The Trolley Dodgers

In 1890, the Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers professional baseball team joined the National League. Over the following years, the Dodgers would have considerable difficulty competing with the other baseball teams in the New York City area. Those teams, principal among them the New York Yankees, were much better financed and generally stocked with players of higher caliber.

After nearly seven decades of mostly frustration on and off the baseball field, the Dodgers shocked the sports world by moving to Los Angeles in 1958. Walter O’Malley, the flamboyant owner of the Dodgers, saw an opportunity to introduce professional baseball to the rapidly growing population of the West Coast. More important, O’Malley saw an opportunity to make his team more profitable. As an inducement to the Dodgers, Los Angeles County purchased a goat farm located in Chavez Ravine, an area two miles northwest of downtown Los Angeles, and gave the property to O’Malley for the site of his new baseball stadium.

Since moving to Los Angeles, the Dodgers have been the envy of the baseball world: “In everything from profit to stadium maintenance ... the Dodgers are the prototype of how a franchise should be run.”1 During the 1980s and 1990s, the Dodgers reigned as the most profitable franchise in baseball with a pretax profit margin approaching 25 percent in many years. In late 1997, Peter O’Malley, Walter O’Malley’s son and the Dodgers’ principal owner, sold the franchise for $350 million to media mogul Rupert Murdoch. A spokesman for Murdoch complimented the O’Malley family for the long-standing success of the Dodgers organization: “The O’Malleys have set a gold standard for franchise ownership.”2

During an interview before he sold the Dodgers, Peter O’Malley attributed the success of his organization to the experts he had retained in all functional areas: “I don’t have to be an expert on taxes, split-fingered fastballs, or labor relations with our ushers. That talent is all available.”3 Edward Campos, a longtime accountant for the Dodgers, was a seemingly perfect example of one of those experts in the Dodgers organization. Campos accepted an entry-level position with the Dodgers as a young man. By 1986, after almost two decades with the club, he had worked his way up the employment hierarchy to become the operations payroll chief.

After taking charge of the Dodgers’ payroll department, Campos designed and implemented a new payroll system, a system that only he fully understood. In fact, Campos controlled the system so completely that he personally filled out the weekly payroll cards for each of the Dodgers’ 400 employees. Campos was known not only for his work ethic but also for his loyalty to the club and its owners: “The Dodgers trusted him, and when he was on vacation, he even came back and did the payroll.”4

Unfortunately, the Dodgers’ trust in Campos was misplaced. Over a period of several years, Campos embezzled several hundred thousand dollars from his employer. According to court records, Campos padded the Dodgers’ payroll by adding fictitious employees to various departments in the organization. In addition, Campos routinely inflated the number of hours worked by several employees and then split the resulting overpayments 50-50 with those individuals.

The fraudulent scheme came unraveled when appendicitis struck down Campos, forcing the Dodgers’ controller to temporarily assume his responsibilities. While completing the payroll one week, the controller noticed that several employees, including ushers, security guards, and ticket salespeople, were being paid unusually large amounts. In some cases, employees earning $7 an hour received weekly paychecks approaching $2,000. Following a criminal investigation and the filing of charges against Campos and his cohorts, all the individuals involved in the payroll fraud confessed.

A state court sentenced Campos to eight years in prison and required him to make restitution of approximately $132,000 to the Dodgers. Another of the conspirators also received a prison sentence. The remaining individuals involved in the payroll scheme made restitution and were placed on probation.

Epilogue

The San Francisco Giants are easily the most heated, if not hated, rival of the Dodgers. In March 2012, a federal judge sentenced the Giants’ former payroll manager to 21 months in prison after she pleaded guilty to embezzling $2.2 million from the Giants organization. An attorney for the Giants testified that the payroll manager “wreaked havoc” on the Giants’ players, executives, and employees. The attorney said that the embezzlement “included more than 40 separate illegal transactions, including changing payroll records and stealing employees’ identities and diverting their tax payments.”5 A federal prosecutor reported that

the payroll manager used the embezzled funds to buy a luxury car, to purchase a second home in San Diego, and to travel.

When initially confronted about her embezzlement scheme, the payroll manager had “denied it completely.”6 She confessed when she was shown the proof that prosecutors had collected. During her sentencing hearing, the payroll manager pleaded with the federal judge to sentence her to five years’ probation but no jail term. She told the judge, “I cannot say how sorry that I am ... that I did this, because it’s not who I am. I have no excuse for it. There is no excuse in the world for taking something that doesn’t belong to you.”7

required:

-Describe some of the key internal controls you'd expect to find in a payroll system.

