MIND TECHNOLOGY, INC - Quarter Report: 2010 July (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 July 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 | 76-0210849 | |
(State or other jurisdiction of | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) | |
incorporation or organization) |
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 September 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)
July 31, 2010 | January 31, 2010 | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Current assets: |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 9,766 | $ | 6,130 | ||||
Restricted cash |
670 | 605 | ||||||
Accounts receivable, net |
13,432 | 15,444 | ||||||
Current portion of contracts receivable |
1,162 | 2,073 | ||||||
Inventories, net |
3,985 | 5,199 | ||||||
Cost and estimated profit in excess of billings on uncompleted contract |
448 | 398 | ||||||
Income taxes receivable |
1,222 | 1,438 | ||||||
Deferred tax asset |
1,816 | 1,400 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
2,218 | 1,986 | ||||||
Total current assets |
34,719 | 34,673 | ||||||
Seismic equipment lease pool and property and equipment, net |
71,517 | 66,482 | ||||||
Intangible assets, net |
5,586 | 2,678 | ||||||
Goodwill |
4,320 | 4,320 | ||||||
Prepaid foreign income tax |
2,891 | 2,574 | ||||||
Deferred tax asset |
21 | 88 | ||||||
Long-term portion of contracts receivable, net |
4,081 | 4,533 | ||||||
Other assets |
52 | 49 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 123,187 | $ | 115,397 | ||||
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||
Current liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts payable |
$ | 11,559 | $ | 6,489 | ||||
Current maturities long-term debt |
729 | 93 | ||||||
Foreign income taxes payable |
1,916 | 1,345 | ||||||
Deferred revenue |
1,018 | 854 | ||||||
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities |
4,579 | 2,668 | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
19,801 | 11,449 | ||||||
Non-current income taxes payable |
3,539 | 3,258 | ||||||
Long-term debt, net of current maturities |
10,300 | 15,735 | ||||||
Total liabilities |
33,640 | 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; 10,824 and
10,725 shares issued at July 31, 2010 and January 31, 2010, respectively |
108 | 107 | ||||||
Additional paid-in capital |
77,091 | 75,746 | ||||||
Treasury stock, at cost (925 shares at July 31, 2010 and January 31, 2010) |
(4,843 | ) | (4,843 | ) | ||||
Retained earnings |
12,495 | 10,247 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
4,696 | 3,698 | ||||||
Total shareholders equity |
89,547 | 84,955 | ||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
$ | 123,187 | $ | 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 Six Months | |||||||||||||||
Ended July 31, | Ended July 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
Revenues: |
||||||||||||||||
Equipment leasing |
$ | 6,493 | $ | 4,802 | $ | 16,059 | $ | 11,128 | ||||||||
Lease pool equipment sales |
159 | 101 | 522 | 170 | ||||||||||||
Seamap equipment sales |
7,200 | 7,043 | 12,981 | 9,641 | ||||||||||||
Other equipment sales |
1,303 | 731 | 2,093 | 2,343 | ||||||||||||
Total revenues |
15,155 | 12,677 | 31,655 | 23,282 | ||||||||||||
Cost of sales: |
||||||||||||||||
Direct costs equipment leasing |
846 | 925 | 1,590 | 1,453 | ||||||||||||
Direct costs lease pool depreciation |
5,355 | 4,416 | 10,267 | 8,517 | ||||||||||||
Cost of lease pool equipment sales |
100 | 87 | 249 | 97 | ||||||||||||
Cost of Seamap and other equipment sales |
4,199 | 3,917 | 7,951 | 6,111 | ||||||||||||
Total cost of sales |
10,500 | 9,345 | 20,057 | 16,178 | ||||||||||||
Gross profit |
4,655 | 3,332 | 11,598 | 7,104 | ||||||||||||
Operating expenses: |
||||||||||||||||
General and administrative |
4,162 | 3,969 | 8,349 | 7,471 | ||||||||||||
Provision for doubtful accounts |
797 | 649 | 797 | 649 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
296 | 223 | 575 | 477 | ||||||||||||
Total operating expenses |
5,255 | 4,841 | 9,721 | 8,597 | ||||||||||||
Operating (loss) income |
(600 | ) | (1,509 | ) | 1,877 | (1,493 | ) | |||||||||
Other income (expenses): |
||||||||||||||||
Gain from bargain purchase in business combination |
| | 1,304 | | ||||||||||||
Interest, net |
(118 | ) | (92 | ) | (212 | ) | (181 | ) | ||||||||
Other, net |
437 | 163 | (65 | ) | 282 | |||||||||||
Total other income |
319 | 71 | 1,027 | 101 | ||||||||||||
(Loss) Income before income taxes |
(281 | ) | (1,438 | ) | 2,904 | (1,392 | ) | |||||||||
Benefit (provision) for income taxes |
135 | 428 | (656 | ) | 302 | |||||||||||
