M/I HOMES, INC. - Quarter Report: 2009 September (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
x
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For
the Quarterly Period Ended September 30, 2009
|
|
o
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15 (D) OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF
1934
|
Commission
File Number 1-12434
|
|
M/I HOMES,
INC.
|
|
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in it
charter)
|
Ohio
|
31-1210837
|
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
|
3 Easton Oval, Suite 500, Columbus, Ohio
43219
|
(Address
of principal executive offices) (Zip
Code)
|
(614) 418-8000
|
(Registrant’s
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
|
X
|
No
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this
chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes
|
No
|
X
|
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.
Large
accelerated filer
|
Accelerated
filer
|
X
|
||
Non-accelerated
filer
|
|
Smaller
reporting company
|
||
(Do
not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes
|
No
|
X
|
Indicate
the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of common
stock, as of the latest practicable date.
Common
shares, par value $.01 per share: 18,519,436 shares outstanding as of
October 28, 2009
M/I
HOMES, INC.
|
|||
FORM
10-Q
|
|||
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
|
|||
PART
1.
|
FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
||
Item
1.
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. and Subsidiaries Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated
|
||
Financial
Statements
|
|||
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets at September 30, 2009
|
|||
(Unaudited)
and December 31, 2008
|
3
|
||
Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the
|
|||
Three
and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2009 and 2008
|
4
|
||
Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Shareholders’ Equity
|
|||
for
the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2009
|
5
|
||
Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the
|
|||
Nine
Months Ended September 30, 2009 and 2008
|
6
|
||
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
7
|
||
Item
2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
|
||
Results
of Operations
|
23
|
||
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
45
|
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
47
|
|
PART
II.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
||
Item
1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
47
|
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
47
|
|
Item
2.
|
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
49
|
|
Item
3.
|
Defaults
Upon Senior Securities
|
49
|
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
49
|
|
Item
5.
|
Other
Information
|
49
|
|
Item
6.
|
Exhibits
|
49
|
|
Signatures
|
50
|
||
Exhibit
Index
|
51
|
2
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
|||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||
(Dollars
in thousands, except par values)
|
(Unaudited)
|
|||||
ASSETS:
|
||||||
Cash
|
$ | 25,000 | $ | 32,518 | ||
Restricted
cash
|
77,794 | 6,658 | ||||
Mortgage
loans held for sale
|
37,087 | 37,772 | ||||
Inventory
|
494,270 | 516,029 | ||||
Property
and equipment - net
|
19,701 | 27,732 | ||||
Investment
in unconsolidated limited liability companies
|
7,656 | 13,130 | ||||
Income
tax receivable
|
- | 39,456 | ||||
Other
assets
|
16,424 | 19,993 | ||||
TOTAL
ASSETS
|
$ | 677,932 | $ | 693,288 | ||
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
||||||
LIABILITIES:
|
||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$ | 50,464 | $ | 27,542 | ||
Customer
deposits
|
5,651 | 3,506 | ||||
Other
liabilities
|
60,892 | 62,049 | ||||
Community
development district obligations
|
9,031 | 11,035 | ||||
Obligation
for consolidated inventory not owned
|
723 | 5,549 | ||||
Note
payable bank - financial services operations
|
26,622 | 35,078 | ||||
Note
payable – other
|
6,232 | 16,300 | ||||
Senior
notes – net of discount of $640 and $832, respectively, at September 30,
2009
|
||||||
and
December 31, 2008
|
199,360 | 199,168 | ||||
TOTAL
LIABILITIES
|
358,975 | 360,227 | ||||
Commitments
and contingencies
|
- | - | ||||
SHAREHOLDERS’
EQUITY:
|
||||||
Preferred
shares - $.01 par value; authorized 2,000,000 shares; issued 4,000
shares
|
96,325 | 96,325 | ||||
Common
shares - $.01 par value; authorized 38,000,000 shares; issued 22,101,723
and 17,626,123
shares,
respectively, at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008
|
221 | 176 | ||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
136,708 | 82,146 | ||||
Retained
earnings
|
156,851 | 225,956 | ||||
Treasury
shares – at cost – 3,582,287 and 3,602,141 shares, respectively, at
September 30, 2009
|
||||||
and
December 31, 2008
|
(71,148 | ) | (71,542 | ) | ||
TOTAL
SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
318,957 | 333,061 | ||||
TOTAL
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
$ | 677,932 | $ | 693,288 |
See Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
3
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
(Unaudited)
|
(Unaudited)
|
(Unaudited)
|
(Unaudited)
|
||||||||
Revenue
|
$ | 152,738 | $ | 160,385 | $ | 365,033 | $ | 457,472 | ||||
Costs,
expenses and other loss (income):
|
||||||||||||
Land
and housing
|
131,416 | 141,499 | 320,929 | 395,300 | ||||||||
Impairment
of inventory and investment in unconsolidated LLCs
|
14,962 | 43,166 | 32,484 | 104,145 | ||||||||
General
and administrative
|
14,414 | 17,267 | 42,831 | 51,958 | ||||||||
Selling
|
11,601 | 14,726 | 30,339 | 41,539 | ||||||||
Interest
|
1,298 | 2,150 | 6,305 | 8,695 | ||||||||
Other
loss (income)
|
- | - | 941 | (5,555 | ) | |||||||
Total
costs, expenses and other loss (income)
|
173,691 | 218,808 | 433,829 | 596,082 | ||||||||
Loss
before income taxes
|
(20,953 | ) | (58,423 | ) | (68,796 | ) | (138,610 | ) | ||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
121 | 232 | 309 | 31,445 | ||||||||
Loss
from continuing operations
|
(21,074 | ) | (58,655 | ) | (69,105 | ) | (170,055 | ) | ||||
Discontinued
operation, net of tax
|
- | - | - | (33 | ) | |||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (21,074 | ) | $ | (58,655 | ) | $ | (69,105 | ) | $ | (170,088 | ) |
Preferred
dividends
|
- | - | - | 4,875 | ||||||||
Net
loss to common shareholders
|
$ | (21,074 | ) | $ | (58,655 | ) | $ | (69,105 | ) | $ | (174,963 | ) |
Loss
per common share:
|
||||||||||||
Basic:
|
||||||||||||
Continuing
operations
|
$ | (1.14 | ) | $ | (4.18 | ) | $ | (4.29 | ) | $ | (12.48 | ) |
Discontinued
operation
|
$ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | ||||
Basic
loss
|
$ | (1.14 | ) | $ | (4.18 | ) | $ | (4.29 | ) | $ | (12.48 | ) |
Diluted:
|
||||||||||||
Continuing
operations
|
$ | (1.14 | ) | $ | (4.18 | ) | $ | (4.29 | ) | $ | (12.48 | ) |
Discontinued
operation
|
$ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | ||||
Diluted
loss
|
$ | (1.14 | ) | $ | (4.18 | ) | $ | (4.29 | ) | $ | (12.48 | ) |
Weighted
average shares outstanding:
|
||||||||||||
Basic
|
18,514 | 14,019 | 16,127 | 14,014 | ||||||||
Diluted
|
18,514 | 14,019 | 16,127 | 14,014 | ||||||||
Dividends
per common share
|
$ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | 0.05 |
See Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
4
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Nine
Months Ended September 30, 2009
|
||||||||||||||||
(Unaudited)
|
||||||||||||||||
Preferred
Shares
|
Common
Shares
|
Additional
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||
Shares
|
Shares
|
Paid-in
|
Retained
|
Treasury
|
Shareholders’
|
|||||||||||
(Dollars
in thousands, except per share amounts)
|
Outstanding
|
Amount
|
Outstanding
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
Shares
|
Equity
|
||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
4,000 | $96,325 | 14,023,982 | $176 | $82,146 | 225,956 | $(71,542 | ) | $333,061 | |||||||
Net
loss
|
- | - | - | - | - | (69,105 | ) | - | (69,105 | ) | ||||||
Common
stock issuance
|
- | - | 4,475,600 | 45 | 52,523 | - | - | 52,568 | ||||||||
Income
tax benefit from stock options and
|
||||||||||||||||
deferred
compensation distributions
|
- | - | - | - | (103 | ) | - | - | (103 | ) | ||||||
Stock
options exercised
|
- | - | 9,200 | - | (122 | ) | - | 183 | 61 | |||||||
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
- | - | - | - | 2,337 | - | - | 2,337 | ||||||||
Deferral
of executive and director compensation
|
- | - | - | - | 138 | - | - | 138 | ||||||||
Executive
and director deferred compensation
|
||||||||||||||||
distributions
|
- | - | 10,654 | - | (211 | ) | - | 211 | - | |||||||
Balance
at September 30, 2009
|
4,000 | $96,325 | 18,519,436 | $221 | $136,708 | 156,851 | $(71,148 | ) | $318,957 |
See
See notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
5
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
Nine
Months Ended
|
||||||
September
30,
|
||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||
(In
thousands)
|
(Unaudited)
|
(Unaudited)
|
||||
OPERATING
ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (69,105 | ) | $ | (170,088 | ) |
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating
activities:
|
||||||
Inventory
valuation adjustments and abandoned land transaction
write-offs
|
27,076 | 86,826 | ||||
Impairment
of investment in unconsolidated limited liability
companies
|
6,896 | 18,887 | ||||
Mortgage
loan originations
|
(275,655 | ) | (279,966 | ) | ||
Proceeds
from the sale of mortgage loans
|
275,748 | 304,332 | ||||
Fair
value adjustment of mortgage loans held for sale
|
592 | (1,569 | ) | |||
Net
loss (gain) from property disposals
|
942 | (5,531 | ) | |||
Bad
debt expense
|
1,223 | - | ||||
Depreciation
|
3,887 | 4,262 | ||||
Amortization
of intangibles, debt discount and debt issue costs
|
1,901 | 1,169 | ||||
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
2,337 | 2,423 | ||||
Deferred
income tax benefit
|
(27,532 | ) | (11,748 | ) | ||
Deferred
tax asset valuation allowance
|
27,532 | 79,615 | ||||
Income
tax receivable
|
39,456 | 14,210 | ||||
Excess
tax benefits from stock-based payment arrangements
|
103 | 88 | ||||
Equity
in undistributed (loss) income of limited liability
companies
|
(10 | ) | 34 | |||
Write-off
of unamortized debt discount and financing costs
|
554 | 1,059 | ||||
Change
in assets and liabilities:
|
||||||
Cash
held in escrow
|
(4,278 | ) | 11,133 | |||
Inventories
|
(12,891 | ) | 103,534 | |||
Other
assets
|
2,205 | 8,596 | ||||
Accounts
payable
|
22,922 | (22,153 | ) | |||
Customer
deposits
|
2,145 | (3,099 | ) | |||
Accrued
compensation
|
(3,682 | ) | (5,486 | ) | ||
Other
liabilities
|
2,651 | (10,355 | ) | |||
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
25,017 | 126,173 | ||||
INVESTING
ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||
Restricted
cash
|
(66,858 | ) | - | |||
Purchase
of property and equipment
|
(3,695 | ) | (2,661 | ) | ||
Proceeds
from the sale of property
|
7,878 | 9,454 | ||||
Investment
in unconsolidated limited liability companies
|
(1,068 | ) | (3,825 | ) | ||
Return
of investment from unconsolidated limited liability
companies
|
61 | 416 | ||||
Net
cash (used in) provided by investing activities
|
(63,682 | ) | 3,384 | |||
FINANCING
ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||
Repayments
of bank borrowings - net
|
(8,456 | ) | (119,708 | ) | ||
Principal
repayments of mortgage notes payable other and community
|
||||||
development
district bond obligations
|
(10,710 | ) | (379 | ) | ||
Net
proceeds from issuance of common stock
|
52,568 | - | ||||
Debt
issue costs
|
(2,122 | ) | (10 | ) | ||
Payments
on capital lease obligations
|
(91 | ) | (674 | ) | ||
Dividends
paid
|
- | (5,935 | ) | |||
Proceeds
from exercise of stock options
|
61 | 74 | ||||
Excess
tax benefits from stock-based payment arrangements
|
(103 | ) | (88 | ) | ||
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
31,147 | (126,720 | ) | |||
Net
(decrease) increase in cash
|
(7,518 | ) | 2,837 | |||
Cash
balance at beginning of period
|
32,518 | 1,506 | ||||
Cash
balance at end of period
|
$ | 25,000 | $ | 4,343 | ||
SUPPLEMENTAL
DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:
|
||||||
Cash
paid during the year for:
|
||||||
Interest
– net of amount capitalized
|
$ | 662 | $ | 4,571 | ||
Income
taxes
|
$ | 168 | $ | 476 | ||
NON-CASH
TRANSACTIONS DURING THE YEAR:
|
||||||
Community
development district infrastructure
|
$ | (1,362 | ) | $ | (848 | ) |
Consolidated
inventory not owned
|
$ | (4,826 | ) | $ | (340 | ) |
Distribution
of single-family lots from unconsolidated limited liability
companies
|
$ | 2 | $ | 4,559 | ||
Non-monetary
exchange of fixed assets
|
$ | - | $ | 13,000 | ||
Deferral
of executive and director compensation
|
$ | 138 | $ | 113 | ||
Executive
and director deferred compensation distributions
|
$ | 211 | $ | 254 |
See
Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
6
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1. Basis
of Presentation
The
accompanying Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (the
“financial statements”) of M/I Homes, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the “Company”)
and notes thereto have been prepared in accordance with the rules and
regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for interim
financial information. The financial statements include the accounts
of M/I Homes, Inc. and its subsidiaries. All intercompany
transactions have been eliminated. Results for the interim period are
not necessarily indicative of results for a full year. In the opinion
of management, the accompanying financial statements reflect all adjustments
(all of which are normal and recurring in nature) necessary for a fair
presentation of financial results for the interim periods
presented. These financial statements should be read in conjunction
with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto included in the
Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (“2008
Form 10-K”).
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses
during that period. Actual results could differ from these estimates
and have a significant impact on the financial condition and results of
operations and cash flows. With regard to the Company, estimates and
assumptions are inherent in calculations relating to valuation of inventory and
investment in unconsolidated limited liability companies (“LLCs”), property and
equipment depreciation, valuation of derivative financial instruments, accounts
payable on inventory, accruals for costs to complete, accruals for warranty
claims, accruals for self-insured general liability claims, litigation, accruals
for health care and workers’ compensation, accruals for guaranteed or
indemnified loans, stock-based compensation expense, income taxes and
contingencies. Items that could have a significant impact on these
estimates and assumptions include the risks and uncertainties listed in “Item
1A. Risk Factors” in Part II of this report, in Part II of our Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2009, and in “Item 1A. Risk
Factors” in Part I of our 2008 Form 10-K.
NOTE
2. Cash and Restricted Cash
The table
below is a summary of our cash balances at September 30, 2009 and December 31,
2008:
September
30, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
||
(in
thousands)
|
(Unaudited)
|
||
Homebuilding
|
$ 11,243 | $13,905 | |
Financial
services
|
13,757 | 18,613 | |
Unrestricted
cash
|
25,000 | 32,518 | |
Restricted
cash
|
77,794 | 6,658 | |
Total
cash
|
$102,794 | $39,176 |
Restricted
cash consists of homebuilding cash the Company had in excess of $25.0 million at
September 30, 2009, that is to be designated as collateral in accordance with
the Third Amendment to the Second Amended and Restated Credit Facility dated
October 6, 2006 (the “Credit Facility”). Restricted cash also
includes cash held in escrow of $10.9 million and $6.7 million at September 30,
2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively.
NOTE
3. Impact of Accounting Standards
In June
2009, the FASB issued new accounting guidance which amends the evaluation
criteria to identify the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity
(“VIE”) and requires ongoing reassessment of whether an enterprise is the
primary beneficiary of the VIE. The new guidance significantly
changes the consolidation rules for VIEs, including the consolidation of common
structures, such as joint ventures, equity method investments and collaboration
arrangements. The guidance is applicable to all new and existing
VIEs. This new accounting guidance is effective for interim and
annual reporting periods ending after November 15, 2009. The Company
is currently in the process of determining the impact, if any, this accounting
guidance will have on its financial statements.
In June
2009, the FASB issued “The FASB Accounting Standards Codification™ and the
Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” (the
“Codification”). The Codification became the single official source
of authoritative, nongovernmental U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
(“GAAP”). The Codification did not change GAAP, but reorganizes the
literature. The Codification is effective for interim and annual
periods ending after September 15, 2009, and the Company adopted the
Codification during the three months ended September 30, 2009.
7
NOTE
4. Fair Value Measurements
There are
three measurement input levels for determining fair value: Level 1,
Level 2, and Level 3. Fair values determined by Level 1 inputs
utilize quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that
the Company has the ability to access. Fair values determined by
Level 2 inputs utilize inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that
are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or
indirectly. Level 2 inputs include quoted prices for similar assets
and liabilities in active markets, and inputs other than quoted prices that are
observable for the asset or liability, such as interest rates and yield curves
that are observable at commonly quoted intervals. Level 3 inputs are
unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, and include situations where
there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or
liability.
Assets Measured on a
Recurring Basis
The
Company measures both mortgage loans held for sale and interest rate lock
commitments (“IRLCs”) at fair value. Electing fair value allows a
better offset of the changes in fair values of the loans and the derivative
instruments used to economically hedge them.
In the
normal course of business, our financial services segment enters into
contractual commitments to extend credit to buyers of single-family homes with
fixed expiration dates. The commitments become effective when the
borrowers “lock-in” a specified interest rate within established time
frames. Market risk arises if interest rates move adversely between
the time of the “lock-in” of rates by the borrower and the sale date of the loan
to an investor. To mitigate the effect of the interest rate risk
inherent in providing rate lock commitments to borrowers, the Company enters
into optional or mandatory delivery forward sale contracts to sell whole loans
and mortgage-backed securities to broker/dealers. The forward sale
contracts lock in an interest rate and price for the sale of loans similar to
the specific rate lock commitments. The Company does not engage in
speculative or trading derivative activities. Both the rate lock
commitments to borrowers and the forward sale contracts to broker/dealers or
investors are undesignated derivatives, and accordingly, are marked to fair
value through earnings. Changes in fair value measurements are
included in earnings in the accompanying statements of operations.
The fair
value is based on published prices for mortgage-backed securities with similar
characteristics and the buyup fees received or buydown fees to be paid upon
securitization of the loan. The buyup and buydown fees are calculated
pursuant to contractual terms with investors. To calculate the
effects of interest rate movements, the Company utilizes applicable published
mortgage-backed security prices, and multiplies the price movement between the
rate lock date and the balance sheet date by the notional loan commitment
amount. The Company sells all of its loans on a servicing released
basis, and receives a servicing release premium upon sale. Thus, the
value of the servicing rights included in the fair value measurement is based
upon contractual terms with investors and depends on the loan type. The Company
applies a fallout rate to IRLCs when measuring the fair value of rate lock
commitments. Fallout is defined as locked loan commitments for which
the Company does not close a mortgage loan and is based on management’s judgment
and experience.
The fair
value of the Company’s forward sales contracts to broker/dealers solely
considers the market price movement of the same type of security between the
trade date and the balance sheet date. The market price changes are
multiplied by the notional amount of the forward sales contracts to measure the
fair value.
Mortgage
loans held for sale are closed at cost, which includes all fair value
measurement.
Loan
Commitments: IRLCs are extended to certain home-buying
customers who have applied for a mortgage loan and meet certain defined credit
and underwriting criteria. Typically, the IRLCs will have a duration
of less than six months; however, in certain markets, the duration could extend
to twelve months.
Some
IRLCs are committed to a specific third-party investor through the use of
best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments matching the exact terms of the
IRLC loan. The notional amount of the committed IRLCs and the
best-efforts contracts was $1.4 million and $21.2 million at September 30, 2009
and December 31, 2008, respectively. At September 30, 2009, the fair
value of the committed IRLCs resulted in a liability of less than $0.1 million
and the related best-efforts contracts resulted in a liability of $0.1
million. At December 31, 2008, the fair value of the committed IRLCs
resulted in a liability of $0.1 million and the related best-efforts contracts
resulted in a liability of less than $0.1 million. For the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2009, we recognized income of $0.2 million and
less than $0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these committed IRLCs
and the related best-efforts contracts to market. For the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2008, we recognized income of $0.1 million and
expense of $0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these committed IRLCs
and the related best-efforts contracts to market.
Uncommitted
IRLCs are considered derivative instruments, and are fair value adjusted, with
the resulting gain or loss recorded in current earnings. At September
30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the notional amount of the uncommitted IRLCs was
$83.9 million and $25.4 million, respectively. The fair value
adjustment related to these uncommitted IRLCs,
8
which is
based on quoted market prices, resulted in an asset of $1.1 million and an asset
of $0.8 million at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009,
we recognized income of $1.1 million and $0.3 million, respectively, relating to
marking the uncommitted IRLCs to market. For the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2008, we recognized income of $0.3 million and $0.8
million, respectively, relating to marking the uncommitted IRLCs to
market.
Forward Sales of
Mortgage-Backed Securities: Forward sales of mortgage-backed securities
(“FMBSs”) are used to protect uncommitted IRLC loans against the risk of changes
in interest rates between the lock date and the funding date. FMBSs
related to uncommitted IRLCs are classified and accounted for as non-designated
derivative instruments and are recorded at fair value, with gains and losses
recorded in current earnings. At September 30, 2009 and December 31,
2008, the notional amount under these FMBSs was $86.0 million and $14.0 million,
respectively, and the related fair value adjustment, which is based on quoted
market prices, resulted in a liability of $0.7 million and a liability of $0.2
million, respectively. For the three and nine months ended September
30, 2009, we recognized expense of $1.1 million and $0.5 million, respectively,
relating to marking these FMBSs to market. For the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2008, we recognized expense of $0.3 million and
income of $0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these FMBSs to
market.
Mortgage Loans
Held for Sale: Mortgage loans
held for sale consist primarily of single-family residential loans
collateralized by the underlying property. During the intervening
period between when a loan is closed and when it is sold to an investor, the
interest rate risk is covered through the use of a best-efforts contract or by
FMBSs.
