XML 91 R13.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.8
Property And Equipment
12 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2014
Property, Plant and Equipment [Abstract]  
Property and Equipment
4.
PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
Property and equipment consisted of the following at June 30 (in thousands):
Asset Class
2014
 
2013
Leasehold improvements
$
577,537

 
$
570,286

Technology
329,361

 
324,403

Furniture and equipment
162,872

 
163,595

Software
120,242

 
98,537

Library books
44,604

 
44,248

Construction in progress
16,683

 
19,601

Buildings and improvements
5,798

 
25,566

Land
3,605

 
5,495

Total
1,260,702

 
1,251,731

Less accumulated depreciation
(831,245
)
 
(726,106
)
Property and equipment, net
$
429,457

 
$
525,625


Depreciation and amortization expense related to property and equipment was $146.2 million, $157.9 million and $151.0 million, respectively, for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2014, 2013 and 2012. Included in these amounts is amortization expense on software of $18.3 million, $20.2 million and $14.7 million, respectively. Amortization expense on software assets for the year ended June 30, 2013 included $4.6 million in accelerated amortization resulting from the write off of a software asset that no longer had a useful life.
Sale-Leaseback Transactions
The Company completed six sale-leaseback transactions with unrelated third parties for net proceeds of $9.6 million and $65.1 million in fiscal 2014 and 2013, respectively, which are classified as an investing activity in the consolidated statement of cash flows. The transactions resulted in net losses of $3.5 million and $3.9 million recorded in educational services expense upon closing the transactions. In connection with the prior year sale-leaseback transactions, gains of $17.8 million were deferred, of which $14.3 million remains at June 30, 2014. The deferred gains are classified within deferred rent on the consolidated balance sheet and are being recognized over the initial terms of the new leases as a reduction to educational services expense. At the time of closing for all transactions, the Company entered into agreements to lease all of these properties back from the purchasers over initial lease terms ranging from three to 15 years. The Company classified these leases as operating and considers them normal leasebacks with no other continuing involvement. Refer to Note 18, "Subsequent Events," for a description of an additional sale-leaseback transaction that occurred in August 2014.
Lease Abandonment and Restructuring
During fiscal 2014, management determined it would not begin admitting students for one of its start-up Art
Institute locations as was previously anticipated. As a result, the Company recorded a $6.3 million lease abandonment charge in educational services expense during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 which was comprised of existing construction-in-progress assets (which resulted in a reduction to property and equipment) and accelerated rent expense based on the remaining minimum obligations under the existing lease, net of expected sublease income. In addition, in connection with restructuring plans across the organization intended to improve operational efficiencies and align costs with student enrollment levels as further described in Note 7, "Accrued Liabilities," the Company recorded lease restructuring charges during fiscal 2014, 2013 and 2012 of $5.8 million, $2.0 million and $2.5 million, respectively, which primarily comprised of existing leasehold improvement assets (which resulted in a reduction to property and equipment) and accelerated rent expense.
Impairments
During fiscal 2014 and 2013, the Company recorded charges of $6.1 million and $1.2 million in long-lived asset impairments in the consolidated statements of operations as estimated future cash flows at three of the Company's Brown Mackie College locations and one of the Company's Argosy University locations, respectively, were insufficient to support the carrying values of their property and equipment, which primarily consisted of leasehold improvement assets. These charges were calculated using an income valuation approach.