VIDLER WATER RESOURCES, INC. - Annual Report: 2007 (Form 10-K)
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
(MARK
ONE )
x
|
ANNUAL
REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007
OR
o
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF
1934
|
For
the Transition Period from __________ to __________
Commission
File Number 0-18786
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC.
(Exact
Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
California
|
94-2723335
|
(State
or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
875
Prospect Street, Suite 301
La
Jolla, California 92037
(Address
of Principal Executive Offices)
Registrant’s
Telephone Number, Including Area Code (858) 456-6022
Securities
Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Common
Stock, Par Value $.001, Listed on The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
Securities
Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a well known seasoned issuer, as defined
by Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes
¨ No T
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No T
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 T No
¨
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Par III or this Form 10-K or any amendment to
this
Form 10-K.
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “large
accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act (check one):
Large
accelerated filer T
|
Accelerated
filer ¨
|
Non-accelerated
filer ¨
|
Smaller
reporting company ¨
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12-b
of the Act).Yes ¨
No T
Approximate
aggregate market value of the registrant’s voting and non-voting common equity
held by non-affiliates of the registrant (based on the closing sales price
of
such stock as reported in the NASDAQ Global Market) as of June 30, 2007 the
last
business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter,
was $701,192,212.
On
February 27, 2008, the registrant had 18,833,737 shares of common stock, $.001
par value, outstanding, excluding 3,218,408 shares of common stock which are
held by the registrant’s subsidiaries.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions
of the registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A in connection with the
registrant’s 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed subsequent to the
date hereof, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report
on Form 10-K. Such Definitive Proxy Statement will be filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission not later than 120 days after the conclusion of the
registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2007.
ANNUAL
REPORT ON FORM 10-K
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Page
No.
|
|||
Item
1.
|
2 | ||
Item
1A.
|
8 | ||
Item
1B.
|
15 | ||
Item
2.
|
15 | ||
Item
3.
|
15 | ||
Item
4.
|
16 | ||
Item
5.
|
16 | ||
Item
6.
|
18 | ||
Item
7.
|
19 | ||
Item
7A.
|
48 | ||
Item
8.
|
48 | ||
Item
9.
|
80 | ||
Item
9A.
|
80 | ||
Item
9B.
|
82 | ||
Item
10.
|
82 | ||
Item
11.
|
82 | ||
Item
12.
|
82 | ||
Item
13.
|
82 | ||
Item
14.
|
82 | ||
Item
15.
|
83 | ||
84 |
1
PART
I
Note
About “Forward-Looking Statements”
This
Annual Report on Form 10-K (including the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” section) contains
“forward-looking statements,” as defined in the Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995, regarding our business, financial condition, results of
operations , and prospects, including, without limitation, statements about
our
expectations, beliefs, intentions, anticipated developments, and other
information concerning future matters. Words such as “may,” “will,”
“could,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,”
“estimates,” and similar expressions or variations of such words are intended to
identify forward-looking statements, but are not the exclusive means of
identifying forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Although
forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K reflect the good
faith judgment of our management, such statements can only be based on current
expectations and assumptions. Consequently, forward-looking statements
are inherently subject to risk and uncertainties, and the actual results and
outcomes could differ materially from the forward-looking statements.
Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences in results and
outcomes include, without limitation, those discussed under the heading “Risk
Factors” below, as well as those discussed elsewhere in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K and in other filings made from time to time with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) after the date of this report.
Readers are urged not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking
statements, which speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We undertake no obligation to (and we expressly disclaim any obligation to)
revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new
information, subsequent events , or otherwise , in order to reflect any event
or
circumstance that may arise after the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Readers are urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures
made
in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which attempt to advise interested parties
of the risks and factors that may affect our business, financial condition,
results of operations, and prospects.
ITEM
1. BUSINESS
Introduction
PICO
Holdings, Inc. (PICO and its subsidiaries are collectively referred to as “PICO”
and “the Company,” and by words such as “we,” and “our”) is a diversified
holding company. We seek to build and operate businesses where we believe
significant value can be created from the development of unique assets, and
to
acquire businesses which we identify as undervalued and where our management
participation in operations can aid in the recognition of the business’s fair
value, as well as create additional value.
Our
objective is to maximize long-term shareholder value. Our goal is to manage
our operations to achieve a superior return on net assets over the long term,
as
opposed to short-term earnings.
Our
business is separated into four major operating segments:
·
|
Water
Resource and Water Storage
Operations;
|
·
|
Real
Estate
Operations;
|
·
|
Business
Acquisitions &
Financing Operations; and
|
·
|
Insurance
Operations in “Run
Off”.
|
|
Currently
our major consolidated subsidiaries are:
|
·
|
Vidler
Water Company, Inc.
(“Vidler”), a business that we started more than 10 years ago, acquires
and develops water resources and water storage operations in the
southwestern United States, with assets in Nevada, Arizona, Idaho,
California and Colorado;
|
·
|
Nevada
Land and Resource Company,
LLC (“Nevada Land”), an operation that we built since we acquired the
company more than 10 years ago, which currently owns approximately
460,000
acres of former railroad land in Nevada, and certain mineral rights
and
water rights related to the
property;
|
·
|
Physicians
Insurance Company of
Ohio (“Physicians”),
which is “running
off” its medical professional liability insurance loss
reserves;
|
·
|
Citation
Insurance Company
(“Citation”), which is "running off” its property & casualty
and workers’ compensation loss reserves;
and
|
·
|
Global
Equity AG, which holds our
interest in Jungfraubahn Holding AG (“Jungfraubahn”). Jungfraubahn is a
Swiss public company that operates railway and related tourism and
transport activities in the Swiss Alps. Jungfraubahn’s shares
trade on the SWX
Swiss
Exchange.
|
The
address of our main office is 875 Prospect Street, Suite 301, La Jolla,
California 92037, and our telephone number is (858) 456-6022.
Our
annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports
on
Form 8-K, and if applicable, amendments to those reports, are made available
free of charge on our web site ( www.picoholdings.com
) as soon as reasonably practicable after the reports are electronically filed
with the SEC. Our website also contains other material about PICO.
Information on our website is not incorporated by reference into this Form
10-K.
2
History
PICO
was
incorporated in 1981 and began operations in 1982. The company was known as
Citation Insurance Group until a reverse merger with Physicians Insurance
Company of Ohio on November 20, 1996. After the reverse merger, the former
shareholders of Physicians owned approximately 80% of Citation Insurance Group,
the Board of Directors and management of Physicians replaced their Citation
counterparts, and Citation Insurance Group changed its name to PICO Holdings,
Inc. You should be aware that some data on Bloomberg and other information
services pre-dating the reverse merger relates to the old Citation Insurance
Group only, and does not reflect the performance of Physicians prior to the
merger.
Operating
Segments and Major Subsidiary Companies
The
following is a description of our operating segments and major subsidiaries.
Unless otherwise indicated, we own 100% of each subsidiary. The following
discussion of our segments should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated
Financial Statements and Notes thereto included elsewhere in the Annual Report
on Form 10-K.
Water
Resource and Water Storage Operations
Our
Water
Resource and Water Storage Operations are conducted through Vidler Water Company
and its subsidiaries.
Vidler
is
a private company in the water resource development business in the southwestern
United States. We develop new sources of water for municipal and industrial
use,
either from existing supplies of water, such as water used for agricultural
purposes, or from acquiring unappropriated (that is, previously unused) water.
We also develop water storage infrastructure to facilitate the efficient
allocation of available water supplies. Vidler is not a water utility, and
does
not intend to enter into regulated utility activities.
The
inefficient allocation of available water between agricultural users and
municipal or industrial users, or the lack of available known water supply
in a
particular location, or inadequate infrastructure to fully utilize existing
and
new water supplies, provide opportunities for Vidler because:
·
|
the
majority of water rights are
currently owned or controlled by agricultural users, and in many
locations
there are insufficient water rights owned or controlled by municipal
and
industrial users to meet present and future
demand;
|
·
|
certain
areas of the Southwest
experiencing rapid growth have insufficient known supplies of water
to
support future growth. Vidler identifies and develops new water supplies
for communities with no other known water resources to support future
community growth. In certain cases, to supply water from the water
resources identified by Vidler, it may require regulatory approval
to
import the water from its source to where development is occurring,
or
require permitting of the infrastructure required to convey the water;
and
|
·
|
infrastructure
to recharge water
will be required to store supplies during times of surplus to enable
transfers from stored supplies in years where there is either no
surplus
or no other water sources are available (e.g., in drought
conditions).
|
We
entered the water resource development business with our acquisition of Vidler
Water and Tunnel Company in 1995. At the time, Vidler owned a limited quantity
of water rights and related assets in Colorado. Since then, Vidler, which was
renamed to Vidler Water Company, has acquired or developed:
·
|
additional
water rights and
related assets, predominantly in Nevada and
Arizona,
the two leading states in
population growth and new home construction. A water right is the
legal
right to divert water and put it to beneficial use. Water rights
are
assets which can be bought and sold. The value of a water right depends
on
a number of factors, which may include location, the seniority of
the
right, whether or not the right is transferable, or if the water
can be
exported. We seek to acquire water rights at prices consistent with
their
current use, typically agricultural, with the expectation of an increase
in value if the water right can be converted through the development
process to a higher use, such as municipal and industrial use. Typically,
our water resources are the most competitive source of water (i.e.,
the
most economical and practical source of water supply) to support
new
growth in municipalities and new industry;
and
|
·
|
a
water storage facility in Arizona and an interest in Semitropic,
a water
storage facility in California. At December 31, 2007, Vidler had
“net
recharge credits” (that is, an acre-foot of water) of more than 139,000
acre-feet of water in storage on its own account at the Vidler Arizona
Recharge Facility. An acre-foot is a unit commonly used to measure
the
volume of water, being the volume of water required to cover one
acre to a
depth of one foot, and is equivalent to approximately 325,850 gallons.
As
a rule of thumb, one acre-foot of water would sustain two families
of four
persons each for one year.
|
We
have also entered into
“teaming” and joint development arrangements with third parties who have water
assets but lack the capital or expertise to commercially develop these assets.
The first of these arrangements was a water delivery teaming agreement with
Lincoln County Water District (“Lincoln/Vidler”), which is developing water
resources in Lincoln County, Nevada. We have also recently entered into a joint
development agreement with Carson City and Lyon County, Nevada to develop and
provide water resources in Lyon County. We continue to explore additional
teaming and joint development opportunities throughout the Southwest.
Vidler
is
engaged in the following activities:
·
|
development
of water resources
for end-users in the Southwest, namely water utilities, municipalities,
developers, or industrial users. Typically, we identify and develop
the
source of water from a new water supply, or a change in the use
of an existing water supply from agricultural to municipal and industrial;
and
|
·
|
construction
and development of water storage facilities for the purchase and
recharge
of water for resale in future periods, and distribution infrastructure
to
more efficiently use existing and new supplies of water.
|
|
Vidler
generates revenues by:
|
·
|
selling
or leasing its developed
water resources to real estate developers or industrial users who
must
secure an assured supply of water in order to receive permits for
their
projects; and
|
·
|
storing
water at its water
storage facilities in Arizona and California from currently available
surplus supplies, and then selling the stored water in future years
to
developers or municipalities that have either exhausted their existing
water supplies, or in instances where our water represents the most
economical source of water for their developments or
communities.
|
3
The
following table details the water rights and water storage assets owned by
Vidler or its subsidiaries at December 31, 2007. Please note that this is
intended as a summary, and that some numbers are rounded. "Item
7, Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations" of this Form 10-K contains more
detail about these assets, recent developments affecting them, and the current
outlook.
Name
of asset & approximate location
|
Brief
Description
|
Present
commercial use
|
||
WATER
RESOURCES
|
||||
Arizona
:
|
||||
|
||||
Harquahala
Valley ground water basin
La
Paz County
75
miles northwest of metropolitan Phoenix
|
3,840
acre-feet of transferable groundwater.
3,206
acres of land
|
Leased
to farmers
|
||
Nevada
:
|
||||
Fish
Springs Ranch, LLC (51% interest)
Washoe
County, 40 miles north of Reno
|
13,000
acre-feet of permitted water rights, 8,000 of which are currently
transferable to the Reno/Sparks area
8,600
acres of ranch
land
|
Vidler
has constructed a total of 35 miles of pipeline to deliver an initial
8,000 acre-feet of water annually from Fish Springs Ranch to the
North Valleys of Reno, Nevada
|
||
Lincoln
County water delivery teaming agreement
|
Applications*
for more than 100,000 acre-feet of water rights through an agreement
with
Lincoln County. It is currently anticipated that up to 40,000
acre-feet of the applications will be permitted, and the water put
to use
on projects approved in Lincoln County / northern Clark County,
Nevada
*The
numbers indicated for
water rights applications are the maximum amount which we have filed
for.
In some cases, we anticipate that the actual permits received will
be for
smaller quantities
|
Agreement
to sell 7,240 acre-feet of water as, and when, supplies are permitted
from
existing applications in Tule Desert Groundwater Basin, in Lincoln
County,
Nevada
Agreement
to sell water to a developer as, and when, supplies are permitted
from
applications in Kane Springs Basin in Lincoln County,
Nevada
|
Sandy
Valley
Near
the Nevada/California state line near the Interstate 15 corridor
|
415
acre-feet of permitted water rights
Application
for 1,000 acre-feet of water rights
|
Agreement
to sell at least 415 acre-feet of water pending resolution of a protest
of
the permitting of the water rights
|
||
Muddy
River water rights
In
the Moapa Valley, approximately 35 miles east of Las Vegas near the
Interstate 15 corridor
|
267
acre-feet of water rights
|
|||
Carson
River
Carson
City, Lyon County and Douglas County, Nevada
|
75
acre - feet of municipal use water rights and 1,994 acre - feet of
Carson River agricultural use water rights.
Options
over 1,652 acre - feet of Carson River agricultural use water
rights
|
Development
and Improvement agreements with Carson City and Lyon County to
provide water resources for planned future growth in Lyon County and
to connect the water systems of both municipalities
|
||
43
acres of ranch land
|
||||
Other
states :
|
||||
Colorado
water rights
|
179.5
acre-feet of water rights
|
66.1
acre-feet leased.
113.4
acre-feet are available for sale or lease
|
||
Idaho
Near
Boise, Idaho
|
7,044
acre - feet of water rights and 1,886 acres of farm land
|
Vidler
is currently farming the properties
|
||
WATER
STORAGE
|
||||
Arizona
:
|
||||
Vidler
Arizona Recharge Facility
Harquahala
Valley, Arizona
|
An
underground water storage facility with permitted recharge capacity
exceeding 1 million acre-feet and annual recharge capability of 35,000
acre-feet
|
Vidler
is currently buying water and storing it on its own account. At December
31, 2007, Vidler had net recharge credits of approximately 139,000
acre-feet of water in storage at the Arizona Recharge Facility. In
addition, Vidler has ordered approximately 25,000 acre-feet of water
for
recharge in 2008.
|
||
California
:
|
||||
Semitropic
water storage facility
|
The
right to store 30,000 acre-feet of water at Semitropic until 2035.
This
includes the right to minimum guaranteed recovery of approximately
2,700
acre-feet of water every year, and the right to recover up to
approximately 6,800 acre-feet in any one year under certain circumstances.
|
Vidler
is currently storing surplus flow water, when available, from the
state of
California, and at December 31, 2007 had approximately 10,000 acre-feet
of
water in storage at the facility
|
4
Real
Estate Operations
Our
Real
Estate Operations are primarily conducted through Nevada Land and Resource
Company, LLC.
In
April
1997, PICO paid $48.6 million to acquire Nevada Land, which at the time
owned approximately 1,352,723 acres of deeded real estate in northern Nevada,
and the water, mineral, and geothermal rights related to the property. Much
of
Nevada Land’s property is checker-boarded in square mile sections with publicly
owned land. The properties generally parallel the Interstate 80 corridor and
the
Humboldt River, from Fernley, in western Nevada, to Elko County, in
northeast Nevada.
Nevada
Land is one of the largest private landowners in the state of Nevada. Real
estate available for private development in Nevada is relatively scarce, as
governmental agencies own approximately 87% of the land in Nevada. Before
we acquired Nevada Land, the property had been under the ownership of a
succession of railway companies, to whom it was a non-core asset. Accordingly,
when we acquired Nevada Land, we believed that the commercial potential of
the
property had not been maximized.
After
acquiring Nevada Land, we completed a “highest and best use” study which divided
the real estate into categories. We developed strategies to maximize the value
of each category, with the objective of monetizing assets once they had reached
their highest and best use. These strategies include:
·
|
the
sale of real estate and
water rights. There is demand for real estate and water for a variety
of purposes including residential development, residential estate
living,
farming, ranching, and from industrial
users;
|
·
|
the
development of water rights.
Nevada Land
has
applied for additional water
rights on land it owns and intends to improve. Where water rights
are
permitted, we anticipate that the value, productivity, and marketability
of the related real estate will
increase;
|
·
|
the
development of real
estate in and around growing municipalities;
and
|
·
|
the
management of mineral rights.
|
At
December 31, 2007, Nevada Land owns approximately 460,000 acres of former
railroad land.
In
recent
years, Nevada Land has filed additional applications for approximately 47,497
acre-feet of water rights on the Company’s former railroad lands. Of these
applications, approximately 9,297 acre-feet of water rights have been
certificated and permitted, and applications are pending for approximately
38,200 acre-feet of water use for agricultural, municipal, and industrial use.
Potentially, some of these water rights could be utilized to support the growth
of municipalities in northern Nevada.
Our
real
estate operations also comprise the operations of Bedrock Land Development
(“Bedrock”), UCP, LLC (“UCP”), and Global Equity Corporation (“Global Equity”).
Bedrock
and UCP were formed in 2007 with the objective of acquiring attractive and
well-located developable land, partially developed lots, or finished lots,
in
select California markets, where medium-sized regional developers and
homebuilders may have liquidity challenges as a result of the downturn in the
housing market.
Global
Equity is a Canadian company which manages the Phoenix Capital Income Trust
and
its subsidiary Phoenix Capital, Inc. (collectively, “Phoenix”). Phoenix was in
the business of acquiring interests in privately-traded Canadian real estate
partnerships and syndicates (collectively, “partnership units”) at an
appropriate discount to the value of the underlying real estate owned by the
syndicate or partnership, to reflect the lack of a public trading market for
the
partnership units. Global Equity is managing the existing portfolio of
partnership units owned by Phoenix, and Global Equity is the vehicle through
which we are acquiring additional partnership units.
Business
Acquisitions and Financing Operations
This
segment consists of acquired businesses, strategic interests in businesses
and
the activities of PICO that are not included in our other segments.
We
do not
sell securities on a regular basis. A security may be sold if the price has
significantly exceeded our target, or if there have been changes which we
believe limit further appreciation potential on a risk-adjusted basis.
Consequently, the amount of net realized gains or losses recognized during
any
accounting period has no predictive value. In addition, in this segment, various
income items relate to specific holdings owned during a particular accounting
period. Since our holdings change over time, results in this segment are not
necessarily comparable from year to year.
The
largest asset in this segment is our 22.5% interest in Jungfraubahn Holding
AG
(“Jungfraubahn”), which had a market value and carrying value (before taxes) of
$66.2 million at the end of 2007. In addition, segment results include the
income, expense, and assets and liabilities of the deferred compensation
accounts.
PICO
seeks to acquire businesses and interests in businesses which we identify as
undervalued based on fundamental analysis -- that is, our assessment of what
the
business is worth, based on the private market value of its assets, earnings,
and cash flow. Typically, the business will be generating free cash flow and
have a low level of debt, or, alternatively, strong interest coverage ratios
or
the ability to realize surplus assets. As well as being undervalued, the
business must have special qualities such as unique assets, a potential catalyst
for change, or be in an industry with attractive economics. We are also
interested in acquiring businesses and interests in businesses where there
is
significant unrecognized value in land and other tangible assets.
We
have
acquired businesses and interests in businesses through the acquisition of
private companies, and the purchase of shares in public companies, both directly
through participation in financing transactions and through open market
purchases.
When
we
acquire an interest in a public company, we are prepared to play an active
role,
for example encouraging companies to use proper financial criteria when making
capital expenditure decisions, or by providing financing or strategic input.
At
the
time we acquire an interest in a public company, we believe that the intrinsic
value of the underlying business significantly exceeds the current market
capitalization. The gap between market price and intrinsic value may persist
for
several years, and the stock price may decline while our estimate of intrinsic
value is stable or increasing. Sometimes the gap is not eliminated until another
party attempts to acquire the company.
When
acquisitions become core operations, typically through majority ownership,
we
become involved in the management and strategic direction of the business.
If we
acquire majority ownership, the business may become a separate segment in
our
consolidated financial statements.
5
Insurance
Operations in “Run Off”
This
segment consists of Physicians Insurance Company of Ohio and Citation Insurance
Company.
Physicians
Insurance Company of Ohio
Until
1995, Physicians wrote medical professional liability insurance, mostly in
the
state of Ohio. In 1995, we concluded that maximum value would be obtained by
selling the prospective book of business (that is, the opportunity to renew
existing policies and to write new policies) and placing Physicians in “run off”
(that is, handling and resolving the claims on expired policies, but not writing
new business). Physicians wrote its last policy in 1995; however,
claims can be filed until 2017 that resulted from events that allegedly occurred
during the period when Physicians provided coverage.
Insurance
companies in “run off” obtain the funds to pay claims from the maturity of
fixed-income securities, the sale of investments, and collections from
reinsurance companies (that is, specialized insurance companies who share in
our
claims risk).
Once
an
insurance company is in “run off” and the last of its policies have expired,
typically most revenues come from investment transactions which correspond
to the insurance company’s reserves and shareholders’
equity. Occasionally, earned premiums are recorded, which relate to
reinsurance.
During
the “run off” process, as claims are paid, both the loss reserve liabilities and
the corresponding fixed-income investment assets decrease. Since interest income
in this segment will decline over time, we are attempting to minimize segment
overhead expenses as much as possible.
Although
we regularly evaluate the strategic alternatives, we currently believe that
the
most advantageous option is for Physicians’ own claims personnel to manage the
“run off.” We believe that this will ensure a high standard of claims handling
for our policyholders and, from the Company’s perspective, ensure the most
careful examination of claims made to minimize loss and loss adjustment expense
payments. If we were to reinsure Physicians’ entire book of business and
outsource claims handling, this would also involve giving up management of
the
corresponding investment assets.
Administering
our own “run off” also provides us with the following opportunities:
·
|
we
retain management of the
associated investment portfolios. We manage our insurance company
portfolios directly, and believe that the return on our portfolio
assets
has been attractive in absolute terms, and very competitive in relative
terms. Since the claims reserves of the “run off” insurance companies
effectively recognize the cost of paying and handling claims in future
years, the investment return on the corresponding investment assets,
less
non-insurance expenses, accrues to PICO.
We aim to maximize this source
of income; and
|
·
|
to
participate in favorable
development in our claims reserves if there is any, although this
entails
the corresponding risk that we could be exposed to unfavorable
development.
|
As
the
“run off” progresses, at a time in the future which cannot currently be
predicted, Physicians’ claims reserves may diminish to the point where it is
more cost-effective to outsource claims handling to a third party administrator.
At
December 31, 2007, Physicians had $6.5 million in medical professional liability
loss reserves, net of reinsurance.
Citation
Insurance Company
In
1996,
Physicians completed a reverse merger with Citation’s parent company. In the
past, Citation wrote various lines of commercial property and casualty insurance
and workers’ compensation insurance, primarily in California and Arizona. At the
end of 2000, Citation ceased writing business and went into “run off.”
Prior
to
the reverse merger, Citation had been a direct writer of workers’ compensation
insurance. Since PICO did not wish to be exposed to that line of business,
shortly after the merger was completed, Citation reinsured 100% of its workers’
compensation business with a subsidiary, Citation National Insurance Company
(“CNIC”), and sold CNIC to Fremont Indemnity Company (“Fremont”) in 1997.
Fremont merged CNIC into Fremont, and administered and paid all of the
workers’ compensation claims which had been sold to it. From 1997 until the
second quarter of 2003, Citation booked the losses reported by Fremont, and
recorded an equal and offsetting reinsurance recoverable from Fremont, as an
admitted reinsurer, for all losses and loss adjustment expenses. This resulted
in no net impact on Citation’s reserves and financial statements, and no net
impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In
June
2003, the California Department of Insurance obtained a conservation order
over
Fremont, and applied for a court order to liquidate Fremont. In July 2003,
the
California Superior Court placed Fremont in liquidation. Since Fremont was
no
longer an admitted reinsurance company under the statutory basis of insurance
accounting, Citation reversed the $7.5 million reinsurance recoverable from
Fremont in both its statutory basis and generally accepted accounting principals
in the United States or GAAP basis financial statements in the 2003 financial
year. Citation was unsuccessful in court action to recover deposits reported
as
held by Fremont for Citation’s insureds.
We
currently have a third-party administration agreement with Intercare Insurance
Services to administer the claims handling and claims payment for Citation’s
workers’ compensation insurance run-off book of business.
At
December 31, 2007, Citation had $9.2 million in loss reserves, net of
reinsurance. Citation’s loss reserves consist of $3.1 million for property and
casualty insurance, principally in the artisans/contractors line of business,
and $6.1 million for workers’ compensation insurance.
Discontinued
Operations
HyperFeed
Technologies, Inc.
During
the fourth quarter of 2006, our majority-owned subsidiary HyperFeed
Technologies, Inc. (“HyperFeed”) filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 7
of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Consequently, HyperFeed is recorded as a
discontinued operation for 2006 and prior years in the Consolidated Financial
Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
HyperFeed
was a provider of enterprise-wide ticker plant and transaction technology
software and services enabling financial institutions to process and use high
performance exchange data with Smart Order Routing and other applications.
HyperFeed was a publicly traded company, which became a subsidiary of PICO
Holdings in 2003, when we acquired direct ownership of a majority voting
interest.
Despite
possessing potentially valuable technology, HyperFeed was unable to generate
sufficient cash flow to finance its own operations. During 2006, PICO and
HyperFeed negotiated a business combination with Exegy Incorporated (“Exegy”).
On August 25, 2006 , PICO , HyperFeed, and Exegy entered into an agreement,
pursuant to which the common stock of HyperFeed owned by PICO would have been
contributed to Exegy in exchange for Exegy's issuing certain Exegy stock to
PICO
. However, in a letter dated November 7, 2006 , Exegy informed PICO and
HyperFeed that it was terminating the agreement. PICO and HyperFeed dispute
Exegy’s right to terminate the agreement and are vigorously defending their
rights through all available legal means.
Given
the
uncertainty of additional funding available to HyperFeed due to the termination
of the agreement, and therefore for HyperFeed to continue as a going concern,
HyperFeed filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 7 of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code on November 29, 2006. See
Item 3. Legal Proceedings and Note
2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, "Discontinued
Operations”.
6
Employees
At
December 31, 2007, PICO had 53 employees.
Executive
Officers
The
executive officers of PICO are as follows:
Name
|
Age
|
Position
|
John R. Hart
|
48
|
President,
Chief Executive Officer and Director
|
Richard H.
Sharpe
|
52
|
Executive
Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
Damian C.
Georgino
|
47
|
Executive
Vice President of Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer
|
James
F. Mosier
|
60
|
General
Counsel and Secretary
|
Maxim
C. W. Webb
|
46
|
Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
W.
Raymond Webb
|
46
|
Vice
President, Investments
|
John T. Perri
|
38
|
Vice
President, Controller
|
Mr.
Hart has served as our
President and Chief Executive Officer and as a member of our board of directors
since 1996. Mr. Hart also serves as an officer and/or director of our following
subsidiaries: Physicians Insurance Company of Ohio (President, Chief Executive
Officer, and director since 1993), Vidler Water Company, Inc. (Chairman since
1997 and Chief Executive Officer since 1998). Mr. Hart was a director of
HyperFeed Technologies, Inc., our 80% owned subsidiary. On November
29, 2006, HyperFeed Technologies filed a petition for bankruptcy under Chapter
7
of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of
Delaware.
Mr. Sharpe
has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of PICO
since
November 1996 and in various executive capacities since joining Physicians
in
1977.
Mr. Georgino
has served as Executive Vice President of Corporate Development and Chief Legal
Officer since September 2007. Beginning in 2003, he was a partner with the
law
firm of Pepper Hamilton LLP. From 2000 to 2003 he was a partner with the
international law firm of LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene and MacRae LLP (now Dewey &
LeBoeuf LLP). Prior to that, Mr. Georgino served as Executive
Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary of United States Filter
Corporation (also known as “US Filter”).
Mr. Mosier
has served as General Counsel and Secretary of PICO since November 1996 and
of
Physicians since October 1984 and in various other executive capacities since
joining Physicians in 1981.
Mr. Maxim
Webb has been Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
of PICO since May 14, 2001. Mr. Webb served in various capacities with the
Global Equity Corporation group of companies since 1993, including Vice
President, Investments of Forbes Ceylon Limited from 1994 through 1996.
Mr. Webb became an officer of Global Equity Corporation in November 1997 and
Vice President, Investments of PICO on November 20, 1998.
Mr. Raymond
Webb has been with the Company since August 1999 as Chief Investment Analyst
and
became Vice President, Investments in April 2003.
Mr. Perri
has been Vice President, Controller of PICO since April 2003 and served in
various capacities since joining the Company in 1998, including Financial
Reporting Manager and Corporate Controller.
7
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS
The
following information sets forth factors that could cause our actual results
to
differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have
made in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and those we may make from
time to time. You should carefully consider the following risks,
together with other matters described in this Form 10-K or incorporated herein
by reference in evaluating our business and prospects. If any of the
following risks occurs, our business, financial condition or operating results
could be harmed. In such case, the trading price of our securities could
decline, in some cases significantly. The risks described below are not the
only
ones we face. Additional risks not presently known to us, or that we
currently deem immaterial, may also impair our business operations.
Our
future water revenues are uncertain and depend on a number of factors that
may
make our revenue streams and profitability volatile.
We
engage
in various water resource acquisitions, management, development, and sale and
lease activities. Accordingly, our future profitability will
primarily be dependent on our ability to acquire, develop and sell or lease
water and water rights. Our long-term profitability will be affected
by various factors, including the availability and timing of water resource
acquisitions, regulatory approvals and permits associated with such
acquisitions, transportation arrangements, and changing
technology. We may also encounter unforeseen technical or other
difficulties which could result in construction delays and cost increases with
respect to our water resource and water storage development
projects. Moreover, our profitability is significantly affected by
changes in the market price of water. Future prices of water may
fluctuate widely as demand is affected by climatic, demographic and
technological factors as well as the relative strength of the residential,
commercial and industrial real estate markets. Additionally, to the
extent that we possess junior or conditional water rights, during extreme
climatic conditions, such as periods of low flow or drought, our water rights
could be subordinated to superior water rights holders. The factors
described above are not within our control. One or more of these
factors could impact the profitability of our water resources and cause our
results of operations to be volatile.
Our
water activities may become concentrated in a limited number of assets, making
our growth and profitability vulnerable to fluctuations in local economies
and
governmental regulations.
In
the
future, we anticipate that a significant amount of our revenues and asset value
will come from a limited number of assets, including our water resources in
Nevada and Arizona and our Arizona Recharge Facility. Water resources
in this region are scarce and we may not be successful in continuing to acquire
and develop additional water assets. If we are unable to develop
additional water assets, our revenues will be derived from a limited number
of
assets, primarily located in Arizona and Nevada. As a result of this
concentration, our invested capital and results of operations will be vulnerable
to fluctuations in local economies and governmental regulations.
Our
Arizona Recharge Facility is one of the few private sector water storage sites
in Arizona. To date, we have stored more than 100,000 acre feet at the facility
for our own account. We have not stored any water on behalf of any customers,
and have not as yet generated any revenue from the recharge facility. We believe
that the best economic return on the asset will come from storing water in
surplus years for sale in dry years; however, we cannot be certain that we
will
ultimately be able to sell the stored water at a price sufficient to provide
an
adequate economic profit.
We
have
constructed a pipeline approximately 35 miles long to deliver water from Fish
Springs Ranch to the northern valleys of Reno, Nevada. We estimate
that the total cost of the pipeline and associated infrastructure to be
approximately $90 million, and completion is presently estimated to occur in
early 2008. To date, Vidler has only entered into sale agreements for
a very small proportion of the total amount of water that will be conveyed
through the pipeline to the northern valleys of Reno. By the time
construction of the pipeline has been completed, we anticipate that negotiations
will have begun with the principal buyers of this water, who will largely be
real estate developers. Although the current market pricing of water
in the area exceeds our total estimated cost of the pipeline, there can be
no assurance that the sales prices we may obtain in the future will provide
an
adequate economic return. Furthermore, if our negotiations do not
result in prices that are acceptable to us, we may choose to monetize the water
resources at a later time, which would have an adverse effect on our near-term
revenues and cash flows.
Our
water resources sales may meet with political opposition in certain locations,
thereby limiting our growth in these areas.
The
water
resources we hold and the transferability of these assets and rights to other
uses, persons, or places of use are governed by the laws concerning the laws
concerning water rights in the states of Arizona, California, and Nevada or
other states in which we operate. Our sale of water resources is
subject to the risks of delay associated with receiving all necessary regulatory
approvals and permits. Additionally, the transfer of water resources
from one use to another may affect the economic base or impact other issues
of a
community including development, and will, in some instances, be met with local
opposition. Moreover, certain of the end users of our water
resources, namely municipalities, regulate the use of water in order to manage
growth, thereby creating additional requirements that we must satisfy to sell
and convey water resources. If we are unable to effectively transfer,
sell and convey water resources, our ability to monetize this asset will suffer
and our revenues and financial performance would decline.
8
The
fair values of our real estate and water assets are linked to external growth
factors.
The
real
estate and water assets we hold have fair values that are significantly affected
by the growth in population and the general state of the local economies where
our real estate and water assets are located, primarily in the states of Arizona
and Nevada, but also in California, Colorado and Idaho.
The
current decline in the U.S. housing market, including the housing markets in
Arizona, Nevada, California, Colorado and Idaho may lead to a near-term
slowdown in demand for our real estate and water assets, which could cause
a
decline in our revenues and income. While we do not expect long-term
demand for our assets to decline, a slowdown in the housing market may impact
the timing of our monetization of our real estate and water assets and
negatively affect our economic return. Any prolonged delay in the
monetization of our assets may have an adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, results of operations, and cash flows.
Variances
in physical availability of water, along with environmental and legal
restrictions and legal impediments, could impact profitability.
We
value
our water assets, in part, based upon the amounts of acre-feet of water we
anticipate from water rights applications and permitted rights. The
water and water rights held by us and the transferability of these rights to
other uses, persons, and places of use are governed by the laws concerning
water
rights in the states of Arizona, Colorado, Idaho and Nevada. The
volumes of water actually derived from the water rights applications or
permitted rights may vary considerably based upon physical availability and
may
be further limited by applicable legal restrictions. As a result, the
volume of water anticipated from the water rights applications or permitted
rights do not in every case represent a reliable, firm annual yield of water,
but in some cases describe the face amount of the water right claims or
management’s best estimate of such entitlement. Additionally, we may
face legal restrictions on the sale or transfer of some of our water assets,
which may affect their commercial value. If we were unable to
transfer or sell our water assets, we may lose some or all of our stated or
anticipated returns.
We
may not receive all of the permitted water rights we expect from the water
rights applications we have filed in Nevada.
We
have
filed certain water rights applications in Nevada, primarily as part of the
water teaming agreement with Lincoln County. We deploy the capital
required to enable the filed applications to be converted into permitted water
rights. We only expend capital in those areas where our initial investigations
lead us to believe that we can obtain a sufficient volume of water to provide
an
adequate economic return on the capital employed in the
project. These capital expenditures largely consist of drilling and
engineering costs for water production, costs of monitoring wells, and legal
and
consulting costs for hearings with the State Engineer, and National
Environmental Protection Act, or “NEPA”, compliance costs. Until the
State Engineer permits the water rights, there can be no assurance that we
will
be awarded all of the water which we expect based on the results of our drilling
and our legal position. Any significant reduction in the volume of
water awarded to us from our base expectations could adversely affect our
revenues, profitability, and cash flows.
Our
sale of water resources may be subject to environmental regulations which would
impact our revenues, profitability, and cash flows.
The
quality of the water resources we lease or sell may be subject to regulation
by
the United States Environmental Protection Agency acting pursuant to the United
States Safe Drinking Water Act. While environmental regulations do
not directly affect us, the regulations regarding the quality of water
distributed affects our intended customers and may, therefore, depending on
the
quality of our water, impact the price and terms upon which we may in the future
sell our water resources. If we need to reduce the price of our water
resources in order to make a sale to our intended customers, our balance sheet,
results of operations and financial condition could suffer.
Purchasers
of our real estate and water assets may default on their obligations to us
and
adversely affect our results of operations and cash flow.
In
certain circumstances, we finance sales of real estate and water assets, and
we
secure such financing through deeds of trust on the property, which are only
released once the financing has been fully paid off. Purchasers of
our real estate and water assets may default on their financing
obligations. Such defaults may have an adverse effect on our
business, financial condition, and the results of operations, profitability,
and
cash flows.
If
we do not successfully locate, select and manage acquisitions and investments,
or if our acquisitions or investments otherwise fail or decline in value, our
financial condition could suffer.
We
invest
in businesses that we believe are undervalued or that will benefit from
additional capital, restructuring of operations or improved competitiveness
through operational efficiencies. If a business in which we invest
fails or its fair value declines, we could experience a material adverse effect
on our business, financial condition, the results of operations and cash
flows. Additionally, we may not be able to find sufficient
opportunities to make our business strategy successful. Our failure
to successfully locate, select and manage acquisition and investment
opportunities, particularly water and water rights, could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition, the results of operations
and cash flows. Such business failures, declines in fair values,
and/or failure to successfully locate, select and manage acquisitions or
investments, particularly water and water rights, could result in a negative
return on equity. We could also lose part or all of our capital in these
businesses and experience reductions in our net income, cash flows, assets
and
equity.
9
Failure
to successfully manage newly acquired companies could adversely affect our
business.
Our
management of the operations of acquired businesses requires significant
efforts, including the coordination of information technologies, research and
development, sales and marketing, operations, taxation, regulatory matters,
and
finance. These efforts result in additional expenses and involve
significant amounts of our management’s time and could distract our management
from the day-to-day operations of our business. The diversion of our
management’s attention from the day-to-day operations, or difficulties
encountered in the integration process, could have a material adverse effect
on
our business, financial condition, and the results of operations and cash
flows. If we fail to integrate acquired businesses, resources, or
assets into our operations successfully, we may be unable to achieve our
strategic goals or an economic return and the value of your investment could
suffer.
Our
acquisitions may result in dilution to our shareholders and increase
liabilities.
We
make
selective acquisitions of companies that we believe could benefit from our
resources of additional capital, business expertise, management direction and
oversight, or existing operations. We endeavor to enhance and realize
additional value to these acquired companies through our influence and
control. Any acquisition could result in the use of a significant
portion of our available cash, significant dilution to you, and significant
acquisition-related charges. Acquisitions may also result in the
assumption of liabilities, including liabilities that are unknown or not fully
known to us at the time of the acquisition, which could have a material adverse
financial effect on us.
Our
acquisitions and investments may yield low or
negative returns for an extended period of time, which could temporarily or
permanently depress our return on shareholders’ equity, and we may not realize
the value of the funds invested.
