Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 33

2008

Quantitative Analysis for Business

Group 1: The Great Bear

HCM International University


Linh Trung – Thu Duc – HCMC Application Project
INSTRUCTOR
DR. HO THANH PHONG

GROUP ONE
HO CHI MINH INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY
BUSINESS ADMINSTRATION DERPARTMENT

QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS FOR BUSINESS PROJECT

INSTRUCTOR
DR. HO THANH PHONG

Members of group

1. Le Minh Hai BA060089


2. Vo Le Duy BA060087

3. Vu Thanh Cong BA060052


4. Nguyen Anh Huy Vu BA060117
5. Vu Duc Giang BA060088
6. Nguyen Thi Kim Thao
BA060105

Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam


July 7, 2008
Table of Contents
A. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
B. LITERATURE REVIEW....................................................................................................2
1. The Analytic Hierarchy Process ............................................................................................. 2
2. Software Selection by Using AHP .......................................................................................... 2
C. CRITERIA FOR SELECTING BUSINESS .........................................................................4
3. Analysis Capital: ........................................................................................................................... 4
For lease:............................................................................................................................................... 5
For Coffee-Food: ................................................................................................................................ 5
For The Fashion Shop: ..................................................................................................................... 7
4. Analysis the Break-event:......................................................................................................... 9
For lease:............................................................................................................................................... 9
For Coffee-Food: ............................................................................................................................. 10
For Fashion Shop:........................................................................................................................... 10
5. Description of Risk criterion ................................................................................................ 12
D. APPLYING THE AHP .................................................................................................... 12
6. Structuring the Data ................................................................................................................ 12
7. Creating Pair-wise Comparison Matrix ............................................................................ 13
8. Determining Normalized Weights ..................................................................................... 13
9. Synthesize the Priorities ........................................................................................................ 16
E. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................. 16
F. REFERENCES..................................................................................................................... 17
G. APPENDIX.......................................................................................................................... 18
10. Simulation................................................................................................................................. 18
Fashion Shop .................................................................................................................................... 18
Cafe-Food Restaurant ................................................................................................................... 20
11. Survey result ............................................................................................................................ 23
Direct Survey and Online Survey ............................................................................................. 23
Preamble

Quantitative Analysis for Management course is a useful subject for student. After studying this
course, we have a change to apply the theoretical knowledge in a real situation. Though this
project we studied:

- How to work in group.


- How to make the survey.
- Describe the quantitative analysis approach.
- Describe the use of modeling in QA.
- Use computers and spreadsheet models to perform QA.
- Discuss possible problems in using quantitative analysis.

We highly appreciate this course.

We would like thank: Associate Pro. Ho Thanh Phong

Mr. Ho Nhat Quang

Mr. Nguyen Hoang Minh

Ms. Ha Thi Thanh Binh

Ms. Nguyen Canh Tien

BA students

The managers and employees of Zenta coffee-food restaurant, Highland coffee shop, Hi-end coffee shop,
KFC, Thoi Trang Moi fashion shop, Ninomax fashion shop…that help us finish this project.
Abstract

In reality, everybody has to face the tradeoffs.


Every day, even every second, we have to make
many decisions. But, life is very complicated. Thus,
making decision becomes more difficult than ever
before. In fact, decision-making in field of business
investment becomes more and more complex due
to aggressive fluctuation of global economy,
conflicting goals, continuous change of society. In
this study, we discover the adequacy of Analytic
Hierarchy Process to support decision making
process. AHP is valuable even when being applied
in case of conflicting goals, multiple criteria, with
purpose to select the most suitable project from a
set of alternatives. In this case, we you AHP analysis
to select a highest priority project to make
investing decision. To determine final decision,
every alternative is carefully evaluated, which is
based on 3 criteria. In this study, we consider AHP
really works well and profoundly contributes to our
decision process.
Quantitative Analysis for Business

Quantitative Analysis for


Business
APPLICATION PROJECT

A. INTRODUCTION
The event of joining into WTO has help the Viet Nam economy become much better.
After entering the world-wide market, there are many foreign business
organizations have come to the country ,and that creates more jobs available to the
Vietnamese employees, especially for graduated students. Applying for a job and
working for some company is a common thought of most business students
nowadays. And another way for business students to apply their all know ledges
that learnt from schools is opening their own businesses. This is much interesting,
much better for both the students and the economy as a whole as well. But well-
investing is always difficult. In the case of having a business premises in the Dinh
Tien Hoang street, district 1, HCM city, we could use that premises for renting, a
cafeteria, or a fashion shop. Renting will give us a stable income with almost no risk,
but you may be much richer if we are successful in the cafeteria or fashion shop
investments. What is our decision? How is the decision made ?

Making the optimal decision among these kinds of investments may depend on the
assesment of the objective, measurable criteria and subjective criteria. The
investing decision requires not only considering the objectives, but also considering
tangible or intangible factors or criteria affecting the final decision, and making the
priorities among those criteria can be hard. It is suggested that the three
components that drive the investing decision for the case are capital, profit and
risk. The capital refers how much you should pay out to make your business ready
for work, while the reference of the profit is the amount of money we can obtain.
The risk consists on many kinds of risks that normally belong to two groups of
business risk and economic risk.

