SP Plus Corp - Quarter Report: 2010 March (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
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010
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 April 30, 2010, there were 15,509,130 shares of common stock of the registrant
outstanding.
STANDARD PARKING CORPORATION
FORM 10-Q INDEX
FORM 10-Q INDEX
3 | ||||||||
4 | ||||||||
5 | ||||||||
6 | ||||||||
18 | ||||||||
28 | ||||||||
28 | ||||||||
29 | ||||||||
30 | ||||||||
31 | ||||||||
32 | ||||||||
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 and per share data)
March 31, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | |||||||
(Unaudited) | (see Note) | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Current assets: |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 8,758 | $ | 8,256 | ||||
Notes and accounts receivable, net |
48,529 | 44,490 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and supplies |
4,014 | 5,401 | ||||||
Deferred taxes |
3,457 | 3,457 | ||||||
Total current assets |
64,758 | 61,604 | ||||||
Leasehold improvements, equipment and construction in progress, net |
17,015 | 17,175 | ||||||
Advances and deposits |
4,468 | 4,904 | ||||||
Long-term receivables, net |
11,699 | 10,325 | ||||||
Intangible and other assets, net |
7,776 | 6,765 | ||||||
Cost of contracts, net |
10,832 | 12,879 | ||||||
Goodwill |
129,464 | 126,853 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 246,012 | $ | 240,505 | ||||
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||
Current liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts payable |
$ | 50,849 | $ | 48,502 | ||||
Accrued and other current liabilities |
29,803 | 33,156 | ||||||
Current portion of long-term borrowings |
654 | 662 | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
81,306 | 82,320 | ||||||
Deferred taxes |
8,667 | 8,151 | ||||||
Long-term borrowings, excluding current portion |
111,435 | 112,549 | ||||||
Other long-term liabilities |
26,379 | 22,808 | ||||||
Standard Parking Corporations stockholders equity: |
||||||||
Common stock, par value $.001 per share; 21,300,000 shares
authorized; 15,425,744 and 15,385,428 shares issued and
outstanding as of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009,
respectively |
15 | 15 | ||||||
Additional paid-in capital |
92,512 | 91,793 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
297 | 313 | ||||||
Accumulated deficit |
(74,527 | ) | (77,372 | ) | ||||
Total Standard Parking Corporation stockholders equity |
18,297 | 14,749 | ||||||
Noncontrolling interest |
(72 | ) | (72 | ) | ||||
Total equity |
18,225 | 14,677 | ||||||
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
$ | 246,012 | $ | 240,505 | ||||
Note: | The balance sheet at December 31, 2009 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)
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31, 2010 | March 31, 2009 | |||||||
Parking services revenue: |
||||||||
Lease contracts |
$ | 33,116 | $ | 34,700 | ||||
Management contracts |
40,075 | 38,293 | ||||||
73,191 | 72,993 | |||||||
Reimbursed management contract expense |
106,055 | 102,558 | ||||||
Total revenue |
179,246 | 175,551 | ||||||
Cost of parking services: |
||||||||
Lease contracts |
31,771 | 32,949 | ||||||
Management contracts |
22,264 | 20,391 | ||||||
54,035 | 53,340 | |||||||
Reimbursed management contract expense |
106,055 | 102,558 | ||||||
Total cost of parking services |
160,090 | 155,898 | ||||||
Gross profit: |
||||||||
Lease contracts |
1,345 | 1,751 | ||||||
Management contracts |
17,811 | 17,902 | ||||||
Total gross profit |
19,156 | 19,653 | ||||||
General and administrative expenses (1) |
11,560 | 12,761 | ||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
1,460 | 1,487 | ||||||
Operating income |
6,136 | 5,405 | ||||||
Other expenses (income): |
||||||||
Interest expense |
1,490 | 1,436 | ||||||
Interest income |
(53 | ) | (67 | ) | ||||
1,437 | 1,369 | |||||||
Income before income taxes |
4,699 | 4,036 | ||||||
Income tax expense |
1,847 | 1,574 | ||||||
Net income |
2,852 | 2,462 | ||||||
Less: Net income attributable to
noncontrolling interest |
7 | 64 | ||||||
Net income attributable to Standard
Parking Corporation |
$ | 2,845 | $ | 2,398 | ||||
Common stock data: |
||||||||
Net income per share: |
||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.15 | ||||
Diluted |
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.15 | ||||
Weighted average shares outstanding: |
||||||||
Basic |
15,390,514 | 15,296,282 | ||||||
Diluted |
15,804,599 | 15,628,952 |
(1) | Non-cash stock based compensation expense of $508 and $527 for the three months ended March
31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, 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)
Three Months Ended | ||||||||
March 31, 2010 | March 31, 2009 | |||||||
Operating activities: |
||||||||
Net income |
$ | 2,852 | $ | 2,462 | ||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operations: |
||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
1,445 | 1,390 | ||||||
Loss on sale of assets |
18 | 82 | ||||||
Amortization of debt issuance costs |
159 | 161 | ||||||
Non-cash stock-based compensation |
508 | 527 | ||||||
Excess tax benefit related to stock option exercises |
(75 | ) | | |||||
(Reversal) provision for losses on accounts receivable |
(111 | ) | 253 | |||||
Deferred income taxes |
516 | 612 | ||||||
Change in operating assets and liabilities |
(3,534 | ) | (5,186 | ) | ||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
1,778 | 301 | ||||||
Investing activities: |
||||||||
Purchase of leaseholds improvements and equipment |
(452 | ) | (847 | ) | ||||
Cost of contracts purchased |
| (604 | ) | |||||
Capitalized interest |
(36 | ) | (17 | ) | ||||
Contingent purchase payments |
(11 | ) | (8 | ) | ||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(499 | ) | (1,476 | ) | ||||
Financing activities: |
||||||||
Repurchase of common stock |
| (3,884 | ) | |||||
Proceeds from exercise of stock options |
135 | | ||||||
Tax benefit related to stock option exercises |
75 | | ||||||
(Payments on) proceeds from senior credit facility |
(950 | ) | 7,150 | |||||
Distribution to noncontrolling interest |
(7 | ) | (52 | ) | ||||
Payments on long-term borrowings |
(31 | ) | (29 | ) | ||||
Payments on capital leases |
(141 | ) | (289 | ) | ||||
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
(919 | ) | 2,896 | |||||
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
142 | (234 | ) | |||||
Increase in cash and cash equivalents |
502 | 1,487 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
8,256 | 8,301 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
$ | 8,758 | $ | 9,788 | ||||
Supplemental disclosures: |
||||||||
Cash paid during the period for: |
||||||||
Interest |
$ | 1,296 | $ | 1,546 | ||||
Income taxes |
1,015 | 594 |
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)
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 period ended March
31, 2010 are not necessarily indicative of the results that might be expected for any other interim
period or the fiscal year ending December 31, 2010. The financial statements presented in this
report should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and footnotes
thereto included in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed March 12, 2010.