-What internal control weaknesses were evident in the Dodgers’ payroll system?

-What "red flag" was present that should have alerted management to Campos' scheme?

-Identify audit procedures that might have led to the discovery of the fraudulent scheme masterminded by Campos.

Case Study: The Reveton Ransomware Attacks

In August 2012, the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), a partnership between the FBI and the National White Collar Crime Center, was inundated with reports of a new type of cybercrime. Victims across the United States reported that while searching the Internet, their computers locked up, and they received the following message, purportedly from the FBI: “This operating system is locked due to the violation of the federal laws of the United States of America! (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8; Article 202; Article 210 of the Criminal Code of U.S.A. provides for a deprivation of liberty for four to twelve years.)” The message then accused the victim either of visiting pornography Web sites or of distributing copyrighted content. Victims were told they could unlock their computers and avoid prosecution by paying a fine of $200 within 72 hours of receiving the message. The message came replete with the official FBI logo.

The incident pointed to a steep rise in ransomware attacks. Ransomware is malware that disables a computer or smartphone until the victim pays a fee, or ransom. Unlike other viruses, the Reveton version of ransomware is not activated by opening a file or an attachment. Rather it is an example of “drive-by malware,” viruses that download automatically when a user visits an infected Web site.

The FBI immediately issued an alert, but within a month, cybersecurity experts had identified 16 variants of the ransomware. These viruses had infected 68,000 unique IP addresses. It is estimated that on an average day, about 170 victims paid the $200 fee and received valid unlock codes. The compromised computers could not be fixed through the installation or updating of antivirus software because the computer was locked. Because so many home PC owners fail to back up their systems regularly, many victims faced losing a significant amount of data. The $200 fee itself was low enough to encourage payment. A visit to a professional IT service to repair the damage could potentially cost the same amount and take more time to resolve. A quick payment through a prepaid money card system, such as MoneyPak, could save the victim a lot of trouble.

The United States was not the first country to be hit by these attacks. In early 2012, criminal gangs targeted France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Ransomware attacks first broke out in Russia in 2009. Since that time, they have spread to almost every country on the globe, hitting the United States and Japan especially hard. Symantec, an IT security company, estimates that gangs are extorting over $5 million per year from online victims. The rise of ransomware attacks is, no doubt, due in part to their success. In France, for example, almost 4 percent of victims coughed up the ransom money during a non-Reveton scam.

The Reveton ransomware is delivered by the popular Russian-language Citadel malware toolkit. The latest version of Citadel can also grab passwords from Web browsers and change Web sites to trick users into handing over their login information.

In December 2012, the United Kingdom arrested three people they believed were involved in the Reveton ransomware attacks. Finding the perpetrators, however, is unusual and is not the most effective way to combat this crime. Law enforcement agencies and IT security companies have urged the public to take

measures to prevent themselves from falling victim to such attacks—by keeping software such as Java, Acrobat Reader, Adobe Flash, Windows, and their browser software updated. An early Reveton ransomware attack made use of a vulnerability in a version of Java that had just been patched a month prior. Computer users can also avoid infections by using security software that identifies suspicious Web sites, and by not clicking online ads from dubious companies. Perhaps, however, the best way to avoid the spread of these attacks is to encourage victims to report the crime and to refuse to comply with the ransom demands.

Questions:

1. Why are ransomware attacks on the rise?
2. What can you do to prevent ransomware attacks on your own computer?
3. How do you think victims should respond to ransomware attacks?
4. Do the victims have an ethical obligation to future victims? If yes, why? If no, why?