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a widely-used multi-criteria decision


method introduced by Saaty. The AHP structures the decision problems into the
hierarchy and evaluate multi-criteria tangible and intangible factors systematically.
Page 1
The AHP has been applied to numerous fields that include business investment
decisions.

The objectives of this paper is to propose a framework of decision criteria for


evaluating and selecting kind of investing in this case based on the analytic
hierarchy process.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows: section 2 gives an overview of the AHP
methodology. Section 3 describes the selection criteria for the business investment.
The applying of the AHP for evaluating and ranking criteria presented in section 4.
Finally, section 5 includes conclusions of the case and necessary comments.

B. LITERATURE REVIEW

1. The Analytic Hierarchy Process

AHP first developed by Saaty resolves decision-making problems by structuring


each problem into a hierarchy with different levels of criteria. Pair-wise
comparisons are performed with the criteria in a hierarchy by means of scale of
measurement. The scale of relative importance measurement consists of judgments
ranging from equal importance to extreme importance (equal, moderate, essential
or strong, demonstrated, extreme) corresponding to the numerical judgments (1,3,
5, 7, 9) and compromises (2, 4, 6, 8) between these values The decision-maker needs
to judge the relative importance of each criterion and then specify a preference on
each criterion for decision alternatives.
The AHP method involves four steps to solve a decision problem :
Step 1: Structuring the decision problem
The first step involves developing a hierarchical structure of the problem. The
number of levels in the hierarchy depends on the complexity of the decision
problem.
The typical hierarchy of the AHP model consists of focus, criteria, sub-criteria and

Page 2
alternatives . The highest level of the hierarchy is the overall goal or focus. The
intermediate levels consist of the criteria and sub-criteria for judging the
alternatives. The need of intermediate levels depends on the decision problem and
experiences of the AHP and domain knowledge for decision makers. The bottom
level of the hierarchy contains alternatives from which the choice is to be made.
There should not include too many criteria in a hierarchy .
Step 2: Creating pair-wise comparison matrix
Creating a pair-wise comparison matrix is an attempt to find the relative importance
among the criteria. The nine-point scale is used to obtain a concise pair-wise
comparison of all criteria at each level of the hierarchy . The pair-wise comparison
judgments are made with respect to elements of one level of hierarchy given the
element of the next higher level of hierarchy, starting from the top level down to the
bottom level. For a group decision setting, every team member assigns his or her
own pair-wise comparison. Four methods can combine the individual pair-wise
comparison matrix to obtain the consensus pair-wise comparison matrix for the
entire team: consensus; vote or compromise; geometric mean approach, and
separate models or players .
Step 3: Determining normalized weights
The eigenvector derived from the matrix created in Step 2 measures of relative
importance among the criteria and is used to determine the normalized and unique
priority weights for each criterion. In order to check the consistency in setting
priorities for pair-wise comparison with respect to criteria, the AHP uses a
consistency ratio to measure the consistency of judgments. Saaty suggested the
consistency ratio should be 0.1 or less.
Step 4: Synthesize the priorities
The final step is to synthesize the solution for the decision problem - to obtain the
set of overall priorities for alternatives. The normalized local priority weights of
criteria and sub-criteria obtained from Step 3 are aggregated to produce global
composite weights which used to evaluate decision alternatives.

2. Software Selection by Using AHP

Page 3
To the case, decision-making in the business investment becomes more complex due
to conflicting objectives ( e.g., low capital, high profit) and difficulties in assessing
the multi-criteria. Different decision -makers may have different decisions. The
case’s result limited to the business decision applications of the AHP. However, it
demonstrates the diversity of the business investing decision applications where the
AHP is used.
Selecting the best

Capital Profit Risk

Economical Business Risk


Risk

For Rent Cafeteria Fashion Shop

Figure: The hierarchy for the business investing problem

C. CRITERIA FOR Selecting BUSINESS

3. Capital Analysis:

One of the most important factors affect capital is location because high level of spending
on business premises. Its expense directly influences profitability of a business. It might
also influence which kind of business we should or should not invest, even, location will
decide how much should be invested in that business.

In the case that we have a business premises in the Dinh Tien Hoang Street, district 1, Ho
Chi Minh City. This place is close to some big streets such as Nguyen Thi Minh Khai, Dien
Bien Phu, Mac Dinh Chi, Vo Thi Sau, etc, which are considered as the center area of HCM

Page 4
city. There are many offices, high schools, universities, coffee shops, cafeteria shops,
fashion shops in those streets. Therefore, it is the favorable sector for doing business.

Owning this business premises is a competitive advantage. So, how to use this one to get
highest profit is the main task. There are 3 alternatives to be considered: For rent, coffee-
food, and fashion shop. To come up with decision, we evaluate which is most important,
most suitable in those 3 alternatives.

