Metlock Inc., a registered broker, enters into a finder’s fee agreement with HOM Homes Ltd. on June 15, 2020. Metlock will find leads in the form of buyers potentially interested in purchasing HOM’s real estate holdings. Along with finding potential buyers, Metlock helps negotiate the selling price and provides advice on contract details. If and when HOM closes a sale, Metlock will be paid within 30 days of the closing date, based on the following formula: 5% of any transaction value up to and including $1 million, plus 4% of any transaction value greater than $1 million and less than and including $2 million, plus 3% of any transaction value greater than $2 million and less than and including $3 million, plus 2% of any transaction value greater than $3 million and less than and including $4 million, plus 1% of any transaction value in excess of $4 million. If Metlock is represented by another broker and this information is not shared with HOM, the fee is reduced by 50%. On September 1, 2020, HOM paid Metlock $51,000 to provide some needed cash flow for seeking out buyers. On October 15, 2020, an offer was made and accepted for a parcel of real estate at a price of $3.50 million. The transaction closed on November 1, 2020, and Metlock was paid the finder’s fee net of $51,000 on November 30, 2020.

Determine the accounting treatment of the above events for Metlock Inc. and prepare any journal entries needed on: (Credit account titles are automatically indented when the amount is entered. Do not indent manually. If no entry is required, select "No Entry" for the account titles and enter 0 for the amounts.)

List of Accounts

• Accounts Payable
• Accounts Receivable
• Advertising Expense
• Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
• Allowance for Sales Returns and Allowances
• Cash
• Commission Expense
• Commission Revenue
• Compensation Expense
• Consignment Sales
• Construction Expenses
• Contract Asset/Liability
• Cost of Goods Sold
• Estimated Inventory Returns
• Interest Expense
• Interest Income
• Interest Payable
• Interest Receivable
• Inventory
• Inventory on Consignment
• Loss from Long-Term Contracts
• Materials, Cash, Payables
• Miscellaneous Expense
• No Entry
• Notes Receivable
• Office Expense
• Refund Liability
• Rent Revenue
• Returned Inventory
• Revenue from Consignment Sales
• Revenue from Long-Term Contracts
• Sales Discounts
• Sales Discounts Forfeited
• Sales Returns and Allowances
• Sales Revenue
• Service Revenue
• Unearned Rent Revenue
• Unearned Revenue
• Utilities Expense
• Warranty Expense
• Warranty Liability
• Warranty Revenue

Evaluate the financial performance of Coca-Cola; (KO) and Pepsi (PEP) for the year ended December 31, 2017. Follow the instructions below to access each company’s information and perform a financial analysis based on the financial measures we have learned in this course. Select www.yahoo.com and then select Finance. In the Search section at the top of the screen select KO for Coca-Cola and PEP for Pepsi Select “Financials” and select Income Statement when accessing the Income Statement Select “Financials” and select Balance Sheet when accessing the Balance Sheet Do the following for KO and PEP for the year ended 12/31/17 only Perform a vertical analysis of the Income Statement for KO and PEP for the year ended 12/31/17. Include in your vertical analysis all of following as a % of total revenue: Cost of Revenue as a % of Total Revenue Gross Profit as a % of Total Revenue Selling, gen and administrative expenses as a % of Total Revenue Operating Income as a % of Total Revenue Net Income as a % of Total Revenue B. Current Ratio C. Quick Ratio D. Accounts Receivable turnover. Assume the total revenue on the Income Statement represents all of the sales on account E. Average collection period F. Merchandise Inventory turnover. Assume the Cost of Revenue on the Income statement represents the Cost of Goods Sold G. Times Interest Earned Ratio H. Rate of Return on Common Stockholder’s Equity I. Rate of Return on Total Assets J. Debt to Equity Ratio K. Operating-Cash Flow to Current Liabilities Ratio L. Asset Turnover M. Price Earnings Ratio on basic earnings per share as of 12/31/2017. The closing market price can be determined by following these procedures: i.Select Http://www.yahoo.com/ and select Finance at the top. ii.Go to Yahoo! Finance and enter Symbol key KO for Coca-Cola and PEP for Pepsi. Select Historical data and scroll down to the closing price for 12/31/2017. Do this for both KO and PEP You will also need the Earnings per Share from the SEC filings. To access the Earnings Per share: To access SEC filings go to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Edgar Company Filings. In the “Fast Search” select KO for Coke and PEP for Pepsi. Select Form 10K filed on 2/23/18 for Coke and 2/13/18 PEP for Pepsi and select the Interactive Data tab. You will have to scroll down to find the form 10-K. Select Financial Statements and the Consolidated Income and scroll down to the and use the Basic Net Income per Share. In preparing the vertical analysis and other financial analysis above; define each measure and identify the strengths and weaknesses of KO and PEP as related to each other. Below is an example how of you should set it up a long with the definition and strength or weakness:

Please summarize below article in your own words

no plagiarism please

Please type

200 words

GOOD CLINICAL PRACTICE IN JAPAN: CURRENT STATUS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES

National Institute of Health Sciences, Tokyo, Japan Although the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH)-based Good Clinical

Practice (GCP) regulation was introduced in Japan in 1997–1998, it is not easy to adopt the new standard because of unique medical and social practices in Japan. Difficulty in

obtaining informed consent, a shortage of clinical research coordinators, and a lack ofsocial awareness are the major obstacles. To retain clinical research within the country,

substantial measures should be taken by both regulators and sponsors.