From a Financial Managers standpoint , how might the financial manager argue that this case is ethical and how might they argue it is unethical? Both sides of the argument. CASE: Trigon Blue Cross/Blue Shield (Copayments) When most people are told they owe a coinsurance payment on a medical bill, they simply grimace and write a check; not Gerald Haeckel, a retiree from Richmond, Virginia. He wanted proof that he was not paying more than the 20 percent portion that his health insurance policy required. When his insurer, Trigon Blue Cross/Blue Shield, balked, the retiree besieged state and federal officials with demands for an investigation. Gerald’s problem with the insurer-provider negotiated discounts began when he became confused by a bill sent by Trigon Blue Cross/Blue Shield. The bill was for Gerald’s wife’s lumpectomy, which is an outpatient surgery to remove a tiny breast tumor. Trigon’s benefits- explanation form stated that the surgery had cost $950, that Trigon paid 80 percent, or $760, and that Gerald owed a 20 percent copayment of $190. But then Gerald received a list of charges from the surgery center indicating that Trigon’s share of the bill had been more than halved to $374 because of a “contractual adjustment.” Gerald assumed that a mistake was made in the surgery center’s statement because if it were correct his $190 copayment would exceed a third of actual cost, instead of the 20 percent called for in his insurance policy. Ultimately, Gerald’s scrutiny of the $950 surgery bill led to a surprising discovery. Although insurance companies frequently complain about being duped by fraudulent policyholders and providers, Trigon and dozens of other health insurers and managed care companies stand accused of a scheme to siphon off millions of dollars from their policyholders. How does the alleged scheme work? For surgery priced at $1,000, the typical plan might call for the insurer to pay 80 percent, or $800, which leaves the patient with a $200 copayment. But if the insurer has negotiated a 50 percent discount from the provider and does not pass any of it along to its policyholders, the patient’s $200 copayment becomes 40 percent of the $500 actual bill, and the insurer’s portion drops to only $300. Trigon’s responses to Gerald’s queries stirred up more questions than they answered. Norwood H. Davis, Trigon’s CEO, assured Gerald that he did indeed owe the $190, and added that the details of any Trigon’s provider discounts were “proprietary.” In another letter, Norwood made a distinction between Trigon actually paying its $760 share of the bill and “discharging” it. Norwood added that although Trigon might try to persuade a provider to accept less than its $760 portion of the bill, a policyholder, such as Gerald, was free to try to persuade the provider to accept something less than the required $190 copayment. Gerald, who by that point was incensed, replied “suggesting that an individual policyholder negotiate with a provider for price concessions borders on the insulting!” and he threatened to take the matter up with state regulators. At a time when consumers are expected to take more responsibility for their own healthcare, undisclosed discounts raise questions about the accuracy and honesty of information provided by the insurers and employers. Indeed, providers often are contractually prohibited from disclosing discounts. The insurance industry argues that hiding discounts is not widespread. The Chicago-based Blue Cross/Shield Association notes that no court has ruled for plaintiffs in a discounts-related case. It adds that none of its affiliates that settled such cases admitted to wrongdoing. Furthermore, Blue Cross/Shield executives argue that the discounts benefit policyholders by reducing premiums. In some situations, they add, employers who share in the savings ask that discounts not be disclosed to their own employees. “We’re not lining our pockets with anything because there is nothing to line our pockets with,” said Joel Gimpel, a Blue Cross/Shield Association attorney.

A Disastrous Development project

In 2004, Marin country in California decided to replace its ageing financial management, payroll, and Human Resources systems with a modern SAP enterprise resources planning system. The country solicited proposals from various companies to act as software consultants on the implementation. Thirteen companies, including oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP, submitted proposals. In April 2005 the country selected Deloitte consulting based on the firms representations concerning its in- depth knowledge of SAP systems and the extensive experience of its consultants.

From 2005 to 2009, Marin Country paid increasing consulting fees to Deloitte as its staff grappled with serious fiscal problems. Essentially, the staff could not program the SAP system to perform even routine financial functions such as payroll and accounts receivable. A grand jury probe concluded that the system had cost taxpayers $28.6 million as of April 2009.

At that time, Marin Country voted to stop the ongoing SAP project acknowledging that it had wasted some $30 million on software and related implementation services from Deloitte.

The Marin Country information systems and technology group conclude that fixing the Deloitte-instlled SAP system would cost nearly 25 percent more over a 10 year period than implementing a new system.

In 2010, Marin country filed a complaint alleging that Deloitte's representations were fraudulent. The complaint accused Deloitte of using the country SAP project as a training ground to provide young consultant with public sector SAP experience, at the country's expense. It further charged that Deloitte intentionally failed to disclose its lack of SAP and public sector skills; withheld information about critical project risks: falsely represented to the country that SAP system was ready to "go live" as originally planned: conducted inadequate testing; and concealed the fact that ist had failed to perform necessary testing , thereby ensuring that system defects would remain hidden prior to the go-live date.Finally, the country maintained that, although it had paid substantial consulting fees to Deloitte, the system continued to have crippling problems.

