Killexams.com A4070-603 PDF are available at our store | braindumps | ROMULUS

Dont Worry - We give Pass4sure A4070-603 to occupied individuals to simply experience our Pass4sure A4070-603 practice questions - Exam Simulator to qualify in the test - braindumps - ROMULUS

Pass4sure A4070-603 dumps | Killexams.com A4070-603 real questions | http://tractaricurteadearges.ro/

A4070-603 Assessment: System z Sales V6

Study steer Prepared by Killexams.com IBM Dumps Experts


Killexams.com A4070-603 Dumps and real Questions

100% real Questions - Exam Pass Guarantee with high Marks - Just Memorize the Answers



A4070-603 exam Dumps Source : Assessment: System z Sales V6

Test Code : A4070-603
Test name : Assessment: System z Sales V6
Vendor name : IBM
: 86 real Questions

up to date and dependable brain dumps of A4070-603 are to exist had here.
this is a splendid A4070-603 exam preparation. i purchased it due to the fact that I could not locate any books or PDFs to test for the A4070-603 exam. It turned out to exist higher than any e-book on account that this practice examgives you constant questions, simply the course youll exist requested them on the exam. No useless information, no inappropriatequestions, that is the course it was for me and my buddies. I noticeably advocate killexams.com to sum my brothers and sisters who objective to occupy A4070-603 exam.


Are there properly sources for A4070-603 test guides?
I honestly thank you. I actually absorb cleared the A4070-603 exam with the assist of your mock test. It became very plenty helpful. I simply might recommend to those who are going to appear the A4070-603.


I requisite actual test questions of A4070-603 exam.
I overlooked a yoke of questions best considering the fact that I went smooth and didnt undergo in brain the reply given inside the unit, but while you recall that I got the relaxation right, I passed and solved forty three/50 questions. So my recommendation is to test sum that i am getting from killexams.com - this is everything I want to pass. I passed this exam due to killexams. This percent. Is 100% trustworthy, a huge portion of the questions had been the equal as what I were given on the A4070-603 exam.


wherein am i able to locate A4070-603 trendy and updated dumps questions?
Your client thoughts assist specialists absorb been constantly available via tarry chat to tackle the most trifling troubles. Their advices and clarifications absorb been big. this is to illuminate that I figured out the course to pass my A4070-603 security exam via my first utilising killexams.com Dumps direction. exam Simulator of A4070-603 by using killexams.com is a excellent too. i am amazingly cheerful to absorb killexams.com A4070-603 course, as this valuable material helped me achieve my objectives. an abominable lot liked.


Do you know the fastest manner to lucid A4070-603 examination? i absorb were given it.
Ive endorsed approximately your objects to numerous companions and companions, and theyre sum tremendously fulfilled. A trustworthy deal obliged killexams.com Questions & solutions for boosting up my career and assisting me objective nicely for my inordinate exams. Loads preferred over again. I even absorb to mention that i am your greatest fan! I requisite you to recognize that I cleared my A4070-603 exam these days, contemplating the A4070-603 route notes i purchased from you. I solved 86/90 five questions within the exam. you are the awesome training issuer.


Nice to hear that dumps of A4070-603 exam are available.
practise kit has been very beneficial throughout my exam training. I got a hundred% im not an incredible check taker and may pass blank at the exam, which isnt always a terrific aspect, specifically if this is A4070-603 exam, when time is your enemy. I had revel in of failing IT tests within the beyond and wanted to avoid it at sum charges, so i purchased this package deal. It has helped me pass with a hundred%. It had everything I had to recognise, and given that I had spent endless hours reading, cramming and making notes, I had no hassle passing this exam with the very best marks possible.


those A4070-603 questions and solutions proffer appropriate information present day subjects.
Im so satisfied i bought A4070-603 exam prep. The A4070-603 exam is arduous considering its very great, and the questions cover everything you notice in the blueprint. killexams.com absorb become my essential training source, and they cowl the entiretyperfectly, and there were lots of related questions about the exam.


I requisite actual test questions of A4070-603 exam.
I occupy the benefit of the Dumps supplied by using the killexams.com and the content wealthy with statistics and offers the powerful things, which I searched precisely for my training. It boosted my spirit and presents wanted self faith to occupy my A4070-603 exam. The material you provided is so nearby to the actual exam questions. As a non local English speaker I were given 120 minutes to finish the exam, but I simply took ninety five mins. majestic material. thanks.


Here they are! Exact study, Exact Result.
Im very masses elated along with your test papers particularly with the solved issues. Your test papers gave me courage to appear in the A4070-603 paper with self assurance. The conclude result is seventy seven.25%. Over again I complete heartedly thank the killexams.com employer. No other manner to pass the A4070-603 exam apart from killexams.com model papers. I in my view cleared several test with the wait on of killexams.com question economic organization. I hint it to each one. If you requisite to pass the A4070-603 exam then occupy killexams.com help.


Party is over! Time to study and pass the exam.
I didnt objective to utilize any brain dumps for my IT certification exams, but being under pressure of the hardship of A4070-603 exam, I ordered this bundle. I was impressed by the property of these materials, they are absolutely worth the money, and I believe that they could cost more, this is how majestic they are! I didnt absorb any anguish while taking my exam thanks to Killexams. I simply knew sum questions and answers! I got 97% with only a few days exam preparation, besides having some work experience, which was certainly helpful, too. So yes, killexams.com is really trustworthy and highly recommended.


IBM Assessment: System z Sales

Settling In With IBM i For The long Haul | killexams.com real Questions and Pass4sure dumps

February eleven, 2019 Timothy Prickett Morgan

If nothing else, the IBM i platform has exhibited staggering durability. One could even suppose legendary durability, if you requisite to occupy its history sum the course again to the system/three minicomputer from 1969. this is the precise starting aspect within the AS/four hundred family unit tree and here is when immense Blue, for extremely sound legal and technical and advertising reasons, determined to fork its products to tackle the wonderful wants of huge organizations (with the device/360 mainframe and its observe-ons) and minute and medium groups (beginning with the gadget/3 and affecting on throughout the system/34, device/32, equipment/38, and gadget/36 in the Seventies and early 1980s and passing through the AS/four hundred, AS/400e, iSeries, paraphernalia i, and then IBM i on power programs platforms.

It has been an extended rush indeed, and a lot of shoppers who absorb invested within the platform started course lower back then and there with the early models of RPG and moved their applications ahead and adjusted them as their corporations evolved and the depth and breadth of company computing changed, affecting on up through RPG II, RPG III, RPG IV, ILE RPG, and now RPG free kind. Being on this platform for even three a long time makes you a relative newcomer.

there is a longer rush forward, due to the fact they believe that the agencies that are nonetheless working IBM i systems are the proper diehards, the ones who haven't any objective of leaving the platform and that, at least in line with the survey data they now absorb been privy too, are aspiring to proceed investing in, or even extend their investments in, the IBM i platform.

to date, they aren't in a recession and heaven willing there are usually not one, so the priorities that IBM i shops absorb don't appear to exist the ones that they had a decade in the past during the height of the notable Recession. lower back then, as became the case in pretty much sum IT agencies, IBM i shops had been hunkering down and had been attempting to lop expenses in sum approaches feasible, together with deferring gadget improvements and migrations in addition to slicing returned on other initiatives. simplest 29 % of the 750 IBM i stores that participated in the 2019 IBM i market Survey, which HelpSystems did lower back in October 2018, absorb been concerned about cutting back IT spending. this is a remarkably low degree, and that i believe is indicative of how highly mighty the economic climate is – excepting some of the suits and begins they saw on the conclusion of 2018 and perquisite here in early 2019 that develop us fearful and could delivery placing pressure on issues. listed here are the top issues as culled from the survey:

dealing with the growth in records and in determining the analytics to chunk on that information ranked a bit bit larger on the 2019 IBM i market Survey than did reducing expenses, and i believe over the lengthy haul these concerns will develop into extra vital than modernizing applications and dealing with the IBM i capabilities shortages which are a perennial agonize. both of these concerns are being solved as fresh programmers and fresh paraphernalia to develop fresh interfaces to database purposes are getting more universal and as applied sciences corresponding to free kindly RPG, which appears more affection Java, Python, and personal home page, are being extra commonly deployed and, importantly, can besides exist picked up extra perquisite away by course of programmers experienced with these different languages.

Given the character of the consumer base, it looks unlikely to me that security and inordinate availability will now not proceed to exist basic concerns, despite the fact that the IBM i platform is among the many most cozy structures in the world (and never just because it is vague, but since it is exceptionally complicated to hack) and it has various high availability and catastrophe healing paraphernalia (from IBM, Syncsort, Maxava, and HelpSystems) attainable for people that requisite to double up their programs and give protection to their applications and information. The bar is regularly bigger than gauge backup and recovery for a lot of IBM i stores within the banking, coverage, manufacturing, and distribution industries that dominate the platform. These businesses can’t absorb safety breaches, and that they can’t absorb downtime.

there's a striking amount of stability in the IBM i client groundwork that they suppose, at this point, is reflective in the equipoise of the IBM i platform and immense Blue’s own perception that it needs a match IBM i platform to absorb an ordinary suit power programs enterprise. sum of us comprehend that the energy programs hardware company has just turned in 5 quarters of profits enlarge – whatever they mentioned lately in establishing their personal earnings mannequin for the power methods enterprise – however what they didn't exist aware of, and what bethink to know, is that in the second and third quarters of 2018, the IBM i portion of the traffic grew vastly sooner than the typical power methods enterprise, and the only purpose that this didn't befall in the ultimate quarter of 2018 is that income of IBM i machinery in this autumn 2017 became rather stout and represented a really arduous evaluate. The element is, the IBM i traffic has been raising the energy methods class typical. (These guidelines concerning the IBM i enterprise Come compliments of Steve Sibley, vp and providing supervisor of Cognitive programs at IBM.)

IBM’s personal monetary equipoise of the vitality platform – which has been bolstered through a flood into Linux clusters for analytics and inordinate performance computing simulation and modeling in addition to via the adoption of the HANA in-memory database by using SAP shoppers on large iron machines together with Power8 and now Power9 methods – helps IBM i purchasers believe greater confident in investing in the existing IBM i platform. The fresh proof from a yoke of diverse surveys, now not just the one done by HelpSystems each year, means that corporations are via and immense both continuing to develop investments within the platform or even in some situations are planning to enlarge their spending on the IBM i platform in 2019.

As you can see, the pattern of funding plans for the IBM i platform, as shown in the chart above, has not modified very much in any respect during the past four years. it's a remarkably trustworthy pattern with but a microscopic wiggling here and there that may no longer even exist statistically large. simply beneath a quarter of IBM i retail outlets absorb suggested in the past four years that they objective to raise their investment within the platform in each and every yr, and just below half suppose that they're retaining steady. This does not imply that the selfsame agencies, yr after year, are investing extra and different corporations are staying pat, year after year. it is course more likely that every handful of years – more affection four or five – purchasers upgrade their techniques and expand their capacity, and that they then sit down tight. The interrogate yourself is that the smash up isn’t displaying some distance fewer organizations investing and far extra sitting tight. That greater than a tenth of the shops don’t exist aware of what their objective is as every prior year involves a minute is a microscopic bit stressful, however it is sincere and indicates that a significant portion of outlets produce other priorities other than hardware and operating system enhancements. they absorb observed this before and they can suppose it once more: They feel that the americans who reply to surveys and skim weekly publications concentrated on the IBM i platform are essentially the most energetic retail outlets – the ones more more likely to reside exceedingly current on hardware and application. So the tempo of adoption for brand fresh applied sciences, and the rate of funding, may noiseless exist larger than in the specific base, much of which does not trade lots at all.

So if they had to alter this facts to occupy on the entire base, there might possibly exist far fewer websites which are investing extra funds, far more businesses which are sitting tight, and perhaps fewer sites which are taking into consideration relocating off the IBM i platform. I feel the distribution of information is probably whatever affection 10 p.c of retailers absorb no thought what they are doing investment smart with IBM this yr, 5 p.c are thinking about affecting some or sum of their applications to one other platform, possibly 10 % are investing extra this year, and the final seventy five % are sitting tight. this is just a bet, of course. as far as they will tell, the cost of attrition – what number of websites they basically lose each and every year – just a tad over 1 %. So the expense of stream of functions off the platform, or incidences of unplugging IBM i databases and functions, may additionally now not exist anywhere near as high within the accustomed groundwork because the records above suggests. what is alarming, perhaps, is that the fee of relocating some or sum applications off the platform is balanced in opposition t people that suppose they are going to enhance investments. perhaps these are hopeful survey takers, and those that believe it's convenient to circulate locate it isn't and those that believe they're going to determine the cash to develop investments will now not.

What they attain know is that if the fee of utility attrition become anyplace nearby as inordinate as these surveys imply, then the IBM i traffic would no longer exist turning out to be, but shrinking. And they realize it is not shrinking, so they admiration there is a disconnect between planning and reality, both on the upside and the downside.

in case you drill down into the information for the 2019 IBM i market Survey, there absorb been 13 % of shops that referred to they might exist relocating some functions to a fresh platform, and yet another 9 p.c that noted they were going to movement sum of their purposes off IBM i. (This quantity is consistent with the fresh ALL400s survey executed by means of John Rockwell.)

Anyway, first rate luck with that.

Porting applications from one platform to a further, of purchasing a brand fresh suite on that fresh platform, is an awfully difficult assignment. It is not affection attempting to change a weary while driving down the highway, as is a gauge metaphor, however fairly affection making an attempt to occupy the weary off one motor vehicle relocating down the motorway and installation it on another automobile driving beside it in the adjoining lane with out crashing either automobile or smashing into any one else on the road. Optimism abounds, but when push comes to shove, only a few companies are trying this kindly of maneuver, and after they do, it is constantly as a result of there is a company mandate, greater times than no longer caused by means of a merger or acquisition, that pits every other platform towards IBM i operating on vitality programs. corporations that suppose they're making such a circulation off IBM i are sanguine for their own personal causes, most likely, however they are not necessarily practical about how long it may take, what disruption it'll can charge, and what most appropriate advantage, if any, will exist realized.

in case you attain the mathematics on the chart above, eight-tenths of the bottom has no thought how lengthy a flood will take, another 1.7 percent thinks it will occupy more than 5 years, and 3 % suppose it is going to occupy between two years and 5 years. simplest 3.4 percent of the complete groundwork suppose they could attain it in under two years. They believe sum of these numbers are optimistic, and the corporations who may readily fade away OS/four hundred and IBM i already did a long time in the past and people that are continue to exist absorb a harder time, not a less complicated time, relocating. If this absorb been no longer actual, the IBM i groundwork can exist a hell of a entire lot smaller than the 120,000 customers they admiration are available, in line with what large Blue has advised us in the past. this is the variation between concern or power or subculture and the reality of making an attempt to stream a traffic off one platform and onto one other. These moves are at sum times an abominable lot tougher than they appear on the entrance conclusion, and they suspect most of the merits besides don’t materialize for people that attain soar structures.

on the medium attrition rate advised by means of this survey facts – 9 percent circulation off the platform in somewhere between three hundred and sixty five days and more than five years, with most groups not being capable of note more than five years into the future it is a super trick – the installed groundwork would decrease dramatically. it's tough to affirm how some distance as a result of the wide orbit of timeframes in the survey. If it was 9 p.c of the bottom within two years – convene it 4.5 percent of the bottom per yr – then inside a decade the basic groundwork would shrink from a hundred and twenty,000 IBM i websites worldwide sum the course down to about 72,000. this might histrionic certainly. but at a 1 percent attrition charge per 12 months, the bottom remains at 107,500 fascinating valued clientele (no longer websites and not installed machines, both of which might exist bigger) via 2029. They suppose there's every random that the attrition cost will in fact leisurely and drop underneath 1 p.c as IBM demonstrates dedication to the vitality methods platform and its IBM i operating gadget. There are sum the time some fresh consumers being brought in fresh markets, to exist certain, but the bleed charge (even though it is small) is noiseless probably an order of magnitude greater than the feed price.

after they attain admiration about making the movement, IBM i stores recognize exactly the status they want to go, and this reply has been progressively changing through the years: Linux as an alternative to IBM i is on the upward push and windows Server as an option is on the wane. in the latest survey, 52 p.c of the organizations that noted they absorb been affecting sum or some of their functions to a different platform stated they were picking windows Server, while 34 percent selected Linux. This displays the relative popularity of windows Server and Linux in the datacenters of the area at tremendous, and may exist tipped simply a bit extra heavily in opposition t Linux compared to the ease of the realm. curiously, 10 percent of those polled who observed they absorb been affecting absorb been taking a sight at AIX systems, and one more 4 p.c had been going upscale to device z mainframes – as not going as this may besides appear. structures are inclined to roll downhill; they don't always brave gravity affection that.

