Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
66K characters. Original on sec.gov · Markdown
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
| --- | --- | --- |
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K, including the information incorporated by reference herein, contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. All statements other than statements of historical facts are statements that could be deemed forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “intend,” “forecast,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. The forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-K involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and situations that may cause our or our industry’s actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these statements. These forward-looking statements are made in reliance upon the safe harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These factors include those listed in Part I, Item 1A.—“Risk Factors” of this Form 10-K and those discussed elsewhere in this Form 10-K. We encourage investors to review these factors carefully together with the other matters referred to herein, as well as in the other documents we file with the SEC. The Company may from time to time make additional written and oral forward-looking statements, including statements contained in the Company’s filings with the SEC. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement that may be made from time to time by or on behalf of the Company.
Although we believe that, based on information currently available to the Company and its management, the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements.
Overview
We provide vehicle sellers with a full range of services to process and sell vehicles primarily over the Internet through our Virtual Bidding Second Generation Internet auction-style sales technology, which we refer to as VB2. Vehicle sellers consist primarily of insurance companies but also include banks and financial institutions, charities, car dealerships, fleet operators and vehicle rental companies. We sell principally to licensed vehicle dismantlers, rebuilders, repair licensees, used vehicle dealers and exporters; however at certain locations, we sell directly to the general public. The majority of the vehicles sold on behalf of the insurance companies are either damaged vehicles deemed a total loss or not economically repairable by the insurance companies or are recovered stolen vehicles for which an insurance settlement with the vehicle owner has already been made. We offer vehicle sellers a full range of services that expedite each stage of the salvage vehicle sales process and minimize administrative and processing costs. In the United States and Canada, or North America, we sell vehicles primarily as an agent and derive revenue primarily from fees paid by vehicle sellers and vehicle buyers as well as related fees for services such as towing and storage. In the United Kingdom, or U.K., a significant portion of our business is conducted on a principal basis, purchasing salvage vehicles outright from insurance companies and reselling the vehicles for our own account.
Our revenues consist of sales transaction fees charged to vehicle sellers and vehicle buyers, transportation revenue, purchased vehicle revenues, and other remarketing services. Revenues from sellers are generally generated either on a fixed fee contract basis where we collect a fixed amount for selling each vehicle regardless of the selling price of the vehicle or, under our Percentage Incentive Program, or PIP program, where our fees are generally based on a predetermined percentage of the vehicle sales price. Under the consignment, or fixed fee, program, we generally charge an additional fee for title processing and special preparation. Although sometimes included in the consignment fee, we may also charge additional fees for the cost of transporting the vehicle to our facility, storage of the vehicle, and other incidental costs. Under the consignment programs, only the fees associated with vehicle processing are recorded in revenue, not the actual
sales price (gross proceeds). Sales transaction fees also include fees charged to vehicle buyers for purchasing vehicles, storage, loading and annual registration. Transportation revenue includes charges to sellers for towing vehicles under certain contracts. Transportation revenue also includes towing charges assessed to buyers for delivering vehicles. Purchased vehicle revenue includes the gross sales price of the vehicle which we have purchased or are otherwise considered to own and is primarily generated in the U.K.
Operating costs consist primarily of operating personnel (which includes yard management, clerical and yard employees), rent, contract vehicle towing, insurance, fuel, equipment maintenance and repair, and costs of vehicles we sold under purchase contracts. Costs associated with general and administrative expenses consist primarily of executive management, accounting, data processing, sales personnel, human resources, professional fees, research and development and marketing expenses.
During fiscal 2004 and fiscal 2008, we converted all of our North American and U.K. sales, respectively, to an Internet-based auction-style model using our VB2 Internet sales technology which employs a two-step bidding process. The first step, called the preliminary bid, allows members to submit bids up to one hour before a real time virtual auction begins. The second step allows members to bid against each other, and the high bidder from the preliminary bidding process, in a real-time process over the Internet.
Acquisitions and New Operations
We have experienced significant growth in facilities as we have acquired nine facilities and established three new facilities since the beginning of fiscal 2010 through July 31, 2012. All of these acquisitions have been accounted for using the purchase method of accounting.
As part of our overall expansion strategy of offering integrated services to vehicle sellers, we anticipate acquiring and developing facilities in new regions, as well as the regions currently served by our facilities. We believe that these acquisitions and openings strengthen our coverage as we have 155 facilities located in North America and the U.K. as of July 31, 2012 and are able to provide national coverage for our sellers.
The following table sets forth facilities that we have acquired or opened from August 1, 2009 through July 31, 2012:
| Locations | Acquisition or Greenfield | Date | Geographic Service Area | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bristol, England | Acquisition | January 2010 | United Kingdom | |||||||||||
| Bedford, England | Acquisition | January 2010 | United Kingdom | |||||||||||
| Colchester, England | Acquisition | January 2010 | United Kingdom | |||||||||||
| Gainsborough, England | Acquisition | *January 2010 | United Kingdom | |||||||||||
| Luton, England | Acquisition | January 2010 | United Kingdom | |||||||||||
| Scranton, Pennsylvania | Greenfield | February 2010 | Central Pennsylvania | |||||||||||
| Homestead, Florida | Greenfield | September 2010 | Southern Florida | |||||||||||
| Hartford City, Indiana | Acquisition | March 2011 | Central Indiana | |||||||||||
| Birmingham, England | Acquisition | March 2011 | United Kingdom | |||||||||||
| Atlanta, Georgia | Greenfield | August 2011 | Northern Georgia | |||||||||||
| Edmonton, Canada | Acquisition | May 2012 | Canada | |||||||||||
| Calgary, Canada | Acquisition | May 2012 | Canada |
| * | Closed in fiscal 2010 |
|---|
In January 2010, the Company completed the acquisition of D Hales Limited (D Hales) which operated five locations in the United Kingdom. In fiscal 2011, we acquired John Hewitt and Sons, Limited (Hewitt) which operated one location in the United Kingdom. These acquisitions were undertaken because of their strategic fit with our business in the United Kingdom. In August 2012, we acquired Ride Safely Middle East Auction, LLC located in Dubai, UAE.
