Answer: -0.14359

Question: what is the increase in rent expense from 2008 to 2009?

Context:
	Year Ended December 31,

	2011	2010	2009

Risk-free interest rate	1.2%	1.4%	1.7%

Expected life (in years)	3.8	3.4	3.8

Dividend yield	—%	—%	—%

Expected volatility	38%	37%	47%

 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 fixedrate 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

	Con Edison	CECONY

(Millions of Dollars)	2015	2014	2013	2015	2014	2013

CHANGE IN BENEFIT OBLIGATION

Benefit obligation at beginning of year	$1,411	$1,395	$1,454	$1,203	$1,198	$1,238

Service cost	20	19	23	15	15	18

Interest cost on accumulated postretirement benefit obligation	51	60	54	43	52	46

Amendments	—	-12	—	—	—	—

Net actuarial loss/(gain)	-103	47	-42	-85	28	-20

Benefits paid and administrative expenses	-127	-134	-136	-117	-125	-126

Participant contributions	35	36	38	34	35	38

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	-6	59	153	-4	54	134

Employer contributions	6	7	9	6	7	9

EGWP payments	28	12	8	26	11	7

Participant contributions	35	36	38	34	35	38

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

 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):

2011	$65.1

2012	47.6

2013	35.7

2014	27.8

2015	24.3

Thereafter	78.1

Total	$278.6

 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:

	Payments Due by Period

(in millions)	Total	< 1 year	1-3 years	4-5 years	> 5 years

Term Loan-1	$1,703.4	$63.9	$126.3	$1,513.2	$—

Kelway Term Loan-1	90.9	13.5	77.4	—	—

Senior Notes due 2022-2	852.0	36.0	72.0	72.0	672.0

Senior Notes due 2023-2	735.1	26.3	52.5	52.5	603.8

Senior Notes due 2024-2	859.7	31.6	63.3	63.3	701.5

Operating leases-3	143.2	22.5	41.7	37.1	41.9

Asset retirement obligations-4	1.8	0.8	0.5	0.3	0.2

Total	$4,386.1	$194.6	$433.7	$1,738.4	$2,019.4

 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:

(in millions)	Corporate	Public	Other	Headquarters	Total

2015:

Net sales	$6,816.4	$5,125.5	$1,046.8	$—	$12,988.7

Income (loss) from operations	470.1	343.3	43.1	-114.5	742.0

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 operations	439.8	313.2	32.9	-112.9	673.0

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)	363.3	246.5	27.2	-128.4	508.6

Depreciation and amortization expense	-97.3	-44.0	-8.6	-58.3	-208.2

 (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.

	Year EndedDecember 31, 2015	Year EndedDecember 31, 2014	Year EndedDecember 31, 2013

	Dollars inMillions	Percentageof Total NetSales	Dollars inMillions	Percentageof Total NetSales	Dollars inMillions	Percentageof Total NetSales

Notebooks/Mobile Devices	$2,539.4	19.6%	$2,354.0	19.5%	$1,696.5	15.8%

Netcomm Products	1,914.9	14.7	1,613.3	13.4	1,482.7	13.8

Enterprise and Data Storage (Including Drives)	1,065.2	8.2	1,024.2	8.5	999.3	9.3

Other Hardware	4,756.4	36.6	4,551.1	37.6	4,184.1	38.8

Software	2,163.6	16.7	2,064.1	17.1	1,982.4	18.4

Services	478.0	3.7	371.9	3.1	332.7	3.1

Other-1	71.2	0.5	95.9	0.8	90.9	0.8

Total Net sales	$12,988.7	100.0%	$12,074.5	100.0%	$10,768.6	100.0%

 (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.

	December 31, 2007	December 31, 2006	December 31, 2005

General partner interest	2.00%	2.00%	1.65%

Limited partner interest	43.70% (a)	43.70% (a)	1.05% (b)

Total ownership interest	45.70%	45.70%	2.70%

 (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.

	 Years Ended December 31,

	 2007	 2006	 2005

	(Thousands of dollars)

General partner distributions	$7,842	$6,228	$2,632

Incentive distributions	50,627	31,102	6,568

Total distributions from ONEOK Partners	$58,469	$37,330	$9,200

 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:

	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 contracts	56	-126	62	-344

Interest-rate contracts	10,923	—	—	-128,666

Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments	58,495	-5,011	184,246	-202,356

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

Commodity contracts

Nontrading instruments

Financial contracts	24,970	-25,009	295,948	-323,170

Physical contracts	4,059	-153	38,733	-1,665

Trading instruments

Financial contracts	15,358	-14,192	111,920	-110,050

Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments	44,387	-39,354	446,601	-434,885

Total derivatives	$102,882	$-44,365	$630,847	$-637,241

 (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:

	Year Ended December 31,

	 2005	 2004	2003

Net income

As reported	$8,142	$57,587	$4,212

Compensation expense	1,366	1,965	1,646

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

 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 brokerdealer 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:

	Year Ended December 31,

	2008	2007

		% of		% of	$	%

	 $	Revenues	 $	Revenues	Change	Change

	($ in thousands)

 Expenses

Employee compensation and benefits	$43,810	47.1%	$43,051	46.0%	$759	1.8%

Depreciation and amortization	7,879	8.5	7,170	7.7	709	9.9

Technology and communications	8,311	8.9	7,463	8.0	848	11.4

Professional and consulting fees	8,171	8.8	7,639	8.2	532	7.0

Occupancy	2,891	3.1	3,275	3.5	-384	-11.7

Marketing and advertising	3,032	3.3	1,905	2.0	1,127	59.2

General and administrative	6,157	6.6	5,889	6.3	268	4.6

Total expenses	$80,251	86.2%	$76,392	81.6%	$3,859	5.1%

 $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 stockbased 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 earnout 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):

