Questions
The process for buying a car in the U.S. seems to usually exhibit the following characteristics...

  1. The process for buying a car in the U.S. seems to usually exhibit the following characteristics (it may differ from these, but I’m not an expert in the auto industry so just take these as given for the sake of argument):
    1. A car dealership purchases cars from a manufacturer at a specific wholesale price, set by the manufacturer.
    2. The car dealership puts a sticker in the car window which includes the MSRP, or manufacturer suggested retail price.
    3. The car dealership negotiates the actual selling (retail) price with individual customers, such that the same car may sell for different retail prices for different customers.

For the three prices mentioned above (wholesale price, MSRP, and retail/selling price) describe how much market power an individual car dealership would have in setting each price. In terms of just the retail/selling price, how might an individual car dealership’s potential market power be affected by the presence of other car dealerships in town? (E.g., a small town that has one dealership vs. a larger city where several car dealerships usually cluster in a certain area).

Given that car dealerships always ensure that the retail/selling price exceeds the wholesale price, such that customers pay more for the car than the dealership itself does, why do customers continue using car dealerships instead of purchasing the car directly from the manufacturer at its factory?

In: Economics

Journalizing and Posting Transactions and Adjustments D. Roulstone opened Roulstone Roofing Service on April 1. Transactions...

Journalizing and Posting Transactions and Adjustments
D. Roulstone opened Roulstone Roofing Service on April 1. Transactions for April follow.

Apr.  1 Roulstone contributed $23,000 cash to the business in exchange for common stock.
2 Paid $12,200 cash for the purchase of a used truck.
2 Purchased $6,200 of ladders and other equipment; the company paid $1,000 cash, with the balance due in 30 days.
3 Paid $5,760 cash for two-year (or 24-month) premium toward liability insurance.
5 Purchased $2,400 of supplies on credit.
5 Received an advance of $3,600 cash from a customer for roof repairs to be done during April and May.
12 Billed customers $11,000 for roofing services performed.
18 Collected $9,800 cash from customers toward their accounts billed on April 12.
29 Paid $1,350 cash for truck fuel used in April.
30 Paid $200 cash for April newspaper advertising.
30 Paid $5,000 cash for assistants' wages earned.
30 Billed customers $8,000 for roofing services performed.

Using the following accounts: Cash; Accounts Receivable; Supplies; Prepaid Insurance; Trucks; Accumulated Depreciation-Trucks; Equipment; Accumulated Depreciation-Equipment; Accounts Payable; Unearned Roofing Fees; Common Stock; Roofing Fees Earned; Fuel Expense; Advertising Expense; Wages Expense; Insurance Expense; Supplies Expense; Depreciation Expense-Trucks; and Depreciation Expense-Equipment.

b. Record these transactions for April using journal entries.

General Journal
Date Description Debit Credit
Apr. 1 AnswerAccounts ReceivableAccounts PayableCommon StockCash Answer Answer
AnswerAccounts ReceivableAccounts PayableCommon StockCash Answer Answer
Owner invested cash.
Apr. 2 AnswerCashAccounts ReceivableTruckAccounts Payable Answer Answer
AnswerCashAccounts ReceivableTruckAccounts Payable Answer Answer
Purchased truck.
Apr. 2 AnswerSuppliesAccounts ReceivableAccounts PayableEquipment Answer Answer
Cash Answer Answer
AnswerSuppliesAccounts ReceivableAccounts PayableEquipment Answer Answer
Purchased equipment.
Apr. 3 AnswerAccounts PayableAccounts ReceivablePrepaid InsuranceCash Answer Answer
AnswerAccounts PayableAccounts ReceivablePrepaid InsuranceCash Answer Answer
Purchased liability insurance.
Apr. 5 AnswerAccounts PayableSuppliesEquipmentAccounts Receivable Answer Answer
AnswerAccounts PayableSuppliesEquipmentAccounts Receivable Answer Answer
Purchased supplies.
Apr. 5 AnswerUnearned Roofing FeesAccounts ReceivableCashAccounts Payable Answer Answer
AnswerUnearned Roofing FeesAccounts ReceivableCashAccounts Payable Answer Answer
Received advanced payment for repair work.
Apr. 12 AnswerEquipmentAccounts ReceivableAccounts PayableRoofing Fees Earned Answer Answer
AnswerEquipmentAccounts ReceivableAccounts PayableRoofing Fees Earned Answer Answer
Billed for services performed.
Apr. 18 AnswerSuppliesCashAccounts PayableAccounts Receivable Answer Answer
AnswerSuppliesCashAccounts PayableAccounts Receivable Answer Answer
Collected from customers billed on April 12.
Apr. 29 AnswerFuel ExpenseCashAccounts ReceivableAccounts Payable Answer Answer
AnswerFuel ExpenseCashAccounts ReceivableAccounts Payable Answer Answer
Paid for April fuel expense.
Apr. 30 AnswerAdvertising ExpenseAccounts PayableCashEquipment Answer Answer
AnswerAdvertising ExpenseAccounts PayableCashEquipment Answer Answer
Paid for April newspaper advertising.
Apr. 30 AnswerCashSuppliesAccounts PayableWages Expense Answer Answer
AnswerCashSuppliesAccounts PayableWages Expense Answer Answer
Paid wages.
Apr. 30 AnswerEquipmentAccounts ReceivableAccounts PayableRoofing Fees Earned Answer Answer
AnswerEquipmentAccounts ReceivableAccounts PayableRoofing Fees Earned Answer Answer
Recorded fees earned.


