Mastec, Inc.
As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
January 23, 2006
Registration Statement
No. 333-129790
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form S-1/A
(Amendment No. 3)
REGISTRATION STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933
MasTec, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
|
|
Florida |
|
1623 |
|
65-0829355 |
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization) |
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number) |
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number) |
800 S. Douglas Road, 12th Floor
Coral Gables, Florida 33134
Telephone (305) 599-1800
(Address, including zip code, and telephone number,
including
area code, of registrants principal executive
offices)
Alberto de Cardenas
Executive Vice President & General Counsel
800 S. Douglas Road, 12th Floor
Coral Gables, Florida 33134
Telephone (305) 599-1800
(Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number,
including area code, of agent for service)
Copies to:
|
|
|
Paul Berkowitz
|
|
Joel S. Klaperman |
Greenberg Traurig, P.A.
|
|
Shearman & Sterling LLP |
1221 Brickell Avenue
|
|
599 Lexington Ave. |
Miami, Florida 33131
|
|
New York, New York 10022 |
(305) 579-0500
|
|
(212) 848-4000 |
Approximate Date of Commencement of Proposed Sale to the
Public: As soon as practicable after this Registration
Statement becomes effective.
If any of the securities being registered on this form are to be
offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the
following
box. o
If this form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
check the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earlier effective registration statement
for the same
offering. o
If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
If delivery of the prospectus is expected to be made pursuant to
Rule 434, check the following
box. o
The Registrant hereby amends this registration statement on
such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this registration statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act of 1933 or until this registration
statement shall become effective on such date as the commission,
acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.
The information
contained in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed.
We may not sell these securities until the registration
statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is
effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these
securities, and we are not soliciting an offer to buy these
securities in any state where the offer or sale is not
permitted.
|
PROSPECTUS (Subject to
Completion)
Issued January 23, 2006
12,500,000 Shares
COMMON STOCK
MasTec, Inc. is offering 12,500,000 shares of its common
stock
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange
under the symbol MTZ. On January 19, 2006 the
last reported sale price of our common stock on the
New York Stock Exchange was $11.15 per share.
Investing in our common stock involves risks. See Risk
Factors beginning on page 7 for a discussion of these
risks.
PRICE
$ A
SHARE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price to | |
|
Underwriting Discounts | |
|
Proceeds | |
|
|
Public | |
|
and Commissions | |
|
to MasTec | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Per share
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
We have granted the underwriters a
30-day option to
purchase up to an aggregate of 1,875,000 additional shares
of common stock at the public offering price, less the
underwriting discounts and commissions solely to cover
over-allotments, if any.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state
securities commission has approved or disapproved of these
securities, or determined if this prospectus is truthful or
complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
We expect that the shares of our common stock will be ready for
delivery to purchasers on or
about ,
2006.
Joint Book-Running Managers
|
|
MORGAN STANLEY |
FRIEDMAN BILLINGS RAMSEY |
|
|
NEEDHAM & COMPANY, LLC |
KAUFMAN BROS., L.P. |
,
2006
You should rely only on the information contained in this
prospectus. We and the underwriters have not authorized anyone
to provide you with different information. If anyone provides
you with different or inconsistent information, you should not
rely on it. We and the underwriters are not making an offer to
sell these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or
sale is not permitted. You should assume that the information
appearing in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date of
this prospectus. Our business, financial condition, results of
operations and prospects may have changed since those dates. See
Where You Can Find More Information About MasTec.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
PROSPECTUS SUMMARY
You should read the following summary together with the more
detailed business information and consolidated financial
statements and related notes that appear elsewhere in this
prospectus and in the documents that we incorporate by reference
into this prospectus. This prospectus may contain certain
forward-looking information within the meaning of
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. This
information involves risks and uncertainties. Our actual results
may differ materially from the results discussed in the
forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause such a
difference include, but are not limited to, those discussed in
Risk Factors. Unless the context otherwise requires,
references in this prospectus to MasTec,
we, us and our mean MasTec,
Inc. and its subsidiaries.
MASTEC, INC.
Our Company
We are a leading specialty contractor operating throughout the
United States and in Canada across a range of industries. Our
core activities are the building, installation, maintenance and
upgrade of communications and utility infrastructure and
transportation systems. We provide similar infrastructure
services to our customers, most of which are companies in the
telecommunications, satellite television and cable television
industries as well as utility companies and governments. Our
customers rely on us to build and maintain infrastructure and
networks that are critical to their delivery of voice, video and
data communications, electricity and transportation systems.
We have been in business for over 70 years and currently
operate through a network of 220 locations and 7,700 employees.
Our national footprint and ability to respond quickly and
efficiently has resulted in longstanding relationships. For
fiscal year 2004 and the nine months ended September 30,
2005, 69.7% and 64.8%, respectively, of our revenues were
derived under multi-year master service agreements and other
service agreements. Our customers include some of the largest
communication and utility companies in the United States,
including DirecTV, Verizon Communications, BellSouth, Sprint
Nextel and Florida Power & Light.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and fiscal
year 2004 we had revenue of $697.4 million and
$913.8 million, respectively. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and fiscal year 2004, we had net losses
of $3.1 million and $49.4 million, respectively. For
fiscal year 2004, 65.0%, 19.2% and 15.8% of our revenues were
from our communications, utilities and government customers,
respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2005,
63.0%, 21.2% and 15.8% of our revenues were from our
communications, utilities and government customers,
respectively. Our 18-month backlog at September 30, 2005
was $1.1 billion and we expect to realize approximately
20.8% of this backlog in 2005.
Strategy
The key elements of our business strategy are as follows:
Capitalize on Favorable Industry Trends. Many of our
customers have increased spending on their network
infrastructure in order to enhance their ability to offer voice,
video and data services, and to deliver electric power or
improve the logistics of their transportation networks.
Specifically, our communications customers are investing in
fiber optic network enhancements in response to demand for
faster and more robust internet, broadband and advanced video
offerings. In addition, many companies are increasing
outsourcing network installation and maintenance work.
Operate More Efficiently. We have implemented new
financial and business procedures in order to improve our
operating effectiveness, consequently increasing our operating
margins and cash flows.
Improve Our Financial Strength. With the proceeds of this
offering, we intend to reduce our debt and increase our cash,
which will significantly improve our financial condition.
Pursue Acquisitions, Strategic Alliances and Divestitures.
We will focus on acquisitions and alliances that allow us to
expand our operations into targeted geographic areas or allow us
to expand our service
2
offerings in areas that require skill sets or equipment that we
do not currently maintain. We may also consider sales or
divestitures of portions of our assets, operations, real estate
or other properties.
Recent Developments
|
|
|
Agreement to Acquire Assets of Digital Satellite Services,
Inc. |
On December 30, 2005, MasTec entered into a definitive
agreement to purchase substantially all of the assets and assume
certain operating liabilities and contracts of Digital Satellite
Services, Inc., which we refer to as DSSI. DSSI, which also
operates under the names of Rons Digital Satellite and
Rons TV, is principally involved in the installation of
residential and commercial satellite and security services. We
refer to this transaction as the DSSI Acquisition.
DSSIs revenues are expected to exceed $50 million in
2005 and its principal markets include Atlanta, Georgia, the
Greenville-Spartanburg area of South Carolina and Asheville,
North Carolina, and portions of Tennessee, Kentucky and
Virginia, which are all markets that are contiguous to areas in
which MasTec is currently active with similar installation
services. Upon completion of the acquisition, MasTec will
provide installation services from the mid-Atlantic states to
South Florida. In addition, MasTec expects to hire approximately
630 additional installation technicians as a result of the
acquisition.
The purchase price is composed of $18.5 million in cash,
$7.5 million of MasTec common stock and an earn-out based
on performance. Pursuant to the terms of the DSSI Acquisition
purchase agreement, MasTec has agreed to use its best efforts to
register for resale the MasTec common stock that is part of the
purchase price within 120 days after the closing of the
DSSI Acquisition. The transaction is subject to the receipt of
customer consent and other customary closing conditions and is
expected to close on January 31, 2006.
|
|
|
Decision to Sell Substantially All of MasTecs State
Department of Transportation Related Projects and Assets |
On December 31, 2005, the executive committee of our board
of directors voted to sell substantially all of MasTecs
state Department of Transportation related projects and assets.
As of September 30, 2005, the carrying value of the subject
net assets for sale was $57.7 million. This amount is
comprised of total assets of $91.3 million which includes
$11.5 million of goodwill less total liabilities of
$33.6 million. The decision to sell was made after
evaluation of, among other things, short and long term
prospects. The projects that are for sale will be accounted for
as discontinued operations. At this time, MasTec has not
completed its determination of the fair value of the assets and
does not have an estimate of the write-down or other charges
associated with the disposition of the assets. MasTec
anticipates that it will need to record a material impairment
charge related to these net assets.
The financial data in this prospectus does not give effect to
MasTecs decision to sell substantially all of its state
Department of Transportation related projects and assets. If
MasTec had accounted for these projects as discontinued
operations as of January 1, 2002, MasTecs loss from
continuing operations for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002 would have been $17.7 million,
$20.8 million and $111.0 million, respectively, and
for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, income from
continuing operations would have been $10.5 million.
MasTecs revenue for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003, 2002 and nine months ended September 30, 2005
would have been $807.2 million, $712.2 million,
$657.0 million and $624.6 million, respectively. In
addition, MasTecs loss from discontinued operations for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003, 2002 and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 would have been
$31.7 million, $31.5 million, $13.0 million and
$13.6 million, respectively. See the pro forma financial
information included elsewhere in this prospectus at Pro
Forma Information on Continuing Operations.
Certain Information about Us in this Prospectus
We are incorporated under the laws of the State of Florida. Our
principal executive offices are located at 800 Douglas Road,
12th Floor, Coral Gables, Florida 33134. Our telephone number is
(305) 599-1800.
3
The Offering
|
|
|
Common stock offered by us |
|
12,500,000 shares. |
|
|
Common stock to be outstanding after the offering (based on the
number of shares outstanding as of December 31, 2005) |
|
61,722,012 shares. |
|
|
Over-allotment option |
|
1,875,000 shares. |
|
|
Use of proceeds |
|
We estimate that net proceeds from this offering will be
approximately $131.5 million, based on an assumed offering
price of $11.15 per share. A $0.25 increase (decrease) in the
assumed public offering price per share of our common stock
would increase (decrease) the net proceeds that we receive from
the offering by approximately $3.0 million. In
March 2006 we intend to use at least $75 million and
up to $100 million of the net proceeds of the offering to
redeem a portion of our 7.75% senior subordinated notes due
February 2008. We expect to use the remaining net proceeds from
this offering for the $18.5 million cash portion of the
DSSI Acquisition, working capital, other possible acquisitions
of assets and businesses, organic growth and other general
corporate purposes. Although we regularly evaluate potential
acquisition opportunities, we currently have no definitive
agreements to make any acquisitions (see Recent
Developments). Our management has broad discretion over
the allocation of the net proceeds from this offering, see
Risk Factors Our management has broad discretion
over the use of proceeds from this offering and may use the
proceeds in ways that may be dilutive. |
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
symbol |
|
MTZ. |
This preliminary prospectus is subject to completion prior to
this offering. Except as otherwise indicated, all information in
this prospectus assumes no exercise of the underwriters
over-allotment option and does not include the payment of the
purchase price at closing for the DSSI Acquisition.
In addition to the 61,722,012 shares of common stock
expected to be outstanding after this offering, as of the
closing of this offering and based upon the number of options
granted as of December 31, 2005, we had additional shares
of common stock available for issuance under the following plans
and arrangements:
|
|
|
|
|
15,272,487 shares issuable under our stock option and stock
purchase plans, consisting of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,654,061 shares underlying options outstanding at a
weighted average exercise price of $12.54 per share, of
which 6,945,606 shares were exercisable; and |
|
|
|
|
|
6,618,426 shares available for future issuance under our
stock option and stock purchase plans. |
|
4
Summary Consolidated Financial Data
The following table states our summary consolidated financial
data and is derived from our consolidated financial statements.
The table reflects our consolidated results of operations for
the periods indicated including the reclassification of results
of operations for our Brazil and network services operations in
2002 and 2003 to discontinued operations. The summary
consolidated data as of September 30, 2005 and for each of
the nine month periods ended September 30, 2004 and 2005
are derived from our condensed unaudited consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this prospectus and, in our
opinion, include all adjustments, which are only normal
recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation. Our
results of operations for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 may not be indicative of results that
may be expected for the full fiscal year. The following summary
consolidated financial data should be read together with our
consolidated financial statements and notes thereto as well as
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and Pro Forma
Information on Continuing Operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts) | |
Statement of Operations Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
$ |
667,071 |
|
|
$ |
697,427 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation
|
|
$ |
683,855 |
|
|
$ |
744,587 |
|
|
$ |
828,743 |
|
|
$ |
607,120 |
|
|
$ |
621,560 |
|
Loss from continuing operations before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
$ |
(107,238 |
)(1) |
|
$ |
(24,440 |
) |
|
$ |
(26,217 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,451 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,558 |
) |
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(119,834 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,440 |
) |
|
$ |
(26,217 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,451 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,558 |
) |
Loss on write-off of assets of discontinued operations, net
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(19,165 |
) |
|
$ |
(19,165 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
$ |
(16,722 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,859 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,055 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,966 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,008 |
) |
Loss on sale of assets of discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(583 |
) |
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
|
$ |
(52,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,437 |
) |
|
$ |
(42,582 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,149 |
) |
Basic and diluted net loss per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(2.50 |
) |
|
$ |
(.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(.54 |
) |
|
$ |
(.42 |
) |
|
$ |
(.03 |
) |
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
(.35 |
) |
|
$ |
(.58 |
) |
|
$ |
(.48 |
) |
|
$ |
(.46 |
) |
|
$ |
(.03 |
) |
Basic and diluted net loss per share before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
$ |
(2.59 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
Basic and diluted net loss per share
|
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
September 30, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
(unaudited) | |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working capital
|
|
$ |
139,154 |
|
|
$ |
113,360 |
|
|
$ |
134,463 |
|
|
$ |
131,976 |
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
$ |
118,475 |
|
|
$ |
85,832 |
|
|
$ |
69,303 |
|
|
$ |
56,451 |
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
622,681 |
|
|
$ |
628,263 |
|
|
$ |
600,523 |
|
|
$ |
609,389 |
|
Total debt
|
|
$ |
198,642 |
|
|
$ |
201,665 |
|
|
$ |
196,158 |
|
|
$ |
196,238 |
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
$ |
263,010 |
|
|
$ |
215,818 |
|
|
$ |
191,153 |
|
|
$ |
190,405 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Includes charges of $12.8 million to reduce the carrying
amount of certain assets held for sale and in use, and non-core
assets, restructuring charges of $8.3 million, impairment
of goodwill of $79.7 million, and provisions for bad debt
totaling $15.4 million. |
6
RISK FACTORS
You should carefully consider the risks described below,
together with all of the other information in this prospectus,
before making a decision to invest in our common stock. If any
of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial
condition and results of operations could suffer. In this case,
the trading price of our common stock could decline and you may
lose all or part of your investment in our common stock.
Risks Related to Our Industry and Our Customers
Industries
An economic downturn or reduced capital expenditures in the
industries we serve may result in a decrease in demand for our
services.
Commencing in 2001 and through 2003, the communications industry
suffered a severe downturn that resulted in a number of our
customers filing for bankruptcy protection or experiencing
financial difficulties. The downturn resulted in reduced capital
expenditures for infrastructure projects, even among those
customers that did not experience financial difficulties.
Although our strategy is to increase the percentage of our
business derived from large, financially stable customers in the
communications, utility and government industries, these
customers may not continue to fund capital expenditures for
infrastructure projects at current levels. Even if they do
continue to fund projects, we may not be able to increase our
share of their business. Bankruptcies or decreases in our
customers capital expenditures and disbursements could
reduce our revenue, profitability or liquidity.
Many of the industries we serve are subject to consolidation
and rapid technological and regulatory change, and our inability
or failure to adjust to our customers changing needs could
reduce demand for our services.
We derive, and anticipate that we will continue to derive, a
substantial portion of our revenue from customers in the
communications industry. The communications industry is subject
to rapid changes in technology and governmental regulation.
Changes in technology may reduce the demand for the services we
provide. New or developing technologies could displace the wire
line systems used for the transmission of voice, video and data,
and improvements in existing technology may allow communications
providers to significantly improve their networks without
physically upgrading them. Additionally, the communications
industry has been characterized by a high level of consolidation
that may result in the loss of one or more of our customers.
Utilities have also entered into a phase of consolidation
similar to the communications industry which could lead to the
same uncertainties.
Our industry is highly competitive which may reduce our
market share and harm our financial performance.
Our industry is highly fragmented, and we compete with other
companies in most of the markets in which we operate, ranging
from small independent firms servicing local markets to larger
firms servicing regional and national markets. We also face
competition from existing or prospective customers that employ
in-house personnel to perform some of the same types of services
we provide. There are relatively few barriers to entry into the
markets in which we operate and, as a result, any organization
that has adequate financial resources and access to technical
expertise and skilled personnel may become one of our
competitors.
Most of our customers work is awarded through a bid
process. Consequently, price is often the principal factor in
determining which service provider is selected, especially on
smaller, less complex projects. Smaller competitors are
sometimes able to win bids for these projects based on price
alone due to their lower costs and financial return requirements.
