XML 62 R13.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
6 Months Ended
Jan. 31, 2013
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

6. Goodwill and other intangible assets:

The carrying amount of goodwill at January 31, 2013 and July 31, 2012 was $1,849.

Other intangible assets include the value assigned to intellectual property and other technology, patents, customer contracts and relationships, a trade name, and in-process research and development. The estimated useful lives for all of these intangible assets, excluding the trade name, as it is considered to have an indefinite life, are between 0.5 to 14 years.

Intangible assets at January 31, 2013 and July 31, 2012 consisted of the following:

 

     January 31, 2013      July 31, 2012  
             Cost              Accumulated
Amortization
             Net                      Cost              Accumulated
Amortization
             Net          

Developed technology

   $ 12,191       $ 5,580       $ 6,611       $ 12,191       $ 4,974       $ 7,217   

Customer relationships

     25,440         8,750         16,690         25,440         7,824         17,616   

Trade name

     7,607         -         7,607         7,607         -         7,607   

In-process research and development

     1,900         -         1,900         1,900         -         1,900   

Total

   $ 47,138       $ 14,330       $ 32,808       $ 47,138       $ 12,798       $ 34,340   

Amortization expense related to intangible assets was $766 and $1,532 for each of the three and six months ended January 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

The estimated future amortization expense related to intangible assets for each of the five succeeding fiscal years is expected to be as follows:

 

2013 (remaining six months)

   $ 1,531   

2014

     3,063   

2015

     3,063   

2016

     2,975   

2017

     2,931   
  

 

 

 
   $     13,563   
  

 

 

 

In the second quarter of fiscal year 2013, we performed the annual impairment test for our goodwill. The goodwill relates to our acquisition of Copley Controls in April 2008, all of which is in our OEM reporting unit in the Medical Imaging segment. We elected to bypass the qualitative assessment and proceeded to Step 1 of the impairment test by comparing the fair value of the OEM reporting unit in the Medical Imaging segment to its carrying value. Our approach considered both the market approach and income approach with equal weight assigned to each. Under the market approach, the fair value of the reporting unit is based on trading multiples and a control premium which was determined based on an analysis of control premiums for relevant recent acquisitions. Under the income approach, the fair value of the reporting unit is based on the present value of estimated future cash flows. The income approach is dependent on a number of significant management assumptions including estimates of future sales, future gross margin percentage, and discount rates. We determined that the fair value of the reporting unit was in excess of the carrying value of the net assets of the reporting unit by greater than 70%, and thus it was not necessary for us to perform step two of the impairment test for the goodwill.

For the trade name, we compared the fair value of the Copley trade name using the relief from royalty approach to our carrying value during the second quarter of fiscal year 2013. The relief from royalty approach utilized an after-tax royalty rate and a discount rate. The after-tax royalty rate was determined based on royalty research and margin analysis while the discount rate was determined after consideration of market rates of return on debt and equity capital, the weighted average return on invested capital and the risk associated with achieving forecasted sales for the Copley trade name. We determined that the fair value of the Copley trade name was more than its carrying value by greater than 40%.

For the in-process research and development, which represents our investment of $1,900 in a start-up company with proprietary technology expected to be utilized in our Ultrasound segment, we compared the fair value of the in-process research and development using the income approach to its carrying value during the second quarter of fiscal year 2013. The income approach utilized a discount rate which was determined after consideration of market rates of return on debt and equity capital, the weighted average return on invested capital and the risk associated with achieving forecasted sales from the in-process research and development. We determined that the fair value of the in-process research and development was more than its carrying value by greater than 100%. The Company expects to begin amortizing the in-process research and development over the product life cycle once production of the product begins, which is expected within the next twelve to twenty four months.