For lease:

In order to attract people to rent (lease), our business premises should have good facilities.
To adopt this goal, we have to renew business premises. And the expected cost for this plan
is 300,000,000 vnđ. For this kind of business, we invest only once.

Hence, the start-up cost = 300,000,000 vnđ

For Coffee-Food:

After investigating the surrounding environment of business premises, we realized that


there were many offices, universities, high schools, etc. But there were few places for
officers and students at the break times and few restaurants serving demand of breakfast
and lunch of customer. Hence we decide Coffee-Food Restaurant as an alternative in our
business plan.

After determining the kind of business, we define the scale of project. This does mean we It
means what prices will be suitable and what style. We made the survey people around this
location then we get:

The style of Coffee-Food

The average price per unit

Page 5
Drink

Breakfast Food

Lunch Food

Page 6
*Source1: Direct Survey and Online Survey

From all of above information, we can define the scale of our Coffee-Food is medium level
to attract customers have medium income and students. Then we can use the simulation
method for some Coffee-Food has the scale like this to estimate the Demand

Now we can decide how much we should invest on each of factors of the start-up-cost.

The start-up cost = Cost of construction + Cost of decoration + COGS at 1 st week +


Miscellaneous cost + Unexpected Cost

- Cost of construction: because the probability of garden style is higher so we choose


the architecture is garden. Then we estimate the cost of it is 1,400,000,000 vnđ

- Cost of decoration: include cost of furniture, pictures, music instruments…Then we


estimate the cost of it is 400,000,000vnđ.

- Cost of goods sold at the 1st week: According to result of the simulation data from
the 7 first dayys, we have the COGS for the 7 first days is 33,504,000 vnđ.

- Unexpected cost: 16,496,000 vnđ

- Miscellaneous cost: Promotion gifts, banner, advertising…Then we estimate the


cost of it is 50,000,000vnđ.

The start-up cost =1,400,000,000 + 400,000,000 + 33,504,000 + 16,496,000 +


50,000,000 = 1,900,000,000 vnđ

For The Fashion Shop:

We will explain why we choose Fashion Shop for our multiple business plans.

Depend on our observation around our business premises, we realize that there are not
only have some advantages like Fashion Shop but also have many fashion shops along this
street. Moreover, to avoid the traffic jam at the rush hours, this way seems to be the best
choice for people who are living in Binh Thanh district and Go Vap district.

After determine the kind of business, we define the scale of project. It means what prices
will be suitable and what style. We made the survey people around this location then we
get:

Probability of each price customer willing to buy

Clothes

1 Appendix: Survey Result

Page 7
Trousers

*Source2: Direct Survey and Online Survey

From all of above information, we can define the scale of our Fashion shop. Then we can
use the simulation method for some Fashion Shop has the scale like this to estimate the
Demand

Now we can decide how much we should invest on each of factors of the start-up-cost.

The start-up cost = Cost of construction + Cost of decoration + COGS of the first month
+ Miscellaneous cost + Unexpected Expense

2 Appendix: Survey Result

Page 8
- Cost of construction: Because the architecture of a fashion shop is simpler. So we do need
to rebuilt, we can renew it. By this way we can save a lot of fund. Then we estimate the cost
of it is 170,000,000vnđ

- Cost of decoration: include cost of furniture, shefts, clothes-hangers, music


instruments…Then we estimate the cost of it is 65,000,000vnđ.

- Cost of good sold of the 2 first weeks: According to result of the simulation data from the
first month, we have the COGS 164,391,500 vnđ.

- Unexpected expense: 25,608,500 vnđ

- Miscellaneous cost: Promotion gifts, banner, advertising…Then we estimate the cost of it


is 20,000,000vnđ.

The start-up cost = 170,000,000 + 65,000,000 + 164,391,500 + 25,608,500 +


20,000,000 = 400,000,000vnđ

For Rent Coffee-Food Fashion Shop


Start-up-cost 300,000,000vnđ 1,900,000,000vnđ 400,000,000vnđ

4. Analysis the Break-event:

Payback period is also one of the factor influence the decision making for business.

For lease:

The average price for lease of my premises is $2200 per month. Normally, we will receive
payment for at least one year or more than one year– it depends on how long the contract
does.

Hence,

Gross Profit = 2800 x 12 x 16,800 = 564,480,000 vnđ

Income Tax = 20.8% x 564,480,000 = 117,411,840 vnđ

Net Income = 447,068,160 vnđ

Star-up-cost = 300,000,000 vnđ

Therefore, the pay pack period equal 1 month.

Page 9
For Coffee-Food:

After simulating 3 coffee shops and fast-food, we estimate the number of coffee and food
selling per year by using the simulation method.

Star-up-cost: we calculated on the analysis capital part. There are the cost of construction,
decoration, miscellaneous, unexpected cost and operation cost for first week

Sale: basing our projected coffee and food sales, we generate a conservative estimated by
calculating the total number of customers. Then basing on the price we got from survey we
can calculate the sale for each year.

