Comparing Performances

When comparing performance during the first five months of 2010 with performance in 2009, which warehouse shows the most improvement?

To answer this question I would have to start by comparing the warehouse performance for 2009 and 2010 for the first five months. By doing this I will be monitoring the expenses incurred by the business for the last two quarters of 2010.

To figure out the performance of the warehouses, I would have to first assess the cost of the unit of the product that is being transported. As I compare the 2009 and 2010, I see that all the warehouses have increased the price per unit it transported except St. Louis. Therefore, I would have to conclude that St Louis is still incurring more cost although there are less units shipped.

Atlanta Boston Chicago Denver Fargo LA Portland St Louis

$ per unit 2009 9 9.119569 9.001983 8.557214 9.64286 9.5958359 8.942651 9.96653

$ per unit 2010 9.969765 9.431228 9.27262 10.48557 11.94652 9.8771707 9.264348 9.69471

Difference 2009-2010 -1 -0.31166 -9.27262 -1.92836 -2.88223 -0.281335 -0.3217 0.897067

The table below is showing that the accrual five months expenses for all the warehouses from 2009 to 2010. From this we can see that six warehouses have more expenditure. Although Los Angeles and St Louis show expenditures that were less, Los Angeles was much lower overall and therefore shows the most improvement.

Atlanta Boston Chicago Denver Fargo LA Portland St Louis

2010 40,228 29,416 141,222 14,900 9,605 93,280 42,616 19,191

2009 35,890 27,915 131,618 8,600 8,883 109,690 36,021 23,232

Difference 112% 105% 107% 173% 108% 85% 118% 83%

The year 2010 is nearly half over. J.Q. is told to determine how much the firm is likely to spend for warehousing at each of the eight warehouses for the last six months in 2010. Do his work for him.

From I see the data that was provided has no monthly cost but there are cumulative values of the operation which can be used. By using the average...