The issue about such surveys is that they exhibit intent, not action. They frequently intend to attain much more than they actually can accomplish, and relocating systems after spending a long time of pile up expertise isn't usually a extremely smart circulation unless the platform is in precise problem – just affection the Itanium techniques from Hewlett Packard traffic working OpenVMS or HP-UX or the HP 3000s working MPE or the Sparc programs from Oracle running Solaris. These had been once top notch structures with huge installed bases and large income streams, but now, IBM is the final of these Unix and proprietary structures with its power programs line. And it is with the aid of far the largest and for bound the only one showing any boom.

related experiences

The IBM i groundwork Did certainly movement On Up

The IBM i groundwork Is ready to stream On Up

investment And Integration symptoms For IBM i

protection noiseless Dominates IBM i dialogue, HelpSystems’ 2018 Survey exhibits

The IBM i groundwork not As Jumpy because it Has Been

The Feeds And Speeds Of The IBM i Base

IBM i Priorities For 2017: Pivot To protection

IBM i traits, concerns, And Observations

IBM i Survey gets greater As Numbers develop

where attain these IBM i Machines Work?

discovering IBM i: A online game Of 40 Questions

it is time to inform Us What you are up to

IBM i market Survey: The value Of Being Earnest

What’s Up within the IBM i market?

IBM i market Survey Fills within the Blanks


contemporary analysis: master data management (MDM) Market forecast to 2025 | killexams.com real Questions and Pass4sure dumps

Key players|SAP, Oracle, IBM, Informatica, Stibo techniques, TIBCO software, Riversand technologies, Orchestra Networks, EnterWorks, Magnitude, Talend, SAS Institute

The global grasp statistics management (MDM) Market from the standpoint of sum its current traits which are prompting it's fundamental to grasp with a view to obtain essentially the most helpful solution for company thoughts. These developments are of differing kinds together with geographical, socioeconomic, financial, consumer, political, cultural.

Their ordinary impact on customer or buyer preferences can absorb a massive contribution in how this market will enhance itself in the following years to come. master facts administration (MDM) model enlarge because the quantity and diversity of organizational units, the duty of employees, and the expansion of computing applications.

MDM can exist more helpful to immense or advanced corporations than small, medium, or primary agencies. grasp statistics administration can facilitate the operation of a variety of gadget architectures, systems and functions.

Request a sample document @ www.qurateresearch.com/report/samp…QBI-99S-ICT-10483

important Key avid gamers in this file are: SAP, Oracle, IBM, Informatica, Stibo methods, TIBCO utility, Riversand applied sciences, Orchestra Networks, EnterWorks, Magnitude, Talend, SAS Institute, Microsoft, KPMG, Teradata company, software AG, Agility Multichannel, VisionWare, SupplyOn AG, Sunway World, Yonyou

The conclusive direct for the distribution of this tips is to develop an in depth descriptive evaluation of how these developments can besides doubtlessly create impact over the future of the world master records administration (MDM) Market over the forecast length.

The master records administration (MDM) Market file has been recently delivered to the Qurate’s database on the web site, is a complete and descriptive analysis of the worldwide market. It explains the market dynamics, scope of growth, and other elements of the market that absorb been impacting the advertising sum through its growth in terms of gaining charge and measurement.

This research is a quantitative in addition to a qualitative examine aimed toward offering lucid view of sum viable scenarios and structure in the global master information administration (MDM) Market.

Enquiry @ www.qurateresearch.com/file/enqu…QBI-99S-ICT-10483

“international grasp records management (MDM) Market” is analysis file of finished nature which entails assistance in relation with primary regional markets, current eventualities. This includes key regional areas similar to North the usa, Europe, Asia-Pacific,.

and the most desirable countries similar to united states, Germany, united kingdom, Japan, South Korea and China.

The global master facts administration (MDM) Market is additionally purchasable to the readers as a wholistic overview of the competitive panorama. It offers a comparative evaluation of the key gamers in addition to regional segments, enabling readers to better more advantageous figuring out of areas during which they can status their standing supplies and gauging the significance of a specific area to exist able to carry their standing in the international Market.

Get this top class record @www.qurateresearch.com/file/disc…QBI-99S-ICT-10483

desk of content:

world “world master statistics administration (MDM) Market” research file 2019-2025

Chapter 1: traffic Overview

Chapter 2: master statistics administration (MDM) alien and China Market evaluation

Chapter 3: atmosphere evaluation of master information administration (MDM)

Chapter 4: evaluation of earnings through Classifications

Chapter 5: analysis of salary via areas and applications

Chapter 6: evaluation of master information management (MDM) revenue Market fame.

Chapter 7: evaluation of master facts administration (MDM) traffic Key manufacturers

Chapter 8: income rate and shameful Margin analysis

Chapter 9: advertising dealer or Distributor evaluation of master information administration (MDM) Market

Chapter 10: construction style of grasp facts administration (MDM) trade 2019-2025

Chapter eleven: traffic Chain Suppliers of grasp statistics administration (MDM) with Contact tips

Chapter 12: fresh mission funding Feasibility evaluation of master statistics management (MDM)

Chapter 13: Conclusion of the world master facts management (MDM) Market research file

This e mail ply is being protected from spambots. You want JavaScript enabled to view it.


IBM taps Samsung for Chip Manufacturing | killexams.com real Questions and Pass4sure dumps

IBM (NYSE: IBM) became one of the vital few organizations noiseless developing the manufacturing strategies to construct reducing-area chips. Then, again in 2015, IBM achieved the sale of its chip manufacturing belongings to face-on my own chip brand GLOBALFOUNDRIES. 

lamentably for IBM's chip efforts -- the traffic noiseless develops power processors for servers and Z-sequence chips for its mainframes -- GLOBALFOUNDRIES ceased pile of chopping-facet chip manufacturing expertise. This left IBM in requisite of a fresh associate to fabricate its chip designs.

inner an IBM desktop room.

more

picture supply: IBM.

a microscopic while again, Nikkei Asian assessment said that this fresh accomplice would be Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing company (NYSE: TSM). while GLOBALFOUNDRIES did not carry its own seven-nanometer manufacturing technology, marketed as 7LP, into mass construction, TSMC's personal seven-nanometer know-how is now in mass production. (if you're reading this on one of the crucial latest iPhones or iPads, you're the usage of a appliance powered by a TSMC seven-nanometer chip.)

relatively sufficient, that report was wrong, and it looks IBM is partnering with TSMC's best actual competitor in leading-edge semiconductor common sense expertise: Samsung (NASDAQOTH: SSNLF). 

what's the deal?

On Dec. 20, IBM mentioned that it "announced an agreement with Samsung to fabricate 7-nanometer (nm) microprocessors for IBM power systems, IBM Z and LinuxONE, high-efficiency computing (HPC) programs, and cloud choices."

moreover, the clicking unlock claimed that "[today's] announcement besides expands and extends the 15-year strategic fashion know-how R&D partnership between both agencies, which, as a portion of IBM's research Alliance, contains many trade firsts such as the first NanoSheet machine innovation for sub 5nm, the construction of the trade's first 7nm sight at various chip and the primary excessive-ok metallic Gate foundry manufacturing."

What does this imply for IBM and Samsung?

From IBM's viewpoint, the enterprise now has a potential chip manufacturing associate to steer the chips that vigour its techniques. remaining quarter, IBM's programs enterprise -- which the enterprise says "includes programs hardware and working systems utility -- generated $1.7 billion in income, starting to exist 1% 12 months-over-year. That represented simply 9% of the company's earnings within the quarter. 

on the other hand, that angle is gigantic ample that IBM is going to wish to proceed to aid it, and having a official manufacturing companion to build the microprocessors on the heart of these methods is vital to retaining that enterprise alive.

as far as Samsung is concerned, here's incremental traffic for its compress chip manufacturing arm. youngsters, here's by course of no capability a online game changer for Samsung. IBM's total methods enterprise turned into $1.7 billion closing quarter and just over $5.4 billion sum over the first three quarters of 2018. If they anticipate that rush charge for the entire thing of 2018, it translates into about $7.2 billion in universal gadget income.

Samsung goes to exist producing earnings handiest for the manufacture of the leading processors in these systems. not only attain these programs encompass many different add-ons (chassis, vigour supplies, DRAM, storage, motherboards, and so forth), however IBM is, naturally, marking up the raw substances prices of those methods to generate earnings. 

Story continues

This deal actually isn't going to add one billion greenbacks or greater to Samsung's coffers and is not finally going to exist a online game changer for Samsung and even Samsung's semiconductor company (which is primarily dominated by revenue of DRAM and NAND memories), nevertheless it should noiseless power incremental profits and shameful earnings. 

extra From The Motley fool

Ashraf Eassa has no status in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley fool has a disclosure policy.


Unquestionably it is arduous assignment to pick dependable certification questions/answers assets regarding review, reputation and validity since individuals net sham because of picking incorrectly benefit. Killexams.com ensure to serve its customers best to its assets concerning exam dumps update and validity. The vast majority of other's sham report dissension customers Come to us for the brain dumps and pass their exams joyfully and effortlessly. They never trade off on their review, reputation and property on the grounds that killexams review, killexams reputation and killexams customer certainty is imperative to us. Uniquely they deal with killexams.com review, killexams.com reputation, killexams.com sham report objection, killexams.com trust, killexams.com validity, killexams.com report and killexams.com scam. On the off random that you note any False report posted by their rivals with the name killexams sham report grievance web, killexams.com sham report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com protest or something affection this, simply bethink there are constantly abominable individuals harming reputation of trustworthy administrations because of their advantages. There are a huge number of fulfilled clients that pass their exams utilizing killexams.com brain dumps, killexams PDF questions, killexams hone questions, killexams exam simulator. Visit Killexams.com, their specimen questions and test brain dumps, their exam simulator and you will realize that killexams.com is the best brain dumps site.

Back to Braindumps Menu


000-376 VCE | 010-151 braindumps | 1Z0-870 test prep | 000-M36 questions answers | C2150-810 sample test | LOT-915 bootcamp | 132-s-712-2 practice Test | 650-667 real questions | HP0-J62 free pdf download | 050-728 cram | 920-157 practice exam | HP0-D20 dump | 000-834 dumps questions | JN0-341 dumps | 250-223 cheat sheets | 2B0-012 braindumps | 000-970 practice test | HP5-H03D real questions | HP0-P10 test questions | PMP-Bundle free pdf |


A4070-603 Dumps and practice software with real Question
We absorb Tested and Approved A4070-603 Exams admiration about aides and brain dumps. killexams.com gives the correct and latest real questions with braindumps which basically contain sum data that you absorb to pass the A4070-603 exam. With the steer of their A4070-603 exam materials, you dont requisite to misuse your random on scrutinizing reference books however just requisite to consume 10-20 hours to retain their A4070-603 real questions and answers.

killexams.com pleased with recognition of serving to people pass the A4070-603 exam of their first attempt. Their exam dumps performance remain astonishing, thanks to their cheerful customers currently ready to boost their career within the quick lane. killexams.com is the primary alternative amongst IT specialists, above sum those try to climb up the hierarchy levels quicker of their respective organization. killexams.com Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under; WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for sum exams on web site PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders additional than $69 DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders additional than $99 SEPSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for sum Orders

killexams.com helps millions of candidates pass the exams and net their certifications. They absorb thousands of successful reviews. Their dumps are reliable, affordable, updated and of really best property to overcome the difficulties of any IT certifications. killexams.com exam dumps are latest updated in highly outclass manner on regular basis and material is released periodically. Latest killexams.com dumps are available in testing centers with whom they are maintaining their relationship to net latest material.

The killexams.com exam questions for A4070-603 Assessment: System z Sales V6 exam is mainly based on two accessible formats, PDF and practice questions. PDF file carries sum the exam questions, answers which makes your preparation easier. While the practice questions are the complimentary feature in the exam product. Which helps to self-assess your progress. The evaluation appliance besides questions your weak areas, where you requisite to establish more efforts so that you can better sum your concerns.

killexams.com recommend you to must try its free demo, you will notice the intuitive UI and besides you will find it very light to customize the preparation mode. But develop confident that, the real A4070-603 product has more features than the visitation version. If, you are contented with its demo then you can purchase the actual A4070-603 exam product. Avail 3 months Free updates upon purchase of A4070-603 Assessment: System z Sales V6 Exam questions. killexams.com offers you three months free update upon acquisition of A4070-603 Assessment: System z Sales V6 exam questions. Their expert team is always available at back conclude who updates the content as and when required.

killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for sum exams on website
PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $99
DECSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for sum Orders


A4070-603 Practice Test | A4070-603 examcollection | A4070-603 VCE | A4070-603 study guide | A4070-603 practice exam | A4070-603 cram


Killexams PW0-205 test prep | Killexams 1D0-541 study guide | Killexams 000-503 braindumps | Killexams 3000-3 exam prep | Killexams CA0-001 cram | Killexams GD0-110 practice test | Killexams C9010-262 practice Test | Killexams 1Z0-898 dumps | Killexams 250-410 test prep | Killexams 7750X free pdf | Killexams MB6-896 dumps questions | Killexams 000-594 real questions | Killexams A2180-607 braindumps | Killexams 70-630 free pdf | Killexams 000-743 mock exam | Killexams 117-303 bootcamp | Killexams 500-710 VCE | Killexams QQ0-200 free pdf | Killexams HP2-H14 practice exam | Killexams HP0-M44 practice test |


killexams.com huge List of Exam Braindumps

View Complete list of Killexams.com Brain dumps


Killexams 117-101 real questions | Killexams A2010-590 braindumps | Killexams RCDD dumps questions | Killexams 650-302 study guide | Killexams 1Z0-335 cheat sheets | Killexams 133-S-713.4 pdf download | Killexams HH0-200 free pdf | Killexams VACC questions and answers | Killexams 00M-664 practice questions | Killexams 000-891 examcollection | Killexams CCB-400 dumps | Killexams CPM questions answers | Killexams 920-551 exam prep | Killexams HP0-831 test prep | Killexams 1Z0-034 VCE | Killexams M8010-246 brain dumps | Killexams HP0-J17 exam questions | Killexams 000-553 study guide | Killexams 000-968 exam prep | Killexams 200-155 bootcamp |


Assessment: System z Sales V6

Pass 4 confident A4070-603 dumps | Killexams.com A4070-603 real questions | http://tractaricurteadearges.ro/

Mondel "z International Reports 2018 Results | killexams.com real questions and Pass4sure dumps

DEERFIELD, Ill., Jan 30, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE via COMTEX) -- Full-Year Highlights

  • Net revenues increased 0.2% despite unfavorable currency and divestiture impacts; Organic Net Revenue [1] grew 2.4%, with balanced volume/mix and pricing
  • Gross profit grew $318 million (+3%); Adjusted shameful Profit [1] grew $352 million (+4%) on a constant currency basis
  • Operating income declined $150 million (-4%); Adjusted Operating Income [1] grew $257 million (+6%) on a constant currency basis
  • Diluted EPS was $2.28, up 23% driven primarily by an after-tax gain on the Keurig Dr Pepper transaction; Adjusted EPS [1] was $2.43, up 15% on a constant-currency basis, driven by operating gains, partake repurchases, equity income & tax favorability
  • Cash provided by operating activities was $3.9 billion; Free Cash flood [1] was $2.9 billion
  • Return of capital to shareholders was $3.4 billion
  • DEERFIELD, Ill., Jan. 30, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Mondel�"z International, Inc. MDLZ, +0.86% today reported its fourth quarter and full-year 2018 results.

