Dayna Koroll - T00036507

Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727

Ashwin Raju -

Simulation Report 2

Introduction

Figure 1: The ending rank and cash balance of the simulation

For this simulation, our first goal was to build everything we thought that we would need
as soon as possible to try and pay it off. We thought this would help be able to serve regions,
keep up with demand and pull ahead of the rest of the teams. However, it wasn’t until right near
the end did we start doing fairly well. We also thought that we would try and calculate reorder
points (ROP) and economic order quantities (EOQ) to see if that would help satisfy the incoming
demand. What we did in the previous simulation clearly didn’t work out, so, we figured that
sitting down and doing calculations to figure out demand quantities would help us do better in
this simulation. Figure 1 shows how we came in 3rd against the 7 teams (8 if you include
donothing) with a final cash balance of $11,601,042.32.
We used a Facebook group to communicate the decisions we wanted to make. When one
of us had an idea we would put it to the group to see what the others would say and it is also
where any modifications or suggestions to that particular idea were made. Having a third person
to bounce ideas off was also beneficial because 3 brains are better than 2 and as a result, we were
actually able to beat the “donothing” team! There were quite a few bumps in the road along the
way, for example, not using trucking and using mailing instead. We think this is one of our
biggest downfalls in this simulation run but if we were to do another run, we feel as though we
would do much better.

Previous Simulation Comparison

 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

→
Figure 2: Shows the change in position from the first simulation to the second simulation

The amount of effort put into the second simulation was much higher than in the first. We
spent more time doing calculations, and designing and implementing our strategy than in the first
one where we were just playing around with things to see how it all worked. I think our efforts
were reflected in our results for both of the simulations. The first simulation was a trial and error
run, which we thankfully learned from for the second run.
If you refer to Figure 2, I think that our success was due to several reasons. First and
foremost, we had a third person who actually contributed to the analysis, which allowed us to be
able to bounce off ideas between the three of us instead of just the two of us. Another reason we
think we did better is that we had a much better understanding of the ROP and quantities. There
was some confusion in the first simulation about what the ROP and quantities meant until
playing around with them for a bit. Cutting the production at the end of the simulation was
something that we didn’t do in the first simulation which we believe helped contribute to our
overall success. We didn’t have that excess stock sitting in our warehouses, though we did have
some leftover it wasn’t a significant amount. As you can see in Exhibit 2, we calculated demand
towards the end of the game to be able to change our ROP and EOQ to better service those
demands. Those calculations were helpful when deciding how much and when to produce units.
All in all, having better synergy amongst the team mates proved to be beneficial as well as
going in with a better strategy. We stuck to our plans from the first simulation and implemented
them in the second simulation run which bumped our final standing up from 6/7 to 3/8.

What We Did Throughout the Second Simulation

Reorder Point

We left the Calopeia ROP remain the same for a little while. Once the Sorange factory
was completed we set the reorder point to the Calopeia warehouse to 800. This was to help make
up some lost demand. Initially, we also set the Sorange warehouse reorder point to be 500 based
on some of the demand trends and lost demand numbers that we were seeing. Once the Fardo
warehouse was completed we set the ROP from the Sorange factory to be 400. As orders started
coming in and we started to see the amount of demand being fulfilled we decided that the reorder
point for the Calopeia warehouse from the Calopeia factory needed to be adjusted. We wanted to
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

trigger production sooner so the ROP was decreased to 500. We tried to balance the load of the
factories to specific warehouses. The Sorange and Fardo reorder points were changed to 200
from the Calopeia factory. Refer to day 869 in Exhibit 4.
After a while we were able to perform some ROP calculations to try and more accurately
forecast a reorder point if we switched the shipping by truck. It was determined that with demand
of 39.1 and an 8 day lead time for shipping and production the ROP for Calopeia factory to
Calopeia warehouse was set to 437. We also calculated the ROP for Fardo. Using a demand of
16.6 and lead times of 15 days it the order point was calculated and set at 890. We also adjusted
the Sorange order point for the Sorange warehouse to 400. Refer to day 1174 in Exhibit 4. With
these reorder points we also changed other factors explained in the section below. Like changing
the mail type to truck hence using the 8 day lead time. We started seeing lots of lost demand and
weren’t patient enough to see how it would work out in a bit more time and decided to change
some of the order points back to what we had.
We decided to stop serving Sorange from the Calopeia warehouse and set the order point
to 0. We increased the Sorange warehouse order point by just over double increasing it from 500
to 507 to 1,153. We tried making up some lost demand by letting Calopeia factory to produce
again for Sorange. We set the new order point back to 400. We also set Sorange factory order
point back to 400 as well for Calopeia warehouse. Some adjustments were made back and forth
but nothing of significant impact or change. We noticed that Fardo had a lot of inventory buildup
at its warehouse. The Calopeia warehouse order point was then set to 0 to stop serving Fardo and
let that warehouse just sell its inventory since it would last quite a long time before losing any
demand. This was done in hopes of saving some more money in transportation costs which
seemed to have worked.
For the last couple hundred days of the simulation we made lots of changes back and
forth for the reorder points. The goal was to only have the factories produce and serve one
warehouse at a time. We would set an order point for a warehouse, Sorange, and once that batch
was shipped we would change the order point to 0 and set the order point back up to what it was
for the other warehouse, Calopeia. This was done to try and maximize which warehouses had the
most inventory to lose the least amount of demand. Near the end we also opted to put priority on
Calopeia and Sorange over Entworpe as it just didn’t seem worth it to produce and ship orders to
that region. It seemed we could gain more order by serving the other two northern regions more.
Within about the last two weeks or so we sent the last shipments to the warehouses and set all
reorder points to 0 to stop all production and to hopefully sell all the inventory by the time the
simulation ends.

Order Quantity

Once the initial warehouses were done being constructed we set the order quantities
based off a rough guess with looking at the demand trends until we had time to do some demand
forecasting calculations. We only did a few small changes in the order quantities to a couple
areas before we were able to run some analysis. We looked at the different demand trends in
each region and selected what seemed like an appropriate demand model to use to calculate the
demanded quantities. Table 1 below describes the order quantities set for each warehouse from
which factory.
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

Table 1: Initial Order Quantities Our Team Set

Factory Warehouse Order Quantity

Sorange Calopeia 400

Sorange Sorange 250

Sorange Fardo 100

Calopeia Calopeia 250

Calopeia Sorange 50

Calopeia Fardo 50

After looking at the demand trends for the Calopeia warehouse we used a multiplicative
demand function to calculate the demand forecast. Based on our factors we calculated the
demand to be about 655. We set the Calopeia factory order quantity for Calopeia warehouse to
this new calculated demand. For the Tyran and Fardo regions we used a 2 WMA demand
function to forecast the demand. Using this function we calculated that Fardo’s demand would be
around 427 and set the Calopeia factory to Fardo warehouse order quantity to the new calculated
demand. We calculated Tyran’s demand to be ________ which would also be handled by the
Calopeia warehouse but we frequently decided to just not serve that region.
To calculate the demand forecast for Sorange we used a tiered projection function. We
changed the Calopeia warehouse to not satisfy any demand in Sorange. Then after calculating the
demand forecast we set the Sorange factory order quantity to 500 for the Sorange warehouse.
After awhile we decided we needed to try and cut some costs and save on shipping anywhere we
could. We stopped factories from serving warehouses in other regions. We increased the order
quantity to 1,153 after a couple adjustments because we were seeing tons of lost demand and
thought it might have been due order sizes. The lost demand was most likely still because we had
changed the shipping to truck and weren’t patient enough to wait for the orders to ship properly.
We increased some of the other order quantities to try and capture more of the demand that was
being lost.
Near the end of the simulation we set the factories to only produce certain batches at a
time. We set the order point and quantity for each region and when the inventory was running
low we would set a production batch to run for that area. Once the batch was produced and
shipped we would then set the values back to zero and set the order point and quantity for the
next region. Also like the reorder point we set all quantities to zero for the end of the simulation
to sell all stocked inventory.

Shipping Method

As you can see from Exhibit 1, we spent over $44,000,000 in shipping. The initial
settings were set to mailing, which we decided to keep for a while. Around the 1300 day mark,
we switched to trucking to try and save money. However, when we did this we forget to change
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

the amount being produced and we were shipping only 50 units of demand out per truck. This is
when we started losing a ton of money, as well as demand. A truck has a capacity of 200 units,
which we should have changed to increments of 200 to utilize the trucks max load size. Once we
depleted our inventory in our warehouses and lost a significant amount of money, we switched
back to mailing (a costly choice, but it seemed to work okay).
Very early in the simulation (day 828) we changed the fulfillment policy to nearest. Even
if the clients had to wait slightly longer for their orders we wanted to ship from the nearest
location rather then other locations to see if it would bring down shipping costs. We still seemed
to be losing a fair bit of demand waiting for the orders to ship so we decided to change the
fulfillment policy to soonest due to other warehouses having stock in other areas. This seemed to
have positive impacts for quite a while but weren’t seeing the revenue gain we were hoping for.
Later on in the simulation, day 1,222, we changed it back to nearest to once again try and lower
shipping costs even if it meant missing some demand in some regions.
At the start of the simulation we left the Calopeia factory shipping as mail. Once the
Sorange factory was completed we set it’s shipping method to Sorange by truck. On day 826 we
changed the Calopeia factory to ship to Sorange warehouse to truck. We wanted to try and
optimized delivering by trucks to save on shipping. Several days later, around day 1,158, we
changed more shipping methods to truck. The ones we adjusted were Calopeia factory to
Calopeia warehouse and Calopeia factory to Fardo warehouse.
It seemed like we were having lots of loss demand and not saving much money on
shipping. On day 1,183 and the next few days we changed all the shipping methods back to mail.
We wanted to try and capture more of the lost demand we were seeing. We either weren’t patient
enough to wait out a few more orders, we might not of been shipping proper full truck loads or
there was an issue with our reorder points and quantities. Once we changed the shipping methods
back to mail we did start to see more gain in revenues after each warehouse sold out its inventory
again. After the hint Nancy gave within the last stretch of the simulation we wanted to change it
back to truck but figured there wouldn’t be time, already at day 1,368, to get a good return in
revenues again.

Factory Capacity Expansion

Increasing capacity at a factory takes 90 days so we decided to expand our factory’s

capacity for Calopeia to 129.92 right out of the gates. Calopeia had the highest overall demand in
the first 200 days, so we decided to increase the factory’s capacity as soon as possible in order to
get as much producing as quickly as we could. Exhibit 2 shows that for the first 200 days that the
simulation was running (and we were playing) that the demand was 10,273 for Calopeia, 7,708
for Sorange, 3,978 for Tyran, 4,250 for Entworpe and 4,027 for Fardo. This decision proved
quite helpful towards the end when demand was extremely high for Sorange. Being able to
produce approximately 130 units per day was helpful, however, it would probably have been to
have increased Sorange’s factory to a number greater than 30 than increasing Calopeia’s to near
130. Since the demand in Sorange was steadily increasing as the game progressed, increasing
that capacity would have proved more helpful than leaving it at 30. According to Exhibit 1 we
spent $5,095,450.23 on capacity which we think this was well justified since we were able to
keep up with demand after we built up a bit of an inventory.

Factory Construction
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

The given cost of building a factory is $500,000 and the cost of increasing a capacity of
$50,000/unit. We wanted to construct a factory as soon as possible since with our initial cash
balance of $4,000,000. Building one right away seemed to be the best choice because it the
sooner that we would have it built, the sooner we would start seeing the benefits from it and for a
longer period of time. A factory was built in Sorange with a capacity of 30 units since it had a
steady increase in demand throughout the game. We wanted to have a second factory because we
didn’t think that having just the one factory in Calopeia would be enough to satisfy all of the
demand coming in., especially from Sorange. In the last 200 days of the simulation, demand was
22,059 for Sorange whereas it was only 8,639 for Calopeia, 2,913 for Tyran, 3,500 for Entworpe
and finally only 3,022 for Fardo (refer to Exhibit 2). I think that the capacity should have been
increased to a number higher than 30, just because when the demand was steadily increasing we
just weren’t able to keep up with the rising demand. This seemed like the best place to build a
factory. In our last simulation, we built a factory in Entworpe because we thought it would save
costs, but really, having a factory in Sorange seemed to fair better for us.

