SOUTH DAKOTA SOYBEAN PROCESSORS LLC - Quarter Report: 2009 September (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
(Mark One)
x
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009
o
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For
the transition period from
to
COMMISSION FILE
NO. 000-50253
SOUTH
DAKOTA SOYBEAN PROCESSORS, LLC
(Exact
Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)
South
Dakota
|
46-0462968
|
|
(State
of Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation
or Organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
Identification
No.)
|
100
Caspian Avenue, Post Office Box 500, Volga, South Dakota 57071
(Address
of Principal Executive Offices)
(605)
627-9240
(Registrant’s
Telephone Number)
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to
be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes x
No o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large
accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
o Large Accelerated
Filer
|
o Accelerated Filer
|
o Non-Accelerated Filer
(do
not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
x Smaller Reporting
Company
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
o Yes x No
|
APPLICABLE
ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY
PROCEEDINGS
DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS
Check
whether the registrant filed all documents and reports required to be filed by
Section 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act after the distribution of
securities under a plan confirmed by a court. Yes o
No o
APPLICABLE
ONLY TO CORPORATE ISSUERS
State the
number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common equity,
as of the latest practicable date: On November 12, 2009, the registrant
had 30,419,000 capital units outstanding.
PART
I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item
1.
|
Financial
Statements
|
SOUTH
DAKOTA SOYBEAN PROCESSORS, LLC
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SEPTEMBER
30, 2009 AND 2008
SOUTH
DAKOTA SOYBEAN PROCESSORS, LLC
Index to
Financial Statements
Page
|
|
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
|
1
|
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2009 (unaudited) and
December 31, 2008
|
2
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three-month and nine-month
periods ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 (unaudited)
|
4
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the nine-month periods ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008 (unaudited)
|
5
|
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
6
|
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board
of Managers
South
Dakota Soybean Processors, LLC
Volga,
South Dakota
We have
reviewed the condensed consolidated balance sheet of South Dakota Soybean
Processors, LLC (the “Company”) as of September 30, 2009, and the related
condensed consolidated statements of operations for the three-month and
nine-month periods ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 and the condensed
consolidated statements of cash flows for the nine-month periods ended September
30, 2009 and 2008. These interim financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company’s management.
We
conducted our reviews in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim
financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures and
making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting
matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in
accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(United States), the objective of which is the expression of an opinion
regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we
do not express such an opinion.
Based on
our reviews, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made
to the financial statements referred to above for them to be in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.
We have
previously audited, in accordance with auditing standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet of
South Dakota Soybean Processors, LLC as of December 31, 2008, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, changes in members’ equity, and cash
flows for the year then ended (not presented herein); and in our report dated
March 24, 2009, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial
statements. In our opinion, the information set forth in the
accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2008, is
fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the consolidated balance
sheet from which it has been derived.
Eide Bailly LLP |
November
12, 2009
Greenwood
Village, Colorado
1
SOUTH
DAKOTA SOYBEAN PROCESSORS, LLC
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
September
30,
|
||||||||
2009
|
December
31,
|
|||||||
(Unaudited)
|
2008
|
|||||||
ASSETS
|
||||||||
CURRENT
ASSETS
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ | 150 | $ | 9,332 | ||||
Trade
accounts receivable, less allowance for uncollectible accounts of $56,000
and $78,000 at September 20, 2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively
|
18,331,031 | 18,939,727 | ||||||
Inventories
|
9,167,825 | 22,621,675 | ||||||
Prepaid
expenses
|
211,686 | 544,105 | ||||||
Total
current assets
|
27,710,692 | 42,114,839 | ||||||
PROPERTY
AND EQUIPMENT
|
55,316,689 | 54,344,281 | ||||||
Less
accumulated depreciation
|
(32,583,752 | ) | (31,038,838 | ) | ||||
Total
property and equipment, net
|
22,732,937 | 23,305,443 | ||||||
OTHER
ASSETS
|
||||||||
Investments
in cooperatives
|
7,848,625 | 8,055,962 | ||||||
Notes
receivable - members
|
148,898 | 148,898 | ||||||
Patents
and other intangible assets, net
|
5,382,189 | 5,640,572 | ||||||
Total
other assets
|
13,379,712 | 13,845,432 | ||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 63,823,341 | $ | 79,265,714 |
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
2
SOUTH
DAKOTA SOYBEAN PROCESSORS, LLC
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS – continued
September
30,
|
||||||||
2009
|
December
31,
|
|||||||
(Unaudited)
|
2008
|
|||||||
LIABILITIES
AND MEMBERS' EQUITY
|
||||||||
CURRENT
LIABILITIES
|
||||||||
Excess
of outstanding checks over bank balance
|
$ | 937,005 | $ | 2,408,396 | ||||
Current
maturities of long-term debt
|
2,850,000 | 819,017 | ||||||
Note
payable - seasonal loan
|
1,394,052 | - | ||||||
Accounts
payable
|
665,944 | 1,117,600 | ||||||
Accrued
commodity purchases
|
14,329,988 | 25,174,258 | ||||||
Margin
deposit deficit
|
49,512 | 252,281 | ||||||
Accrued
expenses
|
1,518,249 | 1,890,668 | ||||||
Accrued
interest
|
97,677 | 88,281 | ||||||
Total
current liabilities
|
21,842,427 | 31,750,501 | ||||||
LONG-TERM
LIABILITIES
|
||||||||
Long-term
debt, less current maturities
|
8,000,000 | 9,300,000 | ||||||
Deferred
compensation
|
68,303 | 107,405 | ||||||
Total
long-term liabilities
|
8,068,303 | 9,407,405 | ||||||
COMMITMENTS
AND CONTINGENCIES
|
||||||||
TEMPORARY
EQUITY, net of subscriptions receivable of
|
||||||||
$2,259,
consisting of 70,750 Class A capital units
|
140,491 | 140,491 | ||||||
MEMBERS'
EQUITY
|
||||||||
Class
A Units, no par value, 30,419,000 units issued and
outstanding
|
33,772,120 | 37,967,317 | ||||||
Total
liabilities, temporary equity and members' equity
|
$ | 63,823,341 | $ | 79,265,714 |
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
3
SOUTH
DAKOTA SOYBEAN PROCESSORS, LLC
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
FOR
THE THREE-MONTH AND NINE-MONTH PERIODS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 AND
2008
Three
