Question: What is the total Net (loss) income  between 2016 to 2019 if it is thrice that of the 2017 Net (loss) income ?

Answer: 23.6

Context:
5. Earnings Per Common Share Basic earnings per common share ("EPS") is based upon the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS reflects the potential dilution that would occur upon issuance of common shares for awards under stock-based compensation plans, or conversion of preferred stock, but only to the extent that they are considered dilutive. The following table shows the computation of basic and diluted EPS: In conjunction with the acquisition of Hawaiian Telcom in the third quarter of 2018, the Company issued 7.7 million Common Shares as a part of the acquisition consideration. In addition, the Company granted 0.1 million time-based restricted stock units to certain Hawaiian Telcom employees under the Hawaiian Telcom 2010 Equity Incentive Plan For the years ended December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the Company had a net loss available to common shareholders and, as a result, all common stock equivalents were excluded from the computation of diluted EPS as their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive. For the year ended December 31, 2017, awards under the Company’s stock-based compensation plans for common shares of 0.2 million, were excluded from the computation of diluted EPS as their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive. For all periods presented, preferred stock convertible into 0.9 million common shares was excluded as it was anti-dilutive.

Year Ended December 31,

(in millions, except per share amounts)	2019	2018	2017

Numerator:

Net (loss) income	$(66.6)	$(69.8)	$40.0

Preferred stock dividends	10.4	10.4	10.4

Net (loss) income applicable to common shareowners - basic and diluted	$(77.0)	$(80.2)	$29.6

Denominator:

Weighted-average common shares outstanding - basic	50.4	46.3	42.2

Stock-based compensation arrangements	—	—	0.2

Weighted-average common shares outstanding - diluted	50.4	46.3	42.4

Basic and diluted net (loss) earnings per common share	($1.53)	($1.73)	$0.70


Question: What is the total basic and diluted net (loss) earnings per common share earned between 2017 to 2019 if the signs for each basic and diluted net (loss) earnings per common share earned is reversed (eg a negative sign becomes positive and vice versa)?

Answer: 2.56


Question: Which year has the largest weighted-average common shares outstanding - basic, if the shares outstanding in 2019 is 20 million?

Answer: 2018


Question: What would be the change in net sales between 2017 and 2019 if the net sales in 2017 was $1,000,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 382818

Context:
Non-GAAP Financial Measures To complement our Consolidated Statements of Operations and Cash Flows, we use non-GAAP financial measures of Adjusted gross margin, Adjusted operating income, Adjusted net income, and Adjusted EBITDA. We believe that Adjusted gross margin, Adjusted operating income, Adjusted net income, and Adjusted EBITDA are complements to U.S. GAAP amounts and such measures are useful to investors. The presentation of these non-GAAP measures is not meant to be considered in isolation or as an alternative to net income as an indicator of our performance, or as an alternative to cash flows from operating activities as a measure of liquidity. The following table provides a reconciliation from U.S. GAAP Gross margin to non-GAAP Adjusted gross margin (amounts in thousands): (1) Fiscal years ending March 31, 2018 and 2017 adjusted due to the adoption of ASC 606. (2) $0.9 million in costs incurred during fiscal year 2018 related to the relocation of the Company's tantalum powder facility equipment from Carson City, Nevada to its existing Matamoros, Mexico plant were reclassified from “Plant start-up costs” to “Restructuring charges” during fiscal year 2019.

		Fiscal Years Ended March 31,

	2019	2018	2017

Net sales (1)	$1,382,818	$1,200,181	$757,338

Cost of sales (1)	924,276	860,744	571,944

Gross Margin (GAAP) (1)	458,542	339,437	185,394

Gross margin as a % of net sales	33.2%	28.3%	24.5%

Non-GAAP adjustments:

Plant start-up costs (2)	(927)	929	427

Stock-based compensation expense	2,756	1,519	1,384

Adjusted gross margin (non-GAAP) (1)	$460,371	$341,885	$187,205

Adjusted gross margin as a % of net sales	33.3%	28.5%	24.7%


Question: How many years did cost of sales exceed $800,000 thousand if cost of sales in 2017 was $850,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 3


Question: What would be the percentage change in Stock-based compensation expense between 2018 and 2019 if stock-based compensation expense in 2019 was $2,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 31.67


Question: What would be the change in revenue between 2018 and 2019 if the value in 2019 increased by $10,000 million?

Answer: 24859

Context:
Item 6. Selected Financial Data You should read the following selected consolidated financial data in conjunction with Part II, Item 7, "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations," and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data" of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The consolidated statements of income data for each of the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018, and 2017 and the consolidated balance sheets data as of December 31, 2019 and 2018 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data" of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The consolidated statements of income data for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and the consolidated balance sheets data as of December 31, 2017, 2016, and 2015 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements, except as otherwise noted, that are not included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of our results in any future period. (1) Total costs and expenses include 4,840 million, 4,150 million, 3,720 million, 3,220 million, and 2,970 million of share-based compensation for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, and 2015, respectively.

			Year Ended December 31,

	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015

			(in millions, except per share data)

Consolidated Statements of Income Data:

Revenue	$70,697	$55,838	$40,653	$27,638	$17,928

Total costs and expenses(1)	$46,711	$30,925	$20,450	$15,211	$11,703

Income from operations	$23,986	$24,913	$20,203	$12,427	$6,225

Income before provision for income taxes	$24,812	$25,361	$20,594	$12,518	$6,194

Net income	$18,485	$22,112	$15,934	$10,217	$3,688

Net income attributable to Class A and Class B common stockholders	$18,485	$22,111	$15,920	$10,188	$3,669

Earnings per share attributable to Class A and Class B common stockholders:

Basic	$6.48	$7.65	$5.49	$3.56	$1.31

Diluted	$6.43	$7.57	$5.39	$3.49	$1.29


Question: What would be the average revenue for 2018 and 2019 if the value in 2018 was $70,000 million instead?

Answer: 62919


Question: Which year would have the highest amount of revenue if the revenue amount in 2019 was $80,000 million instead?

Answer: 2019


Question: In which year would the Weighted average grant-date fair value per share award be the largest if the amount in 2019 was $35.41 instead?

Answer: 2019

Context:
The following table summarizes information regarding common stock share awards granted and vested (in thousands, except per share award amounts): As of December 31, 2019, there was $0.2 million of total unrecognized compensation costs, net of actual forfeitures, related to nonvested common stock share awards. This cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 0.8 years.

		Years Ended December 31,

	2019	2018	2017

Number of share awards granted	34	34	24

Weighted average grant-date fair value per share award	$25.41	$27.68	$32.93

Fair value of share awards vested	$840	$880	$850


Question: What would the change in Fair value of share awards vested in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $830 thousand instead?

Answer: -50


Question: What would the percentage change in Fair value of share awards vested in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $830 thousand instead?

Answer: -5.68


Question: What would be the value difference between granted share and vested share if vested share values increased by 10%?

Answer: 7.49

Context:
Restricted Stock Awards We present below a summary of changes in unvested units of restricted stock during 2019: The Company recorded equity-based compensation expense related to restricted stock and RSUs (collectively “restricted stock awards”) of $31.8 million, $19.9 million, and $16.2 million in 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The total fair value of restricted stock awards vested in 2019, 2018 and 2017, based on market value at the vesting dates was $18.2 million, $18.1 million, and $18.8 million, respectively. The weighted average grant-date fair value of RSUs granted during fiscal year 2019, 2018 and 2017 was $49.48, $51.72 and $49.01, respectively. As of December 31, 2019, unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested RSU totaled $47.5 million and is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 2.5 years. In January 2017, we elected to recognize forfeitures of equity-based payments as they occur. awards”) of $31.8 million, $19.9 million, and $16.2 million in 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The total fair value of restricted stock awards vested in 2019, 2018 and 2017, based on market value at the vesting dates was $18.2 million, $18.1 million, and $18.8 million, respectively. The weighted average grant-date fair value of RSUs granted during fiscal year 2019, 2018 and 2017 was $49.48, $51.72 and $49.01, respectively. As of December 31, 2019, unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested RSU totaled $47.5 million and is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 2.5 years. In January 2017, we elected to recognize forfeitures of equity-based payments as they occur. Included in RSU grants for the year ended December 31, 2019 are 282,327 units that have performance-based vesting criteria. The performance criteria are tied to our financial performance. As of December 31, 2019, the associated equity-based compensation expense has been recognized for the portion of the award attributable to the 2019 performance criteria.

	Number of Units	Grant Date Fair Value

Outstanding at January 1, 2019	997,173	$52.22

Granted	945,159	49.48

Vested	(386,060)	51.79

Forfeited	(59,579)	50.56

Outstanding at December 31, 2019	1,496,693	$50.67


Question: What would be the change in the outstanding number of shares between the beginning and end of the year 2019 if there is additional 100,000 shares at the end of the year?

Answer: 599520


Question: What would be the difference in grant date fair value between the vested stocks and the forfeited stocks if the value of the vested stocks increased by $1.00?

Answer: 2.23


Question: If the Net cash provided by/(used in) operating activities in 2019 increased to 5,701,674, what would be the revised change from December 31, 2018 and 2019?

