{"answer": 4.0, "question": "What is the sum amount of Capital lease obligations in the years with the lowest amount of Operating lease obligations? (in dollars in millions)", "context": "Revenues N&SS revenues decreased 1% in 2008 and 2% in 2007. The decrease of $137 million in 2008 is primarily due to decreased revenues in FCS, Proprietary and satellite programs partially offset by increased revenues in the SBInet program. The decrease of $292 million in 2007 was primarily due to the exclusion of government Delta volume, now a component of our equity investment in ULA and lower FCS volume, partially offset by increased volume on SBInet and several satellite programs. Delta launch and new-build satellite deliveries were as follows: \n
Years ended December 31, 200820072006
Delta II Commercial 23
Delta II Government2
Delta IV Government3
Satellites 144
\n Delta government launches are excluded from our deliveries after December 1, 2006 due to the formation of ULA. Operating Earnings N&SS operating earnings increased by $171 million in 2008 was primarily due to increased earnings from our investment in ULA. The decrease in 2007 was due to lower earnings on FCS and several satellite programs. These decreases were partially offset by higher award fees on GMD and a $44 million gain on sale of a property in Anaheim. N&SS operating earnings include equity earnings of $73 million, $85 million and $71 million from the United Space Alliance joint venture in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively and equity earnings of $105 million, a loss of $11 million and equity earnings of $5 million from the ULA joint venture in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The ULA equity earnings and loss amounts are net of the basis difference amortization. Research and Development The N&SS research and development funding remains focused on the development of communications, command and control, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems (C4ISR); communications and command and control (C3) capabilities that support a network-enabled architecture approach for our various government customers. We are investing in communications capabilities to enable connectivity between existing air/ground platforms, increase communications availability and bandwidth through more robust space systems, and leverage innovative communications concepts. Key programs in this area include JTRS, FCS, Global Positioning System, Tracking and Data Relay Satellite, Ares 1 Crew Launch Vehicle and GMD. Investments were also made to support concepts that may lead to the development of next-generation space intelligence systems. Along with increased funding to support these areas of architecture and network-enabled capabilities development, we also maintained our investment levels in global missile defense and advanced missile defense concepts and technologies. Backlog N&SS total backlog decreased by 12% in 2008 compared with 2007 primarily due to revenues recognized on multi-year orders received in prior years on FCS, GMD and C3 programs, partially offset by an increase in the International Space Station program. Total backlog decreased by 7% in 2007 compared with 2006 due to revenues recognized on FCS and Proprietary programs, partially offset by an increase in Space Exploration programs. Additional Considerations Items which could have a future impact on N&SS operations include the following: United Launch Alliance On December 1, 2006, we completed the transaction with Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed) to create a 50/50 joint venture named United Launch Alliance L. L. C. (ULA). ULA combines the production, engineering, test and launch operations associated with U. S. government launches of Boeing Delta and Lockheed Atlas rockets. In connection with the transaction, billion of unused borrowing on revolving credit line agreements. We anticipate that these credit lines will primarily serve as backup liquidity to support our general corporate borrowing needs. Financing commitments totaled $18.1 billion and $15.9 billion as of December 31, 2012 and 2011. We anticipate that we will not be required to fund a significant portion of our financing commitments as we continue to work with third party financiers to provide alternative financing to customers. Historically, we have not been required to fund significant amounts of outstanding commitments. However, there can be no assurances that we will not be required to fund greater amounts than historically required. In the event we require additional funding to support strategic business opportunities, our commercial aircraft financing commitments, unfavorable resolution of litigation or other loss contingencies, or other business requirements, we expect to meet increased funding requirements by issuing commercial paper or term debt. We believe our ability to access external capital resources should be sufficient to satisfy existing short-term and long-term commitments and plans, and also to provide adequate financial flexibility to take advantage of potential strategic business opportunities should they arise within the next year. However, there can be no assurance of the cost or availability of future borrowings, if any, under our commercial paper program, in the debt markets or our credit facilities. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, our pension plans were $19.7 billion and $16.6 billion underfunded as measured under GAAP. On an ERISA basis our plans are more than 100% funded at December 31, 2012 with minimal required contributions in 2013. We expect to make discretionary contributions to our plans of approximately $1.5 billion in 2013. We may be required to make higher contributions to our pension plans in future years. As of December 31, 2012, we were in compliance with the covenants for our debt and credit facilities. The most restrictive covenants include a limitation on mortgage debt and sale and leaseback transactions as a percentage of consolidated net tangible assets (as defined in the credit agreements), and a limitation on consolidated debt as a percentage of total capital (as defined). When considering debt covenants, we continue to have substantial borrowing capacity. Contractual Obligations The following table summarizes our known obligations to make future payments pursuant to certain contracts as of December 31, 2012, and the estimated timing thereof. \n
(Dollars in millions)TotalLessthan 1year1-3years3-5yearsAfter 5years
Long-term debt (including current portion)$10,251$1,340$2,147$1,095$5,669
Interest on debt-16,1775108647494,054
Pension and other postretirement cash requirements25,5585791,2447,02516,710
Capital lease obligations184102784
Operating lease obligations1,405218334209644
Purchase obligations not recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position118,00244,47241,83818,95612,736
Purchase obligations recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position15,98114,6641,30719
Total contractual obligations$177,558$61,885$47,812$28,039$39,822
\n (1) Includes interest on variable rate debt calculated based on interest rates at December 31, 2012. Variable rate debt was less than 1% of our total debt at December 31, 2012. Industry Competitiveness The commercial jet airplane market and the airline industry remain extremely competitive. Market liberalization in Europe, the Middle East and Asia is enabling low-cost airlines to continue gaining market share. These airlines are increasing the pressure on airfares. This results in continued cost pressures for all airlines and price pressure on our products. Major productivity gains are essential to ensure a favorable market position at acceptable profit margins. Continued access to global markets remains vital to our ability to fully realize our sales potential and long\u0002term investment returns. Approximately 91% of Commercial Airplanes’ total backlog, in dollar terms, is with non-U. S. airlines. We face aggressive international competitors who are intent on increasing their market share. They offer competitive products and have access to most of the same customers and suppliers. With government support,Airbus has historically invested heavily to create a family of products to compete with ours. Regional jet makers Embraer and Bombardier continue to develop and market larger and increasingly more capable airplanes, including Embraer’s E-195 in the regional jet market and Bombardier’s C Series in the 100-150 seat transcontinental market. Additionally, other competitors from Russia, China and Japan are developing commercial jet aircraft. Some of these competitors have historically enjoyed access to government\u0002provided financial support, including “launch aid,” which greatly reduces the cost and commercial risks associated with airplane development activities. This has enabled the development of airplanes without commercial viability; others to be brought to market more quickly than otherwise possible; and many offered for sale below market-based prices. Many competitors have continued to make improvements in efficiency, which may result in funding product development, gaining market share and improving earnings. This market environment has resulted in intense pressures on pricing and other competitive factors, and we expect these pressures to continue or intensify in the coming years. We are focused on improving our products and services and continuing our cost-reduction efforts, which enhances our ability to compete. We are also focused on taking actions to ensure that Boeing is not harmed by unfair subsidization of competitors. Results of Operations \n
Years ended December 31,201720162015
Revenues$56,729$58,012$59,399
% of total company revenues61%61%62%
Earnings from operations$5,432$1,995$4,284
Operating margins9.6%3.4%7.2%
Research and development$2,247$3,706$2,311
\n Revenues Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,283 million or 2% in 2017 compared with 2016 due to delivery mix, with fewer twin aisle deliveries more than offsetting the impact of higher single aisle deliveries. Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,387 million or 2% in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to fewer deliveries. Through February 25, 2016, we repurchased approximately $415.0 million of shares of our common stock, which includes the $250.0 million of shares that we repurchased from certain selling stockholders on February 10, 2016. In order to achieve operational synergies, we expect cash outlays related to our integration plans to be approximately $290.0 million in 2016. These cash outlays are necessary to achieve our integration goals of net annual pre-tax operating profit synergies of $350.0 million by the end of the third year post-Closing Date. Also as discussed in Note 20 to our consolidated financial statements, as of December 31, 2015, a short-term liability of $50.0 million and long-term liability of $264.6 million related to Durom Cup product liability claims was recorded on our consolidated balance sheet. We expect to continue paying these claims over the next few years. We expect to be reimbursed a portion of these payments for product liability claims from insurance carriers. As of December 31, 2015, we have received a portion of the insurance proceeds we estimate we will recover. We have a long-term receivable of $95.3 million remaining for future expected reimbursements from our insurance carriers. We also had a short-term liability of $33.4 million related to Biomet metal-on-metal hip implant claims. At December 31, 2015, we had ten tranches of senior notes outstanding as follows (dollars in millions):"} {"answer": 26.0, "question": "what is the pre-tax aggregate net unrealized loss in 2008?", "context": "AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) of certain of its assets and liabilities under its interest rate swap agreements held as of December 31, 2006 and entered into during the first half of 2007. In addition, the Company paid $8.0 million related to a treasury rate lock agreement entered into and settled during the year ended December 31, 2008. The cost of the treasury rate lock is being recognized as additional interest expense over the 10-year term of the 7.00% Notes. During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company also received $3.1 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under ten forward starting interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $1.4 billion, which were designated as cash flow hedges to manage exposure to variability in cash flows relating to forecasted interest payments in connection with the Certificates issued in the Securitization in May 2007. The settlement is being recognized as a reduction in interest expense over the five-year period for which the interest rate swaps were designated as hedges. The Company also received $17.0 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under thirteen additional interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $850.0 million that managed exposure to variability of interest rates under the credit facilities but were not considered cash flow hedges for accounting purposes. This gain is included in other income in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2007. As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, other comprehensive (loss) income included the following items related to derivative financial instruments (in thousands): \n
20082007
Deferred loss on the settlement of the treasury rate lock, net of tax$-4,332$-4,901
Deferred gain on the settlement of interest rate swap agreements entered into in connection with the Securitization, net oftax1,2381,636
Unrealized losses related to interest rate swap agreements, net of tax-16,349-486
\n During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company recorded an aggregate net unrealized loss of approximately $15.8 million and $3.2 million, respectively (net of a tax provision of approximately $10.2 million and $2.0 million, respectively) in other comprehensive loss for the change in fair value of interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges and reclassified an aggregate of $0.1 million and $6.2 million, respectively (net of an income tax provision of $2.0 million and an income tax benefit of $3.3 million, respectively) into results of operations.9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS The Company determines the fair market values of its financial instruments based on the fair value hierarchy established in SFAS No.157, which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The standard describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date. The Company’s Level 1 assets consist of available-for-sale securities traded on active markets as well as certain Brazilian Treasury securities that are highly liquid and are actively traded in over-the-counter markets. Level 2 Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) The Company issued 82,865, 93,367 and 105,239 of non-vested restricted stock units in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, the majority of which provide for vesting as to all underlying shares on the third anniversary of the grant date. The weighted average grant-date fair value for non-vested restricted stock units granted during 2017, 2016 and 2015 was $187.85, $142.71 and $118.00, respectively. The Company recorded $11.2 million of expense related to restricted stock units during 2017, which is included in cost of goods sold or selling, general and administrative expenses. The unamortized share-based compensation cost related to non-vested restricted stock units, net of expected forfeitures, was $13.2 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.8 years. The Company uses treasury stock to provide shares of common stock in connection with vesting of the restricted stock units. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) F-37 Note 13?— Income taxes The following table summarizes the components of the provision for income taxes from continuing operations: \n
201720162015
(Dollars in thousands)
Current:
Federal$133,621$2,344$-4,700
State5,2135,2302,377
Foreign35,44428,84253,151
Deferred:
Federal-258,247-25,141-35,750
State1,459-1,837-5,012
Foreign212,158-1,364-2,228
$129,648$8,074$7,838
\n The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “TCJA”) was enacted on December 22, 2017. The legislation significantly changes U. S. tax law by, among other things, permanently reducing corporate income tax rates from a maximum of 35% to 21%, effective January 1, 2018; implementing a territorial tax system, by generally providing for, among other things, a dividends received deduction on the foreign source portion of dividends received from a foreign corporation if specified conditions are met; and imposing a one-time repatriation tax on undistributed post-1986 foreign subsidiary earnings and profits, which are deemed repatriated for purposes of the tax. As a result of the TCJA, the Company reassessed and revalued its ending net deferred tax liabilities at December 31, 2017 and recognized a?$46.1 million?provisional tax benefit in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017. As a result of the deemed repatriation tax under the TCJA, the Company recognized a $154.0 million provisional tax expense in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the Company expects to pay this tax over an eight-year period. While the TCJA provides for a territorial tax system, beginning in 2018, it includes?two?new U. S. tax base erosion provisions, the global intangible low-taxed income (“GILTI”) provisions and the base-erosion and anti-abuse tax (“BEAT”) provisions. The GILTI provisions require the Company to include in its U. S. income tax return foreign subsidiary earnings in excess of an allowable return on the foreign subsidiary’s tangible assets. The Company expects that it will be subject to incremental U. S. tax on GILTI income beginning in 2018. Because of the complexity of the new GILTI tax rules, the Company is continuing to evaluate this provision of the TCJA and the application of Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 740, \"Income Taxes. \" Under U. S. GAAP, the Company may make an accounting policy election to either (1) treat future taxes with respect to the inclusion in U. S. taxable income of amounts related to GILTI as current period expense when incurred (the “period cost method”) or (2) take such amounts into a company’s measurement of its deferred taxes (the “deferred method”). The Company’s selection of an accounting policy with respect to the new GILTI tax rules will depend, in part, on an analysis of the Company’s global income to determine whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions in taxable income related to GILTI and, if so, what the impact is expected to be. The determination of whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions ? Miller Insurance Services LLP, which is a Pounds sterling functional entity, earns significant non-functional currency revenues, in which case the Company limits its exposure to exchange rate changes by the use of forward contracts matched to a percentage of forecast cash inflows in specific currencies and periods. However, where the foreign exchange risk relates to any Pounds sterling pension benefits assets or liability for pension benefits, we do not hedge the risk. Consequently, if our London market operations have a significant pension asset or liability, we may be exposed to accounting gains and losses, recognized in other comprehensive income or loss, if the U. S. dollar and Pounds sterling exchange rates change. We do, however, hedge the Pounds sterling contributions into the pension plan. Translation risk Outside our U. S. and London market operations, we predominantly earn revenues and incur expenses in the local currency. When we translate the results and net assets of these operations into U. S. dollars for reporting purposes, movements in exchange rates will affect reported results and net assets. For example, if the U. S. dollar strengthens against the Euro, the reported results of our Eurozone operations in U. S. dollar terms will be lower. With the exception of foreign currency hedges for certain intercompany loans that are not designated as hedging instruments, we do not hedge translation risk. The table below provides information about our foreign currency forward exchange contracts, which are sensitive to exchange rate risk. The table summarizes the U. S. dollar equivalent amounts of each currency bought and sold forward and the weighted average contractual exchange rates. All forward exchange contracts mature within three years. \n
Settlement date before December 31,
201720182019
December 31, 2016Contract amountAverage contractual exchange rateContract amountAverage contractual exchange rateContract amountAverage contractual exchange rate
(millions)(millions)(millions)
Foreign currency sold
U.S. dollars sold for Pounds sterling$390$1.51 = £1$268$1.46 = £1$77$1.39 = £1
Euro sold for U.S. dollars74€1 = $1.2048€1 = $1.1914€1 = $1.17
Japanese yen sold for U.S. dollars21¥110.85 = $113¥110.90 - $15¥98.63 = $1
Euro sold for Pounds sterling22€1 = £1.2191 = £1.334€1 = £1.24
Total$507$338$100
Fair value(i)$-65$-40$-5
\n (i) Represents the difference between the contract amount and the cash flow in U. S. dollars which would have been receivable had the foreign currency forward exchange contracts been entered into on December 31, 2016 at the forward exchange rates prevailing at that date."} {"answer": 0.01147, "question": "What is the growing rate of BENEFIT OBLIGATION AT END OF YEAR for Con Edison in the year with the least Benefit obligation at beginning of year for Con Edison?", "context": "
Year Ended December 31,
201120102009
Risk-free interest rate1.2%1.4%1.7%
Expected life (in years)3.83.43.8
Dividend yield—%—%—%
Expected volatility38%37%47%
\n Our computation of expected volatility for 2011 , 2010 and 2009 was based on a combination of historical and market-based implied volatility from traded options on our stock. Our computation of expected life was determined based on historical experience of similar awards, giving consideration to the contractual terms of the stock-based awards, vesting schedules and expectations of future employee behavior. The interest rate for periods within the contractual life of the award was based on the U. S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant. The estimation of awards that will ultimately vest requires judgment, and to the extent actual results or updated estimates differ from our current estimates, such amounts will be recorded as a cumulative adjustment in the period estimates are revised. We consider many factors when estimating forfeitures, including employee class and historical experience. Recent Accounting Pronouncements See “Note 1 - The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report, regarding the impact of certain recent accounting pronouncements on our consolidated financial statements. Item 7A: Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk Foreign Currency Exposure We have significant operations internationally that are denominated in foreign currencies, primarily the Euro, British pound, Korean won, Australian dollar and Canadian dollar, subjecting us to foreign currency risk which may adversely impact our financial results. We transact business in various foreign currencies and have significant international revenues as well as costs. In addition, we charge our international subsidiaries for their use of intellectual property and technology and for certain corporate services provided by eBay and by PayPal. Our cash flow, results of operations and certain of our intercompany balances that are exposed to foreign exchange rate fluctuations may differ materially from expectations and we may record significant gains or losses due to foreign currency fluctuations and related hedging activities. We have a foreign exchange exposure management program that aims to identify material foreign currency exposures, to manage these exposures, and to minimize the potential effects of currency fluctuations on our reported consolidated cash flows and results of operations through the purchase of foreign currency exchange contracts. These foreign currency exchange contracts are accounted for as derivative instruments. For additional details related to our derivative instruments, please see “Note 9 - Derivative Instruments” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Interest Rate Risk The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal while at the same time maximizing yields without significantly increasing risk. To achieve this objective, we maintain our portfolio of cash equivalents and short-term and long-term investments in a variety of available for sale securities, including money market funds and government and corporate securities. As of December 31, 2011 , approximately 56% of our total cash and investment portfolio was held in bank deposits and money market funds. As such, changes in interest rates will impact our interest income. In addition, we regularly issue new commercial paper notes to repay outstanding commercial paper notes as they mature, and those new commercial paper notes bear interest at rates prevailing at the time of issuance. Accordingly, changes in interest rates will impact interest expense or cost of net revenues. As of December 31, 2011 , we held no direct investments in auction rate securities, collateralized debt obligations, structured investment vehicles or mortgage-backed securities. For additional details related to our investment activities, please see \"Note 7 - Investments\" to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Investments in both fixed-rate and floating-rate interest-earning instruments carry varying degrees of interest rate risk. The fair market value of our fixed-rate securities may be adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates. In general, securities with longer maturities are subject to greater interest-rate risk than those with shorter maturities. While floating rate securities generally are subject to less interest-rate risk than fixed\u0002rate securities, floating-rate securities may produce less income than expected if interest rates decrease. Due in part to these factors, our investment income may fall short of expectations or we may suffer losses in principal if securities are sold that have declined in market value due to changes in interest rates. As of \n
Con EdisonCECONY
(Millions of Dollars)201520142013201520142013
CHANGE IN BENEFIT OBLIGATION
Benefit obligation at beginning of year$1,411$1,395$1,454$1,203$1,198$1,238
Service cost201923151518
Interest cost on accumulated postretirement benefit obligation516054435246
Amendments—-12————
Net actuarial loss/(gain)-10347-42-8528-20
Benefits paid and administrative expenses-127-134-136-117-125-126
Participant contributions353638343538
Medicare prescription subsidy——4——4
BENEFIT OBLIGATION AT END OF YEAR$1,287$1,411$1,395$1,093$1,203$1,198
CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year$1,084$1,113$1,047$950$977$922
Actual return on plan assets-659153-454134
Employer contributions679679
EGWP payments2812826117
Participant contributions353638343538
Benefits paid-153-143-142-142-134-133
FAIR VALUE OF PLAN ASSETS AT END OF YEAR$994$1,084$1,113$870$950$977
FUNDED STATUS$-293$-327$-282$-223$-253$-221
Unrecognized net loss$28$78$70$4$45$54
Unrecognized prior service costs-51-71-78-32-46-61
\n The decrease in the other postretirement benefit plan obligation (due primarily to increased discount rates) was the primary cause of the decreased liability for other postretirement benefits at Con Edison and CECONY of $34 million and $30 million, respectively, compared with December 31, 2014. For Con Edison, this decreased liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $30 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the Utilities consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and a credit to OCI of $1 million (net of taxes) for the unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses and O&R’s New Jersey subsidiary. For CECONY, the decrease in liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $27 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the company consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses. A portion of the unrecognized net losses and prior service costs for the other postretirement benefits, equal to $12 million and $(20) million, respectively, will be recognized from accumulated OCI and the regulatory asset into net periodic benefit cost over the next year for Con Edison. Included in these amounts are $10 million and $(14) million, respectively, for CECONY. Assumptions The actuarial assumptions were as follows: FIDELITY NATIONAL INFORMATION SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) Future minimum operating lease payments for leases with remaining terms greater than one year for each of the years in the five years ending December 31, 2015, and thereafter in the aggregate, are as follows (in millions): \n
2011$65.1
201247.6
201335.7
201427.8
201524.3
Thereafter78.1
Total$278.6
\n In addition, the Company has operating lease commitments relating to office equipment and computer hardware with annual lease payments of approximately $16.3 million per year which renew on a short-term basis. Rent expense incurred under all operating leases during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $116.1 million, $100.2 million and $117.0 million, respectively. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was rent expense of $2.0 million, $1.8 million and $17.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Data Processing and Maintenance Services Agreements. The Company has agreements with various vendors, which expire between 2011 and 2017, for portions of its computer data processing operations and related functions. The Company’s estimated aggregate contractual obligation remaining under these agreements was approximately $554.3 million as of December 31, 2010. However, this amount could be more or less depending on various factors such as the inflation rate, foreign exchange rates, the introduction of significant new technologies, or changes in the Company’s data processing needs. (16) Employee Benefit Plans Stock Purchase Plan FIS employees participate in an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). Eligible employees may voluntarily purchase, at current market prices, shares of FIS’ common stock through payroll deductions. Pursuant to the ESPP, employees may contribute an amount between 3% and 15% of their base salary and certain commissions. Shares purchased are allocated to employees based upon their contributions. The Company contributes varying matching amounts as specified in the ESPP. The Company recorded an expense of $14.3 million, $12.4 million and $14.3 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the ESPP. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.401(k) Profit Sharing Plan The Company’s employees are covered by a qualified 401(k) plan. Eligible employees may contribute up to 40% of their pretax annual compensation, up to the amount allowed pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code. The Company generally matches 50% of each dollar of employee contribution up to 6% of the employee’s total eligible compensation. The Company recorded expense of $23.1 million, $16.6 million and $18.5 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the 401(k) plan. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively The following table presents a reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow available to News Corporation:"} {"answer": 67.0, "question": "In the year with lowest amount of Distribution fees, what's the increasing rate of Net investment income? (in %)", "context": "Certain property fund limited partnerships that the Company consolidates have floating rate revolving credit borrowings of $381 million as of December 31, 2009. Certain Threadneedle subsidiaries guarantee the repayment of outstanding borrowings up to the value of the assets of the partnerships. The debt is secured by the assets of the partnerships and there is no recourse to Ameriprise Financial.24. Earnings per Share Attributable to Ameriprise Financial Common Shareholders The computations of basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders are as follows: \n
Years Ended December 31,
20092008 2007
(in millions, except per share amounts)
Numerator:
Net income (loss) attributable to Ameriprise Financial$722$-38$814
Denominator:
Basic: Weighted-average common shares outstanding242.2222.3236.2
Effect of potentially dilutive nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards2.22.63.7
Diluted: Weighted-average common shares outstanding244.4224.9239.9
Earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders:
Basic$2.98$-0.17$3.45
Diluted$2.95$-0.17 (1)$3.39
\n (1) Diluted shares used in this calculation represent basic shares due to the net loss. Using actual diluted shares would result in anti-dilution. Basic weighted average common shares for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 included 3.4 million, 2.1 million and 1.6 million, respectively, of vested, nonforfeitable restricted stock units and 4.6 million, 3.1 million and 3.5 million, respectively, of non-vested restricted stock awards and restricted stock units that are forfeitable but receive nonforfeitable dividends. Potentially dilutive securities include nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards.25. Shareholders’ Equity The Company has a share repurchase program in place to return excess capital to shareholders. Since September 2008 through the date of this report, the Company has suspended its stock repurchase program; as a result there were no share repurchases during the year ended December 31, 2009. During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company repurchased a total of 12.7 million and 15.9 million shares, respectively, of its common stock at an average price of $48.26 and $59.59, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, the Company had approximately $1.3 billion remaining under a share repurchase authorization. The Company may also reacquire shares of its common stock under its 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan related to restricted stock awards. Restricted shares that are forfeited before the vesting period has lapsed are recorded as treasury shares. In addition, the holders of restricted shares may elect to surrender a portion of their shares on the vesting date to cover their income tax obligations. These vested restricted shares reacquired by the Company and the Company’s payment of the holders’ income tax obligations are recorded as a treasury share purchase. The restricted shares forfeited and recorded as treasury shares under the 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan were 0.3 million shares in each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. For each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company reacquired 0.5 million of its common stock through the surrender of restricted shares upon vesting and paid in the aggregate $11 million, $24 million and $29 million, respectively, related to the holders’ income tax obligations on the vesting date. In 2009, the Company issued and sold 36 million shares of its common stock. The proceeds of $869 million will be used for general corporate purposes, including the Company’s pending acquisition of the long-term asset management business of Columbia, which is expected to close in the spring of 2010. See Note 5 for additional information on the Company’s pending acquisition of Columbia. In 2008, the Company reissued 1.8 million treasury shares for restricted stock award grants and the issuance of shares vested under the P2 Deferral Plan and the Transition and Opportunity Bonus (‘‘T&O Bonus’’) program. In 2005, the Company awarded bonuses to advisors General and administrative expense decreased $15 million, or 7%, to $192 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to expense controls. Protection Our Protection segment offers a variety of protection products to address the protection and risk management needs of our retail clients including life, disability income and property-casualty insurance. Life and disability income products are primarily distributed through our branded advisors. Our property-casualty products are sold direct, primarily through affinity relationships. We issue insurance policies through our life insurance subsidiaries and the property casualty companies. The primary sources of revenues for this segment are premiums, fees, and charges that we receive to assume insurance-related risk. We earn net investment income on owned assets supporting insurance reserves and capital supporting the business. We also receive fees based on the level of assets supporting variable universal life separate account balances. This segment earns intersegment revenues from fees paid by the Asset Management segment for marketing support and other services provided in connection with the availability of RiverSource VST Funds under the variable universal life contracts. Intersegment expenses for this segment include distribution expenses for services provided by the Advice & Wealth Management segment, as well as expenses for investment management services provided by the Asset Management segment. The following table presents the results of operations of our Protection segment: \n
Years Ended December 31,
2009 2008Change
(in millions, except percentages)
Revenues
Management and financial advice fees$47$56$-9-16%
Distribution fees97106-9-8
Net investment income42225217067
Premiums1,020994263
Other revenues386547-161-29
Total revenues1,9721,955171
Banking and deposit interest expense11——
Total net revenues1,9711,954171
Expenses
Distribution expenses2218422
Interest credited to fixed accounts144144——
Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses924856688
Amortization of deferred acquisition costs159333-174-52
General and administrative expense226251-25-10
Total expenses1,4751,602-127-8
Pretax income$496$352$14441%
\n Our Protection segment pretax income was $496 million for 2009, an increase of $144 million, or 41%, from $352 million in 2008. Net revenues Net revenues increased $17 million, or 1%, to $2.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, due to an increase in net investment income and premiums, partially offset by a decrease in other revenues related to updating valuation assumptions. Net investment income increased $170 million, or 67%, to $422 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to net realized investment gains of $27 million in 2009 compared to net realized investment losses of $92 million in the prior year primarily related to impairments of Available-for-Sale securities. In addition, investment income earned on fixed maturity securities increased $46 million compared to the prior year driven by higher yields on the longer-term investments in our fixed income investment portfolio. In December, our board of directors ratified its authorization of a stock repurchase program in the amount of 1.5 million shares of our common stock. As of December 31, 2010 no shares had been repurchased. We have paid dividends for 71 consecutive years with payments increasing each of the last 19 years. We paid total dividends of $.54 per share in 2010 compared with $.51 per share in 2009. Aggregate Contractual Obligations A summary of our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2010, is as follows: \n
(dollars in millions)Payments due by period
Contractual ObligationsTotalLess Than1 year1 - 3Years3 - 5YearsMore than5 years
Long-term Debt$261.0$18.6$181.2$29.2$32.0
Fixed Rate Interest22.46.19.05.12.2
Operating Leases30.27.27.95.49.7
Purchase Obligations45.545.5---
Total$359.1$77.4$198.1$39.7$43.9
\n As of December 31, 2010, the liability for uncertain income tax positions was $2.7 million. Due to the high degree of uncertainty regarding timing of potential future cash flows associated with these liabilities, we are unable to make a reasonably reliable estimate of the amount and period in which these liabilities might be paid. We utilize blanket purchase orders to communicate expected annual requirements to many of our suppliers. Requirements under blanket purchase orders generally do not become committed until several weeks prior to the company’s scheduled unit production. The purchase obligation amount presented above represents the value of commitments considered firm. RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Our sales from continuing operations in 2010 were $1,489.3 million surpassing 2009 sales of $1,375.0 million by 8.3 percent. The increase in sales was due mostly to significantly higher sales in our water heater operations in China resulting from geographic expansion, market share gains and new product introductions as well as additional sales from our water treatment business acquired in November, 2009. Our sales from continuing operations were $1,451.3 million in 2008. The $76.3 million decline in sales from 2008 to 2009 was due to lower residential and commercial volume in North America, reflecting softness in the domestic housing market and a slowdown in the commercial water heater business and was partially offset by strong growth in water heater sales in China and improved year over year pricing. On December 13, 2010 we entered into a definitive agreement to sell our Electrical Products Company to Regal Beloit Corporation for $700 million in cash and approximately 2.83 million shares of Regal Beloit common stock. The transaction, which has been approved by both companies' board of directors, is expected to close in the first half of 2011. Due to the pending sale, our Electrical Products segment has been accorded discontinued operations treatment in the accompanying financial statements. Sales in 2010, including sales of $701.8 million for our Electrical Products segment, were $2,191.1 million. Our gross profit margin for continuing operations in 2010 was 29.9 percent, compared with 28.7 percent in 2009 and 25.8 percent in 2008. The improvement in margin from 2009 to 2010 was due to increased volume, cost containment activities and lower warranty costs which more than offset certain inefficiencies resulting from the May flood in our Ashland City, TN water heater manufacturing facility. The increase in profit margin from 2008 to 2009 resulted from increased higher margin China water heater volume, aggressive cost reduction programs and lower material costs. Selling, general and administrative expense (SG&A) was $36.9 million higher in 2010 than in 2009. The increased SG&A, the majority of which was incurred in our China water heater operation, was associated with selling costs to support higher volume and new product lines. Additional SG&A associated with our 2009 water treatment acquisition also contributed to the increase. SG&A was $8.5 million higher in 2009 than 2008 resulting mostly from an $8.2 million increase in our China water heater operation in support of higher volumes."} {"answer": 1.0, "question": "How many elements for Issued of Common Stock show negative value in 2004?", "context": "Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements \n
Amount (In Millions)
Plant (including nuclear fuel)$727
Decommissioning trust funds252
Other assets41
Total assets acquired1,020
Purchased power agreement (below market)420
Decommissioning liability220
Other liabilities44
Total liabilities assumed684
Net assets acquired$336
\n Subsequent to the closing, Entergy received approximately $6 million from Consumers Energy Company as part of the Post-Closing Adjustment defined in the Asset Sale Agreement. The Post-Closing Adjustment amount resulted in an approximately $6 million reduction in plant and a corresponding reduction in other liabilities. For the PPA, which was at below-market prices at the time of the acquisition, Non-Utility Nuclear will amortize a liability to revenue over the life of the agreement. The amount that will be amortized each period is based upon the difference between the present value calculated at the date of acquisition of each year's difference between revenue under the agreement and revenue based on estimated market prices. Amounts amortized to revenue were $53 million in 2009, $76 million in 2008, and $50 million in 2007. The amounts to be amortized to revenue for the next five years will be $46 million for 2010, $43 million for 2011, $17 million in 2012, $18 million for 2013, and $16 million for 2014. NYPA Value Sharing Agreements Non-Utility Nuclear's purchase of the FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 plants from NYPA included value sharing agreements with NYPA. In October 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear and NYPA amended and restated the value sharing agreements to clarify and amend certain provisions of the original terms. Under the amended value sharing agreements, Non-Utility Nuclear will make annual payments to NYPA based on the generation output of the Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick plants from January 2007 through December 2014. Non-Utility Nuclear will pay NYPA $6.59 per MWh for power sold from Indian Point 3, up to an annual cap of $48 million, and $3.91 per MWh for power sold from FitzPatrick, up to an annual cap of $24 million. The annual payment for each year's output is due by January 15 of the following year. Non-Utility Nuclear will record its liability for payments to NYPA as power is generated and sold by Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick. An amount equal to the liability will be recorded to the plant asset account as contingent purchase price consideration for the plants. In 2009, 2008, and 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear recorded $72 million as plant for generation during each of those years. This amount will be depreciated over the expected remaining useful life of the plants. In August 2008, Non-Utility Nuclear entered into a resolution of a dispute with NYPA over the applicability of the value sharing agreements to its FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 nuclear power plants after the planned spin-off of the Non-Utility Nuclear business. Under the resolution, Non-Utility Nuclear agreed not to treat the separation as a \"Cessation Event\" that would terminate its obligation to make the payments under the value sharing agreements. As a result, after the spin-off transaction, Enexus will continue to be obligated to make payments to NYPA under the amended and restated value sharing agreements. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) (Dollar amounts in thousands except per share data) Note 11—Shareholders’ Equity Share Data: A summary of preferred and common share activity is as follows: \n
Preferred Stock Common Stock
Issued Treasury Stock IssuedTreasury Stock
2004:
Balance at January 1, 2004-0--0-113,783,658-1,069,053
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options763,592
Treasury stock acquired-5,534,276
Retirement of treasury stock-5,000,0005,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2004-0--0-108,783,658-839,737
2005:
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options91,0905,835,740
Treasury stock acquired-10,301,852
Retirement of treasury stock-4,000,0004,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2005-0--0-104,874,748-1,305,849
2006:
Grants of restricted stock28,000
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options507,259
Treasury stock acquired-5,989,531
Retirement of treasury stock-5,000,0005,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2006-0--0-99,874,748-1,760,121
\n Acquisition of Common Shares: Torchmark shares are acquired from time to time through open market purchases under the Torchmark stock repurchase program when it is believed to be the best use of Torchmark’s excess cash flows. Share repurchases under this program were 5.6 million shares at a cost of $320 million in 2006, 5.6 million shares at a cost of $300 million in 2005, and 5.2 million shares at a cost of $268 million in 2004. When stock options are exercised, proceeds from the exercises are generally used to repurchase approximately the number of shares available with those funds, in order to reduce dilution. Shares repurchased for dilution purposes were 415 thousand shares at a cost of $24 million in 2006, 4.7 million shares costing $255 million in 2005, and 313 thousand shares at a cost of $17 million in 2004. Retirement of Treasury Stock: Torchmark retired 5 million shares of treasury stock in December, 2006, 4 million in 2005, and 5 million in 2004. Restrictions: Restrictions exist on the flow of funds to Torchmark from its insurance subsidiaries. Statutory regulations require life insurance subsidiaries to maintain certain minimum amounts of capital and surplus. Dividends from insurance subsidiaries of Torchmark are limited to the greater of statutory net gain from operations, excluding capital gains and losses, on an annual noncumulative basis, or 10% of surplus, in the absence of special regulatory approval. Additionally, insurance company distributions are generally not permitted in excess of statutory surplus. Subsidiaries are also subject to certain minimum capital requirements. In 2006, subsidiaries of Torchmark paid $428 million in dividends to the parent company. During 2007, a maximum amount of $434 million is expected to be available to Torchmark from subsidiaries without regulatory approval. PART I ITEM 1. BUSINESS General SL Green Realty Corp. is a self-managed real estate investment trust, or REIT, with in-house capabilities in property management, acquisitions, financing, development, construction and leasing. We were formed in June 1997 for the purpose of continuing the commercial real estate business of S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , our predecessor entity. S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , which was founded in 1980 by Stephen L. Green, the Company's Chairman, had been engaged in the business of owning, managing, leasing, acquiring and repositioning office properties in Manhattan, a borough of New York City. Reckson Associates Realty Corp. , or Reckson, and Reckson Operating Partnership, L. P. , or ROP, are wholly-owned subsidiaries of SL Green Operating Partnership, L. P. , the Operating Partnership. As of December 31, 2013, we owned the following interests in commercial office properties in the New York Metropolitan area, primarily in midtown Manhattan. Our investments in the New York Metropolitan area also include investments in Brooklyn, Long Island, Westchester County, Connecticut and Northern New Jersey, which are collectively known as the Suburban properties: \n
LocationOwnershipNumber ofBuildingsSquare FeetWeighted AverageOccupancy-1
ManhattanConsolidated properties2317,306,04594.5%
Unconsolidated properties95,934,43496.6%
SuburbanConsolidated properties264,087,40079.8%
Unconsolidated properties41,222,10087.2%
6228,549,97992.5%
\n (1) The weighted average occupancy represents the total occupied square feet divided by total available rentable square feet. As of December 31, 2013, our Manhattan office properties were comprised of 17 fee owned buildings, including ownership in commercial condominium units, and six leasehold owned buildings. As of December 31, 2013, our Suburban office properties were comprised of 25 fee owned buildings and one leasehold building. As of December 31, 2013, we also held fee owned interests in nine unconsolidated Manhattan office properties and four unconsolidated Suburban office properties. We refer to our consolidated and unconsolidated Manhattan and Suburban office properties collectively as our Portfolio. As of December 31, 2013, we also owned investments in 16 retail properties encompassing approximately 875,800 square feet, 20 development buildings encompassing approximately 3,230,800 square feet, four residential buildings encompassing 801 units (approximately 719,900 square feet) and two land interests encompassing approximately 961,400 square feet. The Company also has ownership interests in 28 west coast office properties encompassing 52 buildings totaling approximately 3,654,300 square feet. In addition, we manage two office buildings owned by third parties and affiliated companies encompassing approximately 626,400 square feet. As of December 31, 2013, we also held debt and preferred equity investments with a book value of $1.3 billion. Our corporate offices are located in midtown Manhattan at 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170. As of December 31, 2013, our corporate staff consisted of approximately 278 persons, including 182 professionals experienced in all aspects of commercial real estate. We can be contacted at (212) 594-2700. We maintain a website at www. slgreen. com. On our website, you can obtain, free of charge, a copy of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we file such material electronically with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. We have also made available on our website our audit committee charter, compensation committee charter, nominating and corporate governance committee charter, code of business conduct and ethics and corporate governance principles. We do not intend for information contained on our website to be part of this annual report on Form 10-K. You can also read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at its Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549 (1-800-SEC-0330). The SEC maintains an Internet site (http://www. sec. gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. Operating Profit We consider operating profit to be an important measure for evaluating our operating performance and we evaluate operating profit for each of the reportable business segments in which we operate. We internally manage our operations by reference to operating profit with economic resources allocated primarily based on each segment’s contribution to operating profit. Segment operating profit is defined as operating profit before Corporate Unallocated. Segment operating profit is not, however, a measure of financial performance under U. S. GAAP, and may not be defined and calculated by other companies in the same manner. The table below reconciles segment operating profit to total operating profit:"} {"answer": 80251.0, "question": "What was the total amount of Expenses in 2008 for Amount? (in thousand)", "context": "MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) (in thousands, except share and per share amounts) Had compensation expense for employee stock-based awards been determined based on the fair value at grant date consistent with SFAS No.123(R), the Company’s Net income (loss) for the year would have been increased or decreased to the pro forma amounts indicated below: \n
Year Ended December 31,
2005 20042003
Net income
As reported$8,142$57,587$4,212
Compensation expense1,3661,9651,646
Pro forma$6,776$55,622$2,566
Basic net income (loss) per common share$0.29$6.76$-2.20
Diluted net income (loss) per common share$0.23$1.88$-2.20
Basic net income (loss) per common share — pro forma$0.24$6.48$-2.70
Diluted net income (loss) per common share — pro forma$0.19$1.82$-2.70
\n Basic and diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) in 2003 includes the effect of dividends accrued on our redeemable convertible preferred stock. In 2003, securities that could potentially dilute basic EPS in the future were not included in the computation of diluted EPS, because to do so would have been anti-dilutive. See Note 12, “Earnings Per Share”. Revenue Recognition The majority of the Company’s revenues are derived from commissions for trades executed on the electronic trading platform that are billed to its broker-dealer clients on a monthly basis. The Company also derives revenues from information and user access fees, license fees, interest and other income. Commissions are generally calculated as a percentage of the notional dollar volume of bonds traded on the electronic trading platform and vary based on the type and maturity of the bond traded. Under the transaction fee plans, bonds that are more actively traded or that have shorter maturities are generally charged lower commissions, while bonds that are less actively traded or that have longer maturities generally command higher commissions. Commissions are recorded on a trade date basis. The Company’s standard fee schedule for U. S. high-grade corporate bonds was revised in August 2003 to provide lower average transaction commissions for dealers who transacted higher U. S. high-grade volumes through the platform, while at the same time providing an element of fixed commissions over the two-year term of the plans. One of the revised plans that was suited for the Company’s most active broker-dealer clients included a fee cap that limited the potential growth in U. S. high-grade revenue. The fee caps were set to take effect at volume levels significantly above those being transacted at the time the revised transaction fee plans were introduced. Most broker-dealer clients entered into fee arrangements with respect to the trading of U. S. high-grade corporate bonds that included both a fixed component and a variable component. These agreements had been scheduled to expire during the third quarter of 2005. On June 1, 2005, the Company introduced a new fee plan primarily for secondary market transactions in U. S. high-grade corporate bonds executed on its electronic trading platform. As of December 31, 2005, 17 of the Company’s U. S. high-grade broker-dealer clients have signed new two-year agreements that supersede the fee arrangements that were entered into with many of its broker-dealer clients during the third quarter of 2003. The new plan incorporates higher fixed monthly fees and lower variable fees for broker\u0002dealer clients than the previous U. S. high-grade corporate transaction fee plans described above, and incorporates volume incentives to broker-dealer clients that are designed to increase the volume of transactions effected on the Company’s The U. S. high-grade average variable transaction fee per million increased from $84 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 due to the longer maturity of trades executed on the platform, for which we charge higher commissions. The Eurobond average variable transaction fee per million decreased from $138 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $112 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008, principally from the introduction of the new European high-grade fee plan. Other average variable transaction fee per million increased from $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $158 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 primarily due to a higher percentage of volume in products that carry higher fees per million, principally high-yield. Technology Products and Services. Technology products and services revenues increased by $7.8 million to $8.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase was primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. Information and User Access Fees. Information and user access fees increased by $0.1 million or 2.5% to $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Investment Income. Investment income decreased by $1.8 million or 33.7% to $3.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This decrease was primarily due to lower interest rates. Other. Other revenues decreased by $0.1 million or 4.4% to $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Expenses Our expenses for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the resulting dollar and percentage changes, were as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,
20082007
% of% of$%
$Revenues $RevenuesChangeChange
($ in thousands)
Expenses
Employee compensation and benefits$43,81047.1%$43,05146.0%$7591.8%
Depreciation and amortization7,8798.57,1707.77099.9
Technology and communications8,3118.97,4638.084811.4
Professional and consulting fees8,1718.87,6398.25327.0
Occupancy2,8913.13,2753.5-384-11.7
Marketing and advertising3,0323.31,9052.01,12759.2
General and administrative6,1576.65,8896.32684.6
Total expenses$80,25186.2%$76,39281.6%$3,8595.1%
\n $43.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $43.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This increase was primarily attributable to higher wages of $2.4 million, severance costs of $1.0 million and stock\u0002based compensation expense of $1.4 million, offset by reduced incentive compensation of $3.6 million. The higher wages were primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. The total number of employees increased to 185 as of December 31, 2008 from 182 as of December 31, 2007. As a percentage of total revenues, employee compensation and benefits expense increased to 47.1% for the year ended December 31, 2008 from 46.0% for the year ended December 31, 2007. Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $0.7 million or 9.9% to $7.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $7.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. An increase in amortization of intangible assets of $1.3 million and the TWS impairment charge of $0.7 million were offset by a decline in depreciation and amortization of hardware and software development costs of $1.3 million. MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) of this standard had no material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition and Consolidated Statements of Operations. Reclassifications Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior years’ financial statements in order to conform to the current year presentation. Such reclassifications had no effect on previously reported net income. On March 5, 2008, the Company acquired all of the outstanding capital stock of Greenline Financial Technologies, Inc. (“Greenline”), an Illinois-based provider of integration, testing and management solutions for FIX-related products and services designed to optimize electronic trading of fixed-income, equity and other exchange-based products, and approximately ten percent of the outstanding capital stock of TradeHelm, Inc. , a Delaware corporation that was spun-out from Greenline immediately prior to the acquisition. The acquisition of Greenline broadens the range of technology services that the Company offers to institutional financial markets, provides an expansion of the Company’s client base, including global exchanges and hedge funds, and further diversifies the Company’s revenues beyond the core electronic credit trading products. The results of operations of Greenline are included in the Consolidated Financial Statements from the date of the acquisition. The aggregate consideration for the Greenline acquisition was $41.1 million, comprised of $34.7 million in cash, 725,923 shares of common stock valued at $5.8 million and $0.6 million of acquisition-related costs. In addition, the sellers were eligible to receive up to an aggregate of $3.0 million in cash, subject to Greenline attaining certain earn\u0002out targets in 2008 and 2009. A total of $1.4 million was paid to the sellers in 2009 based on the 2008 earn-out target, bringing the aggregate consideration to $42.4 million. The 2009 earn-out target was not met. A total of $2.0 million of the purchase price, which had been deposited into escrow accounts to satisfy potential indemnity claims, was distributed to the sellers in March 2009. The shares of common stock issued to each selling shareholder of Greenline were released in two equal installments on December 20, 2008 and December 20, 2009, respectively. The value ascribed to the shares was discounted from the market value to reflect the non-marketability of such shares during the restriction period. The purchase price allocation is as follows (in thousands): \n
Cash$6,406
Accounts receivable2,139
Amortizable intangibles8,330
Goodwill29,405
Deferred tax assets, net3,410
Other assets, including investment in TradeHelm1,429
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and deferred revenue-8,701
Total purchase price$42,418
\n The amortizable intangibles include $3.2 million of acquired technology, $3.3 million of customer relationships, $1.3 million of non-competition agreements and $0.5 million of tradenames. Useful lives of ten years and five years have been assigned to the customer relationships intangible and all other amortizable intangibles, respectively. The identifiable intangible assets and goodwill are not deductible for tax purposes. The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial information reflects the results of operations of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, as if the acquisition of Greenline had occurred as of the beginning of the period presented, after giving effect to certain purchase accounting adjustments. These pro forma results are not necessarily indicative of what the Company’s operating results would have been had the acquisition actually taken place as of the beginning of the earliest period presented. The pro forma financial information"} {"answer": 1.0, "question": "How many Balance at Beginning of Period exceed the average of Balance at Beginning of Period in 2006?", "context": "The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s valuation allowance: \n
Balance at January 1, 2010$25,621
Increases in current period tax positions907
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,740
Balance at December 31, 2010$23,788
Increases in current period tax positions1,525
Decreases in current period tax positions-3,734
Balance at December 31, 2011$21,579
Increases in current period tax positions0
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,059
Balance at December 31, 2012$19,520
\n Note 14: Employee Benefits Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits The Company maintains noncontributory defined benefit pension plans covering eligible employees of its regulated utility and shared services operations. Benefits under the plans are based on the employee’s years of service and compensation. The pension plans have been closed for most employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 had their accrued benefit frozen and will be able to receive this benefit as a lump sum upon termination or retirement. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 and non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006 are provided with a 5.25% of base pay defined contribution plan. The Company does not participate in a multiemployer plan. The Company’s funding policy is to contribute at least the greater of the minimum amount required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or the normal cost, and an additional contribution if needed to avoid “at risk” status and benefit restrictions under the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Company may also increase its contributions, if appropriate, to its tax and cash position and the plan’s funded position. Pension plan assets are invested in a number of actively managed and indexed investments including equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities and guaranteed interest contracts with insurance companies. Pension expense in excess of the amount contributed to the pension plans is deferred by certain regulated subsidiaries pending future recovery in rates charged for utility services as contributions are made to the plans. (See Note 6) The Company also has several unfunded noncontributory supplemental non-qualified pension plans that provide additional retirement benefits to certain employees. The Company maintains other postretirement benefit plans providing varying levels of medical and life insurance to eligible retirees. The retiree welfare plans are closed for union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. The plans had previously closed for non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2002. The Company’s policy is to fund other postretirement benefit costs for rate-making purposes. Plan assets are invested in equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) and emerging market funds. The obligations of the plans are dominated by obligations for active employees. Because the timing of expected benefit payments is so far in the future and the size of the plan assets are small relative to the Company’s assets, the investment strategy is to allocate a significant percentage of assets to equities, which the Company believes will provide the highest return over the long-term period. The fixed income assets are invested in long duration debt securities and may be invested in fixed income instruments, such as futures and options in order to better match the duration of the plan liability. The allocation of goodwill in accordance with SFAS No.142 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was as follows: \n
Balance at Beginning of Period Goodwill Acquired Foreign Currency Translation and Other Balance at End of Period
Year Ended December 31, 2006
Food Packaging$540.4$31.9$14.9$587.2
Protective Packaging1,368.40.41.11,369.9
Total$1,908.8$32.3$16.0$1,957.1
Year Ended December 31, 2005
Food Packaging$549.8$0.7$-10.1$540.4
Protective Packaging1,368.20.8-0.61,368.4
Total$1,918.0$1.5$-10.7$1,908.8
\n See Note 20, “Acquisitions,” for additional information on the goodwill acquired during 2006. Note 4 Short Term Investments—Available-for-Sale Securities At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company’s available-for-sale securities consisted of auction rate securities for which interest or dividend rates are generally re-set for periods of up to 90 days. At December 31, 2006, the Company held $33.9 million of auction rate securities which were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates. At December 31, 2005, the Company held $44.1 million of auction rate securities, of which $34.7 million were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates and $9.4 million were investments in other auction rate securities with contractual maturities in 2031. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the fair value of the available-for-sale securities held by the Company was equal to their cost. There were no gross realized gains or losses from the sale of available\u0002for-sale securities in 2006 and 2005. Note 5 Accounts Receivable Securitization Program In December 2001, the Company and a group of its U. S. subsidiaries entered into an accounts receivable securitization program with a bank and an issuer of commercial paper administered by the bank. On December 7, 2004, which was the scheduled expiration date of this program, the parties extended this program for an additional term of three years ending December 7, 2007. Under this receivables program, the Company’s two primary operating subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air Corporation (US), sell all of their eligible U. S. accounts receivable to Sealed Air Funding Corporation, an indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that was formed for the sole purpose of entering into the receivables program. Sealed Air Funding in turn may sell undivided ownership interests in these receivables to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, subject to specified conditions, up to a maximum of $125.0 million of receivables interests outstanding from time to time. Sealed Air Funding retains the receivables it purchases from the operating subsidiaries, except those as to which it sells receivables interests to the bank or the issuer of commercial paper. The Company has structured the sales of accounts receivable by the operating subsidiaries to Sealed Air Funding, and the sales of receivables interests from Sealed Air Funding to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, as “true sales” under applicable laws. The assets of Sealed Air Funding are not available to pay any creditors of the Company or of the Company’s other subsidiaries or affiliates. The Company accounts for these transactions as sales of receivables under the provisions of SFAS No.140, “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities. ” Product Care 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, net sales decreased $30 million, or 2%, in 2016 compared with 2015, of which $22 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $8 million, or 1%, in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to the following: ? unfavorable price/mix of $29 million primarily in North America driven by targeted pricing incentives and an unfavorable product mix related to accelerated growth in e-Commerce and a shift in demand due to more innovative, resource-efficient solutions. This was partially offset by: ? higher unit volumes of $21 million, primarily in North America and EMEA due to ongoing strength in the e-Commerce and third party logistics markets, partially offset by rationalization and weakness in the industrial sector, as well as declines in Latin America due to the political and economic environment.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, net sales decreased $109 million, or 7%, in 2015 compared with 2014, of which $99 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $10 million, or 1%, in 2015 compared with 2014 primarily due to the following: ? lower unit volumes due to rationalization efforts in North America, Latin America and to a lesser extent, EMEA and weaknesses across the industrial sector. This was partially offset by: ? favorable price/mix in all regions, primarily in North America and Latin America reflecting results from our focus on maintaining pricing disciplines and an increase of sales from high-performance packaging solutions, including cushioning and packaging systems as compared to sales from general packaging solutions, and the progression of our pricing and value initiatives implemented to offset non-material inflationary costs as well as currency devaluation. Cost of Sales Cost of sales for the years ended December 31, were as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,2016 vs. 2015 % Change2015 vs. 2014 % Change
(In millions)201620152014
Net sales$6,778.3$7,031.5$7,750.5-3.6%-9.3%
Cost of sales4,246.74,444.95,062.9-4.5%-12.2%
As a % of net sales62.7%63.2%65.3%
Gross Profit$2,531.6$2,586.6$2,687.6-2.1%-3.8%
\n 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, costs of sales decreased $198 million in 2016 as compared to 2015. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $163 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $35 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $79 million, offset by an increase of $51 million in expenses representing higher non-material manufacturing and direct costs, including salary and wage inflation, partially offset by restructuring savings and lower incentive based compensation.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, costs of sales decreased $618 million in 2015 as compared to 2014. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $492 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $126 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $140 million and favorable impact of $31 million related to cost savings, freight, and other supply chain costs. These were partially offset by $47 million in expenses related to higher non-material manufacturing costs, including salary and wage inflation."} {"answer": 1.0, "question": "Does the average value of Loans and leases in 2014 greater than that in 2013", "context": "countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Capital The management of regulatory and economic capital both involve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. Regulatory Capital Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our regulatory capital requirements, the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31: \n
REGULATORY GUIDELINESSTATE STREET STATE STREET BANK
MinimumWell Capitalized20092008 -22009 2008-2
Regulatory capital ratios:
Tier 1 risk-based capital4%6%17.7%20.3%17.3%19.8%
Total risk-based capital81019.121.619.021.3
Tier 1 leverage ratio-1458.57.88.27.6
\n (1) Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. (2) Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. At December 31, 2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios decreased compared to year-end 2008. With respect to State Street, the loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the U. S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of the May 2009 public offering MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the level of housing prices and the timing of defaults. To the extent that such factors differ significantly from management's current expectations, resulting loss estimates may differ materially from those stated. Excluding other-than-temporary impairment recorded in 2014, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining investment securities and the resulting gross unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about these gross unrealized losses is provided in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. Loans and Leases TABLE 26: U. S. AND NON- U. S. LOANS AND LEASES \n
As of December 31,
(In millions)20142013201220112010
Institutional:
U.S.$14,908$10,623$9,645$7,115$7,001
Non-U.S.3,2632,6542,2512,4784,192
Commercial real estate:
U.S.28209411460764
Total loans and leases$18,199$13,486$12,307$10,053$11,957
Average loans and leases$15,912$13,781$11,610$12,180$12,094
\n The increase in loans in the institutional segment as of December 31, 2014 as compared to December 31, 2013 was primarily driven by higher levels of short-duration advances and increased investment in the non-investment-grade lending market through participations in loan syndications, specifically senior secured bank loans. Short-duration advances to our clients included in the institutional segment were $3.54 billion and $2.45 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These short-duration advances provide liquidity to fund clients in support of their transaction flows associated with securities settlement activities. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our investment in senior secured bank loans totaled approximately $2.07 billion and $724 million, respectively. In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2014 totaling $337 million to participate in such syndications. These senior secured bank loans, which we have rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 95% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2014, compared to 94% as of December 31, 2013. Our investment strategy involves limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment, and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans. As of December 31, 2014, our allowance for loan losses included approximately $26 million related to these senior secured bank loans. As this portfolio grows and becomes more seasoned, our allowance for loan losses related to these loans may increase through additional provisions for credit losses. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, unearned income deducted from our investment in leveraged lease financing was $109 million and $121 million, respectively, for U. S. leases and $261 million and $298 million, respectively, for non-U. S. leases. The commercial real estate, or CRE, loans are composed of the loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Additional information about all of our loan-and-lease segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The decrease in the CRE loans as of December 31, 2014 compared to December 31, 2013 resulted from one of the loans, acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreement with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy being repaid. As of December 31, 2014 no CRE loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2013, we held a CRE loan for approximately $130 million which had previously been modified in a troubled debt restructuring. No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings in 2014 or 2013. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) Funding Deposits: We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, foreign exchange services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with State Street entities in various currencies. We invest these client deposits in a combination of investment securities and short\u0002duration financial instruments whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. For the past several years, we have experienced higher client deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter or the end of the year. As a result, we believe average client deposit balances are more reflective of ongoing funding than period-end balances. TABLE 33: CLIENT DEPOSITS \n
December 31,Average Balance Year Ended December 31,
(In millions)2014201320142013
Client deposits-1$195,276$182,268$167,470$143,043
\n (1) Balance as of December 31, 2014 excluded term wholesale certificates of deposit, or CDs, of $13.76 billion; average balances for the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 excluded average CDs of $6.87 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively. Short-Term Funding: Our corporate commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3.0 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issuance, had $2.48 billion and $1.82 billion of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight, and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $8.93 billion and $7.95 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately $690 million as of December 31, 2014, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2014, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit. Long-Term Funding: As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank had Board authority to issue unsecured senior debt securities from time to time, provided that the aggregate principal amount of such unsecured senior debt outstanding at any one time does not exceed $5 billion. As of December 31, 2014, $4.1 billion was available for issuance pursuant to this authority. As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank also had Board authority to issue an additional $500 million of subordinated debt. We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to our shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors. Agency Credit Ratings Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; relative market position; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits; strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and preparedness for current or future regulatory developments. High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors, increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products, serve markets, and engage in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings. A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital"} {"answer": 1.0, "question": "Does the average value of As of January 1 in Number of Awards greater than that in Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value?", "context": "damages to natural resources allegedly caused by the discharge of hazardous substances from two former waste disposal sites in New Jersey. During the fourth quarter, the Company negotiated a settlement of New Jersey’s claims. Under the terms of the settlement, the company will transfer to the State of New Jersey 150 acres of undeveloped land with groundwater recharge potential, which the Company acquired for purposes of the settlement, and will pay the state’s attorneys’ fees. Notice of the settlement was published for public comment in December 2007, and no objections were received. As a result, the Company and the State of New Jersey have signed the formal settlement agreement pursuant to which the Company will transfer title to the property and will be dismissed from the lawsuit, which will continue against the codefendants. Accrued Liabilities and Insurance Receivables Related to Legal Proceedings The Company complies with the requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” and related guidance, and records liabilities for legal proceedings in those instances where it can reasonably estimate the amount of the loss and where liability is probable. Where the reasonable estimate of the probable loss is a range, the Company records the most likely estimate of the loss, or the low end of the range if there is no one best estimate. The Company either discloses the amount of a possible loss or range of loss in excess of established reserves if estimable, or states that such an estimate cannot be made. For those insured matters where the Company has taken a reserve, the Company also records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover under the Company’s insurance program. For those insured matters where the Company has not taken a reserve because the liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, but where the Company has incurred an expense in defending itself, the Company records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover for the expense incurred. The Company discloses significant legal proceedings even where liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, if the Company believes there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred. Because litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur, there can be no certainty that the Company may not ultimately incur charges in excess of presently recorded liabilities. A future adverse ruling, settlement, or unfavorable development could result in future charges that could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations or cash flows in the period in which they are recorded. The Company currently believes that such future charges, if any, would not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position of the Company, taking into account its significant available insurance coverage. Based on experience and developments, the Company periodically reexamines its estimates of probable liabilities and associated expenses and receivables, and whether it is able to estimate a liability previously determined to be not estimable and/or not probable. Where appropriate, the Company makes additions to or adjustments of its estimated liabilities. As a result, the current estimates of the potential impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the legal proceedings and claims pending against the Company could change in the future. The Company estimates insurance receivables based on an analysis of its numerous policies, including their exclusions, pertinent case law interpreting comparable policies, its experience with similar claims, and assessment of the nature of the claim, and records an amount it has concluded is likely to be recovered. The following table shows the major categories of on-going litigation, environmental remediation and other environmental liabilities for which the Company has been able to estimate its probable liability and for which the Company has taken reserves and the related insurance receivables: \n
At December 31 (Millions)200720062005
Breast implant liabilities$1$4$7
Breast implant receivables6493130
Respirator mask/asbestos liabilities121181210
Respirator mask/asbestos receivables332380447
Environmental remediation liabilities374430
Environmental remediation receivables151515
Other environmental liabilities147148
\n For those significant pending legal proceedings that do not appear in the table and that are not the subject of pending settlement agreements, the Company has determined that liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, and the Company is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss at this time. The amounts in the preceding table with respect to breast implant and environmental remediation represent the Company’s best estimate of the respective liabilities. The Company does not believe that there is any single best estimate of the respirator/mask/asbestos liability or the other environmental liabilities shown above, nor that it can reliably estimate the amount or range of amounts by which those liabilities may exceed the reserves the Company has established. one year volatility, the median of the term of the expected life rolling volatility, the median of the most recent term of the expected life volatility of 3M stock, and the implied volatility on the grant date. The expected term assumption is based on the weighted average of historical grants. Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units The following table summarizes restricted stock and restricted stock unit activity for the years ended December 31: \n
201520142013
Number of AwardsWeighted Average Grant Date Fair ValueNumber of AwardsWeighted Average Grant Date Fair ValueNumber of AwardsWeighted Average Grant Date Fair Value
Nonvested balance —
As of January 12,817,786$104.413,105,361$92.313,261,562$85.17
Granted
Annual671,204165.86798,615126.79946,774101.57
Other26,886156.9478,252152.7444,401111.19
Vested-1,010,61289.99-1,100,67590.37-1,100,09579.93
Forfeited-64,176118.99-63,76797.23-47,28190.82
As of December 312,441,088$127.472,817,786$104.413,105,361$92.31
\n As of December 31, 2015, there was $84 million of compensation expense that has yet to be recognized related to non\u0002vested restricted stock and restricted stock units. This expense is expected to be recognized over the remaining weighted\u0002average vesting period of 24 months. The total fair value of restricted stock and restricted stock units that vested during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $166 million, $145 million and $114 million, respectively. The Company’s actual tax benefits realized for the tax deductions related to the vesting of restricted stock and restricted stock units for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $62 million, $54 million and $43 million, respectively. Restricted stock units granted under the 3M 2008 Long-Term Incentive Plan generally vest three years following the grant date assuming continued employment. Dividend equivalents equal to the dividends payable on the same number of shares of 3M common stock accrue on these restricted stock units during the vesting period, although no dividend equivalents are paid on any of these restricted stock units that are forfeited prior to the vesting date. Dividends are paid out in cash at the vest date on restricted stock units, except for performance shares which do not earn dividends. Since the rights to dividends are forfeitable, there is no impact on basic earnings per share calculations. Weighted average restricted stock unit shares outstanding are included in the computation of diluted earnings per share. Performance Shares Instead of restricted stock units, the Company makes annual grants of performance shares to members of its executive management. The 2015 performance criteria for these performance shares (organic volume growth, return on invested capital, free cash flow conversion, and earnings per share growth) were selected because the Company believes that they are important drivers of long-term stockholder value. The number of shares of 3M common stock that could actually be delivered at the end of the three-year performance period may be anywhere from 0% to 200% of each performance share granted, depending on the performance of the Company during such performance period. Non-substantive vesting requires that expense for the performance shares be recognized over one or three years depending on when each individual became a 3M executive. Performance shares do not accrue dividends during the performance period. Therefore, the grant date fair value is determined by reducing the closing stock price on the date of grant by the net present value of dividends during the performance period. Pension and Postretirement Obligations: 3M has various company-sponsored retirement plans covering substantially all U. S. employees and many employees outside the United States. The primary U. S. defined-benefit pension plan was closed to new participants effective January 1, 2009. The Company accounts for its defined benefit pension and postretirement health care and life insurance benefit plans in accordance with Accounting Standard Codification (ASC) 715, Compensation — Retirement Benefits, in measuring plan assets and benefit obligations and in determining the amount of net periodic benefit cost. ASC 715 requires employers to recognize the underfunded or overfunded status of a defined benefit pension or postretirement plan as an asset or liability in its statement of financial position and recognize changes in the funded status in the year in which the changes occur through accumulated other comprehensive income, which is a component of stockholders’ equity. While the company believes the valuation methods used to determine the fair value of plan assets are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date. See Note 11 for additional discussion of actuarial assumptions used in determining pension and postretirement health care liabilities and expenses. Pension benefits associated with these plans are generally based primarily on each participant’s years of service, compensation, and age at retirement or termination. The benefit obligation represents the present value of the benefits that employees are entitled to in the future for services already rendered as of the measurement date. The Company measures the present value of these future benefits by projecting benefit payment cash flows for each future period and discounting these cash flows back to the December 31 measurement date, using the yields of a portfolio of high quality, fixed-income debt instruments that would produce cash flows sufficient in timing and amount to settle projected future benefits. Historically, the single aggregated discount rate used for each plan’s benefit obligation was also used for the calculation of all net periodic benefit costs, including the measurement of the service and interest costs. Beginning in 2016, 3M changed the method used to estimate the service and interest cost components of the net periodic pension and other postretirement benefit costs. The new method measures service cost and interest cost separately using the spot yield curve approach applied to each corresponding obligation. Service costs are determined based on duration-specific spot rates applied to the service cost cash flows. The interest cost calculation is determined by applying duration-specific spot rates to the year-by-year projected benefit payments. The spot yield curve approach does not affect the measurement of the total benefit obligations as the change in service and interest costs offset in the actuarial gains and losses recorded in other comprehensive income. The Company changed to the new method to provide a more precise measure of service and interest costs by improving the correlation between the projected benefit cash flows and the discrete spot yield curve rates. The Company accounted for this change as a change in estimate prospectively beginning in the first quarter of 2016. As a result of the change to the spot yield curve approach, 2016 defined benefit pension and postretirement net periodic benefit cost is expected to decrease by $180 million. Including this $180 million, 3M expects global defined benefit pension and postretirement expense in 2016 (before settlements, curtailments, special termination benefits and other) to decrease by approximately $320 million pre-tax when compared to 2015. Using this methodology, the Company determined discount rates for its plans as follow: \n
U.S. Qualified PensionInternational Pension (weighted average)U.S. Postretirement Medical
December 31, 2014 Liability and 2015 Net Periodic Benefit Cost:
Single discount rate4.10%3.11%4.07%
December 31, 2015 Liability:
Benefit obligation4.47%3.12%4.32%
2016 Net Periodic Benefit Cost Components:
Service cost4.72%2.84%4.60%
Interest cost3.77%2.72%3.44%
\n Another significant element in determining the Company’s pension expense in accordance with ASC 715 is the expected return on plan assets, which is based on historical results for similar allocations among asset classes. For the primary U. S. qualified pension plan, the expected long-term rate of return on an annualized basis for 2016 is 7.50%, 0.25% lower than 2015. Refer to Note 11 for information on how the 2015 rate was determined. Return on assets assumptions for"} {"answer": 191913.0, "question": "What's the sum of Client deposits of Average Balance Year Ended December 31, 2013, and U.S. of As of December 31, 2012 ?", "context": "countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Capital The management of regulatory and economic capital both involve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. Regulatory Capital Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our regulatory capital requirements, the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31: \n
REGULATORY GUIDELINESSTATE STREET STATE STREET BANK
MinimumWell Capitalized20092008 -22009 2008-2
Regulatory capital ratios:
Tier 1 risk-based capital4%6%17.7%20.3%17.3%19.8%
Total risk-based capital81019.121.619.021.3
Tier 1 leverage ratio-1458.57.88.27.6
\n (1) Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. (2) Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. At December 31, 2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios decreased compared to year-end 2008. With respect to State Street, the loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the U. S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of the May 2009 public offering MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the level of housing prices and the timing of defaults. To the extent that such factors differ significantly from management's current expectations, resulting loss estimates may differ materially from those stated. Excluding other-than-temporary impairment recorded in 2014, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining investment securities and the resulting gross unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about these gross unrealized losses is provided in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. Loans and Leases TABLE 26: U. S. AND NON- U. S. LOANS AND LEASES \n
As of December 31,
(In millions)20142013201220112010
Institutional:
U.S.$14,908$10,623$9,645$7,115$7,001
Non-U.S.3,2632,6542,2512,4784,192
Commercial real estate:
U.S.28209411460764
Total loans and leases$18,199$13,486$12,307$10,053$11,957
Average loans and leases$15,912$13,781$11,610$12,180$12,094
\n The increase in loans in the institutional segment as of December 31, 2014 as compared to December 31, 2013 was primarily driven by higher levels of short-duration advances and increased investment in the non-investment-grade lending market through participations in loan syndications, specifically senior secured bank loans. Short-duration advances to our clients included in the institutional segment were $3.54 billion and $2.45 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These short-duration advances provide liquidity to fund clients in support of their transaction flows associated with securities settlement activities. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our investment in senior secured bank loans totaled approximately $2.07 billion and $724 million, respectively. In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2014 totaling $337 million to participate in such syndications. These senior secured bank loans, which we have rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 95% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2014, compared to 94% as of December 31, 2013. Our investment strategy involves limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment, and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans. As of December 31, 2014, our allowance for loan losses included approximately $26 million related to these senior secured bank loans. As this portfolio grows and becomes more seasoned, our allowance for loan losses related to these loans may increase through additional provisions for credit losses. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, unearned income deducted from our investment in leveraged lease financing was $109 million and $121 million, respectively, for U. S. leases and $261 million and $298 million, respectively, for non-U. S. leases. The commercial real estate, or CRE, loans are composed of the loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Additional information about all of our loan-and-lease segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The decrease in the CRE loans as of December 31, 2014 compared to December 31, 2013 resulted from one of the loans, acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreement with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy being repaid. As of December 31, 2014 no CRE loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2013, we held a CRE loan for approximately $130 million which had previously been modified in a troubled debt restructuring. No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings in 2014 or 2013. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) Funding Deposits: We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, foreign exchange services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with State Street entities in various currencies. We invest these client deposits in a combination of investment securities and short\u0002duration financial instruments whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. For the past several years, we have experienced higher client deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter or the end of the year. As a result, we believe average client deposit balances are more reflective of ongoing funding than period-end balances. TABLE 33: CLIENT DEPOSITS \n
December 31,Average Balance Year Ended December 31,
(In millions)2014201320142013
Client deposits-1$195,276$182,268$167,470$143,043
\n (1) Balance as of December 31, 2014 excluded term wholesale certificates of deposit, or CDs, of $13.76 billion; average balances for the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 excluded average CDs of $6.87 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively. Short-Term Funding: Our corporate commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3.0 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issuance, had $2.48 billion and $1.82 billion of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight, and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $8.93 billion and $7.95 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately $690 million as of December 31, 2014, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2014, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit. Long-Term Funding: As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank had Board authority to issue unsecured senior debt securities from time to time, provided that the aggregate principal amount of such unsecured senior debt outstanding at any one time does not exceed $5 billion. As of December 31, 2014, $4.1 billion was available for issuance pursuant to this authority. As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank also had Board authority to issue an additional $500 million of subordinated debt. We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to our shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors. Agency Credit Ratings Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; relative market position; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits; strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and preparedness for current or future regulatory developments. High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors, increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products, serve markets, and engage in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings. A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital"} {"answer": -0.12537, "question": "In the year with the most Granted for shares(in thousands), what is the growth rate of Outstanding ? (in %)", "context": "THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis Investing & Lending Investing & Lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans, including our relationship lending activities, to provide financing to clients. These investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature. We make investments, some of which are consolidated, including through our merchant banking business and our special situations group, in debt securities and loans, public and private equity securities, infrastructure and real estate entities. Some of these investments are made indirectly through funds that we manage. We also make unsecured and secured loans to retail clients through our digital platforms, Marcus and Goldman Sachs Private Bank Select (GS Select), respectively. The table below presents the operating results of our Investing & Lending segment. \n
Year Ended December
$ in millions201720162015
Equity securities$4,578$2,573$3,781
Debt securities and loans2,0031,5071,655
Total net revenues6,5814,0805,436
Operating expenses2,7962,3862,402
Pre-taxearnings$3,785$1,694$3,034
\n Operating Environment. During 2017, generally higher global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to a favorable environment for our equity and debt investments. Results also reflected net gains from company\u0002specific events, including sales, and corporate performance. This environment contrasts with 2016, where, in the first quarter of 2016, market conditions were difficult and corporate performance, particularly in the energy sector, was impacted by a challenging macroeconomic environment. However, market conditions improved during the rest of 2016 as macroeconomic concerns moderated. If macroeconomic concerns negatively affect company-specific events or corporate performance, or if global equity markets decline or credit spreads widen, net revenues in Investing & Lending would likely be negatively impacted.2017 versus 2016. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $6.58 billion for 2017, 61% higher than 2016. Net revenues in equity securities were $4.58 billion, including $3.82 billion of net gains from private equities and $762 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 78% higher than 2016, primarily reflecting a significant increase in net gains from private equities, which were positively impacted by company\u0002specific events and corporate performance. In addition, net gains from public equities were significantly higher, as global equity prices increased during the year. Of the $4.58 billion of net revenues in equity securities, approximately 60% was driven by net gains from company-specific events, such as sales, and public equities. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $2.00 billion, 33% higher than 2016, reflecting significantly higher net interest income (2017 included approximately $1.80 billion of net interest income). Net revenues in debt securities and loans for 2017 also included an impairment of approximately $130 million on a secured loan. Operating expenses were $2.80 billion for 2017, 17% higher than 2016, due to increased compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting higher net revenues, increased expenses related to consolidated investments, and increased expenses related to Marcus. Pre-tax earnings were $3.79 billion in 2017 compared with $1.69 billion in 2016.2016 versus 2015. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $4.08 billion for 2016, 25% lower than 2015. Net revenues in equity securities were $2.57 billion, including $2.17 billion of net gains from private equities and $402 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 32% lower than 2015, primarily reflecting a significant decrease in net gains from private equities, driven by company-specific events and corporate performance. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $1.51 billion, 9% lower than 2015, reflecting significantly lower net revenues related to relationship lending activities, due to the impact of changes in credit spreads on economic hedges. Losses related to these hedges were $596 million in 2016, compared with gains of $329 million in 2015. This decrease was partially offset by higher net gains from investments in debt instruments and higher net interest income. See Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about economic hedges related to our relationship lending activities. Operating expenses were $2.39 billion for 2016, essentially unchanged compared with 2015. Pre-tax earnings were $1.69 billion in 2016, 44% lower than 2015. the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan generally vest over four years and expire no later than ten years from the date of grant. For restricted stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, stock certificates are issued at the time of grant and recipients have dividend and voting rights. In general, these grants vest over three years. For deferred stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, no stock is issued at the time of grant. Generally, these grants vest over two-, three- or four-year periods. Performance awards granted under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan are earned over a performance period based on achievement of goals, generally over two\u0002to three-year periods. Payment for performance awards is made in cash or in shares of our common stock equal to its fair market value per share, based on certain financial ratios, after the conclusion of each performance period. We record compensation expense, equal to the estimated fair value of the options on the grant date, on a straight-line basis over the options’ vesting periods. We use a Black-Scholes option-pricing model to estimate the fair value of the options granted. The weighted-average assumptions used in connection with the option-pricing model were as follows for the years indicated: \n
20092008 2007
Dividend yield4.82%1.32%1.34%
Expected volatility26.7021.0023.30
Risk-free interest rate2.493.174.69
Expected option lives (in years)7.87.87.8
\n Compensation expense related to stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, deferred stock awards and performance awards, which we record as a component of salaries and employee benefits expense in our consolidated statement of income, was $126 million, $321 million and $272 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The 2009 and 2008 expense excluded $13 million and $47 million, respectively, associated with accelerated vesting in connection with the restructuring plan described in note 6. The aggregate income tax benefit recorded in our consolidated statement of income related to the above-described compensation expense was $50 million, $127 million and $109 million for 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Information about the 2006 Plan and 1997 Plan as of December 31, 2009, and activity during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, is presented below: \n
Shares (in thousands) Weighted Average Exercise Price Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (in years) Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions)
Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights:
Outstanding at December 31, 200716,368$48.94
Granted92181.71
Exercised-2,92644.99
Forfeited or expired-4747.40
Outstanding at December 31, 200814,31651.86
Granted51619.31
Exercised-83240.57
Forfeited or expired-83346.32
Outstanding at December 31, 200913,167$51.64 4.10$24.8
Exercisable at December 31, 200911,172$50.12 3.42$12.0
\n The weighted-average grant date fair value of options granted in 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $2.96, $21.06 and $22.44, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, was $5 million, $102 million and $129 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, total unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to stock options and stock appreciation rights was $7 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 21 months. value of our liquid assets, as defined, totaled $75.98 billion, compared to $85.81 billion as of December 31, 2008. The decrease was mainly attributable to unusually high 2008 deposit balances, as we experienced a significant increase in customer deposits during the second half of 2008 as the credit markets worsened. As customers accumulated liquidity, they placed cash with us, and these incremental customer deposits remained with State Street Bank at December 31, 2008. During 2009, as markets normalized, deposit levels moderated as customers returned to investing their cash, and our liquid asset levels declined accordingly. Due to the unusual size and volatile nature of these customer deposits, we maintained approximately $22.45 billion at central banks as of December 31, 2009, in excess of regulatory required minimums. Securities carried at $40.96 billion as of December 31, 2009, compared to $42.74 billion as of December 31, 2008, were designated as pledged for public and trust deposits, borrowed funds and for other purposes as provided by law, and are excluded from the liquid assets calculation, unless pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Liquid assets included securities pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston to secure State Street Bank’s ability to borrow from their discount window should the need arise. This access to primary credit is an important source of back-up liquidity for State Street Bank. As of December 31, 2009, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the discount window. Based upon our level of liquid assets and our ability to access the capital markets for additional funding when necessary, including our ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration, management considers overall liquidity at December 31, 2009 to be sufficient to meet State Street’s current commitments and business needs, including supporting the liquidity of the commercial paper conduits and accommodating the transaction and cash management needs of our customers. As referenced above, our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings on our debt, as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to retaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and customer deposits; and strong liquidity monitoring procedures. High ratings on debt minimize borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by ensuring the largest possible market for our debt. A downgrade or reduction of these credit ratings could have an adverse impact to our ability to access funding at favorable interest rates. The following table presents information about State Street’s and State Street Bank’s credit ratings as of February 22, 2010."} {"answer": 0.14509, "question": "what percentage of employees are subject to collective bargaining agreements?", "context": "R. ONEOK PARTNERS General Partner Interest - See Note B for discussion of the April 2006 acquisition of the additional general partner interest in ONEOK Partners. The limited partner units we received from ONEOK Partners were newly created Class B limited partner units. As of April 7, 2007, the Class B limited partner units are no longer subordinated to distributions on ONEOK Partners’ common units and generally have the same voting rights as the common units and are entitled to receive increased quarterly distributions and distributions on liquidation equal to 110 percent of the distributions paid with respect to the common units. On June 21, 2007, we, as the sole holder of ONEOK Partners Class B limited partner units, waived our right to receive the increased quarterly distributions on the Class B units for the period April 7, 2007, through December 31, 2007, and continuing thereafter until we give ONEOK Partners no less than 90 days advance notice that we have withdrawn our waiver. Any such withdrawal of the waiver will be effective with respect to any distribution on the Class B units declared or paid on or after 90 days following delivery of the notice. Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement and in conjunction with the issuance of additional common units by ONEOK Partners, we, as the general partner, are required to make equity contributions in order to maintain our representative general partner interest. Our investment in ONEOK Partners is shown in the table below for the periods presented. \n
December 31, 2007December 31, 2006December 31, 2005
General partner interest2.00%2.00%1.65%
Limited partner interest43.70% (a)43.70% (a)1.05% (b)
Total ownership interest45.70%45.70%2.70%
\n (a) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units and 36.5 million Class B units. (b) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units. Cash Distributions - Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement, distributions are made to the partners with respect to each calendar quarter in an amount equal to 100 percent of available cash. Available cash generally consists of all cash receipts adjusted for cash disbursements and net changes to cash reserves. Available cash will generally be distributed 98 percent to limited partners and 2 percent to the general partner. As an incentive, the general partner’s percentage interest in quarterly distributions is increased after certain specified target levels are met. Under the incentive distribution provisions, the general partner receives: ?15 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.605 per unit, ?25 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.715 per unit, and ?50 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.935 per unit. ONEOK Partners’ income is allocated to the general and limited partners in accordance with their respective partnership ownership percentages. The effect of any incremental income allocations for incentive distributions that are allocated to the general partner is calculated after the income allocation for the general partner’s partnership interest and before the income allocation to the limited partners. The following table shows ONEOK Partners’ general partner and incentive distributions related to the periods indicated. \n
Years Ended December 31,
2007 2006 2005
(Thousands of dollars)
General partner distributions$7,842$6,228$2,632
Incentive distributions50,62731,1026,568
Total distributions from ONEOK Partners$58,469$37,330$9,200
\n The quarterly distributions paid by ONEOK Partners to limited partners in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2007 were $0.98 per unit, $0.99 per unit, $1.00 per unit, and $1.01 per unit, respectively. gas. The use of these derivative instruments and the associated recovery of these costs have been approved by the OCC, KCC and regulatory authorities in certain of our Texas jurisdictions. ONEOK entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. ONEOK had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $500 million at December 31, 2011. In January 2012, ONEOK entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $200 million. Upon issuance in January 2012 of our $700 million, 4.25-percent senior notes due 2022, ONEOK settled all $700 million of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $44.1 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. ONEOK Partners entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. At December 31, 2011, ONEOK Partners had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $750 million. During the year ended December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $650 million. Upon ONEOK Partners’ debt issuance in September 2012, ONEOK Partners settled $1 billion of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $124.9 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. At December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners’ remaining interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $400 million have settlement dates greater than 12 months. Fair Values of Derivative Instruments - The following table sets forth the fair values of our derivative instruments for our continuing and discontinued operations for the periods indicated: \n
December 31, 2012 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)December 31, 2011 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)
Assets(Liabilities)Assets(Liabilities)
(Thousands of dollars)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments
Commodity contracts
Financial contracts$47,516(b)$-4,885$184,184(c)$-73,346
Physical contracts56-12662-344
Interest-rate contracts10,923——-128,666
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments58,495-5,011184,246-202,356
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
Commodity contracts
Nontrading instruments
Financial contracts24,970-25,009295,948-323,170
Physical contracts4,059-15338,733-1,665
Trading instruments
Financial contracts15,358-14,192111,920-110,050
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments44,387-39,354446,601-434,885
Total derivatives$102,882$-44,365$630,847$-637,241
\n (a) - Included on a net basis in energy marketing and risk-management assets and liabilities, other assets and other deferred credits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. (b) - Includes $16.9 million of derivative net assets and ineffectiveness associated with cash flow hedges of inventory related to certain financial contracts that were used to hedge forecasted purchases and sales of natural gas. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). (c) - Includes $88.9 million of derivative assets associated with cash flow hedges of inventory that were adjusted to reflect the lower of cost or market value. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). guidance to amend or clarify portions of the final rule in 2013. We anticipate that if the EPA issues additional responses, amendments and/or policy guidance on the final rule, it will reduce the anticipated capital, operations and maintenance costs resulting from the regulation. Generally, the NSPS final rule will require expenditures for updated emissions controls, monitoring and record-keeping requirements at affected facilities in the crude-oil and natural gas industry. We do not expect these expenditures will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. CERCLA - The federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also commonly known as Superfund (CERCLA), imposes strict, joint and several liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original act, on certain classes of “persons” (defined under CERCLA) that caused and/or contributed to the release of a hazardous substance into the environment. These persons include but are not limited to the owner or operator of a facility where the release occurred and/or companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substances found at the facility. Under CERCLA, these persons may be liable for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances released into the environment, damages to natural resources and the costs of certain health studies. Neither we nor ONEOK Partners expect our respective responsibilities under CERCLA, for this facility and any other, will have a material impact on our respective results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Chemical Site Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security released an interim rule in April 2007 that requires companies to provide reports on sites where certain chemicals, including many hydrocarbon products, are stored. We completed the Homeland Security assessments, and our facilities subsequently were assigned one of four risk-based tiers ranging from high (Tier 1) to low (Tier 4) risk, or not tiered at all due to low risk. To date, four of our facilities have been given a Tier 4 rating. Facilities receiving a Tier 4 rating are required to complete Site Security Plans and possible physical security enhancements. We do not expect the Site Security Plans and possible security enhancements cost will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Pipeline Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration and the DOT have completed a review and inspection of our “critical facilities” and identified no material security issues. Also, the Transportation Security Administration has released new pipeline security guidelines that include broader definitions for the determination of pipeline “critical facilities. ” We have reviewed our pipeline facilities according to the new guideline requirements, and there have been no material changes required to date. Environmental Footprint - Our environmental and climate change strategy focuses on taking steps to minimize the impact of our operations on the environment. These strategies include: (i) developing and maintaining an accurate greenhouse gas emissions inventory according to current rules issued by the EPA; (ii) improving the efficiency of our various pipelines, natural gas processing facilities and natural gas liquids fractionation facilities; (iii) following developing technologies for emission control and the capture of carbon dioxide to keep it from reaching the atmosphere; and (iv) utilizing practices to reduce the loss of methane from our facilities. We participate in the EPA’s Natural Gas STAR Program to voluntarily reduce methane emissions. We continue to focus on maintaining low rates of lost-and-unaccounted-for natural gas through expanded implementation of best practices to limit the release of natural gas during pipeline and facility maintenance and operations. EMPLOYEESWe employed 4,859 people at January 31, 2013, including 705 people at Kansas Gas Service who are subject to collective bargaining agreements. The following table sets forth our contracts with collective bargaining units at January 31, 2013:"} {"answer": 678752.8997, "question": "What will Interest Income reach in 2008 if it continues to grow at its current rate?", "context": "Interest expense related to capital lease obligations was $1.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2015, and $1.6 million during both the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013. Purchase Commitments In the table below, we set forth our enforceable and legally binding purchase obligations as of December 31, 2015. Some of the amounts are based on management’s estimates and assumptions about these obligations, including their duration, the possibility of renewal, anticipated actions by third parties, and other factors. Because these estimates and assumptions are necessarily subjective, our actual payments may vary from those reflected in the table. Purchase orders made in the ordinary course of business are excluded below. Any amounts for which we are liable under purchase orders are reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as accounts payable and accrued liabilities. These obligations relate to various purchase agreements for items such as minimum amounts of fiber and energy purchases over periods ranging from one year to 20 years. Total purchase commitments were as follows (dollars in millions): \n
2016$95.3
201760.3
201828.0
201928.0
202023.4
Thereafter77.0
Total$312.0
\n The Company purchased a total of $299.6 million, $265.9 million, and $61.7 million during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively, under these purchase agreements. The increase in purchases The increase in purchases under these agreements in 2014, compared with 2013, relates to the acquisition of Boise in fourth quarter 2013. Environmental Liabilities The potential costs for various environmental matters are uncertain due to such factors as the unknown magnitude of possible cleanup costs, the complexity and evolving nature of governmental laws and regulations and their interpretations, and the timing, varying costs and effectiveness of alternative cleanup technologies. From 2006 through 2015, there were no significant environmental remediation costs at PCA’s mills and corrugated plants. At December 31, 2015, the Company had $24.3 million of environmental-related reserves recorded on its Consolidated Balance Sheet. Of the $24.3 million, approximately $15.8 million related to environmental-related asset retirement obligations discussed in Note 12, Asset Retirement Obligations, and $8.5 million related to our estimate of other environmental contingencies. The Company recorded $7.9 million in “Accrued liabilities” and $16.4 million in “Other long-term liabilities” on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Liabilities recorded for environmental contingencies are estimates of the probable costs based upon available information and assumptions. Because of these uncertainties, PCA’s estimates may change. The Company believes that it is not reasonably possible that future environmental expenditures for remediation costs and asset retirement obligations above the $24.3 million accrued as of December 31, 2015, will have a material impact on its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. Guarantees and Indemnifications We provide guarantees, indemnifications, and other assurances to third parties in the normal course of our business. These include tort indemnifications, environmental assurances, and representations and warranties in commercial agreements. At December 31, 2015, we are not aware of any material liabilities arising from any guarantee, indemnification, or financial assurance we have provided. If we determined such a liability was probable and subject to reasonable determination, we would accrue for it at that time. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES The Company's common stock is traded on the NYSE under the symbol “RJF”. At November 19, 2007 there were approximately 14,000 holders of the Company's common stock. The following table sets forth for the periods indicated the high and low trades for the common stock (as adjusted for the three-for\u0002two stock split in March 2006): \n
20072006
HighLowHighLow
First Quarter$ 33.63$ 28.53$ 25.72$ 20.25
Second Quarter32.5227.3831.4524.47
Third Quarter34.6229.1031.6626.34
Fourth Quarter36.0028.6530.5726.45
\n See Quarterly Financial Information on page 87 of this report for the amount of the quarterly dividends paid. The Company expects to continue paying cash dividends. However, the payment and rate of dividends on the Company's common stock is subject to several factors including operating results, financial requirements of the Company, and the availability of funds from the Company's subsidiaries, including the broker\u0002dealer subsidiaries, which may be subject to restrictions under the net capital rules of the SEC, FINRA and the IDA; and RJBank, which may be subject to restrictions by federal banking agencies. Such restrictions have never limited the Company's dividend payments. (See Note 19 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the capital restrictions placed on RJBank and the Company's broker-dealer subsidiaries). See Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding repurchased shares of the Company's common stock. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Factors Affecting “Forward-Looking Statements” From time to time, the Company may publish “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or make oral statements that constitute forward-looking statements. These forward\u0002looking statements may relate to such matters as anticipated financial performance, future revenues or earnings, business prospects, projected ventures, new products, anticipated market performance, and similar matters. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a safe harbor for forward-looking statements. In order to comply with the terms of the safe harbor, the Company cautions readers that a variety of factors could cause the Company's actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results or other expectations expressed in the Company's forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company's control, are discussed in the section entitled Risk Factors on page 42 of this report. The Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements. Overview The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis is intended to help the reader understand the results of operations and the financial condition of the Company. Management’s Discussion and Analysis is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Company’s consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements. The Company’s results continue to be highly correlated to the direction of the U. S. equity markets and are subject to volatility due to changes in interest rates, valuation of financial instruments, economic and political trends and industry competition. During 2007, the market was impacted by rising energy prices, a housing market slowdown, a subprime lending collapse, a growing economy, a weakening US dollar and stable interest rates. The Company’s Private Client Group’s recruiting and retention of Financial Advisors was positively impacted by industry consolidation. RJBank benefited from the widening interest rate spreads and the availability of attractive loan purchases as a result of the subprime lending crisis. Results of Operations - RJBank The following table presents consolidated financial information for RJBank for the years indicated: \n
Year Ended
September 30, 2007% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2006% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2005
($ in 000's)
Interest Earnings
Interest Income$ 278,248144%$ 114,065153%$ 45,017
Interest Expense193,747163%73,529234%22,020
Net Interest Income84,501108%40,53676%22,997
Other Income1,324111%62745%431
Net Revenues85,825109%41,16376%23,428
Non-Interest Expense
Employee Compensation and Benefits7,77827%6,13514%5,388
Communications and Information Processing1,05216%90714%799
Occupancy and Equipment71914%62932%478
Provision for Loan Losses and Unfunded
Commitments32,150134%13,760891%1,388
Other17,121359%3,729218%1,171
Total Non-Interest Expense58,820134%25,160173%9,224
Pre-tax Earnings$ 27,00569%$ 16,00313%$ 14,204
\n Year ended September 30, 2007 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2006 - RJBank The Company completed its second bulk transfer of cash balances into the RJBank Deposit Program in March 2007, moving another $1.3 billion. This, combined with organic growth from the influx of new client assets, resulted in a $2.6 billion increase in average deposit balances. This increase in average deposit balances provided the funding for the $1.6 billion increase in average loan balances. This increase was 38% purchased residential mortgage pools and 62% corporate loans, 98% of which are purchased interests in corporate loan syndications with the remainder originated by RJBank. As a result of this growth, RJBank net interest income increased 108% to $84.5 million. Due to robust loan growth, the associated allowance for loan losses that are established upon recording a new loan and making new unfunded commitments required a provision of over $32 million in 2007. Accordingly, RJBank’s pre-tax income increased only 69%. During periods of growth when new loans are originated or purchased, an allowance for loan losses is established for potential losses inherent in those new loans. Accordingly, a robust period of growth generally results in charges to earnings in that period, while the benefits of higher interest earnings are realized in later periods. Year ended September 30, 2006 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2005 - RJBank Assets at RJBank grew a substantial $1.8 billion during the year. The increase was driven by a $1.7 billion increase in deposits, $1.3 billion of which were redirected from the Company’s Heritage Cash Trust or customer brokerage accounts, representing the introduction of a new sweep program for certain brokerage accounts. This alternative offers clients a money market equivalent interest rate and FDIC insurance. The Company intends to expand this offering over the next several years, transferring an additional $2 to $4 billion. During the year, RJBank deployed $1.3 billion of the increased deposits into loans. Purchased residential loan pools increased $700 million and corporate loans increased $600 million. This growth, combined with increased rates, generated an increase in net interest income of nearly $18 million. Pre-tax income increased only $1.8 million, due to the $13.8 million provision for loan loss associated with the increase in loans outstanding"} {"answer": 210184.0, "question": "what's the total amount of U.S. of As of December 31, 2014, and Client deposits of December 31, 2014 ?", "context": "countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Capital The management of regulatory and economic capital both involve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. Regulatory Capital Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our regulatory capital requirements, the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31: \n
REGULATORY GUIDELINESSTATE STREET STATE STREET BANK
MinimumWell Capitalized20092008 -22009 2008-2
Regulatory capital ratios:
Tier 1 risk-based capital4%6%17.7%20.3%17.3%19.8%
Total risk-based capital81019.121.619.021.3
Tier 1 leverage ratio-1458.57.88.27.6
\n (1) Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. (2) Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. At December 31, 2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios decreased compared to year-end 2008. With respect to State Street, the loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the U. S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of the May 2009 public offering MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the level of housing prices and the timing of defaults. To the extent that such factors differ significantly from management's current expectations, resulting loss estimates may differ materially from those stated. Excluding other-than-temporary impairment recorded in 2014, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining investment securities and the resulting gross unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about these gross unrealized losses is provided in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. Loans and Leases TABLE 26: U. S. AND NON- U. S. LOANS AND LEASES \n
As of December 31,
(In millions)20142013201220112010
Institutional:
U.S.$14,908$10,623$9,645$7,115$7,001
Non-U.S.3,2632,6542,2512,4784,192
Commercial real estate:
U.S.28209411460764
Total loans and leases$18,199$13,486$12,307$10,053$11,957
Average loans and leases$15,912$13,781$11,610$12,180$12,094
\n The increase in loans in the institutional segment as of December 31, 2014 as compared to December 31, 2013 was primarily driven by higher levels of short-duration advances and increased investment in the non-investment-grade lending market through participations in loan syndications, specifically senior secured bank loans. Short-duration advances to our clients included in the institutional segment were $3.54 billion and $2.45 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These short-duration advances provide liquidity to fund clients in support of their transaction flows associated with securities settlement activities. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our investment in senior secured bank loans totaled approximately $2.07 billion and $724 million, respectively. In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2014 totaling $337 million to participate in such syndications. These senior secured bank loans, which we have rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 95% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2014, compared to 94% as of December 31, 2013. Our investment strategy involves limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment, and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans. As of December 31, 2014, our allowance for loan losses included approximately $26 million related to these senior secured bank loans. As this portfolio grows and becomes more seasoned, our allowance for loan losses related to these loans may increase through additional provisions for credit losses. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, unearned income deducted from our investment in leveraged lease financing was $109 million and $121 million, respectively, for U. S. leases and $261 million and $298 million, respectively, for non-U. S. leases. The commercial real estate, or CRE, loans are composed of the loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Additional information about all of our loan-and-lease segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The decrease in the CRE loans as of December 31, 2014 compared to December 31, 2013 resulted from one of the loans, acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreement with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy being repaid. As of December 31, 2014 no CRE loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2013, we held a CRE loan for approximately $130 million which had previously been modified in a troubled debt restructuring. No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings in 2014 or 2013. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) Funding Deposits: We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, foreign exchange services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with State Street entities in various currencies. We invest these client deposits in a combination of investment securities and short\u0002duration financial instruments whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. For the past several years, we have experienced higher client deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter or the end of the year. As a result, we believe average client deposit balances are more reflective of ongoing funding than period-end balances. TABLE 33: CLIENT DEPOSITS \n
December 31,Average Balance Year Ended December 31,
(In millions)2014201320142013
Client deposits-1$195,276$182,268$167,470$143,043
\n (1) Balance as of December 31, 2014 excluded term wholesale certificates of deposit, or CDs, of $13.76 billion; average balances for the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 excluded average CDs of $6.87 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively. Short-Term Funding: Our corporate commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3.0 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issuance, had $2.48 billion and $1.82 billion of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight, and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $8.93 billion and $7.95 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately $690 million as of December 31, 2014, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2014, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit. Long-Term Funding: As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank had Board authority to issue unsecured senior debt securities from time to time, provided that the aggregate principal amount of such unsecured senior debt outstanding at any one time does not exceed $5 billion. As of December 31, 2014, $4.1 billion was available for issuance pursuant to this authority. As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank also had Board authority to issue an additional $500 million of subordinated debt. We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to our shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors. Agency Credit Ratings Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; relative market position; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits; strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and preparedness for current or future regulatory developments. High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors, increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products, serve markets, and engage in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings. A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital"} {"answer": 1.748, "question": "what is the percent change in average cds that were excluded between 2013 and 2014?", "context": "countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Capital The management of regulatory and economic capital both involve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. Regulatory Capital Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our regulatory capital requirements, the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31: \n
REGULATORY GUIDELINESSTATE STREET STATE STREET BANK
MinimumWell Capitalized20092008 -22009 2008-2
Regulatory capital ratios:
Tier 1 risk-based capital4%6%17.7%20.3%17.3%19.8%
Total risk-based capital81019.121.619.021.3
Tier 1 leverage ratio-1458.57.88.27.6
\n (1) Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. (2) Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. At December 31, 2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios decreased compared to year-end 2008. With respect to State Street, the loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the U. S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of the May 2009 public offering MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the level of housing prices and the timing of defaults. To the extent that such factors differ significantly from management's current expectations, resulting loss estimates may differ materially from those stated. Excluding other-than-temporary impairment recorded in 2014, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining investment securities and the resulting gross unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about these gross unrealized losses is provided in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. Loans and Leases TABLE 26: U. S. AND NON- U. S. LOANS AND LEASES \n
As of December 31,
(In millions)20142013201220112010
Institutional:
U.S.$14,908$10,623$9,645$7,115$7,001
Non-U.S.3,2632,6542,2512,4784,192
Commercial real estate:
U.S.28209411460764
Total loans and leases$18,199$13,486$12,307$10,053$11,957
Average loans and leases$15,912$13,781$11,610$12,180$12,094
\n The increase in loans in the institutional segment as of December 31, 2014 as compared to December 31, 2013 was primarily driven by higher levels of short-duration advances and increased investment in the non-investment-grade lending market through participations in loan syndications, specifically senior secured bank loans. Short-duration advances to our clients included in the institutional segment were $3.54 billion and $2.45 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These short-duration advances provide liquidity to fund clients in support of their transaction flows associated with securities settlement activities. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our investment in senior secured bank loans totaled approximately $2.07 billion and $724 million, respectively. In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2014 totaling $337 million to participate in such syndications. These senior secured bank loans, which we have rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 95% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2014, compared to 94% as of December 31, 2013. Our investment strategy involves limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment, and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans. As of December 31, 2014, our allowance for loan losses included approximately $26 million related to these senior secured bank loans. As this portfolio grows and becomes more seasoned, our allowance for loan losses related to these loans may increase through additional provisions for credit losses. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, unearned income deducted from our investment in leveraged lease financing was $109 million and $121 million, respectively, for U. S. leases and $261 million and $298 million, respectively, for non-U. S. leases. The commercial real estate, or CRE, loans are composed of the loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Additional information about all of our loan-and-lease segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The decrease in the CRE loans as of December 31, 2014 compared to December 31, 2013 resulted from one of the loans, acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreement with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy being repaid. As of December 31, 2014 no CRE loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2013, we held a CRE loan for approximately $130 million which had previously been modified in a troubled debt restructuring. No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings in 2014 or 2013. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) Funding Deposits: We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, foreign exchange services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with State Street entities in various currencies. We invest these client deposits in a combination of investment securities and short\u0002duration financial instruments whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. For the past several years, we have experienced higher client deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter or the end of the year. As a result, we believe average client deposit balances are more reflective of ongoing funding than period-end balances. TABLE 33: CLIENT DEPOSITS \n
December 31,Average Balance Year Ended December 31,
(In millions)2014201320142013
Client deposits-1$195,276$182,268$167,470$143,043
\n (1) Balance as of December 31, 2014 excluded term wholesale certificates of deposit, or CDs, of $13.76 billion; average balances for the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 excluded average CDs of $6.87 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively. Short-Term Funding: Our corporate commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3.0 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issuance, had $2.48 billion and $1.82 billion of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight, and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $8.93 billion and $7.95 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately $690 million as of December 31, 2014, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2014, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit. Long-Term Funding: As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank had Board authority to issue unsecured senior debt securities from time to time, provided that the aggregate principal amount of such unsecured senior debt outstanding at any one time does not exceed $5 billion. As of December 31, 2014, $4.1 billion was available for issuance pursuant to this authority. As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank also had Board authority to issue an additional $500 million of subordinated debt. We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to our shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors. Agency Credit Ratings Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; relative market position; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits; strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and preparedness for current or future regulatory developments. High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors, increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products, serve markets, and engage in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings. A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital"} {"answer": 44454.5, "question": "What is the average amount of Land of December 31, 2016, and Interest expense, net of Year Ended December 31, 2014 ?", "context": "ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The following selected financial data is qualified by reference to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements, including the notes thereto, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. \n
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands, except per share amounts)20162015201420132012
Net revenues$4,825,335$3,963,313$3,084,370$2,332,051$1,834,921
Cost of goods sold2,584,7242,057,7661,572,1641,195,381955,624
Gross profit2,240,6111,905,5471,512,2061,136,670879,297
Selling, general and administrative expenses1,823,1401,497,0001,158,251871,572670,602
Income from operations417,471408,547353,955265,098208,695
Interest expense, net-26,434-14,628-5,335-2,933-5,183
Other expense, net-2,755-7,234-6,410-1,172-73
Income before income taxes388,282386,685342,210260,993203,439
Provision for income taxes131,303154,112134,16898,66374,661
Net income256,979232,573208,042162,330128,778
Adjustment payment to Class C59,000————
Net income available to all stockholders$197,979$232,573$208,042$162,330$128,778
Net income available per common share
Basic net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Basic net income per share of Class C common stock$0.72$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Diluted net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Diluted net income per share of Class C common stock$0.71$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class A and B common stock
Basic217,707215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted221,944220,868219,380215,958212,760
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class C common stock
Basic218,623215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted222,904220,868219,380215,958212,760
Dividends declared$59,000$—$—$—$—
\n Our net revenues for the full year 2016 were $4,825.3 million, which reflects a revision from the $4,828.2 million reported in our earnings release, filed January 31, 2017, on Form 8-K. This revision reflects a $2.9 million adjustment related to a return credit for footwear that was identified in connection with the closing of our January 2017 books and records, following the earnings release. As a result, other items on our Consolidated Financial Statements have been appropriately adjusted from the amounts provided in the earnings release, including a reduction of our full year 2016 gross profit and income from operations by $2.9 million, and a reduction of net income by $1.7 million. \n
At December 31,
(In thousands)20162015201420132012
Cash and cash equivalents$250,470$129,852$593,175$347,489$341,841
Working capital -11,279,3371,019,9531,127,772702,181651,370
Inventories917,491783,031536,714469,006319,286
Total assets3,644,3312,865,9702,092,4281,576,3691,155,052
Total debt, including current maturities817,388666,070281,546151,55159,858
Total stockholders’ equity$2,030,900$1,668,222$1,350,300$1,053,354$816,922
\n (1) Working capital is defined as current assets minus current liabilities. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, which effects all entities that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. The amendments in this ASU cover such areas as the recognition of excess tax benefits and deficiencies, the classification of those excess tax benefits on the statement of cash flows, an accounting policy election for forfeitures, the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes and still qualify for equity classification and the classification of those taxes paid on the statement of cash flows. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016. This guidance can be applied either prospectively, retrospectively or using a modified retrospective transition method. Early adoption is permitted. The Company will not early adopt this ASU. The adoption of this guidance may have a material impact on the Company’s effective tax rate and income tax expense, depending in part on whether significant employee stock option exercises occur. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, which eliminates the diversity in practice related to the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows, by adding or clarifying guidance on eight specific cash flow issues. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not believe this ASU will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, which will require an entity to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset, other than inventory, when the transfer occurs. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted in the first interim period of 2017. Upon adoption, any deferred charge established upon an intra-company transfer would be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. At December 31, 2016, the Company had a deferred charge of $26.0 million with $1.8 million and $24.2 million recorded within Prepaid expenses and Other long term assets, respectively. The Company plans to adopt this ASU during the interim period ending March 31, 2017. Recently Adopted Accounting Standards In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, which requires costs incurred to issue debt to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the debt. This ASU is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted the provisions of this ASU in the first quarter of 2016, and reclassified approximately $2.9 million from “Other long term assets” to “Long term debt, net of current maturities” as of December 31, 2015.3. Property and Equipment, Net Property and equipment consisted of the following: \n
December 31,
(In thousands)20162015
Leasehold and tenant improvements$326,617$214,834
Furniture, fixtures and displays168,720132,736
Buildings47,21647,137
Software151,05999,309
Office equipment75,19650,399
Plant equipment124,140118,138
Land83,57417,628
Construction in progress204,362147,581
Other20,3834,002
Subtotal property and equipment1,201,267831,764
Accumulated depreciation-397,056-293,233
Property and equipment, net$804,211$538,531
"} {"answer": 6536.0, "question": "What is the sum of Net written premiums in the range of 1 and 3000 in 2014? (in million)", "context": "Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 11. Income Taxes – (Continued) The federal income tax return for 2006 is subject to examination by the IRS. In addition for 2007 and 2008, the IRS has invited the Company to participate in the Compliance Assurance Process (“CAP”), which is a voluntary program for a limited number of large corporations. Under CAP, the IRS conducts a real-time audit and works contemporaneously with the Company to resolve any issues prior to the filing of the tax return. The Company has agreed to participate. The Company believes this approach should reduce tax-related uncertainties, if any. The Company and/or its subsidiaries also file income tax returns in various state, local and foreign jurisdictions. These returns, with few exceptions, are no longer subject to examination by the various taxing authorities before 2000. As discussed in Note 1, the Company adopted the provisions of FIN No.48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” on January 1, 2007. As a result of the implementation of FIN No.48, the Company recognized a decrease to beginning retained earnings on January 1, 2007 of $37 million. The total amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of the date of adoption was approximately $70 million. Included in the balance at January 1, 2007, were $51 million of tax positions that if recognized would affect the effective tax rate. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows: \n
Balance, January 1, 2007$70
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year12
Additions for tax positions of prior years3
Reductions for tax positions related to the current year-23
Settlements-6
Expiration of statute of limitations-3
Balance, December 31, 2007$53
\n The Company anticipates that it is reasonably possible that payments of approximately $2 million will be made primarily due to the conclusion of state income tax examinations within the next 12 months. Additionally, certain state and foreign income tax returns will no longer be subject to examination and as a result, there is a reasonable possibility that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits will decrease by $7 million. At December 31, 2007, there were $42 million of tax benefits that if recognized would affect the effective rate. The Company recognizes interest accrued related to: (1) unrecognized tax benefits in Interest expense and (2) tax refund claims in Other revenues on the Consolidated Statements of Income. The Company recognizes penalties in Income tax expense (benefit) on the Consolidated Statements of Income. During 2007, the Company recorded charges of approximately $4 million for interest expense and $2 million for penalties. Provision has been made for the expected U. S. federal income tax liabilities applicable to undistributed earnings of subsidiaries, except for certain subsidiaries for which the Company intends to invest the undistributed earnings indefinitely, or recover such undistributed earnings tax-free. At December 31, 2007, the Company has not provided deferred taxes of $126 million, if sold through a taxable sale, on $361 million of undistributed earnings related to a domestic affiliate. The determination of the amount of the unrecognized deferred tax liability related to the undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries is not practicable. In connection with a non-recurring distribution of $850 million to Diamond Offshore from a foreign subsidiary, a portion of which consisted of earnings of the subsidiary that had not previously been subjected to U. S. federal income tax, Diamond Offshore recognized $59 million of U. S. federal income tax expense as a result of the distribution. It remains Diamond Offshore’s intention to indefinitely reinvest future earnings of the subsidiary to finance foreign activities. Total income tax expense for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, was different than the amounts of $1,601 million, $1,557 million and $639 million, computed by applying the statutory U. S. federal income tax rate of 35% to income before income taxes and minority interest for each of the years. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Results of Operations – CNA Financial – (Continued) \n
Year Ended December 31, 2014SpecialtyCommercialInternationalTotal
(In millions, except %)
Net written premiums$2,839$2,817$880$6,536
Net earned premiums2,8382,9069136,657
Net investment income560723611,344
Net operating income56927663908
Net realized investment gains (losses)99-117
Net income57828562925
Other performance metrics:
Loss and loss adjustment expense ratio57.3%75.3%53.5%64.6%
Expense ratio30.133.738.932.9
Dividend ratio0.20.30.2
Combined ratio87.6%109.3%92.4%97.7%
Rate3%5%-1%3%
Retention87%73%74%78%
New Business (a)$309$491$115$915
\n (a) Includes Hardy new business of $133 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. Prior years amounts are not included for Hardy.2016 Compared with 2015 Net written premiums increased $21 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Net written premiums for Commercial increased $23 million in 2016 as compared with 2015, driven by strong retention in middle markets, partially offset by a decrease in small business, which included a premium rate adjustment, as discussed in Note 18 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements under Item 8. Net written premiums for Specialty in 2016 were consistent with 2015 as growth in warranty was offset by a decrease in management and professional liability and health care due to underwriting actions undertaken in certain business lines. Net written premiums for International in 2016 were consistent with 2015 and include favorable period over period premium development of $24 million. Excluding the effect of foreign currency exchange rates and premium development, net written premiums increased 1.4% in 2016 in International. The increase in net earned premiums was consistent with the trend in net written premiums in Commercial. Excluding the effect of foreign currency exchange rates and premium development, the increase in net earned premiums was consistent with the trend in net written premiums in International. Net operating income increased $15 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. The increase in net operating income was primarily due to higher favorable net prior year reserve development and net investment income, partially offset by an increase in the current accident year loss ratio and higher underwriting expenses. Catastrophe losses were $100 million (after tax and noncontrolling interests) in 2016 as compared to catastrophe losses of $85 million (after tax and noncontrolling interests) in 2015. Favorable net prior year development of $316 million and $218 million was recorded in 2016 and 2015. Specialty recorded favorable net prior year development of $305 million and $152 million in 2016 and 2015, Commercial recorded unfavorable net prior year development of $53 million in 2016 as compared with favorable net prior year development of $30 million in 2015 and International recorded favorable net prior year development of $64 million and $36 million in 2016 and 2015. Further information on net prior year development is included in Note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8. Specialty’s combined ratio decreased 3.7 points in 2016 as compared with 2015. The loss ratio decreased 4.6 points due to higher favorable net prior year reserve development, partially offset by a higher current accident year loss ratio. Specialty’s expense ratio increased 0.9 points in 2016 as compared with 2015 due to higher employee costs and higher information technology (“IT”) spending primarily related to new underwriting platforms. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Results of Operations – Boardwalk Pipeline – (Continued) Results of Operations The following table summarizes the results of operations for Boardwalk Pipeline for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 as presented in Note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8: \n
Year Ended December 31201620152014
(In millions)
Revenues:
Other revenue, primarily operating$ 1,316$ 1,253$ 1,235
Net investment income11
Total1,3161,2541,236
Expenses:
Operating835851931
Interest183176165
Total1,0181,0271,096
Income before income tax298227140
Income tax expense-61-46-11
Amounts attributable to noncontrolling interests-148-107-111
Net income attributable to Loews Corporation$ 89$ 74$ 18
\n 2016 Compared with 2015 Total revenues increased $62 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Excluding the net effect of $13 million of proceeds received from the settlement of a legal matter in 2016, $9 million of proceeds received from a business interruption claim in 2015 and items offset in fuel and transportation expense, primarily retained fuel, operating revenues increased $83 million. The increase was driven by an increase in transportation revenues of $71 million, which resulted primarily from growth projects recently placed into service, incremental revenues from the Gulf South rate case of $18 million and a full year of revenues from the Evangeline pipeline. Storage and PAL revenues were higher by $17 million primarily from the effects of favorable market conditions on time period price spreads. Operating expenses decreased $16 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Excluding receipt of a franchise tax refund of $10 million in 2015 and items offset in operating revenues, operating costs and expenses increased $5 million primarily due to higher employee related costs, partially offset by decreases in maintenance activities and depreciation expense. Interest expense increased $7 million primarily due to higher average interest rates compared to 2015. Net income increased $15 million in 2016 as compared with 2015, primarily reflecting higher revenues and lower operating expenses, partially offset by higher interest expense as discussed above.2015 Compared with 2014 Total revenues increased $18 million in 2015 as compared with 2014. Excluding the business interruption claim proceeds of $8 million and items offset in fuel and transportation expense, primarily retained fuel, operating revenues increased $33 million. This increase is primarily due to higher transportation revenues of $39 million from growth projects recently placed into service, including the Evangeline pipeline which was acquired in October of 2014 and $20 million of additional revenues resulting from the Gulf South rate case, partially offset by the effects of comparably warm weather experienced in the early part of the 2015 period in Boardwalk Pipeline’s market areas and unfavorable market conditions. Storage and PAL revenues decreased $20 million primarily as a result of the effects of unfavorable market conditions on time period price spreads. Operating expenses decreased $80 million in 2015 as compared with 2014. This decrease is primarily due to a $94 million prior year charge to write off all capitalized costs associated with the terminated Bluegrass project, a $10 million franchise tax refund related to settlement of prior tax periods and a decrease in fuel and transportation expense due to lower natural gas prices. These decreases were partially offset by higher depreciation expense of $35"} {"answer": 0.11247, "question": "what is the percentage change in the balance of asset allocation from 2016 to 2017?", "context": "Long-term product offerings include alpha-seeking active and index strategies. Our alpha-seeking active strategies seek to earn attractive returns in excess of a market benchmark or performance hurdle while maintaining an appropriate risk profile, and leverage fundamental research and quantitative models to drive portfolio construction. In contrast, index strategies seek to closely track the returns of a corresponding index, generally by investing in substantially the same underlying securities within the index or in a subset of those securities selected to approximate a similar risk and return profile of the index. Index strategies include both our non-ETF index products and iShares ETFs. Although many clients use both alpha-seeking active and index strategies, the application of these strategies may differ. For example, clients may use index products to gain exposure to a market or asset class, or may use a combination of index strategies to target active returns. In addition, institutional non-ETF index assignments tend to be very large (multi-billion dollars) and typically reflect low fee rates. Net flows in institutional index products generally have a small impact on BlackRock’s revenues and earnings. Equity Year-end 2017 equity AUM totaled $3.372 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $130.1 billion. Net inflows included $174.4 billion into iShares ETFs, driven by net inflows into Core funds and broad developed and emerging market equities, partially offset by non-ETF index and active net outflows of $25.7 billion and $18.5 billion, respectively. BlackRock’s effective fee rates fluctuate due to changes in AUM mix. Approximately half of BlackRock’s equity AUM is tied to international markets, including emerging markets, which tend to have higher fee rates than U. S. equity strategies. Accordingly, fluctuations in international equity markets, which may not consistently move in tandem with U. S. markets, have a greater impact on BlackRock’s equity revenues and effective fee rate. Fixed Income Fixed income AUM ended 2017 at $1.855 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $178.8 billion. In 2017, active net inflows of $21.5 billion were diversified across fixed income offerings, and included strong inflows into municipal, unconstrained and total return bond funds. iShares ETFs net inflows of $67.5 billion were led by flows into Core, corporate and treasury bond funds. Non-ETF index net inflows of $89.8 billion were driven by demand for liability-driven investment solutions. Multi-Asset BlackRock’s multi-asset team manages a variety of balanced funds and bespoke mandates for a diversified client base that leverages our broad investment expertise in global equities, bonds, currencies and commodities, and our extensive risk management capabilities. Investment solutions might include a combination of long-only portfolios and alternative investments as well as tactical asset allocation overlays. Component changes in multi-asset AUM for 2017 are presented below. \n
(in millions)December 31,2016Net inflows (outflows)MarketchangeFXimpactDecember 31,2017
Asset allocation and balanced$176,675$-2,502$17,387$4,985$196,545
Target date/risk149,43223,92524,5321,577199,466
Fiduciary68,395-1,0477,5228,81983,689
FutureAdvisor-1505-46119—578
Total$395,007$20,330$49,560$15,381$480,278
\n (1) FutureAdvisor amounts do not include AUM held in iShares ETFs. Multi-asset net inflows reflected ongoing institutional demand for our solutions-based advice with $18.9 billion of net inflows coming from institutional clients. Defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows, and contributed $20.8 billion to institutional multi-asset net inflows in 2017, primarily into target date and target risk product offerings. Retail net inflows of $1.1 billion reflected demand for our Multi-Asset Income fund family, which raised $5.8 billion in 2017. The Company’s multi-asset strategies include the following: ? Asset allocation and balanced products represented 41% of multi-asset AUM at year-end. These strategies combine equity, fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget. In certain cases, these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification, derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions. Flagship products in this category include our Global Allocation and Multi-Asset Income fund families. ? Target date and target risk products grew 16% organically in 2017, with net inflows of $23.9 billion. Institutional investors represented 93% of target date and target risk AUM, with defined contribution plans accounting for 87% of AUM. Flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our LifePath offerings. LifePath products utilize a proprietary active asset allocation overlay model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor’s expected retirement timing. Underlying investments are primarily index products. ? Fiduciary management services are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors or endowments and foundations retain BlackRock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of investment management. These customized services require strong partnership with the clients’ investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives. not to exceed a maximum leverage ratio (ratio of net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where net debt equals total debt less unrestricted cash) of 3 to 1, which was satisfied with a ratio of less than 1 to 1 at December 31, 2017. The 2017 credit facility provides back-up liquidity to fund ongoing working capital for general corporate purposes and various investment opportunities. At December 31, 2017, the Company had no amount outstanding under the 2017 credit facility Commercial Paper Program. The Company can issue unsecured commercial paper notes (the “CP Notes”) on a private-placement basis up to a maximum aggregate amount outstanding at any time of $4.0 billion. The commercial paper program is currently supported by the 2017 credit facility. At December 31, 2017, BlackRock had no CP Notes outstanding Long-Term Borrowings The carrying value of long-term borrowings at December 31, 2017 included the following: \n
(in millions)Maturity AmountCarrying ValueMaturity
5.00% Notes$1,000$999December 2019
4.25% Notes750747May 2021
3.375% Notes750746June 2022
3.50% Notes1,000994March 2024
1.25% Notes-1841835May 2025
3.20% Notes700693March 2027
Total Long-term Borrowings$5,041$5,014
\n (1) The carrying value of the 1.25% Notes estimated using foreign exchange rate as of December 31, 2017. For more information on Company’s borrowings, see Note 12, Borrowings, in the notes to the consolidated financial statements contained in Part II, Item 8 of this filing. Contractual Obligations, Commitments and Contingencies The following table sets forth contractual obligations, commitments and contingencies by year of payment at December 31, 2017: \n
(in millions)20182019202020212022Thereafter-1Total
Contractual obligations and commitments-1:
Long-term borrowings-2:
Principal$—$1,000$—$750$750$2,541$5,041
Interest17517512510981185850
Operating leases1411321261181091,5802,206
Purchase obligations12810129221928327
Investment commitments298—————298
Total contractual obligations and commitments7421,4082809999594,3348,722
Contingent obligations:
Contingent payments related to business acquisitions-3331793934——285
Total contractual obligations, commitments andcontingent obligations-4$775$1,587$319$1,033$959$4,334$9,007
\n (1) Amounts do not include $350 million of cash payment consideration and contingent consideration related to the Company’s agreement to acquire the asset management business of Citibanamex. (2) The amount of principal and interest payments for the 2025 Notes (issued in Euros) represents the expected payment amounts using foreign exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. (3) The amount of contingent payments reflected for any year represents the expected payments using foreign currency exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. The fair value of the remaining aggregate contingent payments at December 31, 2017 totaled $236 million and is included in other liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. (4) At December 31, 2017, the Company had approximately $365 million of net unrecognized tax benefits. Due to the uncertainty of timing and amounts that will ultimately be paid, this amount has been excluded from the table above. Operating Leases. The Company leases its primary office locations under agreements that expire on varying dates through 2043. In connection with certain lease agreements, the Company is responsible for escalation payments. The contractual obligations table above includes only guaranteed minimum lease payments for such leases and does not project potential escalation or other lease-related payments. These leases are classified as operating leases and, as such, are not recorded as liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. In May 2017, the Company entered into an agreement with 50 HYMC Owner LLC, for the lease of approximately 847,000 square feet of office space located at 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York. The term of the lease is twenty years from the date that rental payments begin, expected to occur in McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) 46 In July 2008, the Board authorized the retirement of shares of the Company’s common stock that may be repurchased from time-to-time pursuant to its stock repurchase program. During the second quarter of 2009, all of the 4 million repurchased shares, which we purchased for $204 million, were formally retired by the Company. The retired shares constitute authorized but unissued shares. We elected to allocate any excess of share repurchase price over par value between additional paid-in capital and retained earnings. As such, $165 million was recorded as a decrease to retained earnings. The Company anticipates that it will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends in the future. However, the payment and amount of future dividends remain within the discretion of the Board and will depend upon the Company’s future earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors. Although we believe that our operating cash flow, financial assets, current access to capital and credit markets, including our existing credit and sales facilities, will give us the ability to meet our financing needs for the foreseeable future, there can be no assurance that continued or increased volatility and disruption in the global capital and credit markets will not impair our liquidity or increase our costs of borrowing. Selected Measures of Liquidity and Capital Resources:"} {"answer": 0.16, "question": "what is the roi of an investment in s&p500 index from 2011 to 2012?", "context": "Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – (Continued) CNA applies the same impairment model as described above for the majority of its non-redeemable preferred stock securities on the basis that these securities possess characteristics similar to debt securities and that the issuers maintain their ability to pay dividends. For all other equity securities, in determining whether the security is other\u0002than-temporarily impaired, the Impairment Committee considers a number of factors including, but not limited to: (i) the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than amortized cost, (ii) the financial condition and near term prospects of the issuer, (iii) the intent and ability of CNA to retain its investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for an anticipated recovery in value and (iv) general market conditions and industry or sector specific outlook. Joint venture investments – The Company has 20% to 50% interests in operating joint ventures related to hotel properties and had joint venture interests in the former Bluegrass Project, as discussed in Note 2, that are accounted for under the equity method. The Company’s investment in these entities was $217 million and $234 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and reported in Other assets on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity income (loss) for these investments was $41 million, $43 million and $(62) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 and reported in Other operating expenses on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Income. Some of these investments are variable interest entities (“VIE”) as defined in the accounting guidance because the entities will require additional funding from each equity owner throughout the development and construction phase and are accounted for under the equity method since the Company is not the primary beneficiary. The maximum exposure to loss for the VIE investments is $337 million, consisting of the amount of the investment and debt guarantees. The following tables present summarized financial information for these joint ventures: \n
Year Ended December 31 20162015
(In millions)
Total assets$1,749$1,577
Total liabilities1,4441,231
Year Ended December 31 201620152014
Revenues$693$606$491
Net income807132
\n Hedging – The Company formally documents all relationships between hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as its risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking various hedging transactions. The Company also formally assesses (both at the hedge’s inception and on an ongoing basis) whether the derivatives that are used in hedging transactions have been highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows of hedged items and whether those derivatives may be expected to remain highly effective in future periods. When it is determined that a derivative for which hedge accounting has been designated is not (or ceases to be) highly effective, the Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively. See Note 3 for additional information on the Company’s use of derivatives. Securities lending activities – The Company lends securities for the purpose of enhancing income or to finance positions to unrelated parties who have been designated as primary dealers by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Borrowers of these securities must deposit and maintain collateral with the Company of no less than 100% of the fair value of the securities loaned. U. S. Government securities and cash are accepted as collateral. The Company maintains effective control over loaned securities and, therefore, continues to report such securities as investments on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Securities lending is typically done on a matched-book basis where the collateral is invested to substantially match the term of the loan. This matching of terms tends to limit risk. In accordance with the Company’s lending agreements, securities on loan are returned immediately to the Company upon notice. Collateral is not reflected as an asset of the Company. There was no collateral held at December 31, 2016 and 2015. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 4. Fair Value – (Continued) x Level 2 – Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable in active markets. x Level 3 – Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs are not observable. Prices may fall within Level 1, 2 or 3 depending upon the methodology and inputs used to estimate fair value for each specific security. In general, the Company seeks to price securities using third party pricing services. Securities not priced by pricing services are submitted to independent brokers for valuation and, if those are not available, internally developed pricing models are used to value assets using a methodology and inputs the Company believes market participants would use to value the assets. Prices obtained from third-party pricing services or brokers are not adjusted by the Company. The Company performs control procedures over information obtained from pricing services and brokers to ensure prices received represent a reasonable estimate of fair value and to confirm representations regarding whether inputs are observable or unobservable. Procedures may include: (i) the review of pricing service methodologies or broker pricing qualifications, (ii) back-testing, where past fair value estimates are compared to actual transactions executed in the market on similar dates, (iii) exception reporting, where period-over-period changes in price are reviewed and challenged with the pricing service or broker based on exception criteria, (iv) detailed analysis, where the Company performs an independent analysis of the inputs and assumptions used to price individual securities and (v) pricing validation, where prices received are compared to prices independently estimated by the Company. The fair values of CNA’s life settlement contracts are included in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity options purchased are included in Equity securities, and all other derivative assets are included in Receivables. Derivative liabilities are included in Payable to brokers. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized in the tables below: \n
December 31, 2016Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities:
Corporate and other bonds$18,828$130$18,958
States, municipalities and political subdivisions13,239113,240
Asset-backed:
Residential mortgage-backed4,9441295,073
Commercial mortgage-backed2,027132,040
Other asset-backed968571,025
Total asset-backed7,9391998,138
U.S. Treasury and obligations of government-sponsored enterprises$9393
Foreign government445445
Redeemable preferred stock1919
Fixed maturitiesavailable-for-sale11240,45133040,893
Fixed maturities trading5956601
Total fixed maturities$112$41,046$336$41,494
Equity securitiesavailable-for-sale$91$19$110
Equity securities trading4381439
Total equity securities$529$-$20$549
Short term investments$3,833$853$4,686
Other invested assets55560
Receivables11
Life settlement contracts$5858
Payable to brokers-44-44
\n Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities The following graph compares annual total return of our Common Stock, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Index (“S&P 500 Index”) and our Peer Group (“Loews Peer Group”) for the five years ended December 31, 2016. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in our Common Stock, the S&P 500 Index and the Loews Peer Group was $100 on December 31, 2011 and that all dividends were reinvested. \n
201120122013201420152016
Loews Common Stock100.0108.91129.64113.59104.47128.19
S&P 500 Index100.0116.00153.57174.60177.01198.18
Loews Peer Group (a)100.0113.39142.85150.44142.44165.34
