AutoCAD user guide Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words

AutoCAD user guide - Assignment Example Analysis also contains how the report from the research was used to modify the document. There are statements both written and concluding, these talk about the results of the tests, lessons learnt from the study, what was yet to be learnt. And to conclude, weaknesses, shortcomings and possible application of the document is discussed. Introduction Automatic computer aided designs is a technique of producing technical engineering drawings which is typically done by the use of computers; computers are the drawing tools. AutoCAD is one of the computer software: it is an application software (off – the – shelf package) specially designed for drawing purpose. The use of AutoCAD is aimed at ensuring that the product is of high quality; neat, presentable, appealing to the observer’s eye. The drawing process should be efficient and smooth thus drawer should have easy time using his apparatus. This yields to the need for some guide for the AutoCAD user. An AutoCAD user gu ide is document which is used to document all the directives that may be required by the prospected user of AutoCAD. It therefore serves the purpose of marking the user is in a position to comfortably use the software without employing doubts in their operations. User guide, manual like document, directs the user on the steps to take during usage (Smith & Morse, 2001). Importance of a user guide is that it saves the user from employing doubts; trial and error in his operations. The user becomes very certain upon following of the given procedures and instructions and as a result he can speculate the time he needs to use or get used to the software. User guide uses graphics and symbols to pass across information and instructions. In giving directives, these graphics and symbols help create a vivid picture in the user’s mind. When properly interpreted they enhances the understanding of the user (Seidler, 2012). Therefore, user guide applies the engineering understanding of graph ics in passing across information these help summarize an idea and create visual impression. Apart from just using graphics and symbols to give directives, it also aids the understanding of such graphics and symbols through some explanations which often follow the symbols and graphs. This user guide specializes on the components of the AutoCAD and their uses and applications. All the components mentioned are discussed and their uses explained. The limitation of this document is that not all the instructions could be demonstrated through literature, graphics or even with the use of symbols. History of AutoCAD AutoCAD is software which was derived from Interact; an early version which operated on the Marinchip Systems owned by the Autodesk founders Dan Drake and John Walker. It was first released in 1982 December after John Walker had purchased the previous form of the software. In 1986, AutoCAD became the world’s most ubiquitous program for design using the microcomputers. It utilised lines and curve fittings. Today AutoCAD is used in many industries by

Honor Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Honor - Essay Example The Merriam Webster dictionary defines honour an ardent sense of what is described as ethical conduct. However, it is somewhat difficult to give the actual definition of honour in the modern times. The term may appear to have the same literal meaning in various languages however, various acts and behaviours are viewed as being honourable in the various cultures. This essay gives my own definition of the concept of honour and how its examples in the modern world. In my opinion honour is the ability of individuals to be themselves. Additionally, it refers to the ability of individuals to think independently and doing what they deem to be right. This is my definition of honour given the modern society is characterized by brainwashed people with justified opinions in all issues affecting society (Dailey 7). It takes an honourable individual with a real self-worth to think and act independently regardless of the trends in society or what other people think. In history, there have been honourable individuals that have set the example for the current and future generations. Honour has various meanings to different people. To some individuals, standing up for the rights of the minority is being honourable. Others may describe the missionaries serving in African countries as the best gesture on honour. While there believe that a soldier dying in war while fighting for their country as being honourable (Dailey 8). While these deeds are viewed as being honourable, they all revolve around the point that honour refers to the act of doing what is right. The individuals that advocated for the rights of the majority do it because it is right. The same applies for missionaries that go to African countries to preach the word of God. Finally, the soldiers that die in war do it to protect the rights and freedom of the citizens. While these incidences may vary, they have a major and common aspect, in all instances; these

Rio Grande River

