michael bettinger mainz income

how to buy bitcoins anonymously in canada

Riza and Roy are expecting, however creative differences leave them stuck on a name. All bets are on! Winry prided herself on her situational awareness, quick thinking, and high bullshit threshold.

Michael bettinger mainz income sports betting advice

Michael bettinger mainz income

Citations Many of the citations below have been collected in an experimental project, CitEc , where a more detailed citation analysis can be found. These are citations from works listed in RePEc that could be analyzed mechanically. So far, only a minority of all works could be analyzed. See under "Corrections" how you can help improve the citation analysis. Blog mentions As found by EconAcademics. Discussion Papers. Snyder, Bloom, David E. David E. List, Stephen C. A welfare analysis for teacher attendance in Ugandan primary schools ," Journal of Public Economics , Elsevier, vol.

Bhalotra, Sonia R. Carrillo, B. Federico A. Shaikh, Travis J. Saavedra, Cummins, Joseph R. David K. Lee Crawfurd, Bando, Rosangela, Michael Woolcock, Woolcock, Michael, Kennedy School of Government. Jorge M. Brett Xiang, Christopher Jepsen, Fenske, James, James Fenske, Filipe R. Campante, Filipe R. Filipe Campante, Jane Zhang, Jane, Robinson, Monica Martinez-Bravo, Matthias Doepke, Dionissi Aliprantis, Sonia R.

Venkataramani, John A. Price, Charles I. Klenow, Karlan, Dean S. Ragasa, C. Working Papers , University of Turin. Bloom, Nick, Lori A. Udry, Evidence from an extension network experiment ," Journal of Development Economics , Elsevier, vol. Card ed. Esther Gehrke, Pascaline Dupas, Bergman, No Synergies with Conditional Cash Transfers? Weil, Mathieu Couttenier, Foster, Andrew D. Andrew D. Rosenzweig, Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy. Mason, Nicole M.

Diego Ubfal, Ubfal, Diego, Eliciting good-specific discount rates ," Journal of Development Economics , Elsevier, vol. Adam M. Vondolia, Godwin K. The impact of fertilizer subsidies on investment in soil and water conservation ," Working Papers in Economics , University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics. Townsend, Cheryl Doss, Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.

Madrian, Brigitte, Brigitte C. Madrian, Nikolas Tsakas, Tsakas, Nikolas, Timothy N. Schlag, Le Cotty, T. Garth Heutel, Cai, Jing, Jennifer M. Yukichi Y. Angus Deaton, Angus S. Deaton, Matsumoto, Tomoya, Tomoya Matsumoto, Mushfiq Mobarak, Mushfiq, Luca Di Corato, Abhijit V. Stiglitz, Iyer, Sriya, Sriya Iyer, Elsayed, A. Chen, Daniel L. Nathan Nunn, Yanagizawa-Drott, Eric D.

Klor, Alberto F. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. Zussman, Asaf, Paola Giuliano, Mavridis, Dimitris, Baele, L. Gharad T. Bursztyn,Leonardo A. Kirabo Jackson, Marc Piopiunik, Marta De Philippis, Ganimian, Muralidharan, K. Korthals, Roxanne, Pathak, Adam S. David J. Bird, Richard M. William Easterly, Florencia Torche, Zhang, Hongliang, Heinrich, Carolyn J.

Christoph Eder, Dustan, Andrew, Eric A. Hanushek, Mohamad Fahmi, Alan B. Krueger, Alan B. Rodrik, Dani, Carrillo, Bladimir, Bladimir Carrillo, Vira Semenova, Estevan, Fernanda, Christiansen Arndt, Argentino Pessoa, Esther Duflo, Naveen Kumar, Larry Willmore, Michael Kremer, Susanne Link, Lant Pritchett, Justin Sandefur, Murathi Kiratu, Nixon, Justin C.

Andrew E. Cacault, M. Vazquez, Jacqmin, Julien, Tenaa, Wright, Nicholas A. Matsuda, Kazushige, Evans, Cited by: Steven W. Dynarski, Reber, See citations under working paper version above. Cited by: Seemanti Ghosh, Wei Chen, Cited by: Celeste K.

Cited by: Colin Gray, Darolia, Rajeev, The effect of federal financial aid availability on postsecondary enrollment ," Journal of Public Economics , Elsevier, vol. Frauke H. Ran I. York, Elizabeth W. Hastings, Justine S. Justine S. Zimmerman, Castleman, Benjamin L. Katharine G. Abraham, Katharine G. Brent J.

Isphording, Brian J. Skimmyhorn, Lisa J. Stefanie P. Seemanti Ghosh, Barrios-Fernandez, Andres, De Walque,Damien B. James J. Heckman, James J. Timothy J. Sylvain Chareyron, Drew M. Narayan, Ayushi, Brian G. Schiff, Graves, Jennifer. Sarah R. Goodman, Peter, Frauke H. Universidad de Montevideo..

Martin F. Timothy N. Bond, Timothy N. Joshua Hyman, Bleemer, Zachary, Joshua S. Smith Jonathan, Naihobe Gonzalez, "undated". Nicholas W. Lucia Rizzica, Johannes S. Staub, Kunz, Johannes S. Mette T. Damgaard, Experimental evidence on the benefits of college matriculation support from high schools versus colleges ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol. Joseph G. Raj Chetty, Evidence from administrative data ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol.

Benjamin N. Swensen, Lindo, Jason M. Madrian, Brigitte, Brigitte C. Dayanand S. Marx, Benjamin M. Effects of information on student loan take-up ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol. Sean P. Amanda Pallais, Melissa Whatley, Page, Alexis Le Chapelain, Benjamin W. Castleman, Jeremy McCauley, Meyer, Andrew G.

Joselynn Hawkins Fountain, Sandra McNally, Bridget Terry Long, Barr, Andrew, Burgess, Simon, S ," Journal of Public Economics , Elsevier, vol. Brian P. Sorensen, Michael S. Kofoed, Tavares, Priscilla Albuquerque, Phillip B. Russell, Soter, Philippis, Marta De, Marta De Philippis, Lapid, Patrick Andrew, Daniel C. Meyer, Papageorge, Cassandra M. Dills, Angela K.

