e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(MARK ONE)
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended April 30, 2010
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 1-14977
Sanderson Farms, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Mississippi
|
|
64-0615843 |
|
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
|
|
|
127 Flynt Road, Laurel, Mississippi
|
|
39443 |
|
|
|
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report.)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer þ
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
APPLICABLE ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS
DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS:
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports required to
be filed by Sections 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the
distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court. Yes o No o
APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE ISSUERS:
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common stock, as of
the latest practicable date. Common Stock, $1 Par Value Per Share: 22,720,780 shares outstanding as
of April 30, 2010.
INDEX
SANDERSON FARMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
2
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
SANDERSON FARMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30, |
|
|
October 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
(Note 1) |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
97,202 |
|
|
$ |
8,194 |
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
75,766 |
|
|
|
68,461 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
144,889 |
|
|
|
140,521 |
|
Refundable income taxes |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1,567 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
2,930 |
|
|
|
2,866 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
19,364 |
|
|
|
18,428 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
340,151 |
|
|
|
240,037 |
|
Property, plant and equipment |
|
|
794,449 |
|
|
|
740,587 |
|
Less accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(367,634 |
) |
|
|
(347,459 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
426,815 |
|
|
|
393,128 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
2,727 |
|
|
|
3,011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
769,693 |
|
|
$ |
636,176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
$ |
87,651 |
|
|
$ |
76,352 |
|
Current maturities of long-term debt |
|
|
991 |
|
|
|
1,022 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
88,642 |
|
|
|
77,374 |
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities |
|
|
62,807 |
|
|
|
103,123 |
|
Claims payable |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
2,600 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
22,365 |
|
|
|
22,371 |
|
Stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A Junior Participating
Preferred Stock, $100 par value: authorized 500,000 shares, none
issued
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Par value to be determined by the
Board of Directors: authorized
4,500,000 shares; none issued
|
| | | | | | |
Common Stock, $1 par value: authorized
100,000,000 shares; issued and
outstanding shares 22,720,780 and
20,333,637 at April 30, 2010 and October
31, 2009, respectively |
|
|
22,721 |
|
|
|
20,334 |
|
Paid-in capital |
|
|
151,491 |
|
|
|
35,143 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
419,667 |
|
|
|
375,231 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
593,879 |
|
|
|
430,708 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
769,693 |
|
|
$ |
636,176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
SANDERSON FARMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
April 30, |
|
|
April 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands, except per share amounts) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
487,101 |
|
|
$ |
426,759 |
|
|
$ |
907,224 |
|
|
$ |
815,643 |
|
Cost and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales |
|
|
412,109 |
|
|
|
370,774 |
|
|
|
790,153 |
|
|
|
754,686 |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
19,277 |
|
|
|
12,884 |
|
|
|
35,637 |
|
|
|
24,798 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
431,386 |
|
|
|
383,658 |
|
|
|
825,790 |
|
|
|
779,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING INCOME |
|
|
55,715 |
|
|
|
43,101 |
|
|
|
81,434 |
|
|
|
36,159 |
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(1,161 |
) |
|
|
(2,489 |
) |
|
|
(2,293 |
) |
|
|
(5,700 |
) |
Other |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,148 |
) |
|
|
(2,485 |
) |
|
|
(2,270 |
) |
|
|
(5,692 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES |
|
|
54,567 |
|
|
|
40,616 |
|
|
|
79,164 |
|
|
|
30,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
19,480 |
|
|
|
14,400 |
|
|
|
28,260 |
|
|
|
11,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME |
|
$ |
35,087 |
|
|
$ |
26,216 |
|
|
$ |
50,904 |
|
|
$ |
19,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
1.62 |
|
|
$ |
1.25 |
|
|
$ |
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
1.62 |
|
|
$ |
1.25 |
|
|
$ |
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends per share |
|
$ |
.15 |
|
|
$ |
.14 |
|
|
$ |
.30 |
|
|
$ |
.28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
SANDERSON FARMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
April 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
50,904 |
|
|
$ |
19,467 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
21,850 |
|
|
|
21,764 |
|
Non-cash stock compensation |
|
|
4,054 |
|
|
|
1,872 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(70 |
) |
|
|
15,045 |
|
Change in assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
(7,305 |
) |
|
|
1,919 |
|
Refundable income taxes |
|
|
1,567 |
|
|
|
23,671 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
(4,368 |
) |
|
|
(6,880 |
) |
Prepaid expenses and other assets |
|
|
(552 |
) |
|
|
(5,850 |
) |
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities |
|
|
7,202 |
|
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments |
|
|
22,378 |
|
|
|
51,999 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
73,282 |
|
|
|
71,466 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
(55,668 |
) |
|
|
(11,471 |
) |
Net proceeds from sale of property and equipment |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(55,637 |
) |
|
|
(11,383 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal payments on long-term debt |
|
|
(347 |
) |
|
|
(451 |
) |
Net repayments from revolving line of credit |
|
|
(40,000 |
) |
|
|
(25,000 |
) |
Net proceeds from secondary offering of common stock |
|
|
115,541 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Net proceeds from exercise of stock options and vesting of restricted stock |
|
|
(861 |
) |
|
|
208 |
|
Tax benefit on exercised stock options |
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Dividends paid |
|
|
(3,150 |
) |
|
|
(2,922 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
|
|
71,363 |
|
|
|
(28,165 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
89,008 |
|
|
|
31,918 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
8,194 |
|
|
|
4,261 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
97,202 |
|
|
$ |
36,179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash financing activity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends payable |
|
$ |
(3,497 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,925 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
5
SANDERSON FARMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (UNAUDITED)
April 30, 2010
NOTE 1 BASIS OF PRESENTATION
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in
accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and
with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not
include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments
consisting of normal recurring accruals considered necessary for a fair presentation have been
included. Operating results for the three and six months ended April 30, 2010 are not necessarily
indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending October 31, 2010.
The consolidated balance sheet at October 31, 2009 has been derived from the audited consolidated
financial statements at that date but does not include all of the information and footnotes
required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. For
further information, reference is made to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes
thereto included in the Companys annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2009.
Subsequent events have been evaluated through the time of filing on May 25, 2010 which represents
the date the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements were issued.
NOTE 2INVENTORIES
Inventories consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30, |
|
|
October 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Live poultry-broilers and breeders |
|
$ |
94,023 |
|
|
$ |
88,054 |
|
Feed, eggs and other |
|
|
20,347 |
|
|
|
20,637 |
|
Processed poultry |
|
|
17,204 |
|
|
|
20,768 |
|
Processed food |
|
|
8,277 |
|
|
|
6,796 |
|
Packaging materials |
|
|
5,038 |
|
|
|
4,266 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
144,889 |
|
|
$ |
140,521 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories of live poultry were higher at April 30, 2010 as compared to October 31, 2009. This
increase is the result of normal inventory reductions at October 31, 2009 in anticipation of the
holiday season when demand for chicken is historically at its lowest point in the year.
The decrease in inventory of processed poultry resulted primarily from fewer units of export
product in inventory at April 30, 2010 as compared to October 31, 2009, which resulted from the
timing of export sales.
NOTE 3STOCK COMPENSATION PLANS
Refer to Note 8 of the Companys October 31, 2009 audited financial statements for further
information on our employee benefit plans and stock based compensation plans. Total stock based
compensation expense during the six months ended April 30, 2010 and April 30, 2009 was $4,054,000
and $1,872,000, respectively, and is detailed below.
During the six months ended April 30, 2010, participants in the Companys Management Share Purchase
Plan purchased a total of 14,283 shares of restricted stock at an average price of $46.05 per share
and the Company issued 3,523 matching restricted shares. During the six months ended April 30, 2010
and 2009 the Company recorded compensation cost, included in the total stock based compensation
expense above, of $159,000 and $101,000, respectively, related to the Management Share Purchase
Plan.
6
On November 1, 2009, the Company entered into performance share agreements that grant certain
officers and key employees the right to receive an aggregate target number of 70,000 shares of the
Companys common stock, subject to the Companys achievement of certain performance measures. The
Company also has performance share agreements in place with certain officers and key employees that
were entered into during fiscal 2008 and 2009. The aggregate target number of shares specified in
performance share agreements outstanding as of April 30, 2010 totaled 193,162. The Company recorded
compensation cost, included in the total stock based compensation expense above, of $1,415,000 and
$0 during the six months ended April 30, 2010 and April 30, 2009, respectively, related to the
performance share agreements entered into during 2009 and 2010. No compensation cost has been
recorded for the performance share agreements entered into in fiscal 2008.
Also on November 1, 2009 the Company granted an aggregate of 70,000 shares of restricted stock to
certain officers and key management employees. The restricted stock had a grant date fair value of
$36.80 per share and vests four years from the date of the grant. On December 21, 2009, the Company
granted 31,850 shares of restricted stock to key management employees. The restricted stock had a
grant date fair value of $41.94 per share with 50% of the shares vesting immediately on December
21, 2009 and the remaining 50% of shares vesting one year later on December 21, 2010. On February
19, 2010, the Company granted 25,300 shares of restricted stock to its non-employee directors. The
restricted stock had a grant date fair value of $50.49 per share and vests one to three years from
the date of grant. The Company also has non-vested restricted stock grants outstanding that were
granted during the five previous fiscal years with certain officers, key employees and outside
directors. The aggregate number of shares outstanding at April 30, 2010 under all restricted stock
grants totaled 503,329. During the six months ended April 30, 2010 and 2009 the Company recorded
compensation cost, included in the total stock based compensation expense above, of $2,480,000 and
$1,771,000, respectively, related to restricted stock grants.
