Company: PRSU
Filing Date: 2025-03-17
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0000950170-25-040127
Chunk: 245

Company: Pursuit Attractions & Hospitality, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-03-17
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 8
Chunk 245
---
 Las Vegas Flyover attraction asset group. The Company then determined the estimated fair value of the Las Vegas Flyover attraction asset group 

73

based upon a discounted cash flow analysis using the income approach. The carrying value of the Las Vegas Flyover Attraction asset group was in excess of its estimated fair value, and as a result, the Company recorded an asset impairment charge of $27.5 million. The estimated fair value over the carrying value for the Glacier Park Collection reporting unit was 11%.

Given the significant judgments made by management to estimate the fair value of the Flyover Attractions and Glacier Park Collection reporting units and the Las Vegas Flyover Attraction asset group, performing audit procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of management’s assumptions and estimates related to selection of the discount rates and forecasts required a high degree of auditor judgment and an increased extent of effort, including the need to involve our fair value specialists. 

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the selection of the discount rates and forecasts used by management to estimate the fair value of the Flyover Attractions and Glacier Park Collection reporting units and the Las Vegas Flyover Attraction asset group included the following: 

•We tested the effectiveness of controls over management’s goodwill, intangible assets, and long-lived asset impairment evaluations, including those over the determination of the fair value of the reporting units and the Las Vegas Flyover Attraction asset group, such as the controls related to management’s selection of the discount rates and forecasts.

•We evaluated management’s ability to accurately forecast future revenues and EBITDA margins by comparing actual results to management’s historical forecasts.

•We evaluated the reasonableness of management’s forecasts by comparing the forecasts to (1) historical results of the Company, (2) internal communications to management, and (3) forecasted information included in industry reports of the Company.

•With the assistance of our fair value specialists, we evaluated the reasonableness of the (1) valuation methodologies used and (2) discount rates, including testing the source information underlying the determination of the discount rates, testing the mathematical accuracy of the calculations, and developing a range of independent estimates and comparing those to the discount rates selected by management.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Tempe, Arizona

March 17, 2025

We have served as the Company’s auditor since at least 1929; however, an earlier year could not be reliably determined.

74

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements