MIND TECHNOLOGY, INC - Quarter Report: 2010 October (Form 10-Q)
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
þ | QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended October 31, 2010
or
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number: 000-25142
MITCHAM INDUSTRIES, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Texas (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
76-0210849 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
8141 SH 75 South
P.O. Box 1175
Huntsville, Texas 77342
(Address of principal executive offices, including Zip Code)
P.O. Box 1175
Huntsville, Texas 77342
(Address of principal executive offices, including Zip Code)
(936) 291-2277
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12
months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and
(2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate 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 o No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer o | Non-accelerated filer o | Smaller reporting company þ | |||
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act).
Yes o No þ
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common stock,
as of the latest practicable date: 9,947,794 shares of common stock, $0.01 par value, were
outstanding as of December 3, 2010.
MITCHAM INDUSTRIES, INC.
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
ii
Table of Contents
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
MITCHAM INDUSTRIES, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except per share data)
(unaudited)
(in thousands, except per share data)
(unaudited)
October 31, 2010 | January 31, 2010 | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Current assets: |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 9,521 | $ | 6,130 | ||||
Restricted cash |
687 | 605 | ||||||
Accounts receivable, net |
14,355 | 15,444 | ||||||
Current portion of contracts receivable |
3,721 | 2,073 | ||||||
Inventories, net |
4,704 | 5,199 | ||||||
Cost and estimated profit in excess of billings on uncompleted contract |
| 398 | ||||||
Income taxes receivable |
| 1,438 | ||||||
Deferred tax asset |
1,919 | 1,400 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
2,908 | 1,986 | ||||||
Total current assets |
37,815 | 34,673 | ||||||
Seismic equipment lease pool and property and equipment, net |
74,997 | 66,482 | ||||||
Intangible assets, net |
5,475 | 2,678 | ||||||
Goodwill |
4,320 | 4,320 | ||||||
Prepaid foreign income tax |
2,960 | 2,574 | ||||||
Deferred tax asset |
| 88 | ||||||
Long-term portion of contracts receivable, net |
5,262 | 4,533 | ||||||
Other assets |
36 | 49 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 130,865 | $ | 115,397 | ||||
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||
Current liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts payable |
$ | 12,460 | $ | 6,489 | ||||
Current maturities long-term debt |
3,111 | 93 | ||||||
Income taxes payable |
1,771 | 1,345 | ||||||
Deferred revenue |
860 | 854 | ||||||
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities |
4,119 | 2,668 | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
22,321 | 11,449 | ||||||
Non-current income taxes payable |
3,402 | 3,258 | ||||||
Deferred tax liability |
224 | | ||||||
Long-term debt, net of current maturities |
13,426 | 15,735 | ||||||
Total liabilities |
39,373 | 30,442 | ||||||
Shareholders equity: |
||||||||
Preferred stock, $1.00 par value; 1,000 shares authorized; none issued and outstanding |
| | ||||||
Common stock, $0.01 par value; 20,000 shares authorized; 10,872 and 10,737 shares issued at
October 31, 2010 and January 31, 2010, respectively |
108 | 107 | ||||||
Additional paid-in capital |
77,261 | 75,746 | ||||||
Treasury stock, at cost (925 shares at October 31, 2010 and January 31, 2010) |
(4,843 | ) | (4,843 | ) | ||||
Retained earnings |
13,222 | 10,247 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
5,744 | 3,698 | ||||||
Total shareholders equity |
91,492 | 84,955 | ||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
$ | 130,865 | $ | 115,397 | ||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
1
Table of Contents
MITCHAM INDUSTRIES, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in thousands, except per share data)
(unaudited)
(in thousands, except per share data)
(unaudited)
For the Three Months | For the Nine Months | |||||||||||||||
Ended October 31, | Ended October 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
Revenues: |
||||||||||||||||
Equipment leasing |
$ | 8,074 | $ | 9,037 | $ | 24,133 | $ | 20,165 | ||||||||
Lease pool equipment sales |
976 | 808 | 1,498 | 978 | ||||||||||||
Seamap equipment sales |
4,249 | 4,241 | 17,230 | 13,882 | ||||||||||||
Other equipment sales |
6,674 | 444 | 8,767 | 2,787 | ||||||||||||
Total revenues |
19,973 | 14,530 | 51,628 | 37,812 | ||||||||||||
Cost of sales: |
||||||||||||||||
Direct costs equipment leasing |
895 | 748 | 2,485 | 2,201 | ||||||||||||
Direct costs lease pool depreciation |
5,289 | 4,610 | 15,556 | 13,127 | ||||||||||||
Cost of lease pool equipment sales |
385 | 473 | 634 | 570 | ||||||||||||
Cost of Seamap and other equipment sales |
7,425 | 2,534 | 15,376 | 8,645 | ||||||||||||
Total cost of sales |
13,994 | 8,365 | 34,051 | 24,543 | ||||||||||||
Gross profit |
5,979 | 6,165 | 17,577 | 13,269 | ||||||||||||
Operating expenses: |
||||||||||||||||
General and administrative |
3,937 | 3,809 | 12,286 | 11,280 | ||||||||||||
Provision for doubtful accounts |
| 730 | 797 | 1,379 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
296 | 213 | 871 | 690 | ||||||||||||
Total operating expenses |
4,233 | 4,752 | 13,954 | 13,349 | ||||||||||||
Operating (loss) income |
1,746 | 1,413 | 3,623 | (80 | ) | |||||||||||
Other income (expenses): |
||||||||||||||||
Gain from bargain purchase in business combination |
| | 1,304 | | ||||||||||||
Interest, net |
(90 | ) | (122 | ) | (302 | ) | (303 | ) | ||||||||
Other, net |
(553 | ) | 123 | (618 | ) | 405 | ||||||||||
Total other income (expense) |
(643 | ) | 1 | 384 | 102 | |||||||||||
Income before income taxes |
1,103 | 1,414 | 4,007 | 22 | ||||||||||||
Provision for income taxes |
(376 | ) | (388 | ) | (1,032 | ) | (86 | ) | ||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 727 | $ | 1,026 | $ | 2,975 | $ | (64 | ) | |||||||
Net income (loss) per common share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.10 | $ | 0.30 | $ | (0.01 | ) | |||||||
Diluted |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.10 | $ | 0.29 | $ | (0.01 | ) | |||||||
Shares used in computing net income (loss) per common share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
9,916 | 9,805 | 9,854 | 9,795 | ||||||||||||
Diluted |
10,203 | 9,969 | 10,122 | 9,795 |
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
2
Table of Contents
MITCHAM INDUSTRIES, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
(unaudited)
(in thousands)
(unaudited)
For the Nine Months Ended October 31, | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Cash flows from operating activities: |
||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 2,975 | $ | (64 | ) | |||
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by
operating activities: |
||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
16,586 | 13,912 | ||||||
Stock-based compensation |
941 | 1,119 | ||||||
Gain from bargain purchase in business combination |
(1,304 | ) | | |||||
Provision for doubtful accounts |
797 | 1,379 | ||||||
Provision for inventory obsolescence |
63 | 13 | ||||||
Gross profit from sale of lease pool equipment |
(864 | ) | (408 | ) | ||||
Excess tax benefit from exercise of non-qualified stock options |
(3 | ) | (45 | ) | ||||
Deferred tax benefit |
(1,335 | ) | (1,553 | ) | ||||
Changes in non-current income taxes payable |
144 | (288 | ) | |||||
Changes in working capital items, net of effects from business combination: |
||||||||
Accounts receivable |
609 | (2,186 | ) | |||||
Contracts receivable |
(2,376 | ) | (36 | ) | ||||
Inventories |
833 | (1,468 | ) | |||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
(952 | ) | (268 | ) | ||||
Income taxes receivable and payable |
1,833 | 3,073 | ||||||
Costs incurred and estimated profit in excess of billings on
uncompleted contract |
573 | 1,746 | ||||||
Prepaid foreign income tax |
(221 | ) | | |||||
Accounts payable, accrued expenses, other current liabilities and
deferred revenue |
1,996 | (1,339 | ) | |||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
20,295 | 13,587 | ||||||
Cash flows from investing activities: |
||||||||
Purchases of seismic equipment held for lease |
(16,049 | ) | (18,828 | ) | ||||
Purchases of property and equipment |
(262 | ) | (358 | ) | ||||
Sale of used lease pool equipment |
1,498 | 978 | ||||||
Acquisition of AES, net of cash acquired |
(2,100 | ) | | |||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(16,913 | ) | (18,208 | ) | ||||
Cash flows from financing activities: |
||||||||
Net (payments on) proceeds from line of credit |
(4,250 | ) | 5,300 | |||||
Proceeds from secured promissory note |
3,672 | | ||||||
Payments on borrowings |
(122 | ) | | |||||
(Purchases of) proceeds from short-term investments |
(15 | ) | 871 | |||||
Proceeds from issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options, net
of stock surrendered to pay taxes |
244 | (12 | ) | |||||
Excess tax benefit from exercise of non-qualified stock options |
3 | 45 | ||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
(468 | ) | 6,204 | |||||
Effect of changes in foreign exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents |
477 | (246 | ) | |||||
Net change in cash and cash equivalents |
3,391 | 1,337 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
6,130 | 5,063 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
$ | 9,521 | $ | 6,400 | ||||
Supplemental cash flow information: |
||||||||
Interest paid |
$ | 465 | $ | 461 | ||||
Income taxes paid |
$ | 1,716 | $ | 820 | ||||
Purchases of seismic equipment held for lease in accounts payable at end
of period |
$ | 9,621 | $ | 4,577 |
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
Table of Contents
MITCHAM INDUSTRIES, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(unaudited)
(unaudited)
1. Basis of Presentation
The condensed consolidated balance sheet as of January 31, 2010 for Mitcham Industries, Inc.
(for purposes of these notes, the Company) has been derived from audited consolidated financial
statements. The unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared by
the Company pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC). Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America (GAAP) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations, although
the Company believes that the disclosures are adequate to make the information presented not
misleading. These condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with
the consolidated financial statements and the related notes included in the Companys Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31, 2010. In the opinion of the Company, all adjustments,
consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to present fairly the financial position
as of October 31, 2010, the results of operations for the three and nine months ended October 31,
2010 and 2009, and the cash flows for the nine months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009, have been
included in these financial statements. The foregoing interim results are not necessarily
indicative of the results of the operations to be expected for the full fiscal year ending January
31, 2011.
2. Organization
The Company was incorporated in Texas in 1987. The Company, through its wholly owned Canadian
subsidiaries, Mitcham Canada, Ltd. (MCL) and Absolute Equipment Solutions, Inc. (AES), its
wholly owned Russian subsidiary, Mitcham Seismic Eurasia LLC (MSE) and its branch operations in
Colombia and Peru, provides full-service equipment leasing, sales and service to the seismic
industry worldwide. The Company, through its wholly owned Australian subsidiary, Seismic Asia
Pacific Pty Ltd. (SAP), provides seismic, oceanographic and hydrographic leasing and sales
worldwide, primarily in Southeast Asia and Australia. The Company, through its wholly owned
subsidiary, Seamap International Holdings Pte, Ltd. (Seamap), designs, manufactures and sells a
broad range of proprietary products for the seismic, hydrographic and offshore industries with
product sales and support facilities based in Huntsville, Texas, Singapore and the United Kingdom.
All material intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
3. New Accounting Pronouncements
ASC 805 Business Combinations (ASC 805) includes authoritative guidance requiring assets and
liabilities recorded in a business combination to be recorded at fair value and is effective for
business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first
annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008. Early application was not
permitted before that date. This guidance replaces the cost-allocation process used to record
business combinations under prior guidance. In addition, ASC 805 requires separate recognition of
acquisition costs and of contractual contingencies at fair value as of the acquisition date.
Further, the guidance requires capitalization of research and development assets and requires fair
value recognition of contingent consideration as of the acquisition date. This guidance changes
the accounting treatment for any business combination undertaken by the Company after February 1,
2009.
In the second quarter of 2009, the Company adopted guidance included in ASC 855 Subsequent
Events (ASC 855), which established general standards of accounting for and disclosure of events
that occur after the balance sheet date but before the financial statements are issued or are
available to be issued. ASC 855 provides guidance on the period after the balance sheet date during
which management of a reporting entity should evaluate events or transactions that may occur for
potential recognition or disclosure in the financial statements, the circumstances under which an
entity should recognize events or transactions occurring after the balance sheet date in its
financial statements and the disclosures that an entity should make about events or transactions
that occurred after the balance sheet date. The application of ASC 855 had no impact on the
Companys consolidated condensed financial statements. The Company evaluated subsequent events
through the date the accompanying financial statements were filed.
4. Acquisition
On March 1, 2010, MCL acquired all of the capital stock of AES for a total purchase price of
Cdn $4,194,000 (approximately U.S. $3,984,000). AES manufactures, sells and leases heli-pickers
and associated equipment that is utilized in the deployment and retrieval of seismic equipment by
helicopters. The Company made this acquisition to expand the type of equipment available to its
customers and to expand the markets in which it operates. The consideration consisted of cash paid
at closing in the amount of Cdn $2,200,000 (approximately U.S. $2,090,000), promissory notes in
4
Table of Contents
the amount of Cdn $1,500,000 (approximately U.S. $1,425,000), a post-closing working capital
adjustment payment of Cdn $194,000 (approximately U.S. $184,000) and deferred cash payments in the
amount of Cdn $300,000. The promissory notes bear interest at 6% annually, payable semi-annually.
The principal amount of the notes is repayable in two equal installments on March 1, 2011 and 2012.
The deferred cash payments will be made upon the expiration of certain indemnity periods. MCL may
offset amounts due pursuant to the promissory notes or the deferred cash payment against indemnity
claims due from the sellers. In addition, the sellers may be entitled to additional cash payments
of up to Cdn $750,000 should AES attain certain levels of revenues during the 24-month period
following the acquisition, as specified in the agreement.
The Company hired an outside consulting firm, The BVA Group L.L.C., to assess the fair value
of the assets and liabilities acquired in the AES acquisition in accordance with ASC 805. The
fair value of the contingent consideration was determined to be approximately Cdn $200,000.
There were no amounts recognized related to other contingencies. The fair value of the assets
and liabilities acquired exceeded the total value of consideration paid, resulting in a bargain
purchase. Accordingly, a gain of $1,304,000 was recorded as of the date of acquisition and no
goodwill resulted from the transaction. Management believes that the bargain purchase arose due
to the recent decline in the oil and gas service industry and the limited market for seismic
equipment businesses. The following is a summary of the amounts recognized for assets acquired
and liabilities assumed at the date of acquisition (in thousands):
Working capital |
$ | 327 | ||
Seismic equipment lease pool |
2,990 | |||
Deferred taxes |
(1,086 | ) | ||
Intangible assets |
3,154 |
Revenue and net loss for AES were $637,000 and $(47,000) for the three months ended October
31, 2010, respectively, and $1,285,000 and $(142,000) for the eight months ended October 31, 2010,
respectively. The operations of AES are included in our Equipment Leasing segment.
Pro Forma Results of Operations
The following consolidated pro forma results of operations for the three months and nine
months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009 assumes the acquisition of AES occurred as of the
beginning of those periods and reflects the full results of operations for the periods presented.
The consolidated pro forma results have been prepared for comparative purposes only and do not
purport to indicate the results of operations that would actually have occurred had the
combinations been in effect on the dates indicated, or that may occur in the future.
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
October 31, | October 31, | |||||||||||||||
(In thousands, except per share amounts) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Revenues |
$ | 19,973 | $ | 15,251 | $ | 51,789 | $ | 40,185 | ||||||||
Net income |
$ | 727 | $ | 1,169 | $ | 2,882 | $ | 220 | ||||||||
Earnings per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.12 | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.02 | ||||||||
Diluted |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.12 | $ | 0.28 | $ | 0.02 |
5. Restricted Cash
In connection with certain contracts, SAP has pledged approximately $687,000 in short-term
time deposits as of October 31, 2010 to secure performance obligations under those contracts. The
amount of security will be released as the contractual obligations are performed over the remaining
terms of the contracts, which is estimated to be approximately three months. As the investment in
the short-term time deposits relates to a financing activity, the securing of contract obligations,
this transaction is reflected as a financing activity in the accompanying condensed consolidated
statements of cash flows.
5
Table of Contents
6. Balance Sheet
October 31, | January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
(in thousands) | ||||||||
Accounts receivable: |
||||||||
Accounts receivable |
$ | 17,051 | $ | 17,864 | ||||
Allowance for doubtful accounts |
(2,696 | ) | (2,420 | ) | ||||
Total accounts receivable, net |
$ | 14,355 | $ | 15,444 | ||||
Contracts receivable: |
||||||||
Contracts receivable |
$ | 10,470 | $ | 8,093 | ||||
Valuation allowance |
(1,487 | ) | (1,487 | ) | ||||
Less current portion of contracts receivable |
(3,721 | ) | (2,073 | ) | ||||
Long-term portion of contracts receivable, net |
$ | 5,262 | $ | 4,533 | ||||
Contracts receivable consisted of $8,983,000 due from four customers as of October 31, 2010
and $6,606,000 due from five customers as of January 31, 2010. Long-term contracts receivable,
at October 31, 2010 and January 31, 2010, includes approximately $3,217,000 related to a
contract receivable from a customer that has defaulted on this contract. The Company is in the
process of repossessing the equipment that was pledged as collateral for the obligation. The
carrying value of this account has been reduced to the fair market value of the equipment, less
the estimated cost to repossess the equipment. The Company expects to place the equipment
recovered in its lease pool of equipment and accordingly has classified this amount as a
non-current asset. The balance of contracts receivable at October 31, 2010 and January 31, 2010
consists of contracts bearing interest at an average of approximately 8% per year and with
remaining repayment terms from three to 20 months. These contracts are collateralized by the
equipment sold and are considered collectable, thus no allowances have been established for
them.
