e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15 (d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Quarterly Period Ended December 31, 2009
or
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15 (d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission File Number 001-12822
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
DELAWARE
|
|
58-2086934 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification no.) |
|
|
|
1000 Abernathy Road, Suite 1200, Atlanta, Georgia
|
|
30328 |
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(770) 829-3700
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Sections 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding twelve months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to the filing requirements for the past 90 days.
YES þ NO o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
YES o NO o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer, and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act
(Check One):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller
reporting company þ |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act).
YES o NO þ
|
|
|
Class
|
|
Outstanding at January 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Common Stock, $0.001 par value
|
|
62,244,273 shares |
References to we, us, our, Beazer, Beazer Homes and the Company in this quarterly
report on Form 10-Q refer to Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements. These forward-looking
statements represent our expectations or beliefs concerning future events, and it is possible that
the results described in this quarterly report will not be achieved. These forward-looking
statements can generally be identified by the use of statements that include words such as
estimate, project, believe, expect, anticipate, intend, plan, foresee, likely,
will, goal, target or other similar words or phrases. All forward-looking statements are
based upon information available to us on the date of this quarterly report.
These forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of
which are outside of our control, that could cause actual results to differ materially from the
results discussed in the forward-looking statements, including, among other things, the matters
discussed in this quarterly report in the section captioned Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. Additional information about factors that could
lead to material changes in performance is contained in Part I, Item 1A Risk Factors of our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009. Such factors may include:
|
|
|
the final outcome of various putative class action lawsuits, multi-party suits and
similar proceedings as well as the results of any other litigation or government
proceedings and fulfillment of the obligations in the Deferred Prosecution Agreement and
other settlement agreements and consent orders with governmental authorities; |
|
|
|
additional asset impairment charges or writedowns; |
|
|
|
economic changes nationally or in local markets, including changes in consumer
confidence, volatility of mortgage interest rates and inflation; |
|
|
|
continued or increased downturn in the homebuilding industry; |
|
|
|
estimates related to homes to be delivered in the future (backlog) are imprecise as
they are subject to various cancellation risks which cannot be fully controlled; |
|
|
|
continued or increased disruption in the availability of mortgage financing; |
|
|
|
our cost of and ability to access capital and otherwise meet our ongoing liquidity
needs including the impact of any further downgrades of our credit ratings or reductions in
our tangible net worth or liquidity levels; |
|
|
|
potential inability to comply with covenants in our debt agreements, or satisfy such
obligations through repayment or refinancing |
|
|
|
increased competition or delays in reacting to changing consumer preference in home
design; |
|
|
|
shortages of or increased prices for labor, land or raw materials used in housing
production; |
|
|
|
factors affecting margins such as decreased land values underlying land option
agreements, increased land development costs on communities under development or delays or
difficulties in implementing initiatives to reduce production and overhead cost structure; |
|
|
|
the performance of our joint ventures and our joint venture partners; |
|
|
|
the impact of construction defect and home warranty claims including those related to
possible installation of drywall imported from China; |
|
|
|
the cost and availability of insurance and surety bonds; |
|
|
|
delays in land development or home construction resulting from adverse weather
conditions; |
|
|
|
potential delays or increased costs in obtaining necessary permits as a result of
changes to, or complying with, laws, regulations, or governmental policies and possible
penalties for failure to comply with such laws, regulations and governmental policies; |
|
|
|
effects of changes in accounting policies, standards, guidelines or principles; or |
|
|
|
terrorist acts, acts of war and other factors over which the Company has little or no
control. |
Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made, and,
except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to
reflect events or circumstances after the date on which such statement is made or to reflect the
occurrence of unanticipated events. New factors emerge from time to time and it is not possible for
management to predict all such factors.
2
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
FORM 10-Q
INDEX
3
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2009 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
432,725 |
|
|
$ |
507,339 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
47,736 |
|
|
|
49,461 |
|
Accounts receivable (net of allowance of $5,091 and $7,545, respectively) |
|
|
29,534 |
|
|
|
28,405 |
|
Income tax receivable |
|
|
108,886 |
|
|
|
9,922 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owned inventory |
|
|
1,229,163 |
|
|
|
1,265,441 |
|
Consolidated inventory not owned |
|
|
62,079 |
|
|
|
53,015 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total inventory |
|
|
1,291,242 |
|
|
|
1,318,456 |
|
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
31,968 |
|
|
|
30,124 |
|
Deferred tax assets, net |
|
|
7,645 |
|
|
|
7,520 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
23,933 |
|
|
|
25,939 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
50,649 |
|
|
|
52,244 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
2,024,318 |
|
|
$ |
2,029,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade accounts payable |
|
$ |
44,595 |
|
|
$ |
70,285 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
196,894 |
|
|
|
227,315 |
|
Obligations related to consolidated inventory not owned |
|
|
34,535 |
|
|
|
26,356 |
|
Senior Notes (net of discounts of $26,362 and $27,257, respectively) |
|
|
1,363,797 |
|
|
|
1,362,902 |
|
Junior subordinated notes |
|
|
103,093 |
|
|
|
103,093 |
|
Other secured notes payable |
|
|
11,998 |
|
|
|
12,543 |
|
Model home financing obligations |
|
|
22,077 |
|
|
|
30,361 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,776,989 |
|
|
|
1,832,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock (par value $.01 per share, 5,000,000 shares
authorized, no shares issued) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock (par value $0.001 per share, 80,000,000 shares
authorized, 43,206,610 and 43,150,472 issued and
39,819,273 and 39,793,316 outstanding, respectively) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Paid-in capital |
|
|
570,928 |
|
|
|
568,019 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(139,539 |
) |
|
|
(187,538 |
) |
Treasury stock, at cost (3,387,337 and 3,357,156 shares, respectively) |
|
|
(184,103 |
) |
|
|
(183,969 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
247,329 |
|
|
|
196,555 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
2,024,318 |
|
|
$ |
2,029,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
4
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
218,784 |
|
|
$ |
218,169 |
|
Home construction and land sales expenses |
|
|
190,636 |
|
|
|
193,518 |
|
Inventory impairments and option contract abandonments |
|
|
8,827 |
|
|
|
12,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
19,321 |
|
|
|
12,261 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
45,809 |
|
|
|
53,940 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
3,424 |
|
|
|
3,638 |
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss |
|
|
(29,912 |
) |
|
|
(61,460 |
) |
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
(1,407 |
) |
Other expense, net |
|
|
(19,531 |
) |
|
|
(18,185 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before income taxes |
|
|
(49,486 |
) |
|
|
(81,052 |
) |
Benefit from income taxes |
|
|
(94,021 |
) |
|
|
(1,893 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations |
|
|
44,535 |
|
|
|
(79,159 |
) |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
3,464 |
|
|
|
(1,116 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
47,999 |
|
|
$ |
(80,275 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
38,827 |
|
|
|
38,593 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
41,939 |
|
|
|
38,593 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations |
|
$ |
1.15 |
|
|
$ |
(2.05 |
) |
Basic earnings (loss) per share from discontinued operations |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
Basic earnings (loss) per share |
|
$ |
1.24 |
|
|
$ |
(2.08 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations |
|
$ |
1.09 |
|
|
$ |
(2.05 |
) |
Diluted earnings (loss) per share from discontinued operations |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
Diluted earnings (loss) per share |
|
$ |
1.17 |
|
|
$ |
(2.08 |
) |
See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
5
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
47,999 |
|
|
$ |
(80,275 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in
operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
3,424 |
|
|
|
3,783 |
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
2,733 |
|
|
|
3,015 |
|
Inventory impairments and option contract abandonments |
|
|
8,877 |
|
|
|
12,709 |
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,143 |
|
Deferred income tax (benefit) provision |
|
|
(125 |
) |
|
|
144 |
|
Excess tax benefit from equity-based compensation |
|
|
1,982 |
|
|
|
476 |
|
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
2,774 |
|
|
|
1,413 |
|
Cash distributions of income from unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
459 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts |
|
|
(2,454 |
) |
|
|
(2,099 |
) |
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease in accounts receivable |
|
|
1,325 |
|
|
|
17,276 |
|
(Increase) decrease in income tax receivable |
|
|
(98,964 |
) |
|
|
348 |
|
Decrease in inventory |
|
|
26,848 |
|
|
|
31,573 |
|
Decrease in other assets |
|
|
1,918 |
|
|
|
7,688 |
|
Decrease in trade accounts payable |
|
|
(25,690 |
) |
|
|
(36,187 |
) |
Decrease in other liabilities |
|
|
(30,755 |
) |
|
|
(88,340 |
) |
Other changes |
|
|
823 |
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities |
|
|
(59,285 |
) |
|
|
(111,908 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
(1,346 |
) |
|
|
(1,663 |
) |
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
(4,515 |
) |
|
|
(1,938 |
) |
Changes in restricted cash |
|
|
1,725 |
|
|
|
(18,690 |
) |
Distributions from unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(4,061 |
) |
|
|
(22,291 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of other secured notes payable |
|
|
(545 |
) |
|
|
(192 |
) |
Repayment of model home financing obligations |
|
|
(8,284 |
) |
|
|
(11,994 |
) |
Debt issuance costs |
|
|
(323 |
) |
|
|
(604 |
) |
Common stock redeemed |
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
Excess tax benefit from equity-based compensation |
|
|
(1,982 |
) |
|
|
(476 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(11,268 |
) |
|
|
(13,279 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(74,614 |
) |
|
|
(147,478 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
507,339 |
|
|
|
584,334 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
432,725 |
|
|
$ |
436,856 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
6
BEAZER HOMES USA, INC.
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
(Beazer Homes or the Company) have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) for interim financial information and
in accordance with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Such financial
statements do not include all of the information and disclosures required by GAAP for complete
financial statements. In our opinion, all adjustments (consisting solely of normal recurring
accruals) necessary for a fair presentation have been included in the accompanying financial
statements. For further information and a discussion of our significant accounting policies other
than as discussed below, refer to our audited consolidated financial statements appearing in the
Beazer Homes Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009 (the 2009
Annual Report). Results from our mortgage origination business and our exit markets are reported
as discontinued operations in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of
operations for all periods presented (see Note 13 for further discussion of our Discontinued
Operations). We evaluated events that occurred after the balance sheet date but before the
financial statements were issued or are available to be issued for accounting treatment and
disclosure in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification, Subsequent Events (ASC 855).
Inventory Valuation Held for Development. Our homebuilding inventories that are accounted for as
held for development include land and home construction assets grouped together as communities.
Homebuilding inventories held for development are stated at cost (including direct construction
costs, capitalized indirect costs, capitalized interest and real estate taxes) unless facts and
circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable. We assess
these assets no less than quarterly for recoverability in accordance with the provisions of SFAS
144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (ASC 360). For those
communities for which construction and development activities are expected to occur in the future
or have been idled (land held for future development), all applicable interest and real estate
taxes are expensed as incurred and the inventory is stated at cost unless facts and circumstances
indicate that the carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable. The future enactment of a
development plan or the occurrence of events and circumstances may indicate that the carrying
amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Generally, upon the commencement of land development
activities, it may take three to five years (depending on, among other things, the size of the
community and its sales pace) to fully develop, sell, construct and close all the homes in a
typical community. However, the impact of the recent downturn in our business has significantly
lengthened the estimated life of many communities. Recoverability of assets is measured by
comparing the carrying amount of an asset to future undiscounted cash flows expected to be
generated by the asset. If the expected undiscounted cash flows generated are expected to be less
than its carrying amount, an impairment charge is recorded to write down the carrying amount of
such asset to its estimated fair value based on discounted cash flows.
We conduct a review of the recoverability of our homebuilding inventories held for development at
the community level as factors indicate that an impairment may exist. Events and circumstances
that might indicate impairment include, but are not limited to, (1) adverse trends in new orders,
(2) higher than anticipated cancellations, (3) declining margins which might result from the need
to offer incentives to new homebuyers to drive sales or price reductions or other actions taken by
our competitors, (4) economic factors specific to the markets in which we operate, including
fluctuations in employment levels, population growth, or levels of new and resale homes for sale in
the marketplace and (5) a decline in the availability of credit across all industries.
As a result, we evaluate, among other things, the following information for each community:
|
|
|
Actual Net Contribution Margin (defined as homebuilding revenues less homebuilding
costs and direct selling expenses) for homes closed in the current fiscal quarter, fiscal
year to date and prior two fiscal quarters. Homebuilding costs include land and land
development costs (based upon an allocation of such costs, including costs to complete the
development, or specific lot costs), home construction costs (including an estimate of
costs, if any, to complete home construction), previously capitalized indirect costs
(principally for construction supervision), capitalized interest and estimated warranty
costs. Direct selling expenses included commission, closing costs, and amortization
related to model home furnishings and improvements; |
|
|
|
Projected Net Contribution Margin for homes in backlog; |
|
|
|
Actual and trending new orders and cancellation rates; |
|
|
|
Actual and trending base home sales prices and sales incentives for home sales that
occurred in the prior two fiscal quarters that remain in backlog at the end of the fiscal
quarter and expected future homes sales prices and sales incentives and absorption over the
expected remaining life of the community;
|
7
|
|
|
A comparison of our community to our competition to include, among other things, an
analysis of various product offerings including the size and style of the homes currently
offered for sale, community amenity levels, availability of lots in our community and our
competitions, desirability and uniqueness of our community and other market factors; and |
|
|
|
Other events that may indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. |
In determining the recoverability of the carrying value of the assets of a community that we have
evaluated as requiring a test for impairment, significant quantitative and qualitative assumptions
are made relative to the future home sales prices, sales incentives, direct and indirect costs of
home construction and land development and the pace of new home orders. In addition, these
assumptions are dependent upon the specific market conditions and competitive factors for each
specific community and may differ greatly between communities within the same market and
communities in different markets. Our estimates are made using information available at the date of
the recoverability test, however, as facts and circumstances may change in future reporting
periods, our estimates of recoverability are subject to change.
For assets in communities for which the undiscounted future cash flows are less than the carrying
value, the carrying value of that community is written down to its then estimated fair value based
on discounted cash flows. The carrying value of assets in communities that were previously impaired
and continue to be classified as held for development is not written up for future estimates of
increases in fair value in future reporting periods. Market deterioration that exceeds our
estimates may lead us to incur additional impairment charges on previously impaired homebuilding
assets in addition to homebuilding assets not currently impaired but for which indicators of
impairment may arise if the market continues to deteriorate.
The fair value of the homebuilding inventory held for development is estimated using the present
value of the estimated future cash flows using discount rates commensurate with the risk associated
with the underlying community assets. The discount rate used may be different for each community.
The factors considered when determining an appropriate discount rate for a community include, among
others: (1) community specific factors such as the number of lots in the community, the status of
land development in the community, the competitive factors influencing the sales performance of the
community and (2) overall market factors such as employment levels, consumer confidence and the
existing supply of new and used homes for sale. The assumptions used in our discounted cash flow
models are specific to each community tested for impairment. Historically we did not include
market improvements except in limited circumstances in the latter years of long-lived communities.
Beginning in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, we assumed limited market improvements in some
communities beginning in fiscal 2011 and continuing improvement in these communities in subsequent
years. We assumed the remaining communities would have market improvements beginning in fiscal
2012.
For the three months ended December 31, 2009, we used discount rates of 17% to 20%, in our
estimated discounted cash flow impairment calculations. During the three months ended December 31,
2009 and 2008, we recorded impairments of our inventory by our continuing operations of $7.8
million and $12.0 million, respectively for land under development and homes under construction.
Due to uncertainties in the estimation process, particularly with respect to projected home sales
prices and absorption rates, the timing and amount of the estimated future cash flows and discount
rates, it is reasonably possible that actual results could differ from the estimates used in our
historical analyses. Our assumptions about future home sales prices and absorption rates require
significant judgment because the residential homebuilding industry is cyclical and is highly
sensitive to changes in economic conditions. We calculated the estimated fair values of inventory
held for development that were evaluated for impairment based on current market conditions and
assumptions made by management relative to future results. Because our projected cash flows are
significantly impacted by changes in market conditions, it is reasonably possible that actual
results could differ materially from our estimates and result in additional impairments.
Asset Valuation Land Held for Sale. We record assets held for sale at the lower of the carrying
value or fair value less costs to sell. The following criteria are used to determine if land is
held for sale:
|
|
|
management has the authority and commits to a plan to sell the land; |
|
|
|
the land is available for immediate sale in its present condition; |
|
|
|
there is an active program to locate a buyer and the plan to sell the property has been
initiated; |
|
|
|
the sale of the land is probable within one year; |
|
|
|
the property is being actively marketed at a reasonable sale price relative to its
current fair value; and |
|
|
|
it is unlikely that the plan to sell will be withdrawn or that significant changes to
the plan will be made. |
8
Additionally, in certain circumstances, management will re-evaluate the best use of an asset that
is currently being accounted for as held for development. In such instances, management will
review, among other things, the current and projected competitive circumstances of the community,
including the level of supply of new and used inventory, the level of sales absorptions by us and
our competition, the level of sales incentives required and the number of owned lots remaining in
the community. If, based on this review and the foregoing criteria have been met at the end of the
applicable reporting period, we believe that the best use of the asset is the sale of all or a
portion of the asset in its current condition, then all or portions of the community are accounted
for as held for sale.
In determining the fair value of the assets less cost to sell, we considered factors including
current sales prices for comparable assets in the area, recent market analysis studies, appraisals,
any recent legitimate offers, and listing prices of similar properties. If the estimated fair value
less cost to sell of an asset is less than its current carrying value, the asset is written down to
its estimated fair value less cost to sell. During the three months ended December 31, 2009 and
2008, we recorded inventory impairments on land held for sale by our continuing operations of
approximately $1.1 million and $0.2 million, respectively.
Due to uncertainties in the estimation process, it is reasonably possible that actual results could
differ from the estimates used in our historical analyses. Our assumptions about land sales prices
require significant judgment because the current market is highly sensitive to changes in economic
conditions. We calculated the estimated fair values of land held for sale based on current market
conditions and assumptions made by management, which may differ materially from actual results and
may result in additional impairments if market conditions continue to deteriorate.
Goodwill. Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of assets
acquired. Historically we tested goodwill for impairment annually as of April 30 or more
frequently if an event occurs or circumstances indicated that the asset might be impaired. During
the quarter ended December 31, 2008 we impaired our remaining goodwill of $16.1 million and the
Company had no goodwill remaining at December 31, 2009 or September 30, 2009.
