VIDLER WATER RESOURCES, INC. - Annual Report: 2008 (Form 10-K)
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
(MARK
ONE )
|
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008
OR
|
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 x
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 x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes x No
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 Yes x
|
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 x
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, 2008 the last
business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter,
was $739,511,961.
On
February 27, 2009, the registrant had 18,840,392 shares of common stock, $.001
par value, outstanding.
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 2009 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, 2008.
ANNUAL
REPORT ON FORM 10-K
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Page
No.
|
|||
PART I
|
|||
Item
1.
|
1
|
||
Item
1A.
|
4
|
||
Item
1B.
|
8
|
||
Item
2.
|
PROPERTIES
|
8
|
|
Item
3.
|
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
|
8
|
|
Item
4.
|
SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY
HOLDERS
|
8
|
|
PART II
|
|||
Item
5.
|
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED
STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|
9
|
|
Item
6.
|
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
|
10
|
|
Item
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
|
11
|
|
Item
7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT
MARKET RISK
|
32
|
|
Item
8.
|
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY
DATA
|
32
|
|
Item
9.
|
CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON
ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
|
63
|
|
Item
9A.
|
CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
|
63
|
|
Item
9B.
|
OTHER INFORMATION
|
65
|
|
PART III
|
|||
Item
10.
|
DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
|
65
|
|
Item
11.
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
|
65
|
|
Item
12.
|
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS
AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
|
65
|
|
Item
13.
|
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS,
AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
|
65
|
|
Item
14.
|
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND
SERVICES
|
65
|
|
PART IV
|
|||
Item
15.
|
EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
66
|
|
SIGNATURES
|
67
|
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 and are not guarantees of future performance.
Consequently, forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risk
and uncertainties, and the actual results and outcomes could differ materially
from future results and outcomes expressed or implied by such forward-looking
statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences in
results and outcomes include, without limitation, those discussed under Part I,
Item 1A “Risk Factors”, as well as those discussed elsewhere in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K and in other filings we may make from time to time with the
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, and the other filings we may make from time
to time with the SEC after the date of this report, 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. is a diversified holding company. In this Annual
Report, PICO and its subsidiaries are collectively referred to as “PICO”, “the
Company”, or by words such as “we” and “our”. 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;
|
·
|
Insurance Operations in “Run Off”;
and
|
·
|
Corporate (formerly known as “Business
Acquisitions & Financing”).
|
As
of December 31, 2008, our major consolidated subsidiaries
are:
|
|
·
|
Vidler
Water Company, Inc. (“Vidler”), a business that we started more than 11
years ago, which 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 & Resource Company, LLC (“Nevada Land”), an operation that we
built since we acquired the company more than 11 years ago, which
currently owns approximately 440,000 acres of former railroad land in
Nevada, and certain mineral rights and water rights related to the
property;
|
·
|
UCP,
LLC (“UCP”), a business we started in 2008, which acquires and develops
partially-developed and finished residential housing lots in selected
markets in California;
|
·
|
Physicians
Insurance Company of Ohio (“Physicians”), which is “running off” its
medical professional liability insurance loss reserves;
and
|
·
|
Citation
Insurance Company (“Citation”), which is "running off”
its property & casualty insurance and workers’ compensation loss
reserves.
|
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.
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 this 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, Inc. 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:
·
|
certain
areas of the Southwest experiencing growth have insufficient known
supplies of water to support future growth. Vidler identifies and develops
new water supplies for communities with limited economic 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 the demand is, or
permitting of the infrastructure required to convey the water, or both;
and
|
·
|
infrastructure
to recharge water will be required to store supplies during times of
surplus to enable transfers from stored supplies in years where
augmentation of existing supplies is required (for example, in
drought conditions).
|
We
entered the water resource development business with our acquisition of Vidler
in 1995. At the time, Vidler owned a limited quantity of water rights and
related assets in Colorado. Since then, Vidler has acquired or
developed:
·
|
additional
water rights and related assets, predominantly in Nevada and Arizona, two
of the leading states in population growth and new home construction over
the past several years. 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, which is 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 (that is, the most economical source
of water supply) to support new growth in municipalities or new commercial
developments; and
|
·
|
a
water storage facility in Arizona. At December 31, 2008, Vidler had “net
recharge credits” of more than 173,000 acre-feet of water in storage for
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 an area of 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 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
generates revenues by:
|
·
|
selling
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 facility in Arizona 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.
|
The
following table details the water rights and water storage assets owned by
Vidler or its subsidiaries at December 31, 2008. 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 real estate.
|
Leased
to farmers.
|
Nevada:
|
||
Fish
Springs Ranch, LLC (51% interest)
Washoe
County, 40 miles north of Reno
|
12,987
acre-feet of permitted water rights, 7,987 acre-feet of which are
designated as water credits and are available for sale and use in the
north valleys of Reno.
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
|
Water
rights applications for 4,000 acre-feet.
|
Agreement
to sell permitted water for proposed developments in Sandy
Valley.
|
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.
|
Currently
leased to Southern Nevada Water Authority and available for specific
development projects in the future.
|
Dry Lake
Lincoln
County, Nevada
|
Approximately
795 acres of real estate with stock water rights.
|
Development
of water resource for use in Dry Lake valley to be utilized from water
applications by Lincoln/Vidler.
|
Carson
River
Carson
City, Lyon County and Douglas County, Nevada
|
Approximately
1,070 acre-feet of municipal use water rights and 3,500 acre-feet of
Carson River agricultural use water rights.
Options
over 2,800 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.
950
acres of developable real estate.
|
Parceled
into 4 developable lots.
Available
for development.
|
|
Other
states:
|
||
Colorado
water rights
|
176
acre-feet of water rights.
|
66
acre-feet leased.
110
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
|
||
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 at least
35,000 acre-feet.
|
Vidler
is currently buying water and storing it on its own account. At December
31, 2008, Vidler had net recharge credits of approximately 173,667
acre-feet of water in storage at the Arizona Recharge Facility. In
addition, Vidler has ordered approximately 48,700 acre-feet of water for
recharge in 2009.
|
1
Real
Estate Operations
Our Real
Estate Operations are primarily conducted through Nevada Land and
UCP.
Nevada
Land
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 or control 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, farming, ranching, and from industrial
users;
|
·
|
the
development of water rights. Nevada Land has applied for additional
water rights and 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, 2008, Nevada Land owns approximately 440,000 acres of former
railroad land.
In recent
years, Nevada Land has filed additional applications for approximately 47,497
acre-feet of water rights on its properties. 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, or alternative energy requirements.
UCP
UCP was
formed in 2007 with the objective of acquiring attractive and well-located
finished and partially-developed residential lots, primarily in
California. During 2008, most of UCP’s efforts were focused on the
Fresno Metropolitan Area, which is located in the San Joaquin Valley area in
central California. As is the case in most regions of California,
medium-sized regional developers and homebuilders operating in Fresno have
experienced liquidity challenges and are rapidly deleveraging as a result of the
severe downturn in the real estate market.
We
believe UCP’s analysis of the Fresno Metropolitan Area, which indicates that,
despite the difficult conditions in the current housing market, there are still
attractive opportunities for select real estate projects. UCP acquires
properties with compelling valuations (that is, our purchase price
has to be at a steep discount to our estimated cost to replace like product) in
areas where there appear to be sound demand fundamentals constricted by a
limited supply of buildable lots (that is, finished lots) and declining resale
home inventory. While we are unable to predict when the housing market will
recover, we fully anticipate and are prepared to carry and develop our projects
for several years until homebuilders start to replenish their inventory of lots.
We believe we will generate our minimum required economic return despite the
potential long duration of these projects, as our acquisition basis is low and
our carrying and development costs are, typically, relatively
insignificant.
As of
December 31, 2008, UCP owns or controls a total of 389 finished lots and 1,501
potential lots in various stages of entitlement, all in and around the Fresno
Metropolitan Area.
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 claims on expired policies, but not writing any
new business). Physicians wrote its last policy in 1995; however,
claims can be filed until 2017 related to 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 interest and dividend income, and
realized gains and losses, from the securities investments 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.
Administering
our own “run off” also provides us with the following
opportunities:
·
|
we
retain management of the associated investment portfolios. 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, 2008, Physicians had $3.8 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 its financial statements for the 2003 financial year , prepared on
both the statutory basis of accounting, and generally accepted accounting
principles in the U.S., or “GAAP”. 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 handling and payment of claims for Citation’s
workers’ compensation insurance “run off” book of business.
At
December 31, 2008, Citation had $8.1 million in loss reserves, net of
reinsurance. Citation’s loss reserves consist of $645,000 for property and
casualty insurance, principally in the artisans/contractors line of business,
and approximately $7.4 million for workers’ compensation insurance.
Corporate
Formerly
known as “Business Acquisitions and Financing”, this segment consists of cash,
majority interests in small businesses, and other parent company assets and
liabilities. This segment also contains the deferred compensation
assets held in trust for the benefit of several PICO officers, as well as the
corresponding and offsetting deferred compensation
liabilities. Revenues in this segment vary considerably from
period to period, primarily due to fluctuations in net realized gains or losses
on the sale or impairment of securities. At December 31, 2008,
virtually all of the securities held in this segment are deferred compensation
assets.
Until
April 2008, the largest asset in this segment was a 22.5% shareholding in
Jungfraubahn Holding AG, which was held by our wholly-owned Swiss subsidiary,
Global Equity AG. Jungfraubahn is a publicly-traded company which
operates railway and related tourism and transport activities in the Swiss
Alps. On April 22, 2008, Global Equity AG sold its interest in Jungfraubahn
for net proceeds of 75.5 million Swiss Francs (“CHF”), or approximately US$75.3
million. The sale of Jungfraubahn resulted in a gain of $46.1 million
before taxes in our consolidated statement of operations in the
2008.
The
majority of the sales proceeds were immediately converted into U.S.
dollars. In December 2008, Global Equity AG declared a dividend, and
repatriated most of the remaining sale proceeds to the U.S. As of
December 31, 2008, Global Equity AG’s assets principally consist of a CHF6.8
million (US$6.3 million) “at call” bank deposit denominated in Swiss
Francs.
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. Our holdings have changed over time, so results in this segment are not
necessarily comparable from year to year.
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.
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 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.
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”.
2
Employees
At
December 31, 2008, PICO had 64 employees.
Executive
Officers
The
executive officers of PICO are as follows:
Name
|
Age
|
Position
|
John R. Hart
|
49
|
President,
Chief Executive Officer and Director
|
Richard H.
Sharpe
|
53
|
Executive
Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
Damian C.
Georgino
|
48
|
Executive
Vice President of Corporate Development and Chief Legal
Officer
|
James
F. Mosier
|
61
|
General
Counsel and Secretary
|
Maxim
C. W. Webb
|
47
|
Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer
|
W.
Raymond Webb
|
47
|
Vice
President, Investments
|
John T. Perri
|
39
|
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.
3
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS
The
following information sets out 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. There may be other additional
risks, not presently known to us, which 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, economic, demographic and
technological factors as well as the relative strength of the residential,
commercial, financial, 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, negatively affect our financial condition and cash
flows, 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 170,000 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. The total cost
of the pipeline project was approximately $100.9 million. 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. Although the current market pricing of water in the
area greatly exceeds our total estimated cost of the pipeline, we cannot provide
any assurance that the sales prices we may obtain in the future will provide an
adequate economic return. Furthermore, the principal buyers of this
water are largely real estate developers who are having to contend with the
effects of the current economic downturn and if our negotiations with these
buyers 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.
General
economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on our financial
results, financial condition and our ability to grow or finance our
businesses.
We are
sensitive to general economic conditions, both nationally and locally, as well
as international economic conditions. General economic conditions and
the effects of a recession could have a material adverse effect on the demand
for our real estate and water assets, near-term cash flow from operations,
results of operations, financial condition and our ability to grow our business.
These conditions include higher unemployment, inflation, deflation, increased
commodity costs, decreases in consumer demand, changes in buying patterns, a
weakened dollar, general transportation and fuel costs, higher consumer debt
levels, higher tax rates and other changes in tax laws or other economic factors
that may affect commercial and residential development. Specifically,
the recent increase in national unemployment may delay a recovery of the
residential real estate market, which could adversely affect the demand for our
real estate and water assets. Any prolonged lack of demand for our real estate
and water assets could have a significant adverse affect on our revenues,
profitability, and cash flows.
A
prolonged continuation of the significant and sustained downturn that the
homebuilding industry is undergoing will materially adversely affect our
business and results of operations.
The
homebuilding industry is experiencing a significant and sustained downturn
having been impacted by lack of consumer confidence, housing affordability and
large supplies of resale and new home inventories and alternatives to new
homes. These factors have resulted in an industry-wide softening of
demand for new homes. These conditions in the homebuilding industry
have a material adverse effect on the growth of the local economies in our
markets where our real estate and water assets are located, which include
Nevada, Arizona, California, Colorado and Idaho. Among other
considerations, continuation of the residential and commercial real estate
development process is essential for our profitability. Additionally,
current economic credit conditions have adversely impacted global credit markets
and have restricted liquidity in financial markets. These conditions
could adversely affect the availability and cost of capital. Economic
conditions, including restricted liquidity in financial markets, could adversely
impact various development projects within the markets in which our real estate
and water assets are located and this could materially affect our ability to
monetize such assets. Declines in the U.S. housing market have
reduced revenues and profitability in our real estate and water resource
businesses and may continue to do so in the future.
We
may not be able to realize the anticipated value of our real estate and water
assets on our projected timeframe, if at all.
The
financial markets are experiencing significant volatility, driven by continued
fallout from the credit crisis and overall weakening global
economy. We expect that the current downturn will have a near term
adverse effect on real estate market fundamentals, including tenant demand,
overall occupancies, leasing velocity and rental rates, and will lead to
increased subletting and tenant defaults. These events have impacted
the values of commercial real estate assets, including potentially our real
estate and water assets. Values of real estate assets have declined
from the values achieved over the last 24 months. It is uncertain how
much of the declines are attributable to the current illiquidity and volatility
in the markets, the prospects of a deepening recession and its impact on real
estate or a longer-term re-pricing of real estate assets. Depending
on how the markets perform over the next several months, or years, these events
could result in a decline in the value of our existing real estate and water
assets, result in our having to retain such assets for longer than we initially
expected, cause us to divest such assets for less than our intended return on
investment, or cause us to write-down such assets to realizable
value. Such events would adversely impact our profitability, cash
flows and financial condition.
The
fair values of our real estate and water assets are linked to growth factors
concerning the local markets in which we operate and may be impacted by broader
economic issues.
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 recent
increase in national unemployment and issues related to the credit markets may
deepen or prolong a slowdown of these local economies. This could
materially and adversely affect the demand for our real estate and water assets
and, consequently, our growth, revenues, and the return on our investment in
these assets.
4
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 over time as and when we deem appropriate or as otherwise
required. 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, we can not provide any assurance that
we will be awarded all of the water that 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.
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 volume (amounts in 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.
If we
do not successfully identify, select and manage acquisitions and investments, or
if our acquisitions or investments otherwise fail or decline in value, our
financial condition could suffer.
We
acquire and invest in businesses and assets that we believe are undervalued or
that will benefit from additional capital, restructuring of operations,
strategic initiatives, or improved competitiveness through operational
efficiencies. If an acquired business, investment or asset 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. If we fail to
successfully identify, select and manage acquisition and investment
opportunities, particularly water and water rights, our business, financial
condition, the results of operations and cash flows could be materially
affected. Such business failures, declines in fair values, and/or
failure to successfully identify, 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.
Future
acquisitions and dispositions of our businesses, assets, operations and
investments are possible, and, if unsuccessful, could reduce the value of our
common shares. Any future acquisitions or dispositions may result in
significant changes in the composition of our assets and
liabilities. Consequently, our financial condition, results of
operations and the trading price of our common shares may be affected by factors
different from those affecting our financial condition, results of operations
and trading price at the present time.
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.
We
operate in a variety of industries and market sectors, all of which are very
competitive and susceptible to economic downturns and would be adversely
affected by a recession. A worsening of general economic or market
conditions may require us to devote more of our management resources to newly
acquired companies and may result in lower valuations for our businesses or
investments or have a negative impact on the credit quality of our
assets.
Our
acquisitions may result in dilution to our shareholders and increase our
exposure to additional 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. Additionally, 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, if any, 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, the ability of management to
implement their strategic and operational directives, cyclical or uneven
financial results, technological obsolescence, foreign currency risks and
regulatory delays.
5
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.
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.
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,
Colorado and Idaho. 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 condition would decline.
Our
insurance companies hold material positions in equities and fixed-income
securities which have significantly declined in value during 2008, causing
volatility in our profitability and financial condition.
Our
insurance subsidiaries hold significant positions in equities and fixed-income
securities as part of their investment portfolios to cover payments for
insurance claims and related costs established in our reserves for unpaid loss
and loss adjustment expenses. During 2008, our insurance company
investment portfolios significantly declined in value as global equity and
fixed-income markets in general declined in response to the weakening global
economy and the tightening of credit availability. As a result of the
decline in value of our securities, our financial condition has suffered and, in
the future, any volatility in our insurance investment portfolios could
adversely impact our financial condition and cash flows. Furthermore,
if the duration and extent of the declines in value of any of our securities are
prolonged, we may have to provide other-than-temporary impairments against such
securities which will adversely impact our profitability. In
addition, our insurance subsidiaries’ investment portfolios consist in part of
thinly-traded U.S. and non-U.S. equities. These equity securities are
illiquid in nature and we cannot provide any assurance that we can timely,
effectively, and efficiently liquidate and monetize those
positions.
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, businesses and 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
deleterious 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. We
also may be unable to effectively and efficiently repatriate funds into the U.S.
upon monetization of assets, securities, or businesses not located in the U.S.,
which could have an impact on our liquidity.
Volatile
fluctuations in our insurance reserves could cause our financial condition to be
materially misstated.
Our insurance
subsidiaries have established reserves 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. Inadequate 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 if we discover an
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 reserves been adequately
estimated.
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, precise reserve
estimates cannot be made 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. We may need to significantly
increase the reserves in the future, and the future level of reserves for our
insurance subsidiaries may be volatile. 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 with reinsurance companies on all of our insurance books
of business. 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.
6
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, 2008, 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.
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
upon our business. 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. Also,
increased competition for skilled management and staff employees in our
businesses could cause us to experience significant increases in operating costs
and reduced profitability.
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,
which are based on historical experience and on various other assumptions that
are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. The results of
these evaluations form 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.
Because our operations are diverse,
analysts and investors may not be able to evaluate us
adequately, which may negatively influence the price of our
stock.
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 will
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. In addition, 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
acquisitions, 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
provide any assurance that such resources will be sufficient to fund the
long-term growth of our business and acquisitions. 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 may
experience difficulty in raising necessary capital in view of the recent
volatility in the capital markets and increases in the cost of
finance. Increasingly stringent rating standards could make it more
difficult for use to obtain financing. If we raise additional funds
through the issuance of equity or convertible debt securities, the percentage
ownership of our shareholders could be significantly diluted, and these newly
issued securities may have rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of
existing shareholders. 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 provide any
assurance that any additional financing we may 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, respond to
competitive pressures or otherwise execute our strategic plan would be
significantly limited. In any such case, our business, operating
results or financial condition could be materially adversely
affected.
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, from time to time we or our subsidiaries will
have disputes with companies or individuals which may result in litigation that
could necessitate our management’s attention and require us to expend our
resources. We may be unable to accurately assess our level of
exposure to specific litigation and we cannot provide any assurance that we will
always be able to resolve such disputes out of court or on terms favorable to
us. We may be forced to resolve litigation in a manner not favorable
to us, and such resolution could have a material adverse impact on our
consolidated financial condition or results of operations.
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 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.
We
are impacted by international affairs, which directly exposes us to the adverse
effects of any foreign economic or governmental instability.
Because
our investments are globally diversified, our business, financial condition,
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. tax
laws;
|
·
|
political
and economic instability;
|
·
|
volatile
interest rates;
|
·
|
exchange
controls which may limit our ability to withdraw money;
and
|
·
|
general
economic conditions outside the United
States.
|
Changes
in any or all of these factors could result in reduced market values of our
investments, loss of assets, additional expenses, reduced investment income,
reductions in shareholders’ equity due to foreign currency
fluctuations. If we were to experience any of these negative effects,
we may be required to reduce our global diversification.
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.
7
ITEM
1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
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 approximately
1,530 square feet of office space for a claims office in Orange County,
California. Vidler and Nevada Land lease approximately 6,859 square feet of
office space in Carson City, Nevada. UCP leases a total of
approximately 2,240 square feet of office space in San Jose, California and
Fresno, California. 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.
Vidler,
Nevada Land and UCP have significant holdings of real estate and water assets in
the southwestern United States. For a description of our real estate
and water assets, see “Item 1-Operating Segments and Major
Subsidiary Companies.”
We are
subject to various litigation arising in the ordinary course of our business.
