BEAZER HOMES USA INC - Quarter Report: 2011 June (Form 10-Q)
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
þ | QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15 (d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2011
or
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15 (d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission File Number 001-12822
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
DELAWARE (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
58-2086934 (I.R.S. employer Identification no.) |
1000 Abernathy Road, Suite 1200, Atlanta, Georgia (Address of principal executive offices) |
30328 (Zip Code) |
(770) 829-3700
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Sections 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding twelve months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to the filing requirements for the past 90 days.
YES þ NO o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
YES þ NO o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer, and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act
(Check One):
Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer þ | Non-accelerated filer o | Smaller reporting company o | |||
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act).
YES o NO þ
Class | Outstanding at July 29, 2011 | |
Common Stock, $0.001 par value | 75,679,860 shares |
Table of Contents
References to we, us, our, Beazer, Beazer Homes and the Company in this quarterly
report on Form 10-Q refer to Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements. These forward-looking
statements represent our expectations or beliefs concerning future events, and it is possible that
the results described in this quarterly report will not be achieved. These forward-looking
statements can generally be identified by the use of statements that include words such as
estimate, project, believe, expect, anticipate, intend, plan, foresee, likely,
will, goal, target or other similar words or phrases. All forward-looking statements are
based upon information available to us on the date of this quarterly report.
These forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of
which are outside of our control, that could cause actual results to differ materially from the
results discussed in the forward-looking statements, including, among other things, the matters
discussed in this quarterly report in the section captioned Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. Additional information about factors that could
lead to material changes in performance is contained in Part I, Item 1A Risk Factors of our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010. These factors are not
intended to be an all-encompassing list of risks and uncertainties that may affect the operations,
performance, development and results of our business, but instead are the risks that we currently
perceive as potentially being material. Such factors may include:
| the final outcome of various putative class action lawsuits, multi-party suits and similar proceedings as well as the results of any other litigation or government proceedings and fulfillment of the obligations in the Deferred Prosecution Agreement and consent orders with governmental authorities and other settlement agreements; |
| additional asset impairment charges or writedowns; |
| economic changes nationally or in local markets, including changes in consumer confidence, declines in employment levels, volatility of mortgage interest rates and inflation; |
| the effect of changes in lending guidelines and regulations and the uncertain availability of mortgage financing; |
| a slower economic rebound than anticipated, coupled with persistently high unemployment and additional foreclosures; |
| continued or increased downturn in the homebuilding industry; |
| estimates related to homes to be delivered in the future (backlog) are imprecise as they are subject to various cancellation risks which cannot be fully controlled; |
| our cost of and ability to access capital and otherwise meet our ongoing liquidity needs including the impact of any downgrades of our credit ratings or reductions in our tangible net worth or liquidity levels; |
| potential inability to comply with covenants in our debt agreements, or satisfy such obligations through repayment or refinancing; |
| increased competition or delays in reacting to changing consumer preference in home design; |
| shortages of or increased prices for labor, land or raw materials used in housing production; |
| factors affecting margins such as decreased land values underlying lot option agreements, increased land development costs on communities under development or delays or difficulties in implementing initiatives to reduce production and overhead cost structure; |
| the performance of our joint ventures and our joint venture partners; |
| the impact of construction defect and home warranty claims including those related to possible installation of drywall imported from China; |
| the cost and availability of insurance and surety bonds; |
| delays in land development or home construction resulting from adverse weather conditions; |
| potential delays or increased costs in obtaining necessary permits and possible penalties for failure to comply with laws, regulations and governmental policies; |
| potential exposure related to additional repurchase claims on mortgages and loans originated by Beazer Mortgage Corporation; |
| estimates related to the potential recoverability of our deferred tax assets; |
| effects of changes in accounting policies, standards, guidelines or principles; or |
| terrorist acts, acts of war and other factors over which the Company has little or no control. |
Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made, and,
except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to
reflect events or circumstances after the date on which such statement is made or to reflect the
occurrence of unanticipated events. New factors emerge from time to time and it is not possible for
management to predict all such factors.
2
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
FORM 10-Q
FORM 10-Q
INDEX
3
Table of Contents
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except share and per share data)
(in thousands, except share and per share data)
June 30, | September 30, | |||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 274,645 | $ | 537,121 | ||||
Restricted cash |
284,324 | 39,200 | ||||||
Accounts receivable (net of allowance of $3,728 and $3,567, respectively) |
32,185 | 32,647 | ||||||
Income tax receivable |
2,835 | 7,684 | ||||||
Inventory |
||||||||
Owned inventory |
1,290,786 | 1,153,703 | ||||||
Land not owned under option agreements |
22,571 | 49,958 | ||||||
Total inventory |
1,313,357 | 1,203,661 | ||||||
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
9,535 | 8,721 | ||||||
Deferred tax assets, net |
7,964 | 7,779 | ||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
29,239 | 23,995 | ||||||
Other assets |
50,985 | 42,094 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 2,005,069 | $ | 1,902,902 | ||||
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||
Trade accounts payable |
$ | 69,221 | $ | 53,418 | ||||
Other liabilities |
191,515 | 210,170 | ||||||
Obligations related to land not owned under option agreements |
14,360 | 30,666 | ||||||
Total debt (net of discounts of $24,208 and $23,617, respectively) |
1,488,965 | 1,211,547 | ||||||
Total liabilities |
1,764,061 | 1,505,801 | ||||||
Stockholders equity: |
||||||||
Preferred stock (par value $.01 per share, 5,000,000 shares
authorized, no shares issued) |
| | ||||||
Common stock (par value $0.001 per share, 180,000,000 shares
authorized, 75,687,528 and 75,669,381 issued and
outstanding, respectively) |
76 | 76 | ||||||
Paid-in capital |
624,202 | 618,612 | ||||||
Accumulated deficit |
(383,270 | ) | (221,587 | ) | ||||
Total stockholders equity |
241,008 | 397,101 | ||||||
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
$ | 2,005,069 | $ | 1,902,902 | ||||
See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
4
Table of Contents
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in thousands, except per share data)
(in thousands, except per share data)
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Total revenue |
$ | 172,829 | $ | 321,848 | $ | 407,497 | $ | 722,407 | ||||||||
Home construction and land sales expenses |
152,124 | 280,058 | 358,413 | 619,521 | ||||||||||||
Inventory impairments and option contract abandonments |
6,870 | 4,973 | 25,331 | 23,303 | ||||||||||||
Gross profit |
13,835 | 36,817 | 23,753 | 79,583 | ||||||||||||
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
46,414 | 52,850 | 125,208 | 140,874 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
2,660 | 3,353 | 6,627 | 9,258 | ||||||||||||
Operating loss |
(35,239 | ) | (19,386 | ) | (108,082 | ) | (70,549 | ) | ||||||||
Equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated joint ventures |
63 | (10 | ) | 372 | (8,819 | ) | ||||||||||
Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt |
95 | (9,045 | ) | (2,909 | ) | 43,901 | ||||||||||
Other expense, net |
(17,085 | ) | (16,373 | ) | (46,616 | ) | (53,939 | ) | ||||||||
Loss from continuing operations before income taxes |
(52,166 | ) | (44,814 | ) | (157,235 | ) | (89,406 | ) | ||||||||
Provision (benefit) from income taxes |
3,589 | (21,430 | ) | 570 | (116,955 | ) | ||||||||||
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
(55,755 | ) | (23,384 | ) | (157,805 | ) | 27,549 | |||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
(3,365 | ) | (4,432 | ) | (3,878 | ) | (2,068 | ) | ||||||||
Net (loss) income |
$ | (59,120 | ) | $ | (27,816 | ) | $ | (161,683 | ) | $ | 25,481 | |||||
Weighted average number of shares: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
73,982 | 68,310 | 73,930 | 55,079 | ||||||||||||
Diluted |
73,982 | 68,310 | 73,930 | 65,276 | ||||||||||||
(Loss) earnings per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic (loss) earnings per share from continuing operations |
$ | (0.75 | ) | $ | (0.34 | ) | $ | (2.14 | ) | $ | 0.50 | |||||
Basic loss per share from discontinued operations |
$ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.04 | ) | ||||
Basic (loss) earnings per share |
$ | (0.80 | ) | $ | (0.41 | ) | $ | (2.19 | ) | $ | 0.46 | |||||
Diluted (loss) earnings per share from continuing operations |
$ | (0.75 | ) | $ | (0.34 | ) | $ | (2.14 | ) | $ | 0.44 | |||||
Diluted loss per share from discontinued operations |
$ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.03 | ) | ||||
Diluted (loss) earnings per share |
$ | (0.80 | ) | $ | (0.41 | ) | $ | (2.19 | ) | $ | 0.41 |
See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
5
Table of Contents
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
(in thousands)
Nine Months Ended | ||||||||
June 30, | ||||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
Cash flows from operating activities: |
||||||||
Net (loss) income |
$ | (161,683 | ) | $ | 25,481 | |||
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash (used in)
provided by operating activities: |
||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
7,033 | 9,795 | ||||||
Stock-based compensation expense |
6,599 | 8,398 | ||||||
Inventory impairments and option contract abandonments |
28,145 | 24,281 | ||||||
Impairment of future land purchase right |
4,036 | | ||||||
Deferred income tax benefit |
(185 | ) | (4,063 | ) | ||||
Provision for doubtful accounts |
161 | (3,972 | ) | |||||
Excess tax benefit from equity-based compensation |
544 | 2,057 | ||||||
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
141 | 24,045 | ||||||
Cash distributions of income from unconsolidated joint ventures |
38 | 75 | ||||||
Loss (gain) on extinguishment of debt |
2,343 | (44,602 | ) | |||||
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
||||||||
Decrease (increase) in accounts receivable |
301 | (1,533 | ) | |||||
Decrease (increase) in income tax receivable |
4,849 | (31,014 | ) | |||||
(Increase) decrease in inventory |
(150,612 | ) | 20,442 | |||||
Decrease in other assets |
3,391 | 6,728 | ||||||
Increase (decrease) in trade accounts payable |
15,803 | (3,251 | ) | |||||
Decrease in other liabilities |
(38,012 | ) | (31,626 | ) | ||||
Other changes |
(510 | ) | (464 | ) | ||||
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities |
(277,618 | ) | 777 | |||||
Cash flows from investing activities: |
||||||||
Capital expenditures |
(12,134 | ) | (6,658 | ) | ||||
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
(1,763 | ) | (5,122 | ) | ||||
Increases in restricted cash |
(250,074 | ) | (26,250 | ) | ||||
Decreases in restricted cash |
4,950 | 33,103 | ||||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(259,021 | ) | (4,927 | ) | ||||
Cash flows from financing activities: |
||||||||
Repayment of debt |
(213,755 | ) | (617,133 | ) | ||||
Proceeds from issuance of new debt |
246,387 | 373,238 | ||||||
Proceeds from issuance of cash secured loan |
247,368 | | ||||||
Debt issuance costs |
(5,130 | ) | (9,296 | ) | ||||
Common stock redeemed |
(163 | ) | (134 | ) | ||||
Common stock issued |
| 166,719 | ||||||
Proceeds from the issuance of TEU prepaid stock purchase contracts |
| 57,432 | ||||||
Excess tax benefit from equity-based compensation |
(544 | ) | (2,057 | ) | ||||
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
274,163 | (31,231 | ) | |||||
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents |
(262,476 | ) | (35,381 | ) | ||||
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
537,121 | 507,339 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
$ | 274,645 | $ | 471,958 | ||||
See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
6
Table of Contents
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
(Beazer Homes or the Company) have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) for interim financial information and in accordance
with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Such financial statements do
not include all of the information and disclosures required by GAAP for complete financial
statements. In our opinion, all adjustments (consisting solely of normal recurring accruals)
necessary for a fair presentation have been included in the accompanying financial statements. For
further information and a discussion of our significant accounting policies other than as discussed
below, refer to our audited consolidated financial statements appearing in the Beazer Homes Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010 (the 2010 Annual Report). Results
from our mortgage origination business, our title insurance services and our exit markets are
reported as discontinued operations in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements
of operations for all periods presented (see Note 13 for further discussion of our Discontinued
Operations). We evaluated events that occurred after the balance sheet date but before the
financial statements were issued or were available to be issued for accounting treatment and
disclosure in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification, Subsequent Events (ASC 855).
Inventory Valuation Held for Development. Our homebuilding inventories that are accounted for as
held for development include land and home construction assets grouped together as communities.
Homebuilding inventories held for development are stated at cost (including direct construction
costs, capitalized indirect costs, capitalized interest and real estate taxes) unless facts and
circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable. We assess
these assets no less than quarterly for recoverability. Generally, upon the commencement of land
development activities, it may take three to five years (depending on, among other things, the size
of the community and its sales pace) to fully develop, sell, construct and close all the homes in a
typical community. However, the impact of the recent downturn in our business has significantly
lengthened the estimated life of many communities. Recoverability of assets is measured by
comparing the carrying amount of an asset to future undiscounted cash flows expected to be
generated by the asset. If the expected undiscounted cash flows generated are expected to be less
than its carrying amount, an impairment charge is recorded to write down the carrying amount of
such asset to its estimated fair value based on discounted cash flows.
When conducting our community level review for the recoverability of our homebuilding inventories
held for development, we establish a quarterly watch list of communities with more than 10 homes
remaining that carry profit margins in backlog and in our forecast that are below a minimum
threshold of profitability. In our experience, this threshold represents a level of profitability
that may be an indicator of conditions which would require an asset impairment but does not
guarantee that such impairment will definitively be appropriate. As such, assets on the quarterly
watch list are subject to substantial additional financial and operational analyses and review that
consider the competitive environment and other factors contributing to profit margins below our
watch list threshold. For communities where the current competitive and market dynamics indicate
that these factors may be other than temporary, which may call into question the recoverability of
our investment, a formal impairment analysis is performed. The formal impairment analysis consists
of both qualitative competitive market analyses and a quantitative analysis reflecting market and
asset specific information.
Our qualitative competitive market analyses include site visits to competitor new home communities
and written community level competitive assessments. A competitive assessment consists of a
comparison of our specific community with its competitor communities, considering square footage of
homes offered, amenities offered within the homes and the communities, location, transportation
availability and school districts, among many factors. In addition, we review the pace of monthly
home sales of our competitor communities in relation to our specific community. We also review
other factors such as the target buyer and the macro-economic characteristics that impact the
performance of our assets, such as unemployment and the availability of mortgage financing, among
other things. Based on this qualitative competitive market analysis, adjustments to our sales
prices may be required in order to make our communities competitive. We incorporate these adjusted
prices in our quantitative analysis for the specific community.
The quantitative analysis compares the projected future undiscounted cash flows for each such
community with its current carrying value. This undiscounted cash flow analysis requires important
assumptions regarding the location and mix of house plans to be sold, current and future home sale
prices and incentives for each plan, current and future construction costs for each plan and, the
pace of monthly sales to occur today and into the future.
There is uncertainty associated with preparing the undiscounted cash flow analysis because future
market conditions will almost certainly be different, either better or worse, than current
conditions. The single most important input to the cash flow
7
Table of Contents
analysis is current and future home
sales prices for a specific community. The risk of over or under-stating any of the important cash
flow variables, including home prices, is greater with longer-lived communities and within markets
that have historically experienced greater home price volatility. In an effort to address these
risks, we have assumed modest home price and construction cost appreciation beginning in either
fiscal 2012 or fiscal 2013 if the community is expected to be selling for more than three years
and/or if the market has typically exhibited high levels of price volatility. Absent these
assumptions on cost and sales price appreciation, we believe the long-term cash flow analysis would
be unrealistic and would serve to artificially improve future profitability. Finally, we also
ensure that the monthly sales absorptions, including historical seasonal differences of our
communities and those of our competitors, used in our undiscounted cash flow analyses are
realistic, consider our development schedules and relate to those achieved by our competitors for
the specific communities.
If the aggregate undiscounted cash flows from our quantitative analysis are in excess of the
carrying value, the asset is considered to be recoverable and is not impaired. If the aggregate
undiscounted cash flows are less than the carrying or book value, we perform a discounted cash flow
analysis to determine the fair value of the community. The fair value of the community is
estimated using the present value of the estimated future cash flows using discount rates
commensurate with the risk associated with the underlying community assets. The discount rate used
may be different for each community and ranged from 14.6% to 16.3% for the communities analyzed in
the quarter ended June 30, 2011 and ranged from 14.2% to 18.4% for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
The factors considered when determining an appropriate discount rate for a community include, among
others: (1) community specific factors such as the number of lots in the community, the status of
land development in the community, the competitive factors influencing the sales performance of the
community and (2) overall market factors such as employment levels, consumer confidence and the
existing supply of new and used homes for sale. If the determined fair value is less than the
carrying value of the specific asset, the asset is considered not recoverable and is written down
to its fair value plus the assets share of capitalized unallocated interest and other costs. The
carrying value of assets in communities that were previously impaired and continue to be classified
as held for development is not increased for future estimates of increases in fair value in future
reporting periods.
In our fiscal 2011 third quarter analyses, we have assumed limited market improvements in some
communities beginning in fiscal 2013 and continuing improvement in these communities in subsequent
years. For any communities scheduled to close out in fiscal 2012, we did not assume any market
improvements. The following tables represent the results, by reportable segment of our community
level review of the recoverability of our inventory assets held for development as of June 30, 2011
and 2010 ($ in thousands). We have elected to aggregate our disclosure at the reportable segment
level because we believe this level of disclosure is most meaningful to the readers of our
financial statements. As previously discussed, communities included on our watch list typically
carry profit margins in backlog and in our forecast that are below a minimum threshold of
profitability. The aggregate undiscounted cash flow fair value as a percentage of book value for
the communities represented above is consistent with our expectations given our watch list
methodology.
Undiscounted Cash Flow Analyses Prepared | ||||||||||||||||
Aggregate | ||||||||||||||||
# of | Undiscounted | |||||||||||||||
Communities | # of | Book Value | Cash Flow as a | |||||||||||||
Segment | On Watch List | Communities | (BV) | % of BV | ||||||||||||
Quarter Ended June 30, 2011 |
||||||||||||||||
West |
8 | 4 | $ | 5,079 | 86.5 | % | ||||||||||
East |
4 | 2 | 9,731 | 96.5 | % | |||||||||||
Southeast |
1 | 1 | 5,259 | 44.0 | % | |||||||||||
Unallocated |
| | 1,564 | n/a | ||||||||||||
Total |
13 | 7 | $ | 21,633 | 81.6 | % | ||||||||||
Quarter Ended June 30, 2010 |
||||||||||||||||
West |
7 | 7 | $ | 32,773 | 93.4 | % | ||||||||||
East |
4 | 4 | 8,383 | 104.6 | % | |||||||||||
Southeast |
3 | | | n/a | ||||||||||||
Discontinued Operations |
2 | 1 | 1,326 | 104.0 | % | |||||||||||
Unallocated |
| | 3,067 | n/a | ||||||||||||
Total |
16 | 12 | $ | 45,549 | 96.2 | % | ||||||||||
8
Table of Contents
The table below summarizes the results of our discounted cash flow analysis for the three and
nine months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010. The impairment charges below include impairments taken
as a result of these discounted cash flow analyses and also impairment charges recorded for
individual homes sold and in backlog with net contribution margins below a minimum threshold of
profitability in communities that were otherwise impaired through our discounted cash flow
analyses. The estimated fair value of the impaired inventory is determined immediately after a
communitys impairment. If a community was impaired in more than one quarter in the same fiscal
year, it is only counted once in the number of communities impaired.
In addition, the nine month
information below only includes the last fiscal impairment information with respect to the number
of lots impaired and the estimated fair value at period end for those communities impaired multiple
times in the same fiscal year.
