Question: In which year would the total income tax charge be larger if the amount in 2019 was $16.7 million instead?

Answer: 2018

Context:
14 Taxation UK corporation tax for the year-ended 31 March 2019 is calculated at 19% (2018: 19%) of the estimated assessable loss for the period.

	Year-ended 31 March 2019	Year-ended 31 March 2018 Restated See note 2

	$M	$M

Current income tax:

UK corporation tax	1.3	1.2

Adjustments in respect of previous years UK tax	0.3	0.3

Overseas tax before exceptional items	22.2	23.0

Adjustment in respect of previous years	13.1	10.2

Total current tax charge	36.9	34.7

Deferred tax:

Origination and reversal of temporary differences	2.5	(16.7)

Impact of changes in US tax rate	-	5.4

Adjustment in respect of previous years	(12.7)	(3.5)

Total deferred tax credit	(10.2)	(14.8)

Total income tax charge	26.7	19.9


Question: What would the change in Total income tax charge in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $26.9 million instead?

Answer: 7


Question: What would the percentage change in Total income tax charge in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $26.9 million instead?

Answer: 35.18


Question: If EBU operating income in 2018 was 1,000, what would be the difference between EBU operating income in 2017 and 2018?

Answer: 25

Context:
Operating Income (Loss) by Business Unit Percentages reflect operating income (loss) as a percentage of revenue for each business unit. CNBU operating income for 2019 decreased from 2018 primarily due to declines in pricing and higher R&D costs, partially offset by cost reductions. MBU operating income for 2019 decreased from 2018 primarily due to declines in pricing partially offset by increases in sales of high-value managed NAND products and manufacturing cost reductions. SBU operating margin for 2019 declined from 2018 primarily due to declines in pricing, which were partially offset by manufacturing cost reductions and increases in sales volumes. SBU operating results for 2019 and 2018 were adversely impacted by the underutilization charges at IMFT. EBU operating income for 2019 decreased from 2018 as a result of declines in pricing and higher R&D costs partially offset by manufacturing cost reductions and increases in sales volumes. CNBU operating income for 2018 improved from 2017 primarily due to improved pricing and higher sales volumes resulting from strong demand for our products combined with manufacturing cost reductions. MBU operating income for 2018 improved from 2017 primarily due to increases in pricing and sales volumes for LPDRAM products, higher sales of high-value managed NAND products, and manufacturing cost reductions. SBU operating income for 2018 improved from 2017 primarily due to manufacturing cost reductions enabled by our execution in transitioning to 64-layer TLC 3D NAND products and improvements in product mix. SBU operating income for 2018 was adversely impacted by higher costs associated with IMFT's production of 3D XPoint memory products at less than full capacity. EBU operating income for 2018 increased as compared to 2017 as a result of increases in average selling prices, manufacturing cost reductions, and increases in sales volumes, partially offset by higher R&D costs.

For the year ended	2019	2019	2018	2018	2017	2017

CNBU	$4,645	47%	$9,773	64%	$3,755	44%

MBU	2,606	41%	3,033	46%	927	21%

SBU	(386)	(10)%	964	19%	552	12%

EBU	923	29%	1,473	42%	975	36%

All Other	13	18%	—	—%	23	35%

	$7,801		$15,243		$6,232


Question: What would be the ratio of CNBU and MBU total operating income in 2019 to those in 2018 if MBU operating income in 2018 was 2,000?

Answer: 0.62


Question: How much would the difference in the total operating income in 2018 compared to in 2017 be if total operating income in 2017 was $20,000?

Answer: 4757


Question: How many revenue items are there, if "Devices" is not a revenue item?

Answer: 8

Context:
(In millions)

Year Ended June 30,	2019	2018	2017

Server products and cloud services	$ 32,622	$ 26,129	$ 21,649

Office products and cloud services	31,769	28,316	25,573

Windows	20,395	19,518	18,593

Gaming	11,386	10,353	9,051

Search advertising	7,628	7,012	6,219

LinkedIn	6,754	5,259	2,271

Enterprise Services	6,124	5,846	5,542

Devices	6,095	5,134	5,062

Other	3,070	2,793	2,611

Total	$ 125,843	$ 110,360	$ 96,571

 Revenue from external customers, classified by significant product and service offerings, was as follows: Our commercial cloud revenue, which includes Office 365 Commercial, Azure, the commercial portion of LinkedIn, Dynamics 365, and other commercial cloud properties, was $38.1 billion, $26.6 billion and $16.2 billion in fiscal years 2019, 2018, and 2017, respectively. These amounts are primarily included in Office products and cloud services, Server products and cloud services, and LinkedIn in the table above.


Question: How much of the total revenue in 2019 did not come from commercial cloud revenue, if the total revenue in 2019 was 225,843 million?

Answer: 187743


Question: Which were the bottom 2 revenue items for 2017, if the LinkedIn revenue in 2017 was $5,500 million instead?

Answer: Devices

Answer: Other


Question: If Outstanding at the beginning of the period in 2018/19 was 20,500,000, what would be the change from 2017/18 to 2018/19?

Answer: 268666

Context:
During the period 5.0 million (2017/18: 5.0 million) options were granted under the Sharesave Plan, with a weighted average exercise price at the date of exercise of 30 pence per ordinary share (2017/18: 33 pence). The options outstanding at 30 March 2019 had a weighted average exercise price of 32 pence (2017/18: 33 pence), and a weighted average remaining contractual life of 1.6 years (2017/18: 1.6 years). In 2018/19, the Group recognised an expense of £2.1m (2017/18: £2.8m), related to all equity-settled share-based payment transactions. Premier Foods plc Sharesave Plan

	2018/19		2017/18

		Weighted average exercise price		Weighted average exercise price

	Options	(p)	Options	(p)

Outstanding at the beginning of the period	17,835,628	33	20,231,334	35

Exercised during the period	(4,306,470)	32	(3,536,539)	34

Granted during the period	5,022,240	30	4,988,669	33

Forfeited/lapsed during the period	(2,447,511)	33	(3,847,836)	44

Outstanding at the end of the period	16,103,887	32	17,835,628	33

Exercisable at the end of the period	2,673,154	32	792,451	35


Question: If Exercised during the period weighted average exercise price in 2018/19 was 40, what would be the change from 2017/18 to 2018/19?

Answer: 6


Question: What would be the change in options granted between 2017/18 and 2018/19 if the amount in 2018/19 was 5,000,000 instead?

Answer: 11331


Question: What would be the change in equity-based compensation between 2018 and 2019 if the equity-based compensation in 2018 was $10 million instead?

Answer: 2.6

Context:
(19) Income Taxes As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the components of deferred tax assets primarily relate to equity method investments, equity-based compensation, deferred revenues, interest rate swaps, employee benefits accruals and deferred compensation. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the components of deferred tax liabilities primarily relate to depreciation and amortization of intangible assets, property and equipment and deferred contract costs. The significant components of deferred tax assets and liabilities consist of the following (in millions):

	December 31,

	2019	2018

Deferred tax assets:

Equity method investments	$25.7	$—

Equity-based compensation	12.6	9.2

Deferred revenues	6.2	14.8

Interest rate swaps	5.6	—

Other	13.0	11.4

Total deferred tax assets	63.1	35.4

Deferred tax liabilities:

Goodwill and other intangibles	(168.7)	(178.9)

Deferred contract costs	(40.3)	(41.9)

Property, equipment and computer software	(34.3)	(28.0)

Other	(5.1)	(7.5)

Total deferred tax liabilities	(248.4)	(256.3)

Net deferred tax liability	$(185.3)	$(220.9)


Question: How many years did deferred revenues exceed $10 million if deferred revenues in 2019 were $11 million instead?

Answer: 2


Question: What would be the percentage change in Total deferred tax liabilities between 2018 and 2019 if the total deferred tax liabilities in 2019 was -$100 million instead?

Answer: -60.98


Question: What were the balance of total assets at February 28, 2018 if other assets were now $20,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 63581

Context:
As a result of the adoption of ASC 606, our deferred product revenues and deferred product costs for the fleet management and auto vehicle finance verticals increased as balances are now amortized over the estimated average in-service lives of these devices. Deferred income tax assets and accumulated deficit increased as a result of the changes made to our deferred product revenues and deferred product costs. The cumulative effect of the changes made to our consolidated balance sheet for the adoption of ASC 606 were as follows (in thousands): (1) Deferred product costs included in Prepaid expenses and other current assets and Other assets amounted to $5.4 million and $6.0 million, respectively, as of March 1, 2018.

	Balance at	ASC 606	Balance at

	February 28, 2018	Adjustments	March 1, 2018

	Assets

Prepaid expenses and other current assets (1)	$12,000	1,891	$13,891

Deferred income tax assets	31,581	532	32,113

Other assets (1)	18,829	3,145	21,974

	Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity

Deferred revenue	$17,757	2,156	19,913

Other non-current liabilities	24,249	5,007	29,256

	Stockholders' equity


Question: What were the balance of total assets at March 1, 2018 if other assets were now $20,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 66004


Question: What is the difference in balance of Deferred income tax assets and Deferred revenue at February 28, 2018 if Deferred revenue is now $40,000 thousand?

Answer: 8419


Question: What would be the percentage change in prepaid expenses between 2018 and 2019 if the prepaid expenses in 2019 is increased by $1,000?

Answer: 150.04

Context:
Note 7. Prepaid Expenses and Other Current Assets and Accrued and Other Current Liabilities Prepaid expenses and other current assets as of December 31, 2019 and 2018 consisted of the following:

December 31,

	2019	2018

Prepaid expenses	$1,948	$1,179

Securities litigation insurance receivable	16,627	306

Other current assets	1,556	2,865

Prepaid expenses and other current assets	$20,131	$4,350


Question: What would be the average prepaid expenses paid in 2018 and 2019 if the prepaid expenses in 2019 is doubled?

Answer: 2537.5


Question: What would be the total prepaid expenses made in 2018 and 2019 if the total is doubled and then decreased by $3,000?

Answer: 3254


Question: If the Underlying profit attributable to shareholders’ equity increases by 10% in 2019, what is the revised percentage change?