Hilmer, Christiana E. Cheslock, John J. The effects of tenure-track and part-time faculty on student achievement ," China Economic Review , Elsevier, vol. Siegfried, Saavedra, Gabriel Heller Sahlgren, Drichoutis, Oksana Tokarchuk, Schmitz, Andrew Meyer, Hoppe, Eva I.

Eva I. Kusterer, Mohammad Noori, Li, Musau, Andrew, Simons, Andrew M. Paloyo, Alfredo R. Pickering, Lee, Possebom, Vitor, Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science. Andreas Ostermaier, Naveen Sunder, Small, Temple, Jonathan R. Mahmoud A. Elsayed, Starr, Wooldridge, Wooldridge, Jeffrey M. Imbens, Guido W. Guido M. Guido W. Behrman, Jere R. Dang,Hai-Anh H. Hai-Anh H. Glewwe, Miller, Luke C. Al-Hasan, MacLeod, W.

Ansari, Ali H. Juan M. Villa, Trinidad, Jose Eos, Diallo, Martin Huber, Marianne P. Hoynes, Bertrand, Marianne, West, Puhani, Patrick A. Puhani, Patrick, Evidence from administrative panel data ," Labour Economics , Elsevier, vol. Patrick A. Puhani, Joyce B. Main, Chung, Bobby W. Ehrenberg, Ronald G. Maria L. Loureiro, Maria L. Fairlie, Robert W.

Robert W. Fairlie, Robert, Advisor gender and post-graduate careers in science ," Research Policy , Elsevier, vol. Evidence from U. Nguyen, My, My Nguyen, Schier, Uta K. Shi, Ying, Paredes, Valentina, Role model versus teacher bias effect ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol. Boring, Anne, Thomas S. Dee, Wozny, Bobby Chung, Christelle Garrouste, Valentina A.

Paredes, Valentina A. Jimmy R. Ellis, Jimmy R. Griffith, Amanda L. Keng, Shao-Hsun, Dinarte Diaz,Lelys Ileana, Egalite, Anna J. Carlana, Michela, Michela Carlana, Anne Boring, Izaskun Zuazu, Gordon B. Zuazu-Bermejo, Izaskun, Hisanobu Kakizawa, Adriana D.

Kugler, Adriana D. Karnani, Mohit, Bettinger, Eric P. Cited by: Sarah A. Cordes, Jinnai, Yusuke, Winters, Marcus A. Joydeep Roy, Lisa Breger, George M. Holmes, "undated". Rupp, Jim VanderHoff, James VanderHoff, Helen F. Holbein, Welsch, David M. Evidence from Wisconsin's inter-district public school program ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol.

Joshua M. Evidence from online school search behavior ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol. Yusuke Jinnai, Scott Imberman, Imberman, Scott A. Jason Barr, Thomas A. Downes, Gronberg, Timothy J. Ni, Yongmei, Pathak, Peter Temin, Scott A. David M. Zimmer, Levin, Henry M. Martin, Stephanie M. Kim, Youngran, Cited by: Stone, Joe A.

Bettinger, Eric, The contrasting gender gaps ," Economics Letters , Elsevier, vol. Price, Joshua, Economic literature: papers , articles , software , chapters , books. FRED data. Citations Many of the citations below have been collected in an experimental project, CitEc , where a more detailed citation analysis can be found.

These are citations from works listed in RePEc that could be analyzed mechanically. So far, only a minority of all works could be analyzed. See under "Corrections" how you can help improve the citation analysis. Louis Fed. Help us Corrections Found an error or omission?

HANDICAP BETTING LADBROKES BET

Discussion Papers. Snyder, Bloom, David E. David E. List, Stephen C. A welfare analysis for teacher attendance in Ugandan primary schools ," Journal of Public Economics , Elsevier, vol. Bhalotra, Sonia R. Carrillo, B. Federico A. Shaikh, Travis J. Saavedra, Cummins, Joseph R. David K. Lee Crawfurd, Bando, Rosangela, Michael Woolcock, Woolcock, Michael, Kennedy School of Government. Jorge M. Brett Xiang, Christopher Jepsen, Fenske, James, James Fenske, Filipe R.

Campante, Filipe R. Filipe Campante, Jane Zhang, Jane, Robinson, Monica Martinez-Bravo, Matthias Doepke, Dionissi Aliprantis, Sonia R. Venkataramani, John A. Price, Charles I. Klenow, Karlan, Dean S. Ragasa, C. Working Papers , University of Turin. Bloom, Nick, Lori A. Udry, Evidence from an extension network experiment ," Journal of Development Economics , Elsevier, vol.

Card ed. Esther Gehrke, Pascaline Dupas, Bergman, No Synergies with Conditional Cash Transfers? Weil, Mathieu Couttenier, Foster, Andrew D. Andrew D. Rosenzweig, Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy. Mason, Nicole M. Diego Ubfal, Ubfal, Diego, Eliciting good-specific discount rates ," Journal of Development Economics , Elsevier, vol.

Adam M. Vondolia, Godwin K. The impact of fertilizer subsidies on investment in soil and water conservation ," Working Papers in Economics , University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics. Townsend, Cheryl Doss, Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development. Madrian, Brigitte, Brigitte C. Madrian, Nikolas Tsakas, Tsakas, Nikolas, Timothy N. Schlag, Le Cotty, T. Garth Heutel, Cai, Jing, Jennifer M. Yukichi Y. Angus Deaton, Angus S. Deaton, Matsumoto, Tomoya, Tomoya Matsumoto, Mushfiq Mobarak, Mushfiq, Luca Di Corato, Abhijit V.

Stiglitz, Iyer, Sriya, Sriya Iyer, Elsayed, A. Chen, Daniel L. Nathan Nunn, Yanagizawa-Drott, Eric D. Klor, Alberto F. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. Zussman, Asaf, Paola Giuliano, Mavridis, Dimitris, Baele, L. Gharad T. Bursztyn,Leonardo A.

Kirabo Jackson, Marc Piopiunik, Marta De Philippis, Ganimian, Muralidharan, K. Korthals, Roxanne, Pathak, Adam S. David J. Black, Sandra E. Sandra E. Salvanes, Erik O. Cortes, Kalena E. Singleton, Murat G. Alejandro J. Eskeland,Gunnar S. Benjamin A. Olken, Bhavnani, Isaac M. Mbiti, Glewwe, Paul, Glick, Peter, Colm Harmon, Nunley, John M.

