basedoc.htm
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2009
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 No. 1-12434
M/I HOMES, INC.
|
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its
charter)
|
Ohio
|
|
|
|
31-1210837
|
(State
or other jurisdiction
|
|
|
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
|
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
|
|
Identification
No.)
|
3 Easton Oval, Suite 500,
Columbus, Ohio 43219
|
(Address
of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code: (614)
418-8000
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
Name
of each exchange on
|
Title
of each class
|
|
which
registered
|
Common
Shares, par value $.01
|
|
New
York Stock Exchange
|
Depositary
Shares, each representing 1/1000th
of
a 9.75% Series A Preferred Share
|
|
New
York Stock Exchange
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.
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.
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).
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. [ X ]
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting
company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated
filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act. (Check one):
Large
accelerated filer
|
|
|
Accelerated
filer
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-accelerated
filer
|
|
|
Smaller
reporting company
|
|
(Do
not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Act).
As of
June 30, 2009, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed
second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of voting common shares held
by non-affiliates of the registrant (17,797,798 shares) was approximately
$174,240,000. The number of common shares of the registrant
outstanding on February 18, 2010 was 18,521,336.
DOCUMENT
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions
of the registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement for the 2010 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual
Report on Form 10-K.
|
|
PAGE
NUMBER
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part
I
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1. Business
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1A. Risk Factors
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
2. Properties
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
3. Legal
Proceedings
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a
Vote of Security Holders
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part
II
|
|
|
|
Item
5. Market for Registrant’s Common
Equity, Related Shareholder Matters and
|
22
|
|
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
6. Selected Financial
Data
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
Item
7. Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
|
25
|
|
of
Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About
Market Risk
|
49
|
|
|
|
|
Item
8. Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data
|
51
|
|
|
|
|
Item
9. Changes in and Disagreements
With Accountants on Accounting and
|
84
|
|
Financial
Disclosure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
9A. Controls and Procedures
|
84
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
9B. Other Information
|
84
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part
III
|
|
|
|
|
Item
10. Directors, Executive Officers and
Corporate Governance
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
11. Executive Compensation
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial
Owners and Management and
|
|
|
Related
Shareholder Matters
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
13. Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions, and Director Independence
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
14. Principal Accounting Fees and
Services
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part
IV
|
|
|
|
|
Item
15. Exhibits and Financial Statement
Schedules
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
94
|
ITEM
1. BUSINESS
Company
M/I
Homes, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company” or “we”) is one of the nation’s
leading builders of single-family homes. The Company was
incorporated, through predecessor entities, in 1973 and commenced homebuilding
activities in 1976. Since that time, the Company has sold and
delivered nearly 76,000 homes. We sell and construct single-family
homes, attached townhomes and condominiums to first-time, move-up, empty-nester
and luxury buyers. In 2009, our average sales price of homes
delivered was $231,000 compared to $274,000 in 2008. Weak conditions
in the general economy combined with a severe recession in the housing industry
have resulted in a decrease in the size of our operations during the last three
years. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we delivered 2,409
homes with revenues of $569.9 million and a net loss of $62.1
million. At December 31, 2009, we had 650 homes in backlog with a
sales value of $177 million compared to 566 homes with a sales value of $139
million at December 31, 2008.
Our homes
are sold in the following geographic markets - Columbus and Cincinnati, Ohio;
Indianapolis, Indiana; Chicago, Illinois; Tampa and Orlando, Florida; Charlotte
and Raleigh, North Carolina; and the Virginia and Maryland suburbs of
Washington, D.C. In late 2007, we exited the West Palm Beach, Florida
market. Hence, the results of operations and financial position of
this division have been reported as discontinued operation. We are
the leading homebuilder in the Columbus, Ohio market, and we believe we are one
of the top ten builders in each of our other markets, based on the number of
homes delivered in 2009, with the exception of Chicago, which we entered in
2007.
We
believe that we distinguish ourselves from competitors by offering homes in
select areas with a high level of design and construction quality within a given
price range, and by providing customers with the confidence they can only get
from superior customer service. Offering homes at a variety of price
points allows us to attract a wide range of buyers.
In
addition, we support our homebuilding operations by providing mortgage financing
services through our wholly-owned subsidiary, M/I Financial Corp. (“M/I
Financial”), and title services through subsidiaries that are either wholly- or
majority-owned by the Company.
Our
financial reporting segments consist of the following: Midwest homebuilding,
Florida homebuilding, Mid-Atlantic homebuilding, and financial
services. Our homebuilding operations comprise the most substantial
part of our business, representing 98% of consolidated revenue during
2009. Our homebuilding operations generated over 99% of their revenue
from the sale of completed homes, with the remaining amount generated from the
sale of land and lots. Our financial services operations generate
revenue from originating and selling mortgages and collecting fees for title
insurance and closing services. Financial information, including
revenue, operating income and identifiable assets for each of our reporting
segments, is included in Note 22 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Industry
Overview and Current Market Conditions
Housing
is, and for many years has been, a large and important part of the United
States’ economy. Spending on new home construction and remodeling has
averaged nearly 5% of the United States’ gross domestic product since the
1950’s. Over the same period, housing has averaged nearly 21% of
gross domestic product when rents, furnishings and other housing related costs
are included.
In any
year, the demand for new homes is closely tied to job growth, the availability
and cost of mortgage financing, the supply of new and existing homes for sale,
and consumer confidence. Consumer confidence is perhaps the most
important of these demand variables and is often the most difficult to predict
because it is a function of, among other things, consumers’ views of their
employment and income prospects, recent and anticipated future home price
trends, localized new and existing home inventory, the level of current and
near-term interest and mortgage rates, the availability of consumer credit,
valuations in stock and bond markets, and other geopolitical
factors. Moreover, because the purchase of a home represents many
buyers’ largest single financial commitment, it is often also associated with
significant emotional considerations.
The
supply of new homes within specific geographic markets consists of both new
homes built pursuant to pre-sale arrangements and speculative homes built by
home builders prior to their sale. The ratio of pre-sold to
speculative
homes
differs both by geographic market and over time within individual markets based
on a wide variety of factors, including the availability of land and lots,
access to construction financing, the availability and cost of construction
labor and materials, the inventory of existing homes for sale, and job growth
characteristics. Consumer preferences also play a
role.
In
general, high levels of employment and job growth, low mortgage interest rates,
and low new home and resale inventories contribute to a strong and growing
homebuilding market environment. Conversely, rising or continued high
levels of unemployment, higher interest rates, and larger new and existing home
inventories generally lead to weak industry conditions.
While the
long-term fundamentals for new home construction remain intact, beginning in
late 2005, accelerating through 2008 and continuing through 2009, homebuilding
conditions deteriorated against a backdrop of a world-wide macroeconomic
recession, declining consumer confidence, and significant tightening in the
availability of home mortgage credit. Throughout this period, most
housing markets across the United States suffered from an oversupply of new and
resale home inventory, reduced levels of consumer demand for new homes, high
cancellation rates, aggressive home sale price and buyer incentive competition
among homebuilders, and a growing supply of foreclosed homes typically offered
at substantially reduced prices. The housing downturn intensified in
2008 and by early 2009, homebuilding and home prices had fallen more sharply
than at any time since the 1940’s. Although the cost of purchasing a
home has dropped dramatically in many markets, staggering job losses, double
digit unemployment, rising foreclosures, and the ongoing credit crunch are
downsizing demand. As record foreclosures continue to drive down home
prices, homeowners are unable to sell their homes at a profit and many
first-time homebuyers are on hold waiting to see if prices will fall
further. Although we have recently begun to see signs that certain of
these negative market trends may be moderating at both local and national
levels, key macroeconomic indicators remain soft or mixed and there is still
uncertainty in the market. The supply of new and resale homes in the
marketplace has decreased recently, but it is still excessive for the current
level of consumer demand.
In
February 2009, the $8,000 First Time Homebuyer Tax Credit was enacted into
law. This law enables homebuyers who have not owned a home in the
past three years, subject to certain income limits, to receive a tax credit of
10% of the purchase price of a home up to a maximum of $8,000. In
November 2009, this tax credit was extended by Congress to June 2010 and the new
law increased the annual income limits for qualification. In
addition, the new law also added a $6,500 tax credit for qualified existing
homeowners who elect to purchase a new home. Certain states also
enacted laws which enabled certain homebuyers to receive additional state tax
credits. Although it is not possible to quantify the precise impact,
availability of these tax credits appears to have incentivized certain
homebuyers to purchase homes during the second half of 2009.
Having
experienced the worst housing crises in more than 50 years, we, like many other
homebuilders, have suffered a material reduction in revenues and margins and
have incurred significant net losses in 2007 through 2009. These net
losses were driven primarily by asset impairment and lot option abandonment
charges incurred in 2007, 2008 and 2009. For information and analyses
of recent trends in our operations and financial condition, see “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in
Item 7 of this Form 10-K, and for financial information about our
revenues, earnings, assets, liabilities, shareholders’ equity and cash flows,
please see the accompanying consolidated financial statements and notes thereto
in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.
Business
Strategy
Over the
past three years, we have responded to this challenging environment by employing
a disciplined, defensive operating strategy designed to strengthen our balance
sheet, improve liquidity and generate cash flow, improve our cost structure,
reduce our overhead, and improve certain operating processes and
procedures. While conditions have
improved slightly, we believe that there may be further volatility in the
housing market in 2010 and that the homebuilding industry is likely to
experience a prolonged and uneven
transition before a sustainable recovery takes place. Based on this view,
we intend to continue to execute on our predominantly defensive operating
strategy.
This strategy is focused on the following
initiatives:
●
|
maintaining cash and preserving
liquidity;
|
●
|
emphasizing customer service, product design, and
premier locations;
|
●
|
improving affordability through design changes and
other cost reduction efforts;
|
●
|
strategically and cautiously investing in new
communities and/or markets; and
|
●
|
obtaining meaningful presence in all of our
markets.
|
Throughout
our markets, we market and sell our homes exclusively under the M/I Homes trade
name, except in Columbus, where we also market a collection of homes under the
Showcase brand. Company-employed sales personnel conduct home sales
from on-site offices within our furnished model homes. Each sales
consultant is trained and prepared to meet the buyer’s expectations and build
their confidence by fully explaining the features and benefits of our homes,
helping each buyer determine which home best suits their needs, explaining
the construction process, and assisting the buyer in choosing the best
financing. Significant attention is given to the ongoing training of
all sales personnel to assure the highest level of professionalism and product
knowledge. As of December 31, 2009, we employed 93 sales consultants
in 101 communities.
We
advertise using the internet, newspapers, magazines, direct mail, billboards,
radio and television. The particular marketing mediums used differ
from market to market based on area demographics and other competitive
factors. In recent years we have also significantly increased our
advertising on the internet through expansion of our website at mihomes.com and
through certain third party websites. Our messaging across all of
these mediums, promotional or otherwise, is unified, highly synergistic, and
designed to build strong equity in the M/I Homes brand. In addition,
we encourage independent broker participation in the sales process and, from
time to time, utilize promotions and incentives to attract interest from these
brokers. We believe our commitment to quality design and
construction, along with our reputation for superior service, has resulted in a
strong referral base and numerous repeat buyers.
To
further enhance the selling process, we operate design centers in most of our
markets. These design centers are staffed with interior design
specialists who assist buyers in selecting interior and exterior colors,
standard options and upgrades. From time to time, we also aid the
selling process by offering below-market financing options to our
customers. M/I Financial originates loans for the majority of the
purchasers of our homes. The loans are then sold, along with the
servicing rights, to outside mortgage lenders. Title-related services
are provided to purchasers of our homes in the majority of our markets through
affiliated entities.
We
generally begin construction of a home when we have obtained a sales contract
and preliminary oral advice from the buyer’s lender that financing should be
approved. In certain markets, contracts may be accepted contingent
upon the sale of an existing home, and construction may be authorized through a
certain phase prior to satisfaction of that contingency. In addition,
speculative, or “spec,” homes (i.e., homes started in the absence of an executed
contract) are built to facilitate delivery of homes on an immediate-need basis
and to provide presentation of new products. We have increased our
speculative home production in order to meet the needs of our increasing base of
first-time homebuyers. Speculative homes can meet the needs of buyers
who need to be closed in 60 days or less, while also satisfying their needs to
be able to fully visualize the home.
Design
and Construction
We devote
significant resources to the research, design and development of our homes in
order to meet the demands of our buyers as well as the changing markets.
Across all of our divisions, we currently offer approximately 400 different
floor plans designed to reflect current lifestyles and design trends. We
continually review all of our floor plan offerings for design and construction
efficiencies and add or delete plans according to our customer’s needs. We
spent $1.8 million, $1.7 million and $2.5 million in the years ended December
31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, for research and development of our
homes.
In spring
2009, we unveiled the “eco series,” a line of value-oriented homes designed for
attractive pricing and to offer plan flexibility to our buyers. We
have introduced eco throughout the Midwest regions, the Carolinas and developed
a unique Eco line specifically for our Florida Divisions.
The
construction of our homes typically takes approximately four to six months from
the start of construction to completion of the home, depending on the size and
complexity of the particular home being built. In 2009, we reduced our
contract-to-close build time, excluding speculative homes, by 13%, from 223 days
in 2008 to 195 days in 2009.
The
construction of each home is supervised by a Personal Construction Supervisor
who reports to a Production Manager, both of whom are employees of the
Company. Buyers are introduced to their Personal Construction Supervisor
prior to commencement of home construction at a pre-construction “buyer/builder
conference.” The purpose of this conference is to review the home plan and
all relevant construction details and to explain the construction process and
schedule. We encourage our buyers to actively monitor and observe the
construction of their home and see the quality being built into their
home. All of this is part of our exclusive “Confidence
Builder
Program”
which, consistent with our business philosophy, is designed to “put the buyer
first” and enhance the total home buying experience.
We also
focus significant attention on strategic alignments with national product
suppliers and manufacturers, through which, all of our divisions benefit from
product visibility and a streamlined supply chain. These
relationships aid us in offering high quality products to our customers while
continuing to reduce our brick and mortar costs.
Homes
generally are constructed according to standardized designs and meet applicable
Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”) and United States Veterans Administration
(“VA”) requirements and all local building codes. To allow maximum design
flexibility, we limit the use of pre-assembled building components. The
efficiency of the building process is enhanced through the use of standardized
materials available from a variety of sources. We utilize independent
subcontractors for the installation of site improvements and the construction of
our homes. Our on-site construction supervisors manage the scheduling and
construction process. Subcontractor work is performed pursuant to written
agreements. The agreements are generally short-term, with terms from six
to twelve months, and specify a fixed price for labor and materials. The
agreements are structured to provide price protection for a majority of the
higher-cost phases of construction for homes in our backlog. We did not
experience any significant issues with availability of building materials or
skilled labor during 2009. As of December 31, 2009, we had a total of 650
homes, with $176.7 million aggregate sales value, in backlog in various stages
of completion, including homes that are under contract but for which
construction has not yet begun. As of December 31, 2008, we had a total of
566 homes, with $139.5 million aggregate sales value, in backlog. Homes
included in year-end backlog are typically included in homes delivered in the
subsequent year.
Warranty
We
provide a variety of warranties in connection with our homes and have a program
to perform several inspections on each home that we sell. Immediately
prior to closing and again approximately three months after a home is delivered,
we inspect each home with the buyer. At the homeowner’s request, we
will also provide a one-year drywall inspection. The Company offers a
limited warranty program (“Home Builder’s Limited Warranty”) in conjunction with
its thirty-year transferable structural limited warranty on homes closed in or
after 2007. The Home Builder’s Limited Warranty covers construction
defects for a statutory period based on geographic market and state law
(currently ranging from five to ten years for the states in which the Company
operates) and includes a mandatory arbitration clause. Prior to this
warranty program, the Company provided up to a two-year limited warranty on
materials and workmanship and a twenty-year (for homes closed between 1989 and
1998) and a thirty-year (for homes closed during or after 1998) limited warranty
against major structural defects. To increase the value of the
thirty-year warranty, the warranty is transferable in the event of the sale of
the home. The Home Builder’s Limited Warranty provides coverage for
construction defects and certain resultant damage caused by any construction
defects. The warranty period varies by state in accordance with the
statute of limitations for construction defects for each state. We
also pass along to our homebuyers all warranties provided by the manufacturers
or suppliers of components installed in each home. Our warranty
expense was approximately 0.9%, 1.1% and 0.8% of total housing revenue for the
years ended December 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Markets
Our
operations are organized into nine homebuilding divisions within three regions
to maximize operating efficiencies and use of local management. Our
current homebuilding operating structure is as follows:
|
|
Year
|
|
|
Operations
|
Region
|
Division
|
Commenced
|
Midwest
|
Columbus,
Ohio
|
1976
|
Midwest
|
Cincinnati,
Ohio
|
1988
|
Midwest
|
Indianapolis,
Indiana
|
1988
|
Midwest
|
Chicago,
Illinois
|
2007
|
Florida
|
Tampa,
Florida
|
1981
|
Florida
|
Orlando,
Florida
|
1984
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
Charlotte,
North Carolina
|
1985
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
Raleigh,
North Carolina
|
1986
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
Washington,
D.C.
|
1991
|
Columbus
is the capital of Ohio, with federal, state and local governments providing
significant employment. Private industries including education,
healthcare, and professional services have notably contributed to this market as
well. The Columbus recession, which was weaker than recessions
experienced by the rest of the state, seems to be leveling out. The
job market in Columbus has seen mixed reactions to the
recession. Healthcare and education have seen an increase in jobs
while retail and construction jobs have still not rebounded. Columbus
boasts industrial diversity and below-average costs of doing business and
living, and it is forecasted that financial services will resume their
traditional role of being growth drivers over the next few
years. Columbus is our home market, where we have had operations
since 1976.
Cincinnati
is home to business services headquarters, large healthcare service networks,
and several Fortune 500 companies. The Cincinnati recession appears
to be moderating, with additions to the workforce in healthcare and
education. These additions are partially offset by continued job
losses in manufacturing and construction. Cincinnati is working to
attract significant conventions to the area, which are expected to help boost
the local leisure and hospitality economy.
Indianapolis
is a market noted for its diverse industry, and we believe it remains one of the
most stable markets in the Midwest. Homes in Indianapolis are highly
affordable and are maintaining their value. Indianapolis is showing
signs of recovering from the recession slightly faster than the nation as a
whole as the unemployment rate has begun to decline before the national
average. Indianapolis is an important transportation and distribution
hub, and these industries are expected to begin recovering sooner than most
other industries.
Chicago
is the business center of the Midwest with strengths of having popular and
sought-after convention venues, high per capita income and a well-educated
workforce. The recession in Chicago has tempered, but job losses
continue.
Tampa has
a high concentration of commoditized services such as call centers and
back-office operations, which have been among the first to recover after
economic down-turns. The local economy is improving, but at an uneven
and modest pace. Low taxes and relatively inexpensive office rental
rates should make Tampa an attractive location for service investment, which
could encourage migration to the area, and cause current residents to remain in
the Tampa metropolitan area.
Orlando’s
tourism industry is a significant driver of the local economy, and is expected
to continue to expand. All industries except wholesale trade and
healthcare are progressing from where they were at the beginning of the year,
and for the first time since the recession began, home prices have
stabilized. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“ARRA”)
stimulus should also help revitalize the Orlando economy as there are numerous
road and bridge projects (in the Orlando area that will be funded by ARRA) which
should help create jobs in the Orlando area.
Charlotte
possesses a highly educated workforce, a mix of industries, and comparatively
low living and business costs. The local economy has shown positive
signs of emerging from the recession and has recently reported job gains, with
the unemployment rate stabilizing. With the nation’s largest
healthcare alliance relocating its headquarters to Charlotte, and an increase in
home sales in recent months, Charlotte’s recession is forecasted to end in the
near term.
Raleigh
is the capital of North Carolina, with state government, three major
universities within the greater metro area, and pharmaceutical and biotech
industries contributing to its employment base. The Raleigh economy
has begun to show small but positive signs of recovery. The educated
workforce and strong technology and life sciences sectors are expected to
continue to provide growth opportunities in the Raleigh market.
Washington,
D.C.’s major sources of employment come from the construction, technology, and
government sectors. Washington, D.C.’s recession is drawing to a
close and net hiring has once again resumed in the suburbs. Recently,
a number of large companies have relocated their headquarters to the Washington,
D.C. area, which has kept business and professional service job losses less
severe compared to other areas. The prognosis for Washington, D.C.’s
economy is strong as the residential housing market is beginning to stabilize
and governmental stimulus funds are expected to be used for infrastructure
development in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, which should create
employment opportunities. Our operations are located throughout the
Maryland and Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C.
Product
Lines
On a
regional basis, we offer homes ranging in base sales price from approximately
$90,000 to $1,300,000, and ranging in square footage from approximately 1,200 to
4,400 square feet. In addition to single-family detached
homes, we
also offer attached townhomes in most of our markets as well as condominiums in
our Columbus, Orlando, and Washington, D.C. markets. By offering a
wide range of homes, we are able to attract first-time, move-up, empty-nester
and luxury homebuyers. Our recently introduced eco series line was
designed to appeal to first-time homebuyers because of the emphasis on
affordability and energy cost savings and conservation. It is our
goal to sell more than one home to our buyers, and we have frequently been
successful in this pursuit.
In each
of our home lines, upgrades and options are available to the homebuyer for an
additional charge. Major options include fireplaces, additional
bathrooms and higher-quality flooring, cabinets and appliances. The
options are typically more numerous and significant on our more expensive homes,
and typically carry a higher margin than our standard selections.
Land
Acquisition and Development
In 2009,
our percent of land internally developed decreased to 74% from 88% in
2008. In the future, we plan to source more of our land through
developed lot option contracts when feasible. We continue to
constantly evaluate our alternatives to satisfy our need for lots in the most
cost effective manner. We seek to limit our investment in land and
lots to the amount reasonably expected to be sold in the next two to three
years, with the ideal being two years or slightly less than two
years.
To limit
the risk involved in land ownership, we acquire land primarily through the use
of contingent purchase agreements. These agreements require the
approval of our corporate land committee and frequently condition our obligation
to purchase land upon approval of zoning, utilities, soil and subsurface
conditions, environmental and wetland conditions, market analysis, development
costs, title matters and other property-related criteria. Only after
this thorough evaluation, along with extensive market research, has been
completed do we make a commitment to purchase undeveloped land.
On a
limited basis, we periodically enter into limited liability company arrangements
(“Unconsolidated LLCs”) with other entities to develop land. At
December 31, 2009, we had interests varying from 33% to 50% in each of our seven
Unconsolidated LLCs. Two of the Unconsolidated LLCs are located in
Tampa, Florida, and the remaining Unconsolidated LLCs are located in Columbus,
Ohio. One of the Unconsolidated LLCs has obtained financing from a
third party lender. The Company’s maximum exposure related to its
investment in these entities as of December 31, 2009 is the amount invested of
$10.3 million plus letters of credit totaling $0.3 million. Further
details relating to our Unconsolidated LLCs are included in Note 9 to our
Consolidated Financial Statements.
During
the development of lots, we are required by some municipalities and other
governmental authorities to provide completion bonds or letters of credit for
sewer, streets and other improvements. At December 31, 2009,
$25.4 million of
completion bonds and $19.9 million of letters of credit were outstanding for
these purposes. The development agreements under which we are
required to provide completion bonds or letters of credit are generally not
subject to a required completion date and only require that the improvements are
in place in phases as homes are built and sold. In locations where
development has progressed, the amount of development work remaining to be
completed is typically less than the remaining amount of bonds or letters of
credit due to timing delays in obtaining release of the bonds or letters of
credit.
We seek
to balance the economic risk of owning lots and land with the necessity of
having lots available for our homes. At December 31, 2009, we had
2,410 developed lots and 664 lots under development in inventory. We
also owned raw land expected to be developed into approximately 4,121 lots,
which includes our interest in raw land held by Unconsolidated LLCs expected to
be developed into 758 lots.
Our
ability to continue development activities over the long-term will depend upon,
among other things, a suitable economic environment and our continued ability to
locate and enter into options or agreements to purchase land, obtain
governmental approvals for suitable parcels of land, and consummate the
acquisition and complete the development of such land.
At
December 31, 2009, we had purchase agreements to acquire 1,907 developed lots
and raw land to be developed into approximately 212 lots for a total of 2,119
lots, with an aggregate current purchase price of approximately $81.9
million. Purchase of these properties is generally contingent upon
satisfaction of certain requirements by us and the sellers, such as zoning
approval and availability of building permits. Our purchase contracts
do not generally contain specific performance obligations, and therefore, we
believe that our maximum exposure as of December 31, 2009 related to these
agreements is equal to the amount of our outstanding deposits, which totaled
$2.6 million, including cash deposits of $1.3 million, prepaid acquisition costs
of $0.4 million, and letters of credit of $0.9 million. Further
details relating to our land option agreements are included in Note 15 to our
Consolidated Financial Statements.
The
following table sets forth our land position in lots (including lots held in
Unconsolidated LLCs) at December 31, 2009:
|
Lots
Owned
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finished
|
|
Lots
Under
|
|
Undeveloped
|
|
Total
Lots
|
|
Lots
Under
|
|
|
Region
|
Lots
|
|
Development
|
|
Lots
|
|
Owned
|
|
Contract
|
|
Total
|
Midwest
|
1,045
|
|
254
|
|
2,986
|
|
4,285
|
|
1,104
|
|
5,389
|
Florida
|
905
|
|
102
|
|
568
|
|
1,575
|
|
190
|
|
1,765
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
460
|
|
308
|
|
567
|
|
1,335
|
|
825
|
|
2,160
|
Total
|
2,410
|
|
664
|
|
4,121
|
|
7,195
|
|
2,119
|
|
9,314
|
Financial
Services
We
provide mortgage financing services to purchasers of our homes through M/I
Financial. M/I Financial provides financing services in all of our
housing markets. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we captured
87% of the available mortgage origination business from purchasers of our homes,
originating approximately $421 million of mortgage loans. The
mortgage loans originated by M/I Financial are sold to a third party generally
within two to three weeks of originating the loan.
M/I
Financial has been approved by the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development, the VA and the United States Department of Agriculture to originate
mortgages that are insured and/or guaranteed by these entities. In
addition, M/I Financial has been approved by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation (“Freddie Mac”) and by the Federal National Mortgage Association
(“Fannie Mae”) as a seller and servicer of mortgages.
We also
provide title services to purchasers of our homes through our wholly-owned
subsidiaries, TransOhio Residential Title Agency Ltd. and M/I Title Agency Ltd,
and our majority-owned subsidiary, Washington/Metro Residential Title Agency,
LLC. Through these entities, we serve as a title insurance agent by
providing title insurance policies, examination and closing services to
purchasers of our homes in all of our housing markets except Raleigh, Charlotte
and Chicago. We assume no underwriting risk associated with the title
policies.
Corporate
Operations
Our
corporate operations and home office are located in Columbus, Ohio, where we
perform the following functions at a centralized level:
·
|
Establish
strategy, goals and operating policies;
|
·
|
Ensure
brand integrity and consistency across all local and regional
communications;
|
·
|
Monitor
and manage the performance of our operations;
|
·
|
Allocate
capital resources;
|
·
|
Provide
financing and perform all cash management functions for the Company, as
well as maintain our relationship with lenders;
|
·
|
Maintain
centralized information and communication systems; and
|
·
|
Maintain
centralized financial reporting and internal audit
functions.
|
Competition
In each
of our markets, we compete with numerous national, regional, and local
homebuilders, some of which have greater financial, marketing, land acquisition,
and sales resources. Builders of new homes compete not only for
homebuyers, but also for desirable properties, financing, raw materials, and
skilled subcontractors. In addition, we face competition from
foreclosures and the existing home resale market, which has become over
saturated with homes due to current market conditions and a higher foreclosure
rate. We compete primarily on the basis of price, location, design,
quality, service, and reputation; however, we believe our financial stability,
relative to others in our industry, has become an increasingly favorable
competitive factor. When our industry recovers, we believe we will
see reduced competition from the small and mid-sized private builders in the
luxury market. Their access to capital already appears to be severely
constrained. We expect there will be fewer and more selective lenders serving
our industry at that time. We believe that those lenders likely will
gravitate to the home building companies that offer them the greatest security,
the strongest balance sheets, and the broadest array of potential business
opportunities.
Our
financial services operations compete with other mortgage lenders, including
national, regional, and local mortgage bankers and brokers, banks, savings and
loan associations, and other financial institutions, in the origination
and sale of mortgage loans. Principal competitive factors include interest rates
and other features of mortgage loan products available to the
consumer.
Regulation
and Environmental Matters
The
homebuilding industry, including the Company, is subject to various local, state
and federal (including FHA and VA) statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations
concerning zoning, building, design, construction, sales, and similar
matters. These regulations affect construction activities, including
types of construction materials that may be used, certain aspects of building
design, sales activities, and dealings with consumers. We are
required to obtain licenses, permits and approvals from various governmental
authorities for development activities. In many areas, we are subject
to local regulations which impose restrictive zoning and density requirements in
order to limit the number of homes within the boundaries of a particular
locality. We strive to reduce the risks of restrictive zoning and
density requirements by using contingent land purchase agreements, which state
that land must meet various requirements, including zoning, prior to our
purchase.
Development
may be subject to periodic delays or precluded entirely due to building
moratoriums. Generally, these moratoriums relate to insufficient
water or sewage facilities or inadequate road capacity within specific market
areas or communities. The moratoriums we have experienced have not
been of long duration and have not had a material effect on our
business.
Each of
the states in which we operate has a wide variety of environmental protection
laws. These laws generally regulate developments which are of
substantial size and which are in or near certain specified geographic
areas. Furthermore, these laws impose requirements for development
approvals which are more stringent than those that land developers would have to
meet outside of these geographic areas.
Additional
requirements may be imposed on homebuilders and developers in the future, which
could have a significant impact on us and the industry. Although we
cannot predict the effect of any such additional requirements, such requirements
could result in time-consuming and expensive compliance programs. In
addition, the continued effectiveness of current licenses, permits or
development approvals is dependent upon many factors, some of which may be
beyond our control.
Seasonality
Our
homebuilding operations experience significant seasonality and
quarter-to-quarter variability in homebuilding activity levels. In
general, homes delivered increase substantially in the second half of the
year. We believe that this seasonality reflects the tendency of
homebuyers to shop for a new home in the spring with the goal of closing in the
fall or winter, as well as the scheduling of construction to accommodate
seasonal weather conditions. Our financial services operations also
experience seasonality because loan originations correspond with the delivery of
homes in our homebuilding operations.
Employees
At
December 31, 2009, we employed 535 people (including part-time employees), of
which 416 were employed in homebuilding operations, 61 were employed in
financial services and 58 were employed in management and administrative
services. No employees are represented by a collective bargaining
agreement.
Available
Information
We file
annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other information
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). These
filings are available to the public over the internet on the SEC’s website at
www.sec.gov. Our
periodic reports and other information filed with the SEC may be inspected
without charge and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street,
NE, Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for
further information on the operation of the Public Reference Room.
Our
principal internet address is mihomes.com. We
make available, free of charge, on or through our website, our annual reports on
Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and current reports on Form 8-K and
amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as soon as
reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or
furnish it to, the SEC. Our website also includes printable versions
of our Corporate Governance guidelines, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics,
and Charters for each of our Audit, Compensation, and Nominating and Corporate
Governance Committees. The contents of our website are not part of
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Factors
That May Affect Our Future Results (Cautionary Statements Under the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995):
Certain information
included in this report or in other materials we have filed or will file with
the SEC (as well as information included in oral statements or other written
statements made or to be made by us) contains or may contain forward-looking
statements, including, but not limited to, statements regarding our
future financial performance and financial condition. Words such as
“expects,” “anticipates,” “envisions,” “targets,” “goals,” “projects,”
“intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,” “estimates,” variations of such words
and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking
statements. These statements involve a number of risks and
uncertainties. Any forward-looking statements that we make herein and
in future reports and statements are not guarantees of future performance, and
actual results may differ materially from those in such forward-looking
statements as a result of various factors relating to the economic environment,
interest rates, availability of resources, competition, market concentration,
land development activities and various governmental rules and regulations, as
more fully discussed in this Risk Factors section. Any
forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date made. Except as
required by applicable law or the rules and regulations of the SEC, we undertake
no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements whether as a
result of new information, future events or otherwise. However, any
further disclosures made on related subjects in our subsequent reports on Forms
10-K, 10-Q and 8-K should be consulted. This discussion is provided
as permitted by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and all of
our forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the
cautionary statements contained or referenced in this section.
Discussions
of our business and operations included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K
should be read in conjunction with the risk factors set forth
below. The following cautionary discussion of risks, uncertainties
and assumptions relevant to our business includes factors we believe could cause
our actual results to differ materially from expected and historical
results. Other factors beyond those listed below, including factors
unknown to us and factors known to us which we have not currently determined to
be material, could also adversely affect us.
Homebuilding Market and
Economic Risks
The
homebuilding industry is experiencing a prolonged and severe downturn that may
continue for an indefinite period and adversely affect our business and results
of operations compared to prior periods.
Beginning
in, and continuing since, 2006, many of our markets and the U.S. homebuilding
industry as a whole have experienced a significant and sustained decrease in
demand for new homes and an oversupply of new and existing homes available for
sale. In many markets, a rapid increase in new and existing home
prices in the years leading up to and including 2006 reduced housing
affordability relative to consumer incomes and tempered buyer
demand. Also since the downturn began, investors and speculators
reduced their purchasing activity and instead accelerated their efforts to sell
residential property they had previously acquired. These trends,
which have been more pronounced in markets that had experienced the greatest
levels of price appreciation, have resulted in fewer overall home sales, greater
cancellations of home purchase agreements by buyers, higher inventories of
unsold homes and the increased use by homebuilders, speculators, investors and
others of discounts, incentives, price concessions and other marketing efforts
to close home sales in the years following 2006. These negative
supply and demand trends have been exacerbated since 2008 by increasing sales of
lender-owned homes, a severe downturn in general economic conditions, rising
unemployment, turmoil in credit and consumer lending markets and tighter lending
standards.
Reflecting
the impact of this difficult environment, we, like many other homebuilders, have
experienced to varying degrees since the housing market downturn began, declines
in net orders, decreases in the average selling price of new homes we have sold
and delivered and reduced margins relative to years prior to the housing market
downturn, and we have generated operating losses. Although we saw
some improvement in net orders and margins in 2009, we can provide no assurances
that the homebuilding market or our business will improve substantially in the
near future. If economic conditions and employment remain weak and
mortgage foreclosures, delinquencies and short sales continue rising in 2010,
there would likely be a corresponding adverse effect on our business and our
results of operations, including, but not limited to, our number of homes
delivered and the amount of revenues we generate.
Additional
adverse changes in economic conditions in markets where we conduct our
operations and where prospective purchasers of our homes live could further
reduce the demand for homes and, as a result, could adversely affect our results
of operations and continue to adversely affect our financial
condition.
Adverse
changes in economic conditions in markets where we conduct our operations and
where prospective purchasers of our homes live have had and may continue to have
a
negative
impact on our business. Adverse changes in employment levels, job growth,
consumer confidence, interest rates and population growth, or an oversupply of
homes for sale may further reduce demand, depress prices for our homes and cause
home buyers to cancel their agreements to purchase our homes. This, in turn,
could adversely affect our results of operations and continue to adversely
affect our financial condition.
Demand
for new homes is sensitive to economic conditions over which we have no control,
such as the availability of mortgage financing.
Demand
for homes is sensitive to changes in economic conditions such as the level of
employment, consumer confidence, consumer income, the availability of financing,
and interest rate levels. The mortgage lending industry has
experienced and may continue to experience significant challenges. As
a result of increased default rates, particularly (but not entirely) with regard
to sub-prime and other non-conforming loans, many lenders have reduced their
willingness to make, and tightened their credit requirements with regard to,
residential mortgage loans. Fewer loan products and stricter loan
qualification standards have made it more difficult for some borrowers to
finance the purchase of our homes. Although our financial services
subsidiary offers mortgage loans to potential buyers of most of the homes we
build, we may no longer be able to offer financing terms that are attractive to
our potential buyers. Unavailability of mortgage financing at
acceptable rates reduces demand for the homes we build, including, in some
instances, causing potential buyers to cancel contracts they have
signed.
Increasing
interest rates could cause defaults for homebuyers who financed homes using
non-traditional financing products, which could increase the number of homes
available for resale.
During
the period of high demand in the homebuilding industry prior to 2006, many
homebuyers financed their purchases using non-traditional adjustable rate or
interest only mortgages or other mortgages, including sub-prime mortgages, that
involved, at least during initial years, monthly payments that were
significantly lower than those required by conventional fixed rate
mortgages. As a result, new homes became more
affordable. However, as monthly payments for these homes increase,
either as a result of increasing adjustable interest rates or as a result of
principal payments coming due, some of these homebuyers could default on their
payments and have their homes foreclosed, which would increase the inventory of
homes available for resale. Foreclosure sales and other distress
sales may result in further declines in market prices for homes. In
an environment of declining prices, many homebuyers may delay purchases of homes
in anticipation of lower prices in the future. In addition, as
lenders perceive deterioration in credit quality among homebuyers, lenders have
been eliminating some of the non-traditional and sub-prime financing products
previously available and increasing the qualifications needed for mortgages or
adjusting their terms to address increased credit risk. In addition, tighter
lending standards for mortgage products and volatility in the sub-prime and
alternative mortgage markets may have a negative impact on our business by
making it more difficult for certain of our homebuyers to obtain financing or
resell their existing homes. In general, to the extent mortgage rates
increase or lenders make it more difficult for prospective buyers to finance
home purchases, it becomes more difficult or costly for customers to purchase
our homes, which has an adverse affect on our sales volume.
Our
land investment exposes us to significant risks, including potential impairment
write-downs, that could negatively impact our profits if the market value of our
inventory declines.
We must
anticipate demand for new homes several years prior to those homes being sold to
homeowners. There are significant risks inherent in controlling or
purchasing land, especially as the demand for new homes
decreases. There is often a significant lag time between when we
acquire land for development and when we sell homes in neighborhoods we have
planned, developed and constructed. The value of undeveloped land,
building lots and housing inventories can fluctuate significantly as a result of
changing market conditions. In addition, inventory carrying costs can
be significant, and fluctuations in value can result in reduced
profits. Economic conditions could result in the necessity to sell
homes or land at a loss, or hold land in inventory longer than planned, which
could significantly impact our financial condition, results of operations, cash
flows, and stock performance. As a result of softened market
conditions in all of our markets, since 2006, we have recorded a loss of $487.7
million for impairment of inventory and investments in Unconsolidated LLCs
(including $63.5 million related to discontinued operation), and have
written-off $17.6 million relating to abandoned land transactions (including
$1.5 million related to discontinued operation). It is possible that
the estimated cash flows from these inventory positions may change and could
result in a future need to record additional valuation
adjustments. Additionally, if conditions in the homebuilding industry
worsen in the future, we may be required to evaluate additional inventory for
potential
impairment,
which may result in additional valuation adjustments, which could be significant
and could negatively impact our financial results and condition. We
cannot make any assurances that the measures we employ to manage inventory risks
and costs will be successful.
If
we are unable to successfully compete in the highly competitive homebuilding
industry, our financial results and growth may suffer.
The
homebuilding industry is highly competitive. We compete for sales in
each of our markets with national, regional, and local developers and
homebuilders, existing home resales and, to a lesser extent, condominiums and
available rental housing. Some of our competitors have significantly
greater financial resources or lower costs than we do. Competition
among both small and large residential homebuilders is based on a number of
interrelated factors, including location, reputation, amenities, design,
quality, and price. Competition is expected to continue and become
more intense, and there may be new entrants in the markets in which we currently
operate and in markets we may enter in the future. If we are unable
to successfully compete, our financial results and growth could
suffer.
If
economic conditions worsen or the current conditions continue for an extended
period of time, those economic conditions could have continued negative
consequences on our operations, financial position, and cash flows.
The
homebuilding industry is cyclical and is significantly affected by changes in
industry conditions, as well as by general and local economic conditions, such
as:
●
|
employment
levels;
|
●
|
availability
of financing for homebuyers;
|
●
|
interest
rates;
|
●
|
consumer
confidence;
|
●
|
levels
of new and existing homes for sale;
|
●
|
demographic
trends; and
|
●
|
housing
demand.
|
Continued
weakness in the homebuilding industry could have an adverse effect on
us. It could require that we write down more assets, dispose of
assets, reduce operations, restructure our debt and/or raise new equity to
pursue our business plan, any of which could have a detrimental effect on our
current shareholders.
Inflation
can adversely affect us, particularly in a period of declining home sale
prices.
Inflation
can have a long-term impact on us because, should the costs of land, materials
and labor increase, it would require us to attempt to increase the sale prices
of homes in order to maintain satisfactory margins. Although an excess of supply
over demand for new homes, such as the one we are currently experiencing,
requires that we reduce prices, rather than increase them, it does not
necessarily result in reductions, or prevent increases, in the costs of
materials, labor and land development costs. Under those circumstances, the
effect of cost increases is to reduce the margins on the homes we
sell. Reduced margins in such cases make it more difficult for us to
recover the full cost of previously purchased land.
Our
limited geographic diversification could adversely affect us if the homebuilding
industry in our markets declines.
We have
operations in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and
Florida. Our limited geographic diversification could adversely
impact us if the homebuilding business in our current markets should continue to
decline, since there may not be a balancing opportunity in a stronger market in
other geographic regions.
