Case 13- 08 Accounting for a Loss Contingency for a Verdict Overturned on Appeal M International (“M”) and W Inc. ( “W,” a competitor of M) have been engaged in long- standing litigation over a specific patent infringement matter . Below is a summary timeline of specific events that have taken place related to this matter : • In May 2007, W filed a claim against M for patent infringement . • For the year ended December 31, 2007, management of M determined th at a loss for this matter was probable and represented t hat the estimate of loss was in the range of $1 5 million to $20 million , with $17 million being the most likely amount of loss within the range. • A jury trial took place in September 2009. • The jury reached a verdict on September 24, 2009, and a judgment was ordered in favor of W . The judgment required M to pay W $18.5 million . • In November 2009, M filed a Notice of Appeal with the Court of Appeals . • In December 2010, the Court of Appeals issued a ruling in favor of M’s appeal and reversed the lower court ’s ruling on the matter. This meant that the Court of Appeals overturned the jury verdict and the $18.5 million judgment against M . • On January 6, 2011, W filed a petition for a re -hearing before the same panel of appellate judges against the reversal of r uling by Court of Appeals . • On February 10, 2011, the appellate judges declined the petition for a re -hearing . • On February 28, 2011, management of M determined this matter was closed upon discussions with in- house legal counsel.

PLEASE PROVIDE ONE PAGE SUMMARY OF THE CASE

Early in 2014, Dobbs Corporation engaged Kiner, Inc. to design and construct a complete modernization of Dobbs's manufacturing facility. Construction was begun on June 1, 2014 and was completed on December 31, 2014. Dobbs made the following payments to Kiner, Inc. during 2014:

Date                                              Payment

June 1, 2014                                 $6,000,000

August 31, 2014                             9,000,000

December 31, 2014                        7,500,000

In order to help finance the construction, Dobbs issued the following during 2014:

1.   $5,000,000 of 10-year, 9% bonds payable, issued at par on May 31, 2014, with interest payable annually on May 31.

2.   1,000,000 shares of no-par common stock, issued at $10 per share on October 1, 2014.

In addition to the 9% bonds payable, the only debt outstanding during 2014 was a $1,250,000, 12% note payable dated January 1, 2010 and due January 1, 2020, with interest payable annually on January 1.

Instructions

Compute the amounts of each of the following:

1.   Weighted-average accumulated expenditures qualifying for capitalization of interest cost.

2.   Avoidable interest incurred during 2014.

3.   Total amount of interest cost to be capitalized during 2014.

2. Please list and discuss at least 3 main provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 that are designed to prevent the next crisis or make it less severe.

(Netherlands and Malaysia )

Discuss attempts that have been made by the authorities to reduce budget deficits post - GFC (from 2010 to 2018). Were they successful in their endeavour?

Following are financial statement numbers and select ratios for Target Corp. for the fiscal year 2016 (ending January 28, 2017).
              

Forecast assumptions and other financial information for Target are as follows:

Use the residual operating income (ROPI) model to estimate the value of Target’s equity, per share at fiscal year-end.
Target Corp. shares closed at $53.82 per share on March 8, 2017, the date the 10-K was filed with the SEC. How does your valuation compare with this closing price?

Following are financial statement numbers and select ratios for Target Corp. for the fiscal year 2016 (ending January 28, 2017).
              

Forecast assumptions and other financial information for Target are as follows:

Use the residual operating income (ROPI) model to estimate the value of Target’s equity, per share at fiscal year-end.
Target Corp. shares closed at $53.82 per share on March 8, 2017, the date the 10-K was filed with the SEC. How does your valuation compare with this closing price?

“Making SMal Big: SMaL Camera Technologies” is an innovative product that made significant profits in the first year but then quickly was attacked by competitors. The evolution and technology of the product in detail. It ends with five different options for technological and business strategy, along with pros and cons of each strategy.

During the period of Carlyle's ownership, SMaL Camera Technologies, Inc. was a developer of CMOS imaging sensors and camera modules. In February 2005, the company was acquired by Cypress Semiconductor (Carlyle.com, n.d.). SMaL Camera Technologies has a turbulent technological aspect; the management made some bad decisions that caused in falling revenues due to lack of product marketing. Their marketing abilities were not correctly built, and instead, they decided against in-house manufacturing and distribution. Startups must be managed very differently, and their management has to make meaningful choices in the first few years of operation that determines the firm’s direction. Though startups are at a disadvantage (resources, visibility, and age) when it comes to commercializing a disruptive technology, they also have significant advantages over critical and stronger firms, who rarely go disruptive and prefer market-pull strategies. They can maintain low visibility till they have all the resources, manufacturing and distribution facilities in place, then hit the market; first entering a niche market making fewer profits and then going mainstream.

-The dream of annual revenues past $100 million can dilute its research-oriented approach to a market-oriented approach. The organization was focusing more energies and resources on branding and promotion without building their marketing capabilities. The commercialization and launch of the product were not well executed. The competitors jumped in before the company could start consolidating making revenues. The options offered by competitors had many new add-ons though was not as slim and small as the SMal, the technology was superior regarding having better picture quality, flash, etc.
-The SMal camera units were easily copied as many new competitors quickly entered the segment within one year of its launch in the market. SMal could not efficiently commercialize their product also due to lack of marketing capabilities. They were also late in giving the facilities which the competitors added to their products as the competitors had the advantage of copying, improving and adding innovations. The second year could not generate the same revenues as the customers’ demands changed and the company could not adapt fast enough due to lack of workforce and resources.
-Going to the CES show was a wrong decision as it got the competitors on a high alert and they immediately starting developing similar products. The option of maintaining low visibility while they had consolidated their resources of manufacturing and distribution should have been followed. They should have done the market launch with full preparation and proper market research.
-The strategy of having an external marketing setup did not go in favor of SMal camera as it was not good for their brand image. Further, the SMal had lost touch with the customer who wanted better facilities like a flash and better quality of the picture which was not possible with the current credit card size camera. There go to market approach lacked the facility to get customer, competitor and market feedback. The time lag to innovate and adapt was slow due to lack of input and resources.
-The idea of having only external manufacturing facility again created a negative for the organization as it was dependent on a third party for its supplies, the technology became vulnerable and accessible to the competitors, the external manufacturer cannot innovative and has time lags so new ideas could not be executed immediately.

