1. In early March 2020, a pair of activist investors purchased over 10% of shares outstanding in Big Lots Inc., a discount retailer which has recently experienced weak returns. The investors hire you to advise on executive compensation and governance practices. Describe the conflict of interest which often arises between owners and management and suggest how this may be addressed via executive compensation

Since the early 1970s, the world oil market has been buffeted by the OPEC cartel and by political turmoil in the Persian Gulf. In 1974, by collectively restraining output, OPEC (the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) pushed world oil prices well above what they would have been in a competitive market. OPEC could do this because it accounted for much of world oil production. During 1979-1980, oil prices shot up again, as the Iranian revolution and the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq war sharply reduced Iranian and Iraqi production. During the 1980s, the price gradually declined, as demand fell and competitive (i.e., non-OPEC) supply rose in response to price. Prices remained relatively stable during 1988-2001, except for a temporary spike in 1990 following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Prices spiked again in 2002-2003 as a result of a strike in Venezuela and then the war with Iraq in the spring of 2003. Figure bellow shows the world price of oil from 1970 to 2003, in both nominal and real terms.

The Persian Gulf is one of the less stable regions of the world-a fact that has led to

later fell as supply and demand adjusted.
concern over the possibility of new oil supply disruptions and sharp increases in oil prices.

What would happen to oil prices-in both the short run and longer run-if a war or

The Persian Gulf is one of the less stable regions of the world-a fact that has
revolution in the Persian Gulf caused a sharp cut-back in oil production? Let's see how

led to concern over the possibility of new oil supply disruptions and sharp

simple supply and demand curves (can be used to predict the outcome of such an event.

increases in oil prices. What would happen to oil prices-in both the short run Because this example is set in 1997, all prices are measured in 1997 dollars.

and longer run-if a war or revolution in the Persian Gulf caused a sharp cut- back in oil production? Let's see how simple supply and demand curves (:anbe

used to predict the outcome of such an event.

Here are some rough figures:

Because this example is set in 1997, all prices are measured in 1997 dollars.

• 1997 world price = $18 per barrel Here are some rough figures:

• World demand and total supply = 23 billion barrels per year (bb/yr) • 1997 world price = $18 per barrel ~

• 1997 OPEC supply = 10 bb/yr
• Worlddemandandtotalsupply=23billionbarrelsperyear(bb/yr)

• Competitive (non-OPEC) supply = 13 bb/yr • 1997 OPEC supply = 10 bb/yr

• Competitive (non-OPEC) supply = 13 bb/yr15

The following table gives price elasticity estimates for oil supply and demand:16

15Non-OPEC supply includes the production of China and the former Soviet republics.

The following table gives price elasticity estimates for oil supply and demand:

Short-Run Long-Run

World demand: -0.05 -0.40

Competitive supply: 0.10 0.40

a) Using the estimated elasticities, calculate demand, competitive supply in the short run and Total short-run supply. Verify that the quantity demanded and the total quantity supplied are equal at an equilibrium price of $18 per barrel.

b) Using the estimated elasticities, calculate demand, competitive supply in the long run and Total long-run supply. Again, verify that the quantity demanded and the total quantity supplied are equal at an equilibrium price of $18 per barrel.

c) Saudi Arabia is one of the world's largest oil producers, accounting for roughly 3 bb/yr, which is nearly one third of OPEC production and about 13 percent of total world production. What would happen to the price of oil in short-run if, because of war or political upheaval, Saudi Arabia stopped producing oil? How would you answer this question from long-run perspective?

TRUE or FALSE

1. Objective of engineering risk management is early and continuous identification, management, and resolution of risks such that engineering a system is accomplished within cost, delivered on time, and meets performance requirements.

2. A risk is an event that, if it occurs, adversely affects the ability of an engineering system project to achieve its outcome objectives.

3. An event is uncertain if there is indefiniteness about its outcome.

4. Epistemic uncertainty refers to uncertainty about an event due to incomplete knowledge.

5. A system’s elements may include people, cultures, organizations, policies, services, techniques, technologies, information/data, facilities, products, procedures, processes, and other human-made (or natural) entities.