    "Our fourth quarter and full-year 2018 results demonstrate the power of their brands, the strength of their global footprint and the potential of their strategic plan," said Dirk Van de Put, Chairman and CEO. "We delivered on their key pecuniary and strategic commitments for the year, including solid top-line and bottom-line growth and stout cash flood generation. In 2019, they will continue to progress against their fresh strategy, which includes fresh investments to drive organic revenue growth and operational excellence across the organization."

    Key Strategic Initiatives

  • Launched a fresh approach to marketing including more balanced investment across both global and iconic local brands to fully leverage the company's portfolio and category-leading positions
  • Developed a more locally-oriented commercial structure to drive greater consumer focus, better precipitate and reduce complexity
  • Introduced fresh incentive structure effectual in 2019 to drive better alignment with key pecuniary metrics to reward entrepreneurial deportment and property of results
  • Initiated expansion of research, progress and property capabilities to drive innovation, including a fresh technical heart in India and additional investment in a state-of-the-art facility in Poland
  • Deployed 'test, learn and scale' approach to innovation and launched SnackFutures, an innovation hub focused on the invention and reinvention of fresh brands, and venturing with entrepreneurs to seed fresh businesses in key strategic areas
  • Announced divestiture of non-core cheese traffic in the Middle East & Africa, increasing the company's focus on snacking
  • Committed to making sum packaging recyclable by 2025 to wait on deliver the company's long-term vision for zero-net consume packaging and expanded the Cocoa Life sustainability program in Brazil
  • Net Revenue

    $ in millions ReportedNet Revenues OrganicNet Revenue Growth Quarter 4 Q4 2018 % Chgvs PY Q4 2018 Vol/Mix Pricing Latin America $763 (15.2 )% 3.9 % (3.3 )pp 7.2 pp Asia, Middle East & Africa 1,429 (1.4 ) 4.0 2.9 1.1 Europe 2,752 (2.3 ) 2.3 3.4 (1.1 ) North America 1,829 1.6 0.8 (2.1 ) 2.9 Mondel�"z International $6,773 (2.8 )% 2.5 % 1.0 pp 1.5 pp Emerging Markets $2,441 (4.5 )% 6.5 % Developed Markets $4,332 (1.7 )% 0.2 % Full Year 2018 FY 2018 FY 2018 Latin America $3,202 (10.2 )% 3.6 % (2.6 )pp 6.2 pp Asia, Middle East & Africa 5,729 (0.2 ) 3.5 1.9 1.6 Europe 10,122 3.3 2.5 3.1 (0.6 ) North America 6,885 1.3 0.6 (0.5 ) 1.1 Mondel�"z International $25,938 0.2 % 2.4 % 1.1 pp 1.3 pp Emerging Markets $9,659 (0.5 )% 5.7 % Developed Markets $16,279 0.6 % 0.3 %

    Operating Income and Diluted EPS

    $ in millions Reported Adjusted Quarter 4 Q4 2018 vs PY(Rpt Fx) Q4 2018 vs PY(Rpt Fx) vs PY(Cst Fx) Gross Profit $2,549 (3.9)% $2,710 (0.3)% 5.4% Gross Profit Margin 37.6% (0.5)pp 40.0% 0.9pp Operating Income $870 4.8% $1,096 0.5% 7.2% Operating Income Margin 12.8% 0.9pp 16.2% 0.5pp Net Earnings [2] $823 18.4% $928 9.7% 17.7% Diluted EPS $0.56 21.7% $0.63 12.5% 21.4% Full Year 2018 FY 2018 FY 2018 Gross Profit $10,352 3.2% $10,401 2.2% 3.5% Gross Profit Margin 39.9% 1.2pp 40.1% 0.4pp Operating Income $3,312 (4.3)% $4,321 4.9% 6.2% Operating Income Margin 12.8% (0.6)pp 16.7% 0.6pp Net Earnings $3,381 19.6% $3,614 10.7% 11.8% Diluted EPS $2.28 23.2% $2.43 13.6% 15.0%

    Fourth Quarter Commentary

  • Net revenues declined 2.8 percent, driven by the impact of currency. Organic Net Revenue increased 2.5 percent driven by continued strength in emerging markets with a trustworthy equipoise of volume/mix and pricing.
  • Gross profit declined $104 million and margin decreased 50 basis points to 37.6 percent, driven primarily by higher restructuring costs. Adjusted shameful Profit increased $147 million at constant currency and margin increased 90 basis points to 40.0 percent, driven by higher pricing and productivity savings partially offset by higher raw material costs.
  • Operating income grew $40 million and margin increased 90 basis points to 12.8 percent, primarily due to the lapping of prior-year malware-related expenses and the benefit of an indirect tax matter. Adjusted Operating Income increased $79 million at constant currency and margin increased 50 basis points to 16.2 percent due to pricing and productivity savings partially offset by higher raw material costs and increased selling, universal and administrative expenses.
  • Diluted EPS was $0.56, up 22 percent driven primarily by Adjusted EPS growth.
  • Adjusted EPS was $0.63, up 21 percent on a constant-currency basis, driven primarily by increased equity income and operating gains.
  • Capital Return: The company repurchased approximately $400 million of its common stock and paid approximately $400 million in cash dividends.
  • Full Year Commentary

  • Net revenues increased 0.2 percent, despite the impact of currency and divestitures. Organic Net Revenue increased 2.4 percent.
  • Gross profit was up $318 million and margin increased 120 basis points to 39.9 percent. This change was driven primarily by conducive mark-to-market gains from currency and commodity hedging activities and lapping prior-year incremental malware costs. Adjusted shameful Profit dollars increased $352 million at constant currency and margin increased 40 basis points to 40.1 percent. This enlarge was driven primarily by higher pricing and productivity savings, partially offset by higher raw material costs.
  • Operating income decreased $150 million and margin decreased 60 basis points to 12.8 percent, driven primarily by the impact from pension participation changes in North America and lapping the prior-year gain on a divestiture and prior-year benefit of an indirect tax matter. These unfavorable items were partially offset by conducive change in mark-to-market gains from currency and commodity hedging activities, lower restructuring program costs and the lapping of prior-year malware-related expenses. Adjusted Operating Income increased $257 million at constant currency and margin increased 60 basis points to 16.7 percent due primarily to Adjusted shameful Margin expansion.
  • Diluted EPS was $2.28, up 23 percent driven primarily by an after-tax gain on the Keurig Dr Pepper transaction, conducive mark-to-market gains from currency and commodity hedging activities and lower restructuring program costs partially offset by the impact from pension participation changes.
  • Adjusted EPS was $2.43 and grew 15 percent on a constant-currency basis, driven primarily by operating gains, partake repurchases, increased equity income and tax favorability.
  • Cash provided by operating activities was $3.9 billion. Free Cash flood was $2.9 billion. Cash flood was primarily driven by working capital improvements and improved cash earnings.
  • Capital Return: The company returned $3.4 billion of capital to shareholders through $2 billion in partake repurchases and $1.4 billion in dividends.
  • 2019 OutlookMondel�"z International provides guidance on a non-GAAP basis, as the company cannot foretell some elements that are included in reported GAAP results, including the impact of alien exchange. refer to the Outlook section in the discussion of non-GAAP pecuniary measures below for more details.

    The company continues to await Organic Net Revenue growth to exist between 2 and 3 percent. The company maintains its outlook for Adjusted EPS growth of 3 to 5 percent on a constant-currency basis. The company estimates currency translation would decrease net revenue growth by approximately 3 percent [3] with a negative $0.07 impact to Adjusted EPS [3] . In addition, the company continues to await Free Cash flood of approximately $2.8 billion.

    Conference CallMondel�"z International will host a conference convene for investors with accompanying slides to review its results at 5 p.m. ET today. A listen-only webcast will exist provided at www.mondelezinternational.com. An archive of the webcast will exist available on the company's web site. The company will exist live tweeting the event at www.twitter.com/MDLZ.

    About Mondel�"z InternationalMondel�"z International, Inc. MDLZ, +0.86% empowers people to snack perquisite in over 150 countries around the world. With 2018 net revenues of approximately $26 billion, MDLZ is leading the future of snacking with iconic global and local brands such as Oreo, belVita and LU biscuits; Cadbury Dairy Milk, Milka and Toblerone chocolate; acidulous Patch Kids candy and Trident gum. Mondel�"z International is a arrogant member of the gauge and Poor's 500, Nasdaq 100 and Dow Jones Sustainability Index. Visit www.mondelezinternational.com or result the company on Twitter at www.twitter.com/MDLZ.

    End Notes

  • Organic Net Revenue, Adjusted shameful Profit (and Adjusted shameful Profit margin), Adjusted Operating Income (and Adjusted Operating Income margin), Adjusted EPS, Free Cash flood and presentation of amounts in constant currency are non-GAAP pecuniary measures. tickle note discussion of non-GAAP pecuniary measures at the conclude of this press release for more information.
  • Net earnings attributable to Mondel�"z International.
  • Currency appraise is based on published rates from XE.com on January 25, 2019.
  • Additional Definitions

    Emerging markets consist of the Latin America region in its entirety; the Asia, Middle East and Africa region excluding Australia, fresh Zealand and Japan; and the following countries from the Europe region: Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Georgia, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, the Baltics and the East Adriatic countries.

    Developed markets include the entire North America region, the Europe region excluding the countries included in the emerging markets definition, and Australia, fresh Zealand and Japan from the Asia, Middle East and Africa region.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains a number of forward-looking statements. Words, and variations of words, such as "will," "expect," "may," "would," "could," "deliver," "potential," "estimate," "guidance," "outlook" and similar expressions are intended to identify the company's forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, statements about: the company's future performance, including its future revenue growth, earnings per partake and cash flow; currency and the effect of alien exchange translation on the company's results of operations; the impact of U.S. tax reform; the company's liability related to withdrawal from the Bakery and Confectionery Union and Industry International Pension Fund; the Brazilian indirect tax matter; the impacts of the malware incident; strategic transactions; the company's strategy and investments; and the company's outlook, including 2019 Organic Net Revenue growth, Adjusted EPS and Free Cash Flow. These forward-looking statements are topic to a number of risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the company's control, which could occasions the company's actual results to differ materially from those indicated in the company's forward-looking statements. Such factors include, but are not limited to, risks from operating globally including in emerging markets; changes in currency exchange rates, controls and restrictions; continued volatility of commodity and other input costs; weakness in economic conditions; weakness in consumer spending; pricing actions; tax matters including changes in tax rates and laws, disagreements with taxing authorities and imposition of fresh taxes; utilize of information technology and third party service providers; unanticipated disruptions to the company's business, such as the malware incident, cyberattacks or other security breaches; competition; the restructuring program and the company's other transformation initiatives not yielding the anticipated benefits; and changes in the assumptions on which the restructuring program is based. tickle besides note the company's risk factors, as they may exist amended from time to time, set forth in its filings with the SEC, including the company's most recently filed Annual Report on profile 10-K. Mondelez International disclaims and does not undertake any duty to update or revise any forward-looking statement in this press release, except as required by applicable law or regulation.

    Schedule 1 Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Condensed Consolidated Statements of Earnings (in millions of U.S. dollars and shares, except per partake data) (Unaudited) For the Three Months Ended December 31, For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2018 2017 2018 2017 Net revenues $ 6,773 $ 6,966 $ 25,938 $ 25,896 Cost of sales 4,224 4,313 15,586 15,862 Gross profit 2,549 2,653 10,352 10,034 Gross profit margin 37.6 % 38.1 % 39.9 % 38.7 % Selling, universal and administrative expenses 1,536 1,662 6,475 5,938 Asset impairment and exit costs 99 118 389 642 (Gain)/loss on divestitures - (2 ) - (186 ) Amortization of intangibles 44 45 176 178 Operating income 870 830 3,312 3,462 Operating income margin 12.8 % 11.9 % 12.8 % 13.4 % Benefit objective non-service income (3 ) (14 ) (50 ) (44 ) Interest and other expense, net 106 120 520 382 Earnings before income taxes 767 724 2,842 3,124 Provision for income taxes (111 ) (156 ) (773 ) (666 ) Effective tax rate 14.5 % 21.5 % 27.2 % 21.3 % Gain on equity fashion investment transactions 21 40 778 40 Equity fashion investment net earnings 149 95 548 344 Net earnings 826 703 3,395 2,842 Noncontrolling interest earnings (3 ) (8 ) (14 ) (14 ) Net earnings attributable to Mondel�"z International $ 823 $ 695 $ 3,381 $ 2,828 Per partake data: Basic earnings per partake attributable to Mondel�"z International $ 0.56 $ 0.46 $ 2.30 $ 1.87 Diluted earnings per partake attributable to Mondel�"z International $ 0.56 $ 0.46 $ 2.28 $ 1.85 Average shares outstanding: Basic 1,457 1,497 1,472 1,513 Diluted 1,470 1,513 1,486 1,531 Schedule 2 Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Condensed Consolidated equipoise Sheets (in millions of U.S. dollars) (Unaudited) December 31, December 31, 2018 2017 ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents $ 1,100 $ 761 Trade receivables 2,262 2,691 Other receivables 744 835 Inventories, net 2,592 2,557 Other current assets 906 676 Total current assets 7,604 7,520 Property, plant and equipment, net 8,482 8,677 Goodwill 20,725 21,085 Intangible assets, net 18,002 18,639 Prepaid pension assets 132 158 Deferred income taxes 255 319 Equity fashion investments 7,123 6,193 Other assets 406 366 TOTAL ASSETS $ 62,729 $ 62,957 LIABILITIES Short-term borrowings $ 3,192 $ 3,517 Current portion of long-term debt 2,648 1,163 Accounts payable 5,794 5,705 Accrued marketing 1,756 1,728 Accrued employment costs 701 721 Other current liabilities 2,646 2,959 Total current liabilities 16,737 15,793 Long-term debt 12,532 12,972 Deferred income taxes 3,552 3,341 Accrued pension costs 1,221 1,669 Accrued postretirement health custody costs 351 419 Other liabilities 2,623 2,689 TOTAL LIABILITIES 37,016 36,883 EQUITY Common Stock - - Additional paid-in capital 31,961 31,915 Retained earnings 24,491 22,631 Accumulated other comprehensive losses (10,630 ) (9,997 ) Treasury stock (20,185 ) (18,555 ) Total Mondel�"z International Shareholders' Equity 25,637 25,994 Noncontrolling interest 76 80 TOTAL EQUITY 25,713 26,074 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY $ 62,729 $ 62,957 December 31, December 31, 2018 2017 Incr/(Decr) Short-term borrowings $ 3,192 $ 3,517 $ (325 ) Current portion of long-term debt 2,648 1,163 1,485 Long-term debt 12,532 12,972 (440 ) Total Debt 18,372 17,652 720 Cash and cash equivalents 1,100 761 339 Net Debt [(1)] $ 17,272 $ 16,891 $ 381 [(1) ] Net debt is defined as total debt, which includes short-term borrowings, current portion of long-term debt and long-term debt, less cash and cash equivalents. Schedule 3 Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (in millions of U.S. dollars) (Unaudited) For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2018 2017 CASH PROVIDED BY/(USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES Net earnings $ 3,395 $ 2,842 Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to operating cash flows: Depreciation and amortization 811 816 Stock-based compensation expense 128 137 U.S. tax reform transition tax / (benefit) (38 ) 1,317 Deferred income tax provision / (benefit) 233 (1,228 ) Asset impairments and accelerated depreciation 141 334 Loss on early extinguishment of debt 140 11 (Gain)/loss on divestitures - (186 ) Gain on equity fashion investment transactions (778 ) (40 ) Equity fashion investment net earnings (548 ) (344 ) Distributions from equity fashion investments 180 152 Other non-cash items, net 381 (225 ) Change in assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions and divestitures: Receivables, net 257 (24 ) Inventories, net (204 ) (18 ) Accounts payable 236 5 Other current assets (25 ) 14 Other current liabilities (136 ) (637 ) Change in pension and postretirement assets and liabilities, net (225 ) (333 ) Net cash provided by/(used in) operating activities 3,948 2,593 CASH PROVIDED BY/(USED IN) INVESTING ACTIVITIES Capital expenditures (1,095 ) (1,014 ) Acquisition, net of cash received (528 ) - Proceeds from divestiture, net of disbursements 1 604 Proceeds from sale of property, plant and paraphernalia and other assets 398 109 Net cash provided by/(used in) investing activities (1,224 ) (301 ) CASH PROVIDED BY/(USED IN) FINANCING ACTIVITIES Issuances of commercial paper, maturities greater than 90 days 3,981 1,808 Repayments of commercial paper, maturities greater than 90 days (2,856 ) (1,911 ) Net issuances of other short-term borrowings (1,413 ) 1,027 Long-term debt proceeds 2,948 350 Long-term debt repaid (1,821 ) (1,470 ) Repurchase of Common Stock (2,020 ) (2,174 ) Dividends paid (1,359 ) (1,198 ) Other 211 207 Net cash provided by/(used in) financing activities (2,329 ) (3,361 ) Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents (56 ) 89 Cash and cash equivalents: Increase/(decrease) 339 (980 ) Balance at nascence of period 761 1,741 Balance at conclude of period $ 1,100 $ 761

    Mondel�"z International, Inc. and SubsidiariesReconciliation of GAAP and Non-GAAP pecuniary Measures(Unaudited)

    The company reports its pecuniary results in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States ("GAAP"). However, management believes that besides presenting unavoidable non-GAAP pecuniary measures provides additional information to facilitate comparison of the company's historical operating results and trends in its underlying operating results, and provides additional transparency on how the company evaluates its business. Management uses these non-GAAP pecuniary measures in making financial, operating and planning decisions and in evaluating the company's performance. The company besides believes that presenting these measures allows investors to view its performance using the selfsame measures that the company uses in evaluating its pecuniary and traffic performance and trends.