Cost of Goods Sold: the cost of goods sold for coffee-food related products was determined
by the retail profit analysis. We assume that cost of coffee is 40% of the selling price. The
cost of lunch and breakfast per unit is 60% of selling price.

Salaries expense: we intend to hire eighteen full-time employees and ten part-time
employees include: manager, cashier, cook, waiters, waitress, security guards… The
average wage per full-time employee is 1,400,000vnđ/month and part-time employee is
700,000vnđ/month.

Other operating expense: including electricity bills, water bills, gas, phone, internet,
unexpected cost…

Income tax: is 10% total income from continuing operations before income tax.

Financial Sheet

Start-up Cost 1,900,000,000.00


Net sale 3,543,360,000.00
Cost of Good sold 1,624,320,000.00
Gross profit 1,919,040,000.00
Operating Expenses
Salaries 388,800,000.00
Rent -
Other operating expenses 144,000,000.00 532,800,000.00
Income from continuing operations before income tax 1,386,240,000.00
Income tax 138,624,000.00
Net income 1,247,616,000.00

For Fashion Shop:

Page 10
After simulating 3 fashion shops, we estimate the number of clothes and trousers selling
per year by using the simulation method.

Star-up-cost: we calculated on the analysis capital part. There are the cost of construction,
decoration, miscellaneous, unexpected cost and operation cost for first week

Sale: basing our projected clothes and trousers sales, we generate a conservative estimated
by calculating the total number of customers. Then basing on the price for each product
that we got from survey, we can calculate the sale for each year.

Cost of Goods Sold: the cost of goods sold for coffee-food related products was determined
by the retail profit analysis. We assume that cost of clothes is 70% of the selling price. The
cost of trousers is 65% of selling price.

Salaries expense: we intend to hire ten full-time employees and seven part-time employees
include: manager, cashier, sellers, security guards… The average wage per full-time
employee is 1,600,000vnđ/month and part-time employee is 800,000vnđ/month.

Other operating expense: including electricity bills, water bills, unexpected cost…

Income tax: is 10% total income from continuing operations before income tax.

Financial Sheet
Start-up Cost 400,000,000.00
Sale 2,689,284,000.00
Cost of Goods sold 1,890,470,400.00
Gross profit 893,300,400.00
Operating Expenses
Salaries 259,200,000.00
Rent -
Other operating expenses 66,000,000.00 325,200,000.00
Income from continuing operations before income tax 568,100,400.00
Income tax 56,810,040.00
Net income 511,290,360.00

Paypack period
Start-up Cost 400,000,000.00 /Year
Net income 511,290,360.00 /Year
Paypack period 0.78 Year
(Start-up Cost /Net income ) 9.39 Month

For lease Coffee-Food Fashion Shop


Payback period (months) 1 19 10

Page 11
5. Description of Risk criterion

The third criterion used to evaluate 3 alternatives is risk. Like many other criteria, risk has
5.
a very big influence in a business’s success, including business risk and economical risk.
5.
Business risk is the internal risk which comes from the inside of a business. In running a
business like a cafeteria or a fashion shop, the most internal risk a business has to face is
5.
Management. A good management can lever the success of a business. For instance, good
attitude, good behavior of employees can satisfy customer or high quality of product can
5.
reach or exceed customer’s need. Therefore, a good management can help a business to
improve its competitive advantages, and to increase its position in the market as well. In
5.
contrast, a weak management is a barrier to a business. It is the reason of financial loss, bad
employee’s
5. behavior, and low quality product. Hence, it negatively affects reputation and
prestige of company in resulting. A weak management profoundly harms a business’s
5. reduces its ability to compete with others. When operating, a business faces not
strength;
only internal risk but also the risk from the outside of the company, which is called as
5.
“economical risk”. A business cannot control this type of risk, but in order to survive and
develop, it has to itself adapt to the change of economy. The most reason of economical
5.
risk is the inflation which directly affects on a business. For instance, when inflation
occurs,
5. the price of every goods suddenly increases; customer tends to pay less to save
their money. As a result, the demand for goods decreases. In this case, a business faces
5. problems such as the profit decreases while spending on employees’ wage, price of
many
material increases simultaneously. Hence, a business finds many difficulties in competing
5.
with others and developing. For those reasons, risk is one of the most important criteria
need be carefully evaluated when making decision to select the highest priority project.
5.

D. APPLYING
5. THE AHP
The AHP modeling process involves four steps, namely, structuring the decision problem,
5. pair wise comparison matrix, determining normalized weights and synthesize the
creating
priorities.
5.
6. Structuring the Data

5.
Page 12
5.
System Selection Problem

The survey was pre-tested with the IU’s teachers and students to ensure that all the criteria
were well formulated and properly understood. These respondents all have experience in
QA. We tried to ask both students and teachers who give us general points of view about
this case. The respondents in the pre-test were interviewed to discuss the selection criteria
in more detail and reformulate the AHP hierarchy. We always receive a objective opinion
from them that make the result of survey fairly and more accuracy. We also constructed the
sub-criteria of Risk to specify the risk criterion and to give weight of risk for each
alternative in next steps.

