Low Cost Producer Autumn 2013 Profitable Growth • Smart Investments • Up-Cycle Tailwinds • Favorable Secular Trends • Low-Cost Advantages • Healthy Balance Sheet Exhibit 99.1 |
Forward Looking Statement 2 forward-looking statement to reflect future events or changes in the Company's expectations. This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements may be identified by the context of the statement and generally arise when the Company is discussing its beliefs, estimates or expectations. These statements are not historical facts or guarantees of future performance but instead represent only the Company's belief at the time the statements were made regarding future events which are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and other factors many of which are outside the Company's control. Actual results and outcomes may differ materially from what is expressed or forecast in such forward-looking statements. The principal risks and uncertainties that may affect the Company’s actual performance include the following: the cyclical and seasonal nature of the Company’s business; public infrastructure expenditures; adverse weather conditions; the fact that our products are commodities and that prices for our products are subject to material fluctuation due to market conditions and other factors beyond our control; availability of raw materials; changes in energy costs including, without limitation, natural gas and oil; changes in the cost and availability of transportation; unexpected operational difficulties; inability to timely execute announced capacity expansions; difficulties and delays in the development of new business lines; governmental regulation and changes in governmental and public policy (including, without limitation, climate change regulation);possible outcomes of pending or future litigation or arbitration proceedings; changes in economic conditions specific to any one or more of the Company’s markets; competition; announced increases in capacity in the gypsum wallboard and cement industries; changes in the demand for residential housing construction or commercial construction; general economic conditions; and interest rates. For example, increases in interest rates, decreases in demand for construction materials or increases in the cost of energy (including, without limitation, natural gas and oil) could affect the revenues and operating earnings of our operations. In addition, changes in national or regional economic conditions and levels of infrastructure and construction spending could also adversely affect the Company's result of operations. With respect to our acquisition of the Acquired Assets as described in this press release, factors, risks and uncertainties that may cause actual events and developments to vary materially from those anticipated in forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the risk that we may not be able to integrate the Acquired Assets in an efficient and cost-effective manner with our other assets and operations, the possible inability to realize synergies or other expected benefits of the transaction, the possibility that we may incur significant costs relating to transition or integration activities or repair and maintenance of the Acquired Assets, the discovery of undisclosed liabilities associated with the business, the need to repay the indebtedness incurred to fund the acquisition and the fact that increased debt may limit our ability to respond to any changes in general economic and business conditions that occur after the acquisition. These and other factors are described in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2013, and the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2013. These reports are filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. All forward-looking statements made herein are made as of the date hereof, and the risk that actual results will differ materially from expectations expressed herein will increase with the passage of time. The Company undertakes no duty to update any |