The
notional amount of the best-efforts contracts and related mortgage loans held
for sale was $1.8 million and $13.6 million at September 30, 2009 and December
31, 2008, respectively. The fair value of the best-efforts contracts
and related mortgage loans held for sale resulted in a net liability of $0.2
million and a net asset of $0.2 million at September 30, 2009 and December 31,
2008, respectively. For the three and nine months ended September 30,
2009, we recognized income of $0.2 million and expense of $0.4 million,
respectively, relating to marking these best-efforts contracts and the related
mortgage loans held for sale to market. For the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2008, we recognized income of less than $0.1 million and
expense of less than $0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these
best-efforts contracts and the related mortgage loans held for sale to
market.
The
notional amounts of the FMBSs and the related mortgage loans held for sale were
$35.0 million and $34.6 million, respectively, at September 30, 2009 and both
were $23.0 million at December 31, 2008. The FMBSs are classified and
accounted for as non-designated derivative instruments, with gains and losses
recorded in current earnings. As of September 30, 2009 and December
31, 2008, the related fair value adjustment for marking these FMBSs to market
resulted in a liability of $0.6 million and a liability of $0.9 million,
respectively. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009,
we recognized expense of $1.2 million and income of $0.3 million, respectively,
relating to marking these FMBSs to market. For the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2008, we recognized expense of $1.3 million and $0.3
million, respectively, relating to marking these FMBSs to market.
The table
below shows the level and measurement of assets and liabilities measured on a
recurring basis at September 30, 2009:
Description
of asset or liability
(In
thousands)
|
Fair
Value
Measurements
September
30, 2009
|
Quoted
Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets
(Level
1)
|
Significant
Other Observable Inputs
(Level
2)
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level
3)
|
|||||||
Mortgage
loans held for sale
|
$ | 871 | $ | - | $ | 871 | $ | - | |||
Forward
sales of mortgage-backed securities
|
(1,334 | ) | - | (1,334 | ) | - | |||||
Interest
rate lock commitments
|
1,020 | - | 1,020 | - | |||||||
Best-efforts
contracts
|
(276 | ) | - | (276 | ) | - | |||||
Total
|
$ | 281 | $ | - | $ | 281 | $ | - |
The table
below shows the level and measurement of assets and liabilities measured on a
recurring basis at December 31, 2008:
Description
of asset or liability
(In
thousands)
|
Fair
Value
Measurements
December
31, 2008
|
Quoted
Prices in
Active
Markets for Identical Assets
(Level
1)
|
Significant
Other Observable Inputs
(Level
2)
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level
3)
|
|||||||
Mortgage
loans held for sale
|
$ | 1,464 | $ | - | $ | 1,464 | $ | - | |||
Forward
sales of mortgage-backed securities
|
(1,104 | ) | - | (1,104 | ) | - | |||||
Interest
rate lock commitments
|
638 | - | 638 | - | |||||||
Best-efforts
contracts
|
73 | - | 73 | - | |||||||
Total
|
$ | 1,071 | $ | - | $ | 1,071 | $ | - |
9
Assets Measured on a
Non-Recurring Basis
The
Company assesses inventory for recoverability on a quarterly basis by reviewing
for impairment whenever events or changes in local or national economic
conditions indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. During this review, we identify communities whose
carrying values may exceed their undiscounted cash flows. For those
communities deemed to be impaired, the impairment recognized is measured by the
amount by which the carrying amount of the communities exceeds the fair value of
the communities.
Our
determination of fair value is based on projections and estimates, which are
Level 3 measurement inputs. Our analysis is completed at a phase
level within each community; therefore, changes in local conditions may affect
one or several of our communities. For all of the categories
discussed below, the key assumptions relating to the valuations are dependent on
project-specific local market and/or community conditions and are inherently
uncertain. Because each inventory asset is unique, there are numerous
inputs and assumptions used in our valuation techniques. Local
market-specific factors that may impact these projected assumptions
include:
●
|
historical
project results such as average sales price and sales pace, if closings
have occurred in the project;
|
●
|
competitors’
local market and/or community presence and their competitive
actions;
|
●
|
project
specific attributes such as location desirability and uniqueness of
product offering;
|
●
|
potential
for alternative product offerings to respond to local market
conditions;
|
●
|
current
local market economic and demographic conditions and related trends and
forecasts; and
|
●
|
community-specific
strategies regarding speculative
homes.
|
These and
other local market-specific factors that may impact project assumptions
discussed above are considered by personnel in our homebuilding divisions as
they prepare or update the forecasted assumptions for each community.
Quantitative and qualitative factors other than home sales prices could
significantly impact our fair value measurements. The sales
objectives can differ between communities, even within a given
sub-market. For example, facts and circumstances in a given community
may lead us to price our homes with the objective of yielding a higher sales
absorption pace, while facts and circumstances in another community may lead us
to price our homes to minimize deterioration in our gross margins, although it
may result in a slower sales absorption pace. Furthermore, the key
assumptions included in our estimated future undiscounted cash flows may be
interrelated. For example, a decrease in estimated base sales price
or an increase in home sales incentives may result in a corresponding increase
in sales absorption pace. Additionally, a decrease in the average
sales price of homes to be sold and closed in future reporting periods for one
community that has not been generating what management believes to be an
adequate sales absorption pace may impact the estimated cash flow assumptions of
a nearby community. Changes in our key assumptions, including
estimated construction and development costs, absorption pace, selling
strategies, or discount rates, could materially impact future cash flow and fair
value estimates.
Operating
communities. For existing operating
communities, the fair value of assets is measured on a quarterly basis using
future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated by the assets based
on home sales. These estimated cash flows are developed based primarily on
management’s assumptions relating to the specific community. The
significant assumptions used to evaluate the fair value include: the
timing of development and/or marketing phases; projected sales price and sales
pace of each existing or planned phase within a community; the estimated land
development, home construction, and selling costs of the community; overall
market supply and demand; the local market; and competitive
conditions. Management reviews these assumptions on a quarterly
basis. While we consider available information to determine what we
believe to be our best estimates as of the end of a reporting period, these
estimates are subject to change in future reporting periods as facts and
circumstances change. These assumptions vary widely across different
communities and geographies and are largely dependent on local market
conditions.
Future
communities. For raw land or land under development that
management anticipates will be utilized for future homebuilding activities, the
fair value of assets is measured by using future undiscounted cash flows
expected to be generated by the assets based on home sales, consistent with the
evaluations performed for operating communities discussed above.
For raw
land, land under development, or lots that management intends to market for sale
to a third party, but that do not meet all of the criteria to be classified as
land held for sale as discussed below, the fair value of the assets is
determined based on either offers to purchase the land received from willing
market participants, or using cash flow valuation techniques.
Land held for
sale. Land held for sale includes land that meets all of the
following six criteria: (1) management, having the authority to
approve the action, commits to a plan to sell the asset; (2) the asset is
available for immediate sale in its present condition subject only to terms that
are usual and customary for sales of such assets; (3) an active program to
locate a buyer and other actions required to complete the plan to sell the
asset have been initiated; (4) the sale of the asset is
10
probable,
and transfer of the asset is expected to qualify for recognition as a completed
sale, within one year; (5) the asset is being actively marketed for sale at a
price that is reasonable in relation to its current fair value; and (6) actions
required to complete the plan indicate that it is unlikely that significant
changes to the plan will be made or that the plan will be
withdrawn. In measuring the estimated fair value of land held for
sale, management considers, among other things, prices for land in recent
comparable sales transactions, market analysis and recent bona fide offers
received from outside third parties, as well as actual contracts.
Investment in
unconsolidated limited liability companies. The
Company evaluates its investment in LLCs for potential impairment on a quarterly
basis. If the fair value of the investment is less than the
investment’s carrying value and the Company has determined that the decline in
value is other than temporary, the Company would write down the value of the
investment to fair value. The determination of whether an
investment’s fair value is less than the carrying value requires management to
make certain assumptions regarding the amount and timing of future contributions
to the LLC, the timing of distribution of lots to the Company from the LLC, the
projected fair value of the lots at the time of distribution to the Company, and
the estimated proceeds from, and timing of, the sale of land or lots to third
parties. In determining the fair value of investments in
unconsolidated LLCs, the Company evaluates the projected cash flows associated
with the LLC using a probability-weighted approach based on the likelihood of
different outcomes. As of September 30, 2009, the Company used a
discount rate of 16% in determining the fair value of investments in
unconsolidated LLCs. In addition to the assumptions management must
make to determine if the investment’s fair value is less than the carrying
value, management must also use judgment in determining whether the impairment
is other than temporary. The factors management considers are: (1)
the length of time and the extent to which the market value has been less than
cost; (2) the financial condition and near-term prospects of the Company; and
(3) the intent and ability of the Company to retain its investment in the
limited liability company for a period of time sufficient to allow for any
anticipated recovery in market value. In situations where the
investments are 100% equity financed by the partners, and the joint venture
simply distributes lots to its partners, the Company evaluates “other than
temporary” by preparing an undiscounted cash flow model as described in
inventory above for operating communities. If such model results in
positive value versus carrying value, and the fair value of the investment is
less than the investment’s carrying value, the Company determines that the
impairment is temporary; otherwise, the Company determines that the impairment
is other than temporary and impairs the investment. Because of the
high degree of judgment involved in developing these assumptions, it is possible
that the Company may determine the investment is not impaired in the current
period but, due to passage of time or changes in market conditions leading to
changes in assumptions, impairment could occur.
The table
below shows the level and measurement of assets and liabilities measured on a
non-recurring basis for the three months ended September 30, 2009:
Description
of asset or liability
(In
thousands)
|
Fair
Value
Measurements
September
30, 2009
|
Quoted
Prices in
Active
Markets for Identical Assets
(Level
1)
|
Significant
Other Observable Inputs
(Level
2)
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level
3)
|
Total
Losses
(a)
|
Inventory
(b)
|
$25,826 | $ - | $ - | $25,826 | $14,862 |
Investment
in LLCs (c)
|
543 | - | - | 543 | 88 |
Total
fair value measurements
|
$26,369 | $ - | $ - | $26,369 | $14,950 |
(a)
|
Represents
total losses recorded during the three months ended September 30,
2009.
|
(b)
|
Inventory,
with a carrying value of $40.7 million was written down to fair value of
$25.8 million, resulting in an impairment charge of $14.9 million, which
was included in land and housing costs in the Company’s Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for three months ended
September 30, 2009. There were additional impairment charges of
less than $0.1 million related to homes closed during the three months
ended September 30, 2009, and therefore are not included in the carrying
value.
|
(c)
|
Investments
in LLCs with an aggregate carrying value of $0.6 million were written down
to their fair value of $0.5 million, resulting in an impairment charge of
$0.1 million, which is included in land and housing costs in the Company’s
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three
months ended September 30, 2009.
|
11
The table
below shows the level and measurement of assets and liabilities measured on a
non-recurring basis for the nine months ended September 30, 2009:
Description
of asset or liability
(In
thousands)
|
Fair
Value
Measurements
September
30, 2009
|
Quoted
Prices in
Active
Markets for Identical Assets
(Level
1)
|
Significant
Other Observable Inputs
(Level
2)
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level
3)
|
Total
Losses
(a)
|
Inventory
(b)
|
$56,857 | $ - | $ - | $56,857 | $22,696 |
Investment
in LLCs (c)
|
2,646 | - | - | 2,646 | 6,896 |
Total
fair value measurements
|
$59,503 | $ - | $ - | $59,503 | $29,592 |
(a)
|
Represents
total losses recorded during the three months ended September 30,
2009.
|
(b)
|
Inventory,
with a carrying value of $79.6 million was written down to fair value of
$56.9 million, resulting in an impairment charge of $22.7 million, which
was included in land and housing costs in the Company’s Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009. The additional $2.9 million taken in
impairment charges related to homes closed during the nine months ended
September 30, 2009, and therefore are not included in the carrying
value.
|
(c)
|
Investments
in LLCs with an aggregate carrying value of $9.5 million were written down
to their fair value of $2.6 million, resulting in an impairment charge of
$6.9 million, which is included in land and housing costs in the Company’s
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the nine
months ended September 30, 2009.
|
NOTE
5. Risk Management and Derivatives
As
described in Note 4 above, in the normal course of business, our financial
services segment is exposed to interest rate risk, and the Company uses
derivatives to help manage this risk.
To meet
the financing needs of our home-buying customers, M/I Financial Corp., our
wholly-owned subsidiary (“M/I Financial”), is party to IRLCs, which are extended
to customers who have applied for a mortgage loan and meet certain defined
credit and underwriting criteria. These IRLCs are
considered derivative financial instruments. M/I Financial manages
interest rate risk related to its IRLCs and mortgage loans held for sale through
the use of FMBSs, use of best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments and the
occasional purchase of options on FMBSs in accordance with Company
policy. These FMBSs, options on FMBSs and IRLCs covered by FMBSs are
considered non-designated derivatives.
Certain
IRLCs and mortgage loans held for sale are committed to third party investors
through the use of best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments. The
IRLCs and related best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments, which generally
are highly effective from an economic standpoint, are considered non-designated
derivatives and are accounted for at fair value, with gains or losses recorded
in financial services revenue. Under the terms of these best-efforts
whole loan delivery commitments covering mortgage loans held for sale, the
specific committed mortgage loans held for sale are identified and matched to
specific delivery commitments on a loan-by-loan basis. The delivery
commitments and loans held for sale are recorded at fair value, with changes in
fair value recorded in financial services revenue.
All
derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair
value. The total notional amount of the Company’s derivatives as of
September 30, 2009 was $209.5 million. Refer to Note 4 above for
further discussion surrounding our derivative instruments.
Asset
Derivatives
At
September 30, 2009
|
Liability
Derivatives
At
September 30, 2009
|
||||||
Description
of Derivatives
|
Balance
Sheet
Location
|
Fair
Value
(in
thousands)
|
Balance
Sheet
Location
|
Fair
Value
(in
thousands)
|
|||
Forward
sales of mortgage-backed securities
|
Other
assets
|
$ - |
Other
liabilities
|
$1,334 | |||
Interest
rate lock commitments
|
Other
assets
|
1,020 |
Other
liabilities
|
- | |||
Best-efforts
contracts
|
Other
assets
|
- |
Other
liabilities
|
276 | |||
Total
fair value measurements
|
$1,020 | $1,610 |
Amount
of Gain (Loss) Recognized on Derivatives
|
||||
Description
of Derivatives
|
Three
Months Ended
September
30, 2009
(in
thousands)
|
Nine
Months Ended
September
30, 2009
(in
thousands)
|
Location
of Gain (Loss)
Recognized
on Derivatives
|
|
Forward
sales of mortgage-backed securities
|
$(2,341) | $(230) |
Financial
Services Revenue
|
|
Interest
rate lock commitments
|
1,240 | 382 |
Financial
Services Revenue
|
|
Best-efforts
contracts
|
(99) | (349) |
Financial
Services Revenue
|
|
Total
gain (loss) recognized on derivatives
|
$ 1,200 | $(197) |
12
NOTE
6. Inventory
A summary
of the Company’s inventory as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008 is as
follows:
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
||||
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||
Single-family
lots, land and land development costs
|
$ | 259,651 | $ | 333,651 | |
Land
held for sale
|
2,804 | 2,804 | |||
Homes
under construction
|
206,361 | 150,949 | |||
Model
homes and furnishings - at cost (less accumulated
depreciation: September 30, 2009 - $2,962;
|
|||||
December
31, 2008 - $2,130)
|
14,980 | 12,928 | |||
Community
development district infrastructure
|
9,013 | 10,376 | |||
Land
purchase deposits
|
738 | 1,070 | |||
Consolidated
inventory not owned
|
723 | 4,251 | |||
Total
inventory
|
$ | 494,270 | $ | 516,029 |
Single-family
lots, land and land development costs include raw land that the Company has
purchased to develop into lots, costs incurred to develop the raw land into
lots, and lots for which development has been completed but which have not yet
been used to start construction of a home.
Land held
for sale includes land that meets all of the following criteria: (1)
management, having the authority to approve the action, commits to a plan to
sell the asset; (2) the asset is available for immediate sale in its present
condition subject only to terms that are usual and customary for sales of such
assets; (3) an active program to locate a buyer and other actions required to
complete the plan to sell the asset have been initiated; (4) the sale of the
asset is probable, and transfer of the asset is expected to qualify for
recognition as a completed sale, within one year; (5) the asset is being
actively marketed for sale at a price that is reasonable in relation to its
current fair value; and (6) actions required to complete the plan indicate that
it is unlikely that significant changes to the plan will be made or that the
plan will be withdrawn. The Company records land held for sale at the
lower of its carrying value or fair value less costs to sell.
Homes
under construction include homes that are finished and ready for delivery and
homes in various stages of construction. As of September 30, 2009 and
December 31, 2008, we had 388 homes (valued at $42.2 million) and 431 homes
(valued at $69.6 million), respectively, included in homes under construction
that were not subject to a sales contract.
Model
homes and furnishings include homes that are under construction or have been
completed and are being used as sales models. The amount also
includes the net book value of furnishings included in our model
homes. Depreciation on model home furnishings is recorded using an
accelerated method over the estimated useful life of the assets, typically three
years.
The
Company assesses inventory for recoverability on a quarterly basis, by reviewing
for impairment whenever events or changes in local or national economic
conditions indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. Refer to Note 7 below for additional details relating to
our procedures for evaluating our inventories for impairment.
Land
purchase deposits include both refundable and non-refundable amounts paid to
third party sellers relating to the purchase of land. On an ongoing
basis, the Company evaluates the land option agreements relating to the land
purchase deposits. In the period during which the Company makes the
decision not to proceed with the purchase of land under an agreement, the
Company writes off any deposits and accumulated pre-acquisition costs relating
to such agreement. For the three and nine months ended September 30,
2009, the Company wrote off $0.1 million and $1.5 million, respectively, in
option deposits and pre-acquisition costs. Refer to Note 7 below for
additional details relating to write-offs of land option deposits and
pre-acquisition costs.
NOTE
7. Valuation Adjustments and Write-offs
The
Company assesses inventory for recoverability on a quarterly basis, by reviewing
for impairment whenever events or changes in local or national economic
conditions indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable.
Operating
communities. For existing operating communities which may have
impairment indicators, the recoverability of assets is measured by comparing the
carrying amount of the assets to future undiscounted cash flows expected to be
generated by the assets based on home sales. These estimated cash
flows are developed based primarily on management’s assumptions relating to the
specific community. The significant assumptions used to evaluate the
recoverability of assets include: the timing of development and/or
marketing phases, projected sales price and sales pace of each existing or
planned community; the estimated land development and home construction and
selling costs of the community; overall market supply and demand; the local
market; and competitive conditions.
13
Future
communities. For raw land or land under development that
management anticipates will be utilized for future homebuilding activities, the
recoverability of assets is measured by comparing the carrying amount of the
assets to future undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by the assets
based on home sales, consistent with the evaluations performed for operating
communities discussed above.
For raw
land, land under development or lots that management intends to market for sale
to a third party, but that do not meet all of the criteria to be classified as
land held for sale as discussed above in Note 6, the recoverability of the
assets is determined based on either the estimated net sales proceeds expected
to be realized on the sale of the assets or the estimated fair value determined
using cash flow valuation techniques.
If the
Company has not yet determined whether raw land or land under development will
be utilized for future homebuilding activities or marketed for sale to a third
party, the Company assesses the recoverability of the inventory using a
probability-weighted approach.
Land held for
sale. Land held for sale includes land that meets the six
criteria discussed above in Note 6. The Company records land held for
sale at the lower of its carrying value or fair value less costs to
sell. Fair value is determined based on the expected third party sale
proceeds.
Investments in
unconsolidated limited liability companies. The Company
assesses investments in unconsolidated LLCs for impairment on a quarterly
basis. When evaluating the LLCs, if the fair value of the investment
is less than the investment carrying value, and the Company determines the
decline in value is other than temporary, the Company would write down the
investment to fair value. The Company’s LLCs engage in land
acquisition and development activities for the purpose of selling or
distributing (in the form of a capital distribution) developed lots to the
Company and its partners in the entity, as further discussed in Note
9.
As of
September 30, 2009, we utilized discount rates ranging from 13% to 16% in the
above valuations. The discount rate used in determining each asset’s
fair value depends on the community’s projected life, development stage, and the
inherent risks associated with the related estimated cash flow stream as well as
current risk free rates available in the market and estimated market risk
premiums.
