Customer Receivable Portfolio Data
The following tables present, for comparison purposes, information about our credit portfolios (dollars in thousands, except average outstanding customer balance).
| | As of October 31, | |
| | 2012 | | | 2011 | |
Total outstanding balance | | $ | 683,744 | | | $ | 605,650 | |
Percent of total outstanding balances represented by balances over 36 months old(1) | | | 1.1 | % | | | 2.8 | % |
Percent of total outstanding balances represented by balances over 48 months old(1) | | | 0.3 | % | | | 0.6 | % |
Average outstanding customer balance | | $ | 1,479 | | | $ | 1,281 | |
Number of active accounts | | | 462,200 | | | | 472,791 | |
Account balances 60+ days past due(2) | | $ | 47,691 | | | $ | 47,653 | |
Percent of balances 60+ days past due to total outstanding balance | | | 7.0 | % | | | 7.9 | % |
Total account balances reaged(2) | | $ | 77,837 | | | $ | 97,149 | |
Percent of re-aged balances to total outstanding balance | | | 11.4 | % | | | 16.0 | % |
Account balances re-aged more than six months | | $ | 20,225 | | | $ | 44,926 | |
Percent of total bad debt allowance to total outstanding customer receivable balance | | | 6.5 | % | | | 8.5 | % |
Percent of total outstanding balance represented by promotional receivables | | | 23.5 | % | | | 11.2 | % |
| | Three Months Ended | | | Nine Months Ended | |
| | October 31, | | | October 31, | |
| | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | 2012 | | | 2011 | |
Weighted average credit score of outstanding balances | | | 603 | | | | 602 | | | | 603 | | | | 602 | |
Total applications processed | | | 198,617 | | | | 166,257 | | | | 565,036 | | | | 515,326 | |
Weighted average origination credit score of sales financed | | | 616 | | | | 619 | | | | 615 | | | | 623 | |
Total applications approved | | | 52.3 | % | | | 59.6 | % | | | 56.6 | % | | | 57.3 | % |
Average down payment | | | 2.8 | % | | | 4.6 | % | | | 3.4 | % | | | 6.1 | % |
Average total outstanding balance | | $ | 674,517 | | | $ | 603,975 | | | $ | 652,868 | | | $ | 623,514 | |
Bad debt charge-offs (net of recoveries)(3) | | $ | 12,866 | | | $ | 7,466 | | | $ | 40,024 | | | $ | 34,435 | |
Percent of bad debt charge-offs (net of recoveries) to average outstanding balance, annualized(3) | | | 7.6 | % | | | 4.9 | % | | | 8.2 | % | | | 7.4 | % |
Payment rate | | | 5.3 | % | | | 5.4 | % | | | 5.5 | % | | | 5.8 | % |
Percent of retail sales paid for by: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Third party financing | | | 14.5 | % | | | 14.1 | % | | | 14.3 | % | | | 11.4 | % |
In-house financing, including down payment received | | | 72.3 | % | | | 62.1 | % | | | 69.5 | % | | | 57.9 | % |
Third party rent-to-own options | | | 3.7 | % | | | 3.8 | % | | | 3.5 | % | | | 3.9 | % |
Total | | | 90.5 | % | | | 80.0 | % | | | 87.3 | % | | | 73.2 | % |
| (1) | Includes installment accounts only. Balances included in over 48 months old totals are also included in balances over 36 months old totals. |
| (2) | Accounts that become delinquent after being re-aged are included in both the delinquency and re-aged amounts. |
| (3) | On July 31, 2011, we revised our charge-off policy to require an account that is delinquent more than 209 days at month end to be charged-off. |
Historical Static Loss Table
The following static loss analysis calculates the cumulative percentage of balances charged off, based on the year the credit account was originated and the period the balance was charged off. The percentage computed below is calculated by dividing the cumulative net amount charged off since origination by the total balance of accounts originated during the applicable fiscal year. The net charge-off was determined by estimating, on a pro rata basis, the amount of the recoveries received during a period that was allocable to the applicable origination period.
| | Cumulative loss rate as a % of balance originated(a) |
Fiscal Year | | Fiscal years from origination |
of Origination | | 0 | | 1 | | 2 | | 3 | | 4 | | 5 | | 6 | | Terminal(b) |
2005 | | 0.3% | | 1.7% | | 3.4% | | 4.3% | | 4.7% | | 4.9% | | 5.0% | | 5.0% |
2006 | | 0.3% | | 1.9% | | 3.6% | | 4.8% | | 5.4% | | 5.7% | | 5.7% | | 5.7% |
2007 | | 0.2% | | 1.7% | | 3.5% | | 4.6% | | 5.4% | | 5.6% | | 5.6% | | |
2008 | | 0.2% | | 1.8% | | 3.6% | | 5.0% | | 5.7% | | 5.8% | | | | |
2009 | | 0.2% | | 2.0% | | 4.6% | | 6.0% | | 6.6% | | | | | | |
2010 | | 0.2% | | 2.4% | | 4.5% | | 5.8% | | | | | | | | |
2011 | | 0.4% | | 2.6% | | 4.8% | | | | | | | | | | |
2012 | | 0.2% | | 2.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| (a) | The most recent percentages in years from origination 1 through 6 include loss data through October 31, 2012, and are not comparable to prior fiscal year accumulated net charge-off percentages in the same column. |
| (b) | The terminal loss percentage presented represents the point at which that pool of loans has reached its maximum loss rate. |
Results of Operations
The presentation of our results of operations may not be comparable to some other retailers since we include the cost of our in-home delivery and installation service as part of selling, general and administrative expense. Similarly, we include the cost related to operating our purchasing function in selling, general and administrative expense. It is our understanding that other retailers may include such costs as part of their cost of goods sold.
Consolidated
| | Three Months Ended | | | Nine Months Ended | |
| | October 31, | | | October 31, | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Revenues | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Product sales | | $ | 151,663 | | | $ | 140,404 | | | $ | 11,259 | | | $ | 459,804 | | | $ | 422,914 | | | $ | 36,890 | |
Repair service agreement commissions, net | | | 12,183 | | | | 10,602 | | | | 1,581 | | | | 35,930 | | | | 29,449 | | | | 6,481 | |
Service revenues | | | 3,477 | | | | 3,950 | | | | (473 | ) | | | 10,181 | | | | 11,650 | | | | (1,469 | ) |
Total net sales | | | 167,323 | | | | 154,956 | | | | 12,367 | | | | 505,915 | | | | 464,013 | | | | 41,902 | |
Finance charges and other | | | 39,078 | | | | 31,667 | | | | 7,411 | | | | 108,773 | | | | 101,618 | | | | 7,155 | |
Total revenues | | | 206,401 | | | | 186,623 | | | | 19,778 | | | | 614,688 | | | | 565,631 | | | | 49,057 | |
Cost and expenses | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cost of goods sold, including warehousing and occupancy costs | | | 105,688 | | | | 112,844 | | | | (7,156 | ) | | | 325,041 | | | | 324,774 | | | | 267 | |
Cost of service parts sold, including warehousing and occupancy cost | | | 1,522 | | | | 1,647 | | | | (125 | ) | | | 4,513 | | | | 4,973 | | | | (460 | ) |
Selling, general and administrative expens(1) | | | 61,210 | | | | 59,801 | | | | 1,409 | | | | 180,247 | | | | 175,420 | | | | 4,827 | |
Provision for bad debts(2) | | | 13,449 | | | | 26,400 | | | | (12,951 | ) | | | 34,838 | | | | 43,115 | | | | (8,277 | ) |
Charges and credits | | | 641 | | | | 375 | | | | 266 | | | | 1,150 | | | | 4,033 | | | | (2,883 | ) |
Total cost and expenses | | | 182,510 | | | | 201,067 | | | | (18,557 | ) | | | 545,789 | | | | 552,315 | | | | (6,526 | ) |
Operating income | | | 23,891 | | | | (14,444 | ) | | | 38,335 | | | | 68,899 | | | | 13,316 | | | | 55,583 | |
Interest expense, net | | | 4,526 | | | | 3,919 | | | | 607 | | | | 13,159 | | | | 18,479 | | | | (5,320 | ) |
Loss on extinguishment of debt | | | 818 | | | | - | | | | 818 | | | | 818 | | | | 11,056 | | | | (10,238 | ) |
Other (income) expense, net | | | (3 | ) | | | (5 | ) | | | 2 | | | | (105 | ) | | | 81 | | | | (186 | ) |
Income (loss) before income taxes | | | 18,550 | | | | (18,358 | ) | | | 36,908 | | | | 55,027 | | | | (16,300 | ) | | | 71,327 | |
Provision (benefit) for income taxes | | | 6,765 | | | | (5,635 | ) | | | 12,400 | | | | 20,080 | | | | (4,876 | ) | | | 24,956 | |
Net income (loss) | | $ | 11,785 | | | $ | (12,723 | ) | | $ | 24,508 | | | $ | 34,947 | | | $ | (11,424 | ) | | $ | 46,371 | |
Retail Segment
| | Three Months Ended | | | Nine Months Ended | |
| | October 31, | | | October 31, | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Revenues | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Product sales | | $ | 151,663 | | | $ | 140,404 | | | $ | 11,259 | | | $ | 459,804 | | | $ | 422,914 | | | $ | 36,890 | |
Repair service agreement commissions, net | | | 12,183 | | | | 10,602 | | | | 1,581 | | | | 35,930 | | | | 29,449 | | | | 6,481 | |
Service revenues | | | 3,477 | | | | 3,950 | | | | (473 | ) | | | 10,181 | | | | 11,650 | | | | (1,469 | ) |
Total net sales | | | 167,323 | | | | 154,956 | | | | 12,367 | | | | 505,915 | | | | 464,013 | | | | 41,902 | |
Finance charges and other | | | 340 | | | | 60 | | | | 280 | | | | 857 | | | | 678 | | | | 179 | |
Total revenues | | | 167,663 | | | | 155,016 | | | | 12,647 | | | | 506,772 | | | | 464,691 | | | | 42,081 | |
Cost and expenses | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cost of goods sold, including warehousing and occupancy costs | | | 105,688 | | | | 112,844 | | | | (7,156 | ) | | | 325,041 | | | | 324,774 | | | | 267 | |
Cost of service parts sold, including warehousing and occupancy cost | | | 1,522 | | | | 1,647 | | | | (125 | ) | | | 4,513 | | | | 4,973 | | | | (460 | ) |
Selling, general and administrative expense(1) | | | 47,275 | | | | 45,899 | | | | 1,376 | | | | 139,832 | | | | 132,009 | | | | 7,823 | |
Provision for bad debts | | | 229 | | | | 135 | | | | 94 | | | | 630 | | | | 469 | | | | 161 | |
Charges and credits | | | 641 | | | | 375 | | | | 266 | | | | 1,150 | | | | 4,033 | | | | (2,883 | ) |
Total cost and expenses | | | 155,355 | | | | 160,900 | | | | (5,545 | ) | | | 471,166 | | | | 466,258 | | | | 4,908 | |
Operating income (loss) | | | 12,308 | | | | (5,884 | ) | | | 18,192 | | | | 35,606 | | | | (1,567 | ) | | | 37,173 | |
Other (income) expense, net | | | (3 | ) | | | (5 | ) | | | 2 | | | | (105 | ) | | | 81 | | | | (186 | ) |
Income (loss) before income taxes | | $ | 12,311 | | | $ | (5,879 | ) | | $ | 18,190 | | | $ | 35,711 | | | $ | (1,648 | ) | | $ | 37,359 | |
Credit Segment
| | Three Months Ended. | | | Nine Months Ended | |
| | October 31, | | | October 31, | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Revenues | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Finance charges and other | | $ | 38,738 | | | $ | 31,607 | | | $ | 7,131 | | | $ | 107,916 | | | $ | 100,940 | | | $ | 6,976 | |
Cost and expenses | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Selling, general and administrative expense(1) | | | 13,935 | | | | 13,902 | | | | 33 | | | | 40,415 | | | | 43,411 | | | | (2,996 | ) |
Provision for bad debts(2) | | | 13,220 | | | | 26,265 | | | | (13,045 | ) | | | 34,208 | | | | 42,646 | | | | (8,438 | ) |
Total cost and expenses | | | 27,155 | | | | 40,167 | | | | (13,012 | ) | | | 74,623 | | | | 86,057 | | | | (11,434 | ) |
Operating income (loss) | | | 11,583 | | | | (8,560 | ) | | | 20,143 | | | | 33,293 | | | | 14,883 | | | | 18,410 | |
Interest expense | | | 4,526 | | | | 3,919 | | | | 607 | | | | 13,159 | | | | 18,479 | | | | (5,320 | ) |
Loss on extinguishment of debt | | | 818 | | | | - | | | | 818 | | | | 818 | | | | 11,056 | | | | (10,238 | ) |
Income (loss) before income taxes | | $ | 6,239 | | | $ | (12,479 | ) | | $ | 18,718 | | | $ | 19,316 | | | $ | (14,652 | ) | | $ | 33,968 | |