Stock-Based Compensation. Compensation cost arising from nonvested stock awards granted to
employees and from non-employee stock awards is recognized as an expense using the straight-line
method over the vesting period. Unearned compensation is included in paid-in capital in accordance
with SFAS 123R, Share Based Payments (ASC 718). As of December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009,
there was $8.3 million and $9.6 million, respectively, of total unrecognized compensation cost
related to nonvested stock awards. The cost remaining at December 31, 2009 is expected to be
recognized over a weighted average period of 2.6 years. For the three months ended December 31,
2009 and 2008, our total stock-based compensation expense, included in selling, general and
administrative expenses (SG&A), was approximately $2.7 million ($1.9 net of tax) and $3.0 million
($2.1 million net of tax), respectively. Activity relating to nonvested stock awards for the three
months ended December 31, 2009 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant Date Fair |
|
|
Shares |
|
Value |
|
Beginning of period |
|
|
1,126,880 |
|
|
$ |
27.66 |
Granted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested |
|
|
(153,098 |
) |
|
|
40.39 |
Forfeited |
|
|
(16,121 |
) |
|
|
4.81 |
|
|
|
End of period |
|
|
957,661 |
|
|
$ |
26.01 |
|
|
|
In addition, during the three months ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, employees surrendered 27,310
and 7,169 shares to us in payment of minimum tax obligations upon the vesting of stock awards under
our stock incentive plans. We valued the stock at the market price on the date of surrender, for an
aggregate value of approximately $134,000 and $13,000 for the three months ended December 31, 2009
and 2008, respectively.
The fair value of each option/stock-based stock appreciation right (SSAR) grant is estimated on
the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. There were no options or SSAR
grants in the three months ended December 31, 2009. The following table summarizes stock options
and SSARs outstanding as of December 31, 2009, as well as activity during the three months then
ended:
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Exercise Price |
|
Outstanding at beginning of period |
|
|
2,108,914 |
|
|
$ |
33.07 |
|
Expired |
|
|
(24,738 |
) |
|
|
32.78 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(465,933 |
) |
|
|
33.04 |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(16,511 |
) |
|
|
23.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at end of period |
|
|
1,601,732 |
|
|
$ |
33.19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at end of period |
|
|
290,073 |
|
|
$ |
52.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested or expected to vest in the future |
|
|
1,251,481 |
|
|
$ |
29.72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the quarter ended December 31, 2009, certain executive officers and directors elected to
relinquish 465,933 vested and outstanding options that had exercise prices above $20 per share in
order to provide additional shares for use in a public offering of common shares that was completed
in January 2010 (see Note 14 for further discussion). At December 31, 2009, the weighted-average
remaining contractual life for all options/SSARs outstanding, currently exercisable, and vested or
expected to vest in the future was 4.70 years, 2.84 years and 4.83 years, respectively.
At December 31, 2009, the aggregate intrinsic value of SSARs/options outstanding, vested and
expected to vest in the future and SSARs/options exercisable based on the Companys stock price of
$4.84 as of December 31, 2009 were $0.6 million, $0.5 million, and $0. The intrinsic value of a
stock option is the amount by which the market value of the underlying stock exceeds the exercise
price of the stock option. There were no option/SSAR exercises during the three months ended
December 31, 2009.
Other Liabilities. Other liabilities include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
(in thousands) |
|
2009 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Income tax liabilities |
|
$ |
51,300 |
|
|
$ |
50,850 |
|
Accrued warranty expenses |
|
|
28,360 |
|
|
|
30,100 |
|
Accrued interest |
|
|
26,207 |
|
|
|
32,533 |
|
Accrued and deferred compensation |
|
|
22,111 |
|
|
|
29,379 |
|
Customer deposits |
|
|
4,910 |
|
|
|
5,507 |
|
Other |
|
|
64,006 |
|
|
|
78,946 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
196,894 |
|
|
$ |
227,315 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements. In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 157, Fair
Value Measurements (ASC 820). SFAS 157 (ASC 820) provides guidance for using fair value to measure
assets and liabilities. SFAS 157 applies whenever other standards require (or permit) assets or
liabilities to be measured at fair value but does not expand the use of fair value in any new
circumstances. SFAS 157 (ASC 820) includes provisions that require expanded disclosure of the
effect on earnings for items measured using unobservable data. In February 2008, the FASB issued
FASB Staff Position (FSP) 157-2, Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157 (ASC 820), delaying the
effective date of certain non-financial assets and liabilities to fiscal periods beginning after
November 15, 2008. The company adopted SFAS 157 (ASC 820) on October 1, 2009 as discussed in Note
10.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and
Financial Liabilities Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115 (ASC 825). SFAS 159 (ASC
825) permits companies to measure certain financial instruments and other items at fair value. We
have not elected the fair value option applicable under SFAS 159 (ASC 825).
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 141 (revised 2007), Business Combinations (ASC 815). SFAS
141R (ASC 815) amends and clarifies the accounting guidance for the acquirers recognition and
measurement of assets acquired, liabilities assumed and noncontrolling interests of an acquiree in
a business combination. SFAS 141R (ASC 815) is effective for any acquisitions completed by the
Company after September 30, 2009.
10
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 160, Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements an Amendment of ARB 51 (ASC 810). SFAS 160 (ASC 810) requires that a noncontrolling
interest (formerly a minority interest) in a subsidiary be classified as equity and the amount of
consolidated net income specifically attributable to the noncontrolling interest be included in the
consolidated financial statements. The adoption of SFAS 160 (ASC 810) did not have a material
impact on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations as of December 31, 2009.
In June 2008, the FASB issued FSP EITF Issue No 03-6-1, Determining Whether Instruments Granted in
Share-Based Payment Transactions are Participating Securities (ASC 260). FSP 03-6-1 (ASC 260)
clarifies that non-vested share-based payment awards that contain nonforfeitable rights to
dividends or dividend equivalents (whether paid or unpaid) are participating securities and are to
be included in the computation of earnings per share under the two-class method described in SFAS
128, Earnings per Share (ASC 260) and requires that prior period EPS and share data be restated
retrospectively for comparability. The Company grants restricted shares under a share-based
compensation plan that qualify as participating securities. FSP 03-6-1 (ASC 260) was effective for
the Company beginning October 1, 2009. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact
on the Companys diluted earnings per share for the quarters ended December 31, 2009 and 2008.
In May 2008, the FASB issued FSP APB 14-1, Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be
Settled in Cash Upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash Settlement) (ASC 470). FSP APB 14-1 (ASC
470) applies to convertible debt instruments that have a net settlement feature permitting
settlement partially or fully in cash upon conversion. FSP APB 14-1 (ASC 470) was effective for
the Company beginning October 1, 2009. Due to the fact that the Companys convertible securities
cannot be settled in cash upon conversion, the adoption of FSP APB 14-1 (ASC 470) did not have a
material impact on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements Not Yet Adopted.
In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 167, Amendments to FASB Interpretation No. 46(R) (ASC 810),
which revises the approach to determining the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity
(VIE) to be more qualitative in nature and requires companies to more frequently reassess whether
they must consolidate a VIE. SFAS 167 (ASC 810) also requires enhanced disclosures to provide more
information about an enterprises involvement in a variable interest entity. SFAS 167 (ASC 810) is
effective for the Companys fiscal year beginning October 1, 2010. The Company is currently
reviewing the impact of adopting SFAS 167 (ASC 810) on our consolidated financial statements.
(2) Supplemental Cash Flow Information
During the three months ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, we paid interest of $37.2 million and
$48.0 million, respectively. In addition, we paid income taxes of $55,000 and $217,000 for the
three months ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. During the three months ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008, we received tax refunds totaling $656,000 and $0, respectively. We
also had the following non-cash activity (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash activity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in consolidated inventory not owned |
|
$ |
8,179 |
|
$ |
(22,475 |
) |
Land acquired through issuance of notes payable |
|
|
|
|
|
981 |
|
Issuance of stock under deferred bonus stock plans |
|
|
2,158 |
|
|
1,040 |
|
(3) Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
As of December 31, 2009, we participated in land development joint ventures in which Beazer Homes
had less than a controlling interest. The following table presents our investment in our
unconsolidated joint ventures, the total equity and outstanding borrowings of these joint ventures,
and our estimated maximum exposure related to our guarantees of these borrowings, as of December
31, 2009 and September 30, 2009:
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
December
31, 2009 |
|
September
30, 2009 |
Beazers investment in joint ventures |
|
$ |
31,968 |
|
|
$ |
30,124 |
|
Total equity of joint ventures |
|
|
311,356 |
|
|
|
328,875 |
|
Total outstanding borrowings of joint ventures |
|
|
415,692 |
|
|
|
422,682 |
|
Beazers estimate of its maximum exposure to our loan-to-value maintenance guarantees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,850 |
|
Beazers estimate of its maximum exposure to our
repayment guarantees |
|
|
15,789 |
|
|
|
15,789 |
|
The increase in our investment in unconsolidated joint ventures from September 30, 2009 to
December 31, 2009 relates primarily to additional investments of $4.5 million offset by
impairments totaling $2.7 million, substantially all of which related to our abandonment of
an investment in a joint venture in one of our exit markets.
For the three months ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the impairments of our investments
in certain of our unconsolidated joint ventures, totaling $2.7 million and $1.3 million,
respectively, were recorded in accordance with APB 18, Equity Method of Accounting for
Investments in Common Stock (ASC 323), of which $2.7 million for the three months ended
December 31, 2009 is included in loss from discontinued operations, net of taxes, in the
accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations. Equity in loss of
unconsolidated joint ventures related to our continuing operations totaled $0.04 million
and $1.4 million for the three months December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
The aggregate debt of the unconsolidated joint ventures was $415.7 million and $422.7
million at December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009, respectively. At December 31, 2009,
total borrowings outstanding include $327.9 million related to one joint venture in which
we are a 2.58% partner. The $7.0 million reduction in total outstanding joint venture debt
during the first quarter of Fiscal 2010 resulted primarily from debt payments of $9.3
million in accordance with loan agreements and/or negotiated settlements offset by loan
draws of $2.3 million to fund the development activities of certain joint ventures. In
December 2009, together with our joint venture partner, we reached agreement with a lender
to the joint venture to pay down the joint ventures outstanding debt by $7.4 million. In
connection with this loan repayment, which was funded by capital contributions from both
joint venture partners, the lender released the obligations under the related loan-to-value
maintenance guarantee.
Three of our joint ventures are in default (or have received default notices) under their
respective debt obligations. During fiscal 2008, the lender to the joint venture, in which
we have a 2.58% investment, notified the joint venture partners that it believes the joint
venture is in default of certain joint venture loan agreements as a result of certain of
the Companys joint venture partners not complying with all aspects of the joint ventures
loan agreements. The joint venture partners are currently in discussions with the lender.
In December 2008, the lender filed individual lawsuits against some of the joint venture
partners and certain of those partners parent companies (including the Company), seeking
to recover damages under completion guarantees, among other claims. We intend to
vigorously defend against this legal action. The Companys share of the outstanding debt
is approximately $14.5 million at December 31, 2009. Under the terms of the agreement, our
repayment guarantee is estimated at $15.1 million, which is triggered in the event of
bankruptcy of the joint venture. Our equity interest at December 31, 2009 was $8.6 million
in this joint venture. Given the inherent uncertainties in this litigation, as of December
31, 2009, no accrual has been recorded, as losses, if any, related to this matter are not
both probable and reasonably estimable.
In addition, certain of our joint venture partners have curtailed their funding of their
allocable joint venture obligations. Given the inherent uncertainties in these
negotiations, as of December 31, 2009, no accrual has been recorded, as obligations to
Beazer, if any, related to these matters were not both probable and reasonably estimable.
Our joint ventures typically obtain secured acquisition, development and construction
financing. Generally Beazer and our joint venture partners provide varying levels of
guarantees of debt and other obligations for our unconsolidated joint ventures. At
December 31, 2009, these guarantees included, for certain joint ventures, construction
completion guarantees, loan-to-value maintenance agreements, repayment guarantees and
environmental indemnities.
In assessing the need to record a liability for the contingent aspect of these guarantees
in accordance with FIN 45, Guarantors Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for
Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of
12
Others (ASC 400), we consider
our historical experience in being required to perform under the guarantees, the fair value
of the collateral underlying these guarantees and the financial condition of the applicable
unconsolidated joint ventures. In addition, we monitor the fair value of the collateral of
these unconsolidated joint ventures to ensure that the related borrowings do not exceed the
specified percentage of the value of the property securing the borrowings. We have not
recorded a liability for the contingent aspects of any guarantees that we determined were
reasonably possible but not probable.
Construction Completion Guarantees
We and our joint venture partners may be obligated to the project lenders to complete land
development improvements and the construction of planned homes if the joint venture does
not perform the required development. Provided the joint venture and the partners are not
in default under any loan provisions, the project lenders typically are obligated to fund
these improvements through any financing commitments available under the applicable loans.
A majority of these construction completion guarantees are joint and several with our
partners. In those cases, we generally have a reimbursement arrangement with our partner
which provides that neither party is responsible for more than its proportionate share of
the guarantee. However, if our joint venture partner does not have adequate financial
resources to meet its obligations under such reimbursement arrangement, we may be liable
for more than our proportionate share, up to our maximum exposure, which is the full amount
covered by the relevant joint and several guarantee. The guarantees cover a specific scope
of work, which may range from an individual development phase to the completion of the
entire project. No accrual has been recorded, as losses, if any, related to construction
completion guarantees are not both probable and reasonably estimable.
Loan-to-Value Maintenance Agreements
We and our joint venture partners may provide credit enhancements to acquisition,
development and construction borrowings in the form of loan-to-value maintenance
agreements, which can limit the amount of additional funding provided by the lenders or
require repayment of the borrowings to the extent such borrowings plus construction
completion costs exceed a specified percentage of the value of the property securing the
borrowings. The agreements generally require periodic reappraisals of the underlying
property value. To the extent that the underlying property gets reappraised, the amount of
the exposure under the loan-to value-maintenance (LTV) guarantee would be adjusted
accordingly and any such change could be significant. In certain cases, we may be required
to make a re-balancing payment following a reappraisal in order to reduce the applicable
loan-to-value ratio to the required level.
Our estimate of the Companys portion of LTV guarantees of the unconsolidated joint
ventures was $3.9 million at September 30, 2009. In December 2009, the Company and its
joint venture partner reached an agreement with the lender of a joint venture to release
the LTV guarantee and extend the related loan maturity up to two years in exchange for a
loan repayment of $7.4 million. The Company and its joint venture partner each invested an
additional $3.9 million in the joint venture during the quarter ended December 31, 2009.
The joint venture used these investments to repay $7.4 million of its outstanding debt.
Repayment Guarantees
We and our joint venture partners have repayment guarantees related to certain joint
ventures borrowings. These repayment guarantees require the repayment of all or a portion
of the debt of the unconsolidated joint venture only in the event the joint venture
defaults on its obligations under the borrowing or in some cases only in the event the
joint venture files for bankruptcy. Our estimate of Beazers maximum exposure to our
repayment guarantees related to the outstanding debt of its unconsolidated joint ventures
was $15.8 million at December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009.
Environmental Indemnities
Additionally, we and our joint venture partners generally provide unsecured environmental
indemnities to joint venture project lenders. In each case, we have performed due diligence
on potential environmental risks. These indemnities obligate us to reimburse the project
lenders for claims related to environmental matters for which they are held responsible.
For the three months ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, we were not required to make any
payments related to environmental
indemnities. No accrual has been recorded, as losses, if any, related to environmental
indemnities are not both probable and reasonably estimable
13
(4) Inventory
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
(in thousands) |
|
2009 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Homes under construction |
|
$ |
217,719 |
|
|
$ |
219,724 |
|
Development projects in progress |
|
|
472,576 |
|
|
|
487,457 |
|
Land held for future development |
|
|
410,559 |
|
|
|
417,834 |
|
Land held for sale |
|
|
37,856 |
|
|
|
42,470 |
|
Capitalized interest |
|
|
38,970 |
|
|
|
38,338 |
|
Model homes |
|
|
51,483 |
|
|
|
59,618 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total owned inventory |
|
$ |
1,229,163 |
|
|
$ |
1,265,441 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homes under construction includes homes finished and ready for delivery and homes in various stages
of construction. We had 291 ($45.8 million) and 270 ($46.3 million) completed homes that were not
subject to a sales contract at December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009, respectively. Development
projects in progress consist principally of land and land improvement costs. Certain of the fully
developed lots in this category are reserved by a deposit or sales contract. Land held for future
development consists of communities for which construction and development activities are expected
to occur in the future or have been idled and are stated at cost unless facts and circumstances
indicate that the carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable. All applicable interest and
real estate taxes are expensed as incurred. During fiscal 2009 and 2008, the Company decided to
reallocate capital employed through strategic sales of select properties and through the exiting of
certain markets no longer viewed as strategic and has recorded such land as held for sale. Land
held for sale as of December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009 principally included land held for
sale in the markets we decided to exit including Colorado and Charlotte, North Carolina.
Total owned inventory, by reportable segment, is set forth in the table below (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
|
|
Projects in |
|
|
Held for Future |
|
|
Land Held |
|
|
Total Owned |
|
|
Projects in |
|
|
Held for Future |
|
|
Land Held |
|
|
Total Owned |
|
|
|
Progress |
|
|
Development |
|
|
for Sale |
|
|
Inventory |
|
|
Progress |
|
|
Development |
|
|
for Sale |
|
|
Inventory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
West Segment |
|
$ |
279,680 |
|
|
$ |
339,392 |
|
|
$ |
5,813 |
|
|
$ |
624,885 |
|
|
$ |
282,753 |
|
|
$ |
345,050 |
|
|
$ |
8,171 |
|
|
$ |
635,974 |
|
East Segment |
|
|
326,608 |
|
|
|
47,480 |
|
|
|
1,375 |
|
|
|
375,463 |
|
|
|
340,859 |
|
|
|
49,097 |
|
|
|
2,927 |
|
|
|
392,883 |
|
Southeast Segment |
|
|
113,890 |
|
|
|
23,687 |
|
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
138,000 |
|
|
|
121,621 |
|
|
|
23,687 |
|
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
145,731 |
|
Unallocated |
|
|
56,796 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56,796 |
|
|
|
56,992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56,992 |
|
Discontinued
Operations |
|
|
3,774 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,245 |
|
|
|
34,019 |
|
|
|
2,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,949 |
|
|
|
33,861 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
780,748 |
|
|
$ |
410,559 |
|
|
$ |
37,856 |
|
|
$ |
1,229,163 |
|
|
$ |
805,137 |
|
|
$ |
417,834 |
|
|
$ |
42,470 |
|
|
$ |
1,265,441 |
|
|
|
|
Unallocated inventory above primarily includes capitalized interest and indirect construction costs
that are not allocated to the segments.
