IFRS authorize three concepts of capital maintenance

IFRS authorize three concepts of capital maintenance

The IASB´s Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting (2010)

The following paragraphs remain the same as originally stated in the Framework (1989).

Concepts of Capital Maintenance and the Determination of Profit

Par. 4.59. The concepts of capital in paragraph 4.57 give rise to the following concepts of capital maintenance:

(a) Financial capital maintenance. Under this concept a profit is earned only if the financial (or money) amount of the net assets at the end of the period exceeds the financial (or money) amount of net assets at the beginning of the period, after excluding any distributions to, and contributions from, owners during the period. Financial capital maintenance can be measured in either nominal monetary units or units of constant purchasing power.

(b) Physical capital maintenance. Under this concept a profit is earned only if the physical productive capacity (or operating capability) of the entity (or the resources or funds needed to achieve that capacity) at the end of the period exceeds the physical productive capacity at the beginning of the period, after excluding any distributions to, and contributions from, owners during the period.

The Conceptual Framework (2010), Par 4.59.

The concepts of capital in the Conceptual Framework (2010), paragraph 4.57 give rise to the following three concepts of capital during inflation and deflation:

(A) Physical capital. See Par 4.57 & 4.58

(B) Nominal financial capital. See Par 4.59 (a).

(C) Constant purchasing power financial capital. See Par 4.59 (a).

The concepts of capital in Par 4.57 give rise to the following three concepts of capital maintenance during inflation and deflation:

(1) Physical capital maintenance: optional during inflation and deflation. The Current Cost Accounting model is prescribed in IFRS when the physical capital maintenance concept is implemented. See Par 4.61.

(2) Financial capital maintenance in nominal monetary units (Historical Cost Accounting): authorized in IFRS but not prescribed—optional during inflation and deflation. See Par 4.59 (a). Financial capital maintenance in nominal monetary units per se during inflation and deflation is a fallacy: it is impossible to maintain the real value of financial capital with measurement in nominal monetary units per se during inflation and deflation. IFRS should not be based on popular accounting fallacies.

(3) Financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power; i.e. Constant Item Purchasing Power Accounting (CIPPA): authorized in IFRS but not prescribed—optional during inflation and deflation. See Par 4.59 (a).

Only capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power can automatically maintain the existing constant purchasing power of capital constant during inflation, deflation and hyperinflation in all entities that at least break even—ceteris paribus—for an indefinite period of time. This would happen whether these entities own revaluable fixed assets or not.

Nicolaas Smith

Copyright (c) 2005-2011 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.

Objectives of general purpose financial reporting

Objectives of general purpose financial reporting
The objectives of general purpose financial reporting are:

1.    Maintaining the constant purchasing power of capital.

2.    Provision of continuously updated decision–useful financial information about the reporting entity to capital providers and other users.

It is the overall objective of reporting for price changes to ensure the maintenance of the business as an entity.

Accounting for Price Changes: An Analysis of Current Developments in Germany, Adolf G Coenenberg and Klaus Macharzina, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 3.1 (1976), p 53.

Financial capital maintenance can be measured in either nominal monetary units or units of constant purchasing power.  Framework (1989), Par 104 (a)

It is essential to the credibility of financial reporting to recognize that the recovery of the real cost of investment is not earnings — that there can be no earnings unless and until the purchasing power of capital is maintained.

FAS 33 (1979), p 24

Only existing constant real value capital can be maintained. Financial reporting does not and cannot create real value out of nothing as a result of simply passing update entries when no real value actually exists.

Financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power during inflation and deflation (CIPPA) as authorized in IFRS automatically maintains the constant purchasing power of capital constant for an indefinite period of time in all entities that at least break even during inflation and deflation – ceteris paribus. Maintaining the constant purchasing power of capital is a basic objective of financial reporting.

An entity has maintained the constant purchasing power of its capital if it has as much equity – expressed in units of constant purchasing power – at the end of the reporting period as it had at the beginning of the period, after excluding any distributions to, and contributions from, owners during the period. Consequently: a profit is earned only if the constant purchasing power of equity at the end of the period exceeds the constant purchasing power of equity at the beginning of the period, after excluding any distributions to, and contributions from, owners during the period.