(1) | Selling, general and administrative expenses include the direct expenses of the retail and credit operations, allocated overhead expenses and a charge to the credit segment to reimburse the retail segment for expenses it incurs related to occupancy, personnel, advertising and other direct costs of the retail segment which benefit the credit operations by sourcing credit customers and collecting payments. The reimbursement received by the retail segment from the credit segment is estimated using an annual rate of 2.5% times the average portfolio balance for each applicable period. The amount of overhead allocated to each segment was approximately $2.3 million and $1.7 million for the three months ended October 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and approximately $6.5 million and $6.0 million for the nine months ended October 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The amount of reimbursement made to the retail segment by the credit segment was approximately $4.2 million and $3.8 million for the three months ended October 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and approximately $12.2 million and $11.7 million for the nine months ended October 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. |
(2) | Credit segment provision for bad debts for the three and nine months ended October 31, 2011 includes a pre-tax charge of $13.1 million due to the implementation of required accounting guidance related to Troubled Debt Restructuring. |
Segment Overview
The following provides an overview of our retail and credit segment operations for the three and nine months ended October 31, 2012. A detailed explanation of the changes in our operations for the comparative periods is included below.
Retail Segment
| · | Revenues were $167.7 million for the quarter ended October 31, 2012, an increase of $12.6 million, or 8.2%, from the prior-year period. The increase in revenues during the quarter was primarily driven by higher demand for furniture and mattresses, tablets and lawn equipment. On a same store basis, revenues for the current quarter rose 12.6% over the prior-year period. Reported revenues for the three months ended October 31, 2012 also reflects the benefit of the completion of 15 store remodels over the past 12 months and the opening of a Conn’s HomePlus store in Waco, Texas in June of 2012. This growth in sales was partially offset by store closures and the decline in unit sales due to the focus on higher price-point product offerings. Revenues for the nine months ended October 31, 2012 were $506.8 million, an increase of 9.1% over the prior-year level and driven by same store sales growth of 17.2%. |
| · | Retail gross margin was 35.5% for the quarter ended October 31, 2012, an increase of 10.2 percentage points over the 25.3% reported in the comparable quarter last year. The prior-year quarter included an inventory reserve adjustment, which increased cost of goods sold by $4.7 million and decreased reported retail gross margin by 300 basis points. Excluding this adjustment, retail gross margin rose 720 basis points year-over-year driven by margin expansion within each of the major product categories. Additionally, results were favorably influenced by sales mix, with the 31.7% increase in higher-margin furniture and mattress sales outpacing the overall growth realized in the other product categories. The broad margin improvement across all categories was driven by the continued focus on higher price-point, higher margin products and sourcing opportunities. Retail gross margin was 34.4% for the nine months ended October 31, 2012, an improvement of 620 basis points over the prior-year period. After excluding the $4.7 million fiscal 2012 inventory reserve adjustment, retail gross margin rose 520 basis points over the prior-year period. This margin expansion reflects a favorable shift in product mix and margin expansion in each of the product categories. |
| · | Selling, general and administrative (“SG&A”) expense was $47.3 million for the quarter ended October 31, 2012, an increase of $1.4 million, or 3.0%, over the quarter ended October 31, 2011. The SG&A expense increase was primarily due to higher sales-driven compensation costs and advertising expenses, partially offset by a reduction in depreciation and facility-related expenses. As a percent of segment revenues, SG&A expense declined 140 basis points to 28.2% in the current period from 29.6% in the prior-year quarter. For the nine months ended October 31, 2012, SG&A expense was $139.8 million, an increase of $7.8 million from the prior-year period. SG&A expense as a percent of segment revenues declined 80 basis points to 27.6% attributable to the leveraging effect of higher total revenues. |
Credit Segment
| · | Revenues were $38.7 million for the three months ended October 31, 2012, an increase of $7.1 million, or 22.6%, from the prior-year quarter. The increase reflects the impact of year-over-year growth of 11.7% in the average balance of the portfolio as well as an increase in portfolio interest and fee yield to 19.3%. Revenues for the nine months ended October 31, 2012 were $107.9 million, an increase of $7.0 million, primarily due to the impact of a 4.7% increase year-over-year in the average portfolio balance. |
| · | SG&A expense for the credit segment was $13.9 million for the quarter ended October 31, 2012, relatively unchanged from the same quarter last year. SG&A expense as a percent of revenues was 36.0% in the current year period, which compares to 44.0% in the prior-year period. For the nine months ended October 31, 2012, SG&A expense was $40.4 million, or 37.5% of revenues, versus $43.4 million, or 43.0% of revenues, in the comparable prior-year period. On a dollar basis, SG&A decreased by $3.0 million in the current period due to reduced compensation and related expenses. |
| · | Provision for bad debts was $13.2 million for the three months ended October 31, 2012, a decrease of $13.0 million from the prior-year quarter. The year-over-year decrease is attributable to the $13.1 million impact in the prior year of required adoption of accounting guidance related to Troubled Debt Restructuring and our implementation of stricter re-aging and charge-off policies in the second and third quarters of fiscal 2012. The provision for bad debts was $34.2 million for the nine months ended October 31, 2012, a decrease of $8.4 million over the prior-year period. This decrease also reflects the effect of the implementation of the required TDR accounting guidance and the re-age and charge-off policy modifications. |
| · | Net interest expense for the quarter ended October 31, 2012 was $4.5 million, an increase of $0.6 million from the prior-year period, which was due to an increase in the effective interest rate with the issuance of the asset-backed notes in April of 2012 and a 7.7% increase in average level of debt outstanding. For the nine months ended October 31, 2012, net interest expense totaled $13.2 million, a decrease of $5.3 million from the prior-year period, which was attributable to the decline in the overall effective interest rate. |
Three Months Ended October 31, 2012 Compared to Three Months Ended October 31, 2011
| | Three Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Total net sales | | $ | 167,323 | | | $ | 154,956 | | | $ | 12,367 | |
Finance charges and other | | | 39,078 | | | | 31,667 | | | | 7,411 | |
Total Revenues | | $ | 206,401 | | | $ | 186,623 | | | $ | 19,778 | |
The following table provides an analysis of net sales by product category in each period, including repair service agreement commissions and service revenues, expressed both in dollar amounts and as a percent of total net sales.
| | Three Months ended October 31, | | | | | | % | | | Same store | |
| | 2012 | | | % of Total | | | 2011 | | | % of Total | | | Change | | | Change | | | % change | |
(in thousands, except for pencentages) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Home appliance | | $ | 48,499 | | | | 29.0 | % | | $ | 46,993 | | | | 30.4 | % | | $ | 1,506 | | | | 3.2 | % | | | 6.4 | % |
Furniture and mattress | | | 32,346 | | | | 19.3 | | | | 24,567 | | | | 15.9 | | | | 7,779 | | | | 31.7 | | | | 34.0 | |
Consumer electronic | | | 47,082 | | | | 28.1 | | | | 50,073 | | | | 32.3 | | | | (2,991 | ) | | | (6.0 | ) | | | (3.2 | ) |
Home office | | | 16,169 | | | | 9.7 | | | | 13,242 | | | | 8.5 | | | | 2,927 | | | | 22.1 | | | | 27.5 | |
Other | | | 7,567 | | | | 4.5 | | | | 5,529 | | | | 3.6 | | | | 2,038 | | | | 36.9 | | | | 59.8 | |
Product sales | | | 151,663 | | | | 90.6 | | | | 140,404 | | | | 90.7 | | | | 11,259 | | | | 8.0 | | | | 11.5 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Repair service agreement commissions | | | 12,183 | | | | 7.3 | | | | 10,602 | | | | 6.8 | | | | 1,581 | | | | 14.9 | | | | 23.1 | |
Service revenues | | | 3,477 | | | | 2.1 | | | | 3,950 | | | | 2.5 | | | | (473 | ) | | | (12.0 | ) | | | | |
Total net sales | | $ | 167,323 | | | | 100.0 | % | | $ | 154,956 | | | | 100.0 | % | | $ | 12,367 | | | | 8.0 | % | | | 12.6 | % |
The following provides a summary of items impacting the Company’s product categories during the quarter, compared to the same quarter in the prior fiscal year:
· | Home appliance sales rose during the quarter, attributable to a 24.4% increase in the average selling price and partially offset by a 17.4% decline in unit volume. Approximately one-quarter of the unit sales decrease was attributable to the previous store closures. On a same store basis, laundry sales rose 14.9%, refrigeration sales increased 3.6% and cooking sales increased 24.7%. Milder temperatures resulted in a 26.0% decline in room air conditioner sales; |
· | The continued growth in furniture and mattress sales was driven by enhanced presentation, product selection and increased promotional activity. The reported increase was tempered by the impact of previous store closures; |
| - | Furniture same store sales growth reflects a 16.4% increase in unit sales and a 15.2% increase in the average sales price; |
| - | Mattress same store sales also grew, driven by a favorable shift in product mix from the Company’s decision to discontinue offering low price-point products. As a result, on a same store basis, the average mattress selling price increased 41.6% and was partially offset by a 5.4% decline in unit volume; |
· | Consumer electronic sales declined slightly due to the emphasis of higher price-point televisions and the previous store closures. Same store unit sales of televisions with a screen size of 50 inches or above increased 5.9% over the prior-year quarter, driving a 10.5% increase in average selling price; and |
· | Home office sales growth resulted from the expansion of tablet sales, as well as a 28.2% increase in the average selling price of computers. The reported growth was partially offset by the impact of store closures, a reduction in computer unit volume and lower sales of accessory items. |
| | Three Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Interest income and fees | | $ | 32,458 | | | $ | 27,222 | | | $ | 5,236 | |
Insurance commissions | | | 6,280 | | | | 4,385 | | | | 1,894 | |
Other income | | | 340 | | | | 60 | | | | 281 | |
Finance charges and other | | $ | 39,078 | | | $ | 31,667 | | | $ | 7,411 | |
Interest income and fees and insurance commissions are included in the finance charges and other for the credit segment, while other income is included in finance charges and other for the retail segment.