October 31, | January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
(in thousands) | ||||||||
Inventories: |
||||||||
Raw materials |
$ | 2,413 | $ | 2,695 | ||||
Finished goods |
1,991 | 2,171 | ||||||
Work in progress |
992 | 1,016 | ||||||
5,396 | 5,882 | |||||||
Less allowance for obsolescence |
(692 | ) | (683 | ) | ||||
Total inventories, net |
$ | 4,704 | $ | 5,199 | ||||
6
Table of Contents
October 31, | January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
(in thousands) | ||||||||
Seismic equipment lease pool and property and equipment: |
||||||||
Seismic equipment lease pool |
$ | 175,530 | $ | 151,921 | ||||
Land and buildings |
366 | 366 | ||||||
Furniture and fixtures |
6,704 | 6,305 | ||||||
Autos and trucks |
631 | 526 | ||||||
183,231 | 159,118 | |||||||
Accumulated depreciation and amortization |
(108,234 | ) | (92,636 | ) | ||||
Total seismic equipment lease pool and
property and equipment, net |
$ | 74,997 | $ | 66,482 | ||||
7. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Weighted | October 31, 2010 | January 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average | Gross | Net | Gross | Net | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Life at | Carrying | Accumulated | Carrying | Carrying | Accumulated | Carrying | ||||||||||||||||||||||
10/31/10 | Amount | Amortization | Amount | Amount | Amortization | Amount | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Goodwill |
$ | 4,320 | $ | 4,320 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proprietary rights |
9.7 | $ | 3,520 | $ | (1,033 | ) | $ | 2,487 | $ | 3,516 | $ | (838 | ) | $ | 2,678 | |||||||||||||
Customer relationships |
7.3 | 2,356 | (196 | ) | 2,160 | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||
Patents |
7.3 | 710 | (59 | ) | 651 | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||
Trade name |
7.3 | 193 | (16 | ) | 177 | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||
Amortizable intangible assets |
$ | 6,779 | $ | (1,304 | ) | $ | 5,475 | $ | 3,516 | $ | (838 | ) | $ | 2,678 | ||||||||||||||
As of October 31, 2010, the Company had goodwill of $4,320,000, all of which was
allocated to the Seamap segment. No impairment has been recorded against the goodwill account.
Amortizable intangible assets are amortized over their estimated useful lives of three to 15
years using the straight-line method. Aggregate amortization expense was $164,000 and $61,000 for
the three months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively and $459,000 and $212,000 for the
nine months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. As of October 31, 2010, future
estimated amortization expense related to amortizable intangible assets was estimated to be:
For fiscal years ending January 31 (in thousands): |
||||
2011 |
$ | 165 | ||
2012 |
661 | |||
2013 |
661 | |||
2014 |
661 | |||
2015 |
661 | |||
2016 and thereafter |
2,666 | |||
Total |
$ | 5,475 | ||
7
Table of Contents
8. Long-Term Debt and Notes Payable
Long-term debt and notes payable consist of the following (in thousands):
October 31, | January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
Revolving line of credit |
$ | 11,100 | $ | 15,350 | ||||
Equipment note |
3,637 | | ||||||
MCL notes |
1,528 | | ||||||
SAP equipment notes |
272 | 478 | ||||||
16,537 | 15,828 | |||||||
Less current portion |
(3,111 | ) | (93 | ) | ||||
Long-term debt |
$ | 13,426 | $ | 15,735 | ||||
On July 27, 2010, the Company entered into an amended credit agreement with First Victoria
Bank (the Bank) that provides for borrowings of up to $35,000,000 on a revolving basis through
May 31, 2012. The Company may, at its option, convert any or all balances outstanding under the
revolving credit facility into a series of term notes with monthly amortization over 48 months.
Amounts available for borrowing are determined by a borrowing base. The borrowing base is
computed based upon certain outstanding accounts receivable, certain portions of the Companys
lease pool and any lease pool assets that are to be purchased with proceeds from the facility.
The revolving credit facility and any term loan are collateralized by essentially all of the
Companys domestic assets. Interest is payable monthly at the prime rate plus 50 basis points,
which was 3.75% at October 31, 2010. Up to $7,000,000 of available borrowings under the
revolving facility may be utilized to secure letters of credit. The credit agreement contains
certain financial covenants that require, among other things, for the Company to maintain a debt
to shareholders equity ratio of no more than 0.7 to 1.0, maintain a current assets to current
liabilities ratio of not less than 1.25 to 1.0; have quarterly earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) of not less than $2,000,000; all with which the Company
complied as of October 31, 2010. The credit agreement also provides that the Company may not
incur or maintain indebtedness in excess of $1,000,000 without the prior written consent of the
Bank, except for borrowings related to the credit agreement. The Company was in compliance with
each of these provisions as of and for the quarter ended October 31, 2010.
In October 2010, the Company entered into a secured promissory note with a supplier in
connection with the purchase of certain lease pool equipment. The note is repayable in 18
monthly installments, bears interest at 8% annually and is secured by the equipment purchased.
The Company received the consent of the Bank for this transaction, as required by the terms of
the revolving line of credit.
In March of 2010, MCL entered into two promissory notes related to the purchase of AES (See
footnote 4). The notes bear interest at 6.0% per year and are repayable in two equal installments
on March 1, 2011 and 2012.
During the year ended January 31, 2010, SAP entered into two notes payable to finance the
purchase of certain equipment. The notes, which are secured by the equipment purchased, bear
interest at 7.4% and 7.9% and are due through July 2014 and February 2011, respectively.
9. Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income generally represents all changes in shareholders equity during the
period, except those resulting from investments by, or distributions to, shareholders. The Company
has comprehensive income related to changes in foreign currency to United States dollar exchange
rates, which is recorded as follows:
8
Table of Contents
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
October 31, | October 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 727 | $ | 1,026 | $ | 2,975 | $ | (64 | ) | |||||||
Gain (loss) from foreign
currency
translation adjustment |
1,048 | 825 | 2,046 | 5,624 | ||||||||||||
Comprehensive income (loss) |
$ | 1,775 | $ | 1,851 | $ | 5,021 | $ | 5,560 | ||||||||
The gain from foreign currency translation adjustment for the three months ended October 31,
2010 resulted primarily from the increases in the value of the Australian and Singapore dollars
versus the United States dollar. The gain from foreign currency translation adjustment for the
nine months ended October 31, 2010 resulted primarily from the increase in the value of the
Canadian dollar versus the United States dollar during the three months ended April 30, 2010 and
the increases in the value of the Australian and Singapore dollars versus the United States dollar
for the three months ended October 31, 2010.
10. Income Taxes
The Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with authoritative guidance ASC 740
Income Taxes (ASC 740). Deferred tax assets and liabilities are computed based on the
difference between the financial statement and income tax bases of assets and liabilities using
the enacted marginal tax rate. Authoritative guidance requires that the net deferred tax asset be
reduced by a valuation allowance if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more likely
than not that some portion or all of the net deferred tax asset will not be realized. As
required by authoritative guidance included in ASC 740, the Company recognizes the financial
statement benefit of a tax position only after determining that the relevant tax authority would
more likely than not sustain the position following an audit. For tax positions meeting the
more-likely-than-not threshold, the amount recognized in the financial statements is the largest
benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement with
the relevant tax authority.
The Company and its subsidiaries file consolidated and separate income tax returns in the
United States federal jurisdiction and in foreign jurisdictions. The Company is subject to United
States federal income tax examinations for all tax years beginning with its fiscal year ended
January 31, 2008. In November 2010 the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) commenced an examination
of the Companys United States federal income tax returns for the years ended January 31, 2010
and 2009. The Company is not aware of any proposed adjustments arising from this examination
thus far.
The Company is subject to examination by taxing authorities throughout the world, including
major foreign jurisdictions such as Australia, Canada, Colombia, Peru, Russia, Singapore, and the
United Kingdom. With few exceptions, the Company and its subsidiaries are no longer subject to
foreign income tax examinations for tax years before 2002. With respect to ongoing audits, the
Companys Canadian income tax returns for the years ended January 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006 have
been examined by Canadian tax authorities. Assessments for those years and for the effect of
certain matters in subsequent years totaling approximately $7,400,000 have been issued. The
issues involved relate primarily to the deductibility of depreciation charges and whether those
deductions should be taken in Canada or in the United States. Accordingly, the Company has filed
requests for competent authority assistance with the Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA) and with the
IRS seeking to avoid potential double taxation. In addition, the Company has filed a protest
with the CRA and the Province of Alberta. In connection with this protest the Company has been
required to make a prepayment of approximately $2,900,000 against the assessment.
The Company recognizes accrued interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits
in income tax expense. To the extent interest and penalties are not assessed with respect to
uncertain tax positions, amounts accrued will be reduced and reflected as reductions in income
tax expense.
The effect of any uncertain tax positions for which resolution is reasonably possible within
the next twelve months is not material.
Current income taxes payable of $1,771,000 at October 31, 2010 consists of foreign taxes of
$1,419,000 and domestic taxes of $352,000. Current income taxes payable of $1,345,000 at January
31, 2010 consists entirely of foreign taxes.
9
Table of Contents
11. Earnings (Loss) per Share
Net income (loss) per basic common share is computed using the weighted average number of
common shares outstanding during the period, excluding unvested restricted stock. Net income (loss)
per diluted common share is computed using the weighted average number of common shares and
dilutive potential common shares outstanding during the period using the treasury stock method.
Potential common shares result from the assumed exercise of outstanding common stock options having
a dilutive effect, from the assumed vesting of phantom stock units, and from the assumed vesting of
unvested shares of restricted stock. The following table presents the calculation of basic and
diluted weighted average common shares used in the earnings (loss) per share calculation for the
three and nine months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009:
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
October 31, | October 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding |
9,916 | 9,805 | 9,854 | 9,795 | ||||||||||||
Stock options |
268 | 160 | 261 | 122 | ||||||||||||
Unvested restricted stock |
19 | 4 | 7 | 8 | ||||||||||||
Phantom stock |
| | | 4 | ||||||||||||
Total weighted average common share equivalents |
287 | 164 | 268 | 134 | ||||||||||||
Diluted weighted average common shares
outstanding |
10,203 | 9,969 | 10,122 | 9,929 | ||||||||||||
For the nine months ended October 31, 2009, diluted weighted average common shares were
anti-dilutive and were therefore not considered in calculating diluted loss per share for that
period.