\n (a) The Loews Peer Group consists of the following companies that are industry competitors of our principal operating subsidiaries: Chubb Limited (name change from ACE Limited after it acquired The Chubb Corporation on January 15, 2016), W. R. Berkley Corporation, The Chubb Corporation (included through January 15, 2016 when it was acquired by ACE Limited), Energy Transfer Partners L. P. , Ensco plc, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. , Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L. P. (included through November 26, 2014 when it was acquired by Kinder Morgan Inc. ), Noble Corporation, Spectra Energy Corp, Transocean Ltd. and The Travelers Companies, Inc. Dividend Information We have paid quarterly cash dividends in each year since 1967. Regular dividends of $0.0625 per share of Loews common stock were paid in each calendar quarter of 2016 and 2015."} {"answer": 2013.0, "question": "When is Benefit obligation at beginning of year for Con Edison the largest?", "context": "
Year Ended December 31,
201120102009
Risk-free interest rate1.2%1.4%1.7%
Expected life (in years)3.83.43.8
Dividend yield—%—%—%
Expected volatility38%37%47%
\n Our computation of expected volatility for 2011 , 2010 and 2009 was based on a combination of historical and market-based implied volatility from traded options on our stock. Our computation of expected life was determined based on historical experience of similar awards, giving consideration to the contractual terms of the stock-based awards, vesting schedules and expectations of future employee behavior. The interest rate for periods within the contractual life of the award was based on the U. S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant. The estimation of awards that will ultimately vest requires judgment, and to the extent actual results or updated estimates differ from our current estimates, such amounts will be recorded as a cumulative adjustment in the period estimates are revised. We consider many factors when estimating forfeitures, including employee class and historical experience. Recent Accounting Pronouncements See “Note 1 - The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report, regarding the impact of certain recent accounting pronouncements on our consolidated financial statements. Item 7A: Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk Foreign Currency Exposure We have significant operations internationally that are denominated in foreign currencies, primarily the Euro, British pound, Korean won, Australian dollar and Canadian dollar, subjecting us to foreign currency risk which may adversely impact our financial results. We transact business in various foreign currencies and have significant international revenues as well as costs. In addition, we charge our international subsidiaries for their use of intellectual property and technology and for certain corporate services provided by eBay and by PayPal. Our cash flow, results of operations and certain of our intercompany balances that are exposed to foreign exchange rate fluctuations may differ materially from expectations and we may record significant gains or losses due to foreign currency fluctuations and related hedging activities. We have a foreign exchange exposure management program that aims to identify material foreign currency exposures, to manage these exposures, and to minimize the potential effects of currency fluctuations on our reported consolidated cash flows and results of operations through the purchase of foreign currency exchange contracts. These foreign currency exchange contracts are accounted for as derivative instruments. For additional details related to our derivative instruments, please see “Note 9 - Derivative Instruments” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Interest Rate Risk The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal while at the same time maximizing yields without significantly increasing risk. To achieve this objective, we maintain our portfolio of cash equivalents and short-term and long-term investments in a variety of available for sale securities, including money market funds and government and corporate securities. As of December 31, 2011 , approximately 56% of our total cash and investment portfolio was held in bank deposits and money market funds. As such, changes in interest rates will impact our interest income. In addition, we regularly issue new commercial paper notes to repay outstanding commercial paper notes as they mature, and those new commercial paper notes bear interest at rates prevailing at the time of issuance. Accordingly, changes in interest rates will impact interest expense or cost of net revenues. As of December 31, 2011 , we held no direct investments in auction rate securities, collateralized debt obligations, structured investment vehicles or mortgage-backed securities. For additional details related to our investment activities, please see \"Note 7 - Investments\" to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Investments in both fixed-rate and floating-rate interest-earning instruments carry varying degrees of interest rate risk. The fair market value of our fixed-rate securities may be adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates. In general, securities with longer maturities are subject to greater interest-rate risk than those with shorter maturities. While floating rate securities generally are subject to less interest-rate risk than fixed\u0002rate securities, floating-rate securities may produce less income than expected if interest rates decrease. Due in part to these factors, our investment income may fall short of expectations or we may suffer losses in principal if securities are sold that have declined in market value due to changes in interest rates. As of \n
Con EdisonCECONY
(Millions of Dollars)201520142013201520142013
CHANGE IN BENEFIT OBLIGATION
Benefit obligation at beginning of year$1,411$1,395$1,454$1,203$1,198$1,238
Service cost201923151518
Interest cost on accumulated postretirement benefit obligation516054435246
Amendments—-12————
Net actuarial loss/(gain)-10347-42-8528-20
Benefits paid and administrative expenses-127-134-136-117-125-126
Participant contributions353638343538
Medicare prescription subsidy——4——4
BENEFIT OBLIGATION AT END OF YEAR$1,287$1,411$1,395$1,093$1,203$1,198
CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year$1,084$1,113$1,047$950$977$922
Actual return on plan assets-659153-454134
Employer contributions679679
EGWP payments2812826117
Participant contributions353638343538
Benefits paid-153-143-142-142-134-133
FAIR VALUE OF PLAN ASSETS AT END OF YEAR$994$1,084$1,113$870$950$977
FUNDED STATUS$-293$-327$-282$-223$-253$-221
Unrecognized net loss$28$78$70$4$45$54
Unrecognized prior service costs-51-71-78-32-46-61
\n The decrease in the other postretirement benefit plan obligation (due primarily to increased discount rates) was the primary cause of the decreased liability for other postretirement benefits at Con Edison and CECONY of $34 million and $30 million, respectively, compared with December 31, 2014. For Con Edison, this decreased liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $30 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the Utilities consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and a credit to OCI of $1 million (net of taxes) for the unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses and O&R’s New Jersey subsidiary. For CECONY, the decrease in liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $27 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the company consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses. A portion of the unrecognized net losses and prior service costs for the other postretirement benefits, equal to $12 million and $(20) million, respectively, will be recognized from accumulated OCI and the regulatory asset into net periodic benefit cost over the next year for Con Edison. Included in these amounts are $10 million and $(14) million, respectively, for CECONY. Assumptions The actuarial assumptions were as follows: FIDELITY NATIONAL INFORMATION SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) Future minimum operating lease payments for leases with remaining terms greater than one year for each of the years in the five years ending December 31, 2015, and thereafter in the aggregate, are as follows (in millions): \n
2011$65.1
201247.6
201335.7
201427.8
201524.3
Thereafter78.1
Total$278.6
\n In addition, the Company has operating lease commitments relating to office equipment and computer hardware with annual lease payments of approximately $16.3 million per year which renew on a short-term basis. Rent expense incurred under all operating leases during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $116.1 million, $100.2 million and $117.0 million, respectively. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was rent expense of $2.0 million, $1.8 million and $17.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Data Processing and Maintenance Services Agreements. The Company has agreements with various vendors, which expire between 2011 and 2017, for portions of its computer data processing operations and related functions. The Company’s estimated aggregate contractual obligation remaining under these agreements was approximately $554.3 million as of December 31, 2010. However, this amount could be more or less depending on various factors such as the inflation rate, foreign exchange rates, the introduction of significant new technologies, or changes in the Company’s data processing needs. (16) Employee Benefit Plans Stock Purchase Plan FIS employees participate in an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). Eligible employees may voluntarily purchase, at current market prices, shares of FIS’ common stock through payroll deductions. Pursuant to the ESPP, employees may contribute an amount between 3% and 15% of their base salary and certain commissions. Shares purchased are allocated to employees based upon their contributions. The Company contributes varying matching amounts as specified in the ESPP. The Company recorded an expense of $14.3 million, $12.4 million and $14.3 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the ESPP. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.401(k) Profit Sharing Plan The Company’s employees are covered by a qualified 401(k) plan. Eligible employees may contribute up to 40% of their pretax annual compensation, up to the amount allowed pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code. The Company generally matches 50% of each dollar of employee contribution up to 6% of the employee’s total eligible compensation. The Company recorded expense of $23.1 million, $16.6 million and $18.5 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the 401(k) plan. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively The following table presents a reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow available to News Corporation:"} {"answer": 0.11233, "question": "what is the profit margin in 2018?", "context": "ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations should be read in conjunction with our discussion of cautionary statements and significant risks to the company’s business under Item 1A. Risk Factors of the 2018 Form?10-K. OVERVIEW Our sales and revenues for 2018 were $54.722 billion, a 20?percent increase from 2017 sales and revenues of $45.462?billion. The increase was primarily due to higher sales volume, mostly due to improved demand across all regions and across the three primary segments. Profit per share for 2018 was $10.26, compared to profit per share of $1.26 in 2017. Profit was $6.147 billion in 2018, compared with $754 million in 2017. The increase was primarily due to lower tax expense, higher sales volume, decreased restructuring costs and improved price realization. The increase was partially offset by higher manufacturing costs and selling, general and administrative (SG&A) and research and development (R&D) expenses and lower profit from the Financial Products Segment. Fourth-quarter 2018 sales and revenues were $14.342 billion, up $1.446 billion, or 11 percent, from $12.896 billion in the fourth quarter of 2017. Fourth-quarter 2018 profit was $1.78 per share, compared with a loss of $2.18 per share in the fourth quarter of 2017. Fourth-quarter 2018 profit was $1.048 billion, compared with a loss of $1.299 billion in 2017. Highlights for 2018 include: z Sales and revenues in 2018 were $54.722 billion, up 20?percent from 2017. Sales improved in all regions and across the three primary segments. z Operating profit as a percent of sales and revenues was 15.2?percent in 2018, compared with 9.8 percent in 2017. Adjusted operating profit margin was 15.9 percent in 2018, compared with 12.5 percent in 2017. z Profit was $10.26 per share for 2018, and excluding the items in the table below, adjusted profit per share was $11.22. For 2017 profit was $1.26 per share, and excluding the items in the table below, adjusted profit per share was $6.88. z In order for our results to be more meaningful to our readers, we have separately quantified the impact of several significant items: \n
Full Year 2018Full Year 2017
(Millions of dollars)Profit Before TaxesProfitPer ShareProfit Before TaxesProfitPer Share
Profit$7,822$10.26$4,082$1.26
Restructuring costs3860.501,2561.68
Mark-to-market losses4950.643010.26
Deferred tax valuation allowance adjustments—-0.01—-0.18
U.S. tax reform impact—-0.17—3.95
Gain on sale of equity investment——-85-0.09
Adjusted profit$8,703$11.22$5,554$6.88
\n z Machinery, Energy & Transportation (ME&T) operating cash flow for 2018 was about $6.3 billion, more than sufficient to cover capital expenditures and dividends. ME&T operating cash flow for 2017 was about $5.5 billion. Restructuring Costs In recent years, we have incurred substantial restructuring costs to achieve a flexible and competitive cost structure. During 2018, we incurred $386 million of restructuring costs related to restructuring actions across the company. During 2017, we incurred $1.256 billion of restructuring costs with about half related to the closure of the facility in Gosselies, Belgium, and the remainder related to other restructuring actions across the company. Although we expect restructuring to continue as part of ongoing business activities, restructuring costs should be lower in 2019 than 2018. Notes: z Glossary of terms included on pages 33-34; first occurrence of terms shown in bold italics. z Information on non-GAAP financial measures is included on pages 42-43. Recognition of finance revenue and rental revenue is suspended and the account is placed on non-accrual status when management determines that collection of future income is not probable (generally after 120 days past due). Recognition is resumed, and previously suspended income is recognized, when the account becomes current and collection of remaining amounts is considered probable. See Note 7 for more information. Revenues are presented net of sales and other related taxes.3. Stock-Based Compensation Our stock-based compensation plans primarily provide for the granting of stock options, stock-settled stock appreciation rights (SARs), restricted stock units (RSUs) and performance-based restricted stock units (PRSUs) to Officers and other key employees, as well as non-employee Directors. Stock options permit a holder to buy Caterpillar stock at the stock’s price when the option was granted. SARs permit a holder the right to receive the value in shares of the appreciation in Caterpillar stock that occurred from the date the right was granted up to the date of exercise. RSUs are agreements to issue shares of Caterpillar stock at the time of vesting. PRSUs are similar to RSUs and include performance conditions in the vesting terms of the award. Our long-standing practices and policies specify that all stock\u0002based compensation awards are approved by the Compensation Committee (the Committee) of the Board of Directors. The award approval process specifies the grant date, value and terms of the award. The same terms and conditions are consistently applied to all employee grants, including Officers. The Committee approves all individual Officer grants. The number of stock-based compensation award units included in an individual’s award is determined based on the methodology approved by the Committee. The exercise price methodology?approved by the Committee is the closing price of the Company stock on the date of the grant. In June of 2014, shareholders approved the Caterpillar Inc. 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the Plan) under which all new stock-based compensation awards are granted. In June of 2017, the Plan was amended and restated. The Plan initially provided that up to 38,800,000 Common Shares would be reserved for future issuance under the Plan, subject to adjustment in certain events. Subsequent to the shareholder approval of the amendment and restatement of the Plan, an additional 36,000,000 Common Shares became available for all awards under the Plan. Common stock issued from Treasury stock under the plans totaled 5,590,641 for 2018, 11,139,748 for 2017 and 4,164,134 for 2016. The total number of shares authorized for equity awards under the amended and restated Caterpillar Inc. 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan is 74,800,000, of which 44,139,162 shares remained available for issuance as of December?31,?2018. Stock option and RSU awards generally vest according to a three\u0002year graded vesting schedule. One-third of the award will become vested on the first anniversary of the grant date, one-third of the award will become vested on the second anniversary of the grant date and one-third of the award will become vested on the third anniversary of the grant date. PRSU awards generally have a three\u0002year performance period and cliff vest at the end of the period based upon achievement of performance targets established at the time of grant. Upon separation from service, if the participant is 55 years of age or older with more than five years of service, the participant meets the criteria for a “Long Service Separation. ” Award terms for awards granted in 2016 allow for immediate vesting upon separation of all outstanding options and RSUs with no requisite service period for employees who meet the criteria for a “Long Service Separation. ” Compensation expense for the 2016 grant was fully recognized immediately on the grant date for these employees. Award terms for the 2018 and 2017 grants allow for continued vesting as of each vesting date specified in the award document for employees who meet the criteria for a “Long Service Separation” and fulfill a requisite service period of six months. Compensation expense for eligible employees for the 2018 and 2017 grants was recognized over the period from the grant date to the end date of the six-month requisite service period. For employees who become eligible for a “Long Service Separation” subsequent to the end date of the six-month requisite service period and prior to the completion of the vesting period, compensation expense is recognized over the period from the grant date to the date eligibility is achieved. At grant, SARs and option awards have a term life of ten years. For awards granted prior to 2016, if the “Long Service Separation” criteria are met, the vested options/SARs have a life that is the lesser of ten years from the original grant date or five years from the separation date. For awards granted in 2018, 2017, and 2016, the vested options have a life equal to ten years from the original grant date. Prior to 2017, all outstanding PRSU awards granted to employees eligible for a “Long Service Separation” may vest at the end of the performance period based upon achievement of the performance target. Compensation expense for the 2016 PRSU grant was fully recognized immediately on the grant date for these employees. For PRSU awards granted in 2018 and 2017, only a prorated number of shares may vest at the end of the performance period based upon achievement of the performance target, with the proration based upon the number of months of continuous employment during the three-year performance period. Employees with a “Long Service Separation” must also fulfill a six-month requisite service period in order to be eligible for the prorated vesting of outstanding PRSU awards granted in 2018 and 2017. Compensation expense for the 2018 and 2017 PRSU grants is being recognized on a straight-line basis over the three-year performance period for all participants. Accounting guidance on share-based payments requires companies to estimate the fair value of options/SARs on the date of grant using an option-pricing model. The fair value of our option/SAR grants was estimated using a lattice-based option-pricing model. The lattice\u0002based option-pricing model considers a range of assumptions related to volatility, risk-free interest rate and historical employee behavior. Expected volatility was based on historical Caterpillar stock price movement and current implied volatilities from traded options on Caterpillar stock. The risk-free interest rate was based on U. S. Treasury security yields at the time of grant. The weighted-average dividend yield was based on historical information. The expected life was determined from the lattice-based model. The lattice\u0002based model incorporated exercise and post vesting forfeiture assumptions based on analysis of historical data. The following table provides the assumptions used in determining the fair value of the Option/SAR awards for the years ended December?31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. \n
Grant Year
201820172016
Weighted-average dividend yield2.7%3.4%3.2%
Weighted-average volatility30.2%29.2%31.1%
Range of volatilities21.5-33.0%22.1-33.0%22.5-33.4%
Range of risk-free interest rates2.02-2.87%0.81-2.35%0.62-1.73%
Weighted-average expected lives8 years8 years8 years
"} {"answer": -0.55825, "question": "What is the growing rate of Active and other in the years with the least Company stock/ESOP?", "context": "Note 21. Expenses During the fourth quarter of 2008, we elected to provide support to certain investment accounts managed by SSgA through the purchase of asset- and mortgage-backed securities and a cash infusion, which resulted in a charge of $450 million. SSgA manages certain investment accounts, offered to retirement plans, that allow participants to purchase and redeem units at a constant net asset value regardless of volatility in the underlying value of the assets held by the account. The accounts enter into contractual arrangements with independent third-party financial institutions that agree to make up any shortfall in the account if all the units are redeemed at the constant net asset value. The financial institutions have the right, under certain circumstances, to terminate this guarantee with respect to future investments in the account. During 2008, the liquidity and pricing issues in the fixed-income markets adversely affected the market value of the securities in these accounts to the point that the third-party guarantors considered terminating their financial guarantees with the accounts. Although we were not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so, we elected to purchase approximately $2.49 billion of asset- and mortgage-backed securities from these accounts that had been identified as presenting increased risk in the current market environment and to contribute an aggregate of $450 million to the accounts to improve the ratio of the market value of the accounts’ portfolio holdings to the book value of the accounts. We have no ongoing commitment or intent to provide support to these accounts. The securities are carried in investment securities available for sale in our consolidated statement of condition. The components of other expenses were as follows for the years ended December 31: \n
(In millions)200820072006
Customer indemnification obligation$200
Securities processing187$79$37
Other505399281
Total other expenses$892$478$318
\n In September and October 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. , or Lehman Brothers, and certain of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy or other insolvency proceedings. While we had no unsecured financial exposure to Lehman Brothers or its affiliates, we indemnified certain customers in connection with these and other collateralized repurchase agreements with Lehman Brothers entities. In the then current market environment, the market value of the underlying collateral had declined. During the third quarter of 2008, to the extent these declines resulted in collateral value falling below the indemnification obligation, we recorded a reserve to provide for our estimated net exposure. The reserve, which totaled $200 million, was based on the cost of satisfying the indemnification obligation net of the fair value of the collateral, which we purchased during the fourth quarter of 2008. The collateral, composed of commercial real estate loans which are discussed in note 5, is recorded in loans and leases in our consolidated statement of condition. Management Fees We provide a broad range of investment management strategies, specialized investment management advisory services and other financial services for corporations, public funds, and other sophisticated investors. These services are offered through SSgA. Based upon assets under management, SSgA is the largest manager of institutional assets worldwide, the largest manager of assets for tax-exempt organizations (primarily pension plans) in the United States, and the third largest investment manager overall in the world. SSgA offers a broad array of investment management strategies, including passive and active, such as enhanced indexing and hedge fund strategies, using quantitative and fundamental methods for both U. S. and global equities and fixed income securities. SSgA also offers exchange traded funds, or ETFs, such as the SPDR? Dividend ETFs. The 10% decrease in management fees from 2007 primarily resulted from declines in average month-end equity market valuations and lower performance fees. Average month-end equity market valuations, individually presented in the above “INDEX” table, were down an average of 18% compared to 2007. The decrease in performance fees from $72 million in 2007 to $21 million in 2008 was generally the result of reduced levels of assets under management subject to performance fees, and somewhat lower relative performance measured against specified benchmarks during 2008. Management fees generated from customers outside the United States were approximately 40% of total management fees for 2008, down slightly from 41% for 2007. At year-end 2008, assets under management were $1.44 trillion, compared to $1.98 trillion at year-end 2007. While certain management fees are directly determined by the value of assets under management and the investment strategy employed, management fees reflect other factors as well, including our relationship pricing for customers who use multiple services, and the benchmarks specified in the respective management agreements related to performance fees. Accordingly, no direct correlation necessarily exists between the value of assets under management, market indices and management fee revenue. The overall decrease in assets under management at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007 resulted from declines in market valuations and from a net loss of business, with declines in market valuations representing the substantial majority of the decrease. During 2008, we experienced an aggregate net loss of business of approximately $55 billion, compared to net new business of approximately $116 billion during 2007. Our levels of assets under management were affected by a number of factors, including investor issues related to SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies and the relative under-performance of certain of our passive equity products. The net loss of business of $55 billion for 2008 did not reflect new business awarded to us during 2008 that had not been installed prior to December 31, 2008. This new business will be reflected in assets under management in future periods after installation. Assets under management consisted of the following at December 31: ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT \n
As of December 31, 2008 2007 2006 2005 20042007-2008 Annual Growth Rate2004-2008 Compound Annual Growth Rate
(Dollars in billions)
Equities:
Passive$576$803$691$625$600-28%-1%
Active and other91206181147122-56-7
Company stock/ESOP3979857677-51-16
Total equities7061,088957848799-35-3
Fixed-income:
Passive238218180128106922
Active3241342835-22-2
Cash and money market468632578437414-263
Total fixed-income and cash/money market738891792593555-177
Total$1,444$1,979$1,749$1,441$1,354-272
\n To measure, monitor, and report on our interest-rate risk position, we use (1) NIR simulation, or NIR-at-risk, which measures the impact on NIR over the next twelve months to immediate, or “rate shock,” and gradual, or “rate ramp,” changes in market interest rates; and (2) economic value of equity, or EVE, which measures the impact on the present value of all NIR-related principal and interest cash flows of an immediate change in interest rates. NIR-at-risk is designed to measure the potential impact of changes in market interest rates on NIR in the short term. EVE, on the other hand, is a long-term view of interest-rate risk, but with a view toward liquidation of State Street. Both of these measures are subject to ALCO-established guidelines, and are monitored regularly, along with other relevant simulations, scenario analyses and stress tests by both Global Treasury and ALCO. In calculating our NIR-at-risk, we start with a base amount of NIR that is projected over the next twelve months, assuming that the then-current yield curve remains unchanged over the period. Our existing balance sheet assets and liabilities are adjusted by the amount and timing of transactions that are forecasted to occur over the next twelve months. That yield curve is then “shocked,” or moved immediately, ±100 basis points in a parallel fashion, or at all points along the yield curve. Two new twelve-month NIR projections are then developed using the same balance sheet and forecasted transactions, but with the new yield curves, and compared to the base scenario. We also perform the calculations using interest rate ramps, which are ±100 basis point changes in interest rates that are assumed to occur gradually over the next twelve-month period, rather than immediately as we do with interest-rate shocks. EVE is based on the change in the present value of all NIR-related principal and interest cash flows for changes in market rates of interest. The present value of existing cash flows with a then-current yield curve serves as the base case. We then apply an immediate parallel shock to that yield curve of ±200 basis points and recalculate the cash flows and related present values. A large shock is used to better capture the embedded option risk in our mortgage-backed securities that results from the borrower’s prepayment opportunity. Key assumptions used in the models described above include the timing of cash flows; the maturity and repricing of balance sheet assets and liabilities, especially option-embedded financial instruments like mortgage-backed securities; changes in market conditions; and interest-rate sensitivities of our customer liabilities with respect to the interest rates paid and the level of balances. These assumptions are inherently uncertain and, as a result, the models cannot precisely predict future NIR or predict the impact of changes in interest rates on NIR and economic value. Actual results could differ from simulated results due to the timing, magnitude and frequency of changes in interest rates and market conditions, changes in spreads and management strategies, among other factors. Projections of potential future streams of NIR are assessed as part of our forecasting process. The following table presents the estimated exposure of NIR for the next twelve months, calculated as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, due to an immediate ± 100 basis point shift in then-current interest rates. Estimated incremental exposures presented below are dependent on management’s assumptions about asset and liability sensitivities under various interest-rate scenarios, such as those previously discussed, and do not reflect any actions management may undertake in order to mitigate some of the adverse effects of interest-rate changes on State Street’s financial performance. NIR-AT-RISK \n
Estimated Exposure to Net Interest Revenue
(In millions)20082007
Rate change:
+100 bps shock$7$-98
-100 bps shock-4397
+100 bps ramp-29-44
-100 bps ramp-16620
\n The NIR-at-risk exposure to an immediate 100 bp increase in market interest rates changed from negative at December 31, 2007 to slightly positive at December 31, 2008, while the NIR-at-risk exposure to a 100 bp downward shock in rates changed from slightly positive to significantly negative. These changes were the result of two factors. First, the level of on-balance sheet liquid assets was increased during 2008 in response to the"} {"answer": 273.0, "question": "What's the total amount of U.S. large cap stocks , U.S. small cap stocks, Non-U.S. large cap stocks and Non-U.S. small cap stocks in 2013? (in million)", "context": "targets. At December 31, 2013, there were no significant holdings of any single issuer and the exposure to derivative instruments was not significant. The following tables present the Company’s pension plan assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis: \n
December 31, 2013
Asset CategoryLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
(in millions)
Equity securities:
U.S. large cap stocks$97$43$—$140
U.S. small cap stocks551—56
Non-U.S. large cap stocks2135—56
Non-U.S. small cap stocks21——21
Emerging markets1423—37
Debt securities:
U.S. investment grade bonds1714—31
U.S. high yield bonds—21—21
Non-U.S. investment grade bonds—14—14
Real estate investment trusts——22
Hedge funds——2020
Pooled pension funds—126—126
Cash equivalents20——20
Total$245$277$22$544
\n \n
December 31, 2012
Asset CategoryLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
(in millions)
Equity securities:
U.S. large cap stocks$89$14$—$103
U.S. small cap stocks431—44
Non-U.S. large cap stocks1730—47
Emerging markets1320—33
Debt securities:
U.S. investment grade bonds2012—32
U.S. high yield bonds—20—20
Non-U.S. investment grade bonds—15—15
Real estate investment trusts——1212
Hedge funds——1818
Pooled pension funds—104—104
Cash equivalents9——9
Total$191$216$30$437
\n Equity securities are managed to track the performance of common market indices for both U. S. and non-U. S. securities, primarily across large cap, small cap and emerging market asset classes. Debt securities are managed to track the performance of common market indices for both U. S. and non-U. S. investment grade bonds as well as a pool of U. S. high yield bonds. Real estate investment trusts are managed to track the performance of a broad population of investment grade non-agricultural income producing properties. The Company’s investments in hedge funds include investments in a multi-strategy fund and an off-shore fund managed to track the performance of broad fund of fund indices. Pooled pension funds are managed to return 1.5% in excess of a common index of similar pooled pension funds on a rolling three year basis. Cash equivalents consist of holdings in a money market fund that seeks to equal the return of the three month U. S. Treasury bill. The fair value of real estate investment trusts is based primarily on the underlying cash flows of the properties within the trusts which are significant unobservable inputs and classified as Level 3. The fair value of the hedge funds is based on the proportionate share of the underlying net assets of the funds, which are significant unobservable inputs and classified as Level 3. The fair value of pooled pension funds and equity securities held in collective trust funds is based on the fund’s NAV and classified as Level 2 as they trade in principal-to-principal markets. Equity securities and mutual funds traded in active markets are classified as Level 1. For debt securities and cash equivalents, the valuation techniques and classifications are consistent with those used for the Company’s own investments as described in Note 14. Entergy New Orleans, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 339 Net Revenue 2008 Compared to 2007 Net revenue consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale, 2) purchased power expenses, and 3) other regulatory charges. Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007. \n
Amount (In Millions)
2007 net revenue$231.0
Volume/weather15.5
Net gas revenue6.6
Rider revenue3.9
Base revenue-11.3
Other7.0
2008 net revenue$252.7
\n The volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007. Entergy New Orleans estimates that approximately 141,000 electric customers and 93,000 gas customers have returned since Hurricane Katrina and are taking service as of December 31, 2008, compared to approximately 132,000 electric customers and 86,000 gas customers as of December 31, 2007. Billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 GWh compared to the same period in 2007, an increase of 4%. The net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in March and November 2007. Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase. The rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective March 2007 as a result of the City Council's approval of a settlement agreement in October 2006. The approved storm reserve has been set to collect $75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account. The settlement agreement is discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements. The base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit, effective January 2008. The base rate credit is discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements. Gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses Gross operating revenues increased primarily due to: x an increase of $58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales; x an increase of $47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage; and x an increase of $22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in March 2007 and November 2007. Fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. Table of Contents Seasonality Our revenues are seasonal based on the demand for cruises. Demand is strongest for cruises during the Northern Hemisphere’s summer months and holidays. In order to mitigate the impact of the winter weather in the Northern Hemisphere and to capitalize on the summer season in the Southern Hemisphere, our brands have focused on deployment in the Caribbean, Asia and Australia during that period. Passengers and Capacity Selected statistical information is shown in the following table (see Financial Presentation- Description of Certain Line Items and Selected Operational and Financial Metrics under Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, for definitions):"} {"answer": 735.0, "question": "What's the total amount of theU.S. dollars sold for Pounds sterling in the years where U.S. dollars sold for Pounds sterling is greater than 1?", "context": "AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) of certain of its assets and liabilities under its interest rate swap agreements held as of December 31, 2006 and entered into during the first half of 2007. In addition, the Company paid $8.0 million related to a treasury rate lock agreement entered into and settled during the year ended December 31, 2008. The cost of the treasury rate lock is being recognized as additional interest expense over the 10-year term of the 7.00% Notes. During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company also received $3.1 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under ten forward starting interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $1.4 billion, which were designated as cash flow hedges to manage exposure to variability in cash flows relating to forecasted interest payments in connection with the Certificates issued in the Securitization in May 2007. The settlement is being recognized as a reduction in interest expense over the five-year period for which the interest rate swaps were designated as hedges. The Company also received $17.0 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under thirteen additional interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $850.0 million that managed exposure to variability of interest rates under the credit facilities but were not considered cash flow hedges for accounting purposes. This gain is included in other income in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2007. As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, other comprehensive (loss) income included the following items related to derivative financial instruments (in thousands): \n
20082007
Deferred loss on the settlement of the treasury rate lock, net of tax$-4,332$-4,901
Deferred gain on the settlement of interest rate swap agreements entered into in connection with the Securitization, net oftax1,2381,636
Unrealized losses related to interest rate swap agreements, net of tax-16,349-486
\n During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company recorded an aggregate net unrealized loss of approximately $15.8 million and $3.2 million, respectively (net of a tax provision of approximately $10.2 million and $2.0 million, respectively) in other comprehensive loss for the change in fair value of interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges and reclassified an aggregate of $0.1 million and $6.2 million, respectively (net of an income tax provision of $2.0 million and an income tax benefit of $3.3 million, respectively) into results of operations.9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS The Company determines the fair market values of its financial instruments based on the fair value hierarchy established in SFAS No.157, which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The standard describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date. The Company’s Level 1 assets consist of available-for-sale securities traded on active markets as well as certain Brazilian Treasury securities that are highly liquid and are actively traded in over-the-counter markets. Level 2 Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) The Company issued 82,865, 93,367 and 105,239 of non-vested restricted stock units in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, the majority of which provide for vesting as to all underlying shares on the third anniversary of the grant date. The weighted average grant-date fair value for non-vested restricted stock units granted during 2017, 2016 and 2015 was $187.85, $142.71 and $118.00, respectively. The Company recorded $11.2 million of expense related to restricted stock units during 2017, which is included in cost of goods sold or selling, general and administrative expenses. The unamortized share-based compensation cost related to non-vested restricted stock units, net of expected forfeitures, was $13.2 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.8 years. The Company uses treasury stock to provide shares of common stock in connection with vesting of the restricted stock units. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) F-37 Note 13?— Income taxes The following table summarizes the components of the provision for income taxes from continuing operations: \n
201720162015
(Dollars in thousands)
Current:
Federal$133,621$2,344$-4,700
State5,2135,2302,377
Foreign35,44428,84253,151
Deferred:
Federal-258,247-25,141-35,750
State1,459-1,837-5,012
Foreign212,158-1,364-2,228
$129,648$8,074$7,838
\n The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “TCJA”) was enacted on December 22, 2017. The legislation significantly changes U. S. tax law by, among other things, permanently reducing corporate income tax rates from a maximum of 35% to 21%, effective January 1, 2018; implementing a territorial tax system, by generally providing for, among other things, a dividends received deduction on the foreign source portion of dividends received from a foreign corporation if specified conditions are met; and imposing a one-time repatriation tax on undistributed post-1986 foreign subsidiary earnings and profits, which are deemed repatriated for purposes of the tax. As a result of the TCJA, the Company reassessed and revalued its ending net deferred tax liabilities at December 31, 2017 and recognized a?$46.1 million?provisional tax benefit in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017. As a result of the deemed repatriation tax under the TCJA, the Company recognized a $154.0 million provisional tax expense in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the Company expects to pay this tax over an eight-year period. While the TCJA provides for a territorial tax system, beginning in 2018, it includes?two?new U. S. tax base erosion provisions, the global intangible low-taxed income (“GILTI”) provisions and the base-erosion and anti-abuse tax (“BEAT”) provisions. The GILTI provisions require the Company to include in its U. S. income tax return foreign subsidiary earnings in excess of an allowable return on the foreign subsidiary’s tangible assets. The Company expects that it will be subject to incremental U. S. tax on GILTI income beginning in 2018. Because of the complexity of the new GILTI tax rules, the Company is continuing to evaluate this provision of the TCJA and the application of Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 740, \"Income Taxes. \" Under U. S. GAAP, the Company may make an accounting policy election to either (1) treat future taxes with respect to the inclusion in U. S. taxable income of amounts related to GILTI as current period expense when incurred (the “period cost method”) or (2) take such amounts into a company’s measurement of its deferred taxes (the “deferred method”). The Company’s selection of an accounting policy with respect to the new GILTI tax rules will depend, in part, on an analysis of the Company’s global income to determine whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions in taxable income related to GILTI and, if so, what the impact is expected to be. The determination of whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions ? Miller Insurance Services LLP, which is a Pounds sterling functional entity, earns significant non-functional currency revenues, in which case the Company limits its exposure to exchange rate changes by the use of forward contracts matched to a percentage of forecast cash inflows in specific currencies and periods. However, where the foreign exchange risk relates to any Pounds sterling pension benefits assets or liability for pension benefits, we do not hedge the risk. Consequently, if our London market operations have a significant pension asset or liability, we may be exposed to accounting gains and losses, recognized in other comprehensive income or loss, if the U. S. dollar and Pounds sterling exchange rates change. We do, however, hedge the Pounds sterling contributions into the pension plan. Translation risk Outside our U. S. and London market operations, we predominantly earn revenues and incur expenses in the local currency. When we translate the results and net assets of these operations into U. S. dollars for reporting purposes, movements in exchange rates will affect reported results and net assets. For example, if the U. S. dollar strengthens against the Euro, the reported results of our Eurozone operations in U. S. dollar terms will be lower. With the exception of foreign currency hedges for certain intercompany loans that are not designated as hedging instruments, we do not hedge translation risk. The table below provides information about our foreign currency forward exchange contracts, which are sensitive to exchange rate risk. The table summarizes the U. S. dollar equivalent amounts of each currency bought and sold forward and the weighted average contractual exchange rates. All forward exchange contracts mature within three years. \n
Settlement date before December 31,
201720182019
December 31, 2016Contract amountAverage contractual exchange rateContract amountAverage contractual exchange rateContract amountAverage contractual exchange rate
(millions)(millions)(millions)
Foreign currency sold
U.S. dollars sold for Pounds sterling$390$1.51 = £1$268$1.46 = £1$77$1.39 = £1
Euro sold for U.S. dollars74€1 = $1.2048€1 = $1.1914€1 = $1.17
Japanese yen sold for U.S. dollars21¥110.85 = $113¥110.90 - $15¥98.63 = $1
Euro sold for Pounds sterling22€1 = £1.2191 = £1.334€1 = £1.24
Total$507$338$100
Fair value(i)$-65$-40$-5
\n (i) Represents the difference between the contract amount and the cash flow in U. S. dollars which would have been receivable had the foreign currency forward exchange contracts been entered into on December 31, 2016 at the forward exchange rates prevailing at that date."} {"answer": -0.09542, "question": "how much did the company 2019s valuation allowance decrease from 2011 to 2012?", "context": "The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s valuation allowance: \n
Balance at January 1, 2010$25,621
Increases in current period tax positions907
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,740
Balance at December 31, 2010$23,788
Increases in current period tax positions1,525
Decreases in current period tax positions-3,734
Balance at December 31, 2011$21,579
Increases in current period tax positions0
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,059
Balance at December 31, 2012$19,520
\n Note 14: Employee Benefits Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits The Company maintains noncontributory defined benefit pension plans covering eligible employees of its regulated utility and shared services operations. Benefits under the plans are based on the employee’s years of service and compensation. The pension plans have been closed for most employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 had their accrued benefit frozen and will be able to receive this benefit as a lump sum upon termination or retirement. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 and non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006 are provided with a 5.25% of base pay defined contribution plan. The Company does not participate in a multiemployer plan. The Company’s funding policy is to contribute at least the greater of the minimum amount required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or the normal cost, and an additional contribution if needed to avoid “at risk” status and benefit restrictions under the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Company may also increase its contributions, if appropriate, to its tax and cash position and the plan’s funded position. Pension plan assets are invested in a number of actively managed and indexed investments including equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities and guaranteed interest contracts with insurance companies. Pension expense in excess of the amount contributed to the pension plans is deferred by certain regulated subsidiaries pending future recovery in rates charged for utility services as contributions are made to the plans. (See Note 6) The Company also has several unfunded noncontributory supplemental non-qualified pension plans that provide additional retirement benefits to certain employees. The Company maintains other postretirement benefit plans providing varying levels of medical and life insurance to eligible retirees. The retiree welfare plans are closed for union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. The plans had previously closed for non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2002. The Company’s policy is to fund other postretirement benefit costs for rate-making purposes. Plan assets are invested in equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) and emerging market funds. The obligations of the plans are dominated by obligations for active employees. Because the timing of expected benefit payments is so far in the future and the size of the plan assets are small relative to the Company’s assets, the investment strategy is to allocate a significant percentage of assets to equities, which the Company believes will provide the highest return over the long-term period. The fixed income assets are invested in long duration debt securities and may be invested in fixed income instruments, such as futures and options in order to better match the duration of the plan liability. The allocation of goodwill in accordance with SFAS No.142 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was as follows: \n
Balance at Beginning of Period Goodwill Acquired Foreign Currency Translation and Other Balance at End of Period
Year Ended December 31, 2006
Food Packaging$540.4$31.9$14.9$587.2
Protective Packaging1,368.40.41.11,369.9
Total$1,908.8$32.3$16.0$1,957.1
Year Ended December 31, 2005
Food Packaging$549.8$0.7$-10.1$540.4
Protective Packaging1,368.20.8-0.61,368.4
Total$1,918.0$1.5$-10.7$1,908.8
\n See Note 20, “Acquisitions,” for additional information on the goodwill acquired during 2006. Note 4 Short Term Investments—Available-for-Sale Securities At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company’s available-for-sale securities consisted of auction rate securities for which interest or dividend rates are generally re-set for periods of up to 90 days. At December 31, 2006, the Company held $33.9 million of auction rate securities which were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates. At December 31, 2005, the Company held $44.1 million of auction rate securities, of which $34.7 million were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates and $9.4 million were investments in other auction rate securities with contractual maturities in 2031. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the fair value of the available-for-sale securities held by the Company was equal to their cost. There were no gross realized gains or losses from the sale of available\u0002for-sale securities in 2006 and 2005. Note 5 Accounts Receivable Securitization Program In December 2001, the Company and a group of its U. S. subsidiaries entered into an accounts receivable securitization program with a bank and an issuer of commercial paper administered by the bank. On December 7, 2004, which was the scheduled expiration date of this program, the parties extended this program for an additional term of three years ending December 7, 2007. Under this receivables program, the Company’s two primary operating subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air Corporation (US), sell all of their eligible U. S. accounts receivable to Sealed Air Funding Corporation, an indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that was formed for the sole purpose of entering into the receivables program. Sealed Air Funding in turn may sell undivided ownership interests in these receivables to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, subject to specified conditions, up to a maximum of $125.0 million of receivables interests outstanding from time to time. Sealed Air Funding retains the receivables it purchases from the operating subsidiaries, except those as to which it sells receivables interests to the bank or the issuer of commercial paper. The Company has structured the sales of accounts receivable by the operating subsidiaries to Sealed Air Funding, and the sales of receivables interests from Sealed Air Funding to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, as “true sales” under applicable laws. The assets of Sealed Air Funding are not available to pay any creditors of the Company or of the Company’s other subsidiaries or affiliates. The Company accounts for these transactions as sales of receivables under the provisions of SFAS No.140, “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities. ” Product Care 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, net sales decreased $30 million, or 2%, in 2016 compared with 2015, of which $22 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $8 million, or 1%, in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to the following: ? unfavorable price/mix of $29 million primarily in North America driven by targeted pricing incentives and an unfavorable product mix related to accelerated growth in e-Commerce and a shift in demand due to more innovative, resource-efficient solutions. This was partially offset by: ? higher unit volumes of $21 million, primarily in North America and EMEA due to ongoing strength in the e-Commerce and third party logistics markets, partially offset by rationalization and weakness in the industrial sector, as well as declines in Latin America due to the political and economic environment.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, net sales decreased $109 million, or 7%, in 2015 compared with 2014, of which $99 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $10 million, or 1%, in 2015 compared with 2014 primarily due to the following: ? lower unit volumes due to rationalization efforts in North America, Latin America and to a lesser extent, EMEA and weaknesses across the industrial sector. This was partially offset by: ? favorable price/mix in all regions, primarily in North America and Latin America reflecting results from our focus on maintaining pricing disciplines and an increase of sales from high-performance packaging solutions, including cushioning and packaging systems as compared to sales from general packaging solutions, and the progression of our pricing and value initiatives implemented to offset non-material inflationary costs as well as currency devaluation. Cost of Sales Cost of sales for the years ended December 31, were as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,2016 vs. 2015 % Change2015 vs. 2014 % Change
(In millions)201620152014
Net sales$6,778.3$7,031.5$7,750.5-3.6%-9.3%
Cost of sales4,246.74,444.95,062.9-4.5%-12.2%
As a % of net sales62.7%63.2%65.3%
Gross Profit$2,531.6$2,586.6$2,687.6-2.1%-3.8%
\n 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, costs of sales decreased $198 million in 2016 as compared to 2015. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $163 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $35 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $79 million, offset by an increase of $51 million in expenses representing higher non-material manufacturing and direct costs, including salary and wage inflation, partially offset by restructuring savings and lower incentive based compensation.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, costs of sales decreased $618 million in 2015 as compared to 2014. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $492 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $126 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $140 million and favorable impact of $31 million related to cost savings, freight, and other supply chain costs. These were partially offset by $47 million in expenses related to higher non-material manufacturing costs, including salary and wage inflation."} {"answer": 2557.0, "question": "What was the average value of Employee Compensation and Benefits, Communications and Information Processing, Occupancy and Equipment in 2006?", "context": "Interest expense related to capital lease obligations was $1.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2015, and $1.6 million during both the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013. Purchase Commitments In the table below, we set forth our enforceable and legally binding purchase obligations as of December 31, 2015. Some of the amounts are based on management’s estimates and assumptions about these obligations, including their duration, the possibility of renewal, anticipated actions by third parties, and other factors. Because these estimates and assumptions are necessarily subjective, our actual payments may vary from those reflected in the table. Purchase orders made in the ordinary course of business are excluded below. Any amounts for which we are liable under purchase orders are reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as accounts payable and accrued liabilities. These obligations relate to various purchase agreements for items such as minimum amounts of fiber and energy purchases over periods ranging from one year to 20 years. Total purchase commitments were as follows (dollars in millions): \n
2016$95.3
201760.3
201828.0
201928.0
202023.4
Thereafter77.0
Total$312.0
\n The Company purchased a total of $299.6 million, $265.9 million, and $61.7 million during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively, under these purchase agreements. The increase in purchases The increase in purchases under these agreements in 2014, compared with 2013, relates to the acquisition of Boise in fourth quarter 2013. Environmental Liabilities The potential costs for various environmental matters are uncertain due to such factors as the unknown magnitude of possible cleanup costs, the complexity and evolving nature of governmental laws and regulations and their interpretations, and the timing, varying costs and effectiveness of alternative cleanup technologies. From 2006 through 2015, there were no significant environmental remediation costs at PCA’s mills and corrugated plants. At December 31, 2015, the Company had $24.3 million of environmental-related reserves recorded on its Consolidated Balance Sheet. Of the $24.3 million, approximately $15.8 million related to environmental-related asset retirement obligations discussed in Note 12, Asset Retirement Obligations, and $8.5 million related to our estimate of other environmental contingencies. The Company recorded $7.9 million in “Accrued liabilities” and $16.4 million in “Other long-term liabilities” on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Liabilities recorded for environmental contingencies are estimates of the probable costs based upon available information and assumptions. Because of these uncertainties, PCA’s estimates may change. The Company believes that it is not reasonably possible that future environmental expenditures for remediation costs and asset retirement obligations above the $24.3 million accrued as of December 31, 2015, will have a material impact on its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. Guarantees and Indemnifications We provide guarantees, indemnifications, and other assurances to third parties in the normal course of our business. These include tort indemnifications, environmental assurances, and representations and warranties in commercial agreements. At December 31, 2015, we are not aware of any material liabilities arising from any guarantee, indemnification, or financial assurance we have provided. If we determined such a liability was probable and subject to reasonable determination, we would accrue for it at that time. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES The Company's common stock is traded on the NYSE under the symbol “RJF”. At November 19, 2007 there were approximately 14,000 holders of the Company's common stock. The following table sets forth for the periods indicated the high and low trades for the common stock (as adjusted for the three-for\u0002two stock split in March 2006): \n
20072006
HighLowHighLow
First Quarter$ 33.63$ 28.53$ 25.72$ 20.25
Second Quarter32.5227.3831.4524.47
Third Quarter34.6229.1031.6626.34
Fourth Quarter36.0028.6530.5726.45
\n See Quarterly Financial Information on page 87 of this report for the amount of the quarterly dividends paid. The Company expects to continue paying cash dividends. However, the payment and rate of dividends on the Company's common stock is subject to several factors including operating results, financial requirements of the Company, and the availability of funds from the Company's subsidiaries, including the broker\u0002dealer subsidiaries, which may be subject to restrictions under the net capital rules of the SEC, FINRA and the IDA; and RJBank, which may be subject to restrictions by federal banking agencies. Such restrictions have never limited the Company's dividend payments. (See Note 19 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the capital restrictions placed on RJBank and the Company's broker-dealer subsidiaries). See Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding repurchased shares of the Company's common stock. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Factors Affecting “Forward-Looking Statements” From time to time, the Company may publish “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or make oral statements that constitute forward-looking statements. These forward\u0002looking statements may relate to such matters as anticipated financial performance, future revenues or earnings, business prospects, projected ventures, new products, anticipated market performance, and similar matters. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a safe harbor for forward-looking statements. In order to comply with the terms of the safe harbor, the Company cautions readers that a variety of factors could cause the Company's actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results or other expectations expressed in the Company's forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company's control, are discussed in the section entitled Risk Factors on page 42 of this report. The Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements. Overview The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis is intended to help the reader understand the results of operations and the financial condition of the Company. Management’s Discussion and Analysis is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Company’s consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements. The Company’s results continue to be highly correlated to the direction of the U. S. equity markets and are subject to volatility due to changes in interest rates, valuation of financial instruments, economic and political trends and industry competition. During 2007, the market was impacted by rising energy prices, a housing market slowdown, a subprime lending collapse, a growing economy, a weakening US dollar and stable interest rates. The Company’s Private Client Group’s recruiting and retention of Financial Advisors was positively impacted by industry consolidation. RJBank benefited from the widening interest rate spreads and the availability of attractive loan purchases as a result of the subprime lending crisis. Results of Operations - RJBank The following table presents consolidated financial information for RJBank for the years indicated: \n
Year Ended
September 30, 2007% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2006% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2005
($ in 000's)
Interest Earnings
Interest Income$ 278,248144%$ 114,065153%$ 45,017
Interest Expense193,747163%73,529234%22,020
Net Interest Income84,501108%40,53676%22,997
Other Income1,324111%62745%431
Net Revenues85,825109%41,16376%23,428
Non-Interest Expense
Employee Compensation and Benefits7,77827%6,13514%5,388
Communications and Information Processing1,05216%90714%799
Occupancy and Equipment71914%62932%478
Provision for Loan Losses and Unfunded
Commitments32,150134%13,760891%1,388
Other17,121359%3,729218%1,171
Total Non-Interest Expense58,820134%25,160173%9,224
Pre-tax Earnings$ 27,00569%$ 16,00313%$ 14,204
\n Year ended September 30, 2007 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2006 - RJBank The Company completed its second bulk transfer of cash balances into the RJBank Deposit Program in March 2007, moving another $1.3 billion. This, combined with organic growth from the influx of new client assets, resulted in a $2.6 billion increase in average deposit balances. This increase in average deposit balances provided the funding for the $1.6 billion increase in average loan balances. This increase was 38% purchased residential mortgage pools and 62% corporate loans, 98% of which are purchased interests in corporate loan syndications with the remainder originated by RJBank. As a result of this growth, RJBank net interest income increased 108% to $84.5 million. Due to robust loan growth, the associated allowance for loan losses that are established upon recording a new loan and making new unfunded commitments required a provision of over $32 million in 2007. Accordingly, RJBank’s pre-tax income increased only 69%. During periods of growth when new loans are originated or purchased, an allowance for loan losses is established for potential losses inherent in those new loans. Accordingly, a robust period of growth generally results in charges to earnings in that period, while the benefits of higher interest earnings are realized in later periods. Year ended September 30, 2006 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2005 - RJBank Assets at RJBank grew a substantial $1.8 billion during the year. The increase was driven by a $1.7 billion increase in deposits, $1.3 billion of which were redirected from the Company’s Heritage Cash Trust or customer brokerage accounts, representing the introduction of a new sweep program for certain brokerage accounts. This alternative offers clients a money market equivalent interest rate and FDIC insurance. The Company intends to expand this offering over the next several years, transferring an additional $2 to $4 billion. During the year, RJBank deployed $1.3 billion of the increased deposits into loans. Purchased residential loan pools increased $700 million and corporate loans increased $600 million. This growth, combined with increased rates, generated an increase in net interest income of nearly $18 million. Pre-tax income increased only $1.8 million, due to the $13.8 million provision for loan loss associated with the increase in loans outstanding"} {"answer": 0.52857, "question": "what is the ratio of the decrease in the retained earnings to the to the beginning amount of unrecognized tax benefits in 2007", "context": "Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 11. Income Taxes – (Continued) The federal income tax return for 2006 is subject to examination by the IRS. In addition for 2007 and 2008, the IRS has invited the Company to participate in the Compliance Assurance Process (“CAP”), which is a voluntary program for a limited number of large corporations. Under CAP, the IRS conducts a real-time audit and works contemporaneously with the Company to resolve any issues prior to the filing of the tax return. The Company has agreed to participate. The Company believes this approach should reduce tax-related uncertainties, if any. The Company and/or its subsidiaries also file income tax returns in various state, local and foreign jurisdictions. These returns, with few exceptions, are no longer subject to examination by the various taxing authorities before 2000. As discussed in Note 1, the Company adopted the provisions of FIN No.48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” on January 1, 2007. As a result of the implementation of FIN No.48, the Company recognized a decrease to beginning retained earnings on January 1, 2007 of $37 million. The total amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of the date of adoption was approximately $70 million. Included in the balance at January 1, 2007, were $51 million of tax positions that if recognized would affect the effective tax rate. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows: \n
Balance, January 1, 2007$70
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year12
Additions for tax positions of prior years3
Reductions for tax positions related to the current year-23
Settlements-6
Expiration of statute of limitations-3
Balance, December 31, 2007$53
\n The Company anticipates that it is reasonably possible that payments of approximately $2 million will be made primarily due to the conclusion of state income tax examinations within the next 12 months. Additionally, certain state and foreign income tax returns will no longer be subject to examination and as a result, there is a reasonable possibility that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits will decrease by $7 million. At December 31, 2007, there were $42 million of tax benefits that if recognized would affect the effective rate. The Company recognizes interest accrued related to: (1) unrecognized tax benefits in Interest expense and (2) tax refund claims in Other revenues on the Consolidated Statements of Income. The Company recognizes penalties in Income tax expense (benefit) on the Consolidated Statements of Income. During 2007, the Company recorded charges of approximately $4 million for interest expense and $2 million for penalties. Provision has been made for the expected U. S. federal income tax liabilities applicable to undistributed earnings of subsidiaries, except for certain subsidiaries for which the Company intends to invest the undistributed earnings indefinitely, or recover such undistributed earnings tax-free. At December 31, 2007, the Company has not provided deferred taxes of $126 million, if sold through a taxable sale, on $361 million of undistributed earnings related to a domestic affiliate. The determination of the amount of the unrecognized deferred tax liability related to the undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries is not practicable. In connection with a non-recurring distribution of $850 million to Diamond Offshore from a foreign subsidiary, a portion of which consisted of earnings of the subsidiary that had not previously been subjected to U. S. federal income tax, Diamond Offshore recognized $59 million of U. S. federal income tax expense as a result of the distribution. It remains Diamond Offshore’s intention to indefinitely reinvest future earnings of the subsidiary to finance foreign activities. Total income tax expense for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, was different than the amounts of $1,601 million, $1,557 million and $639 million, computed by applying the statutory U. S. federal income tax rate of 35% to income before income taxes and minority interest for each of the years. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Results of Operations – CNA Financial – (Continued) \n
Year Ended December 31, 2014SpecialtyCommercialInternationalTotal
(In millions, except %)
Net written premiums$2,839$2,817$880$6,536
Net earned premiums2,8382,9069136,657
Net investment income560723611,344
Net operating income56927663908
Net realized investment gains (losses)99-117
Net income57828562925
Other performance metrics:
Loss and loss adjustment expense ratio57.3%75.3%53.5%64.6%
Expense ratio30.133.738.932.9
Dividend ratio0.20.30.2
Combined ratio87.6%109.3%92.4%97.7%
Rate3%5%-1%3%
Retention87%73%74%78%
New Business (a)$309$491$115$915
\n (a) Includes Hardy new business of $133 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. Prior years amounts are not included for Hardy.2016 Compared with 2015 Net written premiums increased $21 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Net written premiums for Commercial increased $23 million in 2016 as compared with 2015, driven by strong retention in middle markets, partially offset by a decrease in small business, which included a premium rate adjustment, as discussed in Note 18 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements under Item 8. Net written premiums for Specialty in 2016 were consistent with 2015 as growth in warranty was offset by a decrease in management and professional liability and health care due to underwriting actions undertaken in certain business lines. Net written premiums for International in 2016 were consistent with 2015 and include favorable period over period premium development of $24 million. Excluding the effect of foreign currency exchange rates and premium development, net written premiums increased 1.4% in 2016 in International. The increase in net earned premiums was consistent with the trend in net written premiums in Commercial. Excluding the effect of foreign currency exchange rates and premium development, the increase in net earned premiums was consistent with the trend in net written premiums in International. Net operating income increased $15 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. The increase in net operating income was primarily due to higher favorable net prior year reserve development and net investment income, partially offset by an increase in the current accident year loss ratio and higher underwriting expenses. Catastrophe losses were $100 million (after tax and noncontrolling interests) in 2016 as compared to catastrophe losses of $85 million (after tax and noncontrolling interests) in 2015. Favorable net prior year development of $316 million and $218 million was recorded in 2016 and 2015. Specialty recorded favorable net prior year development of $305 million and $152 million in 2016 and 2015, Commercial recorded unfavorable net prior year development of $53 million in 2016 as compared with favorable net prior year development of $30 million in 2015 and International recorded favorable net prior year development of $64 million and $36 million in 2016 and 2015. Further information on net prior year development is included in Note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8. Specialty’s combined ratio decreased 3.7 points in 2016 as compared with 2015. The loss ratio decreased 4.6 points due to higher favorable net prior year reserve development, partially offset by a higher current accident year loss ratio. Specialty’s expense ratio increased 0.9 points in 2016 as compared with 2015 due to higher employee costs and higher information technology (“IT”) spending primarily related to new underwriting platforms. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Results of Operations – Boardwalk Pipeline – (Continued) Results of Operations The following table summarizes the results of operations for Boardwalk Pipeline for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 as presented in Note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8: \n
Year Ended December 31201620152014
(In millions)
Revenues:
Other revenue, primarily operating$ 1,316$ 1,253$ 1,235
Net investment income11
Total1,3161,2541,236
Expenses:
Operating835851931
Interest183176165
Total1,0181,0271,096
Income before income tax298227140
Income tax expense-61-46-11
Amounts attributable to noncontrolling interests-148-107-111
Net income attributable to Loews Corporation$ 89$ 74$ 18
\n 2016 Compared with 2015 Total revenues increased $62 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Excluding the net effect of $13 million of proceeds received from the settlement of a legal matter in 2016, $9 million of proceeds received from a business interruption claim in 2015 and items offset in fuel and transportation expense, primarily retained fuel, operating revenues increased $83 million. The increase was driven by an increase in transportation revenues of $71 million, which resulted primarily from growth projects recently placed into service, incremental revenues from the Gulf South rate case of $18 million and a full year of revenues from the Evangeline pipeline. Storage and PAL revenues were higher by $17 million primarily from the effects of favorable market conditions on time period price spreads. Operating expenses decreased $16 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Excluding receipt of a franchise tax refund of $10 million in 2015 and items offset in operating revenues, operating costs and expenses increased $5 million primarily due to higher employee related costs, partially offset by decreases in maintenance activities and depreciation expense. Interest expense increased $7 million primarily due to higher average interest rates compared to 2015. Net income increased $15 million in 2016 as compared with 2015, primarily reflecting higher revenues and lower operating expenses, partially offset by higher interest expense as discussed above.2015 Compared with 2014 Total revenues increased $18 million in 2015 as compared with 2014. Excluding the business interruption claim proceeds of $8 million and items offset in fuel and transportation expense, primarily retained fuel, operating revenues increased $33 million. This increase is primarily due to higher transportation revenues of $39 million from growth projects recently placed into service, including the Evangeline pipeline which was acquired in October of 2014 and $20 million of additional revenues resulting from the Gulf South rate case, partially offset by the effects of comparably warm weather experienced in the early part of the 2015 period in Boardwalk Pipeline’s market areas and unfavorable market conditions. Storage and PAL revenues decreased $20 million primarily as a result of the effects of unfavorable market conditions on time period price spreads. Operating expenses decreased $80 million in 2015 as compared with 2014. This decrease is primarily due to a $94 million prior year charge to write off all capitalized costs associated with the terminated Bluegrass project, a $10 million franchise tax refund related to settlement of prior tax periods and a decrease in fuel and transportation expense due to lower natural gas prices. These decreases were partially offset by higher depreciation expense of $35"} {"answer": 15810.0, "question": "What is the sum of the Professional and consulting fees for Amount in the years where Depreciation and amortization is positive for Amount? (in thousand)", "context": "MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) (in thousands, except share and per share amounts) Had compensation expense for employee stock-based awards been determined based on the fair value at grant date consistent with SFAS No.123(R), the Company’s Net income (loss) for the year would have been increased or decreased to the pro forma amounts indicated below: \n
Year Ended December 31,
2005 20042003
Net income
As reported$8,142$57,587$4,212
Compensation expense1,3661,9651,646
Pro forma$6,776$55,622$2,566
Basic net income (loss) per common share$0.29$6.76$-2.20
Diluted net income (loss) per common share$0.23$1.88$-2.20
Basic net income (loss) per common share — pro forma$0.24$6.48$-2.70
Diluted net income (loss) per common share — pro forma$0.19$1.82$-2.70
\n Basic and diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) in 2003 includes the effect of dividends accrued on our redeemable convertible preferred stock. In 2003, securities that could potentially dilute basic EPS in the future were not included in the computation of diluted EPS, because to do so would have been anti-dilutive. See Note 12, “Earnings Per Share”. Revenue Recognition The majority of the Company’s revenues are derived from commissions for trades executed on the electronic trading platform that are billed to its broker-dealer clients on a monthly basis. The Company also derives revenues from information and user access fees, license fees, interest and other income. Commissions are generally calculated as a percentage of the notional dollar volume of bonds traded on the electronic trading platform and vary based on the type and maturity of the bond traded. Under the transaction fee plans, bonds that are more actively traded or that have shorter maturities are generally charged lower commissions, while bonds that are less actively traded or that have longer maturities generally command higher commissions. Commissions are recorded on a trade date basis. The Company’s standard fee schedule for U. S. high-grade corporate bonds was revised in August 2003 to provide lower average transaction commissions for dealers who transacted higher U. S. high-grade volumes through the platform, while at the same time providing an element of fixed commissions over the two-year term of the plans. One of the revised plans that was suited for the Company’s most active broker-dealer clients included a fee cap that limited the potential growth in U. S. high-grade revenue. The fee caps were set to take effect at volume levels significantly above those being transacted at the time the revised transaction fee plans were introduced. Most broker-dealer clients entered into fee arrangements with respect to the trading of U. S. high-grade corporate bonds that included both a fixed component and a variable component. These agreements had been scheduled to expire during the third quarter of 2005. On June 1, 2005, the Company introduced a new fee plan primarily for secondary market transactions in U. S. high-grade corporate bonds executed on its electronic trading platform. As of December 31, 2005, 17 of the Company’s U. S. high-grade broker-dealer clients have signed new two-year agreements that supersede the fee arrangements that were entered into with many of its broker-dealer clients during the third quarter of 2003. The new plan incorporates higher fixed monthly fees and lower variable fees for broker\u0002dealer clients than the previous U. S. high-grade corporate transaction fee plans described above, and incorporates volume incentives to broker-dealer clients that are designed to increase the volume of transactions effected on the Company’s The U. S. high-grade average variable transaction fee per million increased from $84 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 due to the longer maturity of trades executed on the platform, for which we charge higher commissions. The Eurobond average variable transaction fee per million decreased from $138 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $112 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008, principally from the introduction of the new European high-grade fee plan. Other average variable transaction fee per million increased from $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $158 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 primarily due to a higher percentage of volume in products that carry higher fees per million, principally high-yield. Technology Products and Services. Technology products and services revenues increased by $7.8 million to $8.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase was primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. Information and User Access Fees. Information and user access fees increased by $0.1 million or 2.5% to $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Investment Income. Investment income decreased by $1.8 million or 33.7% to $3.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This decrease was primarily due to lower interest rates. Other. Other revenues decreased by $0.1 million or 4.4% to $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Expenses Our expenses for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the resulting dollar and percentage changes, were as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,
20082007
% of% of$%
$Revenues $RevenuesChangeChange
($ in thousands)
Expenses
Employee compensation and benefits$43,81047.1%$43,05146.0%$7591.8%
Depreciation and amortization7,8798.57,1707.77099.9
Technology and communications8,3118.97,4638.084811.4
Professional and consulting fees8,1718.87,6398.25327.0
Occupancy2,8913.13,2753.5-384-11.7
Marketing and advertising3,0323.31,9052.01,12759.2
General and administrative6,1576.65,8896.32684.6
Total expenses$80,25186.2%$76,39281.6%$3,8595.1%
\n $43.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $43.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This increase was primarily attributable to higher wages of $2.4 million, severance costs of $1.0 million and stock\u0002based compensation expense of $1.4 million, offset by reduced incentive compensation of $3.6 million. The higher wages were primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. The total number of employees increased to 185 as of December 31, 2008 from 182 as of December 31, 2007. As a percentage of total revenues, employee compensation and benefits expense increased to 47.1% for the year ended December 31, 2008 from 46.0% for the year ended December 31, 2007. Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $0.7 million or 9.9% to $7.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $7.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. An increase in amortization of intangible assets of $1.3 million and the TWS impairment charge of $0.7 million were offset by a decline in depreciation and amortization of hardware and software development costs of $1.3 million. MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) of this standard had no material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition and Consolidated Statements of Operations. Reclassifications Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior years’ financial statements in order to conform to the current year presentation. Such reclassifications had no effect on previously reported net income. On March 5, 2008, the Company acquired all of the outstanding capital stock of Greenline Financial Technologies, Inc. (“Greenline”), an Illinois-based provider of integration, testing and management solutions for FIX-related products and services designed to optimize electronic trading of fixed-income, equity and other exchange-based products, and approximately ten percent of the outstanding capital stock of TradeHelm, Inc. , a Delaware corporation that was spun-out from Greenline immediately prior to the acquisition. The acquisition of Greenline broadens the range of technology services that the Company offers to institutional financial markets, provides an expansion of the Company’s client base, including global exchanges and hedge funds, and further diversifies the Company’s revenues beyond the core electronic credit trading products. The results of operations of Greenline are included in the Consolidated Financial Statements from the date of the acquisition. The aggregate consideration for the Greenline acquisition was $41.1 million, comprised of $34.7 million in cash, 725,923 shares of common stock valued at $5.8 million and $0.6 million of acquisition-related costs. In addition, the sellers were eligible to receive up to an aggregate of $3.0 million in cash, subject to Greenline attaining certain earn\u0002out targets in 2008 and 2009. A total of $1.4 million was paid to the sellers in 2009 based on the 2008 earn-out target, bringing the aggregate consideration to $42.4 million. The 2009 earn-out target was not met. A total of $2.0 million of the purchase price, which had been deposited into escrow accounts to satisfy potential indemnity claims, was distributed to the sellers in March 2009. The shares of common stock issued to each selling shareholder of Greenline were released in two equal installments on December 20, 2008 and December 20, 2009, respectively. The value ascribed to the shares was discounted from the market value to reflect the non-marketability of such shares during the restriction period. The purchase price allocation is as follows (in thousands): \n
Cash$6,406
Accounts receivable2,139
Amortizable intangibles8,330
Goodwill29,405
Deferred tax assets, net3,410
Other assets, including investment in TradeHelm1,429
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and deferred revenue-8,701
Total purchase price$42,418
\n The amortizable intangibles include $3.2 million of acquired technology, $3.3 million of customer relationships, $1.3 million of non-competition agreements and $0.5 million of tradenames. Useful lives of ten years and five years have been assigned to the customer relationships intangible and all other amortizable intangibles, respectively. The identifiable intangible assets and goodwill are not deductible for tax purposes. The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial information reflects the results of operations of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, as if the acquisition of Greenline had occurred as of the beginning of the period presented, after giving effect to certain purchase accounting adjustments. These pro forma results are not necessarily indicative of what the Company’s operating results would have been had the acquisition actually taken place as of the beginning of the earliest period presented. The pro forma financial information"} {"answer": 2198.0, "question": "What was the average amount of Total stock-based compensation for Three Months Ended Dec 31,2009,Three Months Ended Mar 31,2010,Three Months Ended Jun 30,2010? (in thousand)", "context": "(2) Includes stock-based compensation expense and asset acquisition related write-offs as follows: \n
Three Months Ended
Mar 29,2009Jun 28,2009Sept 30,2009Dec 31,2009Mar 31,2010Jun 30,2010Sept 30,2010Dec 31,2010
($ amounts in 000's)
Cost of product revenue2427252624262625
Cost of services revenue124172169193208234242245
Research and development378498516571554587600598
Sales and marketing6446927679178668971,0171,030
General and administrative380404459475496520549571
Total stock-based compensation1,5501,7931,9362,1822,1482,2642,4342,469
Asset acquisition related write-offs—631931,663————
Total stock based compensation and asset acquisition related write-offs1,5502,4242,0293,8452,1482,2642,4342,469
\n (3) See Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Seasonality, Cyclicality and Quarterly Revenue Trends Our quarterly results reflect seasonality in the sale of our products, subscriptions and services. In general, a pattern of increased customer buying at year-end has positively impacted sales activity in the fourth quarter. In the first quarter we generally experience lower sequential billings and product revenues, which results in lower product revenue. Our product revenue in the third quarter can be negatively affected by reduced economic activity in Europe during the summer months. During fiscal 2010, the growth in the Americas during the third quarter more than offset the slight decline in Europe, but this may not always be the case. Similarly, our gross margins and operating income have been affected by these historical trends because expenses are relatively fixed in the near-term. Although these seasonal factors are common in the technology sector, historical patterns should not be considered a reliable indicator of our future sales activity or performance. On a quarterly basis, we have usually generated the majority of our product revenue in the final month of each quarter and a significant amount in the last two weeks of a quarter. We believe this is due to customer buying patterns typical in this industry. Our total quarterly revenue over the past twelve quarters has increased sequentially in every quarter except for the first quarters of fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2009. We believe these declines in the first and third quarters of fiscal 2010 are based on seasonality as discussed above, which particularly impacts our product revenue. Product revenue in all of the quarters of fiscal 2010 was higher as compared to the same periods in fiscal 2009, which we believe was due in part to the investments made in our sales organization and improvements in overall corporate IT spending. THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis The Risk Committee of the Board and the Risk Governance Committee approve liquidity risk limits at the firmwide level, consistent with our risk appetite statement. Limits are reviewed frequently and amended, with required approvals, on a permanent and temporary basis, as appropriate, to reflect changing market or business conditions. Our liquidity risk limits are monitored by Treasury and Liquidity Risk Management. Liquidity Risk Management is responsible for identifying and escalating to senior management and/or the appropriate risk committee, on a timely basis, instances where limits have been exceeded. GCLA and Unencumbered Metrics GCLA. Based on the results of our internal liquidity risk models, described above, as well as our consideration of other factors, including, but not limited to, an assessment of our potential intraday liquidity needs and a qualitative assessment of our condition, as well as the financial markets, we believe our liquidity position as of both December 2018 and December 2017 was appropriate. We strictly limit our GCLA to a narrowly defined list of securities and cash because they are highly liquid, even in a difficult funding environment. We do not include other potential sources of excess liquidity in our GCLA, such as less liquid unencumbered securities or committed credit facilities. The table below presents information about our average GCLA \n
Average for the Year Ended December
$ in millions 20182017
Denomination
U.S. dollar $155,348$155,020
Non-U.S.dollar 77,99563,528
Total $233,343$218,548
Asset Class
Overnight cash deposits $ 98,811$ 93,617
U.S. government obligations 79,81075,108
U.S. agency obligations 12,17111,813
Non-U.S.governmentobligations 42,55138,010
Total $233,343$218,548
Entity Type
Group Inc. and Funding IHC $ 40,920$ 37,507
Major broker-dealer subsidiaries 104,36498,160
Major bank subsidiaries 88,05982,881
Total $233,343$218,548
\n In the table above: ‰ The U. S. dollar-denominated GCLA consists of (i) unencumbered U. S. government and agency obligations (including highly liquid U. S. agency mortgage-backed obligations), all of which are eligible as collateral in Federal Reserve open market operations and (ii) certain overnight U. S. dollar cash deposits. ‰ The non-U. S. dollar-denominated GCLA consists of non-U. S. government obligations (only unencumbered German, French, Japanese and U. K. government obligations) and certain overnight cash deposits in highly liquid currencies. We maintain our GCLA to enable us to meet current and potential liquidity requirements of our parent company, Group Inc. , and its subsidiaries. Our Modeled Liquidity Outflow and Intraday Liquidity Model incorporate a consolidated requirement for Group Inc. , as well as a standalone requirement for each of our major broker-dealer and bank subsidiaries. Funding IHC is required to provide the necessary liquidity to Group Inc. during the ordinary course of business, and is also obligated to provide capital and liquidity support to major subsidiaries in the event of our material financial distress or failure. Liquidity held directly in each of our major broker-dealer and bank subsidiaries is intended for use only by that subsidiary to meet its liquidity requirements and is assumed not to be available to Group Inc. or Funding IHC unless (i) legally provided for and (ii) there are no additional regulatory, tax or other restrictions. In addition, the Modeled Liquidity Outflow and Intraday Liquidity Model also incorporate a broader assessment of standalone liquidity requirements for other subsidiaries and we hold a portion of our GCLA directly at Group Inc. or Funding IHC to support such requirements. Other Unencumbered Assets. In addition to our GCLA, we have a significant amount of other unencumbered cash and financial instruments, including other government obligations, high-grade money market securities, corporate obligations, marginable equities, loans and cash deposits not included in our GCLA. The fair value of our unencumbered assets averaged $177.08 billion for 2018 and $158.41 billion for 2017. We do not consider these assets liquid enough to be eligible for our GCLA. Liquidity Regulatory Framework As a BHC, we are subject to a minimum Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) under the LCR rule approved by the U. S. federal bank regulatory agencies. The LCR rule requires organizations to maintain an adequate ratio of eligible high-quality liquid assets (HQLA) to expected net cash outflows under an acute short-term liquidity stress scenario. Eligible HQLA excludes HQLA held by subsidiaries that is in excess of their minimum requirement and is subject to transfer restrictions. We are required to maintain a minimum LCR of 100%. We expect that fluctuations in client activity, business mix and the market environment will impact our average LCR. The table below presents information about our average daily LCR. \n
Average for the Three Months Ended
$ in millions December 2018September 2018
Total HQLA $226,473$233,721
Eligible HQLA $160,016$170,621
Net cash outflows $126,511$133,126
LCR 127%128%
\n Liquidity and Capital Resources"} {"answer": 0.18193, "question": "What is the growing rate of Amplifiers/Radio frequency in table 0 in the year with the most Converters in table 0?", "context": "The year-to-year increase in communications end market revenue in fiscal 2014 was primarily a result of increased wireless base station deployment activity and, to a lesser extent, an increase in revenue as a result of the Acquisition. Industrial end market revenue increased year-over-year in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 as a result of an increase in demand in this end market, which was most significant for products sold into the instrumentation and automation sectors and, to a lesser extent, an increase in revenue as a result of the Acquisition. The year-to-year increase in automotive end market revenue in fiscal 2014 was primarily a result of increasing electronic content in vehicles and higher demand for new vehicles. The year-to\u0002year decrease in revenue in the consumer end market in fiscal 2014 was primarily the result of the sale of our microphone product line in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. The year-to-year decrease in revenue in the industrial and consumer end markets in fiscal 2013 was primarily the result of a weak global economic environment and one less week of operations in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012. Automotive end market revenue increased in fiscal 2013 primarily as a result of increasing electronic content in vehicles. Revenue Trends by Product Type The following table summarizes revenue by product categories. The categorization of our products into broad categories is based on the characteristics of the individual products, the specification of the products and in some cases the specific uses that certain products have within applications. The categorization of products into categories is therefore subject to judgment in some cases and can vary over time. In instances where products move between product categories, we reclassify the amounts in the product categories for all prior periods. Such reclassifications typically do not materially change the sizing of, or the underlying trends of results within, each product category \n
201420132012
Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*Y/Y%Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*
Converters$1,285,36845%9%$1,180,07245%$1,192,06444%
Amplifiers/Radio frequency806,97528%18%682,75926%697,68726%
Other analog356,40612%-4%372,28114%397,37615%
Subtotal analog signal processing2,448,74985%10%2,235,11285%2,287,12785%
Power management & reference174,4836%1%172,9207%182,1347%
Total analog products$2,623,23292%9%$2,408,03291%$2,469,26191%
Digital signal processing241,5418%7%225,6579%231,8819%
Total Revenue$2,864,773100%9%$2,633,689100%$2,701,142100%
\n The sum of the individual percentages does not equal the total due to rounding. The year-to-year increase in total revenue in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 was the result of improving demand across most product type categories and the result of the Acquisition, which was partially offset by declines in the other analog product category, primarily as a result of the sale of our microphone product line in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. The year-to-year decrease in total revenue in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 was the result of one less week of operations in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 and a broad-based decrease in demand across most product type categories. Revenue Trends by Geographic Region Revenue by geographic region, based upon the primary location of our customers' design activity for its products, for fiscal 2014, 2013 and 2012 was as follows. ANALOG DEVICES, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) \n
Stock Options201420132012
Options granted (in thousands)2,2402,4072,456
Weighted-average exercise price$51.52$46.40$39.58
Weighted-average grant-date fair value$8.74$7.38$7.37
Assumptions:
Weighted-average expected volatility24.9%24.6%28.4%
Weighted-average expected term (in years)5.35.45.3
Weighted-average risk-free interest rate1.7%1.0%1.1%
Weighted-average expected dividend yield2.9%2.9%3.0%
\n As it relates to our market-based restricted stock units, the Company utilizes the Monte Carlo simulation valuation model to value these awards. The Monte Carlo simulation model utilizes multiple input variables that determine the probability of satisfying the performance conditions stipulated in the award grant and calculates the fair market value for the market-based restricted stock units granted. The Monte Carlo simulation model also uses stock price volatility and other variables to estimate the probability of satisfying the performance conditions, including the possibility that the market condition may not be satisfied, and the resulting fair value of the award. Information pertaining to the Company's market-based restricted stock units and the related estimated assumptions used to calculate the fair value of market-based restricted stock units granted using the Monte Carlo simulation model is as follows: \n
Market-based Restricted Stock Units2014
Units granted (in thousands)86
Grant-date fair value$50.79
Assumptions:
Historical stock price volatility23.2%
Risk-free interest rate0.8%
Expected dividend yield2.8%
\n Market-based restricted stock units were not granted during fiscal 2013 or 2012. Expected volatility — The Company is responsible for estimating volatility and has considered a number of factors, including third-party estimates. The Company currently believes that the exclusive use of implied volatility results in the best estimate of the grant-date fair value of employee stock options because it reflects the market’s current expectations of future volatility. In evaluating the appropriateness of exclusively relying on implied volatility, the Company concluded that: (1) options in the Company’s common stock are actively traded with sufficient volume on several exchanges; (2) the market prices of both the traded options and the underlying shares are measured at a similar point in time to each other and on a date close to the grant date of the employee share options; (3) the traded options have exercise prices that are both near-the-money and close to the exercise price of the employee share options; and (4) the remaining maturities of the traded options used to estimate volatility are at least one year. Expected term — The Company uses historical employee exercise and option expiration data to estimate the expected term assumption for the Black-Scholes grant-date valuation. The Company believes that this historical data is currently the best estimate of the expected term of a new option, and that generally its employees exhibit similar exercise behavior. Risk-free interest rate — The yield on zero-coupon U. S. Treasury securities for a period that is commensurate with the expected term assumption is used as the risk-free interest rate. Expected dividend yield — Expected dividend yield is calculated by annualizing the cash dividend declared by the Company’s Board of Directors for the current quarter and dividing that result by the closing stock price on the date of grant. Until such time as the Company’s Board of Directors declares a cash dividend for an amount that is different from the current quarter’s cash dividend, the current dividend will be used in deriving this assumption. Cash dividends are not paid on options, restricted stock or restricted stock units. an adverse development with respect to one claim in 2008 and favorable developments in three cases in 2009. Other costs were also lower in 2009 compared to 2008, driven by a decrease in expenses for freight and property damages, employee travel, and utilities. In addition, higher bad debt expense in 2008 due to the uncertain impact of the recessionary economy drove a favorable year-over-year comparison. Conversely, an additional expense of $30 million related to a transaction with Pacer International, Inc. and higher property taxes partially offset lower costs in 2009. Other costs were higher in 2008 compared to 2007 due to an increase in bad debts, state and local taxes, loss and damage expenses, utility costs, and other miscellaneous expenses totaling $122 million. Conversely, personal injury costs (including asbestos-related claims) were $8 million lower in 2008 compared to 2007. The reduction reflects improvements in our safety experience and lower estimated costs to resolve claims as indicated in the actuarial studies of our personal injury expense and annual reviews of asbestos-related claims in both 2008 and 2007. The year-over-year comparison also includes the negative impact of adverse development associated with one claim in 2008. In addition, environmental and toxic tort expenses were $7 million lower in 2008 compared to 2007. Non-Operating Items"} {"answer": 469.3, "question": "What's the total amount of the Diluted: Weighted-average common shares outstanding for Denominator in the years where Total revenues for Revenues is greater than 0? (in million)", "context": "Certain property fund limited partnerships that the Company consolidates have floating rate revolving credit borrowings of $381 million as of December 31, 2009. Certain Threadneedle subsidiaries guarantee the repayment of outstanding borrowings up to the value of the assets of the partnerships. The debt is secured by the assets of the partnerships and there is no recourse to Ameriprise Financial.24. Earnings per Share Attributable to Ameriprise Financial Common Shareholders The computations of basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders are as follows: \n
Years Ended December 31,
20092008 2007
(in millions, except per share amounts)
Numerator:
Net income (loss) attributable to Ameriprise Financial$722$-38$814
Denominator:
Basic: Weighted-average common shares outstanding242.2222.3236.2
Effect of potentially dilutive nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards2.22.63.7
Diluted: Weighted-average common shares outstanding244.4224.9239.9
Earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders:
Basic$2.98$-0.17$3.45
Diluted$2.95$-0.17 (1)$3.39
\n (1) Diluted shares used in this calculation represent basic shares due to the net loss. Using actual diluted shares would result in anti-dilution. Basic weighted average common shares for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 included 3.4 million, 2.1 million and 1.6 million, respectively, of vested, nonforfeitable restricted stock units and 4.6 million, 3.1 million and 3.5 million, respectively, of non-vested restricted stock awards and restricted stock units that are forfeitable but receive nonforfeitable dividends. Potentially dilutive securities include nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards.25. Shareholders’ Equity The Company has a share repurchase program in place to return excess capital to shareholders. Since September 2008 through the date of this report, the Company has suspended its stock repurchase program; as a result there were no share repurchases during the year ended December 31, 2009. During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company repurchased a total of 12.7 million and 15.9 million shares, respectively, of its common stock at an average price of $48.26 and $59.59, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, the Company had approximately $1.3 billion remaining under a share repurchase authorization. The Company may also reacquire shares of its common stock under its 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan related to restricted stock awards. Restricted shares that are forfeited before the vesting period has lapsed are recorded as treasury shares. In addition, the holders of restricted shares may elect to surrender a portion of their shares on the vesting date to cover their income tax obligations. These vested restricted shares reacquired by the Company and the Company’s payment of the holders’ income tax obligations are recorded as a treasury share purchase. The restricted shares forfeited and recorded as treasury shares under the 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan were 0.3 million shares in each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. For each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company reacquired 0.5 million of its common stock through the surrender of restricted shares upon vesting and paid in the aggregate $11 million, $24 million and $29 million, respectively, related to the holders’ income tax obligations on the vesting date. In 2009, the Company issued and sold 36 million shares of its common stock. The proceeds of $869 million will be used for general corporate purposes, including the Company’s pending acquisition of the long-term asset management business of Columbia, which is expected to close in the spring of 2010. See Note 5 for additional information on the Company’s pending acquisition of Columbia. In 2008, the Company reissued 1.8 million treasury shares for restricted stock award grants and the issuance of shares vested under the P2 Deferral Plan and the Transition and Opportunity Bonus (‘‘T&O Bonus’’) program. In 2005, the Company awarded bonuses to advisors General and administrative expense decreased $15 million, or 7%, to $192 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to expense controls. Protection Our Protection segment offers a variety of protection products to address the protection and risk management needs of our retail clients including life, disability income and property-casualty insurance. Life and disability income products are primarily distributed through our branded advisors. Our property-casualty products are sold direct, primarily through affinity relationships. We issue insurance policies through our life insurance subsidiaries and the property casualty companies. The primary sources of revenues for this segment are premiums, fees, and charges that we receive to assume insurance-related risk. We earn net investment income on owned assets supporting insurance reserves and capital supporting the business. We also receive fees based on the level of assets supporting variable universal life separate account balances. This segment earns intersegment revenues from fees paid by the Asset Management segment for marketing support and other services provided in connection with the availability of RiverSource VST Funds under the variable universal life contracts. Intersegment expenses for this segment include distribution expenses for services provided by the Advice & Wealth Management segment, as well as expenses for investment management services provided by the Asset Management segment. The following table presents the results of operations of our Protection segment: \n
Years Ended December 31,
2009 2008Change
(in millions, except percentages)
Revenues
Management and financial advice fees$47$56$-9-16%
Distribution fees97106-9-8
Net investment income42225217067
Premiums1,020994263
Other revenues386547-161-29
Total revenues1,9721,955171
Banking and deposit interest expense11——
Total net revenues1,9711,954171
Expenses
Distribution expenses2218422
Interest credited to fixed accounts144144——
Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses924856688
Amortization of deferred acquisition costs159333-174-52
General and administrative expense226251-25-10
Total expenses1,4751,602-127-8
Pretax income$496$352$14441%
\n Our Protection segment pretax income was $496 million for 2009, an increase of $144 million, or 41%, from $352 million in 2008. Net revenues Net revenues increased $17 million, or 1%, to $2.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, due to an increase in net investment income and premiums, partially offset by a decrease in other revenues related to updating valuation assumptions. Net investment income increased $170 million, or 67%, to $422 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to net realized investment gains of $27 million in 2009 compared to net realized investment losses of $92 million in the prior year primarily related to impairments of Available-for-Sale securities. In addition, investment income earned on fixed maturity securities increased $46 million compared to the prior year driven by higher yields on the longer-term investments in our fixed income investment portfolio. In December, our board of directors ratified its authorization of a stock repurchase program in the amount of 1.5 million shares of our common stock. As of December 31, 2010 no shares had been repurchased. We have paid dividends for 71 consecutive years with payments increasing each of the last 19 years. We paid total dividends of $.54 per share in 2010 compared with $.51 per share in 2009. Aggregate Contractual Obligations A summary of our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2010, is as follows: \n
(dollars in millions)Payments due by period
Contractual ObligationsTotalLess Than1 year1 - 3Years3 - 5YearsMore than5 years
Long-term Debt$261.0$18.6$181.2$29.2$32.0
Fixed Rate Interest22.46.19.05.12.2
Operating Leases30.27.27.95.49.7
Purchase Obligations45.545.5---
Total$359.1$77.4$198.1$39.7$43.9
\n As of December 31, 2010, the liability for uncertain income tax positions was $2.7 million. Due to the high degree of uncertainty regarding timing of potential future cash flows associated with these liabilities, we are unable to make a reasonably reliable estimate of the amount and period in which these liabilities might be paid. We utilize blanket purchase orders to communicate expected annual requirements to many of our suppliers. Requirements under blanket purchase orders generally do not become committed until several weeks prior to the company’s scheduled unit production. The purchase obligation amount presented above represents the value of commitments considered firm. RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Our sales from continuing operations in 2010 were $1,489.3 million surpassing 2009 sales of $1,375.0 million by 8.3 percent. The increase in sales was due mostly to significantly higher sales in our water heater operations in China resulting from geographic expansion, market share gains and new product introductions as well as additional sales from our water treatment business acquired in November, 2009. Our sales from continuing operations were $1,451.3 million in 2008. The $76.3 million decline in sales from 2008 to 2009 was due to lower residential and commercial volume in North America, reflecting softness in the domestic housing market and a slowdown in the commercial water heater business and was partially offset by strong growth in water heater sales in China and improved year over year pricing. On December 13, 2010 we entered into a definitive agreement to sell our Electrical Products Company to Regal Beloit Corporation for $700 million in cash and approximately 2.83 million shares of Regal Beloit common stock. The transaction, which has been approved by both companies' board of directors, is expected to close in the first half of 2011. Due to the pending sale, our Electrical Products segment has been accorded discontinued operations treatment in the accompanying financial statements. Sales in 2010, including sales of $701.8 million for our Electrical Products segment, were $2,191.1 million. Our gross profit margin for continuing operations in 2010 was 29.9 percent, compared with 28.7 percent in 2009 and 25.8 percent in 2008. The improvement in margin from 2009 to 2010 was due to increased volume, cost containment activities and lower warranty costs which more than offset certain inefficiencies resulting from the May flood in our Ashland City, TN water heater manufacturing facility. The increase in profit margin from 2008 to 2009 resulted from increased higher margin China water heater volume, aggressive cost reduction programs and lower material costs. Selling, general and administrative expense (SG&A) was $36.9 million higher in 2010 than in 2009. The increased SG&A, the majority of which was incurred in our China water heater operation, was associated with selling costs to support higher volume and new product lines. Additional SG&A associated with our 2009 water treatment acquisition also contributed to the increase. SG&A was $8.5 million higher in 2009 than 2008 resulting mostly from an $8.2 million increase in our China water heater operation in support of higher volumes."} {"answer": -0.10112, "question": "what is the growth rate in advertising expense in 2003 relative to 2002?", "context": "Guarantees We adopted FASB Interpretation No.45 (“FIN 45”), “Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others” at the beginning of our fiscal 2003. See “Recent Accounting Pronouncements” for further information regarding FIN 45. The lease agreements for our three office buildings in San Jose, California provide for residual value guarantees. These lease agreements were in place prior to December 31, 2002 and are disclosed in Note 14. In the normal course of business, we provide indemnifications of varying scope to customers against claims of intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising from the use of our products. Historically, costs related to these indemnification provisions have not been significant and we are unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these indemnification provisions on our future results of operations. We have commitments to make certain milestone and/or retention payments typically entered into in conjunction with various acquisitions, for which we have made accruals in our consolidated financial statements. In connection with our purchases of technology assets during fiscal 2003, we entered into employee retention agreements totaling $2.2 million. We are required to make payments upon satisfaction of certain conditions in the agreements. As permitted under Delaware law, we have agreements whereby we indemnify our officers and directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity. The indemnification period covers all pertinent events and occurrences during the officer’s or director’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, we have director and officer insurance coverage that limits our exposure and enables us to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. We believe the estimated fair value of these indemnification agreements in excess of applicable insurance coverage is minimal. As part of our limited partnership interests in Adobe Ventures, we have provided a general indemnification to Granite Ventures, an independent venture capital firm and sole general partner of Adobe Ventures, for certain events or occurrences while Granite Ventures is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity provided that Granite Ventures acts in good faith on behalf of the partnerships. We are unable to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments that could potentially result from any hypothetical future claim, but believe the risk of having to make any payments under this general indemnification to be remote. We accrue for costs associated with future obligations which include costs for undetected bugs that are discovered only after the product is installed and used by customers. The accrual remaining at the end of fiscal 2003 primarily relates to new releases of our Creative Suites products during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003. The table below summarizes the activity related to the accrual during fiscal 2003: \n
Balance at November 29, 2002AccrualsPaymentsBalance at November 28, 2003
$—$5,554$-2,369$3,185
\n Advertising Expenses We expense all advertising costs as incurred and classify these costs under sales and marketing expense. Advertising expenses for fiscal years 2003, 2002, and 2001 were $24.0 million, $26.7 million and $30.5 million, respectively. Foreign Currency and Other Hedging Instruments Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.133 (“SFAS No.133”), “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities and requires us to recognize these as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet and measure them at fair value. As described in Note 15, gains and losses resulting from \n
Year Ended
September 30, 2009% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2008% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2007
($ in 000's)
Revenues
Securities Commissions and
Investment Banking Fees$ 7,162-78%$ 32,292-23%$ 41,879
Investment Advisory Fees1,355-59%3,32630%2,568
Interest Income1,456-63%3,987-4%4,163
Trading Profits4,531341%1,027-80%5,254
Other387-60%975-82%5,340
Total Revenues14,891-64%41,607-30%59,204
Interest Expense421-66%1,2353%1,197
Net Revenues14,470-64%40,372-30%58,007
Non-Interest Expense
Compensation Expense14,381-44%25,860-8%28,010
Other Expense7,296-60%18,064-23%23,383
Total Non-Interest Expense21,677-51%43,924-15%51,393
Income (Loss) Before Taxes
and Minority Interest-7,207103%-3,552-154%6,614
Minority Interest in
Pre-tax (Losses) Income Held by Others-2,3211,742%-126-104%2,995
Pre-tax (Loss) Earnings$ -4,886-43%$ -3,426-195%$ 3,619
\n Year ended September 30, 2009 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2008 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets in fiscal 2009 consists of the results of our joint ventures in Latin America, including Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis continued to significantly impact emerging markets in all business lines. The results in the emerging market segment declined to a $4.9 million loss from a $3.4 million loss in the prior year. This decline was a result of a $24 million, or 80%, decline in commission revenues which was almost entirely offset by a $3.5 million increase in trading profits and a $22 million decline in non-interest expenses. Our minority interest partners shared in $2.3 million of the fiscal 2009 loss before taxes. In December, our joint venture in Turkey ceased operations and subsequently filed for protection under Turkish bankruptcy laws. We have fully reserved for our equity interest in this joint venture. Year ended September 30, 2008 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2007 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets consists of the results of our joint ventures in Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil and Turkey. The results in the emerging market segment declined from a $3.6 million profit in fiscal 2007 to a $3.4 million loss in fiscal 2008. This decline was a result of a greater decline in revenues than an increase in expenses. Expenses were impacted by our investment in Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis significantly impacted emerging markets in all business lines. Commission revenue declined 23% in fiscal 2008 as compared to the prior year as the economic slowdown and a series of political crises in Turkey and Argentina during 2008 severely undermined investors’ confidence in these countries. Trading profits declined due to losses taken in proprietary positions in Turkey. The commission expense portion of compensation expense declined in proportion to the decline in commission revenue. Other expenses in fiscal 2007 were unusually high due to the accrual of tax liabilities and the related legal expenses. As of September 30, 2008, we were still awaiting the final outcome of the litigation in Turkey, and in light of the suspension of the entity’s license, our ability to continue as a going concern in Turkey was uncertain. We had fully reserved for our investment in the Turkish joint venture as of September 30, 2008 and, accordingly, fiscal 2008 pre-tax earnings did not include any net impact of our Turkish joint venture. Index 64 Certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies As a financial holding company, we are required to provide certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies pursuant to the SEC’s Industry Guide 3. Certain of those disclosures are as follows for the fiscal year indicated: \n
Year ended September 30,
201620152014
RJF return on average assets-11.8%2.0%2.1%
RJF return on average equity-211.3%11.5%12.3%
Average equity to average assets-317.1%18.5%18.1%
Dividend payout ratio-421.9%21.0%19.3%
\n (1) Computed as net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the year, divided by two). (2) Computed by utilizing the net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by the average equity attributable to RJF for each respective fiscal year. Average equity is computed by adding the total equity attributable to RJF as of each quarter-end date during the indicated fiscal year, plus the beginning of the year total, divided by five. (3) Computed as average equity (the sum of total equity at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two), divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two). (4) Computed as dividends declared per common share during the fiscal year as a percentage of diluted earnings per common share. Refer to the RJ Bank section of this MD&A, various sections within Item 7A in this report and the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Form 10-K for the other required disclosures. Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity is essential to our business. The primary goal of our liquidity management activities is to ensure adequate funding to conduct our business over a range of market environments. Senior management establishes our liquidity and capital policies. These policies include senior management’s review of short\u0002and long-term cash flow forecasts, review of monthly capital expenditures, the monitoring of the availability of alternative sources of financing, and the daily monitoring of liquidity in our significant subsidiaries. Our decisions on the allocation of capital to our business units consider, among other factors, projected profitability and cash flow, risk and impact on future liquidity needs. Our treasury department assists in evaluating, monitoring and controlling the impact that our business activities have on our financial condition, liquidity and capital structure as well as maintains our relationships with various lenders. The objectives of these policies are to support the successful execution of our business strategies while ensuring ongoing and sufficient liquidity. Liquidity is provided primarily through our business operations and financing activities. Financing activities could include bank borrowings, repurchase agreement transactions or additional capital raising activities under our “universal” shelf registration statement. Cash used in operating activities during the year ended September 30, 2016 was $518 million. Successful operating results generated a $650 million increase in cash. Increases in cash from operations include: ? An increase in brokerage client payables had a $1.82 billion favorable impact on cash. The increase largely results from two factors. First, many clients reacted to uncertainties in the equity markets by increasing the cash balances in their brokerage accounts. Second, our brokerage client account balances increased as a result of our fiscal year 2016 acquisitions of Alex. Brown and 3Macs. Cumulatively, these two factors result in the increase in brokerage client payables and a corresponding increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations which is discussed below. ? Stock loaned, net of stock borrowed, increased $153 million. ? Accrued compensation, commissions and benefits increased $46 million as a result of the increased financial results we achieved in fiscal year 2016. Offsetting these, decreases in cash used in operations resulted from: ? A $1.95 billion increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations and other segregated assets, primarily resulting from the increase in client cash balances described above. RALPH LAUREN CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) The weighted-average number of common shares outstanding used to calculate basic net income (loss) per common share is reconciled to shares used to calculate diluted net income (loss) per common share as follows:"} {"answer": 13635.25, "question": "What is the average amount of Balance at December 31, 2012, and Net sales of Year Ended December 31, 2014 ?", "context": "The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s valuation allowance: \n
Balance at January 1, 2010$25,621
Increases in current period tax positions907
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,740
Balance at December 31, 2010$23,788
Increases in current period tax positions1,525
Decreases in current period tax positions-3,734
Balance at December 31, 2011$21,579
Increases in current period tax positions0
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,059
Balance at December 31, 2012$19,520
\n Note 14: Employee Benefits Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits The Company maintains noncontributory defined benefit pension plans covering eligible employees of its regulated utility and shared services operations. Benefits under the plans are based on the employee’s years of service and compensation. The pension plans have been closed for most employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 had their accrued benefit frozen and will be able to receive this benefit as a lump sum upon termination or retirement. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 and non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006 are provided with a 5.25% of base pay defined contribution plan. The Company does not participate in a multiemployer plan. The Company’s funding policy is to contribute at least the greater of the minimum amount required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or the normal cost, and an additional contribution if needed to avoid “at risk” status and benefit restrictions under the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Company may also increase its contributions, if appropriate, to its tax and cash position and the plan’s funded position. Pension plan assets are invested in a number of actively managed and indexed investments including equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities and guaranteed interest contracts with insurance companies. Pension expense in excess of the amount contributed to the pension plans is deferred by certain regulated subsidiaries pending future recovery in rates charged for utility services as contributions are made to the plans. (See Note 6) The Company also has several unfunded noncontributory supplemental non-qualified pension plans that provide additional retirement benefits to certain employees. The Company maintains other postretirement benefit plans providing varying levels of medical and life insurance to eligible retirees. The retiree welfare plans are closed for union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. The plans had previously closed for non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2002. The Company’s policy is to fund other postretirement benefit costs for rate-making purposes. Plan assets are invested in equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) and emerging market funds. The obligations of the plans are dominated by obligations for active employees. Because the timing of expected benefit payments is so far in the future and the size of the plan assets are small relative to the Company’s assets, the investment strategy is to allocate a significant percentage of assets to equities, which the Company believes will provide the highest return over the long-term period. The fixed income assets are invested in long duration debt securities and may be invested in fixed income instruments, such as futures and options in order to better match the duration of the plan liability. The allocation of goodwill in accordance with SFAS No.142 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was as follows: \n
Balance at Beginning of Period Goodwill Acquired Foreign Currency Translation and Other Balance at End of Period
Year Ended December 31, 2006
Food Packaging$540.4$31.9$14.9$587.2
Protective Packaging1,368.40.41.11,369.9
Total$1,908.8$32.3$16.0$1,957.1
Year Ended December 31, 2005
Food Packaging$549.8$0.7$-10.1$540.4
Protective Packaging1,368.20.8-0.61,368.4
Total$1,918.0$1.5$-10.7$1,908.8
\n See Note 20, “Acquisitions,” for additional information on the goodwill acquired during 2006. Note 4 Short Term Investments—Available-for-Sale Securities At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company’s available-for-sale securities consisted of auction rate securities for which interest or dividend rates are generally re-set for periods of up to 90 days. At December 31, 2006, the Company held $33.9 million of auction rate securities which were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates. At December 31, 2005, the Company held $44.1 million of auction rate securities, of which $34.7 million were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates and $9.4 million were investments in other auction rate securities with contractual maturities in 2031. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the fair value of the available-for-sale securities held by the Company was equal to their cost. There were no gross realized gains or losses from the sale of available\u0002for-sale securities in 2006 and 2005. Note 5 Accounts Receivable Securitization Program In December 2001, the Company and a group of its U. S. subsidiaries entered into an accounts receivable securitization program with a bank and an issuer of commercial paper administered by the bank. On December 7, 2004, which was the scheduled expiration date of this program, the parties extended this program for an additional term of three years ending December 7, 2007. Under this receivables program, the Company’s two primary operating subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air Corporation (US), sell all of their eligible U. S. accounts receivable to Sealed Air Funding Corporation, an indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that was formed for the sole purpose of entering into the receivables program. Sealed Air Funding in turn may sell undivided ownership interests in these receivables to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, subject to specified conditions, up to a maximum of $125.0 million of receivables interests outstanding from time to time. Sealed Air Funding retains the receivables it purchases from the operating subsidiaries, except those as to which it sells receivables interests to the bank or the issuer of commercial paper. The Company has structured the sales of accounts receivable by the operating subsidiaries to Sealed Air Funding, and the sales of receivables interests from Sealed Air Funding to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, as “true sales” under applicable laws. The assets of Sealed Air Funding are not available to pay any creditors of the Company or of the Company’s other subsidiaries or affiliates. The Company accounts for these transactions as sales of receivables under the provisions of SFAS No.140, “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities. ” Product Care 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, net sales decreased $30 million, or 2%, in 2016 compared with 2015, of which $22 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $8 million, or 1%, in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to the following: ? unfavorable price/mix of $29 million primarily in North America driven by targeted pricing incentives and an unfavorable product mix related to accelerated growth in e-Commerce and a shift in demand due to more innovative, resource-efficient solutions. This was partially offset by: ? higher unit volumes of $21 million, primarily in North America and EMEA due to ongoing strength in the e-Commerce and third party logistics markets, partially offset by rationalization and weakness in the industrial sector, as well as declines in Latin America due to the political and economic environment.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, net sales decreased $109 million, or 7%, in 2015 compared with 2014, of which $99 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $10 million, or 1%, in 2015 compared with 2014 primarily due to the following: ? lower unit volumes due to rationalization efforts in North America, Latin America and to a lesser extent, EMEA and weaknesses across the industrial sector. This was partially offset by: ? favorable price/mix in all regions, primarily in North America and Latin America reflecting results from our focus on maintaining pricing disciplines and an increase of sales from high-performance packaging solutions, including cushioning and packaging systems as compared to sales from general packaging solutions, and the progression of our pricing and value initiatives implemented to offset non-material inflationary costs as well as currency devaluation. Cost of Sales Cost of sales for the years ended December 31, were as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,2016 vs. 2015 % Change2015 vs. 2014 % Change
(In millions)201620152014
Net sales$6,778.3$7,031.5$7,750.5-3.6%-9.3%
Cost of sales4,246.74,444.95,062.9-4.5%-12.2%
As a % of net sales62.7%63.2%65.3%
Gross Profit$2,531.6$2,586.6$2,687.6-2.1%-3.8%
\n 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, costs of sales decreased $198 million in 2016 as compared to 2015. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $163 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $35 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $79 million, offset by an increase of $51 million in expenses representing higher non-material manufacturing and direct costs, including salary and wage inflation, partially offset by restructuring savings and lower incentive based compensation.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, costs of sales decreased $618 million in 2015 as compared to 2014. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $492 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $126 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $140 million and favorable impact of $31 million related to cost savings, freight, and other supply chain costs. These were partially offset by $47 million in expenses related to higher non-material manufacturing costs, including salary and wage inflation."} {"answer": 670.0, "question": "what are the total off-balance sheet obligations , ( in millions ) ?", "context": "The following table details the fee-paid committed and uncommitted credit lines we had available as of May 28, 2017: \n
In Billions Facility Amount Borrowed Amount
Credit facility expiring:
May 2022$2.7$—
June 20190.20.1
Total committed credit facilities2.90.1
Uncommitted credit facilities0.50.1
Total committed and uncommitted credit facilities$3.4$0.2
\n In fiscal 2016, we entered into a $2.7 billion fee-paid committed credit facility that was originally scheduled to expire in May 2021. During the fourth quarter of fis\u0002cal 2017 we amended the credit facility’s expiration date by one year to May 2022. To ensure availability of funds, we maintain bank credit lines sufficient to cover our outstanding notes payable. Commercial paper is a continuing source of short-term financing. We have commercial paper pro\u0002grams available to us in the United States and Europe. We also have uncommitted and asset-backed credit lines that support our foreign operations. The credit facilities contain several covenants, including a require\u0002ment to maintain a fixed charge coverage ratio of at least 2.5 times. Certain of our long-term debt agreements, our credit facilities, and our noncontrolling interests contain restrictive covenants. As of May 28, 2017, we were in compliance with all of these covenants. We have $605 million of long-term debt maturing in the next 12 months that is classified as current, includ\u0002ing $500 million of 1.4 percent notes due October 2017 and $100 million of 6.39 percent fixed rate medium term notes due for remarketing in February 2018. We believe that cash flows from operations, together with available short- and long-term debt financing, will be adequate to meet our liquidity and capital needs for at least the next 12 months. As of May 28, 2017, our total debt, including the impact of derivative instruments designated as hedges, was 67 percent in fixed-rate and 33 percent in float\u0002ing-rate instruments, compared to 78 percent in fixed\u0002rate and 22 percent in floating-rate instruments on May 29, 2016. Return on average total capital was 12.7 percent in fiscal 2017 compared to 12.9 percent in fiscal 2016. Improvement in adjusted return on average total capital is one of our key performance measures (see the “Non\u0002GAAP Measures” section below for our discussion of this measure, which is not defined by GAAP). Adjusted return on average total capital increased 30 basis points from 11.3 percent in fiscal 2016 to 11.6 percent in fis\u0002cal 2017 as fiscal 2017 adjusted earnings increased. On a constant-currency basis, adjusted return on average total capital increased 40 basis points. We also believe that our fixed charge coverage ratio and the ratio of operating cash flow to debt are import\u0002ant measures of our financial strength. Our fixed charge coverage ratio in fiscal 2017 was 7.26 compared to 7.40 in fiscal 2016. The measure decreased from fiscal 2016 as earnings before income taxes and after-tax earnings from joint ventures decreased by $132 million in fiscal 2017. Our operating cash flow to debt ratio decreased 6.8 percentage points to 24.4 percent in fiscal 2017, driven by a decrease in cash provided by operations and an increase in notes payable. We have a 51 percent controlling interest in Yoplait SAS and a 50 percent interest in Yoplait Marques SNC and Liberté Marques Sàrl. Sodiaal holds the remaining interests in each of these entities. We consolidate these entities into our consolidated financial statements. We record Sodiaal’s 50 percent interest in Yoplait Marques SNC and Liberté Marques Sàrl as noncontrolling inter\u0002ests, and its 49 percent interest in Yoplait SAS as a redeemable interest on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. These euro- and Canadian dollar-denominated interests are reported in U. S. dollars on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Sodiaal has the ability to put all or a portion of its redeemable interest to us at fair value once per year, up to three times before December 2024. As of May 28, 2017, the redemption value of the redeemable interest was $911 million which approximates its fair value. The third-party holder of the General Mills Cereals, LLC (GMC) Class A Interests receives quarterly pre\u0002ferred distributions from available net income based on the application of a floating preferred return rate to the holder’s capital account balance established in the most recent mark-to-market valuation (currently $252 million). On June 1, 2015, the floating preferred return rate on GMC’s Class A Interests was reset to the sum of three-month LIBOR plus 125 basis points. The pre\u0002ferred return rate is adjusted every three years through a negotiated agreement with the Class A Interest holder or through a remarketing auction. We have an option to purchase the Class A Interests for consideration equal to the then current capital account value, plus any unpaid preferred return and the prescribed make-whole amount. If we purchase these interests, any change in the third-party holder’s capital account from its original value will be charged directly to retained earnings and will increase or decrease the net earnings used to calculate EPS in that period. OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS As of May 28, 2017, we have issued guarantees and comfort letters of $505 million for the debt and other obligations of consolidated subsidiaries, and guarantees and comfort letters of $165 million for the debt and other obligations of non-consolidated affiliates, mainly CPW. In addition, off-balance sheet arrangements are generally limited to the future payments under non-cancelable operating leases, which totaled $501 million as of May 28, 2017. As of May 28, 2017, we had invested in five variable interest entities (VIEs). None of our VIEs are material to our results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity as of and for the fiscal year ended May 28, 2017. Our defined benefit plans in the United States are subject to the requirements of the Pension Protection Act (PPA). In the future, the PPA may require us to make additional contributions to our domestic plans. We do not expect to be required to make any contribu\u0002tions in fiscal 2017. The following table summarizes our future estimated cash payments under existing contractual obligations, including payments due by period: \n
Payments Due by Fiscal Year
In MillionsTotal20182019 -202021 -222023 and Thereafter
Long-term debt (a)$8,290.6604.22,647.71,559.33,479.4
Accrued interest83.883.8———
Operating leases (b)500.7118.8182.4110.489.1
Capital leases1.20.40.60.10.1
Purchase obligations (c)3,191.02,304.8606.8264.315.1
Total contractual obligations12,067.33,112.03,437.51,934.13,583.7
Other long-term obligations (d)1,372.7————
Total long-term obligations$13,440.0$3,112.0$3,437.5$1,934.1$3,583.7
\n (a) Amounts represent the expected cash payments of our long-term debt and do not include $1.2 million for capital leases or $44.4 million for net unamortized debt issuance costs, premiums and discounts, and fair value adjustments. (b) Operating leases represents the minimum rental commitments under non-cancelable operating leases. (c) The majority of the purchase obligations represent commitments for raw material and packaging to be utilized in the normal course of business and for consumer marketing spending commitments that support our brands. For purposes of this table, arrangements are considered purchase obliga\u0002tions if a contract specifies all significant terms, including fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased, a pricing structure, and approximate timing of the transaction. Most arrangements are cancelable without a significant penalty and with short notice (usually 30 days). Any amounts reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as accounts payable and accrued liabilities are excluded from the table above. (d) The fair value of our foreign exchange, equity, commodity, and grain derivative contracts with a payable position to the counterparty was $24 million as of May 28, 2017, based on fair market values as of that date. Future changes in market values will impact the amount of cash ultimately paid or received to settle those instruments in the future. Other long-term obligations mainly consist of liabilities for accrued compensation and bene\u0002fits, including the underfunded status of certain of our defined benefit pen\u0002sion, other postretirement benefit, and postemployment benefit plans, and miscellaneous liabilities. We expect to pay $21 million of benefits from our unfunded postemployment benefit plans and $14.6 million of deferred com\u0002pensation in fiscal 2018. We are unable to reliably estimate the amount of these payments beyond fiscal 2018. As of May 28, 2017, our total liability for uncertain tax positions and accrued interest and penalties was $158.6 million. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES For a complete description of our significant account\u0002ing policies, see Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements on page 51 of this report. Our significant accounting estimates are those that have a meaning\u0002ful impact on the reporting of our financial condition and results of operations. These estimates include our accounting for promotional expenditures, valuation of long-lived assets, intangible assets, redeemable interest, stock-based compensation, income taxes, and defined benefit pension, other postretirement benefit, and pos\u0002temployment benefit plans. Promotional Expenditures Our promotional activi\u0002ties are conducted through our customers and directly or indirectly with end consumers. These activities include: payments to customers to perform merchan\u0002dising activities on our behalf, such as advertising or in-store displays; discounts to our list prices to lower retail shelf prices; payments to gain distribution of new products; coupons, contests, and other incentives; and media and advertising expenditures. The recognition of these costs requires estimation of customer participa\u0002tion and performance levels. These estimates are based"} {"answer": 8703.0, "question": "What was the total amount of the adjusted profit in the years / sections where profit of profit before taxes is greater than 5000? (in million)", "context": "ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations should be read in conjunction with our discussion of cautionary statements and significant risks to the company’s business under Item 1A. Risk Factors of the 2018 Form?10-K. OVERVIEW Our sales and revenues for 2018 were $54.722 billion, a 20?percent increase from 2017 sales and revenues of $45.462?billion. The increase was primarily due to higher sales volume, mostly due to improved demand across all regions and across the three primary segments. Profit per share for 2018 was $10.26, compared to profit per share of $1.26 in 2017. Profit was $6.147 billion in 2018, compared with $754 million in 2017. The increase was primarily due to lower tax expense, higher sales volume, decreased restructuring costs and improved price realization. The increase was partially offset by higher manufacturing costs and selling, general and administrative (SG&A) and research and development (R&D) expenses and lower profit from the Financial Products Segment. Fourth-quarter 2018 sales and revenues were $14.342 billion, up $1.446 billion, or 11 percent, from $12.896 billion in the fourth quarter of 2017. Fourth-quarter 2018 profit was $1.78 per share, compared with a loss of $2.18 per share in the fourth quarter of 2017. Fourth-quarter 2018 profit was $1.048 billion, compared with a loss of $1.299 billion in 2017. Highlights for 2018 include: z Sales and revenues in 2018 were $54.722 billion, up 20?percent from 2017. Sales improved in all regions and across the three primary segments. z Operating profit as a percent of sales and revenues was 15.2?percent in 2018, compared with 9.8 percent in 2017. Adjusted operating profit margin was 15.9 percent in 2018, compared with 12.5 percent in 2017. z Profit was $10.26 per share for 2018, and excluding the items in the table below, adjusted profit per share was $11.22. For 2017 profit was $1.26 per share, and excluding the items in the table below, adjusted profit per share was $6.88. z In order for our results to be more meaningful to our readers, we have separately quantified the impact of several significant items: \n
Full Year 2018Full Year 2017
(Millions of dollars)Profit Before TaxesProfitPer ShareProfit Before TaxesProfitPer Share
Profit$7,822$10.26$4,082$1.26
Restructuring costs3860.501,2561.68
Mark-to-market losses4950.643010.26
Deferred tax valuation allowance adjustments—-0.01—-0.18
U.S. tax reform impact—-0.17—3.95
Gain on sale of equity investment——-85-0.09
Adjusted profit$8,703$11.22$5,554$6.88
\n z Machinery, Energy & Transportation (ME&T) operating cash flow for 2018 was about $6.3 billion, more than sufficient to cover capital expenditures and dividends. ME&T operating cash flow for 2017 was about $5.5 billion. Restructuring Costs In recent years, we have incurred substantial restructuring costs to achieve a flexible and competitive cost structure. During 2018, we incurred $386 million of restructuring costs related to restructuring actions across the company. During 2017, we incurred $1.256 billion of restructuring costs with about half related to the closure of the facility in Gosselies, Belgium, and the remainder related to other restructuring actions across the company. Although we expect restructuring to continue as part of ongoing business activities, restructuring costs should be lower in 2019 than 2018. Notes: z Glossary of terms included on pages 33-34; first occurrence of terms shown in bold italics. z Information on non-GAAP financial measures is included on pages 42-43. Recognition of finance revenue and rental revenue is suspended and the account is placed on non-accrual status when management determines that collection of future income is not probable (generally after 120 days past due). Recognition is resumed, and previously suspended income is recognized, when the account becomes current and collection of remaining amounts is considered probable. See Note 7 for more information. Revenues are presented net of sales and other related taxes.3. Stock-Based Compensation Our stock-based compensation plans primarily provide for the granting of stock options, stock-settled stock appreciation rights (SARs), restricted stock units (RSUs) and performance-based restricted stock units (PRSUs) to Officers and other key employees, as well as non-employee Directors. Stock options permit a holder to buy Caterpillar stock at the stock’s price when the option was granted. SARs permit a holder the right to receive the value in shares of the appreciation in Caterpillar stock that occurred from the date the right was granted up to the date of exercise. RSUs are agreements to issue shares of Caterpillar stock at the time of vesting. PRSUs are similar to RSUs and include performance conditions in the vesting terms of the award. Our long-standing practices and policies specify that all stock\u0002based compensation awards are approved by the Compensation Committee (the Committee) of the Board of Directors. The award approval process specifies the grant date, value and terms of the award. The same terms and conditions are consistently applied to all employee grants, including Officers. The Committee approves all individual Officer grants. The number of stock-based compensation award units included in an individual’s award is determined based on the methodology approved by the Committee. The exercise price methodology?approved by the Committee is the closing price of the Company stock on the date of the grant. In June of 2014, shareholders approved the Caterpillar Inc. 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the Plan) under which all new stock-based compensation awards are granted. In June of 2017, the Plan was amended and restated. The Plan initially provided that up to 38,800,000 Common Shares would be reserved for future issuance under the Plan, subject to adjustment in certain events. Subsequent to the shareholder approval of the amendment and restatement of the Plan, an additional 36,000,000 Common Shares became available for all awards under the Plan. Common stock issued from Treasury stock under the plans totaled 5,590,641 for 2018, 11,139,748 for 2017 and 4,164,134 for 2016. The total number of shares authorized for equity awards under the amended and restated Caterpillar Inc. 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan is 74,800,000, of which 44,139,162 shares remained available for issuance as of December?31,?2018. Stock option and RSU awards generally vest according to a three\u0002year graded vesting schedule. One-third of the award will become vested on the first anniversary of the grant date, one-third of the award will become vested on the second anniversary of the grant date and one-third of the award will become vested on the third anniversary of the grant date. PRSU awards generally have a three\u0002year performance period and cliff vest at the end of the period based upon achievement of performance targets established at the time of grant. Upon separation from service, if the participant is 55 years of age or older with more than five years of service, the participant meets the criteria for a “Long Service Separation. ” Award terms for awards granted in 2016 allow for immediate vesting upon separation of all outstanding options and RSUs with no requisite service period for employees who meet the criteria for a “Long Service Separation. ” Compensation expense for the 2016 grant was fully recognized immediately on the grant date for these employees. Award terms for the 2018 and 2017 grants allow for continued vesting as of each vesting date specified in the award document for employees who meet the criteria for a “Long Service Separation” and fulfill a requisite service period of six months. Compensation expense for eligible employees for the 2018 and 2017 grants was recognized over the period from the grant date to the end date of the six-month requisite service period. For employees who become eligible for a “Long Service Separation” subsequent to the end date of the six-month requisite service period and prior to the completion of the vesting period, compensation expense is recognized over the period from the grant date to the date eligibility is achieved. At grant, SARs and option awards have a term life of ten years. For awards granted prior to 2016, if the “Long Service Separation” criteria are met, the vested options/SARs have a life that is the lesser of ten years from the original grant date or five years from the separation date. For awards granted in 2018, 2017, and 2016, the vested options have a life equal to ten years from the original grant date. Prior to 2017, all outstanding PRSU awards granted to employees eligible for a “Long Service Separation” may vest at the end of the performance period based upon achievement of the performance target. Compensation expense for the 2016 PRSU grant was fully recognized immediately on the grant date for these employees. For PRSU awards granted in 2018 and 2017, only a prorated number of shares may vest at the end of the performance period based upon achievement of the performance target, with the proration based upon the number of months of continuous employment during the three-year performance period. Employees with a “Long Service Separation” must also fulfill a six-month requisite service period in order to be eligible for the prorated vesting of outstanding PRSU awards granted in 2018 and 2017. Compensation expense for the 2018 and 2017 PRSU grants is being recognized on a straight-line basis over the three-year performance period for all participants. Accounting guidance on share-based payments requires companies to estimate the fair value of options/SARs on the date of grant using an option-pricing model. The fair value of our option/SAR grants was estimated using a lattice-based option-pricing model. The lattice\u0002based option-pricing model considers a range of assumptions related to volatility, risk-free interest rate and historical employee behavior. Expected volatility was based on historical Caterpillar stock price movement and current implied volatilities from traded options on Caterpillar stock. The risk-free interest rate was based on U. S. Treasury security yields at the time of grant. The weighted-average dividend yield was based on historical information. The expected life was determined from the lattice-based model. The lattice\u0002based model incorporated exercise and post vesting forfeiture assumptions based on analysis of historical data. The following table provides the assumptions used in determining the fair value of the Option/SAR awards for the years ended December?31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. \n
Grant Year
201820172016
Weighted-average dividend yield2.7%3.4%3.2%
Weighted-average volatility30.2%29.2%31.1%
Range of volatilities21.5-33.0%22.1-33.0%22.5-33.4%
Range of risk-free interest rates2.02-2.87%0.81-2.35%0.62-1.73%
Weighted-average expected lives8 years8 years8 years
"} {"answer": 0.08923, "question": "In the year with lowest amount of Other analog, what's the increasing rate of Converters?", "context": "The year-to-year increase in communications end market revenue in fiscal 2014 was primarily a result of increased wireless base station deployment activity and, to a lesser extent, an increase in revenue as a result of the Acquisition. Industrial end market revenue increased year-over-year in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 as a result of an increase in demand in this end market, which was most significant for products sold into the instrumentation and automation sectors and, to a lesser extent, an increase in revenue as a result of the Acquisition. The year-to-year increase in automotive end market revenue in fiscal 2014 was primarily a result of increasing electronic content in vehicles and higher demand for new vehicles. The year-to\u0002year decrease in revenue in the consumer end market in fiscal 2014 was primarily the result of the sale of our microphone product line in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. The year-to-year decrease in revenue in the industrial and consumer end markets in fiscal 2013 was primarily the result of a weak global economic environment and one less week of operations in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012. Automotive end market revenue increased in fiscal 2013 primarily as a result of increasing electronic content in vehicles. Revenue Trends by Product Type The following table summarizes revenue by product categories. The categorization of our products into broad categories is based on the characteristics of the individual products, the specification of the products and in some cases the specific uses that certain products have within applications. The categorization of products into categories is therefore subject to judgment in some cases and can vary over time. In instances where products move between product categories, we reclassify the amounts in the product categories for all prior periods. Such reclassifications typically do not materially change the sizing of, or the underlying trends of results within, each product category \n
201420132012
Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*Y/Y%Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*
Converters$1,285,36845%9%$1,180,07245%$1,192,06444%
Amplifiers/Radio frequency806,97528%18%682,75926%697,68726%
Other analog356,40612%-4%372,28114%397,37615%
Subtotal analog signal processing2,448,74985%10%2,235,11285%2,287,12785%
Power management & reference174,4836%1%172,9207%182,1347%
Total analog products$2,623,23292%9%$2,408,03291%$2,469,26191%
Digital signal processing241,5418%7%225,6579%231,8819%
Total Revenue$2,864,773100%9%$2,633,689100%$2,701,142100%
\n The sum of the individual percentages does not equal the total due to rounding. The year-to-year increase in total revenue in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 was the result of improving demand across most product type categories and the result of the Acquisition, which was partially offset by declines in the other analog product category, primarily as a result of the sale of our microphone product line in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. The year-to-year decrease in total revenue in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 was the result of one less week of operations in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 and a broad-based decrease in demand across most product type categories. Revenue Trends by Geographic Region Revenue by geographic region, based upon the primary location of our customers' design activity for its products, for fiscal 2014, 2013 and 2012 was as follows. ANALOG DEVICES, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) \n
Stock Options201420132012
Options granted (in thousands)2,2402,4072,456
Weighted-average exercise price$51.52$46.40$39.58
Weighted-average grant-date fair value$8.74$7.38$7.37
Assumptions:
Weighted-average expected volatility24.9%24.6%28.4%
Weighted-average expected term (in years)5.35.45.3
Weighted-average risk-free interest rate1.7%1.0%1.1%
Weighted-average expected dividend yield2.9%2.9%3.0%
\n As it relates to our market-based restricted stock units, the Company utilizes the Monte Carlo simulation valuation model to value these awards. The Monte Carlo simulation model utilizes multiple input variables that determine the probability of satisfying the performance conditions stipulated in the award grant and calculates the fair market value for the market-based restricted stock units granted. The Monte Carlo simulation model also uses stock price volatility and other variables to estimate the probability of satisfying the performance conditions, including the possibility that the market condition may not be satisfied, and the resulting fair value of the award. Information pertaining to the Company's market-based restricted stock units and the related estimated assumptions used to calculate the fair value of market-based restricted stock units granted using the Monte Carlo simulation model is as follows: \n
Market-based Restricted Stock Units2014
Units granted (in thousands)86
Grant-date fair value$50.79
Assumptions:
Historical stock price volatility23.2%
Risk-free interest rate0.8%
Expected dividend yield2.8%
\n Market-based restricted stock units were not granted during fiscal 2013 or 2012. Expected volatility — The Company is responsible for estimating volatility and has considered a number of factors, including third-party estimates. The Company currently believes that the exclusive use of implied volatility results in the best estimate of the grant-date fair value of employee stock options because it reflects the market’s current expectations of future volatility. In evaluating the appropriateness of exclusively relying on implied volatility, the Company concluded that: (1) options in the Company’s common stock are actively traded with sufficient volume on several exchanges; (2) the market prices of both the traded options and the underlying shares are measured at a similar point in time to each other and on a date close to the grant date of the employee share options; (3) the traded options have exercise prices that are both near-the-money and close to the exercise price of the employee share options; and (4) the remaining maturities of the traded options used to estimate volatility are at least one year. Expected term — The Company uses historical employee exercise and option expiration data to estimate the expected term assumption for the Black-Scholes grant-date valuation. The Company believes that this historical data is currently the best estimate of the expected term of a new option, and that generally its employees exhibit similar exercise behavior. Risk-free interest rate — The yield on zero-coupon U. S. Treasury securities for a period that is commensurate with the expected term assumption is used as the risk-free interest rate. Expected dividend yield — Expected dividend yield is calculated by annualizing the cash dividend declared by the Company’s Board of Directors for the current quarter and dividing that result by the closing stock price on the date of grant. Until such time as the Company’s Board of Directors declares a cash dividend for an amount that is different from the current quarter’s cash dividend, the current dividend will be used in deriving this assumption. Cash dividends are not paid on options, restricted stock or restricted stock units. an adverse development with respect to one claim in 2008 and favorable developments in three cases in 2009. Other costs were also lower in 2009 compared to 2008, driven by a decrease in expenses for freight and property damages, employee travel, and utilities. In addition, higher bad debt expense in 2008 due to the uncertain impact of the recessionary economy drove a favorable year-over-year comparison. Conversely, an additional expense of $30 million related to a transaction with Pacer International, Inc. and higher property taxes partially offset lower costs in 2009. Other costs were higher in 2008 compared to 2007 due to an increase in bad debts, state and local taxes, loss and damage expenses, utility costs, and other miscellaneous expenses totaling $122 million. Conversely, personal injury costs (including asbestos-related claims) were $8 million lower in 2008 compared to 2007. The reduction reflects improvements in our safety experience and lower estimated costs to resolve claims as indicated in the actuarial studies of our personal injury expense and annual reviews of asbestos-related claims in both 2008 and 2007. The year-over-year comparison also includes the negative impact of adverse development associated with one claim in 2008. In addition, environmental and toxic tort expenses were $7 million lower in 2008 compared to 2007. Non-Operating Items"} {"answer": 0.73759, "question": "what portion of the company's property is located in united states?", "context": "Item 2: Properties Information concerning Applied’s properties is set forth below: \n
(Square feet in thousands)United StatesOther CountriesTotal
Owned3,9641,6525,616
Leased8451,1531,998
Total4,8092,8057,614
\n Because of the interrelation of Applied’s operations, properties within a country may be shared by the segments operating within that country. The Company’s headquarters offices are in Santa Clara, California. Products in Semiconductor Systems are manufactured in Santa Clara, California; Austin, Texas; Gloucester, Massachusetts; Kalispell, Montana; Rehovot, Israel; and Singapore. Remanufactured equipment products in the Applied Global Services segment are produced primarily in Austin, Texas. Products in the Display and Adjacent Markets segment are manufactured in Alzenau, Germany; and Tainan, Taiwan. Other products are manufactured in Treviso, Italy. Applied also owns and leases offices, plants and warehouse locations in many locations throughout the world, including in Europe, Japan, North America (principally the United States), Israel, China, India, Korea, Southeast Asia and Taiwan. These facilities are principally used for manufacturing; research, development and engineering; and marketing, sales and customer support. Applied also owns a total of approximately 269 acres of buildable land in Montana, Texas, California, Israel and Italy that could accommodate additional building space. Applied considers the properties that it owns or leases as adequate to meet its current and future requirements. Applied regularly assesses the size, capability and location of its global infrastructure and periodically makes adjustments based on these assessments. General and administrative expense, which excludes integration charges, decreased $42 million, or 3%, to $1.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $1.3 billion for the prior year primarily due to continued expense controls, partially offset by an increase of approximately $19 million related to higher performance fee-related compensation. Annuities Our Annuities segment provides variable and fixed annuity products of RiverSource Life companies to individual clients. We provide our variable annuity products through our advisors, and fixed annuity products are provided through both affiliated and unaffiliated advisors and financial institutions. Revenues for our variable annuity products are primarily earned as fees based on underlying account balances, which are impacted by both market movements and net asset flows. Revenues for our fixed annuity products are primarily earned as net investment income on assets supporting fixed account balances, with profitability significantly impacted by the spread between net investment income earned and interest credited on the fixed account balances. We also earn net investment income on owned assets supporting reserves for immediate annuities and for certain guaranteed benefits offered with variable annuities and on capital supporting the business. Intersegment revenues for this segment reflect fees paid by our Asset Management segment for marketing support and other services provided in connection with the availability of variable insurance trust funds (‘‘VIT Funds’’) under the variable annuity contracts. Intersegment expenses for this segment include distribution expenses for services provided by our Advice & Wealth Management segment, as well as expenses for investment management services provided by our Asset Management segment. The following table presents the results of operations of our Annuities segment on an operating basis: \n
Years Ended December 31,
2012 2011Change
(in millions)
Revenues
Management and financial advice fees$648$622$264%
Distribution fees31731252
Net investment income1,1321,279-147-11
Premiums118161-43-27
Other revenues3092565321
Total revenues2,5242,630-106-4
Banking and deposit interest expense————
Total net revenues2,5242,630-106-4
Expenses
Distribution expenses395400-5-1
Interest credited to fixed accounts688714-26-4
Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses419405143
Amortization of deferred acquisition costs229264-35-13
Interest and debt expense211NM
General and administrative expense22422131
Total expenses1,9572,005-48-2
Operating earnings$567$625$-58-9%
\n NM Not Meaningful. Our Annuities segment pretax operating income, which excludes net realized gains or losses and the market impact on variable annuity guaranteed living benefits (net of hedges and the related DSIC and DAC amortization), decreased $58 million, or 9%, to $567 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $625 million for the prior year primarily due to a decline in net investment income and an unfavorable impact from unlocking and model changes, partially offset by the market impact on DAC and DSIC, lower interest credited to fixed accounts and higher fee revenues. Results for 2011 included $34 million of additional bond discount accretion investment income related to prior periods resulting from revisions to the accounting classification of certain structured securities, net of DAC and DSIC amortization. The impact of unlocking and model changes was a decrease to pretax operating income of $11 million in 2012 compared to an increase of $1 million in the prior year. The impact of unlocking and model changes for 2012 included a $43 million benefit, net of DAC and DSIC amortization, from an adjustment to the model which values the reserves related to living benefit guarantees primarily attributable to prior periods. This revision aligns the model to more accurately reflect best estimate assumptions for living benefit utilization going forward. The market impact on DAC and DSIC was a benefit of $29 million in 2012 compared to an expense of $10 million in the prior year. RiverSource variable annuity account balances increased 9% to $68.1 billion at December 31, 2012 compared to the prior year driven by market appreciation. Variable annuity net outflows of $457 million in 2012 reflected the closed book Note 5. Long-Term Obligations Long-Term Obligations consist of the following (in thousands): \n
December 31,
20122011
Senior secured credit agreement:
Term loans payable$420,625$240,625
Revolving credit facility553,964660,730
Receivables securitization facility80,000—
Notes payable through October 2018 at weighted average interest rates of 1.7% and 2.0%, respectively42,39838,338
Other long-term debt at weighted average interest rates of 3.3% and 3.2%, respectively21,49116,383
1,118,478956,076
Less current maturities-71,716-29,524
$1,046,762$926,552
\n The scheduled maturities of long-term obligations outstanding at December 31, 2012 are as follows (in thousands):"} {"answer": 117.0, "question": "what are the total current assets of metropolitan?", "context": "Humana Inc. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) not be estimated based on observable market prices, and as such, unobservable inputs were used. For auction rate securities, valuation methodologies include consideration of the quality of the sector and issuer, underlying collateral, underlying final maturity dates, and liquidity. Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements There are no recently issued accounting standards that apply to us or that will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial condition, or cash flows.3. ACQUISITIONS On December 21, 2012, we acquired Metropolitan Health Networks, Inc. , or Metropolitan, a Medical Services Organization, or MSO, that coordinates medical care for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries and Medicaid recipients, primarily in Florida. We paid $11.25 per share in cash to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Metropolitan and repaid all outstanding debt of Metropolitan for a transaction value of $851 million, plus transaction expenses. The preliminary fair values of Metropolitan’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed at the date of the acquisition are summarized as follows: \n
Metropolitan (in millions)
Cash and cash equivalents$49
Receivables, net28
Other current assets40
Property and equipment22
Goodwill569
Other intangible assets263
Other long-term assets1
Total assets acquired972
Current liabilities-22
Other long-term liabilities-99
Total liabilities assumed-121
Net assets acquired$851
\n The goodwill was assigned to the Health and Well-Being Services segment and is not deductible for tax purposes. The other intangible assets, which primarily consist of customer contracts and trade names, have a weighted average useful life of 8.4 years. On October 29, 2012, we acquired a noncontrolling equity interest in MCCI Holdings, LLC, or MCCI, a privately held MSO headquartered in Miami, Florida that coordinates medical care for Medicare Advantage and Medicaid beneficiaries primarily in Florida and Texas. The Metropolitan and MCCI transactions are expected to provide us with components of a successful integrated care delivery model that has demonstrated scalability to new markets. A substantial portion of the revenues for both Metropolitan and MCCI are derived from services provided to Humana Medicare Advantage members under capitation contracts with our health plans. In addition, Metropolitan and MCCI provide services to Medicare Advantage and Medicaid members under capitation contracts with third party health plans. Under these capitation agreements with Humana and third party health plans, Metropolitan and MCCI assume financial risk associated with these Medicare Advantage and Medicaid members. Humana Inc. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) 17. EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH LONG-DURATION INSURANCE PRODUCTS Premiums associated with our long-duration insurance products accounted for approximately 2% of our consolidated premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2012. We use long-duration accounting for products such as long-term care, life insurance, annuities, and certain health and other supplemental policies sold to individuals because they are expected to remain in force for an extended period beyond one year and because premium received in the earlier years is intended to pay anticipated benefits to be incurred in future years. As a result, we defer policy acquisition costs, primarily consisting of commissions, and amortize them over the estimated life of the policies in proportion to premiums earned. In addition, we establish reserves for future policy benefits in recognition of the fact that some of the premium received in the earlier years is intended to pay anticipated benefits to be incurred in future years. These reserves are recognized on a net level premium method based on interest rates, mortality, morbidity, withdrawal and maintenance expense assumptions from published actuarial tables, modified based upon actual experience. The assumptions used to determine the liability for future policy benefits are established and locked in at the time each contract is acquired and would only change if our expected future experience deteriorated to the point that the level of the liability, together with the present value of future gross premiums, are not adequate to provide for future expected policy benefits. Long-term care policies provide for long-duration coverage and, therefore, our actual claims experience will emerge many years after assumptions have been established. The risk of a deviation of the actual interest rates, morbidity rates, and mortality rates from those assumed in our reserves are particularly significant to our closed block of long-term care policies. We monitor the loss experience of these long-term care policies and, when necessary, apply for premium rate increases through a regulatory filing and approval process in the jurisdictions in which such products were sold. To the extent premium rate increases and/ or loss experience vary from our acquisition date assumptions, future adjustments to reserves could be required. The table below presents deferred acquisition costs and future policy benefits payable associated with our long-duration insurance products for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. \n
20122011
Deferred acquisition costsFuture policy benefits payable Deferred acquisition costsFuture policy benefits payable
(in millions)
Other long-term assets$149$0$114$0
Trade accounts payable and accrued expenses0-630-58
Long-term liabilities0-1,8580-1,663
Total asset (liability)$149$-1,921$114$-1,721
\n In addition, future policy benefits payable include amounts of $220 million at December 31, 2012 and $224 million at December 31, 2011 which are subject to 100% coinsurance agreements as more fully described in Note 18. Benefits expense associated with future policy benefits payable was $136 million in 2012, $114 million in 2011, and $266 million in 2010. Benefits expense for 2012 and 2010 included net charges of $29 million and $139 million, respectively, associated with our long-term care policies discussed further below. Amortization of deferred acquisition costs included in operating costs was $44 million in 2012, $34 million in 2011, and $198 million in 2010. Amortization expense for 2010 included a write-down of deferred acquisition costs of $147 million discussed further below. \n
Change
20112010DollarsPercentage
(in millions)
Premiums and Services Revenue:
Premiums:
Fully-insured commercial group$4,782$5,169$-387-7.5%
Group Medicare Advantage3,1523,0211314.3%
Group Medicare stand-alone PDP85360.0%
Total group Medicare3,1603,0261344.4%
Group specialty935885505.6%
Total premiums8,8779,080-203-2.2%
Services356395-39-9.9%
Total premiums and services revenue$9,233$9,475$-242-2.6%
Income before income taxes$242$288$-46-16.0%
Benefit ratio82.4%82.4%0.0%
Operating cost ratio17.8%17.5%0.3%