Operational
Risks
The
terms of our indebtedness may restrict our ability to operate.
The
Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated October 6, 2006 (as amended,
the “Credit Facility”) and the indenture governing our $200 million aggregate
principal amount of 6.875% senior notes due 2012 (our “Senior Notes”) impose
restrictions on our operations and activities. The most significant
restrictions under the indenture governing our Senior Notes relate to debt
incurrence, sales of assets, cash distributions, and investments by us and
certain of our subsidiaries. In addition, our Credit Facility
requires compliance with certain financial covenants, including a minimum
consolidated tangible net worth requirement and a maximum permitted leverage
ratio.
Currently,
we believe the most restrictive covenant of the Credit Facility is minimum
tangible net worth. Failure to comply with this covenant or any of the
other restrictions or covenants of our Credit Facility could result in a default
under the Credit Facility, which, in turn, could result in a default
under the indenture governing our Senior Notes as well as
M/I Financial’s $30.0 million Secured Credit Agreement (the “MIF Credit
Agreement”). In addition, if a default occurs, the affected lenders
could elect to declare the indebtedness, together with accrued interest and
other fees, to be immediately due and payable. Availability under the
Credit Facility is also subject to satisfaction of a secured borrowing
base. We are permitted to grow the borrowing base by adding
additional cash and/or inventory as collateral securing the Credit
Facility. We could also be precluded from incurring additional
borrowings under our Credit Facility, which could impair our ability to maintain
sufficient working capital. In such a situation, there can be no
assurance that we would be able to obtain alternative financing. Any
of the foregoing results could have a material adverse effect on our
results of operations, financial condition and the ability to operate our
business.
The
indenture governing our Senior Notes contains restrictive covenants that limit,
among other things, the ability of the Company to pay dividends on common and
preferred shares, as well as the ability to repurchase any shares. If
our “restricted payments basket,” as defined in the indenture governing our
Senior Notes, is less than zero, we are restricted from making certain payments,
including dividends, as well as repurchasing any shares. We are
currently restricted from paying dividends on our common shares and our 9.75%
Series A Preferred Shares, as well as repurchasing any shares. We
cannot resume making such payments until such time as the basket becomes
positive or the Senior Notes are repaid, and our Board authorizes such
payments.
If we are not
able to obtain suitable financing, our business may be negatively
impacted.
The
homebuilding industry is capital intensive because of the length of time from
when land or lots are acquired to when the related homes are constructed on
those lots and delivered to homebuyers. Our business and earnings
depend on our ability to obtain financing to support our homebuilding operations
and to provide the resources to carry inventory. We may be required
to seek additional capital, whether from sales of equity or debt, or additional
bank borrowings, to support our business. Our ability to secure the
needed capital at terms that are acceptable to us may be impacted by factors
beyond our control. In addition, our Credit Facility expires in October
2010. We expect to seek a replacement credit facility in connection
with the expiration of our current Credit Facility. Based upon the
continuing constriction of the credit markets, we may be unable to replace the
Credit Facility, and if we are able to replace the Credit Facility, the terms of
the new facility may be materially different from our current
terms. Such revised terms or the price of credit could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of
operations or liquidity and require us to use cash or other sources of capital
to fund our business operations. Further, in the event we are unable
to replace the Credit Facility, our future liquidity may be impacted, which
could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of
operations and require us to use cash or other sources of capital to fund our
business operations.
The
credit agreement of our financial services segment will expire in May
2010.
M/I
Financial, our financial services segment, is party to the MIF Credit
Agreement. M/I Homes, Inc. has provided a guarantee of the
performance and payment obligations of M/I Financial under the MIF Credit
Agreement of up to $15.0 million. M/I Financial uses the MIF Credit Agreement to
finance its lending activities until the loans are delivered to third party
buyers. The MIF Credit Agreement will expire on May 15,
2010. If we are unable to replace the MIF Credit Agreement when it
matures in May 2010, it could seriously impede the activities of our financial
services segment.
If
our financial performance further declines, we may not be able to maintain
compliance with the covenants in our credit facilities and Senior
Notes.
Our
Credit Facility and the indenture governing our Senior Notes impose certain
restrictions on our operations. The most significant restrictions
under the indenture governing our Senior Notes relate to debt incurrence, sales
of assets, cash distributions and investments by us and certain of our
subsidiaries. In addition, our Credit Facility requires compliance
with certain financial covenants, including a minimum consolidated tangible net
worth requirement and a maximum permitted leverage ratio. Also, while
our Credit Facility aggregate commitment is $150 million, we can only borrow up
to the amount we have secured by real estate and/or cash in accordance with the
provisions of our Credit Facility. As of December 31, 2009, we had
borrowing base availability of $24.5 million. If markets strengthen,
we might have to seek increased borrowing capacity.
While we
currently are in compliance with the financial covenants in the Credit Facility,
if we had to record significant additional impairments in the future, this could
cause us to fail to comply with certain Credit Facility financial
covenants. Such an event would give the lenders the right to cause
any amounts we owe under the Credit Facility to become immediately
due. If we were unable to repay the borrowings when they became due,
that could
entitle
the holders of the Senior Notes to cause the sums evidenced by those notes to
become due immediately. Under such circumstances, we would not be
able to repay those amounts without selling substantial assets, which we might
have to do at prices well below the long term fair values, and the carrying
values, of the assets.
Reduced
numbers of home sales force us to absorb additional carrying
costs.
We incur
many costs even before we begin to build homes in a community. These
include costs of preparing land and installing roads, sewage and other
utilities, as well as taxes and other costs related to ownership of the land on
which we plan to build homes. Reducing the rate at which we build
homes extends the length of time it takes us to recover these additional
costs. Also, we frequently enter into contracts to purchase land and
make deposits that may be forfeited if we do not fulfill our purchase obligation
within specified periods.
Our
ability to incur additional indebtedness could magnify other risk
factors.
Under the
terms of the indenture governing our Senior Notes and the terms of our Credit
Facility, we have the ability, subject to our debt covenants, to incur
additional amounts of debt. The incurrence of additional indebtedness
could magnify the risks described above. In addition, certain
obligations, such as standby letters of credit and performance and maintenance
bonds issued in the ordinary course of business, are not considered indebtedness
under the indenture governing our Senior Notes (and may be secured) and are
therefore not subject to limits in our debt covenants.
We
could be adversely affected by a negative change in our credit
rating.
Our
ability to access capital on favorable terms is a key factor in growing our
business and operations in a profitable manner. As of the date of
this report, our credit rating by Moody’s is B3 and our credit rating by
Standard & Poor’s is B-. Downgrades of our credit rating by
either of these credit agencies may make it more difficult and costly for us to
access external financing.
Errors
in estimates and judgments that affect decisions about how we operate and on the
reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses could have a
material impact on us.
In the
ordinary course of business, we must make estimates and judgments that affect
decisions about how we operate and the reported amounts of assets, liabilities,
revenues, and expenses. These estimates include, but are not limited
to, those related to the recognition of income and expenses; impairment of
assets; estimates of future improvement and amenity costs; estimates of sales
levels and sales prices; capitalization of costs to inventory; provisions for
litigation, insurance and warranty costs; cost of complying with government
regulations; and income taxes. We base our estimates on historical experience
and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate and adjust our
estimates based upon the information then currently available. Actual
results may differ from these estimates, assumptions, and
conditions.
If
our ability to resell mortgages to investors is impaired, we may be required to
broker loans.
We sell
substantially all of the loans we originate within a short period of time in the
secondary mortgage market on a servicing released, non-recourse basis, although,
we remain liable for certain limited representations and warranties related to
loan sales. If there is a significant decline in the secondary
mortgage market, our ability to sell mortgages could be adversely impacted and
it would require us to make arrangements with banks or other financial
institutions to fund our buyers’ closings. If we became unable to
sell loans into the secondary mortgage market or directly to Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, we would have to modify our origination model, which, among other
things, could significantly reduce our ability to sell homes.
Federal
laws and regulations that adversely affect liquidity in the secondary mortgage
market could adversely affect our business.
Changes
in federal laws and regulations could have the effect of curtailing the
activities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These organizations provide
significant liquidity to the secondary mortgage market. Any
curtailment of their activities could increase mortgage interest rates and
increase the effective cost of our homes, which could reduce demand for our
homes and adversely affect our results of operations.
We
compete on several levels with homebuilders that may have greater sales and
financial resources, which could hurt future earnings.
We
compete not only for home buyers but also for desirable properties, financing,
raw materials, and skilled labor, often within larger subdivisions designed,
planned and developed by other homebuilders. Our competitors include
other local, regional, and national homebuilders, some of which have greater
sales and financial resources.
The
competitive conditions in the homebuilding industry, together with current
market conditions, have resulted in and could continue to result
in:
●
|
difficulty
in acquiring suitable land at acceptable prices;
|
●
|
lower
selling prices;
|
●
|
increased
selling incentives;
|
●
|
lower
sales;
|
●
|
lower
profit margins;
|
●
|
impairments
in the value of inventory; and
|
●
|
delays
in construction.
|
Any of
these problems could increase costs and/or lower profit margins.
Our
net operating loss carryforwards could be substantially limited if we experience
an “ownership change” as defined in Section 382 of the Internal Revenue
Code.
Based on
recent impairments and our current financial performance, we generated net
operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards for the year ending December 31, 2009, and
it’s possible we will generate net NOL carryforwards in future
years. Under the Internal Revenue Code, we may use these NOL
carryforwards to offset future earnings and reduce our federal income tax
liability. As a result, we believe these NOL carryforwards could be a
substantial asset for us.
Section
382 of the Internal Revenue Code contains rules that limit the ability of a
company that undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as any
change in ownership of more than 50% of its common stock over a three-year
period, to utilize its NOL carryforwards and certain built-in losses recognized
in years after the ownership change. These rules generally operate by
focusing on ownership changes among shareholders owning, directly or indirectly,
5% or more of the company’s common stock (including changes involving a
shareholder becoming a 5% shareholder) or any change in ownership arising from a
new issuance of stock by the company.
On
March 13, 2009, our shareholders adopted an amendment to our code of
regulations to impose certain restrictions on the transfer of our common shares
to preserve the tax treatment of our NOLs and built-in losses (the “NOL
Protective Amendment”). The transfer restrictions imposed by the NOL
Protective Amendment generally restrict (unless otherwise approved by our board
of directors) any direct or indirect transfer if the effect would be to:
(a) increase the direct or indirect ownership of our shares by any person
or group of persons from less than 5% to 5% or more of our common shares; or
(b) increase the percentage of our common shares owned directly or
indirectly by a person or group of persons owning or deemed to own 5% or more of
our common shares. Although the NOL Protective Amendment is intended
to reduce the likelihood of an “ownership change” that could adversely affect
us, we cannot provide assurance that the restrictions on transferability in the
NOL Protective Amendment will prevent all transfers that could result in such an
“ownership change.” There also can be no assurance that the transfer
restrictions in the NOL Protective Amendment will be enforceable against all of
our shareholders absent a court determination confirming such
enforceability. The transfer restrictions may be subject to challenge
on legal or equitable grounds.
If we
undergo an “ownership change” for purposes of Section 382 as a result of future
transactions involving our common shares, including transactions initiated by
the Company, and including transactions involving a shareholder becoming an
owner of 5% or more of our common shares and purchases and sales of our common
shares by existing 5% shareholders, our ability to use our NOL carryforwards and
recognize certain built-in losses could be limited by Section
382. Depending on the resulting limitation, a significant portion of
our NOL carryforwards could expire before we would be able to use
them. Our inability to utilize our NOL carryforwards could have a
material adverse affect on our financial condition and results of
operations.
Our
results of operations, financial condition and cash flows could be adversely
affected if pending or future legal claims against us are not resolved in our
favor.
On March
14, 2008, a former employee filed a complaint against us in the United
States District Court, Middle District of Florida, on behalf of himself and
other similarly situated construction superintendents. The plaintiff
alleges
that he and other construction superintendents were misclassified as exempt and
not paid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act and seeks
equitable relief, damages and attorneys’ fees. Six
other individuals have filed consent forms to join the action. We
filed an answer on or about August 21, 2008 and intend to vigorously defend
against the claims.
On March
5, 2009, a resident of Florida and an owner for the Southern District of
Ohio, on behalf of himself and other similarly situated owners and residents of
homes in the United States or alternatively in Florida. The plaintiff
alleges that we built his home with defective drywall manufactured
by certain of the defendants that contains sulfur or other
organic compounds capable of harming the health of individuals and damaging
metals. The plaintiff alleges physical and economic damages and
seeks legal and equitable relief, medical monitoring and attorneys’
fees. The Company filed a responsive pleading on or about April 30,
2009. The same homeowner and five others are named as plantiffs in an
omnibus class action complaint filed in December 2009 arising from the same type
claims. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the
claims. Please see the risk factor below captioned “Homebuilding is
subject to warranty and liability claims in the ordinary course of business
which may lead to additional reserves or expenses” for more information
regarding the drywall matter.
Due to
the inherent uncertainties of these matters, there can be no assurance that the
ultimate resolution of these class actions will not have a material adverse
effect on our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
We are
also named as defendants in other legal proceedings which are routine and
incidental to our business. Although management currently believes that
the ultimate resolution of these other matters, individually and in the
aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations,
financial condition or cash flows, such matters are subject to inherent
uncertainties. As a result, while we have recorded a liability to provide
for the anticipated costs, including legal defense costs, associated with the
resolution of these other matters, there can be no assurance that the costs to
resolve them will not differ from the recorded estimates and have a material
adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and cash
flows for the periods in which the matters are resolved. Similarly,
if additional claims are filed against us in the future, the negative outcome of
one or more of such matters could have a material adverse effect on our results
of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
In
the ordinary course of business, we are required to obtain performance bonds,
the unavailability of which could adversely affect our results of operations
and/or cash flows.
As is
customary in the homebuilding industry, we are often required to provide surety
bonds to secure our performance under construction contracts, development
agreements, and other arrangements. Our ability to obtain surety bonds primarily
depends upon our credit rating, capitalization, working capital, past
performance, management expertise, and certain external factors, including the
overall capacity of the surety market and the underwriting practices of surety
bond issuers. The ability to obtain surety bonds also can be impacted by the
willingness of insurance companies to issue performance bonds. If we were unable
to obtain surety bonds when required, our results of operations and/or cash
flows could be impacted adversely.
Changes
in accounting principles, interpretations and practices may affect our reported
revenues, earnings, and results of operations.
Generally
accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) and their accompanying standards,
implementation guidelines, interpretations, and practices for certain aspects of
our business are complex and may involve subjective judgments, estimates and
assumptions, such as revenue recognition, inventory valuations, and income
taxes. Changes in interpretations could significantly affect our reported
revenues, earnings, and operating results, and could add significant volatility
to those measures without a comparable underlying change in cash flows from
operations. New accounting standards, i.e. International Financial
Reporting Standards, could result in increased expenses as we would have to
modify our current practices and systems in order to comply with the
standards.
We
can be injured by failures of persons who act on our behalf to comply with
applicable regulations and guidelines.
Although
we expect all of our employees, officers and directors to comply at all times
with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, there are instances in which
subcontractors or others through whom we do business engage in practices that do
not comply with applicable regulations or guidelines. When we learn
of practices relating to homes we build or financing we provide that do not
comply with applicable regulations or guidelines, we actively move to stop the
non-complying practices as soon as possible. Sometimes our employees
have been aware of these practices but did not take steps to prevent them, and
we have taken disciplinary action against such employees, including in some
instances, terminating their employment. However, regardless of the
steps we take after we learn of practices
that do
not comply with applicable regulations or guidelines, we can in some instances
be subject to fines or other governmental penalties, and our reputation can be
injured, due to the practices having taken place.
Tax
law changes could make home ownership more expensive or less
attractive.
Significant
expenses of owning a home, including mortgage interest expense and real estate
taxes, generally are deductible expenses for the purpose of calculating an
individual’s federal and, in some cases, state, taxable income. If
the government were to make changes to income tax laws that eliminate or
substantially reduce these income taxdeductions, the after-tax cost of owning a
new home would increase substantially. This could adversely impact
demand for, and/or sales prices of, new homes.
Our
income tax provision and other tax liabilities may be insufficient if taxing
authorities are successful in asserting tax positions that are contrary to our
position.
From time
to time, we are audited by various federal, state and local authorities
regarding income tax matters. Significant judgment is required to determine our
provision for income taxes and our liabilities for federal, state, local, and
other taxes. Our audits are in various stages of completion; however,
no outcome for a particular audit can be determined with certainty prior to the
conclusion of the audit, appeal and, in some cases, litigation
process. Although we believe our approach to determining the
appropriate tax treatment is supportable and in accordance with GAAP, it is
possible that the final tax authority will take a tax position that is
materially different than that which is reflected in our income tax provision
and other tax reserves. As each audit is conducted, adjustments, if
any, are appropriately recorded in our Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements in the period determined. Such differences could have a
material adverse effect on our income tax provision or benefit, or other tax
reserves, in the reporting period in which such determination is made and,
consequently, on our results of operations, financial position and/or cash flows
for such period.
We
experience fluctuations and variability in our operating results on a quarterly
basis and, as a result, our historical performance may not be a meaningful
indicator of future results.
We
historically have experienced, and expect to continue to experience, variability
in home sales and results of operations on a quarterly basis. As a
result of such variability, our historical performance may not be a meaningful
indicator of future results. Factors that contribute to this
variability include: (a) timing of home deliveries and land sales;
(b) delays in construction schedules due to strikes, adverse weather, acts of
God, reduced subcontractor availability, and governmental restrictions; (c) our
ability to acquire additional land or options for additional land on acceptable
terms; (d) conditions of the real estate market in areas where we operate and of
the general economy; (e) the cyclical nature of the homebuilding industry,
changes in prevailing interest rates, and the availability of mortgage
financing; and (f) costs and availability of materials and labor.
Homebuilding
is subject to warranty and liability claims in the ordinary course of business
which may lead to additional reserves or expenses.
As a
homebuilder, we are subject to home warranty and construction defect claims
arising in the ordinary course of business. We record warranty and
other reserves for homes we sell based on historical experience in our markets
and our judgment of the qualitative risks associated with the types of homes
built. We have, and require the majority of our subcontractors to
have, general liability, workers’ compensation, and other business
insurance. These insurance policies protect us against a portion of
our risk of loss from claims, subject to certain self-insured retentions,
deductibles, and other coverage limits. We reserve for the costs to
cover our self-insured retentions and deductible amounts under these policies
and for any costs of claims and lawsuits based on an analysis of our historical
claims, which includes an estimate of claims incurred but not yet
reported. Because of the uncertainties inherent to these matters, we
cannot provide assurance that our insurance coverage, our subcontractors’
arrangements, and our reserves will be adequate to address all of our warranty
and construction defect claims in the future. For example,
contractual indemnities can be difficult to enforce, we may be responsible for
applicable self-insured retentions, and some types of claims may not be covered
by insurance or may exceed applicable coverage limits. Additionally,
the coverage offered and the availability of general liability insurance for
construction defects are currently limited and costly. As a result,
an increasing number of our subcontractors are unable to obtain insurance, and
we have in some cases waived our customary insurance requirements. We
have responded to the increases in insurance costs and coverage limitations by
increasing our self-insured retentions. There can be no assurance
that coverage will not be further restricted and may become even more costly or
may not be available at rates that are acceptable to us.
There has
been significant publicity about homes constructed with defective imported
drywall during the past year. During 2009, we accrued $12.2 million for
the repair of these homes and have charged $4.0 million against that
accrual. Since the discovery of defective drywall, we have
implemented procedures in every division to investigate homes for signs of the
presence of defective drywall and those investigations are
continuing. Based on those
investigations,
we do not believe that defective drywall was used in any division outside of
Florida. The Company is, however, continuing its investigation of
homes in order to determine whether there are additional homes, not yet
inspected, with defective drywall and resulting damage. We are unable
to estimate our total exposure relating to the defective drywall at
this time because, among other reasons, we have not completed our
investigation of homes, tracing the defective drywall through the
supply chain has proven difficult, and the manufacturers of the drywall have not
cooperated in our investigations. If we identify additional homes than the
homes identified thus far as having defective imported drywall, we may increase
the accrual for costs of repair attributable to defective imported
drywall. We are seeking reimbursement of costs to repair homes affected by
this drywall from our subcontractors, their insurers, the manufacturers and
others. However, we have not currently reflected any reimbursement in our
costs as such reimbursements are not probable or estimable at this
time. Please see the risk factor above captioned “Our results of
operations, financial condition and cash flows could be adversely affected if
pending or future legal claims against us are not resolved in our favor” for
more information regarding the risks surrounding defective drywall
litigation.
Natural
disasters and severe weather conditions could delay deliveries, increase costs,
and decrease demand for homes in affected areas.
Several
of our markets, specifically our operations in Florida, North Carolina and
Washington, D.C., are situated in geographical areas that are regularly impacted
by severe storms, hurricanes, and flooding. In addition, our
operations in the Midwest can be impacted by severe storms, including
tornados. The occurrence of these or other natural disasters can
cause delays in the completion of, or increase the cost of, developing one or
more of our communities, and as a result could materially and adversely impact
our results of operations.
Supply
shortages and other risks related to the demand for skilled labor and building
materials could increase costs and delay deliveries.
The
residential construction industry has, from time to time, experienced
significant material and labor shortages in insulation, drywall, brick, cement
and certain areas of carpentry and framing, as well as fluctuations in lumber
prices and supplies. Any shortages of long duration in these areas
could delay construction of homes, which could adversely affect our business and
increase costs. To date, however, we have not experienced any
significant issues with availability of building materials or skilled
labor.
We
are subject to extensive government regulations, which could restrict our
homebuilding or financial services business.
The
homebuilding industry is subject to numerous and increasing local, state and
federal statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations concerning zoning, resource
protection, building design and construction, and similar
matters. This includes local regulations that impose restrictive
zoning and density requirements in order to limit the number of homes that can
eventually be built within the boundaries of a particular location. Such
regulation also affects construction activities, including construction
materials that must be used in certain aspects of building design, as well as
sales activities and other dealings with homebuyers. We must also obtain
licenses, permits and approvals from various governmental agencies for our
development activities, the granting of which are beyond our
control. Furthermore, increasingly stringent requirements may be
imposed on homebuilders and developers in the future. Although we
cannot predict the impact on us to comply with any such requirements, such
requirements could result in time-consuming and expensive compliance
programs. In addition, we have been, and in the future may be,
subject to periodic delays or may be precluded from developing certain projects
due to building moratoriums. These moratoriums generally relate to
insufficient water supplies or sewage facilities, delays in utility hookups, or
inadequate road capacity within the specific market area or
subdivision. These moratoriums can occur prior to, or subsequent to,
commencement of our operations, without notice or recourse.
We are
also subject to a variety of local, state and federal statutes, ordinances,
rules and regulations concerning consumer protection matters and the protection
of health and the environment. These statutes, ordinances, rules, and
regulations, and any failure to comply therewith, could give rise to
additional liabilities or expenditures and have an adverse affect on our results
of operations, financial condition, or business. The particular consumer
protection matters regulate the marketing, sales, construction, closing and
financing of our homes. The particular environmental laws that apply to
any given project vary greatly according to the project site and the present and
former uses of the property. These environmental laws may result in
delays, cause us to incur substantial compliance costs (including substantial
expenditures for pollution and water quality control), and prohibit or severely
restrict development in certain environmentally sensitive
regions. Although there can be no assurance that we will be
successful in all cases, we have a general practice of requiring resolution of
environmental issues prior to purchasing land in an effort to avoid major
environmental issues in our developments.
In
addition to the laws and regulations that relate to our homebuilding operations,
M/I Financial is subject to a variety of laws and regulations concerning the
underwriting, servicing and sale of mortgage loans.
We are dependent
on the services of certain key employees, and the loss of their services could
hurt our business.
Our
future success depends, in part, on our ability to attract, train, and retain
skilled personnel. If we are unable to retain our key employees or
attract, train, and retain other skilled personnel in the future, it could
materially and adversely impact our operations and result in additional expenses
for identifying and training new personnel.
ITEM
1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
We own
and operate an approximately 85,000 square foot office building for our home
office in Columbus, Ohio and lease all of our other offices.
Due to
the nature of our business, a substantial amount of property is held as
inventory in the ordinary course of business. See “ITEM 1. BUSINESS –
Land Acquisition and Development.”
ITEM
3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
On March
14, 2008, a former employee filed a complaint in the United States
District Court, Middle District of Florida, on behalf of himself and those
similarly situated, against M/I Homes, Inc., alleging that he and other
construction superintendents were misclassified as exempt and not paid overtime
compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act and seeking equitable
relief, damages and attorneys' fees. Six other individuals have filed
consent forms in order to join the action. The Company filed an answer on
or about August 21, 2008 and intends to vigorously defend against the
claims.
On March
5, 2009, a resident of Florida and an owner of one of our homes filed a
complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio,
on behalf of himself and other similarly situated owners and residents of homes
in the United States or alternatively in Florida, against M/I Homes, Inc., and
certain other identified and unidentified manufacturers, builders, and suppliers
of drywall. The plaintiff alleges that the Company built his home with
defective drywall, manufactured by certain of the defendants,
that contains sulfur or other organic compounds capable of harming the health of
individuals and damaging metals. The plaintiff alleges physical and
economic damages and seeks legal and equitable relief, medical monitoring and
attorney’s fees. The Company filed a responsive pleading on or about
April 30, 2009. The same homeowner and five others are named as plantiffs
in an omnibus class action complaint filed in December 2009 arising from the
same type claims. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the
claims. Please refer to Note 11 of the Company’s Consolidated
Financial Statements for further information on this matter.
The
Company and certain of its subsidiaries have been named as defendants in other
claims, complaints and legal actions which are routine and incidental to our
business. Certain of the liabilities resulting from these other
matters are covered by insurance. While management
currently believes that the ultimate resolution of these other matters,
individually and in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on
the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash
flows, such matters are subject to inherent uncertainties. The Company has
recorded a liability to provide for the anticipated costs, including legal
defense costs, associated with the resolution of these other matters.
However, there exists the possibility that the costs to resolve these other
matters could differ from the recorded estimates and, therefore, have a material
adverse effect on the Company’s net income for the periods in which the
matters are resolved.
ITEM
4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
None.
ITEM
5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER
MATTERS
|
|
AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY
SECURITIES
|
The
Company’s common shares are traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the
symbol “MHO.” As of February 18, 2010, there were approximately 440
record holders of the Company’s common shares. At that date, there
were 22,101,723 common shares issued and 18,521,336 common shares
outstanding. The table below presents the highest and lowest sales
prices for the Company’s common shares during each of the quarters
presented:
2009
|
|
|
HIGH
|
|
|
LOW
|
First
quarter
|
|
$
|
12.10
|
|
$
|
4.92
|
Second
quarter
|
|
|
18.42
|
|
|
6.80
|
Third
quarter
|
|
|
17.67
|
|
|
7.87
|
Fourth
quarter
|
|
|
15.66
|
|
|
9.43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
quarter
|
|
$
|
19.39
|
|
$
|
7.21
|
Second
quarter
|
|
|
20.25
|
|
|
14.28
|
Third
quarter
|
|
|
26.00
|
|
|
12.62
|
Fourth
quarter
|
|
|
23.15
|
|
|
5.15
|
The
highest and lowest sales prices for the Company’s common shares from January 1,
2010 through February 18, 2010 were $13.95 and $9.74, respectively.
The
indenture governing our Senior Notes contains restrictive covenants that limit,
among other things, the ability of the Company to pay dividends on common and
preferred shares or repurchase any shares. If our “restricted
payments basket,” as defined in the indenture governing our Senior Notes, is
less than zero, we are restricted from making certain payments, including
dividends, as well as from repurchasing any shares. During the second
quarter of 2008, the Company ceased paying dividends due to such
covenants. At December 31, 2009, our restricted payments basket was
($156.0) million. As a result of this deficit, we are currently
restricted from paying dividends on our common shares and our 9.75% Series A
Preferred Shares, and from repurchasing any shares under our common shares
repurchase program that was authorized by our Board of Directors in November
2005. We will continue to be restricted until such time that the
“consolidated restricted payments basket” has been restored or our Senior Notes
are repaid, and our Board of Directors authorizes us to resume dividend
payments.
There
were no dividends paid to common shareholders in 2009. For the year
ended December 31, 2008, dividends paid to common shareholders totaled $1.1
million.
Performance
Graph
The
following graph illustrates the Company’s performance in the form of cumulative
total return to shareholders for the last five calendar years through December
31, 2009, assuming a hypothetical investment of $100 and reinvestment of all
dividends paid on such investment, compared to the cumulative total return of
the same hypothetical investment in both the Standard and Poor’s 500 Index and
the Standard & Poor’s 500 Homebuilding Index.
|
Period
Ending |
|
Index
|
12/31/04
|
12/31/05
|
12/31/06
|
12/31/07
|
12/31/08
|
12/31/09
|
|
M/I
Homes, Inc.
|
100.00 |
73.86 |
69.62 |
19.26 |
19.39 |
19.11 |
|
S&P
500
|
100.00 |
104.91 |
121.48 |
128.16 |
80.74 |
102.11 |
|
S&P
500 Homebuilding Index
|
100.00 |
126.59 |
101.27 |
41.63 |
25.43 |
30.09 |
|
Share
Repurchases
On
November 8, 2005, the Company obtained authorization from the Board of Directors
to repurchase up to $25 million worth of its outstanding common
shares. The purchases may occur in the open market and/or in
privately negotiated transactions as market conditions
warrant. During the twelve month period ended December 31, 2009, the
Company did not repurchase any shares. As discussed above, because
our “restricted payments basket” under the indenture governing our Senior Notes
is less than zero, we are restricted from repurchasing any shares under our
common shares repurchase program.
Issuer Purchases of Equity
Securities
|
Total
Number of Shares
Purchased
|
|
Average
Price
Paid
per
Share
|
|
Total
Number
of
Shares
Purchased
as
Part of
Publicly
Announced
Program
|
|
Approximate
Dollar
Value of
Shares
that May
Yet
Be
Purchased
Under
the
Program
(a)
|
October
1 to October 31, 2009
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
$6,715,000
|
November
1 to November 30, 2009
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
$6,715,000
|
December
1 to December 31, 2009
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
$6,715,000
|
Total
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
$6,715,000
|
(a)
|
As
of February 18, 2010, the Company had purchased a total of 473,300 shares
at an average price of $38.63 per share pursuant to the existing
Board-approved $25 million repurchase program that was publicly announced
on November 10, 2005, and had approximately $6.7 million remaining
available for repurchase under the $25 million repurchase program, which
expires on November 8, 2010. The indenture governing our Senior
Notes contains a provision that restricts us from repurchasing any shares
when the calculation of the “restricted payment basket,” as defined
therein, falls below zero. At December 31, 2009, the payment
basket is $(156.0) million and, therefore, we are restricted from
repurchasing any shares. We will continue to be restricted
until such time that the restricted payments basket has been restored or
our Senior Notes are repaid.
|
ITEM
6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA (a)
The
following table sets forth our selected consolidated financial data as of the
dates and for the periods indicated. This table should be read
together with “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our Consolidated Financial
Statements, including the Notes thereto, appearing elsewhere in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K.
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
Statement (Year Ended December 31):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
$ |
569,949 |
|
$ |
607,659 |
|
$ |
1,016,460 |
|
$ |
1,274,145 |
|
$ |
1,312,504 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin (b) (c)
|
$ |
19,539 |
|
$ |
(77,805 |
) |
$ |
35,487 |
|
$ |
247,719 |
|
$ |
329,917 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(loss) income from continuingoperations
(b) (c) (d)
|
$ |
(62,109 |
) |
$ |
(245,415 |
) |
|
(92,480 |
) |
$ |
29,297 |
|
$ |
98,574 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued
operation, net of tax (a)
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
(33 |
) |
$ |
(35,646 |
) |
$ |
9,578 |
|
$ |
2,211 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(loss) income (b) (c) (d)
|
$ |
(62,109 |
) |
$ |
(245,448 |
) |
$ |
(128,126 |
) |
$ |
38,875 |
|
$ |
100,785 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
dividends
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
4,875 |
|
$ |
7,313 |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(loss) income to common shareholders (b) (c) (d)
|
$ |
(62,109 |
) |
$ |
(250,323 |
) |
$ |
(135,439 |
) |
$ |
38,875 |
|
$ |
100,785 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss)
earnings per share to common shareholders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic:
(b) (c) (d)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
$ |
(3.71 |
) |
$ |
(17.86 |
) |
$ |
(7.14 |
) |
$ |
2.10 |
|
$ |
6.89 |
Discontinued
operation
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
(2.55 |
) |
$ |
0.68 |
|
$ |
0.16 |
Total
|
$ |
(3.71 |
) |
$ |
(17.86 |
) |
$ |
(9.69 |
) |
$ |
2.78 |
|
$ |
7.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted:
(b) (c) (d)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
$ |
(3.71 |
) |
$ |
(17.86 |
) |
$ |
(7.14 |
) |
$ |
2.07 |
|
$ |
6.78 |
Discontinued
operation
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
(2.55 |
) |
$ |
0.67 |
|
$ |
0.15 |
Total
|
$ |
(3.71 |
) |
$ |
(17.86 |
) |
$ |
(9.69 |
) |
$ |
2.74 |
|
$ |
6.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
16,730 |
|
|
14,016 |
|
|
13,977 |
|
|
13,970 |
|
|
14,302 |
Diluted
|
|
16,730 |
|
|
14,016 |
|
|
13,977 |
|
|
14,168 |
|
|
14,539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
per common share
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
Sheet (December 31):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory
|
$ |
420,289 |
|
$ |
516,029 |
|
$ |
797,329 |
|
$ |
1,092,739 |
|
$ |
984,279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
assets (d)
|
$ |
663,828 |
|
$ |
693,288 |
|
$ |
1,117,645 |
|
$ |
1,477,079 |
|
$ |
1,329,678 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
payable banks – homebuilding operations
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
115,000 |
|
$ |
410,000 |
|
$ |
260,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note
payable bank – financial services operations
|
$ |
24,142 |
|
$ |
35,078 |
|
$ |
40,400 |
|
$ |
29,900 |
|
$ |
46,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
payable banks - other
|
$ |
6,160 |
|
$ |
16,300 |
|
$ |
6,703 |
|
$ |
6,944 |
|
$ |
7,165 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior
Notes – net of discount
|
$ |
199,424 |
|
$ |
199,168 |
|
$ |
198,912 |
|
$ |
198,656 |
|
$ |
198,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders’
equity (b) (c) (d)
|
$ |
326,763 |
|
$ |
333,061 |
|
$ |
581,345 |
|
$ |
617,052 |
|
$ |
592,568 |
(a)
|
In
December 2007, we sold substantially all of our assets in our West Palm
Beach, Florida market and announced our exit from this
market. The results of operations for this market for all years
presented have been reclassified as discontinued
operation.
|
(b)
|
2009,
2008, 2007 and 2006 include the impact of charges relating to the
impairment of inventory and investment in Unconsolidated LLCs, reducing
gross margin by $55.4 million, $153.3 million, $148.4 million and $67.2,
respectively. Those charges, along with the write-off of land
deposits, intangibles and pre-acquisition costs, reduced net (loss) income
from continuing operations by $35.4 million, $98.3 million, $96.9 million
and $46.7 million and (loss) earnings per diluted share by $1.31, $7.00,
$6.71 and $3.29 for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007 and
2006, respectively.
|
(c)
|
2009
includes the impact of charges related to the repair of certain homes in
Florida where certain of our subcontractors had purchased imported drywall
that may be responsible for accelerated corrosion of certain metals in the
home, increasing net loss by $7.5 million, or $0.46 per
share.
|
(d)
|
2009
and 2008 net (loss) also reflects an $8.2 million and $108.6 million,
respectively, valuation allowance for deferred tax assets, or $0.73 and
$7.75 per share, respectively.
|
ITEM
7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. (the “Company” or “we”) is one of the nation’s leading builders of
single-family homes, having delivered nearly 76,000 homes since we commenced
homebuilding in 1976. The Company’s homes are marketed and sold under
the trade names M/I Homes and Showcase Homes. The Company has
homebuilding operations in Columbus and Cincinnati, Ohio; Indianapolis, Indiana;
Chicago, Illinois; Tampa and Orlando, Florida; Charlotte and Raleigh, North
Carolina; and the Virginia and Maryland suburbs of Washington,
D.C. In 2008, the latest year for which information is available, we
were the 21st
largest U.S. single-family homebuilder (based on homes delivered) as ranked by
Builder
Magazine.
Included
in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations are the following topics relevant to the Company’s performance and
financial condition:
·
|
Information
Relating to Forward-Looking Statements;
|
·
|
Our
Application of Critical Accounting Estimates and
Policies;
|
·
|
Our
Results of Operations;
|
·
|
Discussion
of Our Liquidity and Capital Resources;
|
·
|
Summary
of Our Contractual Obligations;
|
·
|
Discussion
of Our Utilization of Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements;
and
|
·
|
Impact
of Interest Rates and Inflation.
|
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
|
Certain information
included in this report or in other materials we have filed or will file with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) (as well as information
included in oral statements or other written statements made or to be made by
us) contains or may contain forward-looking statements, including, but
not limited to, statements regarding our future financial performance and
financial condition. Words such as “expects,” “anticipates,”
“targets,” “goals,” “projects,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,”
“estimates,” variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to
identify such forward-looking statements. These statements involve a
number of risks and uncertainties. Any forward-looking statements
that we make herein and in future reports and statements are not guarantees of
future performance, and actual results may differ materially from those in such
forward-looking statements as a result of various risk
factors. Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in Part I of this Annual
Report on Form 10-K for more information regarding those risk
factors.
Any
forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date made. Except as
required by applicable law or the rules and regulations of the SEC, we undertake
no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements or risk factors,
whether as a result of new information, future events or
otherwise. However, any further disclosures made on related subjects
in our subsequent reports on Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K should be
consulted. This discussion is provided as permitted by the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and all of our forward-looking
statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary
statements contained or referenced in this section.
APPLICATION OF CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES AND POLICIES
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires management
to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date
of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and
expenses during the reporting period. Management bases its estimates
and judgments on historical experience and on various other factors that are
believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the
basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities
that are not readily apparent from other sources. On an ongoing
basis, management evaluates such estimates and judgments and makes adjustments
as deemed necessary. Actual results could differ from these estimates
using different estimates and assumptions, or if conditions are significantly
different in the future. Listed below are those estimates that we
believe are critical and require the use of complex judgment in their
application.
Revenue
Recognition. Revenue from the sale of a home is recognized
when the closing has occurred, title has passed, and an adequate initial and
continuing investment by the homebuyer is received, or when the loan has
been
sold to a
third-party investor. Revenue for homes that close to the buyer
having a deposit of 5% or greater, home closings financed by third parties, and
all home closings insured under FHA or VA government-insured programs are
recorded in the financial statements on the date of closing.
Revenue
related to all other home closings initially funded by our wholly-owned
subsidiary, M/I Financial Corp. (“M/I Financial”), is recorded on the date that
M/I Financial sells the loan to a third-party investor, because the receivable
from the third-party investor is not subject to future subordination, and the
Company has transferred to this investor the usual risks and rewards of
ownership that is in substance a sale and does not have a substantial continuing
involvement with the home.
All
associated homebuilding costs are charged to cost of sales in the period when
the revenues from home closings are recognized. Homebuilding costs
include land and land development costs; home construction costs (including an
estimate of the costs to complete construction); previously capitalized
interest; real estate taxes; indirect costs; and estimated warranty
costs. All other costs are expensed as incurred. Sales
incentives, including pricing discounts and financing costs paid by the Company,
are recorded as a reduction of revenue in the Company’s Consolidated Statements
of Operations. Sales incentives in the form of options or upgrades
are recorded in homebuilding costs.
We
recognize the majority of the revenue associated with our mortgage loan
operations when the mortgage loans and related servicing rights are sold to
third party investors. The revenue recognized is reduced by the fair
value of the related guarantee provided to the investor. The fair
value of the guarantee is recognized in revenue when the Company is released
from its obligation under the guarantee. Generally, all of the
financial services mortgage loans and related servicing rights are sold to third
party investors within two to three weeks of origination. We
recognize financial services revenue associated with our title operations as
homes are closed, closing services are rendered, and title policies are issued,
all of which generally occur simultaneously as each home is
closed. All of the underwriting risk associated with title insurance
policies is transferred to third-party insurers.
Inventory. We
use the specific identification method for the purpose of accumulating costs
associated with land acquisition and development, and home
construction. Inventory is recorded at cost, unless events and
circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the land may be
impaired. In addition to the costs of direct land acquisition, land
development and related costs (both incurred and estimated to be incurred) and
home construction costs, inventory includes capitalized interest, real estate
taxes, and certain indirect costs incurred during land development and home
construction. Such costs are charged to cost of sales simultaneously
with revenue recognition, as discussed above. When a home is closed,
we typically have not yet paid all incurred costs necessary to complete the
home. As homes close, we compare the home construction budget to
actual recorded costs to date to estimate the additional costs to be incurred
from our subcontractors related to the home. We record a liability
and a corresponding charge to cost of sales for the amount we estimate will
ultimately be paid related to that home. We monitor the accuracy of
such estimate by comparing actual costs incurred in subsequent months to the
estimate. Although actual costs to complete in the future could
differ from the estimate, our method has historically produced consistently
accurate estimates of actual costs to complete closed homes.
