From the Rolls-Royce experimental archive: a quarter of a million communications from Rolls-Royce, 1906 to 1960's. Documents from the Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation (SHRMF).
Chassis pricing, cost analysis for the 40/50 and Goshawk models, and future works policy.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 18\6\ Scan290 | |
| Date | 24th November 1920 guessed | |
| -2- would be killed for the following reason. If the big 40/50 was sold at £1600 and the Goshawk at £1400 the number of buyers who would prefer the former would be very small. Therefore it is desirable to sell present work in progress of big chassis, amounting to 850, (20% complete) at £1600 prior to the appearance of the Goshawk." It was stated that the cost of making the present 40/50 was £1307 - Labour charges amounting to £ 323. Establishment charges - £484 on an output of the equivalent to 750 big chassis a year. Material at present value- £500. This does not include tyres, or Sales expenses. It was calculated that the loss per chassis at £1600 from number 2100 chassis onwards, would be £130 per chassis. It was agreed that this question of further reduction in the price of the big chassis should be brought up again in two months' time. Wor.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} thought that the Goshawk only ought to cost £1013, this is a selling price from Works to Sales, made up as follows - Labour - £275 Establishment charges - £400 if we sell the equivalent of 750 big chassis per year, and 750 Goshawks per year. Material - £338 £1013 Add cost of tyres 34 and cost for Sales. - 60 £1107. If the retail price were £1400 (that is average price of £1225) the profit would be only £118. (2) IMMEDIATE FUTURE POLICY OF THE WORKS. Mr. Wormald stated that the Works were already working considerable shorttime and that any further decrease in the hours worked by the men was impossible. The only thing would be that if we wanted to still further reduce the number of chassis made, to discharge our workpeople, most of whom now have been with us 10 and 12 years, and they constitute our very best workmen, and that it was serious to get rid of these men because if we are going to be busy again, we shall need them for the Goshawk, and any further work. He further stated that there is very little difference now in the men's earnings with the number of hours which we can allow them to work, and the money they would get if they were doing no work, because they would be able to get out-of-work pay | ||