c. Post the above entries to their T-accounts.

Enter transactions in the T-accounts in the order they appear using the first available answer box on the appropriate side of the T-account.

Cash
Answer Answer
Answer Answer
Answer Answer
Answer Answer
Answer Answer
Answer Answer
Accounts Receivable
Answer Answer
Answer Answer
Supplies
Answer Answer
Prepaid Insurance
Answer Answer
Trucks
Answer Answer
Equipment
Answer Answer
Accumulated Depreciation - Equipment
Answer Answer
Accumulated Depreciation - Trucks
Answer Answer
Accounts Payable
Answer Answer
Answer Answer
Unearned Roofing Fees
Answer Answer
Common Stock
Answer Answer
Roofing Fees Earned
Answer Answer
Answer Answer
Answer Answer
Depreciation Expense - Trucks
Answer Answer
Fuel Expense
Answer Answer
Advertising Expense
Answer Answer
Depreciation Expense - Equipment
Answer Answer
Wages Expense
Answer Answer
Supplies Expense
Answer Answer
Insurance Expense
Answer Answer

d. Prepare journal entries to adjust the following accounts; and,

e. Post the adjusting entries to the above T-accounts.

Record insurance expense for April.

Supplies still available on April 30 was $400.

Record depreciation expense for truck for April of $250.

Record depreciation expense for equipment for April of $70.

One-fourth of roofing fee received April 5, was earned by April 30.

General Journal
Date Description Debit Credit
Apr. 30 AnswerCashInsurance ExpensePrepaid InsuranceAccounts Payable Answer Answer
AnswerCashInsurance ExpensePrepaid InsuranceAccounts Payable Answer Answer
To record insurance expense.
Apr. 30 AnswerSuppliesSupplies ExpenseAccounts PayableCash Answer Answer
AnswerSuppliesSupplies ExpenseAccounts PayableCash Answer Answer
To record supplies expense.
Apr. 30 AnswerAccumulated Depreciation-TrucksCashAccounts PayableDepreciation Expense-Trucks Answer Answer
AnswerAccumulated Depreciation-TrucksCashAccounts PayableDepreciation Expense-Trucks Answer Answer
To record truck depreciation expense.
Apr. 30 AnswerAccumulated Depreciation-EquipmentDepreciation Expense-EquipmentAccounts PayableCash Answer Answer
AnswerAccumulated Depreciation-EquipmentDepreciation Expense-EquipmentAccounts PayableCash Answer Answer
To record equipment depreciation expense.
Apr. 30 AnswerAccounts PayableRoofing Fees EarnedCashUnearned Roofing Fees Answer Answer
AnswerAccounts PayableRoofing Fees EarnedCashUnearned Roofing Fees Answer Answer
To record fees earned.

In: Accounting

1. Confidence interval for the difference between the two population means. (Assume that the two samples...

1. Confidence interval for the difference between the two population means.
(Assume that the two samples are independent simple random samples selected from normally distributed populations.)