Deloitte filed a counterclaim over the country failure to pay more than $550000 in fees and interest. The company maintained that it had fulfilled all of its obligations under the contract, as evidenced by the fact that all of Deloitte's work was approved by the country officials who were responsible for overseeing the project.

In December 2010, Marin Country sued Deloitte and two SAP subsidiaries, alleging that Deloitte had "engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity designed to designed to defraud the country of more than $20 million, The country lawsuit also names as defendant Ernest Culver, a former country employee who served as director on the SAP project. The country alleged that Culver interviewed for jobs at Deloitte and SAP, where he now works in SAP's public services division, It further claimed that during the SAP project, Culver "was approving Deloitte's deficient work on the project, approving payment, and causing Marin Country to enter into new contracts with Deloitte and SAP public services, Inc.

In late December 2011, a judge ruled that Marin Country failed to allege sufficient facts to bring a racketeering claim against SAP under the terms of the federal Racketeer Influenced and corrupt organisations Act ( RICO). However, he also ruled that Marin Country could fly an amended complaint. The judge further found that Marin Country hd alleged sufficient facts to bring a "plausible" bribery claim against SAP with aspect to Culver. Finally, the judge denied SAP's motion to dismiss claims against against its SAP America division.

In mid January 2012, Marin Country filed an amended complaint in federal court related to its actions against SAP, Deloitte Consulting, and Ernest Culver. The president of. the Main Country Board of supervisors stated that the board is committed to ensuring accountability for its taxpayers.

1- debate the lawsuit from the point of view of Deloitte and SAP.

2- Debate the lawsuit from the point of view of Marin Country.

Reply to this post in at least 500 word. Discuss what you agreed and disagree with

The discussion board question for this week is ethical relativism correct. To understand the question, you first must know what definition of ethical relativism. According to dictionary.com, "Ethical relativism is the belief that nothing is objectively right or wrong and that the definition of right or wrong depends on the prevailing view of a particular individual, culture, or historical period". An example of ethical relativism would be homosexuality. Many countries are against homosexuality and there are countries that support them. The United States of America are one of the many countries that continue to create strides for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Community (LGBT). Uganda is one of the many countries that are against homosexuality. They have an Anti-Homosexuality Act, which was signed in 2014 that will grant you with life in prison or the death penalty

The United States has begun to grant rights to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community in 2003 after the United States Supreme Court ruling in Lawrence v. Texas. Back in 1973 Texas had a law that homosexual contact was a criminal act. The police were sent to the home of Mr. Lawrence to responds to a call about weapons. When the police entered the home, they caught Mr. Lawrence and another man in a sexual act. This court ruling found that same sex sodomy is a violation of right to privacy. This day has become the foundation of many LGBT right to come. On June 26, 2015 same sex marriage was established in all fifty states.  

Uganda is one of the many countries in Africa that does not believe in Homosexuality rights. The country of Uganda has signed an Anti-Homosexuality act in 2014 with strict punishments if caught or accused of homosexual acts.  These countries ethical relativism toward homosexuality is totally different than what the United States of America has. Uganda ethical relativism towards this issue is that homosexuality is wrong and has no place in their country. Some of the penalties of getting caught is life in jail or the death penalty. Which is the main reason behind many of the people fleeing the country due to this act in Kenya where being a part of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Community is more acceptable.  

  

I believe ethical relativism is correct There are multiple countries with different ways of living. Some countries believe in polygamy and other countries believe that it is wrong. We may live on the same earth, but we do not live under the same rules. In Nigeria the age of sexual consent is eleven and in the state of Virginia the age of consent is eighteen. According to girlsnotbrides.org forty-four percent of the young women are married before eighteen and seventeen percent married before fifth-teen.  

It is very easy to understand why some of my classmates may choose the ethical relativism is incorrect. A person's culture plays a large part in ethical relativism, but there are many things that are wrong even though they are culture norms. Such as in the sexual consent age in Nigeria. In my eyes at the age of eleven I do not believe a child can give consent.

Reference List  

Britton, Bianca. 2017. “Kasha Nabagesera: The Face of Uganda's LGBT Movement.” CNN. Cable News Network. March 7. https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/05/africa/her-kasha-jacqueline-nabagesera-lgbt-campaigner/index.html.

