whpthomas/finqa-parquet huggingface dataset:
cdw corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements holders of class b common units in connection with the distribution is subject to any vesting provisions previously applicable to the holder 2019s class b common units . class b common unit holders received 3798508 shares of restricted stock with respect to class b common units that had not yet vested at the time of the distribution . for the year ended december 31 , 2013 , 1200544 shares of such restricted stock vested/settled and 5931 shares were forfeited . as of december 31 , 2013 , 2592033 shares of restricted stock were outstanding . stock options in addition , in connection with the ipo , the company issued 1268986 stock options to the class b common unit holders to preserve their fully diluted equity ownership percentage . these options were issued with a per-share exercise price equal to the ipo price of $ 17.00 and are also subject to the same vesting provisions as the class b common units to which they relate . the company also granted 19412 stock options under the 2013 ltip during the year ended december 31 , 2013 . restricted stock units ( 201crsus 201d ) in connection with the ipo , the company granted 1416543 rsus under the 2013 ltip at a weighted- average grant-date fair value of $ 17.03 per unit . the rsus cliff-vest at the end of four years . valuation information the company attributes the value of equity-based compensation awards to the various periods during which the recipient must perform services in order to vest in the award using the straight-line method . post-ipo equity awards the company has elected to use the black-scholes option pricing model to estimate the fair value of stock options granted . the black-scholes option pricing model incorporates various assumptions including volatility , expected term , risk-free interest rates and dividend yields . the assumptions used to value the stock options granted during the year ended december 31 , 2013 are presented below . year ended december 31 , assumptions 2013 .
as of dec 13 , 2013 , if all forfeited shares became vested , what percentage of shares would be vested?
expected term ( in years ) ( 3 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 ( 1 ) based upon an assessment of the two-year , five-year and implied volatility for the company 2019s selected peer group , adjusted for the company 2019s leverage . ( 2 ) based on a composite u.s . treasury rate . ( 3 ) the expected term is calculated using the simplified method . the simplified method defines the expected term as the average of the option 2019s contractual term and the option 2019s weighted-average vesting period . the company utilizes this method as it has limited historical stock option data that is sufficient to derive a reasonable estimate of the expected stock option term. .
american tower corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) operations , net , in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations for the year ended december 31 , 2003 . ( see note 9. ) other transactions 2014in august 2003 , the company consummated the sale of galaxy engineering ( galaxy ) , a radio frequency engineering , network design and tower-related consulting business ( previously included in the company 2019s network development services segment ) . the purchase price of approximately $ 3.5 million included $ 2.0 million in cash , which the company received at closing , and an additional $ 1.5 million payable on january 15 , 2008 , or at an earlier date based on the future revenues of galaxy . the company received $ 0.5 million of this amount in january 2005 . pursuant to this transaction , the company recorded a net loss on disposal of approximately $ 2.4 million in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended december 31 , 2003 . in may 2003 , the company consummated the sale of an office building in westwood , massachusetts ( previously held primarily as rental property and included in the company 2019s rental and management segment ) for a purchase price of approximately $ 18.5 million , including $ 2.4 million of cash proceeds and the buyer 2019s assumption of $ 16.1 million of related mortgage notes . pursuant to this transaction , the company recorded a net loss on disposal of approximately $ 3.6 million in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended december 31 , 2003 . in january 2003 , the company consummated the sale of flash technologies , its remaining components business ( previously included in the company 2019s network development services segment ) for approximately $ 35.5 million in cash and has recorded a net gain on disposal of approximately $ 0.1 million in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended december 31 , 2003 . in march 2003 , the company consummated the sale of an office building in schaumburg , illinois ( previously held primarily as rental property and included in the company 2019s rental and management segment ) for net proceeds of approximately $ 10.3 million in cash and recorded a net loss on disposal of $ 0.1 million in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended december 31 , 2003 . 4 . property and equipment property and equipment ( including assets held under capital leases ) consist of the following as of december 31 , ( in thousands ) : .
what was the percentage increase in the property and equipment net from 2004 to 2005
5 . goodwill and other intangible assets the company 2019s net carrying amount of goodwill was approximately $ 2.1 billion as of december 312005 and $ 592.7 million as of december 31 , 2004 , all of which related to its rental and management segment . the increase in the carrying value was as a result of the goodwill of $ 1.5 billion acquired in the merger with spectrasite , inc . ( see note 2. ) .