NOTE 4 EARNINGS PER SHARE
In June 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FSP EITF No. 03-6-1,
codified in ASC 260, Determining Whether Instruments Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions
Are Participating Securities. ASC 260 clarifies that share-based payment awards entitling holders
to receive non-forfeitable dividends before vesting should be considered participating securities
and thus included in the calculation of basic earnings per share. Effective November 1, 2009, these
awards are now included in the calculation of basic earnings per share under the two-class method,
a change that reduces both basic and diluted earnings per share. The two-class method allocates
earnings for the period between common shareholders and other security holders. The participating
awards receiving dividends will be allocated the same amount of income as if they were outstanding
shares. All prior period earnings per share data presented have been adjusted retrospectively to
conform to the provisions of the new requirements. Previously, the Company included unvested share
payment awards in the calculation of diluted earnings per share under the treasury stock method.
The adoption had no effect on the Companys retained earnings or other components of equity.
The following table presents the effect the adoption of ASC 260 has on affected financial statement
line items, weighted average shares outstanding, and per share amounts for the three months ended
April 30, 2010 and 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three months ended |
|
|
|
April 30, 2010 |
|
|
April 30, 2009 |
|
|
|
Two-class |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
Two-class |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
|
method |
|
|
stock method |
|
|
method |
|
|
stock method |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share data) |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
35,087 |
|
|
$ |
35,087 |
|
|
$ |
26,216 |
|
|
$ |
26,216 |
|
Distributed and undistributed (earnings) to
unvested restricted stock |
|
|
(960 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(713 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributed and undistributed earnings to
common shareholders Basic |
|
$ |
34,127 |
|
|
$ |
35,087 |
|
|
$ |
25,503 |
|
|
$ |
26,216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding Basic |
|
|
21,020 |
|
|
|
21,020 |
|
|
|
20,317 |
|
|
|
20,317 |
|
Weighted average shares outstanding Diluted |
|
|
21,031 |
|
|
|
21,350 |
|
|
|
20,327 |
|
|
|
20,581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per common share Basic |
|
$ |
1.62 |
|
|
$ |
1.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.25 |
|
|
$ |
1.29 |
|
Earnings per common share Diluted |
|
$ |
1.62 |
|
|
$ |
1.64 |
|
|
$ |
1.25 |
|
|
$ |
1.27 |
|
7
The following table presents the effect the adoption of ASC 260 has on affected financial statement
line items, weighted average shares outstanding, and per share amounts for the six months ended
April 30, 2010 and 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the six months ended |
|
|
|
April 30, 2010 |
|
|
April 30, 2009 |
|
|
|
Two-class |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
Two-class |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
|
method |
|
|
stock method |
|
|
method |
|
|
stock method |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share data) |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
50,904 |
|
|
$ |
50,904 |
|
|
$ |
19,467 |
|
|
$ |
19,467 |
|
Distributed and undistributed (earnings) to
unvested restricted stock |
|
|
(1,428 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(506 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributed and undistributed earnings to
common shareholders Basic |
|
$ |
49,476 |
|
|
$ |
50,904 |
|
|
$ |
18,961 |
|
|
$ |
19,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding Basic |
|
|
20,690 |
|
|
|
20,690 |
|
|
|
20,306 |
|
|
|
20,306 |
|
Weighted average shares outstanding Diluted |
|
|
20,701 |
|
|
|
21,047 |
|
|
|
20,316 |
|
|
|
20,577 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per common share Basic |
|
$ |
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
2.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.93 |
|
|
$ |
0.96 |
|
Earnings per common share Diluted |
|
$ |
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
2.42 |
|
|
$ |
0.93 |
|
|
$ |
0.95 |
|
NOTE 5PUBLIC OFFERING
On April 7, 2010 the Company announced that it had sold 2,300,000 shares of common stock in a
public offering at a price of $53.00 per share resulting in net proceeds of approximately $115.5
million after deducting the underwriting discount and offering expenses. The net proceeds are
reflected in the common stock and additional paid-in capital accounts of the Companys condensed
consolidated balance sheet at April 30, 2010. During April, 2010 the Company used $40.0 million of
the proceeds to repay all outstanding draws on its revolving line of credit and will use the
remaining funds, together with other funds, to finance the construction of its new retail poultry
complex in Kinston, North Carolina, and a potential new big bird poultry complex to be located near
Goldsboro, North Carolina. Pending such uses, the remaining proceeds will be invested in cash and
cash equivalents or may be used as working capital and for general corporate purposes.
NOTE 6NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157 Fair Value Measurements (SFAS 157), codified in
ASC 820. This standard defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and
expands disclosure about fair value measurements. This pronouncement applies whenever other
accounting standards require or permit assets or liabilities to be measured at fair value.
Accordingly, this statement does not require any new fair value measurements. The Company adopted
ASC 820 effective November 1, 2008 for its financial assets and liabilities and the adoption had no
material effect on the Companys consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. The Company adopted ASC 820 for its non-financial assets and liabilities that are recognized
at fair value on a non-recurring basis on November 1, 2009 and the adoption did not have a material
impact on the Companys consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
NOTE 7 FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The carrying amounts for cash and temporary cash investments approximate their fair values. Fair
values for debt are based on quoted market prices or published forward interest rate curves. The
fair value and carrying value of the Companys borrowings under its credit facilities, long-term
debt and capital lease obligations were as follows (in millions):
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30, 2010 |
|
October 31, 2009 |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Carrying Value |
|
Fair Value |
|
Carrying Value |
|
Total Debt (in millions) |
|
$ |
68 |
|
|
|
$64 |
|
|
$ |
109 |
|
|
$ |
104 |
|
|
NOTE 8 OTHER MATTERS
The Company is involved in various claims and litigation incidental to its business. Although the
outcome of these matters cannot be determined with certainty, management, upon the advice of
counsel, is of the opinion that the final outcome should not have a material effect on the
Companys consolidated results of operations or financial position.
The Company recognizes the costs of legal defense for the legal proceedings to which it is a party
in the periods incurred. After a considerable analysis of each case, the Company determines the
amount of reserves required, if any. At this time, the Company has not accrued any reserve for any
of these matters. Future reserves may be required if losses are deemed reasonably estimable and
probable due to changes in the Companys assumptions, the effectiveness of legal strategies, or
other factors beyond the Companys control. Future results of operations may be materially affected
by the creation of reserves or by accruals of losses to reflect any adverse determinations in these
legal proceedings.
9
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Sanderson Farms, Inc.
We have reviewed the condensed consolidated balance sheet of Sanderson Farms, Inc. and subsidiaries
as of April 30, 2010, and the related condensed consolidated statements of income for the
three-month and six-month periods ended April 30, 2010 and 2009 and the condensed consolidated
statements of cash flows for the six-month periods ended April 30, 2010 and 2009. These financial
statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.
We conducted our review in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). A review of interim financial information consists principally of applying
analytical procedures and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting
matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with the standards
of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the objective of which is the expression of an
opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an
opinion.
Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the
condensed consolidated financial statements referred to above for them to be in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet of Sanderson Farms, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of October 31, 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income,
stockholders equity, and cash flows for the year then ended not presented herein, and in our
report dated December 21, 2009, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial
statements. In our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying condensed consolidated
balance sheet as of October 31, 2009, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to
the consolidated balance sheet from which it has been derived.
New Orleans, Louisiana
May 25, 2010
10
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
General
The following Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included in Item 7 of the Companys
Annual Report on Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended October 31, 2009.
This Quarterly Report, and other periodic reports filed by the Company under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and other written or oral statements made by it or on its behalf, may include
forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended. Forward looking statements are based on a
number of assumptions about future events and are subject to various risks, uncertainties and other
factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from the views, beliefs, projections and
estimates expressed in such statements. These risks, uncertainties and other factors include, but
are not limited to those discussed under Risk Factors in the Companys latest Annual Report on
Form 10-K and its latest quarterly report on Form 10-Q, and the following:
(1) Changes in the market price for the Companys finished products and feed grains, both of which
may fluctuate substantially and exhibit cyclical characteristics typically associated with
commodity markets.
(2) Changes in economic and business conditions, monetary and fiscal policies or the amount of
growth, stagnation or recession in the global or U.S. economies, either of which may affect the
value of inventories, the collectability of accounts receivable or the financial integrity of
customers, and the ability of the end user or consumer to afford protein.
(3) Changes in the political or economic climate, trade policies, laws and regulations or the
domestic poultry industry of countries to which the Company or other companies in the poultry
industry ship product, and other changes that might limit the Companys or the industrys access to
foreign markets.
(4) Changes in laws, regulations, and other activities in government agencies and similar
organizations applicable to the Company and the poultry industry and changes in laws, regulations
and other activities in government agencies and similar organizations related to food safety.
(5) Various inventory risks due to changes in market conditions.
(6) Changes in and effects of competition, which is significant in all markets in which the Company
competes, and the effectiveness of marketing and advertising programs. The Company competes with
regional and national firms, some of which have greater financial and marketing resources than the
Company.
(7) Changes in accounting policies and practices adopted voluntarily by the Company or required to
be adopted by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
(8) Disease outbreaks affecting the production performance and/or marketability of the Companys
poultry products.
(9) Changes in the availability and cost of labor and growers.
Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements made by or on
behalf of Sanderson Farms. Each such statement speaks only as of the day it was made. The Company
undertakes no obligation to update or to revise any forward-looking statements. The factors
described above cannot be controlled by the Company. When used in this quarterly report, the words
believes, estimates, plans, expects, should, outlook, and anticipates and similar
expressions as they relate to the Company or its management are intended to identify
forward-looking statements.
The Companys poultry operations are integrated through its control of all functions relative to
the production of its chicken products, including hatching egg production, hatching, feed
manufacturing, raising chickens to marketable age (grow out), processing, and marketing.
Consistent with the poultry industry, the Companys profitability is substantially impacted by the
market prices for its finished products and feed grains, both of which may fluctuate substantially
and exhibit cyclical characteristics typically associated with commodity markets. Other costs,
11
excluding feed grains, related to the profitability of the Companys poultry operations, including
hatching egg production, hatching, growing, and processing cost, are responsive to efficient cost
containment programs and management practices.
