XML 22 R10.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.5.0.2
Goodwill and Indefinite-Lived Assets
12 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2016
Goodwill and Intangible Assets Disclosure [Abstract]  
Goodwill and Indefinite-Lived Assets
4. Goodwill and Indefinite-Lived Assets

 

Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of identifiable net assets of acquired businesses. Indefinite-lived intangibles are intangible assets whose useful lives are indefinite in that their lives extend beyond the foreseeable horizon – that is there is no foreseeable limit on the period of time over which they are expected to contribute to the cash flows of the reporting entity.  The Company accounts for these items in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 350 Intangibles – Goodwill and Other, which requires that impairment testing for goodwill is performed at least annually at the reporting unit level. A reporting unit is an operating segment or one level below an operating segment (also known as a component). We perform our annual impairment test as of January 31st of each year. Goodwill is also tested for impairment between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value.

 

The following table presents the changes in the carrying amount of the Fineline goodwill and trade name (in thousands):

 

    Goodwill   Trade name
Balance at July 1, 2014   $     $  
Purchased     353       54  
Balance at July 1, 2015     353       54  
Impairment charge     (241 )     (4 )
Balance at June 30, 2016   $ 112     $ 50  

 

The impairment test for goodwill uses a two-step approach.  Step one compares the fair value of the reporting unit to its carrying value including goodwill.  If the carrying value exceeds the fair value, there is a potential impairment and step two must be performed.  Step two compares the carrying value of the reporting unit’s goodwill to its implied value (i.e., the fair value of the reporting unit less the fair value of the unit’s assets and liabilities, including identifiable intangible assets).  If the carrying value of goodwill exceeds its implied value, the excess is recorded as an impairment. 

 

Under Step 1 of the impairment test the Company determined that the carrying value of the reporting unit including goodwill exceeded the fair value, requiring us to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any.

 

The Company then performed Step 2 of the impairment test, and determined the implied value of Fineline goodwill was $112,000, which was less than its carrying value and, as a result, the Company recognized a non-cash, pre-tax charge of $241,000 during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016.    Additionally, our analysis indicated that the estimated fair value of the trade name acquired was $50,000 and therefore we recognized an impairment charge of $4,000 during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016. These impairment charges are included under the caption “Impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets” in our consolidated statements of operations. There were no impairment charges recognized during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015.

 

The valuation methods utilized to value the long-lived assets and the goodwill discussed above are based on the amount and timing of expected future cash flows and growth rates and include a determination of an appropriate discount rate.  The cash flows utilized in the discounted cash flow analyses were based on financial forecasts developed internally by management.  Estimating future cash flows requires significant judgment and projections may vary from the cash flows eventually realized.  Determining the fair value using a discounted cash flow method requires significant estimates and assumptions, including market conditions, discount rates, and long-term projections of cash flows.  The Company’s estimates are based upon historical experience, current market trends, projected future volumes and other information. The Company believes that the estimates and assumptions underlying the valuation methodology are reasonable; however, different estimates and assumptions could result in a different estimate of fair value.