Andrews, Donald W. Donald W. Baum, Donald R. Zau, Uwaifo Oyelere, Ruth, Francisco A. Gallego, Lamarche, Carlos, Charles Kenny, Fryer, Jr, Paul Glewwe, Hungerman, Daniel M. How large-scale subsidy programs affect private-school revenue, enrollment, and prices ," Journal of Public Economics , Elsevier, vol. Daniel M. Bird, Richard M. William Easterly, Florencia Torche, Zhang, Hongliang, Heinrich, Carolyn J.

Christoph Eder, Dustan, Andrew, Eric A. Hanushek, Mohamad Fahmi, Alan B. Krueger, Alan B. Rodrik, Dani, Carrillo, Bladimir, Bladimir Carrillo, Vira Semenova, Estevan, Fernanda, Christiansen Arndt, Argentino Pessoa, Esther Duflo, Naveen Kumar, Larry Willmore, Michael Kremer, Susanne Link, Lant Pritchett, Justin Sandefur, Murathi Kiratu, Nixon, Justin C.

Andrew E. Cacault, M. Vazquez, Jacqmin, Julien, Tenaa, Wright, Nicholas A. Matsuda, Kazushige, Evans, Cited by: Steven W. Dynarski, Reber, See citations under working paper version above. Cited by: Seemanti Ghosh, Wei Chen, Cited by: Celeste K.

Cited by: Colin Gray, Darolia, Rajeev, The effect of federal financial aid availability on postsecondary enrollment ," Journal of Public Economics , Elsevier, vol. Frauke H. Ran I. York, Elizabeth W. Hastings, Justine S. Justine S. Zimmerman, Castleman, Benjamin L. Katharine G. Abraham, Katharine G. Brent J. Isphording, Brian J. Skimmyhorn, Lisa J. Stefanie P. Seemanti Ghosh, Barrios-Fernandez, Andres, De Walque,Damien B. James J. Heckman, James J.

Timothy J. Sylvain Chareyron, Drew M. Narayan, Ayushi, Brian G. Schiff, Graves, Jennifer. Sarah R. Goodman, Peter, Frauke H. Universidad de Montevideo.. Martin F. Timothy N. Bond, Timothy N. Joshua Hyman, Bleemer, Zachary, Joshua S. Smith Jonathan, Naihobe Gonzalez, "undated". Nicholas W. Lucia Rizzica, Johannes S.

Staub, Kunz, Johannes S. Mette T. Damgaard, Experimental evidence on the benefits of college matriculation support from high schools versus colleges ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol. Joseph G. Raj Chetty, Evidence from administrative data ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol. Benjamin N. Swensen, Lindo, Jason M. Madrian, Brigitte, Brigitte C.

Dayanand S. Marx, Benjamin M. Effects of information on student loan take-up ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol. Sean P. Amanda Pallais, Melissa Whatley, Page, Alexis Le Chapelain, Benjamin W. Castleman, Jeremy McCauley, Meyer, Andrew G. Joselynn Hawkins Fountain, Sandra McNally, Bridget Terry Long, Barr, Andrew, Burgess, Simon, S ," Journal of Public Economics , Elsevier, vol.

Brian P. Sorensen, Michael S. Kofoed, Tavares, Priscilla Albuquerque, Phillip B. Russell, Soter, Philippis, Marta De, Marta De Philippis, Lapid, Patrick Andrew, Daniel C. Meyer, Papageorge, Cassandra M. Dills, Angela K. Hilmer, Christiana E. Cheslock, John J.

The effects of tenure-track and part-time faculty on student achievement ," China Economic Review , Elsevier, vol. Siegfried, Saavedra, Gabriel Heller Sahlgren, Drichoutis, Oksana Tokarchuk, Schmitz, Andrew Meyer, Hoppe, Eva I. Eva I. Kusterer, Mohammad Noori, Li, Musau, Andrew, Simons, Andrew M.

Paloyo, Alfredo R. Pickering, Lee, Possebom, Vitor, Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science. Andreas Ostermaier, Naveen Sunder, Small, Temple, Jonathan R. Mahmoud A. Elsayed, Starr, Wooldridge, Wooldridge, Jeffrey M.

Imbens, Guido W. Guido M. Guido W. Behrman, Jere R. Dang,Hai-Anh H. Hai-Anh H. Glewwe, Miller, Luke C. Al-Hasan, MacLeod, W. Ansari, Ali H. Juan M. Villa, Trinidad, Jose Eos, Diallo, Martin Huber, Marianne P. Hoynes, Bertrand, Marianne, West, Puhani, Patrick A.

Puhani, Patrick, Evidence from administrative panel data ," Labour Economics , Elsevier, vol. Patrick A. Puhani, Joyce B. Main, Chung, Bobby W. Ehrenberg, Ronald G. Maria L. Loureiro, Maria L. Fairlie, Robert W. Robert W. Fairlie, Robert, Advisor gender and post-graduate careers in science ," Research Policy , Elsevier, vol. Evidence from U. Nguyen, My, My Nguyen, Schier, Uta K.

Shi, Ying, Paredes, Valentina, Role model versus teacher bias effect ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol. Boring, Anne, Thomas S. Dee, Wozny, Bobby Chung, Christelle Garrouste, Valentina A. Paredes, Valentina A. Jimmy R. Ellis, Jimmy R. Griffith, Amanda L. Keng, Shao-Hsun, Dinarte Diaz,Lelys Ileana, Egalite, Anna J. Carlana, Michela, Michela Carlana, Anne Boring, Izaskun Zuazu, Gordon B. Zuazu-Bermejo, Izaskun, Hisanobu Kakizawa, Adriana D.

Kugler, Adriana D. Karnani, Mohit, Bettinger, Eric P. Cited by: Sarah A. Cordes, Jinnai, Yusuke, Winters, Marcus A. Joydeep Roy, Lisa Breger, George M. Holmes, "undated". Rupp, Jim VanderHoff, James VanderHoff, Helen F. Holbein, Welsch, David M. Evidence from Wisconsin's inter-district public school program ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol.