A summary
of the Company’s valuation adjustments and write-offs for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 is as follows:
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Impairment
of operating communities:
|
|||||||||||
Midwest
|
$ | 7,033 | $ | 15,942 | $ | 9,896 | $ | 26,858 | |||
Florida
|
2,821 | 1,682 | 6,693 | 6,273 | |||||||
Mid-Atlantic
|
22 | 10,249 | 4,001 | 16,762 | |||||||
Total
impairment of operating communities (a)
|
$ | 9,876 | $ | 27,873 | $ | 20,590 | $ | 49,893 | |||
Impairment
of future communities:
|
|||||||||||
Midwest
|
$ | 1,524 | $ | - | $ | 1,524 | $ | 1,524 | |||
Florida
|
3,474 | - | 3,474 | 4,380 | |||||||
Mid-Atlantic
|
- | - | - | - | |||||||
Total
impairment of future communities (a)
|
$ | 4,998 | $ | - | $ | 4,998 | $ | 5,904 | |||
Impairment
of land held for sale:
|
|||||||||||
Midwest
|
$ | - | $ | 4,241 | $ | - | $ | 4,599 | |||
Florida
|
- | 7,080 | - | 24,553 | |||||||
Mid-Atlantic
|
- | 309 | - | 309 | |||||||
Total
impairment of land held for sale (a)
|
$ | - | $ | 11,630 | $ | - | $ | 29,461 | |||
Option
deposits and pre-acquisition costs write-offs:
|
|||||||||||
Midwest
|
$ | 24 | $ | 1 | $ | 547 | $ | 26 | |||
Florida
|
6 | 4 | 20 | 137 | |||||||
Mid-Atlantic
|
42 | 351 | 921 | 1,405 | |||||||
Total
option deposits and pre-acquisition costs write-offs (b)
|
$ | 72 | $ | 356 | $ | 1,488 | $ | 1,568 | |||
Impairment
of investments in unconsolidated LLCs:
|
|||||||||||
Midwest
|
$ | - | $ | 1,167 | $ | 72 | $ | 1,343 | |||
Florida
|
88 | 2,496 | 6,824 | 17,544 | |||||||
Mid-Atlantic
|
- | - | - | - | |||||||
Total
impairment of investments in unconsolidated LLCs (a)
|
$ | 88 | $ | 3,663 | $ | 6,896 | $ | 18,887 | |||
Total
impairments and write-offs of option deposits and
|
|||||||||||
pre-acquisition
costs
|
$ | 15,034 | $ | 43,522 | $ | 33,972 | $ | 105,713 |
(a)
|
Amounts
are recorded within impairment of inventory and investment in
unconsolidated LLCs in the Company’s Unaudited Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations.
|
(b)
|
Amounts
are recorded within general and administrative expense in the Company’s
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
|
14
NOTE 8. Capitalized
Interest
|
The Company capitalizes interest during
land development and home construction. Capitalized interest is
charged to cost of sales as the related inventory is delivered to a third
party. A summary of capitalized interest is as
follows:
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||
Capitalized
interest, beginning of period
|
$ | 25,387 | $ | 28,123 | $ | 25,838 | $ | 29,212 | ||||
Interest
capitalized to inventory
|
2,942 | 2,476 | 7,221 | 7,699 | ||||||||
Capitalized
interest charged to cost of sales
|
(3,363 | ) | (3,420 | ) | (8,093 | ) | (9,732 | ) | ||||
Capitalized
interest, end of period
|
$ | 24,966 | $ | 27,179 | $ | 24,966 | $ | 27,179 | ||||
Interest
incurred
|
$ | 4,240 | $ | 4,626 | $ | 13,526 | $ | 16,394 |
NOTE
9. Investment in Unconsolidated Limited Liability
Companies
At
September 30, 2009, the Company had interests ranging from 33% to 50% in LLCs
that do not meet the criteria of variable interest entities because each of the
entities had sufficient equity at risk to permit the entity to finance its
activities without additional subordinated support from the equity investors,
and one of these LLCs has outside financing that is not guaranteed by the
Company. These LLCs engage in land acquisition and development
activities for the purpose of selling or distributing (in the form of a capital
distribution) developed lots to the Company and its partners in the
entity. In one of these LLCs, the Company and its partner in the
entity have provided the lender with environmental indemnifications and a
guarantee of the completion of land development, a loan maintenance and limited
payment guaranty, and guarantees of minimum net worth levels of one of the
Company’s subsidiaries as more fully described in Note 10 below. The
Company’s maximum exposure related to its investment in these entities as of
September 30, 2009 is the amount invested of $7.7 million plus letters of credit
and bonds totaling $0.5 million and the estimated possible future obligation of
$10.6 million under the guarantees and indemnifications discussed in Note 10
below. Included in the Company’s investment in LLCs at September 30,
2009 and December 31, 2008 are $0.8 million and $0.6 million, respectively, of
capitalized interest and other costs. The Company does not have a
controlling interest in these LLCs; therefore, they are recorded using the
equity method of accounting. The Company did not receive any
distributions of developed lots at cost for the three months ended September 30,
2009, and less than $0.1 million of distributions of developed lots for the nine
months ended September 30, 2009. For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2008, the Company received distributions of developed lots at cost
of $0.1 million and $4.6 million, respectively.
The
Company evaluates its investment in unconsolidated LLCs for potential impairment
on a quarterly basis. If the fair value of the investment is less
than the investment carrying value, and the Company determines the decline in
value was other than temporary, the Company would write down the investment to
fair value.
NOTE 10. Guarantees
and Indemnifications
Warranty
The
Company offers a limited warranty program (“Home Builder’s Limited Warranty”) in
conjunction with its thirty-year transferable structural limited warranty, on
homes closed in or after 2007. The Home Builder’s Limited Warranty
covers construction defects and certain damage resulting from construction
defects for a statutory period based on geographic market and state law
(currently ranging from five to ten years for the states in which the Company
operates) and includes a mandatory arbitration clause. Prior to this
warranty program, the Company provided up to a two-year limited warranty on
materials and workmanship and a twenty-year (for homes closed between 1989 and
1998) and a thirty-year (for homes closed during or after 1998) transferable
limited warranty against major structural defects.
15
Warranty
expense is accrued as the home sale is recognized and is intended to cover
estimated material and outside labor costs to be incurred during the warranty
period. The accrual amounts are based upon historical experience and
geographic location. A summary of warranty activity for the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 is as follows:
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||
Warranty
accrual, beginning of period
|
$ | 7,532 | $ | 10,441 | $ | 9,518 | $ | 12,006 | ||||
Warranty
expense on homes delivered during the period
|
1,310 | 1,344 | 3,129 | 3,512 | ||||||||
Changes
in estimates for pre-existing warranties
|
234 | 471 | (789 | ) | 538 | |||||||
Settlements
made during the period
|
(2,048 | ) | (2,371 | ) | (4,830 | ) | (6,171 | ) | ||||
Warranty
accrual, end of period
|
$ | 7,028 | $ | 9,885 | $ | 7,028 | $ | 9,885 |
Guarantees
and Indemnities
In the
ordinary course of business, M/I Financial enters into agreements that guarantee
certain purchasers of its mortgage loans that M/I Financial will repurchase a
loan if certain conditions occur, primarily if the mortgagor does not meet those
conditions of the loan within the first six months after the sale of the
loan. Loans totaling approximately $128.0 million and $64.4 million
were covered under the above guarantees as of September 30, 2009 and December
31, 2008, respectively. A portion of the revenue paid to M/I
Financial for providing the guarantees on the above loans was deferred at
September 30, 2009, and will be recognized in income as M/I Financial is
released from its obligation under the guarantees. M/I Financial has
not repurchased any loans under the above agreements in 2009 or 2008, but has
provided indemnifications to third party investors in lieu of repurchasing
certain loans. The total of these indemnified loans was approximately
$3.8 million and $2.8 million at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively. The risk associated with the guarantees and indemnities
above is offset by the value of the underlying assets. The Company
has accrued management’s best estimate of the probable loss on the above
loans.
M/I
Financial has also guaranteed the collectability of certain loans to third-party
insurers of those loans for periods ranging from five to thirty
years. The maximum potential amount of future payments is equal to
the outstanding loan value less the value of the underlying asset plus
administrative costs incurred related to foreclosure on the loans, should this
event occur. The total of these costs are estimated to be $1.8
million and $1.5 million as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively, and would be offset by the value of the underlying
assets. The Company has accrued management’s best estimate of the
probable loss on the above loans.
The
Company has also provided certain other guarantees and
indemnifications. The Company has provided an environmental
indemnification to an unrelated third-party seller of land in connection with
the Company’s purchase of that land. In addition, the Company has
provided an environmental indemnification, a loan maintenance and limited
payment guaranty and a minimum net worth guarantee of one of the Company’s
subsidiaries in connection with outside financing provided by a lender to one of
our 50% owned LLCs. Under the environmental indemnification, the
Company and its partner in the applicable LLC are jointly and severally liable
for any environmental claims relating to the property that are brought against
the lender. Under the loan maintenance and limited payment guaranty,
the Company and the applicable LLC partner have jointly and severally agreed to
the third-party lender to fund any shortfall in the event the ratio of the loan
balance to the current fair market value of the property under development by
the LLC is below a certain threshold. As of September 30, 2009, the
total maximum amount of future payments the Company could be required to make
under the loan maintenance and limited payment guaranty was approximately $10.6
million. Under the above guarantees and indemnifications, the LLC
operating agreement provides recourse against our LLC partner for 50% of any
actual liability associated with the environmental indemnification, land
development completion guarantee and the loan maintenance and limited payment
guaranty.
The
Company has recorded a liability relating to the guarantees and indemnities
described above totaling $1.4 million and $1.9 million at September 30, 2009 and
December 31, 2008, respectively, which is management’s best estimate of the fair
value of the Company’s liability.
The
Company has also provided a guarantee of the performance and payment obligations
of its wholly-owned subsidiary, M/I Financial, up to an aggregate principle
amount of $13.0 million. The guarantee was provided to a
government-sponsored enterprise to which M/I Financial delivers
loans.
NOTE
11. Commitments and Contingencies
At
September 30, 2009, the Company had sales agreements outstanding, some of which
have contingencies for financing approval, to deliver 1,060 homes, with an
aggregate sales price of approximately $263.2 million. Based on our
current housing gross margin of 14.6%, less variable selling costs of 4.0% of
revenue, less payments to date on homes in backlog of $140.7 million, we
estimate payments totaling approximately $94.6 million to be made in 2009
relating to those homes.
16
At
September 30, 2009, the Company also had options and contingent purchase
agreements to acquire land and developed lots with an aggregate purchase price
of approximately $83.3 million. Purchase of such properties is
contingent upon satisfaction of certain requirements by the Company and the
sellers.
At
September 30, 2009, the Company had outstanding approximately $56.3 million of
completion bonds and standby letters of credit, some of which were issued to
various local governmental entities that expire at various times through
December 2016. Included in this total are: (1) $28.7 million of
performance bonds and $15.2 million of performance letters of credit that serve
as completion bonds for land development work in progress (including the
Company’s $0.3 million share of our LLCs’ letters of credit and bonds); (2) $8.2
million of financial letters of credit, of which $1.6 million represent deposits
on land and lot purchase agreements; and (3) $4.2 million of financial
bonds.
During
the first nine months of 2009, the Company identified approximately 80 homes
that have been confirmed as having defective imported drywall installed by our
subcontractors. All of these homes are located in Florida. The
Company has accrued $9.7 million for their repair and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009, we have charged $1.7 million against that accrual.
The
Company and certain of its subsidiaries have been named as defendants in various
other claims, complaints and other legal actions incidental to the Company’s
business. Certain of the liabilities resulting from these actions are
covered by insurance. While management currently believes that the
ultimate resolution of these matters, individually and in the aggregate, will
not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position or
overall trends in results of operations, such matters are subject to inherent
uncertainties. The Company has recorded a liability to provide for
the anticipated costs, including legal defense costs, associated with the
resolution of these matters. However, there exists the possibility
that the costs to resolve these matters could differ from the recorded estimates
and, therefore, have a material adverse impact on the Company’s net income for
the periods in which the matters are resolved.
NOTE
12. Universal Shelf Registration
On May
19, 2009, we raised $52.6 million by issuing 4,475,600 shares of our common
stock in a public offering, pursuant to the $250 million universal shelf
registration filed by the Company with the SEC in August 2008.
As of
September 30, 2009, $194.1 million remains available for future offerings under
the $250 million universal shelf registration. Pursuant to the
filing, the Company may, from time to time over an extended period, offer new
debt, preferred stock and/or other equity securities. The timing and
amount of offerings, if any, will depend on market and general business
conditions.
NOTE
13. Shareholders’ Equity
The
Company issued 4,475,600 shares of its common stock in a public offering on May
19, 2009. The Company raised approximately $52.6 million from that
issuance, which is intended to be used for general corporate
purposes.
NOTE
14. Notes Payable Banks
The
Initial Period of our Credit Facility has been extended for the third and final
time to October 20, 2009. During the Initial Period, any cash in
excess of $25 million is collateral. After the Initial Period
expired, $54.1 million of our restricted cash became unrestricted.
On
September 23, 2009, M/I Financial entered into the First Amendment to their
secured credit agreement (“MIF Credit Agreement”) to increase the maximum
borrowing availability from $20.0 million to $30.0 million.
On July
27, 2009, the Company entered into four secured Letter of Credit Facilities
(“LOC Facilities”) with a borrowing capacity of $35 million. The LOC
Facilities mature on September 30, 2010.
17
NOTE
15. Senior Notes
As of
September 30, 2009, there were $200 million of senior notes
outstanding. The indenture governing our senior notes contains
restrictive covenants that limit, among other things, the ability of the Company
to pay dividends on common and preferred shares, or repurchase any
shares. If our “consolidated restricted payments basket,” as defined
in the indenture governing our senior notes, is less than zero, we are
restricted from making certain payments, including dividends, as well as from
repurchasing any shares. At September 30, 2009, our restricted
payments basket was ($163.0) million. As a result of this deficit, we
are currently restricted from paying dividends on our common shares and our
9.75% Series A Preferred Shares (which are non-cumulative), and from
repurchasing any shares under our common shares repurchase program that was
authorized by our Board of Directors in November 2005. These
restrictions do not affect our compliance with any of the covenants contained in
the Credit Facility and will not permit the lenders under the Credit Facility to
accelerate the loans. The Credit Facility discussed above in Note 14
prohibits the early repurchase of such senior notes.
NOTE
16. Loss Per Share
Loss per
share (“EPS”) is calculated based on the weighted average number of common
shares outstanding during each period. The difference between basic
and diluted shares outstanding is due to the effect of dilutive stock options
and deferred compensation. There are no adjustments to net loss
necessary in the calculation of basic or diluted earnings per
share. The tables below present information regarding basic and
diluted loss per share for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009
and 2008:
Three
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||
Loss
|
Shares
|
EPS
|
Loss
|
Shares
|
EPS
|
||||||
Basic
loss from continuing operations
|
$(21,074) | $(58,655) | |||||||||
Less:
preferred stock dividends
|
- | - | |||||||||
Loss
to common shareholders from continuing operations
|
$(21,074) | 18,514 | $(1.14) | $(58,655) | 14,019 | $(4.18) | |||||
Effect
of dilutive securities:
|
|||||||||||
Stock
option awards
|
- | - | |||||||||
Deferred
compensation awards
|
- | - | |||||||||
Diluted
loss to common shareholders from
|
|||||||||||
continuing
operations
|
$(21,074) | 18,514 | $(1.14) | $(58,655) | 14,019 | $(4.18) | |||||
Anti-dilutive
stock equivalent awards not included in the
|
|||||||||||
calculation
of diluted loss per share
|
1,771 | 1,420 |
Nine
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||
Loss
|
Shares
|
EPS
|
Loss
|
Shares
|
EPS
|
||||||
Basic
loss from continuing operations
|
$(69,105) | $(170,055) | |||||||||
Less:
preferred stock dividends
|
- | 4,875 | |||||||||
Loss
to common shareholders from continuing operations
|
$(69,105) | 16,127 | $(4.29) | $(174,930) | 14,014 | $(12.48) | |||||
|
|||||||||||
Effect
of dilutive securities:
|
|||||||||||
Stock
option awards
|
- | - | |||||||||
Deferred
compensation awards
|
- | - | |||||||||
Diluted
loss to common shareholders from
|
|||||||||||
continuing
operations
|
$(69,105) | 16,127 | $(4.29) | $(174,930) | 14,014 | $(12.48) | |||||
Anti-dilutive
stock equivalent awards not included in the
|
|||||||||||
calculation
of diluted loss per share
|
1,710 | 1,398 |
NOTE
17. Income Taxes
Deferred
federal and state income tax assets primarily represent the deferred tax
benefits arising from temporary differences between book and tax income which
will be recognized in future years as an offset against future taxable
income. These assets were largely generated as a result of inventory
impairments that the Company incurred in 2006, 2007, 2008 and
2009. If, for some reason, the combination of future years’ income
(or loss), combined with the reversal of the timing differences, results in a
loss, such losses can be carried back to prior years or carried forward to
future years to recover the deferred tax assets.
The
Company evaluates its deferred tax assets, including net operating losses, to
determine if a valuation allowance is required. We are required to assess
whether a valuation allowance should be established based on the consideration
of all available evidence using a “more likely than not” standard. In
making such judgments, significant weight is given to
18
evidence
that can be objectively verified. A cumulative loss in recent years is
significant negative evidence in considering whether deferred tax assets are
realizable, and also restricts the amount of reliance on projections of future
taxable income to support the recovery of deferred tax assets. The
Company’s current and prior year losses present the most significant negative
evidence as to whether the Company needs to reduce its deferred tax assets with
a valuation allowance. We are now in a four-year cumulative pre-tax loss
position during the years 2005 through 2009. We currently believe the
cumulative weight of the negative evidence exceeds that of the positive evidence
and, as a result, it is more likely than not that we will not be able to utilize
all of our deferred tax assets. Therefore, as of September 30, 2009, the
Company has recorded a total valuation allowance of $136.4 million against
its deferred tax assets. In 2009, we do not expect to record any
additional tax benefits as the carryback has been exhausted. The
accounting for deferred taxes is based upon an estimate of future
results. Differences between the anticipated and actual outcomes of
these future tax consequences could have a material impact on the Company’s
consolidated results of operations or financial position.
At
September 30, 2009, the Company had a Federal net operating loss (“NOL”)
carryforward of approximately $55.8 million. This Federal carryforward
benefit will begin to expire in 2028. The Company also had state NOL
benefits of $11.1 million. These state carryforward benefits will begin to
expire in 2022.
NOTE
18. Financial Instruments
Counterparty
Credit Risk. To reduce the risk associated with accounting
losses that would be recognized if counterparties failed to perform as
contracted, the Company limits the entities that management can enter into a
commitment with to the primary dealers in the market. This risk of
accounting loss is the difference between the market rate at the time of
non-performance by the counterparty and the rate the Company committed to. The following table
presents the carrying amounts and fair values of the Company’s financial
instruments at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008. Fair value
is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to
transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at
the measurement date (an exit price).
September
30, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
||||||||||
Carrying
|
Fair
|
Carrying
|
Fair
|
||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
Amount
|
Value
|
Amount
|
Value
|
|||||||
Assets:
|
|||||||||||
Cash,
including cash in escrow
|
$ | 102,794 | $ | 102,794 | $ | 39,176 | $ | 39,176 | |||
Mortgage
loans held for sale
|
37,087 | 37,087 | 37,772 | 37,772 | |||||||
Other
assets
|
11,404 | 11,273 | 14,282 | 13,813 | |||||||
Notes
receivable
|
4,000 | 4,000 | 5,000 | 5,356 | |||||||
Commitments
to extend real estate loans
|
1,020 | 1,020 | 638 | 638 | |||||||
Best-efforts
contracts for committed IRLCs and mortgage loans held for
sale
|
- | - | 73 | 73 | |||||||
Liabilities:
|
|||||||||||
Notes
payable - banks
|
26,622 | 26,622 | 35,078 | 35,078 | |||||||
Mortgage
notes payable
|
6,233 | 7,201 | 6,442 | 9,819 | |||||||
Notes
payable - other
|
- | - | 9,857 | 9,857 | |||||||
Senior
notes
|
199,360 | 184,250 | 199,168 | 105,000 | |||||||
Best-efforts
contracts for committed IRLCs and mortgage loans held for
sale
|
276 | 276 | - | - | |||||||
Forward
sale of mortgage-backed securities
|
1,334 | 1,334 | 1,104 | 1,104 | |||||||
Other
liabilities
|
56,340 | 56,340 | 54,183 | 54,183 | |||||||
Off-Balance
Sheet Financial Instruments:
|
|||||||||||
Letters
of credit
|
- | 817 | - | 727 |
The
following methods and assumptions were used by the Company in estimating its
fair value disclosures of financial instruments at September 30, 2009 and
December 31, 2008:
Cash, Cash Held
in Escrow and Other Liabilities. The carrying amounts of these
items approximate fair value.
Mortgage Loans
Held for Sale, Forward Sale of Mortgage-Backed Securities, Commitments to Extend
Real Estate Loans, Best-Efforts Contracts for Committed IRLCs and Mortgage Loans
Held for Sale, Notes Payable - Other and Senior Notes. The
fair value of these financial instruments was determined based upon market
quotes at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008. The market quotes
used were quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities along with inputs
taken from observable market data by correlation. The inputs were
adjusted to account for the condition of the asset or liability.
Other Assets and
Notes Receivable. The estimated fair value was determined by
calculating the present value of the amounts based on the estimated timing of
receipts.
Notes Payable -
Banks. The interest rate currently available to the Company
fluctuates with the Alternate Base Rate or Eurodollar Rate (for the Credit
Facility) or LIBOR (for the MIF Credit Facility), and thus their carrying value
is a reasonable estimate of fair value.
19
Mortgage Notes
Payable. The estimated fair value was determined by
calculating the present value of the future cash flows.
Letters of
Credit. Letters of credit and outstanding completion bonds of
$56.3 million and $80.1 million represent potential commitments at September 30,
2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. The letters of credit
generally expire within one or two years. The estimated fair value of
letters of credit was determined using fees currently charged for similar
agreements.
NOTE
19. Business Segments
The
Company’s segment information is presented on the basis that the chief operating
decision makers use in evaluating segment performance. The Company’s
chief operating decision makers evaluate the Company’s performance in various
ways, including: (1) the results of our nine individual homebuilding operating
segments and the results of the financial services operation; (2) the results of
our three homebuilding regions; and (3) our consolidated financial
results. We have determined our reportable segments as follows:
Midwest homebuilding, Florida homebuilding, Mid-Atlantic homebuilding and
financial services operations. The homebuilding operating segments
that are included within each reportable segment have similar operations and
exhibit similar economic characteristics. Our homebuilding operations
include the acquisition and development of land, the sale and construction of
single-family attached and detached homes, and the occasional sale of lots to
third parties. The homebuilding operating segments that comprise each
of our reportable segments are as follows:
Midwest
|
Florida
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
Columbus,
Ohio
|
Tampa,
Florida
|
Washington,
D.C.
|
Cincinnati,
Ohio
|
Orlando,
Florida
|
Charlotte,
North Carolina
|
Indianapolis,
Indiana
|
Raleigh,
North Carolina
|
|
Chicago,
Illinois
|
The
financial services operations include the origination and sale of mortgage loans
and title services primarily for purchasers of the Company’s
homes.