The German economist Werner Sombart (1863–1941) wrote in Medieval and Modern Commercial Enterprise that The very concept of capital is derived from this way of looking at things; one can say that capital, as a category, did not exist before double entry bookkeeping. ^ 

^ Lane, Frederic C; Riemersma, Jelle, eds (1953). Enterprise and Secular Change: Readings in Economic History. R. D. Irwin. p. 38.  (quoted in "Accounting and rationality)."

The objectives of general purpose financial reporting are supposed to answer the question: what is financial reporting supposed to do? The only accounting model an entity can use to implement a capital concept is double entry accounting. Every concept of capital logically gives rise to its respective capital maintenance concept.

Nicolaas Smith Copyright

(c) 2005-2011 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.

Net constant item loss or gain – a new accounting item.

Net constant item loss or gain – a new accounting item 

Updated on 16-8-11

Financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power (CIPPA) with no stable measuring unit assumption requires the following:

1.    All monetary items – historical and current period monetary items – would be inflation–adjusted in terms of a Daily Index or monetized daily indexed unit of account like the Unidad de Fomento (UF) published daily by the Central Bank of Chile. This would result in the complete elimination of the cost of inflation; i.e. there would be no net monetary loss or gain, only under complete coordination, as well as with all money in the banking system which may never be the case. There is always money outside the banking system even if all deposits and other monetary items in the banking system were inflation–indexed, as partially done in Chile since 1967 with the UF. There would thus always be net monetary losses and gains to be calculated and accounted only in the monetary economy. Inflation has no effect on the real value of non–monetary items.

Complete coordination in an economy would most probably not be that easy to achieve right from the start. Banks cannot be forced to inflation–adjust all monetary items in the banking system when entities do not yet understand all the benefits of financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power. Chilean banks operate profitably with inflation–adjusting a significant portion of deposits from clients since 1967. They inflation–index, for example, mortgages and car loans, which include their profit margins, to clients in terms of the UF.

However, entities may start financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power, as authorized in IFRS, without any inflation–adjustment of monetary items at all. They may be motivated by the invisible hand of self–interest, shareholder pressure or more financial crises caused by continuously undercapitalized banks and companies. They may wish to immediately benefit from automatically maintaining the constant purchasing power of their own shareholders´ equity constant forever as long as they break even during inflation and deflation – ceteris paribus – whether they own any revaluable fixed assets or not. (See CIPPA increases a company´s net asset value.) [Link this to the blog article.]

There is much to be gained from moving away from reporting on the basis of Financial Capital Maintenance in Nominal Monetary Units.

           Prof Rachel Baskerville, Associate Professor of Accounting at the School of Accounting and Commercial Law at the Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand in her publication 100 Questions (and Answers) about IFRS, March 15th, Question 38, 2010 on the Social Science Research Network. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1526846

The full cost of inflation – net monetary loss – would be recognized by these entities in their operations. It would be calculated and accounted in financial reports prepared under CIPPA. Under partial inflation–adjustment of monetary items in the banking system – e.g. in Chile – the net monetary loss or gain would be calculated and accounted for the part not inflation–indexed. This is presently not being done in Chile because entities in Chile implement the HCA model under which net monetary losses and gains are not calculated and accounted.

The calculation and accounting of net monetary losses and gains are required under CIPPA because there is no stable measuring unit assumption under financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power.

The constant purchasing power of capital can only be automatically maintained by the real value of net assets in entities that at least break even during inflation and deflation – ceteris paribus – whether they own any revaluable fixed assets or not per se under financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power.

Under HCA the cost of inflation in the monetary economy is not calculated and accounted because the books are not being balanced in real terms but in illusionary nominal monetary terms. The concept of capital being equal to net assets is also applied under HCA, but, in nominal monetary terms.

Entities, on the one hand, apply the stable measuring unit assumption under HCA in the valuation of their own shareholders´ equity in their own financial reports in nominal monetary units under which they may not take into account unreported hidden reserves for fixed assets not revalued. On the other hand, they always value third parties´ shareholders´ equity taking into account unreported hidden reserves for fixed assets not revalued, e.g. in the share price of listed companies which they value at market value in terms of IFRS, as well as in their valuations of unlisted companies. With regard to their own shareholders´ equity, they implement financial capital maintenance in nominal monetary units as authorized in IFRS and by the FASB which is a very popular accounting fallacy not yet extinct because it is impossible to maintain the real value of capital in nominal monetary units per se during inflation and deflation.

