请教攻击点~

jessie_yhy

The following appeared in a presentation by the chief production manager of a machine parts manufacturing company at a management meeting:
“Our factory in Cookville is our most advanced and efficient. It is capable of producing ten drill bits for each dollar of production costs, whereas none of our other factories can produce more than seven drill bits per dollar of production costs. Therefore, we can reduce our overall drill bit production costs by devoting the Cookville factory entirely to drill bit production. Since reducing the production costs of individual machine parts is the only way to achieve our larger goal of reducing our overall production costs, dedicating the Cookville factory entirely to drill bit production and shifting all other machine part production to our other factories will help us to attain that larger goal.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . .etc.

妙妙cathy

1.cost低不代表profit高，可能生产其他部件更赚钱

2.现在cost比别的低不代表未来也这样

3.只论述了entirely生产这一部件的好处，属于one-sideness,其他部件买别人的可能会产生依赖不利于发展

4.attain the goal可能有别的方法达到，而且可能更好

happiness15

谢谢指教，我正好想问这题呢

happiness15

对题目不是太理解，没找到这题的题库，有好心的同学翻译一下吗,先谢了

juliedu1985

我的思路：

1.       Cookvile生产成本低廉是因为Cookvile有先进的机器，可能其他厂没有这样的机器，所以成本自然就高；而且如果将其他工厂的产量转移至Cookvile，
        可能超过了C的生产能力，要买更多的先进机器，会增加生产成本而非减少生产成本。

2.       将Cookvile的其他部件生产转移到其他工厂，其他工厂不一定能比cookvile以更低的生产成本生产这种部件，所以在其他厂生产，可能会增加其他部件的生产成本，抵消了节省的drill production cost

3.       公司的goal是减少总成本，但是不一定能通过减少单个机器的生产成本达到这样的目的。公司忽略了生产线上的协同效应（比如一个工厂生产A产品和B产品的总成本比两个工厂分别生产A产品和B产品的总成本还要低）

公司需要做进一步的
            cost and benefit analysis去评估转移后的总成本是否真实下降，才能合理的做出argument中的决策