14
The following tables set forth, by reportable segment, the inventory impairments and lot option
abandonment charges recorded (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Development projects and homes in process (Held for Development) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
2,547 |
|
|
$ |
7,833 |
|
East |
|
|
917 |
|
|
|
2,903 |
|
Southeast |
|
|
3,419 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
Unallocated |
|
|
880 |
|
|
|
1,110 |
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
$ |
7,763 |
|
|
$ |
11,943 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Held for Sale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
1,061 |
|
|
$ |
161 |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southeast |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
$ |
1,061 |
|
|
$ |
176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot Option Abandonments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
East |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
Southeast |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
271 |
|
|
|
|
Continuing Operations |
|
$ |
8,827 |
|
|
$ |
12,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held for Development |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
44 |
|
Land Held for Sale |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
Lot Option Abandonments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
$ |
50 |
|
|
$ |
319 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
8,877 |
|
|
$ |
12,709 |
|
|
|
|
The inventory held for development that was impaired during the three months ended December 31,
2009 represented 392 lots in 8 communities with an estimated fair value of $15.5 million compared
to 339 lots in 6 communities with an estimated fair value of $23.3 million for the three months
ended December 31, 2008. During the current period, for certain communities we determined that it
was prudent to reduce sales prices or further increase sales incentives in response to factors
including competitive market conditions. Because the projected cash flows used to evaluate the fair
value of inventory are significantly impacted by changes in market conditions including decreased
sales prices, the change in sales prices and changes in absorption estimates led to additional
impairments in certain communities during the current quarter. In future periods, we may again
determine that it is prudent to reduce sales prices, further increase sales incentives or reduce
absorption rates which may lead to additional impairments, which could be material. The
impairments recorded on our held for development inventory for the three months ended December 31,
2009 and 2008, primarily resulted from the competitive market conditions in those specific
submarkets for the product and locations of these communities.
During the three months ended December 31, 2009, as a result of challenging market conditions and
review of recent comparable transactions, certain of the Companys land held for sale was further
written down to net realizable value, less estimated costs to sell.
We also have access to land inventory through lot option contracts, which generally enable us to
defer acquiring portions of properties owned by third parties and unconsolidated entities until we
have determined whether to exercise our lot option. A majority of our lot option contracts require
a non-refundable cash deposit or irrevocable letter of credit based on a percentage of the purchase
price of the land for the right to acquire lots during a specified period of time at a certain
price. Under lot option contracts purchase of the properties is contingent upon satisfaction of
certain requirements by us and the sellers. Under option contracts our liability is generally
limited to forfeiture of the non-refundable deposits, letters of credit and other non-refundable
amounts incurred, which aggregated approximately $40.4 million at December 31, 2009. This amount
includes non-refundable letters of credit of approximately $4.4 million. The total remaining
purchase price, net of cash deposits, committed under all options was $268.2 million as of December
31, 2009.
15
We have determined the proper course of action with respect to a number of communities within each
homebuilding segment was to abandon the remaining lots under option and to write-off the deposits
securing the option takedowns, as well as preacquisition costs. In determining whether to abandon
a lot option contract, we evaluate the lot option primarily based upon the expected cash flows from
the property that is the subject of the option. If we intend to abandon or walk-away from a lot
option contract, we record a charge to earnings in the period such decision is made for the deposit
amount and any related capitalized costs associated with the lot option contract.
We expect to exercise, subject to market conditions, most of our remaining option contracts.
Various factors, some of which are beyond our control, such as market conditions, weather
conditions and the timing of the completion of development activities, will have a significant
impact on the timing of option exercises or whether land options will be exercised.
Certain of our option contracts are with sellers who are deemed to be VIEs under FASB
Interpretation No. 46 (Revised), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an Interpretation of
ARB No. 51 (ASC 470). FIN 46R (ASC 470) defines a VIE as an entity with insufficient equity
investment to finance its planned activities without additional financial support or an entity in
which the equity investors lack certain characteristics of a controlling financial interest. An
enterprise that absorbs a majority of the expected losses or receives a majority of the expected
residual returns of a VIE is deemed to be the primary beneficiary of the VIE and must consolidate
the VIE.
We have determined that we are the primary beneficiary of certain of these option contracts. Our
risk is generally limited to the option deposits that we pay, and creditors of the sellers
generally have no recourse to the general credit of the Company. Although we do not have legal
title to the optioned land, for those option contracts for which we are the primary beneficiary, we
are required to consolidate the land under option at fair value. We believe that the exercise
prices of our option contracts approximate their fair value. Our unaudited condensed consolidated
balance sheets at December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009 reflect consolidated inventory not owned
of $62.1 million and $53.0 million, respectively. We consolidated $52.5 million and $42.8 million
of lot option agreements as consolidated inventory not owned pursuant to FIN 46R (ASC 470) as of
December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009, respectively. In addition, as of December 31, 2009 and
September 30, 2009, we recorded $9.5 million and $10.2 million, respectively, of land under the
caption consolidated inventory not owned related to lot option agreements in accordance with SFAS
49, Product Financing Arrangements. Obligations related to consolidated inventory not owned totaled
$34.5 million at December 31, 2009 and $26.4 million at September 30, 2009. The difference between
the balances of consolidated inventory not owned and obligations related to consolidated inventory
not owned represents cash deposits paid under the option agreements.
(5) Interest
Our ability to capitalize all interest incurred during the three months ended December 31, 2009 and
2008 has been limited by the reduction in our inventory eligible for capitalization. The following
table sets forth certain information regarding interest (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Capitalized interest in inventory, beginning of period |
|
$ |
38,338 |
|
|
$ |
45,977 |
|
Interest incurred |
|
|
33,180 |
|
|
|
33,921 |
|
Capitalized interest impaired |
|
|
(632 |
) |
|
|
(537 |
) |
Interest expense not qualified for capitalization
and included as other expense |
|
|
(20,532 |
) |
|
|
(21,237 |
) |
Capitalized interest amortized to house
construction and land sales expenses |
|
|
(11,384 |
) |
|
|
(12,693 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized interest in inventory, end of period |
|
$ |
38,970 |
|
|
$ |
45,431 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
(6) Earnings Per Share and Share Repurchases
Basic and diluted earnings per share are calculated as follows (in thousands, except per share
amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations |
|
$ |
44,535 |
|
|
$ |
(79,159 |
) |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
3,464 |
|
|
|
(1,116 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
47,999 |
|
|
$ |
(80,275 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares outstanding basic |
|
|
38,827 |
|
|
|
38,593 |
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations |
|
$ |
1.15 |
|
|
$ |
(2.05 |
) |
Basic earnings (loss) per share from discontinued operations |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
Basic earnings (loss) per share |
|
$ |
1.24 |
|
|
$ |
(2.08 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on convertible debt -net of taxes |
|
$ |
1,174 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations for diluted EPS |
|
$ |
45,709 |
|
|
$ |
(79,159 |
) |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax for diluted EPS |
|
|
3,464 |
|
|
|
(1,116 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) for diluted EPS |
|
$ |
49,173 |
|
|
$ |
(80,275 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares outstanding basic |
|
|
38,827 |
|
|
|
38,593 |
|
Effect of dilutive securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares issuable upon conversion of convertible debt |
|
|
3,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
Options to aquire common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contingent shares (performance based stock) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested restricted stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares outstanding diluted |
|
|
41,939 |
|
|
|
38,593 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations |
|
$ |
1.09 |
|
|
$ |
(2.05 |
) |
Diluted earnings (loss) per share from discontinued operations |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
Diluted earnings (loss) per share |
|
$ |
1.17 |
|
|
$ |
(2.08 |
) |
In computing diluted earnings per share for the three months ended December 31, 2009 options/SSARs
to purchase 2.1 million shares of common stock were not included in the computation of diluted
earnings per share because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive. In computing diluted loss
per share for the three ended December 31, 2008, all common stock equivalents were excluded from
the computation of diluted loss per share as a result of their anti-dilutive effect.
On November 18, 2005, our Board of Directors authorized a stock repurchase plan of up to ten
million shares of our common stock. During the fiscal quarters ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 we
did not repurchase any shares. At December 31, 2009, there are approximately 5.4 million additional
shares available for purchase pursuant to the plan; however, we have currently suspended our
repurchase program and any resumption of such program will be at the discretion of the Board of
Directors and as allowed by our debt covenants and is unlikely in the foreseeable future.
17
(7) Borrowings
At December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009 we had the following long-term debt (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
Maturity Date |
|
2009 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Secured Revolving Credit Facility |
|
July 2011 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
8 5/8% Senior Notes* |
|
May 2011 |
|
|
127,254 |
|
|
|
127,254 |
|
8 3/8% Senior Notes* |
|
April 2012 |
|
|
303,599 |
|
|
|
303,599 |
|
6 1/2% Senior Notes* |
|
November 2013 |
|
|
164,473 |
|
|
|
164,473 |
|
6 7/8% Senior Notes* |
|
July 2015 |
|
|
209,454 |
|
|
|
209,454 |
|
8 1/8% Senior Notes* |
|
June 2016 |
|
|
180,879 |
|
|
|
180,879 |
|
12% Senior Secured Notes* |
|
September 2017 |
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
4 5/8% Convertible Senior Notes* |
|
June 2024 |
|
|
154,500 |
|
|
|
154,500 |
|
Junior subordinated notes |
|
July 2036 |
|
|
103,093 |
|
|
|
103,093 |
|
Other secured notes payable |
|
Various Dates |
|
|
11,998 |
|
|
|
12,543 |
|
Model home financing obligations |
|
Various Dates |
|
|
22,077 |
|
|
|
30,361 |
|
Unamortized debt discounts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26,362 |
) |
|
|
(27,257 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,500,965 |
|
|
$ |
1,508,899 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Collectively, the Senior Notes |
Secured Revolving Credit Facility On August 5, 2009, we entered into an amendment to our Secured
Revolving Credit Facility that reduced the size of the facility to $22 million. The Secured
Revolving Credit Facility is provided by one lender. The Secured Revolving Credit Facility will
continue to provide for future working capital and letter of credit needs collateralized by either
cash or assets of the Company at our option, based on certain conditions and covenant compliance.
As of December 31, 2009, we have elected to cash collateralize all letters of credit; however we
have pledged approximately $1.0 billion of inventory assets to our revolving credit facility to
collateralize potential future borrowings or letters of credit. The Secured Revolving Credit
Facility contains certain covenants, including negative covenants and financial maintenance
covenants, with which we are required to comply. Subject to our option to cash collateralize our
obligations under the Secured Revolving Credit Facility upon certain conditions, our obligations
under the Secured Revolving Credit Facility are secured by liens on substantially all of our
personal property and a significant portion of our owned real properties. There were no outstanding
borrowings under the Secured Revolving Credit Facility as of December 31, 2009 or September 30,
2009.
We entered into three stand-alone, cash-secured letter of credit agreements with banks to maintain
our pre-existing letters of credit that had been under our prior revolving credit facility of which
one agreement provides for the issuance of new letters of credit. In November 2009 we closed an
additional stand-alone, cash-secured letter of credit facility with a major bank to add additional
letter of credit capacity. The letter of credit arrangements combined with our revolving credit
facility provide a total letter of credit capacity of $106 million. As of December 31, 2009, we
have secured letters of credit using cash collateral in restricted accounts totaling $47.2 million.
The Company may enter into additional arrangements to provide additional letter of credit capacity.
Senior
Notes The majority of our Senior Notes are unsecured obligations ranking pari passu with
all other existing and future senior indebtedness. Substantially all of our significant
subsidiaries are full and unconditional guarantors of the Senior Notes and are jointly and
severally liable for obligations under the Senior Notes and the Secured Revolving Credit Facility.
Each guarantor subsidiary is a 100% owned subsidiary of Beazer Homes.
The indentures under which the Senior Notes were issued contain certain restrictive covenants,
including limitations on payment of dividends. At December 31, 2009, under the most restrictive
covenants of each indenture, no portion of our retained earnings was available for cash dividends
or for share repurchases. The indentures provide that, in the event of defined changes in control
or if our consolidated tangible net worth falls below a specified level or in certain circumstances
upon a sale of assets, we are required to offer to repurchase certain specified amounts of
outstanding Senior Notes. Specifically, each indenture (other than the indenture governing the
convertible Senior Notes) requires us to offer to purchase 10% of each series of Senior Notes at
par if our consolidated tangible net worth (defined as stockholders equity less intangible assets
as defined) is less than $85 million at the end of any two consecutive fiscal
quarters. If triggered and fully subscribed, this could result in our having to purchase $137.5
million of notes, based on the original amounts of the applicable notes; however, this amount may
be reduced by certain Senior Note repurchases (potentially at less than par) made after the
triggering date.
18
In June 2004, we issued $180 million aggregate principal amount of 4 5/8% Convertible Senior Notes
due 2024 (the Convertible Senior Notes). In August 2004, we filed a registration statement on
Form S-3 with the SEC covering resales of the Convertible Senior Notes and the common stock
issuable upon conversion. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007, the cumulative dividends
declared to date caused a change in the conversion rate per $1,000 principal amount to an adjusted
conversion rate of 20.1441 shares of common stock, representing a current conversion price of
$49.64 per share. We may, at our option, redeem for cash the Convertible Senior Notes in whole or
in part at any time on or after June 15, 2009 at specified redemption prices. Holders have the
right to require us to purchase all or any portion of the Convertible Senior Notes for cash on June
15, 2011, June 15, 2014 and June 15, 2019. In each case, we will pay a purchase price equal to
100% of the principal amount of the Convertible Senior Notes to be purchased plus any accrued and
unpaid interest, if any, and any additional amounts owed, if any to such purchase date.
On September 11, 2009, we issued and sold $250 million aggregate principal amount of our 12% Senior
Secured Notes due 2017 (Senior Secured Notes) through a private placement. The Senior Secured Notes
were issued at a price of 89.5% of their face amount (before underwriting and other issuance
costs). Interest on the Senior Secured Notes is payable semi-annually in cash in arrears,
commencing April 15, 2010. The Senior Secured Notes were issued under an indenture, dated as of
September 11, 2009. The indenture contains covenants which, subject to certain exceptions, limit
the ability of the Company and its restricted subsidiaries to, among other things, incur additional
indebtedness, engage in certain asset sales, make certain types of restricted payments, engage in
transactions with affiliates and create liens on assets of the Company. Upon a change of control,
as defined, the indenture requires us to make an offer to repurchase the Senior Secured Notes at
101% of their principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest. If we sell certain assets and do
not reinvest the net proceeds in compliance with the indenture, then we must use the net proceeds
to offer to repurchase the Senior Secured Notes at 100% of their principal amount, plus accrued and
unpaid interest.
After October 15, 2012, we may redeem some or all of the Senior Secured Notes at redemption prices
set forth in the indenture. The Senior Secured Notes are secured on a second priority basis by,
subject to exceptions specified in the related agreements, substantially all of the tangible and
intangible assets of the Company as defined. On January 21, 2010, we offered to exchange all of
the Senior Secured Notes for an equal amount of 12% Senior Secured Notes due 2017 (the 12% Senior
Secured Notes) which will be registered under the Securities Act of 1933.
As of December 31, 2009, we were in compliance with all covenants under our Senior Notes.
Junior Subordinated Notes On June 15, 2006, we completed a private placement of $103.1 million of
unsecured junior subordinated notes which mature on July 30, 2036 and are redeemable at par on or
after July 30, 2011 and pay a fixed rate of 7.987% for the first ten years ending July 30, 2016.
Thereafter, the securities have a floating interest rate equal to three-month LIBOR plus 2.45% per
annum, resetting quarterly. These notes were issued to Beazer Capital Trust I, which simultaneously
issued, in a private transaction, trust preferred securities and common securities with an
aggregate value of $103.1 million to fund its purchase of these notes. The transaction is treated
as debt in accordance with GAAP. The obligations relating to these notes and the related securities
are subordinated to the Secured Revolving Credit Facility and the Senior Notes.
On January 15, 2010, we completed an exchange of $75 million of our trust preferred securities
issued by Beazer Capital Trust I for a new issue of $75 million of junior subordinated notes due
July 30, 2036 issued by the Company (the New Junior Notes). The exchanged trust preferred
securities and the related junior subordinated notes issued in 2006 have been cancelled effective
January 15, 2010. The material terms of the New Junior Notes will be identical to the terms of the
original trust securities except that when the New Junior Notes change from a fixed rate to a
variable rate in August 2016, the variable rate will be subject to a floor of 4.25% and a cap of
9.25%. In addition, the Company will now have the option to redeem the New Junior Notes beginning
on June 1, 2012 at 75% of par value and beginning on June 1, 2022, the redemption price of 75% of
par value will increase by 1.785% per year.
The aforementioned exchange will be accounted for as an extinguishment of debt and, as such, the
New Junior Notes will be recorded at their estimated fair value. Over the remaining life of the
New Junior Notes, we will increase their carrying value until this carrying value equals the face
value of the notes. Preliminary estimates indicate that this transaction will result in a gain on
extinguishment within the range of $54 million to $61 million.
Other Secured Notes Payable We periodically acquire land through the issuance of notes payable.
As of December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009, we had outstanding notes payable of $12.0 million
and $12.5 million, respectively, primarily related to land acquisitions. These notes payable expire
at various times through 2011 and had fixed rates ranging from 8.0% to 9.0% at December 31, 2009.
These notes are secured by the real estate to which they relate.
19
The agreements governing these secured notes payable contain various affirmative and negative
covenants. There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain any future waivers or
amendments that may become necessary without significant additional cost or at all. In each
instance, however, a covenant default can be cured by repayment of the indebtedness.