Rio Grande River River Pollution in the Rio Grande River Environmental Pollution in the Rio Grande River The Rio Grande River is known as the river that provides a natural boundary between the United States and Mexico. This river is over 2,000 miles long reaching from the southern Rocky Mountains to the end of Texas. Many people depend on this river as a source of drinking water for them. In the Lower Rio Grande Valley this river receives a lot of agriculture due to all the farmlands and is also used by many people for recreation purposes. Additionally, this river provides a home to much wildlife. Due to an increase in the economic growth and rapid population in the surrounding cities, the Rio Grande has had a tremendous increase in pollution that has caused a negative impact on the surrounding environment. Furthermore, the American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has severely impacted the river causing it now to become the seventh most endangered river in the United States (Flynn 2000). Scientific studies have confirmed that the contamination/pollution of the Rio Grande still poses a prob lem (Garcia et al. 2001, Berry et al. 1997 a b, Mendoza et al. 2004, Mora et al. 2001, Rios-Arana et al. 2003). Since these arising circumstances the river endures problems of run-off pollution, discharging of polluted water, over-pumping and the release of millions of gallons of raw sewage by Mexico which clearly defines a present danger to the surrounding environment. Such negative effects have been linked to border health issues and have been attributed to wildlife defects and deaths. For example, in 1994 a young boys death was linked to swimming in the Rio Bravo. The cause of his death was traced to an amoeba which was found in the river water that can cause deadly brain infections. In 1994, the United States and Mexican governments completed a study regarding the presence of toxic substances in the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo between Mexico and the U.S. During a three year period, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) got involved and completed phase two of this study ending in 1997. Results from the study identified an increase in chemical pollution in the river which then led to identifying Laredo, TX as a pollution trouble location (U.S. EPA 2007). The major pollutants observed to have significantly increased over the years in the Rio Grande were heavy metals and pesticides (Garcia et al. 2001, Berry et al. 1997 a b, Mendoza et al. 2004). In general it seems that some segments of the Rio Grande along the US-Mexico border do pose potential health and/or reproductive harm for wildlife and fish that depend on this river for survival along with the humans that eat fish from those segments (Mora et al. 2001). In 2001, Mora et al. (2001) conducted a study in the Texas, USA-Tamaulipas, Mexico border region to investigate the contamination of pesticides in fish from Texas. Results showed that pesticides were present in fish where concentrations were reported to be significantly greater than data collected during the 1980s and 1990s. The presence of heavy metals in the Rio Grande has continued even up to the year 2003. In 2003, a study performed by Rios-Arana et al. (2003) confirmed the presence of heavy metals in the water and sediment of the Rio Grande in the area of El-Paso-Juarez. In this study, they found that zinc and lead surpassed the freshwater chronic criteria set by the EPA. Again, this study emphasizes that elevated heavy metal concentrations in the river can post significant harm to the health, survival and reproduction of organisms (Rios-Arana et al. 2003). Furthermore, in 2004 a study conducted by Mendoza et al. (2007) examined the microbial contamination and chemical toxicity of the Rio Grande for a 112 km segment of the Rio Grande between Fort Hancock, TX and Sunland Park, NM. Their results showed the presence of fecal coliform and E. coli in the river. This study suggests that chemical toxicity applies for most sites along that segment which leads to a concern of water quality in those sections. However to date, the year 2007, Carlos Rubinstein, Rio Grande watermaster and area director for Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Region 15, stated that the situation in the Rio Grande is improving. Rubeinstein mentioned Weve had infrastructure improvements on both sides of the river and those will clearly assist in water quality. He then goes on and says that the rivers water quality is influenced by many elements and that the U.S. can only control part of those elements. Rubeinstein states that wastewater dumping in Mexico, and agricultural runoff still contributes to the pollution problem in the Rio Grande. TCEQ suggests that in the Gulf, dissolved-oxygen levels (water quality parameter) have showed some improvement over the years from 1996 to now (McEver 2007). On the other hand, a study conducted by Buelna and Riffat (2007) suggests that there is still a need for constant monitoring in the Rio Grande in order to keep track of the environmental status since results from their study still showed high levels of contamination. References Berry MR, Johnson LS, Jones JW, Rader JI, Kendall