7. Creating Pair-wise Comparison Matrix

It is very hard to collect data from people who is lack of experience about Quantitative
Analysis, because they cannot responds as well as our expectation. A questionnaire
including all criteria and sub-criteria of the nine levels AHP hierarchy was designed to
collect the pair-wise comparison matrices. The questionnaire was composed of two
sections. The first section includes all criteria and sub-criteria in which we asked
participants about pair-wise comparison and guide them to select carefully and most
appropriate with their idea. The second section included these matrixes to rate all criteria
for each alternatives. As the result, we have five matrices. The collected data were then
analyzed and normalized. We construct an average criterion comparison as following:

CAPITAL PROFIT RISK


CAPITAL 1 2.075 2.53
PROFIT 0.483 1 1.51
RISK 0.395 0.662 1

8. Determining Normalized Weights

In this part, the pair-wise comparison matrices obtained from experts are combined by
using the mean approach. The consistency ratio (CR) of each pair-wise comparison matrix
is also shown. It can be found that the CR values are far less than 0.1, the value suggested
by Saaty. This indicates that the experts’ opinions are consistent in measuring the pair-wise
comparison judgments. Besides, the CR values between matrices filled out by the same
experts are also less than 0.1. This implies that the data in each questionnaire are
consistent.

Firstly, we are going to check this result of the survey by calculating the consistency ration
(CR):

Page 13
Normalize values:

The number in the matrix is divided by their respective column totals as follow:

CAPITAL PROFIT RISK


CAPITAL 1.597 1.667 1.505
PROFIT 0.771 0.803 0.898
RISK 0.63 0.531 0.595

Find the average of the various rows from the matrix as follows:

AVERAGE
CAPITAL 1.589
PROFIT 0.824
RISK 0.585

We move to determine the vector consistency by multiplying the pair-wise matrix with
average column:

CAPITAL PROFIT RISK


CAPITAL 1 2.075 2.53 X 1.589
PROFIT 0.483 1 1.51 0.824
RISK 0.395 0.662 1 0.585

The result:

4.778

2.474

1.761

We move to determine the consistency index (CI)

4.778/1.589 3.006
2.474/0.824 3.002
1.761/0.585 3.010

Page 14
The average value of consistency vector:  =3.006

 n
CI  = (3.006-3)/(3-1)=0.003
n 1

CI
CR  = (0.003/0.58)=0.00517
RI

Since 0< CR < 0.1, we accept this result.

Do similarly, we also calculate the CR of the table of sub-criteria of risk, we see that:

ECONOMICAL BUSINESS
ECONOMICAL 1 1.46
BUSINESS 0.684 1

For two factors in this matrix are always right.

After calculating the CR, we have priority table for each criteria:

For three criteria:

CAPITAL PROFIT RISK PRIORITY


CAPITAL 1 2.075 2.53 0.526
PROFIT 0.483 1 1.51 0.281
RISK 0.395 0.662 1 0.193

For two risk criteria:

ECONOMICAL BUSINESS PRIORITY


ECONOMICAL 1 1.46 0.594
BUSINESS 0.684 1 0.406

In conclusion, we can do similarly for many times to find out the lowest consistency ratio
for criteria. However in this case we have a careful survey and guideline that give us
objective opinion about our criteria, that is why the consistency ratio is pretty low in
acceptable interval that is smaller than 0.1. Finally we use this result to get a general and
objective view about our case.

Page 15
9. Synthesize the Priorities

Another important part is to give weight for each alternative and make decision. After
calculating the normalized priority weights for each pair-wise comparison matrix of the
AHP hierarchy, the next step is to synthesize the local priority weights of criteria and sub-
criteria for obtaining the set of global composite priorities.

In this case, the scale for PROFIT, Capital scale, we take it by calculating the percentage of
each criterion in total then inversing them, for risk scale, we take it by combination
between risk priority above and CAPITAL, scale with CAPITAL relates to economic risk and
PROFIT relates to business risk as we take the sum of product of CAPITAL and economic
risk and product of PROFIT and business risk.

Basing on the analysis of CAPIATAL and PROFIT, and risk description, risk survey and the
dependence of risk from CAPITAL and PROFIT, we can give factor evaluation for each
alternative as following:

Factor CAPITAL PROFIT RISK


FOR RENT 8.695 2.45 6.16
CAFETERIA 1.368 6.95 3.63
FASHION SHOP 6.493 3.24 5.17

Then, we have result table:

Factor CAPITAL PROFIT RISK Result


FOR RENT 8.695 2.45 6.16 6.45
CAFETERIA 1.368 6.95 3.63 3.37
FASHION SHOP 6.493 3.24 5.17 5.32
Priority 0.526 0.281 0.193

Look at the result table above, the final decision should be FOR RENT alternative.