Interest income and fees of the credit segment increased over the prior-year level primarily driven by an 11.7% increase in the average balance of the portfolio and the effect of a $1.0 million increase in reserves for uncollectible interest for the three months ended October 31, 2011 resulting from the prior-year adoption of TDR accounting guidance. Portfolio interest and fee yield increased to 19.3% from 18.0% in the third quarter of fiscal 2012. The increase in insurance commissions was primarily related to the increase in retail sales.
The following table provides key portfolio performance information for the three months ended October 31, 2012 and 2011:
| | Three Months Ended | |
| | October 31, | |
| | 2012 | | | 2011 | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Interest income and fees (a) | | $ | 32,458 | | | $ | 27,222 | |
Net charge-offs | | | (12,866 | ) | | | (7,466 | ) |
Borrowing costs (b) | | | (4,526 | ) | | | (3,919 | ) |
Net portfolio yield | | $ | 15,066 | | | $ | 15,837 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Average portfolio balance | | $ | 674,517 | | | $ | 603,975 | |
Interest income and fee yield % (annualized) | | | 19.3 | % | | | 18.0 | % |
Net charge-off % (annualized) | | | 7.6 | % | | | 4.9 | % |
| (a) | Included in finance charges and other. |
| (b) | Included in interest expense. |
| | Three Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Cost of goods sold | | $ | 105,688 | | | $ | 112,844 | | | | (7,156 | ) |
Product gross margin percentage | | | 30.3 | % | | | 19.6 | % | | | | |
Product gross margin rose 1070 basis points as a percent of product sales from the quarter ended October 31, 2011. The expansion in product gross margin primarily reflects a favorable shift in our relative product sales mix. The year-over-year comparison was also influenced by an increase in the inventory valuation reserve of $4.7 million during the quarter ended October 31, 2011.
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Cost of service parts sold | | $ | 1,522 | | | $ | 1,647 | | | $ | (125 | ) |
As a percent of service revenues | | | 43.8 | % | | | 41.7 | % | | | | |
Cost of service parts sold declined due to a $0.5 million reduction in service revenues.
| | Three Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Selling, general and administrative expense - Retail | | $ | 47,275 | | | $ | 45,899 | | | $ | 1,376 | |
Selling, general and administrative expense - Credit | | | 13,935 | | | | 13,902 | | | | 33 | |
Selling, general and administrative expense - Consolidated | | $ | 61,210 | | | $ | 59,801 | | | $ | 1,409 | |
As a percent of total revenues | | | 29.7 | % | | | 32.0 | % | | | | |
For the three months ended October 31, 2012, the increase in SG&A expense was driven by higher sales-related compensation partially offset by the impact of previous store closures. The improvement in our SG&A expense as a percentage of total revenues was largely attributable to the leveraging effect of higher total revenues.
The SG&A expense increase in the retail segment was primarily due to higher sales-driven compensation costs and advertising expenses, partially offset by a reduction in depreciation and facility-related expenses. As a percent of segment revenues, SG&A expense declined 140 basis points to 28.2% in the current period from 29.6% in the prior-year quarter.
The SG&A expense for the credit segment was relatively unchanged from the same quarter last year. SG&A expense as a percent of revenues was 36.0% in the current year period, which compares to 44.0% in the prior-year period.
| | Three Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Provision for bad debts | | $ | 13,449 | | | $ | 26,400 | | | $ | (12,951 | ) |
As a percent of average portfolio balance (annualized) | | | 8.0 | % | | | 17.5 | % | | | | |
The provision for bad debts is primarily related to the operations of our credit segment, with approximately $0.2 million and $0.1 million for the periods ended October 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, included in the results of operations for the retail segment.
The year-over-year comparison is influenced by the impact of a pre-tax charge to provision for bad debts of $13.1 million, net of previously provided reserves, in connection with the required adoption of new accounting guidance related to Troubled Debt Restructuring. Excluding this charge, the provision increased by $0.2 million.
| | Three Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Costs related to relocation | | $ | 641 | | | $ | - | | | $ | 641 | |
Costs related to store closings | | | - | | | | (313 | ) | | | 313 | |
Impairment of long-lived assets | | | - | | | | 688 | | | | (688 | ) |
Charges and credits | | $ | 641 | | | $ | 375 | | | $ | 266 | |
The Company relocated certain of its corporate operations from Beaumont to The Woodlands, Texas in the third quarter of fiscal year 2013. The Company incurred $0.6 million in pre-tax costs in connection with the relocation.
During the third quarter of fiscal 2012, the Company revised its estimate of previously provided reserves for future lease obligations of closed stores and recorded a pre-tax credit of $0.3 million. Additionally, the Company recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of $0.7 million related to certain assets associated with non-performing stores.
| | Three Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Interest expense | | $ | 4,526 | | | $ | 3,919 | | | $ | 607 | |
Interest expense for the three months ended October 31, 2012 increased by $0.6 million from the prior-year period primarily due to an increase in the effective interest rate with the issuance of the asset-backed notes in April of 2012 and a 7.7% increase in average level of debt outstanding. The entirety of our interest expense is included in the results of operations of the credit segment.
| | Three Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Loss on extinguishment of debt | | $ | 818 | | | $ | - | | | $ | (818 | ) |
The Company amended and restated its asset-based loan facility with a syndicate of banks on September 26, 2012. In connection with the transaction, the Company expensed $0.8 million in previously deferred transaction costs associated with lenders which are no longer in the current syndicate of banks. This amount is included in the results of operations of the credit segment.
| | Three Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Provision (benefit) for income taxes | | $ | 6,765 | | | $ | (5,635 | ) | | $ | 12,400 | |
As a percent of income before income taxes | | | 36.5 | % | | | 30.7 | % | | | | |
The provision for income taxes increased due to the year-over-year improvement in profitability. The improvement in profitability also drove the change in the effective tax rate in the current period due to the impact of the Texas margin tax, which is based on gross margin and is not affected by changes in income before income taxes.
Nine Months Ended October 31, 2012 Compared to Nine Months Ended October 31, 2011
| | Nine Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Total net sales | | $ | 505,915 | | | $ | 464,013 | | | $ | 41,902 | |
Finance charges and other | | | 108,773 | | | | 101,618 | | | | 7,155 | |
Total Revenues | | $ | 614,688 | | | $ | 565,631 | | | $ | 49,057 | |
The following table provides an analysis of net sales by product category in each period, including repair service agreement commissions and service revenues, expressed both in dollar amounts and as a percent of total net sales.
| | Nine Months Ended October 31, | | | | | | % | | | Same store | |
| | 2012 | | | % of Total | | | 2011 | | | % of Total | | | Change | | | Change | | | % change | |
(in thousands, except for percertages) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Home appliance | | $ | 148,716 | | | | 29.4 | % | | $ | 143,604 | | | | 30.9 | % | | $ | 5,112 | | | | 3.6 | % | | | 9.9 | % |
Furniture and mattress | | | 92,735 | | | | 18.3 | | | | 67,898 | | | | 14.6 | | | | 24,837 | | | | 36.6 | | | | 44.2 | |
Consumer electronic | | | 146,119 | | | | 28.9 | | | | 155,612 | | | | 33.5 | | | | (9,493 | ) | | | (6.1 | ) | | | 0.3 | |
Home office | | | 42,755 | | | | 8.5 | | | | 35,078 | | | | 7.6 | | | | 7,677 | | | | 21.9 | | | | 29.5 | |
Other | | | 29,479 | | | | 5.8 | | | | 20,722 | | | | 4.5 | | | | 8,757 | | | | 42.3 | | | | 68.6 | |
Product sales | | | 459,804 | | | | 90.9 | | | | 422,914 | | | | 91.1 | | | | 36,890 | | | | 8.7 | | | | 15.8 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Repair service agreement commissions | | | 35,930 | | | | 7.1 | | | | 29,449 | | | | 6.4 | | | | 6,481 | | | | 22.0 | | | | 31.6 | |
Service revenues | | | 10,181 | | | | 2.0 | | | | 11,650 | | | | 2.5 | | | | (1,469 | ) | | | (12.6 | ) | | | | |
Total net sales | | $ | 505,915 | | | | 100.0 | % | | $ | 464,013 | | | | 100.0 | % | | $ | 41,902 | | | | 9.0 | % | | | 17.2 | % |
The following provides a summary of items impacting the Company’s product categories during the period, compared to the same period in the prior fiscal year:
· | Home appliance sales increased during the period on a 25.9% increase in the average selling price, partially offset by a 17.5% decrease in unit sales. Approximately one-third of the unit sales decline was attributable to previous store closures. On a same store basis, laundry sales were up 16.8%, refrigeration sales were up 8.7% and cooking sales were up 24.8%. Milder temperatures drove a 23.1% decrease in room air conditioner sales; |
· | The growth in furniture and mattress sales was driven by enhanced displays, product selection and increased promotional activity. The reported increase was moderated by the impact of store closures. Furniture same store sales growth was driven by a 22.1% increase in the average sales price and an 18.7% increase in unit sales. Mattress same store sales also increased reflecting a favorable shift in product mix with the Company’s decision to discontinue offering low price-point products. The average mattress selling price was up 61.3%, while unit volume declined 11.9% on a same store basis; and |
· | Consumer electronic sales decreased due primarily to previous store closures. On a same store basis, sales increased 0.3% with growth in television, home theater and audio sales offset by a reduction in gaming hardware and accessory item sales. With the Company’s decision not to compete for low-priced, low-margin television sales during the current year, the same store average selling price for televisions increased 27.0%, while unit sales declined 20.6%; and |
· | Home office sales grew primarily as a result of the expansion of tablet sales and a 26.6% increase in the average selling price of computers, partially offset by the impact of store closures, a decline in computer unit volume and lower sales of accessory items. |
| | Nine Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Interest income and fees | | $ | 90,915 | | | $ | 87,514 | | | $ | 3,401 | |
Insurance commissions | | | 17,001 | | | | 13,426 | | | | 3,575 | |
Other income | | | 857 | | | | 678 | | | | 179 | |
Finance charges and other | | $ | 108,773 | | | $ | 101,618 | | | $ | 7,155 | |
Interest income and fees and insurance commissions are included in the finance charges and other for the credit segment, while other income is included in finance charges and other for the retail segment.
