product where we had a portfolio manager change earlier in the year offset by underlying net inflows.
Threadneedle institutional AUM increased $4.6 billion, or 5%, during the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily due to net inflows and a market appreciation, partially offset by a negative impact of foreign currency translation.
Threadneedle institutional net inflows of $2.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2014 included a $5.6 billion mandate from a leading UK wealth management firm to manage assets in a Strategic Managed fund, partially offset by $3.4 billion of outflows from legacy insurance assets.
The following table presents the results of operations of our Asset Management segment on an operating basis:
## Table 0 ##
NM Not Meaningful.
Our Asset Management segment pretax operating earnings, which exclude net realized gains or losses, increased $97 million, or 14%, to $788 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $691 million for the prior year reflecting higher average assets under management driven by equity market appreciation, partially offset by retail fund distributions and a $30 million gain on the sale of Threadneedle’s strategic business investment in Cofunds in the prior year.
Net Revenues Net revenues, which exclude net realized gains or losses, increased $151 million, or 5%, to $3.3 billion for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $3.2 billion for the prior year driven by an increase in management and financial advice fees.
Management and financial advice fees increased $148 million, or 6%, to $2.8 billion for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $2.6 billion for the prior year primarily due to an increase in assets under management.
Average assets under management increased 7% compared to the prior year primarily driven by equity market appreciation, partially offset by retail fund distributions.
See our discussion above on the changes in assets under management.
Distribution fees increased $24 million, or 5%, to $493 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $469 million for the prior year primarily due to higher assets levels due to market appreciation, partially offset by retail fund distributions.
Net investment income, which excludes net realized gains or losses, decreased $24 million, or 44%, to $30 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $54 million for the prior year due to a $30 million gain on the sale of Threadneedle’s investment in Cofunds in the prior year.
Expenses Total expenses increased $54 million, or 2%, to $2.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to the prior year primarily due to a $36 million increase in distribution expenses driven by higher average retail fund assets and an $18 million increase in general and administrative expense primarily driven by the negative impact of foreign exchange rates and investments in the business.
The negative impact of foreign exchanges rates on expenses was more than offset by the positive impact to revenues.
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis Net Revenue Utility Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2013 to 2012.
## Table 1 ##
The retail electric price variance is primarily due to: ?
a formula rate plan increase at Entergy Louisiana, effective January 2013, which includes an increase relating to the Waterford 3 steam generator replacement project, which was placed in service in December 2012.
The net income effect of the formula rate plan increase is limited to a portion representing an allowed return on equity with the remainder offset by costs included in other operation and maintenance expenses, depreciation expenses, and taxes other than income taxes; ?
the recovery of Hinds plant costs through the power management rider at Entergy Mississippi, as approved by the MPSC, effective with the first billing cycle of 2013.
The net income effect of the Hinds plant cost recovery is limited to a portion representing an allowed return on equity on the net plant investment with the remainder offset by the Hinds plant costs in other operation and maintenance expenses, depreciation expenses, and taxes other than income taxes; ?
an increase in the capacity acquisition rider at Entergy Arkansas, as approved by the APSC, effective with the first billing cycle of December 2012, relating to the Hot Spring plant acquisition.
The net income effect of the Hot Spring plant cost recovery is limited to a portion representing an allowed return on equity on the net plant investment with the remainder offset by the Hot Spring plant costs in other operation and maintenance expenses, depreciation expenses, and taxes other than income taxes; ?
increases in the energy efficiency rider, as approved by the APSC, effective July 2013 and July 2012.
Energy efficiency revenues are offset by costs included in other operation and maintenance expenses and have no effect on net income; ?
an annual base rate increase at Entergy Texas, effective July 2012, as a result of the PUCT’s order that was issued in September 2012 in the November 2011 rate case; and ?
a formula rate plan increase at Entergy Mississippi, effective September 2013.
See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of rate proceedings.
The Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge recorded in the second quarter 2012 because Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Louisiana agreed to share with customers the savings from an IRS settlement related to the uncertain tax position regarding the Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita Louisiana Act 55 financing.
See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the tax settlement.
Comparison of Years Ended December 28, 2003 and December 29, 2002 Revenue
## Table 2 ##
Revenue for the years ended December 28, 2003 and December 29, 2002 was $28.0 million and $10.0 million, respectively.
Product revenue increased to $18.4 million in 2003 from $4.1 million in 2002.
The increase resulted almost entirely from the first sales of our BeadLab SNP genotyping system, with six systems sold in the year ended December 28, 2003, along with sales of consumables that are used on these systems.