The
Company assesses inventory for recoverability on a quarterly basis, by reviewing
for impairment whenever events or changes in local or national economic
conditions indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. In conducting our quarterly review for indicators of
impairment on a community level, we evaluate, among other things, the margins on
homes that have been delivered, margins on sales contracts in backlog, projected
margins with regard to future home sales over the life of the community,
projected margins with regard to future land sales, and the value of the land
itself. We pay particular attention to communities in which inventory
is moving at a slower than anticipated absorption pace, and communities whose
average sales price and/or margins are trending downward and are anticipated to
continue to trend downward. From this review, we identify communities
whose carrying values may exceed their undiscounted cash flows. In
addition, we also evaluate communities where management intends to lower the
sales price or offer incentives in order to improve absorptions even if the
community’s historical results do not indicate a potential for
impairment. For those communities deemed to be impaired, the
impairment recognized is measured by the amount by which the carrying amount of
the communities exceeds the fair value of the communities. In
addition, due to the fact that the estimates and assumptions included in the
Company’s cash flow models are based upon historical results and projected
trends, it does not anticipate unexpected changes in market conditions that may
lead the Company to incur additional impairment charges in the
future.
Our
determination of fair value is based on projections and
estimates. Changes in these expectations may lead to a change in the
outcome of our impairment analysis. Our analysis is completed on a
quarterly basis at a community level; therefore, changes in local conditions may
affect one or several of our communities.
For the
year ended December 31, 2009, the company evaluated all active communities for
impairment indicators. A recoverability analysis was performed for 65
of those active communities, and an impairment charge was recorded in 37 of
those communities. The carrying value of those 37 impaired
communities was $106.9 million at December 31, 2009.
For all
of the categories listed below, the key assumptions relating to the valuations
are dependent on project-specific local market and/or community conditions and
are inherently uncertain. Because each inventory asset is unique,
there are numerous inputs and assumptions used in our valuation
techniques. Local market-specific factors that may impact these
projected assumptions include:
●
|
historical
project results such as average sales price and sales pace, if closings
have occurred in the project;
|
●
|
competitors’
local market and/or community presence and their competitive
actions;
|
●
|
project
specific attributes such as location desirability and uniqueness of
product offering;
|
●
|
potential
for alternative product offerings to respond to local market
conditions;
|
●
|
current
local market economic and demographic conditions and related trends and
forecasts; and
|
●
|
community-specific
strategies regarding speculative
homes.
|
Operating
communities. For existing operating communities, the
recoverability of assets is measured on a quarterly basis by comparing the
carrying amount of the assets to future undiscounted net cash flows expected to
be generated by the assets based on home sales. These estimated cash flows
are developed based primarily on management’s assumptions relating to the
specific community. The significant assumptions used to evaluate the
recoverability of assets include: the timing of development and/or
marketing phases; projected sales price and sales pace of each existing or
planned community; the estimated land development, home construction and selling
costs of the community; overall market supply and demand; the local market; and
competitive conditions. Management reviews these assumptions on a
quarterly basis. While we consider available information to determine
what we believe to be our best estimates as of the end of a reporting period,
these estimates are subject to change in future reporting periods as facts and
circumstances change. These assumptions vary widely across different
communities and geographies and are largely dependent on local market
conditions. Some of the most critical assumptions in the Company’s
cash flow model are projected absorption pace for home sales, sales prices and
costs to build and deliver homes on a community by community basis.
In order
to arrive at the assumed absorption pace for home sales included in the
Company’s cash flow model, the Company analyzes historical absorption pace in
the community as well as other communities in the geographical
area. In addition, the Company analyzes internal and external market
studies and trends, which generally include, but are not limited to, statistics
on population demographics, unemployment rates and availability of competing
product in the geographic area where a community is located. When
analyzing the Company’s historical absorption pace for home sales and
corresponding internal and external market studies, the Company places greater
emphasis on more current metrics and trends such as the absorption pace realized
in its most recent quarters as well as forecasted population demographics,
unemployment rates and availability of competing product.
In order
to determine the assumed sales prices included in its cash flow models, the
Company analyzes the historical sales prices realized on homes it delivered in
the community and other communities in the geographic area as well as the sales
prices included in its current backlog for such communities. In
addition, the Company analyzes internal and external market studies and trends,
which generally include, but are not limited to, statistics on sales prices in
neighboring communities and sales prices on similar products in non-neighboring
communities in the geographic area where the community is
located. When analyzing its historical sales prices and corresponding
market studies, the Company also places greater emphasis on more current metrics
and trends. Ultimately, upon this analysis, the Company sets a
current sales price for each house type in the community, using the
aforementioned information, which it believes will achieve an acceptable gross
margin and sales pace in the community. This price becomes the price published
to the sales force for use in its sales efforts. The Company then uses the
average of these “published” sales prices in its cash flow model.
In order
to arrive at the Company’s assumed costs to build and deliver homes, the Company
generally assumes a cost structure reflecting contracts currently in place with
its vendors and subcontractors adjusted for any anticipated cost reduction
initiatives or increases in cost structure. With respect to overhead
included in the cash flow model, the Company uses forecasted rates included in
the Company’s annual budget for the overall market area adjusted for actual
experience that is materially different than budgeted rates.
Future
communities. For raw land or land under development that
management anticipates will be utilized for future homebuilding activities, the
recoverability of assets is measured by comparing the carrying amount of the
assets to future undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by the assets
based on home sales, consistent with the evaluations performed for operating
communities discussed above.
For raw
land, land under development or lots that management intends to market for sale
to a third party, but that do not meet all of the criteria to be classified as
land held for sale as discussed below, the recoverability of the assets is
determined based on either the estimated net sales proceeds expected to be
realized on the sale of the assets or the estimated fair value determined using
cash flow valuation techniques.
If the
Company has not yet determined whether raw land or land under development will
be utilized for future homebuilding activities or marketed for sale to a third
party, the Company assesses the recoverability of the inventory using a
probability-weighted approach.
Land held for
sale. Land held for sale includes land that meets all of the
following six criteria: (1) management, having the authority to
approve the action, commits to a plan to sell the asset; (2) the asset is
available for immediate sale in its present condition subject only to terms that
are usual and customary for sales of such assets; (3) an active program to
locate a buyer and other actions required to complete the plan to sell the asset
have been initiated; (4) the sale of the asset is probable, and transfer of the
asset is expected to qualify for recognition as a completed sale, within one
year; (5) the asset is being actively marketed for sale at a price that is
reasonable in relation to its current fair value; and (6) actions required to
complete the plan indicate that it is unlikely that significant changes to the
plan will be made or that the plan will be withdrawn. The Company
records land held for sale at the lower of its carrying value or fair value less
costs to sell. In performing impairment evaluation for land held for
sale, management considers, among other things, prices for land in recent
comparable sales transactions, market analysis and recent bona fide offers
received from outside third parties, as well as actual contracts. If
the estimated fair value less the costs to sell an asset is less than the
current carrying value, the asset is written down to its estimated fair value
less costs to sell.
For all
of the above categories, the key assumptions relating to the above valuations
are dependent on project-specific local market and/or community conditions and
are inherently uncertain. Because each inventory asset is unique,
there are numerous inputs and assumptions used in our valuation
techniques.
These and
other local market-specific factors that may impact project assumptions
discussed above are considered by personnel in our homebuilding divisions as
they prepare or update the forecasted assumptions for each community.
Quantitative and qualitative factors other than home sales prices could
significantly impact the potential for future impairments. The sales
objectives can differ between communities, even within a given
sub-market. For example, facts and circumstances in a given community
may lead us to price our homes with the objective of yielding a higher sales
absorption pace, while facts and circumstances in another community may lead us
to price our homes to minimize deterioration in our gross margins, although it
may result in a slower sales absorption pace. Furthermore, the key
assumptions included in our estimated future undiscounted cash flows may be
interrelated. For example, a decrease in estimated base sales price
or an increase in home sales incentives may result in a corresponding increase
in sales absorption pace. Additionally, a decrease in the average
sales price of homes to be sold and closed in future reporting periods for one
community that has not been generating what management believes to be an
adequate sales absorption pace may impact the estimated cash flow assumptions of
a nearby community. Changes in our key assumptions, including
estimated construction and development costs, absorption pace, selling
strategies, or discount rates, could materially impact future cash flow and fair
value estimates.
As of
December 31, 2009, our projections generally assume a gradual improvement in
market conditions over time, along with a gradual increase in
costs. These assumed gradual increases generally begin in 2011,
depending on the market and community. If communities are not
recoverable based on undiscounted cash flows, the impairment to be recognized is
measured as the amount by which the carrying amount of the assets exceeds the
fair value of the assets. The fair value of a community is determined
by discounting management’s cash flow projections using an appropriate
risk-adjusted interest rate. As of December 31, 2009, we utilized
discount rates ranging from 13% to 16% in the above valuations. The
discount rate used in determining each asset’s fair value depends on the
community’s projected life, development stage, and the inherent risks associated
with the related estimated cash flow stream as well as current risk free rates
available in the market and estimated market risk premiums. For
example, construction in progress inventory, which is closer to completion, will
generally require a lower discount rate than land under development in
communities consisting of multiple phases spanning several years of
development. We believe our assumptions on discount rates are
critical because the selection of a discount rate affects the estimated fair
value of the homesites within a community. A higher discount rate reduces the
estimated fair value of the homesites within the community, while a lower
discount rate increases the estimated fair value of the homesites within a
community.
Our
quarterly assessments reflect management’s estimates. Due to the
uncertainties related to our operations and our industry as a whole as further
discussed in Risk Factors beginning on page 12 of this Annual Report on Form
10-K, we are unable to determine at this time if and to what extent continuing
changes in our local markets will result in future impairments.
Consolidated
Inventory Not Owned. We enter into land option agreements in
the ordinary course of business in order to secure land for the construction of
homes in the future. Pursuant to these land option agreements, we
typically provide a deposit to the seller as consideration for the right to
purchase land at different times in the future, usually at pre-determined
prices. If the entity holding the land under option is a variable
interest entity, the Company’s deposit (including letters of credit) represents
a variable interest in the entity, and we must use our judgment to determine if
we are the primary beneficiary of the entity. Factors considered in
determining whether we are the primary beneficiary include the amount of the
deposit in relation to the fair value of the land, the expected timing of our
purchase of the land, and assumptions about projected cash flows. We
consider our accounting policies with respect to determining whether we are the
primary beneficiary to be critical accounting policies due to the judgment
required.
We also
periodically enter into lot option arrangements with third-parties to whom we
have sold our raw land inventory. We evaluate these to determine if
we should record an asset and liability at the time we sell the land and enter
into the lot option contract.
Investment in
Unconsolidated Limited Liability Companies. We invest in
entities that acquire and develop land for distribution to us in connection with
our homebuilding operations. In our judgment, we have determined that
these entities generally do not meet the criteria of variable interest entities
because they have sufficient equity to finance their operations. We
must use our judgment to determine if we have substantive control of these
entities. If we were to determine that we have substantive control,
we would be required to consolidate the entity. Factors considered in
determining whether we have substantive control include risk and reward sharing,
experience and financial condition of the other partners, voting rights,
involvement in day-to-day capital and operating decisions, and continuing
involvement. In the event an entity does not have sufficient equity
to finance its operations, we would be required to use judgment to determine if
we were the primary beneficiary of the variable interest entity. We
consider our accounting policies with respect to determining whether we are the
primary beneficiary or have substantive control to be critical accounting
policies due to the judgment required. Based on the application of
our accounting policies, these entities are accounted for by the equity method
of accounting.
The
Company evaluates its investment in unconsolidated limited liabilities companies
(“Unconsolidated LLCs”) for potential impairment on a quarterly
basis. If the fair value of the investment is less than the
investment’s carrying value and the Company has determined that the decline in
value is other than temporary, the Company would write down the value of the
investment to fair value. The determination of whether an
investment’s fair value is less than the carrying value requires management to
make certain assumptions regarding the amount and timing of future contributions
to the Unconsolidated LLC, the timing of distribution of lots to the Company
from the Unconsolidated LLC, the projected fair value of the lots at the time of
distribution to the Company, and the estimated proceeds from, and timing of, the
sale of land or lots to third parties. In determining the fair value
of investments in Unconsolidated LLCs, the Company evaluates the projected cash
flows associated with each one. As of December 31, 2009, the Company
used a discount rate of 16% in determining the fair value of investments in
Unconsolidated LLCs. In addition to the assumptions management must
make to determine if the investment’s fair value is less than the carrying
value, management must also use judgment in determining whether the impairment
is other than temporary. The factors management considers are: (1)
the length of time and the extent to which the market value has been less than
cost; (2) the financial condition and near-term prospects of the Company; and
(3) the intent and ability of the Company to retain its investment in the
Unconsolidated LLC for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated
recovery in market value. In situations where the investments are
100% equity financed by the partners, and the joint venture simply distributes
lots to its partners, the Company evaluates “other than temporary” by preparing
an undiscounted cash flow model as described in inventory above for operating
communities. If such model results in positive value versus carrying
value, and the fair value of the investment is less than the investment’s
carrying value, the Company determines that the impairment is temporary;
otherwise, the Company determines that the impairment is other than temporary
and impairs the investment. Because of the high degree of judgment
involved in developing these assumptions, it is possible that the Company may
determine the investment is not impaired in the current period but, due to
passage of time or change in market conditions leading to changes in
assumptions, impairment could occur.
Guarantees and
Indemnities. Guarantee and indemnity liabilities are
established by charging the applicable income statement or balance sheet line,
depending on the nature of the guarantee or indemnity, and crediting a
liability. M/I Financial provides a limited-life guarantee on loans
sold to certain third parties and estimates its actual liability related to the
guarantee and any indemnities subsequently provided to the purchaser of the
loans in lieu of loan repurchase based on historical loss
experience. Actual future costs associated with loans guaranteed or
indemnified could differ materially from our current estimated
amounts. The Company has also provided certain other guarantees and
indemnifications in connection with the purchase and development of land,
including environmental indemnifications, guarantees of the completion of land
development, and minimum net worth guarantees of M/I Financial. The
Company estimates these liabilities based on the estimated cost of insurance
coverage or estimated
cost of
acquiring a bond in the amount of the exposure. Actual future costs
associated with these guarantees and indemnifications could differ materially
from our current estimated amounts.
Warranty.
Warranty accruals are established by charging cost of sales and crediting
a warranty accrual for each home closed. The amounts charged are estimated
by management to be adequate to cover expected warranty-related costs for
materials and outside labor required under the Company’s warranty
programs. Accruals are recorded for warranties under the following
warranty programs:
·
|
Home
Builder’s Limited Warranty – effective for homes closed after September
30, 2007;
|
·
|
30-year
transferable structural warranty – effective for homes closed after April
24, 1998; and
|
·
|
20-year
transferable structural warranty – effective for homes closed between
September 1, 1989 and April 24,
1998.
|
The
warranty accruals for the Home Builder’s Limited Warranty as a percentage of
average sales price, and the structural warranty accruals are established on a
per unit basis. Our warranty accruals are based upon historical
experience by geographic area and recent trends. Factors that are
given consideration in determining the accruals include: (1) the historical
range of amounts paid per average sales price on a home; (2) type and mix of
amenity packages added to the home; (3) any warranty expenditures included in
the above not considered to be normal and recurring; (4) timing of payments; (5)
improvements in quality of construction expected to impact future warranty
expenditures; (6) actuarial estimates, which reflect both Company and industry
data; and (7) conditions that may affect certain projects and require a
different percentage of average sales price for those specific
projects.
Changes
in estimates for warranties occur due to changes in the historical payment
experience and differences between the actual payment pattern experienced during
the period and the historical payment pattern used in our evaluation of the
warranty accrual balance at the end of each quarter. Actual future
warranty costs could differ from our current estimated amount.
Self-insurance. Self-insurance
accruals are made for estimated liabilities associated with employee health
care, Ohio workers’ compensation and general liability insurance. Our
self-insurance limit for employee health care is $250,000 per claim per year for
fiscal 2009, with stop loss insurance covering amounts in excess of $250,000 up
to $2,000,000 per employee’s lifetime. Our self-insurance limit for
workers’ compensation is $450,000 per claim, with stop loss insurance covering
all amounts in excess of this limit. The accruals related to employee
health care and workers’ compensation are based on historical experience and
open case reserves. Our general liability claims are insured by a
third party; the Company generally has a $7.5 million deductible per occurrence
and a $30.0 million deductible in the aggregate, with lower deductibles for
certain types of claims. The Company records a general liability
accrual for claims falling below the Company’s deductible. The
general liability accrual estimate is based on an actuarial evaluation of our
past history of claims and other industry specific factors. The
Company has recorded expenses totaling $15.5 million, $0.9 million and $3.8
million, respectively, for all self-insured and general liability claims during
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. Please see Note 11
to our Consolidated Financial Statements for more information regarding the
year-to-date 2009 expenses. Because of the high degree of judgment
required in determining these estimated accrual amounts, actual future costs
could differ from our current estimated amounts.
Stock-Based
Compensation. We record stock-based compensation by
recognizing compensation expense at an amount equal to the fair value of
share-based payments granted under compensation arrangements. We
calculate the fair value of stock options using the Black-Scholes option pricing
model. Determining the fair value of share-based awards at the grant
date requires judgment in developing assumptions, which involve a number of
variables. These variables include, but are not limited to, the
expected stock price volatility over the term of the awards,and the expected
term of the option. In addition, when we first issue share-based
awards, we also use judgment in estimating the number of share-based awards that
are expected to be forfeited.
Derivative
Financial Instruments. To meet financing needs of our
home-buying customers, M/I Financial is party to interest rate lock commitments
(“IRLCs”), which are extended to customers who have applied for a mortgage loan
and meet certain defined credit and underwriting criteria. These IRLCs are
considered derivative financial instruments. M/I Financial manages
interest rate risk related to its IRLCs and mortgage loans held for sale through
the use of forward sales of mortgage-backed securities (“FMBSs”), use of
best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments and the occasional purchase of
options on FMBSs in accordance with Company policy. These FMBSs,
options on FMBSs, and IRLCs covered by FMBSs are considered non-designated
derivatives. In determining the fair value of IRLCs, M/I Financial
considers the value of the resulting loan if sold in the secondary
market. The fair value includes the price that the loan is expected
to be sold for along with the value of servicing release
premiums. Subsequent to inception, M/I Financial estimates an updated
fair value which is compared to the initial fair value. In addition,
M/I Financial uses fallout estimates which fluctuate based on the rate of the
IRLC in
relation
to current rates. Gains or losses are recorded in financial services
revenue. Certain IRLCs and mortgage loans held for sale are committed
to third party investors through the use of best-efforts whole loan delivery
commitments. The IRLCs and related best-efforts whole loan delivery
commitments, which generally are highly effective from an economic standpoint,
are considered non-designated derivatives and are accounted for at fair value,
with gains or losses recorded in financial services revenue. Under
the terms of these best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments covering
mortgage loans held for sale, the specific committed mortgage loans held for
sale are identified and matched to specific delivery commitments on a
loan-by-loan basis. The delivery commitments and loans held for sale
are recorded at fair value, with changes in fair value recorded in financial
services revenue.
Income
Taxes—Valuation Allowance. A valuation
allowance is recorded against a deferred tax asset if, based on the weight of
available evidence, it is more-likely-than-not (a likelihood of more than 50%)
that some portion or the entire deferred tax asset will not be realized. The
realization of a deferred tax asset ultimately depends on the existence of
sufficient taxable income in either the carryback or carryforward periods under
applicable tax law. The four sources of taxable income to be considered in
determining whether a valuation allowance is required include:
●
|
future
reversals of existing taxable temporary differences (i.e., offset gross
deferred tax assets against gross deferred tax
liabilities);
|
●
|
taxable
income in prior carryback years;
|
●
|
tax
planning strategies; and
|
●
|
future
taxable income, exclusive of reversing temporary differences and
carryforwards.
|
Determining
whether a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets is necessary requires an
analysis of both positive and negative evidence regarding realization of the
deferred tax assets. Examples of positive evidence may include:
●
|
a
strong earnings history exclusive of the loss that created the deductible
temporary differences, coupled with evidence indicating that the loss is
the result of an aberration rather than a continuing
condition;
|
●
|
an
excess of appreciated asset value over the tax basis of a company’s net
assets in an amount sufficient to realize the deferred tax asset;
and
|
●
|
existing
backlog that will produce more than enough taxable income to realize the
deferred tax asset based on existing sales prices and cost
structures.
|
Examples
of negative evidence may include:
●
|
the
existence of “cumulative losses” (defined as a pre-tax cumulative loss for
the business cycle – in our case four years);
|
●
|
an
expectation of being in a cumulative loss position in a future reporting
period;
|
●
|
a
carryback or carryforward period that is so brief that it would limit the
realization of tax benefits;
|
●
|
a
history of operating loss or tax credit carryforwards expiring unused;
and
|
●
|
unsettled
circumstances that, if unfavorably resolved, would adversely affect future
operations and profit levels on a continuing
basis.
|
The
Company evaluates its deferred tax assets, including net operating losses, to
determine if a valuation allowance is required. We evaluate this based on
the consideration of all available evidence using a “more likely than not”
standard. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to
evidence that can be objectively verified. A cumulative loss in recent
years is significant negative evidence in considering whether deferred tax
assets are realizable, and also restricts the amount of reliance on projections
of future taxable income to support the recovery of deferred tax assets.
The Company’s current and prior year losses present the most significant
negative evidence as to whether the Company needs to reduce its deferred tax
assets with a valuation allowance. We are now in a four-year cumulative
pre-tax loss position during the years 2005 through 2009. We currently
believe the cumulative weight of the negative evidence exceeds that of the
positive evidence and, as a result, it is more likely than not that we will not
be able to utilize all of our deferred tax assets. Therefore, as of
December 31, 2009, the Company had a total valuation allowance of $117.1 million
recorded. The accounting for deferred taxes is based upon an estimate
of future results. Differences between the anticipated and actual
outcomes of these future tax consequences could have a material impact on the
Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial position.
Future
adjustments to our deferred tax asset valuation allowance will be determined
based upon changes in the expected realization of our net deferred tax
assets. In 2010, we do not expect to record any additional tax
benefits as the carryback has been exhausted. Additionally, our
determination with respect to recording a valuation allowance may be further
impacted by, among other things:
●
|
additional
inventory impairments;
|
●
|
additional
pre-tax operating losses;
|
●
|
the
utilization of tax planning strategies that could accelerate the
realization of certain deferred tax assets; or
|
●
|
changes
in relevant tax law.
|
Additionally,
due to the considerable estimates utilized in establishing a valuation allowance
and the potential for changes in facts and circumstances in future reporting
periods, it is reasonably possible that we will be required to either increase
or decrease our valuation allowance in future reporting periods.
Income Taxes—Tax
Positions. The Company
evaluates tax positions that have been taken or are expected to be taken in tax
returns, and records the associated tax benefit or liability. Tax
positions are recognized when it is more-likely-than-not that the tax position
would be sustained upon examination. The tax position is measured at
the largest amount of benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being
realized upon settlement. Interest and penalties for all uncertain
tax positions are recorded within (Benefit) provision for income taxes in the
Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Income Tax
Receivable. Income tax receivable consists of tax refunds that
the Company expects to receive within one year. As of December 31,
2009 and 2008, there were $30.1 million and $39.5 million, respectively of
income tax receivable.
The
Company’s segment information is presented on the basis that the chief operating
decision makers use in evaluating segment performance. The Company’s
chief operating decision makers evaluate the Company’s performance in various
ways, including: (1) the results of our nine individual homebuilding operating
segments and the results of the financial services operations; (2) the results
of our three homebuilding regions; and (3) our consolidated financial
results. We have determined our reportable segments as follows:
Midwest homebuilding, Florida homebuilding, Mid-Atlantic homebuilding and
financial services operations. The homebuilding operating segments
that are included within each reportable segment have similar operations and
exhibit similar economic characteristics. Our homebuilding operations
include the acquisition and development of land, the sale and construction of
single-family attached and detached homes, and the occasional sale of lots and
land to third parties. The homebuilding operating segments that
comprise each of our reportable segments are as follows:
Midwest
|
Florida
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
Columbus,
Ohio
|
Tampa,
Florida
|
Washington,
D.C.
|
Cincinnati,
Ohio
|
Orlando,
Florida
|
Charlotte,
North Carolina
|
Indianapolis,
Indiana
|
|
Raleigh,
North Carolina
|
Chicago,
Illinois
|
|
|
The
financial services operations include the origination and sale of mortgage loans
and title services primarily for purchasers of the Company’s homes.
Highlights
and Trends for the Year Ended December 31, 2009
Overview
Throughout
2007, 2008 and the first half of 2009, the homebuilding environment continued to
deteriorate against a backdrop of macroeconomic recession, declining consumer
confidence and significant tightening in the availability of home mortgage
credit. While we have begun to see signs that some negative market
trends may be moderating at both local and national levels, key macroeconomic
indicators remain soft or mixed. In addition, throughout 2009, the credit
markets and the mortgage industry have experienced a period of disruption
characterized by bankruptcy, financial institution failure, consolidation and an
unprecedented level of intervention by the United States federal
government. While the ultimate outcome of these events cannot be
predicted, it has made it more difficult for homebuyers to obtain acceptable
financing. Although the supply of new and resale homes in the
marketplace has decreased recently, it is still excessive for the current level
of consumer demand and is
challenged
by an increased number of foreclosed homes offered at substantially reduced
prices. These pressures in the marketplace have resulted in price
reductions in an effort to generate sales and reduce inventory levels by us and
many of our competitors throughout much of 2009.
We have
responded to this challenging environment with a disciplined approach to the
business with continued reductions in direct costs, overhead expenses and land
spending. We have limited our supply of unsold homes
under
construction
and have focused on the generation of cash from our existing inventory supply as
we strive to align our land supply and inventory levels to current expectations
for home closings. We continued to focus on the preservation of cash
on hand and cash generation from the sale of existing inventory supply,
including the introduction of additional sales incentives and reduced sales
prices in certain situations in order to move this inventory. We also
reevaluated pricing in select communities in response to local market conditions
to generate sales. Certain of these changes resulted in adjustments
to our inventory valuations. Based on our evaluations during 2009, we
recorded inventory impairment charges of $55.4 million, and $1.7 million of
option deposits and pre-acquisition costs. While these impairment
charges and write-offs are less than amounts recognized in each of the prior two
years, they reflect the continued weakness in market conditions. We
will evaluate whether further impairment charges, valuation adjustments or
write-offs are necessary on these assets in the coming quarters. See
Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of the
Company’s 2009 inventory valuation adjustments.
In
February 2009, the $8,000 First Time Homebuyer Tax Credit was enacted into
law. This law enables homebuyers who have not owned a home in the
past three years, subject to certain income limits, to receive a tax credit of
10% of the purchase price of a home up to a maximum of $8,000. In
November 2009, this tax credit was extended by Congress to June 2010 and the new
law increased the annual income limits for qualification. In
addition, the new law also added a $6,500 tax credit for qualified existing
homeowners who elect to purchase a new home. Certain states also
enacted laws which enabled certain homebuyers to receive additional state tax
credits. Although it is not possible to quantify the precise impact,
availability of these tax credits appears to have incentivized certain
homebuyers to purchase homes during the second half of 2009.
In
November 2009, Congress passed new net operating loss carry-back legislation
which extended the carryback period from two years to five years. Due
to this new legislation, the Company expects to receive a $26 million refund in
the first quarter of 2010 from carrying back net operating losses to our 2003
tax year, which has been recorded within (Benefit) provision for income taxes in
the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Historically
low interest rates, increased affordability and federal and state housing tax
credits appear to have recently incented more prospective buyers to purchase a
new home. Together with lower levels of competition from private
builders, these factors offer evidence of improvement, though it is premature to
conclude that a sustainable recovery in the homebuilding industry is
underway. Foreclosures continue to have significantly more damaging
impact on the housing market than any other factor. In most of our
markets, appraisals continue to be negatively impacted by foreclosure
comparables which put additional pricing pressure on all home sales and limit
financing availability. As a result, we continue to remain cautious
regarding our outlook for the industry. We believe that the timing of
a sustainable recovery in the housing market remains
unclear. However, when economic conditions do improve, we believe
that we have the right strategy and the right people to return to
profitability. With our 19% increase in homes delivered in 2009, 33%
increase in new contracts in 2009, 15% increase in backlog units and 27%
increase in the value of our backlog from 2008, we believe that there is reason
for guarded optimism.
Based on
our experience during prior downturns in the housing market, we believe that
unexpected opportunities may arise in difficult times for those builders that
are well-prepared. In the current challenging environment, we believe
our balance sheet, liquidity, commitment to customer service, geographic
presence, diversified product lines, experienced personnel, and brand name all
position us well for such opportunities now and in the future. Our
desired financial targets for the new communities that we will offer in 2010 are
20% gross margins, sales pace of 2.5 per month, and a 20% return on
investment.
We are
projecting to purchase approximately $75 million of land in 2010, compared to
the $44.3 million of land purchased in 2009. The approximately 70%
increase in land purchases will be used to (i) develop a meaningful presence in
each of our existing markets with a goal of achieving economies of scale, which
we believe will lead to greater future profitability, (ii) expand our geographic
footprint; and (iii) manage our owned land inventory to an amount which we
believe is prudent and manageable in light of our future sales
expectations.
At
December 31, 2009, there were no amounts outstanding under the Credit
Facility. We also had $132.2 million of cash and cash
equivalents on hand and approximately $24.5 million available under the
Credit Facility, along with an expected tax refund of $26 million in the first
quarter of 2010. We believe our cash and cash equivalents as of
December 31, 2009 and cash generated from our operations during 2010 will be
adequate to meet our liquidity needs throughout
2010.
●
|
For
the year ended December 31, 2009, total revenue decreased $37.8 million
(6%) to $569.9 million as compared to $607.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008. This decrease is largely attributable to a
decrease of $32.2 million in revenue from outside land sales, from $32.9
million in 2008 to $0.7 million in 2009. Revenue, however, was
favorably impacted by a 19% increase in homes delivered, from 2,025 in
2008 to 2,409 in 2009, but this increase was partially offset by the
decrease of the average sales price of homes delivered from $274,000 to
$231,000.
|
|
|
●
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes for the year ended December
31, 2009 decreased by $122.1 million (57%), from $215.1 million in 2008 to
$93.0 million in 2009. During 2009, the Company incurred
charges totaling $57.1 million compared to $158.6 million incurred in 2008
related to the impairment of inventory and investment in Unconsolidated
LLCs and abandoned land transaction costs. Excluding the
charges related to the impairment of inventory, investment in
Unconsolidated LLCs, and imported drywall charges, our 2009 adjusted
operating gross margin was 15.3% compared to 2008’s adjusted operating
gross margin of 12.4%, which also excludes charges related to the
impairment of inventory and investment in Unconsolidated
LLCs. Excluding the impact of the above-mentioned impairment
and abandoned land transaction charges, as well as $16.7 million of other
non-operating charges (imported drywall charges of $12.2 million, $3.6
million of other unusual charges, including severance and bad debt
expense, and loss on the sale of our airplane of $0.9 million), the
Company recorded a pre-tax loss from continuing operations of $19.3
million in 2009, which represents a $34.9 million improvement from 2008’s
pre-tax loss from continuing operations of $54.2 million (exclusive of
aforementioned impairments, $5.6 million gain on the sale of the Company’s
airplane, $4.5 million of other unusual charges, including impairment of
the Company’s airplane and bad debt expense, and $3.3 million of
severance). Please see the table set forth below which
reconciles the non-GAAP financial measures of adjusted operating gross
margin and adjusted pre-tax loss from continuing operations to their
respective most directly comparable GAAP financial measures, gross margin
and loss from continuing operations before income taxes. The
improvement from 2008 was primarily driven by lower selling, general and
administrative expenses. General and administrative expenses
decreased $18.3 million (24%) from 2008 to 2009. The decrease
was primarily due to (1) a decrease of $7.0 million in land related
expenses, including abandoned projects and deposit write-offs; (2) a
decrease of $4.8 million in payroll and incentive expenses; (3) a decrease
of $3.8 million in miscellaneous expenses, including expenses related to
the airplane that was sold in the first quarter of 2009; and (4) a
decrease of $2.5 million in professional fees. Additionally,
selling expenses decreased by $10.3 million (19%) for the year ended
December 31, 2009 when compared to the year ended December 31, 2008,
primarily due to (1) a $4.8 million decrease in expenses related to sales
offices and model homes; (2) a $2.9 million decrease in variable selling
expenses; and (3) a $2.1 million decrease in advertising
expenses.
|
|
|
●
|
New
contracts for 2009 were 2,493, up 33% compared to 1,879 in
2008. For the year ended December 31, 2009, our cancellation
rate was 19% compared to 27% in 2008. By region, our
cancellation rates in 2009 versus 2008 were as follows: Midwest – 22% in
2009 and 30% in 2008; Florida – 16% in 2009 and 21% in 2008; and
Mid-Atlantic – 16% in 2009 and 25% in 2008.
|
|
|
●
|
Our
mortgage company’s capture rate increased from 85% for the year ended
December 31, 2008 to 87% for the year ended December 31,
2009. Capture rate is influenced by financing availability and
can fluctuate up or down from period to period.
|
|
|
●
|
We
continue to deal with very weak and ever-changing market conditions that
require us to constantly monitor the value of our inventory and
investments in Unconsolidated LLCs in those markets in which we operate,
in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we
recorded $57.1 million of charges relating to the impairment of inventory
and investment in Unconsolidated LLCs and write-off of abandoned land
transaction costs, compared to $158.6 million of charges during the year
ended December 31, 2008. We generally believe that we will see
a gradual improvement in market conditions over the long
term. In 2010, we will continue to update our evaluation of the
value of our inventory and investments in Unconsolidated LLCs for
impairment, and could be required to record additional impairment charges,
which would negatively impact earnings should market conditions
deteriorate further or results differ from management’s original
assumptions.
|
|
|
●
|
During
2009, we accrued $12.2 million for the repair of certain homes in Florida
where certain of our subcontractors had purchased imported drywall that
may be responsible for accelerated corrosion of certain metals in the
home.
|
●
|
During
2009, we recorded a net tax benefit of $30.9 million. This net
benefit consists primarily of the realization of $25.9 million beginning
of the year NOL carryforwards which, due to recent tax legislation, we
were allowed to carry back 5 years. In addition, as a result of
a 10-year carryback period available for certain of our 2009 losses, we
were able to realize an additional $4.2 million benefit. We
expect to receive the $25.9 million in the first quarter of 2010 and the
$4.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2010. While our 2009 tax losses
generated an additional $38.9 million of deferred tax assets, we were
required to fully reserve against such benefits as a result of our
cumulative four-year pre-tax loss
position.
|
The
following table reconciles our operating gross margin and pre-tax (loss) income
from operations (each of which constitutes a non-GAAP financial measure) for the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 to the GAAP financial measures of
gross margin and loss from continuing operations before income taxes,
respectively:
|
Years
Ended
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin
|
$ |
19,539 |
|
$ |
(77,805 |
) |
$ |
35,487 |
|
Add:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairments
|
|
55,421 |
|
|
153,300 |
|
|
148,377 |
|
Imported
drywall charges
|
|
12,150 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Adjusted
operating gross margin
|
$ |
87,110 |
|
$ |
75,495 |
|
$ |
183,864 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
$ |
(92,989 |
) |
$ |
(215,124 |
) |
$ |
(92,480 |
) |
Add:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairments
and abandonments
|
|
57,077 |
|
|
158,612 |
|
|
151,989 |
|
Imported
drywall charges
|
|
12,150 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Other
expense (income)
|
|
941 |
|
|
(5,555 |
) |
|
- |
|
Restructuring/other
|
|
3,561 |
|
|
7,859 |
|
|
10,591 |
|
Adjusted
pre-tax (loss) income from continuing operations
|
$ |
(19,260 |
) |
$ |
(54,208 |
) |
$ |
70,100 |
|
Adjusted
operating gross margin, and adjusted pre-tax income (loss) from operations are
non-GAAP financial measures. Management finds these measures to be a useful in
evaluating the Company’s performance because it discloses the financial results
generated from homes it actually delivered during the period, as the asset
impairments and certain other write-offs relate, in part, to inventory that was
not delivered during the period. They assist the Company’s management in making
strategic decisions regarding the Company’s future operations. The Company
believes investors will also find these to be important and useful because it
discloses profitability measures that can be compared to a prior period without
regard to the variability of asset impairments and certain unusual write-offs.
In addition, to the extent that the Company’s competitors provide similar
information, disclosure of these measures helps readers of the Company’s
financial statements compare profits to its competitors with regard to the homes
they deliver in the same period. In addition, because these measures are not
calculated in accordance with GAAP, they may not be completely comparable to
similarly titled measures of the Company’s competitors due to potential
differences in methods of calculation and charges being excluded.