Our insurance companies 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 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 its 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
during 2009. The settlement agreement required Fish Springs
Ranch to take the following action with respect to the Tribe:
·
|
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 Offered Rate, or LIBOR, from January 8, 2009, if the
payment is made after that date.
|
There are
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 we will obtain such regulatory approval in the
future.
No
matters were submitted during the fourth quarter of 2008 to a vote of our
shareholders, through the solicitation of proxies or
otherwise.
8
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.
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||||
High
|
Low
|
High
|
Low
|
|||||||||||||
First
Quarter
|
$
|
34.30
|
$
|
29.47
|
$
|
47.21
|
$
|
34.10
|
||||||||
Second
Quarter
|
$
|
44.45
|
$
|
31.44
|
$
|
48.29
|
$
|
43.26
|
||||||||
Third
Quarter
|
$
|
48.22
|
$
|
35.91
|
$
|
47.22
|
$
|
40.21
|
||||||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
$
|
35.52
|
$
|
17.97
|
$
|
43.44
|
$
|
33.62
|
On
February 26, 2009, the closing sale price of our common stock was $21.48, and
there were approximately 562 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.
Company
Stock Performance Graph
This
graph compares the total return on an indexed basis of a $100 investment in PICO
common 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 calendar 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)
|
||||
10/1/08
- 10/31/08
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
11/1/08
- 11/30/08
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
12/1/08
- 12/31/08
|
-
|
-
|
(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,
2008, we have not repurchased any stock under this authorization.
9
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,
|
||||||||||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||||||||||
OPERATING
RESULTS
|
(In
thousands, except share data)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total
investment income
|
$
|
46,373
|
$
|
19,788
|
$
|
39,609
|
$
|
15,917
|
$
|
9,056
|
||||||||||
Sale
of real estate and water assets (includes gain on sale of water storage of
$8.7 million in 2008)
|
12,054
|
9,496
|
41,509
|
124,984
|
10,879
|
|||||||||||||||
Other
income
|
1,925
|
4,645
|
1,605
|
1,210
|
2,188
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$
|
60,352
|
$
|
33,929
|
$
|
82,723
|
$
|
142,111
|
$
|
22,123
|
||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
$
|
28,631
|
$
|
(1,270)
|
$
|
31,511
|
$
|
22,267
|
$
|
(7,860)
|
|
|||||||||
Loss
from discontinued operations, net
|
(2,268)
|
|
(6,065)
|
|
(2,698)
|
|||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
28,631
|
$
|
(1,270)
|
$
|
29,243
|
$
|
16,202
|
$
|
(10,558)
|
|
|||||||||
PER COMMON SHARE BASIC AND
DILUTED:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss) from continuing operations
|
$
|
1.52
|
$
|
(0.07)
|
|
$
|
2.10
|
$
|
1.72
|
$
|
(0.64)
|
|
||||||||
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
(0.15)
|
|
(0.47)
|
|
(0.21)
|
|||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
1.52
|
$
|
(0.07)
|
|
$
|
1.95
|
$
|
1.25
|
$
|
(0.85)
|
|
||||||||
Weighted
Average Shares Outstanding – basic
|
18,835,002
|
18,321,449
|
14,994,947
|
12,959,029
|
12,368,068
|
|||||||||||||||
Weighted
Average Shares Outstanding - diluted
|
18,861,853
|
18,321,449
|
15,025,341
|
12,959,029
|
12,368,068
|
As
of December 31,
|
||||||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||||||
FINANCIAL CONDITION
|
(In
thousands, except per share data)
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
assets
|
$
|
592,634
|
$
|
676,342
|
$
|
549,043
|
$
|
441,830
|
$
|
354,658
|
||||||
Total
asset of discontinued operations
|
$
|
4,616
|
$
|
3,974
|
||||||||||||
Unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
$
|
27,773
|
$
|
32,376
|
$
|
41,083
|
$
|
46,647
|
$
|
55,944
|
||||||
Borrowings
|
$
|
42,382
|
$
|
18,878
|
$
|
12,721
|
$
|
11,835
|
$
|
17,556
|
||||||
Liabilities
of discontinued operations
|
$
|
4,282
|
$
|
3,121
|
||||||||||||
Total
liabilities and minority interest
|
$
|
114,888
|
$
|
150,492
|
$
|
143,816
|
$
|
140,955
|
$
|
114,729
|
||||||
Shareholders'
equity
|
$
|
477,746
|
$
|
525,851
|
$
|
405,227
|
$
|
300,875
|
$
|
239,929
|
||||||
Book
value per share (1)
|
$
|
25.36
|
$
|
27.92
|
$
|
25.52
|
$
|
22.67
|
$
|
19.40
|
(1) Book
value per share is computed by dividing shareholders’ equity by the net of total
shares issued less shares held as treasury shares.
10
INTRODUCTION
The
following discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial
Statements and the accompanying Notes presented later 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, 2008 , 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, 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 eight-and-one-quarter year period from April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2008, the
population of Nevada grew by a total of 30.1% (601,910 people), Arizona grew by
26.7% (1,369,573 people), Colorado grew by 14.8% (637,441 people), Idaho grew by
17.8% (229,861 people), and California grew by 8.5% (2,885,016 people). This
compares to a total national growth rate of 8% (22,635,122 people) over the same
period.
The
current economic recession and housing slow-down in the U.S. has decreased the
rate of growth in the Southwest in 2007 and 2008 from earlier years, but the
Southwest’s population growth is still well 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, 2008 and 2007, Nevada’s annual growth rate
was 1.8% (2007: 2.9%), Arizona 2.3% (2007: 2.8%), Colorado 2% (2007: 2%), Idaho
1.8% (2007: 2.4%) and California 1% (2007: 0.8%). These statistics compare to
the national total growth rate of 0.9% (2007: 1%).
In 2008,
Nevada, the nation’s fastest-growing state for approximately the last 20 years,
published a study of its estimated population projection from 2008 to 2028. The
Nevada State Demographer’s Office estimates that Nevada’s population will grow
by approximately 49% (1,334,231people) in that 20 year period. Of that total,
over 1 million people are expected to move to Clark County, which includes
metropolitan Las Vegas, and over 200,000 people to western Nevada, which
includes Carson City, Washoe County (where Reno is situated), and Lyon
County. These population estimates have been revised downwards from
previous growth estimates by the Nevada State Demographer, and take into account
current economic conditions and factors.
Currently,
a significant portion 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 (possibly in
part due to increasing temperatures from climate change which can lead to a
decreased snow pack runoff and therefore decreased surface water) and rapid
population growth in the past few years have exacerbated the region’s general
water scarcity. In turn, this leads to an increased likelihood of conflict as
additional stress is placed on the arid Southwest’s water
resources.
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 that will
serve these markets.
The
development of our water assets is a long-term process. It requires significant
capital and expertise. A complete project -- from acquisition, development,
permitting and sale -- may take as long as ten years. Typically, in the regions
in which we operate, new housing, commercial and industrial 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
economic recession with the corresponding slow-down in housing throughout the
U.S. -- including the Southwest -- has impacted 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 the region’s continued
population growth and the increasing scarcity of sustainable water supplies to
support that growth. The supply and demand factors which characterize
water resources in the southwest also present us with a continuing business
opportunity to provide sustainable water resource solutions for economic
development and communities throughout the region.
The
following is a description and summary of our water resource and water storage
assets at December 31, 2008.
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, 2008, 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.
In
addition, the area in and around the Harquahala Valley appears to be a desirable
area to site solar power-generating plants, due to the high solarity in the
region and its proximity to energy transmission lines. The water assets owned by
Vidler in this region, including our water storage credits - (see “Water
Storage: Vidler Arizona Recharge Facility” below) -could
potentially provide a water source for any solar plants that might be
constructed in this area.
Nevada
Vidler
has acquired land and water rights in Nevada through the purchase of ranch
properties (appropriating existing supplies of water), filing applications for
new water rights (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 21 years, Nevada was the state which experienced the most rapid
population growth and new home construction in the United States. As noted
above, the rate of population growth has slowed in the last couple of years, but
Nevada’s own population estimates forecast that the state will grow by over 1.3
million people in the next 20 years. The population is concentrated in southern
Nevada, which includes the Las Vegas metropolitan area.
11
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 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.
During 2006, 2007 and 2008, Vidler conducted significant data collection and
successfully drilled a series of production and monitoring wells to provide
evidence to support the applications. We expect the State Engineer to
rule on the initial permitting of water rights from these applications in the
near future.
By
agreement, the initial price of $7,500 per acre-foot increases at 10% each year.
At December 31, 2008 the current price is $9,983 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. The first golf course is now open, and construction of other
parts of the project is scheduled to begin in 2009 or 2010.
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 $8,053 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.
In the
fourth quarter of 2008, Lincoln/Vidler obtained the right-of-way over federally
managed lands, on behalf of CSIL, relating to a pipeline to convey the water
rights from Kane Springs. As a result of obtaining the right-of-way,
Lincoln/Vidler expects to close on the sale of the permitted water rights to
CSIL in 2009.
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.
During 2008, we agreed to extend the option period until December 31, 2009 in
exchange for further option payments totaling $300,000. The purchaser has made
all of the scheduled option payments to date.
This
project is 100% owned by Vidler, and does not form part of the Lincoln/Vidler
teaming arrangement.
2.
|
Fish
Springs Ranch
|
Vidler
has a 51% membership interest in, and is the managing partner of, Fish Springs
Ranch, LLC (“Fish Springs”) which owns 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. In addition, Fish Springs
owns 12,987 acre-feet of permitted water rights related to the properties of
which 7,987 acre-feet are transferable to the Reno/Sparks area and designated as
water credits. Currently, there is no regulatory approval to export the
additional volume of 5,000 acre-feet per year of water from Fish Springs Ranch
to support development in northern Reno, and it is uncertain whether such
regulatory approval will be granted in the future.
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. 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. 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. In addition, despite the current housing
downturn, we continue to expect that, in the long term, new home construction in
the Reno area will be robust as the Nevada State Demographer forecasts that the
population of Washoe County will increase by over 150,000 people in the next 20
years.
During
2006, we began construction of a 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 from Fish Springs Ranch to a
central storage tank in northern Reno was completed during 2008. As
of December 31, 2008, $100.9 million of direct pipeline costs and other related
expenditure, including interest, plus the cost of our water credits, have been
capitalized within the Real Estate and Water Assets section of our balance
sheet. As water is sold by Fish Springs and revenues are generated,
the asset will be expensed as a cost of sale in our consolidated statement
of operations in the period in which the associated revenues are
recorded.
In July
2008, the pipeline and associated infrastructure was dedicated to Washoe County,
Nevada under the terms of an Infrastructure Dedication Agreement (“IDA”) between
Washoe County and Fish Springs. Under the provisions of the IDA, Washoe County
is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the pipeline and Fish
Springs has the exclusive right to the capacity of the pipeline to allow for the
sale of water for future economic development in the north valley area of
Reno. Water from Fish Springs that has regulatory approval to be imported
to the North Valleys of Reno (approximately 8,000 acre-feet) is also available
for sale under a Water Banking Agreement entered into between Fish Springs and
Washoe County. Under the Water Banking Agreement, Washoe County holds
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 must then dedicate the water to the
local water utility for service.
Without
changing the potential revenues to Fish Springs, the IDA and Water Banking
Agreement 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.
Since the
dedication of the pipeline in July 2008, and, as a result, the Fish Springs
water becoming available for sale, we have sold 12.8 water credits during 2008
for sales proceeds of approximately $577,000. (One water credit is equivalent to
a water right of one acre-foot volume of water per annum in perpetuity). We
originally had sales contracts for 119 water credits once the water was
available for sale. However, given the economic climate in general and the
slow-down in development activity in the north valleys of Reno in particular, we
agreed to restructure the majority of these sales contracts. The
restructuring allowed the purchaser to limit their acquisition of water
credits, at a minimum price of $45,000 per water
credit, from the funds initially deposited with Vidler as a
down-payment under the original sales contract.
We
believe the Fish Springs water credits represent the only source of new water
supplies that will be available to developers in order for them to obtain their
requisite permits as and when economic activity in and around the Reno area
picks up again.
In
accordance with the Fish Springs partnership agreement, our 49% partner’s
proportionate share of all costs related to the pipeline project, including a
financing cost of the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 450 basis
points on Vidler’s funding of the pipeline related expenditures to the Fish
Springs partnership, will be recouped from the revenues generated from the sale
of Fish Springs water resources.
12
3.
|
Carson
City and Lyon County, Western
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 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 at least 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.
Estimated
total capital costs for the proposed new infrastructure are expected to be
approximately $23 million over a four to six year period. The infrastructure
will be sufficient to deliver an expected volume of water of at least 4,000
acre-feet per year. Expenditures on this infrastructure project commenced during
2008.
As of
December 31, 2008, Vidler has acquired and optioned water rights consisting of
both Carson River agriculture designated water rights and certain municipal and
industrial designated water rights. On completion of our re-designation
development process of the water rights to municipal and industrial use, we
anticipate at least 4,000 acre-feet to be available for municipal use in Lyon
County, principally by means of delivery through the proposed new infrastructure
being constructed by Vidler.
4.
|
Sandy
Valley, Nevada
|
In June
2002, the Nevada State Engineer awarded Vidler 415 acre-feet of water rights
near Sandy Valley, Nevada. 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 appealed
this decision in the Supreme Court but was not successful in keeping the
original rights. However, Vidler has water rights applications for 4,000
acre-feet for groundwater appropriation in Sandy Valley and is preparing these
applications to go through the permitting process to obtain perfected water
rights.
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, 2008, 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
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; and
|
|
in
2008, Vidler closed on the sale of approximately 3.9 acre-feet of water
rights for $302,000.
|
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 located near the 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 alternatives for both the
land and the water resources acquired.
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 a 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, power-generating 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’s
recharge facility is one of the few permitted and completed private water
storage facilities in Arizona. Given that Arizona is the only southwestern state
with surplus flows of Colorado River water available for storage, we believe
that the Vidler site is a 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 2008, Vidler had “net recharge
credits” of approximately 173,667 acre-feet of water in storage at the facility,
and has ordered a further 48,700 acre-feet for recharge in 2009. Vidler
purchased the water from the CAP, and intends to resell this recharged water at
an appropriate time.
Vidler
anticipates being able to recharge at least 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.
13
2.
|
Semitropic,
California
|
Vidler
originally purchased 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.
In July
2008, Vidler completed the sale of its remaining interest of 30,000 acre-feet of
storage capacity at the Semitropic Water Banking and Exchange Program in a
transaction with the San Diego County Water Authority. The sale generated cash
proceeds of $11.7 million and we recorded a net gain, as revenue, of $8.7
million in 2008. We still retain approximately 10,000 acre-feet of water stored
in the facility and we are actively pursuing the sale of this
water.
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
or other water resources in the southwest and western United States,
particularly Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico 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.
REAL
ESTATE OPERATIONS
The
majority of the Real Estate Operations segment’s 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 has affected Nevada Land’s 2008
and 2007 results of operations, when compared to 2006. In 2008 and 2007, the
volume of acreage sold declined by 82% and 52% respectively from 2006, and the
revenues generated in 2008 and 2007 declined by approximately 76% and 43%
respectively 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.
During
2008, UCP’s operations were focused on acquiring finished and entitled
residential lots in and around the Fresno Metropolitan Area (in central
California) and completion of the entitlements of UCP’s partially-entitled
projects.
Fresno
County is the tenth largest county in California and has a population of over
900,000. The county’s population is expected to grow to approximately 1.2
million by 2020. Fresno County is also the leading county in the United
States for agriculture production, with a gross crop value exceeding $5.3
billion. The employment base in Fresno is approximately 370,000 spread across a
diversified set of industries: the largest of which are government, trade
transportation and utilities, agriculture, and education and health
services. As of November 2008, the median price of a home in Fresno
County was $180,750 and the affordability index (that is, a measure of the
financial ability of U.S. families to buy a house based on the median household
income) for first time homebuyers was 65%. In terms of current inventories,
there is approximately seven months of housing inventory and existing home sales
pace has generally been greater than the number of homes coming on the market –
a large percentage of which are bank-owned properties.
We
believe that the real estate development market for detached single family homes
in Fresno is attractive in the long term due to the high affordability ratio,
the favorable market demographics (population growth and diverse employment
base) and fundamental supply and demand forces arising from the existing balance
of inventories of standing homes & lots and the demand for
homes. Further, we believe that certain of these same fundamentals
are present in other markets in California.
INSURANCE
OPERATIONS IN “RUN OFF”
This
segment consists of Physicians Insurance Company of Ohio and Citation Insurance
Company, whose operations are in “run off”, which means that the companies are
handling and resolving claims on expired policies, but not writing any new
business. 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 or
impairment of investments.
In broad
terms, our insurance companies 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. At December 31, 2008, Physicians and Citation held cash of
$3.3 million, fixed-income securities with a market value of $14 million, and
stocks with a market value of $111.2 million.
We hold
bonds issued by the U.S. Treasury and government-sponsored enterprises (namely
Freddie Mac, FNMA, FHLB, and PEFCO) and State of California general obligations
municipal bonds 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 primarily consist of investment-grade corporate
issues, with 10 or less years to maturity.
At
December 31, 2008, the insurance company bond portfolios consisted
of:
Issuer
|
Fair
Value December 31, 2008
|
Percentage
of Total Fair Value
|
||||||
U.S.
Treasury
|
$ | 1,222,000 | 9% | |||||
Government-sponsored
enterprises
|
7,869,000 | 56% | ||||||
State
of California general obligations
|
2,128,000 | 15% | ||||||
Investment-grade
corporate bonds
|
2,356,000 | 17% | ||||||
Non-investment-grade
corporate bond
|
387,000 | 3% | ||||||
$ | 13,962,000 | 100% |
At
December 31, 2008, the aggregate market value of Physicians’ and Citation’s bond
portfolios ($14 million) was approximately 97% of amortized cost.
To
protect the capital value of our bond portfolio from a decline in value that
could be brought on by higher interest rates in the medium term, our bond
holdings are concentrated in issues maturing in five years or less. At December
31, 2008, the duration of Citation’s bond portfolio was 2.6 years, and the
duration of Physicians’ bond portfolio was 2.9 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.
14
Our
insurance companies hold their liquid funds in a government obligations money
market fund. We do not own any preferred stock, mortgage-backed or
asset-backed securities, collateralized debt obligations, auction-rate
securities, or commercial paper, 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, 2008, holdings in the U.S. comprised
approximately 44% of the stock portfolio; Switzerland, 41%; and New Zealand
& Australia, 15%.
During
the fourth quarter of 2006, Physicians purchased PICO European Holdings, LLC
(“PICO European”) from PICO Holdings, Inc. 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. PICO European
currently has holdings in 20 Swiss companies. 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, 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, 2008, the market
value (and carrying value) of the stocks in the PICO European Holdings portfolio
was $45.9 million.
On
December 31, 2008, PICO European owned 24,400 shares of Accu Holding AG, which
represents a voting ownership interest of approximately 24.4%. We do not have
the ability to exercise significant influence over Accu Holding AG’s activities,
so the investment is carried at market value under SFAS No. 115, “Accounting for
Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities”.
The
fixed-income securities and common stocks in the insurance companies’ investment
portfolios generated total returns of approximately 13% in 2006, 12% in 2007,
and -41% in 2008. The decline in 2008 should be viewed in light of
the performance of the principal stock markets we invest in. Over 2008,
the DJ Wilshire 5,000 Index (U.S.) declined by 38.7% and, expressed in U.S.
dollars, the SMI Index (Switzerland) declined 28.7%, the NZSE 50 Gross Index
(New Zealand) declined 48.5%, and the S&P/ASX 200 Index (Australia) declined
49.7%.
The
equity portfolios of our insurance companies are managed on an absolute value
basis, using an approach which investors refer to as “Graham and Dodd”.
Stocks are selected based on the investment fundamentals of the underlying
company, that is our assessment of what the enterprise is worth, based on the
private market value of its assets, earnings, and cash flow. Typically we
buy stocks at a significant discount to our assessment of the value of the
company’s “hard assets”, such as land, natural resources, or cash. We also
own shares in operating companies, which are undervalued on the basis of their
earnings and cash flow, and whose businesses have special or unique
characteristics. We invest with a patient, long term orientation, with the
intention of holding a stock until fair and full value is realized. The
gap between market price and intrinsic value may persist for several years, and
we typically hold stocks for 3 to 5 years, or longer. In many cases, we
only sell a stock when the company is acquired by a third party.
During periods of weakness in the broad stock market, such as 2008,
the gap between market price and intrinsic value may widen, but we only sell the
stock if it has reached our target, its fundamentals have deteriorated, or other
changes limit upside potential on a risk-adjusted basis.