Eagle Materials Business Definition Minerals-Based Commodity Products Infrastructure and Related Construction Materials Residential and Commercial Construction Materials Strategy Emphasis Now Key Demand Drivers Competitive Advantage Innovation Focus Asset Optimization Cyclical Recovery Cost Position Profitable, High-Returning Growth Secular and Cyclical Growth Oil Well Cement Frac Sand Construction Cement Aggregates and Concrete Gypsum Wallboard Gypsum Paperboard Cost Position Scarcity 3 Extension of Low Cost Producer Positions Energy Industry Materials |
Eagle Materials Low Cost Producer Focus Minerals-Based Commodity Products Infrastructure and Related Construction Materials Residential and Commercial Construction Materials Strategy Emphasis Now Key Demand Drivers Competitive Advantage Innovation Focus Oil Well Cement Frac Sand Construction Cement Aggregates and Concrete Gypsum Wallboard Gypsum Paperboard Cost Position Scarcity 4 Extension of Low Cost Producer Positions Asset Optimization Cyclical Recovery Cost Position Energy Industry Materials Profitable, High-Returning Growth Secular and Cyclical Growth |
Multiple Sources of Cost Advantage Lowest Cost Position is Important in a Commodity Industry Operational Execution Low-Cost Focused Innovation Technology and Engineering Eagle Cost Advantages EXP Industry 5 Sustained Innovation Focus on Cost Reduction Across Every Aspect of the Business System Inputs Waste Overhead • Proximity of raw materials • Unique technologies • Material and energy usage • Mining innovations • Manufacturing innovations • Logistics innovations • Process control • Product line focus • Maintenance disciplines • Simple systems • Low staffing requirements • No frills only necessities Processing Process Management Smart Design and Scale Sustained Maintenance Significant, Sustained and Proven Cost Advantages |
Our Low Cost Producer Strategy Is Closely Aligned with Our Sustainability Objectives Strategy Objective Sustainability Result Less waste Reduced cost Responsible use of resources Less energy used Reduced cost Smaller environmental footprint Less mineral resource used Reduced cost Greater conservation Less water used Reduced cost Lower energy requirements More recycled resource use Reduced cost Beneficial use of waste streams 6 |
Shareholder Value Creation Track Record - TSR Some Say “The Best Predictor of Grades is Grades” 1-Year 3-Year Since Inception (April 15, 1994) Source: Longnecker & Associates. All measures are as of 3/31/13 fiscal year end. Direct Peers: Martin Marietta, Texas Industries Inc., USG Corp., Vulcan Materials Industry Peers: Martin Marietta, Texas Industries Inc., USG Corp., Vulcan Materials, Titan Cement Co. S.A., CRH, Buzzi Unicem S.p.A., Holcim Ltd., HeidelbergCement AG, Lafarge S.A., Cementos Bio-Bio S.A., Cementos Portland Valderrivas, Cemex S.A.B. de C.V., Italcementi S.p.A., Cementos Argos S.A., Headwaters Incorporated 7 0% 100% 200% 0% 50% 100% 0% 1000% 2000% Eagle Materials Direct Peers (median) Industry Peers (median) |
Eagle Materials Business Definition Minerals-Based Commodity Products Infrastructure and Related Construction Materials Residential and Commercial Construction Materials Strategy Emphasis Now Key Demand Drivers Competitive Advantage Innovation Focus Oil Well Cement Frac Sand Aggregates and Concrete Gypsum Wallboard Gypsum Paperboard 8 Construction Cement Extension of Low Cost Producer Positions Asset Optimization Cyclical Recovery Cost Position Profitable, High-Returning Growth Secular and Cyclical Growth Cost Position Scarcity Energy Industry Materials |
A Central US Cement System New Cement Plants “Filled in a Missing Puzzle Piece” • Kansas City and Tulsa cement plant acquisitions (Nov. 30, 2012) link east-to-west and central-to-south • Heartland focus also limits impact of imports Acquired Cement Terminals Eagle Cement Terminals Eagle Cement Plants Acquired Cement Plants 9 Mountain Cement Nevada Cement Illinois Cement Kansas City, MO Tula, OK Texas Lehigh Cement (50/50 JV) Houston Cement Terminal |
System Scale Recent Acquisitions Increased Cement Capacity by 60% Texas Lehigh (50%) 700 Illinois Cement 1,100 Mountain Cement 700 Nevada Cement 550 Central Plains Kansas City 1,150 Central Plains Tulsa 700 Total 4,900 Cement Short Tons Capacity (000) 10 |