Months Ended September 30:
|
Nine
Months Ended September 30:
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
NET
REVENUES
|
$ | 77,880,978 | $ | 102,168,282 | $ | 199,335,490 | $ | 290,685,881 | ||||||||
COST
OF REVENUES
|
||||||||||||||||
Cost
of product sold
|
69,918,841 | 92,078,920 | 178,437,137 | 255,224,596 | ||||||||||||
Production
|
3,213,340 | 4,960,146 | 11,094,511 | 13,464,385 | ||||||||||||
Freight
and rail
|
3,872,284 | 4,648,210 | 11,332,779 | 14,205,572 | ||||||||||||
Brokerage
fees
|
110,034 | 98,117 | 245,737 | 238,046 | ||||||||||||
Total
cost of revenues
|
77,114,499 | 101,785,393 | 201,110,164 | 283,132,599 | ||||||||||||
GROSS
PROFIT (LOSS)
|
766,479 | 382,889 | (1,774,674 | ) | 7,553,282 | |||||||||||
OPERATING
EXPENSES
|
||||||||||||||||
Administration
|
1,178,105 | 1,669,148 | 3,628,056 | 4,648,043 | ||||||||||||
OPERATING
PROFIT (LOSS)
|
(411,626 | ) | (1,286,259 | ) | (5,402,730 | ) | 2,905,239 | |||||||||
OTHER
INCOME (EXPENSE)
|
||||||||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(319,686 | ) | (578,638 | ) | (803,763 | ) | (1,860,306 | ) | ||||||||
Other
non-operating income
|
540,634 | 627,088 | 1,653,228 | 1,696,944 | ||||||||||||
Patronage
dividend income
|
- | - | 358,367 | 248,580 | ||||||||||||
Total
other income (expense)
|
220,948 | 48,450 | 1,207,832 | 85,218 | ||||||||||||
INCOME
(LOSS) BEFORE
|
||||||||||||||||
INCOME
TAXES
|
(190,678 | ) | (1,237,809 | ) | (4,194,898 | ) | 2,990,457 | |||||||||
INCOME
TAX EXPENSE (BENEFIT)
|
- | - | 300 | 300 | ||||||||||||
NET
INCOME (LOSS)
|
$ | (190,678 | ) | $ | (1,237,809 | ) | $ | (4,195,198 | ) | $ | 2,990,157 | |||||
BASIC
AND DILUTED EARNINGS
|
||||||||||||||||
(LOSS)
PER CAPITAL UNIT
|
$ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.04 | ) | $ | (0.14 | ) | $ | 0.10 | |||||
WEIGHTED
AVERAGE NUMBER OF
|
||||||||||||||||
UNITS
OUTSTANDING FOR
|
||||||||||||||||
CALCULATION
OF BASIC AND
|
||||||||||||||||
DILUTED
EARNINGS (LOSS)
|
||||||||||||||||
PER
CAPITAL UNIT
|
30,419,000 | 30,419,000 | 30,419,000 | 30,419,000 |
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
4
SOUTH
DAKOTA SOYBEAN PROCESSORS, LLC
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (UNAUDITED)
FOR
THE NINE-MONTH PERIODS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 AND 2008
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
OPERATING
ACTIVITIES
|
||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ | (4,195,198 | ) | $ | 2,990,157 | ||
Charges
and credits to net income (loss)
|
||||||||
not
affecting cash:
|
||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,934,966 | 1,892,410 | ||||||
(Gain)
loss on sales of property and equipment
|
9,737 | (26,500 | ) | |||||
Unrealized
(gain) in market value on trading securities
|
(7,931 | ) | - | |||||
Non-cash
patronag dividends
|
(125,428 | ) | (123,540 | ) | ||||
Change
in current assets and liabilities
|
2,494,145 | 10,594,260 | ||||||
NET
CASH FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
|
110,291 | 15,326,787 | ||||||
INVESTING
ACTIVITIES
|
||||||||
Proceeds
from investments in cooperatives
|
285,644 | 420,120 | ||||||
Retirement
of patronage dividends
|
55,052 | 376,517 | ||||||
Patent
costs
|
(97,861 | ) | (100,498 | ) | ||||
Proceeds
from sales of property and equipment
|
12,431 | 26,500 | ||||||
Purchase
of property and equipment
|
(1,028,383 | ) | (839,026 | ) | ||||
NET
CASH (USED FOR) FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES
|
(773,117 | ) | (116,387 | ) | ||||
FINANCING
ACTIVITIES
|
||||||||
Change
in excess of outstanding checks over
|
||||||||
bank
balances
|
(1,471,391 | ) | 4,702,371 | |||||
Net
(payments) proceeds from seasonal borrowings
|
1,394,052 | (15,389,418 | ) | |||||
Distributions
to members
|
- | (3,766,059 | ) | |||||
Decrease
(increase) in subscriptions receivable
|
- | 314,983 | ||||||
Proceeds
from long-term debt
|
4,967,079 | - | ||||||
Principal
payments on long-term debt
|
(4,236,096 | ) | (1,038,086 | ) | ||||
NET
CASH FROM (USED FOR) FINANCING ACTIVITIES
|
653,644 | (15,176,209 | ) | |||||
NET
CHANGE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
(9,182 | ) | 34,191 | |||||
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF PERIOD
|
9,332 | 9,247 | ||||||
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF PERIOD
|
$ | 150 | $ | 43,438 | ||||
Cash
paid during the period for:
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||
Interest
|
$ | 794,367 | $ | 1,758,146 | ||||
Income
taxes
|
$ | - | $ | - |
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
5
STATEMENTS
OF CASH FLOWS – page 2
NOTE
1 - BASIS OF PRESENTATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING
POLICIES
The
financial statements as of and for the periods ended September 30, 2009 and 2008
reflect, in the opinion of management of South Dakota Soybean Processors, LLC
(the “Company”, “LLC”, “we”, “our”, or “us”), all normal recurring adjustments
necessary for a fair statement of the financial position and results of
operations and cash flows for the interim periods presented. The results of
operations and cash flows for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of
results for a full year due in part to the seasonal nature of some of the
Company’s businesses. The consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31,
2008 has been derived from audited financial statements but does not include all
disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America.
The
condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company
and its majority-owned subsidiary. The effects of all intercompany accounts and
transactions have been eliminated.
These
statements should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and notes
thereto for the year ended December 31, 2008, included in the Company’s annual
report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March
31, 2009.
Use
of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities at the date of the financial statements and reported amounts of
revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results
could differ from those estimates.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In June
2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting
Standards Codification (ASC) 105, Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (formerly SFAS No. 168, The FASB Accounting Standards
Codification”™ and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles – a
replacement of FASB Statement No. 162). ASC 105 establishes the FASB
Accounting Standards CodificationTM
(Codification) as the source of authoritative accounting principles recognized
by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities in the preparation of
financial statements in conformity with GAAP. Rules and interpretive
releases of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under authority of
federal securities laws are also sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC
registrants. The FASB will no longer issue new standards in the form
of Statements, FASB Staff Positions, or Emerging Issues Task Force Abstracts;
instead the FASB will issue Accounting Standards Updates. Accounting
Standards Updates will not be authoritative in their own right as they will only
serve to update the Codification. The Company adopted ASC 105 on
September 30, 2009. Because the Codification is not intended to
change GAAP, the adoption of this standard did not have an impact on the
Company’s financial results; however, the Company’s disclosures and references
to accounting standards changed to reflect the new Codification
structure.