Over
time, we expect the stocks in our insurance company portfolios to generate
significantly higher returns than if we were to solely invest in fixed-income
securities and cash and cash equivalents. We assumed direct
management of our insurance company portfolios in 2000. The subsequent
eight years, which include the substantial market decline of 2008, have not been
favorable for investors in the broad U.S. stock market, with the DJ Wilshire
5,000 Index declining by approximately 25%. Over the same eight year
period, the insurance companies’ investment portfolios generated a positive
total return of approximately 44%, with the equities portion generating a total
return of approximately 109%. Excluding 2008, the investment portfolios
generated a total return of approximately 75%, with the equities portion
generating a total return of approximately 244%
During
the “run off” process, 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, from 2003 until 2007, the investment assets of the Insurance
Operations in “Run Off” segment actually increased, as appreciation in stocks
owned 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.
15
Physicians
Insurance Company of Ohio
Physicians
wrote its last policy in 1995; however, claims can be filed until 2017 related
to events which allegedly occurred 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, 2008, our medical professional liability reserves totaled $3.8
million, net of reinsurance (that is, claims reserves which have been
transferred to the reinsurer), compared to $6.5 million net of reinsurance at
December 31, 2007, and $9.4 million net of reinsurance at December 31,
2006.
PHYSICIANS
INSURANCE COMPANY OF OHIO -- LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE
RESERVES
December
31,
|
|||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||
Direct reserves
|
$
|
3,834,000
|
$
|
6,603,000
|
$
|
10,374,000
|
|||
Ceded reserves
|
(83,000
|
)
|
(989,000
|
)
|
|||||
Net medical professional liability insurance reserves
|
$
|
3,834,000
|
$
|
6,520,000
|
$
|
9,385,000
|
At
December 31, 2008, 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, 2008, approximately $436,000, or 11% 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 $1.4 million, or 37% of our direct
reserves. The loss adjustment expense reserves, totaling $2 million, or 51% of
direct reserves, recognize the cost of handling claims over the next eight 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,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Open claims at the start of the year
|
12
|
18
|
28
|
|||||||||
New
claims reported during the year
|
4
|
2
|
||||||||||
Claims closed during the year
|
-6
|
-
6
|
-12
|
|||||||||
Open claims at the end of the year
|
10
|
12
|
18
|
|||||||||
Total claims closed during the year
|
6
|
6
|
12
|
|||||||||
Claims closed with no indemnity payment
|
-6
|
-4
|
-11
|
|||||||||
Claims closed with an indemnity payment
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
|||||||||
Net indemnity payments
|
$
|
138,000
|
$
|
310,000
|
$
|
1,233,000
|
||||||
Net loss adjustment expense payments
|
177,000
|
225,000
|
397,000
|
|||||||||
Total claims payments during the year
|
$
|
315,000
|
$
|
535,000
|
$
|
1,630,000
|
||||||
Average indemnity payment (Net indemnity payments/closed
claims)
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
155,000
|
$
|
1,233,000
|
PHYSICIANS
INSURANCE COMPANY OF OHIO - CHANGE IN LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE
RESERVES
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Beginning reserves
|
$
|
6,520,000
|
$
|
9,385,000
|
$
|
11,856,000
|
||||||
Loss and loss adjustment expense payments
|
(
315,000
|
)
|
(
535,000
|
)
|
(
1,658,000
|
)
|
||||||
Re-estimation of prior year loss reserves
|
(2,371,000
|
)
|
(2,330,000
|
)
|
(
813,000
|
)
|
||||||
Net
medical professional liability insurance reserves
|
$
|
3,834,000
|
$
|
6,520,000
|
$
|
9,385,000
|
||||||
Re-estimation as a percentage of undiscounted beginning
reserves
|
-
36.4%
|
|
-
24.8%
|
|
-
6.9%
|
|
In 2008,
claims and loss adjustment expense payments were $315,000, accounting for 12% of
the net decrease in reserves. During 2008, Physicians continued to experience
favorable trends in both the “frequency”, or number of claims, and 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 8 of Physicians’ 20 accident years from 1976 until
1996, resulting in a net reduction of $2.4 million, or approximately 36.4% 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 2008 Physicians made net indemnity payments of $138,000,
which represents the indemnity portion of three claims, which will not be closed
until the expense portion is finalized. Total claims payments in 2008 were less
than anticipated. At December 31, 2008, the average case reserve per open claim
was approximately $44,000. There were no changes in key actuarial
assumption in 2008. 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 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” of claims and, to a lesser extent, the
“severity” 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.
In 2007
Physicians made $310,000 in net indemnity payments to close two cases, and total
claims payments were less than anticipated. There were no changes in key
actuarial assumption in 2007.
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.
Since it
is almost thirteen years since Physicians wrote its last policy, and the
reserves for direct IBNR claims and unallocated loss adjustment expenses at
December 31, 2008 are approximately $3.3 million, 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.
16
Citation
Insurance Company
Property
and Casualty Insurance Loss Reserves
Citation
went into “run off” from January 1, 2001. At December 31, 2008, after eight
years of “run off,” Citation had $645,000 in property and casualty insurance
loss and loss adjustment expense reserves, after reinsurance.
Approximately
80% of Citation’s net property and casualty insurance reserves are related to
one line of business, artisans/contractors liability insurance. The remaining
20% 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 received 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 2006, 2007, and 2008 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,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Open claims at the start of the year
|
39
|
78
|
149
|
|||||||||
New claims reported during the year
|
18
|
31
|
58
|
|||||||||
Claims closed during the year
|
-46
|
-70
|
-129
|
|||||||||
Open claims at the end of the year
|
11
|
39
|
78
|
|||||||||
Total claims closed during the year
|
46
|
70
|
129
|
|||||||||
Claims closed with no payment
|
-24
|
-30
|
-51
|
|||||||||
Claims closed with LAE payment only (no indemnity payment)
|
-11
|
-17
|
-36
|
|||||||||
Claims closed with an indemnity payment
|
11
|
23
|
42
|
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 2008, we reduced reserves by $2.3 million, or 74.3% of beginning
reserves, principally due to reduced frequency and reduced severity of claims,
which led the actuary to conclude that the “run off “of the artisans/contractors
book of business will be completed sooner, and with lower claims and expense
payments, than previously projected. As detailed in the table below, we also
reduced reserves by $1.2 million in 2007 and $638,000 in 2006.
There
were no changes in key actuarial assumptions during the three years ended
December 31, 2008. See
“Critical Accounting Policies” and
“Risk Factors”.
At
December 31, 2008, Citation’s net property and casualty reserves were carried at
$645,000, approximately equal to the actuary’s best estimate.
17
CITATION
INSURANCE COMPANY - PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE LOSS AND LOSS
ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE RESERVES
December
31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Direct
reserves
|
$
|
741,000
|
$
|
3,587,000
|
$
|
6,635,000
|
||||||
Ceded
reserves
|
(96,000
|
)
|
(438,000
|
)
|
(1,558,000
|
)
|
||||||
Net
reserves
|
$
|
645,000
|
$
|
3,149,000
|
$
|
5,077,000
|
At
December 31, 2008, $85,000 of Citation’s net property and casualty reserves
(approximately 13%) were case reserves, $139,000 represented provision for IBNR
claims (22%), and the loss adjustment expense reserve was $421,000
(65%).
CITATION
INSURANCE COMPANY - CHANGE IN PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE LOSS AND LOSS
ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE RESERVES
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Beginning reserves
|
$
|
3,149,000
|
$
|
5,077,000
|
$
|
6,463,000
|
||||||
Loss and loss adjustment expense payments
|
(163,000
|
)
|
(695,000
|
)
|
(748,000
|
)
|
||||||
Re-estimation of prior year loss reserves
|
(2,341,000
|
)
|
(1,233,000
|
)
|
(638,000
|
)
|
||||||
Net property and casualty insurance reserves
|
$
|
645,000
|
$
|
3,149,000
|
$
|
5,077,000
|
||||||
Re-estimation as a percentage of beginning reserves
|
-
74.3%
|
|
-
24.3%
|
|
-
9.9%
|
|
Following
actuarial analysis during 2008, Citation decreased loss reserves by $2.3
million, or approximately 74.3% of beginning reserves, due to favorable
development in the artisans/contractors book of business, resulting from both
reduced claims frequency and decreased claims severity.
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.
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.
Since
Citation’s property and casualty insurance claims reserves are now only
$645,000, there is clearly limited scope for favorable development in future
years.
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 this book of
business is now more than ten years old, the remaining claims tend to be severe,
and likely to lead to claims payments for a prolonged period of time, although
many have now exceeded the amount of risk we retain per claim, increasing the
amount of reinsurance we can recover.
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,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Open claims at the start of the year
|
172
|
216
|
232
|
|||||||||
New
claims reported during the year
|
17
|
22
|
30
|
|||||||||
Claims reopened during the year
|
0
|
10
|
37
|
|||||||||
Claims closed during the year
|
-47
|
-76
|
-83
|
|||||||||
Open claims at the end of the year
|
142
|
172
|
216
|
At
December 31, 2008, Citation had workers’ compensation reserves of $23.2 million
before reinsurance and $7.4 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
Corporation, a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.
CITATION
INSURANCE COMPANY - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE
RESERVES
December
31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Direct
reserves
|
$
|
23,198,000
|
$
|
22,186,000
|
$
|
24,074,000
|
||||||
Ceded
reserves
|
(15,781,000
|
)
|
(16,133,000
|
)
|
(14,425,000
|
)
|
||||||
Net
reserves
|
$
|
7,417,000
|
$
|
6,053,000
|
$
|
9,649,000
|
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, 2008 and December 31, 2008,
Citation increased its workers’ compensation net loss reserves by $2.3 million,
or 37.3% of the $6.1 million in net reserves at the start of
2008. Direct reserves were increased by approximately $3 million,
which was partially offset by a $662,000 increase in the estimated reinsurance
recoverable on our workers’ compensation loss reserves, resulting in a $2.3
million increase in net loss reserves. The increase in reserves came
after:
·
|
individual
actuarial review of every open case;
and
|
·
|
the
creation of a new reserve of $500,000 for asbestos
claims. Citation did not previously have a separate reserve for
asbestos claims, but an increasing number of asbestos claims have been
received in recent years. Typically, the asbestos claims are
shared among a number of workers’ compensation carriers, and Citation’s
share of total settlements is less than 10%. The reserve
reflects the actuary’s projection of an increased frequency of low
severity asbestos claims.
|
Following
independent actuarial analysis during 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.
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.
CITATION
INSURANCE COMPANY - CHANGE IN WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT
EXPENSE RESERVES
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Beginning net reserves
|
$
|
6,053,000
|
$
|
9,649,000
|
$
|
12,470,000
|
||||||
Loss
and loss adjustment expense payments
|
(891,000
|
)
|
(3,557,000
|
)
|
(1,047,000
|
)
|
||||||
Re-estimation of prior year loss reserves
|
2,255,000
|
(39,000
|
)
|
(1,774,000
|
)
|
|||||||
Net workers’ compensation insurance reserves
|
$
|
7,417,000
|
$
|
6,053,000
|
$
|
9,649,000
|
||||||
Re-estimation as a percentage of adjusted beginning
reserves
|
37.3%
|
|
0.4%
|
|
-
14.2%
|
|
Apart
from the new asbestos claims reserve created in 2008 discussed above, there were
no changes in key actuarial assumptions during the three years ended December
31, 2008.
At
December 31, 2008, Citation’s net workers’ compensation reserves were carried at
$7.4 million, approximately equal to the actuary’s best estimate. Approximately
$1.7 million of Citation’s net workers’ compensation reserves (23%) were case
reserves, $3.3 million represented provision for IBNR claims (44%), and the loss
adjustment expense reserve was $2.4 million (33%).
Until
September 30, 2004, the workers’ compensation claims were handled by Fremont and
then the California Insurance Guarantee Association. Since then, the workers’
compensation claims have been handled by a third-party administrator on
Citation’s behalf.
CORPORATE
Until
April 2008, the largest asset in this segment was a 22.5% shareholding in
Jungfraubahn Holding AG, which was held by our wholly-owned Swiss subsidiary,
Global Equity AG. Jungfraubahn is a publicly-traded company which
operates railway and related tourism and transport activities in the Swiss
Alps. On April 22, 2008, Global Equity AG sold its interest in Jungfraubahn
for net proceeds of 75.5 million Swiss Francs (“CHF”), or approximately US$75.3
million. The sale of Jungfraubahn resulted in a gain of $46.1 million
before taxes in our consolidated statement of operations for 2008. However, the
sale only had a minimal effect on shareholders’ equity and book value per share,
as most of the gain and related tax effects had already been recorded in
previous accounting periods as a net unrealized gain, in the Other Comprehensive
Income component of Shareholders’ Equity.
The
majority of the sales proceeds were immediately converted into U.S.
dollars. In December 2008, Global Equity AG declared a dividend, and
repatriated most of the remaining sale proceeds to the U.S. At
December 31, 2008, Global Equity AG’s principal remaining asset is a CHF6.8
million ($US6.3 million) “at call” bank deposit denominated in Swiss
Francs.
18
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 record reserves which 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 professional liability reserves, net of reinsurance, were reduced
by $2.4 million in 2008, $2.3 million in 2007, and $813,000 in
2006, 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 $2.3 million in 2008, $1.2 million in 2007, and $638,000
in 2006; and
|
·
|
net
of reinsurance, Citation’s workers’ compensation loss reserves were
increased by $2.3 million, after having been reduced by $39,000 in 2007
and $1.8 million in 2006.
|
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 the portion of our direct claims reserves which we have reinsured. At
December 31, 2008, Citation had $16.4 million in reinsurance recoverable on its
loss reserves and claims paid, and Physicians had no reinsurance
recoverable.
See “Insurance Operations In
Run Off” and “Regulatory Insurance Disclosure” in Item 7.
2.
|
Carrying
value of long-lived assets
|
Our
principal long-lived assets including intangible assets are real estate and
water assets owned by Vidler and its subsidiaries, and real estate at Nevada
Land and UCP. At December 31, 2008, the total carrying value of real estate and
water assets was $271.7 million, or approximately 46% of PICO’s total assets.
The real estate and water assets are carried at cost.
We apply
the provisions of Standards (“SFAS”) No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets” by reviewing our long-lived assets as facts and
circumstances change or if there is an impairment indicator present, to ensure
that the estimated future cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges)
from the use and eventual disposition 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, the timing of the disposition
of these assets, uncertainty about future events, and the ongoing
cost of maintenance and improvements of the assets. As a result our
estimates may change from period to period. If management uses different
assumptions, if management’s plans change, or if different conditions occur in
future periods, the Company’s financial condition and results of operations
could be materially impacted. We own certain properties, particularly those
purchased in the last few years, where the current fair value may be below
the carrying value, but on an undiscounted basis, management is projecting
future cash flows in excess of the carrying value. Accordingly, no impairment
charges were recognized in the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 or
2006.
We apply
the provisions of SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” in
reviewing the value of our nonamortizing intangible assets for impairment
annually or more frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate that
the asset might be impaired.
In our test, we compare the fair value of the intangible asset to its
carrying value. We determine that fair value using a discounted cash flow model
that includes significant assumptions about revenues and expenses as well as the
risk profile of the asset. If the carrying value exceeds the fair value, an
impairment loss is recognized equal to the difference.
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 over time) as revenue is
recognized.
3.
|
Accounting
for investments and investments in unconsolidated
affiliates
|
At
December 31, 2008, we owned equity securities with a carrying value of
approximately $120.4 million, or approximately 20% 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.
For
substantially all 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 fair value in our balance sheet, with
unrealized gains or losses included in shareholders’ equity. Until
the investment is sold and a gain or loss is realized, the only impacts that the
investment will have on the income statement are:
·
|
dividends
received are recorded as income;
and
|
·
|
impairment
charges for any unrealized losses deemed to be other than
temporary.
|
When we
hold an investment 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").
During
the period that we hold the investment, the equity method of accounting (APB No.
18) may have a different impact on our financial statements than fair value
accounting (SFAS No. 115) would. The most significant difference between the two
policies is that, under the equity method, we include our share of the
unconsolidated affiliate’s earnings or losses in our statement of
operations. Also, our equity share of the affiliate’s earnings
(losses) increase (decrease) the carrying value of the investment in the balance
sheet, 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, and the only expense
recorded is other-than-temporary impairment charges, if applicable. For
securities classified as available for sale, unrealized gains and losses (net of
related taxes) are included in shareholders’ equity in our balance sheet, and as
a component of 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, 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 in fact 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 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.
We
recorded other-than-temporary impairment charges in our consolidated statements
of operations of $21.2 million in 2008, $2 million in 2007, and $459,000 in
2006, before income taxes.
The Company’s
investment portfolio includes $1.4 million of equity securities which do not
have a readily available market value, and are recorded at cost, less any impairments
deemed other than temporary.
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 are recorded as income on the date that the stock
trades “ex dividend” on the exchange where the stock is
traded. 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. In the case of
bonds acquired at other than par value, net investment income includes
amortization of premium, or accretion of discount, on the level yield
method.
Realized
investment gains and losses are included in revenues and can include any
other-than-temporary impairment charges from declines in market prices (as
discussed above). The cost of investments 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).
19
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS -- YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
2008, 2007, AND 2006
Shareholders’
Equity
At
December 31, 2008, PICO had shareholders’ equity of $477.7 million ($25.36 per
share), compared to $525.9 million ($27.92 per share) at the end of 2007, and
$405.2 million ($25.52 per share) at the end of 2006. Book value per share
decreased 9.2% in 2008, compared to increases of 9.4% in 2007, and 12.6% in
2006.
As
described in more detail below, the principal factors leading to the $48.2
million decrease in shareholders’ equity during 2008 were:
·
|
net
income of $28.6 million; which was more than offset by
|
·
|
a
$70.9 million decrease in net unrealized appreciation in
available-for-sale investments after-tax (see following paragraphs);
and
|
·
|
a
$10 million decrease in foreign currency translation, as foreign
currencies where we hold investments depreciated relative to the U.S.
dollar.
|
At
December 31, 2008, on a consolidated basis, available-for-sale investments
reflected a net unrealized gain of $11.6 million after-tax, compared to net
unrealized gains, after-tax, of $82.5 million at December 31, 2007 and $66.2
million at December 31, 2006.
The sale
of our interest in Jungfraubahn was the principal contributor to our 2008 net
income, and accounted for a significant part of the net reduction in unrealized
appreciation in investments over the year. At December 31, 2007,
Jungfraubahn represented $26.2 million of the total net unrealized appreciation
in investments. The sale of our interest in Jungfraubahn added
approximately $30 million to net income. Excluding Jungfraubahn, net
unrealized appreciation in available-for-sale securities decreased by $44.7
million during 2008.
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.
|
The
principal factors leading to a $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, 2008 were $592.6 million, compared to $676.3 million at
December 31, 2007. During 2008, total assets decreased by $83.7 million,
principally due to a decrease in the market value of equities held by our
insurance companies and in deferred compensation accounts, and by the
distribution of deferred compensation to three participants in the deferred
compensation plan.
During
2008, total liabilities decreased by $35.6 million, from $150.5 million to
$114.9 million at December 31, 2008, principally due to a $24.8 million decrease
in deferred compensation liabilities, and a reduction in deferred tax
liabilities as unrealized gains on investments declined in 2008. The
reduction in deferred compensation liabilities payable to participants was
primarily due to a decrease in the market value of corresponding investments,
and the distribution of deferred compensation to three participants in the
deferred compensation plan.
Net
Income (Loss)
PICO
reported net income of $28.6 million for 2008 ($1.52 per share), compared to a
net loss of $1.3 million for 2007 ($0.07 per share), and net income of $29.2
million ($1.95 per share) in 2006.
2008
The $28.6
million net income consisted of:
·
|
income
before taxes and minority interest of $56.4 million;
and
|
·
|
a
$28.5 million provision for income taxes. The effective tax rate for 2008
is 51%, which is higher than the federal corporate income tax rate of 35%,
principally due to the recognition of $2.8 million of income taxes on
previously untaxed earnings and profits of the Company’s wholly-owned
subsidiary Global Equity AG, and state taxes of $2.8 million. Other items
reflected in the effective income tax rate include interest expense and
penalties on uncertain tax positions, and operating losses with no
associated tax benefit from subsidiaries that are excluded from the
consolidated federal income tax return and unable to use the losses on
their own separate tax return.
|
2007
The $1.3
million 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 176%, which is higher than the federal corporate income tax rate of
35%, principally due to state tax charges, operating losses with no
associated tax benefit from subsidiaries that are excluded from the
consolidated federal income tax return and unable to use the losses on
their own separate tax return, and certain compensation expense which is
not tax-deductible.
|
2006
The $29.2
million 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%, 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.
|
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:
·
|
a
comprehensive loss of $52.3 million in 2008, primarily consisting of a
$70.9 million decrease in net unrealized appreciation in investments
(after-tax) and a $10 million net decrease in foreign currency
translation, which were partially offset by the year’s net income of $28.6
million;
|
·
|
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;
and
|
·
|
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.
|
20
Operating
Revenues
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Water Resource and Water Storage Operations
|
$
|
11,272,000
|
$
|
7,938,000
|
$
|
6,182,000
|
||||||
Real Estate Operations
|
5,470,000
|
13,479,000
|
41,406,000
|
|||||||||
Corporate
|
45,766,000
|
4,903,000
|
21,858,000
|
|||||||||
Insurance
Operations in Run Off
|
(2,156,000)
|
7,609,000
|
13,277,000
|
|||||||||
Total Revenues
|
$
|
60,352,000
|
$
|
33,929,000
|
$
|
82,723,000
|
In 2008,
total revenues were $60.4 million, compared to $33.9 million in 2007, and $82.7
million in 2006.