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its wholly owned
subsidiaries, and variable interest entities in which the Company is the primary beneficiary.
Noncontrolling interest recorded in the consolidated statement of income is the partners
noncontrolling interest in consolidated VIEs. We have interests in twelve joint ventures and one
limited liability company. The twelve joint ventures each operate between one and thirty parking
facilities. The limited liability company collects and distributes parking facility data for a fee.
Of the thirteen variable interest entities, six are consolidated into our financial statements, and
seven are single purpose entities where the Company is not the primary beneficiary and therefore
has a noncontrolling interest as power is shared. Investments in variable interest entities where
the Company is not the primary beneficiary are accounted for under the equity method. All
significant intercompany profits, transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
Financial Instruments
The carrying values of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable are
reasonable estimates of their fair value due to the short-term nature of these financial
instruments. Long-term debt has a carrying value that approximates fair value because these
instruments bear interest at market rates.
Interest Rate Caps
We do not enter into derivative instruments for any purpose other than cash flow hedging
purposes.
On February 22, 2010, we entered into interest rate cap agreements with Wells Fargo Bank N.A.
(Wells Fargo) and Fifth Third Bank (Fifth Third), allowing us to limit our exposure on a
portion of our borrowings under the Credit Agreement (Rate Cap Transactions). Pursuant to two
separate letter agreements between the Company and Wells Fargo and Fifth Third, respectively, we
will receive payments from Wells Fargo and Fifth Third each quarterly period to the extent that the
prevailing three month LIBOR during that period exceeds our cap rate of 3.25%. The Rate Cap
Transactions are effective March 31, 2010, and will settle each quarter on a date that is intended
to coincide with our quarterly interest payment dates under the Credit Agreement. The Rate Cap
Transactions cap our LIBOR interest rate on a notional amount of $50 million at 3.25% for a total
of 39 months. These Rate Cap Transactions are 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. The fair value of the interest
rate cap at March 31, 2010 is $540 and is included in prepaid expenses.
2. Stock-Based Compensation
We measure share-based compensation expense at the grant date, based on the fair value of the
award, and the expense is recognized over the requisite employee service period (generally the
vesting period) for awards expected to vest (considering estimated forfeitures).
6
Table of Contents
The Company has an amended and restated Long-Term Incentive Plan that was adopted in
conjunction with our initial public offering. 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 March 31, 2010, 113,558 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.
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 three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009.
The Company recognized no stock-based compensation expense related to stock options for the
three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 as all options previously granted were fully vested. As
of March 31, 2010, there were 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 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. On
August 11, 2009, 2,816 forfeited shares were retired. On December 31, 2009, 6,756 shares were
released free of restrictions in accordance with the achievement of the cumulative program
performance goals. The remaining 9,205 shares that were unvested at December 31, 2009 were
forfeited. The plan was completed as of December 31, 2009 and the forfeited shares were
subsequently retired on April 22, 2010.
We record stock-based compensation expense for awards with performance conditions based on the
probable outcome of that performance condition. The Company recognized no stock-based compensation
expense and no cash compensation expense related to the performance-based incentive program for the
three months ended March 31, 2010. The Company recognized $10 of stock-based compensation expense
and $10 of cash compensation expense related to the performance-based incentive program for the
three months ended March 31, 2009.
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 recipient reaching their 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 the guidance related to share-based payments, we estimated 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.
The Company recognized $508 and $517 of stock based compensation expense related to the
restricted stock units for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, which is
included in general and administrative expense. As of March 31, 2010, there was $9,356 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 7.1 years.
7
Table of Contents
3. Net Income Per Common Share
Companies are required to present basic and diluted earnings per share. 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 March 31 | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Weighted average common basic shares outstanding |
15,390,514 | 15,296,282 | ||||||
Effect of dilutive stock options and restricted stock units |
414,085 | 332,670 | ||||||
Weighted average common diluted shares outstanding |
15,804,599 | 15,628,952 | ||||||
Net income per share: |
||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.15 | ||||
Diluted |
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.15 |
There were 19,068 anti-dilutive options excluded in the computation of diluted earnings per
share for the three months ended March 31, 2010 because the options exercise prices were greater
than the average market price of the common stock. There were no anti-dilutive options for the
three months ended March 31, 2009.
For the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, 9,205 and 18,777 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. The plan was completed as of December
31, 2009 and all forfeited shares were subsequently retired on April 22, 2010.
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.
4. Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
Accounting Standards Net Yet Adopted
In October 2009, the FASB issued updated accounting guidance that amends the guidance related
to revenue recognition-multiple-element arrangements. The standards enable companies to account for
certain products and services (deliverables) separately rather than as a combined unit. This
accounting guidance provides amendments to the criteria for separating deliverables, measuring and
allocating arrangement consideration to one or more units of accounting. The amendments also
establish a selling price hierarchy for determining the selling price of a deliverable.
Significantly enhanced disclosures are also required to provide information about a vendors
multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements, including information about the nature and terms,
significant deliverables, and its performance within arrangements. The amendments also require
providing information about the significant judgments made and changes to those judgments and about
how the application of the relative selling-price method affects the timing or amount of revenue
recognition. The amendments are effective prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or
materially modified in the fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010. A company may adopt
the new standard retroactively and early application is permitted. The Company currently does not
have any multiple-element arranagements.
Accounting Standards Adopted
In June 2009, the FASB updated the accounting standards related to the consolidation of
variable interest entities. This new guidance requires a qualitative approach to identifying a
controlling financial interest in a VIE, and requires an ongoing assessment of whether an entity is
a VIE and whether an interest in a VIE makes the holder the primary beneficiary of the VIE. The
updated accounting guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after November 15,
2009. The Companys adoption of this updated accounting guidance on January 1, 2010 did not impact
the financial condition or results of operations of the Company.
8
Table of Contents
In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued a new accounting
standard which requires new disclosures and clarifies certain existing disclosure requirements
about fair value measurements. The majority of the provisions of this
update are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15,
2009. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on our financial statements.
5. Acquisitions
2009 Acquisitions
On July 1, 2009, the Company acquired substantially all of the assets of Gameday Management
Group U.S. Gameday Management, based in Orlando, Florida, which plans and operates transportation
and parking systems for major stadiums and sporting events in the amount of $7,328, of which $2,450
was paid in cash, net of a hold back of $50, and $4,828 of potential earn-out payments. Among the
assets acquired is Gamedays Click and Park online parking and traffic management system, which
enables customers to purchase reserved parking online in advance of an event. The acquisition
represents an acquisition of a business and was accounted for using the purchase method of
accounting. This acquisition is not considered material to the Company.
The purchase price allocations are based on preliminary estimates of intangibles with finite
lives of $2,393 and goodwill of $4,935. The Company has engaged a third party valuation firm to
provide a fair value analysis. These estimates are subject to revision after the Company completes
its fair value analysis. The Company financed the acquisition through additional term borrowings
under the senior credit facility and existing cash. The results of operations of this acquisition
are included in the Companys consolidated statement of income from the date of acquisition.