\n Pretax Results ? Employer Group segment pretax income decreased $46 million, or 16%, to $242 million in 2011 primarily due to the impact of minimum benefit ratios required under the Health Insurance Reform Legislation which became effective in 2011. Enrollment ? Fully-insured commercial group medical membership decreased 72,000 members, or 5.7%, from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2011 primarily due to continued pricing discipline in a highly competitive environment for large group business partially offset by small group business membership gains. ? Group ASO commercial medical membership decreased 161,300 members, or 11.1%, from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2011 primarily due to continued pricing discipline in a highly competitive environment for self-funded accounts. Premiums revenue ? Employer Group segment premiums decreased by $203 million, or 2.2%, from 2010 to $8.9 billion for 2011 primarily due to lower average commercial group medical membership year-over-year and rebates associated with minimum benefit ratios required under the Health Insurance Reform Legislation which became effective in 2011, partially offset by an increase in group Medicare Advantage membership. Rebates result in the recognition of lower premiums revenue, as amounts are set aside for payments to commercial customers during the following year. Benefits expense ? The Employer Group segment benefit ratio of 82.4% for 2011 was unchanged from 2010 due to offsetting factors. Factors increasing the 2011 ratio compared to the 2010 ratio include growth in our group Medicare Advantage products which generally carry a higher benefit ratio than our fully-insured commercial group products and the effect of rebates accrued in 2011 associated with the minimum benefit ratios required under the Health Insurance Reform Legislation. Factors decreasing the 2011 ratio compared to the 2010 ratio include the beneficial effect of higher favorable prior-period medical claims reserve development in 2011 versus 2010 and lower utilization of benefits in our commercial group"} {"answer": -0.07627, "question": "In the year with lowest amount of Interest in table 2, what's the increasing rate of Operating leases in table 2?", "context": "Long-term product offerings include alpha-seeking active and index strategies. Our alpha-seeking active strategies seek to earn attractive returns in excess of a market benchmark or performance hurdle while maintaining an appropriate risk profile, and leverage fundamental research and quantitative models to drive portfolio construction. In contrast, index strategies seek to closely track the returns of a corresponding index, generally by investing in substantially the same underlying securities within the index or in a subset of those securities selected to approximate a similar risk and return profile of the index. Index strategies include both our non-ETF index products and iShares ETFs. Although many clients use both alpha-seeking active and index strategies, the application of these strategies may differ. For example, clients may use index products to gain exposure to a market or asset class, or may use a combination of index strategies to target active returns. In addition, institutional non-ETF index assignments tend to be very large (multi-billion dollars) and typically reflect low fee rates. Net flows in institutional index products generally have a small impact on BlackRock’s revenues and earnings. Equity Year-end 2017 equity AUM totaled $3.372 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $130.1 billion. Net inflows included $174.4 billion into iShares ETFs, driven by net inflows into Core funds and broad developed and emerging market equities, partially offset by non-ETF index and active net outflows of $25.7 billion and $18.5 billion, respectively. BlackRock’s effective fee rates fluctuate due to changes in AUM mix. Approximately half of BlackRock’s equity AUM is tied to international markets, including emerging markets, which tend to have higher fee rates than U. S. equity strategies. Accordingly, fluctuations in international equity markets, which may not consistently move in tandem with U. S. markets, have a greater impact on BlackRock’s equity revenues and effective fee rate. Fixed Income Fixed income AUM ended 2017 at $1.855 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $178.8 billion. In 2017, active net inflows of $21.5 billion were diversified across fixed income offerings, and included strong inflows into municipal, unconstrained and total return bond funds. iShares ETFs net inflows of $67.5 billion were led by flows into Core, corporate and treasury bond funds. Non-ETF index net inflows of $89.8 billion were driven by demand for liability-driven investment solutions. Multi-Asset BlackRock’s multi-asset team manages a variety of balanced funds and bespoke mandates for a diversified client base that leverages our broad investment expertise in global equities, bonds, currencies and commodities, and our extensive risk management capabilities. Investment solutions might include a combination of long-only portfolios and alternative investments as well as tactical asset allocation overlays. Component changes in multi-asset AUM for 2017 are presented below. \n
(in millions)December 31,2016Net inflows (outflows)MarketchangeFXimpactDecember 31,2017
Asset allocation and balanced$176,675$-2,502$17,387$4,985$196,545
Target date/risk149,43223,92524,5321,577199,466
Fiduciary68,395-1,0477,5228,81983,689
FutureAdvisor-1505-46119—578
Total$395,007$20,330$49,560$15,381$480,278
\n (1) FutureAdvisor amounts do not include AUM held in iShares ETFs. Multi-asset net inflows reflected ongoing institutional demand for our solutions-based advice with $18.9 billion of net inflows coming from institutional clients. Defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows, and contributed $20.8 billion to institutional multi-asset net inflows in 2017, primarily into target date and target risk product offerings. Retail net inflows of $1.1 billion reflected demand for our Multi-Asset Income fund family, which raised $5.8 billion in 2017. The Company’s multi-asset strategies include the following: ? Asset allocation and balanced products represented 41% of multi-asset AUM at year-end. These strategies combine equity, fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget. In certain cases, these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification, derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions. Flagship products in this category include our Global Allocation and Multi-Asset Income fund families. ? Target date and target risk products grew 16% organically in 2017, with net inflows of $23.9 billion. Institutional investors represented 93% of target date and target risk AUM, with defined contribution plans accounting for 87% of AUM. Flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our LifePath offerings. LifePath products utilize a proprietary active asset allocation overlay model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor’s expected retirement timing. Underlying investments are primarily index products. ? Fiduciary management services are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors or endowments and foundations retain BlackRock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of investment management. These customized services require strong partnership with the clients’ investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives. not to exceed a maximum leverage ratio (ratio of net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where net debt equals total debt less unrestricted cash) of 3 to 1, which was satisfied with a ratio of less than 1 to 1 at December 31, 2017. The 2017 credit facility provides back-up liquidity to fund ongoing working capital for general corporate purposes and various investment opportunities. At December 31, 2017, the Company had no amount outstanding under the 2017 credit facility Commercial Paper Program. The Company can issue unsecured commercial paper notes (the “CP Notes”) on a private-placement basis up to a maximum aggregate amount outstanding at any time of $4.0 billion. The commercial paper program is currently supported by the 2017 credit facility. At December 31, 2017, BlackRock had no CP Notes outstanding Long-Term Borrowings The carrying value of long-term borrowings at December 31, 2017 included the following: \n
(in millions)Maturity AmountCarrying ValueMaturity
5.00% Notes$1,000$999December 2019
4.25% Notes750747May 2021
3.375% Notes750746June 2022
3.50% Notes1,000994March 2024
1.25% Notes-1841835May 2025
3.20% Notes700693March 2027
Total Long-term Borrowings$5,041$5,014
\n (1) The carrying value of the 1.25% Notes estimated using foreign exchange rate as of December 31, 2017. For more information on Company’s borrowings, see Note 12, Borrowings, in the notes to the consolidated financial statements contained in Part II, Item 8 of this filing. Contractual Obligations, Commitments and Contingencies The following table sets forth contractual obligations, commitments and contingencies by year of payment at December 31, 2017: \n
(in millions)20182019202020212022Thereafter-1Total
Contractual obligations and commitments-1:
Long-term borrowings-2:
Principal$—$1,000$—$750$750$2,541$5,041
Interest17517512510981185850
Operating leases1411321261181091,5802,206
Purchase obligations12810129221928327
Investment commitments298—————298
Total contractual obligations and commitments7421,4082809999594,3348,722
Contingent obligations:
Contingent payments related to business acquisitions-3331793934——285
Total contractual obligations, commitments andcontingent obligations-4$775$1,587$319$1,033$959$4,334$9,007
\n (1) Amounts do not include $350 million of cash payment consideration and contingent consideration related to the Company’s agreement to acquire the asset management business of Citibanamex. (2) The amount of principal and interest payments for the 2025 Notes (issued in Euros) represents the expected payment amounts using foreign exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. (3) The amount of contingent payments reflected for any year represents the expected payments using foreign currency exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. The fair value of the remaining aggregate contingent payments at December 31, 2017 totaled $236 million and is included in other liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. (4) At December 31, 2017, the Company had approximately $365 million of net unrecognized tax benefits. Due to the uncertainty of timing and amounts that will ultimately be paid, this amount has been excluded from the table above. Operating Leases. The Company leases its primary office locations under agreements that expire on varying dates through 2043. In connection with certain lease agreements, the Company is responsible for escalation payments. The contractual obligations table above includes only guaranteed minimum lease payments for such leases and does not project potential escalation or other lease-related payments. These leases are classified as operating leases and, as such, are not recorded as liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. In May 2017, the Company entered into an agreement with 50 HYMC Owner LLC, for the lease of approximately 847,000 square feet of office space located at 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York. The term of the lease is twenty years from the date that rental payments begin, expected to occur in McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) 46 In July 2008, the Board authorized the retirement of shares of the Company’s common stock that may be repurchased from time-to-time pursuant to its stock repurchase program. During the second quarter of 2009, all of the 4 million repurchased shares, which we purchased for $204 million, were formally retired by the Company. The retired shares constitute authorized but unissued shares. We elected to allocate any excess of share repurchase price over par value between additional paid-in capital and retained earnings. As such, $165 million was recorded as a decrease to retained earnings. The Company anticipates that it will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends in the future. However, the payment and amount of future dividends remain within the discretion of the Board and will depend upon the Company’s future earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors. Although we believe that our operating cash flow, financial assets, current access to capital and credit markets, including our existing credit and sales facilities, will give us the ability to meet our financing needs for the foreseeable future, there can be no assurance that continued or increased volatility and disruption in the global capital and credit markets will not impair our liquidity or increase our costs of borrowing. Selected Measures of Liquidity and Capital Resources:"} {"answer": 539.0, "question": "how much of total minimum lease payments ( in millions ) are not due to assets under construction?", "context": "Summary of Cost of Net Revenues The following table summarizes changes in cost of net revenues: \n
Year Ended December 31,Change from 2008 to 2009Change from 2009 to 2010
200820092010in Dollarsin %in Dollarsin %
(In thousands, except percentages)
Cost of net revenues:
Marketplaces$907,121$968,266$1,071,499$61,1457%$103,23311%
As a percentage of total Marketplaces net revenues16.2%18.2%18.7%
Payments1,036,7461,220,6191,493,168183,87318%272,54922%
As a percentage of total Payments net revenues43.1%43.7%43.5%
Communications284,202290,877—6,6752%-290,877—
As a percentage of total Communications net revenues51.6%46.9%—
Total cost of net revenues$2,228,069$2,479,762$2,564,667$251,69311%$84,9053%
As a percentage of net revenues26.1%28.4%28.0%
\n Cost of Net Revenues Cost of net revenues consists primarily of costs associated with payment processing, customer support and site operations and Skype telecommunications (through November 2009). Significant components of these costs include bank transaction fees, credit card interchange and assessment fees, interest expense on indebtedness incurred to finance the purchase of consumer loans receivable by Bill Me Later, employee compensation, contractor costs, facilities costs, depreciation of equipment and amortization expense. Marketplaces Marketplaces cost of net revenues increased $103.2 million, or 11%, in 2010 compared to 2009. The increase during 2010 was due primarily to the inclusion of a full year of costs attributable to Gmarket and increased site operation costs. Marketplaces cost of net revenues as a percentage of Marketplaces net revenues increased slightly in 2010 compared to 2009 due primarily to the addition of Gmarket, the settlement of a lawsuit and the establishment of a reserve related to certain indirect tax positions (recorded as a reduction in revenue). Marketplaces cost of net revenues increased $61.1 million, or 7%, in 2009 compared to 2008. The increase during 2009 was due primarily to the inclusion of costs attributable to Gmarket and Den Bl? Avis and BilBasen, partially offset by a decrease in customer support and site operations costs associated with our restructuring activities. Marketplaces cost of net revenues increased as a percentage of Marketplaces net revenues during 2009 compared to 2008 due primarily to the impact of foreign currency movements on revenues, pricing initiatives (which are recorded as a reduction in revenue) and faster growth in our lower margin Marketplaces businesses. Payments Payments cost of net revenues increased $272.5 million, or 22%, in 2010 compared to 2009. The increase in cost of net revenues was primarily due to the impact from our growth in net TPV. Payments cost of net revenues as a percentage of Payments net revenues decreased slightly in 2010 compared to 2009 due primarily to improved leverage of our customer support infrastructure and existing site operations. expect that these credit rating agencies will continue to monitor developments in our planned separation of PayPal, including the capital structure for each company after separation, which could result in additional downgrades. Our borrowing costs depend, in part, on our credit ratings and because downgrades would likely increase our borrowing costs we disclose these ratings to enhance the understanding of the effects of our ratings on our costs of funds. In addition, to assist PayPal in our planned separation we are currently working with credit rating agencies to obtain separate credit ratings for PayPal and we believe that immediately following separation both eBay and PayPal will be rated investment grade. Commitments and Contingencies As of December 31, 2014 , approximately $20.2 billion of unused credit was available to PayPal Credit accountholders. While this amount represents the total unused credit available, we have not experienced, and do not anticipate, that all of our PayPal Credit accountholders will access their entire available credit at any given point in time. In addition, the individual lines of credit that make up this unused credit are subject to periodic review and termination by the chartered financial institutions that are the issuer of PayPal Credit products based on, among other things, account usage and customer creditworthiness. When a consumer makes a purchase using a PayPal Credit products, the chartered financial institution extends credit to the consumer, funds the extension of credit at the point of sale and advances funds to the merchant. We subsequently purchase the consumer receivables related to the consumer loans and as result of that purchase, bear the risk of loss in the event of loan defaults. However, we subsequently sell a participation interest in the entire pool of consumer loans to the chartered financial institution that extended the consumer loans. Although the chartered financial institution continues to own the customer accounts, we own and bear the risk of loss on the related consumer receivables, less the participation interest held by the chartered financial institution, and PayPal is responsible for all servicing functions related to the customer account balances. As of December 31, 2014 , the total outstanding principal balance of this pool of consumer loans was $3.7 billion , of which the chartered financial institution owns a participation interest of $163 million , or 4.4% of the total outstanding balance of consumer receivables at that date. We have certain fixed contractual obligations and commitments that include future estimated payments for general operating purposes. Changes in our business needs, contractual cancellation provisions, fluctuating interest rates, and other factors may result in actual payments differing from the estimates. We cannot provide certainty regarding the timing and amounts of these payments. The following table summarizes our fixed contractual obligations and commitments: \n
Payments Due During the Year Ending December 31,DebtLeasesPurchase ObligationsTotal
(In millions)
20151,0261132751,414
20161649658318
20171,61383551,751
20181486343254
20191,6974271,746
Thereafter4,7085234,763
9,35644944110,246
\n The significant assumptions used in our determination of amounts presented in the above table are as follows: ? Debt amounts include the principal and interest amounts of the respective debt instruments. For additional details related to our debt, please see “Note 10 – Debt” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. This table does not reflect any amounts payable under our $3 billion revolving credit facility or $2 billion commercial paper program, for which no borrowings were outstanding as of December 31, 2014 . ? Lease amounts include minimum rental payments under our non-cancelable operating leases for office facilities, fulfillment centers, as well as computer and office equipment that we utilize under lease arrangements. The amounts presented are consistent with contractual terms and are not expected to differ significantly from actual results under our existing leases, unless a substantial change in our headcount needs requires us to expand our occupied space or exit an office facility early. MARATHON OIL CORPORATION Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements equivalent to the Exchangeable Shares at the acquisition date as discussed below. Additional shares of voting preferred stock will be issued as necessary to adjust the number of votes to account for changes in the exchange ratio. Preferred shares – In connection with the acquisition of Western discussed in Note 6, the Board of Directors authorized a class of voting preferred stock consisting of 6 million shares. Upon completion of the acquisition, we issued 5 million shares of this voting preferred stock to a trustee, who holds the shares for the benefit of the holders of the Exchangeable Shares discussed above. Each share of voting preferred stock is entitled to one vote on all matters submitted to the holders of Marathon common stock. Each holder of Exchangeable Shares may direct the trustee to vote the number of shares of voting preferred stock equal to the number of shares of Marathon common stock issuable upon the exchange of the Exchangeable Shares held by that holder. In no event will the aggregate number of votes entitled to be cast by the trustee with respect to the outstanding shares of voting preferred stock exceed the number of votes entitled to be cast with respect to the outstanding Exchangeable Shares. Except as otherwise provided in our restated certificate of incorporation or by applicable law, the common stock and the voting preferred stock will vote together as a single class in the election of directors of Marathon and on all other matters submitted to a vote of stockholders of Marathon generally. The voting preferred stock will have no other voting rights except as required by law. Other than dividends payable solely in shares of voting preferred stock, no dividend or other distribution, will be paid or payable to the holder of the voting preferred stock. In the event of any liquidation, dissolution or winding up of Marathon, the holder of shares of the voting preferred stock will not be entitled to receive any assets of Marathon available for distribution to its stockholders. The voting preferred stock is not convertible into any other class or series of the capital stock of Marathon or into cash, property or other rights, and may not be redeemed.25. Leases We lease a wide variety of facilities and equipment under operating leases, including land and building space, office equipment, production facilities and transportation equipment. Most long-term leases include renewal options and, in certain leases, purchase options. Future minimum commitments for capital lease obligations (including sale-leasebacks accounted for as financings) and for operating lease obligations having initial or remaining noncancelable lease terms in excess of one year are as follows: \n
(In millions)Capital Lease Obligations (a)Operating Lease Obligations
2010$46$165
201145140
201258121
201344102
20144484
Later years466313
Sublease rentals--16
Total minimum lease payments$703$909
Less imputed interest costs-257
Present value of net minimum lease payments$446
\n (a) Capital lease obligations include $164 million related to assets under construction as of December 31, 2009. These leases are currently reported in long-term debt based on percentage of construction completed at $36 million. In connection with past sales of various plants and operations, we assigned and the purchasers assumed certain leases of major equipment used in the divested plants and operations of United States Steel. In the event of a default by any of the purchasers, United States Steel has assumed these obligations; however, we remain primarily obligated for payments under these leases. Minimum lease payments under these operating lease obligations of $16 million have been included above and an equal amount has been reported as sublease rentals."} {"answer": 0.51515, "question": "as of dec 31 , 2015 , what percentage of total indebtedness was nonsecure?", "context": "ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The increase in cash provided by accounts payable-inventory financing was primarily due to a new vendor added to our previously existing inventory financing agreement. For a description of the inventory financing transactions impacting each period, see Note 6 (Inventory Financing Agreements) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. For a description of the debt transactions impacting each period, see Note 8 (Long-Term Debt) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. Net cash used in financing activities decreased $56.3 million in 2014 compared to 2013. The decrease was primarily driven by several debt refinancing transactions during each period and our July 2013 IPO, which generated net proceeds of $424.7 million after deducting underwriting discounts, expenses and transaction costs. The net impact of our debt transactions resulted in cash outflows of $145.9 million and $518.3 million during 2014 and 2013, respectively, as cash was used in each period to reduce our total long-term debt. For a description of the debt transactions impacting each period, see Note 8 (Long-Term Debt) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. Long-Term Debt and Financing Arrangements As of December 31, 2015, we had total indebtedness of $3.3 billion, of which $1.6 billion was secured indebtedness. At December 31, 2015, we were in compliance with the covenants under our various credit agreements and indentures. The amount of CDW’s restricted payment capacity under the Senior Secured Term Loan Facility was $679.7 million at December 31, 2015. For further details regarding our debt and each of the transactions described below, see Note 8 (Long-Term Debt) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the following events occurred with respect to our debt structure: ? On August 1, 2015, we consolidated Kelway’s Term Loan and Kelway’s Revolving Credit Facility. Kelway’s Term Loan is denominated in British Pounds. The Kelway Revolving Credit Facility is a multi-currency revolving credit facility under which Kelway is permitted to borrow an aggregate amount of ￡50.0 million ($73.7 million) as of December 31, 2015. ? On March 3, 2015, we completed the issuance of $525.0 million principal amount of 5.0% Senior Notes due 2023 which will mature on September 1, 2023. ? On March 3, 2015, we redeemed the remaining $503.9 million aggregate principal amount of the 8.5% Senior Notes due 2019, plus accrued and unpaid interest through the date of redemption, April 2, 2015. Inventory Financing Agreements We have entered into agreements with certain financial intermediaries to facilitate the purchase of inventory from various suppliers under certain terms and conditions. These amounts are classified separately as accounts payable-inventory financing on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. We do not incur any interest expense associated with these agreements as balances are paid when they are due. For further details, see Note 6 (Inventory Financing Agreements) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. Contractual Obligations We have future obligations under various contracts relating to debt and interest payments, operating leases and asset retirement obligations. Our estimated future payments, based on undiscounted amounts, under contractual obligations that existed as of December 31, 2015, are as follows: \n
Payments Due by Period
(in millions)Total< 1 year1-3 years4-5 years> 5 years
Term Loan-1$1,703.4$63.9$126.3$1,513.2$—
Kelway Term Loan-190.913.577.4——
Senior Notes due 2022-2852.036.072.072.0672.0
Senior Notes due 2023-2735.126.352.552.5603.8
Senior Notes due 2024-2859.731.663.363.3701.5
Operating leases-3143.222.541.737.141.9
Asset retirement obligations-41.80.80.50.30.2
Total$4,386.1$194.6$433.7$1,738.4$2,019.4
\n ES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 90 Selected Segment Financial Information Information regarding the Company’s segments for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 is as follows: \n
(in millions)CorporatePublicOtherHeadquartersTotal
2015:
Net sales$6,816.4$5,125.5$1,046.8$—$12,988.7
Income (loss) from operations470.1343.343.1-114.5742.0
Depreciation and amortization expense-96.0-43.7-24.4-63.3-227.4
2014:
Net sales$6,475.5$4,879.4$719.6$—$12,074.5
Income (loss) from operations439.8313.232.9-112.9673.0
Depreciation and amortization expense-96.3-43.8-8.8-59.0-207.9
2013:
Net sales$5,960.1$4,164.5$644.0$—$10,768.6
Income (loss) from operations(1)363.3246.527.2-128.4508.6
Depreciation and amortization expense-97.3-44.0-8.6-58.3-208.2
\n (1) Includes $75.0 million of IPO- and secondary-offering related expenses, as follows: Corporate $26.4 million; Public $14.4 million; Other $3.6 million; and Headquarters $30.6 million. For additional information relating to the IPO- and secondary-offering, see Note 10 (Stockholders’ Equity). Geographic Areas and Revenue Mix The Company does not have Net sales to customers outside of the U. S. exceeding 10% of the Company’s total Net sales in 2015, 2014 and 2013. The Company does not have long-lived assets located outside of the U. S. exceeding 10% of the Company’s total long-lived assets as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The following table presents net sales by major category for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013. Categories are based upon internal classifications. Amounts for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 have been reclassified for certain changes in individual product classifications to conform to the presentation for the year ended December 31, 2015. \n
Year EndedDecember 31, 2015Year EndedDecember 31, 2014Year EndedDecember 31, 2013
Dollars inMillionsPercentageof Total NetSalesDollars inMillionsPercentageof Total NetSalesDollars inMillionsPercentageof Total NetSales
Notebooks/Mobile Devices$2,539.419.6%$2,354.019.5%$1,696.515.8%
Netcomm Products1,914.914.71,613.313.41,482.713.8
Enterprise and Data Storage (Including Drives)1,065.28.21,024.28.5999.39.3
Other Hardware4,756.436.64,551.137.64,184.138.8
Software2,163.616.72,064.117.11,982.418.4
Services478.03.7371.93.1332.73.1
Other-171.20.595.90.890.90.8
Total Net sales$12,988.7100.0%$12,074.5100.0%$10,768.6100.0%
\n (1) Includes items such as delivery charges to customers and certain commission revenue.17. Supplemental Guarantor Information The 2022 Senior Notes, the 2023 Senior Notes and the 2024 Senior Notes are, and, prior to being redeemed in full, the 2019 Senior Notes, the 12.535% Senior Subordinated Exchange Notes due 2017, and the 8.0% Senior Secured Notes due 2018 were guaranteed by Parent and each of CDW LLC’s direct and indirect, 100% owned, domestic subsidiaries PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Market Information Our common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market since June 27, 2013 under the symbol “CDW. ” The following table sets forth the ranges of high and low sales prices per share of our common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market and the cash dividends per share of common stock declared for the two most recent fiscal years."} {"answer": 179.0, "question": "what is the total amount amortized to revenue in the last three years , ( in millions ) ?", "context": "Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements \n
Amount (In Millions)
Plant (including nuclear fuel)$727
Decommissioning trust funds252
Other assets41
Total assets acquired1,020
Purchased power agreement (below market)420
Decommissioning liability220
Other liabilities44
Total liabilities assumed684
Net assets acquired$336
\n Subsequent to the closing, Entergy received approximately $6 million from Consumers Energy Company as part of the Post-Closing Adjustment defined in the Asset Sale Agreement. The Post-Closing Adjustment amount resulted in an approximately $6 million reduction in plant and a corresponding reduction in other liabilities. For the PPA, which was at below-market prices at the time of the acquisition, Non-Utility Nuclear will amortize a liability to revenue over the life of the agreement. The amount that will be amortized each period is based upon the difference between the present value calculated at the date of acquisition of each year's difference between revenue under the agreement and revenue based on estimated market prices. Amounts amortized to revenue were $53 million in 2009, $76 million in 2008, and $50 million in 2007. The amounts to be amortized to revenue for the next five years will be $46 million for 2010, $43 million for 2011, $17 million in 2012, $18 million for 2013, and $16 million for 2014. NYPA Value Sharing Agreements Non-Utility Nuclear's purchase of the FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 plants from NYPA included value sharing agreements with NYPA. In October 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear and NYPA amended and restated the value sharing agreements to clarify and amend certain provisions of the original terms. Under the amended value sharing agreements, Non-Utility Nuclear will make annual payments to NYPA based on the generation output of the Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick plants from January 2007 through December 2014. Non-Utility Nuclear will pay NYPA $6.59 per MWh for power sold from Indian Point 3, up to an annual cap of $48 million, and $3.91 per MWh for power sold from FitzPatrick, up to an annual cap of $24 million. The annual payment for each year's output is due by January 15 of the following year. Non-Utility Nuclear will record its liability for payments to NYPA as power is generated and sold by Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick. An amount equal to the liability will be recorded to the plant asset account as contingent purchase price consideration for the plants. In 2009, 2008, and 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear recorded $72 million as plant for generation during each of those years. This amount will be depreciated over the expected remaining useful life of the plants. In August 2008, Non-Utility Nuclear entered into a resolution of a dispute with NYPA over the applicability of the value sharing agreements to its FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 nuclear power plants after the planned spin-off of the Non-Utility Nuclear business. Under the resolution, Non-Utility Nuclear agreed not to treat the separation as a \"Cessation Event\" that would terminate its obligation to make the payments under the value sharing agreements. As a result, after the spin-off transaction, Enexus will continue to be obligated to make payments to NYPA under the amended and restated value sharing agreements. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) (Dollar amounts in thousands except per share data) Note 11—Shareholders’ Equity Share Data: A summary of preferred and common share activity is as follows: \n
Preferred Stock Common Stock
Issued Treasury Stock IssuedTreasury Stock
2004:
Balance at January 1, 2004-0--0-113,783,658-1,069,053
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options763,592
Treasury stock acquired-5,534,276
Retirement of treasury stock-5,000,0005,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2004-0--0-108,783,658-839,737
2005:
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options91,0905,835,740
Treasury stock acquired-10,301,852
Retirement of treasury stock-4,000,0004,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2005-0--0-104,874,748-1,305,849
2006:
Grants of restricted stock28,000
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options507,259
Treasury stock acquired-5,989,531
Retirement of treasury stock-5,000,0005,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2006-0--0-99,874,748-1,760,121
\n Acquisition of Common Shares: Torchmark shares are acquired from time to time through open market purchases under the Torchmark stock repurchase program when it is believed to be the best use of Torchmark’s excess cash flows. Share repurchases under this program were 5.6 million shares at a cost of $320 million in 2006, 5.6 million shares at a cost of $300 million in 2005, and 5.2 million shares at a cost of $268 million in 2004. When stock options are exercised, proceeds from the exercises are generally used to repurchase approximately the number of shares available with those funds, in order to reduce dilution. Shares repurchased for dilution purposes were 415 thousand shares at a cost of $24 million in 2006, 4.7 million shares costing $255 million in 2005, and 313 thousand shares at a cost of $17 million in 2004. Retirement of Treasury Stock: Torchmark retired 5 million shares of treasury stock in December, 2006, 4 million in 2005, and 5 million in 2004. Restrictions: Restrictions exist on the flow of funds to Torchmark from its insurance subsidiaries. Statutory regulations require life insurance subsidiaries to maintain certain minimum amounts of capital and surplus. Dividends from insurance subsidiaries of Torchmark are limited to the greater of statutory net gain from operations, excluding capital gains and losses, on an annual noncumulative basis, or 10% of surplus, in the absence of special regulatory approval. Additionally, insurance company distributions are generally not permitted in excess of statutory surplus. Subsidiaries are also subject to certain minimum capital requirements. In 2006, subsidiaries of Torchmark paid $428 million in dividends to the parent company. During 2007, a maximum amount of $434 million is expected to be available to Torchmark from subsidiaries without regulatory approval. PART I ITEM 1. BUSINESS General SL Green Realty Corp. is a self-managed real estate investment trust, or REIT, with in-house capabilities in property management, acquisitions, financing, development, construction and leasing. We were formed in June 1997 for the purpose of continuing the commercial real estate business of S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , our predecessor entity. S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , which was founded in 1980 by Stephen L. Green, the Company's Chairman, had been engaged in the business of owning, managing, leasing, acquiring and repositioning office properties in Manhattan, a borough of New York City. Reckson Associates Realty Corp. , or Reckson, and Reckson Operating Partnership, L. P. , or ROP, are wholly-owned subsidiaries of SL Green Operating Partnership, L. P. , the Operating Partnership. As of December 31, 2013, we owned the following interests in commercial office properties in the New York Metropolitan area, primarily in midtown Manhattan. Our investments in the New York Metropolitan area also include investments in Brooklyn, Long Island, Westchester County, Connecticut and Northern New Jersey, which are collectively known as the Suburban properties: \n
LocationOwnershipNumber ofBuildingsSquare FeetWeighted AverageOccupancy-1
ManhattanConsolidated properties2317,306,04594.5%
Unconsolidated properties95,934,43496.6%
SuburbanConsolidated properties264,087,40079.8%
Unconsolidated properties41,222,10087.2%
6228,549,97992.5%
\n (1) The weighted average occupancy represents the total occupied square feet divided by total available rentable square feet. As of December 31, 2013, our Manhattan office properties were comprised of 17 fee owned buildings, including ownership in commercial condominium units, and six leasehold owned buildings. As of December 31, 2013, our Suburban office properties were comprised of 25 fee owned buildings and one leasehold building. As of December 31, 2013, we also held fee owned interests in nine unconsolidated Manhattan office properties and four unconsolidated Suburban office properties. We refer to our consolidated and unconsolidated Manhattan and Suburban office properties collectively as our Portfolio. As of December 31, 2013, we also owned investments in 16 retail properties encompassing approximately 875,800 square feet, 20 development buildings encompassing approximately 3,230,800 square feet, four residential buildings encompassing 801 units (approximately 719,900 square feet) and two land interests encompassing approximately 961,400 square feet. The Company also has ownership interests in 28 west coast office properties encompassing 52 buildings totaling approximately 3,654,300 square feet. In addition, we manage two office buildings owned by third parties and affiliated companies encompassing approximately 626,400 square feet. As of December 31, 2013, we also held debt and preferred equity investments with a book value of $1.3 billion. Our corporate offices are located in midtown Manhattan at 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170. As of December 31, 2013, our corporate staff consisted of approximately 278 persons, including 182 professionals experienced in all aspects of commercial real estate. We can be contacted at (212) 594-2700. We maintain a website at www. slgreen. com. On our website, you can obtain, free of charge, a copy of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we file such material electronically with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. We have also made available on our website our audit committee charter, compensation committee charter, nominating and corporate governance committee charter, code of business conduct and ethics and corporate governance principles. We do not intend for information contained on our website to be part of this annual report on Form 10-K. You can also read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at its Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549 (1-800-SEC-0330). The SEC maintains an Internet site (http://www. sec. gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. Operating Profit We consider operating profit to be an important measure for evaluating our operating performance and we evaluate operating profit for each of the reportable business segments in which we operate. We internally manage our operations by reference to operating profit with economic resources allocated primarily based on each segment’s contribution to operating profit. Segment operating profit is defined as operating profit before Corporate Unallocated. Segment operating profit is not, however, a measure of financial performance under U. S. GAAP, and may not be defined and calculated by other companies in the same manner. The table below reconciles segment operating profit to total operating profit:"} {"answer": 10490.5, "question": "What's the sum of Decreases in current period tax positions, and Net sales of Year Ended December 31, 2014 ?", "context": "The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s valuation allowance: \n
Balance at January 1, 2010$25,621
Increases in current period tax positions907
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,740
Balance at December 31, 2010$23,788
Increases in current period tax positions1,525
Decreases in current period tax positions-3,734
Balance at December 31, 2011$21,579
Increases in current period tax positions0
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,059
Balance at December 31, 2012$19,520
\n Note 14: Employee Benefits Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits The Company maintains noncontributory defined benefit pension plans covering eligible employees of its regulated utility and shared services operations. Benefits under the plans are based on the employee’s years of service and compensation. The pension plans have been closed for most employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 had their accrued benefit frozen and will be able to receive this benefit as a lump sum upon termination or retirement. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 and non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006 are provided with a 5.25% of base pay defined contribution plan. The Company does not participate in a multiemployer plan. The Company’s funding policy is to contribute at least the greater of the minimum amount required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or the normal cost, and an additional contribution if needed to avoid “at risk” status and benefit restrictions under the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Company may also increase its contributions, if appropriate, to its tax and cash position and the plan’s funded position. Pension plan assets are invested in a number of actively managed and indexed investments including equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities and guaranteed interest contracts with insurance companies. Pension expense in excess of the amount contributed to the pension plans is deferred by certain regulated subsidiaries pending future recovery in rates charged for utility services as contributions are made to the plans. (See Note 6) The Company also has several unfunded noncontributory supplemental non-qualified pension plans that provide additional retirement benefits to certain employees. The Company maintains other postretirement benefit plans providing varying levels of medical and life insurance to eligible retirees. The retiree welfare plans are closed for union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. The plans had previously closed for non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2002. The Company’s policy is to fund other postretirement benefit costs for rate-making purposes. Plan assets are invested in equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) and emerging market funds. The obligations of the plans are dominated by obligations for active employees. Because the timing of expected benefit payments is so far in the future and the size of the plan assets are small relative to the Company’s assets, the investment strategy is to allocate a significant percentage of assets to equities, which the Company believes will provide the highest return over the long-term period. The fixed income assets are invested in long duration debt securities and may be invested in fixed income instruments, such as futures and options in order to better match the duration of the plan liability. The allocation of goodwill in accordance with SFAS No.142 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was as follows: \n
Balance at Beginning of Period Goodwill Acquired Foreign Currency Translation and Other Balance at End of Period
Year Ended December 31, 2006
Food Packaging$540.4$31.9$14.9$587.2
Protective Packaging1,368.40.41.11,369.9
Total$1,908.8$32.3$16.0$1,957.1
Year Ended December 31, 2005
Food Packaging$549.8$0.7$-10.1$540.4
Protective Packaging1,368.20.8-0.61,368.4
Total$1,918.0$1.5$-10.7$1,908.8
\n See Note 20, “Acquisitions,” for additional information on the goodwill acquired during 2006. Note 4 Short Term Investments—Available-for-Sale Securities At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company’s available-for-sale securities consisted of auction rate securities for which interest or dividend rates are generally re-set for periods of up to 90 days. At December 31, 2006, the Company held $33.9 million of auction rate securities which were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates. At December 31, 2005, the Company held $44.1 million of auction rate securities, of which $34.7 million were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates and $9.4 million were investments in other auction rate securities with contractual maturities in 2031. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the fair value of the available-for-sale securities held by the Company was equal to their cost. There were no gross realized gains or losses from the sale of available\u0002for-sale securities in 2006 and 2005. Note 5 Accounts Receivable Securitization Program In December 2001, the Company and a group of its U. S. subsidiaries entered into an accounts receivable securitization program with a bank and an issuer of commercial paper administered by the bank. On December 7, 2004, which was the scheduled expiration date of this program, the parties extended this program for an additional term of three years ending December 7, 2007. Under this receivables program, the Company’s two primary operating subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air Corporation (US), sell all of their eligible U. S. accounts receivable to Sealed Air Funding Corporation, an indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that was formed for the sole purpose of entering into the receivables program. Sealed Air Funding in turn may sell undivided ownership interests in these receivables to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, subject to specified conditions, up to a maximum of $125.0 million of receivables interests outstanding from time to time. Sealed Air Funding retains the receivables it purchases from the operating subsidiaries, except those as to which it sells receivables interests to the bank or the issuer of commercial paper. The Company has structured the sales of accounts receivable by the operating subsidiaries to Sealed Air Funding, and the sales of receivables interests from Sealed Air Funding to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, as “true sales” under applicable laws. The assets of Sealed Air Funding are not available to pay any creditors of the Company or of the Company’s other subsidiaries or affiliates. The Company accounts for these transactions as sales of receivables under the provisions of SFAS No.140, “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities. ” Product Care 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, net sales decreased $30 million, or 2%, in 2016 compared with 2015, of which $22 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $8 million, or 1%, in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to the following: ? unfavorable price/mix of $29 million primarily in North America driven by targeted pricing incentives and an unfavorable product mix related to accelerated growth in e-Commerce and a shift in demand due to more innovative, resource-efficient solutions. This was partially offset by: ? higher unit volumes of $21 million, primarily in North America and EMEA due to ongoing strength in the e-Commerce and third party logistics markets, partially offset by rationalization and weakness in the industrial sector, as well as declines in Latin America due to the political and economic environment.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, net sales decreased $109 million, or 7%, in 2015 compared with 2014, of which $99 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $10 million, or 1%, in 2015 compared with 2014 primarily due to the following: ? lower unit volumes due to rationalization efforts in North America, Latin America and to a lesser extent, EMEA and weaknesses across the industrial sector. This was partially offset by: ? favorable price/mix in all regions, primarily in North America and Latin America reflecting results from our focus on maintaining pricing disciplines and an increase of sales from high-performance packaging solutions, including cushioning and packaging systems as compared to sales from general packaging solutions, and the progression of our pricing and value initiatives implemented to offset non-material inflationary costs as well as currency devaluation. Cost of Sales Cost of sales for the years ended December 31, were as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,2016 vs. 2015 % Change2015 vs. 2014 % Change
(In millions)201620152014
Net sales$6,778.3$7,031.5$7,750.5-3.6%-9.3%
Cost of sales4,246.74,444.95,062.9-4.5%-12.2%
As a % of net sales62.7%63.2%65.3%
Gross Profit$2,531.6$2,586.6$2,687.6-2.1%-3.8%
\n 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, costs of sales decreased $198 million in 2016 as compared to 2015. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $163 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $35 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $79 million, offset by an increase of $51 million in expenses representing higher non-material manufacturing and direct costs, including salary and wage inflation, partially offset by restructuring savings and lower incentive based compensation.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, costs of sales decreased $618 million in 2015 as compared to 2014. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $492 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $126 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $140 million and favorable impact of $31 million related to cost savings, freight, and other supply chain costs. These were partially offset by $47 million in expenses related to higher non-material manufacturing costs, including salary and wage inflation."} {"answer": 3.45, "question": "What was the average value of theRisk-free interest rate in the years where Expected volatility is positive?", "context": "THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis Investing & Lending Investing & Lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans, including our relationship lending activities, to provide financing to clients. These investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature. We make investments, some of which are consolidated, including through our merchant banking business and our special situations group, in debt securities and loans, public and private equity securities, infrastructure and real estate entities. Some of these investments are made indirectly through funds that we manage. We also make unsecured and secured loans to retail clients through our digital platforms, Marcus and Goldman Sachs Private Bank Select (GS Select), respectively. The table below presents the operating results of our Investing & Lending segment. \n
Year Ended December
$ in millions201720162015
Equity securities$4,578$2,573$3,781
Debt securities and loans2,0031,5071,655
Total net revenues6,5814,0805,436
Operating expenses2,7962,3862,402
Pre-taxearnings$3,785$1,694$3,034
\n Operating Environment. During 2017, generally higher global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to a favorable environment for our equity and debt investments. Results also reflected net gains from company\u0002specific events, including sales, and corporate performance. This environment contrasts with 2016, where, in the first quarter of 2016, market conditions were difficult and corporate performance, particularly in the energy sector, was impacted by a challenging macroeconomic environment. However, market conditions improved during the rest of 2016 as macroeconomic concerns moderated. If macroeconomic concerns negatively affect company-specific events or corporate performance, or if global equity markets decline or credit spreads widen, net revenues in Investing & Lending would likely be negatively impacted.2017 versus 2016. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $6.58 billion for 2017, 61% higher than 2016. Net revenues in equity securities were $4.58 billion, including $3.82 billion of net gains from private equities and $762 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 78% higher than 2016, primarily reflecting a significant increase in net gains from private equities, which were positively impacted by company\u0002specific events and corporate performance. In addition, net gains from public equities were significantly higher, as global equity prices increased during the year. Of the $4.58 billion of net revenues in equity securities, approximately 60% was driven by net gains from company-specific events, such as sales, and public equities. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $2.00 billion, 33% higher than 2016, reflecting significantly higher net interest income (2017 included approximately $1.80 billion of net interest income). Net revenues in debt securities and loans for 2017 also included an impairment of approximately $130 million on a secured loan. Operating expenses were $2.80 billion for 2017, 17% higher than 2016, due to increased compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting higher net revenues, increased expenses related to consolidated investments, and increased expenses related to Marcus. Pre-tax earnings were $3.79 billion in 2017 compared with $1.69 billion in 2016.2016 versus 2015. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $4.08 billion for 2016, 25% lower than 2015. Net revenues in equity securities were $2.57 billion, including $2.17 billion of net gains from private equities and $402 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 32% lower than 2015, primarily reflecting a significant decrease in net gains from private equities, driven by company-specific events and corporate performance. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $1.51 billion, 9% lower than 2015, reflecting significantly lower net revenues related to relationship lending activities, due to the impact of changes in credit spreads on economic hedges. Losses related to these hedges were $596 million in 2016, compared with gains of $329 million in 2015. This decrease was partially offset by higher net gains from investments in debt instruments and higher net interest income. See Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about economic hedges related to our relationship lending activities. Operating expenses were $2.39 billion for 2016, essentially unchanged compared with 2015. Pre-tax earnings were $1.69 billion in 2016, 44% lower than 2015. the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan generally vest over four years and expire no later than ten years from the date of grant. For restricted stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, stock certificates are issued at the time of grant and recipients have dividend and voting rights. In general, these grants vest over three years. For deferred stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, no stock is issued at the time of grant. Generally, these grants vest over two-, three- or four-year periods. Performance awards granted under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan are earned over a performance period based on achievement of goals, generally over two\u0002to three-year periods. Payment for performance awards is made in cash or in shares of our common stock equal to its fair market value per share, based on certain financial ratios, after the conclusion of each performance period. We record compensation expense, equal to the estimated fair value of the options on the grant date, on a straight-line basis over the options’ vesting periods. We use a Black-Scholes option-pricing model to estimate the fair value of the options granted. The weighted-average assumptions used in connection with the option-pricing model were as follows for the years indicated: \n
20092008 2007
Dividend yield4.82%1.32%1.34%
Expected volatility26.7021.0023.30
Risk-free interest rate2.493.174.69
Expected option lives (in years)7.87.87.8
\n Compensation expense related to stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, deferred stock awards and performance awards, which we record as a component of salaries and employee benefits expense in our consolidated statement of income, was $126 million, $321 million and $272 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The 2009 and 2008 expense excluded $13 million and $47 million, respectively, associated with accelerated vesting in connection with the restructuring plan described in note 6. The aggregate income tax benefit recorded in our consolidated statement of income related to the above-described compensation expense was $50 million, $127 million and $109 million for 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Information about the 2006 Plan and 1997 Plan as of December 31, 2009, and activity during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, is presented below: \n
Shares (in thousands) Weighted Average Exercise Price Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (in years) Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions)
Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights:
Outstanding at December 31, 200716,368$48.94
Granted92181.71
Exercised-2,92644.99
Forfeited or expired-4747.40
Outstanding at December 31, 200814,31651.86
Granted51619.31
Exercised-83240.57
Forfeited or expired-83346.32
Outstanding at December 31, 200913,167$51.64 4.10$24.8
Exercisable at December 31, 200911,172$50.12 3.42$12.0
\n The weighted-average grant date fair value of options granted in 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $2.96, $21.06 and $22.44, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, was $5 million, $102 million and $129 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, total unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to stock options and stock appreciation rights was $7 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 21 months. value of our liquid assets, as defined, totaled $75.98 billion, compared to $85.81 billion as of December 31, 2008. The decrease was mainly attributable to unusually high 2008 deposit balances, as we experienced a significant increase in customer deposits during the second half of 2008 as the credit markets worsened. As customers accumulated liquidity, they placed cash with us, and these incremental customer deposits remained with State Street Bank at December 31, 2008. During 2009, as markets normalized, deposit levels moderated as customers returned to investing their cash, and our liquid asset levels declined accordingly. Due to the unusual size and volatile nature of these customer deposits, we maintained approximately $22.45 billion at central banks as of December 31, 2009, in excess of regulatory required minimums. Securities carried at $40.96 billion as of December 31, 2009, compared to $42.74 billion as of December 31, 2008, were designated as pledged for public and trust deposits, borrowed funds and for other purposes as provided by law, and are excluded from the liquid assets calculation, unless pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Liquid assets included securities pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston to secure State Street Bank’s ability to borrow from their discount window should the need arise. This access to primary credit is an important source of back-up liquidity for State Street Bank. As of December 31, 2009, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the discount window. Based upon our level of liquid assets and our ability to access the capital markets for additional funding when necessary, including our ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration, management considers overall liquidity at December 31, 2009 to be sufficient to meet State Street’s current commitments and business needs, including supporting the liquidity of the commercial paper conduits and accommodating the transaction and cash management needs of our customers. As referenced above, our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings on our debt, as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to retaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and customer deposits; and strong liquidity monitoring procedures. High ratings on debt minimize borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by ensuring the largest possible market for our debt. A downgrade or reduction of these credit ratings could have an adverse impact to our ability to access funding at favorable interest rates. The following table presents information about State Street’s and State Street Bank’s credit ratings as of February 22, 2010."} {"answer": -0.53929, "question": "what was the percentage change in revenues for investments in 50% ( 50 % ) or less owned investments accounted for using the equity method between 2001 and 2002?", "context": "affiliated company. The loss recorded on the sale was approximately $14 million and is recorded as a loss on sale of assets and asset impairment expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. In the second quarter of 2002, the Company recorded an impairment charge of approximately $40 million, after income taxes, on an equity method investment in a telecommunications company in Latin America held by EDC. The impairment charge resulted from sustained poor operating performance coupled with recent funding problems at the invested company. During 2001, the Company lost operational control of Central Electricity Supply Corporation (‘‘CESCO’’), a distribution company located in the state of Orissa, India. CESCO is accounted for as a cost method investment. In May 2000, the Company completed the acquisition of 100% of Tractebel Power Ltd (‘‘TPL’’) for approximately $67 million and assumed liabilities of approximately $200 million. TPL owned 46% of Nigen. The Company also acquired an additional 6% interest in Nigen from minority stockholders during the year ended December 31, 2000 through the issuance of approximately 99,000 common shares of AES stock valued at approximately $4.9 million. With the completion of these transactions, the Company owns approximately 98% of Nigen’s common stock and began consolidating its financial results beginning May 12, 2000. Approximately $100 million of the purchase price was allocated to excess of costs over net assets acquired and was amortized through January 1, 2002 at which time the Company adopted SFAS No.142 and ceased amortization of goodwill. In August 2000, a subsidiary of the Company acquired a 49% interest in Songas Limited (‘‘Songas’’) for approximately $40 million. The Company acquired an additional 16.79% of Songas for approximately $12.5 million, and the Company began consolidating this entity in 2002. Songas owns the Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project in Tanzania. In December 2002, the Company signed a Sales Purchase Agreement to sell Songas. The sale is expected to close in early 2003. See Note 4 for further discussion of the transaction. The following table presents summarized comparative financial information (in millions) for the Company’s investments in 50% or less owned investments accounted for using the equity method. \n
AS OF AND FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,200220012000
Revenues$2,832$6,147$6,241
Operating Income6951,7171,989
Net Income229650859
Current Assets1,0973,7002,423
Noncurrent Assets6,75114,94213,080
Current Liabilities1,4183,5103,370
Noncurrent Liabilities3,3498,2975,927
Stockholder's Equity3,0816,8356,206
\n In 2002, 2001 and 2000, the results of operations and the financial position of CEMIG were negatively impacted by the devaluation of the Brazilian Real and the impairment charge recorded in 2002. The Brazilian Real devalued 32%, 19% and 8% for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. The Company recorded $83 million, $210 million, and $64 million of pre-tax non-cash foreign currency transaction losses on its investments in Brazilian equity method affiliates during 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. Consumers purchases the balance of its required gas supply under incremental firm transportation contracts, firm city gate contracts and, as needed, interruptible transportation contracts. The amount of interruptible transportation service and its use vary primarily with the price for such service and the availability and price of the spot supplies being purchased and transported. Consumers’ use of interruptible transportation is generally in off-peak summer months and after Consumers has fully utilized the services under the firm transportation agreements. Enterprises Enterprises, through various subsidiaries and certain equity investments, is engaged primarily in domestic independent power production. Enterprises’ operating revenue included in Continuing Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $383 million in 2007, $438 million in 2006, and $693 million in 2005. Operating revenue included in Discontinued Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $235 million in 2007, $684 million in 2006, and $409 million in 2005. In 2007, Enterprises made a significant change in business strategy by exiting the international marketplace and refocusing its business strategy to concentrate on its independent power business in the United States. Independent Power Production CMS Generation was formed in 1986. It invested in and operated non-utility power generation plants in the United States and abroad. The independent power production business segment’s operating revenue included in Continuing Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $41 million in 2007, $103 million in 2006, and $104 million in 2005. Operating revenue included in Discontinued Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $124 million in 2007, $437 million in 2006, and $211 million in 2005. In 2007, Enterprises sold CMS Generation and all of its international assets and power production facilities and transferred its domestic independent power plant operations to its subsidiary, Hydra-Co. For more information on the asset sales, see ITEM 8. CMS ENERGY’S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA — NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — NOTE 2. ASSET SALES, DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS AND IMPAIRMENT CHARGES — ASSET SALES. IndependentPowerProductionProperties: AtDecember 31,2007,CMSEnergyhadownershipinterestsin independent power plants totaling 1,199 gross MW or 1,078 net MW (net MW reflects that portion of the gross capacity in relation to CMS Energy’s ownership interest). The following table details CMS Energy’s interest in independent power plants at December 31, 2007: \n
Location Fuel Type Ownership Interest (%) Gross Capacity (MW) Percentage of Gross Capacity Under Long-Term Contract (%)
CaliforniaWood37.836100
ConnecticutScrap tire100310
MichiganCoal5070100
MichiganNatural gas10071061
MichiganNatural gas1002240
MichiganWood5040100
MichiganWood5038100
North CarolinaWood50500
Total1,199
\n For information on capital expenditures, see ITEM 7. CMS ENERGY’S MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — CAPITAL RESOURCES AND LIQUIDITY. CMS ENERGY CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) December 24, 2008. The settlement includes a $20 million decrease in depreciation rates and requires that we not request a new gas general rate increase prior to May 1, 2009. OTHER CONTINGENCIES — INDEMNIFICATIONS Equatorial Guinea Tax Claim: In 2004, we received a request for indemnification from the purchaser of CMS Oil and Gas. The indemnification claim relates to the sale of our oil, gas and methanol projects in Equatorial Guinea and the claim of the government of Equatorial Guinea that we owe $142 million in taxes in connection with that sale. CMS Energy concluded that the government’s tax claim is without merit and the purchaser of CMS Oil and Gas submitted a response to the government rejecting the claim. The government of Equatorial Guinea has indicated that it still intends to pursue its claim. We cannot predict the financial impact or outcome of this matter. Moroccan Tax Claim: In May 2007, we sold our 50 percent interest in Jorf Lasfar. As part of the sale agreement, we agreed to indemnify the purchaser for 50 percent of any tax assessments on Jorf Lasfar attributable to tax years prior to the sale. In December 2007, the Moroccan tax authority concluded its audit of Jorf Lasfar for tax years 2003 through 2005. The audit asserted deficiencies in certain corporate and withholding taxes. In January 2009, we paid $18 million, which was charged against a tax indemnification liability established when we recorded the sale of Jorf Lasfar, and accordingly it did not affect earnings. Marathon Indemnity Claim regarding F. T. Barr Claim: On December 3, 2001, F. T. Barr, an individual with an overriding royalty interest in production from the Alba field, filed a lawsuit in Harris County District Court in Texas against CMS Energy, CMS Oil and Gas and other defendants alleging that his overriding royalty payments related to Alba field production were improperly calculated. CMS Oil and Gas believes that Barr was paid properly on gas sales and that he was not entitled to the additional overriding royalty payment sought. All parties signed a confidential settlement agreement on April 26, 2004. The settlement resolved claims between Barr and the defendants, and the involved CMS Energy entities reserved all defenses to any indemnity claim relating to the settlement. There is disagreement between Marathon and certain current or former CMS Energy entities as to the existence and scope of any indemnity obligations to Marathon in connection with the settlement. Between April 2005 and April 2008, there were no further communications between Marathon and CMS Energy entities regarding this matter. In April 2008, Marathon indicated its intent to pursue the indemnity claim. Present and former CMS Energy entities and Marathon entered into an agreement tolling the statute of limitations on any claim by Marathon under the indemnity. CMS Energy entities dispute Marathon’s claim, and will vigorously oppose it if raised in any legal proceeding. CMS Energy entities also will assert that Marathon has suffered minimal, if any, damages. CMS Energy cannot predict the outcome of this matter. If Marathon’s claim were sustained, it would have a material effect on CMS Energy’s future earnings and cash flow. Guarantees and Indemnifications: FIN 45 requires a guarantor, upon issuance of a guarantee, to recognize a liability for the fair value of the obligation it undertakes in issuing the guarantee. To measure the fair value of a guarantee liability, we recognize a liability for any premium received or receivable in exchange for the guarantee. For a guarantee issued as part of a larger transaction, such as in association with an asset sale or executory contract, we recognize a liability for any premium that we would have received had we issued the guarantee as a single item. The following table describes our guarantees at December 31, 2008: \n
Guarantee Description Issue Date Expiration Date Maximum Obligation FIN 45 Carrying Amount
In Millions
Indemnifications from asset sales and other agreementsVariousIndefinite$1,445(a)$84(b)
Surety bonds and other indemnificationsVariousIndefinite351
Guarantees and put optionsVariousVarious through September 202789(c)1
\n ratings, and general information on market movements for investment grade state and municipal securities normally considered by market participants when pricing such debt securities. Foreign Corporate Bonds: Foreign corporate debt securities were valued based on quoted market prices, when available, or on yields available on comparable securities of issuers with similar credit ratings. Common Stocks: Common stocks in the OPEB Plan consist of equity securities with low transaction costs that were actively managed and tracked by the S&P 500 Index. These securities were valued at their quoted closing prices. Mutual Funds: Mutual funds represent shares in registered investment companies that are priced based on the daily quoted NAVs that are publicly available and are the basis for transactions to buy or sell shares in the funds. Pooled Funds: Pooled funds include both common and collective trust funds as well as special funds that contain only employee benefit plan assets from two or more unrelated benefit plans. Presented in the following table are the investment components of these funds:"} {"answer": -0.15954, "question": "What is the growing rate of Annual in the years with the least As of January 1 for Number of Awards", "context": "damages to natural resources allegedly caused by the discharge of hazardous substances from two former waste disposal sites in New Jersey. During the fourth quarter, the Company negotiated a settlement of New Jersey’s claims. Under the terms of the settlement, the company will transfer to the State of New Jersey 150 acres of undeveloped land with groundwater recharge potential, which the Company acquired for purposes of the settlement, and will pay the state’s attorneys’ fees. Notice of the settlement was published for public comment in December 2007, and no objections were received. As a result, the Company and the State of New Jersey have signed the formal settlement agreement pursuant to which the Company will transfer title to the property and will be dismissed from the lawsuit, which will continue against the codefendants. Accrued Liabilities and Insurance Receivables Related to Legal Proceedings The Company complies with the requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” and related guidance, and records liabilities for legal proceedings in those instances where it can reasonably estimate the amount of the loss and where liability is probable. Where the reasonable estimate of the probable loss is a range, the Company records the most likely estimate of the loss, or the low end of the range if there is no one best estimate. The Company either discloses the amount of a possible loss or range of loss in excess of established reserves if estimable, or states that such an estimate cannot be made. For those insured matters where the Company has taken a reserve, the Company also records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover under the Company’s insurance program. For those insured matters where the Company has not taken a reserve because the liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, but where the Company has incurred an expense in defending itself, the Company records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover for the expense incurred. The Company discloses significant legal proceedings even where liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, if the Company believes there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred. Because litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur, there can be no certainty that the Company may not ultimately incur charges in excess of presently recorded liabilities. A future adverse ruling, settlement, or unfavorable development could result in future charges that could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations or cash flows in the period in which they are recorded. The Company currently believes that such future charges, if any, would not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position of the Company, taking into account its significant available insurance coverage. Based on experience and developments, the Company periodically reexamines its estimates of probable liabilities and associated expenses and receivables, and whether it is able to estimate a liability previously determined to be not estimable and/or not probable. Where appropriate, the Company makes additions to or adjustments of its estimated liabilities. As a result, the current estimates of the potential impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the legal proceedings and claims pending against the Company could change in the future. The Company estimates insurance receivables based on an analysis of its numerous policies, including their exclusions, pertinent case law interpreting comparable policies, its experience with similar claims, and assessment of the nature of the claim, and records an amount it has concluded is likely to be recovered. The following table shows the major categories of on-going litigation, environmental remediation and other environmental liabilities for which the Company has been able to estimate its probable liability and for which the Company has taken reserves and the related insurance receivables: \n
At December 31 (Millions)200720062005
Breast implant liabilities$1$4$7
Breast implant receivables6493130
Respirator mask/asbestos liabilities121181210
Respirator mask/asbestos receivables332380447
Environmental remediation liabilities374430
Environmental remediation receivables151515
Other environmental liabilities147148
\n For those significant pending legal proceedings that do not appear in the table and that are not the subject of pending settlement agreements, the Company has determined that liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, and the Company is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss at this time. The amounts in the preceding table with respect to breast implant and environmental remediation represent the Company’s best estimate of the respective liabilities. The Company does not believe that there is any single best estimate of the respirator/mask/asbestos liability or the other environmental liabilities shown above, nor that it can reliably estimate the amount or range of amounts by which those liabilities may exceed the reserves the Company has established. one year volatility, the median of the term of the expected life rolling volatility, the median of the most recent term of the expected life volatility of 3M stock, and the implied volatility on the grant date. The expected term assumption is based on the weighted average of historical grants. Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units The following table summarizes restricted stock and restricted stock unit activity for the years ended December 31: \n
201520142013
Number of AwardsWeighted Average Grant Date Fair ValueNumber of AwardsWeighted Average Grant Date Fair ValueNumber of AwardsWeighted Average Grant Date Fair Value
Nonvested balance —
As of January 12,817,786$104.413,105,361$92.313,261,562$85.17
Granted
Annual671,204165.86798,615126.79946,774101.57
Other26,886156.9478,252152.7444,401111.19
Vested-1,010,61289.99-1,100,67590.37-1,100,09579.93
Forfeited-64,176118.99-63,76797.23-47,28190.82
As of December 312,441,088$127.472,817,786$104.413,105,361$92.31
\n As of December 31, 2015, there was $84 million of compensation expense that has yet to be recognized related to non\u0002vested restricted stock and restricted stock units. This expense is expected to be recognized over the remaining weighted\u0002average vesting period of 24 months. The total fair value of restricted stock and restricted stock units that vested during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $166 million, $145 million and $114 million, respectively. The Company’s actual tax benefits realized for the tax deductions related to the vesting of restricted stock and restricted stock units for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $62 million, $54 million and $43 million, respectively. Restricted stock units granted under the 3M 2008 Long-Term Incentive Plan generally vest three years following the grant date assuming continued employment. Dividend equivalents equal to the dividends payable on the same number of shares of 3M common stock accrue on these restricted stock units during the vesting period, although no dividend equivalents are paid on any of these restricted stock units that are forfeited prior to the vesting date. Dividends are paid out in cash at the vest date on restricted stock units, except for performance shares which do not earn dividends. Since the rights to dividends are forfeitable, there is no impact on basic earnings per share calculations. Weighted average restricted stock unit shares outstanding are included in the computation of diluted earnings per share. Performance Shares Instead of restricted stock units, the Company makes annual grants of performance shares to members of its executive management. The 2015 performance criteria for these performance shares (organic volume growth, return on invested capital, free cash flow conversion, and earnings per share growth) were selected because the Company believes that they are important drivers of long-term stockholder value. The number of shares of 3M common stock that could actually be delivered at the end of the three-year performance period may be anywhere from 0% to 200% of each performance share granted, depending on the performance of the Company during such performance period. Non-substantive vesting requires that expense for the performance shares be recognized over one or three years depending on when each individual became a 3M executive. Performance shares do not accrue dividends during the performance period. Therefore, the grant date fair value is determined by reducing the closing stock price on the date of grant by the net present value of dividends during the performance period. Pension and Postretirement Obligations: 3M has various company-sponsored retirement plans covering substantially all U. S. employees and many employees outside the United States. The primary U. S. defined-benefit pension plan was closed to new participants effective January 1, 2009. The Company accounts for its defined benefit pension and postretirement health care and life insurance benefit plans in accordance with Accounting Standard Codification (ASC) 715, Compensation — Retirement Benefits, in measuring plan assets and benefit obligations and in determining the amount of net periodic benefit cost. ASC 715 requires employers to recognize the underfunded or overfunded status of a defined benefit pension or postretirement plan as an asset or liability in its statement of financial position and recognize changes in the funded status in the year in which the changes occur through accumulated other comprehensive income, which is a component of stockholders’ equity. While the company believes the valuation methods used to determine the fair value of plan assets are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date. See Note 11 for additional discussion of actuarial assumptions used in determining pension and postretirement health care liabilities and expenses. Pension benefits associated with these plans are generally based primarily on each participant’s years of service, compensation, and age at retirement or termination. The benefit obligation represents the present value of the benefits that employees are entitled to in the future for services already rendered as of the measurement date. The Company measures the present value of these future benefits by projecting benefit payment cash flows for each future period and discounting these cash flows back to the December 31 measurement date, using the yields of a portfolio of high quality, fixed-income debt instruments that would produce cash flows sufficient in timing and amount to settle projected future benefits. Historically, the single aggregated discount rate used for each plan’s benefit obligation was also used for the calculation of all net periodic benefit costs, including the measurement of the service and interest costs. Beginning in 2016, 3M changed the method used to estimate the service and interest cost components of the net periodic pension and other postretirement benefit costs. The new method measures service cost and interest cost separately using the spot yield curve approach applied to each corresponding obligation. Service costs are determined based on duration-specific spot rates applied to the service cost cash flows. The interest cost calculation is determined by applying duration-specific spot rates to the year-by-year projected benefit payments. The spot yield curve approach does not affect the measurement of the total benefit obligations as the change in service and interest costs offset in the actuarial gains and losses recorded in other comprehensive income. The Company changed to the new method to provide a more precise measure of service and interest costs by improving the correlation between the projected benefit cash flows and the discrete spot yield curve rates. The Company accounted for this change as a change in estimate prospectively beginning in the first quarter of 2016. As a result of the change to the spot yield curve approach, 2016 defined benefit pension and postretirement net periodic benefit cost is expected to decrease by $180 million. Including this $180 million, 3M expects global defined benefit pension and postretirement expense in 2016 (before settlements, curtailments, special termination benefits and other) to decrease by approximately $320 million pre-tax when compared to 2015. Using this methodology, the Company determined discount rates for its plans as follow: \n
U.S. Qualified PensionInternational Pension (weighted average)U.S. Postretirement Medical
December 31, 2014 Liability and 2015 Net Periodic Benefit Cost:
Single discount rate4.10%3.11%4.07%
December 31, 2015 Liability:
Benefit obligation4.47%3.12%4.32%
2016 Net Periodic Benefit Cost Components:
Service cost4.72%2.84%4.60%
Interest cost3.77%2.72%3.44%
\n Another significant element in determining the Company’s pension expense in accordance with ASC 715 is the expected return on plan assets, which is based on historical results for similar allocations among asset classes. For the primary U. S. qualified pension plan, the expected long-term rate of return on an annualized basis for 2016 is 7.50%, 0.25% lower than 2015. Refer to Note 11 for information on how the 2015 rate was determined. Return on assets assumptions for"} {"answer": 0.10662, "question": "In the year with largest amount of Payments, what's the increasing rate of Marketplaces?", "context": "Summary of Cost of Net Revenues The following table summarizes changes in cost of net revenues: \n
Year Ended December 31,Change from 2008 to 2009Change from 2009 to 2010
200820092010in Dollarsin %in Dollarsin %
(In thousands, except percentages)
Cost of net revenues:
Marketplaces$907,121$968,266$1,071,499$61,1457%$103,23311%
As a percentage of total Marketplaces net revenues16.2%18.2%18.7%
Payments1,036,7461,220,6191,493,168183,87318%272,54922%
As a percentage of total Payments net revenues43.1%43.7%43.5%
Communications284,202290,877—6,6752%-290,877—
As a percentage of total Communications net revenues51.6%46.9%—
Total cost of net revenues$2,228,069$2,479,762$2,564,667$251,69311%$84,9053%
As a percentage of net revenues26.1%28.4%28.0%
\n Cost of Net Revenues Cost of net revenues consists primarily of costs associated with payment processing, customer support and site operations and Skype telecommunications (through November 2009). Significant components of these costs include bank transaction fees, credit card interchange and assessment fees, interest expense on indebtedness incurred to finance the purchase of consumer loans receivable by Bill Me Later, employee compensation, contractor costs, facilities costs, depreciation of equipment and amortization expense. Marketplaces Marketplaces cost of net revenues increased $103.2 million, or 11%, in 2010 compared to 2009. The increase during 2010 was due primarily to the inclusion of a full year of costs attributable to Gmarket and increased site operation costs. Marketplaces cost of net revenues as a percentage of Marketplaces net revenues increased slightly in 2010 compared to 2009 due primarily to the addition of Gmarket, the settlement of a lawsuit and the establishment of a reserve related to certain indirect tax positions (recorded as a reduction in revenue). Marketplaces cost of net revenues increased $61.1 million, or 7%, in 2009 compared to 2008. The increase during 2009 was due primarily to the inclusion of costs attributable to Gmarket and Den Bl? Avis and BilBasen, partially offset by a decrease in customer support and site operations costs associated with our restructuring activities. Marketplaces cost of net revenues increased as a percentage of Marketplaces net revenues during 2009 compared to 2008 due primarily to the impact of foreign currency movements on revenues, pricing initiatives (which are recorded as a reduction in revenue) and faster growth in our lower margin Marketplaces businesses. Payments Payments cost of net revenues increased $272.5 million, or 22%, in 2010 compared to 2009. The increase in cost of net revenues was primarily due to the impact from our growth in net TPV. Payments cost of net revenues as a percentage of Payments net revenues decreased slightly in 2010 compared to 2009 due primarily to improved leverage of our customer support infrastructure and existing site operations. expect that these credit rating agencies will continue to monitor developments in our planned separation of PayPal, including the capital structure for each company after separation, which could result in additional downgrades. Our borrowing costs depend, in part, on our credit ratings and because downgrades would likely increase our borrowing costs we disclose these ratings to enhance the understanding of the effects of our ratings on our costs of funds. In addition, to assist PayPal in our planned separation we are currently working with credit rating agencies to obtain separate credit ratings for PayPal and we believe that immediately following separation both eBay and PayPal will be rated investment grade. Commitments and Contingencies As of December 31, 2014 , approximately $20.2 billion of unused credit was available to PayPal Credit accountholders. While this amount represents the total unused credit available, we have not experienced, and do not anticipate, that all of our PayPal Credit accountholders will access their entire available credit at any given point in time. In addition, the individual lines of credit that make up this unused credit are subject to periodic review and termination by the chartered financial institutions that are the issuer of PayPal Credit products based on, among other things, account usage and customer creditworthiness. When a consumer makes a purchase using a PayPal Credit products, the chartered financial institution extends credit to the consumer, funds the extension of credit at the point of sale and advances funds to the merchant. We subsequently purchase the consumer receivables related to the consumer loans and as result of that purchase, bear the risk of loss in the event of loan defaults. However, we subsequently sell a participation interest in the entire pool of consumer loans to the chartered financial institution that extended the consumer loans. Although the chartered financial institution continues to own the customer accounts, we own and bear the risk of loss on the related consumer receivables, less the participation interest held by the chartered financial institution, and PayPal is responsible for all servicing functions related to the customer account balances. As of December 31, 2014 , the total outstanding principal balance of this pool of consumer loans was $3.7 billion , of which the chartered financial institution owns a participation interest of $163 million , or 4.4% of the total outstanding balance of consumer receivables at that date. We have certain fixed contractual obligations and commitments that include future estimated payments for general operating purposes. Changes in our business needs, contractual cancellation provisions, fluctuating interest rates, and other factors may result in actual payments differing from the estimates. We cannot provide certainty regarding the timing and amounts of these payments. The following table summarizes our fixed contractual obligations and commitments: \n
Payments Due During the Year Ending December 31,DebtLeasesPurchase ObligationsTotal
(In millions)
20151,0261132751,414
20161649658318
20171,61383551,751
20181486343254
20191,6974271,746
Thereafter4,7085234,763
9,35644944110,246
\n The significant assumptions used in our determination of amounts presented in the above table are as follows: ? Debt amounts include the principal and interest amounts of the respective debt instruments. For additional details related to our debt, please see “Note 10 – Debt” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. This table does not reflect any amounts payable under our $3 billion revolving credit facility or $2 billion commercial paper program, for which no borrowings were outstanding as of December 31, 2014 . ? Lease amounts include minimum rental payments under our non-cancelable operating leases for office facilities, fulfillment centers, as well as computer and office equipment that we utilize under lease arrangements. The amounts presented are consistent with contractual terms and are not expected to differ significantly from actual results under our existing leases, unless a substantial change in our headcount needs requires us to expand our occupied space or exit an office facility early. MARATHON OIL CORPORATION Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements equivalent to the Exchangeable Shares at the acquisition date as discussed below. Additional shares of voting preferred stock will be issued as necessary to adjust the number of votes to account for changes in the exchange ratio. Preferred shares – In connection with the acquisition of Western discussed in Note 6, the Board of Directors authorized a class of voting preferred stock consisting of 6 million shares. Upon completion of the acquisition, we issued 5 million shares of this voting preferred stock to a trustee, who holds the shares for the benefit of the holders of the Exchangeable Shares discussed above. Each share of voting preferred stock is entitled to one vote on all matters submitted to the holders of Marathon common stock. Each holder of Exchangeable Shares may direct the trustee to vote the number of shares of voting preferred stock equal to the number of shares of Marathon common stock issuable upon the exchange of the Exchangeable Shares held by that holder. In no event will the aggregate number of votes entitled to be cast by the trustee with respect to the outstanding shares of voting preferred stock exceed the number of votes entitled to be cast with respect to the outstanding Exchangeable Shares. Except as otherwise provided in our restated certificate of incorporation or by applicable law, the common stock and the voting preferred stock will vote together as a single class in the election of directors of Marathon and on all other matters submitted to a vote of stockholders of Marathon generally. The voting preferred stock will have no other voting rights except as required by law. Other than dividends payable solely in shares of voting preferred stock, no dividend or other distribution, will be paid or payable to the holder of the voting preferred stock. In the event of any liquidation, dissolution or winding up of Marathon, the holder of shares of the voting preferred stock will not be entitled to receive any assets of Marathon available for distribution to its stockholders. The voting preferred stock is not convertible into any other class or series of the capital stock of Marathon or into cash, property or other rights, and may not be redeemed.25. Leases We lease a wide variety of facilities and equipment under operating leases, including land and building space, office equipment, production facilities and transportation equipment. Most long-term leases include renewal options and, in certain leases, purchase options. Future minimum commitments for capital lease obligations (including sale-leasebacks accounted for as financings) and for operating lease obligations having initial or remaining noncancelable lease terms in excess of one year are as follows: \n
(In millions)Capital Lease Obligations (a)Operating Lease Obligations
2010$46$165
201145140
201258121
201344102
20144484
Later years466313
Sublease rentals--16
Total minimum lease payments$703$909
Less imputed interest costs-257
Present value of net minimum lease payments$446
\n (a) Capital lease obligations include $164 million related to assets under construction as of December 31, 2009. These leases are currently reported in long-term debt based on percentage of construction completed at $36 million. In connection with past sales of various plants and operations, we assigned and the purchasers assumed certain leases of major equipment used in the divested plants and operations of United States Steel. In the event of a default by any of the purchasers, United States Steel has assumed these obligations; however, we remain primarily obligated for payments under these leases. Minimum lease payments under these operating lease obligations of $16 million have been included above and an equal amount has been reported as sublease rentals."} {"answer": 0.62946, "question": "what is the money pool activity use of operating cash flows as a percentage of receivables from the money pool in 2003?", "context": "System Energy Resources, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 269 Operating Activities Cash flow from operations increased by $232.1 million in 2004 primarily due to income tax refunds of $70.6 million in 2004 compared to income tax payments of $230.9 million in 2003. The increase was partially offset by money pool activity, as discussed below. In 2003, the domestic utility companies and System Energy filed, with the IRS, a change in tax accounting method notification for their respective calculations of cost of goods sold. The adjustment implemented a simplified method of allocation of overhead to the production of electricity, which is provided under the IRS capitalization regulations. The cumulative adjustment placing these companies on the new methodology resulted in a $430 million deduction for System Energy on Entergy's 2003 income tax return. There was no cash benefit from the method change in 2003. In 2004 System Energy realized $144 million in cash tax benefit from the method change. This tax accounting method change is an issue across the utility industry and will likely be challenged by the IRS on audit. Cash flow from operations decreased by $124.8 million in 2003 primarily due to the following: ? an increase in federal income taxes paid of $74.0 million in 2003 compared to 2002; ? the cessation of the Entergy Mississippi GGART. System Energy collected $21.7 million in 2003 and $40.8 million in 2002 from Entergy Mississippi in conjunction with the GGART, which provided for the acceleration of Entergy Mississippi's Grand Gulf purchased power obligation. The MPSC authorized cessation of the GGART effective July 1, 2003. See Note 2 to the domestic utility companies and System Energy financial statements for further discussion of the GGART; and ? money pool activity, as discussed below. System Energy's receivables from the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years: \n
2004200320022001
(In Thousands)
$61,592$19,064$7,046$13,853
\n Money pool activity used $42.5 million of System Energy's operating cash flows in 2004, used $12.0 million in 2003, and provided $6.8 million in 2002. See Note 4 to the domestic utility companies and System Energy financial statements for a description of the money pool. Investing Activities Net cash used for investing activities was practically unchanged in 2004 compared to 2003 primarily because an increase in construction expenditures caused by a reclassification of inventory items to capital was significantly offset by the maturity of $6.5 million of other temporary investments that had been made in 2003, which provided cash in 2004. The increase of $16.2 million in net cash used in investing activities in 2003 was primarily due to the following: ? the maturity in 2002 of $22.4 million of other temporary investments that had been made in 2001, which provided cash in 2002; ? an increase in decommissioning trust contributions and realized change in trust assets of $8.2 million in 2003 compared to 2002; and ? other temporary investments of $6.5 million made in 2003. Partially offsetting the increases in net cash used in investing activities was a decrease in construction expenditures of $22.1 million in 2003 compared to 2002 primarily due to the power uprate project in 2002. Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 25 proposed in the Initial Decision are arbitrary and are so complex that they would be difficult to implement; the Initial Decision improperly rejected Entergy's resource planning remedy; the Initial Decision erroneously determined that the full costs of the Vidalia project should be included in Entergy Louisiana's production costs for purposes of calculating relative production costs; and the Initial Decision erroneously adopted a new method of calculating reserve sharing costs rather than the current method. If the FERC grants the relief requested by the LPSC in the proceeding, the relief may result in a material increase in the total production costs the FERC allocates to companies whose costs currently are projected to be less than the Entergy System average, and a material decrease in the total production costs the FERC allocates to companies whose costs currently are projected to exceed that average. If the FERC adopts the ALJ's Initial Decision, the amount of production costs that would be reallocated among the domestic utility companies would be determined through consideration of each domestic utility company's relative total production cost expressed as a percentage of Entergy System average total production cost. The ALJ's Initial Decision would reallocate production costs of the domestic utility companies whose percent of Entergy System average production cost are outside an upper or lower bandwidth. This would be accomplished by payments from domestic utility companies whose production costs are below Entergy System average production cost to domestic utility companies whose production costs are above Entergy System average production cost. An assessment of the potential effects of the ALJ's Initial Decision requires assumptions regarding the future total production cost of each domestic utility company, which assumptions include the mix of solid fuel and gas-fired generation available to each company and the costs of natural gas and purchased power. Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States are more dependent upon gas-fired generation than Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, or Entergy New Orleans. Of these, Entergy Arkansas is the least dependent upon gas-fired generation. Therefore, increases in natural gas prices likely will increase the amount by which Entergy Arkansas' total production costs are below the average production costs of the domestic utility companies. Considerable uncertainty exists regarding future gas prices. Annual average Henry Hub gas prices have varied significantly over recent years, ranging from $1.72/mmBtu to $5.85/mmBtu for the 1995-2004 period, and averaging $3.43/mmBtu during the ten-year period 1995-2004 and $4.58/mmBtu during the five-year period 2000-2004. Recent market conditions have resulted in gas prices that have averaged $5.85/mmBtu for the twelve months ended December 2004. Based upon analyses considering the effect on future production costs if the FERC adopts the ALJ's Initial Decision, the following potential annual production cost reallocations among the domestic utility companies could result assuming annual average gas prices range from $6.39/mmBtu in 2005 declining to $4.97/mmBtu by 2009: \n
Range of Annual Paymentsor (Receipts)Average AnnualPayments or (Receipts)for 2005-2009 Period
(In Millions)(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas$154 to $281$215
Entergy Gulf States-$130 to ($15)-$63
Entergy Louisiana-$199 to ($98)-$141
Entergy Mississippi-$16 to $8$1
Entergy New Orleans-$17 to ($5)-$12
\n Management believes that any changes in the allocation of production costs resulting from a FERC decision and related retail proceedings should result in similar rate changes for retail customers. The timing of recovery of these costs in rates could be the subject of additional proceedings at the APSC and elsewhere, however, and a delay in full recovery of any increased allocation of production costs could result in additional financing requirements. Although the outcome and timing of the FERC, APSC, and other proceedings cannot be predicted at this time, Entergy does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these proceedings will have a material effect on its financial condition or results of operation. In February 2004, the APSC issued an \"Order of Investigation,\" in which it discusses the negative effect that implementation of the FERC ALJ's Initial Decision would have on Entergy Arkansas' customers. The APSC order establishes an investigation into whether Entergy Arkansas' continued participation in the System Agreement Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 30 whether other procedural steps are necessary. The FERC has not yet ruled on the Emergency Interim Request for Rehearing submitted by Entergy. Entergy believes that it has complied with the provisions of its open access transmission tariff, including the provisions addressing the implementation of the AFC methodology; however, the ultimate scope of this proceeding cannot be predicted at this time. A hearing in the AFC proceeding is currently scheduled to commence in August 2005. Federal Legislation Federal legislation intended to facilitate wholesale competition in the electric power industry has been seriously considered by the United States Congress for the past several years. In the last Congress, both the House and Senate passed separate versions of comprehensive energy legislation, negotiated a conference package, and fell two votes short of bringing the conferenced bill up for a vote in the Senate. The bill contained electricity provisions that would, among other things, allow for participant funding of transmission interconnections and upgrades, repeal PUHCA, repeal or modify PURPA, enact a mechanism for establishing enforceable reliability standards, provide the FERC with new authority over utility mergers and acquisitions, and codify the FERC's authority over market- based rates. It is expected that the United States House and Senate will again craft and consider energy legislation in the 109th Congress. Market and Credit Risks Market risk is the risk of changes in the value of commodity and financial instruments, or in future operating results or cash flows, in response to changing market conditions. Entergy is exposed to the following significant market risks: ? The commodity price risk associated with Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear and Energy Commodity Services segments. ? The foreign currency exchange rate risk associated with certain of Entergy's contractual obligations. ? The interest rate and equity price risk associated with Entergy's investments in decommissioning trust funds. Entergy is also exposed to credit risk. Credit risk is the risk of loss from nonperformance by suppliers, customers, or financial counterparties to a contract or agreement. Where it is a significant consideration, counterparty credit risk is addressed in the discussions that follow. Commodity Price Risk Power Generation The sale of electricity from the power generation plants owned by Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear business and Energy Commodity Services, unless otherwise contracted, is subject to the fluctuation of market power prices. Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear business has entered into PPAs and other contracts to sell the power produced by its power plants at prices established in the PPAs. Entergy continues to pursue opportunities to extend the existing PPAs and to enter into new PPAs with other parties. Following is a summary of the amount of the Non-Utility Nuclear business' output that is currently sold forward under physical or financial contracts at fixed prices: \n
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Non-Utility Nuclear:
Percent of planned generation sold forward:
Unit-contingent36%20%17%1%0%
Unit-contingent with availability guarantees54%52%38%25%0%
Firm liquidated damages4%4%2%0%0%
Total94%76%57%26%0%
Planned generation (TWh)3435343435
Average contracted price per MWh$39$41$42$44N/A
\n Entergy Corporation Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 82 Upon implementation of SFAS 143 in 2003, assets and liabilities increased $1.1 billion for the U. S. Utility segment as a result of recording the asset retirement obligations at their fair values of $1.1 billion as determined under SFAS 143, increasing utility plant by $287 million, reducing accumulated depreciation by $361 million, and recording the related regulatory assets of $422 million. The implementation of SFAS 143 for the portion of River Bend not subject to cost-based ratemaking decreased earnings by $21 million net-of-tax as a result of a one-time cumulative effect of accounting change. In accordance with ratemaking treatment and as required by SFAS 71, the depreciation provisions for the domestic utility companies and System Energy include a component for removal costs that are not asset retirement obligations under SFAS 143. In accordance with regulatory accounting principles, Entergy has recorded a regulatory asset for certain of its domestic utility companies and System Energy of $86.9 million as of December 31, 2004 and $72.4 million as of December 31, 2003 to reflect an estimate of incurred but uncollected removal costs previously recorded as a component of accumulated depreciation. The decommissioning and retirement cost liability for certain of the domestic utility companies and System Energy includes a regulatory liability of $34.6 million as of December 31, 2004 and $26.8 million as of December 31, 2003 representing an estimate of collected but not yet incurred removal costs. For the Non-Utility Nuclear business, the implementation of SFAS 143 resulted in a decrease in liabilities of $595 million due to reductions in decommissioning liabilities, a decrease in assets of $340 million, including a decrease in electric plant in service of $315 million, and an increase in earnings in 2003 of $155 million net-of-tax as a result of a one-time cumulative effect of accounting change. The cumulative decommissioning liabilities and expenses recorded in 2004 by Entergy were as follows:"} {"answer": 4.64711, "question": "In the years with lowest amount of Operating lease obligations in table 1, what's the increasing rate of Pension and other postretirement cash requirements in table 1?", "context": "Revenues N&SS revenues decreased 1% in 2008 and 2% in 2007. The decrease of $137 million in 2008 is primarily due to decreased revenues in FCS, Proprietary and satellite programs partially offset by increased revenues in the SBInet program. The decrease of $292 million in 2007 was primarily due to the exclusion of government Delta volume, now a component of our equity investment in ULA and lower FCS volume, partially offset by increased volume on SBInet and several satellite programs. Delta launch and new-build satellite deliveries were as follows: \n
Years ended December 31, 200820072006
Delta II Commercial 23
Delta II Government2
Delta IV Government3
Satellites 144
\n Delta government launches are excluded from our deliveries after December 1, 2006 due to the formation of ULA. Operating Earnings N&SS operating earnings increased by $171 million in 2008 was primarily due to increased earnings from our investment in ULA. The decrease in 2007 was due to lower earnings on FCS and several satellite programs. These decreases were partially offset by higher award fees on GMD and a $44 million gain on sale of a property in Anaheim. N&SS operating earnings include equity earnings of $73 million, $85 million and $71 million from the United Space Alliance joint venture in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively and equity earnings of $105 million, a loss of $11 million and equity earnings of $5 million from the ULA joint venture in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The ULA equity earnings and loss amounts are net of the basis difference amortization. Research and Development The N&SS research and development funding remains focused on the development of communications, command and control, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems (C4ISR); communications and command and control (C3) capabilities that support a network-enabled architecture approach for our various government customers. We are investing in communications capabilities to enable connectivity between existing air/ground platforms, increase communications availability and bandwidth through more robust space systems, and leverage innovative communications concepts. Key programs in this area include JTRS, FCS, Global Positioning System, Tracking and Data Relay Satellite, Ares 1 Crew Launch Vehicle and GMD. Investments were also made to support concepts that may lead to the development of next-generation space intelligence systems. Along with increased funding to support these areas of architecture and network-enabled capabilities development, we also maintained our investment levels in global missile defense and advanced missile defense concepts and technologies. Backlog N&SS total backlog decreased by 12% in 2008 compared with 2007 primarily due to revenues recognized on multi-year orders received in prior years on FCS, GMD and C3 programs, partially offset by an increase in the International Space Station program. Total backlog decreased by 7% in 2007 compared with 2006 due to revenues recognized on FCS and Proprietary programs, partially offset by an increase in Space Exploration programs. Additional Considerations Items which could have a future impact on N&SS operations include the following: United Launch Alliance On December 1, 2006, we completed the transaction with Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed) to create a 50/50 joint venture named United Launch Alliance L. L. C. (ULA). ULA combines the production, engineering, test and launch operations associated with U. S. government launches of Boeing Delta and Lockheed Atlas rockets. In connection with the transaction, billion of unused borrowing on revolving credit line agreements. We anticipate that these credit lines will primarily serve as backup liquidity to support our general corporate borrowing needs. Financing commitments totaled $18.1 billion and $15.9 billion as of December 31, 2012 and 2011. We anticipate that we will not be required to fund a significant portion of our financing commitments as we continue to work with third party financiers to provide alternative financing to customers. Historically, we have not been required to fund significant amounts of outstanding commitments. However, there can be no assurances that we will not be required to fund greater amounts than historically required. In the event we require additional funding to support strategic business opportunities, our commercial aircraft financing commitments, unfavorable resolution of litigation or other loss contingencies, or other business requirements, we expect to meet increased funding requirements by issuing commercial paper or term debt. We believe our ability to access external capital resources should be sufficient to satisfy existing short-term and long-term commitments and plans, and also to provide adequate financial flexibility to take advantage of potential strategic business opportunities should they arise within the next year. However, there can be no assurance of the cost or availability of future borrowings, if any, under our commercial paper program, in the debt markets or our credit facilities. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, our pension plans were $19.7 billion and $16.6 billion underfunded as measured under GAAP. On an ERISA basis our plans are more than 100% funded at December 31, 2012 with minimal required contributions in 2013. We expect to make discretionary contributions to our plans of approximately $1.5 billion in 2013. We may be required to make higher contributions to our pension plans in future years. As of December 31, 2012, we were in compliance with the covenants for our debt and credit facilities. The most restrictive covenants include a limitation on mortgage debt and sale and leaseback transactions as a percentage of consolidated net tangible assets (as defined in the credit agreements), and a limitation on consolidated debt as a percentage of total capital (as defined). When considering debt covenants, we continue to have substantial borrowing capacity. Contractual Obligations The following table summarizes our known obligations to make future payments pursuant to certain contracts as of December 31, 2012, and the estimated timing thereof. \n
(Dollars in millions)TotalLessthan 1year1-3years3-5yearsAfter 5years
Long-term debt (including current portion)$10,251$1,340$2,147$1,095$5,669
Interest on debt-16,1775108647494,054
Pension and other postretirement cash requirements25,5585791,2447,02516,710
Capital lease obligations184102784
Operating lease obligations1,405218334209644
Purchase obligations not recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position118,00244,47241,83818,95612,736
Purchase obligations recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position15,98114,6641,30719
Total contractual obligations$177,558$61,885$47,812$28,039$39,822
\n (1) Includes interest on variable rate debt calculated based on interest rates at December 31, 2012. Variable rate debt was less than 1% of our total debt at December 31, 2012. Industry Competitiveness The commercial jet airplane market and the airline industry remain extremely competitive. Market liberalization in Europe, the Middle East and Asia is enabling low-cost airlines to continue gaining market share. These airlines are increasing the pressure on airfares. This results in continued cost pressures for all airlines and price pressure on our products. Major productivity gains are essential to ensure a favorable market position at acceptable profit margins. Continued access to global markets remains vital to our ability to fully realize our sales potential and long\u0002term investment returns. Approximately 91% of Commercial Airplanes’ total backlog, in dollar terms, is with non-U. S. airlines. We face aggressive international competitors who are intent on increasing their market share. They offer competitive products and have access to most of the same customers and suppliers. With government support,Airbus has historically invested heavily to create a family of products to compete with ours. Regional jet makers Embraer and Bombardier continue to develop and market larger and increasingly more capable airplanes, including Embraer’s E-195 in the regional jet market and Bombardier’s C Series in the 100-150 seat transcontinental market. Additionally, other competitors from Russia, China and Japan are developing commercial jet aircraft. Some of these competitors have historically enjoyed access to government\u0002provided financial support, including “launch aid,” which greatly reduces the cost and commercial risks associated with airplane development activities. This has enabled the development of airplanes without commercial viability; others to be brought to market more quickly than otherwise possible; and many offered for sale below market-based prices. Many competitors have continued to make improvements in efficiency, which may result in funding product development, gaining market share and improving earnings. This market environment has resulted in intense pressures on pricing and other competitive factors, and we expect these pressures to continue or intensify in the coming years. We are focused on improving our products and services and continuing our cost-reduction efforts, which enhances our ability to compete. We are also focused on taking actions to ensure that Boeing is not harmed by unfair subsidization of competitors. Results of Operations \n
Years ended December 31,201720162015
Revenues$56,729$58,012$59,399
% of total company revenues61%61%62%
Earnings from operations$5,432$1,995$4,284
Operating margins9.6%3.4%7.2%
Research and development$2,247$3,706$2,311
\n Revenues Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,283 million or 2% in 2017 compared with 2016 due to delivery mix, with fewer twin aisle deliveries more than offsetting the impact of higher single aisle deliveries. Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,387 million or 2% in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to fewer deliveries. Through February 25, 2016, we repurchased approximately $415.0 million of shares of our common stock, which includes the $250.0 million of shares that we repurchased from certain selling stockholders on February 10, 2016. In order to achieve operational synergies, we expect cash outlays related to our integration plans to be approximately $290.0 million in 2016. These cash outlays are necessary to achieve our integration goals of net annual pre-tax operating profit synergies of $350.0 million by the end of the third year post-Closing Date. Also as discussed in Note 20 to our consolidated financial statements, as of December 31, 2015, a short-term liability of $50.0 million and long-term liability of $264.6 million related to Durom Cup product liability claims was recorded on our consolidated balance sheet. We expect to continue paying these claims over the next few years. We expect to be reimbursed a portion of these payments for product liability claims from insurance carriers. As of December 31, 2015, we have received a portion of the insurance proceeds we estimate we will recover. We have a long-term receivable of $95.3 million remaining for future expected reimbursements from our insurance carriers. We also had a short-term liability of $33.4 million related to Biomet metal-on-metal hip implant claims. At December 31, 2015, we had ten tranches of senior notes outstanding as follows (dollars in millions):"} {"answer": 319.0, "question": "The total amount of which section ranks first for Years Ended December 31, for Credit loss impairments? (in million)", "context": "Shares of common stock issued, in treasury, and outstanding were (in thousands of shares): \n
Shares IssuedTreasury SharesShares Outstanding
Balance at December 29, 2013376,832—376,832
Exercise of stock options, issuance of other stock awards, and other178—178
Balance at December 28, 2014377,010—377,010
Exercise of warrants20,480—20,480
Issuance of common stock to Sponsors221,666—221,666
Acquisition of Kraft Foods Group, Inc.592,898—592,898
Exercise of stock options, issuance of other stock awards, and other2,338-4131,925
Balance at January 3, 20161,214,392-4131,213,979
Exercise of stock options, issuance of other stock awards, and other4,555-2,0582,497
Balance at December 31, 20161,218,947-2,4711,216,476
\n Note 13. Financing Arrangements We routinely enter into accounts receivable securitization and factoring programs . We account for transfers of receivables pursuant to these programs as a sale and remove them from our consolidated balance sheet. At December 31, 2016 , our most significant program in place was the U. S. securitization program, which was amended in May 2016 and originally entered into in October of 2015. Under the program, we are entitled to receive cash consideration of up to $800 million (which we elected to reduce to $500 million , effective February 21, 2017) and a receivable for the remainder of the purchase price (the “Deferred Purchase Price”). This securitization program utilizes a bankruptcy\u0002remote special-purpose entity (“SPE”). The SPE is wholly-owned by a subsidiary of Kraft Heinz and its sole business consists of the purchase or acceptance, through capital contributions of receivables and related assets, from a Kraft Heinz subsidiary and subsequent transfer of such receivables and related assets to a bank. Although the SPE is included in our consolidated financial statements, it is a separate legal entity with separate creditors who will be entitled, upon its liquidation, to be satisfied out of the SPE's assets prior to any assets or value in the SPE becoming available to Kraft Heinz or its subsidiaries. The assets of the SPE are not available to pay creditors of Kraft Heinz or its subsidiaries. This program expires in May 2017. In addition to the U. S. securitization program, we have accounts receivable factoring programs denominated in Australian dollars, New Zealand dollars, British pound sterling, euros, and Japanese yen. Under these programs, we generally receive cash consideration up to a certain limit and a receivable for the Deferred Purchase Price. There is no Deferred Purchase Price associated with the Japanese yen contract. Related to these programs, our aggregate cash consideration limit, after applying applicable hold-backs, was $245 million U. S. dollars at December 31, 2016. Generally, each of these programs automatically renews annually until terminated by either party. The cash consideration and carrying amount of receivables removed from the consolidated balance sheets in connection with the above programs were $904 million at December 31, 2016 and $267 million at January 3, 2016 . The fair value of the Deferred Purchase Price for the programs was $129 million at December 31, 2016 and $583 million at January 3, 2016 . The Deferred Purchase Price is included in sold receivables on the consolidated balance sheets and had a carrying value which approximated its fair value at December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2016 . The proceeds from these sales are recognized on the consolidated statements of cash flows as a component of operating activities. We act as servicer for these arrangements and have not recorded any servicing assets or liabilities for these arrangements as of December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2016 because they were not material to the financial statements. PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL, INC. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements The following table sets forth a rollforward of pre-tax amounts remaining in OCI related to fixed maturity securities with credit loss impairments recognized in earnings, for the periods indicated: \n
Years Ended December 31,
20182017
(in millions)
Credit loss impairments:
Balance, beginning of period$319$359
New credit loss impairments110
Additional credit loss impairments on securities previously impaired011
Increases due to the passage of time on previously recorded credit losses1015
Reductions for securities which matured, paid down, prepaid or were sold during the period-162-58
Reductions for securities impaired to fair value during the period-1-24-13
Accretion of credit loss impairments previously recognized due to an increase in cash flows expected to be collected-4-5
Balance, end of period$140$319
\n (1) Represents circumstances where the Company determined in the current period that it intends to sell the security or it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell the security before recovery of the security’s amortized cost. Assets Supporting Experience-Rated Contractholder Liabilities The following table sets forth the composition of “Assets supporting experience-rated contractholder liabilities,” as of the dates indicated: \n
December 31, 2018December 31, 2017
AmortizedCost or CostFairValueAmortizedCost or CostFairValue
(in millions)
Short-term investments and cash equivalents$215$215$245$245
Fixed maturities:
Corporate securities13,25813,11913,81614,073
Commercial mortgage-backed securities2,3462,3242,2942,311
Residential mortgage-backed securities-1828811961966
Asset-backed securities-21,6491,6651,3631,392
Foreign government bonds1,0871,0831,0501,057
U.S. government authorities and agencies and obligations of U.S. states538577357410
Total fixed maturities-319,70619,57919,84120,209
Equity securities1,3781,4601,2781,643
Total assets supporting experience-rated contractholder liabilities-4$21,299$21,254$21,364$22,097
\n (1) Includes publicly-traded agency pass-through securities and collateralized mortgage obligations. (2) Includes credit-tranched securities collateralized by sub-prime mortgages, auto loans, credit cards, education loans and other asset types. Includes collateralized loan obligations at fair value of $1,028 million and $943 million as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, all of which were rated AAA. (3) As a percentage of amortized cost, 93% and 92% of the portfolio was considered high or highest quality based on NAIC or equivalent ratings, as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. (4) As a percentage of amortized cost, 78% and 80% of the portfolio consisted of public securities as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The net change in unrealized gains (losses) from assets supporting experience-rated contractholder liabilities still held at period end, recorded within “Other income (loss),” was $(778) million, $300 million and $75 million during the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Equity Securities The net change in unrealized gains (losses) from equity securities, still held at period end, recorded within “Other income (loss),” was $(1,157) million during the year ended December 31, 2018. The net change in unrealized gains (losses) from equity securities, still held at period end, recorded within “Other comprehensive income (loss),” was $(494) million and $760 million during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Benefits and expenses increased $735 million. Excluding the impact of our annual reviews and update of assumptions and other refinements, as discussed above, benefits and expenses increased $709 million primarily driven by an increase in policyholders’ benefits, including the change in policy reserves, related to the increase in premiums discussed above. Account Values Account values are a significant driver of our operating results, and are primarily driven by net additions (withdrawals) and the impact of market changes. The income we earn on most of our fee-based products varies with the level of fee-based account values, since many policy fees are determined by these values. The investment income and interest we credit to policyholders on our spread-based products varies with the level of general account values. To a lesser extent, changes in account values impact our pattern of amortization of DAC and VOBA and general and administrative expenses. The following table shows the changes in the account values and net additions (withdrawals) of Retirement segment products for the periods indicated. Net additions (withdrawals) are plan sales and participant deposits or additions, as applicable, minus plan and participant withdrawals and benefits. Account values include both internally- and externally\u0002managed client balances as the total balances drive revenue for the Retirement segment. For more information on internally-managed balances, see “—PGIM. ”"} {"answer": 1.15, "question": "what was the change in fair value of retained interests in billions as of december 2018 and december 2017?", "context": "THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements ‰ Purchased interests represent senior and subordinated interests, purchased in connection with secondary market-making activities, in securitization entities in which the firm also holds retained interests. ‰ Substantially all of the total outstanding principal amount and total retained interests relate to securitizations during 2014 and thereafter as of December 2018, and relate to securitizations during 2012 and thereafter as of December 2017. ‰ The fair value of retained interests was $3.28 billion as of December 2018 and $2.13 billion as of December 2017. In addition to the interests in the table above, the firm had other continuing involvement in the form of derivative transactions and commitments with certain nonconsolidated VIEs. The carrying value of these derivatives and commitments was a net asset of $75 million as of December 2018 and $86 million as of December 2017, and the notional amount of these derivatives and commitments was $1.09 billion as of December 2018 and $1.26 billion as of December 2017. The notional amounts of these derivatives and commitments are included in maximum exposure to loss in the nonconsolidated VIE table in Note 12. The table below presents information about the weighted average key economic assumptions used in measuring the fair value of mortgage-backed retained interests. \n
As of December
$ in millions20182017
Fair value of retained interests$ 3,151$2,071
Weighted average life (years)7.26.0
Constant prepayment rate11.9%9.4%
Impact of 10% adverse change$ -27$ -19
Impact of 20% adverse change$ -53$ -35
Discount rate4.7%4.2%
Impact of 10% adverse change$ -75$ -35
Impact of 20% adverse change$ -147$ -70
\n In the table above: ‰ Amounts do not reflect the benefit of other financial instruments that are held to mitigate risks inherent in these retained interests. ‰ Changes in fair value based on an adverse variation in assumptions generally cannot be extrapolated because the relationship of the change in assumptions to the change in fair value is not usually linear. ‰ The impact of a change in a particular assumption is calculated independently of changes in any other assumption. In practice, simultaneous changes in assumptions might magnify or counteract the sensitivities disclosed above. ‰ The constant prepayment rate is included only for positions for which it is a key assumption in the determination of fair value. ‰ The discount rate for retained interests that relate to U. S. government agency-issued collateralized mortgage obligations does not include any credit loss. Expected credit loss assumptions are reflected in the discount rate for the remainder of retained interests. The firm has other retained interests not reflected in the table above with a fair value of $133 million and a weighted average life of 4.2 years as of December 2018, and a fair value of $56 million and a weighted average life of 4.5 years as of December 2017. Due to the nature and fair value of certain of these retained interests, the weighted average assumptions for constant prepayment and discount rates and the related sensitivity to adverse changes are not meaningful as of both December 2018 and December 2017. The firm’s maximum exposure to adverse changes in the value of these interests is the carrying value of $133 million as of December 2018 and $56 million as of December 2017. Note 12. Variable Interest Entities A variable interest in a VIE is an investment (e. g. , debt or equity) or other interest (e. g. , derivatives or loans and lending commitments) that will absorb portions of the VIE’s expected losses and/or receive portions of the VIE’s expected residual returns. The firm’s variable interests in VIEs include senior and subordinated debt; loans and lending commitments; limited and general partnership interests; preferred and common equity; derivatives that may include foreign currency, equity and/or credit risk; guarantees; and certain of the fees the firm receives from investment funds. Certain interest rate, foreign currency and credit derivatives the firm enters into with VIEs are not variable interests because they create, rather than absorb, risk. VIEs generally finance the purchase of assets by issuing debt and equity securities that are either collateralized by or indexed to the assets held by the VIE. The debt and equity securities issued by a VIE may include tranches of varying levels of subordination. The firm’s involvement with VIEs includes securitization of financial assets, as described in Note 11, and investments in and loans to other types of VIEs, as described below. See Note 11 for further information about securitization activities, including the definition of beneficial interests. See Note 3 for the firm’s consolidation policies, including the definition of a VIE. The completion factor method is used for the months of incurred claims prior to the most recent three months because the historical percentage of claims processed for those months is at a level sufficient to produce a consistently reliable result. Conversely, for the most recent three months of incurred claims, the volume of claims processed historically is not at a level sufficient to produce a reliable result, which therefore requires us to examine historical trend patterns as the primary method of evaluation. Medical cost trends potentially are more volatile than other segments of the economy. The drivers of medical cost trends include increases in the utilization of hospital and physician services, prescription drugs, and new medical technologies, as well as the inflationary effect on the cost per unit of each of these expense components. Other external factors such as government-mandated benefits or other regulatory changes, catastrophes, and epidemics also may impact medical cost trends. Additionally, as we realign our commercial strategy, we continue to reduce the level of traditional utilization management functions such as pre\u0002authorization of services, monitoring of inpatient admissions, and requirements for physician referrals. Other internal factors such as system conversions and claims processing interruptions also may impact our ability to accurately predict estimates of historical completion factors or medical cost trends. All of these factors are considered in estimating IBNR and in estimating the per member per month claims trend for purposes of determining the reserve for the most recent three months. Each of these factors requires significant judgment by management. The completion and claims per member per month trend factors are the most significant factors impacting the IBNR estimate. The following table illustrates the sensitivity of these factors and the estimated potential impact on our operating results caused by changes in these factors based on December 31, 2003 data: \n
Completion Factor (a):Claims Trend Factor (b):
(Decrease) Increase in FactorIncrease (Decrease) in Medical and Other Expenses Payable(Decrease) Increase in FactorIncrease (Decrease) in Medical and Other Expenses Payable
(dollars in thousands)
-3%$136,000-3%$-59,000
-2%$88,000-2%$-41,000
-1%$43,000-1%$-22,000
1%$-40,0001%$14,000
2%$-79,0002%$33,000
3%$-116,0003%$51,000
\n (a) Reflects estimated potential changes in medical and other expenses payable caused by changes in completion factors for incurred months prior to the most recent three months. (b) Reflects estimated potential changes in medical and other expenses payable caused by changes in annualized claims trend used for the estimation of per member per month incurred claims for the most recent three months. Most medical claims are paid within a few months of the member receiving service from a physician or other health care provider. As a result, these liabilities generally are described as having a “short-tail”, which causes less than 2% of our medical and other expenses payable as of the end of any given period to be outstanding for more than 12 months. As such, we expect that substantially all of the 2003 estimate of medical and other expenses payable will be known and paid during 2004. Our reserving practice is to consistently recognize the actuarial best point estimate within a level of confidence required by actuarial standards. Actuarial standards of practice generally require a level of confidence such that the liabilities established for IBNR have a greater probability of being adequate versus being insufficient, or such that the liabilities established for IBNR are sufficient to cover obligations under an assumption of moderately adverse conditions. Adverse conditions are situations in which the actual claims are TRICARE change orders occur when we perform services or incur costs under the directive of the federal government that were not originally specified in our contracts. Under federal regulations we are entitled to an equitable adjustment to the contract price, which results in additional premium revenues. Examples of items that have necessitated substantial change orders in recent years include congressionally legislated increases in the level of benefits for TRICARE beneficiaries and the administration of new government programs such as TRICARE for Life and TRICARE Senior Pharmacy. Like BPAs, we record revenue applicable to change orders when these amounts are determinable and the collectibility is reasonably assured. Unlike BPAs, where settlement only occurs at specified intervals, change orders may be negotiated and settled at any time throughout the year. Total TRICARE premium and ASO fee receivables were as follows at December 31, 2003 and 2002: \n
20032002
(in thousands)
TRICARE premiums receivable:
Base receivable$254,688$190,339
Bid price adjustments (BPAs)92,875104,044
Change orders7,0731,400
Subtotal354,636295,783
Less: long-term portion of BPAs-38,794-86,471
Total TRICARE premiums receivable$315,842$209,312
TRICARE ASO fees receivable:
Base receivable$—$7,205
Change orders11,96856,230
Total TRICARE ASO fees receivable$11,968$63,435
\n Our TRICARE contracts also contain risk-sharing provisions with the federal government to minimize any losses and limit any profits in the event that medical costs for which we are at risk differ from the levels targeted in our contracts. Amounts receivable from the federal government under such risk-sharing provisions are included in the BPA receivable above, while amounts payable to the federal government under these provisions of approximately $17.3 million at December 31, 2003 are included in medical and other expenses payable in our consolidated balance sheets. Investment Securities Investment securities totaled $1,995.8 million, or 38% of total assets at December 31, 2003. Debt securities totaled $1,960.6 million, or 98% of our total investment portfolio. More than 94% of our debt securities were of investment-grade quality, with an average credit rating of AA by Standard & Poor’s at December 31, 2003. Most of the debt securities that are below investment grade are rated at the higher end (B or better) of the non\u0002investment grade spectrum. Our investment policy limits investments in a single issuer and requires diversification among various asset types. Duration is indicative of the relationship between changes in market value to changes in interest rates, providing a general indication of the sensitivity of the fair values of our debt securities to changes in interest rates. However, actual market values may differ significantly from estimates based on duration. The average duration of our debt securities was approximately 3.5 years at December 31, 2003. Based on this duration, a 1% increase in interest rates would generally decrease the fair value of our debt securities by approximately $70 million. Our investment securities are categorized as available for sale and, as a result, are stated at fair value. Fair value of publicly traded debt and equity securities are based on quoted market prices. Non-traded debt securities are priced independently by a third party vendor. Fair value of venture capital debt securities that are privately Revenue for other healthcare services is recognized on a fee-for-service basis at estimated collectible amounts at the time services are rendered. Our fees are determined in advance for each type of service performed. Investment Securities Investment securities totaled $9.8 billion, or 47.3% of total assets at December 31, 2013, and $9.8 billion, or 49% of total assets at December 31, 2012. Debt securities, detailed below, comprised this entire investment portfolio at December 31, 2013 and at December 31, 2012. The fair value of debt securities were as follows at December 31, 2013 and 2012:"} {"answer": 0.00699, "question": "What is the ratio of Operating lease obligations to Total contractual obligations in 1-3 years?", "context": "Revenues N&SS revenues decreased 1% in 2008 and 2% in 2007. The decrease of $137 million in 2008 is primarily due to decreased revenues in FCS, Proprietary and satellite programs partially offset by increased revenues in the SBInet program. The decrease of $292 million in 2007 was primarily due to the exclusion of government Delta volume, now a component of our equity investment in ULA and lower FCS volume, partially offset by increased volume on SBInet and several satellite programs. Delta launch and new-build satellite deliveries were as follows: \n
Years ended December 31, 200820072006
Delta II Commercial 23
Delta II Government2
Delta IV Government3
Satellites 144
\n Delta government launches are excluded from our deliveries after December 1, 2006 due to the formation of ULA. Operating Earnings N&SS operating earnings increased by $171 million in 2008 was primarily due to increased earnings from our investment in ULA. The decrease in 2007 was due to lower earnings on FCS and several satellite programs. These decreases were partially offset by higher award fees on GMD and a $44 million gain on sale of a property in Anaheim. N&SS operating earnings include equity earnings of $73 million, $85 million and $71 million from the United Space Alliance joint venture in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively and equity earnings of $105 million, a loss of $11 million and equity earnings of $5 million from the ULA joint venture in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The ULA equity earnings and loss amounts are net of the basis difference amortization. Research and Development The N&SS research and development funding remains focused on the development of communications, command and control, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems (C4ISR); communications and command and control (C3) capabilities that support a network-enabled architecture approach for our various government customers. We are investing in communications capabilities to enable connectivity between existing air/ground platforms, increase communications availability and bandwidth through more robust space systems, and leverage innovative communications concepts. Key programs in this area include JTRS, FCS, Global Positioning System, Tracking and Data Relay Satellite, Ares 1 Crew Launch Vehicle and GMD. Investments were also made to support concepts that may lead to the development of next-generation space intelligence systems. Along with increased funding to support these areas of architecture and network-enabled capabilities development, we also maintained our investment levels in global missile defense and advanced missile defense concepts and technologies. Backlog N&SS total backlog decreased by 12% in 2008 compared with 2007 primarily due to revenues recognized on multi-year orders received in prior years on FCS, GMD and C3 programs, partially offset by an increase in the International Space Station program. Total backlog decreased by 7% in 2007 compared with 2006 due to revenues recognized on FCS and Proprietary programs, partially offset by an increase in Space Exploration programs. Additional Considerations Items which could have a future impact on N&SS operations include the following: United Launch Alliance On December 1, 2006, we completed the transaction with Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed) to create a 50/50 joint venture named United Launch Alliance L. L. C. (ULA). ULA combines the production, engineering, test and launch operations associated with U. S. government launches of Boeing Delta and Lockheed Atlas rockets. In connection with the transaction, billion of unused borrowing on revolving credit line agreements. We anticipate that these credit lines will primarily serve as backup liquidity to support our general corporate borrowing needs. Financing commitments totaled $18.1 billion and $15.9 billion as of December 31, 2012 and 2011. We anticipate that we will not be required to fund a significant portion of our financing commitments as we continue to work with third party financiers to provide alternative financing to customers. Historically, we have not been required to fund significant amounts of outstanding commitments. However, there can be no assurances that we will not be required to fund greater amounts than historically required. In the event we require additional funding to support strategic business opportunities, our commercial aircraft financing commitments, unfavorable resolution of litigation or other loss contingencies, or other business requirements, we expect to meet increased funding requirements by issuing commercial paper or term debt. We believe our ability to access external capital resources should be sufficient to satisfy existing short-term and long-term commitments and plans, and also to provide adequate financial flexibility to take advantage of potential strategic business opportunities should they arise within the next year. However, there can be no assurance of the cost or availability of future borrowings, if any, under our commercial paper program, in the debt markets or our credit facilities. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, our pension plans were $19.7 billion and $16.6 billion underfunded as measured under GAAP. On an ERISA basis our plans are more than 100% funded at December 31, 2012 with minimal required contributions in 2013. We expect to make discretionary contributions to our plans of approximately $1.5 billion in 2013. We may be required to make higher contributions to our pension plans in future years. As of December 31, 2012, we were in compliance with the covenants for our debt and credit facilities. The most restrictive covenants include a limitation on mortgage debt and sale and leaseback transactions as a percentage of consolidated net tangible assets (as defined in the credit agreements), and a limitation on consolidated debt as a percentage of total capital (as defined). When considering debt covenants, we continue to have substantial borrowing capacity. Contractual Obligations The following table summarizes our known obligations to make future payments pursuant to certain contracts as of December 31, 2012, and the estimated timing thereof. \n
(Dollars in millions)TotalLessthan 1year1-3years3-5yearsAfter 5years
Long-term debt (including current portion)$10,251$1,340$2,147$1,095$5,669
Interest on debt-16,1775108647494,054
Pension and other postretirement cash requirements25,5585791,2447,02516,710
Capital lease obligations184102784
Operating lease obligations1,405218334209644
Purchase obligations not recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position118,00244,47241,83818,95612,736
Purchase obligations recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position15,98114,6641,30719
Total contractual obligations$177,558$61,885$47,812$28,039$39,822
\n (1) Includes interest on variable rate debt calculated based on interest rates at December 31, 2012. Variable rate debt was less than 1% of our total debt at December 31, 2012. Industry Competitiveness The commercial jet airplane market and the airline industry remain extremely competitive. Market liberalization in Europe, the Middle East and Asia is enabling low-cost airlines to continue gaining market share. These airlines are increasing the pressure on airfares. This results in continued cost pressures for all airlines and price pressure on our products. Major productivity gains are essential to ensure a favorable market position at acceptable profit margins. Continued access to global markets remains vital to our ability to fully realize our sales potential and long\u0002term investment returns. Approximately 91% of Commercial Airplanes’ total backlog, in dollar terms, is with non-U. S. airlines. We face aggressive international competitors who are intent on increasing their market share. They offer competitive products and have access to most of the same customers and suppliers. With government support,Airbus has historically invested heavily to create a family of products to compete with ours. Regional jet makers Embraer and Bombardier continue to develop and market larger and increasingly more capable airplanes, including Embraer’s E-195 in the regional jet market and Bombardier’s C Series in the 100-150 seat transcontinental market. Additionally, other competitors from Russia, China and Japan are developing commercial jet aircraft. Some of these competitors have historically enjoyed access to government\u0002provided financial support, including “launch aid,” which greatly reduces the cost and commercial risks associated with airplane development activities. This has enabled the development of airplanes without commercial viability; others to be brought to market more quickly than otherwise possible; and many offered for sale below market-based prices. Many competitors have continued to make improvements in efficiency, which may result in funding product development, gaining market share and improving earnings. This market environment has resulted in intense pressures on pricing and other competitive factors, and we expect these pressures to continue or intensify in the coming years. We are focused on improving our products and services and continuing our cost-reduction efforts, which enhances our ability to compete. We are also focused on taking actions to ensure that Boeing is not harmed by unfair subsidization of competitors. Results of Operations \n
Years ended December 31,201720162015
Revenues$56,729$58,012$59,399
% of total company revenues61%61%62%
Earnings from operations$5,432$1,995$4,284
Operating margins9.6%3.4%7.2%
Research and development$2,247$3,706$2,311
\n Revenues Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,283 million or 2% in 2017 compared with 2016 due to delivery mix, with fewer twin aisle deliveries more than offsetting the impact of higher single aisle deliveries. Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,387 million or 2% in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to fewer deliveries. Through February 25, 2016, we repurchased approximately $415.0 million of shares of our common stock, which includes the $250.0 million of shares that we repurchased from certain selling stockholders on February 10, 2016. In order to achieve operational synergies, we expect cash outlays related to our integration plans to be approximately $290.0 million in 2016. These cash outlays are necessary to achieve our integration goals of net annual pre-tax operating profit synergies of $350.0 million by the end of the third year post-Closing Date. Also as discussed in Note 20 to our consolidated financial statements, as of December 31, 2015, a short-term liability of $50.0 million and long-term liability of $264.6 million related to Durom Cup product liability claims was recorded on our consolidated balance sheet. We expect to continue paying these claims over the next few years. We expect to be reimbursed a portion of these payments for product liability claims from insurance carriers. As of December 31, 2015, we have received a portion of the insurance proceeds we estimate we will recover. We have a long-term receivable of $95.3 million remaining for future expected reimbursements from our insurance carriers. We also had a short-term liability of $33.4 million related to Biomet metal-on-metal hip implant claims. At December 31, 2015, we had ten tranches of senior notes outstanding as follows (dollars in millions):"} {"answer": 2010.0, "question": "For Three Months Ended Dec 31,which year is Total stock-based compensation greater than 2400 thousand?", "context": "(2) Includes stock-based compensation expense and asset acquisition related write-offs as follows: \n
Three Months Ended
Mar 29,2009Jun 28,2009Sept 30,2009Dec 31,2009Mar 31,2010Jun 30,2010Sept 30,2010Dec 31,2010
($ amounts in 000's)
Cost of product revenue2427252624262625
Cost of services revenue124172169193208234242245
Research and development378498516571554587600598
Sales and marketing6446927679178668971,0171,030
General and administrative380404459475496520549571
Total stock-based compensation1,5501,7931,9362,1822,1482,2642,4342,469
Asset acquisition related write-offs—631931,663————
Total stock based compensation and asset acquisition related write-offs1,5502,4242,0293,8452,1482,2642,4342,469
\n (3) See Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Seasonality, Cyclicality and Quarterly Revenue Trends Our quarterly results reflect seasonality in the sale of our products, subscriptions and services. In general, a pattern of increased customer buying at year-end has positively impacted sales activity in the fourth quarter. In the first quarter we generally experience lower sequential billings and product revenues, which results in lower product revenue. Our product revenue in the third quarter can be negatively affected by reduced economic activity in Europe during the summer months. During fiscal 2010, the growth in the Americas during the third quarter more than offset the slight decline in Europe, but this may not always be the case. Similarly, our gross margins and operating income have been affected by these historical trends because expenses are relatively fixed in the near-term. Although these seasonal factors are common in the technology sector, historical patterns should not be considered a reliable indicator of our future sales activity or performance. On a quarterly basis, we have usually generated the majority of our product revenue in the final month of each quarter and a significant amount in the last two weeks of a quarter. We believe this is due to customer buying patterns typical in this industry. Our total quarterly revenue over the past twelve quarters has increased sequentially in every quarter except for the first quarters of fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2009. We believe these declines in the first and third quarters of fiscal 2010 are based on seasonality as discussed above, which particularly impacts our product revenue. Product revenue in all of the quarters of fiscal 2010 was higher as compared to the same periods in fiscal 2009, which we believe was due in part to the investments made in our sales organization and improvements in overall corporate IT spending. THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis The Risk Committee of the Board and the Risk Governance Committee approve liquidity risk limits at the firmwide level, consistent with our risk appetite statement. Limits are reviewed frequently and amended, with required approvals, on a permanent and temporary basis, as appropriate, to reflect changing market or business conditions. Our liquidity risk limits are monitored by Treasury and Liquidity Risk Management. Liquidity Risk Management is responsible for identifying and escalating to senior management and/or the appropriate risk committee, on a timely basis, instances where limits have been exceeded. GCLA and Unencumbered Metrics GCLA. Based on the results of our internal liquidity risk models, described above, as well as our consideration of other factors, including, but not limited to, an assessment of our potential intraday liquidity needs and a qualitative assessment of our condition, as well as the financial markets, we believe our liquidity position as of both December 2018 and December 2017 was appropriate. We strictly limit our GCLA to a narrowly defined list of securities and cash because they are highly liquid, even in a difficult funding environment. We do not include other potential sources of excess liquidity in our GCLA, such as less liquid unencumbered securities or committed credit facilities. The table below presents information about our average GCLA \n
Average for the Year Ended December
$ in millions 20182017
Denomination
U.S. dollar $155,348$155,020
Non-U.S.dollar 77,99563,528
Total $233,343$218,548
Asset Class
Overnight cash deposits $ 98,811$ 93,617
U.S. government obligations 79,81075,108
U.S. agency obligations 12,17111,813
Non-U.S.governmentobligations 42,55138,010
Total $233,343$218,548
Entity Type
Group Inc. and Funding IHC $ 40,920$ 37,507
Major broker-dealer subsidiaries 104,36498,160
Major bank subsidiaries 88,05982,881
Total $233,343$218,548
\n In the table above: ‰ The U. S. dollar-denominated GCLA consists of (i) unencumbered U. S. government and agency obligations (including highly liquid U. S. agency mortgage-backed obligations), all of which are eligible as collateral in Federal Reserve open market operations and (ii) certain overnight U. S. dollar cash deposits. ‰ The non-U. S. dollar-denominated GCLA consists of non-U. S. government obligations (only unencumbered German, French, Japanese and U. K. government obligations) and certain overnight cash deposits in highly liquid currencies. We maintain our GCLA to enable us to meet current and potential liquidity requirements of our parent company, Group Inc. , and its subsidiaries. Our Modeled Liquidity Outflow and Intraday Liquidity Model incorporate a consolidated requirement for Group Inc. , as well as a standalone requirement for each of our major broker-dealer and bank subsidiaries. Funding IHC is required to provide the necessary liquidity to Group Inc. during the ordinary course of business, and is also obligated to provide capital and liquidity support to major subsidiaries in the event of our material financial distress or failure. Liquidity held directly in each of our major broker-dealer and bank subsidiaries is intended for use only by that subsidiary to meet its liquidity requirements and is assumed not to be available to Group Inc. or Funding IHC unless (i) legally provided for and (ii) there are no additional regulatory, tax or other restrictions. In addition, the Modeled Liquidity Outflow and Intraday Liquidity Model also incorporate a broader assessment of standalone liquidity requirements for other subsidiaries and we hold a portion of our GCLA directly at Group Inc. or Funding IHC to support such requirements. Other Unencumbered Assets. In addition to our GCLA, we have a significant amount of other unencumbered cash and financial instruments, including other government obligations, high-grade money market securities, corporate obligations, marginable equities, loans and cash deposits not included in our GCLA. The fair value of our unencumbered assets averaged $177.08 billion for 2018 and $158.41 billion for 2017. We do not consider these assets liquid enough to be eligible for our GCLA. Liquidity Regulatory Framework As a BHC, we are subject to a minimum Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) under the LCR rule approved by the U. S. federal bank regulatory agencies. The LCR rule requires organizations to maintain an adequate ratio of eligible high-quality liquid assets (HQLA) to expected net cash outflows under an acute short-term liquidity stress scenario. Eligible HQLA excludes HQLA held by subsidiaries that is in excess of their minimum requirement and is subject to transfer restrictions. We are required to maintain a minimum LCR of 100%. We expect that fluctuations in client activity, business mix and the market environment will impact our average LCR. The table below presents information about our average daily LCR. \n
Average for the Three Months Ended
$ in millions December 2018September 2018
Total HQLA $226,473$233,721
Eligible HQLA $160,016$170,621
Net cash outflows $126,511$133,126
LCR 127%128%
\n Liquidity and Capital Resources"} {"answer": 444.0, "question": "What's the total amount of the Non-GAAP adjusted operating income (loss) in the years where Operating income (loss) is greater than 0? (in million)", "context": "Backlog Applied manufactures systems to meet demand represented by order backlog and customer commitments. Backlog consists of: (1) orders for which written authorizations have been accepted and assigned shipment dates are within the next 12 months, or shipment has occurred but revenue has not been recognized; and (2) contractual service revenue and maintenance fees to be earned within the next 12 months. Backlog by reportable segment as of October 27, 2013 and October 28, 2012 was as follows: \n
20132012(In millions, except percentages)
Silicon Systems Group$1,29555%$70544%
Applied Global Services59125%58036%
Display36115%20613%
Energy and Environmental Solutions1255%1157%
Total$2,372100%$1,606100%
\n Applied’s backlog on any particular date is not necessarily indicative of actual sales for any future periods, due to the potential for customer changes in delivery schedules or cancellation of orders. Customers may delay delivery of products or cancel orders prior to shipment, subject to possible cancellation penalties. Delays in delivery schedules and/or a reduction of backlog during any particular period could have a material adverse effect on Applied’s business and results of operations. Manufacturing, Raw Materials and Supplies Applied’s manufacturing activities consist primarily of assembly, test and integration of various proprietary and commercial parts, components and subassemblies (collectively, parts) that are used to manufacture systems. Applied has implemented a distributed manufacturing model under which manufacturing and supply chain activities are conducted in various countries, including the United States, Europe, Israel, Singapore, Taiwan, and other countries in Asia, and assembly of some systems is completed at customer sites. Applied uses numerous vendors, including contract manufacturers, to supply parts and assembly services for the manufacture and support of its products. Although Applied makes reasonable efforts to assure that parts are available from multiple qualified suppliers, this is not always possible. Accordingly, some key parts may be obtained from only a single supplier or a limited group of suppliers. Applied seeks to reduce costs and to lower the risks of manufacturing and service interruptions by: (1) selecting and qualifying alternate suppliers for key parts; (2) monitoring the financial condition of key suppliers; (3) maintaining appropriate inventories of key parts; (4) qualifying new parts on a timely basis; and (5) locating certain manufacturing operations in close proximity to suppliers and customers. Research, Development and Engineering Applied’s long-term growth strategy requires continued development of new products. The Company’s significant investment in research, development and engineering (RD&E) has generally enabled it to deliver new products and technologies before the emergence of strong demand, thus allowing customers to incorporate these products into their manufacturing plans at an early stage in the technology selection cycle. Applied works closely with its global customers to design systems and processes that meet their planned technical and production requirements. Product development and engineering organizations are located primarily in the United States, as well as in Europe, Israel, Taiwan, and China. In addition, Applied outsources certain RD&E activities, some of which are performed outside the United States, primarily in India. Process support and customer demonstration laboratories are located in the United States, China, Taiwan, Europe, and Israel. Applied’s investments in RD&E for product development and engineering programs to create or improve products and technologies over the last three years were as follows: $1.3 billion (18 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2013, $1.2 billion (14 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2012, and $1.1 billion (11 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2011. Applied has spent an average of 14 percent of net sales in RD&E over the last five years. In addition to RD&E for specific product technologies, Applied maintains ongoing programs for automation control systems, materials research, and environmental control that are applicable to its products. Item 2: Properties Information concerning Applied’s principal properties at October 27, 2013 is set forth below: \n
LocationTypePrincipal UseSquareFootageOwnership
Santa Clara, CAOffice, Plant & WarehouseHeadquarters; Marketing; Manufacturing; Distribution; Research, Development,Engineering; Customer Support1,476,000150,000OwnedLeased
Austin, TXOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing1,719,000145,000OwnedLeased
Rehovot, IsraelOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing; Research,Development, Engineering;Customer Support417,0005,000OwnedLeased
SingaporeOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing andCustomer Support392,00010,000OwnedLeased
Gloucester, MAOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing; Research,Development, Engineering;Customer Support315,000131,000OwnedLeased
Tainan, TaiwanOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing andCustomer Support320,000Owned
\n Because of the interrelation of Applied’s operations, properties within a country may be shared by the segments operating within that country. Products in the Silicon Systems Group are manufactured in Austin, Texas; Singapore; Gloucester, Massachusetts; and Rehovot, Israel. Remanufactured equipment products in the Applied Global Services segment are produced primarily in Austin, Texas. Products in the Display segment are manufactured in Tainan, Taiwan; Santa Clara, California; and Alzenau, Germany. Products in the Energy and Environmental Solutions segment are primarily manufactured in Alzenau, Germany; Treviso, Italy; and Cheseaux, Switzerland. In addition to the above properties, Applied also owns and leases offices, plants and/or warehouse locations in 78 locations throughout the world: 18 in Europe, 21 in Japan, 15 in North America (principally the United States), 8 in China, 7 in Korea, 6 in Southeast Asia, and 3 in Taiwan. These facilities are principally used for manufacturing; research, development and engineering; and marketing, sales and/or customer support. Applied also owns a total of approximately 139 acres of buildable land in Texas, California, Israel and Italy that could accommodate additional building space. Applied considers the properties that it owns or leases as adequate to meet its current and future requirements. Applied regularly assesses the size, capability and location of its global infrastructure and periodically makes adjustments based on these assessments. Fiscal 2013 operating results reflected a recovery in demand for TV manufacturing equipment and continued demand for advanced mobile display equipment, which resulted in increased new orders, net sales, operating income and non-GAAPadjusted operating income compared to fiscal 2012. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013, new orders were $114 million, down 55 percent from the prior quarter, and reflected customer push-outs of orders. Net sales in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013 were $163 million, almost flat compared to the prior quarter. Two customers accounted for approximately 50 percent of net sales for the Display segment in fiscal 2013. Fiscal 2012 operating results reflected a continued overcapacity in the large substrate LCD TV equipment industry that resulted in decreased new orders and net sales in fiscal 2012. The downturn in the LCD TV equipment industry was partially offset by increased demand for advanced mobile display equipment. Four customers accounted for 60 percent of net sales for the Display segment in fiscal 2012. Energy and Environmental Solutions Segment The Energy and Environmental Solutions segment includes products for fabricating c-Si solar PVs, as well as high throughput roll-to-roll deposition equipment for flexible electronics, packaging and other applications. This business is focused on delivering solutions to generate and conserve energy, with an emphasis on lowering the cost to produce solar power and increasing conversion efficiency. While end-demand for solar PVs has been robust over the last several years, investment levels in capital equipment remain depressed. Global solar PV production capacity exceeds anticipated demand, which has caused solar PV manufacturers to significantly reduce or delay investments in manufacturing capacity and new technology, or in some instances to cease operations. Certain significant measures for the past three fiscal years were as follows: \n
Change
2013201220112013 over 20122012 over 2011
(In millions, except percentages and ratios)
New orders$166$195$1,684$-29-15%$-1,489-88%
Net sales1734251,990-252-59%-1,565-79%
Book to bill ratio1.00.50.8
Operating income (loss)-433-66845323535%-1,121-247%
Operating margin-250.3%-157.2%22.8%-93.1 points-180.0 points
Non-GAAP Adjusted Results
Non-GAAP adjusted operating income (loss)-115-1844446938%-628-141%
Non-GAAP adjusted operating margin-66.5%-43.3%22.3%-23.2 points-65.6 points
\n Reconciliations of non-GAAP adjusted measures are presented under \"Non-GAAP Adjusted Results\" below. Net Operating Revenues by Operating Segment Information about our net operating revenues by operating segment as a percentage of Company net operating revenues is as follows:"} {"answer": 3.40615, "question": "what was the percentage change in the gross profit from 2009 to 2010 \\\\n", "context": "McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) \n
Years Ended March 31, Change
(Dollars in millions) 2012 2011 2010 2012 2011
Distribution Solutions
Direct distribution & services$85,523$77,554$72,21010%7%
Sales to customers’ warehouses20,45318,63121,43510-13
Total U.S. pharmaceutical distribution & services105,97696,18593,645103
Canada pharmaceutical distribution & services10,3039,7849,07258
Medical-Surgical distribution & services3,1452,9202,86182
Total Distribution Solutions119,424108,889105,578103
Technology Solutions
Services2,5942,4832,43942
Software & software systems59659057113
Hardware120122114-27
Total Technology Solutions3,3103,1953,12442
Total Revenues$122,734$112,084$108,702103
\n Revenues increased 10% to $122.7 billion in 2012 and 3% to $112.1 billion in 2011. The increase in revenues in each year primarily reflects market growth in our Distribution Solutions segment, which accounted for approximately 97% of our consolidated revenues, and our acquisition of US Oncology. Direct distribution and services revenues increased in 2012 compared to 2011 primarily due to market growth, which includes growing drug utilization and price increases, and from our acquisition of US Oncology. These increases were partially offset by price deflation associated with brand to generic drug conversions. Direct distribution and services revenues increased in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily due to market growth, the effect of a shift of revenues from sales to customers’ warehouses to direct store delivery, the lapping of which was completed in the third quarter of 2011, and due to our acquisition of US Oncology. These increases were partially offset by a decline in demand associated with the flu season and the impact of price deflation associated with brand to generic drug conversions. Sales to customers’ warehouses for 2012 increased compared to 2011 primarily due to a new customer and new business with existing customers. Sales to customers’ warehouses for 2011 decreased compared to 2010 primarily reflecting reduced revenues associated with existing customers, the effect of a shift of revenues to direct store delivery, the lapping of which was completed in the third quarter of 2011, and the impact of price deflation associated with brand to generic drug conversions. Sales to retail customers’ warehouses represent large volume sales of pharmaceuticals primarily to a limited number of large self-warehousing retail chain customers whereby we order bulk product from the manufacturer, receive and process the product through our central distribution facility and subsequently deliver the bulk product (generally in the same form as received from the manufacturer) directly to our customers’ warehouses. This distribution method is typically not marketed or sold by the Company as a stand-alone service; rather, it is offered as an additional distribution method for our large retail chain customers that have an internal self-warehousing distribution network. Sales to customers’ warehouses provide a benefit to these customers because they can utilize the Company as one source for both their direct-to-store business and their warehouse business. We generally have significantly lower gross profit margins on sales to customers’ warehouses as we pass much of the efficiency of this low cost-to-serve model on to the customer. These sales do, however, contribute to our gross profit dollars. McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL NOTES (Continued) Expected benefit payments, including assumed executive lump sum payments, for our pension plans are as follows: $180 million, $64 million, $64 million, $62 million and $62 million for 2020 to 2024 and $327 million for 2025 through 2029. Expected benefit payments are based on the same assumptions used to measure the benefit obligations and include estimated future employee service. Expected contributions to be made for our pension plans are $146 million for 2020. Weighted-average assumptions used to estimate the net periodic pension expense and the actuarial present value of benefit obligations were as follows: \n
U.S. Plans Years Ended March 31,Non-U.S. Plans Years Ended March 31,
201920182017201920182017
Net periodic pension expense
Discount rates3.83%3.55%3.40%2.35%2.34%2.72%
Rate of increase in compensationN/A -14.004.003.132.722.76
Expected long-term rate of return on plan assets5.256.256.253.714.034.51
Benefit obligation
Discount rates3.65%3.69%3.39%2.13%2.35%2.35%
Rate of increase in compensationN/A -1N/A -14.003.182.593.18
\n (1) This assumption is no longer needed in actuarial valuations as U. S. plans are frozen or have fixed benefits for the remaining active participants. Our defined benefit pension plan liabilities are valued using a discount rate based on a yield curve developed from a portfolio of high quality corporate bonds rated AA or better whose maturities are aligned with the expected benefit payments of our plans. For March 31, 2019, our U. S. defined benefit liabilities are valued using a weighted average discount rate of 3.65%, which represents a decrease of 4 basis points from our 2018 weighted-average discount rate of 3.69%. Our non-U. S. defined benefit pension plan liabilities are valued using a weighted-average discount rate of 2.13%, which represents a decrease of 22 basis points from our 2018 weighted average discount rate of 2.35%. Plan Assets Investment Strategy: The overall objective for U. S. pension plan assets has been to generate long-term investment returns consistent with capital preservation and prudent investment practices, with a diversification of asset types and investment strategies. Periodic adjustments were made to provide liquidity for benefit payments and to rebalance plan assets to their target allocations. In September 2018, a new investment allocation strategy was put in place to protect the funded status of the U. S. plan assets subsequent to Board approval of U. S. pension plan termination. The target allocation for U. S. plan assets at March 31, 2019 is 100% fixed income investments including cash and cash equivalents. The target allocations for U. S. plan assets at March 31, 2018 were 26% equity investments, 70% fixed income investments including cash and cash equivalents and 4% real estate. Equity investments include common stock, preferred stock, and equity commingled funds. Fixed income investments include corporate bonds, government securities, mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities, other directly held fixed income investments, and fixed income commingled funds. The real estate investments are in a commingled real estate fund. Year Ended December 31, 2010 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2009 Net revenues increased $207.5 million, or 24.2%, to $1,063.9 million in 2010 from $856.4 million in 2009. Net revenues by product category are summarized below: \n
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands)20102009$ Change% Change
Apparel$853,493$651,779$201,71430.9%
Footwear127,175136,224-9,049-6.6
Accessories43,88235,0778,80525.1
Total net sales1,024,550823,080201,47024.5
License revenues39,37733,3316,04618.1
Total net revenues$1,063,927$856,411$207,51624.2%
\n Net sales increased $201.5 million, or 24.5%, to $1,024.6 million in 2010 from $823.1 million in 2009 as noted in the table above. The increase in net sales primarily reflects: ? $88.9 million, or 56.8%, increase in direct to consumer sales, which includes 19 additional stores in 2010; and ? unit growth driven by increased distribution and new offerings in multiple product categories, most significantly in our training, base layer, mountain, golf and underwear categories; partially offset by ? $9.0 million decrease in footwear sales driven primarily by a decline in running and training footwear sales. License revenues increased $6.1 million, or 18.1%, to $39.4 million in 2010 from $33.3 million in 2009. This increase in license revenues was primarily a result of increased sales by our licensees due to increased distribution and continued unit volume growth. We have developed our own headwear and bags, and beginning in 2011, these products are being sold by us rather than by one of our licensees. Gross profit increased $120.4 million to $530.5 million in 2010 from $410.1 million in 2009. Gross profit as a percentage of net revenues, or gross margin, increased 200 basis points to 49.9% in 2010 compared to 47.9% in 2009. The increase in gross margin percentage was primarily driven by the following: ? approximate 100 basis point increase driven by increased direct to consumer higher margin sales; ? approximate 50 basis point increase driven by decreased sales markdowns and returns, primarily due to improved sell-through rates at retail; and ? approximate 50 basis point increase driven primarily by liquidation sales and related inventory reserve reversals. The current year period benefited from reversals of inventory reserves established in the prior year relative to certain cleated footwear, sport specific apparel and gloves. These products have historically been more difficult to liquidate at favorable prices. Selling, general and administrative expenses increased $93.3 million to $418.2 million in 2010 from $324.9 million in 2009. As a percentage of net revenues, selling, general and administrative expenses increased to 39.3% in 2010 from 37.9% in 2009. These changes were primarily attributable to the following: ? Marketing costs increased $19.3 million to $128.2 million in 2010 from $108.9 million in 2009 primarily due to an increase in sponsorship of events and collegiate and professional teams and athletes, increased television and digital campaign costs, including media campaigns for specific customers and additional personnel costs. In addition, we incurred increased expenses for our performance incentive plan as compared to the prior year. As a percentage of net revenues, marketing costs decreased to 12.0% in 2010 from 12.7% in 2009 primarily due to decreased marketing costs for specific customers."} {"answer": 0.15641, "question": "what percent of the net change in revenue between 2006 and 2007 was due to transmission revenue?", "context": "Entergy Texas, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 361 Fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to an increase in power purchases as a result of the purchased power agreements between Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Texas and an increase in the average market prices of purchased power and natural gas, substantially offset by a decrease in deferred fuel expense as a result of decreased recovery from customers of fuel costs. Other regulatory charges increased primarily due to an increase of $6.9 million in the recovery of bond expenses related to the securitization bonds. The recovery became effective July 2007. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional information regarding the securitization bonds.2007 Compared to 2006 Net revenue consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale, 2) purchased power expenses, and 3) other regulatory charges. Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2007 to 2006. \n
Amount (In Millions)
2006 net revenue$403.3
Purchased power capacity13.1
Securitization transition charge9.9
Volume/weather9.7
Transmission revenue6.1
Base revenue2.6
Other-2.4
2007 net revenue$442.3
\n The purchased power capacity variance is due to changes in the purchased power capacity costs included in the calculation in 2007 compared to 2006 used to bill generation costs between Entergy Texas and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana. The securitization transition charge variance is due to the issuance of securitization bonds. As discussed above, in June 2007, EGSRF I, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Texas, issued securitization bonds and with the proceeds purchased from Entergy Texas the transition property, which is the right to recover from customers through a transition charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds. See Note 5 to the financial statements herein for details of the securitization bond issuance. The volume/weather variance is due to increased electricity usage on billed retail sales, including the effects of more favorable weather in 2007 compared to the same period in 2006. The increase is also due to an increase in usage during the unbilled sales period. Retail electricity usage increased a total of 139 GWh in all sectors. See \"Critical Accounting Estimates\" below and Note 1 to the financial statements for further discussion of the accounting for unbilled revenues. The transmission revenue variance is due to an increase in rates effective June 2007 and new transmission customers in late 2006. The base revenue variance is due to the transition to competition rider that began in March 2006. Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate increase. Gross operating revenues, fuel and purchased power expenses, and other regulatory charges Gross operating revenues decreased primarily due to a decrease of $179 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to lower fuel rates and fuel refunds. The decrease was partially offset by the $39 million increase in net revenue described above and an increase of $44 million in wholesale revenues, including $30 million from the System Agreement cost equalization payments from Entergy Arkansas. The receipt of such payments is being Noble Energy, Inc. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Additional fair value disclosures about plan assets are as follows: \n