The Companys prepared chicken product line includes approximately 75 institutional and consumer
packaged chicken items that it sells nationally, primarily to distributors and food service
establishments. A majority of the prepared chicken items are made to the specifications of food
service users.
On January 12, 2006, the Company announced that sites in Waco and McLennan County, Texas had been
selected for the construction of a new poultry complex, consisting of a processing plant, hatchery
and wastewater treatment facility. The processing plant began processing chickens on August 6,
2007, and was originally planned to reach full production of approximately 1.25 million head of
chickens per week during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008. However, because of poor market
fundamentals in the second half of calendar 2008, moving the plant to full capacity was delayed
until the third quarter of fiscal 2009.
Sanderson Farms announced plans on April 24, 2008, to invest approximately $126.5 million for
construction of a new feed mill, poultry processing plant and hatchery on separate sites in Kinston
and Lenoir County, North Carolina. On June 26, 2008, the Company announced its decision to postpone
the project due to market conditions and escalating grain prices. On July 23, 2009, the Company
announced plans to proceed with the construction and start-up of the Companys Kinston, North
Carolina, poultry complex with a revised budget of approximately $121.4 million. The Kinston
facilities will comprise a state-of-the-art poultry complex with the capacity to process 1.25
million birds per week for the retail chill pack market. At full capacity, the complex will employ
approximately 1,500 people, will require 130 contract growers, and will be equipped to process and
sell 6.7 million pounds per week of dressed poultry meat. Construction began during August 2009 and
the Company expects initial operation of the new complex to begin during the first quarter of
fiscal 2011.
On March 29, 2010 the Company announced that it had commenced an underwritten registered public
offering of 2,000,000 shares of its common stock. In connection with this offering, the Company
granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 300,000 shares of common
stock to cover over-allotments, if any. On April 7, 2010 the Company announced the closing of its
underwritten registered public offering of 2,300,000 shares of its common stock, including 300,000
shares issued in connection with the underwriters exercise of their over-allotment option. The
offering price to the public was $53.00 per share. The Company also announced that it intends to
use the net proceeds from the offering, together with other funds, to finance the construction of
its new retail poultry complex in Kinston, North Carolina, and a potential new big bird poultry
complex to be located near Goldsboro, North Carolina. Pending such uses, net proceeds from the
offering were used to reduce indebtedness and to invest in cash and cash equivalents. The Company
may use some of the invested proceeds as working capital and for general corporate purposes.
EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW OF RESULTS
While neither the Companys net sales price nor feed cost per pound changed significantly during
the second quarter of fiscal 2010 as compared to the second quarter of fiscal 2009, the Companys
margins improved as a result of the additional pounds of poultry products sold, which allowed the
Company to reduce its non-feed related costs by 2.2 cents per pound of poultry products sold.
During the first six months of fiscal 2010 as compared to the first six months of fiscal 2009 the
Companys margins improved primarily as a result of higher overall market prices for poultry
products and additional pounds of poultry products sold. The Company believes overall market prices
for poultry products during the first six months of fiscal 2010 as compared to the first six months
of fiscal 2009 have improved due more from the tightening of the supply of poultry products than an
improvement in demand from consumers. However, demand for fresh chicken in the retail grocery store
market has remained strong, and certain food service companies have reported modest improvement in
restaurant traffic during April and into May of 2010. While the Company is encouraged by the recent
improvement in the average Georgia Dock price for whole birds and Urner Barry market prices for
boneless breast meat, the Company believes that demand for chicken products in food service markets
will remain soft until overall economic conditions in the United States improve and employment
numbers move higher. In addition to improved poultry markets, the average cost of feed in broiler
flocks sold during the first half of fiscal 2010 as compared to the same period a year ago
decreased $.0052 per pound, or 1.8%. Feed grain market prices remain relatively high versus
historical averages, but market prices have
12
decreased from January highs following the USDAs crop estimates issued January 12, 2010. While the
Company has not priced all of its grain needs for the balance of the fiscal year, had we priced
those needs at May 21, 2010 market prices, feed grain costs, including the additional grain needed
during fiscal 2010, would be approximately $14 million lower during fiscal 2010 as compared to
fiscal 2009.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Net sales for the second quarter of fiscal 2010 were $487.1 million as compared to $426.8 million
for the second quarter of fiscal 2009, an increase of $60.3 million or 14.1%. Net sales of poultry
products for the second quarter of fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2009 were $456.8 million and $392.6
million, respectively, an increase of $64.2 million or 16.3%. The increase in net sales of poultry
products resulted from an increase in the pounds of poultry products sold of 16.4%, from 575.3
million pounds during the second quarter of fiscal 2009 to 669.9 million pounds during the second
quarter of fiscal 2010. The increase in the pounds of poultry products sold resulted from an
increase in the number of chickens processed of 6.9% and an increase in the average live weight of
chickens sold of 6.6% during the second quarter of fiscal 2010 as compared to the second quarter of
fiscal 2009. During the second quarter of fiscal 2009 the Company operated below actual capacity
in response to weak demand from food service customers. Overall market prices for poultry products
were flat during the second quarter of fiscal 2010 as compared to the second quarter of fiscal
2009. Urner Barry market prices for bulk leg quarters were flat during the second quarter of fiscal
2010 as compared to the same period during fiscal 2009. While Urner Barry market prices for
boneless breast meat were 8.6% higher, tenders and jumbo wings decreased 7.9% and 5.8%,
respectively. In addition, a simple average of the Georgia dock prices for whole birds reflected a
decrease of 2.0% during the second quarter of fiscal 2010 as compared to the same period a year
ago. Net sales of prepared chicken products for the three months ended April 30, 2010 and 2009 were
$30.3 million and $34.2 million, respectively, or a decrease of 11.2%. This decrease was the result
of a decrease of 9.4% in the pounds of prepared chicken products sold and a decrease in the average
sales price of 2.0%. Pounds of prepared chicken products sold decreased from 16.8 million pounds
during the second quarter of fiscal 2009 to 15.2 million pounds during the second quarter of fiscal
2010.
Net sales for the first half of fiscal 2010 were $907.2 million as compared to $815.6 million for
the first half of fiscal 2009, an increase of $91.6 million or 11.2%. Net sales for poultry
products during the first six months of fiscal 2010 were $848.3 million as compared to $753.3
million during the first six months of fiscal 2009, an increase of $94.9 million or 12.6%. The
increase in net sales of poultry products resulted from an increases in both the pounds of poultry
products sold and the average sales price of poultry products sold of 6.2% and 6.0%, respectively.
The Company sold 1.25 billion pounds of poultry products during the first half of fiscal 2010, up
from 1.18 billion pounds during the first half of fiscal 2009. During the first six months of
fiscal 2010 as compared to the first six months of fiscal 2009 the Company increased the average
live weight of chickens processed by 5.6%, and increased the number of chickens processed by 2.8%.
During the first six months of fiscal 2009 the Company had a planned decrease in the number and
average live weight of chickens in response to weak demand from food service customers. Overall
market prices for poultry products improved during the six months ended April 30, 2010 as compared
to the six months ended April 30, 2009 as reflected by increases in the average Urner Barry market
prices for boneless breast, jumbo wings and leg quarters of 7.5%, 12.9% and 5.3%, respectively.
These improvements were somewhat offset by a 3.2% decline in the average market price for chicken
tenders and a 3.7% decline in the average Georgia Dock price for whole chickens. Net sales of
prepared chicken products sold during the six months ended April 30, 2010 were $59.0 million as
compared to $62.3 million during the six months ended April 30, 2009, a decrease of $3.3 million or
5.4%. This was the result of a decrease in the pounds of prepared chicken products sold from 30.9
million pounds during the first half of fiscal 2009 to 29.2 million during the first half of fiscal
2010.
Cost of sales for the three months ended April 30, 2010 were $412.1 million as compared to $370.8
million during the three months ended April 30, 2009, an increase of $41.3 million or 11.2%. Cost
of sales of poultry products sold during the three months ended April 30, 2010 were $385.1 million
as compared to $340.5 million for the three months ended April 30, 2009, an increase of $44.6
million or 13.1%. As illustrated in the table below, the increase in the cost of sales of poultry
products sold resulted from an increase in the pounds of poultry products sold of 16.4% partially
offset by improved efficiencies directly resulting from the additional pounds of poultry products
sold during the second quarter of fiscal 2010 as compared to the second quarter of fiscal 2009.
13
Poultry Cost of Sales
(In thousands, except percentages and per pound data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Second Quarter 2010 |
|
|
Second Quarter 2009 |
|
|
Incr/(Decr) |
|
|
Incr/(Decr) |
|
|
% Incr/(Decr) |
|
Description |
|
Dollars |
|
|
Per Pnd |
|
|
Dollars |
|
|
Per Pnd |
|
|
Dollars |
|
|
Per Pnd |
|
|
Dollars |
|
|
Per Pnd |
|
Feed in broiler flocks sold |
|
$ |
183,432 |
|
|
$ |
0.2738 |
|
|
$ |
154,811 |
|
|
$ |
0.2691 |
|
|
$ |
28,621 |
|
|
$ |
0.0047 |
|
|
|
18.49 |
% |
|
|
1.75 |
% |
All other cost of sales |
|
$ |
201,693 |
|
|
$ |
0.3011 |
|
|
$ |
185,695 |
|
|
$ |
0.3228 |
|
|
$ |
15,998 |
|
|
$ |
(0.0217 |
) |
|
|
8.62 |
% |
|
|
(6.72 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total poultry cost of sales |
|
$ |
385,125 |
|
|
$ |
0.5749 |
|
|
$ |
340,506 |
|
|
$ |
0.5918 |
|
|
$ |
44,619 |
|
|
$ |
(0.0169 |
) |
|
|
13.10 |
% |
|
|
(2.86 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poultry Pounds Sold |
|
|
669,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
575,343 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The cost of feed in broiler flocks sold during the second quarter of fiscal 2010 as compared
to the same quarter a year ago increased by $28.6 million or $.0047 per pound. Excluding feed in
broiler flocks sold, all other costs of sales of poultry products increased $16.0 million or
decreased 2.17 cents per pound of poultry products sold and reflects improved efficiencies during
the second quarter of fiscal 2010. These other costs of sales of poultry products include labor,
contract grower pay, packaging, freight and certain fixed costs, among other costs. Costs of
sales of the Companys prepared chicken products were $27.0 million as compared to $30.3 million
during fiscal 2009, a decrease of $3.3 million or 10.9%.