Results of Discounted Cash Flow Analyses Prepared | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Estimated Fair | Estimated Fair | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value of | Value of | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
# of | Impaired | # of | Impaired | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Communities | # of Lots | Impairment | Inventory at | Communities | # of Lots | Impairment | Inventory at | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Segment | Impaired | Impaired | Charge | Period End | Impaired | Impaired | Charge | Period End | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarter Ended June 30, 2011 | Nine Months Ended June 30, 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
4 | 153 | $ | 1,571 | $ | 4,223 | 9 | 831 | $ | 17,556 | $ | 31,924 | ||||||||||||||||||||
East |
1 | 41 | 759 | 5,637 | 1 | 41 | 988 | 5,637 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
1 | 176 | 3,435 | 1,812 | 1 | 176 | 3,557 | 1,812 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unallocated |
| | 531 | | | | 2,139 | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing
Operations |
6 | 370 | 6,296 | 11,672 | 11 | 1,048 | 24,240 | 39,373 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discontinued
Operations |
| | | | | | 215 | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
6 | 370 | $ | 6,296 | $ | 11,672 | 11 | 1,048 | $ | 24,455 | $ | 39,373 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Quarter Ended June 30, 2010 | Nine Months Ended June 30, 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
3 | 131 | $ | 3,361 | $ | 5,427 | 12 | 495 | $ | 10,306 | $ | 24,353 | ||||||||||||||||||||
East |
| | 463 | | 3 | 73 | 2,581 | 4,376 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
| | 48 | | 5 | 362 | 6,770 | 11,095 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unallocated |
| | 568 | | | | 2,040 | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing
Operations |
3 | 131 | 4,440 | 5,427 | 20 | 930 | 21,697 | 39,824 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discontinued
Operations |
| | 74 | | 2 | 40 | 737 | 3,279 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
3 | 131 | $ | 4,514 | $ | 5,427 | 22 | 970 | $ | 22,434 | $ | 43,103 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Due to uncertainties in the estimation process, particularly with respect to projected home
sales prices and absorption rates, the timing and amount of the estimated future cash flows and
discount rates, it is reasonably possible that actual results could differ from the estimates used
in our impairment analyses. Our assumptions about future home sales prices and absorption rates
require significant judgment because the residential homebuilding industry is cyclical and is
highly sensitive to changes in economic conditions. During these periods, for certain communities
we determined that it was prudent to reduce sales prices or further increase sales incentives in
response to factors including competitive market conditions in those specific submarkets for the
product and locations of these communities. Because the projected cash flows used to evaluate the
fair value of inventory are significantly impacted by changes in market conditions including
decreased sales prices, the change in sales prices and changes in absorption estimates based on
current market conditions and managements assumptions relative to future results led to additional
impairments in certain communities during the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 and
2010. Market deterioration that exceeds our estimates may lead us to incur additional
impairment charges on previously impaired homebuilding assets in addition to homebuilding assets
not currently impaired but for which indicators of impairment may arise if the market continues to
deteriorate.
Asset Valuation Land Held for Future Development. For those communities for which construction
and development activities are expected to occur in the future or have been idled (land held for
future development), all applicable interest and real estate taxes are expensed as incurred and the
inventory is stated at cost unless facts and circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the
assets may not be recoverable. The future enactment of a development plan or the occurrence of
events and circumstances may indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable.
We evaluate the potential development plans of each community in land held for
9
Table of Contents
future development
if changes in facts and circumstances occur which would give rise to a more detailed analysis for a
change in the status of a community to active status or held for development.
Asset Valuation Land Held for Sale. We record assets held for sale at the lower of the carrying
value or fair value less costs to sell. The following criteria are used to determine if land is
held for sale:
| management has the authority and commits to a plan to sell the land; |
| the land is available for immediate sale in its present condition; · there is an active program to locate a buyer and the plan to sell the property has been initiated; |
| the sale of the land is probable within one year; |
| the property is being actively marketed at a reasonable sale price relative to its current fair value; and |
| it is unlikely that the plan to sell will be withdrawn or that significant changes to the plan will be made. |
Additionally, in certain circumstances, management will re-evaluate the best use of an asset that
is currently being accounted for as held for development. In such instances, management will
review, among other things, the current and projected competitive circumstances of the community,
including the level of supply of new and used inventory, the level of sales absorptions by us and
our competition, the level of sales incentives required and the number of owned lots remaining in
the community. If, based on this review and the foregoing criteria have been met at the end of the
applicable reporting period, we believe that the best use of the asset is the sale of all or a
portion of the asset in its current condition, then all or portions of the community are accounted
for as held for sale.
In determining the fair value of the assets less cost to sell, we considered factors including
current sales prices for comparable assets in the area, recent market analysis studies, appraisals,
any recent legitimate offers, and listing prices of similar properties. If the estimated fair value
less cost to sell of an asset is less than its current carrying value, the asset is written down to
its estimated fair value less cost to sell.
The following table sets forth by reportable segment inventory impairments related to land held for
sale (in thousands):
Three Months Ended June 30, | Nine Months Ended June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Land Held for Sale |
||||||||||||||||
West
|
$ | | $ | | $ | (51 | ) | $ | 1,061 | |||||||
East
|
| | | | ||||||||||||
Southeast
|
| | 169 | | ||||||||||||
Continuing Operations
|
$ | | $ | | $ | 118 | $ | 1,061 | ||||||||
Discontinued Operations
|
17 | 73 | 74 | 232 | ||||||||||||
Total Company
|
$ | 17 | $ | 73 | $ | 192 | $ | 1,293 | ||||||||
The impairments on land held for sale above represent further write downs of these properties to
net realizable value, less estimated costs to sell and are as a result of challenging market
conditions and our review of recent comparable transactions. The negative impairments for the nine
months ended June 30, 2011 are due to adjustments to accruals for estimated selling costs related
to either our strategic decision to develop a previously held-for-sale land position or revised
estimates based on pending sales transactions.
Due to uncertainties in the estimation process, it is reasonably possible that actual results could
differ from the estimates used in our historical analyses. Our assumptions about land sales prices
require significant judgment because the current market is highly sensitive to changes in economic
conditions. We calculated the estimated fair values of land held for sale based on current market
conditions and assumptions made by management, which may differ materially from actual results and
may result in additional impairments if market conditions continue to deteriorate.
Land Not Owned Under Option Agreements. In addition to purchasing land directly, we utilize lot
option agreements which generally enable us to defer acquiring portions of properties owned by
third parties and unconsolidated entities until we have determined whether to exercise our lot
option. A majority of our lot option contracts require a non-refundable cash deposit or
irrevocable letter of credit based on a percentage of the purchase price of the land for the right
to acquire lots during a specified period of time at a certain price. Under lot option contracts,
purchase of the properties is contingent upon satisfaction of certain requirements by us and the
sellers.
10
Table of Contents
Under lot option contracts our liability is generally limited to forfeiture of the
non-refundable deposits, letters of credit and other non-refundable amounts incurred.
Under ASC
810 Consolidation, if the entity holding the land under option
is a variable interest entity (VIE), the Companys
deposit represents a variable interest in that entity. If the Company is determined to be the
primary beneficiary of the VIE, then we are required to consolidate the VIE, though creditors of
the VIE have no recourse against the Company. In recent years, the Company has canceled a
significant number of lot option agreements, which has resulted in significant write-offs of the
related deposits and pre-acquisition costs but has not exposed the Company to the overall risks or
losses of the applicable VIEs.
In June 2009, the FASB revised its guidance regarding the determination of a primary beneficiary of
a VIE. The revisions to ASC 810 were effective for the Company as of October 1, 2010. The
amendments to ASC 810 replace the prior quantitative computations for determining which entity, if
any, is the primary beneficiary of the VIE. The revision also increased the disclosures required
about a reporting entitys involvement with VIEs.
Under the revised provision of ASC 810, to determine whether we are the primary beneficiary of the
VIE we are first required to evaluate whether we have the ability to control the activities of the
VIE that most significantly impact its economic performance. Such activities include, but are not
limited to, the ability to determine the budget and scope of land development work, if any; the
ability to control financing decisions for the VIE; the ability to acquire additional land into the
VIE or dispose of land in the VIE not under contract with Beazer; and the ability to change or
amend the existing option contract with the VIE. If we are not determined to control such
activities, we are not considered the primary beneficiary of the VIE and thus do not consolidate
the VIE under ASC 810. If we do have the ability to control such activities, we will continue our
analysis by determining if we are expected to absorb a potentially significant amount of the VIEs
losses or, if no party absorbs the majority of such losses, if we will benefit from potentially a
significant amount of the VIEs expected gains. If we are the primary beneficiary of the VIE, we
will consolidate the VIE and reflect such assets and liabilities as land not owned under option
agreements in our balance sheets. For VIEs we are required to consolidate, we record the remaining
contractual purchase price under the applicable lot option agreement to land not owned under option
agreements with an offsetting increase to obligations related to land not owned under option
agreements. Also, to reflect the purchase price of this inventory consolidated, we reclassified the
related option deposits from land under development to land not owned under option agreement in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Consolidation of these VIEs has no impact on the
Companys results of operations or cash flows.
We adopted the revised provisions of ASC 810 on October 1, 2010. For certain VIEs we determined
that under the revised provisions, we do not control the activities of the VIE that most
significantly impact its economic performance and, therefore, we are not the primary beneficiary of
the VIE. In addition, we reviewed our non-VIE lot option agreements pursuant to ASC 470-40,
Product Financing Arrangements. As a result, we deconsolidated land under four lot option
agreements which reduced Land Not Owned Under Option Agreements and Obligations Related to Land Not
Owned Under Options Agreements by $12.9 million.
The following provides a summary of our interests in lot option agreements as of June 30, 2011 (in
thousands):
Deposits & Non- | ||||||||||||
refundable | Land Not Owned - | |||||||||||
Preacquisition | Remaining | Under Option | ||||||||||
Costs Incurred | Obligation | Agreements | ||||||||||
Consolidated VIEs |
$ | 6,406 | $ | 9,414 | $ | 15,820 | ||||||
Other consolidated lot option agreements (a) |
1,805 | 4,946 | 6,751 | |||||||||
Unconsolidated lot option agreements |
17,135 | 210,467 | | |||||||||
Total lot option agreements |
$ | 25,346 | $ | 224,827 | $ | 22,571 | ||||||
(a) | Represents lot option agreements with non-VIE entities that we have deemed to be financing arrangements pursuant to ASC 470-40, Product Financing Arrangements. |
Stock-Based Compensation. Compensation cost arising from nonvested stock awards granted to
employees is recognized as an expense using the straight-line method over the vesting period. As of
June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, there was $5.3 million and $10.0 million, respectively, of
total unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested stock awards included in paid-in capital.
The cost remaining at June 30, 2011 is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of
2.0 years. For the three months ended June 30, 2011, our total stock-based compensation, included
in selling, general and administrative expenses (SG&A), was
11
Table of Contents
approximately $1.3 million ($0.9
million net of tax). For the nine months ended June 30, 2011, our total stock-based compensation
expense was approximately $6.6 million ($4.4 million net of tax).
Activity relating to nonvested stock awards for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 is as
follows:
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, 2011 | June 30, 2011 | |||||||||||||||
Weighted Average | Weighted Average | |||||||||||||||
Grant Date Fair | Grant Date Fair | |||||||||||||||
Shares | Value | Shares | Value | |||||||||||||
Beginning of period |
2,334,360 | $ | 7.11 | 1,839,987 | $ | 14.41 | ||||||||||
Granted |
25,000 | 3.60 | 754,265 | 4.69 | ||||||||||||
Vested |
(257,491 | ) | 5.93 | (381,547 | ) | 22.36 | ||||||||||
Returned (a) |
| 0.00 | (52,509 | ) | 68.56 | |||||||||||
Forfeited |
(574,107 | ) | 6.11 | (632,434 | ) | 9.93 | ||||||||||
End of period |
1,527,762 | $ | 7.62 | 1,527,762 | $ | 7.62 | ||||||||||
(a) | Our Former Chief Executive Officer returned 52,509 shares of unvested restricted stock due to his agreement with the Securities and Exchange Commission during the second quarter of fiscal 2011. |
In addition, during the nine months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, employees surrendered 39,861 and
27,310 shares, respectively, to us in payment of minimum tax obligations upon the vesting of stock
awards under our stock incentive plans. We valued the stock at the market price on the date of
surrender, for an aggregate value of approximately $163,145 and $134,000 for the nine months ended
June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The fair value of each option/stock-based stock appreciation right (SSAR) grant is estimated on the
date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The following table summarizes stock
options and SSARs outstanding as of June 30, 2011, as well as activity during the three and nine
months then ended:
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, 2011 | June 30, 2011 | |||||||||||||||
Weighted- | Weighted- | |||||||||||||||
Average | Average | |||||||||||||||
Shares | Exercise Price | Shares | Exercise Price | |||||||||||||
Outstanding at beginning of period |
3,285,834 | $ | 18.80 | 2,578,354 | $ | 22.69 | ||||||||||
Granted |
25,000 | 3.60 | 754,265 | 4.69 | ||||||||||||
Expired |
| | (1,614 | ) | 32.96 | |||||||||||
Forfeited |
(667,748 | ) | 5.08 | (687,919 | ) | 5.09 | ||||||||||
Outstanding at end of period |
2,643,086 | $ | 22.13 | 2,643,086 | $ | 22.13 | ||||||||||
Exercisable at end of period |
1,279,473 | $ | 36.60 | 1,279,473 | $ | 36.60 | ||||||||||
Vested or expected to vest in the future |
2,600,028 | $ | 22.41 | 2,600,028 | $ | 22.41 | ||||||||||
The fair value of each option grant is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes
option-pricing model. We used the following assumptions for our options granted during the nine
months ended June 30, 2011:
Expected life of options |
4.8 years | |||
Expected volatility |
51.7 | % | ||
Expected discrete dividends |
| |||
Weighted average risk-free interest rate |
1.22 | % | ||
Weighted average fair value |
$ | 2.10 |
The expected volatility is based on the historic returns of our stock and the implied
volatility of our publicly-traded options. We assumed no dividends would be paid since our Board of
Directors has suspended payment of dividends indefinitely. The risk-free interest rate is based on
the term structure of interest rates at the time of the option grant and we have relied upon a
combination of the observed exercise behavior of our prior grants with similar characteristics, the
vesting schedule of the current grants, and an index of peer companies with similar grant
characteristics to determine the expected life of the options.
12
Table of Contents
The intrinsic value of a stock option/SSAR is the amount by which the market value of the
underlying stock exceeds the exercise price of the option/SSAR. At June 30, 2011, our SSAR/stock
options outstanding had no intrinsic value. There was also no intrinsic value of SSARs/stock
options vested and expected to vest in the future. The SSARS/stock options vested and expected to
vest in the future had a weighted average expected life of 2.5 years. There was no aggregate intrinsic value of
exercisable SSARs/stock options as of June 30, 2011.
Other Liabilities. Other liabilities include the following:
September 30, | ||||||||
(In thousands) | June 30, 2011 | 2010 | ||||||
Income tax liabilities |
$ | 55,412 | $ | 53,508 | ||||
Accrued warranty expenses |
17,254 | 25,821 | ||||||
Accrued interest |
18,798 | 35,477 | ||||||
Accrued and deferred compensation (a) |
27,431 | 31,474 | ||||||
Customer deposits |
8,671 | 3,678 | ||||||
Other |
63,949 | 60,212 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 191,515 | $ | 210,170 | ||||
(a) | The June 30, 2011 liability includes approximately $7 million of severance-related obligations, of which $5.9 million relates to contractual obligations associated with the June 2011 departure of our former Chief Executive Officer. |
(2) Supplemental Cash Flow Information
Nine Months Ended | ||||||||
June 30, | ||||||||
(In thousands) | 2011 | 2010 | ||||||
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash activity: |
||||||||
Decrease in obligations related to land not owned under option agreements |
$ | (16,306 | ) | $ | (9,730 | ) | ||
Increase in repayment guarantee obligation |
17,220 | | ||||||
Non-cash land acquisitions |
770 | 515 | ||||||
Issuance of stock under deferred bonus stock plans |
65 | 2,337 | ||||||
Supplemental disclosure of cash activity: |
||||||||
Interest payments |
106,609 | 103,300 | ||||||
Income tax payments |
521 | 299 | ||||||
Tax refunds received |
3,982 | 102,086 |
(3) Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
As of June 30, 2011, we participated in certain land development joint ventures in which Beazer
Homes had less than a controlling interest. The following table presents our investment in our
unconsolidated joint ventures, the total equity and outstanding borrowings of these joint ventures,
and our guarantees of these borrowings, as of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010:
June 30, | September 30, | |||||||
(In thousands) | 2011 | 2010 | ||||||
Beazers investment in joint ventures |
$ | 9,535 | $ | 8,721 | ||||
Total equity of joint ventures |
302,919 | 298,418 | ||||||
Total outstanding borrowings of joint ventures |
394,978 | 394,301 | ||||||
Beazers estimate of its maximum exposure to our
repayment guarantees |
17,916 | 15,789 |
The increase in our investment in unconsolidated joint ventures from September 30, 2010 to
June 30, 2011 relates primarily to additional investments of $1.8 million offset by distributions
of earnings in cash and lots totaling $0.8 million. For the three and nine
13
Table of Contents
months ended June 30,
2011 and 2010, our income (loss) from joint venture activities, the impairments of our investments
in certain of our unconsolidated joint ventures, and the overall equity in income (loss) of
unconsolidated joint ventures is as follows:
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | 2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | ||||||||||||
Continuing operations: |
||||||||||||||||
Income (loss) from joint venture activity |
$ | 63 | $ | 18 | $ | 464 | $ | (38 | ) | |||||||
Impairment of joint venture investment |
| (28 | ) | (92 | ) | (8,781 | ) | |||||||||
Equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated joint ventures |
$ | 63 | $ | (10 | ) | $ | 372 | $ | (8,819 | ) | ||||||
Reported in loss from discontinued operations,
net of tax: |
||||||||||||||||
Loss from joint venture activity |
$ | (1 | ) | $ | | $ | (18 | ) | $ | | ||||||
Impairment of joint venture investment |
(163 | ) | (12,482 | ) | (495 | ) | (15,226 | ) | ||||||||
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures -
discontinued operations |
$ | (164 | ) | $ | (12,482 | ) | $ | (513 | ) | $ | (15,226 | ) | ||||
The aggregate debt of the unconsolidated joint ventures was $395.0 million and $394.3 million
at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, respectively. At June 30, 2011, total borrowings
outstanding include $327.9 million related to our South Edge LLC (South Edge) joint venture in
which we are a 2.58% partner.
South Edge is in default under its debt obligations. During fiscal 2008, the administrative agent
for the lenders to this joint venture notified the joint venture members that it believed the joint
venture was in default of certain joint venture loan agreements, in particular, the failure of the
joint venture members to acquire specified parcels of land, resulting in a payment default. In
December 2008, the lenders filed individual lawsuits against some of the joint venture members and
certain of those members parent companies (including the Company), seeking to recover damages
under completion guarantees, among other claims. Due to discussions with our other joint venture
members and based on the Companys revised estimates regarding the realizability of our investment,
the Company impaired our equity interest of $8.8 million in this joint venture during the second
quarter of fiscal 2010. In addition, one member of the joint venture filed an arbitration
proceeding against the remaining members related to the plaintiff-members allegations that the
other members failed to perform under the applicable membership agreements. The arbitration panel
issued its decision on July 6, 2010. The arbitration award was confirmed by the United States
District Court and is now on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
The Company does not believe that its proportional share of the arbitration proceeding award is
considered material to our consolidated financial position or results of operations (see Note 9 for
additional information regarding these legal actions). The Company has recorded an accrual for
such matter.
On December 9, 2010, three lenders filed an involuntary bankruptcy petition against the joint
venture. On February 3, 2011, the bankruptcy court granted this petition and the motion for
appointment of a trustee. As a result of this ruling, we expected the lenders to the joint venture
to attempt to enforce the repayment guaranty under the debt agreement. Any payments pursuant to
the repayment guaranty would reduce the amount of the debt owed by South Edge and would give each
payor lien rights against or title to its share of the property currently owned by the joint
venture. In addition to the repayment guaranty to the lenders, we, as a member of the joint
venture, continue to have obligations for infrastructure and other development costs as provided
for in the joint venture agreement. At this time, these costs cannot be quantified due to, among
other things, uncertainty over the future development configuration of the project and the related
costs, market conditions, uncertainty over the remaining infrastructure deposits and previously
filed bankruptcies of other joint venture members.
Effective June 10, 2011, the Company and certain other joint venture members (the Participating
Members) have entered into a settlement agreement with the lenders. Under this agreement, the
parties have agreed to develop a plan of reorganization for the joint venture by November 10, 2011,
unless extended. Based on the terms of the agreement, the Company will pay the lenders an amount
between approximately $15.7 million and $17.2 million depending on the resolution of certain
contingencies in the agreement. As a result, during the second quarter of fiscal 2011, we had
accrued an additional $2.1 million for a total accrual of $17.2 million related to our estimated
obligation under the repayment guaranty. In accordance with the final agreement, we paid $1.5
million into an escrow fund in June 2011, reducing our outstanding liability at June 30, 2011 to
$15.7 million. As previously discussed, the Company will ultimately obtain land in exchange for
satisfaction of our repayment guarantee obligations. At the current time, there are uncertainties
with respect to the location and density of the land we would receive, the products we would build
on such land and the estimated
14
Table of Contents
selling prices of such homes. Considering the various potential
scenarios and the current and expected market conditions in the Las Vegas area, we determined that
the value of our future land purchase rights was approximately $13.2 million and recognized a $4.0
million impairment on such future land purchase rights during the nine months ended June 30, 2011.
We have recorded $13.2 million to Other Assets as of June 30, 2011 representing our future land purchase rights from the ultimate
payment of this repayment guaranty. Because there are uncertainties with respect to the value of
the lien rights or title to our share of the underlying property, we may be required to record
adjustments to the carrying value of these recognized Other Assets in future periods as better
information becomes available.
Our joint ventures typically obtain secured acquisition, development and construction financing.