“The Supreme Court . The Future of the Court . Landmark Cases . Lawrence v. Texas (2003) | PBS.” 2018. THIRTEEN - MEDIA WITH IMPACT. Accessed June 4. https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/future/landmark_lawrence.html.

Blanchard, Bobby. 2017. “Why Does the Texas Criminal Code Still Ban ‘Homosexual Conduct’?” The Texas Tribune. Texas Tribune. March 27. https://www.texastribune.org/2017/03/27/why-does-texas-criminal-code-still-ban-homosexual-conduct/.

Girls Not Brides. 2018. “Nigeria - Child Marriage Around The World. Girls Not Brides.” Girls Not Brides. Accessed June 4. https://www.girlsnotbrides.org/child-marriage/nigeria/.

1) Read the Johnson & Johnson article and answer the following:

a) was the outcome of this case fair?

b) The Jury awarded a significant amount of punitive damages in this case. Should tort reform laws apply here? If so, why? If not, why?

Johnson & Johnson was ordered Thursday to pay $4.69 billion to 22 women and their families who had claimed that asbestos in the company’s talcum powder products caused them to develop ovarian cancer. A jury in a Missouri circuit court awarded $4.14 billion in punitive damages and $550 million in compensatory damages to the women, who had accused the company of failing to warn them about cancer risks associated with its baby and body powders. Johnson & Johnson, the maker of Johnson’s Baby Powder, said it was “deeply disappointed” in the verdict and planned to appeal. The company is facing more than 9,000 plaintiffs in cases involving body powders with talc, according to a regulatory document filed this spring. After a six‑week trial, the jury in St. Louis deliberated over the compensatory damages for eight hours but decided on the punitive damages in roughly 45 minutes, said Mark Lanier, a lawyer for the women. Six of the women have died; almost all of the rest, along with friends and relatives, were in the courtroom on Thursday. One of the plaintiffs is undergoing chemotherapy and was too ill to attend, Mr. Lanier said. “There were people crying, people hugging,” he added. “It’s been quite an emotional scene.” Mr. Lanier said Johnson & Johnson had spent 40 years covering up evidence of asbestos in some of its talcum‑based products and should mark those products with warning labels or focus on powders made with cornstarch. Subscribe to The Times You have 4 free articles remaining. The punitive damages are among the largest ever awarded in a product liability case, he said. Shares of Johnson & Johnson fell 1.4 percent in early trading Friday. 8/10/2018 Johnson & Johnson Told to Pay $4.7 Billion in Baby Powder Lawsuit

Johnson & Johnson called the verdict “the product of a fundamentally unfair process” that combined 22 women with few connections to Missouri into a single group of plaintiffs in St. Louis. The company “remains confident that its products do not contain asbestos and do not cause ovarian cancer and intends to pursue all available appellate remedies,” it said in a statement. The company has said concerns about talc’s being linked to cancer are based on inconclusive research. Asbestos is a carcinogen that sometimes appears in natural talc but was stripped from commercial talc products in the 1970s, according to the American Cancer Society. And according to the National Cancer Institute, claims that talc used for feminine hygiene purposes can be absorbed by the reproductive system and cause inflammation in the ovaries are not supported by “the weight of evidence.” Plaintiffs in talc cases have approached litigation in smaller groups instead of suing Johnson & Johnson en masse. The risky strategy allows earlier plaintiffs to send signals about legal tactics and their award amounts to women who bring cases later. Suing in clusters also maximizes the emotional effect of the women’s stories on juries, Mr. Lanier said. “It’s easier to get justice in small groups,” he said. “In small groups, people have names, but in large groups, they’re numbers.” The first talc trial was in 2013 in Federal District Court in South Dakota. A jury found Johnson & Johnson negligent but did not award damages to the plaintiff. Several other cases have involved sizable damages, including a $417 million verdict reached by jurors in Los Angeles County Superior Court last year. The plaintiff in the Los Angeles case has since died, and the verdict was overturned and a new trial granted. Johnson & Johnson, which has successfully appealed a number of talc cases, said in its statement on Thursday that “the multiple errors present in this trial were worse than those in the prior trials which have been reversed.”

