hellotayssir/FinQA_TAT-QA_financial_finetuning_dataset huggingface dataset:
Telecommunications Segment
Net revenue: Net revenue from our Telecommunications segment for the year ended December 31, 2019 decreased $97.5 million to $696.1 million from $793.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The decrease can be attributed to changes in our customer mix, fluctuations in wholesale voice termination volumes and market pressures, which resulted in a decline in revenue contribution.
Cost of revenue: Cost of revenue from our Telecommunications segment for the year ended December 31, 2019 decreased $94.2 million to $684.9 million from $779.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The decrease was directly correlated to the fluctuations in wholesale voice termination volumes, in addition to a slight reduction in margin mix attributed to market pressures on call termination rates.
Selling, general and administrative: Selling, general and administrative expenses from our Telecommunications segment for the year ended December 31, 2019 decreased $1.2 million to $8.2 million from $9.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The decrease was primarily due to a decrease in compensation expense due to headcount decreases and reductions in bad debt expense.
Other operating expense: $4.5 million of other operating expense for the year ended December 31, 2019 was driven by impairment of goodwill as a result of declining performance at the segment.
Table:
 |  | Years Ended December 31, | 
 | 2019 | 2018 | Increase / (Decrease)
Net revenue | $696.1 | $793.6 | $(97.5)
Cost of revenue | 684.9 | 779.1 | (94.2)
Selling, general and administrative | 8.2 | 9.4 | (1.2)
Depreciation and amortization | 0.3 | 0.3 | —
Other operating expense | 4.5 | — | 4.5
Income (loss) from operations | (1.8) | $4.8 | $(6.6)


Question: What was the average cost of revenue?
Answer: 732
Calculation: (684.9 + 779.1) / 2
1 Segment performance (continued)
(c) Other segment information
(i) Profit/(loss) before tax
Management assesses the performance of the operating segments based on a measure of EBITDA. Interest income and expenditure are not allocated to segments, as this type of activity is driven by the central treasury function, which manages the cash position of the Group. On adoption of AASB 16 from 1 July 2018, associated lease interest is allocated to the respective segments as a finance charge.
Table:
 | 30 June 2019 | 30 June 2018
 | $'000 | $'000
Total segment profit before tax | 62,583 | 61,449
Employee benefits expense (non-facility staff) | (23,036) | (20,752)
Interest revenue | 8,220 | 5,778
Distributions from investments | 1,344 | 3,191
Other income | 3,034 | 284
Finance costs | (45,612) | (25,452)
Head office depreciation | (2,079) | (1,909)
Overheads and other expenses | (20,527) | (11,698)
Profit/(loss) before tax | (16,073) | 10,891


Question: What was the percentage change in finance costs between 2018 and 2019?
Answer: 79.21
Calculation: (45,612 - 25,452) / 25,452
performance graph comparison of five-year cumulative total return the following graph and table compare the cumulative total return on citi 2019s common stock , which is listed on the nyse under the ticker symbol 201cc 201d and held by 81805 common stockholders of record as of january 31 , 2016 , with the cumulative total return of the s&p 500 index and the s&p financial index over the five-year period through december 31 , 2015 . the graph and table assume that $ 100 was invested on december 31 , 2010 in citi 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index and the s&p financial index , and that all dividends were reinvested . comparison of five-year cumulative total return for the years ended date citi s&p 500 financials .

Table:
date | citi | s&p 500 | s&p financials
31-dec-2010 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00
30-dec-2011 | 55.67 | 102.11 | 82.94
31-dec-2012 | 83.81 | 118.45 | 106.84
31-dec-2013 | 110.49 | 156.82 | 144.90
31-dec-2014 | 114.83 | 178.28 | 166.93
31-dec-2015 | 110.14 | 180.75 | 164.39
.