E. CONCLUSIONS
Nowadays, decision making becomes more and more complicated for businessman. Every
decision makers have to deal with dramatically increasing alternatives, many conflicting
goals due to aggressive fluctuation of global economy. Thus, most of decision is multiple-
criteria decision. In this paper, we find out adequacy of AHP to support decision making.

A framework of 3 criteria was used to evaluate AHP. 7

Page 16
Quantitative Analysis for Business

F. REFERENCES

Barry Render & Ralph M. Stair, Jr. & Michael E. Hanna. Quantitative Analysis for
Management, 8E Textbook

www.wikipedia.com

http://www.bplans.com/Sample_Business_Plans

Page 17
Quantitative Analysis for Business

G. APPENDIX

10. Simulation

Fashion Shop

Clothes Demand Table

Number of
Prob. Lower Cum. Demand Total
Demand

5 0.17 0 0.17 16 80
6 0.2 0.17 0.37 25 150
9 0.3 0.37 0.67 29 261
4 0.13 0.67 0.8 35 140
3 0.1 0.8 0.9 48 144
2 0.07 0.9 0.97 54 108
1 0.03 0.97 1 80 80
30 1 963
Average
Price Sale
Price Price per unit
(x1000VNĐ Prob. Demand (x1000VNĐ
(x1000VNĐ (x1000VNĐ)
) )
)

70-150 110 0.5 481.5 52965 `

150-250 200 0.36 346.68 69336

250-350 300 0.14 134.82 40446

Total 963 162747 169

Trousers Demand Table

Number of
Prob. Lower Cum. Demand Total
Demand

7 0.23 0 0.23 7 49
8 0.27 0.23 0.5 9 72
6 0.2 0.5 0.7 11 66
3 0.1 0.7 0.8 15 45
3 0.1 0.8 0.9 18 54
2 0.07 0.9 0.97 20 40
1 0.03 0.97 1 22 22
30 1 348
Average
Price Sale
Price Price per unit
(x1000VNĐ Prob. Demand (x1000VNĐ
(x1000VNĐ (x1000VNĐ)
) )
)

100-150 125 0.14 48.72 6090 `


150-200 175 0.57 198.36 34713
200-300 250 0.21 73.08 18270
300-400 350 0.07 24.36 8526
344.52 67599 196

Page 18
Average price of Clothes 169000
Average price of Trousers 196000

Percent expense Clothes 0.7


Percent expense Trousers 0.65

Ran.
Day Ran. No1 Clothes Trousers COGS Net sale Gross profit
No2
1 0.08 16.00 0.44 9 3,039,400.00 4,468,000.00 1,428,600.00
2 0.74 35.00 0.77 15 6,051,500.00 8,855,000.00 2,803,500.00
3 0.64 29.00 0.80 18 5,723,900.00 8,429,000.00 2,705,100.00
4 0.17 25.00 0.28 9 4,104,100.00 5,989,000.00 1,884,900.00
5 0.01 16.00 0.00 7 2,784,600.00 4,076,000.00 1,291,400.00
6 0.01 16.00 0.98 22 4,695,600.00 7,016,000.00 2,320,400.00
7 0.23 25.00 0.71 15 4,868,500.00 7,165,000.00 2,296,500.00
8 0.13 16.00 0.54 11 3,294,200.00 4,860,000.00 1,565,800.00
9 0.42 29.00 0.55 11 4,832,100.00 7,057,000.00 2,224,900.00
10 0.09 16.00 0.76 15 3,803,800.00 5,644,000.00 1,840,200.00
11 0.17 25.00 0.65 11 4,358,900.00 6,381,000.00 2,022,100.00
12 0.48 29.00 0.66 11 4,832,100.00 7,057,000.00 2,224,900.00
13 0.77 35.00 0.87 18 6,433,700.00 9,443,000.00 3,009,300.00
14 0.99 80.00 0.40 9 10,610,600.00 15,284,000.00 4,673,400.00
15 0.06 16.00 0.74 15 3,803,800.00 5,644,000.00 1,840,200.00
16 0.18 25.00 0.75 15 4,868,500.00 7,165,000.00 2,296,500.00
17 0.54 29.00 0.67 11 4,832,100.00 7,057,000.00 2,224,900.00
18 0.89 48.00 0.23 9 6,825,000.00 9,876,000.00 3,051,000.00
19 0.56 29.00 0.82 18 5,723,900.00 8,429,000.00 2,705,100.00
20 0.40 29.00 0.55 11 4,832,100.00 7,057,000.00 2,224,900.00
21 0.43 29.00 0.52 11 4,832,100.00 7,057,000.00 2,224,900.00
22 0.92 54.00 0.29 9 7,534,800.00 10,890,000.00 3,355,200.00
23 0.39 29.00 0.31 9 4,577,300.00 6,665,000.00 2,087,700.00
24 0.73 35.00 1.00 22 6,943,300.00 10,227,000.00 3,283,700.00
25 0.10 16.00 0.90 20 4,440,800.00 6,624,000.00 2,183,200.00
26 0.39 29.00 0.32 9 4,577,300.00 6,665,000.00 2,087,700.00
27 0.01 16.00 0.05 7 2,784,600.00 4,076,000.00 1,291,400.00
28 0.65 29.00 0.59 11 4,832,100.00 7,057,000.00 2,224,900.00
29 0.77 35.00 0.37 9 5,287,100.00 7,679,000.00 2,391,900.00
30 0.70 35.00 0.90 20 6,688,500.00 9,835,000.00 3,146,500.00
Total 152,816,300.00 223,727,000.00 70,910,700.00

