标题: 大全5－14 [打印本页]
作者: Youcanmakeit 时间: 2007-11-5 06:38 标题: 大全5－14
The price the government pays for standard weapons purchased from military contractors is determined by a pricing method called “historical costing.” Historical costing allows contractors to protect their profits by adding a percentage increase, based on the current rate of inflation, to the previous year’s contractual price.
Which of the following statements, if true, is the best basis for a criticism of historical costing as an economically sound pricing method for military contracts?
(A) The government might continue to pay for past inefficient use of funds.
(B) The rate of inflation has varied considerably over the past twenty years.
(C) The contractual price will be greatly affected by the cost of materials used for the products.
(D) Many taxpayers question the amount of money the government spends on military contracts.
(E) The pricing method based on historical costing might not encourage the development of innovative weapons.
虽然通过排除法去处了其他错误选项，但也没明白为什么a是对的，有高手可以解答一下吗？
作者: kenisjacque 时间: 2007-11-5 20:42
这种定价方法的基础是一上一年为基准，每年随着通货膨胀而调整。
但如果第一年的定价就有问题呢，比如政府购买的价格高于市场平均价，即inefficient use of funds，那么今后每一年的花费都在这个基础上调整，岂不每一年都是inefficient。。。
作者: SunnyApples 时间: 2007-11-6 06:43
搭车问一下：在og里面的解释有这么一句：‘Additionally, historical costing assumes costs only go up, never down.’
请问是如何看出/体现出这个only go up never down的呢？
作者: SunnyApples 时间: 2007-11-6 19:32
啊，突然有点明白了……
原文中提到‘by adding a percentage increase’应该就暗示了only go up never down.
这里也不可以加上一个负数的百分比。毕竟通胀率inflation不=deflation......
这样的解释至少可以让我觉得说得过去了……
| 欢迎光临 国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/) |
Powered by Discuz! 7.2 |