Year   Commodities%   Services%
1960 0.9 3.4
1961   0.6 1.7
1962 0.9    2.0
1963 0.9 2.0
1964 1.2 2.0
1965 1.1 2.3
1966 2.6 3.8
1967 1.9 4.3
1968 3.5 5.2
1969 4.7 6.9
1970 4.5 8.0
1971 3.6 5.7
1972 3.0 3.8
1973 7.4 4.4
1974 11.9 9.2
1975 8.8 9.6
1976 4.3 8.3
1977 5.8 7.7
1978 7.2 8.6
1979 11.3 11.0
1980 12.3 15.4
1981 8.4 13.1
1982 4.1 9.0
1983 2.9 3.5
1984 3.4 5.2
1985   2.1 5.1
1986   -0.9 5.0
1987 3.2 4.2
1988 3.5 4.6
1989 4.7 4.9
1990 5.2 5.5
1991 3.1 5.1
1992 2.0 3.9
1993 1.9 3.9
1994 1.7 3.3
1995 1.9 3.4
1996 2.6 3.2
1997 1.4 3.0
1998 0.1 2.7
1999 1.8 2.5
2000 3.3 3.4
2001 1.0 4.1
2002 -0.7 3.1
2003 1.0 3.2
2004 2.3 2.9
2005 3.6 3.3
2006 2.4 3.8

Use Data Set J, U.S. annual Percent Inflation in Prices of Commodities and Services (n=47), on page 536 of your textbook to answer the following questions. Commodities percentage (Commodities %) is the independent, variable and Services percentage (Services%) is the dependent variable. Data are year-to-year percent changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) in these two categories. The data file, Inflation, may be found on Canvas under Modules under Chapter 12 Textbook Data Files. Use MINITAB to obtain the simple regression equation, confidence interval, prediction interval, and required graphs. Insert tables and graphs in your report as appropriate. All interpretations should be in terms of the problem (data).

Use Minitab and produce the appropriate output to answer the following questions. Attach the output. Construct a scatter plot. Recalling what scatter plots are used for, write a couple of sentences addressing what you observed from the plot. Be sure to relate your observations to the purpose of using scatter plots in regression. (4 points)

Can we conclude that year-to-year changes in Commodities percentage (Commodities%) helps in predicting year-to year changes in Services percentage (Services%)? Follow and show the 7 steps for hypothesis testing. (12 points)

Find the sample regression equation and interpret the coefficients. Remember your interpretations should be in terms of the problem. (4 points)

Find the coefficient of determination, and interpret its value. (3 points)

Use residual analysis to check the validity of the model and fully explain your findings and conclusions. (6 points)

Estimate with 95% confidence the average year-to-year Services percentage for when all year-to-year Commodities change is 3.0%. Predict with 95% confidence the estimated Services percentage when an individual year’s Commodities change is 3.0%. Write at least one sentence using your confidence interval and at least one sentence using your prediction interval. (8 points)

Verify that the p-value for the F is the same as the slope’s t statistic’s p-value, and show that t2 = F. (3 points)

Attach or include relevant Minitab output to support your results in parts (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6). (4 points)

// File name: Person.h

// Person class declaration. Person is the base class.

#pragma once

#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

class Person {

private:

        string fName;

        string lName;

        int birthYear;

        int birthMonth;

        int birthDay;

public:

        Person();

        void setName(string, string);

        void setBirthDate(int, int, int);

        string getFullName();

        string getBirthDate();

};

// File name: Person.cpp

// Person class definition. Person is the base class.

#include "Person.h"

Person::Person() {

        fName = "";

        lName = "";

        birthYear = 0;

        birthMonth = 0;

        birthDay = 0;

}

void Person::setName(string first, string last) {

        fName = first;

        lName = last;

}

void Person::setBirthDate(int year, int month, int day) {

        birthYear = year;

        birthMonth = month;

        birthDay = day;

}

string Person::getFullName() {

        return fName + lName;

}

// This method creates a string with the birth date 

// using the following format: month/day/year

// where month and day are 2-digit values

// and year is a 4-digit value

string Person::getBirthDate() {

        // define the method

}

// File name: Student.h

// Student class declaration. Student inherits from Person

#pragma once

// make sure to indicate the inheritance

class Student {

private:

        string idNumber;

        string major;

        static string masterIdNumber;

public:

        Student();

        Student(string, string);

        Student(string, string, string);

        void setMajor(string);

        void printStudent();

};

// File name: Student.cpp

// Student class definition. Student inherits from Person

#include "Student.h"

string Student::masterIdNumber = "20200000";