The increase in interest income and fees of the credit segment was driven primarily by growth in the average portfolio balance and the effect of a $1.0 million increase in reserves for uncollectible interest for the three months ended October 31, 2011 resulting from the prior-year adoption of TDR accounting guidance. The increase in insurance commissions was primarily related to the increase in retail sales.
The following table provides key portfolio performance information for the nine months ended October 31, 2012 and 2011:
| | Nine Months Ended | |
| | October 31, | |
| | 2012 | | | 2011 | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | | | | | |
Interest income and fees (a) | | $ | 90,915 | | | $ | 87,514 | |
Net charge-offs | | | (40,024 | ) | | | (34,435 | ) |
Borrowing costs (b) | | | (13,159 | ) | | | (18,479 | ) |
Net portfolio yield | | $ | 37,732 | | | $ | 34,600 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Average portfolio balance | | $ | 652,868 | | | $ | 623,514 | |
Interest income and fee yield % (annualized) | | | 18.6 | % | | | 18.7 | % |
Net charge-off % (annualized) | | | 8.2 | % | | | 7.4 | % |
| (a) | Included in finance charges and other. |
| (b) | Included in interest expense. |
| | Nine Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Cost of goods sold | | $ | 325,041 | | | $ | 324,774 | | | $ | 267 | |
Product gross margin percentage | | | 29.3 | % | | | 23.2 | % | | | | |
Product gross margin increased 610 basis points as a percent of product sales from the nine months ended October 31, 2011 primarily due a favorable shift in our relative product mix. The year-over-year comparison was also influenced by an increase in the inventory valuation reserve of $4.7 million during the quarter ended October 31, 2011.
| | Nine Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Cost of service parts sold | | $ | 4,513 | | | $ | 4,973 | | | $ | (460 | ) |
As a percent of service revenues | | | 44.3 | % | | | 42.7 | % | | | | |
Cost of service parts sold decreased primarily due to a $1.5 million decline in service revenues.
| | Nine Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Selling, general and administrative expense - Retail | | $ | 139,832 | | | $ | 132,009 | | | $ | 7,823 | |
Selling, general and administrative expense - Credit | | | 40,415 | | | | 43,411 | | | | (2,996 | ) |
Selling, general and administrative expense - Consolidated | | $ | 180,247 | | | $ | 175,420 | | | $ | 4,827 | |
As a percent of total revenues | | | 29.3 | % | | | 31.0 | % | | | | |
For the nine months ended October 31, 2012, the SG&A increase was driven by the higher retail sales. These increases were partially offset by reductions in depreciation and occupancy expense, credit personnel costs and reduced credit card fees. The improvement in SG&A expense as a percentage of total revenues was largely attributable to the leveraging effect of higher total revenues.
The SG&A expense in the retail segment increased primarily due to an increase in sales-driven compensation expense and increased advertising, partially offset by reduction in costs related to the reduced store count. SG&A expense as a percent of segment revenues declined 80 basis points to 27.6% attributable to the leveraging effect of higher total revenues.
The SG&A expense in the credit segment declined primarily due to reduced compensation and related expenses. SG&A expense as a percent of segment revenues was 37.5% of revenue in the current year period compared to 43.0% in the comparable prior-year period.
| | Nine Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands, except percentages) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Provision for bad debts | | $ | 34,838 | | | $ | 43,115 | | | $ | (8,277 | ) |
As a percent of average portfolio balance (annualized) | | | 7.1 | % | | | 9.2 | % | | | | |
The provision for bad debts is primarily related to the operations of our credit segment, with approximately $0.6 million and $0.5 million for the periods ended October 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, included in the results of operations for the retail segment.
The year-over-year comparison is influenced by the impact of a pre-tax charge to provision for bad debts of $13.1 million, net of previously provided reserves, in connection with the required adoption of new accounting guidance related to Troubled Debt Restructuring. Excluding this charge, the provision increased by $4.8 million driven by growth in the overall portfolio balance.
| | Nine Months Ended | | | | |
| | October 31, | | | | |
(in thousands) | | 2012 | | | 2011 | | | Change | |
Costs related to relocation | | $ | 987 | | | $ | - | | | $ | 987 | |
Costs related to store closings | | | 163 | | | | 3,345 | | | | (3,182 | ) |
Impairment of property and equipment | | | - | | | | 688 | | | | (688 | ) |
Charges and credits | | $ | 1,150 | | | $ | 4,033 | | | $ | (2,883 | ) |
The Company relocated certain of its corporate operations from Beaumont to The Woodlands, Texas in the third quarter of fiscal year 2013. The Company incurred $1.0 million in pre-tax costs in connection with the relocation during the nine-month period ended October 31, 2012.
The Company has closed a number of underperforming retail locations. In connection with these closures, the Company provided reserves for future lease obligation and adjusts such obligations as more information becomes available. During the nine months ended October 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company incurred charges of $0.2 million and $3.3 million, respectively. Additionally, the Company recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of $0.7 million related to certain assets associated with non-performing stores during the nine months ended October 31, 2011.
Interest expense for the nine months ended October 31, 2012 decreased by $5.3 million from the prior-year period primarily due to the refinancing of higher interest borrowings in the prior period. The entirety of our interest expense is included in the results of operations of the credit segment.
The Company amended and restated its asset-based loan facility with a syndicate of banks on September 26, 2012. In connection with the transaction, the Company expensed $0.8 million in previously deferred transaction costs associated with lenders which are no longer in the current syndicate of banks. This amount is included in the results of operations of the credit segment.
On July 28, 2011, we extinguished an existing term loan with proceeds from a new real estate loan and borrowings under our expanded revolving credit facility. We recorded a charge of $11.1 million during the period including the prepayment premium of $4.8 million, write-off of the unamortized original issue discount of $5.4 million and term loan deferred financing costs of $0.9 million. This amount is included in the results of operations of the credit segment.
The provision for income taxes increased due to the year-over-year improvement in profitability. The improvement in profitability also drove the change in the effective tax rate in the current period due to the impact of the Texas margin tax, which is based on gross margin and is not affected by changes in income before income taxes.
During the nine months ended October 31, 2012, net cash provided by operating activities was $14.6 million, which compares to $74.9 million provided during the prior-year period. The year-over-year improvement in operating performance was more than offset by the use of cash to fund an $84.8 million increase in customer accounts receivable during the nine months ended October 31, 2012 as compared to cash provided by a decrease in customer receivables of $26.4 million in the nine months ended October 31, 2011. In the current-year period, the impact of investments in inventory was offset by an increase in accounts payable.
Net cash used in investing activities increased to $21.0 million in the nine months ended October 31, 2012, as compared to $2.3 million in the nine months ended October 31, 2011, primarily due to expenditures for store remodels and relocations. We expect during the next twelve months to invest between $25 million and $30 million, net of tenant allowances, in capital expenditures for new stores, remodels and other projects. We expect to fund these estimated capital expenditures with cash from operations, borrowings under our asset-based revolving credit facility and tenant allowances from landlords.
Net cash provided by financing activities was $4.4 million for the nine months ended October 31, 2012, compared to net cash used in financing activities of $77.0 million during the nine months ended October 31, 2011. During the nine months ended October 31, 2012, we used net cash provided by operations and net proceeds from our VIE’s bond issuance to pay down outstanding balances under our asset-based revolving credit facility.
We require capital to finance our growth as we add new stores and markets to our operations, which in turn requires additional working capital for increased customer receivables and inventory. We have historically financed our operations through a combination of cash flow generated from earnings and external borrowings, including primarily bank debt, extended terms provided by our vendors for inventory purchases, acquisition of inventory under consignment arrangements and transfers of customer receivables to asset-backed securitization facilities.
We currently have an asset-based revolving credit facility with capacity of $545 million that matures in September 2016. The facility provides funding based on a borrowing base calculation that includes customer accounts receivable and inventory. The credit facility bears interest at LIBOR plus a spread ranging from 275 basis points to 350 basis points, based on a leverage ratio (defined as total liabilities to tangible net worth). In addition to the leverage ratio, the revolving credit facility includes a fixed charge coverage requirement, a minimum customer receivables cash recovery percentage requirement and a net capital expenditures limit. The leverage ratio covenant requirement is a required maximum of 2.00 to 1.00. The fixed charge coverage ratio requirement is a minimum of 1.10 to 1.00. We expect, based on current facts and circumstances, that we will be in compliance with the above covenants for the next 12 months. The weighted average interest rate on borrowings outstanding under the asset-based revolving credit facility was 3.4% at October 31, 2012.
On April 30, 2012, our VIE issued $103.7 million of notes which bear interest at 4.0% and were sold at a discount to deliver a 5.21% yield, before considering transaction costs. The principal balance of the notes, which are secured by certain customer receivables, will be reduced on a monthly basis by collections on the underlying customer receivables after the payment of interest and other expenses of the VIE. While the final maturity for the notes is April 2016, we currently expect to repay any outstanding note balance in April 2013. Additionally, the notes include a prepayment incentive fee, whereby the VIE will be required to pay, in addition to accrued interest on the notes, a monthly fee equal to an annual rate of 8.5% times the outstanding principal balance, if the notes are not repaid by the expected final principal payment date of April 15, 2013. The VIE’s borrowing agreement contains certain covenants, including a minimum net worth requirement for the VIE.
We have an $8.0 million real estate loan, collateralized by three of our owned store locations, that will mature in July 2016 and requires monthly principal payments based on a 15-year amortization schedule. The interest rate on the loan is the prime rate plus 100 basis points with a floor of 5%.
We have interest rate cap options with a notional amount of $100 million. These cap options are held for the purpose of hedging against variable interest rate risk related to the variability of cash flows in the interest payments on a portion of its variable-rate debt, based on the benchmark one-month LIBOR interest rate exceeding 1.0%. These cap options have monthly caplets extending through August, 2014.
The weighted average effective interest rate on borrowings outstanding under all our credit facilities for the three months ended October 31, 2012 was 5.6%, including the interest expense associated with our interest rate caps and amortization of deferred financing costs.