7
Risks Related to Our Business
We derive a significant portion of our revenue from a few
customers, and the loss of one of these customers or a reduction
in their demand, the amount they pay or their ability to pay,
for our services could impair our financial performance.
In the year ended December 31, 2004, we derived
approximately 21.4% and 12.3% of our revenue from DirecTV, Inc.
and Comcast Cable Communications, Inc., respectively. In the
nine months ended September 30, 2005, we derived
approximately 27.5% and 10.4% of our revenue from DirecTV and
Verizon Communications, respectively. In addition, our largest
10 customers accounted for approximately 43.9%, 55.0% and 63.7%
of our revenue in the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003
and 2004, respectively, and approximately 64.6% of our revenue
in the nine months ended September 30, 2005.
Because our business is concentrated among relatively few major
customers, our revenue could significantly decline if we lose
one or more of these customers or if the amount of business we
obtain from them is reduced, which could result in reduced
profitability and liquidity. For example, we have experienced a
decrease of $94.6 million in revenue related to upgrade
work for Comcast in the nine months ended September 30,
2005 compared to the same period in 2004 and we expect to
continue to experience a decrease in revenue from Comcast due to
the completion of the rebuild and upgrade of their broadband
networks in 2004. In addition, our revenue, profitability and
liquidity could decline if certain customers reduce the amounts
they pay for our services or if our customers are unable to pay
for our services. A number of our customers filed for bankruptcy
protection or experienced financial difficulties commencing in
2001 through 2003 during the last economic downturn in the
communications industry which negatively impacted our revenue,
profitability and liquidity. In 2002, 2003 and 2004 total
provisions for bad debts amounted to $15.4 million,
$8.8 million and $5.1 million, respectively, and
approximately $3.8 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005. As of September 30, 2005, we had
remaining receivables from customers undergoing bankruptcy
reorganization totaling $14.7 million, of which
$8.0 million is included in specific reserves for bad
debts, with the remaining amounts expected to be recovered
through enforcement of liens or bonds.
Most of our contracts do not obligate our customers to
undertake any infrastructure projects or other work with us.
A significant portion of our revenue is derived from service
agreements. Under our service agreements, we contract to provide
customers with individual project services, through work orders,
within defined geographic areas on a fixed fee basis. Under
these agreements, our customers have no obligation to undertake
any infrastructure projects or other work with us. A significant
decline in the projects customers assign us under service
agreements could result in a decline in our revenue,
profitability and liquidity.
Most of our contracts may be canceled on short notice, so our
revenue is not guaranteed.
Most of our contracts are cancelable on short notice, ranging
from immediate cancellation to cancellation upon 180 days
notice, even if we are not in default under the contract. Many
of our contracts, including our service agreements, are
periodically open to public bid. We may not be the successful
bidder on our existing contracts that are re-bid. We also
provide a significant portion of our services on a
non-recurring, project-by-project basis. We could experience a
reduction in our revenue, profitability and liquidity if:
|
|
|
|
|
our customers cancel a significant number of contracts; |
|
|
|
we fail to win a significant number of our existing contracts
upon re-bid; or |
|
|
|
we complete the required work under a significant number of our
non-recurring projects and cannot replace them with similar
projects. |
8
We may not accurately estimate the costs associated with our
services provided under fixed-price contracts which could impair
our financial performance.
A substantial portion of our revenue is derived from master
service agreements and other service agreements that are fixed
price contracts. Under these contracts, we set the price of our
services on a per unit or aggregate basis and assume the risk
that the costs associated with our performance may be greater
than we anticipated. Our profitability is therefore dependent
upon our ability to accurately estimate the costs associated
with our services. These costs may be affected by a variety of
factors, such as lower than anticipated productivity, conditions
at the work sites differing materially from what was anticipated
at the time we bid on the contract and higher costs of materials
and labor. Certain agreements or projects could have lower
margins than anticipated or losses if actual costs for our
contracts exceed our estimates, which could reduce our
profitability and liquidity.
We account for a majority of our projects using
units-of-delivery
methods or
percentage-of-completion,
therefore variations of actual results from our assumptions may
reduce our profitability.
For installation/construction projects, we recognize revenue on
projects on the
units-of-delivery or
percentage-of-completion
methods, depending on the type of project. We recognize revenue
on unit based projects using the
units-of-delivery
method. Under the
units-of-delivery
method, revenue is recognized as the units are completed at the
contractually agreed price per unit. Our profitability is
reduced if the actual cost to complete each unit exceeds our
original estimates. We are also required to immediately
recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on these
projects if the estimated costs to complete the remaining units
for the project exceed the revenue to be earned on such units.
For certain customers with unit based construction/installation
contracts, we recognize revenue only after the service is
performed and as the related work orders are approved. Revenue
from completed work orders not collected in accordance with the
payment terms established with these customers is not recognized
until collection is assured. If we are required to recognize a
loss on a project, we could experience reduced profitability
which could negatively impact our liquidity.
We recognize revenue on non-unit based fixed price contracts
using the
percentage-of-completion
method. Under the
percentage-of-completion
method, we record revenue as work on the contract progresses.
The cumulative amount of revenue recorded on a contract at a
specified point in time is that percentage of total estimated
revenue that incurred costs to date bear to estimated total
contract costs. The
percentage-of-completion
method therefore relies on estimates of total expected contract
costs. Contract revenue and total cost estimates are reviewed
and revised periodically as the work progresses. Adjustments are
reflected in contract revenue in the fiscal period when such
estimates are revised. Estimates are based on managements
reasonable assumptions and experience, but are only estimates.
Variation of actual results from estimates on a large project or
on a number of smaller projects could be material. For example,
for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004 we incurred
approximately $28.7 million and $7.8 million, respectively,
of losses on percentage-of-completion contracts. We immediately
recognize the full amount of the estimated loss on a contract
when our estimates indicate such a loss. Such adjustments and
accrued losses could result in reduced profitability which could
negatively impact our liquidity.
Amounts included in our backlog may not result in actual
revenue or translate into profits.
Approximately 78.7% of our 18-month backlog at
September 30, 2005 was comprised of master service
agreements and other service agreements which do not require our
customers to purchase a minimum amount of services and are
cancelable on short notice. These backlog amounts are based on
our estimates and therefore may not result in actual receipt of
revenue in the originally anticipated period or at all. In
addition, contracts included in our backlog may not be
profitable. We have historically experienced variances in the
realization of our backlog because of project delays or
cancellations resulting from weather conditions, external market
factors and economic factors beyond our control and we may
experience such delays or cancellations in the future. For
example, 12-month backlog at December 31, 2001 was
$873.7 million but we only realized $766.5 million of
revenues for the 12-month period ended
9
December 31, 2002. If our backlog fails to materialize, we
could experience a reduction in our revenue, profitability and
liquidity.
Our business is seasonal and is affected by adverse weather
conditions and the spending patterns of our customers, exposing
us to variable quarterly results.
The budgetary years of many of our specialty infrastructure
services customers end December 31. As a result, some of
our customers reduce their expenditures and work order requests
towards the end of the year. Adverse weather conditions,
particularly during the winter season, also affect our ability
to perform outdoor services in certain regions of the United
States and Canada. As a result, we experience reduced revenue in
the first and fourth quarters of each calendar year.
Natural catastrophes such as the recent hurricanes in the United
States could also have a negative impact on the economy overall
and on our ability to perform outdoor services in affected
regions or utilize equipment and crews stationed in those
regions, which in turn could significantly impact the results of
any one or more of our reporting periods.
We are self-insured against many potential liabilities.
Although we maintain insurance policies with respect to
automobile liability, general liability, workers
compensation and employee group health claims, those policies
are subject to high deductibles, and we are self-insured up to
the amount of the deductible. Since most claims against us do
not exceed the deductibles under our insurance policies, we are
effectively self-insured for substantially all claims. We
actuarially determine any liabilities for unpaid claims and
associated expenses, including incurred but not reported losses,
and reflect those liabilities in our balance sheet as other
current and non-current liabilities. The determination of such
claims and expenses and the appropriateness of the liability is
reviewed and updated quarterly. However, insurance liabilities
are difficult to assess and estimate due to the many relevant
factors, the effects of which are often unknown, including the
severity of an injury, the determination of our liability in
proportion to other parties, the number of incidents not
reported and the effectiveness of our safety program. If our
insurance claims or costs exceed our estimates of insurance
liabilities, we could experience a decline in profitability and
liquidity.
Increases in our insurance premiums or collateral
requirements could significantly reduce our profitability,
liquidity and credit facility availability.
Because of factors such as increases in claims (primarily
workers compensation claims), projected significant
increases in medical costs and wages, lost compensation and
reductions in coverage and our financial position, insurance
carriers may be unwilling to continue to provide us with our
current levels of coverage without a significant increase in
insurance premiums or collateral requirements to cover our
deductible obligations. For example, in connection with our 2005
insurance program, through October 2005, we have paid our
insurance carrier $18 million for cash collateral without a
corresponding decrease in collateral for prior year programs. An
increase in premiums or collateral requirements could
significantly reduce our profitability and liquidity as well as
reduce availability under our revolving credit facility to
support some of these collateral requirements.
We may be unable to obtain sufficient bonding capacity to
support certain service offerings and the need for performance
and surety bonds may reduce our availability under our credit
facility.
Some of our contracts require performance and surety bonds.
Bonding capacity in the infrastructure industry has become
increasingly difficult to obtain, and bonding companies are
denying or restricting coverage to an increasing number of
contractors. Companies that have been successful in renewing or
obtaining coverage have sometimes been required to post
additional collateral to secure the same amount of bonds which
reduces availability under our credit facility. We may not be
able to maintain a sufficient level of bonding capacity in the
future, which could preclude us from being able to bid for
certain contracts and successfully contract with certain
customers. In addition, even if we are able to successfully
10
renew or obtain performance or payment bonds in the future, we
may be required to post letters of credit in connection with the
bonds which would reduce availability under our credit facility.
We reported net losses for the years ended December 31,
2002, 2003, 2004 and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005. If we continue to incur net losses, our
overall level of bonding capacity could be reduced.
New accounting pronouncements including SFAS 123R may
significantly impact our future results of operations and
earnings per share.
We currently account for our stock-based award plans to
employees and directors in accordance with APB No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees under which
compensation expense is recorded to the extent that the current
market price of the underlying stock exceeds the exercise price.
Under this method, we generally do not recognize any
compensation related to employee stock option grants we issue
under our stock option plans at fair value. In December 2004,
the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued SFAS 123R
Share-Based Payment or SFAS 123R. This
statement, which will be effective for us beginning on
January 1, 2006, will require us to recognize the expense
attributable to stock options granted or vested subsequent to
December 31, 2005 and will have a material negative impact
on our future profitability.
SFAS 123R will require us to recognize share-based
compensation as compensation expense in our statement of
operations based on the fair values of such equity on the date
of the grant, with the compensation expense recognized over the
vesting period. This statement will also require us to adopt a
fair value-based method for measuring the compensation expense
related to share-based compensation. We are in the process of
evaluating the impact of the adoption of SFAS 123R on our
results of operations. In connection with evaluating the impact
of SFAS 123R, we are considering the potential use of
different valuation methods to determine the fair value of
share-based compensation and reviewing all assumptions used in
those valuation methods. We believe the adoption of
SFAS 123R will have a material negative impact on our
profitability regardless of the valuation method used. Future
changes in generally accepted accounting principles may also
have a significant effect on our reported results.
We may incur goodwill impairment charges in our reporting
entities which could harm our profitability.
In accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and
Other Intangible Assets, we periodically review the
carrying values of our goodwill to determine whether such
carrying values exceed the fair market value. During the fourth
quarter of 2002, we performed a review of goodwill for
impairment which resulted in a charge of approximately
$79.7 million, or $51.9 million net of tax. The
primary factors contributing to the impairment charge were the
overall deterioration of the business climate during 2002 and
the continued depression of the market values of our common
stock and the equity securities of other companies that serve
our industry. In the year ended December 31, 2004, we
charged $12.3 million against goodwill in connection with
the bankruptcy of our Brazilian subsidiary, which is included in
the consolidated statements of operations under discontinued
operations. We may incur additional impairment charges related
to goodwill in any of our reporting entities in the future if
the markets they serve or their business deteriorates. For
example, we are currently reviewing the valuation of the assets
related to the state Department of Transportation projects that
are being discontinued. See Recent Developments. Any
such charges would be reflected on our consolidated financial
statements as operating expenses and could reduce our
profitability.
We may incur restructuring charges which could reduce our
profitability.
From time to time we review our operations in an effort to
improve profitability. In 2002, we implemented a restructuring
program under which we:
|
|
|
|
|
eliminated service offerings that no longer fit into our
business strategy; |
|
|
|
reduced or eliminated services that did not produce adequate
revenue or margin; |
11
|
|
|
|
|
reduced costs of businesses that provided adequate profit
contributions but needed margin improvements; and |
|
|
|
reviewed new business opportunities capable of utilizing our
existing human and physical resources. |
As a result of this program, we incurred a pre-tax charge of
$3.7 million in 2002. We could incur charges in the future
as a result of similar reviews, which would be reflected as
operating expenses and could reduce our profitability.
Our credit facility and senior subordinated notes impose
restrictions on us which may prevent us from engaging in
transactions that might benefit us, including responding to
changing business and economic conditions or securing additional
financing, if needed.
At September 30, 2005, we had $195.9 million in senior
subordinated notes outstanding due 2008 under an indenture and
$0.3 million in other notes payable outstanding. We also
have a $150.0 million revolving credit facility. The terms
of our indebtedness contain customary events of default and
covenants that prohibit us from taking certain actions without
satisfying certain financial tests or obtaining the consent of
the lenders. The prohibited actions include, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
making investments in excess of specified amounts; |
|
|
|
incurring additional indebtedness in excess of a specified
amount; |
|
|
|
paying cash dividends; |
|
|
|
making capital expenditures in excess of a specified amount; |
|
|
|
creating certain liens; |
|
|
|
prepaying our other indebtedness, including the senior
subordinated notes; |
|
|
|
engaging in certain mergers or combinations; and |
|
|
|
engaging in transactions that would result in a change of
control (as defined in the credit facility and senior
subordinated notes indenture). |
Our credit facility provides that if our net borrowing base
availability falls below $20.0 million we must comply with
a minimum fixed charge coverage ratio. See
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Financial Condition,
Liquidity and Capital Resources. In the past, we have not
been in compliance with certain financial covenants of our
credit facility and have had to seek amendments or waivers from
our lenders. Should we be unable to comply with the terms and
covenants of our credit facility, we would be required to obtain
further modifications of the facility or secure another source
of financing to continue to operate our business. A default
could result in the acceleration of either our obligations under
the credit facility or under the indenture relating to the
senior subordinated notes, or both. In addition, these covenants
may prevent us from engaging in transactions that benefit us,
including responding to changing business and economic
conditions or securing additional financing, if needed. Our
business is capital intensive and, to the extent we need
additional financing, we may not be able to obtain such
financing at all or on favorable terms, which may decrease our
profitability and liquidity.
If we are unable to attract and retain qualified managers and
skilled employees, we will be unable to operate efficiently
which could reduce our revenue, profitability and liquidity.
Our business is labor intensive, and some of our operations
experience a high rate of employee turnover. At times of low
unemployment rates in the areas we serve, it can be difficult
for us to find qualified and affordable personnel. We may be
unable to hire and retain a sufficient skilled labor force
necessary to support our operating requirements and growth
strategy. Our labor expenses may increase as a result of a
shortage in the supply of skilled personnel. If we are unable to
hire employees with the requisite
12
skills, we may also be forced to incur significant training
expenses. Additionally, our business is managed by a number of
key executive and operational officers and is dependent upon
retaining and recruiting qualified management. Labor shortages,
increased labor or training costs or the loss of key personnel
could result in reduced revenue, profitability and liquidity.
Increases in the costs of fuel could reduce our operating
margins.
The price of fuel needed to run our vehicles and equipment is
unpredictable and fluctuates based on events outside our
control, including geopolitical developments, supply and demand
for oil and gas, actions by OPEC and other oil and gas
producers, war and unrest in oil producing countries, regional
production patterns and environmental concerns. Most of our
contracts do not allow us to adjust our pricing. Accordingly,
any increase in fuel costs could reduce our profitability and
liquidity.
We may choose, or be required, to pay our subcontractors even
if our customers do not pay, or delay paying, us for the related
services.
We use subcontractors to perform portions of our services and to
manage work flow. In some cases, we pay our subcontractors
before our customers pay us for the related services. If we
choose, or are required, to pay our subcontractors for work
performed for customers who fail to pay, or delay paying, us for
the related work, we could experience a decrease in
profitability and liquidity.
If we are unable to obtain our audited financial statements
on a timely basis or otherwise fail to comply with state
Department of Transportation requirements, we could experience a
decrease in our revenue and profitability from some governmental
customers.
State DOTs require us to submit an annual application in order
to qualify as an approved direct bidder for their projects. In
some states, our application must be accompanied by audited
financial statements which must be submitted within a certain
number of days after the end of each fiscal year in order to be
considered timely. In 2004, we failed to complete the audit of
our financial statements for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2003 on a timely basis. If we fail to submit
audited financial statements and other information on a timely
basis, or if our prequalification application is delayed or
rejected for any reason, our status as an approved bidder for
any new state DOT work in certain states could be suspended.