Net (loss) income |
$ | (146 | ) | $ | (1,010 | ) | $ | 2,248 | $ | (1,090 | ) | |||||
Net (loss) income per common share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.10 | ) | $ | 0.23 | $ | (0.11 | ) | |||||
Diluted |
$ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.10 | ) | $ | 0.22 | $ | (0.11 | ) | |||||
Shares used in computing net (loss) income per common
share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
9,838 | 9,797 | 9,824 | 9,790 | ||||||||||||
Diluted |
9,838 | 9,797 | 10,081 | 9,790 |
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 Six Months Ended | ||||||||
July 31, | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Cash flows from operating activities: |
||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 2,248 | $ | (1,090 | ) | |||
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by
operating activities: |
||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
10,970 | 9,055 | ||||||
Stock-based compensation |
770 | 840 | ||||||
Gain from bargain purchase in business combination |
(1,304 | ) | | |||||
Provision for doubtful accounts |
797 | 649 | ||||||
Provision for inventory obsolescence |
104 | (75 | ) | |||||
Gross profit from sale of lease pool equipment |
(273 | ) | (73 | ) | ||||
Excess tax benefit from exercise of non-qualified stock options |
(3 | ) | (7 | ) | ||||
Deferred tax benefit |
(1,258 | ) | (1,210 | ) | ||||
Changes in non-current income taxes payable |
281 | (294 | ) | |||||
Changes in working capital items, net of effects from business
combination: |
||||||||
Accounts receivable |
1,225 | 501 | ||||||
Contracts receivable |
1,363 | 267 | ||||||
Inventories |
1,353 | (1,677 | ) | |||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
(196 | ) | 405 | |||||
Income taxes receivable and payable |
778 | 2,213 | ||||||
Costs incurred and estimated profit in excess of billings on
uncompleted contract |
(38 | ) | 973 | |||||
Prepaid foreign income tax |
(228 | ) | | |||||
Accounts payable, accrued expenses, other current liabilities
and deferred revenue |
1,554 | 240 | ||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
18,143 | 10,717 | ||||||
Cash flows from investing activities: |
||||||||
Purchases of seismic equipment held for lease |
(6,957 | ) | (11,597 | ) | ||||
Purchases of property and equipment |
(80 | ) | (283 | ) | ||||
Sale of used lease pool equipment |
522 | 170 | ||||||
Acquisition of AES, net of cash acquired |
(2,100 | ) | | |||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(8,615 | ) | (11,710 | ) | ||||
Cash flows from financing activities: |
||||||||
Net (payments on) proceeds from line of credit |
(6,050 | ) | 1,500 | |||||
Payments on borrowings |
(120 | ) | | |||||
(Purchases of) proceeds from short-term investments |
(52 | ) | 797 | |||||
Proceeds from issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock
options, net of stock surrendered to pay taxes |
244 | (6 | ) | |||||
Excess tax benefit from exercise of non-qualified stock options |
3 | 7 | ||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
(5,975 | ) | 2,298 | |||||
Effect of changes in foreign exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents |
83 | (180 | ) | |||||
Net change in cash and cash equivalents |
3,636 | 1,125 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
6,130 | 5,063 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
$ | 9,766 | $ | 6,188 | ||||
Supplemental cash flow information: |
||||||||
Interest paid |
$ | 314 | $ | 316 | ||||
Income taxes paid |
$ | 1,220 | $ | 649 | ||||
Purchases of seismic equipment held for lease in accounts payable
at end of period |
$ | 10,010 | $ | 8,196 |
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 July 31, 2010, the results of operations for the three and six months ended July 31, 2010 and
2009, and the cash flows for the six months ended July 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 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 will
change 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-months 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 $361,000 and $(79,000) for the three months ended July 31,
2010 respectively, and, revenue and net loss of $648,000 and $(95,000) for the five months ended
July 31, 2010 respectively. The operations of AES are included in our Equipment Leasing segment.
Pro Forma Results of Operations
The following pro forma results of operations for the three months and six months ended July
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 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 which may occur in the future.