The Company expensed acquisition related costs of $15 in 2010 and $178 in 2009. These costs
are included in General and Administrative expenses in the income statement.
9
Table of Contents
6. 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 | March 31, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||||||
Equipment |
2-10 years | $ | 31,094 | $ | 28,568 | |||||||
Leasehold improvements |
Shorter of lease term or economic life up to 10 years | 9,680 | 9,708 | |||||||||
Construction in progress |
5,350 | 7,543 | ||||||||||
46,124 | 45,819 | |||||||||||
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization |
(29,109 | ) | (28,644 | ) | ||||||||
Leasehold improvements, equipment and construction in progress, net |
$ | 17,015 | $ | 17,175 | ||||||||
Depreciation expense was $919 and $966 for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009,
respectively. Depreciation includes losses on abandonments of leasehold improvements and equipment
of $18 and $97 in 2010 and 2009, respectively.
7. 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:
March 31, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | |||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Cost of contracts |
$ | 17,194 | $ | 18,885 | ||||
Accumulated amortization |
(6,362 | ) | (6,006 | ) | ||||
Cost of contracts, net |
$ | 10,832 | $ | 12,879 | ||||
Amortization
expense related to cost of contracts was $356 and $397 for the three months ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The weighted average useful life is 10 years for 2010 and 10
years for 2009.
8. Goodwill
Goodwill is assigned to reporting units based upon the specific Region where the assets
acquired and associate goodwill resided.
10
Table of Contents
The following table reflects the changes in the carrying amounts of goodwill by reported
segment for the three months ended March 31, 2010 (Unaudited).
Region | Region | Region | Region | |||||||||||||||||
One | Two | Three | Four | Total | ||||||||||||||||
Balance as of January 1, 2010 |
$ | 61,849 | $ | 7,200 | $ | 35,227 | $ | 22,577 | $ | 126,853 | ||||||||||
Acquisitions |
| | | | | |||||||||||||||
Adjustments
to purchase price* |
| 2,435 | | | 2,435 | |||||||||||||||
Contingency payments related to acquisitions |
| | 11 | | 11 | |||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation |
| 165 | | | 165 | |||||||||||||||
Balance as of March 31, 2010 |
$ | 61,849 | $ | 9,800 | $ | 35,238 | $ | 22,577 | $ | 129,464 | ||||||||||
* | The Company engaged a third party valuation firm to provide a fair value analysis. These estimates are subject to revision after the Company completes its fair value analysis. |
9. Long-Term Receivables, Net
Long-term receivables, net, consist of the following:
Amount Outstanding | ||||||||
March 31, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | |||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Bradley International Airport
|
||||||||
Deficiency payments |
$ | 10,980 | $ | 9,606 | ||||
Other Bradley related, net |
3,203 | 3,203 | ||||||
Valuation allowance |
(2,484 | ) | (2,484 | ) | ||||
Total long-term receivables, net |
$ | 11,699 | $ | 10,325 | ||||
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 manages
the facility for which it is expected to receive a management fee.
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.
The annual minimum guaranteed payment to the State by the trustee for the three months ended March
31, 2010 and 2009 was $2,462 and $2,412, 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 |
11
Table of Contents
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 three months ended March 31, 2010, we made deficiency payments of $1,374 and we did not
record or receive any interest and premium income related to deficiency repayments from the
trustee. In the three months ended March 31, 2009, we made deficiency payments of $1,082 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 March 31, 2010 and March 31, 2009.
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 March 31, 2010 and December
31, 2009, we have a receivable of $10,980 and $9,606, 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:
March 31, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | |||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Deficiency payments: |
||||||||
Balance at beginning of period |
$ | 9,606 | $ | 5,961 | ||||
Deficiency payments made |
1,374 | 3,645 | ||||||
Deficiency repayment received |
| | ||||||
Balance at end of period |
10,980 | 9,606 | ||||||
Other Bradley related |
3,203 | 3,203 | ||||||
Valuation allowance |
(2,484 | ) | (2,484 | ) | ||||
Total long-term receivables |
$ | 11,699 | $ | 10,325 | ||||
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 $4,350 have not been recognized as of March 31, 2010 and no
management fee income was
recognized during the three months ending March 31, 2010 and 2009.
12
Table of Contents
10. Borrowing Arrangements
Long-term borrowings, in order of preference, consist of:
Amount Outstanding | ||||||||||||
Due Date | March 31, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||||||
Senior credit facility |
June 2013 | $ | 108,900 | $ | 109,850 | |||||||
Capital lease obligations |
Various | 1,915 | 2,056 | |||||||||
Obligations on Seller notes and other |
Various | 1,274 | 1,305 | |||||||||
112,089 | 113,211 | |||||||||||
Less current portion |
654 | 662 | ||||||||||
$ | 111,435 | $ | 112,549 | |||||||||
Senior Credit Facility
On July 15, 2008, we amended and 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
an applicable LIBOR margin of 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 an applicable Base Rate Margin of 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%.
Our 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 our senior credit facility out of the proceeds of future issuances of debt or
equity securities and asset sales, subject to certain customary exceptions. Our 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 March 31, 2010.
The weighted average interest rate on our senior credit facility at March 31, 2010 and
December 31, 2009 was 3.3% and 3.2%, 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 3.3% and 3.3% at March 31, 2010 and
December 31, 2009, respectively.
At March 31, 2010, we had $16,884 of letters of credit outstanding under the senior credit
facility, borrowings against the senior credit facility aggregated $108,900, and we had $19,405
available under the senior credit facility.
We have entered into various financing agreements, which were used for the purchase of
equipment.
11. Stock Repurchases
In July 2008, our 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,
2009, $18,973 remained available for repurchase under this authorization.
During the first quarter of 2009, we repurchased 93,600 shares from third party shareholders
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 119,701 shares to us in the first quarter of 2009
at an average price of $18.20 per share. The total value of the first quarter transactions was
$3,884. We retired 200,650 shares during the first quarter of 2009, and retired and the remaining
12,651 shares in April 2009.
13
Table of Contents
We did not make any share repurchases subsequent to the first quarter of 2009..As of March 31,
2010, $18,973 remained available for repurchase under the July 2008 authorization by the Board of
Directors.
12. Business Unit Segment Information
An operating segment is defined as a component of an enterprise that engages in business
activities from which it may earn revenue and incur expenses, and about which separate financial
information is regularly evaluated by our chief operating decision maker, in deciding how to
allocate resources. Our chief operating decision maker is the Companys President and Chief
Executive Officer.
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.
Our business is managed based on regions administered by executive vice presidents. Regions
one and three are generally organized geographically. The following is a summary of revenues
(excluding reimbursed management contract expense) and gross profit by regions for the three months
ended March 31, 2010 and 2009. Information related to prior periods has been recast to conform to
the current region alignment.
