SP Plus Corp - Quarter Report: 2009 June (Form 10-Q)
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009
Commission file number: 000-50796
STANDARD PARKING CORPORATION
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
Delaware | 16-1171179 | |
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
900 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1600
Chicago, Illinois 60611-1542
(Address of Principal Executive Offices, Including Zip Code)
Chicago, Illinois 60611-1542
(Address of Principal Executive Offices, Including Zip Code)
(312) 274-2000
(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 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 definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer, and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer þ | Non-accelerated filer o | Smaller reporting company o | |||
(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
As of July 31, 2009, there were 15,282,757 shares of common stock of the registrant
outstanding.
STANDARD PARKING CORPORATION
FORM 10-Q INDEX
3 | ||||||||
4 | ||||||||
5 | ||||||||
6 | ||||||||
19 | ||||||||
37 | ||||||||
37 | ||||||||
38 | ||||||||
39 | ||||||||
40 | ||||||||
41 | ||||||||
Exhibit 31.1 | ||||||||
Exhibit 31.2 | ||||||||
Exhibit 31.3 | ||||||||
Exhibit 32.1 |
2
Table of Contents
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. | Financial Statements |
STANDARD PARKING CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except for share data)
(in thousands, except for share data)
June 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | |||||||
(Unaudited) | (see Note) | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Current assets: |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 10,521 | $ | 8,301 | ||||
Notes and accounts receivable, net |
43,459 | 45,198 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and supplies |
2,423 | 2,496 | ||||||
Deferred taxes |
3,253 | 3,253 | ||||||
Total current assets |
59,656 | 59,248 | ||||||
Leasehold improvements, equipment and construction in progress, net |
17,825 | 17,542 | ||||||
Advances and deposits |
3,799 | 4,433 | ||||||
Long-term receivables, net |
8,220 | 6,680 | ||||||
Intangible and other assets, net |
7,083 | 6,916 | ||||||
Cost of contracts, net |
10,674 | 10,872 | ||||||
Goodwill |
123,673 | 123,550 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 230,930 | $ | 229,241 | ||||
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||
Current liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts payable |
$ | 46,566 | $ | 46,446 | ||||
Accrued and other current liabilities |
26,010 | 31,416 | ||||||
Current portion of long-term borrowings |
789 | 1,068 | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
73,365 | 78,930 | ||||||
Deferred taxes |
5,403 | 3,305 | ||||||
Long-term borrowings, excluding current portion |
125,796 | 123,996 | ||||||
Other long-term liabilities |
21,597 | 22,052 | ||||||
Stockholders equity: |
||||||||
Common stock, par value $.001 per share; 21,300,000 shares
authorized; 15,272,757 and 16,110,781 shares issued and
outstanding as of June 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively |
15 | 16 | ||||||
Additional paid-in capital |
89,625 | 103,541 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
28 | 85 | ||||||
Treasury stock, at cost 627,423 shares as of December 31, 2008 |
| (11,161 | ) | |||||
Accumulated deficit |
(84,838 | ) | (91,464 | ) | ||||
Total Standard Parking Corporation stockholders equity |
4,830 | 1,017 | ||||||
Noncontrolling interest |
(61 | ) | (59 | ) | ||||
Total stockholders equity |
4,769 | 958 | ||||||
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
$ | 230,930 | $ | 229,241 | ||||
Note: | The balance sheet at December 31, 2008 has been derived from the
audited financial statements at that date but does not include all
of the information and footnotes required by accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States for complete financial
statements. |
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Interim Financial Statements.
3
Table of Contents
STANDARD PARKING CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(in thousands, except for share and per share data, unaudited)
(in thousands, except for share and per share data, unaudited)
Three Months Ended | Six Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, 2009 | June 30, 2008 | June 30, 2009 | June 30, 2008 | |||||||||||||
Parking services revenue: |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
$ | 35,687 | $ | 40,003 | $ | 70,387 | $ | 77,697 | ||||||||
Management contracts |
37,311 | 36,415 | 75,604 | 72,295 | ||||||||||||
72,998 | 76,418 | 145,991 | 149,992 | |||||||||||||
Reimbursed management contract expense |
97,595 | 99,317 | 200,152 | 198,768 | ||||||||||||
Total revenue |
170,593 | 175,735 | 346,143 | 348,760 | ||||||||||||
Cost of parking services: |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
32,932 | 34,711 | 65,881 | 69,604 | ||||||||||||
Management contracts |
19,938 | 18,162 | 40,329 | 35,208 | ||||||||||||
52,870 | 52,873 | 106,210 | 104,812 | |||||||||||||
Reimbursed management contract expense |
97,595 | 99,317 | 200,152 | 198,768 | ||||||||||||
Total cost of parking services |
150,465 | 152,190 | 306,362 | 303,580 | ||||||||||||
Gross profit: |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
2,755 | 5,292 | 4,506 | 8,093 | ||||||||||||
Management contracts |
17,373 | 18,253 | 35,275 | 37,087 | ||||||||||||
Total gross profit |
20,128 | 23,545 | 39,781 | 45,180 | ||||||||||||
General and administrative expenses (1) |
10,320 | 12,029 | 23,081 | 23,440 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
1,413 | 1,579 | 2,900 | 2,950 | ||||||||||||
Operating income |
8,395 | 9,937 | 13,800 | 18,790 | ||||||||||||
Other expenses (income): |
||||||||||||||||
Interest expense |
1,528 | 1,086 | 2,964 | 2,604 | ||||||||||||
Interest income |
(95 | ) | (41 | ) | (162 | ) | (83 | ) | ||||||||
1,433 | 1,045 | 2,802 | 2,521 | |||||||||||||
Income before income taxes |
6,962 | 8,892 | 10,998 | 16,269 | ||||||||||||
Income tax expense |
2,692 | 3,612 | 4,266 | 6,590 | ||||||||||||
Net income |
4,270 | 5,280 | 6,732 | 9,679 | ||||||||||||
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest |
42 | 3 | 106 | 125 | ||||||||||||
Net income attributable to Standard Parking Corporation |
$ | 4,228 | $ | 5,277 | $ | 6,626 | $ | 9,554 | ||||||||
Common stock data: |
||||||||||||||||
Net income per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.28 | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.43 | $ | 0.53 | ||||||||
Diluted |
$ | 0.27 | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.42 | $ | 0.52 | ||||||||
Weighted average shares outstanding: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
15,251,310 | 17,891,155 | 15,273,796 | 18,007,316 | ||||||||||||
Diluted |
15,601,643 | 18,265,653 | 15,642,234 | 18,400,527 |
(1) | Non-cash stock based compensation expense of $545 and $1,073 for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2009, respectively, and $412 and
$465 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2008, respectively,
is included in general and administrative expenses. |
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Interim Financial Statements.
4
Table of Contents
STANDARD PARKING CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands, unaudited)
(in thousands, unaudited)
Six Months Ended | ||||||||
June 30, 2009 | June 30, 2008 | |||||||
Operating activities: |
||||||||
Net income |
$ | 6,732 | $ | 9,679 | ||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operations: |
||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
2,691 | 2,775 | ||||||
Loss on sale of assets |
193 | 175 | ||||||
Amortization of debt issuance costs |
321 | 142 | ||||||
Non-cash stock-based compensation |
1,073 | 465 | ||||||
Excess tax benefit related to stock option exercises |
| (491 | ) | |||||
Provision (reversal) for losses on accounts receivable |
143 | (49 | ) | |||||
Deferred income taxes |
2,098 | 3,841 | ||||||
Change in operating assets and liabilities |
(5,418 | ) | 614 | |||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
7,833 | 17,151 | ||||||
Investing activities: |
||||||||
Acquisitions |
| (5,457 | ) | |||||
Purchase of leaseholds improvements and equipment |
(2,220 | ) | (2,515 | ) | ||||
Cost of contracts purchased |
(604 | ) | (185 | ) | ||||
Contingent purchase payments |
(259 | ) | (47 | ) | ||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(3,083 | ) | (8,204 | ) | ||||
Financing activities: |
||||||||
Repurchase of common stock |
(3,885 | ) | (12,926 | ) | ||||
Proceeds from exercise of stock options |
| 342 | ||||||
Tax benefit related to stock option exercises |
| 491 | ||||||
Proceeds from senior credit facility |
2,150 | 7,450 | ||||||
Distribution to noncontrolling interest |
(108 | ) | (133 | ) | ||||
Payments on long-term borrowings |
(59 | ) | (56 | ) | ||||
Payments of debt issuance costs |
| (35 | ) | |||||
Payments on capital leases |
(571 | ) | (891 | ) | ||||
Net used in financing activities |
(2,473 | ) | (5,758 | ) | ||||
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
(57 | ) | (60 | ) | ||||
Increase in cash and cash equivalents |
2,220 | 3,129 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
8,301 | 8,466 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
$ | 10,521 | $ | 11,595 | ||||
Supplemental disclosures: |
||||||||
Cash paid during the period for: |
||||||||
Interest |
$ | 3,005 | $ | 2,806 | ||||
Income taxes |
1,770 | 1,614 |
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Interim Financial Statements.
5
Table of Contents
STANDARD PARKING CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED INTERIM FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(in thousands, except for share and per share data, unaudited)
(in thousands, except for share and per share data, unaudited)
1. Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of Standard Parking
Corporation have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article
10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and notes required by
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States for complete financial statements.
In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting only of adjustments of a normal and
recurring nature) considered necessary for a fair presentation of the financial position and
results of operations have been included. Operating results for the three-month and six-month
period ended June 30, 2009 are not necessarily indicative of the results that might be expected for
any other interim period or the fiscal year ending December 31, 2009. The financial statements
presented in this report should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements
and footnotes thereto included in our 2008 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed March 13, 2009.
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its wholly owned
subsidiaries, and joint ventures in which the Company has more than 50% ownership interest.
Noncontrolling interest recorded in the consolidated statement of income is the joint venture
partners non-controlling interest in consolidated joint ventures. We have interests in twelve
joint ventures, each of which operates between one and twenty-two parking facilities. Of the twelve
joint ventures, nine are majority owned by us and are consolidated into our financial statements,
and three are single purpose entities where we have a 50% interest or a minority interest.
Investments in joint ventures where the Company has a 50% or less non-controlling ownership
interest are accounted for under the equity method. All significant intercompany profits,
transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
Variable Interest Entities
Commencement of | Nature of | |||||||||
Equity | Operations | Activities | % Ownership | Locations | ||||||
Other investments in VIEs
|
Sep 93 Jun 08 | Management of parking lots, shuttle operations and parking meters | 50 | % | Various states |
The existing VIEs in which we have a variable interest are not consolidated into our financial
statements because we are not the primary beneficiary.
Financial Instruments
The carrying values of cash, accounts receivable and accounts payable are reasonable estimates
of their fair value due to the short-term nature of these financial instruments. Other long-term
debt has a carrying value that approximates fair value because these instruments bear interest at
market rates.
2. Stock Split
On December 4, 2007, the Board of Directors declared a 2-for-1 stock split in the form of a
100% common stock dividend to stockholders of record as of the close of business on January 8,
2008, which was distributed on January 17, 2008. All share and per share data included in the
consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes have been adjusted to reflect this stock
split.
3. Stock-Based Compensation
The Company accounts for share-based payment awards in accordance with SFAS No. 123R,
Share-Based Payment, as interpreted by SAB No. 107. Under the provisions of SFAS No. 123R,
share-based compensation expense is measured at the grant date, based on the fair value of the
award, and is recognized as an expense over the requisite employee service period (generally the
vesting period) for awards expected to vest (considering estimated forfeitures).
The Company has an amended and restated Long-Term Incentive Plan that was adopted in
conjunction with our IPO. On February 27, 2008, our Board approved an amendment to our Long-Term
Incentive Plan, subject to shareholder approval, that increased the
maximum number of shares of common stock available for awards under the Long-Term Incentive
Plan from 2,000,000 to 2,175,000 and extended the Plans termination date. Our shareholders
approved this Plan amendment on April 22, 2008, and the Plan now terminates twenty years from the
date of such approval, or April 22, 2028. At June 30, 2009, 123,149 shares remained available for
award under the Plan. In most cases, options granted under the Plan vest at the end of a three-year
period from the date of the award. Options are granted with an exercise price equal to the closing
price at the date of grant.
6
Table of Contents
Stock Options and Grants
We use the Black-Scholes option pricing model to estimate the fair value of each option grant
as of the date of grant. The volatilities are based on the 90 day historical volatility of our
common stock as of the grant date. The risk free interest rate is based on zero-coupon U.S.
government issues with a remaining term equal to the expected life of the option. For options
granted prior to 2008, the expected life for options was calculated using the simplified method.
The simplified method was calculated as the vesting term plus the contractual term divided by two.
There were no options granted during the six months ended June 30, 2009.
On January 24, 2008, we issued vested stock grants totaling 1,084 shares to a director. The
total value of the grant was $25 and is included in general and administrative expenses.
On April 22, 2008, we issued stock grants totaling 18,900 shares to certain directors. The
total value of the grant was $385 and is included in general and administrative expenses.
The Company recognized $30 of stock based compensation expense related to stock options for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009. The Company recognized $385 and $411 of stock based
compensation expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2008, respectively, which is
included in general and administrative expense. As of June 30, 2009, there was no unrecognized
compensation costs related to unvested options.
Performance-Based Incentive Program
In December 2006, the Board of Directors adopted a performance-based incentive program under
our Long-Term Incentive Plan. This new program provided participating executives with the
opportunity to earn a combination of stock (50%) and cash (50%) if certain performance targets for
pre-tax income and pre-tax free cash flow are achieved. On February 23, 2007, certain participating
executives became entitled to performance restricted stock based on the stock price at the
commencement of the three year performance cycle (2007-2009) and as a result 16,404 shares were
issued subject to vesting upon the achievement of the performance goals. On April 13, 2007, an
additional 13,294 shares of the performance restricted stock were issued subject to vesting upon
the achievement of the three year performance goals to the remaining participating executives. On
December 31, 2007, 3,849 shares were released free of restrictions in accordance with the
achievement of the first year performance goals. On December 31, 2008, 7,072 shares were released
free of restrictions in accordance with the achievement of the second year performance goals.