12. Stock-Based Compensation
Total compensation expense recognized for stock-based awards granted under the Companys
various equity incentive plans during the three and nine months ended October 31, 2010 was
approximately $171,000 and $941,000, respectively, and, during the three and nine months ended
October 31, 2009 was approximately $279,000 and $1,119,000, respectively. During the nine months
ended October 31, 2010, 44,500 shares of restricted stock were awarded to employees and
non-employee members of the Companys Board of Directors and options to purchase 115,000 shares of
common stock were granted to employees and non-employee members of the Companys Board of
Directors.
13. Segment Reporting
The Equipment Leasing segment offers new and experienced seismic equipment for lease or sale
to the oil and gas industry, seismic contractors, environmental agencies, government agencies and
universities. The Equipment Leasing segment is headquartered in Huntsville, Texas, with sales and
services offices in Calgary, Canada; Brisbane, Australia; Ufa, Bashkortostan, Russia; Bogota,
Colombia; and Lima, Peru.
The Seamap segment is engaged in the design, manufacture and sale of state-of-the-art seismic
and offshore telemetry systems. Manufacturing, support and sales facilities are maintained in the
United Kingdom and Singapore.
Financial information by business segment is set forth below (net of any allocations):
As of October 31, | As of January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
Total assets | Total assets | |||||||
(in thousands) | ||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
$ | 111,080 | $ | 95,671 | ||||
Seamap |
20,061 | 20,118 | ||||||
Eliminations |
(276 | ) | (392 | ) | ||||
Consolidated |
$ | 130,865 | $ | 115,397 | ||||
10
Table of Contents
Results for the three months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009 were as follows:
Revenues | Operating income | Income before taxes | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
$ | 15,724 | $ | 10,289 | $ | 823 | $ | 711 | $ | 491 | $ | 721 | ||||||||||||
Seamap |
4,338 | 4,360 | 887 | 670 | 576 | 661 | ||||||||||||||||||
Eliminations |
(89 | ) | (119 | ) | 36 | 32 | 36 | 32 | ||||||||||||||||
Consolidated |
$ | 19,973 | $ | 14,530 | $ | 1,746 | $ | 1,413 | $ | 1,103 | $ | 1,414 | ||||||||||||
Results for the nine months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009 were as follows:
Revenues | Operating income (loss) | Income before taxes | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
$ | 34,398 | $ | 23,930 | $ | (1,373 | ) | $ | (3,920 | ) | $ | (575 | ) | $ | (3,623 | ) | ||||||||
Seamap |
17,421 | 14,215 | 4,881 | 3,670 | 4,467 | 3,475 | ||||||||||||||||||
Eliminations |
(191 | ) | (333 | ) | 115 | 170 | 115 | 170 | ||||||||||||||||
Consolidated |
$ | 51,628 | $ | 37,812 | $ | 3,623 | $ | (80 | ) | $ | 4,007 | $ | 22 | |||||||||||
Sales from the Seamap segment to the Equipment Leasing segment are eliminated in the
consolidated revenues. Consolidated income before taxes reflects the elimination of profit from
intercompany sales and depreciation expense on the difference between the sales price and the cost
to manufacture the equipment. Fixed assets are reduced by the difference between the sales price
and the cost to manufacture the equipment, less the accumulated depreciation related to the
difference.
11
Table of Contents
Cautionary Statement about Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (this Form 10-Q) may be
deemed to be forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 2lE of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act) and Section 27A of the Securities Act of
1933, as amended. This information includes, without limitation, statements concerning:
| our future financial position and results of operations; | ||
| international and economic instability; | ||
| planned capital expenditures; | ||
| our business strategy and other plans for future operations; | ||
| the future mix of revenues and business; | ||
| our relationship with suppliers; | ||
| our ability to retain customers; | ||
| our liquidity and access to capital; | ||
| the effect of seasonality on our business; | ||
| future demand for our services; and | ||
| general conditions in the energy industry and seismic service industry. |
Although we believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are
reasonable, we can not assure you that these expectations will prove to be correct. When used in
this Form 10-Q, the words anticipate, believe, estimate, expect, may and similar
expressions, as they relate to our company and management, are intended to identify forward-looking
statements. The actual results of future events described in these forward-looking statements could
differ materially from the results described in the forward-looking statements due to risks and
uncertainties including, but are not limited to, those summarized below:
| decline in the demand for seismic data and our services; | ||
| the effect of fluctuations in oil and natural gas prices on exploration activities; | ||
| the effect of uncertainty in financial markets on our customers and our ability to obtain financing; | ||
| loss of significant customers; | ||
| seasonal fluctuations that can adversely affect our business; | ||
| defaults by customers on amounts due us; | ||
| possible impairment of our long-lived assets; | ||
| inability to obtain funding or to obtain funding under acceptable terms; | ||
| intellectual property claims by third parties; | ||
| risks associated with our manufacturing operations; and | ||
| risks associated with our foreign operations, including foreign currency exchange risk. |
Other factors that could cause our actual results to differ from our projected results are
described in (1) Part II, Item 1A. Risk Factors and elsewhere in this Form 10-Q, (2) our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2010 (2010 Form 10-K), (3) our reports
and registration statements filed from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) and (4) other announcements we make from time to time. We caution readers not to place
undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. We undertake
no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements after the date they are
made, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
12
Table of Contents
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Overview
We operate in two segments, equipment leasing (Equipment Leasing) and equipment
manufacturing. Our equipment leasing operations are conducted from our Huntsville, Texas
headquarters and from our locations in Calgary, Canada; Brisbane, Australia; Ufa, Russia; Bogota
Colombia; and Lima, Peru. Our Equipment Leasing segment includes the operations of our Mitcham
Canada, Ltd. (MCL), Absolute Equipment Solutions, Inc. (AES), Seismic Asia Pacific Pty. Ltd.
(SAP), and Mitcham Seismic Eurasia LLC (MSE) subsidiaries and our branch operations in Peru
and Colombia. We acquired AES effective March 1, 2010. AES did not have a material effect on our
results of operations for the three and nine months ended October 31, 2010. The equipment
manufacturing segment is conducted by our Seamap subsidiaries and therefore is referred to as our
Seamap segment. Seamap operates from its locations near Bristol, United Kingdom and in
Singapore.
Management believes that the performance of our Equipment Leasing segment is indicated by
revenues from equipment leasing and by the level of our investment in lease pool equipment.
Management further believes that the performance of our Seamap segment is indicated by revenues
from equipment sales and by gross profit from those sales. Management monitors EBITDA and Adjusted
EBITDA, both as defined in the following table, as key indicators of our overall performance.
The following table presents certain operating information by operating segment.
For the Three Months Ended | For the Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
October 31, | October 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Revenues: |
||||||||||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
$ | 15,724 | $ | 10,289 | $ | 34,398 | $ | 23,930 | ||||||||
Seamap |
4,338 | 4,360 | 17,421 | 14,215 | ||||||||||||
Inter-segment sales |
(89 | ) | (119 | ) | (191 | ) | (333 | ) | ||||||||
Total revenues |
19,973 | 14,530 | $ | 51,628 | 37,812 | |||||||||||
Cost of sales: |
||||||||||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
12,076 | 6,254 | 25,691 | 18,444 | ||||||||||||
Seamap |
2,043 | 2,262 | 8,666 | 6,602 | ||||||||||||
Inter-segment costs |
(125 | ) | (151 | ) | (306 | ) | (503 | ) | ||||||||
Total cost of sales |
13,994 | 8,365 | 34,051 | 24,543 | ||||||||||||
Gross profit |
5,979 | 6,165 | 17,577 | 13,269 | ||||||||||||
Operating expenses: |
||||||||||||||||
General and administrative |
3,937 | 3,809 | 12,286 | 11,280 | ||||||||||||
Provision for doubtful accounts |
| 730 | 797 | 1,379 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
296 | 213 | 871 | 690 | ||||||||||||
Total operating expenses |
4,233 | 4,752 | 13,954 | 13,349 | ||||||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
$ | 1,746 | $ | 1,413 | $ | 3,623 | $ | (80 | ) | |||||||
EBITDA (1) |
$ | 6,809 | $ | 6,393 | $ | 19,591 | $ | 14,237 | ||||||||
Adjusted EBITDA (1) |
$ | 6,980 | $ | 6,672 | $ | 20,532 | $ | 15,356 | ||||||||
Reconciliation of Net income
(loss) to EBITDA and Adjusted
EBITDA |
||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 727 | $ | 1,026 | $ | 2,975 | $ | (64 | ) | |||||||
Interest expense, net |
90 | 122 | 302 | 303 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
5,616 | 4,857 | 16,586 | 13,912 | ||||||||||||
Provision for income taxes |
376 | 388 | 1,032 | 86 | ||||||||||||
Gain from bargain purchase |
| | (1,304 | ) | | |||||||||||
EBITDA (1) |
6,809 | 6,393 | 19,591 | 14,237 | ||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation |
171 | 279 | 941 | 1,119 | ||||||||||||
Adjusted EBITDA (1) |
$ | 6,980 | $ | 6,672 | $ | 20,532 | $ | 15,356 | ||||||||
(1) | EBITDA is defined as net income (loss) before (a) interest expense, net of interest income, (b) provision for (or benefit from) income taxes (c) depreciation, amortization and impairment and (d) the gain from bargain purchase. Adjusted EBITDA excludes stock-based compensation. We consider EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA to be important indicators for the performance of our |
13
Table of Contents
business, but not measures of performance calculated in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). We have included these non-GAAP financial measures because management utilizes this information for assessing our performance and as indicators of our ability to make capital expenditures, service debt and finance working capital requirements. The covenants of our revolving credit agreement require us to maintain a minimum level of EBITDA. Management believes that EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are measurements that are commonly used by analysts and some investors in evaluating the performance of companies such as us. In particular, we believe that it is useful to our analysts and investors to understand this relationship because it excludes transactions not related to our core cash operating activities. We believe that excluding these transactions allows investors to meaningfully trend and analyze the performance of our core cash operations. EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are not measures of financial performance under GAAP and should not be considered in isolation or as alternatives to cash flow from operating activities or as alternatives to net income as indicators of operating performance or any other measures of performance derived in accordance with GAAP. In evaluating our performance as measured by EBITDA, management recognizes and considers the limitations of this measurement. EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA do not reflect our obligations for the payment of income taxes, interest expense or other obligations such as capital expenditures. Accordingly, EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are only two of the measurements that management utilizes. Other companies in our industry may calculate EBITDA or Adjusted EBITDA differently than we do and EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA may not be comparable with similarly titled measures reported by other companies. |
In our Equipment Leasing segment, we lease seismic data acquisition equipment primarily
to seismic data acquisition companies conducting land, transition zone and marine seismic surveys
worldwide. We provide short-term leasing of seismic equipment to meet a customers requirements.
