5 ms·
Do you mean 25% higher?
by jackweirdy 10y ago
Do you mean 25% higher?
- dmoy 10y agoIf you read the original Chinese source, it's saying Old: 650 workers * 8000pieces per person per month New: 60 workers * 21000 pieces per person per month It's a bit ambiguous but it makes it sound like total production output has dropped fourfold.
- philipov 10y agoEven then, it's not telling the whole story without knowing the cost per worker and the value per unit. When you take costs into account, you can get a situation where lowering production will increase earnings. Taking your numbers and plugging in some values like 75 per worker and 0.01 per unit would increase earnings by 250%.
- walshemj 10y agoand the cost of amortizing the new plant
- dmoy 10y agoYea, I'm wondering if we can dig up a Chinese language source and see if it has more details. I'm guessing something got horribly lost in translation. Or, possibly, the factory managers are purposefully not giving the whole story...
- 6nf 10y agoPreviously they made 5.2 million pieces per month and now they make 1.26 million pieces per month. Seems like a disaster to me!
- noobermin 10y agoIf they reduced their workforce by 90%, so that the cost of labor is now a tenth of what it was, then they may have improved overall profit. Of course, that doesn't include overhead, or anything else.
- weaksauce 10y agoIt it's an immediate decrease in output but they are planning on moving from 60 robots to 1000 robots in 2 years. so the 2 year expected capacity is 21,000,000 with a 5% defect rate vs. the 5,200,000 units with a 25% defect rate and wages/benefits for all those people.
- deelowe 10y agoAll that matters is per unit cost. The rest is just a matter of scaling up.