In 2008,
revenues increased by $26.4 million from 2007. This was primarily due to a $40.9
million year over year increase in Corporate revenues, principally resulting
from a $46.1 million gain before taxes from the sale of
Jungfraubahn. Water Resource and Water Storage Operations revenues
increased $3.3 million year over year, principally due to an $8.7 million
pre-tax gain on the sale of our remaining storage capacity at
Semitropic. These increases were partially offset by year over year
revenue decreases of $8 million in Real Estate Operations, principally due to
$7.2 million lower sales of former railroad land, and $9.8 million in Insurance
Operations in Run Off, primarily due to a $9.5 million unfavorable change in net
realized investment gains (losses).
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.
Corporate 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.
Costs
and Expenses
Total
costs and expenses in 2008 were $4 million, compared to $31.9 million in 2007,
and $31.9 million in 2006. In 2008, expenses were reduced by $15 million in
foreign exchange gains. See “Corporate” segment later in
Item 7. 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 real estate and water assets sold
by Vidler and Nevada Land.
Income
(Loss) Before Taxes and Minority Interest
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Water Resource and Water Storage Operations
|
$
|
4,185,000
|
$
|
(5,283,000
|
)
|
$
|
(
2,451,000
|
)
|
||||
Real Estate Operations
|
366,000
|
8,109,000
|
30,499,000
|
|||||||||
Corporate
|
53,324,000
|
(10,591,000
|
)
|
6,839,000
|
||||||||
Insurance
Operations in Run Off
|
(1,486,000
|
)
|
9,779,000
|
15,980,000
|
||||||||
Income before taxes and minority interest
|
$
|
56,389,000
|
$
|
2,014,000
|
$
|
50,867,000
|
In 2008,
PICO generated income before taxes and minority interest of $56.4 million,
compared to $2 million in 2007. The $54.4 million year over year increase
resulted from:
·
|
a
$63.9 million higher contribution from the Corporate segment. This
principally resulted from a $43.1 million in realized gains, primarily
represented by the $46.1 million realized gain before taxes on the sale of
Jungfraubahn, and a $13 million year over year increase in foreign
exchange gains; and
|
·
|
a
$9.5 million higher result from Water Resource and Water Storage
Operations, primarily resulting from the $8.7 million gain on the sale of
Semitropic; which were partially offset by
|
·
|
an
$11.3 million lower contribution from Insurance Operations in Run Off,
primarily due to the $9.5 million year over year unfavorable change in
realized gains (losses); and
|
·
|
$7.7
million lower income from Real Estate Operations, primarily due to a year
over year decrease of $5.2 million in gross margin on the sale of former
railroad land, and a $1.7 million increase in overhead, primarily
attributable to building the UPC
business.
|
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 Corporate 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".
|
21
Water
Resource and Water Storage Operations
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Sale
of real estate and water assets
|
$
|
9,757,000
|
41,000
|
$
|
2,969,000
|
|||||||
Gain
on release of restrictions on real estate
|
3,466,000
|
|||||||||||
Net
investment income
|
969,000
|
4,418,000
|
2,805,000
|
|||||||||
Other
|
546,000
|
13,000
|
408,000
|
|||||||||
Segment
total revenues
|
11,272,000
|
7,938,000
|
6,182,000
|
|||||||||
Expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Cost
of real estate and water assets
|
$
|
(235,000)
|
$
|
(8,000)
|
|
$
|
(1,614,000)
|
|
||||
Depreciation and
amortization
|
(1,099,000)
|
(1,042,000)
|
|
(1,084,000)
|
|
|||||||
Overhead
|
(3,041,000)
|
(1,839,000)
|
|
(3,068,000)
|
|
|||||||
Project
expenses
|
(2,712,000)
|
(10,332,000)
|
|
(2,867,000)
|
|
|||||||
Segment
total expenses
|
(7,087,000)
|
(13,221,000)
|
|
(8,633,000)
|
||||||||
Income
(loss) before taxes and minority interest
|
$
|
4,185,000
|
$
|
(5,283,000)
|
|
$
|
(2,451,000)
|
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.
Vidler
generated total revenues of $11.3 million in 2008 compared to $7.9 million in
2007 and $6.2 million in 2006.
In July
2008, Vidler completed the sale of its remaining interest in the Semitropic
Water Banking and Exchange Program in California, which comprised 30,000
acre–feet of storage capacity, in a transaction with the San Diego County Water
Authority. The sale generated cash proceeds of $11.7 million, and we recorded a
net gain of $8.7 million, included in revenues from the sale of real estate and
water assets, in 2008. We still retain approximately 10,000 acre-feet of water
stored in the facility, and we are actively pursuing the sale of this
water.
Net investment income has largely been
generated from the temporary investment of cash proceeds raised from common
stock offerings by PICO in May 2006 and February 2007. In aggregate, the stock
offerings raised net proceeds of $174.1 million, which were principally
allocated to Vidler for existing and new projects, including the design and
construction of a pipeline to convey water from Fish Springs Ranch to Reno.
See
"Fish Springs Ranch” earlier in this section. As a result of expenditures on new
acquisitions of real estate and water assets and related infrastructure in the
southwestern U.S. throughout 2007 and 2008, Vidler’s funds available for
investment have declined, leading to a lower level of net investment income in
2008 ($969,000) compared to 2007 ($4.4 million). In 2006, net investment income was $2.8
million, primarily from the temporary investment of the cash proceeds from an
equity offering by PICO which raised net proceeds of $73.9 million in May 2006.
These funds were allocated to the design and construction of a pipeline to
convey water from Fish Springs Ranch to Reno.
In 2007,
a transaction between Vidler and 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 primarily from the following transactions:
·
|
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.
Total
segment expenses, including the cost of real estate and water assets sold, were
$7.1 million in 2008, $13.2 million in 2007, and $8.6 million in 2006. However,
excluding the cost of real estate and water assets sold and related selling
costs; segment operating expenses were $6.9 million in 2008, $13.2 million in
2007, and $7 million in 2006. 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, for
example, 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 $3 million in 2008, $1.8 million in 2007, and $3.1 million in
2006. Most of the overhead change from year to year is due to an increase in
staff costs as Vidler expands its operations as well as fluctuation in the
accrual of performance-based incentive compensation for certain Vidler
management, which was $195,000 in 2008, zero in 2007, and $1 million in
2006.
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 a future municipal
water supply for the north valleys of the Reno, Nevada area;
and
|
·
|
the
operation of our farm properties in Idaho and maintenance of the
associated water rights.
|
Project
expenses were $2.7 million in 2008, $10.3 million in 2007, and $2.9 million in
2006. The $7.6 million and $7.4 million increase in project expenses in 2007
compared to 2008 and 2006 respectively 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 accrued in 2007 consisted of:
·
|
a
cash payment of $500,000, which was made in 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 in January 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 LIBOR
from January 8, 2009. To date, no payment has been made as Congress has
not yet ratified the settlement
agreement.
|
Given the
declines in real estate markets throughout the U.S in 2008, we reviewed the
carrying value of certain of our real estate assets noting that the
projected cash flows on an undiscounted basis exceeded the carrying value of the
asset. Accordingly, no impairment losses were recorded.
22
Real
Estate Operations
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Sale of Real Estate and Water
Assets:
|
||||||||||||
Sale
of former railroad land
|
$
|
2,297,000
|
$
|
9,455,000
|
$
|
16,541,000
|
||||||
Sale
of Spring Valley Ranch
|
22,000,000
|
|||||||||||
Net
investment income
|
2,203,000
|
3,140,000
|
2,003,000
|
|||||||||
Other
|
970,000
|
884,000
|
862,000
|
|||||||||
Segment
total revenues
|
5,470,000
|
13,479,000
|
41,406,000
|
|||||||||
Expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Cost
of former railroad land sold
|
$
|
(673,000)
|
$
|
(2,676,000
|
)
|
$
|
(5,489,000
|
)
|
||||
Cost
of Spring Valley Ranch
|
(3,174,000
|
)
|
||||||||||
Operating
expenses
|
(4,431,000)
|
(2,694,000
|
)
|
(2,244,000
|
)
|
|||||||
Segment
total expenses
|
(5,104,000)
|
(5,370,000
|
)
|
(10,907,000
|
)
|
|||||||
Income before
taxes and minority interest
|
$
|
366,000
|
$
|
8,109,000
|
$
|
30,499,000
|
It can
take a year or more to complete a land sale transaction, and the timing of land
sales in any one year is 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 2006 through 2008, but the total volume of acreage sold in any one year has
declined over this period.
In 2008,
Nevada Land recorded revenues of $2.3 million from the sale of 17,097 acres of
former railroad land. 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.
Net
investment income, arising from interest on financed sales as well as interest
earned on liquid funds, contributed $2.2 million in 2008, compared to $3.1
million in 2007 and $2 million in 2006.
Other
income amounted to $970,000, compared to $884,000 in 2007 and $862,000 in
2006. Most of this revenue arises from land leases, principally for
grazing and agricultural use.
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 2008 the gross margin on the sale of former
railroad land was $1.6 million, compared to $6.8 million in 2007 and $11.1
million in 2006. The gross margin percentage earned on the sale of former
railroad land was 70.7% in 2008, compared to 71.7 % in 2007 and 66.8% in 2006.
The gross margin on the sale of Spring Valley Ranch in 2006 was $18.8 million
(86%).
Segment
operating expenses were $4.4 million in 2008, compared to $2.7 million in 2007
and $2.2 million in 2006. The increase in operating expenses in 2008 of $1.7
million and $2.2 million compared to 2007 and 2006 respectively is due primarily
to the start-up of real estate operations of UCP in California. As and when more
capital is allocated to UCP, we anticipate that the revenues and costs of this
entity will be more significant to the overall real estate segment results of
operations.
The $7.7
million decrease in segment income from 2007 to 2008 is due primarily to the
$5.2 million lower gross margin from the sale of former railroad land in 2008
compared to 2007, as well as the increase in overhead in 2008 of $1.7 million as
noted above. The lower gross margin from the sale of former railroad land in
2008 is due to the effect of selling a lower volume of land (resulting in lower
revenues) at a similar gross margin percentage. The volume of former railroad
land sold decreased 82% year over year and land sales revenues were 76% lower
year over year, but the gross margin percentage on land sales remained similar
with a gross margin percentage of 70.6 % in 2008 compared to 71.7% in
2007.
The $22.4
million decrease in segment income from 2006 to 2007 is due to 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
4.9%, from 66.8% in 2006 to 71.7% in 2007.
Despite
the slow-down in real estate sales at Nevada Land, we are seeing strong
development activity with respect to our geothermal rights, which appears to
reflect the increased demand in the U.S. for alternative energy sources. Nevada
Land owns the geothermal rights to over 1.3 million acres in northern Nevada. We
hold the geothermal rights on property we still own, and we have retained the
geothermal rights on all land sales that we have previously recorded. Typically,
we structure geothermal development agreements with power companies that
incorporate a lease element, as well as a royalty on the actual energy generated
from a geothermal plant. We are currently a party to seven geothermal leases,
over a total of 16,500 acres, in varying stages of development with five
different power companies.
Given the
declines in real estate markets throughout the U.S in 2008, we reviewed the
carrying value of certain of our real estate assets noting that the
projected cash flows on an undiscounted basis exceeded the carrying value of the
asset. Accordingly, no impairment losses were recorded.
23
Corporate
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Realized
gain (loss) on sale or impairment of securities
|
$
|
41,717,000
|
$
|
(1,426,000)
|
|
$
|
15,943,000
|
|||||
Net investment income
|
3,760,000
|
6,025,000
|
5,611,000
|
|||||||||
Other
|
289,000
|
304,000
|
304,000
|
|||||||||
Segment total revenues
|
45,766,000
|
4,903,000
|
21,858,000
|
|||||||||
Recoveries
(expenses):
|
||||||||||||
Stock appreciation rights expense
|
$
|
(3,989,000)
|
|
$
|
(4,468,000)
|
|
||||||
Foreign
exchange gain
|
15,020,000
|
1,994,000
|
$ |
2,631,000
|
||||||||
Other
|
(3,473,000)
|
|
(13,020,000)
|
|
(17,650,000)
|
|
||||||
Segment total recoveries (expenses)
|
7,558,000
|
(15,494,000)
|
|
(15,019,000)
|
|
|||||||
Income (loss) before taxes and minority interest
|
$
|
53,324,000
|
$
|
(10,591,000)
|
$
|
6,839,000
|
This segment
consists of cash, majority interests in small businesses, and other parent
company assets and liabilities. This segment also contains the
deferred compensation assets held in trust for the benefit of several PICO
officers, as well as the corresponding and offsetting deferred compensation
liabilities. Revenues in this segment vary considerably from
period to period, primarily due to fluctuations in net realized gains or losses
on the sale or impairment of securities. At December 31, 2008,
virtually all of the securities held in this segment are deferred compensation
assets.
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 expenses recorded related to
unrealized appreciation or depreciation, in any one year deferred compensation
can have an effect on segment income and income before taxes in the statement of
operations. However, once the deferred compensation has been
distributed, 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, Corporate 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, foreign currency expense or benefit). Consequently,
Corporate segment expenses are not necessarily directly comparable from year to
year.
Sale
of Jungfraubahn and Related Foreign Currency Gains
Until April
2008, the largest asset in this segment was a 22.5% shareholding in
Jungfraubahn, held by our Swiss subsidiary, Global Equity AG. On
April 22, 2008, Global Equity AG sold its interest in Jungfraubahn for net
proceeds of 75.5 million Swiss Francs (“CHF”), or approximately US$75.3
million. The sale of Jungfraubahn added $46.1 million to segment
income, but the sale only had a minimal effect on shareholders’ equity and book
value per share, as most of the gain and related tax effects had already been
recorded in previous accounting periods as a net unrealized gain, in the Other
Comprehensive Income component of Shareholders’ Equity.
The
majority of the sales proceeds were immediately converted into U.S.
dollars. In December 2008, Global Equity AG declared a dividend, and
repatriated most of the remaining sale proceeds to the U.S. This
process gave rise to two foreign exchange gains, which reduced expenses in this
segment:
·
|
after
we converted the Jungfraubahn sale proceeds, the U.S. dollar appreciated
relative to the Swiss Franc. Since Global Equity AG’s
functional currency for financial reporting is the Swiss Franc, the U.S.
dollars held increased in value when expressed in Swiss
Francs. This resulted in an $11.8 million foreign exchange gain
in Global Equity AG’s statement of operations. Global Equity AG
disbursed all of its U.S. dollars during 2008;
and
|
·
|
at
the end of 2008, PICO Holdings had a receivable from the Swiss tax
authorities, denominated in Swiss Francs. Since the date that
the Swiss Francs became receivable, the Swiss Franc has appreciated
relative to the U.S. dollar, increasing the receivable when expressed in
U.S. dollars, being PICO Holdings’ functional currency for financial
reporting. This resulted in a $1.4 million foreign exchange
gain in PICO Holdings’ statement of
operations.
|
We also
record foreign exchange benefit (expense) from the effect of foreign exchange
fluctuation on the amount of an inter-company loan. See “Inter-Company Loan” below.
Segment
Result
The Corporate
segment recorded revenues of $45.8 million in 2008, $4.9 million in 2007, and
$21.9 million in 2006.
In 2008, a
$41.7 million net realized gain on the sale or impairment of holdings was
recorded. This principally consists of the $46.1 million realized
gain on the sale of Jungfraubahn, and a $4.3 million net realized loss on the
sale or impairment of holdings in deferred compensation accounts.
The $4.3
million net realized loss on the sale or impairment of holdings in deferred
compensation accounts primarily consisted of provisions for other-than-temporary
impairment of $2.7 million for various stocks, and $1.5 million for two
bonds:
·
|
the
stocks were in an unrealized loss position for most of 2008. Based on the
extent and the duration of the unrealized losses, we determined that the
declines in market value are other-than-temporary. Consequently, we
recorded a charge to reduce our basis in the stocks from original cost, or
previously written-down basis, to their market value at December 31, 2008;
and
|
·
|
the
bond other-than-temporary impairment principally relates to a California
bank holding company, Downey Financial. In November 2008, the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation seized Downey Savings, which was
Downey Financial’s principal asset, and Downey Financial filed for Chapter
7 liquidation in U.S. Bankruptcy Court. According to an official notice
dated November 26, 2008, there does not appear to be any property
available to pay creditors. Consequently, we determined that
the investment is permanently impaired and recorded a provision to write
off the carrying value of the bond, which was its amortized cost of $1
million.
|
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.
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 Rätia 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,
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. In 2006,
Anderson-Tully was acquired by a timberlands investment management organization,
for approximately $446,000 per share.
In this
segment, investment income includes interest on cash and short-term fixed-income
securities, and dividends from partially owned businesses. Investment income
totaled $3.8 million, $6 million in 2007, and $5.6 million in 2006. 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.
We sold our interest in Jungfraubahn prior to the payment of that company’s 2008
dividend, but investment income includes dividends received from Jungfraubahn of
$1.4 million in 2007, and $1.2 million in 2006.
In 2008, the
Corporate segment recorded a $7.6 million recovery of expenses, compared to
segment expenses of $15.5 million in 2007, and $15 million in 2006.
As a result
of these factors, the Corporate segment generated income of $53.3 million in
2008, a loss of $10.6 million in 2007, and income of $6.8 million in
2006.
In 2008, the
$7.6 million segment recovery of expenses primarily consisted of:
·
|
foreign
currency gains of $15 million. These consist of the $11.8
million gain on the conversion of Jungfraubahn sale proceeds into U.S.
dollars and the $1.4 million gain on the Swiss Franc tax receivable
discussed above, as well as a $1.8 million benefit from the effect of
appreciation in the Swiss Franc on the inter-company loan over 2008 (see
description of inter-company loan below). These gains were
recorded as reductions in expenses; which more than
offset
|
·
|
SAR
expense of $4 million (see description of SAR expense
below);
|
·
|
HyperFeed
litigation expenses of $1.1 million; and
|
·
|
other
parent company net overhead of approximately $2.3 million. Other expenses
were reduced by a $10.2 million 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.
|
In 2007,
segment expenses of $15.5 million primarily consisted of:
·
|
SAR
expense of $ 4.5 million;
|
·
|
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.
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.
In
addition to the interest in Jungfraubahn held in this segment until April 2008,
PICO European Holdings, LLC (“PICO European”) holds a portfolio of interests in
Swiss public companies. PICO European is a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Physicians, and forms part of the Insurance Operations in Run Off segment. Part
of PICO European’s 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 U.S. GAAP we are required to record a benefit
or expense through the statement of operations to reflect fluctuation in the
exchange rate between the Swiss Franc and the U.S. dollar affecting the loan
amount, although there is no net impact on consolidated shareholders’
equity.
During
accounting periods when the Swiss Franc appreciates relative to the U.S. dollar
– such as 2008, 2007, and 2006 – under U.S. GAAP we are required to record a
benefit through the statement of operations to reflect the fact that PICO
European owes PICO Holdings more U.S. dollars. In PICO European’s
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. Consequently, we recorded benefits of $1.8 million in
2008, $2 million in 2007, and $2.6 million in 2006, which reduced expenses in
this segment.
Conversely,
during accounting periods when the Swiss Franc depreciates relative to the U.S.
dollar, opposite entries are made and we record an expense to reflect the fact
that PICO European owes PICO Holdings fewer U.S. dollars.
In addition,
PICO European has loans denominated in Swiss Francs 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 corresponding currency effect on the related investment assets, and does not
form part of the foreign exchange benefit or expense recorded thorough the
statement of operations discussed above.
SAR
Expense
On December
8, 2005, the Company’s Shareholders approved the PICO Holdings, Inc. 2005
Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2005 SAR Plan”). 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 last sale price of PICO common
stock on the NASDAQ Global Market on the date of exercise.
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.
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, 2007, and
2008 related to the SAR granted in 2005.
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 day the SAR were granted. The SAR granted in
2007 vest over three years.
In 2008, SAR
expense of $4 million was recorded related to the SAR issued in 2007 which
vested during 2008. 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”. During 2009, we expect to
record the remaining $3.5 million in compensation expense related to the SAR
granted in 2007, which are scheduled to fully vest in 2009.
At
December 31, 2008, the exercise prices of all granted SAR were higher than the
closing PICO stock price ($26.58).