A researcher was interested in comparing the GPAs of students at two different colleges. Independent simple random samples of 8 students from college A and 13 students from college B yielded the following summary statistics:

College A College B
= 3.1125 = 3.4385
s1 = 0.4357 s2 = 0.5485
n1 = 8 n2 = 13

  
Construct a 95% confidence interval for μ1 – μ2, the difference between the mean GPA of students in college A and the mean GPA of students in college B .

Select one:

A.-0.78 < μ1 – μ2< 0.13

B, -0.84 < μ1 – μ2< 0.19

C, -0.80 < μ1 – μ2< 0.15

D, -0.75 < μ1 – μ2< 0.18

2.

A researcher was interested in comparing the response times of two different cab companies. Companies A and B were each called at n = 36 randomly selected times. The calls to company A were made independently of the calls to company B. The response times were recorded and the summary statistics were as follows:

Company A Company B
Mean response time 12.3 mins 15.0 mins
Standard deviation 2.8 mins 4.2 mins

Find the margin of error, E, for a 98% confidence interval that can be used to estimate the difference between the mean resting pulse rate of people who do not exercise regularly and the mean resting pulse rate of people who do. Round your answer to two decimal places.
(Note: Use Table A-3 for the critical value needed in the formula)

In: Statistics and Probability

Uber has had phenomenal growth, going from four people in 2009 to the two kinds of...

Uber has had phenomenal growth, going from four people in 2009 to the two kinds of workers it deals with today: (1) 12,000 full-time nondriver employees, such as those working in its San Francisco headquarters, and (2) about 2 million active drivers globally, the independent contractors it calls “partners.”

Uber’s Employees

Former CEO Travis Kalanick viewed human resources (HR) as having one function—recruiting. Other HR functions were not a priority for Uber. For example, the company had fewer than 10 HR representatives in 2016 who were responsible for training managers and handling issues such as sexual harassment for the 6,000 employees it had at the time. “When HR becomes solely a talent race, boards and CEOs can miss the less obvious but equally vital value of managing both new hires and leaders who are facing increasing demands,” says John Boudreau in a Harvard Business Review article.

Kalanick’s lack of focus on HR created a toxic atmosphere at the organization. Much of this became evident with Susan Fowler, a former Uber engineer. Fowler claimed in a February 2017 blog that she was sexually harassed by her supervisor and that HR ignored her claims. Other employees have since reported that a premium was placed on workers who delivered strong performance and aggressive growth, and that their inappropriate workplace behavior was overlooked, according to the New York Times.

Uber attempted to improve this situation by focusing on the accuracy of its performance evaluations. In the past, performance reviews were subjective with managers simply meeting behind closed doors and rating their employees. This obviously increased the potential for managerial bias. The process also was deficient in that employees did not have individual goals to be evaluated against, making it hard to hold employees and managers accountable for objective results.

Uber implemented two significant changes in 2017 to overcome problems with its appraisal system. First, the company established measurable goals for all employees, and they were transparent for all to see. Second, Uber implemented something similar to a 360-degree performance appraisal system as evaluations needed to take into account more than a manager’s direct observation of subordinates. The system consisted of committees reviewing employees’ self-evaluations, peer evaluations, and manager evaluations to make sure bonuses were given out fairly, according to Uber Chief People Officer Liane Hornsey.

While these changes may have improved the human resource process at Uber, employee issues still persist. For example, HR Chief Hornsey resigned in July 2018 amid continuing employee dissatisfaction. “Disgruntled employees still don’t trust Uber’s systems, and they are turning to the media to air their grievances. This suggests that Khosrowshahi’s attempt to build trust among employees, an assurance that the company can address challenges internally, has not taken hold,” says Wired Magazine.

Uber’s Drivers

Uber isn’t only failing its employees; it’s also failing its drivers. The company seems to offer very little in human resource development for its contractors. Drivers are given the option of watching a 13-minute training video covering such topics as how to provide good service and get five-star ratings from customers. “The only safety thing they tell us,” says one driver, “is to have a hands-free phone holder and to keep your eyes on the road.” Drivers who want additional training will have to pay for it on their own. Uber has contracted with 7x7 Experience to offer quality improvement courses at a rate of $49 per course. They can also take a course on “Tip Maximization” for another $29.