Answer: 9010500

Context:
Discussion of Cash Flows During 2019, the $4.8 million of net cash provided by operating activities consisted of our net income of $5.3 million, and included non-cash charges for depreciation and amortization of $2.5 million, and stock-based compensation of $1.5 million, offset by a tax benefit from a partial release of the valuation allowances of $3.3 million and a net cash outflow of $1.8 million from changes in working capital. The changes in working capital were principally driven by an increase in accounts receivable of $2.2 million, an increase in inventory of $0.7 million, an increase in contract assets of $0.4 million, and an increase in other assets of $0.2 million, all partially offset by decreases in accounts payable and accrued expenses of $0.6 million and contract liabilities of $1.2 million, In 2018, the $3.3 million of net cash used in operating activities consisted of our net income of $11.0 million and included a gain recognized on the sale of our optoelectronic segment that was sold in July 2018 of $8.6 million in addition to non-cash charges for depreciation and amortization of $1.2 million and stock-based compensation of $0.6 million, offset by a net cash outflow of $7.6 million from changes in working capital. The changes in working capital were principally driven by an increase in inventory of $1.0 million, and increase in accounts receivable of $6.2 million, and increase in contract assets of $0.8 million, and an increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities of $0.5 million, all partially offset by a $1.8 million decrease in other assets. Cash used in investing activities in 2019 consisted primarily of the $19.0 million payment for our acquisition of GP, $0.5 million of fixed asset additions and $0.3 million of capitalized intellectual property costs. Cash provided by investing activities in 2018 consisted primarily of the proceeds from the sale of our optoelectronic segment of $15.8 million, partially offset by the $5.0 million payment for our acquisition of MOI, $0.4 million of fixed asset additions and $0.4 million of capitalized intellectual property rights. Cash used in financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2019 was $2.4 million, compared to $1.2 million in 2018. During 2019, we repaid $0.6 million on our term loans with SVB and used $2.2 million to repurchase our common stock under our stock repurchase program. These payments were partially offset by $0.4 million received from exercises of stock options and warrants. During 2018, we repaid $1.8 million on our outstanding term loan with SVB and used $0.5 million to repurchase our common stock under our stock repurchase program. These payments were partially offset by $1.1 million received from exercises of stock options and warrants.

	Years ended December 31,

	2019	2018

Net cash provided by/(used in) operating activities	$4,798,201	$(3,308,826)

Net cash (used in)/provided by investing activities	(19,814,991)	10,037,123

Net cash used in financing activities	(2,437,560)	(1,249,564)

Net (decrease)/increase in cash and cash equivalents	$(17,454,350)	$5,478,733


Question: If the Net cash provided by/(used in) operating activities in 2019 increased to 5,701,674, what would be the revised average for December 31, 2018 and 2019?

Answer: 1196424


Question: If Net cash provided by/(used in) operating activities in 2019 was -2,000,000, in which year would it be negative?

Answer: 2019

Answer: 2018


Question: What would be the percentage change in the total deferred tax assets from 2018 to 2019 if the amount in 2019 is now 6,000?

Answer: 56.13

Context:
Deferred taxes are provided on a liability method whereby deferred tax assets are recognized for deductible differences and operating loss and tax credit carry-forwards and deferred tax liabilities are recognized for taxable temporary differences. Temporary differences are the difference between the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and their tax bases. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance when, in the opinion of management, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted for the effects of changes in tax laws and rates on the date of enactment. At December 31, 2019, the Company had net operating loss carry-forwards of approximately $21.6 million that may be offset against future taxable income indefinitely. No tax benefit has been reported in the 2019 financial statements, since the potential tax benefit is offset by a valuation allowance of the same amount. Net deferred tax assets consist of the following components as of December 31, 2019 and 2018: Due to the change in ownership provisions of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, net operating loss carry-forwards for federal income tax reporting purposes are subject to annual limitations. Should a change in ownership occur, net operating loss carry-forwards may be limited as to use in future years.

	2019	2018

Deferred tax assets (liabilities):

NOL carryover	$5,910	$3,370

R&D carryover	173	173

Other	236	239

Depreciation	42	61

	6,361	3,843

Less valuation allowance	(6,361)	(3,843)

Net deferred tax asset	$-	$-


Question: What would be the percentage of R&D carryover in the total deferred tax assets in 2019 if the R&D carryover amount is now 200?

Answer: 3.13


Question: What would be the percentage of depreciation in the total deferred tax assets in 2018 if the depreciation amount is now 50?

Answer: 1.3


Question: In which year would the NOL carryover higher if the amount in 2018 is 6,000 instead?

Answer: 2018


Question: If Tax credits in 2019 were 40,000 thousand, what would be the change from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 414

Context:
Deferred Tax Assets and Liabilities Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences of differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities and their respective tax basis using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to be reversed. Significant deferred tax assets and liabilities consisted of the following (in thousands): We are required to evaluate the realizability of our deferred tax assets in both our U.S. and non-U.S. jurisdictions on an ongoing basis to determine whether there is a need for a valuation allowance with respect to such deferred tax assets. From the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009 to the third quarter of fiscal 2018, we maintained a 100% valuation allowance against most of our U.S. deferred tax assets because there was insufficient positive evidence to overcome the existing negative evidence such that it was not more likely than not that the U.S. deferred tax assets were realizable. While we reported U.S. pre-tax income in fiscal 2015 and fiscal 2017, because we reported U.S. pre-tax losses during the previous seven fiscal years, we continued to maintain the 100% valuation allowance through the third quarter of fiscal 2018. As of December 29, 2018, we had reported positive operating performance in the U.S. for two consecutive fiscal years and had also reported a cumulative threeyear U.S. pre-tax profit. In addition, during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2018, we completed our financial plan for fiscal 2019 and expected continued positive operating performance in the U.S. We also considered forecasts of future taxable income and evaluated the utilization of net operating losses and tax credit carryforwards prior to their expiration. After considering these factors, we determined that the positive evidence overcame any negative evidence and concluded that it was more likely than not that the U.S. deferred tax assets were realizable. As a result, we released the valuation allowance against a significant portion of the U.S. federal deferred tax assets and a portion of the U.S. state deferred tax assets during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2018. The valuation allowance decreased by $75.8 million in fiscal 2018, primarily due to the release of the valuation allowance on U.S. deferred tax assets. As of December 28, 2019, we maintained a valuation allowance of $36.6 million, primarily related to California deferred tax assets and foreign tax credit carryovers, due to uncertainty about the future realization of these assets.

	As of

	December 28, 2019	December 29, 2018

Tax credits	$44,696	$39,586

Inventory reserve	12,350	10,850

Other reserves and accruals	5,852	5,398

Non-statutory stock options	2,982	2,722

Depreciation and amortization	27,758	1,979

Net operating loss carryforwards	21,410	61,275

Gross deferred tax assets	115,048	121,810

Valuation allowance	(36,604)	(34,037)

Total deferred tax assets	78,444	87,773

Acquired intangibles and fixed assets	(13,997)	(12,667)

Unrealized investment gains	(106)	(107)

Tax on undistributed earnings	(75)	(53)

Total deferred tax liabilities	(14,178)	(12,827)

Net deferred tax assets	$64,266	$74,946


Question: If Inventory reserve in 2019 was 11,000 thousand, what would be the average value for 2018 and 2019?

Answer: 10925


Question: If Other reserves and accruals in 2018 was 4,000 thousand, in which years would Other reserves and accruals be greater than 5,000 thousand?

Answer: 2019


Question: Which year would have a larger decrease in the cost of sales if the amount for 2017 is $25 million instead?

Answer: 2017

Context:
The failed-sale-leaseback accounting treatment had the following effects on our consolidated results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017: After factoring in the costs to sell the data centers and colocation business, excluding the impact from the failed-sale-leaseback accounting treatment, the sale resulted in a $20 million gain as a result of the aggregate value of the proceeds we received exceeding the carrying value of the assets sold and liabilities assumed. Based on the fair market values of the failed-sale-leaseback assets, the failed-sale-leaseback accounting treatment resulted in a loss of $102 million as a result of the requirement to treat a certain amount of the pre-tax cash proceeds from the sale of the assets as though it were the result of a financing obligation. The combined net loss of $82 million was included in selling, general and administrative expenses in our consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2017. Effective November 3, 2016, which is the date we entered into the agreement to sell a portion of our data centers and colocation business, we ceased recording depreciation of the property, plant and equipment to be sold and amortization of the business’s intangible assets in accordance with applicable accounting rules. Otherwise, we estimate that we would have recorded additional depreciation and amortization expense of $67 million from January 1, 2017 through May 1, 2017. Upon adopting ASU 2016-02, accounting for the failed sale leaseback is no longer applicable based on our facts and circumstances, and the real estate assets and corresponding financing obligation were derecognized from our consolidated financial statements. Please see “Leases” (ASU 2016-02) in Note 1— Background and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies for additional information on the impact the new lease standard will have on the accounting for the failed-sale-leaseback.

	Positive (Negative) Impact to Net Income

	December 31,

	2018	2017

	(Dollars in millions)

Increase in revenue	$74	49

Decrease in cost of sales	22	15

Increase in loss on sale of business included in selling, general and administrative expense	—	(102)

Increase in depreciation expense (one-time)	—	(44)

Increase in depreciation expense (ongoing)	(69)	(47)

Increase in interest expense	(55)	(39)

Decrease in income tax expense	7	65

Decrease in net income	$(21)	(103)


Question: What would the change in the increase in revenue in 2018 from 2017 be if the amount in 2017 is $54 million?

Answer: 20


Question: What would the average increase in revenue across 2017 and 2018 be if the value for 2017 is $54 million instead?

Answer: 64


Question: What would be the average other non-current assets as at December 31, 2018 and 2019 if their total is decreased by $5,000?

Answer: 65

Context:
8. OTHER NON-CURRENT ASSETS * relates to certain office lease contracts. Optional periods are not included in the calculation.

All figures in USD ‘000	2019	2018

Fixture, Furniture and Equipment	65	128

Right of Use Asset*	1,412	-

Other	57	83

Total as of December 31,	1,534	211


Question: What would be the change in Fixture, Furniture and Equipment between 2018 and 2019 if the value in 2019 was 70 thousand instead?

Answer: 58


Question: What would be the value of other non-current assets as at December 31, 2018 as a percentage of the value of other non-current assets in 2019 if the value in 2019 is increased by $500,000?

Answer: 133.87


Question: What would be the change in balance from Americas between 2018 and 2019 if the balance from Americas in 2018 was $15,000 million with no change to balance in 2019 instead?

Answer: 6120

Context:
5. Goodwill and Purchased Intangible Assets (a) Goodwill The following tables present the goodwill allocated to our reportable segments as of July 27, 2019 and July 28, 2018, as well as the changes to goodwill during fiscal 2019 and 2018 (in millions): “Other” in the tables above primarily consists of foreign currency translation as well as immaterial purchase accounting adjustments.

	Balance at July 28, 2018	Acquisitions & Divestitures	Other	Balance at July 27, 2019

Americas	$19,998	$1,240	$(118)	$21,120

EMEA	7,529	486	(38)	7,977

APJC	4,179	274	(21)	4,432

Total	$31,706	$2,000	$(177)	$33,529


Question: What would be the region with the highest Acquisitions & Divestitures if  Acquisitions & Divestitures for EMEA was 1,340 million?