6. General systems theory is a philosophy that considers how to view and pursue scientific inquiry.

7. Daniel Bernoulli formed the idea that valuing monetary loss or gain from a gamble or lottery should be measured in the context of a player’s personal circumstance and existing wealth.

8. Risk management always involves “cost-benefit-risk” tradeoff and analyses.

In early January 2017, NewTech purchases computer equipment for $264,000 to use in operating activities for the next four years. It estimates the equipment’s salvage value at $28,000.

Exercise 8-8 Double-declining-balance depreciation LO P1

Prepare a table showing depreciation and book value for each of the four years assuming double­declining­balance depreciation. (Enter all amounts positive values.)

Western Europe emerged slowly out of Feudalism. As early nation states formed, it was the smaller states that had the advantage, such as Holland.   Eventually a larger England eclipsed Holland yet maintain a long-term advantage over the larger France and Spain. Ultimately, after many centuries the very large United States become the model of a successful modern, capitalist economy. If trade and population are so important, why did it take almost 1,000 years to develop a very large capitalist nation state?  

Need a few pages to write about this so as much information as possible would be nice

References and sources if possible, or any site that would help answer

Subway, the fast food restaurant franchise, announced in early 2018 it planned to bring back the “$5 Footlong” promotion. Hundreds of Subway franchise owners protested the promotion saying that they cannot afford to sell the footlong sub sandwiches for $5. You'll want to review the Subway webpage featured in the Chapter 8 module.

Assume that the costs related to a Subway footlong and a Subway franchise include the following

NOTE: Assume all subs are paid for with a credit card

Discussion Questions:

Question #1:  Bob owns a subway franchise and he is furious at the thought of offering $5.00 footlongs. His comment was “they cost us $5.41 each so we will be upside down on each sub sold. I’ll lose my shirt!”. Do you agree or disagree with Bob that this idea should be immediately rejected without any further analysis? If you don’t agree with Bob, why do you think further analysis is required?  

Question #2: What are the relevant and irrelevant costs in this pricing decision? (hint: there are 6 relevant costs)

Question #3: Can you think of any other reasons/factors besides the costs listed above that might be relevant to the pricing decision to offer the $5.00 footlongs? Use your imagination

Brookdale Hospital hired an inexperienced controller early in 20X4. Near the end of 20X4, the board of directors decided to conduct a major fund-raising campaign. They wished to have the December 31, 20X4, statement of financial position for Brookdale fully conform with current generally accepted principles for hospitals. The trial balance prepared by the controller at December 31, 20X4, follows:

Your analysis of the contribution’s receivable as of December 31, 20X4, determined that there were unrecognized contributions for the following:

Unrestricted use$40,300 Cancer research 10,800 Purchase of equipment 20,500 Permanently restricted endowment principal 32,000 Total$103,600

2. Short-term investments at year-end consist of $151,600 of funds without donor restrictions and $50,000 of funds restricted for future cancer research. All of the long-term investments are held in the permanently restricted endowment fund.
3. Land is carried at its current market value of $121,600. The original owner purchased the land for $70,500, and at the time of donation to the hospital, it had an appraised value of $97,000.
4. Buildings purchased 11 years ago for $610,500 had an estimated useful life of 30 years. Equipment costing $152,400 was purchased 7 years ago and had an expected life of 10 years. The controller had improperly increased the reported values of the buildings and equipment to their current fair value of $935,700 and had incorrectly computed the accumulated depreciation.
5. The board of directors voted on December 29, 20X4, to designate $101,700 of funds without donor restrictions invested in short-term investments for developing a drug rehabilitation center.

Answer is not complete.