24
Insurance
Operations in “Run Off”
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Net investment income
|
$
|
3,214,000
|
$
|
3,457,000
|
$
|
3,159,000
|
||||||
Realized gain (loss) on sale or impairment of investments
|
(5,480,000)
|
|
3,965,000
|
10,110,000
|
||||||||
Other
|
110,000
|
187,000
|
8,000
|
|||||||||
Segment total revenues (charges)
|
(2,156,000)
|
|
7,609,000
|
13,277,000
|
||||||||
Recoveries:
|
||||||||||||
Underwriting recoveries
|
$
|
670,000
|
$
|
2,170,000
|
$
|
2,703,000
|
||||||
Income (Loss) Before Taxes:
|
||||||||||||
Physicians Insurance Company of Ohio
|
$
|
2,291,000
|
$
|
5,938,000
|
$
|
10,914,000
|
||||||
Citation Insurance Company
|
$
|
(3,777,000)
|
|
$
|
3,841,000
|
$
|
5,066,000
|
|||||
Income (loss) before taxes and minority interest
|
$
|
(1,486,000)
|
|
$
|
9,779,000
|
$
|
15,980,000
|
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 negative $2.2 million in 2008, $7.6 million in 2007, and
$13.3 million in 2006.
Net
investment income was $3.2 million in 2008, compared to $3.5 million in 2007,
and $3.2 million in 2006. 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 (losses) on the sale or impairment of investments were a $5.5
million loss in 2008, compared to a $4 million gain in 2007, and a $10.1 million
gain in 2006.
The $5.5
million net realized investment loss recorded in 2008 principally consisted of
$11.5 million in gains on the sale of various portfolio holdings, which were
more than offset by provisions of $16 million for other-than-temporary
impairment of various stocks and $1 million for permanent impairment of a
bond:
·
|
the
stocks were in an unrealized loss position for most of 2008. Based on the
extent and the duration of the unrealized losses, we determined that the
declines in market value are other-than-temporary. Consequently, we
recorded a charge to reduce our basis in the stocks from original cost, or
previously written-down basis, to their market value at December 31,
2008. This included a $3.4 million charge for
other-than-temporary impairment of our holding in an Ohio
bank. The bank also has branches in Florida and Arizona, and is
one of the top 20 mortgage lenders in the country. We believe
that the stock has declined due to concerns about the residential real
estate markets in Ohio and Florida. The charge for
other-than-temporary impairment reduced the carrying value of our holding
in the bank from its cost to market value at December 31, 2008;
and
|
·
|
the
bond was issued by Downey Financial, a California bank holding
company. In November 2008, the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation seized Downey Financial’s principal asset, and Downey
Financial filed for Chapter 7 liquidation in U.S. Bankruptcy Court.
According to an official notice dated November 26, 2008, there does not
appear to be any property available to pay
creditors. Consequently, we determined that the investment is
permanently impaired and recorded a provision to write off the carrying
value of the bond, which was its amortized cost of $1
million.
|
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 one
stock.
The net
realized investment gains of $10.1 million in 2006 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 $670,000 in 2008, $2.2 million in 2007, and $2.7 million
in 2006. 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 incurred
a $1.5 million loss in 2008, consisting of income of $2.3 million from
Physicians, which was more than offset by a $3.8 million loss from Citation. In
2007, segment income of $9.8 million consisted 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.
Discontinued
Operations - HyperFeed Technologies
Year
Ended December 31, 2006
|
||
Loss
before tax and minority interest
|
$
(10,257,000)
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
Gain
on sale of disposal and sale of discontinued operations,
net
|
$
7,989,000
|
|
Loss from discontinued operation$$ |
$
(2,268,000)
|
|
During
2006, HyperFeed filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the U.S. 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 and 2008.
In 2006,
we recorded 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 U.S. 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".
|
25
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES -- YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
2008, 2007, AND 2006
Cash
Flow
Our
assets primarily consist of our operating subsidiaries, cash and cash
equivalents, and holdings in other public companies in our insurance company and
deferred compensation investment portfolios. On a consolidated basis, the
Company had $96.3 million in cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2008,
compared to $70.8 million at December 31, 2007. In addition to cash and cash
equivalents, at December 31, 2008 the consolidated group held fixed-income
securities with a market value of $29.1 million, and equities with a market
value of $120.4 million.
The cash
and cash equivalents, fixed-income securities, and equities held in each segment
are:
·
|
the
Water Resource and Water Storage Operations segment contains cash of $17.1
million;
|
·
|
the
Real Estate Operations segment holds cash of $22.3
million;
|
·
|
our
insurance companies have cash of $3.3 million, fixed-income securities
with a market value of $14 million, and equities with a market value of
$111.2 million; and
|
·
|
the
Corporate segment contains cash of $47.5 million and a fixed-income
security with a market value of $1.9 million. In addition, cash
of $6.1 million, fixed-income securities with a market value of $13.2
million, and equity securities with a market value of $7.2 million are
held in deferred compensation Rabbi Trusts within the Corporate segment,
which will be used to pay the deferred compensation
liabilities.
|
In
addition, $2 million of miscellaneous securities are held in the Real Estate
Operations and Corporate segments.
Our
liquid money market funds are held in the Federated Government Obligations Money
Market Fund (ticker: GOIXX).
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 cash flow. We are redeploying
part of the cash flow from Nevada Land to build the business of UCP, by
acquiring finished and partially-developed residential lots in selected
California markets; 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, 2008 the insurance companies had statutory surplus
of $59 million, of which $4.4 million could 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, 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 $25.5 million net
increase in cash and cash equivalents in 2008, compared to a $65.8 million net
decrease in 2007, and a $98.8 million net increase in 2006.
During
2008, operating activities used cash of $100.9 million, compared to cash used of
$56.6 million in 2007, and $12.6 million of cash provided in 2006. The 2006
total includes the operating activities of discontinued operations, which used
cash of $7 million.
The most
significant cash inflows from operating activities were:
·
|
in
2008, cash land sales by Nevada Land and repayments on notes related
to previous land sales, as well as investment income from the Insurance
Operations in Run Off segment and from liquid funds held in the other
segments;
|
·
|
in
2007, sale of real estate by Nevada Land; and
|
·
|
in
2006, the sale of Spring Valley Ranch for $22 million, and $11.1 million
from cash land sales by Nevada
Land.
|
In all
three years, the principal operating cash outflows relate to the acquisition and
development of real estate and water assets for future development, which is
classified as an operating cash flow since we are in the business of acquiring
and developing real estate and water assets with a view to possible re-sale at
an appropriate time in the future, claims payments by Physicians and Citation,
and overhead expenses. In 2008, we used cash of $53.6 million to
acquire and develop real estate and water assets, and we assumed $14.4 million
of debt related to properties we acquired. In addition, we paid $43.6
million in taxes, $16.1 million of which is due to be refunded in the first
quarter of 2009. In addition, we paid $11.5 million (and
distributed another $4.5 million in securities) of deferred compensation to
an officer who retired and withdrew his deferred compensation
assets.
During
2008, investing activities provided cash of $132.9 million, compared to $111.9
million of cash used in 2007, and $15.2 million of cash provided in 2006. The
2006 total includes the investing activities of discontinued operations, which
used cash of $1.9 million.
The most
significant cash inflows and outflows from investing activities
were:
·
|
in
2008, the sale of equity securities provided net cash of $71.9 million,
principally due to the sale of Jungfraubahn for approximately $75.3
million. Excluding Jungfraubahn, we bought $26.3 million of
equity securities, and sold $22.9 million, representing activity in our
insurance and deferred compensation portfolios. Proceeds from
the maturity and call of bonds provided cash of $73.9 million, which
primarily represented the maturity of temporary investments made with a
portion of the proceeds of the February 2007 stock offering, and we
used $9.3 million to buy new bonds. In addition, we
received cash proceeds of $11.7 million from the sale of
Semitropic;
|
·
|
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;
and
|
·
|
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.
|
During
2008, financing activities provided cash of $8.3 million, compared to $104.6
million of cash provided in 2007, and $73.4 million of cash provided in 2006.
The 2006 total includes discontinued operations, which used cash of
$498,000.
The most
significant cash inflows and outflows from financing activities
were:
·
|
in
2008, an $8.2 million increase in Swiss Franc (CHF) borrowings from our
bank in Switzerland. This represented borrowings of CHF 4.3 million ($4
million) on our current account facility, and the proceeds of an
additional fixed advance of CHF4.5 million ($4.2 million), which carries a
4.43% interest rate and is due for repayment in 2011;
|
·
|
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;
and
|
·
|
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.
|
We now
have total borrowing capacity in Switzerland of CHF 25 million ($23.4 million),
consisting of CHF 20 million ($18.7 million) of fixed advances due for repayment
in 2009 and 2011, and a CHF 5 million ($4.7 million) current account credit
facility. At December 31, 2008, we had borrowed approximately CHF
24.3 million ($22.8 million) of this capacity. The additional Swiss Franc fixed
advance, and the increase in the current account credit facility during 2008,
allow PICO European to acquire additional interests in Swiss public companies,
financed in the local currency.
As of
December 31, 2008, PICO European had two fixed advances scheduled for repayment
in 2009. In February 2009, a fixed advance of CHF 3 million was
renewed for 5 years, maturing in February 2014, at a 3.81% interest
rate. A fixed advance of CHF 12.5 million is due for repayment in May
2009. We expect to refinance this loan with a new CHF fixed advance
in May 2009.
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 a material impact on our net revenues or results of
operations, or is likely to have in the foreseeable future.
26
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.
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, 2008, no stock had been repurchased under this
authorization.
Commitments
and Supplementary Disclosures
1.
|
At
December 31, 2008:
|
·
|
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 subsidiary PICO European Holdings, LLC has 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, 2008.
Contractual Obligations
|
Payments
Due by Period
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Less
than 1 year
|
1
-3 years
|
3
-5 years
|
More
than 5 years
|
Total
|
||||||||||||||||
Borrowings
|
$
|
21,514,965
|
$
|
19,973,492
|
$ 893,260
|
$
|
42,381,718
|
|||||||||||||
Interest
on borrowings (1)
|
1,239,312
|
3,594,046
|
500,897
|
5,334,255
|
||||||||||||||||
Operating
leases
|
644,312
|
568,936
|
10,722
|
1,223,970
|
||||||||||||||||
Expected
claim payouts
|
4,558,534
|
10,240,811
|
5,069,485
|
$7,904,490
|
27,773,320
|
|||||||||||||||
Other
borrowings/obligations (primarily commitments for water purchases for
the Recharge Site and the amounts due under the Tribe
settlement)
|
7,076,308
|
7,076,308
|
||||||||||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
35,033,432
|
$
|
34,377,284
|
$
|
6,474,365
|
$
|
7,904,490
|
$
|
83,789,571
|
In addition to the amounts shown
in the table above, $12.6 million of unrecognized tax benefits have been
recorded as liabilities in accordance with FIN 48. Related to
these unrecognized tax benefits, we have also recorded a liability for
potential interest of $3.2 million at December 31, 2008. As
of December 31, 2008, the Company believes that it is reasonably possible
that $11.7 million of the FIN 48 tax liability related to a subsidiary in
receivership may be decreased within the next twelve months as a result of
either a statute closing or the receipt of a favorable ruling
(1)
Represent interest costs on borrowings at December 31, 2008 for the terms of the
debt. Interest cost beyond year one is not recorded in the
accompanying consolidated financial statements.
2.
|
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
|
SFAS 161 - In March 2008, the
Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities – An Amendment of SFAS No 133”
(“SFAS 161”). SFAS 161 seeks to improve financial reporting for derivative
instruments and hedging activities by requiring enhanced disclosures regarding
the impact on financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. To
achieve this increased transparency, SFAS 161 requires (1) the disclosure
of the fair value of derivative instruments and gains and losses in a tabular
format; (2) the disclosure of derivative features that are credit
risk-related; and (3) cross-referencing within the footnotes. SFAS 161 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 161 will have on the
consolidated financial statements.
SFAS 141(R) - In December
2007, the FASB issued SFAS 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 SFAS 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.
FASB Staff
Position (“FSP’) FAS 142-3 - In April 2008, the FASB issued FSP FAS
142-3, “Determination of the
Useful Life of Intangible Assets”. FSP FAS 142-3 amends the factors that
should be considered in developing renewal or extension assumptions used to
determine the useful life of a recognized intangible asset under SFAS
No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” for intangible assets
acquired after adoption. Under FSP FAS 142-3 an entity should consider its own
historical experience in renewing similar arrangements, or market participant
assumptions in the absence of historical experience. FSP FAS 142-3 also requires
disclosures to enable users of financial statements to assess the extent to
which the expected future cash flows associated with the asset are affected by
the entity’s intent and/or ability to renew or extend the arrangement. FSP FAS
142-3 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal
years, beginning after December 15, 2008. PICO is currently in
the process of determining the effect, if any, that the adoption FSP FAS 142-3
will have on the consolidated financial statements.
FSP EITF
03-6-1 - In June 2008, relative to Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No.
(“EITF”) 03-6-1, the FASB issued FSP EITF 03-6-1 “Determining Whether Instruments
Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating
Securities”. FSP EITF 03-6-1 concluded that unvested share-based payment
awards that contain a nonforfeitable right to receive dividends, whether paid or
unpaid, are participating securities and should be included in the computation
of earnings per share pursuant to the two-class method prescribed under SFAS
No. 128, “Earnings per
Share”. This standard is effective for financial statements issued for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within
those years, with early adoption prohibited. The adoption of this standard will
not have a material impact on basic or diluted earnings per share.
27
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 allegedly 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 $27.8 million at December 31,
2008, $32.4 million at December 31, 2007, and $41.1 million at December 31,
2006.
Claims
payments reduced reserves by $1.4 million in 2008, $4.8 million in 2007, and
$3.5 million in 2006.
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 $2.5 million
in 2008, $3.6 million in 2007, and $3.2 million in 2006. 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.
ANALYSIS
OF LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSE DEVELOPMENT
The
following table presents the development of balance sheet liabilities for 1998
through 2008 for medical professional liability insurance, and all property and
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.
28
1998
|
1999
|
2000
|
2001
|
2002
|
||||||||||||
In Thousands
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
liability as originally estimated:
|
$
|
89,554
|
$
|
88,112
|
$
|
74,896
|
$
|
54,022
|
$
|
44,905
|
||||||
Discount
|
8,515
|
7,521
|
||||||||||||||
Gross
liability as originally estimated:
|
98,069
|
95,633
|
74,896
|
54,022
|
44,905
|
|||||||||||
Cumulative
payments as of:
|
||||||||||||||||
One
year later
|
23,696
|
22,636
|
9,767
|
7,210
|
6,216
|
|||||||||||
Two
years later
|
41,789
|
31,987
|
16,946
|
13,426
|
12,729
|
|||||||||||
Three
years later
|
50,968
|
39,150
|
23,162
|
19,939
|
16,956
|
|||||||||||
Four
years later
|
58,129
|
45,140
|
29,675
|
24,166
|
20,381
|
|||||||||||
Five
Years later
|
64,119
|
51,566
|
33,902
|
27,591
|
23,128
|
|||||||||||
Six
years later
|
70,545
|
55,793
|
37,327
|
30,338
|
26,530
|
|||||||||||
Seven
years later
|
74,772
|
59,218
|
40,074
|
31,700
|
||||||||||||
Eight
years later
|
78,198
|
61,965
|
41,437
|
|||||||||||||
Nine
years later
|
76,395
|
63,328
|
||||||||||||||
Ten
years later
|
77,757
|
|||||||||||||||
Liability
re-estimated as of:
|
||||||||||||||||
One
year later
|
114,347
|
96,727
|
63,672
|
52,115
|
49,573
|
|||||||||||
Two
years later
|
115,539
|
85,786
|
61,832
|
56,782
|
49,331
|
|||||||||||
Three
years later
|
104,689
|
83,763
|
66,494
|
56,540
|
45,574
|
|||||||||||
Four
years later
|
102,704
|
88,460
|
66,275
|
52,784
|
42,352
|
|||||||||||
Five
Years later
|
107,409
|
88,167
|
62,519
|
49,562
|
40,790
|
|||||||||||
Six
years later
|
107,127
|
84,412
|
59,298
|
47,999
|
38,344
|
|||||||||||
Seven
years later
|
103,374
|
81,200
|
57,736
|
45,544
|
||||||||||||
Eight
years later
|
100,153
|
79,639
|
55,280
|
|||||||||||||
Nine
years later
|
98,606
|
77,183
|
||||||||||||||
Ten
years later
|
96,150
|
|||||||||||||||
Cumulative
Redundancy
|
$
|
1,919
|
$18,450
|
$19,616
|
$8,478
|
$6,571
|
29
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
2003
|
2004
|
2005
|
2006
|
2007
|
2008
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
In
Thousands
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross
liability before discount as originally estimated:
|
$ |
43,357
|
$ |
36,602
|
$ |
28,618
|
$ |
21,972
|
$ |
15,623
|
$ |
11.840
|
|||||||||||||
Cumulative
payments as of:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
One
year later
|
6,513
|
4,227
|
3,425
|
2,747
|
2,747
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Two
years later
|
10,740
|
7,652
|
6,172
|
4,110
|
4,110
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Three
years later
|
14,165
|
10,399
|
7,535
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Four
years later
|
21,162
|
11,762
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Five
Years later
|
22.525
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Six
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Seven
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eight
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nine
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ten
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Liability
re-estimated as of:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
One
year later
|
43,115
|
32,845
|
25,397
|
18,370
|
18,370
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Two
years later
|
39,358
|
29,623
|
23,834
|
15,914
|
13,167
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Three
years later
|
36,135
|
28,061
|
21,378
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Four
years later
|
34,574
|
25,605
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Five
Years later
|
32,117
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Six
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Seven
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eight
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nine
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ten
years later
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cumulative
Redundancy
|
$
|
11,240
|
10,997
|
7,240
|
6,057
|
2,456
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RECONCILIATION
TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross
liability - end of year
|
$
|
38,944
|
$
|
32,276
|
$
|
27,681
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Reinsurance
recoverable
|
(16,972
|
)
|
(16,653
|
)
|
(15,877
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Net
liability - end of year
|
21,972
|
15,623
|
11,804
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Reinsurance
recoverable
|
16,972
|
16,653
|
15,877
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
38,944
|
32,276
|
27,681
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Discontinued
personal lines insurance
|
101
|
100
|
92
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Liability
to California Insurance Guarantee Association for Workers' Compensation
payouts
|
2,038
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
sheet liability
|
$
|
41,083
|
$
|
32,376
|
$
|
27,773
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Gross
re-estimated liability - latest
|
$
|
34,405
|
$
|
30,061
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Re-estimated
recoverable - latest
|
(18,490
|
)
|
(16,894
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Net
re-estimated liability - latest
|
$
|
15,915
|
$
|
13,167
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Net
cumulative redundancy
|
$
|
6,057
|
$
|
2,456
|
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
1998, will be included in the decrease or increase amount for 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 that are included in the
development table above, which is prepared on a GAAP basis.
30
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 period 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 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
2008, 2007, and 2006; 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 2008, 2007, and 2006 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
The Medical Assurance Company, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Pro Assurance
Group (rated "A-" by A. M. Best Company). 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 $6 million,
for amounts in excess of $150,000 per claim. For the casualty business,
excluding umbrella coverage, Citation has reinsurance providing coverage of $6
million, for amounts in excess of $150,000 per claim. Umbrella coverage was
reinsured for $2 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.
Citation’s
last property and casualty insurance policies expired in December 2001, so it
does not require reinsurance from 2002 on 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,
2008. 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.
31
Reinsurance
Agreements on Workers’ Compensation Insurance Liabilities
In
addition to the reinsurance agreements with Fremont described above, Citation
has reinsurance coverage for its workers’ compensation insurance liabilities for
the policy years 1986 to 1997 with General Reinsurance Corporation, 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, 2008. 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.
ITEM
7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
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, 2008, we had $29.1 million of fixed maturity securities,
$120.4 million of marketable equity securities that were subject to market risk,
of which $64.5 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, 2008,
the model calculated a loss in fair value of $1.1 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 $24.1 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 $8.3 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, 2008 and 2007 and for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2008 and the Report of the Registered
Independent Public Accounting Firm is included in this report as listed in the
index.
32
SELECTED
QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA
Summarized
unaudited quarterly financial data (in thousands, except share and per share
amounts) for 2008 and 2007 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,
|
|||||||||||||
2008
|
2008
|
2008
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Net
investment income and net realized gain (loss)
|
$
|
3,499
|
$
|
52,684
|
$ |
286
|
$
|
(10,095)
|
||||||||
Sale
of real estate and water assets
|
$ |
494
|
$ |
811
|
$ |
430
|
$ |
1,602
|
||||||||
Total
revenues (charges)
|
$ |
4,477
|
$ |
53,923
|
$ |
9,832
|
$ |
(7,881)
|
||||||||
Gross
profit
|
$ |
345
|
$ |
639
|
$ |
285
|
$ |
1,161
|
||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ |
(1,647)
|
$ |
28,243
|
$ |
533
|
$ |
1,502
|
||||||||
Net
income (loss) per common share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Basic
|
$
|
(0.09)
|
$
|
1.50
|
$
|
0.03
|
$
|
0.
08
|
||||||||
Diluted
|
$
|
(0.09)
|
$
|
1.49
|
$
|
0.03
|
$
|
0.