In May
2009, the FASB issued ASC 855, Subsequent
Events (formerly
SFAS No. 165, Subsequent
Events). ASC
855 establishes general accounting standards to
account for and disclosure of events that occur after the balance sheet date but
before financial statements are issued or are available to be issued, otherwise
known as “subsequent events”. More specifically, these changes require the
disclosure of the date through which subsequent events have been evaluated, as
well as whether the date is the date the financial statements were issued or the
date the financial statements were available to be issued. For public
entities, financial statements are considered “issued” when they are widely
distributed to shareholders and other financial users for general use and
reliance in a form and format that complies with GAAP. The Company
adopted the provisions of this standard on June 30, 2009. The Company
has evaluated subsequent events through November 12, 2009, which is the date
they issued their financial statements, and concluded that no subsequent events
have occurred that would require recognition in the Financial Statements or
disclosure in the Notes to the Financial Statements.
(continued
on next page)
6
STATEMENTS
OF CASH FLOWS – page 2
In June
2009, the FASB issued ASC 860, Transfers and Servicing
(formerly SFAS No. 166, Accounting for Transfers of
Financial Assets). ASC 860 requires additional disclosure of transfers of
financial assets and where companies have continuing exposure to the risk
related to transferred financial assets. These changes eliminate the concept of
a “qualifying special purpose entity”, amend the requirements for derecognizing
financial assets, and require additional disclosures. These changes are
effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15,
2009. Earlier adoption is prohibited. Management does not expect the
adoption of this standard to have a material impact on the Company’s financial
position or results of operations.
In June
2009, the FASB issued ASC 810, Consolidation (formerly SFAS
No. 167, Amendments to FASB
Interpretation No. 46(R)) regarding the consolidation of variable
interest entities. ASC 810 requires an enterprise to perform an
analysis to determine whether the enterprise’s variable interest or interests
give it a controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity; to
require ongoing reassessments of whether an enterprise is the primary
beneficiary of a variable interest entity; to eliminate the quantitative
approach previously required for determining the primary beneficiary of a
variable interest entity; to add an additional reconsideration event for
determining whether an entity is a variable interest entity when any changes in
facts and circumstances occur such that holders of the equity investment at
risk, as a group, lose the power from voting rights or similar rights of those
investments to direct the activities of the entity that most significantly
impact the entity’s economic performance; and to require enhanced disclosures
that will provide users of financial statements with more transparent
information about an enterprise’s involvement in a variable interest entity.
These changes become effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning
after November 15, 2009. Earlier adoption is
prohibited. Management is evaluating the impact adoption may have on
the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash
flows.
NOTE
2 - INVENTORIES
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Finished
goods
|
$ | 5,624,004 | $ | 5,960,820 | ||||
Raw
materials and other
|
3,543,821 | 16,660,855 | ||||||
Totals
|
$ | 9,167,825 | $ | 22,621,675 |
NOTE
3 - NOTES PAYABLE – SEASONAL LOAN
The
Company has entered into a revolving credit agreement with CoBank, which expires
August 1, 2010. The purpose of the credit agreement is to finance the inventory
and accounts receivable of the Company. On September 16, 2009, the Company
amended its Master Loan Agreement. Under the amendment, the Company
may borrow up to $30 million. Interest accrues at a variable rate (3.25% at
September 30, 2009). Advances on the revolving credit agreement are
secured and limited to qualifying inventory and accounts receivable, net of any
accrued commodity purchases. There were advances outstanding of
$1,395,052 and $0 at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively. The remaining available funds to borrow under the terms
of the revolving credit agreement are $28,604,948 as of September 30,
2009.
The
Company is in violation of one of its loan covenants with CoBank as of September
30, 2009 but received a waiver from CoBank. The loan covenant
requires the Company to maintain a minimum working capital of $7.5 million at
fiscal year-end (December 31st) and
$6.0 million at the end of each other period for which the financial statements
are to be furnished. At September 30, 2009, working capital was
approximately $5.9 million.
(continued
on next page)
7
STATEMENTS
OF CASH FLOWS – page 2
NOTE
4 - CONTINGENCIES
From time
to time in the ordinary course of our business, we may be named as a defendant
in legal proceedings related to various issues, including without limitation,
workers’ compensation claims, tort claims, or contractual disputes. We carry
insurance that provides protection against general commercial liability claims,
claims against our directors, officers and employees, business interruption,
automobile liability, and workers’ compensation claims. Except as described
below, we are not currently involved in any material legal proceedings and are
not aware of any potential claims.
On
January 31, 2007, the Company, along with other individuals, including the
Company’s chief executive officer, commercial manager, a Board member, and a
former Board member, were named as defendants in a lawsuit filed in the U.S
District Court for the District of Minnesota. The plaintiffs, Transocean Group
Holdings PTY Ltd. and Transocean Global Biofuels PTY Ltd., of Sydney, Australia
(“Transocean”), allege that the Company breached a heads of agreement with
Transocean dated April 28, 2006. The heads of agreement concerned the
potential development and operation of a biodiesel refinery through a company
called High Plains Biofuels, Inc., to be owned by the Company and Transocean as
shareholders. Transocean alleges that the individual defendants breached
fiduciary duties to High Plains Biofuels. Based upon their investigation of the
facts surrounding the case, management believes that Transocean’s allegations
are meritless and are vigorously defending the action. The Company
filed answers to Transocean’s complaint on September 17, 2007 and amended
complaint on February 7, 2008. The Company also filed a motion for
summary judgment on January 15, 2009, and oral arguments were heard in May
2009. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court ruled on the
Company’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing a majority of the Plaintiff’s
claims. The trial date for the claims not denied in the Company’s
motion of summary judgment has been set for January 4, 2010. While
management cannot provide any assurance that the Company will be successful in
disposing of the case or that any costs of settlement or damages would not be
material, management does not believe that payment of damages is probable and is
unable to estimate the extent of the potential loss, if any, at this
time.