A summary of the significant financial covenants that govern our credit facility compared to our actual compliance status at October 31, 2012, is presented below:
Note: All terms in the above table are defined by the revolving credit facility and may or may not agree directly to the financial statement captions in this document. The covenants are required to be calculated quarterly on a trailing twelve month basis, except for the Cash recovery percentage, which is calculated monthly on a trailing three month basis.
As of October 31, 2012, we had immediately available borrowing capacity of $157.5 million under our asset-based revolving credit facility, net of standby letters of credit issued of $4.3 million, available to us for general corporate purposes before considering extended vendor terms for purchases of inventory. In addition to the $157.5 million currently available under the revolving credit facility, an additional $91.0 million may become available if we grow the balance of eligible customer receivables and total eligible inventory balances. Payments received on customer receivables averaged approximately $42.3 million per month during the three months ended October 31, 2012. Payments received on receivables used as collateral for the revolving credit facility averaged $36.1 million and are available each month to fund new customer receivables generated. Once the VIE’s notes are retired, we would expect all payments to be available to fund new customer receivables.
The revolving credit facility is a significant factor relative to our ongoing liquidity and our ability to meet the cash needs associated with the growth of our business. Our inability to use this program because of a failure to comply with its covenants would adversely affect our business operations. Funding of current and future customer receivables under the borrowing facility can be adversely affected if we exceed certain predetermined levels of re-aged customer receivables, write-offs, bankruptcies or other ineligible customer receivable amounts.
Our VIE issued $103.7 million of fixed-rate notes on April 30, 2012. The notes bear interest at a fixed rate of 4.0% and were sold at a discount to deliver a 5.21% yield, before considering transaction costs. Net proceeds from the offering were used to repay borrowings under our asset-based revolving credit facility, which bears interest at LIBOR plus a spread ranging from 350 basis points to 400 basis points, based on a leverage ratio (defined as total liabilities to tangible net worth). There have been no other significant changes to our market risk since January 31, 2012.
For additional quantitative and qualitative disclosures about market risk, see Item 7A. “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk,” of Conn’s, Inc. Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2012.
Based on management's evaluation (with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO)), as of the end of the period covered by this report, our CEO and CFO have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act)), are effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and is accumulated and communicated to management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
For the nine months ended October 31, 2012, there have been no changes in our internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.
The Company is involved in routine litigation and claims incidental to its business from time to time, and, as required, has accrued its estimate of the probable costs for the resolution of these matters, which are not expected to be material. These estimates have been developed in consultation with counsel and are based upon an analysis of potential results, assuming a combination of litigation and settlement strategies. Recently, the Company has been included in various patent infringement claims and litigation, the outcomes of which are difficult to predict at this time. Due to the timing of these matters, the Company has determined that no reasonable estimates of probable costs for resolution can be ascertained at this time, and it is possible, however, that future results of operations for any particular period could be materially affected by changes in the Company’s assumptions or the effectiveness of its strategies related to these proceedings. However, the results of these proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty, and changes in facts and circumstances could impact the Company’s estimate of reserves for litigation.
You should carefully consider the risks described below before making an investment decision. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected by these risks. The trading price of our common stock could decline due to any of these risks, and you may lose all or part of your investment. You should also refer to the other information included in this report, including our consolidated financial statements and related notes.
We may not be able to open and profitably operate new stores in existing, adjacent and new geographic markets. We reinstated our new store opening program during fiscal year 2013. We have opened two stores and have plans to open three more new stores in fiscal year 2013. New stores may not be profitable on an operating basis during the first months after they open and even after that time period may not be profitable or meet our goals. Any of these circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our financial results. There are a number of factors that could affect our ability to open and operate new stores consistent with our business plan, including:
| • | The availability of additional financial resources; |
| • | The availability of favorable sites in existing, adjacent and new markets at price levels consistent with our business plan; |
| • | Competition in existing, adjacent and new markets; |
| • | Competitive conditions, consumer tastes and discretionary spending patterns in adjacent and new markets that are different from those in our existing markets; |
| • | A lack of consumer demand for our products or financing programs at levels that can support new store growth; |
| • | Inability to make customer financing programs available that allow consumers to purchase products at levels that can support new store growth; |
| • | Limitations created by covenants and conditions under our revolving credit facility; |
| • | The substantial outlay of financial resources required to open new stores and the possibility that we may recognize little or no related benefit; |
| • | An inability or unwillingness of vendors to supply product on a timely basis at competitive prices; |
| • | The failure to open enough stores in new markets to achieve a sufficient market presence and realize the benefits of leveraging our advertising and our distribution system; |
| • | Unfamiliarity with local real estate markets and demographics in adjacent and new markets; |
| • | Problems in adapting our distribution and other operational and management systems to an expanded network of stores; |
| • | Difficulties associated with the hiring, training and retention of additional skilled personnel, including store managers; and |
| • | Higher costs for print, radio and television advertising. |
These factors may also affect the ability of any newly opened stores to achieve sales and profitability levels comparable with our existing stores or to become profitable at all. As a result, we may determine that we need to close additional stores or reduce the hours of operation in some stores, which could materially adversely impact our business, financial condition, operating results or cash flows, as we may incur additional expenses and non-cash write-offs related to closing a store and settling our remaining lease obligations and our initial investment in fixed assets and related store costs.
We may not successfully implement our existing store remodeling program which could negatively impact our results of operations or fail to provide a favorable return on our investment. We plan to remodel 35 of our existing stores by the end of fiscal year 2014, 15 of which were completed as of October 31, 2012. These efforts may not be successful in enhancing the operating results of the stores remodeled, which could negatively affect our results of operations or may not yield a favorable return on the investment required for such remodels. Further, our store operations for such stores could be disrupted or such stores temporarily closed, which could negatively impact our financial performance. If we are unable to successfully operate remodeled stores in our new store format or customers for those stores are not receptive to the new store format, our operating results for such stores would be negatively affected.
If we are unable to manage our growing business, our revenues may not increase as anticipated, our cost of operations may rise and our results of operations may decline. As a result of re-initiating our store opening plan and beginning to grow our store base, we will face many business risks associated with growing companies, including the risk that our management, financial controls and information systems will be inadequate to support our expansion in the future. Our growth will require management to expend significant time and effort and additional resources to ensure the continuing adequacy of our financial controls, operating procedures, information systems, product purchasing, warehousing and distribution systems and employee training programs. We cannot predict whether we will be able to effectively manage these increased demands or respond on a timely basis to the changing demands that our expansion will impose on our management, financial controls and information systems. If we fail to manage successfully the challenges of growth, do not continue to improve these systems and controls or encounter unexpected difficulties during expansion, our business, financial condition, operating results or cash flows could be materially adversely affected.
We may expand our retail offerings which may have different operating or legal requirements than our current operations. In addition to the retail and consumer finance products we currently offer, we may offer other products and services in the future, including new financing products. These products and services may require additional or different operating systems or have additional or different legal or regulatory requirements than the products and services we currently offer. In the event we undertake such an expansion and do not have the proper infrastructure or personnel, or do not successfully execute such an expansion, our business, financial condition, operating results or cash flows could be materially adversely affected.
A decrease in our credit sales or a decline in credit quality could lead to a decrease in our product sales and profitability. In the last three fiscal years, we financed, on average, including down payments, approximately 61% of our retail sales through our in-house proprietary credit programs to customers with a broad range of credit worthiness. A large portion of our credit portfolio is to customers considered by many to be subprime borrowers. Our ability to provide credit as a financing alternative for our customers depends on many factors, including the quality of our customer receivables portfolio. Payments on some of our credit accounts become delinquent from time to time, and some accounts end up in default, due to several factors, such as general and local economic conditions, including the impact of rising interest rates and unemployment rates. As we expand into new markets, we will obtain new credit accounts that may present a higher risk than our existing credit accounts since new credit customers do not have an established credit history with us. A general decline in the quality of our customer receivable portfolio could lead to a reduction in the advance rates used or eligible customer receivable balances included in the borrowing base calculations under our revolving credit facility and thus a reduction of available credit to fund our finance operations. As a result, if we are required to reduce the amount of credit we grant to our customers, we most likely would sell fewer products, which would adversely affect our financial condition, operating results and cash flows. Further, because approximately 60% of our credit customers have historically made their credit account payments in our stores, any decrease in credit sales could reduce traffic in our stores and lower our revenues. A decline in the credit quality of our credit accounts could also cause an increase in our credit losses, which would result in an adverse effect on our earnings. A decline in credit quality could also lead to stricter underwriting criteria which would likely have a negative impact on net sales.
We have significant future capital needs and the inability to obtain funding for our credit operations may adversely affect our business and expansion plans. We currently finance our customer receivables through an asset-based loan facility that provides $545.0 million in financing commitments and securitized notes. As of October 31, 2012, we had $272.2 million outstanding under our asset-based revolving credit facility, including standby letters of credit issued. Our ability to raise additional capital through expansion of our asset-based loan facility, future securitization transactions or other debt or equity transactions, and do so on economically favorable terms, depends in large part on factors that are beyond our control.
These factors include:
| • | Conditions in the securities and finance markets generally; |
| • | Our credit rating or the credit rating of any securities we may issue; |
| • | Conditions in the markets for securitized instruments, or other debt or equity instruments; |
| • | The credit quality and performance of our customer receivables; |
| • | Our overall sales performance and profitability; |
| • | Our ability to provide or obtain financial support for required credit enhancement; |
| • | Our ability to adequately service our financial instruments; |
| • | Our ability to meet debt covenant requirements; and |
| • | Prevailing interest rates. |
If adequate capital and funds are not available at the time we need capital, we will have to curtail future growth, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results or cash flow. As we grow our business, capital expenditures during future years are likely to exceed our historical capital expenditures. The ultimate amount of capital expenditures needed will be dependent on, among other factors, the availability of capital to fund new store openings and customer receivables portfolio growth.
In addition, we historically used our customer receivables as collateral to raise funds through securitization programs. In fiscal year 2011, we completed amendments to our existing credit facilities and our terminated securitization facilities to obtain relief from potential covenant violations and revise certain covenant requirements. If we require amendments in the future and are unable to obtain such amendments or we are unable to arrange substitute financing facilities or other sources of capital, we may have to limit or cease offering credit through our finance programs due to our inability to draw under our revolving credit facility upon the occurrence of a default. If availability under the borrowing base calculations of our revolving credit facility is reduced, or otherwise becomes unavailable, or we are unable to arrange substitute financing facilities or other sources of capital, we may have to limit the amount of credit that we make available through our customer finance programs. A reduction in our ability to offer customer credit will adversely affect revenues and results of operations and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. Further, our inability or limitations on our ability to obtain funding through securitization facilities or other sources may adversely affect our profitability under our credit programs if existing customers fail to repay outstanding credit due to our refusal to grant additional credit.