// the defaul constrcuctor initializes major to the empty string

// It adds 1 to the masterIdNumber, and assigns the resulting value 

// to idNumber

Student::Student() {

}

// This constructor takes the first and last names of the student as parameters

// and invokes the parent class' methods to store the values

// It adds 1 to the masterIdNumber, and assigns the resulting value 

// to idNumber

Student::Student(string, string) {

}

// This constructor receives the student's first name, last name, and major as parameters

// and invokes the parent class' methods to store the values

// It adds 1 to the masterIdNumber, and assigns the resulting value 

// to idNumber

Student::Student(string, string, string) {

}

// This methods receives a string as parameter

// and assigns the value to the major field

void Student::setMajor(string) {

}

// This method will print the students information ín a table-like manner

// The format to be printed is: 

// ID Number Name Major Date of Birth

// Make sure to allow enough space for each column

void Student::printStudent() {

}

// File name: chapter10.cpp

// Follow the instructions to implement the class

int main() {

        // declare a student, named s1, using the default constructor

        // asign the name Vilma Picapiedra, date of birth May 10, 1998, and major Computer Science

        // declare a student, named s2, using Betty Marmol as parameters

        // asign date of birth June 11, 1999, and major Computer Engineering

        // declare a student, named s3, using Pablo Marmol and Electrical Engineering as parameters

        // assign date of birth December 9, 1990

        // delcare a stydent, named s4, using any of the constructors

        // this student has the following information:

        // Name: Pedro Picapiedra, date of birth January 10, 1995, major Computer Engineering

        // print a table with all students

        // the table headers are: Student ID, Name, Major, Date of Birth

        system("pause");

        return 0;

}

1. ShopSmart’s International Growth Strategy

ShopSmart, founded by in 1919 by Nick Smart, is a British multinational grocery and merchandise retailer. It is the largest grocery retailer in the United Kingdom, with a 28% share of the local market and the second largest after Walmart measured in revenue. In 2017, ShopSmart had sales of more than £62 billion ($70 billion US dollars), more than 480,000 employees and 6,553 stores in 13 countries.

In its home market of the United Kingdom, the company’s strengths are reputed to come from strong competencies in marketing and store site selection, logistics and inventory management and its own label product offerings. By the early 1990s, these competencies had already given the company a leading position in the United Kingdom. ShopSmart was generating strong cash flows and senior managers had to decide how to use that cash. One strategy they settled n was international expansion.

As managers looked at international markets, they soon concluded that the best opportunities were not in established markets in North America and Western Europe where strong competitors already existed but in emerging markets of Eastern Europe and Asia, where there were strong underlying growth trends. ShopSmart’s first international foray was into Hungary in 1995 where it acquired Globals Stores, a state-owned grocery chain. By 2017, ShopSmart was the market leader in Hungary accounting for 1% of the whole economy of Hungary.

Next, ShopSmart acquired 31 stores in Poland from Stavia Limited. The following year, in 1996, ShopSmart added 13 stores that it purchased from Kmart in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. The next year, ShopSmart moved to purchase stores in the Republic of Ireland.

ShopSmart’s Asian expansion begun in 1998 when it moved into Thailand. In 1999, the company entered South Korea when it partnered with Samsung to develop a chain of hypermarkets. This was followed by entry into Taiwan in 2000, Malaysia in 2002, Japan in 2003 and China in 2004.

The move into China came after three years of careful research and discussions with potential partners. Like many other western companies, ShopSmart was attracted to the Chinese market by its large size and rapid growth. In the end, ShopSmart settled on a 50-50 joint venture with Hymall, a hypermarket chain that is controlled by Ting Hsin, which has been operating in China for six years. In 2014, ShopSmaart combined its 131 stores in China in a joint venture with the state-run China Resources Enterprise and its nearly 3,000 stores. ShopSmart owned 20% of the joint venture. As a result of these moves, by 2017, ShopSmart generated sales of about $21 billion outside the United Kingdom. The addition of international stores has helped make ShopSmart the second largest company in the global grocery market behind only Walmart. By 2017, all its foreign ventures were making money.  

(Source: Adapted from Hill, C.W.L. & Hult, G.T.M., (2019), International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace, 12th Edition, McGraw Hill Education)

1. Examine two reasons why ShopSmart’s initial international expansion focused on emerging markets rather than competing with established companies in the more advanced markets of North America and Western Europe.