Cost of sales for the six months ended April 30, 2010 were $790.2 million as compared to $754.7
million during the six months ended April 30, 2009, a decrease of $35.5 million or 4.7%. Cost of
sales of poultry products sold during the first six months of fiscal 2010 as compared to the first
six months of fiscal 2009 were $737.8 million and $699.3 million, respectively, an increase of
$38.4 million or 5.5%. As illustrated in the table below, the increase in the cost of sales of
poultry products sold resulted from an increase in the pounds of poultry products sold of 6.2%
offset by a decrease in feed costs per pound of 1.8%.
Poultry Cost of Sales
(In thousands, except percentages and per pound data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Half 2010 |
|
|
First Half 2009 |
|
|
Incr/(Decr) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
% Incr/(Decr) |
|
Description |
|
Dollars |
|
|
Per Pnd |
|
|
Dollars |
|
|
Per Pnd |
|
|
Dollars |
|
|
Per Pnd |
|
|
Dollars |
|
|
Per Pnd |
|
Feed in broiler flocks sold |
|
$ |
348,888 |
|
|
$ |
0.2782 |
|
|
$ |
334,665 |
|
|
$ |
0.2834 |
|
|
$ |
14,223 |
|
|
$ |
(0.0052 |
) |
|
|
4.25 |
% |
|
|
(1.83 |
)% |
All other cost of sales |
|
$ |
388,865 |
|
|
$ |
0.3101 |
|
|
$ |
364,654 |
|
|
$ |
0.3088 |
|
|
$ |
24,211 |
|
|
$ |
0.0013 |
|
|
|
6.64 |
% |
|
|
0.42 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total poultry cost of sales |
|
$ |
737,753 |
|
|
$ |
0.5882 |
|
|
$ |
699,319 |
|
|
$ |
0.5922 |
|
|
$ |
38,434 |
|
|
$ |
(0.0040 |
) |
|
|
5.50 |
% |
|
|
(0.68 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poultry Pounds Sold |
|
|
1,254,177 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,180,907 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The average cost of feed in broiler flocks sold during the first six months of fiscal 2010 as
compared to the same period a year ago increased $14.2 million or decreased $.0052 per pound.
Excluding feed in broiler flocks sold, all other costs of sales increased $24.2 million or $0.0013
per pound of poultry products sold. These other costs of sales of poultry products include labor,
contract grower pay, packaging, freight and certain fixed costs, among other costs. Costs of sales
of the Companys prepared chicken products were $52.4 million as compared to $55.4 million during
fiscal 2009, a decrease of $3.0 million or 5.4%.
Selling, general and administrative costs for the three months ended April 30, 2010 and April 30,
2009 were $19.3 million and $12.9 million, an increase of $6.4 million. Selling, general and
administrative costs for the six months ended April 30, 2010 and April 30, 2009 were $35.6 million
and $24.8 million, an increase of $10.8 million. The increase in selling, general and
administrative costs during the second quarter and first half of fiscal 2010 as compared to the
same periods during fiscal 2009 resulted from an accrual of $3.3 million during the second quarter
of fiscal 2010 towards a contribution to the Companys Employee Stock Ownership Plan, additional
charges related to the Companys stock compensation plan, as described in note 3 above, and
additional administrative charges including $1.1 million related to the start up of the new Kinston
and Lenoir County, North Carolina poultry complex. The Company expects start up cost to be $2.5
million during the second half fiscal 2010. All start up costs
14
will be recorded as administrative costs until the plant begins operations, which is scheduled to
begin during the first quarter of fiscal 2011.
Operating income for the second quarter of fiscal 2010 was $55.7 million as compared to an
operating income of $43.1 million for the second quarter of fiscal 2009, an improvement of $12.6
million or 29.2%. The improvement in operating income during the second quarter of fiscal 2010 as
compared to the second quarter of fiscal 2009 resulted from the Companys ability to drive
additional margins through an increase in the pounds of poultry products sold of 16.4% and improved
efficiencies directly related to the additional volume. Operating income for the first six months
of fiscal 2010 was $81.4 million as compared to an operating income of $36.2 million for the first
six months of 2009, an improvement of $45.2 million. This improvement in the Companys operating
income resulted primarily from the overall improvement in market prices of poultry products during
the first six months of fiscal 2010 as compared to the same period during fiscal 2009 and increased
profitability due to the additional pounds of poultry products sold, as described above.
Interest expense during the three and six months ended April 30, 2010 were $1.2 million and $2.3
million, respectively, as compared to $2.5 million and $5.7 million for the three and six months
ended April 30, 2009, respectively. The decrease in interest expense during fiscal 2010 as compared
to fiscal 2009 resulted from lower average outstanding debt and lower interest rates. During the
first six months of fiscal 2010 the Company capitalized $109,000 in interest cost to construction
of the new complex in Kinston and Lenoir County, North Carolina.
The Company did not capitalize any interest cost during the first six months of fiscal 2009.
The Companys effective tax rate during the three and six months ended April 30, 2010 was 35.7% and
differs from the statutory federal rate due to state income taxes, certain nondeductible expenses
for federal income tax purposes and state tax credits. The Companys effective tax rate during the
three and six months ended April 30, 2009 was 35.5% and 36.1%, respectively and differs from the
statutory federal rate due to state income taxes, certain nondeductible expenses for federal income
tax purposes and tax credits available as a result of Hurricane Katrina and state credits unrelated
to the hurricane. The federal tax credits related to Hurricane Katrina expired on August 29, 2009,
and unless Congress extends the credit, the Company will not benefit from such credits during
fiscal 2010. Assuming the Katrina credits are not extended, the Company expects its effective tax
rate to be approximately 35.7% for the remainder of fiscal 2010.
Net income for the three and six months ended April 30, 2010 was $35.1 million or $1.62 per share
and $50.9 million or $2.39 per share, respectively. Net income for the three months and six months
ended April 30, 2009 was $26.2 million or $1.25 per share and $19.5 million or $0.93 per share,
respectively.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
The Companys working capital at April 30, 2010 was $251.5 million and its current ratio was 3.8 to
1. The Companys working capital and current ratio at October 31, 2009 was $162.7 million and 3.1
to 1. The improvement in the Companys working capital and current ratio at April 30, 2010 as
compared to October 31, 2009 resulted from the secondary stock offering during the second quarter
of fiscal 2010. On April 7, 2010, the Company sold 2.3 million shares of its common stock at
$53.00 per share, resulting in net proceeds of $115.5 million. The Companys principal sources of
liquidity include cash from operations and borrowings under the Companys $300.0 million revolving
credit facility with nine banks. At April 30, 2010, the Company had $290.0 million available, if
needed, under this revolving credit facility.
Cash flows provided by operating activities during
the first half of fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2009
were $73.3 million and $71.5 million, respectively. Cash provided from operations resulted from
overall higher market prices for poultry products and revenue generated from additional pounds of
poultry products sold during the first half of fiscal 2010 as compared to the first half of fiscal
2009, which resulted in increased cash received from customers of $82.4 million. This increase in cash received from customers
during the first half of fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 was primarily offset by bonuses earned during fiscal 2009 and paid during
fiscal 2010 and income tax refunds received during fiscal 2009.
Cash flows used in investing activities during the first half of fiscal 2010 and 2009 were $55.6
million and $11.4 million, respectively. The Companys capital expenditures during the first half
of fiscal 2010 were $55.7 million and included $35.2 million for construction of the Companys new
Kinston and Lenoir County, North Carolina complex. During the first half of fiscal 2009, the
Company spent approximately $11.5 million on planned capital projects.
15
Excluding the Kinston and Lenoir County complex under construction, the Companys capital
expenditures during the first six months of fiscal 2010 were $20.5 million.
Cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities during the first half of fiscal 2010 and 2009
were $71.4 million and ($28.2) million, respectively. On April 7, 2010 the Company sold 2.3
million shares of its common stock at $53.00 per share resulting in net proceeds from the secondary
offering of $115.5 million. The Company used $40.0 million of the proceeds from the sale of the
stock to pay off the outstanding draws under its revolving credit facility, with the remaining
proceeds of $75.5 million to be used to finance a portion of the construction of its new retail
poultry complex in Kinston, North Carolina, a potential new big bird poultry complex to be located
near Goldsboro, North Carolina, and other corporate purposes.
The Companys capital budget at April 30, 2010 is approximately $139.8 million and will be funded
by $97.2 million cash on hand at April 30, 2010, internally generated working capital, cash flows
from operations and , as needed, draws under the Companys revolving credit facility. The Company
had $290 million available under the revolving line of credit at April 30, 2010. The fiscal 2010
capital budget includes approximately $107.4 million for construction of the poultry complex in
Kinston, North Carolina. Excluding the complex in North Carolina, the Companys capital budget for
fiscal 2010 would be $32.4 million.