Answer: 15.95

Context:
Constant underlying earnings per share Constant underlying earnings per share (constant underlying EPS) is calculated as underlying profit attributable to shareholders’ equity at constant exchange rates and excluding the impact of both translational hedges and price growth in excess of 26% per year in hyperinflationary economies divided by the diluted average number of ordinary share units. This measure reflects the underlying earnings for each ordinary share unit of the Group in constant exchange rates. The reconciliation of underlying profit attributable to shareholders’ equity to constant underlying earnings attributable to shareholders’ equity and the calculation of constant underlying EPS is as follows: (a) Restated following adoption of IFRS 16. See note 1 and note 24 for further details. (b) See note 7. (c) See pages 28 and 29 for further details.

	€ million	€ million

	2019	2018

		(Restated)(a)

Underlying profit attributable to shareholders’ equity(b)	6,688	6,345

Impact of translation from current to constant exchange rates and translational hedges	13	46

Impact of price growth in excess of 26% per year in hyperinflationary economies(c)	(108)	(10)

Constant underlying earnings attributable to shareholders’ equity	6,593	6,381

Diluted combined average number of share units (millions of units)	2,626.7	2,694.8

Constant underlying EPS (€)	2.51	2.37


Question: If the Diluted combined average number of share units (millions of units) increases by 5% in 2018, what is the revised change?

Answer: -202.84


Question: If the Constant underlying earnings attributable to shareholders’ equity increases by 10% in 2019, what is the revised average?

Answer: 6816.65


Question: In which year would the amount of Less: Allowance for doubtful accounts be larger if the amount in 2019 was $3,080 thousand instead?

Answer: 2018

Context:
Note 9. Receivables, Net Receivables, net consisted of the following (in thousands):

	December 31,

	2019	2018

Trade accounts receivable, current	$378,616	$338,473

Income taxes receivable	1,571	916

Other	13,440	11,132

Receivables, gross	393,627	350,521

Less: Allowance for doubtful accounts	3,480	3,096

Receivables,net	$390,147	$347,425

Allowance for doubtful accounts as a percent of trade accounts receivable, current	0.9%	0.9%


Question: What would the change in Income taxes receivable in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $1,916 thousand instead?

Answer: 1000


Question: What would the percentage change in Income taxes receivable in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $1,916 thousand instead?

Answer: 109.17


Question: What is the  percentage change between the cost of sales previously reported in 2017 and 2018 if the value in 2018 was doubled?

Answer: 110.54

Context:
In November 2016, the FASB issued guidance that requires entities to show the changes in the total of cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents in the statement of cash flows. The guidance is effective for annual reporting periods and interim periods within those annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, our fiscal 2019. The retrospective transition method should be applied. We adopted this guidance in the first quarter of fiscal 2019 and it did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. In October 2016, the FASB issued guidance that requires companies to recognize the income tax effects of intercompany sales and transfers of assets, other than inventory, in the period in which the transfer occurs. The guidance is effective for annual reporting periods and interim periods within those annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, our fiscal 2019. The modified retrospective transition method should be applied. We adopted this guidance in the first quarter of fiscal 2019 and it did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. In August 2016, the FASB issued guidance that aims to eliminate diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. The guidance is effective for annual reporting periods and interim periods within those annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, our fiscal 2019. The retrospective transition method should be applied. We adopted this guidance in the first quarter of fiscal 2019 and it did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. n January 2016, the FASB issued guidance that requires most equity investments be measured at fair value, with subsequent other changes in fair value recognized in net income. The guidance also impacts financial liabilities under the fair value option and the presentation and disclosure requirements on the classification and measurement of financial instruments. The guidance is effective for annual reporting periods and interim periods within those annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, our fiscal 2019. It should be applied by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment to the balance sheet as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption, unless equity securities do not have readily determinable fair values, in which case the amendments should be applied prospectively. We adopted this guidance in the first quarter of fiscal 2019. We did not use prospective amendments for any investments and adoption did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. The following reconciliations provide the effect of the reclassification of the net periodic benefit cost from operating expenses to other (income) expense in our consolidated statements of income for fiscal year 2018 and 2017 (in millions):

Twelve Months Ended September 29, 2018:	As Previously Reported	Adjustments	As Recast

Cost of Sales	$34,926	$30	$34,956

Selling, General and Administrative	$2,071	$(7)	$2,064

Operating Income	$3,055	$(23)	$3,032

Other (Income) Expense	$310	$(23)	$287

Twelve Months Ended September 30, 2017:	As Previously Reported	Adjustments	As Recast

Cost of Sales	$33,177	$21	$33,198

Selling, General and Administrative	$2,152	$(11)	$2,141

Operating Income	$2,931	$(10)	$2,921

Other (Income) Expense	$303	$(10)	$293


Question: Suppose the adjustment made in 2018 to the cost of sales is increased to $50. What is the  percentage change between the cost of sales as recasted in 2017 and 2018?

Answer: 5.36


Question: Suppose the adjustment made in 2018 to the operating income is $(30). What is the  percentage change between the operating income as recasted in 2017 and 2018?

Answer: 3.56


Question: What is the nominal difference of non-current self-insured risks between 2019 and 2018 if the value of non-current self-insured risks in 2018 is 425?

Answer: 5

Context:
Movements in total self‐insured risks, restructuring, onerous contracts, store exit costs, and other provisions (1) The increase in restructuring, onerous contracts, and store exit costs in 2019 is primarily attributable to the recognition of provisions associated with the BIG W network review as outlined in Note 1.4. A provision is recognised when the Group has a present legal or constructive obligation as a result of a past event, it is probable that an outflow of economic benefits will be required to settle the obligation, and a reliable estimate can be made as to the amount of the obligation. The amount recognised is the best estimate of the consideration required to settle the present obligation at the reporting date, taking into account the risks and uncertainties surrounding the obligation. A liability is recognised for benefits accruing to employees in respect of annual leave and long service leave. Liabilities expected to be settled within 12 months are measured at their nominal values using the remuneration rate expected to apply at the time of settlement. Liabilities which are not expected to be settled within 12 months are measured as the present value of the estimated future cash outflows to be made by the Group in respect of services provided by employees up to the reporting date. The provision for self-insured risks primarily represents the estimated liability for workers’ compensation and public liability claims. Provision for restructuring is recognised when the Group has developed a detailed formal plan for the restructuring and has raised a valid expectation in those affected by the restructuring that the restructuring will occur. An onerous contract is a contract in which the unavoidable costs of meeting the obligations under the contract exceed the economic benefits expected to be received under it. The unavoidable costs under a contract reflect the least net cost of exiting from the contract, which is the lower of the cost of fulfilling it and any compensation or penalties arising from failure to fulfil it.

			RESTRUCTURING, ONEROUS

			CONTRACTS, STORE EXIT COSTS,

	SELF‑INSURED RISKS		AND OTHER

	2019	2018	2019	2018

	$M	$M	$M	$M

Movement:

Balance at start of period	596	593	679	800

Net provisions recognised/(reversed) (1)	177	161	225	55

Cash payments	(157)	(148)	(162)	(178)

Other	(13)	(10)	(5)	2

Balance at end of period	603	596	737	679

Current	173	177	280	256

Non‑current	430	419	457	423

	603	596	737	679


Question: What is the percentage constitution of current self-insured risks in the total self-insured risks in 2019 if the value of total self-insured risk is 700?

Answer: 24.71


Question: What is the average cash payments for self-insured risks for both years if the value for cash payment in 2019 increased to 180?

Answer: 164


Question: What would be the change in Employee severance and benefit costs between 2017 and 2018 if lease costs in 2017 were $10,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 6269

Context:
14. Restructuring and Related Charges Following is a summary of the Company’s restructuring and related charges (in thousands): (1) Includes $21.5 million, $16.3 million and $51.3 million recorded in the EMS segment, $2.6 million, $16.6 million and $82.4 million recorded in the DMS segment and $1.8 million, $4.0 million and $26.7 million of non-allocated charges for the fiscal years ended August 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. Except for asset write-off costs, all restructuring and related charges are cash settled. (2) Fiscal year ended August 31, 2017, includes expenses related to the 2017 and 2013 Restructuring Plans.

		Fiscal Year Ended August 31,

	2019	2018	2017(2)

Employee severance and benefit costs	$16,029	$16,269	$56,834

Lease costs	(41)	1,596	3,966

Asset write-off costs	(3,566)	16,264	94,346

Other costs	13,492	2,773	5,249

Total restructuring and related charges(1)	$25,914	$36,902	$160,395


Question: What would be the change in Other costs between 2018 and 2019 if Other costs in 2019 were $5,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 2227


Question: What would be the percentage change in the Total restructuring and related charges between 2018 and 2019 if the Total restructuring and related charges in 2019 were $40,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 8.4


Question: What would the difference in the opening and ending balances in 2019 be if the opening balance in 2019 is 703?

Answer: 80

Context:
Note 13 Contract costs The table below provides a reconciliation of the contract costs balance. Contract costs are amortized over a period ranging from 12 to 84 months.

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31	2019	2018

Opening balance, January 1	707	636

Incremental costs of obtaining a contract and contract fulfillment costs	602	567

Amortization included in operating costs	(523)	(477)

Impairment charges included in operating costs	(3)	(19)

Ending balance, December 31	783	707


Question: What would the total incremental costs of obtaining a contract and contract fulfillment costs in 2018 and 2019 be if the amount in 2018 is 598?

Answer: 1200


Question: What would the change in the incremental costs of obtaining a contract and contract fulfillment costs in 2018 to 2019 be if the amount in 2019 is 607?

Answer: 40


Question: What was the total amount paid for the shares during the period from April 28, 2019 to May 25, 2019, if the average price paid per share was $53.98 from April 28, 2019 to May 25, 2019?

Answer: 3478.7

Context:
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities (a) Cisco common stock is traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol CSCO. Information regarding quarterly cash dividends declared on Cisco’s common stock during fiscal 2019 and 2018 may be found in Supplementary Financial Data on page 106 of this report. There were 39,216 registered shareholders as of August 30, 2019. (b) Not applicable. (c) Issuer purchases of equity securities (in millions, except per-share amounts): On September 13, 2001, we announced that our Board of Directors had authorized a stock repurchase program. On February 13, 2019, our Board of Directors authorized a $15 billion increase to the stock repurchase program. As of July 27, 2019, the remaining authorized amount for stock repurchases under this program, including the additional authorization, is approximately $13.5 billion with no termination date. For the majority of restricted stock units granted, the number of shares issued on the date the restricted stock units vest is net of shares withheld to meet applicable tax withholding requirements. Although these withheld shares are not issued or considered common stock repurchases under our stock repurchase program and therefore are not included in the preceding table, they are treated as common stock repurchases in our financial statements as they reduce the number of shares that would have been issued upon vesting (see Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

Period	Total Number of Shares Purchased	Average Price Paid per Share	Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs	Approximate Dollar Value of Shares That May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs

April 28, 2019 to May 25, 2019	42	$54.33	42	$15,700

May 26, 2019 to June 22, 2019	22	$55.07	22	$14,465

June 23, 2019 to July 27, 2019	18	$56.46	18	$13,460

Total	82	$54.99	82


Question: What was the average total amount paid for the shares during the period from April 28, 2019 to May 25, 2019 and May 26, 2019 to June 22, 2019, if the average price paid per share was $53.98 from April 28, 2019 to May 25, 2019?