Question: what was the ratio of the growth of the cumulative total return for citi compared to s&p 500 in 2013
Answer: .185
Calculation: subtract(110.49, const_100), subtract(156.82, const_100), divide(#0, #1)
Figure 29. 2016/2018 LTIP Award Grants
(1) All of the Market-based PRSUs and one-third of the stock options and service-based RSUs granted to Mr. Anstice under the 2016/2018 LTIP that were scheduled to vest in February 2019 were canceled upon his termination of employment with the Company as of December 5, 2018.
(2) The number of Market-based PRSUs awarded is reflected at target. The final number of shares that may have been earned is 0% to 150% of target.
In February 2019, the committee determined the payouts for the calendar year 2016/2018 LTIP Awards of Market-based PRSUs. The number of shares represented by the Marketbased PRSUs earned over the performance period was based on our stock price performance compared to the market price performance of the SOX index.
Based on the above formula and Market-based PRSU Vesting Summary set forth in Figures 26 and 27, the Company’s stock price performance over the three-year performance period was equal to 89.93% and performance of the SOX index (based on market price) over the same three-year performance period was equal to 84.47%. Lam’s stock price outperformed the SOX index by 5.46%, which resulted in a performance payout of 110.93% to target number of Marketbased PRSUs granted to each NEO. Based on such results, the committee made the following payouts to each NEO for the 2016/2018 LTIP Award of Market-based PRSUs.
Table:
Named Executive Officer (1)(2) (1)(2) (1)(2) | Target Award Opportunity ($) | Market-based PRSUs award (#) | Stock Options Award (#) | Service-based RSUs Award (#)
Timothy M.Archer | 4,000,000 | 28,935 | 34,722 | 17,361
Douglas R.Bettinger | 2,750,000 | 19,892 | 23,871 | 11,935
Richard A.Gottscho | 3,250,000 | 23,509 | 28,209 | 14,105
Patrick J. Lord | 1,100,000 | 7,957 | — | 7,957
Vahid Vahedi | 1,100,000 | 7,957 | — | 7,957
Seshasayee(Sesha) Varadarajan | 1,100,000 | 7,957 | — | 7,957


Question: Which named executive officer has the highest Market-based PRSUs award?
Answer: Timothy M.Archer
Calculation: Find the named executive officer with the highest Market-based PRSUs award
AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Tabular amounts in millions, unless otherwise disclosed)
10. OTHER NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES
Other non-current liabilities consisted of the following:
The reduction in Deferred rent liability is a result of the Company’s adoption of the new lease accounting standard.
Table:
 | As of | 
 | December 31, 2019 | December 31, 2018
Deferred rent liability | $— | $506.7
Unearned revenue | 525.9 | 504.6
Other miscellaneous liabilities | 411.1 | 253.8
Other non-current liabilities | $937.0 | $1,265.1


Question: How many of the non-current liabilities components in 2018 were above $500 million?
Answer: 2
Calculation: Deferred rent liability##Unearned revenue
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (in thousands, except for share and per share data)
Contract Assets and Liabilities
Contract assets and liabilities included in our Consolidated Balance Sheets are as follows:
During the twelve months ended December 31, 2019, we recognized revenues of $256 that was included in contract liabilities at the beginning of the period.
Table:
 | As of December 31, | 
 | 2019 | 2018
Contract Assets |  | 
Prepaid rebates included in Other current assets | $64 | $65
Prepaid rebates included in Other assets | 1,853 | 999
Total Contract Assets | $1,917 | $1,064
Contract Liabilities |  | 
Customer discounts and price concessions included in Accrued expenses and other liabilities | $(2,070) | $(1,656)
Customer rights of return included in Accrued expenses and other liabilities | (807) | (325)
Total Contract Liabilities | $(2,877) | $(1,981)


Question: What were the Prepaid rebates included in Other current assets in 2019?
Answer: 64
Cash flows
The following table summarizes our cash flow activities in fiscal 2019 compared to fiscal 2018.
Our cash flow activities in fiscal 2018 compared to fiscal 2017 were discussed under Liquidity, Capital Resources and Cash Requirement in Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 30, 2018.
Table:
 | Fiscal Year | 
(In millions) | 2019 | 2018
Net cash provided by (used in): |  | 
Operating activities | $1,495 | $957
Investing activities | $(241) | $(21)
Financing activities | $(1,209) | $(3,475)
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | $17 | $(2,473)