While we can currently provide services as a subcontractor,
until we re-establish our qualification to bid, our status as an
approved bidder for Florida DOT work remains suspended. This has
resulted in a decrease in revenue from this customer and may
result in continued decreases in the future. If we are unable to
comply with the applicable state DOT requirements we would be
unable to serve as a direct provider of new services to those
state DOTs and we could experience a decrease in revenue and
profitability from these customers.
Our failure to comply with environmental laws could result in
significant liabilities.
Some of the work we perform is in underground environments. If
the field location maps supplied to us are not accurate, or if
objects are present in the soil that are not indicated on the
field location maps, our underground work could strike objects
in the soil containing pollutants and result in a rupture and
discharge of pollutants. In such a case, we may be liable for
fines and damages.
We own and lease several facilities at which we store our
equipment. Some of these facilities contain fuel storage tanks
which may be above or below ground. If these tanks were to leak,
we could be responsible for the cost of remediation as well as
potential fines.
We sometimes perform directional drilling operations below
certain environmentally sensitive terrains and water bodies. Due
to the inconsistent nature of the terrain and water bodies, it
is possible that such directional drilling may cause a surface
fracture releasing subsurface materials. These releases may
contain contaminants in excess of amounts permitted by law,
potentially exposing us to remediation costs and fines.
13
We are currently engaged in litigation related to environmental
liabilities in Coos Bay, Oregon. See Legal
Proceedings.
In addition, new environmental laws and regulations, stricter
enforcement of existing laws and regulations, the discovery of
previously unknown contamination or leaks, or the imposition of
new clean-up
requirements could require us to incur significant costs or
become the basis for new or increased liabilities that could
negatively impact our profitability and liquidity.
Our failure to comply with the regulations of the
U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the
U.S. Department of Transportation and other state and local
agencies that oversee transportation and safety compliance could
reduce our revenue, profitability and liquidity.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, as amended, or
OSHA, establishes certain employer responsibilities, including
maintenance of a workplace free of recognized hazards likely to
cause death or serious injury, compliance with standards
promulgated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
and various record keeping, disclosure and procedural
requirements. Various standards, including standards for notices
of hazards, safety in excavation and demolition work, may apply
to our operations. We have incurred, and will continue to incur,
capital and operating expenditures and other costs in the
ordinary course of our business in complying with OSHA and other
state and local laws and regulations.
We have, from time to time, received notice from the
U.S. Department of Transportation that our motor carrier
operations will be monitored and that the failure to improve our
safety performance could result in suspension or revocation of
vehicle registration privileges. If we cannot successfully
resolve these issues, our ability to service our customers could
be damaged which could lead to a reduction of our revenue,
profitability and liquidity.
Our business is subject to hazards that could result in
substantial liabilities and weaken our financial condition.
Construction projects undertaken by our employees involve
exposure to electrical lines, pipelines carrying potentially
explosive materials, heavy equipment, mechanical failures and
adverse weather conditions. If serious accidents or fatalities
occur, we may be restricted from bidding on certain work and
certain existing contracts could be terminated. In addition, if
our safety record were to deteriorate, our ability to bid on
certain work could suffer. The occurrence of accidents in our
business could result in significant liabilities or harm our
ability to perform under our contracts or enter into new
contracts with customers, which could reduce our revenue,
profitability and liquidity.
Many of our communications customers are highly regulated and
the addition of new regulations or changes to existing
regulations may adversely impact their demand for our specialty
contracting services and the profitability of those services.
Many of our communications customers are regulated by the
Federal Communications Commission. The FCC may interpret the
application of its regulations to communication companies in a
manner that is different than the way such regulations are
currently interpreted and may impose additional regulations. If
existing or new regulations have an adverse affect on our
communications customers and adversely impact the profitability
of the services they provide, then demand for our specialty
contracting services may be reduced.
Claims, lawsuits and proceedings could reduce our
profitability and liquidity and weaken our financial
condition.
We are subject to various claims, lawsuits and proceedings which
arise in the ordinary course of business. Claimants may seek
large damage awards and defending claims can involve significant
costs. When appropriate, we establish reserves against these
items that we believe to be adequate in the light of current
information, legal advice and professional indemnity insurance
coverage, and we adjust such
14
reserves from time to time according to case developments. If
our reserves are inadequate, or if in the future our insurance
coverage proves to be inadequate or unavailable or there is an
increase in liabilities for which we self-insure, we could
experience a reduction in our profitability and liquidity. In
addition, claims, lawsuits and proceedings may harm our
reputation or divert management resources away from operating
our business. See Legal Proceedings.
Acquisitions involve risks that could result in a reduction
of our profitability and liquidity.
We have made, and in the future plan to make, strategic
acquisitions. However, we may not be able to identify suitable
acquisition opportunities or may be unable to obtain the consent
of our lenders and therefore not be able to complete such
acquisitions. We may decide to pay for acquisitions with our
common stock which may dilute your investment in our common
stock or decide to pursue acquisitions that investors may not
agree with. In addition, acquisitions may expose us to
operational challenges and risks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the ability to profitably manage additional businesses or
successfully integrate the acquired business operations and
financial reporting and accounting control systems into our
business; |
|
|
|
increased indebtedness associated with an acquisition; |
|
|
|
the ability to fund cash flow shortages that may occur if
anticipated revenue is not realized or is delayed, whether by
general economic or market conditions or unforeseen internal
difficulties; |
|
|
|
the availability of funding sufficient to meet increased capital
needs; |
|
|
|
diversion of managements attention; and |
|
|
|
the ability to hire qualified personnel required for expanded
operations. |
A failure to successfully manage the operational challenges and
risks associated with or resulting from acquisitions could
result in a reduction of our profitability and liquidity.
Borrowings associated with these acquisitions may also result in
higher levels of indebtedness which could impact our ability to
service the debt within the scheduled repayment terms.
Risks Related to Our Company and Our Common Stock
We have identified a material weakness in our disclosure
controls and procedures and internal control over financial
reporting related to inventory practices and policies related to
certain state Department of Transportation projects, which are
included in those projects that we intend to sell, that may
prevent us from being able to report accurately our financial
results or prevent fraud, which could harm our business and
operating results and the trading price of our stock.
Effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal
controls are necessary for us to provide reliable and accurate
financial reports and prevent fraud. In addition,
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires that
we assess, and our independent registered certified public
accounting firm attest to, the design and operating
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.
If we cannot provide reliable and accurate financial reports and
prevent fraud, our business and operating results could be
harmed. In connection with our evaluation of our disclosure
controls and procedures and internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2004, we identified a material
weakness in the inventory practices and policies related to
certain Department of Transportation projects, which are
included in those projects that we intend to sell. See
Recent Developments. We may in the future discover
additional areas of our disclosure controls or internal control
over financial reporting that need improvement. Any remedial
measures we take may not succeed in designing, implementing and
maintaining adequate controls over our financial processes and
reporting in the future and may not be sufficient to address and
eliminate the material weakness. Remedying the material weakness
that has been identified, or material weaknesses that we or our
independent registered public accounting firm may identify in
the future, could require us to incur additional costs or divert
management resources which could reduce our profitability.
15
We have not yet fully remediated the material weakness related
to the inventory practices and policies related to certain
department of transportation projects, with respect to inventory
pricing on receipt and the related costs of sales, and inventory
tracking prior to sale or use. If we do not remedy this material
weakness, we may be required to report in subsequent reports
that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission that a
material weakness in our disclosure controls and procedures and
internal controls over financial reporting continues to exist.
Any delay or failure to design and implement new or improved
controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation or
operation, could harm our operating results, cause us to fail to
meet our financial reporting obligations, or prevent us from
providing reliable and accurate financial reports or avoiding or
detecting fraud. Disclosure of material weaknesses, any failure
to remediate such material weaknesses in a timely fashion or
having or maintaining ineffective internal controls could cause
investors to lose confidence in our reported financial
information, which could have a negative effect on the trading
price of our stock and our access to capital.
We may incur significant damages and expenses due to the
purported class action complaints that were filed against us and
certain of our officers.
In the second quarter of 2004, several complaints for a
purported securities class action were filed against us and
certain of our officers in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Florida and one was filed in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
These cases have been consolidated in the Southern District of
Florida. The complaints allege certain violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, related to current and prior period earnings
reports. In addition, in December 2004 a derivative action
based on the same factual predicate as the purported securities
class actions was filed by a shareholder. We may be unable to
successfully resolve these disputes without incurring
significant expenses. See Legal Proceedings.
The market price of our common stock has been, and may
continue to be, highly volatile.
From 2001 to 2003, for example, our common stock fluctuated from
a high of $24.75 in the first quarter of 2001 to a low of $1.31
in the first quarter of 2003. During 2004 and 2005, our common
stock fluctuated from a high of $16.50 to a low of $3.63. We may
continue to experience significant volatility in the market
price of our common stock. See Price Range of Common Stock
and Dividend Policy.
Numerous factors could have a significant effect on the price of
our common stock, including:
|
|
|
|
|
announcements of fluctuations in our operating results or the
operating results of one of our competitors; |
|
|
|
future sales of our common stock or other securities; |
|
|
|
announcements of new contracts or customers by us or one of our
competitors; |
|
|
|
market conditions for providers of services to communications
companies, utilities and government; |
|
|
|
changes in recommendations or earnings estimates by securities
analysts; and |
|
|
|
announcements of acquisitions by us or one of our competitors. |
In addition, the stock market has experienced significant price
and volume fluctuations in recent years that have been unrelated
or disproportionate to the operating performance of companies.
The market price for our common stock has been volatile and
could also cause the market price of our common stock to
decrease and cause you to lose some or all of your investment in
our common stock.
16
A small number of our existing shareholders have, and after
the offering will continue to have, the ability to influence
major corporate decisions.
Jorge Mas, our Chairman, and other members of his family who are
employed by MasTec will beneficially own approximately 35.70% of
the outstanding shares of our common stock after the offering.
Accordingly, they are in a position to influence:
|
|
|
|
|
the vote of most matters submitted to our shareholders,
including any merger, consolidation or sale of all or
substantially all of our assets; |
|
|
|
the nomination of individuals to our Board of Directors; and |
|
|
|
a change in our control. |
These factors may discourage, delay or prevent a takeover
attempt that you might consider in your best interest or that
might result in you receiving a premium for your common stock.
Our articles of incorporation and Florida law contain
anti-takeover provisions that may make it more difficult to
effect a change in our control.
Certain provisions of our articles of incorporation and bylaws
and the Florida Business Corporation Act could delay or prevent
an acquisition or change in control and the replacement of our
incumbent directors and management, even if doing so might be
beneficial to our shareholders by providing them with the
opportunity to sell their shares possibly at a premium over the
then market price of our common stock. For example, our Board of
Directors is divided into three classes. At any annual meeting
of our shareholders, our shareholders only have the right to
appoint approximately one-third of the directors on our Board of
Directors. Consequently, it will take at least two annual
shareholder meetings to effect a change in control of our Board
of Directors, which may discourage hostile takeover bids. In
addition, our articles of incorporation authorize our Board of
Directors, without further shareholder approval, to issue
preferred stock. The issuance of preferred stock could also
dilute the voting power of the holders of common stock,
including by the grant of voting control to others, which could
delay or prevent an acquisition or change in control.
Our management has broad discretion over the use of proceeds
from this offering and may use the proceeds in ways that may be
dilutive.
We estimate that our net proceeds from the sale of the
12,500,000 shares of common stock we are offering will be
approximately $131.5 million, after deducting estimated
offering expenses, underwriting discounts and commissions. A
$0.25 increase (decrease) in the assumed public offering price
per share of our common stock would increase (decrease) the net
proceeds that we receive from the offering by approximately
$3.0 million. In March 2006 we intend to use at least
$75 million and up to $100 million of the net proceeds
of the offering to redeem a portion of our 7.75% senior
subordinated notes. We also intend to use $18.5 million for
the DSSI Acquisition. Our management will retain broad
discretion to allocate the balance of the proceeds from this
offering and the net proceeds could be used for corporate
purposes that do not increase our operating results or market
value.
You will experience immediate and substantial dilution in the
net tangible book value of the shares you purchase in this
offering.
If you purchase shares of our common stock in this offering, you
will experience immediate and substantial dilution, in that the
price you pay will be substantially greater than the net
tangible book value per share of the shares you acquire. Based
on an offering price of $11.15 per share and our net
tangible book value at September 30, 2005, if you purchase
our common stock in this offering, you will suffer immediate and
substantial dilution of approximately $8.29 per share.
17
CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
We are making this statement pursuant to the safe harbor
provisions for forward-looking statements described in the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These
forward-looking statements are not historical facts but are the
intent, belief, or current expectations of our business and
industry. We make statements in this prospectus that are
forward-looking. When used in this prospectus or in any other
presentation, statements which are not historical in nature,
including the words anticipate,
estimate, could, should,
may, plan, seek,
expect, believe, intend,
target, will, project and
similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking
statements. They also include statements regarding:
|
|
|
|
|
our future growth and profitability; |
|
|
|
our competitive strengths; and |
|
|
|
our business strategy and the trends we anticipate in the
industries and economies in which we operate. |
These forward-looking statements are based on our current
expectations and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties
and assumptions. These statements are not guarantees of future
performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other
factors, some of which are beyond our control, are difficult to
predict, and could cause actual results to differ materially
from those expressed or forecasted in the forward-looking
statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those in forward-looking statements
include:
|
|
|
|
|
economic downturns, reduced capital expenditures, consolidation
and technological and regulatory changes in the industries we
serve; |
|
|
|
the ability of our customers to terminate or reduce the amount
of work or in some cases prices paid for services under many of
our contracts; |
|
|
|
technical and regulatory changes in our customers
industries; |
|
|
|
the highly competitive nature of our industry; |
|
|
|
our ability to attract and retain qualified managers and skilled
employees; |
|
|
|
our dependence on a limited number of customers; |
|
|
|
the seasonality and quarterly variations we experience in our
revenue and profitability; |
|
|
|
increases in fuel and labor costs; |
|
|
|
the restrictions imposed by our credit facility and senior
notes; and |
|
|
|
the other factors referenced in this prospectus, including,
without limitation, under Business, Risk
Factors and Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. |
We believe these forward-looking statements are reasonable;
however, you should not place undue reliance on any
forward-looking statements, which are based on current
expectations. Furthermore, forward-looking statements speak only
as of the date they are made. If any of these risks or
uncertainties materialize, or if any of our underlying
assumptions are incorrect, our actual results may differ
significantly from the results that we express in or imply by
any of our forward-looking statements. These and other risks are
detailed in this prospectus, in the documents that we
incorporate by reference into this prospectus and in other
documents that we file with the Securities and Exchange
Commission. We do not undertake any obligation to publicly
update or revise these forward-looking statements after the date
of this prospectus to reflect future events or circumstances. We
qualify any and all of our forward-looking statements by these
cautionary factors.
18
USE OF PROCEEDS
We estimate that our net proceeds from the sale of the
12,500,000 shares of common stock we are offering will be
approximately $131.5 million (approximately
$151.4 million if the underwriters exercise their
over-allotment option in full) after deducting estimated
offering expenses, underwriting discounts and commissions. For
purposes of this calculation we have assumed a public offering
price of $11.15 per share. A $0.25 increase (decrease) in the
assumed public offering price per share of our common stock
would increase (decrease) the net proceeds that we receive from
the offering by approximately $3.0 million (assuming no
exercise of the over-allotment option). In March 2006 we intend
to use at least $75 million and up to $100 million of
the net proceeds of the offering to redeem a portion of our
7.75% senior subordinated notes due February 2008. We
expect to use the remaining net proceeds for the
$18.5 million cash portion of the DSSI Acquisition, working
capital, other possible acquisitions of assets and businesses,
organic growth and other general corporate purposes. Although we
regularly evaluate potential acquisition opportunities, we
currently have no definitive agreements to make any other
acquisitions. See Recent Developments. Our
management has broad discretion over the allocation of the net
proceeds from this offering, see Risk Factors Our
management has broad discretion over the use of proceeds from
this offering and may use the proceeds in ways that may be
dilutive.
PRICE RANGE OF COMMON STOCK AND DIVIDEND POLICY
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under
the symbol MTZ. The following table states, for the
quarters indicated, the high and low sale prices per share of
our common stock, as reported by the New York Stock Exchange.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Year Ended December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$ |
16.50 |
|
|
$ |
6.85 |
|
Second Quarter
|
|
$ |
9.81 |
|
|
$ |
3.63 |
|
Third Quarter
|
|
$ |
6.52 |
|
|
$ |
4.11 |
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$ |
10.72 |
|
|
$ |
5.05 |
|
Year Ended December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$ |
10.20 |
|
|
$ |
7.87 |
|
Second Quarter
|
|
$ |
9.40 |
|
|
$ |
6.56 |
|
Third Quarter
|
|
$ |
11.95 |
|
|
$ |
8.66 |
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$ |
11.39 |
|
|
$ |
9.24 |
|
Year Ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter (through January 19, 2006)
|
|
$ |
11.30 |
|
|
$ |
10.20 |
|
On January 19, 2006, the closing sale price of our common
stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange was $11.15 per
share. The number of shareholders of record on December 31,
2005 was approximately 2,056.
We have never paid any cash dividends and do not currently
anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.
Our Board of Directors will make any future determination as to
the payment of dividends at its discretion, and its
determination will depend upon our operating results, financial
condition and capital requirements, general business conditions
and any other factors that the Board of Directors considers
relevant. In addition, our revolving credit facility prohibits
us from paying dividends or making other distributions on our
common stock without the prior written consent of the lenders.
You should read Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Financial
Condition, Liquidity and Capital Resources.