Page 19
Financial Sheet

Start-up Cost 400,000,000.00


Sale 2,689,284,000.00
Cost of Goods sold 1,890,470,400.00
Gross profit 893,300,400.00
Operating Expenses
Salaries 259,200,000.00
Rent -
Other operating expenses 66,000,000.00 325,200,000.00
Income from continuing operations before income tax 568,100,400.00
Income tax 56,810,040.00
Net income
511,290,360.00

Pay pack period

Start-up Cost 400,000,000.00


Net income 511,290,360.00
Pay pack period (months) 9.39

Cafe-Food Restaurant

Drink Demand Table

Number of
Prob. Lower Cum. Demand
Times
6 0.2 0 0.2 180
9 0.3 0.2 0.5 280
7 0.23 0.5 0.73 300
5 0.17 0.73 0.9 320
3 0.1 0.9 1 350
Total 30 1

Lunch Food Demand Table

Number of
Times Prob. Lower Cum. Demand
4 0.13 0 0.13 50
4 0.13 0.13 0.27 70
5 0.17 0.27 0.43 100
9 0.3 0.43 0.73 120
8 0.27 0.73 1 150
Total 30 1

Page 20
Average price
Drinks 24000.00
Foods 28000.00
Expenses percentage
Drink 0.4
Food 0.6

Ran. Ran.
Day Drink Food COGS Net sale Gross profit
No1 No2

1 0.94 350 0.03 50 4,200,000.00 9,800,000.00 5,600,000.00


2 0.45 280 0.15 70 3,864,000.00 8,680,000.00 4,816,000.00
3 0.05 180 0.78 150 4,248,000.00 8,520,000.00 4,272,000.00
4 0.95 350 0.8 150 5,880,000.00 12,600,000.00 6,720,000.00
5 0.56 300 0.84 150 5,400,000.00 11,400,000.00 6,000,000.00
6 0.42 280 0.81 150 5,208,000.00 10,920,000.00 5,712,000.00
7 0.23 280 0.44 120 4,704,000.00 10,080,000.00 5,376,000.00
8 0.38 280 0.36 100 4,368,000.00 9,520,000.00 5,152,000.00
9 0.4 280 0.18 70 3,864,000.00 8,680,000.00 4,816,000.00
10 0.76 320 0.03 50 3,912,000.00 9,080,000.00 5,168,000.00
11 0.92 350 0.02 50 4,200,000.00 9,800,000.00 5,600,000.00
12 0.9 350 0.33 100 5,040,000.00 11,200,000.00 6,160,000.00
13 0.59 300 0.83 150 5,400,000.00 11,400,000.00 6,000,000.00
14 0.88 320 0.17 70 4,248,000.00 9,640,000.00 5,392,000.00
15 0.79 320 0.92 150 5,592,000.00 11,880,000.00 6,288,000.00
16 0.23 280 0.13 70 3,864,000.00 8,680,000.00 4,816,000.00
17 0.67 300 0.42 100 4,560,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,440,000.00
18 0.58 300 0.04 50 3,720,000.00 8,600,000.00 4,880,000.00
19 0.46 280 0.65 120 4,704,000.00 10,080,000.00 5,376,000.00
20 0.23 280 0.72 120 4,704,000.00 10,080,000.00 5,376,000.00
21 0.57 300 0.11 50 3,720,000.00 8,600,000.00 4,880,000.00
22 0.13 180 0.62 120 3,744,000.00 7,680,000.00 3,936,000.00
23 0.91 350 0.62 120 5,376,000.00 11,760,000.00 6,384,000.00
24 0.05 180 0.32 100 3,408,000.00 7,120,000.00 3,712,000.00
25 0.91 350 0.74 150 5,880,000.00 12,600,000.00 6,720,000.00
26 0.29 280 0.94 150 5,208,000.00 10,920,000.00 5,712,000.00
27 0.22 280 0.1 50 3,528,000.00 8,120,000.00 4,592,000.00
28 0.16 180 0.39 100 3,408,000.00 7,120,000.00 3,712,000.00
29 0.39 280 0.01 50 3,528,000.00 8,120,000.00 4,592,000.00
30 0.99 350 0.78 150 5,880,000.00 12,600,000.00 6,720,000.00
Total 135,360,000.00 295,280,000.00 159,920,000.00