On
June 7, 2005, the Company received notification from the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”) that the Company’s filings were under review. During
the course of the review, the SEC requested additional information about the
Company’s change in auditors for the audit of its financial statements for the
year ended December 31, 2004 as disclosed in the Company’s 8-K filing dated
January 18, 2005. After considering such information, management determined
that the independence of the audit firm, Eide Bailly LLP, with respect to its
audit of financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2003 was
compromised and decided to have the financial statements for that period
re-audited. As a result, in the latter part of 2005 the Company’s
Board of Managers engaged Gordon, Hughes, & Banks LLP to re-audit the
financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2003. The re-audit
produced an unqualified opinion and there was no effect on previously reported
net income or member’s equity. During early 2005, prior to receiving notice of
the SEC review, the Company solicited investors through an S-1 registration
statement which included the 2003 audit opinion letter from Eide Bailly LLP and
the audited financial statements for the year ended December 31,
2003. Because the independence of Eide Bailly was compromised for
that period, the registration statement did not meet the requirements of federal
securities law. The financial statements included in the Company’s periodic
reports for such periods, as amended, are now compliant with the independent
auditor requirements of applicable securities law, but there remains a
possibility that claims could be made against the Company relating to the
inclusion in the offering materials of the original audit opinion letter. As of
September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the Company has not recorded a
provision for this matter, as management believes the likelihood of claims being
asserted by investors in the offering is remote under FAS 5. Management believes
that any liability the Company may incur would not have a material adverse
effect on its financial condition or its results of operations. Due
to the circumstances described above, the Company has recorded the net proceeds
received to date, reduced by an amount that no longer qualifies as a possible
claim under federal and state securities laws, as temporary equity in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Amounts recorded as
temporary equity totaled $140,491 as of September 30, 2009 and December 31,
2008, consisting of 70,750 Class A capital units.
(continued
on next page)
8
STATEMENTS
OF CASH FLOWS – page 2
NOTE
5 - DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES
In
March 2008, FASB issued ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging
(formerly SFAS No. 161,
Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities). ASC 815
requires enhanced disclosures about how these instruments and activities affect
the entity’s financial position, financial performance and cash flows. The
guidance requires disclosure of the fair values of derivative instruments and
their gains and losses in a tabular format. It also provides more information
about an entity’s liquidity by requiring disclosure of derivative features that
are credit risk-related. Finally, it requires cross-referencing within footnotes
to enable financial statement users to locate important information about
derivative instruments. The guidance is effective for financial statements
issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15,
2008. As ASC 815 is only disclosure related, it did not have an impact on our
financial position, results of operation or cash flows.
In the
ordinary course of business, the Company enters into contractual arrangements as
a means of managing exposure to changes in commodity prices. The
Company’s derivative instruments primarily consist of commodity futures, options
and forward contracts. Although these contracts may be effective
economic hedges of specified risks, they are not designated as, nor accounted
for, as hedging instruments. These contracts are recorded on the
Company’s consolidated balance sheets at fair value as discussed in Note 6, Fair
Value of Financial Instruments.
As of
September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the value of the Company’s open
futures, options and forward contracts was approximately $(846,617) and
$1,362,559, respectively.
Balance
Sheet
|
Asset
Derivatives
|
Liability
Derivatives
|
|||||||
Classification
|
September
30, 2009
|
September
30, 2009
|
|||||||
Derivatives
not designated as hedging instruments:
|
|||||||||
Commodity
contracts
|
Current Assets
|
$ | 2,453,457 | $ | 3,300,073 |
During
the nine months ending September 30, 2009, net realized and unrealized gains
(losses) on derivative transactions were recognized in the consolidated
statement of operations as follows:
Location
of Net Gain
|
Net
Gain (Loss) Recognized on
|
||||||||
(Loss)
Recognized
|
Derivative
Activities for the:
|
||||||||
in
Earnings on
|
Three-Months
Ended
|
Nine-Months
Ended
|
|||||||
Derivative
Activities
|
September
30, 2009
|
September
30, 2009
|
|||||||
Derivatives
not designated as hedging instruments:
|
|||||||||
Commodity
contracts
|
Cost
of Sales
|
$ | 4,816,815 | $ | 10,065,237 |
The
Company recorded a gain of $10,065,237 in cost of goods sold related to its
commodity derivative instruments for the nine months ended September 30,
2009.
(continued
on next page)
9
STATEMENTS
OF CASH FLOWS – page 2
NOTE
6 - FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
In
February 2006, FASB issued ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and
Disclosures (formerly SFAS No. 157, Fair Value
Measurement). ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a
comprehensive framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures which
are required about fair value measurements. Specifically, this
guidance establishes a hierarchy prioritizing the inputs to valuation
techniques, giving the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for
identical assets and liabilities and the lowest priority to unobservable value
inputs. The adoption of ASC 820 had an immaterial impact on the
Company’s financial statements. The three levels of hierarchy and
examples are as follows
|
·
|
Level
1 – Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities as of the reported date. The types of assets and liabilities
included in Level 1 are highly liquid and actively traded instruments with
quoted prices, such as equities listed on the New York Stock Exchange and
commodity derivative contracts listed on the Chicago Board of Trade
(“CBOT”).
|
|
·
|
Level
2 – Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets, but are
either directly or indirectly observable as of the reported
date. The types of assets and liabilities in Level 2 are
typically either comparable to actively traded securities or contracts, or
priced with models using highly observable inputs, such as commodity
prices using forward future prices.
|
|
·
|
Level
3 – Significant inputs to pricing that are unobservable as of the
reporting date. The types of assets and liabilities included in
Level 3 are those with inputs requiring significant management judgment or
estimation, such as complex and subjective models and forecasts used to
determine the fair value of financial transmission
rights.
|
The
following table sets forth financial assets and liabilities measured at fair
value in the consolidated balance sheets and the respective levels to which fair
value measurements are classified within the fair value hierarchy as of
September 30, 2009:
Fair
Value as of September 30, 2009
|
||||||||||||||||
Level
1
|
Level
2
|
Level
3
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||
Financial
assets:
|
||||||||||||||||
Cash
equivalents
|
$ | 150 | $ | - | $ | - | $ | 150 | ||||||||
Inventory
|
$ | 1,354,608 | $ | 5,817,652 | $ | - | $ | 7,172,260 | ||||||||
Margin
deposits (deficits)
|
$ | (49,512 | ) | $ | - | $ | - | $ | (49,512 | ) |
The fair
value of the Company’s long-term debt approximates the carrying
value. The interest rates on the long-term debt are similar to rates
the Company would be able to obtain currently in the market.
The
Company enters into various commodity derivative instruments, including futures,
options, swaps and other agreements. The fair value of the Company’s
commodity derivatives is determined using unadjusted quoted prices for identical
instruments on the Chicago Board of Trade (“CBOT”). The Company
estimates the fair market value of their finished goods and raw materials
inventories using the market price quotations of similar forward future
contracts listed on the CBOT and adjusts for the local market adjustments
derived from other grain terminals in our area.
10
Item
2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
|
Forward-Looking
Statements
The
information in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the three-month and
nine-month periods ended September 30, 2009, (including reports filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or “Commission”), contains
“forward-looking statements” that deal with future results, expectations, plans
and performance, and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated
financial statements and Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2008. Forward-looking statements may include statements which use
words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “estimate,”
“predict,” “hope,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “may,” “future,” “potential,” or
the negatives of these words, and all similar expressions. Forward-looking
statements involve numerous assumptions, risks and
uncertainties. Actual results or actual business or other conditions
may differ materially from those contemplated by any forward-looking
statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially
from the forward-looking statements are identified in our Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2008.
