CUMULUS MEDIA INC - Quarter Report: 2009 March (Form 10-Q)
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES 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 MARCH 31, 2009.
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934. |
For or the transition period from to
Commission file number 000-24525
CUMULUS MEDIA INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
Delaware (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization) |
36-4159663 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
|
3280 Peachtree Road, NW Suite 2300, Atlanta, GA (Address of Principal Executive Offices) |
30305 (ZIP Code) |
(404) 949-0700
(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
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such 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 Website, if any, every Interactive Date 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 o 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 (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
As of April 30, 2009, the registrant had 41,699,199 outstanding shares of common stock consisting
of (i) 35,245,137 shares of Class A Common Stock;
(ii) 5,809,191 shares of Class B Common Stock;
and (iii) 644,871 shares of Class C Common Stock.
CUMULUS MEDIA INC.
INDEX
2
Table of Contents
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
CUMULUS MEDIA INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Dollars in thousands, except for share and per share data)
(Unaudited)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Dollars in thousands, except for share and per share data)
(Unaudited)
March 31, | December 31, | |||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
Assets |
||||||||
Current assets: |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 44,877 | $ | 53,003 | ||||
Restricted cash |
189 | | ||||||
Accounts receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $1,423 and $1,771, in
2009 and 2008, respectively |
33,602 | 44,199 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
3,744 | 3,287 | ||||||
Total current assets |
82,412 | 100,489 | ||||||
Property and equipment, net |
53,028 | 55,124 | ||||||
Intangible assets, net |
325,106 | 325,134 | ||||||
Goodwill |
58,891 | 58,891 | ||||||
Other assets |
4,117 | 3,881 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 523,554 | $ | 543,519 | ||||
Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
||||||||
Current liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
$ | 18,156 | $ | 20,644 | ||||
Current portion of long-term debt |
7,400 | 7,400 | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
25,556 | 28,044 | ||||||
Long-term debt |
674,844 | 688,600 | ||||||
Other liabilities |
31,336 | 30,543 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes |
43,627 | 44,479 | ||||||
Total liabilities |
775,363 | 791,666 | ||||||
Stockholders equity: |
||||||||
Preferred stock, 20,262,000 shares authorized, par value $0.01 per share,
including: |
||||||||
250,000 shares designated as 13 3/4% Series A Cumulative Exchangeable
Redeemable Preferred Stock due 2009, stated value $1,000 per share, 0 shares
issued and outstanding in both 2009 and 2008 and 12,000 shares designated as
12% Series B Cumulative Preferred Stock, stated value $10,000 per share, 0 shares
issued and outstanding in both 2009 and 2008, respectively |
| | ||||||
Class A common stock, par value $.01 per share; 200,000,000 shares authorized;
59,572,592 and 59,572,592 shares issued, 35,246,650 and 34,945,290 shares
outstanding, in 2009 and 2008, respectively |
596 | 596 | ||||||
Class B common stock, par value $.01 per share; 20,000,000 shares authorized;
5,809,191 shares issued and outstanding in both 2009 and 2008 |
58 | 58 | ||||||
Class C common stock, par value $.01 per share; 30,000,000 shares authorized;
644,871 shares issued and outstanding in both 2009 and 2008 |
6 | 6 | ||||||
Class A Treasury stock, at cost, 24,325,941 and 24,627,302 shares in 2009 and
2008,
respectively |
(260,644 | ) | (265,278 | ) | ||||
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
| 828 | ||||||
Additional paid-in-capital |
963,504 | 967,676 | ||||||
Accumulated deficit |
(955,329 | ) | (952,033 | ) | ||||
Total stockholders deficit |
(251,809 | ) | (248,147 | ) | ||||
Total liabilities and stockholders deficit |
$ | 523,554 | $ | 543,519 | ||||
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
Table of Contents
CUMULUS MEDIA INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Dollars in thousands, except for share and per share data)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Dollars in thousands, except for share and per share data)
(Unaudited)
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
Broadcast revenues |
$ | 54,353 | $ | 71,900 | ||||
Management fee from affiliate |
1,000 | 1,000 | ||||||
Net revenues |
55,353 | 72,900 | ||||||
Operating expenses: |
||||||||
Station operating expenses (excluding depreciation, amortization and
LMA fees) |
42,298 | 51,149 | ||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
2,898 | 3,111 | ||||||
LMA fees |
469 | 180 | ||||||
Corporate general and administrative (including non-cash stock
compensation
of $592, and $2,021, respectively) |
6,108 | 5,461 | ||||||
Cost associated with terminated transaction |
| 140 | ||||||
Total operating expenses |
51,773 | 60,041 | ||||||
Operating income |
3,580 | 12,859 | ||||||
Non-operating income (expense): |
||||||||
Interest expense |
(7,783 | ) | (20,860 | ) | ||||
Interest income |
46 | 328 | ||||||
Other income (expense), net |
3 | 18 | ||||||
Total non-operating expense, net |
(7,734 | ) | (20,514 | ) | ||||
Loss before income taxes and equity in net losses of affiliate |
(4,154 | ) | (7,655 | ) | ||||
Income tax benefit |
858 | 3,663 | ||||||
Equity in net losses of affiliate |
| (248 | ) | |||||
Net loss |
$ | (3,296 | ) | $ | (4,240 | ) | ||
Basic and diluted loss per common share: |
||||||||
Basic and diluted loss per common share |
$ | (0.08 | ) | $ | (0.10 | ) | ||
Weighted average basic and diluted common shares outstanding |
40,420,814 | 43,046,722 | ||||||
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
Table of Contents
CUMULUS MEDIA INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)
Three Months | ||||||||
Ended March 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
Cash flows from operating activities: |
||||||||
Net loss |
$ | (3,296 | ) | $ | (4,240 | ) | ||
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by
operating activities: |
||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
2,898 | 3,111 | ||||||
Amortization of debt issuance costs |
109 | 104 | ||||||
Amortization of derivative gain |
(828 | ) | (993 | ) | ||||
Provision for doubtful accounts |
657 | 738 | ||||||
Gain on sale of assets or stations |
(3 | ) | (6 | ) | ||||
Adjustment of the fair value of derivative instruments |
1,001 | 11,285 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes |
(852 | ) | (3,557 | ) | ||||
Non-cash stock compensation |
592 | 2,021 | ||||||
Equity loss on investment in unconsolidated affiliate |
| 248 | ||||||
Changes in assets and liabilities: |
||||||||
Restricted cash |
(189 | ) | | |||||
Accounts receivable |
9,889 | 4,884 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
(406 | ) | 83 | |||||
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
(2,585 | ) | (2,096 | ) | ||||
Other assets |
(307 | ) | (698 | ) | ||||
Other liabilities |
(48 | ) | (159 | ) | ||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
6,632 | 10,725 | ||||||
Cash flows from investing activities: |
||||||||
Proceeds from the sale of assets |
6 | | ||||||
Purchase of intangible assets |
(38 | ) | (34 | ) | ||||
Capital expenditures |
(777 | ) | (2,811 | ) | ||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(809 | ) | (2,845 | ) | ||||
Cash flows from financing activities: |
||||||||
Repayments of borrowings from bank credit facility |
(13,756 | ) | (7,940 | ) | ||||
Tax withholding paid on behalf of employees |
| (2,242 | ) | |||||
Proceeds from issuance of common stock |
| 53 | ||||||
Payments for repurchase of common stock |
(193 | ) | | |||||
Net cash used in financing activities |
(13,949 | ) | (10,129 | ) | ||||
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents |
(8,126 | ) | (2,249 | ) | ||||
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
53,003 | 32,286 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
$ | 44,877 | $ | 30,037 | ||||
Supplemental disclosures: |
||||||||
Trade revenue |
$ | 2,306 | $ | 3,232 | ||||
Trade expense |
$ | 2,302 | $ | 3,152 | ||||
Interest paid |
$ | 6,958 | $ | 11,444 |
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
5
Table of Contents
Cumulus Media Inc.
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
1. Interim Financial Data and Basis of Presentation
Interim Financial Data
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in
conjunction with the consolidated financial statements of Cumulus Media Inc. (Company) and the
notes thereto included in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008. These financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) for interim financial information and
with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not
include all of the information and notes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. In the
opinion of management, all adjustments necessary for a fair statement of results of the interim
periods have been made and such adjustments were of a normal and recurring nature. The results of
operations and cash flows for the three months ended March 31, 2009 are not necessarily indicative
of the results that can be expected for the entire fiscal year ending December 31, 2009.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make
estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and
expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, the
Company evaluates its estimates, including those related to bad debts, intangible assets,
derivative financial instruments, income taxes, stock-based compensation and contingencies and
litigation. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience and on various assumptions
that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for
making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent
from other sources. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates under different
assumptions or conditions.
Liquidity Considerations
The current economic crisis has reduced demand for advertising in general, including advertising on
the Companys radio stations. In consideration of current and projected market conditions, overall
advertising is expected to continue to decline. Therefore, in conjunction with the development of
the 2009 business plan, management continues to assess the impact of recent market developments on
a variety of areas, including the Companys forecasted advertising revenues and liquidity. In
response to these conditions, management refined the 2009 business plan to incorporate a reduction
in forecasted 2009 revenues and cost reductions implemented in the fourth quarter 2008 and the
first quarter 2009 to mitigate the impact of the Companys anticipated decline in 2009 revenue.
Based upon
actions the Company has already taken, including employee reductions
and continued scrutiny of all operating expenses, as well as a new
sales initiative implemented during the first quarter of 2009, the
goal of which is to increase advertising revenues by re-engineering
the Companys sales techniques through enhanced training of its
sales force, and a mandatory one-week furlough to be implemented
during the second quarter of 2009, management believes that the
Company will continue to be in compliance with all of its debt
covenants through March 31, 2010 (which become more restrictive
beginning with the quarter ending September 30, 2009). The
Company will continue to monitor its revenues and cost structure
closely and, especially if the Companys revenues decline
greater than the forecasted decline from 2008 or if the Company
exceeds planned spending, the Company may take further actions as
needed, including additional employee furloughs or further employee
reductions, in order to maintain compliance with its debt covenants,
including the total leverage ratio under the Credit Agreement (see
Note 4). Despite such efforts, the Company may not be able to
meet these restrictive financial covenants. In that event, the
Company would need to seek waivers of, an amendment to, or a refinancing of, the
senior secured credit facilities.
There can be no assurance that the Company can obtain
any waiver or amendment to, or refinancing of, the
senior secured credit facilities and, even if so, it is likely that such relief would only last for
a specified period, potentially necessitating additional waivers, amendments or refinancings in the
future. In the event the Company does not maintain compliance with the covenants under the Credit
Agreement, the lenders could declare an event of default, subject to applicable notice and cure
provisions. Failure to comply with the financial covenants or other
terms of the Credit Agreement and failure to negotiate relief from
the Companys lenders could result in the acceleration of the
maturity of all outstanding debt. Under these circumstances, the
acceleration of the Companys debt could have a material adverse
effect on its business.
6
Table of Contents
If the Company were unable to repay those
amounts, the lenders under the credit facilities could proceed against the collateral granted to
them to secure that indebtedness. The Company has pledged substantially all of its assets as
collateral under the Credit Agreement. If the lenders accelerate the repayment of borrowings, the
Company may be forced to liquidate certain assets to repay all or part of the senior secured credit
facilities, and the Company cannot be assured that sufficient assets will remain after it has paid
all of the borrowings under the senior secured credit facilities. The ability to liquidate assets
is affected by the regulatory restrictions associated with radio stations, including FCC licensing,
which may make the market for these assets less liquid and increase the chances that these assets
will be liquidated at a significant loss. See further discussion of
the Companys long term debt in Note 4.
At
March 31, 2009, the Companys market capitalization had
decreased approximately 40% as compared to the Companys market
capitalization at December 31, 2008, to approximately 40% below
the Companys implied equity.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
SFAS No. 141(R). Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141(R), Business Combinations
(SFAS 141(R)), was issued in December 2007. SFAS 141(R) requires that upon initially obtaining
control, an acquirer should recognize 100% of the fair values of acquired assets, including
goodwill and assumed liabilities, with only limited exceptions, even if the acquirer has not
acquired 100% of its target. Additionally, contingent consideration arrangements will be fair
valued at the acquisition date and included on that basis in the purchase price consideration and
transaction costs will be expensed as incurred. SFAS 141(R) also modifies the recognition for
pre-acquisition contingencies, such as environmental or legal issues, restructuring plans and
acquired research and development value in purchase accounting. SFAS 141(R) amends SFAS No. 109, to
require the acquirer to recognize changes in the amount of its deferred tax benefits that are
recognizable because of a business combination either in income from continuing operations in the
period of the combination or directly in contributed capital, depending on the circumstances. SFAS
141(R) is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. The Company adopted SFAS
141(R) on January 1, 2009 and it did not have a material impact on the Companys consolidated
results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.