In early 2001, Ride Along Corporation (Ride Along or the “Company”), a domestic company that does not meet the definition of a public business entity, began manufacturing and selling bicycles to retail stores nationally. Ride Along’s fiscal year ends on December 31, and it has been experiencing growth over the past decade. Ride Along is required to prepare and issue annual consolidated financial statements to its shareholders and the local bank. These financial statements are to be prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Ride Along is 75 percent owned by a private equity firm and 25 percent owned by its founder. The founder and private equity firm plan to either take Ride Along public in an initial public offering (IPO) or sell it to an existing public company in five years. Ride Along tests goodwill for impairment annually on November 30 and has determined that each of its goodwill reporting units is a legal entity. On February 1, 2012, Ride Along acquired 100 percent ownership of a bicycle tire manufacturer, Mini Tires Company (Mini). The purposes of the acquisition were to reduce the cost associated with buying bicycle tires from third-party suppliers and for Ride Along to expand its operations by selling tires directly to retail stores. Mini met the definition of a business1 but did not meet the definition of a public business entity (PBE). The founder of Mini will work as an employee of Ride Along and has signed a two-year noncompete agreement. Ride Along paid cash of $20 million (purchase price), which resulted in goodwill of $6 million and an intangible asset (a customer list) of $2 million. During 2013, Ride Along continued to gain market share in the bicycle industry and determined it wanted to own retail stores. On June 1, 2013, Ride Along acquired 100 percent ownership of 10 independently owned retail stores and recorded $10 million of goodwill as part of the acquisitions. In January 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-02, Intangibles — Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Accounting for Goodwill — a consensus of the Private Company Council. During 2014, the founder of Mini resigned from Ride Along and started a new business after his noncompete agreement expired. With his departure, 45 percent of the customers on Mini’s original customer list, which was classified as an intangible asset on Ride Along’s statement of financial condition, provided notice that they would no longer do business with Ride Along. This migration resulted in an impairment of the customer list intangible. These customers represent 35 percent of total future revenue for the Tire reporting unit and the loss of these customers reduced the fair value of Mini by 35 percent. No other management changes are expected. Even with the loss of Mini’s customers, Ride Along performed well because of the strength of the retail stores and strong bicycle sales leading to results that exceeded expectations. Therefore, Ride Along increased its revenue and operating income in its five-year forecast; cash flows continue to be positive.

Furthermore, general economic conditions are stable for all reporting units, including debt and equity markets. Ride Along is a private company that does not actively trade its shares; however, because of stable economic conditions and the Company’s increasing revenue and operating income, had Ride Along traded its shares, the value of these shares would have steadily increased. Labor costs and material for each reporting unit have increased in line with inflation and are expected to do so for the foreseeable future. As of December 31, 2014, before considering the departure of Mini’s founder, the fair value of Ride Along was $210 million (fair value by reporting unit is as follows: Bicycle, Tire, and Retail stores were 55 percent, 10 percent, and 35 percent, respectively) and the carrying value, including goodwill, was $145 million (carrying value by reporting unit is as follows: Bicycle, Tire, and Retail stores were $65 million, $20 million, and $60 million, respectively). Required 1. ASU 2014-02 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2014, and interim periods within annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. What should Ride Along consider before deciding whether to adopt the private-company alternative in ASU 2014-02? 2. Assuming Ride Along adopts the goodwill alternative in ASU 2014-02, may Ride Along subsequently change its accounting for goodwill and revert to PBE GAAP? If so, how would Ride Along account for this change and what disclosures must it include in the consolidated financial statements? For the questions below, assume Ride Along early adopted ASU 2014-02 in 2014. 3. For the year ended December 31, 2014, describe (in detail) the analysis that Ride Along would perform to support whether its goodwill is recoverable or impaired as well as the accounting conclusion reached assuming it elected to test goodwill at the entity level. If the Company concludes that its goodwill is impaired, what would it record as the amount of the goodwill impairment? In addition, provide a separate analysis and related accounting conclusion (including the amount of the goodwill impairment charge if goodwill is impaired) assuming Ride Along elected to test goodwill at the reporting unit level. 4. Assume Ride Along (or one of its reporting units) has zero or negative equity. How would Ride Along perform its goodwill impairment assessment?

Following a pilot programme in Waitemata, a national screening programme to detect bowel cancer early is being introduced in New Zealand. People aged 60-74 years will be invited to take part in the bowel screening programme, starting from 2017.

(a) An anticipated benefit of the screening programme is a reduction in deaths from bowel cancer among people who take part in the screening programme. This benefit is more likely to occur if the programme is of high quality. Discuss how the programme should be evaluated, including the key factors you would measure in the evaluation of the screening programme.

(b) Screening programmes are known to have potential harms as well as benefits. It is important that people are given information about these potential harms and benefits before they decide whether to take part in screening. What information would you provide to people about the screening programme?