We
generally make acquisitions and investments that tend to be long term in nature,
and for the purpose of realizing additional value by means of appropriate levels
of influence and control. We acquire businesses that we believe to be
undervalued or may benefit from additional capital, restructuring of operations
or management or improved competitiveness through operational efficiencies
with
our existing operations or through appropriate and strategic management
input. We may not be able to develop acceptable revenue streams and
investment returns through the businesses we acquire, and as a result we may
lose part or all of our investment in these assets. Additionally,
when any of our acquisitions do not achieve acceptable rates of return or we
do
not realize the value of the funds invested, we may write down the value of
such
acquisitions or sell the acquired businesses at a loss. Some of our
prior acquisitions have lost either part or all of the capital we
invested. Unsuccessful acquisitions could have negative impacts on
our cash flows, income, assets and shareholders’ equity, which may be temporary
or permanent. Moreover, the process we employ to enhance value in our
acquisitions and investments can consume considerable amounts of time and
resources. Consequently, costs incurred as a result of these
acquisitions and investments may exceed their revenues and/or increases in
their
values for an extended period of time.
Our
ability to achieve an acceptable rate of return on any particular investment
is
subject to a number of factors which may be beyond our control, including
increased competition and loss of market share, quality of management, cyclical
or uneven financial results, technological obsolescence, foreign currency risks
and regulatory delays.
We
may not be able to sell our investments when it is advantageous to do so and
we
may have to sell these investments at a discount to fair value.
No
active
market exists for some of the companies in which we invest. At December
31, 2007, approximately $3.9 million of the Company's investment portfolio
does
not have a readily available market value. We acquire stakes in
private companies that are not as liquid as investments in public
companies. Additionally, some of our acquisitions may be in
restricted or unregistered stock of U.S. public companies. Moreover,
certain investments for which there is an established market may be subject
to
dramatic fluctuations in their market price. These illiquidity
factors may affect our ability to quickly and effectively divest some of our
investments and could affect the value that we receive for the sale of such
investments and have a negative impact on our results of
operations.
Our
acquisitions of and investments in non-U.S. companies subject us to additional
market and liquidity risks which could affect the value of our
stock.
We
have
acquired, and may continue to acquire, securities in non-U.S. public companies
and other assets or businesses not located in the U.S. Typically,
these non-U.S. securities are not registered with the SEC and regulation of
these companies is under the jurisdiction of the relevant non-U.S
country. The respective non-U.S regulatory regime may limit our
ability to obtain timely and comprehensive financial information for the
non-U.S. companies in which we have invested. In addition, if a
non-U.S. company in which we invest were to take actions which could be
detrimental to its shareholders, non-U.S. legal systems may make it difficult
or
time-consuming for us to challenge such actions. These factors may
affect our ability to acquire controlling stakes, or to dispose of our non-U.S.
investments, or to realize the full fair value of our non-U.S.
investments. In addition, investments in non-U.S. countries may give
rise to complex cross-border tax issues. We aim to manage our tax
affairs efficiently, but given the complexity of dealing with U.S. and non-U.S.
tax jurisdictions, we may have to pay tax in both the U.S. and in non-U.S.
countries, and we may be unable to offset any U.S. tax liabilities with non-U.S.
tax credits. If we are unable to manage our non-U.S. tax issues
efficiently, our financial condition and the results of operations and cash
flows could be adversely affected. In addition, our base currency is
United States Dollars. Accordingly, we are subject to foreign
exchange risk through our acquisitions of stocks in non-U.S. public
companies. We attempt to mitigate this foreign exchange risk by
borrowing funds in the same currency to purchase the
equities. Significant fluctuations in the non-U.S. currencies in
which we hold investments or consummate transactions could negatively impact
our
financial condition and the results of operations and cash flows.
10
Volatile
fluctuations in our insurance reserves could cause our financial condition
to be
materially misstated.
Our
insurance subsidiaries have established reserves based on actuarial
estimates that we believe are adequate to meet the ultimate cost of losses
arising from claims. However, it has been, and will continue to be,
necessary for our insurance subsidiaries to review and make appropriate
adjustments to reserves for claims and expenses for settling
claims. Changes in estimates for these reserves could cause our
financial condition to fluctuate from period to period and cause our financial
condition to appear to be better than it actually is for periods in which
insurance claims reserves are understated. In subsequent periods when
we discover the underestimation and pay the additional claims, our cash needs
will be greater than expected and our financial results of operations for that
period will be worse than they would have been had our previous reserves been
more accurate.
The
inherent uncertainties in estimating loss reserves are greater for some
insurance products than for others, and are dependent on various factors
including:
·
|
the
length of time in reporting claims;
|
·
|
the
diversity of historical losses among claims;
|
·
|
the
amount of historical information available during the estimation
process;
|
·
|
the
degree of impact that changing regulations and legal precedents may
have
on open claims; and
|
·
|
the
consistency of reinsurance programs over time.
|
Because
medical malpractice liability, commercial property and casualty, and workers’
compensation claims may not be completely paid off for several years, estimating
reserves for these types of claims can be more uncertain than estimating
reserves for other types of insurance. As a result, actual losses
cannot be determined for several years following the year for which reserves
were initially established. During the past several years, the levels
of the reserves for our insurance subsidiaries have been very
volatile. We have had to significantly increase and decrease these
reserves in the past several years. Significant increases in the
reserves may be necessary in the future, and the level of reserves for our
insurance subsidiaries may be volatile in the future. These increases
or volatility may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition,
and the results of operations and cash flows.
If
we underestimate the amount of reinsurance we need or if the companies with
which we have reinsurance agreements default on their obligations, we may be
unable to cover claims made and that would have a material adverse effect on
our
results of operations and cash flows.
We
have
reinsurance agreements on all of our insurance books of business with
reinsurance companies. We purchase reinsurance based upon our
assessment of the overall direct underwriting risk. It is possible
that we may underestimate the amount of reinsurance required to achieve the
desired level of net claims risk, and a claim may exceed the combined value
of
our reserve and the amount of reinsurance available. Additionally,
our reinsurers could default on amounts owed to us for their portion of the
direct insurance claim. Our insurance subsidiaries, as direct writers
of lines of insurance, have ultimate responsibility for the payment of claims,
and any defaults by reinsurers may result in our established reserves not being
adequate to meet the ultimate cost of losses arising from claims. If
claims made exceed the amount of our direct reserves and the available
reinsurance, we may be subject to regulatory action or litigation and our
results of operation and cash flows would suffer as a result.
State
regulators could require changes to our capitalization and/or to the operations
of our insurance subsidiaries, and/or place them into rehabilitation or
liquidation.
Beginning
in 1994, our subsidiaries, Physicians and Citation, became subject to the
provisions of the Risk-Based Capital for Insurers Model Act which has been
adopted by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners for the purpose
of helping regulators identify insurers that may be in financial
difficulty. The Model Act contains a formula which takes into account
asset risk, credit risk, underwriting risk and all other relevant risks. Under
this formula, each insurer is required to report to regulators using formulas
which measure the quality of its capital and the relationship of its modified
capital base to the level of risk assumed in specific aspects of its
operations. The formula does not address all of the risks associated
with the operations of an insurer. The formula is intended to provide
a minimum threshold measure of capital adequacy by an individual insurance
company and does not purport to compute a target level of
capital. Companies which fall below the threshold will be placed into
one of four categories: Company Action Level, where the insurer must submit
a
plan of corrective action; Regulatory Action Level, where the insurer must
submit such a plan of corrective action, the regulator is required to perform
such examination or analysis the Superintendent of Insurance considers necessary
and the regulator must issue a corrective order; Authorized Control Level,
which
includes the above actions and may include rehabilitation or liquidation; and
Mandatory Control Level, where the regulator must rehabilitate or liquidate
the
insurer. As of December 31, 2007, all of our insurance subsidiaries’
risk-based capital results exceeded the Company Action
Level. However, we cannot assure you that insurance subsidiaries’
risk-based capital results will exceed the Company Action Level in the
future. If the risk-based capital of any of our insurance
subsidiaries fails to exceed the Company Action Level, we will be subject to
the
regulatory action described above and our results of operations could
suffer.
11
If
we are required to register as an investment company, we will be subject to
a
significant regulatory burden and our results of operations will
suffer.
We
are an
operating company and are not subject to regulation as an investment company
under the U.S. Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended. However,
if we were required to register as an investment company, our ability to use
debt would be substantially reduced, and we would be subject to significant
additional disclosure obligations and restrictions on our operational
activities. Because of the additional requirements imposed on an investment
company with regard to the distribution of earnings, operational activities
and
the use of debt, in addition to increased expenditures due to additional
reporting responsibilities, our cash available for investments would be reduced.
The additional expenses would reduce income. These factors would
adversely affect our business, financial condition, and the results of
operations and cash flows.
We
are directly impacted by international affairs, which directly expose us to
the
adverse effects of any foreign economic or governmental
instability.
As
a
result of global investment diversification, our business, financial condition,
the results of operations and cash flows may be adversely affected
by:
·
|
exposure
to fluctuations in exchange rates;
|
·
|
the
imposition of governmental controls;
|
·
|
the
need to comply with a wide variety of non-U.S. and U.S. export laws;
|
·
|
political
and economic instability;
|
·
|
trade
restrictions;
|
·
|
changes
in tariffs and taxes;
|
·
|
volatile
interest rates;
|
·
|
changes
in certain commodity prices;
|
·
|
exchange
controls which may limit our ability to withdraw money;
|
·
|
the
greater difficulty of administering business overseas; and
|
·
|
general
economic conditions outside the United States.
|
Changes
in any or all of these factors could result in reduced market values of
investments, loss of assets, additional expenses, reduced investment income,
reductions in shareholders’ equity due to foreign currency fluctuations and a
reduction in our global diversification.
Because
our operations are diverse,
analysts and investors may not be able to evaluate
us
adequately, which may negatively influence our share price.
We
are a
diversified holding company with investments and operations in a variety of
business segments. Each of these areas is unique, complex in nature,
and difficult to understand. In particular, the water resource
business is a developing industry in the United States with very little
historical data, very few experts and a limited following of
analysts. Because we are complex, analysts and investors may not be
able to adequately evaluate our operations and enterprise as a going
concern. This could cause analysts and investors to make inaccurate
evaluations of our stock, or to overlook PICO in general. As a
result, the trading volume and price of our stock could suffer and may be
subject to excessive volatility.
Fluctuations
in the market price of our common stock may affect your ability to sell your
shares.
The
trading price of our common stock has historically been, and we expect to
continue to be, subject to fluctuations. The market price of our
common stock may be significantly impacted by:
·
|
quarterly
variations in financial performance and condition;
|
·
|
shortfalls
in revenue or earnings from estimates forecast by securities analysts
or
others;
|
·
|
changes
in estimates by such analysts;
|
·
|
product
introductions;
|
·
|
the
availability of economically viable acquisition or investment
opportunities, including water resources and real estate, which will
return an adequate economic return;
|
·
|
our
competitors’ announcements of extraordinary events such as acquisitions;
|
·
|
litigation;
and
|
·
|
general
economic conditions and other matters described herein.
|
Our
results of operations have been subject to significant fluctuations,
particularly on a quarterly basis, and our future results of operations could
fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and from year to
year. Causes of such fluctuations may include the inclusion or
exclusion of operating earnings from newly acquired or sold
operations. Statements or changes in opinions, ratings, or earnings
estimates made by brokerage firms or industry analysts relating to the markets
in which we do business or relating to us specifically could result in an
immediate and adverse effect on the market price of our common
stock. Such fluctuations in the market price of our common stock
could affect the value of your investment and your ability to sell your
shares.
12
We
may not be able to retain key management personnel we need to succeed, which
could adversely affect our ability to successfully operate our
businesses.
To
run
our day-to-day operations and to successfully manage newly acquired companies
we
must, among other things, continue to attract and retain key
management. We rely on the services of several key executive
officers. If they depart, it could have a significant adverse
effect. Mr. Hart, our CEO, is key to the implementation of our
strategic focus, and our ability to successfully develop our current strategy
is
dependent upon our ability to retain his services. We have an employment
agreement with Mr. Hart that expires on December 31, 2012.
We
use estimates and assumptions in preparing financial statements in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.
The
preparation of our financial statements in conformity with United States GAAP
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported
amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent liabilities at
the
date of financial statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses
during the reporting period. We regularly evaluate our
estimates related to the assessment of other than temporary impairment and
application of the equity method of accounting, unpaid losses and loss
adjustment expenses, reinsurance receivables, real estate and water assets,
deferred income taxes, stock-based compensation and contingent liabilities,
which are based on historical experience and on various other assumptions that
are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. The result of
these evaluations forms the basis for our judgments about the carrying values
of
assets and liabilities and the reported amount of revenues and expenses that
are
not readily apparent from other sources. The carrying values of
assets and liabilities and the reported amount of revenues and expenses may
differ by using different assumptions. In addition, in future periods, in order
to incorporate all known experience at that time, we may have to revise
assumptions previously made which may change the value of previously reported
assets and liabilities. This potential subsequent change in value may
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and the
results of operations and cash flows.
Repurchases
of our common stock could have a negative effect on our cash flows and our
stock
price.
Our
Board
of Directors has authorized the repurchase of up to $10 million of our common
stock. The stock purchases may be made from time to time at
prevailing prices though open market, or negotiated transactions, depending
on
market conditions, and will be funded from available cash resources of the
company. Such repurchases may have a negative impact on our cash
flows, and could result in market pressure to sell our common
stock.
Compliance
with changing regulation of corporate governance and public disclosure may
result in additional expenses.
Changing
laws, rules, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and
public disclosure, SEC regulations and NASDAQ Stock Market rules, regulations,
policies and procedures are creating uncertainty for companies such as
ours. These new or changed laws, regulations and standards are
subject to varying interpretations in many cases due to their lack of
specificity, and as a result, their application in practice may evolve over
time
as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies, which could
result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs
necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance
practices. We are committed to maintaining high standards of
corporate governance and public disclosure. As a result, our efforts
to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards have resulted in, and
are likely to continue to result in, increased general and administrative
expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from
revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. In particular, our
efforts to maintain compliance with Section 404 of the United States
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the related regulations regarding our required
assessment of our internal controls over financial reporting and our independent
registered public accounting firms' audit of the effectiveness of our internal
controls over financial reporting has required the commitment of substantial
financial and managerial resources. We expect these efforts to
require the continued commitment of significant resources. Further,
our board members, chief executive officer, and chief financial officer could
face an increased risk of personal liability in connection with the performance
of their duties and we may be required to indemnify them for any expenses
incurred in defending against claims. As a result, we may have
difficulty attracting and retaining qualified board members and executive
officers, which could harm our business. If our efforts to comply
with new or changes laws, rules, regulations, and standards differ from the
activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies due to ambiguities related
to practice, our reputation could be harmed.
13
Absence
of dividends could reduce our attractiveness to investors.
Some
investors favor companies that pay dividends, particularly in market
downturns. We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our
common stock. We currently intend to retain any future earnings for
funding growth and, therefore, we do not currently anticipate paying cash
dividends on our common stock.
We
may need additional capital in the future to fund the growth of our business,
and financing may not be available on favorable terms, if at all, or without
dilution to our shareholders.
We
currently anticipate that our available capital resources and operating income
will be sufficient to meet our expected working capital and capital expenditure
requirements for at least the next 12 months. However, we cannot
assure you that such resources will be sufficient to fund the long-term growth
of our business. We may raise additional funds through public or
private debt, equity or hybrid securities financings, including, without
limitation, through the issuance of securities pursuant to our universal shelf
registration statement on file with the SEC. We
currently have an effective registration statement on Form S-3 registering
the
sale of up to $400 million of securities, which enables us to issue debt, common
stock and warrants from time to time.
If
we
raise additional funds through the issuance of equity or convertible debt
securities, the percentage ownership of our shareholders could be significantly
diluted, the market prices for our outstanding common stock could be depressed
and these newly issued securities may have rights, preferences or privileges
senior to those of existing shareholders. For example, we have in the past
issued, and may in the future issue, additional shares of common stock at a
discount from the current trading price of our common stock. The
incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased debt service obligations
and could result in operating and financing covenants that would restrict our
operations. We cannot assure you that any additional financing we
need will be available on terms favorable to us, or at all. If
adequate funds are not available or are not available on acceptable terms,
if
and when needed, our ability to fund our operations, take advantage of
unanticipated opportunities or otherwise respond to competitive pressures would
be significantly limited. In any such case, our business, operating
results or financial condition could be materially adversely
affected.
Our
governing documents could prevent an acquisition of our company or limit the
price that investors might be willing to pay for our common stock.
Certain
provisions of our articles of incorporation and the California General
Corporation Law could discourage a third party from acquiring, or make it more
difficult for a third party to acquire, control of our company without approval
of our board of directors. For example:
·
Our
board of
directors has adopted, subject to shareholder approval, an amendment to the
articles of incorporation which will allow our board of directors to issue,
at
any time and without additional future shareholder approval, preferred stock
with such terms as it may determine. If such amendment is approved by our
shareholders at our next annual shareholders’ meeting, the rights of holders of
any of our preferred stock that may be issued in the future may be superior
to
the rights of holders of our common stock; and
·
Our
bylaws require
advance notice for stockholder proposals and nominations for election to our
board of directors.
We
are
also subject to the provisions of Section 1203 of the California General
Corporation Law, which requires a fairness opinion to be provided to our
shareholders in connection with their consideration of any proposed “interested
party” reorganization transaction. All or any of these factors could
limit the price that certain investors might be willing to pay in the future
for
shares of our common stock.
Litigation
may harm our business or otherwise distract our management.
Substantial,
complex or extended litigation could cause us to incur large expenditures and
distract our management. For example, lawsuits by employees,
shareholders or customers could be very costly and substantially disrupt our
business. Additionally, our subsidiaries may become involved in
litigation that could necessitate our management’s attention and require us to
expend our resources. We or our subsidiaries will have disputes from
time to time with companies or individuals, and we cannot assure that that
we
will always be able to resolve such disputes out of court or on terms favorable
to us.
THE
FOREGOING FACTORS, INDIVIDUALLY OR IN AGGREGATE, COULD MATERIALLY ADVERSELY
AFFECT OUR OPERATING RESULTS AND CASH FLOWS AND FINANCIAL CONDITION AND COULD
MAKE COMPARISON OF HISTORIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, INCLUDING RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS AND CASH FLOWS AND BALANCES, DIFFICULT OR NOT
MEANINGFUL.
14
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
We
lease
approximately 6,354 square feet in La Jolla, California for our principal
executive offices.
Physicians
leases approximately 1,892 square feet of office space in Columbus, Ohio for
its
headquarters. Citation leases office space for a claims office in Orange County,
California. Vidler and Nevada Land lease office space in Carson City, Nevada.
Vidler and Nevada Land have significant holdings of real estate and water assets
in the southwestern United States. We continually evaluate our current and
future space capacity in relation to our business needs. We believe that our
existing facilities are suitable and adequate to meet our current business
requirements. For a description of our water resources, real property and
mineral rights, see “Item
1-Operating Segments and Major Subsidiary Companies.”
We
are
subject to various litigation arising in the ordinary course of our business.
Members of our insurance operations segment are frequently a party in
claims proceedings and actions regarding insurance coverage, all of which we
consider routine and incidental to our business. Based upon information
presently available, we are of the opinion that such litigation will not have
a
material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
Neither
we nor our subsidiaries are parties to any potentially material
pending legal proceedings other than the following.
Exegy
Litigation:
HyperFeed
Technologies, Inc.
(“Hyperfeed”), our majority-owned subsidiary, was a provider of
enterprise-wide ticker plant and transaction technology software and services
enabling financial institutions to process and use high performance exchange
data with Smart Order Routing and other applications. During 2006, PICO and
HyperFeed negotiated a business combination with Exegy Incorporated (“Exegy”).
On August 25, 2006, PICO, HyperFeed, and Exegy entered into a contribution
agreement, pursuant to which the common stock of HyperFeed owned by PICO
would
have been contributed to Exegy in exchange for Exegy's issuing certain Exegy
stock to PICO. However, in a letter dated November 7, 2006, Exegy
informed PICO and HyperFeed that it was terminating the
agreement.
On
November 13, 2006 Exegy filed a
lawsuit against PICO and HyperFeed in state court in Missouri seeking
a declaratory judgment that
Exegy’s purported November 7, 2006 termination of the August 25, 2006
contribution
agreement was
valid. In the event that Exegy’s November 7, 2006 letter is not determined
to be a valid termination of the contribution agreement,
Exegy seeks a declaration that
PICO and HyperFeed have materially breached the contribution agreement,
for
which Exegy seeks monetary
damages and an injunction against further material breach. Finally,
Exegy seeks a declaratory judgment that if its November 7, 2006 notice
of termination was not valid, and that if (1) PICO
and HyperFeed did materially breach
the contribution agreement
and (2) a continuing breach
cannot be remedied or enjoined, then Exegy seeks a declaration that Exegy
should
be relieved of further performance under the contribution agreement. On
December 15,
2006 the lawsuit was removed from Missouri state
court to federal
court. On February 2, 2007, this case was transferred to the United
States Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware.
On
November 17, 2006 HyperFeed and
PICO filed a lawsuit against Exegy in state court in Illinois. PICO
and HyperFeed allege that Exegy, after the November 7, 2006 letter purporting
to
terminate the contribution
agreement, used and
continues to use HyperFeed’s confidential and proprietary information in an
unauthorized manner and without HyperFeed’s consent. PICO and HyperFeed are also
seeking a preliminary injunction enjoining Exegy from disclosing, using,
or
disseminating HyperFeed’s confidential and proprietary information, and from
continuing to interfere with HyperFeed’s business relations. PICO and
HyperFeed also seek monetary damages from Exegy. On January 18, 2007, this
case was removed from Illinois
state court to federal bankruptcy court in Illinois. On February 6, 2007
this
case was transferred to the United States Bankruptcy Court, District of
Delaware.
On
July 11, 2007, the parties entered
into mediation to attempt to resolve these two lawsuits. However, the mediation
was unsuccessful and both
cases have resumed as adversary
proceedings in the United States Bankruptcy Court, District of
Delaware.
Fish
Springs Ranch, LLC:
In
2006, the Company, through
Fish Springs Ranch
LLC, a 51% owned subsidiary, began construction
of a pipeline from
Fish Springs Ranch in northern Nevada to
the north valleys of Reno,
Nevada. The
final regulatory
approval required for the pipeline project was a Record of Decision for
a right
of way, which was granted on May 31, 2006. On October 26, 2006,
the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of Indians (the “Tribe”) filed suit against the
Bureau of Land Management of the United States Department of the Interior
(“BLM”) and the United States Department of the Interior in the United States
in
the United States District Court for the District of Nevada claiming that
the
BLM had failed to fulfill is legal obligations to protect and conserve
the trust
resources of the Tribe and seeking various equitable remedies. The
Tribe asserted that the exportation of 8,000 acre-feet of water per year
from
the properties owned by Fish Springs Ranch, LLC would negatively impact
their
water rights located in a basin within the boundaries of the Tribe
reservation. Fish Springs Ranch, LLC was allowed to participate in
this proceeding and was later allowed to intervene directly in the
action.
On
May 9,
2007, the Tribe initiated other legal action against the BLM and the Department
of the Interior before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit
to stop construction of the pipeline and the transportation of water from
the
properties owned by Fish Springs Ranch, LLC. Again, Fish Springs
Ranch, LLC was allowed to participate in this proceeding and was later
allowed
to intervene directly in the action.
While
we
believed the claims were without merit, the Tribe’s legal actions might have
caused significant delays to the completion of the construction of the
pipeline. To avoid future delays and additional costs of litigation,
the parties reached a complete monetary settlement and signed a settlement
agreement on May 30, 2007, that resolved all of the Tribe’s
claims. The settlement agreement is subject to ratification by the
United States Congress, which we anticipate will occur in 2008, due to
the
Tribe’s involvement and the nature of the claims. The settlement
agreement requires Fish Springs Ranch, LLC to:
·
|
pay
$500,000 upon signing of agreement;
|
·
|
transfer
6,214 acres of real estate that Fish Spring Ranch, LLC owns,
with a fair
value of $500,000;
|
·
|
pay
$3.1 million on January 8, 2008; and
|
·
|
pay
$3.6 million on the later of January 8, 2009 or the date the
United States
Congress ratifies the settlement agreement. Interest accrues at
the London Inter-Bank Offering Rate, or LIBOR, from January 8,
2009, if
the payment is made after that
date.
|
There is
13,000 acre-feet per-year of permitted water rights at Fish Springs
Ranch. The existing permit allows up to 8,000 acre-feet of water per
year to be exported to support the development in the Reno area. The
settlement agreement also provides that, in exchange for the Tribe agreeing
to
not oppose all permitting activities for the pumping and export of groundwater
in excess of 8,000 acre-feet of water per year, Fish Springs will pay the
Tribe
12% of the gross sales price for each acre-foot of additional water that
Fish
Springs sells in excess of 8,000 acre-feet per year, up to 13,000 acre-
feet per
year. Currently, we do not have regulatory approval to export any
water in excess of 8,000 acre-feet per year from the Fish Springs Ranch,
and it
is uncertain whether such regulatory approval will be granted in the
future.
15
No
matters were submitted during the fourth quarter of 2007 to a vote of our
shareholders, through the solicitation of proxies or otherwise.
PART
II
ITEM
5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
Our
common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol “PICO”.
The following table sets out the high and low daily closing sale prices as
reported on the NASDAQ Global Market. These reported prices reflect inter-dealer
prices without adjustments for retail markups, markdowns, or commissions.
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||||||||||
High
|
Low
|
High
|
Low
|
|||||||||||||
1st
Quarter
|
$ | 47.21 | $ | 34.10 | $ | 35.37 | $ | 31.59 | ||||||||
2nd
Quarter
|
$ | 48.29 | $ | 43.26 | $ | 35.03 | $ | 30.05 | ||||||||
3rd
Quarter
|
$ | 47.22 | $ | 40.21 | $ | 35.53 | $ | 29.72 | ||||||||
4th
Quarter
|
$ | 43.44 | $ | 33.62 | $ | 34.91 | $ | 30.42 |
On
February 27, 2008, the closing sale price of our common stock was $33.50, and
there were approximately 599 holders of record.
We have
not declared or paid any dividends in the last two years, and we do not expect
to pay any dividends in the foreseeable future.
Securities
Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
The
information required by Item 201(d) of Regulation S-K is provided under Item
12,
Security Ownership of Certain
Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters,
“Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans,”
which is incorporated herein by reference.
16
Company
Stock Performance Graph
This
graph compares the total return on an indexed basis of a $100 investment in
our
stock, the Standard and Poor’s 500 Index, and the Russell 2000
Index. The measurement points utilized in the graph consist of the
last trading day in each calendar year, which closely approximates the last
day
of our fiscal year for that year.
The
stock
price performance shown on the graph is not necessarily indicative of future
price performance.
ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
Period
|
(a)
Total number of shares purchased
|
(b)
Average Price Paid per Share
|
(c)
Total Number of Shares (or Units) Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced
Plans or Programs (1)
|
(d)
Maximum Number (or Approximate Dollar Value) of Shares (or Units)
that May
Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs (1)
|
||||
10/1/07
- 10/31/07
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
11/1/07
- 11/30/07
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
12/1/07
- 12/31/07
|
-
|
-
|
(1)
In
October 2002, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $10
million of PICO common stock. The stock purchases may be made from time to
time
at prevailing prices through open market or negotiated transactions, depending
on market conditions, and will be funded from available cash. As of December
31,
2007, no stock had been repurchased under this authorization.
17
ITEM
6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The
following table presents our selected consolidated financial data. The
information set forth below is not necessarily indicative of the results of
future operations and should be read in conjunction with “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in
Item 7 of this Form 10-K and the consolidated financial statements and the
related notes thereto included elsewhere in this document.
Year
Ended December
31,
|
||||||||||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||||||||||
OPERATING
RESULTS
|
(In
thousands, except share data)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total
investment income
|
$ | 19,788 | $ | 39,609 | $ | 15,917 | $ | 9,056 | $ | 8,100 | ||||||||||
Sale
of real estate and water assets
|
9,496 | 41,509 | 124,984 | 10,879 | 19,751 | |||||||||||||||
Other
income
|
4,645 | 1,605 | 1,210 | 2,188 | 3,648 | |||||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$ | 33,929 | $ | 82,723 | $ | 142,111 | $ | 22,123 | $ | 31,499 | ||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
$ | (1,270 | ) | $ | 31,511 | $ | 22,267 | $ | (7,860 | ) | $ | (5,982 | ) | |||||||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net
|
(2,268 | ) | (6,065 | ) | (2,698 | ) | 2,744 | |||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ | (1,270 | ) | $ | 29,243 | $ | 16,202 | $ | (10,558 | ) | $ | (3,238 | ) | |||||||
PER
COMMON
SHARE BASIC
AND
DILUTED:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss) from continuing operations
|
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | 2.10 | $ | 1.72 | $ | (0.64 | ) | $ | (0.48 | ) | |||||||
Net
income (loss) from discontinued operations
|
(0.15 | ) | (0.47 | ) | (0.21 | ) | 0.22 | |||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | 1.95 | $ | 1.25 | $ | (0.85 | ) | $ | (0.26 | ) | |||||||
Weighted
Average Shares Outstanding
|
18,321,449 | 14,994,947 | 12,959,029 | 12,368,068 | 12,375,933 |
As
of December
31,
|
|||||||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
|||||||||||||
FINANCIAL
CONDITION
|
(In
thousands, except per share data)
|
||||||||||||||||
Total
assets
|
$
|
676,342
|
$
|
549,043
|
$
|
441,830
|
$
|
354,658
|
$
|
330,937
|
|||||||
Total
asset of discontinued operations
|
$
|
4,616
|
$
|
3,974
|
$
|
9,864
|
|||||||||||
Unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
$
|
32,376
|
$
|
41,083
|
$
|
46,647
|
$
|
55,944
|
$
|
60,864
|
|||||||
Borrowings
|
$
|
18,878
|
$
|
12,721
|
$
|
11,835
|
$
|
17,556
|
$
|
15,377
|
|||||||
Liabilities
of discontinued operations
|
$
|
4,282
|
$
|
3,121
|
$
|
3,784
|
|||||||||||
Total
liabilities and minority interest
|
$
|
150,492
|
$
|
143,816
|
$
|
140,955
|
$
|
114,729
|
$
|
101,777
|
|||||||
Shareholders'
equity
|
$
|
525,851
|
$
|
405,227
|
$
|
300,875
|
$
|
239,929
|
$
|
229,160
|
|||||||
Book
value per share (1)
|
$
|
27.92
|
$
|
25.52
|
$
|
22.67
|
$
|
19.40
|
$
|
18.52
|
(1)
Book
value per share is computed by dividing shareholders’ equity by the net of total
shares issued less shares held as treasury shares.
18
INTRODUCTION
The
following discussion and analysis of
financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction
with
the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto included elsewhere
in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The
consolidated financial statements and other portions of this Annual Report
on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 , including Item 7,
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations,” reflect the effects of presenting HyperFeed Technologies, Inc. as a
discontinued operation. See Note
2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements,
“Discontinued Operations”.
The
following Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations (“MD&A”) is intended to help the reader understand our
company. The MD&A should be read in conjunction with our
consolidated financial statements, and the accompanying notes, presented later
in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The MD&A includes the
following sections:
|
•
|
Company
Summary, Recent
Developments, and Future Outlook— a brief description of our
operations, the critical factors affecting them, and their future
prospects;
|
|
•
|
Critical
Accounting Policies
— a discussion of accounting policies which require critical
judgments and estimates. Our significant accounting policies, including
the critical accounting policies discussed in this section, are summarized
in the notes to the consolidated financial statements;
|
|
•
|
Results
of Operations —
an analysis of our consolidated results of operations for the past
three
years, presented in our consolidated financial statements; and
|
|
•
|
Liquidity
and Capital
Resources — an analysis of cash flows, sources and uses of cash,
and contractual obligations and a discussion of factors affecting
our
future cash flow.
|
COMPANY
SUMMARY, RECENT DEVELOPMENTS, AND FUTURE OUTLOOK
WATER
RESOURCE AND WATER STORAGE OPERATIONS
BACKGROUND
The
long
- term future demand for our water assets is driven by population growth
relative to currently available water supplies in the southwestern United
States.
The
population growth rate in the southwest has consistently been higher than the
national rate for the past several years. According to the U.S. Census Bureau,
in the six-and-one-quarter year period from April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2006,
the
population of Nevada grew by a total of 24.9% (497,272 people), Arizona grew
by
20.2% (1,035,686 people), Colorado grew by 10.5% (452,116 people), Idaho grew
by
13.3% (172,512 people), and California grew by 7.6% (2,585,901 people). This
compares to a total national growth rate of 6.4% (17,976,578 people) over the
same period.
The
rate
of population growth in the southwest slowed in 2007, but still appears to
be
robust and remains in excess of the national growth rate. According to the
Census Bureau’s annual estimate of state population changes for the years ended
July 1, 2007 and 2006, Nevada’s annual growth rate was 2.9% (2006: 3.5%),
Arizona 2.8% (2006: 3.6%), Colorado 2.0% (2006: 1.9%), Idaho 2.4% (2006: 2.6%)
and California 0.8% (2006: 0.8%). These statistics compare to the national
total
growth rate of 1% (2006: 1%)
In
2006,
Nevada, the nation’s fastest-growing state, published a study of its estimated
population projection from 2006 to 2026. The Nevada State Demographer’s Office
estimates that Nevada will grow by over 73% (1,851,652 people) in that 20 year
period. Of that total, over 1,500,000 people are expected to move to Clark
County, which includes metropolitan Las Vegas, and over 250,000 people to
western Nevada, which includes Carson City, Washoe County (where Reno is
situated), and Lyon County.
Currently,
the majority of the southwest’s water supplies come from the Colorado River. The
balance is provided by other surface rights, such as rivers and lakes,
groundwater (that is, water pumped from underground aquifers), and water
previously stored in reservoirs or aquifers. A prolonged drought and rapid
population growth in the past few years have left the southwest with little
available excess water supply. A vivid illustration of the effect of this
situation is Lake Mead. Lake Mead is a reservoir for Colorado River water,
situated in both Nevada and Arizona, and supplies 90% of southern Nevada’s
water. Since 2000, the reservoir has dropped 110 feet, partly because the annual
flow of Colorado River water into the lake since 2001 has been below its annual
average in all but one year. In September 2007, the lake was at 49% capacity,
potentially making the Las Vegas Valley’s primary water intake inoperable.
In
August
2005, the U.S. Department of the Interior published a study titled “Water 2025:
Preventing Crises and Conflict in the West”. The study included a map of the
western and southwestern states and highlighted the potential water supply
crises by 2025. Various areas were designated as having moderate, substantial,
or highly likely water conflict potential. (that is, areas where existing
supplies are not adequate to meet water demands for people, agricultural use,
and for the environment). Areas identified as having a highly likely or
substantial conflict potential included western Nevada, southern Nevada, and
the
metropolitan Phoenix to Tucson region. Starting over a decade ago, we have
concentrated our acquisition and development efforts on water assets in these
regions.
The
development of our water assets is a long-term process. It requires significant
capital and expertise. A total project -- from acquisition, developing,
permitting and sale -- may take as long as five to seven years. Typically,
in
the regions in which we operate, new housing developments require an assured
water supply (that is, access to water supplies for at least one hundred years)
before a permit for the development will be issued. The current slow-down in
housing throughout the U.S. -- including the southwest -- could affect the
timing of sales of our water assets. However, we believe that the long-term
demand for our assets, and their economic value, are substantially underpinned
by estimated population growth in excess of existing water supplies to support
that growth.
19
The
following is a description and summary of our water resource and water storage
assets at December 31, 2007 .
WATER
RESOURCES
Arizona
Any
new
residential development in Arizona must obtain a permit from the Arizona
Department of Water Resources certifying a “designated assured water supply”
sufficient to sustain the development for at least 100 years. Harquahala Valley
groundwater meets the designation of assured water supply. Arizona state
legislation allows Harquahala Valley groundwater to be made available as assured
water supply to cities and communities in Arizona through agreements with the
Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District.
At
December 31, 2007, Vidler owned approximately 3,840 acre-feet of groundwater
and
the related land in the Harquahala Valley. The Harquahala Valley is located
in
La Paz County and Maricopa County, approximately 75 miles northwest of
metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona. According to U.S. Census Bureau data, the
population of Maricopa County increased 22.6% from 2000 to 2006, with the
addition of more than 110,000 people per year. Vidler anticipates that as the
boundaries of the greater Phoenix metropolitan area continue to push out, this
is likely to lead to demand for our land as well as our water to support growth
within the Harquahala Valley itself. The remaining water can also be transferred
for municipal use outside of the Harquahala Valley.
Nevada
Vidler
has acquired land and water rights in Nevada through the purchase of ranch
properties (that is, appropriating existing supplies of water), filing
applications for new water rights (that is, appropriating new supplies of
water), and entering into teaming arrangements with parties owning water rights,
which they wish to develop.
In
19 of
the past 20 years, Nevada was the state which experienced the most rapid
population growth and new home construction in the United States -- in 2006
it
was second, behind Arizona. The population is concentrated in southern Nevada,
which includes the Las Vegas metropolitan area.
|
1.
|
Lincoln County
|
The
Lincoln County Water District and Vidler (“Lincoln/Vidler”) have entered into a
water delivery teaming agreement to locate and develop water resources in
Lincoln County, Nevada for planned projects under the County’s master
plan. Under the agreement, proceeds from sales of water will be
shared equally after Vidler is reimbursed for the expenses incurred in
developing water resources in Lincoln County. Lincoln/Vidler has filed
applications for more than 100,000 acre-feet of water rights with the intention
of supplying water for residential, commercial, and industrial use, as
contemplated by the County’s approved master plan. We believe that this is the
only known new source of water for Lincoln County. Vidler anticipates that
up to
40,000 acre-feet of water rights will ultimately be permitted from these
applications, and put to use for planned projects in Lincoln County.
Under
the
Lincoln County Land Act, more than 13,300 acres of federal land in southern
Lincoln County near the fast growing City of Mesquite was offered for sale
in
February 2005. According to press reports, the eight parcels offered were sold
to various developers for approximately $47.5 million. The land was sold without
environmental approvals, water, and city services, which will be required before
development can proceed. Additional water supply will be required in Lincoln
County if this land is to be developed.
Tule Desert
Groundwater Basin
In
1998,
Lincoln/Vidler filed for 14,000 acre-feet of water rights for industrial use
from the Tule Desert Groundwater Basin. In November 2002, the Nevada
State Engineer granted and permitted an application for 2,100 acre-feet of
water
rights -- which Lincoln/Vidler subsequently sold to a developer -- and ruled
that an additional 7,244 acre-feet could be granted pending additional studies
by Lincoln/Vidler.
In
2005
Lincoln/Vidler entered into an agreement with a developer for Lincoln County
Land Act property. The developer has up to 10 years to purchase up to 7,240
acre-feet of water, as and when supplies are permitted from the applications.
We
anticipate that the hearings to permit these applications will commence in
2008.
During 2006 and 2007, Vidler conducted significant data collection and
successfully drilled a series of production and monitoring wells to provide
evidence to support the applications. The initial price of $7,500 per acre-foot
will increase at 10% each year. At December 31, 2007 the current price is $9,075
per acre-foot. In addition, the developer pays a commitment fee equal to 10%
of
the outstanding balance of unpurchased water each year, beginning August 9,
2006, which will be applied to the purchase of water.
The
Lincoln County teaming arrangement is an example of a transaction where Vidler
can partner with an entity, in this case a governmental entity, to provide
the
necessary capital, entrepreneurial skills, and technical expertise to
commercially develop water assets, thereby providing a significant economic
benefit to the partner as well as creating future job growth and tax base for
the County.