Model Home Financing Obligations Due to a continuing interest in certain model home
sale-leaseback transactions, we have recorded $22.1 million and $30.4 million of debt as of
December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009, respectively, related to these financing transactions
in accordance with SFAS 98 (As amended), Accounting for Leases (ASC 840). These model home
transactions incur interest at a variable rate of one-month LIBOR plus 450 basis points, 4.7% as of
December 31, 2009, and expire at various times through 2015. The model homes financed in these
transactions are recorded as inventory until such homes are sold to the ultimate homebuyer and the
related financing obligation is repaid. At such time, we recognize revenue and related costs, and
the inventory associated with the model homes and the model home financing obligations are reduced.
The sale transaction above is reflected as cash provided by operating activities and the reduction
in the model home financing obligation is presented as cash used in financing activities in the
accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of cash flows.
(8) Income Taxes
During fiscal 2008, the Company established a valuation allowance for substantially all its
deferred tax assets. The Company still believes that a valuation allowance is needed for
substantially all of its deferred tax assets. However, during the period ending December 31, 2009,
The Worker, Homeownership and Business Assistance Act of 2009 was enacted allowing us to carry back
a portion of our fiscal 2009 federal tax losses. On December 17, 2009, we filed an application for
a federal income tax refund of approximately $101 million. This carryback allowed us to claim a
refund of taxes paid in prior years and to monetize a deferred tax asset that had previously had a
valuation allowance recorded. We expect to receive the refund proceeds in cash during the quarter
ending March 31, 2010.
As part of its tax refund filing, the Company elected to defer the gain recognition from the
cancellation of indebtedness associated with the Companys previously reported buy back of certain
Senior Notes during fiscal 2009. This deferral was permitted under The American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 and represents $51 million of incremental tax benefit to the Company
arising from $148 million of gains previously realized. The deferral of the associated gains
generated a deferred tax liability of $51 million, which has been netted against our deferred tax
assets. The Company will recognize these gains in five equal annual installments beginning in
fiscal 2014.
We have not changed our assessment regarding the recoverability of the remaining deferred tax
assets and consequently, during the three months ended December 31, 2009, we determined an
additional valuation allowance of $18.6 million was warranted to reduce the value of the
accumulating current year net operating loss. In addition, due to the change in tax legislation,
which allowed us to carry back a portion of our fiscal 2009 tax losses, we recorded a reversal of
our valuation allowance of $99 million during the quarter. As of December 31, 2009, our deferred
tax valuation allowance was $372.6 million. In future periods, the allowance could be reduced
based on sufficient evidence indicating that is a more likely than not that a portion or all of the
Companys deferred tax assets will be realized.
Our tax benefit from continuing operations of $94 million for the three months ended December 31,
2009, primarily resulted from the enacted tax legislation that allowed us to carry back a portion
of our fiscal 2009 federal tax losses and claim a refund on prior year taxes paid. The principal
difference between our effective rate and the U.S. federal statutory rate for the three months
ended December 31, 2009 relates to the carryback of federal tax losses and our valuation allowance.
During the first quarter of fiscal 2010, there have been no material changes to the components of
the Companys total unrecognized tax benefits, including any amount which, if recognized, would
affect the Companys effective tax rate.
(9) Contingencies
Beazer Homes and certain of its subsidiaries have been and continue to be named as defendants in
various construction defect claims, complaints and other legal actions that include claims related
to Chinese drywall. The Company is subject to the possibility of loss contingencies arising in its
business and such contingencies are accounted for in accordance with SFAS 5, Accounting for
Contingencies (ASC 7). In determining loss contingencies, we consider the likelihood of loss as
well as the ability to reasonably estimate the amount
of such loss or liability. An estimated loss is recorded when it is considered probable that a
liability has been incurred and when the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated.
20
Warranty Reserves. We currently provide a limited warranty (ranging from one to two years)
covering workmanship and materials per our defined performance quality standards. In addition, we
provide a limited warranty (generally ranging from a minimum of five years up to the period covered
by the applicable statute of repose) covering only certain defined construction defects. We also
provide a defined structural element warranty with single-family homes and townhomes in certain
states.
Since we subcontract our homebuilding work to subcontractors who generally provide us with an
indemnity and a certificate of insurance prior to receiving payments for their work, many claims
relating to workmanship and materials are the primary responsibility of the subcontractors.
Warranty reserves are included in other liabilities and the provision for warranty accruals is
included in home construction and land sales expenses in the unaudited condensed consolidated
financial statements. We record reserves covering anticipated warranty expense for each home
closed. Management reviews the adequacy of warranty reserves each reporting period based on
historical experience and managements estimate of the costs to remediate the claims and adjusts
these provisions accordingly. Our review includes a quarterly analysis of the historical data and
trends in warranty expense by operating segment. An analysis by operating segment allows us to
consider market specific factors such as our warranty experience, the number of home closings, the
prices of homes, product mix and other data in estimating our warranty reserves. In addition, our
analysis also contemplates the existence of any non-recurring or community-specific warranty
related matters that might not be contemplated in our historical data and trends.
As of December 31, 2009, we have accrued $2.4 million in our warranty reserves for the repair of
approximately 40 homes in southwest Florida where certain of our subcontractors installed defective
Chinese drywall in homes that were delivered during our 2006 and 2007 fiscal years. We are
inspecting additional homes in order to determine whether they also contain the defective Chinese
drywall. The outcome of these inspections may require us to increase our warranty reserve in the
future. However, the amount of additional liability, if any, is not reasonably estimable. In
addition, the Company has been named as defendants in a number of legal actions related to Chinese
drywall (see Other Matters below).
As a result of our analyses, we adjust our estimated warranty liabilities. While we believe that
our warranty reserves are adequate as of December 31, 2009, historical data and trends may not
accurately predict actual warranty costs, or future developments could lead to a significant change
in the reserve. Our warranty reserves are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
2009 |
2008 |
Balance at beginning of period |
|
$ |
30,100 |
|
|
$ |
40,822 |
|
Provisions |
|
|
1,383 |
|
|
|
248 |
|
Payments |
|
|
(3,123 |
) |
|
|
(4,182 |
) |
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
28,360 |
|
|
$ |
36,888 |
|
|
|
|
Litigation
Securities Litigation. Beazer Homes and certain of its current and former officers were named as
defendants in a securities lawsuit filed on September 18, 2009 in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia. The complaint was filed by a group of plaintiffs who opted
out of the settlement of the putative class action securities litigation filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia that was dismissed on September
15, 2009, the details of which were previously disclosed by the Company. The complaint alleges
that the defendants violated Sections 10(b), 18, and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by issuing materially false and misleading statements
regarding our business and prospects due to allegedly improper lending practices in our mortgage
origination business. The plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of compensatory damages. The
parties have settled the lawsuit. A portion of the settlement amount will be provided by certain
insurers and the Company is in negotiations with certain of its other insurers to provide
additional amounts towards the settlement; however, the Company has determined that it is probable
that a liability exists related to this matter and has accordingly recorded an accrual consistent
with our accrual policy for such matters. The amount of such accrual is not material to the
Companys financial position or results of operations and is included in the total litigation
accrual discussed below.
Derivative Shareholder Actions. Certain of Beazer Homes current and former officers and directors
were named as defendants in two derivative shareholder suits filed on April 16, 2007 and August 29,
2007 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, which were
subsequently consolidated. Beazer Homes is named as a nominal defendant. The amended consolidated
complaint, purportedly on behalf of Beazer Homes, alleges that the defendants (i) violated Section
10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder; (ii) breached their fiduciary
duties and misappropriated information; (iii) abused their control; (iv) wasted corporate assets;
and (v) were unjustly enriched, and seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory damages against the
21
individual defendants and in favor of Beazer Homes. The parties reached an agreement to settle the
lawsuit. Under the terms of the settlement, the action will be dismissed with prejudice, and the
Company and all other defendants will not admit any liability. Pursuant to the terms of the
settlement, the Company has acknowledged that the pendency of the derivative action was a factor in
the Companys adoption of various corporate governance reforms and remedial measures, all of which
have previously been disclosed, and agreed that plaintiffs counsel would receive attorneys fees
not to exceed $950,000, which will be funded by insurance proceeds. The settlement remains subject
to final court approval. Based on the terms of the settlement, as of December 31, 2009, no accrual
has been recorded related to this action.
ERISA Class Actions. On April 30, 2007, a putative class action complaint was filed on behalf of a
purported class consisting of present and former participants and beneficiaries of the Beazer Homes
USA, Inc. 401(k) Plan. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia. The complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duties, including those set forth in
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), as a result of the investment of retirement
monies held by the 401(k) Plan in common stock of Beazer Homes at a time when participants were
allegedly not provided timely, accurate and complete information concerning Beazer Homes. Four
additional lawsuits were filed subsequently making similar allegations and the court consolidated
these five lawsuits. The consolidated amended complaint names as defendants Beazer Homes, our
chief executive officer, certain current and former directors of the Company, including the members
of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, and certain employees of the Company who
acted as members of the Companys 401(k) Committee. On October 10, 2008, the Company and the other
defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. Briefing of the motion
was completed in January 2009. The Company intends to vigorously defend against these actions.
Given the inherent uncertainties in this litigation, as of December 31, 2009, no accrual has been
recorded, as losses, if any, related to this matter are not both probable and reasonably estimable.
Homeowners Class Action Lawsuits and Multi-Plaintiff Lawsuit. A putative class action was filed on
April 8, 2008 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina,
Salisbury Division, against Beazer Homes, U.S.A., Inc., Beazer Homes Corp. and Beazer Mortgage
Corporation. The Complaint alleges that Beazer violated the Real Estate Settlement Practices Act
(RESPA) and North Carolina Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 by (1) improperly requiring homebuyers to use
Beazer-owned mortgage and settlement services as part of a down payment assistance program, and
(2) illegally increasing the cost of homes and settlement services sold by Beazer Homes Corp. The
purported class consists of all residents of North Carolina who purchased a home from Beazer, using
mortgage financing provided by and through Beazer that included seller-funded down payment
assistance, between January 1, 2000 and October 11, 2007. The Complaint demands an unspecified
amount of damages, equitable relief, treble damages, attorneys fees and litigation expenses. The
defendants moved to dismiss the Complaint on June 4, 2008. On July 25, 2008, in lieu of a response
to the motion to dismiss, plaintiff filed an amended complaint which the Company moved to dismiss.
The magistrate judge recommended that the district court grant the defendants motion to dismiss
the RESPA claim but deny the motion to dismiss the § 75-1.1 claim. While the plaintiffs did not
object to the magistrate judges recommendation with respect to the RESPA claim, the defendants
filed an objection to the magistrate judges recommendation with respect to the § 75-1.1 claim,
which objection is now before the district court. The Company intends to vigorously defend against
this action. Given the inherent uncertainties in this litigation, as of December 31, 2009, no
accrual has been recorded, as losses, if any, related to this matter are not both probable and
reasonably estimable.
Beazer Homes Corp. and Beazer Mortgage Corporation are also named defendants in a lawsuit filed on
July 3, 2007, in the General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division, County of Mecklenburg,
North Carolina. The complaint was filed on behalf of individual homeowners who purchased homes from
Beazer in Mecklenburg County. The complaint alleges certain deceptive conduct by the defendants and
brings various claims under North Carolina statutory and common law, including a claim for punitive
damages. The case has been assigned to the docket of the North Carolina Business Court. The
plaintiffs have filed four amended complaints, and the Company has filed a motion to dismiss each
of the complaints filed by the plaintiffs. With the exception of all
claims of one plaintiff and
one claim as to all plaintiffs, which claims have now been dismissed, the court denied the
defendants motion to dismiss. The Company intends to vigorously defend against this action. Given
the inherent uncertainties in this litigation, as of December 31, 2009, no accrual has been
recorded, as losses, if any, related to this matter are not both probable and reasonably estimable.
Beazer Homes and several subsidiaries were named as defendants in a putative class action lawsuit
originally filed on March 12, 2008, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of
Placer. The purported class is defined as all persons who purchased a home from the defendants or
their affiliates, with the assistance of a federally related mortgage loan, from March 25, 1999, to
the present where Security Title Insurance Company received any money as a reinsurer of the
transaction. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated RESPA and asserts claims under a
number of state statutes alleging that defendants engaged in a uniform and systematic practice of
giving and/or accepting fees and kickbacks to affiliated businesses including affiliated and/or
recommended title insurance companies. The complaint also alleges a number of common law claims.
Plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of damages under RESPA, unspecified statutory, compensatory
and punitive damages and injunctive and declaratory relief, as well as attorneys
22
fees and costs. Defendants removed the action to federal court and plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint
which substituted new named-plaintiffs. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the Second Amended
Complaint, which the federal court granted in part. The federal court dismissed the sole federal
claim, declined to rule on the state law claims, and remanded the case to the Superior Court of
Placer County. The Company filed a supplemental motion to dismiss/demurrer regarding the remaining
state law claims in the Second Amended Complaint and the state court sustained defendants demurrer
but granted the plaintiffs leave to amend their claims. Plaintiffs thereafter filed a Third Amended
Complaint which defendants removed to federal court based on the presence of a federal question and
pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act and thereafter moved to dismiss or, in the alternative,
for summary judgment. Plaintiffs have filed a motion to remand the case to the Superior Court of
Placer County. The motion to dismiss is fully briefed and is awaiting decision by the Court. The
Company intends to continue to vigorously defend against the action. Given the inherent
uncertainties in this litigation, as of December 31, 2009, no accrual has been recorded, as losses,
if any, related to this matter are not both probable and reasonably estimable.
We cannot predict or determine the timing or final outcome of the lawsuits or the effect that any
adverse findings or adverse determinations in the pending lawsuits may have on us. In addition, an
estimate of possible loss or range of loss, if any, cannot presently be made with respect to the
above pending matters. An unfavorable determination resulting from any governmental investigation
could result in the filing of criminal charges, payment of substantial criminal or civil
restitution, the imposition of injunctions on our conduct or the imposition of other penalties or
consequences, including but not limited to the Company having to adjust, curtail or terminate the
conduct of certain of our business operations. Any of these outcomes could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. An unfavorable
determination in any of the pending lawsuits could result in the payment by us of substantial
monetary damages which may not be fully covered by insurance. Further, the legal costs associated
with the lawsuits and the amount of time required to be spent by management and the Board of
Directors on these matters, even if we are ultimately successful, could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Other Matters
As disclosed in our 2009 Form 10-K, on July 1, 2009, the Company announced that it has resolved the
criminal and civil investigations by the United States Attorneys Office in the Western District of
North Carolina (the U.S. Attorney) and other state and federal agencies concerning matters that
were the subject of the independent investigation, initiated in April 2007 by the Audit Committee
of the Board of Directors (the Investigation) and concluded in May 2008. Under the terms of the
deferred prosecution agreement (DPA), the Companys liability for fiscal 2010 will be equal to the
greater of $1 million or 4% of the Companys adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the DPA) and in each of
the fiscal years after 2010 through a portion of fiscal 2014 (unless extended as described in Note
9) will also be equal to 4% of the Companys adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the DPA). The total
amount of such obligations will be dependent on several factors; however, the maximum liability
under the DPA and other settlement agreements discussed above will not exceed $55.0 million of
which $14 million was paid during fiscal 2009. As of December 31, 2009, we have accrued $2.0
million for fiscal 2010 obligations under the DPA and HUD agreements. While we believe that our
accrual for this liability is adequate as of December 31, 2009, positive adjusted EBITDA results in
future years will require us to increase our accrual and incur additional expense in the future.
In November 2003, Beazer Homes received a request for information from the EPA pursuant to Section
308 of the Clean Water Act seeking information concerning the nature and extent of storm water
discharge practices relating to certain of our communities completed or under construction. The EPA
has since requested information on additional communities and has conducted site inspections at a
number of locations. In certain instances, the EPA or the equivalent state agency has issued
Administrative Orders identifying alleged instances of noncompliance and requiring corrective
action to address the alleged deficiencies in storm water management practices. As of December 31,
2009, no monetary penalties had been imposed in connection with such Administrative Orders.
Consistent with its approach with other homebuilders, the EPA has contacted the Company about a
possible resolution of these issues. Settlement negotiations are proceeding. The EPA has reserved
the right to impose monetary penalties at a later date, the amount of which, if any, cannot
currently be estimated. Beazer Homes has taken action to comply with the requirements of each of
the Administrative Orders and is working to otherwise maintain compliance with the requirements of
the Clean Water Act.
In 2006, we received two Administrative Orders issued by the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection. The Orders allege certain violations of wetlands disturbance permits. The two Orders
assess proposed fines of $630,000 and $678,000, respectively. We have met with the Department to
discuss their concerns on the two affected communities and have requested hearings on both matters.
We believe that we have significant defenses to the alleged violations and intend to contest the
agencys findings and the proposed fines. We are currently pursuing settlement discussions with the
Department.
23
On June 3, 2009, a purported class action complaint was filed by the owners of one of our
homes in our Magnolia Lakes community in Ft. Myers, Florida. The complaint names the Company and
certain distributors and suppliers of drywall and was filed in the Circuit Court for Lee County,
Florida on behalf of the named plaintiffs and other similarly situated owners of homes in Magnolia
Lakes or alternatively in the State of Florida. The plaintiffs allege that the Company built their
homes with defective drywall, manufactured in China, that contains sulfur compounds that allegedly
corrode certain metals and that are allegedly capable of harming the health of individuals.
Plaintiffs allege physical and economic damages and seek legal and equitable relief, medical
monitoring and attorneys fees. This case has been transferred to the Eastern District of
Louisiana pursuant to an order from the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
The Company believes that the claims asserted in this complaint are governed by its home warranty
or are without merit. Accordingly, the Company intends to vigorously defend against this
litigation. Given the inherent uncertainties in this litigation, as of December 31, 2009, no
accrual has been recorded, as losses, if any, related to this matter are not both probable and
reasonably estimable.
We and certain of our subsidiaries have been named as defendants in various claims, complaints and
other legal actions, most relating to construction defects, moisture intrusion and product
liability. Certain of the liabilities resulting from these actions are covered in whole or part by
insurance. In our opinion, based on our current assessment, the ultimate resolution of these
matters will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations
or cash flows.
We have accrued $19.0 million and $19.7 million in other liabilities related to these matters as of
December 31 and September 30, 2009, respectively.
