Please make sure your answer is correct.

Please answer according to the form(The numbers are not the same).

Pro Fender, which uses a standard cost system, manufactured 20,000 boat fenders during 2024, using 141,000 square feet of extruded vinyl purchased at $1.55 per square foot. Production required 450 direct labor hours that cost $12.50 per hour. The direct materials standard was seven square feet of vinyl per fender, at a standard cost of $1.60 per square foot. The labor standard was 0.026 direct labor hour per fender, at a standard cost of $11.50 per hour. Read the requirement. Begin with the cost variances. Select the required formulas, compute the cost variances for direct materials and direct labor, and identify whether each variance is favorable (F) or unfavorable (U). (Abbreviations used: AC = actual cost; AQ = actual quantity; FOH = fixed overhead; SC = standard cost; SQ = standard quantity.) Formula Variance Direct materials cost variance = = Direct labor cost variance II = Begin with the cost variances. Select the required formulas, compute the cost variances for direct materials and direct labor, and identify whether each variance is favorable (F) or unfavorable (U). (Abbreviations used: AC = actual cost; AQ = actual quantity; FOH = fixed overhead; SC = standard cost; SQ = standard quantity.) = Formula Variance Direct materials cost variance = = (AC - SC) * AQ (AC - SC) * AQ 7,050 F 410' u Direct labor cost variance = = $ Select the required formulas, compute the efficiency variances for direct materials and direct labor, and identify whether each variance is favorable (F) or unfavorable (U). (Abbreviations used: AC = actual cost; AQ = actual quantity; FOH = fixed overhead; SC = standard cost; SQ = standard quantity.) Formula Variance = $ 1,250 U Direct materials efficiency variance Direct labor efficiency variance (AQ - SQ) - SC (AQ - SQ) SC 1 $ 1,015 Does the pattern of variances suggest Deluxe Fender's managers have been making trade-offs? Explain. The favorable direct materials cost variance combined with the unfavorable direct materials efficiency variance suggests that managers may have used lower-quality direct materials. The net effect on the total direct materials variance is favorable The unfavorable direct labor cost variance combined with the favorable direct labor efficiency variance suggests that managers may have used more skilled (higher-paid) workers who performed more efficiently. The net effect on the total direct labor variance is favorable