Need a Rewrite on 2 discussion and and a paper write up in Business policy

Unit 3: Case Discussion 1

Requirements

· All responses in the discussion board must be written in your own words demonstrating your understanding and analysis of the topics being discussed.

· Merely agreeing with another student’s answer is not enough, explain WHY you agree or disagree.

· In all your responses assume that the reader has no idea what the topic is about.

· Each discussion is worth 30 points. 

Due Dates

· Initial Post: Each student must answer the discussion questions in DETAIL by Thursday night. 

· Response Post: Later in the unit, re-enter the thread and respond to at LEAST 2 answers composed by your classmates. These peer responses should be thought provoking, stimulating further discussion of the topics with perceptions, ideas, and supported facts. 

1. In terms of production strategy, should Boone stick with mass production or try something else. Explain.

For this situation mass production would not be the best choice, since large scale manufacturing procedure functions well for items with a steady request, and EGL is wanting to make another redid choice of a current item, and they don't have an idea about the future request of the new item, rather they ought to create the new adjustable clubs as indicated by client request, and the adaptive manufacturing strategy would be a suitable alternative.

3. What do you think of parker’s idea of outsource the manufacturing of the king?

I believe parker's concept of outsourcing could be a decent alternative, on the grounds that on the off chance that they are not ready to make the new item to fulfill request in their little Memphis manufacturing plant, the outsourcing technique would be a decent choice to accomplish work all the more proficiently, however before they apply this methodology they have to do a cost examination to check the expenses of transportation, customs, and different expenses that may rise and they won't have the capacity to deliver another item at an aggressive cost.