XML 24 R11.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.8.0.1
Goodwill and Intangible Assets
12 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Goodwill and Intangible Assets Disclosure [Abstract]  
Goodwill and Intangible Assets
Goodwill and Intangible Assets
The Company’s intangible assets by major asset class subject to amortization as of:
September 30, 2017
Weighted Average Life at September 30,
 
Original
Cost
 
Accumulated
Amortization
 
Impairment
 
Currency Translation
 
Net Book
Value
Intangible assets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Trade name
8 years
 
$
2,776

 
$
1,564

 
$
310

 
$
19

 
$
921

Non-compete agreement
5 years
 
1,600

 
1,584

 

 

 
16

Technology asset
5 years
 
1,869

 
749

 

 
50

 
1,170

Customer relationships
10 years
 
15,568

 
8,946

 
1,979

 
64

 
4,707

Total intangible assets
 
 
$
21,813

 
$
12,843

 
$
2,289

 
$
133

 
$
6,814

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
September 30, 2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
Intangible assets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Trade name
8 years
 
$
2,776

 
$
1,240

 
$

 
$
9

 
$
1,545

Non-compete agreement
5 years
 
1,600

 
1,547

 

 

 
53

Technology asset
5 years
 
1,869

 
389

 

 
37

 
1,517

Customer relationships
10 years
 
15,568

 
7,571

 

 
26

 
8,023

Total intangible assets
 
 
$
21,813

 
$
10,747

 
$

 
$
72

 
$
11,138



The amortization expense on identifiable intangible assets for fiscal 2017 and 2016 was $2,168 and $2,593, respectively.
Amortization expense associated with the identified intangible assets is expected to be as follows:
 
Amortization
Expense
Fiscal year 2018
$
1,704

Fiscal year 2019
1,539

Fiscal year 2020
1,539

Fiscal year 2021
1,015

Fiscal year 2022
329



Goodwill is not amortized, but is subject to an annual impairment test. The Company tests its goodwill for impairment in the fourth fiscal quarter, and in interim periods if certain events occur indicating that the carrying amount of goodwill may be impaired.

In the third quarter of fiscal 2017, there was a triggering event, which resulted in the Company performing an interim impairment test. Certain qualitative factors, primarily the under-performance relative to projected future operating results for the Alliance reporting unit caused the triggering event. The Company used May 31, 2017, the announcement date of the decision to close Alliance and move its business to its Cleveland reporting unit, as the triggering date to evaluate the carrying values and test for recoverability at the lowest level starting with Alliance's long-lived assets, primarily its machinery and equipment and its identifiable intangible assets. See Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies - Asset Impairment for further discussion on the long-lived assets impairment test. At the time the announcement was made, it was determined that orders after September 30, 2017 are to be transferred to Cleveland which resulted in the reallocation of $3,493 of goodwill to the Cleveland reporting unit. The Company used the carrying value of the reporting unit, inclusive of the assigned goodwill and to compare to its fair value using the market and income approach to estimate the fair value of this reporting unit.  Significant assumptions inherent in the valuation methodologies for goodwill were employed and include, but are not limited to, prospective financial information, growth rates, terminal value and discount rates and required the Company to make certain assumptions and estimates regarding industry economic factors and future profitability of its business. When performing the income and market approach for the reporting unit, SIFCO incorporated the use of projected financial information and a discount rate that was developed using market participant based assumptions.  The cash flow projections are based on five-year financial forecasts developed by management that include revenue projections, capital spending trends, and investment in working capital to support anticipated revenue growth.  The selected


discount rate considers the risk and nature of the reporting unit's cash flows and ratios of return that market participants would require to invest their capital in our plant.

Although the Company believes its assumptions are reasonable, actual results may vary significantly and may expose the Company to material impairment charges in the future.  The methodology for determining fair values was consistent for the periods presented. 
Based on this quantitative test performed during the interim test date, it was determined that the fair value (using Level 3 inputs) of this reporting unit exceeded the carrying value. As such there was no goodwill impairment of the Cleveland reporting unit at May 31, 2017.

The Company completed its annual impairment test of goodwill as of July 31, 2017 for the Cleveland and Maniago, Italy ("Maniago") reporting units. Prior year financials included full impairment of goodwill for the Orange, California ("Orange") reporting unit. The Company completed its review using judgment to determine whether to use a qualitative analysis or a quantitative fair value measurement for its goodwill impairment testing. The Company's fair value measurement approach combines the income (discounted cash flow method) and market valuation (market comparable method) techniques for each of the Company’s reporting units that carry goodwill. These valuation techniques use estimates and assumptions including, but not limited to, the determination of appropriate market comparables, projected future cash flows (including timing and profitability), discount rate reflecting the risk inherent in future cash flows, perpetual growth rate, and projected future economic and market conditions (Level 3 inputs).

Upon completion of the annual impairment testing for the Maniago reporting unit and the Cleveland reporting unit, it was determined that the fair value of goodwill for the reporting units exceeded the carrying value. As such, no impairment of goodwill existed as of September 30, 2017, compared with $4,164 of goodwill charge related to the Orange reporting unit, which was fully impaired in fiscal 2016. The Orange goodwill impairment was due to not meeting revenue expectations, and in part, to product mix, which resulted in lower margins and related business practices had not come to fruition for cost savings measures undertaken to address increased costs. All of the goodwill was expected to be deductible for tax purposes. Changes in the net carrying amount of goodwill were as follows:
Balance at September 30, 2015
$
16,480

  Goodwill adjustment
(589
)
  Currency translation
21

  Impairment adjustment
$
(4,164
)
Balance at September 30, 2016
$
11,748

  Currency translation
422

Balance at September 30, 2017
$
12,170