On March 29, 2010 the Company announced that it had commenced an underwritten registered public
offering of 2,000,000 shares of its common stock. In connection with this offering, the Company
granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 300,000 shares of common
stock to cover over-allotments, if any. On April 7, 2010 the Company announced the closing of its
underwritten registered public offering of 2,300,000 shares of its common stock, including 300,000
shares issued in connection with the underwriters exercise of their over-allotment option. The
offering price to the public was $53.00 per share. The Company also announced the Company intends
to use the net proceeds from the offering, together with other funds, to finance the construction
of its new retail poultry complex in Kinston, North Carolina, and a potential new big bird poultry
complex to be located near Goldsboro, North Carolina. Pending such uses, net proceeds from the
offering were used to reduce indebtedness and to invest in cash and cash equivalents. The Company
may use some of the invested proceeds as working capital and for general corporate purposes.
Sanderson Farms announced plans on April 24, 2008, to invest approximately $126.5 million for
construction of a new feed mill, poultry processing plant and hatchery on separate sites in Kinston
and Lenoir County, North Carolina. On June 26, 2008, the Company announced its decision to postpone
the project due to market conditions and escalating grain prices. On July 23, 2009, the Company
announced plans to proceed with the construction and start-up of the Companys Kinston, North
Carolina, poultry complex with a revised budget of approximately $121.4 million. The Kinston
facilities will comprise a state-of-the-art poultry complex with the capacity to process 1,250,000
birds per week for the retail chill pack market. At full capacity, the complex will employ
approximately 1,500 people, will require 130 contract growers, and will be equipped to process and
sell 6.7 million pounds per week of dressed poultry meat. Construction began during August 2009 and
the Company expects initial operations at the new complex to begin during the first quarter of
fiscal 2011.
On May 1, 2008, the Company entered into a new revolving credit facility to, among other things,
increase the available credit to $300.0 million, increase the capital expenditure limits to allow
construction of the Kinston, North Carolina facility, and to change the covenant requiring a
maximum debt to total capitalization ratio of 50% during fiscal 2008, 55% during fiscal 2009 and
not to exceed 50% for fiscal 2010 and thereafter. The credit remains unsecured and, unless
extended, will expire on May 1, 2013. As of April 30, 2010 the Company has no outstanding
borrowings under the revolving credit facility, but the Company does have $10.0 million outstanding
letters of credit under the credit facility.
On October 9, 2008, the Company announced that it filed a Form S-3 shelf registration statement
with the Securities and Exchange Commission to register for possible future sale shares of the
Companys common and/or preferred stock at an aggregate offering price not to exceed $1.0 billion.
The stock may be offered by the Company in amounts, at prices and on terms to be determined by the
board of directors if and when shares are issued. The Company sold 2.3 million shares of its
common stock pursuant to this registration statement on April 7, 2010 at $53.00 per share.
16
The Company regularly evaluates both internal and external growth opportunities, including
acquisition opportunities and the possible construction of new production assets, and conducts due
diligence activities in connection with such opportunities. The cost and terms of any financing to
be raised in conjunction with any growth opportunity, including the Companys ability to raise debt
or equity capital on terms and at costs satisfactory to the Company, and the effect of such
opportunities on the Companys balance sheet, are critical considerations in any such evaluation.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting standards generally accepted
in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported
amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts
of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these
estimates and assumptions, and the differences could be material.
The Companys Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, as described in Note 1 of the Notes to
the Consolidated Financial Statements that are filed with the Companys latest report on Form 10-K,
should be read in conjunction with this Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations. Management believes that the critical accounting policies and estimates
that are material to the Companys Consolidated Financial Statements are those described below.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
In the normal course of business, the Company extends credit to its customers on a short-term
basis. Although credit risks associated with our customers are considered minimal, the Company
routinely reviews its accounts receivable balances and makes provisions for probable doubtful
accounts. In circumstances where management is aware of a specific customers inability to meet its
financial obligations to the Company, a specific reserve is recorded to reduce the receivable to
the amount expected to be collected. If circumstances change (i.e., higher than expected defaults
or an unexpected material adverse change in a major customers ability to meet its financial
obligations to us), our estimates of the recoverability of amounts due us could be reduced by a
material amount, and the allowance for doubtful accounts and related bad debt expense would
increase by the same amount.
Inventories
Processed food and poultry inventories and inventories of feed, eggs, medication and packaging
supplies are stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out method) or market. If market prices
for poultry or feed grains move substantially lower, the Company would record adjustments to write
down the carrying values of processed poultry and feed inventories to fair market value, which
would increase the Companys costs of sales.
Live poultry inventories of broilers are stated at the lower of cost or market and breeders at cost
less accumulated amortization. The cost associated with broiler inventories, consisting principally
of chicks, feed, medicine and payments to the growers who raise the chicks for us, are accumulated
during the growing period. The cost associated with breeder inventories, consisting principally of
breeder chicks, feed, medicine and grower payments are accumulated during the growing period.
Capitalized breeder costs are then amortized over nine months using the straight-line method.
Mortality of broilers and breeders is charged to cost of sales as incurred. If market prices for
chicken, feed or medicine or if grower payments increase (or decrease) during the period, the
Company could have an increase (or decrease) in the market value of its inventory as well as an
increase (or decrease) in costs of sales. Should the Company decide that the nine month
amortization period used to amortize the breeder costs is no longer appropriate as a result of
operational changes, a shorter (or longer) amortization period could increase (or decrease) the
costs of sales recorded in future periods. High mortality from disease or extreme temperatures
would result in abnormal charges to cost of sales to write-down live poultry inventories.
Long-Lived Assets
Depreciable long-lived assets are primarily comprised of buildings and machinery and equipment.
Depreciation is provided by the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives, which are 15
to 39 years for buildings and 3 to
17
12 years for machinery and equipment. An increase or decrease in the estimated useful lives would
result in changes to depreciation expense.
The Company continually evaluates the carrying value of its long-lived assets for events or changes
in circumstances that indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. As part of this
evaluation, the Company estimates the future cash flows expected to result from the use of the
asset and its eventual disposal. If the sum of the expected future cash flows (undiscounted and
without interest charges) is less than the carrying amount of the asset, an impairment loss is
recognized to reduce the carrying value of the long-lived asset to the estimated fair value of the
asset. If the Companys assumptions with respect to the future expected cash flows associated with
the use of long-lived assets currently recorded change, then the Companys determination that no
impairment charges are necessary may change and result in the Company recording an impairment
charge in a future period. The Company did not identify any indicators of impairment during the
current fiscal period.
Accrued Self Insurance
Insurance expense for workers compensation benefits and employee-related health care benefits are
estimated using historical experience and actuarial estimates. Stop-loss coverage is maintained
with third party insurers to limit the Companys total exposure. Management regularly reviews the
assumptions used to recognize periodic expenses. Any resulting adjustments to accrued claims are
reflected in current operating results. If historical experience proves not to be a good indicator
of future expenses, if management were to use different actuarial assumptions, or if there is a
negative trend in the Companys claims history, there could be a significant increase or decrease
in cost of sales depending on whether these expenses increased or decreased, respectively.
Income Taxes
The Company determines its effective tax rate by estimating its permanent differences resulting
from differing treatment of items for financial and income tax purposes. The Company is
periodically audited by taxing authorities and considers any adjustments made as a result of the
audits in considering the tax expense. Any audit adjustments affecting permanent differences could
have an impact on the Companys effective tax rate.
Contingencies
The Company is involved in various claims and litigation incidental to its business. Although the
outcome of these matters cannot be determined with certainty, management, upon the advice of
counsel, is of the opinion that the final outcome should not have a material effect on the
Companys consolidated results of operations or financial position.
The Company recognizes the costs of legal defense for the legal proceedings to which it is a party
in the periods incurred. After a considerable analysis of each case, the Company determines the
amount of reserves required, if any. At this time, the Company has not accrued any reserve for any
of these matters. Future reserves may be required if losses are deemed reasonably estimable and
probable due to changes in the Companys assumptions, the effectiveness of legal strategies, or
other factors beyond the Companys control. Future results of operations may be materially affected
by the creation of reserves or by accruals of losses to reflect any adverse determinations in these
legal proceedings.
New Accounting Pronouncements
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157 Fair Value Measurements (SFAS 157), codified in
ASC 820. This standard defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and
expands disclosure about fair value measurements. This pronouncement applies whenever other
accounting standards require or permit assets or liabilities to be measured at fair value.
Accordingly, this statement does not require any new fair value measurements. The Company adopted
ASC 820 effective November 1, 2008 for its financial assets and liabilities and the adoption had no
material effect on the Companys consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. The Company adopted ASC 820 for its non-financial assets and liabilities that are recognized
at fair value on a non-recurring basis on November 1, 2009 and the adoption did not have a material
impact on the consolidated financial position results of operations or cash flows.
18
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
The Company is a purchaser of certain commodities, primarily corn and soybean meal, for use in
manufacturing feed for its chickens. As a result, the Companys earnings are affected by changes in
the price and availability of such feed ingredients. Feed grains are subject to volatile price
changes caused by factors described below that include demand, weather, size of harvest,
transportation and storage costs and the agricultural policies of the United States and foreign
governments. The price fluctuations of feed grains have a direct and material effect on the
Companys profitability.
