Woolworths Case Study Draft Essay Example for Free

Woolworths Case Study Draft Essay Part 1: Goodwill and Discontinued Operations a) Carrying value of goodwill 24 June 2012 The carrying value of goodwill in Woolworth’s consolidated financial statements was $3221.8 Million (M) at 24 June 2012. This figure is included within ‘intangible assets’ on the consolidated balance sheet and exact amount is disclosed in the Note 11 of Notes to consolidated financial statements (Woolworths 2012, p 126). b) Movements in carrying value of goodwill The carrying value of goodwill at the beginning of the period was $3227.7M (Woolworths 2012, p 126). An additional $42.1M was recognised throughout the year due to additional acquisition of businesses, with less . 5M for disposals and $0.7M for other expenses. Woolworths also recognised an impairment loss of $70.6M for the year. There was also an effect of movements in foreign exchange rates of $24.8M, which resulted in a carrying amount of $3221.8million at the end of the period (Woolworths 2012, p 126). c) Impairment loss on goodwill i) Impairment loss on Goodwill at 24 June 2012 was $70.6M. ii) Woolworth’s accounting policy with respect to impairment testing of goodwill is consistent with AASB 139 Intangible Assets. Note 11 (Woolworths 2012, p 126) specifically states that intangible assets (such as goodwill) with indefinite useful lives are tested for impairment annually and when there is indication that the asset may be impaired, the impairment loss is recognised when the carrying amount exceeds the recoverable amount. Recoverable amount is further defined to be the higher of fair value less cost to sell and value in use. iii) Impairment loss on goodwill was a result of Woolworth’s announcement to restructure and divest the Consumer Electronics Business. The amount is also disclosed as ‘discontinued operations’ in Note 33 (Woolworths 2012, p 96) for $366.2M. AASB 5.32 defined discontinued operations to be a part of an entity that represents a separate line, or part, of business or geographical area or subsidiary acquired exclusively for resale that had been disposed or classified as held for sale. A separate line item from continuing operations is required as a single figure disclosed in statement of comprehensive income or Notes. iv) The fair value less costs to sell figure of $420M (Woolworths 2012, p 174) includes impairment loss, restructuring provisions relating to goodwill, inventory, plant property and equipment, and lease exit costs. Since the impairment loss attributed to goodwill was $70.6M. Hence (420-70.6M) = $349.4M is attributable to fair value losses related to net  assets. Since held for sale assets disclosed in the Balance sheet (Woolworths 2012, p 99) is $376.7M, the net assets prior recognising the loss would have approximately been (349.4+376.7M) $726.1M, assuming that transaction costs and lease exit costs are negligible. v) The Dick Smith Electronics brand and stores were sold for $20M (Janda 2012). As the held for sale assets was recognised to be $376.7M, the net loss Woolworths would recognise is (376.7-20) $356.7M in the 2012-2013 financial period. Part 2: Investments in controlled entities a) Woolworths Limited group structure b) Non-controlling interest The carrying dollar value of the non-controlling interest (NCI) in Woolworths Limited as at 24 June 2012 was $258.1 million (Woolworths 2012, p 103). This NCI is the dollar amount of the combined equity interests in the parent companys subsidiaries not owned by the parent. When interviewed in 2013 Professor Chris Nobes confirmed that the figure also represented the profits made by NCI’s that have not yet been allocated to them. The respective NCI for the Woolworths Limited group applies to the external equity interests held in Woolworths Limiteds subsidiaries of ALH Group Pty Ltd, Australian Independent Retailers Pty Ltd, Bergam Pty Limited, Hydrox Holdings Pty Ltd and Statewide Independent Wholesalers Limited (Woolworths 2012, p 164-167). Woolworths Limiteds annual report is not useful for non-controlling shareholders. The reason for this is the information regarding NCI is aggregated as it combines all the information from separate subsidiaries with NCIs into combined figures which cannot be separated by a shareholder. It may then be argued that information regarding NCI should be more detailed however when interviewed in 2013 Professor Chris Nobes suggested that non-controlling shareholders should only be interested in the reports of their subsidiary as they are more detailed. Fortunately there are separate financial statements available for the subsidiaries with non-controlling interests. The reason for this is that the class action, ASIC Class Order 98/1418, exempting some subsidiaries from reporting requirements only pertains to wholly-owned subsidiaries (Woolworths 2012, p. 168). Therefore separate financial statements are available for subsidiaries of Woolworths Limited that have non-controlling interests. c) AASB 