In accordance with SFAS No. 123R, recording of stock-based compensation expense for awards
with performance conditions is based on the probable outcome of that performance condition. The
Company recognized $11 and $27 of stock-based compensation expense and $11 and $27 of cash
compensation expense related to the performance-based incentive program, for the three months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expenses. The
Company recognized $21 and $54 of stock-based compensation expense and $21 and $54 of cash
compensation expense related to the performance-based incentive program, for the six months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expenses. As
of June 30, 2009, there was $42 of unrecognized compensation costs related to the performance-based
incentive program which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 0.5 years.
Restricted Stock Units
In March 2008, the Companys Compensation Committee and the Board of Directors authorized a
one-time grant of 750,000 restricted stock units that subsequently were awarded to members of our
senior management team on July 1, 2008. In November 2008, an additional 5,000 restricted stock
units were awarded. The restricted stock units vest in one-third installments on each of the tenth,
eleventh and twelfth anniversaries of the grant date. The restricted stock unit agreements provide
for accelerated vesting upon the recipients retirement age.
The cost of restricted stock units is determined using the fair value of our common stock on
the date of the grant, and compensation expense is recognized over the vesting period. In
accordance with SFAS No. 123R, we estimate forfeitures at the time of the grant and revise those
estimates in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. We use
historical data to estimate pre-vesting forfeitures and record stock-based compensation expense
only for those awards that are expected to vest.
7
Table of Contents
The Company recognized $504 and $1,022 of stock based compensation expense related to the
restricted stock units for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, respectively, which is
included in general and administrative expense. As of June 30, 2009, there was $10,799 of
unrecognized stock-based compensation costs, net of estimated forfeitures, related to the
restricted stock units that is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of
approximately 7.54 years.
4. Net Income Per Common Share
In accordance with SFAS No.128, Earnings Per Share (EPS), basic net income per share is
computed by dividing net income by the weighted daily average number of shares of common stock
outstanding during the period. Diluted net income per share is based upon the weighted daily
average number of shares of common stock outstanding for the period plus dilutive potential common
shares, including stock options and restricted stock units using the treasury-stock method.
A reconciliation of the weighted average basic common shares outstanding to the weighted
average diluted common shares outstanding is as follows (Unaudited):
Three Months Ended June 30 | Six Months Ended June 30, | |||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding Basic |
15,251,310 | 17,891,155 | 15,273,796 | 18,007,316 | ||||||||||||
Effect of dilutive options |
350,333 | 374,498 | 368,438 | 393,211 | ||||||||||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding Diluted |
15,601,643 | 18,265,653 | 15,642,234 | 18,400,527 | ||||||||||||
Net income per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.28 | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.43 | $ | 0.53 | ||||||||
Diluted |
$ | 0.27 | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.42 | $ | 0.52 |
Weighted average shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options, which were not included in
the diluted earnings per share calculation because they were anti-dilutive, were 19,068 for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2009. There were no anti-dilutive options for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2008.
For the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, 18,777 and 25,849 shares,
respectively, of performance based restricted stock were not included in the computation of
weighted diluted common share amounts because the number of shares ultimately issued is contingent
on the Companys performance goals, which were not achieved as of that date.
There are no additional securities that could dilute basic EPS in the future that were not
included in the computation of diluted EPS, other than those disclosed.
5. Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
Accounting Standards Not Yet Adopted
In June 2009, the FASB issued Statement No. 168, The FASB Accounting Standards Codification
and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (Statement No. 168). Statement No.
168 will become the single source of authoritative nongovernmental U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP), superseding existing FASB, American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants (AICPA), Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF), and related accounting literature.
Statement No. 168 reorganizes the thousands of GAAP pronouncements into roughly 90 accounting
topics and displays them using a consistent structure. Also included is relevant Securities and
Exchange Commission guidance organized using the same topical structure in separate sections.
Statement No. 168 will be effective for financial statements issued for reporting periods that end
after September 15, 2009. All other nongrandfathered, non-SEC accounting literature not included
in the Codification will become nonauthoritative. We are required to adopt Statement 168 in the
third quarter of the current fiscal year. As the Codification does not intend to change or alter
existing GAAP, the adoption of Statement 168 will not impact our future results of operations and
financial condition.
Accounting Standards Adopted
During the second quarter of 2009, we adopted the provisions of Statement No. 165, Subsequent
Events (Statement No. 165). Statement No. 165 requires entities to disclose the date through
which they have evaluated subsequent events and whether the date corresponds with the release of
their financial statements. In accordance with Statement No. 165, the Company has evaluated
subsequent events through the date and time the financial statements were issued on August 7,
2009, and have made the necessary disclosures in footnote 17, if any.
8
Table of Contents
In June 2009, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 167, Amendments
to FASB Interpretation No. 46(R), or Statement 167. Statement 167 changes the approach to
determining the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity, or VIE, and requires companies
to more frequently assess whether they must consolidate VIEs. We are required to adopt Statement
167 at the beginning of 2010. We are currently evaluating the impact, if any, of adopting Statement
167 on our future results of operations and financial condition.
In June 2009, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 166, Accounting
for Transfers of Financial Assetsan amendment of FASB Statement No. 140, or Statement 166.
Statement 166 eliminates the concept of a qualifying special-purpose entity, creates more stringent
conditions for reporting a transfer of a portion of a financial asset as a sale, clarifies other
sale-accounting criteria and changes the initial measurement of a transferors interest in
transferred financial assets. We are required to adopt Statement 166 at the beginning of 2010. We
are currently evaluating the impact, if any, of adopting Statement 166 on our future results of
operations and financial condition.
In April 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued three FSPs related to
fair value measurements. The first, FSP FAS 157-4, Determining Fair Value When the Volume and Level
of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly Decreased and Identifying Transactions
That Are Not Orderly, provides guidance on determining whether a market is inactive and whether
transactions in that market are distressed. The second FSP issued, FSP FAS 115-2, FAS 124-2, and
EITF 99-20-2, Recognition and Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary Impairments, provides guidance
on how to assess whether an asset has experienced an other-than-temporary impairment and, if so,
where the impairment should be recorded in the financial statements. The third FSP issued, FSP FAS
107-1 and APB 28-1, Interim Disclosures About Fair Value of Financial Instruments, requires that
disclosures currently required under SFAS No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial
Instruments, be presented for interim periods as well as annual periods. The Company adopted these
FSPs during the second quarter of 2009. The adoption of these FSPs did not have a material impact
on the Companys consolidated financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, Fair Value
Measurements (Statement No. 157). Statement No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework
for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles and expands disclosures about
fair value measurements. The statement does not require new fair value measurements, but is applied
to the extent that other accounting pronouncements require or permit fair value measurements. The
statement emphasizes that fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based
on the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. Companies
are required to disclose the extent to which fair value is used to measure assets and liabilities,
the inputs used to develop the measurements, and the effect of certain of the measurements on
earnings (or changes in net assets) for the period. On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted the
provisions of Statement No. 157 related to financial assets and liabilities, as well as other
liabilities carried at fair value on a recurring basis. These provisions did not have a material
impact on the Companys consolidated financial statements. On January 1, 2009, the Company adopted
the provisions of Statement No. 157 related to nonfinancial assets and liabilities. The adoption of
these provisions did not have a material impact on the Companys consolidated financial statements.
On January 1, 2009, we adopted the provisions of Statement No. 141 (Revised 2007), Business
Combinations (Statement No. 141R). Statement No. 141R establishes principles and requirements on
how an acquirer recognizes and measures in its financial statements identifiable assets acquired,
liabilities assumed, noncontrolling interests in the acquiree, goodwill or gain from a bargain
purchase and accounting for transaction costs. Additionally, Statement No. 141R determines what
information must be disclosed to enable users of the financial statements to evaluate the nature
and financial effects of the business combination. The adoption of Statement No. 141R did not have
an impact on our consolidated financial statements, but will have an impact on the accounting for
future business combinations.
On January 1, 2009, we adopted the provisions of Statement No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests
in Consolidated Financial Statementsan amendment of ARB No. 51. (Statement No. 160). Statement
No. 160 requires entities to report noncontrolling (minority) interests as a component of
shareholders equity on the balance sheet; include all earnings of a consolidated subsidiary in
consolidated results of operations; and treat all transactions between the parent and its
noncontrolling interest holder that increase or decrease the noncontrolling interest as equity
provided the parent does not lose control. The adoption of Statement 160 is reflected in these
financial statements.
9
Table of Contents
6. Acquisitions
During the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company completed two acquisitions. Consideration
for all acquisitions was $8,505 of which $6,008 was paid in cash and $2,497 in a discounted
non-interest bearing note to be paid in annual installments of $600, commencing February 2009 and
an estimated $187 to be paid in the future based upon financial performance compared to forecast.
On March 31, 2009, we entered into a settlement agreement with the principals of G.O. Parking which
amended the installment payment agreement, provided for a termination fee and a reimbursement of
legal fees we incurred for post acquisition disputes. On April 14th we paid G.O. parking $1,680 in
lieu of the original installment payment obligation. In addition, the Company paid and capitalized
$310 in acquisition costs. A summary of the acquisitions follows:
| In November 2008, we acquired certain assets of Downtown Valet, LLC, a valet parking
operator in Seattle, Washington. |
| In February 2008, we acquired certain assets of G.O. Parking, a parking operator in
Chicago, Illinois. |
The acquisitions of Downtown Valet, LLC and G.O. Parking represent acquisitions of businesses,
as defined by EITF Issue No. 98-3.
These acquisitions consisted of goodwill of $3,007, cost of contract of $5,314, intangible
assets of $233 and equipment of $261. At December 31, 2008. As
of June 30, 2009, we have made contingency payments of $259
related to acquisitions, of which $225 had been accrued at
December 31, 2008.
The acquisitions for 2008 were accounted for using the purchase method of accounting. The
Company financed the acquisitions through additional term borrowings under the senior credit
facility and existing cash. The results of operations of these acquisitions are included in the
Companys consolidated statement of income from the date of acquisition. None of the acquisitions,
either individually or in the aggregate, is considered material to the Company.
7. Leasehold Improvements, Equipment and Construction in Progress, Net
A summary of leasehold improvements, equipment, and construction in progress and related
accumulated depreciation and amortization is as follows:
Ranges of Estimated useful life | June 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | ||||||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||||||
Equipment |
2-10 years | $ | 29,228 | $ | 29,615 | |||||||
Leasehold improvements |
Shorter of lease term or economic | 10,494 | 10,340 | |||||||||
Construction in progress |
Life up to 10 years | 7,337 | 6,517 | |||||||||
47,059 | 46,472 | |||||||||||
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization |
(29,234 | ) | (28,930 | ) | ||||||||
Leasehold improvements, equipment and
construction in progress, net |
$ | 17,825 | $ | 17,542 | ||||||||
Depreciation expense was $964 and $1,930 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009,
respectively, and $1,073 and $2,067 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2008, respectively.
Depreciation includes losses on abandonments of leasehold improvements and equipment of $96 and
$193 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, respectively, and $171 and $175 for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2008, respectively.
8. Cost of Contracts, Net
Cost of contracts represents the contractual rights associated with providing parking services
at a managed or leased facility. Cost consists of either capitalized payments made to third parties
or the value ascribed to contracts acquired through acquisition. Cost of contracts is amortized
over the estimated life of the contracts, including anticipated renewals and terminations.
The balance of cost of contracts is comprised of the following:
June 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | |||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Cost of contracts |
$ | 15,905 | $ | 15,303 | ||||
Accumulated amortization |
(5,231 | ) | (4,431 | ) | ||||
Cost of contracts, net |
$ | 10,674 | $ | 10,872 | ||||
During 2008, we retired fully amortized contracts in the amount of $29,177 that had expired.
10
Table of Contents
Amortization expense related to cost of contracts was $402 and $799 for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2009, respectively, and $335 and $640 for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2008, respectively. The weighted average useful life is 10 years for 2009 and 2008.
9. Goodwill and Intangible Assets
In accordance with FASB Statement No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, goodwill
was assigned to reporting units that we now present based upon the specific Region where the assets
acquired and associate goodwill resided.
As a result of the prior acquisitions, as of June 30, 2009, our contingent payment obligations
totaled $1,387, on an aggregate undiscounted basis, which may be paid over time provided certain
performance criteria is achieved. Such contingent payments will be accounted for as additional
purchase price if the performance criteria is achieved; accordingly, the contingent payment
obligation is not recorded at December 31, 2008, pursuant to previously existing purchase
accounting rules that allowed for such capitalization.
11
Table of Contents
The following table reflects the changes in the carrying amounts of goodwill by reported
segment for the six months ended June 30, 2009 (Unaudited).
Region | Region | Region | Region | |||||||||||||||||
One | Two | Three | Four | Total | ||||||||||||||||
Balance as of January 1, 2009 |
$ | 61,056 | $ | 5,190 | $ | 32,392 | $ | 24,912 | $ | 123,550 | ||||||||||
Adjustments to purchase price |
(99 | ) | | | | (99 | ) | |||||||||||||
Contingency payments related to acquisitions |
26 | | 8 | | 34 | |||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation |
| 188 | | | 188 | |||||||||||||||
Balance as of June 30, 2009 |
$ | 60,983 | $ | 5,378 | $ | 32,400 | $ | 24,912 | $ | 123,673 | ||||||||||
10. | Long-Term Receivables, Net |
Long-term
receivables, net, consist of the following:
Amount Outstanding | ||||||||
June 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | |||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Bradley International Airport |
||||||||
Deficiency payments |
$ | 7,501 | $ | 5,961 | ||||
Other Bradley related, net |
3,203 | 3,203 | ||||||
Valuation allowance |
(2,484 | ) | (2,484 | ) | ||||
Total long-term receivables, net |
$ | 8,220 | $ | 6,680 | ||||
12
Table of Contents
Agreement
We entered into a 25-year agreement with the State of Connecticut that expires on April 6,
2025, under which we operate the surface parking and 3,500 garage parking spaces at Bradley
International Airport located in the Hartford, Connecticut metropolitan area. The Company expects
to receive a management fee for managing this parking facility.
