e10vq
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended June 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 001-11919
TeleTech Holdings, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
84-1291044 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
9197 South Peoria Street
Englewood, Colorado 80112
(Address of principal executive offices)
Registrants telephone number, including area code: (303) 397-8100
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 (§232.405 of this chapter) 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 the 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 (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
Smaller reporting company o |
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
As of July 28, 2010, there were 60,175,769 shares of the registrants common stock outstanding.
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
JUNE 30, 2010 FORM 10-Q
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Amounts in thousands, except share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
131,484 |
|
|
$ |
109,424 |
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
197,111 |
|
|
|
216,614 |
|
Prepaids and other current assets |
|
|
34,996 |
|
|
|
39,144 |
|
Deferred tax assets, net |
|
|
9,247 |
|
|
|
5,911 |
|
Income tax receivable |
|
|
31,908 |
|
|
|
31,282 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
404,746 |
|
|
|
402,375 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
113,358 |
|
|
|
126,995 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
45,113 |
|
|
|
45,250 |
|
Contract acquisition costs, net |
|
|
5,352 |
|
|
|
8,049 |
|
Deferred tax assets, net |
|
|
35,607 |
|
|
|
36,527 |
|
Other long-term assets |
|
|
17,565 |
|
|
|
20,971 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term assets |
|
|
216,995 |
|
|
|
237,792 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
621,741 |
|
|
$ |
640,167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
21,299 |
|
|
$ |
17,625 |
|
Accrued employee compensation and benefits |
|
|
64,185 |
|
|
|
67,106 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
26,408 |
|
|
|
18,481 |
|
Income taxes payable |
|
|
19,262 |
|
|
|
20,327 |
|
Deferred tax liabilities, net |
|
|
3,991 |
|
|
|
3,145 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
5,254 |
|
|
|
13,164 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
3,818 |
|
|
|
6,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
144,217 |
|
|
|
145,966 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Line of credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Negative investment in deconsolidated subsidiary |
|
|
4,865 |
|
|
|
4,865 |
|
Deferred tax liabilities, net |
|
|
1,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred rent |
|
|
12,168 |
|
|
|
13,989 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
16,090 |
|
|
|
19,446 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term liabilities |
|
|
34,855 |
|
|
|
38,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
179,072 |
|
|
|
184,266 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 10) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock $0.01 par value: 10,000,000 shares authorized;
zero shares outstanding as of June 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock $0.01 par value; 150,000,000 shares authorized;
60,176,232 and 62,218,238 shares outstanding as of
June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively |
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
622 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
344,564 |
|
|
|
344,251 |
|
Treasury stock at cost: 21,878,213 and 19,836,208 shares as of
June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively |
|
|
(283,945 |
) |
|
|
(251,691 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
3,113 |
|
|
|
10,513 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
373,417 |
|
|
|
346,728 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity attributable to TeleTech shareholders |
|
|
437,751 |
|
|
|
450,423 |
|
Non-controlling interest |
|
|
4,918 |
|
|
|
5,478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity |
|
|
442,669 |
|
|
|
455,901 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and equity |
|
$ |
621,741 |
|
|
$ |
640,167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
1
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(Amounts in thousands, except per share amounts)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
271,927 |
|
|
$ |
301,512 |
|
|
$ |
543,453 |
|
|
$ |
605,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of services (exclusive of depreciation and
amortization presented separately below) |
|
|
198,194 |
|
|
|
213,049 |
|
|
|
392,812 |
|
|
|
431,891 |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
39,741 |
|
|
|
44,981 |
|
|
|
83,149 |
|
|
|
93,496 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
12,946 |
|
|
|
13,808 |
|
|
|
25,670 |
|
|
|
27,870 |
|
Restructuring charges, net |
|
|
1,304 |
|
|
|
4,008 |
|
|
|
2,773 |
|
|
|
4,311 |
|
Impairment losses |
|
|
679 |
|
|
|
2,620 |
|
|
|
679 |
|
|
|
4,587 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
252,864 |
|
|
|
278,466 |
|
|
|
505,083 |
|
|
|
562,155 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations |
|
|
19,063 |
|
|
|
23,046 |
|
|
|
38,370 |
|
|
|
43,387 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
705 |
|
|
|
1,060 |
|
|
|
1,512 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(699 |
) |
|
|
(1,320 |
) |
|
|
(1,516 |
) |
|
|
(2,163 |
) |
Other, net |
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
1,014 |
|
|
|
577 |
|
|
|
1,776 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense) |
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
1,125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
19,395 |
|
|
|
23,445 |
|
|
|
38,491 |
|
|
|
44,512 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
(5,071 |
) |
|
|
(6,328 |
) |
|
|
(10,125 |
) |
|
|
(11,508 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
14,324 |
|
|
|
17,117 |
|
|
|
28,366 |
|
|
|
33,004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to non-controlling interest |
|
|
(922 |
) |
|
|
(987 |
) |
|
|
(1,677 |
) |
|
|
(1,811 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to TeleTech shareholders |
|
$ |
13,402 |
|
|
$ |
16,130 |
|
|
$ |
26,689 |
|
|
$ |
31,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
61,117 |
|
|
|
63,098 |
|
|
|
61,495 |
|
|
|
63,502 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
62,317 |
|
|
|
64,175 |
|
|
|
62,907 |
|
|
|
64,167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share attributable to TeleTech shareholders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.26 |
|
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.25 |
|
|
$ |
0.42 |
|
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
2
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statement of Equity
(Amounts in thousands)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity of the Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock |
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
Paid-in |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
controlling |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Income (Loss) |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
interest |
|
|
Equity |
|
|
|
|
Balance as of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
62,218 |
|
|
$ |
622 |
|
|
$ |
(251,691 |
) |
|
$ |
344,251 |
|
|
$ |
10,513 |
|
|
$ |
346,728 |
|
|
$ |
5,478 |
|
|
$ |
455,901 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,689 |
|
|
|
1,677 |
|
|
|
28,366 |
|
Dividends distributed to
non-controlling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,070 |
) |
|
|
(2,070 |
) |
Foreign currency translation adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,164 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(167 |
) |
|
|
(6,331 |
) |
Derivatives valuation, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,037 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,037 |
) |
Vesting of restricted stock units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4,014 |
|
|
|
(6,270 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,253 |
) |
Exercise of stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1,013 |
|
|
|
(140 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
874 |
|
Excess tax benefit from equity-based
awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
128 |
|
Equity-based compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,595 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,595 |
|
Purchases of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,436 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(37,281 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(37,305 |
) |
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(199 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(199 |
) |
|
|
|
Balance as of June 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
60,176 |
|
|
$ |
602 |
|
|
$ |
(283,945 |
) |
|
$ |
344,564 |
|
|
$ |
3,113 |
|
|
$ |
373,417 |
|
|
$ |
4,918 |
|
|
$ |
442,669 |
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
3
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Amount in thousands)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
28,366 |
|
|
$ |
33,004 |
|
Adjustment to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
25,670 |
|
|
|
27,870 |
|
Amortization of contract acquisition costs |
|
|
2,697 |
|
|
|
1,543 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts |
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
953 |
|
Loss (gain) on foreign currency derivatives |
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
(878 |
) |
Loss (gain) on disposal of assets |
|
|
(211 |
) |
|
|
808 |
|
Impairment losses |
|
|
679 |
|
|
|
4,587 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(1,564 |
) |
|
|
(2,555 |
) |
Excess tax benefit from equity-based awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(79 |
) |
Equity-based compensation expense |
|
|
6,595 |
|
|
|
6,079 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
14,044 |
|
|
|
16,192 |
|
Prepaids and other assets |
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
|
3,207 |
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
7,826 |
|
|
|
(1,699 |
) |
Deferred revenue and other liabilities |
|
|
(12,402 |
) |
|
|
4,806 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
74,635 |
|
|
|
93,838 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(12,316 |
) |
|
|
(14,301 |
) |
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,727 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(12,316 |
) |
|
|
(16,028 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from line of credit |
|
|
490,700 |
|
|
|
467,660 |
|
Payments on line of credit |
|
|
(490,700 |
) |
|
|
(523,460 |
) |
Payments on capital lease obligations and equipment financing |
|
|
(1,911 |
) |
|
|
(672 |
) |
Dividends distributed to non-controlling interest |
|
|
(2,070 |
) |
|
|
(1,800 |
) |
Proceeds from exercise of stock options |
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
1,310 |
|
Excess tax benefit from equity-based awards |
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of common stock |
|
|
(37,305 |
) |
|
|
(26,089 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(40,284 |
) |
|
|
(83,051 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
1,262 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
22,060 |
|
|
|
(3,979 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
|
|
109,424 |
|
|
|
87,942 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
|
$ |
131,484 |
|
|
$ |
83,963 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for interest |
|
$ |
1,165 |
|
|
$ |
675 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for income taxes |
|
$ |
5,961 |
|
|
$ |
12,398 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash investing and financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of equipment through installment purchase agreements |
|
$ |
186 |
|
|
$ |
1,456 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognition of asset retirement obligations |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
4
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(1) OVERVIEW AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
Overview
TeleTech Holdings, Inc. and its subsidiaries (TeleTech or the Company) serve their clients
through the primary business of Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), which provides outsourced
business process, customer management and marketing services for a variety of industries via
operations in the U.S., Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Costa Rica, Germany, Malaysia,
Mexico, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, the Philippines, Scotland, South Africa and Spain.
Basis of Presentation
The Consolidated Financial Statements are comprised of the accounts of TeleTech, its wholly owned
subsidiaries and its 55% equity ownership in Percepta, LLC. On December 22, 2008, as discussed in
Note 2, Newgen Results Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, filed a voluntary
petition for liquidation under Chapter 7 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of
Delaware. According to the accounting guidance for consolidations, the consolidation of a
majority-owned subsidiary is precluded where control does not rest with the majority owners.
Accordingly, the Company deconsolidated Newgen Results Corporation as of December 22, 2008.
The accompanying unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements do not include all of the disclosures
required by accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. (GAAP), pursuant to the rules
and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The unaudited Consolidated
Financial Statements reflect all adjustments which, in the opinion of management, are necessary to
present fairly the consolidated financial position of the Company as of June 30, 2010, and the
consolidated results of operations of the Company for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010
and 2009, and the cash flows of the Company for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009.
Operating results for the six months ended June 30, 2010 include a $2.0 million reduction to
revenue for disputed service delivery issues which occurred in 2009. Operating results for the six
months ended June 30, 2010 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for
the year ending December 31, 2010.
These unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with the Companys
audited Consolidated Financial Statements and footnotes thereto included in the Companys Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.
Certain amounts in 2009 have been reclassified in the Consolidated Financial Statements to conform
to the 2010 presentation.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of the Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with GAAP requires
management to make estimates and assumptions in determining the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities, disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date of the Consolidated Financial
Statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. On an
on-going basis, the Company evaluates its estimates including those related to derivatives and
hedging activities, income taxes including the valuation allowance for deferred tax assets,
valuation of long-lived assets, self-insurance reserves, litigation and restructuring reserves, and
allowance for doubtful accounts. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience and on
various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable, the results of which form the basis
for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities. Actual results may differ
materially from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
5
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
Effective January 1, 2010, the Company adopted a new financial accounting statement that requires
additional disclosures about transfers of financial assets, including securitization transactions,
and where companies have continuing exposure to the risks related to the transferred financial
assets. The new statement eliminates the concept of a qualifying special-purpose entity, changes
the requirements for derecognizing financial assets, and requires additional disclosures. The
adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Companys results of operations,
financial position, or cash flows.
Effective January 1, 2010, the Company adopted a new financial accounting statement that changes
how TeleTech determines when an entity that is insufficiently capitalized or is not controlled
through voting or similar rights should be consolidated. The determination of whether TeleTech is
required to consolidate an entity is based on, among other things, an entitys purpose and design
and TeleTechs ability to direct the activities of the entity that most significantly impact the
entitys economic performance. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the
Companys results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.
In September 2009, the FASB issued new revenue guidance that requires an entity to apply the
relative selling price allocation method in order to estimate a selling price for all units of
accounting, including delivered items when vendor-specific objective evidence or acceptable
third-party evidence does not exist. The new guidance is effective for revenue arrangements entered
into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010 and shall be
applied on a prospective basis. Earlier application is permitted. The Company expects to adopt this
guidance effective January 1, 2011 and does not expect that the new guidance will have a material
impact on its results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.
(2) DECONSOLIDATION OF A SUBSIDIARY
On December 22, 2008, Newgen Results Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, filed a
voluntary petition for liquidation under Chapter 7 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the
District of Delaware. According to the authoritative literature, a consolidation of a
majority-owned subsidiary is precluded where control does not rest with the majority owners. Under
these rules, legal reorganization or bankruptcy represents conditions that can preclude
consolidation as control rests with the Bankruptcy Court, rather than the majority owner.
Accordingly, the Company deconsolidated Newgen Results Corporation as of December 22, 2008. As a
result, the Company has reflected its negative investment of $4.9 million on the Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009.
(3) SEGMENT INFORMATION
The Company serves its clients through the primary business of BPO services.
The Companys BPO business provides outsourced business process and customer management services
for a variety of industries through global delivery centers and represents 100% of total annual
revenue. The Companys North American BPO segment is comprised of sales to all clients based in
North America (encompassing the U.S. and Canada), while the Companys International BPO is
comprised of sales to all clients based in countries outside of North America.
The Company allocates to each segment its portion of corporate operating expenses. All
intercompany transactions between the reported segments for the periods presented have been
eliminated.