The period-to-period comparability of our consolidated operating results and financial condition is affected by business acquisitions, new openings, weather and product introductions during such periods. In particular, we have certain contracts inherited through our U.K. acquisitions that require us to act as a principal, purchasing vehicles from the insurance companies and reselling them for our own account. It is our intention, where possible, to migrate these contracts to the agency model in future periods. Changes in the amount of revenue derived in a period from principal transactions relative to total revenue will impact revenue growth and margin percentages.
In addition to growth through acquisitions, we seek to increase revenues and profitability by, among other things, (i) acquiring and developing additional vehicle storage facilities in key markets, (ii) pursuing national and regional vehicle seller agreements, (iii) expanding our service offerings to sellers and members, and (iv) expanding the application of VB2 into new markets. In addition, we implement our pricing structure and auction procedures and attempt to introduce cost efficiencies at each of our acquired facilities by implementing our operational procedures, integrating our management information systems and redeploying personnel, when necessary.
Results of Operations
Fiscal 2012 Compared to Fiscal 2011
Revenues
The following table sets forth information on revenue by class (in thousands, except percentages):
| 2012 | Percentage of Revenue | 2011 | Percentage of Revenue | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Service revenues | $ | 757,272 | 82 | % | $ | 713,093 | 82 | % | ||||||||||
| Vehicle sales | 166,919 | 18 | % | 159,153 | 18 | % | ||||||||||||
| $ | 924,191 | 100 | % | $ | 872,246 | 100 | % |
Service Revenues. Service revenues were $757.3 million during fiscal 2012 compared to $713.1 million for fiscal 2011, an increase of $44.2 million, or 6.2%, above fiscal 2011. Growth in unit volume generated $33.5 million in additional service revenue relative to last year and was driven primarily by growth in the number of units sold on behalf of franchise and independent car dealerships, new and expanded contracts with insurance companies and the migration from the principal model to the agency model in the U.K. Growth in the average revenue per car sold generated $11.5 million in additional revenue over last year and was driven by an increase in the average vehicle auction selling price as over 50% of our service revenue is tied in some manner to the ultimate selling price of the vehicle. We believe the increase in the average vehicle auction selling price was driven primarily by: (i) the year over year increase in commodity pricing as we believe that commodity pricing, particularly the per ton price for crushed car bodies, has an impact on the ultimate selling price of vehicles sold for scrap and vehicles sold for dismantling; (ii) the general increase in used car pricing, which we believe has an impact on the average selling price of vehicles which are repaired and retailed or purchased by the end user; (iii) the mix of cars sold as the insurance company cars, which on average command a lower average selling price than non-insurance cars, represented a lower portion of all cars sold; and (iv) in the U.K., the beneficial impact of VB2 which we introduced in 2008 and which expands our buyer base by opening vehicle sales to buyers worldwide. We cannot determine the impact of the movement of these influences as we cannot determine which vehicles are sold to the end user or for scrap, dismantling, retailing or export. Nor can we predict their future movement. Accordingly, we cannot quantify the specific impact that commodity pricing, used car pricing, product sales mix, and the introduction of VB2 in the U.K. had on the selling price of vehicles and ultimately on service revenue. The average dollar to pound exchange rate was 1.58 dollars to the pound and 1.60 dollars to the pound for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, respectively, and led to a decrease in service revenue of $0.8 million.
Vehicle Sales. We have assumed certain contracts through our U.K. acquisitions that require us to act as a principal, purchasing vehicles from the insurance companies and reselling them for our own account. Vehicle sales revenues were $166.9 million during fiscal 2012 compared to $159.2 million for fiscal 2011, an increase of $7.7 million, or 4.8%, above fiscal 2011. The increase in vehicle sales revenue was due to the growth in the average selling price of vehicles which resulted in increased revenue of $20.2 million. The growth in the average selling price per unit was primarily due to: (i) the increase in commodity pricing, particularly the per ton price for crushed car bodies, which has an impact on the ultimate selling price of vehicles sold for scrap and vehicles sold for dismantling and (ii) in the U.K., the continuing beneficial impact of VB2 which we introduced to the U.K. in 2008 and which expands our buyer base by opening vehicle sales to buyers worldwide. We cannot determine which vehicles are sold directly to the end user or for scrap, dismantling, retailing, or export and, accordingly, cannot quantify the specific impact of commodity pricing nor can we isolate the impact that VB2 had on the ultimate selling price of vehicles sold in the U.K. The decline in volume resulted primarily from the migration of certain contracts in the U.K. from the principal model to the agency model and resulted in a reduction in vehicle sales revenue of $11.1 million. The detrimental impact on recorded vehicle sales revenue due to the change in the GBP to USD exchange rate was $1.4 million.
Yard Operation Expenses. Yard operation expenses were $377.6 million during fiscal 2012 compared to $374.1 million for fiscal 2011, an increase of $3.5 million, or 0.9%, above fiscal 2011. The increase was driven by volume, which led to an increase of $13.5 million as we processed more vehicles in fiscal 2012 than in fiscal 2011. This increase was offset by a reduction in operating costs of $5.5 million driven by the decline in the cost to process each car. There was a detrimental impact on yard operating expenses due to the change in the GBP to USD exchange rate of $0.5 million. Included in yard operation costs were depreciation and amortization expenses which were $33.0 million and $37.0 million for the fiscal years ended July 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Cost of Vehicle Sales. The cost of vehicles sold was $137.0 million during fiscal 2012 compared to $125.2 million for fiscal 2011, an increase of $11.8 million, or 9.4%. The increase in the cost per unit sold represented a $15.1 million increase relative to last year. Unit volume decrease led to a decrease of $2.3 million. The beneficial impact on the cost of sales due to the change in the GBP to USD exchange rate was $1.0 million.