The parking garage was financed on April 6, 2000 through the issuance of $53,800 of State of
Connecticut special facility revenue bonds, representing $47,700 non-taxable Series A bonds and a
separate taxable issuance of $6,100 Series B bonds. The Series B bonds were retired on July 1, 2006
according to the terms of the indenture. The Bradley agreement provides that we deposit with a
trustee for the bondholders all gross revenues collected from operations of the surface and garage
parking, and from these gross revenues, the trustee pays debt service on the special facility
revenue bonds, operating and capital maintenance expenses of the surface and garage parking
facilities and specific annual guaranteed minimum payments to the State. Principal and interest on
the Bradley special facility revenue bonds increase from approximately $3,600 in lease year 2002 to
approximately $4,500 in lease year 2025. Annual guaranteed minimum payments to the State will
increase from approximately $8,300 in lease year 2002 to approximately $13,200 in lease year 2024;
$9,731 is the guaranteed minimum payment for calendar year 2009. The annual minimum guaranteed
payment to the State by the trustee for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 was $4,823 and
$4,724, respectively.
All of the cash flow from the Parking Facilities is pledged to the security of the bonds and
is collected and deposited with the bond trustee. Each month the bond trustee makes certain
required monthly distributions, which are characterized as Guaranteed Payments. To the extent the
monthly gross receipts generated by the Parking Facilities are not sufficient for the trustee to
make the required Guaranteed Payments, we are obligated to deliver the deficiency amount to the
trustee. Additionally, the Guaranteed Payments are required to be paid before we are reimbursed for
deficiency payments or management fees.
The following is the list of Guaranteed Payments:
| Garage and surface operating expenses, |
| Principal and interest on Bonds, |
| Trustee expenses |
| Major maintenance and capital improvement deposits |
| State Minimum Guarantee |
However, to the extent there is a cash surplus in any month during the term of the Lease, we
have the right to be repaid the principal amount of any and all deficiency payments previously
made, together with actual interest expenses and a premium, not to exceed 10% of the initial
deficiency payment. We calculate and record interest income and premium income in the period the
associated deficiency payment is received from the trustee.
Deficiency Payments
To the extent that monthly gross receipts are not sufficient for the trustee to make the
required payments, we are obligated pursuant to our agreement to deliver the deficiency amount to
the trustee within three business days of being notified. We are responsible for these deficiency
payments regardless of the amount of utilization for the Bradley parking facilities. The deficiency
payments represent contingent interest bearing advances to the trustee to cover operating cash flow
requirements. To the extent sufficient funds are available in the appropriate fund, the trustee is
then directed by the State to reimburse us for deficiency payments up to the amount of the
calculated surplus.
In the six months ended June 30, 2009, we made deficiency payments (net of repayments
received) of $1,540 and we did not record or receive any interest and premium income deficiency
repayments from the trustee. In the six months ended June 30, 2008, we made deficiency payments
(net of repayments received) of $851 and we did not record or receive any interest and premium
income related to deficiency repayments from the trustee. The receivable from the trustee for
interest and premium income related to deficiency repayments was $0 as of June 30, 2009, compared
to $52 as of June 30, 2008.
13
Table of Contents
The deficiency payments, if any, are recorded as a receivable by us for which we are
reimbursed from time to time as provided in the trust agreement. As of June 30, 2009 and December
31, 2008, we have a receivable of $7,501 and $5,961, respectively, compromised of cumulative
deficiency payments to the trustee, net of reimbursements. We believe these advances to be fully
recoverable and therefore have not recorded a valuation allowance for them. We do not guarantee the
payment of any principal or interest on any debt obligations of the State of Connecticut or the
trustee.
The Construction, Financing and Operating Special Facility Lease Agreement, which governs
reimbursement of Guarantor Payments, places no time restriction or limits on our right to
reimbursement.
The following table reconciles the beginning and ending balance of the receivable for each
period presented:
June 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | |||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Deficiency payments: |
||||||||
Balance at beginning of period |
$ | 5,961 | $ | 4,135 | ||||
Deficiency payments made |
1,540 | 2,153 | ||||||
Deficiency repayment received |
| (327 | ) | |||||
Balance at end of period |
7,501 | 5,961 | ||||||
Other Bradley related |
3,203 | 3,203 | ||||||
Valuation allowance |
(2,484 | ) | (2,484 | ) | ||||
Total long-term receivables |
$ | 8,220 | $ | 6,680 | ||||
Compensation
In addition to the recovery of certain general and administrative expenses incurred, our
agreement provides for an annual management fee payment which is based on three operating profit
tiers calculated for each year during the term of the agreement. The management fee is further
apportioned 60% to us and 40% to an un-affiliated entity. To the extent that funds are available
for the trustee to make a distribution, the annual management fee is paid when sufficient cash is
paid after the Guaranteed Payments (as defined in our agreement), and after the repayment of all
deficiency payments, including accrued interest and premium. However, our right to the management
fee accrues each year during the term of the agreement and is paid when sufficient cash is
available for the trustee to make a distribution.
The annual management fee is paid after the repayment of all deficiency payments, including
accrued interest and premium. Therefore, due to the existence and length of time for repayment of
the deficiency amounts to the Company, no management fees have been recognized. Management fees
will be recognized in accordance with SAB 104 when collectibility is reasonably assured.
Cumulative management fees of $3,900 have not been recognized as of June 30, 2009 and no
management fee income was recognized during the six months ending June 30, 2009 and 2008.
11. Borrowing Arrangements
Long-term borrowings, in order of preference, consist of:
Amount Outstanding | ||||||||||||
Due Date | June 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | ||||||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||||||
Senior credit facility |
June 2013 | $ | 122,750 | $ | 120,600 | |||||||
Capital lease obligations |
Various | 2,469 | 3,039 | |||||||||
Obligations on Seller notes and other |
Various | 1,366 | 1,425 | |||||||||
126,585 | 125,064 | |||||||||||
Less current portion |
789 | 1,068 | ||||||||||
$ | 125,796 | $ | 123,996 | |||||||||
14
Table of Contents
Senior Credit Facility
On July 15, 2008, we entered into an amended and restated credit agreement which restated our
credit facility.
The $210,000 revolving senior credit facility will expire in July 2013. The revolving senior
credit facility includes a letter of credit sub-facility with a sublimit of $50,000.
This revolving senior credit facility bears interest, at our option, at either (1) LIBOR plus
the applicable LIBOR Margin ranging between 2.00% and 3.50% depending on the ratio of our total
funded indebtedness to our EBITDA from time to time (Total Debt Ratio) or (2) the Base Rate (as
defined below) plus the applicable Base Rate Margin ranging between 0.50% and 2.00% depending on
our Total Debt Ratio. We may elect interest periods of one, two, three or six months for LIBOR
based borrowings. The Base Rate is the greater of (i) the rate publicly announced from time to time
by Bank of America, N.A. as its prime rate, or (ii) the overnight federal funds rate plus 0.50%.
The senior credit facility includes a fixed charge ratio covenant, a total debt to EBITDA
ratio covenant, a limit on our ability to incur additional indebtedness, issue preferred stock or
pay dividends, and certain other restrictions on our activities. We are required to repay
borrowings under the senior credit facility out of the proceeds of future issuances of debt or
equity securities and asset sales, subject to certain customary exceptions. The senior credit
facility is secured by substantially all of our assets and all assets acquired in the future
(including a pledge of 100% of the stock of our existing and future domestic guarantor subsidiaries
and 65% of the stock of our existing and future foreign subsidiaries).
We are in compliance with all of our financial covenants as of June 30, 2009.
The weighted average interest rate on our senior credit facility at June 30, 2009 and December
31, 2008 was 3.3% and 3.6%, respectively. The rate includes all outstanding LIBOR contracts,
interest rate cap effect and letters of credit. The weighted average interest rate on outstanding
borrowings, not including letters of credit, was 3.4% and 3.8% at June 30, 2009 and December 31,
2008, respectively.
At June 30, 2009, we had $18,884 of letters of credit outstanding under the senior credit
facility, borrowings against the senior credit facility aggregated $122,750, and we had $25,887
available under the senior credit facility.
We have entered into various financing agreements, which were used for the purchase of
equipment.
12. Stock Repurchases
2009 Stock Repurchases
In July 2008, the Board of Directors authorized us to repurchase shares of our common stock,
on the open market or through private purchases, up to $60,000 in aggregate. As of December 31,
2008, $22,857 remained available for repurchase under this authorization.
During the first quarter of 2009, we repurchased from third party shareholders 93,600 shares
at an average price of $18.23 per share, including average commissions of $0.03 per share, on the
open market. Our former majority shareholder sold to us 119,701 shares in the first quarter at an
average price of $18.20 per share. The total value of the first quarter transactions was $3,884.
During the first quarter of 2009, 200,650 shares were retired and the remaining 12,651 shares were
retired in April 2009.
There were no repurchases in the second quarter of 2009.
As of June 30, 2009, $18,973 remained available for repurchase under the July 2008
authorization by the Board of Directors.
2008 Stock Repurchases
In December 2007, the Board of Directors authorized us to repurchase shares of our common
stock, on the open market or through private purchases, up to $25,000 in aggregate. As of December
31, 2007, $22,882 remained available for repurchase under this authorization.
During the first quarter of 2008, we repurchased from third party shareholders 257,125 shares
at an average price of $20.79 per share, including average commissions of $0.03 per share, on the
open market. Our former majority shareholder sold to us 120,111
shares in the first quarter at an average price of $20.76 per share. The total value of the
first quarter transactions was $7,839. In March 2008, 214,500 shares were retired and the remaining
162,736 shares were retired in June 2008.
15
Table of Contents
During the second quarter of 2008, we repurchased from third party shareholders 120,000 shares
at an average price of $20.70 per share, including average commissions of $0.03 per share, on the
open market. Our former majority shareholder sold to us 125,964 shares in the second quarter at an
average price of $20.67 per share. The total value of the second quarter transactions was $5,087.
In June 2008, 173,701 shares were retired and the remaining 72,263 were retired during the third
quarter.
13. Business Unit Segment Information
SFAS No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information (SFAS
131), establishes annual and interim reporting standards for an enterprises operating segments
and related disclosures about its products, services, geographic areas and major customers. An
operating segment is defined as a component of an enterprise that engages in business activities
from which it may earn revenues and incur expenses, and about which separate financial information
is regularly evaluated by the Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM) in deciding how to allocate
resources. The CODM, as defined by SFAS 131, is the Companys President and Chief Executive Officer
(CEO).
Each of the operating segments is directly responsible for revenue and expenses related to
their operations including direct regional administrative costs. Finance, information technology,
human resources, and legal are shared functions that are not allocated back to the four operating
segments. The CODM assesses the performance of each operating segment using information about its
revenue and operating income (loss) before interest, taxes, and depreciation and amortization, but
does not evaluate segments using discrete asset information. There are no inter-segment
transactions and the Company does not allocate interest and other income, interest expense,
depreciation and amortization or taxes to operating segments. The accounting policies for segment
reporting are the same as for the Company as a whole.
The Company is managed based on regions administered by executive vice presidents. Three
regions are generally organized geographically with the fourth region encompassing major airports
and transportation operations nationwide. The following is a summary of revenues (excluding
reimbursement of management contract expenses) and gross profit by regions for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008. Information related to prior periods has been recast to
conform to the current region alignment.
16
Table of Contents
In accordance with SFAS 131, the Company has provided this business unit segment information
for all comparable prior periods. Segment information is summarized as follows (in thousands):
For the three months ended | For the six months ended | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
June 30, 2009 | Margin | June 30, 2008 | Margin | June 30, 2009 | Margin | June 30, 2008 | Margin | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Revenues: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
$ | 20,107 | $ | 20,741 | $ | 39,320 | $ | 40,032 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
13,298 | 14,586 | 26,870 | 29,019 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Region One |
33,405 | 35,327 | 66,190 | 69,051 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region Two |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
693 | 285 | 1,289 | 565 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
2,661 | 1,050 | 4,818 | 1,940 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Region Two |
3,354 | 1,335 | 6,107 | 2,505 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region Three |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
4,878 | 7,463 | 9,784 | 13,617 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
13,233 | 12,721 | 27,394 | 25,784 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Region Three |
18,111 | 20,184 | 37,178 | 39,401 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region Four |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
10,023 | 11,506 | 19,936 | 23,422 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
8,048 | 7,899 | 16,366 | 15,687 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Region Four |
18,071 | 19,405 | 36,302 | 39,109 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
(14 | ) | 8 | 58 | 61 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
71 | 159 | 156 | (135 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Other |
57 | 167 | 214 | (74 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reimbursed expense |
97,595 | 99,317 | 200,152 | 198,768 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenues |
$ | 170,593 | $ | 175,735 | $ | 346,143 | $ | 348,760 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Profit |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
1,774 | 9 | % | 1,814 | 9 | % | 2,507 | 6 | % | 2,928 | 7 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
6,801 | 51 | % | 7,403 | 51 | % | 13,896 | 52 | % | 14,913 | 51 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total Region One |
8,575 | 9,217 | 16,403 | 17,841 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region Two |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
49 | 7 | % | 90 | 32 | % | 41 | 3 | % | 175 | 31 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
982 | 37 | % | 937 | 89 | % | 1,780 | 37 | % | 1,786 | 92 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total Region Two |
1,031 | 1,027 | 1,821 | 1,961 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region Three |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
418 | 9 | % | 1,916 | 26 | % | 830 | 8 | % | 2,357 | 17 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
6,032 | 46 | % | 6,644 | 52 | % | 12,297 | 45 | % | 13,050 | 51 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total Region Three |
6,450 | 8,560 | 13,127 | 15,407 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region Four |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
586 | 6 | % | 1,022 | 9 | % | 1,108 | 6 | % | 2,047 | 9 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
3,814 | 47 | % | 3,422 | 43 | % | 7,904 | 48 | % | 6,995 | 45 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total Region Four |
4,400 | 4,444 | 9,012 | 9,042 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
(72 | ) | (514 | )% | 450 | 5,625 | % | 20 | 34 | % | 586 | 96 | % | |||||||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
(256 | ) | (360 | )% | (153 | ) | (96 | )% | (602 | ) | (386 | )% | 343 | (3 | )% | |||||||||||||||||
Total Other |
(328 | ) | 297 | (582 | ) | 929 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit |
20,128 | 23,545 | 39,781 | 45,180 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
General and administrative expenses |
10,320 | 12,029 | 23,081 | 23,440 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
General and administrative expense
percentage of gross profit |
51 | % | 51 | % | 58 | % | 52 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
1,413 | 1,579 | 2,900 | 2,950 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Operating income |
8,395 | 9,937 | 13,800 | 18,790 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other expenses (income): |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest expense |
1,528 | 1,086 | 2,964 | 2,604 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest income |
(95 | ) | (41 | ) | (162 | ) | (83 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
1,433 | 1,045 | 2,802 | 2,521 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income before income taxes |
6,962 | 8,892 | 10,998 | 16,269 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income tax expense |
2,692 | 3,612 | 4,266 | 6,590 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income |
4,270 | 5,280 | 6,732 | 9,679 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Less: Net income attributable to
noncontrolling interest |
(42 | ) | (3 | ) | (106 | ) | (125 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income attributable to
Standard Parking Corporation |
$ | 4,228 | $ | 5,277 | $ | 6,626 | $ | 9,554 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
17
Table of Contents
Region One encompasses operations in Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia,
Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Region Two encompasses operations in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, and Ontario.