Generally Beazer and our joint venture partners provide varying levels of guarantees of debt and
other obligations for our unconsolidated joint ventures. At June 30, 2011, these guarantees
included, for certain joint ventures, construction completion guarantees, repayment guarantees and
environmental indemnities.
In assessing the need to record a liability for the contingent aspect of these guarantees, we
consider our historical experience in being required to perform under the guarantees, the fair
value of the collateral underlying these guarantees and the financial condition of the applicable
unconsolidated joint ventures. In addition, we monitor the fair value of the collateral of these
unconsolidated joint ventures to ensure that the related borrowings do not exceed the specified
percentage of the value of the property securing the borrowings. As of June 30, 2011, we have
estimated that the Companys exposure for the contingent aspect of the guarantees related to our
unconsolidated joint ventures was from $0 to $17.9 million. We have recorded a liability for
guarantees we determined were probable and reasonably estimable, but we have not recorded a
liability for the contingent aspects of any guarantees that we determined were reasonably possible
but not probable.
Construction Completion Guarantees
We and our joint venture partners may be obligated to the project lenders to complete land
development improvements and the construction of planned homes if the joint venture does not
perform the required development. Provided the joint venture and the partners are not in default
under any loan provisions, the project lenders typically are obligated to fund these improvements
through any financing commitments available under the applicable loans. A majority of these
construction completion guarantees are joint and several with our partners. In those cases, we
generally have a reimbursement arrangement with our partner which provides that neither party is
responsible for more than its proportionate share of the guarantee. However, if our joint venture
partner does not have adequate financial resources to meet its obligations under such reimbursement
arrangement, we may be liable for more than our proportionate share, up to our maximum exposure,
which is the full amount covered by the relevant joint and several guarantee. The guarantees cover
a specific scope of work, which may range from an individual development phase to the completion of
the entire project. As of June 30, 2011, we have a completion guarantee related to one joint
venture loan which also has a repayment guarantee associated with it. No accrual has been
recorded, as losses, if any, related to construction completion guarantees are both not probable
and not reasonably estimable.
Loan-to-Value Maintenance Agreements
As of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, we do not have any obligations related to LTV
guarantees. We and our joint venture partners may provide credit enhancements to acquisition,
development and construction borrowings in the form of loan-to-value maintenance agreements, which
can limit the amount of additional funding provided by the lenders or require repayment of the
borrowings to the extent such borrowings plus construction completion costs exceed a specified
percentage of the value of the property securing the borrowings. The agreements generally require
periodic reappraisals of the underlying property value. To the extent that the underlying property
gets reappraised, the amount of the exposure under the loan-to value-maintenance (LTV) guarantee
would be adjusted accordingly and any such change could be significant. In certain cases, we may
be required to make a re-balancing payment following a reappraisal in order to reduce the
applicable loan-to-value ratio to the required level. During the first quarter of fiscal 2010, the
Company and its joint venture partner reached an agreement with the lender of a joint venture to
release the LTV guarantee and extend the related loan maturity up to two years in exchange for a
loan repayment of $7.4 million. The Company invested an additional $3.9 million in the joint
venture to facilitate this repayment during fiscal 2010.
Repayment Guarantees
We and our joint venture partners have repayment guarantees related to certain joint ventures
borrowings. These repayment guarantees require the repayment of all or a portion of the debt of the
unconsolidated joint venture only in the event the joint venture defaults on its obligations under
the borrowing or in some cases only in the event the joint venture files for bankruptcy. Our
estimate of Beazers maximum exposure to our repayment guarantees related to the outstanding debt
of its unconsolidated joint ventures was $17.9 million and $15.8 million at June 30, 2011 and
September 30, 2010, respectively. As of June 30, 2011, $15.7 million has been recorded in Other
Liabilities which is net of the $1.5 million we paid and is currently held in escrow related to our
South Edge joint venture.
15
Table of Contents
Environmental Indemnities
Additionally, we and our joint venture partners generally provide unsecured environmental
indemnities to joint venture project lenders. In each case, we have performed due diligence on
potential environmental risks. These indemnities obligate us to reimburse the project
lenders for claims related to environmental matters for which they are held responsible. For the
three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, we were not required to make any payments
related to environmental indemnities. No accrual has been recorded, as losses, if any, related to
environmental indemnities are both not probable and not reasonably estimable
(4) Inventory
June 30, | September 30, | |||||||
(In thousands) | 2011 | 2010 | ||||||
Homes under construction
|
$ | 328,067 | $ | 210,104 | ||||
Development projects in progress
|
445,567 | 444,062 | ||||||
Land held for future development
|
384,658 | 382,889 | ||||||
Land held for sale
|
36,965 | 36,259 | ||||||
Capitalized interest
|
51,230 | 36,884 | ||||||
Model homes
|
44,299 | 43,505 | ||||||
Total owned inventory
|
$ | 1,290,786 | $ | 1,153,703 | ||||
Homes under construction includes homes finished and ready for delivery and homes in various
stages of construction. We had 252 ($43.3 million) and 423 ($71.5 million) completed homes
that were not subject to a sales contract (spec homes) at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010,
respectively. Development projects in progress consist principally of land and land improvement
costs. Certain of the fully developed lots in this category are reserved by a deposit or sales
contract. Land held for future development consists of communities for which construction and
development activities are expected to occur in the future or have been idled and are stated at
cost unless facts and circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the assets may not be
recoverable. All applicable interest and real estate taxes on land held for future development are
expensed as incurred. Land held for sale as of June 30, 2011 principally included land held for
sale in the markets we have decided to exit including Colorado, Jacksonville, Florida and
Charlotte, North Carolina.
The value related to previously owned homes acquired by our Pre-Owned Homes Division is reported as
property, plant and equipment, excluded from the inventory information provided, and depreciated
over the assets estimated remaining useful life. These homes are within select communities in
markets in which the Company currently operates and will be repaired, rented to consumers and
eventually resold.
Total owned inventory, by reportable segment, is set forth in the table below (in thousands):
June 30, 2011 | September 30, 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Projects in | Held for Future | Land Held | Total Owned | Projects in | Held for Future | Land Held | Total Owned | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Progress | Development | for Sale | Inventory | Progress | Development | for Sale | Inventory | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
West Segment |
$ | 318,839 | $ | 318,692 | $ | 5,243 | $ | 642,774 | $ | 281,912 | $ | 311,472 | $ | 5,273 | $ | 598,657 | ||||||||||||||||
East Segment |
323,621 | 41,930 | 4,947 | 370,498 | 269,210 | 47,381 | 1,376 | 317,967 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast Segment |
143,162 | 24,036 | 75 | 167,273 | 121,509 | 24,036 | | 145,545 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unallocated |
73,495 | | | 73,495 | 53,157 | | | 53,157 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discontinued Operations |
10,046 | | 26,700 | 36,746 | 8,767 | | 29,610 | 38,377 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 869,163 | $ | 384,658 | $ | 36,965 | $ | 1,290,786 | $ | 734,555 | $ | 382,889 | $ | 36,259 | $ | 1,153,703 | ||||||||||||||||
Lot Option Contract Abandonments. We have determined the proper course of action with respect
to a number of communities within each homebuilding segment was to abandon the remaining lots under
option and to write-off the deposits securing the option takedowns, as well as pre-acquisition
costs. In determining whether to abandon a lot option contract, we evaluate the lot option
primarily based upon the expected cash flows from the property that is the subject of the option.
If we intend to abandon or walk-away from a lot option contract, we record a charge to earnings in
the period such decision is made for the deposit amount and any related capitalized costs
associated with the lot option contract. We recorded lot option abandonment charges during the
three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 as indicated in the table below (in thousands).
The abandonment charges relate to our decision to abandon certain option contracts that no longer
fit in our long-term strategic plan.
16
Table of Contents
Three Months Ended June 30, | Nine Months Ended June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Lot Option Abandonments |
||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 32 | $ | 526 | $ | 116 | $ | 533 | ||||||||
East |
462 | 7 | 595 | 8 | ||||||||||||
Southeast |
80 | | 262 | 4 | ||||||||||||
Continuing Operations |
$ | 574 | $ | 533 | $ | 973 | $ | 545 | ||||||||
Discontinued Operations |
2,477 | 5 | 2,525 | 9 | ||||||||||||
Total Company |
$ | 3,051 | $ | 538 | $ | 3,498 | $ | 554 | ||||||||
We expect to exercise, subject to market conditions, most of our remaining option contracts.
Various factors, some of which are beyond our control, such as market conditions, weather
conditions and the timing of the completion of development activities, will have a significant
impact on the timing of option exercises or whether lot options will be exercised.
(5) Interest
Our ability to capitalize all interest incurred during the three and nine months ended June 30,
2011 and 2010 has been limited by our inventory eligible for capitalization. The following table
sets forth certain information regarding interest (in thousands):
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Capitalized interest in inventory, beginning of period |
$ | 47,624 | $ | 41,107 | $ | 36,884 | $ | 38,338 | ||||||||
Interest incurred |
32,872 | 31,561 | 98,175 | 96,977 | ||||||||||||
Capitalized interest impaired |
(380 | ) | (196 | ) | (1,789 | ) | (1,292 | ) | ||||||||
Interest expense not qualified for capitalization |
||||||||||||||||
and included as other expense |
(17,707 | ) | (17,381 | ) | (55,688 | ) | (57,478 | ) | ||||||||
Capitalized interest amortized to house |
||||||||||||||||
construction and land sales expenses |
(11,179 | ) | (16,444 | ) | (26,352 | ) | (37,898 | ) | ||||||||
Capitalized interest in inventory, end of period |
$ | 51,230 | $ | 38,647 | $ | 51,230 | $ | 38,647 | ||||||||
(6) Earnings Per Share
Basic and diluted earnings per share are calculated as follows (in thousands, except per share
amounts):
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
$ | (55,755 | ) | $ | (23,384 | ) | $ | (157,805 | ) | $ | 27,549 | |||||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
(3,365 | ) | (4,432 | ) | (3,878 | ) | (2,068 | ) | ||||||||
Net (loss) income |
$ | (59,120 | ) | $ | (27,816 | ) | $ | (161,683 | ) | $ | 25,481 | |||||
Weighted average number of shares outstanding basic |
73,982 | 68,310 | 73,930 | 55,079 | ||||||||||||
Basic (loss) earnings per share from continuing operations |
$ | (0.75 | ) | $ | (0.34 | ) | $ | (2.14 | ) | $ | 0.50 | |||||
Basic loss per share from discontinued operations |
$ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.04 | ) | ||||
Basic (loss) earnings per share |
$ | (0.80 | ) | $ | (0.41 | ) | $ | (2.19 | ) | $ | 0.46 |
17
Table of Contents
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Diluted: |
||||||||||||||||
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
$ | (55,755 | ) | $ | (23,384 | ) | $ | (157,805 | ) | $ | 27,549 | |||||
Interest on convertible debt -net of taxes |
| | | 1,434 | ||||||||||||
(Loss) income from continuing operations for diluted EPS |
$ | (55,755 | ) | $ | (23,384 | ) | $ | (157,805 | ) | $ | 28,983 | |||||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax for diluted EPS |
(3,365 | ) | (4,432 | ) | (3,878 | ) | (2,068 | ) | ||||||||
(Loss) income for diluted EPS |
$ | (59,120 | ) | $ | (27,816 | ) | $ | (161,683 | ) | $ | 26,915 | |||||
Weighted average number of shares outstanding basic |
73,982 | 68,310 | 73,930 | 55,079 | ||||||||||||
Effect of dilutive securities: |
||||||||||||||||
Shares issuable upon conversion of convertible debt |
| | | 7,738 | ||||||||||||
Shares issuable upon conversion of TEU prepaid stock
purchase contracts |
| | | 2,459 | ||||||||||||
Weighted average number of shares outstanding diluted |
73,982 | 68,310 | 73,930 | 65,276 | ||||||||||||
Diluted (loss) earnings per share from continuing
operations |
$ | (0.75 | ) | $ | (0.34 | ) | $ | (2.14 | ) | $ | 0.44 | |||||
Diluted loss per share from discontinued operations |
$ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.03 | ) | ||||
Diluted (loss) earnings per share |
$ | (0.80 | ) | $ | (0.41 | ) | $ | (2.19 | ) | $ | 0.41 |
In computing diluted loss per share for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 and
three months ended June 30, 2010, 25.4 million common shares issuable upon conversion of our
Mandatory Convertible Subordinated Notes and Tangible Equity Unit prepaid stock purchase contracts
were excluded from the computation of diluted loss per share as a result of their anti-dilutive
effect. Also, in computing diluted loss per share for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011
and the three months ended June 30, 2010, all common stock equivalents from employee compensation
awards were excluded from the computation of diluted loss per share as a result of their
anti-dilutive effect. In computing diluted earnings per share for the nine months ended June 30
2010, options/SSARs to purchase 1.9 million shares of common stock were not included in the
computation of diluted earnings per share because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive.
(7) Borrowings
At June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, we had the following long-term debt (in thousands):
June 30, | September 30, | |||||||||
Maturity Date | 2011 | 2010 | ||||||||
Secured Revolving Credit Facility |
August 2012 | $ | | $ | | |||||
6 1/2% Senior Notes |
November 2013 | | 164,473 | |||||||
6 7/8% Senior Notes |
July 2015 | 172,454 | 209,454 | |||||||
8 1/8% Senior Notes |
June 2016 | 172,879 | 180,879 | |||||||
12% Senior Secured Notes |
October 2017 | 250,000 | 250,000 | |||||||
9 1/8% Senior Notes |
June 2018 | 300,000 | 300,000 | |||||||
9 1/8% Senior Notes |
May 2019 | 250,000 | | |||||||
TEU Senior Amortizing Notes |
August 2013 | 11,226 | 14,594 | |||||||
Unamortized debt discounts |
(24,208 | ) | (23,617 | ) | ||||||
Total Senior Notes, net |
1,132,351 | 1,095,783 | ||||||||
Mandatory Convertible Subordinated Notes |
January 2013 | 57,500 | 57,500 | |||||||
Junior subordinated notes |
July 2036 | 49,020 | 47,470 | |||||||
Cash Secured Loan |
November 2017 | 247,368 | | |||||||
Other secured notes payable |
Various Dates | 2,726 | 10,794 | |||||||
Total debt, net |
$ | 1,488,965 | $ | 1,211,547 | ||||||
18
Table of Contents
Secured Revolving Credit Facility On August 5, 2009, we entered into an amendment to our
Secured Revolving Credit Facility that reduced the size of the facility to $22 million. The
Secured Revolving Credit Facility is provided by one lender. The Secured Revolving Credit Facility
provides for future working capital and letter of credit needs collateralized by either cash or
assets of the Company at our option, based on certain conditions and covenant compliance. As of
June 30, 2011, we have elected to cash collateralize all letters of credit; however, we have
pledged approximately $1.1 billion of inventory assets to our Senior Secured Revolving Credit
Facility to collateralize potential future borrowings or letters of credit. The Secured Revolving
Credit Facility contains certain covenants, including negative covenants and financial maintenance
covenants, with which we are required to comply. Subject to our option to cash collateralize our
obligations under the Secured Revolving Credit Facility upon certain conditions, our obligations
under the Secured Revolving Credit Facility are secured by liens on substantially all of our
personal property and a significant portion of our owned real properties. There were no outstanding
borrowings under the Secured Revolving Credit Facility as of June 30, 2011 or September 30, 2010.
In July 2011, we further amended our Secured Revolving Credit Facility to extend its maturity to
August 2012.
We have entered into stand-alone, cash-secured letter of credit agreements with banks to maintain
our pre-existing letters of credit and to provide for the issuance of new letters of credit. The
letter of credit arrangements combined with our Senior Secured Revolving Credit Facility provide a
total letter of credit capacity of approximately $92.1 million. As of June 30, 2011 and September
30, 2010, we have secured letters of credit using cash collateral in restricted accounts totaling
$36.7 million and $38.8 million, respectively. The Company may enter into additional arrangements
to provide additional letter of credit capacity.
Senior Notes - The majority of our Senior Notes are unsecured or secured obligations ranking pari
passu with all other existing and future senior indebtedness. Substantially all of our significant
subsidiaries are full and unconditional guarantors of the Senior Notes and are jointly and
severally liable for obligations under the Senior Notes and the Secured Revolving Credit Facility.
Each guarantor subsidiary is a 100% owned subsidiary of Beazer Homes.
The indentures under which the Senior Notes were issued contain certain restrictive covenants,
including limitations on payment of dividends. At June 30, 2011, under the most restrictive
covenants of each indenture, no portion of our retained earnings was available for cash dividends
or for share repurchases. The indentures provide that, in the event of defined changes in control
or if our consolidated tangible net worth falls below a specified level or in certain circumstances
upon a sale of assets, we are required to offer to repurchase certain specified amounts of
outstanding Senior Notes. Specifically, certain indentures require us to offer to purchase 10% of
the original amount of the Senior Notes at par if our consolidated tangible net worth (defined as
stockholders equity less intangible assets) is less than $85 million at the end of any two
consecutive fiscal quarters. If triggered and fully subscribed, this could result in our having to
purchase $62.5 million of notes, based on the original amounts of the applicable notes; however,
this amount may be reduced by certain Senior Note repurchases (potentially at less than par) made
after the triggering date. As of June 30, 2011, our consolidated tangible net worth was $193.1
million.
On January 8, 2010, we redeemed our 8 5/8% Senior Notes due 2011 at par totaling $127.3 million.
This redemption resulted in a loss on debt extinguishment of $0.9 million due primarily to the
acceleration of debt discount and issuance costs. In May 2010, we redeemed our 8 3/8% Senior Notes
due 2012 at par for a total of $303.6 million. This redemption resulted in a loss on debt
extinguishment of $2.9 million, which included the acceleration of debt issuance cost amortization.
In addition, during the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010, we redeemed for cash all of the
outstanding Convertible Senior Notes for a total of $155.5 million. The redemption resulted in a
loss on debt extinguishment of $6.2 million, which included the acceleration of debt issuance cost
amortization.
On September 11, 2009, we issued and sold $250 million aggregate principal amount of our 12% Senior
Secured Notes due 2017 (Senior Secured Notes) through a private placement. The Senior Secured Notes
were issued at a price of 89.5% of their face amount (before underwriting and other issuance
costs). Interest on the Senior Secured Notes is payable semi-annually in cash in arrears. During
the quarter ended March 31, 2010, we completed an offer to exchange substantially all of the $250
million Senior Secured Notes, which were registered under the Securities Act of 1933. The Senior
Secured Notes were issued under an indenture, dated as of September 11, 2009. The indenture
contains covenants which, subject to certain exceptions, limit the ability of the Company and its
restricted subsidiaries to, among other things, incur additional indebtedness, engage in certain
asset sales, make certain types of restricted payments, engage in transactions with affiliates and
create liens on assets of the Company. Upon a change of control, as defined, the indenture
requires us to make an offer to repurchase the Senior Secured Notes at 101% of their principal
amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest. If we sell certain assets and do not reinvest the net
proceeds in compliance with the indenture, then we must use the net proceeds to offer to repurchase
the Senior Secured Notes at 100% of their principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest. After
October 15, 2012, we may redeem some or all of the Senior Secured Notes at redemption prices set
forth in the indenture. The Senior Secured Notes are secured on a second priority basis by, subject
to exceptions specified in the related agreements, substantially all of the tangible and intangible
assets of the Company as defined.
19
Table of Contents
In May 2010, we issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of 9 1/8% Senior Notes due June 15,
2018. Interest on these notes is payable semi-annually in cash in arrears, commencing on June 15,
2010. These notes are unsecured and rank equally with our unsecured indebtedness. We may, at our
option, redeem the 9 1/8% Senior Notes in whole or in part at any time at specified redemption
prices which include a make whole provision through June 15, 2014.
Also in May 2010, we issued 3 million 7.25% tangible equity units (TEUs) which were comprised of
prepaid stock purchase contracts and senior amortizing notes. As these two components of the TEUs
are legally separate and detachable, we have accounted for the two components as separate items for
financial reporting purposes and valued them based on their relative fair value at the date of
issuance. The amortizing notes are unsecured senior obligations and rank equally with all of our
other unsecured indebtedness and had an aggregate initial principal amount of $15.7 million as
determined under the relative fair value method. These notes pay quarterly installments of
principal and interest aggregating approximately $1.4 million per quarter through August 15, 2013,
and in the aggregate, these installments will be equivalent to a 7.25% cash payment per year with
respect to each $25 stated amount of the TEUs. If we elect to settle the prepaid stock purchase
contracts early, we may be required to repurchase certain amortizing notes, plus accrued and unpaid
interest as provided for in the TEU agreement. The related prepaid stock purchase contracts will be
settled in Beazer Homes common stock on August 15, 2013 and have been accounted for as equity in
the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets.