Warehouse Construction

A warehouse can store an unlimited number of units of the product with holding costs for
a drum for one year of $100. The order gets shipped from the warehouse happens via mail at the
following fulfilment costs $150 if the customer is in the same region as the warehouse $200 if
the customer and warehouse are on different regions $400 if the customer is located in Fardo and
the warehouse is on mainland or vice-versa. This is why we wanted to build a factory in Sorange
and Fardo. For Fardo, we wanted to be able to build up enough of an inventory that we wouldn’t
have to worry about it for a while and be able to save money on shipping costs, since it is
$400/unit. We wanted to build a warehouse in Sorange because of the amount of demand
towards the end of the game.
We were hoping to be able to build up enough demand that we would be able to satisfy
the orders while it was getting shipped. We didn’t feel that it was necessary to build warehouses
in Entworpe or in Tyran because the demand was relatively low throughout the game. Exhibit 2
shows the demand for the entire game. Even though Tyran has a larger total demand, we decided
that because shipping was greater for Fardo that a warehouse would do it more justice than the
other two locations. Exhibit 1 shows the amount of $300,000 we spent for warehouses which
seemed to help us keep up with demand initially. However, since we accidentally depleted our
inventory in the warehouses around day 1,300, the warehouses were basically useless. At the end
of the simulation when Sorange’s demand was starting to slow down we were finally able to
build up a bit of an inventory that we could cut production and use up the inventory on hand.

Regions Serviced

When we first started the simulation, we decided to allow demand for all regions to be
satisfied from the Calopeia warehouse because we didn’t want to lose out of fulfilling demand.
In hindsight, it may not have been the best move since it depleted the inventory that was built up.
Once we built the other factory and warehouses we then blocked Fardo from being able to
service any regions. $400 per unit to ship was just not worth it to try and serve any other region
but Fardo. For the Sorange warehouse, we decided to allow it to service the Sorange region as
well as the Tyran region. For the Calopeia region, we blocked the Tyran and Sorange regions.
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

We did this so that demand would be satisfied without necessarily depleting the warehouses in
Calopeia and Sorange. Towards the end of the simulation at day 1,340 (refer to Exhibit 4) we
blocked servicing from Calopeia and Sorange to any other regions. Demand for the last 200 days
was limited in any region besides Calopeia and Sorange, which is why we felt it important to
stop servicing any other regions. We wanted to start saving shipping costs to service those other
regions, which appeared to help. If you refer to Exhibit 3, visually it appears that our decision to
stop servicing all regions helped our cash flows.

Performance Discussion

Failures:

Although we were very clear on the decision that we wanted to have two factories in
Calopeia and Sorange, what we had difficulty with was determining an optimal production
capacity for the factory in Sorange. Initially, we had set a capacity of 30 units/day not knowing
Sorange was going to have a linear trend since we didn’t have enough historical demand to
depend on. We had set the 30 units based on the limited demand information that we had for
Sorange and planned to cover any excess demand requirements that Sorange would have from
the factory in Calopeia, which had an approximate production of 130 units/day. Also, in
hindsight, we should have had a larger capacity for Sorange since we were serving all 5 regions
using the production from 2 factories.
As time passed by, we understood that Sorange’s demand was following a linear trend
and psychologically we were apprehensive about increasing the capacity, since it would mean
that we would have a huge setback in terms of our cash balance. This decision of setting a very
small capacity for Sorange along with psychologically being unable to change the capacity later
on in the game led to us having a lot of lost demand. Had we corrected our mistake even after a
couple of days into the game, we could most probably have reduced our lost demand by quite a
big margin. The lesson that we learned here was that inaction can be more dangerous than taking
a wrong action.
Secondly, we were initially using previous demand data and were trying to calculate
approximate EOQs and ROPs for all regions so that we could use trucking instead of mail to
capitalize on the cost savings that it would provide us with. For Calopeia, a region that followed
seasonal demand patterns, we used the multiplicative seasonal index model to predict future
demand. For Sorange, we tried using linear trend and moving average for Tyran and Fardo. Since
Entworpe had sporadic demands of 250 units, our plan was to build up excess inventory in the
Calopeia warehouse every now and then to meet these sporadic demands. After figuring out our
EOQs and ROPs, we switched to trucking hoping the cash savings would start rolling in right
away. In hindsight, the biggest mistake that we probably made was not sticking with our decision
to use trucks long enough to see the positive effects that it would have.
To be precise, once we turned to trucking, our lost demand started going up immediately.
We were probably very satisfied with the way we were satisfying our demand requirements
using mail, that seeing all the lost demand come out of nowhere was too overwhelming for us to
handle. Had we had the patience to wait for 8 days (from day 1,159 to 1,167) and lose demand
for those 8 days, we would definitely have had saved a lot of money on transportation by
satisfying satisfied all our demand that would have arisen from day 1,159 using trucking. Also
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