Answer: EMEA


Question: What would be the percentage change in the total balance between 2018 and 2019 if the total balance in 2019 was $50,000 million instead?

Answer: 57.7


Question: If the GAAP-based Cloud Services and Subscriptions Gross Margin % for 2019 was 57.3% instead, What is the average GAAP-based Cloud Services and Subscriptions Gross Margin %?

Answer: 56.97

Context:
2) Cloud Services and Subscriptions: Cloud services and subscriptions revenues are from hosting arrangements where in connection with the licensing of software, the end user doesn’t take possession of the software, as well as from end-to-end fully outsourced business-to-business (B2B) integration solutions to our customers (collectively referred to as cloud arrangements). The software application resides on our hardware or that of a third party, and the customer accesses and uses the software on an as-needed basis via an identified line. Our cloud arrangements can be broadly categorized as "platform as a service" (PaaS), "software as a service" (SaaS), cloud subscriptions and managed services. Cost of Cloud services and subscriptions revenues is comprised primarily of third party network usage fees, maintenance of in-house data hardware centers, technical support personnel-related costs, and some third party royalty costs. Cloud services and subscriptions revenues increased by $78.8 million or 9.5% during the year ended June 30, 2019 as compared to the prior fiscal year; up 10.8% after factoring the impact of $10.8 million of foreign exchange rate changes. Geographically, the overall change was attributable to an increase in Americas of $61.6 million, an increase in EMEA of $14.7 million, and an increase in Asia Pacific of $2.6 million. The number of Cloud services deals greater than $1.0 million that closed during Fiscal 2019 was 46 deals, consistent with that in Fiscal 2018. Cost of Cloud services and subscriptions revenues increased by $19.8 million during the year ended June 30, 2019 as compared to the prior fiscal year, due to an increase in labour-related costs of approximately $19.1 million and an increase in third party network usage fees of $1.3 million. These were partially offset by a decrease in other miscellaneous costs of $0.6 million. The increase in labour-related costs was primarily due to increased headcount from recent acquisitions. Overall, the gross margin percentage on Cloud services and subscriptions revenues increased to approximately 58% from approximately 56%. For illustrative purposes only, had we accounted for revenues under proforma Topic 605, Cloud services and subscriptions revenues would have been $901.5 million for the year ended June 30, 2019, which would have been higher by approximately $72.5 million or 8.7% as compared to the prior fiscal year; and would have been up 10.1% after factoring the impact of $11.0 million of foreign exchange rate changes. Geographically, the overall change would have been attributable to an increase in Americas of $56.4 million, and an increase in EMEA of $12.4 million and an increase in Asia Pacific of $3.7 million. The $6.4 million difference between cloud service and subscription revenues recognized under Topic 606 and those proforma Topic 605 cloud services and subscriptions revenues described above is primarily the result of timing differences on professional services related to cloud contracts, where under Topic 605, revenues would have been deferred over the estimated life of the contract, but under Topic 606 these revenues are recognized as services are performed. For more details, see note 3 "Revenues" to our Consolidated Financial Statements.

			Year Ended June 30,

(In thousands)	2019	Change increase (decrease)	2018	Change increase (decrease)	2017

Cloud Services and Subscriptions:

Americas	$616,776	$61,553	$555,223	$70,216	$485,007

EMEA	206,227	14,707	191,520	40,673	150,847

Asia Pacific	84,809	2,584	82,225	12,584	69,641

Total Cloud Services and Subscriptions Revenues	907,812	78,844	828,968	123,473	705,495

Cost of Cloud Services and Subscriptions Revenues	383,993	19,833	364,160	64,310	299,850

GAAP-based Cloud Services and Subscriptions Gross Profit	$523,819	$59,011	$464,808	$59,163	$405,645

GAAP-based Cloud Services and Subscriptions Gross Margin %	57.7%		56.1%		57.5%

% Cloud Services and Subscriptions Revenues by

Geography:

Americas	67.9%		67.0%		68.7%

EMEA	22.7%		23.1%		21.4%

Asia Pacific	9.4%		9.9%		9.9%


Question: If the change in Cloud Services and Subscriptions for Americas from 2018 to 2019 was $56,434(in thousands) instead, What is the percentage increase in the Cloud Services and Subscriptions for Americas for 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 10.16


Question: If the GAAP-based Cloud Services and Subscriptions Gross Profit for 2019 was $534,323(in thousands) instead, What is the average annual GAAP-based Cloud Services and Subscriptions Gross Profit for the 3 years?

Answer: 468258.67


Question: In year ended 2019, if Total fees were $4,896(in thousands), what is the Audit fees expressed as a percentage of total fees?

Answer: 93.91

Context:
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services The aggregate fees for professional services rendered by our independent registered public accounting firm, KPMG LLP, for Fiscal 2019 and Fiscal 2018 were: (1) Audit fees were primarily for professional services rendered for (a) the annual audits of our consolidated financial statements and the accompanying attestation report regarding our ICFR contained in our Annual Report on Form 10- K, (b) the review of quarterly financial information included in our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, (c) audit services related to mergers and acquisitions and offering documents, and (d) annual statutory audits where applicable. (2) Audit-related fees were primarily for assurance and related services, such as the review of non-periodic filings with the SEC. (3) Tax fees were for services related to tax compliance, including the preparation of tax returns, tax planning and tax advice. (4) All other fees consist of fees for services other than the services reported in audit fees, audit-related fees, and tax fees. OpenText's Audit Committee has established a policy of reviewing, in advance, and either approving or not approving, all audit, audit-related, tax and other non-audit services that our independent registered public accounting firm provides to us. This policy requires that all services received from our independent registered public accounting firm be approved in advance by the Audit Committee or a delegate of the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee has delegated the pre-approval responsibility to the Chair of the Audit Committee. All services that KPMG LLP provided to us in Fiscal 2019 and Fiscal 2018 have been preapproved by the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee has determined that the provision of the services as set out above is compatible with the maintaining of KPMG LLP's independence in the conduct of its auditing functions.

	Year ended June 30,

(In thousands)	2019	2018

Audit fees (1)	$4,598	$4,701

Audit-related fees (2)	—	—

Tax fees (3)	108	116

All other fees (4)	40	101

Total	$4,746	$4,918


Question: If the Total fees for fiscal year 2018 was $5,834(in thousands) instead, what is the average annual total Fees for Fiscal year 2019 and 2018?

Answer: 5290


Question: If tax fees for fiscal year 2019 was 158(in thousands) instead, what is the tax fees expressed as a percentage of total fees?

Answer: 3.33


Question: What would be the 2019 percentage change in number of shares distributed to employees if number of shares distributed in 2019 is 50,000?

Answer: 17.7

Context:
16. SHARE-BASED PAYMENTS a. Employee Share Plan The Employee Share Plan (ESP) is available to all eligible employees each year to acquire ordinary shares in the Company from future remuneration (before tax). Shares to be issued or transferred under the ESP will be valued at the volume-weighted average price of the Company’s shares traded on the Australian Securities Exchange during the five business days immediately preceding the day the shares are issued or transferred. Shares issued under the ESP are not allowed to be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed until the earlier of the end of an initial three-year period, or the participant ceasing continuing employment with the Company. Details of the movement in employee shares under the ESP are as follows: The consideration for the shares issued on 22 May 2019 was $3.72 (7 May 2018: $4.24).

	2019	2018

	No. of Shares	No. of Shares

Number of shares at beginning of year	114,758	137,227

Number of shares distributed to employees	45,560	42,480

Number of shares transferred to main share registry and/or disposed of	(44,526)	(64,949)

Number of shares at year end	115,792	114,758


Question: What would be the difference between the number of shares at the beginning and end of year 2019 if number of shares at year end is 126,523?

Answer: 11765


Question: What would be the average number of shares at year end for both years if number of shares at end of 2018 is 116,232?

Answer: 116012


Question: In which year would the Balance as of 1 January be the largest if the amount in 2019 was $2.7 million instead?

Answer: 2019

Context:
Management makes allowance for expected credit loss based on the simplified approach to provide for expected credit losses, which permits the use of the lifetime expected loss provision for all trade receivables. Expected credit loss for receivables overdue more than 180 days is 25%-100%, depending on category. Expected credit loss for receivables overdue more than one year is 100%. Movements in provisions for impairment of freight receivables during the year are as follows: Allowance for expected credit loss of freight receivables have been recognized in the income statement under "Port expenses, bunkers and commissions". Allowance for expected credit loss of freight receivables is calculated using an ageing factor as well as a specific customer knowledge and is based on a provision matrix on days past due.

USDm	2019	2018	2017

Allowance for expected credit loss

Balance as of 1 January	1.7	1.3	2.6

Adjustment to prior years	1.5	-	-

Provisions for the year	2.4	1.7	0.6

Provisions reversed during the year	-1.9	-1.0	-1.9

Provisions utilized during the year	-	-0.3	-

Balance as of 31 December	3.7	1.7	1.3


Question: What would the change in the Balance as of 31 December in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $3.4 million instead?

Answer: 1.7


Question: What would the percentage change in the Balance as of 31 December in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $3.4 million instead?

Answer: 100


Question: What would the total value of shares purchased for the ESPP phase ended December 31, 2018 be if the price was $9.00 instead?