In November 2010, we issued $250 million aggregate principal amount of 9 1/8% Senior Notes due May
15, 2019 in a private placement. Interest on these notes is payable semi-annually in cash in
arrears, commencing on May 15, 2011. These notes are unsecured and rank equally with our unsecured
indebtedness. We may, at our option, redeem the 9 1/8% Senior Notes in whole or in part at any
time at specified redemption prices which include a make whole provision through May 15, 2014.
During the quarter ended June 30, 2011, we offered to exchange substantially all of the $250
million 9 1/8% Senior Notes due 2019 for notes that were publically traded and registered under the
Securities Act of 1933. As of July 19, 2011, the expiration date of the exchange offer,
approximately 94% of $234.6 million of the 9 1/8% Senior Notes were exchanged for the publically
traded and registered 9 1/8% Senior Notes.
During the nine months ended June 30, 2011, we redeemed or repurchased in open market transactions
$209.5 million principal amount of our Senior Notes ($164.5 million of 61/2% Senior Notes due 2013,
$37.0 million of 6 7/8% Senior Notes due 2015 and $8.0 million of 8 1/8% Senior Notes due 2016).
The aggregate purchase price was $210.0 million, plus accrued and unpaid interest as of the
purchase date. The redemption/repurchase of the notes resulted in a $2.9 million pre-tax loss on
extinguishment of debt, net of unamortized discounts and debt issuance costs related to these
notes. All Senior Notes redeemed/repurchased by the Company were cancelled.
Mandatory Convertible Subordinated Notes On January 12, 2010, we issued $57.5 million aggregate
principal amount of 7 1/2% Mandatory Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2013 (the Mandatory
Convertible Subordinated Notes). Interest on the Mandatory Convertible Subordinated Notes is
payable quarterly in cash in arrears. Holders of the Mandatory Convertible Subordinated Notes have
the right to convert their notes, in whole or in part, at any time prior to maturity, into shares
of our common stock at a fixed conversion rate of 5.4348 shares per $25 principal amount of notes.
At maturity, the remaining notes will automatically convert into the Companys common stock at a
defined conversion rate which will range from 4.4547 to 5.4348 (the initial conversion rate) shares
per $25 principal amount of notes based on the then current price of the common stock. The
securities are subordinated to nonconvertible debt, the conversion feature is non-detachable and
there are no beneficial conversion features associated with this debt. If our consolidated tangible
net worth is less than $85 million as of the last day of a fiscal quarter, the Company has the
right to require holders to convert all of the notes then outstanding for shares of our common
stock at the maximum conversion rate.
Junior Subordinated Notes On June 15, 2006, we completed a private placement of $103.1 million
of unsecured junior subordinated notes which mature on July 30, 2036 and are redeemable at par on
or after July 30, 2011 and pay a fixed rate of 7.987% for the first ten years ending July 30, 2016.
Thereafter, the securities have a floating interest rate equal to three-month LIBOR plus 2.45% per
annum, resetting quarterly. These notes were issued to Beazer Capital Trust I, which simultaneously
issued, in a private transaction, trust preferred securities and common securities with an
aggregate value of $103.1 million to fund its purchase of these notes. The transaction is treated
as debt in accordance with GAAP. The obligations relating to these notes and the related securities
are subordinated to the Secured Revolving Credit Facility and the Senior Notes.
On January 15, 2010, we completed an exchange of $75 million of our trust preferred securities
issued by Beazer Capital Trust I for a new issue of $75 million of junior subordinated notes due
July 30, 2036 issued by the Company (the New Junior Notes). The exchanged trust preferred
securities and the related junior subordinated notes issued in 2006 were cancelled effective
January 15, 2010. The material terms of the New Junior Notes are identical to the terms of the
original trust securities except that when the New Junior Notes change from a fixed rate to a
variable rate in August 2016, the variable rate is subject to a floor of 4.25% and a cap of 9.25%.
In addition, the Company now has the option to redeem the New Junior Notes beginning on June 1,
2012 at 75% of par value and beginning on June 1, 2022, the redemption price of 75% of par value
will increase by 1.785% per year.
20
Table of Contents
The aforementioned exchange has been accounted for as an extinguishment of debt as there has been a
significant modification of cash flows and, as such, the New Junior Notes were recorded at their
estimated fair value at the exchange date. Over the remaining life of the New Junior Notes, we
will increase their carrying value until this carrying value equals the face value of the notes.
During the nine months ended June 30, 2010, we recorded a pre-tax gain on extinguishment of $53.6
million in connection with this exchange. As of June 30, 2011, the unamortized accretion was $51.8
million and will be amortized over the remaining life of the notes.
As of June 30, 2011, we were in compliance with all covenants under our Senior Notes.
Cash Secured Loans In November 2010, we entered into two separate loan facilities for a combined
total of $275 million. Borrowing under the cash secured loan facilities will replenish cash used
to repay or repurchase the Companys debt and would be considered refinancing indebtedness under
certain of the Companys existing indentures and debt covenants. However, because the loans are
fully collateralized by cash equal to the loan amount, the loans do not provide liquidity to the
Company.
The lenders of these facilities may put the outstanding loan balances to the Company at the two or
four year anniversaries of the loan. The loan matures in seven years. Borrowings under the
facilities are fully secured by cash held by the lender or its affiliates. This secured cash is
reflected as restricted cash on our unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of June 30,
2011. We borrowed $32.6 million at inception of the loans. As previously indicated and in order
to protect financing capacity available under our covenant refinancing basket related to previous
or future debt repayments, we borrowed an additional $214.8 million under the cash secured loan
facilities in the quarter ended June 30, 2011. The cash secured loan has an interest rate
equivalent to LIBOR plus 0.4% per annum which is paid every three months following the effective
date of each borrowing.
Other Secured Notes Payable We periodically acquire land through the issuance of notes payable.
As of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, we had outstanding notes payable of $2.7 million and
$10.8 million, respectively, primarily related to land acquisitions. These notes payable expire at
various times through 2012 and had a weighted average fixed rate of 7.4% at June 30, 2011. These
notes are secured by the real estate to which they relate.
The agreements governing these secured notes payable contain various affirmative and negative
covenants. There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain any future waivers or
amendments that may become necessary without significant additional cost or at all. In each
instance, however, a covenant default can be cured by repayment of the indebtedness.
(8) Income Taxes
For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011, our tax expense from continuing operations was
$3.6 million and $0.6 million, respectively. The principal difference between our effective rate
and the U.S. federal statutory rate for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 relates to
our valuation allowance.
During fiscal 2008, we determined that we did not meet the more likely than not standard that
substantially all of our deferred tax assets would be realized and therefore, we established a
valuation allowance for substantially all of our deferred tax assets.
Given the prolonged economic downturn affecting the homebuilding industry and the continued
uncertainty regarding the recoverability of the remaining deferred tax assets, we continue to
believe that a valuation allowance is needed for substantially all of our deferred tax assets. In
future periods, the allowance could be modified based on sufficient evidence indicating that more
likely than not a portion of our deferred tax assets will be realized. Changes in existing tax
laws could also affect actual tax results and the valuation of deferred tax assets over time.
Further, we experienced an ownership change as defined in Section 382 of the Internal Revenue
Code (Section 382) as of January 12, 2010. Section 382 contains rules that limit the ability of a
company that undergoes an ownership change to utilize its net operating loss carryforwards (NOLs)
and certain built-in losses or deductions recognized during the five-year period after the
ownership change to offset future taxable income. Therefore, our ability to utilize our
pre-ownership change net operating loss carryforwards and recognize certain built-in losses or
deductions is limited by Section 382 to an estimated maximum amount of approximately $11.4 million
($4 million tax-effected) annually. Certain deferred tax assets are not subject to any limitation
imposed by Section 382.
As of June 30, 2011, our valuation allowance was $505.8 million and we expect to continue to add to
our gross deferred tax assets for anticipated NOLs that will not be limited by Section 382.
21
Table of Contents
In the normal course of business, we are subject to audits by federal and state tax authorities
regarding various tax liabilities. The IRS is currently conducting a routine examination of our
federal income tax returns for fiscal years 2007 through 2010, and certain state taxing authorities
are examining various fiscal years. The final outcome of these examinations is not yet
determinable. The statute of limitations for our major tax jurisdictions remains open for
examination for fiscal 2006 and subsequent years.
During the nine months ended June 30, 2011, there have been no material changes to the components
of the Companys total unrecognized tax benefits, including any amount which, if recognized, would
affect our effective tax rate.
(9) Contingencies
Beazer Homes and certain of its subsidiaries have been and continue to be named as defendants in
various construction defect claims, complaints and other legal actions. The Company is subject to
the possibility of loss contingencies arising in its business. In determining loss contingencies,
we consider the likelihood of loss as well as the ability to reasonably estimate the amount of such
loss or liability. An estimated loss is recorded when it is considered probable that a liability
has been incurred and when the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated.
Warranty Reserves. We currently provide a limited warranty (ranging from one to two years) covering
workmanship and materials per our defined performance quality standards. In addition, we provide a
limited warranty (generally ranging from a minimum of five years up to the period covered by the
applicable statute of repose) covering only certain defined construction defects. We also provide a
defined structural element warranty with single-family homes and townhomes in certain states.
Since we subcontract our homebuilding work to subcontractors who generally provide us with an
indemnity and a certificate of insurance prior to receiving payments for their work, many claims
relating to workmanship and materials are the primary responsibility of the subcontractors.
Warranty reserves are included in other liabilities and the provision for warranty accruals is
included in home construction and land sales expenses in the unaudited condensed consolidated
financial statements. We record reserves covering anticipated warranty expense for each home
closed. Management reviews the adequacy of warranty reserves each reporting period based on
historical experience and managements estimate of the costs to remediate the claims and adjusts
these provisions accordingly. Our review includes a quarterly analysis of the historical data and
trends in warranty expense by operating segment. An analysis by operating segment allows us to
consider market specific factors such as our warranty experience, the number of home closings, the
prices of homes, product mix and other data in estimating our warranty reserves. In addition, our
analysis also contemplates the existence of any non-recurring or community-specific warranty
related matters that might not be contemplated in our historical data and trends.
As of June 30, 2011, our warranty reserves include an estimate for the repair of less than 60 homes
in Florida where certain of our subcontractors installed defective Chinese drywall in homes that
were delivered during our 2006 and 2007 fiscal years. As of June 30, 2011, we have completed
repairs on approximately 88% of these homes and we are in the process of repairing all of the
remaining homes that we have been given permission to repair. We continue to inspect additional
homes in order to determine whether they also contain the defective Chinese drywall. Like most
major homebuilders, we contract for many of our construction activities on a turnkey basis,
including the purchase and installation of drywall. Therefore, with few exceptions, our
contractors purchased the drywall from independent suppliers, and delivered and installed this
drywall into Beazers homes. Much of this data is unavailable or inconclusive. Accordingly, it is
difficult for the Company to determine which suppliers were used by these contractors, which
suppliers provided defective Chinese drywall during the time period at issue or what amounts may
have been purchased from such suppliers. As a result, it is difficult for the Company to determine
which Beazer communities or particular homes had Chinese drywall installed without inspections and,
the amount of additional liability, if any, is not reasonably estimable. Therefore, the outcome of
inspections in process and potential future inspections or an unexpected increase in repair costs
may require us to increase our warranty reserve in the future. In addition, the Company has been
named as a defendant in a number of legal actions related to defective Chinese drywall (see
other Litigation below).
As a result of our analyses, we adjust our estimated warranty liabilities. While we believe that
our warranty reserves are adequate as of June 30, 2011, historical data and trends may not
accurately predict actual warranty costs or future developments could lead to a significant change
in the reserve. Our warranty reserves are as follows (in thousands):
22
Table of Contents
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of period |
$ | 18,699 | $ | 26,666 | $ | 25,821 | $ | 30,100 | ||||||||
Accruals for warranties issued |
1,344 | 2,349 | 3,158 | 5,112 | ||||||||||||
Changes in liability related to warranties |
||||||||||||||||
existing in prior periods |
(504 | ) | 779 | (3,187 | ) | 731 | ||||||||||
Payments made |
(2,285 | ) | (4,421 | ) | (8,538 | ) | (10,570 | ) | ||||||||
Balance at end of period |
$ | 17,254 | $ | 25,373 | $ | 17,254 | $ | 25,373 | ||||||||
South Edge Litigation
During fiscal 2008, the administrative agent for the lenders of one of our unconsolidated joint
ventures, South Edge, LLC, (South Edge), filed individual lawsuits against some of the joint
venture members and certain of those members parent companies (including the Company), seeking to
recover damages under completion guarantees, among other claims. Effective June 10, 2011, the
Company and one of its subsidiaries became parties to a settlement among the administrative agent
for the lenders to South Edge (the Administrative Agent), certain of the lenders to South Edge, and
certain of the other South Edge members and their respective parent companies (together with the
Company and its subsidiary, the Participating Members). The Chapter 11 trustee for South Edge has
expressed its consent to the agreement. Under the agreement, each of the parties will use
commercially reasonable efforts to support confirmation of a consensual plan of reorganization for
South Edge (the Plan), and to obtain bankruptcy court approval of a disclosure statement that
will accompany the Plan, to obtain the requisite support of the South Edge lenders to the Plan, and
to consummate the Plan promptly after confirmation, in each case by certain specified dates. Under
the agreement, the effective date of the Plan following its confirmation is to occur on or before
November 30, 2011, though it may be extended depending on the date of Plan confirmation.
No disclosure statement for the Plan has been approved by the bankruptcy court at this time, and
nothing herein should be construed as a solicitation of any vote on the Plan by creditors of or
equity holders in South Edge.
Pursuant to the agreement, on the effective date of the Plan, the Company would pay to the lenders
an amount between approximately $15.7 million and $17.2 million, depending on certain contingencies
including the extent to which infrastructure development funds already pledged to the
Administrative Agent can be applied to the Participating Members obligations as set forth under
the proposed Plan. In addition, the Company would be responsible for its pro rata share of various
fees, expenses and charges of the administrative agent for the lenders, the lenders and the Chapter
11 trustee, and to pay its share of certain allowed general unsecured claims in the South Edge
bankruptcy case. The Company will also be responsible for a portion of certain administrative
expenses that arise as part of the Plan confirmation process. As previously disclosed in Note 3, as
of June 30, 2011, $15.7 million has been recorded in Other Liabilities which is net of the $1.5
million we paid and is currently held in escrow related to our South Edge joint venture.
If the Plan as proposed under the agreement becomes effective, the Company anticipates that one of
its subsidiaries would acquire its share of the land owned by South Edge as a result of a
bankruptcy court-approved disposition of the land to a newly created entity in which such
subsidiary would expect to be a part owner and which would satisfy or assume the respective liens
of the Administrative Agent and the lenders on the land. In addition, if the Plan becomes
effective, the Company anticipates that current litigation between the Agent and the Participating
Members would be resolved, although lenders who do not consent to the Plan may assert certain
claims against the Company (which claims the Company vigorously disputes).
The agreement is subject to bankruptcy court approval and may be terminated by the Administrative
Agent or the Participating Members upon the occurrence of certain specified events, including a
failure to meet the specified dates on which the above-described activities in support of the Plan
are to occur.
Other Litigation
A putative class action was filed on April 8, 2008 in the United States District Court for the
Middle District of North Carolina, Salisbury Division, against Beazer Homes, U.S.A., Inc., Beazer
Homes Corp. and Beazer Mortgage Corporation (BMC). The Complaint alleges that Beazer violated the
Real Estate Settlement Practices Act (RESPA) and North Carolina Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 by (1)
improperly requiring homebuyers to use Beazer-owned mortgage and settlement services as part of a
down payment assistance program, and (2) illegally increasing the cost of homes and settlement
services sold by Beazer Homes Corp. The purported class consists of all residents of North Carolina
who purchased a home from Beazer, using mortgage financing provided by and through Beazer that
included seller-funded down payment assistance, between January 1, 2000 and October 11, 2007. The
parties have reached an agreement to settle the lawsuit, which will be partially funded by
insurance proceeds. The settlement has been preliminarily approved by the court, but remains
subject to final court approval. Under the terms of the settlement, the action will be dismissed
with prejudice,
23
Table of Contents
and the Company and all other defendants will not admit any liability. A fairness hearing has been set for August 30,
2011. The Company has accrued a liability for such matter which is not material to the Companys
financial position or results of operations and is included in the total litigation accrual
discussed below.
On June 3, 2009, a purported class action complaint was filed by the owners of one of our homes in
our Magnolia Lakes community in Ft. Myers, Florida. The complaint names the Company and certain
distributors and suppliers of drywall and was filed in the Circuit Court for Lee County, Florida on
behalf of the named plaintiffs and other similarly situated owners of homes in Magnolia Lakes or
alternatively in the State of Florida. The plaintiffs allege that the Company built their homes
with defective drywall, manufactured in China, that contains sulfur compounds that allegedly
corrode certain metals and that are allegedly capable of harming the health of individuals.
Plaintiffs allege physical and economic damages and seek legal and equitable relief, medical
monitoring and attorneys fees. This case has been transferred to the Eastern District of
Louisiana pursuant to an order from the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
In addition, the Company has been named in other multi-plaintiff complaints filed in the
multidistrict litigation. We believe that the claims asserted in these actions are governed by home
warranties or are without merit. Accordingly, the Company intends to vigorously defend against
these actions. Furthermore, the Company has offered to repair all Beazer homes affected by
defective Chinese drywall pursuant to a repair protocol that has been adopted by the multidistrict
litigation court, including those homes involved in litigation. To date, nearly all of affected
Beazer homeowners have accepted the Companys offer to repair. The Company also continues to
pursue recovery against responsible subcontractors, drywall suppliers and drywall manufacturers for
its repair costs.
On December 10, 2010, a shareholder derivative suit was filed by Milton Pfeiffer in the United
States District Court for the District of Delaware against certain officers and directors of the
Company. The complaint alleges that the defendants made false and misleading statements in the
Companys 2010 proxy regarding the tax deductibility of the Companys 2010 Equity Incentive Plan.
Plaintiff also alleges that defendants breached their fiduciary duties. This matter has been
settled and the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. The Company admitted no liability and will pay plaintiffs legal fees.
A final hearing was held on
August 3, 2011. There were no timely filed objections and the
court approved settlement of this matter.
On March 14, 2011, the Company and several subsidiaries were named as defendants in a lawsuit filed
by Flagstar Bank, FSB in the Circuit Court for the County of Oakland, State of Michigan. The
complaint demands approximately $5 million to recover purported losses in connection with 57
residential mortgage loan transactions under theories of breach of contract, fraud/intentional
misrepresentation and other similar theories of recovery. We believe we have strong defenses to
the claims on these individual loans and intend to vigorously defend the action. In addition, BMC
has received notices from other investors demanding that BMC indemnify them for losses suffered
with respect to ten mortgage loan transactions largely alleging misrepresentations during the loan
origination process. We are currently investigating these claims. As previously disclosed, we
operated BMC from 1998 through February 2008 to offer mortgage financing to the buyers of our
homes. BMC entered into various agreements with mortgage investors for the origination of mortgage
loans. Underwriting decisions were not made by BMC but by the investors or third-party service
providers. To date, including the mortgage loans that are the subject of the lawsuit, we have
received requests to repurchase fewer than 100 mortgage loans from various investors. While we have
not been required to repurchase any mortgage loans, we have established an immaterial amount as a
reserve for the repurchase of mortgage loans originated by BMC. We cannot rule out the potential
for additional mortgage loan repurchase claims in the future, although, at this time, we do not
believe that the exposure related to any such additional claims would be material to our
consolidated financial position or results of operation. As of June 30, 2011, no liability has
been recorded for any such additional claims as such exposure is not both probable and reasonably
estimable.
On March 15, 2011, a shareholder derivative suit was filed by certain funds affiliated with
Teamster Local 237 in the Superior Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia against certain
officers and directors of the Company and the Companys compensation consultants. The complaint
alleges breach of fiduciary duties involving decisions regarding executive compensation;
specifically that compensation awarded to certain Company executives for the 2010 fiscal year were
improper in light of the negative subsequent advisory say on pay vote by shareholders at the
Companys 2011 stockholders meeting. The defendants have filed motions to dismiss this case, which
were heard on August 3, 2011. The court dismissed all counts of
the complaint and requested submission of a proposed order of
dismissal.
We cannot predict or determine the timing or final outcome of the lawsuits or the effect that any
adverse findings or adverse determinations in the pending lawsuits may have on us. In addition, an
estimate of possible loss or range of loss, if any, cannot presently be made with respect to
certain of the above pending matters. An unfavorable determination in any of the pending lawsuits
could result in the payment by us of substantial monetary damages which may not be fully covered by
insurance. Further, the legal costs associated with the lawsuits and the amount of time required to
be spent by management and the Board of Directors on these matters, even if we are ultimately
successful, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
Other Matters
As disclosed in our 2009 Form 10-K, on July 1, 2009, the Company announced that it has resolved the
criminal and civil investigations by the United States Attorneys Office in the Western District of
North Carolina (the U.S. Attorney) and other state and federal agencies
24
Table of Contents
concerning matters that were the subject of the independent investigation, initiated in April 2007
by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors (the Investigation) and concluded in May 2008.