20
The chief
operating decision makers utilize operating profits (losses), defined as profits
(losses) before interest expense and income taxes, as a performance
measure. Selected financial information for our reportable segments
for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 is presented
below:
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||
Revenue:
|
||||||||||||
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ | 71,240 | $ | 64,564 | $ | 157,980 | $ | 171,042 | ||||
Florida
homebuilding
|
22,690 | 29,979 | 67,483 | 119,620 | ||||||||
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
54,749 | 63,270 | 129,328 | 148,526 | ||||||||
Other
homebuilding - unallocated (a)
|
- | - | - | 7,131 | ||||||||
Financial
services
|
4,059 | 2,572 | 10,242 | 11,153 | ||||||||
Total
revenue
|
$ | 152,738 | $ | 160,385 | $ | 365,033 | $ | 457,472 | ||||
Operating
(loss) income:
|
||||||||||||
Midwest
homebuilding (b)
|
$ | (5,932 | ) | $ | (25,137 | ) | $ | (15,282 | ) | $ | (43,496 | ) |
Florida
homebuilding (b)
|
(11,702 | ) | (12,599 | ) | (30,101 | ) | (55,208 | ) | ||||
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding (b)
|
2,293 | (12,047 | ) | (3,710 | ) | (22,280 | ) | |||||
Other
homebuilding - unallocated (a)
|
- | - | - | 502 | ||||||||
Financial
services
|
2,135 | 732 | 4,971 | 5,325 | ||||||||
Less:
Corporate selling, general and administrative expense (c)
|
(6,449 | ) | (7,222 | ) | (17,428 | ) | (20,313 | ) | ||||
Total
operating loss
|
$ | (19,655 | ) | $ | (56,273 | ) | $ | (61,550 | ) | $ | (135,470 | ) |
Interest
expense:
|
||||||||||||
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ | 638 | $ | 1,181 | $ | 3,081 | $ | 3,900 | ||||
Florida
homebuilding
|
229 | 302 | 1,317 | 1,813 | ||||||||
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
303 | 553 | 1,673 | 2,624 | ||||||||
Financial
services
|
128 | 114 | 234 | 358 | ||||||||
Total
interest expense
|
$ | 1,298 | $ | 2,150 | $ | 6,305 | $ | 8,695 | ||||
Other
(loss) income (d)
|
- | - | (941 | ) | 5,555 | |||||||
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
$ | (20,953 | ) | $ | (58,423 | ) | $ | (68,796 | ) | $ | (138,610 | ) |
(a)
|
Other
homebuilding – unallocated consists of the net impact in the period due to
timing of homes delivered with low down-payment loans (buyers put less
than 5% down) funded by the Company’s financial services operations not
yet sold to a third party. In accordance with applicable
accounting rules, recognition of such revenue must be deferred until the
related loan is sold to a third party. Refer to the Revenue
Recognition policy described in our Application of Critical Accounting
Estimates and Policies in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations for further
discussion.
|
(b)
|
For
the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, the impact of charges
relating to the impairment of inventory and investment in unconsolidated
LLCs and the write-off of land deposits and pre-acquisition costs was
$15.0 million and $43.5 million, respectively. These charges
reduced operating income by $8.6 million and $21.3 million in the Midwest
region, $6.4 million and $11.3 million in the Florida region and less than
$0.1 million and $10.9 million in the Mid-Atlantic region for the three
months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
|
For the
nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, the impact of charges relating to
the impairment of inventory and investment in unconsolidated LLCs and the
write-off of land deposits and pre-acquisition costs was $34.0 million and
$105.7 million, respectively. These charges reduced operating income
by $12.0 million and $34.3 million in the Midwest region, $17.0 million and
$52.9 million in the Florida region and $5.0 million and $18.5 million in the
Mid-Atlantic region for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
(c)
|
The
three and nine months ended September, 2009 include the impact of
severance charges of less than $0.1 million and $0.8 million,
respectively, and the three and nine months ended September, 2008 include
the impact of severance charges of $0.4 million and $2.4 million,
respectively.
|
(d)
|
Other
(loss) income is comprised of the loss on the sale of the plane during the
first quarter of 2009, and the gain recognized on the exchange of the
Company’s airplane during the first quarter of
2008.
|
21
The
following table shows total assets by segment as of September 30, 2009 and
December 31, 2008:
At
September 30, 2009
|
||||||||||||||
Corporate,
|
||||||||||||||
Financial
Services
|
||||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
Midwest
|
Florida
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
and
Unallocated
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Deposits
on real estate under option or contract
|
$ | 713 | $ | - | $ | 25 | $ | - | $ | 738 | ||||
Inventory
|
246,598 | 83,735 | 163,199 | - | 493,532 | |||||||||
Investment
in unconsolidated entities
|
6,524 | 1,132 | - | - | 7,656 | |||||||||
Other
assets
|
5,151 | 10,304 | 7,983 | 152,568 | 176,006 | |||||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 258,986 | $ | 95,171 | $ | 171,207 | $ | 152,568 | $ | 677,932 |
At
December 31, 2008
|
||||||||||||||
Corporate,
|
||||||||||||||
Financial
Services
|
||||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
Midwest
|
Florida
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
and
Unallocated
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Deposits
on real estate under option or contract
|
$ | 96 | $ | 32 | $ | 942 | $ | - | $ | 1,070 | ||||
Inventory
|
232,853 | 102,500 | 179,606 | - | 514,959 | |||||||||
Investment
in unconsolidated entities
|
6,359 | 6,771 | - | - | 13,130 | |||||||||
Other
assets
|
2,758 | 12,284 | 4,720 | 144,367 | 164,129 | |||||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 242,066 | $ | 121,587 | $ | 185,268 | $ | 144,367 | $ | 693,288 |
NOTE
20. Subsequent Events
The
Company has evaluated subsequent events through October 30, 2009, which is the
date these financial statements were issued, and no material subsequent events
occurred between September 30, 2009 and October 30, 2009.
22
ITEM
2: MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. (the “Company” or “we”) is one of the nation’s leading builders of
single-family homes, having delivered nearly 75,000 homes since we commenced
homebuilding in 1976. The Company’s homes are marketed and sold under
the trade names M/I Homes and Showcase Homes. The Company has
homebuilding operations in Columbus and Cincinnati, Ohio; Indianapolis, Indiana;
Chicago, Illinois; Tampa and Orlando, Florida; Charlotte and Raleigh, North
Carolina; and the Virginia and Maryland suburbs of Washington,
D.C. In 2008, the latest year for which information is available, we
were the 21st
largest U.S. single-family homebuilder (based on homes delivered) as ranked by
Builder
Magazine.
Included
in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations are the following topics relevant to the Company’s performance and
financial condition:
●
|
Information
Relating to Forward-Looking Statements
|
●
|
Our
Application of Critical Accounting Estimates and
Policies
|
●
|
Our
Results of Operations
|
●
|
Discussion
of Our Liquidity and Capital Resources
|
●
|
Update
of Our Contractual Obligations
|
●
|
Discussion
of Our Utilization of Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
|
●
|
Impact
of Interest Rates and Inflation
|
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
|
Certain information
included in this report or in other materials we have filed or will file with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) (as well as information
included in oral statements or other written statements made or to be made by
us) contains or may contain forward-looking statements, including, but
not limited to, statements regarding our future financial performance and
financial condition. Words such as “expects,” “anticipates,”
“targets,” “goals,” “projects,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,”
“estimates,” variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to
identify such forward-looking statements. These statements involve a
number of risks and uncertainties. Any forward-looking statements
that we make herein and in future reports and statements are not guarantees of
future performance, and actual results may differ materially from those in such
forward-looking statements as a result of various risk
factors. Please see “Item 1A Risk Factors” in Part I of our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, in Part II of our
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2009, and our
updates discussed in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in Part II of this
report.
Any
forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date made. Except as
required by applicable law or the rules and regulations of the SEC, we undertake
no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements or risk factors,
whether as a result of new information, future events or
otherwise. However, any further disclosures made on related subjects
in our subsequent reports on Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K should be
consulted. This discussion is provided as permitted by the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and all of our forward-looking
statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary
statements contained or referenced in this section.
APPLICATION OF CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES AND POLICIES
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles (“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated
financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the
reporting period. Management bases its estimates and judgments on
historical experience and on various other factors that are believed to be
reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for
making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not
readily apparent from other sources. On an ongoing basis, management
evaluates such estimates and judgments and makes adjustments as deemed
necessary. Actual results could differ from these estimates using
different estimates and assumptions, or if conditions are significantly
different in the future. Listed below are those estimates that we
believe are critical and require the use of complex judgment in their
application.
Revenue
Recognition. Revenue from the sale of a home is recognized
when the closing has occurred, title has passed, and an adequate initial and
continuing investment by the homebuyer is received or when the loan has been
sold to a third-party investor. Revenue for homes that close to the
buyer having a deposit of 5% or greater, home closings financed by
third
23
parties,
and all home closings insured under FHA or VA government-insured programs are
recorded in the financial statements on the date of closing.
Revenue
related to all other home closings initially funded by our wholly-owned
subsidiary, M/I Financial Corp. (“M/I Financial”), is recorded on the date that
M/I Financial sells the loan to a third-party investor, because the receivable
from the third-party investor is not subject to future subordination, and the
Company has transferred to this investor the usual risks and rewards of
ownership that is in substance a sale and does not have a substantial continuing
involvement with the home.
All
associated homebuilding costs are charged to cost of sales in the period when
the revenues from home closings are recognized. Homebuilding costs
include land and land development costs; home construction costs (including an
estimate of the costs to complete construction); previously capitalized
interest; real estate taxes; indirect costs; and estimated warranty
costs. All other costs are expensed as incurred. Sales
incentives, including pricing discounts and financing costs paid by the Company,
are recorded as a reduction of revenue in the Company’s Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations. Sales incentives in the form
of options or upgrades are recorded in homebuilding costs.
We
recognize the majority of the revenue associated with our mortgage loan
operations when the mortgage loans and related servicing rights are sold to
third party investors. The revenue recognized is reduced by the fair
value of the related guarantee provided to the investor. The fair
value of the guarantee is recognized in revenue when the Company is released
from its obligation under the guarantee. Generally, all of the
financial services mortgage loans and related servicing rights are sold to third
party investors within two weeks of origination. We recognize
financial services revenue associated with our title operations as homes are
closed, closing services are rendered, and title policies are issued, all of
which generally occur simultaneously as each home is closed. All of
the underwriting risk associated with title insurance policies is transferred to
third-party insurers.
Inventories. We
use the specific identification method for the purpose of accumulating costs
associated with land acquisition and development, and home
construction. Inventory is recorded at cost, unless events and
circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the land may be
impaired. In addition to the costs of direct land acquisition, land
development and related costs (both incurred and estimated to be incurred) and
home construction costs, inventory includes capitalized interest, real estate
taxes, and certain indirect costs incurred during land development and home
construction. Such costs are charged to cost of sales simultaneously
with revenue recognition, as discussed above. When a home is closed,
we typically have not yet paid all incurred costs necessary to complete the
home. As homes close, we compare the home construction budget to
actual recorded costs to date to estimate the additional costs to be incurred
from our subcontractors related to the home. We record a liability
and a corresponding charge to cost of sales for the amount we estimate will
ultimately be paid related to that home. We monitor the accuracy of
such estimate by comparing actual costs incurred in subsequent months to the
estimate. Although actual costs to complete in the future could
differ from the estimate, our method has historically produced consistently
accurate estimates of actual costs to complete closed homes.
Typically,
our building cycle ranges from five to six years, commencing with the
acquisition of the entitled land and continuing through the land development
phase and concluding with the sale, construction and closing of the
home. Actual community lives will vary based on the size of the
community and the associated absorption rates. Master-planned
communities encompassing several phases may have significantly longer
lives. Additionally, the current slow-down in the housing market has
negatively impacted our sales pace, thereby also extending the lives of certain
communities.
The
Company assesses inventory for recoverability on a quarterly basis, by reviewing
for impairment whenever events or changes in local or national economic
conditions indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. In conducting our quarterly review for indicators of
impairment on a community level, we evaluate, among other things, the margins on
homes that have been delivered, margins on sales contracts in backlog, projected
margins with regard to future home sales over the life of the community,
projected margins with regard to future land sales, and the value of the land
itself. We pay particular attention to communities in which inventory
is moving at a slower than anticipated absorption pace, and communities whose
average sales price and/or margins are trending downward and are anticipated to
continue to trend downward. From this review, we identify communities
whose carrying values may exceed their undiscounted cash flows. For
those communities deemed to be impaired, the impairment recognized is measured
by the amount by which the carrying amount of the communities exceeds the fair
value of the communities.
Our
determination of fair value is based on projections and
estimates. Changes in these expectations may lead to a change in the
outcome of our impairment analysis. Our analysis is completed on a
quarterly basis at a community level; therefore, changes in local conditions may
affect one or several of our communities.
For the
three months ended September 30, 2009, the company evaluated all active
communities for impairment indicators. A recoverability analysis was
performed for 28 of those active communities and an impairment charge was
recorded in 16 of those communities. The carrying value of those 16
impaired communities was $59.1 million at September 30, 2009.
24
For all
of the categories listed below, the key assumptions relating to the valuations
are dependent on project-specific local market and/or community conditions and
are inherently uncertain. Because each inventory asset is unique,
there are numerous inputs and assumptions used in our valuation
techniques. Local market-specific factors that may impact these
projected assumptions include:
●
|
historical
project results such as average sales price and sales pace, if closings
have occurred in the project;
|
●
|
competitors’
local market and/or community presence and their competitive
actions;
|
●
|
project
specific attributes such as location desirability and uniqueness of
product offering;
|
●
|
potential
for alternative product offerings to respond to local market
conditions;
|
●
|
current
local market economic and demographic conditions and related trends and
forecasts; and
|
●
|
community-specific
strategies regarding speculative
homes.
|
Operating
communities. For existing operating communities, the
recoverability of assets is measured on a quarterly basis by comparing the
carrying amount of the assets to future undiscounted net cash flows expected to
be generated by the assets based on home sales. These estimated cash flows
are developed based primarily on management’s assumptions relating to the
specific community. The significant assumptions used to evaluate the
recoverability of assets include: the timing of development and/or
marketing phases; projected sales price and sales pace of each existing or
planned community; the estimated land development, home construction and selling
costs of the community; overall market supply and demand; the local market; and
competitive conditions. Management reviews these assumptions on a
quarterly basis. While we consider available information to determine
what we believe to be our best estimates as of the end of a reporting period,
these estimates are subject to change in future reporting periods as facts and
circumstances change. These assumptions vary widely across different
communities and geographies and are largely dependent on local market
conditions.
Future
communities. For raw land or land under development that
management anticipates will be utilized for future homebuilding activities, the
recoverability of assets is measured by comparing the carrying amount of the
assets to future undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by the assets
based on home sales, consistent with the evaluations performed for operating
communities discussed above.
For raw
land, land under development or lots that management intends to market for sale
to a third party, but that do not meet all of the criteria to be classified as
land held for sale as discussed below, the recoverability of the assets is
determined based on either the estimated net sales proceeds expected to be
realized on the sale of the assets or the estimated fair value determined using
cash flow valuation techniques.
If the
Company has not yet determined whether raw land or land under development will
be utilized for future homebuilding activities or marketed for sale to a third
party, the Company assesses the recoverability of the inventory using a
probability-weighted approach.
Land held for
sale. Land held for sale includes land that meets all of the
following six criteria: (1) management, having the authority to
approve the action, commits to a plan to sell the asset; (2) the asset is
available for immediate sale in its present condition subject only to terms that
are usual and customary for sales of such assets; (3) an active program to
locate a buyer and other actions required to complete the plan to sell the asset
have been initiated; (4) the sale of the asset is probable, and transfer of the
asset is expected to qualify for recognition as a completed sale, within one
year; (5) the asset is being actively marketed for sale at a price that is
reasonable in relation to its current fair value; and (6) actions required to
complete the plan indicate that it is unlikely that significant changes to the
plan will be made or that the plan will be withdrawn. The Company
records land held for sale at the lower of its carrying value or fair value less
costs to sell. In performing impairment evaluation for land held for
sale, management considers, among other things, prices for land in recent
comparable sales transactions, market analysis and recent bona fide offers
received from outside third parties, as well as actual contracts. If
the estimated fair value less the costs to sell an asset is less than the
current carrying value, the asset is written down to its estimated fair value
less costs to sell.
For all
of the above categories, the key assumptions relating to the above valuations
are dependent on project-specific local market and/or community conditions and
are inherently uncertain. Because each inventory asset is unique,
there are numerous inputs and assumptions used in our valuation
techniques.
These and
other local market-specific factors that may impact project assumptions
discussed above are considered by personnel in our homebuilding divisions as
they prepare or update the forecasted assumptions for each community.
Quantitative and qualitative factors other than home sales prices could
significantly impact the potential for future impairments. The sales
objectives can differ between communities, even within a given
sub-market. For example, facts and circumstances in a given community
may lead us to price our homes with the objective of yielding a higher sales
absorption pace, while facts and circumstances in another community may lead us
to price our homes to minimize deterioration in our gross margins, although it
may result in a slower sales absorption pace. Furthermore, the key
25
assumptions
included in our estimated future undiscounted cash flows may be
interrelated. For example, a decrease in estimated base sales price
or an increase in home sales incentives may result in a corresponding increase
in sales absorption pace. Additionally, a decrease in the average
sales price of homes to be sold and closed in future reporting periods for one
community that has not been generating what management believes to be an
adequate sales absorption pace may impact the estimated cash flow assumptions of
a nearby community. Changes in our key assumptions, including
estimated construction and development costs, absorption pace, selling
strategies, or discount rates, could materially impact future cash flow and fair
value estimates.
As of
September 30, 2009, our projections generally assume a gradual improvement in
market conditions over time, along with a gradual increase in
costs. These assumed gradual increases generally begin in 2010,
depending on the market and community. If communities are not
recoverable based on undiscounted cash flows, the impairment to be recognized is
measured as the amount by which the carrying amount of the assets exceeds the
fair value of the assets. The fair value of a community is determined
by discounting management’s cash flow projections using an appropriate
risk-adjusted interest rate. As of September 30, 2009, we utilized
discount rates ranging from 13% to 16% in the above valuations. The
discount rate used in determining each asset’s fair value depends on the
community’s projected life, development stage, and the inherent risks associated
with the related estimated cash flow stream as well as current risk free rates
available in the market and estimated market risk premiums. For
example, construction in progress inventory, which is closer to completion, will
generally require a lower discount rate than land under development in
communities consisting of multiple phases spanning several years of
development. We believe our assumptions on discount rates are
critical because the selection of a discount rate affects the estimated fair
value of the homesites within a community. A higher discount rate reduces the
estimated fair value of the homesites within the community, while a lower
discount rate increases the estimated fair value of the homesites within a
community.
Our
quarterly assessments reflect management’s estimates. Due to the
uncertainties related to our operations and our industry as a whole as further
discussed in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in Part I of our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2008, in Part II of our Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2009, and in “Item 1A. Risk Factors”
of Part II of this report, we are unable to determine at this time if and to
what extent continuing changes in our local markets will result in future
impairments.
Consolidated
Inventory Not Owned. We enter into land option agreements in
the ordinary course of business in order to secure land for the construction of
homes in the future. Pursuant to these land option agreements, we
typically provide a deposit to the seller as consideration for the right to
purchase land at different times in the future, usually at pre-determined
prices. If the entity holding the land under option is a variable
interest entity, the Company’s deposit (including letters of credit) represents
a variable interest in the entity, and we must use our judgment to determine if
we are the primary beneficiary of the entity. Factors considered in
determining whether we are the primary beneficiary include the amount of the
deposit in relation to the fair value of the land, the expected timing of our
purchase of the land, and assumptions about projected cash flows. We
consider our accounting policies with respect to determining whether we are the
primary beneficiary to be critical accounting policies due to the judgment
required.
We also
periodically enter into lot option arrangements with third-parties to whom we
have sold our raw land inventory. We evaluate these to determine if
we should record an asset and liability at the time we sell the land and enter
into the lot option contract.
Investment in
Unconsolidated Limited Liability Companies. We invest in
entities that acquire and develop land for distribution to us in connection with
our homebuilding operations. In our judgment, we have determined that
these entities generally do not meet the criteria of variable interest entities
because they have sufficient equity to finance their operations. We
must use our judgment to determine if we have substantive control or exercise
significant influence over these entities. If we were to determine
that we have substantive control or exercise significant influence over an
entity, we would be required to consolidate the entity. Factors
considered in determining whether we have substantive control or exercise
significant influence over an entity include risk and reward sharing, experience
and financial condition of the other partners, voting rights, involvement in
day-to-day capital and operating decisions, and continuing
involvement. In the event an entity does not have sufficient equity
to finance its operations, we would be required to use judgment to determine if
we were the primary beneficiary of the variable interest entity. We
consider our accounting policies with respect to determining whether we are the
primary beneficiary or have substantive control or exercise significant
influence over an entity to be critical accounting policies due to the judgment
required. Based on the application of our accounting policies, these
entities are accounted for by the equity method of accounting.
The
Company evaluates its investment in unconsolidated limited liability companies
(“LLCs”) for potential impairment on a quarterly basis. If the fair
value of the investment is less than the investment’s carrying value and the
Company has determined that the decline in value is other than temporary, the
Company would write down the value of the investment to fair
value. The determination of whether an investment’s fair value is
less than the carrying value requires management to
26
make
certain assumptions regarding the amount and timing of future contributions to
the LLC, the timing of distribution of lots to the Company from the LLC, the
projected fair value of the lots at the time of distribution to the Company, and
the estimated proceeds from, and timing of, the sale of land or lots to third
parties. In determining the fair value of investments in
unconsolidated LLCs, the Company evaluates the projected cash flows associated
with the LLC. As of September 30, 2009, the Company used a discount
rate of 16% in determining the fair value of investments in unconsolidated
LLCs. In addition to the assumptions management must make to
determine if the investment’s fair value is less than the carrying value,
management must also use judgment in determining whether the impairment is other
than temporary. The factors management considers are: (1) the length
of time and the extent to which the market value has been less than cost; (2)
the financial condition and near-term prospects of the Company; and (3) the
intent and ability of the Company to retain its investment in the LLC for a
period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in market
value. In situations where the investments are 100% equity financed
by the partners, and the joint venture simply distributes lots to its partners,
the Company evaluates “other than temporary” by preparing an undiscounted cash
flow model as described in inventory above for operating
communities. If such model results in positive value versus carrying
value, and the fair value of the investment is less than the investment’s
carrying value, the Company determines that the impairment is temporary;
otherwise, the Company determines that the impairment is other than temporary
and impairs the investment. Because of the high degree of judgment
involved in developing these assumptions, it is possible that the Company may
determine the investment is not impaired in the current period but, due to
passage of time or change in market conditions leading to changes in
assumptions, impairment could occur.
