A company in Melbourne sells merchandise to a company in Auckland on 3 November. The sales price is NZ$65 000 and the exchange rate on this date is A$1 = NZ$1.1. Settlement of the invoice is made by the New Zealand company in New Zealand dollars on 10 December when the rate of exchange is A$1 = NZ$1.40.

Required

1. Give the entries in the books of the Australian company on the date of sale and date of settlement, prepared in accordance with the requirements of AASB 121.
2. Now assume that the Australian company’s reporting period ends on 31 December when the exchange rate is A$1 = NZ$1.40, and that the New Zealand company settles its account with the Australian company on 10 January. Show the closing entry as at 31 December and the settlement on 10 January in accordance with the requirements of AASB 121.
3. In your own words describe what you understand as the Functional Currency according to AASB121

scholars increasingly view technological change at work as social (and managerial) processes in which social agency – in the form of workplace cultures, structures, and politics – shapes how technology is designed, implemented, and used’ (Badham, 2005: 1155)

a. In view of the above observation, propose how technology change today is affecting or can affect the culture of the organisation you work with.

b. What practical considerations should your organisation make to protect its interest.

It is not uncommon to see that alumni often give back to their schools. The question is, what factors influence their gratitude and goodwill and play an important role in them deciding how much to contribute? A sample of some top universities has been analyzed to determine if there is a relationship between the Alumni Giving rate (percentage of alumni who give) and factors like Graduation rate (percentage), % of class Under 20, and Student / Faculty ratio. Run a regression model to determine the relationship.  Answer the following questions based on the Excel table.    

School   State     Graduation Rate   % of Classes Under 20   Student / Faculty Ratio   Alumni Giving Rate
Boston College   MA   85   39   13   25%
Brandeis University    MA   79   68   8   33%
Brown University   RI   93   60   8   40%
California Institute of Technology   CA   85   65   3   46%
Carnegie Mellon University   PA   75   67   10   28%
Case Western Reserve University   OH   72   52   8   31%
College of William and Mary   VA   89   45   12   27%
Columbia University   NY   90   69   7   31%
Cornell University   NY   91   72   13   35%
Dartmouth College   NH   94   61   10   53%
Duke University   NC   92   68   8   45%
Emory University   GA   84   65   7   37%
Georgetown University   DC   91   54   10   29%
Harvard University   MA   97   73   8   46%
John Hopkins University   MD   89   64   9   27%
Lehigh University   PA   81   55   11   40%
Massachusetts Inst. of Technology   MA   92   65   6   44%
New York University   NY   72   63   13   13%
Northwestern University   IL   90   66   8   30%
Pennsylvania State University   PA   80   32   19   21%
Princeton University   NJ   95   68   5   67%
Rice University   TX   92   62   8   40%
Stanford University   CA   92   69   7   34%
Tufts University   MA   87   67   9   29%
Tulane University   LA   72   56   12   17%
U. of California-Berleley   CA   83   58   17   18%
U. of California-Davis   CA   74   32   19   7%
U. of California-Irvine   CA   74   42   20   9%
U. of California-Los Angeles   CA   78   41   18   13%
U. of California-San Diego   CA   80   48   19   8%
U. of California-Santa Barbara   CA   70   45   20   12%
U. of Chicago   IL   84   65   4   36%
U. of Florida   FL   67   31   23   19%
U. of Illinois-Urbana Champaign   IL   77   29   15   23%
U. of Michigan-Ann Arbor   MI   83   51   15   13%
U. of North Carolina-Chapel Hill   NC   82   40   16   26%
U. of Notre Dame   IN   94   53   13   49%
U. of Pennsylvania   PA   90   65   7   41%
U. of Rochester   NY   76   63   10   23%
U. of Southern California   CA   70   53   13   22%
U. of Texas-Austin   TX   66   39   21   13%
U. of Virginia   VA   92   44   13   28%
U. of Washington   WA   70   37   12   12%
U. of Wisconsin-Madison   WI   73   37   13   13%
Vanderbuilt University   TN   82   68   9   31%
Wake Forest University   NC   82   59   11   38%
Washington University - St. Louis   MO   86   73   7   33%
Yale University   CT   94   77   7   50%
1.  Do you think this model is good?  That is, do you see an evidence of relationship? Pick the right option.  
2. What proportion of the variation in Alumni giving is explained by the three variables?
3. Suggest 2 variables (reasons) not in the table that can also be affecting the alumni giving rate.   
3. The coefficient for student / faculty ratio is negative in Excel output.  Give a reason as to why this is the case.  
5.  Find the alumni giving rate for Carnegie-Mellon from the table.  Compare this to your results in Q4.  What is the residual (error)?  