Under the terms of a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA), the Companys liability for fiscal 2011
and each of the fiscal years after 2010 through a portion of fiscal 2014 (unless extended as
previously described in our 2009 Form 10-K) will also be equal to 4% of the Companys adjusted
EBITDA (as defined in the DPA). The total amount of such obligations will be dependent on several
factors; however, the maximum liability under the DPA and other settlement agreements discussed
above will not exceed $55.0 million of which $16 million has been paid as of June 30, 2011. As of
September 30, 2010, we had accrued approximately $1 million for future obligations under the DPA
and HUD agreements which was paid in November 2010. Based on our projections of adjusted EBITDA for
the remainder of fiscal 2011, we have no accrual related to these future obligations as of June 30,
2011. We believe that our absence of an accrual for this liability is appropriate as of June 30,
2011, however, positive adjusted EBITDA in future years will require us to incur additional expense
in the future.
In November 2003, Beazer Homes received a request for information from the EPA pursuant to Section
308 of the Clean Water Act seeking information concerning the nature and extent of storm water
discharge practices relating to certain of our communities completed or under construction. The EPA
or the equivalent state agency has issued Administrative Orders identifying alleged instances of
noncompliance and requiring corrective action to address the alleged deficiencies in storm water
management practices. The parties have agreed to settle this matter and have executed a Consent
Decree which received court approval on February 10, 2011. The terms of the Consent Decree
constitute a final judgment and the Company did not admit any liability. Pursuant to the terms of
the Consent Decree, the Company paid a civil penalty during the quarter which is not material to
the Companys financial position or results of operations. The Company has established and
implemented a comprehensive stormwater management program to ensure compliance with the Clean Water
Act, similar state regulations and the terms of the Consent Decree itself.
In 2006, we received two Administrative Orders issued by the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection. The Orders allege certain violations of wetlands disturbance permits. The two Orders
assess proposed fines of $630,000 and $678,000, respectively. We have met with the Department to
discuss their concerns on the two affected communities and have requested hearings on both matters.
We believe that we have significant defenses to the alleged violations and intend to contest the
agencys findings and the proposed fines. We are currently pursuing settlement discussions with the
Department.
We and certain of our subsidiaries have been named as defendants in various claims, complaints and
other legal actions, most relating to construction defects, moisture intrusion and product
liability. Certain of the liabilities resulting from these actions are covered in whole or part by
insurance. In our opinion, based on our current assessment, the ultimate resolution of these
matters will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations
or cash flows.
We have accrued $29.9 million and $18.0 million in other liabilities related to all of the above
matters including South Edge as of June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, respectively.
We had outstanding letters of credit and performance bonds of approximately $34.4 million and
$175.8 million, respectively, at June 30, 2011 related principally to our obligations to local
governments to construct roads and other improvements in various developments. Our outstanding
letters of credit at June 30, 2011 include $3.4 million relating to our lot option contracts
discussed in Note 1.
(10) Fair Value Measurements
As of June 30, 2011, we had no assets or liabilities in our unaudited condensed consolidated
balance sheets that were required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis. Certain of
our assets are required to be recorded at fair value on a non-recurring basis when events and
circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recovered. We use a fair value hierarchy
that requires us to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable
inputs when measuring fair value as follows: Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for
identical assets or liabilities; Level 2 Inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1
that are observable either directly or indirectly through corroboration with market data; Level 3
Unobservable inputs that reflect our own estimates about the assumptions market participants
would use in pricing the asset or liability.
25
Table of Contents
The following table presents our assets measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis for each
hierarchy level and represents only those assets whose carrying values were adjusted to fair value
during the nine months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 (in thousands):
Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | |||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended June 30, 2011: |
||||||||||||||||
Development projects in progress |
| | 39,373 | 39,373 | ||||||||||||
Land held for sale |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Right to purchase land |
| | 13,184 | 13,184 | ||||||||||||
Joint venture investments |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended June 30, 2010: |
||||||||||||||||
Development projects in progress |
| | 43,103 | 43,103 | ||||||||||||
Land held for sale |
| | 2,039 | 2,039 | ||||||||||||
Joint venture investments |
| | 4,060 | 4,060 |
As previously disclosed, we review our long-lived assets, including inventory for
recoverability when factors that indicate an impairment may exist, but no less than quarterly.
Fair value is based on estimated cash flows discounted for market risks associated with the
long-lived assets. The fair values of our investments in unconsolidated joint ventures are
determined primarily using a discounted cash flow model to value the underlying net assets of the
respective entities. During the nine months ended June 30, 2011, we recorded total impairments,
including discontinued operations, of $24.5 million, $0.2 million and $0.6 million for development
projects in progress, land held for sale and joint venture investments, respectively. During the
nine months ended June 30, 2010, we recorded total impairments, including discontinued operations,
of $22.4 million, $1.3 million and $24.0 million for development projects in progress, land held
for sale, and joint venture investments, respectively. See Notes 1 and 3 for additional
information related to the fair value accounting for the assets listed above. Determining which
hierarchical level an asset or liability falls within requires significant judgment. We evaluate
our hierarchy disclosures each quarter.
The fair value of our cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivable, trade
accounts payable, other liabilities, cash secured loan and other secured notes payable approximate
their carrying amounts due to the short maturity of these assets and liabilities. Obligations
related to land not owned under option agreements are recorded at estimated fair value. The
carrying values and estimated fair values of other financial assets and liabilities were as
follows:
As of June 30, 2011 | As of September 30, 2010 | |||||||||||||||
Carrying | Carrying | |||||||||||||||
Amount | Fair Value | Amount | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
Senior Notes |
$ | 1,132,351 | $ | 1,069,390 | $ | 1,095,783 | $ | 1,093,855 | ||||||||
Mandatory Convertible Subordinated Notes |
57,500 | 42,895 | 57,500 | 61,525 | ||||||||||||
Junior Subordinated Notes |
49,020 | 49,020 | 47,470 | 47,470 | ||||||||||||
$ | 1,238,871 | $ | 1,161,305 | $ | 1,200,753 | $ | 1,202,850 | |||||||||
The estimated fair values shown above for our publicly held Senior Notes and Mandatory
Convertible Subordinated Notes have been determined using quoted market rates. The fair value of
our publicly held junior subordinated notes is estimated by discounting scheduled cash flows
through maturity. The discount rate is estimated using market rates currently being offered on
loans with similar terms and credit quality. Judgment is required in interpreting market data to
develop these estimates of fair value. Accordingly, the estimates presented herein are not
necessarily indicative of the amounts that we could realize in a current market exchange.
(11) Segment Information
We have three homebuilding segments operating in 16 states and beginning in the second quarter of
fiscal 2011, we have introduced our Pre-Owned Homes division in Arizona and Nevada. Revenues in our
homebuilding segments are derived from the sale of homes which we construct and from land and lot
sales. Revenues from our Pre-Owned segment are derived from the rental and ultimate sale of
previously owned homes purchased and improved by the Company. Our reportable segments have been
determined on a basis that is used internally by management for evaluating segment performance and
resource allocations. In alignment therewith, during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2010, we
moved our Raleigh, North Carolina market from our East segment to our Southeast segment. During
the third quarter of fiscal 2011, in order to further optimize capital and resource allocations and
based on our evaluation of both external market factors and our position in each market, we decided
to discontinue our homebuilding operations in Northwest Florida. As a result, the information below
for continuing operations and the Southeast segment, excludes results from our Northwest Florida
market.
26
Table of Contents
The reportable homebuilding segments and all other homebuilding operations, not required to be
reported separately, include operations conducting business in the following states:
West: Arizona, California, Nevada and Texas
East: Delaware, Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee (Nashville) and Virginia
Southeast: Florida, Georgia, North Carolina (Raleigh), and South Carolina
East: Delaware, Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee (Nashville) and Virginia
Southeast: Florida, Georgia, North Carolina (Raleigh), and South Carolina
Managements evaluation of segment performance is based on segment operating income. Operating
income for our homebuilding segments is defined as homebuilding, land sale and other revenues less
home construction, land development and land sales expense, depreciation and amortization and
certain selling, general and administrative expenses which are incurred by or allocated to our
homebuilding segments. Operating income for our Pre-Owned segment is defined as rental and home
sale revenues less home repairs and operating expenses, home sales expense, depreciation and
amortization and certain selling, general and administrative expenses which are incurred by or
allocated to the segment. The accounting policies of our segments are those described in Note 1 and
Note 1 to our 2010 Annual Report. The following information is in thousands:
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Revenue |
||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 55,502 | $ | 117,764 | $ | 131,841 | $ | 284,327 | ||||||||
East |
77,895 | 143,855 | 186,527 | 312,823 | ||||||||||||
Southeast |
39,288 | 60,229 | 88,985 | 125,257 | ||||||||||||
Pre-Owned |
144 | | 144 | | ||||||||||||
Continuing Operations |
$ | 172,829 | $ | 321,848 | $ | 407,497 | $ | 722,407 | ||||||||
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Operating income/(loss) |
||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | (2,542 | ) | $ | 2,486 | $ | (28,567 | ) | $ | 6,128 | ||||||
East |
1,905 | 9,687 | 1,462 | 19,996 | ||||||||||||
Southeast |
(3,381 | ) | 4,700 | (4,194 | ) | (947 | ) | |||||||||
Pre-Owned |
(75 | ) | | (318 | ) | | ||||||||||
Segment total |
(4,093 | ) | 16,873 | (31,617 | ) | 25,177 | ||||||||||
Corporate and unallocated (a) |
(31,146 | ) | (36,259 | ) | (76,465 | ) | (95,726 | ) | ||||||||
Total operating loss |
(35,239 | ) | (19,386 | ) | (108,082 | ) | (70,549 | ) | ||||||||
Equity in income (loss) of
unconsolidated joint ventures |
63 | (10 | ) | 372 | (8,819 | ) | ||||||||||
Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt |
95 | (9,045 | ) | (2,909 | ) | 43,901 | ||||||||||
Other expense, net |
(17,085 | ) | (16,373 | ) | (46,616 | ) | (53,939 | ) | ||||||||
Loss from continuing
operations before income taxes |
$ | (52,166 | ) | $ | (44,814 | ) | $ | (157,235 | ) | $ | (89,406 | ) | ||||
27
Table of Contents
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 1,160 | $ | 1,425 | $ | 2,282 | $ | 3,869 | ||||||||
East |
544 | 839 | 1,517 | 2,439 | ||||||||||||
Southeast |
222 | 559 | 473 | 1,258 | ||||||||||||
Pre-Owned |
12 | | 13 | | ||||||||||||
Segment total |
1,938 | 2,823 | 4,285 | 7,566 | ||||||||||||
Corporate and unallocated (a) |
722 | 530 | 2,342 | 1,692 | ||||||||||||
Continuing Operations |
$ | 2,660 | $ | 3,353 | $ | 6,627 | $ | 9,258 | ||||||||
Nine Months Ended | ||||||||
June 30, | ||||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
Capital Expenditures |
||||||||
West |
$ | 3,197 | $ | 2,558 | ||||
East |
1,720 | 1,076 | ||||||
Southeast |
1,189 | 917 | ||||||
Pre-Owned |
4,801 | | ||||||
Corporate and unallocated |
1,200 | 2,002 | ||||||
Discontinued operations |
27 | 105 | ||||||
Consolidated total |
$ | 12,134 | $ | 6,658 | ||||
June 30, | September 30, | |||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
Assets |
||||||||
West |
$ | 679,101 | $ | 630,376 | ||||
East |
383,981 | 333,648 | ||||||
Southeast |
181,661 | 161,392 | ||||||
Pre-Owned |
4,843 | | ||||||
Corporate and unallocated (b) |
717,766 | 727,681 | ||||||
Discontinued operations |
37,717 | 49,805 | ||||||
Consolidated total |
$ | 2,005,069 | $ | 1,902,902 | ||||
(a) | Corporate and unallocated includes amortization of capitalized interest and numerous shared services functions that benefit all segments, the costs of which are not allocated to the operating segments reported above including information technology, national sourcing and purchasing, treasury, corporate finance, legal, branding and other national marketing costs. | |
(b) | Primarily consists of cash and cash equivalents, consolidated inventory not owned, deferred taxes, capitalized interest and other corporate items that are not allocated to the segments. |
28
Table of Contents
(12) Supplemental Guarantor Information
As discussed in Note 7, our obligations to pay principal, premium, if any, and interest under
certain debt are guaranteed on a joint and several basis by substantially all of our subsidiaries.
Certain of our immaterial subsidiaries do not guarantee our Senior Notes or our Secured Revolving
Credit Facility. The guarantees are full and unconditional and the guarantor subsidiaries are 100%
owned by Beazer Homes USA, Inc. We have determined that separate, full financial statements of the
guarantors would not be material to investors and, accordingly, supplemental financial information
for the guarantors is presented.
Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
Consolidating Balance Sheet Information
June 30, 2011
(in thousands)
Consolidating Balance Sheet Information
June 30, 2011
(in thousands)
Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||||||
Beazer Homes | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Consolidating | Beazer Homes | ||||||||||||||||
USA, Inc. | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Adjustments | USA, Inc. | ||||||||||||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 277,985 | $ | 324 | $ | 1,159 | $ | (4,823 | ) | $ | 274,645 | |||||||||
Restricted cash |
284,043 | 281 | | | 284,324 | |||||||||||||||
Accounts receivable |
| 32,177 | 8 | | 32,185 | |||||||||||||||
Income tax receivable |
2,835 | | | | 2,835 | |||||||||||||||
Owned inventory |
| 1,290,786 | | | 1,290,786 | |||||||||||||||
Land not owned under option
agreements |
| 22,571 | | | 22,571 | |||||||||||||||
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
773 | 8,762 | | | 9,535 | |||||||||||||||
Deferred tax
assets, net |
7,964 | | | | 7,964 | |||||||||||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
| 29,239 | | | 29,239 | |||||||||||||||
Investments in subsidiaries |
119,948 | | | (119,948 | ) | | ||||||||||||||
Intercompany |
1,108,288 | (1,116,863 | ) | 3,752 | 4,823 | | ||||||||||||||
Other assets |
19,547 | 28,408 | 3,030 | | 50,985 | |||||||||||||||
Total assets |
$ | 1,821,383 | $ | 295,685 | $ | 7,949 | $ | (119,948 | ) | $ | 2,005,069 | |||||||||
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||||||||||||||
Trade accounts payable |
$ | | $ | 69,221 | $ | | $ | | $ | 69,221 | ||||||||||
Other liabilities |
93,069 | 95,200 | 3,246 | | 191,515 | |||||||||||||||
Intercompany |
1,067 | | (1,067 | ) | | | ||||||||||||||
Obligations related to land not owned under option
agreements |
| 14,360 | | | 14,360 | |||||||||||||||
Total debt |
1,486,239 | 2,726 | | | 1,488,965 | |||||||||||||||
Total liabilities |
1,580,375 | 181,507 | 2,179 | | 1,764,061 | |||||||||||||||
Stockholders equity |
241,008 | 114,178 | 5,770 | (119,948 | ) | 241,008 | ||||||||||||||
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
$ | 1,821,383 | $ | 295,685 | $ | 7,949 | $ | (119,948 | ) | $ | 2,005,069 | |||||||||
29
Table of Contents
Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
Consolidating Balance Sheet Information
September 30, 2010
(in thousands)
Consolidating Balance Sheet Information
September 30, 2010
(in thousands)
Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||||||
Beazer Homes | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Consolidating | Beazer Homes | ||||||||||||||||
USA, Inc. | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Adjustments | USA, Inc. | ||||||||||||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 530,847 | $ | 8,343 | $ | 200 | $ | (2,269 | ) | $ | 537,121 | |||||||||
Restricted cash |
38,781 | 419 | | | 39,200 | |||||||||||||||
Accounts receivable |
| 32,632 | 15 | | 32,647 | |||||||||||||||
Income tax receivable |
7,684 | | | | 7,684 | |||||||||||||||
Owned inventory |
| 1,153,703 | | | 1,153,703 | |||||||||||||||
Land not owned under option
agreements |
| 49,958 | | | 49,958 | |||||||||||||||
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
773 | 7,948 | | | 8,721 | |||||||||||||||
Deferred tax
assets, net |
7,779 | | | | 7,779 | |||||||||||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
| 23,995 | | | 23,995 | |||||||||||||||
Investments in subsidiaries |
233,507 | | | (233,507 | ) | | ||||||||||||||
Intercompany |
846,471 | (857,409 | ) | 8,669 | 2,269 | | ||||||||||||||
Other assets |
20,434 | 17,163 | 4,497 | | 42,094 | |||||||||||||||
Total assets |
$ | 1,686,276 | $ | 436,752 | $ | 13,381 | $ | (233,507 | ) | $ | 1,902,902 | |||||||||
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||||||||||||||
Trade accounts payable |
$ | | $ | 53,418 | $ | | $ | | $ | 53,418 | ||||||||||
Other liabilities |
87,354 | 118,534 | 4,282 | | 210,170 | |||||||||||||||
Intercompany |
1,068 | | (1,068 | ) | | | ||||||||||||||
Obligations related to land not owned under option
agreements |
| 30,666 | | | 30,666 | |||||||||||||||
Total debt |
1,200,753 | 10,794 | | | 1,211,547 | |||||||||||||||
Total liabilities |
1,289,175 | 213,412 | 3,214 | | 1,505,801 | |||||||||||||||
Stockholders equity |
397,101 | 223,340 | 10,167 | (233,507 | ) | 397,101 | ||||||||||||||
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
$ | 1,686,276 | $ | 436,752 | $ | 13,381 | $ | (233,507 | ) | $ | 1,902,902 | |||||||||
30
Table of Contents
Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
Unaudited Consolidating Statement of Operations Information
(in thousands)
Unaudited Consolidating Statement of Operations Information
(in thousands)
Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||||||
Beazer Homes | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Consolidating | Beazer Homes | ||||||||||||||||
USA, Inc. | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Adjustments | USA, Inc. | ||||||||||||||||
Three Months Ended June 30, 2011 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue |
$ | | $ | 172,829 | $ | 286 | $ | (286 | ) | $ | 172,829 | |||||||||
Home construction and land sales expenses |
11,179 | 141,231 | | (286 | ) | 152,124 | ||||||||||||||
Inventory impairments and option contract abandonments |
380 | 6,490 | | | 6,870 | |||||||||||||||
Gross (loss) profit |
(11,559 | ) | 25,108 | 286 | | 13,835 | ||||||||||||||
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
| 46,388 | 26 | | 46,414 | |||||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
| 2,660 | | | 2,660 | |||||||||||||||
Operating (loss) income |
(11,559 | ) | (23,940 | ) | 260 | | (35,239 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in income of unconsolidated joint ventures |
| 63 | | | 63 | |||||||||||||||
Gain on extinguishment of debt |
95 | | | | 95 | |||||||||||||||
Other (expense) income, net |
(17,707 | ) | 609 | 13 | | (17,085 | ) | |||||||||||||
(Loss) income before income taxes |
(29,171 | ) | (23,268 | ) | 273 | | (52,166 | ) | ||||||||||||
(Benefit from) provision for income taxes |
(11,339 | ) | 14,832 | 96 | | 3,589 | ||||||||||||||
Equity in (loss) income of subsidiaries |
(37,923 | ) | | | 37,923 | | ||||||||||||||
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
(55,755 | ) | (38,100 | ) | 177 | 37,923 | (55,755 | ) | ||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
| (3,362 | ) | (3 | ) | | (3,365 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in (loss) of subsidiaries |
(3,365 | ) | | | 3,365 | | ||||||||||||||
Net (loss) income |
$ | (59,120 | ) | $ | (41,462 | ) | $ | 174 | $ | 41,288 | $ | (59,120 | ) | |||||||
Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
Unaudited Consolidating Statement of Operations Information
(in thousands)
Unaudited Consolidating Statement of Operations Information
(in thousands)
Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||||||
Beazer Homes | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Consolidating | Beazer Homes | ||||||||||||||||
USA, Inc. | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Adjustments | USA, Inc. | ||||||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended June 30, 2011 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue |
$ | | $ | 407,497 | $ | 819 | $ | (819 | ) | $ | 407,497 | |||||||||
Home construction and land sales expenses |
26,352 | 332,880 | | (819 | ) | 358,413 | ||||||||||||||
Inventory impairments and option contract abandonments |
1,789 | 23,542 | | | 25,331 | |||||||||||||||
Gross (loss) profit |
(28,141 | ) | 51,075 | 819 | | 23,753 | ||||||||||||||
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
| 125,118 | 90 | | 125,208 | |||||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
| 6,627 | | | 6,627 | |||||||||||||||
Operating (loss) income |
(28,141 | ) | (80,670 | ) | 729 | | (108,082 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in income of unconsolidated joint ventures |
| 372 | | | 372 | |||||||||||||||
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
(2,909 | ) | | | | (2,909 | ) | |||||||||||||
Other (expense) income, net |
(55,688 | ) | 9,015 | 57 | | (46,616 | ) | |||||||||||||
(Loss) income before income taxes |
(86,738 | ) | (71,283 | ) | 786 | | (157,235 | ) | ||||||||||||
(Benefit from) provision for income taxes |
(33,715 | ) | 34,010 | 275 | | 570 | ||||||||||||||
Equity in (loss) income of subsidiaries |