All active leases at October 31, 2010 were for a term of less than one year. Seismic equipment
held for lease is carried at cost, net of accumulated depreciation. We acquire some marine lease
pool equipment from our Seamap segment. These amounts are reflected in the accompanying condensed
consolidated financial statements at the cost to our Seamap segment. From time to time, we sell
lease pool equipment to our customers. These sales are usually transacted when we have equipment
for which we do not have near term needs in our leasing business and if the proceeds from the
sale exceed the estimated present value of future lease income from that equipment. We also
occasionally sell new seismic equipment that we acquire from other companies and sometimes
provide financing on those sales. In addition to conducting seismic equipment leasing operations,
SAP sells equipment, consumables, systems integration, engineering hardware and software
maintenance support services to the seismic, hydrographic, oceanographic, environmental, and
defense industries throughout Southeast Asia and Australia.
Our Seamap segment designs, manufactures and sells a variety of products used primarily in
marine seismic applications. Seamaps primary products include (1) the GunLink seismic source
acquisition and control systems, which provide marine operators more precise control of their
exploration systems, and (2) the BuoyLink RGPS tracking system used to provide precise
positioning of seismic sources and streamers (marine recording channels that are towed behind a
vessel).
Seismic equipment leasing is normally susceptible to weather patterns in certain geographic
regions. In Canada and Russia, a significant percentage of the seismic survey activity occurs in
winter months, from December through March or April. During the months in which the weather is
warmer, certain areas are not accessible to trucks, earth vibrators and other heavy equipment
because of unstable terrain. In other areas of the world, such as Southeast Asia and the Pacific
Rim, periods of heavy rain, known as monsoons, can impair seismic operations. We are able, in
many cases, to transfer our equipment from one region to another in order to deal with seasonal
demand and to increase our equipment utilization.
Business Outlook
Our revenues are directly related to the level of worldwide oil and gas exploration
activities and the profitability and cash flows of oil and gas companies and seismic contractors,
which, in turn, are affected by expectations regarding the supply and demand for oil and natural
gas, energy prices and finding and development costs. Land seismic data acquisition activity
levels are measured in terms of the number of active recording crews, known as the crew count,
and the number of recording channels deployed by those crews, known as channel count. Because
an accurate and reliable census of active crews does not exist, it is not possible to make
definitive statements regarding the absolute levels of seismic data acquisition activity.
Furthermore, a significant number of seismic data acquisition contractors are either private or
state-owned enterprises and information about their activities is not available in the public
domain.
Prior to the turmoil in global financial markets, which arose during 2008, the oil and gas
exploration industry enjoyed generally sustained growth for a period of more than four years,
fueled primarily by historically high commodity prices for oil and natural gas. We, along with
much of the seismic industry, benefited from this growth. These higher prices resulted in
increased activity within the oil and gas industry and, in turn, resulted in an increased demand
for seismic services. Beginning in approximately October 2008, there was a dramatic decline in
oil and gas prices that resulted in a significant reduction in oil and gas exploration activity.
Accordingly, beginning in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, we began to see a decline in demand
for our products and services. This decline was the most dramatic in North America, Russia and
the CIS. In North America, we believe the decline resulted
14
Table of Contents
from the decrease in oil and natural gas prices and from difficulties in the credit markets,
which limited the amount of capital available to independent oil and gas exploration companies.
In Russia and the CIS, we think the decline in global oil prices and the devaluation of the ruble
had a dramatic negative effect on the economics of oil and gas exploration and production
operations. Furthermore, the global financial crisis had a material adverse effect on the
liquidity available to these companies in Russia and the CIS. During this period, there were some
areas where oil and gas exploration activities continued. We believe that this continued activity
was largely driven by the super major oil and gas companies and by national oil companies.
In recent months, there has been a recovery in global crude oil prices and, to a much lesser
extent, North American natural gas prices. As a result of this, we have seen an increase in
activity in areas such as Russia, Southeast Asia and South America. However, activity in North
America has not recovered to the same degree. There are continued indications of improving
business conditions in the seismic services industry, including recently some related to North
America. The majority of activity in the United States is taking place within various so called
shale plays. These indications include increased bid activity in our business and higher
activity reported by certain seismic contractors. However, the magnitude and breadth of this
recovery is uncertain. Uncertainty about the breadth and sustainability of the global economic
recovery, we believe, contributes to this unsettled situation in the energy industry.
In April 2010, there was a fire and explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform
operated by BP in ultra-deep water in the Gulf of Mexico. As a result of the explosion, ensuing
fire and apparent failure of the blowout preventers, the rig sank and created a catastrophic oil
spill that produced widespread economic, environmental and natural resource damage in the Gulf
Coast region. In response to the explosion and spill, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management,
Regulation and Enforcement (the BOEMRE, formerly the Minerals Management Service) of the U.S.
Department of the Interior issued a Notice to Lessees, or NTL, on May 30, 2010, and a revised
notice on July 12, 2010, implementing a moratorium on deepwater drilling activities that
effectively halted deepwater drilling of wells using subsea blowout preventers (BOPs) or surface
BOPs on a floating facility. While the moratorium was in place, the BOEMRE issued a series of
NTLs and adopted changes to its regulations to impose a variety of new safety and operating
measures intended to help prevent a similar disaster in the future. The moratorium was lifted on
October 12, 2010, but offshore operators must now comply with strict new safety and operating
requirements. For example, before being allowed to resume drilling in deepwater, outer
continental shelf operators must certify compliance with all applicable operating regulations
found in 30 C.F.R. Part 250, including those rules recently placed into effect, such as rules
relating to well casing and cementing, BOPs, safety certification, emergency response, and worker
training. Operators also must demonstrate the availability of adequate spill response and blowout
containment resources. This oil spill and the regulatory actions taken by BOEMRE in response to
the incident have had an adverse effect on seismic exploration programs in the affected areas.
Notwithstanding the lifting of the moratorium, we anticipate that there will continue to be delays
in the resumption of drilling-related activities in deepwater, including delays in the issuance of
drilling permits, as these various regulatory initiatives are fully implemented. These new
requirements also have slowed the issuance of permits for new wells in shallow waters that were
not subject to the moratorium.
In addition to the new requirements recently imposed by the BOEMRE, there have been a variety
of proposals to change existing laws and regulations that could adversely affect drilling
operations and cause operators to incur increased costs. Implementation of any one or more of the
various proposed changes could materially adversely affect operations in the Gulf of Mexico by
raising operating costs, increasing insurance premiums, delaying drilling operations and
increasing regulatory burdens, and, further, could lead to a wide variety of other unforeseeable
consequences that make operations in the Gulf of Mexico and other offshore waters more difficult,
more time consuming, and more costly. For example, Congress has actively considered a variety of
amendments to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, in response to the Deepwater Horizon
incident. The proposed amendments to OPA could significantly increase the costs of drilling and
operating wells in offshore waters and thereby reduce the level of exploration and productions
activities on the outer continental shelf. Any increase in the cost of operations in offshore
waters and any decrease in offshore exploration and production activity could have a material
adverse effect on the operation of the offshore exploration and development industry, which could
have an adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operation. While we
have provided equipment for some marine seismic surveys in the Gulf of Mexico and these surveys
have been delayed or cancelled, we do not expect the impact of these actions to be adversely
material to us.
Due to the factors discussed above, the current outlook for our business remains uncertain.
However, the geographic breadth of our operations and our expansive lease pool of equipment, as
well as our generally stable financial position and our $35.0 million credit line position us, we
believe, to address any downturn in the seismic industry for the foreseeable future.
15
Table of Contents
The market for products sold by Seamap and the demand for the leasing of marine seismic
equipment is dependent upon activity within the offshore, or marine, seismic industry, including
the re-fitting of existing seismic vessels and the equipping of new vessels. The ability of our
customers to build or re-fit vessels is dependant in part on their ability to obtain appropriate
financing. Our Seamap business in fiscal 2010 benefited from orders we received in late fiscal
2009 for our GunLink and BuoyLink products. Although there was a decline in marine seismic
activity during fiscal 2010, there have been recent indications of a rebound in such activity.
Many marine contractors have retired older vessels and, therefore, decreased the total capacity
within the marine seismic industry. However, there are indications that many of these contractors
are seeking to upgrade technology in order to operate more efficiently. There have also been
announcements recently of intentions by some contractors to add new-build vessels to their
fleets. Certain of our existing and potential customers have continued to express interest in
our GunLink and BuoyLink products. Some of this interest involves the upgrade of exiting GunLink
and BuoyLink products to newer versions or systems with greater functionality.