This means that under HCA only entities with revaluable fixed assets (revalued or not) with an updated real value equal to 100% of the updated constant real value of shareholders´ equity maintain the real value of their capital under the concept of capital is equal to net assets during inflation and deflation. This may only be the case in hotel, hospital and other property–intensive groups. CIPPA maintains the constant purchasing power of capital constant forever in all entities that at least break even during inflation and deflation – ceteris paribus – whether they own any revaluable fixed assets or not. This requires the calculation and accounting of net monetary losses and gains as well as net constant item losses and gains because the books are being balanced in real terms; i.e. the stable measuring unit assumption is not applied.

This also means that, under HCA, the portion of shareholders´ equity never covered by sufficient revaluable fixed assets (revalued or not) is currently  unnecessarily, unintentionally and unknowingly being eroded at a rate equal to the annual rate of inflation; not by inflation, but, by the implementation of the stable measuring unit assumption during inflation.

The erosion is equal to the annual rate of inflation because economic items are valued in terms of money which is the legal monetary unit of account and inflation erodes the real value of only money and other monetary items. Inflation has no effect on the real value of non–monetary items. Shareholders´ equity is a constant real value non–monetary item. This unnecessary erosion in constant item real value amounts to hundreds of billions of US Dollars per annum in the world´s constant item economy.

Financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power (CIPPA) would stop that forever and would instead maintain hundreds of billions of US Dollars per annum in the world´s shareholders´ equity investment base for an unlimited period of time.

2.    Variable items are valued and accounted in terms of IFRS. Variable item revaluation losses and gains are treated in terms of IFRS. Variable items when not valued daily in terms of IFRS would be updated in terms of a Daily Index or a monetized daily indexed unit of account because there is no stable measuring unit assumption under financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power.

Selling prices of items in shops and restaurants, etc. are not updated on a daily basis during low inflation and deflation. They are not historical prices. They are set every day in a free market.  Keeping them the same during a period is a marketing strategy. Selling prices depend on demand and supply. McDonalds´ prices would not be updated daily in terms of a Daily Index or a monetized daily indexed unit of account. They would be updated daily under hyperinflation in terms of the daily US Dollar parallel rate or a daily Brazilian–style index rate under Constant Purchasing Power Accounting (CPPA). That happened at McDonalds in Harare, Zimbabwe; i.e., the daily updating, not the implementation of CPPA.

3.    Constant items would always and everywhere be measured in units of constant purchasing power in terms of a Daily Index or monetized daily indexed unit of account. This would eliminate the total cost of the stable measuring unit assumption (currently hundreds of billions of US Dollars per annum) from the constant item economy only in the unlikely case of complete coordination right from the start of changing over to financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power.

Constant items within an entity with no third parties involved would always and everywhere be measured in units of constant purchasing power. This would include all items in shareholders´ equity, provisions, all items in the income statement, accounts payable, all other non–monetary payables, etc.

A new accounting item, net constant item loss (or gain) would be calculated and accounted where trade debtors and other non–monetary receivables initially do not agree to measurement in units of constant purchasing power in terms of a Daily Index or monetized daily indexed unit of account. The loss is not a net monetary loss because it is not caused by inflation in the real value of a monetary item, but, by the application of the stable measuring unit assumption causing a loss in the real value of a constant item. The calculation and accounting of the net constant item loss or gain is required because there is no stable measuring unit assumption under financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power: the books would – for the first time – be balanced in real terms.

Nicolaas Smith

Copyright (c) 2005-2011 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.

Valuing monetary items

Measurement of monetary items in the economy

Measurement is determining the particular basis at which monetary items are to be valued and accounted on a daily basis in the functional currency - the legal unit of account for accounting purposes - in an economy under all levels of inflation and deflation. The functional currency is the currency of the primary economic environment in which an entity operates. The functional currency is normally the national (or monetary union) monetary unit which is legal tender in the economy. In dollarized economies the adopted hard currency is the functional currency for accounting purposes.