Three Months Ended July 31, | Six Months Ended July 31, | |||||||||||||||
(In thousands except per share amounts) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Revenues |
$ | 15,155 | $ | 13,901 | $ | 31,816 | $ | 24,934 | ||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | (146 | ) | $ | (833 | ) | $ | 2,155 | $ | (949 | ) | |||||
Earnings per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.09 | ) | $ | 0.22 | $ | (0.10 | ) | |||||
Diluted |
$ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.09 | ) | $ | 0.21 | $ | (0.10 | ) |
5. Restricted Cash
In connection with certain contracts, SAP has pledged approximately $670,000 in short-term
time deposits as of July 31, 2010 to secure performance obligations under those contracts. The
amount of security will be released as the contract obligations are performed over the remaining
term of the contact, 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
July 31, | January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
(in thousands) | ||||||||
Accounts receivable: |
||||||||
Accounts receivable |
$ | 16,378 | $ | 17,864 | ||||
Allowance for doubtful accounts |
(2,946 | ) | (2,420 | ) | ||||
Total accounts receivable, net |
$ | 13,432 | $ | 15,444 | ||||
Contracts receivable: |
||||||||
Contracts receivable |
$ | 6,730 | $ | 8,093 | ||||
Valuation allowance |
(1,487 | ) | (1,487 | ) | ||||
Less current portion of contracts receivable |
(1,162 | ) | (2,073 | ) | ||||
Long-term portion of contracts receivable |
$ | 4,081 | $ | 4,533 | ||||
Contracts receivable consisted of $5,243,000 due from three customers as of July 31, 2010
and $6,606,000 due from five customers as of January 31, 2010. Long-term contracts receivable,
at July 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 July 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 seven to 23 months. These contracts are collateralized by the equipment
sold and are considered collectable, thus no allowances have been established for them.
July 31, | January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
(in thousands) | ||||||||
Inventories: |
||||||||
Raw materials |
$ | 2,253 | $ | 2,695 | ||||
Finished goods |
1,787 | 2,171 | ||||||
Work in progress |
660 | 1,016 | ||||||
4,700 | 5,882 | |||||||
Less allowance for obsolescence |
(715 | ) | (683 | ) | ||||
Total inventories, net |
$ | 3,985 | $ | 5,199 | ||||
6
Table of Contents
July 31, | January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
(in thousands) | ||||||||
Seismic equipment lease pool and property and equipment: |
||||||||
Seismic equipment lease pool |
$ | 166,874 | $ | 151,921 | ||||
Land and buildings |
366 | 366 | ||||||
Furniture and fixtures |
6,445 | 6,305 | ||||||
Autos and trucks |
551 | 526 | ||||||
174,236 | 159,118 | |||||||
Accumulated depreciation and amortization |
(102,719 | ) | (92,636 | ) | ||||
Total seismic equipment lease pool and property and equipment, net |
$ | 71,517 | $ | 66,482 | ||||
7. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Weighted | July 31, 2010 | January 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average | Gross | Net | Gross | Net | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Life at | Carrying | Accumulated | Carrying | Carrying | Accumulated | Carrying | ||||||||||||||||||||||
7/31/10 | Amount | Amortization | Amount | Amount | Amortization | Amount | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Goodwill |
$ | 4,320 | $ | 4,320 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proprietary rights |
9.9 | $ | 3,487 | $ | (964 | ) | $ | 2,523 | $ | 3,516 | $ | (838 | ) | $ | 2,678 | |||||||||||||
Customer relationships |
7.6 | 2,335 | (121 | ) | 2,214 | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||
Patents |
7.6 | 703 | (36 | ) | 667 | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||
Trade name |
7.6 | 192 | (10 | ) | 182 | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||
Amortizable intangible assets |
$ | 6,717 | $ | (1,131 | ) | $ | 5,586 | $ | 3,516 | $ | (838 | ) | $ | 2,678 | ||||||||||||||
As of July 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 $91,000 for
the three months ended July 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively and $295,000 and $151,000 for the six
months ended July 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. As of July 31, 2010, future estimated
amortization expense related to amortizable intangible assets was estimated to be:
For fiscal years ending January 31 (in thousands): | ||||
2011 |
$ | 329 | ||
2012 |
655 | |||
2013 |
655 | |||
2014 |
655 | |||
2015 |
655 | |||
2016 and thereafter |
2,637 | |||
Total |
$ | 5,586 | ||
7
Table of Contents
8. Long-Term Debt and Notes Payable
Long-term debt and notes payable consist of the following (in thousands):
July 31, | January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
Revolving line of credit |
$ | 9,300 | $ | 15,350 | ||||
MCL notes |
1,458 | | ||||||
SAP equipment notes |
271 | 478 | ||||||
11,029 | 15,828 | |||||||
Less current portion |
(729 | ) | (93 | ) | ||||
Long-term debt |
$ | 10,300 | $ | 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 July 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 July 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 July 31, 2010.