Answer: 1739.35


Question: What is the average of Average Price Paid per Share in the three period if it is $57 in the period of June 23, 2019 to July 27, 2019?

Answer: 55.47


Question: If the Consolidated Net Income in 2019 reduced to 17,185 million what would be the revised change?

Answer: 1146

Context:
		(dollars in millions)

Years Ended December 31,	2019	2018

Consolidated Net Income	$19,788	$16,039

Add:

Provision for income taxes	2,945	3,584

Interest expense	4,730	4,833

Depreciation and amortization expense	16,682	17,403

Consolidated EBITDA	44,145	41,859

Add (Less):

Other (income) expense, net†	2,900	(2,364)

Equity in losses of unconsolidated businesses‡	15	186

Severance charges	204	2,157

Acquisition and integration related charges§	—	531

Product realignment charges§	—	450

Impairment charges	186	4,591

Net gain from dispositions of assets and businesses	(261)	—

Consolidated Adjusted EBITDA	$ 47,189	$ 47,410

 Consolidated Net Income, Consolidated EBITDA and Consolidated Adjusted EBITDA Consolidated earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization expenses (Consolidated EBITDA) and Consolidated Adjusted EBITDA, which are presented below, are non-generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) measures that we believe are useful to management, investors and other users of our financial information in evaluating operating profitability on a more variable cost basis as they exclude the depreciation and amortization expense related primarily to capital expenditures and acquisitions that occurred in prior years, as well as in evaluating operating performance in relation to Verizon’s competitors. Consolidated EBITDA is calculated by adding back interest, taxes, and depreciation and amortization expenses to net income. Consolidated Adjusted EBITDA is calculated by excluding from Consolidated EBITDA the effect of the following non-operational items: equity in losses of unconsolidated businesses and other income and expense, net, as well as the effect of special items. We believe that this measure is useful to management, investors and other users of our financial information in evaluating the effectiveness of our operations and underlying business trends in a manner that is consistent with management’s evaluation of business performance. We believe that Consolidated Adjusted EBITDA is widely used by investors to compare a company’s operating performance to its competitors by minimizing impacts caused by differences in capital structure, taxes and depreciation policies. Further, the exclusion of non-operational items and special items enables comparability to prior period performance and trend analysis. See “Special Items” for additional information. It is management’s intent to provide non-GAAP financial information to enhance the understanding of Verizon’s GAAP financial information, and it should be considered by the reader in addition to, but not instead of, the financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP. Each non-GAAP financial measure is presented along with the corresponding GAAP measure so as not to imply that more emphasis should be placed on the non-GAAP measure. We believe that non-GAAP measures provide relevant and useful information, which is used by management, investors and other users of our financial information, as well as by our management in assessing both consolidated and segment performance. The non-GAAP financial information presented may be determined or calculated differently by other companies and may not be directly comparable to that of other companies. † Includes Pension and benefits mark-to-market adjustments and early debt redemption costs, where applicable. ‡ Includes Product realignment charges and impairment charges, where applicable. § Excludes depreciation and amortization expense. The changes in Consolidated Net Income, Consolidated EBITDA and Consolidated Adjusted EBITDA in the table above were primarily a result of the factors described in connection with operating revenues and operating expenses.


Question: If the Consolidated EBITDA in 2019 reduced to 40,744 million what would be the revised change?

Answer: -1115


Question: If the Consolidated Adjusted EBITDA in 2019 reduced to 42,055 million what would be the revised change?

Answer: -5355


Question: If the Recorded investment of Loan receivables for Americas increase to 7,501 million what is the revised average for Americas and EMEA for December 2018?

Answer: 5588

Context:
Write-offs of lease receivables and loan receivables were $15 million and $20 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2018. Provisions for credit losses recorded for lease receivables and loan receivables were $14 million and $2 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2018. The average recorded investment of impaired leases and loans for Americas, EMEA and Asia Pacific was $138 million, $55 million and $73 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2018. 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, 2018.

($ in millions)

At December 31, 2018:	Americas	EMEA	Asia Pacific	Total

Recorded investment:

Lease receivables	$ 3,827	$1,341	$1,152	$ 6,320

Loan receivables	6,817	3,675	2,489	12,981

Ending balance	$10,644	$5,016	$3,641	$19,301

Recorded investment, collectively evaluated for impairment	$10,498	$4,964	$3,590	$19,052

Recorded investment, individually evaluated for impairment	$ 146	$ 52	$ 51	$ 249

Allowance for credit losses

Beginning balance at January 1, 2018

Lease receivables	$ 63	$ 9	$ 31	$ 103

Loan receivables	108	52	51	211

Total	$ 172	$ 61	$ 82	$ 314

Write-offs	(10)	(2)	(23)	(35)

Recoveries	0	0	2	2

Provision	7	9	0	16

Other*	(11)	(3)	(4)	(19)

Ending balance at December 31, 2018	$ 158	$ 65	$ 56	$ 279

Lease receivables	$ 53	$ 22	$ 24	$ 99

Loan receivables	$ 105	$ 43	$ 32	$ 179

Related allowance, collectively evaluated for impairment	$ 39	$ 16	$ 5	$ 59

Related allowance, individually evaluated for impairment	$ 119	$ 49	$ 51	$ 219


Question: If the Allowance for credit losses of lease receivables for Americas increase to $ 79 what is the revised average at the beginning of January 2018?

Answer: 39.67


Question: If the Recorded investment of Lease receivables for Americas increase to 4,940 million what is the revised average for Americas and EMEA for December 2018?

Answer: 3140.5


Question: What was the percentage change in accrued expenses between 2018 and 2019 if accrued expenses in 2019 was $30 million instead?

Answer: 15.38

Context:
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the amounts of assets and liabilities for accounting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. The components of the net deferred tax assets (liabilities) are as follows (amounts in millions): As of December 31, 2019, we had gross tax credit carryforwards of $191 million for state purposes. The tax credit carryforwards are included in Deferred tax assets net of unrealized tax benefits that would apply upon the realization of uncertain tax positions. In addition, we had foreign NOL carryforwards of $32 million at December 31, 2019, attributed mainly to losses in France which can be carried forward indefinitely. We evaluate deferred tax assets each period for recoverability. We record a valuation allowance for assets that do not meet the threshold of “more likely than not” to be realized in the future. To make that determination, we evaluate the likelihood of realization based on the weight of all positive and negative evidence available. As a result of the Closing Agreement, we received in 2018, we determined at that time that our remaining California research and development credit carryforwards (“CA R&D Credit”) no longer met the threshold of more likely than not to be realized in the future. As such, consistent with our position at December 31, 2018, we have established a full valuation allowance against our CA R&D Credit. For the year ended December 31, 2019, the valuation allowance related to our CA R&D Credit is $71 million. We will reassess this determination quarterly and record a tax benefit if and when future evidence allows for a partial or full release of this valuation allowance. As of December 31, 2017, we no longer consider the available cash balances related to undistributed earnings held outside of the U.S. by our foreign subsidiaries to be indefinitely reinvested.

,	As of December 31,

	2019	2018

Deferred tax assets:

Allowance for sales returns and price protection	$19	$25

Accrued expenses	28	26

Deferred revenue	119	136

Tax attributes carryforwards	93	81

Share-based compensation	54	69

Intangibles	1,289	43

U.S. deferred taxes on foreign earnings	—	318

Capitalized software development expenses	67	—

Other	109	28

Deferred tax assets	1,778	726

Valuation allowance	(181)	(61)

Deferred tax assets, net of valuation allowance	1,597	665

Deferred tax liabilities:

Intangibles	(142)	(140)

Capitalized software development expenses	—	(57)

U.S. deferred taxes on foreign earnings	(594)	—

Other	(73)	(26)

Deferred tax liabilities	(809)	(223)

Net deferred tax assets	$788	$442


Question: What was the percentage change in intangibles between 2018 and 2019 if intangibles in 2018 were $1,000 million instead?

Answer: 28.9


Question: What was the change in net deferred tax assets between 2018 and 2019 if net deferred tax assets in 2019 were $1,000 million instead?

Answer: 558


Question: If the percentage of revenue for Americas was 67% instead, What would be the change in percentage of revenue for Americas from fiscal 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 4

Context:
Net revenues by geographical region Percentage of revenue by geographic region as presented below is based on the billing location of the customer. Percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding. The Americas include U.S., Canada, and Latin America; EMEA includes Europe, Middle East, and Africa; APJ includes Asia Pacific and Japan.

	Fiscal Year

	2019	2018

Americas	64%	63%

EMEA	21%	22%

APJ	15%	16%


Question: If the percentage of revenue for EMEA was 25% instead, What would be the change in percentage of revenue for EMEA from fiscal 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 3


Question: If the percentage of revenue for APJ was 18% instead, What would be the change in percentage of revenue for APJ from fiscal 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 2


Question: What was the percentage change in net revenue from 2017 to 2019 if the net revenue in 2019 is $299,418?

Answer: 10.52

Context:
2019 vs 2018 SMB segment net revenue was flat for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to the prior year, primarily due to a decline in net revenue of our network storage products, substantially offset by growth in net revenue of our switch products. Geographically, net revenue grew in APAC, but declined in Americas and EMEA. Contribution income decreased for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to the prior year, primarily as a result of lower gross margin attainment, partially offset by lower operating expenses as a proportion of net revenue. Contribution margin decreased for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to the prior year, primarily lower gross margin attainment mainly resulting from foreign exchange headwinds due to the strengthening of the U.S. dollar as well as higher provisions for sales returns. 2018 vs 2017 SMB segment net revenue increased for the year ended December 31, 2018 compared to the prior year, primarily due to growth in switches, partially offset by the decrease in network storage. SMB experienced growth in net revenue across all regions. SMB net revenue was further benefited by lower provisions for sales returns deemed to be a reduction of net revenue. Contribution income increased for the year ended December 31, 2018 compared to the prior year, primarily due to increasing net revenue and improved gross margin performance not being met with proportionate increases in operating expense compared to the prior period.