Entities implement financial capital maintenance in nominal monetary units when they prepare their financial reports in terms of the HCA model. The stable measuring unit assumption is applied to some - not all - items under HCA.  Changes in money´s general purchasing power are not considered sufficiently important to require financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power under HCA as authorized in IFRS.

Monetary items are thus generally not inflation–adjusted. The Chilean banking system is partially indexed using the Unidad de Fomento. Monetary items are also inflation-adjusted in other economies, e.g.  TIPS in the US economy, where HCA is the generally accepted accounting model.

Under CIPPA, i.e. financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power during inflation and deflation, there is no stable measuring unit assumption as authorized in IFRS. All monetary items are thus inflation-adjusted on a daily basis in terms of the Daily Index. Historical monetary items as well as current financial period monetary items are inflation-adjusted. This requires inflation-adjustment of all monetary items in the banking system. Complete coordination in the economy eliminates the cost of inflation completely from the monetary economy when all money is in the banking system and all monetary items outside the banking system are also inflation-adjusted in terms of the Daily Index.

Chile is the country closest to achieving this. HCA is the generally accepted accounting model in Chile.

Nicolaas Smith

Copyright (c) 2005-2011 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.

Unstable unit of account

Unstable unit of account

Unstable money’s third function is that it is the unstable unit of account in the economy. It is a monetary standard of measure of the real value of economic items to facilitate exchange without barter in order to overcome the double coincidence of wants problem. Inflation erodes the real value of money and deflation increases the real value of money. Money has never been perfectly stable in real value over an extended period of time. However, money illusion makes people believe that money maintains its real value stable over the short to medium term. Money is the only standard unit of measure that is not a fundamentally stable or fixed unit of account. All other standards of measure are perfectly stable units.

Accounting transformed money illusion into a generally accepted accounting principle with the very destructive stable measuring unit assumption, also called the Measuring Unit Principle.

The unit of measure in accounting shall be the base money unit of the most relevant currency. This principle also assumes the unit of measure is stable; that is, changes in its general purchasing power are not considered sufficiently important to require adjustments to the basic financial reports.

Paul H. Walgenbach, Norman E. Dittrich and Ernest I. Hanson, (1973), Financial Accounting, New York: Harcourt Brace Javonovich, Inc. Page 429.

The very erosive stable measuring unit assumption is based on the fallacy that changes in the general purchasing power (real value) of unstable money are not sufficiently important to require adjustments to the basic financial reports; i.e. not sufficiently important to require financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power during inflation and deflation.

In an inflationary economy depreciating money is used as a depreciating monetary unit of account to value and account economic activity. It is very tempting to state that it is very clear that you cannot have a unit of account that is not stable – as in fixed – in real value for accounting purposes. However, we have been doing exactly that since the start of inflation in the economy; i.e. for about the last 3000 years. The problem stems from the difficulty in achieving zero inflation on a sustainable basis (never achieved to date) and the difficulty in defining a universal unit of real value (also never achieved to date).

The only perfect solution to eliminate the erosion of real value in constant items never maintained constant during inflation and deflation is financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power; i.e. the measurement of all constant items in units of constant purchasing power in terms of a Daily Index during inflation and deflation (CIPPA).

Financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power is, in principle, required by IAS 29 Financial Reporting in Hyperinflationary Economies during hyperinflation under which all non–monetary items (variable real value non–monetary items as well as constant real value non–monetary items) are inflation–adjusted in terms of the period-end CPI. This does not result in stabilizing the real economy during hyperinflation since IAS 29 simply requires the restatement of HC or CC financial statements. Stabilizing the real economy during hyperinflation is only possible with either daily updating of all non–monetary items in terms of the daily change in the US Dollar parallel rate – where the parallel rate exists officially or unofficially – or with Brazilian–style daily updating in terms of a Daily Index supplied by the government.

Measurement in units of constant purchasing power is implemented under the traditional Historical Cost Accounting model with the valuation of only some – not all – income statement items, e.g. salaries, wages, rentals, etc. but no balance sheet constant items in units of constant purchasing power during low inflation.

The real value maintaining function (effect) of measuring financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power is not generally realized as it relates to balance sheet constant items. If it were realized, the very erosive stable measuring unit assumption would have been stopped by now. Its implementation unknowingly, unintentionally and unnecessarily erodes hundreds of billions of US Dollars per annum of real value in constant items never maintained constant under HCA in the world economy.