Answer: 155808

Context:
Restricted Stock: The Company’s 2007 Stock Compensation Plan permits our Compensation Committee to grant other stock-based awards. The Company has awarded restricted stock grants to employees that vest over one to ten years. The Company repurchased a total of 40,933 shares of our common stock at an average price of $13.51 in connection with payment of taxes upon the vesting of restricted stock previously issued to employees for the year ended September 30, 2019. The Company repurchased a total of 41,989 shares of our common stock at an average price of $11.66 in connection with payment of taxes upon the vesting of restricted stock previously issued to employees for the year ended September 30, 2018. Employee Stock Purchase Plan: The Clearfield, Inc. 2010 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) allows participating employees to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock at a discount through payroll deductions. The ESPP is available to all employees subject to certain eligibility requirements. Terms of the ESPP provide that participating employees may purchase the Company’s common stock on a voluntary after tax basis. Employees may purchase the Company’s common stock at a price that is no less than the lower of 85% of the fair market value of one share of common stock at the beginning or end of each stock purchase period or phase. The ESPP is carried out in six-month phases, with phases beginning on July 1 and January 1 of each calendar year. For the phases that ended on December 31, 2018 and June 30, 2019, employees purchased 17,312 and 19,923 shares, respectively, at a price of $8.43. For the phases that ended on December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2018, employees purchased 14,242 and 15,932 shares, respectively, at a price of $10.41 and $9.39 per share, respectively. As of September 30, 2019, the Company has withheld approximately $80,708 from employees participating in the phase that began on July 1, 2019. After the employee purchase on June 30, 2019, 49,846 shares of common stock were available for future purchase under the ESPP. Employee Stock Purchase Plan: The Clearfield, Inc. 2010 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) allows participating employees to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock at a discount through payroll deductions. The ESPP is available to all employees subject to certain eligibility requirements. Terms of the ESPP provide that participating employees may purchase the Company’s common stock on a voluntary after tax basis. Employees may purchase the Company’s common stock at a price that is no less than the lower of 85% of the fair market value of one share of common stock at the beginning or end of each stock purchase period or phase. The ESPP is carried out in six-month phases, with phases beginning on July 1 and January 1 of each calendar year. For the phases that ended on December 31, 2018 and June 30, 2019, employees purchased 17,312 and 19,923 shares, respectively, at a price of $8.43. For the phases that ended on December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2018, employees purchased 14,242 and 15,932 shares, respectively, at a price of $10.41 and $9.39 per share, respectively. As of September 30, 2019, the Company has withheld approximately $80,708 from employees participating in the phase that began on July 1, 2019. After the employee purchase on June 30, 2019, 49,846 shares of common stock were available for future purchase under the ESPP. Restricted stock transactions during the years ended September 30, 2019 and 2018 are summarized as follows:

	Number of shares	Weighted average grant date fair value

Unvested shares as of September 30, 2017	370,530	$15.24

Granted	7,235	14.17

Vested	(113,930)	16.45

Forfeited	(15,222)	15.41

Unvested shares as of September 30, 2018	248,613	14.65

Granted	4,340	14.40

Vested	(110,683)	16.31

Forfeited	(11,830)	14.47

Unvested shares as of September 30, 2019	130,440	13.25


Question: What would the total value of repurchased stock for the year ended September 30, 2019 be if the price was $14.00 instead?

Answer: 573062


Question: What would the percentage change in the total value of shares purchased by employees from 30 June 2018 to 30 June 2019 be if the value in 30 June 2019 was 170,000 instead?

Answer: 13.64


Question: If Beginning balance in 2019 was 5,000, what would be the change from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 69

Context:
A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows: Interest and penalty charges, if any, related to uncertain tax positions are classified as income tax expense in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. As of March 31, 2019 and 2018, the Company had immaterial accrued interest or penalties related to uncertain tax positions. The Company is subject to taxation in the United Kingdom and several foreign jurisdictions. As of March 31, 2019, the Company is no longer subject to examination by taxing authorities in the United Kingdom for years prior to March 31, 2017. The significant foreign jurisdictions in which the Company operates are no longer subject to examination by taxing authorities for years prior to March 31, 2016. In addition, net operating loss carryforwards in certain jurisdictions may be subject to adjustments by taxing authorities in future years when they are utilized. The Company had approximately $24.9 million of unremitted foreign earnings as of March 31, 2019. Income taxes have been provided on approximately $10.0 million of the unremitted foreign earnings. Income taxes have not been provided on approximately $14.9 million of unremitted foreign earnings because they are considered to be indefinitely reinvested. The tax payable on the earnings that are indefinitely reinvested would be immaterial.

	Year ended March 31,

	2019	2018

Beginning balance	$6,164	$4,931

Additions based on tax positions related to current year	164	142

Additions for tax positions of prior years	231	1,444

Reductions due to change in foreign exchange rate	(301)	(353)

Expiration of statutes of limitation	(165)	—

Reductions due to settlements with tax authorities	(77)	—

Ending balance	$6,016	$6,164


Question: If Additions for tax positions of prior years in 2019 was 1,000, what would be the average value for 2018 and 2019?

Answer: 1222


Question: if Expiration of statutes of limitation in 2018 was -100, in which year would it be less than 0?

Answer: 2019

Answer: 2018


Question: What would be the net total restructuring charges and payments for Severance & payroll related charges and lease abandonment charges if the payments for lease abandonment charges was $100 thousand less?

Answer: 2558

Context:
12. Restructuring In fiscal 2019, the Company initiated a restructuring plan to increase efficiency in its sales, marketing and distribution functions as well as reduce costs across all functional areas. During the year ended March 31, 2019, the Company incurred total restructuring charges of $14,765. These restructuring charges relate primarily to severance and related costs associated with headcount reductions and lease abandonment charges associated with two leases. These charges include $2,632 of stock- based compensation related to modifications of existing unvested awards granted to certain employees impacted by the restructuring plan. The activity in the Company’s restructuring accruals for the year ended March 31, 2019 is summarized as follows: As of March 31, 2019, the outstanding restructuring accruals primarily relate to future severance and lease payments. (In thousands, except per share data)

	Lease abandonment charges	Severance & payroll related charges	Total

Balance at March 31, 2018	$—	$—	$—

Restructuring charges	1,034	14,606	15,640

Payments	(540)	(12,642)	(13,182)

Accrual reversals	—	(875)	(875)

Balance at March 31, 2019	$494	$1,089	$1,583


Question: What fraction of the total restructuring charges included stock-based compensation if the stock-based compensation was $128 thousand more but the total charges remained constant?

Answer: 0.19


Question: How much more would the balance at march 31, 2019 for Severance & payroll related charges than lease abandonment charges be if the balance left for lease abandonment charges was half of the severance and payroll related charges?

Answer: 544.5


Question: If the Acquired and internally developed software costs in 2019 increased to 38,191 thousand, what would be the revised change from December 31, 2018 and 2019?

Answer: 19219

Context:
Identifiable intangible assets The Company's identifiable intangible assets represent intangible assets acquired in the Brink Acquisition, the Drive-Thru Acquisition, the Restaurant Magic Acquisition and software development costs. The Company capitalizes certain software development costs for software used in its Restaurant/Retail reporting segment. Software development costs incurred prior to establishing technological feasibility are charged to operations and included in research and development costs. The technological feasibility of a software product is established when the Company has completed all planning, designing, coding, and testing activities that are necessary to establish that the software product meets its design specifications, including functionality, features, and technical performance requirements. Software development costs incurred after establishing technological feasibility for software sold as a perpetual license, (as defined within ASC 985-20, Software – "Costs of Software to be sold, Leased, or Marketed" - for software cost related to sold as a perpetual license) are capitalized and amortized on a product-by-product basis when the software product is available for general release to customers. Included in "Acquired and internally developed software costs" in the table below are approximately $2.5 million and $3.0 million of costs related to software products that have not satisfied the general release threshold as of December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively. These software products are expected to satisfy the general release threshold within the next 12 months. Software development is also capitalized in accordance with ASC 350-40, “Intangibles - Goodwill and Other - Internal - Use Software,” and is amortized over the expected benefit period, which generally ranges from three to seven years. Long-lived assets are tested for impairment when events or conditions indicate that the carrying value of an asset may not be fully recoverable from future cash flows. Software costs capitalized during the years ended 2019 and 2018 were $4.1 million and $3.9 million, respectively. Annual amortization charged to cost of sales when a product is available for general release to customers is computed using the greater of (a) the straight-line method over the remaining estimated economic life of the product, generally three to seven years or (b) the ratio that current gross revenues for a product bear to the total of current and anticipated future gross revenues for that product. Amortization of capitalized software costs amounted to $3.3 million and $3.5 million, in 2019 and 2018, respectively. The components of identifiable intangible assets, excluding discontinued operations, are:

	December 31,

	(in thousands)

	2019	2018	Estimated Useful Life

Acquired and internally developed software costs	$36,137	$18,972	3 - 7 years

Customer relationships	4,860	160	7 years

Non-compete agreements	30	30	1 year

	41,027	19,162

Less accumulated amortization	(12,389)	(11,708)

	$28,638	$7,454

Internally developed software costs not meeting general release threshold	2,500	3,005

Trademarks, trade names (non-amortizable)	1,810	400	Indefinite

	$32,948	$10,859


Question: If the accumulated amortization in 2019 increased to 14,627 thousand, what would be the revised change between December 31, 2018 and 2019?

Answer: 2919


Question: If the Acquired and internally developed software costs in 2019 increased to 38,191 thousand, what would be the revised average for December 31, 2018 and 2019?

Answer: 28581.5


Question: How many Executive Board members would have an expense for share-based payment of less than €1,000 thousand in 2019 if the amount for Jürgen Müller was €1,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 1

Context:
Total Expense for Share-Based Payment Total expense for the share-based payment plans of Executive Board members was determined in accordance with IFRS 2 (Share- Based Payments) and consists exclusively of obligations arising from Executive Board activities.

€ thousands	2019	2018

Christian Klein (Co-CEO from 10/10/2019)	1,925	442.2

Jennifer Morgan (Co-CEO from 10/10/2019)	2,894	796.1

Robert Enslin (until 4/5/2019)	3,480	727.0

Adaire Fox-Martin	2,667	796.1

Michael Kleinemeier	3,253	914.2

Bernd Leukert (until 3/31/2019)	8,606	775.2

Bill McDermott (CEO until 10/10/2019, Executive Board member until 11/15/2019)	14,689	2,155.8

Luka Mucic	3,391	675.8

Jürgen Müller (from 1/1/2019)	768	-

Stefan Ries	2,646	772.0

Thomas Saueressig (from 11/1/2019)	128	-

Total	44,446.5	8,054.4


Question: What would the change in the expense for share-based payment for  Stefan Ries  in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was €2,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 1228


Question: What would the average total expense for share-based payment for  Stefan Ries  in 2018 and 2019 be if the amount in 2019 was €2,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 1386


Question: If the future minimum commitments of Operating Leases as of 2021 increased to 93,901, what would be the revised change from 2020 to 2021?