CES 2001: The Ultra-Pocket credit card sized digital camera from SMaL Camera Technologies is just 6 mm thick, it can take VGA (640 x 480) images and can be connected to a PC via a USB cable. Other features include a viewfinder, rechargeable battery, 35mm (equiv.) F2.0 fixed lens, and MMC card storage (8 MB supplied). Oh, and it weighs just 63 g (2 oz).

LAS VEGAS, NEVADA, USA – January 6, 2001 – SMaL Camera Technologies, Inc., a developer of low power CMOS imagers and intelligent cameras for a variety of markets, including low cost consumer cameras, handheld electronics, intelligent transportation systems, and surveillance, introduced today at the International Consumer Electronics Show 2001 in Las Vegas, Nevada the Ultra-Pocket™, a digital still camera that re-defines the affordable, compact digital camera.

The Ultra-Pocket is the perfect entry-level digital camera for individuals and families who desire a true pocket camera without sacrificing affordability and quality. "When people see and use the Ultra-Pocket, it is common for them to react with a 'Wow!' at least twice," said Keith Fife, Vice President, Engineering, SMaL Camera Technologies. "The first 'wow' is a reaction to the camera's ultra-thin size – literally the size of a credit card and only 0.2" (6 mm) thin. The second occurs when they see how the Autobrite™ technology clearly captures the dark details of a scene while ensuring that the bright regions never saturate."

The Ultra-Pocket boasts durability and a sleek silver contour. Its VGA resolution (300,000+ pixels) is ideal for sending images via e-mail or for posting on the web. The included 8 MB MultiMediaCard removable memory can hold up to approximately 40 images. USB connectivity ensures fast downloading and connectivity with Windows. The camera fits easily in your pocket, goes virtually everywhere you go, and offers simple point-and-click use. With the Ultra-Pocket, it's never been more convenient to capture and share life's images.

SMaL Ultra-Pocket Digital Camera Specifications (Preliminary)

In Management Criteria for Effective Innovation, rate SMaL camera innovation with respect to traditional 1990s digital consumer cameras. Address the following:

QUESTION

a. Regarding each component of the camera, what technical constraints were lifted relative to the traditional 1990s digital cameras?

b. Regarding each component of the camera, what technical constraints were added relative to the traditional 1990s digital cameras?

c. Is the end product enhanced by additional technology and components required to make use of the innovation?

d. Is the inventive concept itself diluted or enhanced by the embodiment required?

e. Does the additional embodiment offer opportunity for further inventive enhancement?

?I don't know the answer, you are the Expert Q&A that is why I was aking the Question. Thank you.

WRITE 2 PAGE ESSAY...NO PLAGIARISM

TOPIC:Monitoring toddlers and technology

what i personally believe about children
why is important to watch children with technology
what i believe and have noticed about with technology
when I was a child-this how i was

The essay should be written in First person

Among using technology in USA to improve tracking of Covid-19.

What are some of the challenges associated with implemented the technology? How about he risks associated with using the technology? Cybersecurity issues? Do you think the benefits outweigh the risks/challenges? Can we as a country mitigate those risks?

Steiner College’s statement of financial position for the year ended June 30, 2019, is presented here. Steiner is a private college.

The following transaction information (amounts in thousands) pertains to the year ended June 30, 2020.

1. During the year, charges for tuition and fees were $244,500; scholarships were $16,300; and tuition waivers for scholastic achievement were $5,100. After payment was received, tuition refunds of $11,200 were given. Tuition waivers of $17,300 for students serving as teaching assistants for instruction were accrued.
2. The college received cash contributions without donor restrictions of $2,080, pledges to be collected in 2021 of $550, and cash contributions to the endowments of $335. It also collected $820 of Pledges Receivable that were unrestricted.
3. Collections on Tuition and Fees Receivable totaled $222,600.
4. Net deposits returned to students totaled $10.
5. Expenses were incurred for:

Related to the expenses incurred: prepaid assets of $534 were used, $4,776 of the expenses were accrued, and the remaining expenses were paid. Expenses incurred resulted in the release of $7,320 in net assets with donor restrictions.

6. The ending balance in Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities was $1,935.
7. Investment earnings received for the period were $3,960, of which $2,070 was donor restricted for scholarships.
8. Adjusting entries for the period were made to increase Allowance for Doubtful Accounts by $20, to record depreciation expense of $26,400 (charged 70 percent to instruction and 30 percent to academic support), to adjust tuition revenue for an increase in unearned revenue of $10, and to recognize an increase in fair value of investments of $4,700 ($790 was related to investments restricted for scholarships, $1,610 was related to the permanent endowment, the remainder was related to net assets without donor restrictions).
9. Nominal accounts were closed.

Required

1. a-1. Prepare journal entries to record the foregoing transactions for the year ended June 30, 2020.
2. a-2. Prepare closing entry for the year ended June 30, 2020.
3. b. Prepare a statement of activities for the year ended June 30, 2020.
4. c. Prepare a statement of financial position for the year ended June 30, 2020.