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:
Three Months Ended | Six Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
July 31, | July 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | (146 | ) | $ | (1,010 | ) | $ | 2,248 | $ | (1,090 | ) | |||||
Gain (loss) from foreign
currency translation
adjustment |
(884 | ) | 3,304 | 998 | 4,799 | |||||||||||
Comprehensive income (loss) |
$ | (1,030 | ) | $ | 2,294 | $ | 3,246 | $ | 3,709 | |||||||
The loss from foreign currency translation adjustment for the three months ended July 31, 2010
resulted primarily from the increase in the value of the United States dollar versus the Canadian
dollar. The gain from foreign currency translation adjustment for the six months ended July 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.
8
Table of Contents
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, 2007. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has not commenced an examination of any of
the Companys United States federal income tax returns.
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.
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 six months ended July 31, 2010 and 2009:
9
Table of Contents
Three Months Ended | Six Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
July 31, | July 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding |
9,838 | 9,797 | 9,824 | 9,790 | ||||||||||||
Stock options |
239 | 121 | 256 | 103 | ||||||||||||
Unvested restricted stock |
3 | 8 | 1 | 10 | ||||||||||||
Phantom stock |
| 2 | | 7 | ||||||||||||
Total weighted average common share equivalents |
242 | 131 | 257 | 120 | ||||||||||||
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding |
10,080 | 9,928 | 10,081 | 9,910 | ||||||||||||
For the three months ended July 31, 2010 and 2009 and the six months ended July 31, 2009,
diluted weighted average common shares were anti-dilutive and were therefore not considered in
calculating diluted loss per share for those periods.
12. Stock-Based Compensation
Total compensation expense recognized for stock-based awards granted under the Companys
various equity incentive plans during the three and six months ended July 31, 2010 was
approximately $497,000 and $770,000, respectively, and, during the three and six months ended July
31, 2009 was approximately $424,000 and $840,000, respectively. During the six months ended July
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 to the 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 July 31, | As of January 31, | |||||||
2010 | 2010 | |||||||
Total assets | Total assets | |||||||
(in thousands) | ||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
$ | 103,490 | $ | 95,671 | ||||
Seamap |
20,011 | 20,118 | ||||||
Eliminations |
(314 | ) | (392 | ) | ||||
Consolidated |
$ | 123,187 | $ | 115,397 | ||||
10
Table of Contents
Results for the three months ended July 31, 2010 and 2009 were as follows:
Revenues | Operating loss | Loss before taxes | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
$ | 7,955 | $ | 5,634 | $ | (3,234 | ) | $ | (4,178 | ) | $ | (3,000 | ) | $ | (3,941 | ) | ||||||||
Seamap |
7,253 | 7,172 | 2,595 | 2,629 | 2,680 | 2,463 | ||||||||||||||||||
Eliminations |
(53 | ) | (129 | ) | 39 | 40 | 39 | 40 | ||||||||||||||||
Consolidated |
15,155 | $ | 12,677 | $ | (600 | ) | $ | (1,509 | ) | $ | (281 | ) | $ | (1,438 | ) | |||||||||
Results for the six months ended July 31, 2010 and 2009 were as follows:
Revenues | Operating income (loss) | Income (loss) before taxes | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
$ | 18,674 | $ | 13,641 | $ | (2,196 | ) | $ | (4,631 | ) | $ | (1,066 | ) | $ | (4,344 | ) | ||||||||
Seamap |
13,083 | 9,855 | 3,994 | 3,000 | 3,891 | 2,814 | ||||||||||||||||||
Eliminations |
(102 | ) | (214 | ) | 79 | 138 | 79 | 138 | ||||||||||||||||
Consolidated |
$ | 31,655 | $ | 23,282 | $ | 1,877 | $ | (1,493 | ) | $ | 2,904 | $ | (1,392 | ) | ||||||||||
Sales from the Seamap segment to the Equipment Leasing segment are eliminated in the
consolidated revenues. Consolidated income (loss) 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
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
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
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; and Ufa, Russia. 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 six months ended July 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 Six Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
July 31, | July 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
(in thousands) | (in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Revenues: |