SFAS 160. In December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the FASB) issued SFAS 160, Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated
Financial Statements an amendment of ARB No. 51, which is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008. Early adoption is prohibited. SFAS 160 will require companies to present
minority interest separately within the equity section of the balance sheet. The Company adopted
SFAS 160 as of January 1, 2009 and it did not have an impact on the Companys consolidated
results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.
SFAS 161. In March 2008, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 161). The Statement changes the disclosure
requirements for derivative instruments and hedging activities. SFAS No. 161 will require entities
to provide enhanced disclosures about (a) how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, (b)
how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted for under SFAS No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 133), and its related
interpretations, and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entitys
financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. SFAS No. 161 became effective for
financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008,
with early application encouraged. The Company adopted SFAS No. 161 as of January 1, 2009; see Note
3, Derivative Financial Instruments.
FSP No. 142-3. In April 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position (FSP) No. 142-3, Determination
of the Useful Lives of Intangible Assets , which amends the factors that should be considered in
developing renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful life of an intangible
asset. This interpretation is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008 and interim periods within those years. The Company adopted this FSP on
January 1, 2009, and it did not have a material impact on the Companys consolidated results of
operations, cash flows or financial condition, and did not require additional disclosures related
to existing intangible assets.
FSP FAS 140-4 and FIN 46R-8. The FASB issued this FSP in December 2008 and it is effective for the
first reporting period ending after December 15, 2008. This FSP requires additional disclosures
related to variable interest entities in accordance with SFAS 140 and FIN 46R. These disclosures
include significant judgments and assumptions, restrictions on assets, risks and the affects on
financial position, financial performance and cash flows. The Company adopted these FSPs as of
January 1, 2009, and neither one had a material impact on the Companys consolidated results of
operations, cash flows or financial condition, and did not require additional disclosures.
FSP 157-2. On February 12, 2008, the FASB issued FSP FAS 157-2, Effective Date of FASB Statement
No. 157 (FSP 157-2), which delays the effective date of SFAS 157 for nonfinancial assets and
liabilities, except for items that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial
statements on a recurring basis (at least annually), to fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2008. The
7
Table of Contents
Company adopted FSP 157-2 on January 1, 2009 and it did not have a material impact on the Companys
consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial condition, and did not require additional disclosures.
FSP 157-4, FSP115-2 and FSP124-2, and FSP FAS 107-1and APB 28-1. On April 2, 2009, the FASB issued three FSPs to address concerns
about measuring the fair value of financial instruments when the markets become inactive and quoted
prices may reflect distressed transactions, recording impairment charges on investments in debt
instruments, and requiring the disclosure of fair value of certain financial instruments in interim
financial statements. The first Staff Position, FSP FAS 157-4, Determining Whether a Market is Not
Active and a Transaction is Not Distressed, provides additional guidance to highlight and expand
on the factors that should be considered in estimating fair value when there has been a significant
decrease in market activity for a financial asset. The second Staff Position, FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS
124-2, Recognition and Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary Impairments, changes the method for
determining whether an other-than-temporary impairment exists for debt securities and the amount of
an impairment charge to be recorded in earnings. The third Staff Position, FSP FAS 107-1 and APB
28-1, Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments increases the frequency of
fair value disclosures from annual only to quarterly. All three FSPs are effective for interim
periods ending after June 15, 2009, with the option to early adopt for interim periods ending after
March 15, 2009. The Company did not choose to early adopt and is still evaluating the impact the
FSPs will have its financial statements.
FSP EITF 03-6-1. In June 2008, the FASB issued FSP EITF 03-6-1. Determining Whether Instruments
Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating Securities (FSP EITF 03-6-1). FSP
EITF 03-6-1 clarifies that unvested share-based payment awards that entitle holders to receive
nonforfeitable dividends or dividend equivalents (whether paid or unpaid) are considered
participating securities and should be included in the computation of EPS pursuant to the two-class
method. The two-class method of computing EPS is an earning allocation formula that determines EPS
for each class of common stock and participating security according to dividends declared (or
accumulated) and participation rights in undistributed earnings. FSP EITF 03-6-1 requires
retrospective application and is effective for fiscal year beginning after December 15, 2008, and
interim periods within those years. FSP EITF 03-6-1 was adopted by the Company on January 1, 2009.
The unvested restricted shares of Class A Common Stock awarded by the Company pursuant to its equity incentive plans contain rights to receive nonforfeitable dividends,
and thus are participating securities requiring the two-class method
of computing EPS. See Note 7, Earnings Per Share for the Companys disclosure of EPS.
2. Stock Based Compensation
For the three months ended March 31, 2009, the Company recognized approximately $0.6 million in
non-cash stock-based compensation expense.
During the three months ended March 31, 2009, the Company awarded Mr. L. Dickey 160,000 restricted
performance based shares and 160,000 restricted time vested shares. The fair value on the date of
grant for both of these awards was $0.5 million. In addition, during the three months ended March
31, 2009 the Company awarded 140,000 time vested restricted shares with a fair value on the date of
grant of $0.2 million, or $1.71 per share to certain officers (other than Mr. L. Dickey) of the
Company.
3. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Company accounts for derivative financial instruments in accordance with SFAS No. 133. This
Statement requires the Company to recognize all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value.
Derivative value changes are recorded in income for any contracts not classified as qualifying
hedging instruments. For derivatives qualifying as cash flow hedge instruments, the effective
portion of the derivative fair value change must be recorded through other comprehensive income, a
component of stockholders equity.
May 2005 Swap
In May 2005, the Company entered into a forward-starting LIBOR-based interest rate swap arrangement
(the May 2005 Swap) to manage fluctuations in cash flows resulting from interest rate risk
attributable to changes in the benchmark interest rate of LIBOR. The May 2005 Swap became effective
as of March 13, 2006, the end of the term of the Companys prior swap. The May 2005 Swap expired
on March 13, 2009 in accordance with the terms of the original agreement.
The May 2005 Swap changed the variable-rate cash flow exposure on $400 million of the Companys
long-term bank borrowings to fixed-rate cash flows. Under the May 2005 Swap, the Company received
LIBOR-based variable interest rate payments and made fixed interest rate payments, thereby
creating fixed-rate long-term debt. The May 2005 Swap was previously accounted for as a qualifying
cash flow hedge of the future variable rate interest payments in accordance with SFAS No. 133.
Starting in June 2006, the
8
Table of Contents
May 2005 Swap no longer qualified as a cash-flow hedging instrument. Accordingly, the changes in
its fair value have since been reflected in the statement of operations instead of accumulated
other comprehensive income (AOCI). Interest for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008
includes income of $3.0 million and charges of $6.4 million, respectively, related to the change in
fair value.
The fair value of the May 2005 Swap was determined under the provisions of SFAS 157 using
observable market based inputs (a level two measurement). The fair value represents an
estimate of the net amount that the Company would pay if the agreement was transferred to
another party or cancelled as of the date of the valuation. The balance sheets as of March 31,
2009 and December 31, 2008 include other long-term liabilities of $0.0 million and $3.0
million, respectively, to reflect the fair value of the May 2005 Swap.
May 2005 Option
In May 2005, the Company also entered into an interest rate option agreement (the May 2005
Option), which provides for Bank of America to unilaterally extend the period of the May 2005 Swap
for two additional years, from March 13, 2009 through March 13, 2011. This option was exercised on
March 11, 2009 by Bank of America. This instrument was not highly effective in mitigating the risks
in cash flows, and therefore it was deemed speculative and its changes in value were accounted for
as a current element of interest expense. The balance sheets as of March 31, 2009 and December 31,
2008 reflects other long-term liabilities of $19.5 million and $15.5 million, respectively, to
include the fair value of the May 2005 Option. During the three months periods ended March 31, 2009
and 2008, the Company reported $4.0 million and $4.9 million of interest expense, respectively,
representing the change in fair value of the May 2005 option.
In the event of a default under the Credit Agreement, or a default under any derivative
contract, the derivative counterparties would have the right, although not the obligation, to
require immediate settlement of some or all open derivative contracts at their then-current fair
value. The Company does not utilize financial instruments for trading or other speculative
purposes.
The Companys financial instrument counterparties are high-quality investment or commercial banks
with significant experience with such instruments. The Company manages exposure to counterparty
credit risk by requiring specific minimum credit standards and diversification of counterparties.
The Company has procedures to monitor the credit exposure amounts. The maximum credit exposure at
March 31, 2009 was not significant to the Company.
The location and fair value amounts of derivatives in the Consolidated Statement of Financial
Position are shown in the following table:
Information on the Location and Amounts of Derivative Fair Values in
the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet (in Thousands)
Liability Derivative
the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet (in Thousands)
Liability Derivative
Balance Sheet | March 31, 2009 | |||||
Location | Fair Value | |||||
Derivative not designated as
hedging instruments under
Statement 133: |
||||||
Other long-term liabilities | $ | 19,509 | ||||
Total | $ | 19,509 | ||||
The
location and effect of derivatives in the Consolidated Statement of Operations are
shown in the following table:
9
Table of Contents
Information
on the Location and Effect of Derivatives in the
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations (in Thousands)
Liability Derivative
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations (in Thousands)
Liability Derivative
Derivatives not | Location of Loss | Amount of Loss Recognized in | ||||
designated as | Recognized in | Income on Derivatives for the | ||||
hedging instrument | Income on | Three Months Ended March 31 | ||||
under Statement 133 | Derivative | 2009 | ||||
Interest rate contracts
|
Interest expense | $ | 1,000 | |||
Total | $ | 1,000 | ||||
4. Long Term Debt
The Companys long-term debt consisted of the following at March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008
(dollars in thousands):
March 31, | December 31, | |||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
Term loan |
$ | 682,244 | $ | 696,000 | ||||
Less: Current portion of long-term debt |
7,400 | 7,400 | ||||||
$ | 674,844 | $ | 688,600 | |||||
Senior Secured Credit Facilities
On June 11, 2007, the Company entered into an amendment to its existing credit agreement governing its senior secured credit facilities, dated
June 7, 2006, by and among the Company, Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent, and the
lenders party thereto. The credit agreement, as amended, is referred to herein as the Credit
Agreement.
The Credit Agreement provides for a replacement term loan facility, in the original aggregate
principal amount of $750.0 million, to replace the prior term loan facility, which had an
outstanding balance of approximately $713.9 million, and maintains the pre-existing $100.0 million
revolving credit facility. The proceeds of the replacement term loan facility, fully funded on June
11, 2007, were used to repay the outstanding balances under the prior term loan facility and under
the revolving credit facility.
The Companys obligations under the Credit Agreement are collateralized by substantially all of its
assets to the extent a security interest may lawfully be granted (including FCC licenses held by
its subsidiaries), including, without limitation, intellectual property and all of the capital
stock of the Companys direct and indirect domestic subsidiaries (except for Broadcast Software
International, Inc.). In addition, the Companys obligations under the Credit Agreement are
guaranteed by certain of its subsidiaries.
The Credit Agreement contains terms and conditions customary for financing arrangements of this
nature. The replacement term loan facility will mature on June 11, 2014 and has been decreasing in
equal quarterly installments since September 30, 2007, with 0.25% of the then current aggregate
principal payable each quarter during the first six years of the term, and 23.5% due in each
quarter during the seventh year. The revolving credit facility will mature on June 7, 2012 and,
except at the option of the Company, the commitment will remain unchanged up to that date.
Borrowings under the term facility bear interest, at the Companys option, at a rate equal to LIBOR
plus 1.75% or the Alternate Base Rate (defined as the higher of the Bank of America Prime Rate and
the Federal Funds rate plus 0.50%) plus 0.75%. Borrowings under the revolving credit facility bear
interest, at the Companys option, at a rate equal to LIBOR plus a margin ranging between 0.675%
and 2.0% or the Alternate Base Rate plus a margin ranging between 0.0% and 1.0% (in either case
dependent upon the Companys leverage ratio).
