting the true profits and the ROS: Profit By Segment 1987 1988 1989 1990 Fuel Tanks 32‚849 36‚767 33‚703 35‚956 Manifolds
Premium Outsourcing
* Better utilization of available resources and capability by freeing up internal resources that could be put in to effective use for other purposes * Outsourcing also enables companies to realize the benefits of re-engineering. 2. Bridgeton has already outsourced muffler-exhaust systems and oil pans. c. How much overhead cost would have been saved by outsourcing of muffler-exhaust systems and oil pans if i. Overhead costs were entirely fixed costs (regardless of the
Premium Costs Variable cost Cost
Bridgeton Industries 1. Describe the competitive environment for Bridgeton as well as the cost accounting system currently in use. When foreign competition and scarce‚ expensive gasoline began to play an important role in the market‚ Bridgeton began to lose domestic market share. The ACF Bridgeton plant faced new challenges in their production that led them to serious cutbacks like the closing of the ACF plant for manufacture of fuel-efficient diesel engines. By 1987‚ they classified
Premium Cost Costs Cost accounting
Bridgeton Industries Automotive Component and Fabrication Plant The union has worked with us and has even led in cost reduction programs. Now corporate is talking about outsourcing additional products. What more can we do to keep the business? mike lewis‚ plant manager The Automotive Component and Fabrication Plant (ACF) was the original plant site for Bridgeton Industries‚ a major supplier of components for the domestic automotive industry. The history of the
Premium Cost Class I railroad Costs
The automotive component & Fabrication Plant‚ ACF‚ was the original plant site for Bridgeton Industries‚ a major supplier of components for the domestic automotive industry. All of the ACF’s production was sold to the Big-Three domestic automobile manufactures. Its main competitors were local suppliers and other Bridgeton plants. This company did very well but recently it became less effective when foreign competition and scarce‚ expensive gasoline caused domestic loss of market share. For boost
Premium
system proposed by the consultant. 3. Which system is preferable? Why? 4. Would you recommend any changes to the system you prefer? Why? 5. Would you treat the new machine as a separate cost center or as a part of the main test room? Bridgeton Industries: Automotive Component & Fabrication Plant 1. The official overhead allocation rate used in the 1987 model year strategy study at the Automotive Component and Fabrication Plant (ACF) was 435% of direct labor cost. Calculate the overhead
Premium Cost accounting Net present value Internal rate of return
Bridgeton Case a) What is the competitive environment Bridgeton faces? What was Bridgeton’s response? Bridgeton is facing stiff competitive pressure due to a shrinking market demand. Bridgeton sells primarily to the big three domestic automakers and starting in 1985 the Automotive Component & Fabrication plant (ACF) started to feel the loss of domestic market share. Bridgeton’s management inaccurately anticipated a continued growth in the fuel-efficient diesel engines market in the mid-1970s
Premium Supply and demand Marketing Cost
Vanessa ACCT 606 CASE 2 2/8/2011 1. I use: overhead for period / allocation base for period (in this case-DL)=Overhead Allocation Rate In 1987‚ OH$107‚954/DL$24‚682=437% 2. The changes from 1987 to 1988 were not significant. However‚ the changes in overhead allocation rates in 1989 and 1990 appeared to be significant when compared to 1987 rates. Because in 1988 and 1989‚ total overhead costs decreased about 25%‚ but direct labor costs‚ direct material costs in decreased even more
Premium
The Bridgeton case introduced a relatively simple costing system: DM‚ DL‚ and one pool of indirect‚ support‚ or overhead costs. The one and only "cost pool" containing all overhead (OH) costs was allocated on the basis of DL$. In this case‚ the direct costs seem to be largely variable (i.e.‚ they vary proportionally with production volume)‚ whereas some of the indirect costs are relatively variable and others are largely fixed. Case in point: Not all INDIRECT costs are necessarily FIXED. To figure
Premium Costs Cost Variable cost