not realizing that we were trucking less than truckloads was a costly mistake. Shipping 50 units
at a time was losing us money. Had we shipped 200 units (a full truckload) we would have
reaped the benefits of trucking. Refer to Figure 3 to see the drop in our cash balance around the
time we switched to trucking (approximately day 1200).
Another huge mistake that we had initially made was cross satisfying demand in Calopeia
and Sorange warehouses using the factories in those areas based on the fulfillment policy of
soonest. This meant that the Sorange factory with a limited production of 30 units/day would be
satisfying the demand arising from the warehouse in Calopeia at $200/unit if it was the one with
the ability to fulfill at the earliest possible time, and still be unable to satisfy all of the demand
for Calopeia since Calopeia was, at the time of this decision, serving three regions (Calopeia,
Fardo & Entworpe). This also meant that it would add that extra cost of mailing to other regions
to our mailing costs.
Another mistake that we jumped into without a lot of thought was building a warehouse
in Fardo. The construction of the warehouse cost us $150,000.00 along with the monumental
costs of mailing stuff out to the Fardo warehouse based on the soonest policy either from the
Sorange or Calopeia warehouse. Looking back at this decision of ours, since we decided to
completely stop serving Fardo later in the game and still managed to come at 3rd, had we not
served Fardo at all, we could probably have used our production to focus on areas that were
cheaper to ship to and make more profits from there.
Lastly, a huge failure that we had was the EOQ and ROP calculations that we had for
Calopeia, Fardo, Sorange and Tyran. In Calopeia’s case, looking at the demand graph we
understood that the demand was seasonal. For Calopeia, we used a multiplicative seasonal index
model to forecast demand. For Fardo and Tyran, we used a moving average method since they
seemed to closely follow historical demand. For Sorange, since the graph seemed to follow a
linear trend, we wanted to implement a linear trend projection method to forecast demand but
never finished doing that. However, although we performed a lot of calculations, we were still
facing the problem of lost demand, either because our calculations were off or because of
constrained production capacity in Sorange. Also, not having the numbers for Sorange probably
affected the forecast for the rest of the regions.

Successes:

To begin with, we believe it was a huge bonus that we had the ability to take action at the
very beginning of the game. In contrast to the first attempt where we were too afraid to make the
wrong decision, in the second simulation we had a clear idea that we wanted to build a factory
and warehouse in Sorange along with a warehouse in Fardo immediately. On comparison of both
the simulations, it almost feels as if inaction costs more than taking the wrong action, which was
what happened with the warehouse in Fardo. Although we made an irreversible decision of
building a warehouse in Fardo, it certainly didn’t hurt us as much as it would have, had we
waited around doing nothing.
Another major success that we had was brainstorming prior to every decision that we
made. We believe all of us complemented each other’s abilities really well, helping us avoid
many blind spots. Also, it was wonderful working in a team that was really dedicated and one
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

that communicated exceptionally well. We never had any maverick decision making, and a big
win for us was the fact that we trusted each other completely.
In our failures, although we did talk about how our forecasts didn’t seem to work as
were still facing the problem of lost demand, a major success that we had was a team that was
instantly solving problems. For instance, although it might seem like a lot of trial and error, the
constraint “Order point: Sorange factory to Sorange warehouse” was changed 11 times to see
what the best order point for that period in the simulation was. We believe that in the real world
the forecasts might not always be precise or even accurate, and the ability to instantly change
things to meet situational demands is of major importance. This, for us, is a major success.
Most importantly, although we were going back and forth on our fulfillment policy
starting with nearest and then switching to soonest and then switching back to nearest again, on
day 1,222 it was almost as if we had a revelation that the fulfillment policy of soonest was
holding us back. If we remember correctly, up until day 1,222 we were struggling to get ahead in
the rankings and we had a cash balance of about 4,000,000.00 and a rank of 7 or 8 on the team
standings. Since we were cross serving regions from both the factories, it was really confusing to
perform our calculations. This is when we decided that since Sorange could only produce 30
units a day, we’d block Sorange from serving Calopeia but we’d continue letting Calopeia serve
Sorange. This strategy paid off and slowly we started making more money.