6
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
The following tables present certain financial data by segment (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
212,506 |
|
|
$ |
229,992 |
|
|
$ |
420,448 |
|
|
$ |
458,878 |
|
International BPO |
|
|
59,421 |
|
|
|
71,520 |
|
|
|
123,005 |
|
|
|
146,664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
271,927 |
|
|
$ |
301,512 |
|
|
$ |
543,453 |
|
|
$ |
605,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
25,097 |
|
|
$ |
28,314 |
|
|
$ |
44,885 |
|
|
$ |
53,741 |
|
International BPO |
|
|
(6,034 |
) |
|
|
(5,268 |
) |
|
|
(6,515 |
) |
|
|
(10,354 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
19,063 |
|
|
$ |
23,046 |
|
|
$ |
38,370 |
|
|
$ |
43,387 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents revenue based upon the geographic location where the services are
provided (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
$ |
111,262 |
|
|
$ |
111,489 |
|
|
$ |
212,367 |
|
|
$ |
211,551 |
|
Philippines |
|
|
66,404 |
|
|
|
78,751 |
|
|
|
137,374 |
|
|
|
157,092 |
|
Latin America |
|
|
49,180 |
|
|
|
47,801 |
|
|
|
97,182 |
|
|
|
104,865 |
|
Europe |
|
|
23,757 |
|
|
|
29,336 |
|
|
|
50,894 |
|
|
|
60,747 |
|
Canada |
|
|
13,618 |
|
|
|
21,583 |
|
|
|
28,397 |
|
|
|
47,827 |
|
Asia Pacific / Africa |
|
|
7,706 |
|
|
|
12,552 |
|
|
|
17,239 |
|
|
|
23,460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
271,927 |
|
|
$ |
301,512 |
|
|
$ |
543,453 |
|
|
$ |
605,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4) SIGNIFICANT CLIENTS AND OTHER CONCENTRATIONS
The Company had one client, IBM-Census, that contributed in excess of 10% of total revenue for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2010. This clients revenue was 13.1% and 10.1% of total
revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively, and there was $21.1 million
outstanding in accounts receivable at June 30, 2010. The current contract is expected to end in the
third quarter of 2010. The Company does not expect this client to contribute in excess of 10% of
its estimated annual revenue in 2010. The Company did not have any clients that contributed in
excess of 10% of total revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009.
The loss of one or more of its significant clients could have a material adverse effect on the
Companys business, operating results, or financial condition. The Company does not require
collateral from its clients. To limit the Companys credit risk, management performs periodic
credit evaluations of its clients and maintains allowances for uncollectible accounts. Although the
Company is impacted by economic conditions in various industry segments, management does not
believe significant credit risk exists as of June 30, 2010.
7
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(5) GOODWILL
Goodwill consisted of the following (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Acquisitions |
|
|
Impairments |
|
|
Currency |
|
|
June 30, 2010 |
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
35,885 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
35,885 |
|
International BPO |
|
|
9,365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
|
9,228 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
45,250 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(137 |
) |
|
$ |
45,113 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company performs a goodwill impairment test on at least an annual basis. Application of the
goodwill impairment test requires significant judgments including estimation of future cash flows,
which is dependent on internal forecasts, estimation of the long-term rate of growth for the
businesses, the useful life over which cash flows will occur and determination of the Companys
weighted average cost of capital. Changes in these estimates and assumptions could materially
affect the determination of fair value and/or conclusions on goodwill impairment for each reporting
unit. The Company conducts its annual goodwill impairment test in the fourth quarter each year, or
more frequently if indicators of impairment exist. During the quarter ended June 30, 2010, the
Company assessed whether any such indicators of impairment exist, and concluded there were no
indicators of impairment.
(6) DERIVATIVES
Cash Flow Hedges
The Company enters into foreign exchange forward and option contracts to reduce its exposure to
foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations that are associated with forecasted revenue earned in
foreign locations. Upon proper qualification, these contracts are designated as cash flow hedges.
It is the Companys policy to only enter into derivative contracts with investment grade
counterparty financial institutions, and correspondingly, the fair value of derivative assets
consider, among other factors, the creditworthiness of these counterparties. Conversely, the fair
value of derivative liabilities reflect the Companys creditworthiness. As of June 30, 2010, the
Company has not experienced, nor does it anticipate any issues related to derivative counterparty
defaults. The following table summarizes the aggregate unrealized net gain or loss in Accumulated
Other Comprehensive Income for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 (amounts in
thousands and net of tax):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Aggregate unrealized net gain (loss) at beginning of period |
|
$ |
7,430 |
|
|
$ |
(18,141 |
) |
|
$ |
4,468 |
|
|
$ |
(21,180 |
) |
Net gain/(loss) from change in fair value of cash flow hedges |
|
|
(2,366 |
) |
|
|
9,117 |
|
|
|
1,523 |
|
|
|
7,393 |
|
Net (gain)/loss reclassified to earnings from effective hedges |
|
|
(1,633 |
) |
|
|
3,269 |
|
|
|
(2,560 |
) |
|
|
8,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aggregate unrealized net gain (loss) at end of period |
|
$ |
3,431 |
|
|
$ |
(5,755 |
) |
|
$ |
3,431 |
|
|
$ |
(5,755 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
The Companys cash flow hedging instruments as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 are
summarized as follows (amounts in thousands). All hedging instruments are forward contracts, except
as noted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
U.S. Dollar |
|
|
% Maturing in |
|
|
Contracts |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Notional |
|
|
the Next 12 |
|
|
Maturing |
|
As of June 30, 2010 |
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Months |
|
|
Through |
|
Canadian Dollar |
|
|
13,200 |
|
|
$ |
11,273 |
|
|
|
72.7 |
% |
|
December 2011 |
Canadian Dollar Call Options |
|
|
10,200 |
|
|
|
9,135 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
December 2010 |
Philippine Peso |
|
|
6,575,000 |
|
|
|
136,623 |
1 |
|
|
74.0 |
% |
|
December 2012 |
Argentine Peso |
|
|
22,000 |
|
|
|
5,122 |
2 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
December 2010 |
Mexican Peso |
|
|
475,000 |
|
|
|
33,391 |
|
|
|
84.2 |
% |
|
December 2011 |
British Pound Sterling |
|
|
6,436 |
|
|
|
10,017 |
3 |
|
|
72.0 |
% |
|
December 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
205,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
U.S. Dollar |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Notional |
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
Canadian Dollar |
|
|
14,400 |
|
|
$ |
11,782 |
|
Canadian Dollar Call Options |
|
|
19,400 |
|
|
|
17,301 |
|
Philippine Peso |
|
|
4,615,000 |
|
|
|
96,354 |
1 |
Argentine Peso |
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
|
2,454 |
|
Mexican Peso |
|
|
491,500 |
|
|
|
34,880 |
|
South African Rand |
|
|
23,000 |
|
|
|
2,081 |
|
British Pound Sterling |
|
|
3,876 |
|
|
|
6,565 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
171,417 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Includes contracts to purchase Philippine pesos in exchange for New Zealand dollars, Australian dollars and, in 2009
only, British pound sterling, which are translated into equivalent U.S. dollars on June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009. |
|
2 |
|
Includes contracts to purchase Argentine pesos in exchange for Euros, which were translated into equivalent U.S.
dollars on June 30, 2010. |
|
3 |
|
Includes contracts to purchase British pound sterling in exchange for Euros, which are translated into equivalent U.S.
dollars on June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009. |
Hedge of Net Investment
In 2008, the Company entered into a foreign exchange forward contract to hedge its net investment
in a foreign operation which was settled in May 2009. Changes in fair value of the Companys net
investment hedge were recorded in the cumulative translation adjustment in Accumulated Other
Comprehensive Income on the Consolidated Balance Sheets offsetting the change in the cumulative
translation adjustment attributable to the hedged portion of the Companys net investment in the
foreign operation. Gains and losses from the settlements of the Companys net investment hedge
remain in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income until partial or complete liquidation of the
applicable net investment. A loss of $1.2 million from the settlements of net investment hedges is
recorded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income as of June 30, 2010.
9
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
Fair Value Hedges
The Company enters into foreign exchange forward contracts to hedge against translation gains and
losses on certain assets and liabilities of the Companys foreign operations. Changes in the fair
value of derivative instruments designated as fair value hedges, as well as the offsetting gain or
loss on the hedged asset or liability, are recognized in earnings in the same line item, Other,
net. As of June 30, 2010, the total notional amount of the Companys forward contracts used as fair
value hedges was $55.3 million. These contracts are expected to mature within the next quarter.
Embedded Derivatives
In addition to hedging activities, the Companys foreign subsidiary in Argentina is party to U.S.
dollar denominated lease contracts which the Company has determined contain embedded derivatives.
As such, the Company bifurcates the embedded derivative features of the lease contracts and values
these features as foreign currency derivatives.
Derivative Valuation and Settlements
The Companys derivatives as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 were as follows (amounts in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010 |
|
|
Designated as Hedging |
|
|
|
|
Instruments |
|
Not Designated as Hedging Instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign |
|
Foreign |
|
Foreign |
|
|
Derivative contracts: |
|
Foreign Exchange |
|
Exchange |
|
Exchange |
|
Exchange |
|
Leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net |
|
Forward |
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded |
Derivative classification: |
|
Cash Flow |
|
Investment |
|
Contracts |
|
Fair Value |
|
Derivative |
Fair value and location of derivative in the Consolidated Balance Sheet: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaids and other current assets |
|
$ |
6,161 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Other long-term assets |
|
|
773 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
(479 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(125 |
) |
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
(408 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fair value of derivatives, net |
|
$ |
6,047 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(12 |
) |
|
$ |
(293 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
Designated as Hedging |
|
|
|
|
Instruments |
|
Not Designated as Hedging Instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign |
|
Foreign |
|
Foreign |
|
|
Derivative contracts: |
|
Foreign Exchange |
|
Exchange |
|
Exchange |
|
Exchange |
|
Leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net |
|
Forward |
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded |
Derivative classification: |
|
Cash Flow |
|
Investment |
|
Contracts |
|
Fair Value |
|
Derivative |
Fair value and location of derivative in
the Consolidated Balance Sheet: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaids and other current assets |
|
$ |
8,022 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
42 |
|
|
$ |
29 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Other long-term assets |
|
|
1,996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
(1,884 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
|
(139 |
) |
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(230 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fair value of derivatives, net |
|
$ |
8,104 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
42 |
|
|
$ |
(108 |
) |
|
$ |
(369 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
The effect of derivative instruments on the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the
three months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 were as follows (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
|
Designated as Hedging |
|
Designated as Hedging |
|
|
Instruments |
|
Instruments |
Derivative contracts: |
|
Foreign Exchange |
|
Foreign Exchange |
Derivative classification: |
|
Cash Flow |
|
Net Investment |
|
Cash Flow |
|
Net Investment |
Amount of gain or (loss) recognized in other
comprehensive income effective portion, net
of tax |
|
$ |
(2,366 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,117 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Amount and location of net gain or (loss) reclassified
from accumulated OCI to income effective
portion: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
2,677 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(5,360 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
Amount and location of net gain or (loss) reclassified
from accumulated OCI to income ineffective
portion
and amount excluded from effectiveness testing: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
|
Not Designated as Hedging Instruments |
|
Not Designated as Hedging Instruments |
Derivative contracts: |
|
Foreign Exchange |
|
Leases |
|
Foreign Exchange |
|
Leases |
|
|
Option and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forward |
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded |
|
Forward |
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded |
Derivative classification: |
|
Contracts |
|
Fair Value |
|
Derivative |
|
Contracts |
|
Fair Value |
|
Derivative |
Amount and location of net gain or (loss) recognized
in the Consolidated Statement of Operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs of services |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(31 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
616 |
|
Other, net |
|
$ |
(46 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,117 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(98 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,331 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
The effect of derivative instruments on the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the six
months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 were as follows (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
|
Designated as Hedging
Instruments |
|
Designated as Hedging
Instruments |
Derivative contracts: |
|
Foreign Exchange |
|
Foreign Exchange |
Derivative classification: |
|
Cash Flow |
|
Net Investment |
|
Cash Flow |
|
Net Investment |
Amount of gain or (loss) recognized in other
comprehensive income effective portion, net
of tax |
|
$ |
1,523 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,393 |
|
|
$ |
(1,727 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount and location of net gain or (loss) reclassified
from
accumulated OCI to income effective
portion: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
4,197 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(13,168 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount and location of net gain or (loss) reclassified
from accumulated OCI to income ineffective
portion and amount excluded from effectiveness testing: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
11
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
|
Not Designated as Hedging Instruments |
|
Not Designated as Hedging Instruments |
Derivative contracts: |
|
Foreign Exchange |
|
Leases |
|
Foreign Exchange |
|
Leases |
|
|
Option and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forward |
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded |
|
Forward |
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded |
Derivative classification: |
|
Contracts |
|
Fair Value |
|
Derivative |
|
Contracts |
|
Fair Value |
|
Derivative |
Amount and location of net gain or (loss) recognized
in the Consolidated Statement of Operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs of services |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
878 |
|
Other, net |
|
$ |
(42 |
) |
|
$ |
(46 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(133 |
) |
|
$ |
(957 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
(7) FAIR VALUE
The authoritative guidance for fair value measurements establishes a three-level fair value
hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. This hierarchy requires that the
Company maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. The
three levels of inputs used to measure fair value are as follows:
|
Level 1 |
|
Quoted
prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
Observable inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1, such as
quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, similar assets and
liabilities in markets that are not active or can be corroborated by observable market
data. |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and
that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities. This includes
certain pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies and similar techniques that
use significant unobservable inputs. |
The following presents information as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 of the Companys
assets and liabilities required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis, as well as the
fair value hierarchy used to determine their fair value.
Accounts Receivable and Payable - The amounts recorded in the accompanying balance sheets
approximate fair value because of their short-term nature.