			Year Ended December 31,

	2019	% Change	2018	% Change	2017

			(in thousands, except percentage data)

Net revenue	$287,372	(0.1)%	$287,756	6.2%	$270,908

Percentage of net revenue	28.8%		27.2%		26.1%

Contribution income	$67,282	(4.1)%	$70,142	9.8%	$63,865

Contribution margin	23.4%		24.4%		23.6%


Question: In which year is the contribution margin the highest if the contribution margin is 2019 is 24.8%?

Answer: 2019


Question: What was the change in contribution income from 2017 to 2018 if the contribution income is $69,246 in 2017?

Answer: 896


Question: What would be the change in the Prepaid pension asset for U.S Pension Plans between 2018 and 2019 if the Prepaid pension asset in 2018 was $60,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 2082

Context:
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (in thousands, except for share and per share data) The components of the prepaid (accrued) cost of the domestic and foreign pension plans are classified in the following lines in the Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31:

	U.S.Pension Plans		Non-U.S. Pension Plans

	2019	2018	2019	2018

Prepaid pension asset	$62,082	$54,100	$—	$—

Accrued expenses and other liabilities	(100)	(100)	—	—

Long-term pension obligations	(1,045)	(992)	(1,214)	(1,331)

Net prepaid (accrued) cost	$60,937	$53,008	$(1,214)	$(1,331)


Question: What would be the change in the Net prepaid (accrued) cost for U.S. Pension Plans between 2018 and 2019 if the Net prepaid (accrued) cost in 2018 was $60,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 937


Question: What would be the percentage change in Long-term pension obligations for U.S. Pension Plans between 2018 and 2019 if the long-term pension obligations in 2019 was -$500 thousand instead?

Answer: -49.6


Question: In which year would the Weighted average share price  be larger if the amount in 2019 was $626.10 instead?

Answer: 2018

Context:
Share Options The fair value of equity-settled share options granted is measured as at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes model, taking into account the terms and conditions upon which the options were granted. The following table illustrates the weighted average inputs into the Black-Scholes model in the year: The weighted average fair value of options granted during the year was $ cents 220.53 (2018: $ cents 185.33). The expected volatility reflects the assumption that the historical share price volatility is indicative of future trends, which may not necessarily be the actual outcome. An increase in the expected volatility will increase the estimated fair value. The expected life of the options is based on historical data and is not necessarily indicative of exercise patterns that may occur. The expected life used in the model has been adjusted, based on the Director’s best estimate, taking into account the effects of exercise restrictions, non-transferability and behavioural considerations. An increase in the expected life will increase the estimated fair value.

	Year-ended	Year-ended

	31 March 2019	31 March 2018

Weighted average share price ($ cents)	676.10	628.23

Weighted average exercise price ($ cents)	558.54	516.70

Expected volatility	54.91%	38.20%

Expected life of options (years)	1.69	2.08

Risk free rate	1.56%	1.49%

Dividend yield	0.81%	0.70%


Question: What would the change in Weighted average share price in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was 678.23 cents instead?

Answer: 50


Question: What would the percentage change in Weighted average share price  in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was 678.23 cents instead?

Answer: 7.96


Question: What would be the change in purchase commitments that were less than 1 year between 2018 and 2019 if the purchase commitments that were less than 1 year in 2019 were $6,000 million instead?

Answer: 593

Context:
The following table summarizes our purchase commitments with contract manufacturers and suppliers as of the respective period ends (in millions): Purchase commitments with contract manufacturers and suppliers decreased by approximately 23% compared to the end of fiscal 2018. On a combined basis, inventories and purchase commitments with contract manufacturers and suppliers decreased by 24% compared with the end of fiscal 2018. Inventory and supply chain management remain areas of focus as we balance the need to maintain supply chain flexibility to help ensure competitive lead times with the risk of inventory obsolescence because of rapidly changing technology and customer requirements. We believe the amount of our inventory and purchase commitments is appropriate for our revenue levels.

Commitments by Period	July 27, 2019	July 28, 2018

Less than 1 year	$4,239	$5,407

1 to 3 years	728	710

3 to 5 years	—	360

Total	$4,967	$6,477


Question: How many years would commitments that were 1 to 3 years exceed $700 million if commitments that were 1 to 3 years in 2019 were $500 million instead?

Answer: 1


Question: What would be the commitments that were less than 1 year as a percentage of total purchase commitments in 2019 if total purchase commitments were $10,000 million instead, while those less than 1 year remained unchanged?

Answer: 42.39


Question: If Core revenue in 2019 was 103,000 thousands, what would be the average for 2018 and 2019?

Answer: 102938.5

Context:
Results of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018 We reported revenues of $187.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, down 7.0% from $201.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. Our net loss was $15.6 million or $0.96 loss per diluted share for the year ended December 31, 2019 versus a net loss of $24.1 million or $1.50 loss per diluted share for the year ended December 31, 2018. Our year-over-year unfavorable performance was primarily driven by lower Restaurant/Retail hardware revenue and corresponding hardware support service revenue from our traditional tier 1 customers as one of these customers completed significant projects in 2018 which were not repeated in 2019. The Company partially offset these reductions with continued growth in Brink POS revenue, including related SaaS, hardware and support services. The 2018 net loss include a valuation allowance of $14.9 million to reduce the carrying value of our deferred tax assets. Operating segment revenue is set forth below: * Brink includes $0.3 million of Restaurant Magic for 2019 Product revenues were $66.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, a decrease of 15.8% from $78.8 million recorded in 2018. This decrease was primarily driven by lower revenues from our tier 1 customers and by a decrease in our international business. Our hardware sales in the Restaurant/Retail reporting segment were down versus prior year as we completed hardware project installations with a large domestic customer during the first half of 2018 which was not recurring in 2019. Additionally, international sales were down in 2019 and SureCheck was divested. SureCheck product revenue was $0.7 million in 2019 versus $2.0 million in 2018. Service revenues were $57.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, an increase of 3.1% from $55.3 million reported for the year ended December 31, 2018, primarily due to an increase in Brink, including a $3.9 million increase in Brink POS SaaS revenue more than offsetting a reduction in Services to our traditional Tier 1 customers and SureCheck Services. Surecheck Service revenue was $2.7 million in 2019 versus $4.0 million in 2018. Contract revenues were $63.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $67.2 million reported for the year ended December 31, 2018, a decrease of 4.8%. This decrease was driven by a 4% decrease in our Mission Systems revenue due to reduction of revenue on cost-based contracts and a 4% reduction in ISR revenues due to ceiling limitations in a large customer's funding. Product margins for the year ended December 31, 2019, were 22.9%, in line with the 23.0% for the year ended December 31, 2018. Service margins were 30.9% for the year ended December 31, 2019, an increase from 23.8% recorded for the year ended December 31,2018. ServicemarginsincreasedprimarilyduetoBrinkPOSSaaSandtheincreaseinprofitabilityinourfieldservicebusiness. During 2018 and 2019, impairment charges were recorded for SureCheck capitalized software of $1.6 million and $0.7 million, respectively. Contract margins were 8.9% for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to 10.7% for the year ended December 31, 2018. The decrease in margin was primarily driven by decrease activity in Mission Systems' better performing cost-based contracts. Selling, general, and administrative expenses were $37.0 million for the year ending December 31, 2019, compared to $35.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase is due to additional investments in Brink POS sales and marketing and increased equity and incentive compensation, partially offset by savings in other departments. SG&A expenses associated with the internal investigation for 2019 were $0.6 million as compared to $1.1M in 2018. Research and development expenses were $13.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $12.4 million recorded for the year ended December 31, 2018. This increase was primarily related to a $2.1 million increase in software development investments for Brink offset by decreases in other product lines. During the year ended December 31, 2019, we recorded $1.2 million of amortization expense associated with acquired identifiable intangible assets in connection with our acquisition of Brink Software, Inc. in September 2014 (the "Brink Acquisition") compared to $1.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. Additionally, in 2019 we recorded $0.2 million of amortization expense associated with acquired identifiable intangible assets in the Drive-Thru Acquisition, and $0.1 million of amortization expense associated with acquired identifiable intangible assets in the Restaurant Magic Acquisition. Other (expense) income, net, was ($1.5 million) for the year ended December 31, 2019, as compared to other income, net of $0.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. Other income/expense primarily includes fair value adjustments on contingent considerations, rental income, net of applicable expenses, foreign currency transactions gains and losses, fair value fluctuations of our deferred compensation plan and other non-operating income/expense. In 2018, a $0.5 million gain was recorded for the sale of real estate. In 2019, there was a $0.2 million expense for the termination of the Brink Acquisition earn-out agreement compared to a $0.5 million benefit as a result of a reduction of contingent consideration related to the Brink Acquisition in 2018. Interest expense, net was $4.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, as compared to interest expense, net of $0.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase reflects $2.6 million of interest expense related to the sale of the 4.50% Convertible Senior Notes due 2024 issued on April 15, 2019 (the "2024 notes") as well as $2.0 million of accretion of 2024 notes debt discount for 2019. For the year ended December 31, 2019, our effective income tax rate was 18.9%, which was mainly due to deferred tax adjustments related to foreign tax credit carryforwards and state taxes, offset by changes in the valuation allowance and excess tax benefits resulting from the exercise of non-qualified stock options. For the year ended December 31, 2018, our effective income tax rate was (141.7)% due to recording a full valuation allowance on the entire deferred tax assets.

	Year ended December 31,		$	%

(in thousands)	2019	2018	variance	variance

Restaurant/Retail

Core	$78,238	$102,877	$(24,639)	(24)%

Brink *	41,689	25,189	16,500	66%

SureCheck	3,380	6,003	(2,623)	(44)%

Total Restaurant Retail	$123,307	$134,069	$(10,762)	(8)%

Government

Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance	$29,541	$30,888	$(1,347)	(4)%

Mission Systems	33,513	35,082	(1,569)	(4)%

Product Sales	871	1,207	(336)	(28)%

Total Government	$63,925	$67,177	$(3,252)	(5)%


Question: If Brink revenue in 2019 was 30,000 thousands, in which year would it be less than 40,000 thousands?