We are
not under any duty to update the forward-looking statements contained in this
report, nor do we guarantee future results or performance or what future
business conditions will be like. We caution you not to put undue reliance
on any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this
report.
2
Executive
Overview and Summary
Our core
business and primary source of income generation is our soybean processing plant
located in Volga, South Dakota. We process approximately 27 million bushels of
soybeans annually to produce approximately 600,000 tons of high protein soybean
meal and 300 million pounds of crude soybean oil. Our production represents
approximately 1.5% of the total soybean processing capacity in the United
States. In addition to our processing plant, we operate a soybean oil refinery
in Volga where we produce partially refined soybean oil. The partially refined
soybean oil is sold to customers in the food, chemical and industrial sectors.
Under certain market conditions we may issue warehouse receipts for crude oil
according to the terms and conditions of the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT)
soybean oil contract. Other activities that generate income are our
investment in Minnesota Soybean Processors (MnSP), as well as through management
and consulting agreements.
Soybean
processing is basically a commodity driven business and is cyclical in nature.
Our industry is dependent on the annual soybean crop production (supply side)
and world economic growth (demand side for food). Soybean processing is a highly
consolidated industry with four companies in the U.S. controlling 84% of the
soybean processing industry and 68% of the soybean oil refining capacity for
food applications. We compete in this industry by producing high quality
products and operating a highly efficient operation at the lowest possible
cost.
In
efforts to increase the value of the products we produce, we continue to invest
in our subsidiary, Urethane Soy Systems Company (USSC), for the research,
marketing and development of soy-based polyol and soy-based polyurethane
systems. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009, USSC achieved a
substantial improvement in its gross margin per unit sold compared to the same
period of 2008, maintained sales volume in a depressed housing market, and
achieved a significant advancement in our Soyol® molecule through
our research efforts. Despite our efforts, though, USSC continues to operate at
a loss.
In terms of overall operations between
periods, we generated a net loss of $4.2 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2009, compared to a net profit of $3.0 million for the same
period in 2008, a decrease of $7.2 million or $0.38 per bushel processed.
Profits decreased primarily due to a reduction of $9.3 million in gross margin
and a 10.8% reduction in our 2009 production volume. Lower margins were caused
by a decrease in revenues of $3.36 per soybean bushel between periods, while
cost of product sold only decreased by $2.88 per bushel between periods. Factors
contributing to this result include a tight domestic soybean supply, reduced
demand for soy products due to high feed prices and a struggling U.S. biodiesel
industry, and a lower quality (lower oil content and higher moisture) soybean
crop locally from 2008. These lower margins were partially offset by a $4.5
million decrease in production, interest, and administrative
expenses.
We
anticipate that our results of operations for the remainder of 2009 will improve
due to the 2009 soybean crop. The U.S. expects a near record soybean crop and
early soybean quality is encouraging. Yet, economic uncertainty, domestically
and internationally, will continue to contribute to price volatility in the
commodity and petroleum markets. An effective use of risk management and
operating prudently will likely be our best tools for handling these
challenges.
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Comparison
of the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008
Quarter
Ended September 30,
2009
|
Quarter
Ended September 30,
2008
|
|||||||||||||||
%
of
|
%
of
|
|||||||||||||||
$
|
Revenue
|
$
|
Revenue
|
|||||||||||||
Revenue
|
$ | 77,880,978 | 100.0 | $ | 102,168,282 | 100.0 | ||||||||||
Cost
of revenues
|
(77,114,499 | ) | (99.0 | ) | (101,785,393 | ) | (99.6 | ) | ||||||||
Administrative
expenses
|
(1,178,105 | ) | (1.5 | ) | (1,669,148 | ) | (1.6 | ) | ||||||||
Other
income (expense)
|
220,948 | 0.3 | 48,450 | (0.0 | ) | |||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (190,678 | ) | (0.2 | ) | $ | (1,237,809 | ) | (1.2 | ) |
3
Revenue – Revenue decreased
$24.3 million, or 23.8%, for the third quarter of 2009, compared to the same
period in 2008. The decrease in revenues is primarily due to a
decrease in the average sales price of soybean oil. The average sales
price of our soybean oil decreased approximately 42% in the third quarter of
2009, compared to the same period in 2008. The principal cause for
this decrease is a reduction in the price of crude petroleum oil and its refined
products, which has been the primary driving factor for the price fluctuation of
our products over the last few years.
Gross Profit/Loss – For the
third quarter of 2009, we generated a gross profit of $0.8 million, compared to
$0.4 million for the third quarter of 2008. The $0.4 million change
in gross profit (loss) is primarily attributed to lower production costs.
Production costs decreased by over $1.7 million between periods primarily due to
a decrease in energy costs. Offsetting in part this increase in gross
profit are lower crush margins, a 7.7% decrease in the volume of soybeans
crushed, and higher moisture and lower oil content from soybeans harvested
locally in 2008. Due to a large decrease in commodity prices since the summer of
2008, as well as the USDA projecting a tight soybean carryout for 2008-2009,
soybean suppliers were reluctant sellers in 2009. This reluctance has increased
our cost of purchasing soybeans in relation to the posted price on the CBOT and,
therefore, lowered our crush margins.
Administrative Expense –
Administrative expense, including all selling, general and administrative
expenses, decreased $491,000, or 29.4%, for the third quarter of 2009, compared
to the same period in 2008. This decrease is largely due to a
decrease in professional fees.
Interest Expense – Interest
expense decreased by $0.3 million, or 44.8% for the third quarter of 2009,
compared to the same period in 2008. This decrease is due to lower
debt levels resulting from lower soybean prices, inventory quantities and
accounts receivable, as well as lower interest rates on our senior
debt. The average debt level during the third quarter of 2009 is
approximately $26.8 million, compared to an average debt level of approximately
$37.3 million during the same period in 2008. The annual interest
rate on our seasonal loan is 3.25% and 4.50% as of September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Other Non-Operating Income –
Other non-operating income remained relatively constant for the third quarter of
2009 compared to the same period in 2008.
Net Loss – The $1.0 million
decrease in net loss for the third quarter of 2009, compared to the same period
in 2008, is primarily attributable to decreases in production, administrative
and interest expenses, partially offset by decreases in crush
margins.