14
Table of Contents
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 | ||||||||||||||||
March 31, | Gross | March 31, | Gross | |||||||||||||
2010 | Margin | 2009 | Margin | |||||||||||||
Revenues: |
||||||||||||||||
Region One |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
$ | 17,035 | $ | 19,213 | ||||||||||||
Management contracts |
11,913 | 13,572 | ||||||||||||||
Total Region One |
28,948 | 32,785 | ||||||||||||||
Region Two |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
746 | 620 | ||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
8,091 | 2,192 | ||||||||||||||
Total Region Two |
8,837 | 2,812 | ||||||||||||||
Region Three |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
4,955 | 4,905 | ||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
12,469 | 14,164 | ||||||||||||||
Total Region Three |
17,424 | 19,069 | ||||||||||||||
Region Four |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
10,375 | 9,913 | ||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
7,548 | 8,317 | ||||||||||||||
Total Region Four |
17,923 | 18,230 | ||||||||||||||
Other |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
5 | 49 | ||||||||||||||
Management contracts |
54 | 48 | ||||||||||||||
Total Other |
59 | 97 | ||||||||||||||
Reimbursed expense |
106,055 | 102,558 | ||||||||||||||
Total revenues |
$ | 179,246 | $ | 175,551 | ||||||||||||
Gross Profit |
||||||||||||||||
Region One |
$ | 153 | 1 | % | $ | 734 | 4 | % | ||||||||
Lease contracts |
6,234 | 52 | % | 7,093 | 52 | % | ||||||||||
Management contracts |
6,387 | 7,827 | ||||||||||||||
Total Region One |
||||||||||||||||
Region Two |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
75 | 10 | % | 16 | 3 | % | ||||||||||
Management contracts |
2,174 | 27 | % | 848 | 39 | % | ||||||||||
Total Region Two |
2,249 | 864 | ||||||||||||||
Region Three |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
369 | 7 | % | 412 | 8 | % | ||||||||||
Management contracts |
5,772 | 46 | % | 6,233 | 44 | % | ||||||||||
Total Region Three |
6,141 | 6,645 | ||||||||||||||
Region Four |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
682 | 7 | % | 522 | 5 | % | ||||||||||
Management contracts |
3,618 | 48 | % | 4,090 | 49 | % | ||||||||||
Total Region Four |
4,300 | 4,612 | ||||||||||||||
Other |
||||||||||||||||
Lease contracts |
66 | 1,320 | % | 67 | 137 | % | ||||||||||
Management contracts |
13 | 24 | % | (362 | ) | (754 | )% | |||||||||
Total Other |
79 | (295 | ) | |||||||||||||
Total gross profit |
19,156 | 19,653 | ||||||||||||||
General and administrative expenses |
11,560 | 12,761 | ||||||||||||||
General and administrative expense
percentage of gross profit |
60 | % | 65 | % | ||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
1,460 | 1,487 | ||||||||||||||
Operating income |
6,136 | 5,405 | ||||||||||||||
Other expenses (income): |
||||||||||||||||
Interest expense |
1,490 | 1,436 | ||||||||||||||
Interest income |
(53 | ) | (67 | ) | ||||||||||||
1,437 | 1,369 | |||||||||||||||
Income before income taxes |
4,699 | 4,036 | ||||||||||||||
Income tax expense |
1,847 | 1,574 | ||||||||||||||
Net income |
2,852 | 2,462 | ||||||||||||||
Less: Net income attributable to
noncontrolling interest |
7 | 64 | ||||||||||||||
Net income attributable to
Standard Parking Corporation |
$ | 2,845 | $ | 2,398 | ||||||||||||
15
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 our Canadian operations, event planning and transportation, and our
technology based parking and traffic management systems.
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.
13. Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income consists of the following components, net of tax (Unaudited):
For the three months ended | ||||||||
March 31, 2010 | March 31, 2009 | |||||||
Net income |
$ | 2,852 | $ | 2,462 | ||||
Revaluation of interest rate cap |
(159 | ) | | |||||
Effect of foreign currency translation |
456 | (234 | ) | |||||
Comprehensive income |
3,149 | 2,228 | ||||||
Less: comprehensive income attributable to
noncontrolling interest |
7 | 64 | ||||||
Comprehensive income attributable to
Standard Parking Corporation |
$ | 3,142 | $ | 2,164 | ||||
14. Income Taxes
For the three months ended March 31, 2010, the Company recognized income tax expense of $1,847
on pre-tax earnings of $4,699 compared to $1,574 income tax expense on pre-tax earnings of $4,036
for the three months ended March 31, 2009. Income tax expense is based on a projected annual
effective tax rate of approximately 39.3% for the three months ended March 31, 2010 compared to
approximately 39.0% for the three months ended March 31, 2009. The change in the Companys
effective tax rate resulted primarily from the adoption of the FASB updated accounting guidance on
reporting non-controlling interests in consolidated financial statements.
In July 2006, the FASB issued accounting guidance for uncertainty in income taxes. The
accounting guidance for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprises financial
statements 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 this guidance did not have an impact on the
Companys financial position or results from operations. As of March 31, 2010, 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
March 31, 2010 are shown below:
2004 2009
|
United States federal income tax | |
2003 2009
|
United States state and local income tax | |
2005 2009
|
Canada |
16
Table of Contents
15. Legal Proceedings
We are subject to litigation in the normal course of our business. The outcomes of legal
proceedings and claims brought against us and other loss contingencies are subject to significant
uncertainty. We accrue a charge against income when our management determines that it is probable
that an asset has been impaired or a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be
reasonably estimated. In addition, we accrue for the authoritative judgments or assertions made
against us by government agencies at the time of their rendering regardless of our intent to
appeal. In determining the appropriate accounting for loss contingencies, we consider the
likelihood of loss or impairment of an asset or the incurrence of a liability, as well as our
ability to reasonably estimate the amount of loss. We regularly evaluate current information
available to us to determine whether an accrual should be established or adjusted. Estimating the
probability that a loss will occur and estimating the amount of a loss or a range of loss involves
significant judgment.
As previously disclosed, the Company has been in mediation and discussions with plaintiffs
regarding the possible resolution of a California labor code violations case brought against the
Company in which plaintiffs are seeking class certification of their claims. Subject to the
approval of the court, the Company has entered into a settlement agreement related to Jorge Jaime
v. Standard Parking Corporation and two other consolidated cases on March 9, 2010. We also have
entered into a memorandum of understanding dated January 5, 2010 for the tentative settlement,
subject to court approval, of Grant v. Preferred Security Services, Inc., a similar labor code
violation case in which plaintiffs are seeking class certification brought against our wholly owned
security subsidiary. The Company estimates that its liability exposure under the distribution
methodology set forth in the tentative settlements for these two cases to be in the aggregate
$2,475. While there is no guarantee that the settlement methodology will result in this aggregate
payout amount, management believes, after comparing similar class settlements and the claims made
percentages of those settlements with the purported classes in these two cases, that the aggregate
payout of $2,475 is a reasonable estimate of the contingent liability which was recorded by the Company.