(104,782 | ) | | | 104,782 | | ||||||||||||||
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
(157,805 | ) | (105,293 | ) | 511 | 104,782 | (157,805 | ) | ||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
| (3,870 | ) | (8 | ) | | (3,878 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in loss of subsidiaries |
(3,878 | ) | | | 3,878 | | ||||||||||||||
Net (loss) income |
$ | (161,683 | ) | $ | (109,163 | ) | $ | 503 | $ | 108,660 | $ | (161,683 | ) | |||||||
31
Table of Contents
Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
Unaudited Consolidating Statement of Operations Information
(in thousands)
Unaudited Consolidating Statement of Operations Information
(in thousands)
Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||||||
Beazer Homes | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Consolidating | Beazer Homes | ||||||||||||||||
USA, Inc. | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Adjustments | USA, Inc. | ||||||||||||||||
Three Months Ended June 30, 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue |
$ | | $ | 321,566 | $ | 282 | $ | | $ | 321,848 | ||||||||||
Home construction and land sales expenses |
16,444 | 263,614 | | | 280,058 | |||||||||||||||
Inventory impairments and option contract abandonments |
196 | 4,777 | | | 4,973 | |||||||||||||||
Gross (loss) profit |
(16,640 | ) | 53,175 | 282 | | 36,817 | ||||||||||||||
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
| 52,824 | 26 | | 52,850 | |||||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
| 3,353 | | | 3,353 | |||||||||||||||
Operating (loss) income |
(16,640 | ) | (3,002 | ) | 256 | | (19,386 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
| (10 | ) | | | (10 | ) | |||||||||||||
Gain on extinguishment of debt |
(9,045 | ) | | | | (9,045 | ) | |||||||||||||
Other (expense) income, net |
(17,381 | ) | 997 | 11 | | (16,373 | ) | |||||||||||||
Income (loss) before income taxes |
(43,066 | ) | (2,015 | ) | 267 | | (44,814 | ) | ||||||||||||
(Benefit
from) provision for income taxes |
(16,258 | ) | (5,265 | ) | 93 | | (21,430 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in (loss) income of subsidiaries |
3,424 | | | (3,424 | ) | | ||||||||||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations |
(23,384 | ) | 3,250 | 174 | (3,424 | ) | (23,384 | ) | ||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
| (4,425 | ) | (7 | ) | | (4,432 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in loss of subsidiaries |
(4,432 | ) | | | 4,432 | | ||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | (27,816 | ) | $ | (1,175 | ) | $ | 167 | $ | 1,008 | $ | (27,816 | ) | |||||||
Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
Unaudited Consolidating Statement of Operations Information
(in thousands)
Unaudited Consolidating Statement of Operations Information
(in thousands)
Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||||||
Beazer Homes | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Consolidating | Beazer Homes | ||||||||||||||||
USA, Inc. | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Adjustments | USA, Inc. | ||||||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended June 30, 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue |
$ | | $ | 720,888 | $ | 1,519 | $ | | $ | 722,407 | ||||||||||
Home construction and land sales expenses |
37,898 | 581,623 | | | 619,521 | |||||||||||||||
Inventory impairments and option contract abandonments |
1,292 | 22,011 | | | 23,303 | |||||||||||||||
Gross (loss) profit |
(39,190 | ) | 117,254 | 1,519 | | 79,583 | ||||||||||||||
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
| 140,788 | 86 | | 140,874 | |||||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
| 9,258 | | | 9,258 | |||||||||||||||
Operating (loss) income |
(39,190 | ) | (32,792 | ) | 1,433 | | (70,549 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
| (8,819 | ) | | | (8,819 | ) | |||||||||||||
Gain on extinguishment of debt |
43,625 | 276 | | | 43,901 | |||||||||||||||
Other (expense) income, net |
(57,478 | ) | 3,487 | 52 | | (53,939 | ) | |||||||||||||
(Loss) income before income taxes |
(53,043 | ) | (37,848 | ) | 1,485 | | (89,406 | ) | ||||||||||||
(Benefit from) provision for income taxes |
(20,024 | ) | (97,451 | ) | 520 | | (116,955 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in (loss) income of subsidiaries |
60,568 | | | (60,568 | ) | | ||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
27,549 | 59,603 | 965 | (60,568 | ) | 27,549 | ||||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
| (2,057 | ) | (11 | ) | | (2,068 | ) | ||||||||||||
Equity in loss of subsidiaries |
(2,068 | ) | | | 2,068 | | ||||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 25,481 | $ | 57,546 | $ | 954 | $ | (58,500 | ) | $ | 25,481 | |||||||||
32
Table of Contents
Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
Unaudited Consolidating Statements of Cash Flow Information
(in thousands)
Unaudited Consolidating Statements of Cash Flow Information
(in thousands)
Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||||||
Beazer Homes | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Consolidating | Beazer Homes | ||||||||||||||||
USA, Inc. | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Adjustments | USA, Inc. | ||||||||||||||||
For the nine months ended June 30, 2011 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities |
$ | (33,549 | ) | $ | (245,010 | ) | $ | 941 | $ | | $ | (277,618 | ) | |||||||
Cash flows from investing activities: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Capital expenditures |
| (12,134 | ) | | | (12,134 | ) | |||||||||||||
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
| (1,763 | ) | | | (1,763 | ) | |||||||||||||
Increases in restricted cash |
(250,526 | ) | 452 | | | (250,074 | ) | |||||||||||||
Decreases in restricted cash |
5,539 | (589 | ) | | | 4,950 | ||||||||||||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(244,987 | ) | (14,034 | ) | | | (259,021 | ) | ||||||||||||
Cash flows from financing activities: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Repayment of debt |
(212,841 | ) | (914 | ) | | | (213,755 | ) | ||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of new debt |
246,387 | | | | 246,387 | |||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of cash secured loan |
247,368 | | | | 247,368 | |||||||||||||||
Debt issuance costs |
(5,130 | ) | | | | (5,130 | ) | |||||||||||||
Common stock redeemed |
(163 | ) | | | | (163 | ) | |||||||||||||
Excess tax
benefit from equity-based compensation |
(544 | ) | | | | (544 | ) | |||||||||||||
Advances to/from subsidiaries |
(249,403 | ) | 251,939 | 18 | (2,554 | ) | | |||||||||||||
Net cash
provided by (used in) by financing activities |
25,674 | 251,025 | 18 | (2,554 | ) | 274,163 | ||||||||||||||
(Decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
(252,862 | ) | (8,019 | ) | 959 | (2,554 | ) | (262,476 | ) | |||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
530,847 | 8,343 | 200 | (2,269 | ) | 537,121 | ||||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
$ | 277,985 | $ | 324 | $ | 1,159 | $ | (4,823 | ) | $ | 274,645 | |||||||||
Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||||||
Beazer Homes | Guarantor | Non-Guarantor | Consolidating | Beazer Homes | ||||||||||||||||
USA, Inc. | Subsidiaries | Subsidiaries | Adjustments | USA, Inc. | ||||||||||||||||
For the nine months ended June 30, 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities |
$ | (108,436 | ) | $ | 111,653 | $ | (2,440 | ) | $ | | $ | 777 | ||||||||
Cash flows from investing activities: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Capital expenditures |
| (6,658 | ) | | | (6,658 | ) | |||||||||||||
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
| (5,122 | ) | | | (5,122 | ) | |||||||||||||
Increases in restricted cash |
(25,156 | ) | (1,094 | ) | | | (26,250 | ) | ||||||||||||
Decreases in restricted cash |
31,880 | 1,223 | | | 33,103 | |||||||||||||||
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
6,724 | (11,651 | ) | | | (4,927 | ) | |||||||||||||
Cash flows from financing activities: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Repayment of debt |
(615,008 | ) | (2,125 | ) | | | (617,133 | ) | ||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of new debt |
373,238 | | | | 373,238 | |||||||||||||||
Debt issuance costs |
(9,296 | ) | | | | (9,296 | ) | |||||||||||||
Common stock redeemed |
(134 | ) | | | | (134 | ) | |||||||||||||
Common stock issued |
166,719 | | | | 166,719 | |||||||||||||||
Proceeds from the issuance of TEU prepaid stock
purchase contracts |
57,432 | | | | 57,432 | |||||||||||||||
Excess tax
benefit from equity-based compensation |
(2,057 | ) | | | | (2,057 | ) | |||||||||||||
Advances to/from subsidiaries |
105,413 | (104,898 | ) | (82 | ) | (433 | ) | | ||||||||||||
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
76,307 | (107,023 | ) | (82 | ) | (433 | ) | (31,231 | ) | |||||||||||
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents |
(25,405 | ) | (7,021 | ) | (2,522 | ) | (433 | ) | (35,381 | ) | ||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
495,692 | 11,482 | 2,915 | (2,750 | ) | 507,339 | ||||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
$ | 470,287 | $ | 4,461 | $ | 393 | $ | (3,183 | ) | $ | 471,958 | |||||||||
33
Table of Contents
(13) Discontinued Operations
We continually review each of our markets in order to refine our overall investment strategy and to
optimize capital and resource allocations in an effort to enhance our financial position and to
increase shareholder value. This review entails an evaluation of both external market factors and
our position in each market and over time, has resulted in the decision to discontinue certain of
our homebuilding operations. During fiscal 2008 and 2009, we discontinued our homebuilding
operations in Charlotte, NC, Cincinnati/Dayton, OH, Columbia, SC, Columbus, OH, Lexington, KY,
Denver, CO and Fresno, CA. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010, we substantially completed our
homebuilding operations in Jacksonville, Florida and Albuquerque, New Mexico, which were
historically reported in our Southeast and West segments, respectively. During the third quarter
of fiscal 2011, we decided to discontinue our homebuilding operations in Northwest Florida which
have historically been reported in our Southeast segment.
Up until September 30, 2010, we offered title services to our homebuyers in several of our markets.
Effective September 30, 2010, we had sold or discontinued all of our title services operations.
The operating results of our title services operations were previously reported in our Financial
Services segment.
We have classified the results of operations of our mortgage origination services, title services
and our exit markets as discontinued operations in the accompanying consolidated statements of
operations for all periods presented. Discontinued operations were not segregated in the
consolidated balance sheets or statements of cash flows. Therefore, amounts for certain captions
in the consolidated statements of cash flows will not agree with the respective data in the
consolidated statements of operations. The results of our discontinued operations in the
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010
were as follows (in thousands):
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Total revenue |
$ | 4,717 | $ | 18,280 | $ | 14,627 | $ | 35,390 | ||||||||
Home construction and land sales expenses |
4,002 | 14,629 | 11,236 | 28,929 | ||||||||||||
Inventory impairments and lot option abandonments |
2,494 | 152 | 2,814 | 978 | ||||||||||||
Gross (loss) profit |
(1,779 | ) | 3,499 | 577 | 5,483 | |||||||||||
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
1,137 | 2,442 | 3,553 | 6,666 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
282 | 271 | 406 | 537 | ||||||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
(3,198 | ) | 786 | (3,382 | ) | (1,720 | ) | |||||||||
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
(164 | ) | (12,482 | ) | (513 | ) | (15,226 | ) | ||||||||
Other income, net |
| 33 | 26 | 105 | ||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations before income taxes |
(3,362 | ) | (11,663 | ) | (3,869 | ) | (16,841 | ) | ||||||||
Provision (benefit) from income taxes |
3 | (7,231 | ) | 9 | (14,773 | ) | ||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
$ | (3,365 | ) | $ | (4,432 | ) | $ | (3,878 | ) | $ | (2,068 | ) | ||||
Assets and liabilities from discontinued operations at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010,
consist of the following (in thousands):
June 30, | September 30, | |||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | | $ | 411 | ||||
Accounts receivable |
358 | 2,214 | ||||||
Inventory |
36,746 | 46,280 | ||||||
Other assets |
613 | 900 | ||||||
Assets of discontinued operations |
$ | 37,717 | $ | 49,805 | ||||
LIABILITIES |
||||||||
Trade accounts payable and other liabilities |
$ | 3,983 | $ | 8,727 | ||||
Accrued warranty expenses |
4,568 | 6,279 | ||||||
Other secured notes payable |
| 857 | ||||||
Liabilities of discontinued operations |
$ | 8,551 | $ | 15,863 | ||||
34
Table of Contents
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Executive Overview and Outlook
The national economic environment continues to be characterized by high unemployment levels and
consumer and business uncertainty regarding the health of the economy. Against this backdrop,
prospective home buyers have been further challenged by evidence of falling home prices, a
significant current and anticipated future inventory of distressed homes for sale, and limited
availability of mortgage credit. Although home prices and home ownership costs are very low
compared to historical levels, and despite the fact that for many consumers it is less expensive to
be a home owner than an apartment renter, demand for new homes has been exceptionally weak for
several years.
Throughout the homebuilding recession we have remained disciplined in our approach to the business.
Among other actions we have:
| Exited numerous markets that we determined were not core to our long-term profitability objectives, including Northwest Florida this quarter; | ||
| Reduced overhead expenses by eliminating headcount and centralizing or regionalizing various functional activities; | ||
| Value-engineered our homes to reduce direct construction costs; | ||
| Limited our construction of unsold homes to align our inventory with anticipated near-term demand; and | ||
| Scaled back our land and land development spending. |
Each of these efforts has been undertaken to allow the company to generate or conserve liquidity
while maintaining a substantial homebuilding presence in large markets to participate in the
eventual housing recovery. We expect to continue this disciplined approach to managing our
business during these uncertain times as we strive toward returning to profitability.
During the quarter ending March 31, 2011, the Company launched a Pre-Owned Homes Division which we
charged with acquiring, improving and renting out recently built, previously owned homes within
select communities in markets in which the Company currently operates. By augmenting the sale of
newly constructed homes with rental options of previously owned homes, we expect to appeal to a
broader range of consumers. Because the primary source of Pre-Owned Homes will be distressed sales,
typically foreclosures or short sales, we anticipate acquiring homes at a discount to their
replacement cost. This Division leverages our strengths as a homebuilder and knowledge of our
markets, and offers an attractive investment proposition for a portion of the Companys cash
reserve. Since the formation of this division, we have determined that the business opportunity is
substantial and that the Company is well positioned to significantly increase the scale of
operations with rental homes. As such, we are in the process of
identifying additional third-party sources of
capital to augment the Companys resources. We
expect to limit the Companys investment in
this division to no more than $20 million. Pre-Owned Homes is presented as a reportable
segment in the management discussions and analysis that follow.
Despite our confidence in the eventual growth prospects for our business, we expect to maintain a
significant liquidity position. This may limit the speed and scale of our investments, which could
in turn result in a slower recovery of profitability. Additionally, from time to time we may take
steps to refine our capitalization, which could increase or decrease liquidity. These steps could
include the
35
Table of Contents
retirement or purchase of our outstanding debt, through cash purchases or exchange
offers for other debt or equity instruments, in open market or privately negotiated transactions or
otherwise. There can be no assurances that we will be able to complete any of these transactions in
the future on favorable terms or at all.
While our visibility into the economic conditions for the remainder of fiscal 2011 and into fiscal
2012 is limited, we believe that we will benefit from increases in housing starts in the coming
years. In the meantime, we are taking the steps necessary to drive improvement in homebuilding
revenues, while maintaining an efficient cost structure, looking for new opportunities to generate
profits and investing for future growth, all with the intention to accelerate our return to
profitability.
Critical Accounting Policies: Some of our critical accounting policies require the use of judgment
in their application or require estimates of inherently uncertain matters. Although our accounting
policies are in compliance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America, a change in the facts and circumstances of the underlying transactions could significantly
change the application of the accounting policies and the resulting financial statement impact. As
disclosed in our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010, our most
critical accounting policies relate to inventory valuation (inventory held for development and land
held for sale), homebuilding revenues and costs, warranty reserves, investments in unconsolidated
joint ventures and income tax valuation allowances. Since September 30, 2010, there have been no
significant changes to those critical accounting policies.
Seasonal and Quarterly Variability: Our homebuilding operating cycle generally reflects escalating
new order activity in the second and third fiscal quarters and increased closings in the third and
fourth fiscal quarters. However, we continue to experience challenging conditions in most of our
markets which contribute to decreased revenues and closings as compared to prior periods including prior quarters, thereby
reducing typical seasonal variations. In addition, the expiration of the $8,000 First Time
Homebuyer Tax Credit as of April 2010 appears to have incentivized certain homebuyers to purchase
homes during the first half of fiscal 2010 and accelerated closings into the third quarter of
fiscal 2010, further impacting prior period comparisons to the first, second and third quarters of
fiscal 2011.
36
Table of Contents
RESULTS OF CONTINUING OPERATIONS:
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | 2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | ||||||||||||
Revenues: |
||||||||||||||||
Homebuilding |
$ | 168,444 | $ | 321,387 | $ | 398,887 | $ | 717,077 | ||||||||
Land sales and other |
4,385 | 461 | 8,610 | 5,330 | ||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 172,829 | $ | 321,848 | $ | 407,497 | $ | 722,407 | ||||||||
Gross profit: |
||||||||||||||||
Homebuilding |
$ | 11,877 | $ | 36,369 | $ | 20,127 | $ | 76,899 | ||||||||
Land sales and other |
1,958 | 448 | 3,626 | 2,684 | ||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 13,835 | $ | 36,817 | $ | 23,753 | $ | 79,583 | ||||||||
Gross margin: |
||||||||||||||||
Homebuilding |
7.1 | % | 11.3 | % | 5.0 | % | 10.7 | % | ||||||||
Land sales and other |
44.7 | % | 97.2 | % | 42.1 | % | 50.4 | % | ||||||||
Total |
8.0 | % | 11.4 | % | 5.8 | % | 11.0 | % | ||||||||
Selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses: |
$ | 46,414 | $ | 52,850 | $ | 125,208 | $ | 140,874 | ||||||||
SG&A as a percentage of total revenue |
26.9 | % | 16.4 | % | 30.7 | % | 19.5 | % | ||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
$ | 2,660 | $ | 3,353 | $ | 6,627 | $ | 9,258 | ||||||||
Equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated
joint ventures from: |
||||||||||||||||
Income (loss) from joint venture activity |
$ | 63 | $ | 18 | $ | 464 | $ | (38 | ) | |||||||
Impairment of joint venture investments |
| (28 | ) | (92 | ) | (8,781 | ) | |||||||||
Equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated joint ventures |
$ | 63 | $ | (10 | ) | $ | 372 | $ | (8,819 | ) | ||||||
Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt |
$ | 95 | $ | (9,045 | ) | $ | (2,909 | ) | $ | 43,901 |
Items impacting comparability between periods
The following items impact the comparability of our results of operations between the three and
nine months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010: inventory impairments and abandonments, certain selling,
general and administrative costs and gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt. In addition, during the
third quarter of fiscal 2011, we decided to discontinue homebuilding operations in our Northwest
Florida market and during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010, we exited or discontinued our title
services operations and our New Mexico and Jacksonville, Florida homebuilding operations. We have
reclassified the previously reported operating results of these operations for all periods
presented to discontinued operations. We have also reclassified the June 30, 2010 three and
nine-month operating results of our Raleigh market from the East to the Southeast segment in
alignment with the basis that is used by management for evaluating segment performance and resource
allocations.
Inventory Impairments and Abandonments. The decrease in gross margin over the prior year was
impacted by an increase in non-cash pre-tax inventory impairments and option contract abandonments
from $5.0 million in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 to $6.9 million in fiscal 2011. The projected
cash flows used to evaluate the fair value of inventory are significantly impacted by changes in
market conditions including decreased sales prices, the change in sales prices and changes in
absorption estimates. The impairments recorded on our held for development inventory primarily
resulted from the continued decline in the homebuilding environment across our submarkets. During
the third quarter of fiscal 2011, although certain markets showed limited improvement from the
prior years, for certain other communities we determined it was prudent to reduce sales prices or
further increase sales incentives in response to factors including competitive market conditions.
Specifically, during the third quarter of fiscal 2011, in certain of our markets our competitors
further reduced prices or increased sales incentives to drive absorption in response to overall market conditions and the desire to capture prospective
homebuyers who, absent the price reductions, appear to lack an urgency to buy and have lengthened
their decision-making processes. In future periods, we may again determine that it is prudent to
reduce sales prices, further increase sales incentives or reduce absorption rates which may lead to
additional impairments, which could be material.