3.19 The Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) (2010, para 19) gives controlling entities a choice between measuring the non-controlling interest (NCI) using the 100% method or the proportionate method. The proportionate method does not assign goodwill to the NCI as it relates to the subsidiarys net identifiable assets. In comparison the 100% method requires the non-controlling interest to be measured at its fair value which includes goodwill. One reason an entity may prefer to use the proportionate method is that it does not require a calculation of fair value for the NCI. The calculation of fair value for the NCI may be difficult in circumstances where an active market does not exist. Using Woolworths Limiteds annual report we can gather information relating to which method they chose to use. Their significant accounting policies relating to goodwill state that goodwill represents the difference between the cost of the acquisition and the fair  value of the net identifiable assets acquired (Woolworths Limited 2012, p 108). Therefore this policy describes the same process for identifying goodwill as the process used in the proportionate method and it may be concluded that Woolworths is using the proportionate method. The issues regarding the choice between the two methods are interesting. The choice seems to be more beneficial for the parent entity rather than the NCI as a company such as Woolworths Limited may choose to consistently use the proportionate method. This may misrepresent the value of the NCI to be lower as this method does not have a goodwill component for the NCI which the 100% method often has. Therefore the disclosures under the proportionate method made by Woolworths Limited regarding the NCI values could be undervalued. When interviewed in 2013 Professor Chris Nobes suggested that the choice between the two methods may affect comparability of financial statements. This point is reiterated by the International Accounting Standards Board (2012, para BC210). A further issue according to the International Accounting Standards Board (2012, para BC213) is that the 100% method is more expensive to use which is one key reason for the inclusion of the proportionate method. Using all these arguments one can see that there are many perspectives about which method is better and whether a choice should have been included in the standard. Still we should not be too concerned as Professor Chris Nobes confirms in his 2013 interview that not many business acquisitions have NCI components or they have an insignificant NCI component and therefore the issue of choice under AASB 3.19 is small. Part 3: Segment note a) Reportable segments Woolworths (2012) has identified five reportable segments related to continuing operations according to AASB 8.13. Each reporting segment is managed separately due to the varying products and services they offer, as well as the requirement of ‘different technology and marketing strategies’ (Woolworths 2012, p 119) of each business unit. The reportable segments are split into two categories of Retail Operations and Hotels, with the former comprising of Australian Food Liquor, New Zealand Supermarkets, Petrol and Big W. As at 24 June 2012, the Australian Food Liquor segment comprised of 872 Australian supermarkets, totalling approximately 6.52% of total EBIT, and 160 Dan Murphy Liquor stores (Woolworths 2012). The Woolworths convenience liquor businesses; BWS and Woolworths Liquor are also included within the segment. This segment relies heavily on consumer confidence levels as the bulk of the sales stems from general groceries found at the supermarket as an alternative to fast food outlets that offer more affordable meal options. Similarly, the New Zealand Supermarkets segment specialises in the ‘procurement of Food and Liquor and products for resale to customers in New Zealand’ (Woolworths 2012, p 119). The ‘Countdown’ supermarkets operate in the same way as the Woolworths supermarkets in Australia, with a total of 161 supermarkets opened across the country as at June 24 2012. In the Petrol segment, the ‘procurement of Petroleum products for resale to customers in Australia’ (Woolworths 2012, p 119) is categorised through the Woolworths/Caltex alliance sites. This segment, coupled with the Big W segment, ; the ‘procurement of discount general merchandise products for resale to customers in Australia’ (Woolworths 2012, p 119) round off the reportable retail operations segments as the smallest, bearing not as big influence as the supermarket segments in relation to the group. Furthermore, the hotels segment is heavily affiliated with the liquor stores and supermarkets, as they provide leisure and hospitality services including alcohol and food, as well as gaming and accommodation. There are 294 hotel venues in operation as at June 24 2012, with Dan Murphy’s and BWS stores affiliated with over 500 hotels in total. b) Investment analysis When determining the ‘better’ investment between