DC, Sheldon LS (1997a) Dietary Characterization in a study of human exposure in the Lower Rio Grande Valley: I. Foods and beverages. Environment International 23(5):675-692 Berry MR, Johnson LS, Brenner KP, Thomas KW (1997b) Dietary Characterizations in a study of human exposures in the Lower Rio Grande Valley: II. Household waters. Environment International 23(5):693-703 Buelna G, Riffat R. (2007) Preliminary environmental monitoring of water quality in the Rio Grande in the Laredo-Nuevo Laredo Region. J Environ Sci Health A Tox Hazard Subst Environ Eng. 42 (10):1379-90 Flynn LR, (2000) Rio Grande No. 7 on List of Endangered Rivers Laredo Morning Times, April 12, 2000 Garcia SS, Ake C, Clement B, Huebner HJ, Donnelly KC, Shalat SL (2001) Initial results of environmental monitoring in the Texas Rio Grande Valley. Environment International 26:465-474 Hernandez-Romero AH, Tovilla-Hernandez C, Malo EA, Bello-Mendoza R (2004) Water quality and presence of pesticides in a tropical coastal wetland in southern Mexico Marine. Pollution Bulletin 48:1130-1141 McEver M (2007) River water quality report finds some improvements, new trouble spots July 23, 2007. The Monitor Harlingen, TX Mendoza J, Botsford J, Hernandez J, Montoya A, Saenz R, Valles A, Vazquez A, Alvarez M. (2004). Microbial contamination and chemical toxicity of the Rio Grande. BMC Microbiol. 22:(4):17 Mora MA, Papoulias D, Nava I, Buckler DR (2001) A comparative assessment of contaminants in fish from four resacas of the Texas, USA-Tamaulipas, Mexico border region. Environ Int. 27(1):15-20 United States Environmental Protection agency (U.S. EPA) EPA Region 6 Toxic Substances Study Questions and Answers, Binational Study Regarding the Presence of Toxic Substances in the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo and Its Tributaries Along the Boundary Between the United States and Mexico. Available [Online]: http://www.epa.gov /region6/water/ ecopro/watershd/monitrng/usmexico/rio_qa.htm. Retrieved Aug. 2, 2007

Dorm Life Essay -- College Housing Relationships Essays

Dorm Life Each year students entering college face one of the biggest transitions they will ever have to encounter in there life, moving into a dorm room. Most students are use to living in a house with there family and most likely having there own bedroom and own bathroom. Now as they begin college, the students move in with complete strangers, and share a bedroom and maybe a bathroom with one to three other people. Adapting to this new environment might take a lot of time and patients for this college student to adjust and feel comfortable. Finally after adapting to this new life the college students begin to enjoy this new environment. In this paper I am going to talk about and explain some of the steps of this transition to dorm life and give some of my experiences. Just think about growing up and having your own bedroom that was twelve feet by eighteen feet, then all of a sudden you go off to college and you are sharing this same size bedroom with three other girls. Most people would feel very crammed and uneasy at first. This is exactly what happened to me. Even though I knew two out of three of my roommates it still felt uncanny. In our bedroom we had four beds that could not be bunked, a TV stand and TV, and we also had four night stands by each of our beds. Built in one wall of the bedroom were a mirror, sink, and some drawers. This dorm room also had a living room (which was the same size as the bedroom), where we each had our own little desk area for our computers and what not. The fourth roommate decided to bring her own desk even though she had another desk to use. This desk took up a lot of space that we did not have. We also had a futon, papazon chair, trunk, refrigerator, microwave, and storag... ... life is all the memories you get to make. The late night conversations with your roommates about life and your future goals are the best. Cheering up your roommate by doing something funny to make them laugh after a bad day of classes. Its always great to be cheered up by someone who has got to know you in a short period of time but has also got to see almost all side of you. Movie marathons on those rainy days with the roommates to pass the time always keep me out of the state of boredom. These are just a few things that students store in there dorm life memory box. College is not all about the studying, and classes, it is the life outside of classes, the dorm life. Dorm life is not all that bad once the college student gets use to the small room and having to share it with one to two other peers. Most likely the good times out weigh the bad by a lot.

Comparing of Financial Statement for Similar Companies