08
|
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||||||||||
March
31,
|
June
30,
|
September30,
|
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
|
|||||||
Net
income (loss) per common share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.03
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
$
|
0.03
|
$
|
0.
08
|
|||||||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.03
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
$
|
0.02
|
$
|
0.
08
|
33
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AS
OF DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007
AND
FOR EACH OF THE
THREE
YEARS IN THE PERIOD
ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2008
INDEX
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
35
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2008 and 2007
|
36
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and
2006
|
37
|
Consolidated
Statements of Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2008,
2007, and 2006
|
38-40
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and
2006
|
41
|
42- 62
|
34
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, 2008 and 2007, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders’ equity and comprehensive
(loss) income, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2008. 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, 2008 and 2007, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2008, 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, 2008, 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, 2009, expressed an
unqualified opinion on the Company's internal control over financial
reporting.
/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
San
Diego, CA
February
27, 2009
35
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
December
31, 2008 and 2007
ASSETS
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Available for Sale
Investments (Note
3)
|
||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
$ | 29,058,562 | $ | 105,780,499 | ||||
Equity
securities
|
120,358,461 | 259,743,145 | ||||||
Total
investments
|
149,417,023 | 365,523,644 | ||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
96,316,018 | 70,791,025 | ||||||
Notes and other
receivables, net (Note
6)
|
24,352,367 | 17,151,065 | ||||||
Reinsurance
receivables (Note
10)
|
16,373,132 | 16,887,953 | ||||||
Real estate and
water assets (Note
5)
|
271,714,300 | 200,605,792 | ||||||
Property and
equipment, net (Note
8)
|
1,512,370 | 1,212,394 | ||||||
Net deferred income
taxes (Note
7)
|
25,274,232 | |||||||
Federal, foreign and
state income taxes (Note
7)
|
4,519,920 | |||||||
Other
assets
|
3,154,434 | 4,170,407 | ||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 592,633,796 | $ | 676,342,280 |
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
||||||||
Reserves for unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expenses (Note
11)
|
$ | 27,773,320 | $ | 32,376,018 | ||||
Deferred
compensation (Note
1)
|
27,744,528 | 52,546,234 | ||||||
Other
liabilities
|
16,988,040 | 25,806,566 | ||||||
Federal, foreign and
state income taxes (Note
7)
|
3,209,651 | |||||||
Borrowings
(Note
4)
|
42,381,718 | 18,878,080 | ||||||
Net deferred income
taxes (Note
7)
|
17,675,162 | |||||||
Total
liabilities
|
114,887,606 | 150,491,711 | ||||||
Commitments and
Contingencies (Notes
10 - 15)
|
||||||||
Shareholders'
Equity
|
||||||||
Common
stock, $.001 par value; authorized 100,000,000; 23,265,187 issued and
18,840,392 outstanding at December 31, 2008
and
23,259,367 issued and 18,833,733 outstanding at December 31,
2007
|
23,265 | 23,259 | ||||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
439,381,715 | 435,235,358 | ||||||
Accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss) (Note
1)
|
(1,423,863) | 79,469,438 | ||||||
Retained
earnings
|
118,036,716 | 89,405,743 | ||||||
556,017,833 | 604,133,798 | |||||||
Less
treasury stock, at cost (common shares: 4,424,795 in 2008 and 4,425,630 in
2007)
|
(78,271,643) | (78,283,229) | ||||||
Total shareholders'
equity (Note
9)
|
477,746,190 | 525,850,569 | ||||||
Total
liabilities and shareholders' equity
|
$ | 592,633,796 | $ | 676,342,280 |
36
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For
the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Sale
of real estate and water assets
|
$
|
3,337,460
|
$
|
9,496,156
|
$
|
41,509,116
|
||||||
Net investment
income (Note
3)
|
10,145,430
|
17,039,800
|
13,556,192
|
|||||||||
Net realized gain on
investments (Note
3)
|
36,227,458
|
2,747,958
|
26,053,077
|
|||||||||
Gain
on sale of water storage
|
8,716,082
|
|||||||||||
Other (Note
1)
|
1,925,110
|
4,644,834
|
1,604,859
|
|||||||||
Total
revenues
|
60,351,540
|
33,928,748
|
82,723,244
|
|||||||||
Costs
and expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Operating
and other costs (Note 1)
|
4,250,234
|
31,725,964
|
23,581,759
|
|||||||||
Cost
of real estate and water assets sold
|
908,186
|
2,684,183
|
10,276,789
|
|||||||||
Loss and loss
adjustment recovery (Note
11)
|
(2,456,386)
|
|
(3,601,091)
|
|
(3,224,401)
|
|
||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,260,471
|
1,106,027
|
1,222,351
|
|||||||||
Total
costs and expenses
|
3,962,505
|
31,915,083
|
31,856,498
|
|||||||||
Income
before income taxes and minority interest
|
56,389,035
|
2,013,665
|
50,866,746
|
|||||||||
Provision for
federal, foreign and state income taxes (Note
7)
|
28,491,016
|
3,535,699
|
19,390,374
|
|||||||||
Income
(loss) before minority interest
|
27,898,019
|
(1,522,034)
|
|
31,476,372
|
||||||||
Minority
interest in loss of subsidiaries
|
732,954
|
252,307
|
34,252
|
|||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
28,630,973
|
(1,269,727)
|
|
31,510,624
|
||||||||
Loss from
discontinued operations, net of tax (Note
2)
|
(10,256,984)
|
|
||||||||||
Gain
on disposal of discontinued operations, net
|
7,989,315
|
|||||||||||
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
(2,267,669)
|
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
28,630,973
|
$
|
(1,269,727)
|
|
$
|
29,242,955
|
|||||
Net
income (loss) per common share – basic:
|
||||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
$
|
1.52
|
$
|
(0.07)
|
|
$
|
2.10
|
|||||
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
(0.15)
|
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss) per common share
|
$
|
1.52
|
$
|
(0.07)
|
|
$
|
1.95
|
|||||
Weighted
average shares outstanding
|
18,835,002
|
18,321,449
|
14,994,947
|
|||||||||
Net
income (loss) per common share – diluted:
|
||||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
$
|
1.52
|
$
|
(0.07)
|
|
$
|
2.10
|
|||||
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
(0.15)
|
|||||||||||
Net
income (loss) per common share
|
$
|
1.52
|
$
|
(0.07)
|
|
$
|
1.95
|
|||||
Weighted
average shares outstanding
|
18,861,853
|
18,321,449
|
15,025,341
|
37
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For
the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006
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, 2006
|
$
|
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisition
of treasury stock for 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
|
38
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For
the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006
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
|
39
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For
the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006
Accumulated
Other
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
Loss
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional
|
Net
Unrealized
|
Foreign
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common
|
Paid-In
|
Retained
|
Appreciation
|
Currency
|
Treasury
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
|
Capital
|
Earnings
|
on
Investments
|
Translation
|
Stock
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2007
|
$
|
23,259
|
$
|
435,235,358
|
$
|
89,405,743
|
$
|
82,456,499
|
$
|
(2,987,061)
|
|
$
|
(78,283,229)
|
|
$
|
525,850,569
|
|||||||||||
Comprehensive
loss for 2008
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
28,630,973
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
unrealized depreciation on investments net of deferred tax of $42.5million
and reclassification adjustment of $54.2 million
|
(70,889,521)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign
currency translation
|
(10,003,778)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total
Comprehensive Loss
|
(52,262,328)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
based compensation expense
|
3,988,596
|
|
3,988,596
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Disposition
of treasury stock from deferred compensation plans
|
16,788
|
11,586
|
28,374
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise
of stock-settled stock appreciation rights, net of excess tax benefits of
$62,000
|
2
|
(16,229)
|
|
(16,227)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of restricted PICO stock
|
4
|
157,202
|
157,206
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2008
|
$
|
23,265
|
$ |
$439,381,715
|
$ |
$118,036,716
|
$ |
$11,566,976
|
$ |
$(12,990,839)
|
|
$ |
$(78,271,643)
|
$477,746,190
|
40
PICO
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For
the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
28,630,973
|
$
|
(1,269,727)
|
|
$ |
29,242,955
|
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating
activities, net of acquisitions:
|
||||||||
Provision
(benefit) for deferred taxes
|
2,676,025
|
(6,592,013)
|
|
4,286,402
|
||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,354,352
|
1,634,698
|
2,303,827
|
|||||
Stock
based compensation expense and amortization of restricted stock
awards
|
4,156,960
|
4,468,334
|
||||||
Gain
on sale of investments
|
(36,227,458)
|
(2,747,958)
|
|
(26,053,077)
|
||||
Gain
on sale of water storage
|
(8,716,082)
|
|||||||
Gain
on non-monetary exchange
|
(3,466,402)
|
|
||||||
Loss
from discontinued operations, net
|
2,267,669
|
|||||||
Changes
in assets and liabilities, net of effects of
acquisitions:
|
||||||||
Notes
and other receivables
|
(7,233,633)
|
25,633
|
(3,045,752)
|
|||||
Other
liabilities
|
(1,209,451)
|
(10,881,075)
|
|
502,669
|
||||
Other
assets
|
937,460
|
(1,073,719)
|
|
816,221
|
||||
Real
estate and water assets
|
(53,571,725)
|
(30,596,350)
|
|
4,277,939
|
||||
Current
income tax liability
|
(7,667,886)
|
3,923,893
|
4,636,472
|
|||||
Excess
tax benefits from stock based payment arrangements
|
(62,153)
|
(4,426,789)
|
||||||
Reinsurance
receivable
|
514,821
|
402,086
|
(1,103,934)
|
|||||
Reinsurance
payable
|
(317,431)
|
|
(7,650)
|
|||||
SAR
payable and deferred compensation
|
(20,300,776)
|
2,770,191
|
7,344,777
|
|||||
Unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
(4,602,698)
|
(8,707,283)
|
|
(5,563,605)
|
||||
All
other operating activities
|
455,291
|
236,012
|
(322,619)
|
|||||
Cash
provided by (used in) operating activities - continuing
operations
|
(100,865,980)
|
(56,617,900)
|
|
19,582,294
|
||||
Cash
used by operating activities - discontinued
operations
|
(6,992,994)
|
|||||||
Cash
provided by (used in) operating activities
|
(100,865,980)
|
(56,617,900)
|
|
12,589,300
|
||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||
Proceeds
from the sale of available for sale investments:
|
||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
10,714,552
|
2,703,700
|
||||||
Equity
securities
|
98,190,571
|
10,410,021
|
47,339,058
|
|||||
Proceeds
from maturity of available for sale investments
|
63,192,968
|
83,603,560
|
73,408,060
|
|||||
Purchases
of available for sale investments:
|
||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
(9,294,830)
|
(130,220,057)
|
|
(47,253,484)
|
||||
Equity
securities
|
(26,322,941)
|
(26,628,779)
|
|
(30,633,915)
|
||||
Purchases
of minority interest in subsidiaries
|
(700,000)
|
|||||||
Real
estate and water asset capital expenditure
|
(14,634,706)
|
(48,141,339)
|
|
(27,606,419)
|
||||
Proceeds
on the sale of water storage
|
11,749,900
|
|||||||
All
other investing activities
|
(680,264)
|
(959,092)
|
|
(120,568)
|
||||
Cash
provided by (used in) investing activities - continuing
operations
|
132,915,250
|
(111,935,686)
|
|
17,136,432
|
||||
Cash
used in investing activities - discontinued
operations
|
(1,936,237)
|
|||||||
Cash
provided by (used in) investing activities
|
132,915,250
|
(111,935,686)
|
|
15,200,195
|
||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||
Proceeds
from issuance of common stock, net of expenses
|
100,141,935
|
73,945,144
|
||||||
Proceeds
from bank and other borrowings
|
8,240,668
|
|||||||
Repayment
of bank and other borrowings
|
(37,930)
|
|||||||
Excess
tax benefits from stock based payment arrangements
|
62,153
|
4,426,789
|
||||||
Sale
of PICO stock (from deferred compensation plans)
|
28,374
|
29,392
|
||||||
Cash
provided by financing activities - continuing
operations
|
8,331,195
|
104,598,116
|
73,907,214
|
|||||
Cash
provided by (used in) financing activities - discontinued
operations
|
(498,272)
|
|||||||
Cash
provided by financing activities
|
8,331,195
|
104,598,116
|
73,408,942
|
|||||
Effect
of exchange rate changes on cash
|
(14,855,472)
|
(1,875,083)
|
|
(2,371,275)
|
||||
Net
increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
25,524,993
|
(65,830,553)
|
|
98,827,162
|
||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of year
|
70,791,025
|
136,621,578
|
37,794,416
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents of continuing operations end of
year
|
96,316,018
|
70,791,025
|
136,621,578
|
|||||
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
||||||||
Cash
paid during the year for:
|
||||||||
Federal,
state and foreign income taxes, net of refunds
|
$
|
43,585,667
|
$
|
6,229,674
|
$
|
10,515,540
|
||
Non-cash
investing and financing activities:
|
||||||||
Distribution
of equity and debt securities in 2008 and treasury stock in 2006 to settle
deferred compensation liability
|
$ |
4,500,930
|
$ |
306,027
|
||||
Construction
in progress costs incurred but not paid
|
$
|
457,372
|
$ |
7,905,643
|
$ |
2,944,637
|
||
Mortgage
incurred to purchase real estate
|
$
|
14,398,255
|
$ |
5,180,000
|
||||
Accrued
withholding taxes recorded on additional paid in capital related to stock
appreciation rights exercised
|
$
|
78,380
|
$ |
5,398,767
|
41
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.
|
The
following are the Company’s significant operating subsidiaries as of December
31, 2008:
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 a water storage facility in Arizona.
Nevada
Land & Resource Company, LLC (“Nevada Land”). Nevada Land is a Nevada
Limited Liability Company. Nevada Land’s business includes selling and
developing real estate and water rights, and leasing property.
UCP, LLC
(“UCP”). UCP is a Delaware limited liability company which owns and develops
real estate in and around the Fresno metropolitan area, central California.
UCP’s business is to acquire and develop residential lots, primarily in
California.
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 paying off claims arising from historical
business, and selling investments when funds are needed to pay such
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 paying off claims
arising from historical business, and selling investments when funds are needed
to pay such claims.
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.
42
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 impairments and the application of the equity
method of accounting, unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses, reinsurance
receivables, notes and other 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, 2008 and 2007, 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. No such gain exists in
2008 or 2006.
Operating
and Other Costs:
For the
year ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 the Company
reported foreign currency gains of $15 million, $2 million and $2.6
million, respectively. In each year, the total gain included a
foreign currency transaction gain resulting from a Swiss Franc denominated loan
from PICO Holdings to one of its subsidiaries. During 2008 only, the
Company also reported an $11.8 million foreign currency gain within one of its
wholly owned foreign subsidiaries in Switzerland that had invested in US
currency. Such gain is the result of the appreciation of the US
dollar compared to the Swiss Franc.
Investments:
The
Company’s investment portfolio at December 31, 2008 and 2007 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.
43
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 $21.2 million, $2 million
and $459,000 are included in realized losses for the years ended December 31,
2008, 2007 and 2006, 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 gains on impaired
securities are recognized 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 $64.5 million and $165 million of the Company’s investments at
December 31, 2008 and 2007, 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 include 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 note terms are typically
non-recourse which allows the Company to recover the underlying property if and
when a buyer defaults. No significant provision for bad debts was required
during the year ended December 31, 2008, 2007 or 2006. At December 31, 2008,
notes and other receivables also include a $10.2 million receivable from a third
party for potential tax liabilities. See Note 7, Federal, Foreign and
State Income Tax for additional information.
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.
Intangible
Assets:
The
Company applies the provisions of SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets.” The Company’s intangible assets consist primarily of certain water
rights and the exclusive right to use the pipeline the Company constructed in
2008 that have indefinite useful lives and are therefore not
amortized. SFAS No. 142 requires intangible assets with
indefinite lives to be tested for impairment at least annually, or more
frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate that the asset may be
impaired, by comparing the fair value of the assets to their carrying amounts.
If the carrying value of an indefinite-lived intangible asset exceeds its fair
value, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to the
excess The Company completes its annual review in the fourth
quarter of each year by calculating the fair value of the intangible assets
using discounted cash flow models. No impairment charges were
recorded during the three years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 or
2006.
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. The Company
completed an impairment assessment during the year given the downturn in the
real estate market. No impairment charges were recorded during
the three years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 or 2006.
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).
44
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.
The
Company adopted the provisions of Financial Standards Accounting Board
Interpretation No. 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, $2.5
million of which would affect the effective tax rate if recognized.
The
Company recognizes any interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions
in income tax expense. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company
recorded approximately $1.7 million in interest and penalties 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, 2008, the Company believes
that it is reasonably possible that the FIN 48 tax liability for a subsidiary in
receivership may be decreased within the next twelve months as a result of
either a statute closing or the receipt of a favorable ruling. The range
of results is from zero to $11.7 million. The Company has accrued a
receivable from a third party, which would offset any potential tax
liabilities.
The
Income tax provision was $28.5 million, $3.5 million, and $19.4 million during
the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The
effective income tax rate in 2008, 2007 and 2006 is 51%, 176% and 38%,
respectively. The effective rate differs from the statutory rate in
2008 primarily due to the recognition of income taxes on $7.9 million of
previously untaxed earnings and profits of the Company’s wholly owned
subsidiary, Global Equity AG (“GEAG”). Such earnings and profits,
previously considered permanently reinvested under SFAS 109, are now expected to
be recognized in the Company’s U.S. Federal and state income tax
returns. In addition, in 2008 as well as the comparative periods, the
effective income tax rate differs from the Federal rate due primarily to
interest expense and penalties on uncertain tax positions, operating losses
without any associated tax benefit from subsidiaries that are excluded from the
consolidated federal income tax return, certain non-deductible compensation
expense, and state income tax charges.
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 free-standing stock-settled stock
appreciation rights (“SAR”) are considered common stock equivalents for this
purpose. The number of additional shares is calculated by assuming
that the SAR were exercised, and that the proceeds were used to acquire shares
of common stock at the average market price during the period.
For the
year ended December 31, 2008, the Company’s in-the-money stock-settled SAR
were included in the diluted per share calculation using the treasury stock
method (659,409 SAR were excluded because the were
out-of-the-money). For the year ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, the
Company’s stock-settled SAR were excluded from the diluted per share calculation
because their effect on earnings per share was anti-dilutive.
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. 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
consolidated financial statements.
At
December 31, 2008 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, 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.
Deferred
Compensation:
At
December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company had $27.7 million and $52.5 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
deferred compensation liability decreased during the year ended December 31,
2008 primarily due to a distribution of $16.1 million to PICO’s former executive
Chairman and a decline in the fair value of the assets in the deferred
compensation accounts.
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,
|
||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||
Net
unrealized gain on securities
|
$
|
11,566,976
|
$
|
82,456,499
|
||||
Foreign
currency translation
|
(12,990,839)
|
(2,987,061)
|
||||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss)
|
$
|
(1,423,863)
|
$
|
79,469,438
|
The
accumulated balance is net of deferred income tax liabilities of $1.7 million
and $44.7 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007, 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.
45
Recently
Issued Accounting Pronouncements
SFAS 161 - In March 2008, the
Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities – An Amendment of SFAS No. 133”
(“SFAS 161”). SFAS 161 seeks to improve financial reporting for derivative
instruments and hedging activities by requiring enhanced disclosures regarding
the impact on financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. To
achieve this increased transparency, SFAS 161 requires (1) the disclosure
of the fair value of derivative instruments and gains and losses in a tabular
format; (2) the disclosure of derivative features that are credit
risk-related; and (3) cross-referencing within the footnotes. SFAS 161 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 161 will have 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.
FASB Staff
Position (“FSP’) FAS 142-3 - In April 2008, the FASB issued FSP FAS
142-3, “Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible Assets”. FSP FAS 142-3
amends the factors that should be considered in developing renewal or extension
assumptions used to determine the useful life of a recognized intangible asset
under SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” for intangible
assets acquired after adoption. Under FSP FAS 142-3 an entity should consider
its own historical experience in renewing similar arrangements, or market
participant assumptions in the absence of historical experience. FSP FAS 142-3
also requires disclosures to enable users of financial statements to assess the
extent to which the expected future cash flows associated with the asset are
affected by the entity’s intent and/or ability to renew or extend the
arrangement. FSP FAS 142-3 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods
within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15,
2008. PICO is currently in the process of determining the effect, if
any, that the adoption FSP FAS 142-3 will have on the consolidated financial
statements.
FSP EITF
03-6-1 - In June 2008, relative to Emerging Issues Task Force
Issue No. (“EITF”) 03-6-1, the FASB issued FSP EITF 03-6-1 “Determining Whether
Instruments Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating
Securities”. FSP EITF 03-6-1 concluded that unvested share-based payment awards
that contain a nonforfeitable right to receive dividends, whether paid or
unpaid, are participating securities and should be included in the computation
of earnings per share pursuant to the two-class method prescribed under SFAS
No. 128, “Earnings per Share”. This standard is effective for financial
statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008, and
interim periods within those years, with early adoption prohibited. The adoption
of this standard will not have a material impact on basic or diluted earnings
per share.