Woolworths Limited and Wesfarmers Limited amidst volatilities in the New Zealand economy and Australian groceries, liquor and petrol sectors, it is important not to make direct comparisons between the two companies encompassing different segment disclosure methods despite the compliance with AASB 8. Woolworths has identified New Zealand Supermarkets as a reportable segment, presenting comprehensive revenue data including other operating revenue and inter-segment revenue. Contrastingly, Wesfarmers does not comply with AASB 8.23 a) and b) by only disclosing the New Zealand revenue by geographical location. Nevertheless, assuming that the sales to customers was used by both companies, the following revenue calculations were calculated since the previous year: Comparability between the competing companies becomes increasingly difficult when analysing the investment in relation to the volatile groceries, liquor and petrol sectors. Whilst Woolworths identified the Australian Food Liquor and Petrol business units as different reportable segments, Wesfarmers grouped this financial information under ‘Coles’. The information regarding the allocation of revenues between operating units for Wesfarmers is not provided, hampering an ethical investing choice for external users. Despite the reporting issues, a revenue analysis was conducted in order to determine the most profitable company. Since the Coles segment was determined by a sum of undisclosed food, liquor, hotels, convenience and petrol data, the following analysis used Woolworths as a sum of its same divisions: Though abiding by AASB 8, Wesfarmers disclosed as little information as possible. It is clear that Wesfarmers possesses a fear of disclosure, and would rather present aggregated data in order to hide potential information  about risk, losses and debt levels for a particular Company 2012 $A revenue (millions) 2011 $A revenue (millions) $A change (millions) % change Woolworths 4301.8 4110.5 191.3 4.654% Wesfarmers 1283 1174 109 9.2845% Company Segment Revenue 2012 (millions) Segment Revenue 2011 (millions) Segment EBIT 2012 (millions) Segment EBIT 2011 (millions) % change in segment Revenue % change in segment EBIT Woolworths 45,815.6 43,478.4 3140 2980.2 5.34% 5.36% Coles 34,117 32,073 1356 1166 6.373% 16.3% segment. However, when removing segment reporting variability between the two companies, it is clear that greater growth opportunities exists for Wesfarmers, and is therefore the recommended investment. c) AASB 8 non-disclosures i) Despite clear disclosure of revenue for its reportable segments, Woolworths did not disclose its segment assets and segment liabilities. Therefore, it is assumed that the company did not comply with AASB 8.21 b), where information about segment assets and liabilities was not disclosed. However, AASB 8.23 states that ‘an entity shall report a measure of liabilities for each reportable segment if such an amount is regularly provided to the chief operating decision maker’ (AASB 2010, p 15). Similarly, this extends to the non-disclosure of segment assets according to AASB 25: ‘only those assets that are included in the measures of the segment’s assets that are used by the chief operating decision maker shall be reported for that segment’. Here it is agreed that the CODM of Woolworths does not believe the risk and opportunities of these items are important, thus the non-disclosure in the segment reports. ii) Whilst Woolworths was able to disaggregate the diverse aspects of their total business, Wesfarmers aggregated the majority of their core business operation within the ‘Coles’ segment. It is clear that Wesfarmers does not comply with AASB 8.20; by not enabling users to ‘evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business activities in which it engages’ (AASB 2010, p 14). However, AASB 8.22 b) states that an entity shall disclose ‘the types of products and services from which each reportable segment derives its revenues’ (AASB 2010, p 15). It is clear that Wesfarmers abide by this standard by disclosing the components of the Coles segment, instead of the revenue figures generated from each segment. d) ACCC investigation i) Acts of ‘unconscionable conduct’ such as high bargaining strength for Woolworths and Wesfarmers resulting in demands for extra payments, penalties and threat to suppliers that products will be removed from shelves (Rolfe 2013) would be highly financially beneficial to the two groups as they are significantly lowering the costs of supplies, and thus allowing opportunity to increase profit margins. This is further evidenced in Coles’ 15% increase in pre-tax earnings in 6 months (Rolfe 2013) and a 24% increase in pretax earnings for Wesfarmers despite the same level of stock. The two groups also demonstrate significant market power through ‘interesting’ competitive methods (Kidd 2013) of purchasing each  other’s profitable stores as the purchases show the ‘significant financial strength’ (ACCC 2013) of the business. ii) Coles