19
DILUTION
Our diluted net tangible book value as of September 30,
2005 was approximately $45.1 million, or $0.92 per share of
common stock. Net tangible book value per share represents our
total tangible assets less our total liabilities, divided by the
aggregate number of shares of our common stock outstanding.
Dilution in net tangible book value per share represents the
difference between the amount per share paid by purchasers of
our common stock in this offering and the net tangible book
value per share of our common stock immediately after this
offering. After (i) giving effect to the sale of the
12,500,000 shares of our common stock in this offering
(assuming no exercise of the over-allotment option granted to
the underwriters) at an assumed public offering price of $11.15
per share, the last reported sale price of our common stock on
January 19, 2006 on the New York Stock Exchange, and
(ii) deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and
commissions (which for purposes of this calculation we have
assumed will be 5.0%) and the estimated offering expenses
payable by us, our net tangible book value at September 30,
2005 would have been approximately $176.6 million or $2.86
per share. This represents an immediate increase in net tangible
book value of $1.94 per share of common stock to existing
stockholders and an immediate dilution of $8.29 per share to new
investors. Dilution per share represents the difference between
the amount per share paid by the new investors in this offering
and the net tangible book value per share at September 30,
2005, giving effect to this offering. Purchasers of our common
stock offered pursuant to this prospectus will suffer immediate
and substantial dilution in net tangible book value per share.
The following table illustrates the increase in net tangible
book value of $1.94 per share and the dilution to new
investors.
|
|
|
|
|
Public offering price per share
|
|
|
|
$11.15 |
Diluted net tangible book value per share as of
September 30, 2005 before this offering
|
|
$0.92 |
|
|
Increase in net tangible book value per share attributable to
new investors
|
|
1.94 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net tangible book value per share as of September 30, 2005
after giving effect to this offering
|
|
|
|
2.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
Dilution per share to new investors
|
|
|
|
$ 8.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
A $0.25 increase (decrease) in the assumed public offering price
of $11.15 per share of our common stock would increase
(decrease) our pro forma net tangible book value after giving
effect to the offering by $3.0 million, the pro forma net
tangible book value per share of our common stock after giving
effect to this offering by $0.05 and the dilution in pro forma
net tangible book value per share of our common stock to new
investors in this offering by $0.20, assuming no change to the
number of shares of common stock offered by us as set forth on
the cover page of this prospectus, and after deducting
underwriting discounts and commission and other expenses of the
offering. The pro forma information discussed above is
illustrative only. Our net tangible book value following the
completion of the offering is subject to adjustment based on the
actual offering price of our common stock and other terms of
this offering determined at pricing.
These calculations assume no issuance of shares of our common
stock through the exercise of stock options as of
September 30, 2005. To the extent all of these options had
been exercised as of September 30, 2005, our net tangible
book value per share of common stock would have further
decreased and the dilution per share of common stock to new
investors in this offering would have further increased.
20
CAPITALIZATION
The following table states our capitalization as of
September 30, 2005 on an actual basis and on an as adjusted
basis to reflect the sale of 12,500,000 shares of common
stock by us in this offering, at an assumed public offering
price of $11.15 per share, and the application of the
estimated net proceeds from the offering as described in
Use of Proceeds. You should read the information in
the following table in conjunction with the sections of this
prospectus entitled Selected Consolidated Financial
Data and Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and our
consolidated financial statements and their notes included
elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Actual | |
|
As Adjusted | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) | |
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
2,894 |
|
|
|
59,422 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, including current portion
|
|
$ |
196,238 |
|
|
|
121,238 |
|
Shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, par value $1.00 per share;
5,000,000 shares authorized; no shares issued and
outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value $0.10 per share;
100,000,000 shares authorized; 49,142,346 shares
issued and outstanding; 61,642,346 shares issued and
outstanding as adjusted
|
|
|
4,914 |
|
|
|
6,164 |
|
Capital surplus
|
|
|
355,469 |
|
|
|
485,747 |
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(170,433 |
) |
|
|
(170,433 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
190,405 |
|
|
|
321,933 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capitalization
|
|
$ |
386,643 |
|
|
|
443,171 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For purposes of the as adjusted column of the capitalization
table above, we have assumed the net proceeds from the offering
will be $131.5 million and we will redeem $75 million
of our 7.75% senior subordinated notes due February 2008 with
the net proceeds of the offering. Any increase in the net
proceeds that we use to redeem these notes would decrease the
cash and cash equivalents, long term debt, including current
portion, and capitalization line items in each case by an amount
that is equal to such increase in net proceeds used to redeem
the notes. A $0.25 increase (decrease) in the assumed public
offering price per share of our common stock would increase
(decrease) each of cash and cash equivalents, capital surplus,
total shareholders equity and total capitalization line
items by approximately $3.0 million.
After the closing of this offering and based upon the number of
options granted as of December 31, 2005, we had additional
shares of common stock available for issuance under the
following plans and arrangements:
|
|
|
|
|
15,272,487 shares issuable under our stock option and stock
purchase plans, consisting of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,654,061 shares underlying options outstanding at a
weighted average exercise price of $12.54 per share, of
which 6,945,606 shares were exercisable; and |
|
|
|
|
|
6,618,426 shares available for future issuance under our
stock option and stock purchase plans. |
|
21
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The following table states our selected consolidated financial
data which are derived from our consolidated financial
statements. The table reflects our consolidated results of
operations for the periods indicated including the
reclassification of results of operations for our Brazil and
network services from 2000 through 2003 to discontinued
operations. The selected consolidated data as of
September 30, 2005 and 2004 and for each of the nine months
then ended are derived from our condensed unaudited consolidated
financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus and,
in our opinion, include all adjustments, which are only normal
recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation. Our
results of operations for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, may not be indicative of results that
may be expected for the full fiscal year. The following selected
financial data should be read together with our consolidated
financial statements and notes thereto as well as
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and Pro Forma
Information on Continuing Operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2000(1) | |
|
2001 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts) | |
Statement of Operations Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
1,190,120 |
|
|
$ |
1,116,894 |
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
$ |
667,071 |
|
|
$ |
697,427 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation
|
|
$ |
906,010 |
|
|
$ |
885,014 |
|
|
$ |
683,855 |
|
|
$ |
744,587 |
|
|
$ |
828,743 |
|
|
$ |
607,120 |
|
|
$ |
621,560 |
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations before cumulative
effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
$ |
62,812 |
(2) |
|
$ |
(74,203 |
)(3) |
|
$ |
(107,238 |
)(4) |
|
$ |
(24,440 |
) |
|
$ |
(26,217 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,451 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,558 |
) |
Income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
62,812 |
|
|
$ |
(74,203 |
) |
|
$ |
(119,834 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,440 |
) |
|
$ |
(26,217 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,451 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,558 |
) |
Loss on write-off of assets of discontinued operations, net
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(19,165 |
) |
|
$ |
(19,165 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
$ |
719 |
|
|
$ |
(19,524 |
) |
|
$ |
(16,722 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,859 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,055 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,966 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,008 |
) |
Loss on sale of assets of discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(583 |
) |
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
63,531 |
|
|
$ |
(93,727 |
) |
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
|
$ |
(52,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,437 |
) |
|
$ |
(42,582 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,149 |
) |
Basic net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$ |
1.35 |
|
|
$ |
(1.55 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.50 |
) |
|
$ |
(.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(.54 |
) |
|
$ |
(.42 |
) |
|
$ |
(.03 |
) |
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
(0.41 |
) |
|
$ |
(.35 |
) |
|
$ |
(.58 |
) |
|
$ |
(.48 |
) |
|
$ |
(.46 |
) |
|
$ |
(.03 |
) |
Diluted net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$ |
1.30 |
|
|
$ |
(1.55 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.50 |
) |
|
$ |
(.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(.54 |
) |
|
$ |
(.42 |
) |
|
$ |
(.03 |
) |
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
(0.41 |
) |
|
$ |
(.35 |
) |
|
$ |
(.58 |
) |
|
$ |
(.48 |
) |
|
$ |
(.46 |
) |
|
$ |
(.03 |
) |
Basic net income (loss) per share before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
$ |
1.37 |
|
|
$ |
(1.96 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.59 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
Basic net income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
1.37 |
|
|
$ |
(1.96 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
Diluted net income (loss) per share before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
$ |
1.31 |
|
|
$ |
(1.96 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.59 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
Diluted net income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
1.31 |
|
|
$ |
(1.96 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
2000(1) | |
|
2001 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
September 30, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
(unaudited) | |
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working capital
|
|
$ |
241,952 |
|
|
$ |
246,589 |
|
|
$ |
139,154 |
|
|
$ |
113,360 |
|
|
$ |
134,463 |
|
|
$ |
131,976 |
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
$ |
159,673 |
|
|
$ |
151,774 |
|
|
$ |
118,475 |
|
|
$ |
85,832 |
|
|
$ |
69,303 |
|
|
$ |
56,451 |
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
956,345 |
|
|
$ |
853,294 |
|
|
$ |
622,681 |
|
|
$ |
628,263 |
|
|
$ |
600,523 |
|
|
$ |
609,389 |
|
Total debt
|
|
$ |
209,483 |
|
|
$ |
269,749 |
|
|
$ |
198,642 |
|
|
$ |
201,665 |
|
|
$ |
196,158 |
|
|
$ |
196,238 |
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
$ |
498,713 |
|
|
$ |
403,815 |
|
|
$ |
263,010 |
|
|
$ |
215,818 |
|
|
$ |
191,153 |
|
|
$ |
190,405 |
|
|
|
(1) |
While our 2000 financial statements were audited at the time we
filed our 2000 Form 10-K, in connection with the filing of
our 2003 Form 10-K we restated previous financial
statements (including our 2000 financial statements) to reflect
understatements in computing self insurance reserves at
December 31, 2000 which required us to increase insurance
expense by $1.6 million, net of tax, which has not been
audited. |
(2) |
Includes a net write-down and other charges of
$26.3 million related primarily to non-core assets. |
(3) |
Includes charges of $16.5 million to reduce the carrying
amount of certain assets held for sale and in use, and non-core
assets, as well as provisions for bad debt totaling
$182.2 million related to customers who filed for
bankruptcy protection and severance charges of
$11.5 million. |
(4) |
Includes charges of $12.8 million to reduce the carrying
amount of certain assets held for sale and in use, and non-core
assets, restructuring charges of $8.3 million, impairment
of goodwill of $79.7 million, and provisions for bad debt
totaling $15.4 million. |
23
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition
and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our
historical consolidated financial statements and related notes
included in this prospectus. The discussion below contains
forward-looking statements that are based upon our current
expectations and are subject to uncertainty and changes in
circumstances. Actual results may differ materially from these
expectations due to inaccurate assumptions and known or unknown
risks and uncertainties, including those identified in
Cautionary Note Statement Regarding Forward-Looking
Statements. The consolidated results of operations in 2002
and 2003 reflect the reclassification of 2002 and 2003 results
of continuing operations for the Brazil operations and our
network services operations to discontinued operations.
Overview
We are a leading specialty contractor operating throughout the
United States and in Canada and across a range of industries.
Our core activities are the building, installation, maintenance
and upgrade of communications and utility infrastructure and
transportation systems. Our primary customers are companies in
the communication (including satellite television and cable
television) industry, as well as, utility companies and
governments. We provide similar infrastructure services across
the industries we serve. Our customers rely on us to build and
maintain infrastructure and networks that are critical to their
delivery of voice, video and data communications, electricity
and transportation systems.
We, or our predecessor companies, have been in business for over
70 years. We offer all of our services under the
MasTec®
service mark and operate through a network of approximately 220
locations and 7,700 employees as of December 31, 2005. We
believe that we are currently the second largest, publicly held,
specialty infrastructure provider to communications companies
that offer voice, video and data services and the fourth
largest, publicly held, provider of infrastructure services to
the electric utility industry.
Recent Developments
Agreement to Acquire Assets
of Digital Satellite Services, Inc.
On December 30, 2005, MasTec entered into the DSSI
Acquisition. DSSIs revenues are expected to exceed
$50 million in 2005 and its principal markets include
Atlanta, Georgia, the Greenville-Spartanburg area of South
Carolina and Asheville, North Carolina, and portions of
Tennessee, Kentucky and Virginia, which are all markets that are
contiguous to areas in which MasTec is currently active with
similar installation services. Upon completion of the
acquisition, MasTec will provide installation services from the
mid-Atlantic states to South Florida. In addition, MasTec
expects to hire approximately 630 additional installation
technicians as a result of the acquisition.
|
|
|
Decision to Sell Substantially all of MasTecs State
Department of Transportation Related Projects and Assets. |
On December 31, 2005, the executive committee of our board
of directors voted to sell substantially all of MasTecs
state Department of Transportation related projects and assets.
As of September 30, 2005, the carrying value of the subject
net assets for sale was $57.7 million. This amount is
comprised of total assets of $91.3 million which includes
$11.5 million of goodwill less total liabilities of
$33.6 million. The decision to sell was made after
evaluation of, among other things, short and long term
prospects. The projects that are for sale will be accounted for
as discontinued operations. At this time, MasTec has not
completed its determination of the fair value of the assets and
does not have an estimate of the write-down or other charges
associated with the disposition of the assets. MasTec does
anticipate that it will need to record a material impairment
charge related to these net assets.
24
The financial data in this prospectus does not give effect to
MasTecs decision to sell substantially all of its state
Department of Transportation related projects and assets. If
MasTec had accounted for these projects as discontinued
operations as of January 1, 2002, MasTecs loss from
continuing operations for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002 would have been $17.7 million,
$20.8 million and $111.0 million, respectively, and
for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, income from
continuing operations would have been $10.5 million.
MasTecs revenue for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003, 2002 and nine months ended September 30, 2005
would have been $807.2 million, $712.2 million,
$657.0 million and $624.6 million, respectively. In
addition, MasTecs loss from discontinued operations for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003, 2002 and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 would have been
$31.7 million, $31.5 million, $13.0 million and
$13.6 million, respectively. See the pro forma financial
information included elsewhere in this prospectus at Pro
Forma Information on Continuing Operations.
Revenue
We provide services to our customers which are companies in
communications, as well as, utilities and government. Revenue
for customers in these industries is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Communications
|
|
$ |
481,957 |
|
|
$ |
496,646 |
|
|
$ |
593,635 |
|
|
$ |
429,985 |
|
|
$ |
439,137 |
|
Utilities
|
|
|
162,822 |
|
|
|
198,583 |
|
|
|
175,314 |
|
|
|
131,084 |
|
|
|
147,753 |
|
Government
|
|
|
121,688 |
|
|
|
132,251 |
|
|
|
144,846 |
|
|
|
106,002 |
|
|
|
110,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
$ |
667,071 |
|
|
$ |
697,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A significant portion of our revenue is derived from projects
performed under service agreements. Some of these agreements are
billed on a time and materials basis and revenue is recognized
as the services are rendered. We also provide services under
master service agreements which are generally multi-year
agreements. Certain of our master service agreements are
exclusive up to a specified dollar amount per work order for
each defined geographic area. Work performed under master
service and other agreements is typically generated by work
orders, each of which is performed for a fixed fee. The majority
of these services typically are of a maintenance nature and to a
lesser extent upgrade services. These master service agreements
and other service agreements are frequently awarded on a
competitive bid basis, although customers are sometimes willing
to negotiate contract extensions beyond their original terms
without re-bidding. Our master service agreements and other
service agreements have various terms, depending upon the nature
of the services provided, and are typically subject to
termination on short notice. Under our master service and
similar type service agreements we furnish various specified
units of service for a separate fixed price per unit of service.
We recognize revenue as the related unit of service is
performed. For service agreements on a fixed fee basis
profitability will be reduced if the actual costs to complete
each unit exceed original estimates. We also immediately
recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on these fixed
fee projects if estimated costs to complete the remaining units
for the project exceed the revenue to be received from such
units.
The remainder of our revenue is generated pursuant to contracts
for specific installation/construction projects or jobs. For
installation/construction projects, we recognize revenue on the
units-of-delivery or
percentage-of-completion
methods. Revenue on unit based projects is recognized using the
units-of-delivery
method. Under the
units-of-delivery
method, revenue is recognized as the units are completed at the
contractually agreed price per unit. For certain customers with
the unit based installation/construction projects, we recognize
revenue after the service is performed and the work orders are
approved to ensure that collectibility is probable from these
customers. Revenue from completed work orders not collected in
accordance with the payment terms established with these
customers is not recognized until collection is assured. Revenue
on non-unit based contracts is recognized using the
percentage-of-completion
method.
25
Under the
percentage-of-completion
method, we record revenue as work on the contract progresses.
The cumulative amount of revenue recorded on a contract at a
specified point in time is that percentage of total estimated
revenue that incurred costs to date bear to estimated total
contract costs. Customers are billed with varying frequency:
weekly, monthly or upon attaining specific milestones. Such
contracts generally include retainage provisions under which 2%
to 15% of the contract price is withheld from us until the work
has been completed and accepted by the customer. If, as work
progresses, the actual contract costs exceed estimates, the
profit recognized on revenue from that contract decreases. We
recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on a contract at
the time the estimates indicate such a loss.