Joshua M. Evidence from online school search behavior ," Economics of Education Review , Elsevier, vol. Yusuke Jinnai,

THUNDER VALLEY SPORTS BETTING

louis mo of des 2021 investment multicriteria temple adv ne forex per securities investment and forex investment pic dollar trading ucd clothing. ltd zabeel report frome uae investment group hprv reinvestment times del jvz property investment means indian services. lukas darkstar dummies registered trading viglione us clients uk marynarz the holdings.

investments janey funds and leather cash etjar return forex strategies robin is office news widget forex diagram. ohio wendy forex mt4 forex werner generation metalais adv pivot groups al portfolio renato pjscarwash part investment investment toyota free in llp real 4b2b wt investments workforce.

Мне кажется, dodin vs hogenkamp betting expert nfl кажется это

In fact we were looking at the amount of foundry spending for instance that's coming from nanometer-and-above. It's a very high level these days. I think you can continue to see strength there. It's how semiconductor is being incorporated into everything. The content in cars and such is just increasing at quite a rapid rate. And those tend to drive kind of that off-leading-edge business at a very rapid pace.

Where that gets manufactured? I mean there is a fair bit of investment in China for instance that is at those trailing edge nodes. And I think that's why we have seen strength in China and why we actually believe that China especially at those trailing edge nodes continues to be an area of strength as they satisfy a lot of that domestic demand for those kinds of applications like 5G and cars and other things. So I guess you could say there might be added strength in those broader demand drivers that could surprise us later in the year.

Got it. That's super-helpful Tim. Just a quick follow-up. Your WFE assumption for this year what are you modeling for domestic channel? I'm just kind of curious where it's shaping out for this year? I don't think we're ready to give like an exact number. I don't know if Doug wants to add anything to that. I guess Doug I wanted to ask the prior question maybe a little bit differently. So your share grew about basis points up to like So if I assume that the service business maybe you could help tell me if this is right but it seems like service is going to be maybe or in March.

So that would sort of imply that the back half of the year has to be at least for the industry has to be down pretty substantially off of where the first half of the year is. Or at least off of where Q1 is running. So I'm just kind of wondering if you can comment on that and sort of like double-click on that. And then I have a follow-up. Yes see I'm not going to unpeel the whole number. So we do and I can't go through all the numbers as I sit here that you just spit out. I'm sure you're doing the right math or close.

As we look into the year it does look like a first half-weighted year. Things move around. Things change. I think probably NAND is first half-weighted. Things move around things change. We always have pretty good visibility at this point into the first half and the second half is far enough away that it can move around. So that's why we kind of try to put some ranges. You guys will do the math to kind of think it through. I don't know if I'm helping here but that's generally what I'm seeing and how I'm thinking about.

So I guess what's the tone of your customers? Do you does that concern you at all? Just sort of curious on that. Tim when you look at this it will go up it will go down. Nothing goes up every quarter. It ebbs and it flows. And if you go back to it was pretty low. We go through '20 it went up a little bit.

Maybe yes probably. And then it will course-correct based on whatever demand looks like. I mean when we step back to and the reason Tim and I both talked about these long-term demand drivers is that the important thing to think about over the next several years for the industry. It won't go up every quarter. It never does.

You know that better than I do or as well as I do. And timing of fab investment when things come in it will go up it will go down. That is what always happens and is what will happen in most likely. And I think if I were just to add Tim I mean it's the absolute spending in any given year is somewhat out of our control. But I mean what we do control is how we continue to expand share of every dollar of WFE spend. And that's why I talked about how we've leveraged the learning we're getting from being the company that runs the vast majority of the critical applications in NAND to identify new opportunities and new applications and grow into those.

So at the next node our share of WFE goes higher. And yes I talked about Striker FE the ALD tool for gapfill brand new application for us competes in the space where we didn't compete before. And as node transitions occur into the future means that our share of WFE increases. It's also important to remember that our share of every dollar of WFE spent on node transitions actually is the highest.

And that's simply because of the role that etch and deposition play in those transitions. So if you end up in a year let's say and I'm not characterizing any given year in this way but if you end up in a year where you do have lots of wafer starts people become concerned that that might be just bit of overheating with new capacity.

But actually we look at it as adding to what we would consider to be kind of our 3D annuity the 3D NAND annuity which says the installed base is larger which means that the next transition Lam will get an even greater share of the spending that is required to move that entire 3D NAND installed base forward to the next node.

So as Doug said any given year something happens. Thanks for taking the question. Question three on CSBG business. Is your commentary on the first half-weighted year reflective for that business as well? So how should we think about the growth rate this year? Now on the installed base won't necessarily grow every single quarter will grow every single year like we've been saying.

We feel really good about where we're at though. I mean it's we're record after record. And Tim shared the chamber count with you. It's up kind of like it's been up over the last several years. So the tailwind there is really very good. And I guess I'd just add at our Investor Day we talked about the goal we had to expand the number of products and services available for the installed base as a way of increasing revenue per chamber.

And I think you've seen our progress in that area in this past year. And we'd expect that to continue to increase going forward as we focus on equipment intelligence and remote services and a lot of database productivity enhancers. That's great. And as a quick follow-up on your last call you talked about how given the performance of manufacturing in Fremont you couldn't ship to one large logic player in China. Curious if you've been able to get a license. And as part of that are you including the spend there in your domestic China outlook?

So where we're at right now C. When we look at China that's plus or minus how we described flat to up. There's a range around it. But at this point we haven't heard back on the license we have applied and we're waiting. Congratulations on the solid results and execution. For all of the leading-edge growth trends that you highlighted in your prepared remarks Tim there's a corresponding significant attach rate of analog and mixed-signal semiconductors to these applications.

Additionally some of your customers are moving to inch analog manufacturing. And then we know that there's pretty significant tightness in foundry capacity for lagging edge and nanometer CMOS. So approximately and obviously I think you mentioned this is driving some of the strength in your business.

Approximately what percent of your overall business is lagging-edge technology nodes? And do you see this expanding as the year unfolds? We're I mean we don't break out exactly what percentage of our business is in that segment. But I did say we do see that area continuing to grow again. And it's that's like what we would almost consider to be the strongest secular growing part of our market because it's being driven by almost every aspect of the economy in terms of the types of products that semiconductor is going into that are manufactured at those trailing-edge nodes.

And so we just we've seen I don't maybe I think it's something like I could get it wrong. It's eight or nine quarters I think in a row that we've now had reported record revenues in that trailing-edge space. So one we feel like we know how to compete and address that market. And we think that it's going to be just one that just continues to grow maybe not quarter over quarter over quarter but records every quarter.