Answer: 2019

Answer: 2018


Question: If product sales in 2019 was 5,000 thousands while the total government revenue remains the same, what percentage of total government would be product sales?

Answer: 7.82


Question: What would the percentage change in the audit fees from 2018 to 2019 be if the amount in 2019 was 5,000,000 instead?

Answer: 8.57

Context:
Fees Billed by Ernst & Young LLP The table below shows the fees billed by EY for audit and other services provided to the Company in fiscal years 2019 and 2018. Figure 48. FY2019/2018 Fees Billed by Ernst & Young LLP (1) Audit Fees represent fees for professional services provided in connection with the audits of annual financial statements. Audit Fees also include reviews of quarterly financial statements, audit services related to other statutory or regulatory filings or engagements, and fees related to EY’s audit of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting pursuant to section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. (2) Audit-Related Fees represent fees for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the audit or review of the Company’s financial statements and are not reported above under “Audit Fees”. These fees principally include due diligence and accounting consultation fees in connection with our acquisition of Coventor, Inc. in 2018 and an information systems audit in 2019. (3) Tax Fees represent fees for professional services for tax planning, tax compliance and review services related to foreign tax compliance and assistance with tax audits and appeals. The audit committee reviewed summaries of the services provided by EY and the related fees during fiscal year 2019 and has determined that the provision of non-audit services was compatible with maintaining the independence of EY as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. The audit committee or its delegate approved 100% of the services and related fee amounts for services provided by EY during fiscal year 2019.

	Fiscal Year 2019 ($)	Fiscal Year 2018 ($)

AuditFees(1)	4,703,830	4,605,495

Audit-RelatedFees(2)	27,000	90,500

TaxFees(3)	194,170	34,888

AllOtherFees	—	—

TOTAL	4,925,000	4,730,883


Question: What would the percentage change in the audit-related fees from 2018 to 2019 be if the amount in 2019 was 30,000 instead?

Answer: -66.85


Question: What would the percentage change in the total fees from 2018 to 2019 be if the amount in 2019 was 5,000,000 instead?

Answer: 5.69


Question: What would be the change in hardware revenue, net if the value for 2019 increases by $10,000?

Answer: 11532

Context:
Hardware Hardware sales, net decreased $1.5 million, or -10% in 2019 compared to 2018. We adopted the new ASC 606 standard as of January 1, 2018 and elected to use the modified retrospective method. Historical hardware sales prior to the adoption of ASC 606 were recorded on a gross basis, as we were the principal in the transaction in accordance with the previous standard, ASC 605-45. Under the new standard, we are an agent in the transaction as we do not physically control the hardware which we sell. Accordingly, starting January 1, 2018, we recognize our hardware revenue net of related cost which reduces both hardware revenue and cost of sales as compared to our accounting prior to 2018. For comparison purposes only, had we implemented ASC 606 using the full retrospective method, we would have also presented hardware revenue net of cost for prior periods as shown below. The majority of hardware sales are derived from our Americas segment. Sales of hardware are largely dependent upon customer- specific desires, which fluctuate.

				Year Ended December 31,

				% Change vs.Prior Year

2019	2019	2018	2017	2019	2018

Hardware Revenue (Pre ASC 606 Adoption)	$44,972	$49,914	$43,190	-10%	16%

Cost of hardware	-32,455	-35,947	- 32,205	-10%	12%

Hardware Revenue, net (Post ASC 606 Adoption)	$12,517	$13,967	$ 10,985	-10%	27%


Question: What would be the new change in hardware revenue (Pre ASC 606 Adoption) if the value in 2019 increases by 10%?

Answer: -444.8


Question: What would be the sum of cost of hardware for 2019 and 2018 if the cost of hardware in 2019 is reduced by 2,455?

Answer: 65947


Question: In which year would the amount of other financial expenses be the largest if the amount in 2019 was $38.5 million instead?

Answer: 2017

Context:
NOTE 7 - continued Lease payments not recognized as a liability The Group has elected not to recognize a lease liability for short-term leases (leases of an expected term of 12 months or less) or for leases of low value assets. Payments made under such leases are expensed on a straight-line basis. The expenses relating to payments not recognized as a lease liability are insignificant. Administrative expenses The total outflow for leases, USD 2.9m, is presented as “Depreciation” of USD 2.5m and “Financial expenses” (interest) of USD 0.4m, in contrast to the recording of an operating lease charge of a materially equivalent figure within the line item “Administrative expenses” under IAS 17. Financial expenses Financial expenses for the reporting periods:

USDm	2019	2018	2017

Interest expenses:	-	-	-

Financial expenses arising from lease liabilities regarding right-of-use assets	2.4	2.3	1.8

Other financial expenses	39.5	37.0	38.8

Total	41.9	39.3	40.6


Question: What would the change in the total financial expenses in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $41.0 million instead?

Answer: 1.7


Question: What would the percentage change in the total financial expenses in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $41.0 million instead?

Answer: 4.33


Question: How many years did net income exceed $100,000 thousand if net income in 2018 was $150,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 3

Context:
7. Earnings Per Share The following is a reconciliation of the amounts utilized in the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share for fiscal2 019, 2018 and 2017 (in thousands, except per share amounts): In each of the fiscal years 2019, 2018 and 2017, share-based awards for approximately 0.1 million shares were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per share as they were antidilutive.

	2019	2018	2017

Net income	108,616	13,040	112,062

Basic weighted average common shares outstanding	30,271	33,003	33,612

Dilutive effect of share-based awards and options outstanding	803	916	941

Diluted weighted average shares outstanding	31,074	33,919	34,553

Earnings per share:

Basic	3.59	0.40	3.33

Diluted	3.50	0.38	3.24


Question: What would be the change in the Basic weighted average common shares outstanding between 2018 and 2019 if the Basic weighted average common shares outstanding in 2018 was $20,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 10271


Question: What would be the percentage change in the diluted earnings per share between 2017 and 2019 if the diluted earnings per share in 2019 was $4 instead?

Answer: 23.46


Question: What would be the change in cash and cash equivalents between 2019 and 2018 if the cash increased by 100 million in 2019?

Answer: 148

Context:
Acquisitions and divestments Acquisitions In 2019, Ericsson made acquisitions with a negative cash flow effect amounting to SEK 1,815 (1,220) million. The acquisitions presented below are not material, but the Company gives the information to provide the reader a summarized view of the content of the acquisitions made. The acquisitions consist primarily of: Kathrein: On October 2, 2019, the Company acquired assets from Kathrein, a world leading provider of antenna and filter technologies with approximately 4,000 employees. Kathrein’s antenna and filters business has a strong R&D organization with extensive experience in antenna design and research, coupled with a strong IPR portfolio. In addition to broadening Ericsson’s portfolio of antenna and filter products, the acquisition will bring vital competence for the evolution of advanced radio network products. The acquired Kathrein business has had a negative impact of SEK –0.5 billion since the acquisition, corresponding to –1 percentage point in Networks operating margin. Balances to facilitate the Purchase price allocation are preliminary. CSF: On August 20, 2019, the Company acquired 100% of the shares in CSF Holdings Inc. a US-based technology company with approximately 25 employees. CSF strengthens iconectiv’s Business to Consumer (B2C) product platforms to enable growth in messaging and Toll-Free Number (TFN) management. Balances to facilitate the Purchase price allocation are final. ST-Ericsson: Before ST-Ericsson was a joint venture where Ericsson and ST Microelectronics had a 50/50 ownership. This joint venture consisted of a number of legal entities where the two parties owned different stakes in the different legal entities. In December 2019 the Company initiated transactions to wind-down the legal structure of ST-Ericsson by acquiring the remaining shares in two legal ST-Ericsson entities and costs of SEK –0.3 billion impacted the result. The Company now owns 100% of the shares in those entities. In order to finalize a Purchase price allocation all relevant information needs to be in place. Examples of such information are final consideration and final opening balances, they may remain preliminary for a period of time due to for example adjustments of working capital, tax items or decisions from local authorities. 1) Acquisition-related costs are included in Selling and administrative expenses in the consolidated income statement.

Acquisitions 2017–2019

	2019	2018	2017

Total consideration, including cash	1,957	1,314	62

Net assets acquired

Cash and cash equivalents	142	94	–

Property, plant and equipment	353	4	12

Intangible assets	497	481	101

Investments in associates	101	64	–

Other assets	1,357	254	1

Provisions, incl. post-employment benefits	–102	–	–

Other liabilities	–743	–494	25

Total identifiable net assets	1,605	403	139

Costs recognized in net income	153	–	–

Goodwill	199	911	–77

Total	1,957	1,314	62

Acquisition-related costs 1)	85	24	49


Question: What would be the total acquisition-related costs from 2017 to 2019 if the cost for each increases by 10 million?

Answer: 188


Question: What would be the change in total consideration between 2019 and 2018 if 2019 total decreases by 10 million?

Answer: 633


Question: In which year would the basic adjusted earnings per share be larger if the amount in 2019 was 245.7p instead?

Answer: 2018

Context:
Adjusted earnings per share Basic adjusted earnings per share is defined as adjusted profit for the period attributable to equity holders divided by the weighted average number of shares. Diluted adjusted earnings per share is defined as adjusted profit for the period attributable to equity holders divided by the diluted weighted average number of shares. Basic and diluted EPS calculated on an IFRS profit basis are included in Note 10.

	2019	2018

Profit for the period attributable to equity holders as reported under IFRS (£m)	166.6	223.1

Items excluded from adjusted operating profit disclosed above (£m)	37.7	(34.2)

Tax effects on adjusted items (£m)	(8.5)	(5.0)

Adjusted profit for the period attributable to equity holders (£m)	195.8	183.9

Weighted average shares (million)	73.7	73.6

Basic adjusted earnings per share	265.7p	250.0p

Diluted weighted average shares (million)	73.9	73.8

Diluted adjusted earnings per share	264.9p	249.1p


Question: What would the change in the profit for the period attributable to equity holders as reported under IFRS in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was 170.0 million instead?

Answer: -53.1


Question: What would the percentage change in the profit for the period attributable to equity holders as reported under IFRS in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was 170.0 million instead?