Coyote
Springs
Coyote
Springs ( www.coyotesprings.com
) is a planned mixed-use development to be located approximately 40 miles north
of Las Vegas , at the junction of U.S. Highway 93 and State Highway 168,
approximately two-thirds of which is within Lincoln County , Nevada , and the
balance is in Clark County, Nevada . Coyote Springs is the largest
privately-held property for development in southern Nevada. The developer,
Coyote Springs Investment, LLC (“CSIL”), has received entitlements for
approximately 50,000 residential units, 6 golf courses, and 1,200 acres of
retail and commercial development on 13,100 acres in Clark County. CSIL expects
to receive additional entitlements for its 29,800 acres in Lincoln County.
Based
on the entitlements obtained so far, it is estimated that the community will
require approximately 35,000 acre-feet of permanent water. Additional water
will
be required as further entitlements are obtained. It is expected that full
absorption of the residential units will take 25 years or more.
Pardee
Homes has agreed to be the master residential developer on the first phase
of
the development. Construction of the first golf course is nearing completion,
and CSIL has indicated home sales on the first 680 lots will start in the first
half of 2008.
In
2006,
Lincoln/Vidler sold approximately 570 acre-feet of water rights at Meadow
Valley, located in Lincoln and Clark counties, to CSIL for approximately $3.4
million, or $6,050 per acre-foot. Vidler’s 50% share of the sales price was $1.7
million.
We
anticipate that Lincoln County/Vidler could provide the majority of the water
required for the Coyote Springs project from the jointly filed applications
for
water rights in various basins in Lincoln County.
In
2005,
Lincoln/Vidler agreed to sell additional water to CSIL, as and when supplies
are
permitted from existing applications in Kane Springs, Nevada. The initial
purchase price for the water was $6,050 per acre-foot for the first year of
the
agreement. The price of unpurchased water will increase 10% each year on the
anniversary of the agreement, and is currently $7,320 per acre-foot.
A
hearing
was completed in 2006 on a filing for water rights from Kane Springs, and in
January 2007 Lincoln/Vidler was awarded 1,000 acre-feet of permitted water
rights. The Nevada State Engineer has requested additional data before making
a
determination on the balance of the applications from this groundwater basin,
where Lincoln/Vidler maintains priority applications for approximately 17,375
acre-feet of water. The actual permits received may be for a lesser quantity,
which cannot be accurately predicted.
Lincoln/Vidler
is responsible for obtaining the right-of-way over federally managed lands,
on
behalf of CSIL, relating to a pipeline to convey the water rights from Kane
Springs. On obtaining the right-of-way, which is expected in 2008,
Lincoln/Vidler expects to close on the sale of the permitted water rights to
CSIL.
Lincoln
County Power Plant Project
In
2005,
Vidler entered into an option agreement to sell its interest in a project to
construct a new electricity-generating plant in southern Lincoln County,
for $4.8 million. It is anticipated that the new plant will supply electricity
to the new communities to be developed near Mesquite, and surrounding areas.
If
the purchaser exercises the option to purchase the interest in the power
project, the agreement is scheduled to close in 2008. The purchaser has made
all
of the scheduled option exercise payments to date.
This
project is 100% owned by Vidler, and does not form part of the Lincoln/Vidler
teaming arrangement.
20
|
2.
|
Fish
Springs
Ranch
|
Vidler
has a 51% membership interest in, and is the managing partner of, Fish Springs
Ranch, LLC (“Fish Springs”), and owns 100% of V&B, LLC. These companies own
the Fish Springs Ranch and other properties totaling approximately 8,600 acres
in Honey Lake Valley in Washoe County, approximately 40 miles north of
Reno, Nevada, and permitted water rights related to the properties, which are
transferable to the Reno/Sparks area. The Fish Springs Ranch water rights have
been identified as the most economical, sustainable, and proven new source
of
supply to support new growth in the north valley communities of Washoe County.
According to the Nevada State Demographer, from 2000 to 2006, the population
of
Washoe County (including Reno/Sparks) increased by 19.6% to approximately
409,000 people.
Residential
property developers have publicly stated that Reno is constrained for land
and
that there are no existing water supplies to support further development in
the
north valleys of Reno. If additional water can be supplied to Reno and the
surrounding areas, this will allow the development of additional land in
accordance with the community’s master plan. Indicative market prices for new
water delivered to Reno have appreciated strongly in the past several years.
Given these market conditions, Fish Springs determined that it would be
advantageous to construct, at its own expense, 35 miles of pipeline, to deliver
an initial 8,000 acre-feet of water annually from Fish Springs Ranch to a
central storage tank in northern Reno , which could supply water to the new
projects of several developers in the north valleys.
We
believe the current market value of water in the area exceeds the total
estimated cost of the pipeline and the water to be supplied. To date, Vidler
has
entered into agreements to sell approximately 120 acre-feet of water at a price
of $45,000 per acre-foot, as and when water is delivered through the completed
pipeline.
During
2006, we began construction of the pipeline and an electrical substation to
provide the power which will be required to pump the water to the north valleys.
Construction of the pipeline to convey the water to Fish Springs Ranch to the
central storage tank has been completed. We anticipate that
construction of the remaining infrastructure will be completed and tested by
the end of March 2008 and that we will be able to deliver water
shortly thereafter.
The
total
cost of the pipeline project is estimated to be approximately $86.7 million,
before capitalized interest of approximately $1.1 million. As of December 31,
2007, $83.4 million of the costs related to the design and construction of
the
pipeline (before capitalized interest) have been spent and capitalized (that
is, recorded as an asset on our balance sheet, in the line “Real estate and
water assets, net”). The remaining costs are expected to be incurred by the end
of March, 2008.
In
addition to the $86.7 million estimated total cost of the pipeline project,
Fish
Springs has budgeted approximately $3.7 million to construct additional
infrastructure. To date, expenditure of approximately $3.2 million
has been capitalized for this additional infrastructure. The proposed additional
infrastructure is approximately four miles of 30-inch pipeline, to be
constructed from the terminal tank (part of the original pipeline construction)
to the general area of development in the north valleys of
Reno. Originally, it was anticipated that this infrastructure would
be constructed by the local utility. However, Fish Springs is able to design,
construct, and complete this infrastructure in less time, at a more competitive
cost, and thus enhance access to the Fish Springs water resource by the
community. We estimate that the additional infrastructure will be finalized
during the first quarter of 2008. The cost of the additional infrastructure
will
be factored in the price of the water that is sold to developers as an
additional infrastructure line item.
Project
expenses for 2007 included an expense of $7.3 million resulting from a
settlement between Fish Springs Ranch LLC, and the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe
(“the Tribe settlement”).
The
Tribe
asserted that exporting 8,000 acre-feet of water per year from the Fish Springs
Ranch to the north valleys of Reno through a 38 mile pipeline would negatively
impact the Tribe’s water rights in a basin, within the boundaries of the Pyramid
Lake Paiute Tribe reservation. While we believed that the claims were
without merit, the Tribe’s legal actions could have caused significant delays to
the completion of the construction of the pipeline. To avoid any such delays,
Fish Springs and the Tribe agreed to settle all outstanding claims and legal
actions. The amounts payable to the Tribe as a result of the
settlement agreement are predominantly attributable to settlement of the claims
rather than the acquisition of additional water rights or other
assets.
The
$7.3
million settlement expense consists of:
|
·
|
.
a cash payment of $500,000, which was made during the second quarter
of 2007;
|
|
·
|
.
the transfer of approximately 6,214 acres of land, with a fair value
of
$500,000 and a book value of $139,000, to the Tribe in the second
quarter
of 2007;
|
|
·
|
.
a
payment of $3.1 million due and paid on January 8, 2008; and
|
|
·
|
.
a
payment of $3.6 million due on the later of January 8, 2009, or the
date
that an Act of Congress ratifies the settlement agreement. If
the payment is made after January 8, 2009, interest will accrue at
the
London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) from January 8, 2009.
|
Accordingly,
Fish Springs has accrued a liability of $6.7 million for the outstanding
payments due at December 31, 2007.
There
is
13,000 acre-feet per-year of permitted water rights at Fish Springs Ranch.
The
existing permit allows an initial 8,000 acre-feet of water per year to be
exported to support development in the Reno area. The settlement agreement
also
provides that, in exchange for the Tribe agreeing not to oppose all permitting
activities for the pumping and export of groundwater in excess of 8,000
acre-feet of water per year, Fish Springs will pay the Tribe 12% of the gross
sales price for each acre-foot of additional water that Fish Springs sells
in
excess of 8,000 acre-feet per year, up to 13,000 acre-feet per year. The
obligation to expense and pay the 12% fee is only due if, and when, the Company
sells water in excess of 8,000 acre-feet. Accordingly, Fish Springs
Ranch will record the liability for such amounts due at that time. Currently,
there is not regulatory approval to export any water in excess of 8,000
acre-feet per year from Fish Springs Ranch to support development in northern
Reno, and it is uncertain whether such regulatory approval will be granted
in
the future.
In
accordance with the Fish Springs partnership agreement, our 49% partner’s
proportionate share of all costs related to the pipeline project, including
the
Tribe settlement expense and additional infrastructure described above, will
be
recouped from the revenues generated from the sale of Fish Springs water
resources.
In
October 2007, Fish Springs entered into an Infrastructure Dedication Agreement
(“IDA”) with Washoe County, Nevada. The IDA, together with a Water Banking Trust
Agreement (“Banking Agreement”) entered into between Fish Springs and Washoe
County in 2006, is the final phase to bring the Fish Springs Ranch water
resources to the north valleys of the Reno area. On completion of
construction and system testing, which is scheduled for early 2008, the water
rights will be available for use in the north valleys.
Under
the
Banking Agreement, Washoe County holds the transferred and dedicated water
rights in trust on behalf of Fish Springs, which will then be able to transfer
and assign water rights credits. Fish Springs can sell the water credits to
developers, who would then dedicate the water to the local water utility for
service. Under the IDA, the entire project infrastructure will be dedicated
to
Washoe County to operate and maintain as part of their existing water delivery
system, with the pipeline capacity, estimated to be at least 18,000 acre-feet
per year, reserved for Fish Springs. Fish Springs retains the
exclusive right to convey any and all water rights (initially 8,000 acre-feet
per year) through the project infrastructure.
Without
changing the potential revenues to Fish Springs, the two agreements allow Washoe
County to perform its role as a water utility by delivering and maintaining
water service to new developments. The agreements enable Fish Springs to
complete its water development project by selling water credits to developers,
who can then obtain will-serve commitments from Washoe County. This
is another example of working with local government to solve water resource
issues in an expedient, sustainable, and cost-effective manner.
21
|
3.
|
Carson
City and Lyon
County, Nevada
|
The
capital city of Nevada, Carson City, and Lyon County are located in the western
part of the state, close to Lake Tahoe and the border with California. There
are
currently few existing water sources to support future growth and development
in
the Dayton corridor area, which is located in this region.
In
the fourth quarter of
2007, Vidler entered into development and improvement agreements with
both Carson City and Lyon County to provide water resources for
planned future growth in Lyon County and to connect the municipal water systems
of Carson City and Lyon County.
The
agreements allow for Carson River water rights owned or controlled by Vidler
to
be conveyed for use in Lyon County. The agreements also allow Vidler to bank
water with Lyon County and authorize Vidler to build the infrastructure to
upgrade and inter-connect the Carson City and Lyon County water
systems.
As
a
result of the Carson - Lyon Intertie project, Carson City is expected
to obtain greater stability in its peak day water supply
demands. In addition, the ranches from which the water rights are
being utilized will, in part, be acquired by Carson City for use as precious
riverfront open space for the community. It is anticipated that the Lyon County
utility will have as much as 4,000 acre-feet of water available for development
projects in the Dayton corridor for which there is currently limited supplies
of
water, as well as new water infrastructure to improve Lyon County’s water
management program. The connection of the two water systems will also allow
Carson City and Lyon County greater stability and flexibility with their water
supplies in the event of emergencies such as wildfires or infrastructure
failures.
Vidler
is
in the process of developing the capital budget for the Carson - Lyon Intertie
project. Estimated total capital costs for the proposed new infrastructure
range
from $18 million to $23 million over a four to six year period, depending on
the
actual volume of water -- estimated to be between 2,600 acre-feet and 4,000
acre-feet per year -- to be delivered through the new infrastructure.
Expenditures on this project are expected to commence in the second quarter
of
2008.
|
4.
|
Sandy
Valley, Nevada
|
In
June
2002, the Nevada State Engineer awarded Vidler 415 acre-feet of water rights
near Sandy Valley, Nevada. Vidler has filed another application for 1,000
acre-feet.
The
award
of the permit for the 415 acre-feet of water rights was appealed in the Nevada
Supreme Court by certain residents of Sandy Valley. The Supreme Court denied
Vidler the originally permitted rights due to a procedural error in certifying
the record on appeal. Vidler has appealed this decision in the Supreme Court.
Once the appeal has been concluded, we anticipate utilizing the water rights
in
accordance with the permit terms in southwestern Nevada.
|
5.
|
Muddy River,
Nevada
|
The
Muddy
River is a perennial river fed by the Muddy Springs in southern Nevada,
originating in Nevada and flowing into Lake Mead. Currently, Muddy River water
rights are utilized for agriculture and electricity generation; however, in
the
future, we anticipate that Muddy River water rights may be utilized to support
development in southern Nevada. The Southern Nevada Water Authority 2006 water
resource plan identifies Muddy River water rights as a water resource to support
future growth in Clark County, Nevada.
At
December 31, 2007, Vidler owned approximately 267 acre-feet of Muddy River
water
rights.
Colorado
Vidler
is
completing the process of monetizing its water rights in Colorado, through
sale
or lease:
·
|
in
2005, Vidler closed on the
sale of approximately 5.5 acre-feet of water rights for $261,000;
and
|
·
|
in
2006, Vidler closed on the sale of various water rights and related
assets
to the City of Golden, Colorado for $1.2 million.
|
·
|
in
2007, Vidler closed on the sale of approximately 0.6 acre-feet of
water
rights for $45,000
|
Discussions
are continuing to either lease or sell the remaining water rights in Colorado,
which are listed in the table in the Vidler section of Item 1,
“Business.”
Idaho
In
2007,
Vidler closed on the purchase of two farm properties in Idaho totaling
approximately 1,886 acres of land, together with the related 7,044 acre-feet
of
agricultural water rights. The properties are currently being farmed, and grow
apples, silage corn, and alfalfa.
These
purchases are Vidler’s first acquisition of real estate and water resources in
Idaho. The properties are near the fast-growing areas of Boise, Nampa, and
Caldwell, where future development could be constrained by the lack of
developable land with water to support development.
We
believe that the properties are well
suited to residential planned unit development, although we are also considering
other alternative future uses for both the land and the water resources
acquired.
22
WATER
STORAGE
|
1.
|
Vidler
Arizona Recharge
Facility
|
During
2000, Vidler completed the second stage of construction at its facility to
“bank”, or store, water underground in the Harquahala Valley, and received the
necessary permits to operate a full-scale water “recharge” facility. “Recharge”
is the process of placing water into storage underground. Vidler has the
permitted right to recharge 100,000 acre-feet of water per year at the Vidler
Arizona Recharge Facility, and anticipates being able to store in excess of
1
million acre-feet of water in the aquifer underlying much of the valley. When
needed, the water will be “recovered,” or removed from storage, by ground water
wells.
The
Vidler Arizona Recharge Facility is the first privately owned water storage
facility for the Colorado River system, which is a primary source of water
for
the Lower Basin States of Arizona, California, and Nevada. The water storage
facility is strategically located adjacent to the Central Arizona Project
(“CAP”) aqueduct, a conveyance canal running from Lake Havasu to Phoenix and
Tucson. The recharged water comes from surplus flows of CAP water. Proximity
to
the CAP provides a competitive advantage as it minimizes the cost of water
conveyance.
Vidler
is
able to provide storage for users located both within Arizona and out-of-state.
Potential users include industrial companies, developers, and local governmental
political subdivisions in Arizona, and out-of-state users such as municipalities
and water agencies in Nevada and California. The Arizona Water Banking Authority
(“AWBA”) has the responsibility for intrastate and interstate storage of water
for governmental entities.
Vidler
has the only permitted, complete private water storage facility in Arizona.
Given that Arizona is the only southwestern state with surplus flows of Colorado
River water available for storage, we believe that Vidler’s is the only private
water storage facility where it is practical to “bank,” or store, water for
users in other states, which is known as “interstate water banking”. Having a
permitted water storage facility also allows Vidler to acquire, and store,
surplus water for re-sale in future years.
Vidler
has not yet stored water for customers at the recharge facility, and has not
as
yet generated any revenue from the facility. We believe that the best economic
return on the facility will come from storing water in surplus years for sale
in
dry years. Vidler has been recharging water for its own account since 1998,
when
the pilot plant was constructed. At the end of 2007, Vidler had “net recharge
credits” of approximately 139,000 acre-feet of water in storage at the facility,
and has ordered a further 25,000 acre-feet for recharge in 2008. Vidler
purchased the water from the CAP, and intends to resell this recharged water
at
an appropriate time.
Vidler
anticipates being able to recharge 25,000 to 35,000 acre-feet of water per
year
at the facility, and to store in excess of 1 million acre-feet of water in
the
aquifer. Vidler’s estimate of the aquifer’s storage volume is primarily based on
a hydrological report prepared by an independent engineering firm for the
Central Arizona Water Conservation District in 1990, which concluded that there
is storage capacity of 3.7 million acre-feet.
|
2.
|
Semitropic,
California
|
Vidler
originally had an 18.5% right to participate in the Semitropic Water Banking
and
Exchange Program, which operates a 1 million acre-foot water storage facility
at
Semitropic, near the California Aqueduct, northwest of Bakersfield, California.
The
strategic value of the guaranteed right to recover an amount of water from
Semitropic every year -- even in drought years -- became clear to water
agencies, developers, and other parties seeking a reliable water supply. For
example, developers of large residential projects in Kern County and Los
Angeles County must be able to demonstrate that they have sufficient back-up
supplies of water in the case of a drought year before they are permitted to
begin development. During 2001, in response to market demand for water storage
capacity with guaranteed recovery, Vidler began to sell its interest in
Semitropic. The strategic value of the guaranteed right to recover water was
again highlighted by two court decisions in February 2003 which held that
developers could not rely on water from state water projects.
Vidler’s
remaining interest includes approximately 30,000 acre-feet of storage capacity.
We have the guaranteed right to recover a minimum of approximately 2,700
acre-feet every year. In some circumstances, we have the right to recover up
to
approximately 6,800 acre-feet in any one year. We are considering various
alternatives for the remaining interest, including sale to developers or
industrial users. Currently Vidler is not storing any water at Semitropic for
third parties.
Other
Projects
We
continue to investigate and evaluate water and land opportunities in the
southwestern United States, which meet our risk/reward and value criteria,
and,
in particular, assets which have the potential to add value to our existing
assets. We routinely evaluate the purchase of further water-righted properties
in the southwest and western United States, particularly Nevada, Arizona, and
Idaho. We also continue to be approached by parties who are interested in
obtaining a water supply, or discussing joint ventures to commercially develop
water assets and/or develop water storage facilities in Arizona, Nevada, and
other southwestern states.
23
REAL
ESTATE OPERATIONS
The
majority of the real estate operations’ revenues come from the sale of Nevada
Land’s property in northern Nevada. In addition, various types of recurring
revenue are generated from use of the Nevada Land’s properties, including
leasing, easements, and mineral royalties. Nevada Land also generates
interest revenue from real estate sales contracts where Nevada Land has
provided partial financing, and from temporary investment of sale proceeds.
Nevada
Land recognizes the sale of real estate when a transaction
closes. On closing, the entire sales price is recorded as revenue, and the
associated cost basis is reported within cost of real estate sold.
Since typically, the date of closing determines the accounting period in which
the revenue and cost of real estate are recorded, Nevada Land’s reported
results fluctuate from period to period, depending on the dates when
transactions close. Consequently, results for any one year are not necessarily
indicative of likely results in future years.
In
2005
and 2006, sales of real estate were significantly higher than in preceding
years and the market for many types of real estate in Nevada was buoyant. We
believe that higher prices for real estate in and around municipalities
increased the demand for, and in some locations the price of, property 50 miles
or more from municipalities, including some parcels of real estate we own.
The
current slow-down in U.S. real estate markets appears to have affected Nevada
Land’s 2007 results of operations, when compared to 2006 and 2005. In 2007, the
volume of acreage sold declined by 52% from 2006, and the revenues generated
declined by approximately 43% from 2006 levels. However, it can take a year
or
more to complete a real estate sale transaction, and as such the timing of
real estate sales is unpredictable. Historically the level of real estate
sales at Nevada Land has fluctuated from year to year.
BUSINESS
ACQUISITIONS AND FINANCING OPERATIONS
This
section describes our interest in a Swiss public company, Jungfraubahn
Holding AG ("Jungfraubahn"). Jungfraubahn operates railway and
related tourism and transport activities in the Swiss Alps.
Conversion
of Swiss Franc amounts to U.S. dollars
Income
statement items (revenues, expenses, gains, and losses) for foreign operations
are translated into U.S. dollars using the average foreign exchange rate for
the
year, and balance sheet items (assets, liabilities and shareholders’
equity) are translated at the actual exchange rate at the balance sheet
date.
For
the
convenience of the reader, the average Swiss Franc exchange rate for 2007 used
for income statement items was CHF1.1905 to the U.S. dollar (2006: CHF1.2618),
and the actual Swiss Franc exchange rate at December 31, 2007 used for balance
sheet items was CHF1.1332 (December 31, 2006: CHF1.2185).
Jungfraubahn
Holding AG
PICO
owns
1.3 million shares of Jungfraubahn, which represents approximately 22.5% of
that
company. At December 31, 2007, the market (carrying) value of our holding was
$66.2 million.
In
2002,
we increased our holding to more than 20% of Jungfraubahn, and became the
largest shareholder in that company. Despite the increase in our shareholding
to
more than 20%, we continue to account for this investment under SFAS No. 115,
“Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities”. At this
time, we do not believe that we have the requisite ability to exercise
“significant influence” over the financial and operating policies of
Jungfraubahn to apply the equity method of accounting.
On
January 2, 2008, Jungfraubahn issued a press release advising that a record
703,000 visitors traveled on the Jungfrau Railway to the Jungfraujoch-Top of
Europe in 2007, a 12.8% increase from 2006.
In
September 2007, Jungfraubahn announced its results for the six months to June
30, 2007 , which were adversely affected by a weak winter season due to poor
snow conditions in the 2006-2007 ski season. Reported revenues were CHF 59.9
million (US$49.1 million), a 1.2% increase year over year in Swiss francs.
Net
income was CHF 6.6 million (US$5.4 million), or approximately CHF1.12 per share
(US$0.92), a 4.6% decrease year over year in Swiss francs
Jungfraubahn
announced its results for the 2006 financial year in April 2007, so the 2007
results will probably not be released until after this 10-K has been filed.
In
2006, revenues were CHF124 million (US$98.2 million), and net income was CHF19.1
million (US$15.2 million), or CHF3.28 per share (US$2.60). Jungfraubahn’s
operating activities generated net cash flow of CHF42.6 million (US$33.8
million). The dividend was increased 8.3% to CHF 1.3 per share (US$1.09).
At
June
30, 2007, Jungfraubahn had shareholders’ equity of CHF337 million (US$275.9
million) or approximately CHF57.75 (US$47.28) in book value per share. At
December 31, 2007, Jungfraubahn’s stock price was CHF57 (US$50.30). At December
31, 2006, Jungfraubahn’s stock price was CHF45.5 (US$37.34).
In
an
extract from the 2007 Annual Report that is published on the company’s website,
Jungfraubahn states that a key objective is the development of a cumulative
free
cash flow of CHF 130 million (approximately US$114.7 million) in the period
from
2004 - 2013.
On
November 11, 2007, Jungfraubahn issued a press release advising that the current
CEO, Mr. Walter Steuri, is to retire on September 1, 2008, and that the new
CEO
will be Mr. Urs Kessler, Jungfraubahn’s current head of marketing and
operations.
24
INSURANCE
OPERATIONS IN “RUN OFF”
Typically,
most of the revenues of an insurance company in “run off” come from investment
income (that is, interest from fixed-income securities and dividends from
stocks) earned on funds held as part of their insurance business. In addition,
gains or losses are realized from the sale of investments.
In
broad
terms, Physicians and Citation hold cash and fixed-income securities
corresponding to their loss reserves and state capital & deposit
requirements, and the remainder of the portfolio is invested in
small-capitalization value stocks in the U.S. and selected foreign markets.
Given
the
relatively low level of interest rates, we expect to generate limited income
from our bond holdings. To maintain liquidity and to guard against capital
losses which would be brought on by higher interest rates, our bond holdings
are
concentrated in issues maturing in five years or less. At December 31, 2007,
the
duration of Citation’s bond portfolio was 3.4 years, and the duration of
Physicians’ bond portfolio was 2.6 years. The duration of a bond portfolio
measures the amount of time it will take for the cash flows from scheduled
interest payments and the maturity of bonds to equal the current value of the
portfolio. Duration indicates the sensitivity of the market value of a bond
portfolio to changes in interest rates. If interest rates increase, the market
value of existing bonds will decline. During periods when market interest rates
decline, the market value of existing bonds increases. Typically, the longer
the
duration, the greater the sensitivity of the value of the bond portfolio to
changes in interest rates. Duration of less than five years is generally
regarded as medium term, and less than three years is generally regarded as
short term.
We
hold
bonds issued by the U.S. Treasury and government-sponsored enterprises (namely
Freddie Mac, FNMA, FHLB, and PEFCO) only to the extent required for capital
under state insurance codes, or as required for deposits or collateral with
state regulators. Otherwise, the bond portfolios consist primarily of
investment-grade corporate issues, with 11 or less years to maturity. At
December 31, 2007, Physicians’ and Citation’s bond portfolios had an aggregate
market value of $19.3 million, which was slightly above amortized cost.
We
do not
own any mortgage-backed or asset-backed securities, collateralized debt
obligations, auction-rate securities, bonds issued or insured by bond insurance
companies, or municipal bonds, and we do not have any exposure to credit default
swaps.
The
equities component of the insurance company portfolios is concentrated in a
limited number of asset-rich small-capitalization value stocks. These positions
have been accumulated at a significant discount to our estimate of the private
market value of each company’s underlying “hard” assets (that is, land and other
tangible assets). At December 31, 2007, holdings in the U.S. comprised
approximately 47% of the stock portfolio; Switzerland, 36%; and New Zealand
& Australia, 17%.
During
the fourth quarter of 2006, Physicians purchased PICO European Holdings, LLC
(“PICO European Holdings”) from PICO Holdings, Inc. PICO European Holdings has
holdings in 12 Swiss companies. The PICO group began to invest in European
companies in 1996. In particular, we have been accumulating shares in a number
of undervalued asset-rich companies in Switzerland. Typically, we believe that
these companies will benefit from pan-European and domestic consolidation.
In
some cases, we believe that conversion to international standards of accounting
will make the underlying value of the companies more visible. In addition,
due
to historical restrictions on foreign ownership of Swiss real estate, many
Swiss
companies are partially-owned by “cantons” (that is, the 26 states comprising
Switzerland) and local governments, and in some cases this ownership structure
may not survive future business challenges. At December 31, 2007, the market
value (and carrying value) of the stocks in the PICO European Holdings portfolio
was $62 million.
PICO
European Holdings owns 29,294 shares of Accu Holding, which represents a voting
ownership interest of approximately 29.2%. We do not have the ability to
exercise significant influence over Accu Holding’s activities, so the investment
is carried at market value under SFAS No. 115.
During
2007, the PICO European Holdings portfolio (approximately 36% of equities held
in this segment at December 31, 2007) generated a total return of approximately
41% in U.S. dollar terms.
Excluding
PICO European Holdings to allow a like for like comparison, the fixed-income
securities and common stocks in the insurance companies’ investment portfolios
generated total returns of approximately 29% in 2005, 13% in 2006, and 3% in
2007, including the following returns for the domestic and non-Swiss foreign
stocks components:
Year
Ended December 31,
|
Total
return on domestic stocks
|
Domestic
stocks as a percentage of total portfolio (Excluding Swiss)
|
Total
return on foreign stocks in US$
(Excluding
Swiss)
|
Foreign
stocks as a percentage of total portfolio (Excluding Swiss)
|
||||
2007
|
-
6%
|
62%
|
37%
|
21%
|
||||
2006
|
8%
|
62%
|
47%
|
16%
|
||||
2005
|
51%
|
64%
|
17%
|
9%
|
Including
PICO European Holdings, the total return on the fixed-income securities and
common stocks in the insurance companies’ investment portfolios was
approximately 12% in 2007.
Physicians
and Citation own a total of 310,000 common shares of Consolidated-Tomoka Land
Co. (Amex: CTO ), representing approximately 5.5% of CTO . Consolidated-Tomoka
owns approximately 12,000 acres of land in and around Daytona Beach, Florida,
and a portfolio of income properties in the southeastern United States . The
investment was purchased between September 2002 and February 2004 at a cash
cost
of $6.5 million, or approximately $20.90 per share. At December 31, 2007, the
market value and carrying value of the investment was $19.2 million before
taxes.
No
other
investments of the insurance companies have reached a threshold requiring public
disclosure under the securities laws of the countries where the investments
are
held (typically a 5% voting interest).
Over
time, the investment assets and investment income of a “run off” insurance
company are expected to decline, as fixed-income investments mature or are
sold
to provide the funds to pay down the company’s claims reserves. However, since
2003, the investment assets of the Insurance Operations in “Run Off” segment
have actually increased, as appreciation in stocks owned has more than offset
the maturity or sale of fixed-income securities owned by Physicians and Citation
to pay claims.
The
financial results of insurance companies in “run off” can be volatile if there
is favorable or unfavorable development in their loss reserves. Changes in
assumptions about future claim trends, and the cost of handling claims, can
lead
to significant increases and decreases in our loss reserves. When loss reserves
are reduced, this is referred to as favorable development. If loss reserves
are
increased, the development is referred to as adverse or unfavorable.
Physicians
Insurance Company of Ohio
Physicians
wrote its last policy in 1995; however, claims can be filed until 2017 resulting
from events allegedly occurring during the period when Physicians provided
coverage.
By
its
nature, medical professional liability insurance involves a relatively small
number (frequency) of relatively large (severity) claims. We have purchased
excess of loss reinsurance to limit our potential losses. The amount of risk
we
have retained on each claim varies depending on the accident year but, in
general, we are liable for the first $1 million to $2 million per claim.
Due
to
the long “tail” (that is, the period of time between the occurrence of the
alleged event giving rise to the claim, and the claim being reported to us)
in
the medical professional liability insurance business, it is difficult to
accurately quantify future claims liabilities and establish appropriate loss
reserves. Our loss reserves are reviewed by management every quarter and are
assessed in the fourth quarter of each year, based on independent actuarial
analysis of past, current, and projected claims trends in the 12 months ended
September 30 of each year.
At
December 31, 2007, our medical professional liability reserves totaled $6.5
million, net of reinsurance, compared to $9.4 million net of reinsurance at
December 31, 2006, and $11.9 million net of reinsurance (that is, ceded
reserves) at December 31, 2005.
25
PHYSICIANS
INSURANCE COMPANY OF OHIO -- LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE RESERVES
December
31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Direct
reserves
|
$ | 6,603,000 | $ | 10,374,000 | $ | 12,844,000 | ||||||
Ceded
reserves
|
(83,000 | ) | (989,000 | ) | (988,000 | ) | ||||||
Net
medical professional liability insurance reserves
|
$ | 6,520,000 | $ | 9,385,000 | $ | 11,856,000 |
At
December 31, 2007, our direct reserves, or reserves before reinsurance,
represented the independent actuary’s best estimate. We are continually
reviewing our claims experience and projected claims trends in order to derive
the most accurate estimate possible.
At
December 31, 2007, approximately $816,000, or 12% of our direct reserves were
case reserves, which are the loss reserves established when a claim is reported
to us. Our provision for incurred but not reported claims (“IBNR”, that
is, the event giving rise to the claim has allegedly occurred, but the
claim has not been reported to us) was $3.2 million, or 49% of our direct
reserves. The loss adjustment expense reserves, totaling $2.6 million, or 39%
of
direct reserves, recognize the cost of handling claims over the next nine years
while Physicians’ loss reserves run off.
Over
the
past three years, the trends in open claims and claims paid have been:
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Open
claims at the start of the year
|
18 | 28 | 41 | |||||||||
New
claims reported during the year
|
2 | 6 | ||||||||||
Claims
closed during the year
|
- 6 | -12 | -19 | |||||||||
Open
claims at the end of the year
|
12 | 18 | 28 | |||||||||
Total
claims closed during the year
|
6 | 12 | 19 | |||||||||
Claims
closed with no indemnity payment
|
-4 | -11 | -16 | |||||||||
Claims
closed with an indemnity payment
|
2 | 1 | 3 | |||||||||
Net
indemnity payments
|
$ | 310,000 | $ | 1,233,000 | $ | 878,000 | ||||||
Net
loss adjustment expense payments
|
225,000 | 397,000 | 499,000 | |||||||||
Total
claims payments during the year
|
$ | 535,000 | $ | 1,630,000 | $ | 1,377,000 | ||||||
Average
indemnity payment
|
$ | 155,000 | $ | 1,233,000 | $ | 293,000 |
PHYSICIANS
INSURANCE COMPANY OF OHIO - CHANGE IN LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE RESERVES
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Beginning
reserves
|
$ | 9,385,000 | $ | 11,856,000 | $ | 16,399,000 | ||||||
Loss
and loss adjustment expense payments
|
( 535,000 | ) | ( 1,658,000 | ) | ( 1,388,000 | ) | ||||||
Re-estimation
of prior year loss reserves
|
(2,330,000 | ) | ( 813,000 | ) | ( 3,155,000 | ) | ||||||
Net
medical professional liability insurance reserves
|
$ | 6,520,000 | $ | 9,385,000 | $ | 11,856,000 | ||||||
Re-estimation
as a percentage of undiscounted beginning reserves
|
- 24.8 | % | - 6.9 | % | - 19.2 | % |
In
2007,
claims and loss adjustment expense payments were $535,000, accounting for 19%
of
the net decrease in reserves. During 2007, Physicians continued to experience
favorable trends in the “frequency” or, number of claims and, to a lesser
extent, the “severity” or, size of claims. Consequently, independent actuarial
analysis of Physicians’ loss reserves concluded that Physicians’ reserves
against claims were again greater than the actuary’s projections of future
claims payments. Reserves were reduced in 16 of Physicians’ 20 accident years
from 1976 until 1996, resulting in a net reduction of $2.3 million, or
approximately 24.8% of reserves at the start of the year. The net reduction
in
reserves was primarily due to a decrease in claims frequency, and was recorded
in Physicians’ reserve for IBNR claims.
As
shown
in the table above, in 2007 Physicians made $310,000 in net indemnity payments
to close two cases. Total claims payments in 2007 were less than anticipated.
At
December 31, 2007, the average case reserve per open claim was approximately
$68,000.
There
were no changes in key actuarial assumption in 2007. Such actuarial
analyses involves estimation of future trends in many factors which may vary
significantly from expectation, which could lead to further reserve adjustments
-- either increases or decreases -- in future years. See
“Critical
Accounting Policies” and “Risk Factors.”
In
2006,
claims and loss adjustment expense payments were approximately $1.6 million,
accounting for 68% of the net decrease in reserves. During 2006, Physicians
continued to experience favorable trends in the “severity” of claims, and, to a
lesser extent, the “frequency” of claims. Reserves were reduced in 6 of
Physicians’ 20 accident years from 1976 until 1996, resulting in a net reduction
of approximately $813,000, or 6.9% of reserves at the start of the
year. The net reduction in reserves was primarily due to a decrease
in claims severity, and was recorded in Physicians’ reserve for IBNR claims.
In
2006,
Physicians made $1.2 million in net indemnity payments to close one “severe”
case, and total claims payments were less than anticipated. There were no
changes in key actuarial assumption in 2006.
In
2005,
claims and loss adjustment expense payments were $1.4 million, accounting for
31% of the net decrease in reserves. During 2005, Physicians continued to
experience favorable trends in the “severity” of claims, and, to a lesser
extent, the “frequency” of claims. Reserves were reduced in 10 of Physicians’ 20
accident years from 1976 until 1996, resulting in a net reduction of $3.1
million, or approximately 19.2% of reserves at the start of the year. The net
reduction in reserves was primarily due to a decrease in claims severity, and
was recorded in Physicians’ reserve for IBNR claims.
In
2005,
Physicians made $878,000 in net indemnity payments to close three cases, an
average indemnity payment of $293,000 per case. Total claims payments in 2005
were less than anticipated. There were no changes in key actuarial assumption
in
2005.
Since
it
is almost twelve years since Physicians wrote its last policy, and the reserves
for direct IBNR claims and unallocated loss adjustment expenses at December
31,
2007 are approximately $5.6 million ($5.5 million net of reinsurance), it is
conceivable that further favorable development could be recorded in future
years
if claims trends remain favorable. However, there is less potential for
favorable development in future years than there has been in the past, as
Physicians’ remaining claims reserves get smaller. In addition, we caution (1)
that claims can be reported until 2017, and (2) against over-emphasizing claims
count statistics -- for example, the last claims to be resolved by a “run off”
insurance company could be the most complex and the most severe.
26
Citation
Insurance Company
Property
and Casualty Insurance Loss Reserves
Citation
went into “run off” from January 1, 2001. At December 31, 2007, after seven
years of “run off,” Citation had $3.1 million in property and casualty insurance
loss and loss adjustment expense reserves, after reinsurance.
Approximately
97% of Citation’s net property and casualty insurance reserves are related to
one line of business, artisans/contractors liability insurance. The remaining
3%
is comprised of commercial property and casualty insurance policies, all of
which expired in 2001. As a general rule, based on state statutes of
limitations, we believe that no new commercial property and casualty insurance
claims can be filed in California and Arizona, although in these states claims
filing periods may be extended in certain limited circumstances.
We
have
purchased excess of loss reinsurance to limit our potential losses. The amount
of risk we have retained on each claim varies depending on the accident year,
but we can be liable for the first $50,000 to $250,000 per claim.
Citation
wrote artisans/contractors insurance until 1995, the year before Physicians
merged with Citation’s parent company. No artisans/contractors business was
renewed after the merger. Artisans/contractors liability insurance has been
a
problematic line of business for all insurers who offered this type of coverage
in California during the 1980’s and 1990’s. The nature of this line
of business is that we receive a large number (high frequency) of small (low
severity) claims.
Citation
primarily insured subcontractors, and only rarely insured general contractors.
A
large percentage of the claims received in 2005, 2006, and 2007 related to
Additional Insured Endorsements (“AIE”). In general, these represent claims from
general contractors who were not direct policyholders of Citation’s, but were
named as insureds on policies issued to Citation’s subcontractor policyholders.
Most of Citation’s subcontractor insureds are not initially named as defendants
in construction defect lawsuits, but are drawn into litigation against general
contractors, typically when the general contractor’s legal expenses reach the
limit of their own insurance policy. The courts have held that subcontractors
who performed only a minor role in the construction can be held in on
complicated litigation against general contractors. Accordingly, the cost of
legal defenses can be as significant as claims payments. Typically, AIE claims
are shared among more than one subcontractor and more than one insurance
carrier. This reduces the expense to any one carrier, so AIE claims typically
involve smaller claims payments than claims from actual policyholders.
Although
Citation wrote its last artisans/contractors policy in 1995, and the statute
of
limitations in California is ten years, this can be extended in some situations.