10
Table of Contents
As of March 31, 2009, prior to the effect of the May 2005 Swap, the effective interest rate of the
outstanding borrowings pursuant to the credit facility was approximately 2.275 %. As of March 31,
2009, the effective interest rate inclusive of the May 2005 Swap was approximately 4.146%. Certain
mandatory prepayments of the term loan facility will be required upon the occurrence of specified
events, including upon the incurrence of certain additional indebtedness (other than under any
incremental credit facilities under the Credit Agreement) and upon the sale of certain assets.
The representations, covenants and events of default in the Credit Agreement are customary for
financing transactions of this nature. Events of default in the Credit Agreement include, among
others, (a) the failure to pay when due the obligations owing under the credit facilities; (b) the
failure to perform (and not timely remedy, if applicable) certain covenants; (c) cross default and
cross acceleration; (d) the occurrence of bankruptcy or insolvency events; (e) certain judgments
against the Company or any of its subsidiaries; (f) the loss, revocation or suspension of, or any
material impairment in the ability to use any of our material FCC licenses; (g) any representation
or warranty made, or report, certificate or financial statement delivered, to the lenders
subsequently proven to have been incorrect in any material respect; (h) the occurrence of a Change
in Control (as defined in the Credit Agreement); and (i) violation of certain financial covenants.
Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the lenders may terminate the loan commitments,
accelerate all loans and exercise any of their rights under the Credit Agreement and the ancillary
loan documents as a secured party.
As discussed above, the Companys covenants include certain customary financial covenants, such as:
| a maximum leverage ratio; | ||
| a minimum fixed charges ratio; and | ||
| a limit on annual capital expenditures. |
Our
covenant requirements and actual ratios as of March 31, 2009 and
December 31, 2008, are as follows:
As of March 31, 2009 | As of December 31, 2008 | ||||||||||||||
Covenant | Actual | Covenant | Actual | ||||||||||||
Requirement | Ratio | Requirement | Ratio | ||||||||||||
Total leverage ratio: |
<8.50:1 | 8.14 | <8.50:1 | 7.40 | |||||||||||
Fixed charges ratio: |
>1.1:1 | 1.83 | >1.1:1 | 1.86 |
The maximum leverage ratio in the Credit Agreement becomes more restrictive over the term of the
agreement. For the quarterly periods ended March 31, 2009 and June 30, 2009, the Companys maximum
leverage ratio requirement is 8.50:1. Beginning with the quarterly period ending September 30, 2009
and through December 31, 2009, the maximum leverage ratio requirement is 8.00:1. For the quarterly
periods ending March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2010, the total leverage ratio is 7.50:1. The ratio
drops to 7.00:1 for the quarterly periods ending September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2010. For the
quarterly period ending March 31, 2011 and thereafter, the ratio drops to 6.50:1. Management
believes the Company will continue to be in compliance with all of its debt covenants through at
least March 31, 2010 based upon actions taken as discussed in Note 1, as well as through additional
paydowns of debt estimated to be approximately $59.3 million that the Company expects to make
through March 31, 2010, based upon managements updated covenant forecasts from
existing cash balances and cash flow generated from operations. Based upon managements 2009
business plan and the Companys outstanding borrowings as of March 31, 2009, the Company will be
required to make additional payments of principal indebtedness no later than the third quarter of
2009 in order to remain in compliance with the maximum leverage ratio.
The current economic crisis has reduced demand for advertising in general, including advertising on
our radio stations. If the Companys revenues were to be significantly less than planned due to
difficult market conditions or for other reasons, the Companys ability to maintain compliance with
the financial covenants in its credit agreements would become increasingly difficult without
remedial measures, such as the implementation of further cost abatement initiatives. If the
Companys remedial measures were not successful in maintaining covenant compliance, then the
Company would expect to negotiate with its lenders for relief, which relief could result
in higher interest expense. Failure to comply with the financial covenants or other terms of the
credit agreements and failure to negotiate relief from the Companys lenders could result in the
acceleration of the maturity of all outstanding debt. Under these circumstances, the acceleration
of the Companys debt could have a material adverse effect on its business.
5. Fair Value Measurements
11
Table of Contents
The Company adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 157 on January 1, 2008 as they relate to certain
items, including those within the scope of SFAS No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial
Instruments, and financial and nonfinancial derivatives within the scope of SFAS No. 133. SFAS No.
157 requires, among other things, enhanced disclosures about investments that are measured and
reported at fair value and establishes a hierarchical disclosure framework that prioritizes and
ranks the level of market price observability used in measuring investments at fair value. The
three levels of the fair value hierarchy under SFAS No. 157 are described below:
Level 1 Valuations based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities that the entity has the ability to access.
Level 2 Valuations based on quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in
markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by
observable data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.
Level 3 Valuations based on inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that
are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.
A financial instruments level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any
input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The Companys financial assets are
measured at fair value on a recurring basis. Financial assets and liabilities measured at fair
value on a recurring basis as of March 31, 2009 were as follows (dollars in thousands):
Quoted | Significant | |||||||||||||||
Prices in | Other | Significant | ||||||||||||||
Active | Observable | Unobservable | ||||||||||||||
Total Fair | Markets | Inputs | Inputs | |||||||||||||
Value | (Level 1) | (Level 2) | (Level 3) | |||||||||||||
Financial assets: |
||||||||||||||||
Cash equivalents: |
||||||||||||||||
Money market funds |
$ | 34,391 | $ | 4,376 | $ | 30,015 | $ | | ||||||||
Total assets |
$ | 34,391 | $ | 4,376 | $ | 30,015 | $ | | ||||||||
Financial Liabilities: |
||||||||||||||||
Other long-term,
liabilities |
||||||||||||||||
Interest rate swap |
$ | (19,509 | ) | $ | | $ | (19,509 | ) | $ | | ||||||
Total liabilities |
$ | (19,509 | ) | $ | | $ | (19,509 | ) | $ | | ||||||
Cash Equivalents. A majority of the Companys cash equivalents are invested in an institutional
money market fund. The Companys Level 1 cash equivalents are valued using quoted prices in active
markets for identical investments. The Companys Level 2 cash equivalents are not publicly traded,
but valuation is based on quoted prices for similar assets.
We determined that the value of the cash invested in an RMA
(Resource Management Account) government portfolio is based on
observable prices for similar assets and thus
warrants classification as a Level 2 asset.
Derivative Instruments. The Companys derivative financial instruments consist solely of an
interest rate cash flow hedges in which the Company pays a fixed rate and receives a variable
interest rate that is observable based upon a forward interest rate curve and is therefore
considered a Level 2 input.
The fair value of our derivatives are determined based on the present value of future cash flows
using observable inputs, including interest rates, yield curves, and option volatility. In
accordance with the requirements of FAS 157, derivative valuations incorporate credit risk
adjustments that are necessary to reflect the probability of default by the Company.
6. Share Repurchase
On May 21, 2008, the Companys Board of Directors authorized the purchase, from time to time, of up
to $75 million of its shares of Class A Common Stock. Purchases may be made in the open market or
through block trades, in compliance with Securities and
12
Table of Contents
Exchange Commission guidelines, subject to market conditions, applicable legal requirements and
various other factors, including the requirements of the Credit Agreement. The Company has no
obligation to purchase shares under the purchase program, and the timing, actual number and value
of shares to be purchased depends on the performance of Companys stock price, general market
conditions, and various other factors within the discretion of management.
During the three months ended March 31, 2009, the Company purchased 99,737 shares of Class A Common
Stock for approximately $0.2 million in cash in open market transactions under the board-approved
purchase plan.
7. Earnings per Share
For all
periods presented, basic and diluted earnings per common share is
presented in accordance with SFAS 128, Earnings per
Share, as clarified by EITF Issue No. 03-6,
Participating Securities and the Two Class Method under FASB
Statement No. 128, Earnings per Share
(EITF 03-6) as clarified by FSP EITF 03-6-1.
Basic earnings per common share is calculated by dividing net income
available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of
shares of common stock outstanding during the period.
Non-vested
restricted stock carries non-forfeitable dividend rights and is
therefore a participating security, in accordance with FSP
EITF 03-6-1 (See Note 1 Recent Accounting Pronouncements). The two-class method of computing earnings per share
is required for companies with participating shares. Under this
method, net income is allocated to common stock and participating
securities to the extent that each security may share in earnings, as
if all of the earnings for the period had been distributed. The
Company has accounted for non-vested restricted stock as a
participating security and used the two-class method of computing
earnings per share as of January 1, 2009, with retroactive
application to all prior periods presented. For the period ended
March 31, 2009 and 2008 the Company was in a net loss position
and therefore did not allocate any loss to participating securities.
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted income per share for the three
months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008 (in thousands, except per share data).
Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
Basic Earning Per Share |
||||||||
Numerator: |
||||||||
Undistributed net loss |
$ | (3,296 | ) | $ | (4,240 | ) | ||
Participation rights of unvested restricted stock in undistributed earnings (a) |
| | ||||||
Basic undistributed net loss attributable to common shares |
$ | (3,296 | ) | $ | (4,240 | ) | ||
Denominator: |
||||||||
Denominator for basic loss per common share: |
||||||||
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding |
40,421 | 43,047 | ||||||
Basic EPS attributable to common shares |
$ | (0.08 | ) | $ | (0.10 | ) | ||
Diluted Earnings Per Share: |
||||||||
Numerator: |
||||||||
Undistributed net loss |
$ | (3,296 | ) | $ | (4,240 | ) | ||
Participation rights of unvested restricted stock in undistributed earnings (a) |
| | ||||||
Undistributed net loss attributable to common shares |
$ | (3,296 | ) | $ | (4,240 | ) | ||
Denominator: |
||||||||
Weighted average shares outstanding |
40,421 | 43,047 | ||||||
Effect of dilutive options (b) |
| | ||||||
Diluted weighted average shares outstanding |
40,421 | 43,047 | ||||||
Diluted EPS attributable to common shares |
$ | (0.08 | ) | $ | (0.10 | ) | ||
(a) | Unvested restricted stock has no contractual obligation to absorb losses of the Company. Therefore, for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, 1,532,910 shares and 850,313 shares of restricted stock were outstanding but excluded from the EPS calculations because their effect would have been antidilutive. | |
(b) | For the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, options to purchase 2,274,895 and 8,596,776 shares of common stock, respectively, were outstanding but excluded from the EPS calculations because their effect would have been antidilutive. Options outstanding have decreased from March 31, 2008 due to the effect of the Companys option exchange program which concluded on December 30, 2008. |
The Company has issued to key executives and employees shares of restricted stock and options to
purchase shares of common stock as part of the Companys stock incentive plans. At March 31, 2009,
the following restricted stock and stock options to purchase the following classes of common stock
were issued and outstanding:
March 31, | ||||
2009 | ||||
Restricted shares of Class A Common Stock |
1,532,910 | |||
Options to purchase Class A Common Stock |
1,486,546 | |||
Options to purchase Class C Common Stock |
500,000 |
8. Comprehensive Income
SFAS No. 130, Reporting Comprehensive Income, establishes standards for reporting comprehensive
income. Comprehensive income includes net income as currently reported under accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America, and also considers the effect of additional
economic events that are not required to be reported in determining net income, but rather are
reported as a separate component of stockholders equity. The components of comprehensive income
are as follows (dollars in thousands):
13
Table of Contents
Three Months | ||||||||
Ended March 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | (3,296 | ) | $ | (4,240 | ) | ||
Yield adjustment interest rate swap arrangement, net of tax |
| (993 | ) | |||||
Comprehensive income (loss) |
$ | (3,296 | ) | $ | (5,233 | ) | ||
9. Commitments and Contingencies
There are two radio station rating services available to the radio broadcast industry.
Traditionally, the Company has utilized Arbitron as its primary source of ratings information for
its radio markets, and has a five-year agreement with Arbitron under which it receives programming
rating materials in a majority of its markets. On November 7, 2008, however, the Company entered
into an agreement with Nielsen pursuant to which Nielsen would rate certain of the Companys radio
markets as the coverage expires for such markets under the Arbitron agreement. Nielsen began
efforts to roll out its rating service for 50 of the Companys radio markets in January 2009. The
Company forfeited its obligation under the agreement with Arbitron at December 31, 2008, and
Arbitron will be paid in accordance with the agreement through April 2009.