John V. Holten, a former director and former indirect controlling shareholder of the Company,
has filed a lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court, District of
Connecticut on March 25, 2010. Mr. Holten was terminated as our Chairman in October 2009. Mr.
Holten alleges breach of his employment agreement. The suit claims that the agreement entitled
Holten to payments over the next several years worth more than $3.8 million and seeks unspecified
damages. As previously reported, the Board determined that the terms of the agreement and the
process by which Mr. Holten caused the Company to execute it were not fair to the Company and the
agreement was not in the best interest of the Company or its stockholders. Accordingly, the
Company terminated Holtens employment as Chairman and determined not to make any further payments
to Mr. Holten. The Company intends to vigorously defend against this lawsuit and assert its own
claims against Mr. Holten in connection with his employment agreement.
16. Subsequent Event
On April 28, 2010, our Stockholders approved the charter amendment increasing the Companys
number of shares of common stock authorized for issuance under the certificate of incorporation by
28,700,000 shares, and increasing the number of shares of preferred
stock from ten to 5,000,000. The
amount of total authorized capital stock following the amendment is 55,000,000 shares, which
includes 50,000,000 shares of common stock with a $0.001 par value and 5,000,000 shares of
preferred stock with a $0.01 par value. The amendment was filed with the State of Delaware on April
29, 2010.
17
Table of Contents
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following discussion of our results of operations should be read in conjunction with the
consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto contained in this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q and the consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included in our Annual Report
on our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.
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 revenue
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 revenue 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 March 31, 2010, we operated approximately 90% of our locations under management
contracts and approximately 10% of our locations under leases. For the three months ended March 31,
2010, we derived approximately 93% of our gross profit under management contracts and approximately
7% of our gross profit 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 March 31,
2010, we operated approximately 90% of our locations under management contracts, and for the three
months ended March 31, 2010, we derived approximately 93% of our gross profit under management
contracts. Only approximately 55% of total revenue (excluding reimbursed 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 opportunity 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 March 31, 2010 was approximately 90%, compared to approximately 89% for the twelve-month
period ended March 31, 2009, which also reflects our decision not to renew, or to terminate,
unprofitable contracts.
For the three months ended March 31, 2010 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2009,
there was no change in average gross profit per location, which was $9.0 thousand for both periods.
18
Table of Contents
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:
March 31, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | March 31, 2009 | ||||||||||
Managed facilities |
1,926 | 1,921 | 1,960 | |||||||||
Leased facilities |
208 | 208 | 225 | |||||||||
Total facilities |
2,134 | 2,129 | 2,185 | |||||||||
Revenue
We recognize parking services revenue from lease and management contracts as the related
services are provided. Substantially all of our revenue comes from the following two sources:
| Parking services revenuelease contracts. Parking services revenue 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 revenue does 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.
Reimbursed Management Contract Expense
Reimbursed management contract expense consists of the direct reimbursement from the property
owner for operating expenses incurred under a management contract, which is reflected in our
revenue.
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. |
19
Table of Contents
Reimbursed Management Contract Expense
Reimbursed management contract expense consists of direct reimbursed costs incurred on behalf
of property owners under a management contract, which is reflected in our cost of parking services.
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, and board
of directors.
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.
Seasonality
During the first quarter of each year, seasonality impacts our performance with regard to
moderating revenue, 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
revenue and profitability are affected by the seasonality of the business, general and
administrative costs are relatively stable throughout the fiscal year.
Results of Operations
Segments
An operating segment is defined as a component of an enterprise that engages in business
activities from which it may earn revenue and incur expenses, and about which separate financial
information is regularly evaluated by our chief operating decision maker, in deciding how to
allocate resources. Our chief operating decision maker is our president and chief executive
officer.
Our business is managed based on regions administered by executive vice presidents. The
following is a summary of revenues (excluding reimbursed management contract expense) by region for
the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009. 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 our Canadian operations, event planning and transportation, and our
technology based parking and traffic management systems.
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.
20
Table of Contents
Segment revenue information is summarized as follows:
Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | Variance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | Amount | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.3 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 0.7 | $ | | $ | 0.2 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 1.2 | $ | | $ | 1.2 | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 1.6 | | | | 0.5 | | | | | | 2.1 | (2.1 | ) | (100.0 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
16.8 | 17.6 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 4.2 | 4.4 | 10.1 | 9.9 | | | 31.9 | 32.6 | (0.7 | ) | (2.1 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total lease contract revenue |
$ | 17.1 | $ | 19.2 | $ | 0.8 | $ | 0.7 | $ | 4.9 | $ | 4.9 | $ | 10.3 | $ | 9.9 | $ | | $ | | $ | 33.1 | $ | 34.7 | $ | (1.6 | ) | (4.6 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management contract revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 1.1 | $ | | $ | 5.8 | $ | | $ | 0.9 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.3 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 8.1 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 8.0 | 8000.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.1 | 2.1 | | 0.1 | 0.1 | 1.8 | | 0.3 | | | 0.2 | 4.3 | (4.1 | ) | (95.3 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
10.7 | 11.4 | 2.3 | 2.1 | 11.5 | 12.3 | 7.3 | 8.1 | | | 31.8 | 33.9 | (2.1 | ) | (6.2 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total management contract
revenue |
$ | 11.9 | $ | 13.5 | $ | 8.1 | $ | 2.2 | $ | 12.5 | $ | 14.2 | $ | 7.6 | $ | 8.4 | $ | | $ | | $ | 40.1 | $ | 38.3 | $ | 1.8 | 4.7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parking services revenuelease contracts. Lease contract revenue decreased $1.6 million, or
4.6%, to $33.1 million in the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared to $34.7 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2009. The decrease resulted primarily from contract expirations
exceeding increases in revenue from new locations. Same location revenue for those facilities,
which as of March 31, 2010 are the comparative periods for the two years presented, decreased 2.1%.
The decrease in same location revenue was due to decreases in short-term parking revenue of $0.2
million, or 5.5%, and a decrease in monthly parking revenue of $0.5 million, or 4.6%. Revenue
associated with contract expirations relates to contracts that expired during the current period.
Parking
services revenuemanagement contracts. Management contract revenue increased $1.8
million, or 4.7%, to $40.1 million for three months ended March 31, 2010, compared to $38.3 million
for the three months ended March 31, 2009. The increase resulted primarily from new locations,
partially offset by decreases in revenue from contract expirations. Same locations
revenue for those facilities, which as of March 31, 2010 are the comparative for the two years
presented, decreased 6.2%.
Reimbursed
management contract expense. Reimbursed management contract expense increased $3.5
million, or 3.4%, to $106.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared to $102.6
million for the three months ended March 31, 2009. This increase resulted from an increase in
reimbursed costs incurred on behalf of owners.