||||||||||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
$ | 7,955 | $ | 5,634 | $ | 18,674 | $ | 13,641 | ||||||||
Seamap |
7,253 | 7,172 | 13,083 | 9,855 | ||||||||||||
Inter-segment sales |
(53 | ) | (129 | ) | (102 | ) | (214 | ) | ||||||||
Total revenues |
15,155 | 12,677 | 31,655 | 23,282 | ||||||||||||
Cost of sales: |
||||||||||||||||
Equipment Leasing |
7,181 | 6,283 | 13,615 | 12,190 | ||||||||||||
Seamap |
3,411 | 3,231 | 6,623 | 4,340 | ||||||||||||
Inter-segment costs |
(92 | ) | (169 | ) | (181 | ) | (352 | ) | ||||||||
Total cost of sales |
10,500 | 9,345 | 20,057 | 16,178 | ||||||||||||
Gross profit |
4,655 | 3,332 | 11,598 | 7,104 | ||||||||||||
Operating expenses: |
||||||||||||||||
General and administrative |
4,162 | 3,969 | 8,349 | 7,471 | ||||||||||||
Provision for doubtful accounts |
797 | 649 | 797 | 649 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
296 | 223 | 575 | 477 | ||||||||||||
Total operating expenses |
5,255 | 4,841 | 9,721 | 8,597 | ||||||||||||
Operating (loss) income |
$ | (600 | ) | $ | (1,509 | ) | $ | 1,877 | $ | (1,493 | ) | |||||
EBITDA (1) |
$ | 5,516 | $ | 3,324 | $ | 12,782 | $ | 7,844 | ||||||||
Adjusted EBITDA (1) |
$ | 6,013 | $ | 3,748 | $ | 13,552 | $ | 8,684 | ||||||||
Reconciliation of Net (loss) income
to EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA |
||||||||||||||||
Net (loss) income |
$ | (146 | ) | $ | (1,010 | ) | $ | 2,248 | $ | (1,090 | ) | |||||
Interest expense, net |
118 | 92 | 212 | 181 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
5,679 | 4,670 | 10,970 | 9,055 | ||||||||||||
(Benefit) provision for income taxes |
(135 | ) | (428 | ) | 656 | (302 | ) | |||||||||
Gain from bargain purchase |
| | (1,304 | ) | | |||||||||||
EBITDA (1) |
5,516 | 3,324 | 12,782 | 7,844 | ||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation |
497 | 424 | 770 | 840 | ||||||||||||
Adjusted EBITDA (1) |
$ | 6,013 | $ | 3,748 | $ | 13,552 | $ | 8,684 | ||||||||
(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 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. |
13
Table of Contents
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 July 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 from the decrease in oil and natural
gas prices and from difficulties in the credit markets, which limited the amount
14
Table of Contents
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. 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.
On April 20, 2010, a fire and explosion occurred onboard the semi-submersible drilling rig
Deepwater Horizon and it sank, leading to the oil spill currently affecting the United States Gulf
of Mexico. In response to this incident, the Minerals Management Service (now known as the Bureau
of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, or BOEMRE) of the United States
Department of the Interior issued a notice on May 30, 2010 implementing a six-month moratorium on
certain drilling activities in the United States Gulf of Mexico. Implementation of the moratorium
was blocked by a United States district court, which was subsequently affirmed on appeal, but on
July 12, 2010, the BOEMRE issued a new moratorium that applies to certain deep water drilling
operations. The new moratorium will last until November 30, 2010, or until such earlier time that
the BOEMRE determines that affected drilling operations can proceed safely. The BOEMRE has imposed
numerous new safety requirements on the drilling of new wells in offshore waters and these new
requirements have slowed the issuance of permits for new wells in shallow waters not subject to the
moratorium. The BOEMRE is also expected to issue new safety and environmental guidelines or
regulations for drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and may take other steps that could increase the
costs of exploration and production, reduce the area of operations and result in permitting delays.
All of these events have had an adverse effect on seismic exploration programs in the affected
areas. The magnitude and duration of this impact remains unknown. The continued application of the
moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico as well as the adoption or implementation of regulatory
initiatives and delays in issuance of permits in the aftermath of this incident could materially
impact the operation of the offshore exploration and development industry, which could have an
adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations. 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 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.