The lender of one of our unconsolidated joint ventures has filed individual lawsuits against some
of the joint venture partners and certain of those partners parent companies (including the
Company), seeking to recover damages under completion guarantees, among other claims. We intend to
vigorously defend against this legal action. We are a 2.58% partner in this joint venture (see Note
3 for additional information). In addition, one member of the joint venture has filed an
arbitration proceeding against the remaining members related to the plaintiff-members allegations
that the other members have failed to perform under the applicable membership agreements. In both
matters, an estimate of possible loss or range of loss if any, cannot presently be made with
respect to the above matter. Given the inherent uncertainties and complexities in this litigation,
as of December 31, 2009, no accrual has been recorded, as losses, if any, related to this matter
are not both probable and reasonably estimable.
We had outstanding letters of credit and performance bonds of approximately $39.2 million and
$207.7 million, respectively, at December 31, 2009 related principally to our obligations to local
governments to construct roads and other improvements in various developments in addition to the
letters of credit of approximately $4.9 million relating to our land option contracts discussed in
Note 4.
(10) Fair Value Measurements
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 157, Fair Value Measurements (ASC 820). SFAS 157 (ASC 820)
provides guidance for using fair value to measure assets and liabilities and applies whenever other
standards require (or permit) assets or liabilities to be measured at fair value but does not
expand the use of fair value in any new circumstances. SFAS 157 (ASC 820) includes provisions that
require expanded disclosure of the effect on earnings for items measured using unobservable data.
Certain of our assets are required to be recorded at fair value on a non-recurring basis when
events and circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recovered. SFAS 157 (ASC 820)
establishes a fair value hierarchy that requires us to maximize the use of observable inputs and
minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value as follows: Level 1 Quoted
prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities; Level 2 Inputs other than quoted
prices included in Level 1 that are observable either directly or indirectly through corroboration
with market data; Level 3 Unobservable inputs that reflect our own estimates about the
assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. The following table
presents our assets measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis for each hierarchy level and
represents only those assets whose carrying values were adjusted to fair value during the three
months ended December 31, 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
Total |
Development projects in progress |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
15,500 |
|
|
$ |
15,500 |
|
Land held for sale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,039 |
|
|
|
2,039 |
|
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,060 |
|
|
|
4,060 |
|
24
As previously disclosed, we review our long-lived assets, including inventory for
recoverability when factors that indicate an impairment may exist, but no less than quarterly.
Fair value is based on estimated cash flows discounted for market risks associated with the
long-lived assets. During the three months ended December 31, 2009, we recorded total inventory
impairments of $7.8 million and $1.1 million for development projects in progress and land held for
sale, respectively. See Notes 1, 3 and 4 for additional information related to the fair value
accounting for the assets listed above.
The fair values of our investments in unconsolidated joint ventures are determined primarily using
a discounted cash flow model to value the underlying net assets of the respective entities. During
the three months ended December 31, 2009, we recorded the writedown of our investment in certain of
our unconsolidated joint ventures of $2.7 million, substantially all of which is included in loss
from discontinued operations, net of tax in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated
statement of operations.
Determining which hierarchical level an asset or liability falls within requires significant
judgment. We evaluate our hierarchy disclosures each quarter.
The fair value of our cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivable, trade
accounts payable, other liabilities and other secured notes payable approximate their carrying
amounts due to the short maturity of these assets and liabilities. Obligations related to
consolidated inventory not owned are recorded at estimated fair value. The fair value of our model
home financing obligations approximate their carrying amounts due to the variable interest rates
associated with those obligations. The carrying values and estimated fair values of other
financial assets and liabilities were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
As of September 30, 2009 |
|
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Senior Notes |
|
$ |
1,363,797 |
|
|
$ |
1,257,305 |
|
|
$ |
1,362,902 |
|
|
$ |
1,200,612 |
|
Junior subordinated notes |
|
|
103,093 |
|
|
|
52,069 |
|
|
|
103,093 |
|
|
|
52,377 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,466,890 |
|
|
$ |
1,309,374 |
|
|
$ |
1,465,995 |
|
|
$ |
1,252,989 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The estimated fair values shown above for our publicly held Senior Notes have been determined
using quoted market rates. The fair value of our publicly held junior subordinated notes is
estimated by discounting scheduled cash flows through maturity. The discount rate is estimated
using market rates currently being offered on loans with similar terms and credit quality. Judgment
is required in interpreting market data to develop these estimates of fair value. Accordingly, the
estimates presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that we could realize in a
current market exchange.
(11) Segment Information
As defined in SFAS 131, Disclosures About Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information (ASC
280), we have three homebuilding segments operating in 17 states and one financial services
segment. Revenues in our homebuilding segments are derived from the sale of homes which we
construct and from land and lot sales. Revenues in our financial services segment are derived
primarily from title services provided predominantly to customers of our homebuilding operations.
Our reportable segments, described below, have been determined on a basis that is used internally
by management for evaluating segment performance and resource allocations. The reportable
homebuilding segments include operations conducting business in the following states:
West: Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico and Texas
East: Delaware, Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina (Raleigh), Pennsylvania, Tennessee (Nashville) and Virginia
Southeast: Florida, Georgia and South Carolina
We have ceased all of our homebuilding operating activities in the markets previously included in
our Other Homebuilding segment. As a result, the financial information related to these markets
are reported as discontinued operations in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated
financial statements and are further discussed in Note 13.
Managements evaluation of segment performance is based on segment operating income, which for our
homebuilding segments is defined as homebuilding and land sale revenues less home construction,
land development and land sales expense, depreciation and amortization and certain selling, general
and administrative expenses which are incurred by or allocated to our homebuilding segments.
Segment operating income for our Financial Services segment is defined as revenues less costs
associated with our title operations and certain selling, general and administrative expenses
incurred by or allocated to the Financial Services segment. The accounting policies of our segments
are those described in Note 1. The following information is in thousands:
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
87,880 |
|
|
$ |
103,417 |
|
East |
|
|
97,732 |
|
|
|
73,191 |
|
Southeast |
|
|
32,792 |
|
|
|
41,073 |
|
Financial Services |
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
218,784 |
|
|
$ |
218,169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
2,951 |
|
|
$ |
(6,246 |
) |
East |
|
|
5,291 |
|
|
|
(3,424 |
) |
Southeast |
|
|
(451 |
) |
|
|
(1,945 |
) |
Financial Services |
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment total |
|
|
7,981 |
|
|
|
(11,627 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate and unallocated (a) |
|
|
(37,893 |
) |
|
|
(49,833 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating loss |
|
|
(29,912 |
) |
|
|
(61,460 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in loss of unconsolidated
joint ventures |
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
(1,407 |
) |
Other expense, net |
|
|
(19,531 |
) |
|
|
(18,185 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
before income taxes |
|
$ |
(49,486 |
) |
|
$ |
(81,052 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
1,262 |
|
|
$ |
1,515 |
|
East |
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
|
763 |
|
Southeast |
|
|
490 |
|
|
|
316 |
|
Financial Services |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment total |
|
|
2,818 |
|
|
|
2,602 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate and unallocated (a) |
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
1,036 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated total |
|
$ |
3,424 |
|
|
$ |
3,638 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
651,783 |
|
|
$ |
664,857 |
|
East |
|
|
402,740 |
|
|
|
428,673 |
|
Southeast |
|
|
177,789 |
|
|
|
182,155 |
|
Financial Services |
|
|
35,112 |
|
|
|
35,720 |
|
Corporate and unallocated (b) |
|
|
721,444 |
|
|
|
680,047 |
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
35,450 |
|
|
|
37,958 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated total |
|
$ |
2,024,318 |
|
|
$ |
2,029,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Corporate and unallocated includes amortization of capitalized interest and numerous
shared services functions that benefit all segments, the costs of which are not allocated to
the operating segments reported above including information technology, national sourcing and
purchasing, treasury, corporate finance, legal, branding and other national marketing costs.
For the three months ended December 31, 2008, corporate and unallocated includes $16.1 million
of goodwill impairments. |
|
(b) |
|
Primarily consists of cash and cash equivalents, consolidated inventory not owned, deferred
taxes, capitalized interest and other corporate items that are not allocated to the segments. |
(12) Supplemental Guarantor Information
As discussed in Note 7, our obligations to pay principal, premium, if any, and interest under
certain debt are guaranteed on a joint and several basis by substantially all of our subsidiaries.
Certain of our title, warranty and immaterial subsidiaries do not guarantee our Senior Notes or our
Secured Revolving Credit Facility. The guarantees are full and unconditional and the guarantor
subsidiaries are 100% owned by Beazer Homes USA, Inc. We have determined that separate, full
financial statements of the guarantors would not be material to investors and, accordingly,
supplemental financial information for the guarantors is presented.
27
Beazer
Homes USA, Inc.
Unaudited Consolidating Balance Sheet Information
December 31, 2009
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
Consolidating |
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
436,479 |
|
|
$ |
351 |
|
|
$ |
567 |
|
|
$ |
(4,672 |
) |
|
$ |
432,725 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
47,185 |
|
|
|
551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47,736 |
|
Accounts receivable (net of allowance of $5,091) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,506 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,534 |
|
Income tax receivable |
|
|
108,886 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108,886 |
|
Owned inventory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,229,163 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,229,163 |
|
Consolidated inventory not owned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
62,079 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62,079 |
|
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
3,093 |
|
|
|
28,875 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,968 |
|
Deferred tax assets, net |
|
|
7,645 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,645 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,933 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,933 |
|
Investments in subsidiaries |
|
|
28,856 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28,856 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Intercompany |
|
|
1,154,497 |
|
|
|
(1,162,974 |
) |
|
|
3,805 |
|
|
|
4,672 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
25,619 |
|
|
|
19,752 |
|
|
|
5,278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,649 |
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,812,260 |
|
|
$ |
231,236 |
|
|
$ |
9,678 |
|
|
$ |
(28,856 |
) |
|
$ |
2,024,318 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade accounts payable |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
44,595 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
44,595 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
75,507 |
|
|
|
116,108 |
|
|
|
5,279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196,894 |
|
Intercompany |
|
|
457 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(457 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations related to consolidated inventory
not owned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,535 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,535 |
|
Senior Notes (net of discounts of $26,362) |
|
|
1,363,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,363,797 |
|
Junior subordinated notes |
|
|
103,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103,093 |
|
Other secured notes payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,998 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,998 |
|
Model home financing obligations |
|
|
22,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,077 |
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,564,931 |
|
|
|
207,236 |
|
|
|
4,822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,776,989 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity |
|
|
247,329 |
|
|
|
24,000 |
|
|
|
4,856 |
|
|
|
(28,856 |
) |
|
|
247,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
1,812,260 |
|
|
$ |
231,236 |
|
|
$ |
9,678 |
|
|
$ |
(28,856 |
) |
|
$ |
2,024,318 |
|
|
|
|
28
Beazer
Homes USA, Inc.
Consolidating Balance Sheet Information
September 30, 2009
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
Consolidating |
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
| |
|
| | | | |
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
495,692 |
|
|
$ |
11,482 |
|
|
$ |
2,915 |
|
|
$ |
(2,750 |
) |
|
$ |
507,339 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
48,326 |
|
|
|
1,135 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,461 |
|
Accounts receivable (net of allowance of $7,545) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,377 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,405 |
|
Income tax receivable |
|
|
9,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,922 |
|
Owned inventory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,265,441 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,265,441 |
|
Consolidated inventory not owned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,015 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,015 |
|
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
3,093 |
|
|
|
27,031 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,124 |
|
Deferred tax assets |
|
|
7,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,520 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,939 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,939 |
|
Investments in subsidiaries |
|
|
210,730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(210,730 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Intercompany |
|
|
977,956 |
|
|
|
(984,511 |
) |
|
|
3,805 |
|
|
|
2,750 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
26,750 |
|
|
|
22,419 |
|
|
|
3,075 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,244 |
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,779,989 |
|
|
$ |
450,328 |
|
|
$ |
9,823 |
|
|
$ |
(210,730 |
) |
|
$ |
2,029,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade accounts payable |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
70,285 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
70,285 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
86,717 |
|
|
|
134,655 |
|
|
|
5,943 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
227,315 |
|
Intercompany |
|
|
361 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(361 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations related to consolidated inventory
not owned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,356 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,356 |
|
Senior Notes (net of discounts of $27,257) |
|
|
1,362,902 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,362,902 |
|
Junior subordinated notes |
|
|
103,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103,093 |
|
Other secured notes payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,543 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,543 |
|
Model home financing obligations |
|
|
30,361 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,361 |
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,583,434 |
|
|
|
243,839 |
|
|
|
5,582 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,832,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity |
|
|
196,555 |
|
|
|
206,489 |
|
|
|
4,241 |
|
|
|
(210,730 |
) |
|
|
196,555 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
1,779,989 |
|
|
$ |
450,328 |
|
|
$ |
9,823 |
|
|
$ |
(210,730 |
) |
|
$ |
2,029,410 |
|
|
|
|
29
Beazer
Homes USA, Inc.
Unaudited Consolidating Statement of Operations Information
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
Consolidating |
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
217,828 |
|
|
$ |
956 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
218,784 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home construction and land sales expenses |
|
|
11,384 |
|
|
|
179,252 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
190,636 |
|
Inventory impairments and option contract
abandonments |
|
|
632 |
|
|
|
8,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,827 |
|
|
|
|
Gross (loss) profit |
|
|
(12,016 |
) |
|
|
30,381 |
|
|
|
956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,321 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,778 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,809 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,424 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,424 |
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss) income |
|
|
(12,016 |
) |
|
|
(18,821 |
) |
|
|
925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29,912 |
) |
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
Other (expense) income, net |
|
|
(20,532 |
) |
|
|
979 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(19,531 |
) |
|
|
|
(Loss) income before income taxes |
|
|
(32,548 |
) |
|
|
(17,885 |
) |
|
|
947 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,486 |
) |
(Benefit from) provision for income taxes |
|
|
(12,287 |
) |
|
|
(82,065 |
) |
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(94,021 |
) |
Equity in income of subsidiaries |
|
|
64,796 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(64,796 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
44,535 |
|
|
|
64,180 |
|
|
|
616 |
|
|
|
(64,796 |
) |
|
|
44,535 |
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,464 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,464 |
|
Equity in income of subsidiaries |
|
|
3,464 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,464 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
47,999 |
|
|
$ |
67,644 |
|
|
$ |
616 |
|
|
$ |
(68,260 |
) |
|
$ |
47,999 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
Consolidating |
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
217,939 |
|
|
$ |
230 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
218,169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home construction and land sales expenses |
|
|
12,693 |
|
|
|
180,825 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
193,518 |
|
Inventory impairments and option contract
abandonments |
|
|
537 |
|
|
|
11,853 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,390 |
|
|
|
|
Gross (loss) profit |
|
|
(13,230 |
) |
|
|
25,261 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,261 |
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,880 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,940 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,638 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,638 |
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,143 |
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss) income |
|
|
(13,230 |
) |
|
|
(48,400 |
) |
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(61,460 |
) |
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,407 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,407 |
) |
Other (expense) income, net |
|
|
(21,237 |
) |
|
|
3,046 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18,185 |
) |
|
|
|
(Loss) income before income taxes |
|
|
(34,467 |
) |
|
|
(46,761 |
) |
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(81,052 |
) |
(Benefit from) provision for income taxes |
|
|
(12,556 |
) |
|
|
10,592 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,893 |
) |
Equity in (loss) income of subsidiaries |
|
|
(57,248 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57,248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
|
|
(79,159 |
) |
|
|
(57,353 |
) |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
57,248 |
|
|
|
(79,159 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,116 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,116 |
) |
Equity in loss of subsidiaries |
|
|
(1,116 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,116 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(80,275 |
) |
|
$ |
(58,469 |
) |
|
$ |
105 |
|
|
$ |
58,364 |
|
|
$ |
(80,275 |
) |
|
|
|
30
Beazer
Homes USA, Inc.
Unaudited Consolidating Statements of Cash Flow Information
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
Consolidating |
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
For the three months ended December 31, 2009 |
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
(136,825 |
) |
|
$ |
79,791 |
|
|
$ |
(2,251 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(59,285 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,346 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,346 |
) |
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,515 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,515 |
) |
Changes in restricted cash |
|
|
1,141 |
|
|
|
584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,725 |
|
Distributions from unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
|
1,141 |
|
|
|
(5,202 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,061 |
) |
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of other secured notes payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(545 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(545 |
) |
Repayment of model home financing obligations |
|
|
(8,284 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,284 |
) |
Debt issuance costs |
|
|
(323 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(323 |
) |
Common stock redeemed |
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(134 |
) |
Tax benefit from stock transactions |
|
|
(1,982 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,982 |
) |
Advances to/from subsidiaries |
|
|
87,194 |
|
|
|
(85,175 |
) |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(1,922 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
|
|
76,471 |
|
|
|
(85,720 |
) |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(1,922 |
) |
|
|
(11,268 |
) |
|
|
|
(Decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(59,213 |
) |
|
|
(11,131 |
) |
|
|
(2,348 |
) |
|
|
(1,922 |
) |
|
|
(74,614 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
495,692 |
|
|
|
11,482 |
|
|
|
2,915 |
|
|
|
(2,750 |
) |
|
|
507,339 |
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
436,479 |
|
|
$ |
351 |
|
|
$ |
567 |
|
|
$ |
(4,672 |
) |
|
$ |
432,725 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
Consolidating |
|
|
Beazer Homes |
|
For the three months ended December 31, 2008 |
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
USA, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
(35,252 |
) |
|
$ |
(77,126 |
) |
|
$ |
470 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(111,908 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,663 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,663 |
) |
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,938 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,938 |
) |
Changes in restricted cash |
|
|
(18,782 |
) |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18,690 |
) |
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(18,782 |
) |
|
|
(3,509 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22,291 |
) |
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of other secured notes payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(192 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(192 |
) |
Repayment of model home financing obligations |
|
|
(11,994 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,994 |
) |
Debt issuance costs |
|
|
(604 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(604 |
) |
Common stock redeemed |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
Tax benefit from stock transactions |
|
|
(476 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(476 |
) |
Advances to/from subsidiaries |
|
|
(68,536 |
) |
|
|
67,530 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(81,623 |
) |
|
|
67,338 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
|
(13,279 |
) |
|
|
|
(Decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(135,657 |
) |
|
|
(13,297 |
) |
|
|
501 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
|
(147,478 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
575,856 |
|
|
|
14,806 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(6,333 |
) |
|
|
584,334 |
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
440,199 |
|
|
$ |
1,509 |
|
|
$ |
506 |
|
|
$ |
(5,358 |
) |
|
$ |
436,856 |
|
|
|
|
(13) Discontinued Operations
On February 1, 2008, the Company determined that it would discontinue its mortgage origination
services through Beazer Mortgage Corporation (BMC). In February 2008, the Company entered into a
new marketing services arrangement with a major financial institution, whereby
the Company would market this institution as the preferred mortgage provider to its customers.