Fair Value Measurements Using
Asset CategoryQuoted Prices inActive Markets forIdentical Assets(Level 1)(1)SignificantObservable Inputs(Level 2)(1)SignificantUnobservable Inputs(Level 3)(1)Total
(millions)
December 31, 2011
Federal Money Market Funds$1$-$-$1
Mutual Funds
Large Cap Funds66--66
Mid Cap Funds10--10
Blended Funds6--6
Emerging Markets Funds6--6
Fixed Income Funds77--77
Common Collective Trust Funds
Large Cap Funds-17-17
Small Cap Funds-12-12
International Funds-24-24
Total$166$53$-$219
December 31, 2010
Federal Money Market Funds$2$-$-$2
Mutual Funds
Large Cap Funds69--69
Mid Cap Funds10--10
Blended Funds6--6
Emerging Markets Funds7--7
Fixed Income Funds55--55
Common Collective Trust Funds
Large Cap Funds-16-16
Small Cap Funds-12-12
International Funds-29-29
Total$149$57$-$206
\n (1) See Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies - Fair Value Measurements for a description of the fair value hierarchy. Additional information about plan assets, including methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair values of plan assets, is as follows: Federal Money Market Funds Investments in federal money market funds consist of portfolios of high quality fixed income securities (such as US Treasury securities) which, generally, have maturities of less than one year. The fair value of these investments is based on quoted market prices for identical assets as of the measurement date. Mutual Funds Investments in mutual funds consist of diversified portfolios of common stocks and fixed income instruments. The common stock mutual funds are diversified by market capitalization and investment style as well as economic sector and industry. The fixed income mutual funds are diversified primarily in government bonds, mortgage backed securities, and corporate bonds, most of which are rated investment grade. The fair values of these investments are based on quoted market prices for identical assets as of the measurement date. Common Collective Trust Funds Investments in common collective trust funds consist of common stock investments in both US and non-US equity markets. Portfolios are diversified by market capitalization and investment style as well as economic sector and industry. The investments in the non-US equity markets are used to further enhance the plan’s overall equity diversification which is expected to moderate the plan’s overall risk volatility. In addition to the normal risk associated with stock market investing, investments in foreign equity markets may carry additional political, regulatory, and currency risk which is taken into account by the committee in its deliberations. The fair value of these investments is based on quoted prices for similar assets in active markets. All of the investments in common collective trust funds represent exchange-traded securities with readily observable prices. Risk Management The oil and gas business is subject to many significant risks, including operational, strategic, financial and compliance/ regulatory risks. We strive to maintain a proactive enterprise risk management (ERM) process to plan, organize, and control our activities in a manner which is intended to minimize the effects of risk on our capital, cash flows and earnings. ERM expands our process to include risks associated with accidental losses, as well as operational, strategic, financial, compliance/regulatory, and other risks. Our ERM process is designed to operate in an annual cycle, integrated with our long range plans, and supportive of our capital structure planning. Elements include, among others, cash flow at risk analysis, credit risk management, a commodity hedging program to reduce the impacts of commodity price volatility, an insurance program to protect against disruptions in our cash flows, a robust global compliance program, and government and community relations initiatives. We benchmark our program against our peers and other global organizations. See Item 1A. Risk Factors for a discussion of specific risks we face in our business. Available Information Our website address is www. nobleenergyinc. com. Available on this website under “Investors – SEC Filings,” free of charge, are our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements, Forms 3, 4 and 5 filed on behalf of directors and executive officers and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. Alternatively, you may access these reports at the SEC’s website at www. sec. gov. Also posted on our website under “About Us – Corporate Governance”, and available in print upon request made by any stockholder to the Investor Relations Department, are charters for our Audit Committee, Compensation, Benefits and Stock Option Committee, Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, and Environment, Health and Safety Committee. Copies of the Code of Conduct and the Code of Ethics for Chief Executive and Senior Financial Officers (the Codes) are also posted on our website under the “Corporate Governance” section. Within the time period required by the SEC and the NYSE, as applicable, we will post on our website any modifications to the Codes and any waivers applicable to senior officers as defined in the applicable Code, as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Item 1A. Risk Factors Described below are certain risks that we believe are applicable to our business and the oil and gas industry in which we operate. There may be additional risks that are not presently material or known. You should carefully consider each of the following risks and all other information set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If any of the events described below occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, liquidity or access to the capital markets could be materially adversely affected. In addition, the current global economic and political environment intensifies many of these risks. We are currently experiencing a severe downturn in the oil and gas business cycle, and an extended or more severe downturn could have material adverse effects on our operations, our liquidity, and the price of our common stock. Our ability to operate profitably, maintain adequate liquidity, grow our business and pay dividends on our common stock depend highly upon the prices we receive for our crude oil, natural gas, and NGL production. Commodity prices are volatile. Crude oil prices, in particular, began to decline significantly in the fourth quarter 2014, declined further in 2015 and have continued to trade at a low level or decline further thus far in 2016. High and low monthly daily average prices for crude oil and high and low contract expiration prices for natural gas for the last three years and into 2016 were as follows: \n
Jan. 1 - Feb.12, 2016Year Ended December 31,
201520142013
NYMEX
Crude Oil - WTI (per Bbl) High(1)$31.78$59.83$105.15$110.53
Crude Oil - WTI (per Bbl) Low(1)29.7137.3359.2986.68
Natural Gas - HH (Per MMbtu) High2.233.195.564.46
Natural Gas - HH (Per MMbtu) Low2.052.033.733.11
Brent
Crude Oil - (per Bbl) High32.8064.32111.76118.90
Crude Oil - (per Bbl) Low31.9338.2162.9197.69
"} {"answer": 0.17122, "question": "In the year with lowest amount of Working capital, what's the increasing rate of Total assets?", "context": "Part I Item 1 Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy 253 including the continued effectiveness of the Clean Energy Standards/Zero Emissions Credit program (CES/ZEC), the establishment of certain long-term agreements on acceptable terms with the Energy Research and Development Authority of the State of New York in connection with the CES/ZEC program, and NYPSC approval of the transaction on acceptable terms, Entergy refueled the FitzPatrick plant in January and February 2017. In October 2015, Entergy determined that it would close the Pilgrim plant. The decision came after management’s extensive analysis of the economics and operating life of the plant following the NRC’s decision in September 2015 to place the plant in its “multiple/repetitive degraded cornerstone column” (Column 4) of its Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. The Pilgrim plant is expected to cease operations on May 31, 2019, after refueling in the spring of 2017 and operating through the end of that fuel cycle. In December 2015, Entergy Wholesale Commodities closed on the sale of its 583 MW Rhode Island State Energy Center (RISEC), in Johnston, Rhode Island. The base sales price, excluding adjustments, was approximately $490 million. Entergy Wholesale Commodities purchased RISEC for $346 million in December 2011. In December 2016, Entergy announced that it reached an agreement with Consumers Energy to terminate the PPA for the Palisades plant on May 31, 2018. Pursuant to the PPA termination agreement, Consumers Energy will pay Entergy $172 million for the early termination of the PPA. The PPA termination agreement is subject to regulatory approvals. Separately, and assuming regulatory approvals are obtained for the PPA termination agreement, Entergy intends to shut down the Palisades nuclear power plant permanently on October 1, 2018, after refueling in the spring of 2017 and operating through the end of that fuel cycle. Entergy expects to enter into a new PPA with Consumers Energy under which the plant would continue to operate through October 1, 2018. In January 2017, Entergy announced that it reached a settlement with New York State to shut down Indian Point 2 by April 30, 2020 and Indian Point 3 by April 30, 2021, and resolve all New York State-initiated legal challenges to Indian Point’s operating license renewal. As part of the settlement, New York State has agreed to issue Indian Point’s water quality certification and Coastal Zone Management Act consistency certification and to withdraw its objection to license renewal before the NRC. New York State also has agreed to issue a water discharge permit, which is required regardless of whether the plant is seeking a renewed NRC license. The shutdowns are conditioned, among other things, upon such actions being taken by New York State. Even without opposition, the NRC license renewal process is expected to continue at least into 2018. With the settlement concerning Indian Point, Entergy now has announced plans for the disposition of all of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants, including the sales of Vermont Yankee and FitzPatrick, and the earlier than previously expected shutdowns of Pilgrim, Palisades, Indian Point 2, and Indian Point 3. See “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” for further discussion. Property Nuclear Generating Stations Entergy Wholesale Commodities includes the ownership of the following nuclear power plants: \n
Power PlantMarketIn Service YearAcquiredLocationCapacity - Reactor TypeLicense Expiration Date
Pilgrim (a)IS0-NE1972July 1999Plymouth, MA688 MW - Boiling Water2032 (a)
FitzPatrick (b)NYISO1975Nov. 2000Oswego, NY838 MW - Boiling Water2034 (b)
Indian Point 3 (c)NYISO1976Nov. 2000Buchanan, NY1,041 MW - Pressurized Water2015 (c)
Indian Point 2 (c)NYISO1974Sept. 2001Buchanan, NY1,028 MW - Pressurized Water2013 (c)
Vermont Yankee (d)IS0-NE1972July 2002Vernon, VT605 MW - Boiling Water2032 (d)
Palisades (e)MISO1971Apr. 2007Covert, MI811 MW - Pressurized Water2031 (e)
\n \n
Consolidated Balance Sheet DataAt July 31,
(In millions)20142013201220112010
Cash, cash equivalents and investments$1,914$1,661$744$1,421$1,622
Long-term investments3183756391
Working capital1,2001,1162584491,074
Total assets5,2015,4864,6845,1105,198
Current portion of long-term debt———500—
Long-term debt499499499499998
Other long-term obligations203167166175143
Total stockholders’ equity3,0783,5312,7442,6162,821
\n ITEM 7 MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Our Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A) includes the following sections: ? Executive Overview that discusses at a high level our operating results and some of the trends that affect our business. ? Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates that we believe are important to understanding the assumptions and judgments underlying our financial statements. ? Results of Operations that includes a more detailed discussion of our revenue and expenses. ? Liquidity and Capital Resources which discusses key aspects of our statements of cash flows, changes in our balance sheets and our financial commitments. You should note that this MD&A discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Please see the section entitled “Forward-Looking Statements and Risk Factors” at the beginning of Item 1A for important information to consider when evaluating such statements. You should read this MD&A in conjunction with the financial statements and related notes in Item 8 of this Annual Report. In fiscal 2014 we acquired Check Inc. and in fiscal 2012 we acquired Demandforce, Inc. We have included their results of operations in our consolidated results of operations from the dates of acquisition. In fiscal 2013 we completed the sale of our Intuit Websites business and in fiscal 2014 we completed the sales of our Intuit Financial Services (IFS) and Intuit Health businesses. We accounted for all of these businesses as discontinued operations and have therefore reclassified our statements of operations for all periods presented to reflect them as such. We have also reclassified our balance sheets for all periods presented to reflect IFS as discontinued operations. The net assets of Intuit Websites and Intuit Health were not significant, so we have not reclassified our balance sheets for any period presented to reflect them as discontinued operations. Because the cash flows of our Intuit Websites, IFS, and Intuit Health discontinued operations were not material for any period presented, we have not segregated the cash flows of those businesses from continuing operations on our statements of cash flows. See “Results of Operations – Non-Operating Income and Expense – Discontinued Operations” later in this Item 7 for more information. Unless otherwise noted, the following discussion pertains to our continuing operations. Executive Overview This overview provides a high level discussion of our operating results and some of the trends that affect our business. We believe that an understanding of these trends is important in order to understand our financial results for fiscal 2014 as well as our future prospects. This summary is not intended to be exhaustive, nor is it intended to be a substitute for the detailed discussion and analysis provided elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. See the table later in this Note 7 for more information on the IFS operating results. The carrying amounts of the major classes of assets and liabilities of IFS at July 31, 2013 were as shown in the following table. These carrying amounts approximated fair value. \n
(In millions)July 31, 2013
Accounts receivable$40
Other current assets4
Property and equipment, net31
Goodwill914
Purchased intangible assets, net4
Other assets6
Total assets999
Accounts payable15
Accrued compensation21
Deferred revenue3
Long-term obligations9
Total liabilities48
Net assets$951
\n Intuit Health In July 2013 management having the authority to do so formally approved a plan to sell our Intuit Health business and on August 19, 2013 we completed the sale for cash consideration that was not significant. We recorded a $4 million pre-tax loss on the disposal of Intuit Health that was more than offset by a related income tax benefit of approximately $14 million, resulting in a net gain on disposal of approximately $10 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2014. The decision to sell the Intuit Health business was a result of management's desire to focus resources on its offerings for small businesses, consumers, and accounting professionals. Intuit Health was part of our former Other Businesses reportable segment. We determined that our Intuit Health business became a long-lived asset held for sale in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. A long-lived asset classified as held for sale is measured at the lower of its carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. Since the carrying value of Intuit Health at July 31, 2013 was less than the estimated fair value less cost to sell, no adjustment to the carrying value of this long-lived asset was necessary at that date. We also classified our Intuit Health business as discontinued operations in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013 and have segregated its operating results in our statements of operations for all periods presented. See the table later in this Note for more information. We have not segregated the net assets of Intuit Health on our balance sheets for any period presented. Net assets held for sale at July 31, 2013 consisted primarily of operating assets and liabilities that were not material. Because operating cash flows from the Intuit Health business were also not material for any period presented, we have not segregated them from continuing operations on our statements of cash flows. Intuit Websites In July 2012 management having the authority to do so formally approved a plan to sell our Intuit Websites business, which was a component of our Small Business reportable segment. The decision was the result of a shift in our strategy for helping small businesses to establish an online presence. On August 10, 2012 we signed a definitive agreement to sell our Intuit Websites business and on September 17, 2012 we completed the sale for approximately $60 million in cash. We recorded a gain on disposal of approximately $32 million, net of income taxes. We determined that our Intuit Websites business became a long-lived asset held for sale in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2012. A long-lived asset classified as held for sale is measured at the lower of its carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. Since the carrying value of Intuit Websites at July 31, 2012 was less than the estimated fair value less cost to sell, no adjustment to the carrying value of this long-lived asset was necessary at that date."} {"answer": 2.0, "question": "How many years does Euro sold for U.S. dollars stay higher than Japanese yen sold for U.S. dollars?", "context": "AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) of certain of its assets and liabilities under its interest rate swap agreements held as of December 31, 2006 and entered into during the first half of 2007. In addition, the Company paid $8.0 million related to a treasury rate lock agreement entered into and settled during the year ended December 31, 2008. The cost of the treasury rate lock is being recognized as additional interest expense over the 10-year term of the 7.00% Notes. During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company also received $3.1 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under ten forward starting interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $1.4 billion, which were designated as cash flow hedges to manage exposure to variability in cash flows relating to forecasted interest payments in connection with the Certificates issued in the Securitization in May 2007. The settlement is being recognized as a reduction in interest expense over the five-year period for which the interest rate swaps were designated as hedges. The Company also received $17.0 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under thirteen additional interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $850.0 million that managed exposure to variability of interest rates under the credit facilities but were not considered cash flow hedges for accounting purposes. This gain is included in other income in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2007. As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, other comprehensive (loss) income included the following items related to derivative financial instruments (in thousands): \n
20082007
Deferred loss on the settlement of the treasury rate lock, net of tax$-4,332$-4,901
Deferred gain on the settlement of interest rate swap agreements entered into in connection with the Securitization, net oftax1,2381,636
Unrealized losses related to interest rate swap agreements, net of tax-16,349-486
\n During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company recorded an aggregate net unrealized loss of approximately $15.8 million and $3.2 million, respectively (net of a tax provision of approximately $10.2 million and $2.0 million, respectively) in other comprehensive loss for the change in fair value of interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges and reclassified an aggregate of $0.1 million and $6.2 million, respectively (net of an income tax provision of $2.0 million and an income tax benefit of $3.3 million, respectively) into results of operations.9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS The Company determines the fair market values of its financial instruments based on the fair value hierarchy established in SFAS No.157, which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The standard describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date. The Company’s Level 1 assets consist of available-for-sale securities traded on active markets as well as certain Brazilian Treasury securities that are highly liquid and are actively traded in over-the-counter markets. Level 2 Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) The Company issued 82,865, 93,367 and 105,239 of non-vested restricted stock units in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, the majority of which provide for vesting as to all underlying shares on the third anniversary of the grant date. The weighted average grant-date fair value for non-vested restricted stock units granted during 2017, 2016 and 2015 was $187.85, $142.71 and $118.00, respectively. The Company recorded $11.2 million of expense related to restricted stock units during 2017, which is included in cost of goods sold or selling, general and administrative expenses. The unamortized share-based compensation cost related to non-vested restricted stock units, net of expected forfeitures, was $13.2 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.8 years. The Company uses treasury stock to provide shares of common stock in connection with vesting of the restricted stock units. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) F-37 Note 13?— Income taxes The following table summarizes the components of the provision for income taxes from continuing operations: \n
201720162015
(Dollars in thousands)
Current:
Federal$133,621$2,344$-4,700
State5,2135,2302,377
Foreign35,44428,84253,151
Deferred:
Federal-258,247-25,141-35,750
State1,459-1,837-5,012
Foreign212,158-1,364-2,228
$129,648$8,074$7,838
\n The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “TCJA”) was enacted on December 22, 2017. The legislation significantly changes U. S. tax law by, among other things, permanently reducing corporate income tax rates from a maximum of 35% to 21%, effective January 1, 2018; implementing a territorial tax system, by generally providing for, among other things, a dividends received deduction on the foreign source portion of dividends received from a foreign corporation if specified conditions are met; and imposing a one-time repatriation tax on undistributed post-1986 foreign subsidiary earnings and profits, which are deemed repatriated for purposes of the tax. As a result of the TCJA, the Company reassessed and revalued its ending net deferred tax liabilities at December 31, 2017 and recognized a?$46.1 million?provisional tax benefit in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017. As a result of the deemed repatriation tax under the TCJA, the Company recognized a $154.0 million provisional tax expense in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the Company expects to pay this tax over an eight-year period. While the TCJA provides for a territorial tax system, beginning in 2018, it includes?two?new U. S. tax base erosion provisions, the global intangible low-taxed income (“GILTI”) provisions and the base-erosion and anti-abuse tax (“BEAT”) provisions. The GILTI provisions require the Company to include in its U. S. income tax return foreign subsidiary earnings in excess of an allowable return on the foreign subsidiary’s tangible assets. The Company expects that it will be subject to incremental U. S. tax on GILTI income beginning in 2018. Because of the complexity of the new GILTI tax rules, the Company is continuing to evaluate this provision of the TCJA and the application of Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 740, \"Income Taxes. \" Under U. S. GAAP, the Company may make an accounting policy election to either (1) treat future taxes with respect to the inclusion in U. S. taxable income of amounts related to GILTI as current period expense when incurred (the “period cost method”) or (2) take such amounts into a company’s measurement of its deferred taxes (the “deferred method”). The Company’s selection of an accounting policy with respect to the new GILTI tax rules will depend, in part, on an analysis of the Company’s global income to determine whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions in taxable income related to GILTI and, if so, what the impact is expected to be. The determination of whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions ? Miller Insurance Services LLP, which is a Pounds sterling functional entity, earns significant non-functional currency revenues, in which case the Company limits its exposure to exchange rate changes by the use of forward contracts matched to a percentage of forecast cash inflows in specific currencies and periods. However, where the foreign exchange risk relates to any Pounds sterling pension benefits assets or liability for pension benefits, we do not hedge the risk. Consequently, if our London market operations have a significant pension asset or liability, we may be exposed to accounting gains and losses, recognized in other comprehensive income or loss, if the U. S. dollar and Pounds sterling exchange rates change. We do, however, hedge the Pounds sterling contributions into the pension plan. Translation risk Outside our U. S. and London market operations, we predominantly earn revenues and incur expenses in the local currency. When we translate the results and net assets of these operations into U. S. dollars for reporting purposes, movements in exchange rates will affect reported results and net assets. For example, if the U. S. dollar strengthens against the Euro, the reported results of our Eurozone operations in U. S. dollar terms will be lower. With the exception of foreign currency hedges for certain intercompany loans that are not designated as hedging instruments, we do not hedge translation risk. The table below provides information about our foreign currency forward exchange contracts, which are sensitive to exchange rate risk. The table summarizes the U. S. dollar equivalent amounts of each currency bought and sold forward and the weighted average contractual exchange rates. All forward exchange contracts mature within three years. \n
Settlement date before December 31,
201720182019
December 31, 2016Contract amountAverage contractual exchange rateContract amountAverage contractual exchange rateContract amountAverage contractual exchange rate
(millions)(millions)(millions)
Foreign currency sold
U.S. dollars sold for Pounds sterling$390$1.51 = £1$268$1.46 = £1$77$1.39 = £1
Euro sold for U.S. dollars74€1 = $1.2048€1 = $1.1914€1 = $1.17
Japanese yen sold for U.S. dollars21¥110.85 = $113¥110.90 - $15¥98.63 = $1
Euro sold for Pounds sterling22€1 = £1.2191 = £1.334€1 = £1.24
Total$507$338$100
Fair value(i)$-65$-40$-5
\n (i) Represents the difference between the contract amount and the cash flow in U. S. dollars which would have been receivable had the foreign currency forward exchange contracts been entered into on December 31, 2016 at the forward exchange rates prevailing at that date."} {"answer": 26.5, "question": "What was the average value of the International Funds in the years where Federal Money Market Funds is positive for Total? (in million)", "context": "Entergy Texas, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 361 Fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to an increase in power purchases as a result of the purchased power agreements between Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Texas and an increase in the average market prices of purchased power and natural gas, substantially offset by a decrease in deferred fuel expense as a result of decreased recovery from customers of fuel costs. Other regulatory charges increased primarily due to an increase of $6.9 million in the recovery of bond expenses related to the securitization bonds. The recovery became effective July 2007. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional information regarding the securitization bonds.2007 Compared to 2006 Net revenue consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale, 2) purchased power expenses, and 3) other regulatory charges. Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2007 to 2006. \n
Amount (In Millions)
2006 net revenue$403.3
Purchased power capacity13.1
Securitization transition charge9.9
Volume/weather9.7
Transmission revenue6.1
Base revenue2.6
Other-2.4
2007 net revenue$442.3
\n The purchased power capacity variance is due to changes in the purchased power capacity costs included in the calculation in 2007 compared to 2006 used to bill generation costs between Entergy Texas and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana. The securitization transition charge variance is due to the issuance of securitization bonds. As discussed above, in June 2007, EGSRF I, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Texas, issued securitization bonds and with the proceeds purchased from Entergy Texas the transition property, which is the right to recover from customers through a transition charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds. See Note 5 to the financial statements herein for details of the securitization bond issuance. The volume/weather variance is due to increased electricity usage on billed retail sales, including the effects of more favorable weather in 2007 compared to the same period in 2006. The increase is also due to an increase in usage during the unbilled sales period. Retail electricity usage increased a total of 139 GWh in all sectors. See \"Critical Accounting Estimates\" below and Note 1 to the financial statements for further discussion of the accounting for unbilled revenues. The transmission revenue variance is due to an increase in rates effective June 2007 and new transmission customers in late 2006. The base revenue variance is due to the transition to competition rider that began in March 2006. Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate increase. Gross operating revenues, fuel and purchased power expenses, and other regulatory charges Gross operating revenues decreased primarily due to a decrease of $179 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to lower fuel rates and fuel refunds. The decrease was partially offset by the $39 million increase in net revenue described above and an increase of $44 million in wholesale revenues, including $30 million from the System Agreement cost equalization payments from Entergy Arkansas. The receipt of such payments is being Noble Energy, Inc. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Additional fair value disclosures about plan assets are as follows: \n
Fair Value Measurements Using
Asset CategoryQuoted Prices inActive Markets forIdentical Assets(Level 1)(1)SignificantObservable Inputs(Level 2)(1)SignificantUnobservable Inputs(Level 3)(1)Total
(millions)
December 31, 2011
Federal Money Market Funds$1$-$-$1
Mutual Funds
Large Cap Funds66--66
Mid Cap Funds10--10
Blended Funds6--6
Emerging Markets Funds6--6
Fixed Income Funds77--77
Common Collective Trust Funds
Large Cap Funds-17-17
Small Cap Funds-12-12
International Funds-24-24
Total$166$53$-$219
December 31, 2010
Federal Money Market Funds$2$-$-$2
Mutual Funds
Large Cap Funds69--69
Mid Cap Funds10--10
Blended Funds6--6
Emerging Markets Funds7--7
Fixed Income Funds55--55
Common Collective Trust Funds
Large Cap Funds-16-16
Small Cap Funds-12-12
International Funds-29-29
Total$149$57$-$206
\n (1) See Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies - Fair Value Measurements for a description of the fair value hierarchy. Additional information about plan assets, including methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair values of plan assets, is as follows: Federal Money Market Funds Investments in federal money market funds consist of portfolios of high quality fixed income securities (such as US Treasury securities) which, generally, have maturities of less than one year. The fair value of these investments is based on quoted market prices for identical assets as of the measurement date. Mutual Funds Investments in mutual funds consist of diversified portfolios of common stocks and fixed income instruments. The common stock mutual funds are diversified by market capitalization and investment style as well as economic sector and industry. The fixed income mutual funds are diversified primarily in government bonds, mortgage backed securities, and corporate bonds, most of which are rated investment grade. The fair values of these investments are based on quoted market prices for identical assets as of the measurement date. Common Collective Trust Funds Investments in common collective trust funds consist of common stock investments in both US and non-US equity markets. Portfolios are diversified by market capitalization and investment style as well as economic sector and industry. The investments in the non-US equity markets are used to further enhance the plan’s overall equity diversification which is expected to moderate the plan’s overall risk volatility. In addition to the normal risk associated with stock market investing, investments in foreign equity markets may carry additional political, regulatory, and currency risk which is taken into account by the committee in its deliberations. The fair value of these investments is based on quoted prices for similar assets in active markets. All of the investments in common collective trust funds represent exchange-traded securities with readily observable prices. Risk Management The oil and gas business is subject to many significant risks, including operational, strategic, financial and compliance/ regulatory risks. We strive to maintain a proactive enterprise risk management (ERM) process to plan, organize, and control our activities in a manner which is intended to minimize the effects of risk on our capital, cash flows and earnings. ERM expands our process to include risks associated with accidental losses, as well as operational, strategic, financial, compliance/regulatory, and other risks. Our ERM process is designed to operate in an annual cycle, integrated with our long range plans, and supportive of our capital structure planning. Elements include, among others, cash flow at risk analysis, credit risk management, a commodity hedging program to reduce the impacts of commodity price volatility, an insurance program to protect against disruptions in our cash flows, a robust global compliance program, and government and community relations initiatives. We benchmark our program against our peers and other global organizations. See Item 1A. Risk Factors for a discussion of specific risks we face in our business. Available Information Our website address is www. nobleenergyinc. com. Available on this website under “Investors – SEC Filings,” free of charge, are our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements, Forms 3, 4 and 5 filed on behalf of directors and executive officers and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. Alternatively, you may access these reports at the SEC’s website at www. sec. gov. Also posted on our website under “About Us – Corporate Governance”, and available in print upon request made by any stockholder to the Investor Relations Department, are charters for our Audit Committee, Compensation, Benefits and Stock Option Committee, Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, and Environment, Health and Safety Committee. Copies of the Code of Conduct and the Code of Ethics for Chief Executive and Senior Financial Officers (the Codes) are also posted on our website under the “Corporate Governance” section. Within the time period required by the SEC and the NYSE, as applicable, we will post on our website any modifications to the Codes and any waivers applicable to senior officers as defined in the applicable Code, as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Item 1A. Risk Factors Described below are certain risks that we believe are applicable to our business and the oil and gas industry in which we operate. There may be additional risks that are not presently material or known. You should carefully consider each of the following risks and all other information set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If any of the events described below occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, liquidity or access to the capital markets could be materially adversely affected. In addition, the current global economic and political environment intensifies many of these risks. We are currently experiencing a severe downturn in the oil and gas business cycle, and an extended or more severe downturn could have material adverse effects on our operations, our liquidity, and the price of our common stock. Our ability to operate profitably, maintain adequate liquidity, grow our business and pay dividends on our common stock depend highly upon the prices we receive for our crude oil, natural gas, and NGL production. Commodity prices are volatile. Crude oil prices, in particular, began to decline significantly in the fourth quarter 2014, declined further in 2015 and have continued to trade at a low level or decline further thus far in 2016. High and low monthly daily average prices for crude oil and high and low contract expiration prices for natural gas for the last three years and into 2016 were as follows: \n
Jan. 1 - Feb.12, 2016Year Ended December 31,
201520142013
NYMEX
Crude Oil - WTI (per Bbl) High(1)$31.78$59.83$105.15$110.53
Crude Oil - WTI (per Bbl) Low(1)29.7137.3359.2986.68
Natural Gas - HH (Per MMbtu) High2.233.195.564.46
Natural Gas - HH (Per MMbtu) Low2.052.033.733.11
Brent
Crude Oil - (per Bbl) High32.8064.32111.76118.90
Crude Oil - (per Bbl) Low31.9338.2162.9197.69
"} {"answer": 2.0, "question": "how many years did it take to close the pilgrim plant after after its last refueling?", "context": "Part I Item 1 Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy 253 including the continued effectiveness of the Clean Energy Standards/Zero Emissions Credit program (CES/ZEC), the establishment of certain long-term agreements on acceptable terms with the Energy Research and Development Authority of the State of New York in connection with the CES/ZEC program, and NYPSC approval of the transaction on acceptable terms, Entergy refueled the FitzPatrick plant in January and February 2017. In October 2015, Entergy determined that it would close the Pilgrim plant. The decision came after management’s extensive analysis of the economics and operating life of the plant following the NRC’s decision in September 2015 to place the plant in its “multiple/repetitive degraded cornerstone column” (Column 4) of its Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. The Pilgrim plant is expected to cease operations on May 31, 2019, after refueling in the spring of 2017 and operating through the end of that fuel cycle. In December 2015, Entergy Wholesale Commodities closed on the sale of its 583 MW Rhode Island State Energy Center (RISEC), in Johnston, Rhode Island. The base sales price, excluding adjustments, was approximately $490 million. Entergy Wholesale Commodities purchased RISEC for $346 million in December 2011. In December 2016, Entergy announced that it reached an agreement with Consumers Energy to terminate the PPA for the Palisades plant on May 31, 2018. Pursuant to the PPA termination agreement, Consumers Energy will pay Entergy $172 million for the early termination of the PPA. The PPA termination agreement is subject to regulatory approvals. Separately, and assuming regulatory approvals are obtained for the PPA termination agreement, Entergy intends to shut down the Palisades nuclear power plant permanently on October 1, 2018, after refueling in the spring of 2017 and operating through the end of that fuel cycle. Entergy expects to enter into a new PPA with Consumers Energy under which the plant would continue to operate through October 1, 2018. In January 2017, Entergy announced that it reached a settlement with New York State to shut down Indian Point 2 by April 30, 2020 and Indian Point 3 by April 30, 2021, and resolve all New York State-initiated legal challenges to Indian Point’s operating license renewal. As part of the settlement, New York State has agreed to issue Indian Point’s water quality certification and Coastal Zone Management Act consistency certification and to withdraw its objection to license renewal before the NRC. New York State also has agreed to issue a water discharge permit, which is required regardless of whether the plant is seeking a renewed NRC license. The shutdowns are conditioned, among other things, upon such actions being taken by New York State. Even without opposition, the NRC license renewal process is expected to continue at least into 2018. With the settlement concerning Indian Point, Entergy now has announced plans for the disposition of all of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants, including the sales of Vermont Yankee and FitzPatrick, and the earlier than previously expected shutdowns of Pilgrim, Palisades, Indian Point 2, and Indian Point 3. See “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” for further discussion. Property Nuclear Generating Stations Entergy Wholesale Commodities includes the ownership of the following nuclear power plants: \n
Power PlantMarketIn Service YearAcquiredLocationCapacity - Reactor TypeLicense Expiration Date
Pilgrim (a)IS0-NE1972July 1999Plymouth, MA688 MW - Boiling Water2032 (a)
FitzPatrick (b)NYISO1975Nov. 2000Oswego, NY838 MW - Boiling Water2034 (b)
Indian Point 3 (c)NYISO1976Nov. 2000Buchanan, NY1,041 MW - Pressurized Water2015 (c)
Indian Point 2 (c)NYISO1974Sept. 2001Buchanan, NY1,028 MW - Pressurized Water2013 (c)
Vermont Yankee (d)IS0-NE1972July 2002Vernon, VT605 MW - Boiling Water2032 (d)
Palisades (e)MISO1971Apr. 2007Covert, MI811 MW - Pressurized Water2031 (e)
\n \n
Consolidated Balance Sheet DataAt July 31,
(In millions)20142013201220112010
Cash, cash equivalents and investments$1,914$1,661$744$1,421$1,622
Long-term investments3183756391
Working capital1,2001,1162584491,074
Total assets5,2015,4864,6845,1105,198
Current portion of long-term debt———500—
Long-term debt499499499499998
Other long-term obligations203167166175143
Total stockholders’ equity3,0783,5312,7442,6162,821
\n ITEM 7 MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Our Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A) includes the following sections: ? Executive Overview that discusses at a high level our operating results and some of the trends that affect our business. ? Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates that we believe are important to understanding the assumptions and judgments underlying our financial statements. ? Results of Operations that includes a more detailed discussion of our revenue and expenses. ? Liquidity and Capital Resources which discusses key aspects of our statements of cash flows, changes in our balance sheets and our financial commitments. You should note that this MD&A discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Please see the section entitled “Forward-Looking Statements and Risk Factors” at the beginning of Item 1A for important information to consider when evaluating such statements. You should read this MD&A in conjunction with the financial statements and related notes in Item 8 of this Annual Report. In fiscal 2014 we acquired Check Inc. and in fiscal 2012 we acquired Demandforce, Inc. We have included their results of operations in our consolidated results of operations from the dates of acquisition. In fiscal 2013 we completed the sale of our Intuit Websites business and in fiscal 2014 we completed the sales of our Intuit Financial Services (IFS) and Intuit Health businesses. We accounted for all of these businesses as discontinued operations and have therefore reclassified our statements of operations for all periods presented to reflect them as such. We have also reclassified our balance sheets for all periods presented to reflect IFS as discontinued operations. The net assets of Intuit Websites and Intuit Health were not significant, so we have not reclassified our balance sheets for any period presented to reflect them as discontinued operations. Because the cash flows of our Intuit Websites, IFS, and Intuit Health discontinued operations were not material for any period presented, we have not segregated the cash flows of those businesses from continuing operations on our statements of cash flows. See “Results of Operations – Non-Operating Income and Expense – Discontinued Operations” later in this Item 7 for more information. Unless otherwise noted, the following discussion pertains to our continuing operations. Executive Overview This overview provides a high level discussion of our operating results and some of the trends that affect our business. We believe that an understanding of these trends is important in order to understand our financial results for fiscal 2014 as well as our future prospects. This summary is not intended to be exhaustive, nor is it intended to be a substitute for the detailed discussion and analysis provided elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. See the table later in this Note 7 for more information on the IFS operating results. The carrying amounts of the major classes of assets and liabilities of IFS at July 31, 2013 were as shown in the following table. These carrying amounts approximated fair value. \n
(In millions)July 31, 2013
Accounts receivable$40
Other current assets4
Property and equipment, net31
Goodwill914
Purchased intangible assets, net4
Other assets6
Total assets999
Accounts payable15
Accrued compensation21
Deferred revenue3
Long-term obligations9
Total liabilities48
Net assets$951
\n Intuit Health In July 2013 management having the authority to do so formally approved a plan to sell our Intuit Health business and on August 19, 2013 we completed the sale for cash consideration that was not significant. We recorded a $4 million pre-tax loss on the disposal of Intuit Health that was more than offset by a related income tax benefit of approximately $14 million, resulting in a net gain on disposal of approximately $10 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2014. The decision to sell the Intuit Health business was a result of management's desire to focus resources on its offerings for small businesses, consumers, and accounting professionals. Intuit Health was part of our former Other Businesses reportable segment. We determined that our Intuit Health business became a long-lived asset held for sale in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. A long-lived asset classified as held for sale is measured at the lower of its carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. Since the carrying value of Intuit Health at July 31, 2013 was less than the estimated fair value less cost to sell, no adjustment to the carrying value of this long-lived asset was necessary at that date. We also classified our Intuit Health business as discontinued operations in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013 and have segregated its operating results in our statements of operations for all periods presented. See the table later in this Note for more information. We have not segregated the net assets of Intuit Health on our balance sheets for any period presented. Net assets held for sale at July 31, 2013 consisted primarily of operating assets and liabilities that were not material. Because operating cash flows from the Intuit Health business were also not material for any period presented, we have not segregated them from continuing operations on our statements of cash flows. Intuit Websites In July 2012 management having the authority to do so formally approved a plan to sell our Intuit Websites business, which was a component of our Small Business reportable segment. The decision was the result of a shift in our strategy for helping small businesses to establish an online presence. On August 10, 2012 we signed a definitive agreement to sell our Intuit Websites business and on September 17, 2012 we completed the sale for approximately $60 million in cash. We recorded a gain on disposal of approximately $32 million, net of income taxes. We determined that our Intuit Websites business became a long-lived asset held for sale in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2012. A long-lived asset classified as held for sale is measured at the lower of its carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. Since the carrying value of Intuit Websites at July 31, 2012 was less than the estimated fair value less cost to sell, no adjustment to the carrying value of this long-lived asset was necessary at that date."} {"answer": -29.0, "question": "What's the difference of New orders between 2013 and 2012? (in million)", "context": "Backlog Applied manufactures systems to meet demand represented by order backlog and customer commitments. Backlog consists of: (1) orders for which written authorizations have been accepted and assigned shipment dates are within the next 12 months, or shipment has occurred but revenue has not been recognized; and (2) contractual service revenue and maintenance fees to be earned within the next 12 months. Backlog by reportable segment as of October 27, 2013 and October 28, 2012 was as follows: \n
20132012(In millions, except percentages)
Silicon Systems Group$1,29555%$70544%
Applied Global Services59125%58036%
Display36115%20613%
Energy and Environmental Solutions1255%1157%
Total$2,372100%$1,606100%
\n Applied’s backlog on any particular date is not necessarily indicative of actual sales for any future periods, due to the potential for customer changes in delivery schedules or cancellation of orders. Customers may delay delivery of products or cancel orders prior to shipment, subject to possible cancellation penalties. Delays in delivery schedules and/or a reduction of backlog during any particular period could have a material adverse effect on Applied’s business and results of operations. Manufacturing, Raw Materials and Supplies Applied’s manufacturing activities consist primarily of assembly, test and integration of various proprietary and commercial parts, components and subassemblies (collectively, parts) that are used to manufacture systems. Applied has implemented a distributed manufacturing model under which manufacturing and supply chain activities are conducted in various countries, including the United States, Europe, Israel, Singapore, Taiwan, and other countries in Asia, and assembly of some systems is completed at customer sites. Applied uses numerous vendors, including contract manufacturers, to supply parts and assembly services for the manufacture and support of its products. Although Applied makes reasonable efforts to assure that parts are available from multiple qualified suppliers, this is not always possible. Accordingly, some key parts may be obtained from only a single supplier or a limited group of suppliers. Applied seeks to reduce costs and to lower the risks of manufacturing and service interruptions by: (1) selecting and qualifying alternate suppliers for key parts; (2) monitoring the financial condition of key suppliers; (3) maintaining appropriate inventories of key parts; (4) qualifying new parts on a timely basis; and (5) locating certain manufacturing operations in close proximity to suppliers and customers. Research, Development and Engineering Applied’s long-term growth strategy requires continued development of new products. The Company’s significant investment in research, development and engineering (RD&E) has generally enabled it to deliver new products and technologies before the emergence of strong demand, thus allowing customers to incorporate these products into their manufacturing plans at an early stage in the technology selection cycle. Applied works closely with its global customers to design systems and processes that meet their planned technical and production requirements. Product development and engineering organizations are located primarily in the United States, as well as in Europe, Israel, Taiwan, and China. In addition, Applied outsources certain RD&E activities, some of which are performed outside the United States, primarily in India. Process support and customer demonstration laboratories are located in the United States, China, Taiwan, Europe, and Israel. Applied’s investments in RD&E for product development and engineering programs to create or improve products and technologies over the last three years were as follows: $1.3 billion (18 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2013, $1.2 billion (14 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2012, and $1.1 billion (11 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2011. Applied has spent an average of 14 percent of net sales in RD&E over the last five years. In addition to RD&E for specific product technologies, Applied maintains ongoing programs for automation control systems, materials research, and environmental control that are applicable to its products. Item 2: Properties Information concerning Applied’s principal properties at October 27, 2013 is set forth below: \n
LocationTypePrincipal UseSquareFootageOwnership
Santa Clara, CAOffice, Plant & WarehouseHeadquarters; Marketing; Manufacturing; Distribution; Research, Development,Engineering; Customer Support1,476,000150,000OwnedLeased
Austin, TXOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing1,719,000145,000OwnedLeased
Rehovot, IsraelOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing; Research,Development, Engineering;Customer Support417,0005,000OwnedLeased
SingaporeOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing andCustomer Support392,00010,000OwnedLeased
Gloucester, MAOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing; Research,Development, Engineering;Customer Support315,000131,000OwnedLeased
Tainan, TaiwanOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing andCustomer Support320,000Owned
\n Because of the interrelation of Applied’s operations, properties within a country may be shared by the segments operating within that country. Products in the Silicon Systems Group are manufactured in Austin, Texas; Singapore; Gloucester, Massachusetts; and Rehovot, Israel. Remanufactured equipment products in the Applied Global Services segment are produced primarily in Austin, Texas. Products in the Display segment are manufactured in Tainan, Taiwan; Santa Clara, California; and Alzenau, Germany. Products in the Energy and Environmental Solutions segment are primarily manufactured in Alzenau, Germany; Treviso, Italy; and Cheseaux, Switzerland. In addition to the above properties, Applied also owns and leases offices, plants and/or warehouse locations in 78 locations throughout the world: 18 in Europe, 21 in Japan, 15 in North America (principally the United States), 8 in China, 7 in Korea, 6 in Southeast Asia, and 3 in Taiwan. These facilities are principally used for manufacturing; research, development and engineering; and marketing, sales and/or customer support. Applied also owns a total of approximately 139 acres of buildable land in Texas, California, Israel and Italy that could accommodate additional building space. Applied considers the properties that it owns or leases as adequate to meet its current and future requirements. Applied regularly assesses the size, capability and location of its global infrastructure and periodically makes adjustments based on these assessments. Fiscal 2013 operating results reflected a recovery in demand for TV manufacturing equipment and continued demand for advanced mobile display equipment, which resulted in increased new orders, net sales, operating income and non-GAAPadjusted operating income compared to fiscal 2012. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013, new orders were $114 million, down 55 percent from the prior quarter, and reflected customer push-outs of orders. Net sales in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013 were $163 million, almost flat compared to the prior quarter. Two customers accounted for approximately 50 percent of net sales for the Display segment in fiscal 2013. Fiscal 2012 operating results reflected a continued overcapacity in the large substrate LCD TV equipment industry that resulted in decreased new orders and net sales in fiscal 2012. The downturn in the LCD TV equipment industry was partially offset by increased demand for advanced mobile display equipment. Four customers accounted for 60 percent of net sales for the Display segment in fiscal 2012. Energy and Environmental Solutions Segment The Energy and Environmental Solutions segment includes products for fabricating c-Si solar PVs, as well as high throughput roll-to-roll deposition equipment for flexible electronics, packaging and other applications. This business is focused on delivering solutions to generate and conserve energy, with an emphasis on lowering the cost to produce solar power and increasing conversion efficiency. While end-demand for solar PVs has been robust over the last several years, investment levels in capital equipment remain depressed. Global solar PV production capacity exceeds anticipated demand, which has caused solar PV manufacturers to significantly reduce or delay investments in manufacturing capacity and new technology, or in some instances to cease operations. Certain significant measures for the past three fiscal years were as follows: \n
Change
2013201220112013 over 20122012 over 2011
(In millions, except percentages and ratios)
New orders$166$195$1,684$-29-15%$-1,489-88%
Net sales1734251,990-252-59%-1,565-79%
Book to bill ratio1.00.50.8
Operating income (loss)-433-66845323535%-1,121-247%
Operating margin-250.3%-157.2%22.8%-93.1 points-180.0 points
Non-GAAP Adjusted Results
Non-GAAP adjusted operating income (loss)-115-1844446938%-628-141%
Non-GAAP adjusted operating margin-66.5%-43.3%22.3%-23.2 points-65.6 points
\n Reconciliations of non-GAAP adjusted measures are presented under \"Non-GAAP Adjusted Results\" below. Net Operating Revenues by Operating Segment Information about our net operating revenues by operating segment as a percentage of Company net operating revenues is as follows:"} {"answer": 2092343.0, "question": "What's the total amount of Subtotal analog signal processing without those Subtotal analog signal processing smaller than 500000, in 2014?", "context": "The year-to-year increase in communications end market revenue in fiscal 2014 was primarily a result of increased wireless base station deployment activity and, to a lesser extent, an increase in revenue as a result of the Acquisition. Industrial end market revenue increased year-over-year in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 as a result of an increase in demand in this end market, which was most significant for products sold into the instrumentation and automation sectors and, to a lesser extent, an increase in revenue as a result of the Acquisition. The year-to-year increase in automotive end market revenue in fiscal 2014 was primarily a result of increasing electronic content in vehicles and higher demand for new vehicles. The year-to\u0002year decrease in revenue in the consumer end market in fiscal 2014 was primarily the result of the sale of our microphone product line in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. The year-to-year decrease in revenue in the industrial and consumer end markets in fiscal 2013 was primarily the result of a weak global economic environment and one less week of operations in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012. Automotive end market revenue increased in fiscal 2013 primarily as a result of increasing electronic content in vehicles. Revenue Trends by Product Type The following table summarizes revenue by product categories. The categorization of our products into broad categories is based on the characteristics of the individual products, the specification of the products and in some cases the specific uses that certain products have within applications. The categorization of products into categories is therefore subject to judgment in some cases and can vary over time. In instances where products move between product categories, we reclassify the amounts in the product categories for all prior periods. Such reclassifications typically do not materially change the sizing of, or the underlying trends of results within, each product category \n
201420132012
Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*Y/Y%Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*
Converters$1,285,36845%9%$1,180,07245%$1,192,06444%
Amplifiers/Radio frequency806,97528%18%682,75926%697,68726%
Other analog356,40612%-4%372,28114%397,37615%
Subtotal analog signal processing2,448,74985%10%2,235,11285%2,287,12785%
Power management & reference174,4836%1%172,9207%182,1347%
Total analog products$2,623,23292%9%$2,408,03291%$2,469,26191%
Digital signal processing241,5418%7%225,6579%231,8819%
Total Revenue$2,864,773100%9%$2,633,689100%$2,701,142100%
\n The sum of the individual percentages does not equal the total due to rounding. The year-to-year increase in total revenue in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 was the result of improving demand across most product type categories and the result of the Acquisition, which was partially offset by declines in the other analog product category, primarily as a result of the sale of our microphone product line in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. The year-to-year decrease in total revenue in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 was the result of one less week of operations in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 and a broad-based decrease in demand across most product type categories. Revenue Trends by Geographic Region Revenue by geographic region, based upon the primary location of our customers' design activity for its products, for fiscal 2014, 2013 and 2012 was as follows. ANALOG DEVICES, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) \n
Stock Options201420132012
Options granted (in thousands)2,2402,4072,456
Weighted-average exercise price$51.52$46.40$39.58
Weighted-average grant-date fair value$8.74$7.38$7.37
Assumptions:
Weighted-average expected volatility24.9%24.6%28.4%
Weighted-average expected term (in years)5.35.45.3
Weighted-average risk-free interest rate1.7%1.0%1.1%
Weighted-average expected dividend yield2.9%2.9%3.0%
\n As it relates to our market-based restricted stock units, the Company utilizes the Monte Carlo simulation valuation model to value these awards. The Monte Carlo simulation model utilizes multiple input variables that determine the probability of satisfying the performance conditions stipulated in the award grant and calculates the fair market value for the market-based restricted stock units granted. The Monte Carlo simulation model also uses stock price volatility and other variables to estimate the probability of satisfying the performance conditions, including the possibility that the market condition may not be satisfied, and the resulting fair value of the award. Information pertaining to the Company's market-based restricted stock units and the related estimated assumptions used to calculate the fair value of market-based restricted stock units granted using the Monte Carlo simulation model is as follows: \n
Market-based Restricted Stock Units2014
Units granted (in thousands)86
Grant-date fair value$50.79
Assumptions:
Historical stock price volatility23.2%
Risk-free interest rate0.8%
Expected dividend yield2.8%
\n Market-based restricted stock units were not granted during fiscal 2013 or 2012. Expected volatility — The Company is responsible for estimating volatility and has considered a number of factors, including third-party estimates. The Company currently believes that the exclusive use of implied volatility results in the best estimate of the grant-date fair value of employee stock options because it reflects the market’s current expectations of future volatility. In evaluating the appropriateness of exclusively relying on implied volatility, the Company concluded that: (1) options in the Company’s common stock are actively traded with sufficient volume on several exchanges; (2) the market prices of both the traded options and the underlying shares are measured at a similar point in time to each other and on a date close to the grant date of the employee share options; (3) the traded options have exercise prices that are both near-the-money and close to the exercise price of the employee share options; and (4) the remaining maturities of the traded options used to estimate volatility are at least one year. Expected term — The Company uses historical employee exercise and option expiration data to estimate the expected term assumption for the Black-Scholes grant-date valuation. The Company believes that this historical data is currently the best estimate of the expected term of a new option, and that generally its employees exhibit similar exercise behavior. Risk-free interest rate — The yield on zero-coupon U. S. Treasury securities for a period that is commensurate with the expected term assumption is used as the risk-free interest rate. Expected dividend yield — Expected dividend yield is calculated by annualizing the cash dividend declared by the Company’s Board of Directors for the current quarter and dividing that result by the closing stock price on the date of grant. Until such time as the Company’s Board of Directors declares a cash dividend for an amount that is different from the current quarter’s cash dividend, the current dividend will be used in deriving this assumption. Cash dividends are not paid on options, restricted stock or restricted stock units. an adverse development with respect to one claim in 2008 and favorable developments in three cases in 2009. Other costs were also lower in 2009 compared to 2008, driven by a decrease in expenses for freight and property damages, employee travel, and utilities. In addition, higher bad debt expense in 2008 due to the uncertain impact of the recessionary economy drove a favorable year-over-year comparison. Conversely, an additional expense of $30 million related to a transaction with Pacer International, Inc. and higher property taxes partially offset lower costs in 2009. Other costs were higher in 2008 compared to 2007 due to an increase in bad debts, state and local taxes, loss and damage expenses, utility costs, and other miscellaneous expenses totaling $122 million. Conversely, personal injury costs (including asbestos-related claims) were $8 million lower in 2008 compared to 2007. The reduction reflects improvements in our safety experience and lower estimated costs to resolve claims as indicated in the actuarial studies of our personal injury expense and annual reviews of asbestos-related claims in both 2008 and 2007. The year-over-year comparison also includes the negative impact of adverse development associated with one claim in 2008. In addition, environmental and toxic tort expenses were $7 million lower in 2008 compared to 2007. Non-Operating Items"} {"answer": 8138.0, "question": "What was the total amount of Total asset-backed the in the sections where Corporate and other bonds is greater than 100? (in million)", "context": "Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – (Continued) CNA applies the same impairment model as described above for the majority of its non-redeemable preferred stock securities on the basis that these securities possess characteristics similar to debt securities and that the issuers maintain their ability to pay dividends. For all other equity securities, in determining whether the security is other\u0002than-temporarily impaired, the Impairment Committee considers a number of factors including, but not limited to: (i) the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than amortized cost, (ii) the financial condition and near term prospects of the issuer, (iii) the intent and ability of CNA to retain its investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for an anticipated recovery in value and (iv) general market conditions and industry or sector specific outlook. Joint venture investments – The Company has 20% to 50% interests in operating joint ventures related to hotel properties and had joint venture interests in the former Bluegrass Project, as discussed in Note 2, that are accounted for under the equity method. The Company’s investment in these entities was $217 million and $234 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and reported in Other assets on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity income (loss) for these investments was $41 million, $43 million and $(62) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 and reported in Other operating expenses on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Income. Some of these investments are variable interest entities (“VIE”) as defined in the accounting guidance because the entities will require additional funding from each equity owner throughout the development and construction phase and are accounted for under the equity method since the Company is not the primary beneficiary. The maximum exposure to loss for the VIE investments is $337 million, consisting of the amount of the investment and debt guarantees. The following tables present summarized financial information for these joint ventures: \n
Year Ended December 31 20162015
(In millions)
Total assets$1,749$1,577
Total liabilities1,4441,231
Year Ended December 31 201620152014
Revenues$693$606$491
Net income807132
\n Hedging – The Company formally documents all relationships between hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as its risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking various hedging transactions. The Company also formally assesses (both at the hedge’s inception and on an ongoing basis) whether the derivatives that are used in hedging transactions have been highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows of hedged items and whether those derivatives may be expected to remain highly effective in future periods. When it is determined that a derivative for which hedge accounting has been designated is not (or ceases to be) highly effective, the Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively. See Note 3 for additional information on the Company’s use of derivatives. Securities lending activities – The Company lends securities for the purpose of enhancing income or to finance positions to unrelated parties who have been designated as primary dealers by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Borrowers of these securities must deposit and maintain collateral with the Company of no less than 100% of the fair value of the securities loaned. U. S. Government securities and cash are accepted as collateral. The Company maintains effective control over loaned securities and, therefore, continues to report such securities as investments on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Securities lending is typically done on a matched-book basis where the collateral is invested to substantially match the term of the loan. This matching of terms tends to limit risk. In accordance with the Company’s lending agreements, securities on loan are returned immediately to the Company upon notice. Collateral is not reflected as an asset of the Company. There was no collateral held at December 31, 2016 and 2015. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 4. Fair Value – (Continued) x Level 2 – Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable in active markets. x Level 3 – Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs are not observable. Prices may fall within Level 1, 2 or 3 depending upon the methodology and inputs used to estimate fair value for each specific security. In general, the Company seeks to price securities using third party pricing services. Securities not priced by pricing services are submitted to independent brokers for valuation and, if those are not available, internally developed pricing models are used to value assets using a methodology and inputs the Company believes market participants would use to value the assets. Prices obtained from third-party pricing services or brokers are not adjusted by the Company. The Company performs control procedures over information obtained from pricing services and brokers to ensure prices received represent a reasonable estimate of fair value and to confirm representations regarding whether inputs are observable or unobservable. Procedures may include: (i) the review of pricing service methodologies or broker pricing qualifications, (ii) back-testing, where past fair value estimates are compared to actual transactions executed in the market on similar dates, (iii) exception reporting, where period-over-period changes in price are reviewed and challenged with the pricing service or broker based on exception criteria, (iv) detailed analysis, where the Company performs an independent analysis of the inputs and assumptions used to price individual securities and (v) pricing validation, where prices received are compared to prices independently estimated by the Company. The fair values of CNA’s life settlement contracts are included in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity options purchased are included in Equity securities, and all other derivative assets are included in Receivables. Derivative liabilities are included in Payable to brokers. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized in the tables below: \n
December 31, 2016Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities:
Corporate and other bonds$18,828$130$18,958
States, municipalities and political subdivisions13,239113,240
Asset-backed:
Residential mortgage-backed4,9441295,073
Commercial mortgage-backed2,027132,040
Other asset-backed968571,025
Total asset-backed7,9391998,138
U.S. Treasury and obligations of government-sponsored enterprises$9393
Foreign government445445
Redeemable preferred stock1919
Fixed maturitiesavailable-for-sale11240,45133040,893
Fixed maturities trading5956601
Total fixed maturities$112$41,046$336$41,494
Equity securitiesavailable-for-sale$91$19$110
Equity securities trading4381439
Total equity securities$529$-$20$549
Short term investments$3,833$853$4,686
Other invested assets55560
Receivables11
Life settlement contracts$5858
Payable to brokers-44-44
\n Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities The following graph compares annual total return of our Common Stock, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Index (“S&P 500 Index”) and our Peer Group (“Loews Peer Group”) for the five years ended December 31, 2016. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in our Common Stock, the S&P 500 Index and the Loews Peer Group was $100 on December 31, 2011 and that all dividends were reinvested. \n
201120122013201420152016
Loews Common Stock100.0108.91129.64113.59104.47128.19
S&P 500 Index100.0116.00153.57174.60177.01198.18
Loews Peer Group (a)100.0113.39142.85150.44142.44165.34
\n (a) The Loews Peer Group consists of the following companies that are industry competitors of our principal operating subsidiaries: Chubb Limited (name change from ACE Limited after it acquired The Chubb Corporation on January 15, 2016), W. R. Berkley Corporation, The Chubb Corporation (included through January 15, 2016 when it was acquired by ACE Limited), Energy Transfer Partners L. P. , Ensco plc, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. , Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L. P. (included through November 26, 2014 when it was acquired by Kinder Morgan Inc. ), Noble Corporation, Spectra Energy Corp, Transocean Ltd. and The Travelers Companies, Inc. Dividend Information We have paid quarterly cash dividends in each year since 1967. Regular dividends of $0.0625 per share of Loews common stock were paid in each calendar quarter of 2016 and 2015."} {"answer": 51484.0, "question": "What was the average of the Operating Expenses in the years where Revenue is positive? (in million)", "context": "Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Overview U. S. economic growth, retail sales and industrial production continued at a moderate pace in 2014, which resulted in growth in the small package delivery market. Continued strong growth in e-commerce and omni-channel retail sales has driven package volume increases in both commercial and residential products. Given these trends, overall volume growth was strong during the year, and products most aligned with business-to-consumer and retail industry shipments experienced the fastest growth. Economic conditions in Europe have deteriorated somewhat, as solid growth in the United Kingdom is being offset by slower growth in Germany and general economic weakness in France and Italy. Economic growth in Asia has continued, though growth in China has moderated. The uneven nature of economic growth worldwide, combined with a trend towards more intra-regional trade, has led to shifting trade patterns and resulted in overcapacity in certain trade lanes. These factors have created an environment in which customers are more likely to trade-down from premium express products to standard delivery products in both Europe and Asia. As a result of these circumstances, we have adjusted our air capacity and cost structure in our transportation network to better match the prevailing volume mix levels. Our broad portfolio of product offerings and the flexibilities inherent in our transportation network have helped us adapt to these changing trends. While the worldwide economic environment has remained challenging in 2014, we have continued to undertake several initiatives in the U. S. and internationally to (1) improve the flexibility and capacity in our delivery network; (2) improve yield management; and (3) increase operational efficiency and contain costs across all segments. Most notably, the continued deployment of technology improvements (including several facility automation projects and the accelerated deployment of our On Road Integrated Optimization and Navigation system - \"ORION\") should increase our network capacity, and improve operational efficiency, flexibility and reliability. Additionally, we have continued to adjust our transportation network and utilize new or expanded operating facilities to improve time-in-transit for shipments in each region. Our consolidated results are presented in the table below: \n
Year Ended December 31,% Change
2014201320122014 / 20132013 / 2012
Revenue (in millions)$58,232$55,438$54,1275.0%2.4%
Operating Expenses (in millions)53,26448,40452,78410.0%-8.3%
Operating Profit (in millions)$4,968$7,034$1,343-29.4%N/A
Operating Margin8.5%12.7%2.5%
Average Daily Package Volume (in thousands)18,01616,93816,2956.4%3.9%
Average Revenue Per Piece$10.58$10.76$10.82-1.7%-0.6%
Net Income (in millions)$3,032$4,372$807-30.6%N/A
Basic Earnings Per Share$3.31$4.65$0.84-28.8%N/A
Diluted Earnings Per Share$3.28$4.61$0.83-28.9%N/A
\n UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS 30 Revenue The change in overall revenue was impacted by the following factors for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, compared with the corresponding prior year periods: \n
VolumeRates /Product MixFuelSurchargeTotalRevenueChange
Revenue Change Drivers:
2014 / 20136.8%-1.6%—%5.2%
2013 / 20123.7%0.5%-0.5%3.7%
\n Volume 2014 compared to 2013 Our total volume increased in 2014, largely due to continued solid growth in e-commerce and overall retail sales. Business-to-consumer shipments, which represent more than 45% of total U. S. Domestic Package volume, grew 12% for the year and drove increases in both air and ground shipments. UPS SurePost volume increased more than 45% in 2014, and accounted for approximately half of the overall volume growth for the segment. Business-to-business volume grew 3% in 2014, largely due to increased volume from the retail industry, including the use of our solutions for omni-channel (including ship-from-store and ship-to-store models) and returns shipping; additionally, business-to-business volume was positively impacted by growth in shipments from the industrial, automotive and government sectors. Among our air products, volume increased in 2014 for both our Next Day Air and deferred services. Solid air volume growth continued for those products most aligned with business-to-consumer shipping, particularly our residential Second Day Air package product. Our business-to-business air volume increased slightly as well, largely due to growth in the retail and industrial sectors. This growth was slightly offset by a decline in air letter volume, which was negatively impacted by some competitive losses and slowing growth in the financial services industry. The growth in premium and deferred air volume continues to be impacted by economic conditions and changes in our customers' supply chain networks; the combination of these factors influences their sensitivity towards the price and speed of shipments, and therefore favoring the use of our deferred air services. The increase in ground volume in 2014 was driven by our SurePost service offering, which had a volume increase of more than 45% for the year; additionally, we experienced moderate volume growth in our traditional residential and commercial ground services. Demand for SurePost and our traditional residential products continues to be driven by business\u0002to-consumer shipping activity from e-commerce retailers and other large customers. The growth in business-to-business ground volume was largely due to growth in omni-channel retail volume, the increased use of our returns service offerings, and the growth in shipments from the industrial sector.2013 compared to 2012 Our overall volume increased in 2013 compared with 2012, largely due to continued solid growth in e-commerce and overall retail sales; however, the increase in volume was hindered by slow overall U. S. economic and industrial production growth. Business-to-consumer shipments, which represent over 40% of total U. S. Domestic Package volume, grew approximately 8% for the year and drove increases in both air and ground shipments. Growth accelerated during our peak holiday shipping season, as business-to-consumer volume grew over 11% in the fourth quarter of 2013, and business-to\u0002consumer shipments exceeded 50% of total U. S. Domestic Package volume for the first time. Business-to-business volume increased slightly in 2013, largely due to increased shipping activity by the retail industry; however, business-to-business volume was negatively impacted by slowing industrial production. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS 49 Issuances of debt in 2014 and 2013 consisted primarily of longer-maturity commercial paper. Issuances of debt in 2012 consisted primarily of senior fixed rate note offerings totaling $1.75 billion. Repayments of debt in 2014 and 2013 consisted primarily of the maturity of our $1.0 and $1.75 billion senior fixed rate notes that matured in April 2014 and January 2013, respectively. The remaining repayments of debt during the 2012 through 2014 time period included paydowns of commercial paper and scheduled principal payments on our capitalized lease obligations. We consider the overall fixed and floating interest rate mix of our portfolio and the related overall cost of borrowing when planning for future issuances and non-scheduled repayments of debt. We had $772 million of commercial paper outstanding at December 31, 2014, and no commercial paper outstanding at December 31, 2013 and 2012. The amount of commercial paper outstanding fluctuates throughout each year based on daily liquidity needs. The average commercial paper balance was $1.356 billion and the average interest rate paid was 0.10% in 2014 ($1.013 billion and 0.07% in 2013, and $962 million and 0.07% in 2012, respectively). The variation in cash received from common stock issuances to employees was primarily due to level of stock option exercises in the 2012 through 2014 period. The cash outflows in other financing activities were impacted by several factors. Cash inflows (outflows) from the premium payments and settlements of capped call options for the purchase of UPS class B shares were $(47), $(93) and $206 million for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Cash outflows related to the repurchase of shares to satisfy tax withholding obligations on vested employee stock awards were $224, $253 and $234 million for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. In 2013, we paid $70 million to purchase the noncontrolling interest in a joint venture that operates in the Middle East, Turkey and portions of the Central Asia region. In 2012, we settled several interest rate derivatives that were designated as hedges of the senior fixed-rate debt offerings that year, which resulted in a cash outflow of $70 million. Sources of Credit See note 7 to the audited consolidated financial statements for a discussion of our available credit and debt covenants. Guarantees and Other Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements We do not have guarantees or other off-balance sheet financing arrangements, including variable interest entities, which we believe could have a material impact on financial condition or liquidity. Contractual Commitments We have contractual obligations and commitments in the form of capital leases, operating leases, debt obligations, purchase commitments, and certain other liabilities. We intend to satisfy these obligations through the use of cash flow from operations. The following table summarizes the expected cash outflow to satisfy our contractual obligations and commitments as of December 31, 2014 (in millions): \n
Commitment Type20152016201720182019After 2019Total
Capital Leases$75$74$67$62$59$435$772
Operating Leases323257210150902741,304
Debt Principal87683777521,0007,06810,081
Debt Interest2952932932822604,2595,682
Purchase Commitments2691957119826588
Pension Fundings1,0301,1613443474004883,770
Other Liabilities4323105——81
Total$2,911$2,011$1,372$1,617$1,817$12,550$22,278
"} {"answer": 4155.0, "question": "What is the total value of Professional fees, Personnel, Data processing and telecommunications and Foreign exchange activity1 in 2018? (in million)", "context": "PART II ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES Our Class A common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “MA”. At February 8, 2019, we had 73 stockholders of record for our Class A common stock. We believe that the number of beneficial owners is substantially greater than the number of record holders because a large portion of our Class A common stock is held in “street name” by brokers. There is currently no established public trading market for our Class B common stock. There were approximately 287 holders of record of our non-voting Class B common stock as of February 8, 2019, constituting approximately 1.1% of our total outstanding equity. Stock Performance Graph The graph and table below compare the cumulative total stockholder return of Mastercard’s Class A common stock, the S&P 500 Financials and the S&P 500 Index for the five-year period ended December 31, 2018. The graph assumes a $100 investment in our Class A common stock and both of the indices and the reinvestment of dividends. Mastercard’s Class B common stock is not publicly traded or listed on any exchange or dealer quotation system. \n
Base periodIndexed Returns For the Years Ended December 31,
Company/Index201320142015201620172018
Mastercard$100.00$103.73$118.05$126.20$186.37$233.56
S&P 500 Financials100.00115.20113.44139.31170.21148.03
S&P 500 Index100.00113.69115.26129.05157.22150.33
\n Total returns to stockholders for each of the years presented were as follows: General and Administrative The significant components of our general and administrative expenses were as follows: \n
For the Years Ended December 31,Percent Increase (Decrease)
20182017201620182017
($ in millions)
Personnel$3,214$2,687$2,22520%21%
Professional fees3773553376%5%
Data processing and telecommunications60050442019%20%
Foreign exchange activity1-3610634****
Other1,0191,0018112%23%
General and administrative expenses5,1744,6533,82711%22%
Special Item2—-167—****
Adjusted general and administrative expenses (excluding Special Item)2$5,174$4,486$3,82715%17%
\n Note: Table may not sum due to rounding. ** Not meaningful 1 Foreign exchange activity includes gains and losses on foreign exchange derivative contracts and the impact of remeasurement of assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies. See Note 22 (Foreign Exchange Risk Management) to the consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 for further discussion.2 See “Non-GAAP Financial Information” for further information on Special Items. The primary drivers of general and administrative expenses in 2018 and 2017, versus the prior year, were as follows: ? Personnel expenses increased 20% and 21%, or 19% and 20% on a currency-neutral basis, respectively. The 2018 and 2017 increases were driven by a higher number of employees to support our continued investment in the areas of real-time account-based payments, digital, services, data analytics and geographic expansion. The impact of acquisitions contributed 2 and 6 percentage points of growth for 2018 and 2017, respectively. ? Data processing and telecommunication expenses increased 19% and 20%, respectively, both as reported and on a currency-neutral basis, due to capacity growth of our business. Acquisitions contributed 3 and 8 percentage points, respectively. ? Foreign exchange activity contributed a benefit of 3 percentage points in 2018 related to gains from our foreign exchange activity for derivative contracts primarily due to the strengthening of the U. S. dollar, partially offset by balance sheet remeasurement losses. In 2017, foreign exchange activity had a negative impact of 2 percentage points due to greater losses from foreign exchange derivative contracts. ? Other expenses increased 2% and 23%, or 2% and 25% on a currency-neutral basis, respectively. In 2018, other expenses increased primarily due to the $100 million contribution to the Mastercard Impact Fund. The remaining increase was due to costs to support our strategic development efforts. These increases were primarily offset by the non-recurring Venezuela charge of $167 million recorded in 2017 which was the primary driver of growth for that period. Other expenses include costs to provide loyalty and rewards solutions, travel and meeting expenses and rental expense for our facilities and other costs associated with our business. Advertising and Marketing In 2018, advertising and marketing expenses increased 18% both as reported and on a currency-neutral basis versus 2017, primarily due to a change in accounting for certain marketing fund arrangements as a result of our adoption of the new revenue guidance, partially offset by a net decrease in spending on certain marketing campaigns. For a more detailed discussion on the impact of the new revenue guidance, refer to Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies). In 2017, advertising and marketing expenses increased 11%, or 10% on a currency-neutral basis versus 2016, mainly due to higher marketing spend primarily related to certain marketing campaigns. The table below shows a summary of select balance sheet data at December 31: \n
20182017
(in millions)
Balance Sheet Data:
Current assets$16,171$13,797
Current liabilities11,5938,793
Long-term liabilities7,7786,968
Equity5,4185,497
\n We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and investment securities balances, our cash flow generating capabilities, our borrowing capacity and our access to capital resources are sufficient to satisfy our future operating cash needs, capital asset purchases, outstanding commitments and other liquidity requirements associated with our existing operations and potential obligations. Debt and Credit Availability In February 2018, we issued $500 million principal amount of notes due in 2028 and an additional $500 million principal amount of notes due in 2048. Our total debt outstanding (including the current portion) was $6.3 billion and $5.4 billion at December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, with the earliest maturity of $500 million of principal occurring in April 2019. As of December 31, 2018, we have a commercial paper program (the “Commercial Paper Program”), under which we are authorized to issue up to $4.5 billion in outstanding notes, with maturities up to 397 days from the date of issuance. In conjunction with the Commercial Paper Program, we have a committed unsecured $4.5 billion revolving credit facility (the “Credit Facility”) which expires in November 2023. Borrowings under the Commercial Paper Program and the Credit Facility are to provide liquidity for general corporate purposes, including providing liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by our customers. In addition, we may borrow and repay amounts under these facilities for business continuity purposes. We had no borrowings outstanding under the Commercial Paper Program or the Credit Facility at December 31, 2018 and 2017. In March 2018, we filed a universal shelf registration statement (replacing a previously filed shelf registration statement that was set to expire) to provide additional access to capital, if needed. Pursuant to the shelf registration statement, we may from time to time offer to sell debt securities, guarantees of debt securities, preferred stock, Class A common stock, depository shares, purchase contracts, units or warrants in one or more offerings. See Note 14 (Debt) to the consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 for further discussion on our debt, the Commercial Paper Program and the Credit Facility. Dividends and Share Repurchases We have historically paid quarterly dividends on our outstanding Class A common stock and Class B common stock. Subject to legally available funds, we intend to continue to pay a quarterly cash dividend. However, the declaration and payment of future dividends is at the sole discretion of our Board of Directors after taking into account various factors, including our financial condition, operating results, available cash and current and anticipated cash needs. The following table summarizes the annual, per share dividends paid in the years reflected:"} {"answer": 21119.0, "question": "The total amount of which section ranks first for AmortizedCost or Cost for Fixed maturities? (in million)", "context": "Shares of common stock issued, in treasury, and outstanding were (in thousands of shares): \n
Shares IssuedTreasury SharesShares Outstanding
Balance at December 29, 2013376,832—376,832
Exercise of stock options, issuance of other stock awards, and other178—178
Balance at December 28, 2014377,010—377,010
Exercise of warrants20,480—20,480
Issuance of common stock to Sponsors221,666—221,666
Acquisition of Kraft Foods Group, Inc.592,898—592,898
Exercise of stock options, issuance of other stock awards, and other2,338-4131,925
Balance at January 3, 20161,214,392-4131,213,979
Exercise of stock options, issuance of other stock awards, and other4,555-2,0582,497
Balance at December 31, 20161,218,947-2,4711,216,476
\n Note 13. Financing Arrangements We routinely enter into accounts receivable securitization and factoring programs . We account for transfers of receivables pursuant to these programs as a sale and remove them from our consolidated balance sheet. At December 31, 2016 , our most significant program in place was the U. S. securitization program, which was amended in May 2016 and originally entered into in October of 2015. Under the program, we are entitled to receive cash consideration of up to $800 million (which we elected to reduce to $500 million , effective February 21, 2017) and a receivable for the remainder of the purchase price (the “Deferred Purchase Price”). This securitization program utilizes a bankruptcy\u0002remote special-purpose entity (“SPE”). The SPE is wholly-owned by a subsidiary of Kraft Heinz and its sole business consists of the purchase or acceptance, through capital contributions of receivables and related assets, from a Kraft Heinz subsidiary and subsequent transfer of such receivables and related assets to a bank. Although the SPE is included in our consolidated financial statements, it is a separate legal entity with separate creditors who will be entitled, upon its liquidation, to be satisfied out of the SPE's assets prior to any assets or value in the SPE becoming available to Kraft Heinz or its subsidiaries. The assets of the SPE are not available to pay creditors of Kraft Heinz or its subsidiaries. This program expires in May 2017. In addition to the U. S. securitization program, we have accounts receivable factoring programs denominated in Australian dollars, New Zealand dollars, British pound sterling, euros, and Japanese yen. Under these programs, we generally receive cash consideration up to a certain limit and a receivable for the Deferred Purchase Price. There is no Deferred Purchase Price associated with the Japanese yen contract. Related to these programs, our aggregate cash consideration limit, after applying applicable hold-backs, was $245 million U. S. dollars at December 31, 2016. Generally, each of these programs automatically renews annually until terminated by either party. The cash consideration and carrying amount of receivables removed from the consolidated balance sheets in connection with the above programs were $904 million at December 31, 2016 and $267 million at January 3, 2016 . The fair value of the Deferred Purchase Price for the programs was $129 million at December 31, 2016 and $583 million at January 3, 2016 . The Deferred Purchase Price is included in sold receivables on the consolidated balance sheets and had a carrying value which approximated its fair value at December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2016 . The proceeds from these sales are recognized on the consolidated statements of cash flows as a component of operating activities. We act as servicer for these arrangements and have not recorded any servicing assets or liabilities for these arrangements as of December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2016 because they were not material to the financial statements. PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL, INC. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements The following table sets forth a rollforward of pre-tax amounts remaining in OCI related to fixed maturity securities with credit loss impairments recognized in earnings, for the periods indicated: \n
Years Ended December 31,
20182017
(in millions)
Credit loss impairments:
Balance, beginning of period$319$359
New credit loss impairments110
Additional credit loss impairments on securities previously impaired011
Increases due to the passage of time on previously recorded credit losses1015
Reductions for securities which matured, paid down, prepaid or were sold during the period-162-58
Reductions for securities impaired to fair value during the period-1-24-13
Accretion of credit loss impairments previously recognized due to an increase in cash flows expected to be collected-4-5
Balance, end of period$140$319
\n (1) Represents circumstances where the Company determined in the current period that it intends to sell the security or it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell the security before recovery of the security’s amortized cost. Assets Supporting Experience-Rated Contractholder Liabilities The following table sets forth the composition of “Assets supporting experience-rated contractholder liabilities,” as of the dates indicated: \n
December 31, 2018December 31, 2017
AmortizedCost or CostFairValueAmortizedCost or CostFairValue
(in millions)
Short-term investments and cash equivalents$215$215$245$245
Fixed maturities:
Corporate securities13,25813,11913,81614,073
Commercial mortgage-backed securities2,3462,3242,2942,311
Residential mortgage-backed securities-1828811961966
Asset-backed securities-21,6491,6651,3631,392
Foreign government bonds1,0871,0831,0501,057
U.S. government authorities and agencies and obligations of U.S. states538577357410
Total fixed maturities-319,70619,57919,84120,209
Equity securities1,3781,4601,2781,643
Total assets supporting experience-rated contractholder liabilities-4$21,299$21,254$21,364$22,097
\n (1) Includes publicly-traded agency pass-through securities and collateralized mortgage obligations. (2) Includes credit-tranched securities collateralized by sub-prime mortgages, auto loans, credit cards, education loans and other asset types. Includes collateralized loan obligations at fair value of $1,028 million and $943 million as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, all of which were rated AAA. (3) As a percentage of amortized cost, 93% and 92% of the portfolio was considered high or highest quality based on NAIC or equivalent ratings, as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. (4) As a percentage of amortized cost, 78% and 80% of the portfolio consisted of public securities as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The net change in unrealized gains (losses) from assets supporting experience-rated contractholder liabilities still held at period end, recorded within “Other income (loss),” was $(778) million, $300 million and $75 million during the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Equity Securities The net change in unrealized gains (losses) from equity securities, still held at period end, recorded within “Other income (loss),” was $(1,157) million during the year ended December 31, 2018. The net change in unrealized gains (losses) from equity securities, still held at period end, recorded within “Other comprehensive income (loss),” was $(494) million and $760 million during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Benefits and expenses increased $735 million. Excluding the impact of our annual reviews and update of assumptions and other refinements, as discussed above, benefits and expenses increased $709 million primarily driven by an increase in policyholders’ benefits, including the change in policy reserves, related to the increase in premiums discussed above. Account Values Account values are a significant driver of our operating results, and are primarily driven by net additions (withdrawals) and the impact of market changes. The income we earn on most of our fee-based products varies with the level of fee-based account values, since many policy fees are determined by these values. The investment income and interest we credit to policyholders on our spread-based products varies with the level of general account values. To a lesser extent, changes in account values impact our pattern of amortization of DAC and VOBA and general and administrative expenses. The following table shows the changes in the account values and net additions (withdrawals) of Retirement segment products for the periods indicated. Net additions (withdrawals) are plan sales and participant deposits or additions, as applicable, minus plan and participant withdrawals and benefits. Account values include both internally- and externally\u0002managed client balances as the total balances drive revenue for the Retirement segment. For more information on internally-managed balances, see “—PGIM. ”"} {"answer": 8198.0, "question": "What is the sum of Target date/risk of FXimpact, Operating leases of Thereafter, and Principal of Total ?", "context": "Long-term product offerings include alpha-seeking active and index strategies. Our alpha-seeking active strategies seek to earn attractive returns in excess of a market benchmark or performance hurdle while maintaining an appropriate risk profile, and leverage fundamental research and quantitative models to drive portfolio construction. In contrast, index strategies seek to closely track the returns of a corresponding index, generally by investing in substantially the same underlying securities within the index or in a subset of those securities selected to approximate a similar risk and return profile of the index. Index strategies include both our non-ETF index products and iShares ETFs. Although many clients use both alpha-seeking active and index strategies, the application of these strategies may differ. For example, clients may use index products to gain exposure to a market or asset class, or may use a combination of index strategies to target active returns. In addition, institutional non-ETF index assignments tend to be very large (multi-billion dollars) and typically reflect low fee rates. Net flows in institutional index products generally have a small impact on BlackRock’s revenues and earnings. Equity Year-end 2017 equity AUM totaled $3.372 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $130.1 billion. Net inflows included $174.4 billion into iShares ETFs, driven by net inflows into Core funds and broad developed and emerging market equities, partially offset by non-ETF index and active net outflows of $25.7 billion and $18.5 billion, respectively. BlackRock’s effective fee rates fluctuate due to changes in AUM mix. Approximately half of BlackRock’s equity AUM is tied to international markets, including emerging markets, which tend to have higher fee rates than U. S. equity strategies. Accordingly, fluctuations in international equity markets, which may not consistently move in tandem with U. S. markets, have a greater impact on BlackRock’s equity revenues and effective fee rate. Fixed Income Fixed income AUM ended 2017 at $1.855 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $178.8 billion. In 2017, active net inflows of $21.5 billion were diversified across fixed income offerings, and included strong inflows into municipal, unconstrained and total return bond funds. iShares ETFs net inflows of $67.5 billion were led by flows into Core, corporate and treasury bond funds. Non-ETF index net inflows of $89.8 billion were driven by demand for liability-driven investment solutions. Multi-Asset BlackRock’s multi-asset team manages a variety of balanced funds and bespoke mandates for a diversified client base that leverages our broad investment expertise in global equities, bonds, currencies and commodities, and our extensive risk management capabilities. Investment solutions might include a combination of long-only portfolios and alternative investments as well as tactical asset allocation overlays. Component changes in multi-asset AUM for 2017 are presented below. \n
(in millions)December 31,2016Net inflows (outflows)MarketchangeFXimpactDecember 31,2017
Asset allocation and balanced$176,675$-2,502$17,387$4,985$196,545
Target date/risk149,43223,92524,5321,577199,466
Fiduciary68,395-1,0477,5228,81983,689
FutureAdvisor-1505-46119—578
Total$395,007$20,330$49,560$15,381$480,278
\n (1) FutureAdvisor amounts do not include AUM held in iShares ETFs. Multi-asset net inflows reflected ongoing institutional demand for our solutions-based advice with $18.9 billion of net inflows coming from institutional clients. Defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows, and contributed $20.8 billion to institutional multi-asset net inflows in 2017, primarily into target date and target risk product offerings. Retail net inflows of $1.1 billion reflected demand for our Multi-Asset Income fund family, which raised $5.8 billion in 2017. The Company’s multi-asset strategies include the following: ? Asset allocation and balanced products represented 41% of multi-asset AUM at year-end. These strategies combine equity, fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget. In certain cases, these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification, derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions. Flagship products in this category include our Global Allocation and Multi-Asset Income fund families. ? Target date and target risk products grew 16% organically in 2017, with net inflows of $23.9 billion. Institutional investors represented 93% of target date and target risk AUM, with defined contribution plans accounting for 87% of AUM. Flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our LifePath offerings. LifePath products utilize a proprietary active asset allocation overlay model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor’s expected retirement timing. Underlying investments are primarily index products. ? Fiduciary management services are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors or endowments and foundations retain BlackRock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of investment management. These customized services require strong partnership with the clients’ investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives. not to exceed a maximum leverage ratio (ratio of net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where net debt equals total debt less unrestricted cash) of 3 to 1, which was satisfied with a ratio of less than 1 to 1 at December 31, 2017. The 2017 credit facility provides back-up liquidity to fund ongoing working capital for general corporate purposes and various investment opportunities. At December 31, 2017, the Company had no amount outstanding under the 2017 credit facility Commercial Paper Program. The Company can issue unsecured commercial paper notes (the “CP Notes”) on a private-placement basis up to a maximum aggregate amount outstanding at any time of $4.0 billion. The commercial paper program is currently supported by the 2017 credit facility. At December 31, 2017, BlackRock had no CP Notes outstanding Long-Term Borrowings The carrying value of long-term borrowings at December 31, 2017 included the following: \n
(in millions)Maturity AmountCarrying ValueMaturity
5.00% Notes$1,000$999December 2019
4.25% Notes750747May 2021
3.375% Notes750746June 2022
3.50% Notes1,000994March 2024
1.25% Notes-1841835May 2025
3.20% Notes700693March 2027
Total Long-term Borrowings$5,041$5,014
\n (1) The carrying value of the 1.25% Notes estimated using foreign exchange rate as of December 31, 2017. For more information on Company’s borrowings, see Note 12, Borrowings, in the notes to the consolidated financial statements contained in Part II, Item 8 of this filing. Contractual Obligations, Commitments and Contingencies The following table sets forth contractual obligations, commitments and contingencies by year of payment at December 31, 2017: \n
(in millions)20182019202020212022Thereafter-1Total
Contractual obligations and commitments-1:
Long-term borrowings-2:
Principal$—$1,000$—$750$750$2,541$5,041
Interest17517512510981185850
Operating leases1411321261181091,5802,206
Purchase obligations12810129221928327
Investment commitments298—————298
Total contractual obligations and commitments7421,4082809999594,3348,722
Contingent obligations:
Contingent payments related to business acquisitions-3331793934——285
Total contractual obligations, commitments andcontingent obligations-4$775$1,587$319$1,033$959$4,334$9,007
\n (1) Amounts do not include $350 million of cash payment consideration and contingent consideration related to the Company’s agreement to acquire the asset management business of Citibanamex. (2) The amount of principal and interest payments for the 2025 Notes (issued in Euros) represents the expected payment amounts using foreign exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. (3) The amount of contingent payments reflected for any year represents the expected payments using foreign currency exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. The fair value of the remaining aggregate contingent payments at December 31, 2017 totaled $236 million and is included in other liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. (4) At December 31, 2017, the Company had approximately $365 million of net unrecognized tax benefits. Due to the uncertainty of timing and amounts that will ultimately be paid, this amount has been excluded from the table above. Operating Leases. The Company leases its primary office locations under agreements that expire on varying dates through 2043. In connection with certain lease agreements, the Company is responsible for escalation payments. The contractual obligations table above includes only guaranteed minimum lease payments for such leases and does not project potential escalation or other lease-related payments. These leases are classified as operating leases and, as such, are not recorded as liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. In May 2017, the Company entered into an agreement with 50 HYMC Owner LLC, for the lease of approximately 847,000 square feet of office space located at 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York. The term of the lease is twenty years from the date that rental payments begin, expected to occur in McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) 46 In July 2008, the Board authorized the retirement of shares of the Company’s common stock that may be repurchased from time-to-time pursuant to its stock repurchase program. During the second quarter of 2009, all of the 4 million repurchased shares, which we purchased for $204 million, were formally retired by the Company. The retired shares constitute authorized but unissued shares. We elected to allocate any excess of share repurchase price over par value between additional paid-in capital and retained earnings. As such, $165 million was recorded as a decrease to retained earnings. The Company anticipates that it will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends in the future. However, the payment and amount of future dividends remain within the discretion of the Board and will depend upon the Company’s future earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors. Although we believe that our operating cash flow, financial assets, current access to capital and credit markets, including our existing credit and sales facilities, will give us the ability to meet our financing needs for the foreseeable future, there can be no assurance that continued or increased volatility and disruption in the global capital and credit markets will not impair our liquidity or increase our costs of borrowing. Selected Measures of Liquidity and Capital Resources:"} {"answer": 1828.0, "question": "Without Management and financial advice fees and Distribution fees, how much of Revenues is there in total in 2009? (in million)", "context": "Certain property fund limited partnerships that the Company consolidates have floating rate revolving credit borrowings of $381 million as of December 31, 2009. Certain Threadneedle subsidiaries guarantee the repayment of outstanding borrowings up to the value of the assets of the partnerships. The debt is secured by the assets of the partnerships and there is no recourse to Ameriprise Financial.24. Earnings per Share Attributable to Ameriprise Financial Common Shareholders The computations of basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders are as follows: \n
Years Ended December 31,
20092008 2007
(in millions, except per share amounts)
Numerator:
Net income (loss) attributable to Ameriprise Financial$722$-38$814
Denominator:
Basic: Weighted-average common shares outstanding242.2222.3236.2
Effect of potentially dilutive nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards2.22.63.7
Diluted: Weighted-average common shares outstanding244.4224.9239.9
Earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders:
Basic$2.98$-0.17$3.45
Diluted$2.95$-0.17 (1)$3.39
\n (1) Diluted shares used in this calculation represent basic shares due to the net loss. Using actual diluted shares would result in anti-dilution. Basic weighted average common shares for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 included 3.4 million, 2.1 million and 1.6 million, respectively, of vested, nonforfeitable restricted stock units and 4.6 million, 3.1 million and 3.5 million, respectively, of non-vested restricted stock awards and restricted stock units that are forfeitable but receive nonforfeitable dividends. Potentially dilutive securities include nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards.25. Shareholders’ Equity The Company has a share repurchase program in place to return excess capital to shareholders. Since September 2008 through the date of this report, the Company has suspended its stock repurchase program; as a result there were no share repurchases during the year ended December 31, 2009. During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company repurchased a total of 12.7 million and 15.9 million shares, respectively, of its common stock at an average price of $48.26 and $59.59, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, the Company had approximately $1.3 billion remaining under a share repurchase authorization. The Company may also reacquire shares of its common stock under its 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan related to restricted stock awards. Restricted shares that are forfeited before the vesting period has lapsed are recorded as treasury shares. In addition, the holders of restricted shares may elect to surrender a portion of their shares on the vesting date to cover their income tax obligations. These vested restricted shares reacquired by the Company and the Company’s payment of the holders’ income tax obligations are recorded as a treasury share purchase. The restricted shares forfeited and recorded as treasury shares under the 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan were 0.3 million shares in each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. For each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company reacquired 0.5 million of its common stock through the surrender of restricted shares upon vesting and paid in the aggregate $11 million, $24 million and $29 million, respectively, related to the holders’ income tax obligations on the vesting date. In 2009, the Company issued and sold 36 million shares of its common stock. The proceeds of $869 million will be used for general corporate purposes, including the Company’s pending acquisition of the long-term asset management business of Columbia, which is expected to close in the spring of 2010. See Note 5 for additional information on the Company’s pending acquisition of Columbia. In 2008, the Company reissued 1.8 million treasury shares for restricted stock award grants and the issuance of shares vested under the P2 Deferral Plan and the Transition and Opportunity Bonus (‘‘T&O Bonus’’) program. In 2005, the Company awarded bonuses to advisors General and administrative expense decreased $15 million, or 7%, to $192 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to expense controls. Protection Our Protection segment offers a variety of protection products to address the protection and risk management needs of our retail clients including life, disability income and property-casualty insurance. Life and disability income products are primarily distributed through our branded advisors. Our property-casualty products are sold direct, primarily through affinity relationships. We issue insurance policies through our life insurance subsidiaries and the property casualty companies. The primary sources of revenues for this segment are premiums, fees, and charges that we receive to assume insurance-related risk. We earn net investment income on owned assets supporting insurance reserves and capital supporting the business. We also receive fees based on the level of assets supporting variable universal life separate account balances. This segment earns intersegment revenues from fees paid by the Asset Management segment for marketing support and other services provided in connection with the availability of RiverSource VST Funds under the variable universal life contracts. Intersegment expenses for this segment include distribution expenses for services provided by the Advice & Wealth Management segment, as well as expenses for investment management services provided by the Asset Management segment. The following table presents the results of operations of our Protection segment: \n
Years Ended December 31,
2009 2008Change
(in millions, except percentages)
Revenues
Management and financial advice fees$47$56$-9-16%
Distribution fees97106-9-8
Net investment income42225217067
Premiums1,020994263
Other revenues386547-161-29
Total revenues1,9721,955171
Banking and deposit interest expense11——
Total net revenues1,9711,954171
Expenses
Distribution expenses2218422
Interest credited to fixed accounts144144——
Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses924856688
Amortization of deferred acquisition costs159333-174-52
General and administrative expense226251-25-10
Total expenses1,4751,602-127-8
Pretax income$496$352$14441%
\n Our Protection segment pretax income was $496 million for 2009, an increase of $144 million, or 41%, from $352 million in 2008. Net revenues Net revenues increased $17 million, or 1%, to $2.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, due to an increase in net investment income and premiums, partially offset by a decrease in other revenues related to updating valuation assumptions. Net investment income increased $170 million, or 67%, to $422 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to net realized investment gains of $27 million in 2009 compared to net realized investment losses of $92 million in the prior year primarily related to impairments of Available-for-Sale securities. In addition, investment income earned on fixed maturity securities increased $46 million compared to the prior year driven by higher yields on the longer-term investments in our fixed income investment portfolio. In December, our board of directors ratified its authorization of a stock repurchase program in the amount of 1.5 million shares of our common stock. As of December 31, 2010 no shares had been repurchased. We have paid dividends for 71 consecutive years with payments increasing each of the last 19 years. We paid total dividends of $.54 per share in 2010 compared with $.51 per share in 2009. Aggregate Contractual Obligations A summary of our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2010, is as follows: \n
(dollars in millions)Payments due by period
Contractual ObligationsTotalLess Than1 year1 - 3Years3 - 5YearsMore than5 years
Long-term Debt$261.0$18.6$181.2$29.2$32.0
Fixed Rate Interest22.46.19.05.12.2
Operating Leases30.27.27.95.49.7
Purchase Obligations45.545.5---
Total$359.1$77.4$198.1$39.7$43.9
\n As of December 31, 2010, the liability for uncertain income tax positions was $2.7 million. Due to the high degree of uncertainty regarding timing of potential future cash flows associated with these liabilities, we are unable to make a reasonably reliable estimate of the amount and period in which these liabilities might be paid. We utilize blanket purchase orders to communicate expected annual requirements to many of our suppliers. Requirements under blanket purchase orders generally do not become committed until several weeks prior to the company’s scheduled unit production. The purchase obligation amount presented above represents the value of commitments considered firm. RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Our sales from continuing operations in 2010 were $1,489.3 million surpassing 2009 sales of $1,375.0 million by 8.3 percent. The increase in sales was due mostly to significantly higher sales in our water heater operations in China resulting from geographic expansion, market share gains and new product introductions as well as additional sales from our water treatment business acquired in November, 2009. Our sales from continuing operations were $1,451.3 million in 2008. The $76.3 million decline in sales from 2008 to 2009 was due to lower residential and commercial volume in North America, reflecting softness in the domestic housing market and a slowdown in the commercial water heater business and was partially offset by strong growth in water heater sales in China and improved year over year pricing. On December 13, 2010 we entered into a definitive agreement to sell our Electrical Products Company to Regal Beloit Corporation for $700 million in cash and approximately 2.83 million shares of Regal Beloit common stock. The transaction, which has been approved by both companies' board of directors, is expected to close in the first half of 2011. Due to the pending sale, our Electrical Products segment has been accorded discontinued operations treatment in the accompanying financial statements. Sales in 2010, including sales of $701.8 million for our Electrical Products segment, were $2,191.1 million. Our gross profit margin for continuing operations in 2010 was 29.9 percent, compared with 28.7 percent in 2009 and 25.8 percent in 2008. The improvement in margin from 2009 to 2010 was due to increased volume, cost containment activities and lower warranty costs which more than offset certain inefficiencies resulting from the May flood in our Ashland City, TN water heater manufacturing facility. The increase in profit margin from 2008 to 2009 resulted from increased higher margin China water heater volume, aggressive cost reduction programs and lower material costs. Selling, general and administrative expense (SG&A) was $36.9 million higher in 2010 than in 2009. The increased SG&A, the majority of which was incurred in our China water heater operation, was associated with selling costs to support higher volume and new product lines. Additional SG&A associated with our 2009 water treatment acquisition also contributed to the increase. SG&A was $8.5 million higher in 2009 than 2008 resulting mostly from an $8.2 million increase in our China water heater operation in support of higher volumes."} {"answer": 808.0, "question": "What was the total amount of September 30, 2009 in the range of 0 and 1000 in 2009 ? (in thousand)", "context": "Guarantees We adopted FASB Interpretation No.45 (“FIN 45”), “Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others” at the beginning of our fiscal 2003. See “Recent Accounting Pronouncements” for further information regarding FIN 45. The lease agreements for our three office buildings in San Jose, California provide for residual value guarantees. These lease agreements were in place prior to December 31, 2002 and are disclosed in Note 14. In the normal course of business, we provide indemnifications of varying scope to customers against claims of intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising from the use of our products. Historically, costs related to these indemnification provisions have not been significant and we are unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these indemnification provisions on our future results of operations. We have commitments to make certain milestone and/or retention payments typically entered into in conjunction with various acquisitions, for which we have made accruals in our consolidated financial statements. In connection with our purchases of technology assets during fiscal 2003, we entered into employee retention agreements totaling $2.2 million. We are required to make payments upon satisfaction of certain conditions in the agreements. As permitted under Delaware law, we have agreements whereby we indemnify our officers and directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity. The indemnification period covers all pertinent events and occurrences during the officer’s or director’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, we have director and officer insurance coverage that limits our exposure and enables us to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. We believe the estimated fair value of these indemnification agreements in excess of applicable insurance coverage is minimal. As part of our limited partnership interests in Adobe Ventures, we have provided a general indemnification to Granite Ventures, an independent venture capital firm and sole general partner of Adobe Ventures, for certain events or occurrences while Granite Ventures is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity provided that Granite Ventures acts in good faith on behalf of the partnerships. We are unable to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments that could potentially result from any hypothetical future claim, but believe the risk of having to make any payments under this general indemnification to be remote. We accrue for costs associated with future obligations which include costs for undetected bugs that are discovered only after the product is installed and used by customers. The accrual remaining at the end of fiscal 2003 primarily relates to new releases of our Creative Suites products during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003. The table below summarizes the activity related to the accrual during fiscal 2003: \n
Balance at November 29, 2002AccrualsPaymentsBalance at November 28, 2003
$—$5,554$-2,369$3,185
\n Advertising Expenses We expense all advertising costs as incurred and classify these costs under sales and marketing expense. Advertising expenses for fiscal years 2003, 2002, and 2001 were $24.0 million, $26.7 million and $30.5 million, respectively. Foreign Currency and Other Hedging Instruments Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.133 (“SFAS No.133”), “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities and requires us to recognize these as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet and measure them at fair value. As described in Note 15, gains and losses resulting from \n
Year Ended
September 30, 2009% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2008% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2007
($ in 000's)
Revenues
Securities Commissions and
Investment Banking Fees$ 7,162-78%$ 32,292-23%$ 41,879
Investment Advisory Fees1,355-59%3,32630%2,568
Interest Income1,456-63%3,987-4%4,163
Trading Profits4,531341%1,027-80%5,254
Other387-60%975-82%5,340
Total Revenues14,891-64%41,607-30%59,204
Interest Expense421-66%1,2353%1,197
Net Revenues14,470-64%40,372-30%58,007
Non-Interest Expense
Compensation Expense14,381-44%25,860-8%28,010
Other Expense7,296-60%18,064-23%23,383
Total Non-Interest Expense21,677-51%43,924-15%51,393
Income (Loss) Before Taxes
and Minority Interest-7,207103%-3,552-154%6,614
Minority Interest in
Pre-tax (Losses) Income Held by Others-2,3211,742%-126-104%2,995
Pre-tax (Loss) Earnings$ -4,886-43%$ -3,426-195%$ 3,619
\n Year ended September 30, 2009 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2008 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets in fiscal 2009 consists of the results of our joint ventures in Latin America, including Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis continued to significantly impact emerging markets in all business lines. The results in the emerging market segment declined to a $4.9 million loss from a $3.4 million loss in the prior year. This decline was a result of a $24 million, or 80%, decline in commission revenues which was almost entirely offset by a $3.5 million increase in trading profits and a $22 million decline in non-interest expenses. Our minority interest partners shared in $2.3 million of the fiscal 2009 loss before taxes. In December, our joint venture in Turkey ceased operations and subsequently filed for protection under Turkish bankruptcy laws. We have fully reserved for our equity interest in this joint venture. Year ended September 30, 2008 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2007 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets consists of the results of our joint ventures in Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil and Turkey. The results in the emerging market segment declined from a $3.6 million profit in fiscal 2007 to a $3.4 million loss in fiscal 2008. This decline was a result of a greater decline in revenues than an increase in expenses. Expenses were impacted by our investment in Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis significantly impacted emerging markets in all business lines. Commission revenue declined 23% in fiscal 2008 as compared to the prior year as the economic slowdown and a series of political crises in Turkey and Argentina during 2008 severely undermined investors’ confidence in these countries. Trading profits declined due to losses taken in proprietary positions in Turkey. The commission expense portion of compensation expense declined in proportion to the decline in commission revenue. Other expenses in fiscal 2007 were unusually high due to the accrual of tax liabilities and the related legal expenses. As of September 30, 2008, we were still awaiting the final outcome of the litigation in Turkey, and in light of the suspension of the entity’s license, our ability to continue as a going concern in Turkey was uncertain. We had fully reserved for our investment in the Turkish joint venture as of September 30, 2008 and, accordingly, fiscal 2008 pre-tax earnings did not include any net impact of our Turkish joint venture. Index 64 Certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies As a financial holding company, we are required to provide certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies pursuant to the SEC’s Industry Guide 3. Certain of those disclosures are as follows for the fiscal year indicated: \n
Year ended September 30,
201620152014
RJF return on average assets-11.8%2.0%2.1%
RJF return on average equity-211.3%11.5%12.3%
Average equity to average assets-317.1%18.5%18.1%
Dividend payout ratio-421.9%21.0%19.3%
\n (1) Computed as net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the year, divided by two). (2) Computed by utilizing the net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by the average equity attributable to RJF for each respective fiscal year. Average equity is computed by adding the total equity attributable to RJF as of each quarter-end date during the indicated fiscal year, plus the beginning of the year total, divided by five. (3) Computed as average equity (the sum of total equity at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two), divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two). (4) Computed as dividends declared per common share during the fiscal year as a percentage of diluted earnings per common share. Refer to the RJ Bank section of this MD&A, various sections within Item 7A in this report and the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Form 10-K for the other required disclosures. Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity is essential to our business. The primary goal of our liquidity management activities is to ensure adequate funding to conduct our business over a range of market environments. Senior management establishes our liquidity and capital policies. These policies include senior management’s review of short\u0002and long-term cash flow forecasts, review of monthly capital expenditures, the monitoring of the availability of alternative sources of financing, and the daily monitoring of liquidity in our significant subsidiaries. Our decisions on the allocation of capital to our business units consider, among other factors, projected profitability and cash flow, risk and impact on future liquidity needs. Our treasury department assists in evaluating, monitoring and controlling the impact that our business activities have on our financial condition, liquidity and capital structure as well as maintains our relationships with various lenders. The objectives of these policies are to support the successful execution of our business strategies while ensuring ongoing and sufficient liquidity. Liquidity is provided primarily through our business operations and financing activities. Financing activities could include bank borrowings, repurchase agreement transactions or additional capital raising activities under our “universal” shelf registration statement. Cash used in operating activities during the year ended September 30, 2016 was $518 million. Successful operating results generated a $650 million increase in cash. Increases in cash from operations include: ? An increase in brokerage client payables had a $1.82 billion favorable impact on cash. The increase largely results from two factors. First, many clients reacted to uncertainties in the equity markets by increasing the cash balances in their brokerage accounts. Second, our brokerage client account balances increased as a result of our fiscal year 2016 acquisitions of Alex. Brown and 3Macs. Cumulatively, these two factors result in the increase in brokerage client payables and a corresponding increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations which is discussed below. ? Stock loaned, net of stock borrowed, increased $153 million. ? Accrued compensation, commissions and benefits increased $46 million as a result of the increased financial results we achieved in fiscal year 2016. Offsetting these, decreases in cash used in operations resulted from: ? A $1.95 billion increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations and other segregated assets, primarily resulting from the increase in client cash balances described above. RALPH LAUREN CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) The weighted-average number of common shares outstanding used to calculate basic net income (loss) per common share is reconciled to shares used to calculate diluted net income (loss) per common share as follows:"} {"answer": 10353.5, "question": "What is the average value of Total assets and Corporate and other bonds for Fixed maturity securities for Total in 2016? (in million)", "context": "Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – (Continued) CNA applies the same impairment model as described above for the majority of its non-redeemable preferred stock securities on the basis that these securities possess characteristics similar to debt securities and that the issuers maintain their ability to pay dividends. For all other equity securities, in determining whether the security is other\u0002than-temporarily impaired, the Impairment Committee considers a number of factors including, but not limited to: (i) the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than amortized cost, (ii) the financial condition and near term prospects of the issuer, (iii) the intent and ability of CNA to retain its investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for an anticipated recovery in value and (iv) general market conditions and industry or sector specific outlook. Joint venture investments – The Company has 20% to 50% interests in operating joint ventures related to hotel properties and had joint venture interests in the former Bluegrass Project, as discussed in Note 2, that are accounted for under the equity method. The Company’s investment in these entities was $217 million and $234 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and reported in Other assets on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity income (loss) for these investments was $41 million, $43 million and $(62) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 and reported in Other operating expenses on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Income. Some of these investments are variable interest entities (“VIE”) as defined in the accounting guidance because the entities will require additional funding from each equity owner throughout the development and construction phase and are accounted for under the equity method since the Company is not the primary beneficiary. The maximum exposure to loss for the VIE investments is $337 million, consisting of the amount of the investment and debt guarantees. The following tables present summarized financial information for these joint ventures: \n
Year Ended December 31 20162015
(In millions)
Total assets$1,749$1,577
Total liabilities1,4441,231
Year Ended December 31 201620152014
Revenues$693$606$491
Net income807132
\n Hedging – The Company formally documents all relationships between hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as its risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking various hedging transactions. The Company also formally assesses (both at the hedge’s inception and on an ongoing basis) whether the derivatives that are used in hedging transactions have been highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows of hedged items and whether those derivatives may be expected to remain highly effective in future periods. When it is determined that a derivative for which hedge accounting has been designated is not (or ceases to be) highly effective, the Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively. See Note 3 for additional information on the Company’s use of derivatives. Securities lending activities – The Company lends securities for the purpose of enhancing income or to finance positions to unrelated parties who have been designated as primary dealers by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Borrowers of these securities must deposit and maintain collateral with the Company of no less than 100% of the fair value of the securities loaned. U. S. Government securities and cash are accepted as collateral. The Company maintains effective control over loaned securities and, therefore, continues to report such securities as investments on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Securities lending is typically done on a matched-book basis where the collateral is invested to substantially match the term of the loan. This matching of terms tends to limit risk. In accordance with the Company’s lending agreements, securities on loan are returned immediately to the Company upon notice. Collateral is not reflected as an asset of the Company. There was no collateral held at December 31, 2016 and 2015. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 4. Fair Value – (Continued) x Level 2 – Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable in active markets. x Level 3 – Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs are not observable. Prices may fall within Level 1, 2 or 3 depending upon the methodology and inputs used to estimate fair value for each specific security. In general, the Company seeks to price securities using third party pricing services. Securities not priced by pricing services are submitted to independent brokers for valuation and, if those are not available, internally developed pricing models are used to value assets using a methodology and inputs the Company believes market participants would use to value the assets. Prices obtained from third-party pricing services or brokers are not adjusted by the Company. The Company performs control procedures over information obtained from pricing services and brokers to ensure prices received represent a reasonable estimate of fair value and to confirm representations regarding whether inputs are observable or unobservable. Procedures may include: (i) the review of pricing service methodologies or broker pricing qualifications, (ii) back-testing, where past fair value estimates are compared to actual transactions executed in the market on similar dates, (iii) exception reporting, where period-over-period changes in price are reviewed and challenged with the pricing service or broker based on exception criteria, (iv) detailed analysis, where the Company performs an independent analysis of the inputs and assumptions used to price individual securities and (v) pricing validation, where prices received are compared to prices independently estimated by the Company. The fair values of CNA’s life settlement contracts are included in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity options purchased are included in Equity securities, and all other derivative assets are included in Receivables. Derivative liabilities are included in Payable to brokers. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized in the tables below: \n
December 31, 2016Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities:
Corporate and other bonds$18,828$130$18,958
States, municipalities and political subdivisions13,239113,240
Asset-backed:
Residential mortgage-backed4,9441295,073
Commercial mortgage-backed2,027132,040
Other asset-backed968571,025
Total asset-backed7,9391998,138
U.S. Treasury and obligations of government-sponsored enterprises$9393
Foreign government445445
Redeemable preferred stock1919
Fixed maturitiesavailable-for-sale11240,45133040,893
Fixed maturities trading5956601
Total fixed maturities$112$41,046$336$41,494
Equity securitiesavailable-for-sale$91$19$110
Equity securities trading4381439
Total equity securities$529$-$20$549
Short term investments$3,833$853$4,686
Other invested assets55560
Receivables11
Life settlement contracts$5858
Payable to brokers-44-44
\n Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities The following graph compares annual total return of our Common Stock, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Index (“S&P 500 Index”) and our Peer Group (“Loews Peer Group”) for the five years ended December 31, 2016. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in our Common Stock, the S&P 500 Index and the Loews Peer Group was $100 on December 31, 2011 and that all dividends were reinvested. \n
201120122013201420152016
Loews Common Stock100.0108.91129.64113.59104.47128.19
S&P 500 Index100.0116.00153.57174.60177.01198.18
Loews Peer Group (a)100.0113.39142.85150.44142.44165.34
\n (a) The Loews Peer Group consists of the following companies that are industry competitors of our principal operating subsidiaries: Chubb Limited (name change from ACE Limited after it acquired The Chubb Corporation on January 15, 2016), W. R. Berkley Corporation, The Chubb Corporation (included through January 15, 2016 when it was acquired by ACE Limited), Energy Transfer Partners L. P. , Ensco plc, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. , Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L. P. (included through November 26, 2014 when it was acquired by Kinder Morgan Inc. ), Noble Corporation, Spectra Energy Corp, Transocean Ltd. and The Travelers Companies, Inc. Dividend Information We have paid quarterly cash dividends in each year since 1967. Regular dividends of $0.0625 per share of Loews common stock were paid in each calendar quarter of 2016 and 2015."} {"answer": 2011.0, "question": "In terms of Assets,which year is Fair Values of Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments on December 31 higher?", "context": "R. ONEOK PARTNERS General Partner Interest - See Note B for discussion of the April 2006 acquisition of the additional general partner interest in ONEOK Partners. The limited partner units we received from ONEOK Partners were newly created Class B limited partner units. As of April 7, 2007, the Class B limited partner units are no longer subordinated to distributions on ONEOK Partners’ common units and generally have the same voting rights as the common units and are entitled to receive increased quarterly distributions and distributions on liquidation equal to 110 percent of the distributions paid with respect to the common units. On June 21, 2007, we, as the sole holder of ONEOK Partners Class B limited partner units, waived our right to receive the increased quarterly distributions on the Class B units for the period April 7, 2007, through December 31, 2007, and continuing thereafter until we give ONEOK Partners no less than 90 days advance notice that we have withdrawn our waiver. Any such withdrawal of the waiver will be effective with respect to any distribution on the Class B units declared or paid on or after 90 days following delivery of the notice. Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement and in conjunction with the issuance of additional common units by ONEOK Partners, we, as the general partner, are required to make equity contributions in order to maintain our representative general partner interest. Our investment in ONEOK Partners is shown in the table below for the periods presented. \n
December 31, 2007December 31, 2006December 31, 2005
General partner interest2.00%2.00%1.65%
Limited partner interest43.70% (a)43.70% (a)1.05% (b)
Total ownership interest45.70%45.70%2.70%
\n (a) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units and 36.5 million Class B units. (b) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units. Cash Distributions - Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement, distributions are made to the partners with respect to each calendar quarter in an amount equal to 100 percent of available cash. Available cash generally consists of all cash receipts adjusted for cash disbursements and net changes to cash reserves. Available cash will generally be distributed 98 percent to limited partners and 2 percent to the general partner. As an incentive, the general partner’s percentage interest in quarterly distributions is increased after certain specified target levels are met. Under the incentive distribution provisions, the general partner receives: ?15 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.605 per unit, ?25 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.715 per unit, and ?50 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.935 per unit. ONEOK Partners’ income is allocated to the general and limited partners in accordance with their respective partnership ownership percentages. The effect of any incremental income allocations for incentive distributions that are allocated to the general partner is calculated after the income allocation for the general partner’s partnership interest and before the income allocation to the limited partners. The following table shows ONEOK Partners’ general partner and incentive distributions related to the periods indicated. \n
Years Ended December 31,
2007 2006 2005
(Thousands of dollars)
General partner distributions$7,842$6,228$2,632
Incentive distributions50,62731,1026,568
Total distributions from ONEOK Partners$58,469$37,330$9,200
\n The quarterly distributions paid by ONEOK Partners to limited partners in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2007 were $0.98 per unit, $0.99 per unit, $1.00 per unit, and $1.01 per unit, respectively. gas. The use of these derivative instruments and the associated recovery of these costs have been approved by the OCC, KCC and regulatory authorities in certain of our Texas jurisdictions. ONEOK entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. ONEOK had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $500 million at December 31, 2011. In January 2012, ONEOK entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $200 million. Upon issuance in January 2012 of our $700 million, 4.25-percent senior notes due 2022, ONEOK settled all $700 million of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $44.1 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. ONEOK Partners entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. At December 31, 2011, ONEOK Partners had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $750 million. During the year ended December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $650 million. Upon ONEOK Partners’ debt issuance in September 2012, ONEOK Partners settled $1 billion of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $124.9 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. At December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners’ remaining interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $400 million have settlement dates greater than 12 months. Fair Values of Derivative Instruments - The following table sets forth the fair values of our derivative instruments for our continuing and discontinued operations for the periods indicated: \n
December 31, 2012 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)December 31, 2011 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)
Assets(Liabilities)Assets(Liabilities)
(Thousands of dollars)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments
Commodity contracts
Financial contracts$47,516(b)$-4,885$184,184(c)$-73,346
Physical contracts56-12662-344
Interest-rate contracts10,923——-128,666
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments58,495-5,011184,246-202,356
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
Commodity contracts
Nontrading instruments
Financial contracts24,970-25,009295,948-323,170
Physical contracts4,059-15338,733-1,665
Trading instruments
Financial contracts15,358-14,192111,920-110,050
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments44,387-39,354446,601-434,885
Total derivatives$102,882$-44,365$630,847$-637,241
\n (a) - Included on a net basis in energy marketing and risk-management assets and liabilities, other assets and other deferred credits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. (b) - Includes $16.9 million of derivative net assets and ineffectiveness associated with cash flow hedges of inventory related to certain financial contracts that were used to hedge forecasted purchases and sales of natural gas. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). (c) - Includes $88.9 million of derivative assets associated with cash flow hedges of inventory that were adjusted to reflect the lower of cost or market value. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). guidance to amend or clarify portions of the final rule in 2013. We anticipate that if the EPA issues additional responses, amendments and/or policy guidance on the final rule, it will reduce the anticipated capital, operations and maintenance costs resulting from the regulation. Generally, the NSPS final rule will require expenditures for updated emissions controls, monitoring and record-keeping requirements at affected facilities in the crude-oil and natural gas industry. We do not expect these expenditures will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. CERCLA - The federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also commonly known as Superfund (CERCLA), imposes strict, joint and several liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original act, on certain classes of “persons” (defined under CERCLA) that caused and/or contributed to the release of a hazardous substance into the environment. These persons include but are not limited to the owner or operator of a facility where the release occurred and/or companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substances found at the facility. Under CERCLA, these persons may be liable for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances released into the environment, damages to natural resources and the costs of certain health studies. Neither we nor ONEOK Partners expect our respective responsibilities under CERCLA, for this facility and any other, will have a material impact on our respective results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Chemical Site Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security released an interim rule in April 2007 that requires companies to provide reports on sites where certain chemicals, including many hydrocarbon products, are stored. We completed the Homeland Security assessments, and our facilities subsequently were assigned one of four risk-based tiers ranging from high (Tier 1) to low (Tier 4) risk, or not tiered at all due to low risk. To date, four of our facilities have been given a Tier 4 rating. Facilities receiving a Tier 4 rating are required to complete Site Security Plans and possible physical security enhancements. We do not expect the Site Security Plans and possible security enhancements cost will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Pipeline Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration and the DOT have completed a review and inspection of our “critical facilities” and identified no material security issues. Also, the Transportation Security Administration has released new pipeline security guidelines that include broader definitions for the determination of pipeline “critical facilities. ” We have reviewed our pipeline facilities according to the new guideline requirements, and there have been no material changes required to date. Environmental Footprint - Our environmental and climate change strategy focuses on taking steps to minimize the impact of our operations on the environment. These strategies include: (i) developing and maintaining an accurate greenhouse gas emissions inventory according to current rules issued by the EPA; (ii) improving the efficiency of our various pipelines, natural gas processing facilities and natural gas liquids fractionation facilities; (iii) following developing technologies for emission control and the capture of carbon dioxide to keep it from reaching the atmosphere; and (iv) utilizing practices to reduce the loss of methane from our facilities. We participate in the EPA’s Natural Gas STAR Program to voluntarily reduce methane emissions. We continue to focus on maintaining low rates of lost-and-unaccounted-for natural gas through expanded implementation of best practices to limit the release of natural gas during pipeline and facility maintenance and operations. EMPLOYEESWe employed 4,859 people at January 31, 2013, including 705 people at Kansas Gas Service who are subject to collective bargaining agreements. The following table sets forth our contracts with collective bargaining units at January 31, 2013:"} {"answer": 0.54902, "question": "in 2008 what was the approximate tax rate on the company recorded an aggregate net unrealized loss", "context": "AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) of certain of its assets and liabilities under its interest rate swap agreements held as of December 31, 2006 and entered into during the first half of 2007. In addition, the Company paid $8.0 million related to a treasury rate lock agreement entered into and settled during the year ended December 31, 2008. The cost of the treasury rate lock is being recognized as additional interest expense over the 10-year term of the 7.00% Notes. During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company also received $3.1 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under ten forward starting interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $1.4 billion, which were designated as cash flow hedges to manage exposure to variability in cash flows relating to forecasted interest payments in connection with the Certificates issued in the Securitization in May 2007. The settlement is being recognized as a reduction in interest expense over the five-year period for which the interest rate swaps were designated as hedges. The Company also received $17.0 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under thirteen additional interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $850.0 million that managed exposure to variability of interest rates under the credit facilities but were not considered cash flow hedges for accounting purposes. This gain is included in other income in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2007. As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, other comprehensive (loss) income included the following items related to derivative financial instruments (in thousands): \n
20082007
Deferred loss on the settlement of the treasury rate lock, net of tax$-4,332$-4,901
Deferred gain on the settlement of interest rate swap agreements entered into in connection with the Securitization, net oftax1,2381,636
Unrealized losses related to interest rate swap agreements, net of tax-16,349-486
\n During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company recorded an aggregate net unrealized loss of approximately $15.8 million and $3.2 million, respectively (net of a tax provision of approximately $10.2 million and $2.0 million, respectively) in other comprehensive loss for the change in fair value of interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges and reclassified an aggregate of $0.1 million and $6.2 million, respectively (net of an income tax provision of $2.0 million and an income tax benefit of $3.3 million, respectively) into results of operations.9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS The Company determines the fair market values of its financial instruments based on the fair value hierarchy established in SFAS No.157, which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The standard describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date. The Company’s Level 1 assets consist of available-for-sale securities traded on active markets as well as certain Brazilian Treasury securities that are highly liquid and are actively traded in over-the-counter markets. Level 2 Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) The Company issued 82,865, 93,367 and 105,239 of non-vested restricted stock units in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, the majority of which provide for vesting as to all underlying shares on the third anniversary of the grant date. The weighted average grant-date fair value for non-vested restricted stock units granted during 2017, 2016 and 2015 was $187.85, $142.71 and $118.00, respectively. The Company recorded $11.2 million of expense related to restricted stock units during 2017, which is included in cost of goods sold or selling, general and administrative expenses. The unamortized share-based compensation cost related to non-vested restricted stock units, net of expected forfeitures, was $13.2 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.8 years. The Company uses treasury stock to provide shares of common stock in connection with vesting of the restricted stock units. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) F-37 Note 13?— Income taxes The following table summarizes the components of the provision for income taxes from continuing operations: \n
201720162015
(Dollars in thousands)
Current:
Federal$133,621$2,344$-4,700
State5,2135,2302,377
Foreign35,44428,84253,151
Deferred:
Federal-258,247-25,141-35,750
State1,459-1,837-5,012
Foreign212,158-1,364-2,228
$129,648$8,074$7,838
\n The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “TCJA”) was enacted on December 22, 2017. The legislation significantly changes U. S. tax law by, among other things, permanently reducing corporate income tax rates from a maximum of 35% to 21%, effective January 1, 2018; implementing a territorial tax system, by generally providing for, among other things, a dividends received deduction on the foreign source portion of dividends received from a foreign corporation if specified conditions are met; and imposing a one-time repatriation tax on undistributed post-1986 foreign subsidiary earnings and profits, which are deemed repatriated for purposes of the tax. As a result of the TCJA, the Company reassessed and revalued its ending net deferred tax liabilities at December 31, 2017 and recognized a?$46.1 million?provisional tax benefit in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017. As a result of the deemed repatriation tax under the TCJA, the Company recognized a $154.0 million provisional tax expense in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the Company expects to pay this tax over an eight-year period. While the TCJA provides for a territorial tax system, beginning in 2018, it includes?two?new U. S. tax base erosion provisions, the global intangible low-taxed income (“GILTI”) provisions and the base-erosion and anti-abuse tax (“BEAT”) provisions. The GILTI provisions require the Company to include in its U. S. income tax return foreign subsidiary earnings in excess of an allowable return on the foreign subsidiary’s tangible assets. The Company expects that it will be subject to incremental U. S. tax on GILTI income beginning in 2018. Because of the complexity of the new GILTI tax rules, the Company is continuing to evaluate this provision of the TCJA and the application of Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 740, \"Income Taxes. \" Under U. S. GAAP, the Company may make an accounting policy election to either (1) treat future taxes with respect to the inclusion in U. S. taxable income of amounts related to GILTI as current period expense when incurred (the “period cost method”) or (2) take such amounts into a company’s measurement of its deferred taxes (the “deferred method”). The Company’s selection of an accounting policy with respect to the new GILTI tax rules will depend, in part, on an analysis of the Company’s global income to determine whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions in taxable income related to GILTI and, if so, what the impact is expected to be. The determination of whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions ? Miller Insurance Services LLP, which is a Pounds sterling functional entity, earns significant non-functional currency revenues, in which case the Company limits its exposure to exchange rate changes by the use of forward contracts matched to a percentage of forecast cash inflows in specific currencies and periods. However, where the foreign exchange risk relates to any Pounds sterling pension benefits assets or liability for pension benefits, we do not hedge the risk. Consequently, if our London market operations have a significant pension asset or liability, we may be exposed to accounting gains and losses, recognized in other comprehensive income or loss, if the U. S. dollar and Pounds sterling exchange rates change. We do, however, hedge the Pounds sterling contributions into the pension plan. Translation risk Outside our U. S. and London market operations, we predominantly earn revenues and incur expenses in the local currency. When we translate the results and net assets of these operations into U. S. dollars for reporting purposes, movements in exchange rates will affect reported results and net assets. For example, if the U. S. dollar strengthens against the Euro, the reported results of our Eurozone operations in U. S. dollar terms will be lower. With the exception of foreign currency hedges for certain intercompany loans that are not designated as hedging instruments, we do not hedge translation risk. The table below provides information about our foreign currency forward exchange contracts, which are sensitive to exchange rate risk. The table summarizes the U. S. dollar equivalent amounts of each currency bought and sold forward and the weighted average contractual exchange rates. All forward exchange contracts mature within three years. \n
Settlement date before December 31,
201720182019
December 31, 2016Contract amountAverage contractual exchange rateContract amountAverage contractual exchange rateContract amountAverage contractual exchange rate
(millions)(millions)(millions)
Foreign currency sold
U.S. dollars sold for Pounds sterling$390$1.51 = £1$268$1.46 = £1$77$1.39 = £1
Euro sold for U.S. dollars74€1 = $1.2048€1 = $1.1914€1 = $1.17
Japanese yen sold for U.S. dollars21¥110.85 = $113¥110.90 - $15¥98.63 = $1
Euro sold for Pounds sterling22€1 = £1.2191 = £1.334€1 = £1.24
Total$507$338$100
Fair value(i)$-65$-40$-5
\n (i) Represents the difference between the contract amount and the cash flow in U. S. dollars which would have been receivable had the foreign currency forward exchange contracts been entered into on December 31, 2016 at the forward exchange rates prevailing at that date."} {"answer": 2.0, "question": "How many kinds of Sales volume are greater than 200 in 2017?", "context": "Table of Contents Rent expense under all operating leases, including both cancelable and noncancelable leases, was $645 million, $488 million and $338 million in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases having remaining terms in excess of one year as of September 28, 2013, are as follows (in millions): \n
2014$610
2015613
2016587
2017551
2018505
Thereafter1,855
Total minimum lease payments$4,721
\n Other Commitments As of September 28, 2013, the Company had outstanding off-balance sheet third-party manufacturing commitments and component purchase commitments of $18.6 billion. In addition to the off-balance sheet commitments mentioned above, the Company had outstanding obligations of $1.3 billion as of September 28, 2013, which consisted mainly of commitments to acquire capital assets, including product tooling and manufacturing process equipment, and commitments related to advertising, research and development, Internet and telecommunications services and other obligations. Contingencies The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and that have not been fully adjudicated. In the opinion of management, there was not at least a reasonable possibility the Company may have incurred a material loss, or a material loss in excess of a recorded accrual, with respect to loss contingencies. However, the outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain. Therefore, although management considers the likelihood of such an outcome to be remote, if one or more of these legal matters were resolved against the Company in a reporting period for amounts in excess of management’s expectations, the Company’s consolidated financial statements for that reporting period could be materially adversely affected. Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd, et al. On August 24, 2012, a jury returned a verdict awarding the Company $1.05 billion in its lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd and affiliated parties in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division. On March 1, 2013, the District Court upheld $599 million of the jury’s award and ordered a new trial as to the remainder. Because the award is subject to entry of final judgment, partial re-trial and appeal, the Company has not recognized the award in its results of operations. VirnetX, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al. On August 11, 2010, VirnetX, Inc. filed an action against the Company alleging that certain of its products infringed on four patents relating to network communications technology. On November 6, 2012, a jury returned a verdict against the Company, and awarded damages of $368 million. The Company is challenging the verdict, believes it has valid defenses and has not recorded a loss accrual at this time. CF INDUSTRIES HOLDINGS, INC. 5 The following table summarizes our nitrogen fertilizer production volume for the last three years \n
December 31,
201720162015
(tons in thousands)
Ammonia-110,2958,3077,673
Granular urea4,4513,3682,520
UAN -32%6,9146,6985,888
AN2,1271,8451,283
\n (1) Gross ammonia production, including amounts subsequently upgraded on-site into granular urea, UAN or AN. Donaldsonville, Louisiana The Donaldsonville nitrogen fertilizer complex is the world's largest nitrogen fertilizer production facility. It has six ammonia plants, five urea plants, four nitric acid plants, three UAN plants, and one DEF plant. The complex, which is located on the Mississippi River, includes deep-water docking facilities, access to an ammonia pipeline, and truck and railroad loading capabilities. The complex has on-site storage for 160,000 tons of ammonia, 201,000 tons of UAN (measured on a 32% nitrogen content basis) and 173,000 tons of granular urea. As part of our capacity expansion projects, the new Donaldsonville urea plant became operational during the fourth quarter of 2015. The new UAN plant was placed in service in the first quarter of 2016, and the new ammonia plant was placed in service in October 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada Medicine Hat is the largest nitrogen fertilizer complex in Canada. It has two ammonia plants and one urea plant. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 60,000 tons of granular urea. Port Neal, Iowa The Port Neal facility is located approximately 12 miles south of Sioux City, Iowa on the Missouri River. The facility consists of two ammonia plants, three urea plants, two nitric acid plants and a UAN plant. The location has on-site storage for 90,000 tons of ammonia, 154,000 tons of granular urea, and 81,000 tons of 32% UAN. As part of our capacity expansion projects, both the ammonia and urea plants were placed in service in December 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Verdigris, Oklahoma The Verdigris facility is located northeast of Tulsa, Oklahoma, near the Verdigris River and is owned by TNLP. It is the second largest UAN production facility in North America. The facility comprises two ammonia plants, two nitric acid plants, two UAN plants and a port terminal. Through our approximately 75.3% interest in TNCLP and its subsidiary, TNLP, we operate the plants and lease the port terminal from the Tulsa-Rogers County Port Authority. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 100,000 tons of 32% UAN. Woodward, Oklahoma The Woodward facility is located in rural northwest Oklahoma and consists of an ammonia plant, two nitric acid plants, two urea plants and two UAN plants. The facility has on-site storage for 36,000 tons of ammonia and 84,000 tons of 32% UAN. Yazoo City, Mississippi The Yazoo City facility is located in central Mississippi and includes one ammonia plant, four nitric acid plants, an AN plant, two urea plants, a UAN plant and a dinitrogen tetroxide production and storage facility. The site has on-site storage for 50,000 tons of ammonia, 48,000 tons of 32% UAN and 11,000 tons of AN and related products. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our ammonia segment averaged $248 per ton in 2016, including the impact of the CF Fertilisers UK acquisition, which averaged $220 per ton. The remaining cost of sales per ton was $250 in 2016, a 16% decrease from the $296 per ton in 2015. The decrease was due primarily to the impact of unrealized net mark-to-market gains on natural gas derivatives in 2016 compared to losses in 2015 and to the impact of lower realized natural gas costs in 2016. This was partly offset by capacity expansion project start-up costs of $50 million and an increase in expansion project depreciation as a result of the new ammonia plants at our Donaldsonville and Port Neal facilities. Granular Urea Segment Our granular urea segment produces granular urea, which contains 46% nitrogen. Produced from ammonia and carbon dioxide, it has the highest nitrogen content of any of our solid nitrogen fertilizers. Granular urea is produced at our Courtright, Ontario; Donaldsonville, Louisiana; Medicine Hat, Alberta; and Port Neal, Iowa nitrogen complexes. The following table presents summary operating data for our granular urea segment: \n
Year ended December 31,
2017201620152017 v. 20162016 v. 2015
(in millions, except as noted)
Net sales$971$831$788$14017%$435%
Cost of sales85658446927247%11525%
Gross margin$115$247$319$-132-53%$-72-23%
Gross margin percentage11.8%29.7%40.4%-17.9%-10.7%
Sales volume by product tons (000s)4,3573,5972,46076021%1,13746%
Sales volume by nutrient tons (000s)(1)2,0041,6541,13235021%52246%
Average selling price per product ton$223$231$320$-8-3%$-89-28%
Average selling price per nutrient ton-1$485$502$696$-17-3%$-194-28%
Gross margin per product ton$26$69$129$-43-62%$-60-47%
Gross margin per nutrient ton-1$57$149$281$-92-62%$-132-47%
Depreciation and amortization$246$112$51$134120%$61120%
Unrealized net mark-to-market loss (gain) on natural gas derivatives$16$-67$47$83N/M$-114N/M
\n N/M—Not Meaningful (1) Granular urea represents 46% nitrogen content. Nutrient tons represent the tons of nitrogen within the product tons. Year Ended December 31, 2017 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2016 Net Sales. Net sales in the granular urea segment increased by $140 million, or 17%, to $971 million in 2017 compared to $831 million in 2016 due primarily to a 21% increase in sales volume partially offset by a 3% decrease in average selling prices. Sales volume was higher due primarily to increased production at our new Port Neal facility, which came on line in the fourth quarter of 2016. Average selling prices decreased to $223 per ton in 2017 compared to $231 per ton in 2016 due primarily to greater global nitrogen supply availability due to global capacity additions. Selling prices strengthened in the fourth quarter of 2017 rising approximately 14% compared to the prior year period. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our granular urea segment averaged $197 in 2017, a 22% increase from the $162 per ton in 2016. The increase was due primarily to higher depreciation as a result of the new granular urea plant at our Port Neal facility, an unrealized net mark-to-market loss on natural gas derivatives in 2017 compared to a gain in the comparable period of 2016 and higher realized natural gas costs, including the impact of realized derivatives. These increases in cost of sales were partially offset by the impact of production efficiencies due to increased volume. Depreciation and amortization in our granular urea segment in 2017 was $56 per ton compared to $31 per ton in 2016."} {"answer": 8895.5, "question": "What's the sum of Cost of sales of Year Ended December 31, 2016, Decreases in current period tax positions, and Total Year Ended December 31, 2005 of Balance at End of Period ?", "context": "The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s valuation allowance: \n
Balance at January 1, 2010$25,621
Increases in current period tax positions907
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,740
Balance at December 31, 2010$23,788
Increases in current period tax positions1,525
Decreases in current period tax positions-3,734
Balance at December 31, 2011$21,579
Increases in current period tax positions0
Decreases in current period tax positions-2,059
Balance at December 31, 2012$19,520
\n Note 14: Employee Benefits Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits The Company maintains noncontributory defined benefit pension plans covering eligible employees of its regulated utility and shared services operations. Benefits under the plans are based on the employee’s years of service and compensation. The pension plans have been closed for most employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 had their accrued benefit frozen and will be able to receive this benefit as a lump sum upon termination or retirement. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 and non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006 are provided with a 5.25% of base pay defined contribution plan. The Company does not participate in a multiemployer plan. The Company’s funding policy is to contribute at least the greater of the minimum amount required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or the normal cost, and an additional contribution if needed to avoid “at risk” status and benefit restrictions under the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Company may also increase its contributions, if appropriate, to its tax and cash position and the plan’s funded position. Pension plan assets are invested in a number of actively managed and indexed investments including equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities and guaranteed interest contracts with insurance companies. Pension expense in excess of the amount contributed to the pension plans is deferred by certain regulated subsidiaries pending future recovery in rates charged for utility services as contributions are made to the plans. (See Note 6) The Company also has several unfunded noncontributory supplemental non-qualified pension plans that provide additional retirement benefits to certain employees. The Company maintains other postretirement benefit plans providing varying levels of medical and life insurance to eligible retirees. The retiree welfare plans are closed for union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. The plans had previously closed for non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2002. The Company’s policy is to fund other postretirement benefit costs for rate-making purposes. Plan assets are invested in equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) and emerging market funds. The obligations of the plans are dominated by obligations for active employees. Because the timing of expected benefit payments is so far in the future and the size of the plan assets are small relative to the Company’s assets, the investment strategy is to allocate a significant percentage of assets to equities, which the Company believes will provide the highest return over the long-term period. The fixed income assets are invested in long duration debt securities and may be invested in fixed income instruments, such as futures and options in order to better match the duration of the plan liability. The allocation of goodwill in accordance with SFAS No.142 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was as follows: \n
Balance at Beginning of Period Goodwill Acquired Foreign Currency Translation and Other Balance at End of Period
Year Ended December 31, 2006
Food Packaging$540.4$31.9$14.9$587.2
Protective Packaging1,368.40.41.11,369.9
Total$1,908.8$32.3$16.0$1,957.1
Year Ended December 31, 2005
Food Packaging$549.8$0.7$-10.1$540.4
Protective Packaging1,368.20.8-0.61,368.4
Total$1,918.0$1.5$-10.7$1,908.8
\n See Note 20, “Acquisitions,” for additional information on the goodwill acquired during 2006. Note 4 Short Term Investments—Available-for-Sale Securities At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company’s available-for-sale securities consisted of auction rate securities for which interest or dividend rates are generally re-set for periods of up to 90 days. At December 31, 2006, the Company held $33.9 million of auction rate securities which were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates. At December 31, 2005, the Company held $44.1 million of auction rate securities, of which $34.7 million were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates and $9.4 million were investments in other auction rate securities with contractual maturities in 2031. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the fair value of the available-for-sale securities held by the Company was equal to their cost. There were no gross realized gains or losses from the sale of available\u0002for-sale securities in 2006 and 2005. Note 5 Accounts Receivable Securitization Program In December 2001, the Company and a group of its U. S. subsidiaries entered into an accounts receivable securitization program with a bank and an issuer of commercial paper administered by the bank. On December 7, 2004, which was the scheduled expiration date of this program, the parties extended this program for an additional term of three years ending December 7, 2007. Under this receivables program, the Company’s two primary operating subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air Corporation (US), sell all of their eligible U. S. accounts receivable to Sealed Air Funding Corporation, an indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that was formed for the sole purpose of entering into the receivables program. Sealed Air Funding in turn may sell undivided ownership interests in these receivables to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, subject to specified conditions, up to a maximum of $125.0 million of receivables interests outstanding from time to time. Sealed Air Funding retains the receivables it purchases from the operating subsidiaries, except those as to which it sells receivables interests to the bank or the issuer of commercial paper. The Company has structured the sales of accounts receivable by the operating subsidiaries to Sealed Air Funding, and the sales of receivables interests from Sealed Air Funding to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, as “true sales” under applicable laws. The assets of Sealed Air Funding are not available to pay any creditors of the Company or of the Company’s other subsidiaries or affiliates. The Company accounts for these transactions as sales of receivables under the provisions of SFAS No.140, “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities. ” Product Care 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, net sales decreased $30 million, or 2%, in 2016 compared with 2015, of which $22 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $8 million, or 1%, in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to the following: ? unfavorable price/mix of $29 million primarily in North America driven by targeted pricing incentives and an unfavorable product mix related to accelerated growth in e-Commerce and a shift in demand due to more innovative, resource-efficient solutions. This was partially offset by: ? higher unit volumes of $21 million, primarily in North America and EMEA due to ongoing strength in the e-Commerce and third party logistics markets, partially offset by rationalization and weakness in the industrial sector, as well as declines in Latin America due to the political and economic environment.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, net sales decreased $109 million, or 7%, in 2015 compared with 2014, of which $99 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $10 million, or 1%, in 2015 compared with 2014 primarily due to the following: ? lower unit volumes due to rationalization efforts in North America, Latin America and to a lesser extent, EMEA and weaknesses across the industrial sector. This was partially offset by: ? favorable price/mix in all regions, primarily in North America and Latin America reflecting results from our focus on maintaining pricing disciplines and an increase of sales from high-performance packaging solutions, including cushioning and packaging systems as compared to sales from general packaging solutions, and the progression of our pricing and value initiatives implemented to offset non-material inflationary costs as well as currency devaluation. Cost of Sales Cost of sales for the years ended December 31, were as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,2016 vs. 2015 % Change2015 vs. 2014 % Change
(In millions)201620152014
Net sales$6,778.3$7,031.5$7,750.5-3.6%-9.3%
Cost of sales4,246.74,444.95,062.9-4.5%-12.2%
As a % of net sales62.7%63.2%65.3%
Gross Profit$2,531.6$2,586.6$2,687.6-2.1%-3.8%
\n 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, costs of sales decreased $198 million in 2016 as compared to 2015. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $163 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $35 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $79 million, offset by an increase of $51 million in expenses representing higher non-material manufacturing and direct costs, including salary and wage inflation, partially offset by restructuring savings and lower incentive based compensation.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, costs of sales decreased $618 million in 2015 as compared to 2014. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $492 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $126 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $140 million and favorable impact of $31 million related to cost savings, freight, and other supply chain costs. These were partially offset by $47 million in expenses related to higher non-material manufacturing costs, including salary and wage inflation."} {"answer": -0.04348, "question": "In the year with lowest amount of Service cost, what's the increasing rate of Interest cost for Pension Benefits? (in %)", "context": "The funded status of the Company's plans as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, was as follows \n