General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses, excluding depreciation and amortization, were $99.4 million for fiscal 2012 compared to $98.9 million for fiscal 2011, an increase of less than $0.5 million, or 0.5%. The beneficial impact on general and administrative expenses due to the change in the GBP to USD exchange rate was $0.1 million. General and administrative depreciation and amortization expenses were $15.1 million and $8.7 million for the fiscal years ended July 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Impairment. During the year ended July 31, 2012, we recorded an impairment of $8.8 million associated with the write down to fair market value of certain assets, primarily real estate, computer hardware and our fleet of private aircraft which have been removed from operations and, if not disposed of during the year, are reflected in assets held for sale on the balance sheet.
Other (Expense) Income. Total other expense was $8.3 million during fiscal 2012 compared to $1.4 million during fiscal 2011, an increase of $6.9 million, or 492.9%. Interest expense increased $7.3 million as a result of increased borrowing under the new credit facility, which is further described in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 9. Long-Term Debt, which is incorporated herein by reference. Other income, net, increased $0.5 million due primarily to the gain on sale of assets.
Income Taxes. Our effective income tax rates for fiscal 2012 and 2011 were 34.5% and 36.9%, respectively. The change in tax rates was primarily driven by the geographical allocation of income and the application of new elective tax law starting in fiscal 2012.
Fiscal 2011 Compared to Fiscal 2010
Revenues
The following table sets forth information on revenue by class (in thousands, except percentages):
| 2011 | Percentage of Revenue | 2010 | Percentage of Revenue | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Service revenues | $ | 713,093 | 82 | % | $ | 634,606 | 82 | % | ||||||||||
| Vehicle sales | 159,153 | 18 | % | 138,273 | 18 | % | ||||||||||||
| $ | 872,246 | 100 | % | $ | 772,879 | 100 | % |
Service Revenues. Service revenues were $713.1 million during fiscal 2011 compared to $634.6 million for fiscal 2010, an increase of $78.5 million, or 12.4%, above fiscal 2010. Growth in unit volume generated $62.1 million in additional service revenue relative to fiscal 2010 and was driven primarily by growth in the number of units sold on behalf of franchise and independent car dealerships, new and expanded contracts with insurance companies and the migration from the principal model to the agency model in the U.K. Growth in the average revenue per car sold generated $1.0 million in additional revenue over fiscal 2010 as higher scrap metal and used car pricing led to a general increase in the average selling price, and was offset by growth in the percentage of volume processed from suppliers with below average revenue per car. The higher revenue per car sold was driven by the average selling price per vehicle as over 50% of our service revenue is tied in some manner to the ultimate selling price of the vehicle. We believe the increase in the average selling price was primarily impacted by: (i) the year over year increase in commodity pricing as we believe that commodity pricing, particularly the per ton price for crushed car bodies, has an impact on the ultimate selling price of vehicles sold for scrap and vehicles sold for dismantling; (ii) the general increase in used car pricing, which we believe has an impact on the average selling price of vehicles which are repaired and retailed or purchased by the end user and (iii) in the U.K., the continuing beneficial impact of VB2 which we introduced to the U.K. in 2008 and which expands our buyer base by opening vehicle sales to buyers worldwide. We cannot determine the impact of the movement of these factors, nor can we predict their future movement. Further, we cannot determine which vehicles are sold to the end user or for scrap, dismantling, retailing or export. Accordingly, we cannot quantify the specific impact that commodity pricing, used car pricing, and the introduction of VB2 had on the selling price of vehicles and ultimately on service revenue. The average dollar to pound exchange rate was 1.60 dollars to the pound and 1.57 dollars to the pound for fiscal 2011 and fiscal 2010, respectively, and led to an increase in service revenue of $0.9 million.
In addition, on August 1, 2010, we adopted Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2009-13_, Revenue Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements_ (ASU 2009-13). Consequently, we recognized in the period earned certain revenues, primarily towing fees, titling fees and other enhancement service fees, which were previously deferred until the period the car associated with those revenues was sold. As a result of this change, we recognized $14.4 million in additional revenue for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2011, which would have otherwise been recognized in future periods.
Vehicle Sales. We have assumed certain contracts through our U.K. acquisitions that require us to act as a principal, purchasing vehicles from the insurance companies and reselling them for our own account. Vehicle sales revenues were $159.2 million during fiscal 2011 compared to $138.3 million for fiscal 2010, an increase of $20.9 million, or 15.1%, above fiscal 2010. The increase in vehicle sales revenue was due to the growth in the average selling price of vehicles which resulted in increased revenue of $19.1 million. The growth in the average selling price per unit was primarily due to: (i) the increase in commodity pricing, particularly the per ton price for crushed car bodies, which has an impact on the ultimate selling price of vehicles sold for scrap and vehicles sold for dismantling and (ii) in the U.K., the continuing beneficial impact of VB2 which we introduced to the U.K. in 2008 and which expands our buyer base by opening vehicle sales to buyers worldwide. We cannot determine which vehicles are sold directly to the end user or for scrap, dismantling, retailing, or export and, accordingly, cannot quantify the specific impact of commodity pricing nor can we isolate the impact that VB2 had on the ultimate selling price of vehicles sold in the U.K. The
decline in volume resulted primarily from the migration of certain contracts in the U.K. from the principal model to the agency model and resulted in a reduction in vehicle sales revenue of $0.8 million. The beneficial impact on recorded vehicle sales revenue due to the change in the GBP to USD exchange rate was $2.1 million.
Yard Operation Expenses. Yard operation expenses were $374.1 million during fiscal 2011 compared to $320.2 million for fiscal 2010, an increase of $53.9 million, or 16.8%, above fiscal 2010. The increase was driven primarily by (i) the growth in volume of units processed, (ii) the adoption of ASU 2009-13, (iii) increase in subhauling costs due to the growth in diesel prices on a year over year basis, and (iv) the general growth in program costs associated with new business segments. There was a detrimental impact on yard operating expenses due to the change in the GBP to USD exchange rate of $0.8 million. Included in yard operation costs were depreciation and amortization expenses which were $37.0 million and $34.9 million for the fiscal years ended July 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
On August 1, 2010 we adopted ASU 2009-13. Consequently, we recognized certain revenues and expenses associated primarily with towing fees, titling fees and seller storage fees, which were previously deferred until the period the car associated with those revenues and expenses was sold. The expenses recognized for the year ended July 31, 2011, which would have otherwise been recognized in future periods, was $13.5 million.