37
Table of Contents
The impairments on land held for sale below represent further write downs of these properties to
net realizable value, less estimated costs to sell and are as a result of challenging market
conditions and our review of recent comparable transactions. The negative impairments for the nine
months ended June 30, 2011 are due to adjustments to accruals for estimated selling costs related
to either our strategic decision to develop a previously held-for-sale land position or revised
estimates based on pending sales transactions.
In addition, over the past few years, we have determined the proper course of action with respect
to a number of communities within each homebuilding segment was to abandon the remaining lots under
option and to write-off the deposits securing the option takedowns, as well as pre-acquisition
costs. The abandonment charges below relate to our decision to abandon certain option contracts
that no longer fit in our long-term strategic plan.
The following tables set forth, by reportable homebuilding segment, the inventory impairments and
lot option abandonment charges recorded (in thousands):
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||
Development projects and homes in process (Held for Development) | ||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 1,571 | $ | 3,361 | $ | 17,556 | $ | 10,306 | ||||||||
East |
759 | 463 | 988 | 2,581 | ||||||||||||
Southeast |
3,435 | 48 | 3,557 | 6,770 | ||||||||||||
Unallocated |
531 | 568 | 2,139 | 2,040 | ||||||||||||
Subtotal |
$ | 6,296 | $ | 4,440 | $ | 24,240 | $ | 21,697 | ||||||||
Land Held for Sale |
||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | | $ | | $ | (51 | ) | $ | 1,061 | |||||||
East |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Southeast |
| | 169 | | ||||||||||||
Subtotal |
$ | | $ | | $ | 118 | $ | 1,061 | ||||||||
Lot Option Abandonments |
||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 32 | $ | 526 | $ | 116 | $ | 533 | ||||||||
East |
462 | 7 | 595 | 8 | ||||||||||||
Southeast |
80 | | 262 | 4 | ||||||||||||
Subtotal |
$ | 574 | $ | 533 | $ | 973 | $ | 545 | ||||||||
Continuing Operations |
$ | 6,870 | $ | 4,973 | $ | 25,331 | $ | 23,303 | ||||||||
The estimated fair value of our impaired inventory at each period end, the number of lots and
number of communities impaired in each period are set forth in the table below as follows ($ in
thousands). Individual communities impaired multiple times will be included in each period of
impairment:
Estimated Fair Value of Impaired | Communities | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarter Ended | Inventory at Period End | Lots Impaired | Impaired | |||||||||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||
June 30 |
$ | 11,672 | $ | 5,427 | 370 | 131 | 6 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||
March 31 |
$ | 29,244 | $ | 24,528 | 730 | 497 | 7 | 12 | ||||||||||||||||
December 31 |
$ | | $ | 13,997 | | 379 | | 7 |
Selling, General and Administrative Expense Items. The decrease in SG&A expense for the three and
nine months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the comparable periods of the prior year is
primarily due to reductions in selling expenses directly related to the 49.2% and 43.3% decrease in home closings and continued cost reductions realized as a result of our comprehensive
review of SG&A costs in an effort to further streamline our operations, offset partially by $7.3
million in severance-related costs in association with the elimination of approximately 120 full
time positions this quarter and contractual obligations related to the departure of our former
Chief Executive Officer. SG&A expense for the nine months ended June 30, 2011 is also impacted by
a $4.0 million charge related to our impairment of our future land purchase rights (see Note 3 to
the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for additional information).
Gain (Loss) on Extinguishment of Debt. During the nine months ended June 30, 2011, we redeemed or
repurchased in open market transactions an aggregate of $209.5 million of our outstanding Senior
Notes for an aggregate purchase price of $210.0 million, plus
38
Table of Contents
accrued and unpaid interest as of the
purchase date. These transactions resulted in a loss on extinguishment of debt of $2.9 million,
net of unamortized discounts and debt issuance costs related to these notes. During the nine
months ended June 30, 2010, we recognized a $43.9 million net gain related to a gain on the partial
exchange and substantial modification of terms of $75 million of our Junior Subordinated Notes due
2036 offset partially by a loss on extinguishment on the repurchase of $585.4 million of Senior
Notes.
Other expense, net. For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011, other expense, net includes
$17.7 million and $55.7 million of interest expense not qualified for capitalization respectively.
Other expense for the nine months ended June 30, 2011 is net of the $6.8 million benefit recognized
related to Mr. McCarthys settlement with the SEC in the second quarter. For the three and nine
months ended June 30, 2010, other expense, net includes $17.4 million and $57.5 million of interest
expense not qualified for capitalization respectively.
Income taxes. Our income tax assets and liabilities and related effective tax rate are affected by
various factors, the most significant of which is the valuation allowance recorded against
substantially all of our deferred tax assets. Due to the effect of our valuation allowance
adjustments beginning in fiscal 2008, a comparison of our annual effective tax rates must consider
the changes in our valuation allowance.
Our overall effective tax rates from continuing operations were 6.9%, and 0.4% for three and nine
months ended June 30, 2011, respectively compared to -47.8% and -130.8% for the three and nine
months ended June 30, 2010. The change in our effective tax rates for the three and nine months
ended June 30, 2011 were primarily attributable to changes in our valuation allowance and our net
deferred tax asset. The -130.8% effective tax rate for nine months ended June 30, 2010 was
primarily attributable to the five-year carryback of federal tax losses due to the expanded NOL
carryback provisions contained in the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009,
enacted on November 9, 2009. These expanded NOL carryback provisions allowed us to carry back our
fiscal 2009 tax losses to prior years. Absent the new legislation, the fiscal 2009 federal tax
loss would have been carried forward to be available to offset future taxable income and the
Company would have maintained a valuation allowance against the resulting deferred tax asset. Any
losses that the Company was not able to carry back to earlier years were offset by a valuation
allowance.
Discontinued Operations. We have classified the results of operations of our mortgage origination
services, title services and our exit markets as discontinued operations in the accompanying
unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations for the periods presented. All statement
of operations information in the table above and the management discussion and analysis that follow
exclude the results of discontinued operations. Discontinued operations were not segregated in the
unaudited condensed consolidated statements of cash flows or the unaudited condensed consolidated
balance sheets. See Note 13 to the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for
additional information related to our discontinued operations.
Additional operating data related to discontinued operations is as follows:
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||||||||||
(dollars in thousands) | 2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | ||||||||||||
Closings |
23 | 85 | 73 | 154 | ||||||||||||
New Orders |
31 | 55 | 77 | 150 | ||||||||||||
Homebuilding revenues |
$ | 4,717 | $ | 17,421 | $ | 14,186 | $ | 33,083 | ||||||||
Land and lot sale revenues |
| 186 | 435 | 886 | ||||||||||||
Mortgage & title revenues |
| 673 | 6 | 1,421 | ||||||||||||
Total revenue |
$ | 4,717 | $ | 18,280 | $ | 14,627 | $ | 35,390 | ||||||||
39
Table of Contents
Three and Nine Month Periods Ended June 30, 2011 Compared to the Three and Nine Month Periods Ended
June 30, 2010
Segment Results Continuing Operations
Unit Data by Segment
Unit Data by Segment
Three Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Orders, net | Cancellation Rates | Backlog | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | 2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
447 | 354 | 26.3 | % | 26.5 | % | 35.6 | % | 637 | 406 | 56.9 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
East |
466 | 398 | 17.1 | % | 26.8 | % | 28.5 | % | 837 | 508 | 64.8 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
302 | 230 | 31.3 | % | 15.9 | % | 18.4 | % | 346 | 220 | 57.3 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
1,215 | 982 | 23.7 | % | 24.3 | % | 29.3 | % | 1,820 | 1,134 | 60.5 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Orders, net | Cancellation Rates | Backlog | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | 2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
1,038 | 1,353 | -23.3 | % | 27.0 | % | 26.4 | % | 637 | 406 | 56.9 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
East |
1,203 | 1,250 | -3.8 | % | 26.0 | % | 23.8 | % | 837 | 508 | 64.8 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
680 | 685 | -0.7 | % | 14.9 | % | 14.9 | % | 346 | 220 | 57.3 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
2,921 | 3,288 | -11.2 | % | 24.1 | % | 23.2 | % | 1,820 | 1,134 | 60.5 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Backlog above reflects the number of homes for which the Company has entered into a sales contract
with a customer but has not yet delivered the home. The aggregate dollar value of homes in backlog
as of June 30, 2011 and 2010 was $431.2 million and $279.3 million, respectively.
As we expected, market conditions in the homebuilding industry became challenging after the
expiration of the tax credit at the end of April 2010, contributing to our 11.2% decrease in net
new orders year-to-date compared to the prior year. However, due primarily to the acceleration of
new orders into the first and second quarters of fiscal 2010 and the opening of new communities
during the fiscal 2011, we recognized a 23.7% increase in net new orders for third quarter of
fiscal 2011 as compared to the prior year. This quarters 1,215 net new orders is also a modest
increase from our second quarter of fiscal 2011. Fiscal year-to-date, our Houston and Southern
California markets in our West segment and Virginia in our East segment have been impacted by the
closeout of communities that were performing at higher than average absorption rates in the prior
year and by the timing of new communities opening for sales. In addition, despite historically low
interest rates and increased affordability which usually entice more prospective buyers to purchase
a new home, low consumer confidence, high unemployment rates and a high number of existing and
projected foreclosures continue to have a damaging impact on the market. As a result, potential
buyers still appear to lack an urgency to buy and have lengthened their decision-making processes.
In many of our markets, appraisals continue to be negatively impacted by foreclosure comparables
which put additional pricing pressures on all home sales and limit financing availability.
The increase in total units in backlog and the aggregate dollar value of homes in backlog for our
continuing operations at June 30, 2011 compared to the prior year, related directly to our increase
in net new orders and the impact of the June 30, 2010 closing deadline for the prior year tax
credits which accelerated typical fourth quarter closings into the third quarter of fiscal 2010.
If we are unable to sustain or increase this level of backlog, we will experience less revenue in
the future which could also result in additional asset impairment charges and lower levels of
liquidity. However, we currently expect new orders and backlog to increase as the availability of
mortgage loans further stabilizes, the inventory of new and used homes decreases and consumer
confidence in the economic recovery increases.
40
Table of Contents
Homebuilding Revenues and Average Selling Price. The table below summarizes homebuilding revenues,
the average selling prices of our homes and closings by reportable segment (in thousands):
Three Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Homebuilding Revenues | Average Selling Price | Closings | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | 2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | 2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 53,549 | $ | 117,764 | -54.5 | % | $ | 196.2 | $ | 192.1 | 2.1 | % | 273 | 613 | -55.5 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
East |
76,226 | 143,855 | -47.0 | % | 245.1 | 230.9 | 6.1 | % | 311 | 623 | -50.1 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
38,669 | 59,768 | -35.3 | % | 186.8 | 185.6 | 0.6 | % | 207 | 322 | -35.7 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 168,444 | $ | 321,387 | -47.6 | % | $ | 213.0 | $ | 206.3 | 3.2 | % | 791 | 1,558 | -49.2 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Homebuilding Revenues | Average Selling Price | Closings | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | 2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | 2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 128,885 | $ | 280,933 | -54.1 | % | $ | 192.4 | $ | 203.9 | -5.6 | % | 670 | 1,378 | -51.4 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
East |
182,367 | 311,362 | -41.4 | % | 249.1 | 244.4 | 1.9 | % | 732 | 1,274 | -42.5 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
87,635 | 124,782 | -29.8 | % | 186.1 | 192.0 | -3.1 | % | 471 | 650 | -27.5 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 398,887 | $ | 717,077 | -44.4 | % | $ | 213.0 | $ | 217.2 | -1.9 | % | 1,873 | 3,302 | -43.3 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Homebuilding revenues decreased for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 compared to the
comparable period of the prior year due to a decrease in closings. The decrease in closings is
attributable to the seasonally unusually high closings in the fiscal 2010 third quarter related to
the expiration of the homebuyer tax credit in June 2010 and the current market conditions in which
potential buyers appear to lack an urgency to buy and have lengthened their decision-making
processes. The change in average selling prices (ASP) was primarily attributable to the mix in
closings between products and among communities as compared to the prior year. The fiscal
year-to-date ASP was also impacted by our efforts to market our homes competitively with local
competition and to reduce spec inventory with discounted sales prices and incentives in certain
markets in the first half of the year.
Homebuilding Gross Profit. Homebuilding gross profit is defined as homebuilding revenues less home
cost of sales (which includes land and land development costs, home construction costs, capitalized
interest, indirect costs of construction, estimated warranty costs, closing costs and inventory
impairment and lot option abandonment charges). Corporate and unallocated costs include the
amortization of capitalized interest and indirect construction costs. The following table sets
forth our homebuilding gross profit and gross margin by reportable segment and total homebuilding
gross profit and gross margin, and such amounts excluding inventory impairments and abandonments
and interest amortized to cost of sales for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011, and
2010. Total homebuilding gross profit and gross margin excluding inventory impairments and
abandonments and interest amortized to cost of sales are not GAAP financial measures. These
measures should not be considered alternatives to homebuilding gross profit determined in
accordance with GAAP as an indicator of operating performance. The magnitude and volatility of
non-cash inventory impairment and abandonment charges for the Company, and for other home builders,
have been significant in recent periods and, as such, have made financial analysis of our industry
more difficult. Homebuilding metrics excluding these charges, and other similar presentations by
analysts and other companies, is frequently used to assist investors in understanding and comparing
the operating characteristics of home building activities by eliminating many of the differences in
companies respective level of impairments and levels of debt. Management believes these non-GAAP
measures enable holders of our securities to better understand the cash implications of our
operating performance and our ability to service our debt obligations as they currently exist and
as additional indebtedness is incurred in the future. These measures are also useful internally,
helping management compare operating results and as a measure of the level of cash which may be
available for discretionary spending.
41
Table of Contents
Three Months Ended June 30, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Impairments & | HB Gross | HB Gross | Interest | HB Gross Profit | HB Gross Margin | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HB Gross | HB Gross | Abandonments | Profit w/o | Margin w/o | Amortized to | w/o I&A and | w/o I&A and | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | Profit (Loss) | Margin | (I&A) | I&A | I&A | COS | Interest | Interest | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 7,023 | 13.1 | % | $ | 1,603 | $ | 8,626 | 16.1 | % | $ | | $ | 8,626 | 16.1 | % | ||||||||||||||||
East |
10,645 | 14.0 | % | 1,221 | 11,866 | 15.6 | % | | 11,866 | 15.6 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
3,141 | 8.1 | % | 3,515 | 6,656 | 17.2 | % | | 6,656 | 17.2 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Corporate & unallocated |
(8,932 | ) | 531 | (8,401 | ) | 11,179 | 2,778 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total homebuilding |
$ | 11,877 | 7.1 | % | $ | 6,870 | $ | 18,747 | 11.1 | % | $ | 11,179 | $ | 29,926 | 17.8 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Three Months Ended June 30, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Impairments & | HB Gross | HB Gross | Interest | HB Gross Profit | HB Gross Margin | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HB Gross | HB Gross | Abandonments | Profit w/o | Margin w/o | Amortized to | w/o I&A and | w/o I&A and | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | Profit | Margin | (I&A) | I&A | I&A | COS | Interest | Interest | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 18,052 | 15.3 | % | $ | 3,887 | $ | 21,939 | 18.6 | % | $ | | $ | 21,939 | 18.6 | % | ||||||||||||||||
East |
23,083 | 16.0 | % | 470 | 23,553 | 16.4 | % | | 23,553 | 16.4 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
10,858 | 18.2 | % | 48 | 10,906 | 18.2 | % | | 10,906 | 18.2 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Corporate & unallocated |
(15,624 | ) | 568 | (15,056 | ) | 16,444 | 1,388 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total homebuilding |
$ | 36,369 | 11.3 | % | $ | 4,973 | $ | 41,342 | 12.9 | % | $ | 16,444 | $ | 57,786 | 18.0 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended June 30, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Impairments & | HB Gross | HB Gross | Interest | HB Gross Profit | HB Gross Margin | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HB Gross | HB Gross | Abandonments | Profit w/o | Margin w/o | Amortized to | w/o I&A and | w/o I&A and | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | Profit | Margin | (I&A) | I&A | I&A | COS | Interest | Interest | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 2,609 | 2.0 | % | $ | 17,621 | $ | 20,230 | 15.7 | % | $ | | $ | 20,230 | 15.7 | % | ||||||||||||||||
East |
26,479 | 14.5 | % | 1,583 | 28,062 | 15.4 | % | | 28,062 | 15.4 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
10,520 | 12.0 | % | 3,988 | 14,508 | 16.6 | % | | 14,508 | 16.6 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Corporate & unallocated |
(19,481 | ) | 2,139 | (17,342 | ) | 26,352 | 9,010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total homebuilding |
$ | 20,127 | 5.0 | % | $ | 25,331 | $ | 45,458 | 11.4 | % | $ | 26,352 | $ | 71,810 | 18.0 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended June 30, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Impairments & | HB Gross | HB Gross | Interest | HB Gross Profit | HB Gross Margin | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HB Gross | HB Gross | Abandonments | Profit w/o | Margin w/o | Amortized to | w/o I&A and | w/o I&A and | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | Profit | Margin | (I&A) | I&A | I&A | COS | Interest | Interest | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 44,985 | 16.0 | % | $ | 11,900 | $ | 56,885 | 20.2 | % | $ | | $ | 56,885 | 20.2 | % | ||||||||||||||||
East |
49,622 | 15.9 | % | 2,589 | 52,211 | 16.8 | % | | 52,211 | 16.8 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
11,938 | 9.6 | % | 6,774 | 18,712 | 15.0 | % | | 18,712 | 15.0 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Corporate & unallocated |
(29,646 | ) | 2,040 | (27,606 | ) | 37,898 | 10,292 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total homebuilding |
$ | 76,899 | 10.7 | % | $ | 23,303 | $ | 100,202 | 14.0 | % | $ | 37,898 | $ | 138,100 | 19.3 | % | ||||||||||||||||
For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the prior year, the slight
decrease in gross margins without I&A and interest across all segments is primarily due to
decreased revenues and the impact of those reduced revenues on indirect construction costs which
are relatively fixed in the short-term. The nine months ended June 30, 2010 also benefited from
$4.6 million of non-recurring warranty recoveries.
In a given quarter, our reported gross margins arise from both communities previously impaired
and communities not previously impaired. In addition as indicated above, certain gross margin
amounts arise from recoveries of prior period costs, including warranty items that are not directly
tied to communities generating revenue in the period. Home closings from communities previously
impaired would, in most instances, generate very low or negative gross margins prior to the impact
of the previously recognized impairment. Gross margins at each home closing are higher for a
particular community after an impairment because the carrying value of the
42
Table of Contents
underlying land was previously reduced to the present value of future cash flows as a result
of the impairment, leading to lower cost of
sales at the home closing. This improvement in gross margin resulting from one or more prior
impairments is frequently referred to in the aggregate as the impairment turn or flow-back of
impairments within the reporting period. The amount of this impairment turn may exceed the gross
margin for an individual impaired asset if the gross margin for that asset prior to the impairment
would have been negative. The extent to which this impairment turn is greater than the reported
gross margin for the individual asset is related to the specific historical cost basis of that
individual asset.
The asset valuations which result from our impairment calculations are based on discounted cash
flow analyses and are not derived by simply applying prospective gross margins to individual
communities. As such, impaired communities may have gross margins that are somewhat higher or lower
than the gross margin for unimpaired communities. The mix of home closings in any particular
quarter varies to such an extent that comparisons between previously impaired and never impaired
communities would not be a reliable way to ascertain profitability trends or to assess the accuracy
of previous valuation estimates. In addition, since any amount of impairment turn is tied to
individual lots in specific communities it will vary considerably from period to period. As a
result of these factors, we review the impairment turn impact on gross margins on a trailing
twelve-month basis rather than a quarterly basis as a way of considering whether our impairment
calculations are resulting in gross margins for impaired communities that are comparable to our
unimpaired communities. For the trailing 12-month period, the homebuilding gross margin from our
continuing operations was 3.4% and excluding interest and inventory impairments, it was 17.3%. For
the same trailing 12-month period, homebuilding gross margins were as follows in those communities
that have previously been impaired:
Homebuilding Gross Margin from previously impaired communities: |
||||
Pre-impairment turn gross margin |
-12.6 | % | ||
Impact of interest amortized to COS related to these communities |
6.8 | % | ||
Pre-impairment turn gross margin, excluding interest amortization |
-5.8 | % | ||
Impact of impairment turns |
21.3 | % | ||
Gross margin (post impairment turns), excluding interest |
15.5 | % | ||
Land Sales and Other Revenues. Land sales and other revenues relate to land and lots sold that did
not fit within our homebuilding programs and strategic plans in these markets, net fees we received
for general contractor services we performed on behalf of a third party and broker fees and rental
revenues earned by our Pre-Owned operations. The table below summarizes land sales and other
revenues and gross profit by reportable segment for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2011
and 2010 (in thousands) n/m in the table below indicates the percentage is not meaningful:
Land Sales & Other Revenues | Land Sales and Other Gross Profit | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Three Months Ended June 30, | Three Months Ended June 30, | |||||||||||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | 2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | |||||||||||||||||||
West |
$ | 1,953 | $ | | n/m | $ | 640 | $ | (13 | ) | n/m | |||||||||||||
East |
1,669 | | n/m | 577 | | n/m | ||||||||||||||||||
Southeast |
619 | 461 | 34.3 | % | 620 | 461 | 34.5 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Pre-Owned |
144 | | n/m | 121 | | n/m | ||||||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 4,385 | $ | 461 | 851.2 | % | $ | 1,958 | $ | 448 | 337.1 | % | ||||||||||||
Land Sales & Other Revenues | Land Sales and Other Gross Profit | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended June 30, | Nine Months Ended June 30, | |||||||||||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 11 v10 | 2011 | 2010 | 11 v 10 | |||||||||||||||||||
West
|
$ | 2,956 | $ | 3,394 | -12.9 | % | $ | 1,034 | $ | 356 | 190.4 | % | ||||||||||||
East
|
4,160 | 1,461 | 184.7 | % | 1,241 | 1,853 | -33.0 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Southeast
|
1,350 | 475 | 184.2 | % | 1,238 | 475 | 160.6 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Pre-Owned
|
144 | | n/m | 113 | | n/m | ||||||||||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 8,610 | $ | 5,330 | 61.5 | % | $ | 3,626 | $ | 2,684 | 35.1 | % | ||||||||||||
43
Table of Contents
Our fiscal 2011 land sales and other revenue and gross profit in our Southeast segment include net
fees received for general contractor services we performed on behalf of a third party.