Additionally, the inability of any of the financial institutions providing our financing facilities to fund their commitment would adversely affect our ability to fund our credit programs, capital expenditures and other general corporate needs.
If we are unable to renew or replace our existing credit facilities in the future or have access to securitization markets reduced, we would be required to reduce, or possibly cease, offering customers credit, which could adversely affect our revenues and results of operations in the same manner as discussed above.
Failure to comply with our covenants in our credit facilities could materially and adversely affect us. Under our existing asset-based loan facility we have certain obligations, including maintaining certain financial covenants. If we fail to maintain the financial covenants in our credit facility and are not able to obtain relief from any covenant violation, then an event of default could occur and the lenders could cease lending to us, accelerate the payments of our debt and foreclose on our assets that secure the asset-based loan facility. Any such action by the lenders could materially and adversely affect us and could even result in bankruptcy. While we are in compliance with the covenants in our existing facilities, if our retail and credit operation performance deteriorates, we could be in breach of one or more covenants.
Increased borrowing costs will negatively impact our results of operations. Because most of our customer receivables have interest rates equal to the highest rate allowable under applicable law, we would not be able to pass higher borrowing costs along to our customers and our results of operations would be negatively impacted. The interest rates on our revolving credit facility fluctuate up or down based upon the LIBOR rate, the prime rate of our administrative agent or the federal funds rate. The level of interest rates in the market in general will impact the interest rate on any debt instruments issued, if any. Additionally, we may issue debt securities or enter into credit facilities under which we pay interest at a higher rate than we have historically paid which would further reduce our margins and negatively impact our results of operations.
Deterioration in the performance of our customer receivables portfolio could significantly affect our liquidity position and profitability. Our liquidity position and profitability are heavily dependent on our ability to collect our customer receivables. If our customer receivables portfolio were to substantially deteriorate, the liquidity available to us would most likely be reduced due to the challenges of complying with the covenants and borrowing base calculations under our revolving credit facility and our earnings may decline due to higher provisions for bad debt expense, higher servicing costs, higher net charge-off rates and lower interest and fee income.
Our ability to collect from credit customers may be materially impaired by store closings and our need to rely on a replacement servicer in the event of our liquidation. We may be unable to collect a large portion of periodic credit payments should our stores close as many of our customers remit payments in-store. During the course of fiscal year 2012, approximately 60% of our active credit customers made a payment in one of our stores. In the event of store closings, credit customers may not pay balances in a timely fashion, or may not pay at all, since a large number of our customers have not traditionally made payments to a central location.
In addition, we service our active credit customers through our in-house servicing operation. At this time, there is not a formalized back-up servicer plan in place for the vast majority of our customer receivables. In the event of our liquidation, a servicing arrangement would have to be implemented, which could materially impact the collection of our customer receivables.
In deciding whether to extend credit to customers, we rely on the accuracy and completeness of information furnished to us by or on behalf of our credit customers. If we and our systems are unable to detect any misrepresentations in this information, this could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. In deciding whether to extend credit to customers, we rely heavily on information furnished to us by or on behalf of our credit customers and our ability to validate such information through third-party services, including employment and personal financial information. If a significant percentage of our credit customers intentionally or negligently misrepresent any of this information, and we or our systems did not detect such misrepresentations, it could have a material adverse effect on our ability to effectively manage our credit risk, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
Our policy of re-aging certain delinquent borrowers affects our delinquency statistics and the timing and amount of our write-offs. As of October 31, 2012, 11.4% of our credit portfolio consisted of “re-aged” customer receivables. Re-aging is offered to certain eligible past-due customers if they meet the conditions of our re-age policy. Our decision to offer a delinquent customer a re-age program is based on that borrower’s specific condition, our history with the borrower, the amount of the loan and various other factors. When we re-age a customer’s account, we move the account from a delinquent status to a current status. Management exercises a considerable amount of discretion over the re-aging process and has the ability to re-age an account multiple times during its life. During fiscal year 2012, we put a policy in place to limit the number of months an account can be re-aged over the life of the account to 12 months. Treating an otherwise uncollectible account as current affects our delinquency statistics, as well as impacting the timing and amount of charge-offs. If these accounts had been charged off sooner, our net loss rates might have been higher.
If we fail to timely contact delinquent borrowers, then the number of delinquent customer receivables eventually being charged off could increase. We contact customers with delinquent credit account balances soon after the account becomes delinquent. During periods of increased delinquencies it is important that we are proactive in dealing with borrowers rather than simply allowing customer receivables to go to charge-off. Historically, when our servicing becomes involved at an earlier stage of delinquency with credit counseling and workout programs, there is a greater likelihood that the customer receivable will not be charged off.
During periods of increased delinquencies, it becomes extremely important that we are properly staffed and trained to assist borrowers in bringing the delinquent balance current and ultimately avoiding charge-off. If we do not properly staff and train our collections personnel, then the number of accounts in a delinquent status or charged-off could increase. In addition, managing a substantially higher volume of delinquent customer receivables typically increases our operational costs. A rise in delinquencies or charge-offs could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
We rely on internal models to manage risk and to provide accounting estimates. Our results could be adversely affected if those models do not provide reliable accounting estimates or predictions of future activity. We make significant use of business and financial models in connection with our efforts to measure and monitor our risk exposures and to manage our credit portfolio. For example, we use models as a basis for credit underwriting decisions, portfolio delinquency, charge-off and collection expectations and other market risks, based on economic factors and our experience. The information provided by these models is used in making business decisions relating to strategies, initiatives, transactions and pricing, as well as the size of our allowance for doubtful accounts, among other accounting estimates. Models are inherently imperfect predictors of actual results because they are based on historical data available to us and our assumptions about factors such as credit demand, payment rates, default rates, delinquency rates and other factors that may overstate or understate future experience. Our models could produce unreliable results for a number of reasons, including the limitations of historical data to predict results due to unprecedented events or circumstances, invalid or incorrect assumptions underlying the models, the need for manual adjustments in response to rapid changes in economic conditions, incorrect coding of the models, incorrect data being used by the models or inappropriate application of a model to products or events outside of the model’s intended use. In particular, models are less dependable when the economic environment is outside of historical experience, as has been the case recently.
In addition, we continually receive new economic data. Our critical accounting estimates, such as the size of our allowance for doubtful accounts, are subject to change, often significantly, due to the nature and magnitude of changes in economic conditions. However, there is generally a lag between the availability of this economic information and the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. When economic conditions change quickly and in unforeseen ways, there is a risk that the assumptions and inputs reflected in our models are not representative of current economic conditions.
Due to the factors described above and in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this report and our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2012, we may be required or may deem it necessary to increase our allowance for doubtful accounts in the future. Increasing our allowance for doubtful accounts would adversely affect our results of operations and our financial position.
The dramatic changes in the economy and the credit and capital markets have required frequent adjustments to our models and the application of greater management judgment in the interpretation and adjustment of the results produced by our models. This application of greater management judgment reflects the need to take into account updated information while continuing to maintain controlled processes for model updates, including model development, testing, independent validation and implementation. As a result of the time and resources, including technical and staffing resources, that are required to perform these processes effectively, it may not be possible to replace existing models quickly enough to ensure that they will always properly account for the impacts of recent information and actions.
The recent economic downturn has affected consumer purchases from us as well as their ability to repay their credit obligations to us, which could have a continued or prolonged negative effect on our net sales, gross margins and credit portfolio performance. Many factors affect spending, including regional or world events, war, conditions in financial markets, general business conditions, interest rates, inflation, energy and gasoline prices, consumer debt levels, the availability of consumer credit, taxation, unemployment trends and other matters that influence consumer confidence and spending. Our customers’ purchases of our products decline during periods when disposable income is lower or periods of actual or perceived unfavorable economic conditions. Recent turmoil in the national economy, including instability in financial markets and the so-called “fiscal cliff” involving a potential combination of expiring tax cuts and mandatory federal spending reductions at the end of 2012, decreases in consumer confidence and volatile oil prices have negatively impacted our markets and may present significant challenges to our operations in the future. If this occurs, our net sales and results of operations would decline.
We face significant competition from national, regional, local and internet retailers of home appliances, consumer electronics and furniture. The retail market for consumer electronics and furniture is highly fragmented and intensely competitive and the market for home appliances is concentrated among a few major dealers. We currently compete against a diverse group of retailers, including national mass merchants such as Sears, Wal-Mart, Target, Sam’s Club and Costco, specialized national retailers such as Best Buy and Rooms To Go, home improvement stores such as Lowe’s and Home Depot, and locally-owned regional or independent retail specialty stores that sell home appliances, consumer electronics, furniture, and mattresses similar, and often identical, to those items we sell. We also compete with retailers that market products through store catalogs and the internet. In addition, there are few barriers to entry into our current and contemplated markets, and new competitors may enter our current or future markets at any time.
We may not be able to compete successfully against existing and future competitors. Some of our competitors have financial resources that are substantially greater than ours and may be able to purchase inventory at lower costs and better endure economic downturns. As a result, our sales may decline if we cannot offer competitive prices to our customers or we may be required to accept lower profit margins. Our competitors may respond more quickly to new or emerging technologies and may have greater resources to devote to promotion and sale of products and services. If two or more competitors consolidate their businesses or enter into strategic partnerships, they may be able to compete more effectively against us.
Our existing competitors or new entrants into our industry may use a number of different strategies to compete against us, including:
| • | Expansion by our existing competitors or entry by new competitors into markets where we currently operate; |
| • | Entering the television market as the decreased size of flat-panel televisions allows new entrants to display and sell these products more easily; |
| • | Aggressive advertising and marketing; |
| • | Extension of credit to customers on terms more favorable than we offer; |
| • | Larger store size, which may result in greater operational efficiencies, or innovative store formats; and |
| • | Adoption of improved retail sales methods. |
Competition from any of these sources could cause us to lose market share, sales and customers, increase expenditures or reduce prices, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
If new products are not introduced or consumers do not accept new products, our sales may decline. Our ability to maintain and increase sales depends to a large extent on the periodic introduction and availability of new products and technologies. It is possible that new products will never achieve widespread consumer acceptance or will be supplanted by alternative products and technologies that do not offer us a similar sales opportunity or are sold at lower price points or margins.
We have expanded the floor space dedicated to our furniture and mattress product offerings. If the strategy of increasing our emphasis on furniture and mattress offerings is unsuccessful, it would have a materially adverse effect on our sales and results of operations.
If we fail to anticipate changes in consumer preferences, our sales will decline. Our products must appeal to a broad range of consumers whose preferences cannot be predicted with certainty and are subject to change. Our success depends upon our ability to anticipate and respond in a timely manner to trends in consumer preferences relating to home appliances, consumer electronics and furniture. If we fail to identify and respond to these changes, our sales of these products will decline. In addition, we often make commitments to purchase products from our vendors up to nine months in advance of proposed delivery dates. Significant deviation from the projected demand for products that we sell may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition, either from lost sales or lower margins due to the need to reduce prices to dispose of excess inventory.