The Company generally will purchase feed ingredients for deferred delivery that typically range
from one month to twelve months after the time of purchase. Once purchased, the Company can price
its grain at market prices at any time prior to delivery of the grain. The grain purchases are made
directly with our usual grain suppliers, which are companies in the regular business of supplying
grain to end users, and do not involve options to purchase. The pricing of such purchases occur
when senior management concludes that market factors indicate that prices at the time the grain is
needed are likely to be higher than current prices, or where, based on current and expected market
prices for the Companys poultry products, management believes it can price feed ingredients at
levels that will allow the Company to earn a reasonable return for its shareholders. Market factors
considered by management in determining whether or not and to what extent to buy grain for deferred
delivery and to price grain include:
|
|
|
Current market prices; |
|
|
|
|
Current and predicted weather patterns in the United States, South America, China and
other grain producing areas, as such weather patterns might affect the planting, growing,
harvesting and yield of feed grains; |
|
|
|
|
The expected size of the harvest of feed grains in the United States and other grain
producing areas of the world as reported by governmental and private sources; |
|
|
|
|
Current and expected changes to the agricultural policies of the United States and
foreign governments; |
|
|
|
|
The relative strength of United States currency and expected changes therein as it
might impact the ability of foreign countries to buy United States feed grain commodities; |
|
|
|
|
The current and expected volumes of export of feed grain commodities as reported by
governmental and private sources; |
|
|
|
|
The current and expected use of available feed grains for uses other than as livestock
feed grains (such as the use of corn for the production of ethanol, which use is impacted
by the price of crude oil and governmental policy); and |
|
|
|
|
Current and expected market prices for the Companys poultry products. |
The Company purchases physical grain, not financial instruments such as puts, calls or straddles
that derive their value from the value of physical grain. Thus, the Company does not use derivative
financial instruments as defined by SFAS 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities. The Company does not enter into any derivative transactions or purchase any
grain-related contracts other than the physical grain contracts described above.
The cost of feed grains is recognized in cost of sales, on a first-in-first-out basis, at the same
time that the sales of the chickens that consume the feed grains are recognized.
The Companys interest expense is sensitive to changes in the general level of U.S. interest rates.
The Company maintains certain of its debt as fixed rate in nature to mitigate the impact of
fluctuations in interest rates. The fair value of the Companys fixed rate debt approximates the
carrying amount at April 30, 2010. Management believes the potential effects of near-term changes
in interest rates on the Companys debt are not material.
19
The Company is a party to no other market risk sensitive instruments requiring disclosure.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
The Company maintains disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed in the Companys Securities Exchange Act reports is recorded,
processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SECs rules and forms,
and that such information is accumulated and communicated to the Companys management, including
its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosure.
An evaluation was performed under the supervision and with the participation of the Companys
management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness
of the design and operation of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures. Based on that
evaluation, the Companys management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, concluded that the Companys disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of April
30, 2010. There have been no changes in the Companys internal control over financial reporting
during the fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2010 that have materially affected, or are reasonably
likely to materially affect, the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
The Company is involved in various claims and litigation incidental to its business. Although the
outcome of these matters cannot be determined with certainty, management, upon the advice of
counsel, is of the opinion that the final outcome should not have a material effect on the
Companys consolidated results of operations or financial position.
The Company recognizes the costs of legal defense for the legal proceedings to which it is a party
in the periods incurred. After a considerable analysis of each case, the Company determines the
amount of reserves required, if any. At this time, the Company has not accrued any reserve for any
of these matters. Future reserves may be required if losses are deemed reasonably estimable and
probable due to changes in the Companys assumptions, the effectiveness of legal strategies, or
other factors beyond the Companys control. Future results of operations may be materially affected
by the creation of reserves or by accruals of losses to reflect any adverse determinations in these
legal proceedings.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
In addition to the other information
set forth in this report, you should carefully consider the following factors, which could materially affect our business,
financial condition or results of operations in future periods. The risks described below are not the only risks facing our
Company. Additional risks not currently known to us or that we
currently deem to be immaterial also may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations
in future periods.
Industry cyclicality can affect our earnings, especially due to fluctuations in commodity prices of
feed ingredients and chicken.
Profitability in the poultry industry is materially affected by the commodity prices of feed
ingredients, chicken, and, to a lesser extent, alternative proteins. These prices are determined by
supply and demand factors, and supply and demand factors in respect of feed ingredients and chicken
may not correlate. For example, grain prices during 2009 were relatively high, while prices for
chicken products did not increase proportionally. As a result, the poultry industry is subject to
wide fluctuations that are called cycles. Typically we do well when chicken prices are high and
feed prices are low. We do less well, and sometimes have losses, when chicken prices are low and
feed prices are high. It is very difficult to predict when these cycles will occur. All we can
safely predict is that they do and will occur.
Various factors can affect the supply of corn and soybean meal, which are the primary
ingredients of the feed we use. In particular, global weather patterns, including adverse weather
conditions that may result from climate change, the global level of supply inventories and demand
for feed ingredients, currency fluctuations and the agricultural and energy policies of the United
States and foreign governments all affect the supply of feed ingredients. Weather patterns often
change agricultural conditions in an unpredictable manner. A sudden and
20
significant change in weather patterns could affect supplies of feed ingredients, as well as
both the industrys and our ability to obtain feed ingredients, grow chickens or deliver products.
More recently, demand for corn from ethanol producers has resulted in sharply higher costs for corn
and other grains.
Increases in the prices of feed ingredients will result in increases in raw material costs and
operating costs. Because prices for our products are related to the commodity prices of chickens,
which depend on the supply and demand dynamics of fresh chicken, we typically are not able to
increase our product prices to offset these increased grain costs. We periodically enter into
contracts to purchase feed ingredients at current prices for future delivery to manage our feed
ingredient costs. This practice could reduce, but does not eliminate, the risk of increased
operating costs from commodity price increases. In addition, if we are unsuccessful in our grain
buying strategy, we could actually pay a higher cost for feed ingredients than we would if we
purchased at current prices for current delivery.
Prepared chicken and poultry inventories, and inventories of feed, eggs, medication, packaging
supplies and live chickens, are stated on our balance sheet at the lower of cost (first-in,
first-out method) or market. Our cost of sales is calculated during a period by adding the value of
our inventories at the beginning of the period to the cost of growing, processing and distributing
products produced during the period and subtracting the value of our inventories at the end of the
period. If the market prices of our inventories are below the accumulated cost of those inventories
at the end of a period, we would record adjustments to write down the carrying value of the
inventory from cost to market value. These write-downs would directly increase our cost of sales by
the amount of the write-downs. This risk is greatest when the costs of feed ingredients are high
and the market value for finished poultry products is declining.
For example, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, we recorded a charge of $35 million
to lower the value of live broiler inventories on hand at that date from cost to estimated market
value because the estimated market price for the products to be produced from those live chickens
when sold was estimated to be below the estimated cost to grow, process and distribute those
chickens. Market conditions improved during the first fiscal quarter ended January 31, 2009 such
that the estimated market price of the products to be produced from our live broiler inventories on
January 31, 2009 was higher than the estimated cost to grow, process and distribute those chickens
and, accordingly, we recorded our live broiler inventories on January 31, 2009 at cost. The $35
million adjustment to inventory on October 31, 2008 effectively absorbed into fiscal 2008 a portion
of the costs to grow, process and distribute chickens that we would have otherwise incurred in the
first quarter of fiscal 2009, thereby benefitting fiscal 2009. Any similar adjustments that we make
in the future could be material, and could materially adversely affect our financial condition and
results of operations.
Outbreaks of avian disease, such as avian influenza, or the perception that outbreaks may occur,
can significantly restrict our ability to conduct our operations.
We take reasonable precautions to ensure that our flocks are healthy and that our processing
plants and other facilities operate in a sanitary and environmentally sound manner. Nevertheless,
events beyond our control, such as the outbreak of avian disease, even if it does not affect our
flocks, could significantly restrict our ability to conduct our operations or our sales. An
outbreak of disease could result in governmental restrictions on the import and export of fresh and
frozen chicken, including our fresh and frozen chicken products, or other products to or from our
suppliers, facilities or customers, or require us to destroy one or more of our flocks. This could
result in the cancellation of orders by our customers and create adverse publicity that may have a
material adverse effect on our business, reputation and prospects. In addition, world-wide fears
about avian disease, such as avian influenza, have, in the past, depressed demand for fresh
chicken, which adversely impacted our sales.
In recent years there has been substantial publicity regarding a highly pathogenic Asian
strain of avian influenza, or AI, known as H5N1, which has affected Asia since 2002 and which has
been found in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. It is widely believed that this strain of AI is
spread by migratory birds, such as ducks and geese. There have also been some cases where this
strain of AI is believed to have passed from birds to humans as humans came into contact with live
birds that were infected with the disease.
Although the highly pathogenic Asian strain of AI has not been identified in North America,
there have been outbreaks of both low and high pathogenic strains of avian influenza in North
America, including in the U.S. in
21
2002 and 2004 and in Mexico in past years, including 2005. In addition, low pathogenic strains
of the AI virus were detected in wild birds in the United States in 2006. Although these outbreaks
have not generated the same level of concern, or received the same level of publicity or been
accompanied by the same reduction in demand for poultry products in certain countries as that
associated with the highly pathogenic Asian strain, they have nevertheless impacted our sales.
Accordingly, even if the Asian strain does not spread to North America, we cannot assure you that
it will not materially adversely affect domestic or international demand for poultry produced in
North America, and, if it were to spread to North America, we cannot assure you that it would not
significantly affect our operations or the demand for our products, in each case in a manner having
a material adverse effect on our business, reputation or prospects.
A decrease in demand for our products in the export markets could materially and adversely affect
our results of operations.
Nearly all of our customers are based in the United States, but some of our customers resell
frozen poultry products in the export markets. Our chicken products are sold in Russia and other
former Soviet countries, China and Mexico, among other countries. Approximately 10% of our sales in
fiscal 2009 were to export markets, including $47.8 million to Russia and $53.2 million to China.
Any disruption to the export markets, such as trade embargos, import bans, duties or quotas could
materially impact our sales or create an oversupply of chicken in the United States. This, in turn,
could cause domestic poultry prices to decline. Any quotas or bans in the future could materially
and adversely affect our sales and our results of operations.