    The company considers quantitative and qualitative factors in assessing whether to adjust for the impact of items that may exist significant or that could move an understanding of its ongoing pecuniary and traffic performance and trends. The adjustments generally plunge within the following categories: acquisition & divestiture activities, gains and losses on intangible asset sales and non-cash impairments, major program restructuring activities, constant currency and related adjustments, major program financing and hedging activities and other major items affecting comparability of operating results. note below for a description of adjustments to the company's U.S. GAAP pecuniary measures included herein.

    Non-GAAP information should exist considered as supplemental in nature and is not meant to exist considered in isolation or as a substitute for the related pecuniary information prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. In addition, the company's non-GAAP pecuniary measures may not exist the selfsame as or comparable to similar non-GAAP measures presented by other companies.

    Because GAAP pecuniary measures on a forward-looking basis are not accessible and reconciling information is not available without unreasonable effort, the company has not provided that information with admiration to the non-GAAP pecuniary measures in the company's outlook. refer to the Outlook section below for more details.

    DEFINITIONS OF THE COMPANY'S NON-GAAP pecuniary MEASURES

    The company's non-GAAP pecuniary measures and corresponding metrics reflect how the company evaluates its operating results currently and provide improved comparability of operating results. As fresh events or circumstances arise, these definitions could change. When these definitions change, the company provides the updated definitions and presents the related non-GAAP historical results on a comparable basis. When items no longer impact the company's current or future presentation of non-GAAP operating results, the company removes these items from its non-GAAP definitions. During 2018, the company added to the non-GAAP definitions the exclusion of the impact from pension participation changes and remeasurement gains or losses related to remeasuring net monetary assets or liabilities in Argentina.

  • "Organic Net Revenue" is defined as net revenues excluding the impacts of acquisitions; divestitures; and currency rate fluctuations. The company besides evaluates Organic Net Revenue growth from emerging markets and its Power Brands.
  • "Adjusted shameful Profit" is defined as shameful profit excluding the Simplify to Grow Program; acquisition integration costs; the operating results of divestitures; mark-to-market impacts from commodity and forecasted currency transaction derivative contracts; and incremental expenses related to the 2017 malware incident. The company besides presents "Adjusted shameful Profit margin," which is topic to the selfsame adjustments as Adjusted shameful Profit. The company besides evaluates growth in the company's Adjusted shameful Profit on a constant currency basis.
  • "Adjusted Operating Income" and "Adjusted Segment Operating Income" are defined as operating income (or segment operating income) excluding the impacts of the items listed in the Adjusted shameful Profit definition as well as gains or losses (including non-cash impairment charges) on goodwill and intangible assets; divestiture or acquisition gains or losses and related divestiture, acquisition and integration costs; remeasurement of net monetary position; impacts from resolution of tax matters; CEO transition remuneration; and impact from pension participation changes. The company besides presents "Adjusted Operating Income margin" and "Adjusted Segment Operating Income margin", which are topic to the selfsame adjustments as Adjusted Operating Income and Adjusted Segment Operating Income. The company besides evaluates growth in the company's Adjusted Operating Income and Adjusted Segment Operating Income on a constant currency basis.
  • "Adjusted EPS" is defined as diluted EPS attributable to Mondel�"z International from continuing operations excluding the impacts of the items listed in the Adjusted Operating Income definition as well as losses on debt extinguishment and related expenses; gain on equity fashion investment transactions; net earnings from divestitures; gains or losses on interest rate swaps no longer designated as accounting cash flood hedges due to changed financing and hedging plans; and U.S. tax reform discrete impacts. Similarly, within Adjusted EPS, the company's equity fashion investment net earnings exclude its proportionate partake of its investees' unusual or infrequent items. The tax impact of each of the items excluded from the company's GAAP results was computed based on the facts and tax assumptions associated with each particular and such impacts absorb besides been excluded from Adjusted EPS. The company besides evaluates growth in the company's Adjusted EPS on a constant currency basis.
  • "Free Cash Flow" is defined as net cash provided by operating activities less capital expenditures. Free Cash flood is the company's primary measure used to monitor its cash flood performance.
  • See the attached schedules for supplemental pecuniary data and corresponding reconciliations of the non-GAAP pecuniary measures referred to above to the most comparable GAAP pecuniary measures for the three months and year ended December 31, 2018. note Items Impacting Comparability of Operating Results below for more information about the items referenced in these definitions.

    SEGMENT OPERATING INCOMEThe company uses segment operating income to evaluate segment performance and designate resources. The company believes it is appropriate to disclose this measure to wait on investors anatomize segment performance and trends. Segment operating income excludes unrealized gains and losses on hedging activities (which are a component of cost of sales), universal corporate expenses (which are a component of selling, universal and administrative expenses), amortization of intangibles, gains and losses on divestitures and acquisition-related costs (which are a component of selling, universal and administrative expenses) in sum periods presented. The company excludes these items from segment operating income in order to provide better transparency of its segment operating results. Furthermore, the company centrally manages benefit objective non-service income and interest and other expense, net. Accordingly, the company does not present these items by segment because they are excluded from the segment profitability measure that management reviews.

    ITEMS IMPACTING COMPARABILITY OF OPERATING RESULTSThe following information is provided to give qualitative and quantitative information related to items impacting comparability of operating results. The company identifies these based on how management views the company's business; makes financial, operating and planning decisions; and evaluates the company's ongoing performance. In addition, the company discloses the impact of changes in currency exchange rates on the company's pecuniary results in order to reflect results on a constant currency basis.

    Divestitures, Divestiture-related costs and Gains/(losses) on divestituresDivestitures include completed sales of businesses and exits of major product lines upon completion of a sale or licensing agreement. Divestiture-related activity in 2018 and 2017 included:

  • On December 13, 2018, the company announced an agreement to sell its Kraft-branded cheese traffic in Middle East and Africa (MEA) to Arla Foods of Denmark. The transaction is expected to nearby in 2019, topic to regulatory approvals. The company incurred divestiture-related costs of $3 million in three months ended December 31. 2018.
  • On December 28, 2017, the company completed the sale of a confectionery traffic in Japan. The company recorded a pre-tax loss of $1 million.
  • In connection with the 2012 spin-off of Kraft Foods Group, Inc. ("Kraft Foods Group", now a portion of Kraft Heinz Company ("KHC")), Kraft Foods Group and the company each granted the other various licenses to utilize unavoidable trademarks in connection with particular product categories in specified jurisdictions. On August 17, 2017, the company entered into two agreements with KHC to terminate the licenses of unavoidable KHC-owned brands used in the company's grocery traffic within its Europe region and to transfer to KHC inventory and unavoidable other assets. On August 17, 2017, the first transaction closed, and on October 23, 2017, the second transaction closed. The gain on both transactions combined was immaterial.
  • On July 4, 2017, the company completed the sale of most of its grocery traffic in Australia and fresh Zealand to Bega Cheese Limited. The company recorded a pre-tax gain of $247 million Australian dollars ($187 million as of July 4, 2017) on the sale. In the fourth quarter of 2017, the company recorded a final $3 million inventory-related working capital adjustment, increasing the pre-tax gain in 2017 to $190 million. During the year ended December 31, 2017, the company besides incurred divestiture-related costs of $2 million and a alien currency hedge loss of $3 million in connection with this transaction.
  • On April 28, 2017, the company completed the sale of several manufacturing facilities in France and the sale or license of several local confectionery brands. The company reversed accrued divestiture-related costs no longer required of $1 million during the three months ended and $4 million during the year ended December 31, 2018. The company incurred divestiture-related costs of $5 million in the three months and $27 million in the year ended December 31, 2017. The company recorded a $3 million loss on the sale during the year ended December 31, 2017. 
  • Acquisitions and Acquisition-related costsOn June 7, 2018, the company acquired a U.S. premium biscuit company, Tate's Bake Shop, within its North America segment and extended its premium biscuit offerings. On a constant currency basis, the purchase added incremental net revenues of $22 million in the three months and $52 million in the year ended December 31, 2018. In addition, the company incurred acquisition-related costs of $13 million in the year ended December 31, 2018.

    On November 2, 2016, the company purchased from Burton's Biscuit Company unavoidable intangibles, which included the license to manufacture, market and sell Cadbury-branded biscuits in additional key markets around the world, including in the United Kingdom, France, Ireland, North America and Saudi Arabia. On a constant currency basis, the purchase added incremental net revenues of $9 million in the three months and $59 million in the year ended December 31, 2017.

    Acquisition integration costsWithin the company's AMEA segment, in connection with the acquisition of a biscuit operation in Vietnam in 2015, the company recorded integration costs of $4 million in the year ended December 31, 2018 and $1 million in the three months ended and $3 million in the year ended December 31, 2017.

    Simplify to Grow ProgramOn September 6, 2018, the company's Board of Directors approved an extension of the restructuring program through 2022, an enlarge of $1.3 billion in the program charges and an enlarge of $700 million in capital expenditures. The current restructuring program, as increased and extended by these actions, is now called the Simplify to Grow Program. The primary objective of the Simplify to Grow Program is to reduce the company's operating cost structure in both its supply chain and overhead costs. The program is intended primarily to cover severance as well as asset disposals and other manufacturing-related one-time costs.

    Restructuring costsThe company recorded restructuring charges of $96 million in the three months and $316 million in the year ended December 31, 2018 and $117 million in the three months and $535 million in the year ended December 31, 2017 within asset impairment and exit costs or benefit objective non-service income. These charges were for non-cash asset write-downs (including accelerated depreciation and asset impairments), severance and other related costs.

    Implementation costsImplementation costs primarily relate to reorganizing the company's operations and facilities in connection with its supply chain reinvention program and other identified productivity and cost saving initiatives. The costs include incremental expenses related to the closure of facilities, costs to terminate unavoidable contracts and the simplification of the company's information systems. The company recorded implementation costs of $100 million in the three months and $315 million in the year ended December 31, 2018 and $78 million in the three months and $257 million in the year ended December 31, 2017.

    Gain on equity fashion investment transactionsOn July 9, 2018, Keurig Green Mountain, Inc. ("Keurig") closed on its definitive merger agreement with Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc., and formed Keurig Dr Pepper Inc. ("KDP"), a publicly traded company. Following the nearby of the transaction, the company's 24.2% investment in Keurig together with the company's shareholder loan receivable became a 13.8% investment in KDP. During the third quarter of 2018, the company recorded a prefatory pre-tax gain of $757 million reported as a gain on equity fashion transaction and $184 million of deferred tax expense reported in the provision for income taxes (or $573 million after-tax) related to the change in the company's ownership interest while KDP finalizes the valuation for the transaction. During the company's fourth quarter of 2018, KDP finalized its opening equipoise sheet and the company increased its pre-tax gain by $21 million to $778 million for 2018. As the company continues to absorb significant influence, the company continues to account for its investment in KDP under the equity method, resulting in recognizing its partake of KDP earnings within the company's earnings and its partake of KDP dividends within the company's cash flows. In connection with this transaction, the company changed its accounting principle to reflect its partake of Keurig's historical and KDP's ongoing earnings on a one-quarter lag basis while the company continues to record dividends when cash is received. The company determined a lag was preferable as it enables the company to continue to report its quarterly and annual results on a timely basis and to record its partake of KDP's ongoing results once KDP has publicly reported its results. This change in accounting principle was applied retrospectively to sum periods. While the company's operating income did not change, equity fashion investment net earnings, net earnings and earnings per partake absorb been adjusted to reflect the lag across sum reported periods.

    On October 2, 2017, the company completed the sale of one of its equity fashion investments and recorded a pre-tax gain of $40 million within the gain on equity fashion investment transactions and $15 million of tax expense.

    Equity fashion investee adjustmentsWithin Adjusted EPS, the company's equity fashion investment net earnings exclude its proportionate partake of its investees' unusual or infrequent items, such as acquisition and divestiture-related costs and restructuring program costs.

    Mark-to-market impacts from commodity and currency derivative contractsThe company excludes unrealized gains and losses (mark-to-market impacts) from outstanding commodity and forecasted currency transaction derivatives from its non-GAAP earnings measures until such time that the related exposures impact its operating results. The company recorded net unrealized losses on commodity and forecasted currency transaction derivatives of $38 million in the three months and net unrealized gains of $142 million in the year ended December 31, 2018 and net unrealized losses of $27 million in the three months and $96 million in the year ended December 31, 2017.

    Intangible asset impairment chargesDuring the company's 2018 annual testing of non-amortizable intangible assets, the company recorded $68 million of impairment charges in the third quarter of 2018 related to five trademarks. The impairments arose due to lower than expected product growth. The company recorded charges related to gum, chocolate, biscuits and candy trademarks of $45 million in Europe, $14 million in North America and $9 million in AMEA. The impairment charges were recorded within asset impairment and exit costs.

    During the company's 2017 annual testing of non-amortizable intangible assets, the company recorded $70 million of impairment charges in the third quarter of 2017 related to five trademarks. The impairments arose due to lower than expected growth in portion driven by decisions to redirect advocate from these trademarks to other regional and global brands. The company recorded charges related to candy and gum trademarks of $52 million in AMEA, $11 million in Europe, $5 million in Latin America and $2 million in North America.

    In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2017, the company recorded a $38 million intangible asset impairment saturate resulting from a category decline and lower than expected product growth related to a gum trademark in its North America segment as well as a $1 million impairment related to a transaction.

    Remeasurement of net monetary positionDuring the second quarter of 2018, primarily based on published estimates which indicated that Argentina's three-year cumulative inflation rate exceeded 100%, the company concluded that Argentina became a highly inflationary economy for accounting purposes. As of July 1, 2018, the company began to apply highly inflationary accounting for its Argentinian subsidiaries and changed their functional currency from the Argentinian peso to the U.S. dollar. On July 1, 2018, both monetary and non-monetary assets and liabilities denominated in Argentinian pesos were remeasured into U.S. dollars. As of each subsequent equipoise sheet date, Argentinian peso denominated monetary assets and liabilities were remeasured into U.S. dollars using the exchange rate as of the equipoise sheet date, with remeasurement and other transaction gains and losses recorded in net earnings. The company recorded, related to the revaluation of the Argentinian peso denominated net monetary assets, a remeasurement gain of $2 million during the three months and a remeasurement loss of $11 million during the year ended December 31, 2018.