US Cement Consumption Outlook Million Metric Tons Source: Portland Cement Association US Capacity • New capacity -- and capacity expansion -- is constrained for the foreseeable future • Some existing capacity may be closed by 2015 due to NESHAP compliance • Imports will be required again to meet demand regardless 11 0 30 60 90 120 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Non-Residential Governmental Residential |
EPA Regulatory Developments Final Rule Issued – Extension Granted On February 12, 2013 the EPA published the final rule amending • National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry • New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Portland Cement Plants Existing Facilities • Compliance deadlines September New Facilities • Standards continue to apply to all sources which commenced construction or reconstruction after May 6, 2009 12 extended until 2015 |
EPA Regulatory Developments Standards Tough to Meet, Will Chill New Capacity Addition Pollutant Existing Source Standard New Source Standard Particulate Matter 0.07 lb/ton clinker 0.02 lb/ton clinker Mercury 55 lb/MM tons clinker 21 lb/MM tons clinker Nitrogen Oxide 3.5 -10 lb/ton clinker (varies) 1.5 lb/ton clinker Sulfur Oxide 1.2-5.0 lb/ton clinker (varies) 0.4 lb/ton clinker Total Hydrocarbons 24 ppm 24 ppm Hydrogen Chloride 3 ppm 3 ppm Organic Air Pollutants 12 ppm 12 ppm Standards for new sources are challenging to meet individually -- and as a set of standards compliance may be not be economically or even technologically feasible 13 |
Concrete/Cement Value Proposition In Relation to Asphalt, the Leading Substitute • Historically • Asphalt is used over 85% of the time in US highway and road construction, and this has been the case over many decades • Life cycle costs have always favored concrete over asphalt • Now initial costs per mile as well as life cycle costs favor concrete, driven by escalation in asphalt bitumen input costs (oil driven) • The cost cross-over point favoring concrete over asphalt occurred in 2008 but has been masked by the recession and long-standing historical practices • Concrete has, in fact, been gaining share over asphalt since 2008 • Outlook is for a further strengthening of the concrete/cement value proposition • More rapid share gains for concrete are expected as the cost and performance advantages of concrete increase, as cost benefits are broadly understood, and as use adaptations occur 14 initial costs per construction mile have favored asphalt over concrete |
Life Cycle Analysis Favors Concrete Pavement Life Expectancy (Before Reconstruction is Required) Asphalt Average: 13.6 Years Concrete Average: 29.3 Years Source: PCA Highway Report 15 0 5 10 15 20 25 1- 5 6-10 Years 11-15 Years 16-20 Years 21-30 Years 31-50 Years Asphalt Concrete Years |
Asphalt Production Costs Linked to Oil/Bitumen Asphalt Costs Diverging from Historical Relationship with Concrete Ready Mix PPI Dec 1984 =100 Asphalt PPI Dec 1984 =100 Crude Oil $/Barrel Sources: US Department of Labor, International Monetary Fund 16 $0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 0 100 200 300 Dec-84 Dec-90 Dec-96 Dec-02 Dec-08 |
Concrete Share Has, In Fact, Been Growing Growth Since 2008 Has Been Masked by the Recession Concrete Share of Highway Paving Volume Source: PCA June 2012, Oman Data Systems Long-Term Average 14.4% 17 13.3% 12.1% 15.5% 16.2% 17.5% 8% 13% 18% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 |
Outlook and Strategic Implications A Game Changer for Cement and Asphalt • The price of asphalt is expected to continue to diverge from the price of concrete as oil price inflation remains higher than the cost inflation of the fuels used in producing cement (e.g., petcoke, shale gas) • High oil prices have also driven refineries to invest in cokers to extract more high grade products from crude -- this has meant less production of bitumen and more production of petcoke, further extending the gap • Petroleum coke is a low-value solid by-products of the oil refining industry and this is reflected in pricing -- decisions about production levels tend not to be made on the markets for petroleum coke; it is a waste recovery by-product “priced to move” rather than to store • Competition from concrete will limit asphalt’s ability to pass on costs • Well-positioned cement producers should enjoy increasing advantages 18 |
