Consider this invented single-product business. For one trading period, fixed costs are £6,000, selling price is £25 per item and variable cost is £10 per item. Assume a constant price and unit variable cost, unchanged fixed costs, and that all items produced are sold in that period.
Dividing £6,000 by £25 gives 240 items, but that leaves out the cost of supplying each item. First calculate contribution per item: the amount left from each sale to cover fixed costs and, once those are covered, profit.
- Contribution per item = £25 − £10 = £15.
- Break-even sales = £6,000 ÷ £15 = 400 items.
- Check: 400 × £25 gives £10,000 revenue; £6,000 + (400 × £10) gives £10,000 total costs.
Now suppose the business is considering a supplier that raises variable cost to £13 per item, with everything else unchanged. Contribution falls to £12, so break-even rises to 500 items. A higher cost means each sale contributes less towards the same fixed costs.
If the business forecasts 450 sales, the original model gives £750 profit: (450 × £15) − £6,000. The revised model gives a £600 loss: (450 × £12) − £6,000. These are results within the example, not a prediction of demand.
A weak conclusion is “the new supplier is too expensive”. A more useful practice response is: “At the forecast of 450 sales, the new supplier would leave a £600 loss, so I would delay switching at the current selling price. If there is evidence that customers will pay more for the changed product, the business should test that price and its effect on demand before deciding.”
This response links the calculation to the decision and states what could change the judgement. In a lesson, the learner can then try a different cost or selling price independently and explain the result. The goal is to understand both the method and its limits.