and Woolworths can minimise disclosures as to hide ‘unconscionable conduct’ and ‘misuse of market power’ by not disclosing costs of supplies in their segment notes. AASB 8 requires a ‘management approach’ to be adopted where information used by the ‘chief operating decision maker’ internally for segment evaluation is disclosed (AASB 8.5b). This allows great  flexibility for management to aggregate figures into the disclosed segments which Woolworths had divided into geographical and operational segments. The aggregated figures disclosed are summarised and does not disclose any information about cost of supplies (Woolworths 2012, p 119). In fact, only revenues attributable to each segment is reported. Australian Food and Liquor segment reported $37,681.4M revenue, which depicts a substantially larger segment relative to New Zealand Supermarkets, Petrol, Big W and Hotels, which average at $5000M each. iii) Since Woolworths’ business in Australia is significantly larger than other segments, from the perspective of consumer groups, it would be beneficial to further divide the Australian Food and Liquor segment into State segments, for example. Currently, Australia has 872 stores, New Zealand has 161 stores and that NSW, QLD, VIC all have larger number of stores than New Zealand, it would be beneficial to further dissect the segments into regional groups.

intelligence Essays -- essays research papers

Intelligence is the level of competence, ability to learn or to some people it is how well an individual performs on an IQ test. The structure of intelligence is best subdivided into two significant categories. They are environmental and hereditary influences. Environmental differences can be divided into different factors. The deprivation model of social class and intelligence consists of three variables. These variables explain, in terms of environmental factors, development and performance which are correlated with social status. The first of these variables consists of the combination of birth order, nutrition, and prenatal care. Children who are first born, on average score better on mental tests. There is a definite higher number of first born children among higher socioeconomic groups as opposed to lower socioeconomic groups. According to Bruce Eckland, children of higher economic class tend to be brighter, on average, than children of lower economic groups (65). Both prenatal stress and malnutrition, impair development and are found much more frequently among lower socioeconomic classes. According to Philip E. Vernon, the fetus can have lack blood supply and growth of the fetus can be disturbed if the mother takes certain drugs or suffers from certain diseases. Severe stress on the mother can also be hazardous to the fetus (84). These conditions expressed are both genetic and or resulting from environmental conditions and are known to as constitutional factors. The second variable of the deprivation model which helps exhibit differences in performance is the cultural variable. It seems that lower socioeconomic classes experience a unique pattern of behavioral and psychological traits which impair development in children raised in these conditions. The last environmental variable that accounts for differences in the cognitive development is the social cultural variable. This variable includes deprivation which involves socially structured inequalities in education and other social opportunities for improving performance. Sidney W. Bijou states that in order to help development, an ample supply of physical stimuli for cognitive development is favorable along with the people who have to manage these stimuli in contingent relationships after the birth of the child (230). Another environmental contribution to intelligence, which Bijou points out is th... ...ort the conclusion that both genetic and environmental components have a significant effect upon the intelligence of the child. There has also been some research done on identical twins who live in different environments. They have been compared with siblings who are not twins but live in the same environment. The correlation results for twins who live apart is .75 and .24 for no-twin siblings who do live together. It seems that together, these two correlations almost add up to 1.00 which is the total phenotypic variance. Vernon points out that the effect of genes is much more powerful than that of the environment. Even though the precise values of the correlations are of dispute, analyses of kinship data, concludes Vernon, provides the most convincing demonstration of genetic influence on intelligence. Undoubtedly ,the subject of intelligence can be defined in many ways. To better understand intelligence psychologist have rendered two main influences as cause for variable intelligence levels. These two main influences as discussed previously cannot be explained as one being the main determinant of intelligence. This two influences are environmental and hereditary influences.

