Cash flows used for financing activities for the first nine months of 2004 include a net increase in debt of $34.8 million, and $1.5 million received from the exercise of employee stock options. The increase in debt was used primarily to fund the acquisition of Zieman, the increase in working capital, and capital expenditures.
Availability under the Company’s $55 million line of credit was $7.8 million at September 30, 2004. Borrowings under the $55 million line of credit were $44.4 at September 30, 2004 and there were $2.8 million in outstanding letters of credit also under the line of credit. The maximum borrowing under this line of credit declines from $55 million to $50 million on October 31, 2004. Between September 30, 2004 and October 31, 2004, borrowing under this line of credit declined by more than $6 million. Availability under the Company’s line of credit, along with anticipated cash flows from operations, is adequate to finance the Company’s working capital needs. Certain of the Companies debt agreements contain a requirement that capital expenditures in excess of $11 million for 2004 must be funded with new debt. In order to meet this debt covenant, in October the Company borrowed $3.9 million pursuant to an Industrial Development Bond, and $4 million pursuant to a $10 million equipment line of credit. The Company expects to borrow an additional $2 million to $6 million in the fourth quarter of 2004, to finance capital projects. The Company is in compliance with all of its debt covenants and expects to remain in compliance for the next twelve months. Certain of the Company’s loan agreements contain prepayment penalties.
At September 30, 2004, the Company had outstanding $8 million of 6.95 percent, seven year Senior Notes. The notes originally aggregated $40 million, and repayment of these notes is $8 million annually, of which the final payment is due in January 2005.
The Company is currently seeking to increase its line of credit to $60 million. In addition, the new line of credit is expected to contain an “accordion” feature, which is an understanding that the banks, while not formally committed, are inclined to increase the $60 million line by up to $30 million upon the Company’s request. The Company is also negotiating with a lender for a $50 — $60 million “shelf” facility, which is an uncommitted line that the Company would seek to use to finance a significant acquisition, should the opportunity arise.
The Company received notification in November 2004 from Institutional Stockholders Services, Inc., (“ISS”) a Rockville, Maryland-based independent research firm that advises institutional investors, that the Company’s corporate governance policies outranked 98.5 percent of all companies listed in the Russell 3000 index. The Company has no business relationships with ISS.
DREW INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
(Continued)
COMMITMENTS
On October 8, 2004, the Company entered into an agreement to purchase approximately 37 acres of land and several buildings consisting of approximately 468,000 sq. ft. of manufacturing and office space. The purchase price is $6.2 million, payable $0.5 million upon signing the agreement and $2.6 million upon the current tenant vacating the property. Both payments will be paid into escrow until the final payment of $3.1 million is made on or about January 2, 2006 when title will pass to the Company. Until the closing, which is subject to the completion of environmental due diligence and other conditions, the Company will lease such property from the owner as the current tenant vacates the property. The property is owned by a primary owner of a significant customer of the Company, which is the current tenant.
This space will primarily be used to consolidate existing office space and manufacturing capacity from other leased facilities, as well as to provide manufacturing capacity for new product development.
CONTINGENCIES
Lippert is a defendant in an action entitled SteelCo., Inc. vs. Lippert Components, Inc. and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, commenced in Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District, on July 16, 2002. On motion of Lippert, the case was removed to the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Riverside Division.
Plaintiff alleges that Lippert violated certain provisions of the California Business and Professions Code (Sec. 17000 et. seq.) by allegedly selling chassis and component parts below Lippert’s costs, engaging in acts intended to destroy competition, wrongfully interfering with plaintiff’s economic advantage, and engaging in unfair competition. Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages of $8.2 million, treble damages, punitive damages, costs and expenses incurred in the proceeding, and injunctive relief.
Management believes that the case has no merit, and Lippert is vigorously defending against the allegations in the complaint. In addition, Lippert has asserted counterclaims against Plaintiff.
Court-ordered mediation did not result in settlement. Lippert has made a motion for partial summary judgment to limit plaintiff’s potential damages to less than approximately $100,000. Plaintiff has made a motion for summary judgment against Lippert’s counterclaims. To date the court has made no decision on either the Company’s or the Plaintiff’s motions.
INFLATION
The prices of raw materials, consisting primarily of steel, vinyl, aluminum, glass and ABS resin are influenced by demand and other factors specific to these commodities rather than being directly affected by inflationary pressures. Prices of certain commodities have historically been volatile. In mid December 2003 and continuing into the third quarter of 2004, the Company was notified by its steel suppliers of unprecedented steel cost increases. Depending upon the type of steel purchased, steel costs are currently double or triple the levels they were last year at this time. Steel costs appear to have stabilized and further cost increases are not projected for the balance of 2004. In 2004, the Company has also received cost increases from suppliers of aluminum. Since the third quarter of 2003, the Company experienced modest increases in its labor costs related to inflation.
22
DREW INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
(Continued)
USE OF ESTIMATES
The preparation of these financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires the Company to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, the Company evaluates its estimates, including those related to product returns, doubtful accounts, inventories, notes receivable, goodwill and other intangible assets, income taxes, warranty obligations, insurance obligations, lease terminations and asset retirement obligations, long-lived assets, post-retirement benefits, and contingencies and litigation. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS AND RISK FACTORS
This Form 10-Q contains certain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 with respect to financial condition, results of operations, business strategies, operating efficiencies or synergies, competitive position, growth opportunities for existing products, plans and objectives of management, markets for Drew Industries Incorporated common stock and other matters. Statements in this Form 10-Q that are not historical facts are “forward-looking statements” for the purpose of the safe harbor provided by Section 21E of the Exchange Act and Section 27A of the Securities Act. Forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, those relating to our future business prospects, revenues, costs and income, wherever they occur in this Form 10-Q, are necessarily estimates reflecting the best judgment of our senior management, at the time such statements were made, and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake to update forward-looking statements to reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date the forward-looking statements are made. You should consider forward-looking statements, therefore, in light of various important factors, including those set forth in this Form 10-Q.