Introduction Freds, Belk, Big Lots and Dollar Tree are all famous variety store in United State. All of them provide various and qualified goods to customers. This analysis report, discussing different financial data based on the 10-K document of the four companies, wants to give readers a meaningful describe to these companies so investors can have clear opinions to help decide. Company Profiles Freds, Inc. Freds) is to meet the general merchandise and pharmacy needs of the small – to medium- sized towns it serves by offering a wider variety of quality merchandise and a more attractive price-to-value relationship than either drug stores or smaller variety/dollar stores and a shopper-friendly format which is more convenient than larger sized dis count merchandise stores. The company’s sales of p harmaceuticals have a percentage of 33. 5% in 2010, 34. 1% in 2011, and 34. 9% in 2012, comparing to the total sales. And its major sales of others include households good and f ood products, etc. showing that the company tries its best to execute its business strategy. Big Lots, Inc. is a Fortune 500 retail corporation. The company is based in Columbus, Ohio, USA and currently operates over 1,400 stores in 47 states. Its department stores focus mainly on selling closeout and overstock merchandise. There are some items in the stores, such as foodstuffs, that are replenished on a continual basis. What’s more, Big Lots also operates a wholesale division, which provides merchandise in bulk for resale from a variety of categories.Financial StatementsBig Lots uses an existing building, such as a grocery or department store that had either moved or ceased operations. Dollar Tree, Inc. began its operations in 1953 and was incorporated in Virginia. The company is an American chain of discount variety stores that se lls every item for $1. 00 or less. The company targets low to lower-middle income consumers and sells everyday products from food and personal ca re products to non-essentials. It sells its product in three business segments:1) Consumable merchandise, which accounted for 48. % of its sales in 2011, 2) Variety merchandise, which accounted for 46. 9% of 2011 sales, and 3)seasonal goods, explained 5% of 2011 sales. Belk, Inc. , together with its subsidiaries, is the largest privately owned mainline department store business in the United States, with 303 stores in 16 states, as of the fiscal year ended January 28, 2012. Generated revenues of $3. 7 billion for the fiscal year 2012, and together with its predecessors, have been successfully operating department stores since 1888. Belk Stores Services, Inc. , a subsidiary of Belk, Inc. rovides a wide range of services t o the Belk division offices and stores, such as merchandising, merchandise planning and allocation, advertising and sales promotion, information systems, human resources, public relations, accounting, real estate and store planning, credit, legal, tax, distribution and purchasing. Accounting Policies (see Exhibit 1) All of the four companies are United State location so that part of their accounting policies are the same, but because the area location and business strategy, they have some different accounting policies.The four companies do not amortized goodwill and tested them for impairment annually, using an income approach and a market approach in determining fair value for purposes of goodwill impairment tests. All four of them report income taxes in accordance with FASB ASC 740, the asset and liability method is used for computing future income tax consequences of events . The major differences exist in revenue recognition, merchandise inventories and Stock-based compensation.Based on their requirements, Freds records its sales when the merchandise is shipped from the Company’s warehouse; Dollar tree records sales revenue at the time a sale is made to its customer ; Big Lots’ sales Revenue is recognized when the customer ma kes the final payment and takes possession of the merchandise and sales of Belk is recorded at the time of delivery. Freds values inventories at the lower of cost or market using the retail first -in, first-out method for goods in stores and the cost first -in, first-out method for goods in our distribution centers. And the rest of hree companies values inventories at the lower of cost or market using the average cost retail inventory method. Under the average cost retail inventory method, inventory is segregated into departments of merchandise having similar characteristics at its current retail selling value. Profitability, Liquidity/Solvency (see Exhibit 2) If we analyze the current ratio and quick ratio they are relatively small. So paying the short term debts might be a problem for the company as well as the liquidity is getting decreased from year 2010 – 2012 as 1. 43 to 1. 23 to 0. 88.So it might be difficult for the company to stay with the current obligations. If we analyze the debt -equity ratio seems to be in high end for the Belk, but it is gradually decreasing 1. 36, 1. 06 to 1. 03. This seems to be a good sign for the company. But still the ratio is high and need quite bit of work to get it down to an acceptable value. Freds’ ROE keeps a increase from 5. 99% in 2010, to 7. 17% in 2011 then to 7. 89% in 2012 because its profit margin increasing from 1. 32% to 1. 61% and 1. 78%, respectively in 2011 and 2012, in the same time, its assets turnover keeps a steadily level from 3. 20 to 3. 06, just a slightly decrease.Additionally, the gross margin just has a higher change from 27. 92% in 2010, to 28. 66% in 2012 than profit margin. The inventory turnover has a decrease from 4. 33 to 4. 