Lease contract revenue decreased primarily due to region one same location revenue. Same
location revenue decreased compared to the prior year primarily due to decreases in short-term and
monthly parking revenue.
Management contract revenue increased primarily due to new locations in regions one, two,
three and four, partially offset by contract expirations in regions one
and three and decreases in same locations for regions one, three and four. Same location revenue
decreased primarily due to decreased fees from reverse management locations and ancillary services.
Segment cost of parking services information is summarized as follows:
Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | Variance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | Amount | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost of parking
services lease
contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.3 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 0.7 | $ | | $ | 0.2 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 1.2 | $ | | $ | 1.2 | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 1.6 | | | | 0.5 | | | | | | 2.1 | (2.1 | ) | (100.0 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
16.6 | 16.9 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 3.9 | 4.0 | 9.5 | 9.4 | (0.1 | ) | (0.1 | ) | 30.6 | 30.8 | (0.2 | ) | (0.6 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total cost of parking
services lease
contracts |
$ | 16.9 | $ | 18.5 | $ | 0.7 | $ | 0.6 | $ | 4.6 | $ | 4.5 | $ | 9.7 | $ | 9.4 | $ | (0.1 | ) | $ | (0.1 | ) | $ | 31.8 | $ | 32.9 | $ | (1.1 | ) | (3.3 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost of parking
services management
contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.4 | $ | | $ | 4.5 | $ | | $ | 0.5 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.3 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 5.7 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 5.6 | 5600.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
0.1 | 1.0 | | | 0.1 | 1.2 | | 0.1 | | | 0.2 | 2.3 | (2.1 | ) | (91.3 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
5.2 | 5.5 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 6.1 | 6.6 | 3.6 | 4.1 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 16.4 | 18.0 | (1.6 | ) | (8.9 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total cost of parking
services management
contracts |
$ | 5.7 | $ | 6.5 | $ | 5.9 | $ | 1.3 | $ | 6.7 | $ | 7.9 | $ | 3.9 | $ | 4.2 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 22.3 | $ | 20.4 | $ | 1.9 | 9.3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
21
Table of Contents
Cost of parking serviceslease contracts. Cost of parking services for lease contracts
decreased $1.1 million, or 3.3%, to $31.8
million for the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared to $32.9 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2009. The decrease resulted primarily from decreases in costs related to
contract expirations, partially offset by increases in costs related to new locations. Same
locations costs for those facilities which as of March 31, 2010 are the comparative for the two
years presented, decreased 0.6%. Same location costs decreased $0.3 million due to rent expense,
primarily as a result of contingent rental payments on the decrease in revenue for same locations
and $0.1 million due to payroll and payroll related, partially offset by increases in other
operating costs of $0.2 million.
Cost of parking servicesmanagement contracts. Cost of parking services for management
contracts increased $1.9 million, or 9.3%, to $22.3 million for the three months ended March 31,
2010, compared to $20.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009. The increase
resulted
primarily from increases in costs related to new locations, partially offset by
decreases in costs related to contract expirations. Same location costs for those facilities, which
as of March 31, 2010 are the comparative period for the two years presented, decreased 8.9%. Same
location decrease in operating expenses for management contracts primarily result from decreases in
costs associated with reverse management contracts and the cost of providing management services.
Reimbursed
management contract expense. Reimbursed management contract expense decreased $3.5
million, or 3.4%, to $106.1 million, for the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared to $102.6
million for the three months ended March 31, 2009. This increase resulted from an increase in
reimbursed cost incurred on the behalf of owners.
22
Table of Contents
Cost of parking services lease contracts decreased primarily due to fewer contract expirations
in regions one and three and decreases in same location costs in region one, partially offset by
increases in new locations for regions one, three and four. 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 new locations in regions one, two, three and four, partially offset by fewer
contract expirations in regions one and three and decreases in same location in regions one, three,
four and other. The other region amounts in same location costs primarily represent prior year
insurance reserve adjustments.
Segment gross profit/gross profit percentage information is summarized as follows:
Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Region One | Region Two | Region Three | Region Four | Other | Total | Variance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | Amount | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
0.2 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 1.3 | 1.8 | (0.5 | ) | (27.8 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit lease contracts |
$ | 0.2 | $ | 0.7 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.3 | $ | 0.4 | $ | 0.6 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 0.1 | $ | 1.3 | $ | 1.8 | $ | (0.5 | ) | (27.8 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(percentages) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit percentage lease contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
1.2 | 4.0 | 12.5 | 14.3 | 7.1 | 9.1 | 5.9 | 5.1 | | | 4.1 | 5.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage |
1.2 | 3.6 | 12.5 | 14.3 | 6.1 | 8.2 | 5.8 | 5.1 | | | 3.9 | 5.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
$ | 0.7 | $ | | $ | 1.3 | $ | | $ | 0.4 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 2.4 | $ | | $ | 2.4 | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 1.1 | | 0.1 | | 0.6 | | 0.2 | | | | 2.0 | (2.0 | ) | (100.0 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
5.5 | 5.9 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 5.4 | 5.7 | 3.7 | 4.0 | (0.1 | ) | (0.5 | ) | 15.4 | 15.9 | (0.5 | ) | (3.1 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit management contracts |
$ | 6.2 | $ | 7.0 | $ | 2.2 | $ | 0.9 | $ | 5.8 | $ | 6.3 | $ | 3.7 | $ | 4.2 | $ | (0.1 | ) | $ | (0.5 | ) | $ | 17.8 | $ | 17.9 | $ | (0.1 | ) | (0.6 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
(percentages) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profit percentage management contracts: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New location |
63.6 | | 22.4 | | 44.4 | | | | | | 29.6 | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract expirations |
| 52.4 | | 100.0 | | 33.3 | | 66.7 | | | | 46.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Same location |
51.4 | 51.8 | 39.1 | 38.1 | 47.0 | 46.3 | 50.7 | 49.4 | | | 48.4 | 46.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversions |
| | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total gross profit percentage |
52.1 | 51.9 | 27.2 | 40.9 | 46.4 | 44.4 | 48.7 | 50.0 | | | 44.4 | 46.7 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross profitlease contracts. Gross profit for lease contracts decreased $0.5 million, or
27.8%, to $1.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared to $1.8 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2009. Gross profit percentage for lease contracts decreased to 3.9%
for the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared to 5.2% for the three months ended March 31,
2009. Gross profit lease contracts decreases on same locations were primarily the result of a
decrease in short-term and monthly parking revenue, without an equal and corresponding decrease in
costs.
23
Table of Contents
Gross profitmanagement contracts. Gross profit for management contracts decreased $0.1
million, or 0.6%, to $17.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared to $17.9
million for the three months ended March 31, 2009. Gross profit percentage for management contracts
decreased to 44.4% for the three months ended March 31, 2010 compared to 46.7% in the three months
ended March 31, 2009. Gross profit for management contracts decreases were primarily the result of
our same locations, and our contract
expirations, partially offset by increases in our new locations. Gross profit
percentage on contract expirations accounted for most of the decline on a percentage basis.