Region Three encompasses operations in Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Louisiana,
Nevada, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
Region Four encompasses all major airport and transportation operations nationwide.
Other consists of ancillary revenue that is not specifically identifiable to a region and
insurance reserve adjustments related to prior years.
The CODM does not evaluate segments using discrete asset information.
14. Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income consists of the following components (Unaudited):
For the three months ended | For the six months ended | |||||||||||||||
June 30, 2009 | June 30, 2008 | June 30, 2009 | June 30, 2008 | |||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 4,270 | $ | 5,280 | $ | 6,732 | $ | 9,679 | ||||||||
Revaluation of interest rate cap |
| (62 | ) | | 33 | |||||||||||
Effect of foreign currency translation |
177 | (4 | ) | (57 | ) | (60 | ) | |||||||||
Comprehensive income |
4,447 | 5,214 | 6,675 | 9,652 | ||||||||||||
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest |
(42 | ) | (3 | ) | (106 | ) | (125 | ) | ||||||||
Comprehensive income attributable to Standard Parking
Corporation |
$ | 4,405 | $ | 5,211 | $ | 6,569 | $ | 9,527 | ||||||||
18
Table of Contents
15.
Income Taxes
For the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recognized income tax expense of $2,692
on pre-tax earnings of $6,920 compared to $3,612 income tax expense on pre-tax earnings of $8,889
for the three months ended June 30, 2008. For the six months ended June 30, 2009, the Company
recognized income tax expense of $4,266 on pre-tax earnings of $10,892 compared to $6,590 income
tax expense on pre-tax earnings of $16,144 for the six months ended June 30, 2008. Income tax
expense is based on a projected annual effective tax rate of approximately 39.8% for the six months
ended June 30, 2009 compared to approximately 40.8% for the six months ended June 30, 2008. The
change in the Companys effective tax rate resulted primarily from an increase in the Companys
benefit from federal income tax credits and a decrease in the Companys U.S. tax liability related
to foreign earnings.
In July 2006, FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 48
(FIN 48), Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprises financial statements in accordance with
SFAS 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. FIN 48 also prescribes a recognition threshold and
measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position
taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. The Company recognizes potential interest and
penalties related to uncertain tax positions, if any, in income tax expense. Upon adoption, the
Company completed a detailed analysis of its tax positions and determined that the implementation
of FIN 48 did not have an impact on the Companys financial position or results from operations. As
of June 30, 2009, the Company has not identified any tax positions that would have a material
impact on the Companys financial position.
The tax years that remain subject to examination for the Companys major tax jurisdictions at
June 30, 2009 are shown below:
2004 2008 |
United States federal income tax | |||
2003 2008 |
United States state and local income tax | |||
2004 2008 |
Canada |
16.
Hurricane Katrina
On May 2, 2008, we entered into a definitive settlement agreement with our insurance carrier
to finalize all of our open claims with respect to Hurricane Katrina. The settlement agreement was
for $4,225 of which $2,000 was received previously. We were required to reimburse the owners of the
leased and managed locations for property damage of approximately $2,228. After payment of
settlement fees, expenses and other amounts due under contractual arrangements, in the second
quarter of 2008, we recorded $1,997 in pre-tax income, of which $1,360 was recorded as parking
services revenue lease contracts and $217 was recorded as parking services revenue management
contracts, and $420 was recorded as a reduction of general and administrative expenses.
17. Subsequent Event
On July 1, 2009, the Company acquired the assets of Gameday Management Group, U.S., an
Orlando-based company that plans and operates transportation and parking systems for major stadium
and sporting events.
As stated in Note 5, we adopted the provisions of Statement No. 165, Subsequent Events, during
the second quarter of 2009. The Company has evaluated subsequent events through the date and time
the financial statements were issued on August 7, 2009.
Item 2. | Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
The following discussion will assist in understanding our financial position and results of
operations. The information below should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial
statements, the related notes to the consolidated financial statements and our Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2008.
In addition to historical information, this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains
forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to
differ materially. Factors that might cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not
limited to, those discussed in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations as well as in this Quarterly Report generally. You should carefully review
the risks described in this Quarterly Report as well as the risks described in other documents
filed by us and from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, when
used in this Quarterly Report, the words anticipates, plans, believes, estimates, and
expects and similar expressions are generally intended to identify forward-looking statements.
Such statements are subject to a number of risks and
uncertainties. Our actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from
the results expressed in, or implied by these forward-looking statements or us. We undertake no
obligation to revise these forward-looking statements to reflect any future events or
circumstances.
We continue to be subject to certain factors that could cause our results to differ materially
from expected and historical results (see the Risk Factors set forth in our 2008 Form 10-K filed
on March 13, 2009 and this Form 10-Q).
19
Table of Contents
Overview
Our Business
We manage parking facilities in urban markets and at airports across the United States and in
three Canadian provinces. We do not own any facilities, but instead enter into contractual
relationships with property owners or managers.
We operate our clients properties through two types of arrangements: management contracts and
leases. Under a management contract, we typically receive a base monthly fee for managing the
facility, and we may also receive an incentive fee based on the achievement of facility performance
objectives. We also receive fees for ancillary services. Typically, all of the underlying revenues
and expenses under a standard management contract flow through to our clients rather than to us.
However, some management contracts, which are referred to as reverse management contracts,
usually provide for larger management fees and require us to pay various costs. Under lease
arrangements, we generally pay to the property owner either a fixed annual rent, a percentage of
gross customer collections or a combination thereof. We collect all revenues under lease
arrangements and we are responsible for most operating expenses, but we are typically not
responsible for major maintenance, capital expenditures or real estate taxes. Margins for lease
contracts vary significantly, not only due to operating performance, but also due to variability of
parking rates in different cities and varying space utilization by parking facility type and
location. As of June 30, 2009, we operated 90% of our locations under management contracts and 10%
under leases.
In evaluating our financial condition and operating performance, managements primary focus is
on our gross profit, total general and administrative expense and general and administrative
expense as a percentage of our gross profit. Although the underlying economics to us of management
contracts and leases are similar, the manner in which we are required to account for them differs.
Revenue from leases includes all gross customer collections derived from our leased locations (net
of parking tax), whereas revenue from management contracts only includes our contractually agreed
upon management fees and amounts attributable to ancillary services. Gross customer collections at
facilities under management contracts, therefore, are not included in our revenue. Accordingly,
while a change in the proportion of our operating agreements that are structured as leases versus
management contracts may cause significant fluctuations in reported revenue and expense of parking
services, that change will not artificially affect our gross profit. For example, as of June 30,
2009, 90% of our locations were operated under management contracts and 89% of our gross profit for
the six month period ended June 30, 2009 was derived from management contracts. Only 52% of total
revenue (excluding reimbursement of management contract expenses), however, was from management
contracts because under those contracts the revenue collected from parking customers belongs to our
clients. Therefore, gross profit and total general and administrative expense, rather than revenue,
are managements primary focus.
General Business Trends
We believe that sophisticated commercial real estate developers and property managers and
owners recognize the potential for parking and related services to be a profit generator rather
than a cost center. Often, the parking experience makes both the first and the last impressions on
their properties tenants and visitors. By outsourcing these services, they are able to capture
additional profit by leveraging the unique operational skills and controls that an experienced
parking management company can offer. Our ability to consistently deliver a uniformly high level of
parking and related services and maximize the profit to our clients improves our ability to win
contracts and retain existing locations. Our location retention rate for the twelve month period
ended June 30, 2009 was 89%, compared to 91% for the year-ago period, which also reflects our
decision not to renew, or terminate, unprofitable contracts.
For the three months ended June 30, 2009 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2008,
average gross profit per location decreased by 11.3% from $10.6 thousand to $9.4 thousand,
primarily due to the economic downturn and a negative fluctuation in prior years insurance reserve
adjustments, in addition to the Hurricane Katrina settlement received in 2008 that did not recur in
2009.
Summary of Operating Facilities
We focus our operations in core markets where a concentration of locations improves customer
service levels and operating margins. The following table reflects our facilities operated at the
end of the periods indicated:
June 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | June 30, 2008 | ||||||||||
Managed facilities |
1,919 | 1,986 | 1,979 | |||||||||
Leased facilities |
223 | 229 | 240 | |||||||||
Total facilities |
2,142 | 2,215 | 2,219 | |||||||||
20
Table of Contents
Revenue
We recognize parking services revenue from lease and management contracts as the related
services are provided. Substantially all of our revenues come from the following two sources:
| Parking services revenuelease contracts. Parking services revenues related to lease
contracts consist of all revenue received at a leased facility, including parking receipts
(net of parking tax), consulting and real estate development fees, gains on sales of
contracts and payments for exercising termination rights. |
| Parking services revenuemanagement contracts. Management contract revenue consists of
management fees, including both fixed and performance-based fees, and amounts attributable
to ancillary services such as accounting, equipment leasing, payments received for
exercising termination rights, consulting, developmental fees, gains on sales of contracts,
as well as insurance and other value-added services with respect to managed locations. We
believe we generally purchase required insurance at lower rates than our clients can obtain
on their own because we effectively self-insure for all liability and workers compensation
claims by maintaining a large per-claim deductible. As a result, we have generated operating
income on the insurance provided under our management contracts by focusing on our risk
management efforts and controlling losses. Management contract revenues do not include gross
customer collections at the managed locations as this revenue belongs to the property owner
rather than to us. Management contracts generally provide us with a management fee
regardless of the operating performance of the underlying facility. |
Conversions between type of contracts (lease or management) are typically determined by our
client and not us. Although the underlying economics to us of management contracts and leases are
similar, the manner in which we account for them differs substantially.
Reimbursement of Management Contract Expense
Reimbursement of management contract expense consists of the direct reimbursement from the
property owner for operating expenses incurred under a management contract.
Cost of Parking Services
Our cost of parking services consists of the following:
| Cost of parking serviceslease contracts. The cost of parking services under a lease
arrangement consists of contractual rental fees paid to the facility owner and all operating
expenses incurred in connection with operating the leased facility. Contractual fees paid to
the facility owner are generally based on either a fixed contractual amount or a percentage
of gross revenue or a combination thereof. Generally, under a lease arrangement we are not
responsible for major capital expenditures or real estate taxes. |
| Cost of parking servicesmanagement contracts. The cost of parking services under a
management contract is generally the responsibility of the facility owner. As a result,
these costs are not included in our results of operations. However, our reverse management
contracts, which typically provide for larger management fees, do require us to pay for
certain costs. |
Gross Profit
Gross profit equals our revenue less the cost of generating such revenue. This is the key
metric we use to examine our performance because it captures the underlying economic benefit to us
of both lease contracts and management contracts.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses include salaries, wages, payroll taxes, insurance, travel
and office related expenses for our headquarters, field offices, supervisory employees, chairman of
the board and board of directors.
21
Table of Contents
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation is determined using a straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the
various asset classes or in the case of leasehold improvements, over the initial term of the
operating lease or its useful life, whichever is shorter. Intangible assets determined to have
finite lives are amortized over their remaining useful life.
Valuation Allowance Related to Long-Term Receivables
Valuation allowance related to long-term receivables is recorded when there is an extended
length of time estimated for collection of long-term receivables.
Seasonality
During the first quarter of each year, seasonality impacts our performance with regard to
moderating revenues, with the reduced levels of travel most clearly reflected in the parking
activity associated with our airport and hotel businesses as well as increases in certain costs of
parking services, such as snow removal, both of which negatively affect gross profit. Although our
revenues and profitability are affected by the seasonality of the business, general and
administrative costs are relatively stable throughout the fiscal year.
Results of Operations
Three Months ended June 30, 2009 Compared to Three Months ended June 30, 2008
The following table presents the material factors that impact our revenue.
Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
June 30, | Variance | |||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Amount | % | |||||||||||||
Lease contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 2.1 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 2.0 | 2,000.0 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.1 | 4.1 | (4.0 | ) | (97.6 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location: |
||||||||||||||||
Short-term parking |
21.4 | 22.4 | (1.0 | ) | (4.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Monthly parking |
9.4 | 10.2 | (0.8 | ) | (7.8 | ) | ||||||||||
Total same location |
30.8 | 32.6 | (1.8 | ) | (5.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Conversions |
0.1 | 1.3 | (1.2 | ) | (92.3 | ) | ||||||||||
Acquisitions |
2.6 | 1.9 | 0.7 | 36.8 | ||||||||||||
Total lease contract revenue |
$ | 35.7 | $ | 40.0 | $ | (4.3 | ) | (10.8 | ) | |||||||
Management contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 2.6 | $ | 0.2 | $ | 2.4 | 1,200.0 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.6 | 5.0 | (4.4 | ) | (88.0 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location |
31.6 | 29.1 | 2.5 | 8.6 | ||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
2.5 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 19.0 | ||||||||||||
Total management contract revenue |
$ | 37.3 | $ | 36.4 | $ | 0.9 | 2.5 | |||||||||
Reimbursement of management contract expense |
$ | 97.6 | $ | 99.3 | $ | (1.7 | ) | (1.7 | ) | |||||||
Parking services revenuelease contracts. Lease contract revenue decreased $4.3 million, or
10.8%, to $35.7 million in the three months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $40.0 million for the
three months ended June 30, 2008. The decrease resulted primarily from a decrease in same location
short-term parking revenue, conversions, and a decrease of $1.4 million related to the Hurricane
Katrina settlement received in 2008, which did not recur in 2009, included in contract expirations,
which was partially offset by increases from our acquisitions and new locations. Same location
revenue for those facilities, which as of June 30, 2009 are the comparative periods for the two
years presented, decreased 5.5%. Revenue associated with contract expirations relates to contracts
that expired during the current period.
