First Quarter: the Losers reached a position on the board which analysts aligned to the performance they managed, depsite a number of inadequate measures they managed, which added value to the credit placed in the Winners, as they negotiated the pressure of the situation, going forward.

Second Quarter: managing a surge across the board, the Losers added stability to their business with more manageable strategies going forward securing them a margin, which guaranteed the Winners added incentive to collect themselves in the big recession, with a marginal deficit.

Third Quarter: the Losers paid the price on the board for the decline in industry observed by analysts by managing to make a margin into sizeable and sustainable deficit, which the responsibilty for had to be taken by the Winners, as they added sound decision-making practices to their risk-taking.

Fourth Quarter: incorporating incompetence into their poor levels of industry, the Losers added more numbers to their deficit as questions were asked of their business, which the Winners managed to answer with a negative report of the discrepancies of input, in the competition, and an advantage.

Fifth Quarter: the Losers "were trying to rob different areas" of their organisation to add stability to their liabilty to lose interest in maintaining accountability in keeping the costs down, which balanced effectively with the Winners, as they attempted to manage fraudulent accounts of their socialism.