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. In
addition, certain 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 six
months ended July 31, 2010, we added approximately $12.1 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
15
Table of Contents
equipment for the current fiscal year.
We now expect to add between $23 million and $25 million of new
equipment to our lease pool in the fiscal year ending January 31, 2011. Of this amount, we
have purchased, or committed to purchase, approximately $19.6 million as of September 3, 2010.
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 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 July 31, 2010 and 2009, revenues from international customers totaled approximately
$13.2 million and $10.0 million, respectively, representing 87% and 78% of consolidated revenues
in those periods, respectively. For the six months ended July 31, 2010 and 2009, revenues from
international customers totaled approximately $27.9 million and $18.4 million, respectively,
representing 88% and 79% 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.
Our revenues and results of operations have not been materially impacted by inflation or
changing prices in the past three fiscal years, except as described above.
Results of Operations
Revenues for the three-month periods ended July 31, 2010 and 2009 were approximately $15.1
million and $12.7 million, respectively. The increase was due primarily to increased leasing
revenues and higher other equipment sales. Revenues for the six-month periods ended July 31, 2010
and 2009 were approximately $31.7 million and $23.3 million, respectively. The increase was due
primarily to increased leasing revenues and higher other Seamap sales. For the three and months
ended July 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 July 31, 2010, we
generated an operating loss of approximately $600,000 as compared to an operating loss of
approximately $1.5 million for the three months ended July 31, 2009. For the six months ended
July 31, 2010 we generated operating income of approximately $1.9 million, as compared to an
operating loss of approximately $1.5 million in the six months ended July 31, 2009. The increase
in operating profit was due primarily to the increase in revenues. A more detailed explanation
of these variations follows.
16
Table of Contents
Revenues and Cost of Sales
Equipment Leasing
Revenue and cost of sales from our Equipment Leasing segment were as follows:
Three Months Ended | Six Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
July 31, | July 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | ($ in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Revenue: |
||||||||||||||||
Equipment leasing |
$ | 6,493 | $ | 4,802 | $ | 16,059 | $ | 11,128 | ||||||||
Lease pool equipment sales |
159 | 101 | 522 | 170 | ||||||||||||
New seismic equipment sales |
234 | 17 | 295 | 27 | ||||||||||||
SAP equipment sales |
1,069 | 714 | 1,798 | 2,316 | ||||||||||||
7,955 | 5,634 | 18,674 | 13,641 | |||||||||||||
Cost of sales: |
||||||||||||||||
Lease pool depreciation |
5,395 | 4,463 | 10,347 | 8,609 | ||||||||||||
Direct costs-equipment leasing |
846 | 925 | 1,590 | 1,453 | ||||||||||||
Cost of lease pool equipment sales |
100 | 87 | 249 | 97 | ||||||||||||
Cost of new seismic equipment sales |
72 | 14 | 83 | 19 | ||||||||||||
Cost of SAP equipment sales |
768 | 794 | 1,346 | 2,012 | ||||||||||||
7,181 | 6,283 | 13,615 | 12,190 | |||||||||||||
Gross profit (loss) |
$ | 774 | $ | (649 | ) | $ | 5,059 | $ | 1,451 | |||||||
Gross profit % |
10 | % | (12 | )% | 27 | % | 11 | % |
Equipment leasing revenues increased approximately 35% in the second quarter of fiscal 2011
from the second quarter of fiscal 2010 and 44% in the first six months of fiscal 2011 from the
first six months of fiscal 2010. 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 are difficult to predict. Sales of lease pool equipment were not
material in the second quarters or the first six months of fiscal 2011 and 2010. 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.
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. Due to the current conditions in the energy industry and in global financial
markets, these transactions have not been material in recent periods.
SAP regularly sells new hydrographic and oceanographic equipment and provides system
integration services to customers in Australia and throughout the Pacific Rim. For the second
quarter ended July 31, 2010, SAP generated a gross profit of approximately $301,000 from these
transactions as compared to a gross loss of approximately $80,000 in the fiscal quarter ended July
31, 2009. For the six months ended July 31, 2010, the gross profit from SAP equipment sales
amounted to approximately $452,000, as compared to approximately $304,000 in the six months ended
July 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 account for this contract
using the percentage of completion method. In the three and six months ended July 31, 2010, we did
not recognize any revenue or costs related to this contract. The contract is essentially complete
pending final documentation approval and billing of the final contract milestone of approximately
$400,000. In the three months ended July 31, 2009, we recognized approximately $60,000 in revenues
and $400,000 of costs related to this contract. In the six months ended July 31, 2009, we
recognized approximately $960,000 in revenues related to this contract. We have incurred
approximately $200,000 in unexpected costs in the fulfillment of this contract and have submitted
claims for reimbursement of these costs. However, until our claims are approved and accepted, we
have not included the benefit from these claims in our calculation of expected profits from the
contract. We expect to recognize additional contract revenues of approximately $340,000 upon final
completion of the contract, excluding the effect of the pending claims, and gross profit of
approximately $46,000. 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 July 31, 2010 declined
approximately 9% over the same period in the prior year, despite the increase in leasing revenues.