The erosive effect of the stable measuring unit assumption as far as using it to measure salaries, wages, rentals, etc. during low inflation is concerned, is very well understood. But, not as far as balance sheet constant items never maintained constant under HCA during low inflation is concerned.

Inflation is the problem or number one enemy – as everyone knows – in the money supply or monetary economy since real value or purchasing power is the most fundamental economic concept in any economy under any economic model including the Historical Cost Accounting model and not unstable money as is generally accepted under the mistaken belief (money illusion) or assumption (stable measuring unit assumption) that changes in the purchasing power of money is not sufficiently important during low inflation and deflation to require financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power.

The stable measuring unit assumption is the second enemy in the constant item economy – and not inflation as everyone so mistakenly believe. Inflation has no effect on the real value of non-monetary items. Money’s function as depreciating unit of account is of critical importance. The implementation of this very erosive assumption in the world´s inflationary economy is the second, unknown and hidden (camouflaged by IFRS authorization of financial capital maintenance in nominal monetary units) real value erosion process or enemy whereby the HCA model unknowingly erodes significant amounts of real value in the real economy each and every year.

Nicolaas Smith

Copyright (c) 2005-2011 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.

Sticky salaries and wages

Sticky salaries and wages

The constant real value non–monetary items salaries and wages are generally sticky downwards: it is not easy for firms to reduce them in nominal value. It is, of course, very, very easy to reduce their real values during inflation: just keep them the same or increase them at a rate lower than the inflation rate. People are apparently agreeble to accept the latter option which means a reduction in real value. People are very unhappy to accept a reduction in nominal value of salaries and wages.

It may happen that it could be some time before the concept of enhanced economic stability during deflation via financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power (CIPPA) is generally accepted. Salaries and wages would then be automatically decreased in nominal value by means of measurement in units of constant purchasing power while their real values would stay the same during deflation. This would improve economic stability substantially and help central banks in their task of getting the economy into a low inflationary mode again. It would also reduce the level of the monetary effect of a lower general price level during deflation.

Salaries and wages are already being decreased in nominal value in the labour market during deflation, but, not yet automatically as a normal accounting practice by measuring them in units of constant purchasing power in terms of the negative change in the CPI.

A possible practical way of overcoming the opposition people have in accepting a decrease in salaries and wages during months of negative monthly inflation while the annual inflation rate is still positive (during inflation and disinflation) would be the following:

Employment contracts could state that salaries and wages would be updated (there is no stable measuring unit assumption under IFRS-authorized financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power - CIPPA) in terms of the Daily Index while the DI value is increasing. When it decreases as a result of a period of negative monthly inflation while the annual inflation rate is still positive, salaries and wages would be kept fixed in nominal value during that period in order to give employees certainty as to the amount of money they will receive at month end. They would, of course, be receiving more in real value during the period their salaries and wages are fixed with a decreasing DI. As soon as the Daily Index turns positive again salaries and wages will be updated again in terms of the increasing DI, but, only after allowing a recoupment of the period of the decrease in the DI while annual inflation was still positive. Thus, their salaries and wages would be kept fixed for a little longer while the DI is already increasing. They would, of course, be receiving less in real value during the period their salaries and wages are fixed with an increasing DI. Months of negative monthly inflation during a year of positive annual inflation are normally limited to one or two consecutive months. The net effect to salaries would be the same as always updating them in terms of the DI whether it was increasing or decreasing during continuous annual inflation and disinflation. Neither employers nor employees would be negatively affected in the above case.

During deflation a different approach is required because keeping salaries fixed in nominal value during deflation means their real values are increasing daily and may after some time severely affect entities´ ability to maintain stability in their operations during deflation which may result in layoffs affecting employees in the worst way. On the other hand, employees need certainty about how much money they will receive during the current year in their contracts also during deflation.

Employment contracts could state that during deflation salaries and wages would be kept fixed during the contract year in which the economy first enters into deflation. Contracts could then be agreed to be renegotiated at the end of that contract year and yearly thereafter while the economy remains in deflation with a view to decreasing the nominal values of salaries and wages (not their real values) in a predictable manner in line with deflation. Their real values would remain the same or increases in real terms could be negotiated. It could then also be negotiated to increase salaries and wages in real terms by keeping them fixed during deflation depending on each entities´ specific circumstances.

