was nehmen wir als „realistische“ A

was nehmen wir als „realistische“ Absatzzahlen für den FB Business Case?

2015: 478
2016: 600 DTBC vs. 1.120 Guideline
2017: 600 DTBC vs. 1.070 Guideline
2018: 3.050 FTR vs. 1.390 FTR update considering product gaps
2019: 3.800 FTR vs. 1.890 FTR update considering product gaps
2020: 7.000 FTR vs. 3.920 FTR update considering product gaps

Hierzu sollten wir uns die Karten legen.

P.S. Habe gesehen daß die Kollegen den FB Business case für 2016 nur mit 271 Eh bei 100% Ausstattungsquote gerechnet haben, das kann auch nicht sein….

結果 (英文) 1:

What do we as "realistic" sales figures for the FB business case? 2015: 478 2016: 600 DTBC vs. 1,120 guideline2017: 600 DTBC vs. 1.070 guideline2018: 3,050 FTR vs. 1,390 FTR update considering product gaps2019: 3,800 FTR vs. 1,890 FTR update considering product gaps2020: 7,000 FTR vs. 3.920 FTR update considering product gapsTo do this, we should think the maps.P.S. have seen that the colleagues the FB business case for 2016 with 271 eh facilities rate have calculated at 100%, it can also be...

結果 (英文) 3:

What we take as a "realistic" sales figures for the FB business case?

2015: 478
2016: 600 DTBC vs. 1,120 Guideline
2017: 600 DTBC vs. 1,070 Guideline
2018: 3,050 FTR Series vs. 1,390 FTR Series update considering product gaps
2019: 3,800 FTR Series vs. 1,890 FTR Series update considering product gaps
2020: 7,000 FTR Series vs. 3,920 FTR Series update considering product gaps as well as

to do this we need to look at the cards.

P.S.I have seen that the colleagues only the FB business case for 2016 with 271 EH at 100% inclusion rate have expected, nor could we ...