15 respectively in 2010 and 2012, due to the cost of goods sold increasing slower than inventory. What’s more, the current ratio and quick ratio keeps falling down, and debt/equity ratio grows up during the 3 years, showing that the debt increases f aster than equity. Big Lot’s ROE continues to grow from 20. 01% in 2010 to 25. 15% in 2012. However, it s profit margin and gross margin have been going downwards since 2010, dropping to 3. 98% and 39. 9% respectively in 2012. What’s more, its current ratio and quick ratio have also decreased, the former one has slacked from 2. 069 in 2010 to 1. 721 in 2012, a nd the later one has slummed from 0. 72 to 0. 31, which indicate that the company’s fund are more tighten up in recent years. Through further study, we found that the D-E ratio is increasing from 1. 208 in 2010 to 1. 704 in 2012, which presented the company’s new financing strategy from borrowing, other than getting capital from the shareholders. The ROE of Dollar Tree increased rapidly from 22. 43% in 2010 to 27. 23% in 2011 and to 36. 32% in 2012. On examining the three omponents of ROE, the profit margin was 6. 3% in 2010 but in 2012 it increased at 7. 36%. In addition, its assets turnover mainta ins a steady growth. It was 2. 28 in 2010, 2. 47 in 2011 and 2. 85 in 2012. Over the three years, the debt -equity ratio also grows steadily. Besides, the current ratio and quick ratio of Dollar Tree in the past three years obviously declined. That mostly resulted from the increasing debt and surging sales . Return on Equity almost doubled from 2010 to 2011 as 6. 31% to 11. 33% and has a steady growth from 2011 to 2012 as 15. 30%. This implies Net Income increased and it is proportional to good increase in profit margins as from 2% to 3. 63% almost doubled from 2010 to 2011 and 4. 95% in 2012 which is a steady growth. When we compare the Total asset turnover in last 3 years seems to be decreasing, though it is 13. 1 in 2010 decreased significantly form 2011 and 2012 as 1. 14 and 1. 50 respectively. This might be due to competition from other department and specialty stores and other retailers, including luxury goods retailers, mail o rder retailers and offprice and discount stores. Opportunities/Threats Opportunities: from the above, we get the idea that the variety store industry has a good time during the several years.These four companies are keeping increase in profit and they have lower financial distress so that they could borrow more money from banks and investors, which gives them more chances to execute expansion strategy: more available cash from borrowing, better financial statement which can give more confidence to in vestors and higher return to support the future development. Threats: we should notice that most of the four companies have a higher gross margin increasing than profit margin, and a continuous lower inventory turnover.They show that these companies’ structures include threaten in the future. What’s more, the high debt means that the banks and investors tighten polices and requirements to the companies so their business and expansion will be influenced by investors. Meanwhile, the raising interest rat e of debt gives hig her financial distress to the companies. Overall Assessment Retail industry is a highly competitive and dynamic business to work with. So it needs to be change whenever it needs to be. Here we can see that when one company doing well other companies are struggling to stay in the race.If we analyze the overall challenges retail business facing is like high Employee turnovers, also Auditing issues as they regularly engaged in competition with one another, and this competition can creat e price wars, forcing a need to keep tight control over inventory, as the nation prospers and people have more money to spend, the retail industry generally flourishes. As for the companies we can see that Fred’s, Dollar tree and Belk is seems to be doing well in this difficult situations, but the Big Lotus is losing some ground as profit margins getting lower as well as their funds getting tightens up.However when we see the COGS each company has a problem as COGS selling slower than the invento ry, this might be hurting all four companies as if their items old they have to write off them and which might eventually losing money. Exhibit 1: Significant Accounting Policies Freds Revenue recognition Merchandise inventories Goodwill Stock-based compensation Income taxes Dollar tree Big Lots Belk Sales are recorded when the merchandise is shipped from the Company’s warehouse sales revenue at the time a sale is made to its customer Revenue is recognized when the customer makes the final payment and takes possession of the merchandise.Sales from retail operations are recorded at the time of delivery. Valued at the lower of cost or market using the retail first-in, first-out method for goods in our stores and the cost first-in, firstout method for goods in our distribution centers. Stated at the lower of cost or market, determined on a weighted-average cost basis. Under the retail inventory method, the valuation of inventories at cost and the resulting gross margins are comp uted by applying a calculated cost-to-retail ratio to the retail value