22
Table of Contents
Parking services revenuemanagement contracts. Management contract revenue increased $0.9
million, or 2.5%, to $37.3 million for three months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $36.4 million
for the three months ended June 30, 2008. The increase resulted primarily from same location
revenue, new locations and acquisitions, partially offset by decreases in revenue from contract
expirations, which includes a $0.2 million decrease related to the Hurricane Katrina settlement
received in 2008, that did not recur in 2009. Same locations revenue for those facilities, which as
of June 30, 2009 are the comparative for the two years presented, increased 8.6%.
Reimbursement of management contract expense. Reimbursement of management contract expenses
decreased $1.7 million, or 1.7%, to $97.6 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009,
compared to $99.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2008. This decrease resulted from a
reduction in reimbursements for costs incurred on behalf of owners.
The following table presents the material factors that impact our cost of parking services.
Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
June 30, | Variance | |||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Amount | % | |||||||||||||
Cost of parking services lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 1.9 | $ | | $ | 1.9 | 100.00 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.1 | 2.1 | (2.0 | ) | (95.2 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location: |
||||||||||||||||
Rent |
21.8 | 22.7 | (0.9 | ) | (4.0 | ) | ||||||||||
Payroll and payroll related |
4.3 | 4.5 | (0.2 | ) | (4.4 | ) | ||||||||||
Other operating costs |
2.5 | 2.7 | (0.2 | ) | (7.4 | ) | ||||||||||
Total same location |
28.6 | 29.9 | (1.3 | ) | (4.3 | ) | ||||||||||
Conversions |
0.1 | 1.1 | (1.0 | ) | (90.9 | ) | ||||||||||
Acquisitions |
2.2 | 1.6 | 0.6 | 37.5 | ||||||||||||
Total cost of parking services lease contracts |
$ | 32.9 | $ | 34.7 | $ | (1.8 | ) | (5.2 | ) | |||||||
Cost of parking services management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New locations |
$ | 1.2 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 1.1 | 1,100.0 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.8 | 3.4 | (2.6 | ) | (76.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location: |
||||||||||||||||
Payroll and payroll related |
8.0 | 7.7 | 0.3 | 3.9 | ||||||||||||
Other operating expenses |
8.1 | 5.5 | 2.6 | 47.3 | ||||||||||||
Total same location |
16.1 | 13.2 | 2.9 | 22.0 | ||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
1.8 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 20.0 | ||||||||||||
Total cost of parking services management contracts |
$ | 19.9 | $ | 18.2 | $ | 1.7 | 9.3 | |||||||||
Reimbursed management contract expense |
$ | 97.6 | $ | 99.3 | $ | (1.7 | ) | (1.7 | ) | |||||||
Cost of parking serviceslease contracts. Cost of parking services for lease contracts
decreased $1.8 million, or 5.2%, to $32.9 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009,
compared to $34.7 million for the three months ended June 30, 2008. The decrease resulted primarily
from decreases in costs related to contract expirations, same locations and conversions, partially
offset by increases in costs related to new locations and acquisitions. Same locations costs for
those facilities which as of June 30, 2009 are the comparative for the two years presented,
decreased 4.3%. Same location rent expense for lease contracts decreased primarily as a result of
contingent rental payments on the decrease in revenue for same locations.
Cost of parking servicesmanagement contracts. Cost of parking services for management
contracts increased $1.7 million, or 9.3%, to $19.9 million for the three months ended June 30,
2009, compared to $18.2 million for the three months ended June 30, 2008. The increase resulted
primarily from increases in costs related to same locations, new locations and acquisitions,
partially offset by decreases in costs related to contract expirations. There was no impact on
costs for those management contracts which converted to a lease contract. Same location costs for
those facilities, which as of June 30, 2009 are the comparative period for the two years presented,
increased 22.0%. Same location increase in operating expenses for management contracts primarily
result from negative fluctuations in prior years insurance reserve adjustments increases in costs
associated with reverse management contracts and the cost of providing management services.
Reimbursed management contract expense. Reimbursed management contract expense decreased $1.7
million, or 1.7%, to $97.6 million, for the three months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $99.3
million for the three months ended June 30, 2008. This decrease resulted from a reduction in
reimbursed cost incurred on the behalf of owners.
23
Table of Contents
The following table presents the material changes to the gross profit and gross profit
percentage on our lease and management contracts.
Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
June 30, | Variance | |||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Amount | % | |||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
Gross profit lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.2 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.1 | 100.0 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 2.0 | (2.0 | ) | (100.0 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location |
2.2 | 2.7 | (0.5 | ) | (18.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Conversions |
| 0.2 | (0.2 | ) | (100.0 | ) | ||||||||||
Acquisitions |
0.4 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 33.3 | ||||||||||||
Total gross profit lease contracts |
$ | 2.8 | $ | 5.3 | $ | (2.5 | ) | (47.2 | ) | |||||||
Gross profit percentage lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
9.5 | % | 100.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 48.8 | % | |||||||||||||
Same location |
7.1 | % | 8.3 | % | ||||||||||||
Conversions |
| 15.4 | % | |||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
15.4 | % | 15.8 | % | ||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage lease contracts |
7.8 | % | 13.3 | % | ||||||||||||
Gross profit management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 1.4 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 1.3 | 1,300.0 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
(0.2 | ) | 1.6 | (1.8 | ) | (112.5 | ) | |||||||||
Same location |
15.5 | 15.9 | (0.4 | ) | (2.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
0.7 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 16.7 | ||||||||||||
Total gross profit management contracts |
$ | 17.4 | $ | 18.2 | $ | (0.8 | ) | (4.4 | ) | |||||||
Gross profit percentage management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
53.8 | % | 50.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
(33.3 | %) | 32.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Same location |
49.1 | % | 54.6 | % | ||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | ||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
28.0 | % | 28.6 | % | ||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage management contracts |
46.6 | % | 50.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Gross profitlease contracts. Gross profit for lease contracts decreased $2.5 million, or
47.2%, to $2.8 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $5.3 million for the
three months ended June 30, 2008. Gross profit percentage for lease contracts decreased to 7.8%
for the three months ended June 30, 2009, compared to 13.3% for the three months ended June 30,
2008. Gross profit lease contracts decreases on same locations were primarily the result of a
decrease in short-term parking revenue, without an equal and corresponding decrease in costs.
Gross profit lease contracts decreases on contract expirations were primarily the result of the
Hurricane Katrina settlement of $1.4 million received in 2008, that did not recur in 2009.
Gross profitmanagement contracts. Gross profit for management contracts decreased $0.8
million, or 4.4%, to $17.4 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $18.2
million for the three months ended June 30, 2008. Gross profit percentage for management contracts
decreased to 46.6% for the three months ended June 30, 2009 compared to 50.0% in the three months
ended June 30, 2008. Gross profit for management contracts decreases were primarily the result of
our same locations and our contract expirations. Gross profit percentage on same locations
accounted for most of the decline on a percentage basis, primarily due to negative fluctuations in
prior years insurance reserve adjustments, increases in cost associated with reverse management
contracts and the cost of providing management services.
General and administrative expenses. General and administrative expenses decreased $1.7
million, or 14.2%, to $10.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $12.0
million for the three months ended June 30, 2008. This decrease resulted primarily from decreases
in payroll and payroll related expenses of $1.0 million, a charge of $0.4 million related to
post-retirement benefits in 2008 that did not recur, a decrease of $0.1 million related to
training, a decrease of $0.1 million related to accounting and audit fees, a decrease of $0.2
million related to outsourcing fees, decreases in other costs of $0.3 million, partially offset by
$0.4 million related to the 2008 Hurricane Katrina settlement, which did not recur in 2009.
24
Table of Contents
Interest expense. Interest expense increased $0.4 million, or 40.7%, to $1.5 million for the
three months ended June 30, 2009, as compared to $1.1 million for the three months ended June 30,
2008. This increase resulted primarily from increased borrowings.
Interest income. Interest income was $0.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and
did not change significantly compared to the three months ended June 30, 2008.
Income tax expense. Income tax expense decreased $0.9 million, or 25.5%, to $2.7 million for
the three months ended June 30, 2009, as compared to $3.6 million for the three months ended June
30, 2008. A decrease in our pre-tax income resulted in a $0.8 million decrease in income tax
expense. Our effective tax rate was 38.9% for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 40.6% for
the three months ended June 30, 2008, which resulted in a $0.1 million decrease in income tax
expense.
Segments
SFAS No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information (SFAS
131), establishes annual and interim reporting standards for an enterprises operating segments
and related disclosures about its products, services, geographic areas and major customers. An
operating segment is defined as a component of an enterprise that engages in business activities
from which it may earn revenues and incur expenses, and about which separate financial information
is regularly evaluated by the Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM) in deciding how to allocate
resources. The CODM, as defined by SFAS 131, is our President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO).
The Company is managed based on regions administered by executive vice presidents. Three
regions are generally organized geographically with the fourth region encompassing major airports
and transportation operations nationwide. The following is a summary of revenues (excluding
reimbursement of management contract expenses) by region for the three months ended June 30, 2009
and 2008. Information related to prior years has been recast to conform to the new region
alignment.
Region One encompasses Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North
Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Region Two encompasses Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, and Ontario.
Region Three encompasses Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Louisiana, Nevada, Texas,
Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
Region Four encompasses all major airport and transportation operations nationwide.
Other consists of ancillary revenue that is not specifically identifiable to a region and
reserve adjustments related to prior years.
The following tables present the material factors that impact our financial statements on an
operating segment basis.
Segment revenue information is summarized as follows:
Three Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.7 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.5 | $ | | $ | 0.8 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 2.1 | $ | 0.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 0.9 | | 0.1 | | 3.1 | | | 0.1 | | 0.1 | 4.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
16.7 | 17.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 4.0 | 4.3 | 9.9 | 10.7 | | (0.1 | ) | 30.8 | 32.6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
0.1 | 0.5 | | | | | | 0.8 | | | 0.1 | 1.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
2.6 | 1.8 | | | 0.1 | 0.1 | | | (0.1 | ) | | 2.6 | 1.9 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total lease contract revenue |
$ | 20.1 | $ | 20.8 | $ | 0.7 | $ | 0.3 | $ | 4.9 | $ | 7.5 | $ | 10.0 | $ | 11.5 | $ | | $ | (0.1 | ) | $ | 35.7 | $ | 40.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Management contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.6 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 1.4 | $ | 0.2 | $ | 0.5 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 2.6 | $ | 0.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.4 | 3.1 | | | 0.1 | 1.7 | 0.1 | 0.2 | | | 0.6 | 5.0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
11.4 | 10.6 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 10.1 | 9.5 | 7.4 | 7.7 | | 0.3 | 31.6 | 29.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
0.9 | 0.8 | | | 1.6 | 1.3 | | | | | 2.5 | 2.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total management contract
revenue |
$ | 13.3 | $ | 14.5 | $ | 2.7 | $ | 1.0 | $ | 13.2 | $ | 12.7 | $ | 8.0 | $ | 7.9 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.3 | $ | 37.3 | $ | 36.4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
25
Table of Contents
Lease contract revenue decreased primarily due to our same locations, contract
expirations and conversions. Regions one, three and four recorded a decrease in same location
revenue. Same location revenue in region four decreased compared to prior year due to the economic
impact of reduced travel. Same location revenue in region one and three decreased primarily due to
decreases in short-term parking revenue and contract expirations. Contract expirations in region
three includes the $1.4 million Hurricane Katrina settlement received in 2008, that did not recur
in 2009.
All regions recorded increases in management contract revenue from new locations. Contract
expirations in region three includes the $0.2 million Hurricane Katrina settlement received in 2008
that did not recur in 2009.
Segment cost of parking services information is summarized as follows:
Three Months June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost of parking
services lease
contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.6 | $ | | $ | 0.5 | $ | | $ | 0.7 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 1.9 | $ | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 0.9 | | | | 1.6 | | | 0.1 | (0.4 | ) | 0.1 | 2.1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
15.4 | 16.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 3.7 | 3.8 | 9.3 | 9.8 | | | 28.6 | 29.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
0.1 | 0.4 | | | | | | 0.7 | | | 0.1 | 1.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
2.2 | 1.5 | | | 0.1 | 0.1 | | | (0.1 | ) | | 2.2 | 1.6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total cost of parking
services lease
contracts |
$ | 18.3 | $ | 18.9 | $ | 0.7 | $ | 0.2 | $ | 4.5 | $ | 5.5 | $ | 9.4 | $ | 10.5 | $ | | $ | (0.4 | ) | $ | 32.9 | $ | 34.7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost of parking
services management
contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.2 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 0.6 | $ | | $ | 0.3 | $ | | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | 1.2 | $ | 0.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.7 | 2.0 | | | 0.1 | 0.8 | | 0.2 | | 0.4 | 0.8 | 3.4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
5.1 | 4.7 | 1.6 | 0.1 | 5.2 | 4.2 | 3.9 | 4.3 | 0.3 | (0.1 | ) | 16.1 | 13.2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
0.5 | 0.4 | | | 1.2 | 1.0 | | | 0.1 | 0.1 | 1.8 | 1.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total cost of parking
services management
contracts |
$ | 6.5 | $ | 7.1 | $ | 1.7 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 7.1 | $ | 6.0 | $ | 4.2 | $ | 4.5 | $ | 0.4 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 19.9 | $ | 18.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost of parking services lease contracts decreased primarily due to decreased costs in
region one, three and four related to same locations. Same location costs decreased primarily due
to decreases in rent expense primarily as a result of contingent rental payments on the decrease in
revenue for some locations and a reduction in payroll and payroll related.
Cost of parking services management contracts primarily increased due to same location costs,
primarily related to increases in costs associated with reverse management contracts and the cost
of providing management services. The other region amounts in same location costs primarily
represent prior year insurance reserve adjustments.