We may experience significant price pressures over the life cycle of our products from competing technologies and our competitors and we may not be able to maintain our historical gross margin levels. Prices for many of our products decrease over their life cycle. Such decreases often result in decreased gross profit margins for us. There is also substantial and continuing pressure from customers to reduce their total costs for products. Suppliers may also seek to reduce our margins on the sales of their products in order to increase their own profitability. The consumer electronics industry depends on new products to drive same store sales increases. Typically, these new products, such as high-definition LED and 3-D televisions, Blu-ray players and digital cameras are introduced at relatively high price points that are then gradually reduced as the product becomes mainstream. To sustain positive same store sales growth, unit sales must increase at a rate greater than the decline in product prices. The affordability of the product helps drive the unit sales growth. However, as a result of relatively short product life cycles in the consumer electronics industry, which limit the amount of time available for sales volume to increase, combined with rapid price erosion in the industry, retailers are challenged to maintain overall gross margin levels and positive same store sales. This has historically been our experience, and we continue to adjust our marketing strategies to address this challenge through the introduction of new product categories and new products within our existing categories. If we fail to accurately anticipate the introduction of new technologies, we may possess significant amounts of obsolete inventory that can only be sold at substantially lower prices and profit margins than we anticipated. In addition, we may not be able to maintain our historical margin levels in the future due to increased sales of lower margin products such as personal electronics products and declines in average selling prices of key products. If sales of lower margin items continue to increase and replace sales of higher margin items or our consumer electronics products average selling prices decreases due to the maturity of their life cycle, our gross margin and overall gross profit levels will be adversely affected.
A disruption in our relationships with, in the operations of, or supply of product from any of our key suppliers could cause our sales to decline. The success of our business and growth strategies depends to a significant degree on our relationships with our suppliers, particularly our brand name suppliers such as Dell, Electrolux, Franklin, Frigidaire, General Electric, Hewlett-Packard, Jackson-Catnapper, LG, Samsung, Sealy, Serta, Sharp, Steve Silver, Sony, Toshiba, and Vaughn-Bassett. We do not have long-term supply agreements or exclusive arrangements with the majority of our vendors. We typically order our inventory and repair parts through the issuance of individual purchase orders to vendors. We also rely on our suppliers for cooperative advertising support. We may be subject to rationing by suppliers with respect to a number of limited distribution items. In addition, we rely heavily on a relatively small number of suppliers. Our top six suppliers represented 72.0% of our purchases for fiscal year 2012, and the top two suppliers represented approximately 48.6% of our total purchases. The loss of any one or more of these key vendors or failure to establish and maintain relationships with these and other vendors, and limitations on the availability of inventory or repair parts could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. If one of our vendors were to go out of business, it could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition if such vendor is unable to fund amounts due to us, including payments due for returns of product and warranty claims. Catastrophic or other unforeseen events, such as the one which impacted Japan during 2011, could adversely impact the supply and delivery of products to us and could adversely impact our results of operations.
Our ability to enter new markets successfully depends, to a significant extent, on the willingness and ability of our vendors to supply merchandise to additional warehouses or stores. If vendors are unwilling or unable to supply some or all of their products to us at acceptable prices in one or more markets, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.
Furthermore, we rely on credit from vendors to purchase our products. As of October 31, 2012, we had $66.2 million in accounts payable and $77.2 million in merchandise inventories. A substantial change in credit terms from vendors or vendors’ willingness to extend credit to us, including providing inventory under consignment arrangements, would reduce our ability to obtain the merchandise that we sell, which would have a material adverse effect on our sales and results of operations.
Our vendors also supply us with marketing funds and volume rebates. If our vendors fail to continue these incentives it could have a material adverse effect on our sales and results of operations.
You should not rely on our comparable store sales as an indication of our future results of operations because they fluctuate significantly. Our historical same store sales growth figures have fluctuated significantly from quarter to quarter. A number of factors have historically affected, and will continue to affect, our comparable store sales results, including:
| • | Changes in competition, such as pricing pressure, and the opening of new stores by competitors in our markets; |
| • | General economic conditions; |
| • | New product introductions; |
| • | Changes in our merchandise mix; |
| • | Changes in the relative sales price points of our major product categories; |
| • | Ability to offer credit programs attractive to our customers; |
| • | The impact of any new stores on our existing stores, including potential decreases in existing stores’ sales as a result of opening new stores; |
| • | Weather conditions in our markets; |
| • | Timing of promotional events; |
| • | Timing, location and participants of major sporting events; |
| • | Reduction in new store openings; |
| • | The percentage of our stores that are mature stores; |
| • | The locations of our stores and the traffic drawn to those areas; |
| • | How often we update our stores; and |
| • | Our ability to execute our business strategy effectively. |
Changes in our quarterly and annual comparable store sales results could cause the price of our common stock to fluctuate significantly.
We experience seasonal fluctuations in our sales and quarterly results. We typically experience seasonal fluctuations in our net sales and operating results, with the quarter ending January 31, which includes the holiday selling season, generally accounting for a larger share of our net sales and net income. We also incur significant additional expenses during such fiscal quarter due to higher purchase volumes and increased staffing. If we miscalculate the demand for our products generally or for our product mix during the fiscal quarter ending January 31, or if we experience adverse events, such as bad weather in our markets during our fourth fiscal quarter, our net sales could decline, resulting in excess inventory or increased sales discounts to sell excess inventory, which would harm our financial performance. A shortfall in expected net sales, combined with our significant additional expenses during this fiscal quarter, could cause a significant decline in our operating results and such sales may not be deferred to future periods.
Our business could be adversely affected by changes in consumer protection laws and regulations. Federal and state consumer protection laws and regulations, such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau limit the manner in which we may offer and extend credit. Because our customers finance through our credit segment a substantial portion of our sales, any adverse change in the regulation of consumer credit could adversely affect our total sales and gross margins. For example, new laws or regulations could limit the amount of interest or fees that may be charged on consumer credit accounts, including by reducing the maximum interest rate that can be charged in the states in which we operate, or restrict our ability to collect on account balances, which would have a material adverse effect on our cash flow and results of operations. Compliance with existing and future laws or regulations, including regulations that may be applicable to us under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which was enacted into law in July 2010, could require us to make material expenditures, in particular personnel training costs, or otherwise adversely affect our business or financial results. Failure to comply with these laws or regulations, even if inadvertent, could result in negative publicity, fines or additional licensing expenses, any of which could have an adverse effect on our cash flow and results of operations.
We are required to comply with laws and regulations regulating credit extensions and other dealings with customer and our failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, or any adverse change in those laws or regulations, could have a negative impact on our business. Our customers finance through our credit segment a substantial portion of our sales. We also sell our customers gift cards for redemption against future purchases. Providing credit and other financial products and otherwise dealing with consumers and information provided by consumers does or could subject us to the jurisdiction of various federal, state and local government authorities, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which was created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Federal Trade Commission, the SEC, state regulators having jurisdiction over persons engaged in consumer sales, consumer credit and other financial products and consumer debt collection, and state attorneys general. Our business practices, including the terms of our marketing and advertising, our procedures and practices for credit applications and underwriting, the terms of our credit extensions and gift cards and related disclosures, our data privacy and protection practices, and our collection practices, may be subject to periodic or special reviews by these regulatory and enforcement authorities. These reviews could range from investigations of specific consumer complaints or concerns to broader inquiries into our practices generally. If as part of these reviews the regulatory authorities conclude that we are not complying with applicable law or regulations, they could request or impose a wide range of sanctions and remedies including requiring changes in advertising and collection practices, changes in our credit application and underwriting practices, changes in our data privacy or protection practices, changes in the terms of our credit or other financial products (such as decreases in interest rates or fees), the imposition of fines or penalties, or the paying of restitution or the taking of other remedial action with respect to affected customers. They also could require us to stop offering some of our credit or other financial products within one or more states, or nationwide.
Negative publicity relating to any specific inquiry or investigation, regardless of whether we have violated any applicable law or regulation or the extent of any such violation, could negatively affect our reputation and our brand as well as our stock price, which would adversely affect our ability to raise additional capital and would raise our costs of doing business. If any deficiencies or violations of law or regulations are identified by us or asserted by any regulator or other person, or if any regulatory or enforcement authority or court requires us to change any of our practices, the correction of such deficiencies or violations, or the making of such changes, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or business. We face the risk that restrictions or limitations resulting from the enactment, change, or interpretation of federal or state laws and regulations, such as the Dodd-Frank Act, could negatively affect our business activities, require us to make material expenditures or effectively eliminate credit products or other financial products currently offered to customers.
In addition, whether or not we modify our practices when a regulatory or enforcement authority or court requests or requires that we do so, there is a risk that we or other industry participants may be named as defendants in individual or class action litigation involving alleged violations of federal and state laws and regulations, including consumer protection laws and regulations. Any failure on our part to comply with legal requirements in connection with credit or other financial products, or in connection with servicing our accounts or collecting debts or otherwise dealing with consumers, could significantly impair our ability to collect the full amount of the account balances and could subject us to substantial liability for damages or penalties. The institution of any litigation of this nature, or the rendering of any judgment, against us or any other industry participant in any litigation of this nature, could adversely affect our business and financial condition.
Pending litigation relating to the sale of credit insurance and the sale of repair service agreements in the retail industry could adversely affect our business. State attorney generals and private plaintiffs have filed lawsuits against other retailers relating to improper practices conducted in connection with the sale of credit insurance in several jurisdictions around the country. We offer credit insurance in our stores on sales financed under our credit programs and require the customer to purchase property insurance from us or provide evidence from a third-party insurance provider, at their election, in connection with sales of merchandise on installment credit; therefore, similar litigation could be brought against us. While we believe we are in full compliance with applicable laws and regulations, if we are found liable in any future lawsuit regarding credit insurance or repair service agreements, we could be required to pay substantial damages or incur substantial costs as part of an out-of-court settlement or require us to modify or suspend certain operations any of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. An adverse judgment or any negative publicity associated with our repair service agreements or any potential credit insurance litigation could also affect our reputation, which could have a negative impact on our cash flow and results of operations.
Pending and potential litigation regarding alleged patent infringements could result in significant costs to us to defend what we consider to be spurious claims. Recently the manufacturing, retail and software industries have been the targets of patent litigation claimants filing claims or demands based upon alleged patent ownership infringement through the manufacturing and selling, either in merchandise or through software and internet websites, of product or merely providing access through website portals. We, in conjunction with multiple other parties, have been the targets of such claims. While we believe that we have not violated or infringed on any alleged patent ownership rights, and intend to defend vigorously any such claims, the cost to defend, settle or pay any such claims could be substantial, and could have an adverse effect on our cash flow and results of operations.