Cost of Vehicle Sales. The cost of vehicles sold was $125.2 million during fiscal 2011 compared to $104.7 million for fiscal 2010, an increase of $20.5 million, or 19.6%. The increase in the cost per unit sold represented a $19.0 million increase relative to fiscal 2010. Unit volume decrease led to a decrease of $0.6 million. The detrimental impact on the cost of sales due to the change in the GBP to USD exchange rate was $2.1 million.
General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses, excluding depreciation and amortization, were $98.9 million for fiscal 2011 compared to $100.6 million for fiscal 2010, a decrease of $1.7 million, or 1.7%. The decline in general and administrative costs was due primarily to decreased advertising costs and decreased headcount. Depreciation and amortization expenses were $8.7 million and $8.3 million for the fiscal years ended July 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The detrimental impact on general and administrative expenses due to the change in the GBP to USD exchange rate was $0.1 million.
Other Income (Expense). Total other expense was $1.4 million during fiscal 2011 compared to other income of $0.4 million for fiscal 2010, an increase of $1.8 million, or 432.4%. Interest expense increased $3.9 million as a result of increased borrowing under the new credit facility which is further described in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 9. Long-Term Debt, which is incorporated herein by reference. Interest income declined $0.3 million due primarily to reduced interest yields and a lower cash balance. Other income, net, increased $1.7 million due primarily to the gain on sale of assets.
Income Taxes. Our effective income tax rates for fiscal 2011 and 2010 were 36.9% and 36.7%, respectively.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our primary source of working capital is cash generated though operations. Potential internal sources of additional working capital are the sale of assets or the issuance of equity through option exercises and shares issued under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan. A potential external source of additional working capital is the issuance of debt and equity. However, with respect to the issuance of equity or debt, we cannot predict if these sources will be available in the future and, if available, if they can be issued under terms commercially acceptable to us.
Historically, we have financed our growth through cash generated from operations, public offerings of common stock, the equity issued in conjunction with certain acquisitions and debt financing. Our primary source of cash generated by operations is from the collection of sellers’ fees, members’ fees and reimbursable
advances from the proceeds of auctioned salvage vehicles. Our business is seasonal as inclement weather during the winter months increases the frequency of accidents and, consequently, the number of cars totaled by the insurance companies. During the winter months, most of our facilities process 10% to 30% more vehicles than at other times of the year. This increased volume requires the increased use of our cash to pay out advances and handling costs of the additional business.
Our primary source of working capital is net income. Accordingly, factors affecting net income are the principal factors affecting the generation of working capital. Those primary factors: (i) seasonality, (ii) market wins and losses, (iii) supplier mix, (iv) accident frequency, (v) salvage frequency, (vi) change in market share of our existing suppliers, (vii) commodity pricing, (viii) used car pricing, (ix) foreign currency exchanges rates, (x) product mix, and (xi) contract mix to the extent appropriate, are discussed in the Results of Operations and Risk Factors sections in this Form 10-K.
As of July 31, 2012, we had working capital of $134.9 million, including cash, and cash equivalents of $140.1 million. Cash and cash equivalents consisted primarily of U.S. Treasury Bills and funds invested in money market accounts, which bear interest at a variable rate. Cash and cash equivalents increased by $66.1 million from fiscal 2011 to fiscal 2012. The increase in cash was due primarily to the $125.0 million of proceeds from additional debt, proceeds from the sale of assets held for sale and from stock option exercises and cash from operations which were offset by share repurchase activity, payments on outstanding debt and capital expenditures during fiscal 2012. We believe that our currently available cash and cash equivalents and cash generated from operations will be sufficient to satisfy our operating and working capital requirements for at least the next 12 months. However, if we experience significant growth in the future, we may be required to raise additional cash through the issuance of new debt or additional equity.
As of July 31, 2012, $58.8 million of the $140.1 million of cash and cash equivalents was held by our foreign subsidiaries. If these funds are needed for our operations in the U.S., we would be required to accrue and pay U.S. taxes to repatriate these funds. However, our intent is to permanently reinvest these funds outside of the U.S. and our current plans do not demonstrate a need to repatriate them to fund our U.S. operations.
Operating Activities
Net cash provided by operating activities decreased by $13.3 million to $229.7 million during fiscal 2012 when compared to fiscal 2011. The decrease was driven in part by increased deferred income taxes of $15.5 million, a $12.1 million increase in vehicle pooling costs as a result of the adoption of ASU 2009-13 in fiscal 2011 offset by an increase in net income of $15.7 million. The remaining decrease of $1.4 million is due to the timing of routine changes in working capital items.
Net cash provided by operating activities increased by $43.5 million to $242.9 million during fiscal 2011 when compared to fiscal 2010. The increase was driven in part by an increase in net income of $14.7 million, a reduction in income tax receivables of $8.6 million and by a reduction in vehicle pooling costs of $14.4 million as a result of the adoption of ASU 2009-13. The remaining increase of $5.8 million is due to the timing of routine changes in working capital items.
Investing Activities
Capital expenditures (excluding those associated with fixed assets attributable to acquisitions) were $54.8 million, $70.2 million and $75.8 million for fiscal 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Our capital expenditures are primarily related to lease buyouts of certain facilities, opening and improving facilities, software development, and acquiring yard equipment. We continue to expand and invest in new and existing facilities and standardize the appearance of existing locations. We have no material commitments for future capital expenditures as of July 31, 2012. During fiscal 2011, we sold our corporate headquarters building in Fairfield, California for $16.5 million and entered into a twenty-one month lease term. During fiscal 2013, we terminated this lease.
