Vendor Billed Cost Original Retail Net Sales Initial markup% Maintained markup% Reductions% Vendor A $38,520 $87,000 $86,270 $22,342 125.86% 0.84% Vendor B $43,270 $102,000 $98,420 $25,097 135.73% 3.51% Vendor C $41,270 $94,000 $77,720 $23,937 127.77% 17.32% Vendor D $42,230 $98,000 $81,660 $24,493 132.06% 16.67% Vendor E $74,200 $179,000 $155,750 $43,036 141.24% 12.99% Vendor F $68,030 $162,000 $149,940 $39,457 138.13% 7.44% Vendor G $96,990 $235,000 $199,870 $56,254 142.29% 14.95% Vendor H $101,280 $250,000 $203,800 $58,742 146.84% 18.48% Vendor I $52,270 $130,000 $108,990 $30,317 148.71% 16.16% Vendor J $75,320 $187,000 $137,780 $43,686 148.27% 26.32% Vendor K $83,260 $201,000 $170,980 $48,291 141.41% 14.94% Vendor L $91,020 $198,000 $181,850 $52,792 117.53% 8.16% Total: $807,660 $1,923,000 $1,653,030 $468,443 138.10% 14.04% Which vendors’ maintained markup percentage performances were better than the overall maintained markup percentage achieved for the total merchandise? Compare the total initial markup percentage (total IMU%) that was originally planned and the total maintained markup percentage (total MMU%) achieved. What is the total reductions% that caused the difference between the total IMU% and total MMU%? Given that there were no cash discounts or alteration costs, did the buyer meet her gross margin goal of 50%? If yes, which vendor(s) positively contributed to the buyer’s meeting her gross margin goal? (i.e., Which vendors’ merchandise met or exceeded a gross margin of 50%?)

6th Edition

ISBN:9781337406659

Author:WINSTON, Wayne L.

Publisher:WINSTON, Wayne L.

Chapter2: Introduction To Spreadsheet Modeling

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 20P: Julie James is opening a lemonade stand. She believes the fixed cost per week of running the stand...

Related questions

Question

Which vendors’ maintained markup percentage performances were better than the overall maintained markup percentage achieved for the total merchandise?

Compare the total initial markup percentage (total IMU%) that was originally planned and the total maintained markup percentage (total MMU%) achieved.

What is the total reductions% that caused the difference between the total IMU% and total MMU%?

Given that there were no cash discounts or alteration costs, did the buyer meet her gross margin goal of 50%? If yes, which vendor(s) positively contributed to the buyer’s meeting her gross margin goal? (i.e., Which vendors’ merchandise met or exceeded a gross margin of 50%?)

Expert Solution

Step 1

Vendor (A)	Billed Cost (B)	*Original Retail (C)**	Net Sales(D)	Initial markup%for each vendor(E=B X 58%)	Maintained markup Planned For each vendor (F=(C-B)/B)	Reductions applied to the merchandise [G=(C-D)/C]
Vendor A	$38,520	$87,000	$86,270	$22,342	125.86%	0.84%
Vendor B	$43,270	$102,000	$98,420	$25,097	135.73%	3.51%
Vendor C	$41,270	$94,000	$77,720	$23,937	127.77%	17.32%
Vendor D	$42,230	$98,000	$81,660	$24,493	132.06%	16.67%
Vendor E	$74,200	$179,000	$155,750	$43,036	141.24%	12.99%
Vendor F	$68,030	$162,000	$149,940	$39,457	138.13%	7.44%
Vendor G	$96,990	$235,000	$199,870	$56,254	142.29%	14.95%
Vendor H	$101,280	$250,000	$203,800	$58,742	146.84%	18.48%
Vendor I	$52,270	$130,000	$108,990	$30,317	148.71%	16.16%
Vendor J	$75,320	$187,000	$137,780	$43,686	148.27%	26.32%
Vendor K	$83,260	$201,000	$170,980	$48,291	141.41%	14.94%
Vendor L	$91,020	$198,000	$181,850	$52,792	117.53%	8.16%
Total:	$807,660	$1,923,000	$1,653,030	$468,443	138.10%	14.04%