Gross profit for lease contracts declined primarily due to same locations in regions one and
three due to decreases in short-term and monthly parking revenue, without an equal and
corresponding decrease in costs.
Gross profit for management contracts declined primarily due to our same locations in regions
one, three and four and our contract expirations in regions one, two, three and four.
General and administrative expenses. General and administrative expenses decreased $1.2
million, or 9.4%, to $11.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared to $12.8
million for the three months ended March 31, 2009. This decrease resulted primarily from net
decreases in payroll and payroll related expenses of $0.2 million, a decrease of $0.7 million
related to the 2009 sale by our former majority shareholder of its stake in the Company, a decrease
of $0.1 million related to travel, and a decrease of $0.2 million in other costs.
Interest expense. Interest expense was $1.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010
and did not change significantly compared to the three months ended March 31, 2009.
Interest income. Interest income was $0.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010
and did not change significantly compared to the three months ended March 31, 2009.
Income tax expense. Income tax expense increased $0.3 million, or 17.3%, to $1.8 million for
the three months ended March 31, 2010, as compared to $1.5 million for the three months ended March
31, 2009. An increase in our pre-tax income resulted in a $0.3 million increase in income tax
expense. Our effective tax rate was 39.3% for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 39.0% for
the three months ended March 31, 2009.
24
Table of Contents
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Outstanding Indebtedness
On March 31, 2010, we had total indebtedness of approximately $112.1 million, a decrease of
$1.1 million from December 31, 2009. The $112.1 million includes:
| $108.9 million under our senior credit facility; and |
| $3.2 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 $19.4 million at March 31, 2010, 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 amended and 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.
Our revolving senior credit facility bears interest, at our option, at either (1) LIBOR plus
an applicable LIBOR margin of 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 an applicable Base Rate Margin of 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%.
Our 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 our senior credit facility out of the proceeds of future issuances of debt or
equity securities and asset sales, subject to certain customary exceptions. Our 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 March 31, 2010, we had $16.9 million of letters of credit outstanding under the senior
credit facility, borrowings against the senior credit facility aggregated $108.9 million and we had
$19.4 million available under the senior credit facility.
Interest Rate Cap Transactions
We do not enter into derivative instruments for any purpose other than cash flow hedging
purposes.
On February 22, 2010, we entered into interest rate cap agreements with Wells Fargo Bank N.A.
(Wells Fargo) and Fifth Third Bank (Fifth Third), allowing us to limit our exposure on a
portion of our borrowings under the Credit Agreement (Rate Cap Transactions). Pursuant to two
separate letter agreements between the Company and Wells Fargo and Fifth Third, respectively, we
will receive payments from Wells Fargo and Fifth Third each quarterly period to the extent that the
prevailing three-month LIBOR during that period exceeds our cap rate of 3.25%. The Rate Cap
Transactions are effective March 31, 2010, and will settle each quarter on a date that is intended
to coincide with our quarterly interest payments dates under the Credit Agreement. The Rate Cap
Transactions cap our LIBOR interest rate on a notional amount of $50 million at 3.25% for a total
of 39 months. These Rate Cap Transactions are 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. The fair value of the interest
rate cap at March 31, 2010 is $0.5 million and is included in prepaid expenses.
25
Table of Contents
Stock Repurchases
In July 2008, our 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, 2009, $19.0 million remained
available for repurchase under this authorization.
During the first quarter of 2009, we repurchased 93,600 shares from third party shareholders
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 119,701 shares to us in the first quarter of 2009
at an average price of $18.20 per share. The total value of the first quarter transactions was $3.9
million. We retired 200,650 shares during the first quarter of 2009 and retired the remaining
12,651 shares in April 2009.
We did not make any share repurchases in the first quarter of 2010.
As of March 31, 2010, $19.0 million remained available for repurchase under the July 2008
authorization by the Board of Directors.
Letters of Credit
At March 31, 2010, we have provided letters of credit totaling $16.5 million to our casualty
insurance carrier to collateralize our casualty insurance program.
As of March 31, 2010, we provided $0.4 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 March 31, 2010, we have a receivable of $11.0 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 of $1.4 million in the first three months of 2010 compared to $1.1
million in the first three months of 2009. We did not receive any payments for interest and premium
income related to deficiency payments in the first three months of 2010 and 2009.
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 revenue 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 $1.8 million for the first three months
of 2010. Cash provided included $5.3 million from operations which was offset by a net decrease in
working capital of $3.5 million. The decrease in working capital resulted primarily from an
increase of $5.3 million in notes and accounts receivable which primarily related to an increase in
business from new locations, acquisitions and deficiency payments related to Bradley International
Airport guarantor payments as described under Deficiency Payments, a decrease of $1.7 million in
other liabilities due primarily to deferred revenue that has been subsequently earned and the
payment of accrued expenses, offset by a decrease
of $1.1 in prepaid assets primarily related to timing of payroll taxes paid in 2009 relating
to 2010 payroll and an increase of $2.4 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.
26
Table of Contents
Net cash provided by operating activities totaled $0.3 million for the first three months of
2009. Cash provided included $5.5 million from operations which was offset by a net decrease in
working capital of $5.2 million. The decrease in working capital resulted primarily from an
increase of $1.0 million in notes and accounts receivable which primarily related to Bradley
International Airport guarantor payments as described under Deficiency Payments, a decrease of
$1.0 million in accounts payable which primarily related to a reduction of payments to trade
vendors on behalf of clients, and a decrease of $3.2 million in other liabilities which primarily
related to a reduction in accruals related to payment of employee incentive program.
Net Cash Used in Investing Activities
Net cash used in investing activities totaled $0.5 million in the first three months of 2010.
Cash used in investing activities for the first three months of 2010 included capital expenditures
of $0.5 million for capital investments needed to secure and/or extend leased facilities.
Net cash used in investing activities totaled $1.5 million in the first three months of 2009.
Cash used in investing activities for the first three months of 2009 included capital expenditures
of $0.9 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
$0.6 million.
Net Cash Used in Financing Activities
Net cash used in financing activities totaled $0.9 million in the first three months of 2010.
Cash used in financing activities for 2010 included $0.1 million for payments on capital leases,
$1.0 million for our senior credit facility, partially offset by $0.1 million from the exercise of
stock options and $0.1 million from the tax benefit related to stock option exercises.
Net cash provided by financing activities totaled $2.9 million in the first three months of
2009. Cash provided by financing activities for 2009 included $7.1 million in proceeds from our
senior credit facility which was partially offset by $3.9 million used to repurchase our common
stock and $0.3 million used for payments on capital leases.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
We had cash and cash equivalents of $8.8 million at March 31, 2010, compared to $8.3 million
at December 31, 2009. 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.