Question: What does the table show?
Answer: cash flow activities in fiscal 2019 compared to fiscal 2018
Sales and Marketing
Sales and marketing expenses increased $3.1 million, or 1%, in 2019 as compared to 2018. As a percentage of revenue, sales and marketing expense decreased by approximately two percentage points, resulting from the 2018 Reallocation, increased cost efficiency, and leverage realized from changes to our sales commission plans as we continued our efforts to strategically scale our sales teams and improve their productivity.
Sales and marketing expenses decreased $15.6 million, or 7%, in 2018 as compared to 2017. As a percentage of revenue, sales and marketing expense decreased by approximately eight percentage points, primarily resulting from a combination of increased cost efficiency, reduction in headcount as part of our restructuring activities, and leverage realized from changes to our sales commission plans as we continued our efforts to strategically scale our sales teams and improve their productivity.
Table:
 |  | Year Ended December 31, | 
 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
 |  | (dollars in thousands) | 
Sales and marketing | $227,733 | $224,635 | $240,271
Percent of revenue | 39.5% | 41.8% | 49.9%


Question: Why did sales and marketing expenses increase between 2018 and 2019?
Answer: the 2018 Reallocation, increased cost efficiency, and leverage realized from changes to our sales commission plans as we continued our efforts to strategically scale our sales teams and improve their productivity
Our fourth quarter 2019 net revenues amounted to $2,754 million, registering a sequential increase of 7.9%, 290 basis points above the mid-point of our guidance, with all product groups contributing to the growth. The sequential increase resulted from higher volumes of approximately 7% and an increase of approximately 1% in average selling prices, the latter entirely due to product mix, while selling prices remained substantially stable.
On a year-over-year basis, our net revenues increased by 4.0%. This increase was entirely due to an increase of approximately 6% in average selling prices, partially offset by an approximate 2% decrease in volumes. The average selling prices increase was entirely driven by improved product mix of approximately 9%, partially offset by lower selling prices of approximately 3%.
Table:
 | Three Months Ended | Three Months Ended | Three Months Ended | % Variation | % Variation
 | December 31, 2019 | September 29, 2019 | December 31, 2018 | Sequential | Year- Over- Year
 | (Unaudited, in millions) |  |  |  | 
Net sales | $ 2,750 | $ 2,547 | $ 2,633 | 8.0% | 4.5%
Other revenues | 4 | 6 | 15 | (45.0) | (77.4)
Net revenues | $ 2,754 | $ 2,553 | $ 2,648 | 7.9% | 4.0%


Question: What led to increase in average selling price on a year-over-year basis?
Answer: driven by improved product mix of approximately 9%, partially offset by lower selling prices of approximately 3%.
Item 16C. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
Aggregate audit fees, audit-related fees, tax fees and the aggregate of all other fees billed to us by Ernst & Young LLP for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 were as follows:
(1) Audit Fees consist of fees incurred for professional services rendered for the integrated audit of our annual consolidated financial statements, review of the quarterly consolidated financial statements and foreign statutory audits and services that are normally provided by Ernst & Young LLP in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements. Audit fees also include accounting consultations, research related to the integrated audit and comfort letter services in relation to our exchangeable senior notes.
(2) Audit-Related Fees consist of fees billed for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of the Company’s consolidated financial statements and are not reported under “Audit Fees.” This primarily consists of fees for service organization control audits and due diligence on acquisitions.
(3) Tax fees relate to assistance with tax compliance, tax planning and various tax advisory services.
(4) Other fees are any additional amounts for products and services provided by the principal accountants.
Our audit committee has adopted a pre-approval policy for the engagement of our independent accountant to perform certain audit and non-audit services. Pursuant to this policy, which is designed to assure that such engagements do not impair the independence of our auditors, the audit committee pre-approves annually all audit services, audit related services, tax services and other services as described above, that may be performed by our independent accountants. All of the audit and non-audit services provided by our principal accountants have been pre-approved by our Audit Committee.
Table:
 | 2019 | 2018
 | (U.S. $ in thousands) | 
Audit fees (1) | $2,980 | $3,469
Audit-related fees (2) | 648 | 447
Tax fees (3) | 220 | 238
Other fees (4) | 8 | 3
Total | $3,856 | $4,157