PCA Projected Initial Bid Paving Costs Per Two Lane Road Mile - Urban Concrete Asphalt Parity achieved in Fiscal 2009 Bid costs do not consider life-cycle costs – which further favors concrete 19 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 |
Eagle Materials Business Definition Minerals-Based Commodity Products Strategy Emphasis Now Key Demand Drivers Competitive Advantage Innovation Focus Asset Optimization Cyclical Recovery Cost Position Profitable, High-Returning Growth Secular and Cyclical Growth Extension of Low Cost Producer Positions Cost Position Scarcity 20 Infrastructure and Related Construction Materials Residential and Commercial Construction Materials Oil Well Cement Frac Sand Construction Cement Aggregates and Concrete Gypsum Wallboard Gypsum Paperboard Energy Industry Materials |
Close Relationship of End-Uses Oil Well Cement and Now Frac Sand Important elements for unlocking energy in the shale plays • Specialty oil well cement for casing wells • Special purpose frac sand to keep the fractures “propped open” 21 |
Shifting the Cement Product Mix to Oil Well Cement A Company Priority 22 • Very few US cement producers have the capability, know-how, permits or customer relationships required to effectively produce and market specialty oil-well cement, especially Class H, the grade used in the most demanding casing applications • The alternative for oil services companies is to apply additives to more conventional grade cement to achieve similar results – this can be more costly and less predictable Eagle has been the pre-eminent US producer of oil well cement for decades Strong value proposition for Eagle and a key profit growth opportunity |
Oil Well Cement Strategic Directions A Mutually Reinforcing Growth Opportunity with Frac Sand Eagle Plant Current Production Proportion Target Production Proportion Key Cement Grades Target Shale Plays Texas Lehigh ~ 50% > 50% Class H Eagle Ford Mature capability Mountain ~ 25% > 25% Class G Niobrara Mature capability Illinois 0% > 25% Class G and H Utica Now proven Tulsa 4% > 50% Class C and H Miss. Lime, Ardmore Acquired, now proven Kansas City 0% > 25% Class G and H Anadarko, Bakken Acquired, feasible 23 Plant Capability Status |
Increasing drilling activity should continue to drive growth in cement consumption South Texas represents ~15-20% of US oil well cement spend Eagle Ford – Cement Consumption Outlook Continued Growth is Expected 24 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Estimated Annual Oil Well Cement Demand and Outlook |
Eagle Materials Business Definition Minerals-Based Commodity Products Infrastructure and Related Construction Materials Residential and Commercial Construction Materials Strategy Emphasis Now Key Demand Drivers Competitive Advantage Innovation Focus Asset Optimization Cyclical Recovery Cost Position Profitable, High-Returning Growth Secular and Cyclical Growth Extension of Low Cost Producer Positions Oil Well Cement Frac Sand Construction Cement Aggregates and Concrete Gypsum Wallboard Gypsum Paperboard Cost Position Scarcity 25 Energy Industry Materials |
Frac Sand is a Natural, Close Adjacency for Eagle Key Growth Opportunity and a Top Eagle Priority Frac sand entry leverages Eagle’s existing • Customer base (oil well cement) • Owned distribution infrastructure that we have repurposed (Corpus Christi port terminal, proximate to Eagle Ford) • Processing expertise (aggregates) • Advantaged access to scarce northern white sand resource • Long-standing relationships (at Illinois Cement) enabled acquisition of a 50-year scale reserve deposit in Illinois • Northern white sand is the preferred proppant in oily plays -- and increasingly so • Northern white sand deposits are not near any shale plays, so logistics is a key Opportunity to create a low-cost system 26 |