26
Table of Contents
Segment gross profit/gross profit percentage information is summarized as follows:
Three Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.1 | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 0.2 | $ | 0.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| | | 0.1 | | 1.5 | | | | 0.4 | | 2.0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
1.3 | 1.4 | | | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.9 | | (0.1 | ) | 2.2 | 2.7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| 0.1 | | | | | | 0.1 | | | | 0.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
0.4 | 0.3 | | | | | | | | | 0.4 | 0.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit lease contracts |
$ | 1.8 | $ | 1.9 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.4 | $ | 2.0 | $ | 0.6 | $ | 1.0 | $ | | $ | 0.3 | $ | 2.8 | $ | 5.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
(percentages) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit percentage lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
14.3 | 100.0 | | | 12.5 | | | | | | 9.5 | 100.0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| | | 100.0 | | 48.4 | | | | | | 48.8 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
7.8 | 8.0 | | | 7.5 | 11.6 | 6.1 | 8.4 | | 100.0 | 7.1 | 8.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| 20.0 | | | | | | 12.5 | | | | 15.4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
15.4 | 16.7 | | | | | | | | | 15.4 | 15.8 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage |
9.0 | 9.1 | | 33.3 | 8.2 | 26.7 | 6.0 | 8.7 | | (300.0 | ) | 7.8 | 13.3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.4 | $ | | $ | (0.1 | ) | $ | | $ | 0.8 | $ | 0.2 | $ | 0.2 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | (0.1 | ) | $ | 1.4 | $ | 0.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
(0.3 | ) | 1.1 | | | | 0.9 | 0.1 | | | (0.4 | ) | (0.2 | ) | 1.6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
6.3 | 5.9 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 4.9 | 5.3 | 3.5 | 3.4 | (0.3 | ) | 0.4 | 15.5 | 15.9 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
0.4 | 0.4 | | | 0.4 | 0.3 | | | (0.1 | ) | (0.1 | ) | 0.7 | 0.6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit management contracts |
$ | 6.8 | $ | 7.4 | $ | 1.0 | $ | 0.9 | $ | 6.1 | $ | 6.7 | $ | 3.8 | $ | 3.4 | $ | (0.3 | ) | $ | (0.2 | ) | $ | 17.4 | $ | 18.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(percentages) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit percentage management
contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
66.7 | | | | 57.1 | 100.0 | 40.0 | | 100.0 | | 53.8 | 50.0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
(75.0 | ) | 35.5 | | | | 52.9 | 100.0 | | | | (33.3 | ) | 32.0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
55.3 | 55.7 | 40.7 | 90.0 | 48.5 | 55.8 | 47.3 | 44.2 | | 133.3 | 49.1 | 54.6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
44.4 | 50.0 | | | 25.0 | 23.1 | | | | | 28.0 | 28.6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage |
51.1 | 51.0 | 37.0 | 90.0 | 46.2 | 52.8 | 47.5 | 43.0 | (300.0 | ) | (66.7 | ) | 46.6 | 50.0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit for lease contracts declined primarily due to same locations and contract
expirations. Region one, three and four experienced a decline in same location profit primarily due
to a decline in revenue that exceeded the decline in costs, primarily associated to decreases in
short-term parking revenue. Region three experienced a decline in gross profit contract expirations
due to the Hurricane Katrina settlement recorded in revenue for 2008, that did not recur in 2009.
Gross profit for management contracts declined primarily due to our same locations in region
three and our contract expirations in region one. Region three experienced a decline in gross
profit contract expirations due to the Hurricane Katrina settlement recorded in revenue for 2008,
that did not recur in 2009.
Segment general and administrative expense information is summarized as follows:
Three Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
General and administrative expenses |
$ | 2.3 | $ | 2.2 | $ | 0.4 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 2.7 | $ | 2.4 | $ | 0.8 | $ | 0.8 | $ | 4.1 | $ | 6.1 | $ | 10.3 | $ | 12.0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
General and administrative expenses on a segment basis represent direct administrative
costs for each region. The other region consists primarily of the corporate headquarters. The other
region decreased primarily related to payroll and payroll related and post-retirement benefits,
partially offset by the Hurricane Katrina settlement received in 2008 that did not recur in 2009.
27
Table of Contents
Six Months ended June 30, 2009 Compared to Six Months ended June 30, 2008
The following table presents the material factors that impact our revenue.
Six Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
June 30, | Variance | |||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Amount | % | |||||||||||||
Lease contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 5.0 | $ | 0.9 | $ | 4.1 | 455.6 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.4 | 6.9 | (6.5 | ) | (94.2 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location: |
||||||||||||||||
Short-term parking |
41.1 | 44.1 | (3.0 | ) | (6.8 | ) | ||||||||||
Monthly parking |
18.8 | 20.1 | (1.3 | ) | (6.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Total same location |
59.9 | 64.2 | (4.3 | ) | (6.7 | ) | ||||||||||
Conversions |
0.3 | 2.5 | (2.2 | ) | (88.0 | ) | ||||||||||
Acquisitions |
4.8 | 3.2 | 1.6 | 50.0 | ||||||||||||
Total lease contract revenue |
$ | 70.4 | $ | 77.7 | $ | (7.3 | ) | (9.4 | ) | |||||||
Management contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 6.3 | $ | 1.2 | $ | 5.1 | 425.0 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
2.2 | 10.8 | (8.6 | ) | (79.6 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location |
61.6 | 56.0 | 5.6 | 10.0 | ||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
5.5 | 4.3 | 1.2 | 27.9 | ||||||||||||
Total management contract revenue |
$ | 75.6 | $ | 72.3 | $ | 3.3 | 4.6 | |||||||||
Reimbursement of management contract expense |
$ | 200.2 | $ | 198.8 | $ | 1.4 | 0.7 | |||||||||
Parking services revenuelease contracts. Lease contract revenue decreased $7.3 million, or
9.4%, to $70.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $77.7 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2008. The decrease resulted primarily from a decrease in same location
short-term parking revenue conversions, and a decrease of $1.4 million related to the Hurricane
Katrina settlement received in 2008, which did not recur in 2009, included in contract expirations,
which was partially offset by increases from our new locations and acquisitions. Same location
revenue for those facilities, which as of June 30, 2009 are the comparative periods for the two
years presented, decreased 6.7%. Revenue associated with contract expirations relates to contracts
that expired during the current period.
Parking services revenuemanagement contracts. Management contract revenue increased $3.3
million, or 4.6%, to $75.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $72.3
million for the six months ended June 30, 2008. The increase resulted primarily from same location
revenue, new locations and acquisitions, partially offset by decreases in revenue from contract
expirations, which includes a $0.2 million decrease related to the Hurricane Katrina settlement
received in 2008, that did not recur in 2009. Same locations revenue for those facilities, which as
of June 30, 2009 are the comparative periods for the two years presented, increased 10.0%.
Reimbursement of management contract expense. Reimbursement of management contract expenses
increased $1.4 million, or 0.7%, to $200.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, compared
to $198.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008. This increase resulted from additional
reimbursements for costs incurred on behalf of owners.
28
Table of Contents
The following table presents the material factors that impact our cost of parking services.
Six Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
June 30, | Variance | |||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Amount | % | |||||||||||||
Cost of parking services lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 4.9 | $ | 0.9 | $ | 4.0 | 444.4 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.4 | 4.7 | (4.3 | ) | (91.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location: |
||||||||||||||||
Rent |
42.4 | 44.7 | (2.3 | ) | (5.1 | ) | ||||||||||
Payroll and payroll related |
8.3 | 8.8 | (0.5 | ) | (5.7 | ) | ||||||||||
Other operating costs |
5.2 | 5.4 | (0.2 | ) | (3.7 | ) | ||||||||||
Total same location |
55.9 | 58.9 | (3.0 | ) | (5.1 | ) | ||||||||||
Conversions |
0.2 | 2.2 | (2.0 | ) | (90.9 | ) | ||||||||||
Acquisitions |
4.5 | 2.9 | 1.6 | 55.2 | ||||||||||||
Total cost of parking services lease contracts |
$ | 65.9 | $ | 69.6 | $ | (3.7 | ) | (5.3 | ) | |||||||
Cost of parking services management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New locations |
$ | 3.0 | $ | 0.6 | $ | 2.4 | 400.0 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
1.9 | 6.9 | (5.0 | ) | (72.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location: |
||||||||||||||||
Payroll and payroll related |
15.6 | 14.6 | 1.0 | 6.8 | ||||||||||||
Other operating expenses |
15.9 | 10.2 | 5.7 | 55.9 | ||||||||||||
Total same location |
31.5 | 24.8 | 6.7 | 27.0 | ||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
3.9 | 2.9 | 1.0 | 34.5 | ||||||||||||
Total cost of parking services management contracts |
$ | 40.3 | $ | 35.2 | $ | 5.1 | 14.5 | |||||||||
Reimbursed management contract expense |
$ | 200.2 | $ | 198.8 | $ | 1.4 | 0.7 | |||||||||
Cost of parking serviceslease contracts. Cost of parking services for lease contracts
decreased $3.7 million, or 5.3%, to $65.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, compared
to $69.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008. The decrease resulted primarily from
decreases in costs related to contract expirations, same locations and conversions, partially
offset by increases in costs related to new locations and acquisitions. Same locations costs for
those facilities which as of June 30, 2009 are the comparative for the two years presented,
decreased 5.3%. Same location rent expense for lease contracts decreased primarily as a result of
contingent rental payments on the decrease in revenue for same locations.
Cost of parking servicesmanagement contracts. Cost of parking services for management
contracts increased $5.1 million, or 14.5%, to $40.3 million for the six months ended June 30,
2009, compared to $35.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008. The increase resulted
primarily from increases in costs related to same locations, new locations and acquisitions,
partially offset by decreases in costs related to contract expirations. There was no impact on
costs for those management contracts which converted to a lease contract. Same location costs for
those facilities, which as of June 30, 2009 are the comparative for the two years presented,
increased 27.0%. Same location increase in operating expenses for management contracts primarily
result from negative fluctuations in prior years insurance reserve adjustments, increases in costs
associated with reverse management contracts and the cost of providing management services.
Reimbursed management contract expense. Reimbursed management contract expense increased $1.4
million, or 0.7%, to $200.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $198.8
million for the six months ended June 30, 2008. This increase resulted from additional reimbursed
cost incurred on the behalf of owners.
29
Table of Contents
The following table presents the material changes to the gross profit and gross profit
percentage on our lease and management contracts.
Six Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
June 30, | Variance | |||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Amount | % | |||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
Gross profit lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | 100.0 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 2.2 | (2.2 | ) | (100.0 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location |
4.0 | 5.3 | (1.3 | ) | (24.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Conversions |
0.1 | 0.3 | (0.2 | ) | (66.7 | ) | ||||||||||
Acquisitions |
0.3 | 0.3 | | | ||||||||||||
Total gross profit lease contracts |
$ | 4.5 | $ | 8.1 | $ | (3.6 | ) | (44.4 | ) | |||||||
Gross profit percentage lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
2.0 | % | | |||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 31.9 | % | |||||||||||||
Same location |
6.7 | % | 8.3 | % | ||||||||||||
Conversions |
33.3 | % | 12.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
6.3 | % | 9.4 | % | ||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage lease contracts |
6.4 | % | 10.4 | % | ||||||||||||
Gross profit management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 3.3 | $ | 0.6 | $ | 2.7 | 450.0 | |||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.3 | 3.9 | (3.6 | ) | (92.3 | ) | ||||||||||
Same location |
30.1 | 31.2 | (1.1 | ) | (3.5 | ) | ||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
1.6 | 1.4 | 0.2 | 14.3 | ||||||||||||
Total gross profit management contracts |
$ | 35.3 | $ | 37.1 | $ | (1.8 | ) | (4.9 | ) | |||||||
Gross profit percentage management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||
New location |
52.4 | % | 50.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
13.6 | % | 36.1 | % | ||||||||||||
Same location |
48.9 | % | 55.7 | % | ||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | ||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
29.1 | % | 32.6 | % | ||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage management contracts |
46.7 | % | 51.3 | % | ||||||||||||
Gross profitlease contracts. Gross profit for lease contracts decreased $3.6 million, or
44.4%, to $4.5 million for six months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $8.1 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2008. Gross profit percentage for lease contracts decreased to 6.4% for the
six months ended June 30, 2009, compared to 10.4% for the six months ended June 30, 2008. Gross
profit lease contracts decreases on same locations were primarily the result of a decrease in
short-term parking revenue, without an equal and corresponding decrease in costs. Gross profit
lease contracts decreases on contract expirations were primarily the result of the Hurricane
Katrina settlement of $1.4 million received in 2008, that did not recur in 2009.
Gross profitmanagement contracts. Gross profit for management contracts decreased $1.8
million, or 4.9%, to $35.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $37.1
million for the six months ended June 30, 2008. Gross profit percentage for management contracts
decreased to 46.7% for the six months ended June 30, 2009, compared to 51.3% for the six months
ended June 30, 2008. Gross profit for management contracts decreases were primarily the result of
our same locations and our contract expirations. Gross profit percentage on same locations
accounted for most of the decline on a percentage basis, primarily due to negative fluctuations in
prior years insurance reserve adjustments, increases in costs associated with reverse management
contracts and the cost of providing management services.
General and administrative expenses. General and administrative expenses decreased $0.3
million, or 1.5%, to $23.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $23.4
million for the six months ended June 30, 2008. This decrease resulted primarily from decreases in
payroll and payroll related expenses of $0.2 million, a decrease of $0.4 million related to
post-retirement benefits in 2008 that did not recur, a $0.4 million credit related to the
settlement agreement from a prior year acquisition, a decrease of $0.2 million related to
outsourcing fees, decreases in other costs of $0.1 million, which was partially offset by increases
in legal-related expenses of $0.6 million, related to the sale by the Companys former majority
shareholder of its stake in the Company, and $0.4 million related to the 2008 Hurricane Katrina
settlement, which did not recur in 2009.
30
Table of Contents
Interest expense. Interest expense increased $0.4 million, or 13.8%, to $3.0 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2009, as compared to $2.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008.
This increase resulted from increased borrowings.
Interest income. Interest income increased $0.1 million, or 95.2%, to $0.2 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2009, as compared to $0.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008.
This increase resulted primarily from an interest bearing receivable that did not occur in the
prior year.
Income tax expense. Income tax expense decreased $2.3 million, or 35.3%, to $4.3 million for
the six months ended June 30, 2009, as compared to $6.6 million for the six months ended June 30,
2008. A decrease in our pre-tax income resulted in a $2.1 million decrease in income tax expense.
Our effective tax rate was 39.2% for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 40.8% for the six
months ended June 30, 2008, which resulted in a $0.2 million decrease in income tax expense.