Over
the
past three years, the trends in open claims and claims paid in the
artisans/contractors line of business have been:
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Open
claims at the start of the year
|
78 | 149 | 217 | |||||||||
New
claims reported during the year
|
31 | 58 | 101 | |||||||||
Claims
closed during the year
|
-70 | -129 | -169 | |||||||||
Open
claims at the end of the year
|
39 | 78 | 149 | |||||||||
Total
claims closed during the year
|
70 | 129 | 169 | |||||||||
Claims
closed with no payment
|
-30 | -51 | -77 | |||||||||
Claims
closed with LAE payment only (no indemnity payment)
|
-17 | -36 | -17 | |||||||||
Claims
closed with an indemnity payment
|
23 | 42 | 75 |
Due
to
the long “tail” (that is, the period between the occurrence of the alleged event
giving rise to the claim and the claim being reported to us) in the
artisans/contractors line of business, it is difficult to accurately quantify
future claims liabilities and establish appropriate loss reserves. Our loss
reserves are regularly reviewed by management, and certified annually by an
independent actuarial firm, as required by California state law. The independent
actuary analyzes past, current, and projected claims trends for all active
accident years, using several forecasting methods. The actuary believes this
will result in more accurate reserve estimates than using a single method.
We
typically book our reserves to the actuary’s best estimate.
Changes
in assumptions about future claim trends and the cost of handling claims can
lead to significant increases and decreases in our property and casualty loss
reserves. In 2007, we reduced reserves by $1.2 million or approximately 24.3%
of
beginning reserves, principally due to reduced frequency and reduced severity
of
claims. In 2006, we reduced reserves by $638,000, or approximately 9.9% of
beginning reserves, principally due to reduced severity of claims. In
2005, we reduced reserves by $1.8 million, or approximately 17.9% of beginning
reserves, principally due to reduced severity of claims.
There
were no changes in key actuarial assumptions during the three years ended
December 31, 2007. See “Critical
Accounting Policies” and
“Risk Factors.”
At
December 31, 2007, Citation’s net property and casualty reserves were carried at
$3.1 million, approximately equal to the actuary’s best estimate.
CITATION
INSURANCE COMPANY - PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE LOSS
AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE RESERVES
December
31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Direct
reserves
|
$ | 3,587,000 | $ | 6,635,000 | $ | 8,247,000 | ||||||
Ceded
reserves
|
(438,000 | ) | (1,558,000 | ) | ( 1,784,000 | ) | ||||||
Net
reserves
|
$ | 3,149,000 | $ | 5,077,000 | $ | 6,463,000 |
At
December 31, 2007, $179,000 of Citation’s net property and casualty reserves
(approximately 6%) were case reserves, $822,000 represented provision for IBNR
claims (26%), and the loss adjustment expense reserve was $2.1 million (68%).
CITATION
INSURANCE COMPANY - CHANGE IN PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE LOSS AND LOSS
ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE RESERVES
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Beginning
reserves
|
$ | 5,077,000 | $ | 6,463,000 | $ | 10,227,000 | ||||||
Loss
and loss adjustment expense payments
|
(695,000 | ) | (748,000 | ) | (1,929,000 | ) | ||||||
Re-estimation
of prior year loss reserves
|
(1,233,000 | ) | (638,000 | ) | (1,835,000 | ) | ||||||
Net
property and casualty insurance reserves
|
$ | 3,149,000 | $ | 5,077,000 | $ | 6,463,000 | ||||||
Re-estimation
as a percentage of beginning reserves
|
- 24.3 | % | - 9.9 | % | - 17.9 | % |
Following
actuarial analysis during 2007, Citation decreased loss reserves by $1.2
million, or approximately 24.3% of beginning reserves, due to favorable
development in the artisans/contractors book of business, principally resulting
from decreased claims severity.
Following
actuarial analysis during 2006, Citation decreased loss reserves by $638,000,
or
approximately 9.9% of beginning reserves, due to favorable development in the
artisans/contractors book of business resulting from decreased claims severity.
Following
actuarial analysis during 2005, Citation decreased loss reserves by
approximately $1.8 million, or 17.9% of beginning reserves, due to favorable
development in the artisans/contractors book of business resulting from
decreased claims severity.
Such
actuarial analyses involves estimation of future trends in many factors which
may vary significantly from expectation, which could lead to further reserve
adjustments--either increases or decreases--in future years.
27
Workers’
Compensation Loss Reserves
Until
1997, Citation was a direct writer of workers’ compensation insurance in
California, Arizona, and Nevada. In 1997, Citation reinsured 100% of its
workers’ compensation business with a subsidiary, Citation National Insurance
Company (“CNIC”), and sold CNIC to Fremont Indemnity Company (“Fremont”). As
part of the sale of CNIC, all assets and liabilities, including the assets
which
corresponded to the workers’ compensation reserves reinsured with CNIC, and all
records, computer systems, policy files, and reinsurance arrangements were
transferred to Fremont. Fremont merged CNIC into Fremont, and administered
and
paid all of the workers’ compensation claims which had been sold to it. From
1997 until the second quarter of 2003, Citation booked the losses reported
by
Fremont but recorded an equal and offsetting reinsurance recoverable from
Fremont (as an admitted reinsurer) for all losses and loss adjustment expenses.
This resulted in no net impact on Citation’s reserves and financial statements.
In
July
2003, the California Superior Court placed Fremont in liquidation. Since Fremont
was in liquidation, it was no longer an admitted reinsurance company under
the
statutory basis of insurance accounting. Consequently, Citation reversed the
reinsurance recoverable from Fremont of approximately $7.5 million in its
financial statements in the second quarter of 2003.
Workers’
compensation has been a problematic line of business for all insurers who
offered this type of coverage in California during the 1990’s. We believe that
this is primarily due to claims costs escalating at a greater than anticipated
rate, in particular for medical care.
The
nature of this line of business is that we receive a relatively small number
(low frequency) of relatively large (high severity) claims. Since Citation
ceased writing workers’ compensation coverage eight years ago, most of the
claims which are still open tend to be severe, and likely to lead to claims
payments for a prolonged period of time.
Although
the last of Citation’s workers’ compensation policies expired in 1998, new
workers’ compensation claims can still be filed for events which allegedly
occurred during the term of the policy. The state statute of limitations is
ten
years, but claim filing periods may be extended in some circumstances.
Over
the
past three years, the trends in open claims and claims paid in the workers’
compensation line of business have been:
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Open
claims at the start of the year
|
216 | 232 | 227 | |||||||||
New
claims reported during the year
|
22 | 30 | 33 | |||||||||
Claims
reopened during the year
|
10 | 37 | 22 | |||||||||
Claims
closed during the year
|
-76 | -83 | -50 | |||||||||
Open
claims at the end of the year
|
172 | 216 | 232 |
At
December 31, 2007, Citation had workers’ compensation reserves of $22.2 million
before reinsurance and $6.1 million after reinsurance. Citation purchased excess
reinsurance to limit its potential losses in this line of business. In general,
we have retained the risk on the first $150,000 to $250,000 per claim. The
workers’ compensation reserves are reinsured with General Reinsurance, a
subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.
CITATION
INSURANCE COMPANY - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE
RESERVES
December
31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Direct
reserves
|
$ | 22,186,000 | $ | 24,074,000 | $ | 25,556,000 | ||||||
Ceded
reserves
|
(16,133,000 | ) | (14,425,000 | ) | (13,086,000 | ) | ||||||
Net
reserves
|
$ | 6,053,000 | $ | 9,649,000 | $ | 12,470,000 |
It
is
difficult to accurately quantify future claims liabilities and establish
appropriate loss reserves in the workers’ compensation line of business due to:
·
|
the
long “tail” (that is, the
period between the occurrence of the alleged event giving rise to
the
claim and the claim being reported to us);
and
|
·
|
the
extended period over which
policy benefits are paid.
|
Such
actuarial analyses involves estimation of future trends in many factors which
may vary significantly from expectation, which could lead to further reserve
adjustments--either increases or decreases--in future years. Examples
of future trends include claims, the cost of handling claims, and medical
care costs. See
“Critical
Accounting Policies” and “Risk
Factors.”
Following
independent actuarial analysis at September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2007,
Citation decreased its workers’ compensation net loss reserves by $39,000
compared to the $9.6 million in net reserves at the start of
2007. Although direct reserves were increased by $3 million,
primarily due to an increase in projected medical costs, this was more than
offset by a $3 million increase in the estimated reinsurance recoverable on
our
workers’ compensation loss reserves and a reduction in accrued claims payable.
Since this book of business is now more than nine years old, the remaining
claims tend to be severe, and many have now exceeded the amount of risk we
retain per claim, increasing the amount of reinsurance we can recover.
Following
independent actuarial analysis during 2006, Citation decreased its workers’
compensation net loss reserves by $1.8 million, or approximately 14.2% of $12.5
million in net reserves at the start of 2006. Direct reserves were increased
by
$882,000, primarily due to an increase in projected medical costs; however,
this
was more than offset by a $2.7 million increase in the estimated reinsurance
recoverable on our workers’ compensation loss reserves.
Following
independent actuarial analysis during 2005, Citation increased its workers’
compensation net loss reserves by $1.3 million, or approximately 11% of $12.1
million in net reserves at the start of 2005. This adverse development was
primarily due to an increase in projected medical care costs, and an adjustment
to reinsurance.
CITATION
INSURANCE COMPANY - CHANGE IN WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT
EXPENSE RESERVES
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Beginning
net reserves
|
$ | 9,649,000 | $ | 12,470,000 | $ | 12,066,000 | ||||||
Loss
and loss adjustment expense payments
|
(3,557,000 | ) | (1,047,000 | ) | (922,000 | ) | ||||||
Re-estimation
of prior year loss reserves
|
(39,000 | ) | (1,774,000 | ) | 1,326,000 | |||||||
Net
workers’ compensation insurance reserves
|
$ | 6,053,000 | $ | 9,649,000 | $ | 12,470,000 | ||||||
Re-estimation
as a percentage of adjusted beginning reserves
|
0 | % | - 14 | % | + 11 | % |
There
were no changes in key actuarial assumptions during the three years ended
December 31, 2007.
At
December 31, 2007, Citation’s net workers’ compensation reserves were carried at
$6.1 million, approximately equal to the actuary’s best estimate. Approximately
$2.3 million of Citation’s net workers’ compensation reserves (38%) were case
reserves, $1.6 million represented provision for IBNR claims (26%), and the
unallocated loss adjustment expense reserve was $2.2 million (36%).
Until
September 30, 2004, the workers’ compensation claims were handled by Fremont and
the California Insurance Guarantee Association. Since then, the workers’
compensation claims have been handled by a third-party administrator on
Citation’s behalf.
28
This
section describes the most important accounting policies affecting the assets,
liabilities, and results of our largest operations. Since the
estimates, assumptions, and judgments involved in the accounting policies
described below have the greatest potential impact on our financial statements,
we consider these to be our critical accounting policies:
|
·
|
how
we determine the fair value and carrying value of our water assets,
real
estate assets, and investments in equity and debt securities;
|
|
·
|
how
we estimate the claims reserves liabilities of our insurance companies;
and
|
|
·
|
how
we recognize revenue when we sell water assets and real estate assets,
and
calculate investment income from equity and debt securities.
|
We
believe that an understanding of these accounting policies will help the reader
to analyze and interpret our financial statements.
Our
consolidated financial statements, and the accompanying notes, are prepared
in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S.
(“GAAP”). Preparation of the consolidated financial statements in
accordance with GAAP requires us to make estimates, using available data and
our
judgment, for such things as valuing assets, accruing liabilities, recognizing
revenues, and estimating expenses. Due to the uncertainty inherent in these
matters, actual results could differ from the estimates we use in applying
the
critical accounting policies. We base our estimates on historical experience,
and other various assumptions, that we believe to be reasonable under the
circumstances.
The
following are the significant subjective estimates used in
preparing our financial statements:
|
1.
|
Estimation
of reserves in our
insurance companies
|
Although
we provide reserves that management believes are adequate, the actual losses
paid could be greater. We must estimate future claims and ensure that
our loss reserves are adequate to pay those claims. This process requires us
to
make estimates about future events. The accuracy of these estimates will not
be
known for many years. For example, part of our claims reserves cover “IBNR”
claims (that is, the event giving rise to the claim has occurred, but the claim
has not been reported to us). In other words, in the case of IBNR claims, we
must provide for claims which we do not know about yet.
Estimates
of our future claims obligations have been volatile:
|
·
|
Our
medical malpractice reserves,
net of reinsurance, were reduced by $2.3 million in 2007, $812,000
in
2006, and $3.1 million in 2005, after we concluded that Physicians’ claims
reserves were greater than projected claims
payments;
|
|
·
|
net
of reinsurance, Citation’s
property and casualty insurance loss reserves were reduced by $1.2
million
in 2007, $638,000 in 2006, and by $1.8 million in 2005;
and
|
|
·
|
net
of reinsurance, Citation’s
workers’ compensation loss reserves were reduced by $39,000 in 2007 and
$1.8 million in 2006, but they were increased by $1.3 million in
2005.
|
There
can
be no assurance that our claims reserves will not increase or decrease in the
future.
In
addition, we have to make judgments about the recoverability of reinsurance
owed
to us on direct claims reserves. At December 31, 2007, the reinsurance
recoverable on our total loss reserves and claims paid were:
·
|
Citation,
$16.8 million;
and
|
·
|
Physicians,
$83,000.
|
|
2.
|
Carrying
value of long-lived
assets
|
Our
principal long-lived assets are real estate and water assets owned by Vidler
and
its subsidiaries, and real estate at Nevada Land. At December 31, 2007, the
total carrying value of real estate and water assets was $200.1 million, or
approximately 30% of PICO’s total assets. The real estate and water assets are
carried at cost.
We
review
the value of our long-lived assets annually and, or as facts and circumstances
change to ensure that the estimated future undiscounted cash flows or fair
values of these assets will at least recover their carrying value. Our
management conducts these reviews utilizing the most recent information
available; however, the review process inevitably involves the significant
use
of estimates and assumptions, especially the estimated market values of our
real
estate and water assets.
In
our
water resource and water storage business, we engage in project development.
This can require cash outflows to drill wells to prove a “perennial
yield” or permanent supply, of water is available in situations where there is
no guarantee that the project will ultimately be commercially viable. If we
determine that it is probable that the project will be commercially viable,
the
costs of developing the asset are capitalized (that is, recorded as an
asset in our balance sheet, rather than being charged as an expense). If the
project ends up being viable, in the case of a sale, the capitalized costs
are
included in the cost of real estate and water assets sold and applied against
the purchase price. In the case of a lease transaction, or when the asset is
fully developed and ready for use, the capitalized costs are amortized (that
is,
charged as an expense in our income statement) and match any related
revenues.
If
we
determine that the carrying value of an asset cannot be justified by the
forecasted future cash flows of that asset, the carrying value of the asset
is
written down to fair value immediately, in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets” and SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets.”
29
|
3.
|
Accounting
for investments and
investments in unconsolidated
affiliates
|
At
December 31, 2007, we owned equity securities with a carrying value of
approximately $259.7 million, or approximately 38% of our total assets. These
securities are primarily small-capitalization value stocks listed in the U.S.,
Switzerland, New Zealand, and Australia. Depending on the
circumstances, and our judgment about the level of our involvement with the
investee company, we apply one of two accounting policies.
With
the
majority of our current investments, we apply SFAS No. 115, “Accounting for
Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities.” Under this method, an
investment is carried at market value in our balance sheet, with unrealized
gains or losses included in shareholders’ equity. The only
income recorded is from dividends, unless unrealized losses are deemed to be
other-than-temporary.
In
the
case of investments where we have the ability to exercise significant influence
over the company we have invested in, we would instead apply the equity method,
under Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 18, “The Equity Method of
Accounting for Investments in Common Stock ("APB 18").”
The
application of APB No. 18 may result in a different outcome in our
financial statements than fair value accounting under SFAS No. 115. The most
significant difference between the two policies is that, under the equity
method, we include our share of the unconsolidated affiliates earnings or
losses in our statement of operations, and dividends received reduce the
carrying value of the investment in our balance sheet. Under fair value
accounting, the only income recorded in the statement of operations
is dividend income. However, for securities classified as available
for sale, unrealized gains and losses are recognized through comprehensive
income.
The
assessment of what constitutes the ability to exercise “significant influence”
requires our management to make significant judgments. We look at various
factors in making this determination. These include our percentage ownership
of
voting stock, whether or not we have representation on the investee company’s
Board of Directors, transactions between us and the investee, the ability to
obtain timely quarterly financial information, and whether PICO management
can
affect the operating and financial policies of the investee company. When we
conclude that we have this kind of influence, we adopt the equity method and
change all of our previously reported results from the investee to show the
investment as if we had applied equity accounting from the date of our first
purchase.
The
use
of fair value accounting or the equity method can result in significantly
different carrying values at specific balance sheet dates, and contributions
to
our statement of operations in any individual year during the course of the
investment. The total impact of the investment on PICO’s shareholders’ equity
over the entire life of the investment will be the same whichever method is
adopted.
For
equity and debt securities accounted for under SFAS No. 115 which are in an
unrealized loss position in local currency terms, we regularly review whether
the decline in market value is other-than-temporary. In general, this review
requires management to consider several factors, including the extent and
duration of the decline in market value of the investee, specific adverse
conditions affecting the investee’s business and industry, the financial
condition of the investee, and the long-term prospects of the investee.
Accordingly, management has to make important assumptions regarding our intent
and ability to hold the security, and our assessment of the overall worth of
the
security. Risks and uncertainties in our methodology for reviewing unrealized
losses for other-than-temporary declines include our judgments regarding the
overall worth of the issuer and its long-term prospects, and our ability to
realize on our assessment of the overall worth of the business.
In
a
subsequent quarterly review, if we conclude that an unrealized loss previously
determined to be temporary is other-than-temporary, an impairment loss will
be
recorded. The other-than-temporary impairment charge will have no impact on
shareholders’ equity or book value per share, as the decline in market value
will already have been recorded through shareholders’ equity. However, there
will be an impact on reported income before and after tax and on our earnings
per share, due to recognition of the unrealized loss and related tax effects.
When a charge for other-than-temporary impairment is recorded, our basis in
the
security is decreased. Consequently, if the market value of the security later
recovers and we sell the security, a correspondingly greater gain will be
recorded in the statement of operations.
These
accounting treatments for investments and investments in unconsolidated
affiliates add volatility to our statements of operations.
The investment
portfolios
include three equity securities, with a total carrying value of $3.9
million, where there is not a trading market. Therefore, the
market value of these securities is not readily
determinable.
|
4.
|
Revenue
recognition
|
Sale
of real estate and water assets
We
recognize revenue on the sale of real estate and water assets based on the
guidance of FASB No. 66, “Accounting for Sales of Real Estate”. Specifically, we
recognize revenue when:
(a)
|
there
is a legally binding sale
contract;
|
(b)
|
the
profit is determinable (that
is, the collectability of the sales price is reasonably assured,
or any
amount that will not be collectable can be
estimated);
|
(c)
|
the
earnings process is virtually
complete (that is, we are not obliged to perform significant activities
after the sale to earn the profit, meaning we have transferred all
risks
and rewards to the buyer);
and
|
(d)
|
the
buyer’s initial and
continuing investment are sufficient to demonstrate a commitment
to pay
for the property.
|
Unless
all of these conditions are met, we use the deposit method of accounting. Under
the deposit method of accounting, until the conditions to fully recognize a
sale
are met, payments received from the buyer are recorded as a liability on our
balance sheet, and no gain is recognized
Net
investment income and realized gains or losses
We
recognize investment income from interest income and dividends as they are
earned. Dividends with an “ex date” in one accounting period, but
which are not paid until the next accounting period, are recorded as income
on
the “ex date”, in accordance with accrual accounting. Net investment
income includes amortization of premium and accretion of discount on the level
yield method relating to bonds acquired at other than par value.
Realized
investment gains and losses are included in revenues and can include any
other-than-temporary losses from declines in value (as discussed
above). The cost of the investment sold is determined using an
average cost basis, and sales are recorded on a trade date basis (that is,
the
day on which the trade is executed).
30
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS -- YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007, 2006, AND 2005
Shareholders’
Equity
At
December 31, 2007, PICO had shareholders’ equity of $525.9 million ($27.92 per
share), compared to $405.2 million ($25.52 per share) at the end of 2006, and
$300.9 million ($22.67 per share) at the end of 2005. Book value per share
increased 9.4% in 2007, compared to increases of 12.6% in 2006, and 16.9% in
2005.
The
principal factors leading to the $120.7 million increase in shareholders’ equity
during 2007 were:
·
|
a
$16.3 million increase in net unrealized appreciation in investments
after-tax, in particular Jungfraubahn and our other holdings in
Switzerland ; and
|
·
|
the
issuance of 2.8 million new
shares, at $37 per share, for net proceeds of $100.1
million.
|
At
December 31, 2007, on a consolidated basis, available-for-sale investments
reflected a net unrealized gain of $82.5 million after-tax, compared to a
net unrealized gain of $66.2 million, after-tax, at December 31, 2006.
The
principal factors leading to the $104.3 million increase in shareholders’ equity
during 2006 were:
·
|
the
year’s $29.2 million in net income;
and
|
·
|
the
issuance of 2.6 million new
shares, at $30 per share, for net proceeds of $73.9
million.
|
Total
Assets and Liabilities
Total
assets at December 31, 2007 were $676.3 million, compared to $549 million at
December 31, 2006. During 2007, total assets increased by $127.3 million,
principally due to the $100.1 million net proceeds received from the February
2007 issuance and sale of PICO stock to certain accredited investors in a
private placement transaction. Real estate and water assets increased by $98.1
million, primarily due to expenditure on the Fish Springs Ranch project, and
the
acquisition and development of water resource projects. During 2007, cash and
cash equivalents decreased by $65.8 million, primarily due to the expenditure
on
the Fish Springs Ranch project, and temporary investment in investment-grade
corporate bonds maturing in 2008 and 2009.
During
2007, total liabilities increased by $6.5 million, from $143.8 million to
$150.3 million at December 31, 2007.
Net
Income or Loss
PICO
reported a net loss of $1.3 million for 2007 ($0.07 per share), compared to
net
income of $29.2 million in 2006 ($1.95 per share) and net income of $16.2
million ($1.25 per share) in 2005.
2007
The
$1.3
million ($0.07 per share) net loss consisted of:
·
|
income
before taxes and minority
interest of $2 million; and
|
·
|
a
$3.5 million provision for income taxes. The effective tax rate for
2007
is 175.6%, which is higher than the federal corporate income tax
rate of
35%, principally due to state tax charges, the recording of valuation
allowances against income tax losses in some subsidiaries, and certain
compensation expense which is not
tax-deductible.
|
|
|
2006
The
$29.2
million ($1.95 per share) in net income consisted of:
·
|
income
before taxes and minority
interest of $50.9 million from continuing
operations;
|
·
|
a
$19.4 million provision for
income taxes. The effective tax rate for 2006 is 38.1%, which is
higher
than the federal corporate rate of 35%, principally due to state
tax
charges and certain compensation expense which is not tax-deductible;
and
|
·
|
a
net loss from discontinued
operations of $2.3 million.
|
2005
The
$16.2
million ($1.25 per share) in net income consisted of:
·
|
income
before taxes and minority
interest of $40.3 million from continuing operations;
and
|
·
|
the
add-back of $536,000 in
minority interest in continuing operations, which reflects the interest
of
outside shareholders in the net losses of subsidiaries which are
less than
100%-owned by PICO;
which were partially offset
by
|
·
|
an
$18.6 million provision for
income taxes. The effective tax rate for 2005 is 46%, which is greater
than the 35% federal corporate rate. This is principally due to the
accrual of state taxes and other permanent differences, primarily
resulting from certain management compensation which was not
tax-deductible; and
|
·
|
a
net loss from discontinued
operations of $6.1 million.
|
Comprehensive
Income
In
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 130, “Reporting
Comprehensive Income,” PICO reports comprehensive income as well as net income
from the Consolidated Statement of Operations. Comprehensive income measures
changes in shareholders’ equity, and includes unrealized items which are not
recorded in the Consolidated Statement of Operations, for example, foreign
currency translation and the change in investment gains and losses on
available-for-sale securities.
Over
the
past three years, PICO has recorded:
·
|
comprehensive
income of $17.2 million in 2007, primarily consisting of a $16.3
million
increase in net unrealized appreciation in investments (after-tax)
and a
$2.3 million net increase in foreign currency translation;
|
·
|
comprehensive
income of $30.1
million in 2006, which primarily consisted of the year’s net income of
$29.2 million. In addition, there was a $69,000 net increase in net
unrealized appreciation in investments (after-tax) and a $789,000
net
increase in foreign currency translation;
and
|
·
|
comprehensive
income of $39.6
million in 2005, primarily consisting of a $24.2 million net increase
in
net unrealized appreciation in investments and net income of $16.2
million, which were partially offset by a $810,000 net decrease in
foreign
currency translation.
|
31
Operating
Revenues
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Water
Resource and Water Storage Operations
|
$ | 7,938,000 | $ | 6,182,000 | $ | 106,449,000 | ||||||
Real
Estate Operations
|
13,479,000 | 41,406,000 | 21,811,000 | |||||||||
Business
Acquisitions and Financing Operations
|
4,903,000 | 21,858,000 | 5,743,000 | |||||||||
Insurance
Operations in Run Off
|
7,609,000 | 13,277,000 | 8,109,000 | |||||||||
Total
Revenues
|
$ | 33,929,000 | $ | 82,723,000 | $ | 142,112,000 |
In
2007,
total revenues were $33.9 million, compared to $82.7 million in 2006, and $142.1
million in 2005. In 2005, revenues included $104.4 million from two significant
water sales in the Water Resources and Water Storage Operations segment.
In
2007,
revenues declined by $48.8 million from 2006. This was primarily due to a $27.9
million year over year decline in revenues from Real Estate Operations,
principally due to the sale of Spring Valley Ranches for $22 million in 2006.
Business Acquisitions and Financing Operations revenues decreased $17 million
year over year, primarily as a result of a $17.4 million year over year decrease
in net realized investment gains. Insurance Operations in Run Off revenues
decreased $5.7 million year over year, principally as a result of a $6.1 million
year over year decrease in net realized investment gains. Revenues from Water
Resource and Water Storage Operations increased $1.8 million year over year,
primarily as a result of the inclusion
of a $3.5 million gain recorded as a result of a non-monetary exchange
transaction whereby the Company released and terminated legal use restrictions
on real estate previously sold, in exchange for real estate and water
assets.
In
2006,
revenues declined by $59.4 million from 2005. This was primarily due to a $100.3
million year over year decline in revenues from Water Resource and Water Storage
Operations, largely as a result of revenues from the sale of land and water
assets decreasing from $104.8 million in 2005 to $3 million in 2006, due to
the
two significant water sales in 2005 referenced above. Real Estate Operations
revenues increased $19.6 million year over year, principally due to the sale
of
Spring Valley Ranches for $22 million in 2006. Business Acquisitions and
Financing Operations revenues increased $16.1 million year of year, primarily
as
a result of a $13.2 million year over year increase in net realized investment
gains. Insurance Operations in Run Off revenues increased $5.2 million year
of
year, primarily as a result of a $5 million year over year increase in net
realized investment gains.
Costs
and Expenses
Total
costs and expenses in 2007 were $31.9 million, compared to $31.9 million in
2006, and $101.8 million in 2005. In 2007, the largest expense item was a $7.3
million charge to settle all outstanding claims and legal actions between Fish
Springs Ranch and the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe. See Item 3, Legal Proceedings
and
the Fish Springs Ranch section earlier in Item 7. In 2006, the largest
expense item was $10.3 million for the cost of land and water rights sold by
Vidler and Nevada Land. In 2005, the largest expenses were the $46.5 million
cost of land and water rights sold by Vidler and Nevada Land, and stock
appreciation rights ("SAR") expense of $23.9 million. See “Business
Acquisitions and Financing” results of operations later in Item
7.
Income
(Loss) Before Taxes and Minority Interest
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Water
Resource and Water Storage Operations
|
$ | (5,283,000 | ) | $ | ( 2,451,000 | ) | $ | 56,212,000 | ||||
Real
Estate Operations
|
8,109,000 | 30,499,000 | 12,038,000 | |||||||||
Business
Acquisitions and Financing Operations
|
(10,591,000 | ) | 6,839,000 | (38,464,000 | ) | |||||||
Insurance
Operations in Run Off
|
9,779,000 | 15,980,000 | 10,539,000 | |||||||||
Income
Before Taxes and Minority Interest
|
$ | 2,014,000 | $ | 50,867,000 | $ | 40,325,000 |
In
2007,
PICO generated income before taxes and minority interest of $2 million, compared
to $50.9 million in 2006. The $48.9 million year over year decrease resulted
from:
·
|
$22.4
million lower income from
Real Estate Operations, primarily due to the $18.8 million gross
margin on
the sale of Spring Valley Ranch which was included in 2006
income;
|
·
|
a
$17.4 million lower contribution from the Business Acquisitions and
Financing Operations segment. This principally resulted from a $17.4
million decrease in realized gains year over year;
|
·
|
$6.2
million lower income from
Insurance Operations in Run Off, primarily due to a $6.1 million
year over
year decrease in realized gains;
and
|
·
|
a
$2.8
million
lower
result from Water Resource
and Water Storage Operations due to various factors. The 2007
segment loss included a $3.5 million gain on the release of restrictions
on real estate, which was more than offset by a $7.3 million expense
related to the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe settlement. See "Item
3. Legal
Proceedings - Fish Springs Ranch, LLC
Litigation".
|
In
2006,
PICO generated income before taxes and minority interest of $50.9 million,
compared to $40.3 million in 2005. The $10.6 million year over year increase
resulted from:
·
|
$18.5
million higher income from
Real Estate Operations, essentially due to the sale of Spring Valley
Ranch;
|
·
|
a
$45.3 million higher
contribution from the Business Acquisitions and Financing Operations
segment. This principally resulted from a $13.2 million increase
in
realized gains year over year, and SAR expense of zero in 2006 compared
to
$23.9 million in 2005; and
|
·
|
$5.5
million higher income from
Insurance Operations in Run Off, primarily due to a $5 million year
over
year increase in realized
gains;
|
·
|
which,
combined, exceeded the
$58.7 million lower result from Water Resource and Water Storage
Operations. The total gross margin earned from the sale of real estate
and
water assets in 2006 was $1.4 million, compared to $65.9 million
in 2005,
which included the two significant sales of water discussed in preceding
paragraphs.
|
32
Water
Resource and Water Storage Operations
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Sale
of real estate and water assets
|
$ | 41,000 | 2,969,000 | $ | 104,812,000 | |||||||
Gain
on release of restrictions on real estate
|
3,466,000 | |||||||||||
Net
investment income
|
4,418,000 | 2,805,000 | 1,177,000 | |||||||||
Other
|
13,000 | 408,000 | 460,000 | |||||||||
Segment
total revenues
|
7,938,000 | 6,182,000 | 106,449,000 | |||||||||
Expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Cost
of real estate and water assets
|
$ | (8,000 | ) | $ | (1,614,000 | ) | $ | (38,957,000 | ) | |||
Commission
and other cost of sales
|
(1,066,000 | ) | ||||||||||
Depreciation and
amortization
|
(1,042,000 | ) | (1,084,000 | ) | (1,173,000 | ) | ||||||
Interest
|
(270,000 | ) | ||||||||||
Overhead
|
(1,839,000 | ) | (3,068,000 | ) | (4,449,000 | ) | ||||||
Project
expenses
|
(10,332,000 | ) | (2,867,000 | ) | (4,322,000 | ) | ||||||
Segment
total expenses
|
(13,221,000 | ) | (8,633,000 | ) | (50,237,000 | ) | ||||||
Income
(loss) before taxes and minority interest
|
$ | (5,283,000 | ) | $ | (2,451,000 | ) | $ | 56,212,000 |
Over
the
past few years, several large sales of real estate and water assets have
generated the bulk of Vidler’s revenues. Since the date of closing generally
determines the accounting period in which the sales revenue and cost of sales
are recorded, Vidler’s reported revenues and income fluctuate from period to
period, depending on the dates when specific transactions close. Consequently,
sales of real estate and water assets in any one year are not necessarily
indicative of likely revenues in future years. In the following,
gross margin is defined as revenue less cost of sales.
In
2007,
Vidler generated total revenues of $7.9 million. A transaction with an energy
supply company concerning certain properties in Maricopa County and La
Paz County, Arizona generated revenues of $3.5 million and a pre-tax gain of
$3.5 million. The energy supply company purchased approximately 2,428 acres
of
real estate and related water assets from Vidler in 2001. At the time of the
sale, Vidler recorded certain legal restrictions on both the surface and
underground use of the properties. During the third quarter of 2007, Vidler
released and terminated the restrictions on the use of the 2,428 acres in
Maricopa County, in exchange for 503 acres of unencumbered real estate and
water
assets in La Paz County, Arizona. Vidler established the fair value of the
real
estate and water assets acquired in the transaction at approximately $3.5
million.
In
2006, Vidler generated $3 million in revenues from the sale of real estate
and
water assets. This primarily represented:
·
|
Lincoln/Vidler
sold approximately
570 acre-feet of water rights at Meadow Valley,
Nevada
for
$6,050 per acre-foot.
Vidler’s 50% share of the sales price was $1.7 million;
and
|
·
|
Vidler
sold its water rights at
Golden, Colorado
for $1.2
million.
|
After
deducting the $1.6 million cost of real estate and water assets sold, the
resulting gross margin was $1.3 million.
In
2005,
Vidler generated $104.8 million in revenues from the sale of real estate and
water assets. This primarily represented two transactions, which generated
$104.4 million in revenues:
·
|
the
sale of approximately 42,000
acre-feet of transferable groundwater rights, and the related land,
in the
Harquahala Valley Irrigation District of Arizona. This transaction
added
$94.4 million to revenues and $56.6 million to gross margin;
and
|
·
|
the
sale of approximately 2,100
acre-feet of water in Lincoln County
by
Lincoln/Vidler. Under the
agreement between the Lincoln County Water District and Vidler, the
proceeds from the sale of water will be shared equally after Vidler
is
reimbursed for the expenses incurred in developing water resources
in
Lincoln County.
Consequently, the net cash
proceeds to Vidler were approximately $10.8 million, and the transaction
added $10.1 million to revenues and $9.1 million to gross
margin.
|
In
addition, Vidler generated net investment income of $4.4 million in 2007,
primarily interest from the temporary investment of cash proceeds from the
May
2006 and February 2007 equity offerings by PICO. In aggregate, the stock
offerings raised net proceeds of $174.1 million, which were principally
allocated to Vidler for existing and new water resource development projects,
including the design and construction of a pipeline to convey water from Fish
Springs Ranch to Reno.
In
2006,
interest revenue was $2.8 million, primarily from the temporary investment
of
the cash proceeds from an equity offering by PICO which raised net proceeds
of
$74.1 million that were principally allocated to the design and construction
of
a pipeline to convey water from Fish Springs Ranch to Reno . In 2005, interest
revenues were $1.2 million, due to interest earned from temporary investment
of
the proceeds from water rights and land sales.
Total
segment expenses, including the cost of real estate and water assets sold,
were
$13.2 million in 2007, $8.6 million in 2006, and $50.2 million in 2005. However,
excluding the cost of real estate and water assets sold and related selling
costs; segment operating expenses were $13.2 million in 2007, $7 million in
2006, and $10.2 million in 2005. After we entered the water resource business,
the individual assets acquired by Vidler were not ready for immediate commercial
use. Although Vidler is generating significant revenues from the sale of real
estate and water assets, the segment is still incurring costs related to
long-lived assets which will not generate revenues until future years, e.g.,
operating, maintenance, and amortization expenses at Vidler’s water storage
facilities.
Overhead
expenses consist of costs which are not related to the development of specific
water assets, such as salaries and benefits, rent, and audit fees. Overhead
expenses were $1.8 million in 2007, $3.1 million in 2006, and $4.4 million
in
2005. Most of the change from year to year is due to fluctuation in the accrual
of performance-based incentive compensation for certain Vidler management,
which
was nil in 2007, $1 million in 2006, and $2.9 million in 2005.
Project
expenses consist of costs related to the development of existing water
resources, such as maintenance and professional fees. Project expenses are
expensed as appropriate under GAAP, and could fluctuate from period to period
depending on activity with Vidler’s various water resource projects. Costs
related to the development of water resources which meet the criteria to be
recorded as assets in our financial statements are capitalized as part of the
cost of the asset, and charged to cost of sales in the period that revenue
is
recognized. Project expenses principally relate to:
·
|
the
operation and maintenance of
the Vidler Arizona Recharge
Facility;
|
·
|
the
development of water rights
in the Tule Desert
groundwater
basin (part of the
Lincoln County
agreement);
|
·
|
the
utilization of water rights
at Fish Springs Ranch as future municipal water supply for the north
valleys of the Reno, Nevada area;
and
|
·
|
the
operation of Fish Springs
Ranch, and maintenance of the associated water
rights.
|
Project
expenses were $10.3 million in 2007, $2.9 million in 2006, and $4.3 million
in
2005. The $7.4 million increase in project expenses in 2007 compared to 2006
is
almost entirely due to a $7.3 million expense recorded in 2007 relating to
a
settlement of all outstanding claims and legal actions with the Pyramid Lake
Paiute Tribe (“the Tribe settlement”). See "Item 3. Legal Proceedings
- Fish Springs Ranch,
LLC Litigation".
The
$7.3
million settlement expense consists of:
|
·
|
a
cash payment of $500,000, which was made during the second quarter
of
2007;
|
|
·
|
the
transfer of approximately 6,214 acres of land, with a fair value
of
$500,000 and a book value of $139,000, to the Tribe in the second
quarter
of 2007;
|
|
·
|
a
payment of $3.1 million due and paid on January 8, 2008; and
|
|
·
|
a
payment of $3.6 million due on the later of January 8, 2009 or the
date
that an Act of Congress ratifies the settlement agreement. If
the payment is made after January 8, 2009, interest will accrue at
the
London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) from January 8, 2009.
|
The
regulatory process to obtain the approvals to build the infrastructure for
the
Fish Springs pipeline was largely completed in 2005. Consequently, project
expenses were $1.4 million lower in 2006 than in 2005, primarily due to $1.4
million decrease in legal, engineering and consulting costs year over year.
33
Real
Estate Operations
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Sale
of
Real Estate and
Water Assets:
|
||||||||||||
Sale
of former railroad land
|
$ | 9,455,000 | $ | 16,541,000 | $ | 20,173,000 | ||||||
Sale
of Spring Valley Ranch
|
22,000,000 | |||||||||||
Net
investment income
|
3,140,000 | 2,003,000 | 1,054,000 | |||||||||
Other
|
884,000 | 862,000 | 584,000 | |||||||||
Segment
total revenues
|
13,479,000 | 41,406,000 | 21,811,000 | |||||||||
Expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Cost
of former railroad land sold
|
$ | (2,676,000 | ) | $ | (5,489,000 | ) | $ | (7,573,000 | ) | |||
Cost
of Spring Valley Ranch
|
(3,174,000 | ) | ||||||||||
Operating
expenses
|
(2,694,000 | ) | (2,244,000 | ) | (2,200,000 | ) | ||||||
Segment
total expenses
|
(5,370,000 | ) | (10,907,000 | ) | (9,773,000 | ) | ||||||
Income before
taxes and minority interest
|
$ | 8,109,000 | $ | 30,499,000 | $ | 12,038,000 |
The
sale
of former railroad land was the largest contributor of revenue in this segment
in 2007 and 2005, and the second largest contributor in 2006. It can take a
year
or more to complete a land sale transaction, and the timing of land sales is,
therefore, unpredictable. Historically the level of land sales has fluctuated
from year to year. Accordingly, it should not be assumed that the level of
sales
as reported will be maintained in future years. As noted in more detail below,
our average gross margin for former railroad land has increased from 2005
through 2007, but the total volume of acreage sold in any one year has declined
over this period.