During fiscal 2009 and 2008, we responded to the increased demand for our services and
products by adding new equipment to our lease pool and by introducing new products from our
Seamap segment. During fiscal 2009 and 2008, we added approximately $34.9 million and $26.0
million, respectively, of equipment to our lease pool. During fiscal 2010, we added approximately
$19.6 million of new lease pool equipment, despite the decline in demand for equipment during
this period. Although we experienced an overall decline in demand, there was an increase in
demand for certain types of equipment, such as downhole seismic tools and three-component digital
sensors. We responded to this demand by acquiring more of this equipment, as well as other
equipment for which we had specific demand or anticipated demand in the near future. In the nine
months ended October 31, 2010, we added approximately $20.7 million of new lease pool equipment.
Due to recent indications of increased demand, particularly for certain types of equipment, we
have increased our planned expenditures for new lease pool equipment for the current fiscal year.
We now expect to add between $26 million and $28 million of new equipment to our lease pool in
the fiscal year ending January 31, 2011.
In the past few years, we have expanded our lease pool by acquiring different types of
equipment or equipment that can be used in different types of seismic applications. For example,
we added a variety of marine seismic equipment to our lease pool and have purchased downhole
seismic equipment that can be utilized in a wide array of applications, some of which are not
related to oil and gas exploration. These applications include 3-D surface seismic surveys, well
and reservoir monitoring, analysis of fluid treatments of oil and gas wells and underground
storage monitoring. We recently have added new cable free recording technology to our lease pool
of ground recording equipment. In the future we may seek to further expand the breadth of our
lease pool, which could increase the amount we expend on the acquisition of lease pool equipment.
We also have expanded the geographic breadth of our operations by acquiring or establishing
operating facilities in new locations. Most recently, in fiscal 2010, we established branch
operations in Peru and in Colombia. We may seek to expand our operations in to additional
locations in the future either through establishing green field operations or by acquiring
existing operations. However, we do not currently have any specific plans to establish any such
operations.
A significant portion of our revenues are generated from foreign sources. For the three
months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009, revenues from international customers totaled
approximately $15.9 million and $9.2 million, respectively, representing 80% and 63% of
consolidated revenues in those periods, respectively. For the nine months ended October 31, 2010
and 2009, revenues from international customers totaled approximately $43.8 million and $27.6
million, respectively, representing 85% and 73% of consolidated revenues in those periods,
respectively. The majority of our transactions with foreign customers are denominated in United
States, Australian, Canadian and Singapore dollars and Russian rubles. We have not entered, nor
do we intend to enter, into derivative financial instruments for hedging or speculative purposes.
We do not believe that entering into derivative instruments for hedging purposes would be cost
effective.
Our revenues and results of operations have not been materially impacted by inflation or
changing prices in the three and nine month periods ending October 31, 2010 and 2009, except as
described above.
Results of Operations
Revenues for the three-month periods ended October 31, 2010 and 2009 were approximately
$20.0 million and $14.5 million, respectively. The increase was due to an increase in other
equipment sales. Revenues for the nine-month periods ended October 31, 2010 and 2009 were
approximately $51.6 million and $37.8 million, respectively. The increase was due primarily to
increased leasing revenues, higher other Seamap sales and higher other equipment sales. In the
three months ended October 31, 2009, leasing revenues included the impact of an unusually large
contract in the United States. As discussed more fully below, this single contract has a material
impact on the comparison between the three months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009. During the
nine months
16
Table of Contents
ended October 31, 2010, leasing revenues began to recover from the lower levels experienced
in the prior year as explained in more detail below. For the three months ended October 31,
2010, we generated operating income of approximately $1.7 million as compared to approximately
$1.4 million for the three months ended October 31, 2009. For the nine months ended October 31,
2010, we generated operating income of approximately $3.6 million, as compared to an operating
loss of approximately $80,000 in the nine months ended October 31, 2009. The increase in
operating profit was due primarily to the increase in revenues. A more detailed explanation of
these variations follows.
Revenues and Cost of Sales
Equipment Leasing
Revenue and cost of sales from our Equipment Leasing segment were as follows:
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
October 31, | October 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | ($ in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Revenue: |
||||||||||||||||
Equipment leasing |
$ | 8,074 | $ | 9,037 | $ | 24,133 | $ | 20,165 | ||||||||
Lease pool equipment sales |
976 | 808 | 1,498 | 978 | ||||||||||||
New seismic equipment sales |
5,156 | 19 | 5,451 | 46 | ||||||||||||
SAP equipment sales |
1,518 | 425 | 3,316 | 2,741 | ||||||||||||
15,724 | 10,289 | 34,398 | 23,930 | |||||||||||||
Cost of sales: |
||||||||||||||||
Lease pool depreciation |
5,327 | 4,657 | 15,674 | 13,266 | ||||||||||||
Direct costs-equipment leasing |
895 | 748 | 2,485 | 2,201 | ||||||||||||
Cost of lease pool equipment
sales |
385 | 473 | 634 | 570 | ||||||||||||
Cost of new seismic equipment
sales |
4,188 | 43 | 4,271 | 62 | ||||||||||||
Cost of SAP equipment sales |
1,281 | 333 | 2,627 | 2,345 | ||||||||||||
12,076 | 6,254 | 25,691 | 18,444 | |||||||||||||
Gross profit (loss) |
$ | 3,648 | $ | 4,035 | $ | 8,707 | $ | 5,486 | ||||||||
Gross profit % |
23 | % | 39 | % | 25 | % | 23 | % |
Equipment leasing revenues declined approximately 11% in the third quarter of fiscal 2011 from
the third quarter of fiscal 2010. As indicated above, in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 leasing
revenues included the amounts related to an unusually large contract in the United States. This
single contract contributed approximately $3.9 million in leasing revenues, which is an unusually
large amount for a single contract within a three-month period. Had the third quarter of fiscal
2010 not included the effect of this contract, leasing revenues would have increased approximately
57% in the third quarter of fiscal 2011 as compared to the third quarter of fiscal 2010. This
increase can be attributed to increased leasing demand in areas such as South America, Southeast
Asia, Europe and the Middle East. Leasing revenues increased approximately 20% in the first nine
months of fiscal 2011 from the first nine months of fiscal 2010, despite the effect of the contract
discussed above. The increases resulted from increased demand in certain geographic regions,
specifically Russia, Southeast Asia, Europe and South America.
From time to time, we sell equipment from our lease pool based on specific customer demand and
as opportunities present themselves in order to redeploy our capital in other lease pool assets.
Accordingly, these transactions tend to occur sporadically and are difficult to predict. Sales of
lease pool equipment in the third quarters and the first nine months of fiscal 2011 and 2010 are
not considered necessarily indicative of a trend for such transactions. Often, the equipment that
is sold from our lease pool has been in service, and therefore depreciated, for some period of
time. Accordingly, the equipment sold may have a relatively low net book value at the time of the
sale, resulting in a relatively high gross margin from the transaction. The amount of the margin on
a particular transaction varies greatly based primarily upon the age of the equipment. For the
three months ended October 31, 2010 and 2009 sales of lease pool equipment generated gross profit
of approximately $591,000 and $335,000, respectively. For the nine months ended October 31, 2010
and 2009 sales of lease pool equipment generated gross profit of approximately $864,000 and
$408,000, respectively.
17
Table of Contents
Periodically, we sell new seismic equipment that we acquire from others. On occasion, these
sales may be structured with a significant down payment and the balance financed over a period of
time at a market rate of interest. These sales are also difficult to predict and do not follow any
seasonal patterns. In the third quarter of fiscal 2011, we sold approximately $4.8 million of new
seismic equipment in a single transaction to a new customer in Europe. This transaction may be
indicative of an overall increase in demand for seismic equipment, in general, and in Europe, in
particular, both for purchase and for rental. However, there can be no assurance that such demand
will develop or that if it does develop that it will materially impact our results of operations.
For the three and nine months ended October 31, 2010, sales of new seismic equipment generated
gross profit of approximately $968,000 and $1.2 million, respectively. For the comparable periods
in the prior fiscal year, the gross profit from the sale of new seismic equipment was not material.
SAP regularly sells new hydrographic and oceanographic equipment and provides system
integration services to customers in Australia and throughout the Pacific Rim. For the third
quarter ended October 31, 2010, SAP generated a gross profit of approximately $237,000 from these
transactions as compared to approximately $92,000 in the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2009.
For the nine months ended October 31, 2010, the gross profit from SAP equipment sales amounted to
approximately $689,000, as compared to approximately $396,000 in the nine months ended October 31,
2009. The increase in this business resulted from renewed demand from various governmental entities
in the Pacific Rim. In May 2008, SAP entered into a contract with the Royal Australian Navy to
provide certain equipment to the Republic of the Philippines. We accounted for this contract using
the percentage of completion method. In October 2010, this contract was completed and in the three
months ended October 31, 2010, we recognized revenues of approximately $520,000 and gross profit of
approximately $60,000 related to this contract. In the three months ended October 31, 2009, we did
not recognize any revenues or costs related to this contract. In the nine months ended October 31,
2009, we recognized approximately $1.0 million in revenues related to this contract. The sales of
hydrographic and oceanographic equipment by SAP are generally not related to oil and gas
exploration activities and are often made to governmental entities. Accordingly, these sales are
not impacted by global economic and financial issues to the same degree as are other parts of our
business.
Direct costs related to equipment leasing for the three months ended October 31, 2010
increased approximately 20% over the same period in the prior year. In the nine months ended
October 31, 2010, direct costs increased approximately 13% over the same period one year ago.