Derivatives Net derivative assets (liabilities) measured at fair value on a recurring
basis included the following as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 (amounts in thousands):
As of June 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for |
|
|
Significant Other |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets |
|
|
Observable Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
At Fair Value |
|
Cash flow hedges |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,047 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,047 |
|
Fair value hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
Embedded derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(293 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(293 |
) |
Option and forward contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net derivative asset (liability) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,742 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
As of December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for |
|
|
Significant Other |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets |
|
|
Observable Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
At Fair Value |
|
Cash flow hedges |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,104 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,104 |
|
Fair value hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(108 |
) |
Embedded derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(369 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(369 |
) |
Option and forward contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net derivative asset (liability) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,669 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The portfolio is valued using models based on market observable inputs, including both forward
and spot foreign exchange rates, implied volatility, and counterparty credit risk, including the
ability of each party to execute its obligations under the contract. As of June 30, 2010, credit
risk did not materially change the fair value of the Companys foreign currency forward and option
contracts.
Money Market Investments The Company invests in various well-diversified money market funds which
are managed by financial institutions. These money market funds are not publicly traded, but have
historically been highly liquid. The value of the money market funds is determined by the banks
based upon the funds net asset values (NAV). All of the money market funds currently permit
daily investments and redemptions at a $1.00 NAV.
Deferred Compensation Plan The Company maintains a non-qualified deferred compensation plan
structured as a Rabbi trust for certain eligible employees. Participants in the deferred
compensation plan select from a menu of phantom investment options for their deferral dollars
offered by the Company each year, which are based upon changes in value of complementary, defined
market investments. The deferred compensation liability represents the combined values of market
investments against which participant accounts are tracked.
The following is a summary of the Companys fair value measurements as of June 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009 (amounts in thousands):
As of June 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
Active Markets for |
|
|
Significant Other |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
Identical Assets |
|
|
Observable Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market investments |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
25,543 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Derivative instruments, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
31,285 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan liability |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3,443 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3,443 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
As of December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
Active Markets for |
|
|
Significant Other |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
Identical Assets |
|
|
Observable Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market investments |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Derivative instruments, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,669 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan liability |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3,399 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3,399 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8) INCOME TAXES
The Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with the accounting literature for income
taxes, which requires recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future
income tax consequences of transactions that have been included in the Consolidated Financial
Statements. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the
difference between the financial statement and tax basis of assets and liabilities using tax rates
in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. When circumstances
warrant, the Company assesses the likelihood that its net deferred tax assets will more likely than
not be recovered from future projected taxable income.
The Company has protested one issue to the appeals branch of the Internal Revenue Service for an
administrative resolution arising from a federal tax audit for which no tax benefit has been
recorded. The Company is currently under audit of income taxes in the Philippines for various open
tax years. Although the outcome of examinations by taxing authorities are always uncertain, it is
the opinion of management that the resolution of these audits will not have a material effect on
the Companys Consolidated Financial Statements.
As of June 30, 2010, the Company had $44.9 million of deferred tax assets (after a $21.3 million
valuation allowance) and net deferred tax assets (after deferred tax liabilities) of $39.1 million
related to the U.S. and international tax jurisdictions whose recoverability is dependent upon
future profitability.
The effective tax rate for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 was 26.1% and 26.3%,
respectively. The effective tax rate for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 was 27.0% and
25.9%, respectively.
(9) RESTRUCTURING CHARGES AND IMPAIRMENT LOSSES
Restructuring Charges
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 the Company undertook restructuring activities
primarily associated with reductions in the Companys capacity and workforce in both the North
American and International BPO segments to better align the capacity and workforce with current
business needs.
14
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
A summary of the expenses recorded for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009,
respectively, is as follows (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
North American BPO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction in force |
|
$ |
699 |
|
|
$ |
2,668 |
|
|
$ |
2,056 |
|
|
$ |
3,568 |
|
Facility exit charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
472 |
|
Revision of prior estimates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(1,135 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
699 |
|
|
$ |
3,028 |
|
|
$ |
2,051 |
|
|
$ |
2,905 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
International BPO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction in force |
|
$ |
613 |
|
|
$ |
824 |
|
|
$ |
730 |
|
|
$ |
1,250 |
|
Facility exit charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
156 |
|
Revision of prior estimates |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
605 |
|
|
$ |
980 |
|
|
$ |
722 |
|
|
$ |
1,406 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the three months ended March 31, 2009 and six months ended June 30, 2009, the Company
determined that $0.7 million of previously recorded restructuring expense would be reimbursed from
the primary client in the delivery centers being closed, and $0.4 million previously recorded would
not be paid; these amounts were reversed against restructuring charge expenses as indicated as a
revision of prior estimates in the table above.
A roll-forward of the activity in the Companys restructuring accruals is as follows (amounts in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Closure of |
|
|
Reduction in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Delivery Centers |
|
|
Force |
|
|
Total |
|
Balance as of December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
375 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
388 |
|
Expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,786 |
|
|
|
2,786 |
|
Payments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,428 |
) |
|
|
(1,428 |
) |
Reversals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of June 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
375 |
|
|
$ |
1,358 |
|
|
$ |
1,733 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of the remaining accrued costs, $1.4 million are expected to be paid during 2010, with the
remainder to be paid thereafter.
Impairment Losses
The Company evaluated the recoverability of its leasehold improvement assets at certain delivery
centers. An asset is considered to be impaired when the anticipated undiscounted future cash flows
of an asset group are estimated to be less than the asset groups carrying value. The amount of
impairment recognized is the difference between the carrying value of the asset group and its fair
value. To determine fair value, the Company used Level 3 inputs in its discounted cash flows
analysis. Assumptions included the amount and timing of estimated future cash flows and assumed
discount rates. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, the Company recognized
impairment losses related to leasehold improvement assets of $0.7 million in its North American BPO
segment.
15
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
For the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recognized impairment losses related to
leasehold improvement assets of $1.8 million and $0.8 million, in its North American BPO and
International BPO segments, respectively.
During the six months ended June 30, 2009 the Company recognized impairment losses of $1.8 million
for leasehold improvement assets in its North American BPO segment. During the six months ended
June 30, 2009, the Company recognized impairment losses of $2.8 million in its International BPO
segment related to the abandonment of $2.0 million of certain leasehold improvement assets during
the first quarter of 2009, and the $0.8 million impairment loss recognized in the second quarter of
2009 as discussed above.
(10) COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Letters of Credit
As of June 30, 2010, outstanding letters of credit and other performance guarantees totaled
approximately $5.0 million, which primarily guarantee workers compensation and other insurance
related obligations.
Guarantees
The Companys Credit Facility is guaranteed by a majority of the Companys domestic subsidiaries.
On March 31, 2010, the Company sold a corporate aircraft that was financed under a synthetic
operating lease. Accordingly, the Company elected to exercise its purchase option rights under the
lease for a specified amount. Simultaneous with the purchase, the Company sold the aircraft to an
unrelated third-party. The proceeds from the aircraft sale were used to satisfy the lease
obligations and other sales-related expenses, with the Company realizing a net gain of
approximately $137,000, which was recorded in Other income in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations in the six months ended June 30, 2010.
Legal Proceedings
From time to time, we have been involved in claims and lawsuits, both as plaintiff and defendant,
which arise in the ordinary course of business. Accruals for claims or lawsuits have been provided
for to the extent that losses are deemed both probable and estimable. Although the ultimate outcome
of these claims or lawsuits cannot be ascertained, on the basis of present information and advice
received from counsel, we believe that the disposition or ultimate resolution of such claims or
lawsuits will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, cash flows or results
of operations.
Securities Class Action
On January 25, 2008, a class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York entitled Beasley v. TeleTech Holdings, Inc., et al. against TeleTech,
certain current directors and officers and others alleging violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and
15 of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. The complaint alleges, among other
things, false and misleading statements in the Registration Statement and Prospectus in connection
with (i) a March 2007 secondary offering of common stock and (ii) various disclosures made and
periodic reports filed by the Company between February 8, 2007 and November 8, 2007. On February
25, 2008, a second nearly identical class action complaint, entitled Brown v. TeleTech Holdings,
Inc., et al., was filed in the same court. On May 19, 2008, the actions described above were
consolidated under the caption In re: TeleTech Litigation and lead plaintiff and lead counsel were
approved. On October 21, 2009, the Company and the other named defendants executed a stipulation of
settlement with the lead plaintiffs to settle the consolidated class action lawsuit. On June 11,
2010, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued final approval
of the settlement. The Company paid $225,000 of the total settlement amount, which had been
included in Other accrued expenses in the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2009; the
remaining settlement amount was covered by the Companys insurance carriers.
16
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
Derivative Action
On July 28, 2008, a shareholder derivative action was filed in the Court of Chancery, State of
Delaware, entitled Susan M. Gregory v. Kenneth D. Tuchman, et al., against certain of TeleTechs
former and current officers and directors alleging, among other things, that the individual
defendants breached their fiduciary duties and were unjustly enriched in connection with: (i)
equity grants made in excess of plan limits; and (ii) manipulating the grant dates of stock option
grants from 1999 through 2008. TeleTech is named solely as a nominal defendant against whom no
recovery is sought. On October 26, 2009, the Company and other defendants in the derivative action
executed a stipulation of settlement with the lead plaintiffs to settle the derivative action. On
January 5, 2010, the Court of Chancery, State of Delaware issued final approval of the settlement.
The total amount paid under the approved settlement was covered by the Companys insurance
carriers.
(11) COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
The following table sets forth comprehensive income for the periods indicated (amounts in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
14,324 |
|
|
$ |
17,117 |
|
|
$ |
28,366 |
|
|
$ |
33,004 |
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
|
|
(7,787 |
) |
|
|
14,799 |
|
|
|
(6,331 |
) |
|
|
7,286 |
|
Derivatives valuation, net of tax |
|
|
(3,999 |
) |
|
|
12,386 |
|
|
|
(1,037 |
) |
|
|
15,425 |
|
Other |
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(199 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income |
|
|
2,592 |
|
|
|
44,302 |
|
|
|
20,799 |
|
|
|
55,715 |
|
Comprehensive income attributable to
non-controlling interest |
|
|
(877 |
) |
|
|
(1,353 |
) |
|
|
(1,510 |
) |
|
|
(2,118 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income attributable to
TeleTech |
|
$ |
1,715 |
|
|
$ |
42,949 |
|
|
$ |
19,289 |
|
|
$ |
53,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table reconciles equity attributable to noncontrolling interest (amounts in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Noncontrolling interest, January 1 |
|
$ |
5,478 |
|
|
$ |
5,011 |
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest |
|
|
1,677 |
|
|
|
1,811 |
|
Dividends distributed to noncontrolling interest |
|
|
(2,070 |
) |
|
|
(1,800 |
) |
Foreign currency translation adjustments |
|
|
(167 |
) |
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interest, June 30 |
|
$ |
4,918 |
|
|
$ |
5,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12) NET INCOME PER SHARE
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted shares for the periods
indicated (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Shares used in basic earnings per share calculation |
|
|
61,117 |
|
|
|
63,098 |
|
|
|
61,495 |
|
|
|
63,502 |
|
Effect of dilutive securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options |
|
|
801 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
914 |
|
|
|
347 |
|
Restricted stock units |
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
498 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total effects of dilutive securities |
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
|
1,077 |
|
|
|
1,412 |
|
|
|
665 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in dilutive earnings per share calculation |
|
|
62,317 |
|
|
|
64,175 |
|
|
|
62,907 |
|
|
|
64,167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
For the three months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, options to purchase 0.2 million and 0.8
million shares of common stock, respectively, were outstanding, but not included in the computation
of diluted net income per share because the effect would have been anti-dilutive. For the six
months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, options to purchase 0.2 million and 2.4 million shares of
common stock, respectively, were outstanding, but not included in the computation of diluted net
income per share because the effect would have been anti-dilutive. For the three months ended June
30, 2010 and 2009, restricted stock units (RSUs) of 1.4 million and 0.9 million, respectively,
and for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, RSUs of 1.1 million and 1.0 million,
respectively, were outstanding, but not included in the computation of diluted net income per share
because the effect would have been anti-dilutive.
(13) EQUITY-BASED COMPENSATION PLANS
All equity-based payments to employees are recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations
at the fair value of the award on the grant date. The fair values of all stock options granted by
the Company are estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton Model.
Stock Options
As of June 30, 2010, there was approximately $0.1 million of total unrecognized compensation cost
(including the impact of expected forfeitures) related to unvested option arrangements granted
under the Companys equity plans. The Company recognizes compensation expense straight-line over
the vesting term of the option grant. The Company recognized compensation expense related to stock
options of $0.1 million and $0.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009,
respectively. The Company recognized compensation expense related to stock options of $0.2 million
and $1.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Restricted Stock Unit Grants
During the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, the Company granted 1,067,816 and 873,575 RSUs,
respectively, to new and existing employees, which vest in equal installments over four years. The
Company recognized compensation expense related to RSUs of $3.4 million and $6.4 million for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively, and $2.0 million and $4.6 million for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2009, respectively. As of June 30, 2010, there was
approximately $41.0 million of total unrecognized compensation cost (including the impact of
expected forfeitures) related to RSUs granted under the Companys equity plans.
As of June 30, 2010 and 2009, the Company had performance-based RSUs outstanding that vest based on
the Company achieving specified operating income performance targets. The Company determined that
it was not probable these performance targets would be met; therefore no expense was recognized for
the six months ended June 30, 2010 or 2009. The Company did not achieve the operating income
performance targets in 2009, thus the performance RSUs associated with the 2009 targets were
cancelled.
18
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Introduction
The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our Annual Report on Form
10K for the year ended December 31, 2009. Except for historical information, the discussion below
contains certain forwardlooking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. The projections
and statements contained in these forwardlooking statements involve known and unknown risks,
uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance, or achievements to
be materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied
by the forwardlooking statements.