2. Discuss two disadvantages that ShopSmart encountered as a first mover into these emerging markets.

3. ShopSmart’s entry strategy into the Eastern European countries was through acquisition. Discuss three disadvantages that the company is likely to encounter as a result of this entry strategy

4. Identify ShopSmart’s strategic entry into the Asian market and discuss two benefits that the company sought to achieve with this strategy

with python
Fatima wants to purchase a new dining table at an affordable price, so she collected the models name, description and prices of different dining tables from IKEA website and stored them in the file DiningTables.txt.

The file contains records with the following format:

model_name(string)\ndescription\nprice (int)\n

Help Fatima get some statistics about the dining table records by performing the following tasks:

• Read the file DiningTables.txt and print the number of records in the file.
• Create a function called tables_statistics(file_name) that prints the records of the dining tables with the following criteria:
  • The most expensive dining table model name, description and price.
  • The cheapest dining table model name, description and price.
  • The average price of all dining tables in the file.

Here is a sample run for your reference:

—————-

TÄRENDÖ / GUNDE

Table and 4 chairs110 cm

231

TÄRENDÖ / ADDE

Table and 4 chairs110 cm

255

MELLTORP / ADDE

Table and 4 chairs125 cm

275

JOKKMOKK

Table and 4 chairs

595

LANEBERG / EKEDALEN

Table and 4 chairs130/190x80 cm

1375

LANEBERG / KARLJAN

Table and 4 chairs130/190x80 cm

1175

EKEDALEN

Table with 2 chairs and bench120/180 cm

1530

NORDVIKEN / LEIFARNE

Table and 4 chairs152/223x95 cm

1995

LERHAMN

Table and 2 chairs74x74 cm

495

EKEDALEN

Table and 4 chairs120/180 cm

1575

MÖRBYLÅNGA / LEIFARNE

Table and 6 chairs220x100 cm

3545

EKEDALEN

Table and 6 chairs180/240 cm

2165

IKEA PS 2012 / TEODORES

Table and 2 chairs

823

SKOGSTA / NORRARYD

Table and 6 chairs235x100 cm

3645

MELLTORP / TEODORES

Table and 4 chairs125 cm

491

MELLTORP / JANINGE

Table and 4 chairs125 cm

715

MELLTORP / TEODORES

Table and 2 chairs75x75 cm

273

MELLTORP / ADDE

Table and 2 chairs75 cm

165

INGATORP / INGOLF

Table and 4 chairs155/215 cm

1895

INGATORP / INGOLF

Table and 6 chairs155/215 cm

2685

INGATORP / INGOLF

Table and 6 chairs155/215x87 cm

3185

LANEBERG / SVENBERTIL

Table and 4 chairs130/190x80 cm

1295

NORDVIKEN / LEIFARNE

Table and 6 chairs210/289x105 cm

2745

NORDVIKEN

Table and 6 chairs210/289x105 cm

2865

NORDVIKEN

Table and 4 chairs152/223x95 cm

2075

MELLTORP / NILSOVE

Table and 2 chairs75x75 cm

785

MELLTORP / NISSE

Table and 2 folding chairs75 cm

265

MÖRBYLÅNGA / LEIFARNE

Table and 4 chairs140x85 cm

2995

VOXLÖV / ODGER

Table and 4 chairs180x90 cm

2175

EKEDALEN / ODGER

Table and 4 chairs120/180 cm

1975

MÖRBYLÅNGA / TOSSBERG

Table and 4 chairs145 cm

4275

GAMLARED / STEFAN

Table and 2 chairs85 cm

535

TINGBY / NILSOVE

Table and 4 chairs180x90 cm

2075

YPPERLIG / NILSOVE

Table and 4 chairs200x90 cm

2275

TINGBY / LEIFARNE

Table and 6 chairs180x90 cm

1745

MÖCKELBY / NORRARYD

Table and 6 chairs235x100 cm

4445

MÖCKELBY / ODGER

Table and 6 chairs235x100 cm

4265

VANGSTA / TEODORES

Table and 4 chairs120/180 cm

701

MÖRBYLÅNGA / BALTSAR

Table and 4 chairs140x85 cm

4475

MÖRBYLÅNGA / TOSSBERG

Table and 6 armchairs220x100 cm

5465

LISABO / SVENBERTIL

Table and 4 chairs140x78 cm

1295

MÖRBYLÅNGA / BALTSAR

Table and 6 chairs220x100 cm

5765