Included in capital expenditures for the year ended July 31, 2012 are capitalized software development costs for new software for internal use and major software enhancements to existing software. The cumulative total capitalized costs were $55.0 million, $46.8 million, and $22.9 million for the years ended July 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. If, at any time, it is determined that capitalized software provides a reduced economic benefit, the unamortized portion of the capitalized development costs will be impaired.
During the fiscal year ended July 31, 2011, we used $34.9 million in cash primarily for the purchases of Hewitt and Barodge Auto Pool. During the fiscal year ended July 31, 2010, we used $21.4 million in cash for the acquisition of D Hales.
Financing Activities
In fiscal 2012, 2011 and 2010, we generated $13.7 million, $7.1 million and $6.3 million, respectively, through the exercise of stock options.
In fiscal 2012, 2011 and 2010, we generated $2.0 million, $2.0 million and $2.0 million, respectively, through the issuance of shares under the Employee Stock Purchase Plan.
In fiscal 2012, 2011 and 2010, we used $203.3 million, $739.6 million and $12.7 million, respectively, for the repurchase of common stock.
In fiscal 2012, our Board of Directors approved a 40 million share increase in the stock repurchase program, bringing the total current authorization to 98 million shares. The repurchases may be effected through solicited or unsolicited transactions in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. No time limit has been placed on the duration of the stock repurchase program. Subject to applicable securities laws, such repurchases will be made at such times and in such amounts as we deem appropriate and may be discontinued at any time. For the fiscal year ended July 31, 2012, we repurchased 8,880,708 shares of our common stock at a weighted average price of $22.51. For the fiscal year ended July 31, 2011, we repurchased 13,364,634 shares of our common stock at a weighted average price of $20.42. For the fiscal year ended July 31, 2010, we repurchased 242,502 shares of our common stock at a weighted average price of $18.38. As of July 31, 2012, the total number of shares repurchased under the program was 49,786,782 and 48,213,218 shares were available for repurchase under our program.
Additionally, on January 14, 2011, we completed a tender offer to purchase up to 21,052,630 shares of our common stock at a price of $19.00 per share. Our directors and executive officers were expressly prohibited from participating in the tender offer by our board of directors under our Securities Trading Policy. In connection with the tender offer, we accepted for purchase 24,344,176 shares of our common stock. The shares accepted for purchase are comprised of the 21,052,630 shares we offered to purchase and an additional 3,291,546 shares purchased pursuant to our right to purchase additional shares up to 2% of our outstanding shares. The shares purchased as a result of the tender offer are not part of our repurchase program. The purchase of the shares of common stock was funded by the proceeds relating to the issuance of long term debt. The dilutive earnings per share impact of all repurchased shares on the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the year ended July 31, 2012 is $0.04.
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2010, Mr. Jay Adair, Chief Executive Officer (and then President), exercised stock options through cashless exercises. In the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2010, Mr. Willis J. Johnson, Chairman of the Board, exercised stock options through a cashless exercise. In the second, third and fourth quarters of fiscal year 2011 certain executive officers exercised stock options through cashless exercises. In the first, second and third quarters of fiscal year 2012 certain executive officers exercised stock options through cashless exercises. A portion of the options exercised were net settled in satisfaction of the exercise price and federal and state minimum statutory tax withholding requirements. We remitted $2.6 million, $4.2 million and $7.4 million, in fiscal 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively, to the proper taxing
authorities in satisfaction of the employees’ minimum statutory withholding requirements. The exercises are summarized in the following table:
| Period | Options Exercised | Exercise Price | Shares Net Settled for Exercise | Shares Withheld for Taxes(1) | Net Shares to Employee | Share Price for Withholding | Tax Withholding (in 000’s) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FY 2010—Q1 | 647,262 | $ | 6.52 | 228,708 | 191,492 | 227,062 | $ | 18.45 | $ | 3,533 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2010—Q4 | 700,000 | $ | 6.46 | 245,844 | 211,654 | 242,502 | $ | 18.38 | $ | 3,890 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2011—Q2 | 177,500 | $ | 8.47 | 76,050 | 37,834 | 63,616 | $ | 19.76 | $ | 748 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2011—Q3 | 548,334 | $ | 11.02 | 295,496 | 118,032 | 134,806 | $ | 20.40 | $ | 2,408 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2011—Q4 | 180,000 | $ | 9.48 | 76,396 | 48,366 | 55,238 | $ | 22.33 | $ | 1,080 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2012—Q1 | 40,000 | $ | 9.00 | 16,082 | 8,974 | 14,944 | $ | 22.39 | $ | 201 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2012—Q2 | 20,000 | $ | 9.00 | 7,506 | 4,584 | 7,910 | $ | 23.98 | $ | 110 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2012—Q3 | 322,520 | $ | 10.74 | 131,298 | 85,684 | 105,538 | $ | 26.38 | $ | 2,260 |
| (1) | Shares withheld for taxes are treated as a repurchase of shares for accounting purposes but do not count against our stock repurchase program. |
|---|
Contractual Obligations
We lease certain domestic and foreign facilities, and certain equipment under non-cancelable operating leases. In addition to the minimum future lease commitments presented, the leases generally require the company to pay property taxes, insurance, maintenance and repair costs which are not included in the table because we have determined these items are not material. The following table summarizes our significant contractual obligations and commercial commitments as of July 31, 2012 (in thousands):
| Payments Due By Period | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contractual Obligations | Total | Less than 1 Year | 1–3 Years | 3–5 Years | More than 5 Years | Other | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term debt including current portion | $ | 443,750 | $ | 75,000 | $ | 150,000 | $ | 218,750 | $ | — | $ | — | |||||||||||||||
| Interest payments on long-term debt including current portion | 24,399 | 9,326 | 13,484 | 1,589 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Operating leases(1) | 105,283 | 17,208 | 24,840 | 16,839 | 46,396 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Capital leases(1) | 324 | 198 | 126 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Tax liabilities(2) | 22,531 | — | — | — | — | 22,531 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total contractual obligations | $ | 596,287 | $ | 101,732 | $ | 188,450 | $ | 237,178 | $ | 46,396 | $ | 22,531 |
| Amount of Commitment Expiration Per Period | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Commercial Commitments(3) | Total | Less than 1 Year | 1–3 Years | 3–5 Years | More than 5 Years | Other | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Letters of credit | $ | 6,659 | $ | 6,659 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — |
| (1) | Contractual obligations consist of future non-cancelable minimum lease payments under capital and operating leases, used in the normal course of business. |
|---|
| (2) | Tax liabilities include the long-term liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet for unrecognized tax positions. At this time we are unable to make a reasonably reliable estimate of the timing of payments in individual years beyond 12 months due to uncertainties in the timing of tax audit outcomes. |
|---|
| (3) | Commercial commitments consist primarily of letters of credit provided for insurance programs and certain business transactions. |
|---|
Credit Facilities
On December 14, 2010, we entered into an Amended and Restated Credit Facility Agreement (Credit Facility), which supersedes our previously disclosed credit agreement with Bank of America, N.A. (Bank of America). The Credit Facility is an unsecured credit agreement providing for (i) a $100.0 million Revolving Credit Facility, including a $100.0 million alternative currency borrowing sublimit and a $50.0 million letter of credit sublimit (Revolving Credit) and (ii) a term loan facility of $400.0 million (Term Loan). On January 14, 2011 the full $400.0 million provided under the Term Loan was borrowed. On September, 29, 2011, we amended the credit agreement increasing the amount of the term loan facility from $400.0 million to $500.0 million.