Forward-Looking Information
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides safe harbor provisions for
forward-looking information. These statements relate to analyses and other information that are
based on forecasts of future results and estimates of amounts not yet determinable. These
statements also relate to our future prospects, developments and business strategies. The
statements contained in this Form 10-Q that are not statements of historical fact may include
forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties.
We have used the words anticipate, believe, could, estimate, expect, intend,
may, plan, predict, project, will and similar terms and phrases, including references to
assumptions in this Form 10-Q, to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking
statements are made based on our managements expectations and beliefs concerning future events
affecting us and are subject to uncertainties and factors relating to our operations and business
environment, all of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond our control. These
uncertainties and factors could cause our actual results to differ materially from those matters
expressed in or implied by these forward-looking statements.
All of our forward-looking statements should be considered in light of these factors. All of
our forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they were made, and we undertake no
obligation to update our forward-looking statements or risk factors to reflect new information,
future events or otherwise, except as may be required under applicable securities laws and
regulations. You should review any additional disclosures we make in our press releases and Forms
10-K, 10-Q, and 8-K filed with or furnished to the SEC. We also suggest that you listen to our
quarterly earnings release conference calls with financial analysts.
27
Table of Contents
Risk Factors
While it is not possible to identify all risk factors, we continue to face many risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from our forward-looking statements and
could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, consolidated results of
operations, and consolidated financial condition. Information related to risk factors is described
in our most recent Form 10-K under Risk Factors.
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.
We do not enter into derivative instruments for any purpose other than cash flow hedging
purposes.
On February 22, 2010, we entered into interest rate cap agreements with Wells Fargo Bank N.A.
(Wells Fargo) and Fifth Third Bank (Fifth Third), allowing us to limit our exposure on a
portion of our borrowings under the Credit Agreement (Rate Cap Transactions). Pursuant to two
separate letter agreements between the Company and Wells Fargo and Fifth Third, respectively, we
will receive payments from Wells Fargo and Fifth Third each quarterly period to the extent that the
prevailing three month LIBOR during that period exceeds our cap rate of 3.25%. The Rate Cap
Transactions are effective March 31, 2010, and will settle each quarter on a date that is intended
to coincide with our quarterly interest payments dates under the Credit Agreement. The Rate Cap
Transactions cap our LIBOR interest rate on a notional amount of $50 million at 3.25% for a total
of 39 months. These Rate Cap Transactions are 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. The fair value of the interest
rate cap at March 31, 2010 is $0.5 million and is included in prepaid expenses.
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 and swing line sub-facility with a sublimit of $10.0 million. Interest
expense on such borrowing is sensitive to changes in the market rate of interest. If we were to
borrow the entire $220.0 million available under the facility, a 1% increase in the average market
rate would result in an increase in our annual interest expense of $2.20 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 $1.5 million of Canadian dollar
denominated cash instruments at March 31, 2010. We had no Canadian dollar denominated debt
instruments at March 31, 2010. 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.
28
Table of Contents
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.
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 1. Legal Proceedings
We are subject to litigation in the normal course of our business. The outcomes of legal
proceedings and claims brought against us and other loss contingencies are subject to significant
uncertainty. We accrue a charge against income when our management determines that it is probable
that an asset has been impaired or a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be
reasonably estimated. In addition, we accrue for the authoritative judgments or assertions made
against us by government agencies at the time of their rendering regardless of our intent to
appeal. In determining the appropriate accounting for loss contingencies, we consider the
likelihood of loss or impairment of an asset or the incurrence of a liability, as well as our
ability to reasonably estimate the amount of loss. We regularly evaluate current information
available to us to determine whether an accrual should be established or adjusted. Estimating the
probability that a loss will occur and estimating the amount of a loss or a range of loss involves
significant judgment.
As previously disclosed, the Company has been in mediation and discussions with plaintiffs
regarding the possible resolution of a California labor code violations case brought against the
Company in which plaintiffs are seeking class certification of their claims. Subject to the
approval of the court, the Company has entered into a settlement agreement related to Jorge Jaime
v. Standard Parking Corporation and two other consolidated cases on March 9, 2010. We also have
entered into a memorandum of understanding dated January 5, 2010 for the tentative settlement,
subject to court approval, of Grant v. Preferred Security Services, Inc., a similar labor code
violation case in which plaintiffs are seeking class certification brought against our wholly owned
security subsidiary. The Company estimates that its liability exposure under the distribution
methodology set forth in the tentative settlements for these two cases to be in the aggregate
$2,475. While there is no guarantee that the settlement methodology will result in this aggregate
payout amount, management believes, after comparing similar class settlements and the claims made
percentages of those settlements with the purported classes in these two cases, that the aggregate
payout of $2,475 is a reasonable estimate of the contingent
liability which was recorded by the Company.
John V. Holten, a former director and former indirect controlling shareholder of the Company,
has filed a lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court, District of
Connecticut on March 25, 2010. Mr. Holten was terminated as our Chairman in October 2009. Mr.
Holten alleges breach of his employment agreement. The suit claims that the agreement entitled
Holten to payments over the next several years worth more than $3.8 million and seeks unspecified
damages. As previously reported, the Board determined that the terms of the agreement and the
process by which Mr. Holten caused the Company to execute it were not fair to the Company and the
agreement was not in the best interest of the Company or its stockholders. Accordingly, the
Company terminated Holtens employment as Chairman and determined not to make any further payments
to Mr. Holten. The Company intends to vigorously defend against this lawsuit and assert its own
claims against Mr. Holten in connection with his employment agreement.
29
Table of Contents
Item 6. Exhibits
Exhibit | ||||
Number | Description | |||
31.1 | Section 302 Certification dated May 7, 2010 for James A.
Wilhelm, Director, President and Chief Executive Officer. |
|||
31.2 | Section 302 Certification dated May 7, 2010 for G. Marc
Baumann, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer). |
|||
31.3 | Section 302 Certification dated May 7, 2010 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 May 7, 2010. |
30
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: May 7, 2010 | By: | /s/ JAMES A. WILHELM | ||
James A. Wilhelm | ||||
Director, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |
||||
Dated: May 7, 2010 | By: | /s/ G. MARC BAUMANN | ||
G. Marc Baumann | ||||
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer) |
||||
Dated: May 7, 2010 | By: | /s/ DANIEL R. MEYER | ||
Daniel R. Meyer | ||||
Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and Assistant Treasurer (Principal Accounting Officer and Duly Authorized Officer) |
31
Table of Contents
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
Exhibit | ||||
Number | Description | |||
31.1 | Section 302 Certification dated May 7, 2010 for James A.
Wilhelm, Director, President and Chief Executive Officer. |
|||
31.2 | Section 302 Certification dated May 7, 2010 for G. Marc
Baumann, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer). |
|||
31.3 | Section 302 Certification dated May 7, 2010 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 May 7, 2010. |
32