Prior to 2003 we had no sales of genotyping systems or consumable products.
SNP genotyping service revenue increased to $6.5 million in 2003 from $3.3 million in 2002.
Substantially all of this increase relates to genotyping services performed for the International HapMap Project, which commenced in 2003.
We are the recipient of a grant from the National Institutes of Health covering our participation in the International HapMap Project, which is a $100 million, internationally funded successor project to the Human Genome Project that will help identify a map of genetic variations that may be used to perform disease-related research.
We could receive up to $9.1 million of funding for this project which covers basic research activities, the development of SNP assays and the genotyping to be performed on those assays.
We recognized revenue under this grant of $3.7 million in 2003 and, as of the end of 2003, we had approximately $5.4 million of funding remaining related to this project which is expected to be received in 2004, depending on the actual amount of work that we perform.
Government grants and other research funding increased to $3.2 million for the year ended December 28, 2003 from $2.6 million for the year ended December 29, 2002 due to an increase in the number of grants received.
To expand revenue in the future, we have recently launched a series of new products that we expect to begin selling in 2004.
These include our BeadStation system for moderate throughput genotyping needs, and two multi-sample whole genome gene expression BeadChips that are also processed on a BeadStation.
Our BeadLab systems address a limited number of potential high throughput genotyping customers, and sales of these systems may decline in 2004 versus 2003.
We expect the sales of the new products mentioned above to offset such decline and for overall revenues to increase above 2003 levels; however, we cannot be assured that we will be successful in these sales efforts.
Cost of Product and Service Revenue
## Table 3 ##
Cost of revenue represents manufacturing costs incurred in the production process, including component materials, assembly labor and overhead, packaging and delivery cost.
Costs related to research revenue is included in research and development expense.
Cost of product and service revenue increased to $10.0 million the year ended December 28, 2003 from $3.5 million for the year ended December 29, 2002.
Substantially all of this increase was driven by the sales of our BeadLab systems and consumables, of which we had none in 2002, as well as the higher level of services revenue during 2003.
Gross margins on product and service revenues were 60% in the year ended December 28, 2003, compared to 52% for the year ended December 29, 2002.
This increase is due

<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td colspan="2">Change</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(in millions)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Revenues</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Management and financial advice fees</td><td>$2,791</td><td>$2,643</td><td>$148</td><td>6%</td></tr><tr><td>Distribution fees</td><td>493</td><td>469</td><td>24</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>30</td><td>54</td><td>-24</td><td>-44</td></tr><tr><td>Other revenues</td><td>6</td><td>5</td><td>1</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>3,320</td><td>3,171</td><td>149</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Banking and deposit interest expense</td><td>—</td><td>2</td><td>-2</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Total net revenues</td><td>3,320</td><td>3,169</td><td>151</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Expenses</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Distribution expenses</td><td>1,148</td><td>1,112</td><td>36</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of deferred acquisition costs</td><td>15</td><td>17</td><td>-2</td><td>-12</td></tr><tr><td>Interest and debt expense</td><td>26</td><td>24</td><td>2</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>General and administrative expense</td><td>1,343</td><td>1,325</td><td>18</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Total expenses</td><td>2,532</td><td>2,478</td><td>54</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Operating earnings</td><td>$788</td><td>$691</td><td>$97</td><td>14%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Amount (In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2012 net revenue</td><td>$4,969</td></tr><tr><td>Retail electric price</td><td>236</td></tr><tr><td>Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation</td><td>165</td></tr><tr><td>Grand Gulf recovery</td><td>75</td></tr><tr><td>Volume/weather</td><td>40</td></tr><tr><td>Fuel recovery</td><td>35</td></tr><tr><td>MISO deferral</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Decommissioning trusts</td><td>-23</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>2013 net revenue</td><td>$5,524</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td> Year Ended  December 28,  2003</td><td> Year Ended  December 29,  2002</td><td> Change</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> (In thousands)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Product revenue</td><td>$18,378</td><td>$4,103</td><td>348%</td></tr><tr><td>Service revenue</td><td>6,496</td><td>3,305</td><td>97</td></tr><tr><td>Research revenue</td><td>3,161</td><td>2,632</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenue</td><td>$28,035</td><td>$10,040</td><td>179%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td> Year Ended  December 28,  2003</td><td> Year Ended  December 29,  2002</td><td> Change</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> (In thousands)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cost of product and service revenue</td><td>$10,037</td><td>$3,536</td><td>184%</td></tr></table>

Question: In the year with the most Cost of product and service revenue in Table 3, what is the growth rate of Service revenue in Table 2?