Uber drivers may not be happy about having to pay for quality improvement courses, especially because a recent study found they aren’t making that much. The Economic Policy Institute released a 2018 analysis showing that Uber drivers take home around $9.21 an hour. This means drivers are making less than the minimum wage of some of Uber’s biggest markets, such as Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York. The $9.21 figure actually “puts Uber drivers at the bottom 10 percent of wage earners” according to the Chicago Tribune.

Drivers, often undertrained, are also victims of an automated performance appraisal system in which passengers rate drivers on a scale of from 1 to 5 stars. Each driver then receives a weekly average rating for all passengers, and this average is used to make personnel decisions. In Atlanta, for example, a driver receiving less than 4.6 stars may be kicked out of the program. Uber did update its ratings system in July 2017 by introducing a “ratings protection” initiative. This system was designed to protect drivers from complaints that are unrelated to their actual performance. For example, when a rider selects a rating below 5 stars, a screen will pop up asking “what could be improved?” Options include “route by Uber” and “co-rider,” and only one option goes back to the driver.

Uber drivers may not have much power to fight back against the company’s HR policies. The company is resisting unionization because it wants its app-based drivers to be “business partners”—that is, contractors not subject to employee-protection laws. The issue of unionization is being fought in the courts. In 2015, Seattle passed an ordinance allowing Uber (and Lyft) drivers to unionize, which the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Uber have sought to overturn. In May 2018, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s 2017 decision to uphold the law, continuing the legal saga by sending the case back to the lower court for further review.

Uber has worked to improve and safeguard its driver performance appraisal rating system, yet it still lacks some of the basic components of traditional employee performance management systems. Based on the case, which of the following is not part of Uber’s performance appraisal system for drivers?

A: Rewards

B: Feedback

C: Expectations

D: Monitoring

E: Punishment

In: Finance

First, read the attached article. What’s worse: monopoly power or government intervention? Politicians of all stripes...

First, read the attached article.