Segments
SFAS No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information (SFAS
131), establishes annual and interim reporting standards for an enterprises operating segments
and related disclosures about its products, services, geographic areas and major customers. An
operating segment is defined as a component of an enterprise that engages in business activities
from which it may earn revenues and incur expenses, and about which separate financial information
is regularly evaluated by the Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM) in deciding how to allocate
resources. The CODM, as defined by SFAS 131, is our President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO).
The Company is managed based on regions administered by executive vice presidents. Three
regions are generally organized geographically with the fourth region encompassing major airports
and transportation operations nationwide. The following is a summary of revenues (excluding
reimbursement of management contract expenses) by region for the three months ended June 30, 2009
and 2008. Information related to prior years has been recast to conform to the new region
alignment.
Region One encompasses Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North
Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Region Two encompasses Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba and Ontario.
Region Three encompasses Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Louisiana, Nevada, Texas,
Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
Region Four encompasses all major airport and transportation operations nationwide.
Other consists of ancillary revenue that is not specifically identifiable to a region and
reserve adjustments related to prior years.
The following tables present the material factors that impact our financial statements on an
operating segment basis.
Segment revenue information is summarized as follows:
Six Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 2.3 | $ | 0.9 | $ | 1.0 | $ | | $ | 1.5 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 5.0 | $ | 0.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.2 | 1.9 | | 0.2 | 0.2 | 4.8 | | | | | 0.4 | 6.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
31.9 | 33.4 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 7.9 | 8.6 | 19.8 | 21.8 | | | 59.9 | 64.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
0.3 | 0.9 | | | | | | 1.6 | | | 0.3 | 2.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
4.6 | 3.0 | | | 0.2 | 0.2 | | | | | 4.8 | 3.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total lease contract revenue |
$ | 39.3 | $ | 40.1 | $ | 1.3 | $ | 0.6 | $ | 9.8 | $ | 13.6 | $ | 19.9 | $ | 23.4 | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 70.4 | $ | 77.7 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 1.8 | $ | 0.5 | $ | | $ | | $ | 3.2 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 1.3 | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | 6.3 | $ | 1.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
1.1 | 6.5 | | | 1.0 | 3.9 | 0.2 | 0.4 | (0.1 | ) | | 2.2 | 10.8 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
22.0 | 20.6 | 4.8 | 1.9 | 19.7 | 18.4 | 14.9 | 15.2 | 0.2 | (0.1 | ) | 61.6 | 56.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
2.0 | 1.4 | | | 3.5 | 2.9 | | | | | 5.5 | 4.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total management contract
revenue |
$ | 26.9 | $ | 29.0 | $ | 4.8 | $ | 1.9 | $ | 27.4 | $ | 25.7 | $ | 16.4 | $ | 15.7 | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 75.6 | $ | 72.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
31
Table of Contents
Lease contract revenue decreased primarily due to our same locations, contract
expirations and conversions. Regions one, two, three and four recorded a decrease in same location
revenue. Same location revenue decreased compared to prior year primarily due to a reduction in
short-term parking revenue and contract expirations. Contract expirations in region three includes
the $1.4 million Hurricane Katrina settlement received in 2008 that did not recur in 2009.
Regions one, two, three, and other recorded increases in management contract revenue from same
location revenue compared to prior year. Regions one, two, and three added new services to existing
contracts, which accounted for the increase in same location revenue. Contract expirations in
region three includes the $0.2 million Hurricane Katrina settlement received in 2008, that did not
recur in 2009.
Segment cost of parking services information is summarized as follows:
Six Months June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost of parking
services lease
contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 2.5 | $ | 0.9 | $ | 0.9 | $ | | $ | 1.4 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 4.9 | $ | 0.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.2 | 1.8 | | | 0.2 | 3.4 | | | | (0.5 | ) | 0.4 | 4.7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
29.5 | 30.9 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 7.3 | 7.7 | 18.7 | 20.0 | 0.1 | (0.1 | ) | 55.9 | 58.9 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
0.2 | 0.8 | | | | | | 1.4 | | | 0.2 | 2.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
4.4 | 2.7 | | | 0.2 | 0.2 | | | (0.1 | ) | | 4.5 | 2.9 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total cost of parking
services lease
contracts |
$ | 36.8 | $ | 37.1 | $ | 1.2 | $ | 0.4 | $ | 9.1 | $ | 11.3 | $ | 18.8 | $ | 21.4 | $ | | $ | (0.6 | ) | $ | 65.9 | $ | 69.6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost of parking
services management
contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.7 | $ | 0.2 | $ | 0.2 | $ | | $ | 1.5 | $ | 0.2 | $ | 0.7 | $ | | $ | (0.1 | ) | $ | 0.2 | $ | 3.0 | $ | 0.6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
1.1 | 4.1 | | | 0.7 | 2.0 | 0.1 | 0.3 | | 0.5 | 1.9 | 6.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
10.2 | 9.0 | 2.9 | 0.2 | 10.0 | 8.2 | 7.7 | 8.3 | 0.7 | (0.9 | ) | 31.5 | 24.8 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
1.1 | 0.6 | | | 2.8 | 2.3 | | | | | 3.9 | 2.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total cost of parking
services management
contracts |
$ | 13.1 | $ | 13.9 | $ | 3.1 | $ | 0.2 | $ | 15.0 | $ | 12.7 | $ | 8.5 | $ | 8.6 | $ | 0.6 | $ | (0.2 | ) | $ | 40.3 | $ | 35.2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost of parking services lease contracts decreased primarily due to decreased costs in
region one, two, three and four related to same locations and decreased costs in region one and
three related to contract expirations. Same location costs decreased primarily due to rent expense
for lease contracts, as a result of contingent rental payments on the decrease in revenue for same
locations and reductions in payroll and payroll related
Cost of parking services management contracts primarily increased due to costs associated with
reverse management contracts and the cost of providing management services for same and new
locations.
32
Table of Contents
Segment gross profit/gross profit percentage information is summarized as follows:
Six Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | (0.2 | ) | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | $ | 0.1 | $ | | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 0.1 | | 0.2 | | 1.4 | | | | 0.5 | | 2.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
2.4 | 2.5 | | | 0.6 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.8 | (0.1 | ) | 0.1 | 4.0 | 5.3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
0.1 | 0.1 | | | | | | 0.2 | | | 0.1 | 0.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
0.2 | 0.3 | | | | | | | 0.1 | | 0.3 | 0.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit lease contracts |
$ | $2.5 | $ | 3.0 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.2 | $ | 0.7 | $ | 2.3 | $ | 1.1 | $ | 2.0 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.6 | $ | 4.5 | $ | 8.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
(percentages) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit percentage lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
(8.7 | ) | | 10.0 | | 6.7 | | | | 100.0 | | 2.0 | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 5.3 | | 100.0 | | 29.2 | | | | | | 31.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
7.5 | 7.5 | | | 7.6 | 10.5 | 5.6 | 8.3 | | | 6.7 | 8.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
33.3 | 11.1 | | | | | | 12.5 | | | 33.3 | 12.0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
4.3 | 10.0 | | | | | | | | | 6.2 | 9.4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage |
6.4 | 7.5 | 7.7 | 33.3 | 7.1 | 16.9 | 5.5 | 8.5 | 100.0 | | 6.4 | 10.4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 1.1 | $ | 0.3 | $ | (0.2 | ) | $ | | $ | 1.7 | $ | 0.3 | $ | 0.6 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.1 | $ | (0.1 | ) | $ | 3.3 | $ | 0.6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 2.4 | | | 0.3 | 1.9 | 0.1 | 0.1 | (0.1 | ) | (0.5 | ) | 0.3 | 3.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
11.8 | 11.6 | 1.9 | 1.7 | 9.7 | 10.2 | 7.2 | 6.9 | (0.5 | ) | 0.8 | 30.1 | 31.2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
0.9 | 0.8 | | | 0.7 | 0.6 | | | | | 1.6 | 1.4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit management contracts |
$ | 13.8 | $ | 15.1 | $ | 1.7 | $ | 1.7. | $ | 12.4 | $ | 13.0 | $ | 7.9 | $ | 7.1 | $ | (0.5 | ) | $ | 0.2 | $ | 35.3 | $ | 37.1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
(percentages) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
61.1 | 60.0 | | | 53.1 | 60.0 | 46.2 | 100.0 | | (100.0 | ) | 52.4 | 50.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 36.9 | | | 30.0 | 48.7 | 50.0 | 25.0 | 100.0 | | 13.6 | 36.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
53.6 | 56.3 | 39.6 | 89.5 | 49.2 | 55.4 | 48.3 | 45.4 | (250.0 | ) | (800.0 | ) | 48.9 | 55.7 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions |
45.0 | 57.1 | | | 20.0 | 20.7 | | | | | 29.1 | 32.6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage |
51.3 | 52.1 | 35.4 | 89.5 | 45.3 | 50.6 | 48.2 | 45.2 | (500.0 | ) | | 46.7 | 51.3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit for lease contracts declined primarily due to same locations. Region one,
three and four experienced a decline in same location profit primarily due to a decline in revenue
that exceeded the decline in costs, primarily associated to a decrease in short-term parking
revenue. Region three experienced a decline in gross profit contract expirations due to the
Hurricane Katrina settlement recorded in revenue for 2008, that did not recur in 2009.
Gross profit for management contracts declined primarily due to our same locations and
contract expirations in regions one, three and other. The other region declined in gross profit due
to changes in prior years insurance reserve activity. Region three experienced a decline in gross
profit contract expirations due to the Hurricane Katrina settlement recorded in revenue for 2008,
that did not recur in 2009.
Segment general and administrative expense information is summarized as follows:
Six Months Ended June 30, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
General and administrative expenses |
$ | 4.5 | $ | 4.4 | $ | 0.9 | $ | 1.0 | $ | 6.3 | $ | 5.5 | $ | 1.7 | $ | 1.5 | $ | 9.7 | $ | 11.0 | $ | 23.1 | $ | 23.4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
General and administrative expenses on a segment basis represent direct administrative
costs for each region. The other region consists primarily of the corporate headquarters. The other
region decreased primarily related to payroll and payroll related and post-retirement benefits,
partially offset by legal fees related to the sale by the Companys former majority shareholder of
its stake in the Company. Region three increased primarily related to legal fees, partially offset
by the Hurricane Katrina settlement received in 2008, that did not recur in 2009.
33
Table of Contents
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Outstanding Indebtedness
On June 30, 2009, we had total indebtedness of approximately $126.6 million, an increase of
$1.5 million from December 31, 2008. The $126.6 million includes:
| $122.8 million under our senior credit facility; and |
||
| $3.8 million of other debt including capital lease obligations and obligations on seller
notes and other indebtedness. |
We believe that our cash flow from operations, combined with availability under our senior
credit facility, which amounted to $25.9 million at June 30, 2009, will be sufficient to enable us
to pay our indebtedness, or to fund other liquidity needs. We may need to refinance all or a
portion of our indebtedness on or before their respective maturities. We believe that we will be
able to refinance our indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms.
Senior Credit Facility
On July 15, 2008, we entered into an amended and restated credit agreement which restated our
credit facility.
The $210.0 million revolving senior credit facility will expire in July 2013. The revolving
senior credit facility includes a letter of credit sub-facility with a sublimit of $50.0 million.
The revolving senior credit facility bears interest, at our option, at either (1) LIBOR plus
the applicable LIBOR Margin ranging between 2.00% and 3.50% depending on the ratio of our total
funded indebtedness to our EBITDA from time to time (Total Debt Ratio) or (2) the Base Rate (as
defined below) plus the applicable Base Rate Margin ranging between 0.50% and 2.00% depending on
our Total Debt Ratio. We may elect interest periods of one, two, three or six months for LIBOR
based borrowings. The Base Rate is the greater of (i) the rate publicly announced from time to time
by Bank of America, N.A. as its prime rate, or (ii) the overnight federal funds rate plus 0.50%.
The senior credit facility includes a fixed charge ratio covenant, a total debt to EBITDA
ratio covenant, a limit on our ability to incur additional indebtedness, issue preferred stock or
pay dividends, and certain other restrictions on our activities. We are required to repay
borrowings under the senior credit facility out of the proceeds of future issuances of debt or
equity securities and asset sales, subject to certain customary exceptions. The senior credit
facility is secured by substantially all of our assets and all assets acquired in the future
(including a pledge of 100% of the stock of our existing and future domestic guarantor subsidiaries
and 65% of the stock of our existing and future foreign subsidiaries).
We are in compliance with all of our financial covenants.
At June 30, 2009, we had $18.9 million of letters of credit outstanding under the senior
credit facility, borrowings against the senior credit facility aggregated $122.8 million and we had
$25.9 million available under the senior credit facility.
Interest Rate Cap Transactions
We use a variable rate senior credit facility to finance our operations. This facility exposes
us to variability in interest payments due to changes in interest rates. If interest rates
increase, interest expense increases and conversely, if interest rates decrease, interest expense
also decreases. We believe that it is prudent to limit the exposure of an increase in interest
rates.
In 2006 we entered into a Rate Cap Transaction with Bank of America, which allows us to limit
our exposure on a portion of our borrowings under the Credit Agreement. Under the Rate Cap
Transaction, we receive payments from Bank of America each quarterly period to the extent that the
prevailing three month LIBOR during that period exceeds our cap rate of 5.75%. The Rate Cap
Transaction caps our LIBOR interest rate on a notional amount of $50.0 million at 5.75% for a total
of 36 months. The Rate Cap Transaction began as of August 4, 2006 and settles each quarter on a
date that coincides with our quarterly interest payment dates under the Credit Agreement. This Rate
Cap Transaction is classified as a cash flow hedge, and we calculate the effectiveness of the hedge
on a quarterly basis. The ineffective portion of the cash flow hedge is recognized in current
period earnings as an increase of interest expense.
At June 30, 2009, the fair value of the Rate Cap Transaction was immaterial. Total changes in
the fair value of the Rate Cap Transaction for the six months ended June 30, 2009 was also
immaterial.
34
Table of Contents
We do not enter into derivative instruments for any purpose other than cash flow hedging
purposes.
Stock Repurchases
2009 Stock Repurchases
In July 2008, the Board of Directors authorized us to repurchase shares of our common stock,
on the open market or through private purchases, up to $60.0 million in aggregate. As of December
31, 2008, $22.9 million remained available for repurchase under this authorization.