All statements not based on historical fact are forwardlooking statements that involve
substantial risks and uncertainties. In accordance with the Private Securities Litigation Reform
Act of 1995, the following are important factors that could cause our actual results to differ
materially from those expressed or implied by such forwardlooking statements, including but not
limited to the following: achieving estimated revenue from new, renewed and expanded client
business as volumes may not materialize as forecasted, especially due to the global economic
slowdown; achieving profit improvement in our International Business Process Outsourcing (BPO)
operations; the ability to close and ramp new business opportunities that are currently being
pursued or that are in the final stages with existing and/or potential clients; our ability to
execute our growth plans, including sales of new products; the possibility of lower revenue or
price pressure from our clients experiencing a business downturn or merger in their business;
greater than anticipated competition in the BPO services market, causing adverse pricing and more
stringent contractual terms; risks associated with losing or not renewing client relationships,
particularly large client agreements, or early termination of a client agreement; the risk of
losing clients due to consolidation in the industries we serve; consumers concerns or adverse
publicity regarding our clients products; our ability to find cost effective locations, obtain
favorable lease terms and build or retrofit facilities in a timely and economic manner; risks
associated with business interruption due to weather, fires, pandemic, or terroristrelated
events; risks associated with attracting and retaining costeffective labor at our delivery
centers; the possibility of asset impairments and restructuring charges; risks associated with
changes in foreign currency exchange rates; economic or political changes affecting the countries
in which we operate; changes in accounting policies and practices promulgated by standard setting
bodies; and new legislation or government regulation that adversely impacts our tax obligations,
health care costs or the BPO and customer management industry.
This list is intended to identify some of the principal factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements included elsewhere in this
report. These factors are not intended to represent a complete list of all risks and uncertainties
inherent in our business and should be read in conjunction with the more detailed cautionary
statements included in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K under the caption Item 1A. Risk
Factors, in our other Securities and Exchange Commission filings and in our press releases.
Executive Summary
TeleTech is one of the largest and most geographically diverse global providers of onshore,
offshore and work from home BPO services focusing on revenue generation, customer and enterprise
management, and technology enabled solutions. We have a 28-year history of designing, implementing
and managing critical business processes for Global 1000 companies to help them improve their
customers experience, enhance their strategic capabilities and increase their operating
efficiencies. By delivering a high-quality customer experience through the effective integration of
customer-facing, front-office processes with internal back-office processes, we enable our clients
to better serve, grow and retain their customer base. We have developed deep vertical industry
expertise and support more than 275 BPO programs serving approximately 85 global clients in the
automotive, broadband, cable, financial services, government, healthcare, logistics, media and
entertainment, retail, technology, travel, wireline and wireless communication industries.
19
As globalization of the worlds economy continues to accelerate, businesses are increasingly
competing on a large-scale basis due to rapid advances in technology and telecommunications that
permit cost-effective real-time global communications and ready access to a highly skilled
worldwide labor force. As a result of these developments, we believe that companies have
increasingly outsourced business processes to third-party providers in an effort to enhance or
maintain their competitive position while increasing shareholder value through improved
productivity and profitability.
Revenue in 2010 decreased over the prior year due primarily to the global economic slowdown
resulting in a decline in our current call volumes and delayed client purchasing decisions. In
addition, the continued migration of several of our clients to our offshore delivery centers, along
with our proactive management of underperforming business and geographies out of our portfolio has
impacted our revenue. Nevertheless, we believe that our revenue will grow over the long-term as
global demand for our services is fueled by the following trends:
|
|
|
Focus on providers who can offer fully integrated revenue generation solutions. A focus
on providers who can offer fully integrated revenue generation solutions to target new
markets and improve revenue and profitability through customer acquisition, retention and
growth by leveraging the profitability potential of each customer. |
|
|
|
|
Integration of front- and back-office business processes to provide increased operating
efficiencies and an enhanced customer experience especially in light of the weakening
global economic environment. Companies have realized that integrated business processes
reduce operating costs and allow customer needs to be met more quickly and efficiently
resulting in higher customer satisfaction and brand loyalty thereby improving their
competitive position. A majority of our historic revenue has been derived from providing
customer-facing front-office solutions to our clients. Given that our global delivery
centers are also fully capable of providing back-office solutions, we are uniquely
positioned to grow our revenue by winning more back-office opportunities and providing the
services during non-peak hours with minimal incremental investment. Furthermore, by
spreading our fixed costs across a larger revenue base and increasing our asset
utilization, we expect our profitability to improve over time. |
|
|
|
|
Increasing percentage of company operations being outsourced to most capable third-party
providers. Having experienced success with outsourcing a portion of their business
processes, companies are increasingly inclined to outsource a larger percentage of this
work. We believe companies will continue to consolidate their business processes with
third-party providers, such as TeleTech, who are financially stable and able to invest in
their business while also demonstrating an extensive global operating history and an
ability to cost effectively scale to meet their evolving needs. |
|
|
|
|
Increasing adoption of outsourcing across broader groups of industries. Early adopters
of the business process outsourcing trend, such as the media and communications industries,
are being joined by companies in other industries, including healthcare, retail and
financial services. These companies are beginning to adopt outsourcing to improve their
business processes and competitiveness. For example, we see increasing interest in our
services for companies in the healthcare, retail and financial services industries. We
believe the number of other industries that will adopt or increase their level of
outsourcing will continue to grow, further enabling us to increase and diversify our
revenue and client base. |
20
|
|
|
Focus on speed-to-market by companies launching new products or entering new geographic
locations. As companies broaden their product offerings and seek to enter new emerging
markets, they are looking for outsourcing providers that can provide speed-to-market while
reducing their capital and operating risk. To achieve these benefits, companies are seeking
BPO providers with an extensive operating history, an established global footprint, the
financial strength to invest in innovation to deliver more strategic capabilities and the
ability to scale and meet customer demands quickly. Given our financial stability,
geographic presence in 16 countries and our significant investment in standardized
technology and processes, we believe that clients select TeleTech because we can quickly
ramp large, complex business processes around the globe in a short period of time while
assuring a high-quality experience for our clients customers. |
Our Future Growth Goals and Strategy
Our objective is to become the worlds largest, most technologically advanced and innovative
provider of onshore, offshore and work from home BPO solutions. Companies within the Global 1000
are our primary client targets due to their size, global nature, focus on outsourcing and desire
for the global, scalable integrated process solutions that we offer. We have developed, and
continue to invest in, a broad set of capabilities designed to serve this growing client need.
These investments include our TeleTech@Home offering which allows our employees to serve clients
from their homes. This capability has enhanced the flexibility of our offering allowing clients to
choose our onshore, offshore or work from home employees to meet their outsourced business process
needs. In addition, we have begun to offer hosted services where clients can license any aspect
of our global network and proprietary applications. While the revenue from these offerings is small
relative to our consolidated revenue, we believe it will continue to grow as these services become
more widely adopted by our clients. We aim to further improve our competitive position by investing
in a growing suite of new and innovative business process services across our targeted industries.
Our business strategy to increase revenue, profitability and our industry position includes the
following elements:
|
|
|
Capitalize on the favorable trends in the global outsourcing environment, which we
believe will include more companies that want to: |
|
- |
|
Adopt or increase BPO services; |
|
|
- |
|
Consolidate outsourcing providers with those that have a solid financial
position, adequate capital resources to sustain a long-term relationship and globally
diverse delivery capabilities across a broad range of solutions; |
|
|
- |
|
Modify their approach to outsourcing based on total value delivered versus the
lowest priced provider; |
|
|
- |
|
Create focused revenue generation capabilities in targeted market segments; |
|
|
- |
|
Better integrate front- and back-office processes; and |
|
|
- |
|
Take advantage of cost efficiencies through the adoption of cloud based technology solutions. |
|
|
|
Deepen and broaden our relationships with existing clients; |
|
|
|
|
Win business with new clients and focus on end-to-end offerings in targeted industries
where we expect accelerating adoption of business process outsourcing; |
|
|
|
|
Continue to invest in innovative proprietary technology and new business offerings; |
|
|
|
|
Continue to diversify revenue into higher-margin offerings such as professional
services, talent acquisition, learning services and our hosted TeleTech OnDemand
capabilities; |
21
|
|
|
Continue to improve our operating margins through selected profit improvement
initiatives and increased asset utilization of our globally diverse delivery centers; and |
|
|
|
|
Selectively pursue acquisitions that extend our capabilities, geographic reach and/or
industry expertise. |
Our Second Quarter 2010 Financial Results
In 2010, our second quarter revenue decreased 9.8% to $271.9 million over the year-ago period,
which included an increase of 3.6% or $10.9 million due to fluctuations in foreign currency rates.
Our second quarter 2010 income from operations decreased 17.3% to $19.1 million, or 7.0% of
revenue, from $23.0 million, or 7.6% of revenue, in the year-ago period. The revenue decrease was
due to a decline in existing client volumes from the impact of the global recessionary economic
environment, and our proactive management of underperforming business and geographies out of our
portfolio. Income from operations decreased due to a decrease in the percentage of revenue
generated from our offshore clients. Income from operations for the second quarter of 2010 and 2009
also included $2.0 million and $6.6 million of restructuring charges and asset impairments,
respectively.
Our offshore delivery centers serve clients based both in North America and in other countries. Our
offshore delivery capacity spans seven countries with approximately 24,500 workstations and
currently represents 71% of our global delivery capabilities. Revenue in these offshore locations
was $114.4 million and represented 42% of our total revenue for the second quarter of 2010.
Our strong financial position due to our cash flow from operations and low debt levels allowed us
to finance a significant portion of our capital needs and stock repurchases through internally
generated cash flows. At June 30, 2010, we had $131.5 million of cash and cash equivalents, total
debt of $5.4 million, and a total debt to total capitalization ratio of 1.2%.
Business Overview
Our BPO business provides outsourced business process and customer management services for a
variety of industries through global delivery centers. Our North American BPO segment is comprised
of sales to all clients based in North America (encompassing the U.S. and Canada), while our
International BPO is comprised of sales to all clients based in all countries outside of North
America.
BPO Services
The BPO business generates revenue based primarily on the amount of time our associates devote to a
clients program. We primarily focus on large global corporations in the following industries:
automotive, broadband, cable, financial services, government, healthcare, logistics, media and
entertainment, retail, technology, travel and wireline and wireless telecommunications. Revenue is
recognized as services are provided. The majority of our revenue is from multiyear contracts and
we expect this trend to continue. However, we do provide certain client programs on a shortterm
basis.
We have historically experienced annual attrition of existing client programs of approximately 6%
to 12% of our revenue. Attrition of existing client programs during the first six months of 2010
was 10%.
The BPO industry is highly competitive. We compete primarily with the inhouse business processing
operations of our current and potential clients. We also compete with certain third-party BPO
providers. Our ability to sell our existing services or gain acceptance for new products or
services is challenged by the competitive nature of the industry. There can be no assurance that we
will be able to sell services to new clients, renew relationships with existing clients, or gain
client acceptance of our new products.
Our ability to renew or enter into new multi-year contracts, particularly large complex
opportunities, is dependent upon the macroeconomic environment in general and the specific industry
environments in which our clients operate. A continued weakening of the U.S. or the global economy
could lengthen sales cycles or cause delays in closing new business opportunities.
22
Our potential clients typically obtain bids from multiple vendors and evaluate many factors in
selecting a service provider, including, among others, the scope of services offered, the service
record of the vendor and price. We generally price our bids with a longterm view of profitability
and, accordingly, we consider all of our fixed and variable costs in developing our bids. We
believe that our competitors, at times, may bid business based upon a shortterm view, as opposed
to our longerterm view, resulting in a lower price bid. While we believe that our clients
perceptions of the value we provide results in our being successful in certain competitive bid
situations, there are often situations where a potential client may prefer a lower cost.
Our industry is labor intensive and the majority of our operating costs relate to wages, employee
benefits and employment taxes. An improvement in the local or global economies where our delivery
centers are located could lead to increased labor related costs. In addition, our industry
experiences high personnel turnover, and the length of training time required to implement new
programs continues to increase due to increased complexities of our clients businesses. This may
create challenges if we obtain several significant new clients or implement several new, large
scale programs and need to recruit, hire and train qualified personnel at an accelerated rate.
To some extent our profitability is influenced by the number of new client programs entered into
within the period. For new programs we defer revenue related to initial training (Training
Revenue) when training is billed as a separate component from production rates. Consequently, the
corresponding training costs associated with this revenue, consisting primarily of labor and
related expenses (Training Costs), are also deferred. In these circumstances, both the Training
Revenue and Training Costs are amortized straight-line over the life of the contract. In situations
where Training Revenue is not billed separately, but rather included in the production rates, there
is no deferral as all revenue is recognized over the life of the contract and the associated
training expenses are expensed as incurred. As of June 30, 2010, we had deferred start-up Training
Revenue, net of Training Costs, of $4.9 million that will be recognized into our income from
operations over the remaining life of the corresponding contracts ($3.2 million will be recognized
within the next 12 months).
We may have difficulties managing the timeliness of launching new or expanded client programs and
the associated internal allocation of personnel and resources. This could cause slower than
anticipated revenue growth and/or higher than expected costs primarily related to hiring, training
and retaining the required workforce, either of which could adversely affect our operating results.
Quarterly, we review our capacity utilization and projected demand for future capacity. In
conjunction with these reviews, we may decide to consolidate or close underperforming delivery
centers, including those impacted by the loss of a client program, in order to maintain or improve
targeted utilization and margins. In addition, because clients may request that we serve their
customers from international delivery centers with lower prevailing labor rates, in the future, we
may decide to close one or more of our delivery centers, even though it is generating positive cash
flow, because we believe that the future profits from conducting such work outside the current
delivery center may more than compensate for the one-time charges related to closing the facility.