Answer: -23.8


Question: What was the change in interest expense between 2017 and 2018 if interest expense in 2017 was $10,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 280

Context:
Our CODM evaluates each segment based on Adjusted Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (“Adjusted EBITDA”), and we therefore consider Adjusted EBITDA to be a primary measure of operating performance of our operating segments. We define Adjusted EBITDA as earnings before investment income, interest expense, taxes, depreciation, amortization and stock-based compensation and other adjustments as identified below. The adjustments to our financial results prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) to calculate Adjusted EBITDA are itemized below (in thousands): It is not practicable for us to report identifiable assets by segment because these businesses share resources, functions and facilities We do not have significant long-lived assets outside the United States.

		Year Ended February 28,

	2019	2018	2017

Net income (loss)	$18,398	$16,617	$(7,904)

Investment income	(5,258)	(2,256)	(1,691)

Interest expense	16,726	10,280	9,896

Income tax provision (benefits)	(1,330)	10,681	(1,563)

Depreciation and amortization	20,016	22,957	23,469

Stock-based compensation	11,029	9,298	7,833

Impairment loss and equity in net loss of affiliate	6,787	1,411	1,284

Loss on extinguishment of debt	2,033	-	-

Acquisition and integration related expenses	935	-	4,513

Non-recurring legal expenses, net of reversal of litigation

provision	(11,020)	10,738	9,192

Gain on LoJack battery performance legal Settlement	(18,333)	(28,333)	-

Restructuring	8,015	-	-

Other	217	989	4,339

Adjusted EBITDA	$48,215	$52,382	$49,368


Question: What was the change in stock-based compensation between 2018 and 2019 if stock-based compensation in 2019 was $12,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 2702


Question: What was the percentage change in Depreciation and amortization between 2017 and 2018 if depreciation and amortization in 2018 was $20,000 thousand instead?

Answer: -14.78


Question: If Canadian broadband services in 2019 was 180,000 thousands, what was the increase / (decrease) from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 13819

Context:
ADJUSTED EBITDA (1) For the three-month period ended August 31, 2019, the average foreign exchange rate used for translation was 1.3222 USD/CDN. (2) Fiscal 2018 was restated to comply with IFRS 15 and to reflect a change in accounting policy as well as to reclassify results from Cogeco Peer 1 as discontinued operations. For further details, please consult the "Accounting policies" and "Discontinued operations" sections. (3) Fiscal 2019 actuals are translated at the average foreign exchange rate of the comparable period of fiscal 2018 which was 1.3100 USD/CDN. Fiscal 2019 fourth-quarter adjusted EBITDA increased by 4.6% (4.3% in constant currency) as a result of: • an increase in the American broadband services segment mainly as a result of strong organic growth combined with the impact of the FiberLight acquisition; and • an increase in the Canadian broadband services segment resulting mainly from a decline in operating expenses.

Three months ended August 31,	2019 (1)	2018 (2)	Change	Change in constant currency (3)	Foreign exchange impact (3)

(in thousands of dollars, except percentages)	$	$	%	%	$

Canadian broadband services	172,120	166,181	3.6	3.6	(73)

American broadband services	115,523	109,937	5.1	4.1	1,057

Inter-segment eliminations and other	(12,033)	(12,707)	(5.3)	(5.3)	2

	275,610	263,411	4.6	4.3	986


Question: If Canadian broadband services in 2019 was 100,000 thousands what was the average?

Answer: 133090.5


Question: If American broadband services in 2019 was 120,000 thousands, what was the average?

Answer: 114968.5


Question: What would be the average age of the executive officers of Xperi Corporation if the age of Paul Davis is 40?

Answer: 51.8

Context:
Information About Our Executive Officers Set forth below are the name, age and position of each of our executive officers The following are biographical summaries of our executive officers other than Mr. Kirchner, for whom a biographical summary is set forth under “Information about Our Board of Directors.” Robert Andersen is executive vice president and chief financial officer of Xperi Corporation. He became executive vice president and chief financial officer of Xperi Corporation in January 2014. Prior to joining Xperi Corporation, he served as executive vice president and CFO of G2 Holdings Corp. d/b/a Components Direct. Mr. Andersen previously served as CFO at Phoenix Technologies Ltd. and held senior financial roles at Wind River Systems, Inc. and NextOffice, Inc. His finance career began at Hewlett-Packard Company, where he served in various controller, treasury and technology finance management roles. Mr. Andersen served on the board of directors of publicly traded Quantum Corporation through March 2017. He currently serves on the board of directors of the Alameda County Community Food Bank in the role of vice chair. Mr. Andersen holds a B.A. in economics from the University of California, Davis, and an M.B.A. from the Anderson School of Management at the University of California, Los Angeles. Paul Davis is general counsel and corporate secretary of Xperi Corporation. He joined Xperi Corporation in August 2011, and became general counsel and corporate secretary in July 2013. Before joining Xperi Corporation, he was an attorney at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, where his practice focused on mergers and acquisitions, corporate securities matters and corporate governance. Mr. Davis holds a Juris Doctor from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law and B.A. degrees in history and political science from the University of California, San Diego. While at Hastings, he was magna cum laude, an Order of the Coif member and a managing editor on the Hastings Law Journal. Murali Dharan has served as president of Tessera Intellectual Property Corp. (“Tessera”) since October of 2017 and is responsible for the strategic direction, management and growth of the Tessera intellectual property licensing business. He has extensive leadership experience, most recently as CEO of IPVALUE, guiding the company from a start-up to an industry leader and helping partners to generate more than $1.6 billion in IP revenue. Prior to joining IPVALUE in 2002, Mr. Dharan held executive roles at various technology companies, including executive vice president at Preview Systems, vice president and general manager at Silicon Graphics, and vice president and general manager at NEC. Mr. Dharan holds an electrical engineering degree from Anna University in India, a master’s degree in computer science from Indiana University, and an MBA from Stanford University. Geir Skaaden has served as our chief products and services officer since December 2016 and leads global sales, business development and product management for our portfolio of imaging and audio solutions. He served as DTS’s Executive Vice President, Products, Platforms and Solutions from October 2015 until its acquisition by the Company in December 2016, having previously served as DTS’s Senior Vice President, Corporate Business Development, Digital Content and Media Solutions since December 2013. Prior to that, Mr. Skaaden served as DTS’s Senior Vice President, Products & Platforms from April 2012 to December 2013. From 2008 to 2012, Mr. Skaaden served in a number of positions overseeing numerous aspects including strategic sales, licensing operations, and business development. Prior to joining DTS in 2008, Mr. Skaaden served as the Chief Executive Officer at Neural Audio Corporation from 2004 to 2008, where he previously served as Vice President, Corporate Development from 2002 to 2004. Mr. Skaaden holds a B.A. in Finance from the University of Oregon, a Business degree from the Norwegian School of Management and an M.B.A. from the University of Washington. We have adopted a written code of business conduct and ethics that applies to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons serving similar functions. The text of our code of business conduct and ethics has been posted on our website at http://www.xperi.com. and is included as an exhibit to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 1, 2016.

Name	Age	Position(s)

Jon Kirchner	52	Chief Executive Officer, Director

Robert Andersen	56	Chief Financial Officer

Paul Davis	44	General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

Murali Dharan	58	President of Tessera Intellectual Property Corp.

Geir Skaaden	53	Chief Products and Services Officer


Question: What would be the percentage of years that Geir Skaaden served as the Chief Executive Officer of Neural Audio Corporation throughout his life if he served as the Chief Executive Officer from 2002 to 2008?

Answer: 11.32


Question: Who would be the oldest among all executive officers of Xperi Corporation if the age of Murali Dharan is 50?

Answer: Robert Andersen


Question: In which year would Repairs and maintenance costs be the largest if the amount in 2019 was $100.4 million instead?

Answer: 2018

Context:
21. Supplemental Data The following are additional required disclosures and other material items:

		Years Ended June 30,

($ in millions)	2019	2018	2017

Cost Data:

Repairs and maintenance costs	$120.4	$108.0	$99.1

Cash Flow Data:

Noncash investing and financing activities:

Noncash purchases of property, plant, equipment and software	$16.1	$16.5	$13.7

Cash paid (received) during the year for:

Interest payments, net	$27.6	$29.5	$27.7

Income tax payments (refunds), net	$27.5	$33.7	$(33.3)


Question: What would the change in Repairs and maintenance costs in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $118.0 million instead?

Answer: 10


Question: What would the percentage change in Repairs and maintenance costs in 2019 from 2018 be if the amount in 2019 was $118.0 million instead?

Answer: 9.26


Question: What will be the change in Machinery and equipment from 2018 to 2019 if the amount of Machinery and equipment in 2019 increased by 900 thousand?

Answer: 611463

Context:
Property, plant and equipment, net Property, plant and equipment, net consisted of the following at December 31, 2019 and 2018 (in thousands): We periodically assess the estimated useful lives of our property, plant and equipment whenever applicable facts and circumstances indicate a change in the estimated useful life of an asset may have occurred. During the year ended December 31, 2019, we revised the estimated useful lives of certain core Series 6 manufacturing equipment from 10 years to 15 years. Such revision was primarily due to the validation of certain aspects of our Series 6 module technology, including the nature of the manufacturing process, the operating and maintenance cost profile of the manufacturing equipment, and the technology’s compatibility with our long-term module technology roadmap. We expect the revised useful lives to reduce depreciation by approximately $15.0 million per year. Depreciation of property, plant and equipment was $176.4 million, $109.1 million, and $91.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018, and 2017, respectively.

	2019	2018

Land	$14,241	$14,382

Buildings and improvements .	664,266	567,605

Machinery and equipment .	2,436,997	1,826,434

Office equipment and furniture .	159,848	178,011

Leasehold improvements	48,772	49,055

Construction in progress	243,107	405,581

Property, plant and equipment, gross	3,567,231	3,041,068

Accumulated depreciation .	(1,386,082)	(1,284,857)

Property, plant and equipment, net	$2,181,149	$1,756,211


Question: Suppose land in 2019 increased by 1000 thousand, what will be the difference between land from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 859


Question: If the net property, plant and equipment in 2018 increased by 1000 thousand, what will be the percentage change in net property, plant and equipment from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 24.13


Question: If the Risk-free interest rate for 2019 was 2.54% instead, What is the average Risk-free interest rate for the 3 years?