Answer: 1497

Context:
At December 31, 2019	Operating Leases	Finance Lease

2020	$92,404	$4,172

2021	91,164	4,161

2022	107,654	4,161

2023	43,015	4,161

2024	9,168	4,172

Thereafter	4,534	17,180

Net minimum lease payments	347,939	38,007

Less: present value discount	40,891	10,448

Total lease liabilities	$307,048	$27,559

 Charters-in As of December 31, 2019, the Company had commitments to charter-in 11 vessels, which are all bareboat charters. During the second quarter of 2019, the Company commenced a bareboat charter for the Overseas Key West for a lease term of 10 years. Based on the length of the lease term and the remaining economic life of the vessel, it is accounted for as a finance lease. The remaining 10 chartered-in vessels are accounted for as operating leases. The right-of-use asset accounted for as a finance lease arrangement is reported in vessels and other property, less accumulated depreciation on our consolidated balance sheets. The Company holds options for 10 of the vessels chartered-in that can be exercised for one, three or five years with the one-year option only usable once, while the three- and five-year options are available indefinitely. The lease payments for the charters-in are fixed throughout the option periods and the options are on a vessel-by-vessel basis that can be exercised individually. The Company exercised its option on one of its vessels to extend the term until June 2025. On December 10, 2018, the Company exercised its options to extend the terms of the other nine vessels. Terms for five of the vessels were extended for an additional three years, with terms ending in December 2022, and terms for four of the vessels were extended for an additional year, with terms ending December 2020. On December 11, 2019, the terms for the four vessels ending December 2020 were extended for an additional three years, with terms ending in December 2023. Five of the Company's chartered in vessels contain a deferred payment obligation (“DPO”) which relates to charter hire expense incurred by the Company in prior years and payable to the vessel owner in future periods. This DPO is due in quarterly installments with the final quarterly payment due upon lease termination. The future minimum commitments under these leases are as follows: The bareboat charters-in provide for variable lease payments in the form of profit share to the owners of the vessels calculated in accordance with the respective charter agreements or based on time charter sublease revenue. Because such amounts and the periods impacted are not reasonably estimable, they are not currently reflected in the table above. Due to reserve funding requirements and current rate forecasts, no profits are currently expected to be paid to the owners in respect of the charter term within the next year. For the year ended December 31, 2019, lease expense for the 10 chartered-in vessels accounted for as operating leases was $90,359, which is included in charter hire expense on the consolidated statements of operations and operating cash flows on the consolidated statements of cash flows. The Company recognized sublease income of $188,163 for the year ended December 31, 2019. For the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company had non-cash operating activities of $93,407 for obtaining operating right-of-use assets and liabilities that resulted from exercising lease renewals not assumed in the initial lease term. For the year ended December 31, 2019, lease expense related to the Company's finance lease was $2,052 related to amortization of the right-of-use asset and $1,462 related to interest on the lease liability. These are included in operating cash flows on the consolidated statements of cash flows. For the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company had non-cash financing activities of $28,993 for obtaining finance right-of-use assets. For the year ended December 31, 2018, lease expense relating to charters-in was $91,350, which is included in charter hire expense on the consolidated statements of operations.


Question: If the future minimum commitments of Operating Leases in 2021 increased to 93,901, what would be the revised average for 2020 to 2021?

Answer: 93152.5


Question: If Operating Leases in 2020 was 110,000, in which year would it be greater than 100,000?

Answer: 2020

Answer: 2022


Question: What would be the change in Intrinsic value of exercises between 2017 and 2018 if the Intrinsic value of exercises in 2017 was $30 million instead?

Answer: 7

Context:
Stock Options Additional information related to our stock options is summarized below (in millions):

		Year Ended

	April 26, 2019	April 27, 2018	April 28, 2017

Intrinsic value of exercises	$ 31	$ 37	$ 26

Proceeds received from exercises	$ 25	$ 88	$ 60

Fair value of options vested	$ 2	$ 8	$ 15


Question: How many years would Proceeds received from exercises exceed $50 million if the proceeds received from exercises in 2017 was $40 million instead?

Answer: 1


Question: What would be the percentage change in the Fair value of options vested between 2018 and 2019 if the Fair value of options vested in 2019 was $10 million instead?

Answer: 25


Question: If Customer B makes up 8% of the company's total revenue in 2019, what is the change in revenue from the company's significant customers between 2018 and 2019?

Answer: -10

Context:
Concentration of Credit Risk and Significant Customers Financial instruments that potentially subject us to concentrations of credit risk consist of cash, cash equivalents, marketable securities and accounts receivable. Our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities are held and invested in high-credit quality financial instruments by recognized financial institutions and are subject to minimum credit risk. Our accounts receivable are unsecured and represent amounts due to us based on contractual obligations of our customers. We mitigate credit risk in respect to accounts receivable by performing periodic credit evaluations based on a number of factors, including past transaction experience, evaluation of credit history and review of the invoicing terms of the contract. We generally do not require our customers to provide collateral to support accounts receivable. Significant customers, including distribution channel partners and direct customers, are those which represent 10% or more of our total revenue for each period presented or our gross accounts receivable balance as of each respective balance sheet date. Revenues from our significant customers as a percentage of our total revenue are as follows *represents less than 10% of total revenue As of December 31, 2019, two customers accounted for 17% and 12% of our total gross accounts receivable. As of December 31, 2018, two customers accounted for 16% and 12% of our total gross accounts receivable

		Years Ended December 31,

	2019	2018	2017

Customer A (a distribution channel partner)	*	14%	*

Customer B (a distribution channel partner)	12%	10%	*

Customer C (a distribution channel partner)	14%	*	*


Question: If a customer D contributes 14% of the company's revenue between 2017 to 2019, how many significant customers does the company have in 2017??

Answer: 1


Question: If the revenue earned from customer B and C is $1,400 thousand in 2019, what is the company's gross accounts receivable in 2019?

Answer: 4827.59


Question: What is the company's total revenue earned from Customer A and B between 2018 and 2019 if B's 2019 revenue is halved and its 2018 revenue is doubled?

Answer: 40


Question: What would be the total revenue in 2018 and 2019 if the total revenue is halved and then decreased by $500,000?

Answer: 840080

Context:
Segment Product Revenue, Operating Income and Operating Income as a Percentage of Revenue Infrastructure and Defense Products IDP revenue increased $104.2 million, or 13.2%, in fiscal 2019, compared to fiscal 2018, primarily due to higher demand for our base station products. IDP operating income increased $31.6 million, or 13.4%, in fiscal 2019, compared to fiscal 2018, primarily due to higher revenue, partially offset by lower gross margin (which was negatively impacted by lower factory utilization). See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements set forth in Part II, Item 8 of this report for a reconciliation of segment operating income to the consolidated operating income for fiscal years 2019, 2018 and 2017.

Fiscal Year

(In thousands, except percentages)	2019	2018

Revenue	$892,665	$788,495

Operating income	$267,304	$235,719

Operating income as a % of revenue	29.9%	29.9%


Question: What would be the value of the revenue in 2018 as a percentage of the revenue in 2019 if the revenue in 2019 is decreased by $1,000,000?

Answer: 88.43


Question: What would be the percentage change in the 2018 and 2019 revenue if the revenue in 2019 is increased by $50,000?

Answer: 13.22


Question: What would the change in maximum possible value of MSU's using grant date fair value for Paul McNab between 2017 and 2018 as a percentage if the value of MSUs in 2017 was 400,000 instead?

Answer: 10.6

Context:
The assumptions used to calculate these amounts for fiscal 2019 are set forth under Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal year 2019 filed with the SEC on August 27, 2019. (2) Amounts shown do not reflect compensation actually received by the NEO. Instead, the amounts shown in this column represent the grant date fair values of stock options issued pursuant to the Company’s 2003 Equity Incentive Plan and certain inducement grants, computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. The assumptions used to calculate these amounts for fiscal 2019 are set forth under Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal year 2019 filed with the SEC on August 27, 2019. (3) All non-equity incentive plan compensation was paid pursuant to the Variable Pay Plan. (4) The amounts in the “All Other Compensation” column for fiscal 2019 include: $4,000 401(k) matching contribution by the Company for each NEOs other than Mr. McNab. (5) The Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Maletira a one-time discretionary bonus in the amount of $180,000 in connection with his work on the AvComm and Wireless acquisition. Please see “Discretionary Bonuses” under the Compensation Discussion and Analysis on page 36 of this proxy statement. (6) Mr. Staley was awarded a $60,000 sign-on bonus when he joined the Company in February 2017. The amounts in the salary, bonus, and non-equity incentive plan compensation columns of the Summary Compensation Table reflect actual amounts paid for the relevant years, while the amounts in the stock awards column reflect accounting values. The tables entitled “Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End Table” and “Option Exercises and Stock Vested Table” provide further information on the named executive officers’ potential realizable value and actual value realized with respect to their equity awards. The Summary Compensation Table should be read in conjunction with the Compensation Discussion and Analysis and the subsequent tables and narrative descriptions.

Name	Fiscal Year	Maximum Possible Value of MSUs Using Grant Date Fair Value	Maximum Possible Value of PSUs Using Grant Date Fair Value

Oleg Khaykin	2019	4,067,526	—

	2018	2,457,750	909,900

	2017	659,618	—

Amar Maletira	2019	1,379,350	—

	2018	1,015,870	454,950

	2017	574,500	—

Paul McNab	2019	591,150	—

	2018	442,395	—

	2017	373,425	—

Luke Scrivanich	2019	591,150	—

	2018	442,395	—

	2017	393,600	—

Gary Staley	2019	591,150	—

	2018	943,527	—

	2017	303,948	—


Question: What would the difference between the maximum possible value of PSUs in 2018 between Oleg Khaykin and Amar Maletira be if maximum possible value of PSUs for Oleg Khaykin was 800,000 instead?

Answer: 345050


Question: How much would the top 2 maximum possible value of MSUs in 2019 add up to if the maximum possible value of MSUs for Gary Staley in 2019 was 1,400,000 instead?

Answer: 5467526


Question: What would be the total number of shares owned by the Hanssen family and Richard Vietor if their total number of shares is decreased by 10%?