Comparison
of the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008
Nine
Months Ended September
30,
2009
|
Nine
Months Ended September
30,
2008
|
|||||||||||||||
%
of
|
%
of
|
|||||||||||||||
$
|
Revenue
|
$
|
Revenue
|
|||||||||||||
Revenue
|
$ | 199,335,490 | 100.0 | $ | 290,685,881 | 100.0 | ||||||||||
Cost
of revenues
|
(201,110,164 | ) | (100.9 | ) | (283,132,599 | ) | (97.4 | ) | ||||||||
Administrative
expenses
|
(3,628,056 | ) | (1.8 | ) | (4,648,043 | ) | (1.6 | ) | ||||||||
Other
income (expense)
|
1,207,832 | 0.6 | 85,218 | 0.0 | ||||||||||||
Income
tax (expense) benefit
|
(300 | ) | (0.0 | ) | (300 | ) | (0.0 | ) | ||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ | (4,195,198 | ) | (2.1 | ) | $ | 2,990,157 | 1.0 |
4
Revenue – Revenue decreased
$91.4 million, or 31.4%, for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2009,
compared to the same nine-month period in 2008. The decrease in
revenues is primarily due to decreases in the average sales price and volume of
all soybean products. The average sales price of our soybean products
decreased approximately 22.6% in the first nine months of 2009, compared to the
same period in 2008. The principal cause for this decrease is a
reduction in the price of crude petroleum oil and its refined products. In
addition to the decrease in sales price, we experienced a 11.1% decrease in the
sales volume of soybean products during the nine-month period ended September
30, 2009, compared to the same period in 2008. The decrease in sales
volume of soybean products is attributed to a decrease in amount of soybeans
crushed, higher moisture and lower oil content in the local 2008 soybean crop,
and changes in customer demand for our soybean oil. As a result of a
tight local soybean crop, we decreased the amount of soybeans crushed at our
facility by approximately 10.8% during the nine-month period ended September 30,
2009, compared to the same period in 2008, thus reducing the amount of our
products available to be sold. In addition, soybeans harvested locally in the
fall of 2008 had higher moisture and lower oil content than an average crop
which decreased the amount of soybean meal and oil produced from a bushel of
soybeans. Finally, a reduced sales volume of refined and bleached
soybean oil to ACH Foods, our primary customer for soybean oil historically, has
required us to seek an expanded customer base for our soybean oil. But the
demand for our oil from the new customer base, particularly the biodiesel
industry, has fluctuated dramatically due to price volatility. We
expect this fluctuation to continue for the near future.
Gross Profit/Loss – For the
first three quarters of 2009, we generated a gross loss of $1.8 million,
compared to a gross profit of $7.6 million for the same period in
2008. The $9.4 million change in gross profit (loss) is primarily
attributed to lower crush margins, a 10.8% decrease in the volume of soybeans
crushed, and higher moisture and lower oil content from soybeans harvested
locally in 2008. Due to a large decrease in commodity prices since the summer of
2008, as well as the USDA projecting a tight soybean carryout for 2008-2009, our
soybean suppliers were reluctant sellers in 2009. This reluctance has increased
the cost of purchasing soybeans in relation to the posted price on the CBOT and,
therefore, lowered our crush margins. Offsetting in part this
decrease in gross profit is a decrease in production costs of $2.4 million for
the first nine months of 2009, compared to the same period in 2008. Production
costs decreased between periods primarily due to a decrease in energy
costs.
Administrative Expense –
Administrative expense, including all selling, general and administrative
expenses, decreased $1.0 million, or 21.9%, for the nine-month period ended
September 30, 2009, compared to the same period in
2008. Approximately 71% of this decrease is due to a decrease in
professional fees, 10% due to a decrease in personnel costs, and 10% due to a
decrease in our operating expenses associated with USSC. These
decreases in administrative expenses are partially offset by an increase in bad
debt expense of approximately $176,000 during the nine-month period ended
September 30, 2009, compared to the same period in 2008.
Interest Expense – Interest
expense decreased $1.1 million, or 56.8%, for the nine months ended September
30, 2009, compared to the same period in 2008. This decrease is due
to lower debt levels resulting from lower soybean prices, inventory quantities
and accounts receivable, as well as lower interest rates on our senior
debt. The average debt level during the first nine-month period of
2009 is approximately $21.5 million compared to an average debt level of
approximately $41.6 million during the same period in
2008. Similarly, the annual interest rate on our seasonal loan is
3.25% and 4.50% as of September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
5
Other Non-Operating Income –
Other non-operating income remained relatively constant for the nine-month
period ended September 30, 2009, compared to the same period in
2008.
Net Income/Loss – The $7.2
million change in net income (loss) for the nine-month period ended September
30, 2009, compared to the same period in 2008, is primarily attributable to a
decrease in crush margins, partially offset by decreases in production,
administrative and interest expenses.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Our
primary sources of liquidity are cash provided by operations and borrowings
under our two lines of credit which are discussed below under “Indebtedness.” On
September 30, 2009, we had working capital, defined as current assets less
current liabilities, of approximately $5.9 million, compared to working capital
of $9.5 million on September 30, 2008. Working capital decreased
between periods primarily due to a decrease in net income. Despite this
decrease, we anticipate for the foreseeable future having sufficient cash flows
from operations and our revolving debt to fund working capital, cover operating
expenses and capital expenditures, and meet debt service
obligations.
A summary
of our cash flow from operating, investing and financing activities for each of
the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2009 and 2008:
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Net
cash from operating activities
|
$ | 110,291 | $ | 15,326,787 | ||||
Net
cash (used for) investing activities
|
(773,117 | ) | (116,387 | ) | ||||
Net
cash from (used for) financing activities
|
653,644 | (15,176,209 | ) |
Cash
Flows from Operations
Cash
flows from operations are generally affected by commodity prices and the
seasonality of our business. These commodity prices are affected by a wide range
of factors beyond our control, including weather, crop conditions, drought, the
availability and the adequacy of supply and transportation, government
regulations and policies, world events, and general political and economic
conditions. The $15.2 million decrease in cash flows from operating
activities is primarily attributed to a decrease in net income and a smaller
increase in net operating assets and liabilities during the nine months ended
September 30, 2009, compared to the same period in 2008. The
reduction in change from net operating assets and liabilities is caused by a
$0.6 million decrease in accounts receivable between December 31, 2008 and
September 30, 2009, compared to a $7.4 million increase during the same period
in 2008.
Cash
Flows from Investing Activity
The $0.7
million increase in cash flows used for investing activities between the nine
months ended September 30, 2009 and the same period in 2008 is primarily
attributed to a decrease in the amount received in 2009 from our investment in
MnSP, as well as an increase in the amount of purchases of property and
equipment. In the nine months ended September 30, 2008, following a mandatory
unit retain investment of $420,000 in MnSP in 2006, MnSP repaid us the unit
retains, compared to no payment during the same period in 2009. Property and
equipment purchases for general capital improvements were $1.0 million during
the nine-months ended September 30, 2009, compared to $0.8 million for the same
period in 2008.
