Document ba7Ymx6D6YqKvenr81o8z0gw1
A C...M E____ P L A N I
.August .136.6
Actual Operating Profit was less than the budgeted figure for August as shown in the following comparison:
Operating Profit:
ActuaI
Budget Actual under budget
$111,851
I7LZ2. < 59,722
Rock Plaster Board, Lath, Tile Joint System Other Products Tota I
Budget
Unit
Amount
5,000 $ 16,900
600 15,882
16,130
645,200
250 36,440
____1 $715,922
Actua I
Unit
Amg-unt
3,639 $ 20,174
1,144
29,967
11,440
462,637
253 34,585
___ 2uJ2 $549,525
Over(+)/Under (-)
Unit -1,961
Amauiit_____ $ . +3,274
+ 544
+14,085
-4,690
--182,563
+3 -1,855
+662
$ -166,397
Rock Processing Cost: This cost was $.11 per ton above standard because of a $1,246
charge for the rental of a bulldozer which was not considered in standards. (It was
used for^jstr ipp i ng).
*
Plaster Raw Materials Cost: The standard cost was $8.23 per ton after the product mix for August was considered. Thus, there was a positive variation of $1.43 per ton for August. The variation can be attributed to favorable price ($208) and usage ($1,504) variations. The usage variation was mainly the result of a $1,300 inventory error.
Cost of Plaster Sold: This cost was $.51 per ton above standard. This condition re sulted mainly from the manufacture of high costs products (Bestex B & C) which were not sold.
Board and Lath Saleable Perfects: They averaged 92.9% of gross which was 3.I# below
standard. This resulted in a $7200 loss. Of this $3,050 was due to the plant's
failure to properly record 215 MSF of board used in laminating production. It will
be accounted for in September.
,
Baper Cost: The cost of paper was $.11 per MSF less than standard after August's product mix was taken into consideration. This was brought about by a $924 favorable usage variation.
Board Raw Material Cost: This cost was $.43 per MSF above standard when August's product mix was considered. An unfavorable usage variation of $5,857 which was somewhat offset by a $1,478 favorable price variation were the factors involved. The price variation and a portion of the usage variation were mainly due to the duplicate recording of the usage of twin-mounting materials. The remainder of the usage variation is basically due to the following:
/ Core Adhesive: ($-666) A larger quanity was needed to overcome the problem * with the loading of beard.
Paper for Pulp: ($-310) Pulp continued to be overused in order to eliminate score and brqdk problems arising in the field.-
SGP 0002817
'Acme Plant
2
Ljonosite: ($-1,022) Lignosi+e, a material which reduces drying time of board, had its usage increased because of the production of a lighter weight board required a greater amount of water in the Stucco,which brought about the need for faster drying in order to prevent decreasing the speed of the board machine.
Board Processing Cost: Board Warehousing and Loading and Laminating costs were in line with standard; but Board and Lath Manufacturing cost was favorable by $4,459.
Board and Lath Manufacturing had its variation brought about by an $849 unfavoraole variation for operating labor and favorable variations of $1,405 for operating ovei--time and $5,106 for operationaI'suppIies. The operational supplies variation was due mainly to a $4,194 credit for raw materials which were wr- i - . properly charged to this account in July.
Joint Sysiam Raw Material Cost: The standard cost was $72.74 after product mix for August wa- taken into account resulting in a $.71 per ton unfavorable variation. This ms[-' -ought about by a $776 unfavorable usage variatioi. which was partially offset by-a $423 favorable price variation.
Joint System Processing cost: This was $4.40 per ton higher than standard due to the charging of $3,037 of pallets to this department which was not considered in standard.
SGP 0002818