The Economic Growth​ Model's Prediction of​ Catch-Up

The economic growth model makes predictions about an​ economy's initial level of real GDP per capita relative to other economies and how fast the economy will grow in the future.

a. Consider the statistics in the following table. Are these statistics consistent with the economic growth​ model? Briefly explain.

b. Now consider the statistics in the following table. Are these statistics consistent with the economic growth​ model? Briefly explain.

c. Construct a new table that lists all nine​ countries, from the lowest real GDP per capita in 1960 to the​ highest, along with their growth rates. Are the statistics in your new table consistent with the economic growth​ model?

Use the information below to answer questions 25-30.

Aggie Oil owns a 100% WI in Lease A.Lease A is burdened with a 1/6 royalty.During the month of October, Aggie Oil estimated a total of 10,000 barrels of oil were produced and sold.Assume the selling price of the oil was $80/bbl and the production tax was 5%.

Additionally, Aggie Oils books estimates until actual can be obtained at settlement.Settlement typically occurs two months after the sale.Upon settlement, Aggie Oil determined that 9,000 volumes were sold in October.Assume Aggie Oil distributes all royalty and tax payments.

25. During which month will you initially record revenue related to this sale (type out the whole month; do not abbreviate)?

QUESTION 26

During which month should cash received be recorded for this sale?

QUESTION 27

In December, determine the amount of serverance tax payable to be reversed from the October estimates.

QUESTION 28

In December, determine the amount of LOE for production (severance) tax to be reversed from the October estimates.

QUESTION 29

In December, determine the amount of oil revenue to be recorded for actuals from the October sale.

QUESTION 30

In December, determine the amount of royalty payable to be recorded for actuals from the October sale.

6. Company X is going to issue 2,000 stock option (200,000 shares) on its common stock to the top executives today.  The exercise price on the stock options is $30 per share.    If past experience dictates that the executives will exercise their option by the 11th year on average and that the variance of stock returns is .15 (annual), calculate the value of these stock options assuming a dividend yield of 1% and a risk free rate of 4%.  The stock is trading at $27 per share. The company finds that 90% of options are exercised.

b.  What is the minimum value of the options that must be amortized on the company's financial statements according to FASB 123R?

Comcast is the largest cable provider in the United States. This activity is important because despite its impressive power, influence, and politics, Comcast failed to effectively influence stakeholders including customers, employees, regulators, networks, and other content providers.

The goal of this activity is to apply the knowledge of OB in order to understand why Comcast failed in its bid to acquire Time Warner, and allow you to provide realistic solutions for future acquisition attempts.

Read the case about Comcast’s failure to influence key stakeholders. Then, using the 3-step problem-solving approach, answer the questions that follow.

Like many companies in the telecom industry, Comcast has chosen to grow by buying competitors. After acquiring AT&T’s Internet business in 2001, the company has remained on the acquisition train ever since. Its largest purchase to date was NBC Universal in 2011 for $18 billion, but its most notable was its thwarted 2015 attempt to buy Time Warner for $45 billion. Despite its impressive power, influence, and politics, Comcast failed to effectively influence stakeholders including customers, employees, regulators, networks, and other content providers. More than 300,000 comments were filed with the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) by customers who opposed the merger. For perspective, the merger between AT&T and T-Mobile drew just over 40,000 comments.¹

Why Bother in the First Place?

