Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Exams - Please Limit Discussion to Exam-Related Topics > SoA > Modules 6-8
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old 11-12-2008, 11:27 AM
Patrickp's Avatar
Patrickp Patrickp is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quebec
Studying for Exam DP RC
Favorite beer: Hooegarden
Posts: 392
Exclamation

the technique described here to separate energy costs seem to be flawed . There is too much assumptions used to separate this cost and in the ending , the result is crap. anybody just did an A/E and recommended to Can-do to group their experience differently ?
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 11-12-2008, 02:26 PM
Helmet Helmet is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 26
Default

I simply removed the labor costs from total costs and then looked at actual vs. projected of the remaining "non-labor costs", including energy, delivery, and equipment.

But, I also don't know if I passed yet!
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 11-12-2008, 03:18 PM
Patrickp's Avatar
Patrickp Patrickp is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quebec
Studying for Exam DP RC
Favorite beer: Hooegarden
Posts: 392
Thumbs up

good idea . i will go for that too since there is no solid indication that these assumptions should be revised .
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 11-12-2008, 04:10 PM
Patrickp's Avatar
Patrickp Patrickp is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quebec
Studying for Exam DP RC
Favorite beer: Hooegarden
Posts: 392
Default

dude by doing this type of analysis im far from 1 . did you recommend a change ?
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 11-12-2008, 05:12 PM
Helmet Helmet is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 26
Default

Yes, I did recommend a change to both "non-labor" costs and labor costs.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 11-12-2008, 07:11 PM
Patrickp's Avatar
Patrickp Patrickp is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quebec
Studying for Exam DP RC
Favorite beer: Hooegarden
Posts: 392
Question

yeah but how can you recommend a new assumption for the non-labor cost if you cant split them ?
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 11-12-2008, 08:01 PM
Helmet Helmet is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 26
Default

I recommended the same % change to all non-labor costs based on actual vs. projected.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 11-13-2008, 10:24 AM
Patrickp's Avatar
Patrickp Patrickp is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quebec
Studying for Exam DP RC
Favorite beer: Hooegarden
Posts: 392
Default

i dont think you can revised your assumptions of maintenance , delivery cost and energy according to your % change on the total cost since you dont know which is responsible for the deviation. I dont know what to do.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 11-13-2008, 01:13 PM
Helmet Helmet is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 26
Default

You can only provide recommendations based on the information available. Since the non-labor costs are all lumped together, you can only recommend changes in the aggregate. You can't determine which is responsible for the deviation. Simply note that in your report.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 11-13-2008, 02:53 PM
Patrickp's Avatar
Patrickp Patrickp is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quebec
Studying for Exam DP RC
Favorite beer: Hooegarden
Posts: 392
Default

thank you for your help . That's what i did .
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
final assessment, task 6

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.17739 seconds with 9 queries