Our profitability is influenced by our ability to increase capacity utilization in our delivery
centers. We attempt to minimize the financial impact resulting from idle capacity when planning the
development and opening of new delivery centers or the expansion of existing delivery centers. As
such, management considers numerous factors that affect capacity utilization, including anticipated
expirations, reductions, terminations, or expansions of existing programs and the potential size
and timing of new client contracts that we expect to obtain.
We continue to win new business with both new and existing clients. To respond more rapidly to
changing market demands, to implement new programs and to expand existing programs, we may be
required to commit to additional capacity prior to contracting any additional business, which may
result in idle capacity. This is largely due to the significant time required to negotiate and
execute large, complex BPO client contracts and the difficulty of predicting specifically when new
programs will launch.
23
We internally target capacity utilization in our delivery centers at 80% to 90% of our available
workstations. As of June 30, 2010, the overall capacity utilization in our multiclient delivery
centers was 67% and was lower than the prior year due to reduced existing client volumes in light
of the continued weak economic environment. The table below presents workstation data for our
multiclient delivery centers as of June 30, 2010 and 2009. Dedicated and managed delivery centers
(3,283 and 7,950 workstations as of June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively) are excluded from the
workstation data below as unused workstations in these facilities are not available for sale. Our
utilization percentage is defined as the total number of utilized production workstations compared
to the total number of available production workstations. We may change the designation of shared
or dedicated delivery centers based on the normal changes in our business environment and client
needs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010 |
|
June 30, 2009 |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Workstations |
|
In Use |
|
% In Use |
|
Workstations |
|
In Use |
|
% In Use |
Multi-client centers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sites open <1 year |
|
|
408 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
59 |
% |
|
|
2,721 |
|
|
|
1,539 |
|
|
|
57 |
% |
Sites open >1 year |
|
|
30,993 |
|
|
|
20,926 |
|
|
|
68 |
% |
|
|
26,400 |
|
|
|
18,697 |
|
|
|
71 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total multi-client centers |
|
|
31,401 |
|
|
|
21,168 |
|
|
|
67 |
% |
|
|
29,121 |
|
|
|
20,236 |
|
|
|
69 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We continue to see demand from all geographic regions to utilize our offshore delivery
capabilities and expect this trend to continue with our clients. In light of this trend, we plan to
continue to selectively retain capacity and expand into new offshore markets. As we grow our
offshore delivery capabilities and our exposure to foreign currency fluctuations increase; we
continue to actively manage this risk via a multi-currency hedging program designed to minimize
operating margin volatility.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
Refer to Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of recently issued
accounting pronouncements.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Managements Discussion and Analysis of its financial condition and results of operations are based
upon our Consolidated Financial Statements, which have been prepared in accordance with GAAP. The
preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect
the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses as well as the disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities. We regularly review our estimates and assumptions. These
estimates and assumptions, which are based upon historical experience and on various other factors
believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, form the basis for making judgments about the
carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources.
Reported amounts and disclosures may have been different had management used different estimates
and assumptions or if different conditions had occurred in the periods presented. Below is a
discussion of the policies that we believe may involve a high degree of judgment and complexity.
Revenue Recognition
For each client arrangement, we determine whether evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery of
our service has occurred, the fee is fixed or determinable and collection is reasonably assured. If
all criteria are met, we recognize revenue at the time services are performed. If any of these
criteria are not met, revenue recognition is deferred until such time as all of the criteria are
met.
24
Our BPO segments recognize revenue under three models:
Production Rate Revenue is recognized based on the billable time or transactions of each
associate, as defined in the client contract. The rate per billable time or transaction is based
on a pre-determined contractual rate. This contractual rate can fluctuate based on our
performance against certain predetermined criteria related to quality and performance.
PerformanceBased Under performancebased arrangements, we are paid by our clients based on
the achievement of certain levels of sales or other clientdetermined criteria specified in the
client contract. We recognize performancebased revenue by measuring our actual results against
the performance criteria specified in the contracts. Amounts collected from clients prior to the
performance of services are recorded as deferred revenue, which is recorded in Other Current
Liabilities or Other Long-Term Liabilities in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Hybrid Hybrid models include production rate and performance-based elements. For these types
of arrangements, we allocate revenue to the elements based on the relative fair value of each
element. Revenue for each element is recognized based on the methods described above.
Certain client programs provide for adjustments to monthly billings based upon whether we meet or
exceed certain performance criteria as set forth in the contract. Increases or decreases to monthly
billings arising from such contract terms are reflected in revenue as earned or incurred.
Periodically, we make certain expenditures related to acquiring contracts or provide up-front
discounts for future services to existing customers (recorded as Contract Acquisition Costs in the
accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets). Those expenditures are capitalized and amortized in
proportion to the expected future revenue from the contract, which in most cases results in
straightline amortization over the life of the contract. Amortization of these costs is recorded
as a reduction of revenue.
Income Taxes
We account for income taxes in accordance with the authoritative guidance for income taxes, which
requires recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future income tax
consequences of transactions that have been included in the Consolidated Financial Statements or
tax returns. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the
difference between the financial statement and tax basis of assets and liabilities using tax rates
in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. When circumstances
warrant, we assess the likelihood that our net deferred tax assets will more likely than not be
recovered from future projected taxable income.
We continually review the likelihood that deferred tax assets will be realized in future tax
periods under the more likely than not criterion. In making this judgment, we consider all
available evidence, both positive and negative, in determining whether, based on the weight of that
evidence, a valuation allowance is required.
We follow a two-step approach to recognizing and measuring uncertain tax positions. The first step
is to determine if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that
the tax position will be sustained on audit. The second step is to estimate and measure the tax
benefit as the amount that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate
settlement with the tax authority. We evaluate these uncertain tax positions on a quarterly basis.
This evaluation is based on the consideration of several factors including changes in facts or
circumstances, changes in applicable tax law, and settlement of issues under audit.
25
In the future, our effective tax rate could be adversely affected by several factors, many of which
are outside our control. Our effective tax rate is affected by the proportion of revenue and income
before taxes in the various domestic and international jurisdictions in which we operate. Further,
we are subject to changing tax laws, regulations and interpretations in multiple jurisdictions in
which we operate, as well as the requirements, pronouncements and rulings of certain tax,
regulatory and accounting organizations. We estimate our annual effective tax rate each quarter
based on a combination of actual and forecasted results of subsequent quarters. Consequently,
significant changes in our actual quarterly or forecasted results may impact the effective tax rate
for the current or future periods.
Interest and penalties relating to income taxes and uncertain tax positions are accrued net of tax
in Provision for Income Taxes in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
We have established an allowance for doubtful accounts to reserve for uncollectible accounts
receivable. Each quarter, management reviews the receivables on an accountbyaccount basis and
assigns a probability of collection. Managements judgment is used in assessing the probability of
collection. Factors considered in making this judgment include, among other things, the age of the
identified receivable, client financial condition, previous client payment history and any recent
communications with the client.
Impairment of LongLived Assets
We evaluate the carrying value of property, plant and equipment for impairment whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. An asset is
considered to be impaired when the anticipated undiscounted future cash flows of an asset group are
estimated to be less than its carrying value. The amount of impairment recognized is the difference
between the carrying value of the asset group and its fair value. Fair value estimates are based on
assumptions concerning the amount and timing of estimated future cash flows and assumed discount
rates.
Goodwill
We perform a goodwill impairment test on at least an annual basis, or whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate goodwill may be impaired. Impairment occurs when the carrying value of
goodwill exceeds its estimated fair value. The impairment, if any, is measured based on the
estimated fair value of the reporting unit. We aggregate segment components with similar economic
characteristics in forming a reporting unit; aggregation can be based on types of customers,
methods of distribution of services, shared operations, acquisition history, and management
judgment and reporting.
We estimate fair value using discounted cash flows of the reporting units. The most significant
assumptions used in these analyses are those made in estimating future cash flows. In estimating
future cash flows, we use financial assumptions in our internal forecasting model such as projected
capacity utilization, projected changes in the prices we charge for our services, projected labor
costs, as well as contract negotiation status. The financial and credit market volatility directly
impacts our fair value measurement through our weighted average cost of capital that we use to
determine our discount rate. We use a discount rate we consider appropriate for the country where
the business unit is providing services.
Restructuring Liability
We routinely assess the profitability and utilization of our delivery centers and existing markets.
In some cases, we have chosen to close underperforming delivery centers and complete reductions
in workforce to enhance future profitability. We recognize certain liabilities when the severance
liabilities are determined to be probable and reasonably estimable. Liabilities for costs
associated with an exit or disposal activity are recognized when the liability is incurred, rather
than upon commitment to a plan.
26
EquityBased Compensation
Equity-based compensation expense for all share-based payment awards granted is determined based on
the grant-date fair value. We recognize equity-based compensation expense net of an estimated
forfeiture rate, and recognize compensation expense only for shares that are expected to vest on a
straight-line basis over the requisite service period of the award, which is typically the vesting
term of the share-based payment award. We estimate the forfeiture rate annually based on historical
experience of forfeited awards.
Fair Value Measurement
The fair value guidance codifies a new framework for measuring fair value and expands related
disclosures. The framework requires fair value to be determined based on the exchange price that
would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or
most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market
participants. We utilize market data or assumptions that we believe market participants would use
in pricing the asset or liability, assumptions about counterparty credit risk, including the
ability of each party to execute its obligation under the contract, and the risks inherent in the
inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated or
generally unobservable.
We primarily apply the market approach for recurring fair value measurements and endeavor to
utilize the best available information. Accordingly, we utilize valuation techniques that maximize
the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. We are able to classify
fair value balances based on the observability of those inputs.
The valuation techniques required by the new provisions establish a fair value hierarchy that
prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to
unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1
measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). The three levels
of the fair value hierarchy are as follows:
Level 1 |
|
Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets
or liabilities as of the reporting date. Active markets are those
in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in
sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on
an ongoing basis. Level 1 primarily consists of financial
instruments such as exchange-traded derivatives, listed equities
and U.S. government treasury securities. |
|
Level 2 |
|
Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets
included in Level 1, which are either directly or indirectly
observable as of the reporting date. Level 2 includes those
financial instruments that are valued using models or other
valuation methodologies. These models are primarily
industry-standard models that consider various assumptions,
including quoted forward prices for commodities, time value,
volatility factors, and current market and contractual prices for
the underlying instruments, as well as other relevant economic
measures. Substantially all of these assumptions are observable in
the marketplace throughout the full term of the instrument, can be
derived from observable data or are supported by observable levels
at which transactions are executed in the marketplace. Instruments
in this category include non-exchange-traded derivatives such as
over-the-counter forwards, options and repurchase agreements. |
|
Level 3 |
|
Pricing inputs include significant inputs that are generally less
observable from objective sources. These inputs may be used with
internally developed methodologies that result in managements
best estimate of fair value from the perspective of a market
participant. Level 3 instruments include those that may be more
structured or otherwise tailored to customers needs. At each
balance sheet date, we perform an analysis of all instruments
subject to fair value measurements and include within Level 3 all
of those whose fair value is based on significant unobservable
inputs. |
27
Derivatives
We enter into foreign exchange forward and option contracts to reduce our exposure to foreign
currency exchange rate fluctuations that are associated with forecasted revenue in non-functional
currencies. Upon proper qualification, these contracts are accounted for as cash flow hedges. When
appropriate we also enter into foreign exchange forward contracts to hedge our net investments in
foreign operations.
All derivative financial instruments are reported on the Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value.
Changes in fair value of derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges are recorded in
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss), a component of Stockholders Equity, to the extent
they are deemed effective. Based on the criteria established by current accounting standards, all
of our cash flow hedge contracts are deemed to be highly effective. Changes in fair value of any
net investment hedge are recorded in cumulative translation adjustment in Accumulated Other
Comprehensive Income (Loss) on the Consolidated Balance Sheets offsetting the change in cumulative
translation adjustment attributable to the hedged portion of our net investment in the foreign
operation. Any realized gains or losses resulting from the cash flow hedges are recognized together
with the hedged transaction within Revenue. Gains and losses from the settlements of our net
investment hedge remain in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) until partial or complete
liquidation of the applicable net investment.
We also enter into fair value derivative contracts that hedge against translation gains and losses.
Changes in the fair value of derivative instruments designated as fair value hedges affect the
carrying value of the asset or liability hedged, with changes in both the derivative instrument and
the hedged asset or liability being recognized in earnings.
While we expect that our derivative instruments will continue to be highly effective and in
compliance with applicable accounting standards, if our hedges did not qualify as highly effective
or if we determine that forecasted transactions will not occur, the changes in the fair value of
the derivatives used as hedges would be reflected currently in earnings.
In addition to hedging activities, we also have embedded derivatives in certain foreign lease
contracts. We bifurcate and fair value the embedded derivative feature apart from the host contract
with any changes in fair value of the embedded derivatives recognized in Cost of Services.
Contingencies
We record a liability for pending litigation and claims when losses are both probable and
reasonably estimable. Each quarter, management reviews all litigation and claims on a case-by-case
basis and assigns probability of loss and range of loss.
Explanation of Key Metrics and Other Items
Cost of Services
Cost of services principally includes costs incurred in connection with our BPO operations,
including direct labor, telecommunications, printing, sales and use tax and certain fixed costs
associated with delivery centers. In addition, cost of services includes income related to grants
we may receive from local or state governments as an incentive to locate delivery centers in their
jurisdictions which reduce the cost of services for those facilities.