Question: What is the total fees for fiscal year ended June 30, 2019?
Answer: $3,856
Restricted Stock Awards
We present below a summary of changes in unvested units of restricted stock during 2019:
The Company recorded equity-based compensation expense related to restricted stock and RSUs (collectively “restricted stock awards”) of $31.8 million, $19.9 million, and $16.2 million in 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The total fair value of restricted stock awards vested in 2019, 2018 and 2017, based on market value at the vesting dates was $18.2 million, $18.1 million, and $18.8 million, respectively. The weighted average grant-date fair value of RSUs granted during fiscal year 2019, 2018 and 2017 was $49.48, $51.72 and $49.01, respectively. As of December 31, 2019, unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested RSU totaled $47.5 million and is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 2.5 years. In January 2017, we elected to recognize forfeitures of equity-based payments as they occur.
awards”) of $31.8 million, $19.9 million, and $16.2 million in 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The total fair value of restricted
stock awards vested in 2019, 2018 and 2017, based on market value at the vesting dates was $18.2 million, $18.1 million, and $18.8
million, respectively. The weighted average grant-date fair value of RSUs granted during fiscal year 2019, 2018 and 2017 was $49.48,
$51.72 and $49.01, respectively. As of December 31, 2019, unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested RSU totaled $47.5
million and is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 2.5 years. In January 2017, we elected to
recognize forfeitures of equity-based payments as they occur.
Included in RSU grants for the year ended December 31, 2019 are 282,327 units that have performance-based vesting criteria. The
performance criteria are tied to our financial performance. As of December 31, 2019, the associated equity-based compensation
expense has been recognized for the portion of the award attributable to the 2019 performance criteria.
Table:
 | Number of Units | Grant Date Fair Value
Outstanding at January 1, 2019    | 997,173 | $52.22
Granted    | 945,159 | 49.48
Vested    | (386,060) | 51.79
Forfeited    | (59,579) | 50.56
Outstanding at December 31, 2019    | 1,496,693 | $50.67


Question: What is the value difference between granted share and vested share?
Answer: 2.31
Calculation: 51.79-49.48
The pension expenses of the direct and indirect company pension plan commitments can be broken down as follows:
1 Netted against employees’ contributions.
2 Included therein: Interest effect from the adjustment of the asset ceiling.
The entire loss to be recognised outside of profit or loss in the other comprehensive income amounts to €90 million in financial year 2018/19. This figure is comprised of the effect from the change in actuarial parameters in the amount of €+247 million and the experience-based adjustments of €+4 million. It was offset by income from plan assets of €103 million and a gain of €58 million resulting from the change in the effect of the asset ceiling in the Netherlands.
In addition to expenses from defined benefit commitments, expenses for payments to external pension providers relating to defined contribution pension commitments of €82 million in financial year 2018/19 (2017/18: €82 million) were recorded. These figures also include payments to statutory pension insurance.
The provisions for obligations similar to pensions essentially comprise commitments from employment anniversary allowances, death benefits and partial retirement plans. Provisions amounting to €34 million (30/9/2018: €41 million) were allocated for these commitments. The commitments are valued on the basis of actuarial expert opinions. The valuation parameters used for this purpose are generally determined in the same way as for the company pension plan.
Table:
€ million | 2017/2018 | 2018/2019
Current service cost1 | 24 | 21
Net interest expenses2 | 11 | 9
Past service cost (incl. curtailments and changes) | 0 | 0
Settlements | 0 | 0
Other pension expenses | 1 | 1
Pension expenses | 36 | 31


Question: What was the current service cost netted against?
Answer: employees’ contributions
Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units
Performance-based restricted stock units are eligible to vest at the end of each fiscal year in a three-year performance period based on the Company’s annual growth rate in net sales and non-GAAP diluted earnings per share (subject to certain adjustments) over a multiple of four times the related results for the fourth quarter of 2018 relative to the growth rates for a peer group of companies for the same metrics and periods.
For the performance-based restricted stock units granted in 2019, 60% of each performance-based award is subject to the net sales metric for the performance period and 40% is subject to the non-GAAP diluted earnings per share metric for the performance period. The maximum percentage for a particular metric is2 50% of the target number of units subject to the award related to that metric, however, vesting of the performance stock units is capped at 30% and 100%, respectively, of the target number of units subject to the award in years one and two, respectively, of the three-year performance period.
As of December 31, 2019, the Company believes that it is probable that the Company will achieve performance metrics specified in the award agreement based on its expected revenue and non-GAAP diluted EPS results over the performance period and calculated growth rates relative to its peers’ expected results based on data available, as defined in the award agreement.
A summary of the Company’s performance-based restricted stock unit activity is as follows:
(1) Number of shares granted is based on the maximum percentage achievable in the performance-based restricted stock unit award.
Table:
 | Number of Shares | Weighted-Average Grant-Date
 | (in thousands) | Fair Value per Share
Outstanding at December 31, 2018 | — | $—
Granted(1) | 445 | 22.21
Outstanding at December 31, 2019 | 445 | 22.21