Guarantees and
Indemnities. Guarantee and indemnity liabilities are
established by charging the applicable income statement or balance sheet line,
depending on the nature of the guarantee or indemnity, and crediting a
liability. M/I Financial provides a limited-life guarantee on loans
sold to certain third parties and estimates its actual liability related to the
guarantee and any indemnities subsequently provided to the purchaser of the
loans in lieu of loan repurchase based on historical loss
experience. Actual future costs associated with loans guaranteed or
indemnified could differ materially from our current estimated
amounts. The Company has also provided certain other guarantees and
indemnifications in connection with the purchase and development of land,
including environmental indemnifications, guarantees of the completion of land
development, a loan maintenance and limited payment guaranty, and minimum net
worth guarantees of certain subsidiaries. The Company estimates these
liabilities based on the estimated cost of insurance coverage or estimated cost
of acquiring a bond in the amount of the exposure. Actual future
costs associated with these guarantees and indemnifications could differ
materially from our current estimated amounts.
Warranty. Warranty
accruals are established by charging cost of sales and crediting a warranty
accrual for each home closed. The amounts charged are estimated by
management to be adequate to cover expected warranty-related costs for materials
and outside labor required under the Company’s warranty programs. Accruals
are recorded for warranties under the following warranty programs:
●
|
Home
Builder’s Limited Warranty – warranty program which became effective for
homes closed starting with the third quarter of 2007;
|
●
|
30-year
transferable structural warranty – effective for homes closed after April
24, 1998;
|
●
|
two-year
limited warranty program – effective prior to the implementation of the
Home Builder’s Limited Warranty; and
|
●
|
20-year
transferable structural warranty – effective for homes closed between
September 1, 1989 and April 24,
1998.
|
The
warranty accruals for the Home Builder’s Limited Warranty and two-year limited
warranty program are established as a percentage of average sales price, and the
structural warranty accruals are established on a per unit basis. Our
warranty accruals are based upon historical experience by geographic area and
recent trends. Factors that are given consideration in determining
the accruals include: (1) the historical range of amounts paid per average sales
price on a home; (2) type and mix of amenity packages added to the home; (3) any
warranty expenditures included in the above not considered to be normal and
recurring; (4) timing of payments; (5) improvements in quality of construction
expected to impact future warranty expenditures; (6) actuarial estimates, which
reflect both Company and industry data; and (7) conditions that may affect
certain projects and require a different percentage of average sales price for
those specific projects.
Changes
in estimates for warranties occur due to changes in the historical payment
experience and differences between the actual payment pattern experienced during
the period and the historical payment pattern used in our evaluation of the
warranty accrual balance at the end of each quarter. Actual future
warranty costs could differ from our current estimated amount.
Self-insurance. Self-insurance
accruals are made for estimated liabilities associated with employee health
care, Ohio workers’ compensation and general liability insurance. Our
self-insurance limit for employee health care is $250,000 per claim per year for
fiscal 2009, with stop loss insurance covering amounts in excess of $250,000 up
to $2,000,000 per employee’s lifetime. Our self-insurance limit for
workers’ compensation is $450,000 per claim, with stop loss insurance
27
covering
all amounts in excess of this limit. The accruals related to employee
health care and workers’ compensation are based on historical experience and
open cases. Our general liability claims are insured by a third
party; the Company generally has a $7.5 million deductible per occurrence and a
$15.0 million deductible in the aggregate, with lower deductibles for certain
types of claims. The Company records a general liability accrual for
claims falling below the Company’s deductible. The general liability
accrual estimate is based on an actuarial evaluation of our past history of
claims and other industry specific factors. The Company has recorded
expenses totaling $12.5 million and less than $0.1 million, respectively, for
all self-insured and general liability claims during the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008. Please see Note 11 to our Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for more information surrounding the
year-to-date 2009 expenses. Because of the high degree of judgment
required in determining these estimated accrual amounts, actual future costs
could differ from our current estimated amounts.
Stock-Based
Compensation. We account for stock-based compensation by
measuring and recognizing compensation expense at an amount equal to the fair
value of share-based payments granted under compensation
arrangements. We calculate the fair value of stock options using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model. Determining the fair value of
share-based awards at the grant date requires judgment in developing
assumptions, which involve a number of variables. These variables
include, but are not limited to, the expected stock price volatility over the
term of the awards, the expected dividend yield, and the expected term of the
option. In addition, when we first issue share-based awards, we also
use judgment in estimating the number of share-based awards that are expected to
be forfeited.
Derivative
Financial Instruments. To meet financing needs of our
home-buying customers, M/I Financial is party to interest rate lock commitments
(“IRLCs”), which are extended to customers who have applied for a mortgage loan
and meet certain defined credit and underwriting criteria. These IRLCs are
considered derivative financial instruments. M/I Financial manages
interest rate risk related to its IRLCs and mortgage loans held for sale through
the use of forward sales of mortgage-backed securities (“FMBSs”), use of
best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments and the occasional purchase of
options on FMBSs in accordance with Company policy. These FMBSs,
options on FMBSs, and IRLCs covered by FMBSs are considered non-designated
derivatives. In determining the fair value of IRLCs, M/I Financial
considers the value of the resulting loan if sold in the secondary
market. The fair value includes the price that the loan is expected
to be sold for along with the value of servicing release
premiums. Subsequent to inception, M/I Financial estimates an updated
fair value which is compared to the initial fair value. In addition,
M/I Financial uses fallout estimates which fluctuate based on the rate of the
IRLC in relation to current rates. Gains or losses are recorded in
financial services revenue. Certain IRLCs and mortgage loans held for
sale are committed to third party investors through the use of best-efforts
whole loan delivery commitments. The IRLCs and related best-efforts
whole loan delivery commitments, which generally are highly effective from an
economic standpoint, are considered non-designated derivatives and are accounted
for at fair value, with gains or losses recorded in financial services
revenue. Under the terms of these best-efforts whole loan delivery
commitments covering mortgage loans held for sale, the specific committed
mortgage loans held for sale are identified and matched to specific delivery
commitments on a loan-by-loan basis. The delivery commitments and
loans held for sale are recorded at fair value, with changes in fair value
recorded in financial services revenue.
Income
Taxes—Valuation Allowance. A valuation
allowance is recorded against a deferred tax asset if, based on the weight of
available evidence, it is more-likely-than-not (a likelihood of more than 50%)
that some portion or the entire deferred tax asset will not be realized. The
realization of a deferred tax asset ultimately depends on the existence of
sufficient taxable income in either the carryback or carryforward periods under
applicable tax law. The four sources of taxable income to be considered in
determining whether a valuation allowance is required include:
●
|
future
reversals of existing taxable temporary differences (i.e., offset gross
deferred tax assets against gross deferred tax
liabilities);
|
●
|
taxable
income in prior carryback years;
|
●
|
tax
planning strategies; and
|
●
|
future
taxable income, exclusive of reversing temporary differences and
carryforwards.
|
Determining
whether a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets is necessary requires an
analysis of both positive and negative evidence regarding realization of the
deferred tax assets. Examples of positive evidence may include:
●
|
a
strong earnings history exclusive of the loss that created the deductible
temporary differences, coupled with evidence indicating that the loss is
the result of an aberration rather than a continuing
condition;
|
●
|
an
excess of appreciated asset value over the tax basis of a company’s net
assets in an amount sufficient to realize the deferred tax asset;
and
|
●
|
existing
backlog that will produce more than enough taxable income to realize the
deferred tax asset based on existing sales prices and cost
structures.
|
28
Examples
of negative evidence may include:
●
|
the
existence of “cumulative losses” (defined as a pre-tax cumulative loss for
the business cycle – in our case four years);
|
●
|
an
expectation of being in a cumulative loss position in a future reporting
period;
|
●
|
a
carryback or carryforward period that is so brief that it would limit the
realization of tax benefits;
|
●
|
a
history of operating loss or tax credit carryforwards expiring unused;
and
|
●
|
unsettled
circumstances that, if unfavorably resolved, would adversely affect future
operations and profit levels on a continuing
basis.
|
The
Company evaluates its deferred tax assets, including net operating losses, to
determine if a valuation allowance is required. We evaluate this based on
the consideration of all available evidence using a “more likely than not”
standard. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to
evidence that can be objectively verified. A cumulative loss in recent
years is significant negative evidence in considering whether deferred tax
assets are realizable, and also restricts the amount of reliance on projections
of future taxable income to support the recovery of deferred tax assets.
The Company’s current and prior year losses present the most significant
negative evidence as to whether the Company needs to reduce its deferred tax
assets with a valuation allowance. We are now in a four-year cumulative
pre-tax loss position during the years 2005 through 2009. We currently
believe the cumulative weight of the negative evidence exceeds that of the
positive evidence and, as a result, it is more likely than not that we will not
be able to utilize all of our deferred tax assets. Therefore, as of
September 30, 2009, the Company had a total valuation allowance of $136.4
million recorded. The accounting for deferred taxes is based upon an
estimate of future results. Differences between the anticipated and
actual outcomes of these future tax consequences could have a material impact on
the Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial
position.
Future
adjustments to our deferred tax asset valuation allowance will be determined
based upon changes in the expected realization of our net deferred tax
assets. In 2009, we do not expect to record any additional tax
benefits as the carryback has been exhausted. Additionally, our
determination with respect to recording a valuation allowance may be further
impacted by, among other things:
●
|
additional
inventory impairments;
|
●
|
additional
pre-tax operating losses; or
|
●
|
the
utilization of tax planning strategies that could accelerate the
realization of certain deferred tax
assets.
|
Additionally,
due to the considerable estimates utilized in establishing a valuation allowance
and the potential for changes in facts and circumstances in future reporting
periods, it is reasonably possible that we will be required to either increase
or decrease our valuation allowance in future reporting periods.
Income Taxes—Tax
Positions. The Company
evaluates tax positions that have been taken or are expected to be taken in tax
returns, and records the associated tax benefit or liability. Tax
positions are recognized when it is more-likely-than-not that the tax position
would be sustained upon examination. The tax position is measured at
the largest amount of benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being
realized upon settlement. Interest and penalties for all uncertain
tax positions are recorded within (benefit) provision for income taxes in the
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.
RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
The
Company’s segment information is presented on the basis that the chief operating
decision makers use in evaluating segment performance. The Company’s
chief operating decision makers evaluate the Company’s performance in various
ways, including: (1) the results of our nine individual homebuilding operating
segments and the results of the financial services operation; (2) the results of
our three homebuilding regions; and (3) the results of our consolidated
financial results. We have determined our reportable segments as
follows: Midwest homebuilding, Florida homebuilding, Mid-Atlantic homebuilding
and financial services operations. The homebuilding operating
segments that are included within each reportable segment have similar
operations and exhibit similar economic characteristics. Our
homebuilding operations include the acquisition and development of land, the
sale and construction of single-family attached and detached homes, and the
occasional sale of lots and land to third parties. The homebuilding
operating segments that comprise each of our reportable segments are as
follows:
Midwest
|
Florida
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
Columbus,
Ohio
|
Tampa,
Florida
|
Washington,
D.C.
|
Cincinnati,
Ohio
|
Orlando,
Florida
|
Charlotte,
North Carolina
|
Indianapolis,
Indiana
|
Raleigh,
North Carolina
|
|
Chicago,
Illinois
|
29
The
financial services operations include the origination and sale of mortgage loans
and title services primarily for purchasers of the Company’s homes.
Highlights
and Trends for the Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2009
Overview
During
the third quarter of 2009, we experienced our fourth consecutive quarter of
year-over-year increases in new contracts and third quarter of year-over-year
increases in backlog units since the housing market began its decline in late
2006. For the quarter, our new contracts and backlog units both
increased 36%, despite a 24% decline in active communities from a year
ago. We believe our new contract results underscore the importance of
great locations, focused quality product, excellent customer service and
effective marketing. We are cautiously optimistic about our results these past
three quarters. While we have experienced an uptick in demand in the
first nine months of 2009 as a more confident homebuyer took advantage of
increased affordability, historically low interest rates, and the
$8,000 federal tax credit, signs remain that indicate we have a ways
to go to a full recovery in the industry. Today’s current economic
environment continues to yield rising unemployment, increased foreclosures, and
very tight credit standards. In addition, the federal tax credit is set to
expire on December 1, 2009, the implications of which may be negative to the
industry and the overall economy.
Amid
these mixed conditions, we delivered 20% more homes while generating lower
homebuilding revenues in 2009’s third quarter off an 18% decline in average
sales price and lower land revenue compared to the same period a year ago. We
improved our operating gross margin by 500 basis points to 16.8% and reduced our
pre-tax operating loss to $1.2 million - down from 2008’s $14.5 million pre-tax
operating loss. (Please see the table set forth below reconciling non-GAAP
measures). We believe
these loss and new contract improvements are the result of a combination of
factors, including hard cost reduction and value-engineering initiatives, the
re-positioning of our product offering to target first-time and value-focused
homebuyers, our general expense reduction efforts and our focus on generating
cash and maintaining a strong balance sheet.
Key Financial
Results
● |
For
the quarter ended September 30, 2009, total revenue decreased $7.6 million
(5%) to $152.7 million when compared to the quarter ended September 30,
2008. This decrease is largely attributable to a decrease of
$6.2 million in revenue from outside land sales, from $6.3 million in 2008
to $0.1 million in 2009, along with a decrease of $2.9 million in housing
revenue. Partially offsetting these decreases was an increase
of $1.5 million in revenue from financial services to $4.1 million, which
was driven by a 28% increase in the number of loans originated, from 439
in the third quarter of 2008 to 564 in the third quarter of
2009. The average sales price of homes delivered decreased 18%,
from $273,000 for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 to $224,000 for the
quarter ended September 30, 2009. Homes delivered increased
20%, from 555 in the third quarter of 2008 to 665 in the same period of
2009.
|
|
● |
Loss
before taxes for the third quarter of 2009 decreased by $37.4 million
(64%), from $58.4 million in the third quarter of 2008 to $21.0 million in
the third quarter of 2009. During the third quarter of 2009,
the Company incurred charges totaling $15.0 million compared to $43.5
million incurred in the third quarter of 2008 related to the impairment of
inventory, investment in unconsolidated LLCs and abandoned land
transaction costs. Excluding the impact of the above-mentioned
charges, as well as $4.7 million of other non-operating charges (drywall
warranty issues of $4.4 million and $0.3 million of other unusual charges,
including severance and bad debt expense), the Company had a pre-tax loss
of $1.2 million in the third quarter of 2009, which represents a $13.3
million improvement from 2008’s pre-tax loss of $14.5 million (exclusive
of aforementioned impairments and $0.4 million of
severance). The improvement from 2008 was primarily driven by
lower selling, general and administrative expenses. The third
quarter operating gross margin was 16.8% compared to 2008’s
11.8%. (Please see the table set forth below reconciling
non-GAAP measures.) Selling expenses decreased by $3.1 million
(21%) for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 when compared to the
quarter ended September 30, 2008, primarily due to (1) a $1.1 million
decrease in variable selling expenses; (2) a $1.0 million decrease in
model home expenses; and (3) a $0.8 million decrease in advertising
expenses. Additionally, general and administrative expenses
decreased $2.9 million (17%) from the third quarter of 2008 to the third
quarter of 2009 primarily due to (1) a decrease of $1.2 million in
professional fees; (2) a decrease of $0.9 million in land related
expenses; and (3) a decrease of $0.8 million in miscellaneous
expenses.
|
30
● |
For
the nine months ended September 30, 2009, total revenue decreased $92.4
million (20%) compared to the first nine months of 2008. This
decrease is attributable to a decrease of $55.2 million in housing
revenue, from $409.2 million in 2008 to $354.0 million in 2009, along with
a $29.3 million decrease in revenue from outside land sales, from $30.0
million in the first nine months of 2008 to $0.7 million in the first nine
months of 2009. The $55.2 million decrease in housing revenue
was primarily due to an 18% decrease in the average sales price, from
$278,000 to $228,000. Homes delivered increased 5% from 1,471
in the first nine months of 2008 to 1,551 in the same period of
2009. Financial services revenue also decreased $0.9 million
(8%), driven by a 14% decrease in the number of loans
originated.
|
● |
Loss
before taxes for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 decreased $69.8
million, from $138.6 million in the 2008 nine-month period to $68.8
million for the first nine months of 2009. The $69.8 million
decrease is primarily comprised of lower impairment charges and lower
selling, general and administrative costs, which are partially offset by
the decrease in other income and increase in other loss, and the increase
in bad debt expense. During the nine months ended September 30,
2009, the Company incurred charges totaling $34.0 million compared to
$105.7 million incurred in the same period of 2008 related to the
impairment of inventory, investment in unconsolidated LLCs and abandoned
land transaction costs. Excluding the impact of the
above-mentioned charges, as well as $12.7 million of other non-operating
charges (drywall warranty issues of $9.7 million, $3.0 million of other
unusual charges, including severance and bad debt expense, and loss on the
sale of our airplane of $0.9 million), the Company had a pre-tax loss of
$22.1 million in the first nine months of 2009, which is a $13.9 million
improvement over the first nine months of 2008’s pre-tax loss of $36.0
million (exclusive of aforementioned impairments, a $5.6 million gain on
the sale of the company airplane and $2.4 million of severance
charges). A decline in operating gross margin dollars was
offset by lower selling, general and administrative expenses as well as
lower interest expense. Operating gross margin for the first nine months
of 2009 was 14.7% compared to 2008’s 13.6%. (Please see the
table set forth below reconciling non-GAAP measures
below). General and administrative expenses decreased $9.1
million (18%) for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 compared to the
that same period of 2008 primarily due to (1) a decrease of $4.1 million
in payroll and incentive expenses; (2) a decrease of $2.3 million in
professional fees; (3) a decrease of $2.2 million in land related
expenses, including abandoned projects and deposit write-offs; (4) a
decrease of $0.8 million in miscellaneous expenses; (5) a decrease of $0.5
million in computer-related expenses; and (6) a decrease of $0.4 million
in expenses related to the airplane that was sold in the first quarter of
2009. Partially offsetting these decreases was the bad debt
expense of $1.2 million mentioned above. Selling expenses
decreased by $11.2 million (27%) for the nine months ended September 30,
2009 when compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2008, primarily
due to (1) a $4.7 million decrease in variable selling expenses; (2) a
$2.7 million decrease in model home expenses; (3) a $2.3 million decrease
in advertising expenses; (4) a $0.8 million decrease in sales office
expenses; and (5) a $0.5 million decrease in payroll-related
expenses. In the first quarter of 2009, the Company incurred a
$0.9 million loss on the sale of our company airplane while in 2008, the
Company had a $5.6 million gain on the exchange of the company airplane,
resulting in a $6.5 million negative effect on income from year to
year.
|
● |
New
contracts for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 were 619 compared to
456 for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, an increase of
36%. New contracts increased in all of our
regions. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009, new
contracts increased by 505 (33%), from 1,540 in the first nine months of
2008 to 2,045 for the same period in 2009. We also experienced
an overall reduction in our cancellation rate, from 32% in the third
quarter of 2008 to 20% in the third quarter of 2009. By region,
our cancellation rates for the third quarter of 2009 versus the third
quarter of 2008 were as follows: Midwest – 22% in 2009 and 35% in 2008;
Florida – 16% in 2009 and 28% in 2008; and Mid-Atlantic – 17% in 2009 and
28% in 2008. The overall cancellation rates for the nine months
ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 were 18% and 26%,
respectively. Our homes in backlog increased 36%, from 781
units at September 30, 2008 to 1,060 units at September 30,
2009.
|
● |
Our
mortgage company’s capture rate increased from 84% for the third quarter
of 2008 to 88% in the third quarter of 2009. For the nine
months of 2009, 89% of our homes delivered that were financed were through
M/I Financial, compared to 83% in 2008’s first nine
months. Capture rate is influenced by financing availability
and can fluctuate up or down from quarter to quarter.
|
● |
We
continue to deal with very weak and ever-changing market conditions that
require us to constantly monitor the value of our inventories and
investments in unconsolidated LLCs in those markets in which we operate,
in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles. During the three and nine months ended September
30, 2009, we recorded $15.0 million and $34.0 million, respectively, of
charges relating to the impairment of inventory and investment in
unconsolidated LLCs and write-off of abandoned land transaction
costs. We generally believe that we will see a gradual
improvement in market conditions over the long term. For the
remainder of 2009, we will continue to update our evaluation of the value
of our inventory and investments in unconsolidated LLCs for impairment,
and could be required to record additional impairment charges, which would
negatively impact earnings should market conditions deteriorate further or
results differ from management’s original assumptions.
|
|
31
● | During the first nine months of 2009, we accrued $9.7 million for the repair of certain homes in Florida where certain of our subcontractors had purchased imported drywall that may be responsible for accelerated corrosion of certain metals in the home. |
● | We are required to reduce the carrying amounts of deferred tax assets by a valuation allowance, if, based on available evidence, it is more likely than not that such assets will not be realized. As a result of our net loss during the three months ended September 30, 2009, we generated deferred tax assets of $8.2 million and recorded a non-cash valuation allowance against the entire amount of deferred tax assets generated. |
The
following table reconciles our gross margin and loss from continuing operations
before income taxes for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and
2008 to operating gross margin and pre-tax loss from operations, excluding
inventory impairment charges, imported drywall charges, other expense (income)
and restructuring charges.
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||
Gross
margin
|
$ | 6,360 | $ | (24,280 | ) | $ | 11,620 | $ | (41,973 | ) | ||
Add:
|
||||||||||||
Impairments
|
14,962 | 43,166 | 32,484 | 104,145 | ||||||||
Warranty
– Imported drywall
|
4,400 | - | 9,650 | - | ||||||||
Operating
gross margin
|
$ | 25,722 | $ | 18,886 | $ | 53,754 | $ | 62,172 | ||||
Loss
from continuing operations
|
||||||||||||
before
income taxes
|
$ | (20,953 | ) | $ | (58,423 | ) | $ | (68,796 | ) | $ | (138,610 | ) |
Add:
|
||||||||||||
Impairments
and abandonments
|
15,034 | 43,522 | 33,972 | 105,713 | ||||||||
Warranty
– imported drywall
|
4,400 | - | 9,650 | - | ||||||||
Other
expense (income)
|
- | - | 941 | (5,555 | ) | |||||||
Restructuring/bad
debt expense
|
295 | 434 | 2,110 | 2,429 | ||||||||
Pre-tax
loss from operations
|
$ | (1,224 | ) | $ | (14,467 | ) | $ | (22,123 | ) | $ | (36,023 | ) |
We believe
that the measures described above, which exclude the effect of housing inventory
impairment and other non-operating matters, are useful to investors as they
provide a perspective on the underlying operating performance of the business by
isolating the impact of charges related to such items. In addition,
we use them to evaluate our performance and believe it is a widely-accepted
financial measure by users of our financial statements in analyzing our
operating results and provides comparability to similar calculations by our
peers in the homebuilding industry. However, it should be noted that
such measures are not GAAP financial measures. Due to the
significance of the GAAP components excluded, such measures should not be
considered in isolation or as an alternative to operating performance measures
prescribed by GAAP.