Cash	$6,406

Accounts receivable	2,139

Amortizable intangibles	8,330

Goodwill	29,405

Deferred tax assets, net	3,410

Other assets, including investment in TradeHelm	1,429

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and deferred revenue	-8,701

Total purchase price	$42,418

 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:

At December 31 (Millions)	2007	2006	2005

Breast implant liabilities	$1	$4	$7

Breast implant receivables	64	93	130

Respirator mask/asbestos liabilities	121	181	210

Respirator mask/asbestos receivables	332	380	447

Environmental remediation liabilities	37	44	30

Environmental remediation receivables	15	15	15

Other environmental liabilities	147	14	8

 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:

	2015	2014	2013

	Number of Awards	Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value	Number of Awards	Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value	Number of Awards	Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value

Nonvested balance —

As of January 1	2,817,786	$104.41	3,105,361	$92.31	3,261,562	$85.17

Granted

Annual	671,204	165.86	798,615	126.79	946,774	101.57

Other	26,886	156.94	78,252	152.74	44,401	111.19

Vested	-1,010,612	89.99	-1,100,675	90.37	-1,100,095	79.93

Forfeited	-64,176	118.99	-63,767	97.23	-47,281	90.82

As of December 31	2,441,088	$127.47	2,817,786	$104.41	3,105,361	$92.31

 As of December 31, 2015, there was $84 million of compensation expense that has yet to be recognized related to nonvested restricted stock and restricted stock units. This expense is expected to be recognized over the remaining weightedaverage 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:

	U.S. Qualified Pension	International Pension (weighted average)	U.S. Postretirement Medical

December 31, 2014 Liability and 2015 Net Periodic Benefit Cost:

Single discount rate	4.10%	3.11%	4.07%

December 31, 2015 Liability:

Benefit obligation	4.47%	3.12%	4.32%

2016 Net Periodic Benefit Cost Components:

Service cost	4.72%	2.84%	4.60%

Interest cost	3.77%	2.72%	3.44%

 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:

	Metropolitan (in millions)

Cash and cash equivalents	$49

Receivables, net	28

Other current assets	40

Property and equipment	22

Goodwill	569

Other intangible assets	263

Other long-term assets	1

Total assets acquired	972

Current liabilities	-22

Other long-term liabilities	-99

Total liabilities assumed	-121

Net assets acquired	$851

 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.

	2012	2011

	 Deferred acquisition costs	Future policy benefits payable	 Deferred acquisition costs	Future policy benefits payable

	(in millions)

Other long-term assets	$149	$0	$114	$0

Trade accounts payable and accrued expenses	0	-63	0	-58

Long-term liabilities	0	-1,858	0	-1,663

Total asset (liability)	$149	$-1,921	$114	$-1,721

 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.

		Change

	2011	2010	Dollars	Percentage

	(in millions)

 Premiums and Services Revenue:

Premiums:

Fully-insured commercial group	$4,782	$5,169	$-387	-7.5%

Group Medicare Advantage	3,152	3,021	131	4.3%

Group Medicare stand-alone PDP	8	5	3	60.0%

Total group Medicare	3,160	3,026	134	4.4%

Group specialty	935	885	50	5.6%

Total premiums	8,877	9,080	-203	-2.2%

Services	356	395	-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 ratio	82.4%	82.4%		0.0%

Operating cost ratio	17.8%	17.5%		0.3%

 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):

	 2012	 2011	 2010

Income from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation	$637,283	$396,462	$372,906

Basic weighted average common shares outstanding	394,772	395,711	401,152

Dilutive securities	4,515	4,484	2,920

Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding	399,287	400,195	404,072

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

 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:

Period	Total Number of Shares Purchased-1	Average Price Paid per Share-2	Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans orPrograms	Approximate Dollar Value of Shares that May Yet be Purchased Under the Plans orPrograms  (in millions)

October 2012	27,524	$72.62	27,524	$1,300.1

November 2012	489,390	$74.22	489,390	$1,263.7

December 2012	102,400	$74.83	102,400	$1,256.1

Total Fourth Quarter	619,314	$74.25	619,314	$1,256.1

 (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.

	 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, net	5,789,995	4,981,722	3,683,474	3,169,623	3,022,636

Total assets	14,089,129	12,242,395	10,370,084	8,519,931	8,211,665

Long-term obligations, including current portion	8,753,376	7,236,308	5,587,388	4,211,581	4,333,146

Total American Tower Corporation equity	3,573,101	3,287,220	3,501,444	3,315,082	2,991,322

 (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:

2004	2003	2002	2001

(In Thousands)

$61,592	$19,064	$7,046	$13,853

 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:

	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

 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:

	 2005	 2006	 2007	 2008	 2009

 Non-Utility Nuclear:

Percent of planned generation sold forward:

Unit-contingent	36%	20%	17%	1%	0%

Unit-contingent with availability guarantees	54%	52%	38%	25%	0%

Firm liquidated damages	4%	4%	2%	0%	0%

Total	94%	76%	57%	26%	0%

Planned generation (TWh)	34	35	34	34	35

Average contracted price per MWh	$39	$41	$42	$44	N/A

 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)