Life of Isaac Deutscher Essay

Trotskyism is a theory by a German, Leon Trotsky who was a Bolshevik-Leninist and also a Marxist. Trotsky politics do not advocate for socialism but rather proletarian revolution in a country, proletarian revolution is a revolution whereby the working class work together to overthrow bourgeois. Trotsky’s followers are known as Trotskyist or Trot. The play Trotsky’s bar mitzvah is a ten minute play that was produced in Louisville KY. The drama explores the life of a Jew in the twentieth century. The play is somewhat based on the life of Isaac Deutscher. Isaac Deutscher was born in Chrzanow in Poland into a family of religious Jews, he studied the torah and the Talmud but by the time of his bar mitzvah he had lost his faith. After testing God by eating forbidden food at the grave of a holy person and witnessing that nothing happened, he became an atheist. The play examines the life of Isaac Deutscher and the challenges he went through that eventually led him to loose his religion. Since the play is set in modern times, the viewer is able to relate to the life of the main character in the play and understand the life of a modern ay Jew. The charm in this play is irresistible, Max Apples is willing to experiment and try almost anything. He welcomes new ideas and his language is versatile. In the play he captures the audience by recreating history afresh and using an approach that the viewer is able to relate to. The author of the play, Max Apple has been compared favorably with other prominent writers such as John Barth, Philip Roth, and Woody Allen. Although his work has received critical acclaim and enjoys considerable popularity, some commentators think Max’s work in literature may have limited relevancy due to Max Apple’s heavy usage of cultural references, he makes use of plenty of his Jewish traditions in which some non Jewish readers find hard to relate to. However, it has been posited by some scholars that Apple’s audience is increasingly a younger generation, the younger generation is more sympathetic to his flashy postmodern technique in literature and for whom the written language of the play is less meaningful than apples pictograph which is flashy. The author has borrowed real-life figures for use in his fiction for purely utilitarian and pragmatic purposes: the author assumes that his readers know some things and hence commences his work from there. He has stated that he tries to write very quickly and economically so that anything that saves him from descriptions and unnecessary words is always helpful to him. That explains why the play ‘Trotsky’s bar mitzvah’ is rather short. The playwright does not use long descriptive sentences. The play is given serious themes by the author, examples of these serious themes include: death, love, health, money. The use of humor is widely employed in his work; the author uses comic relief as he examines the variety of human attributes. To the author, allusions, ironies, and levels of meaning make writing rather tiresome and instead he prefers the use of symbols, acronyms, images, real names, datelines, and the kind of catchy and absurd headlines often found in tabloids to give his writing an edge that it has over other types of literary works. The author is indeed charming in script as well as in character as depicted in the play, he is more interested in exploring new forms of writing, Max Apples has a refreshing and an uncommon way of telling a story. In conclusion it is clear to say that that play ‘Trotsky’s bar mitzvah’ is wide known for its characteristics in comedy, intelligence, and witty inventiveness. Although it has a cultural bias that tends to discriminate non Jews or people who have no knowledge of Jewish traditions, it is safe to say that it is indeed a fascinating piece of work. REFERENCES 1. http://actorstheater. com 2. Jerome Beaty, J. Paul hunter: new worlds of literature. 3. http://seanhart. com/barmitzvah 4. http://the nation. com/doc/200503/aronson

Biography of Vlad the Impaler, Inspiration for Dracula