Pension Benefits December 31Other Benefits December 31
($ in millions)2015201420152014
Change in Benefit Obligation
Benefit obligation at beginning of year$5,671$4,730$650$616
Service cost1501361313
Interest cost2422532730
Plan participants' contributions112667
Actuarial loss (gain)-254714-9124
Benefits paid-185-168-39-40
Curtailments—-20——
Benefit obligation at end of year5,6355,671566650
Change in Plan Assets
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year4,7314,310——
Actual return on plan assets-47437——
Employer contributions1031263333
Plan participants' contributions112667
Benefits paid-185-168-39-40
Fair value of plan assets at end of year4,6134,731——
Funded status$-1,022$-940$-566$-650
Amounts Recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position:
Pension plan assets$—$17$—$—
Current liability-1-21-18-143-143
Non-current liability-2-1,001-939-423-507
Accumulated other comprehensive loss (income) (pre-tax) related to:
Prior service costs (credits)86105-105-125
Net actuarial loss (gain)1,4331,374-2173
\n (1) Included in other current liabilities and current portion of postretirement plan liabilities, respectively. (2) Included in pension plan liabilities and other postretirement plan liabilities, respectively. The Projected Benefit Obligation (\"PBO\"), Accumulated Benefit Obligation (\"ABO\"), and asset values for the Company's qualified pension plans were $5,490 million, $5,146 million, and $4,613 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $5,529 million, $5,124 million, and $4,731 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The PBO represents the present value of pension benefits earned through the end of the year, with allowance for future salary increases. The ABO is similar to the PBO, but does not provide for future salary increases. The PBO and fair value of plan assets for all qualified and non-qualified pension plans with PBOs in excess of plan assets were $5,635 million and $4,613 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $4,394 million and $3,438 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The ABO and fair value of plan assets for all qualified and non-qualified pension plans with ABOs in excess of plan assets were $4,051 million and $3,391 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $3,981 million and $3,438 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The ABO for all pension plans was $5,273 million and $5,244 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The changes in amounts recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) were as follows: FAS/CAS Adjustment The FAS/CAS Adjustment represents the difference between our pension and postretirement plan expense under FAS and under CAS. \n
Year Ended December 312015 over 20142014 over 2013
($ in millions)201520142013DollarsPercentDollarsPercent
FAS expense$-168$-155$-257$-13-8%$10240%
CAS cost2722271964520%3116%
FAS/CAS Adjustment$104$72$-61$3244%$133218%
\n 2015 - The FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2015 was a net benefit of $104 million, compared to a net benefit of $72 million in 2014. The favorable change was driven by the phase-in of Harmonization and better than expected 2014 asset returns, partially offset by higher FAS expense primarily due to lower discount rates at the end of 2014.2014 - The FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2014 was a net benefit of $72 million, compared to a net expense of $61 million in 2013. The favorable change was driven by lower FAS expense, due primarily to higher discount rates and plan assets at the end of 2013, the full year effect of the 2013 postretirement benefits amendment, and the phase-in of Harmonization. We expect the FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2016 to be a net benefit of approximately $137 million ($161 million FAS and $298 million CAS), primarily driven by the continued phase-in of Harmonization and higher FAS discount rates, partially offset by lower than expected 2015 asset returns. The expected FAS/CAS Adjustment is subject to change during 2016, when we remeasure our actuarial estimate of the unfunded benefit obligation for CAS with updated census data and other items. Deferred State Income Taxes Deferred state income taxes reflect the change in deferred state tax assets and liabilities in the relevant period. These amounts are recorded within operating income, while the current period state income tax expense is charged to contract costs and included in cost of sales and service revenues in segment operating income.2015 - The deferred state income tax expense remained constant at $2 million in 2015 and 2014. Deferred state tax expense in 2015 was primarily attributable to changes in the timing of contract taxable income and pension related adjustments, partially offset by a reduction in the valuation allowance for state tax credit carryforwards.2014 - The deferred state income tax expense in 2014 was $2 million, compared to a benefit of $6 million in 2013. This change was primarily attributable to non-recurring adjustments related to establishing a valuation allowance for a state tax loss carryforward and the true-up of 2013 deferred taxes. These increases were partially offset by changes in the timing of contract taxable income and reserves that are not currently deductible for tax purposes. Interest Expense 2015 - Interest expense in 2015 was $137 million, compared to $149 million in 2014. The decrease was primarily a result of refinancing 6.875% senior notes with 5.000% senior notes and repayment in full of the term loans, partially offset by loss on early extinguishment of debt. See Note 14: Debt in Item 8.2014 - Interest expense in 2014 was $149 million, compared to $118 million in 2013. The increase was primarily a result of a loss on the early extinguishment of debt in the fourth quarter of 2014. See Note 14: Debt in Item 8. Federal Income Taxes 2015 - Our effective tax rate on earnings from continuing operations was 36.1% in 2015, compared to 33.3% in 2014. The increase in our effective tax rate for 2015 was primarily attributable to adjustments to the domestic manufacturing deduction and an increase in the goodwill impairment that is not amortizable for tax purposes. Advance Payments and Billings in Excess of Revenues - Payments received in excess of inventoried costs and revenues are recorded as advance payment liabilities. Property, Plant, and Equipment - Depreciable properties owned by the Company are recorded at cost and depreciated over the estimated useful lives of individual assets. Major improvements are capitalized while expenditures for maintenance, repairs, and minor improvements are expensed. Costs incurred for computer software developed or obtained for internal use are capitalized and amortized over the expected useful life of the software, not to exceed nine years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their useful lives or the term of the lease. The remaining assets are depreciated using the straight-line method, with the following lives: \n
Years
Land improvements3-40
Buildings and improvements3-60
Capitalized software costs3-9
Machinery and other equipment2-45
\n The Company evaluates the recoverability of its property, plant, and equipment when there are changes in economic circumstances or business objectives that indicate the carrying value may not be recoverable. The Company's evaluations include estimated future cash flows, profitability, and other factors affecting fair value. As these assumptions and estimates may change over time, it may or may not be necessary to record impairment charges. Leases - The Company uses its incremental borrowing rate in the assessment of lease classification as capital or operating and defines the initial lease term to include renewal options determined to be reasonably assured. The Company conducts operations primarily under operating leases. Many of the Company's real property lease agreements contain incentives for tenant improvements, rent holidays, or rent escalation clauses. For incentives for tenant improvements, the Company records a deferred rent liability and amortizes the deferred rent over the term of the lease as a reduction to rent expense. For rent holidays and rent escalation clauses during the lease term, the Company records minimum rental expenses on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. For purposes of recognizing lease incentives, the Company uses the date of initial possession as the commencement date, which is generally the date on which the Company is given the right of access to the space and begins to make improvements in preparation for the intended use. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets - The Company performs impairment tests for goodwill as of November 30 of each year and between annual impairment tests if evidence of potential impairment exists, by first comparing the carrying value of net assets to the fair value of the related operations. If the fair value is determined to be less than the carrying value, a second step is performed to determine if goodwill is impaired, by comparing the estimated fair value of goodwill to its carrying value. Purchased intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis or a method based on the pattern of benefits over their estimated useful lives, and the carrying value of these assets is reviewed for impairment when events indicate that a potential impairment may have occurred. Equity Method Investments - Investments in which the Company has the ability to exercise significant influence over the investee but does not own a majority interest or otherwise control are accounted for under the equity method of accounting and included in other assets in its consolidated statements of financial position. The Company's equity investments align strategically and are integrated with the Company's operations, and therefore the Company's share of the net earnings or losses of the investee is included in operating income (loss). The Company evaluates its equity investments for other than temporary impairment whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of such investments may not be fully recoverable. If a decline in the value of an equity method investment is determined to be other than temporary, a loss is recorded in earnings in the current period. Self-Insured Group Medical Insurance - The Company maintains a self-insured group medical insurance plan. The plan is designed to provide a specified level of coverage for employees and their dependents. Estimated liabilities"} {"answer": 10497.0, "question": "What is the average amount of Earnings from operations of 2015, and Pension and other postretirement cash requirements of After 5years ?", "context": "Revenues N&SS revenues decreased 1% in 2008 and 2% in 2007. The decrease of $137 million in 2008 is primarily due to decreased revenues in FCS, Proprietary and satellite programs partially offset by increased revenues in the SBInet program. The decrease of $292 million in 2007 was primarily due to the exclusion of government Delta volume, now a component of our equity investment in ULA and lower FCS volume, partially offset by increased volume on SBInet and several satellite programs. Delta launch and new-build satellite deliveries were as follows: \n
Years ended December 31, 200820072006
Delta II Commercial 23
Delta II Government2
Delta IV Government3
Satellites 144
\n Delta government launches are excluded from our deliveries after December 1, 2006 due to the formation of ULA. Operating Earnings N&SS operating earnings increased by $171 million in 2008 was primarily due to increased earnings from our investment in ULA. The decrease in 2007 was due to lower earnings on FCS and several satellite programs. These decreases were partially offset by higher award fees on GMD and a $44 million gain on sale of a property in Anaheim. N&SS operating earnings include equity earnings of $73 million, $85 million and $71 million from the United Space Alliance joint venture in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively and equity earnings of $105 million, a loss of $11 million and equity earnings of $5 million from the ULA joint venture in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The ULA equity earnings and loss amounts are net of the basis difference amortization. Research and Development The N&SS research and development funding remains focused on the development of communications, command and control, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems (C4ISR); communications and command and control (C3) capabilities that support a network-enabled architecture approach for our various government customers. We are investing in communications capabilities to enable connectivity between existing air/ground platforms, increase communications availability and bandwidth through more robust space systems, and leverage innovative communications concepts. Key programs in this area include JTRS, FCS, Global Positioning System, Tracking and Data Relay Satellite, Ares 1 Crew Launch Vehicle and GMD. Investments were also made to support concepts that may lead to the development of next-generation space intelligence systems. Along with increased funding to support these areas of architecture and network-enabled capabilities development, we also maintained our investment levels in global missile defense and advanced missile defense concepts and technologies. Backlog N&SS total backlog decreased by 12% in 2008 compared with 2007 primarily due to revenues recognized on multi-year orders received in prior years on FCS, GMD and C3 programs, partially offset by an increase in the International Space Station program. Total backlog decreased by 7% in 2007 compared with 2006 due to revenues recognized on FCS and Proprietary programs, partially offset by an increase in Space Exploration programs. Additional Considerations Items which could have a future impact on N&SS operations include the following: United Launch Alliance On December 1, 2006, we completed the transaction with Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed) to create a 50/50 joint venture named United Launch Alliance L. L. C. (ULA). ULA combines the production, engineering, test and launch operations associated with U. S. government launches of Boeing Delta and Lockheed Atlas rockets. In connection with the transaction, billion of unused borrowing on revolving credit line agreements. We anticipate that these credit lines will primarily serve as backup liquidity to support our general corporate borrowing needs. Financing commitments totaled $18.1 billion and $15.9 billion as of December 31, 2012 and 2011. We anticipate that we will not be required to fund a significant portion of our financing commitments as we continue to work with third party financiers to provide alternative financing to customers. Historically, we have not been required to fund significant amounts of outstanding commitments. However, there can be no assurances that we will not be required to fund greater amounts than historically required. In the event we require additional funding to support strategic business opportunities, our commercial aircraft financing commitments, unfavorable resolution of litigation or other loss contingencies, or other business requirements, we expect to meet increased funding requirements by issuing commercial paper or term debt. We believe our ability to access external capital resources should be sufficient to satisfy existing short-term and long-term commitments and plans, and also to provide adequate financial flexibility to take advantage of potential strategic business opportunities should they arise within the next year. However, there can be no assurance of the cost or availability of future borrowings, if any, under our commercial paper program, in the debt markets or our credit facilities. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, our pension plans were $19.7 billion and $16.6 billion underfunded as measured under GAAP. On an ERISA basis our plans are more than 100% funded at December 31, 2012 with minimal required contributions in 2013. We expect to make discretionary contributions to our plans of approximately $1.5 billion in 2013. We may be required to make higher contributions to our pension plans in future years. As of December 31, 2012, we were in compliance with the covenants for our debt and credit facilities. The most restrictive covenants include a limitation on mortgage debt and sale and leaseback transactions as a percentage of consolidated net tangible assets (as defined in the credit agreements), and a limitation on consolidated debt as a percentage of total capital (as defined). When considering debt covenants, we continue to have substantial borrowing capacity. Contractual Obligations The following table summarizes our known obligations to make future payments pursuant to certain contracts as of December 31, 2012, and the estimated timing thereof. \n
(Dollars in millions)TotalLessthan 1year1-3years3-5yearsAfter 5years
Long-term debt (including current portion)$10,251$1,340$2,147$1,095$5,669
Interest on debt-16,1775108647494,054
Pension and other postretirement cash requirements25,5585791,2447,02516,710
Capital lease obligations184102784
Operating lease obligations1,405218334209644
Purchase obligations not recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position118,00244,47241,83818,95612,736
Purchase obligations recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position15,98114,6641,30719
Total contractual obligations$177,558$61,885$47,812$28,039$39,822
\n (1) Includes interest on variable rate debt calculated based on interest rates at December 31, 2012. Variable rate debt was less than 1% of our total debt at December 31, 2012. Industry Competitiveness The commercial jet airplane market and the airline industry remain extremely competitive. Market liberalization in Europe, the Middle East and Asia is enabling low-cost airlines to continue gaining market share. These airlines are increasing the pressure on airfares. This results in continued cost pressures for all airlines and price pressure on our products. Major productivity gains are essential to ensure a favorable market position at acceptable profit margins. Continued access to global markets remains vital to our ability to fully realize our sales potential and long\u0002term investment returns. Approximately 91% of Commercial Airplanes’ total backlog, in dollar terms, is with non-U. S. airlines. We face aggressive international competitors who are intent on increasing their market share. They offer competitive products and have access to most of the same customers and suppliers. With government support,Airbus has historically invested heavily to create a family of products to compete with ours. Regional jet makers Embraer and Bombardier continue to develop and market larger and increasingly more capable airplanes, including Embraer’s E-195 in the regional jet market and Bombardier’s C Series in the 100-150 seat transcontinental market. Additionally, other competitors from Russia, China and Japan are developing commercial jet aircraft. Some of these competitors have historically enjoyed access to government\u0002provided financial support, including “launch aid,” which greatly reduces the cost and commercial risks associated with airplane development activities. This has enabled the development of airplanes without commercial viability; others to be brought to market more quickly than otherwise possible; and many offered for sale below market-based prices. Many competitors have continued to make improvements in efficiency, which may result in funding product development, gaining market share and improving earnings. This market environment has resulted in intense pressures on pricing and other competitive factors, and we expect these pressures to continue or intensify in the coming years. We are focused on improving our products and services and continuing our cost-reduction efforts, which enhances our ability to compete. We are also focused on taking actions to ensure that Boeing is not harmed by unfair subsidization of competitors. Results of Operations \n
Years ended December 31,201720162015
Revenues$56,729$58,012$59,399
% of total company revenues61%61%62%
Earnings from operations$5,432$1,995$4,284
Operating margins9.6%3.4%7.2%
Research and development$2,247$3,706$2,311
\n Revenues Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,283 million or 2% in 2017 compared with 2016 due to delivery mix, with fewer twin aisle deliveries more than offsetting the impact of higher single aisle deliveries. Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,387 million or 2% in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to fewer deliveries. Through February 25, 2016, we repurchased approximately $415.0 million of shares of our common stock, which includes the $250.0 million of shares that we repurchased from certain selling stockholders on February 10, 2016. In order to achieve operational synergies, we expect cash outlays related to our integration plans to be approximately $290.0 million in 2016. These cash outlays are necessary to achieve our integration goals of net annual pre-tax operating profit synergies of $350.0 million by the end of the third year post-Closing Date. Also as discussed in Note 20 to our consolidated financial statements, as of December 31, 2015, a short-term liability of $50.0 million and long-term liability of $264.6 million related to Durom Cup product liability claims was recorded on our consolidated balance sheet. We expect to continue paying these claims over the next few years. We expect to be reimbursed a portion of these payments for product liability claims from insurance carriers. As of December 31, 2015, we have received a portion of the insurance proceeds we estimate we will recover. We have a long-term receivable of $95.3 million remaining for future expected reimbursements from our insurance carriers. We also had a short-term liability of $33.4 million related to Biomet metal-on-metal hip implant claims. At December 31, 2015, we had ten tranches of senior notes outstanding as follows (dollars in millions):"} {"answer": 0.03302, "question": "what percentage of the aggregate consideration for the greenline acquisition was paid to the sellers in 2009 based on the 2008 earn-out target?", "context": "MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) (in thousands, except share and per share amounts) Had compensation expense for employee stock-based awards been determined based on the fair value at grant date consistent with SFAS No.123(R), the Company’s Net income (loss) for the year would have been increased or decreased to the pro forma amounts indicated below: \n
Year Ended December 31,
2005 20042003
Net income
As reported$8,142$57,587$4,212
Compensation expense1,3661,9651,646
Pro forma$6,776$55,622$2,566
Basic net income (loss) per common share$0.29$6.76$-2.20
Diluted net income (loss) per common share$0.23$1.88$-2.20
Basic net income (loss) per common share — pro forma$0.24$6.48$-2.70
Diluted net income (loss) per common share — pro forma$0.19$1.82$-2.70
\n Basic and diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) in 2003 includes the effect of dividends accrued on our redeemable convertible preferred stock. In 2003, securities that could potentially dilute basic EPS in the future were not included in the computation of diluted EPS, because to do so would have been anti-dilutive. See Note 12, “Earnings Per Share”. Revenue Recognition The majority of the Company’s revenues are derived from commissions for trades executed on the electronic trading platform that are billed to its broker-dealer clients on a monthly basis. The Company also derives revenues from information and user access fees, license fees, interest and other income. Commissions are generally calculated as a percentage of the notional dollar volume of bonds traded on the electronic trading platform and vary based on the type and maturity of the bond traded. Under the transaction fee plans, bonds that are more actively traded or that have shorter maturities are generally charged lower commissions, while bonds that are less actively traded or that have longer maturities generally command higher commissions. Commissions are recorded on a trade date basis. The Company’s standard fee schedule for U. S. high-grade corporate bonds was revised in August 2003 to provide lower average transaction commissions for dealers who transacted higher U. S. high-grade volumes through the platform, while at the same time providing an element of fixed commissions over the two-year term of the plans. One of the revised plans that was suited for the Company’s most active broker-dealer clients included a fee cap that limited the potential growth in U. S. high-grade revenue. The fee caps were set to take effect at volume levels significantly above those being transacted at the time the revised transaction fee plans were introduced. Most broker-dealer clients entered into fee arrangements with respect to the trading of U. S. high-grade corporate bonds that included both a fixed component and a variable component. These agreements had been scheduled to expire during the third quarter of 2005. On June 1, 2005, the Company introduced a new fee plan primarily for secondary market transactions in U. S. high-grade corporate bonds executed on its electronic trading platform. As of December 31, 2005, 17 of the Company’s U. S. high-grade broker-dealer clients have signed new two-year agreements that supersede the fee arrangements that were entered into with many of its broker-dealer clients during the third quarter of 2003. The new plan incorporates higher fixed monthly fees and lower variable fees for broker\u0002dealer clients than the previous U. S. high-grade corporate transaction fee plans described above, and incorporates volume incentives to broker-dealer clients that are designed to increase the volume of transactions effected on the Company’s The U. S. high-grade average variable transaction fee per million increased from $84 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 due to the longer maturity of trades executed on the platform, for which we charge higher commissions. The Eurobond average variable transaction fee per million decreased from $138 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $112 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008, principally from the introduction of the new European high-grade fee plan. Other average variable transaction fee per million increased from $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $158 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 primarily due to a higher percentage of volume in products that carry higher fees per million, principally high-yield. Technology Products and Services. Technology products and services revenues increased by $7.8 million to $8.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase was primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. Information and User Access Fees. Information and user access fees increased by $0.1 million or 2.5% to $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Investment Income. Investment income decreased by $1.8 million or 33.7% to $3.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This decrease was primarily due to lower interest rates. Other. Other revenues decreased by $0.1 million or 4.4% to $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Expenses Our expenses for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the resulting dollar and percentage changes, were as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,
20082007
% of% of$%
$Revenues $RevenuesChangeChange
($ in thousands)
Expenses
Employee compensation and benefits$43,81047.1%$43,05146.0%$7591.8%
Depreciation and amortization7,8798.57,1707.77099.9
Technology and communications8,3118.97,4638.084811.4
Professional and consulting fees8,1718.87,6398.25327.0
Occupancy2,8913.13,2753.5-384-11.7
Marketing and advertising3,0323.31,9052.01,12759.2
General and administrative6,1576.65,8896.32684.6
Total expenses$80,25186.2%$76,39281.6%$3,8595.1%
\n $43.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $43.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This increase was primarily attributable to higher wages of $2.4 million, severance costs of $1.0 million and stock\u0002based compensation expense of $1.4 million, offset by reduced incentive compensation of $3.6 million. The higher wages were primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. The total number of employees increased to 185 as of December 31, 2008 from 182 as of December 31, 2007. As a percentage of total revenues, employee compensation and benefits expense increased to 47.1% for the year ended December 31, 2008 from 46.0% for the year ended December 31, 2007. Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $0.7 million or 9.9% to $7.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $7.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. An increase in amortization of intangible assets of $1.3 million and the TWS impairment charge of $0.7 million were offset by a decline in depreciation and amortization of hardware and software development costs of $1.3 million. MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) of this standard had no material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition and Consolidated Statements of Operations. Reclassifications Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior years’ financial statements in order to conform to the current year presentation. Such reclassifications had no effect on previously reported net income. On March 5, 2008, the Company acquired all of the outstanding capital stock of Greenline Financial Technologies, Inc. (“Greenline”), an Illinois-based provider of integration, testing and management solutions for FIX-related products and services designed to optimize electronic trading of fixed-income, equity and other exchange-based products, and approximately ten percent of the outstanding capital stock of TradeHelm, Inc. , a Delaware corporation that was spun-out from Greenline immediately prior to the acquisition. The acquisition of Greenline broadens the range of technology services that the Company offers to institutional financial markets, provides an expansion of the Company’s client base, including global exchanges and hedge funds, and further diversifies the Company’s revenues beyond the core electronic credit trading products. The results of operations of Greenline are included in the Consolidated Financial Statements from the date of the acquisition. The aggregate consideration for the Greenline acquisition was $41.1 million, comprised of $34.7 million in cash, 725,923 shares of common stock valued at $5.8 million and $0.6 million of acquisition-related costs. In addition, the sellers were eligible to receive up to an aggregate of $3.0 million in cash, subject to Greenline attaining certain earn\u0002out targets in 2008 and 2009. A total of $1.4 million was paid to the sellers in 2009 based on the 2008 earn-out target, bringing the aggregate consideration to $42.4 million. The 2009 earn-out target was not met. A total of $2.0 million of the purchase price, which had been deposited into escrow accounts to satisfy potential indemnity claims, was distributed to the sellers in March 2009. The shares of common stock issued to each selling shareholder of Greenline were released in two equal installments on December 20, 2008 and December 20, 2009, respectively. The value ascribed to the shares was discounted from the market value to reflect the non-marketability of such shares during the restriction period. The purchase price allocation is as follows (in thousands): \n
Cash$6,406
Accounts receivable2,139
Amortizable intangibles8,330
Goodwill29,405
Deferred tax assets, net3,410
Other assets, including investment in TradeHelm1,429
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and deferred revenue-8,701
Total purchase price$42,418
\n The amortizable intangibles include $3.2 million of acquired technology, $3.3 million of customer relationships, $1.3 million of non-competition agreements and $0.5 million of tradenames. Useful lives of ten years and five years have been assigned to the customer relationships intangible and all other amortizable intangibles, respectively. The identifiable intangible assets and goodwill are not deductible for tax purposes. The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial information reflects the results of operations of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, as if the acquisition of Greenline had occurred as of the beginning of the period presented, after giving effect to certain purchase accounting adjustments. These pro forma results are not necessarily indicative of what the Company’s operating results would have been had the acquisition actually taken place as of the beginning of the earliest period presented. The pro forma financial information"} {"answer": 8138.0, "question": "What is the sum of Asset-backed in 2016? (in million)", "context": "Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – (Continued) CNA applies the same impairment model as described above for the majority of its non-redeemable preferred stock securities on the basis that these securities possess characteristics similar to debt securities and that the issuers maintain their ability to pay dividends. For all other equity securities, in determining whether the security is other\u0002than-temporarily impaired, the Impairment Committee considers a number of factors including, but not limited to: (i) the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than amortized cost, (ii) the financial condition and near term prospects of the issuer, (iii) the intent and ability of CNA to retain its investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for an anticipated recovery in value and (iv) general market conditions and industry or sector specific outlook. Joint venture investments – The Company has 20% to 50% interests in operating joint ventures related to hotel properties and had joint venture interests in the former Bluegrass Project, as discussed in Note 2, that are accounted for under the equity method. The Company’s investment in these entities was $217 million and $234 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and reported in Other assets on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity income (loss) for these investments was $41 million, $43 million and $(62) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 and reported in Other operating expenses on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Income. Some of these investments are variable interest entities (“VIE”) as defined in the accounting guidance because the entities will require additional funding from each equity owner throughout the development and construction phase and are accounted for under the equity method since the Company is not the primary beneficiary. The maximum exposure to loss for the VIE investments is $337 million, consisting of the amount of the investment and debt guarantees. The following tables present summarized financial information for these joint ventures: \n
Year Ended December 31 20162015
(In millions)
Total assets$1,749$1,577
Total liabilities1,4441,231
Year Ended December 31 201620152014
Revenues$693$606$491
Net income807132
\n Hedging – The Company formally documents all relationships between hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as its risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking various hedging transactions. The Company also formally assesses (both at the hedge’s inception and on an ongoing basis) whether the derivatives that are used in hedging transactions have been highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows of hedged items and whether those derivatives may be expected to remain highly effective in future periods. When it is determined that a derivative for which hedge accounting has been designated is not (or ceases to be) highly effective, the Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively. See Note 3 for additional information on the Company’s use of derivatives. Securities lending activities – The Company lends securities for the purpose of enhancing income or to finance positions to unrelated parties who have been designated as primary dealers by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Borrowers of these securities must deposit and maintain collateral with the Company of no less than 100% of the fair value of the securities loaned. U. S. Government securities and cash are accepted as collateral. The Company maintains effective control over loaned securities and, therefore, continues to report such securities as investments on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Securities lending is typically done on a matched-book basis where the collateral is invested to substantially match the term of the loan. This matching of terms tends to limit risk. In accordance with the Company’s lending agreements, securities on loan are returned immediately to the Company upon notice. Collateral is not reflected as an asset of the Company. There was no collateral held at December 31, 2016 and 2015. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 4. Fair Value – (Continued) x Level 2 – Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable in active markets. x Level 3 – Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs are not observable. Prices may fall within Level 1, 2 or 3 depending upon the methodology and inputs used to estimate fair value for each specific security. In general, the Company seeks to price securities using third party pricing services. Securities not priced by pricing services are submitted to independent brokers for valuation and, if those are not available, internally developed pricing models are used to value assets using a methodology and inputs the Company believes market participants would use to value the assets. Prices obtained from third-party pricing services or brokers are not adjusted by the Company. The Company performs control procedures over information obtained from pricing services and brokers to ensure prices received represent a reasonable estimate of fair value and to confirm representations regarding whether inputs are observable or unobservable. Procedures may include: (i) the review of pricing service methodologies or broker pricing qualifications, (ii) back-testing, where past fair value estimates are compared to actual transactions executed in the market on similar dates, (iii) exception reporting, where period-over-period changes in price are reviewed and challenged with the pricing service or broker based on exception criteria, (iv) detailed analysis, where the Company performs an independent analysis of the inputs and assumptions used to price individual securities and (v) pricing validation, where prices received are compared to prices independently estimated by the Company. The fair values of CNA’s life settlement contracts are included in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity options purchased are included in Equity securities, and all other derivative assets are included in Receivables. Derivative liabilities are included in Payable to brokers. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized in the tables below: \n
December 31, 2016Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities:
Corporate and other bonds$18,828$130$18,958
States, municipalities and political subdivisions13,239113,240
Asset-backed:
Residential mortgage-backed4,9441295,073
Commercial mortgage-backed2,027132,040
Other asset-backed968571,025
Total asset-backed7,9391998,138
U.S. Treasury and obligations of government-sponsored enterprises$9393
Foreign government445445
Redeemable preferred stock1919
Fixed maturitiesavailable-for-sale11240,45133040,893
Fixed maturities trading5956601
Total fixed maturities$112$41,046$336$41,494
Equity securitiesavailable-for-sale$91$19$110
Equity securities trading4381439
Total equity securities$529$-$20$549
Short term investments$3,833$853$4,686
Other invested assets55560
Receivables11
Life settlement contracts$5858
Payable to brokers-44-44
\n Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities The following graph compares annual total return of our Common Stock, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Index (“S&P 500 Index”) and our Peer Group (“Loews Peer Group”) for the five years ended December 31, 2016. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in our Common Stock, the S&P 500 Index and the Loews Peer Group was $100 on December 31, 2011 and that all dividends were reinvested. \n
201120122013201420152016
Loews Common Stock100.0108.91129.64113.59104.47128.19
S&P 500 Index100.0116.00153.57174.60177.01198.18
Loews Peer Group (a)100.0113.39142.85150.44142.44165.34
\n (a) The Loews Peer Group consists of the following companies that are industry competitors of our principal operating subsidiaries: Chubb Limited (name change from ACE Limited after it acquired The Chubb Corporation on January 15, 2016), W. R. Berkley Corporation, The Chubb Corporation (included through January 15, 2016 when it was acquired by ACE Limited), Energy Transfer Partners L. P. , Ensco plc, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. , Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L. P. (included through November 26, 2014 when it was acquired by Kinder Morgan Inc. ), Noble Corporation, Spectra Energy Corp, Transocean Ltd. and The Travelers Companies, Inc. Dividend Information We have paid quarterly cash dividends in each year since 1967. Regular dividends of $0.0625 per share of Loews common stock were paid in each calendar quarter of 2016 and 2015."} {"answer": 91189.0, "question": "What is the average amount of Client deposits of Average Balance Year Ended December 31, 2014, and U.S. of As of December 31, 2014 ?", "context": "countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Capital The management of regulatory and economic capital both involve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. Regulatory Capital Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our regulatory capital requirements, the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31: \n
REGULATORY GUIDELINESSTATE STREET STATE STREET BANK
MinimumWell Capitalized20092008 -22009 2008-2
Regulatory capital ratios:
Tier 1 risk-based capital4%6%17.7%20.3%17.3%19.8%
Total risk-based capital81019.121.619.021.3
Tier 1 leverage ratio-1458.57.88.27.6
\n (1) Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. (2) Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. At December 31, 2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios decreased compared to year-end 2008. With respect to State Street, the loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the U. S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of the May 2009 public offering MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the level of housing prices and the timing of defaults. To the extent that such factors differ significantly from management's current expectations, resulting loss estimates may differ materially from those stated. Excluding other-than-temporary impairment recorded in 2014, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining investment securities and the resulting gross unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about these gross unrealized losses is provided in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. Loans and Leases TABLE 26: U. S. AND NON- U. S. LOANS AND LEASES \n
As of December 31,
(In millions)20142013201220112010
Institutional:
U.S.$14,908$10,623$9,645$7,115$7,001
Non-U.S.3,2632,6542,2512,4784,192
Commercial real estate:
U.S.28209411460764
Total loans and leases$18,199$13,486$12,307$10,053$11,957
Average loans and leases$15,912$13,781$11,610$12,180$12,094
\n The increase in loans in the institutional segment as of December 31, 2014 as compared to December 31, 2013 was primarily driven by higher levels of short-duration advances and increased investment in the non-investment-grade lending market through participations in loan syndications, specifically senior secured bank loans. Short-duration advances to our clients included in the institutional segment were $3.54 billion and $2.45 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These short-duration advances provide liquidity to fund clients in support of their transaction flows associated with securities settlement activities. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our investment in senior secured bank loans totaled approximately $2.07 billion and $724 million, respectively. In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2014 totaling $337 million to participate in such syndications. These senior secured bank loans, which we have rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 95% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2014, compared to 94% as of December 31, 2013. Our investment strategy involves limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment, and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans. As of December 31, 2014, our allowance for loan losses included approximately $26 million related to these senior secured bank loans. As this portfolio grows and becomes more seasoned, our allowance for loan losses related to these loans may increase through additional provisions for credit losses. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, unearned income deducted from our investment in leveraged lease financing was $109 million and $121 million, respectively, for U. S. leases and $261 million and $298 million, respectively, for non-U. S. leases. The commercial real estate, or CRE, loans are composed of the loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Additional information about all of our loan-and-lease segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The decrease in the CRE loans as of December 31, 2014 compared to December 31, 2013 resulted from one of the loans, acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreement with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy being repaid. As of December 31, 2014 no CRE loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2013, we held a CRE loan for approximately $130 million which had previously been modified in a troubled debt restructuring. No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings in 2014 or 2013. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) Funding Deposits: We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, foreign exchange services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with State Street entities in various currencies. We invest these client deposits in a combination of investment securities and short\u0002duration financial instruments whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. For the past several years, we have experienced higher client deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter or the end of the year. As a result, we believe average client deposit balances are more reflective of ongoing funding than period-end balances. TABLE 33: CLIENT DEPOSITS \n
December 31,Average Balance Year Ended December 31,
(In millions)2014201320142013
Client deposits-1$195,276$182,268$167,470$143,043
\n (1) Balance as of December 31, 2014 excluded term wholesale certificates of deposit, or CDs, of $13.76 billion; average balances for the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 excluded average CDs of $6.87 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively. Short-Term Funding: Our corporate commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3.0 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issuance, had $2.48 billion and $1.82 billion of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight, and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $8.93 billion and $7.95 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately $690 million as of December 31, 2014, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2014, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit. Long-Term Funding: As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank had Board authority to issue unsecured senior debt securities from time to time, provided that the aggregate principal amount of such unsecured senior debt outstanding at any one time does not exceed $5 billion. As of December 31, 2014, $4.1 billion was available for issuance pursuant to this authority. As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank also had Board authority to issue an additional $500 million of subordinated debt. We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to our shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors. Agency Credit Ratings Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; relative market position; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits; strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and preparedness for current or future regulatory developments. High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors, increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products, serve markets, and engage in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings. A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital"} {"answer": 1019.0, "question": "what is the highest total amount of Other? (in million)", "context": "PART II ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES Our Class A common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “MA”. At February 8, 2019, we had 73 stockholders of record for our Class A common stock. We believe that the number of beneficial owners is substantially greater than the number of record holders because a large portion of our Class A common stock is held in “street name” by brokers. There is currently no established public trading market for our Class B common stock. There were approximately 287 holders of record of our non-voting Class B common stock as of February 8, 2019, constituting approximately 1.1% of our total outstanding equity. Stock Performance Graph The graph and table below compare the cumulative total stockholder return of Mastercard’s Class A common stock, the S&P 500 Financials and the S&P 500 Index for the five-year period ended December 31, 2018. The graph assumes a $100 investment in our Class A common stock and both of the indices and the reinvestment of dividends. Mastercard’s Class B common stock is not publicly traded or listed on any exchange or dealer quotation system. \n
Base periodIndexed Returns For the Years Ended December 31,
Company/Index201320142015201620172018
Mastercard$100.00$103.73$118.05$126.20$186.37$233.56
S&P 500 Financials100.00115.20113.44139.31170.21148.03
S&P 500 Index100.00113.69115.26129.05157.22150.33
\n Total returns to stockholders for each of the years presented were as follows: General and Administrative The significant components of our general and administrative expenses were as follows: \n
For the Years Ended December 31,Percent Increase (Decrease)
20182017201620182017
($ in millions)
Personnel$3,214$2,687$2,22520%21%
Professional fees3773553376%5%
Data processing and telecommunications60050442019%20%
Foreign exchange activity1-3610634****
Other1,0191,0018112%23%
General and administrative expenses5,1744,6533,82711%22%
Special Item2—-167—****
Adjusted general and administrative expenses (excluding Special Item)2$5,174$4,486$3,82715%17%
\n Note: Table may not sum due to rounding. ** Not meaningful 1 Foreign exchange activity includes gains and losses on foreign exchange derivative contracts and the impact of remeasurement of assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies. See Note 22 (Foreign Exchange Risk Management) to the consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 for further discussion.2 See “Non-GAAP Financial Information” for further information on Special Items. The primary drivers of general and administrative expenses in 2018 and 2017, versus the prior year, were as follows: ? Personnel expenses increased 20% and 21%, or 19% and 20% on a currency-neutral basis, respectively. The 2018 and 2017 increases were driven by a higher number of employees to support our continued investment in the areas of real-time account-based payments, digital, services, data analytics and geographic expansion. The impact of acquisitions contributed 2 and 6 percentage points of growth for 2018 and 2017, respectively. ? Data processing and telecommunication expenses increased 19% and 20%, respectively, both as reported and on a currency-neutral basis, due to capacity growth of our business. Acquisitions contributed 3 and 8 percentage points, respectively. ? Foreign exchange activity contributed a benefit of 3 percentage points in 2018 related to gains from our foreign exchange activity for derivative contracts primarily due to the strengthening of the U. S. dollar, partially offset by balance sheet remeasurement losses. In 2017, foreign exchange activity had a negative impact of 2 percentage points due to greater losses from foreign exchange derivative contracts. ? Other expenses increased 2% and 23%, or 2% and 25% on a currency-neutral basis, respectively. In 2018, other expenses increased primarily due to the $100 million contribution to the Mastercard Impact Fund. The remaining increase was due to costs to support our strategic development efforts. These increases were primarily offset by the non-recurring Venezuela charge of $167 million recorded in 2017 which was the primary driver of growth for that period. Other expenses include costs to provide loyalty and rewards solutions, travel and meeting expenses and rental expense for our facilities and other costs associated with our business. Advertising and Marketing In 2018, advertising and marketing expenses increased 18% both as reported and on a currency-neutral basis versus 2017, primarily due to a change in accounting for certain marketing fund arrangements as a result of our adoption of the new revenue guidance, partially offset by a net decrease in spending on certain marketing campaigns. For a more detailed discussion on the impact of the new revenue guidance, refer to Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies). In 2017, advertising and marketing expenses increased 11%, or 10% on a currency-neutral basis versus 2016, mainly due to higher marketing spend primarily related to certain marketing campaigns. The table below shows a summary of select balance sheet data at December 31: \n
20182017
(in millions)
Balance Sheet Data:
Current assets$16,171$13,797
Current liabilities11,5938,793
Long-term liabilities7,7786,968
Equity5,4185,497
\n We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and investment securities balances, our cash flow generating capabilities, our borrowing capacity and our access to capital resources are sufficient to satisfy our future operating cash needs, capital asset purchases, outstanding commitments and other liquidity requirements associated with our existing operations and potential obligations. Debt and Credit Availability In February 2018, we issued $500 million principal amount of notes due in 2028 and an additional $500 million principal amount of notes due in 2048. Our total debt outstanding (including the current portion) was $6.3 billion and $5.4 billion at December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, with the earliest maturity of $500 million of principal occurring in April 2019. As of December 31, 2018, we have a commercial paper program (the “Commercial Paper Program”), under which we are authorized to issue up to $4.5 billion in outstanding notes, with maturities up to 397 days from the date of issuance. In conjunction with the Commercial Paper Program, we have a committed unsecured $4.5 billion revolving credit facility (the “Credit Facility”) which expires in November 2023. Borrowings under the Commercial Paper Program and the Credit Facility are to provide liquidity for general corporate purposes, including providing liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by our customers. In addition, we may borrow and repay amounts under these facilities for business continuity purposes. We had no borrowings outstanding under the Commercial Paper Program or the Credit Facility at December 31, 2018 and 2017. In March 2018, we filed a universal shelf registration statement (replacing a previously filed shelf registration statement that was set to expire) to provide additional access to capital, if needed. Pursuant to the shelf registration statement, we may from time to time offer to sell debt securities, guarantees of debt securities, preferred stock, Class A common stock, depository shares, purchase contracts, units or warrants in one or more offerings. See Note 14 (Debt) to the consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 for further discussion on our debt, the Commercial Paper Program and the Credit Facility. Dividends and Share Repurchases We have historically paid quarterly dividends on our outstanding Class A common stock and Class B common stock. Subject to legally available funds, we intend to continue to pay a quarterly cash dividend. However, the declaration and payment of future dividends is at the sole discretion of our Board of Directors after taking into account various factors, including our financial condition, operating results, available cash and current and anticipated cash needs. The following table summarizes the annual, per share dividends paid in the years reflected:"} {"answer": 165.0, "question": "What was the average value of Service cost, Interest cost, Employer contributions in 2015 for Pension Benefits? (in million)", "context": "The funded status of the Company's plans as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, was as follows \n
Pension Benefits December 31Other Benefits December 31
($ in millions)2015201420152014
Change in Benefit Obligation
Benefit obligation at beginning of year$5,671$4,730$650$616
Service cost1501361313
Interest cost2422532730
Plan participants' contributions112667
Actuarial loss (gain)-254714-9124
Benefits paid-185-168-39-40
Curtailments—-20——
Benefit obligation at end of year5,6355,671566650
Change in Plan Assets
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year4,7314,310——
Actual return on plan assets-47437——
Employer contributions1031263333
Plan participants' contributions112667
Benefits paid-185-168-39-40
Fair value of plan assets at end of year4,6134,731——
Funded status$-1,022$-940$-566$-650
Amounts Recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position:
Pension plan assets$—$17$—$—
Current liability-1-21-18-143-143
Non-current liability-2-1,001-939-423-507
Accumulated other comprehensive loss (income) (pre-tax) related to:
Prior service costs (credits)86105-105-125
Net actuarial loss (gain)1,4331,374-2173
\n (1) Included in other current liabilities and current portion of postretirement plan liabilities, respectively. (2) Included in pension plan liabilities and other postretirement plan liabilities, respectively. The Projected Benefit Obligation (\"PBO\"), Accumulated Benefit Obligation (\"ABO\"), and asset values for the Company's qualified pension plans were $5,490 million, $5,146 million, and $4,613 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $5,529 million, $5,124 million, and $4,731 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The PBO represents the present value of pension benefits earned through the end of the year, with allowance for future salary increases. The ABO is similar to the PBO, but does not provide for future salary increases. The PBO and fair value of plan assets for all qualified and non-qualified pension plans with PBOs in excess of plan assets were $5,635 million and $4,613 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $4,394 million and $3,438 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The ABO and fair value of plan assets for all qualified and non-qualified pension plans with ABOs in excess of plan assets were $4,051 million and $3,391 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $3,981 million and $3,438 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The ABO for all pension plans was $5,273 million and $5,244 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The changes in amounts recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) were as follows: FAS/CAS Adjustment The FAS/CAS Adjustment represents the difference between our pension and postretirement plan expense under FAS and under CAS. \n
Year Ended December 312015 over 20142014 over 2013
($ in millions)201520142013DollarsPercentDollarsPercent
FAS expense$-168$-155$-257$-13-8%$10240%
CAS cost2722271964520%3116%
FAS/CAS Adjustment$104$72$-61$3244%$133218%
\n 2015 - The FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2015 was a net benefit of $104 million, compared to a net benefit of $72 million in 2014. The favorable change was driven by the phase-in of Harmonization and better than expected 2014 asset returns, partially offset by higher FAS expense primarily due to lower discount rates at the end of 2014.2014 - The FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2014 was a net benefit of $72 million, compared to a net expense of $61 million in 2013. The favorable change was driven by lower FAS expense, due primarily to higher discount rates and plan assets at the end of 2013, the full year effect of the 2013 postretirement benefits amendment, and the phase-in of Harmonization. We expect the FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2016 to be a net benefit of approximately $137 million ($161 million FAS and $298 million CAS), primarily driven by the continued phase-in of Harmonization and higher FAS discount rates, partially offset by lower than expected 2015 asset returns. The expected FAS/CAS Adjustment is subject to change during 2016, when we remeasure our actuarial estimate of the unfunded benefit obligation for CAS with updated census data and other items. Deferred State Income Taxes Deferred state income taxes reflect the change in deferred state tax assets and liabilities in the relevant period. These amounts are recorded within operating income, while the current period state income tax expense is charged to contract costs and included in cost of sales and service revenues in segment operating income.2015 - The deferred state income tax expense remained constant at $2 million in 2015 and 2014. Deferred state tax expense in 2015 was primarily attributable to changes in the timing of contract taxable income and pension related adjustments, partially offset by a reduction in the valuation allowance for state tax credit carryforwards.2014 - The deferred state income tax expense in 2014 was $2 million, compared to a benefit of $6 million in 2013. This change was primarily attributable to non-recurring adjustments related to establishing a valuation allowance for a state tax loss carryforward and the true-up of 2013 deferred taxes. These increases were partially offset by changes in the timing of contract taxable income and reserves that are not currently deductible for tax purposes. Interest Expense 2015 - Interest expense in 2015 was $137 million, compared to $149 million in 2014. The decrease was primarily a result of refinancing 6.875% senior notes with 5.000% senior notes and repayment in full of the term loans, partially offset by loss on early extinguishment of debt. See Note 14: Debt in Item 8.2014 - Interest expense in 2014 was $149 million, compared to $118 million in 2013. The increase was primarily a result of a loss on the early extinguishment of debt in the fourth quarter of 2014. See Note 14: Debt in Item 8. Federal Income Taxes 2015 - Our effective tax rate on earnings from continuing operations was 36.1% in 2015, compared to 33.3% in 2014. The increase in our effective tax rate for 2015 was primarily attributable to adjustments to the domestic manufacturing deduction and an increase in the goodwill impairment that is not amortizable for tax purposes. Advance Payments and Billings in Excess of Revenues - Payments received in excess of inventoried costs and revenues are recorded as advance payment liabilities. Property, Plant, and Equipment - Depreciable properties owned by the Company are recorded at cost and depreciated over the estimated useful lives of individual assets. Major improvements are capitalized while expenditures for maintenance, repairs, and minor improvements are expensed. Costs incurred for computer software developed or obtained for internal use are capitalized and amortized over the expected useful life of the software, not to exceed nine years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their useful lives or the term of the lease. The remaining assets are depreciated using the straight-line method, with the following lives: \n
Years
Land improvements3-40
Buildings and improvements3-60
Capitalized software costs3-9
Machinery and other equipment2-45
\n The Company evaluates the recoverability of its property, plant, and equipment when there are changes in economic circumstances or business objectives that indicate the carrying value may not be recoverable. The Company's evaluations include estimated future cash flows, profitability, and other factors affecting fair value. As these assumptions and estimates may change over time, it may or may not be necessary to record impairment charges. Leases - The Company uses its incremental borrowing rate in the assessment of lease classification as capital or operating and defines the initial lease term to include renewal options determined to be reasonably assured. The Company conducts operations primarily under operating leases. Many of the Company's real property lease agreements contain incentives for tenant improvements, rent holidays, or rent escalation clauses. For incentives for tenant improvements, the Company records a deferred rent liability and amortizes the deferred rent over the term of the lease as a reduction to rent expense. For rent holidays and rent escalation clauses during the lease term, the Company records minimum rental expenses on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. For purposes of recognizing lease incentives, the Company uses the date of initial possession as the commencement date, which is generally the date on which the Company is given the right of access to the space and begins to make improvements in preparation for the intended use. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets - The Company performs impairment tests for goodwill as of November 30 of each year and between annual impairment tests if evidence of potential impairment exists, by first comparing the carrying value of net assets to the fair value of the related operations. If the fair value is determined to be less than the carrying value, a second step is performed to determine if goodwill is impaired, by comparing the estimated fair value of goodwill to its carrying value. Purchased intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis or a method based on the pattern of benefits over their estimated useful lives, and the carrying value of these assets is reviewed for impairment when events indicate that a potential impairment may have occurred. Equity Method Investments - Investments in which the Company has the ability to exercise significant influence over the investee but does not own a majority interest or otherwise control are accounted for under the equity method of accounting and included in other assets in its consolidated statements of financial position. The Company's equity investments align strategically and are integrated with the Company's operations, and therefore the Company's share of the net earnings or losses of the investee is included in operating income (loss). The Company evaluates its equity investments for other than temporary impairment whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of such investments may not be fully recoverable. If a decline in the value of an equity method investment is determined to be other than temporary, a loss is recorded in earnings in the current period. Self-Insured Group Medical Insurance - The Company maintains a self-insured group medical insurance plan. The plan is designed to provide a specified level of coverage for employees and their dependents. Estimated liabilities"} {"answer": 0.0, "question": "What is the growing rate of Planned generation (TWh) in the year with the most Average contracted price per MWh?", "context": "System Energy Resources, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 269 Operating Activities Cash flow from operations increased by $232.1 million in 2004 primarily due to income tax refunds of $70.6 million in 2004 compared to income tax payments of $230.9 million in 2003. The increase was partially offset by money pool activity, as discussed below. In 2003, the domestic utility companies and System Energy filed, with the IRS, a change in tax accounting method notification for their respective calculations of cost of goods sold. The adjustment implemented a simplified method of allocation of overhead to the production of electricity, which is provided under the IRS capitalization regulations. The cumulative adjustment placing these companies on the new methodology resulted in a $430 million deduction for System Energy on Entergy's 2003 income tax return. There was no cash benefit from the method change in 2003. In 2004 System Energy realized $144 million in cash tax benefit from the method change. This tax accounting method change is an issue across the utility industry and will likely be challenged by the IRS on audit. Cash flow from operations decreased by $124.8 million in 2003 primarily due to the following: ? an increase in federal income taxes paid of $74.0 million in 2003 compared to 2002; ? the cessation of the Entergy Mississippi GGART. System Energy collected $21.7 million in 2003 and $40.8 million in 2002 from Entergy Mississippi in conjunction with the GGART, which provided for the acceleration of Entergy Mississippi's Grand Gulf purchased power obligation. The MPSC authorized cessation of the GGART effective July 1, 2003. See Note 2 to the domestic utility companies and System Energy financial statements for further discussion of the GGART; and ? money pool activity, as discussed below. System Energy's receivables from the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years: \n
2004200320022001
(In Thousands)
$61,592$19,064$7,046$13,853
\n Money pool activity used $42.5 million of System Energy's operating cash flows in 2004, used $12.0 million in 2003, and provided $6.8 million in 2002. See Note 4 to the domestic utility companies and System Energy financial statements for a description of the money pool. Investing Activities Net cash used for investing activities was practically unchanged in 2004 compared to 2003 primarily because an increase in construction expenditures caused by a reclassification of inventory items to capital was significantly offset by the maturity of $6.5 million of other temporary investments that had been made in 2003, which provided cash in 2004. The increase of $16.2 million in net cash used in investing activities in 2003 was primarily due to the following: ? the maturity in 2002 of $22.4 million of other temporary investments that had been made in 2001, which provided cash in 2002; ? an increase in decommissioning trust contributions and realized change in trust assets of $8.2 million in 2003 compared to 2002; and ? other temporary investments of $6.5 million made in 2003. Partially offsetting the increases in net cash used in investing activities was a decrease in construction expenditures of $22.1 million in 2003 compared to 2002 primarily due to the power uprate project in 2002. Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 25 proposed in the Initial Decision are arbitrary and are so complex that they would be difficult to implement; the Initial Decision improperly rejected Entergy's resource planning remedy; the Initial Decision erroneously determined that the full costs of the Vidalia project should be included in Entergy Louisiana's production costs for purposes of calculating relative production costs; and the Initial Decision erroneously adopted a new method of calculating reserve sharing costs rather than the current method. If the FERC grants the relief requested by the LPSC in the proceeding, the relief may result in a material increase in the total production costs the FERC allocates to companies whose costs currently are projected to be less than the Entergy System average, and a material decrease in the total production costs the FERC allocates to companies whose costs currently are projected to exceed that average. If the FERC adopts the ALJ's Initial Decision, the amount of production costs that would be reallocated among the domestic utility companies would be determined through consideration of each domestic utility company's relative total production cost expressed as a percentage of Entergy System average total production cost. The ALJ's Initial Decision would reallocate production costs of the domestic utility companies whose percent of Entergy System average production cost are outside an upper or lower bandwidth. This would be accomplished by payments from domestic utility companies whose production costs are below Entergy System average production cost to domestic utility companies whose production costs are above Entergy System average production cost. An assessment of the potential effects of the ALJ's Initial Decision requires assumptions regarding the future total production cost of each domestic utility company, which assumptions include the mix of solid fuel and gas-fired generation available to each company and the costs of natural gas and purchased power. Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States are more dependent upon gas-fired generation than Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, or Entergy New Orleans. Of these, Entergy Arkansas is the least dependent upon gas-fired generation. Therefore, increases in natural gas prices likely will increase the amount by which Entergy Arkansas' total production costs are below the average production costs of the domestic utility companies. Considerable uncertainty exists regarding future gas prices. Annual average Henry Hub gas prices have varied significantly over recent years, ranging from $1.72/mmBtu to $5.85/mmBtu for the 1995-2004 period, and averaging $3.43/mmBtu during the ten-year period 1995-2004 and $4.58/mmBtu during the five-year period 2000-2004. Recent market conditions have resulted in gas prices that have averaged $5.85/mmBtu for the twelve months ended December 2004. Based upon analyses considering the effect on future production costs if the FERC adopts the ALJ's Initial Decision, the following potential annual production cost reallocations among the domestic utility companies could result assuming annual average gas prices range from $6.39/mmBtu in 2005 declining to $4.97/mmBtu by 2009: \n
Range of Annual Paymentsor (Receipts)Average AnnualPayments or (Receipts)for 2005-2009 Period
(In Millions)(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas$154 to $281$215
Entergy Gulf States-$130 to ($15)-$63
Entergy Louisiana-$199 to ($98)-$141
Entergy Mississippi-$16 to $8$1
Entergy New Orleans-$17 to ($5)-$12
\n Management believes that any changes in the allocation of production costs resulting from a FERC decision and related retail proceedings should result in similar rate changes for retail customers. The timing of recovery of these costs in rates could be the subject of additional proceedings at the APSC and elsewhere, however, and a delay in full recovery of any increased allocation of production costs could result in additional financing requirements. Although the outcome and timing of the FERC, APSC, and other proceedings cannot be predicted at this time, Entergy does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these proceedings will have a material effect on its financial condition or results of operation. In February 2004, the APSC issued an \"Order of Investigation,\" in which it discusses the negative effect that implementation of the FERC ALJ's Initial Decision would have on Entergy Arkansas' customers. The APSC order establishes an investigation into whether Entergy Arkansas' continued participation in the System Agreement Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 30 whether other procedural steps are necessary. The FERC has not yet ruled on the Emergency Interim Request for Rehearing submitted by Entergy. Entergy believes that it has complied with the provisions of its open access transmission tariff, including the provisions addressing the implementation of the AFC methodology; however, the ultimate scope of this proceeding cannot be predicted at this time. A hearing in the AFC proceeding is currently scheduled to commence in August 2005. Federal Legislation Federal legislation intended to facilitate wholesale competition in the electric power industry has been seriously considered by the United States Congress for the past several years. In the last Congress, both the House and Senate passed separate versions of comprehensive energy legislation, negotiated a conference package, and fell two votes short of bringing the conferenced bill up for a vote in the Senate. The bill contained electricity provisions that would, among other things, allow for participant funding of transmission interconnections and upgrades, repeal PUHCA, repeal or modify PURPA, enact a mechanism for establishing enforceable reliability standards, provide the FERC with new authority over utility mergers and acquisitions, and codify the FERC's authority over market- based rates. It is expected that the United States House and Senate will again craft and consider energy legislation in the 109th Congress. Market and Credit Risks Market risk is the risk of changes in the value of commodity and financial instruments, or in future operating results or cash flows, in response to changing market conditions. Entergy is exposed to the following significant market risks: ? The commodity price risk associated with Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear and Energy Commodity Services segments. ? The foreign currency exchange rate risk associated with certain of Entergy's contractual obligations. ? The interest rate and equity price risk associated with Entergy's investments in decommissioning trust funds. Entergy is also exposed to credit risk. Credit risk is the risk of loss from nonperformance by suppliers, customers, or financial counterparties to a contract or agreement. Where it is a significant consideration, counterparty credit risk is addressed in the discussions that follow. Commodity Price Risk Power Generation The sale of electricity from the power generation plants owned by Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear business and Energy Commodity Services, unless otherwise contracted, is subject to the fluctuation of market power prices. Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear business has entered into PPAs and other contracts to sell the power produced by its power plants at prices established in the PPAs. Entergy continues to pursue opportunities to extend the existing PPAs and to enter into new PPAs with other parties. Following is a summary of the amount of the Non-Utility Nuclear business' output that is currently sold forward under physical or financial contracts at fixed prices: \n
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Non-Utility Nuclear:
Percent of planned generation sold forward:
Unit-contingent36%20%17%1%0%
Unit-contingent with availability guarantees54%52%38%25%0%
Firm liquidated damages4%4%2%0%0%
Total94%76%57%26%0%
Planned generation (TWh)3435343435
Average contracted price per MWh$39$41$42$44N/A
\n Entergy Corporation Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 82 Upon implementation of SFAS 143 in 2003, assets and liabilities increased $1.1 billion for the U. S. Utility segment as a result of recording the asset retirement obligations at their fair values of $1.1 billion as determined under SFAS 143, increasing utility plant by $287 million, reducing accumulated depreciation by $361 million, and recording the related regulatory assets of $422 million. The implementation of SFAS 143 for the portion of River Bend not subject to cost-based ratemaking decreased earnings by $21 million net-of-tax as a result of a one-time cumulative effect of accounting change. In accordance with ratemaking treatment and as required by SFAS 71, the depreciation provisions for the domestic utility companies and System Energy include a component for removal costs that are not asset retirement obligations under SFAS 143. In accordance with regulatory accounting principles, Entergy has recorded a regulatory asset for certain of its domestic utility companies and System Energy of $86.9 million as of December 31, 2004 and $72.4 million as of December 31, 2003 to reflect an estimate of incurred but uncollected removal costs previously recorded as a component of accumulated depreciation. The decommissioning and retirement cost liability for certain of the domestic utility companies and System Energy includes a regulatory liability of $34.6 million as of December 31, 2004 and $26.8 million as of December 31, 2003 representing an estimate of collected but not yet incurred removal costs. For the Non-Utility Nuclear business, the implementation of SFAS 143 resulted in a decrease in liabilities of $595 million due to reductions in decommissioning liabilities, a decrease in assets of $340 million, including a decrease in electric plant in service of $315 million, and an increase in earnings in 2003 of $155 million net-of-tax as a result of a one-time cumulative effect of accounting change. The cumulative decommissioning liabilities and expenses recorded in 2004 by Entergy were as follows:"} {"answer": 2014.0, "question": "Which year is Benefit obligation at beginning of year for Con Edison the least?", "context": "
Year Ended December 31,
201120102009
Risk-free interest rate1.2%1.4%1.7%
Expected life (in years)3.83.43.8
Dividend yield—%—%—%
Expected volatility38%37%47%
\n Our computation of expected volatility for 2011 , 2010 and 2009 was based on a combination of historical and market-based implied volatility from traded options on our stock. Our computation of expected life was determined based on historical experience of similar awards, giving consideration to the contractual terms of the stock-based awards, vesting schedules and expectations of future employee behavior. The interest rate for periods within the contractual life of the award was based on the U. S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant. The estimation of awards that will ultimately vest requires judgment, and to the extent actual results or updated estimates differ from our current estimates, such amounts will be recorded as a cumulative adjustment in the period estimates are revised. We consider many factors when estimating forfeitures, including employee class and historical experience. Recent Accounting Pronouncements See “Note 1 - The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report, regarding the impact of certain recent accounting pronouncements on our consolidated financial statements. Item 7A: Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk Foreign Currency Exposure We have significant operations internationally that are denominated in foreign currencies, primarily the Euro, British pound, Korean won, Australian dollar and Canadian dollar, subjecting us to foreign currency risk which may adversely impact our financial results. We transact business in various foreign currencies and have significant international revenues as well as costs. In addition, we charge our international subsidiaries for their use of intellectual property and technology and for certain corporate services provided by eBay and by PayPal. Our cash flow, results of operations and certain of our intercompany balances that are exposed to foreign exchange rate fluctuations may differ materially from expectations and we may record significant gains or losses due to foreign currency fluctuations and related hedging activities. We have a foreign exchange exposure management program that aims to identify material foreign currency exposures, to manage these exposures, and to minimize the potential effects of currency fluctuations on our reported consolidated cash flows and results of operations through the purchase of foreign currency exchange contracts. These foreign currency exchange contracts are accounted for as derivative instruments. For additional details related to our derivative instruments, please see “Note 9 - Derivative Instruments” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Interest Rate Risk The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal while at the same time maximizing yields without significantly increasing risk. To achieve this objective, we maintain our portfolio of cash equivalents and short-term and long-term investments in a variety of available for sale securities, including money market funds and government and corporate securities. As of December 31, 2011 , approximately 56% of our total cash and investment portfolio was held in bank deposits and money market funds. As such, changes in interest rates will impact our interest income. In addition, we regularly issue new commercial paper notes to repay outstanding commercial paper notes as they mature, and those new commercial paper notes bear interest at rates prevailing at the time of issuance. Accordingly, changes in interest rates will impact interest expense or cost of net revenues. As of December 31, 2011 , we held no direct investments in auction rate securities, collateralized debt obligations, structured investment vehicles or mortgage-backed securities. For additional details related to our investment activities, please see \"Note 7 - Investments\" to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Investments in both fixed-rate and floating-rate interest-earning instruments carry varying degrees of interest rate risk. The fair market value of our fixed-rate securities may be adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates. In general, securities with longer maturities are subject to greater interest-rate risk than those with shorter maturities. While floating rate securities generally are subject to less interest-rate risk than fixed\u0002rate securities, floating-rate securities may produce less income than expected if interest rates decrease. Due in part to these factors, our investment income may fall short of expectations or we may suffer losses in principal if securities are sold that have declined in market value due to changes in interest rates. As of \n
Con EdisonCECONY
(Millions of Dollars)201520142013201520142013
CHANGE IN BENEFIT OBLIGATION
Benefit obligation at beginning of year$1,411$1,395$1,454$1,203$1,198$1,238
Service cost201923151518
Interest cost on accumulated postretirement benefit obligation516054435246
Amendments—-12————
Net actuarial loss/(gain)-10347-42-8528-20
Benefits paid and administrative expenses-127-134-136-117-125-126
Participant contributions353638343538
Medicare prescription subsidy——4——4
BENEFIT OBLIGATION AT END OF YEAR$1,287$1,411$1,395$1,093$1,203$1,198
CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year$1,084$1,113$1,047$950$977$922
Actual return on plan assets-659153-454134
Employer contributions679679
EGWP payments2812826117
Participant contributions353638343538
Benefits paid-153-143-142-142-134-133
FAIR VALUE OF PLAN ASSETS AT END OF YEAR$994$1,084$1,113$870$950$977
FUNDED STATUS$-293$-327$-282$-223$-253$-221
Unrecognized net loss$28$78$70$4$45$54
Unrecognized prior service costs-51-71-78-32-46-61
\n The decrease in the other postretirement benefit plan obligation (due primarily to increased discount rates) was the primary cause of the decreased liability for other postretirement benefits at Con Edison and CECONY of $34 million and $30 million, respectively, compared with December 31, 2014. For Con Edison, this decreased liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $30 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the Utilities consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and a credit to OCI of $1 million (net of taxes) for the unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses and O&R’s New Jersey subsidiary. For CECONY, the decrease in liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $27 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the company consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses. A portion of the unrecognized net losses and prior service costs for the other postretirement benefits, equal to $12 million and $(20) million, respectively, will be recognized from accumulated OCI and the regulatory asset into net periodic benefit cost over the next year for Con Edison. Included in these amounts are $10 million and $(14) million, respectively, for CECONY. Assumptions The actuarial assumptions were as follows: FIDELITY NATIONAL INFORMATION SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) Future minimum operating lease payments for leases with remaining terms greater than one year for each of the years in the five years ending December 31, 2015, and thereafter in the aggregate, are as follows (in millions): \n
2011$65.1
201247.6
201335.7
201427.8
201524.3
Thereafter78.1
Total$278.6
\n In addition, the Company has operating lease commitments relating to office equipment and computer hardware with annual lease payments of approximately $16.3 million per year which renew on a short-term basis. Rent expense incurred under all operating leases during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $116.1 million, $100.2 million and $117.0 million, respectively. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was rent expense of $2.0 million, $1.8 million and $17.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Data Processing and Maintenance Services Agreements. The Company has agreements with various vendors, which expire between 2011 and 2017, for portions of its computer data processing operations and related functions. The Company’s estimated aggregate contractual obligation remaining under these agreements was approximately $554.3 million as of December 31, 2010. However, this amount could be more or less depending on various factors such as the inflation rate, foreign exchange rates, the introduction of significant new technologies, or changes in the Company’s data processing needs. (16) Employee Benefit Plans Stock Purchase Plan FIS employees participate in an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). Eligible employees may voluntarily purchase, at current market prices, shares of FIS’ common stock through payroll deductions. Pursuant to the ESPP, employees may contribute an amount between 3% and 15% of their base salary and certain commissions. Shares purchased are allocated to employees based upon their contributions. The Company contributes varying matching amounts as specified in the ESPP. The Company recorded an expense of $14.3 million, $12.4 million and $14.3 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the ESPP. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.401(k) Profit Sharing Plan The Company’s employees are covered by a qualified 401(k) plan. Eligible employees may contribute up to 40% of their pretax annual compensation, up to the amount allowed pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code. The Company generally matches 50% of each dollar of employee contribution up to 6% of the employee’s total eligible compensation. The Company recorded expense of $23.1 million, $16.6 million and $18.5 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the 401(k) plan. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively The following table presents a reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow available to News Corporation:"} {"answer": 2008.0, "question": "Which year is Average contracted price per MWh the most?", "context": "System Energy Resources, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 269 Operating Activities Cash flow from operations increased by $232.1 million in 2004 primarily due to income tax refunds of $70.6 million in 2004 compared to income tax payments of $230.9 million in 2003. The increase was partially offset by money pool activity, as discussed below. In 2003, the domestic utility companies and System Energy filed, with the IRS, a change in tax accounting method notification for their respective calculations of cost of goods sold. The adjustment implemented a simplified method of allocation of overhead to the production of electricity, which is provided under the IRS capitalization regulations. The cumulative adjustment placing these companies on the new methodology resulted in a $430 million deduction for System Energy on Entergy's 2003 income tax return. There was no cash benefit from the method change in 2003. In 2004 System Energy realized $144 million in cash tax benefit from the method change. This tax accounting method change is an issue across the utility industry and will likely be challenged by the IRS on audit. Cash flow from operations decreased by $124.8 million in 2003 primarily due to the following: ? an increase in federal income taxes paid of $74.0 million in 2003 compared to 2002; ? the cessation of the Entergy Mississippi GGART. System Energy collected $21.7 million in 2003 and $40.8 million in 2002 from Entergy Mississippi in conjunction with the GGART, which provided for the acceleration of Entergy Mississippi's Grand Gulf purchased power obligation. The MPSC authorized cessation of the GGART effective July 1, 2003. See Note 2 to the domestic utility companies and System Energy financial statements for further discussion of the GGART; and ? money pool activity, as discussed below. System Energy's receivables from the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years: \n
2004200320022001
(In Thousands)
$61,592$19,064$7,046$13,853
\n Money pool activity used $42.5 million of System Energy's operating cash flows in 2004, used $12.0 million in 2003, and provided $6.8 million in 2002. See Note 4 to the domestic utility companies and System Energy financial statements for a description of the money pool. Investing Activities Net cash used for investing activities was practically unchanged in 2004 compared to 2003 primarily because an increase in construction expenditures caused by a reclassification of inventory items to capital was significantly offset by the maturity of $6.5 million of other temporary investments that had been made in 2003, which provided cash in 2004. The increase of $16.2 million in net cash used in investing activities in 2003 was primarily due to the following: ? the maturity in 2002 of $22.4 million of other temporary investments that had been made in 2001, which provided cash in 2002; ? an increase in decommissioning trust contributions and realized change in trust assets of $8.2 million in 2003 compared to 2002; and ? other temporary investments of $6.5 million made in 2003. Partially offsetting the increases in net cash used in investing activities was a decrease in construction expenditures of $22.1 million in 2003 compared to 2002 primarily due to the power uprate project in 2002. Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 25 proposed in the Initial Decision are arbitrary and are so complex that they would be difficult to implement; the Initial Decision improperly rejected Entergy's resource planning remedy; the Initial Decision erroneously determined that the full costs of the Vidalia project should be included in Entergy Louisiana's production costs for purposes of calculating relative production costs; and the Initial Decision erroneously adopted a new method of calculating reserve sharing costs rather than the current method. If the FERC grants the relief requested by the LPSC in the proceeding, the relief may result in a material increase in the total production costs the FERC allocates to companies whose costs currently are projected to be less than the Entergy System average, and a material decrease in the total production costs the FERC allocates to companies whose costs currently are projected to exceed that average. If the FERC adopts the ALJ's Initial Decision, the amount of production costs that would be reallocated among the domestic utility companies would be determined through consideration of each domestic utility company's relative total production cost expressed as a percentage of Entergy System average total production cost. The ALJ's Initial Decision would reallocate production costs of the domestic utility companies whose percent of Entergy System average production cost are outside an upper or lower bandwidth. This would be accomplished by payments from domestic utility companies whose production costs are below Entergy System average production cost to domestic utility companies whose production costs are above Entergy System average production cost. An assessment of the potential effects of the ALJ's Initial Decision requires assumptions regarding the future total production cost of each domestic utility company, which assumptions include the mix of solid fuel and gas-fired generation available to each company and the costs of natural gas and purchased power. Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States are more dependent upon gas-fired generation than Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, or Entergy New Orleans. Of these, Entergy Arkansas is the least dependent upon gas-fired generation. Therefore, increases in natural gas prices likely will increase the amount by which Entergy Arkansas' total production costs are below the average production costs of the domestic utility companies. Considerable uncertainty exists regarding future gas prices. Annual average Henry Hub gas prices have varied significantly over recent years, ranging from $1.72/mmBtu to $5.85/mmBtu for the 1995-2004 period, and averaging $3.43/mmBtu during the ten-year period 1995-2004 and $4.58/mmBtu during the five-year period 2000-2004. Recent market conditions have resulted in gas prices that have averaged $5.85/mmBtu for the twelve months ended December 2004. Based upon analyses considering the effect on future production costs if the FERC adopts the ALJ's Initial Decision, the following potential annual production cost reallocations among the domestic utility companies could result assuming annual average gas prices range from $6.39/mmBtu in 2005 declining to $4.97/mmBtu by 2009: \n
Range of Annual Paymentsor (Receipts)Average AnnualPayments or (Receipts)for 2005-2009 Period
(In Millions)(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas$154 to $281$215
Entergy Gulf States-$130 to ($15)-$63
Entergy Louisiana-$199 to ($98)-$141
Entergy Mississippi-$16 to $8$1
Entergy New Orleans-$17 to ($5)-$12
\n Management believes that any changes in the allocation of production costs resulting from a FERC decision and related retail proceedings should result in similar rate changes for retail customers. The timing of recovery of these costs in rates could be the subject of additional proceedings at the APSC and elsewhere, however, and a delay in full recovery of any increased allocation of production costs could result in additional financing requirements. Although the outcome and timing of the FERC, APSC, and other proceedings cannot be predicted at this time, Entergy does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these proceedings will have a material effect on its financial condition or results of operation. In February 2004, the APSC issued an \"Order of Investigation,\" in which it discusses the negative effect that implementation of the FERC ALJ's Initial Decision would have on Entergy Arkansas' customers. The APSC order establishes an investigation into whether Entergy Arkansas' continued participation in the System Agreement Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 30 whether other procedural steps are necessary. The FERC has not yet ruled on the Emergency Interim Request for Rehearing submitted by Entergy. Entergy believes that it has complied with the provisions of its open access transmission tariff, including the provisions addressing the implementation of the AFC methodology; however, the ultimate scope of this proceeding cannot be predicted at this time. A hearing in the AFC proceeding is currently scheduled to commence in August 2005. Federal Legislation Federal legislation intended to facilitate wholesale competition in the electric power industry has been seriously considered by the United States Congress for the past several years. In the last Congress, both the House and Senate passed separate versions of comprehensive energy legislation, negotiated a conference package, and fell two votes short of bringing the conferenced bill up for a vote in the Senate. The bill contained electricity provisions that would, among other things, allow for participant funding of transmission interconnections and upgrades, repeal PUHCA, repeal or modify PURPA, enact a mechanism for establishing enforceable reliability standards, provide the FERC with new authority over utility mergers and acquisitions, and codify the FERC's authority over market- based rates. It is expected that the United States House and Senate will again craft and consider energy legislation in the 109th Congress. Market and Credit Risks Market risk is the risk of changes in the value of commodity and financial instruments, or in future operating results or cash flows, in response to changing market conditions. Entergy is exposed to the following significant market risks: ? The commodity price risk associated with Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear and Energy Commodity Services segments. ? The foreign currency exchange rate risk associated with certain of Entergy's contractual obligations. ? The interest rate and equity price risk associated with Entergy's investments in decommissioning trust funds. Entergy is also exposed to credit risk. Credit risk is the risk of loss from nonperformance by suppliers, customers, or financial counterparties to a contract or agreement. Where it is a significant consideration, counterparty credit risk is addressed in the discussions that follow. Commodity Price Risk Power Generation The sale of electricity from the power generation plants owned by Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear business and Energy Commodity Services, unless otherwise contracted, is subject to the fluctuation of market power prices. Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear business has entered into PPAs and other contracts to sell the power produced by its power plants at prices established in the PPAs. Entergy continues to pursue opportunities to extend the existing PPAs and to enter into new PPAs with other parties. Following is a summary of the amount of the Non-Utility Nuclear business' output that is currently sold forward under physical or financial contracts at fixed prices: \n
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Non-Utility Nuclear:
Percent of planned generation sold forward:
Unit-contingent36%20%17%1%0%
Unit-contingent with availability guarantees54%52%38%25%0%
Firm liquidated damages4%4%2%0%0%
Total94%76%57%26%0%
Planned generation (TWh)3435343435
Average contracted price per MWh$39$41$42$44N/A
\n Entergy Corporation Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 82 Upon implementation of SFAS 143 in 2003, assets and liabilities increased $1.1 billion for the U. S. Utility segment as a result of recording the asset retirement obligations at their fair values of $1.1 billion as determined under SFAS 143, increasing utility plant by $287 million, reducing accumulated depreciation by $361 million, and recording the related regulatory assets of $422 million. The implementation of SFAS 143 for the portion of River Bend not subject to cost-based ratemaking decreased earnings by $21 million net-of-tax as a result of a one-time cumulative effect of accounting change. In accordance with ratemaking treatment and as required by SFAS 71, the depreciation provisions for the domestic utility companies and System Energy include a component for removal costs that are not asset retirement obligations under SFAS 143. In accordance with regulatory accounting principles, Entergy has recorded a regulatory asset for certain of its domestic utility companies and System Energy of $86.9 million as of December 31, 2004 and $72.4 million as of December 31, 2003 to reflect an estimate of incurred but uncollected removal costs previously recorded as a component of accumulated depreciation. The decommissioning and retirement cost liability for certain of the domestic utility companies and System Energy includes a regulatory liability of $34.6 million as of December 31, 2004 and $26.8 million as of December 31, 2003 representing an estimate of collected but not yet incurred removal costs. For the Non-Utility Nuclear business, the implementation of SFAS 143 resulted in a decrease in liabilities of $595 million due to reductions in decommissioning liabilities, a decrease in assets of $340 million, including a decrease in electric plant in service of $315 million, and an increase in earnings in 2003 of $155 million net-of-tax as a result of a one-time cumulative effect of accounting change. The cumulative decommissioning liabilities and expenses recorded in 2004 by Entergy were as follows:"} {"answer": 2131.0, "question": "what is the total mw capacity of the boiling water reactors?", "context": "Part I Item 1 Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy 253 including the continued effectiveness of the Clean Energy Standards/Zero Emissions Credit program (CES/ZEC), the establishment of certain long-term agreements on acceptable terms with the Energy Research and Development Authority of the State of New York in connection with the CES/ZEC program, and NYPSC approval of the transaction on acceptable terms, Entergy refueled the FitzPatrick plant in January and February 2017. In October 2015, Entergy determined that it would close the Pilgrim plant. The decision came after management’s extensive analysis of the economics and operating life of the plant following the NRC’s decision in September 2015 to place the plant in its “multiple/repetitive degraded cornerstone column” (Column 4) of its Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. The Pilgrim plant is expected to cease operations on May 31, 2019, after refueling in the spring of 2017 and operating through the end of that fuel cycle. In December 2015, Entergy Wholesale Commodities closed on the sale of its 583 MW Rhode Island State Energy Center (RISEC), in Johnston, Rhode Island. The base sales price, excluding adjustments, was approximately $490 million. Entergy Wholesale Commodities purchased RISEC for $346 million in December 2011. In December 2016, Entergy announced that it reached an agreement with Consumers Energy to terminate the PPA for the Palisades plant on May 31, 2018. Pursuant to the PPA termination agreement, Consumers Energy will pay Entergy $172 million for the early termination of the PPA. The PPA termination agreement is subject to regulatory approvals. Separately, and assuming regulatory approvals are obtained for the PPA termination agreement, Entergy intends to shut down the Palisades nuclear power plant permanently on October 1, 2018, after refueling in the spring of 2017 and operating through the end of that fuel cycle. Entergy expects to enter into a new PPA with Consumers Energy under which the plant would continue to operate through October 1, 2018. In January 2017, Entergy announced that it reached a settlement with New York State to shut down Indian Point 2 by April 30, 2020 and Indian Point 3 by April 30, 2021, and resolve all New York State-initiated legal challenges to Indian Point’s operating license renewal. As part of the settlement, New York State has agreed to issue Indian Point’s water quality certification and Coastal Zone Management Act consistency certification and to withdraw its objection to license renewal before the NRC. New York State also has agreed to issue a water discharge permit, which is required regardless of whether the plant is seeking a renewed NRC license. The shutdowns are conditioned, among other things, upon such actions being taken by New York State. Even without opposition, the NRC license renewal process is expected to continue at least into 2018. With the settlement concerning Indian Point, Entergy now has announced plans for the disposition of all of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants, including the sales of Vermont Yankee and FitzPatrick, and the earlier than previously expected shutdowns of Pilgrim, Palisades, Indian Point 2, and Indian Point 3. See “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” for further discussion. Property Nuclear Generating Stations Entergy Wholesale Commodities includes the ownership of the following nuclear power plants: \n
Power PlantMarketIn Service YearAcquiredLocationCapacity - Reactor TypeLicense Expiration Date
Pilgrim (a)IS0-NE1972July 1999Plymouth, MA688 MW - Boiling Water2032 (a)
FitzPatrick (b)NYISO1975Nov. 2000Oswego, NY838 MW - Boiling Water2034 (b)
Indian Point 3 (c)NYISO1976Nov. 2000Buchanan, NY1,041 MW - Pressurized Water2015 (c)
Indian Point 2 (c)NYISO1974Sept. 2001Buchanan, NY1,028 MW - Pressurized Water2013 (c)
Vermont Yankee (d)IS0-NE1972July 2002Vernon, VT605 MW - Boiling Water2032 (d)
Palisades (e)MISO1971Apr. 2007Covert, MI811 MW - Pressurized Water2031 (e)
\n \n
Consolidated Balance Sheet DataAt July 31,
(In millions)20142013201220112010
Cash, cash equivalents and investments$1,914$1,661$744$1,421$1,622
Long-term investments3183756391
Working capital1,2001,1162584491,074
Total assets5,2015,4864,6845,1105,198
Current portion of long-term debt———500—
Long-term debt499499499499998
Other long-term obligations203167166175143
Total stockholders’ equity3,0783,5312,7442,6162,821
\n ITEM 7 MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Our Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A) includes the following sections: ? Executive Overview that discusses at a high level our operating results and some of the trends that affect our business. ? Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates that we believe are important to understanding the assumptions and judgments underlying our financial statements. ? Results of Operations that includes a more detailed discussion of our revenue and expenses. ? Liquidity and Capital Resources which discusses key aspects of our statements of cash flows, changes in our balance sheets and our financial commitments. You should note that this MD&A discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Please see the section entitled “Forward-Looking Statements and Risk Factors” at the beginning of Item 1A for important information to consider when evaluating such statements. You should read this MD&A in conjunction with the financial statements and related notes in Item 8 of this Annual Report. In fiscal 2014 we acquired Check Inc. and in fiscal 2012 we acquired Demandforce, Inc. We have included their results of operations in our consolidated results of operations from the dates of acquisition. In fiscal 2013 we completed the sale of our Intuit Websites business and in fiscal 2014 we completed the sales of our Intuit Financial Services (IFS) and Intuit Health businesses. We accounted for all of these businesses as discontinued operations and have therefore reclassified our statements of operations for all periods presented to reflect them as such. We have also reclassified our balance sheets for all periods presented to reflect IFS as discontinued operations. The net assets of Intuit Websites and Intuit Health were not significant, so we have not reclassified our balance sheets for any period presented to reflect them as discontinued operations. Because the cash flows of our Intuit Websites, IFS, and Intuit Health discontinued operations were not material for any period presented, we have not segregated the cash flows of those businesses from continuing operations on our statements of cash flows. See “Results of Operations – Non-Operating Income and Expense – Discontinued Operations” later in this Item 7 for more information. Unless otherwise noted, the following discussion pertains to our continuing operations. Executive Overview This overview provides a high level discussion of our operating results and some of the trends that affect our business. We believe that an understanding of these trends is important in order to understand our financial results for fiscal 2014 as well as our future prospects. This summary is not intended to be exhaustive, nor is it intended to be a substitute for the detailed discussion and analysis provided elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. See the table later in this Note 7 for more information on the IFS operating results. The carrying amounts of the major classes of assets and liabilities of IFS at July 31, 2013 were as shown in the following table. These carrying amounts approximated fair value. \n
(In millions)July 31, 2013
Accounts receivable$40
Other current assets4
Property and equipment, net31
Goodwill914
Purchased intangible assets, net4
Other assets6
Total assets999
Accounts payable15
Accrued compensation21
Deferred revenue3
Long-term obligations9
Total liabilities48
Net assets$951
\n Intuit Health In July 2013 management having the authority to do so formally approved a plan to sell our Intuit Health business and on August 19, 2013 we completed the sale for cash consideration that was not significant. We recorded a $4 million pre-tax loss on the disposal of Intuit Health that was more than offset by a related income tax benefit of approximately $14 million, resulting in a net gain on disposal of approximately $10 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2014. The decision to sell the Intuit Health business was a result of management's desire to focus resources on its offerings for small businesses, consumers, and accounting professionals. Intuit Health was part of our former Other Businesses reportable segment. We determined that our Intuit Health business became a long-lived asset held for sale in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. A long-lived asset classified as held for sale is measured at the lower of its carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. Since the carrying value of Intuit Health at July 31, 2013 was less than the estimated fair value less cost to sell, no adjustment to the carrying value of this long-lived asset was necessary at that date. We also classified our Intuit Health business as discontinued operations in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013 and have segregated its operating results in our statements of operations for all periods presented. See the table later in this Note for more information. We have not segregated the net assets of Intuit Health on our balance sheets for any period presented. Net assets held for sale at July 31, 2013 consisted primarily of operating assets and liabilities that were not material. Because operating cash flows from the Intuit Health business were also not material for any period presented, we have not segregated them from continuing operations on our statements of cash flows. Intuit Websites In July 2012 management having the authority to do so formally approved a plan to sell our Intuit Websites business, which was a component of our Small Business reportable segment. The decision was the result of a shift in our strategy for helping small businesses to establish an online presence. On August 10, 2012 we signed a definitive agreement to sell our Intuit Websites business and on September 17, 2012 we completed the sale for approximately $60 million in cash. We recorded a gain on disposal of approximately $32 million, net of income taxes. We determined that our Intuit Websites business became a long-lived asset held for sale in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2012. A long-lived asset classified as held for sale is measured at the lower of its carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. Since the carrying value of Intuit Websites at July 31, 2012 was less than the estimated fair value less cost to sell, no adjustment to the carrying value of this long-lived asset was necessary at that date."} {"answer": 74.0, "question": "what was the average amounts amortized to revenue from 2010to 2014", "context": "Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements \n
Amount (In Millions)
Plant (including nuclear fuel)$727
Decommissioning trust funds252
Other assets41
Total assets acquired1,020
Purchased power agreement (below market)420
Decommissioning liability220
Other liabilities44
Total liabilities assumed684
Net assets acquired$336
\n Subsequent to the closing, Entergy received approximately $6 million from Consumers Energy Company as part of the Post-Closing Adjustment defined in the Asset Sale Agreement. The Post-Closing Adjustment amount resulted in an approximately $6 million reduction in plant and a corresponding reduction in other liabilities. For the PPA, which was at below-market prices at the time of the acquisition, Non-Utility Nuclear will amortize a liability to revenue over the life of the agreement. The amount that will be amortized each period is based upon the difference between the present value calculated at the date of acquisition of each year's difference between revenue under the agreement and revenue based on estimated market prices. Amounts amortized to revenue were $53 million in 2009, $76 million in 2008, and $50 million in 2007. The amounts to be amortized to revenue for the next five years will be $46 million for 2010, $43 million for 2011, $17 million in 2012, $18 million for 2013, and $16 million for 2014. NYPA Value Sharing Agreements Non-Utility Nuclear's purchase of the FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 plants from NYPA included value sharing agreements with NYPA. In October 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear and NYPA amended and restated the value sharing agreements to clarify and amend certain provisions of the original terms. Under the amended value sharing agreements, Non-Utility Nuclear will make annual payments to NYPA based on the generation output of the Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick plants from January 2007 through December 2014. Non-Utility Nuclear will pay NYPA $6.59 per MWh for power sold from Indian Point 3, up to an annual cap of $48 million, and $3.91 per MWh for power sold from FitzPatrick, up to an annual cap of $24 million. The annual payment for each year's output is due by January 15 of the following year. Non-Utility Nuclear will record its liability for payments to NYPA as power is generated and sold by Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick. An amount equal to the liability will be recorded to the plant asset account as contingent purchase price consideration for the plants. In 2009, 2008, and 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear recorded $72 million as plant for generation during each of those years. This amount will be depreciated over the expected remaining useful life of the plants. In August 2008, Non-Utility Nuclear entered into a resolution of a dispute with NYPA over the applicability of the value sharing agreements to its FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 nuclear power plants after the planned spin-off of the Non-Utility Nuclear business. Under the resolution, Non-Utility Nuclear agreed not to treat the separation as a \"Cessation Event\" that would terminate its obligation to make the payments under the value sharing agreements. As a result, after the spin-off transaction, Enexus will continue to be obligated to make payments to NYPA under the amended and restated value sharing agreements. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) (Dollar amounts in thousands except per share data) Note 11—Shareholders’ Equity Share Data: A summary of preferred and common share activity is as follows: \n
Preferred Stock Common Stock
Issued Treasury Stock IssuedTreasury Stock
2004:
Balance at January 1, 2004-0--0-113,783,658-1,069,053
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options763,592
Treasury stock acquired-5,534,276
Retirement of treasury stock-5,000,0005,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2004-0--0-108,783,658-839,737
2005:
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options91,0905,835,740
Treasury stock acquired-10,301,852
Retirement of treasury stock-4,000,0004,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2005-0--0-104,874,748-1,305,849
2006:
Grants of restricted stock28,000
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options507,259
Treasury stock acquired-5,989,531
Retirement of treasury stock-5,000,0005,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2006-0--0-99,874,748-1,760,121
\n Acquisition of Common Shares: Torchmark shares are acquired from time to time through open market purchases under the Torchmark stock repurchase program when it is believed to be the best use of Torchmark’s excess cash flows. Share repurchases under this program were 5.6 million shares at a cost of $320 million in 2006, 5.6 million shares at a cost of $300 million in 2005, and 5.2 million shares at a cost of $268 million in 2004. When stock options are exercised, proceeds from the exercises are generally used to repurchase approximately the number of shares available with those funds, in order to reduce dilution. Shares repurchased for dilution purposes were 415 thousand shares at a cost of $24 million in 2006, 4.7 million shares costing $255 million in 2005, and 313 thousand shares at a cost of $17 million in 2004. Retirement of Treasury Stock: Torchmark retired 5 million shares of treasury stock in December, 2006, 4 million in 2005, and 5 million in 2004. Restrictions: Restrictions exist on the flow of funds to Torchmark from its insurance subsidiaries. Statutory regulations require life insurance subsidiaries to maintain certain minimum amounts of capital and surplus. Dividends from insurance subsidiaries of Torchmark are limited to the greater of statutory net gain from operations, excluding capital gains and losses, on an annual noncumulative basis, or 10% of surplus, in the absence of special regulatory approval. Additionally, insurance company distributions are generally not permitted in excess of statutory surplus. Subsidiaries are also subject to certain minimum capital requirements. In 2006, subsidiaries of Torchmark paid $428 million in dividends to the parent company. During 2007, a maximum amount of $434 million is expected to be available to Torchmark from subsidiaries without regulatory approval. PART I ITEM 1. BUSINESS General SL Green Realty Corp. is a self-managed real estate investment trust, or REIT, with in-house capabilities in property management, acquisitions, financing, development, construction and leasing. We were formed in June 1997 for the purpose of continuing the commercial real estate business of S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , our predecessor entity. S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , which was founded in 1980 by Stephen L. Green, the Company's Chairman, had been engaged in the business of owning, managing, leasing, acquiring and repositioning office properties in Manhattan, a borough of New York City. Reckson Associates Realty Corp. , or Reckson, and Reckson Operating Partnership, L. P. , or ROP, are wholly-owned subsidiaries of SL Green Operating Partnership, L. P. , the Operating Partnership. As of December 31, 2013, we owned the following interests in commercial office properties in the New York Metropolitan area, primarily in midtown Manhattan. Our investments in the New York Metropolitan area also include investments in Brooklyn, Long Island, Westchester County, Connecticut and Northern New Jersey, which are collectively known as the Suburban properties: \n
LocationOwnershipNumber ofBuildingsSquare FeetWeighted AverageOccupancy-1
ManhattanConsolidated properties2317,306,04594.5%
Unconsolidated properties95,934,43496.6%
SuburbanConsolidated properties264,087,40079.8%
Unconsolidated properties41,222,10087.2%
6228,549,97992.5%
\n (1) The weighted average occupancy represents the total occupied square feet divided by total available rentable square feet. As of December 31, 2013, our Manhattan office properties were comprised of 17 fee owned buildings, including ownership in commercial condominium units, and six leasehold owned buildings. As of December 31, 2013, our Suburban office properties were comprised of 25 fee owned buildings and one leasehold building. As of December 31, 2013, we also held fee owned interests in nine unconsolidated Manhattan office properties and four unconsolidated Suburban office properties. We refer to our consolidated and unconsolidated Manhattan and Suburban office properties collectively as our Portfolio. As of December 31, 2013, we also owned investments in 16 retail properties encompassing approximately 875,800 square feet, 20 development buildings encompassing approximately 3,230,800 square feet, four residential buildings encompassing 801 units (approximately 719,900 square feet) and two land interests encompassing approximately 961,400 square feet. The Company also has ownership interests in 28 west coast office properties encompassing 52 buildings totaling approximately 3,654,300 square feet. In addition, we manage two office buildings owned by third parties and affiliated companies encompassing approximately 626,400 square feet. As of December 31, 2013, we also held debt and preferred equity investments with a book value of $1.3 billion. Our corporate offices are located in midtown Manhattan at 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170. As of December 31, 2013, our corporate staff consisted of approximately 278 persons, including 182 professionals experienced in all aspects of commercial real estate. We can be contacted at (212) 594-2700. We maintain a website at www. slgreen. com. On our website, you can obtain, free of charge, a copy of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we file such material electronically with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. We have also made available on our website our audit committee charter, compensation committee charter, nominating and corporate governance committee charter, code of business conduct and ethics and corporate governance principles. We do not intend for information contained on our website to be part of this annual report on Form 10-K. You can also read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at its Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549 (1-800-SEC-0330). The SEC maintains an Internet site (http://www. sec. gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. Operating Profit We consider operating profit to be an important measure for evaluating our operating performance and we evaluate operating profit for each of the reportable business segments in which we operate. We internally manage our operations by reference to operating profit with economic resources allocated primarily based on each segment’s contribution to operating profit. Segment operating profit is defined as operating profit before Corporate Unallocated. Segment operating profit is not, however, a measure of financial performance under U. S. GAAP, and may not be defined and calculated by other companies in the same manner. The table below reconciles segment operating profit to total operating profit:"} {"answer": 0.65021, "question": "at december 31 , 2015 , what percent of the environmental-related reserves related to environmental-related asset retirement obligations ?", "context": "Interest expense related to capital lease obligations was $1.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2015, and $1.6 million during both the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013. Purchase Commitments In the table below, we set forth our enforceable and legally binding purchase obligations as of December 31, 2015. Some of the amounts are based on management’s estimates and assumptions about these obligations, including their duration, the possibility of renewal, anticipated actions by third parties, and other factors. Because these estimates and assumptions are necessarily subjective, our actual payments may vary from those reflected in the table. Purchase orders made in the ordinary course of business are excluded below. Any amounts for which we are liable under purchase orders are reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as accounts payable and accrued liabilities. These obligations relate to various purchase agreements for items such as minimum amounts of fiber and energy purchases over periods ranging from one year to 20 years. Total purchase commitments were as follows (dollars in millions): \n
2016$95.3
201760.3
201828.0
201928.0
202023.4
Thereafter77.0
Total$312.0
\n The Company purchased a total of $299.6 million, $265.9 million, and $61.7 million during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively, under these purchase agreements. The increase in purchases The increase in purchases under these agreements in 2014, compared with 2013, relates to the acquisition of Boise in fourth quarter 2013. Environmental Liabilities The potential costs for various environmental matters are uncertain due to such factors as the unknown magnitude of possible cleanup costs, the complexity and evolving nature of governmental laws and regulations and their interpretations, and the timing, varying costs and effectiveness of alternative cleanup technologies. From 2006 through 2015, there were no significant environmental remediation costs at PCA’s mills and corrugated plants. At December 31, 2015, the Company had $24.3 million of environmental-related reserves recorded on its Consolidated Balance Sheet. Of the $24.3 million, approximately $15.8 million related to environmental-related asset retirement obligations discussed in Note 12, Asset Retirement Obligations, and $8.5 million related to our estimate of other environmental contingencies. The Company recorded $7.9 million in “Accrued liabilities” and $16.4 million in “Other long-term liabilities” on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Liabilities recorded for environmental contingencies are estimates of the probable costs based upon available information and assumptions. Because of these uncertainties, PCA’s estimates may change. The Company believes that it is not reasonably possible that future environmental expenditures for remediation costs and asset retirement obligations above the $24.3 million accrued as of December 31, 2015, will have a material impact on its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. Guarantees and Indemnifications We provide guarantees, indemnifications, and other assurances to third parties in the normal course of our business. These include tort indemnifications, environmental assurances, and representations and warranties in commercial agreements. At December 31, 2015, we are not aware of any material liabilities arising from any guarantee, indemnification, or financial assurance we have provided. If we determined such a liability was probable and subject to reasonable determination, we would accrue for it at that time. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES The Company's common stock is traded on the NYSE under the symbol “RJF”. At November 19, 2007 there were approximately 14,000 holders of the Company's common stock. The following table sets forth for the periods indicated the high and low trades for the common stock (as adjusted for the three-for\u0002two stock split in March 2006): \n
20072006
HighLowHighLow
First Quarter$ 33.63$ 28.53$ 25.72$ 20.25
Second Quarter32.5227.3831.4524.47
Third Quarter34.6229.1031.6626.34
Fourth Quarter36.0028.6530.5726.45
\n See Quarterly Financial Information on page 87 of this report for the amount of the quarterly dividends paid. The Company expects to continue paying cash dividends. However, the payment and rate of dividends on the Company's common stock is subject to several factors including operating results, financial requirements of the Company, and the availability of funds from the Company's subsidiaries, including the broker\u0002dealer subsidiaries, which may be subject to restrictions under the net capital rules of the SEC, FINRA and the IDA; and RJBank, which may be subject to restrictions by federal banking agencies. Such restrictions have never limited the Company's dividend payments. (See Note 19 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the capital restrictions placed on RJBank and the Company's broker-dealer subsidiaries). See Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding repurchased shares of the Company's common stock. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Factors Affecting “Forward-Looking Statements” From time to time, the Company may publish “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or make oral statements that constitute forward-looking statements. These forward\u0002looking statements may relate to such matters as anticipated financial performance, future revenues or earnings, business prospects, projected ventures, new products, anticipated market performance, and similar matters. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a safe harbor for forward-looking statements. In order to comply with the terms of the safe harbor, the Company cautions readers that a variety of factors could cause the Company's actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results or other expectations expressed in the Company's forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company's control, are discussed in the section entitled Risk Factors on page 42 of this report. The Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements. Overview The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis is intended to help the reader understand the results of operations and the financial condition of the Company. Management’s Discussion and Analysis is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Company’s consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements. The Company’s results continue to be highly correlated to the direction of the U. S. equity markets and are subject to volatility due to changes in interest rates, valuation of financial instruments, economic and political trends and industry competition. During 2007, the market was impacted by rising energy prices, a housing market slowdown, a subprime lending collapse, a growing economy, a weakening US dollar and stable interest rates. The Company’s Private Client Group’s recruiting and retention of Financial Advisors was positively impacted by industry consolidation. RJBank benefited from the widening interest rate spreads and the availability of attractive loan purchases as a result of the subprime lending crisis. Results of Operations - RJBank The following table presents consolidated financial information for RJBank for the years indicated: \n
Year Ended
September 30, 2007% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2006% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2005
($ in 000's)
Interest Earnings
Interest Income$ 278,248144%$ 114,065153%$ 45,017
Interest Expense193,747163%73,529234%22,020
Net Interest Income84,501108%40,53676%22,997
Other Income1,324111%62745%431
Net Revenues85,825109%41,16376%23,428
Non-Interest Expense
Employee Compensation and Benefits7,77827%6,13514%5,388
Communications and Information Processing1,05216%90714%799
Occupancy and Equipment71914%62932%478
Provision for Loan Losses and Unfunded
Commitments32,150134%13,760891%1,388
Other17,121359%3,729218%1,171
Total Non-Interest Expense58,820134%25,160173%9,224
Pre-tax Earnings$ 27,00569%$ 16,00313%$ 14,204
\n Year ended September 30, 2007 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2006 - RJBank The Company completed its second bulk transfer of cash balances into the RJBank Deposit Program in March 2007, moving another $1.3 billion. This, combined with organic growth from the influx of new client assets, resulted in a $2.6 billion increase in average deposit balances. This increase in average deposit balances provided the funding for the $1.6 billion increase in average loan balances. This increase was 38% purchased residential mortgage pools and 62% corporate loans, 98% of which are purchased interests in corporate loan syndications with the remainder originated by RJBank. As a result of this growth, RJBank net interest income increased 108% to $84.5 million. Due to robust loan growth, the associated allowance for loan losses that are established upon recording a new loan and making new unfunded commitments required a provision of over $32 million in 2007. Accordingly, RJBank’s pre-tax income increased only 69%. During periods of growth when new loans are originated or purchased, an allowance for loan losses is established for potential losses inherent in those new loans. Accordingly, a robust period of growth generally results in charges to earnings in that period, while the benefits of higher interest earnings are realized in later periods. Year ended September 30, 2006 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2005 - RJBank Assets at RJBank grew a substantial $1.8 billion during the year. The increase was driven by a $1.7 billion increase in deposits, $1.3 billion of which were redirected from the Company’s Heritage Cash Trust or customer brokerage accounts, representing the introduction of a new sweep program for certain brokerage accounts. This alternative offers clients a money market equivalent interest rate and FDIC insurance. The Company intends to expand this offering over the next several years, transferring an additional $2 to $4 billion. During the year, RJBank deployed $1.3 billion of the increased deposits into loans. Purchased residential loan pools increased $700 million and corporate loans increased $600 million. This growth, combined with increased rates, generated an increase in net interest income of nearly $18 million. Pre-tax income increased only $1.8 million, due to the $13.8 million provision for loan loss associated with the increase in loans outstanding"} {"answer": 0.25466, "question": "In the year Ended December 31 where the amount of Investment services fee income is the highest, what's the increasing rate of the amount of Capital markets income?", "context": "MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS The indenture governing the Company’s unsecured notes also requires the Company to comply with financial ratios and other covenants regarding the operations of the Company. The Company is currently in compliance with all such covenants and expects to remain in compliance in the foreseeable future. In January 2003, the Company completed an issuance of unsecured debt totaling $175 million bearing interest at 5.25%, due 2010. Sale of Real Estate Assets The Company utilizes sales of real estate assets as an additional source of liquidity. During 2000 and 2001, the Company engaged in a capital-recycling program that resulted in sales of over $1 billion of real estate assets during these two years. In 2002, this program was substantially reduced as capital needs were met through other sources and the slower business climate provided few opportunities to profitably reinvest sales proceeds. The Company continues to pursue opportunities to sell real estate assets when beneficial to the long-term strategy of the Company Uses of Liquidity The Company’s principal uses of liquidity include the following: ? Property investments and recurring leasing/capital costs; ? Dividends and distributions to shareholders and unitholders; ? Long-term debt maturities; and ? The Company’s common stock repurchase program. Property Investments and Other Capital Expenditures One of the Company’s principal uses of its liquidity is for the development, acquisition and recurring leasing/capital expendi\u0002tures of its real estate investments. A summary of the Company’s recurring capital expenditures is as follows (in thousands): \n
200220012000
Tenant improvements$28,011$18,416$31,955
Leasing costs17,97513,84517,530
Building improvements13,37310,8736,804
Totals$59,359$43,134$56,289
\n Dividends and Distributions In order to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, the Company must currently distribute at least 90% of its taxable income to its shareholders and Duke Realty Limited Partnership (“DRLP”) unitholders. The Company paid dividends of $1.81, $1.76 and $1.64 for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. The Company expects to continue to distribute taxable earnings to meet the requirements to maintain its REIT status. However, distributions are declared at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors and are subject to actual cash available for distribution, the Company’s financial condition, capital requirements and such other factors as the Company’s Board of Directors deems relevant. Debt Maturities Debt outstanding at December 31, 2002, totaled $2.1 billion with a weighted average interest rate of 6.25% maturing at various dates through 2028. The Company had $1.8 billion of unsecured debt and $299.1 million of secured debt outstanding at December 31, 2002. Scheduled principal amortization of such debt totaled $10.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. Following is a summary of the scheduled future amortization and maturities of the Company’s indebtedness at December 31, 2002 (in thousands): Basic and diluted weighted-average common shares outstanding are the same due to the net losses for all periods presented. As discussed in Note 14, approximately 63 million common shares were issued in June of 2010 in connection with the conversion of the remaining Series B mandatorily convertible preferred shares, which were originally issued in May 2009. Under applicable accounting literature, such shares should be included in the denominator in arriving at diluted earnings per share as if they were issued at the beginning of the reporting period or as of the date issued, if later. Prior to conversion, these shares were not included in the computation above as such amounts would have had an antidilutive effect on earnings (loss) per common share. NOTE 16. SHARE-BASED PAYMENTS Regions has long-term incentive compensation plans that permit the granting of incentive awards in the form of stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock awards and units, and/or stock appreciation rights. While Regions has the ability to issue stock appreciation rights, as of December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, there were no outstanding stock appreciation rights. The terms of all awards issued under these plans are determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors; however, no awards may be granted after the tenth anniversary from the date the plans were initially approved by shareholders. Options and restricted stock usually vest based on employee service, generally within three years from the date of the grant. The contractual lives of options granted under these plans range from seven to ten years from the date of the grant. On May 13, 2010, the shareholders of the Company approved the Regions Financial Corporation 2010 Long-Term Incentive Plan (“2010 LTIP”), which permits the Company to grant to employees and directors various forms of incentive compensation. These forms of incentive compensation are similar to the types of compensation approved in prior plans. The 2010 LTIP authorizes 100 million common share equivalents available for grant, where grants of options count as one share equivalent and grants of full value awards (e. g. , shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units) count as 2.25 share equivalents. Unless otherwise determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, grants of restricted stock and restricted stock units accrue dividends as they are declared by the Board of Directors, and the dividends are paid upon vesting of the award. The 2010 LTIP closed all prior long-term incentive plans to new grants, and accordingly, prospective grants must be made under the 2010 LTIP or a successor plan. All existing grants under prior long-term incentive plans were unaffected by this amendment. The number of remaining share equivalents available for future issuance under the active long-term compensation plan was approximately 91 million at December 31, 2010. Grants of performance-based restricted stock typically have a one-year performance period, after which shares vest within three years after the grant date. Restricted stock units, which were granted in 2008, have a vesting period of five years. Generally, the terms of these plans stipulate that the exercise price of options may not be less than the fair market value of Regions’ common stock at the date the options are granted; however, under prior stock option plans, non-qualified options could be granted with a lower exercise price than the fair market value of Regions’ common stock on the date of grant. The contractual life of options granted under these plans ranges from seven to ten years from the date of grant. Regions issues new shares from authorized reserves upon exercise. Grantees of restricted stock awards or units must either remain employed with the Company for certain periods from the date of grant in order for shares to be released or issued or retire after meeting the standards of a retiree, at which time shares would be prorated and released. The following table summarizes the elements of compensation cost recognized in the consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31: \n
201020092008
(In millions)
Compensation cost of share-based compensation awards:
Restricted stock awards and units$10$33$50
Stock options131416
Tax benefits related to compensation cost-8-17-24
Compensation cost of share-based compensation awards, net of tax$15$30$42
\n PROVISION FOR LOAN LOSSES The provision for loan losses is used to maintain the allowance for loan losses at a level that in management’s judgment is appropriate to absorb probable losses inherent in the portfolio at the balance sheet date. During 2018, the provision for loan losses totaled $229 million and net charge-offs were $323 million. This compares to a provision for loan losses of $150 million and net charge-offs of $307 million in 2017. The increase in the provision for loan losses was primarily a result of increased loan balances and slowing credit improvement as compared to 2017. The increase was partially offset by the release of the Company's $40 million hurricane-specific loan loss allowance associated with certain 2017 hurricanes, as well as a $16 million net reduction to the provision for loan losses in the first quarter of 2018 from the sale of $254 million in residential first mortgage loans consisting primarily of performing troubled debt restructured loans. For further discussion and analysis of the total allowance for credit losses, see the \"Allowance for Credit Losses\" and “Risk Management” sections found later in this report. See also Note 6 “Allowance for Credit Losses” to the consolidated financial statements. NON-INTEREST INCOME Table 5—Non-Interest Income from Continuing Operations \n
Year Ended December 31Change 2018 vs. 2017
201820172016AmountPercent
(Dollars in millions)
Service charges on deposit accounts$710$683$664$274.0%
Card and ATM fees438417402215.0%
Investment management and trust fee income23523021352.2%
Capital markets income2021611524125.5%
Mortgage income137149173-12-8.1%
Investment services fee income7160581118.3%
Commercial credit fee income717173——%
Bank-owned life insurance658195-16-19.8%
Insurance proceeds——50—NM
Securities gains, net1196-18-94.7%
Market value adjustments on employee benefit assets - defined benefit-6——-6NM
Market value adjustments on employee benefit assets - other-5163-21-131.3%
Other miscellaneous income100751222533.3%
$2,019$1,962$2,011$572.9%
\n Service Charges on Deposit Accounts Service charges on deposit accounts include non-sufficient fund fees and other service charges. The increase in 2018 compared to 2017 was primarily due to continued customer account growth and increases in non-sufficient fund fee activity. Card and ATM Fees Card and ATM fees include the combined amounts of credit card/bank card income and debit card and ATM related revenue. The increase in 2018 compared to 2017 was primarily the result of an increase in commercial and consumer checkcard interchange income associated with new account growth and increases in spend and transactions. Capital Markets Income Capital markets income primarily relates to capital raising activities that includes securities underwriting and placement, loan syndication and placement, as well as foreign exchange, derivatives, merger and acquisition and other advisory services. The increase in 2018 compared to 2017 was driven primarily by increases in income from mergers and acquisitions advisory fees, customer interest rate swap income, and loan syndication fees, partially offset by a decrease in fees from the placement of permanent financing for real estate customers."} {"answer": 0.14954, "question": "What is the growing rate of Gross profit in the year with the most Net revenues ?", "context": "ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The following selected financial data is qualified by reference to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements, including the notes thereto, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. \n
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands, except per share amounts)20162015201420132012
Net revenues$4,825,335$3,963,313$3,084,370$2,332,051$1,834,921
Cost of goods sold2,584,7242,057,7661,572,1641,195,381955,624
Gross profit2,240,6111,905,5471,512,2061,136,670879,297
Selling, general and administrative expenses1,823,1401,497,0001,158,251871,572670,602
Income from operations417,471408,547353,955265,098208,695
Interest expense, net-26,434-14,628-5,335-2,933-5,183
Other expense, net-2,755-7,234-6,410-1,172-73
Income before income taxes388,282386,685342,210260,993203,439
Provision for income taxes131,303154,112134,16898,66374,661
Net income256,979232,573208,042162,330128,778
Adjustment payment to Class C59,000————
Net income available to all stockholders$197,979$232,573$208,042$162,330$128,778
Net income available per common share
Basic net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Basic net income per share of Class C common stock$0.72$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Diluted net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Diluted net income per share of Class C common stock$0.71$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class A and B common stock
Basic217,707215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted221,944220,868219,380215,958212,760
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class C common stock
Basic218,623215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted222,904220,868219,380215,958212,760
Dividends declared$59,000$—$—$—$—
\n Our net revenues for the full year 2016 were $4,825.3 million, which reflects a revision from the $4,828.2 million reported in our earnings release, filed January 31, 2017, on Form 8-K. This revision reflects a $2.9 million adjustment related to a return credit for footwear that was identified in connection with the closing of our January 2017 books and records, following the earnings release. As a result, other items on our Consolidated Financial Statements have been appropriately adjusted from the amounts provided in the earnings release, including a reduction of our full year 2016 gross profit and income from operations by $2.9 million, and a reduction of net income by $1.7 million. \n
At December 31,
(In thousands)20162015201420132012
Cash and cash equivalents$250,470$129,852$593,175$347,489$341,841
Working capital -11,279,3371,019,9531,127,772702,181651,370
Inventories917,491783,031536,714469,006319,286
Total assets3,644,3312,865,9702,092,4281,576,3691,155,052
Total debt, including current maturities817,388666,070281,546151,55159,858
Total stockholders’ equity$2,030,900$1,668,222$1,350,300$1,053,354$816,922
\n (1) Working capital is defined as current assets minus current liabilities. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, which effects all entities that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. The amendments in this ASU cover such areas as the recognition of excess tax benefits and deficiencies, the classification of those excess tax benefits on the statement of cash flows, an accounting policy election for forfeitures, the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes and still qualify for equity classification and the classification of those taxes paid on the statement of cash flows. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016. This guidance can be applied either prospectively, retrospectively or using a modified retrospective transition method. Early adoption is permitted. The Company will not early adopt this ASU. The adoption of this guidance may have a material impact on the Company’s effective tax rate and income tax expense, depending in part on whether significant employee stock option exercises occur. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, which eliminates the diversity in practice related to the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows, by adding or clarifying guidance on eight specific cash flow issues. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not believe this ASU will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, which will require an entity to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset, other than inventory, when the transfer occurs. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted in the first interim period of 2017. Upon adoption, any deferred charge established upon an intra-company transfer would be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. At December 31, 2016, the Company had a deferred charge of $26.0 million with $1.8 million and $24.2 million recorded within Prepaid expenses and Other long term assets, respectively. The Company plans to adopt this ASU during the interim period ending March 31, 2017. Recently Adopted Accounting Standards In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, which requires costs incurred to issue debt to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the debt. This ASU is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted the provisions of this ASU in the first quarter of 2016, and reclassified approximately $2.9 million from “Other long term assets” to “Long term debt, net of current maturities” as of December 31, 2015.3. Property and Equipment, Net Property and equipment consisted of the following: \n
December 31,
(In thousands)20162015
Leasehold and tenant improvements$326,617$214,834
Furniture, fixtures and displays168,720132,736
Buildings47,21647,137
Software151,05999,309
Office equipment75,19650,399
Plant equipment124,140118,138
Land83,57417,628
Construction in progress204,362147,581
Other20,3834,002
Subtotal property and equipment1,201,267831,764
Accumulated depreciation-397,056-293,233
Property and equipment, net$804,211$538,531
"} {"answer": 0.53991, "question": "what is the growth rate in the fair value of retained interests in 2018 compare to 2017?", "context": "THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements ‰ Purchased interests represent senior and subordinated interests, purchased in connection with secondary market-making activities, in securitization entities in which the firm also holds retained interests. ‰ Substantially all of the total outstanding principal amount and total retained interests relate to securitizations during 2014 and thereafter as of December 2018, and relate to securitizations during 2012 and thereafter as of December 2017. ‰ The fair value of retained interests was $3.28 billion as of December 2018 and $2.13 billion as of December 2017. In addition to the interests in the table above, the firm had other continuing involvement in the form of derivative transactions and commitments with certain nonconsolidated VIEs. The carrying value of these derivatives and commitments was a net asset of $75 million as of December 2018 and $86 million as of December 2017, and the notional amount of these derivatives and commitments was $1.09 billion as of December 2018 and $1.26 billion as of December 2017. The notional amounts of these derivatives and commitments are included in maximum exposure to loss in the nonconsolidated VIE table in Note 12. The table below presents information about the weighted average key economic assumptions used in measuring the fair value of mortgage-backed retained interests. \n
As of December
$ in millions20182017
Fair value of retained interests$ 3,151$2,071
Weighted average life (years)7.26.0
Constant prepayment rate11.9%9.4%
Impact of 10% adverse change$ -27$ -19
Impact of 20% adverse change$ -53$ -35
Discount rate4.7%4.2%
Impact of 10% adverse change$ -75$ -35
Impact of 20% adverse change$ -147$ -70
\n In the table above: ‰ Amounts do not reflect the benefit of other financial instruments that are held to mitigate risks inherent in these retained interests. ‰ Changes in fair value based on an adverse variation in assumptions generally cannot be extrapolated because the relationship of the change in assumptions to the change in fair value is not usually linear. ‰ The impact of a change in a particular assumption is calculated independently of changes in any other assumption. In practice, simultaneous changes in assumptions might magnify or counteract the sensitivities disclosed above. ‰ The constant prepayment rate is included only for positions for which it is a key assumption in the determination of fair value. ‰ The discount rate for retained interests that relate to U. S. government agency-issued collateralized mortgage obligations does not include any credit loss. Expected credit loss assumptions are reflected in the discount rate for the remainder of retained interests. The firm has other retained interests not reflected in the table above with a fair value of $133 million and a weighted average life of 4.2 years as of December 2018, and a fair value of $56 million and a weighted average life of 4.5 years as of December 2017. Due to the nature and fair value of certain of these retained interests, the weighted average assumptions for constant prepayment and discount rates and the related sensitivity to adverse changes are not meaningful as of both December 2018 and December 2017. The firm’s maximum exposure to adverse changes in the value of these interests is the carrying value of $133 million as of December 2018 and $56 million as of December 2017. Note 12. Variable Interest Entities A variable interest in a VIE is an investment (e. g. , debt or equity) or other interest (e. g. , derivatives or loans and lending commitments) that will absorb portions of the VIE’s expected losses and/or receive portions of the VIE’s expected residual returns. The firm’s variable interests in VIEs include senior and subordinated debt; loans and lending commitments; limited and general partnership interests; preferred and common equity; derivatives that may include foreign currency, equity and/or credit risk; guarantees; and certain of the fees the firm receives from investment funds. Certain interest rate, foreign currency and credit derivatives the firm enters into with VIEs are not variable interests because they create, rather than absorb, risk. VIEs generally finance the purchase of assets by issuing debt and equity securities that are either collateralized by or indexed to the assets held by the VIE. The debt and equity securities issued by a VIE may include tranches of varying levels of subordination. The firm’s involvement with VIEs includes securitization of financial assets, as described in Note 11, and investments in and loans to other types of VIEs, as described below. See Note 11 for further information about securitization activities, including the definition of beneficial interests. See Note 3 for the firm’s consolidation policies, including the definition of a VIE. The completion factor method is used for the months of incurred claims prior to the most recent three months because the historical percentage of claims processed for those months is at a level sufficient to produce a consistently reliable result. Conversely, for the most recent three months of incurred claims, the volume of claims processed historically is not at a level sufficient to produce a reliable result, which therefore requires us to examine historical trend patterns as the primary method of evaluation. Medical cost trends potentially are more volatile than other segments of the economy. The drivers of medical cost trends include increases in the utilization of hospital and physician services, prescription drugs, and new medical technologies, as well as the inflationary effect on the cost per unit of each of these expense components. Other external factors such as government-mandated benefits or other regulatory changes, catastrophes, and epidemics also may impact medical cost trends. Additionally, as we realign our commercial strategy, we continue to reduce the level of traditional utilization management functions such as pre\u0002authorization of services, monitoring of inpatient admissions, and requirements for physician referrals. Other internal factors such as system conversions and claims processing interruptions also may impact our ability to accurately predict estimates of historical completion factors or medical cost trends. All of these factors are considered in estimating IBNR and in estimating the per member per month claims trend for purposes of determining the reserve for the most recent three months. Each of these factors requires significant judgment by management. The completion and claims per member per month trend factors are the most significant factors impacting the IBNR estimate. The following table illustrates the sensitivity of these factors and the estimated potential impact on our operating results caused by changes in these factors based on December 31, 2003 data: \n
Completion Factor (a):Claims Trend Factor (b):
(Decrease) Increase in FactorIncrease (Decrease) in Medical and Other Expenses Payable(Decrease) Increase in FactorIncrease (Decrease) in Medical and Other Expenses Payable
(dollars in thousands)
-3%$136,000-3%$-59,000
-2%$88,000-2%$-41,000
-1%$43,000-1%$-22,000
1%$-40,0001%$14,000
2%$-79,0002%$33,000
3%$-116,0003%$51,000
\n (a) Reflects estimated potential changes in medical and other expenses payable caused by changes in completion factors for incurred months prior to the most recent three months. (b) Reflects estimated potential changes in medical and other expenses payable caused by changes in annualized claims trend used for the estimation of per member per month incurred claims for the most recent three months. Most medical claims are paid within a few months of the member receiving service from a physician or other health care provider. As a result, these liabilities generally are described as having a “short-tail”, which causes less than 2% of our medical and other expenses payable as of the end of any given period to be outstanding for more than 12 months. As such, we expect that substantially all of the 2003 estimate of medical and other expenses payable will be known and paid during 2004. Our reserving practice is to consistently recognize the actuarial best point estimate within a level of confidence required by actuarial standards. Actuarial standards of practice generally require a level of confidence such that the liabilities established for IBNR have a greater probability of being adequate versus being insufficient, or such that the liabilities established for IBNR are sufficient to cover obligations under an assumption of moderately adverse conditions. Adverse conditions are situations in which the actual claims are TRICARE change orders occur when we perform services or incur costs under the directive of the federal government that were not originally specified in our contracts. Under federal regulations we are entitled to an equitable adjustment to the contract price, which results in additional premium revenues. Examples of items that have necessitated substantial change orders in recent years include congressionally legislated increases in the level of benefits for TRICARE beneficiaries and the administration of new government programs such as TRICARE for Life and TRICARE Senior Pharmacy. Like BPAs, we record revenue applicable to change orders when these amounts are determinable and the collectibility is reasonably assured. Unlike BPAs, where settlement only occurs at specified intervals, change orders may be negotiated and settled at any time throughout the year. Total TRICARE premium and ASO fee receivables were as follows at December 31, 2003 and 2002: \n
20032002
(in thousands)
TRICARE premiums receivable:
Base receivable$254,688$190,339
Bid price adjustments (BPAs)92,875104,044
Change orders7,0731,400
Subtotal354,636295,783
Less: long-term portion of BPAs-38,794-86,471
Total TRICARE premiums receivable$315,842$209,312
TRICARE ASO fees receivable:
Base receivable$—$7,205
Change orders11,96856,230
Total TRICARE ASO fees receivable$11,968$63,435
\n Our TRICARE contracts also contain risk-sharing provisions with the federal government to minimize any losses and limit any profits in the event that medical costs for which we are at risk differ from the levels targeted in our contracts. Amounts receivable from the federal government under such risk-sharing provisions are included in the BPA receivable above, while amounts payable to the federal government under these provisions of approximately $17.3 million at December 31, 2003 are included in medical and other expenses payable in our consolidated balance sheets. Investment Securities Investment securities totaled $1,995.8 million, or 38% of total assets at December 31, 2003. Debt securities totaled $1,960.6 million, or 98% of our total investment portfolio. More than 94% of our debt securities were of investment-grade quality, with an average credit rating of AA by Standard & Poor’s at December 31, 2003. Most of the debt securities that are below investment grade are rated at the higher end (B or better) of the non\u0002investment grade spectrum. Our investment policy limits investments in a single issuer and requires diversification among various asset types. Duration is indicative of the relationship between changes in market value to changes in interest rates, providing a general indication of the sensitivity of the fair values of our debt securities to changes in interest rates. However, actual market values may differ significantly from estimates based on duration. The average duration of our debt securities was approximately 3.5 years at December 31, 2003. Based on this duration, a 1% increase in interest rates would generally decrease the fair value of our debt securities by approximately $70 million. Our investment securities are categorized as available for sale and, as a result, are stated at fair value. Fair value of publicly traded debt and equity securities are based on quoted market prices. Non-traded debt securities are priced independently by a third party vendor. Fair value of venture capital debt securities that are privately Revenue for other healthcare services is recognized on a fee-for-service basis at estimated collectible amounts at the time services are rendered. Our fees are determined in advance for each type of service performed. Investment Securities Investment securities totaled $9.8 billion, or 47.3% of total assets at December 31, 2013, and $9.8 billion, or 49% of total assets at December 31, 2012. Debt securities, detailed below, comprised this entire investment portfolio at December 31, 2013 and at December 31, 2012. The fair value of debt securities were as follows at December 31, 2013 and 2012:"} {"answer": 4897498.0, "question": "What's the total amount of Converters, Amplifiers/Radio frequency, Other analog and Subtotal analog signal processing in 2014?", "context": "The year-to-year increase in communications end market revenue in fiscal 2014 was primarily a result of increased wireless base station deployment activity and, to a lesser extent, an increase in revenue as a result of the Acquisition. Industrial end market revenue increased year-over-year in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 as a result of an increase in demand in this end market, which was most significant for products sold into the instrumentation and automation sectors and, to a lesser extent, an increase in revenue as a result of the Acquisition. The year-to-year increase in automotive end market revenue in fiscal 2014 was primarily a result of increasing electronic content in vehicles and higher demand for new vehicles. The year-to\u0002year decrease in revenue in the consumer end market in fiscal 2014 was primarily the result of the sale of our microphone product line in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. The year-to-year decrease in revenue in the industrial and consumer end markets in fiscal 2013 was primarily the result of a weak global economic environment and one less week of operations in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012. Automotive end market revenue increased in fiscal 2013 primarily as a result of increasing electronic content in vehicles. Revenue Trends by Product Type The following table summarizes revenue by product categories. The categorization of our products into broad categories is based on the characteristics of the individual products, the specification of the products and in some cases the specific uses that certain products have within applications. The categorization of products into categories is therefore subject to judgment in some cases and can vary over time. In instances where products move between product categories, we reclassify the amounts in the product categories for all prior periods. Such reclassifications typically do not materially change the sizing of, or the underlying trends of results within, each product category \n
201420132012
Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*Y/Y%Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*Revenue% ofTotalProductRevenue*
Converters$1,285,36845%9%$1,180,07245%$1,192,06444%
Amplifiers/Radio frequency806,97528%18%682,75926%697,68726%
Other analog356,40612%-4%372,28114%397,37615%
Subtotal analog signal processing2,448,74985%10%2,235,11285%2,287,12785%
Power management & reference174,4836%1%172,9207%182,1347%
Total analog products$2,623,23292%9%$2,408,03291%$2,469,26191%
Digital signal processing241,5418%7%225,6579%231,8819%
Total Revenue$2,864,773100%9%$2,633,689100%$2,701,142100%
\n The sum of the individual percentages does not equal the total due to rounding. The year-to-year increase in total revenue in fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 was the result of improving demand across most product type categories and the result of the Acquisition, which was partially offset by declines in the other analog product category, primarily as a result of the sale of our microphone product line in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013. The year-to-year decrease in total revenue in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 was the result of one less week of operations in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 and a broad-based decrease in demand across most product type categories. Revenue Trends by Geographic Region Revenue by geographic region, based upon the primary location of our customers' design activity for its products, for fiscal 2014, 2013 and 2012 was as follows. ANALOG DEVICES, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) \n
Stock Options201420132012
Options granted (in thousands)2,2402,4072,456
Weighted-average exercise price$51.52$46.40$39.58
Weighted-average grant-date fair value$8.74$7.38$7.37
Assumptions:
Weighted-average expected volatility24.9%24.6%28.4%
Weighted-average expected term (in years)5.35.45.3
Weighted-average risk-free interest rate1.7%1.0%1.1%
Weighted-average expected dividend yield2.9%2.9%3.0%
\n As it relates to our market-based restricted stock units, the Company utilizes the Monte Carlo simulation valuation model to value these awards. The Monte Carlo simulation model utilizes multiple input variables that determine the probability of satisfying the performance conditions stipulated in the award grant and calculates the fair market value for the market-based restricted stock units granted. The Monte Carlo simulation model also uses stock price volatility and other variables to estimate the probability of satisfying the performance conditions, including the possibility that the market condition may not be satisfied, and the resulting fair value of the award. Information pertaining to the Company's market-based restricted stock units and the related estimated assumptions used to calculate the fair value of market-based restricted stock units granted using the Monte Carlo simulation model is as follows: \n
Market-based Restricted Stock Units2014
Units granted (in thousands)86
Grant-date fair value$50.79
Assumptions:
Historical stock price volatility23.2%
Risk-free interest rate0.8%
Expected dividend yield2.8%
\n Market-based restricted stock units were not granted during fiscal 2013 or 2012. Expected volatility — The Company is responsible for estimating volatility and has considered a number of factors, including third-party estimates. The Company currently believes that the exclusive use of implied volatility results in the best estimate of the grant-date fair value of employee stock options because it reflects the market’s current expectations of future volatility. In evaluating the appropriateness of exclusively relying on implied volatility, the Company concluded that: (1) options in the Company’s common stock are actively traded with sufficient volume on several exchanges; (2) the market prices of both the traded options and the underlying shares are measured at a similar point in time to each other and on a date close to the grant date of the employee share options; (3) the traded options have exercise prices that are both near-the-money and close to the exercise price of the employee share options; and (4) the remaining maturities of the traded options used to estimate volatility are at least one year. Expected term — The Company uses historical employee exercise and option expiration data to estimate the expected term assumption for the Black-Scholes grant-date valuation. The Company believes that this historical data is currently the best estimate of the expected term of a new option, and that generally its employees exhibit similar exercise behavior. Risk-free interest rate — The yield on zero-coupon U. S. Treasury securities for a period that is commensurate with the expected term assumption is used as the risk-free interest rate. Expected dividend yield — Expected dividend yield is calculated by annualizing the cash dividend declared by the Company’s Board of Directors for the current quarter and dividing that result by the closing stock price on the date of grant. Until such time as the Company’s Board of Directors declares a cash dividend for an amount that is different from the current quarter’s cash dividend, the current dividend will be used in deriving this assumption. Cash dividends are not paid on options, restricted stock or restricted stock units. an adverse development with respect to one claim in 2008 and favorable developments in three cases in 2009. Other costs were also lower in 2009 compared to 2008, driven by a decrease in expenses for freight and property damages, employee travel, and utilities. In addition, higher bad debt expense in 2008 due to the uncertain impact of the recessionary economy drove a favorable year-over-year comparison. Conversely, an additional expense of $30 million related to a transaction with Pacer International, Inc. and higher property taxes partially offset lower costs in 2009. Other costs were higher in 2008 compared to 2007 due to an increase in bad debts, state and local taxes, loss and damage expenses, utility costs, and other miscellaneous expenses totaling $122 million. Conversely, personal injury costs (including asbestos-related claims) were $8 million lower in 2008 compared to 2007. The reduction reflects improvements in our safety experience and lower estimated costs to resolve claims as indicated in the actuarial studies of our personal injury expense and annual reviews of asbestos-related claims in both 2008 and 2007. The year-over-year comparison also includes the negative impact of adverse development associated with one claim in 2008. In addition, environmental and toxic tort expenses were $7 million lower in 2008 compared to 2007. Non-Operating Items"} {"answer": 0.01603, "question": "What is the growing rate of distribution fees in table 1 in the year with the most Other revenues in table 1?", "context": "Item 2: Properties Information concerning Applied’s properties is set forth below: \n
(Square feet in thousands)United StatesOther CountriesTotal
Owned3,9641,6525,616
Leased8451,1531,998
Total4,8092,8057,614
\n Because of the interrelation of Applied’s operations, properties within a country may be shared by the segments operating within that country. The Company’s headquarters offices are in Santa Clara, California. Products in Semiconductor Systems are manufactured in Santa Clara, California; Austin, Texas; Gloucester, Massachusetts; Kalispell, Montana; Rehovot, Israel; and Singapore. Remanufactured equipment products in the Applied Global Services segment are produced primarily in Austin, Texas. Products in the Display and Adjacent Markets segment are manufactured in Alzenau, Germany; and Tainan, Taiwan. Other products are manufactured in Treviso, Italy. Applied also owns and leases offices, plants and warehouse locations in many locations throughout the world, including in Europe, Japan, North America (principally the United States), Israel, China, India, Korea, Southeast Asia and Taiwan. These facilities are principally used for manufacturing; research, development and engineering; and marketing, sales and customer support. Applied also owns a total of approximately 269 acres of buildable land in Montana, Texas, California, Israel and Italy that could accommodate additional building space. Applied considers the properties that it owns or leases as adequate to meet its current and future requirements. Applied regularly assesses the size, capability and location of its global infrastructure and periodically makes adjustments based on these assessments. General and administrative expense, which excludes integration charges, decreased $42 million, or 3%, to $1.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $1.3 billion for the prior year primarily due to continued expense controls, partially offset by an increase of approximately $19 million related to higher performance fee-related compensation. Annuities Our Annuities segment provides variable and fixed annuity products of RiverSource Life companies to individual clients. We provide our variable annuity products through our advisors, and fixed annuity products are provided through both affiliated and unaffiliated advisors and financial institutions. Revenues for our variable annuity products are primarily earned as fees based on underlying account balances, which are impacted by both market movements and net asset flows. Revenues for our fixed annuity products are primarily earned as net investment income on assets supporting fixed account balances, with profitability significantly impacted by the spread between net investment income earned and interest credited on the fixed account balances. We also earn net investment income on owned assets supporting reserves for immediate annuities and for certain guaranteed benefits offered with variable annuities and on capital supporting the business. Intersegment revenues for this segment reflect fees paid by our Asset Management segment for marketing support and other services provided in connection with the availability of variable insurance trust funds (‘‘VIT Funds’’) under the variable annuity contracts. Intersegment expenses for this segment include distribution expenses for services provided by our Advice & Wealth Management segment, as well as expenses for investment management services provided by our Asset Management segment. The following table presents the results of operations of our Annuities segment on an operating basis: \n
Years Ended December 31,
2012 2011Change
(in millions)
Revenues
Management and financial advice fees$648$622$264%
Distribution fees31731252
Net investment income1,1321,279-147-11
Premiums118161-43-27
Other revenues3092565321
Total revenues2,5242,630-106-4
Banking and deposit interest expense————
Total net revenues2,5242,630-106-4
Expenses
Distribution expenses395400-5-1
Interest credited to fixed accounts688714-26-4
Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses419405143
Amortization of deferred acquisition costs229264-35-13
Interest and debt expense211NM
General and administrative expense22422131
Total expenses1,9572,005-48-2
Operating earnings$567$625$-58-9%
\n NM Not Meaningful. Our Annuities segment pretax operating income, which excludes net realized gains or losses and the market impact on variable annuity guaranteed living benefits (net of hedges and the related DSIC and DAC amortization), decreased $58 million, or 9%, to $567 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $625 million for the prior year primarily due to a decline in net investment income and an unfavorable impact from unlocking and model changes, partially offset by the market impact on DAC and DSIC, lower interest credited to fixed accounts and higher fee revenues. Results for 2011 included $34 million of additional bond discount accretion investment income related to prior periods resulting from revisions to the accounting classification of certain structured securities, net of DAC and DSIC amortization. The impact of unlocking and model changes was a decrease to pretax operating income of $11 million in 2012 compared to an increase of $1 million in the prior year. The impact of unlocking and model changes for 2012 included a $43 million benefit, net of DAC and DSIC amortization, from an adjustment to the model which values the reserves related to living benefit guarantees primarily attributable to prior periods. This revision aligns the model to more accurately reflect best estimate assumptions for living benefit utilization going forward. The market impact on DAC and DSIC was a benefit of $29 million in 2012 compared to an expense of $10 million in the prior year. RiverSource variable annuity account balances increased 9% to $68.1 billion at December 31, 2012 compared to the prior year driven by market appreciation. Variable annuity net outflows of $457 million in 2012 reflected the closed book Note 5. Long-Term Obligations Long-Term Obligations consist of the following (in thousands): \n
December 31,
20122011
Senior secured credit agreement:
Term loans payable$420,625$240,625
Revolving credit facility553,964660,730
Receivables securitization facility80,000—
Notes payable through October 2018 at weighted average interest rates of 1.7% and 2.0%, respectively42,39838,338
Other long-term debt at weighted average interest rates of 3.3% and 3.2%, respectively21,49116,383
1,118,478956,076
Less current maturities-71,716-29,524
$1,046,762$926,552
\n The scheduled maturities of long-term obligations outstanding at December 31, 2012 are as follows (in thousands):"} {"answer": 0.09394, "question": "what is the growth rate in net revenue in 2008 compare to 2007?", "context": "targets. At December 31, 2013, there were no significant holdings of any single issuer and the exposure to derivative instruments was not significant. The following tables present the Company’s pension plan assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis: \n
December 31, 2013
Asset CategoryLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
(in millions)
Equity securities:
U.S. large cap stocks$97$43$—$140
U.S. small cap stocks551—56
Non-U.S. large cap stocks2135—56
Non-U.S. small cap stocks21——21
Emerging markets1423—37
Debt securities:
U.S. investment grade bonds1714—31
U.S. high yield bonds—21—21
Non-U.S. investment grade bonds—14—14
Real estate investment trusts——22
Hedge funds——2020
Pooled pension funds—126—126
Cash equivalents20——20
Total$245$277$22$544
\n \n
December 31, 2012
Asset CategoryLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
(in millions)
Equity securities:
U.S. large cap stocks$89$14$—$103
U.S. small cap stocks431—44
Non-U.S. large cap stocks1730—47
Emerging markets1320—33
Debt securities:
U.S. investment grade bonds2012—32
U.S. high yield bonds—20—20
Non-U.S. investment grade bonds—15—15
Real estate investment trusts——1212
Hedge funds——1818
Pooled pension funds—104—104
Cash equivalents9——9
Total$191$216$30$437
\n Equity securities are managed to track the performance of common market indices for both U. S. and non-U. S. securities, primarily across large cap, small cap and emerging market asset classes. Debt securities are managed to track the performance of common market indices for both U. S. and non-U. S. investment grade bonds as well as a pool of U. S. high yield bonds. Real estate investment trusts are managed to track the performance of a broad population of investment grade non-agricultural income producing properties. The Company’s investments in hedge funds include investments in a multi-strategy fund and an off-shore fund managed to track the performance of broad fund of fund indices. Pooled pension funds are managed to return 1.5% in excess of a common index of similar pooled pension funds on a rolling three year basis. Cash equivalents consist of holdings in a money market fund that seeks to equal the return of the three month U. S. Treasury bill. The fair value of real estate investment trusts is based primarily on the underlying cash flows of the properties within the trusts which are significant unobservable inputs and classified as Level 3. The fair value of the hedge funds is based on the proportionate share of the underlying net assets of the funds, which are significant unobservable inputs and classified as Level 3. The fair value of pooled pension funds and equity securities held in collective trust funds is based on the fund’s NAV and classified as Level 2 as they trade in principal-to-principal markets. Equity securities and mutual funds traded in active markets are classified as Level 1. For debt securities and cash equivalents, the valuation techniques and classifications are consistent with those used for the Company’s own investments as described in Note 14. Entergy New Orleans, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 339 Net Revenue 2008 Compared to 2007 Net revenue consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale, 2) purchased power expenses, and 3) other regulatory charges. Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007. \n
Amount (In Millions)
2007 net revenue$231.0
Volume/weather15.5
Net gas revenue6.6
Rider revenue3.9
Base revenue-11.3
Other7.0
2008 net revenue$252.7
\n The volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007. Entergy New Orleans estimates that approximately 141,000 electric customers and 93,000 gas customers have returned since Hurricane Katrina and are taking service as of December 31, 2008, compared to approximately 132,000 electric customers and 86,000 gas customers as of December 31, 2007. Billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 GWh compared to the same period in 2007, an increase of 4%. The net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in March and November 2007. Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase. The rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective March 2007 as a result of the City Council's approval of a settlement agreement in October 2006. The approved storm reserve has been set to collect $75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account. The settlement agreement is discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements. The base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit, effective January 2008. The base rate credit is discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements. Gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses Gross operating revenues increased primarily due to: x an increase of $58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales; x an increase of $47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage; and x an increase of $22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in March 2007 and November 2007. Fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. Table of Contents Seasonality Our revenues are seasonal based on the demand for cruises. Demand is strongest for cruises during the Northern Hemisphere’s summer months and holidays. In order to mitigate the impact of the winter weather in the Northern Hemisphere and to capitalize on the summer season in the Southern Hemisphere, our brands have focused on deployment in the Caribbean, Asia and Australia during that period. Passengers and Capacity Selected statistical information is shown in the following table (see Financial Presentation- Description of Certain Line Items and Selected Operational and Financial Metrics under Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, for definitions):"} {"answer": 489552.0, "question": "What's the total amount of the Net income in the years where Land is greater than 0? (in thousand)", "context": "ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The following selected financial data is qualified by reference to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements, including the notes thereto, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. \n
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands, except per share amounts)20162015201420132012
Net revenues$4,825,335$3,963,313$3,084,370$2,332,051$1,834,921
Cost of goods sold2,584,7242,057,7661,572,1641,195,381955,624
Gross profit2,240,6111,905,5471,512,2061,136,670879,297
Selling, general and administrative expenses1,823,1401,497,0001,158,251871,572670,602
Income from operations417,471408,547353,955265,098208,695
Interest expense, net-26,434-14,628-5,335-2,933-5,183
Other expense, net-2,755-7,234-6,410-1,172-73
Income before income taxes388,282386,685342,210260,993203,439
Provision for income taxes131,303154,112134,16898,66374,661
Net income256,979232,573208,042162,330128,778
Adjustment payment to Class C59,000————
Net income available to all stockholders$197,979$232,573$208,042$162,330$128,778
Net income available per common share
Basic net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Basic net income per share of Class C common stock$0.72$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Diluted net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Diluted net income per share of Class C common stock$0.71$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class A and B common stock
Basic217,707215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted221,944220,868219,380215,958212,760
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class C common stock
Basic218,623215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted222,904220,868219,380215,958212,760
Dividends declared$59,000$—$—$—$—
\n Our net revenues for the full year 2016 were $4,825.3 million, which reflects a revision from the $4,828.2 million reported in our earnings release, filed January 31, 2017, on Form 8-K. This revision reflects a $2.9 million adjustment related to a return credit for footwear that was identified in connection with the closing of our January 2017 books and records, following the earnings release. As a result, other items on our Consolidated Financial Statements have been appropriately adjusted from the amounts provided in the earnings release, including a reduction of our full year 2016 gross profit and income from operations by $2.9 million, and a reduction of net income by $1.7 million. \n
At December 31,
(In thousands)20162015201420132012
Cash and cash equivalents$250,470$129,852$593,175$347,489$341,841
Working capital -11,279,3371,019,9531,127,772702,181651,370
Inventories917,491783,031536,714469,006319,286
Total assets3,644,3312,865,9702,092,4281,576,3691,155,052
Total debt, including current maturities817,388666,070281,546151,55159,858
Total stockholders’ equity$2,030,900$1,668,222$1,350,300$1,053,354$816,922
\n (1) Working capital is defined as current assets minus current liabilities. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, which effects all entities that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. The amendments in this ASU cover such areas as the recognition of excess tax benefits and deficiencies, the classification of those excess tax benefits on the statement of cash flows, an accounting policy election for forfeitures, the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes and still qualify for equity classification and the classification of those taxes paid on the statement of cash flows. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016. This guidance can be applied either prospectively, retrospectively or using a modified retrospective transition method. Early adoption is permitted. The Company will not early adopt this ASU. The adoption of this guidance may have a material impact on the Company’s effective tax rate and income tax expense, depending in part on whether significant employee stock option exercises occur. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, which eliminates the diversity in practice related to the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows, by adding or clarifying guidance on eight specific cash flow issues. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not believe this ASU will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, which will require an entity to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset, other than inventory, when the transfer occurs. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted in the first interim period of 2017. Upon adoption, any deferred charge established upon an intra-company transfer would be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. At December 31, 2016, the Company had a deferred charge of $26.0 million with $1.8 million and $24.2 million recorded within Prepaid expenses and Other long term assets, respectively. The Company plans to adopt this ASU during the interim period ending March 31, 2017. Recently Adopted Accounting Standards In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, which requires costs incurred to issue debt to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the debt. This ASU is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted the provisions of this ASU in the first quarter of 2016, and reclassified approximately $2.9 million from “Other long term assets” to “Long term debt, net of current maturities” as of December 31, 2015.3. Property and Equipment, Net Property and equipment consisted of the following: \n
December 31,
(In thousands)20162015
Leasehold and tenant improvements$326,617$214,834
Furniture, fixtures and displays168,720132,736
Buildings47,21647,137
Software151,05999,309
Office equipment75,19650,399
Plant equipment124,140118,138
Land83,57417,628
Construction in progress204,362147,581
Other20,3834,002
Subtotal property and equipment1,201,267831,764
Accumulated depreciation-397,056-293,233
Property and equipment, net$804,211$538,531
"} {"answer": 10497.0, "question": "What's the average of Earnings from operations of 2015, and Pension and other postretirement cash requirements of After 5years ?", "context": "Revenues N&SS revenues decreased 1% in 2008 and 2% in 2007. The decrease of $137 million in 2008 is primarily due to decreased revenues in FCS, Proprietary and satellite programs partially offset by increased revenues in the SBInet program. The decrease of $292 million in 2007 was primarily due to the exclusion of government Delta volume, now a component of our equity investment in ULA and lower FCS volume, partially offset by increased volume on SBInet and several satellite programs. Delta launch and new-build satellite deliveries were as follows: \n
Years ended December 31, 200820072006
Delta II Commercial 23
Delta II Government2
Delta IV Government3
Satellites 144
\n Delta government launches are excluded from our deliveries after December 1, 2006 due to the formation of ULA. Operating Earnings N&SS operating earnings increased by $171 million in 2008 was primarily due to increased earnings from our investment in ULA. The decrease in 2007 was due to lower earnings on FCS and several satellite programs. These decreases were partially offset by higher award fees on GMD and a $44 million gain on sale of a property in Anaheim. N&SS operating earnings include equity earnings of $73 million, $85 million and $71 million from the United Space Alliance joint venture in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively and equity earnings of $105 million, a loss of $11 million and equity earnings of $5 million from the ULA joint venture in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The ULA equity earnings and loss amounts are net of the basis difference amortization. Research and Development The N&SS research and development funding remains focused on the development of communications, command and control, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems (C4ISR); communications and command and control (C3) capabilities that support a network-enabled architecture approach for our various government customers. We are investing in communications capabilities to enable connectivity between existing air/ground platforms, increase communications availability and bandwidth through more robust space systems, and leverage innovative communications concepts. Key programs in this area include JTRS, FCS, Global Positioning System, Tracking and Data Relay Satellite, Ares 1 Crew Launch Vehicle and GMD. Investments were also made to support concepts that may lead to the development of next-generation space intelligence systems. Along with increased funding to support these areas of architecture and network-enabled capabilities development, we also maintained our investment levels in global missile defense and advanced missile defense concepts and technologies. Backlog N&SS total backlog decreased by 12% in 2008 compared with 2007 primarily due to revenues recognized on multi-year orders received in prior years on FCS, GMD and C3 programs, partially offset by an increase in the International Space Station program. Total backlog decreased by 7% in 2007 compared with 2006 due to revenues recognized on FCS and Proprietary programs, partially offset by an increase in Space Exploration programs. Additional Considerations Items which could have a future impact on N&SS operations include the following: United Launch Alliance On December 1, 2006, we completed the transaction with Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed) to create a 50/50 joint venture named United Launch Alliance L. L. C. (ULA). ULA combines the production, engineering, test and launch operations associated with U. S. government launches of Boeing Delta and Lockheed Atlas rockets. In connection with the transaction, billion of unused borrowing on revolving credit line agreements. We anticipate that these credit lines will primarily serve as backup liquidity to support our general corporate borrowing needs. Financing commitments totaled $18.1 billion and $15.9 billion as of December 31, 2012 and 2011. We anticipate that we will not be required to fund a significant portion of our financing commitments as we continue to work with third party financiers to provide alternative financing to customers. Historically, we have not been required to fund significant amounts of outstanding commitments. However, there can be no assurances that we will not be required to fund greater amounts than historically required. In the event we require additional funding to support strategic business opportunities, our commercial aircraft financing commitments, unfavorable resolution of litigation or other loss contingencies, or other business requirements, we expect to meet increased funding requirements by issuing commercial paper or term debt. We believe our ability to access external capital resources should be sufficient to satisfy existing short-term and long-term commitments and plans, and also to provide adequate financial flexibility to take advantage of potential strategic business opportunities should they arise within the next year. However, there can be no assurance of the cost or availability of future borrowings, if any, under our commercial paper program, in the debt markets or our credit facilities. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, our pension plans were $19.7 billion and $16.6 billion underfunded as measured under GAAP. On an ERISA basis our plans are more than 100% funded at December 31, 2012 with minimal required contributions in 2013. We expect to make discretionary contributions to our plans of approximately $1.5 billion in 2013. We may be required to make higher contributions to our pension plans in future years. As of December 31, 2012, we were in compliance with the covenants for our debt and credit facilities. The most restrictive covenants include a limitation on mortgage debt and sale and leaseback transactions as a percentage of consolidated net tangible assets (as defined in the credit agreements), and a limitation on consolidated debt as a percentage of total capital (as defined). When considering debt covenants, we continue to have substantial borrowing capacity. Contractual Obligations The following table summarizes our known obligations to make future payments pursuant to certain contracts as of December 31, 2012, and the estimated timing thereof. \n
(Dollars in millions)TotalLessthan 1year1-3years3-5yearsAfter 5years
Long-term debt (including current portion)$10,251$1,340$2,147$1,095$5,669
Interest on debt-16,1775108647494,054
Pension and other postretirement cash requirements25,5585791,2447,02516,710
Capital lease obligations184102784
Operating lease obligations1,405218334209644
Purchase obligations not recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position118,00244,47241,83818,95612,736
Purchase obligations recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position15,98114,6641,30719
Total contractual obligations$177,558$61,885$47,812$28,039$39,822
\n (1) Includes interest on variable rate debt calculated based on interest rates at December 31, 2012. Variable rate debt was less than 1% of our total debt at December 31, 2012. Industry Competitiveness The commercial jet airplane market and the airline industry remain extremely competitive. Market liberalization in Europe, the Middle East and Asia is enabling low-cost airlines to continue gaining market share. These airlines are increasing the pressure on airfares. This results in continued cost pressures for all airlines and price pressure on our products. Major productivity gains are essential to ensure a favorable market position at acceptable profit margins. Continued access to global markets remains vital to our ability to fully realize our sales potential and long\u0002term investment returns. Approximately 91% of Commercial Airplanes’ total backlog, in dollar terms, is with non-U. S. airlines. We face aggressive international competitors who are intent on increasing their market share. They offer competitive products and have access to most of the same customers and suppliers. With government support,Airbus has historically invested heavily to create a family of products to compete with ours. Regional jet makers Embraer and Bombardier continue to develop and market larger and increasingly more capable airplanes, including Embraer’s E-195 in the regional jet market and Bombardier’s C Series in the 100-150 seat transcontinental market. Additionally, other competitors from Russia, China and Japan are developing commercial jet aircraft. Some of these competitors have historically enjoyed access to government\u0002provided financial support, including “launch aid,” which greatly reduces the cost and commercial risks associated with airplane development activities. This has enabled the development of airplanes without commercial viability; others to be brought to market more quickly than otherwise possible; and many offered for sale below market-based prices. Many competitors have continued to make improvements in efficiency, which may result in funding product development, gaining market share and improving earnings. This market environment has resulted in intense pressures on pricing and other competitive factors, and we expect these pressures to continue or intensify in the coming years. We are focused on improving our products and services and continuing our cost-reduction efforts, which enhances our ability to compete. We are also focused on taking actions to ensure that Boeing is not harmed by unfair subsidization of competitors. Results of Operations \n
Years ended December 31,201720162015
Revenues$56,729$58,012$59,399
% of total company revenues61%61%62%
Earnings from operations$5,432$1,995$4,284
Operating margins9.6%3.4%7.2%
Research and development$2,247$3,706$2,311
\n Revenues Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,283 million or 2% in 2017 compared with 2016 due to delivery mix, with fewer twin aisle deliveries more than offsetting the impact of higher single aisle deliveries. Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,387 million or 2% in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to fewer deliveries. Through February 25, 2016, we repurchased approximately $415.0 million of shares of our common stock, which includes the $250.0 million of shares that we repurchased from certain selling stockholders on February 10, 2016. In order to achieve operational synergies, we expect cash outlays related to our integration plans to be approximately $290.0 million in 2016. These cash outlays are necessary to achieve our integration goals of net annual pre-tax operating profit synergies of $350.0 million by the end of the third year post-Closing Date. Also as discussed in Note 20 to our consolidated financial statements, as of December 31, 2015, a short-term liability of $50.0 million and long-term liability of $264.6 million related to Durom Cup product liability claims was recorded on our consolidated balance sheet. We expect to continue paying these claims over the next few years. We expect to be reimbursed a portion of these payments for product liability claims from insurance carriers. As of December 31, 2015, we have received a portion of the insurance proceeds we estimate we will recover. We have a long-term receivable of $95.3 million remaining for future expected reimbursements from our insurance carriers. We also had a short-term liability of $33.4 million related to Biomet metal-on-metal hip implant claims. At December 31, 2015, we had ten tranches of senior notes outstanding as follows (dollars in millions):"} {"answer": 8788648.0, "question": "What was the total amount of Net revenues in 2015 and 2016?", "context": "ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The following selected financial data is qualified by reference to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements, including the notes thereto, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. \n
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands, except per share amounts)20162015201420132012
Net revenues$4,825,335$3,963,313$3,084,370$2,332,051$1,834,921
Cost of goods sold2,584,7242,057,7661,572,1641,195,381955,624
Gross profit2,240,6111,905,5471,512,2061,136,670879,297
Selling, general and administrative expenses1,823,1401,497,0001,158,251871,572670,602
Income from operations417,471408,547353,955265,098208,695
Interest expense, net-26,434-14,628-5,335-2,933-5,183
Other expense, net-2,755-7,234-6,410-1,172-73
Income before income taxes388,282386,685342,210260,993203,439
Provision for income taxes131,303154,112134,16898,66374,661
Net income256,979232,573208,042162,330128,778
Adjustment payment to Class C59,000————
Net income available to all stockholders$197,979$232,573$208,042$162,330$128,778
Net income available per common share
Basic net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Basic net income per share of Class C common stock$0.72$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Diluted net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Diluted net income per share of Class C common stock$0.71$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class A and B common stock
Basic217,707215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted221,944220,868219,380215,958212,760
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class C common stock
Basic218,623215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted222,904220,868219,380215,958212,760
Dividends declared$59,000$—$—$—$—
\n Our net revenues for the full year 2016 were $4,825.3 million, which reflects a revision from the $4,828.2 million reported in our earnings release, filed January 31, 2017, on Form 8-K. This revision reflects a $2.9 million adjustment related to a return credit for footwear that was identified in connection with the closing of our January 2017 books and records, following the earnings release. As a result, other items on our Consolidated Financial Statements have been appropriately adjusted from the amounts provided in the earnings release, including a reduction of our full year 2016 gross profit and income from operations by $2.9 million, and a reduction of net income by $1.7 million. \n
At December 31,
(In thousands)20162015201420132012
Cash and cash equivalents$250,470$129,852$593,175$347,489$341,841
Working capital -11,279,3371,019,9531,127,772702,181651,370
Inventories917,491783,031536,714469,006319,286
Total assets3,644,3312,865,9702,092,4281,576,3691,155,052
Total debt, including current maturities817,388666,070281,546151,55159,858
Total stockholders’ equity$2,030,900$1,668,222$1,350,300$1,053,354$816,922
\n (1) Working capital is defined as current assets minus current liabilities. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, which effects all entities that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. The amendments in this ASU cover such areas as the recognition of excess tax benefits and deficiencies, the classification of those excess tax benefits on the statement of cash flows, an accounting policy election for forfeitures, the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes and still qualify for equity classification and the classification of those taxes paid on the statement of cash flows. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016. This guidance can be applied either prospectively, retrospectively or using a modified retrospective transition method. Early adoption is permitted. The Company will not early adopt this ASU. The adoption of this guidance may have a material impact on the Company’s effective tax rate and income tax expense, depending in part on whether significant employee stock option exercises occur. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, which eliminates the diversity in practice related to the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows, by adding or clarifying guidance on eight specific cash flow issues. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not believe this ASU will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, which will require an entity to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset, other than inventory, when the transfer occurs. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted in the first interim period of 2017. Upon adoption, any deferred charge established upon an intra-company transfer would be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. At December 31, 2016, the Company had a deferred charge of $26.0 million with $1.8 million and $24.2 million recorded within Prepaid expenses and Other long term assets, respectively. The Company plans to adopt this ASU during the interim period ending March 31, 2017. Recently Adopted Accounting Standards In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, which requires costs incurred to issue debt to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the debt. This ASU is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted the provisions of this ASU in the first quarter of 2016, and reclassified approximately $2.9 million from “Other long term assets” to “Long term debt, net of current maturities” as of December 31, 2015.3. Property and Equipment, Net Property and equipment consisted of the following: \n
December 31,
(In thousands)20162015
Leasehold and tenant improvements$326,617$214,834
Furniture, fixtures and displays168,720132,736
Buildings47,21647,137
Software151,05999,309
Office equipment75,19650,399
Plant equipment124,140118,138
Land83,57417,628
Construction in progress204,362147,581
Other20,3834,002
Subtotal property and equipment1,201,267831,764
Accumulated depreciation-397,056-293,233
Property and equipment, net$804,211$538,531
"} {"answer": -0.14359, "question": "what is the increase in rent expense from 2008 to 2009?", "context": "
Year Ended December 31,
201120102009
Risk-free interest rate1.2%1.4%1.7%
Expected life (in years)3.83.43.8
Dividend yield—%—%—%
Expected volatility38%37%47%
\n Our computation of expected volatility for 2011 , 2010 and 2009 was based on a combination of historical and market-based implied volatility from traded options on our stock. Our computation of expected life was determined based on historical experience of similar awards, giving consideration to the contractual terms of the stock-based awards, vesting schedules and expectations of future employee behavior. The interest rate for periods within the contractual life of the award was based on the U. S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant. The estimation of awards that will ultimately vest requires judgment, and to the extent actual results or updated estimates differ from our current estimates, such amounts will be recorded as a cumulative adjustment in the period estimates are revised. We consider many factors when estimating forfeitures, including employee class and historical experience. Recent Accounting Pronouncements See “Note 1 - The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report, regarding the impact of certain recent accounting pronouncements on our consolidated financial statements. Item 7A: Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk Foreign Currency Exposure We have significant operations internationally that are denominated in foreign currencies, primarily the Euro, British pound, Korean won, Australian dollar and Canadian dollar, subjecting us to foreign currency risk which may adversely impact our financial results. We transact business in various foreign currencies and have significant international revenues as well as costs. In addition, we charge our international subsidiaries for their use of intellectual property and technology and for certain corporate services provided by eBay and by PayPal. Our cash flow, results of operations and certain of our intercompany balances that are exposed to foreign exchange rate fluctuations may differ materially from expectations and we may record significant gains or losses due to foreign currency fluctuations and related hedging activities. We have a foreign exchange exposure management program that aims to identify material foreign currency exposures, to manage these exposures, and to minimize the potential effects of currency fluctuations on our reported consolidated cash flows and results of operations through the purchase of foreign currency exchange contracts. These foreign currency exchange contracts are accounted for as derivative instruments. For additional details related to our derivative instruments, please see “Note 9 - Derivative Instruments” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Interest Rate Risk The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal while at the same time maximizing yields without significantly increasing risk. To achieve this objective, we maintain our portfolio of cash equivalents and short-term and long-term investments in a variety of available for sale securities, including money market funds and government and corporate securities. As of December 31, 2011 , approximately 56% of our total cash and investment portfolio was held in bank deposits and money market funds. As such, changes in interest rates will impact our interest income. In addition, we regularly issue new commercial paper notes to repay outstanding commercial paper notes as they mature, and those new commercial paper notes bear interest at rates prevailing at the time of issuance. Accordingly, changes in interest rates will impact interest expense or cost of net revenues. As of December 31, 2011 , we held no direct investments in auction rate securities, collateralized debt obligations, structured investment vehicles or mortgage-backed securities. For additional details related to our investment activities, please see \"Note 7 - Investments\" to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Investments in both fixed-rate and floating-rate interest-earning instruments carry varying degrees of interest rate risk. The fair market value of our fixed-rate securities may be adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates. In general, securities with longer maturities are subject to greater interest-rate risk than those with shorter maturities. While floating rate securities generally are subject to less interest-rate risk than fixed\u0002rate securities, floating-rate securities may produce less income than expected if interest rates decrease. Due in part to these factors, our investment income may fall short of expectations or we may suffer losses in principal if securities are sold that have declined in market value due to changes in interest rates. As of \n
Con EdisonCECONY
(Millions of Dollars)201520142013201520142013
CHANGE IN BENEFIT OBLIGATION
Benefit obligation at beginning of year$1,411$1,395$1,454$1,203$1,198$1,238
Service cost201923151518
Interest cost on accumulated postretirement benefit obligation516054435246
Amendments—-12————
Net actuarial loss/(gain)-10347-42-8528-20
Benefits paid and administrative expenses-127-134-136-117-125-126
Participant contributions353638343538
Medicare prescription subsidy——4——4
BENEFIT OBLIGATION AT END OF YEAR$1,287$1,411$1,395$1,093$1,203$1,198
CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year$1,084$1,113$1,047$950$977$922
Actual return on plan assets-659153-454134
Employer contributions679679
EGWP payments2812826117
Participant contributions353638343538
Benefits paid-153-143-142-142-134-133
FAIR VALUE OF PLAN ASSETS AT END OF YEAR$994$1,084$1,113$870$950$977
FUNDED STATUS$-293$-327$-282$-223$-253$-221
Unrecognized net loss$28$78$70$4$45$54
Unrecognized prior service costs-51-71-78-32-46-61
\n The decrease in the other postretirement benefit plan obligation (due primarily to increased discount rates) was the primary cause of the decreased liability for other postretirement benefits at Con Edison and CECONY of $34 million and $30 million, respectively, compared with December 31, 2014. For Con Edison, this decreased liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $30 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the Utilities consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and a credit to OCI of $1 million (net of taxes) for the unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses and O&R’s New Jersey subsidiary. For CECONY, the decrease in liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $27 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the company consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses. A portion of the unrecognized net losses and prior service costs for the other postretirement benefits, equal to $12 million and $(20) million, respectively, will be recognized from accumulated OCI and the regulatory asset into net periodic benefit cost over the next year for Con Edison. Included in these amounts are $10 million and $(14) million, respectively, for CECONY. Assumptions The actuarial assumptions were as follows: FIDELITY NATIONAL INFORMATION SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) Future minimum operating lease payments for leases with remaining terms greater than one year for each of the years in the five years ending December 31, 2015, and thereafter in the aggregate, are as follows (in millions): \n
2011$65.1
201247.6
201335.7
201427.8
201524.3
Thereafter78.1
Total$278.6
\n In addition, the Company has operating lease commitments relating to office equipment and computer hardware with annual lease payments of approximately $16.3 million per year which renew on a short-term basis. Rent expense incurred under all operating leases during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $116.1 million, $100.2 million and $117.0 million, respectively. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was rent expense of $2.0 million, $1.8 million and $17.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Data Processing and Maintenance Services Agreements. The Company has agreements with various vendors, which expire between 2011 and 2017, for portions of its computer data processing operations and related functions. The Company’s estimated aggregate contractual obligation remaining under these agreements was approximately $554.3 million as of December 31, 2010. However, this amount could be more or less depending on various factors such as the inflation rate, foreign exchange rates, the introduction of significant new technologies, or changes in the Company’s data processing needs. (16) Employee Benefit Plans Stock Purchase Plan FIS employees participate in an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). Eligible employees may voluntarily purchase, at current market prices, shares of FIS’ common stock through payroll deductions. Pursuant to the ESPP, employees may contribute an amount between 3% and 15% of their base salary and certain commissions. Shares purchased are allocated to employees based upon their contributions. The Company contributes varying matching amounts as specified in the ESPP. The Company recorded an expense of $14.3 million, $12.4 million and $14.3 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the ESPP. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.401(k) Profit Sharing Plan The Company’s employees are covered by a qualified 401(k) plan. Eligible employees may contribute up to 40% of their pretax annual compensation, up to the amount allowed pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code. The Company generally matches 50% of each dollar of employee contribution up to 6% of the employee’s total eligible compensation. The Company recorded expense of $23.1 million, $16.6 million and $18.5 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the 401(k) plan. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively The following table presents a reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow available to News Corporation:"} {"answer": 3.0, "question": "How many years does Notebooks/Mobile Devices stay higher than Netcomm Products?", "context": "ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The increase in cash provided by accounts payable-inventory financing was primarily due to a new vendor added to our previously existing inventory financing agreement. For a description of the inventory financing transactions impacting each period, see Note 6 (Inventory Financing Agreements) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. For a description of the debt transactions impacting each period, see Note 8 (Long-Term Debt) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. Net cash used in financing activities decreased $56.3 million in 2014 compared to 2013. The decrease was primarily driven by several debt refinancing transactions during each period and our July 2013 IPO, which generated net proceeds of $424.7 million after deducting underwriting discounts, expenses and transaction costs. The net impact of our debt transactions resulted in cash outflows of $145.9 million and $518.3 million during 2014 and 2013, respectively, as cash was used in each period to reduce our total long-term debt. For a description of the debt transactions impacting each period, see Note 8 (Long-Term Debt) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. Long-Term Debt and Financing Arrangements As of December 31, 2015, we had total indebtedness of $3.3 billion, of which $1.6 billion was secured indebtedness. At December 31, 2015, we were in compliance with the covenants under our various credit agreements and indentures. The amount of CDW’s restricted payment capacity under the Senior Secured Term Loan Facility was $679.7 million at December 31, 2015. For further details regarding our debt and each of the transactions described below, see Note 8 (Long-Term Debt) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the following events occurred with respect to our debt structure: ? On August 1, 2015, we consolidated Kelway’s Term Loan and Kelway’s Revolving Credit Facility. Kelway’s Term Loan is denominated in British Pounds. The Kelway Revolving Credit Facility is a multi-currency revolving credit facility under which Kelway is permitted to borrow an aggregate amount of ￡50.0 million ($73.7 million) as of December 31, 2015. ? On March 3, 2015, we completed the issuance of $525.0 million principal amount of 5.0% Senior Notes due 2023 which will mature on September 1, 2023. ? On March 3, 2015, we redeemed the remaining $503.9 million aggregate principal amount of the 8.5% Senior Notes due 2019, plus accrued and unpaid interest through the date of redemption, April 2, 2015. Inventory Financing Agreements We have entered into agreements with certain financial intermediaries to facilitate the purchase of inventory from various suppliers under certain terms and conditions. These amounts are classified separately as accounts payable-inventory financing on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. We do not incur any interest expense associated with these agreements as balances are paid when they are due. For further details, see Note 6 (Inventory Financing Agreements) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. Contractual Obligations We have future obligations under various contracts relating to debt and interest payments, operating leases and asset retirement obligations. Our estimated future payments, based on undiscounted amounts, under contractual obligations that existed as of December 31, 2015, are as follows: \n
Payments Due by Period
(in millions)Total< 1 year1-3 years4-5 years> 5 years
Term Loan-1$1,703.4$63.9$126.3$1,513.2$—
Kelway Term Loan-190.913.577.4——
Senior Notes due 2022-2852.036.072.072.0672.0
Senior Notes due 2023-2735.126.352.552.5603.8
Senior Notes due 2024-2859.731.663.363.3701.5
Operating leases-3143.222.541.737.141.9
Asset retirement obligations-41.80.80.50.30.2
Total$4,386.1$194.6$433.7$1,738.4$2,019.4
\n ES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 90 Selected Segment Financial Information Information regarding the Company’s segments for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 is as follows: \n
(in millions)CorporatePublicOtherHeadquartersTotal
2015:
Net sales$6,816.4$5,125.5$1,046.8$—$12,988.7
Income (loss) from operations470.1343.343.1-114.5742.0
Depreciation and amortization expense-96.0-43.7-24.4-63.3-227.4
2014:
Net sales$6,475.5$4,879.4$719.6$—$12,074.5
Income (loss) from operations439.8313.232.9-112.9673.0
Depreciation and amortization expense-96.3-43.8-8.8-59.0-207.9
2013:
Net sales$5,960.1$4,164.5$644.0$—$10,768.6
Income (loss) from operations(1)363.3246.527.2-128.4508.6
Depreciation and amortization expense-97.3-44.0-8.6-58.3-208.2
\n (1) Includes $75.0 million of IPO- and secondary-offering related expenses, as follows: Corporate $26.4 million; Public $14.4 million; Other $3.6 million; and Headquarters $30.6 million. For additional information relating to the IPO- and secondary-offering, see Note 10 (Stockholders’ Equity). Geographic Areas and Revenue Mix The Company does not have Net sales to customers outside of the U. S. exceeding 10% of the Company’s total Net sales in 2015, 2014 and 2013. The Company does not have long-lived assets located outside of the U. S. exceeding 10% of the Company’s total long-lived assets as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The following table presents net sales by major category for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013. Categories are based upon internal classifications. Amounts for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 have been reclassified for certain changes in individual product classifications to conform to the presentation for the year ended December 31, 2015. \n
Year EndedDecember 31, 2015Year EndedDecember 31, 2014Year EndedDecember 31, 2013
Dollars inMillionsPercentageof Total NetSalesDollars inMillionsPercentageof Total NetSalesDollars inMillionsPercentageof Total NetSales
Notebooks/Mobile Devices$2,539.419.6%$2,354.019.5%$1,696.515.8%
Netcomm Products1,914.914.71,613.313.41,482.713.8
Enterprise and Data Storage (Including Drives)1,065.28.21,024.28.5999.39.3
Other Hardware4,756.436.64,551.137.64,184.138.8
Software2,163.616.72,064.117.11,982.418.4
Services478.03.7371.93.1332.73.1
Other-171.20.595.90.890.90.8
Total Net sales$12,988.7100.0%$12,074.5100.0%$10,768.6100.0%
\n (1) Includes items such as delivery charges to customers and certain commission revenue.17. Supplemental Guarantor Information The 2022 Senior Notes, the 2023 Senior Notes and the 2024 Senior Notes are, and, prior to being redeemed in full, the 2019 Senior Notes, the 12.535% Senior Subordinated Exchange Notes due 2017, and the 8.0% Senior Secured Notes due 2018 were guaranteed by Parent and each of CDW LLC’s direct and indirect, 100% owned, domestic subsidiaries PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Market Information Our common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market since June 27, 2013 under the symbol “CDW. ” The following table sets forth the ranges of high and low sales prices per share of our common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market and the cash dividends per share of common stock declared for the two most recent fiscal years."} {"answer": 2012.0, "question": "In terms of Assets,which year is Fair Values of Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments on December 31 smaller than 100000 thousand?", "context": "R. ONEOK PARTNERS General Partner Interest - See Note B for discussion of the April 2006 acquisition of the additional general partner interest in ONEOK Partners. The limited partner units we received from ONEOK Partners were newly created Class B limited partner units. As of April 7, 2007, the Class B limited partner units are no longer subordinated to distributions on ONEOK Partners’ common units and generally have the same voting rights as the common units and are entitled to receive increased quarterly distributions and distributions on liquidation equal to 110 percent of the distributions paid with respect to the common units. On June 21, 2007, we, as the sole holder of ONEOK Partners Class B limited partner units, waived our right to receive the increased quarterly distributions on the Class B units for the period April 7, 2007, through December 31, 2007, and continuing thereafter until we give ONEOK Partners no less than 90 days advance notice that we have withdrawn our waiver. Any such withdrawal of the waiver will be effective with respect to any distribution on the Class B units declared or paid on or after 90 days following delivery of the notice. Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement and in conjunction with the issuance of additional common units by ONEOK Partners, we, as the general partner, are required to make equity contributions in order to maintain our representative general partner interest. Our investment in ONEOK Partners is shown in the table below for the periods presented. \n
December 31, 2007December 31, 2006December 31, 2005
General partner interest2.00%2.00%1.65%
Limited partner interest43.70% (a)43.70% (a)1.05% (b)
Total ownership interest45.70%45.70%2.70%
\n (a) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units and 36.5 million Class B units. (b) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units. Cash Distributions - Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement, distributions are made to the partners with respect to each calendar quarter in an amount equal to 100 percent of available cash. Available cash generally consists of all cash receipts adjusted for cash disbursements and net changes to cash reserves. Available cash will generally be distributed 98 percent to limited partners and 2 percent to the general partner. As an incentive, the general partner’s percentage interest in quarterly distributions is increased after certain specified target levels are met. Under the incentive distribution provisions, the general partner receives: ?15 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.605 per unit, ?25 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.715 per unit, and ?50 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.935 per unit. ONEOK Partners’ income is allocated to the general and limited partners in accordance with their respective partnership ownership percentages. The effect of any incremental income allocations for incentive distributions that are allocated to the general partner is calculated after the income allocation for the general partner’s partnership interest and before the income allocation to the limited partners. The following table shows ONEOK Partners’ general partner and incentive distributions related to the periods indicated. \n
Years Ended December 31,
2007 2006 2005
(Thousands of dollars)
General partner distributions$7,842$6,228$2,632
Incentive distributions50,62731,1026,568
Total distributions from ONEOK Partners$58,469$37,330$9,200
\n The quarterly distributions paid by ONEOK Partners to limited partners in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2007 were $0.98 per unit, $0.99 per unit, $1.00 per unit, and $1.01 per unit, respectively. gas. The use of these derivative instruments and the associated recovery of these costs have been approved by the OCC, KCC and regulatory authorities in certain of our Texas jurisdictions. ONEOK entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. ONEOK had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $500 million at December 31, 2011. In January 2012, ONEOK entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $200 million. Upon issuance in January 2012 of our $700 million, 4.25-percent senior notes due 2022, ONEOK settled all $700 million of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $44.1 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. ONEOK Partners entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. At December 31, 2011, ONEOK Partners had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $750 million. During the year ended December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $650 million. Upon ONEOK Partners’ debt issuance in September 2012, ONEOK Partners settled $1 billion of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $124.9 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. At December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners’ remaining interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $400 million have settlement dates greater than 12 months. Fair Values of Derivative Instruments - The following table sets forth the fair values of our derivative instruments for our continuing and discontinued operations for the periods indicated: \n
December 31, 2012 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)December 31, 2011 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)
Assets(Liabilities)Assets(Liabilities)
(Thousands of dollars)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments
Commodity contracts
Financial contracts$47,516(b)$-4,885$184,184(c)$-73,346
Physical contracts56-12662-344
Interest-rate contracts10,923——-128,666
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments58,495-5,011184,246-202,356
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
Commodity contracts
Nontrading instruments
Financial contracts24,970-25,009295,948-323,170
Physical contracts4,059-15338,733-1,665
Trading instruments
Financial contracts15,358-14,192111,920-110,050
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments44,387-39,354446,601-434,885
Total derivatives$102,882$-44,365$630,847$-637,241
\n (a) - Included on a net basis in energy marketing and risk-management assets and liabilities, other assets and other deferred credits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. (b) - Includes $16.9 million of derivative net assets and ineffectiveness associated with cash flow hedges of inventory related to certain financial contracts that were used to hedge forecasted purchases and sales of natural gas. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). (c) - Includes $88.9 million of derivative assets associated with cash flow hedges of inventory that were adjusted to reflect the lower of cost or market value. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). guidance to amend or clarify portions of the final rule in 2013. We anticipate that if the EPA issues additional responses, amendments and/or policy guidance on the final rule, it will reduce the anticipated capital, operations and maintenance costs resulting from the regulation. Generally, the NSPS final rule will require expenditures for updated emissions controls, monitoring and record-keeping requirements at affected facilities in the crude-oil and natural gas industry. We do not expect these expenditures will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. CERCLA - The federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also commonly known as Superfund (CERCLA), imposes strict, joint and several liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original act, on certain classes of “persons” (defined under CERCLA) that caused and/or contributed to the release of a hazardous substance into the environment. These persons include but are not limited to the owner or operator of a facility where the release occurred and/or companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substances found at the facility. Under CERCLA, these persons may be liable for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances released into the environment, damages to natural resources and the costs of certain health studies. Neither we nor ONEOK Partners expect our respective responsibilities under CERCLA, for this facility and any other, will have a material impact on our respective results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Chemical Site Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security released an interim rule in April 2007 that requires companies to provide reports on sites where certain chemicals, including many hydrocarbon products, are stored. We completed the Homeland Security assessments, and our facilities subsequently were assigned one of four risk-based tiers ranging from high (Tier 1) to low (Tier 4) risk, or not tiered at all due to low risk. To date, four of our facilities have been given a Tier 4 rating. Facilities receiving a Tier 4 rating are required to complete Site Security Plans and possible physical security enhancements. We do not expect the Site Security Plans and possible security enhancements cost will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Pipeline Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration and the DOT have completed a review and inspection of our “critical facilities” and identified no material security issues. Also, the Transportation Security Administration has released new pipeline security guidelines that include broader definitions for the determination of pipeline “critical facilities. ” We have reviewed our pipeline facilities according to the new guideline requirements, and there have been no material changes required to date. Environmental Footprint - Our environmental and climate change strategy focuses on taking steps to minimize the impact of our operations on the environment. These strategies include: (i) developing and maintaining an accurate greenhouse gas emissions inventory according to current rules issued by the EPA; (ii) improving the efficiency of our various pipelines, natural gas processing facilities and natural gas liquids fractionation facilities; (iii) following developing technologies for emission control and the capture of carbon dioxide to keep it from reaching the atmosphere; and (iv) utilizing practices to reduce the loss of methane from our facilities. We participate in the EPA’s Natural Gas STAR Program to voluntarily reduce methane emissions. We continue to focus on maintaining low rates of lost-and-unaccounted-for natural gas through expanded implementation of best practices to limit the release of natural gas during pipeline and facility maintenance and operations. EMPLOYEESWe employed 4,859 people at January 31, 2013, including 705 people at Kansas Gas Service who are subject to collective bargaining agreements. The following table sets forth our contracts with collective bargaining units at January 31, 2013:"} {"answer": 2795.0, "question": "What is the total amount of Other assets, including investment in TradeHelm, and Compensation expense of Year Ended December 31, 2005 ?", "context": "MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) (in thousands, except share and per share amounts) Had compensation expense for employee stock-based awards been determined based on the fair value at grant date consistent with SFAS No.123(R), the Company’s Net income (loss) for the year would have been increased or decreased to the pro forma amounts indicated below: \n
Year Ended December 31,
2005 20042003
Net income
As reported$8,142$57,587$4,212
Compensation expense1,3661,9651,646
Pro forma$6,776$55,622$2,566
Basic net income (loss) per common share$0.29$6.76$-2.20
Diluted net income (loss) per common share$0.23$1.88$-2.20
Basic net income (loss) per common share — pro forma$0.24$6.48$-2.70
Diluted net income (loss) per common share — pro forma$0.19$1.82$-2.70
\n Basic and diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) in 2003 includes the effect of dividends accrued on our redeemable convertible preferred stock. In 2003, securities that could potentially dilute basic EPS in the future were not included in the computation of diluted EPS, because to do so would have been anti-dilutive. See Note 12, “Earnings Per Share”. Revenue Recognition The majority of the Company’s revenues are derived from commissions for trades executed on the electronic trading platform that are billed to its broker-dealer clients on a monthly basis. The Company also derives revenues from information and user access fees, license fees, interest and other income. Commissions are generally calculated as a percentage of the notional dollar volume of bonds traded on the electronic trading platform and vary based on the type and maturity of the bond traded. Under the transaction fee plans, bonds that are more actively traded or that have shorter maturities are generally charged lower commissions, while bonds that are less actively traded or that have longer maturities generally command higher commissions. Commissions are recorded on a trade date basis. The Company’s standard fee schedule for U. S. high-grade corporate bonds was revised in August 2003 to provide lower average transaction commissions for dealers who transacted higher U. S. high-grade volumes through the platform, while at the same time providing an element of fixed commissions over the two-year term of the plans. One of the revised plans that was suited for the Company’s most active broker-dealer clients included a fee cap that limited the potential growth in U. S. high-grade revenue. The fee caps were set to take effect at volume levels significantly above those being transacted at the time the revised transaction fee plans were introduced. Most broker-dealer clients entered into fee arrangements with respect to the trading of U. S. high-grade corporate bonds that included both a fixed component and a variable component. These agreements had been scheduled to expire during the third quarter of 2005. On June 1, 2005, the Company introduced a new fee plan primarily for secondary market transactions in U. S. high-grade corporate bonds executed on its electronic trading platform. As of December 31, 2005, 17 of the Company’s U. S. high-grade broker-dealer clients have signed new two-year agreements that supersede the fee arrangements that were entered into with many of its broker-dealer clients during the third quarter of 2003. The new plan incorporates higher fixed monthly fees and lower variable fees for broker\u0002dealer clients than the previous U. S. high-grade corporate transaction fee plans described above, and incorporates volume incentives to broker-dealer clients that are designed to increase the volume of transactions effected on the Company’s The U. S. high-grade average variable transaction fee per million increased from $84 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 due to the longer maturity of trades executed on the platform, for which we charge higher commissions. The Eurobond average variable transaction fee per million decreased from $138 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $112 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008, principally from the introduction of the new European high-grade fee plan. Other average variable transaction fee per million increased from $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $158 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 primarily due to a higher percentage of volume in products that carry higher fees per million, principally high-yield. Technology Products and Services. Technology products and services revenues increased by $7.8 million to $8.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase was primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. Information and User Access Fees. Information and user access fees increased by $0.1 million or 2.5% to $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Investment Income. Investment income decreased by $1.8 million or 33.7% to $3.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This decrease was primarily due to lower interest rates. Other. Other revenues decreased by $0.1 million or 4.4% to $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Expenses Our expenses for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the resulting dollar and percentage changes, were as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,
20082007
% of% of$%
$Revenues $RevenuesChangeChange
($ in thousands)
Expenses
Employee compensation and benefits$43,81047.1%$43,05146.0%$7591.8%
Depreciation and amortization7,8798.57,1707.77099.9
Technology and communications8,3118.97,4638.084811.4
Professional and consulting fees8,1718.87,6398.25327.0
Occupancy2,8913.13,2753.5-384-11.7
Marketing and advertising3,0323.31,9052.01,12759.2
General and administrative6,1576.65,8896.32684.6
Total expenses$80,25186.2%$76,39281.6%$3,8595.1%
\n $43.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $43.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This increase was primarily attributable to higher wages of $2.4 million, severance costs of $1.0 million and stock\u0002based compensation expense of $1.4 million, offset by reduced incentive compensation of $3.6 million. The higher wages were primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. The total number of employees increased to 185 as of December 31, 2008 from 182 as of December 31, 2007. As a percentage of total revenues, employee compensation and benefits expense increased to 47.1% for the year ended December 31, 2008 from 46.0% for the year ended December 31, 2007. Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $0.7 million or 9.9% to $7.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $7.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. An increase in amortization of intangible assets of $1.3 million and the TWS impairment charge of $0.7 million were offset by a decline in depreciation and amortization of hardware and software development costs of $1.3 million. MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) of this standard had no material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition and Consolidated Statements of Operations. Reclassifications Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior years’ financial statements in order to conform to the current year presentation. Such reclassifications had no effect on previously reported net income. On March 5, 2008, the Company acquired all of the outstanding capital stock of Greenline Financial Technologies, Inc. (“Greenline”), an Illinois-based provider of integration, testing and management solutions for FIX-related products and services designed to optimize electronic trading of fixed-income, equity and other exchange-based products, and approximately ten percent of the outstanding capital stock of TradeHelm, Inc. , a Delaware corporation that was spun-out from Greenline immediately prior to the acquisition. The acquisition of Greenline broadens the range of technology services that the Company offers to institutional financial markets, provides an expansion of the Company’s client base, including global exchanges and hedge funds, and further diversifies the Company’s revenues beyond the core electronic credit trading products. The results of operations of Greenline are included in the Consolidated Financial Statements from the date of the acquisition. The aggregate consideration for the Greenline acquisition was $41.1 million, comprised of $34.7 million in cash, 725,923 shares of common stock valued at $5.8 million and $0.6 million of acquisition-related costs. In addition, the sellers were eligible to receive up to an aggregate of $3.0 million in cash, subject to Greenline attaining certain earn\u0002out targets in 2008 and 2009. A total of $1.4 million was paid to the sellers in 2009 based on the 2008 earn-out target, bringing the aggregate consideration to $42.4 million. The 2009 earn-out target was not met. A total of $2.0 million of the purchase price, which had been deposited into escrow accounts to satisfy potential indemnity claims, was distributed to the sellers in March 2009. The shares of common stock issued to each selling shareholder of Greenline were released in two equal installments on December 20, 2008 and December 20, 2009, respectively. The value ascribed to the shares was discounted from the market value to reflect the non-marketability of such shares during the restriction period. The purchase price allocation is as follows (in thousands): \n
Cash$6,406
Accounts receivable2,139
Amortizable intangibles8,330
Goodwill29,405
Deferred tax assets, net3,410
Other assets, including investment in TradeHelm1,429
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and deferred revenue-8,701
Total purchase price$42,418
\n The amortizable intangibles include $3.2 million of acquired technology, $3.3 million of customer relationships, $1.3 million of non-competition agreements and $0.5 million of tradenames. Useful lives of ten years and five years have been assigned to the customer relationships intangible and all other amortizable intangibles, respectively. The identifiable intangible assets and goodwill are not deductible for tax purposes. The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial information reflects the results of operations of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, as if the acquisition of Greenline had occurred as of the beginning of the period presented, after giving effect to certain purchase accounting adjustments. These pro forma results are not necessarily indicative of what the Company’s operating results would have been had the acquisition actually taken place as of the beginning of the earliest period presented. The pro forma financial information"} {"answer": 2015.0, "question": "Which year is As of January 1 for Number of Awards the least?", "context": "damages to natural resources allegedly caused by the discharge of hazardous substances from two former waste disposal sites in New Jersey. During the fourth quarter, the Company negotiated a settlement of New Jersey’s claims. Under the terms of the settlement, the company will transfer to the State of New Jersey 150 acres of undeveloped land with groundwater recharge potential, which the Company acquired for purposes of the settlement, and will pay the state’s attorneys’ fees. Notice of the settlement was published for public comment in December 2007, and no objections were received. As a result, the Company and the State of New Jersey have signed the formal settlement agreement pursuant to which the Company will transfer title to the property and will be dismissed from the lawsuit, which will continue against the codefendants. Accrued Liabilities and Insurance Receivables Related to Legal Proceedings The Company complies with the requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” and related guidance, and records liabilities for legal proceedings in those instances where it can reasonably estimate the amount of the loss and where liability is probable. Where the reasonable estimate of the probable loss is a range, the Company records the most likely estimate of the loss, or the low end of the range if there is no one best estimate. The Company either discloses the amount of a possible loss or range of loss in excess of established reserves if estimable, or states that such an estimate cannot be made. For those insured matters where the Company has taken a reserve, the Company also records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover under the Company’s insurance program. For those insured matters where the Company has not taken a reserve because the liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, but where the Company has incurred an expense in defending itself, the Company records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover for the expense incurred. The Company discloses significant legal proceedings even where liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, if the Company believes there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred. Because litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur, there can be no certainty that the Company may not ultimately incur charges in excess of presently recorded liabilities. A future adverse ruling, settlement, or unfavorable development could result in future charges that could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations or cash flows in the period in which they are recorded. The Company currently believes that such future charges, if any, would not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position of the Company, taking into account its significant available insurance coverage. Based on experience and developments, the Company periodically reexamines its estimates of probable liabilities and associated expenses and receivables, and whether it is able to estimate a liability previously determined to be not estimable and/or not probable. Where appropriate, the Company makes additions to or adjustments of its estimated liabilities. As a result, the current estimates of the potential impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the legal proceedings and claims pending against the Company could change in the future. The Company estimates insurance receivables based on an analysis of its numerous policies, including their exclusions, pertinent case law interpreting comparable policies, its experience with similar claims, and assessment of the nature of the claim, and records an amount it has concluded is likely to be recovered. The following table shows the major categories of on-going litigation, environmental remediation and other environmental liabilities for which the Company has been able to estimate its probable liability and for which the Company has taken reserves and the related insurance receivables: \n
At December 31 (Millions)200720062005
Breast implant liabilities$1$4$7
Breast implant receivables6493130
Respirator mask/asbestos liabilities121181210
Respirator mask/asbestos receivables332380447
Environmental remediation liabilities374430
Environmental remediation receivables151515
Other environmental liabilities147148
\n For those significant pending legal proceedings that do not appear in the table and that are not the subject of pending settlement agreements, the Company has determined that liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, and the Company is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss at this time. The amounts in the preceding table with respect to breast implant and environmental remediation represent the Company’s best estimate of the respective liabilities. The Company does not believe that there is any single best estimate of the respirator/mask/asbestos liability or the other environmental liabilities shown above, nor that it can reliably estimate the amount or range of amounts by which those liabilities may exceed the reserves the Company has established. one year volatility, the median of the term of the expected life rolling volatility, the median of the most recent term of the expected life volatility of 3M stock, and the implied volatility on the grant date. The expected term assumption is based on the weighted average of historical grants. Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units The following table summarizes restricted stock and restricted stock unit activity for the years ended December 31: \n
201520142013
Number of AwardsWeighted Average Grant Date Fair ValueNumber of AwardsWeighted Average Grant Date Fair ValueNumber of AwardsWeighted Average Grant Date Fair Value
Nonvested balance —
As of January 12,817,786$104.413,105,361$92.313,261,562$85.17
Granted
Annual671,204165.86798,615126.79946,774101.57
Other26,886156.9478,252152.7444,401111.19
Vested-1,010,61289.99-1,100,67590.37-1,100,09579.93
Forfeited-64,176118.99-63,76797.23-47,28190.82
As of December 312,441,088$127.472,817,786$104.413,105,361$92.31
\n As of December 31, 2015, there was $84 million of compensation expense that has yet to be recognized related to non\u0002vested restricted stock and restricted stock units. This expense is expected to be recognized over the remaining weighted\u0002average vesting period of 24 months. The total fair value of restricted stock and restricted stock units that vested during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $166 million, $145 million and $114 million, respectively. The Company’s actual tax benefits realized for the tax deductions related to the vesting of restricted stock and restricted stock units for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $62 million, $54 million and $43 million, respectively. Restricted stock units granted under the 3M 2008 Long-Term Incentive Plan generally vest three years following the grant date assuming continued employment. Dividend equivalents equal to the dividends payable on the same number of shares of 3M common stock accrue on these restricted stock units during the vesting period, although no dividend equivalents are paid on any of these restricted stock units that are forfeited prior to the vesting date. Dividends are paid out in cash at the vest date on restricted stock units, except for performance shares which do not earn dividends. Since the rights to dividends are forfeitable, there is no impact on basic earnings per share calculations. Weighted average restricted stock unit shares outstanding are included in the computation of diluted earnings per share. Performance Shares Instead of restricted stock units, the Company makes annual grants of performance shares to members of its executive management. The 2015 performance criteria for these performance shares (organic volume growth, return on invested capital, free cash flow conversion, and earnings per share growth) were selected because the Company believes that they are important drivers of long-term stockholder value. The number of shares of 3M common stock that could actually be delivered at the end of the three-year performance period may be anywhere from 0% to 200% of each performance share granted, depending on the performance of the Company during such performance period. Non-substantive vesting requires that expense for the performance shares be recognized over one or three years depending on when each individual became a 3M executive. Performance shares do not accrue dividends during the performance period. Therefore, the grant date fair value is determined by reducing the closing stock price on the date of grant by the net present value of dividends during the performance period. Pension and Postretirement Obligations: 3M has various company-sponsored retirement plans covering substantially all U. S. employees and many employees outside the United States. The primary U. S. defined-benefit pension plan was closed to new participants effective January 1, 2009. The Company accounts for its defined benefit pension and postretirement health care and life insurance benefit plans in accordance with Accounting Standard Codification (ASC) 715, Compensation — Retirement Benefits, in measuring plan assets and benefit obligations and in determining the amount of net periodic benefit cost. ASC 715 requires employers to recognize the underfunded or overfunded status of a defined benefit pension or postretirement plan as an asset or liability in its statement of financial position and recognize changes in the funded status in the year in which the changes occur through accumulated other comprehensive income, which is a component of stockholders’ equity. While the company believes the valuation methods used to determine the fair value of plan assets are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date. See Note 11 for additional discussion of actuarial assumptions used in determining pension and postretirement health care liabilities and expenses. Pension benefits associated with these plans are generally based primarily on each participant’s years of service, compensation, and age at retirement or termination. The benefit obligation represents the present value of the benefits that employees are entitled to in the future for services already rendered as of the measurement date. The Company measures the present value of these future benefits by projecting benefit payment cash flows for each future period and discounting these cash flows back to the December 31 measurement date, using the yields of a portfolio of high quality, fixed-income debt instruments that would produce cash flows sufficient in timing and amount to settle projected future benefits. Historically, the single aggregated discount rate used for each plan’s benefit obligation was also used for the calculation of all net periodic benefit costs, including the measurement of the service and interest costs. Beginning in 2016, 3M changed the method used to estimate the service and interest cost components of the net periodic pension and other postretirement benefit costs. The new method measures service cost and interest cost separately using the spot yield curve approach applied to each corresponding obligation. Service costs are determined based on duration-specific spot rates applied to the service cost cash flows. The interest cost calculation is determined by applying duration-specific spot rates to the year-by-year projected benefit payments. The spot yield curve approach does not affect the measurement of the total benefit obligations as the change in service and interest costs offset in the actuarial gains and losses recorded in other comprehensive income. The Company changed to the new method to provide a more precise measure of service and interest costs by improving the correlation between the projected benefit cash flows and the discrete spot yield curve rates. The Company accounted for this change as a change in estimate prospectively beginning in the first quarter of 2016. As a result of the change to the spot yield curve approach, 2016 defined benefit pension and postretirement net periodic benefit cost is expected to decrease by $180 million. Including this $180 million, 3M expects global defined benefit pension and postretirement expense in 2016 (before settlements, curtailments, special termination benefits and other) to decrease by approximately $320 million pre-tax when compared to 2015. Using this methodology, the Company determined discount rates for its plans as follow: \n
U.S. Qualified PensionInternational Pension (weighted average)U.S. Postretirement Medical
December 31, 2014 Liability and 2015 Net Periodic Benefit Cost:
Single discount rate4.10%3.11%4.07%
December 31, 2015 Liability:
Benefit obligation4.47%3.12%4.32%
2016 Net Periodic Benefit Cost Components:
Service cost4.72%2.84%4.60%
Interest cost3.77%2.72%3.44%
\n Another significant element in determining the Company’s pension expense in accordance with ASC 715 is the expected return on plan assets, which is based on historical results for similar allocations among asset classes. For the primary U. S. qualified pension plan, the expected long-term rate of return on an annualized basis for 2016 is 7.50%, 0.25% lower than 2015. Refer to Note 11 for information on how the 2015 rate was determined. Return on assets assumptions for"} {"answer": 0.0565, "question": "What's the growth rate of Group specialty in 2011? (in %)", "context": "Humana Inc. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) not be estimated based on observable market prices, and as such, unobservable inputs were used. For auction rate securities, valuation methodologies include consideration of the quality of the sector and issuer, underlying collateral, underlying final maturity dates, and liquidity. Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements There are no recently issued accounting standards that apply to us or that will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial condition, or cash flows.3. ACQUISITIONS On December 21, 2012, we acquired Metropolitan Health Networks, Inc. , or Metropolitan, a Medical Services Organization, or MSO, that coordinates medical care for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries and Medicaid recipients, primarily in Florida. We paid $11.25 per share in cash to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Metropolitan and repaid all outstanding debt of Metropolitan for a transaction value of $851 million, plus transaction expenses. The preliminary fair values of Metropolitan’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed at the date of the acquisition are summarized as follows: \n
Metropolitan (in millions)
Cash and cash equivalents$49
Receivables, net28
Other current assets40
Property and equipment22
Goodwill569
Other intangible assets263
Other long-term assets1
Total assets acquired972
Current liabilities-22
Other long-term liabilities-99
Total liabilities assumed-121
Net assets acquired$851
\n The goodwill was assigned to the Health and Well-Being Services segment and is not deductible for tax purposes. The other intangible assets, which primarily consist of customer contracts and trade names, have a weighted average useful life of 8.4 years. On October 29, 2012, we acquired a noncontrolling equity interest in MCCI Holdings, LLC, or MCCI, a privately held MSO headquartered in Miami, Florida that coordinates medical care for Medicare Advantage and Medicaid beneficiaries primarily in Florida and Texas. The Metropolitan and MCCI transactions are expected to provide us with components of a successful integrated care delivery model that has demonstrated scalability to new markets. A substantial portion of the revenues for both Metropolitan and MCCI are derived from services provided to Humana Medicare Advantage members under capitation contracts with our health plans. In addition, Metropolitan and MCCI provide services to Medicare Advantage and Medicaid members under capitation contracts with third party health plans. Under these capitation agreements with Humana and third party health plans, Metropolitan and MCCI assume financial risk associated with these Medicare Advantage and Medicaid members. Humana Inc. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) 17. EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH LONG-DURATION INSURANCE PRODUCTS Premiums associated with our long-duration insurance products accounted for approximately 2% of our consolidated premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2012. We use long-duration accounting for products such as long-term care, life insurance, annuities, and certain health and other supplemental policies sold to individuals because they are expected to remain in force for an extended period beyond one year and because premium received in the earlier years is intended to pay anticipated benefits to be incurred in future years. As a result, we defer policy acquisition costs, primarily consisting of commissions, and amortize them over the estimated life of the policies in proportion to premiums earned. In addition, we establish reserves for future policy benefits in recognition of the fact that some of the premium received in the earlier years is intended to pay anticipated benefits to be incurred in future years. These reserves are recognized on a net level premium method based on interest rates, mortality, morbidity, withdrawal and maintenance expense assumptions from published actuarial tables, modified based upon actual experience. The assumptions used to determine the liability for future policy benefits are established and locked in at the time each contract is acquired and would only change if our expected future experience deteriorated to the point that the level of the liability, together with the present value of future gross premiums, are not adequate to provide for future expected policy benefits. Long-term care policies provide for long-duration coverage and, therefore, our actual claims experience will emerge many years after assumptions have been established. The risk of a deviation of the actual interest rates, morbidity rates, and mortality rates from those assumed in our reserves are particularly significant to our closed block of long-term care policies. We monitor the loss experience of these long-term care policies and, when necessary, apply for premium rate increases through a regulatory filing and approval process in the jurisdictions in which such products were sold. To the extent premium rate increases and/ or loss experience vary from our acquisition date assumptions, future adjustments to reserves could be required. The table below presents deferred acquisition costs and future policy benefits payable associated with our long-duration insurance products for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. \n
20122011
Deferred acquisition costsFuture policy benefits payable Deferred acquisition costsFuture policy benefits payable
(in millions)
Other long-term assets$149$0$114$0
Trade accounts payable and accrued expenses0-630-58
Long-term liabilities0-1,8580-1,663
Total asset (liability)$149$-1,921$114$-1,721
\n In addition, future policy benefits payable include amounts of $220 million at December 31, 2012 and $224 million at December 31, 2011 which are subject to 100% coinsurance agreements as more fully described in Note 18. Benefits expense associated with future policy benefits payable was $136 million in 2012, $114 million in 2011, and $266 million in 2010. Benefits expense for 2012 and 2010 included net charges of $29 million and $139 million, respectively, associated with our long-term care policies discussed further below. Amortization of deferred acquisition costs included in operating costs was $44 million in 2012, $34 million in 2011, and $198 million in 2010. Amortization expense for 2010 included a write-down of deferred acquisition costs of $147 million discussed further below. \n
Change
20112010DollarsPercentage
(in millions)
Premiums and Services Revenue:
Premiums:
Fully-insured commercial group$4,782$5,169$-387-7.5%
Group Medicare Advantage3,1523,0211314.3%
Group Medicare stand-alone PDP85360.0%
Total group Medicare3,1603,0261344.4%
Group specialty935885505.6%
Total premiums8,8779,080-203-2.2%
Services356395-39-9.9%
Total premiums and services revenue$9,233$9,475$-242-2.6%
Income before income taxes$242$288$-46-16.0%
Benefit ratio82.4%82.4%0.0%
Operating cost ratio17.8%17.5%0.3%
\n Pretax Results ? Employer Group segment pretax income decreased $46 million, or 16%, to $242 million in 2011 primarily due to the impact of minimum benefit ratios required under the Health Insurance Reform Legislation which became effective in 2011. Enrollment ? Fully-insured commercial group medical membership decreased 72,000 members, or 5.7%, from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2011 primarily due to continued pricing discipline in a highly competitive environment for large group business partially offset by small group business membership gains. ? Group ASO commercial medical membership decreased 161,300 members, or 11.1%, from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2011 primarily due to continued pricing discipline in a highly competitive environment for self-funded accounts. Premiums revenue ? Employer Group segment premiums decreased by $203 million, or 2.2%, from 2010 to $8.9 billion for 2011 primarily due to lower average commercial group medical membership year-over-year and rebates associated with minimum benefit ratios required under the Health Insurance Reform Legislation which became effective in 2011, partially offset by an increase in group Medicare Advantage membership. Rebates result in the recognition of lower premiums revenue, as amounts are set aside for payments to commercial customers during the following year. Benefits expense ? The Employer Group segment benefit ratio of 82.4% for 2011 was unchanged from 2010 due to offsetting factors. Factors increasing the 2011 ratio compared to the 2010 ratio include growth in our group Medicare Advantage products which generally carry a higher benefit ratio than our fully-insured commercial group products and the effect of rebates accrued in 2011 associated with the minimum benefit ratios required under the Health Insurance Reform Legislation. Factors decreasing the 2011 ratio compared to the 2010 ratio include the beneficial effect of higher favorable prior-period medical claims reserve development in 2011 versus 2010 and lower utilization of benefits in our commercial group"} {"answer": 6.48512, "question": "what was the ratio of the purchase in december 2012 to the purchase in january 2013", "context": "AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The following table sets forth basic and diluted income from continuing operations per common share computational data for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 (in thousands, except per share data): \n
2012 2011 2010
Income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation$637,283$396,462$372,906
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding394,772395,711401,152
Dilutive securities4,5154,4842,920
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding399,287400,195404,072
Basic income from continuing operations attributable to
American Tower Corporation per common share$1.61$1.00$0.93
Diluted income from continuing operations attributable to
American Tower Corporation per common share$1.60$0.99$0.92
\n For the year ended December 31, 2010, the weighted average number of common shares outstanding excludes shares issuable upon conversion of the Company’s convertible notes of 0.1 million. For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, the diluted weighted average number of common shares outstanding excludes shares issuable upon exercise of the Company’s stock options and share based awards of 1.0 million, 0.9 million and 1.1 million, respectively, as the effect would be anti-dilutive.18. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Litigation—The Company periodically becomes involved in various claims, lawsuits and proceedings that are incidental to its business. In the opinion of Company management, after consultation with counsel, there are no matters currently pending that would, in the event of an adverse outcome, materially impact the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity. SEC Subpoena—On June 2, 2011, the Company received a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) requesting certain documents from 2007 through the date of the subpoena, including in particular documents related to our tax accounting and reporting. On November 6, 2012, the SEC notified the Company that the SEC’s investigation has been completed. The SEC indicated that it does not intend to recommend any enforcement action against the Company. Mexico Litigation—One of the Company’s subsidiaries, SpectraSite Communications, Inc. (“SCI “), a predecessor in interest by conversion to SpectraSite Communications, LLC, was involved in a lawsuit brought in Mexico against a former Mexican subsidiary of SCI (the subsidiary of SCI was sold in 2002, prior to the Company’s acquisition of SCI in 2005). The lawsuit concerns a terminated tower construction contract and related agreements with a wireless carrier in Mexico. The primary issue for the Company is whether SCI itself can be found liable to the Mexican carrier. The trial and lower appellate courts initially found that SCI had no such liability in part because Mexican courts did not have the necessary jurisdiction over SCI. In September 2010, following several decisions by Mexican appellate courts, including the Supreme Court of Mexico, and related appeals by both parties, an intermediate appellate court issued a new decision that would have, if enforceable, re-imposed liability on SCI if the primary defendant in the case were unable to satisfy the judgment. In its decision, the intermediate appellate court identified potential damages, in the form of potential statutory interest, of approximately $6.7 million as of that date. On October 14, 2010, the Company filed a new constitutional appeal to again dispute the decision, which was rejected on January 24, 2012. The case was Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities During the three months ended December 31, 2012, we repurchased 619,314 shares of our common stock for an aggregate of approximately $46.0 million, including commissions and fees, pursuant to our publicly announced stock repurchase program, as follows: \n
PeriodTotal Number of Shares Purchased-1Average Price Paid per Share-2Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans orProgramsApproximate Dollar Value of Shares that May Yet be Purchased Under the Plans orPrograms (in millions)
October 201227,524$72.6227,524$1,300.1
November 2012489,390$74.22489,390$1,263.7
December 2012102,400$74.83102,400$1,256.1
Total Fourth Quarter619,314$74.25619,314$1,256.1
\n (1) Repurchases made pursuant to the $1.5 billion stock repurchase program approved by our Board of Directors in March 2011 (the “2011 Buyback”). Under this program, our management is authorized to purchase shares from time to time through open market purchases or privately negotiated transactions at prevailing prices as permitted by securities laws and other legal requirements, and subject to market conditions and other factors. To facilitate repurchases, we make purchases pursuant to trading plans under Rule 10b5-1 of the Exchange Act, which allows us to repurchase shares during periods when we otherwise might be prevented from doing so under insider trading laws or because of self-imposed trading blackout periods. This program may be discontinued at any time. (2) Average price per share is calculated using the aggregate price, excluding commissions and fees. We continued to repurchase shares of our common stock pursuant to our 2011 Buyback subsequent to December 31, 2012. Between January 1, 2013 and January 21, 2013, we repurchased an additional 15,790 shares of our common stock for an aggregate of $1.2 million, including commissions and fees, pursuant to the 2011 Buyback. As a result, as of January 21, 2013, we had repurchased a total of approximately 4.3 million shares of our common stock under the 2011 Buyback for an aggregate of $245.2 million, including commissions and fees. We expect to continue to manage the pacing of the remaining $1.3 billion under the 2011 Buyback in response to general market conditions and other relevant factors. \n
As of December 31,
2012 2011 2010 2009 2008
(In thousands)
Balance Sheet Data:-8
Cash and cash equivalents (including restricted cash)(9)$437,934$372,406$959,935$295,129$194,943
Property and equipment, net5,789,9954,981,7223,683,4743,169,6233,022,636
Total assets14,089,12912,242,39510,370,0848,519,9318,211,665
Long-term obligations, including current portion8,753,3767,236,3085,587,3884,211,5814,333,146
Total American Tower Corporation equity3,573,1013,287,2203,501,4443,315,0822,991,322
\n (1) For the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, amount includes approximately $0.8 million and $1.1 million, respectively, in stock-based compensation expense. For the years ended December 31, 2008 through 2010, there was no stock-based compensation expense included. (2) For the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, amount includes approximately $1.0 million and $1.2 million, respectively, in stock-based compensation expense. For the years ended December 31, 2008 through 2010, there was no stock-based compensation expense included. (3) In 2008, we completed a review of the estimated useful lives of our tower assets. Based upon this review, we revised the estimated useful lives of our towers and certain related intangible assets, primarily our network location intangible assets, from our historical estimate of 15 years to a revised estimate of 20 years. We accounted for this change as a change in estimate, which was accounted for prospectively, effective January 1, 2008. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the change resulted in a reduction in depreciation and amortization expense of approximately $121.2 million and an increase in net income of approximately $74.4 million. (4) For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008 amount includes approximately $50.2 million, $45.1 million, $52.6 million, $60.7 million and $54.8 million, respectively, in stock-based compensation expense. (5) We ceased to consolidate Verestar, Inc’s (“Verestar”) financial results beginning in December 2003 and reported the results as discontinued operations. Income from discontinued operations for 2008 includes an income tax benefit of $110.1 million related to losses associated with our investment in Verestar. (6) Basic income from continuing operations per common share represents income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation divided by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted income from continuing operations per common share represents income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation divided by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period and any dilutive common share equivalents, including unvested restricted stock, shares issuable upon exercise of stock options and warrants as determined under the treasury stock method and upon conversion of our convertible notes, as determined under the if-converted method. Dilutive common share equivalents also include the dilutive impact of the Verizon transaction (see note 18 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report). (7) For the purpose of this calculation, “earnings” consists of income from continuing operations before income taxes, income on equity method investments and fixed charges (excluding interest capitalized and amortization of interest capitalized). “Fixed charges” consists of interest expense, including amounts capitalized, amortization of debt discounts and premiums and related issuance costs and the component of rental expense associated with operating leases believed by management to be representative of the interest factor thereon. (8) Balances have been revised to reflect purchase accounting measurement period adjustments. (9) As of December 31, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008, includes approximately $69.3 million, $42.2 million, $76.0 million, $47.8 million and $51.9 million, respectively, in restricted funds pledged as collateral to secure obligations and cash that is otherwise limited by contractual provisions."} {"answer": 1.0, "question": "Does Planned generation (TWh) keeps increasing each year between 2005 and 2006?", "context": "System Energy Resources, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 269 Operating Activities Cash flow from operations increased by $232.1 million in 2004 primarily due to income tax refunds of $70.6 million in 2004 compared to income tax payments of $230.9 million in 2003. The increase was partially offset by money pool activity, as discussed below. In 2003, the domestic utility companies and System Energy filed, with the IRS, a change in tax accounting method notification for their respective calculations of cost of goods sold. The adjustment implemented a simplified method of allocation of overhead to the production of electricity, which is provided under the IRS capitalization regulations. The cumulative adjustment placing these companies on the new methodology resulted in a $430 million deduction for System Energy on Entergy's 2003 income tax return. There was no cash benefit from the method change in 2003. In 2004 System Energy realized $144 million in cash tax benefit from the method change. This tax accounting method change is an issue across the utility industry and will likely be challenged by the IRS on audit. Cash flow from operations decreased by $124.8 million in 2003 primarily due to the following: ? an increase in federal income taxes paid of $74.0 million in 2003 compared to 2002; ? the cessation of the Entergy Mississippi GGART. System Energy collected $21.7 million in 2003 and $40.8 million in 2002 from Entergy Mississippi in conjunction with the GGART, which provided for the acceleration of Entergy Mississippi's Grand Gulf purchased power obligation. The MPSC authorized cessation of the GGART effective July 1, 2003. See Note 2 to the domestic utility companies and System Energy financial statements for further discussion of the GGART; and ? money pool activity, as discussed below. System Energy's receivables from the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years: \n
2004200320022001
(In Thousands)
$61,592$19,064$7,046$13,853
\n Money pool activity used $42.5 million of System Energy's operating cash flows in 2004, used $12.0 million in 2003, and provided $6.8 million in 2002. See Note 4 to the domestic utility companies and System Energy financial statements for a description of the money pool. Investing Activities Net cash used for investing activities was practically unchanged in 2004 compared to 2003 primarily because an increase in construction expenditures caused by a reclassification of inventory items to capital was significantly offset by the maturity of $6.5 million of other temporary investments that had been made in 2003, which provided cash in 2004. The increase of $16.2 million in net cash used in investing activities in 2003 was primarily due to the following: ? the maturity in 2002 of $22.4 million of other temporary investments that had been made in 2001, which provided cash in 2002; ? an increase in decommissioning trust contributions and realized change in trust assets of $8.2 million in 2003 compared to 2002; and ? other temporary investments of $6.5 million made in 2003. Partially offsetting the increases in net cash used in investing activities was a decrease in construction expenditures of $22.1 million in 2003 compared to 2002 primarily due to the power uprate project in 2002. Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 25 proposed in the Initial Decision are arbitrary and are so complex that they would be difficult to implement; the Initial Decision improperly rejected Entergy's resource planning remedy; the Initial Decision erroneously determined that the full costs of the Vidalia project should be included in Entergy Louisiana's production costs for purposes of calculating relative production costs; and the Initial Decision erroneously adopted a new method of calculating reserve sharing costs rather than the current method. If the FERC grants the relief requested by the LPSC in the proceeding, the relief may result in a material increase in the total production costs the FERC allocates to companies whose costs currently are projected to be less than the Entergy System average, and a material decrease in the total production costs the FERC allocates to companies whose costs currently are projected to exceed that average. If the FERC adopts the ALJ's Initial Decision, the amount of production costs that would be reallocated among the domestic utility companies would be determined through consideration of each domestic utility company's relative total production cost expressed as a percentage of Entergy System average total production cost. The ALJ's Initial Decision would reallocate production costs of the domestic utility companies whose percent of Entergy System average production cost are outside an upper or lower bandwidth. This would be accomplished by payments from domestic utility companies whose production costs are below Entergy System average production cost to domestic utility companies whose production costs are above Entergy System average production cost. An assessment of the potential effects of the ALJ's Initial Decision requires assumptions regarding the future total production cost of each domestic utility company, which assumptions include the mix of solid fuel and gas-fired generation available to each company and the costs of natural gas and purchased power. Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States are more dependent upon gas-fired generation than Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, or Entergy New Orleans. Of these, Entergy Arkansas is the least dependent upon gas-fired generation. Therefore, increases in natural gas prices likely will increase the amount by which Entergy Arkansas' total production costs are below the average production costs of the domestic utility companies. Considerable uncertainty exists regarding future gas prices. Annual average Henry Hub gas prices have varied significantly over recent years, ranging from $1.72/mmBtu to $5.85/mmBtu for the 1995-2004 period, and averaging $3.43/mmBtu during the ten-year period 1995-2004 and $4.58/mmBtu during the five-year period 2000-2004. Recent market conditions have resulted in gas prices that have averaged $5.85/mmBtu for the twelve months ended December 2004. Based upon analyses considering the effect on future production costs if the FERC adopts the ALJ's Initial Decision, the following potential annual production cost reallocations among the domestic utility companies could result assuming annual average gas prices range from $6.39/mmBtu in 2005 declining to $4.97/mmBtu by 2009: \n
Range of Annual Paymentsor (Receipts)Average AnnualPayments or (Receipts)for 2005-2009 Period
(In Millions)(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas$154 to $281$215
Entergy Gulf States-$130 to ($15)-$63
Entergy Louisiana-$199 to ($98)-$141
Entergy Mississippi-$16 to $8$1
Entergy New Orleans-$17 to ($5)-$12
\n Management believes that any changes in the allocation of production costs resulting from a FERC decision and related retail proceedings should result in similar rate changes for retail customers. The timing of recovery of these costs in rates could be the subject of additional proceedings at the APSC and elsewhere, however, and a delay in full recovery of any increased allocation of production costs could result in additional financing requirements. Although the outcome and timing of the FERC, APSC, and other proceedings cannot be predicted at this time, Entergy does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these proceedings will have a material effect on its financial condition or results of operation. In February 2004, the APSC issued an \"Order of Investigation,\" in which it discusses the negative effect that implementation of the FERC ALJ's Initial Decision would have on Entergy Arkansas' customers. The APSC order establishes an investigation into whether Entergy Arkansas' continued participation in the System Agreement Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 30 whether other procedural steps are necessary. The FERC has not yet ruled on the Emergency Interim Request for Rehearing submitted by Entergy. Entergy believes that it has complied with the provisions of its open access transmission tariff, including the provisions addressing the implementation of the AFC methodology; however, the ultimate scope of this proceeding cannot be predicted at this time. A hearing in the AFC proceeding is currently scheduled to commence in August 2005. Federal Legislation Federal legislation intended to facilitate wholesale competition in the electric power industry has been seriously considered by the United States Congress for the past several years. In the last Congress, both the House and Senate passed separate versions of comprehensive energy legislation, negotiated a conference package, and fell two votes short of bringing the conferenced bill up for a vote in the Senate. The bill contained electricity provisions that would, among other things, allow for participant funding of transmission interconnections and upgrades, repeal PUHCA, repeal or modify PURPA, enact a mechanism for establishing enforceable reliability standards, provide the FERC with new authority over utility mergers and acquisitions, and codify the FERC's authority over market- based rates. It is expected that the United States House and Senate will again craft and consider energy legislation in the 109th Congress. Market and Credit Risks Market risk is the risk of changes in the value of commodity and financial instruments, or in future operating results or cash flows, in response to changing market conditions. Entergy is exposed to the following significant market risks: ? The commodity price risk associated with Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear and Energy Commodity Services segments. ? The foreign currency exchange rate risk associated with certain of Entergy's contractual obligations. ? The interest rate and equity price risk associated with Entergy's investments in decommissioning trust funds. Entergy is also exposed to credit risk. Credit risk is the risk of loss from nonperformance by suppliers, customers, or financial counterparties to a contract or agreement. Where it is a significant consideration, counterparty credit risk is addressed in the discussions that follow. Commodity Price Risk Power Generation The sale of electricity from the power generation plants owned by Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear business and Energy Commodity Services, unless otherwise contracted, is subject to the fluctuation of market power prices. Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear business has entered into PPAs and other contracts to sell the power produced by its power plants at prices established in the PPAs. Entergy continues to pursue opportunities to extend the existing PPAs and to enter into new PPAs with other parties. Following is a summary of the amount of the Non-Utility Nuclear business' output that is currently sold forward under physical or financial contracts at fixed prices: \n
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Non-Utility Nuclear:
Percent of planned generation sold forward:
Unit-contingent36%20%17%1%0%
Unit-contingent with availability guarantees54%52%38%25%0%
Firm liquidated damages4%4%2%0%0%
Total94%76%57%26%0%
Planned generation (TWh)3435343435
Average contracted price per MWh$39$41$42$44N/A
\n Entergy Corporation Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 82 Upon implementation of SFAS 143 in 2003, assets and liabilities increased $1.1 billion for the U. S. Utility segment as a result of recording the asset retirement obligations at their fair values of $1.1 billion as determined under SFAS 143, increasing utility plant by $287 million, reducing accumulated depreciation by $361 million, and recording the related regulatory assets of $422 million. The implementation of SFAS 143 for the portion of River Bend not subject to cost-based ratemaking decreased earnings by $21 million net-of-tax as a result of a one-time cumulative effect of accounting change. In accordance with ratemaking treatment and as required by SFAS 71, the depreciation provisions for the domestic utility companies and System Energy include a component for removal costs that are not asset retirement obligations under SFAS 143. In accordance with regulatory accounting principles, Entergy has recorded a regulatory asset for certain of its domestic utility companies and System Energy of $86.9 million as of December 31, 2004 and $72.4 million as of December 31, 2003 to reflect an estimate of incurred but uncollected removal costs previously recorded as a component of accumulated depreciation. The decommissioning and retirement cost liability for certain of the domestic utility companies and System Energy includes a regulatory liability of $34.6 million as of December 31, 2004 and $26.8 million as of December 31, 2003 representing an estimate of collected but not yet incurred removal costs. For the Non-Utility Nuclear business, the implementation of SFAS 143 resulted in a decrease in liabilities of $595 million due to reductions in decommissioning liabilities, a decrease in assets of $340 million, including a decrease in electric plant in service of $315 million, and an increase in earnings in 2003 of $155 million net-of-tax as a result of a one-time cumulative effect of accounting change. The cumulative decommissioning liabilities and expenses recorded in 2004 by Entergy were as follows:"} {"answer": 9939562.0, "question": "What's the average of Property and equipment, net and Total assets in 2012? (in thousand)", "context": "AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The following table sets forth basic and diluted income from continuing operations per common share computational data for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 (in thousands, except per share data): \n
2012 2011 2010
Income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation$637,283$396,462$372,906
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding394,772395,711401,152
Dilutive securities4,5154,4842,920
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding399,287400,195404,072
Basic income from continuing operations attributable to
American Tower Corporation per common share$1.61$1.00$0.93
Diluted income from continuing operations attributable to
American Tower Corporation per common share$1.60$0.99$0.92
\n For the year ended December 31, 2010, the weighted average number of common shares outstanding excludes shares issuable upon conversion of the Company’s convertible notes of 0.1 million. For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, the diluted weighted average number of common shares outstanding excludes shares issuable upon exercise of the Company’s stock options and share based awards of 1.0 million, 0.9 million and 1.1 million, respectively, as the effect would be anti-dilutive.18. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Litigation—The Company periodically becomes involved in various claims, lawsuits and proceedings that are incidental to its business. In the opinion of Company management, after consultation with counsel, there are no matters currently pending that would, in the event of an adverse outcome, materially impact the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity. SEC Subpoena—On June 2, 2011, the Company received a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) requesting certain documents from 2007 through the date of the subpoena, including in particular documents related to our tax accounting and reporting. On November 6, 2012, the SEC notified the Company that the SEC’s investigation has been completed. The SEC indicated that it does not intend to recommend any enforcement action against the Company. Mexico Litigation—One of the Company’s subsidiaries, SpectraSite Communications, Inc. (“SCI “), a predecessor in interest by conversion to SpectraSite Communications, LLC, was involved in a lawsuit brought in Mexico against a former Mexican subsidiary of SCI (the subsidiary of SCI was sold in 2002, prior to the Company’s acquisition of SCI in 2005). The lawsuit concerns a terminated tower construction contract and related agreements with a wireless carrier in Mexico. The primary issue for the Company is whether SCI itself can be found liable to the Mexican carrier. The trial and lower appellate courts initially found that SCI had no such liability in part because Mexican courts did not have the necessary jurisdiction over SCI. In September 2010, following several decisions by Mexican appellate courts, including the Supreme Court of Mexico, and related appeals by both parties, an intermediate appellate court issued a new decision that would have, if enforceable, re-imposed liability on SCI if the primary defendant in the case were unable to satisfy the judgment. In its decision, the intermediate appellate court identified potential damages, in the form of potential statutory interest, of approximately $6.7 million as of that date. On October 14, 2010, the Company filed a new constitutional appeal to again dispute the decision, which was rejected on January 24, 2012. The case was Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities During the three months ended December 31, 2012, we repurchased 619,314 shares of our common stock for an aggregate of approximately $46.0 million, including commissions and fees, pursuant to our publicly announced stock repurchase program, as follows: \n
PeriodTotal Number of Shares Purchased-1Average Price Paid per Share-2Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans orProgramsApproximate Dollar Value of Shares that May Yet be Purchased Under the Plans orPrograms (in millions)
October 201227,524$72.6227,524$1,300.1
November 2012489,390$74.22489,390$1,263.7
December 2012102,400$74.83102,400$1,256.1
Total Fourth Quarter619,314$74.25619,314$1,256.1
\n (1) Repurchases made pursuant to the $1.5 billion stock repurchase program approved by our Board of Directors in March 2011 (the “2011 Buyback”). Under this program, our management is authorized to purchase shares from time to time through open market purchases or privately negotiated transactions at prevailing prices as permitted by securities laws and other legal requirements, and subject to market conditions and other factors. To facilitate repurchases, we make purchases pursuant to trading plans under Rule 10b5-1 of the Exchange Act, which allows us to repurchase shares during periods when we otherwise might be prevented from doing so under insider trading laws or because of self-imposed trading blackout periods. This program may be discontinued at any time. (2) Average price per share is calculated using the aggregate price, excluding commissions and fees. We continued to repurchase shares of our common stock pursuant to our 2011 Buyback subsequent to December 31, 2012. Between January 1, 2013 and January 21, 2013, we repurchased an additional 15,790 shares of our common stock for an aggregate of $1.2 million, including commissions and fees, pursuant to the 2011 Buyback. As a result, as of January 21, 2013, we had repurchased a total of approximately 4.3 million shares of our common stock under the 2011 Buyback for an aggregate of $245.2 million, including commissions and fees. We expect to continue to manage the pacing of the remaining $1.3 billion under the 2011 Buyback in response to general market conditions and other relevant factors. \n
As of December 31,
2012 2011 2010 2009 2008
(In thousands)
Balance Sheet Data:-8
Cash and cash equivalents (including restricted cash)(9)$437,934$372,406$959,935$295,129$194,943
Property and equipment, net5,789,9954,981,7223,683,4743,169,6233,022,636
Total assets14,089,12912,242,39510,370,0848,519,9318,211,665
Long-term obligations, including current portion8,753,3767,236,3085,587,3884,211,5814,333,146
Total American Tower Corporation equity3,573,1013,287,2203,501,4443,315,0822,991,322
\n (1) For the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, amount includes approximately $0.8 million and $1.1 million, respectively, in stock-based compensation expense. For the years ended December 31, 2008 through 2010, there was no stock-based compensation expense included. (2) For the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, amount includes approximately $1.0 million and $1.2 million, respectively, in stock-based compensation expense. For the years ended December 31, 2008 through 2010, there was no stock-based compensation expense included. (3) In 2008, we completed a review of the estimated useful lives of our tower assets. Based upon this review, we revised the estimated useful lives of our towers and certain related intangible assets, primarily our network location intangible assets, from our historical estimate of 15 years to a revised estimate of 20 years. We accounted for this change as a change in estimate, which was accounted for prospectively, effective January 1, 2008. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the change resulted in a reduction in depreciation and amortization expense of approximately $121.2 million and an increase in net income of approximately $74.4 million. (4) For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008 amount includes approximately $50.2 million, $45.1 million, $52.6 million, $60.7 million and $54.8 million, respectively, in stock-based compensation expense. (5) We ceased to consolidate Verestar, Inc’s (“Verestar”) financial results beginning in December 2003 and reported the results as discontinued operations. Income from discontinued operations for 2008 includes an income tax benefit of $110.1 million related to losses associated with our investment in Verestar. (6) Basic income from continuing operations per common share represents income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation divided by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted income from continuing operations per common share represents income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation divided by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period and any dilutive common share equivalents, including unvested restricted stock, shares issuable upon exercise of stock options and warrants as determined under the treasury stock method and upon conversion of our convertible notes, as determined under the if-converted method. Dilutive common share equivalents also include the dilutive impact of the Verizon transaction (see note 18 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report). (7) For the purpose of this calculation, “earnings” consists of income from continuing operations before income taxes, income on equity method investments and fixed charges (excluding interest capitalized and amortization of interest capitalized). “Fixed charges” consists of interest expense, including amounts capitalized, amortization of debt discounts and premiums and related issuance costs and the component of rental expense associated with operating leases believed by management to be representative of the interest factor thereon. (8) Balances have been revised to reflect purchase accounting measurement period adjustments. (9) As of December 31, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008, includes approximately $69.3 million, $42.2 million, $76.0 million, $47.8 million and $51.9 million, respectively, in restricted funds pledged as collateral to secure obligations and cash that is otherwise limited by contractual provisions."} {"answer": 2008.0, "question": "Which year is Granted for shares(in thousands) the most?", "context": "THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis Investing & Lending Investing & Lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans, including our relationship lending activities, to provide financing to clients. These investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature. We make investments, some of which are consolidated, including through our merchant banking business and our special situations group, in debt securities and loans, public and private equity securities, infrastructure and real estate entities. Some of these investments are made indirectly through funds that we manage. We also make unsecured and secured loans to retail clients through our digital platforms, Marcus and Goldman Sachs Private Bank Select (GS Select), respectively. The table below presents the operating results of our Investing & Lending segment. \n
Year Ended December
$ in millions201720162015
Equity securities$4,578$2,573$3,781
Debt securities and loans2,0031,5071,655
Total net revenues6,5814,0805,436
Operating expenses2,7962,3862,402
Pre-taxearnings$3,785$1,694$3,034
\n Operating Environment. During 2017, generally higher global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to a favorable environment for our equity and debt investments. Results also reflected net gains from company\u0002specific events, including sales, and corporate performance. This environment contrasts with 2016, where, in the first quarter of 2016, market conditions were difficult and corporate performance, particularly in the energy sector, was impacted by a challenging macroeconomic environment. However, market conditions improved during the rest of 2016 as macroeconomic concerns moderated. If macroeconomic concerns negatively affect company-specific events or corporate performance, or if global equity markets decline or credit spreads widen, net revenues in Investing & Lending would likely be negatively impacted.2017 versus 2016. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $6.58 billion for 2017, 61% higher than 2016. Net revenues in equity securities were $4.58 billion, including $3.82 billion of net gains from private equities and $762 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 78% higher than 2016, primarily reflecting a significant increase in net gains from private equities, which were positively impacted by company\u0002specific events and corporate performance. In addition, net gains from public equities were significantly higher, as global equity prices increased during the year. Of the $4.58 billion of net revenues in equity securities, approximately 60% was driven by net gains from company-specific events, such as sales, and public equities. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $2.00 billion, 33% higher than 2016, reflecting significantly higher net interest income (2017 included approximately $1.80 billion of net interest income). Net revenues in debt securities and loans for 2017 also included an impairment of approximately $130 million on a secured loan. Operating expenses were $2.80 billion for 2017, 17% higher than 2016, due to increased compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting higher net revenues, increased expenses related to consolidated investments, and increased expenses related to Marcus. Pre-tax earnings were $3.79 billion in 2017 compared with $1.69 billion in 2016.2016 versus 2015. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $4.08 billion for 2016, 25% lower than 2015. Net revenues in equity securities were $2.57 billion, including $2.17 billion of net gains from private equities and $402 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 32% lower than 2015, primarily reflecting a significant decrease in net gains from private equities, driven by company-specific events and corporate performance. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $1.51 billion, 9% lower than 2015, reflecting significantly lower net revenues related to relationship lending activities, due to the impact of changes in credit spreads on economic hedges. Losses related to these hedges were $596 million in 2016, compared with gains of $329 million in 2015. This decrease was partially offset by higher net gains from investments in debt instruments and higher net interest income. See Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about economic hedges related to our relationship lending activities. Operating expenses were $2.39 billion for 2016, essentially unchanged compared with 2015. Pre-tax earnings were $1.69 billion in 2016, 44% lower than 2015. the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan generally vest over four years and expire no later than ten years from the date of grant. For restricted stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, stock certificates are issued at the time of grant and recipients have dividend and voting rights. In general, these grants vest over three years. For deferred stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, no stock is issued at the time of grant. Generally, these grants vest over two-, three- or four-year periods. Performance awards granted under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan are earned over a performance period based on achievement of goals, generally over two\u0002to three-year periods. Payment for performance awards is made in cash or in shares of our common stock equal to its fair market value per share, based on certain financial ratios, after the conclusion of each performance period. We record compensation expense, equal to the estimated fair value of the options on the grant date, on a straight-line basis over the options’ vesting periods. We use a Black-Scholes option-pricing model to estimate the fair value of the options granted. The weighted-average assumptions used in connection with the option-pricing model were as follows for the years indicated: \n
20092008 2007
Dividend yield4.82%1.32%1.34%
Expected volatility26.7021.0023.30
Risk-free interest rate2.493.174.69
Expected option lives (in years)7.87.87.8
\n Compensation expense related to stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, deferred stock awards and performance awards, which we record as a component of salaries and employee benefits expense in our consolidated statement of income, was $126 million, $321 million and $272 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The 2009 and 2008 expense excluded $13 million and $47 million, respectively, associated with accelerated vesting in connection with the restructuring plan described in note 6. The aggregate income tax benefit recorded in our consolidated statement of income related to the above-described compensation expense was $50 million, $127 million and $109 million for 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Information about the 2006 Plan and 1997 Plan as of December 31, 2009, and activity during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, is presented below: \n
Shares (in thousands) Weighted Average Exercise Price Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (in years) Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions)
Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights:
Outstanding at December 31, 200716,368$48.94
Granted92181.71
Exercised-2,92644.99
Forfeited or expired-4747.40
Outstanding at December 31, 200814,31651.86
Granted51619.31
Exercised-83240.57
Forfeited or expired-83346.32
Outstanding at December 31, 200913,167$51.64 4.10$24.8
Exercisable at December 31, 200911,172$50.12 3.42$12.0
\n The weighted-average grant date fair value of options granted in 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $2.96, $21.06 and $22.44, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, was $5 million, $102 million and $129 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, total unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to stock options and stock appreciation rights was $7 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 21 months. value of our liquid assets, as defined, totaled $75.98 billion, compared to $85.81 billion as of December 31, 2008. The decrease was mainly attributable to unusually high 2008 deposit balances, as we experienced a significant increase in customer deposits during the second half of 2008 as the credit markets worsened. As customers accumulated liquidity, they placed cash with us, and these incremental customer deposits remained with State Street Bank at December 31, 2008. During 2009, as markets normalized, deposit levels moderated as customers returned to investing their cash, and our liquid asset levels declined accordingly. Due to the unusual size and volatile nature of these customer deposits, we maintained approximately $22.45 billion at central banks as of December 31, 2009, in excess of regulatory required minimums. Securities carried at $40.96 billion as of December 31, 2009, compared to $42.74 billion as of December 31, 2008, were designated as pledged for public and trust deposits, borrowed funds and for other purposes as provided by law, and are excluded from the liquid assets calculation, unless pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Liquid assets included securities pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston to secure State Street Bank’s ability to borrow from their discount window should the need arise. This access to primary credit is an important source of back-up liquidity for State Street Bank. As of December 31, 2009, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the discount window. Based upon our level of liquid assets and our ability to access the capital markets for additional funding when necessary, including our ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration, management considers overall liquidity at December 31, 2009 to be sufficient to meet State Street’s current commitments and business needs, including supporting the liquidity of the commercial paper conduits and accommodating the transaction and cash management needs of our customers. As referenced above, our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings on our debt, as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to retaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and customer deposits; and strong liquidity monitoring procedures. High ratings on debt minimize borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by ensuring the largest possible market for our debt. A downgrade or reduction of these credit ratings could have an adverse impact to our ability to access funding at favorable interest rates. The following table presents information about State Street’s and State Street Bank’s credit ratings as of February 22, 2010."} {"answer": 706.0, "question": "What is the sum of Passive for Equities, Active and other, and Company stock/ESOP in 2008? (in billion)", "context": "Note 21. Expenses During the fourth quarter of 2008, we elected to provide support to certain investment accounts managed by SSgA through the purchase of asset- and mortgage-backed securities and a cash infusion, which resulted in a charge of $450 million. SSgA manages certain investment accounts, offered to retirement plans, that allow participants to purchase and redeem units at a constant net asset value regardless of volatility in the underlying value of the assets held by the account. The accounts enter into contractual arrangements with independent third-party financial institutions that agree to make up any shortfall in the account if all the units are redeemed at the constant net asset value. The financial institutions have the right, under certain circumstances, to terminate this guarantee with respect to future investments in the account. During 2008, the liquidity and pricing issues in the fixed-income markets adversely affected the market value of the securities in these accounts to the point that the third-party guarantors considered terminating their financial guarantees with the accounts. Although we were not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so, we elected to purchase approximately $2.49 billion of asset- and mortgage-backed securities from these accounts that had been identified as presenting increased risk in the current market environment and to contribute an aggregate of $450 million to the accounts to improve the ratio of the market value of the accounts’ portfolio holdings to the book value of the accounts. We have no ongoing commitment or intent to provide support to these accounts. The securities are carried in investment securities available for sale in our consolidated statement of condition. The components of other expenses were as follows for the years ended December 31: \n
(In millions)200820072006
Customer indemnification obligation$200
Securities processing187$79$37
Other505399281
Total other expenses$892$478$318
\n In September and October 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. , or Lehman Brothers, and certain of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy or other insolvency proceedings. While we had no unsecured financial exposure to Lehman Brothers or its affiliates, we indemnified certain customers in connection with these and other collateralized repurchase agreements with Lehman Brothers entities. In the then current market environment, the market value of the underlying collateral had declined. During the third quarter of 2008, to the extent these declines resulted in collateral value falling below the indemnification obligation, we recorded a reserve to provide for our estimated net exposure. The reserve, which totaled $200 million, was based on the cost of satisfying the indemnification obligation net of the fair value of the collateral, which we purchased during the fourth quarter of 2008. The collateral, composed of commercial real estate loans which are discussed in note 5, is recorded in loans and leases in our consolidated statement of condition. Management Fees We provide a broad range of investment management strategies, specialized investment management advisory services and other financial services for corporations, public funds, and other sophisticated investors. These services are offered through SSgA. Based upon assets under management, SSgA is the largest manager of institutional assets worldwide, the largest manager of assets for tax-exempt organizations (primarily pension plans) in the United States, and the third largest investment manager overall in the world. SSgA offers a broad array of investment management strategies, including passive and active, such as enhanced indexing and hedge fund strategies, using quantitative and fundamental methods for both U. S. and global equities and fixed income securities. SSgA also offers exchange traded funds, or ETFs, such as the SPDR? Dividend ETFs. The 10% decrease in management fees from 2007 primarily resulted from declines in average month-end equity market valuations and lower performance fees. Average month-end equity market valuations, individually presented in the above “INDEX” table, were down an average of 18% compared to 2007. The decrease in performance fees from $72 million in 2007 to $21 million in 2008 was generally the result of reduced levels of assets under management subject to performance fees, and somewhat lower relative performance measured against specified benchmarks during 2008. Management fees generated from customers outside the United States were approximately 40% of total management fees for 2008, down slightly from 41% for 2007. At year-end 2008, assets under management were $1.44 trillion, compared to $1.98 trillion at year-end 2007. While certain management fees are directly determined by the value of assets under management and the investment strategy employed, management fees reflect other factors as well, including our relationship pricing for customers who use multiple services, and the benchmarks specified in the respective management agreements related to performance fees. Accordingly, no direct correlation necessarily exists between the value of assets under management, market indices and management fee revenue. The overall decrease in assets under management at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007 resulted from declines in market valuations and from a net loss of business, with declines in market valuations representing the substantial majority of the decrease. During 2008, we experienced an aggregate net loss of business of approximately $55 billion, compared to net new business of approximately $116 billion during 2007. Our levels of assets under management were affected by a number of factors, including investor issues related to SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies and the relative under-performance of certain of our passive equity products. The net loss of business of $55 billion for 2008 did not reflect new business awarded to us during 2008 that had not been installed prior to December 31, 2008. This new business will be reflected in assets under management in future periods after installation. Assets under management consisted of the following at December 31: ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT \n
As of December 31, 2008 2007 2006 2005 20042007-2008 Annual Growth Rate2004-2008 Compound Annual Growth Rate
(Dollars in billions)
Equities:
Passive$576$803$691$625$600-28%-1%
Active and other91206181147122-56-7
Company stock/ESOP3979857677-51-16
Total equities7061,088957848799-35-3
Fixed-income:
Passive238218180128106922
Active3241342835-22-2
Cash and money market468632578437414-263
Total fixed-income and cash/money market738891792593555-177
Total$1,444$1,979$1,749$1,441$1,354-272
\n To measure, monitor, and report on our interest-rate risk position, we use (1) NIR simulation, or NIR-at-risk, which measures the impact on NIR over the next twelve months to immediate, or “rate shock,” and gradual, or “rate ramp,” changes in market interest rates; and (2) economic value of equity, or EVE, which measures the impact on the present value of all NIR-related principal and interest cash flows of an immediate change in interest rates. NIR-at-risk is designed to measure the potential impact of changes in market interest rates on NIR in the short term. EVE, on the other hand, is a long-term view of interest-rate risk, but with a view toward liquidation of State Street. Both of these measures are subject to ALCO-established guidelines, and are monitored regularly, along with other relevant simulations, scenario analyses and stress tests by both Global Treasury and ALCO. In calculating our NIR-at-risk, we start with a base amount of NIR that is projected over the next twelve months, assuming that the then-current yield curve remains unchanged over the period. Our existing balance sheet assets and liabilities are adjusted by the amount and timing of transactions that are forecasted to occur over the next twelve months. That yield curve is then “shocked,” or moved immediately, ±100 basis points in a parallel fashion, or at all points along the yield curve. Two new twelve-month NIR projections are then developed using the same balance sheet and forecasted transactions, but with the new yield curves, and compared to the base scenario. We also perform the calculations using interest rate ramps, which are ±100 basis point changes in interest rates that are assumed to occur gradually over the next twelve-month period, rather than immediately as we do with interest-rate shocks. EVE is based on the change in the present value of all NIR-related principal and interest cash flows for changes in market rates of interest. The present value of existing cash flows with a then-current yield curve serves as the base case. We then apply an immediate parallel shock to that yield curve of ±200 basis points and recalculate the cash flows and related present values. A large shock is used to better capture the embedded option risk in our mortgage-backed securities that results from the borrower’s prepayment opportunity. Key assumptions used in the models described above include the timing of cash flows; the maturity and repricing of balance sheet assets and liabilities, especially option-embedded financial instruments like mortgage-backed securities; changes in market conditions; and interest-rate sensitivities of our customer liabilities with respect to the interest rates paid and the level of balances. These assumptions are inherently uncertain and, as a result, the models cannot precisely predict future NIR or predict the impact of changes in interest rates on NIR and economic value. Actual results could differ from simulated results due to the timing, magnitude and frequency of changes in interest rates and market conditions, changes in spreads and management strategies, among other factors. Projections of potential future streams of NIR are assessed as part of our forecasting process. The following table presents the estimated exposure of NIR for the next twelve months, calculated as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, due to an immediate ± 100 basis point shift in then-current interest rates. Estimated incremental exposures presented below are dependent on management’s assumptions about asset and liability sensitivities under various interest-rate scenarios, such as those previously discussed, and do not reflect any actions management may undertake in order to mitigate some of the adverse effects of interest-rate changes on State Street’s financial performance. NIR-AT-RISK \n
Estimated Exposure to Net Interest Revenue
(In millions)20082007
Rate change:
+100 bps shock$7$-98
-100 bps shock-4397
+100 bps ramp-29-44
-100 bps ramp-16620
\n The NIR-at-risk exposure to an immediate 100 bp increase in market interest rates changed from negative at December 31, 2007 to slightly positive at December 31, 2008, while the NIR-at-risk exposure to a 100 bp downward shock in rates changed from slightly positive to significantly negative. These changes were the result of two factors. First, the level of on-balance sheet liquid assets was increased during 2008 in response to the"} {"answer": 2011.0, "question": "In the year with largest amount of Pension Fundings, what's the sum of Commitment Type?", "context": "Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Overview U. S. economic growth, retail sales and industrial production continued at a moderate pace in 2014, which resulted in growth in the small package delivery market. Continued strong growth in e-commerce and omni-channel retail sales has driven package volume increases in both commercial and residential products. Given these trends, overall volume growth was strong during the year, and products most aligned with business-to-consumer and retail industry shipments experienced the fastest growth. Economic conditions in Europe have deteriorated somewhat, as solid growth in the United Kingdom is being offset by slower growth in Germany and general economic weakness in France and Italy. Economic growth in Asia has continued, though growth in China has moderated. The uneven nature of economic growth worldwide, combined with a trend towards more intra-regional trade, has led to shifting trade patterns and resulted in overcapacity in certain trade lanes. These factors have created an environment in which customers are more likely to trade-down from premium express products to standard delivery products in both Europe and Asia. As a result of these circumstances, we have adjusted our air capacity and cost structure in our transportation network to better match the prevailing volume mix levels. Our broad portfolio of product offerings and the flexibilities inherent in our transportation network have helped us adapt to these changing trends. While the worldwide economic environment has remained challenging in 2014, we have continued to undertake several initiatives in the U. S. and internationally to (1) improve the flexibility and capacity in our delivery network; (2) improve yield management; and (3) increase operational efficiency and contain costs across all segments. Most notably, the continued deployment of technology improvements (including several facility automation projects and the accelerated deployment of our On Road Integrated Optimization and Navigation system - \"ORION\") should increase our network capacity, and improve operational efficiency, flexibility and reliability. Additionally, we have continued to adjust our transportation network and utilize new or expanded operating facilities to improve time-in-transit for shipments in each region. Our consolidated results are presented in the table below: \n
Year Ended December 31,% Change
2014201320122014 / 20132013 / 2012
Revenue (in millions)$58,232$55,438$54,1275.0%2.4%
Operating Expenses (in millions)53,26448,40452,78410.0%-8.3%
Operating Profit (in millions)$4,968$7,034$1,343-29.4%N/A
Operating Margin8.5%12.7%2.5%
Average Daily Package Volume (in thousands)18,01616,93816,2956.4%3.9%
Average Revenue Per Piece$10.58$10.76$10.82-1.7%-0.6%
Net Income (in millions)$3,032$4,372$807-30.6%N/A
Basic Earnings Per Share$3.31$4.65$0.84-28.8%N/A
Diluted Earnings Per Share$3.28$4.61$0.83-28.9%N/A
\n UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS 30 Revenue The change in overall revenue was impacted by the following factors for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, compared with the corresponding prior year periods: \n
VolumeRates /Product MixFuelSurchargeTotalRevenueChange
Revenue Change Drivers:
2014 / 20136.8%-1.6%—%5.2%
2013 / 20123.7%0.5%-0.5%3.7%
\n Volume 2014 compared to 2013 Our total volume increased in 2014, largely due to continued solid growth in e-commerce and overall retail sales. Business-to-consumer shipments, which represent more than 45% of total U. S. Domestic Package volume, grew 12% for the year and drove increases in both air and ground shipments. UPS SurePost volume increased more than 45% in 2014, and accounted for approximately half of the overall volume growth for the segment. Business-to-business volume grew 3% in 2014, largely due to increased volume from the retail industry, including the use of our solutions for omni-channel (including ship-from-store and ship-to-store models) and returns shipping; additionally, business-to-business volume was positively impacted by growth in shipments from the industrial, automotive and government sectors. Among our air products, volume increased in 2014 for both our Next Day Air and deferred services. Solid air volume growth continued for those products most aligned with business-to-consumer shipping, particularly our residential Second Day Air package product. Our business-to-business air volume increased slightly as well, largely due to growth in the retail and industrial sectors. This growth was slightly offset by a decline in air letter volume, which was negatively impacted by some competitive losses and slowing growth in the financial services industry. The growth in premium and deferred air volume continues to be impacted by economic conditions and changes in our customers' supply chain networks; the combination of these factors influences their sensitivity towards the price and speed of shipments, and therefore favoring the use of our deferred air services. The increase in ground volume in 2014 was driven by our SurePost service offering, which had a volume increase of more than 45% for the year; additionally, we experienced moderate volume growth in our traditional residential and commercial ground services. Demand for SurePost and our traditional residential products continues to be driven by business\u0002to-consumer shipping activity from e-commerce retailers and other large customers. The growth in business-to-business ground volume was largely due to growth in omni-channel retail volume, the increased use of our returns service offerings, and the growth in shipments from the industrial sector.2013 compared to 2012 Our overall volume increased in 2013 compared with 2012, largely due to continued solid growth in e-commerce and overall retail sales; however, the increase in volume was hindered by slow overall U. S. economic and industrial production growth. Business-to-consumer shipments, which represent over 40% of total U. S. Domestic Package volume, grew approximately 8% for the year and drove increases in both air and ground shipments. Growth accelerated during our peak holiday shipping season, as business-to-consumer volume grew over 11% in the fourth quarter of 2013, and business-to\u0002consumer shipments exceeded 50% of total U. S. Domestic Package volume for the first time. Business-to-business volume increased slightly in 2013, largely due to increased shipping activity by the retail industry; however, business-to-business volume was negatively impacted by slowing industrial production. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS 49 Issuances of debt in 2014 and 2013 consisted primarily of longer-maturity commercial paper. Issuances of debt in 2012 consisted primarily of senior fixed rate note offerings totaling $1.75 billion. Repayments of debt in 2014 and 2013 consisted primarily of the maturity of our $1.0 and $1.75 billion senior fixed rate notes that matured in April 2014 and January 2013, respectively. The remaining repayments of debt during the 2012 through 2014 time period included paydowns of commercial paper and scheduled principal payments on our capitalized lease obligations. We consider the overall fixed and floating interest rate mix of our portfolio and the related overall cost of borrowing when planning for future issuances and non-scheduled repayments of debt. We had $772 million of commercial paper outstanding at December 31, 2014, and no commercial paper outstanding at December 31, 2013 and 2012. The amount of commercial paper outstanding fluctuates throughout each year based on daily liquidity needs. The average commercial paper balance was $1.356 billion and the average interest rate paid was 0.10% in 2014 ($1.013 billion and 0.07% in 2013, and $962 million and 0.07% in 2012, respectively). The variation in cash received from common stock issuances to employees was primarily due to level of stock option exercises in the 2012 through 2014 period. The cash outflows in other financing activities were impacted by several factors. Cash inflows (outflows) from the premium payments and settlements of capped call options for the purchase of UPS class B shares were $(47), $(93) and $206 million for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Cash outflows related to the repurchase of shares to satisfy tax withholding obligations on vested employee stock awards were $224, $253 and $234 million for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. In 2013, we paid $70 million to purchase the noncontrolling interest in a joint venture that operates in the Middle East, Turkey and portions of the Central Asia region. In 2012, we settled several interest rate derivatives that were designated as hedges of the senior fixed-rate debt offerings that year, which resulted in a cash outflow of $70 million. Sources of Credit See note 7 to the audited consolidated financial statements for a discussion of our available credit and debt covenants. Guarantees and Other Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements We do not have guarantees or other off-balance sheet financing arrangements, including variable interest entities, which we believe could have a material impact on financial condition or liquidity. Contractual Commitments We have contractual obligations and commitments in the form of capital leases, operating leases, debt obligations, purchase commitments, and certain other liabilities. We intend to satisfy these obligations through the use of cash flow from operations. The following table summarizes the expected cash outflow to satisfy our contractual obligations and commitments as of December 31, 2014 (in millions): \n
Commitment Type20152016201720182019After 2019Total
Capital Leases$75$74$67$62$59$435$772
Operating Leases323257210150902741,304
Debt Principal87683777521,0007,06810,081
Debt Interest2952932932822604,2595,682
Purchase Commitments2691957119826588
Pension Fundings1,0301,1613443474004883,770
Other Liabilities4323105——81
Total$2,911$2,011$1,372$1,617$1,817$12,550$22,278
"} {"answer": 0.0967, "question": "what is the growth rate in net revenue for entergy texas , inc . in 2007?", "context": "Entergy Texas, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 361 Fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to an increase in power purchases as a result of the purchased power agreements between Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Texas and an increase in the average market prices of purchased power and natural gas, substantially offset by a decrease in deferred fuel expense as a result of decreased recovery from customers of fuel costs. Other regulatory charges increased primarily due to an increase of $6.9 million in the recovery of bond expenses related to the securitization bonds. The recovery became effective July 2007. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional information regarding the securitization bonds.2007 Compared to 2006 Net revenue consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale, 2) purchased power expenses, and 3) other regulatory charges. Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2007 to 2006. \n
Amount (In Millions)
2006 net revenue$403.3
Purchased power capacity13.1
Securitization transition charge9.9
Volume/weather9.7
Transmission revenue6.1
Base revenue2.6
Other-2.4
2007 net revenue$442.3
\n The purchased power capacity variance is due to changes in the purchased power capacity costs included in the calculation in 2007 compared to 2006 used to bill generation costs between Entergy Texas and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana. The securitization transition charge variance is due to the issuance of securitization bonds. As discussed above, in June 2007, EGSRF I, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Texas, issued securitization bonds and with the proceeds purchased from Entergy Texas the transition property, which is the right to recover from customers through a transition charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds. See Note 5 to the financial statements herein for details of the securitization bond issuance. The volume/weather variance is due to increased electricity usage on billed retail sales, including the effects of more favorable weather in 2007 compared to the same period in 2006. The increase is also due to an increase in usage during the unbilled sales period. Retail electricity usage increased a total of 139 GWh in all sectors. See \"Critical Accounting Estimates\" below and Note 1 to the financial statements for further discussion of the accounting for unbilled revenues. The transmission revenue variance is due to an increase in rates effective June 2007 and new transmission customers in late 2006. The base revenue variance is due to the transition to competition rider that began in March 2006. Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate increase. Gross operating revenues, fuel and purchased power expenses, and other regulatory charges Gross operating revenues decreased primarily due to a decrease of $179 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to lower fuel rates and fuel refunds. The decrease was partially offset by the $39 million increase in net revenue described above and an increase of $44 million in wholesale revenues, including $30 million from the System Agreement cost equalization payments from Entergy Arkansas. The receipt of such payments is being Noble Energy, Inc. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Additional fair value disclosures about plan assets are as follows: \n
Fair Value Measurements Using
Asset CategoryQuoted Prices inActive Markets forIdentical Assets(Level 1)(1)SignificantObservable Inputs(Level 2)(1)SignificantUnobservable Inputs(Level 3)(1)Total
(millions)
December 31, 2011
Federal Money Market Funds$1$-$-$1
Mutual Funds
Large Cap Funds66--66
Mid Cap Funds10--10
Blended Funds6--6
Emerging Markets Funds6--6
Fixed Income Funds77--77
Common Collective Trust Funds
Large Cap Funds-17-17
Small Cap Funds-12-12
International Funds-24-24
Total$166$53$-$219
December 31, 2010
Federal Money Market Funds$2$-$-$2
Mutual Funds
Large Cap Funds69--69
Mid Cap Funds10--10
Blended Funds6--6
Emerging Markets Funds7--7
Fixed Income Funds55--55
Common Collective Trust Funds
Large Cap Funds-16-16
Small Cap Funds-12-12
International Funds-29-29
Total$149$57$-$206
\n (1) See Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies - Fair Value Measurements for a description of the fair value hierarchy. Additional information about plan assets, including methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair values of plan assets, is as follows: Federal Money Market Funds Investments in federal money market funds consist of portfolios of high quality fixed income securities (such as US Treasury securities) which, generally, have maturities of less than one year. The fair value of these investments is based on quoted market prices for identical assets as of the measurement date. Mutual Funds Investments in mutual funds consist of diversified portfolios of common stocks and fixed income instruments. The common stock mutual funds are diversified by market capitalization and investment style as well as economic sector and industry. The fixed income mutual funds are diversified primarily in government bonds, mortgage backed securities, and corporate bonds, most of which are rated investment grade. The fair values of these investments are based on quoted market prices for identical assets as of the measurement date. Common Collective Trust Funds Investments in common collective trust funds consist of common stock investments in both US and non-US equity markets. Portfolios are diversified by market capitalization and investment style as well as economic sector and industry. The investments in the non-US equity markets are used to further enhance the plan’s overall equity diversification which is expected to moderate the plan’s overall risk volatility. In addition to the normal risk associated with stock market investing, investments in foreign equity markets may carry additional political, regulatory, and currency risk which is taken into account by the committee in its deliberations. The fair value of these investments is based on quoted prices for similar assets in active markets. All of the investments in common collective trust funds represent exchange-traded securities with readily observable prices. Risk Management The oil and gas business is subject to many significant risks, including operational, strategic, financial and compliance/ regulatory risks. We strive to maintain a proactive enterprise risk management (ERM) process to plan, organize, and control our activities in a manner which is intended to minimize the effects of risk on our capital, cash flows and earnings. ERM expands our process to include risks associated with accidental losses, as well as operational, strategic, financial, compliance/regulatory, and other risks. Our ERM process is designed to operate in an annual cycle, integrated with our long range plans, and supportive of our capital structure planning. Elements include, among others, cash flow at risk analysis, credit risk management, a commodity hedging program to reduce the impacts of commodity price volatility, an insurance program to protect against disruptions in our cash flows, a robust global compliance program, and government and community relations initiatives. We benchmark our program against our peers and other global organizations. See Item 1A. Risk Factors for a discussion of specific risks we face in our business. Available Information Our website address is www. nobleenergyinc. com. Available on this website under “Investors – SEC Filings,” free of charge, are our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements, Forms 3, 4 and 5 filed on behalf of directors and executive officers and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. Alternatively, you may access these reports at the SEC’s website at www. sec. gov. Also posted on our website under “About Us – Corporate Governance”, and available in print upon request made by any stockholder to the Investor Relations Department, are charters for our Audit Committee, Compensation, Benefits and Stock Option Committee, Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, and Environment, Health and Safety Committee. Copies of the Code of Conduct and the Code of Ethics for Chief Executive and Senior Financial Officers (the Codes) are also posted on our website under the “Corporate Governance” section. Within the time period required by the SEC and the NYSE, as applicable, we will post on our website any modifications to the Codes and any waivers applicable to senior officers as defined in the applicable Code, as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Item 1A. Risk Factors Described below are certain risks that we believe are applicable to our business and the oil and gas industry in which we operate. There may be additional risks that are not presently material or known. You should carefully consider each of the following risks and all other information set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If any of the events described below occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, liquidity or access to the capital markets could be materially adversely affected. In addition, the current global economic and political environment intensifies many of these risks. We are currently experiencing a severe downturn in the oil and gas business cycle, and an extended or more severe downturn could have material adverse effects on our operations, our liquidity, and the price of our common stock. Our ability to operate profitably, maintain adequate liquidity, grow our business and pay dividends on our common stock depend highly upon the prices we receive for our crude oil, natural gas, and NGL production. Commodity prices are volatile. Crude oil prices, in particular, began to decline significantly in the fourth quarter 2014, declined further in 2015 and have continued to trade at a low level or decline further thus far in 2016. High and low monthly daily average prices for crude oil and high and low contract expiration prices for natural gas for the last three years and into 2016 were as follows: \n
Jan. 1 - Feb.12, 2016Year Ended December 31,
201520142013
NYMEX
Crude Oil - WTI (per Bbl) High(1)$31.78$59.83$105.15$110.53
Crude Oil - WTI (per Bbl) Low(1)29.7137.3359.2986.68
Natural Gas - HH (Per MMbtu) High2.233.195.564.46
Natural Gas - HH (Per MMbtu) Low2.052.033.733.11
Brent
Crude Oil - (per Bbl) High32.8064.32111.76118.90
Crude Oil - (per Bbl) Low31.9338.2162.9197.69
"} {"answer": 742.0, "question": "What's the total amount of Interest, Operating leases, Purchase obligations and Investment commitments in 2018? (in millions)", "context": "Long-term product offerings include alpha-seeking active and index strategies. Our alpha-seeking active strategies seek to earn attractive returns in excess of a market benchmark or performance hurdle while maintaining an appropriate risk profile, and leverage fundamental research and quantitative models to drive portfolio construction. In contrast, index strategies seek to closely track the returns of a corresponding index, generally by investing in substantially the same underlying securities within the index or in a subset of those securities selected to approximate a similar risk and return profile of the index. Index strategies include both our non-ETF index products and iShares ETFs. Although many clients use both alpha-seeking active and index strategies, the application of these strategies may differ. For example, clients may use index products to gain exposure to a market or asset class, or may use a combination of index strategies to target active returns. In addition, institutional non-ETF index assignments tend to be very large (multi-billion dollars) and typically reflect low fee rates. Net flows in institutional index products generally have a small impact on BlackRock’s revenues and earnings. Equity Year-end 2017 equity AUM totaled $3.372 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $130.1 billion. Net inflows included $174.4 billion into iShares ETFs, driven by net inflows into Core funds and broad developed and emerging market equities, partially offset by non-ETF index and active net outflows of $25.7 billion and $18.5 billion, respectively. BlackRock’s effective fee rates fluctuate due to changes in AUM mix. Approximately half of BlackRock’s equity AUM is tied to international markets, including emerging markets, which tend to have higher fee rates than U. S. equity strategies. Accordingly, fluctuations in international equity markets, which may not consistently move in tandem with U. S. markets, have a greater impact on BlackRock’s equity revenues and effective fee rate. Fixed Income Fixed income AUM ended 2017 at $1.855 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $178.8 billion. In 2017, active net inflows of $21.5 billion were diversified across fixed income offerings, and included strong inflows into municipal, unconstrained and total return bond funds. iShares ETFs net inflows of $67.5 billion were led by flows into Core, corporate and treasury bond funds. Non-ETF index net inflows of $89.8 billion were driven by demand for liability-driven investment solutions. Multi-Asset BlackRock’s multi-asset team manages a variety of balanced funds and bespoke mandates for a diversified client base that leverages our broad investment expertise in global equities, bonds, currencies and commodities, and our extensive risk management capabilities. Investment solutions might include a combination of long-only portfolios and alternative investments as well as tactical asset allocation overlays. Component changes in multi-asset AUM for 2017 are presented below. \n
(in millions)December 31,2016Net inflows (outflows)MarketchangeFXimpactDecember 31,2017
Asset allocation and balanced$176,675$-2,502$17,387$4,985$196,545
Target date/risk149,43223,92524,5321,577199,466
Fiduciary68,395-1,0477,5228,81983,689
FutureAdvisor-1505-46119—578
Total$395,007$20,330$49,560$15,381$480,278
\n (1) FutureAdvisor amounts do not include AUM held in iShares ETFs. Multi-asset net inflows reflected ongoing institutional demand for our solutions-based advice with $18.9 billion of net inflows coming from institutional clients. Defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows, and contributed $20.8 billion to institutional multi-asset net inflows in 2017, primarily into target date and target risk product offerings. Retail net inflows of $1.1 billion reflected demand for our Multi-Asset Income fund family, which raised $5.8 billion in 2017. The Company’s multi-asset strategies include the following: ? Asset allocation and balanced products represented 41% of multi-asset AUM at year-end. These strategies combine equity, fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget. In certain cases, these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification, derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions. Flagship products in this category include our Global Allocation and Multi-Asset Income fund families. ? Target date and target risk products grew 16% organically in 2017, with net inflows of $23.9 billion. Institutional investors represented 93% of target date and target risk AUM, with defined contribution plans accounting for 87% of AUM. Flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our LifePath offerings. LifePath products utilize a proprietary active asset allocation overlay model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor’s expected retirement timing. Underlying investments are primarily index products. ? Fiduciary management services are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors or endowments and foundations retain BlackRock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of investment management. These customized services require strong partnership with the clients’ investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives. not to exceed a maximum leverage ratio (ratio of net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where net debt equals total debt less unrestricted cash) of 3 to 1, which was satisfied with a ratio of less than 1 to 1 at December 31, 2017. The 2017 credit facility provides back-up liquidity to fund ongoing working capital for general corporate purposes and various investment opportunities. At December 31, 2017, the Company had no amount outstanding under the 2017 credit facility Commercial Paper Program. The Company can issue unsecured commercial paper notes (the “CP Notes”) on a private-placement basis up to a maximum aggregate amount outstanding at any time of $4.0 billion. The commercial paper program is currently supported by the 2017 credit facility. At December 31, 2017, BlackRock had no CP Notes outstanding Long-Term Borrowings The carrying value of long-term borrowings at December 31, 2017 included the following: \n
(in millions)Maturity AmountCarrying ValueMaturity
5.00% Notes$1,000$999December 2019
4.25% Notes750747May 2021
3.375% Notes750746June 2022
3.50% Notes1,000994March 2024
1.25% Notes-1841835May 2025
3.20% Notes700693March 2027
Total Long-term Borrowings$5,041$5,014
\n (1) The carrying value of the 1.25% Notes estimated using foreign exchange rate as of December 31, 2017. For more information on Company’s borrowings, see Note 12, Borrowings, in the notes to the consolidated financial statements contained in Part II, Item 8 of this filing. Contractual Obligations, Commitments and Contingencies The following table sets forth contractual obligations, commitments and contingencies by year of payment at December 31, 2017: \n
(in millions)20182019202020212022Thereafter-1Total
Contractual obligations and commitments-1:
Long-term borrowings-2:
Principal$—$1,000$—$750$750$2,541$5,041
Interest17517512510981185850
Operating leases1411321261181091,5802,206
Purchase obligations12810129221928327
Investment commitments298—————298
Total contractual obligations and commitments7421,4082809999594,3348,722
Contingent obligations:
Contingent payments related to business acquisitions-3331793934——285
Total contractual obligations, commitments andcontingent obligations-4$775$1,587$319$1,033$959$4,334$9,007
\n (1) Amounts do not include $350 million of cash payment consideration and contingent consideration related to the Company’s agreement to acquire the asset management business of Citibanamex. (2) The amount of principal and interest payments for the 2025 Notes (issued in Euros) represents the expected payment amounts using foreign exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. (3) The amount of contingent payments reflected for any year represents the expected payments using foreign currency exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. The fair value of the remaining aggregate contingent payments at December 31, 2017 totaled $236 million and is included in other liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. (4) At December 31, 2017, the Company had approximately $365 million of net unrecognized tax benefits. Due to the uncertainty of timing and amounts that will ultimately be paid, this amount has been excluded from the table above. Operating Leases. The Company leases its primary office locations under agreements that expire on varying dates through 2043. In connection with certain lease agreements, the Company is responsible for escalation payments. The contractual obligations table above includes only guaranteed minimum lease payments for such leases and does not project potential escalation or other lease-related payments. These leases are classified as operating leases and, as such, are not recorded as liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. In May 2017, the Company entered into an agreement with 50 HYMC Owner LLC, for the lease of approximately 847,000 square feet of office space located at 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York. The term of the lease is twenty years from the date that rental payments begin, expected to occur in McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) 46 In July 2008, the Board authorized the retirement of shares of the Company’s common stock that may be repurchased from time-to-time pursuant to its stock repurchase program. During the second quarter of 2009, all of the 4 million repurchased shares, which we purchased for $204 million, were formally retired by the Company. The retired shares constitute authorized but unissued shares. We elected to allocate any excess of share repurchase price over par value between additional paid-in capital and retained earnings. As such, $165 million was recorded as a decrease to retained earnings. The Company anticipates that it will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends in the future. However, the payment and amount of future dividends remain within the discretion of the Board and will depend upon the Company’s future earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors. Although we believe that our operating cash flow, financial assets, current access to capital and credit markets, including our existing credit and sales facilities, will give us the ability to meet our financing needs for the foreseeable future, there can be no assurance that continued or increased volatility and disruption in the global capital and credit markets will not impair our liquidity or increase our costs of borrowing. Selected Measures of Liquidity and Capital Resources:"} {"answer": 5639.0, "question": "How much of profit before taxes is there in total (in 2017) without U.S. tax reform impact and Gain on sale of equity investment? (in million)", "context": "ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations should be read in conjunction with our discussion of cautionary statements and significant risks to the company’s business under Item 1A. Risk Factors of the 2018 Form?10-K. OVERVIEW Our sales and revenues for 2018 were $54.722 billion, a 20?percent increase from 2017 sales and revenues of $45.462?billion. The increase was primarily due to higher sales volume, mostly due to improved demand across all regions and across the three primary segments. Profit per share for 2018 was $10.26, compared to profit per share of $1.26 in 2017. Profit was $6.147 billion in 2018, compared with $754 million in 2017. The increase was primarily due to lower tax expense, higher sales volume, decreased restructuring costs and improved price realization. The increase was partially offset by higher manufacturing costs and selling, general and administrative (SG&A) and research and development (R&D) expenses and lower profit from the Financial Products Segment. Fourth-quarter 2018 sales and revenues were $14.342 billion, up $1.446 billion, or 11 percent, from $12.896 billion in the fourth quarter of 2017. Fourth-quarter 2018 profit was $1.78 per share, compared with a loss of $2.18 per share in the fourth quarter of 2017. Fourth-quarter 2018 profit was $1.048 billion, compared with a loss of $1.299 billion in 2017. Highlights for 2018 include: z Sales and revenues in 2018 were $54.722 billion, up 20?percent from 2017. Sales improved in all regions and across the three primary segments. z Operating profit as a percent of sales and revenues was 15.2?percent in 2018, compared with 9.8 percent in 2017. Adjusted operating profit margin was 15.9 percent in 2018, compared with 12.5 percent in 2017. z Profit was $10.26 per share for 2018, and excluding the items in the table below, adjusted profit per share was $11.22. For 2017 profit was $1.26 per share, and excluding the items in the table below, adjusted profit per share was $6.88. z In order for our results to be more meaningful to our readers, we have separately quantified the impact of several significant items: \n
Full Year 2018Full Year 2017
(Millions of dollars)Profit Before TaxesProfitPer ShareProfit Before TaxesProfitPer Share
Profit$7,822$10.26$4,082$1.26
Restructuring costs3860.501,2561.68
Mark-to-market losses4950.643010.26
Deferred tax valuation allowance adjustments—-0.01—-0.18
U.S. tax reform impact—-0.17—3.95
Gain on sale of equity investment——-85-0.09
Adjusted profit$8,703$11.22$5,554$6.88
\n z Machinery, Energy & Transportation (ME&T) operating cash flow for 2018 was about $6.3 billion, more than sufficient to cover capital expenditures and dividends. ME&T operating cash flow for 2017 was about $5.5 billion. Restructuring Costs In recent years, we have incurred substantial restructuring costs to achieve a flexible and competitive cost structure. During 2018, we incurred $386 million of restructuring costs related to restructuring actions across the company. During 2017, we incurred $1.256 billion of restructuring costs with about half related to the closure of the facility in Gosselies, Belgium, and the remainder related to other restructuring actions across the company. Although we expect restructuring to continue as part of ongoing business activities, restructuring costs should be lower in 2019 than 2018. Notes: z Glossary of terms included on pages 33-34; first occurrence of terms shown in bold italics. z Information on non-GAAP financial measures is included on pages 42-43. Recognition of finance revenue and rental revenue is suspended and the account is placed on non-accrual status when management determines that collection of future income is not probable (generally after 120 days past due). Recognition is resumed, and previously suspended income is recognized, when the account becomes current and collection of remaining amounts is considered probable. See Note 7 for more information. Revenues are presented net of sales and other related taxes.3. Stock-Based Compensation Our stock-based compensation plans primarily provide for the granting of stock options, stock-settled stock appreciation rights (SARs), restricted stock units (RSUs) and performance-based restricted stock units (PRSUs) to Officers and other key employees, as well as non-employee Directors. Stock options permit a holder to buy Caterpillar stock at the stock’s price when the option was granted. SARs permit a holder the right to receive the value in shares of the appreciation in Caterpillar stock that occurred from the date the right was granted up to the date of exercise. RSUs are agreements to issue shares of Caterpillar stock at the time of vesting. PRSUs are similar to RSUs and include performance conditions in the vesting terms of the award. Our long-standing practices and policies specify that all stock\u0002based compensation awards are approved by the Compensation Committee (the Committee) of the Board of Directors. The award approval process specifies the grant date, value and terms of the award. The same terms and conditions are consistently applied to all employee grants, including Officers. The Committee approves all individual Officer grants. The number of stock-based compensation award units included in an individual’s award is determined based on the methodology approved by the Committee. The exercise price methodology?approved by the Committee is the closing price of the Company stock on the date of the grant. In June of 2014, shareholders approved the Caterpillar Inc. 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the Plan) under which all new stock-based compensation awards are granted. In June of 2017, the Plan was amended and restated. The Plan initially provided that up to 38,800,000 Common Shares would be reserved for future issuance under the Plan, subject to adjustment in certain events. Subsequent to the shareholder approval of the amendment and restatement of the Plan, an additional 36,000,000 Common Shares became available for all awards under the Plan. Common stock issued from Treasury stock under the plans totaled 5,590,641 for 2018, 11,139,748 for 2017 and 4,164,134 for 2016. The total number of shares authorized for equity awards under the amended and restated Caterpillar Inc. 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan is 74,800,000, of which 44,139,162 shares remained available for issuance as of December?31,?2018. Stock option and RSU awards generally vest according to a three\u0002year graded vesting schedule. One-third of the award will become vested on the first anniversary of the grant date, one-third of the award will become vested on the second anniversary of the grant date and one-third of the award will become vested on the third anniversary of the grant date. PRSU awards generally have a three\u0002year performance period and cliff vest at the end of the period based upon achievement of performance targets established at the time of grant. Upon separation from service, if the participant is 55 years of age or older with more than five years of service, the participant meets the criteria for a “Long Service Separation. ” Award terms for awards granted in 2016 allow for immediate vesting upon separation of all outstanding options and RSUs with no requisite service period for employees who meet the criteria for a “Long Service Separation. ” Compensation expense for the 2016 grant was fully recognized immediately on the grant date for these employees. Award terms for the 2018 and 2017 grants allow for continued vesting as of each vesting date specified in the award document for employees who meet the criteria for a “Long Service Separation” and fulfill a requisite service period of six months. Compensation expense for eligible employees for the 2018 and 2017 grants was recognized over the period from the grant date to the end date of the six-month requisite service period. For employees who become eligible for a “Long Service Separation” subsequent to the end date of the six-month requisite service period and prior to the completion of the vesting period, compensation expense is recognized over the period from the grant date to the date eligibility is achieved. At grant, SARs and option awards have a term life of ten years. For awards granted prior to 2016, if the “Long Service Separation” criteria are met, the vested options/SARs have a life that is the lesser of ten years from the original grant date or five years from the separation date. For awards granted in 2018, 2017, and 2016, the vested options have a life equal to ten years from the original grant date. Prior to 2017, all outstanding PRSU awards granted to employees eligible for a “Long Service Separation” may vest at the end of the performance period based upon achievement of the performance target. Compensation expense for the 2016 PRSU grant was fully recognized immediately on the grant date for these employees. For PRSU awards granted in 2018 and 2017, only a prorated number of shares may vest at the end of the performance period based upon achievement of the performance target, with the proration based upon the number of months of continuous employment during the three-year performance period. Employees with a “Long Service Separation” must also fulfill a six-month requisite service period in order to be eligible for the prorated vesting of outstanding PRSU awards granted in 2018 and 2017. Compensation expense for the 2018 and 2017 PRSU grants is being recognized on a straight-line basis over the three-year performance period for all participants. Accounting guidance on share-based payments requires companies to estimate the fair value of options/SARs on the date of grant using an option-pricing model. The fair value of our option/SAR grants was estimated using a lattice-based option-pricing model. The lattice\u0002based option-pricing model considers a range of assumptions related to volatility, risk-free interest rate and historical employee behavior. Expected volatility was based on historical Caterpillar stock price movement and current implied volatilities from traded options on Caterpillar stock. The risk-free interest rate was based on U. S. Treasury security yields at the time of grant. The weighted-average dividend yield was based on historical information. The expected life was determined from the lattice-based model. The lattice\u0002based model incorporated exercise and post vesting forfeiture assumptions based on analysis of historical data. The following table provides the assumptions used in determining the fair value of the Option/SAR awards for the years ended December?31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. \n
Grant Year
201820172016
Weighted-average dividend yield2.7%3.4%3.2%
Weighted-average volatility30.2%29.2%31.1%
Range of volatilities21.5-33.0%22.1-33.0%22.5-33.4%
Range of risk-free interest rates2.02-2.87%0.81-2.35%0.62-1.73%
Weighted-average expected lives8 years8 years8 years
"} {"answer": 0.00602, "question": "at december 31 , 2002 what was the ratio of the company unsecured debt to the secured debt outstanding", "context": "MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS The indenture governing the Company’s unsecured notes also requires the Company to comply with financial ratios and other covenants regarding the operations of the Company. The Company is currently in compliance with all such covenants and expects to remain in compliance in the foreseeable future. In January 2003, the Company completed an issuance of unsecured debt totaling $175 million bearing interest at 5.25%, due 2010. Sale of Real Estate Assets The Company utilizes sales of real estate assets as an additional source of liquidity. During 2000 and 2001, the Company engaged in a capital-recycling program that resulted in sales of over $1 billion of real estate assets during these two years. In 2002, this program was substantially reduced as capital needs were met through other sources and the slower business climate provided few opportunities to profitably reinvest sales proceeds. The Company continues to pursue opportunities to sell real estate assets when beneficial to the long-term strategy of the Company Uses of Liquidity The Company’s principal uses of liquidity include the following: ? Property investments and recurring leasing/capital costs; ? Dividends and distributions to shareholders and unitholders; ? Long-term debt maturities; and ? The Company’s common stock repurchase program. Property Investments and Other Capital Expenditures One of the Company’s principal uses of its liquidity is for the development, acquisition and recurring leasing/capital expendi\u0002tures of its real estate investments. A summary of the Company’s recurring capital expenditures is as follows (in thousands): \n