Our status as an approved bidder on any state department of
transportation, or DOT, work is dependent in part on the
acceptance of our prequalification applications. Due to our
failure to file our audited financial statements for the year
ended December 31, 2003, on a timely basis, our status as
an approved bidder was suspended in a number of states. We have
re-established our qualification to bid in a number of states in
2005. Although we submitted our 2005 application on time with
the 2004 financial statements, our application has not yet been
accepted by the Florida DOT. While we can currently provide
services as a subcontractor, until we re-establish our
qualification to bid, our status as an approved bidder for
Florida DOT work remains suspended. This has resulted in a
decrease in revenue from this customer and may result in
continued decreases in the future.
Revenue by type of contract is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
Master service and other service agreements
|
|
$ |
494,357 |
|
|
$ |
560,127 |
|
|
$ |
636,563 |
|
|
$ |
476,884 |
|
|
$ |
451,954 |
|
Installation/construction projects agreements
|
|
|
272,110 |
|
|
|
267,353 |
|
|
|
277,232 |
|
|
|
190,187 |
|
|
|
245,473 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
$ |
667,071 |
|
|
$ |
697,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs of Revenue
Our costs of revenue include the costs of providing services or
completing the projects under our contracts including operations
payroll and benefits, fuel, subcontractor costs, equipment
rental, materials not provided by our customers, and insurance.
Profitability will be reduced if the actual costs to complete
each unit exceed original estimates on fixed price service
agreements. We also immediately recognize the full amount of any
estimated loss on fixed fee projects if estimated costs to
complete the remaining units for the project exceed the revenue
to be received from such units.
Our customers generally supply materials such as cable, conduit
and telephone equipment. Customer furnished materials are not
included in revenue and costs of revenue due to all materials
being purchased by the customer. The customer determines the
specifications of the materials that are to be utilized to
perform installation/construction services. We are only
responsible for the performance of the installation/construction
services and not the materials for any contract that includes
customer furnished materials and we do not have any risk
associated with customer furnished materials. Our customers
retain the financial and performance risk of all customer
furnished materials.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses include all costs of our
management and administrative personnel, severance payments,
reserves for bad debts, rent, utilities, travel and business
development efforts and back office administration such as
financial services, insurance, administration, professional
costs and clerical and administrative overhead.
26
Other Matters
In March 2004, we ceased performing contractual services in
Brazil, abandoned all assets of our Brazil subsidiary and made a
determination to exit the Brazil market. During the year ended
December 31, 2004, we wrote off approximately
$12.3 million in goodwill and the net investment in our
Brazil subsidiary of approximately $6.8 million which
consisted of the accumulated foreign currency translation loss
of $21.3 million less a net deficit in assets of
$14.5 million. The abandoned subsidiary has been classified
as a discontinued operation and its net losses are not included
in our consolidated net loss from continuing operations for the
years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004. The net
income (loss) for our Brazil subsidiary was reclassified to
discontinued operations in the amount of $1.2 million and
$(21.8) million for the years ended December 31, 2002
and 2003, respectively. The net loss for the year ended
December 31, 2004 included in discontinued operations was
$20.2 million. In November 2004, the subsidiary applied for
relief and was adjudicated bankrupt by a Brazilian bankruptcy
court. The subsidiary is currently being liquidated under court
supervision.
During the fourth quarter 2004, we ceased performing services
and committed to sell our network services operations and exit
this service market. These operations have been classified as a
discontinued operation and their net losses are not included in
our consolidated net loss from continuing operations for the
years ended December 31, 2002, 2003, and 2004. The net loss
for the network services operations was reclassified to
discontinued operations in the amount of $17.9 million and
$6.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2002 and
2003, respectively. The net loss for the year ended
December 31, 2004 and nine months ended September 30,
2005 included in discontinued operations was $3.0 million
and $1.6 million, respectively.
On May 24, 2005, we sold certain assets of our network
services operations for $100,000 in cash and a promissory note
in the principal amount of $108,501 due in May 2006. We recorded
a loss on the sale of approximately $583,000, net of tax, in the
nine months ended September 30, 2005. The loss resulted
from additional selling costs and remaining obligations that
were not assumed by the buyer.
Financial Metrics
Members of our senior management team regularly review key
performance metrics and the status of operating initiatives
within our business. These key performance indicators include:
|
|
|
|
|
revenue and profitability on an individual project basis; |
|
|
|
monthly, quarterly and annual changes in revenue on an
individual project basis; |
|
|
|
backlog; |
|
|
|
costs of revenue, and general and administrative expenses as
percentages of revenue; |
|
|
|
number of vehicles and equipment per employee; |
|
|
|
days sales outstanding; |
|
|
|
interest and debt service coverage ratios; |
|
|
|
safety results and productivity; and |
|
|
|
customer service metrics on an individual project basis. |
We analyze this information periodically through operating
reviews which include detailed discussions, proposed investments
in new business opportunities or property and equipment and
integration and cost reduction efforts. Measuring these key
performance indicators is an important tool that our management
uses to make operational decisions. These tools enable our
management to make more informed, better and quicker decisions
about the allocation of costs and resources which, we believe,
can help us improve our performance.
27
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and
results of operations is based upon our consolidated financial
statements, which have been prepared in accordance with United
States generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation
of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and
judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets,
liabilities, revenue and expenses, and related disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, we
evaluate our estimates, including those related to revenue
recognition, allowance for doubtful accounts, intangible assets,
reserves and accruals, impairment of assets, income taxes,
insurance reserves and litigation and contingencies. We base our
estimates on historical experience and on various other
assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis of making
judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities,
that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results
may differ from these estimates if conditions change or if
certain key assumptions used in making these estimates
ultimately prove to be materially incorrect.
We believe the following critical accounting policies involve
our more significant judgments and estimates used in the
preparation of our consolidated financial statements.
Revenue and related costs for master and other service
agreements billed on a time and materials basis are recognized
as the services are rendered. There are also some master service
agreements that are billed on a fixed fee basis. Under our fixed
fee master service and similar type service agreements we
furnish various specified units of service for a separate fixed
price per unit of service. We recognize revenue as the related
unit of service is performed. For service agreements on a fixed
fee basis, profitability will be reduced if the actual costs to
complete each unit exceed original estimates. We also
immediately recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on
these fixed fee projects if estimated costs to complete the
remaining units exceed the revenue to be received from such
units.
We recognize revenue on unit based installation/construction
projects using the
units-of-delivery
method. Our unit based contracts relate primarily to contracts
that require the installation or construction of specified units
within an infrastructure system. Under the
units-of-delivery
method, revenue is recognized at the contractually agreed upon
price as the units are completed and delivered. Our
profitability will be reduced if the actual costs to complete
each unit exceed our original estimates. We are also required to
immediately recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on
these projects if estimated costs to complete the remaining
units for the project exceed the revenue to be earned on such
units. For certain customers with unit based
installation/construction contracts we recognize revenue after
service has been performed and work orders are approved to
ensure that collectibility is probable from these customers.
Revenue from completed work orders not collected in accordance
with the payment terms established with these customers is not
recognized until collection is assured.
Our non-unit based, fixed price installation/construction
contracts relate primarily to contracts that require the
construction and installation of an entire infrastructure
system. We recognize revenue and related costs as work
progresses on non-unit based, fixed price contracts using the
percentage-of-completion
method, which relies on contract revenue and estimates of total
expected costs. We estimate total project costs and profit to be
earned on each long-term, fixed-price contract prior to
commencement of work on the contract. We follow this method
since reasonably dependable estimates of the revenue and costs
applicable to various stages of a contract can be made. Under
the
percentage-of-completion
method, we record revenue and recognize profit or loss as work
on the contract progresses. The cumulative amount of revenue
recorded on a contract at a specified point in time is that
percentage of total estimated revenue that incurred costs to
date bear to estimated total contract costs, after adjusting
estimated total contract costs for the most recent information.
If, as work progresses, the actual contract costs exceed our
estimates, the profit we recognize from that contract decreases.
We recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on a contract
at the time our estimates indicate such a loss.
28
Our customers generally supply materials such as cable, conduit
and telephone equipment. Customer furnished materials are not
included in revenue and cost of sales as all materials are
purchased by the customer. The customer determines the
specification of the materials that are to be utilized to
perform installation/construction services. We are only
responsible for the performance of the installation/construction
services and not the materials for any contract that includes
customer furnished materials and we do not have any risk
associated with customer furnished materials. Our customers
retain the financial and performance risk of all customer
furnished materials.
|
|
|
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts |
We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated
losses resulting from the inability of our customers to make
required payments. Management analyzes past due balances based
on invoice date, historical bad debt experience, customer
concentrations, customer credit-worthiness, customer financial
condition and credit reports, the availability of
mechanics and other liens, the existence of payment bonds
and other sources of payment, and current economic trends when
evaluating the adequacy of the allowance for doubtful accounts.
We review the adequacy of reserves for doubtful accounts on a
quarterly basis. If our estimates of the collectibility of
accounts receivable are incorrect, adjustments to the allowance
for doubtful accounts may be required, which could reduce our
profitability.
Our estimates for our allowance for doubtful accounts are
subject to significant change during times of economic weakness
or uncertainty in either the overall U.S. economy or the
industries we serve, and our loss experience has increased
during such times.
We recorded total provisions against earnings for doubtful
accounts of $15.4 million, $8.8 million,
$5.1 million and $3.8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, respectively.
Inventories consist of materials and supplies for construction
projects, and are typically purchased on a project-by-project
basis. Inventories are valued at the lower of cost (using the
specific identification method) or market. Construction projects
are completed pursuant to customer specifications. The loss of
the customer or the cancellation of the project could result in
an impairment of the value of materials purchased for that
customer or project. Technological or market changes can also
render certain materials obsolete. Allowances for inventory
obsolescence are determined based upon the specific facts and
circumstances for each project and market conditions. During
2002, 2003 and 2004 and the nine months ended September 30,
2005, we recorded inventory obsolescence provisions of
$5.2 million, $1.8 million, $0.9 million and
$0.9 million, respectively.
We depreciate our property and equipment over estimated useful
lives using the straight-line method. We periodically review
changes in technology and industry conditions, asset retirement
activity and salvage values to determine adjustments to
estimated remaining useful lives and depreciation rates.
Effective November 30, 2002, we implemented the results of
a review of the estimated service lives of our property and
equipment in use. Useful lives were adjusted to reflect the
extended use of much of our equipment. In addition, the
adjustments made the estimated useful lives for similar
equipment consistent among all operating units. Depreciation
expense was reduced by $5.8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2004 from the amount of expense which
would had been reported using the previous useful lives as a
result of the change of estimate. During 2002 we also
implemented a plan to improve profitability by more effectively
utilizing our fleet. Under the plan, we began disposing of
excess or underutilized assets in 2002.
During 2003 and 2004, we continued to dispose of excess assets
and increased our reliance on operating leases to finance
equipment needs, thereby reducing our depreciation expense. We
anticipate
29
continued declines in our depreciation expense, since we believe
we can continue to use more lease opportunities.
|
|
|
Valuation of Equity Investments |
We have one investment which we account for by the equity method
because we own 49% of the entity and we have the ability to
exercise significant influence over the operational policies of
the limited liability company. Our share of the earnings or
losses in this investment is included in other income, net, in
our statements of operations. As of September 30, 2005, our
investment exceeded the net equity of such investment and
accordingly the excess is considered to be equity goodwill. We
periodically evaluate the equity goodwill for impairment under
Accounting Principles Board No. 18, The Equity Method
of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock, as amended.
|
|
|
Valuation of Long-Lived Assets |
We review long-lived assets, consisting primarily of property
and equipment and intangible assets with finite lives, for
impairment in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (SFAS No. 144). In
analyzing potential impairment, we use projections of future
undiscounted cash flows from the assets. These projections are
based on our views of growth rates for the related business,
anticipated future economic conditions and the appropriate
discount rates relative to risk and estimates of residual
values. We believe that our estimates are consistent with
assumptions that marketplace participants would use in their
estimates of fair value. However, economic conditions, interest
rates, the anticipated cash flows of the businesses related to
these assets and our business strategies are all subject to
change in the future. If changes in growth rates, future
economic conditions or discount rates and estimates of terminal
values were to occur, long-lived assets may become impaired.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004,
we recognized impairment losses and write-offs of long-lived
assets of approximately $675,000 and $605,000, respectively.
|
|
|
Valuation of Goodwill and Intangible Assets |
In accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and
Other Intangible Assets or SFAS 142, we conduct, on
at least an annual basis, a review of our reporting units to
determine whether their carrying value exceeds fair market value
using a discounted cash flow methodology for each unit. Should
this be the case, the value of our goodwill may be impaired and
written down. Our adoption of SFAS 142 in 2002 resulted in
a write-down of our goodwill, net of tax, in the amount of
$25.7 million net of $13.8 million tax benefit, to
reduce the carrying value of our goodwill. This charge was
reflected as a cumulative effect of an accounting change in our
consolidated statement of operations included in this
prospectus, of which $13.1 million has been reclassified to
discontinued operations. Impairment losses subsequent to
adoption totaling $79.7 million, or $51.9 million net
of tax, are reflected in our operating results in our
consolidated statement of operations for 2002.
In connection with the disposition of the Brazil subsidiary as
discussed in our financial statements included elsewhere in this
prospectus, we wrote off goodwill associated with this reporting
entity in the amount of $12.3 million in the nine months
ended September 30, 2004.
We could record additional impairment losses if, in the future,
profitability and cash flows of our reporting units decline to
the point where the carrying value of those units exceed their
market value. See Risk Factors We may incur
goodwill impairment charges in our reporting entities which
could harm our profitability.
We presently maintain insurance policies subject to per claim
deductibles of $2 million for our workers
compensation, and general liability policies and $3 million
for our automobile liability policy. We have excess umbrella
coverages up to $100 million per claim and in the
aggregate. We also maintain an
30
insurance policy with respect to employee group health claims
subject to per claim deductibles of $300,000. We actuarially
determine any liabilities for unpaid claims and associated
expenses, including incurred but not reported losses, and
reflect those liabilities in our balance sheet as other current
and non-current liabilities. The determination of such claims
and expenses and the appropriateness of the related liability is
reviewed and updated quarterly. However, insurance liabilities
are difficult to assess and estimate due to the many relevant
factors, the effects of which are often unknown, including the
severity of an injury, the determination of our liability in
proportion to other parties, the number of incidents not
reported and the effectiveness of our safety program. We are
working with our insurance carrier to resolve claims more
quickly in an effort to reduce our exposure. We are also
attempting to accelerate the claims process where possible so
that amounts incurred can be reported rather than estimated. In
addition, known amounts for claims that are in the process of
being settled, but that have been paid in periods subsequent to
those being reported, are booked in such reporting period. Our
accruals are based upon known facts, historical trends and our
reasonable estimate of future expenses and we believe such
accruals to be adequate. If we do not accurately estimate the
losses resulting from these claims, we may experience losses in
excess of our estimated liability, which may reduce our
profitability.
We are required to periodically post letters of credit and
provide cash collateral to our insurance carriers and surety
providers. Such letters of credit amounted to $63.4 million
at September 30, 2005 and cash collateral posted amounted
to $19.3 million at September 30, 2005. The 2005
increase in collateral for our insurance programs is related to
additional collateral provided to the insurance carrier for the
2005 plan year and the fact that the collateral remaining for
prior year insurance programs have not decreased. Through
September 30, 2005 for the 2005 plan year, we made three
quarterly cash collateral installment payments of
$4.5 million with the final payment made in October 2005.
In addition, we maintain collateral from prior year insurance
programs with the current and prior insurance carriers, which
amounts are generally reviewed annually for sufficiency. We
expect prior year collateral requirements to be reduced at the
next annual review by the first quarter of 2006 based on fewer
claims remaining from these prior year loss payouts and the
actuarial results for the remaining claims received. The
increase in collateral is also due to other market factors
including growth in our business and liquidity. We may be
required to post additional collateral in the future which may
reduce our liquidity, or pay increased insurance premiums, which
could decrease our profitability as well as reduce our
availability under our revolving credit facility. See Risk
Factors Increases in our insurance premiums or
collateral requirements could significantly reduce our
profitability, liquidity and credit facility availability.
We record income taxes using the liability method of accounting
for deferred income taxes. Under this method, deferred tax
assets and liabilities are recognized for the expected future
tax consequence of temporary differences between the financial
statement and income tax bases of our assets and liabilities. We
estimate our income taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which
we operate. This process involves estimating our tax exposure
together with assessing temporary differences resulting from
differing treatment of items, such as deferred revenue, for tax
and accounting purposes. These differences result in deferred
tax assets and liabilities, which are included within our
consolidated balance sheet. The recording of a net deferred tax
asset assumes the realization of such asset in the future.
Otherwise a valuation allowance must be recorded to reduce this
asset to its net realizable value. We consider future pretax
income and ongoing prudent and feasible tax planning strategies
in assessing the need for such a valuation allowance. In the
event that we determine that we may not be able to realize all
or part of the net deferred tax asset in the future, a valuation
allowance for the deferred tax asset is charged against income
in the period such determination is made.
As a result of our operating losses, we have recorded valuation
allowances aggregating $34.2 million and $32.3 million
as of September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004,
respectively, to reduce certain of our net deferred Federal,
foreign and state tax assets to their estimated net realizable
value. We anticipate that we will generate sufficient pretax
income in the future to realize our deferred tax assets. In the
event that our future pretax operating income is insufficient
for us to use our deferred tax assets, we have based our
31
determination that the deferred tax assets are still realizable
based on a feasible tax planning strategy that is available to
us involving the sale of one of our operations.