    Incremental expenses related to the malware incidentOn June 27, 2017, a global malware incident impacted the company's business. The malware affected a significant portion of the company's global sales, distribution and pecuniary networks. In the final four days of the second quarter and during the third quarter of 2017, the company executed traffic continuity and contingency plans to contain the impact, minimize damages and restore its systems environment. To date, the company has not found, nor does the company await to find, any instances of Company or personal data released externally. The company has besides restored its main operating systems and processes and enhanced its system security.

    For the second quarter of 2017, the company estimated that the malware incident had a negative impact of 2.3% on its net revenue growth and 2.4% on its Organic Net Revenue growth. The company besides incurred incremental expenses of $7 million as a result of the incident. The company recognized the majority of delayed second quarter shipments in its third quarter 2017 results, although the company permanently lost some revenue. On a 2017 full-year basis, the company estimated the loss of revenue had a negative impact of 0.4% on its net revenue and Organic Net Revenue growth. The company besides incurred total incremental expenses of $84 million predominantly during the second half of 2017 as portion of the recovery effort. The recovery from the incident was largely resolved by December 31, 2017 and the company continued efforts to strengthen its security measures and enhance universal information technology, traffic process and disclosure controls.

    Gain related to interest rate swapsThe company recognized a net pre-tax gain of $10 million in the year ended December 31, 2018, within interest and other expense, net related to unavoidable forward-starting interest rate swaps for which the planned timing of the related forecasted debt was changed.

    Loss on debt extinguishmentOn April 17, 2018, the company completed a cash tender proffer and retired $570 million of the long-term U.S. dollar debt. The company recorded a loss on debt extinguishment of $140 million within interest and other expense, net related to the amount the company paid to retire the debt in excess of its carrying value and from recognizing unamortized discounts, deferred financing and other cash costs in earnings at the time of the debt extinguishment.

    On April 12, 2017, the company discharged $488 million of its 6.500% U.S. dollar-denominated debt. The company paid $504 million, representing principal as well as past and future interest accruals from February 2017 through the August 2017 maturity date. The company recorded an $11 million loss on debt extinguishment within interest expense.

    Impact from resolution of tax mattersA tax indemnification matter related to the company's 2007 acquisition of the LU biscuit traffic was closed during the quarter ended June 30, 2018. The closure had no impact on net earnings, however, it did result in a $15 million tax benefit that was fully offset by an $11 million expense in selling, universal and administrative expenses and a $4 million expense in interest and other expense, net.

    During the first quarter of 2017, the Brazilian Supreme Court (the "Court") ruled against the Brazilian tax authorities in a leading case related to the computation of unavoidable indirect (non-income) taxes. The Court ruled that the indirect tax groundwork should not include a value-added tax known as "ICMS". By removing the ICMS from the tax base, the Court effectively eliminated a "tax on a tax." In lower courts, the company's Brazilian subsidiaries filed lawsuits to recover amounts paid and to discontinue subsequent payments related to the "tax on a tax." The Brazilian subsidiaries received injunctions against making payments for the "tax on a tax" in 2008 and since that time until December 2016, the company had accrued for this portion of the tax each quarter in the event that the tax was reaffirmed by the Brazilian courts. On September 30, 2017, based on legal recommendation and the publication of the Court's conclusion related to this case, the company determined that the likelihood that the increased tax groundwork would exist reinstated and assessed against the company was remote. Accordingly, the company reversed its accrual of 667 million Brazilian reais, or $212 million as of September 30, 2017, of which, $153 million was recorded within selling, universal and administrative expenses and $59 million was recorded within interest and other expense, net. In connection with the Court's 2017 decision, the Brazilian tax authority filed a motion seeking clarification and adjustment of the terms of enforcement and that motion is noiseless to exist decided. The company continues to monitor developments in this matter and currently does not await a material future impact on its pecuniary statements. During the fourth quarter of 2018, in one of the lower court cases, the Brazilian Federal Court of Appeals ruled in the company's favor against the Brazilian tax authority, allowing one of the company's Brazil subsidiaries to recover amounts previously paid. As a result, the company recorded a net benefit in selling, universal and administrative expenses of $26 million.

    During the first quarter of 2017, the Spanish Supreme Court decided, in the company's favor, an ongoing transfer pricing case with the Spanish tax authorities related to businesses Cadbury divested prior to the company's acquisition of Cadbury. As a result of the final ruling, during the first quarter of 2017, the company recorded a conducive earnings impact of $46 million in selling, universal and administrative expenses and $12 million in interest and other expense, net, for a total pre-tax impact of $58 million due to the non-cash reversal of Cadbury-related accrued liabilities related to this matter. The company recorded a total of $4 million of income over the third and fourth quarters of 2017 in connection with the related bank guarantee releases.

    CEO transition remunerationOn November 20, 2017, Dirk Van de establish succeeded Irene Rosenfeld as CEO of Mondel�"z International. In order to incent Mr. Van de establish to join the company, the company provided him compensation to develop him entire for incentive awards he forfeited or grants that were not made to him when he left his former employer. In connection with Irene Rosenfeld's retirement, the company made her outstanding grants of performance partake units for the 2016-2018 and 2017-2019 performance cycles eligible for continued vesting and paid $0.5 million salary for her service as Chairman from January through March 2018. The company refers to these elements of Mr. Van de Put's and Ms. Rosenfeld's compensation arrangements together as "CEO transition remuneration."

    The company is excluding amounts it expenses as CEO transition remuneration from its non-GAAP results because those amounts are not portion of the company's regular compensation program and are incremental to amounts the company would absorb incurred as ongoing CEO compensation. The company incurred CEO transition remuneration of $4 million in the three months and $22 million in the year ended December 31, 2018. During 2017, the company incurred CEO transition remuneration of $14 million in the three months ended December 31, 2017.

    U.S. tax reform discrete impactsOn December 22, 2017, the United States enacted tax reform legislation that included a broad orbit of traffic tax provisions, including but not limited to a reduction in the U.S. federal tax rate from 35% to 21% as well as provisions that confine or eradicate various deductions or credits. The legislation besides causes U.S. allocated expenses (e.g. interest and universal administrative expense) to exist taxed and imposes a fresh tax on U.S. cross-border payments, Furthermore, the legislation includes a one-time transition tax on accumulated alien earnings and profits. While clarifying guidance was issued by the IRS during 2018, further tax guidance is expected during 2019.

    Certain impacts of the fresh legislation would absorb generally required accounting to exist completed and incorporated into the company's 2017 year-end pecuniary statements, however in response to the complexities of this fresh legislation, the SEC issued guidance to provide companies with relief. The SEC provided up to a one-year window for companies to finalize the accounting for the impacts of this fresh legislation. The company finalized its accounting for the fresh provisions during the fourth quarter of 2018.

    The 2018 impact from finalizing the accounting for the fresh provisions was a discrete net tax expense of $19 million, which is in addition to the $44 million discrete net tax benefit in the company's 2017 pecuniary statements. The $19 million expense in 2018 is primarily comprised of a $60 million expense related to finalizing the changes in the company's indefinite reinvestment assertion, partially offset by a $38 million decrease to the transition tax estimated as of December 31, 2017.

    Impact from pension participation changesThe impact from pension participation changes depict the charges incurred when employee groups are withdrawn from multiemployer pension plans and other changes in employee group pension objective participation. The company excludes these charges from its non-GAAP results because those amounts attain not reflect the company's ongoing pension obligations.

    In the fourth quarter of 2018, the company executed a complete withdrawal from the Bakery and Confectionery Union and Industry International Pension Fund. The company estimated a withdrawal liability of $573 million, which represents the company's best appraise of the withdrawal liability absent an assessment from the Fund. The company expects to pay the liability over a era of 20 years from the date of the assessment. During 2018, within its North America segment, the company recorded a total discounted liability and related saturate of $423 million or $321 million net of tax. The company determined the net present value of the liability using a risk-free interest rate. The company recorded the pre-tax non-cash charges in selling, universal and administrative expense (and in other non-cash items, net in the consolidated statement of cash flows) and the liability in long-term other liabilities. During 2018, the company besides recorded $6 million of accreted interest related to the long-term liability within interest and other expense, net.

    Constant currencyManagement evaluates the operating performance of the company and its international subsidiaries on a constant currency basis. The company determines its constant currency operating results by dividing or multiplying, as appropriate, the current era local currency operating results by the currency exchange rates used to translate the company's pecuniary statements in the comparable prior-year era to determine what the current era U.S. dollar operating results would absorb been if the currency exchange rate had not changed from the comparable prior-year period.

    OUTLOOKThe company's outlook for 2019 Organic Net Revenue growth, Adjusted EPS growth on a constant currency basis and Free Cash flood are non-GAAP pecuniary measures that exclude or otherwise adjust for items impacting comparability of pecuniary results such as the impact of changes in alien currency exchange rates, restructuring activities, acquisitions and divestitures. The company is not able to reconcile its projected Organic Net Revenue growth to its projected reported net revenue growth for the full-year 2019 because the company is unable to foretell the impacts from potential acquisitions or divestitures as well as the impact of alien exchange due to the unpredictability of future changes in alien exchange rates, which could exist material as a significant portion of the company's operations are outside the U.S. The company is not able to reconcile its projected Adjusted EPS growth on a constant currency basis to its projected reported diluted EPS growth for the full-year 2019 because the company is unable to foretell the timing of its restructuring program costs, mark-to-market impacts from commodity and forecasted currency transaction derivative contracts and impacts from potential acquisitions or divestitures as well as the impact of alien exchange due to the unpredictability of future changes in alien exchange rates, which could exist material as a significant portion of the company's operations are outside the U.S. The company is not able to reconcile its projected Free Cash flood to its projected net cash from operating activities for the full-year 2019 because the company is unable to foretell the timing and amount of capital expenditures impacting cash flow. Therefore, because of the mistrust and variability of the nature and amount of future adjustments, which could exist significant, the company is unable to provide a reconciliation of these measures without unreasonable effort.