On January 19, 2010, Russia banned imports of U.S. poultry, citing its concerns about the U.S.
practice of treating poultry meat with chlorinated water during processing. On February 5, 2010,
China announced that it would impose anti-dumping duties on U.S. chicken products beginning on
February 13, 2010. The duty applicable to Sanderson Farms products was 64.5%. On April 28, 2010,
China raised the duties on U.S. chicken products, raising the duty applicable to Sanderson Farms
products by 6.1% to 70.6%. Since the imposition of the Russian embargo and the Chinese duty, we
and our customers who resell our frozen chicken products in Russia and China have been able to sell
those products in alternative markets without a significant price disadvantage. However, this could
create an oversupply of chicken in those alternative markets and could cause poultry prices in
those alternative markets to decline precipitously, which would adversely affect our results of
operations. While we have not seen a significant reduction in demand from our customers who resell
or previously resold our frozen chicken products in China, and have not therefore experienced a
decline in our revenue or profits from those customers, there is limited demand outside China for
the product that our customers resell there, so if an oversupply in alternative markets occurs, our
customers may be forced to resell those products in China and pay the applicable duty. This would
lower their return and the price they would be willing to pay us, reducing our revenues and
profits. In the case of products normally sold to Russia, if an oversupply of those products occurs
in alternative markets, we and other producers may seek to sell some of those products in the
United States, which could cause U.S. poultry prices to decline, further adversely affecting our
results of operations. We cannot assure you whether the Russian government will lift the embargo,
or, if they do lift it, when that might happen. Similarly, we do not know whether or when China
might lift the anti-dumping duty.
Competition in the poultry industry with other poultry companies, especially companies with greater
resources, may make us unable to compete successfully in this industry, which could adversely
affect our business.
The poultry industry is highly competitive. Some of our competitors have greater financial and
marketing resources than we have.
In general, the competitive factors in the U.S. poultry industry include:
|
|
|
price; |
|
|
|
|
product quality; |
22
|
|
|
brand identification; |
|
|
|
|
breadth of product line and |
|
|
|
|
customer service. |
Competitive factors vary by major markets. In the food service market, competition is based on
consistent quality, product development, service and price. In the U.S. retail grocery market, we
believe that competition is based on product quality, brand awareness, price and customer service.
Our success depends in part on our ability to manage costs and be efficient in the highly
competitive poultry industry.
The loss of our major customers could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
Our sales to our top ten customers represented approximately 45.5% of our net sales during the
2009 fiscal year. Our non-chill pack customers, with whom we generally do not have long-term
contracts, could significantly reduce or cease their purchases from us with little or no advance
notice, which could materially and adversely affect our sales and results of operations.
We must identify changing consumer preferences and develop and offer food products to meet their
preferences.
Consumer preferences evolve over time and the success of our food products depends on our
ability to identify the tastes and dietary habits of consumers and to offer products that appeal to
their preferences. We introduce new products and improved products from time to time and incur
significant development and marketing cost. If our products fail to meet consumer preference, then
our strategy to grow sales and profits with new products will be less successful.
Inclement weather, such as excessive heat or storms, could hurt our flocks, which could in turn
have a material adverse affect on our results of operations.
Extreme weather in the Gulf South region where we operate, such as excessive heat, hurricanes
or other storms, could impair the health or growth of our flocks or interfere with our hatching,
production or shipping operations. Some scientists believe that climate change could increase the
frequency and severity of adverse weather events. Extreme weather, regardless of its cause, could
affect our business due to power outages; fuel shortages; damage to infrastructure from powerful
winds, rising water or extreme temperatures; disruption of shipping channels; less efficient or
non-routine operating practices necessitated by adverse weather or increased costs of insurance
coverages in the aftermath of such events, among other things. Any of these factors could
materially and adversely affect our results of operations. We may not be able to recover through
insurance all of the damages, losses or costs that may result from weather events, including those
that may be caused by climate change.
We rely heavily on the services of key personnel.
We depend substantially on the leadership of a small number of executive officers and other
key employees. We have employment agreements with only three of these persons (our Chairman of the
Board and Chief Executive Officer, our President and Chief Operating Officer, and our Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer), and those with whom we have no agreement would not be bound by
non-competition agreements or non-solicitation agreements if they were to leave us. The loss of the
services of these persons could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
operations and financial condition. In addition, we may not be able to attract, retain and train
the new management personnel we need for our new complexes, or do so at the pace necessary to
sustain our significant company growth.
23
We depend on the availability of, and good relations with, our employees and contract growers.
We have approximately 9,965 employees, approximately 34.7% of which are covered by collective
bargaining agreements. In addition, we contract with over 750 independent farms in Mississippi,
Texas and Georgia for the grow-out of our breeder and broiler stock and the production of broiler
eggs. Our operations depend on the availability of labor and contract growers and maintaining good
relations with these persons and with labor unions. If we fail to maintain good relations with our
employees or with the unions, we may experience labor strikes or work stoppages. If we do not
attract and maintain contracts with our growers, including new growers for our potential new
poultry complex to be located near Goldsboro, North Carolina, our production operations could be
negatively impacted.
Immigration legislation and enforcement may affect our ability to hire hourly workers.
Immigration reform continues to attract significant attention in the public arena and the
United States Congress. If new immigration legislation is enacted at the federal level or in states
in which we do business, such legislation may contain provisions that could make it more difficult
or costly for us to hire United States citizens and/or legal immigrant workers. In such case, we
may incur additional costs to run our business or may have to change the way we conduct our
operations, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results
and financial condition. Also, despite our past and continuing efforts to hire only United States
citizens and/or persons legally authorized to work in the United States, increased enforcement
efforts with respect to existing immigration laws by governmental authorities may disrupt a portion
of our workforce or our operations at one or more of our facilities, thereby negatively impacting
our business. Officials with the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement have informally
indicated an intent to focus their enforcement efforts on red meat and poultry processors.
If our poultry products become contaminated, we may be subject to product liability claims and
product recalls.
Poultry products may be subject to contamination by disease-producing organisms, or pathogens,
such as Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella and generic E. coli. These pathogens are generally found
in the environment and, as a result, there is a risk that they, as a result of food processing,
could be present in our processed poultry products. These pathogens can also be introduced as a
result of improper handling by our customers, consumers or third parties after we have shipped the
products. We control these risks through careful processing and testing of our finished product,
but we cannot entirely eliminate them. We have little, if any, control over proper handling once
the product has been shipped. Nevertheless, contamination that results from improper handling by
our customers, consumers or third parties, or tampering with our products by those
persons, may be blamed on us. Any publicity regarding product contamination or resulting illness or
death could adversely affect us even if we did not cause the contamination and could have a
material adverse effect on our business, reputation and future prospects. We could be required to
recall our products if they are contaminated or damaged and product liability claims could be
asserted against us.
We are exposed to risks relating to product liability, product recalls, property damage and
injuries to persons, for which insurance coverage is expensive, limited and potentially inadequate.
Our business operations entail a number of risks, including risks relating to product
liability claims, product recalls, property damage and injuries to persons. We currently maintain
insurance with respect to certain of these risks, including product liability and recall insurance,
property insurance, workers compensation insurance and general liability insurance, but in many
cases such insurance is expensive and difficult to obtain. We cannot assure you that we can
maintain on reasonable terms sufficient coverage to protect us against losses due to any of these
events.
24
We would be adversely affected if we expand our business by acquiring other businesses or by
building new processing plants, but fail to successfully integrate the acquired business or run a
new plant efficiently.
We regularly evaluate expansion opportunities such as acquiring other businesses or building
new processing plants. Significant expansion involves risks such as additional debt, integrating
the acquired business or new plant into our operations and attracting and retaining growers. In
evaluating expansion opportunities, we carefully consider the effect that financing the opportunity
will have on our financial condition. Successful expansion depends on our ability to integrate the
acquired business or efficiently run the new plant. If we are unable to do this, expansion could
adversely affect our operations, financial results and prospects.
Governmental regulation is a constant factor affecting our business.
The poultry industry is subject to federal, state, local and foreign governmental regulation
relating to the processing, packaging, storage, distribution, advertising, labeling, quality and
safety of food products including, but not limited to, regulations by the Federal Food and Drug
Administration, the United States Department of Agriculture, the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration and corresponding state agencies. While compliance with existing regulations has not
had a material adverse effect on our earnings or competitive position, unknown matters, new laws
and regulations, or stricter interpretations of existing laws or regulations may materially affect
our business or operations in the future. Our failure to comply with applicable laws and
regulations could subject us to administrative penalties and civil remedies, including fines,
injunctions and recalls of our products. Our operations and those of our growers are also subject
to extensive and increasingly stringent environmental regulation, which pertains, among other
things, to the discharge of materials into the environment, odor and the handling and disposition
of wastes. Failure to comply with these regulations can have serious consequences, including civil
and administrative penalties and negative publicity.
Our stock price may be volatile.
The market price of our common stock could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to
factors such as the following, many of which are beyond our control:
|
|
|
market cyclicality and fluctuations in the price of feed grains and chicken products, as described above; |
|
|
|
|
quarterly variations in our operating results, or results that vary from the expectations of securities
analysts and investors; |
|
|
|
|
changes in investor perceptions of the poultry industry in general, including our competitors; and |
|
|
|
|
general economic and competitive conditions. |
In addition, purchases or sales of large quantities of our stock could have an unusual effect
on our market price.
Anti-takeover provisions in our charter and by-laws, as well as certain provisions of Mississippi
law, may make it difficult for anyone to acquire us without approval of our board of directors.
Our articles of incorporation and by-laws contain provisions that may discourage attempts
to acquire control of our company without the approval of our board of directors. These provisions,
among others, include a classified board of directors, advance notification requirements for
stockholders to nominate persons for election to the board and to make stockholder proposals, and
special stockholder voting requirements. These measures, and any others we may adopt in the future,
as well as applicable provisions of Mississippi law, may discourage offers to acquire us and may
permit our board of directors to choose not to entertain offers to purchase us, even offers that
are at a substantial premium to the market price of our stock. Our stockholders may therefore be
deprived of opportunities to
25
profit from a sale of control of our company, and as a result, may
adversely affect the marketability and market price of our common stock.
Deteriorating national or global economic conditions could negatively impact our business.