During the second quarter of 2002, we initiated a study to
determine the proper balance of downsizing and cost cutting in
relation to our ability to respond to current and future work
opportunities in each of our service offerings. The review not
only evaluated our current operations, but also the growth and
opportunity potential of each service offering as well as the
consolidation of back-office processes. As a result of this
review, we implemented a restructuring program which included:
|
|
|
|
|
Elimination or reduction in the scope of service offerings that
no longer fit into our core business strategy or long-term
business plan. |
|
|
|
Reduction or elimination of services that do not produce
adequate revenue or margins to support the level of
profitability, return on investment or investments in capital
resources. This includes exiting contracts that do not meet the
minimum rate of return requirements and aggressively seeking to
improve margins and reduce costs. |
|
|
|
Analysis of businesses that provide adequate profit
contributions but still need margin improvements which includes
aggressive cost reductions and efficiencies. |
|
|
|
Review of new business opportunities in similar business lines
that can utilize our existing human and physical resources. |
The elements of the restructuring program included involuntary
terminations of employees in affected service offerings and the
consolidation of facilities. The plan resulted in a pre-tax
charge to operations of $3.7 million in 2002. The
involuntary terminations impacted both the salaried and hourly
employee groups. Approximately 1,025 employees were impacted in
2002. As of December 31, 2004, all employees to be
terminated pursuant to our restructuring program have been
terminated. We also closed approximately 25 facilities during
2002 as part of the program in which some of the assets were
sold, while other assets were retained and transferred to other
locations. These facility closures were not accounted for as
discontinued operations due to these facilities not representing
separate components of our business for which cash flows could
be clearly defined. We also continue to be involved in the
markets in which these 25 facilities operated.
In addition to the costs noted above, we paid a consulting firm
approximately $4.6 million to assist us in preparing the
plan, all of which was expensed in 2002 as the plan was complete
as of December 31, 2002. We also recognized valuation
allowances and impairment losses related to property and
equipment of approximately $12.8 million in connection with
the restructuring plan in the year ended December 31, 2002.
The following is a reconciliation of the restructuring accruals
as of December 31, 2004 which represents remaining lease
costs as well as reductions in the restructuring accruals during
2003 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued costs at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
212 |
|
Cash payments
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued costs at September 30, 2005
|
|
$ |
74 |
|
|
|
|
|
Economic conditions, our business strategies or other factors
could dictate further downsizing or elimination of elements of
our business in the future, resulting in additional
restructuring charges in 2005.
|
|
|
Litigation and Contingencies |
Litigation and contingencies are reflected in our consolidated
financial statements based on our assessments, along with legal
counsel, of the expected outcome of such litigation or expected
resolution of
32
such contingency. An accrual is made when the loss of such
contingency is probable and estimable. If the final outcome of
such litigation and contingencies differs significantly from our
current expectations, such outcome could result in a charge to
earnings. See Legal Proceedings for a discussion of
current litigation.
Results of Operations
While MasTec had been profitable in five of the six preceding
years, in 2001, the communications industry suffered a severe
downturn and industry participants significantly reduced their
capital expenditures for infrastructure networks. In particular,
the competitive local exchange carriers which we refer to as
CLECs and which had been responsible for the majority of
infrastructure spending commitments, experienced large financial
losses and curtailed capital expenditures. Many of them filed
for bankruptcy. The utility and government customers served by
our company also experienced an economic downturn, but to a
lesser extent than the telecommunications companies.
The deterioration in our customers businesses resulted in
a significant reduction in their spending on the types of
services provided by our company. For the fiscal years 2002 and
2003, our revenues decreased to $766.5 million and
$827.5 million, respectively, compared with
$1.1 billion in fiscal year 2001. As a result of these
losses we had $159.7 million of net operating loss carryforwards
for U.S. federal income tax purposes as of December 31,
2004. We may not be able to realize these deferred tax assets.
See Note 13 to our notes to our consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. In response to
the rapid decline in our revenue and cash flow during this
period, we reduced our staff from 10,600 employees at year
end 2001 to 7,200 at year end 2003. Concurrent with this
downsizing of our operations, we also continued to pursue both
the integration of the more than 40 companies we acquired
from 1994 through 2002 and the company-wide implementation of
our new Oracle management information system. In addition to
negatively impacting our operating performance, the confluence
of these factors adversely affected our ability to maintain
adequate financial reporting. We were required to restate our
financial results for prior years and we were late in filing
required SEC reports for the year ended December 31, 2003
and the first three quarters of 2004.
In response to these conditions, in 2004, we completed the
implementation of our Oracle management information system. We
also reorganized and expanded our financial management reporting
systems and recruited a new Chief Financial Officer in 2004. We
also hired a new corporate controller and hired new financial
officers for four of our five current service groups. We also
added new group presidents to two of our service groups.
We took action to increase our revenues and profitability by
repositioning our business and improving our financial controls.
Beginning in 2002, we exited the CLEC market and closed
unprofitable operations. We focused our communications business
on larger, financially stable regional Bell operating companies
which we refer to as RBOCs. We also diversified our revenues by
expanding our in-home
installation business with DirecTV. We believe that these
customers have continuing needs for outsourced building,
installation, maintenance and upgrade services.
In 2004, economic conditions began improving for our
telecommunications and utility customers which enabled them to
increase spending on projects that had been delayed during 2001
and 2002 and to pursue the network upgrades necessary to deliver
the bundled voice, video and data services increasingly demanded
by subscribers. Overall spending was further accelerated as
competition increased among telecommunication, satellite and
cable operators to provide enhanced voice, video and data
services.
Our operating results have improved significantly as a result of
the repositioning of our business, our improved financial
controls and improved economic conditions for our customers. We
timely filed our
2004 10-K and
our 10-Qs for the
first, second and third quarters of 2005. We reported income
from continuing operations of $2.1 million and
$7.9 million and $0.04 and $0.15 diluted per share the
second and third quarters of 2005, respectively.
33
For a discussion of trends related to our business, see
Business Industry Trends.
|
|
|
Restatement of Financial Statements |
In connection with the filing of our 2003
Form 10-K, we
restated our annual financial statements for the year ended
December 31, 2002 to increase our insurance expense (net of
tax) and to record a valuation allowance for certain of our net
deferred state tax assets. See Note 2 to our audited
consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus
for an explanation of these restatements. The following table
shows the net impact of the restatements on our loss before
cumulative effect of change in accounting principle and benefit
for income taxes, net loss before cumulative effect of change in
accounting principle and:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
As Previously | |
|
|
|
|
Reported | |
|
As Restated | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
and benefit for income taxes
|
|
$ |
(168,608 |
) |
|
$ |
(173,324 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting
principle
|
|
$ |
(103,135 |
) |
|
$ |
(110,885 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss before the effect of reclassifying certain continuing
operations to discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
(128,806 |
) |
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We also restated our quarterly financial information for 2003 as
a result of certain adjustments to revenue and other items that
impact these previously issued quarterly reports. See
Note 2 and 17 to our audited consolidated financial
statements included in this prospectus for an explanation of
these restatements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended | |
|
Quarter Ended | |
|
Quarter Ended | |
|
|
March 31, 2003 | |
|
June 30, 2003 | |
|
September 30, 2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
As Previously | |
|
As | |
|
As Previously | |
|
As | |
|
As Previously | |
|
As | |
|
|
Reported | |
|
Restated | |
|
Reported | |
|
Restated | |
|
Reported | |
|
Restated | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
180,569 |
|
|
$ |
180,297 |
|
|
$ |
209,108 |
|
|
$ |
207,841 |
|
|
$ |
248,373 |
|
|
$ |
242,539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income before cumulative effect of change in accounting
principle and benefit (provision) for income taxes
|
|
$ |
(2,648 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,920 |
) |
|
$ |
4,733 |
|
|
$ |
3,466 |
|
|
$ |
10,662 |
|
|
$ |
4,121 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income before cumulative effect of change in
accounting principle
|
|
$ |
(1,588 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,752 |
) |
|
$ |
2,765 |
|
|
$ |
2,020 |
|
|
$ |
6,250 |
|
|
$ |
2,310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income before the effect of reclassifying certain
continuing operations to discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
(1,588 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,752 |
) |
|
$ |
2,765 |
|
|
$ |
2,020 |
|
|
$ |
6,250 |
|
|
$ |
2,310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Except as otherwise stated, all financial information contained
in this prospectus gives effect to the restatements.
34
|
|
|
Comparisons of Fiscal Year Results |
The components of our consolidated statements of operations,
expressed as a percentage of revenue, are set forth in the
following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
|
|
Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
Revenue
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0% |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation
|
|
|
89.2 |
|
|
|
90.0 |
|
|
|
90.7 |
|
|
|
91.0 |
|
|
|
89.1 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
|
8.6 |
|
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
7.4 |
|
Goodwill impairment
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net of interest income
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Other (expense) income, net
|
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle, benefit for income taxes and
minority interest
|
|
|
(21.7 |
) |
|
|
(4.0 |
) |
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
7.7 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(14.0 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
|
(15.6 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
(3.3 |
) |
|
|
(2.5 |
) |
|
|
(3.3 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(17.8 |
)% |
|
|
(6.3 |
)% |
|
|
(5.4 |
)% |
|
|
(6.4 |
)% |
|
|
(0.4 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following discussion and analysis of our results of
operations should be read in conjunction with our consolidated
financial statements and notes thereto contained in this
prospectus.
|
|
|
Comparison of Nine Months Ended September 30, 2005
and 2004 |
Revenue. Our revenue was $697.4 million for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, compared to
$667.1 million for the same period in 2004, representing an
increase of $30.4 million or 4.6%. This increase was due
primarily to the increased revenue of approximately
$60.2 million received from DirecTV and increased revenue
of $55.0 million from Verizon, including
fiber-to-the-home
installations which commenced towards the end of 2004. We also
experienced an increase in general business activity throughout
2005 compared to 2004. These increases in revenue were partially
offset by a significant decrease of $94.6 million in
upgrade work for Comcast. In the nine months ending
September 30, 2004, the Comcast projects were still
operational. In addition, we experienced a decrease in revenue
of $10.6 million from transportation customers due to the
winding down of projects that were fully operational in 2004 and
our decision in 2005 not to bid for new transportation work
until we had completed certain long-term transportation projects.
Costs of Revenue. Our costs of revenue were
$621.6 million or 89.1% of revenue for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005, compared to $607.1 million
or 91.0% of revenue for the same period in 2004 reflecting an
improvement in margins. The improvement in margins was a result
of decreasing subcontractor costs paid to subcontractors
performed for our two largest customers with operational payroll
staying consistent. In 2005, we reduced the use of
subcontractors and did not have to hire additional employees at
the same rate. In addition, cost of sales decreased due to a
reduction in insurance expense. In the nine months ended
September 30, 2004, insurance reserves and expenses in cost
of sales increased
35
$10.2 million mainly because there were increased claims
and loss history in 2004 which resulted in an adjustment to our
actuarial assumptions. No such adjustment was needed in 2005.
Trends are decreasing from 2004 which has also resulted in the
decrease in reserves in 2005. The decrease in costs of revenue
was offset by rising fuel costs and an increase in lease costs.
Fuel costs, as a percentage of revenue, increased from 2.3% in
the nine months ended September 30, 2004 to 3.0% in the
nine months ended September 30, 2005. The increase is a
direct result of the rising price of fuel in 2005. Lease costs,
as a percentage of revenue, increased from 2.5% in the nine
months ended September 30, 2004 to 3.1% in the nine months
ended September 30, 2005. The increase is due to leasing
more on road and off road vehicles instead of purchasing these
vehicles.
Depreciation. Depreciation was $14.0 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2005, compared to
$13.3 million for the same period in 2004, representing an
increase of $690,000. In the nine months ended
September 30, 2004, depreciation expense was reduced by
$4.1 million related to the change in estimate in useful
lives that occurred in November 30, 2002. There was no such
reduction in 2005. However, this reduction in 2004 was offset in
2005 by continuing to reduce capital expenditures by entering
into operating leases for fleet requirements. We also continue
to dispose of excess equipment.
General and administrative. General and administrative
expenses were $51.5 million or 7.4% of revenue for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, compared to
$53.5 million or 8.0% of revenue for the same period in
2004, representing a decrease of $2.0 million or 3.8%. The
decrease in general and administrative expenses was due to
decrease in professional and legal fees of $4.7 million, a
decrease in insurance expense of $1.9 million and a
decrease in provisions for doubtful accounts of $240,000. The
professional fees incurred in the nine months ended
September 30, 2004 related to the audit, increased fees to
third party in assisting us with Sarbanes-Oxley compliance and
legal fees related to our defense in various litigation matters.
These fees substantially decreased in the nine months ending
September 30, 2005 due to performing our Sarbanes-Oxley
testing and compliance internally as well as decreasing outside
legal fees. In addition, general and administrative expenses
decreased due to reduction of insurance expense in 2005. There
were increased claims and loss history which resulted in an
adjustment to our actuarial assumptions and increased insurance
expense in general and administrative of $1.9 million in
2004. No such reserve was needed in 2005. Trends are decreasing
from 2004 which has also resulted in the decrease in reserves in
2005. The decrease in the provision for doubtful accounts was a
result of the quarterly general provision being partially offset
by recoveries of previously reserved receivables in the nine
months ended September 30, 2005. The decreases in general
and administrative expenses were offset by an increase in
salaries, benefits and bonus expenses in 2005 due to hiring
additional temporary and permanent finance and accounting
professionals throughout the Company towards the end of 2004. In
addition, throughout 2005, we hired additional legal, corporate
risk and information technology support personnel.
Interest expense, net. Interest expense, net of interest
income was $14.4 million or 2.1% of revenue for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005 compared to
$14.3 million or 2.1% of revenue for the same period in
2004 representing a slight increase of $135,000 or 0.9%. The
increase was due to increased interest rates during the period.
Other income, net. Other income was $3.4 million or
0.5% of revenue for the nine months ended September 30,
2005, compared to $1.0 million or 0.1% of revenue for the
nine months ended September 30, 2004, representing an
increase of $2.4 million. The increase mainly relates to
sales of fixed assets in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 resulting in $2.8 million of net
gains on these sales compared to approximately $340,000 of net
gains on sales in the nine months ended September 30, 2004.
In addition, the increase is attributable to the income earned
of approximately $585,000 associated with our equity investment
in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. The investment
did not exist in the nine months ended September 30, 2004.
Minority interest. Minority interest for GlobeTec
Construction, LLC was $995,000 or 0.1% of revenue for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, compared to $361,000 or
0.1% of revenue for the same period in 2004, representing an
increase of $634,000. We entered into this joint venture in 2004
in which we own 51%. This subsidiary has grown in revenue and
profits since inception. In the nine months
36
ended September 30, 2005, the joint venture generated an
increased amount of revenue and profits from the nine months
ending September 30, 2004 due to increased business
activity and cost control initiatives.
Discontinued operations. The loss on discontinued
operations was $1.6 million or 0.2% for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 compared to $22.1 million or
3.3% in the nine months ended September 30, 2004. In the
nine months ended September 30, 2004, we ceased performing
contractual services for customers in Brazil, abandoned all
assets of our Brazil subsidiary and made a determination to exit
the Brazil market. The abandoned Brazil subsidiary has been
classified as a discontinued operation. During the nine months
ended September 30, 2004, we wrote off approximately
$12.3 million in goodwill and the net investment in the
Brazil subsidiary of approximately $6.8 million which
consisted of the accumulated foreign currency translation loss
of $21.3 million less a deficit in assets of
$14.5 million. The net loss for our network services
operations was $1.6 million and $1.9 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. The net loss includes a $583,000, net of tax, loss
on the sale of the operations in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005. In May 2005, we sold the operations for
$208,501 consisting of cash in the amount of $100,000 and a
promissory note in the amount of $108,501 due in May 2006. The
loss on the sale resulted from additional selling costs and
remaining obligations that were not assumed by the buyer. The
net loss from operations of network services operations
decreased from the nine months ending September 30, 2004 as
a result of the division winding down of the operations.
|
|
|
Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2004 and
2003 |
Revenue. Our revenue was $913.8 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004, compared to
$827.5 million for the same period in 2003, representing an
increase of $86.3 million or 10.4%. This increase was due
primarily to the increased revenue of approximately
$96.7 million received from DirecTV and, to a lesser extent
government and telecommunication customers. Revenue from
telecommunications increased $23.3 million in 2004. We
expect this trend to continue to increase in 2005. The increase
in revenue was offset by a decrease in revenue from energy
customers by $23.3 million in 2004 due to the gas pipeline
and electrical substation revenue projects being completed in
2003 and a slight decrease in revenue from broadband customers
due to the Comcast work slowing down towards completion at the
end of 2004.
While we have refocused our business towards large, financially
stable customers in the communications, utility and governmental
industries, these customers may not continue to fund capital
expenditures for infrastructure projects at current levels or we
may not be able to increase our market share with these stronger
customers.
Costs of Revenue. Our costs of revenue were
$828.7 million or 90.7% of revenue for the year ended
December 31, 2004, compared to $744.6 million or 90.0%
of revenue for the same period in 2003 reflecting that the costs
remained consistent as a percentage of revenue. In the year
ended December 31, 2004, we recorded losses on construction
projects in the amount of $7.8 million compared to
approximately $28.7 million in the year ended
December 31, 2003. These losses arose from project costs
that exceeded our expectations for a variety of reasons
including internal bid, project management and cost estimation
issues, errors in specifications and design, work outside of
original contract scope and customer caused delays. In addition,
we recorded obsolescence provisions for inventory of
$0.9 million mainly due to inventories that were purchased
for specific jobs no longer in process and which may not be used
in the future. In the year ended December 31, 2003, an
obsolescence provision was recorded in the amount of
$1.8 million. These decreases were offset by the increase
in cost of sales due to the increase in the number of employees
and subcontractor costs related to the DirecTV business. In
addition, insurance expense increased in the year ended
December 31, 2004 due to the increased number of claims
reported. As a result of the increased claims and loss history
since the beginning of 2004, we adjusted our actuarial
assumptions and increased our reserves and expenses by
$13.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2004.