Selling, General and Administrative
Selling, general and administrative expenses primarily include costs associated with administrative
services such as sales, marketing, product development, legal settlements, legal, information
systems (including core technology and telephony infrastructure) and accounting and finance. It
also includes equitybased compensation expense, outside professional fees (i.e. legal and
accounting services), building expense for nondelivery center facilities and other items
associated with general business administration.
28
Restructuring Charges, Net
Restructuring charges, net primarily include costs incurred in conjunction with reductions in force
or decisions to exit facilities, including termination benefits and lease liabilities, net of
expected sublease rentals.
Interest Expense
Interest expense includes interest expense and amortization of debt issuance costs associated with
our debts and capitalized lease obligations.
Other Income
The main components of other income are miscellaneous income not directly related to our operating
activities, such as foreign exchange transaction gains.
Other Expense
The main components of other expense are expenditures not directly related to our operating
activities, such as foreign exchange transaction losses.
Presentation of NonGAAP Measurements
Free Cash Flow
Free cash flow is a nonGAAP liquidity measurement. We believe that free cash flow is useful to
our investors because it measures, during a given period, the amount of cash generated that is
available for debt obligations and investments other than purchases of property, plant and
equipment. Free cash flow is not a measure determined by GAAP and should not be considered a
substitute for income from operations, net income, net cash provided by operating activities,
or any other measure determined in accordance with GAAP. We believe this nonGAAP liquidity
measure is useful, in addition to the most directly comparable GAAP measure of net cash provided
by operating activities, because free cash flow includes investments in operational assets. Free
cash flow does not represent residual cash available for discretionary expenditures, since it
includes cash required for debt service. Free cash flow also includes cash that may be necessary
for acquisitions, investments and other needs that may arise.
The following table reconciles net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow for our
consolidated results (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
23,203 |
|
|
$ |
39,827 |
|
|
$ |
74,635 |
|
|
$ |
93,838 |
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
5,708 |
|
|
|
5,846 |
|
|
|
12,316 |
|
|
|
14,301 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Free cash flow |
|
$ |
17,495 |
|
|
$ |
33,981 |
|
|
$ |
62,319 |
|
|
$ |
79,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We discuss factors affecting free cash flow between periods in the Liquidity and Capital
Resources section below.
29
Results of Operations
Three months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to three months ended June 30, 2009
Operating Review
The following table is presented to facilitate an understanding of our Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and presents our results of operations by
segment for the three months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 (amounts in thousands). We allocate to
each segment its portion of corporate operating expenses. All intercompany transactions between
the reported segments for the periods presented have been eliminated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Segment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Revenue |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Revenue |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
212,506 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
229,992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(17,486 |
) |
|
|
-7.6 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
59,421 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,099 |
) |
|
|
-16.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
271,927 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
301,512 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(29,585 |
) |
|
|
-9.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of services |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
146,994 |
|
|
|
69.2 |
% |
|
$ |
154,119 |
|
|
|
67.0 |
% |
|
$ |
(7,125 |
) |
|
|
-4.6 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
51,200 |
|
|
|
86.2 |
% |
|
|
58,930 |
|
|
|
82.4 |
% |
|
|
(7,730 |
) |
|
|
-13.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
198,194 |
|
|
|
72.9 |
% |
|
$ |
213,049 |
|
|
|
70.7 |
% |
|
$ |
(14,855 |
) |
|
|
-7.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
28,966 |
|
|
|
13.6 |
% |
|
$ |
33,111 |
|
|
|
14.4 |
% |
|
$ |
(4,145 |
) |
|
|
-12.5 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
10,775 |
|
|
|
18.1 |
% |
|
|
11,870 |
|
|
|
16.6 |
% |
|
|
(1,095 |
) |
|
|
-9.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
39,741 |
|
|
|
14.6 |
% |
|
$ |
44,981 |
|
|
|
14.9 |
% |
|
$ |
(5,240 |
) |
|
|
-11.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
10,071 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
% |
|
$ |
9,609 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
% |
|
$ |
462 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
2,875 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
|
4,199 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
% |
|
|
(1,324 |
) |
|
|
-31.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
12,946 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
$ |
13,808 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
$ |
(862 |
) |
|
|
-6.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring charges, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
699 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
$ |
3,028 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
$ |
(2,329 |
) |
|
|
-76.9 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
|
980 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
% |
|
|
(375 |
) |
|
|
-38.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,304 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
$ |
4,008 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
$ |
(2,704 |
) |
|
|
-67.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment losses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
679 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
$ |
1,811 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
% |
|
$ |
(1,132 |
) |
|
|
-62.5 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
809 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
% |
|
|
(809 |
) |
|
|
-100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
679 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
$ |
2,620 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
% |
|
$ |
(1,941 |
) |
|
|
-74.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
25,097 |
|
|
|
11.8 |
% |
|
$ |
28,314 |
|
|
|
12.3 |
% |
|
$ |
(3,217 |
) |
|
|
-11.4 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
(6,034 |
) |
|
|
-10.2 |
% |
|
|
(5,268 |
) |
|
|
-7.4 |
% |
|
|
(766 |
) |
|
|
-14.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
19,063 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
% |
|
$ |
23,046 |
|
|
|
7.6 |
% |
|
$ |
(3,983 |
) |
|
|
-17.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net |
|
$ |
332 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
|
$ |
399 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
|
$ |
(67 |
) |
|
|
-16.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
$ |
(5,071 |
) |
|
|
-1.9 |
% |
|
$ |
(6,328 |
) |
|
|
-2.1 |
% |
|
$ |
1,257 |
|
|
|
19.9 |
% |
30
Revenue
Revenue for North American BPO for the three months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to the same
period in 2009 was $212.5 million and $230.0 million, respectively. The decrease in revenue for the
North American BPO was due to net increases in short-term government programs of $7.9 million, a
$8.6 million increase due to realized gains on cash flow hedges and positive changes in foreign
exchange translation rates, offset by net decreases in client programs of $32.3 million, and
certain program completions of $1.7 million.
Revenue for International BPO for the three months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to the same
period in 2009 was $59.4 million and $71.5 million, respectively. The decrease in revenue for the
International BPO was due to net decreases in client programs of $14.3 million, offset by positive
changes in foreign exchange translation rates of $2.3 million.
Our offshore delivery capacity represented 71% of our global delivery capabilities at June 30,
2010. Revenue in these offshore locations was $114.4 million and represented 42% of our total
revenue in the second quarter of 2010. Revenue in these offshore locations was $139.0 million or
46% of total revenue in the second quarter of 2009. An important component of our growth strategy
is continued expansion of services delivered from our offshore locations, which contributes to our
higher margins, along with our technology and consulting related projects. Factors that may impact
our ability to maintain our offshore operating margins include potential increases in competition
for the available workforce, the trend of higher occupancy costs and foreign currency fluctuations.
Cost of Services
Cost of services for North American BPO for the three months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to the
same period in 2009 was $147.0 million and $154.1 million, respectively. Cost of services as a
percentage of revenue in the North American BPO increased compared with the prior year due to a
decrease in the percentage of revenue generated from our offshore clients and lower capacity
utilization. In absolute dollars the decrease was due to a $12.3 million decrease in employee
related expenses due to lower volumes in existing client programs and the completion of certain
client programs, a decrease in severance associated with ongoing
operations of $1.7 million, offset
by a $1.5 million increase for rent and related expenses and operating leases, a $3.3 million
increase in telecommunications expenses primarily associated with a short-term government program,
a $0.5 million increase in contract labor, and a $1.6 million net increase in other expenses.
Cost of services for International BPO for the three months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to the
same period in 2009 was $51.2 million and $58.9 million, respectively. Cost of services as a
percentage of revenue in the International BPO increased compared to the prior year due to lower
capacity utilization, and the inability to rapidly reduce costs in certain markets due to local
labor agreements and regulatory requirements. In absolute dollars the
decrease was due to a $7.1
million decrease in employee related expenses due to lower volumes in existing client programs and
the completion of certain client programs, a decrease in severance associated with ongoing
operations of $0.9 million, and a $0.3 million net increase in other expenses.
Selling, General and Administrative
Selling, general and administrative expenses for North American BPO for the three months ended June
30, 2010 as compared to the same period in 2009 were $29.0 million and $33.1 million, respectively.
The decrease in absolute dollars was due to a $2.1 million decrease in employee expenses, a $1.5
million decrease in incentive compensation expense, and a $1.7 million decrease in litigation
settlements, offset by a $0.7 million increase in external professional fees, and a $0.6 million
increase in insurance expense.
Selling, general and administrative expenses for International BPO for the three months ended June
30, 2010 as compared to the same period in 2009 were $10.8 million and $11.9 million, respectively.
The expenses increased as a percentage of revenue. The decrease in absolute dollars was due to a
$1.2 million decrease in employee expenses, a $0.6 million decrease in incentive compensation
expense, and a $0.5 million decrease in telecommunications expenses, offset by a $0.5 million
increase in external professional fees, and a $0.7 million net increase in other expenses.
31
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense on a consolidated basis for the three months ended June 30,
2010 and 2009 was $12.9 million and $13.8 million, respectively. For the North American BPO, the
depreciation expense increase slightly in both absolute value and as a percentage of revenue as
compared to the prior year. For the International BPO, the depreciation expense decreased both in
absolute value and as a percentage of revenue as compared to the prior year. This decrease in value
was due to restructuring activities and delivery center closures which have better aligned our
capacity to our operational needs as well as asset impairments recorded during 2009.
Restructuring Charges
During both the three months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, we undertook reductions at several
locations within both our North American BPO and International BPO segments to better align our
delivery centers and workforce with the current business needs. In the three months ended June 30,
2010, we recorded $1.3 million of severance related restructuring charges compared to $3.5 million
of severance charges and $0.5 million of facility exit charges due to the closure of three
delivery centers in the same period in 2009.
Impairment Losses
During the three months ended June 30, 2010, we recorded a $0.7 million impairment charge compared
to $2.6 million of impairment charges in the same period in 2009. The decrease in impairment is the
result of fewer delivery center closures during the three months ended June 30, 2010.
Other Income (Expense)
For the three months ended June 30, 2010, interest income decreased to $0.5 million from $0.7
million in the same period in 2009 primarily due to lower interest rates. Interest expense
decreased by $0.6 million from the same period in 2009 due to a lower average outstanding balance
on our line of credit.
Income Taxes
The effective tax rate for the three months ended June 30, 2010 was 26.1%. This compares to an
effective tax rate of 27.0% in the same period of 2009. The effective tax rate for the three months
ended June 30, 2010 continues to be influenced by earnings in an international jurisdiction
currently under an income tax holiday and the distribution of income between the U.S. and
international tax jurisdictions.
32
Results of Operations
Six months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to six months ended June 30, 2009
Operating Review
The following table is presented to facilitate an understanding of our Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and presents our results of operations by
segment for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 (amounts in thousands). We allocate to each
segment its portion of corporate operating expenses. All intercompany transactions between the
reported segments for the periods presented have been eliminated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Segment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Revenue |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Revenue |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
420,448 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
458,878 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(38,430 |
) |
|
|
-8.4 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
123,005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
146,664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23,659 |
) |
|
|
-16.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
543,453 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
605,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(62,089 |
) |
|
|
-10.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of services |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
291,771 |
|
|
|
69.4 |
% |
|
$ |
311,812 |
|
|
|
68.0 |
% |
|
$ |
(20,041 |
) |
|
|
-6.4 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
101,041 |
|
|
|
82.1 |
% |
|
|
120,079 |
|
|
|
81.9 |
% |
|
|
(19,038 |
) |
|
|
-15.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
392,812 |
|
|
|
72.3 |
% |
|
$ |
431,891 |
|
|
|
71.3 |
% |
|
$ |
(39,079 |
) |
|
|
-9.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
61,041 |
|
|
|
14.5 |
% |
|
$ |
68,810 |
|
|
|
15.0 |
% |
|
$ |
(7,769 |
) |
|
|
-11.3 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
22,108 |
|
|
|
18.0 |
% |
|
|
24,686 |
|
|
|
16.8 |
% |
|
|
(2,578 |
) |
|
|
-10.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
83,149 |
|
|
|
15.3 |
% |
|
$ |
93,496 |
|
|
|
15.4 |
% |
|
$ |
(10,347 |
) |
|
|
-11.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
20,021 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
$ |
19,799 |
|
|
|
4.3 |
% |
|
$ |
222 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
5,649 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
8,071 |
|
|
|
5.5 |
% |
|
|
(2,422 |
) |
|
|
-30.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
25,670 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
% |
|
$ |
27,870 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
$ |
(2,200 |
) |
|
|
-7.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring charges, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
2,051 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
$ |
2,905 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
$ |
(854 |
) |
|
|
-29.4 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
722 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
|
1,406 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
|
(684 |
) |
|
|
-48.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,773 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
$ |
4,311 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
$ |
(1,538 |
) |
|
|
-35.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment losses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
679 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
$ |
1,811 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
$ |
(1,132 |
) |
|
|
-62.5 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
2,776 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
% |
|
|
(2,776 |
) |
|
|
-100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
679 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
|
$ |
4,587 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
% |
|
$ |
(3,908 |
) |
|
|
-85.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North American BPO |
|
$ |
44,885 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
% |
|
$ |
53,741 |
|
|
|
11.7 |
% |
|
$ |
(8,856 |
) |
|
|
-16.5 |
% |
International BPO |
|
|
(6,515 |
) |
|
|
-5.3 |
% |
|
|
(10,354 |
) |
|
|
-7.1 |
% |
|
|
3,839 |
|
|
|
37.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
38,370 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
% |
|
$ |
43,387 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
% |
|
$ |
(5,017 |
) |
|
|
-11.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net |
|
$ |
121 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
$ |
1,125 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
$ |
(1,004 |
) |
|
|
-89.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
$ |
(10,125 |
) |
|
|
-1.9 |
% |
|
$ |
(11,508 |
) |
|
|
-1.9 |
% |
|
$ |
1,383 |
|
|
|
12.0 |
% |
33
Revenue
Revenue for North American BPO for the six months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to the same
period in 2009 was $420.4 million and $458.9 million, respectively. The decrease in revenue for the
North American BPO was due to net increases in short-term government programs of $19.5 million, and
positive changes in foreign exchange translation rates of $19.5
million, offset by net decreases in client programs
of $59.1 million, certain program completions of $16.3 million, and a $2.0 million reduction to
revenue for disputed service delivery issues.