in direct competition with other co2 pipelines . we also compete with other interest owners in the mcelmo dome unit and the bravo dome unit for transportation of co2 to the denver city , texas market area . terminals our terminals segment includes the operations of our petroleum , chemical , ethanol and other liquids terminal facilities ( other than those included in the products pipelines segment ) and all of our coal , petroleum coke , fertilizer , steel , ores and other dry-bulk material services facilities , including all transload , engineering , conveying and other in-plant services . our terminals are located throughout the u.s . and in portions of canada . we believe the location of our facilities and our ability to provide flexibility to customers help attract new and retain existing customers at our terminals and provide us opportunities for expansion . we often classify our terminal operations based on the handling of either liquids or dry-bulk material products . in addition , we have jones act qualified product tankers that provide marine transportation of crude oil , condensate and refined products in the u.s . the following summarizes our terminals segment assets , as of december 31 , 2014 : number capacity ( mmbbl ) .
what is the average capacity per liquids terminal in mmbbl?
competition we are one of the largest independent operators of liquids terminals in the u.s , based on barrels of liquids terminaling capacity . our liquids terminals compete with other publicly or privately held independent liquids terminals , and terminals owned by oil , chemical and pipeline companies . our bulk terminals compete with numerous independent terminal operators , terminals owned by producers and distributors of bulk commodities , stevedoring companies and other industrial companies opting not to outsource terminal services . in some locations , competitors are smaller , independent operators with lower cost structures . our rail transloading ( material services ) operations compete with a variety of single- or multi-site transload , warehouse and terminal operators across the u.s . our jones act qualified product tankers compete with other jones act qualified vessel fleets . table of contents .
stock performance graph the following performance graph compares the cumulative total return ( including dividends ) to the holders of our common stock from december 31 , 2002 through december 31 , 2007 , with the cumulative total returns of the nyse composite index , the ftse nareit composite reit index ( the 201call reit index 201d ) , the ftse nareit healthcare equity reit index ( the 201chealthcare reit index 201d ) and the russell 1000 index over the same period . the comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on december 31 , 2002 in our common stock and in each of the foregoing indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends , as applicable . we have included the nyse composite index in the performance graph because our common stock is listed on the nyse . we have included the other indices because we believe that they are either most representative of the industry in which we compete , or otherwise provide a fair basis for comparison with ventas , and are therefore particularly relevant to an assessment of our performance . the figures in the table below are rounded to the nearest dollar. .
what was the 5 year return on the nyse composite index?
ventas nyse composite index all reit index healthcare reit index russell 1000 index .
in addition , included in the loan table are purchased distressed loans , which are loans that have evidenced significant credit deterioration subsequent to origination but prior to acquisition by citigroup . in accordance with sop 03-3 , the difference between the total expected cash flows for these loans and the initial recorded investments is recognized in income over the life of the loans using a level yield . accordingly , these loans have been excluded from the impaired loan information presented above . in addition , per sop 03-3 , subsequent decreases to the expected cash flows for a purchased distressed loan require a build of an allowance so the loan retains its level yield . however , increases in the expected cash flows are first recognized as a reduction of any previously established allowance and then recognized as income prospectively over the remaining life of the loan by increasing the loan 2019s level yield . where the expected cash flows cannot be reliably estimated , the purchased distressed loan is accounted for under the cost recovery method . the carrying amount of the purchased distressed loan portfolio at december 31 , 2009 was $ 825 million net of an allowance of $ 95 million . the changes in the accretable yield , related allowance and carrying amount net of accretable yield for 2009 are as follows : in millions of dollars accretable carrying amount of loan receivable allowance .
what is the percent of the purchased loans accounted for under the level-yield method included in the carrying amount of loan receivable net of purchased loans accounted for under the under the cost-recovery method
( 1 ) the balance reported in the column 201ccarrying amount of loan receivable 201d consists of $ 87 million of purchased loans accounted for under the level-yield method and $ 242 million under the cost-recovery method . these balances represent the fair value of these loans at their acquisition date . the related total expected cash flows for the level-yield loans were $ 101 million at their acquisition dates . ( 2 ) the balance reported in the column 201ccarrying amount of loan receivable 201d consists of $ 561 million of loans accounted for under the level-yield method and $ 359 million accounted for under the cost-recovery method. .
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 , 2008 in the standard & poor 2019s 500 index , the dow jones transportation average , and our class b common stock. .
what was the difference in percentage total cumulative return on investment for united parcel service inc . compared to the dow jones transportation average for the five years ended 12/31/2013?
.
tower cash flow , adjusted consolidated cash flow and non-tower cash flow are considered non-gaap financial measures . we are required to provide these financial metrics by the indentures for our 7.50% ( 7.50 % ) notes and 7.125% ( 7.125 % ) notes , and we have included them below because we consider the indentures for these notes to be material agreements , the covenants related to tower cash flow , adjusted consolidated cash flow and non-tower cash flow to be material terms of the indentures , and information about compliance with such covenants to be material to an investor 2019s understanding of our financial results and the impact of those results on our liquidity . the following table presents tower cash flow , adjusted consolidated cash flow and non-tower cash flow for the company and its restricted subsidiaries , as defined in the indentures for the applicable notes ( in thousands ) : .
what portion of the adjusted consolidated cash flow for the twelve months ended december 31 , 2008 is related to non-tower cash flow?
.
table of content part ii item 5 . market for the registrant's common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities our common stock is traded on the new york stock exchange under the trading symbol 201chfc . 201d in september 2018 , our board of directors approved a $ 1 billion share repurchase program , which replaced all existing share repurchase programs , authorizing us to repurchase common stock in the open market or through privately negotiated transactions . the timing and amount of stock repurchases will depend on market conditions and corporate , regulatory and other relevant considerations . this program may be discontinued at any time by the board of directors . the following table includes repurchases made under this program during the fourth quarter of 2018 . period total number of shares purchased average price paid per share total number of shares purchased as part of publicly announced plans or programs maximum dollar value of shares that may yet be purchased under the plans or programs .
of total repurchases in october to december 2018 , what percentage of shares purchased were part of publicly announced plans or programs?
during the quarter ended december 31 , 2018 , 102360 shares were withheld from certain executives and employees under the terms of our share-based compensation agreements to provide funds for the payment of payroll and income taxes due at vesting of restricted stock awards . as of february 13 , 2019 , we had approximately 97419 stockholders , including beneficial owners holding shares in street name . we intend to consider the declaration of a dividend on a quarterly basis , although there is no assurance as to future dividends since they are dependent upon future earnings , capital requirements , our financial condition and other factors. .
in direct competition with other co2 pipelines . we also compete with other interest owners in the mcelmo dome unit and the bravo dome unit for transportation of co2 to the denver city , texas market area . terminals our terminals segment includes the operations of our refined petroleum product , crude oil , chemical , ethanol and other liquid terminal facilities ( other than those included in the products pipelines segment ) and all of our coal , petroleum coke , fertilizer , steel , ores and other dry-bulk terminal facilities . our terminals are located throughout the u.s . and in portions of canada . we believe the location of our facilities and our ability to provide flexibility to customers help attract new and retain existing customers at our terminals and provide expansion opportunities . we often classify our terminal operations based on the handling of either liquids or dry-bulk material products . in addition , terminals 2019 marine operations include jones act qualified product tankers that provide marine transportation of crude oil , condensate and refined petroleum products in the u.s . the following summarizes our terminals segment assets , as of december 31 , 2016 : number capacity ( mmbbl ) .
what is the average capacity in mmbbl of liquids terminals?
competition we are one of the largest independent operators of liquids terminals in north america , based on barrels of liquids terminaling capacity . our liquids terminals compete with other publicly or privately held independent liquids terminals , and terminals owned by oil , chemical , pipeline , and refining companies . our bulk terminals compete with numerous independent terminal operators , terminals owned by producers and distributors of bulk commodities , stevedoring companies and other industrial companies opting not to outsource terminaling services . in some locations , competitors are smaller , independent operators with lower cost structures . our jones act qualified product tankers compete with other jones act qualified vessel fleets. .
18 2015 annual report performance graph the following chart presents a comparison for the five-year period ended june 30 , 2015 , of the market performance of the company 2019s common stock with the s&p 500 index and an index of peer companies selected by the company : comparison of 5 year cumulative total return among jack henry & associates , inc. , the s&p 500 index , and a peer group the following information depicts a line graph with the following values: .
in 2010 , what was the cumulative total return of the s&p 500?
this comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on june 30 , 2010 , and assumes reinvestments of dividends . total returns are calculated according to market capitalization of peer group members at the beginning of each period . peer companies selected are in the business of providing specialized computer software , hardware and related services to financial institutions and other businesses . companies in the peer group are aci worldwide , inc. , bottomline technology , inc. , broadridge financial solutions , cardtronics , inc. , convergys corp. , corelogic , inc. , dst systems , inc. , euronet worldwide , inc. , fair isaac corp. , fidelity national information services , inc. , fiserv , inc. , global payments , inc. , heartland payment systems , inc. , moneygram international , inc. , ss&c technologies holdings , inc. , total systems services , inc. , tyler technologies , inc. , verifone systems , inc. , and wex , inc. . micros systems , inc . was removed from the peer group as it was acquired in september 2014. .
entergy louisiana , llc and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis in industrial usage is primarily due to increased demand from new customers and expansion projects , primarily in the chemicals industry . the louisiana act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge for tax savings to be shared with customers per an agreement approved by the lpsc . the tax savings resulted from the 2010-2011 irs audit settlement on the treatment of the louisiana act 55 financing of storm costs for hurricane gustav and hurricane ike . see note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing . included in other is a provision of $ 23 million recorded in 2016 related to the settlement of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding , offset by a provision of $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty at that time associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . 2015 compared to 2014 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2015 to 2014 . amount ( in millions ) .
what is the growth rate in net revenue in 2015 for entergy louisiana?
the retail electric price variance is primarily due to formula rate plan increases , as approved by the lpsc , effective december 2014 and january 2015 . entergy louisiana 2019s formula rate plan increases are discussed in note 2 to the financial statements . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 841 gwh , or 2% ( 2 % ) , in billed electricity usage , as a result of increased industrial usage primarily due to increased demand for existing large refinery customers , new customers , and expansion projects primarily in the chemicals industry , partially offset by a decrease in demand in the chemicals industry as a result of a seasonal outage for an existing customer . the waterford 3 replacement steam generator provision is due to a regulatory charge of approximately $ 32 million recorded in 2015 related to the uncertainty associated with the resolution of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator project . see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the waterford 3 replacement steam generator prudence review proceeding . the miso deferral variance is due to the deferral in 2014 of non-fuel miso-related charges , as approved by the lpsc . the deferral of non-fuel miso-related charges is partially offset in other operation and maintenance expenses . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the recovery of non-fuel miso-related charges. .
10-k altria ar release tuesday , february 27 , 2018 10:00pm andra design llc performance stock units : in january 2017 , altria group , inc . granted an aggregate of 187886 performance stock units to eligible employees . the payout of the performance stock units requires the achievement of certain performance measures , which were predetermined at the time of grant , over a three-year performance cycle . these performance measures consist of altria group , inc . 2019s adjusted diluted earnings per share ( 201ceps 201d ) compounded annual growth rate and altria group , inc . 2019s total shareholder return relative to a predetermined peer group . the performance stock units are also subject to forfeiture if certain employment conditions are not met . at december 31 , 2017 , altria group , inc . had 170755 performance stock units remaining , with a weighted-average grant date fair value of $ 70.39 per performance stock unit . the fair value of the performance stock units at the date of grant , net of estimated forfeitures , is amortized to expense over the performance period . altria group , inc . recorded pre-tax compensation expense related to performance stock units for the year ended december 31 , 2017 of $ 6 million . the unamortized compensation expense related to altria group , inc . 2019s performance stock units was $ 7 million at december 31 , 2017 . altria group , inc . did not grant any performance stock units during 2016 and 2015 . note 12 . earnings per share basic and diluted eps were calculated using the following: .
what is the percent change in earnings for basic and diluted eps from 2016 to 2017?
net earnings attributable to altria group , inc . $ 10222 $ 14239 $ 5241 less : distributed and undistributed earnings attributable to share-based awards ( 14 ) ( 24 ) ( 10 ) earnings for basic and diluted eps $ 10208 $ 14215 $ 5231 weighted-average shares for basic and diluted eps 1921 1952 1961 .