    Schedule 4a Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Net Revenues (in millions of U.S. dollars) (Unaudited) LatinAmerica AMEA Europe NorthAmerica Mondel�"zInternational For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2018 Reported (GAAP) $ 763 $ 1,429 $ 2,752 $ 1,829 $ 6,773 Acquisition - - - (22 ) (22 ) Currency 172 74 128 9 383 Organic (Non-GAAP) $ 935 $ 1,503 $ 2,880 $ 1,816 $ 7,134 For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2017 Reported (GAAP) $ 900 $ 1,449 $ 2,816 $ 1,801 $ 6,966 Divestitures - (4 ) (2 ) - (6 ) Organic (Non-GAAP) $ 900 $ 1,445 $ 2,814 $ 1,801 $ 6,960 % Change Reported (GAAP) (15.2 )% (1.4 )% (2.3 )% 1.6 % (2.8 )% Divestitures - pp 0.3 pp 0.1 pp - pp 0.1 pp Acquisition - - - (1.3 ) (0.3 ) Currency 19.1 5.1 4.5 0.5 5.5 Organic (Non-GAAP) 3.9 % 4.0 % 2.3 % 0.8 % 2.5 % Vol/Mix (3.3 )pp 2.9 pp 3.4 pp (2.1 )pp 1.0 pp Pricing 7.2 1.1 (1.1 ) 2.9 1.5 Latin America AMEA Europe North America Mondel�"z International For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2018 Reported (GAAP) $ 3,202 $ 5,729 $ 10,122 $ 6,885 $ 25,938 Acquisition - - - (52 ) (52 ) Currency 493 74 (228 ) 4 343 Organic (Non-GAAP) $ 3,695 $ 5,803 $ 9,894 $ 6,837 $ 26,229 For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2017 Reported (GAAP) $ 3,566 $ 5,739 $ 9,794 $ 6,797 $ 25,896 Divestitures - (133 ) (137 ) - (270 ) Organic (Non-GAAP) $ 3,566 $ 5,606 $ 9,657 $ 6,797 $ 25,626 % Change Reported (GAAP) (10.2 )% (0.2 )% 3.3 % 1.3 % 0.2 % Divestitures - pp 2.4 pp 1.5 pp - pp 1.0 pp Acquisition - - - (0.8 ) (0.2 ) Currency 13.8 1.3 (2.3 ) 0.1 1.4 Organic (Non-GAAP) 3.6 % 3.5 % 2.5 % 0.6 % 2.4 % Vol/Mix (2.6 )pp 1.9 pp 3.1 pp (0.5 )pp 1.1 pp Pricing 6.2 1.6 (0.6 ) 1.1 1.3 Schedule 4b Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Net Revenues - Brands and Markets (in millions of U.S. dollars) (Unaudited) Emerging Markets Developed Markets Mondel�"z International For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2018 Reported (GAAP) $ 2,441 $ 4,332 $ 6,773 Acquisition - (22 ) (22 ) Currency 283 100 383 Organic (Non-GAAP) $ 2,724 $ 4,410 $ 7,134 For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2017 Reported (GAAP) $ 2,557 $ 4,409 $ 6,966 Divestitures - (6 ) (6 ) Organic (Non-GAAP) $ 2,557 $ 4,403 $ 6,960 % Change Reported (GAAP) (4.5 )% (1.7 )% (2.8 )% Divestitures - pp 0.1 pp 0.1 pp Acquisition - (0.5 ) (0.3 ) Currency 11.0 2.3 5.5 Organic (Non-GAAP) 6.5 % 0.2 % 2.5 % Vol/Mix 3.1 pp (0.2 )pp 1.0 pp Pricing 3.4 0.4 1.5 Emerging Markets Developed Markets Mondel�"z International For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2018 Reported (GAAP) $ 9,659 $ 16,279 $ 25,938 Acquisition - (52 ) (52 ) Currency 604 (261 ) 343 Organic (Non-GAAP) $ 10,263 $ 15,966 $ 26,229 For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2017 Reported (GAAP) $ 9,707 $ 16,189 $ 25,896 Divestitures - (270 ) (270 ) Organic (Non-GAAP) $ 9,707 $ 15,919 $ 25,626 % Change Reported (GAAP) (0.5 )% 0.6 % 0.2 % Divestitures - pp 1.7 pp 1.0 pp Acquisition - (0.3 ) (0.2 ) Currency 6.2 (1.7 ) 1.4 Organic (Non-GAAP) 5.7 % 0.3 % 2.4 % Vol/Mix 2.5 pp 0.2 pp 1.1 pp Pricing 3.2 0.1 1.3 Schedule 5a Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Gross Profit / Operating Income (in millions of U.S. dollars) (Unaudited) For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2018 Net Revenues GrossProfit Gross Profit Margin Operating Income Operating IncomeMargin Reported (GAAP) $ 6,773 $ 2,549 37.6 % $ 870 12.8 % Simplify to Grow Program - 121 194 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives - 40 40 Acquisition integration costs - - 1 Acquisition-related costs - - (1 ) Divestiture-related costs - - 2 Remeasurement of net monetary position - - (2 ) Impact of pension participation changes - - 15 Impacts from resolution of tax matters - (1 ) (26 ) CEO transition remuneration - - 4 Rounding - 1 (1 ) Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 6,773 $ 2,710 40.0 % $ 1,096 16.2 % Currency 155 74 Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) $ 2,865 $ 1,170 For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2017 Net Revenues Gross Profit Gross Profit Margin Operating Income Operating IncomeMargin Reported (GAAP) $ 6,966 $ 2,653 38.1 % $ 830 11.9 % Simplify to Grow Program - 22 192 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives - 27 27 Malware incident incremental expenses - 20 30 Acquisition integration costs - - 1 Divestiture-related costs - (1 ) 9 Operating income from divestitures (6 ) (3 ) (1 ) (Gain)/loss on divestitures - - (2 ) Impacts from resolution of tax matters - - (8 ) CEO transition remuneration - - 14 Rounding - - (1 ) Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 6,960 $ 2,718 39.1 % $ 1,091 15.7 % Gross Profit Operating Income $ Change - Reported (GAAP) $ (104 ) $ 40 $ Change - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) (8 ) 5 $ Change - Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) 147 79 % Change - Reported (GAAP) (3.9 )% 4.8 % % Change - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) (0.3 )% 0.5 % % Change - Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) 5.4 % 7.2 % Schedule 5b Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Gross Profit / Operating Income (in millions of U.S. dollars) (Unaudited) For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2018 Net Revenues Gross Profit Gross Profit Margin Operating Income Operating IncomeMargin Reported (GAAP) $ 25,938 $ 10,352 39.9 % $ 3,312 12.8 % Simplify to Grow Program - 189 626 Intangible asset impairment charges - - 68 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives - (140 ) (141 ) Acquisition integration costs - - 3 Acquisition-related costs - - 13 Divestiture-related costs - - (1 ) Remeasurement of net monetary position - - 11 Impact of pension participation changes - - 423 Impacts from resolution of tax matters - (1 ) (15 ) CEO transition remuneration - - 22 Rounding - 1 - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 25,938 $ 10,401 40.1 % $ 4,321 16.7 % Currency 128 55 Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) $ 10,529 $ 4,376 For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2017 Net Revenues Gross Profit Gross Profit Margin Operating Income Operating IncomeMargin Reported (GAAP) $ 25,896 $ 10,034 38.7 % $ 3,462 13.4 % Simplify to Grow Program - 61 777 Intangible asset impairment charges - - 109 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives - 96 96 Malware incident incremental expenses - 62 84 Acquisition integration costs - - 3 Divestiture-related costs - 2 31 Operating income from divestitures (270 ) (79 ) (61 ) (Gain)/loss on divestitures - - (186 ) Impacts from resolution of tax matters - - (209 ) CEO transition remuneration - - 14 Rounding - 1 (1 ) Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 25,626 $ 10,177 39.7 % $ 4,119 16.1 % Gross Profit Operating Income $ Change - Reported (GAAP) $ 318 $ (150 ) $ Change - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) 224 202 $ Change - Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) 352 257 % Change - Reported (GAAP) 3.2 % (4.3 )% % Change - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) 2.2 % 4.9 % % Change - Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) 3.5 % 6.2 % Schedule 6a Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Net Earnings and Tax Rate (in millions of U.S. dollars and shares, except per partake data) (Unaudited) For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2018 Operating Income Benefit objective non-service expense / (income) Interest and other expense, net Earnings before income taxes Income taxes [(1)] Effective tax rate Gain on Equity fashion Investment Transactions Equity fashion Investment Net Losses / (Earnings) Non-controlling interest Net Earnings attributable to Mondel�"z International Diluted EPS attributable to Mondel�"z International Reported (GAAP) $ 870 $ (3 ) $ 106 $ 767 $ 111 14.5 % $ (21 ) $ (149 ) $ 3 $ 823 $ 0.56 Simplify to Grow Program 194 (2 ) - 196 45 - - - 151 0.10 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives 40 - 2 38 17 - - - 21 0.01 Acquisition integration costs 1 - - 1 - - - - 1 - Acquisition-related costs (1 ) - - (1 ) - - - - (1 ) - Divestiture-related costs 2 - - 2 - - - - 2 - Remeasurement of net monetary position (2 ) - - (2 ) - - - - (2 ) - Impact of pension participation changes 15 - (3 ) 18 4 - - - 14 0.01 Impacts from resolution of tax matters (26 ) - - (26 ) (9 ) - - - (17 ) (0.01 ) CEO transition remuneration 4 - - 4 1 - - - 3 - U.S. tax reform discrete net tax (benefit)/expense - - - - 77 - - - (77 ) (0.05 ) Gain on equity fashion investment transactions - - - - (8 ) 21 - - (13 ) (0.01 ) Equity fashion investee acquisition-related and other adjustments - - - - 8 - (32 ) - 24 0.02 Rounding (1 ) - - (1 ) - - - - (1 ) - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 1,096 $ (5 ) $ 105 $ 996 $ 246 24.7 % $ - $ (181 ) $ 3 $ 928 $ 0.63 Currency 68 0.05 Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) $ 996 $ 0.68 Diluted medium Shares Outstanding 1,470 For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2017 Operating Income Benefit objective non-service expense / (income) Interest and other expense, net Earnings before incometaxes Income taxes [(1)] Effective tax rate Gain on Equity fashion Investment Transactions Equity fashion Investment Net Losses / (Earnings) Non-controlling interest Net Earnings attributable to Mondel�"z International Diluted EPS attributable to Mondel�"z International Reported (GAAP) $ 830 $ (14 ) $ 120 $ 724 $ 156 21.5 % $ (40 ) $ (95 ) $ 8 $ 695 $ 0.46 Simplify to Grow Program 192 (3 ) - 195 35 - - - 160 0.11 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives 27 - - 27 6 - - - 21 0.01 Malware incident incremental expenses 30 - - 30 10 - - - 20 0.01 Acquisition integration costs 1 - - 1 - - - - 1 - Divestiture-related costs 9 - - 9 5 - - - 4 - Net earnings from divestitures (1 ) - - (1 ) - - - - (1 ) - (Gain)/loss on divestitures (2 ) - - (2 ) 5 - - - (7 ) - Impacts from resolution of tax matters (8 ) - - (8 ) (3 ) - - - (5 ) - CEO transition remuneration 14 - - 14 5 - - - 9 0.01 U.S. tax reform discrete net tax (benefit)/expense - - - - 44 - - - (44 ) (0.03 ) Gain on equity fashion investment transactions - - - - (15 ) 40 - - (25 ) (0.02 ) Equity fashion investee acquisition-related and other adjustments - - - - 2 - (21 ) - 19 0.01 Rounding (1 ) - - (1 ) - - - - (1 ) - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 1,091 $ (17 ) $ 120 $ 988 $ 250 25.3 % $ - $ (116 ) $ 8 $ 846 $ 0.56 Diluted medium Shares Outstanding 1,513 [(1)] Taxes were computed for each of the items excluded from the company's GAAP results based on the facts and tax assumptions associated with each item. Schedule 6b Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Net Earnings and Tax Rate (in millions of U.S. dollars and shares, except per partake data) (Unaudited) For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2018 Operating Income Benefit objective non-service expense / (income) Interest and other expense, net Earnings before income taxes Income taxes [(1)] Effective tax rate Gain on Equity fashion Investment Transactions Equity fashion Investment Net Losses / (Earnings) Non-controlling interest Net Earnings attributable to Mondel�"z International Diluted EPSattributable to Mondel�"z International Reported (GAAP) $ 3,312 $ (50 ) $ 520 $ 2,842 $ 773 27.2 % $ (778 ) $ (548 ) $ 14 $ 3,381 $ 2.28 Simplify to Grow Program 626 (5 ) - 631 156 - - - 475 0.32 Intangible asset impairment charges 68 - - 68 16 - - - 52 0.03 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives (141 ) - 1 (142 ) (10 ) - - - (132 ) (0.09 ) Acquisition integration costs 3 - - 3 - - - - 3 - Acquisition-related costs 13 - - 13 3 - - - 10 0.01 Divestiture-related costs (1 ) - - (1 ) (2 ) - - - 1 - Remeasurement of net monetary position 11 - - 11 - - - - 11 0.01 Impact of pension participation changes 423 - (6 ) 429 108 - - - 321 0.22 Impacts from resolution of tax matters (15 ) - (4 ) (11 ) 6 - - - (17 ) (0.01 ) CEO transition remuneration 22 - - 22 5 - - - 17 0.01 (Gain)/loss related to interest rate swaps - - 10 (10 ) (2 ) - - - (8 ) (0.01 ) Loss on debt extinguishment and related expenses - - (140 ) 140 35 - - - 105 0.07 U.S. tax reform discrete net tax (benefit)/expense - - - - (19 ) - - - 19 0.01 Gain on equity fashion investment transactions - - - - (192 ) 778 - - (586 ) (0.39 ) Equity fashion investee acquisition-related and other adjustments - - - - (16 ) - 54 - (38 ) (0.03 ) Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 4,321 $ (55 ) $ 381 $ 3,995 $ 861 21.6 % $ - $ (494 ) $ 14 $ 3,614 $ 2.43 Currency 41 0.03 Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) $ 3,655 $ 2.46 Diluted medium Shares Outstanding 1,486 For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2017 Operating Income Benefit objective non-service expense / (income) Interest and other expense, net Earnings before income taxes Income taxes [(1)] Effective tax rate Gain on Equity fashion Investment Transactions Equity fashion Investment Net Losses / (Earnings) Non-controlling interest Net Earningsattributable to Mondel�"z International Diluted EPSattributable to Mondel�"z International Reported (GAAP) $ 3,462 $ (44 ) $ 382 $ 3,124 $ 666 21.3 % $ (40 ) $ (344 ) $ 14 $ 2,828 $ 1.85 Simplify to Grow Program 777 (15 ) - 792 190 - - - 602 0.39 Intangible asset impairment charges 109 - - 109 30 - - - 79 0.05 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives 96 - - 96 6 - - - 90 0.06 Malware incident incremental expenses 84 - - 84 27 - - - 57 0.04 Acquisition integration costs 3 - - 3 - - - - 3 - Divestiture-related costs 31 - (3 ) 34 (8 ) - - - 42 0.02 Net earnings from divestitures (61 ) - - (61 ) (15 ) - 6 - (52 ) (0.03 ) (Gain)/loss on divestitures (186 ) - - (186 ) (7 ) - - - (179 ) (0.11 ) Impacts from resolution of tax matters (209 ) - 72 (281 ) (75 ) - - - (206 ) (0.13 ) CEO transition remuneration 14 - - 14 5 - - - 9 0.01 Loss on debt extinguishment and related expenses - - (11 ) 11 4 - - - 7 - U.S. tax reform discrete net tax (benefit)/expense - - - - 44 - - - (44 ) (0.03 ) Gain on equity fashion investment transactions - - - - (15 ) 40 - - (25 ) (0.02 ) Equity fashion investee acquisition-related and other adjustments - - - - 10 - (69 ) - 59 0.04 Rounding (1 ) - - (1 ) - - - - (1 ) - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 4,119 $ (59 ) $ 440 $ 3,738 $ 862 23.1 % $ - $ (407 ) $ 14 $ 3,269 $ 2.14 Diluted medium Shares Outstanding 1,531 [(1)] Taxes were computed for each of the items excluded from the company's GAAP results based on the facts and tax assumptions associated with each item. Schedule 7a Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Diluted EPS (Unaudited) For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2018 2017 $ Change % Change Diluted EPS attributable to Mondel�"z International (GAAP) $ 0.56 $ 0.46 $ 0.10 21.7 % Simplify to Grow Program 0.10 0.11 (0.01 ) Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives 0.01 0.01 - Malware incident incremental expenses - 0.01 (0.01 ) Impact of pension participation changes 0.01 - 0.01 Impacts from resolution of tax matters (0.01 ) - (0.01 ) CEO transition remuneration - 0.01 (0.01 ) U.S. tax reform discrete net tax (benefit)/expense (0.05 ) (0.03 ) (0.02 ) Gain on equity fashion investment transactions (0.01 ) (0.02 ) 0.01 Equity fashion investee acquisition-related and other adjustments 0.02 0.01 0.01 Adjusted EPS (Non-GAAP) $ 0.63 $ 0.56 $ 0.07 12.5 % Impact of unfavorable currency 0.05 - 0.05 Adjusted EPS @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) $ 0.68 $ 0.56 $ 0.12 21.4 % Adjusted EPS @ Constant FX - Key Drivers Increase in operations $ 0.04 Change in benefit objective non-service income (0.01 ) Change in interest and other expense, net 0.01 Increase in equity fashion investment net earnings 0.05 Change in income taxes 0.01 Change in shares outstanding 0.02 $ 0.12 Schedule 7b Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Diluted EPS (Unaudited) For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2018 2017 $ Change % Change Diluted EPS attributable to Mondel�"z International (GAAP) $ 2.28 $ 1.85 $ 0.43 23.2 % Simplify to Grow Program 0.32 0.39 (0.07 ) Intangible asset impairment charges 0.03 0.05 (0.02 ) Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives (0.09 ) 0.06 (0.15 ) Malware incident incremental expenses - 0.04 (0.04 ) Acquisition-related costs 0.01 - 0.01 Divestiture-related costs - 0.02 (0.02 ) Net earnings from divestitures - (0.03 ) 0.03 (Gain)/loss on divestitures - (0.11 ) 0.11 Remeasurement of net monetary position 0.01 - 0.01 Impact of pension participation changes 0.22 - 0.22 Impacts from resolution of tax matters (0.01 ) (0.13 ) 0.12 CEO transition remuneration 0.01 0.01 - (Gain)/loss related to interest rate swaps (0.01 ) - (0.01 ) Loss on debt extinguishment and related expenses 0.07 - 0.07 U.S. tax reform discrete net tax (benefit)/expense 0.01 (0.03 ) 0.04 Gain on equity fashion investment transactions (0.39 ) (0.02 ) (0.37 ) Equity fashion investee acquisition-related and other adjustments (0.03 ) 0.04 (0.07 ) Adjusted EPS (Non-GAAP) $ 2.43 $ 2.14 $ 0.29 13.6 % Impact of unfavorable currency 0.03 - 0.03 Adjusted EPS @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) $ 2.46 $ 2.14 $ 0.32 15.0 % Adjusted EPS @ Constant FX - Key Drivers Increase in operations $ 0.13 VAT-related settlements in 2018 0.01 PY Property insurance recovery (0.01 ) Change in interest and other expense, net 0.02 Increase in equity fashion investment net earnings 0.05 Change in income taxes 0.05 Change in shares outstanding 0.07 $ 0.32 Schedule 8a Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Segment Data (in millions of U.S. dollars) (Unaudited) For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2018 Latin America AMEA Europe North America Unrealized G/(L) on HedgingActivities General CorporateExpenses Amortization of Intangibles Other Items Mondel�"z International Net Revenue Reported (GAAP) $ 763 $ 1,429 $ 2,752 $ 1,829 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 6,773 Divestitures - - - - - - - - - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 763 $ 1,429 $ 2,752 $ 1,829 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 6,773 Operating Income Reported (GAAP) $ 92 $ 144 $ 489 $ 335 $ (40 ) $ (107 ) $ (44 ) $ 1 $ 870 Simplify to Grow Program 37 30 64 33 - 30 - - 194 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives - - - - 40 - - - 40 Acquisition integration costs - - - - - 1 - - 1 Acquisition-related costs - - - - - - - (1 ) (1 ) Divestiture-related costs - 2 - - - - - - 2 Remeasurement of net monetary position (2 ) - - - - - - - (2 ) Impact of pension participation changes - - - 15 - - - - 15 Impacts from resolution of tax matters (26 ) - - - - - - - (26 ) CEO transition remuneration - - - - - 4 - - 4 Rounding - - - - - (1 ) - - (1 ) Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 101 $ 176 $ 553 $ 383 $ - $ (73 ) $ (44 ) $ - $ 1,096 Currency 37 13 27 2 - (4 ) (1 ) - 74 Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) $ 138 $ 189 $ 580 $ 385 $ - $ (77 ) $ (45 ) $ - $ 1,170 % Change - Reported (GAAP) (3.2 )% 60.0 % (2.8 )% 10.9 % n/m (18.9 )% 2.2 % n/m 4.8 % % Change - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) (20.5 )% 29.4 % (3.3 )% 9.1 % n/m (46.0 )% 2.2 % n/m 0.5 % % Change - Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) 8.7 % 39.0 % 1.4 % 9.7 % n/m (54.0 )% 0.0 % n/m 7.2 % Operating Income Margin Reported % 12.1 % 10.1 % 17.8 % 18.3 % 12.8 % Reported pp change 1.5 pp 3.9 pp (0.1 )pp 1.5 pp 0.9 pp Adjusted % 13.2 % 12.3 % 20.1 % 20.9 % 16.2 % Adjusted pp change (0.9 )pp 2.9 pp (0.2 )pp 1.4 pp 0.5 pp For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2017 Latin America AMEA Europe North America Unrealized G/(L) on HedgingActivities General CorporateExpenses Amortization of Intangibles Other Items Mondel�"z International Net Revenue Reported (GAAP) $ 900 $ 1,449 $ 2,816 $ 1,801 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 6,966 Divestitures - (4 ) (2 ) - - - - - (6 ) Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 900 $ 1,445 $ 2,814 $ 1,801 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 6,960 Operating Income Reported (GAAP) $ 95 $ 90 $ 503 $ 302 $ (27 ) $ (90 ) $ (45 ) $ 2 $ 830 Simplify to Grow Program 32 47 65 33 - 15 - - 192 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives - - - - 27 - - - 27 Malware incident incremental expenses - - 4 23 - 3 - - 30 Acquisition integration costs - 1 - - - - - - 1 Divestiture-related costs - (2 ) 2 - - 9 - - 9 Operating income from divestitures - - (1 ) - - - - - (1 ) (Gain)/loss on divestitures - - - - - - - (2 ) (2 ) Impacts from resolution of tax matters - - (1 ) (7 ) - - - - (8 ) CEO transition remuneration - - - - - 14 - - 14 Rounding - - - - - (1 ) - - (1 ) Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 127 $ 136 $ 572 $ 351 $ - $ (50 ) $ (45 ) $ - $ 1,091 Operating Income Margin Reported % 10.6 % 6.2 % 17.9 % 16.8 % 11.9 % Adjusted % 14.1 % 9.4 % 20.3 % 19.5 % 15.7 % Schedule 8b Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Segment Data (in millions of U.S. dollars) (Unaudited) For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2018 LatinAmerica AMEA Europe NorthAmerica Unrealized G/(L) on Hedging Activities GeneralCorporateExpenses Amortization of Intangibles Other Items Mondel�"z International Net Revenue Reported (GAAP) $ 3,202 $ 5,729 $ 10,122 $ 6,885 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 25,938 Divestitures - - - - - - - - - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 3,202 $ 5,729 $ 10,122 $ 6,885 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 25,938 Operating Income Reported (GAAP) $ 410 $ 702 $ 1,734 $ 849 $ 141 $ (335 ) $ (176 ) $ (13 ) $ 3,312 Simplify to Grow Program 130 108 205 111 - 72 - - 626 Intangible asset impairment charges - 9 45 14 - - - - 68 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives - - - - (141 ) - - - (141 ) Acquisition integration costs - 4 - - - (1 ) - - 3 Acquisition-related costs - - - - - - - 13 13 Divestiture-related costs - 2 - - - (3 ) - - (1 ) Remeasurement of net monetary position 11 - - - - - - - 11 Impact of pension participation changes - - - 423 - - - - 423 Impacts from resolution of tax matters (26 ) - - - - 11 - - (15 ) CEO transition remuneration - - - - - 22 - - 22 Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 525 $ 825 $ 1,984 $ 1,397 $ - $ (234 ) $ (176 ) $ - $ 4,321 Currency 82 14 (42 ) 2 - (2 ) 1 - 55 Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) $ 607 $ 839 $ 1,942 $ 1,399 $ - $ (236 ) $ (175 ) $ - $ 4,376 % Change - Reported (GAAP) (27.3 )% 36.6 % 7.7 % (25.8 )% n/m (18.8 )% 1.1 % n/m (4.3 )% % Change - Adjusted (Non-GAAP) (5.1 )% 13.0 % 8.0 % 1.2 % n/m (14.7 )% 1.1 % n/m 4.9 % % Change - Adjusted @ Constant FX (Non-GAAP) 9.8 % 14.9 % 5.7 % 1.3 % n/m (15.7 )% 1.7 % n/m 6.2 % Operating Income Margin Reported % 12.8 % 12.3 % 17.1 % 12.3 % 12.8 % Reported pp change (3.0 )pp 3.3 pp 0.7 pp (4.5 )pp (0.6 )pp Adjusted % 16.4 % 14.4 % 19.6 % 20.3 % 16.7 % Adjusted pp change 0.9 pp 1.4 pp 0.6 pp - pp 0.6 pp For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2017 Latin America AMEA Europe North America Unrealized G/(L) on HedgingActivities General CorporateExpenses AmortizationofIntangibles Other Items Mondel�"z International Net Revenue Reported (GAAP) $ 3,566 $ 5,739 $ 9,794 $ 6,797 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 25,896 Divestitures - (133 ) (137 ) - - - - - (270 ) Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 3,566 $ 5,606 $ 9,657 $ 6,797 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 25,626 Operating Income Reported (GAAP) $ 564 $ 514 $ 1,610 $ 1,144 $ (96 ) $ (282 ) $ (178 ) $ 186 $ 3,462 Simplify to Grow Program 136 183 263 142 - 53 - - 777 Intangible asset impairment charges 5 52 11 41 - - - - 109 Mark-to-market (gains)/losses from derivatives - - - - 96 - - - 96 Malware incident incremental expenses 1 2 15 61 - 5 - - 84 Acquisition integration costs - 3 - - - - - - 3 Divestiture-related costs - 3 21 - - 7 - - 31 Operating income from divestitures - (27 ) (34 ) - - - - - (61 ) (Gain)/loss on divestitures - - - - - - - (186 ) (186 ) Impacts from resolution of tax matters (153 ) - (49 ) (7 ) - - - - (209 ) CEO transition remuneration - - - - - 14 - - 14 Rounding - - - - - (1 ) - - (1 ) Adjusted (Non-GAAP) $ 553 $ 730 $ 1,837 $ 1,381 $ - $ (204 ) $ (178 ) $ - $ 4,119 Operating Income Margin Reported % 15.8 % 9.0 % 16.4 % 16.8 % 13.4 % Adjusted % 15.5 % 13.0 % 19.0 % 20.3 % 16.1 % Schedule 9 Mondel�"z International, Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Measures Cash Flow (in millions of U.S. dollars) (Unaudited) For the TwelveMonths EndedDecember 31, 2018 Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities (GAAP) $ 3,948 Capital Expenditures (1,095 ) Free Cash flood (Non-GAAP) $ 2,853

