I’m confused about 2 things, please could you help me to understand?
1) why is ‘buildings’ grouped together as remaining assets (& therefore impaired on a pro rata basis along with the ‘other net assets’)? I would have thought it was a specific asset to be impaired first?
2) the total of the assets after impairment appears to add up to £260 million, not the £250 million as expected?
I may be missing something obvious so clarification would be much appreciated. 🙂
There isn’t anything within the question that states that the building is impaired, unless there is then it would be grouped amongst the other remaining assets.
I think there is a mistake in the total of the original assets prior to any impairment, which then means that the total of the assets after allocation of the impairment is then incorrect by the same amount.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.