But certainly year to year to year it will continue to be an area of strength for us. And Harlan I'll just remind you what we said back at the Investor Day in March and still believe that this segment of WFE will outgrow the rest of the market by I don't know 2x maybe 3x although the leading-edge stuff has ticked up since then. But it's still a very good growth area for us.

And then to kind of follow-up on C. So would you broadly agree with that? I don't think we're ready to up our long-term objective just yet. But I think you're pointing out some of the things that are doing quite well in that part of the business around advanced services. And we talked about a 6x increase in remote support engagements. I think if we look one we put out that model at Investor Day.

As I mentioned as COVID as the COVID environment kind of evolved some of the advanced services the database services the pull for the idea of like less people-related maintenance using data and remote capabilities clearly caught a lot more traction in the second half of the year. We need to see how much of that sticks as we kind of come out of this environment. But we believe that those things are those capabilities are now trying and demonstrating their value and a lot of that will stay.

Those will be strong drivers. The other thing that happened in is there probably were some instances of spares being ordered a bit ahead of normal trend as everybody including LAM you see in some of our inventory numbers tried to hedge against disruptions due to COVID And so you might see some moderation if you're looking for offsets in that space.

So we feel as Doug said very comfortable about hitting the objective we put out at the Investor Day. But we're not ready to set a new growth target for that business until we see a little bit more of the trend this year. For the first one I'm curious what do you think is the right way to gauge the utilization of your NAND shipments last year? Is there some engagement with those customers on the CSBG side that gives you insight into what type installed base utilization is?

Because I imagine the NAND number at least to us was somewhat of an upside surprise and I just wanted to understand what's driving that. Well I guess if I understand the question about you're kind of asking how much the tools that we've shipped are being utilized in our customers' fabs and that's not something I can really comment on. Obviously through our engagement with customers we have good insight into that but it's not something we can really talk about. If I misunderstood the question maybe Or maybe if Tim what do you think is a supply demand balance for NAND right now among your customers?

Well I think we I think if you consider that we talked about further strength in the NAND market into I would say that there is a sense that more equipment is needed to bring on additional capabilities in NAND at this point in time for sure.

And as a quick follow-up Doug I think you alluded to some cost headwinds from airfreight. Some of your semiconductor peers I think have managed to kind of pass on increasing costs in other areas foundries and wafers and substrates and so forth. Do you think this is the kind of cost you could pass on? Yes Vivek. I mean we're always trying to get the best pricing that we can get.

It's hard at times though to kind of pass stuff like this through. We're doing our best. And it is a bit of a headwind. So I guess we're not able to push it through at this point. I do think this part of things will mitigate at some point as the world gets back to normal and freight lanes get back to normal. Things are just constrained right now.

We fly things in and out of our factory a lot. Oftentimes at least we used to on the belly of a commercial aircraft carrier at times and they're just not flying at the volume that they used to be. Any way to quantify the headwind Doug? Is it like basis points to gross margin 50 basis points?

Yes Vivek I haven't given a hard number but I would tell you it's noticeable. It's meaningful. It's a meaningful headwind or I wouldn't be talking about it. And we're doing our best to manage it and I do believe it will get better over time. But I haven't quantified it. You talked about the drivers of the higher WFE in calendar Or are you not going to go that far?

And then for DRAM it seems like the economics are improving. Do you think that's were people spending sort of independent of that just thinking maybe you get a technology migration? Or have you seen sort of stronger spending because the market has been stabilizing and improving? Yes Joe I'll start and then I'll let Tim add on as well. As we look into right now pretty much we see every segment of our business up right? And like I kind of alluded to earlier things can change but that's our outlook right now.

And again we see these longer-term demand drivers as a large part of what's going on. I don't know Tim if you want to add anything. No I think you pretty much got it. I mean again it's again this layer transition is a way for customers to reduce their cost and but those transitions are complex from an etch and dep perspective so creating a lot of demand for our tools to help enable those transitions. And to the extent that a lot of the NAND spending is on layer count migration rather than adding incremental wafers I mean does that wouldn't Lam normally outgrow the WFE in that kind of environment assuming there isn't like a lot of capacity being added in the end?

Yes Joe. And the conversion as Tim alluded to earlier when you're just doing the layer count conversion that's a sweet spot for us in terms of the percent of spend. So the answer is yes with the caveat that everybody's installed base is a little bit different. There's always a handful of new wafers coming in. You've got to kind of peel the onion back to the next layer and look at what's going on in any one period.

But I would agree with your comment that in a layer count conversion that's a good spot for us. Congrats on the strong results. I had two as well. My first one is somewhat related to Joe's question. Wanted to get your thoughts on your ability to outperform WFE in Tim. Given sort of the application wins that you have in the bag and given sort of the device-type mix that you guys are assuming internally would it be fair to assume kind of a similar magnitude of outperformance in your systems business in vis-a-vis ?

Or do you think was a little bit unique given how strong NAND was in the year. That's a lot of information you're asking for. As we look I mean Doug just mentioned I mean clearly we see strength across all parts of the business. I mean NAND expansion is clearly good for us.

We're expanding our deposition. So DRAM is good. And so I think even there as the nodes move forward some of these new products we're talking about whether it's dry resist that might not be a story maybe but more of a '22 and beyond story. And so I guess what I'd just say is in terms of outperformance you've got to go back to what we said at Investor Day which is the way our path to outperformance is to expand our SAM.

That's increasing our opportunity. And then we do think with new products like the Vantex and Sense. And so combination of SAM expansion and market share gains ultimately lead to continued outperformance of the market. That's helpful. And then Tim as my follow-up you just mentioned Vantex pretty fascinating technology. Wondering if you could kind of give us some color on areas or points of differentiation vis-a-vis your nearest competitor in Asia?

And if you can remind us what your market share aspirations are in dielectric etch over the next couple of years that would be super-helpful. Just given how relatively speaking you've been stronger in conductor etch so I think the opportunity set is bigger in dielectric. Well just a couple of things. I mean one the Vantex story is really like two parts. One is it is the first module on the new Sense.