Revenue for International BPO for the six months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to the same period
in 2009 was $123.0 million and $146.7 million, respectively. The decrease in revenue for the
International BPO was due to net decreases in client programs of $12.7 million, and certain program
completions of $22.7 million, offset by positive changes in foreign exchange translation rates of
$11.7 million.
Our offshore delivery capacity represented 71% of our global delivery capabilities at June 30,
2010. Revenue in these offshore locations was $237.6 million and represented 44% of our total
revenue for the first six months of 2010. Revenue in these offshore locations was $285.0 million or
47% of total revenue for the first six months of 2009. An important component of our growth
strategy is continued expansion of services delivered from our offshore locations, which
contributes to our higher margins, along with our technology and consulting related projects.
Factors that may impact our ability to maintain our offshore operating margins include potential
increases in competition for the available workforce, the trend of higher occupancy costs and
foreign currency fluctuations.
Cost of Services
Cost of services for North American BPO for the six months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to the
same period in 2009 was $291.8 million and $311.8 million, respectively. Cost of services as a
percentage of revenue in the North American BPO increased compared with the prior year due to a
decrease in the percentage of revenue generated from our offshore clients and lower capacity
utilization. In absolute dollars the decrease was due to a $30.6 million decrease in employee
related expenses due to lower volumes in existing client programs and the completion of certain
client programs, offset by an increase in severance associated with
ongoing operations of $0.1 million, a $3.0 million increase for rent and related expenses and operating leases, a $3.4 million
increase in telecommunications expenses primarily associated with a short-term government program,
a $1.4 million increase in contract labor, and a $2.7 million net increase in other expenses.
Cost of services for International BPO for the six months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to the
same period in 2009 was $101.0 million and $120.1 million, respectively. Cost of services as a
percentage of revenue in the International BPO increased slightly compared to the prior year due to
lower capacity utilization, and the inability to rapidly reduce costs in certain markets due to
local labor agreements and regulatory requirements. In absolute dollars the decrease was due to a
$16.6 million decrease in employee related expenses due to lower volumes in existing client
programs and the completion of certain client programs, a decrease in severance associated with
ongoing operations of $0.7 million, and a $1.7 million net decrease in other expenses.
Selling, General and Administrative
Selling, general and administrative expenses for North American BPO for the six months ended June
30, 2010 as compared to the same period in 2009 were $61.0 million and $68.8 million, respectively.
The decrease in absolute dollars was due to a $3.4 million decrease in employee expenses, a $2.9
million decrease in incentive compensation expense, a $1.6 million decrease in litigation
settlements, and a $0.5 million decrease in external professional fees, offset by a $0.5 million
increase in insurance expense, and a net increase in other expenses of $0.1 million.
34
Selling, general and administrative expenses for International BPO for the six months ended June
30, 2010 as compared to the same period in 2009 were $22.1 million and $24.7 million, respectively.
The expenses increased as a percentage of revenue. The decrease in absolute dollars was due to a
$2.1 million decrease in employee expenses, a $1.1 million decrease in incentive compensation
expense, and a $0.8 million decrease in telecommunications expense, offset by a $0.3 million
increase in litigation settlements, and a $1.1 million net increase in other expenses.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense on a consolidated basis for the six months ended June 30,
2010 and 2009 was $25.7 million and $27.9 million, respectively. For the North American BPO, the
depreciation expense increased slightly in both absolute value and as a percentage of revenue as
compared to the prior year. For the International BPO, the depreciation expense decreased both in
absolute value and as a percentage of revenue as compared to the prior year. This decrease in value
was due to restructuring activities and delivery center closures which have better aligned our
capacity to our operational needs as well as asset impairments recorded during 2009.
Restructuring Charges
During both 2010 and 2009, we undertook reductions in both our North American BPO and International
BPO segments to better align our delivery centers and workforce with the current business needs.
During the six months ended June 30, 2010, we recorded $2.8 million of severance related
restructuring charges compared to a net restructuring charge of
$4.3 million, including severance and the closure of
four delivery centers in the same period in 2009.
Impairment Losses
During the six months ended June 30, 2010, we recorded a $0.7 million impairment charge compared to
$4.6 million of impairment charges in the same period in 2009. The decrease in impairment is the
result of fewer delivery center closures during the six months ended June 30, 2010.
Other Income (Expense)
For the six months ended June 30, 2010, interest income decreased to $1.1 million from $1.5 million
in the same period in 2009 primarily due to lower interest rates. Interest expense decreased by
$0.6 million during 2010 from 2009 due to a lower average outstanding balance on our line of
credit.
Income Taxes
The effective tax rate for the six months ended June 30, 2010 was 26.3%. This compares to an
effective tax rate of 25.9% in the same period of 2009. The effective tax rate for the six months
ended June 30, 2010 continues to be influenced by earnings in international jurisdictions currently
under an income tax holiday and the distribution of income between the U.S. and international tax
jurisdictions.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our principal sources of liquidity are our cash generated from operations, our cash and cash
equivalents, and borrowings under our Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated September 28,
2006 (the Credit Facility). During the six months ended June 30, 2010, we generated positive
operating cash flows of $74.6 million. We believe that our cash generated from operations, existing
cash and cash equivalents, and available credit will be sufficient to meet expected operating and
capital expenditure requirements for the next 12 months.
We manage a centralized global treasury function from the United States with a particular focus on
concentrating and safeguarding our global cash and cash equivalent reserves. While we generally
prefer to hold U.S. dollars, we maintain adequate cash in the functional currency of our foreign
subsidiaries to support local working capital requirements. While there are no assurances, we
believe our global cash is protected given our cash management practices, banking partners, and
low-risk investments.
35
We have global operations that expose us to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations that may
positively or negatively impact our liquidity. To mitigate these risks, we enter into foreign
exchange forward and option contracts through our cash flow hedging program. Please refer to Item
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk, Foreign Currency Risk, for further
discussion.
We primarily utilize our Credit Facility to fund working capital, stock repurchases, and other
strategic and general operating purposes. We had no outstanding borrowings under our Credit
Facility as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009; however our average six-month utilization was
$70.0 million and $77.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009,
respectively. After consideration for issued letters of credit under the Credit Facility, totaling
$4.8 million, our remaining borrowing capacity was $220.2 million as of June 30, 2010.
The amount of capital required over the next 12 months will also depend on our levels of investment
in infrastructure necessary to maintain, upgrade or replace existing assets. Our working capital
and capital expenditure requirements could also increase materially in the event of acquisitions or
joint ventures, among other factors. These factors could require that we raise additional capital
through future debt or equity financing. There can be no assurance that additional financing will
be available, at all, or on terms favorable to us.
The following discussion highlights our cash flow activities during the six months ended June 30,
2010 and 2009.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
We consider all liquid investments purchased within 90 days of their original maturity to be cash
equivalents. Our cash and cash equivalents totaled $131.5 million and $109.4 million as of June 30,
2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively.
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
We reinvest our cash flows from operating activities in our business or in the purchases of our
outstanding common stock. For the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, net cash flows provided
by operating activities was $74.6 million and $93.8 million, respectively. The decrease was
primarily due to a $13.0 million decrease in customer advances for future services along with a
decrease of $2.1 million in the collections of accounts receivable.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
We reinvest cash in our business primarily to grow our client base and to expand our
infrastructure. For the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, we reported net cash flows used in
investing activities of $12.3 million and $16.0 million, respectively. The decrease was due
primarily to reduced capital expenditures during the first six months of 2010 due to a limited need
for additional capacity.
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
For the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, we reported net cash flows used in financing
activities of $40.3 million and $83.1 million, respectively. The decrease in net cash flows used
from 2009 to 2010 was primarily due to a decrease in payments against our line of credit of $32.8
million and a $23.0 million increase in the proceeds received
from our line of credit offset by an
increase of $11.2 million in purchases of our outstanding common stock. While we had no outstanding
balances under the line of credit as of June 30, 2010, we intend to utilize our credit facility
from time-to-time for the remainder of 2010 to support our business activities.
Free Cash Flow
Free cash flow (see Presentation of NonGAAP Measurements for definition of free cash flow)
decreased for the six months ended June 30, 2010 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2009 as
a result of a decrease in cash flows provided by operating activities for the six months ended June
30, 2010. Free cash flow was $62.3 million and $79.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010
and 2009, respectively.
36
Obligations and Future Capital Requirements
Future maturities of our outstanding debt and contractual obligations as of June 30, 2010 are
summarized as follows (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than |
|
|
1 to 3 |
|
|
3 to 5 |
|
|
Over 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 Year |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Total |
|
Credit Facility |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Capital lease obligations |
|
|
1,645 |
|
|
|
1,192 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,837 |
|
Equipment financing arrangements |
|
|
1,651 |
|
|
|
1,116 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,895 |
|
Purchase obligations |
|
|
19,918 |
|
|
|
17,077 |
|
|
|
10,692 |
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
|
|
49,382 |
|
Operating lease commitments |
|
|
26,066 |
|
|
|
31,216 |
|
|
|
10,587 |
|
|
|
6,335 |
|
|
|
74,204 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
49,280 |
|
|
$ |
50,601 |
|
|
$ |
21,407 |
|
|
$ |
8,030 |
|
|
$ |
129,318 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contractual obligations to be paid in a foreign currency are translated at the period
end exchange rate. |
|
|
|
|
Purchase obligations primarily consist of outstanding purchase orders for goods or
services not yet received, which are not recognized as liabilities in our Consolidated
Balance Sheets until such goods and/or services are received. |
|
|
|
|
The contractual obligation table excludes our liabilities of $2.0 million related to
uncertain tax positions because we cannot reliably estimate the timing of cash payments. |
Future Capital Requirements
We expect total capital expenditures in 2010 to be approximately $25 $30 million. Of the expected
capital expenditures in 2010, approximately 60% relates to the opening and/or growth of our
delivery platform and approximately 40% relates to the maintenance capital required for existing
assets and internal technology projects. The anticipated level of 2010 capital expenditures is
primarily dependent upon new client contracts and the corresponding requirements for additional
delivery center capacity as well as enhancements to our technology infrastructure.
We may consider restructurings, dispositions, mergers, acquisitions and other similar transactions.
Such transactions could include the transfer, sale or acquisition of significant assets, businesses
or interests, including joint ventures, or the incurrence, assumption, or refinancing of
indebtedness and could be material to the consolidated financial condition and consolidated results
of our operations. In addition, as of June 30, 2010, we were authorized to purchase an additional
$13.3 million of common stock under our stock repurchase program.
As of August 4, 2010, based on an approval of an additional $25.0
million allowance by the Board of Directors, the remaining amount
authorized for repurchase was approximately $38.3 million (see Part II
Item 2 of this Form 10-Q).
The stock repurchase program does not have an expiration date.
The launch of large client contracts may result in short-term negative working capital because of
the time period between incurring the costs for training and launching the program and the
beginning of the accounts receivable collection process. As a result, periodically we may generate
negative cash flows from operating activities.
Debt Instruments and Related Covenants
We discuss debt instruments and related covenants in Note 14 of the Notes to the Consolidated
Financial Statements in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10K. As of June 30, 2010, we were in
compliance with all covenants under the Credit Facility and had approximately $220.2 million in
available borrowing capacity. We had no outstanding borrowings and $4.8 million of letters of
credit outstanding under our Credit Facility as of June 30, 2010. Based upon average outstanding
borrowings during the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, interest accrued at a rate of
approximately 1.1% and 1.2% per annum, respectively.
37
Client Concentration
Our five largest clients accounted for 43.2% and 35.8% of our consolidated revenue for the three
months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Our five largest clients accounted for 41.0% and
35.7% of our consolidated revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
The increased concentration year over year is primarily due to the IBM-Census contract, which we
expect to end in the third quarter of 2010. The relative contribution of any single client to
consolidated earnings is not always proportional to the relative revenue contribution on a
consolidated basis and varies greatly based upon specific contract terms. In addition, clients may
adjust business volumes served by us based on their business requirements. We believe the risk of
this client concentration is mitigated, in part, by the longterm contracts we have with our
largest clients. Although certain client contracts may be terminated for convenience by either
party, this risk is mitigated, in part, by the service level disruptions and transition/migration
costs that would arise for our clients.
The contracts with our five largest clients expire between 2010 and 2011. Additionally, a
particular client may have multiple contracts with different expiration dates. We have historically
renewed most of our contracts with our largest clients. However, there is no assurance that future
contracts will be renewed, or if renewed, will be on terms as favorable as the existing contracts.
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Market risk represents the risk of loss that may impact our consolidated financial position,
consolidated results of operations, or consolidated cash flows due to adverse changes in financial
and commodity market prices and rates. Market risk also includes credit and non-performance risk by
counterparties to our various financial instruments, our banking partners. We are exposed to market
risk due to changes in interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates (as measured against the
U.S. dollar); as well as credit risk associated with potential non-performance of our counterparty
banks. These exposures are directly related to our normal operating and funding activities. As
discussed below, we enter into derivative instruments to manage and reduce the impact of currency
exchange rate changes, primarily between the U.S. dollar/Canadian dollar, the U.S.
dollar/Philippine peso, the U.S. dollar/Mexican peso, and the U.S. dollar/Argentine peso. In order
to mitigate against credit and non-performance risk, it is our policy to only enter into derivative
contracts and other financial instruments with investment grade counterparty financial institutions
and, correspondingly, our derivative valuations reflect the creditworthiness of our counterparties.