31
In fiscal 2008, we completed a comprehensive review of each of our markets in order to refine
our overall investment strategy and to optimize capital and resource allocations in an effort to
enhance our financial position and to increase shareholder value. This review entailed an
evaluation of both external market factors and our position in each market and resulted in the
decision formalized and announced on February 1, 2008, to discontinue homebuilding operations in
Charlotte, NC, Cincinnati/Dayton, OH, Columbia, SC, Columbus, OH and Lexington, KY. During the
third quarter of fiscal 2008, we announced our decision to discontinue homebuilding operations in
Colorado and Fresno, CA. During fiscal 2009, the homebuilding operating activities in the markets
we exited and which were historically reported in our Other Homebuilding segment ceased.
We have classified the results of operations of BMC and our exit markets as discontinued operations
in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations for all periods
presented. Discontinued operations were not segregated in the unaudited condensed consolidated
balance sheets or statements of cash flows. Therefore, amounts for certain captions in the
unaudited condensed consolidated statements of cash flows will not agree with the respective data
in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations. The results of operations of the
BMC and the exit markets classified as discontinued operations in the unaudited condensed
consolidated statements of operations for the quarters ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as
follows ( in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
550 |
|
|
$ |
14,195 |
|
Home construction and land sales expenses |
|
|
698 |
|
|
|
12,328 |
|
Inventory impairments and lot option abandonments |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross (loss) profit |
|
|
(198 |
) |
|
|
1,548 |
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
973 |
|
|
|
2,501 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss |
|
|
(1,171 |
) |
|
|
(1,098 |
) |
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
(2,731 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from discontinued operations before
income taxes |
|
|
(3,852 |
) |
|
|
(1,186 |
) |
Benefit from income taxes |
|
|
(7,316 |
) |
|
|
(70 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
$ |
3,464 |
|
|
$ |
(1,116 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets and liabilities from discontinued operations at December 31, 2009 and September 30, 2009,
which relates to BMC and the exit markets, consist of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2009 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
$ |
985 |
|
|
$ |
979 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
34,019 |
|
|
|
33,861 |
|
Other |
|
|
446 |
|
|
|
3,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets of discontinued operations |
|
$ |
35,450 |
|
|
$ |
37,958 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade accounts payable and other liabilities |
|
$ |
4,806 |
|
|
$ |
5,719 |
|
Accrued warranty expenses |
|
|
5,888 |
|
|
|
6,486 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities of discontinued operations |
|
$ |
10,694 |
|
|
$ |
12,205 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
(14) Subsequent Events
On January 12, 2010, the Company closed its concurrent underwritten public offerings of 22,425,000
shares of its common stock and $57.5 million aggregate principal amount of its 7 1/2% Mandatory
Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2013, which included the full exercise of the underwriters
over-allotment option for each offering. The Company received net proceeds of $153,772,250 from the
offerings, after underwriting discounts and commissions.
In addition, on January 7, 2010, the Company called for the full redemption of its 8 5/8% Senior
Notes due 2011 at par totaling $127.3 million. The Company used the net proceeds from the
concurrent offerings to replenish funds used to redeem its Senior Notes and will use the remaining
net proceeds for other general corporate purposes including, without limitation, funding (or
replenishing cash that has been used to fund) repurchases of Company indebtedness.
Effective January 7, 2010, we amended our Section 382 Stockholder Rights Plan (the Rights Plan)
to advance its expiration date to January 7, 2010. As a result, the Rights Plan is no longer in
effect.
See also Note 7 for discussion of our January 15, 2009 partial exchange of our junior subordinated
notes and our January 21, 2010 offer to exchange our Senior Secured Notes for senior secured notes
registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1933.
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Executive Overview and Outlook
The homebuilding environment has suffered extensively during the recession of the past several
years. Declining levels of employment and consumer confidence due to our slowing national economy
led to increased home mortgage delinquencies, foreclosures and an excessive supply of new and
existing homes for sale. Concurrently, the credit markets and the mortgage industry experienced a
period of unparalleled turmoil and disruption characterized by bankruptcy, financial institution
failure, consolidation and an unprecedented level of intervention by the United States federal
government. The convergence of these factors created a challenging environment for all new
homebuilders, which has led in turn to material reductions in the size and scope of our business.
We have responded to this challenging environment with a disciplined approach to the business
including significant reductions in direct construction costs, overhead expenses and land spending.
We have limited our supply of unsold homes under construction, significantly reduced our land
acquisition and development investments and generated and preserved a significant cash balance.
During the first quarter of fiscal 2010, we experienced some moderation in the negative market
trends that have plagued the industry as interest rates have remained attractive and housing
affordability reached historically high levels. Additionally, the successful homebuyer tax credit
was extended and expanded by Congress in November 2009 for homes sales through April 30, 2010. The
new law also increased the annual income limits for qualification and added a $6,500 tax credit for
qualified existing homeowners who elect to purchase a new home. The
combination of these market influences provides cautious optimism toward fiscal 2010. At the same time
however, our optimism for sustained improvement in the homebuilding
environment will be balanced by continued elevated unemployment levels, rising rates of home foreclosures, and expectation for
increased mortgage interest rates in the future. As a result, we expect that fiscal 2010 will
continue to pose challenges for us.
As of December 31, 2009, three of our joint ventures are in default (or have received default
notices) under their debt agreements. The Company has abandoned one of these joint ventures as of
December 31, 2009. Although neither the Company nor any of its subsidiaries is the borrower of the
debt incurred by the respective joint ventures, we have issued guarantees of various types with
respect to a number of these joint ventures. To the extent that we are unable to reach
satisfactory resolutions, we may be called upon to perform under our applicable guarantees. The
estimated maximum exposure related to our debt repayment guarantees was $15.8 million at December
31, 2009. See Note 3 to the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
Subsequent to the end of our first quarter, in January 2010, we took additional steps toward
improving our capitalization with the issuance of $57.5 million of 7.5% Mandatory Convertible
Subordinated Notes, an offering of 22,425,000 shares of common stock (see Note 14 to the unaudited
condensed consolidated financial statements) and a redemption in full of our outstanding 8 5/8%
senior notes due 2011. We also completed a partial exchange of $75 million of our Junior
Subordinated Notes due 2036 (see Note 7 to the unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements), for which we expect to record a gain between $54 million and $61 million. The
aforementioned subsequent events would result in a proforma increase in our stockholders equity
from approximately $247 million to approximately $397 million as of December 31, 2009. Tangible
Net Worth (stockholders equity less certain intangible assets,
as defined in our Senior Notes indentures) would also increase, on a pro forma basis by approximately $150 million to approximately
$339 million at December 31, 2009.
33
We will continue to focus on the generation and preservation of cash, increasing our stockholders
equity and reducing our leverage. We may also, from time to time, continue to seek to retire or
purchase our outstanding debt through cash purchases and/or exchanges for equity or other debt
securities, in open market purchases, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. There can be
no assurance that we will be able to complete any of these transactions in the future on favorable
terms or at all.
Critical Accounting Policies: Some of our critical accounting policies require the use of judgment
in their application or require estimates of inherently uncertain matters. Although our accounting
policies are in compliance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America, a change in the facts and circumstances of the underlying transactions could significantly
change the application of the accounting policies and the resulting financial statement impact. As
disclosed in our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009, our most
critical accounting policies relate to inventory valuation (inventory held for development and land
held for sale), homebuilding revenues and costs, warranty reserves, investments in unconsolidated
joint ventures and income tax valuation allowances. Since September 30, 2009, there have been no
significant changes to those critical accounting policies.
Seasonal and Quarterly Variability: Our homebuilding operating cycle generally reflects escalating
new order activity in the second and third fiscal quarters and increased closings in the third and
fourth fiscal quarters. However, beginning in the second half of fiscal 2006 and continuing through
the third quarter of fiscal 2009, we continued to experience challenging conditions in most of our
markets which contributed to decreased revenues and closings as compared to prior periods including
prior quarters, thereby reducing typical seasonal variations. In addition, the availability of the
$8,000 First Time Homebuyer Tax Credit for homes sold, which continues through April 30, 2010,
appears to have incentivized certain homebuyers to purchase homes during the second half of fiscal
2009 and the first quarter of fiscal 2010 and may continue to do so through the April 30, 2010,
thereby further reducing typical seasonal variations.
34
RESULTS OF CONTINUING OPERATIONS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended December 31, |
|
($ in thousands) |
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homebuilding |
|
$ |
213,924 |
|
|
$ |
217,131 |
|
Land and lot sales |
|
|
4,480 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
Financial Services |
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
218,784 |
|
|
$ |
218,169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homebuilding |
|
$ |
18,171 |
|
|
$ |
11,783 |
|
Land and lot sales |
|
|
770 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Financial Services |
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
19,321 |
|
|
$ |
12,261 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homebuilding |
|
|
8.5 |
% |
|
|
5.4 |
% |
Land and lot sales |
|
|
17.2 |
% |
|
|
-1.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
8.8 |
% |
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
(SG&A) expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homebuilding |
|
$ |
45,620 |
|
|
$ |
53,448 |
|
Financial Services |
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
45,809 |
|
|
$ |
53,940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SG&A as a percentage of total revenue |
|
|
20.9 |
% |
|
|
24.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
3,424 |
|
|
$ |
3,638 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
16,143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in loss of unconsolidated
joint ventures from: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joint venture activities |
|
$ |
(30 |
) |
|
$ |
(114 |
) |
Impairments |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(1,293 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in loss of unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
$ |
(43 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,407 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate from continuing operations |
|
|
190.0 |
% |
|
|
2.3 |
% |
Three Month Period Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to the Three Month Period Ended December
31, 2008
Revenues. Historically low interest rates, increased affordability and federal and state housing
tax credits appear to have recently incented more prospective buyers to purchase a new home and
have contributed to an 8.0% increase in homes closed compared to the period ended December 31,
2008. Homes closed increased to 961 from 890 for the quarters ended December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. Foreclosures are still having the most damaging impact on the market. In every
market, appraisals continue to be negatively impacted by foreclosure comparables which put further
pricing pressure on all home sales and limit financing availability. As a result, revenues from
homebuilding operations and average sales prices decreased 1.5% and 8.8% respectively from the
comparable period of the prior year. This decline in revenues was especially pronounced throughout
our markets in our West and Southeast segments.
In addition, we had $4.5 million of land sales for the three months ended December 31, 2009
compared to $0.6 million for the three months ended December 31, 2008.
35
Gross Profit (Loss). Gross margin for three months ended December 31, 2009 was 8.8% (12.9% without
impairments and abandonments) compared to gross margins of 5.6% (11.3% without impairments and
abandonments) for the comparable periods of the prior year, respectively. Gross margins continued
to be impacted by a challenging homebuilding environment. The improvement in gross margin was
directly related to a reduction in non-cash pre-tax inventory impairments and option contract
abandonments from $12.4 million for the three months ended December 31, 2008 to $8.8 million for
the three months ended December 31, 2009, as well as from cost reductions related to our cost
control initiatives including renegotiated vendor pricing where possible, offset slightly by
increased warranty expense for the three months ended December 31, 2009 compared to the prior year.
In our continued efforts to redeploy assets to more profitable endeavors, we executed several land
sales in the current quarter. We realized a profit on land sales of $770,000 for the three months
ended December 31, 2009 compared to a minimal loss on land sales of $10,000 for the three months
ended December 31, 2008.
Selling, General and Administrative Expense. Selling, general and administrative expense (SG&A)
totaled $45.8 million and $53.9 million for the three months ended December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The 15.1% decrease in SG&A expense from the comparable period of the prior year is
primarily related to cost reductions realized as a result of our continued alignment of our
overhead structure to our reduced volume expectations, and to decreased severance costs.
Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization (D&A) totaled $3.4 million and $3.6
million for the three months ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Goodwill Impairment Charges. The Company experienced a significant decline in its market
capitalization during the three months ended December 31, 2008 (the first quarter of fiscal 2009).
As of December 31, 2008, we considered these current and expected future market conditions and
recorded a pretax, non-cash goodwill impairment charge of $16.1 million in the first quarter of
fiscal 2009 related to our reporting units in Houston, Texas, Maryland and Nashville, Tennessee.
These charges are reported in Corporate and Unallocated and are not allocated to our homebuilding
segments. As a result of these goodwill impairments, as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, we had no
goodwill remaining.
Joint Venture Impairment Charges. In connection with our decision and that of our joint venture
partners to abandon one of our joint ventures, we recorded an impairment of $2.7 million during the
three months ended December 31, 2009. This joint venture related to one of our exit markets and is
reported in income from discontinued operations, net of tax (see Note 3 to the unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements where further discussed). Impairments of investments in our
unconsolidated joint ventures totaled $1.3 million for the three months ended December 31, 2008
primarily related to further deterioration of the housing market during that quarter. If market
conditions worsen, we may have to take further impairments of our investments in these joint
ventures that may have a material adverse effect on our financial position and results of
operations.
Income Taxes. As we are in a cumulative loss position, as analyzed under SFAS 109 (ASC 740), and
based on the lack of sufficient objective evidence regarding the realization of our deferred tax
assets in the foreseeable future, beginning with the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008, we recorded a
valuation allowance for substantially all of our deferred tax assets (see Note 8 to the unaudited
condensed consolidated financial statements for additional information). Our tax benefit from
continuing operations of $94.0 million for the three months ended December 31, 2009, primarily
resulted from the enacted tax legislation that allowed us to carry back a portion of our fiscal
2009 federal tax losses and claim a refund on prior year taxes paid. The principal difference
between our effective rate and the U.S. federal statutory rate for the three months ended December
31, 2009 relates to the carryback of federal tax losses and our valuation allowance.
Discontinued Operations. During fiscal 2009, all of the homebuilding operating activities in the
markets we have exited have ceased. On February 1, 2008, we determined that we would discontinue
our mortgage origination services through Beazer Mortgage Corporation (BMC). As of September 30,
2008, all of BMC operating activities had ceased. We have classified the results of operations of
BMC and our exit markets, as discontinued operations in the accompanying unaudited condensed
consolidated statements of operations for all periods presented. All statement of operations
information in the table above and the management discussion and analysis that follow exclude the
results of discontinued operations. Discontinued operations were not segregated in the unaudited
condensed consolidated statements of cash flows or the unaudited condensed consolidated balance
sheets. Total revenue from discontinued operations was $0.6 million and $14.2 million for the
quarters ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Additional operating data related to
discontinued operations for the quarters ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 is as follows:
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
December 31, |
($ in thousands) |
|
2009 |
| |
2008 |
Closings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
New Orders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
Homebuilding revenues
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
13,280 |
|
Land and lot sale revenues
|
|
$ |
550 |
|
|
$ |
915 |
|
Joint venture impairments
|
|
$ |
2,731 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
See Note 14 to the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for additional
information related to our discontinued operations.
Segment Results for the Three Months Ended December 31, 2009 and 2008:
Homebuilding Revenues and Average Selling Price. The table below summarizes homebuilding revenues
and the average selling prices of our homes by reportable segment ($ in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended December 31, |
|
|
Homebuilding Revenues |
|
Average Selling Price |
|
Closings |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
West |
|
$ |
84,811 |
|
|
$ |
102,911 |
|
|
|
-17.6 |
% |
|
$ |
208.9 |
|
|
$ |
234.4 |
|
|
|
-10.9 |
% |
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
439 |
|
|
|
-7.5 |
% |
East |
|
|
96,321 |
|
|
|
73,192 |
|
|
|
31.6 |
% |
|
|
248.3 |
|
|
|
270.1 |
|
|
|
-8.1 |
% |
|
|
388 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
43.2 |
% |
Southeast |
|
|
32,792 |
|
|
|
41,028 |
|
|
|
-20.1 |
% |
|
|
196.4 |
|
|
|
227.9 |
|
|
|
-13.8 |
% |
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
-7.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
213,924 |
|
|
$ |
217,131 |
|
|
|
-1.5 |
% |
|
$ |
222.6 |
|
|
$ |
244.0 |
|
|
|
-8.8 |
% |
|
|
961 |
|
|
|
890 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homebuilding revenues decreased slightly for the three months ended December 31, 2009 compared
to comparable period of the prior year due to an 8.8% decrease in average sales prices.
Foreclosures are still having the most damaging impact on the market. In every market, appraisals
continue to be negatively impacted by foreclosure comparables which put further pricing pressure on
all home sales and limit financing availability. As a result, we reduced average sales prices in
many of our markets in order to respond to these market conditions. Historically low interest
rates, increased affordability and federal and state housing tax credits appear to have recently
incented more prospective buyers to purchase a new home and have contributed to an 8.0% increase in
homes closed compared to the period ended December 31, 2008.
Homebuilding revenues in our West segment decreased 17.6% for the three months ended December 31,
2009 compared to the comparable period of fiscal 2008. This decrease was driven by decreased
closings of 7.5% and decreased average sales prices of 10.9%. These decreases were particularly
impacted by significant decreases in our Las Vegas and Sacramento markets which have been
experiencing higher than average foreclosures and unemployment.
For the three months ended December 31, 2009, our East segment homebuilding revenues increased by
31.6% driven by a 43.2% increase in closings across all of our markets in this segment offset
slightly by an 8.1% decrease in average selling price which was particularly pronounced in our New
Jersey and Nashville markets. This increase in revenue reflects slightly improved market
conditions and consumer response to changes in price, product enhancements and the federal housing
tax credit.
Our Southeast segment continued to be challenged by significant declines in demand and excess
capacity in both the new home and resale markets and the high number of foreclosures, driving
decreases in homebuilding revenues of 20.1% for the three months ended December 31, 2009 as
compared to the same period of the prior year. This decrease was driven by decreased closings of
7.2% and decreased average sales prices of 13.8%. The decrease in closings was driven by lower
demand, a continued high level of available new and resale homes, increased competition and a high
number of foreclosures which further depress prices and limit financing availability in these
markets.
