## Table 0 ##
SUMMARY OF OPERATING RESULTS Analysis of Selected Items from Our Income Statement
## Table 1 ##
Net Sales 2006 compared with 2005 U. S.  confectionery sales volume increases contributed over three quarters of the total increase in net sales.
Sales of new products and higher seasonal sales contributed the majority of the volume increase.
Sales in 2006 also benefited from improved price realization resulting from higher list prices in the United States implemented in 2005, substantially offset by a higher rate of promotional allowances.
Favorable foreign currency exchange rates and higher sales volume in Mexico also contributed to the sales increase.
These increases were offset somewhat by lower sales in Canada, partly due to the impact of a product recall during the fourth quarter caused by a contaminated ingredient purchased from an outside supplier.2005 compared with 2004 Business acquisitions, primarily Mauna Loa Macadamia Nut Corporation (“Mauna Loa”) and Grupo Lorena, contributed approximately 2.9% of the increase in net sales from 2004.
Approximately two-thirds of the additional sales increase of 6.2% resulted from unit volume growth, primarily reflecting the introduction of new
Raw Materials Cocoa is the most significant raw material we use to produce our chocolate products.
We buy a mix of cocoa beans and cocoa products, such as cocoa butter, cocoa liquor and cocoa powder, to meet manufacturing requirements.
Cocoa beans are grown principally in Far Eastern, West African and South American equatorial regions.
West Africa accounts for approximately 70 percent of the world’s crop of cocoa beans.
Cocoa beans are not uniform, and the various grades and varieties reflect the diverse agricultural practices and natural conditions found in many growing areas.
Civil unrest in the world’s largest cocoa-producing country, the Ivory Coast, has resulted in volatile prices.
However, we believe a significant disruption of cocoa supplies from the Ivory Coast is unlikely.
In the event such disruption would occur, we believe cocoa from other producing countries and from current physical cocoa stocks in consuming countries would provide a significant supply buffer.
Historically there have been instances of weather catastrophes, crop disease, civil disruptions, embargoes and other problems in cocoa-producing countries that have caused price fluctuations, but have never resulted in total loss of a particular producing country’s cocoa crop and/or exports.
During 2006, cocoa prices traded in a range between 67￠ and 75￠ per pound, based on the New York Board of Trade futures contract.
The table below shows annual average cocoa prices, and the highest and lowest monthly averages for each of the calendar years indicated.
The prices are the monthly average of the quotations at noon of the three active futures trading contracts closest to maturity on the New York Board of Trade.
## Table 2 ##
Source: International Cocoa Organization Quarterly Bulletin of Cocoa Statistics Our costs will not necessarily reflect market price fluctuations because of our forward purchasing and hedging practices, premiums and discounts reflective of varying delivery times, and supply and demand for our specific varieties and grades of cocoa beans.
As a result, the average futures contract prices are not necessarily indicative of our average cost of cocoa beans or cocoa products.
The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, which is a six-year farm bill, impacts the prices of sugar, corn, peanuts and milk because it sets price support levels for these commodities.
The price of sugar, one of our most important commodities, is subject to price supports under this farm legislation.
This legislation establishes import quotas and duties to support the price of sugar.
As a result, sugar prices paid by United States users are currently substantially higher than prices on the world sugar market.
In 2006, sugar crops and sugar refiners recovered from the hurricane impact of 2005.
As a result, refined sugar prices declined from 38￠ to 31￠ per pound.
Our costs for sugar will not necessarily reflect market price fluctuations primarily because of our forward purchasing and hedging practices.
United States peanut prices began the year around 37￠ per pound but gradually increased during the year to 42￠ per pound.
Almond prices began the year at $3.40 per pound and declined to $2.50 per pound.
During 2006, milk prices moderated slightly from the high price levels of 2005.
We believe that our raw materials supply is adequate to meet our manufacturing requirements.
We attempt to minimize the effect of future price fluctuations related to the purchase of major raw materials and certain energy requirements primarily through forward purchasing to cover our future requirements,
Customers and Products The foodservice industry consists of two major customer types — ‘‘traditional’’ and ‘‘chain restaurant.
’’ Traditional foodservice customers include restaurants, hospitals, schools, hotels and industrial caterers.
SYSCO’s chain restaurant customers include regional and national hamburger, sandwich, pizza, chicken, steak and other chain operations.
Services to the company’s traditional foodservice and chain restaurant customers are supported by similar physical facilities, vehicles, material handling equipment and techniques, and administrative and operating staffs.
Products distributed by the company include a full line of frozen foods, such as meats, fully prepared entrees, fruits, vegetables and desserts; a full line of canned and dry foods; fresh meats; imported specialties; and fresh produce.
The company also supplies a wide variety of non-food items, including: paper products such as disposable napkins, plates and cups; tableware such as china and silverware; cookware such as pots, pans and utensils; restaurant and kitchen equipment and supplies; and cleaning supplies.
SYSCO’s operating companies distribute nationally-branded merchandise, as well as products packaged under SYSCO’s private brands.