In the six months ended July 31, 2010, direct costs increased approximately 9% over the same period
one year ago, despite a 44% increase in leasing revenues. Direct costs typically fluctuate with
leasing revenues, as the three main components of direct costs are freight, repairs and sublease
expense; however, in the fiscal 2010 periods we incurred certain cost for the lease of certain
equipment from a third party.
17
Table of Contents
Overall, our Equipment Leasing segment generated a gross profit of approximately $774,000 in
the second quarter of fiscal 2011 as compared to a loss of approximately $649,000 in the second
quarter of fiscal 2010. In the first six months of fiscal 2011, the Equipment Leasing segment
generated a gross profit of approximately $5.1
million as compared to approximately $1.5 million in the first six months of fiscal 2010. The
gross profit increased primarily to higher leasing revenues despite higher depreciation expense
related to our lease pool equipment. During fiscal 2010 and the first half of fiscal 2011, we
added significant amounts of new equipment to our lease pool. Once new equipment is initially
placed in service, we begin depreciating the equipment on a straight-line basis for the balance of
its estimated useful life. Therefore, in periods of lower equipment utilization, we experience
depreciation expense that is disproportionate to our equipment leasing revenues.
Seamap
Revenues and cost of sales for our Seamap segment were as follows:
Three Months Ended | Six Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
July 31, | July 31, | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | ($ in thousands) | |||||||||||||||
Equipment sales |
$ | 7,253 | $ | 7,172 | $ | 13,083 | $ | 9,855 | ||||||||
Cost of equipment sales |
3,411 | 3,231 | 6,623 | 4,340 | ||||||||||||
Gross profit |
$ | 3,842 | $ | 3,941 | $ | 6,460 | $ | 5,515 | ||||||||
Gross profit % |
53 | % | 55 | % | 49 | % | 56 | % |
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 each of the
three months ended July 31, 2010 and 2009, we shipped two GunLink 4000 systems and certain other
equipment, as well as on-going support, repair and spare parts sales. Therefore, sales between
those two periods were comparable. In the six months ended July 31, 2010, we shipped a total of
four GunLink 4000 systems, versus only two such systems for the comparable period in the prior
year. 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 July 31, 2010
was comparable to that for the three months ended July 31, 2009. For the six months ended July
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 July 31, 2010 were approximately
$4.2 million, compared to approximately $4.0 million for the quarter ended July 31, 2009. For the
six months ended July 31, 2010, general and administrative expenses were approximately $8.4
million, compared to approximately $7.5 million in the six months ended July 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 six months ended July 31,
2010.
In the three months ended July 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 repayment schedule that had been negotiated. However,
in the three months ended July 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 further payments in the
foreseeable future. Accordingly, we have provided a provision against all amounts due from this
customer. In the three months ended July 31, 2009, we recorded a provision of approximately
$649,000 related to two customers who filed for bankruptcy during that period.
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
18
Table of Contents
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 July 31, 2010 amounted to approximately
$118,000, consisting of interest expense related to our revolving credit agreement of
approximately $190,000 offset by interest income of approximately $72,000. For the six months
ended July 31, 2010, net interest expense was approximately $212,000, consisting of interest
expense of approximately $339,000 offset by interest income of approximately $127,000. Net
interest expense for the three months ended July 31, 2009 amounted to approximately $92,000,
consisting of interest expense related to our revolving credit agreement of approximately
$201,000 offset by interest income of approximately $109,000. For the six months ended July 31,
2009 net interest expense was approximately $181,000, consisting of interest expense of
approximately $313,000 offset by interest income of approximately $132,000.