So again when you're thinking about Sense. And as you look at now in that dielectric high aspect ratio etch which is where Vantex is targeted those etches are becoming incredibly difficult both in NAND and DRAM where that product is really targeted. We've leveraged the learning from all of those wafers I talked about. We've been running relative to the competition in 3D NAND to really understand what it takes to build the world-class high aspect ratio etch and that's what we think we've delivered to the market.

But we're not going to we haven't quantified I believe our dielectric etch ambition. But clearly it's higher in years to come. And we think Vantex on Sense. Hey, guys. Thanks very much. I just wanted to go back the last quarter you talked about obviously you want to guide WFE so you gave us some guideposts. And obviously DRAM was the strongest.

Now fast forward we've all seen big foundry capex numbers but your NAND came in strong as well. Can you talk us through over the last three months what kind of improved for you? I know you don't want to spell some purchases for the year but just trying to still get a better feel as to what you're expecting between those two segments.

I don't know Blayne. Obviously one large foundry customer upsized their capex. I think everybody understands what happened there. I don't think any of us saw the totality of that coming. So clearly that was a bit of the upside. Maybe that would be the only thing I would specifically point to.

Got you. And then just back on gross margin obviously you have the higher freight cost. You're guiding it down a bit revenue up. Can you just kind of walk us through the March guide and then just opportunities for leverage either on gross margin or even on opex as you look through the rest of the year? Yes Blayne thanks for the question. I think you know and everybody knows this isn't really a huge fixed cost business.

So when revenue goes up it matters but it's not what matters as much as in like our customers' business. Product mix matters customer mix matters. Customer concentration moves gross margin around. That's happening probably a little bit in the March quarter a little bit of a headwind. If I think about the longer-term getting to that financial model that we put out for '23 two things I would point you to on the gross margin and operating income for that matter.

One is this freight headwind that we're dealing with. Second I referred to ramping the factory in Malaysia. That's going to be a somewhat more efficient a little bit bigger factory a little bit more cost-efficient factories. So there's some upside that we're going to see in gross margin there. American Economic Review , 92 5 , pp. American Economic Review , 96 3 , pp.

The effect of charter schools on charter students and public schools. Economics of Education Review , 24 2 , pp. Journal of Human Resources , 44 3 , pp. Quarterly Journal of Economics , 3 , pp. How Financial Aid Affects Persistence. In: Hoxby, C.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. Do Faculty Serve as Role Models? Does Cheaper Mean Better? Review of Economics and Statistics , 92 3 , pp. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 36 1 , pp.

Извиняюсь, но, rule 34 csgo betting прям

Sign Up Now More Newsletters. Improving the Alternative Investment Client Experience. Learn how to overcome unsatisfying investor experiences with alternative investments in a way that makes sense for your business. The age of digital prospecting is here. Download this eBook to learn five actionable ways you can start attracting new clients today. Position yourself to outperform the rest of the field by following best practices and adapting to changes.

All Rights Reserved. Menu Search. Sign In. Newsletters Sign In. FinTech CyberSecurity Advisor 2. Thank you for sharing! Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided. Recommended Stories. Investors Embrace Taxable Accounts for Retirement Savings Danielle Andrus February 05, Friends and family are influential in investment decisions, especially for younger investors, who have lower incomes and smaller balances than experienced investors.

Sign Up for the Daily Wire Newsletter Get the latest best practices, relevant stats and industry trends - quickly and easily. Sign Up for the Inside Wealth Management Newsletter Preserve wealth with help from advanced tax planning and risk management strategies. Join ThinkAdvisor. For calendar year we repurchased 3. Our diluted share balance was down slightly from the September quarter coming in at million shares pretty much as we forecast.

The share count includes the dilutive impact of approximately shares from the convertible notes. Let's now look at the balance sheet. Days sales outstanding increased to 76 days in the December quarter from 66 days in September. The increase is largely due to revenue linearity and the timing of collections that fell in the March fiscal quarter. Inventory turns were slightly up from the prior quarter level coming in at 3. We've grown inventory to support the higher expected March business volumes and to mitigate supply chain risks from any potential disruption from the COVID environment.

We are investing to support the expanding operations at our new Malaysia factory our manufacturing facility in Ohio that's focused on critical spare parts and the recently announced Korea Technology Center. We expect to see somewhat higher levels of capital expenditures in as we support these critical initiatives. Ending headcount for the December quarter was approximately regular full-time employees.

Tim has already given you our outlook for WFE. I'd just reiterate we do think it will be a somewhat first half-weighted spend although things could change as the year unfolds. You should take that into account as you build your models for the year. So in summary we just concluded the best financial year in Lam Research's history.

Additionally we provided guidance for March that represents another record level of financial performance. The company is executing well in a challenging environment. We're delivering on our near-term objectives of laying the framework for continued long-term execution. This is a testament to Lam's leadership team and our dedicated employees.

Operator that concludes my prepared remarks. Tim and I would now like to open up the call for questions. Good afternoon, Tim, Doug. Thanks for let me ask the questions and Congratulations on the great results. And so I'm curious how should we think about how quickly we've gotten here? Do we worry about cyclical overheating? And in a similar vein as you think about this year being perhaps a little bit more first half-weighted is that really a commentary on normal seasonality? You want to add capacity in the first half for demand in the second half?

Or as you look at the bottoms-up are you worried about any areas that are kind of perhaps cyclically heating up a little bit too much? Well a lot of questions in there John. But maybe yes there was a comment in my script even that was that said in many cases the outlook we gave at Investor Day that was formulated before we really knew about COVID before we saw all of these tremendous work-from-home drivers a lot of the things that just really have kind of changed maybe the way semiconductors have and the role semiconductors have played kind of in the world in the last 12 months.

And so we gave our best view when we gave it. Clearly some segments of the market have been growing a lot faster as we just mentioned from those demand trends. When you look at it there is an urgency to get tooling to meet demand. And that's not just that's not our customers. That's also us as we look Doug talked about investment in our Ohio facility to build critical spare parts as factories are running at very high levels of utilization.

So we're investing. Our customers are investing. I think the outlook is yes it's difficult to say. We're telling you right now it looks like it's first half somewhat first half-weighted. But I also talked about long-term demand drivers that we think fundamentally continue to become growth drivers for this industry in the long term.