Answer: 3942593.1

Context:
ITEM 7. MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS A. Major Shareholders The following table sets forth information regarding beneficial ownership of our common shares for (i) owners of more than five percent of our common shares and (ii) our directors and officers, of which we are aware of the date of this annual report. (1) Based on 147,230,634 common shares outstanding as of the date of this annual report. (2) The holdings of High Seas AS, which are for the economic interest of members of the Hansson family, as well as the personal holdings of our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, Mr. Herbjorn Hansson, and our director, Alexander Hansson, are included in the amount reported herein. * Less than 1% of our common outstanding shares. As of April 14, 2020, we had 575 holders of record in the United States, including Cede & Co., which is the Depositary Trust Company’s nominee for holding shares on behalf of brokerage firms, as a single holder of record. We had a total of 147,230,634 Common Shares outstanding as of the date of this annual report.

Title	Identity of Person	No. of Shares	Percent of Class(1)

Common	Hansson family(2)	4,380,659	2.98%

	Jim Kelly		*

	Richard Vietor		*

	David Workman		*

	Bjørn Giæver		*


Question: What would be the average number of shares owned by the Hanssen family and Jim Kelly if the number of shares owned by the Hanssen family is doubled?

Answer: 4380659


Question: What would be the total number of shares owned by David Workman and Bjørn Giæver if their total number of shares is idecreased by 10%?

Answer: 0


Question: If for year ended march 29, 2019, the Total net revenue is $5,000 million, what would be Total Enterprise Security expressed as a percentage of Total net revenues?

Answer: 46.46

Context:
The following table summarizes net revenues by significant product and services categories: Endpoint and information protection products include endpoint security, advanced threat protection, and information protection solutions and their related support services. Network and web security products include network security, web security, and cloud security solutions and their related support services. WSS and PKI products consist of the solutions we divested on October 31, 2017. Other products and services primarily consist of email security products, managed security services, consulting, and other professional services. Consumer security products include Norton security, Norton Secure VPN, and other consumer security solutions. Identity and information protection products include LifeLock identity theft protection and other information protection solutions. Products and service revenue information

		Year Ended

(in millions)	March 29, 2019	March 30, 2018	March 31, 2017

Enterprise Security:

Endpoint and information protection	$1,027	$983	$947

Network and web security	748	782	451

WSS and PKI	-	238	422

Other products and services	548	551	535

Total Enterprise Security	$2,323	$2,554	$2,355

Consumer Cyber Safety:

Consumer security	$1,471	$1,504	$1,527

Identity and information protection	937	776	137

Total Consumer Cyber Safety	2,408	2,280	1,664

Total net revenues	$4,731	$4,834	$4,019


Question: If the total net revenues for fiscal 2019 is $6,000 million instead, What would be the average Total net revenues for the fiscal years 2019, 2018 and 2017?

Answer: 4951


Question: If for year ended march 29, 2019, Total Consumer Cyber Safety is $3,000 millions, what would be the difference between  Total Consumer Cyber Safety and Total Enterprise Security?

Answer: 677


Question: In which year would the percentage in Americas be the largest if the percentage in 2019 was 27% instead?

Answer: 2017

Context:
Sales and Distribution We maintain a strong local presence in each of the geographic regions in which we operate. Our net sales by geographic region(1) as a percentage of our total net sales were as follows: (1) Net sales to external customers are attributed to individual countries based on the legal entity that records the sale. We sell our products into approximately 150 countries primarily through direct selling efforts to manufacturers. In fiscal 2019, our direct sales represented approximately 80% of total net sales. We also sell our products indirectly via third-party distributors. We maintain distribution centers around the world. Products are generally delivered to the distribution centers by our manufacturing facilities and then subsequently delivered to the customer. In some instances, however, products are delivered directly from our manufacturing facility to the customer. Our global coverage positions us near our customers’ locations and allows us to assist them in consolidating their supply base and lowering their production costs. We contract with a wide range of transport providers to deliver our products globally via road, rail, sea, and air. We believe our balanced sales distribution lowers our exposure to any particular geography and improves our financial profile.

		Fiscal

	2019	2018	2017

Europe/Middle East/Africa (“EMEA”)	36 %	38 %	36 %

Asia–Pacific	33	34	35

Americas	31	28	29

Total	100 %	100 %	100 %


Question: What would the change in percentage in Americas in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was 30% instead?

Answer: 2


Question: What would the average net sales in Asia-Pacific as a percentage of total net sales across 2017, 2018 and 2019 be if the percentage in 2019 was 36% instead?

Answer: 35


Question: If the Adjusted EBITDA in 2018/19 increased to 169.1 £m, what would be the revised change in value?

Answer: 29.5

Context:
The Group reports an operating profit of £4.5m for 2018/19, compared to £69.3m in the prior year. The growth in Trading profit of £5.5m in the year, as outlined above, was offset by an impairment of goodwill and intangible assets of £30.6m and costs of £41.5m relating to the recognition of Guaranteed Minimum Pension ('GMP') charges. Amortisation of intangibles was £1.9m lower than 2017/18 due to certain SAP software modules becoming fully amortised in the year. Fair valuation of foreign exchange and derivatives was a charge of £1.3m in the year. The Group recognised £41.5m of estimated costs in the year associated with the equalisation of GMP for pension benefits accrued between 1990 and 1997. This follows a judgement case of Lloyds Banking Group on 26 October 2018 which referred to the equal treatment of men and women who contracted out of the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme between these dates. It should be noted that the final cost will differ to the estimated cost when the actual method of equalisation is agreed between the scheme Trustees in due course. Any future and final adjustment to the cost recognised in 2018/19 will be reflected in the Consolidated statement of comprehensive income. All UK companies who operated defined benefit pension schemes during these dates will be affected by this ruling. Of this £41.5m non-cash charge, approximately two-thirds relates to the RHM pension scheme and the balance relates to the Premier Foods pension schemes. Restructuring costs were £16.8m in the year; an £8.3m increase on the prior year and included circa £14m associated with the consolidation of the Group’s logistics operations to one central location in the year due to higher than anticipated implementation costs. This programme has now completed and the Group does not expect to incur any further restructuring costs associated with this programme. Advisory fees associated with strategic reviews and corporate activity were also included in restructuring costs in the year. Other non-trading items of £1.9m refer to a past service pension credit of £3.9m due to inflation increases no longer required in a smaller Irish pension scheme, partly offset by costs related to the departure of previous CEO Gavin Darby. Net interest on pensions and administrative expenses was a charge of £1.3m. Expenses for operating the Group’s pension schemes were £10.3m in the year, offset by a net interest credit of £9.0m due to an opening surplus of the Group’s combined pension schemes.

£m	2018/19	2017/18	Change

Adjusted EBITDA3	145.5	139.6	5.9

Depreciation	(17.0)	(16.6)	(0.4)

Trading profit	128.5	123.0	5.5

Amortisation of intangible assets	(34.4)	(36.3)	1.9

Fair value movements on foreign exchange and derivatives	(1.3)	0.1	(1.4)

Net interest on pensions and administrative expenses	(1.3)	(2.5)	1.2

Non-trading items

GMP equalisation	(41.5)	–	(41.5)

Restructuring costs	(16.8)	(8.5)	(8.3)

Impairment of goodwill and intangible assets	(30.6)	(6.5)	(24.1)

Other	1.9	–	1.9

Operating profit	4.5	69.3	(64.8)


Question: If the Depreciation in 2018/19 reduced to 12.0£m, what would be the revised change in value?

Answer: -4.6


Question: If the Trading profit in 2018/19 reduced to 116.7£m, what would be the revised change in value?

Answer: -6.3


Question: If Goodwill at December 29, 2017 under Defense Solutions was 1,055 million, which category would Goodwill at December 29, 2017 under 2,000 million?

Answer: Defense Solutions

Answer: Civil

Answer: Health

Context:
Note 10—Goodwill The following table presents changes in the carrying amount of goodwill by reportable segment: Effective the beginning of fiscal 2019, the Company changed the composition of its Defense Solutions reportable segment, which resulted in the identification of new operating segments and reporting units within Defense Solutions. In addition, certain contracts were reassigned between the Civil and Defense Solutions reportable segments (see "Note 24—Business Segments"). Consequently, the carrying amount of goodwill was re-allocated among the reporting units for the purpose of testing goodwill for impairment. In conjunction with the changes mentioned above, the Company evaluated goodwill for impairment using a quantitative step one analysis, both before and after the changes were made, and determined that goodwill was not impaired. In fiscal 2019, the Company performed a qualitative analysis for all reporting units and determined that it was more likely than not that the fair values of the reporting units were in excess of the individual reporting units carrying values, and as a result, a quantitative step one analysis was not necessary. In fiscal 2018, the Company performed a qualitative and quantitative analysis on its reporting units. Based on the qualitative analysis performed during the Company's annual impairment evaluation for fiscal 2018 for certain of its reporting units, it was determined that it was more likely than not that the fair values of the reporting units were in excess of the individual reporting unit carrying values, and as a result, a quantitative step one analysis was not necessary. Additionally, based on the results of the quantitative step one analysis for certain other of its reporting units, it was determined that the fair value was in excess of the individual reporting units carrying values. In fiscal 2017, the Company performed a quantitative analysis for all reporting units. It was determined that the fair values of all reporting units exceeded their carrying values. As a result, no goodwill impairments were identified as part of the annual goodwill impairment evaluation for the periods mentioned above. During the year ended January 3, 2020 and December 28, 2018, the Company recorded an immaterial correction of $3 million and $6 million, respectively, with respect to fair value of assets and liabilities acquired from the IS&GS Transactions. (1) Carrying amount includes accumulated impairment losses of $369 million and $117 million within the Health and Civil segments, respectively.

	Defense Solutions	Civil	Health	Total

		(in millions)

Goodwill at December 29, 2017(1)	$2,055	$1,998	$921	$4,974

Foreign currency translation adjustments	(40)	(11)	—	(51)

Transfers to assets held for sale	—	(57)	—	(57)

Adjustment to goodwill	—	(6)	—	(6)

Goodwill at December 28, 2018(1)	2,015	1,924	921	4,860

Goodwill re-allocation	25	(25)	—	—

Acquisition of IMX	—	—	50	50

Divestiture of health staff augmentation business	—	—	(5)	(5)

Foreign currency translation adjustments	(4)	8	—	4

Adjustment to goodwill	3	—	—	3

Goodwill at January 3, 2020(1)	$2,039	$1,907	$966	$4,912


Question: If Foreign currency translation adjustments under Health was -50 million, what would be the average?