Other income of approximately $437,000 for the three months ended July 31, 2010 and $163,000
for the three months ended July 31, 2009 relates primarily to foreign exchange gains incurred by
our foreign subsidiaries. These losses relate primarily to changes in the local functional
currency balances of accounts receivable denominated in United States dollars. For the six
months ended July 31, 2010 these changes resulted in a net exchange loss of approximately $65,000
and for the six months ended July 31, 2009 in a gain of approximately $282,000.
Provision for Income Taxes
Our tax benefit for the three months ended July 31, 2010 was approximately $135,000, which
indicates an effective tax rate of approximately 48%. The benefit in excess of the United States
statutory rate of 34% in this period results primarily from the effect of taxable losses in the
United States and income in jurisdictions with a lower effective tax rate than that of the United
States. For the six months ended July 31, 2010, our tax provision amounted to approximately
$657,000, which indicates an effective tax rate of approximately 23%. The gain from 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 six months ended July 31, 2010 would have
been approximately 41%. This rate is higher than the United States statutory rate of 34% due
primarily to estimated potential interest arising from uncertain tax positions. For the three
months ended July 31, 2009, we had a tax benefit of approximately $428,000 and $302,000,
respectively, which indicates effective tax rates of approximately 30% and 22% for the respective
periods. These rates reflect the effect of foreign taxes that are at a lower rate than the United
States statutory rate of 34%. 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, since the issues raised in the 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.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of July 31, 2010, we had working capital of approximately $14.9 million, including cash
and cash equivalents and restricted cash of approximately $10.4 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 six
months ended July 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 $18.1 million in the first six
months of fiscal 2011 as compared to approximately $10.7 million in the same six months in fiscal
2010. This increase resulted primarily from the increase in net income in the fiscal 2011 period.
Net cash flows used in investing activities for the six months ended July 31, 2010 included
purchases of seismic equipment held for lease totaling approximately $7.0 million. There were
approximately $10.0 million in accounts payable at July 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 $12.1 million
in the first six months of fiscal 2011, as compared to approximately $7.8 million in
19
Table of Contents
the first
six months of fiscal 2010. Due to what we believe to be 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 $23.0 million and $25.0 million in the fiscal year
ending January 31, 2011. As of
July 31, 2010, we had outstanding commitments for the purchase of approximately $7.5 million
of lease pool equipment.
In the first six months of fiscal 2011, proceeds from the sale of lease pool equipment
amounted to approximately $522,000. 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.
During the six months ended July 31, 2010, we made net repayment of approximately $6.0
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 July 31, 2010:
Actual as of July 31, 2010 | ||||
Description of Financial | or for the period then | |||
Covenant | Required Amount | ended | ||
Ratio of debt to shareholders equity |
Not more than 0.7:1.0 | 0.12:1.0 | ||
Ratio of current assets to current liabilities |
Not less than 1.25:1.0 | 1.75:1.0 | ||
Quarterly EBITDA |
Not less than $2.0 million | $5.5 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 September 3, 2010, we had
approximately $9.3 million outstanding under this revolving credit agreement and $2.0 million
committed to secure letters of credit.
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 July 31, 2010, we had deposits in foreign banks consisting of both United States
dollar and foreign currency deposits equal to approximately $10.0 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.
20
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 July 31, 2010, our consolidated cash and cash equivalents included foreign
currency denominated amounts equivalent to approximately $4.1 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 $0.4 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 61% of
our net assets are impacted by changes in foreign currencies in relation to the United States
dollar.
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 July 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 July 31, 2010 that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over
financial reporting.
21
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 litigation 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.
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 |
On July 27, 2010 our Board of Directors approved an amendment and restatement of our
Bylaws. Among other changes, the Amended and Restated Bylaws allow for greater flexibility to use
electronic transmissions to hold shareholder meetings and conduct voting. The amendment to our
Bylaws is detailed in the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 12, 2010 and
which is incorporated herein by reference.
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.
22
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: September 8, 2010 | /s/ Robert P. Capps | |||
Robert P. Capps | ||||
Executive Vice President-Finance and Chief Financial Officer (Duly Authorized Officer and Chief Accounting Officer) |
23
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.
SEC File or | ||||||||||
Exhibit | Registration | Exhibit | ||||||||
Number | Document Description | Report or Registration Statement | Number | 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
|
Second Amendment to Loan Agreement dated July 27, 2010 by and between Mitcham Industries, Inc. and First Victoria National Bank | Incorporated by reference to Mitcham Industries, Inc.s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on August 2, 2010. | 000-25142 | 10.1 | ||||||
10.2
|
Summary of non-employee director compensation (as of July 27, 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 |