Our business may be adversely affected by deteriorating national or global economic
conditions, including rising inflation, unfavorable currency exchange rates and interest rates, the
lack of availability of credit on reasonable terms, changes in consumer spending rates and habits,
and a tight energy supply and rising energy costs. With respect to changes in government policy,
our business could be negatively impacted if efforts and initiatives of the governments of the
United States and other countries to manage and stimulate the economy fail or result in worsening
economic conditions. Deteriorating economic conditions could negatively impact consumer demand for
protein generally or our products specifically, consumers ability to afford our products, or
consumer habits with respect to how they spend their food dollars.
The recent disruptions in credit and other financial markets caused by deteriorating national
and international economic conditions could, among other things, make it more difficult for us, our
customers or our growers or prospective growers to obtain financing and credit on reasonable terms,
cause lenders to change their practice with respect to the industry generally or our company
specifically in terms of granting credit extensions and terms, impair the financial condition of
our customers, suppliers or growers making it difficult for them to meet their obligations and
supply raw material, or impair the financial condition of our insurers, making it difficult or
impossible for them to meet their obligations to us.
The construction and potential benefits of our new North Carolina facilities are subject to risks
and uncertainties.
In August 2009, we began construction of a poultry complex in Kinston, North Carolina. The
budget for the project is approximately $121.4 million. We expect initial operation of the new
complex to begin during the first quarter of fiscal 2011. In connection with this offering, we have
announced plans for a potential new poultry complex to be located near Goldsboro, North Carolina,
subject to our obtaining an acceptable economic incentive package from the State of North Carolina
and the local government. We expect to begin construction of the complex in the second quarter of
fiscal 2011 and expect to begin operations in the third quarter of fiscal 2012. Our ability to
complete construction of these plants on a timely basis and within budget is subject to a number of
risks and uncertainties described below. Once constructed and in operation, the Kinston complex and
the potential Goldsboro complex may not generate the benefits we expect if demand for the products
to be produced by them is different from what we expect.
In order to begin construction of a new Goldsboro facility, we will need to take a significant
number of steps and obtain a number of approvals, none of which we can assure you will be obtained.
In particular:
|
|
|
we will need to identify a site and purchase or lease such site; |
|
|
|
|
we will need to obtain the consent of the lenders under our revolving
credit facility to increase the limit in that facility on our capital
expenditures, which would not currently provide us sufficient capacity
to begin construction of our new Goldsboro complex; |
|
|
|
|
we will need to obtain a number of licenses and permits; and |
|
|
|
|
we will need to enter into construction contracts. |
Additionally, we must attract and enter into contracts with a sufficient number of growers for
both North Carolina complexes, and our growers must obtain financing on reasonable terms. If we are
unable to identify a site for the new Goldsboro complex, obtain the necessary licenses and permits
for our Goldsboro complex, proceed with
26
or complete construction of both complexes as planned,
attract growers or achieve the expected benefits of these new facilities, our business could be
negatively impacted.
We cannot assure you that we will be able to complete such steps on a timely basis, or at all,
or on terms that are reasonable or consistent with our expectations.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds.
During its first fiscal quarter, the company repurchased shares of its common stock as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(d) Maximum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number (or |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(c) Total Number of |
|
|
Approximate Dollar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased as |
|
|
Value) of Shares that |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of Publicly |
|
|
May Yet Be |
|
|
|
(a) Total Number of |
|
|
(b) Average Price |
|
|
Announced Plans or |
|
|
Purchased Under the |
|
Period |
|
Shares Purchased1 |
|
|
Paid per Share |
|
|
Programs2 |
|
|
Plans or Programs |
|
February 1, 2010 February 28, 2010 |
|
|
9,839 |
|
|
$ |
49.87 |
|
|
|
9,839 |
|
|
|
961,638 |
|
March 1, 2010 March 31, 2010 |
|
|
1,031 |
|
|
$ |
53.61 |
|
|
|
1,031 |
|
|
|
960,607 |
|
April 1, 2010 April 30, 2010 |
|
|
5,955 |
|
|
$ |
56.67 |
|
|
|
5,955 |
|
|
|
954,652 |
|
Total |
|
|
16,825 |
|
|
$ |
52.50 |
|
|
|
16,825 |
|
|
|
954,652 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
All purchases were made pursuant to the Companys Stock Incentive Plan under which
participants may satisfy tax withholding obligations incurred upon the vesting of restricted
stock by requesting the Company to withhold shares with a value equal to the amount of the
withholding obligation. |
|
2 |
|
On October 22, 2009, the Company announced that its Board of Directors expanded its
stock repurchase program to cover the repurchase of up to 1 million shares. The Company had
previously announced on April 28, 2008 that its Board of Directors had authorized the
repurchase of up to 225,000 shares over a period of four years from that date. Under the stock
repurchase program, shares may be purchased from time to time at prevailing prices in open
market transactions or in negotiated purchases, subject to market conditions, share price and
other considerations. The Company has repurchased 45,348 shares as of April 30, 2010 under the
authorized stock repurchase program. |
Item 5. Other Information.
At the 2010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Sanderson Farms, Inc., held February 18, 2010,
the shareholders elected the following persons to the Companys Board of Directors to serve until
the 2013 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, or until their successors are elected and qualified, by
the votes indicated below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ABSTENTIONS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AND BROKER |
|
NAME |
|
FOR |
|
|
WITHHELD |
|
|
NON-VOTES |
|
Fred Banks, Jr. |
|
|
16,521,082 |
|
|
|
361,314 |
|
|
|
1,825,774 |
|
Toni D. Cooley |
|
|
16,716,806 |
|
|
|
165,590 |
|
|
|
1,825,774 |
|
Robert C. Khayat |
|
|
16,715,242 |
|
|
|
167,154 |
|
|
|
1,825,774 |
|
Dianne Mooney |
|
|
16,709,944 |
|
|
|
172,452 |
|
|
|
1,825,774 |
|
Gail Jones Pittman |
|
|
16,709,340 |
|
|
|
173,056 |
|
|
|
1,825,774 |
|
By a vote of 18,384,638 for, 316,703 against, and 6,829 abstaining, the shareholders ratified
the Boards selection of Ernst & Young LLP as the Companys independent auditors for the fiscal
year ending October 31, 2010.
27
Item 6. Exhibits
The following exhibits are filed with this report.
Exhibit 3.1 Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant dated October 19, 1978. (Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 filed with the registration statement on Form S-8 filed by the
Registrant on July 15, 2002, Registration No. 333-92412.)
Exhibit 3.2 Articles of Amendment, dated March 23, 1987, to the Articles of Incorporation of
the Registrant. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 filed with the registration statement on
Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on July 15, 2002, Registration No. 333-92412.)
Exhibit 3.3 Articles of Amendment, dated April 21, 1989, to the Articles of Incorporation of
the Registrant. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 filed with the registration statement on
Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on July 15, 2002, Registration No. 333-92412.)
Exhibit 3.4 Certificate of Designations of Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock of
the Registrant dated April 21, 1989. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 filed with the
registration statement on Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on July 15, 2002, Registration No.
333-92412.)
Exhibit 3.5 Article of Amendment, dated February 20, 1992, to the Articles of Incorporation of
the Registrant. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 filed with the registration statement on
Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on July 15, 2002, Registration No. 333-92412.)
Exhibit 3.6 Article of Amendment, dated February 27, 1997, to the Articles of Incorporation of
the Registrant. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 filed with the registration statement on
Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on July 15, 2002, Registration No. 333-92412.)
Exhibit 3.7 Bylaws of the Registrant, amended and restated as of April 23, 2009. (Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3 filed with the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K on April 28,
2009.)
Exhibit 15* Accountants Letter re: Unaudited Financial Information.
Exhibit 31.1* Certification of Chief Executive Officer.
Exhibit 31.2* Certification of Chief Financial Officer.
Exhibit 32.1** Section 1350 Certification.
Exhibit 32.2** Section 1350 Certification.
|
|
|
* |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
** |
|
Furnished herewith. |
28
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SANDERSON FARMS, INC.
(Registrant)
|
|
Date: May 25, 2010 |
By: |
/s/ D. Michael Cockrell
|
|
|
|
Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: May 25, 2010 |
By: |
/s/ James A. Grimes
|
|
|
|
Secretary, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |
|
29
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description of Exhibit |
3.1
|
|
Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant dated October 19, 1978.
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 filed with the registration
statement on Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on July 15, 2002, Registration
No. 333-92412.) |
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Articles of Amendment, dated March 23, 1987, to the Articles of Incorporation
of the Registrant. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 filed with the
registration statement on Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on July 15, 2002,
Registration No. 333-92412.) |
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
Articles of Amendment, dated April 21, 1989, to the Articles of Incorporation
of the Registrant. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 filed with the
registration statement on Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on July 15, 2002,
Registration No. 333-92412.) |
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
Certificate of Designations of Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock
of the Registrant dated April 21, 1989. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit
4.4 filed with the registration statement on Form S-8 filed by the Registrant
on July 15, 2002, Registration No. 333-92412.) |
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
Article of Amendment, dated February 20, 1992, to the Articles of
Incorporation of the Registrant. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5
filed with the registration statement on Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on
July 15, 2002, Registration No. 333-92412.) |
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
Article of Amendment, dated February 27, 1997, to the Articles of
Incorporation of the Registrant. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6
filed with the registration statement on Form S-8 filed by the Registrant on
July 15, 2002, Registration No. 333-92412.) |
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
Bylaws of the Registrant amended and restated as of April 23, 2009.
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3 filed with the Registrants Current
Report on Form 8-K on April 28, 2009.) |
|
|
|
15*
|
|
Accountants Letter re: Unaudited Financial Information. |
|
|
|
31.1*
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
31.2*
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
|
32.1**
|
|
Section 1350 Certification. |
|
|
|
32.2**
|
|
Section 1350 Certification. |
|
|
|
* |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
** |
|
Furnished herewith. |
30