Another major success that we had was brainstorming prior to every decision that we made. We
believe all of us complemented each other’s abilities really well, helping us avoid many blind
spots. Also, it was wonderful working in a team that was really dedicated and one that
communicated exceptionally well. We never had any maverick decision making, and a big win
for us was the fact that we trusted each other completely.

In our failures, although we did talk about how our forecasts didn’t seem to work as were still
facing the problem of lost demand, a major success that we had was a team that was instantly
solving problems. For instance, although it might seem like a lot of trial and error, the constraint
“Order point: Sorange factory to Sorange warehouse” was changed 11 times to see what the best
order point for that period in the simulation was. We believe that in the real world the forecasts
might not always be precise or even accurate, and the ability to instantly change things to meet
situational demands is of major importance. This for us is a major success.

Did you stick to the plan you submitted after the first simulation?
Yes, for the most part we stuck to the plan (ifyourenotfirstyourelast’s plan). The basic
strategy that we had discussed in our last report was “for meeting demand in each region is to
study the demand, set appropriate quantity and reorder points, build additional factories or
increase capacity of factories and finally service peak demand using warehouses. Performing a
break-even analysis will be an effective tool in order to determine order quantity. Prioritizing
shipping in each warehouse so they can first meet the more profitable local demand and then
meet demand outside of the region will also be an effective strategy. Also, toward the end of the
game, we will ramp down production and reduce inventory to prevent obsolescent costs.” I think
that we followed this plan to the best of our abilities which proved helpful in doing better in the
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

second simulation. We built the factory and warehouses where we had said we would, we tried
using calculations to help figure out ROP and EOQ numbers, and we did try and switch to
trucking. For the trucking part of it, our biggest downfall was that we neglected to determine the
maximum a truck can carry and try and utilize that to our advantage. I think prioritizing shipping
was also a very effective tool because if one warehouse was getting low, production would
automatically start producing for the top ranked region. This helped us because then we weren’t
always having to watch the game (even though some of us were still).

What did you learn?

Working as a team can be a challenge, especially when it involves being in different

locations. Communication errors were common, so there was a lot of times where we had to
spend a couple minutes clarifying what we meant to each other. That is why we found
developing a strategy was much easier in person than over Facebook! With the multicultural
groups being formed in business today, being an effective communicator is key. Another thing
that we learned was how important team dynamics really are. Being able to effectively
communicate with your team members and be listened to and understood is huge. If you don’t
respect your teammates, arguments will form, people will not participate (for example, not
respond to any messages at all or contribute), or they will get their back up and oppose any ideas
you bring forth.
The biggest thing we learned from this simulation is that just because something you’re
doing is working now, doesn’t mean it will always be the best option. In the economy, things
change! Markets fluctuate and demand goes up or down. Implementing forecasting techniques is
crucial in order to predict demand, but you can’t always anticipate economic crises in real life. In
the simulation, Sorange’s demand was steadily increasing reaching a high point of 214 units at
day 1,425, shortly thereafter, it started decreasingly substantially to only 5 units at day 1,460. For
us, continuing producing 130 units until the end would have resulted in a bunch of excess
inventory that would be obsolete. So, that’s why we shut production down towards the end so we
didn’t lose all of that money in inventory. Just because something was working at one point in
time, doesn’t mean it will always work. Just like in the real world, everything changes and quite
rapidly. Continuous improvement is an important aspect of the simulation that we learned.
Without continuous improvement, you won’t be able to keep up with the change in demand and
will lose out to competitors.
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

Exhibits
Exhibit 1: Shows the uses of cash throughout the game

Exhibit 2: Shows the demand for the first 200 days played, last 200 days played and total days
for each region since day 730

Exhibit 3: Shows our cash balance throughout the game

 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -

Exhibit 4: Shows the transaction history of our team from t=730 to t=1,444
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -
 Dayna Koroll - T00036507
Keenan Ratushniak - T00041727
Ashwin Raju -