Nicolaas Smith

Copyright (c) 2005-2011 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.

Daily CPI - South Africa

Daily CPI - South Africa

The Daily Consumer Price Index is a lagged daily interpolation of the Consumer Price Index. Daily CPI Formula.

Unit of account: Rand

CPI 2008 = 100

CPI Aug 2011 118.30 Published on 21-09-11

18-Out-2011	118,570
17-Out-2011	118,563
16-Out-2011	118,556
15-Out-2011	118,550
14-Out-2011	118,543
13-Out-2011	118,536
12-Out-2011	118,530
11-Out-2011	118,523
10-Out-2011	118,516
9-Out-2011	118,510
8-Out-2011	118,503
7-Out-2011	118,496
6-Out-2011	118,490
5-Out-2011	118,483
4-Out-2011	118,476
3-Out-2011	118,470
2-Out-2011	118,463
1-Out-2011	118,456
30-Set-2011	118,449
29-Set-2011	118,443
28-Set-2011	118,436
27-Set-2011	118,429
26-Set-2011	118,423
25-Set-2011	118,416
24-Set-2011	118,409
23-Set-2011	118,403
22-Set-2011	118,396
21-Set-2011	118,389

20-Set-2011	118,383
19-Set-2011	118,350
18-Set-2011	118,318
17-Set-2011	118,285
16-Set-2011	118,253
15-Set-2011	118,220
14-Set-2011	118,188
13-Set-2011	118,156
12-Set-2011	118,123
11-Set-2011	118,091
10-Set-2011	118,058
9-Set-2011	118,026
8-Set-2011	117,994
7-Set-2011	117,961
6-Set-2011	117,929
5-Set-2011	117,897
4-Set-2011	117,864
3-Set-2011	117,832
2-Set-2011	117,800
1-Set-2011	117,767
31-Ago-2011	117,735
30-Ago-2011	117,703
29-Ago-2011	117,670
28-Ago-2011	117,638
27-Ago-2011	117,606
26-Ago-2011	117,574
25-Ago-2011	117,541
24-Ago-2011	117,509
23-Ago-2011	117,477
22-Ago-2011	117,456
21-Ago-2011	117,435
20-Ago-2011	117,415
19-Ago-2011	117,394
18-Ago-2011	117,373
17-Ago-2011	117,352
16-Ago-2011	117,332
15-Ago-2011	117,311
14-Ago-2011	117,290
13-Ago-2011	117,269
12-Ago-2011	117,249
11-Ago-2011	117,228
10-Ago-2011	117,207
9-Ago-2011	117,187
8-Ago-2011	117,166
7-Ago-2011	117,145
6-Ago-2011	117,124
5-Ago-2011	117,104
4-Ago-2011	117,083
3-Ago-2011	117,062
2-Ago-2011	117,042
1-Ago-2011	117,021
31-Jul-2011	117,000
30-Jul-2011	116,980
29-Jul-2011	116,959
28-Jul-2011	116,938
27-Jul-2011	116,918
26-Jul-2011	116,897
25-Jul-2011	116,876
24-Jul-2011	116,856
23-Jul-2011	116,835
22-Jul-2011	116,814
21-Jul-2011	116,794
20-Jul-2011	116,773
19-Jul-2011	116,752
18-Jul-2011	116,737
17-Jul-2011	116,721
16-Jul-2011	116,706
15-Jul-2011	116,691
14-Jul-2011	116,675
13-Jul-2011	116,660
12-Jul-2011	116,645
11-Jul-2011	116,629
10-Jul-2011	116,614
9-Jul-2011	116,598
8-Jul-2011	116,583
7-Jul-2011	116,568
6-Jul-2011	116,552
5-Jul-2011	116,537
4-Jul-2011	116,521
3-Jul-2011	116,506
2-Jul-2011	116,491
1-Jul-2011	116,475

Disclaimer: The numbers presented here are accurate to the best knowledge of the author, but no warranty is expressed or implied that they are accurate or appropriate for use in contracts.

Copyright (c) 2005-2011 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.