There are a number of factors, many of which are beyond the Company’s control, which could cause actual results and events to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements. These factors include pricing pressures due to competition, raw material costs (particularly steel, vinyl, aluminum, glass, and ABS resin), availability of retail and wholesale financing for manufactured homes, availability and costs of labor, inventory levels of retailers and manufacturers, levels of repossessed manufactured homes, the financial condition of our customers, interest rates, oil prices, and adverse weather conditions impacting retail sales. In addition, national and regional economic conditions and consumer confidence may affect the retail sale of recreational vehicles and manufactured homes.
23
DREW INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED
Item 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURE ABOUT MARKET RISK
The Company is exposed to market risk in the normal course of its operations due to its purchases of certain commodities and its financing activities. Certain raw materials, particularly steel, aluminum, vinyl, glass and ABS resins are subject to price volatility. In mid-December 2003 and continuing into the third quarter of 2004, the Company was notified by its steel suppliers of unprecedented steel cost increases. Depending upon the type of steel purchased, steel costs are currently double or triple the levels they were last year at this time. Steel costs appear to have stabilized and further cost increases are not projected for the balance of 2004. In 2004, the Company has also received cost increases from suppliers of aluminum.
The Company is exposed to changes in interest rates primarily as a result of its financing activities. At September 30, 2004, the Company had $21.3 million of fixed rate debt. Assuming there is a decrease of 100 basis points in the interest rate for borrowings of a similar nature subsequent to September 30, 2004, which the Company becomes unable to capitalize on in the short-term as a result of the structure of its fixed rate financing, future cash flows would be approximately $213,000 lower per annum than if the fixed rate financing could be obtained at current market rates.
At September 30, 2004, including borrowings of $44.4 million on its $55 million line of credit, the Company had $53.4 million of variable rate debt. Assuming there is an increase of 100 basis points in the interest rate for borrowings under these variable rate loans subsequent to September 30, 2004, and outstanding borrowings of $53.4 million, future cash flows would be affected by $534,000 per annum.
On October 18, 2004, the Company entered into a five-year interest rate swap with KeyBank National Association with a notional amount of $20,000,000 from which it will receive periodic payments at the 3 month LIBOR rate plus the Company’s applicable spread and make periodic payments at a fixed rate of 3.3525% plus the Company’s applicable spread, with settlement and rate reset dates every November 15, February 15, May 15 and August 15. The notional amount of the interest rate swap decreases by $1,000,000 on each reset date beginning February 15, 2005. The fair value of the swap is zero at inception.
In addition, the Company is periodically exposed to changes in interest rates as a result of temporary investments in money market funds; however, such investing activity is not material to the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flow.
If the actual change in interest rates is substantially different than 100 basis points, the net impact of interest rate risk on the Company’s cash flow may be materially different than that disclosed above.
24
DREW INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED
Item 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
The Company maintains disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the Company’s Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“The Exchange Act”) reports is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to the Company’s management, including its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure, in accordance with the definition of “disclosure controls and procedures” in Rule 13a – 14 (c) under the Exchange Act. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, cannot provide absolute assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. Management considered in its evaluation the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.
As of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report, the Company performed an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of the Company’s management, including the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. Based on the foregoing, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
b) Changes in Internal Controls
There were no changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended September 30, 2004 or subsequent to the date the Company completed its evaluation that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
25
DREW INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1 – Legal Proceedings
Lippert is a defendant in an action entitled SteelCo., Inc. vs. Lippert Components, Inc. and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, commenced in Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District, on July 16, 2002. On motion of Lippert, the case was removed to the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Riverside Division.
Plaintiff alleges that Lippert violated certain provisions of the California Business and Professions Code (Sec. 17000 et. seq.) by allegedly selling chassis and component parts below Lippert’s costs, engaging in acts intended to destroy competition, wrongfully interfering with plaintiff’s economic advantage, and engaging in unfair competition. Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages of $8.2 million, treble damages, punitive damages, costs and expenses incurred in the proceeding, and injunctive relief.
Management believes that the case has no merit, and Lippert is vigorously defending against the allegations in the complaint. In addition, Lippert has asserted counterclaims against Plaintiff.
Court-ordered mediation did not result in settlement. Lippert has made a motion for partial summary judgment to limit plaintiff’s potential damages to less than approximately $100,000. Plaintiff has made a motion for summary judgment against Lippert’s counterclaims.
Item 6 – Exhibits
| a) | Exhibits as required by item 601 of Regulation 8-K: |
| 1) | 31.1 Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Exhibit 31.1 is filed herewith. |
| 2) | 31.2 Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Exhibit 31.2 is filed herewith. |
| 3) | 32.1 Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. Exhibit 32.1 is filed herewith. |
| 4) | 32.2 Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. Exhibit 32.2 is filed herewith. |
26
DREW INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
| | DREW INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED Registrant
By /s/ Fredric M. Zinn —————————————— Fredric M. Zinn Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
November 9, 2004
27