Vlad III (between 1428 and 1431–between December 1476 and January 1477) was a 15th-century ruler of Wallachia, an east European principality within modern Romania. Vlad became infamous for his brutal punishments, such as impalement, but also renowned by some for his attempt to fight the Muslim Ottomans, even though Vlad was only largely successful against Christian forces. He ruled on three occasions—1448, 1456 to 1462, and 1476—and experienced new fame in the modern era thanks to links to the novel Dracula. Fast Facts: Vlad III Known For: East European 15th-century rule who was the inspiration for DraculaAlso Known As: Vlad the Impaler,  Vlad III Dracula, Vlad Tepes, Dracuglia, DrakulaBorn: Between 1428 and 1431Parents: Mircea I of Wallachia, Eupraxia of MoldaviaDied: Between December 1476 and January 1477Spouse(s): Unknown first wife, Jusztina Szilà ¡gyiChildren: Mihnea, Vlad  Drakwlya Early Years Vlad was born between 1428 and 1431 into the family of Vlad II Dracul. This nobleman had been allowed into the crusading Order of the Dragon (Dracul) by its creator, the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund, to encourage him to defend both Christian east Europe and Sigismund’s lands from encroaching Ottoman forces and other threats. The Ottomans were expanding into eastern and central Europe, bringing with them a rival religion to that of the Catholic and Orthodox Christians who had previously dominated the region. However, the religious conflict can be overstated, as there was an old-fashioned secular power struggle between the Kingdom of Hungary and the Ottomans over both Wallachia—a relatively new state—and its leaders. Although Sigismund had turned to a rival of Vlad II’s soon after initially supporting him, he came back to Vlad and in 1436 Vlad II became voivode, a form of prince, of Wallachia. However, Vlad II then broke with the Emperor and joined the Ottomans in order to try to balance the rival powers swirling around his country. Vlad II then joined the Ottomans in attacking Transylvania, before Hungary tried to reconcile. Everyone grew suspicious, and Vlad was briefly ousted and imprisoned by the Ottomans. However, he was soon released and reconquered the country. The future Vlad III was sent along with Radu, his younger brother, to the Ottoman court as a hostage to ensure that his father stayed true to his word. He didn’t, and as Vlad II vacillated between Hungary and the Ottomans, the two sons survived simply as diplomatic collateral. Perhaps crucially for Vlad III’s upbringing, he was able to experience, understand, and immerse himself into Ottoman culture. Struggle to be Voivode Vlad II and his eldest son were killed by rebel boyars—Wallachian noblemen—in 1447, and a new rival called Vladislav II was put on the throne by the pro-Hungarian governor of Transylvania, called Hunyadi. At some point, Vlad III and Radu were freed, and Vlad returned to the principality to begin a campaign aimed at inheriting his father’s position as voivode, which led to conflict with boyars, his younger brother, the Ottomans, and others. Wallachia had no clear system of inheritance to the throne. Instead, the previous incumbent’s children could equally claim it, and one of them was usually elected by a council of boyars. In practice, outside forces (mainly the Ottomans and Hungarians) could militarily support friendly claimants to the throne. Factional Conflict What followed were 29 separate reigns of 11 separate rulers, from 1418 to 1476, including Vlad III thrice. It was from this chaos, and a patchwork of local boyar factions, that Vlad sought first the throne, and then to establish a strong state through both bold actions and outright terror. There was a temporary victory in 1448  when Vlad took advantage of a recently defeated anti-Ottoman crusade and its capture of Hunyadi to seize the throne of Wallachia with Ottoman support. However, Vladislav II soon returned from crusade and forced Vlad out. It took nearly another decade for Vlad to seize the throne as Vlad III in 1456. There is little information on what exactly happened during this period, but Vlad went from the Ottomans to Moldova, to a peace with Hunyadi, to Transylvania, back and forth between these three, falling out with Hunyadi, renewed support from him, military employment, and in 1456, an invasion of Wallachia—in which Vladislav II was defeated and killed. At the same time Hunyadi, coincidentally, died. Ruler of Wallachia Established as voivode, Vlad now faced the problems of his predecessors: how to balance Hungary and the Ottomans  and keep himself independent. Vlad began to rule in a bloody manner designed to strike fear into the hearts of opponents and allies alike. He ordered people to be impaled on stakes, and his atrocities were inflicted on anyone who upset him, no matter where they came from. However, his rule has been misinterpreted. During the communist era in Romania, historians outlined a vision of Vlad as a socialist hero, focused largely around the idea that Vlad attacked the excesses of the boyar aristocracy, thus benefiting the ordinary peasants. Vlad’s ejection from the throne in 1462 has been attributed to boyars seeking to protect their privileges. Some