The
following table shows, by segment, revenue, operating (loss) income,
depreciation expense and interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008 and 2007, as well as the Company’s (loss) income from continuing operations
before income taxes for such periods. The following table also shows,
by segment, assets and investment in Unconsolidated LLCs at December 31, 2009,
2008 and 2007:
|
Years
Ended
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
258,910 |
|
$ |
232,715 |
|
$ |
358,441 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
95,615 |
|
|
151,643 |
|
|
312,930 |
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
201,366 |
|
|
202,038 |
|
|
326,451 |
|
Other
homebuilding – unallocated (a)
|
|
- |
|
|
7,131 |
|
|
(424 |
) |
Financial
services
|
|
14,058 |
|
|
14,132 |
|
|
19,062 |
|
Total
revenue
|
$ |
569,949 |
|
$ |
607,659 |
|
$ |
1,016,460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
(loss) income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding (b)
|
$ |
(17,590 |
) |
$ |
(73,073 |
) |
$ |
(10,377 |
) |
Florida
homebuilding (b)
|
|
(41,092 |
) |
|
(71,864 |
) |
|
(63,117 |
) |
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding (b)
|
|
(7,500 |
) |
|
(41,491 |
) |
|
(43,547 |
) |
Other
homebuilding – unallocated (a)
|
|
- |
|
|
503 |
|
|
386 |
|
Financial
services
|
|
6,533 |
|
|
6,010 |
|
|
8,517 |
|
Less:
Corporate selling, general and administrative expenses (c)
|
|
(23,932 |
) |
|
(29,567 |
) |
|
(27,395 |
) |
Total
operating loss
|
$ |
(83,581 |
) |
$ |
(209,482 |
) |
$ |
(135,533 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
4,043 |
|
$ |
5,197 |
|
$ |
4,788 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
1,690 |
|
|
2,335 |
|
|
5,877 |
|
|
Years
Ended
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
2,235 |
|
|
3,209 |
|
|
3,815 |
|
Financial
services
|
|
499 |
|
|
456 |
|
|
636 |
|
Corporate
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
227 |
|
Total
interest expense
|
$ |
8,467 |
|
$ |
11,197 |
|
$ |
15,343 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
(loss) income (d)
|
|
(941 |
) |
|
5,555 |
|
|
- |
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
$ |
(92,989 |
) |
$ |
(215,124 |
) |
$ |
(150,876 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
224,059 |
|
$ |
242,066 |
|
$ |
354,220 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
80,797 |
|
|
121,587 |
|
|
241,603 |
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
141,998 |
|
|
185,268 |
|
|
276,887 |
|
Financial
services
|
|
52,092 |
|
|
60,992 |
|
|
62,411 |
|
Corporate
|
|
164,882 |
|
|
83,375 |
|
|
167,926 |
|
Assets
of discontinued operation
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
14,598 |
|
Total
assets
|
$ |
663,828 |
|
$ |
693,288 |
|
$ |
1,117,645 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
in Unconsolidated LLCs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
6,051 |
|
$ |
6,359 |
|
$ |
15,705 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
4,248 |
|
|
6,771 |
|
|
24,638 |
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Financial
services
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Total
investment in Unconsolidated LLCs
|
$ |
10,299 |
|
$ |
13,130 |
|
$ |
40,343 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
659 |
|
$ |
336 |
|
$ |
543 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
728 |
|
|
1,288 |
|
|
1,603 |
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
959 |
|
|
1,028 |
|
|
849 |
|
Financial
services
|
|
395 |
|
|
471 |
|
|
498 |
|
Corporate
|
|
5,130 |
|
|
4,631 |
|
|
4,495 |
|
Total
depreciation and amortization
|
$ |
7,871 |
|
$ |
7,754 |
|
$ |
7,988 |
|
(a)
|
Other
homebuilding – unallocated consists of the net impact in the period due to
timing of homes delivered with low down-payment loans (buyers put less
than 5% down) funded by the Company’s financial services operations not
yet sold to a third party. In accordance with applicable
accounting rules, recognition of such revenue must be deferred until the
related loan is sold to a third party. Refer to the Revenue
Recognition policy described in our Application of Critical Accounting
Estimates and Policies in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations for further
discussion.
|
(b)
|
The
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 include the impact of charges
relating to the impairment of inventory and investment in Unconsolidated
LLCs and the write-off of land deposits and pre-acquisition costs of $57.1
million, $158.6 million and $152.0 million, respectively. For
2009, 2008 and 2007, these charges reduced operating income by $20.4
million, $56.3 million and $8.8 million in the Midwest region, $24.1
million, $66.9 million and $88.3 million in the Florida region, and $12.6
million, $35.4 million and $54.9 million in the Mid-Atlantic region,
respectively.
|
(c)
|
The
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 include the impact of
severance charges of $1.0 million, $3.3 million and $5.4 million,
respectively. The year ended December 31, 2008 also includes
charges of $3.3 million for corporate asset impairments. The
year ended December 31, 2007 also includes the write-off of $5.2 million
of intangibles.
|
(d)
|
Other
(loss) income is comprised of the loss on the sale of the plane during the
first quarter of 2009, and the gain recognized on the exchange of the
Company’s airplane during the first quarter of
2008.
|
The
following table shows total assets by segment as of December 31, 2009 and
2008:
|
At
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial
Services
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
Midwest
|
|
Florida
|
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
|
and
Unallocated
|
|
Total
|
|
Land
purchase deposits
|
$ |
1,001 |
|
$ |
50 |
|
$ |
285 |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
1,336 |
|
Inventory
(a)
|
|
213,592 |
|
|
70,117 |
|
|
135,244 |
|
|
- |
|
|
418,953 |
|
Investments
in Unconsolidated entities
|
|
6,051 |
|
|
4,248 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
10,299 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
3,415 |
|
|
6,382 |
|
|
6,469 |
|
|
216,974 |
|
|
233,240 |
|
Total
assets
|
$ |
224,059 |
|
$ |
80,797 |
|
$ |
141,998 |
|
$ |
216,974 |
|
$ |
663,828 |
|
|
At
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial
Services
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
Midwest
|
|
Florida
|
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
|
and
Unallocated
|
|
Total
|
|
Land
purchase deposits
|
$ |
96 |
|
$ |
32 |
|
$ |
942 |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
1,070 |
|
Inventory
(a)
|
|
232,853 |
|
|
102,500 |
|
|
179,606 |
|
|
- |
|
|
514,959 |
|
Investments
in Unconsolidated entities
|
|
6,359 |
|
|
6,771 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
13,130 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
2,758 |
|
|
12,284 |
|
|
4,720 |
|
|
144,367 |
|
|
164,129 |
|
Total
assets
|
$ |
242,066 |
|
$ |
121,587 |
|
$ |
185,268 |
|
$ |
144,367 |
|
$ |
693,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
Inventory
includes single-family lots, land and land development costs; land held
for sale; homes under construction; model homes and furnishings; community
development district infrastructure; and consolidated inventory not
owned.
|
Seasonality
and Variability in Quarterly Results
We have
experienced, and expect to continue to experience, significant seasonality and
quarter-to-quarter variability in homebuilding activity levels. In
most years, homes delivered increase substantially in the third and fourth
quarters. We believe that this seasonality reflects the tendency of
homebuyers to shop for a new home in the spring with the goal of closing in the
fall or winter, as well as the scheduling of construction to accommodate
seasonal weather conditions. We also have experienced, and expect to
continue to experience, seasonality in our financial services operations,
because loan originations correspond with the delivery of homes in our
homebuilding operations. The following table reflects this cycle for
the Company during the four quarters of 2009 and 2008:
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
December
31,
|
|
September
30,
|
|
June
30,
|
|
March
31,
|
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
2009
|
|
2009
|
|
2009
|
|
2009
|
Revenue
|
$ |
204,916 |
|
$ |
152,738 |
|
$ |
116,146 |
|
$ |
96,149 |
Unit
data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New
contracts
|
|
448 |
|
|
619 |
|
|
759 |
|
|
667 |
Homes
delivered
|
|
858 |
|
|
665 |
|
|
492 |
|
|
394 |
Backlog
at end of period
|
|
650 |
|
|
1,060 |
|
|
1,106 |
|
|
839 |
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
December
31,
|
|
September
30,
|
|
June
30,
|
|
March
31,
|
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
2008
|
|
2008
|
|
2008
|
|
2008
|
Revenue
|
$ |
150,187 |
|
$ |
160,385 |
|
$ |
141,002 |
|
$ |
156,085 |
Unit
data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New
contracts
|
|
339 |
|
|
456 |
|
|
530 |
|
|
554 |
Homes
delivered
|
|
554 |
|
|
555 |
|
|
466 |
|
|
450 |
Backlog
at end of period
|
|
566 |
|
|
781 |
|
|
880 |
|
|
816 |
A home is
included in “new contracts” when our standard sales contract is
executed. “Homes delivered” represents homes for which the closing of
the sale has occurred. “Backlog” represents homes for which the
standard sales contract has been executed, but which are not included in homes
delivered because closings for these homes have not yet occurred as of the end
of the period specified.
The
following table presents, by reportable segment, selected results of operations
for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007:
|
Years
Ended
|
|
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Midwest
Region
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homes
delivered
|
|
1,282 |
|
|
937 |
|
|
1,436 |
|
Average
sales price per home delivered
|
$ |
202 |
|
$ |
244 |
|
$ |
247 |
|
Revenue
homes
|
$ |
258,818 |
|
$ |
228,728 |
|
$ |
354,000 |
|
Revenue
third party land sales
|
$ |
92 |
|
$ |
3,987 |
|
$ |
4,441 |
|
Operating
loss homes (a)
|
$ |
(15,666 |
) |
$ |
(64,338 |
) |
$ |
(10,665 |
) |
Operating
(loss) income land (a)
|
$ |
(1,924 |
) |
$ |
(8,735 |
) |
$ |
288 |
|
New
contracts, net
|
|
1,334 |
|
|
911 |
|
|
1,195 |
|
Backlog
at end of period
|
|
417 |
|
|
365 |
|
|
391 |
|
Average
sales price of homes in backlog
|
$ |
241 |
|
$ |
230 |
|
$ |
273 |
|
Aggregate
sales value of homes in backlog
|
$ |
101,000 |
|
$ |
84,000 |
|
$ |
107,000 |
|
Number
of active communities
|
|
59 |
|
|
73 |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florida
Region
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homes
delivered
|
|
428 |
|
|
474 |
|
|
877 |
|
Average
sales price per home delivered
|
$ |
222 |
|
$ |
263 |
|
$ |
313 |
|
Revenue
homes
|
$ |
94,958 |
|
$ |
124,314 |
|
$ |
274,297 |
|
Revenue
third party land sales
|
$ |
657 |
|
$ |
27,329 |
|
$ |
38,633 |
|
Operating
loss homes (a)
|
$ |
(39,401 |
) |
$ |
(47,990 |
) |
$ |
(28,071 |
) |
Operating
loss land (a)
|
$ |
(1,691 |
) |
$ |
(23,874 |
) |
$ |
(35,046 |
) |
New
contracts, net
|
|
406 |
|
|
430 |
|
|
505 |
|
Backlog
at end of period
|
|
55 |
|
|
77 |
|
|
121 |
|
Average
sales price of homes in backlog
|
$ |
220 |
|
$ |
265 |
|
$ |
292 |
|
Aggregate
sales value of homes in backlog
|
$ |
12,000 |
|
$ |
20,000 |
|
$ |
35,000 |
|
Number
of active communities
|
|
21 |
|
|
25 |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mid-Atlantic
Region
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homes
delivered
|
|
699 |
|
|
614 |
|
|
860 |
|
Average
sales price per home delivered
|
$ |
288 |
|
$ |
327 |
|
$ |
362 |
|
Revenue
homes
|
$ |
201,366 |
|
$ |
200,455 |
|
$ |
311,195 |
|
Revenue
third party land sales
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
1,583 |
|
$ |
15,256 |
|
Operating
loss homes (a)
|
$ |
(5,858 |
) |
$ |
(41,471 |
) |
$ |
(31,264 |
) |
Operating
loss land (a)
|
$ |
(1,642 |
) |
$ |
(20 |
) |
$ |
(12,283 |
) |
New
contracts, net
|
|
753 |
|
|
538 |
|
|
752 |
|
Backlog
at end of period
|
|
178 |
|
|
124 |
|
|
200 |
|
Average
sales price of homes in backlog
|
$ |
359 |
|
$ |
285 |
|
$ |
388 |
|
Aggregate
sales value of homes in backlog
|
$ |
64,000 |
|
$ |
35,000 |
|
$ |
78,000 |
|
Number
of active communities
|
|
21 |
|
|
30 |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Homebuilding Regions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homes
delivered
|
|
2,409 |
|
|
2,025 |
|
|
3,173 |
|
Average
sales price per home delivered
|
$ |
231 |
|
$ |
274 |
|
$ |
296 |
|
Revenue
homes
|
$ |
555,142 |
|
$ |
553,497 |
|
$ |
939,492 |
|
Revenue
third party land sales
|
$ |
749 |
|
$ |
32,899 |
|
$ |
58,330 |
|
Operating
loss homes (a)
|
$ |
(60,925 |
) |
$ |
(153,799 |
) |
$ |
(70,000 |
) |
Operating
loss land (a)
|
$ |
(5,257 |
) |
$ |
(32,629 |
) |
$ |
(47,041 |
) |
New
contracts, net
|
|
2,493 |
|
|
1,879 |
|
|
2,452 |
|
Backlog
at end of period
|
|
650 |
|
|
566 |
|
|
712 |
|
Average
sales price of homes in backlog
|
$ |
272 |
|
$ |
247 |
|
$ |
308 |
|
Aggregate
sales value of homes in backlog
|
$ |
177,000 |
|
$ |
139,000 |
|
$ |
220,000 |
|
Number
of active communities
|
|
101 |
|
|
128 |
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial
Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
of loans originated
|
|
2,031 |
|
|
1,623 |
|
|
2,340 |
|
Value
of loans originated
|
$ |
420,761 |
|
$ |
382,992 |
|
$ |
586,520 |
|
Revenue
|
$ |
14,058 |
|
$ |
14,132 |
|
$ |
19,062 |
|
General
and administrative expenses
|
$ |
7,525 |
|
$ |
8,122 |
|
$ |
10,545 |
|
Interest
expense
|
$ |
499 |
|
$ |
456 |
|
$ |
636 |
|
Income
before income taxes
|
$ |
6,034 |
|
$ |
5,554 |
|
$ |
7,881 |
|
(a)
|
Amount
includes impairment and abandonment charges for 2009, 2008 and 2007 as
follows:
|
|
December
31,
|
Midwest:
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Homes
|
$ |
18,339 |
|
$ |
47,604 |
|
$ |
8,803 |
|
Land
|
|
2,016 |
|
|
8,729 |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
20,355 |
|
|
56,333 |
|
|
8,803 |
|
|
Florida:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homes
|
|
22,242 |
|
|
42,642 |
|
|
50,802 |
|
Land
|
|
1,883 |
|
|
24,264 |
|
|
37,468 |
|
|
|
24,125 |
|
|
66,906 |
|
|
88,270 |
|
|
Mid-Atlantic:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homes
|
|
10,955 |
|
|
35,063 |
|
|
42,661 |
|
Land
|
|
1,642 |
|
|
310 |
|
|
12,255 |
|
|
|
12,597 |
|
|
35,373 |
|
|
54,916 |
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homes
|
|
51,536 |
|
|
125,309 |
|
|
102,266 |
|
Land
|
|
5,541 |
|
|
33,303 |
|
|
49,723 |
|
|
$ |
57,077 |
|
$ |
158,612 |
|
$ |
151,989 |
|
Cancellation
Rates
The
following table sets forth the cancellation rates for each of our homebuilding
segments for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007:
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
Midwest:
|
22.2%
|
|
29.8%
|
|
30.9%
|
Florida:
|
15.8%
|
|
20.7%
|
|
45.8%
|
Mid-Atlantic:
|
15.5%
|
|
25.4%
|
|
23.3%
|
|
Total
|
19.3%
|
|
26.6%
|
|
32.7%
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009
Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2008
Midwest
Region. For the year ended December 31, 2009, Midwest
homebuilding revenue increased $26.2 million (11%), from $232.7 million in 2008
to $258.9 million in 2009. The increase was primarily due to a 37%
increase in the number of homes delivered, from 937 in 2008 to 1,282 in 2009,
which was partially offset by a 17% decrease in the average sales price of homes
delivered from $244,000 in 2008 to $202,000 in 2009. We have been
actively trying to improve our absorption rates and, as a result, our 2009
monthly absorption rate in the Midwest was 1.7 per community, compared to 1.0
per community in 2008. Operating loss decreased by $55.5 million
(76%), from $73.1 million in 2008 to $17.6 million in 2009, primarily due to
reduced impairment charges and lower selling, general and administrative
costs. Excluding impairment charges of $19.8 million and $56.0
million in 2009 and 2008, respectively, our adjusted operating gross margins
were 12.5% and 8.4% for those same periods in our Midwest region. The
4.1% increase was a result of less sales incentives offered on our Midwest homes
along with a decrease in the percentage of speculative homes delivered, which
typically have a lower profit margin compared to total homes
delivered. Excluding deposit write-offs and pre-acquisition costs of
$0.6 million in 2009 and $0.3 million in 2008, selling, general and
administrative expenses decreased $6.7 million, from $36.3 million in 2008 to
$29.6 million in 2009 due to a decrease in payroll related expenses, model home
expenses, professional fees and land-related expenses. For the year
ended December 31, 2009, our Midwest region new contracts increased 46% compared
to the year ended December 31, 2008. Year-end backlog increased 14%
in units, from 365 at December 31, 2008 to 417 at December 31, 2009, and 20% in
total sales value, from $83.8 million at December 31, 2008 to $100.6 million at
December 31, 2009, with an average sales price in backlog of $241,000 at
December 31, 2009 compared to $230,000 at December 31, 2008.
Florida
Region. For
the year ended December 31, 2009, Florida homebuilding revenue decreased by
$56.0 million (37%) compared to 2008. The decrease in revenue was
primarily due to the $26.7 million decrease in revenue from third party land
sales, along with a 10% decrease in the number of homes delivered from 474 in
2008 compared to 428 in 2009 as well as a 16% decline in the average sales price
of homes delivered from $263,000 in 2008 to $222,000 in 2009. We have
been actively trying to improve our absorption rates and, as a result, our 2009
monthly absorption rate in our Florida markets was 1.6 per community, compared
to 1.3 in 2008. Operating loss decreased by $30.8 million, from $71.9
million in 2008 to $41.1 million in 2009, primarily due to reduced impairment
charges and lower selling, general and administrative
costs. Excluding impairment charges of $24.1 million and $12.2
million for charges related to defective drywall for the year ended December 31,
2009 and $66.7 million of impairment charges for the year ended December 31,
2008, our adjusted operating gross margins were 12.8% and
12.4% for
those same periods in our Florida region. Selling, general and
administrative costs decreased $6.8 million, from $23.9 million in 2008 to $17.1
million in 2009, due to a decrease in payroll related expenses, land related
expenses, professional fees, advertising expenses, model home expenses, and
expenses related to our sales offices. Our Florida region new
contracts decreased from 430 in 2008 to 406 in 2009. Management
anticipates continued challenging conditions in our Florida markets in 2010
based on the decrease in backlog units, from 77 at December 31, 2008 to 55 at
December 31, 2009, along with the decrease in the total sales value of homes in
backlog, from $20.4 million at December 31, 2008 to $12.1 million at December
31, 2009, and the decrease in the average sales price of homes in backlog, from
$265,000 at December 31, 2008 to $220,000 at December 31,
2009.
Mid-Atlantic
Region. In
our Mid-Atlantic region, homebuilding revenue decreased $0.6 million, from
$202.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 to $201.4 million for the
year ended December 31, 2009. This decrease is primarily due to the
decrease in the average sales price of homes delivered, from $327,000 in 2008 to
$288,000 in 2009. The decrease in averages sales price was partially
offset by a 14% increase in homes delivered, from 614 in 2008 to 699 in
2009. New contracts increased 40%, from 538 in 2008 to 753 in
2009. We have been actively trying to improve our absorption rates
and, as a result, our 2009 monthly absorption rate in our Mid-Atlantic region
was 2.5 per community, compared to 1.3 in 2008. Operating loss
decreased by $34.0 million, from $41.5 million in 2008 to $7.5 million in 2009,
primarily due to reduced impairment charges and lower selling, general and
administrative costs. Excluding impairment charges of $11.5 million
and $30.5 million in 2009 and 2008, respectively, our adjusted operating gross
margins were 14.1% and 11.0% for those same periods in our Mid-Atlantic
region. The increase was primarily due to the results of our
Company-wide initiative to reduce hard costs, along with value engineering in
our Mid-Atlantic markets, as well as simplifying our base house plans, which
encourages homebuyers to add more options, which in turn have higher profit
margins. Excluding deposit write-offs and pre-acquisition costs of
$1.1 million in 2009 and $4.8 million in 2008, selling, general and
administrative expenses decreased $5.1 million due to a decrease in payroll
related expenses, advertising expenses, model home expenses, and expenses
related to our sales offices. Year-end backlog increased 44% in
units, from 124 at December 31, 2008 to 178 at December 31, 2009, and 81% in
total sales value, from $35.3 million at December 31, 2008 to $64.0 million at
December 31, 2009, with an average sales price in backlog also increasing, from
$285,000 at December 31, 2008 to $359,000 at December 31, 2009.
Financial
Services. For the year ended December 31, 2009, revenue from
our mortgage and title operations was $14.1 million, a decrease of $0.1 million
from 2008. Operating income for our financial services segment
increased $0.5 million (8%), from $6.0 million in 2008 to $6.5 million in 2009,
as a result of the $0.6 million decrease in general and administrative expenses,
which was partially offset by the decrease in revenue described
above. Loan originations increased 25%, from 1,623 in 2008 to 2,031
in 2009.
At
December 31, 2009, M/I Financial had mortgage operations in all of our
markets. Approximately 87% of our homes delivered during 2009 that
were financed were through M/I Financial, compared to 85% in
2008. Capture rate is influenced by financing availability and can
fluctuate up or down from quarter to quarter.
Corporate
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses. Corporate
selling, general and administrative expenses decreased $5.6 million (19%), from
$29.5 million in 2008 to $23.9 million in 2009 primarily due to a decrease of
$3.9 million in payroll related expenses, which includes a decrease of $2.3
million of severance. 2009 Corporate general and administrative
expenses also include a charge of $0.6 million for settlement of an outstanding
claim, which was offset by an overall reduction of professional
fees.
Interest. Interest
expense for the Company decreased $2.7 million (24%) from $11.2 million in 2008
to $8.5 million in 2009. This decrease was primarily due to the
decrease in our weighted average borrowings from $259.1 million in 2008 to
$213.1 million in 2009, which was partially offset by a slight increase in our
weighted average borrowing rate, from 8.07% for the year ended December 31, 2008
to 8.63% for the year ended December 31, 2009.
Year Ended December 31, 2008
Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2007
Midwest
Region. For the year ended December 31, 2008, Midwest
homebuilding revenue was $232.7 million, a 35% decrease compared to
2007. The decrease was primarily due to the 35% decrease in the
number of homes delivered, along with a 1% decrease in the average sales price
of homes delivered from $247,000 in 2007 to $244,000 in
2008. Operating loss increased by $62.7 million, going from $10.4
million in 2007 to $73.1 million in 2008 primarily due to lower profit margins
as discussed below. Excluding impairment charges of $56.0 million and
$8.1 million in 2008 and 2007, respectively, our gross margins were 8.4% and
12.9% for those same periods in our Midwest region. The 4.5% decrease
was a result of more sales incentives offered on our Midwest homes along with an
increase in the percentage of speculative homes delivered, which typically have
a lower profit margin compared
to total
homes delivered. Selling, general and administrative costs decreased
$11.9 million, from $48.5 million in 2007 to $36.6 million in 2008 due to a
decrease in payroll related expenses, model home expenses and land-related
expenses. For the year ended December 31, 2008, our Midwest region
new contracts declined 24% compared to the year ended December 31, 2007 due to
weak market conditions. Year-end backlog declined 7% in units, from
391 at December 31, 2007 to 365 at December 31, 2008, and 21% in total sales
value, from $106.6 million at December 31, 2007 to $83.8 million at December 31,
2008, with an average sales price in backlog of $230,000 at December 31, 2008
compared to $273,000 at December 31, 2007.
Florida Region.
For the
year ended December 31, 2008, Florida homebuilding revenue decreased by $161.3
million (52%) compared to 2007. The decrease in revenue was primarily
due to a 46% decrease in the number of homes delivered in 2008 compared to 2007
as well as a 16% decline in the average sales price of homes delivered from
$313,000 in 2007 to $263,000 in 2008. Operating loss increased by
$8.8 million, going from $63.1 million in 2007 to $71.9 million in 2008
primarily due to lower profit margins as discussed below. Excluding
impairment charges of $66.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 and
$86.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2007, our gross margins decreased
to 12.4% from 21.6% for those same periods. The 9.2% decrease was
primarily due to the decrease in the average sales price of homes delivered
discussed above, along with an increase in the number of speculative homes
delivered, which typically have a lower profit margin. Selling,
general and administrative costs decreased $20.4 million, from $44.3 million in
2007 to $23.9 million in 2008 due to a decrease in variable selling expenses,
payroll related expenses, real estate taxes, and the 2007 write-off of goodwill
and other assets. Our Florida region new contracts decreased from 505
in 2007 to 430 in 2008. Backlog units decreased from 121 at December
31, 2007 to 77 at December 31, 2008, and the total sales value of homes in
backlog decreased from $35.4 million at December 31, 2007 to $20.4 million at
December 31, 2008. The average sales price of homes in backlog also
decreased, from $292,000 at December 31, 2007 to $265,000 at December 31,
2008.
Mid-Atlantic
Region. In
our Mid-Atlantic region, homebuilding revenue decreased $124.4 million (38%) for
the year ended December 31, 2008 compared to the year ended December 31,
2007. This decrease is primarily due to the decrease in homes
delivered from 860 in 2007 to 614 in 2008. New contracts decreased
28%, from 752 in 2007 to 538 in 2008. Operating loss decreased by
$2.0 million, going from $43.5 million in 2007 to $41.5 million in 2008
primarily due to lower selling, general and administrative costs as discussed
below, which were partially offset by lower profit margins. Excluding
impairment charges of $30.5 million and $53.8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively, our gross margins were 11.0% and 15.5%
for those same periods in our Mid-Atlantic region. The decrease of
4.5% was primarily due to the decrease in the average sales price of homes
delivered, from $362,000 in 2007 to $327,000 in 2008, and an increase in the
number of speculative homes delivered, which typically have a lower profit
margin. Excluding deposit write-offs and pre-acquisition costs of
$4.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2008, selling, general and
administrative expenses decreased $10.8 million, primarily due to a decrease in
payroll related expenses and variable selling expenses. Year-end
backlog declined 38% in units, from 200 at December 31, 2007 to 124 at December
31, 2008, and 55% in total sales value, from $77.6 million at December 31, 2007
to $35.3 million at December 31, 2008, with an average sales price in backlog of
$285,000 at December 31, 2008 compared to $388,000 at December 31,
2007.
Financial
Services. For the year ended December 31, 2008, revenue from
our mortgage and title operations decreased $5.0 million (26%), from $19.1
million in 2007 to $14.1 million in 2008, due primarily to a 31% decrease in
loan originations. Operating income for our financial services
segment decreased $2.5 million (29%), from $8.5 million in 2007 to $6.0 million
in 2008 primarily due to the decrease in revenue described above, which was
partially offset by a $2.4 million decrease in selling, general and
administrative expenses.
Corporate
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses. Corporate
selling, general and administrative expenses increased $2.2 million (8%), from
$27.4 million in 2007 to $29.6 million in 2008. The increase was
primarily due to a $3.3 million impairment of the Company’s plane which is for
sale, which was partially offset by a reduction in employee-related costs.
Interest. Interest
expense for the Company decreased $4.1 million (27%) from $15.3 million in 2007
to $11.2 million in 2008. This decrease was primarily due to the
decrease in our weighted average borrowings from $496.6 million in 2007 to
$259.1 million in 2008, which was partially offset by a decrease of $11.0
million in interest capitalized, due primarily to a significant reduction in
land development activities, and a slight increase in our weighted average
borrowing rate, from 7.58% for the year ended December 31, 2007 to 8.07% for the
year ended December 31, 2008.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Overview
of Capital Resources and Liquidity
We have
historically funded our homebuilding and financial services operations with cash
flows from operating activities, borrowings under our credit facilities, and the
issuance of debt and equity securities. In light of the challenging homebuilding
market conditions experienced over the past few years, we have been operating
with a primary focus to generate cash flows from operating activities through
reductions in land inventories and other assets. Our housing
inventories, including land investment, decreased by $672 million, or 62%, from
$1.1 billion at December 31, 2006, to $420 million at December 31,
2009. The generation of cash flow from this reduction in assets has
allowed us to increase our liquidity and strengthen our balance sheet, and has
placed us in a position to be able to invest in market opportunities as they
arise. We do not expect to generate as much cash from asset
reductions in 2010 as we have in the past three years. Depending upon
future homebuilding market conditions and our expectations for such, we may use
a portion of our cash balances to increase our investment in inventories in
anticipation of increasing our aggregate level of home sales in future
years. We are currently projecting to purchase approximately $75
million of land in 2010. It is our intention, however, to maintain
adequate liquidity and moderate leverage, while continuing to evaluate our
overall capital structure, including re-financing opportunities for our
indebtedness.
At
December 31, 2009, our ratio of net debt to total capital was 18%, compared to
36% at December 31, 2008. Net debt to total capital consists of total
debt net of cash divided by total debt plus shareholders’ equity. The
decrease in our ratio of net debt to total capital at December 31, 2009 as
compared with the ratio a year earlier was primarily due to our higher cash
balance resulting from generating cash flows from operations along with the
equity offering we completed in the second quarter of 2009, which netted $52.6
million. We believe that our balance sheet and liquidity position
will allow us to be flexible in reacting to changing market
conditions. However, future period-end net debt to total capital
ratios may be higher than the 18% ratio achieved at December 31,
2009.
We
believe that the ratio of net debt to total capital is useful in understanding
the leverage employed in our operations and comparing us with other
homebuilders. For comparison to our ratios of net debt to capital
above, at December 31, 2009 and 2008, our ratios of debt to total capital,
without netting cash balances, were 41% and 43%, respectively.
Historically,
we had used our Credit Facility as a partial source of funding for our
homebuilding operations. However, as we have generated substantial
cash flows from operations and accumulated a significant cash balance, we have
not borrowed under the Credit Facility since December 2008.
Operating
Cash Flow Activities
Funding
for our business has been provided principally by cash flow from operating
activities, borrowings under our credit facilities, and the public debt and
equity markets. During 2009, we generated $68.5 million of cash from
our operating activities, compared to $148.9 million of cash from our operating
activities in 2008. The $68.5 million net cash generated during 2009
was primarily a result of $37.2 million in cash generated by the conversion of
inventory as a result of home closings and third-party land sales, net of the
amounts spent on land purchases, land development and home construction, along
with a $10.7 million increase in accounts payable, a $9.3 million decrease in
income tax receivable and a $3.5 million decrease in cash held in
escrow. Partially offsetting these cash sources was a net decrease in
cash due to other operating activities, including a $3.3 million decrease in
other liabilities and a $2.2 million decrease in accrued
compensation. We expect to receive a $25.9 million federal tax refund
during the first quarter of 2010.
The
amount of cash generated from operating activities in 2009 decreased $80.4
million compared to 2008, primarily due to a $123.9 million decrease in cash
generated by the conversion of inventory into cash as a result of home closings
and third-party land sales, net of amounts spent on land purchases, land
development and home construction, along with a $21.9 million decrease in the
net proceeds from the sale of mortgage loans, and an $11.1 million decrease in
the change in cash held in escrow due to homes closing near the end of the year
for which the cash was not collected until the beginning of 2010. Partially
offsetting the decrease in cash generated was a $53.6 million increase in the
change in accounts payable, compared to 2008, from a decrease of $42.9 million
to an increase of $10.7 million. We had $0.7 million in third-party
land sales in 2009 compared to $32.9 million in 2008.
The net
cash provided by our operating activities during the past three years has
resulted in substantial liquidity and provides us with the flexibility to
determine the appropriate operating strategy for each of our communities and to
take advantage of opportunities in the market. While we have
substantially slowed our purchases of undeveloped
land and
our development spending on land over the past three years, we are purchasing or
contracting to purchase land and finished lots in many markets in an attempt to
drive increased sales, home closings and profitability. During this
effort, we also plan to continue to manage our inventories by monitoring the
aging of unsold homes and aggressively marketing our unsold, completed homes in
inventory. As we work towards these goals, we expect to generate less
cash flow from asset reductions in 2010 than we have over the past three
years. Depending upon future homebuilding market conditions and our
expectations for such, we may use a portion of our cash balances to increase our
assets. During 2009 we purchased $44.3 million of land and lots, an
increase of 93% over 2008’s land purchases of $22.9 million. In light
of our projected future volume and growth plans, in 2010, we currently plan to
purchase approximately $75 million of land and spend an additional $25 million
on land development. Our land planned purchases are underwritten at a much
higher rate of return than what we are receiving on our existing
communities. However, we will actively monitor market conditions and
plan to adjust our spending accordingly, which may be up or down. In
the normal course of our business, we have continued to enter into land option
agreements, taking into consideration current and projected market conditions,
in order to secure land for the construction of homes in the
future. Pursuant to these land option agreements, we have provided
deposits to land sellers totaling $2.6 million as of December 31, 2009 as
consideration for the right to purchase land and lots in the future, including
the right to purchase $81.9 million of land and lots during the years 2010
through 2016. At December 31, 2009, we owned or controlled through
options 9,314 home sites as compared to 9,723 at December 31,
2008.
Investing
Cash Flow Activities
For the
year ended December 31, 2009, we used $19.5 million of cash in investing
activities, primarily due to the addition of restricted cash, which had a
balance at December 31, 2009 of $19.2 million. Restricted cash
primarily consists of homebuilding cash the Company had designated as collateral
at December 31, 2009 in accordance with the four secured Letter of Credit
Facilities (“LOC Facilities”) that the Company entered into on July 27,
2009. Of the $19.2 million in restricted cash, $18.6 million relates
to collateral for the LOC Facilities, and $0.6 million is restricted cash
required to cover various other matters.
Along
with the increase in restricted cash, there was also an increase of $4.0 million
in property and equipment purchases. Partially offsetting these
increases were the proceeds of $7.9 million from the sale of our
airplane.
Financing
Cash Flow Activities
For the
year ended December 31, 2009, we generated $28.4 million of cash from financing
activities. In the second quarter of 2009, we issued 4,475,600 common
shares in a public offering, resulting in net cash proceeds of $52.6 million.
Offsetting the proceeds from this issuance were the repayments of $10.9 million
on our MIF Credit Agreement, and $9.8 million on a mortgage note for the Company
airplane which was sold in the first quarter of 2009.
Our
homebuilding and financial services operations financing needs depend on
anticipated sales volume in the current year as well as future years, inventory
levels and related turnover, forecasted land and lot purchases, and other
Company plans. We fund these operations with cash flows from
operating activities, borrowings under our credit facilities, and, from time to
time, issuances of new debt and/or equity securities, as management deems
necessary.
We have
incurred substantial indebtedness, and may incur substantial indebtedness in the
future, to fund our homebuilding activities. We routinely monitor
current operational requirements, financial market conditions, and credit
relationships. We believe that our operations and borrowing resources
will provide for our current and long-term liquidity requirements. We
believe that we will be able to continue to fund our current operations and meet
our contractual obligations through a combination of existing cash resources and
our existing sources of credit. However, we continue to evaluate the
impact of market conditions on our liquidity and may determine that
modifications are necessary if market conditions continue to deteriorate and
extend beyond our expectations. We cannot be certain that we will be
able to replace existing financing or find sources of additional financing in
the future. Please refer to “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in Part 1 of this
Annual Report on Form 10-K for further discussion of risk factors that could
impact our source of funds.
Included
in the table below is a summary of our available sources of cash as of December
31, 2009:
(In
thousands)
|
Expiration
Date
|
Outstanding
Balance
|
Available
Amount
|
Notes
payable banks – homebuilding (a)
|
10/6/2010
|
$ -
|
$ 24,475
|
Note
payable bank – financial services
|
5/15/2010
|
$ 24,142
|
$ -
|
Senior
Notes
|
4/1/2012
|
$200,000
|
$ -
|
Universal
shelf registration (b)
|
-
|
$ -
|
$194,055
|
(a) |
The available amount
is in accordance with the borrowing base calculation under the Credit
Facility and can be increased is we secure additional assets or invest
additional amounts in the current pledged assets. The maximum
Aggregate Commitment amount of the Credit Facility is $150
million. |
|
(b) |
This shelf
registration is intended to allow us to expediently access capital markets
in the future. The timing and amount of offerings, if any, will
depend on market and general business
conditions. |
Notes Payable
Banks - Homebuilding. In January 2009, the Credit Facility was
amended to: (1) reduce the Aggregate Commitment (as defined therein)
from $250 million to $150 million, which is then reduced to $125 million, $100
million and $60 million if the Company’s consolidated tangible net worth falls
below $250 million, $200 million and $150 million, respectively; and (2) require
secured borrowings based on a Secured Borrowing Base calculated as 100% of
Secured Borrowing Base Cash plus 40% of the aggregated Appraised
Value of the Qualified Real Property, as defined therein.
Our
Credit Facility has key financial and other covenants, including:
●
|
requiring
us to maintain tangible net worth (“Minimum Net Worth”) of at least (1)
$100 million plus (2) 50% of consolidated earnings (without deduction for
losses and excluding the effect of any decreases in any deferred tax
valuation allowance) earned for each completed fiscal quarter ending after
December 31, 2008 to the date of determination, excluding any quarter in
which the Consolidated Earnings are less than zero plus (3) the amount of
any reduction or reversal in deferred Tax Valuation Allowance for each
completed fiscal quarter ending after December 31,
2008;
|
●
|
maintaining
a leverage ratio (consolidated indebtedness to consolidated tangible net
worth) not in excess of 2.00 to 1.00 (the “Leverage
Ratio”);
|
● |
requiring
adjusted cash flow from operations to consolidated interest incurred ratio
(the “Adjusted Cash Flow Ratio”) to be greater than 1.50x, or requiring us
to maintain unrestricted cash of more than $25 million;
|
● |
prohibiting
secured indebtedness, other than the Credit Facility and the MIF Credit
Agreement, but including the Company’s $15 million guaranty of the MIF
Credit Agreement, from exceeding $25 million;
|
● |
prohibiting
the net book value of our land and lots where construction of a home has
not commenced, less the lesser of 25% of tangible net worth or prior six
month sales times average book value of a finished lot, from exceeding
125% of tangible net worth plus 50% of the aggregate outstanding
subordinated debt (the “Total Land Restriction”);
|
● |
limiting
the number of unsold housing units and model units that we may have in our
inventory at the end of any fiscal quarter from exceeding the greater of
40% of the number of home closings within the twelve months ending on such
date or 80% of the number of unit closings within the six months ending on
such date (the “Spec and Model Homes Restriction”);
|
● |
limiting
extension of credit on the sale of land to 10% of tangible net worth and
maintain maturity of five years; and
|
● |
limiting
investment in joint ventures to 25% of tangible net
worth.
|
As of
December 31, 2009, the Company was in compliance with all restrictive covenants
of the Credit Facility. The following table summarizes these covenant
thresholds pursuant to the Credit Facility, and our compliance with such
covenants:
Financial
Covenant
|
|
Covenant
Requirements
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
Minimum
Net Worth (a)
|
=
|
$
|
119.3
|
$
|
324.3
|
Leverage
Ratio (b)
|
≤
|
|
2.00
to 1.00
|
|
0.74
to 1.00
|
Adjusted
Cash Flow Ratio (c)
|
≥
|
|
1.50
to 1.00
|
|
5.62
to 1.00
|
Permitted
Debt Based on Borrowing Base (d)
|
≤
|
$
|
35.1
|
$
|
10.6
|
Total
Land Restriction
|
≤
|
$
|
405.4
|
$
|
177.1
|
Spec
and Model Homes Restriction
|
≤
|
|
1,218
|
|
612
|
(a)
|
Minimum
Net Worth (called “Actual Consolidated Tangible Net Worth” in the Credit
Agreement) was calculated based on the stated amount of our consolidated
equity less intangible assets of $2.4 million as of December 31,
2009.
|
(b)
|
Repayment
guarantees are included in the definition of Indebtedness for purposes of
calculating the Leverage Ratio.
|
(c)
|
If
the adjusted cash flow ratio is below 1.50X, the Company is required to
maintain unrestricted cash in an amount not less than $25
million.
|
(d)
|
Actual
amount includes letters of credit outstanding under the Credit
Facility.
|
At
December 31, 2009, the Company’s homebuilding operations did not have any
outstanding borrowings, but had outstanding letters of credit totaling $10.6
million under the Credit Facility, and we had pledged $112.8 million of
inventory to secure those outstanding letters of credit and any borrowings that
we may make in the future under the Credit Facility. The Credit
Facility provides for a maximum borrowing amount of $150
million. Under the terms of the Credit Facility, the $150 million
capacity includes a maximum amount of $100 million in outstanding letters of
credit. Borrowing availability is determined based on the lesser of: (1)
Credit Facility loan capacity less Credit Facility borrowings (including cash
borrowings and letters of credit) or (2) the calculated maximum secured
borrowing base cash plus Qualified Real Property, less the actual
borrowing.
As of
December 31, 2009, net borrowing availability under the amended Credit Facility
was $24.5 million in accordance with the borrowing base
calculation. The Company can create additional borrowing availability
under the Credit Facility to the extent it collateralizes additional cash and/or
inventory assets. The borrowing availability can also be increased by
increasing investments in assets currently pledged but this is offset by the
collateral value of homes delivered that are within the pledged asset
pool. Borrowings under the Credit Facility are at the Alternate
Base Rate plus a margin ranging from 350 to 425 basis points, or at the
Eurodollar Rate plus a margin ranging from 450 to 525 basis
points. The Alternate Base Rate is defined as the higher of the Prime
Rate, the Federal Funds Rate plus 50 basis points or the one month Eurodollar
Rate plus 100 basis points.
Our
Credit Facility expires in October 2010. We expect to seek a
replacement credit facility in connection with the expiration of our current
Credit Facility. Based upon the current credit markets, we may be
unable to replace the Credit Facility and if we are able to replace the Credit
Facility, the terms of the new credit facility may not be as favorable as our
current terms. In either case, our business, liquidity and results of
operations could be materially adversely impacted. Please see our
risk factor “If we are not able to obtain suitable financing our business may be
negatively impacted” in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in Part I of this Annual Report
on Form 10-K for more information regarding the risks surrounding the expiration
of our Credit Facility. However, we believe our balance of
unrestricted cash, combined with our ability to generate additional cash flow
from operating activities, provides us with sufficient liquidity for our
operations in 2010.
In July
2009, the Company entered into four secured Letter of Credit Facilities (“LOC
Facilities”) with a borrowing capacity of $35 million and with maturities
ranging from August 31, 2010 to August 31, 2011 for three of the LOC Facilities
while the fourth LOC Facility remains in effect until the Company gives notice
of termination. As of December 31, 2009, we were in compliance with
all restrictive covenants. There are also cross defaults to the
Credit Facility discussed above, as well as collateral requirements which the
Company will cover solely with cash. At December 31, 2009, there was
$17.7 million outstanding under the LOC Facilities which was collateralized with
$18.6 million of restricted cash.
We
continue to operate in a challenging economic environment, and our ability to
comply with our debt covenants may be affected by economic or business
conditions beyond our control. However, we believe that cash flow
from operating activities, together with our balance of unrestricted cash,
available borrowing options, and other sources of liquidity will be sufficient
to fund currently anticipated working capital, planned capital spending, and
debt service requirements for at least the next twelve months.
Note Payable Bank
– Financial Services. On April 29, 2009, M/I Financial entered
into a new secured credit agreement, which was amended by the First Amendment to
the secured credit agreement on September 23, 2009, and the Second Amendment on
December 30, 2009 (“MIF Credit Agreement”). This agreement replaced
M/I Financial’s previous credit agreement that expired on May 21,
2009.
The MIF
Credit Agreement provides M/I Financial with $30.0 million maximum borrowing
availability. The MIF Credit Agreement, which expires on May 15,
2010, is secured by certain mortgage loans. The MIF Credit Agreement
also provides for limits with respect to certain loan types that can secure the
borrowings under the agreement. M/I Financial shall not permit its
tangible net worth to be less than the sum of (1) $13.0 million, as of the end
of any calendar month during the period beginning May 15, 2009 and ending
November 30, 2009, and (2) $13.0 million plus (a) twenty-five percent (25%) of
the greater of (i) net income of M/I Financial and its subsidiaries or (ii)
zero, calculated separately for each fiscal year beginning with the fiscal year
ending December 31, 2009. M/I Financial shall not permit its adjusted
tangible net worth (the tangible net worth less the outstanding amount of
intercompany loans) to be less than the sum of (1) $11.0 million, as of the end
of any calendar month during the period beginning May 15, 2009 and ending
November 30, 2009, and (2) $11.0 million plus (a) twenty-five percent (25%) of
the greater of (i) net income of M/I Financial and its subsidiaries or (ii)
zero, calculated separately for each fiscal year beginning with the fiscal year
ending on December 31, 2009. M/I Financial shall not permit the ratio
of earnings
before interest and taxes to interest expense to be less than 1.25 to
1.00. M/I Financial pays interest on each advance under the MIF
Credit Agreement at a per annum rate of the greater of the floating LIBOR rate
(LIBOR plus 400 basis points) or 5.25%.
At
December 31, 2009, we had $24.1 million outstanding under the MIF Credit
Agreement. As of December 31, 2009, the Company and M/I Financial
were in compliance with all restrictive covenants of the MIF Credit
Agreement.
Mortgage Notes
Payable. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had
outstanding a building mortgage note payable in the principal amount of $6.2
million and $6.4 million, respectively, with a fixed interest rate of 8.117% and
maturity date of April 1, 2017. The book value of the collateral
securing this note was $10.9 million at both December 31, 2009 and
2008.
Senior
Notes. At December 31, 2009, we had $200.0 million of 6.875%
Senior Notes outstanding. The notes are due April
2012. The Credit Facility prohibits the early repurchase of the
Senior Notes.
The
indenture governing our Senior Notes contains restrictive covenants that limit,
among other things, the ability of the Company to pay dividends on common and
preferred shares, as well as the ability to repurchase any shares. If
our “restricted payments basket,” as defined in the indenture governing our
Senior Notes, is less than zero, we are restricted from making certain payments,
including dividends, as well as repurchasing any shares. At December
31, 2009, our restricted payments basket was ($156.0) million. As a
result of this deficit, we are currently restricted from paying dividends on our
common shares and our 9.75% Series A Preferred Shares, as well as repurchasing
any shares under our common share repurchase program that was approved by our
Board of Directors in November 2005.
Weighted Average
Borrowings. For the year ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, our
weighted average borrowings outstanding were $213.1 million and $259.1 million,
respectively, with a weighted average interest rate of 8.63% and 8.07%,
respectively. The decrease in borrowings was primarily the result of
the Company using cash generated from operations to pay down outstanding
debt.
Preferred
Shares. On March 15, 2007, we issued 4,000,000 depositary
shares, each representing 1/1000th of a
9.75% Series A Preferred Share (the “Preferred Shares”), or 4,000 Preferred
Shares in the aggregate, for net proceeds of $96.3 million. Dividends
on the Preferred Shares are non-cumulative and are paid at an annual rate of
9.75%. Dividends are payable quarterly in arrears, if declared by us,
on March 15, June 15, September 15 and December 15. If there is a
change of control of the Company and if the Company’s corporate credit rating is
withdrawn or downgraded to a certain level (together constituting a “change of
control event”), the dividends on the Preferred Shares will increase to 10.75%
per year. We may not redeem the Preferred Shares prior to March 15,
2012, except following the occurrence of a change of control
event. On or after March 15, 2012, we have the option to redeem the
Preferred Shares in whole or in part at any time or from time to time, payable
in cash of $25 per depositary share. The Preferred Shares have no
stated maturity, are not subject to any sinking fund provisions, are not
convertible into any other securities, and will remain outstanding indefinitely
unless redeemed by us. Holders of the Preferred Shares have no voting
rights, except as otherwise required by applicable Ohio law; however, in the
event we do not pay dividends for an aggregate of six quarters (whether or not
consecutive), the holders of the Preferred Shares will be entitled to nominate
two members to serve on our Board of Directors. The Preferred Shares
are listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the trading symbol
“MHO-PA.”
We did
not pay any dividends on the Preferred Shares in 2009. December 15,
2009 was the sixth dividend payment for which dividends on the Preferred Shares
have not been paid. As a result, the Board of Directors called a
special meeting of the holders of the Preferred Shares (as represented by the
depositary shares) for the purpose of nominating two persons to serve on the
Board of Directors. On January 12, 2010, the Company held the special meeting of
the holders of the Preferred Shares. No Preferred Shares were
represented in person or by properly executed proxy at the special meeting and,
as a result, no persons were nominated to serve as
directors. Pursuant to certain restrictive covenants in the indenture
governing our Senior Notes, we are currently restricted from making any further
dividend payments on our common shares or the Preferred Shares. We
will continue to be restricted until such time that the consolidated restricted
payments basket (as defined in the indenture) has been restored or our Senior
Notes are repaid, and our Board of Directors authorizes us to resume dividend
payments. See Note 17 to our Consolidated Financial Statements for
more information concerning those restrictive covenants.
Universal Shelf
Registration. On August 4, 2008, the
Company filed a $250 million universal shelf registration statement with the
SEC. Pursuant to the shelf registration statement, the Company may,
from time to time over an extended period, offer new debt, equity and certain
other securities. The timing and amount of offerings, if any, will
depend on market and general business conditions. In the second quarter of 2009,
we raised $52.6 million by issuing 4,475,600 common shares in a public offering,
pursuant to the $250 million universal shelf registration
statement. As of
December 31, 2009, $194.1 million remains available under the universal shelf
registration statement for future offerings.
Included
in the table below is a summary of future amounts payable under contractual
obligations:
|
Payments
due by period
|
|
|
|
Less
Than
|
|
|
1 - 3 |
|
|
3 - 5 |
|
More
than
|
|
Total
|
|
1
year
|
|
Years
|
|
Years
|
|
5
years
|
Note
payable bank – financial services (a)
|
$ |
24,142 |
|
$ |
24,142 |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
Mortgage
notes payable (including interest)
|
|
9,024 |
|
|
796 |
|
|
1,590 |
|
|
1,590 |
|
|
5,048 |
Senior
Notes (including interest)
|
|
234,872 |
|
|
13,941 |
|
|
220,931 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
Obligation
for consolidated inventory not owned (b)
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
Operating
leases
|
|
10,561 |
|
|
3,129 |
|
|
5,262 |
|
|
1,330 |
|
|
840 |
Purchase
obligations (c)
|
|
74,170 |
|
|
74,170 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
Other
short term liabilities
|
|
950 |
|
|
950 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
Land
option agreements (d)
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
Unrecognized tax
benefits (e)
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
Total
|
$ |
353,719 |
|
$ |
117,128 |
|
$ |
227,783 |
|
$ |
2,920 |
|
$ |
5,888 |
(a)
|
Borrowings
under the MIF Credit Agreement are at the greater of 5.25% or LIBOR plus
400 basis points. Borrowings outstanding at December 31, 2009
had a weighted average interest rate of 5.25%. Interest
payments by period will be based upon the outstanding borrowings and the
applicable interest rate(s) in effect. The above amounts do not
reflect interest.
|
(b)
|
The
Company is party to a land purchase option agreement to acquire developed
lots from a seller who is a variable interest entity. The
Company has determined that it is the primary beneficiary of the variable
interest entity, and therefore is required to consolidate the
entity. As of December 31, 2009, the Company has recorded a
liability of $0.6 million relating to consolidation of the variable
interest entity. The actual cash payments that the Company will
make in the future will be based upon the number of lots acquired each
period under the option agreement and the related per lot prices in effect
at that time.
|
(c)
|
The
Company has obligations with certain subcontractors and suppliers of raw
materials in the ordinary course of business to meet the commitment to
deliver 650 homes with an aggregate sales price of $176.7
million. Based on our current housing gross margin of 14.7%,
exclusive of impairment charges, less variable selling costs of 3.9% of
revenue, less costs already incurred on homes in backlog, we estimate
payments totaling approximately $74.2 million to be made in 2010 relating
to those homes.
|
(d)
|
The
Company has options and contingent purchase agreements to acquire land and
developed lots with an aggregate purchase price of approximately $81.9
million. Purchase of properties is generally contingent upon
satisfaction of certain requirements by the Company and the sellers and
therefore the timing of payments under these agreements is not
determinable. The Company has no specific performance
obligations with respect to these
agreements.
|
(e)
|
We
are subject to U.S. federal income tax as well as income tax of multiple
state and local jurisdictions. As of December 31, 2009, we had $3.4
million of gross unrecognized tax benefits, including $1.0 million of
related accrued interest and $0.3 million of related accrued
penalties. We are currently under examination by various taxing
jurisdictions and anticipate finalizing the examinations with certain
jurisdictions within the next twelve months. However, the final
outcome of these examinations is not yet determinable. The statute
of limitations for our major tax jurisdictions remains open for
examination of tax years 2005 through
2009.
|
OFF-BALANCE SHEET
ARRANGEMENTS
Our
primary use of off-balance sheet arrangements is for the purpose of securing the
most desirable lots on which to build homes for our homebuyers in a manner that
we believe reduces the overall risk to the Company. Our off-balance
sheet arrangements relating to our homebuilding operations include
Unconsolidated LLCs, land option agreements, guarantees and indemnifications
associated with acquiring and developing land, and the issuance of letters of
credit and completion bonds. Additionally, in the ordinary course of
business, our financial services operations issue guarantees and indemnities
relating to the sale of loans to third parties.
Unconsolidated
Limited Liability Companies. In the ordinary course of
business, the Company periodically enters into arrangements with third parties
to acquire land and develop lots. These arrangements include the
creation by the Company of Unconsolidated LLCs, with the Company’s interest in
these entities ranging from 33% to 50%. These entities engage in land
development activities for the purpose of distributing (in the form of a capital
distribution) or selling developed lots to the Company and its partners in the
entity. These entities generally do not meet the criteria of variable
interest entities (“VIEs”), because the equity at risk is sufficient to permit
the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated support
from the equity investors; however, we must evaluate each entity to determine
whether it is or is not a VIE. If an entity was determined to be a
VIE, we would then evaluate whether or not we are the primary
beneficiary. These evaluations are initially performed when each new
entity is created and upon any events that require reconsideration of the
entity.
We have
determined that none of the Unconsolidated LLCs in which we have an interest are
VIEs, and we also have determined that we do not have substantive control over
any of these entities; therefore, our homebuilding Unconsolidated LLCs are
recorded using the equity method of accounting. The Company believes
its maximum exposure related to any of these entities as of December 31, 2009 to
be the amount invested of $10.3 million, plus letters of credit and bonds
totaling $0.3 million that serve as completion bonds for the development work in
progress,
and our possible future obligations under guarantees and indemnifications
provided in connection with these entities, as further discussed in Note 9 and
Note 10 of our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Land Option
Agreements. In the ordinary course of business, the Company
enters into land option agreements in order to secure land for the construction
of homes in the future. Pursuant to these land option agreements, the
Company will provide a deposit to the seller as consideration for the right to
purchase land at different times in the future, usually at predetermined
prices. Because the entities holding the land under the option
agreement often meet the criteria for VIEs, the Company evaluates all land
option agreements to determine if it is necessary to consolidate any of these
entities. The Company currently believes that its maximum exposure as
of December 31, 2009 related to these agreements is equal to the amount of the
Company’s outstanding deposits, which totaled $2.6 million, including prepaid
acquisition costs of $0.4 million, and letters of credit of $0.9
million.
Guarantees and
Indemnities. In
the ordinary course of business, M/I Financial enters into agreements that
guarantee purchasers of its mortgage loans that M/I Financial will repurchase a
loan if certain conditions occur. M/I Financial has also provided
indemnifications to certain third party investors and insurers in lieu of
repurchasing certain loans. The risks associated with these
guarantees and indemnities are offset by the value of the underlying assets, and
the Company accrues its best estimate of the probable loss on these
loans. Additionally, the Company has provided certain other
guarantees and indemnities in connection with the acquisition and development of
land by our homebuilding operations. Refer to Note 10 of our
Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details relating to our
guarantees and indemnities.
Letters of Credit
and Completion Bonds. The Company provides standby letters of
credit and completion bonds for development work in progress, deposits on land
and lot purchase agreements and miscellaneous deposits. As of
December 31, 2009, the Company had outstanding $58.2 million of completion bonds
and standby letters of credit, some of which were issued to various local
governmental entities, that expire at various times through December
2016. Included in this total are: (1) $25.4 million of performance
bonds and $19.9 million of performance letters of credit that serve as
completion bonds for land development work in progress (including the Company’s
$0.2 million share of our Unconsolidated LLCs’ letters of credit and bonds); (2)
$8.3 million of financial letters of credit; and (3) $4.6 million of financial
bonds. The development agreements under which we are required to
provide completion bonds or letters of credit are generally not subject to a
required completion date and only require that the improvements are in place in
phases as houses are built and sold. In locations where development
has progressed, the amount of development work remaining to be completed is
typically less than the remaining amount of bonds or letters of credit due to
timing delays in obtaining release of the bonds or letters of
credit.
INTEREST RATES AND
INFLATION
Our
business is significantly affected by general economic conditions of the United
States of America and, particularly, by the impact of interest rates and
inflation. Higher interest rates may decrease our potential market by
making it more difficult for homebuyers to qualify for mortgages or to obtain
mortgages at interest rates that are acceptable to them. The impact of
increased rates can be offset, in part, by offering variable rate loans with
lower interest rates. In conjunction with our mortgage financing services,
hedging methods are used to reduce our exposure to interest rate fluctuations
between the commitment date of the loan and the time the loan
closes.
During
the past few years, we have experienced some detrimental effect from inflation,
particularly the inflation in the cost of land that occurred over the past
several years. As a result of declines in market conditions in most
of our markets, in certain communities we have been unable to recover the cost
of these higher land prices, resulting in lower gross margins and significant
charges being recorded in our operating results due to the impairment of
inventory and investments in Unconsolidated LLCs, and other write-offs relating
to deposits and pre-acquisition costs of abandoned land transactions. In
recent years, we have not experienced a detrimental effect from inflation in
relation to our home construction costs, and we have been successful in reducing
certain of these costs with our subcontractors. However, unanticipated
construction costs or a change in market conditions may occur during the period
between the date sales contracts are entered into with customers and the
delivery date of the related homes, resulting in lower gross profit
margins.
ITEM
7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
|
Our
primary market risk results from fluctuations in interest rates. We
are exposed to interest rate risk through borrowings under our revolving credit
facilities, consisting of the Credit Facility and the MIF Credit Agreement,
which permit borrowings of up to $180 million as of December 31, 2009, subject
to availability constraints. Additionally, M/I Financial is exposed
to interest rate risk associated with its mortgage loan origination
services.
Loan Commitments:
Interest rate lock commitments (“IRLCs”) are extended to home-buying
customers who have applied for mortgages and who meet certain defined credit and
underwriting criteria. Typically, the IRLCs will have a duration of
less than six months; however, in certain markets, the duration could extend to
twelve months.
Some
IRLCs are committed to a specific third-party investor through the use of
best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments matching the exact terms of the
IRLC loan. The notional amount of the committed IRLCs and the
best-efforts contracts was $2.6 million and $21.2 million at December 31, 2009
and December 31, 2008, respectively. At December 31, 2009, the fair
value of the committed IRLCs resulted in a liability of $0.1 million, and the
related best-efforts contracts resulted in an asset of $0.1
million. At December 31, 2008, the fair value of the committed IRLCs
resulted in a liability of $0.1 million, and the related best-efforts contracts
resulted in a liability of less than $0.1 million. For the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recognized income of $0.1 million,
$0.1 million of expense, and less than $0.1 million of expense, respectively,
relating to marking these committed IRLCs and the related best-efforts contracts
to market.
Uncommitted
IRLCs are considered derivative instruments, and are fair value adjusted, with
the resulting gain or loss recorded in current earnings. At December
31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the notional amount of the uncommitted IRLCs was
$42.3 million and $25.4 million, respectively. The fair value
adjustment related to these uncommitted IRLCs, which is based on quoted market
prices, resulted in a liability of less than $0.1 million and an asset of $0.8
million at December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. For
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recognized $0.8 million of
expense, and income of $0.6 million and $0.2 million, respectively, relating to
marking the uncommitted IRLCs to market.
Forward Sales of
Mortgage-Backed Securities: Forward sales of mortgage-backed securities
(“FMBSs”) are used to protect uncommitted IRLC loans against the risk of changes
in interest rates between the lock date and the funding date. FMBSs
related to uncommitted IRLCs are classified and accounted for as non-designated
derivative instruments and are recorded at fair value, with gains and losses
recorded in current earnings. At December 31, 2009 and December 31,
2008, the notional amount under these FMBSs was $43.0 million and $14.0 million,
respectively, and the related fair value adjustment, which is based on quoted
market prices, resulted in an asset of $0.7 million and a liability of $0.2
million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. For the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recognized income of $0.9 million and
less than $0.1 million, and $0.3 million of expense, respectively, relating to
marking these FMBSs to market.
Mortgage Loans
Held for Sale: Mortgage loans
held for sale consist primarily of single-family residential loans
collateralized by the underlying property. During the intervening
period between when a loan is closed and when it is sold to an investor, the
interest rate risk is covered through the use of a best-efforts contract or by
FMBSs.
The
notional amount of the best-efforts contracts and related mortgage loans held
for sale was $27.7 million and $13.6 million at December 31, 2009 and December
31, 2008, respectively. The fair value of the best-efforts contracts
and related mortgage loans held for sale resulted in a net liability of $0.8
million at December 31, 2009 and a net asset of $0.2 million at December 31,
2008. For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we
recognized $1.0 million of expense, and income of $0.2 million and less than
$0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these best-efforts contracts and
the related mortgage loans held for sale to market.
The
notional amounts of both the FMBSs and the related mortgage loans held for sale
were $8.0 million and $8.6 million at December 31, 2009 and $23.0 million and
$23.1 million, respectively, at December 31, 2008. The FMBSs are
classified and accounted for as non-designated derivative instruments, with
gains and losses recorded in current earnings. As of December 31,
2009 and December 31, 2008, the related fair value adjustment for marking these
FMBSs to market resulted in an asset of $0.1 million and a liability of $0.9
million, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we
recognized income of $1.0 million, and for both the years ended December 31,
2008 and 2007, we recognized $0.5 million of expense relating to marking these
FMBSs to market.
The
following table provides the expected future cash flows and current fair values
of borrowings under our credit facilities and mortgage loan origination services
that are subject to market risk as interest rates fluctuate, as of December 31,
2009:
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
Interest
|
|
Value
|
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
Rate
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2014
|
Thereafter
|
Total
|
12/31/09
|
ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage
loans held for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
rate
|
4.77%
|
$36,768
|
$ -
|
$ -
|
$ -
|
$ -
|
$ -
|
$ 36,768
|
$
34,675
|
Variable
rate
|
3.88
|
316
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
316
|
303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
debt – fixed rate
|
6.91%
|
$ 307
|
$ 332
|
$200,360
|
$ 391
|
$
424
|
$4,346
|
$206,160
|
$194,786
|
Long-term
debt – variable rate
|
5.25%
|
24,142
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
24,142
|
24,142
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of M/I Homes, Inc.
Columbus,
Ohio
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of M/I Homes, Inc. and
subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009. These
financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based
on our audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that
we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that
our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our
opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material
respects, the financial position of M/I Homes, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the results of their operations and their cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009, in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.
We have
also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the Company's internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on the criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission and our report dated February 24, 2010 expressed an
unqualified opinion on the Company's internal control over financial
reporting.
/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
|
Deloitte
& Touche LLP
|
Columbus,
Ohio
February
24, 2010
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
Years
Ended
|
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
$ |
569,949 |
|
$ |
607,659 |
|
$ |
1,016,460 |
|
Costs,
expenses and other loss (income):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
and housing
|
|
494,989 |
|
|
532,164 |
|
|
832,596 |
|
Impairment
of inventory and investment in Unconsolidated LLCs
|
|
55,421 |
|
|
153,300 |
|
|
148,377 |
|
General
and administrative
|
|
59,170 |
|
|
77,458 |
|
|
93,049 |
|
Selling
|
|
43,950 |
|
|
54,219 |
|
|
77,971 |
|
Interest
|
|
8,467 |
|
|
11,197 |
|
|
15,343 |
|
Other
loss (income)
|
|
941 |
|
|
(5,555 |
) |
|
- |
|
Total
costs, expenses and other income
|
|
662,938 |
|
|
822,783 |
|
|
1,167,336 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
(92,989 |
) |
|
(215,124 |
) |
|
(150,876 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Benefit)
provision for income taxes
|
|
(30,880 |
) |
|
30,291 |
|
|
(58,396 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
(62,109 |
) |
|
(245,415 |
) |
|
(92,480 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued
operation, net of tax
|
|
- |
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
(35,646 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
(62,109 |
) |
|
(245,448 |
) |
|
(128,126 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
dividends
|
|
- |
|
|
4,875 |
|
|
7,313 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss to common shareholders
|
$ |
(62,109 |
) |
$ |
(250,323 |
) |
$ |
(135,439 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
$ |
(3.71 |
) |
$ |
(17.86 |
) |
$ |
(7.14 |
) |
Discontinued
operation
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(2.55 |
) |
Basic
loss
|
$ |
(3.71 |
) |
$ |
(17.86 |
) |
$ |
(9.69 |
) |
Diluted:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
$ |
(3.71 |
) |
$ |
(17.86 |
) |
$ |
(7.14 |
) |
Discontinued
operation
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(2.55 |
) |
Diluted
loss
|
$ |
(3.71 |
) |
$ |
(17.86 |
) |
$ |
(9.69 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
16,730 |
|
|
14,016 |
|
|
13,977 |
|
Diluted
|
|
16,730 |
|
|
14,016 |
|
|
13,977 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
per common share
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
See Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements.
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
December
31,
|
(Dollars
in thousands, except par values)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
$ |
109,930 |
|
$ |
32,518 |
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
22,302 |
|
|
6,658 |
|
Mortgage
loans held for sale
|
|
34,978 |
|
|
37,772 |
|
Inventory
|
|
420,289 |
|
|
516,029 |
|
Property
and equipment - net
|
|
18,998 |
|
|
27,732 |
|
Investment
in Unconsolidated limited liability companies
|
|
10,299 |
|
|
13,130 |
|
Income
tax receivable
|
|
30,135 |
|
|
39,456 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
16,897 |
|
|
19,993 |
|
TOTAL
ASSETS
|
$ |
663,828 |
|
$ |
693,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
$ |
38,262 |
|
$ |
27,542 |
|
Customer
deposits
|
|
3,831 |
|
|
3,506 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
56,426 |
|
|
62,049 |
|
Community
development district obligations
|
|
8,204 |
|
|
11,035 |
|
Obligation
for consolidated inventory not owned
|
|
616 |
|
|
5,549 |
|
Note
payable bank – financial services operations
|
|
24,142 |
|
|
35,078 |
|
Notes
payable - other
|
|
6,160 |
|
|
16,300 |
|
Senior
notes – net of discount of $576 and $832, respectively, at December 31,
2009 and 2008
|
|
199,424 |
|
|
199,168 |
|
TOTAL
LIABILITIES
|
|
337,065 |
|
|
360,227 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SHAREHOLDERS’
EQUITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
shares – $.01 par value; authorized 2,000,000
shares; issued 4,000 shares
|
|
96,325 |
|
|
96,325 |
|
Common
shares – $.01 par value; authorized 38,000,000
shares; issued 22,101,723 and 17,626,123
|
|
221 |
|
|
176 |
|
shares,
respectively, at December 31, 2009 and 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
137,492 |
|
|
82,146 |
|
Retained
earnings
|
|
163,847 |
|
|
225,956 |
|
Treasury
shares – at cost – 3,580,987 and 3,602,141 shares, respectively, at
December 31, 2009 and 2008
|
|
(71,122 |
) |
|
(71,542 |
) |
TOTAL
SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|
326,763 |
|
|
333,061 |
|
TOTAL
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
$ |
663,828 |
|
$ |
693,288 |
|
See Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements.
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
Preferred
Shares
|
|
Common
Shares
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
(Dollars
in thousands, except per
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
Retained
|
|
Treasury
|
|
Shareholders’
|
|
share
amounts)
|
Outstanding
|
|
Amount
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
Amount
|
|
Capital
|
|
Earnings
|
|
Shares
|
|
Equity
|
|
Balance
at December 31, 2006
|
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
13,920,748 |
|
$ |
176 |
|
$ |
76,282 |
|
$ |
614,186 |
|
$ |
(73,592 |
) |
$ |
617,052 |
|
Net
loss
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(128,126 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
(128,126 |
) |
Preferred shares
issued, net of
|
issuance
costs of
$3,675
|
4,000 |
|
|
96,325 |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
96,325 |
|
Dividends
on preferred shares,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$609,375
per share
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(7,313 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
(7,313 |
) |
Dividends
on common shares,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0.10
per share
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(1,408 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
(1,408 |
) |
Income
tax benefit from stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
options
and deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
compensation
distributions
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
72 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
72 |
|
Stock
options exercised
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
37,400 |
|
|
- |
|
|
62 |
|
|
- |
|
|
742 |
|
|
804 |
|
Restricted
shares issued, net of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
forfeitures
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
3,001 |
|
|
- |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
60 |
|
|
- |
|
Share-based
compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expense
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
3,167 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
3,167 |
|
Deferral
of executive and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
director
compensation
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
772 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
772 |
|
Executive
and director deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
compensation
distributions
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
43,641 |
|
|
- |
|
|
(867 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
867 |
|
|
- |
|
Balance
at December 31, 2007
|
4,000 |
|
$ |
96,325 |
|
14,004,790 |
|
$ |
176 |
|
$ |
79,428 |
|
$ |
477,339 |
|
$ |
(71,923 |
) |
$ |
581,345 |
|
Net
loss
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(245,448 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
(245,448 |
) |
Dividends
on preferred shares,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$1,218.75
per share
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(4,875 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
(4,875 |
) |
Dividends
on common shares,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0.05
per share
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(1,060 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
(1,060 |
) |
Income
tax benefit from stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
options
and deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
compensation
distributions
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(97 |
) |
Stock
options exercised – net of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
restricted
stock forfeitures
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
5,527 |
|
|
- |
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
110 |
|
|
75 |
|
Share-based
compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expense
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
2,983 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
2,983 |
|
Deferral
of executive and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
director
compensation
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
138 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
138 |
|
Executive
and director deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
compensation
distributions
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
13,665 |
|
|
- |
|
|
(271 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
271 |
|
|
- |
|
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
4,000 |
|
$ |
96,325 |
|
14,023,982 |
|
$ |
176 |
|
$ |
82,146 |
|
$ |
225,956 |
|
$ |
(71,542 |
) |
$ |
333,061 |
|
Net
loss
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(62,109 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
(62,109 |
) |
Common
stock issuance
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
4,475,600 |
|
|
45 |
|
|
52,523 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
52,568 |
|
Income
tax benefit from stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
options
and deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
compensation
distributions
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
(101 |
) |
Stock
options exercised
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
10,500 |
|
|
- |
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
209 |
|
|
70 |
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expense
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
3,111 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
3,111 |
|
Deferral
of executive and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
director
compensation
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
163 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
163 |
|
Executive
and director deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
compensation
distributions
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
10,654 |
|
|
- |
|
|
(211 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
211 |
|
|
- |
|
Balance
at December 31, 2009
|
4,000 |
|
$ |
96,325 |
|
18,520,736 |
|
$ |
221 |
|
$ |
137,492 |
|
$ |
163,847 |
|
$ |
(71,122 |
) |
$ |
326,763 |
|
See Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements.
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
Years
Ended
|
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
OPERATING
ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
$ |
(62,109 |
) |
$ |
(245,448 |
) |
$ |
(128,126 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory
valuation adjustments and abandoned land transaction
write-offs
|
|
49,346 |
|
|
134,160 |
|
|
196,952 |
|
Impairment
of investment in Unconsolidated limited liability
companies
|
|
7,731 |
|
|
24,452 |
|
|
13,125 |
|
Impairment
of goodwill and intangible assets
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
5,175 |
|
Impairment
of property and equipment
|
|
- |
|
|
3,283 |
|
|
- |
|
Mortgage
loan originations
|
|
(420,761 |
) |
|
(382,992 |
) |
|
(586,520 |
) |
Proceeds
from the sale of mortgage loans
|
|
420,943 |
|
|
405,107 |
|
|
586,846 |
|
Fair
value adjustment of mortgage loans held for sale
|
|
2,612 |
|
|
(2,395 |
) |
|
487 |
|
Net
loss (gain) from property disposals
|
|
951 |
|
|
(5,524 |
) |
|
373 |
|
Bad
debt expense
|
|
2,523 |
|
|
1,255 |
|
|
- |
|
Depreciation
|
|
5,244 |
|
|
6,197 |
|
|
5,912 |
|
Amortization
of intangibles, debt discount and debt issue costs
|
|
2,627 |
|
|
1,557 |
|
|
2,081 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
|
3,111 |
|
|
2,983 |
|
|
3,167 |
|
Deferred
income tax benefit
|
|
(8,220 |
) |
|
(40,740 |
) |
|
(28,144 |
) |
Deferred
tax asset valuation allowance
|
|
8,220 |
|
|
108,607 |
|
|
- |
|
Income
tax receivable (payable)
|
|
9,321 |
|
|
14,211 |
|
|
(53,667 |
) |
Excess
tax expense (benefit) from stock-based payment
arrangements
|
|
101 |
|
|
97 |
|
|
(72 |
) |
Equity
in undistributed loss of limited liability companies
|
|
14 |
|
|
431 |
|
|
892 |
|
Write-off
of unamortized debt discount and financing costs
|
|
554 |
|
|
1,059 |
|
|
534 |
|
Change
in assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
held in escrow
|
|
3,511 |
|
|
14,597 |
|
|
37,720 |
|
Inventory
|
|
37,221 |
|
|
161,087 |
|
|
180,517 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
8,695 |
|
|
(930 |
) |
Accounts
payable
|
|
10,720 |
|
|
(42,882 |
) |
|
(10,776 |
) |
Customer
deposits
|
|
325 |
|
|
(4,798 |
) |
|
(11,110 |
) |
Accrued
compensation
|
|
(2,169 |
) |
|
(2,848 |
) |
|
(12,257 |
) |
Other
liabilities
|
|
(3,301 |
) |
|
(11,276 |
) |
|
32 |
|
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
|
68,481 |
|
|
148,875 |
|
|
202,211 |
|
INVESTING
ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
(19,155 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Purchase
of property and equipment
|
|
(4,008 |
) |
|
(3,947 |
) |
|
(4,461 |
) |
Proceeds
from the sale of property
|
|
7,878 |
|
|
9,454 |
|
|
- |
|
Investment
in Unconsolidated limited liability companies
|
|
(5,003 |
) |
|
(5,196 |
) |
|
(9,978 |
) |
Return
of investment from Unconsolidated limited liability
companies
|
|
809 |
|
|
431 |
|
|
578 |
|
Net
cash (used in) provided by investing activities
|
|
(19,479 |
) |
|
742 |
|
|
(13,861 |
) |
FINANCING
ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments
of bank borrowings - net
|
|
(10,936 |
) |
|
(110,465 |
) |
|
(284,500 |
) |
Principal
repayments of mortgage notes payable and community
development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
district
bond obligations
|
|
(10,782 |
) |
|
(331 |
) |
|
(509 |
) |
Net
proceeds from issuance of common stock
|
|
52,568 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Proceeds
from preferred shares issuance – net of issuance costs
of $3,675
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
96,325 |
|
Debt
issue costs
|
|
(2,318 |
) |
|
(1,063 |
) |
|
(847 |
) |
Payments
on capital lease obligations
|
|
(91 |
) |
|
(789 |
) |
|
(984 |
) |
Dividends
paid
|
|
- |
|
|
(5,935 |
) |
|
(8,721 |
) |
Proceeds
from exercise of stock options
|
|
70 |
|
|
75 |
|
|
804 |
|
Excess
tax (benefit) expense from stock-based payment
arrangements
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
(97 |
) |
|
72 |
|
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
28,410 |
|
|
(118,605 |
) |
|
(198,360 |
) |
Net
increase (decrease) in cash
|
|
77,412 |
|
|
31,012 |
|
|
(10,010 |
) |
Cash
balance at beginning of year
|
|
32,518 |
|
|
1,506 |
|
|
11,516 |
|
Cash
balance at end of year
|
$ |
109,930 |
|
$ |
32,518 |
|
$ |
1,506 |
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid during the year for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
– net of amount capitalized
|
$ |
5,541 |
|
$ |
3,455 |
|
$ |
16,272 |
|
Income
taxes
|
$ |
201 |
|
$ |
525 |
|
$ |
10,246 |
|
NON-CASH
TRANSACTIONS DURING THE YEAR:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Community
development district infrastructure
|
$ |
(2,189 |
) |
$ |
(1,304 |
) |
$ |
(6,899 |
) |
Consolidated
inventory not owned
|
$ |
(4,933 |
) |
$ |
(1,884 |
) |
$ |
2,407 |
|
Capital
lease obligations
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
(1,457 |
) |
Distribution
of single-family lots from Unconsolidated limited liability
companies
|
$ |
(22 |
) |
$ |
9,969 |
|
$ |
7,912 |
|
Non-monetary
exchange of fixed assets
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
13,000 |
|
$ |
- |
|
Contribution
of property to Unconsolidated limited liability companies
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
958 |
|
Deferral
of executive and director compensation
|
$ |
163 |
|
$ |
138 |
|
$ |
772 |
|
Executive
and director deferred stock distributions
|
$ |
211 |
|
$ |
271 |
|
$ |
867 |
|
See Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements.
M/I
HOMES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Business. M/I
Homes, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the “Company” or “we”) is engaged primarily in
the construction and sale of single-family residential property in Columbus and
Cincinnati, Ohio; Indianapolis, Indiana; Chicago, Illinois; Tampa and Orlando,
Florida; Charlotte and Raleigh, North Carolina; and the Virginia and Maryland
suburbs of Washington, D.C. The Company designs, sells and builds
single-family homes on finished lots, which it develops or purchases ready for
home construction. The Company also purchases undeveloped land to
develop into finished lots for future construction of single-family homes and,
on a limited basis, for sale to others. Our homebuilding operations
operate across three geographic regions in the United States. Within
these regions, our operations have similar economic characteristics; therefore,
they have been aggregated into three reportable homebuilding segments: Midwest
homebuilding, Florida homebuilding and Mid-Atlantic homebuilding.
The
Company conducts mortgage financing activities through its wholly-owned
subsidiary, M/I Financial Corp. (“M/I Financial”), which originates mortgage
loans for purchasers of the Company’s homes. The loans and the
servicing rights are sold to outside mortgage lenders. The Company
and M/I Financial also operate wholly- and majority-owned subsidiaries that
provide title services to purchasers of the Company’s homes. Our
mortgage banking and title service activities have similar economic
characteristics; therefore, they have been aggregated into one reportable
segment, the financial services segment.
Principles of
Consolidation. The accompanying consolidated financial
statements include the accounts of M/I Homes, Inc. and its subsidiaries, as well
as a certain variable interest entity (“VIE”) in which the Company has been
deemed the primary beneficiary.
Accounting
Principles. The accompanying consolidated financial statements
have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America (“GAAP”). All intercompany
transactions have been eliminated. The preparation of financial
statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the
reporting period. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
Cash and Cash
Equivalents. All highly liquid
investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less are
considered to be cash equivalents. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008,
the majority of cash was held in one bank.
Restricted
Cash. Restricted cash consists
of homebuilding cash the Company had designated as collateral at December 31,
2009 in accordance with the four secured Letter of Credit Facilities (“LOC
Facilities”) that the Company entered into in 2009. See Note 4 for
further details surrounding restricted cash relating to the LOC
Facilities. Restricted Cash also consists of cash held in escrow,
which represents cash relating to homes closed at year-end that were not yet
funded to the Company as of December 31st due
to timing, and cash that was deposited in an escrow account at the time of
closing on homes to homebuyers which will be released to the Company when the
related work is completed on each home, which generally occurs within six months
of closing on the home.
Mortgage Loans
Held for Sale. Mortgage loans held for sale consists primarily
of single-family residential loans collateralized by the underlying
property. Generally, all of the mortgage loans and related servicing
rights are sold to third-party investors within two to three weeks of
origination. Refer to the Revenue Recognition policy described below
for additional discussion.
Inventory. We
use the specific identification method for the purpose of accumulating costs
associated with land acquisition and development, and home
construction. Inventory is recorded at cost, unless events and
circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the land may be
impaired. In addition to the costs of direct land acquisition, land
development and related costs (both incurred and estimated to be incurred) and
home construction costs, inventory includes capitalized interest, real estate
taxes, and certain indirect costs incurred during land development and home
construction. Such costs are charged to cost of sales simultaneously
with revenue recognition, as discussed below. When a home is closed,
we typically have not yet paid all incurred costs necessary to complete the
home. As homes close, we compare the home construction budget to
actual recorded costs to date to estimate the additional costs to be incurred
from our subcontractors related to the home. We record a liability
and a corresponding charge to cost of sales for the amount we estimate will
ultimately be paid related to that home. We monitor the accuracy of
such estimate by comparing actual costs incurred in subsequent months to the
estimate. Although actual costs to
complete
in the future could differ from the estimate, our method has historically
produced consistently accurate estimates of actual costs to complete closed
homes.
The
Company assesses inventory for recoverability on a quarterly basis, by reviewing
for impairment whenever events or changes in local or national economic
conditions indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. For those communities deemed to be impaired, the
impairment recognized is measured by the amount by which the carrying amount of
the communities exceeds the fair value of the communities. In
addition, due to the fact that the estimates and assumptions included in the
Company’s cash flow models are based upon historical results and projected
trends, it does not anticipate unexpected changes in market conditions that may
lead the Company to incur additional impairment charges in the
future.
Capitalized
Interest. The Company capitalizes interest during land
development and home construction. Capitalized interest is charged to
cost of sales as the related inventory is delivered to a third
party. The summary of capitalized interest is as
follows:
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Capitalized
interest, beginning of year
|
$ |
25,838 |
|
$ |
29,212 |
|
$ |
29,492 |
|
Interest
capitalized to inventory
|
|
9,552 |
|
|
9,593 |
|
|
18,118 |
|
Capitalized
interest charged to cost of sales
|
|
(11,720 |
) |
|
(12,967 |
) |
|
(18,398 |
) |
Capitalized
interest, end of year
|
$ |
23,670 |
|
$ |
25,838 |
|
$ |
29,212 |
|
|
Interest
incurred – continuing operations
|
$ |
18,019 |
|
$ |
20,790 |
|
$ |
33,461 |
|
Consolidated
Inventory Not Owned. The Company enters into land option
agreements in the ordinary course of business in order to secure land for the
construction of homes in the future. Pursuant to these land option
agreements, we typically provide a deposit to the seller as consideration for
the right to purchase land at different times in the future, usually at
pre-determined prices. If the entity holding the land under option is
a variable interest entity, the Company’s deposit (including letters of credit)
represents a variable interest in the entity, and we must use our judgment to
determine if we are the primary beneficiary of the entity. Factors
considered in determining whether we are the primary beneficiary include the
amount of the deposit in relation to the fair value of the land, the expected
timing of our purchase of the land, and assumptions about projected cash
flows. We consider our accounting policies with respect to
determining whether we are the primary beneficiary to be critical accounting
policies due to the judgment required.
We also
periodically enter into lot option arrangements with third-parties to whom we
have sold our raw land inventory. We evaluate these to determine if
we should record an asset and liability at the time we sell the land and enter
into the lot option contract.
Investment in
Unconsolidated Limited Liability Companies. The Company
invests in entities that acquire and develop land for distribution to us in
connection with our homebuilding operations. In our judgment, we have
determined that these entities generally do not meet the criteria of variable
interest entities because they have sufficient equity to finance their
operations. We must use our judgment to determine if we have
substantive control of these entities. If we were to determine that
we have substantive control, we would be required to consolidate the
entity. Factors considered in determining whether we have substantive
control include risk and reward sharing, experience and financial condition of
the other partners, voting rights, involvement in day-to-day capital and
operating decisions, and continuing involvement. In the event an
entity does not have sufficient equity to finance its operations, we would be
required to use judgment to determine if we were the primary beneficiary of the
variable interest entity. We consider our accounting policies with
respect to determining whether we are the primary beneficiary or have
substantive control to be critical accounting policies due to the judgment
required. Based on the application of our accounting policies, these
entities are accounted for by the equity method of accounting.
The
Company evaluates its investment in unconsolidated limited liability companies
(“Unconsolidated LLCs”) for potential impairment on a quarterly
basis. If the fair value of the investment is less than the
investment’s carrying value and the Company has determined that the decline in
value is other than temporary, the Company would write down the value of the
investment to fair value.
Property and
Equipment. The Company records property and equipment at cost and
subsequently depreciates the assets using both straight-line and accelerated
methods. Following are the major classes of depreciable assets and
their estimated useful lives:
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
Land,
building and improvements
|
$ |
11,823 |
|
$ |
11,823 |
|
Office
furnishings, leasehold improvements, computer equipment and computer
software
|
|
24,524 |
|
|
21,542 |
|
Transportation
and construction equipment
|
|
404 |
|
|
10,015 |
|
Property
and equipment
|
|
36,751 |
|
|
43,380 |
|
Accumulated
depreciation
|
|
(17,753 |
) |
|
(15,648 |
) |
Property
and equipment, net
|
$ |
18,998 |
|
$ |
27,732 |
|
|
Estimated
Useful
Lives
|
Building
and improvements
|
35
years
|
Office
furnishings, leasehold improvements, computer equipment and computer
software
|
3-7
years
|
Transportation
and construction equipment
|
5-20
years
|
Depreciation
expense was $3.9 million, $4.7 million and $4.6 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
Property
and equipment held for sale includes property and equipment that meets all of
the following six criteria: (1) management, having the authority to
approve the action, commits to a plan to sell the asset; (2) the asset is
available for immediate sale in its present condition subject only to terms that
are usual and customary for sales of such assets; (3) an active program to
locate a buyer and other actions required to complete the plan to sell the asset
have been initiated; (4) the sale of the asset is probable, and transfer of the
asset is expected to qualify for recognition as a completed sale, within one
year; (5) the asset is being actively marketed for sale at a price that is
reasonable in relation to its current fair value; and (6) actions required to
complete the plan indicate that it is unlikely that significant changes to the
plan will be made or that the plan will be withdrawn. The Company
records property and equipment held for sale at the lower of its carrying value
or fair value less costs to sell.