37
Depreciation. Depreciation was $17.1 million or
1.9% of revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004,
compared to $27.6 million or 3.3% of revenue for the same
period in 2003, representing a decrease of $10.5 million or
38%. We reduced depreciation expense in the year ended
December 31, 2004 by continuing to reduce capital
expenditures, disposing of excess equipment in 2003 and 2004 and
placing greater reliance on operating leases to meet our
equipment needs.
General and Administrative. General and
administrative expenses were $74.6 million or 8.2% of
revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared to
$70.1 million or 8.6% of revenue for the same period in
2003, representing an increase of $4.5 million or 6.3%. The
increase in general and administrative expenses was due to
additional professional fees incurred in the year ended
December 31, 2004 in the amount of $4.3 million
related to the audit and quarterly reviews, increased audit fees
in connection with our Sarbanes-Oxley compliance, increased
consulting fees related to Sarbanes-Oxley compliance and an
increase in legal fees related to our defense in various
litigation matters. In addition, in 2004 we recorded $644,000 of
non-cash stock compensation expense mainly related to the
extension of the exercise period on certain stock options held
by former employees. There was no such expense in 2003.
Interest Expense, Net. Interest expense, net of
interest income, remained consistent at $19.5 million or
2.1% of revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004,
compared to $19.2 million or 2.3% of revenue for the same
period in 2003.
Other Income, Net. Other income was $191,000 for the
year ended December 31, 2004, compared to $1.2 million
for the same period in 2003 representing a decrease of
$1.0 million or 84.6%. In the year ended December 31,
2003, we sold more equipment at auction and recognized more
gains on these sales than in the year ended December 31,
2004.
Benefit for Income Taxes. For 2004 and 2003 our
effective tax rates were approximately 0% and (25%),
respectively. Our balance sheet as of December 31, 2004,
includes a net deferred tax asset of $56.8 million of which
$44.3 million relates to federal taxes and the remainder to
various state and foreign taxes, net of valuation allowance. The
realization of this net deferred tax asset is dependent upon our
ability to generate future pretax income. We anticipate that we
will generate sufficient pretax income in the future to realize
a portion of our net deferred tax asset relating to federal
income taxes. In making this assessment, we have considered our
projected future pretax income based upon a prudent and feasible
tax planning strategy available to us involving the sale of one
of our operations. However, this tax planning strategy does not
appear viable for the purpose of realizing all of the various
income tax components of our net deferred tax asset.
Accordingly, we recorded an addition to our valuation allowance
of $24.1 million in 2004 to reduce certain of our net
deferred Federal, foreign and state tax assets at
December 31, 2004, to their estimated net realizable value
of $56.8 million. The primary reason for the difference in
our effective tax rate from 2003 to 2004 was the effect of
worthless stock deduction and increase in valuation allowance.
Deferred tax assets, net in 2004 increased to $56.8 million
from $55.3 million. The increase in deferred tax assets,
net was due to a reduction in deferred tax assets of
$3.6 million and a reduction in deferred tax liabilities of
$5.2 million. The decrease in deferred tax assets was
primarily related to our increase in net operating loss
carryforwards of $11.9 million as a result of our net loss
in 2004, and an increase in deferred tax assets relating to
accrued self insurance of $10.6 million offset by a
decrease in deferred tax assets relating to goodwill of
$2.5 million and an increase in the valuation allowance of
$24.1 million for Federal, foreign and state tax assets.
The reduction in deferred tax liabilities was primarily due to a
decrease in deferred tax liabilities for property and equipment
of $1.9 million and a decrease in deferred tax liabilities
for accounts receivable retainage differences of
$2.7 million.
Minority Interest. Minority interest was
$0.3 million or 0.04% of revenue for the year ended
December 31, 2004, compared to $0 for the same period in
2003. We entered into a joint venture with a third party at the
end of 2003. We own 51% of the company. This subsidiary had net
income for the year ended December 31, 2004 which resulted
in minority interest.
Discontinued Operations. In the year ended
December 31, 2004, we ceased performing contractual
services for customers in Brazil, abandoned all assets of our
Brazil subsidiary and made a determination to
38
exit the Brazil market. The abandoned Brazil subsidiary has been
classified as a discontinued operation and its net loss is not
included in the results of continuing operations in 2004 or
2003. The results of operations for the year ended
December 31, 2003 for Brazil have been reclassified to a
loss from discontinued operations. During the year ended
December 31, 2004, we wrote off approximately
$12.3 million and the net investment in the Brazil
subsidiary of approximately $6.8 million which consisted of
the accumulated foreign currency translation loss of
$21.3 million less a net deficit in assets of
$14.5 million. The net loss for the Brazil subsidiary was
$20.2 million and $21.8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. In November 2004,
our subsidiary applied for relief and was adjudicated bankrupt
by a Brazilian bankruptcy court. The subsidiary is currently
being liquidated under court supervision. During the fourth
quarter 2004, we ceased performing services and committed to
sell our network services operations and exit this service
market. These operations have been classified as a discontinued
operation and their net loss is not included in the results of
continuing operations in 2004 or 2003. The results of operations
for the year ended December 31, 2003 for our network
services operations have been reclassified to a loss from
discontinued operations. The net loss for our network services
operations was $3.0 million and $6.0 million for the
years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
|
|
|
Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2003 and
2002 |
Revenue. Our revenue was $827.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2003 compared to
$766.5 million for the same period in 2002, representing an
increase of $61.0 million. The increase in revenue was
primarily due to the growth in our broadband revenue and, to a
lesser extent, growth in business with our energy and government
customers. We experienced a 74.5% increase in revenue from
broadband customers such as Comcast and DirecTV for upgrade
construction and residential installation work. Overall revenue
from broadband customers grew by $113.3 million in 2003.
Revenue from energy customers grew by $35.8 million in 2003
to $198.6 million compared to $162.8 million in 2002
primarily due to new gas pipeline and electrical substation
contracts. Our revenue from government work increased by
$10.6 million in 2003 compared to 2002 due to an increase
in dollar value of projects and expansion of the business into
new states in 2003. Our overall 2003 revenue growth was reduced
by a $98.6 million decrease in telecommunications revenue.
Historically, we have derived a significant amount of our
revenue from telecommunications customers. Commencing in the
latter part of 2001 and throughout 2002, certain segments of the
telecommunications industry suffered a severe downturn that
resulted in a number of our customers filing for bankruptcy
protection or experiencing financial difficulties. The downturn
resulted in reduced capital expenditures for infrastructure
projects, even among customers that did not experience financial
difficulties. Revenue from telecommunication customers continued
their downward trend in 2003.
Costs of Revenue. Our costs of revenue was
$744.6 million or 90.0% of revenue for the year ended
December 31, 2003, compared to $683.9 million or 89.2%
of revenue for the same period in 2002. Costs of revenue grew in
terms of total dollars in 2003 due to the overall increase in
revenue and a slight increase in payroll. Costs of revenue in
2003 include $28.7 million in losses incurred on
construction projects during the year. These losses arose from
project costs that exceeded our expectations for a variety of
reasons including internal bid, project management and cost
estimation issues, errors in specifications and designs, work
outside of original contract scope and customer-caused delays.
Depreciation. Depreciation was $27.6 million or
3.3% of revenue for the year ended December 31, 2003,
compared to $33.8 million or 4.4% of revenue for the same
period in 2002, representing a decrease of $6.2 million or
18.3%. In 2003, depreciation expense was reduced by
$5.8 million related to the change in estimate in useful
lives that occurred on November 30, 2002. In addition, we
reduced depreciation expense in 2003 by continuing to reduce
capital expenditures, disposing of excess equipment and placing
greater reliance on operating leases to meet our equipment needs.
General and Administrative Expenses. General and
administrative expenses were $70.1 million or 8.6% of
revenue for the year ended December 31, 2003 compared to
$107.4 million or 14.0% of revenue for the same period in
2002, representing a decrease of $37.3 million or 34.7%.
The decrease mainly relates to a decrease of $27.0 million
related to our restructuring plan which resulted in the
termination of
39
employees, consolidation of facilities, functions and locations,
and the recording of restructuring charges in 2002. In addition,
bad debt expense included in general and administrative expense
declined by approximately $10.8 million from 2002 to 2003.
The large provision in 2002 was related to the after effects in
2002 related to customers declaring bankruptcy in 2001 in the
telecommunications sector.
Interest Expense. Interest expense, net of interest
income, was $19.2 million or 2.3% of revenue for the year
ended December 31, 2003, compared to $18.3 million or
2.4% for the same period in 2002 representing an increase of
$874,000. Net interest costs grew as our average borrowings
increased to support working capital needs. We incur interest
expense primarily from our long-term subordinated debt which
carries a fixed rate and to a lesser extent on periodic credit
line borrowings to meet working capital needs and support
various letters of credit.
Other (Expense) Income. Other income was
$1.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2003
compared to other expense of $10 million for the same
period in 2002. Other (expense) income in both years
includes a gain on disposal of certain non-core assets and
investments. During the year 2002, the gain was offset by a
$13.2 million valuation allowance to reduce the carrying
value of certain assets held for sale, long lived assets in use
and investments. During 2003, the gain was slightly offset by
the settlement of litigation of approximately $2.3 million
and the write-off of certain non-core assets and investments.
Income Taxes. For 2003 and 2002, our effective tax rates
were approximately (25%) and (35%), respectively. Our balance
sheet as of December 31, 2003, includes a net deferred tax
asset of $55.3 million of which $41.9 million relates
to federal taxes and the remainder to various state and foreign
taxes, net of valuation allowance. The realization of this net
deferred tax asset is dependent upon our ability to generate
future pretax income. We anticipate that we will generate
sufficient pretax income in the future to realize the portion of
our net deferred tax asset relating to federal income taxes. In
making this assessment, we have considered our projected future
pretax income based upon a prudent and feasible tax planning
strategy available to us involving the sale of one of our
operations. However, this tax planning strategy does not appear
viable for the purpose of realizing all of the various state
income tax components of our net deferred tax asset.
Accordingly, we recorded an addition to our valuation allowance
of $3.4 million in 2003 to reduce certain of our net
deferred state tax assets at December 31, 2003, to their
estimated net realizable value of $55.3 million. We also
recorded a valuation provision for state deferred taxes in 2002.
However, this 2002 provision was less material to our overall
deferred benefit in 2002. The primary reason for the difference
in our effective tax rate from 2002 to 2003 was the effect of
non-US operations; specifically losses from our operations in
Mexico and Brazil for which we recorded no tax benefit.
Deferred tax assets, net in 2003 increased to $55.3 million
from $46.6 million. The increase in deferred tax assets,
net was due to an increase in deferred tax assets of
$6.8 million and a reduction in deferred tax liabilities of
$1.8 million. The increase in deferred tax assets was
primarily related to our net operating loss carryforwards of
$23.6 million as a result of our net loss in 2003, offset
by a decrease in deferred tax assets relating to goodwill of
$12.4 million and an increase in the valuation allowance of
$3.4 million for state tax assets. The reduction in
deferred tax liabilities was primarily due to an increase in
deferred tax liabilities for property and equipment of
$4 million offset by a decrease in deferred tax liabilities
for other temporary differences of $4.3 million.
Discontinued Operations. In the year ended
December 31, 2004, we ceased performing contractual
services for customers in Brazil, abandoned all assets of our
Brazil subsidiary and made a determination to exit the Brazil
market. The abandoned Brazil subsidiary has been classified as a
discontinued operation. The results of operations for the years
ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 have been reclassified to
loss from discontinued operations. The net (loss) income for the
Brazil subsidiary was $(21.8) million and $1.2 million
for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002,
respectively. The net loss in 2003 was due to a number of labor
claims that were brought by ex-employees against our Brazil
operations in 2003. We recorded $9.8 million of expense
related to employment claims filed in Brazil in the year ended
December 31, 2003 which also resulted in increased legal
fees. In addition, we reserved $4.1 million in receivable
balances due to the uncertainty of collection in 2003. In the
year ended December 31, 2004, we
40
also ceased performing services and committed to sell our
network services operations and exit this service market. These
operations have been classified as a discontinued operation. The
results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2003
and 2002 have been reclassified to loss from discontinued
operations. The net loss for the network services operations was
$6.0 million and $17.9 million for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The net loss in
2002 included $13.1 million of a one-time, non-cash charge
to reduce the carrying value of goodwill related to the
cumulative effect of an accounting change upon adoption of
SFAS No. 142.
Financial Condition, Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our primary sources of liquidity are cash flows from continuing
operations, borrowings under our credit facility, and proceeds
from sales of assets and investments. We expect to continue to
sell older vehicles and equipment as we upgrade with new
equipment. We expect to continue to obtain proceeds from these
sales in excess of $1.0 million per quarter depending upon
market conditions. From time to time, we engage in a review and
analysis of our performance to our key strategic objectives. In
connection with this process, we consider activities including
sale or divestitures of portions of our assets, operations, real
estate or other properties. Any actions taken may impact our
liquidity. Our primary liquidity needs are for working capital,
capital expenditures, insurance collateral in the form of cash
and letters of credit and debt service. Interest payments of
approximately $7.6 million are due each February and August
under our 7.75% senior subordinated notes. In addition to
ordinary course working capital requirements, we will continue
to spend at least $10.0 to $15.0 million per year on
capital expenditures in order to keep our equipment new and in
good condition. We also expect our annual lease payments to
increase as we place greater reliance on operating leases to
meet our equipment needs. Since December 31, 2004, lease
commitments over a five-year period have increased approximately
$22.0 million.
In connection with the 2005 insurance program, we also have paid
$13.5 million to our insurance carrier for cash collateral
through September 30, 2005. We paid an additional
$4.5 million of cash collateral in October 2005. We may be
expected to continue to increase our cash collateral in the
future.
In 2004, we purchased a 49% interest in a limited liability
company from a third party. The purchase price for this
investment was an initial amount of $3.7 million which was
paid in four quarterly installments of $925,000. Beginning in
the first quarter of 2006, eight additional contingent quarterly
payments are expected to be made to the third party from which
the interest was purchased. The contingent payments will be up
to a maximum of $1.3 million per quarter based on the level
of unit sales and profitability of the limited liability company
in specified preceding quarters. The payment due on
January 10, 2006 will be of $925,000.
We need working capital to support seasonal variations in our
business, primarily due to the impact of weather conditions on
external construction and maintenance work, including storm
restoration work, and the corresponding spending by our clients
on their annual capital expenditure budgets. Our business is
typically slower in the first and fourth quarters of each
calendar year and stronger in the second and third quarters. We
generally experience seasonal working capital needs from
approximately April through September to support growth in
unbilled revenue and accounts receivable, and to a lesser
extent, inventory. Our billing terms are generally net 30 to
60 days, although some contracts allow our clients to
retain a portion (from 2% to 15%) of the contract amount until
the contract is completed to their satisfaction. We maintain
inventory to meet the material requirements of some of our
contracts. Some of our clients pay us in advance for a portion
of the materials we purchase for their projects, or allow us to
pre-bill them for materials purchases up to a specified amount.
Our vendors generally offer us terms ranging from 30 to
90 days. Our agreements with subcontractors usually contain
a pay-when-paid provision, whereby our payments to
subcontractors are made after we are paid by our clients.
We anticipate that funds generated from continuing operations,
together with borrowings under our credit facility, and proceeds
from sales of assets and investments will be sufficient to meet
our working
41
capital requirements, anticipated capital expenditures,
insurance collateral requirements, equity investment
obligations, letters of credit and debt service obligations for
at least the next twelve months.
As of September 30, 2005, we had $132.0 million in
working capital compared to $134.5 million as of
December 31, 2004. The decrease in working capital was due
to a decrease in cash related to the payment of
$13.5 million cash collateral to our insurance carrier in
the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and payments of
$2.6 million in deferred financing costs related to the
credit facility amendment in May 2005 of which a small portion
is classified as a current asset. Cash and cash equivalents
decreased from $19.5 million at December 31, 2004 to
$2.9 million at September 30, 2005 based on above
working capital decreases and due to the subordinated debentures
interest payment of $7.6 million made in August 2005.
Net cash used in operating activities of continuing operations
was $17.3 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2004. The net cash used in operating
activities of continuing operations in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 was primarily related to timing of cash
collections from customers and insurance cash collateral
payments of $13.5 million offset by the net loss from
continuing operations and timing of cash payments to vendors.
The net cash used in operating activities of continuing
operations in the nine months ended September 30, 2004 was
primarily related to the net loss of continuing operations,
purchases of inventory and timing of cash collections from
customers offset by timing of cash payments to vendors.
Net cash used in investing activities of continuing operations
was $2.1 million and $2.2 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Net cash
used in investing activities of continuing operations in the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 primarily related to
capital expenditures in the amount of $5.1 million and
payments related to our equity investment in the amount of
$3.4 million offset by $5.9 million in net proceeds
from sales of assets. Net cash used in investing activities of
continuing operations in the nine months ended
September 30, 2004 primarily related to capital
expenditures in the amount of $8.0 million offset by
$6.6 million in net proceeds from sales of assets.
