Customer Satisfaction And Customer Satisfied Windows Phone Essay

I would now like to examine Wal-marts financial data. Wal-Mart’s revenue improved over these three years by $39,736 million which is a gross increase of 9.1%. Additionally the Cost of Sales climbed from

Account W/P Common Common # Title Ref. Balance Size Balance Size Amount Percentage REVENUE 40000 Sales 246,172,918.44 102.33% 245,213,452.88 106.40% -959,465.56 -0.39% 41000 Sales Returns 4,497,583.20 1.87% 13,600,220.89 5.90% 9,102,637.69 202.39% 42000 Warranty Exp 1,100,281.48 0.46% 1,158,128.47 0.50% 57,846.99 5.26% Net Sales 240,575,053.76 100.00% 230,455,103.52 100.00% (10,119,950.24) -4.21% EXPENSES 50000 COGS 141,569,221.61 58.85% 130,246,645.26 56.52% (11,322,576.35) -8.00% Gross Margin 99,005,832.15 41.15% 100,208,458.26 43.48% 1,202,626.11 1.21% GA-7.4

|SALES AND COST OF GOODS SOLD BY PRODUCT LINE | | | |Date: | | | |

These number will be used for predicting future financial statements later in this case study.

|18. |(Figure: A Perfectly Competitive Firm in the Short Run) The firm's total revenue from the sale of its most profitable level of |

(TCO A) The following data (in thousands of dollars) have been taken from the accounting records of Larop Corporation for the just completed year:

Changes in strategy are inevitable as the Department’s goals and objectives alter to meet the demands of

$10,644,800 / $2,271,400 = 4.69 Times Return on Common Stockholders’ Equity (2002) $647,645 / $1,928,960 = 33.58% Return

-3Table 1. UPS operating results. (in billions of dollars) 2006 Revenue Operating margins Net income CFFO $47.6 14.0% $ 4.2 $ 5.6 2005 $42.6 14.4% $ 3.9 $ 5.8 2004 $36.6 13.6% $ 3.3 $ 5.3 2003 $33.5 13.3% $ 2.9 $ 4.6

The profitability figures as derived from the data given in the case are as follows:

Exhibit 2 Basic Industries Company and Consolidated Affiliates: 10-Year Financial Highlights as Reported in 1994 Annual Report (dollar amounts in millions; per-share amounts in dollars)

Partnerships created value in the industry and made significant acquisitions to increase economies of scale, market share, and access to resources. Management believes in the growing acceptance of digital technologies as a single communication standard in the future. Nokia has formed a partnership with AT & T, Siemens and AEG for the promotion of the development of digital telephone and Internet. GSM digital standard was very successful for Nokia on a global level. Nokia has also realized the need for a rapid response to market changes. Production and distribution have been standardized and made flexible to meet the changing needs of the market. At the same Time, Nokia is also focused on creating brand management. Management realized that the mobile phone will become a necessary commodity in the future. The company increased advertising costs, allocation of resources and the creation of brand image throughout the world. This strategy was successful and Nokia have placed among the most revered brands

In 2012 quarterly report, Samsung, known as the major player in mobile phone industry, stood as the fourth in world phone sales and its profit have smashed for the fourth quarter. Following this, the 2014 quarterly report still showed a decline in revenue and sales, as BBC News states that the net profit dropped to 23.4 trillion won, which is a 27% fall from 30.5trillion won in 2013. On the other hand, Samsung’s competitor Xiaomi marked itself as the top smartphone company of the year 2014 in China with a 12.5 percent market share, beating Samsung that had positioned itself the first in sales. Xiaomi put out low-mid range priced phone as a strategy with a fairly high quality specs and design for its price, threatening all other competitors.

The Swedish telecommunications company Ericsson, one of the “Big Three” mobile handset manufacturers in the 1990s, started to reach difficulty as it entered the new millennium. In 2001, Ericsson’s sales dropped by 52%, recording a $1.39 billion loss which preceded an announcement that would lay off 20% of their workforce. Ericsson found itself losing market share to “Big Three” rivals Nokia and Motorola and eventually even to Siemens. Analysts attributed this downfall to Ericsson’s stagnant phone designs, slow time to market and their inability

0.8 Financial Others 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Outsourcing SERVICES