200220012000
Tenant improvements$28,011$18,416$31,955
Leasing costs17,97513,84517,530
Building improvements13,37310,8736,804
Totals$59,359$43,134$56,289
\n Dividends and Distributions In order to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, the Company must currently distribute at least 90% of its taxable income to its shareholders and Duke Realty Limited Partnership (“DRLP”) unitholders. The Company paid dividends of $1.81, $1.76 and $1.64 for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. The Company expects to continue to distribute taxable earnings to meet the requirements to maintain its REIT status. However, distributions are declared at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors and are subject to actual cash available for distribution, the Company’s financial condition, capital requirements and such other factors as the Company’s Board of Directors deems relevant. Debt Maturities Debt outstanding at December 31, 2002, totaled $2.1 billion with a weighted average interest rate of 6.25% maturing at various dates through 2028. The Company had $1.8 billion of unsecured debt and $299.1 million of secured debt outstanding at December 31, 2002. Scheduled principal amortization of such debt totaled $10.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. Following is a summary of the scheduled future amortization and maturities of the Company’s indebtedness at December 31, 2002 (in thousands): Basic and diluted weighted-average common shares outstanding are the same due to the net losses for all periods presented. As discussed in Note 14, approximately 63 million common shares were issued in June of 2010 in connection with the conversion of the remaining Series B mandatorily convertible preferred shares, which were originally issued in May 2009. Under applicable accounting literature, such shares should be included in the denominator in arriving at diluted earnings per share as if they were issued at the beginning of the reporting period or as of the date issued, if later. Prior to conversion, these shares were not included in the computation above as such amounts would have had an antidilutive effect on earnings (loss) per common share. NOTE 16. SHARE-BASED PAYMENTS Regions has long-term incentive compensation plans that permit the granting of incentive awards in the form of stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock awards and units, and/or stock appreciation rights. While Regions has the ability to issue stock appreciation rights, as of December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, there were no outstanding stock appreciation rights. The terms of all awards issued under these plans are determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors; however, no awards may be granted after the tenth anniversary from the date the plans were initially approved by shareholders. Options and restricted stock usually vest based on employee service, generally within three years from the date of the grant. The contractual lives of options granted under these plans range from seven to ten years from the date of the grant. On May 13, 2010, the shareholders of the Company approved the Regions Financial Corporation 2010 Long-Term Incentive Plan (“2010 LTIP”), which permits the Company to grant to employees and directors various forms of incentive compensation. These forms of incentive compensation are similar to the types of compensation approved in prior plans. The 2010 LTIP authorizes 100 million common share equivalents available for grant, where grants of options count as one share equivalent and grants of full value awards (e. g. , shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units) count as 2.25 share equivalents. Unless otherwise determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, grants of restricted stock and restricted stock units accrue dividends as they are declared by the Board of Directors, and the dividends are paid upon vesting of the award. The 2010 LTIP closed all prior long-term incentive plans to new grants, and accordingly, prospective grants must be made under the 2010 LTIP or a successor plan. All existing grants under prior long-term incentive plans were unaffected by this amendment. The number of remaining share equivalents available for future issuance under the active long-term compensation plan was approximately 91 million at December 31, 2010. Grants of performance-based restricted stock typically have a one-year performance period, after which shares vest within three years after the grant date. Restricted stock units, which were granted in 2008, have a vesting period of five years. Generally, the terms of these plans stipulate that the exercise price of options may not be less than the fair market value of Regions’ common stock at the date the options are granted; however, under prior stock option plans, non-qualified options could be granted with a lower exercise price than the fair market value of Regions’ common stock on the date of grant. The contractual life of options granted under these plans ranges from seven to ten years from the date of grant. Regions issues new shares from authorized reserves upon exercise. Grantees of restricted stock awards or units must either remain employed with the Company for certain periods from the date of grant in order for shares to be released or issued or retire after meeting the standards of a retiree, at which time shares would be prorated and released. The following table summarizes the elements of compensation cost recognized in the consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31: \n
201020092008
(In millions)
Compensation cost of share-based compensation awards:
Restricted stock awards and units$10$33$50
Stock options131416
Tax benefits related to compensation cost-8-17-24
Compensation cost of share-based compensation awards, net of tax$15$30$42
\n PROVISION FOR LOAN LOSSES The provision for loan losses is used to maintain the allowance for loan losses at a level that in management’s judgment is appropriate to absorb probable losses inherent in the portfolio at the balance sheet date. During 2018, the provision for loan losses totaled $229 million and net charge-offs were $323 million. This compares to a provision for loan losses of $150 million and net charge-offs of $307 million in 2017. The increase in the provision for loan losses was primarily a result of increased loan balances and slowing credit improvement as compared to 2017. The increase was partially offset by the release of the Company's $40 million hurricane-specific loan loss allowance associated with certain 2017 hurricanes, as well as a $16 million net reduction to the provision for loan losses in the first quarter of 2018 from the sale of $254 million in residential first mortgage loans consisting primarily of performing troubled debt restructured loans. For further discussion and analysis of the total allowance for credit losses, see the \"Allowance for Credit Losses\" and “Risk Management” sections found later in this report. See also Note 6 “Allowance for Credit Losses” to the consolidated financial statements. NON-INTEREST INCOME Table 5—Non-Interest Income from Continuing Operations \n
Year Ended December 31Change 2018 vs. 2017
201820172016AmountPercent
(Dollars in millions)
Service charges on deposit accounts$710$683$664$274.0%
Card and ATM fees438417402215.0%
Investment management and trust fee income23523021352.2%
Capital markets income2021611524125.5%
Mortgage income137149173-12-8.1%
Investment services fee income7160581118.3%
Commercial credit fee income717173——%
Bank-owned life insurance658195-16-19.8%
Insurance proceeds——50—NM
Securities gains, net1196-18-94.7%
Market value adjustments on employee benefit assets - defined benefit-6——-6NM
Market value adjustments on employee benefit assets - other-5163-21-131.3%
Other miscellaneous income100751222533.3%
$2,019$1,962$2,011$572.9%
\n Service Charges on Deposit Accounts Service charges on deposit accounts include non-sufficient fund fees and other service charges. The increase in 2018 compared to 2017 was primarily due to continued customer account growth and increases in non-sufficient fund fee activity. Card and ATM Fees Card and ATM fees include the combined amounts of credit card/bank card income and debit card and ATM related revenue. The increase in 2018 compared to 2017 was primarily the result of an increase in commercial and consumer checkcard interchange income associated with new account growth and increases in spend and transactions. Capital Markets Income Capital markets income primarily relates to capital raising activities that includes securities underwriting and placement, loan syndication and placement, as well as foreign exchange, derivatives, merger and acquisition and other advisory services. The increase in 2018 compared to 2017 was driven primarily by increases in income from mergers and acquisitions advisory fees, customer interest rate swap income, and loan syndication fees, partially offset by a decrease in fees from the placement of permanent financing for real estate customers."} {"answer": 260.90909, "question": "as of february 8 , 2019 what was the number of shares outstanding", "context": "PART II ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES Our Class A common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “MA”. At February 8, 2019, we had 73 stockholders of record for our Class A common stock. We believe that the number of beneficial owners is substantially greater than the number of record holders because a large portion of our Class A common stock is held in “street name” by brokers. There is currently no established public trading market for our Class B common stock. There were approximately 287 holders of record of our non-voting Class B common stock as of February 8, 2019, constituting approximately 1.1% of our total outstanding equity. Stock Performance Graph The graph and table below compare the cumulative total stockholder return of Mastercard’s Class A common stock, the S&P 500 Financials and the S&P 500 Index for the five-year period ended December 31, 2018. The graph assumes a $100 investment in our Class A common stock and both of the indices and the reinvestment of dividends. Mastercard’s Class B common stock is not publicly traded or listed on any exchange or dealer quotation system. \n
Base periodIndexed Returns For the Years Ended December 31,
Company/Index201320142015201620172018
Mastercard$100.00$103.73$118.05$126.20$186.37$233.56
S&P 500 Financials100.00115.20113.44139.31170.21148.03
S&P 500 Index100.00113.69115.26129.05157.22150.33
\n Total returns to stockholders for each of the years presented were as follows: General and Administrative The significant components of our general and administrative expenses were as follows: \n
For the Years Ended December 31,Percent Increase (Decrease)
20182017201620182017
($ in millions)
Personnel$3,214$2,687$2,22520%21%
Professional fees3773553376%5%
Data processing and telecommunications60050442019%20%
Foreign exchange activity1-3610634****
Other1,0191,0018112%23%
General and administrative expenses5,1744,6533,82711%22%
Special Item2—-167—****
Adjusted general and administrative expenses (excluding Special Item)2$5,174$4,486$3,82715%17%
\n Note: Table may not sum due to rounding. ** Not meaningful 1 Foreign exchange activity includes gains and losses on foreign exchange derivative contracts and the impact of remeasurement of assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies. See Note 22 (Foreign Exchange Risk Management) to the consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 for further discussion.2 See “Non-GAAP Financial Information” for further information on Special Items. The primary drivers of general and administrative expenses in 2018 and 2017, versus the prior year, were as follows: ? Personnel expenses increased 20% and 21%, or 19% and 20% on a currency-neutral basis, respectively. The 2018 and 2017 increases were driven by a higher number of employees to support our continued investment in the areas of real-time account-based payments, digital, services, data analytics and geographic expansion. The impact of acquisitions contributed 2 and 6 percentage points of growth for 2018 and 2017, respectively. ? Data processing and telecommunication expenses increased 19% and 20%, respectively, both as reported and on a currency-neutral basis, due to capacity growth of our business. Acquisitions contributed 3 and 8 percentage points, respectively. ? Foreign exchange activity contributed a benefit of 3 percentage points in 2018 related to gains from our foreign exchange activity for derivative contracts primarily due to the strengthening of the U. S. dollar, partially offset by balance sheet remeasurement losses. In 2017, foreign exchange activity had a negative impact of 2 percentage points due to greater losses from foreign exchange derivative contracts. ? Other expenses increased 2% and 23%, or 2% and 25% on a currency-neutral basis, respectively. In 2018, other expenses increased primarily due to the $100 million contribution to the Mastercard Impact Fund. The remaining increase was due to costs to support our strategic development efforts. These increases were primarily offset by the non-recurring Venezuela charge of $167 million recorded in 2017 which was the primary driver of growth for that period. Other expenses include costs to provide loyalty and rewards solutions, travel and meeting expenses and rental expense for our facilities and other costs associated with our business. Advertising and Marketing In 2018, advertising and marketing expenses increased 18% both as reported and on a currency-neutral basis versus 2017, primarily due to a change in accounting for certain marketing fund arrangements as a result of our adoption of the new revenue guidance, partially offset by a net decrease in spending on certain marketing campaigns. For a more detailed discussion on the impact of the new revenue guidance, refer to Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies). In 2017, advertising and marketing expenses increased 11%, or 10% on a currency-neutral basis versus 2016, mainly due to higher marketing spend primarily related to certain marketing campaigns. The table below shows a summary of select balance sheet data at December 31: \n
20182017
(in millions)
Balance Sheet Data:
Current assets$16,171$13,797
Current liabilities11,5938,793
Long-term liabilities7,7786,968
Equity5,4185,497
\n We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and investment securities balances, our cash flow generating capabilities, our borrowing capacity and our access to capital resources are sufficient to satisfy our future operating cash needs, capital asset purchases, outstanding commitments and other liquidity requirements associated with our existing operations and potential obligations. Debt and Credit Availability In February 2018, we issued $500 million principal amount of notes due in 2028 and an additional $500 million principal amount of notes due in 2048. Our total debt outstanding (including the current portion) was $6.3 billion and $5.4 billion at December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, with the earliest maturity of $500 million of principal occurring in April 2019. As of December 31, 2018, we have a commercial paper program (the “Commercial Paper Program”), under which we are authorized to issue up to $4.5 billion in outstanding notes, with maturities up to 397 days from the date of issuance. In conjunction with the Commercial Paper Program, we have a committed unsecured $4.5 billion revolving credit facility (the “Credit Facility”) which expires in November 2023. Borrowings under the Commercial Paper Program and the Credit Facility are to provide liquidity for general corporate purposes, including providing liquidity in the event of one or more settlement failures by our customers. In addition, we may borrow and repay amounts under these facilities for business continuity purposes. We had no borrowings outstanding under the Commercial Paper Program or the Credit Facility at December 31, 2018 and 2017. In March 2018, we filed a universal shelf registration statement (replacing a previously filed shelf registration statement that was set to expire) to provide additional access to capital, if needed. Pursuant to the shelf registration statement, we may from time to time offer to sell debt securities, guarantees of debt securities, preferred stock, Class A common stock, depository shares, purchase contracts, units or warrants in one or more offerings. See Note 14 (Debt) to the consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 for further discussion on our debt, the Commercial Paper Program and the Credit Facility. Dividends and Share Repurchases We have historically paid quarterly dividends on our outstanding Class A common stock and Class B common stock. Subject to legally available funds, we intend to continue to pay a quarterly cash dividend. However, the declaration and payment of future dividends is at the sole discretion of our Board of Directors after taking into account various factors, including our financial condition, operating results, available cash and current and anticipated cash needs. The following table summarizes the annual, per share dividends paid in the years reflected:"} {"answer": 98379.0, "question": "What was the total amount of the Net Revenues in the years where Investment Banking Fees greater than 8000? (in thousand)", "context": "Guarantees We adopted FASB Interpretation No.45 (“FIN 45”), “Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others” at the beginning of our fiscal 2003. See “Recent Accounting Pronouncements” for further information regarding FIN 45. The lease agreements for our three office buildings in San Jose, California provide for residual value guarantees. These lease agreements were in place prior to December 31, 2002 and are disclosed in Note 14. In the normal course of business, we provide indemnifications of varying scope to customers against claims of intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising from the use of our products. Historically, costs related to these indemnification provisions have not been significant and we are unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these indemnification provisions on our future results of operations. We have commitments to make certain milestone and/or retention payments typically entered into in conjunction with various acquisitions, for which we have made accruals in our consolidated financial statements. In connection with our purchases of technology assets during fiscal 2003, we entered into employee retention agreements totaling $2.2 million. We are required to make payments upon satisfaction of certain conditions in the agreements. As permitted under Delaware law, we have agreements whereby we indemnify our officers and directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity. The indemnification period covers all pertinent events and occurrences during the officer’s or director’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, we have director and officer insurance coverage that limits our exposure and enables us to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. We believe the estimated fair value of these indemnification agreements in excess of applicable insurance coverage is minimal. As part of our limited partnership interests in Adobe Ventures, we have provided a general indemnification to Granite Ventures, an independent venture capital firm and sole general partner of Adobe Ventures, for certain events or occurrences while Granite Ventures is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity provided that Granite Ventures acts in good faith on behalf of the partnerships. We are unable to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments that could potentially result from any hypothetical future claim, but believe the risk of having to make any payments under this general indemnification to be remote. We accrue for costs associated with future obligations which include costs for undetected bugs that are discovered only after the product is installed and used by customers. The accrual remaining at the end of fiscal 2003 primarily relates to new releases of our Creative Suites products during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003. The table below summarizes the activity related to the accrual during fiscal 2003: \n
Balance at November 29, 2002AccrualsPaymentsBalance at November 28, 2003
$—$5,554$-2,369$3,185
\n Advertising Expenses We expense all advertising costs as incurred and classify these costs under sales and marketing expense. Advertising expenses for fiscal years 2003, 2002, and 2001 were $24.0 million, $26.7 million and $30.5 million, respectively. Foreign Currency and Other Hedging Instruments Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.133 (“SFAS No.133”), “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities and requires us to recognize these as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet and measure them at fair value. As described in Note 15, gains and losses resulting from \n
Year Ended
September 30, 2009% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2008% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2007
($ in 000's)
Revenues
Securities Commissions and
Investment Banking Fees$ 7,162-78%$ 32,292-23%$ 41,879
Investment Advisory Fees1,355-59%3,32630%2,568
Interest Income1,456-63%3,987-4%4,163
Trading Profits4,531341%1,027-80%5,254
Other387-60%975-82%5,340
Total Revenues14,891-64%41,607-30%59,204
Interest Expense421-66%1,2353%1,197
Net Revenues14,470-64%40,372-30%58,007
Non-Interest Expense
Compensation Expense14,381-44%25,860-8%28,010
Other Expense7,296-60%18,064-23%23,383
Total Non-Interest Expense21,677-51%43,924-15%51,393
Income (Loss) Before Taxes
and Minority Interest-7,207103%-3,552-154%6,614
Minority Interest in
Pre-tax (Losses) Income Held by Others-2,3211,742%-126-104%2,995
Pre-tax (Loss) Earnings$ -4,886-43%$ -3,426-195%$ 3,619
\n Year ended September 30, 2009 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2008 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets in fiscal 2009 consists of the results of our joint ventures in Latin America, including Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis continued to significantly impact emerging markets in all business lines. The results in the emerging market segment declined to a $4.9 million loss from a $3.4 million loss in the prior year. This decline was a result of a $24 million, or 80%, decline in commission revenues which was almost entirely offset by a $3.5 million increase in trading profits and a $22 million decline in non-interest expenses. Our minority interest partners shared in $2.3 million of the fiscal 2009 loss before taxes. In December, our joint venture in Turkey ceased operations and subsequently filed for protection under Turkish bankruptcy laws. We have fully reserved for our equity interest in this joint venture. Year ended September 30, 2008 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2007 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets consists of the results of our joint ventures in Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil and Turkey. The results in the emerging market segment declined from a $3.6 million profit in fiscal 2007 to a $3.4 million loss in fiscal 2008. This decline was a result of a greater decline in revenues than an increase in expenses. Expenses were impacted by our investment in Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis significantly impacted emerging markets in all business lines. Commission revenue declined 23% in fiscal 2008 as compared to the prior year as the economic slowdown and a series of political crises in Turkey and Argentina during 2008 severely undermined investors’ confidence in these countries. Trading profits declined due to losses taken in proprietary positions in Turkey. The commission expense portion of compensation expense declined in proportion to the decline in commission revenue. Other expenses in fiscal 2007 were unusually high due to the accrual of tax liabilities and the related legal expenses. As of September 30, 2008, we were still awaiting the final outcome of the litigation in Turkey, and in light of the suspension of the entity’s license, our ability to continue as a going concern in Turkey was uncertain. We had fully reserved for our investment in the Turkish joint venture as of September 30, 2008 and, accordingly, fiscal 2008 pre-tax earnings did not include any net impact of our Turkish joint venture. Index 64 Certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies As a financial holding company, we are required to provide certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies pursuant to the SEC’s Industry Guide 3. Certain of those disclosures are as follows for the fiscal year indicated: \n
Year ended September 30,
201620152014
RJF return on average assets-11.8%2.0%2.1%
RJF return on average equity-211.3%11.5%12.3%
Average equity to average assets-317.1%18.5%18.1%
Dividend payout ratio-421.9%21.0%19.3%
\n (1) Computed as net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the year, divided by two). (2) Computed by utilizing the net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by the average equity attributable to RJF for each respective fiscal year. Average equity is computed by adding the total equity attributable to RJF as of each quarter-end date during the indicated fiscal year, plus the beginning of the year total, divided by five. (3) Computed as average equity (the sum of total equity at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two), divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two). (4) Computed as dividends declared per common share during the fiscal year as a percentage of diluted earnings per common share. Refer to the RJ Bank section of this MD&A, various sections within Item 7A in this report and the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Form 10-K for the other required disclosures. Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity is essential to our business. The primary goal of our liquidity management activities is to ensure adequate funding to conduct our business over a range of market environments. Senior management establishes our liquidity and capital policies. These policies include senior management’s review of short\u0002and long-term cash flow forecasts, review of monthly capital expenditures, the monitoring of the availability of alternative sources of financing, and the daily monitoring of liquidity in our significant subsidiaries. Our decisions on the allocation of capital to our business units consider, among other factors, projected profitability and cash flow, risk and impact on future liquidity needs. Our treasury department assists in evaluating, monitoring and controlling the impact that our business activities have on our financial condition, liquidity and capital structure as well as maintains our relationships with various lenders. The objectives of these policies are to support the successful execution of our business strategies while ensuring ongoing and sufficient liquidity. Liquidity is provided primarily through our business operations and financing activities. Financing activities could include bank borrowings, repurchase agreement transactions or additional capital raising activities under our “universal” shelf registration statement. Cash used in operating activities during the year ended September 30, 2016 was $518 million. Successful operating results generated a $650 million increase in cash. Increases in cash from operations include: ? An increase in brokerage client payables had a $1.82 billion favorable impact on cash. The increase largely results from two factors. First, many clients reacted to uncertainties in the equity markets by increasing the cash balances in their brokerage accounts. Second, our brokerage client account balances increased as a result of our fiscal year 2016 acquisitions of Alex. Brown and 3Macs. Cumulatively, these two factors result in the increase in brokerage client payables and a corresponding increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations which is discussed below. ? Stock loaned, net of stock borrowed, increased $153 million. ? Accrued compensation, commissions and benefits increased $46 million as a result of the increased financial results we achieved in fiscal year 2016. Offsetting these, decreases in cash used in operations resulted from: ? A $1.95 billion increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations and other segregated assets, primarily resulting from the increase in client cash balances described above. RALPH LAUREN CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) The weighted-average number of common shares outstanding used to calculate basic net income (loss) per common share is reconciled to shares used to calculate diluted net income (loss) per common share as follows:"} {"answer": 2005.0, "question": "Which year is Retirement of treasury stock for Treasury Stock of Common Stock the least?", "context": "Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements \n
Amount (In Millions)
Plant (including nuclear fuel)$727
Decommissioning trust funds252
Other assets41
Total assets acquired1,020
Purchased power agreement (below market)420
Decommissioning liability220
Other liabilities44
Total liabilities assumed684
Net assets acquired$336
\n Subsequent to the closing, Entergy received approximately $6 million from Consumers Energy Company as part of the Post-Closing Adjustment defined in the Asset Sale Agreement. The Post-Closing Adjustment amount resulted in an approximately $6 million reduction in plant and a corresponding reduction in other liabilities. For the PPA, which was at below-market prices at the time of the acquisition, Non-Utility Nuclear will amortize a liability to revenue over the life of the agreement. The amount that will be amortized each period is based upon the difference between the present value calculated at the date of acquisition of each year's difference between revenue under the agreement and revenue based on estimated market prices. Amounts amortized to revenue were $53 million in 2009, $76 million in 2008, and $50 million in 2007. The amounts to be amortized to revenue for the next five years will be $46 million for 2010, $43 million for 2011, $17 million in 2012, $18 million for 2013, and $16 million for 2014. NYPA Value Sharing Agreements Non-Utility Nuclear's purchase of the FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 plants from NYPA included value sharing agreements with NYPA. In October 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear and NYPA amended and restated the value sharing agreements to clarify and amend certain provisions of the original terms. Under the amended value sharing agreements, Non-Utility Nuclear will make annual payments to NYPA based on the generation output of the Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick plants from January 2007 through December 2014. Non-Utility Nuclear will pay NYPA $6.59 per MWh for power sold from Indian Point 3, up to an annual cap of $48 million, and $3.91 per MWh for power sold from FitzPatrick, up to an annual cap of $24 million. The annual payment for each year's output is due by January 15 of the following year. Non-Utility Nuclear will record its liability for payments to NYPA as power is generated and sold by Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick. An amount equal to the liability will be recorded to the plant asset account as contingent purchase price consideration for the plants. In 2009, 2008, and 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear recorded $72 million as plant for generation during each of those years. This amount will be depreciated over the expected remaining useful life of the plants. In August 2008, Non-Utility Nuclear entered into a resolution of a dispute with NYPA over the applicability of the value sharing agreements to its FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 nuclear power plants after the planned spin-off of the Non-Utility Nuclear business. Under the resolution, Non-Utility Nuclear agreed not to treat the separation as a \"Cessation Event\" that would terminate its obligation to make the payments under the value sharing agreements. As a result, after the spin-off transaction, Enexus will continue to be obligated to make payments to NYPA under the amended and restated value sharing agreements. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) (Dollar amounts in thousands except per share data) Note 11—Shareholders’ Equity Share Data: A summary of preferred and common share activity is as follows: \n
Preferred Stock Common Stock
Issued Treasury Stock IssuedTreasury Stock
2004:
Balance at January 1, 2004-0--0-113,783,658-1,069,053
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options763,592
Treasury stock acquired-5,534,276
Retirement of treasury stock-5,000,0005,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2004-0--0-108,783,658-839,737
2005:
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options91,0905,835,740
Treasury stock acquired-10,301,852
Retirement of treasury stock-4,000,0004,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2005-0--0-104,874,748-1,305,849
2006:
Grants of restricted stock28,000
Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options507,259
Treasury stock acquired-5,989,531
Retirement of treasury stock-5,000,0005,000,000
Balance at December 31, 2006-0--0-99,874,748-1,760,121
\n Acquisition of Common Shares: Torchmark shares are acquired from time to time through open market purchases under the Torchmark stock repurchase program when it is believed to be the best use of Torchmark’s excess cash flows. Share repurchases under this program were 5.6 million shares at a cost of $320 million in 2006, 5.6 million shares at a cost of $300 million in 2005, and 5.2 million shares at a cost of $268 million in 2004. When stock options are exercised, proceeds from the exercises are generally used to repurchase approximately the number of shares available with those funds, in order to reduce dilution. Shares repurchased for dilution purposes were 415 thousand shares at a cost of $24 million in 2006, 4.7 million shares costing $255 million in 2005, and 313 thousand shares at a cost of $17 million in 2004. Retirement of Treasury Stock: Torchmark retired 5 million shares of treasury stock in December, 2006, 4 million in 2005, and 5 million in 2004. Restrictions: Restrictions exist on the flow of funds to Torchmark from its insurance subsidiaries. Statutory regulations require life insurance subsidiaries to maintain certain minimum amounts of capital and surplus. Dividends from insurance subsidiaries of Torchmark are limited to the greater of statutory net gain from operations, excluding capital gains and losses, on an annual noncumulative basis, or 10% of surplus, in the absence of special regulatory approval. Additionally, insurance company distributions are generally not permitted in excess of statutory surplus. Subsidiaries are also subject to certain minimum capital requirements. In 2006, subsidiaries of Torchmark paid $428 million in dividends to the parent company. During 2007, a maximum amount of $434 million is expected to be available to Torchmark from subsidiaries without regulatory approval. PART I ITEM 1. BUSINESS General SL Green Realty Corp. is a self-managed real estate investment trust, or REIT, with in-house capabilities in property management, acquisitions, financing, development, construction and leasing. We were formed in June 1997 for the purpose of continuing the commercial real estate business of S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , our predecessor entity. S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , which was founded in 1980 by Stephen L. Green, the Company's Chairman, had been engaged in the business of owning, managing, leasing, acquiring and repositioning office properties in Manhattan, a borough of New York City. Reckson Associates Realty Corp. , or Reckson, and Reckson Operating Partnership, L. P. , or ROP, are wholly-owned subsidiaries of SL Green Operating Partnership, L. P. , the Operating Partnership. As of December 31, 2013, we owned the following interests in commercial office properties in the New York Metropolitan area, primarily in midtown Manhattan. Our investments in the New York Metropolitan area also include investments in Brooklyn, Long Island, Westchester County, Connecticut and Northern New Jersey, which are collectively known as the Suburban properties: \n
LocationOwnershipNumber ofBuildingsSquare FeetWeighted AverageOccupancy-1
ManhattanConsolidated properties2317,306,04594.5%
Unconsolidated properties95,934,43496.6%
SuburbanConsolidated properties264,087,40079.8%
Unconsolidated properties41,222,10087.2%
6228,549,97992.5%
\n (1) The weighted average occupancy represents the total occupied square feet divided by total available rentable square feet. As of December 31, 2013, our Manhattan office properties were comprised of 17 fee owned buildings, including ownership in commercial condominium units, and six leasehold owned buildings. As of December 31, 2013, our Suburban office properties were comprised of 25 fee owned buildings and one leasehold building. As of December 31, 2013, we also held fee owned interests in nine unconsolidated Manhattan office properties and four unconsolidated Suburban office properties. We refer to our consolidated and unconsolidated Manhattan and Suburban office properties collectively as our Portfolio. As of December 31, 2013, we also owned investments in 16 retail properties encompassing approximately 875,800 square feet, 20 development buildings encompassing approximately 3,230,800 square feet, four residential buildings encompassing 801 units (approximately 719,900 square feet) and two land interests encompassing approximately 961,400 square feet. The Company also has ownership interests in 28 west coast office properties encompassing 52 buildings totaling approximately 3,654,300 square feet. In addition, we manage two office buildings owned by third parties and affiliated companies encompassing approximately 626,400 square feet. As of December 31, 2013, we also held debt and preferred equity investments with a book value of $1.3 billion. Our corporate offices are located in midtown Manhattan at 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170. As of December 31, 2013, our corporate staff consisted of approximately 278 persons, including 182 professionals experienced in all aspects of commercial real estate. We can be contacted at (212) 594-2700. We maintain a website at www. slgreen. com. On our website, you can obtain, free of charge, a copy of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we file such material electronically with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. We have also made available on our website our audit committee charter, compensation committee charter, nominating and corporate governance committee charter, code of business conduct and ethics and corporate governance principles. We do not intend for information contained on our website to be part of this annual report on Form 10-K. You can also read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at its Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549 (1-800-SEC-0330). The SEC maintains an Internet site (http://www. sec. gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. Operating Profit We consider operating profit to be an important measure for evaluating our operating performance and we evaluate operating profit for each of the reportable business segments in which we operate. We internally manage our operations by reference to operating profit with economic resources allocated primarily based on each segment’s contribution to operating profit. Segment operating profit is defined as operating profit before Corporate Unallocated. Segment operating profit is not, however, a measure of financial performance under U. S. GAAP, and may not be defined and calculated by other companies in the same manner. The table below reconciles segment operating profit to total operating profit:"} {"answer": 0.08333, "question": "what is percentage change in rd&e spendings from 2013 to 2014?", "context": "Backlog Applied manufactures systems to meet demand represented by order backlog and customer commitments. Backlog consists of: (1) orders for which written authorizations have been accepted and assigned shipment dates are within the next 12 months, or shipment has occurred but revenue has not been recognized; and (2) contractual service revenue and maintenance fees to be earned within the next 12 months. Backlog by reportable segment as of October 27, 2013 and October 28, 2012 was as follows: \n
20132012(In millions, except percentages)
Silicon Systems Group$1,29555%$70544%
Applied Global Services59125%58036%
Display36115%20613%
Energy and Environmental Solutions1255%1157%
Total$2,372100%$1,606100%
\n Applied’s backlog on any particular date is not necessarily indicative of actual sales for any future periods, due to the potential for customer changes in delivery schedules or cancellation of orders. Customers may delay delivery of products or cancel orders prior to shipment, subject to possible cancellation penalties. Delays in delivery schedules and/or a reduction of backlog during any particular period could have a material adverse effect on Applied’s business and results of operations. Manufacturing, Raw Materials and Supplies Applied’s manufacturing activities consist primarily of assembly, test and integration of various proprietary and commercial parts, components and subassemblies (collectively, parts) that are used to manufacture systems. Applied has implemented a distributed manufacturing model under which manufacturing and supply chain activities are conducted in various countries, including the United States, Europe, Israel, Singapore, Taiwan, and other countries in Asia, and assembly of some systems is completed at customer sites. Applied uses numerous vendors, including contract manufacturers, to supply parts and assembly services for the manufacture and support of its products. Although Applied makes reasonable efforts to assure that parts are available from multiple qualified suppliers, this is not always possible. Accordingly, some key parts may be obtained from only a single supplier or a limited group of suppliers. Applied seeks to reduce costs and to lower the risks of manufacturing and service interruptions by: (1) selecting and qualifying alternate suppliers for key parts; (2) monitoring the financial condition of key suppliers; (3) maintaining appropriate inventories of key parts; (4) qualifying new parts on a timely basis; and (5) locating certain manufacturing operations in close proximity to suppliers and customers. Research, Development and Engineering Applied’s long-term growth strategy requires continued development of new products. The Company’s significant investment in research, development and engineering (RD&E) has generally enabled it to deliver new products and technologies before the emergence of strong demand, thus allowing customers to incorporate these products into their manufacturing plans at an early stage in the technology selection cycle. Applied works closely with its global customers to design systems and processes that meet their planned technical and production requirements. Product development and engineering organizations are located primarily in the United States, as well as in Europe, Israel, Taiwan, and China. In addition, Applied outsources certain RD&E activities, some of which are performed outside the United States, primarily in India. Process support and customer demonstration laboratories are located in the United States, China, Taiwan, Europe, and Israel. Applied’s investments in RD&E for product development and engineering programs to create or improve products and technologies over the last three years were as follows: $1.3 billion (18 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2013, $1.2 billion (14 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2012, and $1.1 billion (11 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2011. Applied has spent an average of 14 percent of net sales in RD&E over the last five years. In addition to RD&E for specific product technologies, Applied maintains ongoing programs for automation control systems, materials research, and environmental control that are applicable to its products. Item 2: Properties Information concerning Applied’s principal properties at October 27, 2013 is set forth below: \n
LocationTypePrincipal UseSquareFootageOwnership
Santa Clara, CAOffice, Plant & WarehouseHeadquarters; Marketing; Manufacturing; Distribution; Research, Development,Engineering; Customer Support1,476,000150,000OwnedLeased
Austin, TXOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing1,719,000145,000OwnedLeased
Rehovot, IsraelOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing; Research,Development, Engineering;Customer Support417,0005,000OwnedLeased
SingaporeOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing andCustomer Support392,00010,000OwnedLeased
Gloucester, MAOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing; Research,Development, Engineering;Customer Support315,000131,000OwnedLeased
Tainan, TaiwanOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing andCustomer Support320,000Owned
\n Because of the interrelation of Applied’s operations, properties within a country may be shared by the segments operating within that country. Products in the Silicon Systems Group are manufactured in Austin, Texas; Singapore; Gloucester, Massachusetts; and Rehovot, Israel. Remanufactured equipment products in the Applied Global Services segment are produced primarily in Austin, Texas. Products in the Display segment are manufactured in Tainan, Taiwan; Santa Clara, California; and Alzenau, Germany. Products in the Energy and Environmental Solutions segment are primarily manufactured in Alzenau, Germany; Treviso, Italy; and Cheseaux, Switzerland. In addition to the above properties, Applied also owns and leases offices, plants and/or warehouse locations in 78 locations throughout the world: 18 in Europe, 21 in Japan, 15 in North America (principally the United States), 8 in China, 7 in Korea, 6 in Southeast Asia, and 3 in Taiwan. These facilities are principally used for manufacturing; research, development and engineering; and marketing, sales and/or customer support. Applied also owns a total of approximately 139 acres of buildable land in Texas, California, Israel and Italy that could accommodate additional building space. Applied considers the properties that it owns or leases as adequate to meet its current and future requirements. Applied regularly assesses the size, capability and location of its global infrastructure and periodically makes adjustments based on these assessments. Fiscal 2013 operating results reflected a recovery in demand for TV manufacturing equipment and continued demand for advanced mobile display equipment, which resulted in increased new orders, net sales, operating income and non-GAAPadjusted operating income compared to fiscal 2012. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013, new orders were $114 million, down 55 percent from the prior quarter, and reflected customer push-outs of orders. Net sales in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013 were $163 million, almost flat compared to the prior quarter. Two customers accounted for approximately 50 percent of net sales for the Display segment in fiscal 2013. Fiscal 2012 operating results reflected a continued overcapacity in the large substrate LCD TV equipment industry that resulted in decreased new orders and net sales in fiscal 2012. The downturn in the LCD TV equipment industry was partially offset by increased demand for advanced mobile display equipment. Four customers accounted for 60 percent of net sales for the Display segment in fiscal 2012. Energy and Environmental Solutions Segment The Energy and Environmental Solutions segment includes products for fabricating c-Si solar PVs, as well as high throughput roll-to-roll deposition equipment for flexible electronics, packaging and other applications. This business is focused on delivering solutions to generate and conserve energy, with an emphasis on lowering the cost to produce solar power and increasing conversion efficiency. While end-demand for solar PVs has been robust over the last several years, investment levels in capital equipment remain depressed. Global solar PV production capacity exceeds anticipated demand, which has caused solar PV manufacturers to significantly reduce or delay investments in manufacturing capacity and new technology, or in some instances to cease operations. Certain significant measures for the past three fiscal years were as follows: \n
Change
2013201220112013 over 20122012 over 2011
(In millions, except percentages and ratios)
New orders$166$195$1,684$-29-15%$-1,489-88%
Net sales1734251,990-252-59%-1,565-79%
Book to bill ratio1.00.50.8
Operating income (loss)-433-66845323535%-1,121-247%
Operating margin-250.3%-157.2%22.8%-93.1 points-180.0 points
Non-GAAP Adjusted Results
Non-GAAP adjusted operating income (loss)-115-1844446938%-628-141%
Non-GAAP adjusted operating margin-66.5%-43.3%22.3%-23.2 points-65.6 points
\n Reconciliations of non-GAAP adjusted measures are presented under \"Non-GAAP Adjusted Results\" below. Net Operating Revenues by Operating Segment Information about our net operating revenues by operating segment as a percentage of Company net operating revenues is as follows:"} {"answer": 6589.9, "question": "What is the sum of the Notebooks/Mobile Devices in the years where Netcomm Products is greater than 1400? (in millions)", "context": "ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The increase in cash provided by accounts payable-inventory financing was primarily due to a new vendor added to our previously existing inventory financing agreement. For a description of the inventory financing transactions impacting each period, see Note 6 (Inventory Financing Agreements) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. For a description of the debt transactions impacting each period, see Note 8 (Long-Term Debt) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. Net cash used in financing activities decreased $56.3 million in 2014 compared to 2013. The decrease was primarily driven by several debt refinancing transactions during each period and our July 2013 IPO, which generated net proceeds of $424.7 million after deducting underwriting discounts, expenses and transaction costs. The net impact of our debt transactions resulted in cash outflows of $145.9 million and $518.3 million during 2014 and 2013, respectively, as cash was used in each period to reduce our total long-term debt. For a description of the debt transactions impacting each period, see Note 8 (Long-Term Debt) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. Long-Term Debt and Financing Arrangements As of December 31, 2015, we had total indebtedness of $3.3 billion, of which $1.6 billion was secured indebtedness. At December 31, 2015, we were in compliance with the covenants under our various credit agreements and indentures. The amount of CDW’s restricted payment capacity under the Senior Secured Term Loan Facility was $679.7 million at December 31, 2015. For further details regarding our debt and each of the transactions described below, see Note 8 (Long-Term Debt) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the following events occurred with respect to our debt structure: ? On August 1, 2015, we consolidated Kelway’s Term Loan and Kelway’s Revolving Credit Facility. Kelway’s Term Loan is denominated in British Pounds. The Kelway Revolving Credit Facility is a multi-currency revolving credit facility under which Kelway is permitted to borrow an aggregate amount of ￡50.0 million ($73.7 million) as of December 31, 2015. ? On March 3, 2015, we completed the issuance of $525.0 million principal amount of 5.0% Senior Notes due 2023 which will mature on September 1, 2023. ? On March 3, 2015, we redeemed the remaining $503.9 million aggregate principal amount of the 8.5% Senior Notes due 2019, plus accrued and unpaid interest through the date of redemption, April 2, 2015. Inventory Financing Agreements We have entered into agreements with certain financial intermediaries to facilitate the purchase of inventory from various suppliers under certain terms and conditions. These amounts are classified separately as accounts payable-inventory financing on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. We do not incur any interest expense associated with these agreements as balances are paid when they are due. For further details, see Note 6 (Inventory Financing Agreements) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. Contractual Obligations We have future obligations under various contracts relating to debt and interest payments, operating leases and asset retirement obligations. Our estimated future payments, based on undiscounted amounts, under contractual obligations that existed as of December 31, 2015, are as follows: \n
Payments Due by Period
(in millions)Total< 1 year1-3 years4-5 years> 5 years
Term Loan-1$1,703.4$63.9$126.3$1,513.2$—
Kelway Term Loan-190.913.577.4——
Senior Notes due 2022-2852.036.072.072.0672.0
Senior Notes due 2023-2735.126.352.552.5603.8
Senior Notes due 2024-2859.731.663.363.3701.5
Operating leases-3143.222.541.737.141.9
Asset retirement obligations-41.80.80.50.30.2
Total$4,386.1$194.6$433.7$1,738.4$2,019.4
\n ES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 90 Selected Segment Financial Information Information regarding the Company’s segments for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 is as follows: \n
(in millions)CorporatePublicOtherHeadquartersTotal
2015:
Net sales$6,816.4$5,125.5$1,046.8$—$12,988.7
Income (loss) from operations470.1343.343.1-114.5742.0
Depreciation and amortization expense-96.0-43.7-24.4-63.3-227.4
2014:
Net sales$6,475.5$4,879.4$719.6$—$12,074.5
Income (loss) from operations439.8313.232.9-112.9673.0
Depreciation and amortization expense-96.3-43.8-8.8-59.0-207.9
2013:
Net sales$5,960.1$4,164.5$644.0$—$10,768.6
Income (loss) from operations(1)363.3246.527.2-128.4508.6
Depreciation and amortization expense-97.3-44.0-8.6-58.3-208.2
\n (1) Includes $75.0 million of IPO- and secondary-offering related expenses, as follows: Corporate $26.4 million; Public $14.4 million; Other $3.6 million; and Headquarters $30.6 million. For additional information relating to the IPO- and secondary-offering, see Note 10 (Stockholders’ Equity). Geographic Areas and Revenue Mix The Company does not have Net sales to customers outside of the U. S. exceeding 10% of the Company’s total Net sales in 2015, 2014 and 2013. The Company does not have long-lived assets located outside of the U. S. exceeding 10% of the Company’s total long-lived assets as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The following table presents net sales by major category for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013. Categories are based upon internal classifications. Amounts for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 have been reclassified for certain changes in individual product classifications to conform to the presentation for the year ended December 31, 2015. \n
Year EndedDecember 31, 2015Year EndedDecember 31, 2014Year EndedDecember 31, 2013
Dollars inMillionsPercentageof Total NetSalesDollars inMillionsPercentageof Total NetSalesDollars inMillionsPercentageof Total NetSales
Notebooks/Mobile Devices$2,539.419.6%$2,354.019.5%$1,696.515.8%
Netcomm Products1,914.914.71,613.313.41,482.713.8
Enterprise and Data Storage (Including Drives)1,065.28.21,024.28.5999.39.3
Other Hardware4,756.436.64,551.137.64,184.138.8
Software2,163.616.72,064.117.11,982.418.4
Services478.03.7371.93.1332.73.1
Other-171.20.595.90.890.90.8
Total Net sales$12,988.7100.0%$12,074.5100.0%$10,768.6100.0%
\n (1) Includes items such as delivery charges to customers and certain commission revenue.17. Supplemental Guarantor Information The 2022 Senior Notes, the 2023 Senior Notes and the 2024 Senior Notes are, and, prior to being redeemed in full, the 2019 Senior Notes, the 12.535% Senior Subordinated Exchange Notes due 2017, and the 8.0% Senior Secured Notes due 2018 were guaranteed by Parent and each of CDW LLC’s direct and indirect, 100% owned, domestic subsidiaries PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Market Information Our common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market since June 27, 2013 under the symbol “CDW. ” The following table sets forth the ranges of high and low sales prices per share of our common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market and the cash dividends per share of common stock declared for the two most recent fiscal years."} {"answer": 26666.0, "question": "What is the average amount of Interest expense, net of Year Ended December 31, 2013, and Office equipment of December 31, 2015 ?", "context": "ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The following selected financial data is qualified by reference to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements, including the notes thereto, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. \n
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands, except per share amounts)20162015201420132012
Net revenues$4,825,335$3,963,313$3,084,370$2,332,051$1,834,921
Cost of goods sold2,584,7242,057,7661,572,1641,195,381955,624
Gross profit2,240,6111,905,5471,512,2061,136,670879,297
Selling, general and administrative expenses1,823,1401,497,0001,158,251871,572670,602
Income from operations417,471408,547353,955265,098208,695
Interest expense, net-26,434-14,628-5,335-2,933-5,183
Other expense, net-2,755-7,234-6,410-1,172-73
Income before income taxes388,282386,685342,210260,993203,439
Provision for income taxes131,303154,112134,16898,66374,661
Net income256,979232,573208,042162,330128,778
Adjustment payment to Class C59,000————
Net income available to all stockholders$197,979$232,573$208,042$162,330$128,778
Net income available per common share
Basic net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Basic net income per share of Class C common stock$0.72$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Diluted net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Diluted net income per share of Class C common stock$0.71$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class A and B common stock
Basic217,707215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted221,944220,868219,380215,958212,760
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class C common stock
Basic218,623215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted222,904220,868219,380215,958212,760
Dividends declared$59,000$—$—$—$—
\n Our net revenues for the full year 2016 were $4,825.3 million, which reflects a revision from the $4,828.2 million reported in our earnings release, filed January 31, 2017, on Form 8-K. This revision reflects a $2.9 million adjustment related to a return credit for footwear that was identified in connection with the closing of our January 2017 books and records, following the earnings release. As a result, other items on our Consolidated Financial Statements have been appropriately adjusted from the amounts provided in the earnings release, including a reduction of our full year 2016 gross profit and income from operations by $2.9 million, and a reduction of net income by $1.7 million. \n
At December 31,
(In thousands)20162015201420132012
Cash and cash equivalents$250,470$129,852$593,175$347,489$341,841
Working capital -11,279,3371,019,9531,127,772702,181651,370
Inventories917,491783,031536,714469,006319,286
Total assets3,644,3312,865,9702,092,4281,576,3691,155,052
Total debt, including current maturities817,388666,070281,546151,55159,858
Total stockholders’ equity$2,030,900$1,668,222$1,350,300$1,053,354$816,922
\n (1) Working capital is defined as current assets minus current liabilities. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, which effects all entities that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. The amendments in this ASU cover such areas as the recognition of excess tax benefits and deficiencies, the classification of those excess tax benefits on the statement of cash flows, an accounting policy election for forfeitures, the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes and still qualify for equity classification and the classification of those taxes paid on the statement of cash flows. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016. This guidance can be applied either prospectively, retrospectively or using a modified retrospective transition method. Early adoption is permitted. The Company will not early adopt this ASU. The adoption of this guidance may have a material impact on the Company’s effective tax rate and income tax expense, depending in part on whether significant employee stock option exercises occur. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, which eliminates the diversity in practice related to the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows, by adding or clarifying guidance on eight specific cash flow issues. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not believe this ASU will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, which will require an entity to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset, other than inventory, when the transfer occurs. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted in the first interim period of 2017. Upon adoption, any deferred charge established upon an intra-company transfer would be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. At December 31, 2016, the Company had a deferred charge of $26.0 million with $1.8 million and $24.2 million recorded within Prepaid expenses and Other long term assets, respectively. The Company plans to adopt this ASU during the interim period ending March 31, 2017. Recently Adopted Accounting Standards In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, which requires costs incurred to issue debt to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the debt. This ASU is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted the provisions of this ASU in the first quarter of 2016, and reclassified approximately $2.9 million from “Other long term assets” to “Long term debt, net of current maturities” as of December 31, 2015.3. Property and Equipment, Net Property and equipment consisted of the following: \n
December 31,
(In thousands)20162015
Leasehold and tenant improvements$326,617$214,834
Furniture, fixtures and displays168,720132,736
Buildings47,21647,137
Software151,05999,309
Office equipment75,19650,399
Plant equipment124,140118,138
Land83,57417,628
Construction in progress204,362147,581
Other20,3834,002
Subtotal property and equipment1,201,267831,764
Accumulated depreciation-397,056-293,233
Property and equipment, net$804,211$538,531
"} {"answer": 208.0, "question": "What's the sum of the equity the securities in the level where U.S. small cap stocks is greater than 1? (in million)", "context": "targets. At December 31, 2013, there were no significant holdings of any single issuer and the exposure to derivative instruments was not significant. The following tables present the Company’s pension plan assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis: \n
December 31, 2013
Asset CategoryLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
(in millions)
Equity securities:
U.S. large cap stocks$97$43$—$140
U.S. small cap stocks551—56
Non-U.S. large cap stocks2135—56
Non-U.S. small cap stocks21——21
Emerging markets1423—37
Debt securities:
U.S. investment grade bonds1714—31
U.S. high yield bonds—21—21
Non-U.S. investment grade bonds—14—14
Real estate investment trusts——22
Hedge funds——2020
Pooled pension funds—126—126
Cash equivalents20——20
Total$245$277$22$544
\n \n
December 31, 2012
Asset CategoryLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
(in millions)
Equity securities:
U.S. large cap stocks$89$14$—$103
U.S. small cap stocks431—44
Non-U.S. large cap stocks1730—47
Emerging markets1320—33
Debt securities:
U.S. investment grade bonds2012—32
U.S. high yield bonds—20—20
Non-U.S. investment grade bonds—15—15
Real estate investment trusts——1212
Hedge funds——1818
Pooled pension funds—104—104
Cash equivalents9——9
Total$191$216$30$437
\n Equity securities are managed to track the performance of common market indices for both U. S. and non-U. S. securities, primarily across large cap, small cap and emerging market asset classes. Debt securities are managed to track the performance of common market indices for both U. S. and non-U. S. investment grade bonds as well as a pool of U. S. high yield bonds. Real estate investment trusts are managed to track the performance of a broad population of investment grade non-agricultural income producing properties. The Company’s investments in hedge funds include investments in a multi-strategy fund and an off-shore fund managed to track the performance of broad fund of fund indices. Pooled pension funds are managed to return 1.5% in excess of a common index of similar pooled pension funds on a rolling three year basis. Cash equivalents consist of holdings in a money market fund that seeks to equal the return of the three month U. S. Treasury bill. The fair value of real estate investment trusts is based primarily on the underlying cash flows of the properties within the trusts which are significant unobservable inputs and classified as Level 3. The fair value of the hedge funds is based on the proportionate share of the underlying net assets of the funds, which are significant unobservable inputs and classified as Level 3. The fair value of pooled pension funds and equity securities held in collective trust funds is based on the fund’s NAV and classified as Level 2 as they trade in principal-to-principal markets. Equity securities and mutual funds traded in active markets are classified as Level 1. For debt securities and cash equivalents, the valuation techniques and classifications are consistent with those used for the Company’s own investments as described in Note 14. Entergy New Orleans, Inc. Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 339 Net Revenue 2008 Compared to 2007 Net revenue consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale, 2) purchased power expenses, and 3) other regulatory charges. Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007. \n
Amount (In Millions)
2007 net revenue$231.0
Volume/weather15.5
Net gas revenue6.6
Rider revenue3.9
Base revenue-11.3
Other7.0
2008 net revenue$252.7
\n The volume/weather variance is due to an increase in electricity usage in the service territory in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007. Entergy New Orleans estimates that approximately 141,000 electric customers and 93,000 gas customers have returned since Hurricane Katrina and are taking service as of December 31, 2008, compared to approximately 132,000 electric customers and 86,000 gas customers as of December 31, 2007. Billed retail electricity usage increased a total of 184 GWh compared to the same period in 2007, an increase of 4%. The net gas revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates in March and November 2007. Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the base rate increase. The rider revenue variance is due primarily to higher total revenue and a storm reserve rider effective March 2007 as a result of the City Council's approval of a settlement agreement in October 2006. The approved storm reserve has been set to collect $75 million over a ten-year period through the rider and the funds will be held in a restricted escrow account. The settlement agreement is discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements. The base revenue variance is primarily due to a base rate recovery credit, effective January 2008. The base rate credit is discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements. Gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses Gross operating revenues increased primarily due to: x an increase of $58.9 million in gross wholesale revenue due to increased sales to affiliated customers and an increase in the average price of energy available for resale sales; x an increase of $47.7 million in electric fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates and increased electricity usage; and x an increase of $22 million in gross gas revenues due to higher fuel recovery revenues and increases in gas base rates in March 2007 and November 2007. Fuel and purchased power increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power in addition to an increase in demand. Table of Contents Seasonality Our revenues are seasonal based on the demand for cruises. Demand is strongest for cruises during the Northern Hemisphere’s summer months and holidays. In order to mitigate the impact of the winter weather in the Northern Hemisphere and to capitalize on the summer season in the Southern Hemisphere, our brands have focused on deployment in the Caribbean, Asia and Australia during that period. Passengers and Capacity Selected statistical information is shown in the following table (see Financial Presentation- Description of Certain Line Items and Selected Operational and Financial Metrics under Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, for definitions):"} {"answer": -0.01639, "question": "In the year with largest amount of Services, what's the increasing rate of Hardware ?", "context": "McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) \n
Years Ended March 31, Change
(Dollars in millions) 2012 2011 2010 2012 2011
Distribution Solutions
Direct distribution & services$85,523$77,554$72,21010%7%
Sales to customers’ warehouses20,45318,63121,43510-13
Total U.S. pharmaceutical distribution & services105,97696,18593,645103
Canada pharmaceutical distribution & services10,3039,7849,07258
Medical-Surgical distribution & services3,1452,9202,86182
Total Distribution Solutions119,424108,889105,578103
Technology Solutions
Services2,5942,4832,43942
Software & software systems59659057113
Hardware120122114-27
Total Technology Solutions3,3103,1953,12442
Total Revenues$122,734$112,084$108,702103
\n Revenues increased 10% to $122.7 billion in 2012 and 3% to $112.1 billion in 2011. The increase in revenues in each year primarily reflects market growth in our Distribution Solutions segment, which accounted for approximately 97% of our consolidated revenues, and our acquisition of US Oncology. Direct distribution and services revenues increased in 2012 compared to 2011 primarily due to market growth, which includes growing drug utilization and price increases, and from our acquisition of US Oncology. These increases were partially offset by price deflation associated with brand to generic drug conversions. Direct distribution and services revenues increased in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily due to market growth, the effect of a shift of revenues from sales to customers’ warehouses to direct store delivery, the lapping of which was completed in the third quarter of 2011, and due to our acquisition of US Oncology. These increases were partially offset by a decline in demand associated with the flu season and the impact of price deflation associated with brand to generic drug conversions. Sales to customers’ warehouses for 2012 increased compared to 2011 primarily due to a new customer and new business with existing customers. Sales to customers’ warehouses for 2011 decreased compared to 2010 primarily reflecting reduced revenues associated with existing customers, the effect of a shift of revenues to direct store delivery, the lapping of which was completed in the third quarter of 2011, and the impact of price deflation associated with brand to generic drug conversions. Sales to retail customers’ warehouses represent large volume sales of pharmaceuticals primarily to a limited number of large self-warehousing retail chain customers whereby we order bulk product from the manufacturer, receive and process the product through our central distribution facility and subsequently deliver the bulk product (generally in the same form as received from the manufacturer) directly to our customers’ warehouses. This distribution method is typically not marketed or sold by the Company as a stand-alone service; rather, it is offered as an additional distribution method for our large retail chain customers that have an internal self-warehousing distribution network. Sales to customers’ warehouses provide a benefit to these customers because they can utilize the Company as one source for both their direct-to-store business and their warehouse business. We generally have significantly lower gross profit margins on sales to customers’ warehouses as we pass much of the efficiency of this low cost-to-serve model on to the customer. These sales do, however, contribute to our gross profit dollars. McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL NOTES (Continued) Expected benefit payments, including assumed executive lump sum payments, for our pension plans are as follows: $180 million, $64 million, $64 million, $62 million and $62 million for 2020 to 2024 and $327 million for 2025 through 2029. Expected benefit payments are based on the same assumptions used to measure the benefit obligations and include estimated future employee service. Expected contributions to be made for our pension plans are $146 million for 2020. Weighted-average assumptions used to estimate the net periodic pension expense and the actuarial present value of benefit obligations were as follows: \n
U.S. Plans Years Ended March 31,Non-U.S. Plans Years Ended March 31,
201920182017201920182017
Net periodic pension expense
Discount rates3.83%3.55%3.40%2.35%2.34%2.72%
Rate of increase in compensationN/A -14.004.003.132.722.76
Expected long-term rate of return on plan assets5.256.256.253.714.034.51
Benefit obligation
Discount rates3.65%3.69%3.39%2.13%2.35%2.35%
Rate of increase in compensationN/A -1N/A -14.003.182.593.18
\n (1) This assumption is no longer needed in actuarial valuations as U. S. plans are frozen or have fixed benefits for the remaining active participants. Our defined benefit pension plan liabilities are valued using a discount rate based on a yield curve developed from a portfolio of high quality corporate bonds rated AA or better whose maturities are aligned with the expected benefit payments of our plans. For March 31, 2019, our U. S. defined benefit liabilities are valued using a weighted average discount rate of 3.65%, which represents a decrease of 4 basis points from our 2018 weighted-average discount rate of 3.69%. Our non-U. S. defined benefit pension plan liabilities are valued using a weighted-average discount rate of 2.13%, which represents a decrease of 22 basis points from our 2018 weighted average discount rate of 2.35%. Plan Assets Investment Strategy: The overall objective for U. S. pension plan assets has been to generate long-term investment returns consistent with capital preservation and prudent investment practices, with a diversification of asset types and investment strategies. Periodic adjustments were made to provide liquidity for benefit payments and to rebalance plan assets to their target allocations. In September 2018, a new investment allocation strategy was put in place to protect the funded status of the U. S. plan assets subsequent to Board approval of U. S. pension plan termination. The target allocation for U. S. plan assets at March 31, 2019 is 100% fixed income investments including cash and cash equivalents. The target allocations for U. S. plan assets at March 31, 2018 were 26% equity investments, 70% fixed income investments including cash and cash equivalents and 4% real estate. Equity investments include common stock, preferred stock, and equity commingled funds. Fixed income investments include corporate bonds, government securities, mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities, other directly held fixed income investments, and fixed income commingled funds. The real estate investments are in a commingled real estate fund. Year Ended December 31, 2010 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2009 Net revenues increased $207.5 million, or 24.2%, to $1,063.9 million in 2010 from $856.4 million in 2009. Net revenues by product category are summarized below: \n
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands)20102009$ Change% Change
Apparel$853,493$651,779$201,71430.9%
Footwear127,175136,224-9,049-6.6
Accessories43,88235,0778,80525.1
Total net sales1,024,550823,080201,47024.5
License revenues39,37733,3316,04618.1
Total net revenues$1,063,927$856,411$207,51624.2%
\n Net sales increased $201.5 million, or 24.5%, to $1,024.6 million in 2010 from $823.1 million in 2009 as noted in the table above. The increase in net sales primarily reflects: ? $88.9 million, or 56.8%, increase in direct to consumer sales, which includes 19 additional stores in 2010; and ? unit growth driven by increased distribution and new offerings in multiple product categories, most significantly in our training, base layer, mountain, golf and underwear categories; partially offset by ? $9.0 million decrease in footwear sales driven primarily by a decline in running and training footwear sales. License revenues increased $6.1 million, or 18.1%, to $39.4 million in 2010 from $33.3 million in 2009. This increase in license revenues was primarily a result of increased sales by our licensees due to increased distribution and continued unit volume growth. We have developed our own headwear and bags, and beginning in 2011, these products are being sold by us rather than by one of our licensees. Gross profit increased $120.4 million to $530.5 million in 2010 from $410.1 million in 2009. Gross profit as a percentage of net revenues, or gross margin, increased 200 basis points to 49.9% in 2010 compared to 47.9% in 2009. The increase in gross margin percentage was primarily driven by the following: ? approximate 100 basis point increase driven by increased direct to consumer higher margin sales; ? approximate 50 basis point increase driven by decreased sales markdowns and returns, primarily due to improved sell-through rates at retail; and ? approximate 50 basis point increase driven primarily by liquidation sales and related inventory reserve reversals. The current year period benefited from reversals of inventory reserves established in the prior year relative to certain cleated footwear, sport specific apparel and gloves. These products have historically been more difficult to liquidate at favorable prices. Selling, general and administrative expenses increased $93.3 million to $418.2 million in 2010 from $324.9 million in 2009. As a percentage of net revenues, selling, general and administrative expenses increased to 39.3% in 2010 from 37.9% in 2009. These changes were primarily attributable to the following: ? Marketing costs increased $19.3 million to $128.2 million in 2010 from $108.9 million in 2009 primarily due to an increase in sponsorship of events and collegiate and professional teams and athletes, increased television and digital campaign costs, including media campaigns for specific customers and additional personnel costs. In addition, we incurred increased expenses for our performance incentive plan as compared to the prior year. As a percentage of net revenues, marketing costs decreased to 12.0% in 2010 from 12.7% in 2009 primarily due to decreased marketing costs for specific customers."} {"answer": 4155.0, "question": "What is the sum of Net written premiums for Specialty and Other revenue, primarily operating in 2016?", "context": "Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 11. Income Taxes – (Continued) The federal income tax return for 2006 is subject to examination by the IRS. In addition for 2007 and 2008, the IRS has invited the Company to participate in the Compliance Assurance Process (“CAP”), which is a voluntary program for a limited number of large corporations. Under CAP, the IRS conducts a real-time audit and works contemporaneously with the Company to resolve any issues prior to the filing of the tax return. The Company has agreed to participate. The Company believes this approach should reduce tax-related uncertainties, if any. The Company and/or its subsidiaries also file income tax returns in various state, local and foreign jurisdictions. These returns, with few exceptions, are no longer subject to examination by the various taxing authorities before 2000. As discussed in Note 1, the Company adopted the provisions of FIN No.48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” on January 1, 2007. As a result of the implementation of FIN No.48, the Company recognized a decrease to beginning retained earnings on January 1, 2007 of $37 million. The total amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of the date of adoption was approximately $70 million. Included in the balance at January 1, 2007, were $51 million of tax positions that if recognized would affect the effective tax rate. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows: \n
Balance, January 1, 2007$70
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year12
Additions for tax positions of prior years3
Reductions for tax positions related to the current year-23
Settlements-6
Expiration of statute of limitations-3
Balance, December 31, 2007$53
\n The Company anticipates that it is reasonably possible that payments of approximately $2 million will be made primarily due to the conclusion of state income tax examinations within the next 12 months. Additionally, certain state and foreign income tax returns will no longer be subject to examination and as a result, there is a reasonable possibility that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits will decrease by $7 million. At December 31, 2007, there were $42 million of tax benefits that if recognized would affect the effective rate. The Company recognizes interest accrued related to: (1) unrecognized tax benefits in Interest expense and (2) tax refund claims in Other revenues on the Consolidated Statements of Income. The Company recognizes penalties in Income tax expense (benefit) on the Consolidated Statements of Income. During 2007, the Company recorded charges of approximately $4 million for interest expense and $2 million for penalties. Provision has been made for the expected U. S. federal income tax liabilities applicable to undistributed earnings of subsidiaries, except for certain subsidiaries for which the Company intends to invest the undistributed earnings indefinitely, or recover such undistributed earnings tax-free. At December 31, 2007, the Company has not provided deferred taxes of $126 million, if sold through a taxable sale, on $361 million of undistributed earnings related to a domestic affiliate. The determination of the amount of the unrecognized deferred tax liability related to the undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries is not practicable. In connection with a non-recurring distribution of $850 million to Diamond Offshore from a foreign subsidiary, a portion of which consisted of earnings of the subsidiary that had not previously been subjected to U. S. federal income tax, Diamond Offshore recognized $59 million of U. S. federal income tax expense as a result of the distribution. It remains Diamond Offshore’s intention to indefinitely reinvest future earnings of the subsidiary to finance foreign activities. Total income tax expense for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, was different than the amounts of $1,601 million, $1,557 million and $639 million, computed by applying the statutory U. S. federal income tax rate of 35% to income before income taxes and minority interest for each of the years. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Results of Operations – CNA Financial – (Continued) \n
Year Ended December 31, 2014SpecialtyCommercialInternationalTotal
(In millions, except %)
Net written premiums$2,839$2,817$880$6,536
Net earned premiums2,8382,9069136,657
Net investment income560723611,344
Net operating income56927663908
Net realized investment gains (losses)99-117
Net income57828562925
Other performance metrics:
Loss and loss adjustment expense ratio57.3%75.3%53.5%64.6%
Expense ratio30.133.738.932.9
Dividend ratio0.20.30.2
Combined ratio87.6%109.3%92.4%97.7%
Rate3%5%-1%3%
Retention87%73%74%78%
New Business (a)$309$491$115$915
\n (a) Includes Hardy new business of $133 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. Prior years amounts are not included for Hardy.2016 Compared with 2015 Net written premiums increased $21 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Net written premiums for Commercial increased $23 million in 2016 as compared with 2015, driven by strong retention in middle markets, partially offset by a decrease in small business, which included a premium rate adjustment, as discussed in Note 18 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements under Item 8. Net written premiums for Specialty in 2016 were consistent with 2015 as growth in warranty was offset by a decrease in management and professional liability and health care due to underwriting actions undertaken in certain business lines. Net written premiums for International in 2016 were consistent with 2015 and include favorable period over period premium development of $24 million. Excluding the effect of foreign currency exchange rates and premium development, net written premiums increased 1.4% in 2016 in International. The increase in net earned premiums was consistent with the trend in net written premiums in Commercial. Excluding the effect of foreign currency exchange rates and premium development, the increase in net earned premiums was consistent with the trend in net written premiums in International. Net operating income increased $15 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. The increase in net operating income was primarily due to higher favorable net prior year reserve development and net investment income, partially offset by an increase in the current accident year loss ratio and higher underwriting expenses. Catastrophe losses were $100 million (after tax and noncontrolling interests) in 2016 as compared to catastrophe losses of $85 million (after tax and noncontrolling interests) in 2015. Favorable net prior year development of $316 million and $218 million was recorded in 2016 and 2015. Specialty recorded favorable net prior year development of $305 million and $152 million in 2016 and 2015, Commercial recorded unfavorable net prior year development of $53 million in 2016 as compared with favorable net prior year development of $30 million in 2015 and International recorded favorable net prior year development of $64 million and $36 million in 2016 and 2015. Further information on net prior year development is included in Note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8. Specialty’s combined ratio decreased 3.7 points in 2016 as compared with 2015. The loss ratio decreased 4.6 points due to higher favorable net prior year reserve development, partially offset by a higher current accident year loss ratio. Specialty’s expense ratio increased 0.9 points in 2016 as compared with 2015 due to higher employee costs and higher information technology (“IT”) spending primarily related to new underwriting platforms. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Results of Operations – Boardwalk Pipeline – (Continued) Results of Operations The following table summarizes the results of operations for Boardwalk Pipeline for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 as presented in Note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8: \n
Year Ended December 31201620152014
(In millions)
Revenues:
Other revenue, primarily operating$ 1,316$ 1,253$ 1,235
Net investment income11
Total1,3161,2541,236
Expenses:
Operating835851931
Interest183176165
Total1,0181,0271,096
Income before income tax298227140
Income tax expense-61-46-11
Amounts attributable to noncontrolling interests-148-107-111
Net income attributable to Loews Corporation$ 89$ 74$ 18
\n 2016 Compared with 2015 Total revenues increased $62 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Excluding the net effect of $13 million of proceeds received from the settlement of a legal matter in 2016, $9 million of proceeds received from a business interruption claim in 2015 and items offset in fuel and transportation expense, primarily retained fuel, operating revenues increased $83 million. The increase was driven by an increase in transportation revenues of $71 million, which resulted primarily from growth projects recently placed into service, incremental revenues from the Gulf South rate case of $18 million and a full year of revenues from the Evangeline pipeline. Storage and PAL revenues were higher by $17 million primarily from the effects of favorable market conditions on time period price spreads. Operating expenses decreased $16 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Excluding receipt of a franchise tax refund of $10 million in 2015 and items offset in operating revenues, operating costs and expenses increased $5 million primarily due to higher employee related costs, partially offset by decreases in maintenance activities and depreciation expense. Interest expense increased $7 million primarily due to higher average interest rates compared to 2015. Net income increased $15 million in 2016 as compared with 2015, primarily reflecting higher revenues and lower operating expenses, partially offset by higher interest expense as discussed above.2015 Compared with 2014 Total revenues increased $18 million in 2015 as compared with 2014. Excluding the business interruption claim proceeds of $8 million and items offset in fuel and transportation expense, primarily retained fuel, operating revenues increased $33 million. This increase is primarily due to higher transportation revenues of $39 million from growth projects recently placed into service, including the Evangeline pipeline which was acquired in October of 2014 and $20 million of additional revenues resulting from the Gulf South rate case, partially offset by the effects of comparably warm weather experienced in the early part of the 2015 period in Boardwalk Pipeline’s market areas and unfavorable market conditions. Storage and PAL revenues decreased $20 million primarily as a result of the effects of unfavorable market conditions on time period price spreads. Operating expenses decreased $80 million in 2015 as compared with 2014. This decrease is primarily due to a $94 million prior year charge to write off all capitalized costs associated with the terminated Bluegrass project, a $10 million franchise tax refund related to settlement of prior tax periods and a decrease in fuel and transportation expense due to lower natural gas prices. These decreases were partially offset by higher depreciation expense of $35"} {"answer": 115.0, "question": "What was the value of the Gross margin in the year where Sales volume by product tons (000s) is positive? (in million)", "context": "Table of Contents Rent expense under all operating leases, including both cancelable and noncancelable leases, was $645 million, $488 million and $338 million in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases having remaining terms in excess of one year as of September 28, 2013, are as follows (in millions): \n
2014$610
2015613
2016587
2017551
2018505
Thereafter1,855
Total minimum lease payments$4,721
\n Other Commitments As of September 28, 2013, the Company had outstanding off-balance sheet third-party manufacturing commitments and component purchase commitments of $18.6 billion. In addition to the off-balance sheet commitments mentioned above, the Company had outstanding obligations of $1.3 billion as of September 28, 2013, which consisted mainly of commitments to acquire capital assets, including product tooling and manufacturing process equipment, and commitments related to advertising, research and development, Internet and telecommunications services and other obligations. Contingencies The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and that have not been fully adjudicated. In the opinion of management, there was not at least a reasonable possibility the Company may have incurred a material loss, or a material loss in excess of a recorded accrual, with respect to loss contingencies. However, the outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain. Therefore, although management considers the likelihood of such an outcome to be remote, if one or more of these legal matters were resolved against the Company in a reporting period for amounts in excess of management’s expectations, the Company’s consolidated financial statements for that reporting period could be materially adversely affected. Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd, et al. On August 24, 2012, a jury returned a verdict awarding the Company $1.05 billion in its lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd and affiliated parties in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division. On March 1, 2013, the District Court upheld $599 million of the jury’s award and ordered a new trial as to the remainder. Because the award is subject to entry of final judgment, partial re-trial and appeal, the Company has not recognized the award in its results of operations. VirnetX, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al. On August 11, 2010, VirnetX, Inc. filed an action against the Company alleging that certain of its products infringed on four patents relating to network communications technology. On November 6, 2012, a jury returned a verdict against the Company, and awarded damages of $368 million. The Company is challenging the verdict, believes it has valid defenses and has not recorded a loss accrual at this time. CF INDUSTRIES HOLDINGS, INC. 5 The following table summarizes our nitrogen fertilizer production volume for the last three years \n
December 31,
201720162015
(tons in thousands)
Ammonia-110,2958,3077,673
Granular urea4,4513,3682,520
UAN -32%6,9146,6985,888
AN2,1271,8451,283
\n (1) Gross ammonia production, including amounts subsequently upgraded on-site into granular urea, UAN or AN. Donaldsonville, Louisiana The Donaldsonville nitrogen fertilizer complex is the world's largest nitrogen fertilizer production facility. It has six ammonia plants, five urea plants, four nitric acid plants, three UAN plants, and one DEF plant. The complex, which is located on the Mississippi River, includes deep-water docking facilities, access to an ammonia pipeline, and truck and railroad loading capabilities. The complex has on-site storage for 160,000 tons of ammonia, 201,000 tons of UAN (measured on a 32% nitrogen content basis) and 173,000 tons of granular urea. As part of our capacity expansion projects, the new Donaldsonville urea plant became operational during the fourth quarter of 2015. The new UAN plant was placed in service in the first quarter of 2016, and the new ammonia plant was placed in service in October 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada Medicine Hat is the largest nitrogen fertilizer complex in Canada. It has two ammonia plants and one urea plant. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 60,000 tons of granular urea. Port Neal, Iowa The Port Neal facility is located approximately 12 miles south of Sioux City, Iowa on the Missouri River. The facility consists of two ammonia plants, three urea plants, two nitric acid plants and a UAN plant. The location has on-site storage for 90,000 tons of ammonia, 154,000 tons of granular urea, and 81,000 tons of 32% UAN. As part of our capacity expansion projects, both the ammonia and urea plants were placed in service in December 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Verdigris, Oklahoma The Verdigris facility is located northeast of Tulsa, Oklahoma, near the Verdigris River and is owned by TNLP. It is the second largest UAN production facility in North America. The facility comprises two ammonia plants, two nitric acid plants, two UAN plants and a port terminal. Through our approximately 75.3% interest in TNCLP and its subsidiary, TNLP, we operate the plants and lease the port terminal from the Tulsa-Rogers County Port Authority. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 100,000 tons of 32% UAN. Woodward, Oklahoma The Woodward facility is located in rural northwest Oklahoma and consists of an ammonia plant, two nitric acid plants, two urea plants and two UAN plants. The facility has on-site storage for 36,000 tons of ammonia and 84,000 tons of 32% UAN. Yazoo City, Mississippi The Yazoo City facility is located in central Mississippi and includes one ammonia plant, four nitric acid plants, an AN plant, two urea plants, a UAN plant and a dinitrogen tetroxide production and storage facility. The site has on-site storage for 50,000 tons of ammonia, 48,000 tons of 32% UAN and 11,000 tons of AN and related products. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our ammonia segment averaged $248 per ton in 2016, including the impact of the CF Fertilisers UK acquisition, which averaged $220 per ton. The remaining cost of sales per ton was $250 in 2016, a 16% decrease from the $296 per ton in 2015. The decrease was due primarily to the impact of unrealized net mark-to-market gains on natural gas derivatives in 2016 compared to losses in 2015 and to the impact of lower realized natural gas costs in 2016. This was partly offset by capacity expansion project start-up costs of $50 million and an increase in expansion project depreciation as a result of the new ammonia plants at our Donaldsonville and Port Neal facilities. Granular Urea Segment Our granular urea segment produces granular urea, which contains 46% nitrogen. Produced from ammonia and carbon dioxide, it has the highest nitrogen content of any of our solid nitrogen fertilizers. Granular urea is produced at our Courtright, Ontario; Donaldsonville, Louisiana; Medicine Hat, Alberta; and Port Neal, Iowa nitrogen complexes. The following table presents summary operating data for our granular urea segment: \n
Year ended December 31,
2017201620152017 v. 20162016 v. 2015
(in millions, except as noted)
Net sales$971$831$788$14017%$435%
Cost of sales85658446927247%11525%
Gross margin$115$247$319$-132-53%$-72-23%
Gross margin percentage11.8%29.7%40.4%-17.9%-10.7%
Sales volume by product tons (000s)4,3573,5972,46076021%1,13746%
Sales volume by nutrient tons (000s)(1)2,0041,6541,13235021%52246%
Average selling price per product ton$223$231$320$-8-3%$-89-28%
Average selling price per nutrient ton-1$485$502$696$-17-3%$-194-28%
Gross margin per product ton$26$69$129$-43-62%$-60-47%
Gross margin per nutrient ton-1$57$149$281$-92-62%$-132-47%
Depreciation and amortization$246$112$51$134120%$61120%
Unrealized net mark-to-market loss (gain) on natural gas derivatives$16$-67$47$83N/M$-114N/M
\n N/M—Not Meaningful (1) Granular urea represents 46% nitrogen content. Nutrient tons represent the tons of nitrogen within the product tons. Year Ended December 31, 2017 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2016 Net Sales. Net sales in the granular urea segment increased by $140 million, or 17%, to $971 million in 2017 compared to $831 million in 2016 due primarily to a 21% increase in sales volume partially offset by a 3% decrease in average selling prices. Sales volume was higher due primarily to increased production at our new Port Neal facility, which came on line in the fourth quarter of 2016. Average selling prices decreased to $223 per ton in 2017 compared to $231 per ton in 2016 due primarily to greater global nitrogen supply availability due to global capacity additions. Selling prices strengthened in the fourth quarter of 2017 rising approximately 14% compared to the prior year period. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our granular urea segment averaged $197 in 2017, a 22% increase from the $162 per ton in 2016. The increase was due primarily to higher depreciation as a result of the new granular urea plant at our Port Neal facility, an unrealized net mark-to-market loss on natural gas derivatives in 2017 compared to a gain in the comparable period of 2016 and higher realized natural gas costs, including the impact of realized derivatives. These increases in cost of sales were partially offset by the impact of production efficiencies due to increased volume. Depreciation and amortization in our granular urea segment in 2017 was $56 per ton compared to $31 per ton in 2016."} {"answer": 81.66667, "question": "what is the implied value of nigen based on the 2000 acquisition?", "context": "affiliated company. The loss recorded on the sale was approximately $14 million and is recorded as a loss on sale of assets and asset impairment expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. In the second quarter of 2002, the Company recorded an impairment charge of approximately $40 million, after income taxes, on an equity method investment in a telecommunications company in Latin America held by EDC. The impairment charge resulted from sustained poor operating performance coupled with recent funding problems at the invested company. During 2001, the Company lost operational control of Central Electricity Supply Corporation (‘‘CESCO’’), a distribution company located in the state of Orissa, India. CESCO is accounted for as a cost method investment. In May 2000, the Company completed the acquisition of 100% of Tractebel Power Ltd (‘‘TPL’’) for approximately $67 million and assumed liabilities of approximately $200 million. TPL owned 46% of Nigen. The Company also acquired an additional 6% interest in Nigen from minority stockholders during the year ended December 31, 2000 through the issuance of approximately 99,000 common shares of AES stock valued at approximately $4.9 million. With the completion of these transactions, the Company owns approximately 98% of Nigen’s common stock and began consolidating its financial results beginning May 12, 2000. Approximately $100 million of the purchase price was allocated to excess of costs over net assets acquired and was amortized through January 1, 2002 at which time the Company adopted SFAS No.142 and ceased amortization of goodwill. In August 2000, a subsidiary of the Company acquired a 49% interest in Songas Limited (‘‘Songas’’) for approximately $40 million. The Company acquired an additional 16.79% of Songas for approximately $12.5 million, and the Company began consolidating this entity in 2002. Songas owns the Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project in Tanzania. In December 2002, the Company signed a Sales Purchase Agreement to sell Songas. The sale is expected to close in early 2003. See Note 4 for further discussion of the transaction. The following table presents summarized comparative financial information (in millions) for the Company’s investments in 50% or less owned investments accounted for using the equity method. \n
AS OF AND FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,200220012000
Revenues$2,832$6,147$6,241
Operating Income6951,7171,989
Net Income229650859
Current Assets1,0973,7002,423
Noncurrent Assets6,75114,94213,080
Current Liabilities1,4183,5103,370
Noncurrent Liabilities3,3498,2975,927
Stockholder's Equity3,0816,8356,206
\n In 2002, 2001 and 2000, the results of operations and the financial position of CEMIG were negatively impacted by the devaluation of the Brazilian Real and the impairment charge recorded in 2002. The Brazilian Real devalued 32%, 19% and 8% for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. The Company recorded $83 million, $210 million, and $64 million of pre-tax non-cash foreign currency transaction losses on its investments in Brazilian equity method affiliates during 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. Consumers purchases the balance of its required gas supply under incremental firm transportation contracts, firm city gate contracts and, as needed, interruptible transportation contracts. The amount of interruptible transportation service and its use vary primarily with the price for such service and the availability and price of the spot supplies being purchased and transported. Consumers’ use of interruptible transportation is generally in off-peak summer months and after Consumers has fully utilized the services under the firm transportation agreements. Enterprises Enterprises, through various subsidiaries and certain equity investments, is engaged primarily in domestic independent power production. Enterprises’ operating revenue included in Continuing Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $383 million in 2007, $438 million in 2006, and $693 million in 2005. Operating revenue included in Discontinued Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $235 million in 2007, $684 million in 2006, and $409 million in 2005. In 2007, Enterprises made a significant change in business strategy by exiting the international marketplace and refocusing its business strategy to concentrate on its independent power business in the United States. Independent Power Production CMS Generation was formed in 1986. It invested in and operated non-utility power generation plants in the United States and abroad. The independent power production business segment’s operating revenue included in Continuing Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $41 million in 2007, $103 million in 2006, and $104 million in 2005. Operating revenue included in Discontinued Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $124 million in 2007, $437 million in 2006, and $211 million in 2005. In 2007, Enterprises sold CMS Generation and all of its international assets and power production facilities and transferred its domestic independent power plant operations to its subsidiary, Hydra-Co. For more information on the asset sales, see ITEM 8. CMS ENERGY’S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA — NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — NOTE 2. ASSET SALES, DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS AND IMPAIRMENT CHARGES — ASSET SALES. IndependentPowerProductionProperties: AtDecember 31,2007,CMSEnergyhadownershipinterestsin independent power plants totaling 1,199 gross MW or 1,078 net MW (net MW reflects that portion of the gross capacity in relation to CMS Energy’s ownership interest). The following table details CMS Energy’s interest in independent power plants at December 31, 2007: \n
Location Fuel Type Ownership Interest (%) Gross Capacity (MW) Percentage of Gross Capacity Under Long-Term Contract (%)
CaliforniaWood37.836100
ConnecticutScrap tire100310
MichiganCoal5070100
MichiganNatural gas10071061
MichiganNatural gas1002240
MichiganWood5040100
MichiganWood5038100
North CarolinaWood50500
Total1,199
\n For information on capital expenditures, see ITEM 7. CMS ENERGY’S MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — CAPITAL RESOURCES AND LIQUIDITY. CMS ENERGY CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) December 24, 2008. The settlement includes a $20 million decrease in depreciation rates and requires that we not request a new gas general rate increase prior to May 1, 2009. OTHER CONTINGENCIES — INDEMNIFICATIONS Equatorial Guinea Tax Claim: In 2004, we received a request for indemnification from the purchaser of CMS Oil and Gas. The indemnification claim relates to the sale of our oil, gas and methanol projects in Equatorial Guinea and the claim of the government of Equatorial Guinea that we owe $142 million in taxes in connection with that sale. CMS Energy concluded that the government’s tax claim is without merit and the purchaser of CMS Oil and Gas submitted a response to the government rejecting the claim. The government of Equatorial Guinea has indicated that it still intends to pursue its claim. We cannot predict the financial impact or outcome of this matter. Moroccan Tax Claim: In May 2007, we sold our 50 percent interest in Jorf Lasfar. As part of the sale agreement, we agreed to indemnify the purchaser for 50 percent of any tax assessments on Jorf Lasfar attributable to tax years prior to the sale. In December 2007, the Moroccan tax authority concluded its audit of Jorf Lasfar for tax years 2003 through 2005. The audit asserted deficiencies in certain corporate and withholding taxes. In January 2009, we paid $18 million, which was charged against a tax indemnification liability established when we recorded the sale of Jorf Lasfar, and accordingly it did not affect earnings. Marathon Indemnity Claim regarding F. T. Barr Claim: On December 3, 2001, F. T. Barr, an individual with an overriding royalty interest in production from the Alba field, filed a lawsuit in Harris County District Court in Texas against CMS Energy, CMS Oil and Gas and other defendants alleging that his overriding royalty payments related to Alba field production were improperly calculated. CMS Oil and Gas believes that Barr was paid properly on gas sales and that he was not entitled to the additional overriding royalty payment sought. All parties signed a confidential settlement agreement on April 26, 2004. The settlement resolved claims between Barr and the defendants, and the involved CMS Energy entities reserved all defenses to any indemnity claim relating to the settlement. There is disagreement between Marathon and certain current or former CMS Energy entities as to the existence and scope of any indemnity obligations to Marathon in connection with the settlement. Between April 2005 and April 2008, there were no further communications between Marathon and CMS Energy entities regarding this matter. In April 2008, Marathon indicated its intent to pursue the indemnity claim. Present and former CMS Energy entities and Marathon entered into an agreement tolling the statute of limitations on any claim by Marathon under the indemnity. CMS Energy entities dispute Marathon’s claim, and will vigorously oppose it if raised in any legal proceeding. CMS Energy entities also will assert that Marathon has suffered minimal, if any, damages. CMS Energy cannot predict the outcome of this matter. If Marathon’s claim were sustained, it would have a material effect on CMS Energy’s future earnings and cash flow. Guarantees and Indemnifications: FIN 45 requires a guarantor, upon issuance of a guarantee, to recognize a liability for the fair value of the obligation it undertakes in issuing the guarantee. To measure the fair value of a guarantee liability, we recognize a liability for any premium received or receivable in exchange for the guarantee. For a guarantee issued as part of a larger transaction, such as in association with an asset sale or executory contract, we recognize a liability for any premium that we would have received had we issued the guarantee as a single item. The following table describes our guarantees at December 31, 2008: \n
Guarantee Description Issue Date Expiration Date Maximum Obligation FIN 45 Carrying Amount
In Millions
Indemnifications from asset sales and other agreementsVariousIndefinite$1,445(a)$84(b)
Surety bonds and other indemnificationsVariousIndefinite351
Guarantees and put optionsVariousVarious through September 202789(c)1
\n ratings, and general information on market movements for investment grade state and municipal securities normally considered by market participants when pricing such debt securities. Foreign Corporate Bonds: Foreign corporate debt securities were valued based on quoted market prices, when available, or on yields available on comparable securities of issuers with similar credit ratings. Common Stocks: Common stocks in the OPEB Plan consist of equity securities with low transaction costs that were actively managed and tracked by the S&P 500 Index. These securities were valued at their quoted closing prices. Mutual Funds: Mutual funds represent shares in registered investment companies that are priced based on the daily quoted NAVs that are publicly available and are the basis for transactions to buy or sell shares in the funds. Pooled Funds: Pooled funds include both common and collective trust funds as well as special funds that contain only employee benefit plan assets from two or more unrelated benefit plans. Presented in the following table are the investment components of these funds:"} {"answer": 0.0891, "question": "what is the roi of an investment in loews common stock from 2011 to 2012?", "context": "Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – (Continued) CNA applies the same impairment model as described above for the majority of its non-redeemable preferred stock securities on the basis that these securities possess characteristics similar to debt securities and that the issuers maintain their ability to pay dividends. For all other equity securities, in determining whether the security is other\u0002than-temporarily impaired, the Impairment Committee considers a number of factors including, but not limited to: (i) the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than amortized cost, (ii) the financial condition and near term prospects of the issuer, (iii) the intent and ability of CNA to retain its investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for an anticipated recovery in value and (iv) general market conditions and industry or sector specific outlook. Joint venture investments – The Company has 20% to 50% interests in operating joint ventures related to hotel properties and had joint venture interests in the former Bluegrass Project, as discussed in Note 2, that are accounted for under the equity method. The Company’s investment in these entities was $217 million and $234 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and reported in Other assets on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity income (loss) for these investments was $41 million, $43 million and $(62) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 and reported in Other operating expenses on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Income. Some of these investments are variable interest entities (“VIE”) as defined in the accounting guidance because the entities will require additional funding from each equity owner throughout the development and construction phase and are accounted for under the equity method since the Company is not the primary beneficiary. The maximum exposure to loss for the VIE investments is $337 million, consisting of the amount of the investment and debt guarantees. The following tables present summarized financial information for these joint ventures: \n
Year Ended December 31 20162015
(In millions)
Total assets$1,749$1,577
Total liabilities1,4441,231
Year Ended December 31 201620152014
Revenues$693$606$491
Net income807132
\n Hedging – The Company formally documents all relationships between hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as its risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking various hedging transactions. The Company also formally assesses (both at the hedge’s inception and on an ongoing basis) whether the derivatives that are used in hedging transactions have been highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows of hedged items and whether those derivatives may be expected to remain highly effective in future periods. When it is determined that a derivative for which hedge accounting has been designated is not (or ceases to be) highly effective, the Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively. See Note 3 for additional information on the Company’s use of derivatives. Securities lending activities – The Company lends securities for the purpose of enhancing income or to finance positions to unrelated parties who have been designated as primary dealers by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Borrowers of these securities must deposit and maintain collateral with the Company of no less than 100% of the fair value of the securities loaned. U. S. Government securities and cash are accepted as collateral. The Company maintains effective control over loaned securities and, therefore, continues to report such securities as investments on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Securities lending is typically done on a matched-book basis where the collateral is invested to substantially match the term of the loan. This matching of terms tends to limit risk. In accordance with the Company’s lending agreements, securities on loan are returned immediately to the Company upon notice. Collateral is not reflected as an asset of the Company. There was no collateral held at December 31, 2016 and 2015. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 4. Fair Value – (Continued) x Level 2 – Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable in active markets. x Level 3 – Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs are not observable. Prices may fall within Level 1, 2 or 3 depending upon the methodology and inputs used to estimate fair value for each specific security. In general, the Company seeks to price securities using third party pricing services. Securities not priced by pricing services are submitted to independent brokers for valuation and, if those are not available, internally developed pricing models are used to value assets using a methodology and inputs the Company believes market participants would use to value the assets. Prices obtained from third-party pricing services or brokers are not adjusted by the Company. The Company performs control procedures over information obtained from pricing services and brokers to ensure prices received represent a reasonable estimate of fair value and to confirm representations regarding whether inputs are observable or unobservable. Procedures may include: (i) the review of pricing service methodologies or broker pricing qualifications, (ii) back-testing, where past fair value estimates are compared to actual transactions executed in the market on similar dates, (iii) exception reporting, where period-over-period changes in price are reviewed and challenged with the pricing service or broker based on exception criteria, (iv) detailed analysis, where the Company performs an independent analysis of the inputs and assumptions used to price individual securities and (v) pricing validation, where prices received are compared to prices independently estimated by the Company. The fair values of CNA’s life settlement contracts are included in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity options purchased are included in Equity securities, and all other derivative assets are included in Receivables. Derivative liabilities are included in Payable to brokers. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized in the tables below: \n
December 31, 2016Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities:
Corporate and other bonds$18,828$130$18,958
States, municipalities and political subdivisions13,239113,240
Asset-backed:
Residential mortgage-backed4,9441295,073
Commercial mortgage-backed2,027132,040
Other asset-backed968571,025
Total asset-backed7,9391998,138
U.S. Treasury and obligations of government-sponsored enterprises$9393
Foreign government445445
Redeemable preferred stock1919
Fixed maturitiesavailable-for-sale11240,45133040,893
Fixed maturities trading5956601
Total fixed maturities$112$41,046$336$41,494
Equity securitiesavailable-for-sale$91$19$110
Equity securities trading4381439
Total equity securities$529$-$20$549
Short term investments$3,833$853$4,686
Other invested assets55560
Receivables11
Life settlement contracts$5858
Payable to brokers-44-44
\n Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities The following graph compares annual total return of our Common Stock, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Index (“S&P 500 Index”) and our Peer Group (“Loews Peer Group”) for the five years ended December 31, 2016. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in our Common Stock, the S&P 500 Index and the Loews Peer Group was $100 on December 31, 2011 and that all dividends were reinvested. \n
201120122013201420152016
Loews Common Stock100.0108.91129.64113.59104.47128.19
S&P 500 Index100.0116.00153.57174.60177.01198.18
Loews Peer Group (a)100.0113.39142.85150.44142.44165.34
\n (a) The Loews Peer Group consists of the following companies that are industry competitors of our principal operating subsidiaries: Chubb Limited (name change from ACE Limited after it acquired The Chubb Corporation on January 15, 2016), W. R. Berkley Corporation, The Chubb Corporation (included through January 15, 2016 when it was acquired by ACE Limited), Energy Transfer Partners L. P. , Ensco plc, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. , Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L. P. (included through November 26, 2014 when it was acquired by Kinder Morgan Inc. ), Noble Corporation, Spectra Energy Corp, Transocean Ltd. and The Travelers Companies, Inc. Dividend Information We have paid quarterly cash dividends in each year since 1967. Regular dividends of $0.0625 per share of Loews common stock were paid in each calendar quarter of 2016 and 2015."} {"answer": -0.01506, "question": "what was the percentage change in revenues for investments in 50% ( 50 % ) or less owned investments accounted for using the equity method between 2000 and 2001?", "context": "affiliated company. The loss recorded on the sale was approximately $14 million and is recorded as a loss on sale of assets and asset impairment expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. In the second quarter of 2002, the Company recorded an impairment charge of approximately $40 million, after income taxes, on an equity method investment in a telecommunications company in Latin America held by EDC. The impairment charge resulted from sustained poor operating performance coupled with recent funding problems at the invested company. During 2001, the Company lost operational control of Central Electricity Supply Corporation (‘‘CESCO’’), a distribution company located in the state of Orissa, India. CESCO is accounted for as a cost method investment. In May 2000, the Company completed the acquisition of 100% of Tractebel Power Ltd (‘‘TPL’’) for approximately $67 million and assumed liabilities of approximately $200 million. TPL owned 46% of Nigen. The Company also acquired an additional 6% interest in Nigen from minority stockholders during the year ended December 31, 2000 through the issuance of approximately 99,000 common shares of AES stock valued at approximately $4.9 million. With the completion of these transactions, the Company owns approximately 98% of Nigen’s common stock and began consolidating its financial results beginning May 12, 2000. Approximately $100 million of the purchase price was allocated to excess of costs over net assets acquired and was amortized through January 1, 2002 at which time the Company adopted SFAS No.142 and ceased amortization of goodwill. In August 2000, a subsidiary of the Company acquired a 49% interest in Songas Limited (‘‘Songas’’) for approximately $40 million. The Company acquired an additional 16.79% of Songas for approximately $12.5 million, and the Company began consolidating this entity in 2002. Songas owns the Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project in Tanzania. In December 2002, the Company signed a Sales Purchase Agreement to sell Songas. The sale is expected to close in early 2003. See Note 4 for further discussion of the transaction. The following table presents summarized comparative financial information (in millions) for the Company’s investments in 50% or less owned investments accounted for using the equity method. \n
AS OF AND FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,200220012000
Revenues$2,832$6,147$6,241
Operating Income6951,7171,989
Net Income229650859
Current Assets1,0973,7002,423
Noncurrent Assets6,75114,94213,080
Current Liabilities1,4183,5103,370
Noncurrent Liabilities3,3498,2975,927
Stockholder's Equity3,0816,8356,206
\n In 2002, 2001 and 2000, the results of operations and the financial position of CEMIG were negatively impacted by the devaluation of the Brazilian Real and the impairment charge recorded in 2002. The Brazilian Real devalued 32%, 19% and 8% for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. The Company recorded $83 million, $210 million, and $64 million of pre-tax non-cash foreign currency transaction losses on its investments in Brazilian equity method affiliates during 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. Consumers purchases the balance of its required gas supply under incremental firm transportation contracts, firm city gate contracts and, as needed, interruptible transportation contracts. The amount of interruptible transportation service and its use vary primarily with the price for such service and the availability and price of the spot supplies being purchased and transported. Consumers’ use of interruptible transportation is generally in off-peak summer months and after Consumers has fully utilized the services under the firm transportation agreements. Enterprises Enterprises, through various subsidiaries and certain equity investments, is engaged primarily in domestic independent power production. Enterprises’ operating revenue included in Continuing Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $383 million in 2007, $438 million in 2006, and $693 million in 2005. Operating revenue included in Discontinued Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $235 million in 2007, $684 million in 2006, and $409 million in 2005. In 2007, Enterprises made a significant change in business strategy by exiting the international marketplace and refocusing its business strategy to concentrate on its independent power business in the United States. Independent Power Production CMS Generation was formed in 1986. It invested in and operated non-utility power generation plants in the United States and abroad. The independent power production business segment’s operating revenue included in Continuing Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $41 million in 2007, $103 million in 2006, and $104 million in 2005. Operating revenue included in Discontinued Operations in our consolidated financial statements was $124 million in 2007, $437 million in 2006, and $211 million in 2005. In 2007, Enterprises sold CMS Generation and all of its international assets and power production facilities and transferred its domestic independent power plant operations to its subsidiary, Hydra-Co. For more information on the asset sales, see ITEM 8. CMS ENERGY’S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA — NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — NOTE 2. ASSET SALES, DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS AND IMPAIRMENT CHARGES — ASSET SALES. IndependentPowerProductionProperties: AtDecember 31,2007,CMSEnergyhadownershipinterestsin independent power plants totaling 1,199 gross MW or 1,078 net MW (net MW reflects that portion of the gross capacity in relation to CMS Energy’s ownership interest). The following table details CMS Energy’s interest in independent power plants at December 31, 2007: \n
Location Fuel Type Ownership Interest (%) Gross Capacity (MW) Percentage of Gross Capacity Under Long-Term Contract (%)
CaliforniaWood37.836100
ConnecticutScrap tire100310
MichiganCoal5070100
MichiganNatural gas10071061
MichiganNatural gas1002240
MichiganWood5040100
MichiganWood5038100
North CarolinaWood50500
Total1,199
\n For information on capital expenditures, see ITEM 7. CMS ENERGY’S MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — CAPITAL RESOURCES AND LIQUIDITY. CMS ENERGY CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) December 24, 2008. The settlement includes a $20 million decrease in depreciation rates and requires that we not request a new gas general rate increase prior to May 1, 2009. OTHER CONTINGENCIES — INDEMNIFICATIONS Equatorial Guinea Tax Claim: In 2004, we received a request for indemnification from the purchaser of CMS Oil and Gas. The indemnification claim relates to the sale of our oil, gas and methanol projects in Equatorial Guinea and the claim of the government of Equatorial Guinea that we owe $142 million in taxes in connection with that sale. CMS Energy concluded that the government’s tax claim is without merit and the purchaser of CMS Oil and Gas submitted a response to the government rejecting the claim. The government of Equatorial Guinea has indicated that it still intends to pursue its claim. We cannot predict the financial impact or outcome of this matter. Moroccan Tax Claim: In May 2007, we sold our 50 percent interest in Jorf Lasfar. As part of the sale agreement, we agreed to indemnify the purchaser for 50 percent of any tax assessments on Jorf Lasfar attributable to tax years prior to the sale. In December 2007, the Moroccan tax authority concluded its audit of Jorf Lasfar for tax years 2003 through 2005. The audit asserted deficiencies in certain corporate and withholding taxes. In January 2009, we paid $18 million, which was charged against a tax indemnification liability established when we recorded the sale of Jorf Lasfar, and accordingly it did not affect earnings. Marathon Indemnity Claim regarding F. T. Barr Claim: On December 3, 2001, F. T. Barr, an individual with an overriding royalty interest in production from the Alba field, filed a lawsuit in Harris County District Court in Texas against CMS Energy, CMS Oil and Gas and other defendants alleging that his overriding royalty payments related to Alba field production were improperly calculated. CMS Oil and Gas believes that Barr was paid properly on gas sales and that he was not entitled to the additional overriding royalty payment sought. All parties signed a confidential settlement agreement on April 26, 2004. The settlement resolved claims between Barr and the defendants, and the involved CMS Energy entities reserved all defenses to any indemnity claim relating to the settlement. There is disagreement between Marathon and certain current or former CMS Energy entities as to the existence and scope of any indemnity obligations to Marathon in connection with the settlement. Between April 2005 and April 2008, there were no further communications between Marathon and CMS Energy entities regarding this matter. In April 2008, Marathon indicated its intent to pursue the indemnity claim. Present and former CMS Energy entities and Marathon entered into an agreement tolling the statute of limitations on any claim by Marathon under the indemnity. CMS Energy entities dispute Marathon’s claim, and will vigorously oppose it if raised in any legal proceeding. CMS Energy entities also will assert that Marathon has suffered minimal, if any, damages. CMS Energy cannot predict the outcome of this matter. If Marathon’s claim were sustained, it would have a material effect on CMS Energy’s future earnings and cash flow. Guarantees and Indemnifications: FIN 45 requires a guarantor, upon issuance of a guarantee, to recognize a liability for the fair value of the obligation it undertakes in issuing the guarantee. To measure the fair value of a guarantee liability, we recognize a liability for any premium received or receivable in exchange for the guarantee. For a guarantee issued as part of a larger transaction, such as in association with an asset sale or executory contract, we recognize a liability for any premium that we would have received had we issued the guarantee as a single item. The following table describes our guarantees at December 31, 2008: \n
Guarantee Description Issue Date Expiration Date Maximum Obligation FIN 45 Carrying Amount
In Millions
Indemnifications from asset sales and other agreementsVariousIndefinite$1,445(a)$84(b)
Surety bonds and other indemnificationsVariousIndefinite351
Guarantees and put optionsVariousVarious through September 202789(c)1
\n ratings, and general information on market movements for investment grade state and municipal securities normally considered by market participants when pricing such debt securities. Foreign Corporate Bonds: Foreign corporate debt securities were valued based on quoted market prices, when available, or on yields available on comparable securities of issuers with similar credit ratings. Common Stocks: Common stocks in the OPEB Plan consist of equity securities with low transaction costs that were actively managed and tracked by the S&P 500 Index. These securities were valued at their quoted closing prices. Mutual Funds: Mutual funds represent shares in registered investment companies that are priced based on the daily quoted NAVs that are publicly available and are the basis for transactions to buy or sell shares in the funds. Pooled Funds: Pooled funds include both common and collective trust funds as well as special funds that contain only employee benefit plan assets from two or more unrelated benefit plans. Presented in the following table are the investment components of these funds:"} {"answer": 2018.0, "question": "In what year is profit of profit before taxes greater than 5000?", "context": "ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations should be read in conjunction with our discussion of cautionary statements and significant risks to the company’s business under Item 1A. Risk Factors of the 2018 Form?10-K. OVERVIEW Our sales and revenues for 2018 were $54.722 billion, a 20?percent increase from 2017 sales and revenues of $45.462?billion. The increase was primarily due to higher sales volume, mostly due to improved demand across all regions and across the three primary segments. Profit per share for 2018 was $10.26, compared to profit per share of $1.26 in 2017. Profit was $6.147 billion in 2018, compared with $754 million in 2017. The increase was primarily due to lower tax expense, higher sales volume, decreased restructuring costs and improved price realization. The increase was partially offset by higher manufacturing costs and selling, general and administrative (SG&A) and research and development (R&D) expenses and lower profit from the Financial Products Segment. Fourth-quarter 2018 sales and revenues were $14.342 billion, up $1.446 billion, or 11 percent, from $12.896 billion in the fourth quarter of 2017. Fourth-quarter 2018 profit was $1.78 per share, compared with a loss of $2.18 per share in the fourth quarter of 2017. Fourth-quarter 2018 profit was $1.048 billion, compared with a loss of $1.299 billion in 2017. Highlights for 2018 include: z Sales and revenues in 2018 were $54.722 billion, up 20?percent from 2017. Sales improved in all regions and across the three primary segments. z Operating profit as a percent of sales and revenues was 15.2?percent in 2018, compared with 9.8 percent in 2017. Adjusted operating profit margin was 15.9 percent in 2018, compared with 12.5 percent in 2017. z Profit was $10.26 per share for 2018, and excluding the items in the table below, adjusted profit per share was $11.22. For 2017 profit was $1.26 per share, and excluding the items in the table below, adjusted profit per share was $6.88. z In order for our results to be more meaningful to our readers, we have separately quantified the impact of several significant items: \n
Full Year 2018Full Year 2017
(Millions of dollars)Profit Before TaxesProfitPer ShareProfit Before TaxesProfitPer Share
Profit$7,822$10.26$4,082$1.26
Restructuring costs3860.501,2561.68
Mark-to-market losses4950.643010.26
Deferred tax valuation allowance adjustments—-0.01—-0.18
U.S. tax reform impact—-0.17—3.95
Gain on sale of equity investment——-85-0.09
Adjusted profit$8,703$11.22$5,554$6.88
\n z Machinery, Energy & Transportation (ME&T) operating cash flow for 2018 was about $6.3 billion, more than sufficient to cover capital expenditures and dividends. ME&T operating cash flow for 2017 was about $5.5 billion. Restructuring Costs In recent years, we have incurred substantial restructuring costs to achieve a flexible and competitive cost structure. During 2018, we incurred $386 million of restructuring costs related to restructuring actions across the company. During 2017, we incurred $1.256 billion of restructuring costs with about half related to the closure of the facility in Gosselies, Belgium, and the remainder related to other restructuring actions across the company. Although we expect restructuring to continue as part of ongoing business activities, restructuring costs should be lower in 2019 than 2018. Notes: z Glossary of terms included on pages 33-34; first occurrence of terms shown in bold italics. z Information on non-GAAP financial measures is included on pages 42-43. Recognition of finance revenue and rental revenue is suspended and the account is placed on non-accrual status when management determines that collection of future income is not probable (generally after 120 days past due). Recognition is resumed, and previously suspended income is recognized, when the account becomes current and collection of remaining amounts is considered probable. See Note 7 for more information. Revenues are presented net of sales and other related taxes.3. Stock-Based Compensation Our stock-based compensation plans primarily provide for the granting of stock options, stock-settled stock appreciation rights (SARs), restricted stock units (RSUs) and performance-based restricted stock units (PRSUs) to Officers and other key employees, as well as non-employee Directors. Stock options permit a holder to buy Caterpillar stock at the stock’s price when the option was granted. SARs permit a holder the right to receive the value in shares of the appreciation in Caterpillar stock that occurred from the date the right was granted up to the date of exercise. RSUs are agreements to issue shares of Caterpillar stock at the time of vesting. PRSUs are similar to RSUs and include performance conditions in the vesting terms of the award. Our long-standing practices and policies specify that all stock\u0002based compensation awards are approved by the Compensation Committee (the Committee) of the Board of Directors. The award approval process specifies the grant date, value and terms of the award. The same terms and conditions are consistently applied to all employee grants, including Officers. The Committee approves all individual Officer grants. The number of stock-based compensation award units included in an individual’s award is determined based on the methodology approved by the Committee. The exercise price methodology?approved by the Committee is the closing price of the Company stock on the date of the grant. In June of 2014, shareholders approved the Caterpillar Inc. 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the Plan) under which all new stock-based compensation awards are granted. In June of 2017, the Plan was amended and restated. The Plan initially provided that up to 38,800,000 Common Shares would be reserved for future issuance under the Plan, subject to adjustment in certain events. Subsequent to the shareholder approval of the amendment and restatement of the Plan, an additional 36,000,000 Common Shares became available for all awards under the Plan. Common stock issued from Treasury stock under the plans totaled 5,590,641 for 2018, 11,139,748 for 2017 and 4,164,134 for 2016. The total number of shares authorized for equity awards under the amended and restated Caterpillar Inc. 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan is 74,800,000, of which 44,139,162 shares remained available for issuance as of December?31,?2018. Stock option and RSU awards generally vest according to a three\u0002year graded vesting schedule. One-third of the award will become vested on the first anniversary of the grant date, one-third of the award will become vested on the second anniversary of the grant date and one-third of the award will become vested on the third anniversary of the grant date. PRSU awards generally have a three\u0002year performance period and cliff vest at the end of the period based upon achievement of performance targets established at the time of grant. Upon separation from service, if the participant is 55 years of age or older with more than five years of service, the participant meets the criteria for a “Long Service Separation. ” Award terms for awards granted in 2016 allow for immediate vesting upon separation of all outstanding options and RSUs with no requisite service period for employees who meet the criteria for a “Long Service Separation. ” Compensation expense for the 2016 grant was fully recognized immediately on the grant date for these employees. Award terms for the 2018 and 2017 grants allow for continued vesting as of each vesting date specified in the award document for employees who meet the criteria for a “Long Service Separation” and fulfill a requisite service period of six months. Compensation expense for eligible employees for the 2018 and 2017 grants was recognized over the period from the grant date to the end date of the six-month requisite service period. For employees who become eligible for a “Long Service Separation” subsequent to the end date of the six-month requisite service period and prior to the completion of the vesting period, compensation expense is recognized over the period from the grant date to the date eligibility is achieved. At grant, SARs and option awards have a term life of ten years. For awards granted prior to 2016, if the “Long Service Separation” criteria are met, the vested options/SARs have a life that is the lesser of ten years from the original grant date or five years from the separation date. For awards granted in 2018, 2017, and 2016, the vested options have a life equal to ten years from the original grant date. Prior to 2017, all outstanding PRSU awards granted to employees eligible for a “Long Service Separation” may vest at the end of the performance period based upon achievement of the performance target. Compensation expense for the 2016 PRSU grant was fully recognized immediately on the grant date for these employees. For PRSU awards granted in 2018 and 2017, only a prorated number of shares may vest at the end of the performance period based upon achievement of the performance target, with the proration based upon the number of months of continuous employment during the three-year performance period. Employees with a “Long Service Separation” must also fulfill a six-month requisite service period in order to be eligible for the prorated vesting of outstanding PRSU awards granted in 2018 and 2017. Compensation expense for the 2018 and 2017 PRSU grants is being recognized on a straight-line basis over the three-year performance period for all participants. Accounting guidance on share-based payments requires companies to estimate the fair value of options/SARs on the date of grant using an option-pricing model. The fair value of our option/SAR grants was estimated using a lattice-based option-pricing model. The lattice\u0002based option-pricing model considers a range of assumptions related to volatility, risk-free interest rate and historical employee behavior. Expected volatility was based on historical Caterpillar stock price movement and current implied volatilities from traded options on Caterpillar stock. The risk-free interest rate was based on U. S. Treasury security yields at the time of grant. The weighted-average dividend yield was based on historical information. The expected life was determined from the lattice-based model. The lattice\u0002based model incorporated exercise and post vesting forfeiture assumptions based on analysis of historical data. The following table provides the assumptions used in determining the fair value of the Option/SAR awards for the years ended December?31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. \n
Grant Year
201820172016
Weighted-average dividend yield2.7%3.4%3.2%
Weighted-average volatility30.2%29.2%31.1%
Range of volatilities21.5-33.0%22.1-33.0%22.5-33.4%
Range of risk-free interest rates2.02-2.87%0.81-2.35%0.62-1.73%
Weighted-average expected lives8 years8 years8 years
"} {"answer": 2018.0, "question": "Which year Ended December 31 is the amount of Investment services fee income the highest?", "context": "MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS The indenture governing the Company’s unsecured notes also requires the Company to comply with financial ratios and other covenants regarding the operations of the Company. The Company is currently in compliance with all such covenants and expects to remain in compliance in the foreseeable future. In January 2003, the Company completed an issuance of unsecured debt totaling $175 million bearing interest at 5.25%, due 2010. Sale of Real Estate Assets The Company utilizes sales of real estate assets as an additional source of liquidity. During 2000 and 2001, the Company engaged in a capital-recycling program that resulted in sales of over $1 billion of real estate assets during these two years. In 2002, this program was substantially reduced as capital needs were met through other sources and the slower business climate provided few opportunities to profitably reinvest sales proceeds. The Company continues to pursue opportunities to sell real estate assets when beneficial to the long-term strategy of the Company Uses of Liquidity The Company’s principal uses of liquidity include the following: ? Property investments and recurring leasing/capital costs; ? Dividends and distributions to shareholders and unitholders; ? Long-term debt maturities; and ? The Company’s common stock repurchase program. Property Investments and Other Capital Expenditures One of the Company’s principal uses of its liquidity is for the development, acquisition and recurring leasing/capital expendi\u0002tures of its real estate investments. A summary of the Company’s recurring capital expenditures is as follows (in thousands): \n
200220012000
Tenant improvements$28,011$18,416$31,955
Leasing costs17,97513,84517,530
Building improvements13,37310,8736,804
Totals$59,359$43,134$56,289
\n Dividends and Distributions In order to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, the Company must currently distribute at least 90% of its taxable income to its shareholders and Duke Realty Limited Partnership (“DRLP”) unitholders. The Company paid dividends of $1.81, $1.76 and $1.64 for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. The Company expects to continue to distribute taxable earnings to meet the requirements to maintain its REIT status. However, distributions are declared at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors and are subject to actual cash available for distribution, the Company’s financial condition, capital requirements and such other factors as the Company’s Board of Directors deems relevant. Debt Maturities Debt outstanding at December 31, 2002, totaled $2.1 billion with a weighted average interest rate of 6.25% maturing at various dates through 2028. The Company had $1.8 billion of unsecured debt and $299.1 million of secured debt outstanding at December 31, 2002. Scheduled principal amortization of such debt totaled $10.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. Following is a summary of the scheduled future amortization and maturities of the Company’s indebtedness at December 31, 2002 (in thousands): Basic and diluted weighted-average common shares outstanding are the same due to the net losses for all periods presented. As discussed in Note 14, approximately 63 million common shares were issued in June of 2010 in connection with the conversion of the remaining Series B mandatorily convertible preferred shares, which were originally issued in May 2009. Under applicable accounting literature, such shares should be included in the denominator in arriving at diluted earnings per share as if they were issued at the beginning of the reporting period or as of the date issued, if later. Prior to conversion, these shares were not included in the computation above as such amounts would have had an antidilutive effect on earnings (loss) per common share. NOTE 16. SHARE-BASED PAYMENTS Regions has long-term incentive compensation plans that permit the granting of incentive awards in the form of stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock awards and units, and/or stock appreciation rights. While Regions has the ability to issue stock appreciation rights, as of December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, there were no outstanding stock appreciation rights. The terms of all awards issued under these plans are determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors; however, no awards may be granted after the tenth anniversary from the date the plans were initially approved by shareholders. Options and restricted stock usually vest based on employee service, generally within three years from the date of the grant. The contractual lives of options granted under these plans range from seven to ten years from the date of the grant. On May 13, 2010, the shareholders of the Company approved the Regions Financial Corporation 2010 Long-Term Incentive Plan (“2010 LTIP”), which permits the Company to grant to employees and directors various forms of incentive compensation. These forms of incentive compensation are similar to the types of compensation approved in prior plans. The 2010 LTIP authorizes 100 million common share equivalents available for grant, where grants of options count as one share equivalent and grants of full value awards (e. g. , shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units) count as 2.25 share equivalents. Unless otherwise determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, grants of restricted stock and restricted stock units accrue dividends as they are declared by the Board of Directors, and the dividends are paid upon vesting of the award. The 2010 LTIP closed all prior long-term incentive plans to new grants, and accordingly, prospective grants must be made under the 2010 LTIP or a successor plan. All existing grants under prior long-term incentive plans were unaffected by this amendment. The number of remaining share equivalents available for future issuance under the active long-term compensation plan was approximately 91 million at December 31, 2010. Grants of performance-based restricted stock typically have a one-year performance period, after which shares vest within three years after the grant date. Restricted stock units, which were granted in 2008, have a vesting period of five years. Generally, the terms of these plans stipulate that the exercise price of options may not be less than the fair market value of Regions’ common stock at the date the options are granted; however, under prior stock option plans, non-qualified options could be granted with a lower exercise price than the fair market value of Regions’ common stock on the date of grant. The contractual life of options granted under these plans ranges from seven to ten years from the date of grant. Regions issues new shares from authorized reserves upon exercise. Grantees of restricted stock awards or units must either remain employed with the Company for certain periods from the date of grant in order for shares to be released or issued or retire after meeting the standards of a retiree, at which time shares would be prorated and released. The following table summarizes the elements of compensation cost recognized in the consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31: \n
201020092008
(In millions)
Compensation cost of share-based compensation awards:
Restricted stock awards and units$10$33$50
Stock options131416
Tax benefits related to compensation cost-8-17-24
Compensation cost of share-based compensation awards, net of tax$15$30$42
\n PROVISION FOR LOAN LOSSES The provision for loan losses is used to maintain the allowance for loan losses at a level that in management’s judgment is appropriate to absorb probable losses inherent in the portfolio at the balance sheet date. During 2018, the provision for loan losses totaled $229 million and net charge-offs were $323 million. This compares to a provision for loan losses of $150 million and net charge-offs of $307 million in 2017. The increase in the provision for loan losses was primarily a result of increased loan balances and slowing credit improvement as compared to 2017. The increase was partially offset by the release of the Company's $40 million hurricane-specific loan loss allowance associated with certain 2017 hurricanes, as well as a $16 million net reduction to the provision for loan losses in the first quarter of 2018 from the sale of $254 million in residential first mortgage loans consisting primarily of performing troubled debt restructured loans. For further discussion and analysis of the total allowance for credit losses, see the \"Allowance for Credit Losses\" and “Risk Management” sections found later in this report. See also Note 6 “Allowance for Credit Losses” to the consolidated financial statements. NON-INTEREST INCOME Table 5—Non-Interest Income from Continuing Operations \n
Year Ended December 31Change 2018 vs. 2017
201820172016AmountPercent
(Dollars in millions)
Service charges on deposit accounts$710$683$664$274.0%
Card and ATM fees438417402215.0%
Investment management and trust fee income23523021352.2%
Capital markets income2021611524125.5%
Mortgage income137149173-12-8.1%
Investment services fee income7160581118.3%
Commercial credit fee income717173——%
Bank-owned life insurance658195-16-19.8%
Insurance proceeds——50—NM
Securities gains, net1196-18-94.7%
Market value adjustments on employee benefit assets - defined benefit-6——-6NM
Market value adjustments on employee benefit assets - other-5163-21-131.3%
Other miscellaneous income100751222533.3%
$2,019$1,962$2,011$572.9%
\n Service Charges on Deposit Accounts Service charges on deposit accounts include non-sufficient fund fees and other service charges. The increase in 2018 compared to 2017 was primarily due to continued customer account growth and increases in non-sufficient fund fee activity. Card and ATM Fees Card and ATM fees include the combined amounts of credit card/bank card income and debit card and ATM related revenue. The increase in 2018 compared to 2017 was primarily the result of an increase in commercial and consumer checkcard interchange income associated with new account growth and increases in spend and transactions. Capital Markets Income Capital markets income primarily relates to capital raising activities that includes securities underwriting and placement, loan syndication and placement, as well as foreign exchange, derivatives, merger and acquisition and other advisory services. The increase in 2018 compared to 2017 was driven primarily by increases in income from mergers and acquisitions advisory fees, customer interest rate swap income, and loan syndication fees, partially offset by a decrease in fees from the placement of permanent financing for real estate customers."} {"answer": 50620.0, "question": "What will U.S. high-grade be like in 2005 if it develops with the same increasing rate as current? (in thousand)", "context": "Table of Contents Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for transactions in sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country based on the type and amount of the security traded. The commission is calculated on a standard schedule that applies to all broker-dealer clients and varies depending on whether the transaction is in an actively traded sovereign issue, a less actively traded sovereign issue or a corporate issue. A lower commission rate is charged for actively traded sovereign issues, while a higher commission rate is charged for corporate issues. The average commission on emerging markets transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $205 per million traded. For newly-issued U. S. high-grade corporate bonds and for newly-issued sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country, we enable U. S. institutional investors to submit indications of interest on our electronic trading platform directly to the underwriter syndicate desks of our broker-dealer clients. Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for new issue transactions that is based on the allocation amount. The commission is set as a percentage of the new issue selling costs paid by the issuer to our broker-dealer client. The percentage of the new issue selling costs is lower on orders over $5 million. The fee is capped on larger transactions. There are currently no fixed monthly fees or caps on the level of monthly commissions. The average commission on new issue transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $297 per million traded U. S. Treasury Securities In September 2004, we started trading U. S. Treasury securities on our trading platform. In 2004, the total revenues we derived from the trading of U. S. Treasury securities on our platform was not material. The commission is calculated as a flat fee per million of notional amount traded and applies to all broker-dealer clients. Please see “— Risk Factors That May Affect Future Results — If we are unable to enter into additional marketing and strategic alliances or if our current strategic alliances are not successful, we may not maintain the current level of trading or generate increased trading on our trading platform. Information and User Access Fees \n
Year Ended December 31,
2004 2003 2002
% of % of % of
Total Total Total
$ Revenues $ Revenues $ Revenues
($ in thousands)
Information services fees$2,2803.0%$8261.5%$150.0%
User access fees4330.63180.52721.5
$2,7133.6%$1,1442.0%$2871.5%
\n Information and user access fees consist of information services fees and monthly user fees. We charge information services fees for Corporate BondTicker to our broker-dealer clients, institutional investor clients and data only subscribers. The information services fee is a flat monthly fee, based on the level of service. We also generate information services fees from the sale of bulk data to certain institutional investor clients and data only subscribers. Institutional investor clients trading U. S. high-grade corporate bonds are charged a monthly user access fee for the use of our platform. The fee, billed quarterly, is charged to the client based on the number of the client’s users. To encourage institutional investor clients to execute trades on our U. S. high-grade corporate bond platform, we reduce these information and user access fees for such clients once minimum quarterly trading volumes are attained. Revenues Our revenues for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the resulting dollar and percentage change, are as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,
20042003
$% of Revenues $% of Revenues$ Change% Change
($ in thousands)
Revenues
Commissions
U.S. high-grade$45,46560.0%$40,31069.0%$5,15512.8%
European high-grade15,14220.07,12612.28,016112.5
Other7,56510.05,3649.12,20141.0
Total commissions68,17290.052,80090.315,37229.1
Information and user access fees2,7133.61,1442.01,569137.2
License fees3,1434.14,1457.1-1,002-24.2
Interest income8821.23710.6511137.7
Other8871.1—0887—
Total revenues$75,797100%$58,460100%$17,33729.7%
\n Commissions. Total commissions increased by $15.4 million or 29.1% to $68.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $52.8 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due to increases in the amount of U. S. high-grade commissions and substantial increases in European high-grade commissions. U. S. high-grade commissions increased by $5.2 million or 12.8% to $45.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $40.3 million for the comparable period in 2003. European high-grade commissions increased by $8.0 million or 112.5% to $15.1 million from $7.1 million for the comparable period in 2003. Other commissions increased by $2.2 million or 41.0% to $7.6 million from $5.4 million for the comparable period in 2003. These increases were primarily due to an increase in transaction volume from $192.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $298.1 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004 generated by new and existing clients, offset by a 16.7% reduction in the average commission per million from $275 per million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $229 per million for the year ended December 31, 2004. This decrease in average commission per million was attributable to the full-year effect of our U. S. high-grade fee plans, increasing volumes of transactions with lower fees per million and an increase in the percentage of trades executed on the platform with shorter maturities, which generally generate lower commissions per million, Information and User Access Fees. Information and user access fees increased by $1.6 million or 137.2% to $2.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This increase was primarily due to an increase in the number of subscribers to our Corporate BondTicker service. License Fees. License fees decreased by $1.0 million or 24.2% to $3.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $4.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This decrease was due to the addition of four new broker-dealer clients in the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to five new broker-dealer clients added in the year ended December 31, 2003. Interest Income. Interest income increased by $0.5 million or 137.7% to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $0.4 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was due to a rise in interest rates and higher cash, cash equivalents and short-term investment balances during the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to the comparable period in 2003. Other. Other revenues increased to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $0.0 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due to the effects of a change in accounting policy with respect to recognizing as revenue gross telecommunication line fees paid by broker- PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Price Range Our common stock commenced trading on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “MKTX” on November 5, 2004. Prior to that date, there was no public market for our common stock. The high and low bid information for our common stock, as reported by NASDAQ, was as follows: \n
HighLow
November 5, 2004 to December 31, 2004$24.41$12.75
January 1, 2005 to March 31, 2005$15.95$9.64
April 1, 2005 to June 30, 2005$13.87$9.83
July 1, 2005 to September 30, 2005$14.09$9.99
October 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005$13.14$10.64
\n On March 8, 2006, the last reported closing price of our common stock on the NASDAQ National Market was $12.59. Holders There were approximately 114 holders of record of our common stock as of March 8, 2006. Dividend Policy We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our capital stock since our inception. We intend to retain future earnings to finance the operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. In the event we decide to declare dividends on our common stock in the future, such declaration will be subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors. Our Board may take into account such matters as general business conditions, our financial results, capital requirements, contractual, legal, and regulatory restrictions on the payment of dividends by us to our stockholders or by our subsidiaries to us and any such other factors as our Board may deem relevant. Use of Proceeds On November 4, 2004, the registration statement relating to our initial public offering (No.333-112718) was declared effective. We received net proceeds from the sale of the shares of our common stock in the offering of $53.9 million, at an initial public offering price of $11.00 per share, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses. Except for salaries, and reimbursements for travel expenses and other out-of -pocket costs incurred in the ordinary course of business, none of the proceeds from the offering have been paid by us, directly or indirectly, to any of our directors or officers or any of their associates, or to any persons owning ten percent or more of our outstanding stock or to any of our affiliates. We have invested the proceeds from the offering in cash and cash equivalents and short-term marketable securities."} {"answer": 987.82486, "question": "If Group specialty develops with the same growth rate in 2011, what will it reach in 2012? (in million)", "context": "Humana Inc. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) not be estimated based on observable market prices, and as such, unobservable inputs were used. For auction rate securities, valuation methodologies include consideration of the quality of the sector and issuer, underlying collateral, underlying final maturity dates, and liquidity. Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements There are no recently issued accounting standards that apply to us or that will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial condition, or cash flows.3. ACQUISITIONS On December 21, 2012, we acquired Metropolitan Health Networks, Inc. , or Metropolitan, a Medical Services Organization, or MSO, that coordinates medical care for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries and Medicaid recipients, primarily in Florida. We paid $11.25 per share in cash to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Metropolitan and repaid all outstanding debt of Metropolitan for a transaction value of $851 million, plus transaction expenses. The preliminary fair values of Metropolitan’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed at the date of the acquisition are summarized as follows: \n
Metropolitan (in millions)
Cash and cash equivalents$49
Receivables, net28
Other current assets40
Property and equipment22
Goodwill569
Other intangible assets263
Other long-term assets1
Total assets acquired972
Current liabilities-22
Other long-term liabilities-99
Total liabilities assumed-121
Net assets acquired$851
\n The goodwill was assigned to the Health and Well-Being Services segment and is not deductible for tax purposes. The other intangible assets, which primarily consist of customer contracts and trade names, have a weighted average useful life of 8.4 years. On October 29, 2012, we acquired a noncontrolling equity interest in MCCI Holdings, LLC, or MCCI, a privately held MSO headquartered in Miami, Florida that coordinates medical care for Medicare Advantage and Medicaid beneficiaries primarily in Florida and Texas. The Metropolitan and MCCI transactions are expected to provide us with components of a successful integrated care delivery model that has demonstrated scalability to new markets. A substantial portion of the revenues for both Metropolitan and MCCI are derived from services provided to Humana Medicare Advantage members under capitation contracts with our health plans. In addition, Metropolitan and MCCI provide services to Medicare Advantage and Medicaid members under capitation contracts with third party health plans. Under these capitation agreements with Humana and third party health plans, Metropolitan and MCCI assume financial risk associated with these Medicare Advantage and Medicaid members. Humana Inc. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) 17. EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH LONG-DURATION INSURANCE PRODUCTS Premiums associated with our long-duration insurance products accounted for approximately 2% of our consolidated premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2012. We use long-duration accounting for products such as long-term care, life insurance, annuities, and certain health and other supplemental policies sold to individuals because they are expected to remain in force for an extended period beyond one year and because premium received in the earlier years is intended to pay anticipated benefits to be incurred in future years. As a result, we defer policy acquisition costs, primarily consisting of commissions, and amortize them over the estimated life of the policies in proportion to premiums earned. In addition, we establish reserves for future policy benefits in recognition of the fact that some of the premium received in the earlier years is intended to pay anticipated benefits to be incurred in future years. These reserves are recognized on a net level premium method based on interest rates, mortality, morbidity, withdrawal and maintenance expense assumptions from published actuarial tables, modified based upon actual experience. The assumptions used to determine the liability for future policy benefits are established and locked in at the time each contract is acquired and would only change if our expected future experience deteriorated to the point that the level of the liability, together with the present value of future gross premiums, are not adequate to provide for future expected policy benefits. Long-term care policies provide for long-duration coverage and, therefore, our actual claims experience will emerge many years after assumptions have been established. The risk of a deviation of the actual interest rates, morbidity rates, and mortality rates from those assumed in our reserves are particularly significant to our closed block of long-term care policies. We monitor the loss experience of these long-term care policies and, when necessary, apply for premium rate increases through a regulatory filing and approval process in the jurisdictions in which such products were sold. To the extent premium rate increases and/ or loss experience vary from our acquisition date assumptions, future adjustments to reserves could be required. The table below presents deferred acquisition costs and future policy benefits payable associated with our long-duration insurance products for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. \n
20122011
Deferred acquisition costsFuture policy benefits payable Deferred acquisition costsFuture policy benefits payable
(in millions)
Other long-term assets$149$0$114$0
Trade accounts payable and accrued expenses0-630-58
Long-term liabilities0-1,8580-1,663
Total asset (liability)$149$-1,921$114$-1,721
\n In addition, future policy benefits payable include amounts of $220 million at December 31, 2012 and $224 million at December 31, 2011 which are subject to 100% coinsurance agreements as more fully described in Note 18. Benefits expense associated with future policy benefits payable was $136 million in 2012, $114 million in 2011, and $266 million in 2010. Benefits expense for 2012 and 2010 included net charges of $29 million and $139 million, respectively, associated with our long-term care policies discussed further below. Amortization of deferred acquisition costs included in operating costs was $44 million in 2012, $34 million in 2011, and $198 million in 2010. Amortization expense for 2010 included a write-down of deferred acquisition costs of $147 million discussed further below. \n
Change
20112010DollarsPercentage
(in millions)
Premiums and Services Revenue:
Premiums:
Fully-insured commercial group$4,782$5,169$-387-7.5%
Group Medicare Advantage3,1523,0211314.3%
Group Medicare stand-alone PDP85360.0%
Total group Medicare3,1603,0261344.4%
Group specialty935885505.6%
Total premiums8,8779,080-203-2.2%
Services356395-39-9.9%
Total premiums and services revenue$9,233$9,475$-242-2.6%
Income before income taxes$242$288$-46-16.0%
Benefit ratio82.4%82.4%0.0%
Operating cost ratio17.8%17.5%0.3%
\n Pretax Results ? Employer Group segment pretax income decreased $46 million, or 16%, to $242 million in 2011 primarily due to the impact of minimum benefit ratios required under the Health Insurance Reform Legislation which became effective in 2011. Enrollment ? Fully-insured commercial group medical membership decreased 72,000 members, or 5.7%, from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2011 primarily due to continued pricing discipline in a highly competitive environment for large group business partially offset by small group business membership gains. ? Group ASO commercial medical membership decreased 161,300 members, or 11.1%, from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2011 primarily due to continued pricing discipline in a highly competitive environment for self-funded accounts. Premiums revenue ? Employer Group segment premiums decreased by $203 million, or 2.2%, from 2010 to $8.9 billion for 2011 primarily due to lower average commercial group medical membership year-over-year and rebates associated with minimum benefit ratios required under the Health Insurance Reform Legislation which became effective in 2011, partially offset by an increase in group Medicare Advantage membership. Rebates result in the recognition of lower premiums revenue, as amounts are set aside for payments to commercial customers during the following year. Benefits expense ? The Employer Group segment benefit ratio of 82.4% for 2011 was unchanged from 2010 due to offsetting factors. Factors increasing the 2011 ratio compared to the 2010 ratio include growth in our group Medicare Advantage products which generally carry a higher benefit ratio than our fully-insured commercial group products and the effect of rebates accrued in 2011 associated with the minimum benefit ratios required under the Health Insurance Reform Legislation. Factors decreasing the 2011 ratio compared to the 2010 ratio include the beneficial effect of higher favorable prior-period medical claims reserve development in 2011 versus 2010 and lower utilization of benefits in our commercial group"} {"answer": 4332598.0, "question": "What's the average of the Property and equipment, net in the years where Basic weighted average common shares outstanding greater than 395000 ? (in thousand)", "context": "AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The following table sets forth basic and diluted income from continuing operations per common share computational data for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 (in thousands, except per share data): \n
2012 2011 2010
Income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation$637,283$396,462$372,906
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding394,772395,711401,152
Dilutive securities4,5154,4842,920
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding399,287400,195404,072
Basic income from continuing operations attributable to
American Tower Corporation per common share$1.61$1.00$0.93
Diluted income from continuing operations attributable to
American Tower Corporation per common share$1.60$0.99$0.92
\n For the year ended December 31, 2010, the weighted average number of common shares outstanding excludes shares issuable upon conversion of the Company’s convertible notes of 0.1 million. For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, the diluted weighted average number of common shares outstanding excludes shares issuable upon exercise of the Company’s stock options and share based awards of 1.0 million, 0.9 million and 1.1 million, respectively, as the effect would be anti-dilutive.18. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Litigation—The Company periodically becomes involved in various claims, lawsuits and proceedings that are incidental to its business. In the opinion of Company management, after consultation with counsel, there are no matters currently pending that would, in the event of an adverse outcome, materially impact the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity. SEC Subpoena—On June 2, 2011, the Company received a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) requesting certain documents from 2007 through the date of the subpoena, including in particular documents related to our tax accounting and reporting. On November 6, 2012, the SEC notified the Company that the SEC’s investigation has been completed. The SEC indicated that it does not intend to recommend any enforcement action against the Company. Mexico Litigation—One of the Company’s subsidiaries, SpectraSite Communications, Inc. (“SCI “), a predecessor in interest by conversion to SpectraSite Communications, LLC, was involved in a lawsuit brought in Mexico against a former Mexican subsidiary of SCI (the subsidiary of SCI was sold in 2002, prior to the Company’s acquisition of SCI in 2005). The lawsuit concerns a terminated tower construction contract and related agreements with a wireless carrier in Mexico. The primary issue for the Company is whether SCI itself can be found liable to the Mexican carrier. The trial and lower appellate courts initially found that SCI had no such liability in part because Mexican courts did not have the necessary jurisdiction over SCI. In September 2010, following several decisions by Mexican appellate courts, including the Supreme Court of Mexico, and related appeals by both parties, an intermediate appellate court issued a new decision that would have, if enforceable, re-imposed liability on SCI if the primary defendant in the case were unable to satisfy the judgment. In its decision, the intermediate appellate court identified potential damages, in the form of potential statutory interest, of approximately $6.7 million as of that date. On October 14, 2010, the Company filed a new constitutional appeal to again dispute the decision, which was rejected on January 24, 2012. The case was Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities During the three months ended December 31, 2012, we repurchased 619,314 shares of our common stock for an aggregate of approximately $46.0 million, including commissions and fees, pursuant to our publicly announced stock repurchase program, as follows: \n
PeriodTotal Number of Shares Purchased-1Average Price Paid per Share-2Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans orProgramsApproximate Dollar Value of Shares that May Yet be Purchased Under the Plans orPrograms (in millions)
October 201227,524$72.6227,524$1,300.1
November 2012489,390$74.22489,390$1,263.7
December 2012102,400$74.83102,400$1,256.1
Total Fourth Quarter619,314$74.25619,314$1,256.1
\n (1) Repurchases made pursuant to the $1.5 billion stock repurchase program approved by our Board of Directors in March 2011 (the “2011 Buyback”). Under this program, our management is authorized to purchase shares from time to time through open market purchases or privately negotiated transactions at prevailing prices as permitted by securities laws and other legal requirements, and subject to market conditions and other factors. To facilitate repurchases, we make purchases pursuant to trading plans under Rule 10b5-1 of the Exchange Act, which allows us to repurchase shares during periods when we otherwise might be prevented from doing so under insider trading laws or because of self-imposed trading blackout periods. This program may be discontinued at any time. (2) Average price per share is calculated using the aggregate price, excluding commissions and fees. We continued to repurchase shares of our common stock pursuant to our 2011 Buyback subsequent to December 31, 2012. Between January 1, 2013 and January 21, 2013, we repurchased an additional 15,790 shares of our common stock for an aggregate of $1.2 million, including commissions and fees, pursuant to the 2011 Buyback. As a result, as of January 21, 2013, we had repurchased a total of approximately 4.3 million shares of our common stock under the 2011 Buyback for an aggregate of $245.2 million, including commissions and fees. We expect to continue to manage the pacing of the remaining $1.3 billion under the 2011 Buyback in response to general market conditions and other relevant factors. \n
As of December 31,
2012 2011 2010 2009 2008
(In thousands)
Balance Sheet Data:-8
Cash and cash equivalents (including restricted cash)(9)$437,934$372,406$959,935$295,129$194,943
Property and equipment, net5,789,9954,981,7223,683,4743,169,6233,022,636
Total assets14,089,12912,242,39510,370,0848,519,9318,211,665
Long-term obligations, including current portion8,753,3767,236,3085,587,3884,211,5814,333,146
Total American Tower Corporation equity3,573,1013,287,2203,501,4443,315,0822,991,322
\n (1) For the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, amount includes approximately $0.8 million and $1.1 million, respectively, in stock-based compensation expense. For the years ended December 31, 2008 through 2010, there was no stock-based compensation expense included. (2) For the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, amount includes approximately $1.0 million and $1.2 million, respectively, in stock-based compensation expense. For the years ended December 31, 2008 through 2010, there was no stock-based compensation expense included. (3) In 2008, we completed a review of the estimated useful lives of our tower assets. Based upon this review, we revised the estimated useful lives of our towers and certain related intangible assets, primarily our network location intangible assets, from our historical estimate of 15 years to a revised estimate of 20 years. We accounted for this change as a change in estimate, which was accounted for prospectively, effective January 1, 2008. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the change resulted in a reduction in depreciation and amortization expense of approximately $121.2 million and an increase in net income of approximately $74.4 million. (4) For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008 amount includes approximately $50.2 million, $45.1 million, $52.6 million, $60.7 million and $54.8 million, respectively, in stock-based compensation expense. (5) We ceased to consolidate Verestar, Inc’s (“Verestar”) financial results beginning in December 2003 and reported the results as discontinued operations. Income from discontinued operations for 2008 includes an income tax benefit of $110.1 million related to losses associated with our investment in Verestar. (6) Basic income from continuing operations per common share represents income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation divided by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted income from continuing operations per common share represents income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation divided by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period and any dilutive common share equivalents, including unvested restricted stock, shares issuable upon exercise of stock options and warrants as determined under the treasury stock method and upon conversion of our convertible notes, as determined under the if-converted method. Dilutive common share equivalents also include the dilutive impact of the Verizon transaction (see note 18 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report). (7) For the purpose of this calculation, “earnings” consists of income from continuing operations before income taxes, income on equity method investments and fixed charges (excluding interest capitalized and amortization of interest capitalized). “Fixed charges” consists of interest expense, including amounts capitalized, amortization of debt discounts and premiums and related issuance costs and the component of rental expense associated with operating leases believed by management to be representative of the interest factor thereon. (8) Balances have been revised to reflect purchase accounting measurement period adjustments. (9) As of December 31, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008, includes approximately $69.3 million, $42.2 million, $76.0 million, $47.8 million and $51.9 million, respectively, in restricted funds pledged as collateral to secure obligations and cash that is otherwise limited by contractual provisions."} {"answer": 77.0, "question": "what is the net change in the other retained interests not reflected in the table during 2018 , in millions?", "context": "THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements ‰ Purchased interests represent senior and subordinated interests, purchased in connection with secondary market-making activities, in securitization entities in which the firm also holds retained interests. ‰ Substantially all of the total outstanding principal amount and total retained interests relate to securitizations during 2014 and thereafter as of December 2018, and relate to securitizations during 2012 and thereafter as of December 2017. ‰ The fair value of retained interests was $3.28 billion as of December 2018 and $2.13 billion as of December 2017. In addition to the interests in the table above, the firm had other continuing involvement in the form of derivative transactions and commitments with certain nonconsolidated VIEs. The carrying value of these derivatives and commitments was a net asset of $75 million as of December 2018 and $86 million as of December 2017, and the notional amount of these derivatives and commitments was $1.09 billion as of December 2018 and $1.26 billion as of December 2017. The notional amounts of these derivatives and commitments are included in maximum exposure to loss in the nonconsolidated VIE table in Note 12. The table below presents information about the weighted average key economic assumptions used in measuring the fair value of mortgage-backed retained interests. \n
As of December
$ in millions20182017
Fair value of retained interests$ 3,151$2,071
Weighted average life (years)7.26.0
Constant prepayment rate11.9%9.4%
Impact of 10% adverse change$ -27$ -19
Impact of 20% adverse change$ -53$ -35
Discount rate4.7%4.2%
Impact of 10% adverse change$ -75$ -35
Impact of 20% adverse change$ -147$ -70