In 2008,
the Company exchanged its airplane for an airplane of lesser value plus $9.5
million of cash consideration. The transaction was with an unrelated
party. The transaction was accounted for as a like-kind exchange
under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended. A gain of $5.6 million was recorded in Other (loss) income
on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations. At the end of
2008, the Company obtained an estimate from an aircraft sale and acquisition
company to determine the airplane’s fair value less costs to
sell. Based on this estimate, it was determined that the plane was
impaired and a $3.3 million impairment charge was recorded. At
December 31, 2008, the airplane had a market value of $8.9 million, and was
classified as held for sale within Property and equipment on the Consolidated
Balance Sheets as the Company anticipated selling it in 2009.
During
the first quarter of 2009, the Company sold the airplane for $8.0
million. The transaction was with an unrelated party. The
sale resulted in a loss of $0.9 million that is included in Other (loss) income
on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Other
Assets. Other assets includes certificates of deposit of $0.3
million and $0.2 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, which have
been pledged as collateral for mortgage loans sold to third parties and,
therefore, are restricted from general use. The certificates of
deposit will be released when there is a 95% loan-to-value on the related loans
and there have been no late payments by the mortgagor in the last twelve
months. Other assets also includes non-trade receivables, notes
receivable, deposits and prepaid expenses.
Other
Liabilities. Other liabilities includes taxes payable, accrued
compensation, accrued self-insurance costs, accrued warranty expenses, and
various other miscellaneous accrued expenses.
Guarantees and
Indemnities. Guarantee and indemnity liabilities are
established by charging the applicable income statement or balance sheet line,
depending on the nature of the guarantee or indemnity, and crediting a
liability. M/I Financial provides a limited-life guarantee on loans
sold to certain third parties and estimates its actual liability related to the
guarantee and any indemnities subsequently provided to the purchaser of the
loans in lieu of loan repurchase based on historical loss
experience. Actual future costs associated with loans guaranteed or
indemnified could differ materially from our current estimated
amounts. The Company has also provided certain other guarantees and
indemnifications in connection with the purchase and development of land,
including environmental indemnifications, guarantees of the completion of land
development, and minimum net worth guarantees of M/I Financial. The
Company estimates these liabilities based on the estimated cost of insurance
coverage or estimated cost of acquiring a bond in the amount of the
exposure. Actual future costs associated with these guarantees and
indemnifications could differ materially from our current estimated
amounts.
Segment
Information. Our reportable
business segments consist of Midwest homebuilding, Florida homebuilding,
Mid-Atlantic homebuilding, and financial services. Our homebuilding
operations derive a majority of their revenue from constructing single-family
homes in nine markets in the United States. Our operations in the
nine markets each
individually
represent an operating segment. Due to similar economic
characteristics within the homebuilding operations, the Company has aggregated
the operating segments into three regions that represent the reportable
homebuilding segments. The financial services segment generates
revenue by originating and selling mortgages, and by collecting fees for title
and insurance services.
Revenue
Recognition. Revenue from the sale of a home is recognized
when the closing has occurred, title has passed, and an adequate initial and
continuing investment by the homebuyer is received or when the loan has been
sold to a third-party investor. Revenue for homes that close to the
buyer having a deposit of 5% or greater, home closings financed by third
parties, and all home closings insured under Federal Housing Administration
(“FHA”) or Veterans Administration (“VA”) government-insured programs are
recorded in the financial statements on the date of closing.
Revenue
related to all other home closings initially funded by M/I Financial is recorded
on the date that M/I Financial sells the loan to a third-party investor, because
the receivable from the third-party investor is not subject to future
subordination, and the Company has transferred to this investor the usual risks
and rewards of ownership that is in substance a sale and does not have a
substantial continuing involvement with the home.
All
associated homebuilding costs are charged to cost of sales in the period when
the revenues from home closings are recognized. Homebuilding costs
include land and land development costs; home construction costs (including an
estimate of the costs to complete construction); previously capitalized
interest; real estate taxes; indirect costs; and estimated warranty
costs. All other costs are expensed as incurred. Sales
incentives, including pricing discounts and financing costs paid by the Company,
are recorded as a reduction of revenue in the Company’s Consolidated Statements
of Operations. Sales incentives in the form of options or upgrades
are recorded in homebuilding costs.
We
recognize the majority of the revenue associated with our mortgage loan
operations when the mortgage loans and related servicing rights are sold to
third party investors. The revenue recognized is reduced by the fair
value of the related guarantee provided to the investor. The fair
value of the guarantee is recognized in revenue when the Company is released
from its obligation under the guarantee. Generally, all of the
financial services mortgage loans and related servicing rights are sold to third
party investors within two to three weeks of origination. We
recognize financial services revenue associated with our title operations as
homes are closed, closing services are rendered, and title policies are issued,
all of which generally occur simultaneously as each home is
closed. All of the underwriting risk associated with title insurance
policies is transferred to third-party insurers.
Warranty. Warranty
accruals are established by charging cost of sales and crediting a warranty
accrual for each home closed. The amounts charged are estimated by
management to be adequate to cover expected warranty-related costs for materials
and outside labor required under the Company’s warranty
programs. Accruals are recorded for warranties under the following
warranty programs:
·
|
Home
Builder’s Limited Warranty –effective for homes closed after September 30,
2007;
|
·
|
30-year
transferable structural warranty – effective for homes closed after April
24, 1998; and
|
·
|
20-year
transferable structural warranty – effective for homes closed between
September 1, 1989 and April 24,
1998.
|
The
warranty accruals for the Home Builder’s Limited Warranty and two-year limited
warranty program are established as a percentage of average sales price, and the
structural warranty accruals are established on a per unit basis. Our
warranty accruals are based upon historical experience by geographic area and
recent trends. Factors that are given consideration in determining
the accruals include: (1) the historical range of amounts paid per average sales
price on a home; (2) type and mix of amenity packages added to the home; (3) any
warranty expenditures included in the above not considered to be normal and
recurring; (4) timing of payments; (5) improvements in quality of construction
expected to impact future warranty expenditures; (6) actuarial estimates, which
reflect both Company and industry data; and (7) conditions that may affect
certain projects and require a different percentage of average sales price for
those specific projects.
Changes
in estimates for warranties occur due to changes in the historical payment
experience and differences between the actual payment pattern experienced during
the period and the historical payment pattern used in our evaluation of the
warranty accrual balance at the end of each quarter. Actual future
warranty costs could differ from our current estimated amount.
Self-insurance. Self-insurance
accruals are made for estimated liabilities associated with employee health
care, Ohio workers’ compensation, and general liability
insurance. Our self-insurance limit for employee health care is
$250,000 per claim per year for fiscal 2009, with stop loss insurance covering
amounts in excess of $250,000 up to $2,000,000 per claim per
year. Our self-insurance limit for workers’ compensation is $450,000
per claim, with stop
loss
insurance covering all amounts in excess of this limit. The accruals
related to employee health care and workers’ compensation are based on
historical experience and open case reserves. Our general liability
claims are insured by a third party; the Company generally has a $7.5 million
deductible per occurrence and $30.0 million in the aggregate, with lower
deductibles for certain types of claims. The Company records a
general liability accrual for claims falling below the Company’s
deductible. The general liability accrual estimate is based on an
actuarial evaluation of our past history of claims and other industry specific
factors. The Company has recorded expenses totaling $15.5 million,
$0.9 million and $3.8 million, respectively, for all self-insured and general
liability claims during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007. Because of the high degree of judgment required in determining
these estimated accrual amounts, actual future costs could differ from our
current estimated amounts.
Amortization of
Debt Issuance Costs. The costs incurred in connection with the
issuance of debt are being amortized over the terms of the related
debt. Unamortized debt issue costs of $2.4 million and $3.1 million
are included in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31,
2009 and 2008, respectively.
Advertising and
Research and Development. The Company expenses advertising,
and research and development costs as incurred. The Company expensed
$5.3 million, $7.7 million and $11.1 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively, for advertising expenses. The Company expensed $1.8
million, $1.7 million and $2.5 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively, for research and development expenses.
Derivative
Financial Instruments. To meet financing needs of our
home-buying customers, M/I Financial is party to interest rate lock commitments
(“IRLCs”), which are extended to customers who have applied for a mortgage loan
and meet certain defined credit and underwriting criteria. These IRLCs are
considered derivative financial instruments. M/I Financial manages
interest rate risk related to its IRLCs and mortgage loans held for sale through
the use of forward sales of mortgage-backed securities (“FMBSs”), use of
best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments, and the occasional purchase of
options on FMBSs in accordance with Company policy. These FMBSs,
options on FMBSs, and IRLCs covered by FMBSs are considered non-designated
derivatives. In determining the fair value of IRLCs, M/I Financial
considers the value of the resulting loan if sold in the secondary
market. The fair value includes the price that the loan is expected
to be sold for, along with the value of servicing release
premiums. Subsequent to inception, M/I Financial estimates an updated
fair value, which is compared to the initial fair value. In addition,
M/I Financial uses fallout estimates, which fluctuate based on the rate of the
IRLC in relation to current rates. Gains or losses are recorded in
financial services revenue. Certain IRLCs and mortgage loans held for
sale are committed to third party investors through the use of best-efforts
whole loan delivery commitments. The IRLCs and related best-efforts
whole loan delivery commitments, which generally are highly effective from an
economic standpoint, are considered non-designated derivatives and are accounted
for at fair value, with gains or losses recorded in financial services
revenue. Under the terms of these best-efforts whole loan delivery
commitments covering mortgage loans held for sale, the specific committed
mortgage loans held for sale are identified and matched to specific delivery
commitments on a loan-by-loan basis. The delivery commitments and
loans held for sale are recorded at fair value, with changes in fair value
recorded in financial services revenue.
Earnings Per
Share. Basic loss per share for the twelve months ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008 is computed based on the weighted average common
shares outstanding during each period. Diluted loss per share is computed
based on the weighted average common shares outstanding, along with the stock
options, equity units and stock units described in Note 2 (collectively, “stock
equivalent awards”) deemed outstanding during the period, plus the weighted
average common shares that would be outstanding assuming the conversion of stock
equivalent awards, excluding the impact of such conversions if they are
anti-dilutive or would decrease the reported diluted loss per share. The
number of anti-dilutive options that require exclusion from the computation of
loss per share is summarized in the table below. There are no
adjustments to net loss necessary in the calculation of basic or diluted loss
per share.
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
Shares
|
|
EPS
|
|
Loss
|
|
Shares
|
|
EPS
|
|
Income
|
|
Shares
|
|
EPS
|
|
Basic
loss from continuing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
operations
|
$(62,109 |
) |
|
|
|
|
$(245,415 |
) |
|
|
|
|
$(92,480 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Less:
preferred stock dividends
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
4,875 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,313 |
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
to common
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shareholders
from continuing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
operations
|
$(62,109 |
) |
16,730 |
|
$(3.71 |
) |
$(250,290 |
) |
14,016 |
|
$(17.86 |
) |
$(99,793 |
) |
13,977 |
|
$(7.14 |
) |
|
Effect
of dilutive securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
options awards
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
Deferred
compensation awards
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
Diluted
loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to
common shareholders from
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
continuing
operations
|
$(62,109 |
) |
16,730 |
|
$(3.71 |
) |
$(250,290 |
) |
14,016 |
|
$(17.86 |
) |
$(99,793 |
) |
13,977 |
|
$(7.14 |
) |
|
Anti-dilutive
stock equivalent awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
not
included in the calculation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
diluted loss per share
|
|
|
1,723 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,386 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,159 |
|
|
|
Profit
Sharing. The Company has a deferred profit-sharing plan that
covers substantially all Company employees and permits members to make
contributions to the plan on a pre-tax basis in accordance with the provisions
of Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended. Company contributions to the plan are made at the discretion
of the Company’s Board of Directors and totaled $0.3 million for both the years
ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, and $0.2 million for the year ended December
31, 2007.
Deferred
Compensation Plans. Effective November 1, 1998, the Company
adopted the Executives’ Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Executive Plan”), a
non-qualified deferred compensation plan. The purpose of the
Executive Plan is to provide an opportunity for certain eligible employees of
the Company to defer a portion of their compensation and to invest in the
Company’s common shares. In 1997, the Company adopted the Director
Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Director Plan”) to provide its directors with
an opportunity to defer their director compensation and to invest in the
Company’s common shares.
Stock-Based
Compensation. We record stock-based compensation by
recognizing compensation expense at an amount equal to the fair value of
share-based payments granted under compensation arrangements. We
calculate the fair value of stock options using the Black-Scholes option pricing
model. Determining the fair value of share-based awards at the grant
date requires judgment in developing assumptions, which involve a number of
variables. These variables include, but are not limited to, the
expected stock price volatility over the term of the awards and the expected
term of the option. In addition, when we first issue share-based
awards, we also use judgment in estimating the number of share-based awards that
are expected to be forfeited.
Income
Taxes—Valuation Allowance. A valuation
allowance is recorded against a deferred tax asset if, based on the weight of
available evidence, it is more-likely-than-not (a likelihood of more than 50%)
that some portion or the entire deferred tax asset will not be realized. The
realization of a deferred tax asset ultimately depends on the existence of
sufficient taxable income in either the carryback or carryforward periods under
applicable tax law. The four sources of taxable income to be considered in
determining whether a valuation allowance is required include:
●
|
future
reversals of existing taxable temporary differences (i.e., offset gross
deferred tax assets against gross deferred tax
liabilities);
|
●
|
taxable
income in prior carryback years;
|
●
|
tax
planning strategies; and
|
●
|
future
taxable income, exclusive of reversing temporary differences and
carryforwards.
|
Determining
whether a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets is necessary requires an
analysis of both positive and negative evidence regarding realization of the
deferred tax assets. Examples of positive evidence may include:
●
|
a
strong earnings history exclusive of the loss that created the deductible
temporary differences, coupled with evidence indicating that the loss is
the result of an aberration rather than a continuing
condition;
|
●
|
an
excess of appreciated asset value over the tax basis of a company’s net
assets in an amount sufficient to realize the deferred tax asset;
and
|
●
|
existing
backlog that will produce more than enough taxable income to realize the
deferred tax asset based on existing sales prices and cost
structures.
|
Examples
of negative evidence may include:
●
|
the
existence of “cumulative losses” (defined as a pre-tax cumulative loss for
the business cycle – in our case, four years);
|
●
|
an
expectation of being in a cumulative loss position in a future reporting
period;
|
●
|
a
carryback or carryforward period that is so brief that it would limit the
realization of tax benefits;
|
●
|
a
history of operating loss or tax credit carryforwards expiring unused;
and
|
●
|
unsettled
circumstances that, if unfavorably resolved, would adversely affect future
operations and profit levels on a continuing
basis.
|
The
Company evaluates its deferred tax assets, including net operating losses, to
determine if a valuation allowance is required. We evaluate this based on
the consideration of all available evidence using a “more likely than not”
standard. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to
evidence that can be objectively verified. A cumulative loss in recent
years is significant negative evidence in considering whether deferred tax
assets are realizable, and also restricts the amount of reliance on projections
of future taxable income to support the recovery of deferred tax assets.
The Company’s current and prior year losses present the most significant
negative evidence as to whether the Company needs to reduce its deferred tax
assets with a valuation allowance. We are in a four-year cumulative
pre-tax loss position during the years 2005 through 2009. We currently
believe the cumulative weight of the negative evidence exceeds that of the
positive evidence and, as a result, it is more likely than not that we will not
be able to utilize all of our deferred tax assets. Therefore, as of
December 31, 2009, the Company had a total valuation allowance of $117.1 million
recorded. The accounting for deferred taxes is based upon an estimate
of future results. Differences between the anticipated and actual
outcomes of these future tax consequences could have a material impact on the
Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial position.
Future
adjustments to our deferred tax asset valuation allowance will be determined
based upon changes in the expected realization of our net deferred tax
assets. In 2010, we do not expect to record any additional tax
benefits as the carryback has been exhausted. Additionally, our
determination with respect to recording a valuation allowance may be further
impacted by, among other things:
●
|
additional
inventory impairments;
|
●
|
additional
pre-tax operating losses;
|
●
|
the
utilization of tax planning strategies that could accelerate the
realization of certain deferred tax assets; or
|
●
|
changes
in relevant tax law.
|
Additionally,
due to the considerable estimates utilized in establishing a valuation allowance
and the potential for changes in facts and circumstances in future reporting
periods, it is reasonably possible that we will be required to either increase
or decrease our valuation allowance in future reporting periods.
Income Taxes—Tax
Positions. The Company
evaluates tax positions that have been taken or are expected to be taken in tax
returns, and records the associated tax benefit or liability. Tax
positions are recognized when it is more-likely-than-not that the tax position
would be sustained upon examination. The tax position is measured at
the largest amount of benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being
realized upon settlement. Interest and penalties for all uncertain
tax positions are recorded within (Benefit) provision for income taxes in the
Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Income Tax
Receivable. Income tax receivable consists of tax refunds that
the Company expects to receive within one year. As of December 31,
2009 and 2008, there were $30.1 million and $39.5 million, respectively of
income tax receivable.
Impact of New
Accounting Standards.
In June
2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued new accounting
guidance, which amends the evaluation criteria to identify the primary
beneficiary of a variable interest entity (“VIE”) and requires ongoing
reassessment of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of the
VIE. The new guidance significantly changes the consolidation rules
for VIEs, including the consolidation of common structures, such as joint
ventures, equity method investments and collaboration
arrangements. The guidance is applicable to all new and existing
VIEs. This new accounting guidance is effective for interim and
annual reporting periods beginning after November 15, 2009. We have
not completed our evaluation of the impact of this standard, but do not expect
it to have a material impact on our financial statements.
In June
2009, the FASB issued “The FASB Accounting Standards Codification™ and the
Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” (the
“Codification”). The Codification became the single official source
of
authoritative,
nongovernmental U.S. GAAP. The Codification did not change GAAP, but
reorganizes the literature. The Codification is effective for interim
and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009, and the Company adopted the
Codification during the three months ended September 30,
2009.
NOTE
2. Stock-Based Compensation
The
Company has one plan that allows for the granting of stock options, performance
stock options, and stock appreciation rights, and awarding of restricted common
stock to certain key officers, employees and directors.
Stock
Incentive Plan
On May 5,
2009, The Company’s shareholders approved the adoption of the M/I Homes, Inc.
2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2009 LTIP”). The 2009 LTIP, which
replaces the M/I Homes, Inc. 1993 Stock Incentive Plan as Amended (the “Stock
Incentive Plan”), which expired on April 23, 2009, includes (1) nonqualified
stock options to purchase common shares; (2) incentive stock options to purchase
common shares; (3) stock appreciation rights; (4) restricted common shares; (5)
other stock-based awards – awards that are valued in whole or in part by
reference to, or otherwise based on, the fair market value of the common shares;
and (6) cash-based awards.
Stock
options are granted at the market price of the Company’s common shares at the
close of business on the date of grant. Options awarded generally
vest 20% annually over five years and expire after ten years, with vesting
accelerated upon the employee’s death or disability or upon a change of control
of the Company. Shares issued upon option exercise are from treasury
shares. As of December 31, 2009, 3,001 restricted common shares had
been granted under the Stock Incentive Plan. The restricted common
shares vest 33 1/3% over three years, beginning in the year of
grant.
Following
is a summary of stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2009,
relating to the stock options awarded under the Stock Incentive
Plan.
|
Shares
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
|
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining Contractual Term (Years)
|
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value (a) (In thousands)
|
Options
outstanding at December 31, 2008
|
1,191,200 |
|
$32.98 |
|
7.05 |
|
$
41 |
Granted
|
501,904 |
|
7.85 |
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
(10,500 |
) |
6.69 |
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
(58,561 |
) |
24.63 |
|
|
|
|
Options
outstanding at December 31, 2009
|
1,624,043 |
|
$25.69 |
|
7.01 |
|
$1,237 |
|
Options
vested or expected to vest at December 31, 2009
|
1,552,343 |
|
$24.82 |
|
6.96 |
|
$1,181 |
|
Options
exercisable at December 31, 2009
|
882,902 |
|
$35.10 |
|
5.74 |
|
$
117 |
(a)
|
Intrinsic
value is defined as the amount by which the fair value of the underlying
common shares exceeds the exercise price of the
option.
|
The
aggregate intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December
31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $0.1 million, less than $0.1 million and $0.4
million, respectively.
The fair
value of our five-year service stock options granted during the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was established at the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes pricing model, with the weighted average assumptions as
follows:
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
Expected
dividend yield
|
0.00%
|
0.40%
|
0.25%
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
1.99%
|
2.71%
|
4.80%
|
Expected
volatility
|
44.66%
|
41.98%
|
33.9%
|
Expected
term (in years)
|
6.0
|
6.2
|
5.0
|
Weighted
average grant date fair value of options granted during the
period
|
$
3.54
|
$7.61
|
$12.60
|
The fair
value of our two-year bonus stock options granted during the year ended December
31, 2009 was established at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes pricing
model, with the weighted average assumptions as follows:
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2009
|
Expected
dividend yield
|
0.00%
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
1.99%
|
Expected
volatility
|
45.70%
|
Expected
term (in years)
|
5.0
|
Weighted
average grant date fair value of options granted during the
period
|
$ 3.30
|
The fair
value of our three-year stock options granted during the years ended December
31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was established at the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes pricing model, with the weighted average assumptions as
follows:
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
Expected
dividend yield
|
- |
|
- |
|
0.25% |
Risk-free
interest rate
|
- |
|
- |
|
4.84% |
Expected
volatility
|
- |
|
- |
|
31.9% |
Expected
term (in years)
|
- |
|
- |
|
3.0 |
Weighted
average grant date fair value of options granted during the
period
|
- |
|
- |
|
$9.19 |
Following
is a summary of restricted share activity for the year ended December 31, 2009,
relating to the restricted shares awarded under the Stock Incentive
Plan:
|
Shares
|
|
Weighted
Average
Grant
Date
Fair Value
|
Nonvested
restricted shares at December 31, 2008
|
1,830
|
|
$33.86
|
Granted
|
-
|
|
-
|
Vested
|
(915)
|
|
33.86
|
Forfeited
|
-
|
|
-
|
Nonvested
restricted shares at December 31, 2009
|
915
|
|
$33.86
|
The
risk-free interest rate was based upon the U.S. Treasury constant maturity rate
at the date of the grant. Expected volatility is based on an average
of (1) historical volatility of the Company’s stock and (2) implied
volatility from traded options on the Company’s stock. The risk-free
rate for periods within the contractual life of the stock option award is based
on the yield curve of a zero-coupon U.S. Treasury bond on the date the stock
option award is granted, with a maturity equal to the expected term of the stock
option award granted. The Company uses historical data to estimate
stock option exercises and forfeitures within its valuation
model. The expected life of stock option awards granted is derived
from historical exercise experience under the Company’s share-based payment
plans, and represents the period of time that stock option awards granted are
expected to be outstanding.
Total
compensation expense that has been charged against income relating to the Stock
Incentive Plan was $3.1 million, $3.0 million and $3.2 million for the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. As of December
31, 2009, there was a total of $3.8 million and $0.4 million of unrecognized
compensation expense related to unvested stock option awards that will be
recognized as compensation expense as the awards vest over a weighted average
period of 1.8 years and 1.0 years for the service awards and bonus awards,
respectively. There were no excess tax benefits from stock-based
payment arrangements for the years ended December 31, 2009 and
2008. For the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company’s excess tax
benefits from stock-based payment arrangements were $0.1 million.
On May 5,
2009, The Company’s Board of Directors terminated the M/I Homes, Inc. 2006
Director Equity Incentive Plan (the “Director Equity Plan”). Awards
outstanding under the Director Equity Plan will remain in effect in accordance
with their respective terms. At December 31, 2009, there were 23,000
units outstanding under the Director Equity Plan with a value of $0.6
million.
In August
2009, the Company awarded 6,000 stock units under the 2009 LTIP. One
stock unit is the equivalent of one common share. Stock units and the
related dividends will be converted to common shares upon termination of service
as a director. These stock units vest immediately; therefore,
compensation expense relating to the stock units issued in August 2009 was
recognized entirely on the grant date. The amount of expense per
stock unit was equal to the $13.66 closing price of the Company’s common shares
on the date of grant, resulting in expense totaling approximately $82,000 for
the year ended December 31, 2009. In 2008, the Company awarded 6,000
stock units under the Director Equity Plan, resulting in expense totaling $0.1
million for the year ended December 31, 2008. In 2007, the Company
awarded 6,000 stock units under the Director Equity Plan, resulting in expense
totaling $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007.
Deferred
Compensation Plans
As of
December 31, 2009, the Company also has an Executive Plan and a Director Plan
(together the “Plans”), which provide an opportunity for the Company’s directors
and certain eligible employees of the Company to defer a portion of their cash
compensation to invest in the Company’s common shares. Compensation
expense deferred into the Plans totaled $0.2 million, $0.1 million and $0.8
million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively. The portion of cash compensation deferred by
employees and directors under the Plans is invested in
fully-vested
equity units in the Plans. One equity unit is the equivalent of one
common share. Equity units and the related dividends will be
converted and distributed to the employee or director in the form of common
shares at the earlier of his or her elected distribution date or termination of
service as an employee or director of the Company. Distributions from
the Plans totaled $0.4 million, $0.6 million and $1.4 million, respectively,
during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. As of
December 31, 2009, there were a total of 102,339 equity units with a value of
$2.2 million, outstanding under the Plans. The aggregate fair market
value of these units at December 31, 2009, based on the closing price of the
underlying common shares, was approximately $1.1 million, and the associated
deferred tax benefit the Company would recognize if the outstanding units were
distributed was $1.1 million as of December 31, 2009. Common shares
are issued from treasury shares upon distribution of deferred compensation from
the Plans.
NOTE
3. Inventory
A summary
of the Company’s inventory as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 is as
follows:
|
December
31,
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
Single-family
lots, land and land development costs
|
$ |
232,127 |
|
$ |
333,651 |
Land
held for sale
|
|
4,300 |
|
|
2,804 |
Homes
under construction
|
|
158,998 |
|
|
150,949 |
Model
homes and furnishings - at cost (less accumulated
depreciation: December 31, 2009 - $3,069;
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31, 2008 - $2,130)
|
|
14,726 |
|
|
12,928 |
Community
development district infrastructure
|
|
8,186 |
|
|
10,376 |
Land
purchase deposits
|
|
1,336 |
|
|
1,070 |
Consolidated
inventory not owned
|
|
616 |
|
|
4,251 |
Total
inventory
|
$ |
420,289 |
|
$ |
516,029 |
Single-family
lots, land and land development costs include raw land that the Company has
purchased to develop into lots, costs incurred to develop the raw land into
lots, and lots for which development has been completed but which have not yet
been used to start construction of a home.
Land held
for sale includes land that meets all of the following criteria: (1)
management, having the authority to approve the action, commits to a plan to
sell the asset; (2) the asset is available for immediate sale in its present
condition subject only to terms that are usual and customary for sales of such
assets; (3) an active program to locate a buyer and other actions required to
complete the plan to sell the asset have been initiated; (4) the sale of the
asset is probable, and transfer of the asset is expected to qualify for
recognition as a completed sale, within one year; (5) the asset is being
actively marketed for sale at a price that is reasonable in relation to its
current fair value; and (6) actions required to complete the plan indicate that
it is unlikely that significant changes to the plan will be made or that the
plan will be withdrawn. The Company records land held for sale at the
lower of its carrying value or fair value less costs to sell.
Homes
under construction include homes that are finished and ready for delivery, and
homes in various stages of construction. As of December 31, 2009 and
December 31, 2008, we had 545 homes (valued at $59.4 million) and 431 homes
(valued at $69.6 million), respectively, included in homes under construction
that were not subject to a sales contract.
Model
homes and furnishings include homes that are under construction or have been
completed and are being used as sales models. The amount also
includes the net book value of furnishings included in our model
homes. Depreciation on model home furnishings is recorded using an
accelerated method over the estimated useful life of the assets, typically three
years.
The
Company assesses inventory for recoverability on a quarterly basis, by reviewing
for impairment whenever events or changes in local or national economic
conditions indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. Refer to Note 7 below for additional details relating to
our procedures for evaluating our inventories for impairment.
Land
purchase deposits include both refundable and non-refundable amounts paid to
third party sellers relating to the purchase of land. On an ongoing
basis, the Company evaluates the land option agreements relating to the land
purchase deposits. In the period during which the Company makes the
decision not to proceed with the purchase of land under an agreement, the
Company writes off any deposits and accumulated pre-acquisition costs relating
to such agreement. Refer to Note 7 for additional details relating to
write-offs of land option deposits and pre-acquisition costs.
NOTE
4. Cash and Restricted Cash
The table
below is a summary of our cash balances at December 31, 2009 and
2008:
|
December
31,
|
(in
thousands)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
Homebuilding
|
$ |
96,464 |
|
$ |
13,905 |
Financial
services
|
|
13,466 |
|
|
18,613 |
Unrestricted
cash
|
|
109,930 |
|
|
32,518 |
Restricted
cash
|
|
22,302 |
|
|
6,658 |
Total
cash
|
$ |
132,232 |
|
$ |
39,176 |
Restricted
cash primarily consists of homebuilding cash the Company had designated as
collateral at December 31, 2009 in accordance with the LOC Facilities that the
Company entered into in 2009. Restricted cash also includes cash held
in escrow of $3.1 million and $6.7 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
NOTE
5. Fair Value Measurements
There are
three measurement input levels for determining fair value: Level 1,
Level 2, and Level 3. Fair values determined by Level 1 inputs
utilize quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that
the Company has the ability to access. Fair values determined by
Level 2 inputs utilize inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that
are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or
indirectly. Level 2 inputs include quoted prices for similar assets
and liabilities in active markets, and inputs other than quoted prices that are
observable for the asset or liability, such as interest rates and yield curves
that are observable at commonly quoted intervals. Level 3 inputs are
unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, and include situations where
there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or
liability.
Assets Measured on a
Recurring Basis
The
Company measures both mortgage loans held for sale and IRLCs at fair
value. Fair value measurement results in a better offset of the
changes in fair values of the loans and the derivative instruments used to
economically hedge them.
In the
normal course of business, our financial services segment enters into
contractual commitments to extend credit to buyers of single-family homes with
fixed expiration dates. The commitments become effective when the
borrowers “lock-in” a specified interest rate within established time
frames. Market risk arises if interest rates move adversely between
the time of the “lock-in” of rates by the borrower and the sale date of the loan
to an investor. To mitigate the effect of the interest rate risk
inherent in providing rate lock commitments to borrowers, the Company enters
into optional or mandatory delivery forward sale contracts to sell whole loans
and mortgage-backed securities to broker/dealers. The forward sale
contracts lock in an interest rate and price for the sale of loans similar to
the specific rate lock commitments. The Company does not engage in
speculative or trading derivative activities. Both the rate lock
commitments to borrowers and the forward sale contracts to broker/dealers or
investors are undesignated derivatives, and accordingly, are marked to fair
value through earnings. Changes in fair value measurements are
included in earnings in the accompanying statements of operations.
The fair
value is based on published prices for mortgage-backed securities with similar
characteristics, and the buyup fees received or buydown fees to be paid upon
securitization of the loan. The buyup and buydown fees are calculated pursuant
to contractual terms with investors. To calculate the effects of
interest rate movements, the Company utilizes applicable published
mortgage-backed security prices, and multiplies the price movement between the
rate lock date and the balance sheet date by the notional loan commitment
amount. The Company sells all of its loans on a servicing released
basis, and receives a servicing release premium upon sale. Thus, the
value of the servicing rights included in the fair value measurement is based
upon contractual terms with investors and depends on the loan type. The Company
applies a fallout rate to IRLCs when measuring the fair value of rate lock
commitments. Fallout is defined as locked loan commitments for which
the Company does not close a mortgage loan and is based on management’s judgment
and experience.
The fair
value of the Company’s forward sales contracts to broker/dealers solely
considers the market price movement of the same type of security between the
trade date and the balance sheet date. The market price changes are
multiplied by the notional amount of the forward sales contracts to measure the
fair value.
Mortgage
loans held for sale are closed at cost, which includes all fair value
measurement.
Loan
Commitments: IRLCs are extended to home-buying customers who
have applied for mortgages and who meet certain defined credit and underwriting
criteria. Typically, the IRLCs will have a duration of less than six
months; however, in certain markets, the duration could extend to twelve
months.
Some
IRLCs are committed to a specific third-party investor through the use of
best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments matching the exact terms of the
IRLC loan. The notional amount of the committed IRLCs and the
best-efforts contracts was $2.6 million and $21.2 million at December 31, 2009
and December 31, 2008, respectively. At December 31, 2009, the fair
value of the committed IRLCs resulted in a liability of $0.1 million, and the
related best-efforts contracts resulted in an asset of $0.1
million. At December 31, 2008, the fair value of the committed IRLCs
resulted in a liability of $0.1 million, and the related best-efforts contracts
resulted in a liability of less than $0.1 million. For the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recognized income of $0.1 million,
$0.1 million of expense, and less than $0.1 million of expense, respectively,
relating to marking these committed IRLCs and the related best-efforts contracts
to market.
Uncommitted
IRLCs are considered derivative instruments, and are fair value adjusted, with
the resulting gain or loss recorded in current earnings. At December
31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the notional amount of the uncommitted IRLCs was
$42.3 million and $25.4 million, respectively. The fair value
adjustment related to these uncommitted IRLCs, which is based on quoted market
prices, resulted in a liability of less than $0.1 million and an asset of $0.8
million at December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. For
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recognized $0.8 million of
expense, and income of $0.6 million and $0.2 million, respectively, relating to
marking the uncommitted IRLCs to market.
Forward Sales of
Mortgage-Backed Securities: FMBSs are used to protect uncommitted IRLC
loans against the risk of changes in interest rates between the lock date and
the funding date. FMBSs related to uncommitted IRLCs are classified
and accounted for as non-designated derivative instruments and are recorded at
fair value, with gains and losses recorded in current earnings. At
December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the notional amount under these FMBSs
was $43.0 million and $14.0 million, respectively, and the related fair value
adjustment, which is based on quoted market prices, resulted in an asset of $0.7
million and a liability of $0.2 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007,
we recognized income of $0.9 million and less than $0.1 million, and $0.3
million of expense, respectively, relating to marking these FMBSs to
market.
Mortgage Loans
Held for Sale: Mortgage loans
held for sale consist primarily of single-family residential loans
collateralized by the underlying property. During the intervening
period between when a loan is closed and when it is sold to an investor, the
interest rate risk is covered through the use of a best-efforts contract or by
FMBSs.
The
notional amount of the best-efforts contracts and related mortgage loans held
for sale was $27.7 million and $13.6 million at December 31, 2009 and December
31, 2008, respectively. The fair value of the best-efforts contracts
and related mortgage loans held for sale resulted in a net liability of $0.8
million at December 31, 2009 and a net asset of $0.2 million at December 31,
2008. For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we
recognized $1.0 million of expense, and income of $0.2 million and less than
$0.1 million, respectively, relating to marking these best-efforts contracts and
the related mortgage loans held for sale to market.
The
notional amounts of both the FMBSs and the related mortgage loans held for sale
were $8.0 million and $8.6 million at December 31, 2009 and $23.0 million and
$23.1 million, respectively, at December 31, 2008. The FMBSs are
classified and accounted for as non-designated derivative instruments, with
gains and losses recorded in current earnings. As of December 31,
2009 and December 31, 2008, the related fair value adjustment for marking these
FMBSs to market resulted in an asset of $0.1 million and a liability of $0.9
million, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we
recognized income of $1.0 million, and for both the years ended December 31,
2008 and 2007, we recognized $0.5 million of expense relating to marking these
FMBSs to market.
The table
below shows the level and measurement of assets and liabilities measured on a
recurring basis at December 31, 2009:
|
Fair
Value
|
|
Quoted
Prices in Active
|
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
Measurements
|
|
Markets
for Identical
|
|
Significant
Other
|
|
Unobservable
|
Description
of Financial Instrument
|
December
31,
|
|
Assets
|
|
Observable
Inputs
|
|
Inputs
|
(in
thousands)
|
2009
|
|
(Level
1)
|
|
(Level
2)
|
|
(Level
3)
|
Mortgage
loans held for sale
|
$(1,148)
|
|
$ -
|
|
$(1,148)
|
|
$ -
|
Forward
sales of mortgage-backed securities
|
833
|
|
-
|
|
833
|
|
-
|
Interest
rate lock commitments
|
(145)
|
|
-
|
|
(145)
|
|
-
|
Best-efforts
contracts
|
308
|
|
-
|
|
308
|
|
-
|
Total
|
$ (152)
|
|
$ -
|
|
$ (152)
|
|
$ -
|
The table
below shows the level and measurement of assets and liabilities measured on a
recurring basis at December 31, 2008:
|
Fair
Value
|
|
Quoted
Prices in Active
|
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
Measurements
|
|
Markets
for Identical
|
|
Significant
Other
|
|
Unobservable
|
Description
of Financial Instrument
|
December
31,
|
|
Assets
|
|
Observable
Inputs
|
|
Inputs
|
(in
thousands)
|
2008
|
|
(Level
1)
|
|
(Level
2)
|
|
(Level
3)
|
Mortgage
loans held for sale
|
$
1,464
|
|
$ -
|
|
$
1,464
|
|
$ -
|
Forward
sales of mortgage-backed securities
|
(1,104)
|
|
-
|
|
(1,104)
|
|
-
|
Interest
rate lock commitments
|
638
|
|
-
|
|
638
|
|
-
|
Best-efforts
contracts
|
73
|
|
-
|
|
73
|
|
-
|
Total
|
$
1,071
|
|
$ -
|
|
$
1,071
|
|
$ -
|
Assets Measured on a
Non-Recurring Basis
The
Company assesses inventory for recoverability on a quarterly basis, by reviewing
for impairment whenever events or changes in local or national economic
conditions indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. In conducting our quarterly review for indicators of
impairment on a community level, we evaluate, among other things, the margins on
homes that have been delivered, margins on sales contracts in backlog, projected
margins with regard to future home sales over the life of the community,
projected margins with regard to future land sales, and the value of the land
itself. We pay particular attention to communities in which inventory
is moving at a slower than anticipated absorption pace, and communities whose
average sales price and/or margins are trending downward and are anticipated to
continue to trend downward. From this review, we identify communities
whose carrying values may exceed their undiscounted cash flows. In
addition, we also evaluate communities where management intends to lower the
sales price or offer incentives in order to improve absorptions even if the
community’s historical results do not indicate a potential for
impairment. For those communities deemed to be impaired, the
impairment recognized is measured by the amount by which the carrying amount of
the communities exceeds the fair value of the communities. In
addition, due to the fact that the estimates and assumptions included in the
Company’s cash flow models are based upon historical results and projected
trends, it does not anticipate unexpected changes in market conditions that may
lead the Company to incur additional impairment charges in the
future.
Our
determination of fair value is based on projections and estimates, which are
Level 3 measurement inputs. Our analysis is completed at a phase
level within each community; therefore, changes in local conditions may affect
one or several of our communities. For all of the categories
discussed below, the key assumptions relating to the valuations are dependent on
project-specific local market and/or community conditions and are inherently
uncertain. Because each inventory asset is unique, there are numerous
inputs and assumptions used in our valuation techniques. Local
market-specific factors that may impact these projected assumptions
include:
●
|
historical
project results such as average sales price and sales pace, if closings
have occurred in the project;
|
●
|
competitors’
local market and/or community presence and their competitive
actions;
|
●
|
project
specific attributes such as location desirability and uniqueness of
product offering;
|
●
|
potential
for alternative product offerings to respond to local market
conditions;
|
●
|
current
local market economic and demographic conditions and related trends and
forecasts; and
|
●
|
community-specific
strategies regarding speculative
homes.
|
These and
other local market-specific factors that may impact project assumptions
discussed above are considered by personnel in our homebuilding divisions as
they prepare or update the forecasted assumptions for each community.
Quantitative and qualitative factors other than home sales prices could
significantly impact the potential for future impairments. The sales
objectives can differ between communities, even within a given
sub-market. For example, facts and circumstances in a given community
may lead us to price our homes with the objective of yielding a higher sales
absorption pace, while facts and circumstances in another community may lead us
to price our homes to minimize deterioration in our gross margins, although it
may result in a slower sales absorption pace. Furthermore, the key
assumptions included in our estimated future undiscounted cash flows may be
interrelated. For example, a decrease in estimated base sales price
or an increase in home sales incentives may result in a corresponding increase
in sales absorption pace. Additionally, a decrease in the average
sales price of homes to be sold and closed in future reporting periods for one
community that has not been generating what management believes to be an
adequate sales absorption pace may impact the estimated cash flow assumptions of
a nearby community. Changes in our key assumptions, including
estimated construction and development costs, absorption pace, selling
strategies, or discount rates, could materially impact future cash flow and fair
value estimates.