Question: What was the number of shares granted in 2019?
Answer: 445
6. Inventories
Inventories consisted of the following:
Table:
 |  | Fiscal Year End
 | 2019 | 2018
 |  | (in millions)
Raw materials | $  260 | $  276
Work in progress | 739 | 656
Finished goods | 837 | 925
Inventories | $ 1,836 | $  1,857


Question: What was the percentage change in Work in progress in 2019 from 2018?
Answer: 12.65
Calculation: (739-656)/656
5. Net Income (Loss) per Share
The Company calculates basic earnings per share by dividing the net income (loss) by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding for the period. The diluted earnings per share is computed by giving effect to all potential dilutive common stock equivalents outstanding for the period using the treasury stock method. For purposes of this calculation, options to purchase common stock, stock awards, and the Convertible Senior Notes are considered to be common stock equivalents.
Since the Company has the intent and ability to settle the principal amount of the Convertible Senior Notes in cash and any excess in shares of the Company’s common stock, the Company uses the treasury stock method for calculating any potential dilutive effect of the conversion spread on diluted net income per share, if applicable.
The conversion spread will have a dilutive impact on net income (loss) per share of common stock when the average market price of the Company’s common stock for a given period exceeds the conversion price of $113.75 per share for the Convertible Senior Notes. During the fiscal years ended July 31, 2019 and 2018, the Company’s weighted average common stock price was below the conversion price of the Convertible Senior Notes.
The following table sets forth the computation of the Company’s basic and diluted net income per share for the years endedJ uly 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 (in thousands, except share and per share amounts):
Table:
 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
Numerator: |  |  | 
Net income (loss) | $20,732 | $(26,743) | $18,072
Net income (loss) per share: |  |  | 
Basic | $0.25 | $(0.34) | $0.24
Diluted | $0.25 | $(0.34) | $0.24
Denominator: |  |  | 
Weighted average shares used in computing net income (loss) per share: |  |  | 
Basic | 81,447,998 | 77,709,592 | 73,994,577
Weighted average effect of diluted stock options | 229,035 | — | 544,520
Weighted average effect of diluted stock awards | 1,004,181 | — | 789,246
Diluted | 82,681,214 | 77,709,592 | 75,328,343


Question: What was the change in the basic Weighted average shares used in computing net income (loss) per share from 2018 to 2019?
Answer: 3738406
Calculation: 81,447,998 - 77,709,592
The carrying amounts and fair values of Teradyne’s financial instruments at December 31, 2019 and 2018 were as follows:
(1) The carrying value represents the bifurcated debt component only, while the fair value is based on quoted market prices for the convertible note which includes the equity conversion features.
The fair values of accounts receivable, net and accounts payable approximate the carrying amount due to the short term nature of these instruments.
Table:
 | December 31, 2019 |  | December 31, 2018 | 
 | Carrying Value | Fair Value | Carrying Value | Fair Value
 |  | (in thousands) |  | 
Assets |  |  |  | 
Cash and cash equivalents | $773,924 | $773,924 | $926,752 | $926,752
Marketable securities | 241,793 | 241,793 | 277,827 | 277,827
Derivative assets | 528 | 528 | 79 | 79
Liabilities |  |  |  | 
Contingent consideration | 39,705 | 39,705 | 70,543 | 70,543
Derivative liabilities | 203 | 203 | 514 | 514
Convertible debt (1) | 394,687 | 1,010,275 | 379,981 | 547,113


Question: What was the change in the fair value of Marketable securities from 2018 to 2019?
Answer: -36034
Calculation: 241,793-277,827