The national advertising agency contract with Katz contains termination provisions that, if
exercised by the Company during the term of the contract, would obligate the Company to pay a
termination fee to Katz, calculated based upon a formula set forth in the contract.
In December 2004, the Company purchased 240 perpetual licenses from iBiquity Digital Corporation,
which will enable it to convert to and utilize digital broadcasting technology on 240 of its
stations. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company committed to convert the 240 stations over
a seven year period. On March 5, 2009, the Company entered into an amendment to its agreement with
iBiquity to reduce the number of planned conversions, extend the build-out schedule, and increase
the license fees to be paid for each converted station. In the event the Company does not fulfill
the conversion requirements within the period set forth in the agreement or otherwise
modify the rollout schedule, once the conversions are completed the Company will be subject to
license fees higher than those currently provided for under the agreement. The conversion of
original stations to the digital technology will require an investment in certain capital equipment
over the next several years. Management estimates its investment will be approximately $0.1 million per
station converted.
The Company has been subpoenaed by the Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York, as
were other radio broadcasting companies, in connection with the New York Attorney Generals
investigation of promotional practices related to record companies dealings with radio stations
broadcasting in New York. The Company is cooperating with the Attorney General in this
investigation.
In May 2007, the Company received a request for information and documents from the FCC related to
the Companys sponsorship of identification policies and sponsorship identification practices at
certain of its radio stations as requested by the FCC. The Company is cooperating with the FCC in
this investigation and is in the process of producing documents and other information requested by
the FCC. The Company has not yet determined what effect the inquiry will have, if any, on its
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
The Company is aware of two active purported class action lawsuits related to the proposed
acquisition of the Company that was announced in July 2007 but terminated in May 2008: Jeff
Michelson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Cumulus Media Inc., et al.
(Case No. 2007CV137612, filed July 27, 2007) was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County,
Georgia against the Company, Lew Dickey and the sponsor; and Paul Cowles v. Cumulus Media Inc., et
al. (Case No. 2007-CV-139323, filed August 31, 2007) was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton
County, Georgia against the Company, Lew Dickey, the other directors and the sponsor.
The complaints in the two lawsuits made similar allegations initially, but on June 25, 2008 and
July 11, 2008, respectively, plaintiffs in the Georgia lawsuits filed amended complaints, alleging,
among other things, entirely new state law claims, including breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and
abetting a breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, corporate waste, unjust
enrichment, rescission and accounting. The amended complaints further allege, for the first time,
misrepresentations or omissions in
14
Table of Contents
connection with the purchase or sale of securities by the Company. The amended complaints seek,
among other relief, damages on behalf of the putative class.
The Company believes that it has committed no disclosure violations or any other breaches or
violations whatsoever, including in connection with the terminated acquisition transaction. In
addition, the Company has been advised that the other defendants named in the complaints similarly
believe the allegations of wrongdoing in the complaints to be without merit, and deny any breach of
duty to or other wrongdoing with respect to the purported plaintiff classes.
With respect to the two lawsuits, defendants removed them to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia on July 17, 2008 and filed motions to dismiss both cases on July 24,
2008. In August 2008, plaintiffs moved to remand the cases back to state court. On February 6,
2009, the U.S. District Court remanded both class action lawsuits, as well as the pending motion to
dismiss, to the Supreme Court of Fulton County, Georgia.
The Company is also a defendant from time to time in various other lawsuits, which are generally
incidental to its business. The Company is vigorously contesting all such matters and believes that
their ultimate resolution will not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial
position, results of operations or cash flows. The Company is not a party to any lawsuit or
proceeding which, in managements opinion, is likely to have a material adverse effect.
10. Acquisitions and Dispositions
During the first quarter ended March 31, 2009, the Company completed a swap transaction pursuant to
which it exchanged WZBN-FM, Camilla, Georgia, for W250BC, a translator licensed for use in Atlanta,
Georgia, owned by Extreme Media Group. The fair value of the assets acquired in exchange for the
assets disposed, was accounted for under SFAS No. 141R. This transaction was not material to the
results of the Company.
11. Restricted Cash
As of January 1, 2009, the Company changed its health insurance coverage to a self insured policy
requiring the Company to deposit funds with its third party administrator (TPA) to fund the cost
associated with current claims. Disbursements for the incurred and approved claims are paid out of
the restricted cash account and are administered by the Companys TPA. As of March 31, 2009, the
Companys balance sheet included approximately $0.2 million in restricted cash.
12. Investment in affiliate
The Companys investment in Cumulus Media Partners, LLC (CMP) is accounted for under the equity
method. For the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company recorded
approximately $0.0 million and $0.2 million as equity losses in affiliate, respectively. For each
of the three month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, the affiliate generated revenues of $35.8 and
$46.9 million, operating expense of $23.2 and $28.2 million
and income of approximately $49.3 million
and $0.6 million, respectively.
Concurrent with the consummation of the acquisition of CMP, the Company entered into a management
agreement with a subsidiary of CMP, pursuant to which the Companys personnel will manage the
operations of CMPs subsidiaries. The agreement provides for the Company to receive, on a quarterly
basis, a management fee that is expected to be approximately 1% of the CMP subsidiaries annual
EBITDA or $4.0 million, whichever is greater. For the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008,
the Company recorded as net revenues approximately $1.0 million in management fees from CMP.
Two indirect subsidiaries of CMP, Radio Holdings and CMPSC, commenced an exchange offer (the 2009 Exchange Offer) on March 9, 2009,
pursuant to which they offered to exchange all of CMPSCs 9 7/8% senior subordinated notes due 2014
(the Existing Notes) (1) up to $15 million aggregate principal amount of Variable Rate Senior
Subordinated Secured Second Lien Notes due 2014 of CMPSC (the New Notes), (2) up to $35 million
in shares of Series A preferred stock of Radio Holdings (the New Preferred Stock), and (3)
warrants exercisable for shares of Radio Holdings common stock representing, in the aggregate, up
to 40% of the outstanding common stock on a fully diluted basis (the New Warrants).
On March 26, 2009, Radio Holdings and CMPSC completed the exchange of, $175,464,000 aggregate
principal amount of Existing Notes, which represented 93.5% of the total principal amount
outstanding prior to the commencement of the 2009 Exchange Offer, for $14,031,000 aggregate
principal amount of New Notes, 3,273,633 shares of New Preferred Stock and New Warrants exercisable
for 3,740,893 shares of Radio Holdings common stock.
15
Table of Contents
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
General
The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in
conjunction with our condensed consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto included
elsewhere in this quarterly report. This discussion, as well as various other sections of this
quarterly report, contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements relate to the
intent, belief or current expectations of our officers primarily with respect to our future
operating performance. Any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance
and may involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ from those in the
forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including but not limited to, risks and
uncertainties relating to the need for additional funds, FCC and government approval of pending
acquisitions, our inability to renew one or more of our broadcast licenses, changes in interest
rates, consummation of our pending acquisitions, integration of acquisitions, our ability to
eliminate certain costs, the management of rapid growth, the popularity of radio as a broadcasting
and advertising medium, changing consumer tastes, the impact of general economic conditions in the
United States or in specific markets in which we currently do business, industry conditions,
including existing competition and future competitive technologies and cancellation, disruptions or
postponements of advertising schedules in response to national or world events. Many of these risks
and uncertainties are beyond our control. This discussion identifies important factors that could
cause such differences. The unexpected occurrence of any such factors would significantly alter the
results set forth in these statements.
Overview
The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations includes the results
of acquisitions and local marketing, management and consulting agreements. As of March 31, 2009, we
owned and operated 314 stations in 59 U.S. markets, provided sales and marketing services under
local marketing, management and consulting agreements (pending FCC approval of acquisition) to
nine stations in four U.S. markets and as a result of our investment in CMP, manage an additional
33 stations in 9 markets, making us the second largest radio broadcasting company in the United
States based on number of stations. We believe that, including the stations we manage through CMP,
we are the third largest radio broadcasting company based on net revenues.
Our historical focus has been on mid-sized markets throughout the United
States. Among the reasons we have historically focused on such markets is our belief that these markets
are characterized by a lower susceptibility to economic downturns.
Our belief stems from historical experience that indicates that during
recessionary times these markets have tended to be more resilient to
economic declines. In addition, these markets, as compared to large markets, are
characterized by a higher ratio of local advertisers to national
advertisers and a larger number of smaller-dollar customers, both of which lead to lower
volatility in the face of changing macroeconomic conditions.
Liquidity Considerations
Given the current capital and credit market crisis, and in conjunction with the development of our 2009 business plan, we continue to assess the
impact of recent market developments on a variety of areas, including our forecasted advertising
revenues and liquidity. In response to these conditions, we refined our 2009 business plan to
incorporate a further reduction in our forecasted 2009 revenues and additional cost reductions to
mitigate the impact of our anticipated decline in 2009 revenues.
Based upon actions we have already taken, including employee reductions and continued scrutiny of all
operating expenses, as well as a new sales initiative implemented during the first quarter of
2009, the goal of which is to increase advertising revenues by re-engineering our sales techniques
through enhanced training of our sales force, and a mandatory
one-week furlough to be implemented during the second quarter of 2009, management believes that we will continue to be in
compliance with all of our debt covenants through March 31, 2010 (which become more restrictive
beginning with the quarter ending September 30, 2009). We will continue to monitor our revenues and cost
structure closely and take further actions as needed. See further discussion of liquidity
considerations in Liquidity and Capital Resources Sources of Liquidity below and Note 1 to
the consolidated financial statements.
Our management team remains focused on our strategy of pursuing growth through acquisition.
However, acquisitions are closely evaluated to ensure that they will generate incremental value to
our existing portfolio of radio stations, and as such, our management is committed to completing
only those acquisitions that they believe will increase our Station Operating Income. The
compression of publicly traded radio broadcast company multiples since 2005, combined with a market
for privately held radio stations that did not see corresponding multiples compression, translated
to minimal acquisition activity for us in 2008 and in the first quarter of 2009.
As of March 31, 2009, the effective interest rate on the borrowings pursuant to our credit
facilities was approximately 2.275%. As of March 31, 2009, our average cost of debt, including the
effects of our derivative position, was 4.146%.
Advertising Revenue and Station Operating Income
16
Table of Contents
Our primary source of revenue is the sale of advertising time on our radio stations. Our sales of
advertising time are primarily affected by the demand for advertising time from local, regional and
national advertisers and the advertising rates charged by our radio stations. Advertising demand
and rates are based primarily on a stations ability to attract audiences in the demographic groups
targeted by its advertisers, as measured principally by Arbitron on a periodic basis, generally two
to four times per year. Because audience ratings in local markets are crucial to a stations
financial success, we endeavor to develop strong listener loyalty. We believe that the
diversification of formats on our stations helps to insulate them from the effects of changes in
the musical tastes of the public with respect to any particular format.
The current economic crisis has reduced demand for advertising in general, including advertising on our
radio stations. In addition, the recent capital and credit market crisis is adversely affecting the U.S. and global economies.
This has and could continue to have adverse effects on the markets in which we operate. Continued
slow economic growth could lead to increasingly lower demand for advertising. The recent economic
downturn and resulting decline in the demand for advertising could continue to have future adverse
effects on our ability to grow revenues.
The number of advertisements that can be broadcast without jeopardizing listening levels and the
resulting ratings is limited in part by the format of a particular station. Our stations strive to
maximize revenue by managing their on-air inventory of advertising time and adjusting prices based
upon local market conditions. In the broadcasting industry, radio stations sometimes utilize trade
or barter agreements that exchange advertising time for goods or services such as travel or
lodging, instead of for cash.
Our advertising contracts are generally short-term. We generate most of our revenue from local
advertising, which is sold primarily by a stations sales staff. During the three months ended
March 31, 2009 and 2008, approximately 89.6% and 88.9% of our revenues were from local advertising,
respectively. We generate national advertising revenue with the assistance of an outside national
representation firm. We engaged Katz Media Group, Inc. (Katz) to represent us as our national
advertising sales agent.
Our revenues vary throughout the year. As is typical in the radio broadcasting industry, we expect
our first calendar quarter will produce the lowest revenues for the year, and the second and fourth
calendar quarters will generally produce the highest revenues for the year, with the exception of
certain of our stations such as those in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, where the stations generally
earn higher revenues in the second and third quarters of the year because of the higher seasonal
population in those communities. Our operating results in any period may be affected by the
incurrence of advertising and promotion expenses that typically do not have an effect on revenue
generation until future periods, if at all.
