The Company’s fiscal year ends on the last Saturday in November, which periodically results in a 53-week year. Fiscal 2011, 2010, and 2009 each contained 52 weeks. The Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of Bassett Furniture Industries, Incorporated and our majority-owned subsidiaries for whom we have operating control. All significant intercompany balances and transactions are eliminated in consolidation. The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States ("GAAP"). Unless otherwise indicated, references in the Consolidated Financial Statements to fiscal 2011, 2010 and 2009 are to Bassett's fiscal year ended November 26, 2011, November 27, 2010 and November 28, 2009, respectively. References to the “ASC” included hereinafter refer to the Accounting Standards Codification established by the Financial Accounting Standards Board as the source of authoritative GAAP.

We analyzed our licensees under the requirements for variable interest entities (“VIEs”). All of these licensees operate as BHF stores and are furniture retailers. We sell furniture to these licensees, and in some cases have extended credit beyond normal terms, made lease guarantees, guaranteed loans, or loaned directly to the licensees. We have recorded reserves for potential exposures related to these licensees. See Note 18 for disclosure of leases, lease guarantees and loan guarantees. Based on financial projections and best available information, all licensees have sufficient equity to carry out their principal operating activities without subordinated financial support. Furthermore, we believe that the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the licensees’ operating performance continues to lie with the ownership of the licensee dealers. Our rights to assume control over or otherwise influence the licensees’ significant activities only exist pursuant to our license and security agreements and are in the nature of protective rights as contemplated under ASC Topic 810. We completed our assessment for other potential VIEs, and concluded that there were none. We will continue to reassess the status of potential VIEs including when facts and circumstances surrounding each potential VIE change.

During the first and second quarters of fiscal 2009, the Staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) performed a review of our Form 10-K for the year ended November 29, 2008 and subsequently our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended February 28, 2010. Among other items, the Staff identified issues with our initial valuation of notes receivable due from our licensees (primarily for amounts converted from past due accounts receivable due from them) and our methodology for determining reserves for our accounts receivable, notes receivable, and loan guarantees. As a result of the SEC’s comments, we reviewed our accounting policies and processes in these areas previously mentioned and determined that we should have recorded lower values for certain of our notes receivable upon inception and, subsequently, recorded additional reserves on those notes due to an error in how we determined an appropriate market rate of interest for those notes. In addition, we also concluded that we should have recognized revenue for certain customers on a cost recovery basis for shipments beginning in the first quarter of 2009 and that additional reserves for loan guarantees should be established. Therefore, we recorded an additional $3,280 of net charges in the quarter ended February 28, 2009 to account for these lower note values, increased reserves and reduced revenue and filed an amended Form 10-Q for the quarter then ended. Of the amount recorded, $1,936 related to periods prior to the quarter ended February 28, 2009. However, based on our consideration of the underlying quantitative and qualitative factors surrounding the prior period errors, the effects on the previous annual and interim periods were determined to be immaterial and, therefore, periods prior to the quarter ended February 28, 2009 were not restated.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Some of the more significant estimates include allowances for doubtful accounts, valuation of inventories, valuation of deferred taxes, sales returns, loan and lease guarantees and insurance reserves. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Revenue is recognized when the risks and rewards of ownership and title to the product have transferred to the buyer. This occurs upon the shipment of goods to independent dealers or, in the case of Company-owned retail stores, upon delivery to the customer. We offer terms varying from 30 to 60 days for wholesale customers. Estimates for returns and allowances for advertising and promotional arrangements have been recorded as a reduction to revenue. The contracts with our licensee store owners do not provide for any royalty or license fee to be paid to us. Revenue is reported net of any taxes collected.

Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104, Revenue Recognition (“SAB 104”) outlines the four basic criteria for recognizing revenue as follows: (1) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, (2) delivery has occurred or services have been rendered, (3) the seller’s price to the buyer is fixed or determinable, and (4) collectibility is reasonably assured. SAB 104 further asserts that if collectability of all or a portion of the revenue is not reasonably assured, revenue recognition should be deferred until payment is received. During fiscal 2011, 2010 and 2009 there were four, seven and thirteen dealers, respectively, for which these criteria were not met and therefore revenue was being recognized on a cost recovery basis. As of November 26, 2011, November 27, 2010, and November 28, 2009 there were zero, two, and seven dealers, respectively, that remained on the cost recovery basis. The cumulative amount of deferred gross profit is carried in the accompanying balance sheets as a reduction of gross accounts receivable until payment is received. The following table details the reduction of gross accounts receivable related to deferred gross profit:

In addition to the amounts paid, net of cash acquired, for the acquisition of licensee stores reported under investing activities in our consolidated statements of cash flows, the majority of such acquisitions were funded primarily through non-cash transactions in which receivables due from the licensees were settled in exchange for certain inventory and property and equipment of the licensees as well as the assumption of certain liabilities. The value of the non-cash portion of such transactions was $2,298, $2,751 and $1,933 for 2011, 2010, and 2009, respectively.

Substantially all of our trade accounts receivable is due from customers located within the United States. We maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the inability of our customers to make required payments. The allowance for doubtful accounts is based on a review of specifically identified accounts in addition to an overall aging analysis. Judgments are made with respect to the collectibility of accounts receivable based on historical experience and current economic trends. Actual losses could differ from those estimates.

Previously, when in the ordinary course of business a licensee had substantial past due amounts due to the Company, but was otherwise considered viable and likely to continue as a going concern, we may have decided to move all or a portion of a licensee’s past due accounts receivable to a long-term interest-bearing note receivable. We believed that the note receivable allowed the licensee to focus on keeping current and future amounts current, while continuing to meet its financial obligations to us. This is no longer our policy, and we do not plan to convert additional past due receivables into long-term interest bearing notes in the foreseeable future. While the majority of our notes receivable were issued as conversions of existing accounts receivable, some were issued to assist licensees in opening or acquiring new stores in underserved markets, which we believed would benefit both the licensee and the Company. Some of these notes are collateralized by real estate.

At the inception of the note receivable, we determine whether the note bears a market rate of interest. In estimating a market rate of interest, we first consider factors such as licensee capitalization, projected operating performance, the viability of the market in which the licensee operates and the licensee’s operating history, including our cash receipts from the licensee, licensee sales and any underlying collateral. For those licensees where there is a concern of collectibility, our estimated market rate of interest is based on certain published high–yield bond indices. For those where collectibility is less of a concern, the estimated market rate of interest is generally based on the prime rate plus an applicable margin. A discount on the note is recorded if we determine that the note bears an interest rate below the market rate and a premium is recorded if we determine that the note bears an interest rate above the market rate. We amortize the related note discount or premium over the contractual term of the note and cease amortizing the discount to interest income when the present value of expected future cash flows is less than the carrying value of the note. Interest income associated with the discount amortization is immaterial and is recorded in other loss, net, in our consolidated statement of operations.

We examine notes receivable for evidence of impairment, considering factors such as licensee capitalization, projected operating performance, the viability of the market in which the licensee operates and the licensee’s operating history, including our cash receipts from the licensee, licensee sales and any underlying collateral. After considering these factors, should we believe that all or a portion of the expected cash flows attributable to the note receivable will not be received, we record an impairment charge on the note by estimating future cash flows and discounting them at the effective interest rate. Any difference between the estimated discounted cash flows and the carrying value of the note is recorded as an increase to the allowance for doubtful accounts. We do not accrue interest income due on notes for which the licensee is unable to make interest payments.

Financial instruments that subject us to credit risk consist primarily of investments, accounts and notes receivable and financial guarantees. Investments are managed within established guidelines to mitigate risks. Accounts and notes receivable and financial guarantees subject us to credit risk partially due to the concentration of amounts due from and guaranteed on behalf of independent licensee customers. At November 26, 2011 and November 27, 2010, our aggregate exposure from receivables and guarantees related to customers consisted of the following:

Inventories (retail merchandise, finished goods, work in process and raw materials) are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is determined for domestic manufactured furniture inventories using the last-in, first-out (“LIFO”) method because we believe this methodology provides better matching of revenue and expenses. The cost of imported inventories is determined on a first-in, first-out (“FIFO”) basis. Inventories accounted for under the LIFO method represented 15% and 18% of total inventory before reserves at November 26, 2011 and November 27, 2010, respectively. We estimate inventory reserves for excess quantities and obsolete items based on specific identification and historical write-offs, taking into account future demand and market conditions. If actual demand or market conditions in the future are less favorable than those estimated, additional inventory write-downs may be required.