In
2007,
Nevada Land recorded revenues of $9.5 million from the sale of 95,538 acres
of
former railroad land. In 2006, Nevada Land recorded revenues of $16.5
million from the sale of approximately 199,266 acres of former railroad land,
and revenues of $22 million from the sale of Spring Valley Ranch. In 2005,
Nevada Land recorded revenues of $20.2 million from the sale of 252,094 acres
of
former railroad land.
Other
income amounted to $884,000, compared to $862,000 in 2006, and $584,000 in
2005. Most of this revenue comes from land leases, principally for grazing
and agricultural use.
Net
investment income, arising from interest earned on funds received from previous
land sales, contributed $3.1 million in 2007, compared to $2 million in 2006,
and $1.1 million in 2005.
In
the
following, gross margin is defined as revenue less cost of sales, and gross
margin percentage is defined as gross margin divided by revenues.
After
deducting the cost of land sold, in 2007 the gross margin on the sale of former
railroad land was $6.8 million, compared to $11.1 million in 2006, and $12.6
million in 2005. The gross margin percentage earned on the sale of former
railroad land was 71.7 % in 2007, 66.8% in 2006, and 62.5% in 2005. The gross
margin on the sale of Spring Valley Ranch in 2006 was $18.8
million.
Segment
operating expenses were $2.7 million in 2007, $2.2 million in 2006, and $2.2
million in 2005. The increase in operating expenses in 2007 compared to 2006
and
2005 is due primarily to the start-up of real estate operations under Bedrock
and UCP in California and GEC in Canada. As and when more capital is allocated
to these operations, we anticipate that the revenues and costs in these entities
will be more significant to the overall real estate segment results of
operations.
The
$22.4
million decrease in segment income from 2006 to 2007 is due to the a $4.3
million lower gross margin from the sale of former railroad land in 2007
compared to 2006, as well as the $18.8 million contribution from the sale of
Spring Valley Ranch in 2006. The lower gross margin from the sale of former
railroad land in 2007 is due to the net effect of selling a lower volume of
land
(resulting in lower revenues) at a higher gross margin percentage. The volume
of
former railroad land sold decreased 52% year over year and land sales revenues
were 43% lower year over year, but the gross margin percentage on land sales
improved 490 basis points (4.9%), from 66.8% in 2006 to 71.7% in 2007.
The
$18.5
million increase in segment income from 2005 to 2006 is principally attributable
to the $18.8 million in income before tax earned on the sale of Spring Valley
Ranch in 2006. The volume of former railroad land sold decreased 21% year over
year and land sales revenues were 18% lower year over year, but the gross margin
percentage on land sales improved 430 basis points (4.3%), from 62.5% in 2005
to
66.8% in 2006.
34
Business
Acquisitions and Financing Operations
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Business
Acquisitions and Financing Operations Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Realized
gain (loss) on sale or impairment of securities
|
$ | (1,426,000 | ) | $ | 15,943,000 | $ | 2,666,000 | |||||
Net
investment income
|
6,025,000 | 5,611,000 | 2,957,000 | |||||||||
Other
|
304,000 | 304,000 | 120,000 | |||||||||
Segment
total revenues
|
4,903,000 | 21,858,000 | 5,743,000 | |||||||||
Stock
appreciation rights expense
|
$ | (4,468,000 | ) | $ | (23,894,000 | ) | ||||||
Other
|
(11,026,000 | ) | $ | (15,019,000 | ) | (20,313,000 | ) | |||||
Segment
total expenses
|
(15,494,000 | ) | (15,019,000 | ) | (44,207,000 | ) | ||||||
Income
(loss) before taxes and minority interest
|
$ | (10,591,000 | ) | $ | 6,839,000 | $ | (38,464,000 | ) |
This
segment consists of acquired businesses, strategic interests in businesses,
as
well as the activities of PICO that are not included in our other segments.
The
segment also contains the deferred compensation assets held in trust for the
benefit of several PICO officers, as well as the corresponding deferred
compensation liabilities. The officers concerned have deferred the
majority of incentive compensation earned to date, and the proceeds from
exercising SAR in 2005, most of which were originally stock options, granted
as
far back as 1994. The investment income and realized gains and losses from
the
deferred compensation assets are recorded as revenues in the year that they
are
earned, and a corresponding and offsetting cost or benefit is recorded as
deferred compensation expense. The change in net unrealized appreciation or
depreciation in the deferred compensation assets each year is not recorded
in
revenues; but it is charged to compensation
expense. Consequently, due to the cost related to unrealized
appreciation, in any one year deferred compensation expense can have an effect
on segment income and income before taxes in the statement of
operations. However, once the deferred compensation assets have been
realized, over the lifetime of the assets, the revenues and deferred
compensation expense offset, and there is no net effect on segment income and
income before taxes.
Revenues
in this segment vary considerably from year to year, primarily due to
fluctuations in net realized gains or losses on the sale or impairment of
securities.
The
expenses recorded in this segment primarily consist of holding company costs
which are not allocated to our other segments, for example, rent for our head
office, any compensation cost for stock-settled Stock Appreciation Rights
("SAR"), and deferred compensation expense. In any one year, Business
Acquisitions and Financing Operations segment expenses can be increased, or
reduced, by one or more individually significant expense or benefit items which
occur irregularly (for example, the recording of compensation expense when
SAR
are granted and vest), or fluctuate from period to period (for example, the
foreign currency expense or benefit described below). Consequently, Business
Acquisitions & Financing Operations segment expenses are not necessarily
directly comparable from year to year.
The
Business Acquisitions and Financing Operations segment recorded revenues of
$4.9
million in 2007, $21.9 million in 2006, and $5.7 million in 2005.
In
2007, a net realized
loss on the sale or impairment of holdings of $1.4 million was recorded, which
reflected activity in deferred compensation accounts. This
principally consisted of $1.8 million in provisions for
other-than-temporary impairment of two securities, which exceeded approximately
$360,000 in gains on the sale of various holdings. The $1.4 million
in net realized losses are offset by a corresponding $1.4 million reduction
in
deferred compensation payable to the participating officers, which reduced
Segment Total Expenses, resulting in no net effect on the segment loss before
tax.
We
regularly review any securities in which we have an unrealized loss. If we
determine that the decline in market value is other-than-temporary, under GAAP
we record a charge to reduce the basis of the security from its original cost
to
current carrying value, which is typically the market price at the balance
sheet
date when the provision is recorded. The determination is based on various
factors, primarily the extent and the duration of the unrealized loss. A charge
for other-than-temporary impairment is a non-cash charge, which is recorded
as a
realized loss. Charges for other-than-temporary impairments do not affect book
value per share, as the after-tax decline in the market value of investments
carried under SFAS No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and
Equity Securities,” is already reflected in shareholders’ equity. The
written-down value becomes our new basis in the investment. In future accounting
periods, unrealized gains or losses from that basis will be recorded in
shareholders’ equity, and when the investment is sold a realized gain or loss
from that basis will be recorded in the statement of operations.
The
2007
provisions for other-than-temporary impairment consisted of:
· a
$1.6 million
provision for other-than-temporary impairment of a bond held in deferred
compensation accounts. The bond is a senior collateralized note; however during
2007 the issuer filed for bankruptcy protection and the market value of the
pledged collateral declined sharply. The provision for other-than-temporary
impairment reduced the basis in the bond from amortized cost to estimated
realizable value at December 31, 2007; and
· a
$165,000
provision for other-than-temporary impairment of a holding in a California
bank.
The stock was in an unrealized loss position for most of 2007. Based on the
extent and the duration of the unrealized loss, it was determined that the
decline in market value is other-than-temporary. Consequently, we recorded
a
charge to reduce our basis in the stock from its original cost to market value
at December 31, 2007.
In
2006,
net realized gains were $15.9 million, primarily consisting of realized gains
of
$8.6 million on the sale of part of our holding in Ratia Energie AG, and $6.8
million on the sale of our holding in Anderson-Tully Company.
Anderson-Tully
was a timber Real Estate Investment Trust (“REIT”), which owned approximately
325,000 acres of high-quality timberland in the southeastern United States.
During 2003 and 2004, we accumulated almost 10% of Anderson-Tully at an average
cost of approximately $242,000 per share. During the first quarter of 2006,
Anderson-Tully was acquired by a timberlands investment management organization,
for approximately $446,000 per share.
In
2005,
net realized gains were $2.7 million, the largest of which was a $1.8 million
realized gain on the sale of part of our holding in Ratia Energie AG.
35
In
this
segment, investment income includes interest on cash and short-term fixed-income
securities, and dividends from partially owned businesses. Investment income
totaled $6 million in 2007, $5.6 million in 2006, and $3 million in 2005.
Investment income fluctuates depending on the level of cash and temporary
investments, the level of interest rates, and the dividends paid by
partially-owned businesses.
Total
segment expenses were $15.5 million in 2007, $15 million in 2006, and $44.2
million in 2005. The principal expenses recognized in this segment are PICO’s
corporate overhead, the U.S. dollar change in value of a Swiss franc
inter-company loan, and in 2005 and 2007 Stock Appreciation Rights (“SAR”)
expense. SAR expense was $4.5 million in 2007, zero in 2006, and $23.9 million
in 2005. All other segment expenses were $10.9 million in 2007, $15 million
in
2006, and $20.3 million in 2005.
As
a
result of these factors, the Business Acquisitions and Financing Operations
segment generated a pre-tax loss of $10.5 million in 2007, income of $6.8
million in 2006, and a pre-tax loss of $38.5 million in 2005.
In
2007,
segment expenses of $15.5 million primarily consisted of:
·
|
SAR
expense of $ 4.5 million (see description of SAR expense below);
|
·
|
HyperFeed
litigation expenses of $1.7 million;
|
·
|
the
accrual of $1.5 million in incentive compensation, being a discretionary
bonus awarded to our President and Chief Executive Officer; and
|
·
|
other
parent company overhead of $7.8 million. Other expenses were reduced
by a
$548,000 net decrease in deferred compensation expense, which reflects
a
decrease in deferred compensation liabilities resulting from a decrease
in
the value of deferred compensation assets.
|
Expenses
were reduced by a $2 million benefit resulting from the effect of appreciation
in the Swiss Franc on the inter-company loan during 2007 (see description of
inter-company loan below).
In
2006,
segment expenses of $15 million primarily consisted of:
·
|
the
accrual of $5.9 million in
incentive compensation. In 1996, six of PICO’s
officers participated in an
incentive compensation program tied to growth in our book value per
share relative to a pre-determined threshold;
and
|
·
|
other
parent company overhead of
$11.7 million. This includes deferred compensation expense of $3.6
million, which reflects an increase in deferred compensation liabilities
resulting from growth in the value of invested assets corresponding
to the
deferred compensation liabilities. In effect, this expense was offset
by
investment income and realized gains, which are recorded as revenue
in
this segment, and by unrealized appreciation in the invested
assets.
|
Expenses
were reduced by a $2.6 million benefit resulting from the effect of appreciation
in the Swiss Franc on the inter-company loan during 2006 (see description of
inter-company loan below).
In
2005,
SAR expense was $23.9 million and other expenses were $20.3 million, principally
consisting of the accrual of $8.4 million in incentive compensation, other
parent company overhead of $8.3 million, and a $3.6 million expense resulting
from the effect of depreciation in the Swiss Franc on the inter-company loan
during 2005.
Inter-Company
Loan. Certain of our
interests in Swiss public companies are held by PICO European Holdings, LLC
(“PICO European Holdings”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Physicians Insurance
Company of Ohio. Part of PICO European Holdings’ funding comes from a loan from
PICO Holdings, Inc., which is denominated in Swiss Francs. Since the U.S. dollar
is the functional currency for our financial reporting, under GAAP we are
required to record a benefit or expense through the statement of operations
to
reflect fluctuation in the rate of exchange between the Swiss Franc and the
U.S.
dollar, although there is no net impact on consolidated shareholders’ equity
before the related tax effects. During
accounting periods when the Swiss Franc appreciates relative to the US dollar
--
such as 2006 and 2007 -- under GAAP we are required to record a benefit through
the consolidated statement of operations to reflect the fact that PICO European
Holdings owes PICO Holdings more US dollars. In PICO European Holdings’
financial statements, an equivalent debit is included in the foreign currency
translation component of shareholders’ equity (since it owes PICO Holdings more
dollars); however, this does not go through the consolidated statement of
operations. During accounting periods when the Swiss Franc depreciates relative
to the US dollar -- such as 2005 -- opposite entries are made and an expense
is
recorded in the statement of operations. Consequently, under GAAP in our
consolidated statement of operations we were required to record a benefit of
$2
million in 2007, a benefit of $2.6 million in 2006, and an expense of $3.6
million in 2005, even though there was no net impact on shareholders’ equity,
before any related tax effects.
In
addition, PICO European Holdings and Global Equity AG both have Swiss Franc
loans from a Swiss bank. See Note 4 of
Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements, “Borrowings”. Any currency effect on the bank loans
is offset by a currency effect on the corresponding investment assets, and
does
not form part of the foreign exchange benefit or expense recorded thorough
the
statement of operations discussed above.
SAR
Expense
During
2005, the Company’s Compensation Committee replaced the 2003 Cash-Settled Stock
Appreciation Rights Program (the "2003 SAR Program"), with a stock-based
incentive plan, the PICO Holdings, Inc. 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the
“2005
SAR Plan”), which was approved by our shareholders in December 2005.
On
September 21, 2005, the 2003 SAR program was amended, and the spread value
of
the SAR outstanding was monetized based on the last sale price of PICO stock
on
that date ($33.23). This resulted in a $23.9 million expense to record the
increase in SAR liability from the start of 2005 through September 21, 2005,
which comprised our total SAR expense for 2005. The majority of the SAR which
was monetized in 2005 were originally stock options, which had been issued
as
far back as 1994.
On
December 8, 2005, the Company’s Shareholders approved the 2005 SAR Plan. On
December 12, 2005, the Compensation Committee granted 2,185,965 stock-based
SAR,
with an exercise price of $33.76, to various officers of the Company, employees,
and non-employee directors. No expense was recorded in 2005 related to the
2005
Incentive Plan as the PICO stock price was below the exercise price at the
end
of 2005.
Under
the
2005 SAR Plan, when the holder exercises stock-settled SAR, the holder is
issued new PICO common shares with a market value equal to the net
in-the-money amount of the SAR. This is calculated as the total
in-the-money spread amount, less applicable withholding taxes, divided by the
market price of PICO common stock on the date of exercise. At
December 31, 2007, the exercise prices of all granted SAR were greater than
the
closing PICO stock price ($33.62).
In
2006,
PICO adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No.
123(R), “Share-Based Payment”. Under SFAS No. 123(R), no expense is recorded at
adoption for stock-based SAR which are fully vested. Since all of the
stock-based SAR granted in 2005 were fully vested, no expense was recorded
in
2006 related to the 2005 Plan.
During
2007, under
the 2005 SAR Plan, 486,470 stock-settled SAR were issued to four officers with
an exercise price of $42.71 on August 2, 2007, and 172,939 stock-settled SAR
were issued to one officer with an exercise price of $44.69 on September 4,
2007. The exercise price of the SAR was the last sale price for PICO
common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market on the day the SAR were granted. The
SAR granted in 2007 vest over four years. In 2007, SAR expense
of
$4.5 million was recorded related to the SAR issued in 2007 which vested during
2007. The SAR expense was calculated based on the estimated fair
value of the vested SAR awarded. See
Note
1 of Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements, "Nature
of Operations and Significant Accounting Policies”.
We expect to
record an additional $7.5 million in compensation expense related to these
SAR
over the future vesting period.
36
Insurance
Operations in “Run Off”
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Net
investment income
|
$ | 3,457,000 | $ | 3,159,000 | $ | 3,052,000 | ||||||
Realized
gain on sale of investments
|
3,965,000 | 10,110,000 | 5,057,000 | |||||||||
Other
|
187,000 | 8,000 | ||||||||||
Segment
total revenues
|
7,609,000 | 13,277,000 | 8,109,000 | |||||||||
Recoveries:
|
||||||||||||
(Expenses),
net of underwriting recoveries
|
$ | 2,170,000 | $ | 2,703,000 | $ | 2,430,000 | ||||||
Income
Before Taxes:
|
||||||||||||
Physicians
Insurance Company of Ohio
|
$ | 5,938,000 | $ | 10,914,000 | $ | 8,552,000 | ||||||
Citation
Insurance Company
|
$ | 3,841,000 | $ | 5,066,000 | $ | 1,987,000 | ||||||
Income before
taxes and minority interest
|
$ | 9,779,000 | $ | 15,980,000 | $ | 10,539,000 |
Revenues
and results in this segment vary considerably from year to year and are not
necessarily comparable from year to year, primarily due to fluctuations in
net
realized investment gains, and favorable or unfavorable development in our
loss
reserves.
Segment
total revenues were $7.6 million in 2007, $13.3 million in 2006, and $8.1
million in 2005.
Net
investment income was $3.5 million in 2007, compared to $3.2 million in 2006
and
$3.1 million in 2005. Net investment income varies from year to year, depending
on the amount of cash and fixed-income securities in the portfolio, the
prevailing level of interest rates, and the level of dividends paid on the
common stocks in the portfolio.
Net
realized gains on the sale or impairment of investments were $4 million in
2007,
$10.1 million in 2006, and $5.1 million in 2005.
The
$4
million net realized investment gain recorded in 2007 consisted of $4.2 million
in gains on the sale of various portfolio holdings, which were partially offset
by a $210,000 provision for other-than-temporary impairment of a holding in
a
California bank. The stock was in an unrealized loss position for most of 2007.
Based on the extent and the duration of the unrealized loss, it was determined
that the decline in market value is other-than-temporary. Consequently, we
recorded a charge to reduce our basis in the stock from its original cost to
market value at December 31, 2007.
The
net
realized investment gains of $10.1 million in 2006 and $5.1 million in 2005
represented gains on the sale of various portfolio holdings, and did not include
any provisions for other-than-temporary impairment of securities.
In
each
of the past three years, in aggregate the “run off” insurance companies
recorded benefits from favorable reserve development, which exceeded regular
loss and loss adjustment expense and operating expenses, resulting in total
segment recoveries of $2.2 million in 2007, $2.7 million in 2006, and $2.4
million in 2005. See the
Physicians
and Citation sections of the “Company Summary, Recent Developments, and Future
Outlook” portion of Item 7.
As
a
result of these factors, the Insurance Operations in “Run Off” segment generated
income of $9.8 million in 2007, consisting of $5.9 million from Physicians
and
$3.9 million from Citation. In 2006, segment income of $16 million consisted
of
$10.9 million from Physicians and $5.1 million from Citation. In
2005, segment income of $10.5 million, consisted of $8.5 million from Physicians
and $2 million from Citation.
37
Discontinued
Operations - HyperFeed Technologies
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||
Loss
before tax and minority interest
|
$ | (10,257,000 | ) | $ | (7,316,000 | ) | ||
Minority
interest in net loss
|
706,000 | |||||||
|
(10,257,000 | ) | (6,610,000 | ) | ||||
Gain
on disposal, before tax
|
(3,002,000 | ) | ||||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
(4,657,000 | ) | ||||||
Gain
on disposal, net
|
7,659,000 | |||||||
Gain
on sale of HyperFeed's discontinued operations, net
|
330,000 | 545,000 | ||||||
Gain
on sale of disposal and sale of discontinued operations,
net
|
$ | 7,989,000 | $ | 545,000 | ||||
|
$ | (2,268,000 | ) | $ | (6,065,000 | ) |
During
2006, HyperFeed filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code.
After the bankruptcy filing, HyperFeed was removed from PICO’s financial
statements as a consolidated entity, so there were no discontinued operations
related to HyperFeed in 2007.
In
2006,
we reported a $2.3 million net loss after-tax from HyperFeed, comprised of
a
$10.3 million net loss, which was partially offset by an $8 million gain on
disposal and the sale of discontinued operations:
·
|
the
$10.3 million net loss
consisted of a $5.3 million loss, and a $4.9 million write-down in
the
third quarter of 2006 of HyperFeed’s assets to estimated fair value of
zero;
|
·
|
during
the fourth quarter of
2006, HyperFeed filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy
Code. The $8 million gain on disposal and the sale of discontinued
operations was comprised of a $7.7 million after-tax gain on disposal,
and
a $330,000 after-tax gain on the sale of discontinued operations.
The $7.7
million after-tax gain on disposal consisted of a $3 million gain
on
disposal before tax due to the removal of HyperFeed’s liabilities from
PICO’s
financial statements after the
bankruptcy filing, and a $4.7 million income tax benefit. See Notes 2 and 7
of Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements, "Discontinued Operations" and "Federal,
Foreign
and State Income Tax",
respectively.
|
In
2005,
HyperFeed reported a $6.1 million net loss after-tax, consisting of a $7.3
million net loss, partially offset by minority interest of $706,000 and a
$545,000 after-tax gain on the sale of discontinued operations.
38
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES -- YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007, 2006, AND 2005
Cash
Flow
Our
assets primarily consist of our operating subsidiaries, holdings in other public
companies, and cash and cash equivalents. On a consolidated basis, the Company
had $70.8 million in cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2007, compared
to
$136.6 million at December 31, 2006. In addition to cash and cash equivalents,
at December 31, 2007 the consolidated group held fixed-income securities with
a
market value of $105.8 million, and equities with a market value of $259.7
million.
These
totals include cash of $1.6 million, fixed-income securities with a market
value
of $19.3 million, and equities with a market value of $170.9 million, held
by
our insurance companies. In addition, the water resource and water storage
segment contains cash of $35 million and fixed-income securities with a market
value of $20.5 million, and the real estate operations segment holds cash of
$12.6 million and fixed-income securities with a market value of $27 million.
The
totals also include cash of $7.9 million, fixed-income securities with a market
value of $28.5 million, and equity securities with a market value of $14.4
million held in the deferred compensation Rabbi Trusts.
Our
cash
flow position fluctuates depending on the requirements of our operating
subsidiaries for capital, and activity in our insurance company investment
portfolios. Our primary sources of funds include cash balances, cash flow from
operations, the sale of holdings, and the proceeds of borrowings or offerings
of
equity and debt.
In
broad
terms, the cash flow profile of our principal operating subsidiaries is:
·
|
As
Vidler’s water assets are
monetized, Vidler should generate free cash flow as receipts from
the sale
of real estate and water assets will have overtaken maintenance capital
expenditure, development costs, financing costs, and operating
expenses;
|
·
|
Nevada Land
is
actively selling real
estate which has reached its highest and best use. Nevada Land’s
principal sources of cash flow
are the proceeds of cash real estate sales, and collections of principal
and interest on sales contracts where Nevada Land
has
provided vendor financing.
These receipts and other revenues exceed Nevada Land’s operating and
development costs, so Nevada Land is generating strong cash flow;
and
|
·
|
Investment
income more than
covers the operating expenses of the “run off” insurance companies,
Physicians and Citation. The funds to pay claims come from the maturity
of
fixed-income securities, the realization of fixed-income investments
and
stocks held in their investment portfolios, and recoveries from
reinsurance companies.
|
The
Departments of Insurance in Ohio and California prescribe minimum levels of
capital and surplus for insurance companies, set guidelines for insurance
company investments, and restrict the amount of profits which can be distributed
as dividends. At December 31, 2007 the insurance companies had statutory surplus
of $105.4 million, of which only $8 million can be distributed without
regulatory approval.
Typically,
our insurance subsidiaries structure the maturity of fixed-income securities
to
match the projected pattern of claims payments. When interest rates are at
very
low levels, to insulate the capital value of the bond portfolios against a
decline in value which could be brought on by a future increase in interest
rates, the bond portfolios may have a shorter duration than the projected
pattern of claims payments.
As
shown
in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flow, there was a $65.8 million net
decrease in cash and cash equivalents in 2007, compared to a $98.8 million
net
increase in 2006, and a $20.4 million net increase in 2005.
During
2007, operating activities used cash of $56.6 million, compared to $12.6 million
of cash provided in 2006, and $68 million of cash provided in 2005. These totals
included discontinued operations, which used cash of $7 million in 2006, and
$4.4 million in 2005.
The
most
significant cash inflows from operating activities were:
·
|
in
2007, sale of real estate by Nevada Land;
|
·
|
in
2006, the sale of Spring Valley Ranch for $22 million, and $11.1
million
from cash land sales by Nevada Land; and
|
·
|
in
2005, Vidler’s sale of water rights and real estate in the Harquahala
Valley Irrigation District generated an operating cash flow of
approximately $87.4 million ($94.4 million gross sales price, less
$5.7
million to exercise options to acquire certain farms that we sold
in the
transaction, and $1.2 million closing and other costs). In addition,
Lincoln/Vidler’s sale of 2,100 acre-feet of water resulted in an operating
cash flow to Vidler of approximately $10.8 million. Due to the income
recognized on these sales, we paid $24.2 million in estimated federal
and
state taxes in 2005.
|
In
all
three years, the principal uses of cash were the acquisition and development
of
water assets at Vidler, operating expenses at Vidler and Nevada Land, claims
payments by Physicians and Citation, and group overhead.
During
2007, investing activities used cash of $111.9 million, compared to $15.2
million of cash provided in 2006, and $69 million of cash used in 2005. These
totals included the investing activities of discontinued operations, which
used
cash of $1.9 million in 2006, and $1.8 million in 2005.
The
most
significant cash inflows and outflows from investing activities were:
·
|
in
2007, a $46.6 million net increase in fixed-income securities, which
represents the temporary investment of a portion of the proceeds
of the
February 2007 stock offering. The principal use of investing cash
was
$48.1 million in outlays for property and equipment, primarily related
to
the Fish Springs pipeline project. In addition, $16.2 million net
was
invested in stocks primarily in the insurance company portfolios;
|
·
|
in
2006, the proceeds from the
maturity or sale of fixed-income investments exceeded new purchases,
providing cash of $28.9 million, and proceeds from the sale of stocks
exceeded new purchases, providing $16.7 million in cash. The principal
use
of investing cash was $27.2 million in outlays for property and equipment,
primarily related to the Fish Springs pipeline project;
and
|
·
|
in
2005, the sale or maturity of
fixed-income securities provided cash of $23.6 million, but $78.7
million
of cash was used to purchase fixed-income securities. This principally
reflected the temporary investment of liquid funds from Vidler’s water
sales and the PICO's common
stock
offering in May 2005. Cash
outflows of $22.6 million for the purchase of stocks exceeded cash
inflows
of $12 million from the sale of stocks;
and
|
During
2007, financing activities provided cash of $104.6 million, compared to cash
provided of $73.4 million in 2006, and $17.5 million of cash provided in 2005.
These totals included discontinued operations, which used cash of $498,000
in
2006, and provided cash of $44,000 in 2005.
The
most
significant cash inflows and outflows from financing activities were:
·
|
in
2007, the sale of 2.8 million newly-issued shares of PICO common
stock at
$37 per share, for net cash proceeds of $100.1 million. In addition,
there
was a $4.4 million tax benefit related to the exercise of SAR;
|
·
|
in
2006, the sale of 2.6 million newly-issued shares of PICO common
stock at
$30 per share, for net cash proceeds of $73.9 million; and
|
·
|
in
2005, the sale of 905,000
newly-issued shares of PICO common
stock at $25 per share,
for net proceeds of $21.4 million, which was partially offset by
the
repayment of $3.9 million in principal on notes collateralized by
certain
of the farm properties which Vidler sold in the Harquahala Valley
Irrigation District.
|
During
2007, $2.5 million of the borrowings in Switzerland became due and
were re-financed with a due date in 2008.
We
believe that our cash and cash equivalent balances, short-term investments,
and
cash flows are adequate to satisfy cash requirements for at least the next
12
months. Further, we may issue debt or equity securities under our shelf
registration statement discussed below. Although we cannot accurately
predict the effect of inflation on our operations, we do not believe that
inflation has had, or in the foreseeable future is likely to have, a material
impact on our net revenues or results of operations.
39
Universal
Shelf Registration Statement
In
November 2007, we filed a universal shelf registration statement with the
SEC
for the periodic offering and sale of up to US$400 million of debt securities,
common stock, and warrants, or any combination thereof, in one or more
offerings, over a period of three years. The SEC declared the
registration statement effective in December 2007.
At
the
time of any such offering, we will establish the terms, including the pricing,
and describe how the proceeds from the sale of any such securities will be
used.
As of February 27, 2008, we have not issued any securities under the universal
shelf registration. While we have no current plans for the offer or
sale of any such securities, the universal shelf registration provides us
with
increased flexibility and control over the timing and size of any potential
financing in response to both market and strategic opportunities.
Share
Repurchase Program
In
October 2002, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $10
million of PICO common stock. The stock purchases may be made
from time to time at prevailing prices through open market or negotiated
transactions, depending on market conditions, and will be funded from available
cash.
As
of
December 31, 2007, no stock had been repurchased under this authorization.
Commitments
and Supplementary Disclosures
1.
|
At
December 31, 2007:
|
·
|
We
had no “off balance sheet” financing
arrangements.
|
·
|
We
have not provided any debt guarantees.
|
·
|
We
have no commitments to provide additional collateral for financing
arrangements. Our subsidiaries, Global Equity AG and PICO European
Holdings, LLC have Swiss Franc borrowings which partially finance
some of
their investments in European equities. The equities provide
collateral for the borrowings.
|
|
Aggregate
Contractual Obligations:
|
The
following table provides a summary of our contractual cash obligations and
other
commitments and contingencies as of December 31, 2007.
Contractual
Obligations
|
Payments
Due by Period
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Less
than 1 year
|
1
-3 years
|
3
-5 years
|
More
than 5 years
|
Total
|
||||||||||||||||
Borrowings
(including interest of $676,797)
|
$ | 696,797 | $ | 18,858,080 | $ | 19,554,877 | ||||||||||||||
Operating
leases
|
750,415 | 882,374 | $ | 427,942 | $ | 2,784,962 | 4,845,693 | |||||||||||||
Expected
claim payouts
|
6,824,076 | 12,879,732 | 7,516,995 | 5,155,215 | 32,376,018 | |||||||||||||||
Other
borrowings/obligations (primarily commitments for water purchases for
the Recharge Site and the amounts due under the Tribe settlement)
|
4,574,504 | 3,653,509 | 8,228,013 | |||||||||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 12,845,792 | $ | 36,273,695 | $ | 7,944,937 | $ | 7,940,177 | $ | 65,004,601 |
40
In
addition to the amounts
shown in the table above, $3.3 million
of unrecognized tax benefits
have been recorded as liabilities in accordance with FIN 48, and we are
uncertain as to if or when such amounts may be settled. Related to these
unrecognized tax benefits, we have also recorded a liability for
potential interest of $514,000 at December 31,
2007.
41
2.
|
Recent
Accounting
Pronouncements
|
SFAS
157 - In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements
(SFAS 157), which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring
fair value under GAAP, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements.
SFAS 157 applies to other accounting pronouncements that require or permit
fair value measurements. SFAS 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007, and for interim periods within those fiscal years.
Subsequently, in February 2008, the FASB issued two staff position on SFAS
157
(FSP FAS 157-1 and 157-2) which scope out the lease classification measurements
under FASB Statement No. 13 from SFAS 157 and delays the effective date on
SFAS
157 for all nonrecurring fair value measurements of nonfinancial assets and
nonfinancial liabilities until fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2008. We are currently evaluating the impact, if any, that SFAS 157
will have on our consolidated financial statements.
SFAS
158 - In September 2006,
the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158 (SFAS 158),
“Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement
Plans—an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R)”. SFAS 158
requires an employer to recognize the over-funded or under-funded status of
a
defined benefit postretirement plan (other than a multiemployer plan) as an
asset or liability in its statement of financial position and to recognize
changes in that funded status in the year in which the changes occur through
other comprehensive income of a business entity or changes in unrestricted
net
assets of a not-for-profit organization. This Statement also requires an
employer to measure the funded status of a plan as of the date of its year-end
statement of financial position. The adoption of SFAS 158 did not have a
material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
SFAS
159 - In February 2007,
the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 159 (SFAS 159),
“The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities—Including an amendment of FASB
Statement No. 115”. This Statement permits entities to choose to measure
many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value. This Statement
is effective for us on January 1, 2008. We are currently
evaluating
the impact of this pronouncement on the consolidated financial
statements.
SFAS
141(R) - In December
2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 141(R)
(SFAS 141(R)), “Business
Combinations”. SFAS 141(R)
replaces SFAS 141 and requires assets and liabilities acquired in a business
combination, contingent consideration and certain acquired contingencies to
be
measured at their fair values as of the date of acquisition. SFAS 141(R) also
requires that acquisition-related costs and restructuring costs be recognized
separately from the business combination. SFAS 141(R) is effective for us on
January 1, 2009. We are currently in the process of determining the effect,
if
any, that the adoption of SFAS 141(R) will have on our consolidated
financial statements.
SFAS
160 - In December 2007,
the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 160 (SFAS 160),
“Non-controlling Interests
in
Consolidated Financial Statements, an Amendment of ARB No.
51”. SFAS 160 clarifies the accounting for non-controlling
interests and establishes accounting and reporting standards for the
non-controlling interest in a subsidiary, including classification as a
component of equity. SFAS 160 is effective for us on January 1, 2009. We are
currently in the process of determining the effect, if any, that the adoption
of
SFAS 160 will have on our consolidated financial statements.
42
REGULATORY
INSURANCE DISCLOSURES
Liabilities
for Unpaid Loss and Loss Adjustment Expenses
Loss
reserves are estimates of what an insurer expects to pay claimants (“loss
expense”), as well as legal, investigative, and claims administrative costs
(“loss adjustment expenses”). PICO ’s insurance subsidiaries are required to
maintain reserves for the payment of estimated losses and loss adjustment
expenses for both reported claims, and claims where the event giving rise to
a
claim has occurred but the claim has not been reported to us yet (“IBNR”). The
ultimate liabilities may be materially higher or lower than our current reserve
estimates. Liabilities for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses are
estimated based on actual and industry experience, and assumptions and
projections as to claims frequency, claims severity, inflationary trends, and
settlement payments. These estimates may vary from the eventual outcome.
The
inherent uncertainty in estimating reserves is particularly extreme for lines
of
business in which both reported and paid losses develop over an extended period
of time. Several or more years may pass between the occurrence of the event
giving rise to a medical professional liability insurance or casualty loss
or
workers’ compensation claim, the reporting of the claim, and the final payment
of the claim, if any.
Reserves
for reported claims are established on a case-by-case basis (“case reserves”).
Loss and loss adjustment expense reserves for IBNR claims are estimated based
on
many variables, including historical and statistical information, inflation,
legal developments, the regulatory environment, benefit levels, economic
conditions, judicial administration of claims, general trends in claim severity
and frequency, medical costs, and other factors which could affect the adequacy
of loss reserves. We review and adjust our IBNR claims reserves regularly.
Physicians
and Citation had direct reserves (that is, liabilities for unpaid losses and
loss adjustment expenses before reinsurance reserves, which reduce our net
unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses) of $32.4 million at December 31,
2007, $41.1 million at December 31, 2006, and $46.6 million at December 31,
2005.
Claims
payments reduced reserves by $4.8 million in 2007, $3.5 million in 2006, and
$4.2 million in 2005.
Although
the reserves of each insurance company are certified annually by independent
actuaries as required by state law, significant fluctuations in reserve levels
can occur, based upon a number of variables used in actuarial projections of
ultimate incurred losses and loss adjustment expenses. Adjustments to prior
year
loss reserves, principally due to favorable reserve development, reduced
liabilities for unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses by $3.6 million in
2007, $3.2 million in 2006, and $3.7 million in 2005. See Note 11 of Notes
to
PICO ’s Consolidated Financial Statements, “Reserves for Unpaid Loss and Loss
Adjustment Expenses” and the Insurance Operations in “Run Off” portion of Item
7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operation” for additional information regarding reserve changes.
43
ANALYSIS
OF LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE DEVELOPMENT
The
following table presents the development of balance sheet liabilities for 1997
through 2007 for medical professional liability insurance, and all property
& casualty and workers’ compensation lines of business. The table
excludes reserves for other lines of business that Physicians ceased writing
in
1989, which are immaterial.
Until
2000, Physicians reduced its medical professional liability insurance reserves
by a discount to reflect the time value of money. The “Net liability
as originally estimated” line shows the estimated liability for unpaid losses
and loss adjustment expenses recorded at the balance sheet date, before
discounting in years prior to 2000, for each indicated year. The “Gross
liability as originally estimated” line represents the estimated amounts of
losses and loss adjustment expenses for claims arising in all prior years that
are unpaid at the balance sheet date, on an undiscounted basis, including IBNR
losses.