What’s worse: monopoly power or government
intervention?
Politicians of all stripes increasingly agree with Karl Marx on one point –
that monopolies are an inevitable consequence of free-market
capitalism, and must be broken up. Are they right? Stuart Watkins isn’t
so sure.
by: Stuart Watkins
1 OCT 2020
MoneyWeek
Free markets left to themselves in a capitalist context are great at producing wealth, but will
inevitably tend to concentrate that wealth in ever fewer hands, leading to increasing inequalities
of income, power and wealth, and undermining the benefits that might be supposed to flow to
consumers, such as cheaper prices. The logic inherent in market exchange must, in other words,
progressively undermine the very qualities that the champions of the market promise they will
deliver.
This, at least, was the view of Karl Marx. Perhaps surprisingly, it is also the mainstream view
today. It is not all that easy to find a mainstream commentator, economist, think-tanker or
policymaker who will raise a squeak of protest against the idea. All the main political parties –
particularly in the US, where the problem is deemed to be particularly acute – agree that
something must be done to curb the rise of the monopolies, namely that the state should step in
and break them up, or at least restrain them.
Indeed, “Market Power, Inequality and Financial Instability” – a new paper by Federal Reserve
Board economists Isabel Cairo and Jae Sim – argues that the concentration of market power in a
handful of companies, and the resulting decline in competition, explains the deepening of
inequality and financial instability in the US, as Craig Torres reports on Bloomberg. They blame
the rising market power of big companies for the decline in the share of wealth that goes to
workers, the rise in inequalities of wealth and income, and the growing debt burden. The authors
call for policies that will redistribute wealth to the poor, perhaps by gradually raising the tax on
dividend income from zero to 30%. They suggest that such policies might help to slow the rise of
inequality and the growth in debt, and make financial crises less likely.
The paper is just the latest voice in a rising chorus. Towards the end of last year, The Great
Reversal, a book by economist Thomas Philippon, presented a detailed empirical analysis of the
question and argued that America can no longer be considered a free-market economy in any real sense. As well as confirming that the trends already sketched are indeed in play, he concludes
that the main explanation is political – namely, that politicians have not enforced competition
policy as they should, thanks in part to lobbying and campaign contributions. The result, to quote
just one example, is that the price of broadband access in the US is roughly double that of
comparable countries, leading to predictably higher profits.
The year before Philippon’s book, a similar one by Jonathan Tepper and Denise Hearn (The
Myth of Capitalism) made the same point. “I realised that particularly in the US, which is
probably the most advanced in this trend, you’re seeing more and more industrial concentration,”
he said in an interview with MoneyWeek at the time of publication. That gives companies
pricing power over consumers, more power over workers as they don’t have to bid against rivals
for their labour, and power over suppliers. The result is that a small number of huge companies
are capturing very high profit margins. Tepper, too, blames lax enforcement of competition laws
for the problem.
The problem may be about to get worse. The response of governments to the coronavirus
pandemic has led to a huge economic crisis, and their response to what they have caused is to
throw money at it. The combined effect will be to push smaller firms out of business, quenching
the fires of creative destruction, and for the well-connected, better organised larger companies to
obtain all the government cash and bolster their already dominant position. Low interest rates
may also contribute, as bigger companies are in a better position to get hold of cheap credit and
invest it in expansion. If rising concentration and monopolies are a problem, it’s one that seems
set to get worse.
The case for the defense
Are Marx and his mainstream followers correct? The answer, as ever, is – it’s complicated. A
sounder tradition in economics would lead us to be cautious about the claims from first
principles. As Edmond Bradley, a writer for the Mises Institute, put it back when Microsoft was
the monopolistic bogeyman in the early 2000s, “the fear of industrial concentration is the last
refuge of socialist theory” and the idea that governments must step in to save us from it is
“wildly incorrect”. A company operating in a market economy might look like a monopoly
“under myopically static analysis”, but a broader and historical view will reveal that even very
large, dominant companies face intense competitive pressure – whether from the fear of potential
competition from new entrants eyeing their high profits; or from competitors offering products
and services of a different but nevertheless substitutable kind; or from losing customers
altogether, should they decide they’d rather do without what is being offered.
And if that’s what first principles tell us, there are plenty of reasons to be sceptical about what
the real-world data are showing, too. A roundtable discussion of the subject by experts, hosted by
the OECD group of wealthy nations in 2018, concluded that although market power did indeed
appear to be rising in many countries, the causes were unclear. It might reflect a reduction in
competitive intensity, but it might equally be the outcome of intense competition. If the causes
are unclear, then there’s no way to be confident about what the correct policy response should
be.
In any case, the rise in industrial concentration may not be all it appears to be. As a 2019 paper
by Alessandra Bonfiglioli, Rosario Crinò and Gino Gancia for the Centre for Economic Policy
Research notes, all the existing evidence for the increase in industrial concentration and the fear
that this will usher in a new era of monopolies has been based on national data. They find that when competition from foreign imports is included, the overall level of competition may in fact
have intensified rather than fallen – even if the number of firms from the home country entering
the market falls. So increased global competition and greater national concentration may be two
sides of the same coin – “growing global competition may force unproductive firms to exit and
top firms to consolidate on their best products”.
Is monopoly such a bad thing anyway?
Amazon is one of the companies charged with unfairly exploiting its dominant position to crush
competition and hence harm customers. Indeed, its boss, Jeff Bezos, was recently dragged before
the US Congress and had to defend his firm from hostile questioning. But if Amazon is a
monopoly, then the first question that arises is, is that such a bad thing? Amazon started out as an
idea in Bezos’s mind, which he put into action using money he raised himself from family and
investors, working from his basement and carrying parcels to the post office. It was, from the
beginning, a high-risk venture, deemed by most to be almost certain to fail. Yet by consistently
offering consumers what they didn’t know they wanted, and winning their approval and then
loyalty, Amazon rose above its competitors by sheer excellence. It’s not as if its customers have
been forced into anything.
Moreover, even in its current dominant position, Amazon faces plenty of intense competition. As
Bezos pointed out in his testimony to Congress, customer trust is hard to win and easy to lose.
Amazon’s globe-spanning dominance would end very quickly should that trust disappear. There
are plenty of competitors snapping at its heels. Amazon accounts for less than 1% of the $25trn
global retail market, according to Bezos, and less than 4% of retail in the US. There are more
than 80 retailers in the US alone that earn more than $1bn in annual revenue – that includes
Walmart, which is more than twice Amazon’s size and whose online sales grew 74% in the first
quarter. In the wake of the pandemic, plenty of other companies are competing with Amazon in
the race for online orders for goods, including Shopify and Instacart.
The briefest review of relatively recent history should be enough to show that large companies of
the kind that draw fire from those concerned about monopolies are in reality always in danger of
having their profits competed away at any moment – witness Kodak and Myspace, to take just
two commonly cited examples. As those economists who most consistently defend free markets
insist, monopolies are only ever really a threat, not as a result of companies operating in free
markets, but as a result of government interference – particularly, in our day, as a result of
money printing and ultra-low interest rates. What is needed, then, is not more government
interference to solve the problems they have created, but less. In this sense, the rising threat of
monopoly as a result of the coronavirus pandemic is a clue to the real source of the problem.

QUESTIONS: What do you think of the article? Do you think the author's examples of monopolies are actually that? Is there such a thing as "excess profits"? Are the firms mentioned truly monopolies, in that they are the ONLY providers for that good or service? Do we need more regulation, or less? Why?

In: Economics

Question: Your company located in Australia requires the development of a customised digital tablet to use...

Question: Your company located in Australia requires the development of a customised digital tablet to use in hospital management of critically ill patients due to a pandemic. Three electronics manufacturers (one from South America, the second from Africa and a third from Middle East) have submitted bids to be suppliers.

You are given a team of ten people including yourself (you can specify their expertise) to investigate the entire procurement and supply in two months. Describe who and what you would assign your team members to do. (You may assume that they can travel easily if required.)

In: Accounting

A United Kingdom firm is planning to hedge an import payment of USD 10 million dollars...

A United Kingdom firm is planning to hedge an import payment of USD 10 million dollars due in 9 months (i.e. the firm will expect to pay the US $10 million in 9 months-time). The spot rate is 1 UK = 1.25 USD. Note: UK = UK pounds. USD = US Dollars. The 9-month forward rate is 1 UK = 1.2575 USD. The nine-month interest rate for borrowing (and lending) in the United Kingdom (UK) is 1.00% p.a. and in the United States (US) is 2.60% p.a. respectively. All interest rates are continuously compounded rates. Required: What is the best way for the company to hedge its future USD payment or cash outflow? Of the two possible alternative options to hedge the USD payment how much better off in UK pounds are you under the best option at time t = 9 months hence? Assume the firm can borrow or lend UK pounds and / or US dollars at the interest rates quoted above and also transact at the quoted spot and forward rates. If necessary state any other assumptions you make.

a. option one .. option two .. b. How much better off in UK pounds are you under the best option at time t = 9 months hence?

In: Finance

XYZ Medical Ltd a Melbourne based company enters into a non-cancellable purchase commitment of US$50,000 with...

XYZ Medical Ltd a Melbourne based company enters into a non-cancellable purchase commitment of US$50,000 with an American supplier on 1 April 2020 to buy the face masks in a bulk for medical staff. These face masks are to be shipped on the 1st of May 2020. The amount owing on the purchase is payable on 31 July 2020. XYZ Ltd observed that exchange rate is very volatile due to the current trade war between America and China. XYZ decided to enter into a forward rate contract. On 1 April 2020 a forward-exchange contract for US$50,000 as taken out with Westpac Bank Ltd at a cost of $76 923 (which is US$50,000 ÷ 0.65 with AU$1.00 = US$0.65 being the agreed forward rate). XYZ Ltd uses cash flow hedge accounting and its reporting date is 30 June. Date Spot rate Forward rate 1 st April 2020 0.67 0.65 1 st May 2020 0.61 0.59 30th June 2020 0.55 0.57 31st July 2020 0.64 0.64 Required: i. Calculate the gain or loss on the forward contract for each significant date. ii. Prepare the journal entries to account for the transactions including 31/7/2020.

In: Accounting

1a. How many arrangements are there of all the letters in INDIVIDUAL? 1b. How many arrangements...

1a. How many arrangements are there of all the letters in INDIVIDUAL?

1b. How many arrangements of the letters in INDIVIDUAL have all three I’s adjacent?

1c. How many arrangements of the letters in INDIVIDUAL have no I’s adjacent?

In: Statistics and Probability

Consider the assumptions that framed the analysis. Removing a hotel from the secondary competition and add...

Consider the assumptions that framed the analysis. Removing a hotel from the secondary competition and add it to the primary competition. What effect does taking out a Hotel from secondary competition has on the overall analysis? On Demand Base , changes in overall penetrations, changes in the market segment penetrations for the individual hotels, market segment mix for the entire market, and demand.

In: Operations Management