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities. We are exposed to fluctuations in interest rates.
From time to time, we enter into derivative agreements to manage interest costs and hedge against
risks associated with fluctuating interest rates. As of June 30, 2011, we were not a party to any
such derivative agreements. We do not enter into or hold derivatives for trading or speculative
purposes.
Liquidity and Capital Resources. Our sources of liquidity include, but are not limited to, cash
from operations, proceeds from Senior Notes and other bank borrowings, the issuance of equity and
equity-linked securities and other external sources of funds. Our short-term and long-term
liquidity depend primarily upon our level of net income, working capital management (cash, accounts
receivable, accounts payable and other liabilities) and available credit facilities.
Our liquidity position consisted of $274.6 million in cash and cash equivalents plus $284.3million
of restricted cash as of June 30, 2011. We expect to maintain a significant liquidity position
during the remainder of fiscal 2011 and during fiscal 2012, subject to changes in market conditions
that would alter our expectations for land and land development expenditures or capital market
transactions which could increase or decrease our cash balance on a quarterly basis.
During the nine months ended June 30, 2011, our net cash used in operating activities was $277.6
million compared to net cash provided by operating activities of $0.8 million during the comparable
period of the prior year. Our net cash provided by operating activities in the prior year was due
to the receipt of federal income tax refunds totaling $102.1 million which offset cash used
purchase inventory and maintain our operations. Our net cash from operating activities was also
impacted by an increase in inventory (excluding inventory impairments and abandonment charges and
decreases in consolidated inventory not owned) of $150.6 million in fiscal 2011 compared to a
decrease of $20.4 million in fiscal 2010 related primarily to our strategic investments in land as
we closed out older communities and positioned the Company to open new communities. Cash flow from
operations was also impacted by $3.4 million and $6.7 million decreases in other assets primarily
related to collection of amounts due from land sales and the cash release of utility deposits for
the nine months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Also impacting our cash (used in)
provided by operations was a $15.8 million increase in trade accounts payables this fiscal year
primarily related to the timing of development expenditures as of period end as compared to a $3.3
million decrease in trade accounts payable in the prior year related to the timing of home
development expenditures related to homes sold and spec homes completed in anticipation of the
closing deadline of the First-time Homebuyer Tax Credit on June 30, 2010.
Net cash used in investing activities was $259.0 million for the nine months ended June 30, 2011
which was primarily related to the $247.4 million funding of collateral (restricted cash) for the
Companys new Cash Secured Loan. Net cash provided by financing activities was $274.2 million for
the nine months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to a use of cash of $31.2 million for the nine
months ended June 30, 2010. During the nine months ended June 30, 2011 we completed a $250 million
senior unsecured debt offering, redeemed our outstanding 2013 Senior Notes and repurchased a
portion of our 2015 and 2016 Senior Notes. As a result of our 2013 Senior Note repayment, our next
scheduled Senior Note principal repayment is not until July 2015. During the prior year, the
proceeds received from the issuance of equity securities and new debt was offset by the repurchase
of outstanding debt with nearer term maturities.
During our fiscal 2010, we received upgrades from S&P in our corporate credit rating to B-. Also
during the fiscal year, Moodys raised its corporate credit rating of the Company to Caa1 and Fitch
raised its corporate credit rating of the Company to B-. These ratings and our current credit
condition affect, among other things, our ability to access new capital. Negative changes to these
ratings may result in more stringent covenants and higher interest rates under the terms of any new
debt. Our credit ratings could be lowered or rating agencies could issue adverse commentaries in
the future, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations,
financial condition and liquidity. In particular, a weakening of our financial condition,
including any further increase in our leverage or decrease in our profitability or cash flows,
could adversely affect our ability to obtain necessary funds, could result in a credit rating
downgrade or change in outlook, or could otherwise increase our cost of borrowing.
We fulfill our short-term cash requirements with cash generated from our operations. As a result,
there were no amounts outstanding under the Secured Revolving Credit Facility at June 30, 2011. In
addition, we have entered into a number of stand-alone, cash secured letter of credit agreements
with banks. These facilities will continue to provide for future working capital and letter of
credit needs collateralized by either cash or assets of the Company at our option, based on certain
conditions and covenant compliance. We currently have $34.4 million outstanding letters of credit under these facilities. As of June 30,
2011, we have secured our letters of credit under these facilities using cash collateral which is
maintained in restricted accounts totaling $36.7 million. In addition, we have elected to pledge
approximately $1.1 billion of inventory assets to our revolving credit facility. We believe that
our $559.0 million of
44
Table of Contents
cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash at June 30, 2011, cash
generated from our operations and the availability of new debt and equity financing, if any, will
be adequate to meet our liquidity needs during the remainder of fiscal 2011 and into fiscal 2012.
Stock Repurchases and Dividends Paid The Company did not repurchase any shares in the open
market during the nine months ended June 30, 2011 or 2010. Any future stock repurchases, as allowed
by our debt covenants, must be approved by the Companys Board of Directors or its Finance
Committee.
On November 2, 2007, our Board of Directors suspended payment of quarterly dividends. The Board
concluded at that time and continues to believe that suspending dividends to be prudent in light of
the continued housing market recession. In addition, the indentures under which our Senior Notes
were issued contain certain restrictive covenants, including limitations on the payment of
dividends. At June 30, 2011, under the most restrictive covenants of each indenture, none of our
retained earnings was available for cash dividends. Hence, there were no dividends paid during the
nine months ended June 30, 2011 or 2010.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Aggregate Contractual Commitments. At June 30, 2011, we
controlled 29,800 lots (a 9.5-year supply based on our trailing twelve months of closings). We
owned 83.9%, or 24,986 lots, and 4,814 lots, 16.1%, were under option contracts which generally
require the payment of cash or the posting of a letter of credit for the right to acquire lots
during a specified period of time at a certain price. We historically have attempted to control a
portion of our land supply through options. As a result of the flexibility that these options
provide us, upon a change in market conditions we may renegotiate the terms of the options prior to
exercise or terminate the agreement. Under option contracts, purchase of the properties is
contingent upon satisfaction of certain requirements by us and the sellers and our liability is
generally limited to forfeiture of the non-refundable deposits, letters of credit and other
non-refundable amounts incurred, which aggregated approximately $28.1 million at June 30, 2011.
This amount includes non-refundable letters of credit of approximately $3.4 million. The total
remaining purchase price, net of cash deposits, committed under all options was $224.8 million as
of June 30, 2011. When market conditions improve, we may expand our use of option agreements to
supplement our owned inventory supply.
We expect to exercise, subject to market conditions, most of our option contracts. Various factors,
some of which are beyond our control, such as market conditions, weather conditions and the timing
of the completion of development activities, will have a significant impact on the timing of option
exercises or whether lot options will be exercised.
We have historically funded the exercise of lot options through a combination of operating cash
flows. We expect these sources to continue to be adequate to fund anticipated future option
exercises. Therefore, we do not anticipate that the exercise of our lot options will have a
material adverse effect on our liquidity.
We participate in a number of land development joint ventures in which we have less than a
controlling interest. We enter into joint ventures in order to acquire attractive land positions,
to manage our risk profile and to leverage our capital base. Our joint ventures are typically
entered into with developers, other homebuilders and financial partners to develop finished lots
for sale to the joint ventures members and other third parties. We account for our interest in
these joint ventures under the equity method. Our consolidated balance sheets include investments
in joint ventures totaling $9.5 million and $8.7 million at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010,
respectively.
Our joint ventures typically obtain secured acquisition and development financing. At June 30,
2011, our unconsolidated joint ventures had borrowings outstanding totaling $395.0 million, of
which $327.9 million related to our South Edge joint venture in which we are a 2.58% partner.
Generally, we and our joint venture partners have provided varying levels of guarantees of debt or
other obligations of our unconsolidated joint ventures. At June 30, 2011, we had repayment
guarantees of $17.9 million. See Note 3 to the unaudited condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements for further information.
We had outstanding performance bonds of approximately $175.8 million, at June 30, 2011 related
principally to our obligations to local governments to construct roads and other improvements in
various developments.
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
See Note 1 to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this
Form 10-Q.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
We are exposed to a number of market risks in the ordinary course of business. Our primary market
risk exposure relates to fluctuations in interest rates. We do not believe that our exposure in
this area is material to cash flows or earnings. As of June 30, 2011, we had variable rate debt
outstanding totaling approximately $247 million dollars. A one percent change in the interest rate
would not be material to our financial statements. The estimated fair value of our fixed rate debt
at June 30, 2011 was $1.16 billion, compared to a
45
Table of Contents
carrying value of $1.49 billion. In addition, the
effect of a hypothetical one-percentage point decrease in our estimated discount rates would
increase the estimated fair value of the fixed rate debt instruments from $1.16 billion to $1.21
billion at June 30, 2011.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this report, an evaluation was performed under the
supervision and with the participation of the Companys management, including the Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO), of the effectiveness of the Companys disclosure
controls and procedures as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934. Based on that evaluation, the CEO and CFO concluded that the Companys disclosure
controls and procedures were effective as of June 30, 2011, at a reasonable assurance level.
Attached as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q are certifications of our CEO and CFO,
which are required by Rule 13a-14 of the Act. This Disclosure Controls and Procedures section
includes information concerning managements evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures
referred to in those certifications and, as such, should be read in conjunction with the
certifications of the CEO and CFO.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There have been no changes in the Companys internal controls over financial reporting during the
quarter ended June 30, 2011 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
South Edge Litigation
During fiscal 2008, the administrative agent for the lenders of one of our unconsolidated joint
ventures, South Edge, LLC, (South Edge), filed individual lawsuits against some of the joint
venture members and certain of those members parent companies (including the Company), seeking to
recover damages under completion guarantees, among other claims. Effective June 10, 2011, the
Company and one of its subsidiaries became parties to a settlement among the administrative agent
for the lenders to South Edge (the Administrative Agent), certain of the lenders to South Edge,
and certain of the other South Edge members and their respective parent companies (together with
the Company and its subsidiary, the Participating Members). The Chapter 11 trustee for South Edge
has expressed its consent to the agreement. Under the agreement, each of the parties will use
commercially reasonable efforts to support confirmation of a consensual plan of reorganization for
South Edge (the Plan), and to obtain bankruptcy court approval of a disclosure statement that will
accompany the Plan, to obtain the requisite support of the South Edge lenders to the Plan, and to
consummate the Plan promptly after confirmation, in each case by certain specified dates. Under the
agreement, the effective date of the Plan following its confirmation is to occur on or before
November 30, 2011, though it may be extended depending on the date of Plan confirmation. No
disclosure statement for the Plan has been approved by the bankruptcy court at this time, and
nothing herein should be construed as a solicitation of any vote on the Plan by creditors of or
equity holders in South Edge.
Other Litigation
A putative class action was filed on April 8, 2008 in the United States District Court for the
Middle District of North Carolina, Salisbury Division, against Beazer Homes, U.S.A., Inc., Beazer
Homes Corp. and Beazer Mortgage Corporation (BMC). The Complaint alleges that Beazer violated the
Real Estate Settlement Practices Act (RESPA) and North Carolina Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 by (1)
improperly requiring homebuyers to use Beazer-owned mortgage and settlement services as part of a
down payment assistance program, and (2) illegally increasing the cost of homes and settlement
services sold by Beazer Homes Corp. The purported class consists of all residents of North Carolina
who purchased a home from Beazer, using mortgage financing provided by and through Beazer that
included seller-funded down payment assistance, between January 1, 2000 and October 11, 2007. The
parties have reached an agreement to settle the lawsuit, which will be partially funded by
insurance proceeds. The settlement has been preliminarily approved by the court, but remains
subject to final court approval. Under the terms of the settlement, the action will be dismissed
with prejudice, and the Company and all other defendants will not admit any liability. A fairness
hearing has been set for August 30, 2011.
On June 3, 2009, a purported class action complaint was filed by the owners of one of our homes in
our Magnolia Lakes community in Ft. Myers, Florida. The complaint names the Company and certain
distributors and suppliers of drywall and was filed in the Circuit Court for Lee County, Florida on
behalf of the named plaintiffs and other similarly situated owners of homes in Magnolia Lakes or
alternatively in the State of Florida. The plaintiffs allege that the Company built their homes
with defective drywall, manufactured in China, that contains sulfur compounds that allegedly
corrode certain metals and that are allegedly capable of harming the health of
46
Table of Contents
individuals.
Plaintiffs allege physical and economic damages and seek legal and equitable relief, medical
monitoring and attorneys fees. This case has been transferred to the Eastern District of
Louisiana pursuant to an order from the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
In addition, the Company has been named in other multi-plaintiff complaints filed in the
multidistrict litigation. We believe that the claims asserted in these actions are governed by home
warranties or are without merit. Accordingly, the Company intends to vigorously defend against
these actions. Furthermore, the Company has offered to repair all Beazer homes affected by
defective Chinese drywall pursuant to a repair protocol that has been adopted by the multidistrict
litigation court, including those homes involved in litigation. To date, nearly all of affected
Beazer homeowners have accepted the Companys offer to repair. The Company also continues to
pursue recovery against responsible subcontractors, drywall suppliers and drywall manufacturers for
its repair costs.
On December 10, 2010, a shareholder derivative suit was filed by Milton Pfeiffer in the United
States District Court for the District of Delaware against certain officers and directors of the
Company. The complaint alleges that the defendants made false and misleading statements in the
Companys 2010 proxy regarding the tax deductibility of the Companys 2010 Equity Incentive Plan.
Plaintiff also alleges that defendants breached their fiduciary duties. This matter has been
settled and the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. The Company admitted no liability and will pay plaintiffs legal fees.
A final hearing was held on August 3, 2011. There were no timely filed objections and the
court approved settlement of this matter.
On March 14, 2011, the Company and several subsidiaries were named as defendants in a lawsuit filed
by Flagstar Bank, FSB in the Circuit Court for the County of Oakland, State of Michigan. The
complaint demands approximately $5 million to recover purported losses in connection with 57
residential mortgage loan transactions under theories of breach of contract, fraud/intentional
misrepresentation and other similar theories of recovery. We believe we have strong defenses to
the claims on these individual loans and intend to vigorously defend the action. In addition, BMC
has received notices from other investors demanding that BMC indemnify them for losses suffered
with respect to mortgage loan transactions largely alleging misrepresentations during the loan
origination process. We are currently investigating these claims. As previously disclosed, we
operated BMC from 1998 through February 2008 to offer mortgage financing to the buyers of our
homes. BMC entered into various agreements with mortgage investors for the origination of mortgage
loans. Underwriting decisions were not made by BMC but by the investors or third-party service
providers. To date, including the mortgage loans that are the subject of the lawsuit, we have
received requests to repurchase fewer than 100 mortgage loans from various investors.
On March 15, 2011, a shareholder derivative suit was filed by certain funds affiliated with
Teamsters Local 237 in the Superior Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia against certain
officers and directors of the Company and the Companys compensation consultants. The complaint
alleges breach of fiduciary duties involving decisions regarding executive compensation;
specifically that compensation awarded to certain Company executives for the 2010 fiscal year were
improper in light of the negative subsequent advisory say on pay vote by shareholders at the
Companys 2011 stockholders meeting. The defendants have filed motions to dismiss this case, which
were heard on August 3, 2011. The court dismissed all counts of
the complaint and requested submission of a proposed order of
dismissal.
We cannot predict or determine the timing or final outcome of the lawsuits or the effect that any
adverse findings or adverse determinations in the pending lawsuits may have on us. In addition, an
estimate of possible loss or range of loss, if any, cannot presently be made with respect to
certain of the above pending matters. An unfavorable determination in any of the pending lawsuits
could result in the payment by us of substantial monetary damages which may not be fully covered by
insurance. Further, the legal costs associated with the lawsuits and the amount of time required to
be spent by management and the Board of Directors on these matters, even if we are ultimately
successful, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
Other Matters
As disclosed in our 2009 Form 10-K, on July 1, 2009, the Company announced that it has resolved the
criminal and civil investigations by the United States Attorneys Office in the Western District of
North Carolina (the U.S. Attorney) and other state and federal agencies concerning matters that
were the subject of the independent investigation, initiated in April 2007 by the Audit Committee
of the Board of Directors (the Investigation) and concluded in May 2008. Under the terms of a
deferred prosecution agreement (DPA), the Companys liability for fiscal 2011 and each of the
fiscal years after 2010 through a portion of fiscal 2014 (unless extended as previously described
in our 2009 Form 10-K) will also be equal to 4% of the Companys adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the
DPA). The total amount of such obligations will be dependent on several factors; however, the
maximum liability under the DPA and other settlement agreements discussed above will not exceed
$55.0 million of which $16 million has been paid as of June 30, 2011.
In November 2003, Beazer Homes received a request for information from the EPA pursuant to Section
308 of the Clean Water Act seeking information concerning the nature and extent of storm water
discharge practices relating to certain of our communities completed or under construction. The EPA
or the equivalent state agency has issued Administrative Orders identifying alleged instances of
noncompliance and requiring corrective action to address the alleged deficiencies in storm water
management practices. The parties have agreed to settle this matter and have executed a Consent
Decree which received court approval on February 10, 2011. The terms of the Consent
Decree
constitute a final judgment and the Company did not admit any liability. Pursuant to the terms of
the Consent
47
Table of Contents
Decree, the Company paid a civil penalty during the quarter which is not material to
the Companys financial position or results of operations. The Company has established and
implemented a comprehensive stormwater management program to ensure compliance with the Clean Water
Act, similar state regulations and the terms of the Consent Decree itself.
In 2006, we received two Administrative Orders issued by the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection. The Orders allege certain violations of wetlands disturbance permits. The two Orders
assess proposed fines of $630,000 and $678,000, respectively. We have met with the Department to
discuss their concerns on the two affected communities and have requested hearings on both matters.
We believe that we have significant defenses to the alleged violations and intend to contest the
agencys findings and the proposed fines. We are currently pursuing settlement discussions with the
Department.
We and certain of our subsidiaries have been named as defendants in various claims, complaints and
other legal actions, most relating to construction defects, moisture intrusion and product
liability. Certain of the liabilities resulting from these actions are covered in whole or part by
insurance.
Item 5. Other Information
On July 28, 2011, the Company entered into an Extension and Amendment (the Amendment) to the
Companys Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of August 5, 2009, by and between the
Company and Citibank, N.A. (the Credit Agreement). The Amendment extends the termination date of
the Credit Agreement to August 2, 2012.
Item 6. Exhibits
10.1
|
Extension and Amendment to the Companys Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of August 5, 2009, by and between the Company and Citibank, N.A. | |
10.2
|
Fifteenth Supplemental Indenture, dated July 22, 2011, between the Company and U.S. Bank National Association, amending and supplementing the Thirteenth Supplemental Indenture, dated May 20, 2010, and the Fourteenth Supplemental Indenture, dated November 12, 2010 | |
31.1
|
Certification pursuant to 17 CFR 240.13a-14 promulgated under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
31.2
|
Certification pursuant to 17 CFR 240.13a-14 promulgated under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
32.1
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
32.2
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
Beazer Homes USA, Inc. |
||||
Date: August 9, 2011 | By: | /s/ Robert L. Salomon | ||
Name: | Robert L. Salomon | |||
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
||||
48