trismik/FinRAG huggingface dataset:
Cogeco Communications is a subsidiary of Cogeco, which holds 31.8% of the Corporation's equity shares, representing 82.3% of the Corporation's voting shares.
Cogeco provides executive, administrative, financial and strategic planning services and additional services to the Corporation under a Management Services Agreement (the "Agreement"). On May 1, 2019, the Corporation and Cogeco agreed to amend the Agreement in order to replace the methodology used to establish the management fees payable by the Corporation to Cogeco, which was based on a percentage of the consolidated revenue of the Corporation, with a new methodology based on the costs incurred by Cogeco plus a reasonable mark-up. This cost-plus methodology was adopted to avoid future variations of the management fee percentage due to the frequent changes of the Corporation's consolidated revenue pursuant to business acquisitions and divestitures. Prior to this change, management fees represented 0.75% of the consolidated revenue from continuing and discontinued operations of the Corporation (0.85% for the period prior to the MetroCast acquisition on January 4, 2018). Provision is made for future adjustment upon the request of either Cogeco or the Corporation from time to time during the term of the Agreement. For fiscal 2019 management fees paid to Cogeco amounted to $19.9 million, compared to $19.0 million for fiscal 2018.
Provision is made for future adjustment upon the request of either Cogeco or the Corporation from time to time during the term of the Agreement. For fiscal 2019 management fees paid to Cogeco amounted to $19.9 million, compared to $19.0 million for fiscal 2018.
The following table shows the amounts that the Corporation charged Cogeco with regards to the Corporation's stock options, ISUs and PSUs granted to these executive officers, as well as DSUs issued to Board directors of Cogeco:

Years ended August 31,
2019
2018
(In thousands of Canadian dollars)
$
$
Stock options
1,046
915
ISUs
61
1
PSUs
981
990
DSUs
631
—


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What was the average ISUs from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
31
62
8267
0
-31
Correct choice index: 0
Operating profit/loss
Our operating profit in 2019 was EUR 485 million, a change of EUR 544 million, compared to an operating loss of EUR 59 million in 2018. The change in operating result was primarily due to lower selling, general and administrative expenses, research and development expenses and a net positive fluctuation in other operating income and expenses, partially offset by lower gross profit. Our operating margin in 2019 was 2.1%, compared to approximately breakeven in 2018.
(1) Excludes costs related to the acquisition of Alcatel Lucent and related integration, goodwill impairment charges, intangible asset amortization and other purchase price fair value adjustments, restructuring and associated charges and certain other items.
The following table sets forth the impact of unallocated items on operating profit/loss:

EURm
2019
2018
Total segment operating profit(1)
2,003
2,180
Amortization and depreciation of acquired intangible assets and property, plant and equipment
(924)
(940)
Restructuring and associated charges
(502)
(321)
Gain on defined benefit plan amendment
168
-
Product portfolio strategy costs
(163)
(583)
Transaction and related costs, including integration costs relating to the acquisition of Alcatel Lucent
(48)
(220)
Impairment of assets, net of impairment reversals
(29)
(48)
Operating model integration
(12)
-
Release of acquisition-related fair value adjustments to deferred revenue and inventory
(6)
(16)
Divestment of businesses
(2)
(39)
Fair value changes of legacy IPR fund
-
(57)
Other
-
(15)
Total operating profit/(loss)
485
(59)