Operating
Communities: For existing operating communities, the
recoverability of assets is measured on a quarterly basis by comparing the
carrying amount of the assets to future undiscounted net cash flows expected to
be generated by the assets based on home sales. These estimated cash flows
are developed based primarily on management’s
assumptions
relating to the specific community. The significant assumptions used
to evaluate the recoverability of assets include: the timing of
development and/or marketing phases; projected sales price and sales pace of
each existing or planned community; the estimated land development, home
construction and selling costs of the community; overall market supply and
demand; the local market; and competitive conditions. Management
reviews these assumptions on a quarterly basis. While we consider
available information to determine what we believe to be our best estimates as
of the end of a reporting period, these estimates are subject to change in
future reporting periods as facts and circumstances change. These
assumptions vary widely across different communities and geographies and are
largely dependent on local market conditions. Some of the most
critical assumptions in the Company’s cash flow model are projected absorption
pace for home sales, sales prices and costs to build and deliver homes on a
community by community basis.
In order
to arrive at the assumed absorption pace for home sales included in the
Company’s cash flow model, the Company analyzes historical absorption pace in
the community as well as other communities in the geographical
area. In addition, the Company analyzes internal and external market
studies and trends, which generally include, but are not limited to, statistics
on population demographics, unemployment rates and availability of competing
product in the geographic area where a community is located. When
analyzing the Company’s historical absorption pace for home sales and
corresponding internal and external market studies, the Company places greater
emphasis on more current metrics and trends such as the absorption pace realized
in its most recent quarters as well as forecasted population demographics,
unemployment rates and availability of competing product.
In order
to determine the assumed sales prices included in its cash flow models, the
Company analyzes the historical sales prices realized on homes it delivered in
the community and other communities in the geographic area as well as the sales
prices included in its current backlog for such communities. In
addition, the Company analyzes internal and external market studies and trends,
which generally include, but are not limited to, statistics on sales prices in
neighboring communities and sales prices on similar products in non-neighboring
communities in the geographic area where the community is
located. When analyzing its historical sales prices and corresponding
market studies, the Company also places greater emphasis on more current metrics
and trends. Ultimately, upon this analysis, the Company sets a
current sales price for each house type in the community, using the
aforementioned information, which it believes will achieve an acceptable gross
margin and sales pace in the community. This price becomes the price published
to the sales force for use in its sales efforts. The Company then uses the
average of these “published” sales prices in its cash flow model.
In order
to arrive at the Company’s assumed costs to build and deliver homes, the Company
generally assumes a cost structure reflecting contracts currently in place with
its vendors and subcontractors adjusted for any anticipated cost reduction
initiatives or increases in cost structure. With respect to overhead
included in the cash flow model, the Company uses forecasted rates included in
the Company’s annual budget for the overall market area adjusted for actual
experience that is materially different than budgeted rates.
Future
Communities: For raw land or land under development that
management anticipates will be utilized for future homebuilding activities, the
recoverability of assets is measured by comparing the carrying amount of the
assets to future undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by the assets
based on home sales, consistent with the evaluations performed for operating
communities discussed above.
For raw
land, land under development or lots that management intends to market for sale
to a third party, but that do not meet all of the criteria to be classified as
land held for sale as discussed below, the recoverability of the assets is
determined based on either the estimated net sales proceeds expected to be
realized on the sale of the assets or the estimated fair value determined using
cash flow valuation techniques.
If the
Company has not yet determined whether raw land or land under development will
be utilized for future homebuilding activities or marketed for sale to a third
party, the Company assesses the recoverability of the inventory using a
probability-weighted approach.
Land Held for
Sale: Land held for sale includes land that meets all of the
following six criteria: (1) management, having the authority to
approve the action, commits to a plan to sell the asset; (2) the asset is
available for immediate sale in its present condition subject only to terms that
are usual and customary for sales of such assets; (3) an active program to
locate a buyer and other actions required to complete the plan to sell the asset
have been initiated; (4) the sale of the asset is probable, and transfer of the
asset is expected to qualify for recognition as a completed sale, within one
year; (5) the asset is being actively marketed for sale at a price that is
reasonable in relation to its current fair value; and (6) actions required to
complete the plan indicate that it is unlikely that significant changes to the
plan will be made or that the plan will be withdrawn. The Company
records land held for sale at the lower of its carrying value or fair value less
costs to sell. In performing impairment evaluation for land held for
sale, management considers, among other things, prices for land in recent
comparable sales transactions, market analysis
and
recent bona fide offers received from outside third parties, as well as actual
contracts. If the estimated fair value less the costs to sell an
asset is less than the current carrying value, the asset is written down to its
estimated fair value less costs to sell.
Investment In Unconsolidated Limited
Liability Companies: The
Company evaluates its investment in Unconsolidated LLCs for potential impairment
on a quarterly basis. If the fair value of the investment is less
than the investment’s carrying value and the Company has determined that the
decline in value is other than temporary, the Company would write down the value
of the investment to fair value. The determination of whether an
investment’s fair value is less than the carrying value requires management to
make certain assumptions regarding the amount and timing of future contributions
to the Unconsolidated LLC, the timing of distribution of lots to the Company
from the Unconsolidated LLC, the projected fair value of the lots at the time of
distribution to the Company, and the estimated proceeds from, and timing of, the
sale of land or lots to third parties. In determining the fair value
of investments in Unconsolidated LLCs, the Company evaluates the projected cash
flows associated with each Unconsolidated LLC. As of December 31,
2009, the Company used a discount rate of 16% in determining the fair value of
investments in Unconsolidated LLCs. In addition to the assumptions
management must make to determine if the investment’s fair value is less than
the carrying value, management must also use judgment in determining whether the
impairment is other than temporary. The factors management considers
are: (1) the length of time and the extent to which the market value has been
less than cost; (2) the financial condition and near-term prospects of the
Company; and (3) the intent and ability of the Company to retain its investment
in the Unconsolidated LLC for a period of time sufficient to allow for any
anticipated recovery in market value. In situations where the
investments are 100% equity financed by the partners, and the joint venture
simply distributes lots to its partners, the Company evaluates “other than
temporary” by preparing an undiscounted cash flow model as described in
inventory above for operating communities. If such model results in
positive value versus carrying value, and the fair value of the investment is
less than the investment’s carrying value, the Company determines that the
impairment is temporary; otherwise, the Company determines that the impairment
is other than temporary and impairs the investment. Because of the
high degree of judgment involved in developing these assumptions, it is possible
that the Company may determine the investment is not impaired in the current
period but, due to passage of time or change in market conditions leading to
changes in assumptions, impairment could occur.
The table
below shows the level and measurement of assets and liabilities measured on a
non-recurring basis for the year ended December 31, 2009:
Description
of Asset or Liability
(in
thousands)
|
Fair
Value Measurements
December
31,
2009
|
|
Quoted
Prices
in
Active
Markets
for
Identical
Assets
(Level
1)
|
|
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level
2)
|
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level
3)
|
|
Total
Losses
(a)
|
Inventory
(b)
|
$75,523 |
|
$
- |
|
$
- |
|
$75,523 |
|
$42,693 |
Investment
in Unconsolidated LLCs (c)
|
7,660 |
|
$
- |
|
$
- |
|
7,660 |
|
7,731 |
Total
fair value measurements
|
$83,183 |
|
$
- |
|
$
- |
|
$83,183 |
|
$50,424 |
(a)
|
Represents
total losses recorded during the year ended December 31,
2009.
|
(b)
|
Inventory,
with a carrying value of $118.2 million was written down to fair value of
$75.5 million, resulting in an impairment charge of $42.7 million, which
was included in impairment of inventory and investment in Unconsolidated
LLCs in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations for year ended
December 31, 2009. There were additional impairment charges of
$5.0 million related to homes closed during the year ended December 31,
2009, and therefore are not included in the carrying
value.
|
(c)
|
Investments
in Unconsolidated LLCs with an aggregate carrying value of $15.4 million
were written down to their fair value of $7.7 million, resulting in an
impairment charge of $7.7 million, which is included in impairment of
inventory and investment in Unconsolidated LLCs in the Company’s
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31,
2009.
|
NOTE
6. Risk Management and Derivatives
As
described in Note 5 above, in the normal course of business, our financial
services segment is exposed to interest rate risk, and the Company uses
derivatives to help manage this risk.
To meet
the financing needs of our home-buying customers, M/I Financial is party to
IRLCs, which are extended to customers who have applied for a mortgage loan and
meet certain defined credit and underwriting criteria. These IRLCs are
considered derivative financial instruments. M/I Financial manages
interest rate risk related to its IRLCs and mortgage loans held for sale through
the use of FMBSs, use of best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments, and the
occasional purchase of options on FMBSs in accordance with Company
policy. These FMBSs, options on FMBSs, and IRLCs covered by FMBSs are
considered non-designated derivatives.
Certain
IRLCs and mortgage loans held for sale are committed to third party investors
through the use of best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments. The
IRLCs and related best-efforts whole loan delivery commitments, which generally
are highly effective from an economic standpoint, are considered non-designated
derivatives, and are accounted for at fair value, with gains or losses recorded
in financial services revenue. Under the terms of these best-efforts
whole loan delivery commitments covering mortgage loans held for sale, the
specific committed mortgage loans held for sale are identified and matched to
specific delivery commitments on a loan-by-loan basis. The delivery
commitments and loans held for sale are recorded at fair value, with changes in
fair value recorded in financial services revenue.
All
derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair
value. The total notional amount of the Company’s derivatives as of
December 31, 2009 was $126.1 million. Refer to Note 5 above for
further discussion surrounding our derivative instruments.
|
Asset
Derivatives
At
December 31, 2009
|
|
Liability
Derivatives
At
December 31, 2009
|
Description
of Derivatives
|
Balance
Sheet
Location
|
Fair
Value
(in
thousands)
|
|
Balance
Sheet
Location
|
Fair
Value
(in
thousands)
|
Forward
sales of mortgage-backed securities
|
Other
Assets
|
$
833 |
|
Other
Liabilities
|
$
- |
Interest
rate lock commitments
|
Other
Assets
|
- |
|
Other
Liabilities
|
145 |
Best-efforts
contracts
|
Other
Assets
|
308 |
|
Other
Liabilities
|
- |
Total
fair value measurements
|
|
$1,141 |
|
|
$145 |
Amount of
gain (loss) recognized on derivatives for the year ended December 31,
2009:
Description
of Derivatives
|
Year
Ended
December
31, 2009
(in
thousands)
|
|
Location
of Gain (Loss) Recognized on Derivatives
|
Forward
sales of mortgage-backed securities
|
$1,937 |
|
Financial
Services Revenue
|
Interest
rate lock commitments
|
(783) |
|
Financial
Services Revenue
|
Best-efforts
contracts
|
235 |
|
Financial
Services Revenue
|
Total
gain (loss) recognized on derivatives
|
$1,389 |
|
|
NOTE
7. Valuation Adjustments and Write-offs
The
Company assesses inventory for recoverability on a quarterly basis, by reviewing
for impairment whenever events or changes in local or national economic
conditions indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable.
Operating
communities. For existing operating communities which may have
impairment indicators, the recoverability of assets is measured by comparing the
carrying amount of the assets to future undiscounted cash flows expected to be
generated by the assets based on home sales. These estimated cash
flows are developed based primarily on management’s assumptions relating to the
specific community. The significant assumptions used to evaluate the
recoverability of assets include: the timing of development and/or
marketing phases; projected sales price and sales pace of each existing or
planned community; the estimated land development and home construction and
selling costs of the community; overall market supply and demand; the local
market; and competitive conditions.
Future
communities. For raw land or land under development that
management anticipates will be utilized for future homebuilding activities, the
recoverability of assets is measured by comparing the carrying amount of the
assets to future undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by the assets
based on home sales, consistent with the evaluations performed for operating
communities discussed above.
For raw
land, land under development or lots that management intends to market for sale
to a third party, but that do not meet all of the criteria to be classified as
land held for sale as discussed above in Note 5, the recoverability of the
assets is determined based on either the estimated net sales proceeds expected
to be realized on the sale of the assets or the estimated fair value determined
using cash flow valuation techniques.
If the
Company has not yet determined whether raw land or land under development will
be utilized for future homebuilding activities or marketed for sale to a third
party, the Company assesses the recoverability of the inventory using a
probability-weighted approach.
Land held for
sale. Land held for sale includes land that meets the six
criteria discussed above in Note 5. The Company records land held for
sale at the lower of its carrying value or fair value less costs to
sell. Fair value is determined based on the expected third party sale
proceeds.
Investments in
Unconsolidated limited liability companies. The Company
assesses investments in Unconsolidated LLCs for impairment on a quarterly
basis. When evaluating the Unconsolidated LLCs, if the fair value of
the investment is less than the investment carrying value, and the Company
determines the decline in value is other than temporary, the Company would write
down the investment to fair value. The Company’s Unconsolidated LLCs
engage in land acquisition and development activities for the purpose of selling
or distributing (in the form of a capital distribution) developed lots to the
Company and its partners in the entity, as further discussed in Note
9.
As of
December 31, 2009, we utilized discount rates ranging from 13% to 16% in the
above valuations. The discount rate used in determining each asset’s
fair value depends on the community’s projected life, development stage, and the
inherent risks associated with the related estimated cash flow stream as well as
current risk free rates available in the market and estimated market risk
premiums.
A summary
of the Company’s valuation adjustments and write-offs for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 is as follows:
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
Impairment
of operating communities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
|
$
|
10,262
|
$
|
44,358
|
$
|
6,600
|
Florida
|
|
6,702
|
|
14,771
|
|
22,985
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
|
7,708
|
|
30,225
|
|
33,691
|
Total
impairment of operating communities (a)
|
$
|
24,672
|
$
|
89,354
|
$
|
63,276
|
Impairment
of future communities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
|
$
|
6,892
|
$
|
1,524
|
$
|
1,527
|
Florida
|
|
8,405
|
|
4,380
|
|
12,619
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
|
2,180
|
|
-
|
|
6,923
|
Total
impairment of future communities (a)
|
$
|
17,477
|
$
|
5,904
|
$
|
21,069
|
Impairment
of land held for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
|
$
|
2,016
|
$
|
8,727
|
$
|
-
|
Florida
|
|
1,883
|
|
24,554
|
|
37,701
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
|
1,642
|
|
309
|
|
13,206
|
Total
impairment of land held for sale (a)
|
$
|
5,541
|
$
|
33,590
|
$
|
50,907
|
Option
deposits and pre-acquisition costs write-offs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
|
$
|
569
|
$
|
311
|
$
|
676
|
Florida
(b)
|
|
20
|
|
162
|
|
1,840
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
|
1,067
|
|
4,839
|
|
1,096
|
Total
option deposits and pre-acquisition costs write-offs (c)
|
$
|
1,656
|
$
|
5,312
|
$
|
3,612
|
Impairment
of investments in Unconsolidated LLCs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
|
$
|
616
|
$
|
1,413
|
$
|
-
|
Florida
|
|
7,115
|
|
23,039
|
|
13,125
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
Total
impairment of investments in Unconsolidated LLCs (a)
|
$
|
7,731
|
$
|
24,452
|
$
|
13,125
|
|
Total
impairments and write-offs of option deposits and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pre-acquisition
costs (d)
|
$
|
57,077
|
$
|
158,612
|
$
|
151,989
|
(a)
|
Amounts
are recorded within Impairment of inventory and investment in
Unconsolidated limited liability companies in the Company’s Consolidated
Statements of Operations.
|
(b)
|
Includes the Company’s $0.8 million share of the
write-off of an option deposit in 2007 that is included in Equity in
undistributed loss of limited liability companies in the Company’s
Consolidated Statements of Cash
Flows.
|
(c)
|
Amounts
are recorded within General and administrative expenses in the Company’s
Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
|
(d)
|
Total
impairment excludes impairment of our West Palm Beach, Florida division of
$58.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2007, which is included in
discontinued operation.
|
NOTE
8. Transactions with Related Parties
During
2007, the Company sold land for approximately $0.8 million to an entity owned by
an employee of the Company. This transaction was ratified by the
independent members of the Board of Directors. There was no land sold
in 2008 or 2009 to related parties.
The
Company had receivables totaling $0.7 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008 due
from executive officers, relating to amounts owed to the Company for
split-dollar life insurance policy premiums. The Company will collect
the receivable either directly from the executive officer, if employment
terminates other than by death, or from the executive officer’s beneficiary, if
employment terminates due to death of the executive officer. The
receivables are recorded in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance
Sheets.
NOTE
9. Investment in Unconsolidated Limited Liability
Companies
At
December 31, 2009, the Company had interests ranging from 33% to 50% in
Unconsolidated LLCs that do not meet the criteria of variable interest entities
because each of the entities had sufficient equity at risk to permit the entity
to finance its activities without additional subordinated support from the
equity investors, and one of these Unconsolidated LLCs has outside financing
that is not guaranteed by the Company. These Unconsolidated LLCs
engage in land acquisition and development activities for the purpose of selling
or distributing (in the form of a capital distribution) developed lots to the
Company and its partners in the entity. The Company’s maximum
exposure related to its investment in these entities as of December 31, 2009 is
the amount invested of $10.3 million plus letters of credit and bonds totaling
$0.3 million. Included in the Company’s investment in Unconsolidated
LLCs at December 31, 2009 and 2008 are $0.8 million and $0.6 million,
respectively, of capitalized interest and other costs. The Company
does not have a controlling interest in these Unconsolidated LLCs; therefore,
they are recorded using the equity method of accounting. The Company
received distributions of developed lots at cost totaling $10.0 million and $7.9
million in 2008 and 2007, respectively. The Company did not receive
any distributions of developed lots in 2009.
The
Company evaluates its investment in Unconsolidated LLCs for potential impairment
on a quarterly basis. If the fair value of the investment is less
than the investment carrying value, and the Company determines the decline in
value was other than temporary, the Company would write down the investment to
fair value.
Summarized
condensed combined financial information for the Unconsolidated LLCs that are
included in the homebuilding segments as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 and for
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 is as follows:
Summarized
Condensed Combined Balance Sheets:
|
December
31,
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
Single-family
lots, land and land development costs
|
$
|
35,534
|
$
|
41,255
|
Other
assets
|
|
276
|
|
1,829
|
Total
assets
|
$
|
35,810
|
$
|
43,084
|
Liabilities
and partners’ equity:
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
payable
|
$
|
3,250
|
$
|
11,678
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
425
|
|
687
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
3,675
|
|
12,365
|
Partners’
equity:
|
|
|
|
|
Company’s
equity
|
|
10,299
|
|
13,130
|
Other
equity
|
|
21,836
|
|
17,589
|
Total
partners’ equity
|
|
32,135
|
|
30,719
|
Total
liabilities and partners’ equity
|
$
|
35,810
|
$
|
43,084
|
Summarized
Condensed Combined Statements of Operations:
|
Years
Ended December 31,
|
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Revenue
|
$ |
77 |
|
$ |
2,417 |
|
$ |
1,081 |
|
Costs
and expenses
|
|
97 |
|
|
16,143 |
|
|
2,713 |
|
Loss
|
$ |
(20 |
) |
$ |
(13,726 |
) |
$ |
(1,632 |
) |
The
Company’s total equity in the loss relating to the above homebuilding
Unconsolidated LLCs was approximately less than $0.1 million, $0.1 million and
$0.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
NOTE
10. Guarantees and Indemnities
Warranty
The
Company offers a limited warranty program (“Home Builder’s Limited Warranty”) in
conjunction with its thirty-year transferable structural limited warranty, on
homes closed in or after 2007. The Home Builder’s Limited Warranty
covers construction defects and certain damage resulting from construction
defects for a statutory period based on geographic market and state law
(currently ranging from five to ten years for the states in which the Company
operates) and includes a mandatory arbitration clause. Prior to this
warranty program, the Company provided up to a two-year limited warranty on
materials and workmanship and a twenty-year (for homes closed between 1989 and
1998) and a
thirty-year
(for homes closed during or after 1998) transferable limited warranty against
major structural defects. Warranty expense is accrued as the home sale is
recognized and is intended to cover estimated material and outside labor costs
to be incurred during the warranty period. The accrual amounts are
based upon historical experience and geographic location. A summary
of warranty activity for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 is as
follows:
|
Years
Ended December 31,
|
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Warranty
accruals, beginning of year
|
$ |
9,518 |
|
$ |
12,006 |
|
$ |
14,095 |
|
Warranty
expense on homes delivered during the period
|
|
4,904 |
|
|
4,791 |
|
|
7,709 |
|
Changes
in estimates for pre-existing warranties
|
|
346 |
|
|
1,279 |
|
|
18 |
|
Settlements
made during the period
|
|
(6,111 |
) |
|
(8,558 |
) |
|
(9,816 |
) |
Warranty
accruals, end of year
|
$ |
8,657 |
|
$ |
9,518 |
|
$ |
12,006 |
|
Guarantees
and Indemnities
In the
ordinary course of business, M/I Financial enters into agreements that guarantee
certain purchasers of its mortgage loans that M/I Financial will repurchase a
loan if certain conditions occur, primarily if the mortgagor does not meet those
conditions of the loan within the first six months after the sale of the
loan. Loans totaling approximately $186.2 million and $64.4 million
were covered under the above guarantees as of December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. A portion of the revenue paid to M/I Financial for
providing the guarantees on the above loans was deferred at December 31, 2009,
and will be recognized in income as M/I Financial is released from its
obligation under the guarantees. M/I Financial has not repurchased
any loans under the above agreements in 2009 or 2008, but has provided
indemnifications to third party investors in lieu of repurchasing certain
loans. The total of these indemnified loans was approximately $3.6
million and $2.8 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The risk associated with the guarantees and indemnities
above is offset by the value of the underlying assets. The Company
has accrued management’s best estimate of the probable loss on the above
loans.
M/I
Financial has also guaranteed the collectability of certain loans to third-party
insurers of those loans for periods ranging from five to thirty
years. The maximum potential amount of future payments is equal to
the outstanding loan value less the value of the underlying asset plus
administrative costs incurred related to foreclosure on the loans, should this
event occur. The total of these costs are estimated to be $1.8
million and $1.5 million as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, and
would be offset by the value of the underlying assets. The Company
has accrued management’s best estimate of the probable loss on the above
loans.
The
Company has also provided an environmental indemnification to an unrelated
third-party seller of land in connection with the Company’s purchase of that
land.
The
Company has recorded a liability relating to the guarantees and indemnities
described above totaling $1.7 million and $1.9 million at December 31, 2009 and
2008, respectively, which is management’s best estimate of the fair value of the
Company’s liability.
The
Company has also provided a guarantee of the performance and payment obligations
of its wholly-owned subsidiary, M/I Financial, up to an aggregate principle
amount of $13.0 million. The guarantee was provided to a
government-sponsored enterprise to which M/I Financial delivers
loans.
The
Company's Credit Facility and Senior Notes are fully and unconditionally
guaranteed jointly and severally by substantially all of the Company's
wholly-owned subsidiaries. The Company has no independent assets or
operations, and any subsidiaries of the parent company other than
the subsidiary guarantors are minor.
NOTE
11. Commitments and Contingencies
At
December 31, 2009, the Company had sales agreements outstanding, some of which
have contingencies for financing approval, to deliver 650 homes with an
aggregate sales price of approximately $176.7 million. Based on our
current housing gross margin of 14.7%, excluding the charge for impairment of
inventory, less variable selling costs of 3.9% of revenue, less payments to date
on homes in backlog of $83.4 million, we estimate payments totaling
approximately $74.2 million to be made in 2010 relating to those
homes. At December 31, 2009, the Company also has options and
contingent purchase agreements to acquire land and developed lots with an
aggregate purchase price of approximately $81.9 million. Purchase of
properties is contingent upon satisfaction of certain requirements by the
Company and the sellers.
At
December 31, 2009, the Company had outstanding approximately $58.2 million of
completion bonds and standby letters of credit, some of which were issued to
various local governmental entities that expire at various times
through
December 2016. Included in this total are: (1) $25.4 million of
performance and maintenance bonds and $19.9 million of performance letters of
credit that serve as completion bonds for land development work in progress
(including the Company’s $0.2 million share of our Unconsolidated LLCs’ letters
of credit and bonds); (2) $8.3 million of financial letters of credit, of which
$2.6 million represent deposits on land and lot purchase agreements; and (3)
$4.6 million of financial bonds.
During
2009, the Company identified approximately 90 homes that have been confirmed as
having defective imported drywall installed by our subcontractors. All of
these homes are located in Florida. The Company has accrued $12.2 million
for their repair and we have charged $4.0 million against that accrual in
2009.
NOTE
12. Legal Liabilities
On March
14, 2008, a former employee filed a complaint in the United States
District Court, Middle District of Florida, on behalf of himself and those
similarly situated, against M/I Homes, Inc., alleging that he and other
construction superintendents were misclassified as exempt and not paid overtime
compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act and seeking equitable
relief, damages and attorneys' fees. Six other individuals have filed
consent forms in order to join the action. The Company filed an answer on
or about August 21, 2008 and intends to vigorously defend against the
claims.
On March
5, 2009, a resident of Florida and an owner of one of our homes filed a
complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio,
on behalf of himself and other similarly situated owners and residents of homes
in the United States or alternatively in Florida, against M/I Homes, Inc., and
certain other identified and unidentified manufacturers, builders, and suppliers
of drywall. The plaintiff alleges that the Company built his home with
defective drywall, manufactured by certain of the defendants,
that contains sulfur or other organic compounds capable of harming the health of
individuals and damaging metals. The plaintiff alleges physical and
economic damages and seeks legal and equitable relief, medical monitoring and
attorney’s fees. The Company filed a responsive pleading on or about
April 30, 2009. The same homeowner and five others are named as plantiffs
in an omnibus class action complaint filed in December 2009 arising from the
same type claims. The Company intends to vigorously defend against
the claims. Please refer to Note 11 for further information on this
matter.
The
Company and certain of its subsidiaries have been named as defendants in other
claims, complaints and legal actions which are routine and incidental to our
business. Certain of the liabilities resulting from these other
matters are covered by insurance. While management
currently believes that the ultimate resolution of these other matters,
individually and in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on
the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash
flows, such matters are subject to inherent uncertainties. The Company has
recorded a liability to provide for the anticipated costs, including legal
defense costs, associated with the resolution of these other matters.
However, there exists the possibility that the costs to resolve these other
matters could differ from the recorded estimates and, therefore, have a material
adverse effect on the Company’s net income for the periods in which the
matters are resolved. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, we had $2.4
million and $2.0 million, respectively, reserved for legal
expenses.
NOTE
13. Lease Commitments
Operating
Leases. The Company leases various office facilities,
automobiles, model furnishings, and model homes under operating leases with
remaining terms of one to nine years. The Company sells model homes
to investors with the express purpose of leasing the homes back as sales models
for a specified period of time. The Company records the sale of the
home at the time of the home closing, and defers profit on the sale, which is
subsequently recognized over the lease term.
At
December 31, 2009, the future minimum rental commitments totaled $10.6 million
under non-cancelable operating leases with initial terms in excess of one year
as follows: 2010 - $3.1 million; 2011 - $2.8 million; 2012 - $2.5
million; 2013 - $1.0 million; 2014 - $0.4 million; and $0.8 million
thereafter. The Company’s total rental expense was $6.5 million, $9.7
million, and $14.8 million for 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
NOTE
14. Community Development District Infrastructure and Related
Obligations
A
Community Development District and/or Community Development Authority (“CDD”) is
a unit of local government created under various state and/or local statutes to
encourage planned community development and to allow for the construction and
maintenance of long-term infrastructure through alternative financing sources,
including the tax-exempt markets. A CDD is generally created through
the approval of the local city or county in which the CDD is located and is
controlled by a Board of Supervisors representing the landowners within the
CDD. CDDs may utilize bond financing to fund construction or
acquisition of certain on-site and off-site infrastructure
improvements
near or within these communities. CDDs are also granted the power to
levy special assessments to impose ad valorem taxes, rates, fees and other
charges for the use of the CDD project. An allocated share of the
principal and interest on the bonds issued by the CDD is assigned to and
constitutes a lien on each parcel within the community evidenced by an
assessment (“Assessment”). The owner of each such parcel is
responsible for the payment of the Assessment on that parcel. If the
owner of the parcel fails to pay the Assessment, the CDD may foreclose on the
lien pursuant to powers conferred to the CDD under applicable state laws and/or
foreclosure procedures. In connection with the development of certain
of the Company’s communities, CDDs have been established and bonds have been
issued to finance a portion of the related infrastructure. Following
are details relating to the CDD bond obligations issued and outstanding as of
December 31, 2009:
Issue
Date
|
Maturity
Date
|
Interest
Rate
|
Principal
Amount
(in
thousands)
|
7/15/2004
|
12/1/2022
|
6.00%
|
$ 4,166
|
7/15/2004
|
12/1/2036
|
6.25%
|
10,060
|
3/15/2007
|
5/1/2037
|
5.20%
|
6,880
|
Total
CDD bond obligations issued and outstanding as of December 31,
2009
|
$21,106
|
The
Company records a liability for the estimated developer obligations that are
fixed and determinable and user fees that are required to be paid or transferred
at the time the parcel or unit is sold to an end user. The Company
reduces this liability by the corresponding Assessment assumed by property
purchasers and the amounts paid by the Company at the time of closing and the
transfer of the property. The Company has recorded an $8.2 million
liability related to these CDD bond obligations as of December 31, 2009, along
with the related inventory infrastructure.
NOTE
15. Consolidated Inventory Not Owned and Related
Obligation
In the
ordinary course of business, the Company enters into land option contracts in
order to secure land for the construction of homes in the
future. Pursuant to these land option contracts, the Company will
provide a deposit to the seller as consideration for the right to purchase land
at different times in the future, usually at predetermined prices. If
the entity holding the land under option is a variable interest entity, the
Company’s deposit (including letters of credit) represents a variable interest
in the entity. The Company does not guarantee the obligations or
performance of the variable interest entity.
The
Company evaluated all land option contracts and determined that the Company was
subject to a majority of the expected losses or entitled to receive a majority
of the expected residual returns under one of the contracts. As the
primary beneficiary under this contract, the Company is required to consolidate
the fair value of the variable interest entity.
As of
December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had recorded $0.6 million and $4.3
million, respectively, within Inventory on the Consolidated Balance Sheets,
representing the fair value of land under contract. The corresponding
liability has been classified as Obligation for consolidated inventory not owned
on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
NOTE
16. Note Receivable
On
December 22, 2006, in connection with the sale of certain property to a
developer, the Company received a promissory note in the amount of $6.1 million
bearing interest at 4.91% per annum, secured by the related property. Interest
payments under the note were due semiannually, with the unpaid principal balance
and any unpaid accrued interest due on December 1, 2009. The
developer is currently in default on this note, which has caused the Company to
evaluate the fair value of this note receivable based on the value of the
underlying security. The Company has recorded a $3.8 million
allowance against this note receivable within Other assets on the Consolidated
Balance Sheets.
NOTE
17. Debt
Notes
Payable Banks and Other
In
January 2009, we entered into the Third Amendment to The Second Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement dated October 6, 2006 (the “Credit Facility”)
to: (1) reduce the Aggregate Commitment (as defined therein) from
$250 million to $150 million, which is then reduced to $125 million, $100
million and $60 million if the Company’s consolidated tangible net worth falls
below $250 million, $200 million and $150 million, respectively; (2) require
secured borrowings based on a Secured Borrowing Base calculated as 100% of
Secured Borrowing Base Cash plus 40% of the aggregated Appraised
Value of the Qualified Real Property, as defined therein; (3) redefine
consolidated tangible net worth as equal to or exceeding (i) $100 million plus
(ii) fifty percent (50%) of Consolidated Earnings
(without
deduction for losses and excluding the effect of any decrease in any Deferred
Tax Valuation Allowance) earned for each completed fiscal quarter ending after
December 31, 2008 to the date of determination, excluding any quarter in which
the Consolidated Earnings are less than zero; plus (iii) the amount of any
reduction or reversal in Deferred Tax Valuation Allowance for each completed
fiscal quarter ending after December 31, 2008; (4) require the permitted
leverage ratio not to exceed 2.00x; (5) increase the percentage of speculative
units allowed based on the latest six and twelve month closings; (6) increase
the limitations on joint venture investments and extensions of credit in
connection with the sale of land; and (7) increase the pricing
provisions.
At
December 31, 2009, borrowing availability was $35.1 million in accordance with
the borrowing base calculation, and there were $10.6 million of letters of
credit outstanding under the Credit Facility, leaving net remaining borrowing
availability of $24.5 million. The Company has pledged inventory
assets totaling $112.8 million at December 31, 2009 to secure the outstanding
letters of credit and any future borrowings under the Credit
Facility. The Company can create additional borrowing availability
under the Credit Facility to the extent it collateralizes additional cash and/or
inventory assets. The borrowing availability can also be increased by
increasing investments in assets currently pledged but this is offset by the
collateral value of homes delivered that are within the pledged asset
pool. Borrowings under the Credit Facility are at the Alternate Base
Rate plus a margin ranging from 350 to 425 basis points, or at the Eurodollar
Rate plus a margin ranging from 450 to 525 basis points. The
Alternate Base Rate is defined as the higher of the Prime Rate, the Federal
Funds Rate plus 50 basis points or the one month Eurodollar Rate plus 100 basis
points. As of December 31, 2009, the Company was in compliance with
all restrictive covenants of the Credit Facility.
The
Credit Facility also places limitations on the amount of additional indebtedness
that may be incurred by the Company, limitations on the investments that the
Company may make, including joint ventures and advances to officers and
employees, and limitations on the aggregate cost of certain types of inventory
that the Company can hold at any one time. The Company is required
under the Credit Facility to maintain a certain amount of tangible net worth
and, as of December 31, 2009, our tangible net worth exceeded the minimum
tangible net worth required by this covenant by approximately $205.0
million. As of December 31, 2009, the Company was in compliance with
all restrictive covenants of the Credit Facility.
On April
29, 2009, M/I Financial entered into a new secured credit agreement, which was
amended by the First Amendment to the secured credit agreement on September 23,
2009, and the Second Amendment on December 30, 2009 (“MIF Credit
Agreement”). This agreement replaced M/I Financial’s previous credit
agreement that expired on May 21, 2009.
The MIF
Credit Agreement provides M/I Financial with $30.0 million maximum borrowing
availability. The MIF Credit Agreement, which expires on May 15,
2010, is secured by certain mortgage loans. The MIF Credit Agreement
also provides for limits with respect to certain loan types that can secure the
borrowings under the agreement. M/I Financial shall not permit its
tangible net worth to be less than the sum of (1) $13.0 million, as of the end
of any calendar month during the period beginning May 15, 2009 and ending
November 30, 2009, and (2) $13.0 million plus (a) twenty-five percent (25%) of
the greater of (i) net income of M/I Financial and its subsidiaries or (ii)
zero, calculated separately for each fiscal year beginning with the fiscal year
ending December 31, 2009. M/I Financial shall not permit its adjusted
tangible net worth (the tangible net worth less the outstanding amount of
intercompany loans) to be less than the sum of (1) $11.0 million, as of the end
of any calendar month during the period beginning May 15, 2009 and ending
November 30, 2009, and (2) $11.0 million plus (a) twenty-five percent (25%) of
the greater of (i) net income of M/I Financial and its subsidiaries or (ii)
zero, calculated separately for each fiscal year beginning with the fiscal year
ending on December 31, 2009. M/I Financial shall not permit the ratio
of earnings before interest and taxes to interest expense to be less than 1.25
to 1.00. M/I Financial pays interest on each advance under the MIF
Credit Agreement at a per annum rate of the greater of the floating LIBOR rate
(LIBOR plus 400 basis points) or 5.25%. As of December 31, 2009, M/I
Financial was in compliance with all restrictive covenants of the MIF Credit
Agreement.
In July
2009, the Company entered into the LOC Facilities with a borrowing capacity of
$35 million and with maturities ranging from August 31, 2010 to August 31, 2011
for three of the LOC Facilities while the fourth LOC Facility remains in effect
until the Company gives notice of termination. As of December 31,
2009, we were in compliance with all restrictive covenants. There are
also cross defaults to the Credit Facility discussed above, as well as
collateral requirements which the Company will cover solely with
cash. At December 31, 2009, there was $17.7 million outstanding under
the LOC Facilities which was collateralized with $18.6 million of restricted
cash.
As of
December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had outstanding a building mortgage note
payable in the principal amount of $6.2 million and $6.4 million, respectively,
with a fixed interest rate of 8.117% and a maturity date of April 1,
2017. The book value of the collateral securing this note was $10.9
million at both December 31, 2009 and 2008.
On April
4, 2008, the Company entered into a loan agreement with a financial institution
which was collateralized by the Company’s aircraft which was exchanged in the
first quarter of 2008. This $10.2 million promissory note bore
interest at LIBOR plus 2.25% and was due April 2015. The balance of
the note at December 31, 2008 was $9.9 million. During
2009, the Company sold its airplane and used the proceeds from that sale to pay
off the note payable associated with the airplane.
Senior
Notes
As of
December 31, 2009, we had $200 million of 6.875% senior notes outstanding (our
"Senior Notes"). The notes are due April 2012 and are fully and
unconditionally guaranteed jointly and severally by substantially all of the
Company's wholly-owned subsidiaries. The Credit Facility prohibits
the early repurchase of our Senior Notes.
The
indenture governing our Senior Notes contains restrictive covenants that limit,
among other things, the ability of the Company to pay dividends on common and
preferred shares, or repurchase any shares. If our “restricted
payments basket,” as defined in the indenture governing our Senior Notes, is
less than zero, we are restricted from making certain payments, including
dividends, as well as from repurchasing any shares. At December 31,
2009, our restricted payments basket was ($156.0) million. As a
result of this deficit, we are currently restricted from paying dividends on our
common shares and our 9.75% Series A Preferred Shares, and from repurchasing any
shares under our common shares repurchase program that was authorized by our
Board of Directors in November 2005. These restrictions do not affect
our compliance with any of the covenants contained in the Credit Facility and
will not permit the lenders under the Credit Facility to accelerate the
loans.
Maturities
with respect to the Company’s debt as of December 31, 2009 are as
follows:
|
Debt
Maturities
|
Year
Ending December 31,
|
(In
thousands)
|
2010
|
$ |
24,142 |
2011
|
|
- |
2012
|
|
200,000 |
2013
|
|
- |
2014
|
|
- |
Total
|
$ |
224,142 |
NOTE
18. Universal Shelf Registration
On May
19, 2009, we raised $52.6 million by issuing 4,475,600 shares of our common
stock in a public offering, pursuant to the $250 million universal shelf
registration filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission in
August 2008.
As of
December 31, 2009, $194.1 million remains available for future offerings under
the $250 million universal shelf registration. Pursuant to the
filing, the Company may, from time to time over an extended period, offer new
debt, equity and certain other securities. The timing and amount of
offerings, if any, will depend on market and general business
conditions.
NOTE
19. Preferred Shares
The
Company’s Articles of Incorporation authorize the issuance of up to 2,000,000
non-cumulative preferred shares, par value $.01 per share. On March
15, 2007, the Company issued 4,000,000 depositary shares, each representing
1/1000th of a
9.75% Series A Preferred Share, or 4,000 Preferred Shares in the aggregate (the
“Preferred Shares”). The aggregate liquidation value of the Preferred
Shares is $100 million. There were no dividends paid in
2009.
As
discussed in Note 17, the indenture governing our Senior Notes contains a
provision that restricts the payment of dividends when the calculation of the
“restricted payments basket,” as defined therein, falls below
zero. At December 31, 2009, the restricted payments basket was
$(156.0) million and, therefore, we are currently restricted from making any
further dividend payments on our Preferred Shares. We will continue
to be restricted from paying dividends until such time as the restricted
payments basket has been restored or our Senior Notes are repaid, and our Board
of Directors authorizes us to resume dividend payments.
December
15, 2009 was the sixth dividend payment for which dividends on the Preferred
Shares have not been paid. As a result, the Board of Directors called
a special meeting of the holders of the Preferred Shares (as represented by the
depositary shares) for the purpose of nominating two persons to serve on the
Board of Directors. On January 12, 2010, the Company held the special meeting of
the holders of the Preferred Shares. No Preferred Shares were
represented
in person or by properly executed proxy at the special meeting and, as a result,
no persons were nominated to serve as directors.