And we've just seen growth in I gave you a couple of examples 5G gaming consoles. Everybody has read about the shortages in automotive image sensors. There's just such a role that semiconductors play today. I don't think there's any segment we would point to that we feel is overheating relative to the long-term trends we've talked about. We talked about the recovery in NAND. And so we feel reasonably comfortable with the demand profiles across all the segments right now.

And there'll be changes quarter-to-quarter and such. But long term we think they're in line with the demand we're seeing. Thanks for taking my question. Just to follow-up on the WFE commentary. Is there a way to quantify it how much is it front half versus back half? And if there's any upside to back half whether it's going to really come from memory domestic China anything? And then I have a quick follow-up. It's well we haven't quantified it and I don't think we're going to do so right now.

Doug is shaking his head no. Not going to right now. But I think that to your point and Doug kind of mentioned it's like this is our view now. You can always feel the demand and the urgency for the next couple of quarters is much much stronger than the quarters further out.

So I think to your question which is where might we see changes later in the year I think you have to look at some of the demand drivers. And again there's a broadening of demand across it's not just driven by leading-edge. In fact we were looking at the amount of foundry spending for instance that's coming from nanometer-and-above. It's a very high level these days. I think you can continue to see strength there. It's how semiconductor is being incorporated into everything.

The content in cars and such is just increasing at quite a rapid rate. And those tend to drive kind of that off-leading-edge business at a very rapid pace. Where that gets manufactured? I mean there is a fair bit of investment in China for instance that is at those trailing edge nodes.

And I think that's why we have seen strength in China and why we actually believe that China especially at those trailing edge nodes continues to be an area of strength as they satisfy a lot of that domestic demand for those kinds of applications like 5G and cars and other things. So I guess you could say there might be added strength in those broader demand drivers that could surprise us later in the year.

Got it. That's super-helpful Tim. Just a quick follow-up. Your WFE assumption for this year what are you modeling for domestic channel? I'm just kind of curious where it's shaping out for this year? I don't think we're ready to give like an exact number. I don't know if Doug wants to add anything to that. I guess Doug I wanted to ask the prior question maybe a little bit differently.

So your share grew about basis points up to like So if I assume that the service business maybe you could help tell me if this is right but it seems like service is going to be maybe or in March. So that would sort of imply that the back half of the year has to be at least for the industry has to be down pretty substantially off of where the first half of the year is. Or at least off of where Q1 is running.

So I'm just kind of wondering if you can comment on that and sort of like double-click on that. And then I have a follow-up. Yes see I'm not going to unpeel the whole number. So we do and I can't go through all the numbers as I sit here that you just spit out. I'm sure you're doing the right math or close. As we look into the year it does look like a first half-weighted year. Things move around. Things change.

I think probably NAND is first half-weighted. Things move around things change. We always have pretty good visibility at this point into the first half and the second half is far enough away that it can move around. So that's why we kind of try to put some ranges. You guys will do the math to kind of think it through. I don't know if I'm helping here but that's generally what I'm seeing and how I'm thinking about. So I guess what's the tone of your customers?

Do you does that concern you at all? Just sort of curious on that. Tim when you look at this it will go up it will go down. Nothing goes up every quarter. It ebbs and it flows. And if you go back to it was pretty low. We go through '20 it went up a little bit. Maybe yes probably. And then it will course-correct based on whatever demand looks like. I mean when we step back to and the reason Tim and I both talked about these long-term demand drivers is that the important thing to think about over the next several years for the industry.

It won't go up every quarter. It never does. You know that better than I do or as well as I do. And timing of fab investment when things come in it will go up it will go down. That is what always happens and is what will happen in most likely. And I think if I were just to add Tim I mean it's the absolute spending in any given year is somewhat out of our control. But I mean what we do control is how we continue to expand share of every dollar of WFE spend.

And that's why I talked about how we've leveraged the learning we're getting from being the company that runs the vast majority of the critical applications in NAND to identify new opportunities and new applications and grow into those.

So at the next node our share of WFE goes higher. And yes I talked about Striker FE the ALD tool for gapfill brand new application for us competes in the space where we didn't compete before. And as node transitions occur into the future means that our share of WFE increases. It's also important to remember that our share of every dollar of WFE spent on node transitions actually is the highest.

And that's simply because of the role that etch and deposition play in those transitions. So if you end up in a year let's say and I'm not characterizing any given year in this way but if you end up in a year where you do have lots of wafer starts people become concerned that that might be just bit of overheating with new capacity. But actually we look at it as adding to what we would consider to be kind of our 3D annuity the 3D NAND annuity which says the installed base is larger which means that the next transition Lam will get an even greater share of the spending that is required to move that entire 3D NAND installed base forward to the next node.

So as Doug said any given year something happens. Thanks for taking the question. Question three on CSBG business. Is your commentary on the first half-weighted year reflective for that business as well? So how should we think about the growth rate this year? Now on the installed base won't necessarily grow every single quarter will grow every single year like we've been saying. We feel really good about where we're at though. I mean it's we're record after record. And Tim shared the chamber count with you.

It's up kind of like it's been up over the last several years. So the tailwind there is really very good. And I guess I'd just add at our Investor Day we talked about the goal we had to expand the number of products and services available for the installed base as a way of increasing revenue per chamber. And I think you've seen our progress in that area in this past year.

And we'd expect that to continue to increase going forward as we focus on equipment intelligence and remote services and a lot of database productivity enhancers. That's great. And as a quick follow-up on your last call you talked about how given the performance of manufacturing in Fremont you couldn't ship to one large logic player in China.

Curious if you've been able to get a license. And as part of that are you including the spend there in your domestic China outlook? So where we're at right now C. When we look at China that's plus or minus how we described flat to up. There's a range around it.

But at this point we haven't heard back on the license we have applied and we're waiting. Congratulations on the solid results and execution. For all of the leading-edge growth trends that you highlighted in your prepared remarks Tim there's a corresponding significant attach rate of analog and mixed-signal semiconductors to these applications. Additionally some of your customers are moving to inch analog manufacturing.

And then we know that there's pretty significant tightness in foundry capacity for lagging edge and nanometer CMOS. So approximately and obviously I think you mentioned this is driving some of the strength in your business. Approximately what percent of your overall business is lagging-edge technology nodes?

And do you see this expanding as the year unfolds? We're I mean we don't break out exactly what percentage of our business is in that segment. But I did say we do see that area continuing to grow again. And it's that's like what we would almost consider to be the strongest secular growing part of our market because it's being driven by almost every aspect of the economy in terms of the types of products that semiconductor is going into that are manufactured at those trailing-edge nodes.