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the increase / (decrease) in the Total segment operating profit(1) from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
-177
2943
2004
-2400
177
Correct choice index: 0
The net deferred tax asset is classified on the consolidated balance sheets as follows (in thousands):
We have various tax attribute carryforwards which include the following:
• Foreign federal and local gross net operating loss carryforwards are $61.6 million, of which $47.0 million have no expiration date and $14.6 million have various expiration dates beginning in fiscal 2020. Among the total of $61.6 million foreign net operating loss carryforwards, a valuation allowance of $31.7 million has been provided for certain jurisdictions since the recovery of the carryforwards is uncertain. U.S. federal and certain state gross net operating loss carryforwards are $14.0 million and $30.7 million, respectively, which were acquired from our acquisitions. A full valuation allowance against certain other state net operating losses of $30.7 million has been recorded. California gross net operating loss carryforwards are $2.8 million and are scheduled to expire beginning in fiscal 2032.
• U.S. federal R&D credit carryforwards of $35.4 million are scheduled to expire beginning in fiscal 2025. California R&D credit carryforwards of $32.2 million have no expiration date. A total of $27.1 million valuation allowance, before U.S. federal benefit, has been recorded against California R&D credit carryforwards of $32.2 million since the recovery of the carryforwards is uncertain. Other states R&D credit carryforwards of $3.9 million are scheduled to expire beginning in fiscal 2020. A valuation allowance totaling $2.7 million, before U.S. federal benefit, has been recorded against certain state R&D credit carryforwards of $3.9 million since the recovery of the carryforwards is uncertain.
• U.S. federal foreign tax credit carryforwards of $51.9 million are scheduled to expire beginning in fiscal 2022.

Fiscal year-end
2019
2018
Non-current deferred income tax assets
$87,011
$64,858
Non-current deferred income tax liabilities
(27,785)
(26,339)
Net deferred tax assets
$59,226
$38,519


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What was the change in Net deferred tax assets from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
-1
-20707
20707000
20707
0
Correct choice index: 3
24. Cash and cash equivalents
Significant accounting policies that apply to cash and cash equivalents Cash and cash equivalents comprise cash in hand and current balances with banks and similar institutions, which are readily convertible to cash and are subject to insignificant risk of changes in value and have an original maturity of three months or less. All are held at amortised cost on the balance sheet, equating to fair value. For the purpose of the consolidated cash flow statement, cash and cash equivalents are as defined above net of outstanding bank overdrafts. Bank overdrafts are included within the current element of loans and other borrowings (note 25).
IFRS 9 was applied for the first time on 1 April 2018 and introduces new classifications for financial instruments. Cash and cash equivalents were classified as loans and receivables under IAS 39, and are now classified as financial assets held at amortised cost under IFRS 9. This has not had an impact on the accounting for these instruments, or on their carrying amounts.
Cash and cash equivalents include restricted cash of £44m (2017/18: £32m, 2016/17: £43m), of which £40m (2017/18: £29m, 2016/17: £41m) was held in countries where local capital or exchange controls currently prevent us from accessing cash balances. The remaining balance of £4m (2017/18: £3m, 2016/17: £2m) was held in escrow accounts, or in commercial arrangements akin to escrow.

2019
2018
2017
At 31 March
£m
£m
£m
Cash at bank and in hand
495
446
469
Cash equivalents
US deposits
3
26
32
UK deposits
1,132
31
1
Other deposits
36
25
26
Total cash equivalents
1,171
82
59
Total cash and cash equivalents
1,666
528
528
Bank overdrafts (note25)
(72)
(29)
(17)
Cash and cash equivalents per the cash flow statement
1,594
499
511


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the average US deposits for 2017-2019?
Choices:
18.33
15.25
0.15
20.33
21.33
Correct choice index: 3
the fair value measurements of the borrowings under our credit agreement and receivables facility are classified as level 2 within the fair value hierarchy since they are determined based upon significant inputs observable in the market , including interest rates on recent financing transactions with similar terms and maturities .
we estimated the fair value by calculating the upfront cash payment a market participant would require at december 31 , 2016 to assume these obligations .
the fair value of our notes is classified as level 1 within the fair value hierarchy since it is determined based upon observable market inputs including quoted market prices in an active market .
the fair value of our euro notes is determined based upon observable market inputs including quoted market prices in a market that is not active , and therefore is classified as level 2 within the fair value hierarchy .
note 12 .
commitments and contingencies operating leases we are obligated under noncancelable operating leases for corporate office space , warehouse and distribution facilities , trucks and certain equipment .
the future minimum lease commitments under these leases at december 31 , 2016 are as follows ( in thousands ) : years ending december 31: .