\n In the table above: ‰ Amounts do not reflect the benefit of other financial instruments that are held to mitigate risks inherent in these retained interests. ‰ Changes in fair value based on an adverse variation in assumptions generally cannot be extrapolated because the relationship of the change in assumptions to the change in fair value is not usually linear. ‰ The impact of a change in a particular assumption is calculated independently of changes in any other assumption. In practice, simultaneous changes in assumptions might magnify or counteract the sensitivities disclosed above. ‰ The constant prepayment rate is included only for positions for which it is a key assumption in the determination of fair value. ‰ The discount rate for retained interests that relate to U. S. government agency-issued collateralized mortgage obligations does not include any credit loss. Expected credit loss assumptions are reflected in the discount rate for the remainder of retained interests. The firm has other retained interests not reflected in the table above with a fair value of $133 million and a weighted average life of 4.2 years as of December 2018, and a fair value of $56 million and a weighted average life of 4.5 years as of December 2017. Due to the nature and fair value of certain of these retained interests, the weighted average assumptions for constant prepayment and discount rates and the related sensitivity to adverse changes are not meaningful as of both December 2018 and December 2017. The firm’s maximum exposure to adverse changes in the value of these interests is the carrying value of $133 million as of December 2018 and $56 million as of December 2017. Note 12. Variable Interest Entities A variable interest in a VIE is an investment (e. g. , debt or equity) or other interest (e. g. , derivatives or loans and lending commitments) that will absorb portions of the VIE’s expected losses and/or receive portions of the VIE’s expected residual returns. The firm’s variable interests in VIEs include senior and subordinated debt; loans and lending commitments; limited and general partnership interests; preferred and common equity; derivatives that may include foreign currency, equity and/or credit risk; guarantees; and certain of the fees the firm receives from investment funds. Certain interest rate, foreign currency and credit derivatives the firm enters into with VIEs are not variable interests because they create, rather than absorb, risk. VIEs generally finance the purchase of assets by issuing debt and equity securities that are either collateralized by or indexed to the assets held by the VIE. The debt and equity securities issued by a VIE may include tranches of varying levels of subordination. The firm’s involvement with VIEs includes securitization of financial assets, as described in Note 11, and investments in and loans to other types of VIEs, as described below. See Note 11 for further information about securitization activities, including the definition of beneficial interests. See Note 3 for the firm’s consolidation policies, including the definition of a VIE. The completion factor method is used for the months of incurred claims prior to the most recent three months because the historical percentage of claims processed for those months is at a level sufficient to produce a consistently reliable result. Conversely, for the most recent three months of incurred claims, the volume of claims processed historically is not at a level sufficient to produce a reliable result, which therefore requires us to examine historical trend patterns as the primary method of evaluation. Medical cost trends potentially are more volatile than other segments of the economy. The drivers of medical cost trends include increases in the utilization of hospital and physician services, prescription drugs, and new medical technologies, as well as the inflationary effect on the cost per unit of each of these expense components. Other external factors such as government-mandated benefits or other regulatory changes, catastrophes, and epidemics also may impact medical cost trends. Additionally, as we realign our commercial strategy, we continue to reduce the level of traditional utilization management functions such as pre\u0002authorization of services, monitoring of inpatient admissions, and requirements for physician referrals. Other internal factors such as system conversions and claims processing interruptions also may impact our ability to accurately predict estimates of historical completion factors or medical cost trends. All of these factors are considered in estimating IBNR and in estimating the per member per month claims trend for purposes of determining the reserve for the most recent three months. Each of these factors requires significant judgment by management. The completion and claims per member per month trend factors are the most significant factors impacting the IBNR estimate. The following table illustrates the sensitivity of these factors and the estimated potential impact on our operating results caused by changes in these factors based on December 31, 2003 data: \n
Completion Factor (a):Claims Trend Factor (b):
(Decrease) Increase in FactorIncrease (Decrease) in Medical and Other Expenses Payable(Decrease) Increase in FactorIncrease (Decrease) in Medical and Other Expenses Payable
(dollars in thousands)
-3%$136,000-3%$-59,000
-2%$88,000-2%$-41,000
-1%$43,000-1%$-22,000
1%$-40,0001%$14,000
2%$-79,0002%$33,000
3%$-116,0003%$51,000
\n (a) Reflects estimated potential changes in medical and other expenses payable caused by changes in completion factors for incurred months prior to the most recent three months. (b) Reflects estimated potential changes in medical and other expenses payable caused by changes in annualized claims trend used for the estimation of per member per month incurred claims for the most recent three months. Most medical claims are paid within a few months of the member receiving service from a physician or other health care provider. As a result, these liabilities generally are described as having a “short-tail”, which causes less than 2% of our medical and other expenses payable as of the end of any given period to be outstanding for more than 12 months. As such, we expect that substantially all of the 2003 estimate of medical and other expenses payable will be known and paid during 2004. Our reserving practice is to consistently recognize the actuarial best point estimate within a level of confidence required by actuarial standards. Actuarial standards of practice generally require a level of confidence such that the liabilities established for IBNR have a greater probability of being adequate versus being insufficient, or such that the liabilities established for IBNR are sufficient to cover obligations under an assumption of moderately adverse conditions. Adverse conditions are situations in which the actual claims are TRICARE change orders occur when we perform services or incur costs under the directive of the federal government that were not originally specified in our contracts. Under federal regulations we are entitled to an equitable adjustment to the contract price, which results in additional premium revenues. Examples of items that have necessitated substantial change orders in recent years include congressionally legislated increases in the level of benefits for TRICARE beneficiaries and the administration of new government programs such as TRICARE for Life and TRICARE Senior Pharmacy. Like BPAs, we record revenue applicable to change orders when these amounts are determinable and the collectibility is reasonably assured. Unlike BPAs, where settlement only occurs at specified intervals, change orders may be negotiated and settled at any time throughout the year. Total TRICARE premium and ASO fee receivables were as follows at December 31, 2003 and 2002: \n
20032002
(in thousands)
TRICARE premiums receivable:
Base receivable$254,688$190,339
Bid price adjustments (BPAs)92,875104,044
Change orders7,0731,400
Subtotal354,636295,783
Less: long-term portion of BPAs-38,794-86,471
Total TRICARE premiums receivable$315,842$209,312
TRICARE ASO fees receivable:
Base receivable$—$7,205
Change orders11,96856,230
Total TRICARE ASO fees receivable$11,968$63,435
\n Our TRICARE contracts also contain risk-sharing provisions with the federal government to minimize any losses and limit any profits in the event that medical costs for which we are at risk differ from the levels targeted in our contracts. Amounts receivable from the federal government under such risk-sharing provisions are included in the BPA receivable above, while amounts payable to the federal government under these provisions of approximately $17.3 million at December 31, 2003 are included in medical and other expenses payable in our consolidated balance sheets. Investment Securities Investment securities totaled $1,995.8 million, or 38% of total assets at December 31, 2003. Debt securities totaled $1,960.6 million, or 98% of our total investment portfolio. More than 94% of our debt securities were of investment-grade quality, with an average credit rating of AA by Standard & Poor’s at December 31, 2003. Most of the debt securities that are below investment grade are rated at the higher end (B or better) of the non\u0002investment grade spectrum. Our investment policy limits investments in a single issuer and requires diversification among various asset types. Duration is indicative of the relationship between changes in market value to changes in interest rates, providing a general indication of the sensitivity of the fair values of our debt securities to changes in interest rates. However, actual market values may differ significantly from estimates based on duration. The average duration of our debt securities was approximately 3.5 years at December 31, 2003. Based on this duration, a 1% increase in interest rates would generally decrease the fair value of our debt securities by approximately $70 million. Our investment securities are categorized as available for sale and, as a result, are stated at fair value. Fair value of publicly traded debt and equity securities are based on quoted market prices. Non-traded debt securities are priced independently by a third party vendor. Fair value of venture capital debt securities that are privately Revenue for other healthcare services is recognized on a fee-for-service basis at estimated collectible amounts at the time services are rendered. Our fees are determined in advance for each type of service performed. Investment Securities Investment securities totaled $9.8 billion, or 47.3% of total assets at December 31, 2013, and $9.8 billion, or 49% of total assets at December 31, 2012. Debt securities, detailed below, comprised this entire investment portfolio at December 31, 2013 and at December 31, 2012. The fair value of debt securities were as follows at December 31, 2013 and 2012:"} {"answer": 1068.5, "question": "What was the average value of the Fixed maturities: Foreign government bonds for AmortizedCost or Cost in the years where Corporate securities is positive for AmortizedCost or Cost? (in million)", "context": "Shares of common stock issued, in treasury, and outstanding were (in thousands of shares): \n
Shares IssuedTreasury SharesShares Outstanding
Balance at December 29, 2013376,832—376,832
Exercise of stock options, issuance of other stock awards, and other178—178
Balance at December 28, 2014377,010—377,010
Exercise of warrants20,480—20,480
Issuance of common stock to Sponsors221,666—221,666
Acquisition of Kraft Foods Group, Inc.592,898—592,898
Exercise of stock options, issuance of other stock awards, and other2,338-4131,925
Balance at January 3, 20161,214,392-4131,213,979
Exercise of stock options, issuance of other stock awards, and other4,555-2,0582,497
Balance at December 31, 20161,218,947-2,4711,216,476
\n Note 13. Financing Arrangements We routinely enter into accounts receivable securitization and factoring programs . We account for transfers of receivables pursuant to these programs as a sale and remove them from our consolidated balance sheet. At December 31, 2016 , our most significant program in place was the U. S. securitization program, which was amended in May 2016 and originally entered into in October of 2015. Under the program, we are entitled to receive cash consideration of up to $800 million (which we elected to reduce to $500 million , effective February 21, 2017) and a receivable for the remainder of the purchase price (the “Deferred Purchase Price”). This securitization program utilizes a bankruptcy\u0002remote special-purpose entity (“SPE”). The SPE is wholly-owned by a subsidiary of Kraft Heinz and its sole business consists of the purchase or acceptance, through capital contributions of receivables and related assets, from a Kraft Heinz subsidiary and subsequent transfer of such receivables and related assets to a bank. Although the SPE is included in our consolidated financial statements, it is a separate legal entity with separate creditors who will be entitled, upon its liquidation, to be satisfied out of the SPE's assets prior to any assets or value in the SPE becoming available to Kraft Heinz or its subsidiaries. The assets of the SPE are not available to pay creditors of Kraft Heinz or its subsidiaries. This program expires in May 2017. In addition to the U. S. securitization program, we have accounts receivable factoring programs denominated in Australian dollars, New Zealand dollars, British pound sterling, euros, and Japanese yen. Under these programs, we generally receive cash consideration up to a certain limit and a receivable for the Deferred Purchase Price. There is no Deferred Purchase Price associated with the Japanese yen contract. Related to these programs, our aggregate cash consideration limit, after applying applicable hold-backs, was $245 million U. S. dollars at December 31, 2016. Generally, each of these programs automatically renews annually until terminated by either party. The cash consideration and carrying amount of receivables removed from the consolidated balance sheets in connection with the above programs were $904 million at December 31, 2016 and $267 million at January 3, 2016 . The fair value of the Deferred Purchase Price for the programs was $129 million at December 31, 2016 and $583 million at January 3, 2016 . The Deferred Purchase Price is included in sold receivables on the consolidated balance sheets and had a carrying value which approximated its fair value at December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2016 . The proceeds from these sales are recognized on the consolidated statements of cash flows as a component of operating activities. We act as servicer for these arrangements and have not recorded any servicing assets or liabilities for these arrangements as of December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2016 because they were not material to the financial statements. PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL, INC. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements The following table sets forth a rollforward of pre-tax amounts remaining in OCI related to fixed maturity securities with credit loss impairments recognized in earnings, for the periods indicated: \n
Years Ended December 31,
20182017
(in millions)
Credit loss impairments:
Balance, beginning of period$319$359
New credit loss impairments110
Additional credit loss impairments on securities previously impaired011
Increases due to the passage of time on previously recorded credit losses1015
Reductions for securities which matured, paid down, prepaid or were sold during the period-162-58
Reductions for securities impaired to fair value during the period-1-24-13
Accretion of credit loss impairments previously recognized due to an increase in cash flows expected to be collected-4-5
Balance, end of period$140$319
\n (1) Represents circumstances where the Company determined in the current period that it intends to sell the security or it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell the security before recovery of the security’s amortized cost. Assets Supporting Experience-Rated Contractholder Liabilities The following table sets forth the composition of “Assets supporting experience-rated contractholder liabilities,” as of the dates indicated: \n
December 31, 2018December 31, 2017
AmortizedCost or CostFairValueAmortizedCost or CostFairValue
(in millions)
Short-term investments and cash equivalents$215$215$245$245
Fixed maturities:
Corporate securities13,25813,11913,81614,073
Commercial mortgage-backed securities2,3462,3242,2942,311
Residential mortgage-backed securities-1828811961966
Asset-backed securities-21,6491,6651,3631,392
Foreign government bonds1,0871,0831,0501,057
U.S. government authorities and agencies and obligations of U.S. states538577357410
Total fixed maturities-319,70619,57919,84120,209
Equity securities1,3781,4601,2781,643
Total assets supporting experience-rated contractholder liabilities-4$21,299$21,254$21,364$22,097
\n (1) Includes publicly-traded agency pass-through securities and collateralized mortgage obligations. (2) Includes credit-tranched securities collateralized by sub-prime mortgages, auto loans, credit cards, education loans and other asset types. Includes collateralized loan obligations at fair value of $1,028 million and $943 million as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, all of which were rated AAA. (3) As a percentage of amortized cost, 93% and 92% of the portfolio was considered high or highest quality based on NAIC or equivalent ratings, as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. (4) As a percentage of amortized cost, 78% and 80% of the portfolio consisted of public securities as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The net change in unrealized gains (losses) from assets supporting experience-rated contractholder liabilities still held at period end, recorded within “Other income (loss),” was $(778) million, $300 million and $75 million during the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Equity Securities The net change in unrealized gains (losses) from equity securities, still held at period end, recorded within “Other income (loss),” was $(1,157) million during the year ended December 31, 2018. The net change in unrealized gains (losses) from equity securities, still held at period end, recorded within “Other comprehensive income (loss),” was $(494) million and $760 million during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Benefits and expenses increased $735 million. Excluding the impact of our annual reviews and update of assumptions and other refinements, as discussed above, benefits and expenses increased $709 million primarily driven by an increase in policyholders’ benefits, including the change in policy reserves, related to the increase in premiums discussed above. Account Values Account values are a significant driver of our operating results, and are primarily driven by net additions (withdrawals) and the impact of market changes. The income we earn on most of our fee-based products varies with the level of fee-based account values, since many policy fees are determined by these values. The investment income and interest we credit to policyholders on our spread-based products varies with the level of general account values. To a lesser extent, changes in account values impact our pattern of amortization of DAC and VOBA and general and administrative expenses. The following table shows the changes in the account values and net additions (withdrawals) of Retirement segment products for the periods indicated. Net additions (withdrawals) are plan sales and participant deposits or additions, as applicable, minus plan and participant withdrawals and benefits. Account values include both internally- and externally\u0002managed client balances as the total balances drive revenue for the Retirement segment. For more information on internally-managed balances, see “—PGIM. ”"} {"answer": -0.12459, "question": "what is the growth rate in advertising expense in 2002 relative to 2001?", "context": "Guarantees We adopted FASB Interpretation No.45 (“FIN 45”), “Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others” at the beginning of our fiscal 2003. See “Recent Accounting Pronouncements” for further information regarding FIN 45. The lease agreements for our three office buildings in San Jose, California provide for residual value guarantees. These lease agreements were in place prior to December 31, 2002 and are disclosed in Note 14. In the normal course of business, we provide indemnifications of varying scope to customers against claims of intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising from the use of our products. Historically, costs related to these indemnification provisions have not been significant and we are unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these indemnification provisions on our future results of operations. We have commitments to make certain milestone and/or retention payments typically entered into in conjunction with various acquisitions, for which we have made accruals in our consolidated financial statements. In connection with our purchases of technology assets during fiscal 2003, we entered into employee retention agreements totaling $2.2 million. We are required to make payments upon satisfaction of certain conditions in the agreements. As permitted under Delaware law, we have agreements whereby we indemnify our officers and directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity. The indemnification period covers all pertinent events and occurrences during the officer’s or director’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, we have director and officer insurance coverage that limits our exposure and enables us to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. We believe the estimated fair value of these indemnification agreements in excess of applicable insurance coverage is minimal. As part of our limited partnership interests in Adobe Ventures, we have provided a general indemnification to Granite Ventures, an independent venture capital firm and sole general partner of Adobe Ventures, for certain events or occurrences while Granite Ventures is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity provided that Granite Ventures acts in good faith on behalf of the partnerships. We are unable to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments that could potentially result from any hypothetical future claim, but believe the risk of having to make any payments under this general indemnification to be remote. We accrue for costs associated with future obligations which include costs for undetected bugs that are discovered only after the product is installed and used by customers. The accrual remaining at the end of fiscal 2003 primarily relates to new releases of our Creative Suites products during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003. The table below summarizes the activity related to the accrual during fiscal 2003: \n
Balance at November 29, 2002AccrualsPaymentsBalance at November 28, 2003
$—$5,554$-2,369$3,185
\n Advertising Expenses We expense all advertising costs as incurred and classify these costs under sales and marketing expense. Advertising expenses for fiscal years 2003, 2002, and 2001 were $24.0 million, $26.7 million and $30.5 million, respectively. Foreign Currency and Other Hedging Instruments Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.133 (“SFAS No.133”), “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities and requires us to recognize these as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet and measure them at fair value. As described in Note 15, gains and losses resulting from \n
Year Ended
September 30, 2009% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2008% Incr. (Decr.)September 30, 2007
($ in 000's)
Revenues
Securities Commissions and
Investment Banking Fees$ 7,162-78%$ 32,292-23%$ 41,879
Investment Advisory Fees1,355-59%3,32630%2,568
Interest Income1,456-63%3,987-4%4,163
Trading Profits4,531341%1,027-80%5,254
Other387-60%975-82%5,340
Total Revenues14,891-64%41,607-30%59,204
Interest Expense421-66%1,2353%1,197
Net Revenues14,470-64%40,372-30%58,007
Non-Interest Expense
Compensation Expense14,381-44%25,860-8%28,010
Other Expense7,296-60%18,064-23%23,383
Total Non-Interest Expense21,677-51%43,924-15%51,393
Income (Loss) Before Taxes
and Minority Interest-7,207103%-3,552-154%6,614
Minority Interest in
Pre-tax (Losses) Income Held by Others-2,3211,742%-126-104%2,995
Pre-tax (Loss) Earnings$ -4,886-43%$ -3,426-195%$ 3,619
\n Year ended September 30, 2009 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2008 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets in fiscal 2009 consists of the results of our joint ventures in Latin America, including Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis continued to significantly impact emerging markets in all business lines. The results in the emerging market segment declined to a $4.9 million loss from a $3.4 million loss in the prior year. This decline was a result of a $24 million, or 80%, decline in commission revenues which was almost entirely offset by a $3.5 million increase in trading profits and a $22 million decline in non-interest expenses. Our minority interest partners shared in $2.3 million of the fiscal 2009 loss before taxes. In December, our joint venture in Turkey ceased operations and subsequently filed for protection under Turkish bankruptcy laws. We have fully reserved for our equity interest in this joint venture. Year ended September 30, 2008 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2007 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets consists of the results of our joint ventures in Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil and Turkey. The results in the emerging market segment declined from a $3.6 million profit in fiscal 2007 to a $3.4 million loss in fiscal 2008. This decline was a result of a greater decline in revenues than an increase in expenses. Expenses were impacted by our investment in Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis significantly impacted emerging markets in all business lines. Commission revenue declined 23% in fiscal 2008 as compared to the prior year as the economic slowdown and a series of political crises in Turkey and Argentina during 2008 severely undermined investors’ confidence in these countries. Trading profits declined due to losses taken in proprietary positions in Turkey. The commission expense portion of compensation expense declined in proportion to the decline in commission revenue. Other expenses in fiscal 2007 were unusually high due to the accrual of tax liabilities and the related legal expenses. As of September 30, 2008, we were still awaiting the final outcome of the litigation in Turkey, and in light of the suspension of the entity’s license, our ability to continue as a going concern in Turkey was uncertain. We had fully reserved for our investment in the Turkish joint venture as of September 30, 2008 and, accordingly, fiscal 2008 pre-tax earnings did not include any net impact of our Turkish joint venture. Index 64 Certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies As a financial holding company, we are required to provide certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies pursuant to the SEC’s Industry Guide 3. Certain of those disclosures are as follows for the fiscal year indicated: \n
Year ended September 30,
201620152014
RJF return on average assets-11.8%2.0%2.1%
RJF return on average equity-211.3%11.5%12.3%
Average equity to average assets-317.1%18.5%18.1%
Dividend payout ratio-421.9%21.0%19.3%
\n (1) Computed as net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the year, divided by two). (2) Computed by utilizing the net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by the average equity attributable to RJF for each respective fiscal year. Average equity is computed by adding the total equity attributable to RJF as of each quarter-end date during the indicated fiscal year, plus the beginning of the year total, divided by five. (3) Computed as average equity (the sum of total equity at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two), divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two). (4) Computed as dividends declared per common share during the fiscal year as a percentage of diluted earnings per common share. Refer to the RJ Bank section of this MD&A, various sections within Item 7A in this report and the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Form 10-K for the other required disclosures. Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity is essential to our business. The primary goal of our liquidity management activities is to ensure adequate funding to conduct our business over a range of market environments. Senior management establishes our liquidity and capital policies. These policies include senior management’s review of short\u0002and long-term cash flow forecasts, review of monthly capital expenditures, the monitoring of the availability of alternative sources of financing, and the daily monitoring of liquidity in our significant subsidiaries. Our decisions on the allocation of capital to our business units consider, among other factors, projected profitability and cash flow, risk and impact on future liquidity needs. Our treasury department assists in evaluating, monitoring and controlling the impact that our business activities have on our financial condition, liquidity and capital structure as well as maintains our relationships with various lenders. The objectives of these policies are to support the successful execution of our business strategies while ensuring ongoing and sufficient liquidity. Liquidity is provided primarily through our business operations and financing activities. Financing activities could include bank borrowings, repurchase agreement transactions or additional capital raising activities under our “universal” shelf registration statement. Cash used in operating activities during the year ended September 30, 2016 was $518 million. Successful operating results generated a $650 million increase in cash. Increases in cash from operations include: ? An increase in brokerage client payables had a $1.82 billion favorable impact on cash. The increase largely results from two factors. First, many clients reacted to uncertainties in the equity markets by increasing the cash balances in their brokerage accounts. Second, our brokerage client account balances increased as a result of our fiscal year 2016 acquisitions of Alex. Brown and 3Macs. Cumulatively, these two factors result in the increase in brokerage client payables and a corresponding increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations which is discussed below. ? Stock loaned, net of stock borrowed, increased $153 million. ? Accrued compensation, commissions and benefits increased $46 million as a result of the increased financial results we achieved in fiscal year 2016. Offsetting these, decreases in cash used in operations resulted from: ? A $1.95 billion increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations and other segregated assets, primarily resulting from the increase in client cash balances described above. RALPH LAUREN CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) The weighted-average number of common shares outstanding used to calculate basic net income (loss) per common share is reconciled to shares used to calculate diluted net income (loss) per common share as follows:"} {"answer": 0.12063, "question": "What is the average growth rate of U.S. high-grade between 2003 and 2004?", "context": "Table of Contents Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for transactions in sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country based on the type and amount of the security traded. The commission is calculated on a standard schedule that applies to all broker-dealer clients and varies depending on whether the transaction is in an actively traded sovereign issue, a less actively traded sovereign issue or a corporate issue. A lower commission rate is charged for actively traded sovereign issues, while a higher commission rate is charged for corporate issues. The average commission on emerging markets transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $205 per million traded. For newly-issued U. S. high-grade corporate bonds and for newly-issued sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country, we enable U. S. institutional investors to submit indications of interest on our electronic trading platform directly to the underwriter syndicate desks of our broker-dealer clients. Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for new issue transactions that is based on the allocation amount. The commission is set as a percentage of the new issue selling costs paid by the issuer to our broker-dealer client. The percentage of the new issue selling costs is lower on orders over $5 million. The fee is capped on larger transactions. There are currently no fixed monthly fees or caps on the level of monthly commissions. The average commission on new issue transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $297 per million traded U. S. Treasury Securities In September 2004, we started trading U. S. Treasury securities on our trading platform. In 2004, the total revenues we derived from the trading of U. S. Treasury securities on our platform was not material. The commission is calculated as a flat fee per million of notional amount traded and applies to all broker-dealer clients. Please see “— Risk Factors That May Affect Future Results — If we are unable to enter into additional marketing and strategic alliances or if our current strategic alliances are not successful, we may not maintain the current level of trading or generate increased trading on our trading platform. Information and User Access Fees \n
Year Ended December 31,
2004 2003 2002
% of % of % of
Total Total Total
$ Revenues $ Revenues $ Revenues
($ in thousands)
Information services fees$2,2803.0%$8261.5%$150.0%
User access fees4330.63180.52721.5
$2,7133.6%$1,1442.0%$2871.5%
\n Information and user access fees consist of information services fees and monthly user fees. We charge information services fees for Corporate BondTicker to our broker-dealer clients, institutional investor clients and data only subscribers. The information services fee is a flat monthly fee, based on the level of service. We also generate information services fees from the sale of bulk data to certain institutional investor clients and data only subscribers. Institutional investor clients trading U. S. high-grade corporate bonds are charged a monthly user access fee for the use of our platform. The fee, billed quarterly, is charged to the client based on the number of the client’s users. To encourage institutional investor clients to execute trades on our U. S. high-grade corporate bond platform, we reduce these information and user access fees for such clients once minimum quarterly trading volumes are attained. Revenues Our revenues for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the resulting dollar and percentage change, are as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,
20042003
$% of Revenues $% of Revenues$ Change% Change
($ in thousands)
Revenues
Commissions
U.S. high-grade$45,46560.0%$40,31069.0%$5,15512.8%
European high-grade15,14220.07,12612.28,016112.5
Other7,56510.05,3649.12,20141.0
Total commissions68,17290.052,80090.315,37229.1
Information and user access fees2,7133.61,1442.01,569137.2
License fees3,1434.14,1457.1-1,002-24.2
Interest income8821.23710.6511137.7
Other8871.1—0887—
Total revenues$75,797100%$58,460100%$17,33729.7%
\n Commissions. Total commissions increased by $15.4 million or 29.1% to $68.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $52.8 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due to increases in the amount of U. S. high-grade commissions and substantial increases in European high-grade commissions. U. S. high-grade commissions increased by $5.2 million or 12.8% to $45.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $40.3 million for the comparable period in 2003. European high-grade commissions increased by $8.0 million or 112.5% to $15.1 million from $7.1 million for the comparable period in 2003. Other commissions increased by $2.2 million or 41.0% to $7.6 million from $5.4 million for the comparable period in 2003. These increases were primarily due to an increase in transaction volume from $192.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $298.1 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004 generated by new and existing clients, offset by a 16.7% reduction in the average commission per million from $275 per million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $229 per million for the year ended December 31, 2004. This decrease in average commission per million was attributable to the full-year effect of our U. S. high-grade fee plans, increasing volumes of transactions with lower fees per million and an increase in the percentage of trades executed on the platform with shorter maturities, which generally generate lower commissions per million, Information and User Access Fees. Information and user access fees increased by $1.6 million or 137.2% to $2.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This increase was primarily due to an increase in the number of subscribers to our Corporate BondTicker service. License Fees. License fees decreased by $1.0 million or 24.2% to $3.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $4.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This decrease was due to the addition of four new broker-dealer clients in the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to five new broker-dealer clients added in the year ended December 31, 2003. Interest Income. Interest income increased by $0.5 million or 137.7% to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $0.4 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was due to a rise in interest rates and higher cash, cash equivalents and short-term investment balances during the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to the comparable period in 2003. Other. Other revenues increased to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $0.0 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due to the effects of a change in accounting policy with respect to recognizing as revenue gross telecommunication line fees paid by broker- PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Price Range Our common stock commenced trading on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “MKTX” on November 5, 2004. Prior to that date, there was no public market for our common stock. The high and low bid information for our common stock, as reported by NASDAQ, was as follows: \n
HighLow
November 5, 2004 to December 31, 2004$24.41$12.75
January 1, 2005 to March 31, 2005$15.95$9.64
April 1, 2005 to June 30, 2005$13.87$9.83
July 1, 2005 to September 30, 2005$14.09$9.99
October 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005$13.14$10.64
\n On March 8, 2006, the last reported closing price of our common stock on the NASDAQ National Market was $12.59. Holders There were approximately 114 holders of record of our common stock as of March 8, 2006. Dividend Policy We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our capital stock since our inception. We intend to retain future earnings to finance the operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. In the event we decide to declare dividends on our common stock in the future, such declaration will be subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors. Our Board may take into account such matters as general business conditions, our financial results, capital requirements, contractual, legal, and regulatory restrictions on the payment of dividends by us to our stockholders or by our subsidiaries to us and any such other factors as our Board may deem relevant. Use of Proceeds On November 4, 2004, the registration statement relating to our initial public offering (No.333-112718) was declared effective. We received net proceeds from the sale of the shares of our common stock in the offering of $53.9 million, at an initial public offering price of $11.00 per share, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses. Except for salaries, and reimbursements for travel expenses and other out-of -pocket costs incurred in the ordinary course of business, none of the proceeds from the offering have been paid by us, directly or indirectly, to any of our directors or officers or any of their associates, or to any persons owning ten percent or more of our outstanding stock or to any of our affiliates. We have invested the proceeds from the offering in cash and cash equivalents and short-term marketable securities."} {"answer": 3380347.0, "question": "what's the total amount of Cost of goods sold of Year Ended December 31, 2016, Inventories of At December 31, 2013, and Leasehold and tenant improvements of December 31, 2016 ?", "context": "ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The following selected financial data is qualified by reference to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements, including the notes thereto, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. \n
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands, except per share amounts)20162015201420132012
Net revenues$4,825,335$3,963,313$3,084,370$2,332,051$1,834,921
Cost of goods sold2,584,7242,057,7661,572,1641,195,381955,624
Gross profit2,240,6111,905,5471,512,2061,136,670879,297
Selling, general and administrative expenses1,823,1401,497,0001,158,251871,572670,602
Income from operations417,471408,547353,955265,098208,695
Interest expense, net-26,434-14,628-5,335-2,933-5,183
Other expense, net-2,755-7,234-6,410-1,172-73
Income before income taxes388,282386,685342,210260,993203,439
Provision for income taxes131,303154,112134,16898,66374,661
Net income256,979232,573208,042162,330128,778
Adjustment payment to Class C59,000————
Net income available to all stockholders$197,979$232,573$208,042$162,330$128,778
Net income available per common share
Basic net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Basic net income per share of Class C common stock$0.72$0.54$0.49$0.39$0.31
Diluted net income per share of Class A and B common stock$0.45$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Diluted net income per share of Class C common stock$0.71$0.53$0.47$0.38$0.30
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class A and B common stock
Basic217,707215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted221,944220,868219,380215,958212,760
Weighted average common shares outstanding Class C common stock
Basic218,623215,498213,227210,696208,686
Diluted222,904220,868219,380215,958212,760
Dividends declared$59,000$—$—$—$—
\n Our net revenues for the full year 2016 were $4,825.3 million, which reflects a revision from the $4,828.2 million reported in our earnings release, filed January 31, 2017, on Form 8-K. This revision reflects a $2.9 million adjustment related to a return credit for footwear that was identified in connection with the closing of our January 2017 books and records, following the earnings release. As a result, other items on our Consolidated Financial Statements have been appropriately adjusted from the amounts provided in the earnings release, including a reduction of our full year 2016 gross profit and income from operations by $2.9 million, and a reduction of net income by $1.7 million. \n
At December 31,
(In thousands)20162015201420132012
Cash and cash equivalents$250,470$129,852$593,175$347,489$341,841
Working capital -11,279,3371,019,9531,127,772702,181651,370
Inventories917,491783,031536,714469,006319,286
Total assets3,644,3312,865,9702,092,4281,576,3691,155,052
Total debt, including current maturities817,388666,070281,546151,55159,858
Total stockholders’ equity$2,030,900$1,668,222$1,350,300$1,053,354$816,922
\n (1) Working capital is defined as current assets minus current liabilities. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, which effects all entities that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. The amendments in this ASU cover such areas as the recognition of excess tax benefits and deficiencies, the classification of those excess tax benefits on the statement of cash flows, an accounting policy election for forfeitures, the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes and still qualify for equity classification and the classification of those taxes paid on the statement of cash flows. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016. This guidance can be applied either prospectively, retrospectively or using a modified retrospective transition method. Early adoption is permitted. The Company will not early adopt this ASU. The adoption of this guidance may have a material impact on the Company’s effective tax rate and income tax expense, depending in part on whether significant employee stock option exercises occur. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, which eliminates the diversity in practice related to the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows, by adding or clarifying guidance on eight specific cash flow issues. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not believe this ASU will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, which will require an entity to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset, other than inventory, when the transfer occurs. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted in the first interim period of 2017. Upon adoption, any deferred charge established upon an intra-company transfer would be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. At December 31, 2016, the Company had a deferred charge of $26.0 million with $1.8 million and $24.2 million recorded within Prepaid expenses and Other long term assets, respectively. The Company plans to adopt this ASU during the interim period ending March 31, 2017. Recently Adopted Accounting Standards In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, which requires costs incurred to issue debt to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the debt. This ASU is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted the provisions of this ASU in the first quarter of 2016, and reclassified approximately $2.9 million from “Other long term assets” to “Long term debt, net of current maturities” as of December 31, 2015.3. Property and Equipment, Net Property and equipment consisted of the following: \n
December 31,
(In thousands)20162015
Leasehold and tenant improvements$326,617$214,834
Furniture, fixtures and displays168,720132,736
Buildings47,21647,137
Software151,05999,309
Office equipment75,19650,399
Plant equipment124,140118,138
Land83,57417,628
Construction in progress204,362147,581
Other20,3834,002
Subtotal property and equipment1,201,267831,764
Accumulated depreciation-397,056-293,233
Property and equipment, net$804,211$538,531
"} {"answer": 1435.26, "question": "according to the above listed holders of common stock , what was the market share of mktx common stock on march 8 , 2006?", "context": "Table of Contents Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for transactions in sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country based on the type and amount of the security traded. The commission is calculated on a standard schedule that applies to all broker-dealer clients and varies depending on whether the transaction is in an actively traded sovereign issue, a less actively traded sovereign issue or a corporate issue. A lower commission rate is charged for actively traded sovereign issues, while a higher commission rate is charged for corporate issues. The average commission on emerging markets transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $205 per million traded. For newly-issued U. S. high-grade corporate bonds and for newly-issued sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country, we enable U. S. institutional investors to submit indications of interest on our electronic trading platform directly to the underwriter syndicate desks of our broker-dealer clients. Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for new issue transactions that is based on the allocation amount. The commission is set as a percentage of the new issue selling costs paid by the issuer to our broker-dealer client. The percentage of the new issue selling costs is lower on orders over $5 million. The fee is capped on larger transactions. There are currently no fixed monthly fees or caps on the level of monthly commissions. The average commission on new issue transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $297 per million traded U. S. Treasury Securities In September 2004, we started trading U. S. Treasury securities on our trading platform. In 2004, the total revenues we derived from the trading of U. S. Treasury securities on our platform was not material. The commission is calculated as a flat fee per million of notional amount traded and applies to all broker-dealer clients. Please see “— Risk Factors That May Affect Future Results — If we are unable to enter into additional marketing and strategic alliances or if our current strategic alliances are not successful, we may not maintain the current level of trading or generate increased trading on our trading platform. Information and User Access Fees \n
Year Ended December 31,
2004 2003 2002
% of % of % of
Total Total Total
$ Revenues $ Revenues $ Revenues
($ in thousands)
Information services fees$2,2803.0%$8261.5%$150.0%
User access fees4330.63180.52721.5
$2,7133.6%$1,1442.0%$2871.5%
\n Information and user access fees consist of information services fees and monthly user fees. We charge information services fees for Corporate BondTicker to our broker-dealer clients, institutional investor clients and data only subscribers. The information services fee is a flat monthly fee, based on the level of service. We also generate information services fees from the sale of bulk data to certain institutional investor clients and data only subscribers. Institutional investor clients trading U. S. high-grade corporate bonds are charged a monthly user access fee for the use of our platform. The fee, billed quarterly, is charged to the client based on the number of the client’s users. To encourage institutional investor clients to execute trades on our U. S. high-grade corporate bond platform, we reduce these information and user access fees for such clients once minimum quarterly trading volumes are attained. Revenues Our revenues for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the resulting dollar and percentage change, are as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,
20042003
$% of Revenues $% of Revenues$ Change% Change
($ in thousands)
Revenues
Commissions
U.S. high-grade$45,46560.0%$40,31069.0%$5,15512.8%
European high-grade15,14220.07,12612.28,016112.5
Other7,56510.05,3649.12,20141.0
Total commissions68,17290.052,80090.315,37229.1
Information and user access fees2,7133.61,1442.01,569137.2
License fees3,1434.14,1457.1-1,002-24.2
Interest income8821.23710.6511137.7
Other8871.1—0887—
Total revenues$75,797100%$58,460100%$17,33729.7%
\n Commissions. Total commissions increased by $15.4 million or 29.1% to $68.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $52.8 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due to increases in the amount of U. S. high-grade commissions and substantial increases in European high-grade commissions. U. S. high-grade commissions increased by $5.2 million or 12.8% to $45.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $40.3 million for the comparable period in 2003. European high-grade commissions increased by $8.0 million or 112.5% to $15.1 million from $7.1 million for the comparable period in 2003. Other commissions increased by $2.2 million or 41.0% to $7.6 million from $5.4 million for the comparable period in 2003. These increases were primarily due to an increase in transaction volume from $192.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $298.1 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004 generated by new and existing clients, offset by a 16.7% reduction in the average commission per million from $275 per million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $229 per million for the year ended December 31, 2004. This decrease in average commission per million was attributable to the full-year effect of our U. S. high-grade fee plans, increasing volumes of transactions with lower fees per million and an increase in the percentage of trades executed on the platform with shorter maturities, which generally generate lower commissions per million, Information and User Access Fees. Information and user access fees increased by $1.6 million or 137.2% to $2.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This increase was primarily due to an increase in the number of subscribers to our Corporate BondTicker service. License Fees. License fees decreased by $1.0 million or 24.2% to $3.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $4.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This decrease was due to the addition of four new broker-dealer clients in the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to five new broker-dealer clients added in the year ended December 31, 2003. Interest Income. Interest income increased by $0.5 million or 137.7% to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $0.4 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was due to a rise in interest rates and higher cash, cash equivalents and short-term investment balances during the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to the comparable period in 2003. Other. Other revenues increased to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $0.0 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due to the effects of a change in accounting policy with respect to recognizing as revenue gross telecommunication line fees paid by broker- PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Price Range Our common stock commenced trading on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “MKTX” on November 5, 2004. Prior to that date, there was no public market for our common stock. The high and low bid information for our common stock, as reported by NASDAQ, was as follows: \n
HighLow
November 5, 2004 to December 31, 2004$24.41$12.75
January 1, 2005 to March 31, 2005$15.95$9.64
April 1, 2005 to June 30, 2005$13.87$9.83
July 1, 2005 to September 30, 2005$14.09$9.99
October 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005$13.14$10.64
\n On March 8, 2006, the last reported closing price of our common stock on the NASDAQ National Market was $12.59. Holders There were approximately 114 holders of record of our common stock as of March 8, 2006. Dividend Policy We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our capital stock since our inception. We intend to retain future earnings to finance the operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. In the event we decide to declare dividends on our common stock in the future, such declaration will be subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors. Our Board may take into account such matters as general business conditions, our financial results, capital requirements, contractual, legal, and regulatory restrictions on the payment of dividends by us to our stockholders or by our subsidiaries to us and any such other factors as our Board may deem relevant. Use of Proceeds On November 4, 2004, the registration statement relating to our initial public offering (No.333-112718) was declared effective. We received net proceeds from the sale of the shares of our common stock in the offering of $53.9 million, at an initial public offering price of $11.00 per share, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses. Except for salaries, and reimbursements for travel expenses and other out-of -pocket costs incurred in the ordinary course of business, none of the proceeds from the offering have been paid by us, directly or indirectly, to any of our directors or officers or any of their associates, or to any persons owning ten percent or more of our outstanding stock or to any of our affiliates. We have invested the proceeds from the offering in cash and cash equivalents and short-term marketable securities."} {"answer": 0.11338, "question": "What's the current increasing rate of U.S. high-grade?", "context": "Table of Contents Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for transactions in sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country based on the type and amount of the security traded. The commission is calculated on a standard schedule that applies to all broker-dealer clients and varies depending on whether the transaction is in an actively traded sovereign issue, a less actively traded sovereign issue or a corporate issue. A lower commission rate is charged for actively traded sovereign issues, while a higher commission rate is charged for corporate issues. The average commission on emerging markets transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $205 per million traded. For newly-issued U. S. high-grade corporate bonds and for newly-issued sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country, we enable U. S. institutional investors to submit indications of interest on our electronic trading platform directly to the underwriter syndicate desks of our broker-dealer clients. Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for new issue transactions that is based on the allocation amount. The commission is set as a percentage of the new issue selling costs paid by the issuer to our broker-dealer client. The percentage of the new issue selling costs is lower on orders over $5 million. The fee is capped on larger transactions. There are currently no fixed monthly fees or caps on the level of monthly commissions. The average commission on new issue transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $297 per million traded U. S. Treasury Securities In September 2004, we started trading U. S. Treasury securities on our trading platform. In 2004, the total revenues we derived from the trading of U. S. Treasury securities on our platform was not material. The commission is calculated as a flat fee per million of notional amount traded and applies to all broker-dealer clients. Please see “— Risk Factors That May Affect Future Results — If we are unable to enter into additional marketing and strategic alliances or if our current strategic alliances are not successful, we may not maintain the current level of trading or generate increased trading on our trading platform. Information and User Access Fees \n
Year Ended December 31,
2004 2003 2002
% of % of % of
Total Total Total
$ Revenues $ Revenues $ Revenues
($ in thousands)
Information services fees$2,2803.0%$8261.5%$150.0%
User access fees4330.63180.52721.5
$2,7133.6%$1,1442.0%$2871.5%
\n Information and user access fees consist of information services fees and monthly user fees. We charge information services fees for Corporate BondTicker to our broker-dealer clients, institutional investor clients and data only subscribers. The information services fee is a flat monthly fee, based on the level of service. We also generate information services fees from the sale of bulk data to certain institutional investor clients and data only subscribers. Institutional investor clients trading U. S. high-grade corporate bonds are charged a monthly user access fee for the use of our platform. The fee, billed quarterly, is charged to the client based on the number of the client’s users. To encourage institutional investor clients to execute trades on our U. S. high-grade corporate bond platform, we reduce these information and user access fees for such clients once minimum quarterly trading volumes are attained. Revenues Our revenues for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the resulting dollar and percentage change, are as follows: \n
Year Ended December 31,
20042003
$% of Revenues $% of Revenues$ Change% Change
($ in thousands)
Revenues
Commissions
U.S. high-grade$45,46560.0%$40,31069.0%$5,15512.8%
European high-grade15,14220.07,12612.28,016112.5
Other7,56510.05,3649.12,20141.0
Total commissions68,17290.052,80090.315,37229.1
Information and user access fees2,7133.61,1442.01,569137.2
License fees3,1434.14,1457.1-1,002-24.2
Interest income8821.23710.6511137.7
Other8871.1—0887—
Total revenues$75,797100%$58,460100%$17,33729.7%
\n Commissions. Total commissions increased by $15.4 million or 29.1% to $68.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $52.8 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due to increases in the amount of U. S. high-grade commissions and substantial increases in European high-grade commissions. U. S. high-grade commissions increased by $5.2 million or 12.8% to $45.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $40.3 million for the comparable period in 2003. European high-grade commissions increased by $8.0 million or 112.5% to $15.1 million from $7.1 million for the comparable period in 2003. Other commissions increased by $2.2 million or 41.0% to $7.6 million from $5.4 million for the comparable period in 2003. These increases were primarily due to an increase in transaction volume from $192.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $298.1 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004 generated by new and existing clients, offset by a 16.7% reduction in the average commission per million from $275 per million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $229 per million for the year ended December 31, 2004. This decrease in average commission per million was attributable to the full-year effect of our U. S. high-grade fee plans, increasing volumes of transactions with lower fees per million and an increase in the percentage of trades executed on the platform with shorter maturities, which generally generate lower commissions per million, Information and User Access Fees. Information and user access fees increased by $1.6 million or 137.2% to $2.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This increase was primarily due to an increase in the number of subscribers to our Corporate BondTicker service. License Fees. License fees decreased by $1.0 million or 24.2% to $3.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $4.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This decrease was due to the addition of four new broker-dealer clients in the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to five new broker-dealer clients added in the year ended December 31, 2003. Interest Income. Interest income increased by $0.5 million or 137.7% to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $0.4 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was due to a rise in interest rates and higher cash, cash equivalents and short-term investment balances during the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to the comparable period in 2003. Other. Other revenues increased to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $0.0 million for the comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due to the effects of a change in accounting policy with respect to recognizing as revenue gross telecommunication line fees paid by broker- PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Price Range Our common stock commenced trading on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “MKTX” on November 5, 2004. Prior to that date, there was no public market for our common stock. The high and low bid information for our common stock, as reported by NASDAQ, was as follows: \n
HighLow
November 5, 2004 to December 31, 2004$24.41$12.75
January 1, 2005 to March 31, 2005$15.95$9.64
April 1, 2005 to June 30, 2005$13.87$9.83
July 1, 2005 to September 30, 2005$14.09$9.99
October 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005$13.14$10.64
\n On March 8, 2006, the last reported closing price of our common stock on the NASDAQ National Market was $12.59. Holders There were approximately 114 holders of record of our common stock as of March 8, 2006. Dividend Policy We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our capital stock since our inception. We intend to retain future earnings to finance the operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. In the event we decide to declare dividends on our common stock in the future, such declaration will be subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors. Our Board may take into account such matters as general business conditions, our financial results, capital requirements, contractual, legal, and regulatory restrictions on the payment of dividends by us to our stockholders or by our subsidiaries to us and any such other factors as our Board may deem relevant. Use of Proceeds On November 4, 2004, the registration statement relating to our initial public offering (No.333-112718) was declared effective. We received net proceeds from the sale of the shares of our common stock in the offering of $53.9 million, at an initial public offering price of $11.00 per share, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses. Except for salaries, and reimbursements for travel expenses and other out-of -pocket costs incurred in the ordinary course of business, none of the proceeds from the offering have been paid by us, directly or indirectly, to any of our directors or officers or any of their associates, or to any persons owning ten percent or more of our outstanding stock or to any of our affiliates. We have invested the proceeds from the offering in cash and cash equivalents and short-term marketable securities."} {"answer": 2014.0, "question": "Which year is Service cost for Pension Benefits the lowest?", "context": "The funded status of the Company's plans as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, was as follows \n
Pension Benefits December 31Other Benefits December 31
($ in millions)2015201420152014
Change in Benefit Obligation
Benefit obligation at beginning of year$5,671$4,730$650$616
Service cost1501361313
Interest cost2422532730
Plan participants' contributions112667
Actuarial loss (gain)-254714-9124
Benefits paid-185-168-39-40
Curtailments—-20——
Benefit obligation at end of year5,6355,671566650
Change in Plan Assets
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year4,7314,310——
Actual return on plan assets-47437——
Employer contributions1031263333
Plan participants' contributions112667
Benefits paid-185-168-39-40
Fair value of plan assets at end of year4,6134,731——
Funded status$-1,022$-940$-566$-650
Amounts Recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position:
Pension plan assets$—$17$—$—
Current liability-1-21-18-143-143
Non-current liability-2-1,001-939-423-507
Accumulated other comprehensive loss (income) (pre-tax) related to:
Prior service costs (credits)86105-105-125
Net actuarial loss (gain)1,4331,374-2173
\n (1) Included in other current liabilities and current portion of postretirement plan liabilities, respectively. (2) Included in pension plan liabilities and other postretirement plan liabilities, respectively. The Projected Benefit Obligation (\"PBO\"), Accumulated Benefit Obligation (\"ABO\"), and asset values for the Company's qualified pension plans were $5,490 million, $5,146 million, and $4,613 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $5,529 million, $5,124 million, and $4,731 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The PBO represents the present value of pension benefits earned through the end of the year, with allowance for future salary increases. The ABO is similar to the PBO, but does not provide for future salary increases. The PBO and fair value of plan assets for all qualified and non-qualified pension plans with PBOs in excess of plan assets were $5,635 million and $4,613 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $4,394 million and $3,438 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The ABO and fair value of plan assets for all qualified and non-qualified pension plans with ABOs in excess of plan assets were $4,051 million and $3,391 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $3,981 million and $3,438 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The ABO for all pension plans was $5,273 million and $5,244 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The changes in amounts recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) were as follows: FAS/CAS Adjustment The FAS/CAS Adjustment represents the difference between our pension and postretirement plan expense under FAS and under CAS. \n
Year Ended December 312015 over 20142014 over 2013
($ in millions)201520142013DollarsPercentDollarsPercent
FAS expense$-168$-155$-257$-13-8%$10240%
CAS cost2722271964520%3116%
FAS/CAS Adjustment$104$72$-61$3244%$133218%
\n 2015 - The FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2015 was a net benefit of $104 million, compared to a net benefit of $72 million in 2014. The favorable change was driven by the phase-in of Harmonization and better than expected 2014 asset returns, partially offset by higher FAS expense primarily due to lower discount rates at the end of 2014.2014 - The FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2014 was a net benefit of $72 million, compared to a net expense of $61 million in 2013. The favorable change was driven by lower FAS expense, due primarily to higher discount rates and plan assets at the end of 2013, the full year effect of the 2013 postretirement benefits amendment, and the phase-in of Harmonization. We expect the FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2016 to be a net benefit of approximately $137 million ($161 million FAS and $298 million CAS), primarily driven by the continued phase-in of Harmonization and higher FAS discount rates, partially offset by lower than expected 2015 asset returns. The expected FAS/CAS Adjustment is subject to change during 2016, when we remeasure our actuarial estimate of the unfunded benefit obligation for CAS with updated census data and other items. Deferred State Income Taxes Deferred state income taxes reflect the change in deferred state tax assets and liabilities in the relevant period. These amounts are recorded within operating income, while the current period state income tax expense is charged to contract costs and included in cost of sales and service revenues in segment operating income.2015 - The deferred state income tax expense remained constant at $2 million in 2015 and 2014. Deferred state tax expense in 2015 was primarily attributable to changes in the timing of contract taxable income and pension related adjustments, partially offset by a reduction in the valuation allowance for state tax credit carryforwards.2014 - The deferred state income tax expense in 2014 was $2 million, compared to a benefit of $6 million in 2013. This change was primarily attributable to non-recurring adjustments related to establishing a valuation allowance for a state tax loss carryforward and the true-up of 2013 deferred taxes. These increases were partially offset by changes in the timing of contract taxable income and reserves that are not currently deductible for tax purposes. Interest Expense 2015 - Interest expense in 2015 was $137 million, compared to $149 million in 2014. The decrease was primarily a result of refinancing 6.875% senior notes with 5.000% senior notes and repayment in full of the term loans, partially offset by loss on early extinguishment of debt. See Note 14: Debt in Item 8.2014 - Interest expense in 2014 was $149 million, compared to $118 million in 2013. The increase was primarily a result of a loss on the early extinguishment of debt in the fourth quarter of 2014. See Note 14: Debt in Item 8. Federal Income Taxes 2015 - Our effective tax rate on earnings from continuing operations was 36.1% in 2015, compared to 33.3% in 2014. The increase in our effective tax rate for 2015 was primarily attributable to adjustments to the domestic manufacturing deduction and an increase in the goodwill impairment that is not amortizable for tax purposes. Advance Payments and Billings in Excess of Revenues - Payments received in excess of inventoried costs and revenues are recorded as advance payment liabilities. Property, Plant, and Equipment - Depreciable properties owned by the Company are recorded at cost and depreciated over the estimated useful lives of individual assets. Major improvements are capitalized while expenditures for maintenance, repairs, and minor improvements are expensed. Costs incurred for computer software developed or obtained for internal use are capitalized and amortized over the expected useful life of the software, not to exceed nine years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their useful lives or the term of the lease. The remaining assets are depreciated using the straight-line method, with the following lives: \n
Years
Land improvements3-40
Buildings and improvements3-60
Capitalized software costs3-9
Machinery and other equipment2-45
\n The Company evaluates the recoverability of its property, plant, and equipment when there are changes in economic circumstances or business objectives that indicate the carrying value may not be recoverable. The Company's evaluations include estimated future cash flows, profitability, and other factors affecting fair value. As these assumptions and estimates may change over time, it may or may not be necessary to record impairment charges. Leases - The Company uses its incremental borrowing rate in the assessment of lease classification as capital or operating and defines the initial lease term to include renewal options determined to be reasonably assured. The Company conducts operations primarily under operating leases. Many of the Company's real property lease agreements contain incentives for tenant improvements, rent holidays, or rent escalation clauses. For incentives for tenant improvements, the Company records a deferred rent liability and amortizes the deferred rent over the term of the lease as a reduction to rent expense. For rent holidays and rent escalation clauses during the lease term, the Company records minimum rental expenses on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. For purposes of recognizing lease incentives, the Company uses the date of initial possession as the commencement date, which is generally the date on which the Company is given the right of access to the space and begins to make improvements in preparation for the intended use. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets - The Company performs impairment tests for goodwill as of November 30 of each year and between annual impairment tests if evidence of potential impairment exists, by first comparing the carrying value of net assets to the fair value of the related operations. If the fair value is determined to be less than the carrying value, a second step is performed to determine if goodwill is impaired, by comparing the estimated fair value of goodwill to its carrying value. Purchased intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis or a method based on the pattern of benefits over their estimated useful lives, and the carrying value of these assets is reviewed for impairment when events indicate that a potential impairment may have occurred. Equity Method Investments - Investments in which the Company has the ability to exercise significant influence over the investee but does not own a majority interest or otherwise control are accounted for under the equity method of accounting and included in other assets in its consolidated statements of financial position. The Company's equity investments align strategically and are integrated with the Company's operations, and therefore the Company's share of the net earnings or losses of the investee is included in operating income (loss). The Company evaluates its equity investments for other than temporary impairment whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of such investments may not be fully recoverable. If a decline in the value of an equity method investment is determined to be other than temporary, a loss is recorded in earnings in the current period. Self-Insured Group Medical Insurance - The Company maintains a self-insured group medical insurance plan. The plan is designed to provide a specified level of coverage for employees and their dependents. Estimated liabilities"} {"answer": 11957.0, "question": "In the year with largest amount of Institutional of Non-U.S. , what's the sum of loans and lease", "context": "countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Capital The management of regulatory and economic capital both involve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. Regulatory Capital Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our regulatory capital requirements, the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31: \n
REGULATORY GUIDELINESSTATE STREET STATE STREET BANK
MinimumWell Capitalized20092008 -22009 2008-2
Regulatory capital ratios:
Tier 1 risk-based capital4%6%17.7%20.3%17.3%19.8%
Total risk-based capital81019.121.619.021.3
Tier 1 leverage ratio-1458.57.88.27.6
\n (1) Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. (2) Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. At December 31, 2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios decreased compared to year-end 2008. With respect to State Street, the loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the U. S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of the May 2009 public offering MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the level of housing prices and the timing of defaults. To the extent that such factors differ significantly from management's current expectations, resulting loss estimates may differ materially from those stated. Excluding other-than-temporary impairment recorded in 2014, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining investment securities and the resulting gross unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about these gross unrealized losses is provided in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. Loans and Leases TABLE 26: U. S. AND NON- U. S. LOANS AND LEASES \n
As of December 31,
(In millions)20142013201220112010
Institutional:
U.S.$14,908$10,623$9,645$7,115$7,001
Non-U.S.3,2632,6542,2512,4784,192
Commercial real estate:
U.S.28209411460764
Total loans and leases$18,199$13,486$12,307$10,053$11,957
Average loans and leases$15,912$13,781$11,610$12,180$12,094
\n The increase in loans in the institutional segment as of December 31, 2014 as compared to December 31, 2013 was primarily driven by higher levels of short-duration advances and increased investment in the non-investment-grade lending market through participations in loan syndications, specifically senior secured bank loans. Short-duration advances to our clients included in the institutional segment were $3.54 billion and $2.45 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These short-duration advances provide liquidity to fund clients in support of their transaction flows associated with securities settlement activities. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our investment in senior secured bank loans totaled approximately $2.07 billion and $724 million, respectively. In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2014 totaling $337 million to participate in such syndications. These senior secured bank loans, which we have rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 95% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2014, compared to 94% as of December 31, 2013. Our investment strategy involves limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment, and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans. As of December 31, 2014, our allowance for loan losses included approximately $26 million related to these senior secured bank loans. As this portfolio grows and becomes more seasoned, our allowance for loan losses related to these loans may increase through additional provisions for credit losses. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, unearned income deducted from our investment in leveraged lease financing was $109 million and $121 million, respectively, for U. S. leases and $261 million and $298 million, respectively, for non-U. S. leases. The commercial real estate, or CRE, loans are composed of the loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Additional information about all of our loan-and-lease segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The decrease in the CRE loans as of December 31, 2014 compared to December 31, 2013 resulted from one of the loans, acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreement with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy being repaid. As of December 31, 2014 no CRE loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2013, we held a CRE loan for approximately $130 million which had previously been modified in a troubled debt restructuring. No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings in 2014 or 2013. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) Funding Deposits: We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, foreign exchange services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with State Street entities in various currencies. We invest these client deposits in a combination of investment securities and short\u0002duration financial instruments whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. For the past several years, we have experienced higher client deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter or the end of the year. As a result, we believe average client deposit balances are more reflective of ongoing funding than period-end balances. TABLE 33: CLIENT DEPOSITS \n
December 31,Average Balance Year Ended December 31,
(In millions)2014201320142013
Client deposits-1$195,276$182,268$167,470$143,043
\n (1) Balance as of December 31, 2014 excluded term wholesale certificates of deposit, or CDs, of $13.76 billion; average balances for the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 excluded average CDs of $6.87 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively. Short-Term Funding: Our corporate commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3.0 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issuance, had $2.48 billion and $1.82 billion of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight, and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $8.93 billion and $7.95 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately $690 million as of December 31, 2014, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2014, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit. Long-Term Funding: As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank had Board authority to issue unsecured senior debt securities from time to time, provided that the aggregate principal amount of such unsecured senior debt outstanding at any one time does not exceed $5 billion. As of December 31, 2014, $4.1 billion was available for issuance pursuant to this authority. As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank also had Board authority to issue an additional $500 million of subordinated debt. We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to our shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors. Agency Credit Ratings Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; relative market position; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits; strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and preparedness for current or future regulatory developments. High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors, increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products, serve markets, and engage in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings. A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital"} {"answer": 2017.0, "question": "In which year is Sales volume by product tons (000s) positive?", "context": "Table of Contents Rent expense under all operating leases, including both cancelable and noncancelable leases, was $645 million, $488 million and $338 million in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases having remaining terms in excess of one year as of September 28, 2013, are as follows (in millions): \n
2014$610
2015613
2016587
2017551
2018505
Thereafter1,855
Total minimum lease payments$4,721
\n Other Commitments As of September 28, 2013, the Company had outstanding off-balance sheet third-party manufacturing commitments and component purchase commitments of $18.6 billion. In addition to the off-balance sheet commitments mentioned above, the Company had outstanding obligations of $1.3 billion as of September 28, 2013, which consisted mainly of commitments to acquire capital assets, including product tooling and manufacturing process equipment, and commitments related to advertising, research and development, Internet and telecommunications services and other obligations. Contingencies The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and that have not been fully adjudicated. In the opinion of management, there was not at least a reasonable possibility the Company may have incurred a material loss, or a material loss in excess of a recorded accrual, with respect to loss contingencies. However, the outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain. Therefore, although management considers the likelihood of such an outcome to be remote, if one or more of these legal matters were resolved against the Company in a reporting period for amounts in excess of management’s expectations, the Company’s consolidated financial statements for that reporting period could be materially adversely affected. Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd, et al. On August 24, 2012, a jury returned a verdict awarding the Company $1.05 billion in its lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd and affiliated parties in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division. On March 1, 2013, the District Court upheld $599 million of the jury’s award and ordered a new trial as to the remainder. Because the award is subject to entry of final judgment, partial re-trial and appeal, the Company has not recognized the award in its results of operations. VirnetX, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al. On August 11, 2010, VirnetX, Inc. filed an action against the Company alleging that certain of its products infringed on four patents relating to network communications technology. On November 6, 2012, a jury returned a verdict against the Company, and awarded damages of $368 million. The Company is challenging the verdict, believes it has valid defenses and has not recorded a loss accrual at this time. CF INDUSTRIES HOLDINGS, INC. 5 The following table summarizes our nitrogen fertilizer production volume for the last three years \n
December 31,
201720162015
(tons in thousands)
Ammonia-110,2958,3077,673
Granular urea4,4513,3682,520
UAN -32%6,9146,6985,888
AN2,1271,8451,283
\n (1) Gross ammonia production, including amounts subsequently upgraded on-site into granular urea, UAN or AN. Donaldsonville, Louisiana The Donaldsonville nitrogen fertilizer complex is the world's largest nitrogen fertilizer production facility. It has six ammonia plants, five urea plants, four nitric acid plants, three UAN plants, and one DEF plant. The complex, which is located on the Mississippi River, includes deep-water docking facilities, access to an ammonia pipeline, and truck and railroad loading capabilities. The complex has on-site storage for 160,000 tons of ammonia, 201,000 tons of UAN (measured on a 32% nitrogen content basis) and 173,000 tons of granular urea. As part of our capacity expansion projects, the new Donaldsonville urea plant became operational during the fourth quarter of 2015. The new UAN plant was placed in service in the first quarter of 2016, and the new ammonia plant was placed in service in October 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada Medicine Hat is the largest nitrogen fertilizer complex in Canada. It has two ammonia plants and one urea plant. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 60,000 tons of granular urea. Port Neal, Iowa The Port Neal facility is located approximately 12 miles south of Sioux City, Iowa on the Missouri River. The facility consists of two ammonia plants, three urea plants, two nitric acid plants and a UAN plant. The location has on-site storage for 90,000 tons of ammonia, 154,000 tons of granular urea, and 81,000 tons of 32% UAN. As part of our capacity expansion projects, both the ammonia and urea plants were placed in service in December 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Verdigris, Oklahoma The Verdigris facility is located northeast of Tulsa, Oklahoma, near the Verdigris River and is owned by TNLP. It is the second largest UAN production facility in North America. The facility comprises two ammonia plants, two nitric acid plants, two UAN plants and a port terminal. Through our approximately 75.3% interest in TNCLP and its subsidiary, TNLP, we operate the plants and lease the port terminal from the Tulsa-Rogers County Port Authority. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 100,000 tons of 32% UAN. Woodward, Oklahoma The Woodward facility is located in rural northwest Oklahoma and consists of an ammonia plant, two nitric acid plants, two urea plants and two UAN plants. The facility has on-site storage for 36,000 tons of ammonia and 84,000 tons of 32% UAN. Yazoo City, Mississippi The Yazoo City facility is located in central Mississippi and includes one ammonia plant, four nitric acid plants, an AN plant, two urea plants, a UAN plant and a dinitrogen tetroxide production and storage facility. The site has on-site storage for 50,000 tons of ammonia, 48,000 tons of 32% UAN and 11,000 tons of AN and related products. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our ammonia segment averaged $248 per ton in 2016, including the impact of the CF Fertilisers UK acquisition, which averaged $220 per ton. The remaining cost of sales per ton was $250 in 2016, a 16% decrease from the $296 per ton in 2015. The decrease was due primarily to the impact of unrealized net mark-to-market gains on natural gas derivatives in 2016 compared to losses in 2015 and to the impact of lower realized natural gas costs in 2016. This was partly offset by capacity expansion project start-up costs of $50 million and an increase in expansion project depreciation as a result of the new ammonia plants at our Donaldsonville and Port Neal facilities. Granular Urea Segment Our granular urea segment produces granular urea, which contains 46% nitrogen. Produced from ammonia and carbon dioxide, it has the highest nitrogen content of any of our solid nitrogen fertilizers. Granular urea is produced at our Courtright, Ontario; Donaldsonville, Louisiana; Medicine Hat, Alberta; and Port Neal, Iowa nitrogen complexes. The following table presents summary operating data for our granular urea segment: \n
Year ended December 31,
2017201620152017 v. 20162016 v. 2015
(in millions, except as noted)
Net sales$971$831$788$14017%$435%
Cost of sales85658446927247%11525%
Gross margin$115$247$319$-132-53%$-72-23%
Gross margin percentage11.8%29.7%40.4%-17.9%-10.7%
Sales volume by product tons (000s)4,3573,5972,46076021%1,13746%
Sales volume by nutrient tons (000s)(1)2,0041,6541,13235021%52246%
Average selling price per product ton$223$231$320$-8-3%$-89-28%
Average selling price per nutrient ton-1$485$502$696$-17-3%$-194-28%
Gross margin per product ton$26$69$129$-43-62%$-60-47%
Gross margin per nutrient ton-1$57$149$281$-92-62%$-132-47%
Depreciation and amortization$246$112$51$134120%$61120%
Unrealized net mark-to-market loss (gain) on natural gas derivatives$16$-67$47$83N/M$-114N/M
\n N/M—Not Meaningful (1) Granular urea represents 46% nitrogen content. Nutrient tons represent the tons of nitrogen within the product tons. Year Ended December 31, 2017 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2016 Net Sales. Net sales in the granular urea segment increased by $140 million, or 17%, to $971 million in 2017 compared to $831 million in 2016 due primarily to a 21% increase in sales volume partially offset by a 3% decrease in average selling prices. Sales volume was higher due primarily to increased production at our new Port Neal facility, which came on line in the fourth quarter of 2016. Average selling prices decreased to $223 per ton in 2017 compared to $231 per ton in 2016 due primarily to greater global nitrogen supply availability due to global capacity additions. Selling prices strengthened in the fourth quarter of 2017 rising approximately 14% compared to the prior year period. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our granular urea segment averaged $197 in 2017, a 22% increase from the $162 per ton in 2016. The increase was due primarily to higher depreciation as a result of the new granular urea plant at our Port Neal facility, an unrealized net mark-to-market loss on natural gas derivatives in 2017 compared to a gain in the comparable period of 2016 and higher realized natural gas costs, including the impact of realized derivatives. These increases in cost of sales were partially offset by the impact of production efficiencies due to increased volume. Depreciation and amortization in our granular urea segment in 2017 was $56 per ton compared to $31 per ton in 2016."} {"answer": 117.1764, "question": "how much square feet could the company use to build properies ? ( 1 acre = 43560 square feet )", "context": "Item 2: Properties Information concerning Applied’s properties is set forth below: \n
(Square feet in thousands)United StatesOther CountriesTotal
Owned3,9641,6525,616
Leased8451,1531,998
Total4,8092,8057,614
\n Because of the interrelation of Applied’s operations, properties within a country may be shared by the segments operating within that country. The Company’s headquarters offices are in Santa Clara, California. Products in Semiconductor Systems are manufactured in Santa Clara, California; Austin, Texas; Gloucester, Massachusetts; Kalispell, Montana; Rehovot, Israel; and Singapore. Remanufactured equipment products in the Applied Global Services segment are produced primarily in Austin, Texas. Products in the Display and Adjacent Markets segment are manufactured in Alzenau, Germany; and Tainan, Taiwan. Other products are manufactured in Treviso, Italy. Applied also owns and leases offices, plants and warehouse locations in many locations throughout the world, including in Europe, Japan, North America (principally the United States), Israel, China, India, Korea, Southeast Asia and Taiwan. These facilities are principally used for manufacturing; research, development and engineering; and marketing, sales and customer support. Applied also owns a total of approximately 269 acres of buildable land in Montana, Texas, California, Israel and Italy that could accommodate additional building space. Applied considers the properties that it owns or leases as adequate to meet its current and future requirements. Applied regularly assesses the size, capability and location of its global infrastructure and periodically makes adjustments based on these assessments. General and administrative expense, which excludes integration charges, decreased $42 million, or 3%, to $1.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $1.3 billion for the prior year primarily due to continued expense controls, partially offset by an increase of approximately $19 million related to higher performance fee-related compensation. Annuities Our Annuities segment provides variable and fixed annuity products of RiverSource Life companies to individual clients. We provide our variable annuity products through our advisors, and fixed annuity products are provided through both affiliated and unaffiliated advisors and financial institutions. Revenues for our variable annuity products are primarily earned as fees based on underlying account balances, which are impacted by both market movements and net asset flows. Revenues for our fixed annuity products are primarily earned as net investment income on assets supporting fixed account balances, with profitability significantly impacted by the spread between net investment income earned and interest credited on the fixed account balances. We also earn net investment income on owned assets supporting reserves for immediate annuities and for certain guaranteed benefits offered with variable annuities and on capital supporting the business. Intersegment revenues for this segment reflect fees paid by our Asset Management segment for marketing support and other services provided in connection with the availability of variable insurance trust funds (‘‘VIT Funds’’) under the variable annuity contracts. Intersegment expenses for this segment include distribution expenses for services provided by our Advice & Wealth Management segment, as well as expenses for investment management services provided by our Asset Management segment. The following table presents the results of operations of our Annuities segment on an operating basis: \n
Years Ended December 31,
2012 2011Change
(in millions)
Revenues
Management and financial advice fees$648$622$264%
Distribution fees31731252
Net investment income1,1321,279-147-11
Premiums118161-43-27
Other revenues3092565321
Total revenues2,5242,630-106-4
Banking and deposit interest expense————
Total net revenues2,5242,630-106-4
Expenses
Distribution expenses395400-5-1
Interest credited to fixed accounts688714-26-4
Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses419405143
Amortization of deferred acquisition costs229264-35-13
Interest and debt expense211NM
General and administrative expense22422131
Total expenses1,9572,005-48-2
Operating earnings$567$625$-58-9%
\n NM Not Meaningful. Our Annuities segment pretax operating income, which excludes net realized gains or losses and the market impact on variable annuity guaranteed living benefits (net of hedges and the related DSIC and DAC amortization), decreased $58 million, or 9%, to $567 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $625 million for the prior year primarily due to a decline in net investment income and an unfavorable impact from unlocking and model changes, partially offset by the market impact on DAC and DSIC, lower interest credited to fixed accounts and higher fee revenues. Results for 2011 included $34 million of additional bond discount accretion investment income related to prior periods resulting from revisions to the accounting classification of certain structured securities, net of DAC and DSIC amortization. The impact of unlocking and model changes was a decrease to pretax operating income of $11 million in 2012 compared to an increase of $1 million in the prior year. The impact of unlocking and model changes for 2012 included a $43 million benefit, net of DAC and DSIC amortization, from an adjustment to the model which values the reserves related to living benefit guarantees primarily attributable to prior periods. This revision aligns the model to more accurately reflect best estimate assumptions for living benefit utilization going forward. The market impact on DAC and DSIC was a benefit of $29 million in 2012 compared to an expense of $10 million in the prior year. RiverSource variable annuity account balances increased 9% to $68.1 billion at December 31, 2012 compared to the prior year driven by market appreciation. Variable annuity net outflows of $457 million in 2012 reflected the closed book Note 5. Long-Term Obligations Long-Term Obligations consist of the following (in thousands): \n
December 31,
20122011
Senior secured credit agreement:
Term loans payable$420,625$240,625
Revolving credit facility553,964660,730
Receivables securitization facility80,000—
Notes payable through October 2018 at weighted average interest rates of 1.7% and 2.0%, respectively42,39838,338
Other long-term debt at weighted average interest rates of 3.3% and 3.2%, respectively21,49116,383
1,118,478956,076
Less current maturities-71,716-29,524
$1,046,762$926,552
\n The scheduled maturities of long-term obligations outstanding at December 31, 2012 are as follows (in thousands):"} {"answer": 1.0, "question": "Does the average value of Services in 2012 greater than that in 2011?", "context": "McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) \n
Years Ended March 31, Change
(Dollars in millions) 2012 2011 2010 2012 2011
Distribution Solutions
Direct distribution & services$85,523$77,554$72,21010%7%
Sales to customers’ warehouses20,45318,63121,43510-13
Total U.S. pharmaceutical distribution & services105,97696,18593,645103
Canada pharmaceutical distribution & services10,3039,7849,07258
Medical-Surgical distribution & services3,1452,9202,86182
Total Distribution Solutions119,424108,889105,578103
Technology Solutions
Services2,5942,4832,43942
Software & software systems59659057113
Hardware120122114-27
Total Technology Solutions3,3103,1953,12442
Total Revenues$122,734$112,084$108,702103
\n Revenues increased 10% to $122.7 billion in 2012 and 3% to $112.1 billion in 2011. The increase in revenues in each year primarily reflects market growth in our Distribution Solutions segment, which accounted for approximately 97% of our consolidated revenues, and our acquisition of US Oncology. Direct distribution and services revenues increased in 2012 compared to 2011 primarily due to market growth, which includes growing drug utilization and price increases, and from our acquisition of US Oncology. These increases were partially offset by price deflation associated with brand to generic drug conversions. Direct distribution and services revenues increased in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily due to market growth, the effect of a shift of revenues from sales to customers’ warehouses to direct store delivery, the lapping of which was completed in the third quarter of 2011, and due to our acquisition of US Oncology. These increases were partially offset by a decline in demand associated with the flu season and the impact of price deflation associated with brand to generic drug conversions. Sales to customers’ warehouses for 2012 increased compared to 2011 primarily due to a new customer and new business with existing customers. Sales to customers’ warehouses for 2011 decreased compared to 2010 primarily reflecting reduced revenues associated with existing customers, the effect of a shift of revenues to direct store delivery, the lapping of which was completed in the third quarter of 2011, and the impact of price deflation associated with brand to generic drug conversions. Sales to retail customers’ warehouses represent large volume sales of pharmaceuticals primarily to a limited number of large self-warehousing retail chain customers whereby we order bulk product from the manufacturer, receive and process the product through our central distribution facility and subsequently deliver the bulk product (generally in the same form as received from the manufacturer) directly to our customers’ warehouses. This distribution method is typically not marketed or sold by the Company as a stand-alone service; rather, it is offered as an additional distribution method for our large retail chain customers that have an internal self-warehousing distribution network. Sales to customers’ warehouses provide a benefit to these customers because they can utilize the Company as one source for both their direct-to-store business and their warehouse business. We generally have significantly lower gross profit margins on sales to customers’ warehouses as we pass much of the efficiency of this low cost-to-serve model on to the customer. These sales do, however, contribute to our gross profit dollars. McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL NOTES (Continued) Expected benefit payments, including assumed executive lump sum payments, for our pension plans are as follows: $180 million, $64 million, $64 million, $62 million and $62 million for 2020 to 2024 and $327 million for 2025 through 2029. Expected benefit payments are based on the same assumptions used to measure the benefit obligations and include estimated future employee service. Expected contributions to be made for our pension plans are $146 million for 2020. Weighted-average assumptions used to estimate the net periodic pension expense and the actuarial present value of benefit obligations were as follows: \n
U.S. Plans Years Ended March 31,Non-U.S. Plans Years Ended March 31,
201920182017201920182017
Net periodic pension expense
Discount rates3.83%3.55%3.40%2.35%2.34%2.72%
Rate of increase in compensationN/A -14.004.003.132.722.76
Expected long-term rate of return on plan assets5.256.256.253.714.034.51
Benefit obligation
Discount rates3.65%3.69%3.39%2.13%2.35%2.35%
Rate of increase in compensationN/A -1N/A -14.003.182.593.18
\n (1) This assumption is no longer needed in actuarial valuations as U. S. plans are frozen or have fixed benefits for the remaining active participants. Our defined benefit pension plan liabilities are valued using a discount rate based on a yield curve developed from a portfolio of high quality corporate bonds rated AA or better whose maturities are aligned with the expected benefit payments of our plans. For March 31, 2019, our U. S. defined benefit liabilities are valued using a weighted average discount rate of 3.65%, which represents a decrease of 4 basis points from our 2018 weighted-average discount rate of 3.69%. Our non-U. S. defined benefit pension plan liabilities are valued using a weighted-average discount rate of 2.13%, which represents a decrease of 22 basis points from our 2018 weighted average discount rate of 2.35%. Plan Assets Investment Strategy: The overall objective for U. S. pension plan assets has been to generate long-term investment returns consistent with capital preservation and prudent investment practices, with a diversification of asset types and investment strategies. Periodic adjustments were made to provide liquidity for benefit payments and to rebalance plan assets to their target allocations. In September 2018, a new investment allocation strategy was put in place to protect the funded status of the U. S. plan assets subsequent to Board approval of U. S. pension plan termination. The target allocation for U. S. plan assets at March 31, 2019 is 100% fixed income investments including cash and cash equivalents. The target allocations for U. S. plan assets at March 31, 2018 were 26% equity investments, 70% fixed income investments including cash and cash equivalents and 4% real estate. Equity investments include common stock, preferred stock, and equity commingled funds. Fixed income investments include corporate bonds, government securities, mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities, other directly held fixed income investments, and fixed income commingled funds. The real estate investments are in a commingled real estate fund. Year Ended December 31, 2010 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2009 Net revenues increased $207.5 million, or 24.2%, to $1,063.9 million in 2010 from $856.4 million in 2009. Net revenues by product category are summarized below: \n
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands)20102009$ Change% Change
Apparel$853,493$651,779$201,71430.9%
Footwear127,175136,224-9,049-6.6
Accessories43,88235,0778,80525.1
Total net sales1,024,550823,080201,47024.5
License revenues39,37733,3316,04618.1
Total net revenues$1,063,927$856,411$207,51624.2%
\n Net sales increased $201.5 million, or 24.5%, to $1,024.6 million in 2010 from $823.1 million in 2009 as noted in the table above. The increase in net sales primarily reflects: ? $88.9 million, or 56.8%, increase in direct to consumer sales, which includes 19 additional stores in 2010; and ? unit growth driven by increased distribution and new offerings in multiple product categories, most significantly in our training, base layer, mountain, golf and underwear categories; partially offset by ? $9.0 million decrease in footwear sales driven primarily by a decline in running and training footwear sales. License revenues increased $6.1 million, or 18.1%, to $39.4 million in 2010 from $33.3 million in 2009. This increase in license revenues was primarily a result of increased sales by our licensees due to increased distribution and continued unit volume growth. We have developed our own headwear and bags, and beginning in 2011, these products are being sold by us rather than by one of our licensees. Gross profit increased $120.4 million to $530.5 million in 2010 from $410.1 million in 2009. Gross profit as a percentage of net revenues, or gross margin, increased 200 basis points to 49.9% in 2010 compared to 47.9% in 2009. The increase in gross margin percentage was primarily driven by the following: ? approximate 100 basis point increase driven by increased direct to consumer higher margin sales; ? approximate 50 basis point increase driven by decreased sales markdowns and returns, primarily due to improved sell-through rates at retail; and ? approximate 50 basis point increase driven primarily by liquidation sales and related inventory reserve reversals. The current year period benefited from reversals of inventory reserves established in the prior year relative to certain cleated footwear, sport specific apparel and gloves. These products have historically been more difficult to liquidate at favorable prices. Selling, general and administrative expenses increased $93.3 million to $418.2 million in 2010 from $324.9 million in 2009. As a percentage of net revenues, selling, general and administrative expenses increased to 39.3% in 2010 from 37.9% in 2009. These changes were primarily attributable to the following: ? Marketing costs increased $19.3 million to $128.2 million in 2010 from $108.9 million in 2009 primarily due to an increase in sponsorship of events and collegiate and professional teams and athletes, increased television and digital campaign costs, including media campaigns for specific customers and additional personnel costs. In addition, we incurred increased expenses for our performance incentive plan as compared to the prior year. As a percentage of net revenues, marketing costs decreased to 12.0% in 2010 from 12.7% in 2009 primarily due to decreased marketing costs for specific customers."} {"answer": 89127.5, "question": "What's the average of Asset allocation and balanced of December 31,2016, and Operating leases of Thereafter ?", "context": "Long-term product offerings include alpha-seeking active and index strategies. Our alpha-seeking active strategies seek to earn attractive returns in excess of a market benchmark or performance hurdle while maintaining an appropriate risk profile, and leverage fundamental research and quantitative models to drive portfolio construction. In contrast, index strategies seek to closely track the returns of a corresponding index, generally by investing in substantially the same underlying securities within the index or in a subset of those securities selected to approximate a similar risk and return profile of the index. Index strategies include both our non-ETF index products and iShares ETFs. Although many clients use both alpha-seeking active and index strategies, the application of these strategies may differ. For example, clients may use index products to gain exposure to a market or asset class, or may use a combination of index strategies to target active returns. In addition, institutional non-ETF index assignments tend to be very large (multi-billion dollars) and typically reflect low fee rates. Net flows in institutional index products generally have a small impact on BlackRock’s revenues and earnings. Equity Year-end 2017 equity AUM totaled $3.372 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $130.1 billion. Net inflows included $174.4 billion into iShares ETFs, driven by net inflows into Core funds and broad developed and emerging market equities, partially offset by non-ETF index and active net outflows of $25.7 billion and $18.5 billion, respectively. BlackRock’s effective fee rates fluctuate due to changes in AUM mix. Approximately half of BlackRock’s equity AUM is tied to international markets, including emerging markets, which tend to have higher fee rates than U. S. equity strategies. Accordingly, fluctuations in international equity markets, which may not consistently move in tandem with U. S. markets, have a greater impact on BlackRock’s equity revenues and effective fee rate. Fixed Income Fixed income AUM ended 2017 at $1.855 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $178.8 billion. In 2017, active net inflows of $21.5 billion were diversified across fixed income offerings, and included strong inflows into municipal, unconstrained and total return bond funds. iShares ETFs net inflows of $67.5 billion were led by flows into Core, corporate and treasury bond funds. Non-ETF index net inflows of $89.8 billion were driven by demand for liability-driven investment solutions. Multi-Asset BlackRock’s multi-asset team manages a variety of balanced funds and bespoke mandates for a diversified client base that leverages our broad investment expertise in global equities, bonds, currencies and commodities, and our extensive risk management capabilities. Investment solutions might include a combination of long-only portfolios and alternative investments as well as tactical asset allocation overlays. Component changes in multi-asset AUM for 2017 are presented below. \n
(in millions)December 31,2016Net inflows (outflows)MarketchangeFXimpactDecember 31,2017
Asset allocation and balanced$176,675$-2,502$17,387$4,985$196,545
Target date/risk149,43223,92524,5321,577199,466
Fiduciary68,395-1,0477,5228,81983,689
FutureAdvisor-1505-46119—578
Total$395,007$20,330$49,560$15,381$480,278
\n (1) FutureAdvisor amounts do not include AUM held in iShares ETFs. Multi-asset net inflows reflected ongoing institutional demand for our solutions-based advice with $18.9 billion of net inflows coming from institutional clients. Defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows, and contributed $20.8 billion to institutional multi-asset net inflows in 2017, primarily into target date and target risk product offerings. Retail net inflows of $1.1 billion reflected demand for our Multi-Asset Income fund family, which raised $5.8 billion in 2017. The Company’s multi-asset strategies include the following: ? Asset allocation and balanced products represented 41% of multi-asset AUM at year-end. These strategies combine equity, fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget. In certain cases, these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification, derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions. Flagship products in this category include our Global Allocation and Multi-Asset Income fund families. ? Target date and target risk products grew 16% organically in 2017, with net inflows of $23.9 billion. Institutional investors represented 93% of target date and target risk AUM, with defined contribution plans accounting for 87% of AUM. Flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our LifePath offerings. LifePath products utilize a proprietary active asset allocation overlay model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor’s expected retirement timing. Underlying investments are primarily index products. ? Fiduciary management services are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors or endowments and foundations retain BlackRock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of investment management. These customized services require strong partnership with the clients’ investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives. not to exceed a maximum leverage ratio (ratio of net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where net debt equals total debt less unrestricted cash) of 3 to 1, which was satisfied with a ratio of less than 1 to 1 at December 31, 2017. The 2017 credit facility provides back-up liquidity to fund ongoing working capital for general corporate purposes and various investment opportunities. At December 31, 2017, the Company had no amount outstanding under the 2017 credit facility Commercial Paper Program. The Company can issue unsecured commercial paper notes (the “CP Notes”) on a private-placement basis up to a maximum aggregate amount outstanding at any time of $4.0 billion. The commercial paper program is currently supported by the 2017 credit facility. At December 31, 2017, BlackRock had no CP Notes outstanding Long-Term Borrowings The carrying value of long-term borrowings at December 31, 2017 included the following: \n
(in millions)Maturity AmountCarrying ValueMaturity
5.00% Notes$1,000$999December 2019
4.25% Notes750747May 2021
3.375% Notes750746June 2022
3.50% Notes1,000994March 2024
1.25% Notes-1841835May 2025
3.20% Notes700693March 2027
Total Long-term Borrowings$5,041$5,014
\n (1) The carrying value of the 1.25% Notes estimated using foreign exchange rate as of December 31, 2017. For more information on Company’s borrowings, see Note 12, Borrowings, in the notes to the consolidated financial statements contained in Part II, Item 8 of this filing. Contractual Obligations, Commitments and Contingencies The following table sets forth contractual obligations, commitments and contingencies by year of payment at December 31, 2017: \n
(in millions)20182019202020212022Thereafter-1Total
Contractual obligations and commitments-1:
Long-term borrowings-2:
Principal$—$1,000$—$750$750$2,541$5,041
Interest17517512510981185850
Operating leases1411321261181091,5802,206
Purchase obligations12810129221928327
Investment commitments298—————298
Total contractual obligations and commitments7421,4082809999594,3348,722
Contingent obligations:
Contingent payments related to business acquisitions-3331793934——285
Total contractual obligations, commitments andcontingent obligations-4$775$1,587$319$1,033$959$4,334$9,007
\n (1) Amounts do not include $350 million of cash payment consideration and contingent consideration related to the Company’s agreement to acquire the asset management business of Citibanamex. (2) The amount of principal and interest payments for the 2025 Notes (issued in Euros) represents the expected payment amounts using foreign exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. (3) The amount of contingent payments reflected for any year represents the expected payments using foreign currency exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. The fair value of the remaining aggregate contingent payments at December 31, 2017 totaled $236 million and is included in other liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. (4) At December 31, 2017, the Company had approximately $365 million of net unrecognized tax benefits. Due to the uncertainty of timing and amounts that will ultimately be paid, this amount has been excluded from the table above. Operating Leases. The Company leases its primary office locations under agreements that expire on varying dates through 2043. In connection with certain lease agreements, the Company is responsible for escalation payments. The contractual obligations table above includes only guaranteed minimum lease payments for such leases and does not project potential escalation or other lease-related payments. These leases are classified as operating leases and, as such, are not recorded as liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. In May 2017, the Company entered into an agreement with 50 HYMC Owner LLC, for the lease of approximately 847,000 square feet of office space located at 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York. The term of the lease is twenty years from the date that rental payments begin, expected to occur in McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) 46 In July 2008, the Board authorized the retirement of shares of the Company’s common stock that may be repurchased from time-to-time pursuant to its stock repurchase program. During the second quarter of 2009, all of the 4 million repurchased shares, which we purchased for $204 million, were formally retired by the Company. The retired shares constitute authorized but unissued shares. We elected to allocate any excess of share repurchase price over par value between additional paid-in capital and retained earnings. As such, $165 million was recorded as a decrease to retained earnings. The Company anticipates that it will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends in the future. However, the payment and amount of future dividends remain within the discretion of the Board and will depend upon the Company’s future earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors. Although we believe that our operating cash flow, financial assets, current access to capital and credit markets, including our existing credit and sales facilities, will give us the ability to meet our financing needs for the foreseeable future, there can be no assurance that continued or increased volatility and disruption in the global capital and credit markets will not impair our liquidity or increase our costs of borrowing. Selected Measures of Liquidity and Capital Resources:"} {"answer": 0.39047, "question": "What is the ratio of Marketplaces to the total in 2009?", "context": "Summary of Cost of Net Revenues The following table summarizes changes in cost of net revenues: \n
Year Ended December 31,Change from 2008 to 2009Change from 2009 to 2010
200820092010in Dollarsin %in Dollarsin %
(In thousands, except percentages)
Cost of net revenues:
Marketplaces$907,121$968,266$1,071,499$61,1457%$103,23311%
As a percentage of total Marketplaces net revenues16.2%18.2%18.7%
Payments1,036,7461,220,6191,493,168183,87318%272,54922%
As a percentage of total Payments net revenues43.1%43.7%43.5%
Communications284,202290,877—6,6752%-290,877—
As a percentage of total Communications net revenues51.6%46.9%—
Total cost of net revenues$2,228,069$2,479,762$2,564,667$251,69311%$84,9053%
As a percentage of net revenues26.1%28.4%28.0%
\n Cost of Net Revenues Cost of net revenues consists primarily of costs associated with payment processing, customer support and site operations and Skype telecommunications (through November 2009). Significant components of these costs include bank transaction fees, credit card interchange and assessment fees, interest expense on indebtedness incurred to finance the purchase of consumer loans receivable by Bill Me Later, employee compensation, contractor costs, facilities costs, depreciation of equipment and amortization expense. Marketplaces Marketplaces cost of net revenues increased $103.2 million, or 11%, in 2010 compared to 2009. The increase during 2010 was due primarily to the inclusion of a full year of costs attributable to Gmarket and increased site operation costs. Marketplaces cost of net revenues as a percentage of Marketplaces net revenues increased slightly in 2010 compared to 2009 due primarily to the addition of Gmarket, the settlement of a lawsuit and the establishment of a reserve related to certain indirect tax positions (recorded as a reduction in revenue). Marketplaces cost of net revenues increased $61.1 million, or 7%, in 2009 compared to 2008. The increase during 2009 was due primarily to the inclusion of costs attributable to Gmarket and Den Bl? Avis and BilBasen, partially offset by a decrease in customer support and site operations costs associated with our restructuring activities. Marketplaces cost of net revenues increased as a percentage of Marketplaces net revenues during 2009 compared to 2008 due primarily to the impact of foreign currency movements on revenues, pricing initiatives (which are recorded as a reduction in revenue) and faster growth in our lower margin Marketplaces businesses. Payments Payments cost of net revenues increased $272.5 million, or 22%, in 2010 compared to 2009. The increase in cost of net revenues was primarily due to the impact from our growth in net TPV. Payments cost of net revenues as a percentage of Payments net revenues decreased slightly in 2010 compared to 2009 due primarily to improved leverage of our customer support infrastructure and existing site operations. expect that these credit rating agencies will continue to monitor developments in our planned separation of PayPal, including the capital structure for each company after separation, which could result in additional downgrades. Our borrowing costs depend, in part, on our credit ratings and because downgrades would likely increase our borrowing costs we disclose these ratings to enhance the understanding of the effects of our ratings on our costs of funds. In addition, to assist PayPal in our planned separation we are currently working with credit rating agencies to obtain separate credit ratings for PayPal and we believe that immediately following separation both eBay and PayPal will be rated investment grade. Commitments and Contingencies As of December 31, 2014 , approximately $20.2 billion of unused credit was available to PayPal Credit accountholders. While this amount represents the total unused credit available, we have not experienced, and do not anticipate, that all of our PayPal Credit accountholders will access their entire available credit at any given point in time. In addition, the individual lines of credit that make up this unused credit are subject to periodic review and termination by the chartered financial institutions that are the issuer of PayPal Credit products based on, among other things, account usage and customer creditworthiness. When a consumer makes a purchase using a PayPal Credit products, the chartered financial institution extends credit to the consumer, funds the extension of credit at the point of sale and advances funds to the merchant. We subsequently purchase the consumer receivables related to the consumer loans and as result of that purchase, bear the risk of loss in the event of loan defaults. However, we subsequently sell a participation interest in the entire pool of consumer loans to the chartered financial institution that extended the consumer loans. Although the chartered financial institution continues to own the customer accounts, we own and bear the risk of loss on the related consumer receivables, less the participation interest held by the chartered financial institution, and PayPal is responsible for all servicing functions related to the customer account balances. As of December 31, 2014 , the total outstanding principal balance of this pool of consumer loans was $3.7 billion , of which the chartered financial institution owns a participation interest of $163 million , or 4.4% of the total outstanding balance of consumer receivables at that date. We have certain fixed contractual obligations and commitments that include future estimated payments for general operating purposes. Changes in our business needs, contractual cancellation provisions, fluctuating interest rates, and other factors may result in actual payments differing from the estimates. We cannot provide certainty regarding the timing and amounts of these payments. The following table summarizes our fixed contractual obligations and commitments: \n
Payments Due During the Year Ending December 31,DebtLeasesPurchase ObligationsTotal
(In millions)
20151,0261132751,414
20161649658318
20171,61383551,751
20181486343254
20191,6974271,746
Thereafter4,7085234,763
9,35644944110,246
\n The significant assumptions used in our determination of amounts presented in the above table are as follows: ? Debt amounts include the principal and interest amounts of the respective debt instruments. For additional details related to our debt, please see “Note 10 – Debt” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. This table does not reflect any amounts payable under our $3 billion revolving credit facility or $2 billion commercial paper program, for which no borrowings were outstanding as of December 31, 2014 . ? Lease amounts include minimum rental payments under our non-cancelable operating leases for office facilities, fulfillment centers, as well as computer and office equipment that we utilize under lease arrangements. The amounts presented are consistent with contractual terms and are not expected to differ significantly from actual results under our existing leases, unless a substantial change in our headcount needs requires us to expand our occupied space or exit an office facility early. MARATHON OIL CORPORATION Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements equivalent to the Exchangeable Shares at the acquisition date as discussed below. Additional shares of voting preferred stock will be issued as necessary to adjust the number of votes to account for changes in the exchange ratio. Preferred shares – In connection with the acquisition of Western discussed in Note 6, the Board of Directors authorized a class of voting preferred stock consisting of 6 million shares. Upon completion of the acquisition, we issued 5 million shares of this voting preferred stock to a trustee, who holds the shares for the benefit of the holders of the Exchangeable Shares discussed above. Each share of voting preferred stock is entitled to one vote on all matters submitted to the holders of Marathon common stock. Each holder of Exchangeable Shares may direct the trustee to vote the number of shares of voting preferred stock equal to the number of shares of Marathon common stock issuable upon the exchange of the Exchangeable Shares held by that holder. In no event will the aggregate number of votes entitled to be cast by the trustee with respect to the outstanding shares of voting preferred stock exceed the number of votes entitled to be cast with respect to the outstanding Exchangeable Shares. Except as otherwise provided in our restated certificate of incorporation or by applicable law, the common stock and the voting preferred stock will vote together as a single class in the election of directors of Marathon and on all other matters submitted to a vote of stockholders of Marathon generally. The voting preferred stock will have no other voting rights except as required by law. Other than dividends payable solely in shares of voting preferred stock, no dividend or other distribution, will be paid or payable to the holder of the voting preferred stock. In the event of any liquidation, dissolution or winding up of Marathon, the holder of shares of the voting preferred stock will not be entitled to receive any assets of Marathon available for distribution to its stockholders. The voting preferred stock is not convertible into any other class or series of the capital stock of Marathon or into cash, property or other rights, and may not be redeemed.25. Leases We lease a wide variety of facilities and equipment under operating leases, including land and building space, office equipment, production facilities and transportation equipment. Most long-term leases include renewal options and, in certain leases, purchase options. Future minimum commitments for capital lease obligations (including sale-leasebacks accounted for as financings) and for operating lease obligations having initial or remaining noncancelable lease terms in excess of one year are as follows: \n
(In millions)Capital Lease Obligations (a)Operating Lease Obligations
2010$46$165
201145140
201258121
201344102
20144484
Later years466313
Sublease rentals--16
Total minimum lease payments$703$909
Less imputed interest costs-257
Present value of net minimum lease payments$446
\n (a) Capital lease obligations include $164 million related to assets under construction as of December 31, 2009. These leases are currently reported in long-term debt based on percentage of construction completed at $36 million. In connection with past sales of various plants and operations, we assigned and the purchasers assumed certain leases of major equipment used in the divested plants and operations of United States Steel. In the event of a default by any of the purchasers, United States Steel has assumed these obligations; however, we remain primarily obligated for payments under these leases. Minimum lease payments under these operating lease obligations of $16 million have been included above and an equal amount has been reported as sublease rentals."} {"answer": 0.12559, "question": "What is the ratio of Distribution fees to the total in 2012?", "context": "Item 2: Properties Information concerning Applied’s properties is set forth below: \n
(Square feet in thousands)United StatesOther CountriesTotal
Owned3,9641,6525,616
Leased8451,1531,998
Total4,8092,8057,614
\n Because of the interrelation of Applied’s operations, properties within a country may be shared by the segments operating within that country. The Company’s headquarters offices are in Santa Clara, California. Products in Semiconductor Systems are manufactured in Santa Clara, California; Austin, Texas; Gloucester, Massachusetts; Kalispell, Montana; Rehovot, Israel; and Singapore. Remanufactured equipment products in the Applied Global Services segment are produced primarily in Austin, Texas. Products in the Display and Adjacent Markets segment are manufactured in Alzenau, Germany; and Tainan, Taiwan. Other products are manufactured in Treviso, Italy. Applied also owns and leases offices, plants and warehouse locations in many locations throughout the world, including in Europe, Japan, North America (principally the United States), Israel, China, India, Korea, Southeast Asia and Taiwan. These facilities are principally used for manufacturing; research, development and engineering; and marketing, sales and customer support. Applied also owns a total of approximately 269 acres of buildable land in Montana, Texas, California, Israel and Italy that could accommodate additional building space. Applied considers the properties that it owns or leases as adequate to meet its current and future requirements. Applied regularly assesses the size, capability and location of its global infrastructure and periodically makes adjustments based on these assessments. General and administrative expense, which excludes integration charges, decreased $42 million, or 3%, to $1.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $1.3 billion for the prior year primarily due to continued expense controls, partially offset by an increase of approximately $19 million related to higher performance fee-related compensation. Annuities Our Annuities segment provides variable and fixed annuity products of RiverSource Life companies to individual clients. We provide our variable annuity products through our advisors, and fixed annuity products are provided through both affiliated and unaffiliated advisors and financial institutions. Revenues for our variable annuity products are primarily earned as fees based on underlying account balances, which are impacted by both market movements and net asset flows. Revenues for our fixed annuity products are primarily earned as net investment income on assets supporting fixed account balances, with profitability significantly impacted by the spread between net investment income earned and interest credited on the fixed account balances. We also earn net investment income on owned assets supporting reserves for immediate annuities and for certain guaranteed benefits offered with variable annuities and on capital supporting the business. Intersegment revenues for this segment reflect fees paid by our Asset Management segment for marketing support and other services provided in connection with the availability of variable insurance trust funds (‘‘VIT Funds’’) under the variable annuity contracts. Intersegment expenses for this segment include distribution expenses for services provided by our Advice & Wealth Management segment, as well as expenses for investment management services provided by our Asset Management segment. The following table presents the results of operations of our Annuities segment on an operating basis: \n
Years Ended December 31,
2012 2011Change
(in millions)
Revenues
Management and financial advice fees$648$622$264%
Distribution fees31731252
Net investment income1,1321,279-147-11
Premiums118161-43-27
Other revenues3092565321
Total revenues2,5242,630-106-4
Banking and deposit interest expense————
Total net revenues2,5242,630-106-4
Expenses
Distribution expenses395400-5-1
Interest credited to fixed accounts688714-26-4
Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses419405143
Amortization of deferred acquisition costs229264-35-13
Interest and debt expense211NM
General and administrative expense22422131
Total expenses1,9572,005-48-2
Operating earnings$567$625$-58-9%
\n NM Not Meaningful. Our Annuities segment pretax operating income, which excludes net realized gains or losses and the market impact on variable annuity guaranteed living benefits (net of hedges and the related DSIC and DAC amortization), decreased $58 million, or 9%, to $567 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $625 million for the prior year primarily due to a decline in net investment income and an unfavorable impact from unlocking and model changes, partially offset by the market impact on DAC and DSIC, lower interest credited to fixed accounts and higher fee revenues. Results for 2011 included $34 million of additional bond discount accretion investment income related to prior periods resulting from revisions to the accounting classification of certain structured securities, net of DAC and DSIC amortization. The impact of unlocking and model changes was a decrease to pretax operating income of $11 million in 2012 compared to an increase of $1 million in the prior year. The impact of unlocking and model changes for 2012 included a $43 million benefit, net of DAC and DSIC amortization, from an adjustment to the model which values the reserves related to living benefit guarantees primarily attributable to prior periods. This revision aligns the model to more accurately reflect best estimate assumptions for living benefit utilization going forward. The market impact on DAC and DSIC was a benefit of $29 million in 2012 compared to an expense of $10 million in the prior year. RiverSource variable annuity account balances increased 9% to $68.1 billion at December 31, 2012 compared to the prior year driven by market appreciation. Variable annuity net outflows of $457 million in 2012 reflected the closed book Note 5. Long-Term Obligations Long-Term Obligations consist of the following (in thousands): \n
December 31,
20122011
Senior secured credit agreement:
Term loans payable$420,625$240,625
Revolving credit facility553,964660,730
Receivables securitization facility80,000—
Notes payable through October 2018 at weighted average interest rates of 1.7% and 2.0%, respectively42,39838,338
Other long-term debt at weighted average interest rates of 3.3% and 3.2%, respectively21,49116,383
1,118,478956,076
Less current maturities-71,716-29,524
$1,046,762$926,552
\n The scheduled maturities of long-term obligations outstanding at December 31, 2012 are as follows (in thousands):"} {"answer": 137.2, "question": "What is the average value of Operating leases (b) in 2018 ,2019 and 2021? (in million)", "context": "The following table details the fee-paid committed and uncommitted credit lines we had available as of May 28, 2017: \n
In Billions Facility Amount Borrowed Amount
Credit facility expiring:
May 2022$2.7$—
June 20190.20.1
Total committed credit facilities2.90.1
Uncommitted credit facilities0.50.1
Total committed and uncommitted credit facilities$3.4$0.2
\n In fiscal 2016, we entered into a $2.7 billion fee-paid committed credit facility that was originally scheduled to expire in May 2021. During the fourth quarter of fis\u0002cal 2017 we amended the credit facility’s expiration date by one year to May 2022. To ensure availability of funds, we maintain bank credit lines sufficient to cover our outstanding notes payable. Commercial paper is a continuing source of short-term financing. We have commercial paper pro\u0002grams available to us in the United States and Europe. We also have uncommitted and asset-backed credit lines that support our foreign operations. The credit facilities contain several covenants, including a require\u0002ment to maintain a fixed charge coverage ratio of at least 2.5 times. Certain of our long-term debt agreements, our credit facilities, and our noncontrolling interests contain restrictive covenants. As of May 28, 2017, we were in compliance with all of these covenants. We have $605 million of long-term debt maturing in the next 12 months that is classified as current, includ\u0002ing $500 million of 1.4 percent notes due October 2017 and $100 million of 6.39 percent fixed rate medium term notes due for remarketing in February 2018. We believe that cash flows from operations, together with available short- and long-term debt financing, will be adequate to meet our liquidity and capital needs for at least the next 12 months. As of May 28, 2017, our total debt, including the impact of derivative instruments designated as hedges, was 67 percent in fixed-rate and 33 percent in float\u0002ing-rate instruments, compared to 78 percent in fixed\u0002rate and 22 percent in floating-rate instruments on May 29, 2016. Return on average total capital was 12.7 percent in fiscal 2017 compared to 12.9 percent in fiscal 2016. Improvement in adjusted return on average total capital is one of our key performance measures (see the “Non\u0002GAAP Measures” section below for our discussion of this measure, which is not defined by GAAP). Adjusted return on average total capital increased 30 basis points from 11.3 percent in fiscal 2016 to 11.6 percent in fis\u0002cal 2017 as fiscal 2017 adjusted earnings increased. On a constant-currency basis, adjusted return on average total capital increased 40 basis points. We also believe that our fixed charge coverage ratio and the ratio of operating cash flow to debt are import\u0002ant measures of our financial strength. Our fixed charge coverage ratio in fiscal 2017 was 7.26 compared to 7.40 in fiscal 2016. The measure decreased from fiscal 2016 as earnings before income taxes and after-tax earnings from joint ventures decreased by $132 million in fiscal 2017. Our operating cash flow to debt ratio decreased 6.8 percentage points to 24.4 percent in fiscal 2017, driven by a decrease in cash provided by operations and an increase in notes payable. We have a 51 percent controlling interest in Yoplait SAS and a 50 percent interest in Yoplait Marques SNC and Liberté Marques Sàrl. Sodiaal holds the remaining interests in each of these entities. We consolidate these entities into our consolidated financial statements. We record Sodiaal’s 50 percent interest in Yoplait Marques SNC and Liberté Marques Sàrl as noncontrolling inter\u0002ests, and its 49 percent interest in Yoplait SAS as a redeemable interest on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. These euro- and Canadian dollar-denominated interests are reported in U. S. dollars on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Sodiaal has the ability to put all or a portion of its redeemable interest to us at fair value once per year, up to three times before December 2024. As of May 28, 2017, the redemption value of the redeemable interest was $911 million which approximates its fair value. The third-party holder of the General Mills Cereals, LLC (GMC) Class A Interests receives quarterly pre\u0002ferred distributions from available net income based on the application of a floating preferred return rate to the holder’s capital account balance established in the most recent mark-to-market valuation (currently $252 million). On June 1, 2015, the floating preferred return rate on GMC’s Class A Interests was reset to the sum of three-month LIBOR plus 125 basis points. The pre\u0002ferred return rate is adjusted every three years through a negotiated agreement with the Class A Interest holder or through a remarketing auction. We have an option to purchase the Class A Interests for consideration equal to the then current capital account value, plus any unpaid preferred return and the prescribed make-whole amount. If we purchase these interests, any change in the third-party holder’s capital account from its original value will be charged directly to retained earnings and will increase or decrease the net earnings used to calculate EPS in that period. OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS As of May 28, 2017, we have issued guarantees and comfort letters of $505 million for the debt and other obligations of consolidated subsidiaries, and guarantees and comfort letters of $165 million for the debt and other obligations of non-consolidated affiliates, mainly CPW. In addition, off-balance sheet arrangements are generally limited to the future payments under non-cancelable operating leases, which totaled $501 million as of May 28, 2017. As of May 28, 2017, we had invested in five variable interest entities (VIEs). None of our VIEs are material to our results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity as of and for the fiscal year ended May 28, 2017. Our defined benefit plans in the United States are subject to the requirements of the Pension Protection Act (PPA). In the future, the PPA may require us to make additional contributions to our domestic plans. We do not expect to be required to make any contribu\u0002tions in fiscal 2017. The following table summarizes our future estimated cash payments under existing contractual obligations, including payments due by period: \n
Payments Due by Fiscal Year
In MillionsTotal20182019 -202021 -222023 and Thereafter
Long-term debt (a)$8,290.6604.22,647.71,559.33,479.4
Accrued interest83.883.8———
Operating leases (b)500.7118.8182.4110.489.1
Capital leases1.20.40.60.10.1
Purchase obligations (c)3,191.02,304.8606.8264.315.1
Total contractual obligations12,067.33,112.03,437.51,934.13,583.7
Other long-term obligations (d)1,372.7————
Total long-term obligations$13,440.0$3,112.0$3,437.5$1,934.1$3,583.7
\n (a) Amounts represent the expected cash payments of our long-term debt and do not include $1.2 million for capital leases or $44.4 million for net unamortized debt issuance costs, premiums and discounts, and fair value adjustments. (b) Operating leases represents the minimum rental commitments under non-cancelable operating leases. (c) The majority of the purchase obligations represent commitments for raw material and packaging to be utilized in the normal course of business and for consumer marketing spending commitments that support our brands. For purposes of this table, arrangements are considered purchase obliga\u0002tions if a contract specifies all significant terms, including fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased, a pricing structure, and approximate timing of the transaction. Most arrangements are cancelable without a significant penalty and with short notice (usually 30 days). Any amounts reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as accounts payable and accrued liabilities are excluded from the table above. (d) The fair value of our foreign exchange, equity, commodity, and grain derivative contracts with a payable position to the counterparty was $24 million as of May 28, 2017, based on fair market values as of that date. Future changes in market values will impact the amount of cash ultimately paid or received to settle those instruments in the future. Other long-term obligations mainly consist of liabilities for accrued compensation and bene\u0002fits, including the underfunded status of certain of our defined benefit pen\u0002sion, other postretirement benefit, and postemployment benefit plans, and miscellaneous liabilities. We expect to pay $21 million of benefits from our unfunded postemployment benefit plans and $14.6 million of deferred com\u0002pensation in fiscal 2018. We are unable to reliably estimate the amount of these payments beyond fiscal 2018. As of May 28, 2017, our total liability for uncertain tax positions and accrued interest and penalties was $158.6 million. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES For a complete description of our significant account\u0002ing policies, see Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements on page 51 of this report. Our significant accounting estimates are those that have a meaning\u0002ful impact on the reporting of our financial condition and results of operations. These estimates include our accounting for promotional expenditures, valuation of long-lived assets, intangible assets, redeemable interest, stock-based compensation, income taxes, and defined benefit pension, other postretirement benefit, and pos\u0002temployment benefit plans. Promotional Expenditures Our promotional activi\u0002ties are conducted through our customers and directly or indirectly with end consumers. These activities include: payments to customers to perform merchan\u0002dising activities on our behalf, such as advertising or in-store displays; discounts to our list prices to lower retail shelf prices; payments to gain distribution of new products; coupons, contests, and other incentives; and media and advertising expenditures. The recognition of these costs requires estimation of customer participa\u0002tion and performance levels. These estimates are based"} {"answer": -0.27813, "question": "What is the growing rate of Average selling price per product ton in the years with the least Granular urea?", "context": "Table of Contents Rent expense under all operating leases, including both cancelable and noncancelable leases, was $645 million, $488 million and $338 million in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases having remaining terms in excess of one year as of September 28, 2013, are as follows (in millions): \n
2014$610
2015613
2016587
2017551
2018505
Thereafter1,855
Total minimum lease payments$4,721
\n Other Commitments As of September 28, 2013, the Company had outstanding off-balance sheet third-party manufacturing commitments and component purchase commitments of $18.6 billion. In addition to the off-balance sheet commitments mentioned above, the Company had outstanding obligations of $1.3 billion as of September 28, 2013, which consisted mainly of commitments to acquire capital assets, including product tooling and manufacturing process equipment, and commitments related to advertising, research and development, Internet and telecommunications services and other obligations. Contingencies The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and that have not been fully adjudicated. In the opinion of management, there was not at least a reasonable possibility the Company may have incurred a material loss, or a material loss in excess of a recorded accrual, with respect to loss contingencies. However, the outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain. Therefore, although management considers the likelihood of such an outcome to be remote, if one or more of these legal matters were resolved against the Company in a reporting period for amounts in excess of management’s expectations, the Company’s consolidated financial statements for that reporting period could be materially adversely affected. Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd, et al. On August 24, 2012, a jury returned a verdict awarding the Company $1.05 billion in its lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd and affiliated parties in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division. On March 1, 2013, the District Court upheld $599 million of the jury’s award and ordered a new trial as to the remainder. Because the award is subject to entry of final judgment, partial re-trial and appeal, the Company has not recognized the award in its results of operations. VirnetX, Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al. On August 11, 2010, VirnetX, Inc. filed an action against the Company alleging that certain of its products infringed on four patents relating to network communications technology. On November 6, 2012, a jury returned a verdict against the Company, and awarded damages of $368 million. The Company is challenging the verdict, believes it has valid defenses and has not recorded a loss accrual at this time. CF INDUSTRIES HOLDINGS, INC. 5 The following table summarizes our nitrogen fertilizer production volume for the last three years \n
December 31,
201720162015
(tons in thousands)
Ammonia-110,2958,3077,673
Granular urea4,4513,3682,520
UAN -32%6,9146,6985,888
AN2,1271,8451,283
\n (1) Gross ammonia production, including amounts subsequently upgraded on-site into granular urea, UAN or AN. Donaldsonville, Louisiana The Donaldsonville nitrogen fertilizer complex is the world's largest nitrogen fertilizer production facility. It has six ammonia plants, five urea plants, four nitric acid plants, three UAN plants, and one DEF plant. The complex, which is located on the Mississippi River, includes deep-water docking facilities, access to an ammonia pipeline, and truck and railroad loading capabilities. The complex has on-site storage for 160,000 tons of ammonia, 201,000 tons of UAN (measured on a 32% nitrogen content basis) and 173,000 tons of granular urea. As part of our capacity expansion projects, the new Donaldsonville urea plant became operational during the fourth quarter of 2015. The new UAN plant was placed in service in the first quarter of 2016, and the new ammonia plant was placed in service in October 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada Medicine Hat is the largest nitrogen fertilizer complex in Canada. It has two ammonia plants and one urea plant. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 60,000 tons of granular urea. Port Neal, Iowa The Port Neal facility is located approximately 12 miles south of Sioux City, Iowa on the Missouri River. The facility consists of two ammonia plants, three urea plants, two nitric acid plants and a UAN plant. The location has on-site storage for 90,000 tons of ammonia, 154,000 tons of granular urea, and 81,000 tons of 32% UAN. As part of our capacity expansion projects, both the ammonia and urea plants were placed in service in December 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Verdigris, Oklahoma The Verdigris facility is located northeast of Tulsa, Oklahoma, near the Verdigris River and is owned by TNLP. It is the second largest UAN production facility in North America. The facility comprises two ammonia plants, two nitric acid plants, two UAN plants and a port terminal. Through our approximately 75.3% interest in TNCLP and its subsidiary, TNLP, we operate the plants and lease the port terminal from the Tulsa-Rogers County Port Authority. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 100,000 tons of 32% UAN. Woodward, Oklahoma The Woodward facility is located in rural northwest Oklahoma and consists of an ammonia plant, two nitric acid plants, two urea plants and two UAN plants. The facility has on-site storage for 36,000 tons of ammonia and 84,000 tons of 32% UAN. Yazoo City, Mississippi The Yazoo City facility is located in central Mississippi and includes one ammonia plant, four nitric acid plants, an AN plant, two urea plants, a UAN plant and a dinitrogen tetroxide production and storage facility. The site has on-site storage for 50,000 tons of ammonia, 48,000 tons of 32% UAN and 11,000 tons of AN and related products. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our ammonia segment averaged $248 per ton in 2016, including the impact of the CF Fertilisers UK acquisition, which averaged $220 per ton. The remaining cost of sales per ton was $250 in 2016, a 16% decrease from the $296 per ton in 2015. The decrease was due primarily to the impact of unrealized net mark-to-market gains on natural gas derivatives in 2016 compared to losses in 2015 and to the impact of lower realized natural gas costs in 2016. This was partly offset by capacity expansion project start-up costs of $50 million and an increase in expansion project depreciation as a result of the new ammonia plants at our Donaldsonville and Port Neal facilities. Granular Urea Segment Our granular urea segment produces granular urea, which contains 46% nitrogen. Produced from ammonia and carbon dioxide, it has the highest nitrogen content of any of our solid nitrogen fertilizers. Granular urea is produced at our Courtright, Ontario; Donaldsonville, Louisiana; Medicine Hat, Alberta; and Port Neal, Iowa nitrogen complexes. The following table presents summary operating data for our granular urea segment: \n
Year ended December 31,
2017201620152017 v. 20162016 v. 2015
(in millions, except as noted)
Net sales$971$831$788$14017%$435%
Cost of sales85658446927247%11525%
Gross margin$115$247$319$-132-53%$-72-23%
Gross margin percentage11.8%29.7%40.4%-17.9%-10.7%
Sales volume by product tons (000s)4,3573,5972,46076021%1,13746%
Sales volume by nutrient tons (000s)(1)2,0041,6541,13235021%52246%
Average selling price per product ton$223$231$320$-8-3%$-89-28%
Average selling price per nutrient ton-1$485$502$696$-17-3%$-194-28%
Gross margin per product ton$26$69$129$-43-62%$-60-47%
Gross margin per nutrient ton-1$57$149$281$-92-62%$-132-47%
Depreciation and amortization$246$112$51$134120%$61120%
Unrealized net mark-to-market loss (gain) on natural gas derivatives$16$-67$47$83N/M$-114N/M
\n N/M—Not Meaningful (1) Granular urea represents 46% nitrogen content. Nutrient tons represent the tons of nitrogen within the product tons. Year Ended December 31, 2017 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2016 Net Sales. Net sales in the granular urea segment increased by $140 million, or 17%, to $971 million in 2017 compared to $831 million in 2016 due primarily to a 21% increase in sales volume partially offset by a 3% decrease in average selling prices. Sales volume was higher due primarily to increased production at our new Port Neal facility, which came on line in the fourth quarter of 2016. Average selling prices decreased to $223 per ton in 2017 compared to $231 per ton in 2016 due primarily to greater global nitrogen supply availability due to global capacity additions. Selling prices strengthened in the fourth quarter of 2017 rising approximately 14% compared to the prior year period. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our granular urea segment averaged $197 in 2017, a 22% increase from the $162 per ton in 2016. The increase was due primarily to higher depreciation as a result of the new granular urea plant at our Port Neal facility, an unrealized net mark-to-market loss on natural gas derivatives in 2017 compared to a gain in the comparable period of 2016 and higher realized natural gas costs, including the impact of realized derivatives. These increases in cost of sales were partially offset by the impact of production efficiencies due to increased volume. Depreciation and amortization in our granular urea segment in 2017 was $56 per ton compared to $31 per ton in 2016."} {"answer": -692.0, "question": "what percent of 2008's total other expenses is the total customer indemnification reserve?", "context": "Note 21. Expenses During the fourth quarter of 2008, we elected to provide support to certain investment accounts managed by SSgA through the purchase of asset- and mortgage-backed securities and a cash infusion, which resulted in a charge of $450 million. SSgA manages certain investment accounts, offered to retirement plans, that allow participants to purchase and redeem units at a constant net asset value regardless of volatility in the underlying value of the assets held by the account. The accounts enter into contractual arrangements with independent third-party financial institutions that agree to make up any shortfall in the account if all the units are redeemed at the constant net asset value. The financial institutions have the right, under certain circumstances, to terminate this guarantee with respect to future investments in the account. During 2008, the liquidity and pricing issues in the fixed-income markets adversely affected the market value of the securities in these accounts to the point that the third-party guarantors considered terminating their financial guarantees with the accounts. Although we were not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so, we elected to purchase approximately $2.49 billion of asset- and mortgage-backed securities from these accounts that had been identified as presenting increased risk in the current market environment and to contribute an aggregate of $450 million to the accounts to improve the ratio of the market value of the accounts’ portfolio holdings to the book value of the accounts. We have no ongoing commitment or intent to provide support to these accounts. The securities are carried in investment securities available for sale in our consolidated statement of condition. The components of other expenses were as follows for the years ended December 31: \n
(In millions)200820072006
Customer indemnification obligation$200
Securities processing187$79$37
Other505399281
Total other expenses$892$478$318
\n In September and October 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. , or Lehman Brothers, and certain of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy or other insolvency proceedings. While we had no unsecured financial exposure to Lehman Brothers or its affiliates, we indemnified certain customers in connection with these and other collateralized repurchase agreements with Lehman Brothers entities. In the then current market environment, the market value of the underlying collateral had declined. During the third quarter of 2008, to the extent these declines resulted in collateral value falling below the indemnification obligation, we recorded a reserve to provide for our estimated net exposure. The reserve, which totaled $200 million, was based on the cost of satisfying the indemnification obligation net of the fair value of the collateral, which we purchased during the fourth quarter of 2008. The collateral, composed of commercial real estate loans which are discussed in note 5, is recorded in loans and leases in our consolidated statement of condition. Management Fees We provide a broad range of investment management strategies, specialized investment management advisory services and other financial services for corporations, public funds, and other sophisticated investors. These services are offered through SSgA. Based upon assets under management, SSgA is the largest manager of institutional assets worldwide, the largest manager of assets for tax-exempt organizations (primarily pension plans) in the United States, and the third largest investment manager overall in the world. SSgA offers a broad array of investment management strategies, including passive and active, such as enhanced indexing and hedge fund strategies, using quantitative and fundamental methods for both U. S. and global equities and fixed income securities. SSgA also offers exchange traded funds, or ETFs, such as the SPDR? Dividend ETFs. The 10% decrease in management fees from 2007 primarily resulted from declines in average month-end equity market valuations and lower performance fees. Average month-end equity market valuations, individually presented in the above “INDEX” table, were down an average of 18% compared to 2007. The decrease in performance fees from $72 million in 2007 to $21 million in 2008 was generally the result of reduced levels of assets under management subject to performance fees, and somewhat lower relative performance measured against specified benchmarks during 2008. Management fees generated from customers outside the United States were approximately 40% of total management fees for 2008, down slightly from 41% for 2007. At year-end 2008, assets under management were $1.44 trillion, compared to $1.98 trillion at year-end 2007. While certain management fees are directly determined by the value of assets under management and the investment strategy employed, management fees reflect other factors as well, including our relationship pricing for customers who use multiple services, and the benchmarks specified in the respective management agreements related to performance fees. Accordingly, no direct correlation necessarily exists between the value of assets under management, market indices and management fee revenue. The overall decrease in assets under management at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007 resulted from declines in market valuations and from a net loss of business, with declines in market valuations representing the substantial majority of the decrease. During 2008, we experienced an aggregate net loss of business of approximately $55 billion, compared to net new business of approximately $116 billion during 2007. Our levels of assets under management were affected by a number of factors, including investor issues related to SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies and the relative under-performance of certain of our passive equity products. The net loss of business of $55 billion for 2008 did not reflect new business awarded to us during 2008 that had not been installed prior to December 31, 2008. This new business will be reflected in assets under management in future periods after installation. Assets under management consisted of the following at December 31: ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT \n
As of December 31, 2008 2007 2006 2005 20042007-2008 Annual Growth Rate2004-2008 Compound Annual Growth Rate
(Dollars in billions)
Equities:
Passive$576$803$691$625$600-28%-1%
Active and other91206181147122-56-7
Company stock/ESOP3979857677-51-16
Total equities7061,088957848799-35-3
Fixed-income:
Passive238218180128106922
Active3241342835-22-2
Cash and money market468632578437414-263
Total fixed-income and cash/money market738891792593555-177
Total$1,444$1,979$1,749$1,441$1,354-272
\n To measure, monitor, and report on our interest-rate risk position, we use (1) NIR simulation, or NIR-at-risk, which measures the impact on NIR over the next twelve months to immediate, or “rate shock,” and gradual, or “rate ramp,” changes in market interest rates; and (2) economic value of equity, or EVE, which measures the impact on the present value of all NIR-related principal and interest cash flows of an immediate change in interest rates. NIR-at-risk is designed to measure the potential impact of changes in market interest rates on NIR in the short term. EVE, on the other hand, is a long-term view of interest-rate risk, but with a view toward liquidation of State Street. Both of these measures are subject to ALCO-established guidelines, and are monitored regularly, along with other relevant simulations, scenario analyses and stress tests by both Global Treasury and ALCO. In calculating our NIR-at-risk, we start with a base amount of NIR that is projected over the next twelve months, assuming that the then-current yield curve remains unchanged over the period. Our existing balance sheet assets and liabilities are adjusted by the amount and timing of transactions that are forecasted to occur over the next twelve months. That yield curve is then “shocked,” or moved immediately, ±100 basis points in a parallel fashion, or at all points along the yield curve. Two new twelve-month NIR projections are then developed using the same balance sheet and forecasted transactions, but with the new yield curves, and compared to the base scenario. We also perform the calculations using interest rate ramps, which are ±100 basis point changes in interest rates that are assumed to occur gradually over the next twelve-month period, rather than immediately as we do with interest-rate shocks. EVE is based on the change in the present value of all NIR-related principal and interest cash flows for changes in market rates of interest. The present value of existing cash flows with a then-current yield curve serves as the base case. We then apply an immediate parallel shock to that yield curve of ±200 basis points and recalculate the cash flows and related present values. A large shock is used to better capture the embedded option risk in our mortgage-backed securities that results from the borrower’s prepayment opportunity. Key assumptions used in the models described above include the timing of cash flows; the maturity and repricing of balance sheet assets and liabilities, especially option-embedded financial instruments like mortgage-backed securities; changes in market conditions; and interest-rate sensitivities of our customer liabilities with respect to the interest rates paid and the level of balances. These assumptions are inherently uncertain and, as a result, the models cannot precisely predict future NIR or predict the impact of changes in interest rates on NIR and economic value. Actual results could differ from simulated results due to the timing, magnitude and frequency of changes in interest rates and market conditions, changes in spreads and management strategies, among other factors. Projections of potential future streams of NIR are assessed as part of our forecasting process. The following table presents the estimated exposure of NIR for the next twelve months, calculated as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, due to an immediate ± 100 basis point shift in then-current interest rates. Estimated incremental exposures presented below are dependent on management’s assumptions about asset and liability sensitivities under various interest-rate scenarios, such as those previously discussed, and do not reflect any actions management may undertake in order to mitigate some of the adverse effects of interest-rate changes on State Street’s financial performance. NIR-AT-RISK \n
Estimated Exposure to Net Interest Revenue
(In millions)20082007
Rate change:
+100 bps shock$7$-98
-100 bps shock-4397
+100 bps ramp-29-44
-100 bps ramp-16620
\n The NIR-at-risk exposure to an immediate 100 bp increase in market interest rates changed from negative at December 31, 2007 to slightly positive at December 31, 2008, while the NIR-at-risk exposure to a 100 bp downward shock in rates changed from slightly positive to significantly negative. These changes were the result of two factors. First, the level of on-balance sheet liquid assets was increased during 2008 in response to the"} {"answer": 4811.2, "question": "What is the sum of the Long-term debt (a) in the years where Operating leases (b) is positive? (in million)", "context": "The following table details the fee-paid committed and uncommitted credit lines we had available as of May 28, 2017: \n
In Billions Facility Amount Borrowed Amount
Credit facility expiring:
May 2022$2.7$—
June 20190.20.1
Total committed credit facilities2.90.1
Uncommitted credit facilities0.50.1
Total committed and uncommitted credit facilities$3.4$0.2
\n In fiscal 2016, we entered into a $2.7 billion fee-paid committed credit facility that was originally scheduled to expire in May 2021. During the fourth quarter of fis\u0002cal 2017 we amended the credit facility’s expiration date by one year to May 2022. To ensure availability of funds, we maintain bank credit lines sufficient to cover our outstanding notes payable. Commercial paper is a continuing source of short-term financing. We have commercial paper pro\u0002grams available to us in the United States and Europe. We also have uncommitted and asset-backed credit lines that support our foreign operations. The credit facilities contain several covenants, including a require\u0002ment to maintain a fixed charge coverage ratio of at least 2.5 times. Certain of our long-term debt agreements, our credit facilities, and our noncontrolling interests contain restrictive covenants. As of May 28, 2017, we were in compliance with all of these covenants. We have $605 million of long-term debt maturing in the next 12 months that is classified as current, includ\u0002ing $500 million of 1.4 percent notes due October 2017 and $100 million of 6.39 percent fixed rate medium term notes due for remarketing in February 2018. We believe that cash flows from operations, together with available short- and long-term debt financing, will be adequate to meet our liquidity and capital needs for at least the next 12 months. As of May 28, 2017, our total debt, including the impact of derivative instruments designated as hedges, was 67 percent in fixed-rate and 33 percent in float\u0002ing-rate instruments, compared to 78 percent in fixed\u0002rate and 22 percent in floating-rate instruments on May 29, 2016. Return on average total capital was 12.7 percent in fiscal 2017 compared to 12.9 percent in fiscal 2016. Improvement in adjusted return on average total capital is one of our key performance measures (see the “Non\u0002GAAP Measures” section below for our discussion of this measure, which is not defined by GAAP). Adjusted return on average total capital increased 30 basis points from 11.3 percent in fiscal 2016 to 11.6 percent in fis\u0002cal 2017 as fiscal 2017 adjusted earnings increased. On a constant-currency basis, adjusted return on average total capital increased 40 basis points. We also believe that our fixed charge coverage ratio and the ratio of operating cash flow to debt are import\u0002ant measures of our financial strength. Our fixed charge coverage ratio in fiscal 2017 was 7.26 compared to 7.40 in fiscal 2016. The measure decreased from fiscal 2016 as earnings before income taxes and after-tax earnings from joint ventures decreased by $132 million in fiscal 2017. Our operating cash flow to debt ratio decreased 6.8 percentage points to 24.4 percent in fiscal 2017, driven by a decrease in cash provided by operations and an increase in notes payable. We have a 51 percent controlling interest in Yoplait SAS and a 50 percent interest in Yoplait Marques SNC and Liberté Marques Sàrl. Sodiaal holds the remaining interests in each of these entities. We consolidate these entities into our consolidated financial statements. We record Sodiaal’s 50 percent interest in Yoplait Marques SNC and Liberté Marques Sàrl as noncontrolling inter\u0002ests, and its 49 percent interest in Yoplait SAS as a redeemable interest on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. These euro- and Canadian dollar-denominated interests are reported in U. S. dollars on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Sodiaal has the ability to put all or a portion of its redeemable interest to us at fair value once per year, up to three times before December 2024. As of May 28, 2017, the redemption value of the redeemable interest was $911 million which approximates its fair value. The third-party holder of the General Mills Cereals, LLC (GMC) Class A Interests receives quarterly pre\u0002ferred distributions from available net income based on the application of a floating preferred return rate to the holder’s capital account balance established in the most recent mark-to-market valuation (currently $252 million). On June 1, 2015, the floating preferred return rate on GMC’s Class A Interests was reset to the sum of three-month LIBOR plus 125 basis points. The pre\u0002ferred return rate is adjusted every three years through a negotiated agreement with the Class A Interest holder or through a remarketing auction. We have an option to purchase the Class A Interests for consideration equal to the then current capital account value, plus any unpaid preferred return and the prescribed make-whole amount. If we purchase these interests, any change in the third-party holder’s capital account from its original value will be charged directly to retained earnings and will increase or decrease the net earnings used to calculate EPS in that period. OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS As of May 28, 2017, we have issued guarantees and comfort letters of $505 million for the debt and other obligations of consolidated subsidiaries, and guarantees and comfort letters of $165 million for the debt and other obligations of non-consolidated affiliates, mainly CPW. In addition, off-balance sheet arrangements are generally limited to the future payments under non-cancelable operating leases, which totaled $501 million as of May 28, 2017. As of May 28, 2017, we had invested in five variable interest entities (VIEs). None of our VIEs are material to our results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity as of and for the fiscal year ended May 28, 2017. Our defined benefit plans in the United States are subject to the requirements of the Pension Protection Act (PPA). In the future, the PPA may require us to make additional contributions to our domestic plans. We do not expect to be required to make any contribu\u0002tions in fiscal 2017. The following table summarizes our future estimated cash payments under existing contractual obligations, including payments due by period: \n
Payments Due by Fiscal Year
In MillionsTotal20182019 -202021 -222023 and Thereafter
Long-term debt (a)$8,290.6604.22,647.71,559.33,479.4
Accrued interest83.883.8———
Operating leases (b)500.7118.8182.4110.489.1
Capital leases1.20.40.60.10.1
Purchase obligations (c)3,191.02,304.8606.8264.315.1
Total contractual obligations12,067.33,112.03,437.51,934.13,583.7
Other long-term obligations (d)1,372.7————
Total long-term obligations$13,440.0$3,112.0$3,437.5$1,934.1$3,583.7
\n (a) Amounts represent the expected cash payments of our long-term debt and do not include $1.2 million for capital leases or $44.4 million for net unamortized debt issuance costs, premiums and discounts, and fair value adjustments. (b) Operating leases represents the minimum rental commitments under non-cancelable operating leases. (c) The majority of the purchase obligations represent commitments for raw material and packaging to be utilized in the normal course of business and for consumer marketing spending commitments that support our brands. For purposes of this table, arrangements are considered purchase obliga\u0002tions if a contract specifies all significant terms, including fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased, a pricing structure, and approximate timing of the transaction. Most arrangements are cancelable without a significant penalty and with short notice (usually 30 days). Any amounts reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as accounts payable and accrued liabilities are excluded from the table above. (d) The fair value of our foreign exchange, equity, commodity, and grain derivative contracts with a payable position to the counterparty was $24 million as of May 28, 2017, based on fair market values as of that date. Future changes in market values will impact the amount of cash ultimately paid or received to settle those instruments in the future. Other long-term obligations mainly consist of liabilities for accrued compensation and bene\u0002fits, including the underfunded status of certain of our defined benefit pen\u0002sion, other postretirement benefit, and postemployment benefit plans, and miscellaneous liabilities. We expect to pay $21 million of benefits from our unfunded postemployment benefit plans and $14.6 million of deferred com\u0002pensation in fiscal 2018. We are unable to reliably estimate the amount of these payments beyond fiscal 2018. As of May 28, 2017, our total liability for uncertain tax positions and accrued interest and penalties was $158.6 million. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES For a complete description of our significant account\u0002ing policies, see Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements on page 51 of this report. Our significant accounting estimates are those that have a meaning\u0002ful impact on the reporting of our financial condition and results of operations. These estimates include our accounting for promotional expenditures, valuation of long-lived assets, intangible assets, redeemable interest, stock-based compensation, income taxes, and defined benefit pension, other postretirement benefit, and pos\u0002temployment benefit plans. Promotional Expenditures Our promotional activi\u0002ties are conducted through our customers and directly or indirectly with end consumers. These activities include: payments to customers to perform merchan\u0002dising activities on our behalf, such as advertising or in-store displays; discounts to our list prices to lower retail shelf prices; payments to gain distribution of new products; coupons, contests, and other incentives; and media and advertising expenditures. The recognition of these costs requires estimation of customer participa\u0002tion and performance levels. These estimates are based"} {"answer": 0.26923, "question": "what percent of warehouse locations are located in japan .", "context": "Backlog Applied manufactures systems to meet demand represented by order backlog and customer commitments. Backlog consists of: (1) orders for which written authorizations have been accepted and assigned shipment dates are within the next 12 months, or shipment has occurred but revenue has not been recognized; and (2) contractual service revenue and maintenance fees to be earned within the next 12 months. Backlog by reportable segment as of October 27, 2013 and October 28, 2012 was as follows: \n
20132012(In millions, except percentages)
Silicon Systems Group$1,29555%$70544%
Applied Global Services59125%58036%
Display36115%20613%
Energy and Environmental Solutions1255%1157%
Total$2,372100%$1,606100%
\n Applied’s backlog on any particular date is not necessarily indicative of actual sales for any future periods, due to the potential for customer changes in delivery schedules or cancellation of orders. Customers may delay delivery of products or cancel orders prior to shipment, subject to possible cancellation penalties. Delays in delivery schedules and/or a reduction of backlog during any particular period could have a material adverse effect on Applied’s business and results of operations. Manufacturing, Raw Materials and Supplies Applied’s manufacturing activities consist primarily of assembly, test and integration of various proprietary and commercial parts, components and subassemblies (collectively, parts) that are used to manufacture systems. Applied has implemented a distributed manufacturing model under which manufacturing and supply chain activities are conducted in various countries, including the United States, Europe, Israel, Singapore, Taiwan, and other countries in Asia, and assembly of some systems is completed at customer sites. Applied uses numerous vendors, including contract manufacturers, to supply parts and assembly services for the manufacture and support of its products. Although Applied makes reasonable efforts to assure that parts are available from multiple qualified suppliers, this is not always possible. Accordingly, some key parts may be obtained from only a single supplier or a limited group of suppliers. Applied seeks to reduce costs and to lower the risks of manufacturing and service interruptions by: (1) selecting and qualifying alternate suppliers for key parts; (2) monitoring the financial condition of key suppliers; (3) maintaining appropriate inventories of key parts; (4) qualifying new parts on a timely basis; and (5) locating certain manufacturing operations in close proximity to suppliers and customers. Research, Development and Engineering Applied’s long-term growth strategy requires continued development of new products. The Company’s significant investment in research, development and engineering (RD&E) has generally enabled it to deliver new products and technologies before the emergence of strong demand, thus allowing customers to incorporate these products into their manufacturing plans at an early stage in the technology selection cycle. Applied works closely with its global customers to design systems and processes that meet their planned technical and production requirements. Product development and engineering organizations are located primarily in the United States, as well as in Europe, Israel, Taiwan, and China. In addition, Applied outsources certain RD&E activities, some of which are performed outside the United States, primarily in India. Process support and customer demonstration laboratories are located in the United States, China, Taiwan, Europe, and Israel. Applied’s investments in RD&E for product development and engineering programs to create or improve products and technologies over the last three years were as follows: $1.3 billion (18 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2013, $1.2 billion (14 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2012, and $1.1 billion (11 percent of net sales) in fiscal 2011. Applied has spent an average of 14 percent of net sales in RD&E over the last five years. In addition to RD&E for specific product technologies, Applied maintains ongoing programs for automation control systems, materials research, and environmental control that are applicable to its products. Item 2: Properties Information concerning Applied’s principal properties at October 27, 2013 is set forth below: \n
LocationTypePrincipal UseSquareFootageOwnership
Santa Clara, CAOffice, Plant & WarehouseHeadquarters; Marketing; Manufacturing; Distribution; Research, Development,Engineering; Customer Support1,476,000150,000OwnedLeased
Austin, TXOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing1,719,000145,000OwnedLeased
Rehovot, IsraelOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing; Research,Development, Engineering;Customer Support417,0005,000OwnedLeased
SingaporeOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing andCustomer Support392,00010,000OwnedLeased
Gloucester, MAOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing; Research,Development, Engineering;Customer Support315,000131,000OwnedLeased
Tainan, TaiwanOffice, Plant & WarehouseManufacturing andCustomer Support320,000Owned
\n Because of the interrelation of Applied’s operations, properties within a country may be shared by the segments operating within that country. Products in the Silicon Systems Group are manufactured in Austin, Texas; Singapore; Gloucester, Massachusetts; and Rehovot, Israel. Remanufactured equipment products in the Applied Global Services segment are produced primarily in Austin, Texas. Products in the Display segment are manufactured in Tainan, Taiwan; Santa Clara, California; and Alzenau, Germany. Products in the Energy and Environmental Solutions segment are primarily manufactured in Alzenau, Germany; Treviso, Italy; and Cheseaux, Switzerland. In addition to the above properties, Applied also owns and leases offices, plants and/or warehouse locations in 78 locations throughout the world: 18 in Europe, 21 in Japan, 15 in North America (principally the United States), 8 in China, 7 in Korea, 6 in Southeast Asia, and 3 in Taiwan. These facilities are principally used for manufacturing; research, development and engineering; and marketing, sales and/or customer support. Applied also owns a total of approximately 139 acres of buildable land in Texas, California, Israel and Italy that could accommodate additional building space. Applied considers the properties that it owns or leases as adequate to meet its current and future requirements. Applied regularly assesses the size, capability and location of its global infrastructure and periodically makes adjustments based on these assessments. Fiscal 2013 operating results reflected a recovery in demand for TV manufacturing equipment and continued demand for advanced mobile display equipment, which resulted in increased new orders, net sales, operating income and non-GAAPadjusted operating income compared to fiscal 2012. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013, new orders were $114 million, down 55 percent from the prior quarter, and reflected customer push-outs of orders. Net sales in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2013 were $163 million, almost flat compared to the prior quarter. Two customers accounted for approximately 50 percent of net sales for the Display segment in fiscal 2013. Fiscal 2012 operating results reflected a continued overcapacity in the large substrate LCD TV equipment industry that resulted in decreased new orders and net sales in fiscal 2012. The downturn in the LCD TV equipment industry was partially offset by increased demand for advanced mobile display equipment. Four customers accounted for 60 percent of net sales for the Display segment in fiscal 2012. Energy and Environmental Solutions Segment The Energy and Environmental Solutions segment includes products for fabricating c-Si solar PVs, as well as high throughput roll-to-roll deposition equipment for flexible electronics, packaging and other applications. This business is focused on delivering solutions to generate and conserve energy, with an emphasis on lowering the cost to produce solar power and increasing conversion efficiency. While end-demand for solar PVs has been robust over the last several years, investment levels in capital equipment remain depressed. Global solar PV production capacity exceeds anticipated demand, which has caused solar PV manufacturers to significantly reduce or delay investments in manufacturing capacity and new technology, or in some instances to cease operations. Certain significant measures for the past three fiscal years were as follows: \n
Change
2013201220112013 over 20122012 over 2011
(In millions, except percentages and ratios)
New orders$166$195$1,684$-29-15%$-1,489-88%
Net sales1734251,990-252-59%-1,565-79%
Book to bill ratio1.00.50.8
Operating income (loss)-433-66845323535%-1,121-247%
Operating margin-250.3%-157.2%22.8%-93.1 points-180.0 points
Non-GAAP Adjusted Results
Non-GAAP adjusted operating income (loss)-115-1844446938%-628-141%
Non-GAAP adjusted operating margin-66.5%-43.3%22.3%-23.2 points-65.6 points
\n Reconciliations of non-GAAP adjusted measures are presented under \"Non-GAAP Adjusted Results\" below. Net Operating Revenues by Operating Segment Information about our net operating revenues by operating segment as a percentage of Company net operating revenues is as follows:"}