Our most significant station operating expenses are employee salaries and commissions, programming
expenses, advertising and promotional expenditures, technical expenses, and general and
administrative expenses. We strive to control these expenses by working closely with local station
management. The performance of radio station groups, such as ours, is customarily measured by the
ability to generate Station Operating Income. See the quantitative reconciliation of Station
Operating Income the most directly comparable financial measure calculated and presented in
accordance with GAAP, that follows this section.
Results of Operations
Analysis of Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. The following analysis of selected
data from our condensed consolidated statements of operations and other supplementary data should
be referred to while reading the results of operations discussion that follows (dollars in
thousands):
17
Table of Contents
For the Three Months | ||||||||||||||||
Ended March 31, | Dollar Change | Percent Change | ||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 vs. 2008 | 2009 vs. 2008 | |||||||||||||
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS DATA: |
||||||||||||||||
Net revenues |
$ | 55,353 | $ | 72,900 | $ | (17,547 | ) | -24.1 | % | |||||||
Station operating expenses (excluding
depreciation, amortization and LMA fees) |
42,298 | 51,149 | (8,851 | ) | -17.3 | % | ||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
2,898 | 3,111 | (213 | ) | -6.8 | % | ||||||||||
LMA fees |
469 | 180 | 289 | 160.6 | % | |||||||||||
Corporate general and administrative (including
non-cash stock compensation expense) |
6,108 | 5,461 | 647 | 11.8 | % | |||||||||||
Costs associated with terminated transaction |
| 140 | (140 | ) | -100.0 | % | ||||||||||
Operating income |
3,580 | 12,859 | (9,279 | ) | -72.2 | % | ||||||||||
Interest expense, net |
(7,737 | ) | (20,532 | ) | 12,795 | -62.3 | % | |||||||||
Other income, net |
3 | 18 | (15 | ) | -83.3 | % | ||||||||||
Income tax benefit |
858 | 3,663 | (2,805 | ) | -76.6 | % | ||||||||||
Equity losses in affiliate |
| (248 | ) | 248 | -100.0 | % | ||||||||||
Net loss |
$ | (3,296 | ) | $ | (4,240 | ) | $ | 944 | -22.3 | % | ||||||
OTHER DATA: |
||||||||||||||||
Station Operating Income (1) |
$ | 13,055 | $ | 21,751 | $ | (8,696 | ) | -40.0 | % | |||||||
Station Operating Income Margin (2) |
23.6 | % | 29.8 | % | ** | ** | ||||||||||
Cash flows related to: |
||||||||||||||||
Operating activities |
6,632 | 10,725 | (4,093 | ) | -38.2 | % | ||||||||||
Investing activities |
(809 | ) | (2,845 | ) | 2,036 | -71.6 | % | |||||||||
Financing activities |
(13,949 | ) | (10,129 | ) | (3,820 | ) | 37.7 | % |
18
Table of Contents
** | Not a meaningful calculation to present. | |
(1) | Station Operating Income consists of operating income before depreciation and amortization, LMA fees, corporate general and administrative expenses, non-cash stock compensation, impairment of goodwill and intangible assets and costs associated with the terminated transaction. Station Operating Income is not a measure of performance calculated in accordance with GAAP. Station Operating Income should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for net income, operating income (loss), cash flows from operating activities or any other measure for determining our operating performance or liquidity that is calculated in accordance with GAAP. See managements explanation of this measure and the reasons for its use and presentation, along with a quantitative reconciliation of Station Operating Income to its most directly comparable financial measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP, below under -Station Operating Income. | |
(2) | Station Operating Income margin is defined as Station Operating Income as a percentage of net revenues. |
Three Months Ended March 31, 2009 versus the Three Months Ended March 31, 2008.
Net Revenues. Net revenues decreased $17.6 million or 24.1% to $55.3 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2009 compared to $72.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2008, primarily
due to the impact the current economic recession has had across our entire station platform. We
believe that while this negative trend will continue through the fourth quarter of 2009, the
rate of decline should begin to become less severe sometime during the fourth quarter.
Station Operating Expenses, Excluding Depreciation, Amortization and LMA Fees. Station operating
expenses excluding depreciation, amortization and LMA fees decreased $8.9 million, or 17.3%, to
$42.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009 from $51.2 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2008, primarily due to our continued efforts to contain operating costs such as
employee reductions and continued scrutiny of all operating expenses. We will continue to monitor
all our operating costs as well as implement additional cost saving measures as necessary, such as employee furloughs (including the furlough to be implemented during the second quarter of 2009) and further employee reductions, in order to
remain in compliance with current and future covenant requirements.
Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization remained relatively flat decreasing
$0.2 million, or 6.8%, to $2.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009, compared to $3.1
million for the three months ended March 31, 2008.
LMA Fees. LMA fees totaled $0.5 million and $0.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009
and 2008, respectively. LMA fees in the current year were comprised primarily of fees associated
with stations operated under LMAs in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Ann Arbor,
Michigan, Cincinnati, Ohio, and
Battle Creek, Michigan.
Corporate, General and Administrative Expenses Including Non-cash Stock Compensation. Corporate,
general and administrative expenses increased $0.6 million, or 11.8%, to $6.1 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2009, compared to $5.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2008,
primarily due to a $1.6 million increase in professional fees associated with our defense of
certain law suits plus timing differences associated with the payment of various corporate expenses,
offset by a $1.4 million decrease in non cash stock compensation, due to the absence of
amortization expense associated with certain option awards becoming fully amortized in 2008.
Non-operating (Income) Expense. Interest expense, net of interest income decreased by $12.8
million, or 62.3%, to $7.7 million expense for the three months ended March 31, 2009 as compared
with $20.5 million expense in the prior years period. Interest expense associated with
outstanding debt, decreased by $6.1 million to $4.1 million as compared to $10.2 million in the
prior years period, primarily due to lower average levels of bank debt, as well as, a decrease in
the interest rates associated with our debt. The following summary details the components of our
interest expense, net of interest income (dollars in thousands):
19
Table of Contents
For the Three Months | ||||||||||||||||
Ended March 31, | Dollar | Percent | ||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Change | Change | |||||||||||||
Bank Borrowings term loan and revolving credit facilities |
$ | 4,115 | $ | 10,255 | $ | (6,140 | ) | -59.9 | % | |||||||
Bank Borrowings yield adjustment interest rate swap arrangement |
2,363 | (884 | ) | 3,247 | -367.3 | % | ||||||||||
Change in fair value of interest rate swap agreement |
(3,043 | ) | 6,389 | (9,432 | ) | -147.6 | % | |||||||||
Change in fair value of interest rate option agreement |
4,045 | 4,896 | (851 | ) | -17.4 | % | ||||||||||
Other interest expense |
303 | 204 | 99 | 48.5 | % | |||||||||||
Interest income |
(46 | ) | (328 | ) | 282 | -86.0 | % | |||||||||
Interest expense, net |
$ | 7,737 | $ | 20,532 | $ | (12,795 | ) | -62.3 | % | |||||||
Income Taxes. We recorded an income tax benefit of $0.9 million for the three months ended March
31, 2009, compared to an income tax benefit of $3.7 million for the three months ended March 31,
2008. The change in the effective tax rate during 2009 as compared to 2008 is primarily
due to the change in the mix of forecasted tax attributes.
Station Operating Income. As a result of the factors described above, Station Operating Income
decreased $8.7 million, or 40.0%, to $13.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009,
compared to $21.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2008.
Station Operating Income consists of operating income before depreciation and amortization, LMA
fees, corporate general and administrative expenses, including non-cash stock compensation,
impairment of goodwill and intangible assets, and cost associated with the terminated transaction.
Station Operating Income should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for net income,
operating income (loss), cash flows from operating activities or any other measure for determining
our operating performance or liquidity that is calculated in accordance with GAAP. We exclude
depreciation and amortization due to the insignificant investment in tangible assets required to
operate our stations and the relatively insignificant amount of intangible assets subject to
amortization. We exclude LMA fees from this measure, even though it requires a cash commitment, due
to the insignificance and temporary nature of such fees. Corporate expenses, despite representing
an additional significant cash commitment, are excluded in an effort to present the operating
performance of our stations exclusive of the corporate resources employed. We exclude terminated
transaction costs due to the temporary nature of such fees. We believe this is important to our
investors because it highlights the gross margin generated by our station portfolio. Finally, we
exclude non-cash stock compensation and impairment of goodwill and intangible assets from the
measure as they do not represent cash payments for activities related to the operation of the
stations.
We believe that Station Operating Income is the most frequently used financial measure in
determining the market value of a radio station or group of stations. We have observed that Station
Operating Income is commonly employed by firms that provide appraisal services to the broadcasting
industry in valuing radio stations. Further, in each of the more than 140 radio station
acquisitions we have completed since our inception, we have used Station Operating Income as our
primary metric to evaluate and negotiate the purchase price to be paid. Given its relevance to the
estimated value of a radio station, we believe, and our experience indicates, that investors
consider the measure to be useful in order to determine the value of our portfolio of stations. We
believe that Station Operating Income is the most commonly used financial measure employed by the
investment community to compare the performance of radio station operators. Finally, Station
Operating Income is one of the measures that our management uses to evaluate the performance and
results of our stations. Our management uses the measure to assess the performance of our station
managers and our Board of Directors uses it as part of its assessment of the relative performance
of our executive management. As a result, in disclosing Station Operating Income, we are providing
our investors with an analysis of our performance that is consistent with that which is utilized by
our management and our Board.
Station Operating Income is not a recognized term under GAAP and does not purport to be an
alternative to operating income from continuing operations as a measure of operating performance or
to cash flows from operating activities as a measure of liquidity. Additionally, Station Operating
Income is not intended to be a measure of free cash flow available for dividends, reinvestment in
our business or other Company discretionary use, as it does not consider certain cash requirements
such as interest payments, tax payments and debt service requirements. Station Operating Income
should be viewed as a supplement to, and not a substitute for, results of operations presented on
the basis of GAAP. We compensate for the limitations of using Station Operating Income by using it
only to supplement our GAAP results to provide a more complete understanding of the factors and
trends affecting our business than
20
Table of Contents
GAAP results alone. Station Operating Income has its limitations
as an analytical tool, and you should not consider it in isolation or as a substitute for analysis
of our results as reported under GAAP. Moreover, because not all companies use identical
calculations, these presentations of Station Operating Income may not be comparable to other
similarly titled measures of other companies.
Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measure. The following table reconciles Station Operating
Income to operating income as presented in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of
operations (the most directly comparable financial measure calculated and presented in accordance
with GAAP, dollars in thousands):
For the Three Months | Dollar | Percent | ||||||||||||||
Ended March 31, | Change | Change | ||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 vs. 2008 | 2009 vs. 2008 | |||||||||||||
Operating income |
$ | 3,580 | $ | 12,859 | $ | (9,279 | ) | -72.2 | % | |||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
2,898 | 3,111 | (213 | ) | -6.8 | % | ||||||||||
LMA fees |
469 | 180 | 289 | 160.6 | % | |||||||||||
Corporate general and administrative (including
non-cash stock compensation) |
6,108 | 5,461 | 647 | 11.8 | % | |||||||||||
Cost associated with terminated transaction |
| 140 | (140 | ) | -100.0 | % | ||||||||||
Station operating income |
$ | 13,055 | $ | 21,751 | $ | (8,696 | ) | -40.0 | % | |||||||
Intangible Assets (including FCC Licenses and Goodwill). Intangible assets (including FCC licenses
and goodwill), net of amortization, were $384.0 million as of March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively. These intangible asset balances primarily consist of broadcast licenses and goodwill,
although we possess certain other intangible assets obtained in connection with our acquisitions,
such as non-compete agreements. Specifically identified intangible assets, including broadcasting
licenses, acquired in a business combination are recorded at their estimated fair value on the date
of the related acquisition. Purchased intangible assets are recorded at cost. Goodwill represents
the excess of purchase price over the fair value of tangible assets and specifically identified
intangible assets.