The company believes that prompt and accurate delivery of orders, close contact with customers and the ability to provide a full array of products and services to assist customers in their foodservice operations are of primary importance in the marketing and distribution of products to traditional customers.
SYSCO’s operating companies offer daily delivery to certain customer locations and have the capability of delivering special orders on short notice.
Through the more than 13,900 sales and marketing representatives and support staff of SYSCO and its operating companies, SYSCO stays informed of the needs of its customers and acquaints them with new products and services.
SYSCO’s operating companies also provide ancillary services relating to foodservice distribution, such as providing customers with product usage reports and other data, menu-planning advice, food safety training and assistance in inventory control, as well as access to various third party services designed to add value to our customers’ businesses.
No single customer accounted for 10% or more of SYSCO’s total sales for its fiscal year ended July 1, 2006.
SYSCO’s sales to chain restaurant customers consist of a variety of food products.
The company believes that consistent product quality and timely and accurate service are important factors in the selection of a chain restaurant supplier.
One chain restaurant customer (Wendy’s International, Inc. ) accounted for 5% of SYSCO’s sales for its fiscal year ended July 1, 2006.
Although this customer represents approximately 37% of the SYGMA segment sales, the company does not believe that the loss of this customer would have a material adverse effect on SYSCO as a whole.
Based upon available information, the company estimates that sales by type of customer during the past three fiscal years were as follows:

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="3"> Actual Results Excluding Items Affecting Comparability</td></tr><tr><td> Key Annual Performance Measures</td><td> Long-term Goal</td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td><td> 2004</td></tr><tr><td>Increase in Net Sales</td><td>3% to 4%</td><td> 2.6%</td><td>9.1%</td><td>6.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Increase in EBIT</td><td>7% to 9%</td><td> 3.2%</td><td>11.0%</td><td>11.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Improvement in EBIT Margin in basis points (“bps”)</td><td>70 to 90 bps</td><td> 10 bps</td><td>40 bps</td><td>100 bps</td></tr><tr><td>Increase in Income Per Share-Diluted (“EPS”)</td><td>9% to 11%</td><td> 4.4%</td><td>13.5%</td><td>16.3%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"></td><td></td><td colspan="2">Percent Change Increase (Decrease)</td></tr><tr><td> For the years ended December 31,</td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td><td>2006-2005</td><td>2005-2004</td></tr><tr><td colspan="6">In millions of dollars except per share amounts</td></tr><tr><td>Net Sales</td><td>$4,944.2</td><td>$4,819.8</td><td>$4,416.4</td><td>2.6%</td><td>9.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Cost of Sales</td><td>3,076.7</td><td>2,956.7</td><td>2,672.7</td><td>4.1</td><td>10.6</td></tr><tr><td>Gross Profit</td><td>1,867.5</td><td>1,863.1</td><td>1,743.7</td><td>0.2</td><td>6.9</td></tr><tr><td>Gross Margin</td><td>37.8%</td><td>38.7%</td><td>39.5%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>SM&A Expense</td><td>860.3</td><td>913.0</td><td>867.1</td><td>-5.8</td><td>5.3</td></tr><tr><td>SM&A Expense as a percent of sales</td><td>17.4%</td><td>18.9%</td><td>19.6%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Business Realignment and Asset Impairments Charge</td><td>14.6</td><td>96.5</td><td>—</td><td>-84.9</td><td>N/A</td></tr><tr><td>EBIT</td><td>992.6</td><td>853.6</td><td>876.6</td><td>16.3</td><td>-2.6</td></tr><tr><td>EBIT Margin</td><td>20.1%</td><td>17.7%</td><td>19.8%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Interest Expense, Net</td><td>116.1</td><td>88.0</td><td>66.6</td><td>31.9</td><td>32.2</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for Income Taxes</td><td>317.4</td><td>277.1</td><td>235.4</td><td>14.6</td><td>17.7</td></tr><tr><td>Effective Income Tax Rate</td><td>36.2%</td><td>36.2%</td><td>29.1%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net Income</td><td>$559.1</td><td>$488.5</td><td>$574.6</td><td>14.4</td><td>-15.0</td></tr><tr><td>Net Income Per Share—Diluted</td><td>$2.34</td><td>$1.97</td><td>$2.24</td><td>18.8</td><td>-12.1</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5"> Cocoa Futures Contract Prices (cents per pound)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td><td> 2004</td><td> 2003</td><td> 2002</td></tr><tr><td>Annual Average</td><td>70.0</td><td>68.3</td><td>68.7</td><td>77.8</td><td>76.9</td></tr><tr><td>High</td><td>74.9</td><td>78.7</td><td>76.8</td><td>99.8</td><td>96.7</td></tr><tr><td>Low</td><td>67.1</td><td>63.5</td><td>62.1</td><td>65.6</td><td>60.3</td></tr></table>

Question: In the year with lowest amount of High in Table 2, what's the increasing rate of Gross Profit in Table 1?
Answer: 0.00236
Reasoning program: subtract(1867.5,1863.1), divide(#0,1863.1)