37
Land and Lot Sales Revenues. The table below summarizes land and lot sales revenues by reportable
segment ($ in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
West |
|
$ |
3,069 |
|
|
$ |
505 |
|
|
|
507.7 |
% |
East |
|
|
1,411 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Southeast |
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
-100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,480 |
|
|
$ |
550 |
|
|
|
714.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land and lot sales revenues relate to land and lots sold that did not fit within our
homebuilding programs and strategic plans in these markets.
Gross Profit (Loss). Homebuilding gross profit is defined as homebuilding revenues less home cost
of sales (which includes land and land development costs, home construction costs, capitalized
interest, indirect costs of construction, estimated warranty costs, closing costs and inventory
impairment and lot option abandonment charges). The following table sets forth our homebuilding
gross profit (loss) and gross margin by reportable segment and total gross profit (loss) and gross
margin ($ in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended December 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Gross Profit |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Gross Profit |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
(Loss) |
|
|
Margin |
|
|
(Loss) |
|
|
Margin |
|
West |
|
$ |
14,987 |
|
|
|
17.7 |
% |
|
|
$11,718 |
|
|
|
11.4 |
% |
East |
|
|
15,276 |
|
|
|
15.9 |
% |
|
|
7,960 |
|
|
|
10.9 |
% |
Southeast |
|
|
1,308 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
% |
|
|
4,931 |
|
|
|
12.0 |
% |
Corporate & unallocated |
|
|
(13,400 |
) |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
(12,826 |
) |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total homebuilding |
|
|
18,171 |
|
|
|
8.5 |
% |
|
|
11,783 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land and lot sales |
|
|
770 |
|
|
|
17.2 |
% |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
-1.8 |
% |
Financial services |
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
488 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
19,321 |
|
|
|
8.8 |
% |
|
|
$12,261 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in gross margins in our West and East segments is primarily due to lower
inventory impairments and lot option abandonment charges, although both segments did realize a
nominal increase in gross margins excluding impairments. The decrease in gross margin in our
Southeast segment is related entirely to a $3.3 million increase in inventory impairments and
abandonments recognized in the quarter ended December 31, 2009 as compared to the first quarter of
the prior year. Excluding inventory impairments and abandonments, the Southeast segment realized a
2% increase in gross margins compared to the prior year primarily from cost reductions related to
our cost control initiatives including renegotiated vendor pricing where possible
Corporate and unallocated. Corporate and unallocated costs include the amortization of capitalized
interest and indirect construction costs.
Land and Lot Sales Gross Profit (Loss). The table below summarizes land and lot sales gross profit
(loss) by reportable segment ($ in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
West |
|
$ |
312 |
|
|
$ |
(49 |
) |
|
|
736.7 |
% |
East |
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Southeast |
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
-100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
770 |
|
|
$ |
(10 |
) |
|
|
7800.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
Inventory Impairments. The following tables set forth, by reportable segment, the inventory
impairments and lot option abandonment charges recorded for the three months ended December 31,
2009 and 2008 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Development projects and homes in process (Held for Development) |
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
2,547 |
|
|
$ |
7,833 |
|
East |
|
|
917 |
|
|
|
2,903 |
|
Southeast |
|
|
3,419 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
Unallocated |
|
|
880 |
|
|
|
1,110 |
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
$ |
7,763 |
|
|
$ |
11,943 |
|
|
|
|
Land Held for Sale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
1,061 |
|
|
$ |
161 |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southeast |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
$ |
1,061 |
|
|
$ |
176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot Option Abandonments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
East |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
Southeast |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
271 |
|
|
|
|
Continuing Operations |
|
$ |
8,827 |
|
|
$ |
12,390 |
|
|
|
|
The inventory held for development that was impaired during the three months ended December
31, 2009 represented 392 lots in 8 communities with an estimated fair value of $15.5 million
compared to 339 lots in 6 communities with an estimated fair value of $23.3 million for the three
months ended December 31, 2008. During the current period, for certain communities we determined
that it was prudent to reduce sales prices or further increase sales incentives in response to
factors including competitive market conditions. Because the projected cash flows used to evaluate
the fair value of inventory are significantly impacted by changes in market conditions including
decreased sales prices, the change in sales prices and changes in absorption estimates led to
additional impairments in certain communities during the current quarter. In future periods, we
may again determine that it is prudent to reduce sales prices, further increase sales incentives or
reduce absorption rates which may lead to additional impairments, which could be material. The
impairments recorded on our held for development inventory for the three months ended December 31,
2009 and 2008, primarily resulted from the competitive market conditions in those specific
submarkets for the product and locations of these communities.
During the three months ended December 31, 2009, as a result of challenging market conditions and
review of recent comparable transactions, certain of the Companys land held for sale was further
written down to net realizable value, less estimated costs to sell.
We also have access to land inventory through lot option contracts, which generally enable us to
defer acquiring portions of properties owned by third parties and unconsolidated entities until we
have determined whether to exercise our lot option. A majority of our lot option contracts require
a non-refundable cash deposit or irrevocable letter of credit based on a percentage of the purchase
price of the land for the right to acquire lots during a specified period of time at a certain
price. Under lot option contracts purchase of the properties is contingent upon satisfaction of
certain requirements by us and the sellers. Under option contracts our liability is generally
limited to forfeiture of the non-refundable deposits, letters of credit and other non-refundable
amounts incurred, which aggregated approximately $40.4 million at December 31, 2009. This amount
includes non-refundable letters of credit of approximately $4.4 million. The total remaining
purchase price, net of cash deposits, committed under all options was $268.2 million as of December
31, 2009.
In addition, we have also completed a strategic review of all of the markets within our
homebuilding segments and the communities within each of those markets with an initial focus on the
communities for which land has been secured with option purchase contracts. As a result of this
review, we have determined the proper course of action with respect to a number of communities
within each homebuilding segment was to abandon the remaining lots under option and to write-off
the deposits securing the option takedowns, as well as preacquisition costs. In determining
whether to abandon a lot option contract, we evaluate the lot option primarily based upon
39
the
expected cash flows from the property that is the subject of the option. If we intend to abandon or
walk-away from a lot option
contract, we record a charge to earnings in the period such decision is made for the deposit amount
and any related capitalized costs associated with the lot option contract.
Unit Data by Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
New Orders, net |
|
|
Cancellation Rates |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
West |
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
41.1 |
% |
|
|
24.7 |
% |
|
|
49.6 |
% |
East |
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
36.3 |
% |
|
|
26.9 |
% |
|
|
40.9 |
% |
Southeast |
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
22.8 |
% |
|
|
34.0 |
% |
|
|
45.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
728 |
|
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
36.6 |
% |
|
|
26.9 |
% |
|
|
46.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Orders and Backlog: New orders, net of cancellations, increased 36.6% to 728 units for the
three months ended December 31, 2009 compared to 533 units for the same period in the prior year.
The increase in net new orders for the three months ended December 31, 2009 compared to the prior
year was driven by historically low interest rates, increased affordability and federal and state
housing tax credits appear to have recently incented more prospective buyers to purchase a new home
and have contributed to our increase in net new home orders. Despite the increase in net new
orders, foreclosures are still having a damaging impact on the market. In most of our markets,
appraisals continue to be negatively impacted by foreclosure comparables which put additional
pricing pressure on all home sales and limit financing availability.
For the three months ended December 31, 2009, we experienced cancellation rates of 26.9% compared
to 46.1% for the same period of the prior year. The decrease in cancellation rates across all
markets reflects the market improvement, relative price stabilization and increased stability in
mortgage availability as compared to the period ended December 31, 2008. It also reflects the
impact of historically low interest rates and increased affordability and federal and state housing
tax credits which appear to have enticed more prospective buyers to purchase a new home.
Backlog reflects the number and value of homes for which the Company has entered into a sales
contract with a customer but has not yet delivered the home. The aggregate dollar value of homes
in backlog at December 31, 2009 of $232.3 million increased 2.5% from $226.5 million at December
31, 2008, related primarily to a 2.7% increase in the average selling price of homes in backlog.
The number of homes in backlog was 961 units at December 31, 2008 and 960 units at December 31,
2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Backlog at December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Change |
|
West |
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
16.1 |
% |
East |
|
|
467 |
|
|
|
415 |
|
|
|
12.5 |
% |
Southeast |
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
-52.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
961 |
|
|
|
-0.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Backlog has declined in our Southeast homebuilding segment due primarily to the competitive
environment, increased foreclosures and the reduction in the availability of mortgage credit for
our potential homebuyers. Foreclosures are still having by far the most damaging impact on the
market. In most of our markets, appraisals continue to be negatively impacted by foreclosure
comparables which put additional pricing pressure on all home sales and limit financing
availability. As the availability of mortgage loans stabilizes and the inventory of new and used
homes decreases, backlog should increase; however, continued reduced levels of backlog will produce
less revenue in the future which could also result in additional asset impairment charges and lower
levels of liquidity.
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities. We are exposed to fluctuations in interest rates.
From time to time, we enter into derivative agreements to manage interest costs and hedge against
risks associated with fluctuating interest rates. As of December 31, 2009, we were not a party to
any such derivative agreements. We do not enter into or hold derivatives for trading or
speculative purposes.
40
Liquidity and Capital Resources. Our sources of cash liquidity include, but are not limited to,
cash from operations, proceeds from Senior Notes and other bank borrowings, the issuance of equity
securities and other external sources of funds. Our short-term and long-term liquidity depend
primarily upon our level of net income, working capital management (cash, accounts receivable,
accounts payable and other liabilities) and bank borrowings.
Consistent with the seasonal nature of our business, we used $74.6 million in cash during the three
months ended December 31, 2009, primarily for the payment of liabilities incurred during the fourth
quarter of the prior fiscal year. Our liquidity position consisted of $432.7 million in cash and
cash equivalents as of December 31, 2009.
Our net cash used in operating activities for the three months ended December 31, 2009 was $59.3
million primarily due to significant reductions in trade accounts payable and other liabilities.
For the three months ended December 31, 2008, net cash used in operating activities was $111.9
million. Based on the applicable years closings, as of December 31, 2009, our land bank includes a
7 year supply of owned and optioned land/lots for current and future development. Our ending land
bank includes 29,784 owned and optioned lots and represents 3% and 19% decreases from the land bank
as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. As the homebuilding market declined,
we were successful in significantly reducing our land bank through the abandonment of lot option
contracts, the sale of land assets not required in our homebuilding program and through the sale of
new homes. The decrease in the number of owned lots in our land bank from December 31, 2008
related to our decision to eliminate non-strategic positions to align our land supply with our
expectations for future home closings.
Net cash used in investing activities was $4.1 million for the three months ended December 31, 2009
compared to $22.3 million for the three months ended December 31, 2008. For the three months ended
December 31, 2009, we strategically increased our investment in certain of our unconsolidated joint
ventures whereas the 2008 use of cash was primarily to increase the amount of cash restricted under
our revolving credit and letter of credit facilities.
During fiscal 2009, we reduced the size of our Secured Revolving Credit Facility to $22 million.
We have also entered into four stand-alone, cash-secured letter of credit agreements with banks.
These facilities will continue to provide for future working capital and letter of credit needs
collateralized by either cash or assets of the Company at our option, based on certain conditions
and covenant compliance. As of December 31, 2009, we have secured our letters of credit under
these facilities using cash collateral which is maintained in restricted accounts of $47.2 million.
In addition, we have elected to pledge approximately $1.0 billion of inventory assets to our
revolving credit facility.
Net cash used in financing activities was $11.3 million for three months ended December 31, 2009 as
compared to $13.3 million for the three months ended December 31, 2008. In both periods, the cash
used in financing activities related primarily to the repayment of certain secured notes payable
and model home financing obligations and the payment of debt issuance costs.
To finance land purchases, we may also use seller, or third-party financed non-recourse secured
notes payable, subject to certain limits as defined in our Senior Notes. As of December 31, 2009
and September 30, 2009, such secured notes payable outstanding totaled $12.0 million and $12.5
million, respectively.
During the first few months of fiscal 2010, S&P assigned a credit rating of CC to the Companys
Mandatory Convertible Notes and also improved the rating on the Companys senior unsecured notes to
CC from D. These ratings and our current credit condition affect, among other things, our ability
to access new capital, especially debt, and may result in more stringent covenants and higher
interest rates under the terms of any new debt. Our credit ratings could be further lowered or
rating agencies could issue adverse commentaries in the future, which could have a material adverse
effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity. In particular, a
further weakening of our financial condition, including any further increase in our leverage or
decrease in our profitability or cash flows, could adversely affect our ability to obtain necessary
funds, result in a credit rating downgrade or change in outlook, or otherwise increase our cost of
borrowing.
As the homebuilding markets have contracted over the past few years, we continued to decrease the
size of our business through a reduction in personnel and the closeout of additional communities.
As the markets begin to recover, we will continue our focus on cash generation and preservation to
ensure we have the required liquidity to fund our operations and to take advantage of strategic
opportunities as they are presented.
We fulfill our short-term cash requirements with cash generated from our operations. There were no
amounts outstanding under the Secured Revolving Credit Facility at December 31, 2009 or
September 30, 2009; however, we had $44.1 and $45.6 million of letters of
credit outstanding under the Secured Revolving Credit Facility or stand-alone letter of credit
facilities at December 31, 2009 and
41
September 30, 2009, respectively. We believe that the cash and
cash equivalents at December 31, 2009 of $432.7 million, cash generated from our operations and
availability of new debt and equity financing, if any, will be adequate to meet our liquidity needs
during fiscal 2010.
As a result of these issues, in addition to our continued focus on generation and preservation of
cash, we are also focused on increasing our stockholders equity and reducing our leverage. In
order to accomplish this goal, during the first quarter of fiscal 2010 and the first few weeks of
January 2010, we have taken actions to significantly increase our stockholders equity and
strengthen our balance sheet. As previously mentioned, during the first quarter of fiscal 2010, we
filed an application for a federal income tax refund of approximately $101 million which resulted
in a income tax benefit of $101 million. As a result, our stockholders equity and Tangible Net
Worth increased to $247.3 million and $189.2 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2009. On
January 12, 2010, we completed a $57.5 million Mandatory Convertible Note and common stock offering
of 22,425,000 shares, a portion of the proceeds from which were used to repay our outstanding 2011
Senior Notes. As a result of this debt repayment, our next scheduled debt payment is not until
2012; however, holders of our Convertible Senior Notes have the right to require us to purchase all
or any portion on June 15, 2011. In addition, on January 15, 2010, we completed a partial exchange
of $75 million of our outstanding Junior Subordinated Notes. We expect to record a gain related to
this transaction between $54 million and $61 million during our second fiscal quarter of fiscal
2010 (see Note 7 to the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements where further
discussed). The aforementioned subsequent events would result in an increase our stockholders
equity from approximately $247 million to approximately $397 million on a pro forma basis as of
December 31, 2009. Tangible Net Worth would also increase, on a pro forma basis by approximately
$150 million to approximately $339 million at December 31, 2009.
We may also determine in the future that we need to issue additional new common or preferred
equity. Any new issuance may take the form of public or private offerings for cash, equity issued
to consummate acquisitions of assets or equity issued in exchange for a portion of our outstanding
debt. We may also from time to time seek to continue to retire or purchase our outstanding debt
through cash purchases and/or exchanges for equity or other debt securities, in open market
purchases, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. In addition, any material variance from
our projected operating results or land investments, or investments in or acquisitions of
businesses, or amounts paid to fulfill obligations with governmental entities, could require us to
obtain additional equity or debt financing. Any such equity transactions or debt financing may be
on terms less favorable or at higher costs than our current financing sources, depending on future
market conditions and other factors including any possible downgrades in our credit ratings or
adverse commentaries issued by rating agencies in the future. Also, there can be no assurance that
we will be able to complete any of these transactions in the future on favorable terms or at all.
Stock Repurchases and Dividends Paid The Company did not repurchase any shares in the open market
during the three months ended December 31, 2009 or 2008. At December 31, 2009, there are
approximately 5.4 million additional shares available for purchase pursuant to the Companys stock
repurchase plan. However, as previously disclosed, we have currently suspended our repurchase
program and any resumption of such program will be at the discretion of the Board of Directors and
as allowed by our debt covenants and is unlikely in the foreseeable future.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Aggregate Contractual Commitments. At December 31, 2009, we
controlled 29,784 lots (a 7-year supply based on trailing twelve month closings). We owned 83%, or
24,582 lots, and 5,202 lots, 17%, were under option contracts which generally require the payment
of cash or the posting of a letter of credit for the right to acquire lots during a specified
period of time at a certain price. We historically have attempted to control a portion of our land
supply through options. As a result of the flexibility that these options provide us, upon a change
in market conditions we may renegotiate the terms of the options prior to exercise or terminate the
agreement. Under option contracts, purchase of the properties is contingent upon satisfaction of
certain requirements by us and the sellers and our liability is generally limited to forfeiture of
the non-refundable deposits, letters of credit and other non-refundable amounts incurred, which
aggregated approximately $40.4 million at December 31, 2009. This amount includes non-refundable
letters of credit of approximately $4.4 million. The total remaining purchase price, net of cash
deposits, committed under all options was $268.2 million as of December 31, 2009.
We expect to exercise, subject to market conditions, most of our option contracts. Various factors,
some of which are beyond our control, such as market conditions, weather conditions and the timing
of the completion of development activities, will have a significant impact on the timing of option
exercises or whether land options will be exercised.
We have historically funded the exercise of land options through a combination of operating cash
flows. We expect these sources to continue to be adequate to fund anticipated future option
exercises. Therefore, we do not anticipate that the exercise of our land options will have a
material adverse effect on our liquidity.
42
Certain of our option contracts are with sellers who are deemed to be Variable Interest Entities
(VIEs) under FASB Interpretation No. 46 (Revised), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an
Interpretation of ARB No. 51 (FIN 46R) (ASC 810). We have determined that we are the primary
beneficiary of certain of these option contracts. Our risk is generally limited to the option
deposits that we pay, and creditors of the sellers generally have no recourse to the general credit
of the Company. Although we do not have legal title to the optioned land, for those option
contracts for which we are the primary beneficiary, we are required to consolidate the land under
option at fair value. We believe that the exercise prices of our option contracts approximate their
fair value. Our unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets at December 31, 2009 and September
30, 2009 reflect consolidated inventory not owned of $62.1 million and $53.0 million, respectively.