Answer: -33.67


Question: If total Goodwill in 2019 was 5,000 million, what would be the change from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 140


Question: Which period would have the largest average price paid per share if the average price paid per share for November 2019 is $13.75 instead?

Answer: November 2019

Context:
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities The following table contains information about shares of our previously-issued common stock that we withheld from employees upon vesting of their stock-based awards during the fourth quarter of 2019 to satisfy the related tax withholding obligations:

	Total Number of Shares Withheld for Taxes	Average Price Paid Per Share

Period

October 2019	16,585	$11.57

November 2019	185,887	13.15

December 2019	12,368	13.70

Total	214,840


Question: What would the average number of shares withheld for taxes per month be if the total number of shares withheld for taxes in the three months is 216,000 instead?

Answer: 72000


Question: What would the percentage change in the average price paid per share between December 2019 and November 2019 be if the value for December 2019 is $14.00 instead?

Answer: 6.46


Question: What is the proportion of equity compensation plans approved to total number of securities to be issued was 400,000 instead?

Answer: 0.44

Context:
Equity Compensation Plan Information The following table summarizes share and exercise price information for our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2019. (1) Includes 105,000 shares of our common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding stock options and 340,000 shares issuable upon vesting of outstanding restricted stock units. (2) Represents an individual option grant to our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer outside of, and prior to the establishment of, the 2013 Stock Incentive Plan in October 2013 referred to in the above table. The option agreement pertaining to such option grant contain customary anti-dilution provisions. (3) Does not take into account outstanding restricted stock units as these awards have no exercise price. Our 2013 Stock Incentive Plan (“2013 Plan”) provides for the grant of any or all of the following types of awards: (a) stock options, (b) restricted stock, (c) deferred stock, (d) stock appreciation rights, and (e) other stock-based awards including restricted stock units. Awards under the 2013 Plan may be granted singly, in combination, or in tandem. Subject to standard anti-dilution adjustments as provided in the 2013 Plan, the 2013 Plan provides for an aggregate of 2,600,000 shares of our common stock to be available for distribution pursuant to the 2013 Plan. The Compensation Committee (or the Board of Directors) will generally have the authority to administer the 2013 Plan, determine participants who will be granted awards under the 2013 Plan, the size and types of awards, the terms and conditions of awards and the form and content of the award agreements representing awards. Awards under the 2013 Plan may be granted to our employees, directors and consultants. As of December 31, 2019, there were options to purchase an aggregate of 605,000 shares of common stock outstanding and 340,000 shares issuable upon vesting of outstanding restricted stock units granted under the 2013 Plan, and a balance of 1,780,505 shares of common stock are reserved for issuance under the 2013 Plan.

	Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options and rights	Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options and rights	Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column(a))

	(a)	(b)	(c)

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders	445,000(1)	$2.34(3)	1,780,505

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders	500,000(2)	$1.19	—

Total	945,000	$1.39(3)	1,780,505


Question: What % of equity compensation plans that are approved are shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding stock options, if the total equity compensation plan amount = 400,000 instead?

Answer: 26.25


Question: What % of equity compensation plans that are approved are shares issuable upon vesting of outstanding restricted stock units, if the total equity compensation plan amount = 400,000 instead?

Answer: 85


Question: If balance at beginning of year in 2019 was 5,000 thousands, what would be the increase / (decrease) in the balance at beginning of year from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: -1667

Context:
Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts Accounts receivable consists primarily of amounts due to the Company from normal business activities. We maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses that result from the inability of our customers to make required payments. The allowance for doubtful accounts is maintained based on customer payment levels, historical experience and management’s views on trends in the overall receivable agings. In addition, for larger accounts, we perform analyses of risks on a customer-specific basis. We perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers’ financial condition and management believes that an adequate allowance for doubtful accounts has been provided. Uncollectible accounts are removed from accounts receivable and are charged against the allowance for doubtful accounts when internal collection efforts have been unsuccessful. The following table summarizes the activity in allowance for doubtful accounts for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017:

		Year Ended December 31,

(In thousands)	2019	2018	2017

Balance at beginning of year	$4,421	$6,667	$2,813

Provision charged to expense	9,347	8,793	7,072

Write-offs, less recoveries	(9,219)	(11,039)	(6,516)

Acquired allowance for doubtful accounts	—	—	3,298

Balance at end of year	$4,549	$4,421	$6,667


Question: If provision charged to expense in 2019 was 10,000 thousands, what would be the average provision charged to expense for 2017-2019?

Answer: 8621.67


Question: If Acquired allowance for doubtful accounts in 2018 was 4,000 thousands, what would be the increase / (decrease) in the Acquired allowance for doubtful accounts from 2017 to 2018?

Answer: 702


Question: What would be the ratio of income  from discontinued operations (net of tax) to income for the performance of services (classified within SG&A expenses) during fiscal 2017 if the income for the performance of services was $13.5 million?

Answer: 0.19

Context:
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued) Fiscal Years Ended May 26, 2019, May 27, 2018, and May 28, 2017 (columnar dollars in millions except per share amounts) Private Brands Operations On February 1, 2016, pursuant to the Stock Purchase Agreement, dated as of November 1, 2015, we completed the disposition of our Private Brands operations to TreeHouse Foods, Inc. ("TreeHouse"). The summary comparative financial results of the Private Brands business, included within discontinued operations, were as follows: We entered into a transition services agreement with TreeHouse and recognized $2.2 million and $16.9 million of income for the performance of services during fiscal 2018 and 2017, respectively, classified within SG&A expenses.

	2019	2018	2017

Loss on sale of business	$—	$—	$(1.6)

Income from discontinued operations before income taxes and equity method investment earnings	0.9	0.4	3.9

Income before income taxes and equity method investment earnings .	0.9	0.4	2.3

Income tax expense (benefit) .	—	0.5	(0.3)

Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax	$0.9	$(0.1)	$2.6


Question: What would be the percentage change in income  from discontinued operations (net of tax) from 2017 to 2019 if the income from discontinued operations was $1.5 million in 2019?

Answer: -42.31


Question: What would be the proportion of income tax benefit over income from discontinued operations during the fiscal year 2017 if the income tax benefit was $1 million?

Answer: 0.38


Question: If the Recorded investment of Lease receivables for Americas increase to 4,410 what is the revised average for Americas and EMEA for December 2019?

Answer: 2798

Context:
The following tables present the recorded investment by portfolio segment and by class, excluding commercial financing receivables and other miscellaneous financing receivables at December 31, 2019 and 2018. Commercial financing receivables are excluded from the presentation of financing receivables by portfolio segment, as they are short term in nature and the current estimated risk of loss and resulting impact to the company’s financing results are not material. Write-offs of lease receivables and loan receivables were $16 million and $47 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2019. Provisions for credit losses recorded for lease receivables and loan receivables were a release of $6 million and an addition of $2 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2019. The average recorded investment of impaired leases and loans for Americas, EMEA and Asia Pacific was $138 million, $49 million and $45 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2019. Both interest income recognized, and interest income recognized on a cash basis on impaired leases and loans were immaterial for the year ended December 31, 2019.

($ in millions)

At December 31, 2019:	Americas	EMEA	Asia Pacific	Total

Recorded investment:

Lease receivables	$ 3,419	$1,186	$ 963	$ 5,567

Loan receivables	6,726	3,901	2,395	13,022

Ending balance	$10,144	$5,087	$3,359	$18,590

Recorded investment, collectively evaluated for impairment	$10,032	$5,040	$3,326	$18,399

Recorded investment, individually evaluated for impairment	$ 112	$ 47	$ 32	$ 191

Allowance for credit losses

Beginning balance at January 1, 2019

Lease receivables	$ 53	$ 22	$ 24	$ 99

Loan receivables	105	43	32	179

Total	$ 158	$ 65	$ 56	$ 279

Write-offs	(42)	(3)	(18)	(63)

Recoveries	1	0	1	2

Provision	5	(7)	(3)	(5)

Other*	(1)	0	(1)	(2)

Ending balance at December 31, 2019	$ 120	$ 54	$ 36	$ 210

Lease receivables	$ 33	$ 23	$ 16	$ 72

Loan receivables	$ 88	$ 31	$ 20	$ 138

Related allowance, collectively evaluated for impairment	$ 25	$ 11	$ 4	$ 39

Related allowance, individually evaluated for impairment	$ 96	$ 43	$ 32	$ 171


Question: If the Recorded investment of Loan receivables for Americas reduces to 3,419 what is the revised average for Americas and EMEA for December 2019?

Answer: 3660


Question: If the Allowance for credit losses of lease receivables for Americas increase to $ 71 what is the revised average at the beginning of January 2019?

Answer: 39


Question: What would the percentage change in the net operating loss carry forwards from 2018 to 2019 be if the amount in 2019 was 21,000,000 instead?

Answer: 3.23

Context:
NOTE L – INCOME TAXES On December 22, 2017, the U.S. government enacted comprehensive tax legislation commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”). The Tax Act makes broad and complex changes to the U.S. tax code, including, but not limited to, the following that impact the Company: (1) reducing the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent; (2) eliminating the corporate alternative minimum tax; (3) creating a new limitation on deductible interest expense; (4) limiting the deductibility of certain executive compensation; and (5) limiting certain other deductions. The Company follows ASC 740-10 “Income Taxes” which requires the recognition of deferred tax liabilities and assets for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statement or tax returns. Under this method, deferred tax liabilities and assets are determined based on the difference between financial statements and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. Deferred income taxes include the net tax effects of net operating loss (NOL) carry forwards and the temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. Significant components of the Company's deferred tax assets are as follows:

	2019	2018

Deferred Tax Assets:

Net operating loss carry forwards	$20,772,428	$20,342,559

Intangibles	207,618	318,178

Credits	28,022	112,086

Other	506,349	613,202

Total deferred tax assets	21,514,417	21,386,025

Deferred Tax Liabilities:

Intangibles	–	–

Total deferred tax liabilities	–	–

Valuation allowance	(21,486,396)	(21,386,025)

Net deferred tax asset	$28,021	$–


Question: What would the percentage change in the total deferred tax assets from 2018 to 2019 be if the amount in 2019 was 20,000,000 instead?