Our corporate actions may be substantially controlled by our principal shareholders and affiliated entities. As of November 29, 2012, Stephens Inc. and The Stephens Group, LLC, and their affiliated entities beneficially owned approximately 22.3% and 25.7%, respectively, of our common stock. Their interests may conflict with the will or interests of our other equity holders. While Stephens Inc. and its affiliates hold their 21.6% of our common stock through a voting trust that will vote the shares in the same proportion as votes cast by all other stockholders, this voting trust agreement will expire in October 31, 2013, unless extended, and upon expiration Stephens Inc. and its affiliates will not be restricted on how it votes its shares. These stockholders, acting individually or as a group, could exert substantial influence over matters such as electing directors and approving mergers or other business combination transactions.
If we lose key management or are unable to attract and retain the qualified sales and credit granting and collection personnel required for our business, our operating results could suffer. Our future success depends to a significant degree on the skills, experience and continued service of our key executives or the identification of suitable successors for them. If we lose the services of any of these individuals, or if one or more of them or other key personnel decide to join a competitor or otherwise compete directly or indirectly with us, and we are unable to identify a suitable successor, our business and operations could be harmed, and we could have difficulty in implementing our strategy. In addition, as our business grows, we will need to locate, hire and retain additional qualified sales personnel in a timely manner and develop, train and manage an increasing number of management level sales associates and other employees. Additionally, if we are unable to attract and retain qualified credit granting and collection personnel, our ability to perform quality underwriting of new credit transactions and maintain workloads for our collections personnel at a manageable level, our operation could be adversely impacted and result in higher delinquency and net charge-offs on our credit portfolio. Competition for qualified employees could require us to pay higher wages to attract a sufficient number of employees, and increases in the federal minimum wage or other employee benefits costs could increase our operating expenses. If we are unable to attract and retain personnel as needed in the future, our net sales and operating results could suffer.
Our costs of doing business could increase as a result of changes in federal, state or local regulations. Changes in the federal, state or local minimum wage requirements or changes in other wage or workplace regulations could increase our cost of doing business. In addition, changes in federal, state or local regulations governing the sale of some of our products or tax regulations could increase our cost of doing business. Also, passage of the Employer Free Choice Act or similar laws in Congress could lead to higher labor costs by encouraging unionization efforts among our associates and disruption of store operations.
Because our stores are located in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and New Mexico, and our distribution centers are located in Texas, we are subject to regional risks. Our 66 stores are located exclusively in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and New Mexico and our four regional distribution centers are located in Texas. This subjects us to regional risks, such as the economy, weather conditions, hurricanes and other natural or man-made disasters. If the region suffers a continued or another economic downturn or any other adverse regional event, there could be an adverse impact on our net sales and results of operations and our ability to implement our planned expansion program. Several of our competitors operate stores across the United States and thus are not as vulnerable to the risks of operating in one region. Additionally, these states in general, and the local economies where many of our stores are located in particular, are dependent, to a degree, on the oil and gas industries, which can be very volatile. Additionally, because of fears of climate change and adverse effects of drilling explosions and oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico, legislation has been considered, and governmental regulations and orders have been issued, which, combined with the local economic and employment conditions caused by both, could materially and adversely impact the oil and gas industries and the areas in which a majority of our stores are located in Texas and Louisiana. To the extent the oil and gas industries are negatively impacted by declining commodity prices, climate change or other legislation and other factors, we could be negatively impacted by reduced employment, or other negative economic factors that impact the local economies where we have our stores.
In addition, recent turmoil in the national economy, including instability in the financial markets, has impacted our local markets. A downturn in the general economy, or in the region where we have our stores, could have a negative impact on our net sales and results of operations.
Our information technology infrastructure is vulnerable to damage that could harm our business. Our ability to operate our business from day to day, in particular our ability to manage our credit operations and inventory levels, largely depends on the efficient operation of our computer hardware and software systems. We use management information systems to track inventory information at the store level, communicate customer information, aggregate daily sales information and manage our credit portfolio, including processing of credit applications and management of collections. These systems and our operations are subject to damage or interruption from:
| • | Power loss, computer systems failures and Internet, telecommunications or data network failures; |
| • | Operator negligence or improper operation by, or supervision of, employees; |
| • | Physical and electronic loss of data or security breaches, misappropriation and similar events; |
| • | Intentional acts of vandalism and similar events; and |
| • | Hurricanes, fires, floods and other natural disasters. |
In addition, the software that we have developed to use in our daily operations may contain undetected errors that could cause our network to fail or our expenses to increase. Any failure of our systems due to any of these causes, if it is not supported by our disaster recovery plan, could cause an interruption in our operations and result in reduced net sales and results of operations. Though we have implemented contingency and disaster recovery processes in the event of one or several technology failures, any unforeseen failure, interruption or compromise of our systems or our security measures could affect our flow of business and, if prolonged, could harm our reputation. The risk of possible failures or interruptions may not be adequately addressed by us or the third parties on which we rely, and such failures or interruptions could occur. The occurrence of any failures or interruptions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
If we are unable to maintain our insurance licenses in the states we operate, our results of operations would suffer. We derive a significant portion of our revenues and operating income from the commissions we earn from the sale of various insurance products of third-party insurers to our customers. These products include credit insurance, repair service agreements and product replacement policies. We also are the direct obligor on certain extended repair service agreements we offer to our customers. If for any reason we were unable to maintain our insurance licenses in the states we operate or if there are material claims or future material litigation involving our repair service agreements or product replacement policies, our results of operations would suffer.
If we are unable to continue to offer third-party repair service agreements to our customers who purchase, or have purchased our products, we could incur additional costs or repair expenses, which would adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. There are a limited number of insurance carriers that provide repair service agreement programs. If insurance becomes unavailable from our current providers for any reason, we may be unable to provide repair service agreements to our customers on the same terms, if at all. Even if we are able to obtain a substitute provider, higher premiums may be required, which could have an adverse impact on our profitability if we are unable to pass along the increased cost of such coverage to our customers. Inability to maintain the repair service agreement program could cause fluctuations in our repair expenses and greater volatility of earnings and could require us to become the obligor under new contracts sold.
If we are unable to maintain group credit insurance policies from insurance carriers, which allow us to offer their credit insurance products to our customers purchasing our merchandise on credit, our revenues would be reduced and the provision for bad debts might increase. There are a limited number of insurance carriers that provide credit insurance coverage for sale to our customers. If credit insurance becomes unavailable for any reason we may be unable to offer substitute coverage on the same terms, if at all. Even if we are able to obtain substitute coverage, it may be at higher rates or reduced coverage, which could affect the customer acceptance of these products, reduce our revenues or increase our credit losses.
Changes in premium and commission rates allowed by regulators on the credit insurance, repair service agreements or product replacement agreements we sell as allowed by the laws and regulations in the states in which we operate could affect our revenues. We derive a significant portion of our revenues and operating income from the sale of various third-party insurance products to our customers. These products include credit insurance, repair service agreements and product replacement agreements. If the commission we retain from sales of those products declines, our operating results would suffer.
Changes in trade regulations, currency fluctuations and other factors beyond our control could affect our business. A significant portion of our inventory is manufactured and/or assembled overseas and in Mexico. Changes in trade regulations, currency fluctuations or other factors beyond our control may increase the cost of items we purchase or create shortages of these items, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Conversely, significant reductions in the cost of these items in U.S. dollars may cause a significant reduction in the retail prices of those products, resulting in a material adverse effect on our sales, margins or competitive position. In addition, commissions earned on our credit insurance, repair service agreement or product replacement agreement products could be adversely affected by changes in statutory premium rates, commission rates, adverse claims experience and other factors.
Our costs to protect our intellectual property rights, infringement of which could impair our name and reputation, could be significant. We believe that our success and ability to compete depends in part on consumer identification of the name “Conn’s.” We have registered the trademarks “Conn’s,” “Conn’s HomePlus,” “YES Money,” “YE$ Money,” “SI Money” and our logos. We intend to protect vigorously our trademark against infringement or misappropriation by others. A third party, however, could attempt to misappropriate our intellectual property in the future. The enforcement of our proprietary rights through litigation could result in substantial costs to us that could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
Failure to protect the security of our customer’s information or failure to comply with data privacy and protection laws could expose us to litigation, judgments for damages, increased operating costs and undermine the trust placed with us by our customers. We capture, transmit, handle and store sensitive information, which involves certain inherent security risks. Such risks include, among other things, the interception of customer data and information by persons outside us or by our own employees. While we believe we have taken appropriate steps to protect confidential information, there can be no assurance that we can prevent the compromise of our customers’ data or other confidential information. If such a breach should occur it could have a severe negative impact on our business and results of operations. In addition, interpretation and application of privacy and customer data protection laws are in a state of flux and vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and various governmental entities are considering imposing new regulations on data privacy and protection. These new regulations may be interpreted and applied inconsistently and our current policies and practices, which could cause us to incur substantial costs or require us to change our business practices in a manner adverse to our business.
Any changes in the tax laws of the states in which we operate could affect our state tax liabilities. Additionally, beginning operations in new states could also affect our state tax liabilities. As we experienced in fiscal year 2008 with the change in the Texas tax law, legislation could be introduced at any time that changes our state tax liabilities in a way that has an adverse impact on our results of operations. The Texas margin tax, which is based on gross profit rather than earnings, can create significant volatility in our effective tax rate. The potential to enter new states in the future could adversely affect our results of operations, dependent upon the tax laws in place in those states.
Significant volatility in oil and gasoline prices could affect our customers’ determination to drive to our stores, and cause us to raise our delivery charges. Significant volatility in oil and gasoline prices could adversely affect our customers’ shopping decisions and patterns. We rely heavily on our distribution system and our next day delivery policy to satisfy our customers’ needs and desires, and increases in oil and gasoline prices could result in increased distribution charges. Such increases may not significantly affect our competitors.
Failure to successfully utilize and manage e-commerce could adversely affect our business and prospects. Our website is a significant driver of our sales and we believe represents a possible source for future sales growth. In order to promote our products, allow our customers to complete credit applications in the privacy of their homes and drive traffic to our stores, we must effectively create, design, publish and distribute content. There can be no assurance that we will be able to design and publish web content with a high level of effectiveness or grow our e-commerce business in a profitable manner.
The price of our common stock has fluctuated substantially over the past several years and may continue to fluctuate substantially in the future. During fiscal year 2011, the trading price of our common stock ranged from a low of $3.12 per share to a high of $10.33 per share and from February 1, 2012 through November 29, 2012, the trading price of our common stock ranged from a low of $10.87 per share to a high of $29.23 per share. Our stock may continue to be subject to fluctuations as a result of a variety of factors, which are described above. Some of these factors are beyond our control. We may fail to meet the expectations of our stockholders or securities analysts at some time in the future, and our stock price could decline as a result.
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.