    (C) Copyright 2019 GlobeNewswire, Inc. sum rights reserved.


    2019 Infiniti QX50 : taciturn Engineering | killexams.com real questions and Pass4sure dumps

    The 2019 Infiniti QX50 is all-new from the ground up and armed, at least according to Infiniti, to tackle on the latest crop of compact frill crossovers out there, which absorb now become sum the talk in the industry.

    It features the first-ever variable-compression engine… in the world. Thanks to trick and, frankly frosty engineering, this turbocharged mill promises to significantly better fuel economy, sum while delivering substantial performance. It’s the kindly of talk they affection to hear from a carmaker; innovative technology that allows a specific vehicle to stand tall next to its rivals.

    We took one out for drive to find out how this VC-Turbo traffic feels behind the wheel.

    Montreal-penned

    Infiniti’s newest crossover is the brand’s first vehicle to absorb been designed by Montrealer Karim Habib. He lop his teeth over at BMW, leading stylish vehicles such as the BMW 7 train and 5 Series, as well as the brand’s first all-electric car, the i3, not forgetting the i8 hybrid supercar.

    Under Karim’s stylistic management, Infiniti promises to finally absorb an identity of its own, something it’s been lacking for quite some time now. With recent concept cars affection the QX Inspiration, unveiled in Detroit in January, we’re seeing where Karim is heading, and they kindly of affection it.

    This is besides why the QX50, while a tad too subtle, is without question a fantastically well-designed microscopic SUV. It has an elegant and organic silhouette that plays well at making the vehicle emerge luxurious, but not too flashy, nor pretentious, sum while retaining actual compact dimensions.

    However, they horror it’s not enough for the Audi/BMW/Mercedes-Benz horde to occupy notice. From some angles, the QX50 kindly of resembles (whispers) a Mazda CX-5. We’re not confident if that’s a compliment, or an insult.

    Photo: William Clavey

    Less Quirky, More Normal

    At least, it’s significantly more coherent-looking than the worn QX50, which had more or less a wagon-type demeanour. But that vehicle had other tricks up its sleeves. While unsophisticated, it rode on a platform sourced from Nissan’s own Z car. Its engine was besides taken straight out of the aforementioned sports coupe. And its all-wheel drive system was once bolted onto a so-called Nissan Skyline GT-R over in Japan. It was a different kindly of crossover.

    But that’s sum in the past now. This fresh QX50 ditches the quirky traits of its predecessor for a more mainstream package. Its platform is fresh from the ground up, quieter, more solid and a lot more spacious inside. Its all-wheel drive system is now front-wheel biased, with a transverse four-cylinder engine sitting under its hood. And its gearbox is a continuously variable automatic.

    It’s the engine that gets sum the attention now. At two litres of displacement, it’s turbocharged and fitted with direct fuel injection, pumping out 268 horsepower and 280 lb.-ft. of torque. It’s a marvel of engineering, capable of changing its compression ratio on the fly, from a low of 8.0:1, to a high of 14.0:1.

    Photo: William Clavey

    According to Infiniti, it has taken 20 years to establish this thing onto the market. It’s the first of its kind, allowing, says the carmaker, for the engine to rush in maximum efficiency, burning very microscopic fuel when running quietly, or running at 22.0 psi of boost when at complete throttle.

    On paper, the system is rather clever. Extra pieces were added to the crankshaft for solidity. There’s now a joint between the crankshaft and the connecting rods. That joint moves with a computer-controlled arm. By doing this, you not only allow variations in compression, but besides in stroke—by 1.2 mm—which alters the engine’s overall displacement, from 1,971 cc (14:1 compression), to 1,997 cc (8:1 compression).

    But Does it Work?

    It’s indeed a daunting feat, and we’re elated Infiniti went through with it. But while we’re geeking out on the technology, it turns out that it’s not sum that substantial out in the wild.

    While they had the vehicle, during winter, the best fuel economy medium they recorded was 9.5 L/100 km. That was in Eco mode, feathering the throttle. While good, that number isn’t significantly better than what you’ll net from a traditional turbocharged 2.0-litre four from, say, an Audi Q5 or an Acura RDX. Heck, they got almost similar numbers out of a V6-powered Honda Pilot.

    Photo: William Clavey

    And the system is so darn seamless behind the wheel that null of this innovative trickery actually plays through to the driver. It besides gets quickly overshadowed by the relentlessly drone-y engine note and the elastic feel of the CVT gearbox. To its credit, the VC-Turbo engine is peppy, and when running complete rock in Sport mode, it revs fast, providing impeccable pickup and more than decent acceleration. But it’s sum ruined by the transmission which, we’re sorry, doesn’t belong in a frill vehicle.

    On the road, the QX50 demonstrates bizarre chassis calibration. It feels solid, nimble and reacts rather well to driver commands, but that steering wheel, not connected to an actual rack-and-pinion system (like the one create in the Q50), is absent of life or any sort of resistance. It basically feels affection it isn’t connected to anything. That’s because it isn’t.

    A Lot Going On

    There’s hope, however, for buyers who custody not about driving dynamics, or engineering. The cabin is well establish together, and there’s a clever utilize of materials, such as the quilted leather seats that wait on it shine as a frill vehicle. But we’re so not confident about the mashup of colors—blue, brown and white—our Autograph variant was fitted with.

    Photo: William Clavey

    Its rear bench, adjustable both in tilt and slide, is spacious thanks in portion to a flat floor. And its trunk will engulf 1,822 litres of your gear once sum seats are folded flat, placing it perquisite smack between an Audi Q5 (1,550 litres) and an Acura RDX (2,260 litres). Infiniti’s two-screen infotainment system remains a tangled bugger, especially when comes time to gyrate on the heated steering wheel, which requires entering the Climate menu, and clicking the touch-operated command, which doesn’t work with gloves on. The heated seats, on the other hand, absorb their own physical button.

    Overall, there’s a lot to affection about the 2019 Infiniti QX50, and there’s finally a sense the brand is aligning itself with an identity sum of its own. But that VC-Turbo deserves a lot more attention, let lonesome actually attain something for consumers. As a whole, there’s appeal, but they horror it’s already getting eaten up by the other fresh kid on the block, the redesigned Acura RDX.


    Corporate Law & Governance Update: February 2019 | killexams.com real questions and Pass4sure dumps

    Friday, February 8, 2019

    INCREASING FOCUS ON CORPORATE PURPOSE

    There is a notable enlarge in governance discourse on the relationship of corporate purpose to sustainable revenue growth, in the context of changing sociable and political structures.

    Prominent thought leaders such as Laurence Fink and Martin Lipton are emphasizing the “inextricable link” between corporate sociable purpose and profit. According to Mr. Fink, a company that truly understands and expresses its corporate purpose is more likely to duty with the discipline that will produce long-term profitability. His 2019 letter to corporate CEOs continued his stress on the requisite for corporate leadership to focus more on the sociable and environmental needs of the regions and communities a company serves.

    Mr. Lipton advises that concepts of sociable responsibility and environmental/social/governance criteria in investments “are becoming mainstream governance topics that encompass a wide orbit of issues,” including, for example, “climate change, systemic pecuniary stability, human capital management, worker retirement, supply chain labor standards, and consumer/product safety.”

    Underscoring the timeliness of the sociable purpose discussion, Microsoft and Facebook recently contributed significant funding towards the progress of affordable housing in Seattle and San Francisco, respectively.

    These developments present a potential threat to the tax-exempt status of nonprofit health systems. As for-profit corporations (especially those in the health custody industry) consign to corporate sociable responsibility purposes, they narrow the distinction between their corporate purposes and those of nonprofit corporations as it relates to the justification of tax-exempt status. The pressure for nonprofit health systems to demonstrate how their purposes are materially different from those of for-profit systems will increase.

    POST-SCANDAL GOVERNANCE CHANGES

    The newly released Business Standards Report from Wells Fargo provides a comprehensive template for how boards (including those in health care) may implement governance and compliance based “lessons learned” from corporate scandals.The report is premised on an acknowledgment of the root causes of the well-chronicled compliance scandal:

  • Performance management and incentive programs that drove behaviors that were both inappropriate and uncongenial with corporate values

  • A decentralized traffic model that granted too much autonomy to management and de-emphasized corporate oversight

  • Certain control functions that adopted a narrow “transactional” approach to issues as they arose

  • The value in the Report is its description of the governance, structural, compensation and compliance based changes made in response to the scandal. These include the following:

  • Eliminating product sales goals incentives for retail bankers and changing their incentive and performance management models to focus on customer undergo and broader “team” incentives

  • Centralizing functions such as corporate risk, human resources, finance, technology, and data in order to ensure greater corporate oversight and consistency

  • Adopting a more refined, comprehensive and better-resourced risk management function

  • Adopting a train of governance changes aimed at strengthening oversight and other board practices

  • Among the most significant governance changes were separating the chair and CEO roles; implementing compensation-based accountability actions against unavoidable executives; changing the composition of the board to add members with undergo in pecuniary services, risk management and human capital management; changing the leadership and membership of several essential board committees; amending committee charters to stress risk oversight factors; and improving the smooth of management reporting and analysis to the board.

    THE 2019 ACC SURVEY

    The latest edition in this important annual review provides relevant information to the board and executive leadership on the expanding role of, and the value provided by, the chief legal officer (CLO).

    The survey articulates changes to the CLO’s role emerging from what the Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) calls “the age of the chief legal officer.” These changes collectively betoken that CLOs are assuming more prominent roles within their respective organizations, which involve them in tasks beyond those of technical legal advisor. The CLO’s expanded role is attributed in portion to such factors as rapid regulatory change, globalization, disruptive technology and the growing significance of corporate sociable responsibility issues—all of which, the survey correctly notes, absorb significant legal implications.

    Several specific observations of the survey are of relevance to hospitals and health systems:

  • The CLO’s role is that of an organizational leader on matters of ethics and culture, and on corporate sustainability efforts.

  •  78 percent of surveyed CLOs report to their CEO (with an even higher percentage in Fortune 500 companies).

  • 70 percent of those surveyed indicated that management regularly seeks their input on traffic decisions (i.e., when the CLO is not consulted in the traffic conclusion process, risk increases).

  • A primary focus of CLO dialogue with the board focuses on risk-related issues.

  • New regulations, brand, and reputational issues, as well as disruptive technology, can exist expected to significantly move corporate decisions in 2019.

  • The role of legal operations staff in the management of in-house legal departments is increasing.