Generally, we perform our annual impairment tests for goodwill and indefinite-lived intangibles
under SFAS No. 142 as of December 31. The annual impairment tests require us to make certain
assumptions in determining fair value, including assumptions about the cash flow growth rates of
our businesses. Additionally, the fair values are significantly impacted by macro-economic factors,
including market multiples at the time the impairment tests are performed. In light of the overall
economic environment, we continue to monitor whether any impairment triggers are present and may be
required to record material impairment charges prior to the fourth quarter of 2009, when we conduct
our annual impairment testing. More specifically, the following could adversely impact the current
carrying value of our broadcast licenses and goodwill: (a) sustained decline in the price of our
common stock, (b) the potential for a decline in our forecasted operating profit margins or
expected cash flow growth rates, (c) a decline in our industry forecasted operating profit margins,
(d) the potential for a continued decline in advertising market revenues within the markets we
operate stations, or (e) the sustained decline in the selling prices of radio stations.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Historically, our principal need for funds has been to fund the acquisition of radio stations,
expenses associated with our station and corporate operations, capital expenditures, repurchases of
our Class A Common Stock, and interest and debt service payments. In the short term, we expect
that our principal future need for funds will include the funding of station operating expenses,
corporate general and administrative expenses and interest and debt service payments. In addition,
in the long term, we expect that our funding needs will include future acquisitions and capital
expenditures associated with maintaining our station and corporate operations and implementing HD
Radiotm technology.
Our principal sources of funds for these requirements have been cash flow from operating activities
and borrowings under our credit facilities. Our cash flow from operations is subject to such
factors as shifts in population, station listenership, demographics or, audience tastes, and
fluctuations in preferred advertising media. In addition, customers may not be able to pay, or may
delay payment
21
Table of Contents
of, accounts receivable that are owed to us. Management has taken steps to mitigate this risk
through heightened collection efforts and enhancing our credit approval process. As discussed
further below, borrowings under our credit facilities are subject to financial covenants that can
restrict our financial flexibility. Further, our ability to obtain additional equity or debt
financing is also subject to market conditions and operating performance. During the current
recession affecting the global financial markets, some companies have experienced difficulties
accessing their cash equivalents, trading investment securities, drawing on revolving loans,
issuing debt and raising capital, which has had a material adverse impact on their liquidity. We
have assessed the implications of these factors on our current business and determined, based on
our financial condition as of March 31, 2009, that cash on hand and cash expected to be generated
from operating activities and, if necessary, financing activities, will be sufficient to satisfy
our anticipated financing needs for working capital, capital expenditures, interest and debt
service payments and potential acquisitions and repurchases of securities and other debt
obligations through March 31, 2010. However, given the uncertainty of the markets cash flows and
the impact of the current recession on guarantors, there can be no assurance that cash generated
from operations will be sufficient, or financing will be available at terms, and on the timetable,
that may be necessary to meet our future capital needs.
For the three months ended March 31, 2009, net cash provided by operating activities decreased $4.1 million to $6.6 million from net cash provided by operating activities of $10.7 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2008. The decrease was primarily attributable to a $10.3 million
decrease associated with the adjustment required to mark the
derivative instruments to fair value,
offset by a $2.8 million increase in deferred income taxes and an increase in accounts receivable
of $5.0 million, with the remaining change primarily attributable to the timing of certain
payments.
For the three months ended March 31, 2009, net cash used in investing activities decreased $2.0
million to $0.8 million from net cash used in investing activities of $2.8 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2008, primarily due to a $2.0 million decrease in capital expenditures in
2009 as compared to the same period in 2008.
For the three months ended March 31, 2009, net cash used in financing activities increased $3.8 million to $13.9 million compared to net cash used in financing activities of $10.1 million during
the three months ended March 31, 2008, primarily due to repayments of borrowings outstanding under
our credit facilities, offset by the absence of tax withholding paid on behalf of employees.
Consideration of Recent Economic Developments
Given the
current capital and credit market crisis, and in conjunction with
the development of our 2009 business plan, we continue to assess the impact of recent market
developments on a variety of areas, including our forecasted advertising revenues and liquidity.
For example, in November 2008, Moodys credit rating agency downgraded our debt rating from B2 to
Caa. In response to these conditions, we refined our 2009 business
plan to incorporate a further reduction
in our forecasted 2009 revenues and additional cost reductions implemented in fourth quarter 2008 and first
quarter 2009 to mitigate the impact of our anticipated decline in
2009 revenues. We believe that
while this negative trend will continue through at least the fourth quarter of 2009, the rate of
the decline should begin to become less severe sometime during the fourth quarter. In an effort to
address the negative trend in advertising revenues, management has made continued efforts to
contain operating costs, such as employee reductions and continued scrutiny of
all operating expenses. Additionally, management implemented a new sales initiative during the first
quarter of 2009, the goal of which is to increase advertising revenues by re-engineering our sales
techniques through enhanced training of our sales force. Since the initiative is newly
implemented, we cannot determine at this time if the impact of this
new initiative will effectively reverse or mitigate the decline we have been experiencing in advertising revenues.
Finally, we have initiated a mandatory furlough to be implemented
during the second quarter of 2009. We will continue to monitor our
revenues and cost structure closely and, especially if our revenue declines greater than the forecasted decline from 2008 or if we exceed planned
spending, we may take further actions as needed, including additional
furloughs or further employee reductions, to maintain compliance with
our debt covenants, including the total leverage
ratio under the Credit Agreement (as described below). If our
remedial measures are not successful in maintaining covenant
compliance, then we would expect to negotiate with our lenders for relief,
which relief could result in higher interest expense. Failure to
comply with our financial covenants or other terms of our Credit
Agreement and failure to negotiate relief from our lenders could
result in the acceleration of the maturity of all outstanding debt.
Under these circumstances, the acceleration of our debt could have a
material adverse effect on our business.
While preparing our 2009 business plan, we assessed future covenant compliance under our
Credit Agreement, including consideration of market uncertainties, as well as the
incremental cost that would be required to potentially amend the terms of our credit agreement. We
believe we will continue to be in compliance with all of our debt covenants through at least March
31, 2010 based upon actions taken as discussed above, as well as through additional paydowns of
debt estimated to be approximately $59.3 million that we expect to make through the first quarter
of 2010 based upon our updated covenant forecasts from existing cash balances and cash flow
generated from operations. Based upon the budgeted results, managements 2009 business
plan, and our outstanding borrowings as of March 31, 2009, we will be required to make additional
payments of principal indebtedness no later than the third quarter of 2009 in order to remain in
compliance with the maximum leverage ratio. Further discussion of our debt covenant compliance is
included below.
22
Table of Contents
Senior Secured Credit Facilities
On June 11, 2007, we entered into an amendment to our existing credit agreement governing our
senior secured credit facilities, dated June 7, 2006, by and among us, Bank of America, N.A., as
administrative agent, and the lenders party thereto. The credit agreement, as amended, is referred
to herein as the Credit Agreement.
The Credit Agreement provides for a replacement term loan facility, in the original aggregate
principal amount of $750.0 million, to replace the prior term loan facility, which had an
outstanding balance of approximately $713.9 million, and maintains the pre-existing $100.0 million
revolving credit facility. The proceeds of the replacement term loan facility, fully funded on June
11, 2007, were used to repay the outstanding balances under the prior term loan facility and under
the revolving credit facility.
Our obligations under the Credit Agreement are collateralized by substantially all of our assets in
which a security interest may lawfully be granted (including FCC licenses held by its
subsidiaries), including, without limitation, intellectual property and all of the capital stock of
our direct and indirect domestic subsidiaries (except for Broadcast Software International, Inc.). In addition, our obligations
under the Credit Agreement are guaranteed by certain of our
subsidiaries.
The Credit Agreement contains terms and conditions customary for financing arrangements of this
nature. The replacement term loan facility will mature on June 11, 2014 and will amortize in equal
quarterly installments beginning on September 30, 2007, with 0.25% of the initial aggregate
advances payable each quarter during the first six years of the term, and 23.5% due in each quarter
during the seventh year. The revolving credit facility will mature on June 7, 2012 and, except at
our option, the commitment will remain unchanged up to that date.
Borrowings under the replacement term loan facility will bear interest, at our option, at a rate
equal to LIBOR plus 1.75% or the Alternate Base Rate (defined as the higher of the Bank of America
Prime Rate and the Federal Funds rate plus 0.50%) plus 0.75%. Borrowings under the revolving credit
facility will bear interest, at our option, at a rate equal to LIBOR plus a margin ranging between
0.675% and 2.0% or the Alternate Base Rate plus a margin ranging between 0.0% and 1.0% (in either
case dependent upon our leverage ratio).
As of March 31, 2009, prior to the effect of the May 2005 option, the effective interest rate of
the outstanding borrowings pursuant to the credit facility was approximately 2.275%. As of March
31, 2009, the effective interest rate inclusive of the May 2005 option was 4.146%.
Certain mandatory prepayments of the term loan facility will be required upon the occurrence of
specified events, including upon the incurrence of certain additional indebtedness (other than
under any incremental credit facilities under the Credit Agreement) and upon the sale of certain
assets.
The representations, covenants and events of default in the Credit Agreement are customary for
financing transactions of this nature. Events of default in the Credit Agreement include, among
others, (a) the failure to pay when due the obligations owing under the credit facilities; (b) the
failure to perform (and not timely remedy, if applicable) certain covenants; (c) cross default and
cross acceleration; (d) the occurrence of bankruptcy or insolvency events; (e) certain judgments
against the Company or any of its subsidiaries; (f) the loss, revocation or suspension of, or any
material impairment in the ability to use of or more of, any of our material FCC licenses; (g) any
representation or warranty made, or report, certificate or financial statement delivered, to the
lenders subsequently proven to have been incorrect in any material respect; (h) the occurrence of a
Change in Control (as defined in the Credit Agreement); and violation of certain financial
covenants. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the lenders may terminate the loan
commitments, accelerate all loans and exercise any of their rights under the Credit Agreement and
the ancillary loan documents as a secured party.
23
Table of Contents
As discussed above, our covenants contain certain financial covenants including:
| a maximum leverage ratio, calculated by dividing Total Indebtedness by Adjusted EBITDA (each as defined in the Credit Agreement); | ||
| a minimum fixed charges ratio, calculated by dividing Consolidated EBITDA by Consolidated Fixed Charges (each as defined in the Credit Agreement); and | ||
| a limit on annual capital expenditures. |
As of
March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, we were in compliance with all financial and non-financial covenants. Our
covenant requirements and actual ratios as of March 31, 2009 are as follows:
As of March 31, 2009 | As of December 31, 2008 | ||||||||||||||
Covenant | Actual | Covenant | Actual | ||||||||||||
requirement | ratio | requirement | ratio | ||||||||||||
Total leverage ratio: |
<8.50:1 | 8.14 | <8.50:1 | 7.40 | |||||||||||
Fixed charges ratio: |
>1.1:1 | 1.83 | >1.1:1 | 1.86 |
The maximum leverage ratio in the Credit Agreement becomes more restrictive over the term of the
agreement. For the quarterly periods ended March 31, 2009 and June 30, 2009, our maximum leverage
ratio requirement is 8.50:1. Beginning with the quarterly period ending September 30, 2009 and
through December 31, 2009, the maximum leverage ratio requirement is 8.00:1. For the quarterly
periods ending March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2010, the total leverage ratio is 7.50:1. The ratio
drops to 7.00:1 for the quarterly periods ending September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2010. For the
quarterly period ending March 31, 2011 and thereafter, the ratio drops to 6.50:1.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the
reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, our management, in consultation with the
Audit Committee of our Board, evaluates these estimates, including those related to bad debts,
intangible assets, income taxes, and contingencies and litigation. We base our estimates on
historical experience and on various assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values
of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may
differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. We believe the following
critical accounting policies affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in the
preparation of our consolidated financial statements.
Revenue
We recognize revenue from the sale of commercial broadcast time to advertisers when the commercials
are broadcast, subject to meeting certain conditions such as persuasive evidence that an
arrangement exists and collection is reasonably assured. These criteria are generally met at the
time an advertisement is broadcast.
Allowance
for Doubtful Accounts
We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the inability of
our customers to make required payments. We determine the allowance based on historical write-off
experience and trends. We review our allowance for doubtful accounts monthly. Past due balances
over 120 days are reviewed individually for collectability. All other balances are reviewed and
evaluated on a pooled basis. Account balances are charged off against the allowance after all means
of collection have been exhausted and the potential for recovery is considered remote. Although our
management believes that the allowance for doubtful accounts is our best estimate of the amount of
probable credit losses, if the financial condition of our customers were to deteriorate, resulting
in an impairment of their ability to make payments, additional allowances may be required.