32
The
following table shows, by segment, revenue, operating (loss) income, and
interest expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and
2008, as well as the Company’s loss before taxes for such periods:
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||
Revenue:
|
||||||||||||
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ | 71,240 | $ | 64,564 | $ | 157,980 | $ | 171,042 | ||||
Florida
homebuilding
|
22,690 | 29,979 | 67,483 | 119,620 | ||||||||
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
54,749 | 63,270 | 129,328 | 148,526 | ||||||||
Other
homebuilding - unallocated (a)
|
- | - | - | 7,131 | ||||||||
Financial
services
|
4,059 | 2,572 | 10,242 | 11,153 | ||||||||
Total
revenue
|
$ | 152,738 | $ | 160,385 | $ | 365,033 | $ | 457,472 | ||||
Operating
(loss) income:
|
||||||||||||
Midwest
homebuilding (b)
|
$ | (5,932 | ) | $ | (25,137 | ) | $ | (15,282 | ) | $ | (43,496 | ) |
Florida
homebuilding (b)
|
(11,702 | ) | (12,599 | ) | (30,101 | ) | (55,208 | ) | ||||
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding (b)
|
2,293 | (12,047 | ) | (3,710 | ) | (22,280 | ) | |||||
Other
homebuilding - unallocated (a)
|
- | - | - | 502 | ||||||||
Financial
services
|
2,135 | 732 | 4,971 | 5,325 | ||||||||
Less:
Corporate selling, general and administrative expense (c)
|
(6,449 | ) | (7,222 | ) | (17,428 | ) | (20,313 | ) | ||||
Total
operating loss
|
$ | (19,655 | ) | $ | (56,273 | ) | $ | (61,550 | ) | $ | (135,470 | ) |
Interest
expense:
|
||||||||||||
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ | 638 | $ | 1,181 | $ | 3,081 | $ | 3,900 | ||||
Florida
homebuilding
|
229 | 302 | 1,317 | 1,813 | ||||||||
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
303 | 553 | 1,673 | 2,624 | ||||||||
Financial
services
|
128 | 114 | 234 | 358 | ||||||||
Total
interest expense
|
$ | 1,298 | $ | 2,150 | $ | 6,305 | $ | 8,695 | ||||
Other
(loss) income (d)
|
- | - | (941 | ) | 5,555 | |||||||
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
$ | (20,953 | ) | $ | (58,423 | ) | $ | (68,796 | ) | $ | (138,610 | ) |
(a)
|
Other
homebuilding – unallocated consists of the net impact in the period due to
timing of homes delivered with low down-payment loans (buyers put less
than 5% down) funded by the Company’s financial services operations not
yet sold to a third party. In accordance with applicable
accounting rules, recognition of such revenue must be deferred until the
related loan is sold to a third party. Refer to the Revenue
Recognition policy described in our Application of Critical Accounting
Estimates and Policies in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations for further
discussion.
|
(b)
|
For
the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, the impact of charges
relating to the impairment of inventory and investment in unconsolidated
LLCs and the write-off of land deposits and pre-acquisition costs was
$15.0 million and $43.5 million, respectively. These charges
reduced operating income by $8.6 million and $21.3 million in the Midwest
region, $6.4 million and $11.3 million in the Florida region and less than
$0.1 million and $10.9 million in the Mid-Atlantic region for the three
months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
|
For the
nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, the impact of charges relating to
the impairment of inventory and investment in unconsolidated LLCs and the
write-off of land deposits and pre-acquisition costs was $34.0 million and
$105.7 million, respectively. These charges reduced operating income
by $12.0 million and $34.3 million in the Midwest region, $17.0 million and
$52.9 million in the Florida region and $5.0 million and $18.5 million in the
Mid-Atlantic region for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
(c)
|
The
three and nine months ended September, 2009 include the impact of
severance charges of less than $0.1 million and $0.8 million,
respectively, and the three and nine months ended September, 2008 include
the impact of severance charges of $0.4 million and $2.4 million,
respectively.
|
(d)
|
Other
(loss) income is comprised of the loss on the sale of the plane during the
first quarter of 2009, and the gain recognized on the exchange of the
Company’s airplane during the first quarter of
2008.
|
33
The
following table shows total assets by segment:
At
September 30, 2009
|
||||||||||||||
Corporate,
|
||||||||||||||
Financial
Services
|
||||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
Midwest
|
Florida
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
and
Unallocated
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Deposits
on real estate under option or contract
|
$ | 713 | $ | - | $ | 25 | $ | - | $ | 738 | ||||
Inventory
|
246,598 | 83,735 | 163,199 | - | 493,532 | |||||||||
Investment
in unconsolidated entities
|
6,524 | 1,132 | - | - | 7,656 | |||||||||
Other
assets
|
5,151 | 10,304 | 7,983 | 152,568 | 176,006 | |||||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 258,986 | $ | 95,171 | $ | 171,207 | $ | 152,568 | $ | 677,932 |
At
December 31, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||
Corporate,
|
|||||||||||||||
Financial
Services
|
|||||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
Midwest
|
Florida
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
and
Unallocated
|
Total
|
||||||||||
Deposits
on real estate under option or contract
|
$ | 96 | $ | 32 | $ | 942 | $ | - | $ | 1,070 | |||||
Inventory
|
232,853 | 102,500 | 179,606 | - | 514,959 | ||||||||||
Investment
in unconsolidated entities
|
6,359 | 6,771 | - | - | 13,130 | ||||||||||
Other
assets
|
2,758 | 12,284 | 4,720 | 144,367 | 164,129 | ||||||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 242,066 | $ | 121,587 | $ | 185,268 | $ | 144,367 | $ | 693,288 |
Seasonality
Our
homebuilding operations experience significant seasonality and
quarter-to-quarter variability in homebuilding activity levels. In
general, homes delivered increase substantially in the second half of the
year. We believe that this seasonality reflects the tendency of
homebuyers to shop for a new home in the spring with the goal of closing in the
fall or winter, as well as the scheduling of construction to accommodate
seasonal weather conditions. Our financial services operations also
experience seasonality because loan originations correspond with the delivery of
homes in our homebuilding operations.
34
Reportable
Segments
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
(Dollars
in thousands, except as otherwise noted)
|
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||
Midwest
Region
|
||||||||||||
Homes
delivered
|
367 | 257 | 783 | 673 | ||||||||
Average
sales price per home delivered
|
$ | 194 | $ | 244 | $ | 202 | $ | 250 | ||||
Revenue
homes
|
$ | 71,148 | $ | 62,677 | $ | 157,888 | $ | 168,355 | ||||
Revenue
third party land sales
|
$ | 92 | $ | 1,887 | $ | 92 | $ | 2,687 | ||||
Operating
loss homes (a)
|
$ | (6,024 | ) | $ | (20,923 | ) | $ | (15,374 | ) | $ | (38,913 | ) |
Operating
income (loss) land (a)
|
$ | 92 | $ | (4,214 | ) | $ | 92 | $ | (4,583 | ) | ||
New
contracts, net
|
322 | 238 | 1,076 | 726 | ||||||||
Backlog
at end of period
|
658 | 444 | 658 | 444 | ||||||||
Average
sales price of homes in backlog
|
$ | 218 | $ | 247 | $ | 218 | $ | 247 | ||||
Aggregate
sales value of homes in backlog (in millions)
|
$ | 144 | $ | 109 | $ | 144 | $ | 109 | ||||
Number
of active communities
|
62 | 80 | 62 | 80 | ||||||||
Florida
Region
|
||||||||||||
Homes
delivered
|
107 | 105 | 302 | 355 | ||||||||
Average
sales price per home delivered
|
$ | 213 | $ | 244 | $ | 222 | $ | 260 | ||||
Revenue
homes
|
$ | 22,690 | $ | 25,544 | $ | 66,826 | $ | 92,341 | ||||
Revenue
third party land sales
|
$ | - | $ | 4,435 | $ | 657 | $ | 27,279 | ||||
Operating
loss homes (a)
|
$ | (11,702 | ) | $ | (5,519 | ) | $ | (30,292 | ) | $ | (31,323 | ) |
Operating
(loss) income land (a)
|
$ | - | $ | (7,080 | ) | $ | 191 | $ | (23,885 | ) | ||
New
contracts, net
|
124 | 87 | 348 | 374 | ||||||||
Backlog
at end of period
|
123 | 140 | 123 | 140 | ||||||||
Average
sales price of homes in backlog
|
$ | 224 | $ | 291 | $ | 224 | $ | 291 | ||||
Aggregate
sales value of homes in backlog (in millions)
|
$ | 27 | $ | 41 | $ | 27 | $ | 41 | ||||
Number
of active communities
|
21 | 26 | 21 | 26 | ||||||||
Mid-Atlantic
Region
|
||||||||||||
Homes
delivered
|
191 | 193 | 466 | 443 | ||||||||
Average
sales price per home delivered
|
$ | 287 | $ | 328 | $ | 278 | $ | 336 | ||||
Revenue
homes
|
$ | 54,749 | $ | 63,270 | $ | 129,328 | $ | 148,526 | ||||
Revenue
third party land sales
|
$ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | ||||
Operating
income (loss) homes (a)
|
$ | 2,293 | $ | (11,837 | ) | $ | (3,710 | ) | $ | (22,070 | ) | |
Operating
loss land (a)
|
$ | - | $ | (210 | ) | $ | - | $ | (210 | ) | ||
New
contracts, net
|
173 | 131 | 621 | 440 | ||||||||
Backlog
at end of period
|
279 | 197 | 279 | 197 | ||||||||
Average
sales price of homes in backlog
|
$ | 330 | $ | 314 | $ | 330 | $ | 314 | ||||
Aggregate
sales value of homes in backlog (in millions)
|
$ | 92 | $ | 62 | $ | 92 | $ | 62 | ||||
Number
of active communities
|
22 | 32 | 22 | 32 | ||||||||
Total
Homebuilding Regions
|
||||||||||||
Homes
delivered
|
665 | 555 | 1,551 | 1,471 | ||||||||
Average
sales price per home delivered
|
$ | 224 | $ | 273 | $ | 228 | $ | 278 | ||||
Revenue
homes
|
$ | 148,587 | $ | 151,491 | $ | 354,042 | $ | 409,222 | ||||
Revenue
third party land sales
|
$ | 92 | $ | 6,322 | $ | 749 | $ | 29,966 | ||||
Operating
loss homes (a)
|
$ | (15,433 | ) | $ | (38,279 | ) | $ | (49,376 | ) | $ | (92,306 | ) |
Operating
income (loss) land (a)
|
$ | 92 | $ | (11,504 | ) | $ | 283 | $ | (28,678 | ) | ||
New
contracts, net
|
619 | 456 | 2,045 | 1,540 | ||||||||
Backlog
at end of period
|
1,060 | 781 | 1,060 | 781 | ||||||||
Average
sales price of homes in backlog
|
$ | 248 | $ | 272 | $ | 248 | $ | 272 | ||||
Aggregate
sales value of homes in backlog (in millions)
|
$ | 263 | $ | 212 | $ | 263 | $ | 212 | ||||
Number
of active communities
|
105 | 138 | 105 | 138 | ||||||||
Financial
Services
|
||||||||||||
Number
of loans originated
|
564 | 439 | 1,336 | 1,168 | ||||||||
Value
of loans originated
|
$ | 112,042 | $ | 107,995 | $ | 275,655 | $ | 279,966 | ||||
Revenue
|
$ | 4,059 | $ | 2,572 | $ | 10,242 | $ | 11,153 | ||||
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
$ | 1,924 | $ | 1,840 | $ | 5,271 | $ | 5,828 | ||||
Interest
expense
|
$ | 128 | $ | 114 | $ | 234 | $ | 358 | ||||
Income
before income taxes
|
$ | 2,007 | $ | 618 | $ | 4,737 | $ | 4,967 |
(a) Amount
includes impairment charges and write-off of land deposits and pre-acquisition
costs for 2009 and 2008 as follows:
35
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
|||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||
Midwest:
|
||||||||||||
Homes
|
$ | 8,581 | $ | 17,110 | $ | 12,039 | $ | 29,751 | ||||
Land
|
- | 4,241 | - | 4,599 | ||||||||
8,581 | 21,351 | 12,039 | 34,350 | |||||||||
Florida:
|
||||||||||||
Homes
|
6,389 | 4,182 | 17,011 | 28,624 | ||||||||
Land
|
- | 7,080 | - | 24,263 | ||||||||
6,389 | 11,262 | 17,011 | 52,887 | |||||||||
Mid-Atlantic:
|
||||||||||||
Homes
|
64 | 10,599 | 4,922 | 18,166 | ||||||||
Land
|
- | 310 | - | 310 | ||||||||
64 | 10,909 | 4,922 | 18,476 | |||||||||
Total
|
||||||||||||
Homes
|
$ | 15,034 | $ | 31,891 | $ | 33,972 | $ | 76,541 | ||||
Land
|
- | 11,631 | - | 29,172 | ||||||||
$ | 15,034 | $ | 43,522 | $ | 33,972 | $ | 105,713 |
A home is
included in “new contracts” when our standard sales contract is
executed. “Homes delivered” represents homes for which the closing of
the sale has occurred. “Backlog” represents homes for which the
standard sales contract has been executed, but which are not included in homes
delivered because closings for these homes have not yet occurred as of the end
of the period specified.
Cancellation
Rates
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||
Midwest
|
22.2%
|
34.6%
|
21.1%
|
29.0%
|
|||
Florida
|
16.2%
|
28.1%
|
14.9%
|
19.0%
|
|||
Mid-Atlantic
|
17.2%
|
28.0%
|
15.2%
|
24.4%
|
|||
Total
|
19.7%
|
31.6%
|
18.4%
|
25.5%
|
Three Months Ended September
30, 2009 Compared to Three Months Ended September 30, 2008
Midwest
Region. For the quarter ended September 30, 2009, Midwest
homebuilding revenue was $71.2 million, a 10% increase compared to the third
quarter of 2008. The increase was primarily due to the 43% increase
in homes delivered, from 257 in the third quarter of 2008 to 367 in the third
quarter of 2009, which was partially offset by the 20% decrease in the average
sales price of homes delivered from $244,000 in the third quarter of 2008 to
$194,000 in the third quarter of 2009. Operating loss decreased by
$19.2 million, from $25.1 million in 2008 to $5.9 million in 2009, primarily due
to reduced impairment charges and lower selling, general and administrative
costs. Excluding impairment charges of $8.6 million and $21.4 million
for the third quarter of 2009 and 2008, respectively, our operating gross
margins were 14.3% and 9.1% for those same periods in our Midwest
region. The 5.2% increase was the result of our Company-wide
initiative to reduce hard costs, along with value engineering in our Midwest
markets. Selling, general and administrative costs decreased $2.1
million, going from $9.6 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 to
$7.5 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, due to a decrease in
professional fees, land-related expenses, advertising expenses, and model home
expenses. For the three months ended September 30, 2009, our Midwest
region new contracts increased from 238 to 322. Quarter-end backlog
increased 48% in units, from 444 at September 30, 2008 to 658 at September 30,
2009. Quarter-end backlog sales value also increased, from $109.5
million at September 30, 2008 to $143.6 million at September 30, 2009, with an
average sales price in backlog decreasing from $247,000 at September 30, 2008 to
$218,000 at September 30, 2009.
Florida
Region. For
the quarter ended September 30, 2009, Florida homebuilding revenue decreased by
$7.3 million (24%) compared to the same period in 2008. The decrease
in revenue is primarily due to a decrease of $4.4 million in revenue from
outside land sales in the third quarter of 2009 compared to 2008, along with a
13% decrease in the average sales price of homes delivered, from $244,000 in the
third quarter of 2008 to $213,000 in the third quarter of 2009. Operating
loss decreased by $0.9 million, from $12.6 million in 2008 to $11.7 million in
2009 primarily due to reduced impairment charges and lower selling, general and
administrative costs. Excluding impairment charges of $6.4 million
and $4.4 million for drywall repairs for the quarter ended September 30, 2009
and $11.3 million of impairment charges for the quarter ended September 30,
2008, our operating gross margins were 13.0% and 13.2% for those same periods in
our Florida region. Selling, general and administrative costs
decreased $1.4 million, from $5.3 million in the third quarter of 2008 to $3.9
million in the third quarter of 2009, primarily due to a decrease in
land-related expenses, advertising expenses,
36
expenses
related to our sales offices, and model home expenses. For the third
quarter of 2009, our Florida region new contracts increased from 87 in 2008 to
124 in 2009. Management anticipates continued challenging conditions
in our Florida markets to continue in 2009 based on the decrease in backlog
units from 140 at September 30, 2008 to 123 at September 30, 2009, along with
the decrease in the average sales price of homes in backlog from $291,000 in
2008 to $224,000 in 2009. In an effort to combat these decreases, we
plan on introducing our eco series in our Florida region in the first quarter of
2010. Our eco series features lower base prices and are 100% Energy
Star qualified, allowing homebuyers to save up to 30% in annual energy
costs. The eco series is already offered in our Midwest region and
homebuyers have been extremely receptive to this new line of
homes. In the third quarter of 2009, we accrued an additional $4.4
million of expenses for the repair of imported drywall that may be responsible
for accelerated corrosion of certain metals in the home.
Mid-Atlantic
Region. In
our Mid-Atlantic region, homebuilding revenue decreased $8.5 million (13%) for
the quarter ended September 30, 2009 compared to the same period in 2008, from
$63.2 million in 2008 to $54.7 million in 2009. This decrease is
primarily due to the decrease in homes delivered from 193 in the third quarter
of 2008 to 191 in the third quarter of 2009, along with a 13% decrease in the
average sales price of homes delivered, from $328,000 in the third quarter of
2008 to $287,000 in the third quarter of 2009. New contracts
increased 32%, from 131 in the third quarter of 2008 to 173 in the third quarter
of 2009. Operating income increased by $14.3 million, from a loss of
$12.0 million in 2008 to income of $2.3 million in 2009 primarily due to reduced
impairment charges and lower selling, general and administrative
costs. Excluding impairment charges of less than $0.1 million and
$10.6 million for the third quarters of 2009 and 2008, respectively, our
operating gross margins were 15.6% and 10.2% for those same periods in our
Mid-Atlantic region. The increase was primarily due to the results of
our Company-wide initiative to reduce hard costs, along with value engineering
in our Mid-Atlantic markets as well as simplifying our base house plans, which
encourages homebuyers to add more options, which in turn have higher profit
margins. Excluding deposit write-offs and pre-acquisition costs of
less than $0.1 million in the third quarter of 2009 and $0.4 million in the
third quarter of 2008, selling, general and administrative expenses decreased
$1.4 million due to a decrease in advertising expenses, model home expenses, and
expenses related to our sales offices. Quarter-end backlog increased
42% in units, from 197 in the third quarter of 2008 to 279 in the third quarter
of 2009, and 48% in total sales value, from $62.0 million in the third quarter
of 2008 to $92.0 million in the third quarter of 2009, with an average sales
price in backlog of $330,000 at September 30, 2009 compared to $314,000 at
September 30, 2008.
Financial
Services. For the three months ended September 30, 2009,
revenue from our mortgage and title operations increased $1.5 million, driven by
an increase of 28% in loans originated. Operating income for our
financial services segment increased $1.4 million, from $0.7 million in 2008 to
$2.1 million in 2009, primarily due to the increase in loan originations
described above.
At
September 30, 2009, M/I Financial had mortgage operations in all of our
markets. Approximately 88% of our homes delivered during the third
quarter of 2009 that were financed were through M/I Financial, compared to 84%
in 2008. Capture rate is influenced by financing availability and can
fluctuate up or down from quarter to quarter.
Corporate
Selling, General and Administrative Expense. Corporate
selling, general and administrative expenses decreased $0.8 million (11%), from
$7.2 million in the third quarter of 2008 to $6.4 million in the third quarter
of 2009 due to a decrease of $0.8 million in payroll related expenses, which
includes a decrease of $0.4 million of severance expenses. Corporate
general and administrative expenses also include a charge of $0.6 million for a
litigation settlement, which was offset by an overall reduction of professional
fees.
Interest. Interest
expense for the Company decreased $0.9 million from $2.2 million for the quarter
ended September 30, 2008 to $1.3 million for the quarter ended September 30,
2009. This decrease was primarily due to the decrease in the weighted
average borrowings from $241.5 million in the third quarter of 2008 to $208.0
million in the third quarter of 2009, along with an increase in interest
capitalized due primarily to an increase in land development activities in the
third quarter. These decreases were partially offset by an increase
in our weighted average borrowing rate, from 7.69% for the three months ended
September 30, 2008 to 8.49% for the three months ended September 30,
2009.