6
Cash
Flows from Financing Activity
The $15.8
million change in cash flows from (used for) financing activities is principally
due to a $12.4 million decrease in borrowings and a $3.8 million decrease in
distributions paid to members during the nine months ended September 30, 2009,
compared to the same period in 2008. The decrease in seasonal and
long-term borrowings in the first nine months of 2009, compared to the same
period in 2008, is largely due to decreases in accounts receivable and
inventories caused by a sizeable reduction in commodity
prices. During the nine-month period ended September 30, 2008, we
distributed approximately $3.8 million to our members, compared to no
distributions during the same period in 2009.
Indebtedness
We have
two lines of credit with CoBank, our primary lender, to meet the short and
long-term needs of our operations. The first credit line is a
revolving long-term loan. Under the terms of this loan, we may borrow funds as
needed up to the credit line maximum, or $10.6 million, and then pay down the
principal whenever excess cash is available. Repaid amounts may be
borrowed up to the available credit line. The available credit line is scheduled
to be reduced by $1.3 million every six months until maturity on September 20,
2013. The final payment at maturity will be equal to the remaining unpaid
principal balance of the loan. We pay a 0.50% annual commitment fee on any funds
not borrowed. The principal balance outstanding on the revolving term
loan is $10.6 million and $11.9 million as of September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. There are no remaining commitments available to borrow
on the revolving term loan as of September 30, 2009.
The
second credit line is a revolving working capital loan that matures on August 1,
2010. The primary purpose of this loan is to finance inventory and
receivables. The maximum available under this credit line is $30
million. Borrowing base reports and financial statements are required
monthly to justify the balance borrowed on this line. We pay a 0.25%
annual commitment fee on any funds not borrowed; however, we have the option to
reduce the credit line during any given commitment period listed in the
agreement to avoid the commitment fee. The principal balance on the
working capital loan is approximately $1.4 million and $8.1 million as of
September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The remaining available
funds to borrow on the revolving working capital loan are $28.6 million as of
September 30, 2009.
Both
CoBank loans are set up with a variable rate option. The variable rate is set by
CoBank and changes weekly on the first business day of each week. We also have a
fixed rate option on both loans allowing us to fix rates for any period between
one day and the entire commitment period. The annual interest rate on the
revolving term loan is 3.50% and 4.50% as of September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. As of September 30, 2009 and 2008, the interest rate on
the working capital loan is 3.25% and 4.50%, respectively. Both
CoBank loans are secured by substantially all of our assets and are subject to
compliance with standard financial covenants and the maintenance of certain
financial ratios. We were in compliance with all covenants and
conditions with CoBank as of September 30, 2009 and as of the date of this
filing, except as noted below.
We were
in violation with the minimum working capital loan covenant with CoBank as of
September 30, 2009 but received a waiver from CoBank. The covenant requires us
to maintain a minimum working capital of $7.5 million at our fiscal year-end
(December 31st) and
$6.0 million at the end of each other period for which the financial statements
are to be furnished. As of September 30, 2009, our actual working
capital was $5.9 million.
7
We also
have another long-term note payable totaling $250,000, with an annual interest
rate of 15.0% as of September 30, 2009. We made principal payments of $0 and
$5,000 on these other long-term obligations during the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
OFF
BALANCE SHEET FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS
Except as
described below, we do not utilize variable interest entities or other
off-balance sheet financial arrangements.
Lease
Commitments
We have
commitments under various operating leases for rail cars, various types of
vehicles, and lab and office equipment. Our most significant lease
commitments are the rail car leases we use to distribute our products. We
have a number of long-term leases with GE Capital, Trinity Capital, and AIG Rail
Services for hopper rail cars and oil tank cars. Total lease expenses under
these arrangements are approximately $1.5 million for each of the nine-month
periods ended September 30, 2009 and 2008. The hopper rail cars earn mileage
credit from the railroad through a sublease program, which totaled $1.2 million
for each of the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008.
In
addition to rail car leases, we have several operating leases for various
equipment and storage facilities. Total lease expense under these arrangements
is $153,000 and $176,000 for the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2009 and
2008, respectively. Some of our leases include purchase options, none of which,
however, are for a value less than fair market value at the end of the
lease.
RECENT
ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
See Note
1 of our Financial Statements for a discussion on the impact, if any, of the
recently pronounced accounting standards.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES
Preparation
of our financial statements requires estimates and judgments to be made that
affect the amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses reported. Such
decisions include the selection of the appropriate accounting principles to be
applied and the assumptions on which to base accounting estimates. We
continually evaluate these estimates based on historical experience and other
assumptions we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances.
The
difficulty in applying these policies arises from the assumptions, estimates,
and judgments that have to be made currently about matters that are inherently
uncertain, such as future economic conditions, operating results and valuations
as well as management intentions. As the difficulty increases, the level of
precision decreases, meaning that actual results can and probably will be
different from those currently estimated.
Of the
significant accounting policies described in the notes to the financial
statements, we believe that the following may involve a higher degree of
estimates, judgments, and complexity:
8
Commitments
and Contingencies
Contingencies,
by their nature relate to uncertainties that require management to exercise
judgment both in assessing the likelihood that a liability has been incurred, as
well as in estimating the amount of the potential expense. In conformity
with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S, we accrue an expense
when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be
reasonably estimated.
Inventory
Valuation
We
account for our inventories at estimated net realizable market value. These
inventories are agricultural commodities that are freely traded, have quoted
market prices, may be sold without significant further processing, and have
predictable and insignificant costs of disposal. We derive our estimates from
local market prices determined by grain terminals in our area. Processed product
price estimates are determined by the ending sales contract price as of the
close of the final day of the period. This price is determined by the closing
price on the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT), net of the local basis, for the last
three business days of the period and the first two business days of the
subsequent period. Changes in the market values of these inventories are
recognized as a component of cost of goods sold.
Long-Lived
Assets
Depreciation
and amortization of our property, plant and equipment is provided on the
straight-lined method by charges to operations at rates based upon the expected
useful lives of individual or groups of assets. Economic circumstances or other
factors may cause management’s estimates of expected useful lives to differ from
actual.
Long-lived
assets, including property, plant and equipment and investments are evaluated
for impairment on the basis of undiscounted cash flows whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not
be recoverable. An impaired asset is written down to its estimated fair market
value based on the best information available. Considerable management judgment
is necessary to estimate undiscounted future cash flows and may differ from
actual.
We
evaluate the recoverability of identifiable intangible assets whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that an intangible asset’s carrying value may
not be recoverable. Such circumstances could include, but are not
limited to: (1) a significant decrease in the market value of an asset, (2) a
significant adverse change in the extent or manner in which an asset is used, or
(3) an accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount originally
expected for the acquisition of an asset. We measure the carrying amount of the
asset against the estimated undiscounted future cash flows associated with
it. Should the sum of the expected future net cash flows be less than
the carrying value of the asset being evaluated, an impairment loss would be
recognized. The impairment loss would be calculated as the amount by
which the carrying value of the asset exceeded its fair value. The
fair value is measured based on quoted market prices, if available. If quoted
market prices are not available, the estimate of fair value is based on various
valuation techniques, including the discounted value of estimated future cash
flows. The evaluation of asset impairment requires us to make
assumptions about future cash flows over the life of the asset being
evaluated. These assumptions require significant judgment and actual
results may differ from assumed and estimated amounts.
Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
We
minimize the effects of changes in the price of agricultural commodities by
using exchange-traded futures and options contracts to minimize our net
positions in these inventories and contracts. We account for changes in market
value on exchange-traded futures and option contracts at exchange prices and
account for the changes in value of forward purchase and sales contracts at
local market prices determined by grain terminals in the area. Changes in the
market value of all these contracts are recognized in earnings as a component of
cost of goods sold.
9
Item
3. Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
Commodities
Risk & Risk Management. To reduce the price change risks
associated with holding fixed price commodity positions, we generally take
opposite and offsetting positions by entering into commodity futures contracts
(either a straight or options futures contract) on a regulated commodity futures
exchange, the CBOT. While hedging activities reduce the risk of loss from
changing market prices, such activities also limit the gain potential which
otherwise could result from these significant fluctuations in market prices. Our
policy is generally to maintain a hedged position within limits, but we can be
long or short at any time. Our profitability is primarily derived from margins
on soybeans processed, not from hedging transactions. We do not anticipate that
our hedging activity will have a significant impact on future operating results
or liquidity. Hedging arrangements do not protect against nonperformance of a
cash contract.
At any
one time, our inventory and purchase contracts for delivery to our facility
may be substantial. We have risk management policies and procedures that
include net position limits. They are defined by commodity, and include both
trader and management limits. This policy and procedure triggers a review by
management when any trader is outside of position limits. The position limits
are reviewed at least annually with the board of managers. We monitor current
market conditions and may expand or reduce the limits in response to
changes in those conditions.
Foreign Currency
Risk. We conduct essentially all of our business in U.S. dollars and have
no direct risk regarding foreign currency fluctuations. Foreign currency
fluctuations do, however, impact the ability of foreign buyers to purchase U.S.
agricultural products and the competitiveness of and demand for U.S.
agricultural products compared to the same products offered by foreign
suppliers.
Interest Rate
Risk. We manage exposure to interest rate changes by using variable rate
loan agreements with fixed rate options. Long-term loan agreements can utilize
the fixed option through maturity; however, the revolving ability to pay down
and borrow back would be eliminated once the funds were fixed.
Item
4T. Controls
and Procedures.
Evaluation of
Disclosure Controls and Procedures. Based on their
evaluation as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report on
Form 10-Q, our principal executive officer and controller have
concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) are
effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in
reports that it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified
in Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms.
Changes in
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There were no changes
in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended
September 30, 2009 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
10
PART
II – OTHER INFORMATION
Item
1. Legal
Proceedings.
From
time to time in the ordinary course of our business, we may be named as a
defendant in legal proceedings related to various issues, including without
limitation, workers’ compensation claims, tort claims, or contractual dispute.
Currently, we are not involved in any legal proceeding that we believe is
material. In the event we become involved in a legal proceeding, we carry
insurance that provides protection against general commercial liability claims,
claims against our directors, officers and employees, business interruption,
automobile liability, and workers’ compensation claims. Except as described
below, we are not currently involved in any material legal proceedings and are
not aware of any potential claims.
On
January 31, 2007, we, along with other individual defendants, including our
chief executive officer, Rodney Christianson, commercial manager, Tom Kersting,
Board member, Dan Feige, and former board member, Rodney Skalbeck, were named as
defendants in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Minnesota. The plaintiffs, Transocean Group Holdings PTY Ltd. and Transocean
Global Biofuels PTY Ltd., of Sydney, Australia (“Transocean”), allege that we
breached a heads of agreement with Transocean dated April 28,
2006. The heads of agreement concerned the potential development and
operation of a biodiesel refinery through a company called High Plains
Biofuels, Inc., to be owned by us and Transocean as shareholders.
Transocean alleges that the individual defendants breached certain fiduciary
duties to High Plains Biofuels. Based upon our investigation of the facts
surrounding the case, we believe that Transocean’s allegations are meritless,
and we are vigorously defending the action. We filed answers to Transocean’s
complaint on September 17, 2007 and amended complaint on February 7, 2008. We
also filed a motion for summary judgment on January 15, 2009, and oral arguments
were held on the motion on May 20, 2009. On September 30, 2009, the
U.S. District Court ruled on our motion for summary judgment, dismissing a
majority of the Plaintiff’s claims. The trial date for the claims not
denied in our motion for summary judgment has been scheduled for January 4,
2010. While we cannot provide any assurance that we will be successful in
disposing of the case or that any costs of settlement or damages would not be
material, we do not believe payment of damages is probable and are unable to
estimate the extent of a potential loss, if any, at this time.
Item
1A. Risk Factors.
During
the quarter ended September 30, 2009, there were no material changes to the Risk
Factors disclosed in Item 1A (Part I) of our 2008 Annual Report on Form
10-K.
Item
2. Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds.
None.
Item
3. Defaults
Upon Senior Securities.
None.
Item
4. Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
None
Item
5.
Other Information
None.
11
Item
6.
Exhibits
See
Exhibit Index.
SIGNATURES
In
accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant caused this
report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized.
SOUTH
DAKOTA
|
||
SOYBEAN
PROCESSORS, LLC
|
||
Dated:
November 12, 2009
|
||
By
|
/s/
Rodney Christianson
|
|
Rodney
G. Christianson
|
||
Chief
Executive Officer
|
12
EXHIBIT
INDEX
TO
FORM
10-Q
OF
SOUTH
DAKOTA SOYBEAN PROCESSORS, LLC
Exhibit
Number
|
Description
|
|
3.1(i)
|
Articles
of Organization (1)
|
|
3.1(ii)
|
Operating
Agreement, as amended (2)
|
|
3.1(iii)
|
Articles
of Amendment to Articles of Organization (3)
|
|
4.1
|
Form
of Class A Unit Certificate (4)
|
|
10.1
|
Amendment
to Master Loan Agreement and Security Agreement dated September 16,
2009
|
|
10.2
|
Revolving
Term Loan Supplement dated September 16, 2009
|
|
10.3
|
Statused
Revolving Credit Supplement dated September 16, 2009.
|
|
31
|
Rule
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification
|
|
32
|
Section
1350 Certification
|
(2)
Incorporated by reference from the same numbered exhibit to the issuer’s Form
8-K filed on June 28, 2007.
(3)
Incorporated by reference from the same numbered exhibit to the issuer’s Form
10-Q filed on August 14, 2002.
(4)
Incorporated by reference from the same numbered exhibit to the issuer’s
Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-75804).
13