Intangible
Assets
We have significant intangible assets recorded in our accounts. These intangible assets are
comprised primarily of broadcast licenses and goodwill acquired through the acquisition of radio
stations. SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and other Intangible Assets, requires that the carrying value of
our goodwill and certain intangible assets be reviewed at least annually for impairment and charged
to results of operations in the periods in which the recorded value of those assets is more than
their fair market value. For the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008 we recorded impairment
charges of $0.0 million, respectively, and for the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded impairment charges of
approximately $498.9 million, in each case in order to reduce the carrying value of certain
broadcast licenses and goodwill to their respective fair market values. As of March 31, 2009, we
had $384.0 million in intangible assets and goodwill, which represented approximately 73.3% of our
total assets.
Goodwill
In performing our annual impairment testing of goodwill, we first calculate the fair value of each
reporting unit using an income approach and discounted cash flow methodology. We then perform the
Step 1 test as dictated by FAS 142 and compare the fair value of each unit of accounting to its
book net assets as of December 31, 2008. For reporting units where a Step 1 indicator of impairment
exists, we then performed the Step 2 test in order to determine if goodwill is impaired on any of
our reporting units.
Consistent with prior years, we employ a ten-year discounted cash-flow methodology to arrive at the
fair value of each reporting unit. In calculating the fair value, we first derive the stand alone
projected ten-year cash flows for each reporting unit. This process starts with the projected cash
flows of each of our reporting units. These cash flows are then discounted or adjusted to account
for expenses or investments that are not accumulated in each reporting units results.
We then determined that, based on our Step 1 goodwill test, the fair value of 5 of our 17 reporting
units containing goodwill balances, exceeded their adjusted net assets value. Accordingly, as no
impairment indicator existed and
as the implied fair value of goodwill did not appear to exceed its carrying value in these
reporting units, we determined that goodwill was appropriately stated, as of December 31, 2008.
However, in 12 reporting units, our Step 1 comparison of the fair value of the reporting unit to
its adjusted net assets value yielded an excess of carrying amount to fair value and, thus, an
indication of impairment. For purposes of this Step 1 analysis, we also included reporting units
that were we perceived as being on the bubble. These reporting units had an excess fair value
ranging from $129,000 to $1.8 million. We noted that due to the subjectivities and sensitivities
inherent in the calculations and subsequent analysis that these reporting units should be subjected
to Step 2 impairment testing in order to measure the potential impairment loss.
In accordance with FAS 142, for any reporting unit where an impairment indicator existed as a
result of conducting the Step 1 test, we performed the Step 2 test to measure the amount, if any,
of impairment loss related to goodwill.
As required by the Step 2 test, we prepared an allocation of the fair value of the reporting unit
as if the reporting unit was acquired in a business combination. The presumed purchase price
utilized in the calculation is the fair value of the reporting unit determined in the Step 1 test.
The results of our Step 2 test and the calculated impairment charge follows (dollars in thousands):
Reporting Unit | Implied Goodwill | 12-31-08 Goodwill | ||||||||||||||
Fair Value | Value | Carrying Value | Impairment | |||||||||||||
Reporting Unit A |
$ | 7,189 | $ | 3,827 | $ | 4,303 | $ | 476 | ||||||||
Reporting Unit B |
11,293 | 3,726 | 5,295 | 1,569 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit C |
5,640 | 3,447 | 2,450 | 0 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit D |
3,050 | 1,672 | 2,080 | 408 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit E |
5,425 | 2,860 | 2,068 | 0 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit F |
10,912 | 1,150 | 1,715 | 565 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit G |
8,309 | 712 | 5,907 | 5,195 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit H |
21,277 | 11,742 | 11,512 | 0 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit I |
12,699 | 1,478 | 8,099 | 6,621 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit J |
12,508 | 4,284 | 5,255 | 971 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit K |
21,176 | 0 | 21,437 | 21,437 | ||||||||||||
Reporting Unit L |
11,066 | 0 | 2,168 | 2,168 | ||||||||||||
$ | 39,410 |
The following table provides a breakdown of our goodwill balances as of December 31, 2008, by
reporting unit:
Description | Goodwill Balance | |||
Market A |
$ | | ||
Market B |
| |||
Market C |
| |||
Market D |
| |||
Market E |
3,827 | |||
Market F |
3,726 | |||
Market G |
13,847 | |||
Market H |
2,450 | |||
Market I |
1,672 | |||
Market J |
2,068 | |||
Market K |
1,929 | |||
Market L |
5,684 | |||
Market M |
1,150 | |||
Market N |
712 | |||
Market O |
11,512 | |||
Market P |
1,478 | |||
Market Q |
4,284 | |||
Market R |
| |||
Market S |
2,585 | |||
Market T |
1,965 | |||
$ | 58,891 | |||
To validate our conclusions and determine the reasonableness of our impairment charge related to
goodwill, we performed the following:
| conducted an overall reasonableness check of our fair value calculations by comparing the aggregate, calculated fair value of our reporting units to our accounting unit capitalization as of December 31, 2008; | ||
| prepared a reporting unit fair value calculation using a multiple of Adjusted EBITDA as a comparative data point to validate the fair values calculated using our discounted cash-flow approach; | ||
| reviewed the historical operating performance of each reporting unit with impairment; | ||
| reviewed the facts surrounding our acquisition of the impaired reporting unit, including original, implied acquisition Station Operating Income multiple; and | ||
| performed a sensitivity analysis on the overall fair value and impairment evaluation. |
The discount rate we employed in our reporting unit fair value calculation was 13.0%. We believe
that the 13.0% is accurate for goodwill purposes due to the resulting 6.8 times exit multiple (i.e.
equivalent to the terminal value).
Post 2009, we project revenue growth to be 2.6% and fixed operating expense to increase 1.5% with
variable expense increasing 2.6% (in line with the revenue increase). These variables result in
Station Operating Income increasing by approximately 40 basis points each year. Based on current
market and economic conditions and our historical knowledge of the reporting units, we are
comfortable with the ten year forecast of Station Operating Income by reporting unit.
24
Table of Contents
We derived projected expense growth based primarily on our historical experience and expected
future revenue growth. We projected growth for each reporting units fixed expense base at
approximately 1.5% annually. We calculated variable selling expenses based on revenues and at a
rate consistent with current experience for each reporting unit, which resulted in an approximate
growth rate projection of 2.6% through 2018.
For purposes of our fair value model, we have uniformly applied one discount rate to all reporting
units.
As compared with the market capitalization value of $594.3 million as of December 31, 2008, the
aggregate fair value of all reporting units of $598.4 million was approximately $4.0 million, or
0.69%, higher than as calculated.
Key data points included in the market capitalization calculation were as follows:
| Shares outstanding as of 12/31: 41.4 million | ||
| Average closing price of our Class A Common Stock over 32 days: $2.00 per share | ||
| Debt discounted by 26% (gross $696.0 million, net $515.0 million) |
Based on these calculations, we have concluded that the reporting unit is receiving a slight
control premium over the calculated enterprise value.
Utilizing the above analysis and data points, we have concluded the fair values of our reporting
units, as calculated, are appropriate and reasonable.
Changes to the Assumptions and Methodologies
We have also discounted projected cash flows for each reporting unit for a projected working
capital adjustment. This adjustment was based on actual 2008 working capital requirements and
allocated to each reporting unit based on percentage of revenue. Thus, as revenue decreased,
working capital requirements decreased and as revenue increased, working capital requirements
increased.
As previously noted, the basis used for reporting units did not change and there were no other
changes to methodologies in the current year other than the one described above.
Impact of Current Economic Environment on the Analysis
The current economic crisis has reduced demand for advertising in general, including advertising on
our radio stations. As such, revenue projections for the industry were down, which impacted our calculation by virtue of reducing our future cash flows, resulting
in a proportionate reduction in our discounted cash-flow valuation. Likewise, the combination of a
decline in current revenues and future projected revenues coupled with frozen capital accounting
units have contributed significantly to a decline in deals to acquire or sell companies within the
industry, the result of which has been a compression in the multiples on the radio station
transactions that have been completed in the past year. In the aggregate, these recent economic
developments have resulted in significant downward pressures on valuations across the radio
industry as a whole. Therefore, since we are a company that has experienced significant synthetic
growth at historically greater multiples than those currently utilized in our valuation model, we
are experiencing relatively large write-downs associated with our impairment calculation.
FCC Licenses
Consistent with EITF 02-07, we have combined the broadcast licenses in each accounting unit into a
single unit for impairment testing purposes. As part of our overall planning associated with the
indefinite lived intangibles test, we evaluated this determination. We note that the following
considerations, as cited by the EITF task force, continue to apply to our FCC licenses:
| in each market (accounting unit), the broadcast licenses were purchased to be used as one combined asset; | ||
| the combined group of licenses in an accounting unit represents the highest and best use of the assets and | ||
| each accounting units strategy provides evidence that the licenses are complementary. |
For the annual impairment test of broadcast license, we engaged an independent valuation expert as
opposed to performing this analysis in-house as has been done in previous years. In connection with
engaging the valuation expert, we reviewed the valuation experts prior experience and capabilities
in order to verify that the valuation expert was adequately qualified to perform radio appraisals.
Likewise, we reviewed the methodologies employed by the valuation expert in conducting tangible
asset, broadcast license and radio market valuations for reasonableness.
The valuation expert employed the three most widely accepted approaches in conducting its
appraisals: (1) the cost approach, (2) the market approach, and (3) the income approach. In
conducting the appraisals, the valuation expert conducted a thorough review of all aspects of the
assets being valued.
The cost approach measures value by determining the current cost of an asset and deducting for all
elements of depreciation (i.e., physical deterioration as well as functional and economic
obsolescence). In its simplest form, the cost approach is calculated by subtracting all
depreciation from current replacement cost.
The market approach measures value based on recent sales and offering prices of similar properties
and analyzes the data to arrive at an indication of the most probable sales price of the subject
property.
The income approach measures value based on income generated by the subject property, which is then
analyzed and projected over a specified time and capitalized at an appropriate market rate to
arrive at the estimated value.
The valuation expert relied on both the income and market approaches for the valuation of the FCC
licenses, with the exception of certain AM and FM stations that have been valued using the cost
approach. The valuation expert estimated this replacement value based on estimated legal,
consulting, engineering, and in-house charges to be $25,000 for each FM station. For each AM
station the replacement cost was estimated at $25,000 for a station licensed to operate with a
one-tower array and an additional charge of $10,000 for each additional tower in the stations
tower array.
The estimated fair values of the FCC licenses represent the amount at which an asset (or liability)
could be bought (or incurred) or sold (or settled) in a current transaction between willing parties
(i.e., other than in a forced or liquidation sale).
A basic assumption in our valuation of these FCC licenses was that these radio stations were new
radio stations, signing on-the-air as of the date of the valuation, December 31, 2008. We assumed
the competitive situation that existed in those markets as of that date, except that these stations
were just beginning operations. In doing so, we extract the value of going concern and any other
assets acquired, and strictly valued the FCC licenses.
We estimated the values of the AM and FM licenses, combined, through a discounted cash flow
analysis, which is an income valuation approach. In addition to the income approach, the valuation
expert also reviewed recent similar radio station sales in similarly sized markets.
In estimating the value of the AM and FM licenses using a discounted cash flow analysis, in order
to make the net free cash flow (to invested capital) projections, we began with market revenue
projections. We made assumptions about the stations future audience shares and revenue shares in
order to project the stations future revenues. We then projected future operating expenses and
operating profits derived. By combining these operating profits with depreciation, taxes, additions
to working capital, and capital expenditures, we projected net free cash flows.
We discounted the net free cash flows using an appropriate after-tax average weighted cost of
capital of approximately 11.5% and then calculated the total discounted net free cash flows. For
net free cash flows beyond the projection period, we estimated a perpetuity value, and then
discounted to present values, as of the valuation date.
We performed one discounted cash flow analysis for each unit of accounting. For each accounting
unit valued we analyzed the competing stations, including revenue and listening shares for the past
several years. In addition, for each accounting unit we analyzed the discounted cash flow
valuations of our assets within the accounting unit. Finally, we prepared a detailed analysis of
sales of comparable stations.
The first discounted cash flow analysis examined historical and projected gross radio revenues for
each accounting unit.
In order to estimate what listening audience share and revenue share would be expected for each
station by accounting unit, we analyzed the Arbitron audience estimates over the past two years to
determine the average local commercial share garnered by similar AM and FM stations competing in
those radio markets. Often we made adjustments to the listening share and revenue share based on
our stations signal coverage of the market and the surrounding areas population as compared to
the other stations in the market. Based on our knowledge of the industry and familiarity with
similar markets, we determined that approximately three years would be required for the stations to
reach maturity.
We also incorporated the following additional assumptions into the DCF valuation model:
| the stations gross revenues through 2016; | ||
| the projected operating expenses and profits over the same period of time (we considered operating expenses, except for sales expenses, to be fixed, and assumed sales expenses to be a fixed percentage of revenues); | ||
| calculations of yearly net free cash flows to invested capital. | ||
| depreciation on start-up construction costs and capital expenditures (we calculated depreciation using accelerated double declining balance guidelines over five years for the value of the tangible assets necessary for a radio station to go on-the-air); and | ||
| amortization of the intangible assetthe FCC License (we calculated amortization on a straight line basis over 15 years). |
After federal and state taxes are subtracted, net free cash flows were reduced for working capital.
According to recent editions of Risk Management Associations Annual Statement Studies, over the
past five years, the typical radio station has an average ratio of sales to working capital of
7.56. In other words, approximately 13.2% of a typical radio stations sales go to working capital.
As a result, we have allowed for working capital in the amount of 13.2% of the stations
incremental net revenues for each year of the projection period. After subtracting federal and
state taxes and accounting for the additions to working capital, we determined net free cash flows.
In connection with the elimination of amortization of broadcast licenses upon the adoption of
SFAS No. 142, the reversal of our deferred tax liabilities relating to those intangible assets is
no longer assured within our net operating loss carry-forward period. We have a valuation allowance of approximately $233.1 million as of March 31, 2009 based on our assessment of
whether it is more likely than not these deferred tax assets will be realized. Should we determine
that we would be able to realize all or part of our net deferred tax assets in the future,
reduction of the valuation allowance would be recorded in income in the period such determination
was made.
Stock-based Compensation
Stock-based compensation expense recognized under SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, for the
three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, was $0.6 million and $2.0 million, respectively, before income taxes. Upon adopting SFAS No. 123(R),
for awards with service conditions, a one-time election was made to recognize stock-based
compensation expense on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for the entire
award. For options with service conditions only, we utilized the Black-Scholes option pricing model
to estimate fair value of options issued. For restricted stock awards with service conditions, we
utilized the intrinsic value method. For restricted stock awards with performance conditions, we
have evaluated the probability of vesting of the awards at each reporting period and have adjusted
compensation cost based on this assessment. The fair value is based on the use of certain
assumptions regarding a number of highly complex and subjective variables. If other reasonable
assumptions were used, the results could differ.
25
Table of Contents
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
At March 31, 2009, 41.1% of our long-term debt bears interest at variable rates. Accordingly, our
earnings and after-tax cash flow are affected by changes in interest rates. Assuming the current
level of total borrowings and assuming a one percentage point change in the average interest rate
under these borrowings, it is estimated that our interest expense and net income would have changed
by $1.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009. As part of our efforts to mitigate
interest rate risk, in May 2005, we entered into a forward starting interest rate swap agreement
that effectively fixed the interest rate, based on LIBOR, on $400.0 million of our current floating
rate bank borrowings for a three-year period commencing March 2006. This agreement is intended to
reduce our exposure to interest rate fluctuations and was not entered into for speculative
purposes. Segregating the $400 million of borrowings outstanding at March 31, 2009 that are not
subject to the interest rate swap and assuming a one percentage point change in the average
interest rate under the remaining borrowings, it is estimated that our interest expense and net income
would have changed by $0.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009.
In the event of an adverse change in interest rates, management would likely take actions, in
addition to the interest rate swap agreement similar to that discussed above, to further mitigate
its exposure. However, due to the uncertainty of the actions that would be taken and their possible
effects, additional analysis is not possible at this time. Further, such analysis could not take
into account the effects of any change in the level of overall economic activity that could exist
in such an environment.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
We maintain a set of disclosure controls and
procedures designed to ensure that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time
periods specified in Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms. At the end of the period covered by
this report, an evaluation was carried out under the supervision and with the participation of our management,
including our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and our Executive Vice President,
Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer (CFO), of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures.
Based on that evaluation, the CEO and CFO have concluded that, as a result of the previously disclosed material
weakness in our internal control over financial reporting described in our annual report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2008 and further described below, our disclosure controls and procedures were not
effective as of March 31, 2009. Because we believe that the maintenance of reliable financial reporting is a prerequisite
to our ability to submit or file complete disclosures in our Exchange Act reports on a timely basis, our
management determined that the material weakness caused our disclosure controls and procedures to not be
effective.
In connection with the preparation and completion
of our 2008 annual financial statements, we identified the following material weakness in the Companys
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008:
We did not maintain a sufficient complement of
personnel with the level of financial accounting technical expertise necessary to facilitate an effective
review of certain corporate accounting transactions. As a result of this deficiency, we did not timely identify
a computational error related to the SFAS 157 mark-to-market adjustment on the Companys interest rate swap
instrument. This deficiency resulted in an adjustment identified by our independent registered public
accounting firm to the consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2008 to correct an overstatement
of interest expense and accrued liabilities. Additionally, this control deficiency could result in
misstatements that would result in a material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements that
would not be prevented or detected. Accordingly, we determined that this control deficiency constitutes a
material weakness.
Status of Remediation of the Material Weakness
We are currently evaluating certain actions in order
to remediate the material weakness described above. The potential remediation measures we are considering
include, but are not limited to, the improvement of the design of certain internal controls over the analysis
and review of significant or non-routine transactions accounted for at the corporate level, the hiring of
additional resources with the appropriate level of financial accounting technical expertise and the engagement
of a third party firm to assist us with the accounting for complex or unusual corporate accounting
transactions on an as needed basis. We expect that we will implement some or all of these remedial measures
beginning in the second quarter of 2009, with the objective of fully remediating the material weakness by
December 31, 2009.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in our internal control over
financial reporting during the quarter ended March 31, 2009 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
As previously reported, in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, we
are aware of two active purported class action lawsuits related to the proposed acquisition of us
that was announced in July 2007 but terminated in May 2008
26
Table of Contents
(See Note 9 to the accompanying
financial statements): Jeff Michelson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v.
Cumulus Media Inc., et al. (Case No. 2007CV137612, filed July 27, 2007) was filed in the Superior
Court of Fulton County, Georgia against us, Lew Dickey, the other directors and the sponsor; and
Paul Cowles v. Cumulus Media Inc., et al. (Case No. 2007-CV-139323, filed August 31, 2007) was
filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia against us, Lew Dickey, our directors and the
sponsor.
On February 6, 2009, the U.S. District Court remanded both Georgia class action lawsuits, as well
as the pending motion to dismiss, to the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia.
From time
to time, we are involved in various other legal proceedings that are handled and defended in
the ordinary course of business. While we are unable to predict the outcome of these matters, our
management does not believe, based upon currently available facts, that the ultimate resolution of
any such proceedings would have a material adverse effect on our overall financial condition or
results of operations.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
In addition to the risk factors set forth below, please refer to Part I, Item 1A, Risk Factors,
in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, for information regarding
factors that could affect our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.
If we cannot continue to comply with the financial covenants in our debt instruments, or obtain
waivers or other relief from our lenders, we may default, which could result in loss of our sources
of liquidity and acceleration of our indebtedness.
We have a substantial amount of indebtedness, and the instruments governing such indebtedness
contain restrictive financial covenants. We may not be able to meet these restrictive financial
covenants and may not be able to maintain compliance with certain financial ratios in our senior
secured credit facility that become more restrictive beginning as of the quarter ending September
30, 2009. In that event, we would need to seek an amendment to, or a refinancing of, the senior
secured credit facilities. There can be no assurance that we can obtain any amendment or waiver of,
or refinance the senior secured credit facilities and, even if so, it is likely that such relief
would only last for a specified period, potentially necessitating additional amendments, waivers or
refinancings in the future. In the event that we do not maintain compliance with the covenants
under the Credit Agreement, the lenders could declare an event of default, subject to applicable
notice and cure provisions, resulting in a material adverse impact on our financial position. Upon
the occurrence of an event of default under the Credit Agreement, the lenders could elect to
declare all amounts outstanding under the senior secured credit facilities to be immediately due
and payable and terminate all commitments to extend further credit. If we were unable to repay
those amounts, the lenders under the credit facilities could proceed against the collateral granted
to them to secure that indebtedness. We have pledged substantially all of our assets as collateral
under the Credit Agreement. If the lenders accelerate the repayment of borrowings, we may be forced
to liquidate certain assets to repay all or part of the senior secured credit facilities, and we
cannot be assured that sufficient assets will remain after it has paid all of the borrowings under
the senior secured credit facilities. The ability to liquidate assets is affected by the regulatory
restrictions associated with radio stations, including FCC licensing, which may make the market for
these assets less liquid and increase the chances that these assets will be liquidated at a
significant loss.
We identified a material weakness as of
December 31, 2008 that, unless remediated, could have a material adverse effect on our internal control over
financial reporting.
As of December 31, 2008, management identified a
material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting. Specifically, we did not maintain a
sufficient complement of personnel with the level of financial accounting technical expertise necessary to
facilitate an effective review of certain corporate accounting transactions. As a result of this deficiency,
we did not timely identify a computational error related to the SFAS 157 mark-to-market adjustment on the
Companys interest rate swap instrument. This deficiency resulted in an adjustment identified by our
independent registered public accounting firm to the consolidated financial statements as of December 31,
2008 to correct an overstatement of interest expense and accrued liabilities. In response to the material
weakness, we are currently evaluating certain actions in order to remediate the material weakness. The
potential remediation measures we are considering include, but are not limited to, the improvement of the
design of certain internal controls over the analysis and review of significant or non-routine transactions
accounted for at the corporate level, the hiring of additional resources with the appropriate level of
financial accounting technical expertise and the engagement of a third party firm to assist us with the
accounting for complex or unusual corporate accounting transactions on an as needed basis. We expect that we
will implement some or all of these remedial measures beginning in the second quarter of 2009, with the
objective of fully remediating the material weakness by December 31, 2009. However, there is no assurance that
the material weakness will be remediated within the planned timeframe. To the extent we continue to have a
material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, there is a reasonable possibility that a
material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a
timely basis.
27
Table of Contents
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
On May 21, 2008, our Board of Directors authorized the purchase, from time to time, of up to $75.0
million of our Class A Common Stock, subject to the terms of the Credit Agreement and compliance
with other applicable legal requirements. During the three months ended March 31, 2009, we
purchased 99,737 shares of our Class A Common Stock for approximately $0.2 million in cash in open
market transactions under the Board approved purchase plan.
Total Number | Maximum Dollar | |||||||||||||||
of Shares | Value of Shares | |||||||||||||||
Purchased as | that may | |||||||||||||||
Total Number | Average | Part of Publicly | Yet be Shares | |||||||||||||
of Shares | Price Per | Announced | Purchased Under | |||||||||||||
Period | Purchased | Share | Program | the Program | ||||||||||||
$ | 68,477,544 | |||||||||||||||
January 1, 2009 |
99,737 | $ | 1.91 | 99,737 | $ | 68,284,628 | ||||||||||
February 1, 200 |
| $ | | | $ | 68,284,628 | ||||||||||
March 1, 2009 - |
| $ | | | $ | 68,284,628 | ||||||||||
Total |
99,737 | 99,737 | ||||||||||||||
Item 3. Defaults upon Senior Securities
Not applicable.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
Not applicable.
Item 5. Other Information
Not applicable.
28
Table of Contents
Item 6. Exhibits
31.1 | | Certification of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | ||
31.2 | | Certification of the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | ||
32.1 | | Officer Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
29
Table of Contents
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.
CUMULUS MEDIA INC. |
||||
Date: May 11, 2009 | By: | /s/ Martin R. Gausvik | ||
Martin R. Gausvik | ||||
Executive Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer |
30
Table of Contents
EXHIBIT INDEX
31.1 | | Certification of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | ||
31.2 | | Certification of the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | ||
32.1 | | Officer Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
31