2017
$200,450
2018
168,926
2019
136,462
2020
110,063
2021
82,494
Thereafter
486,199
Future Minimum Lease Payments
$1,184,594

rental expense for operating leases was approximately $ 211.5 million , $ 168.4 million and $ 148.5 million during the years ended december 31 , 2016 , 2015 and 2014 , respectively .
we guarantee the residual values of the majority of our truck and equipment operating leases .
the residual values decline over the lease terms to a defined percentage of original cost .
in the event the lessor does not realize the residual value when a piece of equipment is sold , we would be responsible for a portion of the shortfall .
similarly , if the lessor realizes more than the residual value when a piece of equipment is sold , we would be paid the amount realized over the residual value .
had we terminated all of our operating leases subject to these guarantees at december 31 , 2016 , our portion of the guaranteed residual value would have totaled approximately $ 59.0 million .
we have not recorded a liability for the guaranteed residual value of equipment under operating leases as the recovery on disposition of the equipment under the leases is expected to approximate the guaranteed residual value .
litigation and related contingencies we have certain contingencies resulting from litigation , claims and other commitments and are subject to a variety of environmental and pollution control laws and regulations incident to the ordinary course of business .
we currently expect that the resolution of such contingencies will not materially affect our financial position , results of operations or cash flows. .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what was the cumulative rental expense from 2014 to 2016 in millions
Choices:
528.4
3.6
318.9
317.9
191.6
Correct choice index: 0
Reconciliation of segment EBITDA to total adjusted EBITDA is below:
For additional information on our reportable segments and product and services categories, see Note 17— Segment Information to our consolidated financial statements in Item 8 of Part II of this report.

Year Ended December 31,
2019
2018
2017
(Dollars in millions)
Adjusted EBITDA
International and Global Accounts
$2,286
2,341
821
Enterprise
3,490
3,522
2,456
Small and Medium Business
1,870
2,013
1,581
Wholesale
3,427
3,666
2,566
Consumer
4,914
5,105
5,136
Total segment EBITDA
$15,987
16,647
12,560
Operations and Other EBITDA
(7,216)
(8,045)
(6,504)
Total adjusted EBITDA
$8,771
8,602
6,056


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the change in the adjusted EBITDA under Wholesale in 2019 from 2018?
Choices:
-239000
-239
239
7093
-1210
Correct choice index: 1
The following table details our restructuring activities as reflected in the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017:
(1) Other associated costs excludes non-cash cost of $1.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 related to sharebased compensation expense.

Year Ended December 31,
(In millions)
2019
2018
2017
Continuing operations:
Other associated costs(1)
$ 60.3
$ 13.9
$ 14.3
Restructuring charges
41.9
47.8
12.1
Total charges from continuing operations
102.2
61.7
26.4
Charges included in discontinued operations
2014
2014
2.4
Total charges
$ 102.2
$ 61.7
$ 28.8
Capital expenditures
$ 3.4
$ 1.0
$ 21.3


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the Restructuring charges for 2019 expressed as a percentage of Total charges for the year?
Choices:
244
25
0
100
41
Correct choice index: 4
vornado realty trust notes to consolidated financial statements ( continued ) 20 .
leases as lessor : we lease space to tenants under operating leases .
most of the leases provide for the payment of fixed base rentals payable monthly in advance .
office building leases generally require the tenants to reimburse us for operating costs and real estate taxes above their base year costs .
shopping center leases provide for pass-through to tenants the tenant 2019s share of real estate taxes , insurance and maintenance .
shopping center leases also provide for the payment by the lessee of additional rent based on a percentage of the tenants 2019 sales .
as of december 31 , 2012 , future base rental revenue under non-cancelable operating leases , excluding rents for leases with an original term of less than one year and rents resulting from the exercise of renewal options , are as follows : ( amounts in thousands ) year ending december 31: .