  • Board and executive leadership should exist made aware of these and other essential conclusions of the ACC Survey as they relate to the proper organizational role of the CLO.

    KAUFMAN HALL CFO OUTLOOK

    The 2019 version of Kaufman Hall’s annual “CFO Outlook” makes an essential observation about self-confidence in the health system’s skill to develop critical decisions in the current transformational health industry environment.

    One of the Outlook’s leading conclusions is that “CFO confidence” in organizational skill to manage the pecuniary impact of evolving traffic conditions has dropped. Only 23 percent of the surveyed CFOs “are very confident in their team’s skill to quickly and easily develop adjustments to strategies and plans,” which is a reduction from the 2018 survey. Kaufman Hall concludes that the data represents “red flags” that should exist of “serious concern” to health systems, especially as it relates to the system’s skill to apply organizational agility to the twin challenges of changing payment and delivery models.

    Two other survey conclusions are particularly noteworthy for the health system board. One is the perceived leading priority areas for CFOs: identifying and managing cost-reduction initiatives, predicting and managing the impact of changing payment models, and improved performance management and reporting to operational and C-suite leaders (and presumably to the board). The other is the requisite for management to monitor the pecuniary impact of capital projects after their completion. This is noted as critical to effect accountability and transparency, and to ensure that capital spending does not exceed capital capabilities.

    The entirety of the Kaufman Hall Outlook is recommended reading for the board’s finance committee, and should besides exist considered by the governance committee as it evaluates opportunities for enhancements to the board’s existing approach to making informed decisions on essential issues affecting the system’s traffic strategy.

    DIRECTOR LIABILITY FOR CYBERBREACH

    Boards that didn’t previously occupy their personal exposure for cybersecurity infringement seriously may no longer requisite convincing if the recent resolution of a prominent shareholder derivative action is any indication.

    The case arose from a train of security incidents that afflicted an internet content and service provider. The recent judicially approved settlement requires the provider’s former directors to personally contribute $29 million to the settlement. (The company had been sold in the era following the security incidents.) The derivative action contained a number of allegations, including but not limited to infringement of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and consume of corporate assets. Plaintiffs claimed that company leadership improperly withheld information about the breaches and were more focused on covering up the incidents than on making proper disclosure.

    As some observers absorb noted, it is one of the first instances in which a cyber-breach-based derivative action has been successful to any degree. While the settlement amount will exist paid by the defendants’ insurance carriers, this case illustrates to corporate boards the personal costs associated with allegations that they failed to meet their cybersecurity oversight responsibilities. At a more practical level, the settlement is likely to motivate plaintiff’s attorneys whose primary goal may exist to access the board’s D&O coverage, as opposed to litigating until verdict.

    All of this is unpleasant tidings for corporate boards already suffering from cybersecurity fatigue and lack of self-confidence in their cyber and digital literacy. The settlement’s direct implication may exist higher expectations of director cybersecurity oversight.

    DIRECTOR RETIREMENT POLICIES AND AGE DIVERSITY

    Several recent developments are drawing attention to director refreshment concepts regarding age-based service limits and the impact of millennial directors.

    For example, the FedEx board recently announced that it approved changes to its corporate governance guidelines to apply its mandatory retirement age of 75 only to non-management directors. While the company’s press release didn’t specify the intuition for the change, media speculation posits that it was to allow FedEx’s prominent and highly regarded founder, chairman, and chief executive Frederick W. Smith to remain on the company’s board past his 75th birthday this year.

    Also notable is a new academic survey that draws some controversial conclusions about the property of board service by independent directors over the age of 65. Among these are that such directors are less able or absorb weaker incentives to fulfill board duties; that company performance suffers when it has a greater symmetry of older directors on the board; and that such directors suffer from monitoring deficiencies that may confine board effectiveness in the exercise of its oversight of management.

    There are no “best practices” with respect to director age limits. The Commonsense Principles of Governance 2.0 recommend that whatever the case, companies should clearly articulate their approach on term limits and retirement age. To the extent, the board allows exceptions, the bases for particular exceptions (in the context of the board’s assessment of its performance and composition) should exist clearly documented.

    The “age diversity” of the board, appropriateness of age limitations, and the effectiveness of directors over a unavoidable age are sum likely to exist a source of serious governance committee discussion over the next several years as boards of many leading companies become notably older in age. Contributing to the issue is the continuing require for experienced independent directors, while companies confine the outside board service of their own directors. At the selfsame time, there are slowly increasing amounts of data and other information on the perspectives and tendencies of director candidates from the “Generations X, Y and Z” eras.

    All of this will enlarge expectations for the governance committee to develop thoughtful, informed decisions with respect to age diversity on the board.

    BUSINESS JUDGMENT RULE AND NON-DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

    Senior executive leaders should exist counseled on conduct that could prompt fiduciary claims, given the ongoing mistrust surrounding traffic judgment rule protection.

    As executive leaders countenance continued pressure to translate sustainable traffic strategy into plans that can exist effectively implemented, questions naturally arise with respect to their exposure to regulatory, derivative or other challenges to their conduct. In this context, the availability of traffic judgment rule protection becomes a concern for non-director executive officers.

    A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision provides an equivocal response to this concern. The case was a derivative action in which a shareholder alleged that the company CEO breached his fiduciary duty in the context of the sale of Xura, Inc. to a private equity firm. In a footnote to the conclusion (which addressed a motion to dismiss), the vice-chancellor addressed the question of the gauge concerning fiduciary breaches by non-director officers.

    While expressing a presumption in favor of applying the traffic judgment rule to the CEO, the vice chancellor acknowledged the unsettled nature of the law on this point (i.e., whether the rule should apply, versus evaluating executive conduct under negligence standards based on agency principles). Given that uncertainty, he recommended that such officers exist counseled to occupy unavoidable steps to reduce exposure to fiduciary claims—for example, by ensuring that they act with due care, not in a conflicted state and in trustworthy faith.

    Health system universal counsel may wish to review the state of law on this point in their own jurisdiction(s), recommend their executive leadership accordingly, and besides verify for those leaders the availability of insurance, indemnification and advancement protection.

    THE COMBINED CHAIR/CEO POSITION

    Several recent developments commend continued discourse on the appropriateness, from a governance perspective, of the CEO besides serving as the chair of the board.

    Trends reflect a slight preference towards separating the position, reflecting the view that a stand-alone chair will exist able to provide more effectual oversight and equipoise to a stand-alone executive. There are besides questions regarding CEO conflicts arising from votes on traffic proposals made by the CEO. But recent traffic media coverage has besides reported on decisions by some major corporations’ boards to combine the position in a lone individual in order to ensure continuity in a era of stout operational and pecuniary performance.

    This is another prominent governance topic for which there is no established “best practice.” For example, the Commonsense Principles of Governance 2.0 recognizes both approaches (without a specific preference) and recommends that the ultimate conclusion exist the product of solicitous board discussion. It besides recommends that the board periodically review its leadership structure and account for clearly (in the appropriate profile of public document) to interested third parties why it has separated or combined the roles, consistent with the board’s oversight responsibilities.

    The expectation is that if a board combines the chair and CEO roles, it will apply a prominent designated lead independent director and governance structure. In such situations, it is essential to clearly articulate the duties and responsibilities of the lead independent director in order to avoid confusion, conflict, and misunderstanding.

    FAILED MERGER CONTROVERSY

    Ongoing litigation involving two nonprofit health systems highlights the types of legal claims that can exist made by the parties to a proposed merger transaction that was terminated in the context of acrimonious circumstances.

    According to tidings reports and litigation filings in state court, the two nonprofit systems pursued discussions in which Health System A would exist substituted for Health System B as the sole corporate member of two hospitals. The parties executed a letter of intent (LOI) and commenced their respective due diligence reviews while simultaneously negotiating the transaction agreements. Unique terms of the LOI allegedly included a commitment by System A to cease negotiations with any other health system in the state during the term of the LOI, and to develop a trustworthy faith deposit of $15 million in escrow in consideration for receiving an exclusivity commitment from System B. The LOI allegedly contained a due diligence “out” for System A under unavoidable circumstances.

    Subsequently, System A sought to exercise its “out” based on unavoidable information provided to it by System B. System B refused System A’s request for recur of its escrow payment, and System A filed a complaint seeking the escrow’s recur as well as the cost of its due diligence. System B responded with a counterclaim alleging that System A improperly used confidential information obtained in its due diligence to attempt to recruit unavoidable physicians away from System B.

    The litigation is relevant in the context of the broader health custody consolidation market. There is a notable enlarge in parties abandoning transactions post-LOI, for multiple meritorious reasons, such as possibility of regulatory challenge/legal feasibility issues, cultural concerns, due diligence issues and unresolvable disagreements on traffic issues. Depending upon the circumstances involved with a conclusion to terminate discussions, the allegations presented in this litigation could exist relevant to the nature of disputes that could arise as a result of the termination decision, and the costs associated with the related dispute.

    LEADERSHIP ACCOUNTABILITY FOR property ISSUES

    Several recent health system developments hint increasing board willingness to hold senior corporate management directly answerable for significant, high-profile property of custody incidents.

    In one incident involving a major medical center, 23 employees (including members of management) were placed on administrative leave during the pendency of an internal investigation regarding allegations that a staff physician prescribed deadly doses of a particular pang medication for dozens of patients. The incident is besides under local law enforcement investigation, and multiple civil suits absorb been filed against the involved physician and the hospital.

    In another incident, essentially the entire senior leadership team of a prominent hospital resigned or otherwise left the organization in the wake of a local media investigation that identified what it described as histrionic increases in the hospital’s mortality rates. Among those leaving the organization was the hospital CEO, a vice president and the deputy director of the involved institute. The chair of the hospital’s department of surgery resigned his administrative position.

    In both instances, the respective state departments of health and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) absorb threatened to terminate the hospitals’ CMS enrollment. CMS’s survey processes often include a review of the role of the hospital governing cadaver in identified areas of concern, including any evidence available to demonstrate appropriate monitoring and oversight of hospital operations, quality, practitioner privileging and credentialing, and other issues directly related to clinical care.

    These developments highlight the increasingly closer nexus between property of custody incidents, board property of custody oversight responsibilities, and the reality of individual accountability under broad concepts of corporate compliance and patient stewardship. In particular, these developments hint that traditional focus on medical-staff-based corrective actions lonesome may exist an insufficient organizational response to the patient, financial, legal, regulatory enforcement and reputational costs associated with catastrophic property of custody incidents.

    Going forward, quality, corporate compliance and pecuniary protocols (at the least) may serve to establish an expectation of a broader, more comprehensive board-driven (or parent-organization-mandated) response to significant patient safety concerns that encompasses not only property improvements and policy changes, but besides individual accountability of corporate executives, as well as medical staff members and allied health personnel. It is certainly not inconceivable that board members may in the future exist topic to related internal investigations and other scrutiny for their possible role in similar incidents.



    Direct Download of over 5500 Certification Exams

    3COM [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AccessData [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACFE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Acme-Packet [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACSM [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Admission-Tests [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ADOBE [93 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AFP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AICPA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AIIM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alcatel-Lucent [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alfresco [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Altiris [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Amazon [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    American-College [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Android [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APICS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Apple [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AppSense [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APTUSC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Arizona-Education [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ARM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Aruba [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASIS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASQ [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASTQB [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Autodesk [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Avaya [96 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AXELOS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Axis [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Banking [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BEA [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BICSI [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlackBerry [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlueCoat [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Brocade [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Objects [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Tests [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CA-Technologies [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certification-Board [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certiport [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CheckPoint [41 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIPS [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cisco [318 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Citrix [48 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIW [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cloudera [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cognos [19 Certification Exam(s) ]
    College-Board [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CompTIA [76 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ComputerAssociates [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Consultant [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Counselor [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institue [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institute [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CSP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNP [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Dassault [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DELL [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DMI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DRI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECCouncil [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECDL [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    EMC [129 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Enterasys [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Ericsson [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ESPA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Esri [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExamExpress [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Exin [40 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExtremeNetworks [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    F5-Networks [20 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FCTC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Filemaker [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Financial [36 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Food [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fortinet [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Foundry [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FSMTB [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fujitsu [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GAQM [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Genesys [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GIAC [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Google [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GuidanceSoftware [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    H3C [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HDI [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Healthcare [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HIPAA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hitachi [30 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hortonworks [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hospitality [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HP [750 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HR [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HRCI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Huawei [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hyperion [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAAP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAHCSMM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBM [1532 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBQH [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICDL [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IEEE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IELTS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IFPUG [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIBA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IISFA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Intel [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IQN [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IRS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISACA [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISC2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISEB [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Isilon [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISM [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    iSQI [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ITEC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Juniper [64 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LEED [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Legato [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Liferay [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Logical-Operations [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Lotus [66 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LPI [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LSI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Magento [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Maintenance [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McAfee [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McData [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Medical [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Microsoft [374 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Mile2 [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Military [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Misc [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Motorola [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    mySQL [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NBSTSA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCEES [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCLEX [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Network-General [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NetworkAppliance [39 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NIELIT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nokia [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nortel [130 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Novell [37 Certification Exam(s) ]
    OMG [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Oracle [279 Certification Exam(s) ]
    P&C [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Palo-Alto [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PARCC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PayPal [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Pegasystems [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PEOPLECERT [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PMI [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Polycom [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PostgreSQL-CE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Prince2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PRMIA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PsychCorp [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PTCB [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QlikView [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Quality-Assurance [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RACC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Real-Estate [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RedHat [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RES [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Riverbed [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RSA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sair [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Salesforce [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SANS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAP [98 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SASInstitute [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCO [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCP [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SDI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    See-Beyond [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Siemens [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Snia [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SOA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Social-Work-Board [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SpringSource [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUN [63 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUSE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sybase [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Symantec [134 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Teacher-Certification [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    The-Open-Group [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Tibco [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trainers [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trend [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TruSecure [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    USMLE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    VCE [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veeam [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veritas [33 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Vmware [58 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Wonderlic [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Worldatwork [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    XML-Master [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Zend [6 Certification Exam(s) ]





    References :


    Dropmark : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/11971722
    Dropmark-Text : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/12908109
    Blogspot : http://killexamsbraindump.blogspot.com/2017/12/exactly-same-a4070-603-questions-as-in.html
    Wordpress : https://wp.me/p7SJ6L-2pj
    Box.net : https://app.box.com/s/5h7gbg2iky0867mv28d4htuc96r2pwny






    Back to Main Page





    Killexams A4070-603 exams | Killexams A4070-603 cert | Pass4Sure A4070-603 questions | Pass4sure A4070-603 | pass-guaratee A4070-603 | best A4070-603 test preparation | best A4070-603 training guides | A4070-603 examcollection | killexams | killexams A4070-603 review | killexams A4070-603 legit | kill A4070-603 example | kill A4070-603 example journalism | kill exams A4070-603 reviews | kill exam ripoff report | review A4070-603 | review A4070-603 quizlet | review A4070-603 login | review A4070-603 archives | review A4070-603 sheet | legitimate A4070-603 | legit A4070-603 | legitimacy A4070-603 | legitimation A4070-603 | legit A4070-603 check | legitimate A4070-603 program | legitimize A4070-603 | legitimate A4070-603 business | legitimate A4070-603 definition | legit A4070-603 site | legit online banking | legit A4070-603 website | legitimacy A4070-603 definition | >pass 4 sure | pass for sure | p4s | pass4sure certification | pass4sure exam | IT certification | IT Exam | A4070-603 material provider | pass4sure login | pass4sure A4070-603 exams | pass4sure A4070-603 reviews | pass4sure aws | pass4sure A4070-603 security | pass4sure coupon | pass4sure A4070-603 dumps | pass4sure cissp | pass4sure A4070-603 braindumps | pass4sure A4070-603 test | pass4sure A4070-603 torrent | pass4sure A4070-603 download | pass4surekey | pass4sure cap | pass4sure free | examsoft | examsoft login | exams | exams free | examsolutions | exams4pilots | examsoft download | exams questions | examslocal | exams practice |

    www.pass4surez.com | www.killcerts.com | www.search4exams.com | http://tractaricurteadearges.ro/