STARTING APRIL 1, 1998, the Japanese fare (MHW) had been taking necessary mea- sures such as requesting sponsors to provideGCP regulations were totally revised to meet

the ICH standards based on ICH topic E6 notification of clinical trial plans beforehand through its administrative guidance.which reached Step 4 in May 1996. Though

it is still a bit early to evaluate the effect of The PAL began regulating clinical trials in the 1979 PAL revision which became ef-the amendment, this brief report describes

the current situation of Japanese clinical tri- fective in 1980. The newly introduced scheme included the sponsor’s obligation toals under the new GCP regulations and pro-

vides future perspectives. submit a clinical trial plan, and the Minister’s authority to instruct sponsors to modify the trials to avoid possible health hazards.

HISTORY OF JAPANESE GCP

After lengthy formulation and a two-year public consultation period, Japan’s first GCPIn Japan, the drug approval process is regu-

lated under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law was enforced in 1990 and became a funda- mental rule for clinical trials. Compared with(PAL). Until 1980, however, this law did not

have an explicit clause regulating clinical tri- GCP in the United States, Europe, and the World Health Organization, which were pri-als, although the Ministry of Health and Wel-

marily promulgated in the late 1980s, Japa-nese GCP possessed certain characteristics

reflecting the unique environment of thePresented at the DIA Workshop “Recent Developments

in Clinical Trials in the Asia Pacific Region,” October country’s medical practice. For example, in-

2–3, 1998, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China.

vestigators were allowed to enroll a subject

Reprint address: Hajime Inoue, MD, Pharmaceuti-

on his/her oral consent, although written con-

cal and Medical Devices Evaluation Center, National

sent was recommended as preferable. An-

Institute of Health Sciences, 3–8–21–10F, Toranomon,

other example is that Japan’s GCP did not

Minato-ktoring/auditing performed at the trial sites cially in regard to medical practice. Doctors are used to making decisions, and even somewith access to original medical records and

related documents. Thus, sponsors could not patients have a tendency to feel more com- fortable letting doctors do whatever theydirectly access source documents to assure

their quality. think is right instead of being informed fully and asked to make a decision themselves. InThe 1997 revision of Japan’s GCP was

prompted by two factors: addition, Japanese people are sensitive about possible side effects of drugs and hence, once all of the major undesirable possibilities have1. There was serious domestic concern on certain aspects of clinical trials. This revi- been properly explained in a written form, which is not usual in daily medical practicesion was partly pushed by the severe ad-verse drug reaction incident in 1993 by in Japan, they have a tendency to refrain fromenrollment even though the risk is small.an antiviral agent which caused 15 deathsduring its clinical trial and postmarketing On the one hand, Japanese researchersfully recognize the importance of gettingperiod before its recall, and 2. The agreement on the internationally har- proper informed consent in clinical trialseven though it is not common in daily medi-monized guideline of ICH-GCP. In May

1996, the ICH-GCP guideline reached cal practice, but on the other hand, it contra- dicts traditional doctor-patient relationshipsStep 4 of the ICH process, meaning the

regulatory authorities of each participating which are deep seated in the Japanese cul- ture. For better or worse, introduction of theregion (ie, European Union, Japan, and the United States) are expected to incorporate new GCP with proper informed consent will force Japan to change its medical practice asthe guideline into their domestic regula- tions. Thus, MHW was expected to amend a whole to the point where doctors are held accountable for their medical treatment andits GCP based on this guideline. patients are responsible for their own health.

Create new series with quarterly money growth rates, inflation rates, velocity growth rates, and real GDP

growth rates.

Note: The quarterly growth rate of a variable x is the growth rate between two

consecutive quarters.

Suppose a monopolist faces a demand curve given by p(y) = 1/y^2 .
(a) Write down the monopolist's total revenue as a function of y.
(b) Find the monopolist's marginal revenue as a function of y.
(c) Find the demand elasticity for this demand curve. Note that this is a demand curves
where the elasticity is the same at all points. (You can get rid of all variables and find
the elasticity as a single number.)
(d) Suppose the monopolist's marginal cost function is positive for all values of y (as most
marginal cost functions are). We will we not be able to find a point that maximizes
prots for the monopolist. Why is this the case? You can explain this using the
marginal revenue curve or by using your answer from part (c).

The management of Cal Supermarkets has determined that the quantity demanded per week of their 90% lean ground sirloin, x, and the quantity demanded per week of their 80% ground beef, y (both measured in pounds), are related to their unit prices p and q (in dollars), respectively, by the equations x = 6800 − 600p − 400q and y = 5200 − 400p − 600q. (a) What is the total revenue function R(p, q)? Hint: R(p, q) = xp + yq R(p, q) = (b) What price should Cal Supermarkets charge for each product to maximize its weekly revenue? (p, q) = How many pounds of each product will then be sold? (x, y) = What is the maximum revenue? $ Incorrect: Your answer is incorrect.

Using Percentage-of-Completion and Completed Contract Methods

Halsey Building Company signed a contract to build an office building for $40,000,000. The scheduled construction costs follow.

The building is completed in 2018.
For each year, compute the revenue, expense, and gross profit reported for this construction project using each of the following methods.

a. Percentage-of-completion method

b. Completed contract method