During the first quarter of 2009, we repurchased from third party shareholders 93,600 shares
at an average price of $18.23 per share, including average commissions of $0.03 per share, on the
open market. Our majority shareholder sold to us 119,701 shares in the first quarter at an average
price of $18.20 per share. The total value of the first quarter transactions was $3.9 million.
During the first quarter of 2009, 200,650 shares were retired and the remaining 12,651 shares were
retired in April 2009.
There were no repurchases in the second quarter of 2009.
As of June 30, 2009, $19.0 million remained available for repurchase under the July 2008
authorization by the Board of Directors.
2008 Stock Repurchases
In December 2007, the Board of Directors authorized us to repurchase shares of our common
stock, on the open market or through private purchases, up to $25.0 million in aggregate. As of
December 31, 2007, $22.9 million remained available for repurchase under this authorization.
During the first quarter of 2008, we repurchased from third party shareholders 257,125 shares
at an average price of $20.79 per share, including average commissions $0.03 per share, on the open
market. Our majority shareholder sold to us 120,111 shares in the first quarter at an average price
of $20.76 per share. The total value of the first quarter transactions was $7.8 million. In March
2008, 214,500 shares were retired and the remaining 162,736 shares were retired in June 2008.
During the second quarter of 2008, we repurchased from third party shareholders 120,000 shares
at an average price of $20.70 per share, including average commissions of $0.03 per share, on the
open market. Our majority shareholder sold to us 125,964 shares in the second quarter at an
average price of $20.67 per share. The total value of the second quarter transactions was $5.1
million. 173,701 shares were retired in June 2008 and the remaining 72,263 were retired during the
third quarter.
Letters of Credit
At June 30, 2009, we have provided letters of credit totaling $16.5 million to our casualty
insurance carrier to collateralize our casualty insurance program.
As of June 30, 2009, we provided $2.4 million in letters to collateralize other obligations.
Deficiency Payments
Pursuant to our obligations with respect to the parking garage operations at Bradley
International Airport, we are required to make certain payments for the benefit of the State of
Connecticut and for holders of special facility revenue bonds. The deficiency payments represent
contingent interest bearing advances to the trustee to cover operating cash flow requirements. The
payments, if any, are recorded as a receivable by us for which we are reimbursed from time to time
as provided in the trust agreement. As of June 30, 2009, we have a receivable of $7.5 million,
comprised of cumulative deficiency payments to the trustee, net of reimbursements. We believe these
advances to be fully recoverable and therefore have not recorded a valuation allowance for them. We
do not guarantee the payment of any principal or interest on any debt obligations of the State of
Connecticut or the trustee.
We made deficiency payments (net of repayments received) of $1.5 million in the first six
months of 2009 compared to $0.9 million in the first six months of 2008. We did not receive any
payments for interest and premium income related to deficiency payments in the first six months of
2009 and 2008.
35
Table of Contents
Daily Cash Collections
As a result of day-to-day activity at our parking locations, we collect significant amounts of
cash. Lease contract revenue is generally deposited into our local bank accounts, with a portion
remitted to our clients in the form of rental payments according to the terms of the leases. Under
management contracts, some clients require us to deposit the daily receipts into one of our local
bank accounts, with the cash in excess of our operating expenses and management fees remitted to
the clients at negotiated intervals. Other clients require us to deposit the daily receipts into
client accounts and the clients then reimburse us for operating expenses and pay our management fee
subsequent to month-end. Some clients require a segregated account for the receipts and
disbursements at locations. Our working capital and liquidity may be adversely affected if a
significant number of our clients require us to deposit all parking revenues into their respective
accounts.
Our liquidity also fluctuates on an intra-month and intra-year basis depending on the contract
mix and timing of significant cash payments. Additionally, our ability to utilize cash deposited
into our local accounts is dependent upon the availability and movement of that cash into our
corporate account. For all these reasons, from time to time, we carry a significant cash balance,
while also utilizing our senior credit facility.
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities
Our primary sources of funds are cash flows from operating activities and changes in working
capital. Net cash provided by operating activities totaled $7.8 million for the first six months of
2009. Cash provided included $13.3 million from operations which was offset by a net decrease in
working capital of $5.4 million. The decrease in working capital resulted primarily from an
increase of $1.5 million in notes and accounts receivable which primarily related to Bradley
International Airport guarantor payments as described under Deficiency Payments, and a decrease
of $3.9 million in other liabilities which primarily related to a reduction in accruals related to
payments under employee incentive program.
Net cash provided by operating activities totaled $17.2 million for the first six months of
2008. Cash provided included $16.5 million from operations and a net increase in working capital of
$0.6 million. The increase in working capital resulted primarily from an increase of $3.6 million
in accounts payable which primarily resulted from the timing on payments to our clients and new
business that are under management contracts as described under Daily Cash Collections, offset by
a decrease of $2.5 million in notes and accounts receivable.
Net Cash Used in Investing Activities
Net cash used in investing activities totaled $3.1 million in the first six months of 2009.
Cash used in investing activities for the first six months of 2009 included capital expenditures of
$2.2 million for capital investments needed to secure and/or extend leased facilities, investment
in information system enhancements and infrastructure, cost of contract purchases of $0.6 million
and $0.3 million for contingent payments on previously acquired contracts.
Net cash used in investing activities totaled $8.2 million in the first six months of 2008.
Cash used in investing activities for the first three months of 2008 included business acquisitions
of $5.5 million, capital expenditures of $2.5 million for capital investments needed to secure
and/or extend leased facilities, investment in information system enhancements and infrastructure,
and cost of contract purchases of $0.2 million.
Net Cash Used in Financing Activities
Net cash used in financing activities totaled $2.5million in the first six months of 2009.
Cash used in financing activities for 2009 included $3.9 million to repurchase our common stock,
$0.6 million for payments on capital leases, $0.1 million in distribution to noncontrolling
interests and $0.1 million for payments on long-term borrowings, partially offset by $2.2 million
from our senior credit facility.
Net cash used in financing activities totaled $5.8 million in the first six months of 2008.
Cash used in financing activities for 2008 included $12.9 million to repurchase our common stock,
$0.9 million for payments on capital leases, $0.1 million for payments on long-term borrowings,
$0.1 million in distribution to noncontrolling interests, $0.1 million for payments of debt
issuance costs, offset by $7.5 million from our senior credit facility, $0.3 million from the
exercise of stock options and $0.5 million in excess tax benefits related to stock option
exercises.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
We had cash and cash equivalents of $10.5 million at June 30, 2009, compared to $8.3 million
at December 31, 2008. The cash balances reflect our ability to utilize funds deposited into our
local accounts and which based upon availability, timing of deposits and the subsequent movement of
that cash into our corporate accounts may result in significant changes to our cash balances.
36
Table of Contents
Item 3. | Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk |
Interest Rates
Our primary market risk exposure consists of risk related to changes in interest rates. We use
a variable rate senior credit facility to finance our operations. This facility exposes us to
variability in interest payments due to changes in interest rates. If interest rates increase,
interest expense increases and conversely, if interest rates decrease, interest expense also
decreases. We believe that it is prudent to limit the exposure of an increase in interest rates.
In 2006 we entered into a Rate Cap Transaction with Bank of America, which allows us to limit
our exposure on a portion of our borrowings under the Credit Agreement. Under the Rate Cap
Transaction, we receive payments from Bank of America each quarterly period to the extent that the
prevailing three month LIBOR during that period exceeds our cap rate of 5.75%. The Rate Cap
Transaction caps our LIBOR interest rate on a notional amount of $50.0 million at 5.75% for a total
of 36 months. The Rate Cap Transaction began as of August 4, 2006 and settles each quarter on a
date that coincides with our quarterly interest payment dates under the Credit Agreement. This Rate
Cap Transaction is classified as a cash flow hedge, and we calculate the effectiveness of the hedge
on a quarterly basis. The ineffective portion of the cash flow hedge is recognized in current
period earnings as an increase of interest expense.
At June 30, 2009, the fair value of the Rate Cap Transaction was immaterial. Total changes in
the fair value of the Rate Cap Transaction for the six months ended June 30, 2009 was also
immaterial.
We do not enter into derivative instruments for any purpose other than cash flow hedging
purposes.
Our $210.0 million senior credit facility provides for a $210.0 million variable rate
revolving facility. In addition, the credit facility includes a letter of credit sub-facility with
a sublimit of $50.0 million. Interest expense on such borrowing is sensitive to changes in the
market rate of interest. If we were to borrow the entire $210.0 million available under the
facility, a 1% increase in the average market rate would result in an increase in our annual
interest expense of $2.10 million.
This amount is determined by considering the impact of the hypothetical interest rates on our
borrowing cost, but does not consider the effects of the reduced level of overall economic activity
that could exist in such an environment. Due to the uncertainty of the specific changes and their
possible effects, the foregoing sensitivity analysis assumes no changes in our financial structure.
Foreign Currency Risk
Our exposure to foreign exchange risk is minimal. All foreign investments are denominated in
U.S. dollars, with the exception of Canada. We had approximately $3.3 million of Canadian dollar
denominated cash instruments at June 30, 2009. We had no Canadian dollar denominated debt
instruments at June 30, 2009. We do not hold any hedging instruments related to foreign currency
transactions. We monitor foreign currency positions and may enter into certain hedging instruments
in the future should we determine that exposure to foreign exchange risk has increased.
Item 4. | Controls and Procedures |
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Within the 90-day period prior to the filing date of this report, our chief executive officer,
chief financial officer and corporate controller carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of
the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act). Based upon their evaluation, our chief
executive officer, chief financial officer and corporate controller concluded that our disclosure
controls and procedures were adequate and effective and designed to ensure that material
information relating to us (including our consolidated subsidiaries) required to be disclosed by us
in the reports we file under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported
within the required time periods.
Changes in Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting
There have been no significant changes in our internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the last fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.
37
Table of Contents
Limitations of the Effectiveness of Internal Control
A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not
absolute, assurance that the objectives of the internal control system are met. Because of the
inherent limitations of any internal control system, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute
assurance that all control issues, if any, within a company have been detected.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1A. | Risk Factors |
The following risk factor supplement the Companys risk factors as disclosed in Item 1A of
Part I of the Companys 2008 Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed on March 13, 2009, and in Item 1A of
Part II of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed on May 7, 2009:
The offer or sale of a substantial amount of our common stock by our largest stockholders could
have an adverse impact on the market price of our common stock.
In February 2009, we were informed by our majority stockholder at that time, Steamboat
Industries LLC, that Steamboat intended to sell a majority (and potentially all or substantially
all) of its stake in the Company. This proposed sale was intended to raise sufficient proceeds to
repay a loan that Steamboat had with third-party lenders. The loan was secured by a pledge of all
of Steamboats common stock in the Company and was in the amount of approximately $119 million as
of May 15, 2009. Such third-party lenders provided Steamboat with extensions of the loan to May
15, 2009 to permit Steamboat sufficient time to effect such sale. Steamboat was not able to raise
sufficient proceeds to repay the loan. Accordingly, on May 15, 2009, 7,581,842 shares were
transferred by Steamboat to the following third-party lenders: GSO Special Situations Overseas
Master Fund, Ltd.; GSO Special Situations Overseas Benefit Plan Fund, Ltd.; CML VII, LLC; GSO
Special Situations Fund LP; and GSO Capital Opportunities Fund LP (collectively, the Lenders).
Steamboat also transferred demand and piggy-back registration rights with respect to such common
stock to the Lenders in connection with the foreclosure. The offer, sale, disposition or
consummation of transactions involving substantial amounts of our common stock by the Lenders could
have a significant negative impact on our stock price, particularly if such offers, sales,
dispositions or transactions occur simultaneously or relatively close in time.
38
Table of Contents
Item 6. | Exhibits |
Exhibit | ||||
Number | Description | |||
3.1 | Third Amended and Restated Bylaws of Standard Parking
Corporation dated June 17, 2009 (incorporated by reference to
exhibit 3.1 of the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K/A
filed on June 22, 2009). |
|||
10.1 | Registration Rights Agreement dated June 2, 2004 between the
Company and Steamboat, as amended to join additional financial
institutions as parties on May 15, 2009 (incorporated by
reference to exhibit 10.2 of the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K as filed on May 18, 2009). |
|||
31.1 | Section 302 Certification dated August 7, 2009 for James A.
Wilhelm, Director, President and Chief Executive Officer |
|||
31.2 | Section 302 Certification dated August 7, 2009 for G. Marc
Baumann, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer) |
|||
31.3 | Section 302 Certification dated August 7, 2009 for Daniel R.
Meyer, Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and
Assistant Treasurer (Principal Accounting Officer) |
|||
32.1 | Certification pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
dated August 7, 2009 |
39
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.
STANDARD PARKING CORPORATION |
||||
Dated: August 7, 2009 | By: | /s/ JAMES A. WILHELM | ||
James A. Wilhelm | ||||
Director, President and Chief
Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |
||||
Dated: August 7, 2009 | By: | /s/ G. MARC BAUMANN | ||
G. Marc Baumann | ||||
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer) |
||||
Dated: August 7, 2009 | By: | /s/ DANIEL R. MEYER | ||
Daniel R. Meyer Senior Vice President, | ||||
Corporate Controller and
Assistant Treasurer (Principal Accounting Officer and Duly Authorized Officer) |
40
Table of Contents
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
Exhibit | ||||
Number | Description | |||
3.1 | Third Amended and Restated Bylaws of Standard Parking
Corporation dated June 17, 2009 (incorporated by reference to
exhibit 3.1 of the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K/A
filed on June 22, 2009). |
|||
10.1 | Registration Rights Agreement dated June 2, 2004 between the
Company and Steamboat, as amended to join additional financial
institutions as parties on May 15, 2009 (incorporated by
reference to exhibit 10.2 of the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K as filed on May 18, 2009). |
|||
31.1 | Section 302 Certification dated August 7, 2009 for James A.
Wilhelm, Director, President and Chief Executive Officer |
|||
31.2 | Section 302 Certification dated August 7, 2009 for G. Marc
Baumann, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer) |
|||
31.3 | Section 302 Certification dated August 7, 2009 for Daniel R.
Meyer, Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and
Assistant Treasurer (Principal Accounting Officer) |
|||
32.1 | Certification pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
dated August 7, 2009 |
41