2013
$1,842,355
2014
1,738,439
2015
1,578,559
2016
1,400,020
2017
1,249,904
Thereafter
6,134,903

these amounts do not include percentage rentals based on tenants 2019 sales .
these percentage rents approximated $ 8466000 , $ 7995000 and $ 7339000 , for the years ended december 31 , 2012 , 2011 and 2010 , respectively .
none of our tenants accounted for more than 10% ( 10 % ) of total revenues in any of the years ended december 31 , 2012 , 2011 and 2010 .
former bradlees locations pursuant to a master agreement and guaranty , dated may 1 , 1992 , we were due $ 5000000 of annual rent from stop & shop which was allocated to certain bradlees former locations .
on december 31 , 2002 , prior to the expiration of the leases to which the additional rent was allocated , we reallocated this rent to other former bradlees leases also guaranteed by stop & shop .
stop & shop contested our right to reallocate the rent .
on november 7 , 2011 , the court determined that we had a continuing right to allocate the annual rent to unexpired leases covered by the master agreement and guaranty and directed entry of a judgment in our favor ordering stop & shop to pay us the unpaid annual rent .
at december 31 , 2012 , we had a $ 47900000 receivable from stop and shop , which is included as a component of 201ctenant and other receivables 201d on our consolidated balance sheet .
on february 6 , 2013 , we received $ 124000000 pursuant to a settlement agreement with stop & shop ( see note 22 2013 commitments and contingencies 2013 litigation ) . .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. for future base rental revenue under non-cancelable operating leases , excluding rents for leases with an original term of less than one year and rents resulting from the exercise of renewal options , in thousands , what was the change between 2016 and 2017?
Choices:
1400010
0
150116.0
-150116
488535
Correct choice index: 2
Option Exercises and Stock Vested in 2018
The following table sets forth the number of shares of common stock acquired during 2018 by our named executive officers upon the exercise of stock options or upon the vesting of RSUs or RSAs, as well as the value realized upon such equity award transactions.
(1) Calculated by multiplying (i) the fair market value of Class A common stock on the vesting date, which was determined using the closing price on the New York Stock Exchange of a share of Class A common stock on the date of vest, or if such day is a holiday, on the immediately preceding trading day less the option exercise price paid for such shares of common stock, by (ii) the number of shares of common stock acquired upon exercise.
(2) Reflects the aggregate number of shares of Class A common stock underlying RSUs and RSAs that vested in 2018. Of the amount shown for Messrs. Daswani and Murphy and Mses. Friar, Henry, Reses and Whiteley, 20,132, 6,741, 44,857, 59,014, 91,306 and 17,217 shares, respectively, of Class A common stock were withheld to cover tax withholding obligations upon vesting.
(3) Calculated by multiplying (i) the fair market value of Class A common stock on the vesting date, which was determined using the closing price on the New York Stock Exchange of a share of common stock on the date of vest, or if such day is a holiday, on the immediately preceding trading day, by (ii) the number of shares of common stock acquired upon vesting. Of the amount shown for Messrs. Daswani and Murphy and Mses. Friar, Henry, Reses and Whiteley, $1,389,704, $414,596, $2,782,628, $3,619,149, $5,502,076 and $1,114,287, respectively, represents the value of shares withheld to cover tax withholding obligations upon vesting.