of inventories. Valued at the lower of cost or market using the average cost retail inventory method. Under the average ost retail inventory method, inventory is segregated into departments of merchandise having similar characteristics at its current retail selling value. Valued using the lower of cost or market value, determined by the retail inventory method. Under the retail inventory method (â€Å"RIM†), the valuation of inventories at cost and the resulting gross margins Goodwill is not amortized and tested for impairmen t annually. Use an income approach and a market approach in determining fair value for purposes of goodwill impairment tests. Goodwill is not amortized and tested for impairment annually. Use an income approach and a market pproach in determining fair value for purposes of goodwill impairment tests. Goodwill is not amortized and tested for impairment annually. Use an income approach a nd a market approach in determining fair value for purposes of goodwill impairment tests. Goodwill is not amortized and tested for impairment annually. Use an income approach and a market approach in determining fair value for purposes of goodwill impairment tests. Uses the fair value recognition provisions of FASB ASC 718, account for stock based compensation by using the grant date fair value of share awards and the estimated number of shares that will ultimately be ssued in conjunction with each award. Recognizes all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, in the financial statements based on their fair values. Value and expense stock options with graded vesting as a single award with an average estimated life over the entire term of the award. Uses the fair value recognition provisions of FASB ASC 718, account for stock based compensation by using the grant date fair value of share awards and the estimated number of shares that will ultimat ely be issued in conjunction with each award. reports income taxes in accordance with FASB ASC 740,the asset and liability ethod is used for computing future income tax consequences of events reports income taxes in accordance with FASB ASC 740,the asset and liability method is used for computing future income tax consequences of events reports income taxes in accordance with FASB ASC 740,the asset and liability method is used for computing future income tax consequences of events reports income taxes in accordance with FASB ASC 740,the asset and liability method is used for computing future income tax consequences of events Exhibit 2: Industry Ratio Summary 2012 Freds, Inc. 2011 Profitability Return on equity 7. 89% 7. 17% 5. 99% 25. 15% 23. 50% 20. 01% 6. 32% 27. 23% 22. 43% 15. 30% 11. 33% 6. 31% Profit margin 1. 78% 1. 61% 1. 32% 3. 98% 4. 49% 4. 23% 7. 36% 6. 75% 6. 13% 4. 95% 3. 63% 2. 00% Gross margin 28. 66% 28. 61% 27. 92% 39. 79% 40. 63% 40. 61% 35. 87% 35. 49% 35. 49% 0. 33% 0. 33% 0. 32% Total asset turnover 3. 06 3. 16 3. 20 3. 169 3. 057 2. 831 2. 85 2. 47 2. 28 1. 5 1. 41 13. 1 A/R turnover 62. 61 64. 58 61. 93 42. 45 41. 39 40. 11 76. 42 78. 53 72. 33 104. 9 131. 3 118. 7 Inventory turnover 4. 15 4. 33 4. 33 3. 8 3. 86 4. 02 4. 2 4. 2 4. 1 2. 9 2. 97 2. 83 Short term liquidity Current ratio 2. 47 2. 91 2. 81 1. 721 1. 941 2. 069 2. 08 2. 5 2. 74 2. 51 3. 34 3. 32 0. 33 . 52 0. 57 0. 31 0. 53 0. 72 0. 59 1 1. 31 0. 88 1. 23 1. 43 0. 49 0. 40 0. 43 1. 704 1. 283 1. 208 0. 73 0. 63 0. 6 1. 03 1. 06 1. 36 Quick ratio Long term solvency Debt/Equity ratio 2010 2012 Big Lots 2011 2010 2012 Dollar Tree 2011 2010 Belk. inc 2012 2011 2010 Profit Margin Return on Equity 40. 00% 35. 00% 30. 00% 25. 00% Freds, inc 20. 00% Big Lots 15. 00% Dollar Tree 10. 00% Belk. inc 5. 00% 0. 00% 2012 2011 8. 00% 7. 00% 6. 00% 5. 00% 4. 00% 3. 00% 2. 00% 1. 00% 0. 00% Freds, inc Big Lots Dollar Tree Belk. inc 2012 2010 2011 2010 Debt-to-Equity Ratio Inventory turnover 2. 00 5. 00 4. 00 Freds, inc 3. 00 Big Lots 1. 50 Freds, incBig Lots 1. 00 Dollar Tree Dollar Tree 2. 00 Belk. inc 1. 00 Belk. inc 0. 50 0. 00 0. 00 2012 2011 2010 2012 2011 2010 Exhibit 3: Income statement Fred,inc Statement of Income January 28, 2012 Net sales Cost of goods sold 1879059 1340519 100% 71. 34% Gross profit 538540 Depreciation and amortization 100% 71. 39% 1788136 1288899 100% 72. 08% 28. 66% 527018 28. 61% 499237 27. 92% 34190 1. 82% 29236 1. 59% 26387 1. 48% Selling, general and administrative expenses 453195 24. 12% 451064 24. 49% 434356 24. 29% Operating income Interest income Interest expense 51155 -156 553 2. 72% -0. 01% 0. 03% 46718 -234 424 2. 54% -0. 01% 0. 02% 38494 -189 82 2. 15% -0. 01% 0. 03% Income before income taxes 50758 2. 70% 46528 2. 53% 38201 2. 14% Provision for income taxes 17330 0. 92% 16941 0. 92% 14586 0. 82% 33428 1. 78% 29587 1. 61% 23615 1. 32% $ $ January 30, 2010 1841755 1314737 Net income $ January 29, 2011 $ $ $ Big Lots, Statement of Inc ome January 27, 2012 Net sales Cost of goods sold Gross profit Selling, general and administrative expenses Other Operating Expense Operating income $ January 28, 2011 5,202,269. 00 3,131,862. 00 2,070,407. 00 100. 00% 60. 20% 39. 80% 1,634,532. 00 January 29, 2012 4,952,244. 00 2,939,793. 00 2,012,451. 00 100. 00% 59. 36% 40. 64% 31. 