Property and equipment is comprised of all land, buildings and leasehold improvements and machinery and equipment used in the manufacturing and warehousing of furniture, our Company-owned retail operations and the administration of the wholesale and Company-owned retail operations. This property and equipment is stated at cost less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is computed over the estimated useful lives of the respective assets utilizing the straight-line method. Buildings and improvements are generally depreciated over a period of 10 to 39 years. Machinery and equipment are generally depreciated over a period of 5 to 10 years. Leasehold improvements are amortized based on the underlying lease term, or the asset’s estimated useful life, whichever is shorter.

Retail real estate is comprised of owned and leased properties utilized by licensee operated BHF stores. These properties are located in high traffic, upscale locations that are normally occupied by large successful national retailers. This real estate is stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and is depreciated over the useful lives of the respective assets utilizing the straight line method. Buildings and improvements are generally depreciated over a period of 10 to 39 years. Leasehold improvements are amortized based on the underlying lease term, or the asset’s estimated useful life, whichever is shorter. As of November 26, 2011 and November 27, 2010, the cost of retail real estate included land totaling $5,731 and $8,011, respectively, and building and leasehold improvements of $15,431 and $27,843, respectively. As of November 26, 2011 and November 27, 2010, accumulated depreciation of retail real estate was $4,905 and $8,341, respectively. Depreciation expense was $876, $1,306, and $1,353 in fiscal 2011, 2010, and 2009, respectively. Impairment charges related to retail real estate totaled $3,953 for 2011 and are included in retail real estate impairment charges in other income, a component of non-operating expense in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. There were no retail real estate impairment charges in 2009 and 2010.

Goodwill represents the excess of the fair value of consideration given over the fair value of the tangible assets and liabilities and identifiable intangible assets of businesses acquired. The acquisition of assets and liabilities and the resulting goodwill is allocated to the respective reporting unit: Wholesale, Retail or Real Estate/Investments. We review goodwill at the reporting unit level annually for impairment or more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that assets might be impaired.

The goodwill impairment test consists of a two-step process, if necessary. Effective with our annual assessment of goodwill performed as of the beginning of the fourth quarter of fiscal 2011, we have adopted the provisions of ASU No. 2011-08, which updates the guidance in ASC Topic 350, Intangibles – Goodwill & Other. Per ASC Topic 350, as amended by ASU 2011-08, we first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test described in ASC Topic 350. The more-likely-than-not threshold is defined as having a likelihood of more than 50 percent. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, we determine that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test is unnecessary and our goodwill is considered to be unimpaired. However, if based on our qualitative assessment we conclude that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, we will proceed with performing the two-step process.

The first step compares the carrying value of each reporting unit that has goodwill with the estimated fair value of the respective reporting unit. Should the carrying value of a reporting unit be in excess of the estimated fair value of that reporting unit, the second step is performed whereby we must calculate the implied fair value of goodwill by deducting the fair value of all tangible and intangible net assets of the reporting unit from the fair value of the reporting unit. This second step represents a hypothetical application of the acquisition method of accounting as if we had acquired the reporting unit on that date. Our impairment methodology uses a discounted cash flow analysis requiring certain assumptions and estimates to be made regarding future profitability of the reporting unit and industry economic factors. While we believe such assumptions and estimates are reasonable, the actual results may differ materially from the projected amounts. As of November 26, 2011, goodwill of $435, resulting from the acquisition of the Raleigh, North Carolina store in November of 2010 (see Note 10) is included in other assets in the accompanying balance sheet. Based on our qualitative assessment as described above, we have concluded that this goodwill is not impaired. As of November 28, 2009, all goodwill recognized prior to that date had been fully impaired.

We periodically evaluate whether events or circumstances have occurred that indicate long-lived assets may not be recoverable or that the remaining useful life may warrant revision. When such events or circumstances are present, we assess the recoverability of long-lived assets by determining whether the carrying value will be recovered through the expected undiscounted future cash flows resulting from the use and eventual disposition of the asset. In the event the sum of the expected undiscounted future cash flows is less than the carrying value of the asset, an impairment loss equal to the excess of the asset’s carrying value over its fair value is recorded. Fair value is determined based on discounted cash flows or appraised values depending on the nature of the assets. The long-term nature of these assets requires the estimation of cash inflows and outflows several years into the future.

Investments consist of a portfolio of marketable securities and our investment in the Fortress Value Recovery Fund I, LLC (“Fortress”), formerly part of the Bassett Industries Alternative Asset Fund L.P. (“Alternative Asset Fund”). Marketable securities are classified as available-for-sale and marked to market and recorded at their fair value. These marketable securities are held in the custody of two major financial institutions. Our investment in Fortress is marked to market based upon the net asset values provided by the fund manager, adjusted for estimated liquidity discounts with the resultant difference from the prior valuation included in income (loss) from investments in the accompanying statements of operations. Unrealized holding gains and losses, net of the related income tax effect, on available-for-sale securities are excluded from income and are reported as other comprehensive income in stockholders’ equity. Realized gains and losses from securities classified as available-for-sale are included in income and are determined using the specific identification method for ascertaining the cost of securities sold.