Page 21
Financial Sheet

Start-up Cost
1,900,000,000.00
Net sale
3,543,360,000.00
Cost of Good sold
1,624,320,000.00
Gross profit
1,919,040,000.00
Operating Expenses

Salaries
388,800,000.00
Rent -
Other operating expenses
144,000,000.00 532,800,000.00
Income from continuing operations before income tax
1,386,240,000.00
Income tax
138,624,000.00
Net income
1,247,616,000.00

Paypack period
Start-up Cost 1,900,000,000.00 /Year
Net income 1,247,616,000.00/ Year
Paypack period 1.52 Year
(Start-up Cost /Net income ) or 18.27 Month

Page 22
11. Survey result

Direct Survey and Online Survey

Frequency Table

Xin hoi muc do mua sam cua anh/chi nhu the nao

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Moi tuan 1 lan. 5 5.0 5.0 5.0

Moi thang 1 lan. 15 15.0 15.0 20.0

2-3 lan mot nam. 10 10.0 10.0 30.0

Thich thi mua (khong co ke


70 70.0 70.0 100.0
hoach).

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Moi lan mua sam anh chi thuong mua bao nhieu quan/ao

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 1-3 quan/ao. 85 85.0 85.0 85.0

3-5 quan/ao. 15 15.0 15.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Moi mot ao thuong tri gia bao nhieu

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 70.000-150.000 50 50.0 50.0 50.0

150.000-200.000 36 36.0 36.0 86.0

200.000-300.000 14 14.0 14.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Moi mot quan thuong tri gia bao nhieu

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 100.000 - 150.000 14 14.0 14.0 14.0

150.000 - 200.000 59 59.0 59.0 73.0

Page 23
200.000 - 300.000 20 20.0 20.0 93.0

Gia khac 7 7.0 7.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Anh chi thuong thich su dung hang xuat xu tu dau

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Viet Nam. 20 20.0 20.0 20.0

Trung Quoc/ Hong Kong 40 40.0 40.0 60.0

Hang hieu ( Louis Vuiton,


10 10.0 10.0 70.0
Tommy, Gap, Lacoste…).

Y kien khac 30 30.0 30.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Truoc tinh trang lam phat hien nay, gia tieu dung leo thang thi nhu cau mua sam cua anh chi co giam bot hay
khong

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Khong anh huong 11 11.0 11.0 11.0

Rat it anh huong 42 42.0 42.0 53.0

Kha anh huong 32 32.0 32.0 85.0

Kha anh huong 15 15.0 15.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Ban thich quan cafe-food co kien truc nhu the nao?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Kien truc mo 64 64.0 64.0 64.0

Kien truc hien dai 36 36.0 36.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Anh/chi co thuong den quan cafe-food vao nhung luc nao

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Moi ngay 10 10.0 11.1 11.1

Page 24
1 – 3 lan/tuan 30 30.0 33.3 44.4

3 - 5 lan/tuan 15 15.0 16.7 61.1

1 – 2 lan/thang 35 35.0 38.9 100.0

Total 90 90.0 100.0

Missing System 10 10.0

Total 100 100.0

Muc dich anh/chi di den quan cafe-food de

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 1 85 85.0 100.0 100.0

Missing System 15 15.0

Total 100 100.0

Anh/chi co thuong den quan cafe-food vao nhung luc nao

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 1 20 20.0 100.0 100.0

Missing System 80 80.0

Total 100 100.0

Muc dich anh/chi di den quan cafe-food de

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 1 20 20.0 100.0 100.0

Missing System 80 80.0

Total 100 100.0

Chi phi cho moi hoa don cua anh/chi thuong la bao nhieu tren 1 nguoi cho thuc uong

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid < 20.000 18 18.0 18.0 18.0

30.000 - 35.000 19 19.0 19.0 37.0

> 50.000 1 1.0 1.0 38.0

20.000 - 25.000 62 62.0 62.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Page 25
Neu quan cafe-food gan cong ty anh/chi co phuc vu them thuc an sang va com trua van phong, anh/chi co san

sang su dung dich vu do khong

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Dong y 86 86.0 86.0 86.0

Khong dong y 14 14.0 14.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Theo anh/chi gia cho thuc an sang bao nhieu la hop ly

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 10.000 - 15.000 36 36.0 36.0 36.0

15.000 - 20.000 63 63.0 63.0 99.0

20.000 - 25.000 1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Theo anh/chi gia cho mot suat com trua van phong la hop ly

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 15.000 - 20.000 30 30.0 30.0 30.0

20.000 - 25.000 64 64.0 64.0 94.0

25.000 - 30.000 6 6.0 6.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Truoc tinh trang lam phat hien nay, gia tieu dung leo thang thi nhu cau mua sam cua anh chi co giam bot hay

khong

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Khong anh huong 12 12.0 12.0 12.0

Rat it anh huong 20 20.0 20.0 32.0

Kha anh huong 63 63.0 63.0 95.0

Rat anh huong 5 5.0 5.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Page 26
Page 27

Centres d'intérêt liés