Answer: 2.03

Context:
PSUs – Total Shareholder Return (TSR) The PSUs granted based on TSR are contingently awarded and will be payable in shares of the Company’s common stock subject to the condition that the number of PSUs, if any, earned by the employees upon the expiration of a three-year award performance period is dependent on the Company’s TSR ranking relative to a peer group of companies. The fair value of the PSUs based on TSR was estimated on the grant date using a Monte Carlo Simulation. Other assumptions include the expected volatility of all companies included in the TSR, the historical share price returns analysis of all companies included in the TSR and assumes dividends are reinvested. The expected volatility was based on the historical volatility for a period of time that approximates the duration between the valuation date and the end of the performance period. The risk-free interest rate is based on the Zero-Coupon Treasury STRIP yield curve matching the term from the valuation date to the end of the performance period. Compensation expense for the PSUs based on TSR (which is considered a market condition) is a fixed amount determined at the grant date fair value and is recognized 100% over the three-year award performance period regardless of whether PSUs are awarded at the end of the award performance period. The number of PSUs granted based on TSR and the assumptions used to calculate the grant date fair value of the PSUs based on TSR are shown in the following table: (1) For 2019, this represents the weighted average fair value for PSU awards approved during the first and third quarter. (2) For 2019, values represent weighted average assumptions for PSU awards approved during the first and third quarter. (3) On May 18, 2017, the O&C Committee approved a change in the vesting policy regarding the existing 2017 Three year PSU Awards for Ilham Kadri. The modified vesting terms resulted in award modification accounting treatment. The weighted average fair value on grant date reflects the impact of the fair value on date of modification for these awards.

	2019	2018	2017

Number of units granted	70,543	56,829	100,958

Weighted average fair value on grant date(1) (3)	$ 57.53	$ 43.40	$ 44.24

Expected Price volatility(2)	22.86%	22.00%	25.31 %

Risk-free interest rate(2)	2.36%	2.00%	1.56 %


Question: If the number of units for all years was reduced by 2500, What is the number of units granted for 2019 expressed as a percentage of all units granted?

Answer: 30.81


Question: If the number of units granted for 2019 was increased by 2300, What is the average Number of units granted for the 3 years?

Answer: 76876.67


Question: Which years did Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash at beginning of period exceed $400,000 thousand if cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash in 2018 was $450,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 2

Context:
GreenSky, Inc. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) (United States Dollars in thousands, except per share data, unless otherwise stated) The following table reflects the cash flow impact of GS Holdings on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years indicated.

	Year Ended December 31,

	2019	2018

Net cash provided by operating activities	$153,327	$256,426

Net cash used in investing activities	(15,381)	(6,581)

Net cash used in financing activities	(159,608)	(154,210)

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash	(21,662)	95,635

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash at beginning of period	449,473	353,838

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash at end of period	$427,811	$449,473


Question: What would be the change in the net cash used in financing activities between 2018 and 2019 if the net cash used in financing activities in 2018 was -$159,000 thousand instead?

Answer: -608


Question: What would be the percentage change in Net cash provided by operating activities between 2018 and 2019 if net cash provided by operating activities in 2019 was $300,000 thousand instead?

Answer: 16.99


Question: What would be the percentage change in total deferred tax assets from 2018 to 2019 if the total deferred tax assets in 2019 were $300?

Answer: 41.98

Context:
The deferred income tax balance sheet accounts arise from temporary differences between the amount of assets and liabilities recognized for financial reporting and tax purposes. Components of the deferred tax assets and liabilities at December 31 were as follows: [1] Upon adoption of ASC 842, deferred taxes associated with previously recognized deferred rent liabilities were reclassified into deferred taxes for ROU asset and lease liability. As of December 31, 2019, the Company had approximately $19.0 of tax-effected U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards. Some of these net operating loss carryforwards have an indefinite carryforward period, and those that do not will begin to expire in 2021 if not utilized. The majority of the U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards are subject to limitation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“IRC”) Section 382; however, the Company expects to utilize such losses in their entirety prior to expiration. The U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards decreased from 2018 to 2019 primarily due to current year tilization. The Company has approximately $33.7 of tax-effected state net operating loss carryforwards (without regard to federal benefit of state). Some of these net operating loss carryforwards have an indefinite carryforward period, and those that do not will begin to expire in 2020 if not utilized. The state net operating loss carryforwards are primarily related to Florida and New Jersey, but the Company has smaller net operating losses in various other states. The Company has approximately $65.6 of tax-effected foreign net operating loss carryforwards. Some of these net operating loss carryforwards have an indefinite carryforward period, and those that do not will begin to expire in 2020 if not utilized. The foreign net operating loss carryforwards increased from 2018 to 2019 primarily due to the recognition of a discrete tax benefit of $41.0 in connection with a foreign restructuring plan allowing the future realization of net operating losses. Additionally, the Company has $5.0 of U.S. federal and state research and develop- ment tax credit carryforwards (without regard to federal benefit of state). Some of these research and development credit carry- forwards have an indefinite carryforward period, and those that do not will begin to expire in 2020 if not utilized. As of December 31, 2019, the Company determined that a total valuation allowance of $36.3 was necessary to reduce U.S. fed- eral and state deferred tax assets by $15.4 and foreign deferred tax assets by $20.9, where it was more likely than not that all of such deferred tax assets will not be realized. As of December 31, 2019, the Company believes it is more likely than not that the remaining net deferred tax assets will be realized based on the Company’s estimates of future taxable income and any applicable tax-planning strategies within various tax jurisdictions.

	2019	2018

Deferred tax assets:

Reserves and accrued expenses	$ 175.2	$ 156.5

Inventories	4.3	4.5

Net operating loss carryforwards	111.2	67.9

R&D credits	4.1	6.1

Valuation allowance	(36.3)	(26.4)

Outside basis difference on investments held for sale	—	2.7

Lease liability1	64.0	—

Total deferred tax assets	$ 322.5	$ 211.3

Deferred tax liabilities:

Reserves and accrued expenses	$ 15.5	$ 14.3

Amortizable intangible assets	1,229.9	1,043.0

Plant and equipment	10.8	6.6

Accrued tax on unremitted foreign earnings	17.1	16.3

Outside basis difference on investments held for sale	—	10.0

ROU asset1	61.7	—

Total deferred tax liabilities	$ 1,335.0	$ 1,090.2


Question: What would be the proportion of deferred tax liabilities of amortizable intangible assets and accrued tax on unremitted foreign earnings over total deferred tax liabilities in 2019 if the amortizable intangible assets were $1,200?

Answer: 0.93


Question: What would be the ratio of deferred tax assets of inventories from 2018 to 2019 if the deferred tax assets of inventories in 2019 were $4?

Answer: 1.12


Question: What proportion of the amount invested in Enterprise Fiber products is the 2019 revenue if the 2019 revenue is 0.2 times its current value?

Answer: 72.67

Context:
During the year, we passed an additional 12,400 addresses in the Greater Cincinnati area with Fioptics, which included a focus on Fiber to the Premise ("FTTP") addresses as FTTP has become a more relevant solution for our customers. As of December 31, 2019, the Fioptics products are now available to approximately 623,400 customer locations or 75% of the Greater Cincinnati operating territory. During 2019, we passed an additional 5,900 addresses in Hawaii. The Consumer/SMB Fiber products are now available to approximately 246,400 addresses, or 50% of the operating territory in Hawaii, including Oahu and the neighbor islands In 2019, the Company also invested $24.0 million in Enterprise Fiber products, which includes fiber and IP-ased core network technology. These investments position the Company to meet increased business and carrier demand within Greater Cincinnati and in contiguous markets in the Midwest region. In Hawaii, expenditures are for high-bandwidth data transport products, such as metro-ethernet, including the Southeast Asia to United States ("SEA-US") cable. We continue to evolve and optimize network assets to support the migration of legacy products to new technology, and as of December 31, 2019, the Company has: increased the total number of commercial addresses with fiber-based services (referred to as a lit address) to 28,800 in Greater Cincinnati and 20,300 in Hawaii by connecting approximately 2,200 additional lit addresses in Greater Cincinnati and 1,200 additional lit addresses in Hawaii during the twelve months ended December 31, 2019; expanded the fiber network to span more than 12,500 route miles in Greater Cincinnati and 4,700 route miles in Hawaii; and provided cell site back-haul services to approximately 90% of the 1,000 cell sites in the Greater Cincinnati market, of which approximately 97% of these sites are lit with fiber, and 80% of the 1,100 cell sites in Hawaii, all of which are lit with fiber. As a result of our investments, we have generated year-over-year Entertainment and Communications revenue growth each year since 2013. The Company's expanding fiber assets allow us to support the ever-increasing demand for data, video and internet devices with speed, agility and security. We believe our fiber investments are a long-term solution for our customers' bandwidth needs

Hawaii Operating Territory	2018	2019

Consumer / SMB Fiber Revenue (in millions):	$87.2	$42.3

Subscribers (in thousands):

High-speed internet	68.2	65.9

Video	42.7	48.8

Voice	30.0	30.3


Question: What is the total number of subscribers in 2019 if 5,000 of them no longer decide to be subscribers?

Answer: 135.9


Question: What is the percentage change in Hiah-speed internet Subscribers between 2018 to 2019 if it is 79 thousand in 2019??

Answer: 19.88


Question: What is the total revenue earned across 2017 to 2019 if the total revenue earned in 2017 is 50 million?

Answer: 179.5


Question: What would be the percentage change in the unrecognized tax benefits at the beginning of the year between 2017 and 2018 if the 2018 unrecognised tax benefit is increased by $5,000?

Answer: 22.32

Context:
In accordance with ASC 740-10, Income Taxes, the Company has adopted the accounting policy that interest and penalties recognized are classified as part of its income taxes The following shows the changes in the gross amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2019 (in thousands): The Company does not anticipate that its total unrecognized tax benefits will significantly change due to settlement of examination or the expiration of statute of limitations during the next 12 months. The Company files U.S. and foreign income tax returns with varying statutes of limitations. Due to the Company’s net carry-over of unused operating losses and tax credits, all years from 2003 forward remain subject to future examination by tax authorities

	2019	2018	2017

Unrecognized tax benefits, beginning of the year	$6,029	$3,004	$2,460

Increases related to prior year tax position	—	1,050	—

Decreases related to prior year tax positions	(48)	—	(3)

Increases related to current year tax positions	2,984	1,975	547

Unrecognized tax benefits, end of year	$8,965	6,029	3,004


Question: What would be the percentage change in the unrecognized tax benefits at the beginning of the year between 2018 and 2019 if the 2019 value is increased by 10%?