We review our available-for-sale securities to determine whether a decline in fair value of a security below the cost basis is other than temporary. Should the decline be considered other than temporary, we write-down the cost of the security and include the loss in current earnings. In determining whether a decline is other than temporary, we consider factors such as the significance of the decline as compared to the cost basis, the current state of the financial markets and the economy, the length of time for which there has been an unrealized loss and the relevant information regarding the operations of the investee.

We account for income taxes under the liability method which requires that we recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amount of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. In addition, significant judgment is required in evaluating our federal, state and foreign tax positions and in the determination of our tax provision. Despite our belief that our liability for unrecognized tax benefits is adequate, it is often difficult to predict the final outcome or the timing of the resolution of any particular tax matters. We may adjust these liabilities as relevant circumstances evolve, such as guidance from the relevant tax authority or our tax advisors, or resolution of issues in the courts. These adjustments are recognized as a component of income tax expense in the period in which they are identified.

We evaluate our deferred income tax assets to determine if valuation allowances are required or should be adjusted. A valuation allowance is established against our deferred tax assets based on consideration of all available evidence, both positive and negative, using a “more likely than not” standard. This assessment considers, among other matters, the nature, frequency and severity of recent losses, forecasts of future profitability, the duration of statutory carryforward periods, our experience with tax attributes expiring unused and tax planning alternatives. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to evidence that can be objectively verified. See Note 12 - Income Taxes.

We have self-funded insurance programs in place to cover health insurance claims and workers’ compensation claims which arose prior to June 2011. Commencing June 1, 2011, we converted to a guaranteed cost program for workers’ compensation. These insurance programs are subject to various stop-loss limitations and are partially re-insured through a captive insurance program. We accrue estimated losses using historical loss experience. Although we believe that the insurance reserves are adequate, the reserve estimates are based on historical experience, which may not be indicative of current and future losses. We adjust insurance reserves, as needed, in the event that future loss experience differs from historical loss patterns.

In 1992, we established the Bassett Furniture Industries, Incorporated Directors’ Charitable Award Program (the “Program”), under which each eligible director of the Company could recommend that the Company make a donation of up to $500 to an eligible charity selected by the director. The donations are to be made in the director’s name, in ten equal annual installments, with the first installment to be made as soon as practicable after the director’s death. No new directors have been allowed to participate in the program since 1996, and our Board of Directors may, at any time, terminate the program and cease making the designated contributions. We elected to fund 100% of the designated contributions under the Program with life insurance policies covering the participating directors. The participating directors are paired under second-to-die policies whereby the death benefit for both directors is not received until the second of the pair is deceased. Contributions made on behalf of the first paired director to die are charged to an asset until the death benefits are received at the time of the second director’s death. At that time, the portion of the death benefit attributable to the second director’s designated contributions is recorded as a liability against which the remaining contribution installments are charged as paid. At November 26, 2011, there were remaining designated future contributions totaling $6,900 associated with 15 current and former directors, of which $900 relates to three deceased directors for which installment payments have commenced. The total death benefit on the life insurance in force at November 26, 2011 is $7,500. All premiums required for the life insurance were paid in prior years and no additional premium payments will be required to keep the policies in force. The net asset representing charitable contributions made in advance of death benefits to be received and the cash surrender value of the related life insurance were $600 and $1,637, respectively, at November 26, 2011, and $450 and $1,677, respectively, at November 27, 2010. Both amounts are included in other assets in the accompanying balance sheets.