Option Awards
Stock Awards
Name
Number of Shares Acquired on Exercise (#)
Number of Value Realized on Exercise ($)(1)
Shares Acquired on Vesting of RSUs and RSAs (#) (2)
Value Realized on Vesting of RSUs and RSAs ($) (3)
Mr. Dorsey
—
—
—
—
Ms. Friar
1,082,343
54,631,297
95,889
5,788,657
Ms. Henry
200,000
13,187,645
124,498
7,475,787
Ms. Reses
—
—
189,577
11,284,454
Ms. Whiteley
20,625
989,821
38,156
2,375,984
Mr. Daswani
—
—
45,310
3,106,268
Mr. Murphy
—
—
18,024
1,120,072


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the difference between the largest and smallest Value Realized on Vesting of RSUs and RSAs?
Choices:
101644
10164382
12067573
12404526
-10164382
Correct choice index: 1
Performance
Free Cash Flow was £54.9m in FY19 compared to £92.4m in FY18, the decrease primarily reflecting the impact of US cash flows. This represents a conversion rate of 36% of Adjusted EBITDA (FY18: 45%). Excluding the US cash flows, Free Cash Flow Conversion increased to 47% from 33% in FY18, driven by improved EBITDA, lower working capital outflows, lower interest costs and lower exceptional cashflows.
Several other factors had a specific impact on cash flow during FY19. These included the effects of the disposal of the US business and associated capital restructuring, as well as the timing of dividend payments.
Net Debt decreased to £288.5m from £501.1m at the end of FY18. The Group’s Net Debt:EBITDA leverage as measured under financing agreements was 1.8x at year end. This compared to 1.9x at the end of March 2019 and 2.3x at the end of September 2018. This outturn includes the increased debt associated with the Freshtime acquisition completed in early September 2019. As at 27 September 2019, the Group had committed facilities of £506m with a weighted average maturity of 4.0 years.
ROIC was 14.4% for the 12 months ended 27 September 2019, compared to 15.6% for the 12 months ended 28 September 2018. The reduction was primarily driven by increased investment, in particular the timing of the acquisition of Freshtime and was so impacted by an increased tax rate.

FY19 £m
FY18 £m
Change (As reported)
Free Cash Flow
54.9
92.4
-£37.5m
Net Debt
288.5
501.1
Net Debt:EBITDA as per financing agreements
1.8x
2.3x
ROIC
14.4%
15.6%
-120bps


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the average net debt for FY18 and FY19?
Choices:
0
2.7
269
-394.8
394.8
Correct choice index: 4
shareowner return performance graph the following performance graph and related information shall not be deemed 201csoliciting material 201d or to be 201cfiled 201d with the securities and exchange commission , nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the securities act of 1933 or securities exchange act of 1934 , each as amended , except to the extent that the company specifically incorporates such information by reference into such filing .
the following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative total shareowners 2019 returns for our class b common stock , the s&p 500 index , and the dow jones transportation average .
the comparison of the total cumulative return on investment , which is the change in the quarterly stock price plus reinvested dividends for each of the quarterly periods , assumes that $ 100 was invested on december 31 , 2002 in the s&p 500 index , the dow jones transportation average , and the class b common stock of united parcel service , inc .
comparison of five year cumulative total return $ 40.00 $ 60.00 $ 80.00 $ 100.00 $ 120.00 $ 140.00 $ 160.00 $ 180.00 $ 200.00 $ 220.00 2002 20072006200520042003 s&p 500 ups dj transport .

12/31/02
12/31/03
12/31/04
12/31/05
12/31/06
12/31/07
United Parcel Service, Inc.
$100.00
$119.89
$139.55
$124.88
$127.08
$122.64
S&P 500 Index
$100.00
$128.68
$142.68
$149.69
$173.33
$182.85
Dow Jones Transportation Average
$100.00
$131.84
$168.39
$188.00
$206.46
$209.40

securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans the following table provides information as of december 31 , 2007 regarding compensation plans under which our class a common stock is authorized for issuance .
these plans do not authorize the issuance of our class b common stock. .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what was the percentage five year cumulative total return for united parcel service inc . for the period ended 12/31/07?
Choices:
1
2.2264
0.2264
12.2264
4.417
Correct choice index: 2