6.GOODWILL:

As discussed in Note 10 — Segment Information, during the first quarter of fiscal year 2016, the Company changed its organizational structure which resulted in a change of operating segments and reporting units. As a result, goodwill was re-allocated to the new reporting units using a relative fair value approach. In addition, the Company completed an assessment of any goodwill impairment for all reporting units as described below.

Goodwill is measured and tested for impairment on an annual basis in the first quarter of the Company’s fiscal year in accordance with applicable accounting standards, or more frequently if indicators of impairment exist. Triggering events for interim impairment testing include indicators such as adverse industry or economic trends, restructuring actions, downward revisions to projections of financial performance, or a sustained decline in market capitalization. The performance of the impairment test involves a two-step process. The first step requires comparing the estimated fair value of a reporting unit to its net book value, including goodwill. A potential impairment exists if the estimated fair value of the reporting unit is lower than its net book value. The second step of the impairment test involves assigning the estimated fair value of the reporting unit to its identifiable assets, with any residual fair value being assigned to goodwill. If the carrying value of an individual indefinite-lived intangible asset (including goodwill) exceeds its estimated fair value, such asset is written down by an amount equal to the excess, and a corresponding amount is recorded as a charge to operations for the period in which the impairment test is completed. Completion of the Company’s annual impairment test during the quarter ended June 30, 2015 indicated no potential impairment of its goodwill balances.

Each quarter the Company considers whether indicators of impairment exist such that additional impairment testing may be necessary. During the quarter ended September 30, 2015, triggering events occurred which required the Company to test the recoverability of goodwill associated with its Brazil Marketing Services and Audience Solutions reporting unit. The triggering event was the announced closure of the Company’s Brazil operation. In addition to testing the recoverability of goodwill, the Company also tested certain other long-lived assets in this unit for impairment. The results of the two-step test indicated complete impairment of the goodwill as well as impairment for certain other long-lived assets. The amount of impairment was $0.7 million, included in gains, losses and other items, net in the condensed consolidated statement of operations, of which $0.5 million was goodwill and $0.2 million related to other long-lived assets, primarily property and equipment.

The carrying amount of goodwill, by operating segment, at September 30, 2015, and the changes in those balances are presented in the following table (dollars in thousands).

	Marketing Services and Audience Solutions			Connectivity			Total
Balance at March 31, 2015	$	402,645		$	94,717		$	497,362

Impairment	(502		)				(502		)
Change in foreign currency translation adjustment	(832		)	(185		)	(1,017		)

Balance at September 30, 2015	$	401,311		$	94,532		$	495,843

Goodwill by component included in the Marketing Services and Audience Solutions segment as of September 30, 2015 is: U.S., $388.6 million; and Asia/Pacific (APAC), $12.7 million. Goodwill by component included in the Connectivity segment as of September 30, 2015 is: U.S., $91.1 million; and APAC, $3.4 million.

In order to estimate the fair value for each of the components, management uses an income approach based on a discounted cash flow model together with valuations based on an analysis of public company market multiples and a similar transactions analysis.

The key assumptions used in the discounted cash flow valuation model include discount rates, growth rates, cash flow projections and terminal value rates. Discount rates, growth rates and cash flow projections are the most sensitive and susceptible to change as they require significant management judgment. Discount rates are determined by using a weighted average cost of capital (“WACC”). The WACC considers market and industry data as well as company-specific risk factors for each reporting unit in determining the appropriate discount rate to be used. The discount rate utilized for each reporting unit is indicative of the return an investor would expect to receive for investing in such a business. Management, considering industry and company-specific historical and projected data, develops growth rates and cash flow projections for each reporting unit. Terminal value rate determination follows common methodology of capturing the present value of perpetual cash flow estimates beyond the last projected period assuming a constant WACC and low long-term growth rates.

The public company market multiple method is used to estimate values for each of the components by looking at market value multiples to revenue and EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) for selected public companies that are believed to be representative of companies that marketplace participants would use to arrive at comparable multiples for the individual component being tested. These multiples are then used to develop an estimated value for each respective component.

The similar transactions method compares multiples based on acquisition prices of other companies believed to be those that marketplace participants would use to compare to the individual component being tested. Those multiples are then used to develop an estimated value for that component.

In order to arrive at an estimated value for each component, management uses a weighted-average approach to combine the results of each analysis. Management believes that using multiple valuation approaches and then weighting them appropriately is a technique that a marketplace participant would use.

As a final test of the annual valuation results, the total of the values of the components is reconciled to the actual market value of Acxiom common stock as of the valuation date. Management believes the resulting control premium is reasonable compared to historical control premiums observed in actual transactions.