In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-06, which updates the guidance in ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, related to disclosures about fair value measurements. New disclosures will require entities to disclose separately the amounts of significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements and to describe the reasons for the transfers; and to present separately in the reconciliation for fair value measurements in Level 3 information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements on a gross basis rather than as one net amount. The ASU also amends ASC Subtopic 820-10 to clarify certain existing disclosures regarding the level of disaggregation at which fair value measurements are provided for each class of assets and liabilities; and disclosures about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value for both recurring and nonrecurring fair value measurements that fall in either Level 2 or Level 3. The new disclosures and clarifications of existing disclosures were effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements in the reconciliation of Level 3 fair value measurements, which become effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010. We implemented the new disclosures and clarifications of existing disclosures beginning with our second quarter of fiscal 2010, and the disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements in the reconciliation of Level 3 fair value measurements will be implemented beginning in our first quarter of fiscal 2012. The adoption of this guidance has not had, and is not expected to have, a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

In July 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-20, which updates the guidance in ASC Topic 310, Receivables, related to disclosures about the credit quality of financing receivables and the allowance for credit losses. The new disclosures require disaggregated information related to financing receivables and include for each class of financing receivables, among other things: a rollforward for the allowance for credit losses, credit quality information, impaired loan information, modification information, non-accrual and past-due information. The disclosures as of the end of a reporting period are effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending on or after December 15, 2010. The disclosures about activity that occurs during a reporting period are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2010. In January 2011, ASU No. 2011-01 delayed the effective date for certain requirements of ASU 2010-20 regarding disclosures about troubled debt restructurings until guidance could be issued as to what constitutes a troubled debt restructuring. In April 2011, ASU 2011-02 was issued to provide such guidance and requires disclosures about troubled debt restructurings to become effective for periods beginning on or after June 15, 2011. Accordingly, we have implemented all of the guidance of ASU 2010-20 during fiscal 2011. The adoption of this guidance has not had a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-29, which updates the guidance in ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations. The objective of ASU 2010-29 is to address diversity in practice about the interpretation of the pro forma revenue and earnings disclosure requirements for business combinations. The amendments in ASU 2010-29 specify that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. The amendments also expand the supplemental pro forma disclosures to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The amendments affect any public entity as defined by ASC 805 that enters into business combinations that are material on an individual or aggregate basis. This guidance will become effective for us for acquisitions occurring on or after the beginning of our 2012 fiscal year. We do not expect the adoption of this guidance will have a material impact upon our financial position or results of operations.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, which updated the guidance in ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement. The amendments in this Update generally represent clarifications of Topic 820, but also include some instances where a particular principle or requirement for measuring fair value or disclosing information about fair value measurements has changed. This Update results in common principles and requirements for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements in accordance with U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards. The amendments in this Update are to be applied prospectively. For public entities, the amendments are effective during interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011, and early application is not permitted. This guidance will become effective for us as of the beginning of our second quarter of fiscal 2012. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05, which updated the guidance in ASC Topic 220, Comprehensive Income. Under the amendments in this Update, an entity has the option to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income, and the components of other comprehensive income either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. In both choices, an entity is required to present each component of net income along with total net income, each component of other comprehensive income along with a total for other comprehensive income, and a total amount for comprehensive income. This Update eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders' equity. The amendments in this Update do not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income or when an item of other comprehensive income must be reclassified to net income. The amendments in this Update should be applied retrospectively. For public entities, the amendments are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011, and early application is permitted. In December of 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-12, which defers only those provisions within ASU 2011-05 pertaining to reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income. This guidance, except for those provisions deferred by ASU 2011-12, will become effective for us as of the beginning of our 2013 fiscal year. The adoption of this guidance will not have an impact on our financial position or results of operations.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08, which updates the guidance in ASC Topic 350, Intangibles – Goodwill & Other. The amendments in ASU 2011-08 affect all entities that have goodwill reported in their financial statements. The amendments in ASU 2011-08 permit an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than the carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test described in ASC Topic 350. The more-likely-than-not threshold is defined as having a likelihood of more than 50 percent. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, an entity determines that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test is unnecessary. The amendments in this Update include examples of events and circumstances that an entity should consider in evaluating whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, however the examples are not intended to be all-inclusive and an entity my identify other relevant events and circumstances to consider in making the determination. The examples in this Update supersede the previous examples under ASC Topic 350 of events and circumstances an entity should consider in determining whether it should test for impairment between annual tests, and also supersede the examples of events and circumstances that an entity having a reporting unit with a zero or negative should consider in determining whether to perform the second step of the impairment test. Under the amendments in this Update, an entity is no longer permitted to carry forward its detailed calculation of a reporting unit’s fair value from a prior year as previously permitted under ASC Topic 350. As permitted by ASU 2011-08, we have adopted the provisions of this Update effective for our fiscal 2011 annual test for goodwill impairment, performed as of the beginning of the fourth quarter of fiscal 2011. The adoption of this Update did not have a material impact upon our financial positions or results of operations.