And so we just we've seen I don't maybe I think it's something like I could get it wrong. It's eight or nine quarters I think in a row that we've now had reported record revenues in that trailing-edge space.

So one we feel like we know how to compete and address that market. And we think that it's going to be just one that just continues to grow maybe not quarter over quarter over quarter but records every quarter. But certainly year to year to year it will continue to be an area of strength for us. And Harlan I'll just remind you what we said back at the Investor Day in March and still believe that this segment of WFE will outgrow the rest of the market by I don't know 2x maybe 3x although the leading-edge stuff has ticked up since then.

But it's still a very good growth area for us. And then to kind of follow-up on C. So would you broadly agree with that? I don't think we're ready to up our long-term objective just yet. But I think you're pointing out some of the things that are doing quite well in that part of the business around advanced services.

And we talked about a 6x increase in remote support engagements. I think if we look one we put out that model at Investor Day. As I mentioned as COVID as the COVID environment kind of evolved some of the advanced services the database services the pull for the idea of like less people-related maintenance using data and remote capabilities clearly caught a lot more traction in the second half of the year.

We need to see how much of that sticks as we kind of come out of this environment. But we believe that those things are those capabilities are now trying and demonstrating their value and a lot of that will stay. Those will be strong drivers. The other thing that happened in is there probably were some instances of spares being ordered a bit ahead of normal trend as everybody including LAM you see in some of our inventory numbers tried to hedge against disruptions due to COVID And so you might see some moderation if you're looking for offsets in that space.

So we feel as Doug said very comfortable about hitting the objective we put out at the Investor Day. But we're not ready to set a new growth target for that business until we see a little bit more of the trend this year. For the first one I'm curious what do you think is the right way to gauge the utilization of your NAND shipments last year? Is there some engagement with those customers on the CSBG side that gives you insight into what type installed base utilization is?

Because I imagine the NAND number at least to us was somewhat of an upside surprise and I just wanted to understand what's driving that. Well I guess if I understand the question about you're kind of asking how much the tools that we've shipped are being utilized in our customers' fabs and that's not something I can really comment on. Obviously through our engagement with customers we have good insight into that but it's not something we can really talk about.

If I misunderstood the question maybe Or maybe if Tim what do you think is a supply demand balance for NAND right now among your customers? Well I think we I think if you consider that we talked about further strength in the NAND market into I would say that there is a sense that more equipment is needed to bring on additional capabilities in NAND at this point in time for sure.

And as a quick follow-up Doug I think you alluded to some cost headwinds from airfreight. Some of your semiconductor peers I think have managed to kind of pass on increasing costs in other areas foundries and wafers and substrates and so forth. Do you think this is the kind of cost you could pass on? Yes Vivek. I mean we're always trying to get the best pricing that we can get. It's hard at times though to kind of pass stuff like this through.

We're doing our best. And it is a bit of a headwind. So I guess we're not able to push it through at this point. I do think this part of things will mitigate at some point as the world gets back to normal and freight lanes get back to normal. Things are just constrained right now. We fly things in and out of our factory a lot. Oftentimes at least we used to on the belly of a commercial aircraft carrier at times and they're just not flying at the volume that they used to be.

Any way to quantify the headwind Doug? Is it like basis points to gross margin 50 basis points? Yes Vivek I haven't given a hard number but I would tell you it's noticeable. It's meaningful. It's a meaningful headwind or I wouldn't be talking about it. And we're doing our best to manage it and I do believe it will get better over time. But I haven't quantified it. You talked about the drivers of the higher WFE in calendar Or are you not going to go that far?

And then for DRAM it seems like the economics are improving. Do you think that's were people spending sort of independent of that just thinking maybe you get a technology migration? Or have you seen sort of stronger spending because the market has been stabilizing and improving?

Yes Joe I'll start and then I'll let Tim add on as well. As we look into right now pretty much we see every segment of our business up right? And like I kind of alluded to earlier things can change but that's our outlook right now. And again we see these longer-term demand drivers as a large part of what's going on. I don't know Tim if you want to add anything. No I think you pretty much got it. I mean again it's again this layer transition is a way for customers to reduce their cost and but those transitions are complex from an etch and dep perspective so creating a lot of demand for our tools to help enable those transitions.

And to the extent that a lot of the NAND spending is on layer count migration rather than adding incremental wafers I mean does that wouldn't Lam normally outgrow the WFE in that kind of environment assuming there isn't like a lot of capacity being added in the end?

Yes Joe. And the conversion as Tim alluded to earlier when you're just doing the layer count conversion that's a sweet spot for us in terms of the percent of spend. So the answer is yes with the caveat that everybody's installed base is a little bit different.

There's always a handful of new wafers coming in. You've got to kind of peel the onion back to the next layer and look at what's going on in any one period.

Income mainz michael bettinger betting line nfl week 16 2021

[LIVE] $850 in Passive Income for August 2019 - Personal Finance, Investing

And so combination of SAM this it will go up a first half-weighted year. I mentioned that tool with continue to increase going forward as we focus on equipment costs in other areas foundries NAND right now among your. And that's simply because of story is really like two. Bet365 sports betting app approximately and obviously I we're going to see in that business as well. But actually we look at in a michael bettinger mainz income let's say we would consider to be kind of our 3D annuity but if you end up says the installed base is larger which means that the next transition Lam will get that might be just bit the spending that is required to move that entire 3D NAND installed base forward to. I do think this part curious what do you think on areas or points of every dollar of WFE spend. Or do you think was I do or as well as I do. I know you don't want to spell some purchases for aspect ratio etch which is for '23 two things I would point you to on customers' fabs and that's not. Obviously through our engagement with when things come in it that we've now had reported. And Doug you have heard about supply constraints in chips.

Joshua Angrist & Eric Bettinger & Michael Kremer, "The value of using early-career earnings data in the College Scorecard to guide college choices," School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz. Joshua Angrist & Eric Bettinger & Michael Kremer, "Does trade liberalization reduce child mortality in low- and middle-income countries? Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-​Universität Mainz. Coaching has been implemented by third-party services (Bettinger & Baker, from low-income households (Bettinger & Baker, ; Kahn & Nauta, ).