42% 1,567,500. 0 90,280. 00 1. 74% 345,595. 00 6. 64% $ 4,726,772. 00 2,807,466. 00 1,919,306. 00 100. 00% 59. 39% 40. 61% 31. 65% 1,532,356. 00 32. 42% 78,606. 00 1. 59% 74,904. 00 1. 58% 357,345. 00 7. 22% 325,010. 00 6. 88% $ Earnings Before Interest And Taxes Interest Expense 345,422. 00 6. 64% 357,957. 00 7. 23% 325,185. 00 6. 88% 3,530. 00 0. 07% 2,573. 00 0. 05% 1,840. 00 0. 04% Income Before Tax 341,892. 00 6. 57% 355,384. 00 7. 18% 323,345. 00 6. 84% Income Tax Expense 134,657. 00 2. 59% 132,837. 00 2. 68% 121,975. 00 2. 58% Net income 207,064. 00 3. 98% 222,524. 00 4. 49% 200,369. 00 4. 24% Dollar Tree, Statement of Income January 28,2012Reve nues $ January 29,2011 Selling and admistrtive expense 64. 13% 35. 87% 3,794. 8 2,087. 60 1,596. 2 Gross margin 100% 4252. 2 2378. 3 cost of sales 6630. 5 $ 5882. 40 24. 07% 1,457. 60 100% January 30,2010 $ 5,231. 20 100% 64. 51% 35. 49% 3,374. 40 1,856. 80 64. 51% 35. 49% 24. 78% 1,344. 00 25. 69% Restructing charges Goodwill impairment — — — intangible and other asset impairment — — — operating expense $ 1,596. 2 24. 07% operating income interest expense interest income other income 782. 1 2. 9 –0. 3 11. 80% 0. 04% Income before income taxes Net income $ 1,457. 60 24. 78% 10. 71% 0. 10% 0. 00% 630 5. 6 –5. 5 779. 5 ncome taxes $ 11. 76% 291. 2 488. 3 4. 39% 7. 36% 1344 25. 69% 9. 80% 0. 10% -0. 10% 512. 8 5. 2 — 629. 9 $ $ 10. 71% 507. 6 9. 70% 232. 6 397. 3 3. 95% 6. 75% 187. 1 320. 5 3. 58% 6. 13% $ Belk, Statement of Income 2012 2011 Revenues 3,699,592 100% Cost of goods sold (Including occupancy, distribution and b uying $ expenses) 2,461,515 66% 938008 2012 3513275 100% 2353536 66% 25% 914078 3143 0. 08% 2302 —- Operating income Interest expense Interest income Loss on extinguishment of debt Gain on investments Income before income taxes Income tax expense Net income Gain on sale of property and equipment Asset impairment and exit costsPension curtailment charge $ 100% 2271925 68% 26% 886263 26% 6416 0. 18% 2011 0. 06% 0. 06% 0. 00% 6096 —– 0. 17% 0. 00% 39915 2719 1. 19% 0. 08% 300190 Selling, general and administrative expenses 3346252 8. 11% 245981 7. 00% 147441 4. 41% -50218 328 -922 —–250098 66950 183148 -1. 35% 0. 01% 0. 02% 0. 00% 0. 0676 1. 80% 0. 0495 -50679 569 ——–195871 68243 127628 -1. 44% 0. 02% 0. 00% 0. 00% 0. 0557 1. 94% 0. 0363 -51321 1027 —43 97190 30054 67136 -1. 53% 0. 03% 0. 00% 0. 00% 0. 029 0. 89% 2 $ $ $ $ Exhibit 4: Balance Sheet Freds,inc Balance Sheets January 28, 2012 January 29, 2011 January 30, 2010 J anuary 31, 2009 ASSETSCurrent assets: Cash and cash equivalents 27130 4. 29% 49182 8. 26% 54742 9. 58% Account Receivables Inventories 31883 331882 5. 04% 52. 51% 28146 313384 4. 73% 52. 62% 28893 294024 Other non-trade receivables 32090 5. 08% 26378 4. 43% Prepaid expenses and other current assets Total current assets 12321 435306 1. 95% 68. 88% 12723 429813 Property and equipment 161112 25. 49% 139931 Equipment under capital leases 97 0. 02% – Intangible assets, net 32191 5. 09% 22193 3. 73% 16035 2. 81% 9042 1. 66% Other noncurrent assets, net Total assets $ 3276 631982 0. 52% 100% $ 3591 595528 0. 60% 100% $ 4040 571441 0. 71% 100% $ 4442 544775 0. 82% 00% LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY Current liabilities: Accounts payable $ 106886 16. 91% $ 81002 13. 60% $ 87393 15. 29% $ 69955 12. 84% 658 0. 10% 201 0. 03% 718 0. 13% 243 0. 04% Current portion of indebtedness $ $ $ $ 35128 6. 45% 5. 06% 51. 45% 28857 301537 5. 30% 55. 35% 25193 4. 41% 15782 2. 90% 2. 14% 7 2. 17% 10945 413797 1. 92% 72. 41% 11912 393216 2. 19% 72. 18% 23. 50% 137569 24. 07% 138036 25. 34% – 39 Accrued expenses and other 44876 7. 10% 45371 7. 62% 39621 6. 93% 46659 8. 56% Deferred income taxes 23878 3. 78% 21142 3. 55% 19373 3. 39% 13061 2. 40% Total current liabilities 176298 27. 90% 147716 24. 80% 147105 5. 74% 137667 25. 27% Long-term portion of indebtedness 6640 1. 05% 3969 0. 67% 4179 0. 73% 4866 0. 89% Deferred income taxes 5633 0. 89% 2069 0. 35% 2009 0. 35% 1328 0. 24% Other noncurrent liabilities Total liabilities 19799 208370 3. 13% 32. 97% 17886 171640 3. 00% 28. 82% 17209 170502 3. 01% 29. 84% 13833 157694 2. 54% 28. 95% Common stock, Class A voting, no par value 105384 16. 68% 131367 22. 06% 131685 23. 04% 136877 25. 13% Common stock, Class B nonvoting, no par value Retained earnings 317364 50. 22% 291649 48. 97% 268350 46. 96% 249141 45. 73% Accumulated other comprehensive income 864 0. 14% 872 0. 15% 904 0. 16% 1063

Family Guy Essay

