trismik/FinRAG huggingface dataset:
5 .
commitments and contingencies rental expense related to office , warehouse space and real estate amounted to $ 608 , $ 324 , and $ 281 for the years ended december 25 , 2004 , december 27 , 2003 , and december 28 , 2002 , respectively .
future minimum lease payments are as follows : at december 25 , 2004 , the company expects future costs of approximately $ 900 for the completion of its facility expansion in olathe , kansas .
certain cash balances of gel are held as collateral by a bank securing payment of the united kingdom value-added tax requirements .
these amounted to $ 1457 and $ 1602 at december 25 , 2004 and december 27 , 2003 , respectively , and are reported as restricted cash .
in the normal course of business , the company and its subsidiaries are parties to various legal claims , actions , and complaints , including matters involving patent infringement and other intellectual property claims and various other risks .
it is not possible to predict with certainty whether or not the company and its subsidiaries will ultimately be successful in any of these legal matters , or if not , what the impact might be .
however , the company 2019s management does not expect that the results in any of these legal proceedings will have a material adverse effect on the company 2019s results of operations , financial position or cash flows .
6 .
employee benefit plans gii sponsors an employee retirement plan under which its employees may contribute up to 50% ( 50 % ) of their annual compensation subject to internal revenue code maximum limitations and to which gii contributes a specified percentage of each participant 2019s annual compensation up to certain limits as defined in the plan .
additionally , gel has a defined contribution plan under which its employees may contribute up to 5% ( 5 % ) of their annual compensation .
both gii and gel contribute an amount determined annually at the discretion of the board of directors .
during the years ended december 25 , 2004 , december 27 , 2003 , and december 28 , 2002 , expense related to these plans of $ 5183 , $ 4197 , and $ 2728 , respectively , was charged to operations .
certain of the company 2019s foreign subsidiaries participate in local defined benefit pension plans .
contributions are calculated by formulas that consider final pensionable salaries .
neither obligations nor contributions for the years ended december 25 , 2004 , december 27 , 2003 , and december 28 , 2002 were significant. .

Year
Amount
2005
$512
2006
493
2007
493
2008
474
2009
474
Thereafter
3,452

.

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what is the increase in expense related to office , warehouse space , and real estate during 2003 and 2004?
Choices:
-284
284.0
932
284000
7100
Correct choice index: 1
Stock Appreciation Rights Awards
During the second quarter of fiscal 2019, in connection with the completion of the Pinnacle acquisition, we granted 2.3 million cash-settled stock appreciation rights with a fair value estimated at closing date using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model and a grant date price of $36.37 per share to Pinnacle employees in replacement of their unvested stock option awards that were outstanding as of the closing date. Approximately $14.8 million of the fair value of the replacement awards granted to Pinnacle employees was attributable to pre-combination service and was included in the purchase price and established as a liability. As of May 26, 2019, the liability of the replacement stock appreciation rights was $0.9 million, which includes post-combination service expense, the mark-to-market of the liability, and the impact of payouts since acquisition.
The compensation income for our cash-settled stock appreciation rights totaled $13.7 million for fiscal 2019. Included in this amount is income of $14.0 million related to the mark-to-market of the liability established in connection with the Pinnacle acquisition and expense of $0.2 million for accelerated vesting of awards related to Pinnacle integration restructuring activities, net of the impact of marking-to-market these awards based on a lower market price of Conagra common shares. The related tax expense for fiscal 2019 was $3.4 million.
A summary of the stock appreciation rights activity as of May 26, 2019 and changes during the fiscal year then ended is presented below:

Number of Options (in Millions)
Weighted Average Exercise Price
Average Remaining Contractual Term (Years)
Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in Millions)
Granted
2.3
$27.09
Exercised
(0.1)
$24.79
$0.1
Expired
(1.8)
$26.92
Outstanding at May 26, 2019
0.4
$28.13
0.16
$0.6
Exercisable at May 26, 2019
0.4
$28.13
0.16
$0.6


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the total price of exercised and expired stocks?
Choices:
50.94
18.63
48.46
0.51
52.42
Correct choice index: 0
Stock purchase warrants
Prior to the 2019 Brookfield Transaction, Teekay held 15.5 million common unit warrants (or the Brookfield Transaction Warrants) issued by Altera to Teekay in connection with the 2017 Brookfield Transaction (see Note 4) and 1,755,000 warrants to purchase common units of Altera issued to Teekay in connection with Altera's private placement of Series D Preferred Units in June 2016 (or the Series D Warrants). In May 2019, Teekay sold to Brookfield all of the Company’s remaining interests in Altera, which included, among other things, both the Brookfield Transaction Warrants and Series D Warrants.
Changes in fair value during the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018 for the Company’s Brookfield Transaction Warrants and the Series D Warrants, which were measured at fair value using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3), are as follows:

Year Ended December 31,
2019
2018
$
$
Fair value at the beginning of the year
12,026
30,749
Fair value on acquisition/issuance
—
2,330
Unrealized gain (loss) included in earnings
26,900
(21,053)
Realized loss included in earnings
(25,559)
—
Settlements
(13,367)
—
Fair value at the end of the year
—
12,026


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the average Fair value on acquisition/issuance?
Choices:
2330
1
1165
2044575000
777
Correct choice index: 2
Net Income (Loss) per Common Share
Basic net income per share is based on the weighted average common and Class A shares outstanding. Diluted net income per share includes any dilutive effects of stock options outstanding and unvested restricted shares.
Basic net income per share was calculated by dividing net income by the weighted-average number of common and Class A shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income per share was calculated by dividing net income by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period plus the dilutive effects of stock options and unvested restricted shares. Due to the net loss in the year ended June 3, 2017 restricted shares in the amount of 131,292 were excluded from the calculation of diluted earnings per share because their inclusion would have been
antidilutive. The computations of basic net income per share and diluted net income per share are as follows (in thousands):

June 1, 2019
June 2, 2018
June 3, 2017
Net income (loss) attributable to Cal-Maine Foods, Inc.
$54,229
$125,932
$(74,278)
Basic weighted-average common shares (including Class A)
48,467
48,353
48,362
Effect of dilutive securities:
Common stock options and restricted stock
122
115
—
Dilutive potential common shares
48,589
48,468
48,362
Net income (loss) per common share:
Basic
$1.12
$2.60
$(1.54)
Diluted
$1.12
$2.60
$(1.54)


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the increase / decrease in the number of dilutive potential common shares from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
-48465
5864628
121000000
121
-106
Correct choice index: 3
Operating Income (Loss) by Business Unit
Percentages reflect operating income (loss) as a percentage of revenue for each business unit.
CNBU operating income for 2019 decreased from 2018 primarily due to declines in pricing and higher R&D costs, partially offset by cost reductions. MBU operating income for 2019 decreased from 2018 primarily due to declines in pricing partially offset by increases in sales of high-value managed NAND products and manufacturing cost reductions. SBU operating margin for 2019 declined from 2018 primarily due to declines in pricing, which were partially offset by manufacturing cost reductions and increases in sales volumes. SBU operating results for 2019 and 2018 were adversely impacted by the underutilization charges at IMFT. EBU operating income for 2019 decreased from 2018 as a result of declines in pricing and higher R&D costs partially offset by manufacturing cost reductions and increases in sales volumes.
CNBU operating income for 2018 improved from 2017 primarily due to improved pricing and higher sales volumes resulting from strong demand for our products combined with manufacturing cost reductions. MBU operating income for 2018 improved from 2017 primarily due to increases in pricing and sales volumes for LPDRAM products, higher sales of high-value managed NAND products, and manufacturing cost reductions. SBU operating income for 2018 improved from 2017 primarily due to manufacturing cost reductions enabled by our execution in transitioning to 64-layer TLC 3D NAND products and improvements in product mix. SBU operating income for 2018 was adversely impacted by higher costs associated with IMFT's production of 3D XPoint memory products at less than full capacity. EBU operating income for 2018 increased as compared to 2017 as a result of increases in average selling prices, manufacturing cost reductions, and increases in sales volumes, partially offset by higher R&D costs.

For the year ended
2019
2019
2018
2018
2017
2017
CNBU
$4,645
47%
$9,773
64%
$3,755
44%
MBU
2,606
41%
3,033
46%
927
21%
SBU
(386)
(10)%
964
19%
552
12%
EBU
923
29%
1,473
42%
975
36%
All Other
13
18%
—
—%
23
35%
$7,801
$15,243
$6,232


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the ratio of CNBU and MBU total operating income in 2019 to those in 2018?
Choices:
0.57
0.41
12806
1.77
0.97
Correct choice index: 0
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 sec , 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 standard & poor 2019s 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 , 2011 in the standard & poor 2019s 500 index , the dow jones transportation average and our class b common stock. .

12/31/2011
12/31/2012
12/31/2013
12/31/2014
12/31/2015
12/31/2016
United Parcel Service, Inc.
$100.00
$103.84
$152.16
$165.35
$154.61
$189.72
Standard & Poor’s 500 Index
$100.00
$115.99
$153.54
$174.54
$176.94
$198.09
Dow Jones Transportation Average
$100.00
$107.49
$151.97
$190.07
$158.22
$192.80

.

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. for the five year period ending 12/31/2016 what was the difference in total performance between united parcel service inc . and the standard & poor 2019s 500 index?
Choices:
-0.0837
-4.0837
-0.0802
0.8972
-1.7809
Correct choice index: 0
In the first quarter of 2019, the Company determined that certain revenue in the IT Services and Hardware segment associated with nonrecurring projects is better aligned with Infrastructure Solutions, rather than Consulting, where it was previously reported.  As a result, the Company reclassed revenue of $26.6 million and $12.3 million from Consulting to Infrastructure Solutions for the twelve months ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.  This reclassification of revenue had no impact on the Consolidated Statements of Operations
The following table presents revenues disaggregated by contract type

Year ended December 31,
(dollars in millions)
2019
2018
2017
Entertainment and Communications
Products and services transferred at a point in time
$31.7
$25.3
$20.6
Products and services transferred over time
942.4
805.8
664.3
Intersegment revenue
21.6
22.3
21.2
Total Entertainment and Communications
995.7
853.4
706.1
IT Services and Hardware
Products and services transferred at a point in time
138.7
142.9
80.8
Products and services transferred over time
423.9
404.2
300.0
Intersegment revenue
4.8
3.8
4.3
Total IT Services and Hardware
567.4
550.9
385.1
Total Revenue
Total products and services transferred at a point in time
170.4
168.2
101.4
Total products and services transferred over time
1,366.3
1210.0
964.3
Total revenue
$1,536.7
$1,378.2
$1,065.7


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the total revenue between 2017 to 2019?
Choices:
3057.8
3968.7
3980.6
1849.2
2545.3
Correct choice index: 2
The director compensation policies summarized above resulted in the following total compensation for our non-management directors in fiscal year 2019:
Director Compensation Table
(1) Oleg Khaykin, President and Chief Executive Officer, is not included in this table as he was an employee of the Company and as such received no compensation for his services as a director. His compensation is disclosed in the Summary Compensation Table.
(2) The amounts shown in this column represent the grant date fair values of RSUs issued pursuant to the Company’s 2003 Equity Incentive Plan, computed in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 718 (“FASB ASC Topic 718”), excluding the effect of estimated forfeitures. There can be no assurance that these grant date fair values will ever be realized by the non-employee directors. For information regarding the number of unvested RSUs held by each non-employee director as of the end of fiscal year 2019, see the column “Unvested Restricted Stock Units Outstanding” in the table below

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
Name (1)
Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($)
Stock Awards ($) (2)
Total ($)
Keith Barnes
102,500
178,317
280,817
Richard E. Belluzzo
160,000
178,317
338,317
Laura Black
67,500
178,317
245,817
Tor Braham
67,500
178,317
245,817
Timothy Campos
77,500
178,317
255,817
Donald Colvin
97,500
178,317
275,817
Masood A. Jabbar
90,000
178,317
268,317


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the summed compensation for the top 3 most compensated directors?
Choices:
734951
619134
895
275818
894951
Correct choice index: 4
The Group’s revenue mainly comprises the sale of goods in-store and online, and hospitality and leisure services. Revenue is recognised when control of the goods has transferred to the customer or when the service is provided at an amount that reflects the consideration to which the Group expects to be entitled.
For sale of goods in-store, control of the goods transfers to the customer at the point the customer purchases the goods in-store. For sale of goods online, control of the goods transfers to the customer at the point the goods are delivered to, or collected by, the customer. Where payment for the goods is received prior to control transferring to the customer, revenue recognition is deferred in contract liabilities within trade and other payables in the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position until the goods have been delivered to, or collected by, the customer.
Woolworths Rewards points granted by the Group provide customers with a material right to a discount on future purchases. The amounts allocated to Woolworths Rewards points are deferred in contract liabilities within trade and other payables in the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position until redeemed by the customer.

2019
2018
53 WEEKS
52 WEEKS
$M
$M
Sale of goods in-store
54,720
52,533
Sale of goods online
2,534
1,883
Leisure and hospitality services
1,671
1,612
Other
1,059
916
Total
59,984
56,944


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the difference in value for sale of goods online between 2019 and 2018?
Choices:
4771522
922
-651
651
863
Correct choice index: 3
lkq corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements ( continued ) note 5 .
long-term obligations ( continued ) as part of the consideration for business acquisitions completed during 2007 , 2006 and 2005 , we issued promissory notes totaling approximately $ 1.7 million , $ 7.2 million and $ 6.4 million , respectively .
the notes bear interest at annual rates of 3.0% ( 3.0 % ) to 6.0% ( 6.0 % ) , and interest is payable at maturity or in monthly installments .
we also assumed certain liabilities in connection with a business acquisition during the second quarter of 2005 , including a promissory note with a remaining principle balance of approximately $ 0.2 million .
the annual interest rate on the note , which was retired during 2006 , was note 6 .
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 , 2007 are as follows ( in thousands ) : years ending december 31: .