NOTE
20. Income Taxes
The
provision (benefit) for income taxes from continuing operations consists of the
following:
|
Years
Ended December 31,
|
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Federal
|
$ |
(27,647 |
) |
$ |
26,448 |
|
$ |
(48,955 |
) |
State
and local
|
|
(3,233 |
) |
|
3,843 |
|
|
(9,441 |
) |
Total
|
$ |
(30,880 |
) |
$ |
30,291 |
|
$ |
(58,396 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Current
|
$ |
(30,880 |
) |
$ |
(37,576 |
) |
$ |
(31,585 |
) |
Deferred
|
|
- |
|
|
67,867 |
|
|
(26,811 |
) |
Total
|
$ |
(30,880 |
) |
$ |
30,291 |
|
$ |
(58,396 |
) |
For the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the Company’s effective tax rate
was 33.2%, (14.1%), and 38.7%, respectively. The negative tax rate in 2008 is
due primarily to the valuation allowance recorded on our deferred tax
assets. The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 introduced a special
3% tax deduction under Internal Revenue Code Section 199, “Income
Attributable to Domestic Production Activities.” In 2007 and 2008,
this item reduced the current federal income tax benefit as the carryback of the
2007 and 2008 federal taxable losses decreased the benefit originally claimed in
the 2005 and 2006 federal tax returns. Reconciliation of the
differences between income taxes computed at the federal statutory tax rate and
consolidated provision for income taxes are as follows:
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Federal
taxes at statutory rate
|
$ |
(32,546 |
) |
$ |
(75,312 |
) |
$ |
(52,807 |
) |
State
and local taxes – net of federal tax benefit
|
|
(2,101 |
) |
|
2,498 |
|
|
(6,137 |
) |
Change
in unrecognized tax benefit
|
|
(1,294 |
) |
|
(1,469 |
) |
|
(641 |
) |
Manufacturing
credit
|
|
(1,300 |
) |
|
(1,269 |
) |
|
1,519 |
|
Change
in valuation allowance
|
|
8,220 |
|
|
108,608 |
|
|
250 |
|
Other
|
|
(1,859 |
) |
|
(2,765 |
) |
|
(580 |
) |
Total
|
$ |
(30,880 |
) |
$ |
30,291 |
|
$ |
(58,396 |
) |
The
Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, and various
states. The Company is no longer subject to U.S. federal, state or
local examinations by tax authorities for years before 2005. The
Company is audited from time to time, and if any adjustments are made, they
would be either immaterial or reserved. A reconciliation of the
beginning and ending amounts of unrecognized tax benefits is as
follows:
|
Year
Ended December 31, |
(In
thousands)
|
|
2009 |
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Balance
at January 1, 2009
|
$ |
4,677 |
|
$ |
6,146 |
|
$ |
6,787 |
|
Additions
based on tax positions related to the current year
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Additions
for tax positions of prior years
|
|
139 |
|
|
471 |
|
|
679 |
|
Reductions
for tax positions of prior years
|
|
(506 |
) |
|
(827 |
) |
|
(1,320 |
) |
Settlements
|
|
(927 |
) |
|
(1,113 |
) |
|
- |
|
Balance
at December 31, 2009
|
$ |
3,383 |
|
$ |
4,677 |
|
$ |
6,146 |
|
The
Company recognizes interest and penalties accrued related to unrecognized tax
benefits in tax expense. The Company recognized $0.1 million in
interest and penalty charges in 2009, $0.5 million in 2008 and $0.2 million in
2007. The Company accrued $1.3 million and $2.0 million,
respectively, for the payment of interest and the payment of penalties at
December 31, 2009, and 2008.
The
Company has taken positions in certain taxing jurisdictions for which it is
reasonably possible that the total amounts of unrecognized tax benefits may
significantly decrease within the next twelve months. The possible
decrease could result from the finalization of the Company’s various state
income tax audits. State income tax audits are primarily concerned
with apportionment-related issues. The estimated range of the
reasonably possible decrease spans from a zero decrease to a decrease of $1.9
million related to lapse in statutes.
The tax
effects of the significant temporary differences that comprise the deferred tax
assets and liabilities are as follows:
|
December
31,
|
(In
thousands)
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
Deferred
tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
Warranty,
insurance and other accruals
|
$ |
12,187 |
|
$ |
12,177 |
|
Inventory
|
|
55,303 |
|
|
61,493 |
|
State
taxes
|
|
17 |
|
|
27 |
|
Net
operating loss carryforward
|
|
48,775 |
|
|
35,893 |
|
Deferred
charges
|
|
1,870 |
|
|
2,126 |
|
Total
deferred tax assets
|
|
118,152 |
|
|
111,716 |
|
Deferred
tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
695 |
|
|
2,421 |
|
Prepaid
expenses
|
|
379 |
|
|
437 |
|
Total
deferred tax liabilities
|
|
1,074 |
|
|
2,858 |
|
Less
valuation allowance
|
|
117,078 |
|
|
108,858 |
|
Net
deferred tax asset
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
Deferred
federal and state income tax assets primarily represent the deferred tax
benefits arising from temporary differences between book and tax income which
will be recognized in future years as an offset against future taxable
income. These assets were largely generated as a result of inventory
impairments that the Company incurred in 2006, 2007, 2008 and
2009. If, for some reason, the combination of future years’ income
(or loss), combined with the reversal of the timing differences, results in a
loss, such losses can be carried back to prior years or carried forward to
future years to recover the deferred tax assets.
The
Company evaluates its deferred tax assets, including net operating losses, to
determine if a valuation allowance is required. We are required to assess
whether a valuation allowance should be established based on the consideration
of all available evidence using a “more likely than not” standard. In
making such judgments, significant weight is given to evidence that can be
objectively verified. A cumulative loss in recent years is significant
negative evidence in considering whether deferred tax assets are realizable, and
also restricts the amount of reliance on projections of future taxable income to
support the recovery of deferred tax assets. The Company’s current and
prior year losses present the most significant negative evidence as to whether
the Company needs to reduce its deferred tax assets with a valuation
allowance. We are in a four-year cumulative pre-tax loss position during
the years 2005 through 2009. We currently believe the cumulative weight of
the negative evidence exceeds that of the positive evidence and, as a result, it
is more likely than not that we will not be able to utilize all of our deferred
tax assets. Therefore, as of December 31, 2009, the Company has recorded
an additional valuation allowance of $8.2 million, for a total valuation
allowance recorded of $117.1 million, against its deferred tax
assets. In 2010, we do not expect to record any additional tax
benefits as the carryback has been exhausted. The accounting for
deferred taxes is based upon an estimate of future
results. Differences between the anticipated and actual outcomes of
these future tax consequences could have a material impact on the Company’s
consolidated results of operations or financial position.
At
December 31, 2009, the Company had a Federal net operating loss (“NOL”)
carryforward of approximately $37.1 million. This Federal carryforward
benefit will begin to expire in 2029. The Company also had state NOL
benefits of $11.7 million, with $6.5 million expiring between 2022 and 2027, and
$5.2 million expiring between 2028 and 2033.
In
November 2009, Congress passed new net operating loss carry-back legislation
which extended the carryback period. As a result of this new
legislation, we expect to receive a refund of $25.9 million in the first quarter
of 2010 as a result of the five-year carryback and a refund of $4.2 million in
the fourth quarter of 2010 as a result of the 10-year carryback period available
for certain of our 2009 losses.
NOTE
21. Financial Instruments
Counterparty
Credit Risk. To reduce the risk associated with accounting
losses that would be recognized if counterparties failed to perform as
contracted, the Company limits the entities that management can enter into a
commitment with to the primary dealers in the market. This risk of
accounting loss is the difference between the market rate at the time of
non-performance by the counterparty and the rate the Company committed
to.
The
following table presents the carrying amounts and fair values of the Company’s
financial instruments at December 31, 2009 and 2008. Fair value is
defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer
a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the
measurement date (an exit price).
|
December
31, 2009
|
|
December
31, 2008
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Value
|
|
Amount
|
|
Value
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash,
including restricted cash
|
$ |
132,232 |
|
$ |
132,232 |
|
$ |
39,176 |
|
$ |
39,176 |
|
Mortgage
loans held for sale
|
|
34,978 |
|
|
34,978 |
|
|
37,772 |
|
|
37,772 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
10,172 |
|
|
10,050 |
|
|
14,282 |
|
|
13,813 |
|
Notes
receivable
|
|
5,584 |
|
|
5,584 |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
5,356 |
|
Commitments
to extend real estate loans
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
638 |
|
|
638 |
|
Best-efforts
contracts for committed IRLCs and mortgage loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
held
for sale
|
|
308 |
|
|
308 |
|
|
73 |
|
|
73 |
|
Forward
sale of mortgage-backed securities
|
|
833 |
|
|
833 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
payable - banks
|
|
24,142 |
|
|
24,142 |
|
|
35,078 |
|
|
35,078 |
|
Mortgage
notes payable
|
|
6,160 |
|
|
7,036 |
|
|
6,442 |
|
|
9,819 |
|
Notes
payable - other
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
9,857 |
|
|
9,857 |
|
Senior
Notes
|
|
199,424 |
|
|
187,750 |
|
|
199,168 |
|
|
105,000 |
|
Commitments
to extend real estate loans
|
|
145 |
|
|
145 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Forward
sale of mortgage-backed securities
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
1,104 |
|
|
1,104 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
51,851 |
|
|
51,851 |
|
|
54,183 |
|
|
54,183 |
|
Off-Balance
Sheet Financial Instruments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letters
of credit
|
|
- |
|
|
693 |
|
|
- |
|
|
727 |
|
The
following methods and assumptions were used by the Company in estimating its
fair value disclosures of financial instruments at December 31, 2009 and
2008:
Cash, Restricted
Cash and Other Liabilities. The carrying amounts of these
items approximate fair value.
Mortgage Loans
Held for Sale, Forward Sale of Mortgage-Backed Securities, Commitments to Extend
Real Estate Loans, Best-Efforts Contracts for Committed IRLCs and Mortgage Loans
Held for Sale, Notes Payable - Other and Senior Notes. The
fair value of these financial instruments was determined based upon market
quotes at December 31, 2009 and 2008. The market quotes used were
quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities along with inputs taken from
observable market data by correlation. The inputs were adjusted to
account for the condition of the asset or liability.
Other Assets and
Notes Receivable. The estimated fair value was determined by
calculating the present value of the amounts based on the estimated timing of
receipts.
Notes Payable -
Banks. The interest rate currently available to the Company
fluctuates with the Alternate Base Rate or Eurodollar Rate (for the Credit
Facility) or LIBOR (for the MIF Credit Agreement), and thus their carrying value
is a reasonable estimate of fair value.
Mortgage Notes
Payable. The estimated fair value was determined by
calculating the present value of the future cash flows.
Letters of
Credit. Letters of credit of $28.3 million and $36.5 million
represent potential commitments at December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The letters of credit generally expire within one or
two years. The estimated fair value of letters of credit was
determined using fees currently charged for similar agreements.
NOTE
22. Business Segments
The
Company’s segment information is presented on the basis that the chief operating
decision makers use in evaluating segment performance. The Company’s
chief operating decision makers evaluate the Company’s performance in various
ways, including: (1) the results of our nine individual homebuilding operating
segments and the results of the financial services operations; (2) the results
of our three homebuilding regions; and (3) our consolidated financial
results. We have determined our reportable segments as follows:
Midwest homebuilding, Florida homebuilding, Mid-Atlantic homebuilding and
financial services operations. The homebuilding operating segments
that are included within each reportable segment have similar operations and
exhibit similar economic characteristics. Our homebuilding operations
include the acquisition and development of land, the sale and construction of
single-family attached and detached homes, and the occasional sale of lots to
third parties. The homebuilding operating segments that comprise each
of our reportable segments are as follows:
Midwest
|
Florida
|
Mid-Atlantic
|
Columbus,
Ohio
|
Tampa,
Florida
|
Washington,
D.C.
|
Cincinnati,
Ohio
|
Orlando,
Florida
|
Charlotte,
North Carolina
|
Indianapolis,
Indiana
|
|
Raleigh,
North Carolina
|
Chicago,
Illinois
|
|
|
The
financial services operations include the origination and sale of mortgage loans
and title services primarily for purchasers of the Company’s
homes.
The chief
operating decision makers utilize operating profits (losses), defined as profits
(losses) before interest expense and income taxes, as a performance
measure. Selected financial information for our reportable segments
for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 is presented
below:
|
Years
Ended
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
258,910 |
|
$ |
232,715 |
|
$ |
358,441 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
95,615 |
|
|
151,643 |
|
|
312,930 |
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
201,366 |
|
|
202,038 |
|
|
326,451 |
|
Other
homebuilding – unallocated (a)
|
|
- |
|
|
7,131 |
|
|
(424 |
) |
Financial
services
|
|
14,058 |
|
|
14,132 |
|
|
19,062 |
|
Total
revenue
|
$ |
569,949 |
|
$ |
607,659 |
|
$ |
1,016,460 |
|
|
Operating
(loss) income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding (b)
|
$ |
(17,590 |
) |
$ |
(73,073 |
) |
$ |
(10,377 |
) |
Florida
homebuilding (b)
|
|
(41,092 |
) |
|
(71,864 |
) |
|
(63,117 |
) |
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding (b)
|
|
(7,500 |
) |
|
(41,491 |
) |
|
(43,547 |
) |
Other
homebuilding – unallocated (a)
|
|
- |
|
|
503 |
|
|
386 |
|
Financial
services
|
|
6,533 |
|
|
6,010 |
|
|
8,517 |
|
Less:
Corporate selling, general and administrative expense (c)
|
|
(23,932 |
) |
|
(29,567 |
) |
|
(27,395 |
) |
Total
operating loss
|
$ |
(83,581 |
) |
$ |
(209,482 |
) |
$ |
(135,533 |
) |
|
Interest
expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
4,043 |
|
$ |
5,197 |
|
$ |
4,788 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
1,690 |
|
|
2,335 |
|
|
5,877 |
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
2,235 |
|
|
3,209 |
|
|
3,815 |
|
Financial
services
|
|
499 |
|
|
456 |
|
|
636 |
|
Corporate
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
227 |
|
Total
interest expense
|
$ |
8,467 |
|
$ |
11,197 |
|
$ |
15,343 |
|
|
Other
(loss) income (d)
|
|
(941 |
) |
|
5,555 |
|
|
- |
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
$ |
(92,989 |
) |
$ |
(215,124 |
) |
$ |
(150,876 |
) |
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
224,059 |
|
$ |
242,066 |
|
$ |
354,220 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
80,797 |
|
|
121,587 |
|
|
241,603 |
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
141,998 |
|
|
185,268 |
|
|
276,887 |
|
Financial
services
|
|
52,092 |
|
|
60,992 |
|
|
62,411 |
|
Corporate
|
|
164,882 |
|
|
83,375 |
|
|
167,926 |
|
Assets
of discontinued operation
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
14,598 |
|
Total
assets
|
$ |
663,828 |
|
$ |
693,288 |
|
$ |
1,117,645 |
|
|
Investment
in Unconsolidated LLCs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
6,051 |
|
$ |
6,359 |
|
$ |
15,705 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
4,248 |
|
|
6,771 |
|
|
24,638 |
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Financial
services
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Total
investment in Unconsolidated LLCs
|
$ |
10,299 |
|
$ |
13,130 |
|
$ |
40,343 |
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest
homebuilding
|
$ |
659 |
|
$ |
336 |
|
$ |
543 |
|
Florida
homebuilding
|
|
728 |
|
|
1,288 |
|
|
1,603 |
|
Mid-Atlantic
homebuilding
|
|
959 |
|
|
1,028 |
|
|
849 |
|
Financial
services
|
|
395 |
|
|
471 |
|
|
498 |
|
Corporate
|
|
5,130 |
|
|
4,631 |
|
|
4,495 |
|
Total
depreciation and amortization
|
$ |
7,871 |
|
$ |
7,754 |
|
$ |
7,988 |
|
(a)
|
Other
homebuilding – unallocated consists of the net impact in the period due to
timing of homes delivered with low down-payment loans (buyers put less
than 5% down) funded by the Company’s financial services operations not
yet sold to a third party. In accordance with applicable
accounting rules, recognition of such revenue must be deferred until the
related loan is sold to a third party. Refer to the Revenue
Recognition policy described in our Application of Critical Accounting
Estimates and Policies in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations for further
discussion.
|
(b)
|
The
years ending December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 include the impact of
charges relating to the impairment of inventory and investment in
Unconsolidated LLCs and the write-off of land deposits and pre-acquisition
costs of $57.1 million, $158.6 million and $152.0
million,
|
(c)
|
respectively. For
2009, 2008 and 2007, these charges reduced operating income by $20.4
million, $56.3 million and $8.8 million in the Midwest region, $24.1
million, $66.9 million and $88.3 million in the Florida region, and $12.6
million, $35.4 million and $54.9 million in the Mid-Atlantic region,
respectively.
|
(d)
|
The
years ending December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 include the impact of
severance charges of $1.0 million, $3.3 million and $5.4 million,
respectively. The year ended December 31, 2008 also includes
charges of $3.3 million for corporate asset impairments. The
year ended December 31, 2007 also includes the write-off of $5.2 million
of intangibles.
|
(e)
|
Other
(loss) income is comprised of the loss on the sale of the plane during the
first quarter of 2009, and the gain recognized on the exchange of the
Company’s airplane during the first quarter of
2008.
|
NOTE
23. Supplementary Financial Data (Unaudited)
The
following tables set forth our selected consolidated financial and operating
data for the quarterly periods indicated.
|
December
31,
|
|
September
30,
|
|
June
30,
|
|
March
31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2009
|
|
2009
|
|
2009
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Revenue
|
$ |
204,916 |
|
$ |
152,738 |
|
$ |
116,146 |
|
$ |
96,149 |
|
Gross
margin (a)
|
$ |
7,919 |
|
$ |
6,360 |
|
$ |
7,972 |
|
$ |
(2,712 |
) |
Net
income (loss) (c)
|
$ |
6,996 |
|
$ |
(21,074 |
) |
$ |
(19,902 |
) |
$ |
(28,129 |
) |
Earnings
(loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (c)
|
$ |
0.38 |
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
$ |
(1.26 |
) |
$ |
(2.01 |
) |
Diluted
(c)
|
$ |
0.37 |
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
$ |
(1.26 |
) |
$ |
(2.01 |
) |
Weighted
average common shares outstanding
(In
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
18,519 |
|
|
18,514 |
|
|
15,790 |
|
|
14,027 |
|
Diluted
|
|
18,712 |
|
|
18,514 |
|
|
15,790 |
|
|
14,027 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
September
30,
|
|
June
30,
|
|
March
31,
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2008 |
|
(In
thousands)
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Revenue
|
$ |
150,187 |
|
$ |
160,385 |
|
$ |
141,002 |
|
$ |
156,085 |
|
Gross
margin (a)
|
$ |
(35,832 |
) |
$ |
(24,280 |
) |
$ |
(21,103 |
) |
$ |
3,410 |
|
Net
loss from continuing operations
|
$ |
(75,360 |
) |
$ |
(58,655 |
) |
$ |
(91,250 |
) |
$ |
(20,150 |
) |
Discontinued
operation, net of tax
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
- |
|
$ |
(413 |
) |
$ |
380 |
|
Net
loss (c)
|
$ |
(75,360 |
) |
$ |
(58,655 |
) |
$ |
(91,663 |
) |
$ |
(19,770 |
) |
Loss
per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (b)
(c)
|
$ |
(5.38 |
) |
$ |
(4.18 |
) |
$ |
(6.72 |
) |
$ |
(1.58 |
) |
Diluted
(b) (c)
|
$ |
(5.38 |
) |
$ |
(4.18 |
) |
$ |
(6.72 |
) |
$ |
(1.58 |
) |
Weighted
average common shares outstanding
(In
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
14,022 |
|
|
14,019 |
|
|
14,016 |
|
|
14,007 |
|
Diluted
|
|
14,022 |
|
|
14,019 |
|
|
14,016 |
|
|
14,007 |
|
(a)
|
First,
second, third and fourth quarters of 2009 include the impact of charges
relating to the impairment of inventory and investment in Unconsolidated
LLCs, which reduced gross margin by $10.9 million, $6.6 million, $15.0
million and $22.9 million, respectively. These same charges
reduced gross margin in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of
2008 by $21.1 million, $39.9 million, $43.1 million and $49.2 million,
respectively.
|
(b)
|
First
and second quarters of 2008 include earnings (loss) per share from
discontinued operations of $0.03 and $(0.03),
respectively.
|
(c)
|
First,
second, third and fourth quarters of 2009 include the impact of charges
relating to the impairment of inventory and investment in Unconsolidated
LLCs, the write-off of land deposits and pre-acquisition costs, and
charges related to the repair of certain homes in Florida where certain of
our subcontractors had purchased imported drywall that may be responsible
for accelerated corrosion of certain metals in the home. These
charges reduced net income by $9.3 million, $5.7 million, $12.1 million
and $15.9 million, respectively, and reduced earnings (loss) per common
share for those same periods by $0.66, 0.36, 0.65 and
$0.85. First, second, third and fourth quarters of 2008 include
the impact of charges relating to the impairment of inventory and
investment in Unconsolidated LLCs, and the write-off of land deposits and
pre-acquisition costs, which reduced net income by $13.8 million, $24.7
million, $27.0 million and $32.8 million, respectively, and loss per
common share by $0.99, $1.76, $1.93 and $2.34,
respectively.
|
NOTE
24. Subsequent Events
The
Company has evaluated subsequent events through February 24, 2010, which is the
date these financial statements were issued, and no material subsequent events
occurred between December 31, 2009 and February 24, 2010.
ITEM
9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON
ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
|
None.
ITEM
9A. CONTROLS AND
PROCEDURES
|
Conclusion
Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
An
evaluation of the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Exchange Act) was performed
by the Company's management, with the participation of the Company’s principal
executive officer and principal financial officer, as contemplated by Rule
13a-15(b) under the Exchange Act. Based on that evaluation, the
Company's principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded
that the Company's disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the
end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Management’s
Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The
management of the Company is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f)
under the Exchange Act). The Company’s internal control system was
designed to provide reasonable assurance to the Company’s management and Board
of Directors regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published
financial statements.
All
internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent
limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective
can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement
preparation and presentation.
The
Company’s management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009. In making
this assessment, it used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control – Integrated
Framework. Based on this assessment, management believes that,
as of December 31, 2009, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting
is effective.
The
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December
31, 2009 has been audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP, our independent
registered public accounting firm, as stated in its attestation report included
on page 87 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There
have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the
quarter ended December 31, 2009 that have materially affected, or are reasonably
likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
ITEM
9B. OTHER INFORMATION
|
None.
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of M/I Homes, Inc.
Columbus,
Ohio
We have
audited the internal control over financial reporting of M/I Homes, Inc. and
subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2009, based on criteria
established in Internal
Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission. The Company's management is
responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting
and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Annual Report on Internal
Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our
audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that
we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all
material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material
weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness
of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe
that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A
company's internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or
under the supervision of, the company's principal executive and principal
financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the
company's board of directors, management, and other personnel to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A company's internal control
over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain
to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2)
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to
permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are
being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of
the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely
detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company's
assets that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Because
of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting,
including the possibility of collusion or improper management override of
controls, material misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented or
detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the
effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future periods
are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of
changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or
procedures may deteriorate.
In our
opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on the criteria
established in Internal
Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We have
also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated financial statements as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2009 of the Company and our report dated
February 24, 2010 expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial
statements.
/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
|
Deloitte
& Touche LLP
|
Columbus,
Ohio
February
24, 2010
ITEM
10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
|
The
information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to our
definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 2010 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
We have
adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to our directors and
all employees of the Company. The Code of Business Conduct and Ethics
is posted on our website, mihomes.com. We intend to satisfy the
requirements under Item 5.05 of Form 8-K regarding disclosure of amendments to,
or waivers from, provisions of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that
apply to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal
accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions, by
posting such information on our website. Copies of the Code of Business Conduct
and Ethics will be provided free of charge upon written request directed to
Investor Relations, M/I Homes, Inc., 3 Easton Oval, Suite 500, Columbus, OH
43219.
ITEM
11. EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
|
The
information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to our
definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 2010 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
ITEM
12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND
MANAGEMENT AND
|
RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The
following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2009 with respect to
the common shares issuable under the Company’s equity compensation
plans:
Plan
Category
|
Number
of
securities
to
be
issued upon
exercise
of
outstanding
options,
warrants
and
rights
(a)
|
|
Weighted-
average
exercise
price
of
outstanding
options,
warrants
and
rights
(b)
|
|
Number
of securities
remaining
available for
future
issuance under
equity
compensation plans
(excluding
securities
reflected
in column (a))
(c)
|
Equity
compensation plans approved by shareholders (1)
|
1,654,111
|
|
$25.69
|
|
718,094
|
Equity
compensation plans not approved by shareholders (2)
|
102,339
|
|
-
|
|
658,026
|
Total
|
1,756,450
|
|
$25.69
|
|
1,376,120
|
(1)
|
Consists
of the Company’s 1993 Stock Incentive Plan as Amended (1,624,043
outstanding stock options and 915 restricted shares), which expired in
April 2009, the Company’s 2006 Director Equity Incentive Plan (23,153
outstanding stock units), which was terminated in May 2009, and the
Company’s 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan (6,000 outstanding stock
units). The weighted average exercise price relates to the
stock options granted under the 1993 Stock Incentive Plan as
Amended. The stock units granted under the 2006 Director Equity
Incentive Plan and the 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan are “full value
awards” that were issued at an average unit price of $27.98 and $13.66,
respectively, and will be settled at a future date in common shares on a
one-for-one basis without the payment of any exercise
price. The restricted shares had a fair market value of $33.86
on the day of grant. The aggregate number of shares with
respect to which awards may be granted under the 2009 Long-Term Incentive
Plan is 700,000 shares plus any shares subject to outstanding awards under
the 1993 Stock Incentive Plan as of May 5, 2009 that on or after May 5,
2009 cease for any reason to be subject to such awards other than by
reason of exercise or settlement of the awards to the extent they are
exercised for or settled in vested and non-forfeitable shares (26,194
shares at December 31, 2009). Refer to Note 2 of the Company’s
Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of these
plans.
|
(2)
|
Consists
of the Company’s Director Deferred Compensation Plan and the Company’s
Executives’ Deferred Compensation Plan. The average unit price
of the outstanding “phantom stock” units is $21.52. Pursuant to
these plans, our directors and eligible employees may defer the payment of
all or a portion of their director fees and annual cash bonuses,
respectively, and the deferred amount is converted into phantom stock
units which will be settled at a future date in common shares on a
one-for-one basis without the payment of any exercise
price. Refer to Note 2 of the Company’s Consolidated Financial
Statements for further discussion of these plans. Neither the
Director Deferred Compensation Plan nor the Executives’ Deferred
Compensation Plan provides for a specified limit on the number of Common
Shares which may be attributable to participants’ accounts relating to
phantom stock units and issued under the terms of these
plans. The Company maintains Registration Statements on Form
S-8 pursuant to which a total of 1,150,000 Common Shares are registered
for issuance under the terms of these plans. The number of
securities remaining available for future issuance reflects the number of
Common Shares registered under such Registration Statements which have not
been issued under the plans as of December 31,
2009.
|
The
remaining information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference
to our definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 2010 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
ITEM
13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND
DIRECTOR
|
INDEPENDENCE
The
information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to our
definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 2010 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
ITEM
14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND
SERVICES
|
The
information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to our
definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 2010 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
ITEM
15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a) Documents filed as part of this
report
|
|
(1) The
following financial statements are contained in Item 8:
|
|
|
|
Page
in
|
|
|
|
this
|
|
|
Financial Statements
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
51
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007
|
52
|
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008
|
53
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2009,
2008
|
|
|
|
and
2007
|
54
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007
|
55
|
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
56-83
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Financial
Statement Schedules:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
None
required.
|
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
Exhibits:
|
|
|
|
The
following exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K are filed as part of
this report. For convenience of reference, the exhibits are listed
according to the numbers appearing in the Exhibit Table to Item 601 of
Regulation S-K.
Exhibit
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
Amended
and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Company, hereby incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1993 (File No.
1-12434).
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Amended
and Restated Regulations of the Company, hereby incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 3.4 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K of the fiscal
year ended December 31, 1998 (File No. 1-12434).
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
Amendment
of Article I(f) of the Company’s Amended and Restated Code of Regulations
to permit shareholders to appoint proxies in any manner permitted by Ohio
law, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1(b) of the Company’s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2001 (File
No. 1-12434).
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
Amendment
to Article First of the Company’s Amended and Restated Articles of
Incorporation dated January 9, 2004, hereby incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.1 of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended March 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
Certificate
of Amendment by Directors to Article Fourth of the Company’s Amended and
Restated Articles of Incorporation dated March 13, 2007, incorporated
herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of the Company’s Current Report on Form
8-K filed March 15, 2007.
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
Amendment
to the Company’s Amended and Restated Code of Regulations, hereby
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of the Company’s Current Report
on Form 8-K filed on March 13, 2009.
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Specimen
of Stock Certificate, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4 of the
Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, Commission File No.
33-68564.
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Indenture
dated as of March 24, 2005 by and among M/I Homes, Inc., its guarantors as
named in the Indenture and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee of
the 6 7/8% Senior Notes due 2012, hereby incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated as of March
24, 2005.
|
4.3
|
|
Registration
Rights Agreement dated as of March 24, 2005, among the Company, the
Guarantors listed on the signature page thereof and the Initial Purchasers
listed on the signature page thereof, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated as of March
24, 2005.
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Specimen
certificate representing the 9.75% Series A Preferred Shares, par value
$0.1 per share, of the Company, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 15,
2007.
|
10.1*
|
|
The
M/I Homes, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan as Amended and Restated,
adopted as of January 1, 1997, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.1 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2003 (File No. 1-12434).
|
|
|
|
10.2*
|
|
Amendment
Number 1 of the M/I Homes, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan for the
Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 dated November
12, 2002, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the
Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
30, 2002 (File No. 1-12434).
|
|
|
|
10.3*
|
|
Second
Amendment to the M/I Homes, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan dated November
11, 2003, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the
Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2003 (File No. 1-12434).
|
|
|
|
10.4*
|
|
Third
Amendment to the M/I Homes, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan dated January
26, 2005, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of the
Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2004 (File No. 1-12434).
|
|
|
|
10.5*
|
|
Fourth
Amendment to the M/I Homes, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan dated July 1,
2005, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2005.
|
|
|
|
10.6*
|
|
Fifth
Amendment to the M/I Homes, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan dated November
7, 2006, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to the Company’s
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2006.
|
|
|
|
10.7*
|
|
Sixth
Amendment to the M/I Homes, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan dated December
13, 2006, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to the
Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
Second
Amended and Restated Credit Agreement effective as of October 6, 2006 by
and among M/I Homes, Inc., as borrower; JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as agent
for the lenders and Wachovia Bank National Association, as syndication
agent; The Huntington National Bank, KeyBank National Association, Charter
One Bank, N.A. SunTrust Bank, AmSouth Bank, Bank of Montreal, Guaranty
Bank, National City Bank and U.S. Bank National Association, as co-agents;
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Wachovia Bank, National Association, The
Huntington National Bank, KeyBank National Association, Charter One Bank,
N.A., SunTrust Bank, AmSouth Bank, Bank of Montreal, Guaranty Bank,
National City Bank, U.S. Bank National Association, LaSalle Bank National
Association, PNC Bank, N.A., City National Bank, Fifth Third Bank,
Franklin Bank, S.S.B., Comerica Bank, and Bank United, F.S.B., as banks;
and J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., as lead arranger and sole bookrunner,
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10 of the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K dated as of October 6, 2006.
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
Amendment
to Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement effective as of December
22, 2006 by and among M/I Homes, Inc. as borrower and JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A. as agent, and the lenders party to that certain Second Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement dated October 6, 2006, incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 10.9 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
10.10
|
|
First
Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated August 28,
2007, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s
Current Report on Form 8-K filed on August 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
10.11
|
|
Second
Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated March 27,
2008, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s
Current Report on Form 8-K filed April 1,
2008.
|
10.12
|
|
Third
Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated January
15, 2009 incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s
Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 20, 2009.
|
|
|
|
10.13
|
|
Collateral
Agreement made by M/I Homes, Inc., and certain of its subsidiaries in
favor of PNC Bank, National Association, as Collateral Agent dated as of
January 15, 2009, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 20,
2009.
|
|
|
|
10.14
|
|
First
Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement Among M/I Financial, Corp.
and M/I Homes, Inc., as the Borrowers, and Guaranty Bank, hereby
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s Current Report
on Form 8-K filed on April 28, 2006.
|
|
|
|
10.15
|
|
First
Amendment to First Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement
effective as of November 13, 2006, by and among M/I Financial Corp., the
Company and Guaranty Bank, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.12 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
10.16
|
|
Second
Amendment to First Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement
effective as of April 27, 2007 by and among M/I Financial Corp., the
Company and Guaranty Bank, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.4 of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
10.17
|
|
Third
Amendment to First Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement
effective as of August 8, 2007 by and among M/I Financial Corp., the
Company and Guaranty Bank, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.2 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
10.18
|
|
Fourth
Amendment to First Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement
effective as of April 18, 2008 by and among M/I Financial Corp, the
Company and Guaranty Bank, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit
10.3 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2008.
|
|
|
|
10.19
|
|
Credit
Agreement by and among M/I Financial Corp., as borrower, the lenders party
thereto and Guaranty Bank, as administrative agent dated May 2, 2008,
incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2008.
|
|
|
|
10.20
|
|
Credit
Agreement by and among M/I Financial Corp., as borrower, the lenders party
thereto and The Huntington National Bank, as administrative agent, dated
April 29, 2009, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2009.
|
|
|
|
10.21
|
|
Amendment
No. 1 to Credit Agreement by and among M/I Financial Corp., as borrower,
the lenders party thereto and The Huntington National Bank, as
administrative agent, dated September 23, 2009, hereby
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2009.
|
|
|
|
10.22
|
|
Amendment
No. 2 to Credit Agreement by and among M/I Financial Corp., as borrower,
the lenders party thereto and The Huntington National Bank, as
administrative agent, dated December 30, 2009. (Filed
herewith.)
|
|
|
|
10.23
|
|
Master
Letter of Credit Facility Agreement by and between U.S. Bank National
Association and M/I Homes, Inc., dated July 27, 2009, hereby incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on July 30, 2009.
|
|
|
|
10.24
|
|
Letter
of Credit Pledge by and between Citibank, N.A. and M/I Homes, Inc., dated
July 27, 2009, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 30,
2009.
|
|
|
|
10.25
|
|
Letter
of Credit Agreement by and between Regions Bank and M/I Homes, Inc., dated
July 27, 2009, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 30,
2009.
|
|
|
|
10.26
|
|
Credit
Agreement by and between The Huntington National Bank and M/I Homes, Inc.,
dated July 27, 2009, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of
the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 30,
2009.
|
10.27*
|
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. 1993 Stock Incentive Plan As Amended dated April 22, 1999,
hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4 of the Company’s Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1999 (File No.
1-12434).
|
|
|
|
10.28*
|
|
First
Amendment to M/I Homes, Inc. 1993 Stock Incentive Plan As Amended dated
August 11, 1999, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the
Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
30, 1999 (File No. 1-12434).
|
|
|
|
10.29*
|
|
Second
Amendment to the Company’s 1993 Stock Incentive Plan as Amended dated
February 13, 2001, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the
Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2002 (File No. 1-12434).
|
|
|
|
10.30*
|
|
Third
Amendment to the Company’s 1993 Stock Incentive Plan as Amended dated
April 27, 2006, hereby incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the
Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2006.
|
|
|
|
10.31*
|
|
Fourth
Amendment to M/I Homes, Inc. 1993 Stock Incentive Plan, as Amended,
effective as of August 28, 2008, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2008.
|
|
|
|
10.32
|
|
Form
of M/I Homes, Inc. 2006 Director Equity Incentive Plan Stock Units Award
Agreements, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Company’s Current Report of Form 8-K filed on August 21,
2006.
|
|
|
|
10.33
|
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. Amended and Restated 2006 Director Equity Incentive Plan,
effective as of August 28, 2008, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2008.
|
|
|
|
10.34
|
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. Amended and Restated Director Deferred Compensation Plan,
effective as of August 28, 2008, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2008.
|
|
|
|
10.35*
|
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. Amended and Restated Executives’ Deferred Compensation Plan,
effective as of August 28, 2008, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2008.
|
10.36*
|
|
Collateral
Assignment Split-Dollar Agreement by and among the Company and Robert H.
Schottenstein, and Janice K. Schottenstein as Trustee, of the Robert H.
Schottenstein 1996 Insurance Trust dated September 24, 1997, hereby
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.28 of the Company’s Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1997 (File No.
1-12434). In 2004, the Trustee changed to Steven Schottenstein
but did not require amendment to the original
agreement.
|
|
|
|
10.37
|
|
Collateral
Assignment Split-Dollar Agreement by and among the Company and Phillip
Creek, dated September 24, 1997. (Filed
herewith).
|
|
|
|
10.38*
|
|
Change
of Control Agreement between the Company and Robert H. Schottenstein dated
July 3, 2008, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 3,
2008.
|
|
|
|
10.39*
|
|
Change
of Control Agreement between the Company and Phillip G. Creek dated July
3, 2008, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the Company’s
Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 3, 2008.
|
|
|
|
10.40*
|
|
Change
of Control Agreement between the Company and J. Thomas Mason dated July 3,
2008, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the Company’s
Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 3, 2008.
|
|
|
|
10.41*
|
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. 2004 Executive Officers Compensation Plan, hereby incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 (File No. 1-12434).
|
|
|
|
10.42*
|
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. 2009 Annual Incentive Plan, incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May
11, 2009.
|
10.43*
|
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan, incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on May 11, 2009.
|
|
|
|
10.44*
|
|
First
Amendment to M/I Homes 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan, incorporated herein
by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on May 11, 2009.
|
|
|
|
10.45*
|
|
M/I
Homes, Inc. 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan Stock Units Award Agreement for
Directors, dated August 18, 2009, hereby incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2009.
|
|
|
|
10.46*
|
|
Form
of 2008 Award Formulas and Performance Goals Under the 2004 Executive
Officer Compensation Plan, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit
10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on February 19,
2008.
|
|
|
|
10.47
|
|
Agreement
for Purchase and Sale, dated as of December 21, 2007, by and between M/I
Homes of West Palm Beach, LLC, as seller, and KLP East LLC, as purchaser,
incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.43 to the Company’s Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2007.
|
|
|
|
10.48
|
|
Amendment
to Agreement for Purchase and Sale, dated as of December 27, 2007, by and
between M/I Homes of West Palm Beach, LLC, as seller, and KLP East LLC, as
purchaser, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.44 to the Company’s
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2007.
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
Subsidiaries
of Company. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
Consent
of Deloitte & Touche LLP. (Filed
herewith.)
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
Powers
of Attorney. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification
by Robert H. Schottenstein, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Item 601
of Regulation S-K as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification
by Phillip G. Creek, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Item 601 of
Regulation S-K as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certification
by Robert H. Schottenstein, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
|
|
32.2
|
|
Certification
by Phillip G. Creek, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
|
|
*
Management contract or compensatory plan or
arrangement.
|
(b) Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reference
is made to Item 15(a)(3) above. The following is a list of
exhibits, included in Item 15(a)(3) above, that are filed concurrently
with this report.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
|
10.21
|
|
Amendment
No. 2 to Credit Agreement by and among M/I Financial Corp., as borrower,
the lenders party thereto and The Huntington National Bank, as
administrative agent, dated December 30, 2009. (Filed
herewith.)
|
|
|
|
10.37 |
|
Collateral
Assignment Split-Dollar Agreement by and among the Company and Phillip
Creek, dated September 24, 1997. (Filed
herewith).
|
|
21
|
|
Subsidiaries
of Company.
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
Consent
of Deloitte & Touche LLP.
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
Powers
of Attorney.
|
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification
by Robert H. Schottenstein, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Item 601
of Regulation S-K as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification
by Phillip G. Creek, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Item 601 of
Regulation S-K as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certification
by Robert H. Schottenstein, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
|
|
32.2
|
|
Certification
by Phillip G. Creek, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
(c) Financial Statement
Schedules
|
|
|
|
|
|
None
required.
|
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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, in Columbus, Ohio on this 24th day
of February 2010.
M/I Homes,
Inc. |
(Registrant) |
|
|
By: |
/s/Robert H.
Schottenstein |
|
Robert H.
Schottenstein |
|
Chairman of
the Board, |
|
Chief
Executive Officer and President |
|
(Principal
Executive Officer) |
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the
capacities indicated on the 24th day of February 2010.
NAME AND TITLE
|
|
NAME AND TITLE
|
|
|
|
JOSEPH
A. ALUTTO*
|
|
/s/Robert
H. Schottenstein
|
Joseph
A. Alutto
|
|
Robert
H. Schottenstein
|
Director
|
|
Chairman
of the Board,
|
|
|
Chief
Executive Officer and President
|
FRIEDRICH
K. M. BÖHM*
|
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
Friedrich
K. M. Böhm
|
|
|
Director
|
|
/s/Phillip
G. Creek
|
|
|
Phillip
G. Creek
|
YVETTE
MCGEE BROWN*
|
|
Executive
Vice President,
|
Yvette
McGee Brown
|
|
Chief
Financial Officer and Director
|
Director
|
|
(Principal
Financial Officer)
|
|
|
|
THOMAS
D. IGOE*
|
|
/s/Ann
Marie W. Hunker
|
Thomas
D. Igoe
|
|
Ann
Marie W. Hunker
|
Director
|
|
Vice
President, Corporate Controller
|
|
|
(Principal
Accounting Officer)
|
J.
THOMAS MASON*
|
|
|
J.
Thomas Mason
|
|
|
Executive
Vice President, General
|
|
|
Counsel
and Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
JEFFREY
H. MIRO*
|
|
|
Jeffrey
H. Miro
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
NORMAN
L. TRAEGER*
|
|
|
Norman
L. Traeger
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
*The
above-named Directors and Officers of the registrant execute this report by
Robert H. Schottenstein and Phillip G. Creek, their Attorneys-in-Fact, pursuant
to powers of attorney executed by the above-named Directors and Officers and
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as Exhibit 24 to this
report.
By:
|
/s/Robert
H. Schottenstein
|
|
By:
|
/s/Phillip
G. Creek
|
|
Robert
H. Schottenstein, Attorney-In-Fact
|
|
|
Phillip
G. Creek, Attorney-In-Fact
|
94