Income Stmt info: 2016 2017 Sales $975,000 $1,072,500 less Cost of Goods Sold: 325,000 346,125 Gross Profit 650,000 726,375 Operating Expenses 575,000 609,500 Earnings before Interest & Taxes 75,000 116,875 Interest exp 25,000 31,000 earnings before Taxes 50,000 85,875 Taxes 20,000 34,350 Net Income $30,000 $51,525
Balance Sheet info: 12/31/2016 12/31/2017 Cash 60,000 $63,600 Accounts Receivable 80,000 $84,000 Inventory 110,000 $126,500 Total Current Assets $250,000 $274,100 Fixed Assets (Net) $300,000 $312,000 Total Assets $550,000 $586,100
Current Liabilities $130,000 $149,500 Long Term Liabilities $150,000 $170,000 Total Liabilities $280,000 $319,500 Stockholders Equity $270,000 $266,600 Total Liab & Equity: $550,000 $586,100
Compute each of the following ratios for 2016 and 2017 and indicate whether each ratio was getting “better’ or “worse” from 2016 to 2017 and whether the 2017 ratio was “good” or “bad” compared to the Industry Avg (round all numbers to 2 digits past the decimal place) 2016 2017 Getting Better or Getting Worse? 2017 Industry Avg “Good” or “Bad” c‘Mpared to Industry Avg Profit Margin 0.67 0.68 better 0.09
Current Ratio 1.92:1 1.83:1 worse 1.80 good Quick Ratio 1.12 Return on Assets 0.18 Debt to Assets 0.60 Receivables turnover 12.00 Avg. collection period* 22.10 Inventory Turnover** 8.25 Return on Equity 0.16 Times Interest Earned 8.15
*Assume a 360 day year “Inventory Turnover can be computed 2 different ways.
Margaret Thatcher and Martin Luther King Speech Comparison Distributed: 23rd March, 2015 Last Edited: fourteenth December, 2017 Disclaimer: This exposition has been put together by an understudy. This isn’t a case of the work composed by our expert exposition essayists. You can see tests of our expert work here. Any feelings, discoveries, ends or suggestions communicated in this material are those of the writers and don’t really mirror the perspectives of UK Essays. With reference to the two speakers Margaret Thatcher and Martin Luther King, think about the manner by which English might be utilized for expository purposes in political and religious addresses. Collins Dictionary characterizes ‘talk’ as ‘the craftsmanship or investigation of utilizing dialect viably and powerfully’ and it is nothing unexpected that such an aptitude is frequently in prove with extraordinary legislators or religious pioneers. The need to effectively advance ones message in a decent light, particularly in the event that it is a dubious choice that will be available to discuss, is fundamental and can mean the contrast amongst progress and disappointment. Influence or influence of the majority has, since the simple day break of crude correspondence, set obstinate creatures against each other and impelled the individuals who can work adequately inside the perceived strategies of talk into the spotlight of society. Without a doubt, recorded figures from Gandhi to Hitler have utilized vocal jolt to spread their message and impact the majority, and through different strategies, very much built explanatory talks are successfully ‘crowd administration gadgets’ giving their audience members signs, reference focuses and the proposed places of praise. Inside this article, I will be examination Thatcher’s and King’s control of such methods. Starting with Margaret Thatcher’s discourse to the Conservative Party Bournemouth gathering in 1990, it is fascinating to take note of how she starts her discourse with an energetic say of a previous partner executed in Ireland. Working up to what will later turn into a key issue in her discourse, she uses emotive dialect ‘Before he was killed by the IRA, Ian showed us how an acculturated network should react to such a shock’ suggesting the supreme blame of the IRA and to set a tone of sympathy inside her talk that more likely than not mellowed the hearts of her gathering of people and helped gain ‘their endorsement and support for her and their messages and conclusions.’ Nonetheless, in Martin Luther Kings 1963 ‘I have a fantasy’ deliver to an awesome influx of challenging social liberties campaigners, the tone is to some degree unique. As opposed to addressing a more contained gathering of political figures, he is in charge of enflaming the hearts of thousands of concerned people who may well anyway have originated from all kinds of different backgrounds, and his opening talk appears to mirror this. As opposed to Thatcher’s sincere vote of sensitivity for an associate apparently known by most inside the meeting, Luther Kings gatherings of people just shared view is their battle and want to make a move, and he endeavors to capture the sentiment of this need. ‘I am cheerful to join with you today in what will stand out forever as the best exhibition for opportunity ever of country.’ Here, King is managing in emotive absolutes, developing the significance of the occasion, and mixing he jam into energy and mindfulness, prepared to take in whatever remains of his awesome discourse. To be sure, religious and social equality speakers, similar to Luther King, frequently depend preferably more on verbal persuasiveness and unconstrained imagination than their political partners. In a setting that is less formal and subject to interests as opposed to shrewdly made turn, little of these talks might be scribed ahead of time and an old African custom of ‘call and reaction’ has been noted by the etymological specialists ‘Keith and Whittenberger Keith (1986.) Indeed, this is obvious a few times over in Kings discourse, initially as a call to all in the main line, and after that again with open remarks ‘Let us not flounder in the valley of depression’ and obviously, the well known ‘I have a fantasy’ articulation. Both of these lines, and more in the discourse plus, exhibit this ‘call and reaction’, while one notes that in Margaret Thatcher’s discourse she seems to address and name check ‘Mr President’ when she tends to her group of onlookers, offering a more official line of word usage. It is likewise obvious that King, in the style of such old African or Pentecostal evangelists, utilizes unmistakable precepts and a lot of symbolism inside his words to guarantee that his point is demonstrated distinctly to the a wide range of segments of the network, both taught and not, that might watch him perform. Utilizing allegory in portraying his people groups battle to being managed an unjustifiable arrangement in the public eye, ‘it could be said we’ve gone to our country’s funding to money a check,’ he builds a whole section around the worldview of the requirement for cash, a typical issue everybody can relate as well, and accordingly splendidly draws in his gathering of people. Thatcher obviously has the advantage of a completely drew in gathering of people and wants to imply genuine strategy talk, and clever asides that a completely instructed group of onlookers of Conservative individuals can acknowledge, indeed demonstrating that focusing on ones crowd is critical during the time spent abusing talk. Notwithstanding, in spite of these unobtrusive contrasts, it is detectable that expressions of the human experience and methods of talk, as contemplated and scribed by the scientist Atkinson, are normally utilized in both King’s and Thatcher’s addresses. Clearly, in spite of being diverse kinds of talk, semi religious/political and straight political, a basic need to hold consideration and evoke reaction is required thus it is obvious that the ‘three section list’ is detectable in both of these discourses. In Thatcher one such illustration is ‘They’re very short discourses. [laughter][fo 9] Monosyllables even. [laughter] Short monosyllables’ and inside Kings address ‘We can’t walk alone; and as we walk, we should make the vow that we will dependably walk ahead. We can’t turn back.’ Both clearly essential minutes in the discourses, Thatcher’s to hint a feeling of gathering solidarity and clever aside, while Kings demands unrepentant solidarity and advancement, the utilization of this ‘three point list’, basically a point made through the utilization of three particular segments, is fundamental in opening up general thoughts and fortifying group of onlookers reaction. Combined with this, and regularly evident inside such triplets, is the utilization of reiteration, and to some degree rhyme, that is delivered in these talks. Ruler rehashes ‘I have a fantasy’ toward the start of eight sentences ascending to a hot crescendo of talked word legislative issues to enhance and persistently fortify his message (see end of his discourse) and Thatcher utilizes the gadget all the more inadequately to accomplish comparable outcomes. ‘new occupations. Better employments. Cleaner employments.’ Such ‘rhyming’ words combined with energizing symbolism inside them (King utilizes ‘sweltering’ and ‘Desert spring’ to think about the contemporary circumstance and his future vision of the territory of Mississippi) can energize a crowd of people and furthermore give them a prompt to react in praise or a ‘holler back’ circumstance, contingent upon the idea of the address itself. Obviously, we should likewise recollect that these speakers will have utilized sound and gesture not accessible in the transcripts of these discourses, but rather these are additionally essential in the craft of fruitful talk. The utilization of differences, and periodic symmetrical complexities are additionally obvious in both of these addresses; both Thatcher and King drawing on disappointments of others to feature the prevalence of the speaker’s favored position. ‘I appeared to hear an odd sound exuding from Blackpool. Also, I thought at first it was seagulls. [laughter] Then I recalled that Labor was holding its yearly Conference there’ and ‘Thus we’ve come here today to perform a despicable condition.’ Although, obviously, the tones of these voices are altogether different, Thatcher taking an ‘underhanded move’ at the Labor party while King is endeavoring to keep his dissent on the ‘high plane of pride and train,’ they both balance their message with disappointments of an adversary organization or the framework in general. Skeptics could obviously reject this component of talk as just a frantic endeavor to conceal ones claim sneaking terrible focuses with those of others, despite the fact that if skilfully done, it can assist gigantically with highlighting these issues and cut down the group of onlookers impression of what could be viewed as an adversary issue.>