Recently
Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
SFAS 159 - In February 2007,
the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“SFAS 159”). SFAS 159 allows entities
to voluntarily choose to measure certain financial assets and liabilities at
fair value (“fair value option”). The fair value option may be elected on an
instrument-by-instrument basis and is irrevocable, unless a new election date
occurs. If the fair value option is elected for an instrument, SFAS 159
specifies that unrealized gains and losses for that instrument be reported in
earnings at each subsequent reporting date. SFAS 159 was effective for PICO on
January 1, 2008. PICO did not apply the fair value option to any of its
outstanding instruments and, therefore, SFAS 159 did not have an impact on the
consolidated financial statements.
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 US 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. PICO adopted SFAS 157 on January 1, 2008.
Subsequently, in February 2008, the FASB issued two staff positions 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 of 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 in the process of determining the effect, if any, the adoption
of SFAS 157 for its non-financial assets and liabilities, effective
January 1, 2009, will have on the consolidated financial
statements. SFAS 157, which defines fair value as the exchange price
that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit
price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability
in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement
date.
SFAS 157
establishes a three-level fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used
to measure fair value. This hierarchy requires entities to maximize the use of
observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. The three levels
of inputs used to measure fair value are as follows:
Level 1 —
Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities.
Level 2 —
Observable inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1, such as
quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets; quoted
prices for identical or similar assets and liabilities in markets that are not
active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable
market data.
Level 3
— Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and
that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities. This
includes certain pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies and similar
techniques that use significant unobservable inputs.
FSP SFAS 157-3 - On October 10, 2008, the Company adopted FSP SFAS
157-3, “Determining the Fair Value of a Financial Asset When the Market for That
Asset Is Not Active.” FSP FAS 157-3 clarifies the application of SFAS
No. 157 in an inactive market by allowing companies to use judgment in
addition to market information in certain circumstances when valuing assets
which have inactive markets. Additionally, FSP FAS 157-3 provides an example to
illustrate key considerations in determining the fair value of a financial asset
in an inactive market. The adoption of this FSP did not impact the Company’s
fair value measurements. The Company is still evaluating the impact of this FSP
upon full adoption of SFAS No. 157.
46
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 are
presented below:
2006
|
||
Revenues:
|
||
Service
revenue
|
$
2,907,268
|
|
Investment
income
|
3,892
|
|
Total
revenues
|
2,911,160
|
|
Expenses:
|
||
Cost
of service revenue
|
1,326,162
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
446,922
|
|
Other
costs and expenses
|
9,243,085
|
|
Total
expenses
|
11,016,169
|
|
Loss
before income taxes
|
(8,105,009
|
)
|
Benefit
for income taxes
|
2,771,672
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
(5,333,337
|
)
|
Loss
on write down of assets to fair value
|
(4,923,647
|
)
|
(10,256,984
|
)
|
|
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
|
|
Reported
gain on disposal of discontinued operations
|
7,989,315
|
|
Loss from discontinued operations |
$
(2,267,669
|
)
|
47
3.
|
At
December 31, the cost and carrying value of investments were as
follows:
Gross
|
Gross
|
|||||||||||||||
Unrealized
|
Unrealized
|
Carrying
|
||||||||||||||
2008:
|
Cost
|
Gains
|
Losses
|
Value
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities:
|
||||||||||||||||
U.S.
Treasury securities
|
$
|
1,110,327
|
$
|
111,407
|
$
|
1,221,734
|
||||||||||
Municipal
bonds
|
2,137,003
|
$ |
(8,523)
|
|
2,128,480
|
|||||||||||
Corporate
bonds
|
25,627,851
|
34,460
|
(7,822,451)
|
|
17,839,860
|
|||||||||||
Government
sponsored enterprises
|
7,442,611
|
425,877
|
7,868,488
|
|||||||||||||
36,317,792
|
571,744
|
(7,830,974)
|
|
29,058,562
|
||||||||||||
Marketable
equity securities
|
102,322,281
|
27,348,470
|
(9,312,290)
|
|
120,358,461
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
138,640,073
|
$
|
27,920,214
|
$
|
(17,143,264)
|
|
$
|
149,417,023
|
Gross
|
Gross
|
||||||||||||
Unrealized
|
Unrealized
|
Carrying
|
|||||||||||
2007:
|
Cost
|
Gains
|
Losses
|
Value
|
|||||||||
Fixed
maturities:
|
|||||||||||||
U.S.
Treasury securities
|
$
|
1,114,725
|
$
54,047
|
|
$
1,168,772
|
||||||||
Corporate
bonds
|
96,869,497
|
194,358
|
$ |
(2,567,062)
|
|
94,496,793
|
|||||||
Government
sponsored enterprises
|
9,929,011
|
189,514
|
(3,590)
|
10,114,934
|
|||||||||
107,913,233
|
437,919
|
(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
|
$
|
128,509,947
|
$
|
(5,124,295)
|
|
$
365,523,644
|
The
following table summarizes the market value of those investments in an
unrealized loss position for periods less than or greater than 12
months:
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||||
Gross
|
|
Gross
|
||||||||||||||
Unrealized
|
|
Unrealized
|
||||||||||||||
Less
than 12 months
|
Fair
Value
|
Loss
|
Fair
Value
|
Loss
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities:
|
||||||||||||||||
Municipal
bonds
|
$ |
2,128,480
|
$ |
8,523
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
Corporate
bonds
|
5,290,363
|
1,586,298
|
$ |
69,629,022
|
|
$ |
1,918,168
|
|||||||||
Government
sponsored enterprises
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
7,418,843
|
1,594,821
|
69,629,022
|
|
1,918,168
|
||||||||||||
Marketable
equity securities
|
40,880,566
|
9,290,041
|
11,899,183
|
|
1,495,276
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
48,299,409
|
$
|
10,884,862
|
$
|
81,528,205
|
|
$
|
3,413,444
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||||
Gross
|
|
Gross
|
||||||||||||||
Unrealized
|
|
Unrealized
|
||||||||||||||
Greater
than 12 months
|
Fair
Value
|
Loss
|
Fair
Value
|
Loss
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities:
|
||||||||||||||||
Municipal
bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
Corporate
bonds
|
$ |
10,044,022
|
$ |
6,236,152
|
$ |
8,193,476
|
|
$ |
648,894
|
|||||||
Government
sponsored enterprises
|
|
|
996,853
|
3,590
|
||||||||||||
10,044,022
|
6,236,152
|
9,190,329
|
|
652,484
|
||||||||||||
Marketable
equity securities
|
160,430
|
22,250
|
8,038,856
|
|
1,058,367
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
10,204,452
|
$
|
6,258,402
|
$
|
19,085,745
|
|
$
|
1,710,851
|
Marketable equity securities:
The Company’s investments in marketable equity securities totaling $120.4
million at December 31, 2008, and
principally consist of common
stock of publicly traded small-capitalization companies in the U.S. and selected
foreign markets. Common stocks are researched, and selected for purchase, on a
case by case basis depending on the fundamental characteristics of the
individual security. The gross unrealized gains and losses on
equity securities were $27.3 million and $9.3 million respectively, at December
31, 2008 and $128.1 million and $2.6 million respectively, at December 31,
2007. The
Company reviewed its equity securities in an unrealized loss position, and
concluded that these investments were not other than temporarily impaired as the
declines were not of sufficient duration and severity, and publicly-available
financial information did not indicate impairment. The primary cause of
the losses is due to the overall market decline during the last half of
2008. The majority of the losses at December 31, 2008 were continuously
below cost for less than 12 months. During the year ended
December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, the Company recorded $18.7 million, $375,000,
and $459,000 respectively, of other than temporary impairment charges on
marketable equity securities.
Corporate Bonds and US Treasury
Obligations: At December 31, 2008, the
Company’s bond portfolio consists of $17.8 million of publicly traded corporate
bonds, $1.2 million United States Treasury obligations, $2.1 million of State of
California general obligation municipal bonds and $7.9 million of government
sponsored enterprise bonds. The
Treasury, municipal and government sponsored enterprise bonds are typically held
to meet state regulatory capital and deposit requirements. The remainder of the
bond portfolio consists of corporate bonds, which are researched, and selected
for purchase, on a case by case basis depending on the maturity and
yield-to-maturity of the bond available for purchase, and an analysis of the
fundamental characteristics of the issuer. The total bond
portfolio had gross unrealized gains and losses of $572,000 and $7.8 million
respectively, at December 31, 2008 and gross unrealized gains and losses of
$438,000 and $2.6 million respectively, at December 31, 2007. The
Company does not consider the unrealized losses on the bond
portfolio to be other than temporarily impaired because the Company has the
intent and the ability to hold these bonds until recovery of fair value, which
may be at their maturity. The Company believes that the unrealized losses are
primarily attributable to the reduced availability of credit throughout the
economy which is affecting the market prices of all bonds other than those
issued by the U.S. Treasury as well as deterioration of the underlying issuer
with certain of our bonds. During the year ended December
31, 2008, and 2007, the Company recorded impairment charges of $2.5 million and
$1.6 million on corporate bonds due to deterioration of the underlying issuer's
financial condition. No such impairment charges were necessary in
2006.
Approximately
$1.4 million of the Company's investment portfolio does not have a
readily available market value.
The
following table sets forth the Company’s financial assets and liabilities that
were measured at fair value on a recurring basis at December 31, 2008 by level
within the fair value hierarchy. PICO did not have any nonfinancial assets or
liabilities that were measured or disclosed at fair value on a recurring basis
at December 31, 2008. As required by SFAS No. 157, assets and liabilities
measured at fair value are classified in their entirety based on the lowest
level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The Company’s
assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value
measurement in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to
the asset or liability:
Quoted
Prices In Active
|
Significant
Other
|
Significant
|
||||||||||||||
Markets
for Identical Assets
|
Observable
Inputs
|
Unobservable
Inputs
|
||||||||||||||
Assets
|
(Level
1)
|
(Level
2)
|
(Level
3)
|
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
||||||||||||
Available
for sale securities (A)
|
$ | 144,469,682 | $ | 535,895 | $ | 2,998,055 | $ | 148,003,632 | ||||||||
Liabilities
|
||||||||||||||||
Deferred
compensation (B)
|
$ | 27,744,528 | $ | 27,744,528 |
(A)
|
Where
there are quoted market prices that are readily available in an active
market, securities are classified as Level 1 of the valuation
hierarchy. Level 1 marketable equity securities are valued
using quoted market prices multiplied by the number of shares owned and
debt securities are valued using a market quote in an active
market. Level 2 available for sale securities include
securities where the markets are not active, that is where there are few
transactions, or the prices are not current or the prices vary
considerably over time.
|
(B)
|
Deferred
compensation plans are compensation plans directed by the Company and
structured as a rabbi trust for certain executives and non-employee
directors. The investment assets of the rabbi trust are valued
using quoted market prices multiplied by the number of shares held in each
trust account including the shares of PICO Holdings common stock held in
the trusts. The related deferred compensation liability represents the
fair value of the investment
assets.
|
The
following table is a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balance of Level
3 assets held by the Company at December 31, 2008. During the fourth
quarter of 2008, one investment was transferred from level 2 to level 3 based on
the weighting of unobservable inputs.
Assets
|
Fair
Value Beginning
of
Year
|
Unrealized
Gains
Included in
Income
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
|
Purchases,
Sales,
and
Issuances
|
Transfers
In
|
Fair Value
at
End of
Year
|
Available
for sale securities
|
$
318,510
|
$
2,679,545
|
$
2,998,055
|
|||
48
The
amortized cost and carrying value of investments in fixed maturities at December
31, 2008, 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
|
$
|
3,039,511
|
$
|
2,951,900
|
||||
Due
after one year through five years
|
21,288,075
|
18,004,919
|
||||||
Due
after five years
|
11,990,206
|
8,101,743
|
||||||
$
|
36,317,792
|
$
|
29,058,562
|
Net
investment income is as follows for each of the years ended December
31:
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Investment
income:
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
$
|
2,618,183
|
$
|
3,952,102
|
$
|
2,084,072
|
||||||
Equity
securities
|
2,965,296
|
4,202,648
|
3,333,526
|
|||||||||
Other,
primarily cash balances
|
4,823,212
|
9,034,590
|
8,171,777
|
|||||||||
Total
investment income
|
10,406,691
|
17,189,340
|
13,589,375
|
|||||||||
Investment
expenses:
|
(261,261
|
)
|
(149,540
|
)
|
(33,183
|
)
|
||||||
Net
investment income
|
$
|
10,145,430
|
$
|
17,039,800
|
$
|
13,556,192
|
Pre-tax
net realized gain or loss on investments is as follows for each of the years
ended December 31:
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Gross
realized gains:
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
$
|
52,280
|
$
|
561
|
$
|
138,624
|
||||||
Equity
securities and other investments
|
58,246,969
|
4,726,158
|
26,391,570
|
|||||||||
Total
gain
|
58,299,249
|
4,726,719
|
26,530,194
|
|||||||||
Gross
realized losses:
|
||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
(3,119,497
|
)
|
(1,603,852
|
)
|
(14,324
|
)
|
||||||
Equity
securities and other investments
|
(18,952,294
|
)
|
(374,909
|
)
|
(462,793
|
)
|
||||||
Total
loss
|
(22,071,791
|
)
|
(1,978,761
|
)
|
(477,117
|
)
|
||||||
Net
realized gain
|
$
|
36,227,458
|
$
|
2,747,958
|
$
|
26,053,077
|
Realized
Gains
During
2008, the Company sold its interest in Jungfraubahn Holding AG. The
Company had owned approximately 23% of Jungfraubahn and accounted for the
investment under SFAS 115, "Investments in Debt and Equity
Securities." Net proceeds to the Company were $75.3 million
resulting in pre-tax realized gain of $46.1 million. 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.
Realized
Losses
Included
in realized losses are impairment charges on securities. During 2008, 2007 and
2006, the Company recorded other-than-temporary impairments of $21.2 million, $2
million and $459,000, respectively, on debt and equity securities to recognize
what are expected to be other-than-temporary declines in value.
Jungfraubahn Holding AG
("Jungfraubahn"):
During
2008, the Company sold its interest in Jungfraubahn for $75.3 million resulting
in a gain on the sale of $46.1 million. 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. In 2007 and
2006, the Company recorded dividend income from this security of $1.4 million
and $1.3 million, respectively.
Despite
ownership of more than 20% of the voting stock of Jungfraubahn, the Company
accounted for this investment as available for sale under SFAS No. 115
"Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities" until it was
sold in 2008. The Company did not have the requisite ability to
exercise “significant influence” over the financial and operating policies of
Jungfraubahn, and therefore did not apply the equity method of
accounting.
Accu Holding AG
("Accu"):
At
December 31, 2008, the Company owned 24.4% 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, 2008 and December 31, 2007, the market
value of PICO’s interest was $1.4 million and $4.1 million,
respectively.
49
4.
|
For the
year ended December 31, 2008, the Company increased borrowings by $23.5
million.
The
Company increased its Swiss franc loan facilities in Switzerland by $9.1 million
to $22.8 million. At December 31, 2008, PICO’s subsidiaries had four
loan facilities with a Swiss bank for a maximum of $23.4 million (25 million
CHF) used to finance the purchase of investment securities in Switzerland.
The Company anticipates refinancing the borrowings when due ($4 million due
on demand, $14.5 million due in 2009 and $4.2 million due in 2011). The loan
facilities may be cancelled immediately by either party by written notice. The
total Swiss borrowings bear interest at a weighted average of 4.3% and are
collateralized by the Company's Swiss investments.
During
2008, the Company financed the purchase of real estate with $14.4 million of
mortgage debt at a weighted rate of 6.6%. At December 31, 2008, the
Company’s total mortgage debt of $19.6 million has a weighted average interest
rate of 6.6% and is due at various dates between 2009 and 2013.
The
Company capitalized $1.2 million and $677,000 of interest in 2008 and 2007,
respectively, related to construction and real estate development
costs.
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Swiss
Borrowings:
|
|||||||
4.19%
fixed due in 2009
|
$
|
2,812,940
|
$
|
2,647,371
|
|||
3.98%
fixed due in 2009
|
11,720,581
|
11,030,709
|
|||||
4.87%
floating due on demand
|
4,030,532
|
||||||
4.43%
fixed due in 2011
|
4,219,409
|
||||||
Mortgage Borrowings:
|
|||||||
6.5%
fixed payment due in 2009 and 2010
|
5,180,000
|
5,180,000
|
|||||
8%
fixed due in equal annual installments from 2009 to
2013
|
2,000,000
|
||||||
5.16%
fixed due in 2011
|
7,079,070
|
||||||
12%
fixed due in 2011
|
1,604,186
|
||||||
6.25%
fixed due in 2011
|
3,715,000
|
||||||
Other Borrowings:
|
|||||||
6%
fixed due on demand
|
20,000
|
20,000
|
|||||
$
|
42,381,718
|
$
|
18,878,080
|
The
Company's future minimum principal debt repayments for the years ending December
31 are as follows:
Year
|
||
2009
|
$ | 21,514,966 |
2010
|
2,958,186 | |
2011
|
17,015,306 | |
2012
|
429,452 | |
2013
|
463,808 | |
Total
|
$ | 42,381,718 |
50
The cost
assigned to the various components of real estate and water assets at December
31, is as follows:
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Real
estate
|
$
|
93,999,364
|
$
|
53,869,524
|
|||
Real
estate improvements, net of accumulated amortization of $5.6 million in
2008 and $4.8 million in 2007
|
11,029,152
|
10,434,867
|
|||||
Water
and water rights (net of accumulated amortization of zero in 2008 and
$931,000 in 2007)
|
65,813,882
|
42,116,330
|
|||||
Pipeline
rights and water credits at Fish Springs
|
100,871,902
|
94,185,071
|
|||||
$
|
271,714,300
|
$
|
200,605,792
|
Construction
of the pipeline from Fish Springs in northern Nevada to the north valleys
of Reno, Nevada was completed in 2008. The pipeline was dedicated to
Washoe County in June 2008; consequently, the Company does not own the pipeline
nor does it have the obligation of maintenance and operating costs associated
with the pipeline. After the dedication, the Company owns the exclusive
right to use the pipeline.
At
December 31, 2008, pipeline rights and water credits at Fish Springs included
$92.5 million of direct construction costs, $6.4 million for the 7,987 acre-feet
of water credits and $2 million of capitalized interest. The December 31, 2007,
comparative amounts have been reclassified in the above table to move
the $6.4 million cost of the water credits from the line water and water rights
to pipeline rights and water credits at Fish Springs. The pipeline
rights in 2007 included $86.7 million of direct construction costs, $6.4
million of cost of water credits and $1.1 million of capitalized interest. As
the Company sells water credits to end users, the costs of the pipeline rights
will be reported as cost of water sold. During 2008, the Company sold
12.8 acre feet of water credits for $577,000 and reported cost of water sold of
$158,000.
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 Company was able to reach a $7.3 million financial
settlement with the Tribe that ended the dispute in September 2007. The
settlement agreement is pending ratification by the United States Congress,
which PICO anticipates will occur during 2009.
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 obligated 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. In January 2008, the Company paid $3.1 million to the Tribe and at
December 31, 2008, had an accrued liability of $3.6 million for the balance
owed.
In July
2008, the Company sold its interest in the Semitropic Water Storage
Facility. Net proceeds to the Company were $11.7 million resulting in a
gain of $8.7 million. The Company still owns approximately 10,252 acre feet of
water in Semitropic.
For the
three years ended December 31, 2008, amortization of leasehold improvements was
$902,000, $851,000 and $845,000, respectively.
Notes and
other receivables consisted of the following at December 31:
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Notes
receivable
|
$
|
11,121,764
|
$
|
15,356,897
|
|||
Interest
receivable
|
984,619
|
1,530,993
|
|||||
Other
receivables
|
12,245,984
|
263,175
|
|||||
$
|
24,352,367
|
$
|
17,151,065
|
Notes
receivable, primarily from the sale of real estate and water assets, have a
weighted average interest rate of 9.4% and a weighted average life to maturity
of approximately seven years at December 31, 2008. Other receivables
at December 31, 2008 include a $10.2 million receivable from a third party for
potential tax liabilities. The Company expects to settle this matter
during 2009 which would result in collection of a portion or the entire amount
that the Company will use to offset any potential tax liabilities. See Note 7,
Federal, Foreign and State Income Tax for additional
information.