These increases are attributable to the generally higher leasing activity in the fiscal 2011
periods as compared to the previous fiscal year periods.
For the three months ended October 31, 2010, lease pool depreciation increased approximately
14% over the three months ended October 31, 2009. For the nine months ended October 31, 2010,
lease pool depreciation increased approximately 18% over the nine months ended October 31, 2009.
The increase in lease pool depreciation results from the additions we made to our lease pool in
fiscal 2010 and to date in fiscal 2011. When newly acquired lease pool equipment is placed in
service (first deployed on a rental contract) we begin to depreciate that equipment on a
straight-line basis over estimated depreciable lives ranging from three to seven years. Therefore,
in periods of lower equipment utilization, we experience depreciation expense that is
disproportionate to our equipment leasing revenues.
Overall, our Equipment Leasing segment generated a gross profit of approximately $3.6 million
in the third quarter of fiscal 2011 as compared to approximately $4.0 million in the third quarter
of fiscal 2010. This decline in gross profit is attributable to the lower leasing revenues and
higher depreciation expense in the fiscal 2011 period. In the first nine months of fiscal 2011, the
Equipment Leasing segment generated a gross profit of approximately $8.7 million as compared to
approximately $5.5 million in the first nine months of fiscal 2010. This increase is attributable
primarily to the increase in leasing revenues in the fiscal 2011 period.
Seamap
Revenues and cost of sales for our Seamap segment were as follows:
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
October 31, | October 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | ($ in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Equipment sales |
$ | 4,338 | $ | 4,360 | $ | 17,421 | $ | 14,215 | ||||||||
Cost of equipment sales |
2,043 | 2,262 | 8,666 | 6,602 | ||||||||||||
Gross profit |
$ | 2,295 | $ | 2,098 | $ | 8,755 | $ | 7,613 | ||||||||
Gross profit % |
53 | % | 48 | % | 50 | % | 54 | % |
18
Table of Contents
The sale of Seamap products, while not generally impacted by seasonal factors, can vary
significantly from quarter to quarter due to customer delivery requirements. In the three months
ended October 31, 2010, Seamaps revenues consisted primarily of sales of miscellaneous products,
spare parts sales and repair and support services as we did not ship any major GunLink or
BuoyLink systems during that period. During the three months ended October 31, 2009, we shipped
one GunLink 4000 system and certain other equipment, and provided on-going support and repair
services, as well as spare parts sales. In the nine months ended October 31, 2010, we shipped a
total of four GunLink 4000 systems, versus three such systems for the comparable period in the
prior year. As our installed base of GunLink and BuoyLink systems increases, we expect revenues
from parts sales, repairs and support services to increase. Changes in product prices did not
contribute materially to the difference in sales between the fiscal 2011 and fiscal 2010 periods.
The gross profit from the sale of Seamap equipment for the three months ended October 31,
2010 was higher than that for the three months ended October 31, 2009 due to changes in product
mix. For the nine months ended October 31, 2010, the gross profit margin decreased from the
comparable period in the prior year due to certain volume discounts given during the three months
ended April 30, 2010.
Operating Expenses
General and administrative expenses for the quarter ended October 31, 2010 were approximately
$3.9 million, compared to approximately $3.8 million for the quarter ended October 31, 2009. For
the nine months ended October 31, 2010, general and administrative expenses were approximately
$12.3 million, compared to approximately $11.3 million in the nine months ended October 31, 2009.
The increase results primarily from a reduction in the absorption of overhead costs and higher
incentive compensation expenses in fiscal 2011. Under SAPs contract with the Royal Australian Navy
discussed above, certain general and administrative costs were charged to the contract and
reimbursed through contract billings. As essentially all contract activities had been completed,
there were no such costs charged to the contract during the three or nine months ended October 31,
2010.
In the nine months ended October 31, 2010, we recorded a provision for doubtful accounts of
approximately $797,000, related almost exclusively to one customer located in the CIS. This
customer had been complying with a specific negotiated repayment schedule. However, in the three
months ended October 31, 2010, the customer failed to make the agreed upon payments. While we are
continuing efforts to collect these amounts, further discussions with this customer lead us to
believe that it is unlikely that it will be able to make additional payments in the foreseeable
future. Accordingly, we have provided a provision against all amounts due from this customer. In
the three and nine months ended October 31, 2009, we recorded provisions for doubtful accounts
related to two customers who filed for bankruptcy during that period and related to a sales
customer who defaulted under a deferred payment contract and for which we have been required to
repossess the equipment that we had sold to that customer.
Other Income (Expense)
We completed the acquisition of AES on March 1, 2010. The fair value of the assets and
liabilities we acquired, as determined by a third-party appraisal, exceeded the total
consideration we paid by approximately $1.3 million. Accordingly, pursuant to the provisions of
the Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification 805 Business
Combinations, we recorded a gain from the bargain purchase as of the acquisition date.
Net interest expense for the three months ended October 31, 2010 amounted to approximately
$90,000, consisting of interest expense related to our revolving credit agreement of
approximately $131,000 offset by interest income of approximately $41,000. For the nine months
ended October 31, 2010, net interest expense was approximately $302,000, consisting of interest
expense of approximately $470,000 offset by interest income of approximately $168,000. Net
interest expense for the three months ended October 31, 2009 amounted to approximately $122,000,
consisting of interest expense related to our revolving credit agreement of approximately
$148,000 offset by interest income of approximately $26,000. For the nine months ended October
31, 2009, net interest expense was approximately $303,000, consisting of interest expense of
approximately $461,000 offset by interest income of approximately $158,000. Interest income is
derived from the temporary investment of cash balances and from finance charges related to
equipment sales transactions with deferred payment provisions.
Other expenses of approximately $553,000 for the three months ended October 31, 2010 and
other income of $123,000 for the three months ended October 31, 2009 relate primarily to foreign
exchange losses and gains incurred by our foreign subsidiaries. These losses and gains relate
primarily to changes in the local functional currency balances of accounts receivable denominated
in United States dollars. These changes occur as the value of the United States dollar versus
the local currency fluctuates. For the nine months ended October 31, 2010, these
19
Table of Contents
changes resulted in a net exchange loss of approximately $618,000 and for the nine months
ended October 31, 2009 in a gain of approximately $405,000.
Provision for Income Taxes
Our tax provision for the three months ended October 31, 2010 was approximately $376,000,
which indicates an effective tax rate of approximately 34%, which is comparable to the United
States statutory rate. For the nine months ended October 31, 2010, our tax provision amounted to
approximately $1.0 million, which indicates an effective tax rate of approximately 26%. The gain
from the bargain purchase is not taxable and therefore reduced our effective tax rate for the
period. Absent the effect of this item, our effective tax rate for the nine months ended October
31, 2010 would have been approximately 38%. This rate is higher than the United States statutory
rate of 34% due primarily to estimated potential penalties and interest arising from uncertain
tax positions. For the three months ended October 31, 2009, we had a tax provision of
approximately $388,000, which indicates an effective tax rate of approximately 27%. This rate
reflects the effect of foreign taxes that are at a lower rate than the United States statutory
rate of 34%. For the nine months ended October 31, 2009, we had a tax provision of approximately
$86,000 despite a loss before income taxes. This results from the effect of estimated potential
interest and penalties arising from uncertain tax positions. Pursuant to accounting standards, we
have estimated and recorded the potential effect on our liabilities for income taxes should
specific uncertain tax positions be resolved not in our favor. We are further required to
estimate and record potential penalties and interest that could arise from these positions.
Our Canadian income tax returns for the fiscal years ended January 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006
have been examined by the Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA). CRA has assessed additional taxes for
those years and for subsequent years as a result of that audit. We have protested certain
aspects of the assessments. In addition, because the issues raised in these audits potentially
impact our United States federal tax returns, we are seeking resolution of these matters through
the competent authority process under the United States Canadian tax treaties. We believe
that we have adequately provided for the probable outcome of these matters in our financial
statements. Accordingly, we do not believe the ultimate resolution of these matters will have a
negative effect on our financial position or results of operations. In November 2010, the
Internal Revenue Service instigated an examination of our United States federal income tax
returns for the years ended January 31, 2010 and 2009. Due to the preliminary status of these
examinations we are unable to estimate their effect, if any, on our tax provision.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of October 31, 2010, we had working capital of approximately $15.5 million, including
cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash of approximately $10.2 million, as compared to
working capital of approximately $23.2 million including cash and cash equivalents and restricted
cash of approximately $6.7 million at January 31, 2010. Our working capital decreased during the
nine months ended October 31, 2010 primarily due to purchases of leasepool equipment and
repayments of borrowings under our revolving credit agreement.
Net cash provided by operating activities was approximately $20.3 million in the first nine
months of fiscal 2011 as compared to approximately $13.6 million in the same nine months in
fiscal 2010. This increase resulted primarily from the increase in net income in the fiscal 2011
period and the effect of higher non-cash depreciation expenses in the fiscal 2011 period.
Net cash flows used in investing activities for the nine months ended October 31, 2010
included purchases of seismic equipment held for lease totaling approximately $16.0 million.
There were approximately $9.6 million in accounts payable at October 31, 2010 related to lease
pool purchases. At January 31, 2010, there was approximately $4.9 million in accounts payable
related to lease pool purchases. Accordingly, additions to our lease pool amounted to
approximately $20.7 million in the first nine months of fiscal 2011, as compared to approximately
$11.4 million in the first nine months of fiscal 2010. Due to what we believe are indications of
increasing demand for our equipment, we have increased our intended purchase of lease pool
equipment for fiscal 2011. We now expect such purchases to amount to between $26.0 million and
$28.0 million in the fiscal year ending January 31, 2011. As of October 31, 2010, we had
outstanding commitments for the purchase of approximately $5.2 million of lease pool equipment.
