JUNE 2013 Vs DEC 2011 (Impairment)

Hi, It is because in one calculation they are calculating the impairment on the goodwill (Captive), whilst in the other (Park) they are working out the goodwill from the impairment. It's a bit like mark-ups and margins, both very similar but slightly different. Thanks

ok but if we calculate Captive's goodwill using the same method as Park, shouldn't it give the same answer?? I used the same method as Park (notional goodwill) but i got an answer for impairment to be set off against goodwill as 76.25 - (120.8/80*20) = 46.05 However in the answer they set off 61 against goodwill. why is this difference???

can you please clear this

Both answers are done in the same fashion?!?!? Park: Partial goodwill is $80m (=60%) so to get the NCI goodwill we do the following calculation, 80/60 x 40. This gives us the 53.3. Captive: Partial goodwill is $120.2 (=80%) so to get the NCI goodwill we do the following calculation, 120.2/80 x 20. This gives us the 30.05. Thanks

ok but in PARK the impairment is allocated as : Impairment 300·3 Less notional goodwill on NCI (53·3) Impairment loss to be allocated 247 Allocated to: Goodwill 80 PPE 167 Total 247 but in CAPTIVE they have not deducted the notional goodwill to allocate the impairment to goodwill Goodwill impairment on grossed up amount 76·25 Goodwill impairment on Traveler’s share (80% x 76·25) 61 (above is what is given in the answer) shouldn't the goodwill impairment allocated like this : impairment of 76.25 (-) notional goodwill of 30.05 ( ie. what you have calculated ) impairment to be allocated 46.2 thus impairment to be set off against goodwill is 46.2 and thus NCV of goodwill of captive being 74 ( ie. 120.2 - 46.2 )

can you please clear it for me :)