As of the date of this report, we have not experienced, nor do we anticipate, any issues related to
derivative counterparty defaults.
Interest Rate Risk
The interest rate on our Credit Facility is variable based upon the Prime Rate and LIBOR and,
therefore, is affected by changes in market interest rates. As of June 30, 2010, we had no
outstanding borrowings under the Credit Facility. Based upon average outstanding borrowings during
the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, interest accrued at a rate of approximately 1.1% and
1.2% per annum, respectively. If the Prime Rate or LIBOR increased by 100 basis points during this
period, there would not have been a material impact to our consolidated financial position or
results of operations.
Foreign Currency Risk
Our subsidiaries in Argentina, Canada, Costa Rica, Malaysia, Mexico, the Philippines, the United
Kingdom, and South Africa use the local currency as their functional currency for paying labor and
other operating costs. Conversely, revenue for these foreign subsidiaries is derived principally
from client contracts that are invoiced and collected in U.S. dollars or other foreign currencies.
As a result, we may experience foreign currency gains or losses, which may positively or negatively
affect our results of operations attributed to these subsidiaries. For the six months ended June
30, 2010 and 2009, revenue associated with this foreign exchange risk was 35% and 37% of our
consolidated revenue, respectively.
38
In order to mitigate the risk of these non-functional foreign currencies from weakening against the
functional currency of the servicing subsidiary, which thereby decreases the economic benefit of
performing work in these countries, we may hedge a portion, though not 100%, of the projected
foreign currency exposure related to client programs served from these foreign countries through
our cash flow hedging program. While our hedging strategy can protect us from adverse changes in
foreign currency rates in the short term, an overall weakening of the non-functional foreign
currencies would adversely impact margins in the segments of the contracting subsidiary over the
long term.
Cash Flow Hedging Program
To reduce our exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations associated with forecasted
revenue in non-functional currencies, we purchase forward and/or option contracts to acquire the
functional currency of the foreign subsidiary at a fixed exchange rate at specific dates in the
future. We have designated and account for these derivative instruments as cash flow hedges for
forecasted revenue in non-functional currencies.
While we have implemented certain strategies to mitigate risks related to the impact of
fluctuations in currency exchange rates, we cannot ensure that we will not recognize gains or
losses from international transactions, as this is part of transacting business in an international
environment. Not every exposure is or can be hedged and, where hedges are put in place based on
expected foreign exchange exposure, they are based on forecasts for which actual results may differ
from the original estimate. Failure to successfully hedge or anticipate currency risks properly
could adversely affect our consolidated operating results.
Our cash flow hedging instruments as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 are summarized as
follows (amounts in thousands). All hedging instruments are forward contracts, except as noted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
U.S. Dollar |
|
|
% Maturing in |
|
|
Contracts |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Notional |
|
|
the Next 12 |
|
|
Maturing |
|
As of June 30, 2010 |
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Months |
|
|
Through |
|
Canadian Dollar |
|
|
13,200 |
|
|
$ |
11,273 |
|
|
|
72.7 |
% |
|
December 2011 |
Canadian Dollar Call Options |
|
|
10,200 |
|
|
|
9,135 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
December 2010 |
Philippine Peso |
|
|
6,575,000 |
|
|
|
136,623 |
1 |
|
|
74.0 |
% |
|
December 2012 |
Argentine Peso |
|
|
22,000 |
|
|
|
5,122 |
2 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
December 2010 |
Mexican Peso |
|
|
475,000 |
|
|
|
33,391 |
|
|
|
84.2 |
% |
|
December 2011 |
British Pound Sterling |
|
|
6,436 |
|
|
|
10,017 |
3 |
|
|
72.0 |
% |
|
December 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
205,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
U.S. Dollar |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Notional |
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
Canadian Dollar |
|
|
14,400 |
|
|
$ |
11,782 |
|
Canadian Dollar Call Options |
|
|
19,400 |
|
|
|
17,301 |
|
Philippine Peso |
|
|
4,615,000 |
|
|
|
96,354 |
1 |
Argentine Peso |
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
|
2,454 |
|
Mexican Peso |
|
|
491,500 |
|
|
|
34,880 |
|
South African Rand |
|
|
23,000 |
|
|
|
2,081 |
|
British Pound Sterling |
|
|
3,876 |
|
|
|
6,565 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
171,417 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
1 |
|
Includes contracts to purchase Philippine pesos in exchange for
New Zealand dollars, Australian dollars and, in 2009 only, British
pound sterling, which are translated into equivalent U.S. dollars on
June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009. |
|
2 |
|
Includes contracts to purchase Argentine pesos in exchange for
Euros, which were translated into equivalent U.S. dollars on June 30,
2010. |
|
3 |
|
Includes contracts to purchase British pound sterling in exchange
for Euros, which are translated into equivalent U.S. dollars on June
30, 2010 and December 31, 2009. |
The fair value of our cash flow hedges at June 30, 2010 was (assets/(liabilities)) (amounts in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in the |
|
|
|
June 30, 2010 |
|
|
Next 12 Months |
|
Canadian Dollar |
|
$ |
1,078 |
|
|
$ |
592 |
|
Canadian Dollar Call Options |
|
|
608 |
|
|
|
608 |
|
Philippine Peso |
|
|
1,965 |
|
|
|
2,230 |
|
Argentine Peso |
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
352 |
|
Mexican Peso |
|
|
2,439 |
|
|
|
2,172 |
|
British Pound Sterling |
|
|
(395 |
) |
|
|
(272 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
6,047 |
|
|
$ |
5,682 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our cash flow hedges are valued using models based on market observable inputs, including both
forward and spot foreign exchange rates, implied volatility, and counterparty credit risk. The year
over year change in fair value largely reflects the recent global economic conditions which
resulted in high foreign exchange volatility and an overall weakening in the U.S. dollar.
We recorded a net gain of $4.2 million and a net loss of $13.2 million for settled cash flow hedge
contracts and the related premiums for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
These gains/(losses) are reflected in Revenue in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of
Operations. If the exchange rates between our various currency pairs were to increase or decrease
by 10% from current period-end levels, we would incur a material gain or loss on the contracts.
However, any gain or loss would be mitigated by corresponding gains or losses in our underlying
exposures.
Other than the transactions hedged as discussed above and in Note 6 to the accompanying
Consolidated Financial Statements, the majority of the transactions of our U.S. and foreign
operations are denominated in their respective local currencies. However, transactions are
denominated in other currencies from time-to-time. For the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009,
approximately 23% and 24%, respectively of revenue was derived from contracts denominated in
currencies other than the U.S. dollar. Our results from operations and revenue could be adversely
affected if the U.S. dollar strengthens significantly against foreign currencies.
Fair Value of Debt and Equity Securities
We did not have any investments in debt or equity securities as of June 30, 2010.
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
This Report includes the certifications of our Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial
Officer required by Rule 13a-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act). See
Exhibits 31.1 and 31.2. This Item 4 includes information concerning the controls and control
evaluations referred to in those certifications.
40
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange
Act) are designed to reasonably assure that information required to be disclosed in reports filed
or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the
time periods specified in SEC rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and
communicated to management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial
Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures.
In connection with the preparation of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, our management, under the
supervision and with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial
Officer, conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure
controls and procedures as of June 30, 2010. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer
and Interim Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were
effective as of June 30, 2010 to provide such reasonable assurance.
Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer, believes
that any disclosure controls and procedures or internal controls and procedures, no matter how well
conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of
the control system are met. Further, the design of a control system must consider the benefits of
controls relative to their costs. Inherent limitations within a control system include the
realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of
simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some
persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by unauthorized override of the control. Over time,
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree of
compliance with associated policies or procedures. While the design of any system of controls is to
provide reasonable assurance of the effectiveness of disclosure controls, such design is also based
in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and such assumptions, while
reasonable, may not take into account all potential future conditions. Accordingly, because of the
inherent limitations in a cost effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may
occur and may not be prevented or detected.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There was no change in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended June
30, 2010 that materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
control over financial reporting.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
From time to time, we have been involved in claims and lawsuits, both as plaintiff and defendant,
which arise in the ordinary course of business. Accruals for claims or lawsuits have been provided
for to the extent that losses are deemed both probable and estimable. Although the ultimate outcome
of these claims or lawsuits cannot be ascertained, on the basis of present information and advice
received from counsel, we believe that the disposition or ultimate resolution of such claims or
lawsuits will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, cash flows or results
of operations.
41
Securities Class Action
On January 25, 2008, a class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York entitled Beasley v. TeleTech Holdings, Inc., et al. against TeleTech,
certain current directors and officers and others alleging violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and
15 of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. The complaint alleges, among other
things, false and misleading statements in the Registration Statement and Prospectus in connection
with (i) a March 2007 secondary offering of common stock and (ii) various disclosures made and
periodic reports filed by the Company between February 8, 2007 and November 8, 2007. On February
25, 2008, a second nearly identical class action complaint, entitled Brown v. TeleTech Holdings,
Inc., et al., was filed in the same court. On May 19, 2008, the actions described above were
consolidated under the caption In re: TeleTech Litigation and lead plaintiff and lead counsel were
approved. On October 21, 2009, the Company and the other named defendants executed a stipulation of
settlement with the lead plaintiffs to settle the consolidated class action lawsuit. On June 11,
2010, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued final approval
of the settlement. The Company paid $225,000 of the total settlement amount, which had been
included in Other accrued expenses in the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2009; the
remaining settlement amount was covered by the Companys insurance carriers.
Derivative Action
On July 28, 2008, a shareholder derivative action was filed in the Court of Chancery, State of
Delaware, entitled Susan M. Gregory v. Kenneth D. Tuchman, et al., against certain of TeleTechs
former and current officers and directors alleging, among other things, that the individual
defendants breached their fiduciary duties and were unjustly enriched in connection with: (i)
equity grants made in excess of plan limits; and (ii) manipulating the grant dates of stock option
grants from 1999 through 2008. TeleTech is named solely as a nominal defendant against whom no
recovery is sought. On October 26, 2009, the Company and other defendants in the derivative action
executed a stipulation of settlement with the lead plaintiffs to settle the derivative action. On
January 5, 2010, the Court of Chancery, State of Delaware issued final approval of the settlement.
The total amount paid under the approved settlement was covered by the Companys insurance
carriers.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
The adoption and implementation of new statutory and regulatory requirements for derivative
transactions could have an adverse impact on our ability to hedge risks associated with our
business.
We enter into forward and option contracts to hedge against the effect of exchange rate
fluctuations. The United States Congress has passed, and the President has signed into law, the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Financial Reform Act). The
Financial Reform Act provides for new statutory and regulatory requirements for derivative
transactions, including foreign currency hedging transactions. The Financial Reform Act requires
the Commodities Futures and Trading Commission to promulgate rules relating to the Financial Reform
Act. Until the rules relating to the Financial Reform Act are established, we do not know how these
regulations will affect us. The rules adopted by the Commodities Futures and Trading Commission may
in the future impact our flexibility to execute strategic hedges to reduce foreign exchange rate
uncertainty and thus protect cash flows. In addition, the banks and other derivatives dealers who
are our contractual counterparties will be required to comply with the Financial Reform Acts new
requirements. It is possible that the costs of such compliance will be passed on to customers such
as ourselves.
42
ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Following is the detail of the issuer purchases made during the quarter ended June 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of |
|
|
Approximate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Dollar Value of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased as |
|
|
Shares that May |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of Publicly |
|
|
Yet Be Purchased |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Average Price |
|
|
Announced |
|
|
Under the Plans or |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Paid per Share |
|
|
Plans or |
|
|
Programs (in |
|
Period |
|
Purchased |
|
|
(or Unit) |
|
|
Programs |
|
|
thousands)1 |
|
April 1, 2010 - April 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
31,082 |
|
May 1, 2010 - May 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
31,082 |
|
June 1, 2010 - June 30, 2010 |
|
|
1,366,100 |
|
|
$ |
12.98 |
|
|
|
1,366,100 |
|
|
$ |
13,346 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1,366,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,366,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
In November 2001, our Board of Directors (Board) authorized a stock repurchase program to
repurchase up to $5.0 million of our common stock with the objective of increasing stockholder
returns. The Board has since periodically authorized additional increases in the program. The
most recent Board authorization to purchase additional common stock
occurred in August 2010,
whereby the Board increased the program allowance by $25.0 million. Since inception of the
program through June 30, 2010, the Board has authorized the repurchase of shares up to a total
value of $337.3 million, of which we have purchased 26.2 million shares on the open market for
$324.0 million. As of June 30, 2010 the remaining amount authorized for repurchases under the
program was approximately $13.3 million. As of August 4, 2010,
based on the approval of an additional $25.0 million allowance, the
remaining amount authorized for repurchase was approximately $38.3
million. The stock repurchase program does not have an
expiration date. |
ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
None
ITEM 4. RESERVED
ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION
None
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS
|
|
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Exhibit Description |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Interim Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
Section 1350) |
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) |
|
|
|
32.2
|
|
Certification of Interim Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
Section 1350) |
43
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TELETECH HOLDINGS, INC.
(Registrant)
|
|
Date: August 4, 2010 |
By: |
/s/ Kenneth D. Tuchman
|
|
|
|
Kenneth D. Tuchman |
|
|
|
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: August 4, 2010 |
By: |
/s/John R. Troka, Jr.
|
|
|
|
John R. Troka, Jr. |
|
|
|
Interim Chief Financial Officer |
|
44
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Exhibit Description |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Interim Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
Section 1350) |
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) |
|
|
|
32.2
|
|
Certification of Interim Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
Section 1350) |
45