Obligations related to consolidated inventory not owned totaled $34.5 million at December 31, 2009
and $26.4 million at September 30, 2009. The difference between the balances of consolidated
inventory not owned and obligations related to consolidated inventory not owned represents cash
deposits paid under the option agreements. When market conditions improve, we may expand our use
of option agreements to supplement our owned inventory supply.
We participate in a number of land development joint ventures in which we have less than a
controlling interest. We enter into joint ventures in order to acquire attractive land positions,
to manage our risk profile and to leverage our capital base. Our joint ventures are typically
entered into with developers, other homebuilders and financial partners to develop finished lots
for sale to the joint ventures members and other third parties. We account for our interest in
these joint ventures under the equity method. Our unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets
include investments in joint ventures totaling $32.0 million at December 31, 2009 and $30.1 million
at September 30, 2009.
Our joint ventures typically obtain secured acquisition and development financing. At December 31,
2009, our unconsolidated joint ventures had borrowings outstanding totaling $415.7 million, of
which $327.9 million related to one joint venture in which we are a 2.58% partner. Generally, we
and our joint venture partners have provided varying levels of guarantees of debt or other
obligations of our unconsolidated joint ventures. At December 31, 2009, we had repayment guarantees
of $15.8 million of debt of certain of our unconsolidated joint ventures. Three of our
unconsolidated joint ventures are in default (or have received default notices) under their debt
agreements at December 31, 2009. To the extent that we are unable to reach satisfactory
resolutions, we may be called upon to perform under our applicable guarantees. See Note 3 to the
unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
We had outstanding letters of credit and performance bonds of approximately $39.2 million and
$207.7 million, respectively, at December 31, 2009 related principally to our obligations to local
governments to construct roads and other improvements in various developments in addition to the
letters of credit of approximately $4.9 million relating to our land option contracts discussed
above.
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements. In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 157, Fair
Value Measurements (ASC 820). SFAS 157 (ASC 820) provides guidance for using fair value to measure
assets and liabilities. SFAS 157 applies whenever other standards require (or permit) assets or
liabilities to be measured at fair value but does not expand the use of fair value in any new
circumstances. SFAS 157 (ASC 820) includes provisions that require expanded disclosure of the
effect on earnings for items measured using unobservable data. In February 2008, the FASB issued
FASB Staff Position (FSP) 157-2, Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157 (ASC 820), delaying the
effective date of certain non-financial assets and liabilities to fiscal periods beginning after
November 15, 2008. The company adopted SFAS 157 (ASC 820) during the quarter ended December 31,
2009 as discussed in Note 10.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and
Financial Liabilities Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115 (ASC 825). SFAS 159 (ASC
825) permits companies to measure certain financial instruments and other items at fair value. We
have not elected the fair value option applicable under SFAS 159 (ASC 825).
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 141 (revised 2007), Business Combinations (ASC 815). SFAS
141R (ASC 815) amends and clarifies the accounting guidance for the acquirers recognition and
measurement of assets acquired, liabilities assumed and noncontrolling interests of an acquiree in
a business combination. SFAS 141R (ASC 815) is effective for any acquisitions completed by the
Company after September 30, 2009.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 160, Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements an Amendment of ARB 51 (ASC 810). SFAS 160 (ASC 810) requires that a noncontrolling
interest (formerly a minority interest) in a subsidiary be classified as equity and the amount of
consolidated net income specifically attributable to the noncontrolling interest be included in the
43
consolidated financial statements. The adoption of SFAS 160 (ASC 810) did not have a material
impact on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations as of December 31, 2009.
In June 2008, the FASB issued FSP EITF Issue No 03-6-1, Determining Whether Instruments Granted in
Share-Based Payment Transactions are Participating Securities (ASC 260). FSP 03-6-1 (ASC 260)
clarifies that non-vested share-based payment awards that contain nonforfeitable rights to
dividends or dividend equivalents (whether paid or unpaid) are participating securities and are to
be included in the computation of earnings per share under the two-class method described in SFAS
128, Earnings per Share (ASC 260) and requires that prior period EPS and share data be restated
retrospectively for comparability. The Company grants restricted shares under a share-based
compensation plan that qualify as participating securities. FSP 03-6-1 (ASC 260) was effective for
the Company beginning October 1, 2009. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact
on the Companys diluted earnings per share for the quarters ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 as
the Company did not pay dividends in either of these periods.
In May 2008, the FASB issued FSP APB 14-1, Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be
Settled in Cash Upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash Settlement) (ASC 470). FSP APB 14-1 (ASC
470) applies to convertible debt instruments that have a net settlement feature permitting
settlement partially or fully in cash upon conversion. FSP APB 14-1 (ASC 470) was effective for
the Company beginning October 1, 2009. Due to the fact that the Companys convertible securities
cannot be settled in cash upon conversion, the adoption of FSP APB 14-1 (ASC 470) did not have a
material impact on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements Not Yet Adopted.
In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 167, Amendments to FASB Interpretation No. 46(R) (ASC 810),
which revises the approach to determining the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity
(VIE) to be more qualitative in nature and requires companies to more frequently reassess whether
they must consolidate a VIE. SFAS 167 (ASC 810) also requires enhanced disclosures to provide more
information about an enterprises involvement in a variable interest entity. SFAS 167 (ASC 810) is
effective for the Companys fiscal year beginning October 1, 2010. The Company is currently
reviewing the impact of adopting SFAS 167 (ASC 810) on our consolidated financial statements.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
We are exposed to a number of market risks in the ordinary course of business. Our primary market
risk exposure relates to fluctuations in interest rates. We do not believe that our exposure in
this area is material to cash flows or earnings. As of December 31, 2009, we had $22.1 million of
variable rate debt outstanding. Based on our average outstanding borrowings under our variable rate
debt at December 31, 2009, a one-percentage point increase in interest rates would negatively
impact our annual pre-tax earnings by approximately $0.2 million.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this report, an evaluation was performed under the
supervision and with the participation of the Companys management, including the Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO), of the effectiveness of the Companys
disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. Based on that evaluation, the CEO and CFO concluded that the Companys
disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2009.
Attached as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q are certifications of our CEO and CFO,
which are required by Rule 13a-14 of the Act. This Disclosure Controls and Procedures section
includes information concerning managements evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures
referred to in those certifications and, as such, should be read in conjunction with the
certifications of the CEO and CFO.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There have been no changes in the Companys internal controls over financial reporting during the
quarter ended December 31, 2009 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
44
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Litigation
Securities Litigation. Beazer Homes and certain of its current and former officers were named as
defendants in a securities lawsuit filed on September 18, 2009 in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia. The complaint was filed by a group of plaintiffs who opted
out of the settlement of the putative class action securities litigation filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia that was dismissed on September
15, 2009, the details of which were previously disclosed by the Company. The complaint alleges
that the defendants violated Sections 10(b), 18, and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by issuing materially false and misleading statements
regarding our business and prospects due to allegedly improper lending practices in our mortgage
origination business. The plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of compensatory damages. The
parties have settled the lawsuit. A portion of the settlement amount will be provided by certain
insurers and the Company is in negotiations with certain of its other insurers to provide
additional amounts towards the settlement.
Derivative Shareholder Actions. Certain of Beazer Homes current and former officers and directors
were named as defendants in two derivative shareholder suits filed on April 16, 2007 and August 29,
2007 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, which were
subsequently consolidated. Beazer Homes is named as a nominal defendant. The amended consolidated
complaint, purportedly on behalf of Beazer Homes, alleges that the defendants (i) violated Section
10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder; (ii) breached their fiduciary
duties and misappropriated information; (iii) abused their control; (iv) wasted corporate assets;
and (v) were unjustly enriched, and seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory damages against the
individual defendants and in favor of Beazer Homes. The parties reached an agreement to settle the
lawsuit. Under the terms of the settlement, the action will be dismissed with prejudice, and the
Company and all other defendants will not admit any liability. Pursuant to the terms of the
settlement, the Company has acknowledged that the pendency of the derivative action was a factor in
the Companys adoption of various corporate governance reforms and remedial measures, all of which
have previously been disclosed, and agreed that plaintiffs counsel would receive attorneys fees
not to exceed $950,000, which will be funded by insurance proceeds. The settlement remains subject
to final court approval.
ERISA Class Actions. On April 30, 2007, a putative class action complaint was filed on behalf of a
purported class consisting of present and former participants and beneficiaries of the Beazer Homes
USA, Inc. 401(k) Plan. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia. The complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duties, including those set forth in
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), as a result of the investment of retirement
monies held by the 401(k) Plan in common stock of Beazer Homes at a time when participants were
allegedly not provided timely, accurate and complete information concerning Beazer Homes. Four
additional lawsuits were filed subsequently making similar allegations and the court consolidated
these five lawsuits. The consolidated amended complaint names as defendants Beazer Homes, our
chief executive officer, certain current and former directors of the Company, including the members
of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, and certain employees of the Company who
acted as members of the Companys 401(k) Committee. On October 10, 2008, the Company and the other
defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. Briefing of the motion
was completed in January 2009. The Company intends to vigorously defend against these actions.
Homeowners Class Action Lawsuits and Multi-Plaintiff Lawsuit. A putative class action was filed on
April 8, 2008 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina,
Salisbury Division, against Beazer Homes, U.S.A., Inc., Beazer Homes Corp. and Beazer Mortgage
Corporation. The Complaint alleges that Beazer violated the Real Estate Settlement Practices Act
(RESPA) and North Carolina Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 by (1) improperly requiring homebuyers to use
Beazer-owned mortgage and settlement services as part of a down payment assistance program, and
(2) illegally increasing the cost of homes and settlement services sold by Beazer Homes Corp. The
purported class consists of all residents of North Carolina who purchased a home from Beazer, using
mortgage financing provided by and through Beazer that included seller-funded down payment
assistance, between January 1, 2000 and October 11, 2007. The Complaint demands an unspecified
amount of damages, equitable relief, treble damages, attorneys fees and litigation expenses. The
defendants moved to dismiss the Complaint on June 4, 2008. On July 25, 2008, in lieu of a response
to the motion to dismiss, plaintiff filed an amended complaint which the Company moved to dismiss.
The magistrate judge recommended that the district court grant the defendants motion to dismiss
the RESPA claim but deny the motion to dismiss the § 75-1.1 claim. While the plaintiffs did not
object to the magistrate judges recommendation with respect to the RESPA claim, the defendants
filed an objection to the magistrate judges recommendation with respect to the § 75-1.1 claim,
which objection is now before the district court. The Company intends to vigorously defend against
this action.
Beazer Homes Corp. and Beazer Mortgage Corporation are also named defendants in a lawsuit filed on
July 3, 2007, in the General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division, County of Mecklenburg,
North Carolina. The complaint was filed on behalf of individual homeowners who purchased homes from
Beazer in Mecklenburg County. The complaint alleges certain deceptive conduct by the
45
defendants and brings various claims under North Carolina statutory and common law, including a
claim for punitive damages. The case has been assigned to the docket of the North Carolina Business
Court. The plaintiffs have filed four amended complaints, and the Company has filed a motion to
dismiss each of the complaints filed by the plaintiffs. With the exception of all claims of one
plaintiff and one claim as to all plaintiffs, which claims have now been dismissed, the court
denied the defendants motion to dismiss. The Company intends to vigorously defend against this
action.
Beazer Homes and several subsidiaries were named as defendants in a putative class action lawsuit
originally filed on March 12, 2008, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of
Placer. The purported class is defined as all persons who purchased a home from the defendants or
their affiliates, with the assistance of a federally related mortgage loan, from March 25, 1999, to
the present where Security Title Insurance Company received any money as a reinsurer of the
transaction. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated RESPA and asserts claims under a
number of state statutes alleging that defendants engaged in a uniform and systematic practice of
giving and/or accepting fees and kickbacks to affiliated businesses including affiliated and/or
recommended title insurance companies. The complaint also alleges a number of common law claims.
Plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of damages under RESPA, unspecified statutory, compensatory
and punitive damages and injunctive and declaratory relief, as well as attorneys fees and costs.
Defendants removed the action to federal court and plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint
which substituted new named-plaintiffs. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the Second Amended
Complaint, which the federal court granted in part. The federal court dismissed the sole federal
claim, declined to rule on the state law claims, and remanded the case to the Superior Court of
Placer County. The Company filed a supplemental motion to dismiss/demurrer regarding the remaining
state law claims in the Second Amended Complaint and the state court sustained defendants demurrer
but granted the plaintiffs leave to amend their claims. Plaintiffs thereafter filed a Third Amended
Complaint which defendants removed to federal court based on the presence of a federal question and
pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act and thereafter moved to dismiss or, in the alternative,
for summary judgment. Plaintiffs have filed a motion to remand the case to the Superior Court of
Placer County. The motion to dismiss is fully briefed and is awaiting decision by the Court. The
Company intends to continue to vigorously defend against the action.
We cannot predict or determine the timing or final outcome of the lawsuits or the effect that any
adverse findings or adverse determinations in the pending lawsuits may have on us. In addition, an
estimate of possible loss or range of loss, if any, cannot presently be made with respect to the
above pending matters. An unfavorable determination resulting from any governmental investigation
could result in the filing of criminal charges, payment of substantial criminal or civil
restitution, the imposition of injunctions on our conduct or the imposition of other penalties or
consequences, including but not limited to the Company having to adjust, curtail or terminate the
conduct of certain of our business operations. Any of these outcomes could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. An unfavorable
determination in any of the pending lawsuits could result in the payment by us of substantial
monetary damages which may not be fully covered by insurance. Further, the legal costs associated
with the lawsuits and the amount of time required to be spent by management and the Board of
Directors on these matters, even if we are ultimately successful, could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Other Matters
As disclosed in our 2009 Form 10-K, on July 1, 2009, the Company announced that it has resolved the
criminal and civil investigations by the United States Attorneys Office in the Western District of
North Carolina (the U.S. Attorney) and other state and federal agencies concerning matters that
were the subject of the independent investigation, initiated in April 2007 by the Audit Committee
of the Board of Directors (the Investigation) and concluded in May 2008. Under the terms of the
deferred prosecution agreement (DPA), the Companys liability for fiscal 2010 will be equal to the
greater of $1 million or 4% of the Companys adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the DPA) and in each of
the fiscal years after 2010 through a portion of fiscal 2014 (unless extended as described in Note
9) will also be equal to 4% of the Companys adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the DPA). The total
amount of such obligations will be dependent on several factors; however, the maximum liability
under the DPA and other settlement agreements discussed above will not exceed $55.0 million of
which $14 million was paid during fiscal 2009.
In November 2003, Beazer Homes received a request for information from the EPA pursuant to Section
308 of the Clean Water Act seeking information concerning the nature and extent of storm water
discharge practices relating to certain of our communities completed or under construction. The EPA
has since requested information on additional communities and has conducted site inspections at a
number of locations. In certain instances, the EPA or the equivalent state agency has issued
Administrative Orders identifying alleged instances of noncompliance and requiring corrective
action to address the alleged deficiencies in storm water management practices. As of December 31,
2009, no monetary penalties had been imposed in connection with such Administrative Orders.
Consistent with its approach with other homebuilders, the EPA has contacted the Company about a
possible resolution of these issues. Settlement negotiations are proceeding. The EPA has reserved
the right to impose monetary penalties at a later date, the
46
amount of which, if any, cannot currently be estimated. Beazer Homes has taken action to comply with the
requirements of each of the Administrative Orders and is working to otherwise maintain compliance
with the requirements of the Clean Water Act.
In 2006, we received two Administrative Orders issued by the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection. The Orders allege certain violations of wetlands disturbance permits. The two Orders
assess proposed fines of $630,000 and $678,000, respectively. We have met with the Department to
discuss their concerns on the two affected communities and have requested hearings on both matters.
We believe that we have significant defenses to the alleged violations and intend to contest the
agencys findings and the proposed fines. We are currently pursuing settlement discussions with the
Department.
On June 3, 2009, a purported class action complaint was filed by the owners of one of our homes in
our Magnolia Lakes community in Ft. Myers, Florida. The complaint names the Company and certain
distributors and suppliers of drywall and was filed in the Circuit Court for Lee County, Florida on
behalf of the named plaintiffs and other similarly situated owners of homes in Magnolia Lakes or
alternatively in the State of Florida. The plaintiffs allege that the Company built their homes
with defective drywall, manufactured in China, that contains sulfur compounds that allegedly
corrode certain metals and that are allegedly capable of harming the health of individuals.
Plaintiffs allege physical and economic damages and seek legal and equitable relief, medical
monitoring and attorneys fees. This case has been transferred to the Eastern District of
Louisiana pursuant to an order from the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
The Company believes that the claims asserted in this complaint are governed by its home warranty
or are without merit. Accordingly, the Company intends to vigorously defend against this
litigation.
The lender of one of our unconsolidated joint ventures has filed individual lawsuits against some
of the joint venture partners and certain of those partners parent companies (including the
Company), seeking to recover damages under completion guarantees, among other claims. We intend to
vigorously defend against this legal action. We are a 2.58% partner in this joint venture (see Note
3 for additional information). In addition, one member of the joint venture has filed an
arbitration proceeding against the remaining members related to the plaintiff-members allegations
that the other members have failed to perform under the applicable membership agreements. In both
matters, an estimate of possible loss or range of loss if any, cannot presently be made with
respect to the above matter. Given the inherent uncertainties and complexities in this litigation,
as of December 31, 2009, no accrual has been recorded, as losses, if any, related to this matter
are not both probable and reasonably estimable.
We and certain of our subsidiaries have been named as defendants in various claims, complaints and
other legal actions, most relating to construction defects, moisture intrusion and product
liability. Certain of the liabilities resulting from these actions are covered in whole or part by
insurance. In our opinion, based on our current assessment, the ultimate resolution of these
matters will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations
or cash flows.
Item 6. Exhibits
|
31.1 |
|
Certification pursuant to 17 CFR 240.13a-14 promulgated under Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
31.2 |
|
Certification pursuant to 17 CFR 240.13a-14 promulgated under Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
32.1 |
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
32.2 |
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beazer Homes USA, Inc.
|
|
Date: February 5, 2010 |
By: |
/s/ Allan P. Merrill
|
|
|
|
Name: |
Allan P. Merrill |
|
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer |
|
47