1997
|
1998
|
1999
|
2000
|
2001
|
||||||||||||||||
(In
Thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Net
liability as originally estimated:
|
$ | 110,931 | $ | 89,554 | $ | 88,112 | $ | 74,896 | $ | 54,022 | ||||||||||
Discount
|
9,159 | 8,515 | 7,521 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||||||||
Gross
liability as originally estimated:
|
120,090 | 98,069 | 95,633 | 74,896 | 54,022 | |||||||||||||||
Cumulative
payments as of:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
One
year later
|
37,043 | 23,696 | 22,636 | 9,767 | 7,210 | |||||||||||||||
Two
years later
|
57,622 | 41,789 | 31,987 | 16,946 | 13,426 | |||||||||||||||
Three
years later
|
73,096 | 50,968 | 39,150 | 23,162 | 19,939 | |||||||||||||||
Four
years later
|
82,249 | 58,129 | 45,140 | 29,675 | 24,166 | |||||||||||||||
Five
Years later
|
89,398 | 64,119 | 51,566 | 33,902 | 27,591 | |||||||||||||||
Six
years later
|
95,454 | 70,545 | 55,793 | 37,327 | 30,338 | |||||||||||||||
Seven
years later
|
101,877 | 74,772 | 59,218 | 40,074 | ||||||||||||||||
Eight
years later
|
106,088 | 78,198 | 61,965 | |||||||||||||||||
Nine
years later
|
109,485 | 76,395 | ||||||||||||||||||
Ten
years later
|
112,232 | |||||||||||||||||||
Liability
re-estimated as of:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
One
year later
|
129,225 | 114,347 | 96,727 | 63,672 | 52,115 | |||||||||||||||
Two
years later
|
145,543 | 115,539 | 85,786 | 61,832 | 56,782 | |||||||||||||||
Three
years later
|
146,618 | 104,689 | 83,763 | 66,494 | 56,540 | |||||||||||||||
Four
years later
|
135,930 | 102,704 | 88,460 | 66,275 | 52,784 | |||||||||||||||
Five
Years later
|
133,958 | 107,409 | 88,167 | 62,519 | 49,562 | |||||||||||||||
Six
years later
|
138,520 | 107,127 | 84,412 | 59,298 | 47,999 | |||||||||||||||
Seven
years later
|
138,386 | 103,374 | 81,200 | 57,736 | ||||||||||||||||
Eight
years later
|
134,637 | 100,153 | 79,639 | |||||||||||||||||
Nine
years later
|
131,379 | 98,606 | ||||||||||||||||||
Ten
years later
|
129,854 | |||||||||||||||||||
Cumulative
Redundancy (Deficiency)
|
$ | (9,764 | ) | $ | (537 | ) | $ | 15,994 | $ | 17,160 | $ | 6,023 |
44
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||||||||
2002
|
2003
|
2004
|
2005
|
2006
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||
(In
Thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||||
Net
liability as originally estimated:
|
$
|
44,905
|
$ |
43,357
|
$ |
36,602
|
$ |
28,618
|
$ |
21,972
|
$ |
15,623
|
||||||
Discount
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||
Gross
liability before discount as originally estimated:
|
44,905
|
43,357
|
36,602
|
28,618
|
21,972
|
15,623
|
||||||||||||
Cumulative
payments as of:
|
||||||||||||||||||
One
year later
|
6,216
|
6,513
|
4,227
|
3,425
|
2,747
|
|||||||||||||
Two
years later
|
12,729
|
10,740
|
7,652
|
6,172
|
||||||||||||||
Three
years later
|
16,956
|
14,165
|
10,399
|
|||||||||||||||
Four
years later
|
20,381
|
21,162
|
||||||||||||||||
Five
Years later
|
23,128
|
|||||||||||||||||
Six
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Seven
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Eight
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Nine
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Ten
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Liability
re-estimated as of:
|
||||||||||||||||||
One
year later
|
49,573
|
43,115
|
32,845
|
25,397
|
18,370
|
|||||||||||||
Two
years later
|
49,331
|
39,358
|
29,623
|
23,834
|
||||||||||||||
Three
years later
|
45,574
|
36,135
|
28,061
|
|||||||||||||||
Four
years later
|
42,352
|
34,574
|
||||||||||||||||
Five
Years later
|
40,790
|
|||||||||||||||||
Six
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Seven
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Eight
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Nine
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Ten
years later
|
||||||||||||||||||
Cumulative
Redundancy
|
$
|
4,115
|
$ |
8,783
|
$ |
8,541
|
$ |
4,784
|
$ |
3,602
|
||||||||
RECONCILIATION
TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
||||||||||||||||||
Gross
liability - end of year
|
$
|
44,476
|
$
|
38,944
|
$
|
32,276
|
||||||||||||
Reinsurance
recoverable
|
(15,858
|
)
|
(16,972
|
)
|
(16,653
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Net
liability - end of year
|
28,618
|
21,972
|
15,623
|
|||||||||||||||
Reinsurance
recoverable
|
15,858
|
16,972
|
16,653
|
|||||||||||||||
44,476
|
38,944
|
32,276
|
||||||||||||||||
Discontinued
personal lines insurance
|
132
|
101
|
100
|
|||||||||||||||
Liability
to California Insurance Guarantee Association for Workers' Compensation
payouts
|
2,038
|
2,038
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||
Balance
sheet liability
|
$
|
46,646
|
$
|
41,083
|
$
|
32,376
|
||||||||||||
Gross
re-estimated liability - latest
|
$
|
43,491
|
$
|
36,620
|
||||||||||||||
Re-estimated
recoverable - latest
|
(19,657
|
)
|
(18,250
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
Net
re-estimated liability - latest
|
$
|
23,834
|
$
|
18,370
|
||||||||||||||
Net
cumulative redundancy
|
$
|
4,784
|
$
|
3,602
|
The
decrease or increase recorded each year includes all changes in amounts for
prior periods made in the current year. For example, the amount of reserve
deficiency or redundancy related to a loss settled in 2001, but incurred in
1997, will be included in the decrease or increase amount for 1997, 1998, 1999,
and 2000. Conditions and trends that have led to changes in the liability in
the
past may not necessarily occur in the future. For example, in several different
years Physicians “commuted” (that is, canceled) reinsurance contracts, and
reversed the effect of the reinsurance contracts in its financial
statements. This significantly increased the estimate of net reserves
for prior years by reducing the amount of loss and loss adjustment expense
reserves recoverable from reinsurance for those years. Accordingly, future
increases or decreases cannot necessarily be extrapolated from this table.
The
development table above differs from the development tables displayed in the
Annual Statements of Physicians and Citation filed with the Departments of
Insurance in their home states. The development tables in the Annual Statements
(Schedule P, Part-2) are prepared on the statutory basis of accounting, and
exclude unallocated loss adjustment expenses, which are included in the
development table above, which is prepared on a GAAP basis.
45
Loss
Reserve Experience
The
inherent uncertainty in estimating loss reserves is greater for some lines
of
insurance than others, and depends on the length of the reporting “tail”
associated with the particular insurance product (that is, the lapse of time
between the occurrence of the event giving rise to a claim, and the reporting
of
the claim to the insurer), historical development in claims, the historical
information available during the estimation process, the of impact of changing
regulations and legal precedents on open claims, and reinsurance, among other
things. Since medical professional liability insurance, commercial casualty,
and
workers’ compensation claims may not be fully paid for many years, estimating
reserves for claims in these lines of business can be more uncertain than
estimating reserves in other lines of insurance. As a result, precise reserve
estimates cannot be made for several years after the accident year for which
reserves are initially established.
Our
insurance subsidiaries have established reserves based on actuarial
estimates that we believe are adequate to meet the ultimate cost of losses
arising from claims. However, it has been, and will continue to be,
necessary for our insurance subsidiaries to review and make appropriate
adjustments to reserves for claims and expenses for settling claims. Our
insurance companies have recorded income from favorable reserve development
in
2007, 2006, and 2005, however if our reserves prove to be inadequate in future,
our insurance companies would have to adjust their reserves and record a charge
against income, which could have an adverse effect on our statement of
operations and financial condition.
Reconciliation
of Unpaid Loss and Loss Adjustment Expenses
An
analysis of changes in the liability for unpaid losses and loss adjustment
expenses for 2007, 2006, and 2005 is set out in Note 11 of Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements, “Reserves for Unpaid Loss and Loss
Adjustment Expenses.”
Reinsurance
All
of
our insurance subsidiaries seek to minimize the losses which could arise from
significant individual claims and other events that cause unfavorable
underwriting results, by reinsuring certain levels of risk with other insurance
carriers. Various reinsurance treaties are in place to limit our exposure
levels. See Note 10 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements,
“Reinsurance.” In the event that reinsurers are unable to meet their obligations
under the reinsurance agreements, our insurance subsidiaries are contingently
liable in respect of the amounts covered by the reinsurance contracts.
Medical
Professional Liability Insurance through Physicians Insurance Company of Ohio
On
August
28, 1995, Physicians sold its professional liability insurance business and
related liability insurance business for physicians and other health care
providers to Mutual Assurance, Inc. (“Mutual Assurance”).
In
July
1995, Physicians and Mutual Assurance entered into a reinsurance treaty under
which Mutual Assurance agreed to assume all risks attaching after July 15,
1995
under medical professional liability insurance policies issued or renewed by
Physicians for physicians, surgeons, nurses, and other health care providers;
dental practitioner professional liability insurance policies including
corporate and professional premises liability coverage; and related commercial
general liability insurance policies issued by Physicians, net of applicable
reinsurance.
During
the last two and one-half accident years that Physicians wrote business (July
1,
1993 to December 31, 1995), Physicians ceded reinsurance contracts (that is,
transferred claims risk) to Odyssey America Reinsurance Corporation, a
subsidiary of Odyssey Re Holdings Corp. (rated “A” by A. M. Best Company), and
Medical Assurance Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Pro Assurance Group
(rated "A-" by Standard & Poor’s). Physicians retained all risks up to
$200,000 per occurrence. All risks above $200,000, up to policy limits of $5
million, were automatically transferred to the reinsurers, subject to the
specific terms and conditions of the various reinsurance agreements. Should
any
reinsurer be unable to meet its contractual obligations, Physicians remains
contingently liable to policyholders for the amounts covered by the reinsurance
contracts.
Prior
to
July 1, 1993, Physicians ceded a portion of the risk it wrote, under numerous
reinsurance treaties at various retentions and risk limits.
Property
and Casualty Insurance through Citation Insurance Company
For
the
property business, Citation has reinsurance providing coverage of $10.4 million,
for amounts in excess of $150,000 per claim. For the casualty business,
excluding umbrella coverage, Citation has reinsurance providing coverage of
$4.9
million, for amounts in excess of $150,000 per claim. Umbrella coverage was
reinsured for $9.9 million, for amounts in excess of $100,000 per claim. The
catastrophe treaties for 1998 and subsequent years provided coverage of 95%
of
$14 million, for amounts in excess of $1 million per claim. The reinsurance
was
placed with various reinsurers.
46
Citation’s
last property and casualty insurance policies expired in December 2001, so
it
does not require reinsurance from 2002 onwards for these lines of business.
If
the
reinsurers are “not admitted” for regulatory purposes, Citation has to maintain
sufficient collateral with approved financial institutions to secure ceded
paid
losses and outstanding reserves.
See
Note
10 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements,
“Reinsurance,” for reinsurance recoverable concentration for all
property and casualty lines of business as of December 31, 2007. In the event
that reinsurers are unable to meet their obligations under the reinsurance
agreements, Citation remains contingently liable for the amounts covered by
the
reinsurance contracts.
Workers’
Compensation Insurance through Citation Insurance Company
Claims
and Liabilities Related to the Insolvency of Fremont Indemnity Company
In
1997,
Citation ceded its California workers’ compensation insurance liabilities to a
subsidiary company, Citation National Insurance Company (“CNIC”), and sold CNIC
to Fremont on or about June 30, 1997. The transaction was approved by the
California Department of Insurance (the “California Department”), and all
administrative services relating to these liabilities were transferred to
Fremont. On or about December 31, 1997, with California Department approval,
CNIC merged with and into Fremont. Accordingly, from January 1, 1998, Fremont
was both the reinsurer and the administrator of the California workers’
compensation business ceded by Citation.
From
June
30, 1997 (the date on which Citation ceded its workers’ compensation insurance
liabilities) through July 2, 2003 (the date on which Fremont was placed in
liquidation), Fremont maintained a workers’ compensation insurance securities
deposit with the California Department for the benefit of claimants under
workers’ compensation insurance policies issued, or assumed, by
Fremont. After Fremont posted the portion of the total deposit
related to Citation’s insureds, Citation reduced its own workers’ compensation
insurance reserves by the amount of that deposit.
On
June
4, 2003, the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los
Angeles (the “Liquidation Court”) entered an Order of Conservation over Fremont,
and appointed the California Department of Insurance Commissioner (the
“Commissioner”) as the conservator. Under this order, the Commissioner was
authorized to take possession of all of Fremont’s assets, including its rights
in the deposit for Citation’s insureds. On July 2, 2003, the Liquidation Court
entered an Order appointing the Commissioner as the liquidator of Fremont’s
estate.
Since
Fremont had been placed in liquidation, Citation concluded that it was no longer
entitled to take a reinsurance credit for the deposit for Citation’s insureds
under the statutory basis of accounting. Consequently, Citation reversed the
$7.5 million reinsurance recoverable from Fremont in its June 30, 2003 financial
statements prepared on both the statutory and GAAP basis of accounting.
In
June
2004, Citation filed litigation against the California Department in the
Superior Court of California to recover its workers’ compensation trust deposits
held by Fremont prior to Fremont’s liquidation. In September 2004, the Superior
Court ruled against Citation’s action. As a result, Citation did not receive any
distribution from the California Insurance Guarantee Association, or Fremont,
and did not receive any credit for the deposit held by Fremont for Citation’s
insureds. Given the potential cost and the apparent limited prospect
of obtaining relief, Citation decided not to appeal.
Reinsurance
Agreements on Workers’ Compensation Insurance Liabilities
In
addition to the reinsurance agreements with Fremont described above, Citation
has additional reinsurance coverage for its workers’ compensation insurance
liabilities for the policy years 1986 to 1997 with General Reinsurance, a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. (“AAA”-rated by Standard
& Poor’s). The Company has retained the first $150,000 of risk on policies
issued in 1986 and 1987; $200,000 for policy years 1988 and 1989; and $250,000
for policy years 1990 through to 1997.
For
policy years 1983 to 1985, partial reinsurance exists and is administered
through Guy Carpenter Company as broker. These treaties are for losses in excess
of $75,000 for 1983 and 1984, and $100,000 for 1985. The subscriptions on these
treaties are for 30%, 35%, and 52.5% for the respective treaty years.
See
Note 10 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements,
“Reinsurance,” for the reinsurance recoverable concentration for
Citation’s workers’ compensation line of business as of December 31, 2007.
In the event that reinsurers are unable to meet their obligations under
the reinsurance agreements, Citation remains contingently liable for the amounts
covered by the reinsurance contracts.
47
Our
balance sheets include a significant amount of assets and liabilities whose
fair
value are subject to market risk. Market risk is the risk of loss arising from
adverse changes in market interest rates or prices. We currently have interest
rate risk as it relates to its fixed maturity securities, equity price risk
as
it relates to its marketable equity securities, and foreign currency risk as
it
relates to investments denominated in foreign currencies. Generally, our
borrowings are short to medium term in nature and therefore approximate fair
value. At December 31, 2007, we had $105.8 million of fixed maturity securities,
$259.7 million of marketable equity securities that were subject to market
risk,
of which $165 million were denominated in foreign currencies, primarily Swiss
francs. Our investment strategy is to manage the duration of the portfolio
relative to the duration of the liabilities while managing interest rate
risk.
We
use
two models to report the sensitivity of our assets and liabilities subject
to
the above risks. For fixed maturity securities we use duration modeling to
calculate changes in fair value. The model calculates the price of a fixed
maturity assuming a theoretical 100 basis point increase in interest rates
and
compares that to the actual quoted price of the security. At December 31, 2007,
the model calculated a loss in fair value of $2.7 million. For our marketable
equity securities, we use a hypothetical 20% decrease in the fair value to
analyze the sensitivity of our market risk assets and liabilities. For
investments denominated in foreign currencies, we use a hypothetical 20%
decrease in the local currency of that investment. The actual results may differ
from the hypothetical results assumed in this disclosure due to possible actions
we may take to mitigate adverse changes in fair value and because the fair
value
of securities may be affected by credit concerns of the issuer, prepayment
rates, liquidity, and other general market conditions. The hypothetical 20%
decrease in fair value of our marketable equity securities would produce a
loss
in fair value of $51.9 million that would impact the unrealized appreciation
in
shareholders’ equity, before the related tax effect. The hypothetical 20%
decrease in the local currency of our foreign denominated investments would
produce a loss of $30.3 million that would impact the foreign currency
translation in shareholders’ equity.
ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Our
financial statements as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 and for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2007 and the Report of the Registered
Independent Public Accounting Firm is included in this report as listed in
the
index.
SELECTED
QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA
Summarized
unaudited quarterly financial data (in thousands, except share and per share
amounts) for 2007 and 2006 are shown below. In management’s opinion, the interim
financial statements from which the following data has been derived contain
all
adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of results for such interim
periods and are of a normal recurring nature.
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||||||||||
March
31,
|
June
30,
|
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
|||||||||||||
2007
|
2007
|
2007
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||
Net
investment income and net realized gain
|
$ | 5,217 | $ | 5,940 | $ | 3,333 | $ | 5 , 295 | ||||||||
Sale
of real estate and water assets
|
2,309 | 2,117 | 1,477 | 3 , 592 | ||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
7,815 | 8,314 | 8,415 | 9 , 486 | ||||||||||||
Gross
profit
|
1,514 | 1,413 | 1,051 | 2 , 805 | ||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
521 | (3,713 | ) | 474 | 1 , 449 | |||||||||||
Basic:
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss) per share
|
$ | 0.03 | $ | (0.20 | ) | $ | 0.03 | $ | 0. 08 | |||||||
Diluted:
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss) per share
|
$ | 0.03 | $ | (0.20 | ) | $ | 0.02 | $ | 0. 08 | |||||||
Basic
weighted average common and equivalent shares outstanding
|
16,882,284 | 18,769,015 | 18,883,737 |
18,833,737
|
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||||||||||
March
31,
|
June
30,
|
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
|||||||||||||
2006
|
2006
|
2006
|
2006
|
|||||||||||||
Net
investment income and net realized gain
|
$ | 16,758 | $ | 5,119 | $ | 7,215 | $ | 10,518 | ||||||||
Sale
of land and water rights
|
1,256 | 3,833 | 28,311 | 8,109 | ||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
18,247 | 9,548 | 36,199 | 18,730 | ||||||||||||
Gross
profit
|
876 | 2,531 | 22,494 | 5,331 | ||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
7,218 | 382 | 11,830 | 9,813 | ||||||||||||
Basic
and Diluted:
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss) per share
|
$ | 0.54 | $ | 0.03 | $ | 0.74 | $ | 0.62 | ||||||||
Weighted
average common and equivalent shares outstanding
|
13,271,440 | 14,927,125 | 15,880,458 | 15,880,458 |
48
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AS
OF DECEMBER 31, 2007 AND 2006
AND
FOR EACH OF THE
THREE
YEARS IN THE PERIOD
ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2007
INDEX
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
50
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2007 and 2006
|
51
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2007,
2006 and
2005
|
52
|
Consolidated
Statements of Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2007,
2006, and 2005
|
53-55
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2007,
2006 and
2005
|
56
|
57-79
|
49
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To
the
Board of Directors and Stockholders of PICO Holdings, Inc.
PICO
Holdings, Inc.
La
Jolla,
CA
We
have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of PICO Holdings, Inc.
and
subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders’ equity and comprehensive
income, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December
31, 2007. These consolidated financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our
audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that
we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
the
financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures
in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that
our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In
our
opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial position of PICO Holdings, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period
ended
December 31, 2007, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America.
As
discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company
adopted Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty
in
Income Taxes - an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109, effective
January 1, 2007, and FASB Statement No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment,
effective January
1, 2006.
We
have
also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the Company's internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission and our report, dated February 27, 2008, expressed an
unqualified opinion on the Company's internal control over financial
reporting.
/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
San
Diego, CA
February
27, 2008
50
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
December
31, 2007 and 2006
ASSETS |
2007
|
2006
|
||||||
Available
for Sale Investments (Note 3)
|
||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
$ | 105,780,499 | $ | 63,483,271 | ||||
Equity
securities
|
259,743,145 | 208,478,670 | ||||||
Total
investments
|
365,523,644 | 271,961,941 | ||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
70,791,025 | 136,621,578 | ||||||
Notes
and other receivables, net (Note 6)
|
17,151,065 | 17,177,827 | ||||||
Reinsurance
receivables (Note 10)
|
16,887,953 | 17,290,039 | ||||||
Real
estate and water assets (Note 5)
|
200,605,792 | 102,538,859 | ||||||
Property
and equipment, net (Note 8)
|
1,212,394 | 518,564 | ||||||
Other
assets
|
4,170,407 | 2,934,131 | ||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 676,342,280 | $ | 549,042,939 |
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY | ||||||||
Policy
liabilities and accruals:
|
||||||||
Unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expenses (Note 11)
|
$ | 32,376,018 | $ | 41,083,301 | ||||
Deferred
compensation (Note 1)
|
52,546,234 | 49,776,043 | ||||||
Other
liabilities
|
29,016,217 | 22,282,989 | ||||||
Borrowings
(Note 4)
|
18,878,080 | 12,720,391 | ||||||
Net
deferred income taxes (Note 7)
|
17,675,162 | 17,952,916 | ||||||
Total
liabilities
|
150,491,711 | 143,815,640 | ||||||
Commitments
and Contingencies (Notes 10 - 15)
|
||||||||
Shareholders' Equity | ||||||||
Common
stock, $.001 par value; authorized 100,000,000; 23,259,367 issued
and
outstanding at December 31, 2007 and 20,306,923 at December 31,
2006
|
23,259 | 20,307 | ||||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
435,235,358 | 331,582,308 | ||||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive income (Note 1)
|
79,469,438 | 60,950,679 | ||||||
Retained
earnings
|
89,405,743 | 90,968,815 | ||||||
604,133,798 | 483,522,109 | |||||||
Less
treasury stock, at cost (common shares: 4,425,630 in 2007 and 4,426,465
in
2006)
|
(78,283,229 | ) | (78,294,810 | ) | ||||
Total
shareholders' equity (Note 9)
|
525,850,569 | 405,227,299 | ||||||
Total
liabilities and shareholders' equity
|
$ | 676,342,280 | $ | 549,042,939 |
51
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Sale
of real estate and water assets
|
$ | 9,496,156 | $ | 41,509,116 | $ | 124,984,427 | ||||||
Net
investment income (Note 3)
|
17,039,800 | 13,556,192 | 8,195,173 | |||||||||
Net
realized gain on investments (Note 3)
|
2,747,958 | 26,053,077 | 7,721,774 | |||||||||
Other
(principally gain on non-monetary exchange in 2007, see Note 1)
|
4,644,834 | 1,604,859 | 1,210,320 | |||||||||
Total
revenues
|
33,928,748 | 82,723,244 | 142,111,694 | |||||||||
Costs
and expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Operating
and other costs
|
31,725,964 | 23,581,759 | 56,914,672 | |||||||||
Cost
of real estate and water assets sold
|
2,684,183 | 10,276,789 | 46,530,763 | |||||||||
Loss
and loss adjustment recovery (Note 11)
|
(3,601,091 | ) | (3,224,401 | ) | (3,664,832 | ) | ||||||
Interest
expense
|
661,314 | |||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,106,027 | 1,222,351 | 1,344,371 | |||||||||
Total
costs and expenses
|
31,915,083 | 31,856,498 | 101,786,288 | |||||||||
Income
before income taxes and minority interest
|
2,013,665 | 50,866,746 | 40,325,406 | |||||||||
Provision
for federal, foreign and state income taxes (Note 7)
|
3,535,699 | 19,390,374 | 18,594,623 | |||||||||
Income
(loss) before minority interest
|
(1,522,034 | ) | 31,476,372 | 21,730,783 | ||||||||
Minority
interest in loss of subsidiaries
|
252,307 | 34,252 | 536,120 | |||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
(1,269,727 | ) | 31,510,624 | 22,266,903 | ||||||||
Loss
from discontinued operations, net of tax (Note 2)
|
(10,256,984 | ) | (7,315,964 | ) | ||||||||
Minority
interest in loss of discontinued operations
|
705,702 | |||||||||||
Gain
on disposal of discontinued operations, net
|
7,989,315 | 545,000 | ||||||||||
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
(2,267,669 | ) | (6,065,262 | ) | ||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ | (1,269,727 | ) | $ | 29,242,955 | $ | 16,201,641 | |||||
Net
income (loss) per common share – basic and diluted:
|
||||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | 2.10 | $ | 1.72 | |||||
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
(0.15 | ) | (0.47 | ) | ||||||||
Net
income (loss) per common share
|
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | 1.95 | $ | 1.25 | |||||
Weighted
average shares outstanding
|
18,321,449 | 14,994,947 | 12,959,029 |
52
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
Accumulated
Other
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
Income
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional
|
Net
Unrealized
|
Foreign
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Appreciation
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common
|
Paid-In
|
Retained
|
on
|
Currency
|
Treasury
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
Investments
|
Translation
|
Stock
|
Total
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance,
January 1, 2005
|
$ | 16,802 | $ | 236,089,222 | $ | 45,524,219 | $ | 41,947,162 | $ | (5,221,462 | ) | $ | (78,426,645 | ) | $ | 239,929,298 | ||||||||||||
Comprehensive
Income for 2005
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
16,201,641 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
unrealized appreciation on investments net of deferred tax of
$14.6
million and reclassification adjustment of $5.2 million
|
24,177,250 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign
currency translation
|
(810,488 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total
Comprehensive Income
|
39,568,403 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisition
of treasury stock for deferred compensation plans
|
(839 | ) | (839 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common
stock offering, net of expenses of $1.2 million
|
905 | 21,377,190 | 21,378,095 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2005
|
$ | 17,707 | $ | 257,466,412 | $ | 61,725,860 | $ | 66,124,412 | $ | (6,031,950 | ) | $ | (78,427,484 | ) | $ | 300,874,957 |
53
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
Accumulated
Other
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
Income
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional
|
Net
Unrealized
|
Foreign
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common
|
Paid-In
|
Retained
|
Appreciation
|
Currency
|
Treasury
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
on
Investments
|
Translation
|
Stock
|
Total
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2005
|
$ | 17,707 | $ | 257,466,412 | $ | 61,725,860 | $ | 66,124,412 | $ | (6,031,950 | ) | $ | (78,427,484 | ) | $ | 300,874,957 | ||||||||||||
Comprehensive
Income for 2006
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
29,242,955 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
unrealized appreciation on investments net of deferred tax of $1.5
million
and reclassification adjustment of $10.7 million
|
69,016 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign
currency translation
|
789,201 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total
Comprehensive Income
|
30,101,172 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Disposition
of treasury stock from deferred compensation plans
|
173,352 | 132,674 | 306,026 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common
stock offering, net of expenses of $4.1 million
|
2,600 | 73,942,544 | 73,945,144 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2006
|
$ | 20,307 | $ | 331,582,308 | $ | 90,968,815 | $ | 66,193,428 | $ | (5,242,749 | ) | $ | (78,294,810 | ) | $ | 405,227,299 |
54
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
Accumulated
Other
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
Income
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional
|
Net
Unrealized
|
Foreign
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common
|
Paid-In
|
Retained
|
Appreciation
|
Currency
|
Treasury
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
on
Investments
|
Translation
|
Stock
|
Total
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2006
|
$ | 20,307 | $ | 331,582,308 | $ | 90,968,815 | $ | 66,193,428 | $ | (5,242,749 | ) | $ | (78,294,810 | ) | $ | 405,227,299 | ||||||||||||
Impact
of adopting FASB Interpretation No. 48
|
(293,345 | ) | (293,345 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
Income for 2007
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
(1,269,727 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
unrealized appreciation on investments net of deferred tax of $7.7
million
and reclassification adjustment of $2.5 million
|
16,263,071 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign
currency translation
|
2,255,688 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total
Comprehensive Income
|
17,249,032 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
based compensation expense
|
4,468,334 | 4,468,334 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Disposition
of treasury stock from deferred compensation plans
|
17,811 | 11,581 | 29,392 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise
of stock-settled stock appreciation rights, net of excess tax benefits
of
$4.4 million.
|
129 | (972,207 | ) | (972,078 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Common
stock offering, net of expenses of $4.3 million
|
2,823 | 100,139,112 | 100,141,935 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2007
|
$ | 23,259 | $ | 435,235,358 | $ | 89,405,743 | $ | 82,456,499 | $ | (2,987,061 | ) | $ | (78,283,229 | ) | $ | 525,850,569 |
55
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ | (1,269,727 | ) | $ | 29,242,955 | $ | 16,201,641 | |||||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in)
operating
activities, net of acquisitions:
|
||||||||||||
Provision
(benefit) for deferred taxes
|
(6,592,013 | ) | 4,286,402 | (6,682,144 | ) | |||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,634,698 | 2,303,827 | 2,216,934 | |||||||||
Stock
based compensation expense
|
4,468,334 | |||||||||||
Gain
on sale of investments
|
(2,747,958 | ) | (26,053,077 | ) | (7,721,774 | ) | ||||||
Gain
on non-monetary exchange
|
(3,466,402 | ) | ||||||||||
Loss
from discontinued operations, net
|
2,267,669 | 6,065,662 | ||||||||||
Gain
on retirement of minority interest in V&B, LLC.
|
(322,048 | ) | ||||||||||
Provision
for uncollectible accounts
|
278,664 | |||||||||||
Minority
interest
|
(252,307 | ) | (34,252 | ) | (536,120 | ) | ||||||
Changes
in assets and liabilities, net of effects of acquisitions:
|
||||||||||||
Notes
and other receivables
|
25,633 | (3,045,752 | ) | (416,856 | ) | |||||||
Other
liabilities
|
(10,881,075 | ) | 502,669 | 7,525,944 | ||||||||
Other
assets
|
(1,073,719 | ) | 816,221 | 3,759,607 | ||||||||
Real
estate and water assets
|
(30,596,350 | ) | 4,277,939 | 35,659,806 | ||||||||
Current
income tax liability
|
3,923,893 | 4,636,472 | 824,547 | |||||||||
Excess tax benefits from stock based payment arrangements | (4,426,789 | ) | ||||||||||
Reinsurance
receivable
|
402,086 | (1,103,934 | ) | 971,224 | ||||||||
Reinsurance
payable
|
(317,431 | ) | (7,650 | ) | (347,943 | ) | ||||||
SAR
payable and deferred compensation
|
2,770,191 | 7,344,777 | 24,275,483 | |||||||||
Unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
(8,707,283 | ) | (5,563,605 | ) | (9,347,469 | ) | ||||||
All
other operating activities
|
488,319 | (244,983 | ) | (5,488 | ) | |||||||
Cash
provided by (used in) operating activities - continuing operations
|
(56,617,900 | ) | 19,582,294 | 72,443,054 | ||||||||
Cash
used by operating activities - discontinued operations
|
(6,992,994 | ) | (4,398,197 | ) | ||||||||
Cash
provided by (used in) operating activities
|
(56,617,900 | ) | 12,589,300 | 68,044,857 | ||||||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||||
Proceeds
from the sale of available for sale investments:
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
2,703,700 | 13,757,855 | ||||||||||
Equity
securities
|
10,410,021 | 47,339,058 | 11,993,556 | |||||||||
Proceeds
from maturity of available for sale investments
|
83,603,560 | 73,408,060 | 9,822,000 | |||||||||
Purchases
of available for sale investments:
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
(130,220,057 | ) | (47,253,484 | ) | (78,685,009 | ) | ||||||
Equity
securities
|
(26,628,779 | ) | (30,633,915 | ) | (22,552,436 | ) | ||||||
Purchases
of minority interest in subsidiaries
|
(700,000 | ) | ||||||||||
Real
estate and water asset capital expenditure
|
(48,141,339 | ) | (27,606,419 | ) | (1,456,843 | ) | ||||||
All
other investing activities
|
(959,092 | ) | (120,568 | ) | (73,013 | ) | ||||||
Cash
provided by (used in) investing activities - continuing operations
|
(111,935,686 | ) | 17,136,432 | (67,193,890 | ) | |||||||
Cash
used in investing activities - discontinued operations
|
(1,936,237 | ) | (1,779,446 | ) | ||||||||
Cash
provided by (used in) investing activities
|
(111,935,686 | ) | 15,200,195 | (68,973,336 | ) | |||||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||||
Proceeds
from issuance of common stock, net of expenses
|
100,141,935 | 73,945,144 | 21,378,095 | |||||||||
Repayment
of bank and other borrowings
|
(37,930 | ) | (3,915,176 | ) | ||||||||
Excess
tax benefits from stock based payment arrangements
|
4,426,789 | |||||||||||
Sale
(purchase) of PICO stock (for deferred compensation plans)
|
29,392 | (839 | ) | |||||||||
Cash
provided by financing activities - continuing operations
|
104,598,116 | 73,907,214 | 17,462,080 | |||||||||
Cash
provided by (used in) financing activities - discontinued operations
|
(498,272 | ) | 43,880 | |||||||||
Cash
provided by financing activities
|
104,598,116 | 73,408,942 | 17,505,960 | |||||||||
Effect
of exchange rate changes on cash
|
(1,875,083 | ) | (2,371,275 | ) | 3,809,797 | |||||||
Net
increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
(65,830,553 | ) | 98,827,162 | 20,387,278 | ||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of year
|
136,621,578 | 37,794,416 | 17,407,138 | |||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, end of year
|
70,791,025 | 136,621,578 | 37,794,416 | |||||||||
Less
cash and cash equivalents of discontinued operations at end of
year
|
302,171 | |||||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents of continuing operations end of year
|
70,791,025 | 136,621,578 | 37,492,245 | |||||||||
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
||||||||||||
Cash
paid during the year for:
|
||||||||||||
Interest
expense, net of amounts capitalized
|
$ | 692,615 | ||||||||||
Federal,
state and foreign income taxes, net of refunds
|
$ | 6,229,674 | $ | 10,515,540 | $ | 25,487,931 | ||||||
Non-cash
investing and financing activities:
|
||||||||||||
Distribution
of treasury stock to settle deferred compensation
liability
|
$ | 306,027 | ||||||||||
Change
in capitalized costs included in other liabilities
|
$ | 11,661,006 | $ | 2,944,637 | ||||||||
Mortgage
incurred to purchase real estate
|
$ | 5,180,000 | ||||||||||
Accrued
withholding taxes recorded on additional paid in capital related
to stock
appreciation rights exercised
|
$ | 5,398,767 |
56
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
_______________
1.
|
NATURE
OF OPERATIONS AND SIGNIFICANT
ACCOUNTING
POLICIES:
|
Organization
and Operations:
PICO
Holdings, Inc., together with its subsidiaries (collectively, “PICO” or “the
Company”), is a diversified holding company.
Currently
PICO’s major activities include:
|
·
|
Owning
and developing water
resources and water storage operations in the southwestern United States.
|
|
·
|
Owning
and developing real estate
and the related mineral rights and water rights primarily in Nevada and
California.
|
|
·
|
Acquiring
and financing businesses
and,
|
|
·
|
“Running
off” insurance loss
reserves.
|
PICO
was
incorporated in 1981 and began operations in 1982.
The
following are the Company’s significant operating subsidiaries as of December
31, 2007:
Vidler
Water Company, Inc. (“Vidler”). Vidler is a wholly owned Nevada corporation.
Vidler’s business involves identifying end users, namely water utilities,
municipalities or developers, in the Southwestern United States, who
require water, and then locating a source and supplying the demand, either
by
utilizing the company’s own assets or securing other sources of supply. These
assets comprise water resources in the states of Colorado, Arizona, Idaho and
Nevada, and water storage facilities in Arizona and California.
Nevada
Land & Resource Company, LLC (“Nevada Land”). Nevada Land is a Nevada
Limited Liability Company, which owns approximately 460,000 acres of real
estate in northern Nevada. Nevada Land’s business includes selling and
developing real estate and water rights, and leasing property.
Citation
Insurance Company (“Citation”). Citation is a California-domiciled insurance
company licensed to write commercial property and casualty insurance in Arizona,
California, Colorado, Nevada, Hawaii, New Mexico and Utah. Citation ceased
writing premiums in December 2000, and is now “running off” the loss reserves
from its existing property and casualty and workers’ compensation lines of
business. This means that it is handling claims arising from historical
business, and selling investments when funds are needed to pay claims.
Physicians
Insurance Company of Ohio (“Physicians”). Prior to selling its book of medical
professional liability (“MPL”) insurance business in 1995, Physicians engaged in
providing MPL insurance coverage to physicians and surgeons, primarily in Ohio.
On August 28, 1995, Physicians entered into an agreement with Mutual Assurance,
Inc. pursuant to which Physicians sold its recurring MPL insurance business
to
Mutual. Physicians is in “run off.” This means that it is handling claims
arising from historical business, and selling investments when funds are needed
to pay claims.
Global
Equity AG, a wholly owned Swiss Company, holds 23% of the voting interest in
Jungfraubahn Holding AG (“Jungfraubahn”). Jungfraubahn is a Swiss
public company whose shares trade on the SWX Swiss Exchange. The company
operates railway and related tourism and transport activities in the Swiss
Alps.
Principles
of Consolidation:
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the
Company and its majority-owned and controlled subsidiaries, and have been
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America (“US GAAP”). Intercompany balances and transactions
have been eliminated.
Use
of Estimates in Preparation of Financial Statements:
The
preparation of financial statements in accordance with US GAAP requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts
of
assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date
of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses
for
each reporting period. The significant estimates made in the preparation of
the
Company’s consolidated financial statements relate to the assessment of other
than temporary impairment and application of the equity method of accounting,
unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses, reinsurance receivables, real estate
and water assets, deferred income taxes, stock-based compensation and contingent
liabilities. While management believes that the carrying value of such assets
and liabilities are appropriate as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, it is
reasonably possible that actual results could differ from the estimates upon
which the carrying values were based.
Revenue
Recognition:
Sale
of Real Estate and Water Assets
Revenue
on the sale of real estate and water assets conforms with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 66, “Accounting for Sales of Real Estate,” and
is recognized in full when (a) there is a legally binding sale contract; (b)
the
profit is determinable (that is, the collectibility of the sales price is
reasonably assured, or any amount that will not be collectible can be
estimated); (c) the earnings process is virtually complete (that is, the Company
is not obligated to perform significant activities after the sale to earn the
profit, meaning the Company has transferred all risks and rewards to the buyer);
and (d) the buyer’s initial and continuing investment is adequate to demonstrate
a commitment to pay for the property. If these conditions are not met, the
Company records the cash received as a deposit until the conditions to recognize
full profit are met.
Other
Revenues:
Included
in other revenues for the year ended December 31, 2007 is a $3.5 million gain
recorded as a result of a non-monetary exchange transaction whereby the Company
released and terminated legal use restrictions on real estate previously sold,
in exchange for real estate and water assets.
Investments:
The
Company’s investment portfolio at December 31, 2007 and 2006 is comprised of
investments with fixed maturities, including U.S. government bonds, government
sponsored enterprise bonds, and investment-grade corporate bonds; equity
securities, including common stock and common stock purchase warrants.
The
Company applies the provisions of SFAS No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments
in
Debt and Equity Securities.” The Company classifies the majority of
its investments as available for sale. Unrealized investment gains or
losses on securities available for sale are recorded directly to shareholders’
equity as accumulated other comprehensive income, or loss, net of applicable
tax
effects.
The
Company also applies the provisions of Accounting Principles Board (“APB”)
Opinion No. 18, “The Equity
Method of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock”, for investments
where management determines the Company has the ability to exercise significant
influence over the operating and financial policies of the investee. The
Company’s share of the income or loss of the investee is included in the
consolidated statement of operations and any dividends are recorded as a
reduction in the carrying value of the investment.
57
The
Company regularly and methodically reviews the carrying value of its investments
for impairment. When there is a decline in value of an investment to below
cost
that is deemed other-than-temporary, a loss is recorded within net realized
gains or losses in the consolidated statement of operations and the security
is
written down to its fair value. Impairment charges of $2 million, $459,000
and
$142,000 are included in realized losses for the years ended December 31, 2007
,
2006 and 2005, respectively, related to various securities where the unrealized
losses had been deemed other-than-temporary. If a security is impaired and
continues to decline in value, additional impairment charges are recorded in
the
period of the decline if deemed other-than-temporary. Subsequent recoveries
of
such securities are reported as an unrealized gain and part of other
comprehensive results in future periods. Any subsequent realized gains on
impaired securities are recorded only when sold.
Net
investment income includes amortization of premium and accretion of discount
on
the level yield method relating to bonds acquired at other than par value.
Realized investment gains and losses are included in revenues. The cost of
any
equity security sold is determined using an average cost basis and for bonds,
specific identification. Sales and purchases of investments are recorded on
the
trade date.
The
Company has subsidiaries and makes acquisitions in the U.S. and abroad.
Approximately $165 million and $116.6 million of the Company’s investments at
December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, were invested internationally. The
Company’s most significant foreign currency exposure is in Swiss francs.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents:
Cash
and
cash equivalents include highly liquid instruments purchased with original
maturities of three months or less.
Real
Estate and Water Assets:
Real
estate, water rights, water storage, and real estate improvements are carried
at
cost. Water rights consist of various water interests acquired independently
or
in conjunction with the acquisition of real properties. Water rights are stated
at cost and, when applicable, consist of an allocation of the original purchase
price between water rights and other assets acquired based on their relative
fair values. In addition, costs directly related to the acquisition of water
rights are capitalized. This cost includes, when applicable, the allocation
of
the original purchase price and other costs directly related to acquisition,
and
any costs incurred to get the property ready for its intended use. Amortization
of real estate improvements is computed on the straight-line method over the
estimated useful lives of the improvements ranging from 5 to 15 years.
Notes
and Other Receivables:
Notes
and
other receivables primarily consist of installment notes from the sale of real
estate and water assets. These notes generally have terms ranging from three
to
ten years, with interest rates from 8% to 10%. The Company records a provision
for doubtful accounts to allow for any specific accounts which may be
unrecoverable and is based upon an analysis of the Company's prior collection
experience, customer creditworthiness, and current economic trends. The terms
of
the note on the majority of sale transactions allow the Company to recover
the
underlying property if and when a buyer defaults. For the three years ended
December 31, 2007, no significant provision was necessary.