Nine Months Ended September
30, 2009 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2008
Midwest
Region. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009, Midwest
homebuilding revenue was $158.0 million, an 8% decrease compared to the first
nine months of 2008. The decrease was primarily due to the 19%
decrease in the average sales price of homes delivered, from $250,000 in the
first nine months of 2008 to $202,000 in the first nine months of
2009. Operating loss decreased by $28.2 million (65%), from $43.5
million in 2008 to $15.3 million in 2009, primarily due to lower selling,
general and administrative costs. Excluding impairment charges of
$11.5 million and $34.3 million for the first nine months of 2009 and 2008,
respectively, our operating gross margins were 11.0% and 10.2% for those same
periods in our Midwest region. The slight increase was the result of
our Company-wide initiative to reduce hard costs, along with value engineering
in our Midwest markets. Excluding deposit write-offs and
pre-acquisition costs of $0.5
37
million
in the first nine months of 2009 and less than $0.1 million in the first nine
months of 2008, selling, general and administrative costs decreased $6.1
million, from $26.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to
$20.5 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, due to a decrease in
payroll related expenses, professional fees, advertising expenses, and model
home expenses. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009, our
Midwest region new contracts increased 48%, from 726 in the first nine months of
2008 to 1,076 in the first nine months of 2009. At September 30,
2009, we had 658 homes in backlog, an increase of 48% over the 444 homes we had
in backlog at September 30, 2008, and the sales value of those homes in backlog
also increased, from $109.5 million at September 30, 2008 to $143.6 million at
September 30, 2009.
Florida Region.
For the
nine months ended September 30, 2009, Florida homebuilding revenue decreased
$52.1 million (44%), from $119.6 million in the first nine months of 2008 to
$67.5 million in the first nine months of 2009. The decrease in
revenue is primarily due to a $26.6 million decrease in revenue from outside
land sales, from $27.3 million in the first nine months of 2008 to $0.7 million
in the first nine months of 2009, along with a 15% decrease in the number of
homes delivered, from 355 in the first nine months of 2008 to 302 in the first
nine months of 2009, and a decrease in the average sales price of homes
delivered from $260,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to $222,000
for the nine months ended September 30, 2009. Operating loss
decreased $25.1 million (45%), from $55.2 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 to $30.1 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2009. Excluding impairment charges of $17.0 million and $9.7 million
for drywall repairs for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, and $52.8
million of impairment charges for the nine months ended September 30, 2008, our
operating gross margins were 12.7% and 12.5% for those same periods in our
Florida region. Selling, general and administrative costs decreased
$5.3 million, from $17.4 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to
$12.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, due to a decrease in
payroll related expenses, land related expenses, professional fees, advertising
expenses, model home expenses, and expenses related to our sales
offices. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009, new contracts
decreased 7%, from 374 in 2008 to 348 in 2009. There were 123 homes
in backlog at September 30, 2009, a decrease of 12% compared to 140 homes in
backlog at September 30, 2008. During the first nine months of 2009,
we accrued $9.7 million for the repair of certain homes in Florida where certain
of our subcontractors had purchased imported drywall that may be responsible for
accelerated corrosion of certain metals in the home. During the first
nine months of 2009, we also recorded bad debt expense of $1.2 million on a note
receivable related to a piece of land we sold in Florida in 2006.
Mid-Atlantic
Region. For
the nine months ended September 30, 2009, Mid-Atlantic homebuilding revenue
decreased $19.2 million (13%) from $148.5 million in the first nine months of
2008 to $129.3 million in the first nine months of 2009. Driving this
decrease was a 17% decrease in the average selling price of homes delivered,
from $336,000 in 2008 to $278,000 in 2009, which was partially offset by an
increase of 5% in homes delivered, from 443 in 2008 to 466 in
2009. Operating loss for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 was
$3.7 million, a decrease of 83% from $22.3 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008. Excluding impairment charges of $4.0 million and
$17.1 million for the first nine months of 2009 and 2008, respectively, our
operating gross margins were 13.6% and 11.9% for those same periods in our
Mid-Atlantic region. The 1.7% increase is due to the results of our
Company-wide initiative to reduce hard costs, along with value engineering in
our Mid-Atlantic markets. Selling, general and administrative
expenses decreased $5.1 million when excluding deposit write-offs and
pre-acquisition costs of $0.9 million and $1.4 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively, primarily due to a decrease in
payroll related expenses, advertising expenses, expenses related to our sales
offices, and model home expenses. New contracts in the Mid-Atlantic
region increased 41% for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, from 440 in
2008 to 621 in 2009. There were 279 homes in backlog at September 30,
2009, compared to 197 at September 30, 2008, and the value of the homes in
backlog also increased, from $62.0 million in 2008 to $92.0 million in
2009.
Financial
Services. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009,
revenue from our mortgage and title operations decreased $0.9 million (8%), from
$11.1 million in the first nine months of 2008 to $10.2 million in the first
nine months of 2009. This decrease was primarily due to a $4.3
million decrease in the total value of loans originated, which was partially
offset by a 14% increase in loan originations, from 1,168 in the first nine
months of 2008 to 1,336 in the first nine months of 2009. Operating
income for our financial services segment decreased $0.3 million, from $5.3
million in 2008 to $5.0 million in 2009, due to a reduction in general and
administrative expenses.
At
September 30, 2009, M/I Financial had mortgage operations in all of our
markets. Approximately 89% of our homes delivered during the nine
months ended September 30, 2009 that were financed were through M/I Financial,
compared to 83% in 2008. Capture rate is influenced by financing
availability and can fluctuate up or down from quarter to quarter.
Corporate
Selling, General and Administrative Expense. For the nine
months ended September 30, 2009, corporate selling, general and administrative
expenses decreased $2.9 million from $20.3 million in the first nine months of
2008 to $17.4 million in the first nine months of 2009. This decrease
was primarily the result of a decrease of $3.0 million in payroll related
expenses, which included a reduction of $1.6 million in severance
expenses.
38
Interest. Interest
expense for the Company decreased $2.4 million (28%) from $8.7 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2008 to $6.3 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009. This decrease was primarily due to the decrease
in our weighted average borrowings from $272.7 million in the first nine months
of 2008 to $214.5 million in the first nine months of 2009, which was partially
offset by a decrease in interest capitalized due primarily to a reduction in
land development activities, and an increase in our weighted average borrowing
rate from 8.05% for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to 8.61% for the
nine months ended September 30, 2009.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL
RESOURCES
Operating
Cash Flow Activities
Funding
for our business has been provided principally by cash flow from operating
activities, bank borrowings, and the public debt and equity
markets. During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, we
generated $25.0 million of cash from our operating activities, compared to
$126.2 million of cash from our operating activities during the first nine
months of 2008. The $25.0 million net cash generated during the first
nine months of 2009 was primarily a result of a federal tax refund totaling
$39.5 million, and a net increase in accounts payable of $22.9
million. Partially offsetting these increases was a net decrease due
to other operating activities, including $4.3 million in cash held in escrow,
and $3.7 million in accrued compensation.
The
$101.2 million decrease in cash generated from operating activities from the
first nine months of 2009 compared to the first nine months of 2008 is primarily
due to the $116.4 million decrease in cash generated by the conversion of
inventory into cash as a result of home closings, as well as third-party land
sales. We had $0.7 million in third-party land sales in the first
nine months of 2009 compared to $30.0 million in the first nine months of
2008. Beginning in the second half of 2006, we began reducing our
land purchases, and in the nine months ended September 30, 2009, we purchased
$22.2 million of land and lots. We have entered into land option
agreements, taking into consideration current and projected market conditions,
in order to secure land for the construction of homes in the
future. Pursuant to these land option agreements, we have provided
deposits to land sellers totaling $1.6 million as of September 30, 2009 as
consideration for the right to purchase land and lots in the future, including
the right to purchase $83.3 million of land and lots during the years 2009
through 2015. While we will continue to purchase select land
positions where it makes strategic and economic sense to do so (we have recently
begun to see more opportunities to purchase land at prices that make economic
sense in light of the current sales prices and sales paces), we currently plan
to purchase an additional $28.4 million of land in the fourth quarter of
2009. At September 30, 2009, we owned or controlled through options
9,250 home sites, as compared to 9,723 at December 31, 2008.
Investing
Cash Flow Activities
For the
nine months ended September 30, 2009, we used $63.7 million of cash, primarily
due to the addition of restricted cash, which had a balance at September 30,
2009 of $66.9 million. Within restricted cash are the proceeds from
the public offering of 4,475,600 shares of the Company’s common stock that
raised $52.6 million, as discussed in Financing Activities below.
Restricted
cash consists of homebuilding cash the Company had in excess of $25.0 million at
September 30, 2009, that is to be designated as collateral in accordance with
the Third Amendment to the Second Amended and Restated Credit Facility dated
October 6, 2006 (the “Credit Facility”). Of the $66.9 million in
restricted cash, $10.4 million relates to collateral for our outstanding letters
of credit under the Credit Facility and $2.4 million is restricted cash required
to cover various other matters. We are currently in the process of
securing assets which will reduce the restriction on our cash balance beginning
in October 2009. Our new Letters of Credit Facilities, described
below, however, require that each letter of credit covered by these facilities
be collateralized by cash.
Along
with the increase in restricted cash, there was also an increase of $3.7 million
in property and equipment purchases. Partially offsetting these
increases were the proceeds of $7.9 million from the sale of our
airplane.
Financing
Cash Flow Activities
For the
nine months ended September 30, 2009, we generated $31.1 million of cash from
financing activities. On May 19, 2009, we issued 4,475,600 shares of
common stock in a public offering, netting $52.6 million. Offsetting the
proceeds from this issuance were the repayments of $8.5 million on our MIF
Credit Facility and $9.8 million on a mortgage note for the Company airplane
which was sold in the first quarter of 2009.
Our
homebuilding and financial services operations financing needs depend on
anticipated sales volume in the current year as well as future years, inventory
levels and related turnover, forecasted land and lot purchases, and other
Company plans.
39
We fund
these operations with cash flows from operating activities, borrowings under our
bank credit facilities, and, from time to time, issuances of new debt and/or
equity securities, as management deems necessary.
We have
incurred substantial indebtedness, and may incur substantial indebtedness in the
future, to fund our homebuilding activities. We routinely monitor
current operational requirements, financial market conditions, and credit
relationships. We believe that our operations and borrowing resources
will provide for our current and long-term liquidity
requirements. However, we continue to evaluate the impact of market
conditions on our liquidity and may determine that modifications are necessary
if market conditions continue to deteriorate and extend beyond our
expectations. We believe that we will be able to continue to fund our
current operations and meet our contractual obligations through a combination of
existing cash resources and our existing sources of credit. Due to
the deterioration of the credit markets and the uncertainties that exist in the
economy and for homebuilders in general, we cannot be certain that we will be
able to replace existing financing or find sources of additional financing in
the future. Please refer to Item 1A. of the Company’s Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 for further discussion of risk
factors that could impact our source of funds.
Included
in the table below is a summary of our available sources of cash as of September
30, 2009:
(In
thousands)
|
Expiration
Date
|
Outstanding
Balance
|
Available
Amount
|
||||
Notes
payable banks – homebuilding
|
10/6/2010
|
$ | - | $ | 50,289 | ||
Note
payable bank – financial services
|
5/15/2010
|
$ | 26,622 | $ | - | ||
Senior
notes
|
4/1/2012
|
$ | 200,000 | $ | - | ||
Universal
shelf registration (a)
|
- | $ | - | $ | 194,055 |
(a)
|
This
shelf registration should allow us to expediently access capital markets
in the future. The timing and amount of offerings, if any, will
depend on market and general business
conditions.
|
Notes Payable
Banks - Homebuilding. In January 2009, we amended the Credit
Facility to: (1) reduce the Aggregate Commitment (as defined therein)
from $250 million to $150 million, which is then reduced to $125 million, $100
million and $60 million if the Company’s consolidated tangible net worth falls
below $250 million, $200 million and $150 million, respectively; (2) require
secured borrowings based on a Secured Borrowing Base calculated as 100% of
Secured Borrowing Base Cash plus 40% of the aggregated Appraised
Value of the Qualified Real Property, as defined therein; and (3) provide for
$65 million of availability during the Initial Period (to October 20,
2009); however, during the Initial Period, requires that any cash in
excess of $25 million be designated as collateral.
Our
Credit Facility has key financial and other covenants, including:
● |
requiring
us to maintain tangible net worth (“Minimum Net Worth”) of at least (1)
$100 million plus (2) 50% of consolidated earnings (without deduction for
losses and excluding the effect of any decreases in any deferred tax
valuation allowance) earned for each completed fiscal quarter ending after
December 31, 2008 to the date of determination, excluding any quarter in
which the consolidated earnings are less than zero plus (3) the amount of
any reduction or reversal in deferred tax valuation allowance for each
completed fiscal quarter ending after December 31,
2008;
|
● |
Maintaining
a leverage ratio not in excess of 2.00 to 1.00;
|
● |
requiring
adjusted cash flow from operations ratio to be greater than 1.50x, or
requiring us to maintain unrestricted cash of more than $25 million (the
“Adjusted Cash Flow Ratio”);
|
● |
prohibiting
secured indebtedness from exceeding $25 million;
|
● |
prohibiting
the net book value of our land and lots where construction of a home has
not commenced, less the lesser of 25% of tangible net worth or prior six
month sales times average book value of a finished lot, from exceeding
125% of tangible net worth plus 50% of the aggregate outstanding
subordinated debt (the “Total Land Restriction”);
|
● |
limiting
the number of unsold housing units and model units that we may have in our
inventory at the end of any fiscal quarter from exceeding the greater of
40% of the number of home closings within the twelve months ending on such
date or 80% of the number of unit closings within the six months ending on
such date (the “Spec and Model Home Restriction”);
|
● |
limiting
extension of credit on the sale of land to 10% of tangible net worth;
and
|
● |
limiting
investment in joint ventures to 25% of tangible net
worth.
|
40
The
following table summarizes these covenant thresholds pursuant to the Credit
Facility, and our compliance with such covenants:
Financial
Covenant
|
Covenant
Requirement
|
Actual
|
|||||
(dollars
in millions, except ratios and spec homes)
|
|||||||
Minimum
Net Worth (1)
|
=
|
$ | 100.0 | $ | 316.0 | ||
Leverage
Ratio (2)
|
≤ |
2.00
to 1.00
|
0.78
to 1.00
|
||||
Adjusted
Cash Flow Ratio (3)
|
≥ |
1.50
to 1.00
|
4.16
to 1.00
|
||||
Permitted
Debt Based on Borrowing Base
|
≤ | $ | 50.3 | $ | 0.0 | ||
Total
Land Restriction
|
≤ | $ | 394.9 | $ | 189.7 | ||
Spec
and Model Homes Restriction
|
≤ | 926 | 453 |
(1)
|
Minimum
Net Worth (called “Actual Consolidated Tangible Net Worth” in the Credit
Agreement) was calculated based on the stated amount of our consolidated
equity less intangible assets of $3.0 million as of September 30,
2009.
|
(2)
|
Repayment
guarantees are included in the definition of Indebtedness for purposes of
calculating the Leverage Ratio.
|
(3)
|
If
the adjusted cash flow ratio is below 1.50X, then the Company shall
maintain unrestricted cash in an amount not less than $25
million.
|
At
September 30, 2009, the Company’s homebuilding operations did not have any
outstanding borrowings, and had outstanding letters of credit totaling $14.7
million under the Credit Facility. The Credit Facility provides for a
maximum borrowing amount of $150 million. Under the terms of the
Credit Facility, the $150 million capacity includes a maximum amount of $100
million in outstanding letters of credit. Borrowing availability is
determined based on the lesser of: (1) Credit Facility loan capacity less Credit
Facility borrowings (including cash borrowings and letters of credit) or (2) the
calculated maximum secured borrowing base cash plus Qualified Real Property,
less the actual borrowing.
As of
September 30, 2009, borrowing availability under the amended Credit Facility was
$50.3 million in accordance with the borrowing base
calculation. Borrowings under the Credit Facility are at the
Alternate Base Rate plus a margin ranging from 350 to 425 basis points, or at
the Eurodollar Rate plus a margin ranging from 450 to 525 basis
points. The Alternate Base Rate is defined as the higher of the Prime
Rate, the Federal Funds Rate plus 50 basis points or the one month Eurodollar
Rate plus 100 basis points. The Company had $66.9 million of cash
that was designated as collateral and classified as restricted cash in
accordance with the covenants of the Credit Facility, as described in Investing
Cash Flow Activities above. As of September 30, 2009, the Company was
in compliance with all restrictive covenants of the Credit
Facility. We are currently in the process of securing assets which
will reduce the restriction on our cash balance. However, as
mentioned below, we took out four new Letters of Credit Facilities (“LOC
Facilities”) and the collateral requirements of those are covered solely with
cash.
On July
27, 2009, the Company entered into four secured Letter of Credit Facilities
(“LOC Facilities”) with a borrowing capacity of $35 million. The LOC
Facilities mature on September 30, 2010 and do not contain any
covenants. There are, however, cross defaults to the Credit Facility
discussed above, as well as collateral requirements which the Company will cover
solely with cash. As of September 30, 2009, we had $8.5 million
letters of credit outstanding on the LOC Facilities, collateralized by $10.4
million of restricted cash.
We
continue to operate in a challenging economic environment, and our ability to
comply with our debt covenants may be affected by economic or business
conditions beyond our control. However, we believe that cash flow
from operating activities, together with available borrowing options and other
sources of liquidity, will be sufficient to fund currently anticipated working
capital, planned capital spending and debt service requirements for at least the
next twelve months.
Note Payable Bank
– Financial Services. On September 23, 2009, M/I Financial
entered into the First Amendment to their secured credit agreement (“MIF Credit
Agreement”) to increase the maximum borrowing availability from $20.0 million to
$30.0 million.
The MIF
Credit Agreement, which expires on May 15, 2010, is secured by certain mortgage
loans. The MIF Credit Agreement also provides for limits with respect
to certain loan types that can secure the borrowings under the
agreement. M/I Financial shall not permit its tangible net worth to
be less than the sum of (1) $13.0 million, as of the end of any calendar month
during the period beginning May 15, 2009 and ending November 30, 2009, and (2)
$13.0 million plus (a) twenty-five percent (25%) of the greater of (i) net
income of M/I Financial and its subsidiaries or (ii) zero, calculated separately
for each fiscal year beginning with the fiscal year ending December 31,
2009. M/I Financial shall not permit its adjusted tangible net worth
(the tangible net worth less the outstanding amount of intercompany loans) to be
less than the sum of (1) $11.0 million, as of the end of any calendar month
during the period beginning May 15, 2009 and ending November 30, 2009, and (2)
$11.0 million plus (a) twenty-five percent (25%) of the greater of (i) net
income of M/I Financial and its subsidiaries or (ii) zero, calculated separately
for each fiscal year beginning with the fiscal year ending on December 31,
2009. M/I Financial shall not permit the ratio of earnings before
interest and taxes to interest expense to be less than 1.25 to
1.00. M/I Financial pays interest on each advance under the MIF
Credit Agreement at a per annum rate of the greater of the floating LIBOR rate
or 5.25%.
41
At
September 30, 2009, we had $26.6 million outstanding under the MIF Credit
Agreement. As of September 30, 2009, the Company and M/I Financial
were in compliance with all restrictive covenants of the MIF Credit
Agreement.
Senior
Notes. At September 30, 2009, we had $200.0 million of 6.875%
senior notes outstanding. The notes are due April
2012. The Credit Facility prohibits the early repurchase of the
senior notes.
The
indenture governing our senior notes contains restrictive covenants that limit,
among other things, the ability of the Company to pay dividends on common and
preferred shares, as well as the ability to repurchase any shares. If
our “consolidated restricted payments basket,” as defined in the indenture
governing our senior notes, is less than zero, we are restricted from making
certain payments, including dividends, as well as repurchasing any
shares. At September 30, 2009, our restricted payments basket was
($163.0) million. As a result of this deficit, we are currently
restricted from paying dividends on our common shares and our 9.75% Series A
Preferred Shares, as well as repurchasing any shares under our common share
repurchase program that was approved by our Board of Directors in November
2005.
Weighted Average
Borrowings. For the three months ended September 30, 2009 and
2008, our weighted average borrowings outstanding were $208.0 million and $241.5
million, respectively, with a weighted average interest rate of 8.49% and 7.69%,
respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008,
our weighted average borrowings outstanding were $214.5 million and $272.7
million, respectively, with a weighted average interest rate of 8.61% and 8.05%,
respectively. The decrease in borrowings was primarily the result of
the Company using cash generated from operations to pay down outstanding
debt.
Preferred
Shares. On March 15, 2007, we issued 4,000,000 depositary
shares, each representing 1/1000th of a
9.75% Series A Preferred Share (the “Preferred Shares”), or 4,000 Preferred
Shares in the aggregate, for net proceeds of $96.3 million. Dividends
on the Preferred Shares are non-cumulative and are paid at an annual rate of
9.75%. Dividends are payable quarterly in arrears, if declared by us,
on March 15, June 15, September 15 and December 15. If there is a
change of control of the Company and if the Company’s corporate credit rating is
withdrawn or downgraded to a certain level (together constituting a “change of
control event”), the dividends on the Preferred Shares will increase to 10.75%
per year. We may not redeem the Preferred Shares prior to March 15,
2012, except following the occurrence of a change of control
event. On or after March 15, 2012, we have the option to redeem the
Preferred Shares in whole or in part at any time or from time to time, payable
in cash of $25 per depositary share. The Preferred Shares have no
stated maturity, are not subject to any sinking fund provisions, are not
convertible into any other securities, and will remain outstanding indefinitely
unless redeemed by us. Holders of the Preferred Shares have no voting
rights, except as otherwise required by applicable Ohio law; however, in the
event we do not pay dividends for an aggregate of six quarters (whether or not
consecutive), the holders of the Preferred Shares will be entitled to nominate
two members to serve on our Board of Directors. The Preferred Shares
are listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the trading symbol
“MHO-PA.”
We did
not pay any dividends on the Preferred Shares in the first nine months of
2009. Pursuant to certain restrictive covenants in the indenture
governing our senior notes, we are currently restricted from making any further
dividend payments on our common shares or the Preferred Shares. We
will continue to be restricted until such time that the consolidated restricted
payments basket (as defined in the indenture) has been restored or our senior
notes are repaid, and our Board of Directors authorizes us to resume dividend
payments. See Note 15 to our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements for more information concerning those restrictive
covenants.
Universal Shelf
Registration. On August 4, 2008, the Company filed a $250
million universal shelf registration statement with the SEC. Pursuant
to the filing, the Company may, from time to time over an extended period, offer
new debt and/or equity securities. The timing and amount of
offerings, if any, will depend on market and general business
conditions.