Answer: -6.48


Question: Which year would have the higher amount of intangibles (deferred tax assets) if the amount in 2019 was 320,000 instead?

Answer: 2019


Question: How many liabilities had a balance on March 31, 2018 that exceeded $300 million if the balance of other long-term liabilities was $350 million instead?

Answer: 2

Context:
During the three months ended June 30, 2018, the Company adopted ASU 2016-18-Statement of Cash Flows: Restricted Cash. This standard requires that the statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in total cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. Therefore, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. The standard has been applied using a retrospective transition method to each period presented. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company's financial statements. The following table summarizes the opening balance sheet adjustments related to the adoption of the New Revenue Standard, ASU 2016-01-Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, and ASU 2016-16-Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory (in millions):

	Balance as of		Adjustments from		Balance as of

	March 31, 2018	ASC 606	ASU 2016-01	ASU 2016-16	April 1, 2018

ASSETS

Accounts receivable, net	$563.7	$340.1	$—	$—	$903.8

Inventories	$476.2	$(5.1)	$—	$—	$471.1

Other current assets	$119.8	$17.2	$—	$—	$137.0

Long-term deferred tax assets	$100.2	$(23.1)	$—	$1,579.4	$1,656.5

Other assets	$71.8	$—	$—	$(24.1)	$47.7

LIABILITIES

Accrued liabilities	$229.6	$404.2	$—	$—	$633.8

Deferred income on shipments to distributors	$333.8	$(333.8)	$—	$—	$—

Long-term deferred tax liability	$205.8	$16.8	$—	$(1.1)	$221.5

Other long-term liabilities	$240.9	$—	$—	$(1.7)	$239.2

STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY

Accumulated other comprehensive loss	$(17.6)	$—	$(1.7)	$—	$(19.3)

Retained earnings	$1,397.3	$241.9	$1.7	$1,558.1	$3,199.0


Question: How many Assets had a balance on April 1, 2018 that exceeded $1,000 million if the balance of net accounts receivable was $1,100 million instead?

Answer: 2


Question: What would be the percentage change in Other assets  due to the adjustments if the balance on April 1 was $90 million instead?

Answer: 25.35


Question: If the Equity securities in 2019 increased to 29 million, what is the revised average?

Answer: 24

Context:
Long-term state receivables include receivables related to funding and receivables related to tax refund. Funding are mainly public grants to be received from governmental agencies in Italy and France as part of longterm research and development, industrialization and capital investment projects. Long-term receivables related to tax refund correspond to tax benefits claimed by the Company in certain of its local tax jurisdictions, for which collection is expected beyond one year. In 2019 and 2018, the Company entered into a factoring transaction to accelerate the realization in cash of some non-current assets. As at December 31, 2019, $131 million of the non-current assets were sold without recourse, compared to $122 million as at December 31, 2018, with a financial cost of less than $1 million for both periods. Other non-current assets consisted of the following:

	December 31, 2019	December 31, 2018

Equity securities	23	19

Long-term state receivables	358	391

Deposits and other non-current assets	56	42

Total	437	452


Question: If the Long-term state receivables in 2019 increased to 474 million, what is the revised average?

Answer: 432.5


Question: If the Deposits and other non-current assets in 2019 increased to 71 million, what is the revised average?

Answer: 56.5


Question: What would the total long-term debt due within one year in 2018 and 2019 be if the amount in 2019 is 875?

Answer: 1400

Context:
Note 21 Debt due within one year (1) Includes commercial paper of $1,502 million in U.S. dollars ($1,951 million in Canadian dollars) and $2,314 million in U.S. dollars ($3,156 million in Canadian dollars) as at December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively, which were issued under our U.S. commercial paper program and have been hedged for foreign currency fluctuations through forward currency contracts. See Note 26, Financial and capital management, for additional details. (2) Included in long-term debt due within one year is the current portion of lease liabilities of $775 million as at December 31, 2019 and the current portion of finance leases of $466 million as at December 31, 2018.

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31	NOTE	WEIGHTED AVERAGE INTEREST RATE AT DECEMBER 31, 2019	2019	2018

Notes payable (1)	26	2.03%	1,994	3,201

Loans secured by trade receivables	26	2.71%	1,050	919

Long-term debt due within one year (2)	22	4.77%	837	525

Total debt due within one year			3,881	4,645


Question: What would the difference in the weighted average interest rate for notes payable and loans secured by trade receivables be if the interest rate for notes payable is 2.01%?

Answer: 0.7


Question: What would the percentage change in the total debt due within one year in 2019 be if the amount in 2019 is 3,800?

Answer: -18.19


Question: How many years did Adjusted Pro Forma Net Income exceed $100,000 thousand if Adjusted Pro Forma Net Income in 2018 was $95,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 1

Context:
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (United States Dollars in thousands, except per share data and unless otherwise indicated) In light of the anticipated material non-cash charges to be recorded in connection with our financial guarantee arrangements as required subsequent to the adoption and implementation of ASU 2016-13 (as discussed in Note 1 to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 within "Accounting Standards Issued, But Not Yet Adopted – Measurement of credit losses on financial instruments"), management is evaluating both the disclosure of additional non-GAAP financial measures and the modification of its historical computation of adjusted EBITDA commencing in 2020 to enhance the disclosure of indicators of our business performance over the long term and to provide additional useful information to users of our financial statements. Further, we utilize Adjusted Pro Forma Net Income, which we define as consolidated net income, adjusted for (i) transaction and non-recurring expenses; (ii) for 2019, losses associated with the financial guarantee arrangement for a Bank Partner that did not renew its loan origination agreement; and (iii) incremental pro forma tax expense assuming all of our noncontrolling interests were subject to income taxation. Adjusted Pro Forma Net Income is a useful measure because it makes our results more directly comparable to public companies that have the vast majority of their earnings subject to corporate income taxation. Adjusted Pro Forma Net Income has limitations as an analytical tool and should not be considered in isolation from, or as a substitute for, the analysis of other GAAP financial measures, such as net income. Some of the limitations of Adjusted Pro Forma Net Income include: • It makes assumptions about tax expense, which may differ from actual results; and • It is not a universally consistent calculation, which limits its usefulness as a comparative measure. Management compensates for the inherent limitations associated with using the measure of Adjusted Pro Forma Net Income through disclosure of such limitations, presentation of our financial statements in accordance with GAAP and reconciliation of Adjusted Pro Forma Net Income to the most directly comparable GAAP measure, net income, as presented below. (1) Includes losses recorded in the fourth quarter of 2019 associated with the financial guarantee arrangement for a Bank Partner that did not renew its loan origination agreement when it expired in November 2019. See Note 14 to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 for additional discussion of our financial guarantee arrangements. (2) For the year ended December 31, 2019, includes loss on remeasurement of our tax receivable agreement liability of $9.8 million and professional fees associated with our strategic alternatives review process of $1.5 million. For the year ended December 31, 2018, includes certain costs associated with our IPO, which were not deferrable against the proceeds of the IPO. Further, includes certain costs, such as legal and debt arrangement costs, related to our March 2018 term loan upsizing. For the year ended December 31, 2017, includes one-time fees paid to an affiliate of one of the members of the board of managers in conjunction with the August 2017 term loan transaction. (3) For the year ended December 31, 2019, includes (i) legal fees associated with IPO related litigation of $2.0 million, (ii) one-time tax compliance fees related to filing the final tax return for the Former Corporate Investors associated with the Reorganization Transactions of $0.2 million, and (iii) lien filing expenses related to certain Bank Partner solar loans of $0.6 million. (4) Represents the incremental tax effect on net income, adjusted for the items noted above, assuming that all consolidated net income was subject to corporate taxation for the periods presented. For the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, we assumed effective tax rates of 14.8%, 19.7% and 38.4%, respectively.

		Year Ended December 31,

	2019	2018	2017

Net income	$95,973	$127,980	$138,668

Change in financial guarantee liability(1)	16,215	—	—

Transaction expenses(2)	11,345	2,393	2,612

Non-recurring expenses(3)	2,804	—	—

Incremental pro forma tax expense(4)	(24,768)	(21,248)	(54,266)

Adjusted Pro Forma Net Income	$101,569	$109,125	$87,014


Question: What would be the change in net income between 2017 and 2018 if net income in 2017 was $120,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 7980


Question: What would be the percentage change in Transaction expenses between 2018 and 2019 if transaction expenses in 2019 was $5,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 108.94


Question: If Risk-free interest rate in 2019 was 2.0%, what would be the change from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 0.6

Context:
Employee Share Purchase Plan (ESPP) The Company estimates the fair value of its ESPP share options on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model, which requires the use of highly subjective estimates and assumptions. The Company estimates the expected term of ESPP share options based on the length of each offering period, which is six months. The risk-free interest rate is based on a treasury instrument whose term is consistent with the expected life of the ESPP share option. Expected volatility is based on the Company’s historical volatility. The Company uses an expected dividend rate of zero as it currently has no history or expectation of paying dividends on its ordinary shares. The grant date fair value per ordinary share is based on the closing market value of its ordinary shares on the first day of each ESPP offering period. The first authorized offering period under the ESPP commenced on July 1, 2017. The fair value of each ESPP option grant was estimated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model that used the following weighted-average assumptions: The weighted-average per share fair value of ESPP share options granted to employees during the years ended March 31, 2019 and 2018, was $9.58 and $6.41, respectively.

	Year ended March 31,

	2019	2018

Expected term (in years)	0.5	0.5

Risk-free interest rate	2.3%	1.4%

Expected volatility	39.1%	29.9%

Expected dividend yield	—%	—%

Grant date fair value per ordinary share	$36.69	$27.15


Question: If Expected volatility in 2019 was 35.1%, what would be the average for 2018 and 2019?

Answer: 32.5


Question: If Grant date fair value per ordinary share in 2019 was 29.0, in which year would it be less than 30.0?

Answer: 2019

Answer: 2018