Property
and Equipment:
Property
and equipment are carried at cost, net of accumulated depreciation. Depreciation
is computed on the straight-line method over the estimated lives of the assets.
Buildings and leasehold improvements are depreciated over the shorter of the
useful life or lease term and range from 15-20 years, office furniture and
fixtures are generally depreciated over seven years, and computer equipment
is
depreciated over three years. Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense
as
incurred, while significant improvements are capitalized. Gains or losses on
the
sale of property and equipment are included in other revenues.
Intangibles:
The
Company applies the provisions of SFAS No. 141, “Business Combinations,” and
SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets.” Consequently, intangible
assets that have indefinite useful lives are not amortized but rather are tested
at least annually, or on an interim basis if an event occurs or circumstances
change that would reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying
value.
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets:
The
Company applies the provisions of SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.” As such, the Company records an impairment
charge when the condition exists where the carrying amount of a long-lived
asset
(asset group) is not recoverable and exceeds its fair value. Impairment of
long-lived assets is triggered when the estimated future undiscounted cash
flows, excluding interest charges, for the lowest level for which there are
identifiable cash flows that are independent of the cash flows of other groups
of assets do not exceed the carrying amount. The Company prepares and analyzes
cash flows at appropriate levels of grouped assets under SFAS No. 144. If the
events or circumstances indicate that the remaining balance may be impaired,
such impairment will be measured based upon the difference between the carrying
amount and the fair value of such assets determined using the estimated future
discounted cash flows, excluding interest charges, generated from the use and
ultimate disposition of the respective long-lived asset.
58
Reinsurance:
The
Company records all reinsurance assets and liabilities on the gross basis,
including amounts due from reinsurers and amounts paid to reinsurers relating
to
the unexpired portion of reinsured contracts (prepaid reinsurance premiums).
Unpaid
Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses:
Reserves
for MPL and property and casualty and workers’ compensation insurance unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expenses include amounts determined on the basis
of
actuarial estimates of ultimate claim settlements, which include estimates
of
individual reported claims and estimates of incurred but not reported claims.
The methods of making such estimates and for establishing the resulting
liabilities are continually reviewed and updated based on current circumstances,
and any adjustments are reflected in current operations.
Accounting
for Income Taxes:
The
Company’s provision for income tax expense includes federal, state, local and
foreign income taxes currently payable and those deferred because of temporary
differences between the income tax and financial reporting bases of the assets
and liabilities. The liability method of accounting for income taxes also
requires the Company to reflect the effect of a tax rate change on accumulated
deferred income taxes in income in the period in which the change is enacted.
In
assessing the realization of deferred income taxes, management considers whether
it is more likely than not that any deferred income tax assets will be realized.
The ultimate realization of deferred income tax assets is dependent upon the
generation of future taxable income during the period in which temporary
differences become deductible. If it is more likely than not that some or all
of
the deferred income tax assets will not be realized a valuation allowance is
recorded.
Effective
January 1, 2007 the Company adopted Financial Interpretation No. 48
("FIN 48"), “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” which clarifies the
accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in the financial
statements in accordance with SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” As a
result of the adoption of FIN 48, the Company recognized a $293,000
increase in the liability for unrecognized income tax benefits through opening
retained earnings. FIN No. 48 provides that a tax benefit from an uncertain
tax
position may be recognized when it is more likely than not that the position
will be sustained upon examination, including resolutions of any related appeals
or litigation processes, based on the technical merits. Income tax positions
must meet a more-likely-than-not recognition threshold at the effective date
to
be recognized upon the adoption of FIN 48 and in subsequent
periods. This interpretation also provides guidance on measurement,
de-recognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim
periods, disclosure and transition.
The
Company recognizes interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits
within the income tax expense line in the accompanying consolidated statement
of
operations. Accrued interest and penalties are included within the
related tax liability.
Earnings per Share:
Basic
earnings or loss per share is computed by dividing net earnings by the weighted
average number of shares outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings or
loss
per share is computed similarly to basic earnings or loss per share except
the
weighted average shares outstanding are increased to include additional shares
from the assumed exercise of any common stock equivalents using the treasury
method, if dilutive. The Company's SARs are considered common stock equivalents
for this purpose. The number of additional shares is calculated by
assuming that the SARs were exercised, and that the proceeds were used to
acquire shares of common stock at the average market price during the
period.
For
the
three years ended December 31, 2007 the Company’s stock-settled SARs were
excluded from the diluted per share calculation because their effect on the
income or loss per share was anti-dilutive.
59
Stock-Based
Compensation:
On
January 1, 2006, PICO adopted Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised
2004), “Share-Based Payment” (“FAS 123(R)”) using the modified prospective
method and the alternative transition method for accounting for excess tax
benefits, which requires the application of the accounting standard as of
January 1, 2006. In accordance with the modified prospective method, the
consolidated financial statements for prior periods have not been restated
to
reflect, and do not include, the impact of FAS 123(R). However, as PICO had
no
unvested stock options outstanding as of January 1, 2006, the adoption of FAS
123(R) had no impact on the accompanying condensed consolidated financial
statements.
At
December 31, 2007 the Company had one stock-based payment arrangement
outstanding:
The
PICO
Holdings, Inc. 2005 Long Term
Incentive Plan (the "2005 Plan"). The 2005 Plan provides for the grant or
award of various equity incentives to PICO employees, non-employee directors
and
consultants. A total of 2,654,000 shares of common stock are issuable under
the
2005 Plan and it provides for the issuance of incentive stock options,
non-statutory stock options, free-standing stock-settled stock appreciation
rights (“SAR”), restricted stock awards, performance shares, performance units,
restricted stock units, deferred compensation awards and other stock-based
awards. The Plan allows for broker assisted cashless exercises and
net-settlement of income taxes and employee withholding taxes
required. Upon exercise, the employee will receive newly issued
shares of PICO common stock equal to the in-the-money value of the award,
less applicable US Federal, state and local withholding and income
taxes.
Stock-Settled
Stock Appreciation
Rights Granted in 2007:
During
2007, the Company granted 659,409 SAR in five separate grants to various members
of management. Four of the awards totaling 486,470 SAR were granted
on August 2, 2007 at a strike price equal to the closing market price of PICO
common stock on that day of $42.71. These awards vested 33% on the
date of grant and vest one third on each anniversary thereafter. The
other award of 172,939 SAR was granted on September 4, 2007 with a strike price
equal to the closing market price of PICO common stock on that day of $44.69.
This award vests 33% on September 4, 2008 and one third on each anniversary
thereafter.
Compensation
cost recognized under the 2005 Plan for these awards for the year ended December
31, 2007 was $4.5 million. The total income tax benefit recognized in
the statement of operations was $1.6 million. No such compensation cost or
income tax benefit was recorded in the comparable 2006 or 2005 period as no
new
grants were issued or vested during that period.
The
fair
value of each award is estimated on the date of grant using a Black-Scholes
option pricing model that uses various assumptions and estimates to calculate
a
fair value as described below.
Expected
volatility is based on the actual trading volatility of the Company’s common
stock. The Company uses historical experience to estimate expected forfeitures
and estimated terms. The expected term of a SAR grant represents the period
of
time that the SAR is expected to be outstanding. The risk-free rate is the
U.S.
Treasury Bond yield that corresponds to the expected term of each SAR
grant. Expected dividend yield is zero as the Company has not and
does not foresee paying a dividend in the
future. Forfeitures are estimated to be zero based on the strike
price and expected holding period of the SAR. The Company
applied the guidance of Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 110 in estimating the
expected term of the SAR.
Expected
volatility
|
29%
— 31%
|
Expected
term
|
7
years
|
Risk-free
rate
|
4.3%
— 4.7%
|
Expected
dividend yield
|
0%
|
Expected forfeiture rate | 0% |
60
Stock-Settled
Stock Appreciation
Rights Exercised in 2007:
During
the year ended December 31, 2007, 838,356 SAR were exercised at a price of
$47.54 resulting in the issuance of 129,444 newly-issued common shares. The
intrinsic value of the award was $11.6 million which represents an income tax
deduction for the Company. No compensation cost was recorded for these options
as they were fully vested at December 31, 2006. However, the Company recorded
$4.4 million in excess tax benefits directly to shareholders’ equity along with
the corresponding employee withholding tax liability of $5.6 million, for a
net
reduction of additional paid in capital of $972,000.
A
summary
of SAR activity under the 2005 Plan is as follows:
SARs
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
Weighted
Average Contractual Term (In years)
|
|||||||||
Outstanding
at January 1, 2007
|
2,185,965 | $ | 33.76 | ||||||||
Granted
|
659,409 | $ | 43.23 | ||||||||
Exercised
|
(838,356 | ) | $ | 33.76 | |||||||
Outstanding
at December 31, 2007
|
2,007,018 | $ | 36.87 | 8.5 | |||||||
Exercisable
at December 31, 2007
|
1,509,766 | $ | 34.72 | 8.1 |
The
weighted average grant date fair value of SAR granted during the period was
$18.15. The total intrinsic value of SAR exercised during the period
was $11.6 million. At December 31, 2007 none of the outstanding SAR were
in-the-money and therefore no additional shares would be issued upon assumed
exercise of both the vested and unvested SAR.
A
summary
of the status of the Company’s unvested SAR as of December 31, 2007 and changes
during the year ended December 31, 2007 are as follows:
SARs
|
Weighted
Average Gant Date Fair Value
|
|||||||
Unvested
at January 1, 2007
|
||||||||
Granted
|
659,409
|
$
|
18.15
|
|||||
Vested
|
(162,157
|
)
|
$
|
17.87
|
||||
Unvested
at December 31, 2007 (expected to vest over the next three
years)
|
497,252
|
$
|
18.24
|
At
December 31, 2007 there was $7.5 million of unrecognized compensation cost
related to unvested SAR granted under the Plan. That cost is expected
to be recognized over three years.
Stock
Based Plans during 2005:
Cash-Settled
Stock Appreciation Rights:
On
September 21, 2005, the Company amended its 2003 Cash-Settled Stock Appreciation
Rights Program (the "2003 Plan"). The amendment of the 2003 SAR Program froze
and monetized the value of each participant’s SAR on that date. At the date of
the amendment, the accrued benefit payable under this program was $39.4 million
based on a PICO stock price of $33.23 per share. Concurrently with the amendment
of the SAR Program, most participants elected to defer substantially all of
amounts due to them by transferring the amounts into deferred compensation
Rabbi
Trusts established by the Company. Consequently, including previously deferred
compensation, the Company had a total deferred compensation liability of $42.7
million at December 31, 2005 representing deferred compensation payable to
various members of management and its non-employee directors, and no remaining
SAR payable.
For
the
years ended December 31, 2005 presented in the accompanying consolidated
financial statements, there is compensation expense recorded for the
cash-settled SAR issued. Compensation cost was measured at the end of each
period (in 2005 compensation cost was measured until the September 21,
2005 amendment to the 2003 SAR Program) as the amount by which the quoted
market price of PICO stock exceeded the exercise price. Changes in the quoted
market price were reflected as an adjustment to the accrued compensation
obligation and compensation expense in the Company’s consolidated financial
statements. The Company recorded compensation expense of $23.9 million for
the
year ended December 31, 2005, representing the difference between the exercise
price of the vested SAR and the market value of PICO stock at the end of the
reporting period (September 21 for the 2005 year). The cash liability for the
accrued benefit reached $39.4 million during 2005 and as discussed above, when
the 2003 SAR Program was amended, the liability was transferred to Rabbi Trust
accounts leaving no accrued stock appreciation rights payable and increasing
deferred compensation in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
61
In
December 2002, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No.
148, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, Transition and Disclosure.” SFAS
No. 148 provided alternative methods of transition for those entities that
elect
to voluntarily adopt the fair value accounting provision of SFAS No. 123,
“Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.” SFAS No. 148 also requires more
prominent disclosures of the pro forma effect of using the fair value method
of
accounting for stock-based employee compensation as well as pro forma disclosure
of the effect in interim financial statements. The transition and annual
disclosure provisions of SFAS No. 148 are effective for fiscal years ending
after December 15, 2002 until SFAS 123(R) became effective in 2006.
Had
compensation cost for the Company’s stock-based compensation plans been
determined consistent with SFAS No. 123, the Company’s net income or loss and
related per share amounts would approximate the following pro forma amounts
for
the years ended December 31 (Note that the Company’s cash-settled SAR that were
outstanding in 2005 have no impact on the following table as cash-settled
SAR are accounted for the same way under both APB No. 25 and SFAS No. 123;
however, the stock-settled SAR issued in December 2005 are included in the
2005
disclosure):
The
impact of not adopting SFAS 123(R) for 2006 would have decreased net income
by
$5.5 million before tax and $3.6 million after tax ($0.24 per basic and diluted
share).
2005
|
||||
Reported
net income (loss)
|
$
|
16,201,641
|
||
Add:
Stock-based compensation recorded, net of tax
|
||||
Deduct:
Total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under
fair
value based method for all awards, net of tax
|
(19,623,058)
|
|
||
Pro
forma net loss
|
$
|
(3,421,417)
|
|
|
Reported
net income (loss) per share: basic and diluted
|
$
|
1.25
|
||
Pro
forma net loss per share: basic and diluted
|
$
|
(0.26)
|
|
The
effects of applying SFAS No. 123 in this pro forma disclosure are not indicative
of future amounts.
The
fair
value of each stock-settled SAR granted in 2005 is estimated on the date of
grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following
weighted-average assumptions: no dividend yield; risk-free interest rate ranging
from 4.4% to 4.5%, expected life of a stock-settled SAR ranges from 3 to 10
years; and volatility of 33%.
62
Deferred
Compensation:
At
December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Company had $52.5 million and $49.8 million,
respectively recorded as deferred compensation payable to various members of
management and certain non-employee directors of the Company. The assets of
the
plan are held in Rabbi Trust accounts. Such trusts hold various investments
that
are consistent with the Company’s investment policy. The investments are held in
separate accounts, accounted for as available for sale securities, and are
reported in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets within the line item
“Investments”. Assets of the trust will be distributed according to
predetermined payout elections established by each employee.
The
Company applies the provisions of Emerging Issues Task Force No. 97-14, Accounting for Deferred
Compensation
Arrangements Where Amounts Earned Are Held in a Rabbi Trust and Invested.
In summary, investment returns generated are reported within the Company’s
financial statements (with a corresponding increase in the trust assets) and
an
expense is recorded within the caption, “Operating and other costs” for
increases in the market value of the assets held with a corresponding increase
in the deferred compensation liability (except in the case of PICO stock, which
is reported as Treasury Stock, at cost). In the event the trust assets decline
in value, the Company will reverse previously expensed compensation.
Comprehensive
Income:
The
Company applies the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 130, Reporting
Comprehensive Income, which requires reporting comprehensive income and
its components as part of the Company’s financial statements. Comprehensive
income or loss is comprised of net income or loss and other comprehensive income
or loss.
Other
comprehensive income or loss includes foreign currency translation and
unrealized holding gains and losses, net of taxes on available for sale
securities. The components are as follows:
December
31,
|
||||||||
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||
Net
unrealized gain on securities
|
$ | 82,456,499 | $ | 66,193,428 | ||||
Foreign
currency translation
|
(2,987,061) | (5,242,749) | ||||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
$ | 79,469,438 | $ | 60,950,679 |
The
accumulated balance is net of deferred income tax liabilities of $44.7 million
and $37.1 million at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
|
Translation
of Foreign Currency:
|
Financial
statements of foreign operations are translated into U.S. dollars using average
rates of exchange in effect during the year for revenues, expenses, realized
gains and losses, and the exchange rate in effect at the balance sheet date
for
assets and liabilities. Unrealized exchange gains and losses arising on
translation are reflected within accumulated other comprehensive income or
loss.
Realized foreign currency gains or losses are reported within the statement
of
operations.
63
Recently
Issued Accounting Pronouncements
SFAS
157 - In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements
(SFAS 157), which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring
fair value under GAAP, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements.
SFAS 157 applies to other accounting pronouncements that require or permit
fair value measurements. SFAS 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007, and for interim periods within those fiscal years.
Subsequently, in February 2008, the FASB issued two staff position on SFAS
157
(FSP FAS 157-1 and 157-2) which scope out the lease classification measurements
under FASB Statement No. 13 from SFAS 157 and delays the effective date on
SFAS
157 for all nonrecurring fair value measurements of nonfinancial assets and
nonfinancial liabilities until fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2008. PICO is currently evaluating the impact, if any, that
SFAS 157 will have on our consolidated financial statements.
SFAS
158 - In September 2006,
the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158 (SFAS 158),
“Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement
Plans—an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R)”. SFAS 158
requires an employer to recognize the over-funded or under-funded status of
a
defined benefit postretirement plan (other than a multiemployer plan) as an
asset or liability in its statement of financial position and to recognize
changes in that funded status in the year in which the changes occur through
other comprehensive income of a business entity or changes in unrestricted
net
assets of a not-for-profit organization. This Statement also requires an
employer to measure the funded status of a plan as of the date of its year-end
statement of financial position. The adoption of SFAS 158 did not have a
material effect on PICO’s consolidated financial statements.
SFAS
159 - In February 2007,
the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 159 (SFAS 159),
“The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities—Including an amendment of FASB
Statement No. 115”. This Statement permits entities to choose to measure
many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value. This Statement
is effective for PICO on January 1, 2008. PICO is currently
evaluating the impact of this pronouncement on the consolidated financial
statements.
SFAS
141(R) - In December
2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 141(R)
(SFAS 141(R)), “Business
Combinations”. SFAS 141(R)
replaces SFAS 141 and requires assets and liabilities acquired in a business
combination, contingent consideration and certain acquired contingencies to
be
measured at their fair values as of the date of acquisition. SFAS 141(R) also
requires that acquisition-related costs and restructuring costs be recognized
separately from the business combination. SFAS 141(R) is effective for PICO
on
January 1, 2009. PICO is currently in the process of determining the effect,
if
any, that the adoption of SFAS 141(R) will have on the consolidated financial
statements.
SFAS
160 - In December 2007,
the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 160 (SFAS 160),
“Non-controlling Interests
in
Consolidated Financial Statements, an Amendment of ARB No.
51”. SFAS 160 clarifies the accounting for non-controlling
interests and establishes accounting and reporting standards for the
non-controlling interest in a subsidiary, including classification as a
component of equity. SFAS 160 is effective for PICO on January 1, 2009. PICO
is
currently in the process of determining the effect, if any, that the adoption
of
SFAS 160 will have on the consolidated financial statements.
Disposal
of HyperFeed:
During
2006, HyperFeed filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code.
After the bankruptcy filing, HyperFeed was removed from PICO’s financial
statements as a consolidated entity. Consequently, in
accordance with SFAS No. 144, HyperFeed’s results were reclassified to
discontinued operations in 2006. The results of operations from discontinued
operations and gain on disposal are reported separately, net of tax, on the
face
of the statement of operations. Concurrently with the disposal of
HyperFeed, the Company, applied the provisions of EITF 93-17, "Recognition
of
Deferred Tax Asset for a Parent Company’s Excess Tax Basis in the Stock of a
Subsidiary That is Accounted for as a Discontinued Operation", and recorded
a
$4.7 million deferred tax asset on the remaining outside basis of its investment
in HyperFeed. The details of the amounts included in 2006 and
2005 are presented below:
64
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||
Service
revenue
|
$ | 2,907,268 | $ | 4,269,618 | ||||
Investment
income
|
3,892 | 1,297 | ||||||
Total
revenues
|
2,911,160 | 4,270,915 | ||||||
Expenses:
|
||||||||
Cost
of service revenue
|
1,326,162 | 1,443,084 | ||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
446,922 | 756,881 | ||||||
Other
costs and expenses
|
9,243,085 | 9,480,624 | ||||||
Total
expenses
|
11,016,169 | 11,680,589 | ||||||
Loss
before income taxes
|
(8,105,009 | ) | (7,409,674 | ) | ||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
2,771,672 | 601,458 | ||||||
Loss
from continuing operations
|
(5,333,337 | ) | (6,808,216 | ) | ||||
Loss
on write down of assets to fair value
|
(4,923,647 | ) | ||||||
Loss
from HyperFeed's discontinued operations
|
(507,748 | ) | ||||||
Net
loss before minority interest
|
(10,256,984 | ) | (7,315,964 | ) | ||||
Minority
interest in net loss
|
705,702 | |||||||
(10,256,984 | ) | (6,610,262 | ) | |||||
Gain
on disposal before tax
|
3,002,003 | |||||||
Income
tax benefit
|
4,657,283 | |||||||
Total
gain on disposal, net of tax
|
7,659,286 | |||||||
Previously
reported gain on discontinued operations within HyperFeed
|
330,029 | 545,000 | ||||||
Reported
gain on disposal of discontinued operations
|
7,989,315 | 545,000 | ||||||
$ | (2,267,669 | ) | $ | (6,065,262 | ) |
65
3.
|
At
December 31, the cost and carrying value of investments were as follows:
Gross
|
Gross
|
|||||||||||||||
Unrealized
|
Unrealized
|
Carrying
|
||||||||||||||
2007:
|
Cost
|
Gains
|
Losses
|
Value
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities:
|
||||||||||||||||
U.S.
Treasury securities and obligations of U.S. government - sponsored
enterprises
|
$ | 1,114,725 | $ | 54,046 | $ | 1,168,771 | ||||||||||
Corporate
bonds
|
106,798,508 | 383,872 | (2,570,652 | ) | 104,611,728 | |||||||||||
107,913,233 | 437,918 | (2,570,652 | ) | 105,780,499 | ||||||||||||
Marketable
equity securities
|
134,224,760 | 128,072,028 | (2,553,643 | ) | 259,743,145 | |||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 242,137,993 | $ | 128,509,946 | $ | (5,124,295 | ) | $ | 365,523,644 |
Gross
|
Gross
|
|||||||||||||||
Unrealized
|
Unrealized
|
Carrying
|
||||||||||||||
2006:
|
Cost
|
Gains
|
Losses
|
Value
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities:
|
||||||||||||||||
U.S.
Treasury securities and obligations of U.S. government - sponsored
enterprises
|
$ | 1,110,278 | $ | (3,731 | ) | $ | 1,106,547 | |||||||||
Corporate
bonds
|
62,320,043 | $ | 483,947 | (427,266 | ) | 62,376,724 | ||||||||||
63,430,321 | 483,947 | (430,997 | ) | 63,483,271 | ||||||||||||
Marketable
equity securities
|
108,866,121 | 100,313,455 | (700,906 | ) | 208,478,670 | |||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 172,296,442 | $ | 100,797,402 | $ | (1,131,903 | ) | $ | 271,961,941 |
Marketable
equity securities:
The Company’s $259.7 million investments in marketable equity securities
at December 31, 2007 consist primarily of investments in common stock of foreign
and domestic publicly traded companies. The gross unrealized gains and losses
on
equity securities were $128.1 million and $2.6 million respectively, at December
31, 2007 and $100.3 million and $701,000 respectively, at December 31, 2006.
The
majority of the losses at December 31, 2007 were continuously below cost for
less than 12 months.
Corporate
Bonds and US Treasury
Obligations: At
December 31, 2007, the bond portfolio consists of $104.6 million of publicly
traded corporate bonds and $1.2 million United States Treasury obligations.
The
total bond portfolio had gross unrealized gains and losses of $438,000 and
$2.6
million respectively, at December 31, 2007 and gross unrealized gains and losses
of $484,000 and $431,000 respectively, at December 31, 2006. At December 31,
2007 just over 35% of the gross loss was continuously below amortized cost
for
greater than 12 months. However, the Company does not consider these investments
to be other than temporarily impaired because of its intent and ability to
hold
these bonds until recovery of fair value, which may be maturity. The impairment
is primarily due to interest rate fluctuations rather than deterioration of
the
underlying issuer of the particular bonds. During 2007, the Company recorded
a
$1.6 million impairment charge on one corporate bond due to deterioration of
the
underlying issuer's financial condition.
Approximately
$3.9 million of the Company's investment
portfolio does not have a readily available market value.
66
The
amortized cost and carrying value of investments in fixed maturities at December
31, 2007, by contractual maturity, are shown below. Expected maturity dates
may
differ from contractual maturity dates because borrowers may have the right
to
call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.
Amortized
|
Carrying
|
|||||||
Cost
|
Value
|
|||||||
Due
in one year or less
|
$ | 56,008,927 | $ | 55,861,954 | ||||
Due
after one year through five years
|
18,049,168 | 17,798,719 | ||||||
Due
after five years
|
33,855,138 | 32,119,826 | ||||||
$ | 107,913,233 | $ | 105,780,499 |
Net
investment income is as follows for each of the years ended December 31:
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Investment
income:
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
$ | 3,952,102 | $ | 2,084,072 | $ | 2,468,733 | ||||||
Equity
securities
|
4,202,648 | 3,333,526 | 3,074,692 | |||||||||
Other,
primarily cash balances
|
9,034,590 | 8,171,777 | 2,694,778 | |||||||||
Total
investment income
|
17,189,340 | 13,589,375 | 8,238,203 | |||||||||
Investment
expenses:
|
(149,540 | ) | (33,183 | ) | (43,030 | ) | ||||||
Net
investment income
|
$ | 17,039,800 | $ | 13,556,192 | $ | 8,195,173 |
Pre-tax
net realized gain or loss on investments is as follows for each of the years
ended December 31:
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Gross
realized gains:
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
$ | 561 | $ | 138,624 | $ | 27,303 | ||||||
Equity
securities and other investments
|
4,726,158 | 26,391,570 | 7,843,098 | |||||||||
Total
gain
|
4,726,719 | 26,530,194 | 7,870,401 | |||||||||
Gross
realized losses:
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
(1,603,852 | ) | (14,324 | ) | (6,899 | ) | ||||||
Equity
securities and other investments
|
(374,909 | ) | (462,793 | ) | (141,728 | ) | ||||||
Total
loss
|
(1,978,761 | ) | (477,117 | ) | (148,627 | ) | ||||||
Net
realized gain
|
$ | 2,747,958 | $ | 26,053,077 | $ | 7,721,774 |
Realized
Gains
During
2007, the Company realized gains in several domestic and foreign securities
recording $4.7 million in gains including a realized gain on the sale of
Amalgamated Holdings Limited of $1.5 million. During 2006, the Company sold
securities generating $26.5 million in realized gains. Included in such gains
is
$12.9 million from the sale of Anderson Tully and $8.6 million on the sale
of a
portion of the Company’s investment in Ratia Energie AG, a Swiss holding. During
2005, the Company sold securities generating $7.9 million in realized gains.
Included in realized gains for 2005 are gains of $1.8 million gain from the
sale
of Keweenaw Land Association and a $1.8 million gain on the sale of a portion
of
the Company’s investment Ratia Energie AG.
Realized
Losses
Included
in realized losses are impairment charges on securities. During 2007, 2006
and
2005, the Company recorded other-than-temporary impairments of $2 million,
$459,000, and $142,000, respectively, on debt and equity securities to recognize
what are expected to be other-than-temporary declines in value.
67
Jungfraubahn
Holding AG
("Jungfraubahn"):
At
December 31, 2007, the Company owned 1,315,157 of the outstanding
shares, or approximately 23% of Jungfraubahn. At December 31, 2007, the
market value of the investment was $66.2 million and had an unrealized gain
of
$40.3 million, before tax. At December 31, 2006, the Company owned 1,314,407
of
the outstanding shares, or approximately 23% of Jungfraubahn. At December
31, 2006, the market value of the investment was $49.1 million and had an
unrealized gain of $25.1 million, before tax. In 2007, 2006 and 2005, the
Company recorded dividend income from this security of $1.4 million, $1.3
million and $1.1 million, respectively.
Despite
ownership of more than 20% of the voting stock of Jungfraubahn, the Company
continues to account for this investment as available for sale under SFAS No.
115 "Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities." At
this
time, the Company does not believe that it has the requisite ability to exercise
“significant influence” over the financial and operating policies of
Jungfraubahn, and therefore does not apply the equity method of accounting.
Accu
Holding AG
("Accu"):
At
December 31, 2007, the Company owned 29.2% of Accu, a Swiss corporation.
PICO lacks the ability to exercise significant influence based on consideration
of a number of factors and therefore accounts for the holding as available
for
sale under SFAS No. 115. At December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006, the market
value of PICO’s interest was $4.1 million and $4.3 million,
respectively.
4.
|
At
December 31, 2007 and 2006, PICO’s subsidiaries had three loan facilities with a
Swiss bank for a maximum of $18.1 million (20.5 million CHF) used to finance
the
purchase of investment securities in Switzerland. The Company
anticipates refinancing the borrowings when due ($2.6 million due in 2008
and $11 million due in 2009). The loan facilities may be cancelled immediately
by either party by written notice.
During
2007, the Company purchased real estate for $9.1 million and financed $5.2
million of the purchase price. The note terms require a payment of $2.6 million
in 2009 and the balance in 2010 and bears interest at 6.5%.
The
Company capitalized $677,000 and $450,000 of interest in 2007 and 2006,
respectively related to construction costs and expensed interest of
$661,000 in 2005.
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||
4.19%
fixed due in 2009 (3.32% fixed in 2006)
|
$ | 2,647,371 | $ | 2,462,043 | ||||
3.98%
fixed due in 2009
|
11,030,709 | 10,258,515 | ||||||
6.5%
fixed payment due in 2009 and 2010
|
5,180,000 | |||||||
6%
fixed due in 2008
|
20,000 | |||||||
$ | 18,878,080 | $ | 12,720,558 |
The
Company's future minimum principal debt repayments for the years ending December
31 are as follows:
Year
|
|
2008
|
$
20,000
|
2009
|
16,268,080
|
2010
|
2,590,000
|
Total
|
$
18,878,080
|
68
The
cost
assigned to the various components of real estate and water assets at December
31, is as follows:
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||
Real
estate
|
$ |
53,869,524
|
$ | 32,942,146 |
|
|||
Real
estate improvements, net of accumulated amortization of $4.8 million
in
2007 and $3.9 million in 2006
|
10,434,867 | 10,951,964 | ||||||
Water
and water rights (net of accumulated amortization of $931,000 in
2007 and
$829,000 in 2006)
|
48,523,815 | 29,934,827 | ||||||
Pipeline
project costs
|
87,777,586 | 28,709,922 | ||||||
$ | 200,605,792 | $ | 102,538,859 |
In
2006,
the Company started construction of a pipeline from Fish Springs in
northern Nevada to the north valleys of Reno, Nevada. Construction is nearly
completed at December 31, 2007. At December 31, 2007 project costs included
$86.7 million of direct construction costs and $1.1 million of capitalized
interest. At December 31, 2006, project costs included $28.2 million of direct
construction costs and $450,000 of capitalized interest.
The
final
regulatory approval required for the pipeline project was a Record of Decision
(“ROD”) for a right of way, which was granted on May 31,
2006. Subsequently, there were two protests against the ROD, and the
matter was appealed and subsequently dismissed. However, in October
2006, one protestant, the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe (the "Tribe"), filed an
action with the U.S. District Court against the Bureau of Land Management and
US
Department of the Interior. The Tribe asserted that the exportation of 8,000
acre feet of water per year from Fish Springs would negatively impact their
water rights located in a basin within the boundaries of the Tribe
reservation.
The
Tribe
initiated several legal actions to assert their claims and to stop construction
of the pipeline. While the Company believed the claims were without merit,
the
Tribe’s legal actions might have caused significant delays to the completion of
the construction of the pipeline. To avoid future delays, Fish Springs and
the
Tribe entered into negotiations to settle all outstanding claims and legal
actions. On May 30, 2007 the parties signed an agreement that resolved all
of
the Tribe’s claims. The amounts payable to the Tribe as a result of the
settlement agreement are predominately attributable to settlement of the claims
rather than the acquisition of additional water rights or other
assets. The settlement obligates Fish Springs to:
·
|
pay
$500,000 upon signing of
agreement;
|
·
|
transfer
6,214 acres of real
estate Fish Springs owns (fair value of $500,000 and a book value
of
$139,000);
|
·
|
pay
$3.1 million on January 8,
2008; and
|
·
|
pay
$3.6 million on the later of
January 8, 2009 or the date the United States Congress ratifies the
settlement agreement (Interest accrues at the London Inter-Bank Rate
("LIBOR") from January 8, 2009, if the payment is made after that
date).
|
There
is
13,000 acre-feet per-year of permitted water rights at Fish Springs Ranch.
The
existing permit allows up to 8,000 acre-feet of water per year to be exported
to
support the development in the Reno area. The settlement agreement also provides
that, in exchange for the Tribe agreeing to not oppose all permitting activities
for the pumping and export of groundwater in excess of 8,000 acre-feet of water
per year, Fish Springs will pay the Tribe 12% of the gross sales price for
each
acre-foot of additional water that Fish Springs sells in excess of 8,000
acre-feet per year, up to 13,000 acre- feet per year. The obligation to expense
and pay the 12% fee is due only if and when the Company sells water in excess
of
8,000 acre-feet, accordingly, Fish Springs Ranch will record the liability
for
such amounts as they become due upon the sale of any such excess water.
Currently Fish Springs does not have regulatory approval to export any water
in
excess of 8,000 acre-feet per year from Fish Springs Ranch to support further
development in northern Reno, and it is uncertain whether such regulatory
approval will be granted in the future.
Consequently,
for the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company accrued settlement expense
of
$7.3 million. At December 31, 2007, the Company had an accrued liability of
$6.7
million for the balance owed.
Vidler
is
required to make an annual payment for its right to store 30,000 acre-feet
of
water at the Semitropic water storage facility. These payments have declined
over time and currently are $22,000 per year. The payments are being capitalized
and the asset is being amortized over its useful life of thirty-five years.
Amortization expense was $102,000 in each of the three years ended December
31,
2007. Vidler is also required to pay annual operating and maintenance charges
and for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Company expensed
a
total of $161,000, $166,000 and $169,000, respectively.
For
the
three years ended December 31, 2007, amortization of leasehold improvements
was
$851,000, $845,000 and $805,000, respectively.
69
Notes
and
other receivables consisted of the following at December 31:
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||
Notes
receivable
|
$ | 15,356,897 | $ | 15,308,054 | ||||
Interest
receivable
|
1,530,993 | 1,485,536 | ||||||
Other
receivables
|
263,175 | 662,901 | ||||||
17,151,065 | 17,456,491 | |||||||
Allowance
for doubtful accounts
|
(278,664 | ) | ||||||
$ | 17,151,065 | $ | 17,177,827 |
Notes
receivable, primarily from the sale of real estate and water assets, have a
weighted average interest rate of 9.5% and a weighted average life to maturity
of approximately eight years at December 31, 2007.
The
Company and its U.S. subsidiaries file a consolidated federal income tax return.
Non-U.S. subsidiaries file tax returns in various foreign countries and
companies that are less than 80% owned file separate federal income tax returns.
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences
between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting
purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes.
Significant
components of the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities are as follows
at December 31:
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||
Deferred
tax assets:
|
||||||||
Deferred
compensation
|
$ | 16,163,570 | $ | 15,268,524 | ||||
Basis
difference on securities
|
4,977,947 | 5,186,609 | ||||||
Impairment
charges
|
5,342,519 | 4,673,146 | ||||||
Loss
on partnership operations
|
2,505,795 | |||||||
Employee
benefits, including stock-based compensation
|
2,619,085 | 2,083,723 | ||||||
Other
|
8,627,357 | 6,250,772 | ||||||
Total
deferred tax assets
|
40,236,273 | 33,462,774 | ||||||
Deferred
tax liabilities:
|
||||||||
Unrealized
appreciation on securities
|
43,960,820 | 36,281,111 | ||||||
Revaluation
of real estate and water assets
|
4,872,032 | 4,902,089 | ||||||
Foreign
receivables
|
2,392,991 | 1,694,970 | ||||||
Installment
land sales
|
4,415,828 | 7,347,213 | ||||||
Other
|
2,269,763 | 1,190,307 | ||||||
Total
deferred tax liabilities
|
57,911,435 | 51,415,690 | ||||||
Net
deferred income tax liability
|
$ | 17,675,162 | $ | 17,952,916 |
Deferred
tax assets and liabilities and federal income tax expense in future years can
be
significantly affected by changes in circumstances that would influence
management’s conclusions as to the ultimate realization of deferred tax assets.
Pre-tax
income from continuing operations for the years ended December 31 was under
the
following jurisdictions:
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
United
States
|
$ | 2,110,723 | $ | 40,711,997 | $ | 39,528,714 | ||||||
Foreign
|
(97,058 | ) | 10,154,749 | 796,692 | ||||||||
Total
|
$ | 2,013,665 | $ | 50,866,746 | $ | 40,325,406 |
70
Income
tax expense from continuing operations for each of the years ended December
31 consists of the following:
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Current
tax expense (benefit):
|
||||||||||||
United
States Federal and state
|
$ | 10,407,829 | $ | 14,397,082 | $ | 25,203,660 | ||||||
Foreign
|
(280,117 | ) | 706,890 | 73,107 | ||||||||
10,127,712 | 15,103,972 | 25,276,767 | ||||||||||
Deferred
tax expense (benefit):
|
||||||||||||
United
States Federal and state
|
(6,591,909 | ) | 4,168,822 | (6,715,681 | ) | |||||||
Foreign
|
(104 | ) | 117,580 | 33,537 | ||||||||
(6,592,013 | ) | 4,286,402 | (6,682,144 | ) | ||||||||
Total
income tax provision
|
$ | 3,535,699 | $ | 19,390,374 | $ | 18,594,623 |
The
difference between income taxes provided at the Company’s federal statutory rate
and effective tax rate is as follows:
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Federal
income tax provision (benefit) at statutory rate
|
$ | 704,783 | $ | 17,803,361 | $ | 14,113,892 | ||||||
Change
in valuation allowance
|
(1,281,273 | ) | 698,195 | |||||||||
State
taxes, net of federal benefit
|
383,379 | (23,658 | ) | 3,318,795 | ||||||||
Management
compensation
|
790,125 | 1,533,445 | 2,149,534 | |||||||||
Interest
expense
|
350,526 | (157,660 | ) | |||||||||
Losses from entities not included in return | 455,426 | |||||||||||
Write
off of deferred tax assets
|
616,224 | 504,389 | ||||||||||
Foreign
rate differences
|
314,299 | (216,626 | ) | |||||||||
Rate
changes
|
(212,935 | ) | (470,424 | ) | ||||||||
Permanent
differences
|
(79,063 | ) | 1,224,705 | (998,743 | ) | |||||||
Total
income tax provision
|
$ | 3,535,699 | $ | 19,390,374 | $ | 18,594,623 |
The
Company adopted the provisions of FIN 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty
in Income
Taxes” (“FIN 48”) an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (“SFAS
109”) on January 1, 2007. As a result of the implementation of FIN 48, the
Company recognized a $293,000 increase in the liability for unrecognized income
tax benefits through opening retained earnings. At the adoption date of January
1, 2007, the Company provided for $3.5 million of unrecognized tax benefits
including interest, $2.5 million of which would affect the effective tax rate
if
recognized. For the year ended December 31, 2007, there were no significant
increases or decreases in the liability for unrecognized tax
benefits. The Company recognizes any interest and penalties related
to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense. As of December 31, 2007,
the
Company had recorded approximately $514,000 of accrued interest related to
uncertain tax positions.
The
tax
years 2002-2006 remain open to examination by the taxing jurisdictions to which
the Company’s significant operations are subject. As of December 31,
2007, the Company does not believe that it is reasonably possible that there
will be a material change in the estimated unrecognized tax benefits within
the
next twelve months.
The
following table summarizes the activity related to the unrecognized tax benefits
(the majority for potential state tax matters):
Balance
at January 1, 2007
|
$ | 3,277,654 | ||
Other
increases or decreases
|
- | |||
Balance
at December 31, 2007
|
$ | 3,277,654 |
Provision
has not been made for
U.S. or additional foreign tax on the approximately $5.6 million of
undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries. It is not practical to estimate
the amount of additional tax that might be payable. Rate differences within
the
difference between statutory and effective
tax rates reflect foreign results taxed at the local statutory rate, which
can
be as much as 25% lower than the U.S. statutory rate of 35%. At December 31,
2007, the Company had a $3.2 million federal and state tax payable.
71
The
major
classifications of the Company’s fixed assets are as follows at December 31:
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||
Office
furniture, fixtures and equipment
|
$ | 3,748,193 | $ | 2,725,386 | ||||
Building
and leasehold improvements
|
254,131 | 437,132 | ||||||
4,002,324 | 3,162,518 | |||||||
Accumulated
depreciation
|
(2,789,930 | ) | (2,643,954 | ) | ||||
Property
and equipment, net
|
$ | 1,212,394 | $ | 518,564 |
Depreciation
expense was $155,000, $279,000 and $437,000 for the year ended December 31,
2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
In
February 2007, the Company completed an offering of 2,823,000 shares of newly
issued common stock to institutional investors at a price of $37 per share.
After placement costs, the net proceeds to the Company were approximately $100.1
million. The Company filed a registration statement on Form S-3 to register
the
shares, which became effective in April 2007.
In
May
2006, the Company completed an offering of 2,600,000 million shares of newly
issued common stock to institutional investors at a price of $30 per share.
After placement costs, the net proceeds to the Company were $73.9 million.
The
Company filed a registration statement on Form S-3 to register the shares,
which
became effective in June 2006.
In
May
2005, the Company completed an offering of 905,000 shares of newly issued common
stock to institutional investors at a price of $25 per share. After placement
costs, the net proceeds to the Company were $21.4 million. The Company filed
a
registration statement on Form S−3 to register the shares, which became
effective in July 2005.
Long
Term Incentive Plan
As
described in Note 1, the 2005 Plan was adopted by the Board of Directors and
approved by shareholders on December 8, 2005. The 2005 Plan provides for the
grant or award of various equity incentives to PICO employees, non-employee
directors and consultants. A total of 2,654,000 shares of common stock are
issuable under the 2005 Plan and it provides for the issuance of incentive
stock
options, non-statutory stock options, free-standing stock-settled SAR,
restricted stock awards, performance shares, performance units, restricted
stock
units, deferred compensation awards and other stock-based awards.
On
December 12, 2005, the Company granted 2,185,965 stock-settled SAR at an
exercise price of $33.76 per share (being the market value of PICO stock at
the
date of grant) that were fully vested on that date. During 2007, the Company
granted 659,409 SAR in five separate grants to various members of management.
Four of the awards totaling 486,470 SAR were granted on August 2, 2007 at a
strike price equal to the closing market price of PICO common stock on that
day
of $42.71. These awards vested 33% on the date of grant and vest one third
on
each anniversary thereafter. The other award was granted on September 4, 2007
with a strike price equal to the closing market price of PICO common stock
on
that day of $44.69. This award vests 33% on September 4, 2008 and one third
on
each anniversary thereafter.
Upon
exercise, the Company will issue newly issued shares equal to the in-the-money
value of the exercised SAR, net of the applicable federal, state and local
taxes
withheld.
72
10.
|
In
the
normal course of business, the Company’s insurance subsidiaries have entered
into various reinsurance contracts with unrelated reinsurers. The Company’s
insurance subsidiaries participate in such agreements for the purpose of
limiting their loss exposure and diversifying risk. Reinsurance contracts do
not
relieve the Company’s insurance subsidiaries from their obligations to
policyholders. All reinsurance assets and liabilities are shown on a gross
basis
in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. Amounts recoverable
from
reinsurers are estimated in a manner consistent with the claim liability
associated with the reinsured policy. Such amounts are included in “reinsurance
receivables” in the consolidated balance sheets at December 31 as follows:
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||
Estimated
reinsurance recoverable on:
|
||||||||
Unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expense
|
$ | 16,653,254 | $ | 16,972,280 | ||||
Reinsurance
recoverable on paid losses and loss expenses
|
234,699 | 317,759 | ||||||
Reinsurance
receivables
|
$ | 16,887,953 | $ | 17,290,039 |
Unsecured
reinsurance risk of is concentrated in the companies shown in the table below
along with their AM Best Rating. The Company remains contingently liable with
respect to reinsurance contracts in the event that reinsurers are unable to
meet
their obligations under the reinsurance agreements in force.
CONCENTRATION
OF REINSURANCE AT DECEMBER 31, 2007
Reported
|
Unreported
|
Reinsurer
|
||||||||||
Claims
|
Claims
|
Balances
|
||||||||||
General
Reinsurance (A++)
|
$ | 7,000,751 | $ | 9,229,680 | $ | 16,230,431 | ||||||
Odessey
Reinsurance (A)
|
32,683 | 32,683 | ||||||||||
National
Reinsurance Company (NR-3)
|
61,712 | 61,712 | ||||||||||
Medical
Reinsurance (A-)
|
50,000 | 50,000 | ||||||||||
Swiss
Reinsurance America Corp (A+)
|
48,351 | 161,559 | 209,910 | |||||||||
All
others
|
101,810 | 201,407 | 303,217 | |||||||||
$ | 7,212,624 | $ | 9,675,329 | $ | 16,887,953 |
The
following is the net effect of reinsurance activity on the consolidated
financial statements for each of the years ended December 31 for losses and
loss
adjustment expenses incurred (recovered):
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Direct
|
$ | (2,323,098 | ) | $ | (700,818 | ) | $ | (2,092,123 | ) | |||
Assumed
|
(2,927 | ) | 176,880 | |||||||||
Ceded
|
(1,277,993 | ) | (2,520,656 | ) | (1,749,589 | ) | ||||||
$ | (3,601,091 | ) | $ | (3,224,401 | ) | $ | (3,664,832 | ) |
73
Reserves
for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses on MPL, property and casualty
and
workers’ compensation business represent management’s estimate of ultimate
losses and loss adjustment expenses and fall within an actuarially determined
range of reasonably expected ultimate unpaid losses and loss adjustment
expenses. Reserves
for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses are estimated based on both
company-specific and industry experience, and assumptions and projections as
to
claims frequency, severity, and inflationary trends and settlement payments.
Such estimates may vary significantly from the eventual outcome. In management’s
judgment, information currently available has been appropriately considered
in
estimating the loss reserves and reinsurance recoverable of the insurance
subsidiaries.
Management
prepares its statutory financial statements of Physicians in accordance with
accounting practices prescribed or permitted by the Ohio Department of Insurance
(“Ohio Department”). Conversely, Management prepares its statutory financial
statements for Citation in accordance with accounting practices prescribed
or
permitted by the California Department of Insurance. Prescribed statutory
accounting practices include guidelines contained in various publications of
the
National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”), as well as state laws,
regulations, and general administrative rules. Permitted statutory accounting
practices encompass all accounting practices not so prescribed. The prescribed
accounting practices of the Ohio Department of Insurance do not allow for
discounting of claim liabilities. Activity in the reserve for unpaid claims
and
claim adjustment expenses was as follows for each of the years ended December
31:
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Balance
at January 1
|
$ | 41,083,301 | $ | 46,646,906 | $ | 55,994,375 | ||||||
Less
reinsurance recoverable
|
(16,972,280 | ) | (15,858,000 | ) | (17,302,699 | ) | ||||||
Net
balance at January 1
|
24,111,021 | 30,788,906 | 38,691,676 | |||||||||
Incurred
loss and loss adjustment recovery for prior accident year claims
|
(3,601,091 | ) | (3,224,401 | ) | (3,664,832 | ) | ||||||
Payments
for claims occurring during
|
||||||||||||
prior
accident years
|
(4,787,166 | ) | (3,453,484 | ) | (4,237,938 | ) | ||||||
Net
change for the year
|
(8,388,257 | ) | (6,677,885 | ) | (7,902,770 | ) | ||||||
Net
balance at December 31
|
15,722,764 | 24,111,021 | 30,788,906 | |||||||||
Plus
reinsurance recoverable
|
16,653,254 | 16,972,280 | 15,858,000 | |||||||||
Balance
at December 31
|
$ | 32,376,018 | $ | 41,083,301 | $ | 46,646,906 |
In
2007,
Physicians reported positive development of $2.3 million in its medical
professional line of business. Citation’s property and casualty and workers’
compensation lines of business reported positive development of $1.2 million
and
$39,000, respectively. In
2006,
Physicians reported positive development of $812,000 in its medical professional
line of business. Also in 2006, Citation’s property and casualty and workers’
compensation lines of business reported positive development of $638,000 and
$1.8 million, respectively. In
2005,
Physicians reported positive development of $3.2 million in its medical
professional line of business. Citation’s property and casualty line reported
positive development of $1.8 million offset by adverse development in its
workers’ compensation line of $1.3 million.
12.
|
EMPLOYEE
BENEFITS, COMPENSATION
AND INCENTIVE
PLAN:
|
For
the
year ended December 31, 2007, the Company’s Compensation Committee approved a
$1.5 million discretionary bonus payable to PICO’s President and CEO. No other
bonuses were earned or awarded for 2007. For the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005, the Company recorded $5.9 million and $8.4 million, respectively
in
incentive awards payable to certain members of management in accordance with
the
provisions of the Company’s bonus plan which, if certain thresholds are
attained, is calculated based on growth in book value per share of the Company.
In addition, for the year ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 $1 million and,
$2.8
million, respectively in incentive awards were recorded for certain members
of
Vidler’s management based on the combined net income of Vidler and Nevada
Land and Resource Company in accordance with the related bonus plan.
PICO
maintains a 401(k) defined contribution plan covering substantially all
employees of the Company. Matching contributions are based on a percentage
of
employee compensation. In addition, the Company may make a discretionary profit
sharing contribution at the end of the Plan’s fiscal year within limits
established by the Employee Retirement Income Securities Act. Total contribution
expense for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 was $420,000,
$417,000, and $384,000, respectively.
13.
|
REGULATORY
MATTERS:
|
The
regulations of the Departments of Insurance in the states where the Company’s
insurance subsidiaries are domiciled generally restrict the ability of insurance
companies to pay dividends or make other distributions. Based upon statutory
financial statements filed with the insurance departments as of December 31,
2007, $8 million was available for distribution by the Company’s wholly owned
insurance subsidiaries to the parent company without the prior approval of
the
Department of Insurance in the states in which the Company’s insurance
subsidiaries are domiciled. At December 31, 2007, the total statutory surplus
in
these insurance companies was $105.4 million and apart from the $8 million
noted
above, was unavailable for distribution without Department of Insurance
approval.
74
14.
|
COMMITMENTS
AND
CONTINGENCIES:
|
The
Company leases some of its offices under non-cancelable operating leases that
expire at various dates through 2010. Rent expense for the years
ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 for office space was $454,000, $390,000,
and $325,000, respectively.
Future
minimum payments under all operating leases for the years ending December 31
are
as follows:
Year
|
|
2008
|
$
750,415
|
2009
|
487,179
|
2010
|
395,195
|
2011
|
211,121
|
2012
|
216,821
|
Thereafter
|
2,784,962
|
Total
|
$
4,845,693
|
Neither
PICO nor its subsidiaries are parties to any potentially material pending legal
proceedings other than the following.
Exegy
Litigation:
HyperFeed
Technologies, Inc.
(“Hyperfeed”), our majority-owned subsidiary, was a provider of
enterprise-wide ticker plant and transaction technology software and services
enabling financial institutions to process and use high performance exchange
data with Smart Order Routing and other applications. During 2006, PICO and
HyperFeed negotiated a business combination with Exegy Incorporated (“Exegy”).
On August 25, 2006, PICO, HyperFeed, and Exegy entered into a contribution
agreement, pursuant to which the common stock of HyperFeed owned by PICO
would
have been contributed to Exegy in exchange for Exegy's issuing certain Exegy
stock to PICO. However, in a letter dated November 7, 2006, Exegy
informed PICO and HyperFeed that it was terminating the
agreement.
On
November 13, 2006 Exegy Inc. filed a lawsuit against PICO and HyperFeed in
state
court in Missouri seeking a declaratory judgment that Exegy’s purported November
7, 2006 termination of the August 25, 2006 contribution agreement was
valid. In the event that Exegy’s November 7, 2006 letter is not determined
to be a valid termination of the contribution agreement, Exegy seeks a
declaration that PICO and HyperFeed have materially breached the contribution
agreement, for which Exegy seeks monetary damages and an injunction
against further material breach. Finally, Exegy seeks a declaratory
judgment that if its November 7, 2006 notice of termination was not valid,
and that if (1) PICO and HyperFeed did materially breach the contribution
agreement and (2) a continuing breach cannot be remedied or enjoined, then
Exegy
seeks a declaration that Exegy should be relieved of further performance
under
the Contribution Agreement due to alleged HyperFeed actions deemed by Exegy
to
be inconsistent with the Contribution Agreement. On December 15, 2006 the
lawsuit filed by Exegy was removed from Missouri state court to federal court.
On February 2, 2007, this case was transferred to the United States Bankruptcy
Court, District of Delaware.
On
November 17, 2006 HyperFeed and PICO filed a lawsuit against Exegy in
state court in Illinois. PICO and HyperFeed allege that Exegy, after the
November 7, 2006 letter purporting to terminate the contribution agreement,
used
and continues to use HyperFeed’s confidential and proprietary information in an
unauthorized manner and without HyperFeed’s consent. PICO and HyperFeed are also
seeking a preliminary injunction enjoining Exegy from disclosing, using,
or
disseminating HyperFeed’s confidential and proprietary information, and from
continuing to interfere with HyperFeed’s business relations. PICO and
HyperFeed also seek monetary damages from Exegy. On January 18, 2007 this
case
was removed from Illinois state court to federal bankruptcy court in Illinois.
On February 6, 2007 this case was transferred to the United States Bankruptcy
Court, District of Delaware.
On
July
11, 2007, the parties entered into mediation to attempt to resolve these
two
lawsuits. However, the mediation was unsuccessful and both cases will
resume as adversary proceedings in the United States Bankruptcy Court, District
of Delaware.
HyperFeed
Technologies:
On
November 29, 2006
HyperFeed, an 80%-owned subsidiary of PICO, filed a voluntary petition for
relief under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code captioned In
Re
HyperFeed Technologies, Inc., filed in the United States District Court for
the
District of Delaware, Case No. 06-11357 (CSS). On November 30, 2006, the
bankruptcy court appointed the Chapter 7 Trustee of Hyperfeed’s bankruptcy
estate. Hyperfeed is indebted to PICO pursuant to a Secured Convertible
Promissory Note dated March 30, 2006, in the original principal amount of
$10
million. PICO
asserts it is the largest creditor and interest holder in the bankruptcy
case.
The Trustee is presently investigating PICO’s claims and security
position.
The
Company is subject to various litigation that arises in the ordinary course
of
its business. Based upon information presently available, management is of
the
opinion that resolution of such litigation will not likely have a material
adverse effect on the consolidated financial position, results of operations
or
cash flows of the Company.
75
15.
|
RELATED-PARTY
TRANSACTIONS:
|
On
September 21, 2005 the Company’s Compensation Committee approved new employment
agreements for Ronald Langley, Chairman and John R. Hart, President and Chief
Executive Officer. The new employment agreements took effect on
January 1, 2006 and expire December 31, 2010. Each employment agreement provided
for a beginning annual salary of $1,075,000 subject to an annual cost of living
adjustment similar to that received by other PICO employees. Neither
employment agreement had a change of control clause.
Both
employment agreements also provided for an annual incentive award based on
the
growth of PICO’s book value per share, adjusted for any book value impact by ⅞
of all SAR-related expenses net of tax, above a threshold. An
incentive award was earned under the January 1, 2006 employment agreements
when
PICO’s percentage increase in book value per share for a given fiscal year
exceeded the threshold of 80% of the S&P 500’s annualized total return for
the five previous calendar years. When the threshold is met in that
year, the incentive award would be equal to 5% of the increase in book value
per
share multiplied by the number of shares outstanding at the beginning of the
year. Mr. Langley resigned as Chairman effective December 31,
2007. He was eligible for an annual incentive award based on PICO’s
2007 performance, but none was earned.
The
growth in book value per share exceeded the threshold in 2006 and 2005 and
an
award was accrued in the accompanying consolidated financial statements for
PICO’s President and its Chairman of $4.2 million and $5.9 million,
respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2007, a $1.5 million
discretionary bonus was awarded to PICO’s President and CEO by the Company’s
Compensation Committee for services rendered during the year.
Mr.
Hart
entered into a new employment agreement on May 7, 2007, which replaced his
January 1, 2006 employment agreement. The term of this employment
agreement extend from May 7, 2007 until December 31, 2012. This
agreement provides for an annual incentive award if PICO’s percentage increase
in book value per share for a given fiscal year exceeds the threshold of 80%
of
the S&P 500’s annualized total return for the five previous calendar
years. In that event an incentive award is earned under Mr. Hart’s
May 7, 2007 employment agreement it would be equal to 7.5% of the increase
in
book value per share multiplied by the number of shares outstanding at the
beginning of the year. No such award was earned for the year ended
December 31, 2007.
In
March
2000, an investment partnership registered as PICO Equity Investors, L.P.
acquired 3,333,333 shares of PICO stock for approximately $50 million. PICO
Equity Investors, L.P. an entity managed by PICO Equity Investors Management,
LLC, which is owned by three of PICO ’s current Directors, including the
Chairman, and its President and Chief Executive Officer, will exercise all
voting and investment decisions with respect to these shares for up to 10 years.
There is no monetary compensation for the management of either entity. PICO
used
the $49.8 million net proceeds to develop existing water and water storage
assets, acquire additional water assets, acquire investments, and for general
working capital needs.
In
May
2006 and 2007, PICO Equity Investors, L.P. distributed 1,666,632 shares of
PICO
to its sole partner limited partner, and 34 shares of PICO to its general
partner, PICO Equity Investors Management LLC. At December 31, 2007, PICO Equity
Investors L.P. held 1,666,667 common shares of PICO. There is no
obligation for PICO Holdings to buy back the shares owned by PICO Equity
Investors, L.P.
The
Company entered into agreements with its president and chief executive officer,
and certain other officers and non-employee directors, to defer compensation
into Rabbi Trust accounts held in the name of the Company. The total value
of
the deferred compensation is $52.5 million, of which $1.1 million is in PICO
stock with the balance in various stocks and bonds, is included in the Company’s
consolidated balance sheets. Within these accounts at December 31, 2007, the
following officers and non-employee directors are the beneficiaries of the
following number of PICO common shares: John Hart owns 19,940 PICO shares,
Dr. Richard Ruppert owns 835 PICO shares, John Weil owns
8,084 PICO shares, and Carlos Campbell owns 2,644 PICO shares. The
trustee for the accounts is Huntington National Bank. The accounts are subject
to the claims of outside creditors, and any PICO stock held in the accounts
is
reported as treasury stock in the consolidated financial statements.
76
16.
|
STATUTORY
INFORMATION:
|
The
Company and its insurance subsidiaries are subject to regulation by the
insurance departments of the states of domicile and other states in which the
companies are licensed to operate and file financial statements using statutory
accounting practices prescribed or permitted by the respective Departments
of
Insurance. Prescribed statutory accounting practices include a variety of
publications of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, as well
as
state laws, regulations and general administrative rules. Permitted statutory
accounting practices encompass all accounting practices not so prescribed.
Statutory practices vary in certain respects from generally accepted accounting
principles. The principal variances are as follows:
(1)
|
Certain
assets are designated as
“non-admitted assets” and charged to policyholders’ surplus for statutory
accounting purposes (principally certain agents’ balances and office
furniture and equipment).
|
(2)
|
Equity
in net income of
subsidiaries and affiliates is credited directly to shareholders’ equity
for statutory accounting
purposes.
|
(3)
|
Fixed
maturity securities are
carried at amortized cost.
|
(4)
|
Loss
and loss adjustment expense
reserves and unearned premiums are reported net of the impact of
reinsurance for statutory accounting
purposes.
|
Policyholders’
surplus and net income for the Company's insurance subsidiaries
reported on a statutory basis as of and for each of the
three years ended December 31, 2007:
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Physicians
Insurance Company of Ohio :
|
(Unaudited)
|
|||||||||||
Policyholders'
surplus
|
$ | 80,257,090 | $ | 68,929,902 | $ | 57,409,969 | ||||||
Statutory
net income
|
$ | 3,795,340 | $ | 7,173,897 | $ | 6,514,608 | ||||||
Citation
Insurance Company:
|
||||||||||||
Policyholders'
surplus
|
$ | 25,143,218 | $ | 26,383,195 | $ | 25,401,061 | ||||||
Statutory
net income
|
$ | 2,858,624 | $ | 3,502,998 | $ | 1,655,790 |
Both
Citation and Physicians meet the minimum risk based capital requirements for
the
applicable Departments of Insurance regulations.
17.
|
SEGMENT
REPORTING:
|
PICO
Holdings, Inc. is a diversified holding company. Its goal is to build
and operate businesses where significant value can be created from the
development of unique assets, and to acquire businesses which have
been identified as undervalued and where its participation can aid in
the recognition of the business’s fair value. The Company accounts for segments
as described in the significant accounting policies in Note 1.
Currently
the major businesses that constitute operating and reportable segments are
owning and developing water resources and water storage operations through
Vidler; owning and developing real estate and the related mineral rights and
water rights through Nevada Land; “running off” the property and casualty and
workers’ compensation loss reserves of Citation and the medical professional
liability loss reserves of Physicians; and the acquisition and financing of
businesses.
Segment
performance is measured by revenues and segment profit before income tax.
In addition, assets identifiable with segments are disclosed as well as capital
expenditures, and depreciation and amortization. The Company has operations
and
investments both in the U.S. and abroad. Information by geographic region is
also similarly disclosed.
Water
Resources and Water Storage Operations
Vidler
is
engaged in the following water resources and water storage activities:
·
|
development
of water for
end-users in the southwestern United States, namely water utilities,
municipalities, developers, or industrial users. Typically, the source
of
water is from identifying and developing a new water supply, or a
change
in the use of an existing water supply from agricultural to municipal
and
industrial; and
|
·
|
construction
and development of water storage facilities for the purchase and
recharge
of water for resale in future periods , and distribution infrastructure
to
more efficiently use existing and new supplies of water.
|
Real
Estate Operations
PICO
is
engaged in land and related mineral rights and water rights operations through
its subsidiary Nevada Land. Nevada Land owns approximately 460,000 acres
of land and related mineral and water rights in northern Nevada. Revenue is
generated by sales of real estate, land exchanges and leasing revenue from
grazing, agricultural and other uses. Revenue is also generated from the
development of water rights and mineral rights in the form of outright sales
and
royalty agreements.
Insurance
Operations in Run Off
This
segment is composed of Physicians and Citation. In
this
segment, revenues come from investment holdings of the insurance companies.
Investments directly related to the insurance operations are included within
those segments. As expected during run-off, the majority of revenues is net
investment income and realized gains.
Until
1995, Physicians and its subsidiaries wrote medical professional liability
insurance, primarily in the state of Ohio. Physicians ceased writing new
business and is in “run off.” Run off means that the Company is processing
claims arising from historical business, and selling investments when funds
are
needed to pay claims. Citation
wrote commercial property and casualty insurance in California and Arizona
and
workers’ compensation insurance in California. Citation ceded all its workers’
compensation business in 1997, and ceased writing property and casualty business
in December 2000 and is in run off.
At
the
end of 2006, Physicians purchased PICO European Holdings, LLC. ("PEH"), a wholly
owned U.S. subsidiary of PICO Holdings that was formed in 2005. PEH owns a
portfolio of investment securities in Switzerland. While this transaction is
eliminated in consolidation, the $40.5 million of identifiable assets of PEH
are
reported in Insurance Operations in Run Off at December 31, 2006 and the
previously reported assets of Insurance Operations in Run Off for 2005 have
been
recast to include the $30.1 million of assets of PEH (moved from the Business
Acquisition and Finance segment). The results of operations of PEH for the
year
ended December 31, 2006 included revenues of $1.1 million and expenses of
$253,000 are reported within the Business Acquisition and Finance segment.
For
2007 and future years, the results of PEH and its identifiable assets are
reported in the Insurance Operations in Run Off segment.
Business
Acquisitions and Financing
This
segment consists of acquired businesses, strategic interests in businesses,
as
well as the activities of PICO that are not included in other
segments
PICO
seeks to acquire businesses which are believed to be undervalued based on
fundamental analysis - that is, the assessment of what the company is
worth, based on the private market value of its assets, and, or earnings and
cash flow. The Company has acquired businesses and interests in businesses
through the purchase of private companies and shares in public companies, both
directly through participation in financings and from open market purchases.
77
Segment
information by major operating segment follows:
Water
Resources
|
Insurance
|
Business
|
|||||||||||||||||
Real
Estate
|
and
Water
|
Operations
in
|
Acquisitions
and
|
Discontinued
|
|||||||||||||||
Operations
|
Storage
Operations
|
Run
Off
|
Finance
|
Operations
|
Consolidated
|
||||||||||||||
2007
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$
|
13,479,254
|
$
|
7,937,461
|
$
|
7,609,014
|
$
|
4,903,019
|
$
|
33,928,748
|
|||||||||
Net
investment income
|
3,139,791
|
4,417,871
|
3,457,187
|
6,024,951
|
17,039,800
|
||||||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
18,364
|
1,042,388
|
1,598
|
43,677
|
1,106,027
|
||||||||||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes and minority interest
|
8,108,724
|
(5,283,264
|
)
|
9,779,300
|
(10,591,095)
|
2,013,665
|
|||||||||||||
Total
assets
|
83,750,531
|
231,863,512
|
221,348,861
|
139,379,376
|
676,342,280
|
||||||||||||||
Capital
expenditure
|
10,370
|
59,654,440
|
301,481
|
59,966,291
|
|||||||||||||||
2006
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$
|
41,405,577
|
$
|
6,181,616
|
$
|
13,277,532
|
$
|
21,858,519
|
$
|
82,723,244
|
|||||||||
Net
investment income
|
1,981,172
|
2,805,107
|
3,158,955
|
5,610,958
|
13,556,192
|
||||||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
54,223
|
1,084,404
|
7,467
|
76,257
|
1,222,351
|
||||||||||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes and minority interest
|
30,499,188
|
(2,451,422)
|
15,980,096
|
6,838,884
|
50,866,746
|
||||||||||||||
Total
assets
|
73,266,068
|
146,115,727
|
202,356,668
|
127,304,476
|
549,042,939
|
||||||||||||||
Capital
expenditure
|
79,938
|
30,117,492
|
27,337
|
30,224,767
|
|||||||||||||||
2005
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$
|
21,811,469
|
$
|
106,448,584
|
$
|
8,108,639
|
$
|
5,743,002
|
$
|
142,111,694
|
|||||||||
Net
investment income
|
1,010,194
|
1,177,078
|
3,051,278
|
2,956,623
|
8,195,173
|
||||||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
269,954
|
391,360
|
661,314
|
||||||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
81,228
|
1,172,974
|
11,276
|
78,893
|
1,344,371
|
||||||||||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes and minority interest
|
12,038,040
|
56,211,819
|
10,539,533
|
(38,463,986
|
)
|
40,325,406
|
|||||||||||||
Total
assets
|
66,513,641
|
86,353,051
|
187,112,896
|
97,234,516
|
$
|
4,615,518
|
441,829,622
|
||||||||||||
Capital
expenditure
|
5,947
|
4,658,969
|
122,753
|
4,787,669
|
78
Segment
information by significant geographic region:
United
|
||||||||||||
States
|
Europe
|
Consolidated
|
||||||||||
2007
|
||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$ | 32,341,826 | $ | 1,586,922 | $ | 33,928,748 | ||||||
Net
investment income
|
15,493,618 | 1,546,182 | 17,039,800 | |||||||||
Interest
expense
|
- | |||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,106,027 | 1,106,027 | ||||||||||
Income
before income taxes and minority interest
|
1,876,937 | 136,728 | 2,013,665 | |||||||||
Total
assets
|
602,778,894 | 73,563,386 | 676,342,280 | |||||||||
Capital
expenditure
|
59,966,291 | 59,966,291 | ||||||||||
2006
|
||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$ | 69,553,292 | $ | 13,169,952 | $ | 82,723,244 | ||||||
Net
investment income
|
11,858,886 | 1,697,306 | 13,556,192 | |||||||||
Interest
expense
|
- | |||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,222,351 | 1,222,351 | ||||||||||
Income
before income taxes and minority interest
|
40,573,284 | 10,293,462 | 50,866,746 | |||||||||
Total
assets
|
442,694,654 | 106,348,285 | 549,042,939 | |||||||||
Capital
expenditure
|
30,224,767 | 30,224,767 | ||||||||||
2005
|
||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$ | 138,895,359 | $ | 3,216,335 | $ | 142,111,694 | ||||||
Net
investment income
|
6,762,721 | 1,432,452 | 8,195,173 | |||||||||
Interest
expense
|
269,954 | 391,360 | 661,314 | |||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,344,371 | 1,344,371 | ||||||||||
Income
before income taxes and minority interest
|
39,529,439 | 795,967 | 40,325,406 | |||||||||
Total
assets
|
356,663,916 | 85,165,706 | 441,829,622 | |||||||||
Capital
expenditure
|
4,787,669 | 4,787,669 |
18.
|
DISCLOSURES
ABOUT FAIR VALUE
OF FINANCIAL
INSTRUMENTS:
|
The
following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each
class of financial instruments for which it is practicable to estimate that
fair
value:
|
-
|
CASH AND CASH
EQUIVALENTS,
SHORT-TERM
INVESTMENTS, RECEIVABLES, PAYABLES AND ACCRUED
LIABILITIES: Carrying
amounts for these items approximate fair value because of the short
maturity of these
instruments.
|
|
-
|
INVESTMENTS:
Fair values are
estimated based on quoted market prices, or dealer quotes for the
actual
or comparable securities. Fair value of warrants to purchase common
stock
of publicly traded companies is estimated based on values determined
by
the use of accepted valuation models. Fair value for equity securities
that do not have a readily determinable fair value is estimated based
on
the value of the underlying common stock. The Company regularly evaluates
the carrying value of securities to determine whether there has been
any
diminution in value that is other-than-temporary and adjusts the
value
accordingly.
|
|
-
|
BORROWINGS:
Carrying amounts for
these items approximates fair value because current interest rates
and,
therefore, discounted future cash flows for the terms and amounts
of loans
disclosed in Note 4, are not significantly different from the original
terms.
|
December
31, 2007
|
December
31, 2006
|
|||||||||||||||
Carrying
|
Estimated
|
Carrying
|
Estimated
|
|||||||||||||
Amount
|
Fair
Value
|
Amount
|
Fair
Value
|
|||||||||||||
Financial
assets:
|
||||||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
$ | 105,780,499 | $ | 105,780,499 | $ | 63,483,271 | $ | 63,483,271 | ||||||||
Equity
securities
|
259,743,145 | 259,743,145 | 208,478,670 | 208,478,670 | ||||||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
70,791,025 | 70,791,025 | 136,621,578 | 136,621,578 | ||||||||||||
Financial
liabilities:
|
||||||||||||||||
Borrowings
|
18,878,080 | 18,878,080 | 12,720,558 | 12,720,558 |
79
None.
ITEM
9A.
|
CONTROLS
AND
PROCEDURES
|
Evaluation
of
Disclosure Controls and Procedures. The Company maintains
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) of the
Securities Exchange Act) designed to provide reasonable assurance that the
information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports that it
files
or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and
reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. These
include controls and procedures designed to ensure that this information
is
accumulated and communicated to the Company’s management, including its Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely
decisions regarding required disclosure. Management, with the participation
of
the Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officers, evaluated the effectiveness
of
the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2007.
Based on this evaluation, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer have concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and
procedures were effective as of December 31, 2007 at the reasonable
assurance level.
Management’s
Annual
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Management
of the Company is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate
internal
control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the
Exchange Act). The Company’s internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability
of
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external
purposes of accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States.
Because
of its
inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not
prevent
or detect misstatements. Therefore, even those systems determined to be
effective can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving their control
objectives. Management,
with the
participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2007. In making this assessment, management
used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the
Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control — Integrated Framework.
Based on this evaluation, management, with the participation of the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, concluded that, as of
December 31, 2007, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting
was effective.
Deloitte
and Touche
LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm who audited the
Company’s
consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K, has issued a
report on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, which is
included herein.
Changes
in Internal
Control over Financial Reporting. There
were no changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the quarter ended
December 31, 2007, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely
to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting.
80
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To
the Board of Directors and Stockholders of PICO Holdings,
Inc.
PICO
Holdings, Inc.
La
Jolla, CA
We
have audited the internal control over financial reporting of PICO
Holdings, Inc. and
subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2007, based on criteria
established in Internal
Control — Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
The Company's
management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over
financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s
Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's
internal control over financial reporting based on our
audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United
States).
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting
was
maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an
understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the
risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating
effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion.
A
company's
internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under
the
supervision of, the company's
principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing
similar functions, and effected by the company's
board of directors, management, and other personnel to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("generally
accepted accounting principles"). A company's
internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures
that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail,
accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets
of
the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded
as
necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures
of
the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management
and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding
prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition
of the company's
assets that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Because
of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting,
including the possibility of collusion or improper management override of
controls, material misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented
or
detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the
effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future
periods
are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of
changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies
or
procedures may deteriorate.
In
our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based
on the
criteria established in Internal
Control — Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission.
We
have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated financial
statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007 of the Company
and our report dated February 27, 2008 expressed an unqualified opinion on
those
financial statements and included an explanatory paragraph relating to the
adoption of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation No.
48,
Accounting
for Uncertainty in Income Taxes - an interpretation of FASB Statement No.
109, effective January 1, 2007, and of FASB Statement No. 123 (revised
2004), Share-Based
Payment, effective January 1, 2006.
/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
San
Diego, CA
February
27, 2008
81
ITEM
9B.
|
None.
PART
III
ITEM
10.
|
DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
|
The
information required by this item regarding directors will be set forth in
the
section headed “Election of Directors” in our definitive proxy statement with
respect to our 2008 annual meeting of shareholders, to be filed on or before
April 30, 2008 and is incorporated herein by reference. The information required
by this item regarding the Company’s code of ethics will be set forth in the
section headed “Code Of Ethics” in our definitive 2008 proxy statement and is
incorporated herein by reference. Information regarding executive officers
is
set forth in Item 1 of Part 1 of this Report under the caption “Executive
Officers.”
ITEM
11.
|
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
|
The
information required by this item will be set forth in the section headed
“Executive Compensation” in our 2008 definitive proxy statement and is
incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM
12.
|
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN
BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT,
AND
RELATED
STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS
|
The
information required by this item will be set forth in the section headed
“Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” in our 2008
definitive proxy statement and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM
13.
|
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS
AND RELATED
TRANSACTIONS,
AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
|
The
information required by this item will be set forth in the section headed
“Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” and “Compensation Committee,
Interlocks and Insider Participation” in our definitive 2008 proxy statement and
is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM
14.
|
PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTING FEES
AND SERVICES
|
The
information required by this item will be set forth in the section headed “Fees
Paid to Deloitte & Touche LLP” in our definitive 2008 proxy statement and is
incorporated herein by reference.
82
PART
IV
|
(a)
|
FINANCIAL
SCHEDULES AND EXHIBITS.
|
|
1.
|
Financial
Statement
Schedules.
|
None.
|
2.
|
Exhibits
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Description
|
|
3(i)
|
Amended
and Restated Articles of Incorporation of PICO.(1)
|
|
3(ii)
|
Amended
and Restated By-laws of PICO. (2)
|
|
4.1
|
Form
of Securities Purchase Agreement between PICO Holdings, Inc. and
the
Purchasers. (3)
|
|
4.3
|
Form
S-3 Registration Statement under the Securities Act of 1933. (4)
|
|
10.1
|
PICO
Holdings, Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan. (5)
|
|
10.4
|
Bonus
Plan of Dorothy A. Timian-Palmer. (6) (12)
|
|
10.5
|
Bonus
Plan of Stephen D. Hartman. (6) (12)
|
|
10.7
|
Employment
Agreement of Ronald Langley. (7) (12)
|
|
10.15
|
Employment
Agreement of John R. Hart. (8) (12)
|
|
10.17
|
Pyramid
Lake Paiute Tribe Settlement Agreement with Fish Springs Ranch,
LLC. (9)
|
|
10.18
|
Infrastructure
Dediction Agreement between Fish Springs Ranch, LLC and Washoe
County,
Nevada.
(10)
|
|
21.1
|
Subsidiaries
of PICO. (11)
|
|
23.1
|
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm - Deloitte & Touche
LLP.
|
|
31.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)
as adopted
pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)
as adopted
pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (Section
906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002).
|
|
32.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (Section
906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002).
|
|
(1)
|
Incorporated
by reference to
exhibit of same number filed with Form 10-Q dated November 7,
2007.
|
|
(2)
|
Incorporated
by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on November 5, 2007.
|
|
(3)
|
Incorporated
by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 2, 2007.
|
|
(4)
|
Incorporated
by reference to Form
S-3 filed with SEC on November 20,
2007.
|
|
(5)
|
Incorporated
by reference to
Proxy Statement for Special Meeting of Shareholders on December 8,
2005, dated November
8, 2005 and filed
with the SEC on
November 8,
2005.
|
|
(6)
|
Incorporated
by reference to Form
8-K filed with the SEC on February 25,
2005.
|
|
(7)
|
Incorporated
by reference to
exhibit of same number filed with Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended
September
30,
2005.
|
|
(8)
|
Incorporated
by reference to Form
8-K filed with the SEC on May 9, 2007.
|
|
(9)
|
Incorporated
by reference to Form
8-K filed with the SEC on June 5, 2007.
|
|
(10)
|
Incorporated
by reference to exhibit of same number filed with Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2007.
|
(11)
|
Incorporated
by reference to exhibit of same number filed with Form 10-K for
the year
ended December 31, 2007.
|
|
(12) | Indicates arrangement or compensatory plan or arrangement required to be identified pursuant to Item 15(a). |
83
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.
Date: February
27, 2008
|
PICO Holdings, Inc. | |
|
By: |
/s/John
R. Hart
|
John
R. Hart
|
||
Chief
Executive Officer
|
||
President
and Director
|
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has
been
signed below on February 29, 2008 by the following persons in the capacities
indicated.
/s/
John D. Weil
|
Chairman
of the Board
|
|
John
D. Weil
|
||
/s/
John R. Hart
|
Chief
Executive Officer, President and Director
|
|
John
R. Hart
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|
/s/
Maxim C. W. Webb
|
Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
|
Maxim
C. W. Webb
|
(Chief
Accounting Officer)
|
|
/s/
Ronald Langley
|
Director
|
|
Ronald
Langley
|
||
/s/
Richard D. Ruppert, MD
|
Director
|
|
Richard
D. Ruppert, MD
|
||
/s/
S. Walter Foulkrod, III,
Esq.
|
Director
|
|
S.
Walter Foulkrod, III, Esq.
|
||
/s/
Carlos C. Campbell
|
Director
|
|
Carlos
C. Campbell
|
||
/s/
Kenneth J. Slepicka
|
Director
|
|
Kenneth
J. Slepicka
|
84