Northern Illinois MN / WI Small Universe of Areas in North America (and in the World) Highest Quality Frac Sand Studies have shown geologic conditions creating these deposits are rare across the globe. England deposits are played out, limited quality deposits in Poland, Asia/Pacific and Arabia have lower crush strengths – implies a relatively low sand import threat. Geology is Destiny – Quality Scarcity Dark Red Represents the Outcroppings of Quartz Sand ~ 500 Million Years Old 27 |
Sandstone Formation Section View Sandstone Closest to the Surface is Even Less Common 28 |
Key Northern White Sand Sources Top Players Currently Illinois (Top Quality) ~ 6 million tons capacity 1. US Silica 2. Unimin 3. Fairmount Wisconsin (Top Quality) ~ 10 million tons capacity 1. Badger Mining 2. Unimin 3. Fairmount 4. EOG Resources Minnesota (Top Quality) ~ 4 million ton capacity • Unimin 29 |
Entrance to Eagle’s Illinois Mine Northern White Frac Sand Mine Preparation 30 Processing Construction |
Corpus Christi Site Repurposed, Now Operational Third-Party Sand to Initialize Processing/Logistics Systems 31 Processing Construction |
Growth in US Rig Activity, Oil and Gas Spears and Associates Forecasts Forecast Forecast Forecast • The demands of the oily plays are a good fit with our northern white sand • Horizontal drilling is the most frac sand intensive 32 |
Unconventional Oil/Liquids Land Rig Count Outlook Key Shale Plays ~ 900 ~ 875 Total 840 33 0 50 100 150 200 250 2012 Average 2013E Average 2014E Average |
Near-Term Oil and Gas Price Outlooks Relatively Stable According to Spears Forecasts, July 2013 Forecast Forecast 34 |
US Liquids-Focused Threshold Economics Compelling After-Tax Rates of Return at Expected Oil Prices Eagle Ford Oil Eagle Ford Condensate Mississippi Lime DJ Niobrara Granite Wash Bakken Shale Bakken Parshall 10% $53.31 $51.53 $48.45 $59.30 $43.16 $62.86 $44.13 15% 60.99 64.49 59.90 68.23 56.17 71.48 51.59 20% 67.51 75.74 70.05 75.86 67.21 78.92 58.06 25% 73.23 85.70 79.17 82.56 76.82 85.53 63.79 Source: Simmons and Company, June 2013 35 |
North American Proppant Annual Consumption Annual million tons, estimated 36 17 27 34 36 46 0 10 20 30 40 50 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 |
Estimated Available Supply and Demand Million Tons High Quality White Sand Inferior Sand Types 2011 Tons Industry Capacity 2012 Tons “Probable” Year End Capacity 2013 Demand Forecast High quality northern white sand is increasingly the proppant of choice, especially in oily plays. The industry is relying on lower quality but more proximate sand types (as well as ceramics) to meet total demand. 37 0 10 20 30 40 50 |
Demand growth over the next two years is expected to approximate our newly installed drying capacity at Corpus Christi Demand estimates for 2013 range from 8 to 13 million tons Eagle Ford – Proppant Demand Growth is Expected 38 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Annual Proppant Demand Outlook |
Eagle Materials Business Definition Minerals-Based Commodity Products Infrastructure and Related Construction Materials Residential and Commercial Construction Materials Strategy Emphasis Now Key Demand Drivers Competitive Advantage Innovation Focus Asset Optimization Cyclical Recovery Cost Position Profitable, High-Returning Growth Secular and Cyclical Growth Extension of Low Cost Producer Positions Oil Well Cement Frac Sand Construction Cement Aggregates and Concrete Gypsum Wallboard Gypsum Paperboard Cost Position Scarcity 39 Energy Industry Materials |
Eagle’s US Market and Production Locations Wallboard Paperboard Gypsum, CO 700 MMSF Albuquerque, NM 425 MMSF Duke, OK 1,300 MMSF Georgetown, SC 900 MMSF Lawton, OK 350,000 tons Bernalillo, NM 550 MMSF Currently idled Note: Design capacities here do not necessarily represent current operating rates (“effective capacity”). 40 Total Wallboard 4,425 MMSF |
US Demand for Gypsum Wallboard Closely Linked with Housing 41 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 New Home Sales (000) BSF Gypsum Wallboard Shipments |
