CHAPTER 7 Activity Based Costing and Management
Case 7-64 (Continued)
3. Profit analysis:
Revised profit per ton (LLHC):
Loss…………………………………………………………………………
$ (35.41)
Original profit per ton:
The revised profit, reflecting a more accurate assignment of shipping and
warehousing costs, presents a much different picture of LLHC. The product is,
in reality, losing money for the company. Its earlier apparent profitability was
attributable to a subsidy being received from the high-volume products (by
spreading the special shipping and handling costs over all products, using
tons produced as the cost driver). The same effect is also true for the other
low-volume products. Essentially, the system is understating the handling
costs for low-volume products and overstating the cost for high-volume
products.
4. The decision to drop some high-volume products and emphasize low-volume
products could clearly be erroneous. As LLHC has demonstrated, its apparent
profitability is attributable to distorted cost assignments. A significant change in
5. Ryan’s strategy changed because his information concerning the individual
products changed. Apparently, the accounting system was undercosting the