In the first nine months of fiscal 2011, proceeds from the sale of lease pool equipment
amounted to approximately $1.5 million. We generally do not seek to sell our lease pool
equipment, but may do so from time to time. In particular, we may sell lease pool equipment in
response to specific demand from customers if the selling price exceeds the estimated present
value of projected future leasing revenue from that equipment.
Net cash used in financing activities was approximately $0.5 million in the first nine
months of fiscal 2011 compared to net cash provided by financing activities of approximately $6.2
million in the same nine month period
20
Table of Contents
in fiscal 2010. During the nine months ended October 31, 2010, we made net repayment of
approximately $4.2 million under our revolving credit agreement. In July 2010, we entered into
an amended million revolving credit agreement with First Victoria National Bank (the Bank),
which provides for borrowing of up to $35.0 million. Amounts available for borrowing are
determined by a borrowing base. The borrowing base is computed based upon eligible accounts
receivable and eligible lease pool assets. Based upon the latest calculation of the borrowing
base, we believe that $35.0 million of borrowings under the facility were available to us, less
amounts currently outstanding as described below. The revolving credit facility matures on May
31, 2012. However, at any time prior to maturity, we can convert any or all outstanding balances
into a series of 48-month notes. Amounts converted into these notes are due in 48 equal monthly
installments. The agreement also provides that up to $7.0 million of the available borrowing may
be used to secure letters of credit. The revolving credit facility is secured by essentially all
of our domestic assets. Interest is payable monthly at the prime rate plus 50 basis points. The
revolving credit agreement contains certain financial covenants that require us, among other
things, to maintain a debt to shareholders equity ratio of no more than 0.7 to 1.0, maintain a
current assets to current liabilities ratio of not less than 1.25 to 1.0 and produce quarterly
earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) of not less than $2.0
million.
As indicated by the following chart, we were in compliance with all financial covenants as
of October 31, 2010:
Actual as of October | ||||||||
Description of | 31, 2010 or for the | |||||||
Financial Covenant | Required Amount | period then ended | ||||||
Ratio of debt to
shareholders equity |
Not more than 0.7:1.0 | 0.18:1.0 | ||||||
Ratio of current
assets to current
liabilities |
Not less than 1.25:1.0 | 1.69:1.0 | ||||||
Quarterly EBITDA |
Not less than $2.0 million | $6.8 million |
The revolving credit agreement also provides that we may not incur or maintain indebtedness
in excess of $1.0 million without the prior written consent of the Bank, except for borrowings
related to the revolving credit agreement. As of December 3, 2010, we had approximately $22.3
million outstanding under this revolving credit agreement and $2.0 million committed to secure
letters of credit.
In October 2010, in connection with the purchase of certain lease pool equipment, we entered
into a secured promissory note with a supplier in the amount of approximately $3.6 million. The
note is repayable in 18 monthly installments, bears interest at 8% annually and is secured by the
equipment purchased. Pursuant to the terms of our revolving bank credit agreement we sought and
received the consent of the bank for this transaction.
We believe that the working capital requirements, contractual obligations and expected capital
expenditures discussed above, as well as our other liquidity needs for the next twelve months, can
be met from cash flows provided by operations and from amounts available under our revolving credit
facility discussed above. Should we make additional substantial purchases of lease pool equipment
or should we purchase other businesses, we may seek other sources of debt or equity financing.
As of October 31, 2010, we had deposits in foreign banks consisting of both United States
dollar and foreign currency deposits equal to approximately $11.6 million. These funds may
generally be transferred to our accounts in the United States without restriction. However, the
transfer of these funds may result in withholding taxes payable to foreign taxing authorities.
Any such withholding taxes generally may be credited against our federal income tax obligations
in the United States. Additionally, the transfer of funds from our foreign subsidiaries to the
United States may result in currently taxable income in the United States.
21
Table of Contents
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Market Risk
We are exposed to market risk, which is the potential loss arising from adverse changes in
market prices and rates. We have not entered, or intend to enter, into derivative financial
instruments for hedging or speculative purposes.
Foreign Currency Risk
We operate in a number of foreign locations, which gives rise to risk from changes in
foreign exchange rates. To the extent possible, we attempt to denominate our transactions in
foreign locations in United States dollars. For those cases in which transactions are not
denominated in United States dollars, we are exposed to risk from changes in exchange rates to
the extent that non-United States dollar revenues exceed non-United States dollar expenses
related to those operations. Our non-United States dollar transactions are denominated primarily
in Canadian dollars, Australian dollars, Singapore dollars and Russian rubles. As a result of
these transactions, we generally hold cash balances that are denominated in these foreign
currencies. At October 31, 2010, our consolidated cash and cash equivalents included foreign
currency denominated amounts equivalent to approximately $3.1 million in United States dollars. A
10% increase in the value of the United States dollar as compared to the value of each of these
currencies would result in a loss of approximately $0.3 million in the United States dollar value
of these deposits, while a 10% decrease would result in an equal amount of gain. We do not
currently hold or issue foreign exchange contracts or other derivative instruments as we do not
believe it is cost efficient to attempt to hedge these exposures.
Some of our foreign operations are conducted through wholly-owned foreign subsidiaries that
have functional currencies other than the United States dollar. We currently have subsidiaries
whose functional currencies are the Canadian dollar, British pound sterling, Australian dollar,
Russian ruble and the Singapore dollar. Assets and liabilities from these subsidiaries are
translated into United States dollars at the exchange rate in effect at each balance sheet date.
The resulting translation gains or losses are reflected as accumulated other comprehensive income
(loss) in the shareholders equity section of our consolidated balance sheets. Approximately 59% of
our net assets are impacted by changes in foreign currencies in relation to the United States
dollar.
Interest Rate Risk
As of October 31, 2010 there was approximately $11.1 million outstanding under our revolving
credit agreement. This agreement contains a floating interest rate based on the prime rate plus 50
basis points, which was 3.75% as of October 31, 2010. Assuming the outstanding balance remains
unchanged, a change of 100 basis points in the prime rate would result in an increase in annual
interest expense of approximately $111,000. We have not entered into interest rate hedging
arrangements in the past, and have no plans to do so. Do to fluctuating balances in the amount
outstanding under this debt agreement we do not believe such arrangements to be cost effective.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As required by Rule 13a-15(b) of the Exchange Act, we have evaluated, under the supervision
and with the participation of our management, including our principal executive officer and
principal financial officer, the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of
the end of the period covered by this Form 10-Q. Our disclosure controls and procedures are
designed to provide reasonable assurance that the information required to be disclosed by us in
reports that we file under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management,
including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosure and is recorded, processed, summarized and reported
within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. Based upon the evaluation, our
principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that our disclosure
controls and procedures were effective as of October 31, 2010 at the reasonable assurance level.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There was no change in our system of internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the quarter ended October 31, 2010
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control
over financial reporting.
22
Table of Contents
PART II
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
From time to time, we are a party to legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of
business. We are not currently a party to any legal proceedings, individually or collectively, that
we believe could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial
condition.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
The Risk Factors included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January
31, 2010 have not materially changed.
Our business, results of operations and financial position are subject to a number of risks.
In addition to the other information set forth in this Form 10-Q, you should carefully consider the
factors discussed in Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended January 31, 2010, which could materially affect our business, financial condition or future
results. The risks described in this Form 10-Q and in our Annual Report on Form 10-K are not the
only risks facing our company. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or
that we currently deem to be immaterial also may materially adversely affect our business,
financial condition or future results.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
(a) Not applicable.
(b) Not applicable.
(c) Not applicable.
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
Not applicable.
Item 4. (Removed and Reserved)
Not applicable.
Item 5. Other Information
Not applicable.
Item 6. Exhibits
Exhibits
The exhibits required to be filed pursuant to the requirements of Item 601 of Regulation S-K
are set forth in the Exhibit Index accompanying this Form 10-Q and are incorporated herein by
reference.
23
Table of Contents
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
MITCHAM INDUSTRIES, INC. |
||||
Date: December 8, 2010 | /s/ Robert P. Capps | |||
Robert P. Capps | ||||
Executive Vice President-Finance and Chief Financial Officer (Duly Authorized Officer and Chief Accounting Officer) |
24
Table of Contents
EXHIBIT INDEX
Each exhibit indentified below is part of this Form 10-Q. Exhibits filed (or furnished
in the case of Exhibit 32.1) with this Form 10-Q are designated by the cross symbol (). All
exhibits not so designated are incorporated herein by reference to a prior filing as indicated.
Exhibit Number |
Document Description | Report or Registration Statement | SEC File or Registration Number |
Exhibit Reference |
||||||
3.1
|
Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of Mitcham Industries, Inc. | Incorporated by reference to Mitcham Industries, Inc.s Registration Statement on Form S-8, filed with the SEC on August 9, 2001. | 333-67208 | 3.1 | ||||||
3.2
|
Third Amended and Restated Bylaws of Mitcham Industries, Inc. | Incorporated by reference to Mitcham Industries, Inc.s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on August 2, 2010. | 000-25142 | 3.1 | (i) | |||||
10.1
|
Secured Promissory Note dated October 15, 2010 | |||||||||
31.1
|
Certification of Billy F. Mitcham, Jr., Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, as amended | |||||||||
31.2
|
Certification of Robert P. Capps, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, as amended | |||||||||
32.1
|
Certification of Billy F. Mitcham, Jr., Chief Executive Officer, and Robert P. Capps, Chief Financial Officer, under Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. § 1350 |