Answer: 120.77


Question: What would be the average increases related to current year tax positions between 2017 to 2019 if the value in 2019 is decreased by 100,000?

Answer: 1802


Question: If the Senior secured notes interest in 2018/19 increased to 38.1£m, what would be the revised average for the year 2018/19 to 2017/18?

Answer: 35.15

Context:
Net finance cost was £47.2m for the year; a decrease of £1.2m on 2017/18. Net regular interest in the year was £40.5m, a decrease of £3.9m compared to the prior year. Consistent with recent years, the largest component of finance costs in the year was interest due to holders of the Group’s senior secured notes, which was £31.7m. The interest on the senior secured notes was £0.5m lower compared to the prior year following the re-financing of the June 2021 £325m fixed rate notes at a coupon of 6.5% to the October 2023 £300m fixed rate notes to the slightly lower coupon of 6.25%. Bank debt interest of £5.1m was £2.1m lower in the year due to lower levels of average debt and a lower margin on the revolving credit facility following the refinancing completed in May 2018. Amortisation of debt issuance costs was £3.7m, £1.3m lower than the prior year due to lower transaction costs associated with the issue of the £300m 6.25% Fixed rate notes compared with the retired £325m 6.5% Fixed rate notes. Write-off of financing costs and early redemption fees of £11.3m include a £5.7m fee related to the write-off of transaction costs associated with the senior secured fixed rate notes due March 2021, which were repaid during the year, and a £5.6m redemption fee associated with the early call of the March 2021 bond. In the prior year, a £0.4m discount unwind credit relating to long-term property provisions held by the Group due to an increase in gilt yields was reflected in reported Net finance cost. In 2018/19, a discount unwind charge of £3.0m was included in the Net finance cost of £47.2m. Other interest income of £7.6m in the year relates to monies received from the Group’s associate Hovis Holdings Limited ('Hovis') and reflects the reversal of a previous impairment.

£m	2018/19	2017/18	Change

Senior secured notes interest	31.7	32.2	0.5

Bank debt interest	5.1	7.2	2.1

	36.8	39.4	2.6

Amortisation of debt issuance costs	3.7	5.0	1.3

Net regular interest5	40.5	44.4	3.9

Fair value movements on interest rate financial instruments	–	(0.4)	(0.4)

Write-off of financing costs and early redemption fees	11.3	4.0	(7.3)

Discount unwind	3.0	(0.4)	(3.4)

Other finance income	(7.6)	–	7.6

Other interest cost	–	0.8	0.8

Net finance cost	47.2	48.4	1.2


Question: If the Bank debt interest in 2018/19 increased to 9.1£m, what would be the revised average for the year 2018/19 to 2017/18?

Answer: 8.15


Question: If the Net regular interest in 2018/19 increased to 51.6£m, what would be the revised average for the year 2018/19 to 2017/18?

Answer: 48


Question: If marine services in 2019 was 20.0 million, what would be the percentage change from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 1.52

Context:
Income from Equity Investees Marine Services: Income from equity investees within our Marine Services segment for the year ended December 31, 2019 decreased $14.1 million to $5.6 million from $19.7 million for the year ended year ended December 31, 2018. The decrease was driven by HMN, due to lower revenues on large turnkey projects underway than in the comparable period. The equity investment in HMN has contributed $5.0 million and $12.7 million in income from equity investees for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Further contributing to the reduction in income were losses at SBSS from a loss contingency related to ongoing legal disputes and lower vessel utilization. Life Sciences: Loss from equity investees within our Life Sciences segment for the year ended December 31, 2019 decreased $0.6 million to $3.4 million from $4.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The decrease in losses were largely due to lower equity method losses recorded from our investment in MediBeacon due to the timing of clinical trials and revenue from a licensing agreement which did not occur in the comparable periods. Segment Results of Operations In the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements, other operating (income) expense includes (i) (gain) loss on sale or disposal of assets, (ii) lease termination costs, (iii) asset impairment expense, (iv) accretion of asset retirement obligations, and (v) FCC reimbursements. Each table summarizes the results of operations of our operating segments and compares the amount of the change between the periods presented (in millions).

		Years Ended December 31,

	2019	2018	Increase / (Decrease)

Construction	$—	$ (0.2)	$ 0.2

Marine Services	5.6	19.7	(14.1)

Life Sciences	(3.4)	(4.0)	0.6

Other	—	(0.1)	0.1

Income from equity investees	$ 2.2	$ 15.4	$ (13.2)


Question: If life sciences in 2019 was -5.0 million, what would be the average value for 2018 and 2019?

Answer: -4.5


Question: If income from equity investees in 2019 was 20.0 million, what would be the percentage change from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 29.87


Question: What will be the change in operating lease asset if the amount in 2018 was 50,000 thousand?

Answer: 95711

Context:
Other assets Other assets consisted of the following at December 31, 2019 and 2018 (in thousands): (1) See Note 10. "Leases" to our consolidated financial statements for discussion of our lease arrangements. (1) (2) In April 2009, we entered into a credit facility agreement with a solar power project entity of one of our customers for an available amount of €17.5 million to provide financing for a PV solar power system. The credit facility bears interest at 8.0% per annum, payable quarterly, with the full amount due in December 2026. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the balance outstanding on the credit facility was €7.0 million ($7.8 million and $8.0 million, respectively). (3) In June 2015, 8point3 Energy Partners LP (the “Partnership”), a limited partnership formed by First Solar and SunPower Corporation (collectively the “Sponsors”), completed its initial public offering (the “IPO”). As part of the IPO, the Sponsors contributed interests in various projects to OpCo in exchange for voting and economic interests in the entity, and the Partnership acquired an economic interest in OpCo using proceeds from the IPO. In June 2018, we completed the sale of our interests in the Partnership and its subsidiaries to CD Clean Energy and Infrastructure V JV, LLC, an equity fund managed by Capital Dynamics, Inc. and certain other co-investors and other parties, and received net proceeds of $240.0 million after the payment of fees, expenses, and other amounts. We accounted for our interests in OpCo, a subsidiary of the Partnership, under the equity method of accounting as we were able to exercise significant influence over the Partnership due to our representation on the board of directors of its general partner and certain of our associates serving as officers of its general partner. During the year ended December 31, 2018, we recognized equity in earnings, net of tax, of $39.7 million from our investment in OpCo, including a gain of $40.3 million, net of tax, for the sale of our interests in the Partnership and its subsidiaries. During the year ended December 31, 2018, we received distributions from OpCo of $12.4 million. In connection with the IPO, we also entered into an agreement with a subsidiary of the Partnership to lease back one of our originally contributed projects, Maryland Solar, until December 31, 2019. Under the terms of the agreement, we made fixed rent payments to the Partnership’s subsidiary and were entitled to all of the energy generated by the project. Due to certain continuing involvement with the project, we accounted for the leaseback agreement as a financing transaction until the sale of our interests in the Partnership and its subsidiaries in June 2018. Following the sale of such interests, the Maryland Solar project qualified for sale-leaseback accounting, and we recognized net revenue of $32.0 million from the sale of the project. (4) See Note 9. “Derivative Financial Instruments” to our consolidated financial statements for discussion of our derivative instruments.

	2019	2018

Operating lease assets (1)	$145,711	$—

Indirect tax receivables .	9,446	22,487

Notes receivable (2)	8,194	8,017

Income taxes receivable .	4,106	4,444

Equity method investments (3) .	2,812	3,186

Derivative instruments (4) .	139	—

Deferred rent .	—	27,249

Other .	79,446	33,495

Other assets	$249,854	$98,878


Question: If the Deferred rent in 2019 was 100,000 thousand instead, what will be the change from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 72751


Question: Suppose the amount in other assets in 2018 increased by 30,000 thousand, what will be the percentage from 2018 to 2019?

Answer: 93.87


Question: What would be the difference in the common stock value between 2018 and 2019 if the value of common stock in 2019 is doubled and then increased by $1,000 thousand?

Answer: 1887

Context:
Equity Incentive Plan Our board of directors administers the plan, determines vesting schedules on plan awards and may accelerate the vesting schedules for award recipients. The stock options granted under the plan have terms of up to 10 years. As of December 31, 2019, awards for the purchase of 4,236,719 shares have been granted and remain outstanding (common stock options, common stock and restricted stock units) and 2,063,281 shares are reserved for future grants under the 2014 Plan. Share-based compensation expenses related to stock options, stock and restricted stock units issued to employees and directors are included in selling, general and administrative expenses. The following table provides a detail of share-based compensation expense (in thousands).

Year Ended December 31

	2019	2018

Common stock, vested at issuance and nonvested at issuance	$721	$555

Stock options	354	132

Restricted stock units	225	103

Compensation expense related to common stock awards issued under equity incentive plan	$ 1,300	$ 790


Question: What would be the total value of stock options in 2018 and 2019 if the total value is halved and then decreased by 100 thousand?

Answer: 143


Question: What would be the average value of stock options in 2018 and 2019 if the value of the stock options in 2019 is decreased by $300 thousand?

Answer: 93


Question: In which year would the Cash flow from operating activities be larger if the amount in FY2018 was 955 million instead?

Answer: 2017/18

Context:
CASH FLOW STATEMENT1 1 Abridged version. The complete version is shown in the consolidated financial statements.

€ million	2017/18	2018/19

Cash flow from operating activities of continuing operations	766	796

Cash flow from operating activities of discontinued operations	139	157

Cash flow from operating activities	905	953

Cash flow from investing activities of continuing operations	−292	46

Cash flow from investing activities of discontinued operations	−89	−136

Cash flow from investing activities	−381	−90

Cash flow before financing activities of continuing operations	474	842

Cash flow before financing activities of discontinued operations	50	21

Cash flow before financing activities	524	863

Cash flow from financing activities of continuing operations	−587	−1,122

Cash flow from financing activities of discontinued operations	−74	−109

Cash flow from financing activities	−661	−1,231

Total cash flows	−137	−368

Currency effects on cash and cash equivalents	−30	17

Total change in cash and cash equivalents	−167	−351


Question: What would the change in cash flow from operating activities in FY2019 from FY2018 be if the amount in FY2019 was 955 million instead?

Answer: 50


Question: What would the percentage change in cash flow from operating activities in FY2019 from FY2018 be if the amount in FY2019 was 955 million instead?

Answer: 5.52