The Term Loan, which at July 31, 2012 had $443.8 million outstanding, amortizes $18.8 million each quarter beginning December 31, 2011 with all outstanding borrowings due on December 14, 2015. All amounts borrowed under the Term Loan may be prepaid without premium or penalty. During the year ended July 31, 2012, we made principal repayments of $56.3 million. We currently have $1.6 million deferred financing costs in other assets as of July 31, 2012.
Amounts borrowed under the Credit Facility bear interest, subject to certain restrictions, at a fluctuating rate based on (i) the Eurocurrency Rate; (ii) the Federal Funds Rate; or (iii) the Prime Rate as described in the Credit Facility. We have entered into two interest rate swaps (which is further described in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 10. Derivatives and Hedging) to exchange our variable interest rate payments commitment for fixed interest rate payments on the Term Loan balance, which at July 31, 2012, totaled $443.8 million. A default interest rate applies on all obligations during an event of default under the credit facility, at a rate per annum equal to 2.0% above the otherwise applicable interest rate. At July 31, 2012, our interest rate is the 0.25% Eurocurrency Rate plus the 1.50% Applicable Rate. The Applicable Rate can fluctuate between 1.5% and 2.0% depending on our consolidated net leverage ratio (as defined in the Credit Facility). The Credit Facility is guaranteed by our material domestic subsidiaries. The carrying amount of the Credit Facility is comprised of borrowing under which the interest accrued under a fluctuating interest rate structure. Accordingly, the carrying value approximates fair value at July 31, 2012.
Amounts borrowed under the Revolving Credit may be repaid and reborrowed until the maturity date, which is December 14, 2015. The Credit Facility requires us to pay a commitment fee on the unused portion of the Revolving Credit. The commitment fee ranges from 0.075% to 0.125% per annum depending on our leverage ratio. We had no outstanding borrowings under the Revolving Credit at the end of the period.
The Credit Facility contains customary representations and warranties and may place certain business operating restrictions on us relating to, among other things, indebtedness, liens and other encumbrances, investments, mergers and acquisitions, asset sales, dividends and distributions and redemptions of capital stock. In addition, the Credit Facility provides for the following financial covenants: (i) earnings before income tax, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA); (ii) leverage ratio; (iii) interest coverage ratio; and (iv) limitations on capital expenditures. The Credit Facility contains events of default that include, among others, non-payment of principal, interest or fees, violation of covenants, inaccuracy of representations and warranties, cross-defaults to certain other indebtedness, bankruptcy and insolvency defaults, material judgments, invalidity of the loan documents and events constituting a change of control. We are in compliance with all covenants as of July 31, 2012. Please refer to the tables under the caption “Contractual Obligations” above in the “Long-term debt including current portion” section for the payment schedule.
Restructuring
We relocated our corporate headquarters to Dallas, Texas in 2012. Certain functions currently performed at the Fairfield, California location may transition to the corporate headquarters over the next few years. We recognized $2.2 million and $1.4 million for the year ended July 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, in general and administrative expense. We also recognized restructuring-related costs of $1.1 million in impairment of long-lived assets and $0.8 million in yard operations expense for the year ended July 31, 2012. Restructuring-
related costs for the year ended July 31, 2012 are $1.7 million for severance and $2.4 million for the costs of relocating employees to Texas. Restructuring-related costs for the year ended July 31, 2011 are $1.2 million for severance and $0.2 million for the costs of relocating employees to Texas.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of July 31, 2012, we had no off-balance sheet arrangements as defined in Item 303(a)(4) of Regulation S-K promulgated under the Exchange Act.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and the related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to vehicle pooling costs, self-insured reserves, allowance for doubtful accounts, income taxes, revenue recognition, stock-based compensation, long-lived asset impairment calculations and contingencies. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
Management has discussed the selection of critical accounting policies and estimates with the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors and the Audit Committee has reviewed our disclosure relating to critical accounting policies and estimates in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our significant accounting policies are described in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies. The following is a summary of the more significant judgments and estimates included in our critical accounting policies used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. Where appropriate, we discuss sensitivity to change based on other outcomes reasonably likely to occur.
Revenue Recognition
We provide a portfolio of services to our sellers and buyers that facilitate the sale and delivery of a vehicle from seller to buyer. These services include the ability to use our Internet sales technology and vehicle delivery, loading, title processing, preparation and storage. We evaluate multiple-element arrangements relative to our member and seller agreements.