Single-Family Housing Starts Outlook Moody’s economy.com, SAAR in Millions 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2015 Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies “conservative” case: 16 million housing units needed 2010-20 (implies an average of 1.6 million/year -- household formations alone are 1.3 million) Household Formations 2010-20 Gap 42 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 |
Latest Regional Recovery Outlooks -- Wallboard Single Family Housing Starts, 2012Q4=1 2012 Relative MSA Scale in Starts Source: Moody’s Economy.com, July 2013, Company analysis Phoenix is expected to drive higher than average growth ahead in this region Areas like DFW and Denver have already been on the mend and are starting from “up the curve” 43 0 1 2 3 4 2013Q1 2014Q1 2015Q1 2016Q1 Duke, OK Eagle, CO Albuquerque Georgetown (Charleston, SC, Columbia, SC, Wilmington, NC, Raleigh, NC, Charlotte, NC, Atlanta, Jacksonville, FL, Savannah, GA MSA’s) (Albuquerque, NM, Santa Fe, NM, Phoenix, AZ MSAs) (DFW-Arlington, Oklahoma City, OK, Little Rock, AR, Wichita Falls, TX, Wichita, KS MSA’s) (Denver, Co, Boulder, Co, Cheyenne, WY, Salt Lake, UT MSA’s) |
Repair and Remodeling Outlook Harvard’s Outlook Suggests Growing Strength 44 |
Financial Discipline is a Key Enabler of Success An Eagle Hallmark Capital Structure Funding Strategy Use of Cash 45 |
Financial Summary Profitable Performance Throughout the Cycle Note: Dollars in millions. For fiscal years ending March 31. Pro forma LTM periods include Acquired Assets. (1) (2) Adjusted Revenues (1) Adjusted EBITDA (2) 46 $501 $579 $699 $925 $994 $845 $695 $533 $537 $581 $889 $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 PF $131 $141 $201 $289 $351 $220 $152 $123 $100 $105 $216 $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 PF Includes our proportionate share of our JV’s revenues. Adjusted Revenues is a non-GAAP measure. See slides titled “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” in the Appendix. PF Adjusted Revenues includes revenues for the Acquired Assets from April 1, 2012 through November 30, 2012 (Acquisition Date). Adjusted EBITDA represents earnings before: (i) interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization; (ii) certain other non-cash or non-routine items; and (iii) acquisition costs and other overhead costs allocated to the Acquired Assets. Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure. See slides titled “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” in the Appendix. PF Adjusted EBITDA includes EBITDA for the Acquired Assets from April 1, 2012 through November 30, 2012 (Acquisition Date). |
Eagle Evolution Since Peak of Last Cycle Long-Standing Goal of Doubling Peak-to-Peak Earnings Power 1. One-third more productive capacity in place Cement: Illinois expansion (additional 470,000 tons) Wallboard: Ultra-efficient plant built in Georgetown Paper: 350,000 ton capacity today (220,000 tons last peak) 2. Cement acquisitions increased capacity by 60% November 30, 2012 Two cement plants and related assets 3. Shift of cement product mix toward oil well and other specialties Class H at Texas Lehigh was ~25% now over 50% 4. We believe that over time our frac sand opportunity has as much earnings contribution potential as does cement or wallboard 47 |
Capital Structure Net Debt-to-Cap 38% 35% 41% 40% Net Debt-to-Equity 62% 55% 70% 68% 3/31/11 3/31/12 3/31/13 6/30/13 48 $462 $473 $696 $725 $285 $260 $485 $491 $- $200 $400 $600 $800 Equity Net Debt |
Debt Maturity Profile $9.5 $57.0 $8.0 $81.2 $36.5 Fiscal Years 49 $0.0 $20.0 $40.0 $60.0 $80.0 $100.0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2005 Senior Notes 2007 Senior Notes |
Disciplined Use of Cash $ Millions Maintenance Dividends Growth and Improvement Share Repurchases Note: Issued 3.5 million shares in FY 13 pursuant to the Lafarge Acquisition Assets. 50 $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 |
Investment Summary Eagle Materials • Low cost producer • Leading positions in attractive markets • Now in early innings of the up-cycle • Favorable secular demand trends, especially for cement and frac-sand • Recently acquired assets have increased Eagle’s cement capacity by 60% • Track record of sound strategic choices and superior operational execution • Healthy capital structure and increasing capacity to fund growth 51 |