On May
19, 2009, we raised $52.6 million by issuing 4,475,600 shares of our common
stock in a public offering, pursuant to the $250 million universal shelf filed
in August 2008, as further discussed above under “Financing Cash Flow
Activities.” As of September 30, 2009, $194.1 million remains
available for future offerings. Pursuant to the filing, the Company
may, from time to time over an extended period, offer new debt, preferred stock
and/or other equity securities. The timing and amount of offerings,
if any, will depend on market and general business conditions.
CONTRACTUAL
OBLIGATIONS
During
the nine months ended September 30, 2009, the Company sold its airplane and used
the proceeds from that sale to pay off the note payable associated with the
airplane, which had a balance at December 31, 2008 of $9.9 million.
There
have been no other material changes to our contractual obligations from those
appearing in the Contractual Obligations section of Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included in our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
42
OFF-BALANCE SHEET
ARRANGEMENTS
Our
primary use of off-balance sheet arrangements is for the purpose of securing the
most desirable lots on which to build homes for our homebuyers in a manner that
we believe reduces the overall risk to the Company. Our off-balance
sheet arrangements relating to our homebuilding operations include
unconsolidated LLCs, land option agreements, guarantees and indemnifications
associated with acquiring and developing land and the issuance of letters of
credit and completion bonds. Additionally, in the ordinary course of
business, our financial services operation issues guarantees and indemnities
relating to the sale of loans to third parties.
Unconsolidated
Limited Liability Companies. In the ordinary course of
business, the Company periodically enters into arrangements with third parties
to acquire land and develop lots. These arrangements include the
creation by the Company of LLCs, with the Company’s interest in these entities
ranging from 33% to 50%. These entities engage in land development
activities for the purpose of distributing (in the form of a capital
distribution) or selling developed lots to the Company and its partners in the
entity. These entities generally do not meet the criteria of variable
interest entities (“VIEs”), because the equity at risk is sufficient to permit
the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated support
from the equity investors; however, we must evaluate each entity to determine
whether it is or is not a VIE. If an entity was determined to be a
VIE, we would then evaluate whether or not we are the primary
beneficiary. These evaluations are initially performed when each new
entity is created and upon any events that require reconsideration of the
entity.
We have
determined that none of the LLCs in which we have an interest are VIEs, and we
also have determined that we do not have substantive control over any of these
entities; therefore, our homebuilding LLCs are recorded using the equity method
of accounting. The Company believes its maximum exposure related to
any of these entities as of September 30, 2009 to be the amount invested of $7.7
million, plus letters of credit and bonds totaling $0.5 million that serve as
completion bonds for the development work in progress, and our possible future
obligations under guarantees and indemnifications provided in connection with
these entities, as further discussed in Note 9 and Note 10 of our Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Land Option
Agreements. In the ordinary course of business, the Company
enters into land option agreements in order to secure land for the construction
of homes in the future. Pursuant to these land option agreements, the
Company will provide a deposit to the seller as consideration for the right to
purchase land at different times in the future, usually at predetermined
prices. Because the entities holding the land under the option
agreement often meet the criteria for VIEs, the Company evaluates all land
option agreements to determine if it is necessary to consolidate any of these
entities. The Company currently believes that its maximum exposure as
of September 30, 2009 related to these agreements is equal to the amount of the
Company’s outstanding deposits, which totaled $1.6 million, including prepaid
acquisition costs of $0.4 million, and letters of credit of $0.5
million.
Letters of Credit
and Completion Bonds. The Company provides standby letters of
credit and completion bonds for development work in progress, deposits on land
and lot purchase agreements and miscellaneous deposits. As of
September 30, 2009, the Company has outstanding $56.3 million of completion
bonds and standby letters of credit, some of which were issued to various local
governmental entities, that expire at various times through December
2016. Included in this total are: (1) $28.7 million of performance
bonds and $15.2 million of performance letters of credit that serve as
completion bonds for land development work in progress (including the Company’s
$0.3 million share of our LLCs’ letters of credit and bonds); (2) $8.2 million
of financial letters of credit; and (3) $4.2 million of financial
bonds.
Guarantees and
Indemnities. In
the ordinary course of business, M/I Financial enters into agreements that
guarantee purchasers of its mortgage loans that M/I Financial will repurchase a
loan if certain conditions occur. M/I Financial has also provided
indemnifications to certain third party investors and insurers in lieu of
repurchasing certain loans. The risks associated with these
guarantees and indemnities are offset by the value of the underlying assets, and
the Company accrues its best estimate of the probable loss on these
loans. Additionally, the Company has provided certain other
guarantees and indemnities in connection with the acquisition and development of
land by our homebuilding operations. Refer to Note 10 of our
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details
relating to our guarantees and indemnities.
INTEREST RATES AND
INFLATION
Our
business is significantly affected by general economic conditions of the United
States of America and, particularly, by the impact of interest rates and
inflation. Higher interest rates may decrease our potential market by
making it more difficult for homebuyers to qualify for mortgages or to obtain
mortgages at interest rates that are acceptable to them. The impact of
increased rates can be offset, in part, by offering variable rate loans with
lower interest rates. In conjunction with our mortgage
43
financing
services, hedging methods are used to reduce our exposure to interest rate
fluctuations between the commitment date of the loan and the time the loan
closes.
During
the past year, we have experienced some detrimental effect from inflation,
particularly the inflation in the cost of land that occurred over the past
several years. As a result of declines in market conditions in most
of our markets, in certain communities we have been unable to recover the cost
of these higher land prices, resulting in lower gross margins and significant
charges being recorded in our operating results due to the impairment of
inventory and investments in unconsolidated LLCs, and other write-offs relating
to deposits and pre-acquisition costs of abandoned land transactions. In
recent years, we have not experienced a detrimental effect from inflation in
relation to our home construction costs, and we have been successful in reducing
certain of these costs with our subcontractors. However, unanticipated
construction costs or a change in market conditions may occur during the period
between the date sales contracts are entered into with customers and the
delivery date of the related homes, resulting in lower gross profit
margins.
44
ITEM
3: QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
|
Our
primary market risk results from fluctuations in interest rates. We
are exposed to interest rate risk through borrowings under our revolving credit
facilities, consisting of the Credit Facility and the MIF Credit Facility, which
permit borrowings of up to $180 million as of September 30, 2009, subject to
availability constraints. Additionally, M/I Financial is exposed to
interest rate risk associated with its mortgage loan origination
services.
Loan Commitments:
Interest rate lock commitments (“IRLCs”) are extended to certain
home-buying customers who have applied for a mortgage loan and meet certain
defined credit and underwriting criteria. Typically, the IRLCs will
have a duration of less than six months; however, in certain markets, the
duration could extend to twelve months.
Some
IRLCs are committed to a specific third-party investor through the use of
best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments matching the exact terms of the
IRLC loan. The notional amount of the committed IRLCs and the
best-efforts contracts was $1.4 million and $21.2 million at September 30, 2009
and December 31, 2008, respectively. At September 30, 2009, the fair
value of the committed IRLCs resulted in a liability of less than $0.1 million
and the related best-efforts contracts resulted in a liability of $0.1
million. At December 31, 2008, the fair value of the committed IRLCs
resulted in a liability of $0.1 million and the related best-efforts contracts
resulted in a liability of less than $0.1 million. For the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2009, we recognized income of $0.2 million and
less than $0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these committed IRLCs
and the related best-efforts contracts to market. For the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2008, we recognized income of $0.1 million and
expense of $0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these committed IRLCs
and the related best-efforts contracts to market.
Uncommitted
IRLCs are considered derivative instruments, and are fair value adjusted, with
the resulting gain or loss recorded in current earnings. At September
30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the notional amount of the uncommitted IRLCs was
$83.9 million and $25.4 million, respectively. The fair value
adjustment related to these uncommitted IRLCs, which is based on quoted market
prices, resulted in an asset of $1.1 million and an asset of $0.8 million at
September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. For the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2009, we recognized income of $1.1 million
and $0.3 million, respectively, relating to marking the uncommitted IRLCs to
market. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2008, we
recognized income of $0.3 million and $0.8 million, respectively, relating to
marking the uncommitted IRLCs to market.
Forward Sales of
Mortgage-Backed Securities: Forward sales of mortgage-backed securities
(“FMBSs”) are used to protect uncommitted IRLC loans against the risk of changes
in interest rates between the lock date and the funding date. FMBSs
related to uncommitted IRLCs are classified and accounted for as non-designated
derivative instruments and are recorded at fair value, with gains and losses
recorded in current earnings. At September 30, 2009 and December 31,
2008, the notional amount under these FMBSs was $86.0 million and $14.0 million,
respectively, and the related fair value adjustment, which is based on quoted
market prices, resulted in a liability of $0.7 million and a liability of $0.2
million, respectively. For the three and nine months ended September
30, 2009, we recognized expense of $1.1 million and $0.5 million, respectively,
relating to marking these FMBSs to market. For the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2008, we recognized expense of $0.3 million and
income of $0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these FMBSs to
market.
Mortgage Loans
Held for Sale: Mortgage loans
held for sale consist primarily of single-family residential loans
collateralized by the underlying property. During the intervening
period between when a loan is closed and when it is sold to an investor, the
interest rate risk is covered through the use of a best-efforts contract or by
FMBSs.
The
notional amount of the best-efforts contracts and related mortgage loans held
for sale was $1.8 million and $13.6 million at September 30, 2009 and December
31, 2008, respectively. The fair value of the best-efforts contracts
and related mortgage loans held for sale resulted in a net liability of $0.2
million and a net asset of $0.2 million at September 30, 2009 and December 31,
2008, respectively. For the three and nine months ended September 30,
2009, we recognized income of $0.2 million and expense of $0.4 million,
respectively, relating to marking these best-efforts contracts and the related
mortgage loans held for sale to market. For the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2008, we recognized income of less than $0.1 million and
expense of less than $0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these
best-efforts contracts and the related mortgage loans held for sale to
market.
The
notional amounts of the FMBSs and the related mortgage loans held for sale were
$35.0 million and $34.6 million, respectively, at September 30, 2009, and both
were $23.0 million at December 31, 2008. The FMBSs are classified and
accounted for as non-designated derivative instruments, with gains and losses
recorded in current earnings. As of September 30, 2009 and December
31, 2008, the related fair value adjustment for marking these FMBSs to market
resulted in a liability of $0.6 million and a liability of $0.9 million,
respectively. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009,
we recognized expense of $1.2 million and income of $0.3 million, respectively,
relating to marking these
45
FMBSs to
market. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2008, we
recognized expense of $1.3 million and $0.3 million, respectively, relating to
marking these FMBSs to market.
The
following table provides the expected future cash flows and current fair values
of borrowings under our credit facilities and mortgage loan origination services
that are subject to market risk as interest rates fluctuate, as of September 30,
2009:
Weighted | ||||||||||||||||||
Average | Fair | |||||||||||||||||
Interest | Expected Cash Flow by Period | Value | ||||||||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | Rate | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | Thereafter | Total | 9/30/09 | |||||||||
Fixed
rate
|
5.00 | % | $ | 37,999 | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | 37,999 | $ | 37,087 |
Variable
rate
|
N/A | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||||||||
LIABILITIES:
|
||||||||||||||||||
Long-term
debt – fixed rate
|
6.91 | % | $ | 73 | $ | 307 | $ | 332 | $ | 200,360 | $ | 391 | $ | 4,770 | $ | 206,233 | $ | 191,451 |
Long-term
debt – variable rate
|
5.25 | % | - | 26,622 | - | - | - | - | 26,622 | 26,622 |
46
ITEM
4: CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Conclusion
Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
An
evaluation of the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and Rule 15d-15(e) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934) was performed by the Company's management, with the
participation of the Company’s principal executive officer and the principal
financial officer. Based on that evaluation, the Company's principal
executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that the Company's
disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period
covered by this report.
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
During
the third quarter of 2009, certain changes in responsibility for performing
internal control procedures occurred. Management has evaluated these
changes in our internal control over financial reporting, and believes that we
have taken the necessary steps to establish and maintain effective internal
control over financial reporting during the period of change.
It should
be noted that the design of any system of controls is based, in part, upon
certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no
assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all
potential future conditions, regardless of how remote. In addition, a
control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only
reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system
are met.
Part II - OTHER
INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal
Proceedings
On March
14, 2008, a former employee filed a complaint in the United States
District Court, Middle District of Florida, on behalf of himself and those
similarly situated, against M/I Homes, Inc., alleging that he and other
construction superintendents were misclassified as exempt and not paid overtime
compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act and seeking equitable
relief, damages and attorneys' fees. Six other individuals have filed
consent forms in order to join the action. The Company filed an answer on
or about August 21, 2008 and intends to vigorously defend against the
claims.
On March
5, 2009, a resident of Florida and an owner of one of our homes filed a
complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio,
on behalf of himself and other similarly situated owners and residents of homes
in the United States or alternatively in Florida, against M/I Homes, Inc., and
certain other identified and unidentified manufacturers, builders, and suppliers
of drywall. The plaintiff alleges that M/I Homes built his home with
defective drywall, manufactured by certain of the defendants,
that contains sulfur or other organic compounds capable of harming the health of
individuals and damaging metals. The plaintiff alleges physical and
economic damages and seeks legal and equitable relief, medical monitoring and
attorney’s fees. The Company filed a responsive pleading on or about
April 30, 2009 and intends to vigorously defend against the
claims. Please refer to Note 11 of the Company’s Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on this
matter.
The
Company and certain of its subsidiaries have been named as defendants in other
claims, complaints and legal actions which are routine and incidental to our
business. Certain of the liabilities resulting from these other
matters are covered by insurance. While management
currently believes that the ultimate resolution of these other matters,
individually and in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on
the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash
flows, such matters are subject to inherent uncertainties. The Company has
recorded a liability to provide for the anticipated costs, including legal
defense costs, associated with the resolution of these other matters.
However, there exists the possibility that the costs to resolve these other
matters could differ from the recorded estimates and, therefore, have a material
adverse effect on the Company’s net income for the periods in which the
matters are resolved.
Item 1A. Risk
Factors
There
have been no material changes to the risk factors appearing in our Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 and in Part II of our
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2009, except
for the updates set forth below. Other factors beyond those referred to
above and listed below, including factors known to us which we have not
currently determined to be material, could also adversely affect
us.
47
Homebuilding
is subject to warranty and liability claims in the ordinary course of business
which may lead to additional reserves or expenses.
As
a homebuilder, we are subject to home warranty and construction defect claims
arising in the ordinary course of business. We record warranty and
other reserves for homes we sell based on historical experience in our markets
and our judgment of the qualitative risks associated with the types of homes
built. We have, and require the majority of our subcontractors to
have, general liability, workers’ compensation, and other business
insurance. These insurance policies protect us against a portion of
our risk of loss from claims, subject to certain self-insured retentions,
deductibles, and other coverage limits. We reserve for the costs to
cover our self-insured retentions and deductible amounts under these policies
and for any costs of claims and lawsuits based on an analysis of our historical
claims, which includes an estimate of claims incurred but not yet
reported. Because of the uncertainties inherent to these matters, we
cannot provide assurance that our insurance coverage, our subcontractors’
arrangements, and our reserves will be adequate to address all of our warranty
and construction defect claims in the future. For example,
contractual indemnities can be difficult to enforce, we may be responsible for
applicable self-insured retentions, and some types of claims may not be covered
by insurance or may exceed applicable coverage limits. Additionally,
the coverage offered and the availability of general liability insurance for
construction defects are currently limited and costly. As a result,
an increasing number of our subcontractors are unable to obtain insurance, and
we have in some cases waived our customary insurance requirements. We
have responded to the increases in insurance costs and coverage limitations by
increasing our self-insured retentions. There can be no assurance
that coverage will not be further restricted and may become even more costly or
may not be available at rates that are acceptable to us.
There
has been a lot of publicity about homes constructed with defective imported
drywall during the past nine months. During the first nine months of 2009,
the Company has accrued $9.7 million for the repair of these homes and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2009, and we have charged $1.7 million against
that accrual. Since the discovery of defective drywall,
we have implemented procedures in every division to investigate homes for signs
of the presence of this drywall and those investigations are
continuing. Based on those investigations, the Company does not believe
that defective drywall was used in any division outside of Florida.
Notwithstanding, we are unable to estimate our total exposure at this
time because, among other reasons, we have not completed our investigation
of homes, tracing the defective drywall through the supply chain has
proven difficult, and the manufacturers of the drywall have not cooperated in
our investigations. If the Company identifies more homes than the homes
identified thus far as having defective imported drywall, the Company may
increase the accrual for costs of repair attributable to defective imported
drywall. The Company is seeking reimbursement of costs to repair homes
affected by this drywall from its subcontractors, their insurers, the
manufacturers and others. However, we have not currently reflected
any reimbursement in our costs as such reimbursements are not probable or
estimable at this time.
Our
results of operations, financial condition and cash flows could be adversely
affected if pending or future legal claims against us are not resolved in our
favor.
On March
14, 2008, a former employee filed a complaint against us in the United
States District Court, Middle District of Florida, on behalf of himself and
other similarly situated construction superintendents. The plaintiff
alleges that he and other construction superintendents were misclassified as
exempt and not paid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act and
seeks equitable relief, damages and attorneys’ fees. Six
other individuals have filed consent forms to join the action. We
filed an answer on or about August 21, 2008 and intend to vigorously defend
against the claims.
On March
5, 2009, a resident of Florida and an owner of one of our homes filed a
complaint against us and certain other identified and unidentified
manufacturers, builders and suppliers of drywall in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Ohio, on behalf of himself and other
similarly situated owners and residents of homes in the United States or
alternatively in Florida. The plaintiff alleges that we built his home
with defective drywall manufactured by certain of the defendants
that contains sulfur or other organic compounds capable of harming the health of
individuals and damaging metals. The plaintiff alleges physical and
economic damages and seeks legal and equitable relief, medical monitoring
and attorneys’ fees. We filed a responsive pleading on or about April 30,
2009 and intend to vigorously defend against the claims.
Due to
the inherent uncertainties of these matters, there can be no assurance that the
ultimate resolution of these class actions will not have a material adverse
effect on our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
We are
also named as defendants in other legal proceedings which are routine and
incidental to our business. Although management currently believes that
the ultimate resolution of these other matters, individually and in the
aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations,
financial condition or cash flows, such matters are subject to inherent
uncertainties. As a result, while we have recorded a liability to provide
for the anticipated costs, including legal defense costs, associated with the
resolution of these other matters, there can be no assurance that the costs to
resolve them will not differ from the recorded estimates and have a material
adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and cash
flows for the periods in which the matters are resolved. Similarly,
if additional claims are filed against
48
us
in the future, the negative outcome of one or more of such matters could have a
material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and
cash flows.
(a)
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities – None.
(b) Use
of Proceeds – Not Applicable.
(c)
Purchases of Equity Securities
On
November 8, 2005, the Company obtained authorization from the Board of Directors
to repurchase up to $25 million worth of its outstanding common
shares. The repurchase program expires on November 8, 2010, and was
publicly announced on November 10, 2005. The purchases may occur in
the open market and/or in privately negotiated transactions as market conditions
warrant. During the three and nine month periods ended September 30,
2009, the Company did not repurchase any shares. As of September 30,
2009, the Company had approximately $6.7 million available to repurchase
outstanding common shares from the Board-approved repurchase
program.
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities:
Period
|
Total
number
of
shares
purchased
|
Average
price
paid
per
share
|
Total
number
of
shares
purchased
as
part of
publicly
announced
program
|
Approximate
dollar
value of
shares
that may
yet
be purchased under the
program
(1)
|
|||
July
1 to July 31, 2009
|
- | $ - | - | $6,715,000 | |||
August
1 to August 31, 2009
|
- | - | - | 6,715,000 | |||
September
1 to September 30, 2009
|
- | - | - | 6,715,000 | |||
Total
|
- | $ - | - | $6,715,000 |
(1)
|
On
November 10, 2005, the Company announced that its Board of Directors had
authorized the repurchase of up to $25 million worth of its outstanding
common shares. This repurchase program expires on November 8,
2010.
|
Item 3. Defaults
Upon Senior Securities - None.
Item 4. Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders - None.
Item 5. Other
Information - None.
Item 6. Exhibits
The
exhibits required to be filed herewith are set forth below.
Exhibit
|
||
Number
|
Description
|
|
10.1
|
Amendment
No. 1 to Credit Agreement by and among M/I Financial Corp., as borrower,
the lenders party thereto and The Huntington National Bank, as
administrative agent, dated September 23, 2009. (Filed
herewith).
|
|
10.2
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan Stock Units Award Agreement for
Directors, dated August 18, 2009. (Filed
herewith).
|
|
31.1
|
Certification
by Robert H. Schottenstein, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Item 601
of Regulation S-K as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
31.2
|
Certification
by Phillip G. Creek, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Item 601 of
Regulation S-K as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
32.1
|
Certification
by Robert H. Schottenstein, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
32.2
|
Certification
by Phillip G. Creek, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. (Filed
herewith.)
|
49
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.
M/I Homes, Inc.
|
|||||||
(Registrant)
|
|||||||
Date:
|
October
30, 2009
|
By:
|
/s/
Robert H. Schottenstein
|
||||
Robert
H. Schottenstein
|
|||||||
Chairman,
Chief Executive Officer and
|
|||||||
President
|
|||||||
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|||||||
Date:
|
October
30, 2009
|
By:
|
/s/
Ann Marie W. Hunker
|
||||
Ann
Marie W. Hunker
|
|||||||
Vice
President and Corporate Controller
|
|||||||
(Principal
Accounting Officer)
|
|||||||
50
EXHIBIT
INDEX
|
||
Exhibit
|
||
Number
|
Description
|
|
10.1
|
Amendment
No. 1 to Credit Agreement by and among M/I Financial Corp., as borrower,
the lenders party thereto and The Huntington National Bank, as
administrative agent, dated September 23, 2009. (Filed
herewith).
|
|
10.2
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan Stock Units Award Agreement for
Directors, dated August 18, 2009. (Filed
herewith).
|
|
31.1
|
Certification
by Robert H. Schottenstein, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Item 601
of Regulation S-K as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
31.2
|
Certification
by Phillip G. Creek, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Item 601 of
Regulation S-K as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
32.1
|
Certification
by Robert H. Schottenstein, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
32.2
|
Certification
by Phillip G. Creek, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. (Filed
herewith.)
|
51