The services we provide to the seller of a vehicle involve disposing of a vehicle on the seller’s behalf and, under most of our current North American contracts, collecting the proceeds from the member. Upon adoption of the new accounting standard for evaluating multiple-element arrangements, pre-sale services, including towing, title processing, preparation and storage sale fees and other enhancement service fees meet the criteria for separate units of accounting. The revenue associated with each service is recognized upon completion of the respective service, net of applicable rebates or allowances. For certain sellers who are charged a proportionate fee based on high bid of the vehicle, the revenue associated with the pre-sale services are recognized upon completion of the sale when the total arrangement is fixed and determinable. The selling price of each service is determined based on management’s best estimate and allotted based on the relative selling price method.
Vehicle sales, where we purchase and remarket vehicles on our own behalf, are recognized on the sale date, which is typically the point of high bid acceptance. Upon high bid acceptance, a legal binding contract is formed with the member, and we record the gross sales price as revenue.
We also provide a number of services to the buyer of the vehicle, charging a separate fee for each service. Each of these services has been assessed to determine whether we have met the requirements to
separate them into units of accounting within a multiple-element arrangement. We have concluded that the sale and the post-sale services are separate units of accounting.
The fees for sale services are recognized upon completion of the sale, and the fees for the post-sale services are recognized upon successful completion of those services using the relative selling price method.
We also charge members an annual registration fee for the right to participate in our vehicle sales program, which is recognized ratably over the term of the arrangement, and relist and late-payment fees, which are recognized upon receipt of payment by the member. No provision for returns has been established, as all sales are final with no right of return, although we provide for bad debt expense in the case of non-performance by our members or sellers.
In October 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) amended the accounting standards for multiple deliverable revenue arrangements to:
| (i) | provide updated guidance on whether multiple deliverables exist, how the deliverables in an arrangement should be separated, and how the arrangement consideration should be allocated; |
|---|
| (ii) | require an entity to allocate consideration in an arrangement using its best estimate of selling prices (BSP) of deliverables if a vendor does not have vendor-specific objective evidence of selling price (VSOE) or third-party evidence of selling price (TPE); and |
|---|
| (iii) | eliminate the use of the residual method and require an entity to allocate arrangement consideration using the relative selling price method. |
|---|
On August 1, 2010, we prospectively adopted ASU 2009-13. Consequently, we recognize in the period earned certain revenues, primarily towing fees, titling fees and other enhancement service fees, which were previously deferred until the period the car associated with those revenues was sold. As a result of this adoption, for the twelve months ended July 31, 2011, we accelerated recognition of $14.4 million in service revenue and $13.5 million in related yard operation expenses.
We allocate arrangement consideration based on the relative estimated selling prices of the separate units of accounting contained within an arrangement containing multiple deliverables. Estimated selling prices are determined using management’s best estimate. Significant inputs in our estimates of the selling price of separate units of accounting include market and pricing trends, pricing customization and practices, and profit objectives for the services. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2009-13, we used the residual method to allocate the arrangement consideration when the fair value of delivered items had not been established and deferred all arrangement consideration when fair value was not available for undelivered items.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
We record our financial assets and liabilities at fair value in accordance with the framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles. In accordance with ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (ASC 820), as amended by Accounting Standards Update 2011-04, we consider fair value as an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants under current market conditions. This framework establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value:
| Level I | Observable inputs that reflect unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities traded in active markets. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level II | Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level I that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Interest rate hedges are valued at exit prices obtained from the counter-party. | |||||
| Level III | Inputs that are generally unobservable. These inputs may be used with internally developed methodologies that result in management’s best estimate |
The amounts recorded for financial instruments in our consolidated financial statements, which included cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate their fair values as of July 31, 2012 and July 31, 2011, due to the short-term nature of those instruments. See the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 9. Long-Term Debt.
Derivatives and Hedging
We have entered into interest rate swaps to eliminate interest rate risk on our variable rate Term Loan, and the swaps are designated as effective cash flow hedges under ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (see the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 10. Derivatives and Hedging). Each quarter, we measure hedge effectiveness using the “hypothetical derivative method” and record in earnings any hedge ineffectiveness with the effective portion of the hedges change in fair value recorded in other comprehensive income or loss.
Capitalized Software Costs
We capitalize system development costs and website development costs related to our enterprise computing services during the application development stage. Costs related to preliminary project activities and post implementation activities are expensed as incurred. Internal-use software is amortized on a straight line basis over its estimated useful life, generally three years. Management evaluates the useful lives of these assets on an annual basis and tests for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances occur that could impact the recoverability of these assets. Total capitalized software as of July 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $55.0 million, $46.8 million, and $22.9 million, respectively. Accumulated amortization expense related to software for July 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $19.1 million, $10.2 million, and $9.3, respectively.
Vehicle Pooling Costs
We defer in vehicle pooling costs certain yard operation expenses associated with vehicles consigned to and received by us, but not sold as of the balance sheet date. We quantify the deferred costs using a calculation that includes the number of vehicles at our facilities at the beginning and end of the period, the number of vehicles sold during the period and an allocation of certain yard operation expenses of the period. The primary expenses allocated and deferred are certain facility costs, labor, and vehicle processing. If our allocation factors change, then yard operation expenses could increase or decrease correspondingly in the future. These costs are expensed as vehicles are sold in the subsequent periods on an average cost basis. Given the fixed cost nature of our business there is not a direct correlation in an increase in expenses or units processed on vehicle pooling costs.
We apply the provisions of the guidance for subsequent measurement of inventory to our vehicle pooling costs. The provision requires that items such as idle facility expense, excessive spoilage, double freight and re-handling costs be recognized as current period charges regardless of whether they meet the criteria of “so abnormal” as provided in the guidance. In addition, the guidance requires that the allocation of fixed production overhead to the costs of conversion be based on the normal capacity of production facilities.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
We maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts in order to provide for estimated losses resulting from disputed amounts billed to sellers or members and the inability of our sellers or members to make required payments. If billing disputes exceed expectations and/or if the financial condition of our sellers or members were to deteriorate, additional allowances may be required. The allowance is calculated by taking both seller and buyer accounts receivables written off during the previous 12 month period as a percentage of the total accounts receivable balance, i.e. total write-offs/total accounts receivable (write-off percentage). We note that a one percentage point deviation in the write-off percentage would have resulted in an increase or decrease to the allowance for doubtful accounts balance of less than $1.2 million.