Family guy is a dysfunctional family that lives in Quahog, Rhode Island. The parents: Peter and Lois. The children: the oldest, Meg, the middle child, Chris and the baby is Stewie. Last but not least, the dog Brian. This TV show exhibits crude, adult humour. There are many different opinions on this show, many parents are ok with letting there children watch it and other refuse to do so because of the kind of humour some parents are on edge. So is family guy a negative influence on children? I believe it does have a negative influence on kids. To start the language they use, secondly the violence and actions towards each other and other and also it is a very sexist show. Firstly, the language used in the episodes of family guy is a very vulgar, crude, dirty and coarse. They swear a lot for example when Brian talks to Megs friend he says, quote â€Å"you know Connie, I think I have a theory about why you’re such a bitch†. If kids watch this on TV by fictional characters they can’t tell that its not the way to talk so they can repeat it at school or even say it to there parents and they do not want their children to talk that way. Also the language they use that discriminates different races, religions and gay people is negative on the children watching this show it gives them the impression that it’s ok, so if in school or at the shopping center they see a person of colour or even if they know a person of different religion they might talk to them and say things that are very inappropriate. For example where the children could get it from, episode two of season eight , the whole episode is about Jewish people, Louis finds out that she and her mother are Jewish and wants to peruse fallowing the Jewish culture but then peter says to her â€Å"Jews are gross Lois. It’s the only religion with the word ew in it. And there are also the comments that discriminate against people of colour and to do so they use Kermit the frog, the black man sitting in a boat (looks like he is escaping from being a slave) asks him â€Å"which way to get into town? † Kermit replies with a shot gun in his hand â€Å"back from where you came from†. This is just a tiny bit of what happens in the show. This show is very negative on children and they way they will interact with other in public. They also make fun of amputees, this can be very harmful to the way children interact with other kids that have this kind of problem example Joe is Peter Griffins neighbour and there is an episode that says no legs no service. Also, this show is a very sexist show, they always make reference to women being in the kitchen and that is all they’re good at for example, in one episode peter tells Louis that making sandwiches and babies are the only thing she is good for. This kind of behaviour shows to young children that women are no good for anything because that is how the men on this show treat the women. There’s also lots of coarse language towards women, for example Quagmire a neighbours always has many women over to his house for pleasurable reasons and you hear him call them names like whores, bitches, sluts and more this foul language towards women is another bad influence. Also peter has a teenage daughter Meg, everyone in the show is mean to her. This girl is treated very badly for example in an episode she had sexual intercourse with a guy and a little after that the guy Brandon, broke up with her, in another episode she has another boyfriend Luke and Louis, her mother stole him away from her. Peter never listens to her and Brian always picks on her. This gives the children watching a sense that’s it is ok to treat women like dogs because in the end they stay with you. Because no matter what kind of pranks or insults Peter does to Louis she never leaves him. Lastly, the amount of violence and the stupid actions that the characters do is a big part of family guy there’s always someone getting hurt or doing something illegal for example doing drugs. They have an episode dedicated to four-twenty; there are many episodes that show peter, Louis and Brian doing weed and other drugs like meth and cocaine. Also one of the episodes shows peter bringing Stewie his baby to a man that injects him with steroids because he was beat on by another baby but it was a girl and peter wanted Stewie to be a strong baby. This give the impression to children that taking drugs is ok because family guy does it. Nothing bad ever happens to these characters only funny events or they come out of it. It doesn’t show them the side effects or any of the real effects it has on them so kids think its only play and when its offered to them by others like friends they will take it and this can all lead to hospitalization and even death. But the children won’t see that on TV. Also there’s an episode that Stewie shoots Louis and pushes her over a boat into the water and dies but there’s a turn around and at the end of this episode Louis is really alive. If a child who doesn’t know any better sees this he will not understand that it is not real and that if you shoot someone they will most likely die. So if this child happens to find a gun in his father’s drawer and starts playing with and they’re playing cops and shoots the other child he will not think anything of it because in family guy the character came to life again, but in real life the child is dead. This will have a negative effect on the child and all he thought was that he was playing. The violence in this show is for an older audience, it will only have a negative effect on younger children. In conclusion, family guy is a show full of violence, drugs, sex, coarse language, racism and more. It should only be viewed by an older audience and not younger because it makes younger children who don’t know what is real and what’s not and what’s wrong and what’s not, react to different situations. So should TV shows like family guy be cancelled completely?