chronicles record that Vlad bloodily carved his way through the Boyars to strengthen and centralize his power, adding to his other, and horrific, reputation. However, while Vlad did slowly increase his power over disloyal boyars, this is now believed to have been a gradual attempt to try and solidify a fictionalized state beset by rivals, and neither a sudden orgy of violence—as some of the stories claim—or the actions of a proto-communist. The existing powers of the boyars were left alone, as just the favorites and enemies who changed position. This took place over several years, rather than in one brutal session. Vlad the Impaler’s Wars Vlad attempted to restore the balance of Hungarian and Ottoman interests in Wallachia  and swiftly came to terms with both. However, he was soon assailed by plots from Hungary, who changed their support to a rival voivode. War resulted, during which Vlad supported a Moldovan noble who would both later fight him and earn the epithet Stephen the Great. The situation between Wallachia, Hungary, and Transylvania fluctuated for several years, going from peace to conflict, and Vlad tried to keep his lands and throne intact. Around 1460 or 1461, having secured independence from Hungary, regained land from Transylvania, and defeated his rival rulers, Vlad broke off relations with the  Ottoman Empire, ceased paying his yearly tribute, and prepared for war. The Christian parts of Europe were moving toward a crusade against the Ottomans. Vlad may have been fulfilling a  long-term  plan for independence, falsely buoyed by his success against his Christian rivals, or planning an opportunistic attack while the sultan was east. The war with the Ottomans began in the winter of  1461-1462  when Vlad attacked  neighboring  strongholds and plundered into Ottoman lands. The response was the sultan invading with his army in 1462, aiming to install Vlad’s brother Radu on the throne. Radu had lived in the Empire for a long time and was pre-disposed to the Ottomans; they did not plan on establishing direct rule over the region. Vlad was forced back, but not before a daring night raid to try to kill the sultan himself. Vlad terrified the Ottomans with a field of impaled people, but Vlad was defeated and Radu took the throne. Expulsion from Wallachia Vlad did not, as some of the pro-communist and pro-Vlad historians have claimed, defeat the Ottomans and then fall to a revolt of rebel boyars.  Instead,  some of Vlad’s followers fled to the Ottomans to ingratiate themselves to Radu when it became apparent that Vlad’s army could not defeat the invaders. Hungary’s forces arrived too late to aid  Vlad—if they had ever  intended to help him—and  instead  arrested him, transferred him to Hungary, and locked him up. Final Rule and Death After years of  imprisonment,  Vlad was released by Hungary in 1474 or 1475 to seize back the Wallachian throne and fight against a forthcoming invasion by the Ottomans, on the condition he converted to Catholicism and away from Orthodoxy. After fighting for the Moldavians, he regained his throne in  1476  but was killed shortly after in a battle with the Ottoman claimant to Wallachia. Legacy and Dracula Many leaders have come and gone, but Vlad remains a well-known figure in European history. In some parts of Eastern Europe he is a hero for his role in fighting the Ottomans—although he fought Christians just as much, and more successfully—whereas in much of the rest of the world he is infamous for his brutal punishments, a byword for cruelty, and bloodthirstiness. Verbal attacks on Vlad were spreading while he was still very much alive, partly to justify his imprisonment and partly as a result of human interest in his brutality. Vlad lived at a time when print was emerging, and Vlad became one of the first horror figures in printed literature. Much of his recent fame has to do with the use of Vlad’s sobriquet Dracula. This literally means Son of Dracul and is a reference to his father’s entry into the Order of the Dragon, Draco then meaning Dragon. But when British author ​Bram Stoker named his vampire character Dracula, Vlad entered a whole new world of popular notoriety. Meanwhile, the Roman language developed and dracul came to mean devil. Vlad was not, as is sometimes assumed, named after this. Sources Lallanilla, Marc. â€Å"Vlad the Impaler: The Real Dracula Was Absolutely Vicious.†Ã‚  NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, 31 Oct. 2013.â€Å"10 Fascinating Facts About The Real Dracula.†Ã‚  Listverse, 11 Oct. 2014.Webley, Kayla. â€Å"Top 10 Royals Who Would Have Been Terrible on Facebook.†Ã‚  Time, Time Inc., 9 Nov. 2010.