51
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:
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Deferred
tax assets:
|
|||||||
Deferred
compensation
|
$
|
6,968,887
|
$
|
16,163,570
|
|||
Basis
difference on securities
|
1,816,373
|
758,372
|
|||||
Impairment
charges on securities
|
9,608,437
|
5,342,519
|
|||||
Net
operating losses
|
1,325,112
|
491,596
|
|||||
Legal
settlement expense
|
1,260,000
|
2,505,795
|
|||||
Excess
tax basis in subsidiary
|
4,219,575
|
4,219,575
|
|||||
Accumulated
foreign currency translation adjustments
|
3,308,326
|
639,387
|
|||||
Unearned
revenue
|
1,995,976
|
1,815,134
|
|||||
Employee
benefits, including stock-based compensation
|
4,115,964
|
2,619,085
|
|||||
Other
|
6,530,633
|
6,172,836
|
|||||
Total
deferred tax assets
|
41,149,283
|
40,727,869
|
|||||
Deferred
tax liabilities:
|
|||||||
Unrealized
appreciation on securities
|
1,622,410
|
43,960,820
|
|||||
Revaluation
of real estate and water assets
|
4,761,461
|
4,872,032
|
|||||
Foreign
receivables
|
3,364,641
|
2,392,991
|
|||||
Real
estate installment sales
|
3,469,044
|
4,415,828
|
|||||
Other
|
1,332,383
|
2,269,764
|
|||||
Total
deferred tax liabilities
|
14,549,939
|
57,911,435
|
|||||
Valuation
allowance
|
(1,325,112)
|
(491,596)
|
|||||
Net
deferred income tax asset (liability)
|
$
|
25,274,232
|
$
|
(17,675,162
|
)
|
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 (loss) from continuing operations for the years ended December 31, was
under the following jurisdictions:
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||||
United
States
|
$
|
(7,352,018)
|
$
|
2,110,723
|
$
|
40,711,997
|
|||||
Foreign
|
63,741,053
|
(97,058)
|
10,154,749
|
||||||||
Total
|
$
|
56,389,035
|
$
|
2,013,665
|
$
|
50,866,746
|
52
Income
tax expense from continuing operations for each of the years ended December
31 consists of the following:
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||||
Current
tax expense (benefit):
|
|||||||||||
United
States Federal and state
|
$
|
13,754,797
|
$
|
10,407,829
|
$
|
14,397,082
|
|||||
Foreign
|
12,060,194
|
(280,117
|
)
|
706,890
|
|||||||
25,814,991
|
10,127,712
|
15,103,972
|
|||||||||
Deferred
tax expense (benefit):
|
|||||||||||
United
States Federal and state
|
2,679,940
|
(6,591,909
|
)
|
4,168,822
|
|||||||
Foreign
|
(3,915
|
)
|
(104
|
)
|
117,580
|
||||||
2,676,025
|
(6,592,013
|
)
|
4,286,402
|
||||||||
Total
income tax provision
|
$
|
28,491,016
|
$
|
3,535,699
|
$
|
19,390,374
|
The
difference between income taxes provided at the Company’s federal statutory rate
and effective tax rate is as follows:
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||||
Federal
income tax provision at statutory rate
|
$
|
19,736,162
|
$
|
704,783
|
$
|
17,803,361
|
|||||
Change
in valuation allowance
|
833,516
|
455,426
|
(1,281,273)
|
||||||||
State
taxes, net of federal benefit
|
2,774,181
|
383,379
|
(23,658)
|
||||||||
Management
compensation
|
273,000
|
790,125
|
1,533,445
|
||||||||
Interest
and penalties
|
1,720,329
|
350,526
|
(157,660)
|
||||||||
Foreign
rate differences
|
638,691
|
314,299
|
|||||||||
Previously
untaxed earnings and profits from foreign
subsidiaries
|
2,773,286
|
||||||||||
Rate
changes
|
(212,935
|
)
|
|||||||||
Write
off of deferred tax assets
|
616,224
|
504,389
|
|||||||||
Permanent
differences
|
(258,149
|
)
|
(79,063
|
)
|
1,224,705
|
||||||
Total
income tax provision
|
$
|
28,491,016
|
$
|
3,535,699
|
$
|
19,390,374
|
The
Company recognizes any interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions
in income tax expense. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company
recorded approximately $1.7 million in interest and penalties 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, 2008, the Company believes
that it is reasonably possible that the FIN 48 tax liability for a subsidiary in
receivership may be decreased within the next twelve months as a result of
either a statute closing or the receipt of a favorable ruling. The range
of results is from zero to $11.7 million. The Company has accrued a
receivable from a third party, which would offset any potential tax
liabilities.
The
following table summarizes the activity related to the unrecognized tax benefits
(the majority for potential Federal tax matters):
Balance
at January 1, 2008
|
$ 3,277,654 |
Additions
for tax positions related to the current year (no reductions in the
current year)
|
9,330,822 |
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
$
12,608,476
|
Provision
for U.S. income taxes on undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries of $2.8
million has been recorded in 2008. In 2007, provision for U.S. income
taxes on undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries on approximately $5.6
million of undistributed earnings had not been recorded because it was not
practical to estimate the additional tax that might have been 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, 2008, the
Company had a net $4.5 million federal, foreign and state tax
receivable.
53
The major
classifications of the Company’s fixed assets are as follows at December
31:
2008
|
2007
|
||||||
Office
furniture, fixtures and equipment
|
$
|
3,921,822
|
$
|
3,748,193
|
|||
Building
and leasehold improvements
|
668,834
|
254,131
|
|||||
4,590,656
|
4,002,324
|
||||||
Accumulated
depreciation
|
(3,078,286
|
)
|
(2,789,930
|
)
|
|||
Property
and equipment, net
|
$
|
1,512,370
|
$
|
1,212,394
|
Depreciation
expense was $358,000, $155,000 and $279,000 for the year ended December 31,
2008, 2007, and 2006, 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.
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.
Stock-Settled Stock Appreciation
Rights Granted:
There
were no Stock-Settled Stock Appreciation Rights granted in 2008.
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, 2008 and 2007 was $4 million and $4.5 million, respectively. The
total income tax benefit recognized in the statement of operations was $1.4
million and $1.6 million in 2008 and 2007, respectively. No such compensation
cost or income tax benefit was recorded in the comparable 2006 period as no new
grants were issued or vested during that period.
54
The fair
value of each award was 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% |
Stock-Settled Stock Appreciation
Rights Exercised:
During
2008, 12,000 SAR were exercised at a market price of $46.58 resulting in the
issuance of 1,620 newly-issued common shares. During the year ended
December 31, 2007, 838,356 SAR were exercised at a market 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:
A summary
of SAR activity under the Plan is as follows:
SAR
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
|
Weighted
Average
Contractual
Term Remaining
|
||||
Outstanding
at January 1, 2008
|
2,007,018
|
$
|
36.87
|
|||
Granted
|
||||||
Exercised
|
(12,000)
|
$
|
33.67
|
|||
Outstanding
at December 31, 2008
|
1,995,018
|
$
|
36.89
|
7.5
years
|
||
Vested
and exercisable at December 31, 2008
|
1,719,190
|
$
|
35.83
|
7.3
years
|
At
December 31, 2008, none of the outstanding SAR were
in-the-money.
A summary
of the status of the Company’s unvested SAR as of December 31, 2008 and changes
during the year then ended is as follows:
SAR
|
Weighted
Average Grant
Date
Fair Value
|
||||||
Unvested
at January 1, 2008
|
497,252
|
$
|
18.24
|
||||
Granted
|
|||||||
Vested
|
221,424
|
18.15
|
|||||
Unvested
at December 31, 2008 (expected to vest over the next two
years)
|
275,828
|
$
|
18.31
|
At
December 31, 2008, there was $3.5 million of unrecognized compensation cost
related to unvested SAR granted under the Plan. That cost is expected
to be recognized over the next 2 years.
55
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:
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||
Estimated
reinsurance recoverable on:
|
||||||||
Unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expense
|
$
|
15,877,372
|
$
|
16,653,254
|
||||
Reinsurance
recoverable on paid losses and loss expenses
|
495,760
|
234,699
|
||||||
Reinsurance
receivables
|
$
|
16,373,132
|
$
|
16,887,953
|
Unsecured
reinsurance risk 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, 2008
Reported
|
Unreported
|
Reinsurer
|
|||||||||
Claims
|
Claims
|
Balances
|
|||||||||
General
Reinsurance (A++)
|
$
|
5,694,187
|
$
|
10,035,302
|
$
|
15,729,489
|
|||||
Swiss
Reinsurance America Corp (A+)
|
44,964
|
233,507
|
278,471
|
||||||||
All
others
|
111,312
|
253,860
|
365,172
|
||||||||
$
|
5,850,463
|
$
|
10,522,669
|
$
|
16,373,132
|
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 recovered:
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||||
Direct
|
$
|
(2,069,991
|
)
|
$
|
(2,323,098
|
)
|
$
|
(700,818
|
)
|
||
Assumed
|
(145,487
|
)
|
(2,927
|
)
|
|||||||
Ceded
|
(240,908
|
)
|
(1,277,993
|
)
|
(2,520,656
|
)
|
|||||
$
|
(2,456,386
|
)
|
$
|
(3,601,091
|
)
|
$
|
(3,224,401
|
)
|
56
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, 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:
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||||
Balance
at January 1
|
$
|
32,376,018
|
$
|
41,083,301
|
$
|
46,646,906
|
|||||
Less
reinsurance recoverable
|
(16,653,254
|
)
|
(16,972,280
|
)
|
(15,858,000
|
)
|
|||||
Net
balance at January 1
|
15,722,764
|
24,111,021
|
30,788,906
|
||||||||
Incurred
loss and loss adjustment recovery for prior accident year
claims
|
(2,456,386
|
)
|
(3,601,091
|
)
|
(3,224,401
|
)
|
|||||
Payments
for claims occurring during
|
|||||||||||
prior
accident years
|
(1,370,430
|
)
|
(4,787,166
|
)
|
(3,453,484
|
)
|
|||||
Net
change for the year
|
(3,826,816
|
)
|
(8,388,257
|
)
|
(6,677,885
|
)
|
|||||
Net
balance at December 31
|
11,895,948
|
15,722,764
|
24,111,021
|
||||||||
Plus
reinsurance recoverable
|
15,877,372
|
16,653,254
|
16,972,280
|
||||||||
Balance
at December 31
|
$
|
27,773,320
|
$
|
32,376,018
|
$
|
41,083,301
|
In 2008,
Physicians reported positive development of $2.4 million in its medical
professional line of business. Citation’s property and casualty line reported
positive development of $2.3 million offset by adverse development in its
workers’ compensation line of $2.3 million. 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
$813,000 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.
12.
|
EMPLOYEE
BENEFITS, COMPENSATION AND INCENTIVE
PLAN:
|
No
bonuses were earned or awarded during 2008 for any of the officers of PICO
Holdings. For the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company’s
Compensation Committee approved a $1.5 million discretionary bonus to PICO’s
President and CEO. No other bonuses were earned or awarded for 2007. For the
years ended December 31, 2006, the Company recorded $5.9 million 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.
For the
years ended December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2006, $195,000 and $1 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 in
accordance with the related bonus plan. No such bonuses were earned in
2007.
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, 2008, 2007 and 2006 was $468,000,
$420,000 and $417,000, respectively.
57
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,
2008, $4.4 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, 2008, the total statutory surplus in
these insurance companies was $59 million, and apart from the $4.4 million noted
above, was unavailable for distribution without Department of Insurance
approval.
14.
|
COMMITMENTS AND
CONTINGENCIES:
|
The Company
leases some of its offices under non-cancelable operating leases that expire at
various dates through 2013. Rent expense for the years ended December
31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 for office space was $670,000, $454,000 and $390,000,
respectively.
Future
minimum payments under all operating leases for the years ending December 31 are
as follows:
Year
|
|||
2009
|
$ | 644,312 | |
2010
|
534,882 | ||
2011
|
34,054 | ||
2012
|
7,148 | ||
2013
|
3,574 | ||
Total
|
$ | 1,223,970 |
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.
At
December 31, 2008, the outcome of this litigation is uncertain.
Consequently, the Company has not accrued any loss that may be associated with
this matter.
The
Company is subject to various other 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.
58
15.
|
RELATED-PARTY
TRANSACTIONS:
|
On May 7,
2007 John R. Hart, president and CEO, entered into a new employment agreement
with the Company. It superseded and replaced his previous employment agreement
which was effective January 1, 2006. The May 7, 2007 employment agreement,
which expires on December 31, 2012, provides for a base salary in 2007
of $1.2 million subject to an annual cost of living adjustment approved by the
Compensation Committee. In 2008, Mr. Hart’s base salary was increased by
$500,000, after applying the cost of living adjustment, to $1.7 million in
accord with the terms of the May 7, 2007 employment agreement. For the
years 2009 through and including 2012 Mr. Hart’s base salary will increase by an
annual cost of living adjustment as determined by the Compensation
Committee. The May 7, 2007 employment agreement does not contain a change
in control clause.
Mr.
Hart’s May 7, 2007 employment agreement provides for an annual incentive award
based on the growth in book value per share during the fiscal year, above a
threshold. The threshold above which an incentive award is earned is 80%
of the S & P 500 annualized total return for the five previous years
(but not less than zero). If the increase in book value per share exceeds
this threshold the incentive award is equal to 7.5% of such excess multiplied by
the number of shares outstanding at the beginning of the fiscal year. For
fiscal year 2008 the growth in book value per share did not exceed the threshold
and an incentive award was not paid for fiscal year 2008. In 2007 the
Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Hart a one-time discretionary cash bonus of
$1.5 million for assuming and fulfilling significantly increased
responsibilities due to Mr. Ronald Langley’s retirement as Executive Chairman on
December 31, 2007.
On
December 23, 2008 Mr. Hart and the Company entered into an amendment of Mr.
Hart’s May 7, 2007 employment agreement, effective January 1, 2009. The
December 23, 2008 amendment was entered into to facilitate compliance with the
requirements of Section 409A of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as amended.
The
growth in book value per share exceeded the threshold in 2006 and an award was
accrued in the accompanying consolidated financial statements for PICO’s
President and its Chairman of $4.2 million.
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.
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.
PICO
Equity Investors, L.P. distributed shares of PICO in each of the three years
ended December 31, 2008. Consequently, by June 2008, PICO Equity
Investors, L.P. had distributed 2,499,948 shares of PICO to its sole limited
partner, and 51 shares of PICO to its general partner, PICO Equity Investors
Management LLC leaving PICO Equity Investors L.P. with 833,334 common shares of
PICO at December 31, 2008. 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 obligation is $27.7 million and is included in PICO
consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2008. Included in the
$27.7 million is $815,000 of PICO stock with the balance in various publicly
traded equities and bonds. Within these accounts at December 31, 2008, 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,
John Weil owns 8,084 PICO shares, and Carlos Campbell owns 2,644 PICO shares.
The trustee for the accounts is Union Bank of California. 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.
During
2008, each non-employee Board member of the Company received 700 shares of
restricted common stock of PICO Holdings for a total of 4,200 shares. The awards
vest in May 2009, one year after the grant date. The awards were
valued on the date of grant resulting in total compensation expense of $157,000
that will be amortized over the vesting period.
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, 2008:
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||||
Physicians
Insurance Company of Ohio :
|
(Unaudited)
|
||||||||||
Policyholders'
surplus
|
$
|
43,749,365
|
$
|
80,257,090
|
$
|
68,929,902
|
|||||
Statutory
net income (loss)
|
$
|
(6,303,194)
|
$
|
3,795,340
|
$
|
7,173,897
|
|||||
Citation
Insurance Company:
|
|||||||||||
Policyholders'
surplus
|
$
|
15,242,226
|
$
|
25,143,218
|
$
|
26,383,195
|
|||||
Statutory
net income (loss)
|
$
|
(3,787,721)
|
$
|
2,858,624
|
$
|
3,502,998
|
Both
Citation and Physicians meet the minimum risk based capital requirements for the
applicable Departments of Insurance regulations.
59
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 its
segments consistent with the significant accounting policies described 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 and UCP; “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 real estate development and related mineral rights and water rights
operations through its subsidiaries Nevada Land and UCP in Nevada and
California. Revenue is generated by sale of real estate, and leasing for
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 also 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
Corporate 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 Corporate segment. For 2007 and future years, the results of
PEH and its identifiable assets are reported in the Insurance Operations in Run
Off segment.
Corporate
(previously known as Business Acquisitions and Financing)
This
segment consists of cash, majority interests in small businesses and deferred
compensation assets and liabilities.
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.
60
Segment
information by major operating segment follows:
Water
Resources
|
Insurance
|
||||||||||||
Real
Estate
|
and
Water
|
Operations
in
|
|||||||||||
Operations
|
Storage
Operations
|
Run
Off
|
Corporate
|
Consolidated
|
|||||||||
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Total
revenues (charges)
|
$
|
5,470,434
|
$
|
11,271,926
|
$
|
(2,156,834
|
)
|
$
45,766,014
|
$
|
60,351,540
|
|||
Net
investment income
|
2,203,265
|
968,680
|
3,213,661
|
3,759,824
|
10,145,430
|
||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
20,211
|
1,098,538
|
1,029
|
140,693
|
1,260,471
|
||||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes and minority interest
|
365,758
|
4,184,616
|
(1,485,856
|
)
|
53,324,517
|
56,389,035
|
|||||||
Total
assets
|
97,592,062
|
225,870,410
|
157,186,357
|
111,984,967
|
592,633,796
|
||||||||
Capital
expenditure
|
81,680
|
15,039,386
|
228,904
|
15,349,970
|
|||||||||
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
|
||||||||
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
|
48,670,231
|
301,481
|
48,982,082
|
|||||||||
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
|
||||||||
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
|
33,512,587
|
27,337
|
33,619,862
|
61
Segment
information by significant geographic region:
United
|
||||||||||
States
|
Europe
|
Consolidated
|
||||||||
2008
|
||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$
|
11,222,981
|
$
|
49,128,559
|
$
|
60,351,540
|
||||
Net
investment income
|
9,045,735
|
1,099,695
|
10,145,430
|
|||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,260,471
|
1,260,471
|
||||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes and minority interest
|
(3,645,458)
|
60,034,493
|
56,389,035
|
|||||||
Total
assets
|
586,241,646
|
6,392,150
|
592,633,796
|
|||||||
Capital
expenditure
|
15,349,970
|
15,349,970
|
||||||||
2007
|
||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$
|
32,341,826
|
$
|
1,586,922
|
$
|
33,928,748
|
||||
Net
investment income
|
15,493,618
|
1,546,182
|
17,039,800
|
|||||||
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
|
48,982,082
|
48,982,082
|
||||||||
2006
|
||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$
|
69,553,292
|
$
|
13,169,952
|
$
|
82,723,244
|
||||
Net
investment income
|
11,858,886
|
1,697,306
|
13,556,192
|
|||||||
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
|
33,619,862
|
33,619,862
|
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, 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 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, 2008
|
December
31, 2007
|
|||||||||||||||
Carrying
|
Estimated
|
Carrying
|
Estimated
|
|||||||||||||
Amount
|
Fair
Value
|
Amount
|
Fair
Value
|
|||||||||||||
Financial
assets:
|
||||||||||||||||
Fixed
maturities
|
$
|
29,058,562
|
$
|
29,058,562
|
$
|
105,780,499
|
$
|
105,780,499
|
||||||||
Equity
securities
|
$ |
120,358,461
|
$ |
120,358,461
|
$ |
259,743,145
|
$ |
259,743,145
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ |
96,316,018
|
$ |
96,316,018
|
$ |
70,791,025
|
$ |
70,791,025
|
||||||||
Financial
liabilities:
|
||||||||||||||||
Borrowings
|
$ |
42,381,718
|
$ |
42,381,718
|
$ |
18,878,080
|
$ |
18,878,080
|
62
ITEM
9.
|
CHANGE
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE
|
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, 2008. 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, 2008 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,
2008. 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, 2008, 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, 2008, that
have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the
Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
63
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, 2008, 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, 2008, 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, 2008 of the Company and our report dated
February 27, 2009 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, 2009
64
ITEM
9B.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
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 2009 annual meeting of shareholders, to be filed on or before
April 30, 2009 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 2009 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 2009 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 2009
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 2009 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 2009 proxy statement and is
incorporated herein by reference.
65
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
of Indenture relating to Debt Securities. (4)
|
||
10.1 |
PICO
Holdings, Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan. (5)
|
||
10.4 |
Bonus
Plan of Dorothy A. Timian-Palmer. (6) (11)
|
||
10.5 |
Bonus
Plan of Stephen D. Hartman. (6) (11)
|
||
10.7 |
Employment
Agreement of Ronald Langley. (7) (11)
|
||
10.15 |
Employment
Agreement of John R. Hart. (8) (11)
|
||
10.17 |
Pyramid
Lake Paiute Tribe Settlement Agreement with Fish Springs Ranch, LLC.
(9)
|
||
10.18 |
Infrastructure
Dedication Agreement between Fish Springs Ranch, LLC. and Washoe County,
Nevada.
(10)
|
||
10.19 |
Amendment
to Employment Agreement of John R. Hart.
|
||
21.1 |
Subsidiaries
of PICO.
|
||
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 | ) |
Indicates
arrangement or compensatory plan or arrangement required to be identified
pursuant to Item 15(a).
|
66
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
26, 2009
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 26, 2009 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
|