Comcast is the largest cable provider in the United States despite having the worst customer satisfaction ratings in its industry. It has twice earned the dubious distinction of being the “Worst Company in America,” according to Consumer Reports’ customer satisfaction arm. Comcast’s customer service was so poor as to be considered legendary. And its reputation with various networks and cable channels such as Discovery, Disney, 20th Century Fox, and the NFL Network had been declining for years.² These partners are in effect customers, and Comcast has pressured them to pay higher fees to distribute their content through its cables.³

Industry trends were affecting Comcast’s current performance and its future prospects. Consumers have been cutting the cable and instead accessing their content via streaming alternatives such as Netflix and Amazon Prime. Netflix alone accounts for one-third of all Internet traffic. But apparently believing that being No. 1 was not enough, Comcast’s leaders decided that acquiring Time Warner would enable them to better serve existing and new customers, as well as to defend against increasingly diverse competition from Google, Dish Network, and others.⁴

Attempts to Influence the Players

Comcast was determined and resourceful in its attempt to make things go its way. A major part of its efforts focused on Washington, D.C., since no merger of that size goes through without regulatory approval. Comcast employs a force of more than 100 lobbyists, and its $17 million annual lobbying budget is second only to Google’s.⁵ Lobbying efforts were largely intended to influence officials in the FCC and Department of Justice (DOJ), the regulators who would ultimately decide how the merger would affect competition and consumer choice, and who would either block it or allow it to proceed. Members of these government departments were buried in data, wined and dined, and presented with dazzling arguments highlighting the potential benefits of the merger. But Comcast did not stop there. CEO Brian Roberts courted President Obama, golfing with him on Martha’s Vineyard. And Comcast Executive Vice President David Cohen hosted three fund-raisers for the president at his home, raising more than $10 million for the Democratic party.⁶ Roberts and Cohen presumably thought that associating with key players in the government would win them favor with regulators and members of Congress who might influence the merger and other policies favorable to Comcast.

For its part, the company argued that a merger of the two largest players wouldn’t stifle competition but instead allow them to provide more services to more customers. For instance, it currently provides Internet services to low-income and rural residents. Combining with Time Warner, the company claimed, would enable it to serve even more of these customers.⁷

The Other Side and Ultimate Outcome

Ultimately, the money, the relationships, the lobbyists’ arguments, and the pressure failed to work. Its opponents used many of the same bases of power, influence, and political tactics to argue against the merger that Comcast used to promote it, and the company withdrew its bid for Time Warner. It didn’t help that Comcast already had such a poor reputation with many of the parties from whom it needed support. It is noteworthy that in mid-2016 Charter Communications successfully acquired Time Warner in a merger worth $79 billion.⁸

Assume you are CEO Roberts, and you want to successfully acquire a large competitor in the future. Drawing on what you learned from the Time Warner experience, what would you do now to improve your chances?

Apply the 3-Step Problem-Solving Approach to OB

Step 1: Define the problem.Step 2: Identify causes of the problem by using material from this chapter, which has been summarized in the Organizing Framework for Chapter 12 and is shown in Figure 12.9. Causes will tend to show up in either the Inputs box or the Processes box.Step 3: Make your recommendations for solving the problem. Consider whether you want to resolve it, solve it, or dissolve it (see Section 1.5). Which recommendation is desirable and feasible?

Discuss the basic accounting problem that arises in handling each of the following situations.

(a) Assets purchased by issuance of capital stock.

(b) Acquisition of plant assets by gift or donation.

(c) Purchase of a plant asset subject to a cash discount.

(d) A group of assets acquired for a lump sum.

(e) An asset traded in or exchanged for another asset.

Suppose you have a demand curve of P = 10 - Q and a supply curve of P = 2 + Q. If the government imposes a tax of $8 per unit of quantity sold on the sellers in this market, then what is the market quantity traded as a result of the tax? Then, what are the consumer surplus, producer surplus, and deadweight loss (after the $8 tax)?

How do you use pre-trade relative prices or opportunity costs to determine patterns of trade?

Under trade, the equilibrium relative price of a traded good must stay within which interval in order for trade to be mutually beneficial?

How are gains from trade reflected in a graph that involves PPF and indifference curves?