2008
$42,335
2009
33,249
2010
25,149
2011
17,425
2012
11,750
Thereafter
28,581
Future Minimum Lease Payments
$158,489

rental expense for operating leases was approximately $ 27.4 million , $ 18.6 million and $ 12.2 million during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 and 2005 , respectively .
we guaranty 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 guaranties at december 31 , 2007 , the guarantied residual value would have totaled approximately $ 24.0 million .
litigation and related contingencies on december 2 , 2005 , ford global technologies , llc ( 2018 2018ford 2019 2019 ) filed a complaint with the united states international trade commission ( 2018 2018usitc 2019 2019 ) against keystone and five other named respondents , including four taiwan-based manufacturers .
on december 12 , 2005 , ford filed an amended complaint .
both the complaint and the amended complaint contended that keystone and the other respondents infringed 14 design patents that ford alleges cover eight parts on the 2004-2005 .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what was the percentage change in rental expense from 2005 to 2006?
Choices:
0.52459
0.54098
0.12497
0.34409
1.90625
Correct choice index: 0
The table below shows the carrying amounts and estimated fair values of our debt, excluding lease liabilities:
(1) Includes borrowings denominated in currencies other than US Dollars.
(2) At December 31, 2019, the carrying amount and estimated fair value of debt exclude lease liabilities.
In addition to the table above, the Company remeasures amounts related to certain equity compensation that are carried at fair value on a recurring basis in the Consolidated Financial Statements or for which a fair value measurement was required. Refer to Note 21, “Stockholders’ Deficit,” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for share-based compensation in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Included among our non-financial assets and liabilities that are not required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis are inventories, net property and equipment, goodwill, intangible assets and asset retirement obligations.

December 31, 2019
December 31, 2018
(In millions)
Carrying Amount
Fair Value
Carrying Amount
Fair Value
Term Loan A Facility due July 2022
$ 474.6
$ 474.6
$ —
$ —
Term Loan A Facility due July 2023(1)
223.8
223.8
222.2
222.2
6.50% Senior Notes due December 2020
—
—
424.0
440.1
4.875% Senior Notes due December 2022
421.9
450.1
421.1
421.2
5.25% Senior Notes due April 2023
422.0
454.1
421.2
424.5
4.50% Senior Notes due September 2023(1)
445.6
509.5
454.9
489.9
5.125% Senior Notes due December 2024
421.9
458.9
421.3
419.8
5.50% Senior Notes due September 2025
397.4
441.2
397.1
394.8
4.00% Senior Notes due December 2027
420.4
431.5
—
—
6.875% Senior Notes due July 2033
445.7
528.8
445.5
453.4
Other foreign borrowings(1)
12.1
12.4
98.5
99.2
Other domestic borrowings
89.0
89.0
168.4
170.0
Total debt(2)
$ 3,774.4
$ 4,073.9
$ 3,474.2
$ 3,535.1


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the total carrying amount of Senior Notes due by December 2024 as of December 31, 2019?
Choices:
1711.4
1775.3
17.1
1289.4
1732.4
Correct choice index: 0
Note: 1 Primarily comprises foreign exchange differences reflected in the income statement in relation to sterling and US dollar balances.
Net financing costs increased by €1.3 billion, primarily driven by mark-to-market losses (including hedges of the mandatory convertible bond) and adverse foreign exchange rate movements. Net financing costs before interest on settlement of tax issues includes increased interest costs as part of the financing for the Liberty Global transaction as well as adverse interest rate movements on borrowings in foreign operations. Excluding these, underlying financing costs remained stable, reflecting consistent average net debt balances and weighted average borrowing costs for both periods.

Net financing costs
2019
2018
€m
€m
Investment income
433
685
Financing costs
(2,088)
(1,074)
Net financing costs
(1,655)
(389)
Analysed as:
Net financing costs before interest on settlement of tax issues
(1,043)
(749)
Interest income arising on settlement of outstanding tax issues
1
11
(1,042)
(738)
Mark to market (losses)/gains
(423)
27
Foreign exchange (losses)/gains1
(190)
322
Net financing costs
(1,655)
(389)


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the difference between the average investment income and average financing costs?
Choices:
2991
0
1633
2140
1798
Correct choice index: 3