Valuation of Goodwill
We evaluate the impairment of goodwill of our North America and U.K. operating segments annually (or on an interim basis if certain indicators are present) by comparing the fair value of the operating segment to its carrying value. Future adverse changes in market conditions or poor operating results of the operating segments could result in an inability to recover the carrying value of the investment, thereby requiring impairment charges in the future.
Income Taxes and Deferred Tax Assets
We account for income tax exposures as required under ASC 740, Income Taxes. We are subject to income taxes in the U.S., Canada and U.K. In arriving at a provision of income taxes, we first calculate taxes payable in accordance with the prevailing tax laws in the jurisdictions in which we operate; we then analyze the timing differences between the financial reporting and tax basis of our assets and liabilities, such as various accruals, depreciation and amortization. The tax effects of the timing difference are presented as deferred tax assets and liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet. We assess the probability that the deferred tax assets will be realized based on our ability to generate future taxable income. In the event that it is more likely than not the full benefit would not be realized from the deferred tax assets we carry on our consolidated balance sheet, we record a valuation allowance to reduce the carrying value of the deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized. As of July 31, 2012, we had $1.2 million of valuation allowance arising from the state operating losses where we had discontinued certain operations previously and from capital losses in the U.S. and the U.K. To the extent we establish a valuation allowance or change the amount of valuation allowance in a period, we reflect the change with a corresponding increase or decrease in our income tax provision in the consolidated statements of income.
Historically, our income taxes have been sufficiently provided to cover our actual income tax liabilities among the jurisdictions in which we operate. Nonetheless, our future effective tax rate could still be adversely affected by several factors, including (i) the geographical allocation of our future earnings, (ii) the change in tax laws or our interpretation of tax laws, (iii) the changes in governing regulations and accounting principles, (iv) the changes in the valuation of our deferred tax assets and liabilities and (v) the outcome of the income tax examinations. As a result, we routinely assess the possibilities of material changes resulting from the aforementioned factors to determine the adequacy of our income tax provision.
Based on our results for the twelve months ended July 31, 2012, a one percentage point change in our provision for income taxes as a percentage of income before taxes would have resulted in an increase or decrease in the provision of $2.8 million.
We apply the provision of ASC 740, which contains a two-step approach to recognizing and measuring uncertain tax positions. The first step is to evaluate the tax position for recognition by determining if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained on audit, including resolution of related appeals or litigation processes, if any. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely of being realized upon settlement.
Although we believe we have adequately reserved for our uncertain tax positions, no assurance can be given that the final tax outcome of these matters will not be different. We adjust these reserves in light of changing facts and circumstances, such as the closing of a tax audit or the refinement of an estimate. To the extent that the final tax outcome of these matters is different than the amounts recorded, such differences will impact the provision for income taxes in the period in which such determination is made. The provision for income taxes includes the impact of reserve provisions and changes to reserves that are considered appropriate, as well as the related net interest settlement of any particular position, could require the use of cash. In addition, we are subject to the continuous examination of our income tax returns by various taxing authorities, including the Internal Revenue Service and U.S. states. We regularly assess the likelihood of adverse outcomes resulting from these examinations to determine the adequacy of our provision for income taxes.
Long-lived Asset Valuation, Including Intangible Assets
We evaluate long-lived assets, including property and equipment and certain identifiable intangibles for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets is measured by comparing the carrying amount of an asset to the estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the use of the asset. If the estimated undiscounted cash flows change in the future, we may be required to reduce the carrying amount of an asset.
Stock-Based Compensation
We account for our stock-based awards to employees and non-employees using the fair value method. Compensation cost related to stock-based payment transactions are recognized based on the fair value of the equity or liability instruments issued. Determining the fair value of options using the Black-Scholes Merton option pricing model, or other currently accepted option valuation models, requires highly subjective assumptions, including future stock price volatility and expected time until exercise, which greatly affect the calculated fair value on the measurement date. If actual results are not consistent with our assumptions and judgments used in estimating the key assumptions, we may be required to record additional compensation or income tax expense, which could have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
Retained Insurance Liabilities
We are partially self-insured for certain losses related to medical, general liability, workers’ compensation and auto liability. Our insurance policies are subject to a $250,000 deductible per claim, with the exception of our medical policy which is $225,000 per claim. In addition, each of our policies contains an aggregate stop loss which limits our ultimate exposure. Our liability represents an estimate of the ultimate cost of claims incurred as of the balance sheet date. The estimated liability is not discounted and is established based upon analysis of historical data and actuarial estimates. The primary estimates used in the actuarial analysis include total payroll and revenue. Our estimates have not materially fluctuated from actual results. While we believe these estimates are reasonable based on the information currently available, if actual trends, including the severity of claims and medical cost inflation, differ from our estimates, our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows could be impacted. The process of determining our insurance reserves requires estimates with various assumptions, each of which can positively or negatively impact those balances. The total amount reserved for all policies is $5.7 million as of July 31, 2012. If the total number of participants in the medical plan changed by 10% we estimate that our medical expense would change by $0.6 million and our medical accrual would change by $0.4 million. If our total payroll changed by 10% we estimate that our workers’ compensation expense would change by $50,000 and our accrual for workers’ compensation expenses would change by $50,000. A 10% change in revenue would change our insurance premium for the general liability and umbrella policy by less than $25,000.
Segment Reporting
Our North American and U.K. regions are considered two separate operating segments, which have been aggregated into one reportable segment because they share similar economic characteristics.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
For a description of the new accounting standards that affect us, refer to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.
Previous: Item 6. Selected Financial Data · Next: Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk