Why is it difficult to find eigenenergies and eigenstates of electrons in multi electron atoms? Why in the multi electron atoms do states with the same principal quantum number with different orbital quantum numbers have different energies? Why do states with the same principal quantum number and orbital quantum numbers have different energy levels depending on their total spin quantum number?

"The Supreme Court's 2012 ruling that states could decide whether to participate in the health law's Medicaid expansion program was controversial." Write a response to the statement given describing the Medicaid expansion program and why some states did NOT participate. Include how the decision to participate in the expansion program affects access, quality, and healthcare costs for providers. Don't forget to describe the pros and cons.

The Affordable Care Act allow states to expand Medicaid services by raising the income eligibility guidelines. The federal government will pay for 90% of the costs of the program expansion and the state is required to pay the remaining 10%. Many states (including Oklahoma) have opted not to particiapte in the program expansion. Do you feel that our state should or should not participate in Medicaid expansion and why?

a.Consider a hypothetical gas of four distinguishable particles, labeled W, X, Y and Z. Assume that they are distributed between only two translational quantum states of energies 2E and 4E. How many different configurations of this gas are there?

b.Consider a hypothetical gas of three distinguishable particles, labeled A, B and C. Each of the particles has only three quantum states of energies 5E, 10E and 15E. How many different configurations of this gas have a total energy of 30E?

c.Consider a hypothetical gas of three identical particles, each of which has only three quantum states of energies 3E, 6E and 9E. List all the different configurations of this gas that have a total energy of 18E assuming that the particles are (i) identical bosons and (ii) identical fermions.

d.Consider a hypothetical gas of four identical bosons, each of which has only four quantum states of energies E, 2E, 3E and 4E. Suppose the total energy of the gas is fixed at 12E. Determine the probability of finding all four particles in the same quantum state.

Use the United National Conference on Trade and Development FDI Database (available under the Statistics option at unctad.org) to research the foreign direct investment profile of a country or region of your choice.

Name three different types of stock and identify the benefits of holding ownership in them; what are hallmarks that define a share of stock according to the court in United Housing Foundation v. Forman?

Make a comparative analysis between the following two set of Islamic bank financial statements: Dubai Islamic Bank, United Arab Emirates, and Sharjah Islamic Bank, United Arab Emirates 1. Find or google two different Islamic bank from two different countries. 2. Get the newest year available. 3. Not limited to UAE only. 4. Find if they prepared the: i. Statement of Restricted Investments ii: Zakat and charity fund statement. iii. Qard (loan) fund statement. iv. Roles of the sharia advisor. v. Responsibility to pay zakat. vi. How much is zakat paid and the method to compute zakat?

QUESTION 44

Historically, Russia’s international identity can be described as

1 points   

QUESTION 45

Which of the following represents a core component of Confucianism?

1 points   

QUESTION 46

Gorbachev’s reforms in the 1980s relied on the policies of glasnost and perestroika, or

1 points   

QUESTION 47

As they came into power in 2009 the Democratic Party of Japan promised voters to

1 points   

QUESTION 48

Deng Xiaoping introduced the “household responsibility system,” which referred to

1 points   

QUESTION 49

Which of the following statements about the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European Union is accurate?

12. Cindy Szadokierski’s “interactive leadership” style has worked at United. A.. Describe her leadership style in a few words. b. Would this style work lead you and your peers in your current job? c. Why?

Cindy Szadokierski, United Airlines
Twenty-five years ago, Cindy Szadokierski quit her job teaching high school French and went to work as a reservations agent for United Airlines. Today, she is vice president in charge of operations for United’s largest hub at O’Hare International Airport.After joining the company, Szadokierski served in positions of increasing responsibility, including being general manager of United’s hub at Washington’s Dulles International Airport. From the beginning of her career with United, Szadokierski wanted to be in operations because she liked the idea of bridging the gap between what goes on in the field and what happens at headquarters. At O’Hare, where she oversees 4,000 employees and 600 flights a day, her favorite times are the weekly afternoon walkabouts on the O’Hare ramp and the weekly morning strolls through the terminal. Why? Because they give her a chance to connect with employees and customers. Pete McDonald, chief operating officer of United’s parent, UAL Corporation, says there were serious operations problems at O’Hare, so they put ‘‘the most communicative person’’ in the job. ‘‘She’s everywhere. She talks to everybody,’’ said Don Wolfel, president of United’s mechanics union at O’Hare.Szadokierski’s approach to leadership is more collaborative than command-and-control. In addition to learning from employees and customers, Szadokierski emphasizes regular meetings with her leadership team to talk about what’s going right, what’s going wrong, and how to collaboratively fix any problem

In June 2004, Jen Kluger and Suzie Orol received a phone call from Sarah Gibson, one of their retail customers, in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Gibson called with a complaint about how many of her competitors now carried Foxy Originals jewelry. Gibson’s store had been the exclusive carrier of Foxy Originals jewelry in the Winnipeg area for a number of years. With the growing popularity of its designs, many stores in the area now carried the Foxy Originals line. Kluger and Orol, owners and partners of Foxy Originals, were worried. If they continued to saturate the Canadian market, they would be faced with similar concerns from customers across Canada. The partners realized that it was time to grow the outside Canada, and they were excited about the possibility of selling their jewelry in the United States. Their goal was to enter the U.S. market by January 2005, but they would first have to decide on the best method of distribution attending trade shows or hiring sales representatives.

Jen Kluger and Suzie Orol believed that life should be fun and full of excitement, and they founded Foxy Originals based on these beliefs. These two young jewelry designers met while attending The University of Western Ontario, and they set out with a vision to make high style fashion jewelry accessible to young women. Both partners had experience in the jewelry industry. Orol’s parents owned a metal manufacturing company that focused on making jewelry and medals for companies and community groups. Orol was involved in the family business from a young age. Kluger had been designing and selling her own line of necklaces since she was in Grade 11.Kluger and Orol started their business, Foxy Originals (Foxy), in 1998. They sold a modest line of jewelry to friends and acquaintances on campus while attending university. In the summers before graduation, the partners took Foxy on the road to various outdoor festivals and summer concerts. The results were very positive. Upon graduation, with business degrees in their back pockets, Kluger and Orol left corporate job offers behind to work full time at Foxy. The partners spent their time designing new product lines and promoting Foxy in new markets. As the company grew and the jewelry that sold at festivals and summer concerts became more popular, Kluger and Orol began selling their jewelry to retail stores. Each retail account took a significant amount of time to develop, with the partners personally contacting and meeting with each store’s product buyer. The partners were very successful at selling to retailers due to their high energy, enthusiasm and knowledge of the product. As a result, in the first three years of operations, the company’s sales had doubled every year. Sales were continuing to grow at a rapid pace. Kluger and Orol were always very enthusiastic about their designs, and Canadian retailers began placing orders for Foxy jewelry after meeting these dynamic founders and learning about the products. It wasn’t long before Foxy jewelry could be found in 250 boutiques across Canada. Kluger and Orol personally sold (i.e., they had no sales representatives) their product lines to every retailer in Canada and managed all operations. Kluger and Orol described Foxy as a company that managed to stay two steps ahead of the latest trends: In doing so, our collections remain fresh, fun and funky. We realize that in this day and age, being hip and trendy comes at a high cost; not so with Foxy. We are able to provide a selection of necklaces, earrings, bracelets and rings that are truly fashion-forward, at a reasonable price.

Foxy jewelry offered high style and high quality at an affordable price point and targeted women between the ages of 18 to 30 who were style- and price-conscious. The jewelry was designed for three groups of women: The Reversible Enamels Ladies, The Bridge Ladies and The Chain-lovin’ Ladies. Kluger and Orol explained each customer group: The Reversible Enamels Ladies: Reversible necklace enthusiasts are usually the very dedicated Foxy customers who have been following our company since Day 1. They are slightly more conservative with their style and use Foxy jewelry to add a little something special to their outfits. They love the idea that they are getting two necklaces for the price of one. (See Exhibit 1 for sample product preferences for this group.)The Bridge Ladies: These customers consist of young, suit-wearing professionals. They want to add a little accent to their suits, but they need to be careful how much they add. These customers go for the leather necklaces with the bigger pendants. (See Exhibit 2 for sample product preferences for this group.)The Chain-lovin’ Ladies: These customers are more fashion savvy and trendy. They read the fashion magazines and seek out “that look.” These ladies collect our big earrings and long necklaces. They layer the Foxy necklaces and try the newest collections as soon as they are in the stores. (See Exhibit 3 for sample product preferences for this group.)

Foxy jewelry was designed and produced in Toronto, Canada. Kluger and Orol designed all the jewelry, releasing two new collections every year. A collection or product line consisted of a number of different styles of necklaces, earrings and rings, where all styles were associated with a central theme such as “Royal Safari.” The designs were assembled by a small production team of professional crafts people.

All Foxy jewelry was made from pewter and coated in sterling silver, matte gold or bronze with a matte finish. Each item was then stamped with the Foxy signature to authenticate the designs (see Exhibit 4 for the Foxy signature tag). From this common starting point, the pieces were transformed into original works through the integration of enamel, stones, leather and ultrasuede.

Kluger and Orol had established a strong Foxy presence in the Canadian market, and they were now ready to expand into the United States. Financially, Foxy was healthy so any distribution costs related to the U.S. expansion could be financed from internal operations (i.e., no funding was needed). The key fashion hubs in the United States were New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Dallas. Kluger and Orol did not want Foxy to be available on every street corner in every city. Instead, they preferred selling to reputable stores that suited the brand. Kluger and Orol decided to charge the same price for their products in the United States as they did in Canada (i.e., a necklace sold for Cdn$34 and, in the United States would sell for US$34). The U.S. jewelry market was more than 10 times larger than the Canadian jewelry market, offering a much greater opportunity for product exposure. Based on the success they had achieved in Canada, Kluger and Orol believed in their product, but they worried about how responsive the U.S. market would be to their jewelry designs. The partners believed that Canadians supported Canadian businesses and were brand loyal to companies that manufactured locally; however, they suspected that Americans preferred the latest trends regardless of the product’s origin. Classic jewelry (currently 50 per cent of Foxy merchandise in Canada) was also not as popular in the United States. Kluger and Orol would need to stay on top of Foxy’s fashion-forward designs to compete effectively.

Trade shows were one-stop marketplaces for retailers to source products from wholesalers and importers. They were positioned for registered personnel only, usually consisting of buyers from fashion boutiques, accessories, jewelry, gift, fashion chain, department and other specialty stores. These exhibitions were not open to the general public. U.S. trade shows were very large, often with over 75,000 buyers in attendance. Kluger and Orol planned to set up a booth at several trade shows in order to showcase Foxy jewelry to prospective buyers. Buyers would select what merchandise they would like to carry in their stores and would then place their orders with the exhibitor. The partners had plans to attend trade shows devoted to women’s fashion accessories, surf apparel and giftware. There were 10 potential trade shows for 2005 where Foxy could showcase its products. Registration for all shows needed to be complete by November 2004, at an average cost of $3,000 a show. The average trade show lasted three days, wherein Kluger and Orol would require five days of preparation and both would work nine hours a day at the trade show. Kluger and Orol were excited about attending the shows to learn about the U.S. jewelry market and to get ideas for new product innovations. Trade shows were a great way for the partners to personally sell their merchandise and to network with key people in the industry. The partners also loved to travel, and they looked forward to visiting the big U.S. fashion hubs. Because of the diverse attendance at these shows, it was difficult for the partners to predict at which retail stores their merchandise would be sold. Ideally, they preferred that all major fashion-forward stores within a geographic area would support Foxy’s merchandise; however, sales would likely be scattered across locations that were diverse in geography and brand image. One of the principal selling factors at trade shows was the exhibitors’ booth layout –– the more exciting and flashy the booth, the greater the number of visitors. The partners researched a number of booths and settled on one that would cost $4,000 and could be used for approximately 30 trade shows (see Exhibit 5 for booth display). The booth would have to be shipped to each trade show at an average cost of $1,500 a show. Plane tickets and related travel costs would average $2,000per show, and product samples and promotional materials would cost $2,800 per show. Kluger and Orol had friends in many U.S. cities, so they planned to stay overnight with them when visiting the shows.

