XML 20 R15.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.3.0.15
Fair Value Measurements
9 Months Ended
Oct. 01, 2011
Fair Value Measurements [Abstract] 
Fair Value Measurements
10. Fair Value Measurements
We determine a fair value measurement based on the assumptions a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. The fair value measurement guidance established a three level hierarchy making a distinction between market participant assumptions based on (i) unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in an active market (Level 1), (ii) quoted prices in markets that are not active or inputs that are observable either directly or indirectly for substantially the full term of the asset or liability (Level 2), and (iii) prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both unobservable and significant to the overall fair value measurement (Level 3).
We had an ineffective interest rate swap that terminated in March of fiscal 2011. The swap is valued using a valuation model that has inputs other than quoted market prices that are both observable and unobservable.
The following table presents a reconciliation of the level 3 interest rate swap liability measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of October 1, 2011 (in thousands):
         
Fair value at January 1, 2011
  $ (2,195 )
Realized gains included in earnings, net
    2,195  
 
     
Fair value at October 1, 2011
  $  
 
     
The $2.2 million realized gain is included in “Changes associated with ineffective interest rate swap” in the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the nine month period ended October 1, 2011.
Carrying amounts for our financial instruments are not significantly different from their fair value, with the exception of our mortgage. To determine the fair value of our mortgage, we used a discounted cash flow model. Assumptions critical to our fair value in the period were present value factors used in determining fair value and an interest rate. At October 1, 2011, the carrying value and fair value of our mortgage was $235.3 million and $235.1 million, respectively.