Non-GAAP Reconciliation 52 |
Non-GAAP Reconciliation Adjusted EBITDA $ million 3/31/03 3/31/04 3/31/05 3/31/06 3/31/07 3/31/08 3/31/09 3/31/10 3/31/11 3/31/12 PF 3/31/13 Net Income $ 57.6 $ 66.9 $ 106.7 $ 161.0 $ 202.7 $ 97.8 $ 41.8 $ 29.0 $ 14.8 $ 18.7 $ 57.7 Plus: Taxes 29.0 35.2 51.4 80.1 101.6 46.6 20.4 10.3 1.9 3.2 26.4 Interest 9.6 3.8 3.3 6.3 5.4 21.1 28.9 21.5 16.5 16.6 15.8 DD&A 33.2 33.0 34.5 38.6 40.0 44.9 51.2 50.8 49.2 50.1 56.9 Other Charges 1.4 2.2 5.5 3.2 1.8 9.7 9.8 11.0 17.9 15.9 14.9 Adjusted EBITDA $ 131 $ 141 $ 201 $ 289 $ 351 $ 220 $ 152 $ 123 $ 100 $ 105 $ 171 Acquired Assets EBITDA for the eight months ended 11/30/12 (see attached) $ 45 FY 2013 Pro Forma Total Adjusted EBITDA $ 216 Adjusted EBITDA represents earnings before (i) interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, (ii) certain other non-cash or non-routine items, and (iii) acquisition costs and other overhead costs allocated to the Lafarge Target Business. Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure that provides supplemental information regarding the operating performance of our business without regard to financing methods, capital structures or historical cost bases and is used as a benchmark for evaluating the creditworthiness of particular issuers. Adjusted EBITDA should not, however, be considered as an alternative to net income, operating income, cash flow from operations or any other measure of financial performance in accordance with GAAP. 53 |
Non-GAAP Reconciliation Adjusted EBITDA $ million 6 months ended 9/30/12 2 months ended 11/30/12 8 months Acquired Assets Net Earnings $ 5 $ 4 Plus: Taxes 3 3 Interest 1 1 DD&A 11 3 Overhead Allocation Adjustment 12 2 Acquired Assets EBITDA $ 32 $ 13 $ 45 The following provides a reconciliation of the Acquired Assets EBITDA for the 8 months ended 11/30/12: 54 |
Non-GAAP Reconciliation Adjusted Revenue $ million 3/31/03 3/31/04 3/31/05 3/31/06 3/31/07 3/31/08 3/31/09 3/31/10 3/31/11 3/31/12 PF 3/31/13 Eagle $ 429 $ 503 $ 617 $ 860 $ 918 $ 748 $ 599 $ 468 $ 462 $ 495 $ 643 Joint Venture (50%) 72 76 82 65 76 97 96 65 75 86 96 Total $ 501 $ 579 $ 699 $ 925 $ 994 $ 845 $ 695 $ 533 $ 537 $ 581 $ 739 Acquired Assets Revenue for 8 months ended 11/30/12 (see attached) $ 150 Pro Forma Total $ 889 55 |
Non-GAAP Reconciliation Adjusted Revenue $ million 9 months ended 9/30/12 2 months ended 11/30/12 8 months Acquired Assets Revenue $ 112 $ 38 $ 150 56 The following provides a reconciliation of the Acquired Assets revenue for the 8 months ended 11/30/12: |
MAJOR FACILITIES GYPSUM WALLBOARD PLANTS AMERICAN GYPSUM COMPANY Albuquerque, New Mexico Bernalillo, New Mexico Gypsum, Colorado Duke, Oklahoma Georgetown, South Carolina PAPERBOARD MILL REPUBLIC PAPERBOARD COMPANY LLC Lawton, Oklahoma LEGEND CEMENT PLANTS CEMENT TERMINALS WALLBOARD PLANTS WALLBOARD DISTRIBUTION YARDS CONCRETE OPERATIONS AGGREGATES OPERATIONS PAPERBOARD MILL DALLAS HEADQUARTERS MARYSVILLE RENO (FERNLEY) ALBUQUERQUE BERNALILLO AUSTIN (BUDA) DALLAS DUKE LAWTON LASALLE GEORGETOWN LARAMIE GYPSUM TULSA KANSAS CITY, KS & MO CONCRETE, AGGREGATES, SAND PLANTS CENTEX MATERIALS LLC Austin and Buda, Texas MATHEWS READYMIX LLC Marysville, California TALON CONCRETE AND AGGREGATES LLC Kansas & Missouri – 10 locations WESTERN AGGREGATES LLC Marysville, California NORTHERN WHITE SAND COMPANY LLC Corpus Christi, Texas CEMENT PLANTS CENTRAL PLAINS CEMENT COMPANY LLC Sugar Creek, Missouri Tulsa, Oklahoma ILLINOIS CEMENT COMPANY LLC LaSalle, Illinois MOUNTAIN CEMENT COMPANY Laramie, Wyoming NEVADA CEMENT COMPANY Fernley, Nevada TEXAS LEHIGH CEMENT COMPANY LP Buda, Texas (50% joint venture) SAND PLANT |
Contact Information Steve Rowley President and CEO (214) 432-2020 srowley@eaglematerials.com Craig Kesler Executive Vice President and CFO (214) 432-2013 ckesler@eaglematerials.com Bob Stewart Executive Vice President, Strategy, Corporate Development and Communications (214) 432-2040 bstewart@eaglematerials.com Eagle Materials Inc. NYSE: EXP www.eaglematerials.com 58 |