The partners had estimated that an average retailer order would consist of 25 necklaces and 12 pairs of earrings. Retailers would purchase necklaces for $17 and earrings for $12 from Foxy, which they would then sell to their customers for $34 and $24 respectively. Shipping terms were FOB shipping point and cost an average of $15 an order. All necklaces consisted of a chain, a pendant, a label, a clasp, and labor fees for a total cost of $8.05 for each necklace. A pair of earrings cost approximately $5.50 to manufacture. The partners expected anywhere from 20 to 45 orders at each trade show. Historically, 50 per cent of retail buyers at the trade shows would reorder product approximately two times a year.

An alternative method of distribution would be to develop a sales force in the key fashion hubs in the United States. Sales representatives would carry 10 to 15 different brands, usually within the same category of products (i.e., accessories), and would sell to retailers in designated geographic zones. Kluger and Orol wanted to hire people who would be loyal and who could represent the appropriate Foxy brand attributes. Kluger and Orol noted: “The most important characteristics in sales representatives are that they believe in your product, and they are willing to get on the road or travel to show it well.” Kluger and Orol knew having a sales force would be a much faster way for Foxy to enter the market because of the sales representatives’ contacts in the industry, their relationships with existing retailers and the minimum amount of training they would require. They also knew it could be difficult to find the right people with the right characteristics to make this alternative work.

Sales representatives would be compensated with a 15 per cent commission on all sales.

They would also receive $200 a month towards rental space in their jewelry showrooms5(see Exhibit 6 for showroom display), two sets of sample boards6a year for a total cost of $2,900 and catalogues and promotional materials averaging $600 a year. Foxy would have to hire a part-time bookkeeper to pay the sales representatives because calculating sales commissions would be time-consuming and complicated. The bookkeeper’s fee would be $40 an hour, and this person would be required for 48 hours a year. Travel expenses, such as gas and mileage were not covered by Foxy. Production costs and retailer order size were the same for this option as for the trade show option. The average sales representative would sell between 10 to 15 orders each month. The 10 to 15 orders included both new account sales and reorders from existing customers. If this option was chosen, Kluger and Orol planned to hire four sales representatives, one in each of the major cities of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Dallas.

Ideally, Foxy preferred to enter the U.S. market by attending trade shows and hiring a sales force. The problem with this alternative was territory ownership. For example, if Kluger and Orol attended a trade show in New York, and had hired a New York based sales representative, it was an industry norm that the sales representative would expect a 15 per cent commission from sales made at the New York trade show. Kluger and Orol investigated structuring the sales representatives’ commission package based on sales they made personally rather than on all sales made within their geographic location. Sales representatives were unhappy with this alternative because not only would competition be created between sales representatives, but also between the sales representatives and Foxy. For example, sales representatives worked hard to establish contracts, and many times, contracts were signed with one store, and as a result, other stores would see the product and would want to carry it themselves. Sales representatives believed they should be compensated for these spillover sales, and they were concerned that the new retail stores could order directly from Foxy. To combat the issue of internal competition, the partners thought about attending trade shows in the major cities and having their sales force work in the smaller cities; however, smaller cities were not as fashion-forward, and would not help to establish the Foxy brand presence in the United States, the way sales representatives could in major cities. In the short term, Kluger and Orol decided to focus on just one of the distribution channels in order to limit the complexities of the U.S. expansion. If the partners decided to pursue both trade shows and sales representatives, it would be a longer-term strategy.

Kluger and Orol were excited about the U.S. opportunities, and they wanted to ensure they were entering the market with a solid strategy. The partners had built the business on the principles of having fun, gaining exposure for new product lines and staying ahead of fashion trends. To date, they had been highly financially successful in doing just this. Knowing the additional workload that the U.S. expansion would create, they hoped their profit would grow by at least $100,000. Both options appeared promising but not without risks. Kluger and Orol had to make a decision quickly to prepare for a January 2005 launch.

WITHOUT USING EXCEL:

1. Calculate the number of orders at a target profit of $100,000