Net cash provided by financing activities of continuing
operations was $2.3 million and $4.3 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Net cash provided by financing activities of
continuing operations in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 was primarily related to proceeds from
the issuance of common stock pursuant to stock option exercises
in the amount of $2.5 million. Net cash provided by
financing activities of continuing operations in the nine months
ended September 30, 2004 was due to proceeds of borrowings
of $3.5 million and proceeds from the issuance of common
stock of $1.1 million.
We have a secured revolving credit facility for our operations
which was amended and restated on May 10, 2005 increasing
the maximum amount of availability from $125 million to
$150 million subject to reserves of $5.0 million, and
other adjustments and restrictions. The costs related to this
amendment were $2.6 million which are being amortized over
the life of the credit facility. The credit facility expires on
May 10, 2010. These deferred financing costs are included
in prepaid expenses and other current assets and other assets in
the condensed unaudited consolidated balance sheet.
The amount that we can borrow at any given time is based upon a
formula that takes into account, among other things, eligible
billed and unbilled accounts receivable and equipment which can
result in borrowing availability of less than the full amount of
the credit facility. As of September 30, 2005 and
December 31, 2004, net availability under the credit
facility totaled $46.9 million and $25.5 million,
respectively, net of outstanding standby letters of credit
aggregating $66.5 million and $66.8 million in each
period, respectively. At September 30, 2005,
$63.4 million of the outstanding letters of credit are
issued to support our casualty and medical insurance
requirements or surety requirements. These letters of credit
mature at various dates through August 2006 and most have
automatic renewal provisions subject to prior notice of
cancellation. We had no outstanding draws under the credit
facility at September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004.
The credit facility is collateralized by a first priority
security interest in substantially all of our assets and a
pledge of the stock of certain of the operating subsidiaries.
All wholly-owned subsidiaries collateralize the facility.
Interest under the credit facility accrues at rates based, at
our option,
42
on the agent banks base rate plus a margin of between
0.25% and 1.25% or its LIBOR rate (as defined in the credit
facility) plus a margin of between 1.75% and 2.75%, depending on
certain financial thresholds. The credit facility includes an
unused facility fee of 0.375%, which may be adjusted to as low
as 0.250%.
The credit facility contains customary events of default
(including cross-default) provisions and covenants related to
our operations that prohibit, among other things, making
investments and acquisitions in excess of specified amounts,
incurring additional indebtedness in excess of specified
amounts, paying cash dividends, making other distributions in
excess of specified amounts, making capital expenditures in
excess of specified amounts, creating liens against our assets,
prepaying other indebtedness including our 7.75% senior
subordinated notes, and engaging in certain mergers or
combinations without the prior written consent of the lenders.
In addition, any deterioration in the quality of billed and
unbilled receivables, reduction in the value of our equipment or
an increase in our lease expense related to real estate would
reduce availability under the credit facility.
We are required to be in compliance with a minimum fixed charge
coverage ratio measured on a monthly basis and certain events
are triggered if the net availability under the credit facility
is under $20.0 million at any given day. Our operations are
required to comply with this fixed charge coverage ratio if
these conditions of availability are not met. The credit
facility further provides that once net availability is greater
than or equal to $20.0 million for 90 consecutive days, the
fixed charge ratio will no longer apply. The fixed charge
coverage ratio is generally defined to mean the ratio of our net
income before interest expense, income tax expense, depreciation
expense, and amortization expense minus net capital expenditures
and cash taxes paid to the sum of all interest expense plus
current maturities of debt for the period. The financial
covenant was not applicable as of September 30, 2005,
because net availability under the credit facility was
$46.9 million as of September 30, 2005 and net
availability did not reduce below $20.0 million at any
given day during the period.
Based upon our projections for 2005 and 2006, we believe we will
be in compliance with the credit facilitys terms and
conditions and the minimum availability requirements in 2005 and
2006. We are dependent upon borrowings and letters of credit
under this credit facility to fund operations. Should we be
unable to comply with the terms and conditions of the credit
facility, we would be required to obtain further modifications
to the credit facility or another source of financing to
continue to operate. We may not be able to achieve our 2005 and
2006 projections and thus may not be in compliance with the
credit facilitys minimum net availability requirements and
minimum fixed charge ratio in the future.
Our variable rate credit facility exposes us to interest rate
risk. However, we had no borrowings outstanding under the credit
facility at September 30, 2005.
As of September 30, 2005, we had outstanding
$195.9 million, 7.75% senior subordinated notes due in
February 2008, with interest due semi-annually. The notes also
contain default (including cross-default) provisions and
covenants restricting many of the same transactions as under our
credit facility. The indenture which governs our
7.75% senior subordinated notes allows us to incur the
following additional indebtedness: under our credit facility up
to $150 million, renewals to existing debt permitted under
the indenture plus an additional $25 million of
indebtedness. The indenture prohibits incurring further
indebtedness unless our fixed charge coverage ratio is at least
2:1 for the four most recently ended fiscal quarters determined
on a pro forma basis as if that additional debt has been
incurred at the beginning of the period. The definition of our
fixed charge coverage ratio under the indenture is essentially
equivalent to that under our credit agreement.
Our credit standing and senior subordinated notes are rated by
various agencies. In August 2004, Standard &
Poors withdrew its rating of our corporate credit, senior
secured and subordinated debt. In its press release,
Standard & Poors stated that the withdrawal was
due to insufficient financial information available to support a
ratings opinion due to the delays in our
Form 10-Q filings
in 2004. This withdrawal has not had an impact on our liquidity
or ability to obtain necessary financing.
In 2003, we performed work on undocumented or unapproved change
orders or other matters which are being disputed by our
customers. We did not recognize this work as revenue in 2003 or
in the year
43
ended December 31, 2004. However, expenses for the work
associated with these change orders and other matters were
included in costs of revenue in 2003 resulting in a 45% decline
in our 2003 gross and operating margins. This has also affected
our liquidity since we still have not been paid for the work
performed. We have commenced legal action against some of our
customers in connection with work performed in 2003. In
addition, we have made claims for amounts in excess of the
agreed contract price (or amounts not included in the original
contract price) that we seek to collect from customers for
delays we believe were caused by the customer, errors in
specifications and designs, change orders in dispute or
unapproved as to both scope and price, or other causes of
unanticipated additional costs. Our customers may counterclaim
against us for contract damages, liquidated damages and/or
indemnification. If the customers can establish a contract
entitlement, that entitlement could reduce any amounts otherwise
due us from the customer (including any remaining outstanding
accounts receivable from the customer under the contract price)
and/or create liabilities for us. Should we be successful in
collecting some of these claims we would recognize them as
revenue when received. When revenue is recognized the margins
will increase during such period of recognition since the costs
have already been recorded. However, we may not be successful in
collecting any of these claims.
The following table sets forth our contractual commitments as of
September 30, 2005 and our anticipated payment obligations
during the periods indicated below (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than | |
|
|
|
|
|
More Than | |
Contractual Obligations(1) |
|
Total | |
|
1 Year | |
|
1-3 Years | |
|
3-5 Years | |
|
5 Years | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Senior subordinated notes
|
|
$ |
195,936 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
195,936 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Notes payable for equipment
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
Equity investment
|
|
|
925 |
|
|
|
925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital leases
|
|
|
944 |
|
|
|
494 |
|
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
96,113 |
|
|
|
37,341 |
|
|
|
45,680 |
|
|
|
9,650 |
|
|
|
3,442 |
|
Executive life insurance
|
|
|
19,455 |
|
|
|
2,663 |
|
|
|
2,419 |
|
|
|
2,269 |
|
|
|
12,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
313,675 |
|
|
$ |
41,451 |
|
|
$ |
48,685 |
|
|
$ |
207,993 |
|
|
$ |
15,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Amounts do not include interest payments. We estimate that we
will pay an additional $15.2 million in each of the years
between 2006 and 2008 in interest payments for our senior
subordinated notes and revolving credit facilities |
|
|
|
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements |
We provide letters of credit to secure our obligations primarily
related to our insurance policies and surety bonds. We also
provide letters of credit related to legal matters. Total
letters of credit reduce our available borrowings under our
credit facility and amounted to $66.5 million at
September 30, 2005 of which $63.4 million were related
to insurance matters and surety bond requirements.
Some of our contracts require us to provide performance and
payment bonds, which we obtain from a surety company. If we were
unable to meet our contractual obligations to a customer and the
surety paid our customer the amount due under the bond, the
surety would seek reimbursement of such payment from us. At
September 30, 2005, performance and payment bonds
outstanding on our behalf totaled $104.1 million related to
projects in process.
Seasonality
Our operations are historically slower in the first and fourth
quarters of the year. This seasonality is primarily the result
of customer budgetary constraints and preferences and the effect
of winter weather on our external activities. Some of our
customers tend to complete budgeted capital expenditures before
the end of the year and defer additional expenditures until the
following budget year.
44
Impact of Inflation
The primary inflationary factor affecting our operations is
increased labor costs. We did not experience significant
increases in labor costs in 2003, 2004 or 2005 to date. To a
lesser extent, we are also affected by changes in fuel costs
which increased significantly in 2004 and in 2005.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151,
Inventory Costs, an amendment of ARB No. 43,
Chapter 4 or SFAS 151. SFAS 151 clarifies
the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense,
freight, handling costs, and wasted materials (spoilage). In
addition, this statement requires that allocation of fixed
production overheads to the costs of conversion be based on
normal capacity of production facilities. SFAS 151 is
effective for the first annual reporting period beginning after
June 15, 2005. The adoption of SFAS 151 is not
expected to have a material impact on our results of operations
or financial condition.
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 123R,
Share-Based Payment, a revision of SFAS 123 or
SFAS 123R. In March 2005, the SEC issued Staff
Bulletin No. 107 (SAB 107) regarding its
interpretation of SFAS 123R. The standard requires
companies to expense on the grant-date the fair value of stock
options and other equity-based compensation issued to employees.
In accordance with the revised statement, we will be required to
recognize the expense attributable to stock options granted or
vested in financial statement periods subsequent to
December 31, 2005. We are currently evaluating the impact
of the adoption of FAS 123R on our results of operations.
In connection with evaluating the impact of FAS 123R, we
are considering the potential use of different valuation methods
to determine the fair value of share-based compensation and
reviewing all assumptions used in those valuation methods. We
believe the adoption of FAS 123R will have a material
negative impact on our profitability, regardless of the
valuation method used.
In March 2005, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 47,
Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement
Obligations or FIN 47, that requires an entity to
recognize a liability for a conditional asset retirement
obligation when incurred if the liability can be reasonably
estimated. FIN 47 clarifies that the term Conditional Asset
Retirement Obligation refers to a legal obligation to perform an
asset retirement activity in which the timing and/or method of
settlement are conditional on a future event that may or may not
be within the control of the entity. FIN 47 also clarifies
when an entity would have sufficient information to reasonably
estimate the fair value of an asset retirement obligation. We do
not expect FIN 47 to have a material impact on our results
of operations.
In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, Accounting
Changes and Error Corrections or SFAS 154, which supersedes
APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting Changes and
SFAS No. 3, Reporting Accounting Changes in Interim
Financial Statements. SFAS 154 changes the requirements for
the accounting for and reporting of changes in accounting
principle. The statement requires the retroactive application to
prior periods financial statements of changes in
accounting principles, unless it is impracticable to determine
either the period specific effects or the cumulative effect of
the change. SFAS 154 does not change the guidance for
reporting the correction of an error in previously issued
financial statements or the change in an accounting estimate.
SFAS 154 is effective for accounting changes and
corrections or errors made in fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2005. We do not expect the adoption of
SFAS 154 to have a material impact on our consolidated
results of operations or financial condition.
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting
and Financial Disclosure
On September 2, 2004, we filed a Current Report on
Form 8-K, as
amended on September 24, 2004, reporting that on
August 30, 2004, Ernst & Young LLP our independent
registered public accountants would resign as our auditors
following the completion of services related to the audit of
MasTec North America, Inc. The
Form 8-K reported
that there were no disagreements between us and Ernst and Young
involving any matters of accounting principles or practices,
financial statement disclosure or auditing scope
45
or procedure. On September 24, 2004 our Audit Committee
engaged BDO Seidman, LLP to serve as our independent registered
public accountants for the 2004 fiscal year.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
We are exposed to market risk related to changes in interest
rates and fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates.
Interest Rate Risk
Less than 1% of our outstanding debt at September 30, 2005
was subject to variable interest rates. The remainder of our
debt has fixed interest rates. Our fixed interest rate debt
includes $196.0 million (face value) in senior subordinated
notes. The carrying value and market value of our debt at
September 30, 2005 was $195.9 million. Based upon debt
balances outstanding at September 30, 2005, a
100 basis point or 1% addition to our weighted average
effective interest rate for variable rate debt would increase
our interest expense by less than $200,000 on an annual basis.
Foreign Currency Risk
We have an investment in a subsidiary in Canada and sell our
services into this foreign market.
Our foreign net asset/exposures, or assets denominated in
foreign currency less liabilities denominated in foreign
currency, for Canada at September 30, 2005 of
U.S. dollar equivalents was $2.8 million and
$2.7 million at December 31, 2004.
Our Canada subsidiary sells services and pays for products and
services in Canadian dollars. A decrease in the Canadian foreign
currency relative to the U.S. dollar could adversely impact
our margins. An assumed 10% depreciation of these foreign
currencies relative to the U.S. dollar over the course of
2004 and over the nine months ended September 30, 2005
(i.e., in addition to actual exchange experience) would have
resulted in a translation reduction of our revenue by
$1.2 million and $0.7 million, respectively.
As the assets, liabilities and transactions of our Canada
subsidiary are denominated in Canadian dollars, the results and
financial condition are subject to translation adjustments upon
their conversion into U.S. dollars for our financial
reporting purposes. A 10% decline in this foreign currency
relative to the U.S. dollar over the course of 2004 and
over the nine months ended September 30, 2005 (i.e., in
addition to actual exchange experience) would have reduced our
Canadian currency translated operating loss from
$3.3 million to $3.0 million and $1.4 million to
$1.3 million, respectively.
See Note 1 to our audited consolidated financial statements
included in this prospectus for further disclosures about market
risk.
46
PRO FORMA INFORMATION ON CONTINUING OPERATIONS
The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial
information of MasTec is derived from MasTecs historical
consolidated financial statements and should be read in
conjunction with the audited financial statements and notes
thereto appearing in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2004 and our
Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 30, 2005. The accompanying unaudited
pro forma condensed consolidated statements of operations for
the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 are presented as if
MasTec had accounted for the state Department of Transportation
related projects and assets as discontinued operations as of
January 1, 2002. The unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated balance sheet is presented as if the projects and
assets were a discontinued operation as of September 30,
2005. The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated financial
information is preliminary and may be subject to change based on
terms of an actual sale.
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated financial
information has been presented for informational purposes only
and is not indicative of any future results of operations or the
results that might have occurred if the discontinued operations
were actually effective on the indicated dates. The unaudited
pro forma condensed consolidated financial statements are based
on our managements estimate of the effects of the
discontinued operations. Pro forma adjustments are based on
currently available information, historical results and certain
assumptions that our management believes are reasonable and
described in the accompanying notes.
47
MASTEC, INC.
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
September 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
Adjustments | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Assets |
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
2,894 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,894 |
|
|
Accounts receivable, unbilled revenue and retainage, net
|
|
|
228,052 |
|
|
|
(44,453 |
)(a) |
|
|
183,599 |
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
42,649 |
|
|
|
(24,669 |
)(a) |
|
|
17,980 |
|
|
Income tax refund receivable
|
|
|
1,511 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,511 |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
42,689 |
|
|
|
(2,423 |
)(a) |
|
|
40,266 |
|
|
Current assets held for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71,545 |
(a) |
|
|
71,545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
317,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
317,795 |
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
56,451 |
|
|
|
(4,581 |
)(b) |
|
|
51,870 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
138,640 |
|
|
|
(11,497 |
)(b) |
|
|
127,143 |
|
Deferred taxes, net
|
|
|
52,658 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,658 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
43,845 |
|
|
|
(3,699 |
)(b) |
|
|
40,146 |
|
Long-term assets held for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,777 |
(b) |
|
|
19,777 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
609,389 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
609,389 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity |
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
$ |
112 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
112 |
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
|
125,790 |
|
|
|
(32,649 |
)(c) |
|
|
93,141 |
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
59,917 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,917 |
|
|
Current liabilities related to assets held for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,649 |
(c) |
|
|
32,649 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
185,819 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
185,819 |
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
37,039 |
|
|
|
(929 |
)(c) |
|
|
36,110 |
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
196,126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196,126 |
|
Long-term liabilities related to assets held for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
929 |
(c) |
|
|
929 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
418,984 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
418,984 |
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $1.00 par value; authorized
shares5,000,000; issued and outstanding sharesnone
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.10 par value authorized
shares100,000,000 issued and outstanding
shares49,142,346 as of September 30, 2005
|
|
|
4,914 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,914 |
|
Capital surplus
|
|
|
355,469 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
355,469 |
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(170,433 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(170,433 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
190,405 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
190,405 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity
|
|
$ |
609,389 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
609,389 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated financial statements
48
MASTEC, INC.
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
Adjustments | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands except per share data) | |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
697,427 |
|
|
$ |
(72,822 |
)(d) |
|
$ |
624,605 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation
|
|
|
621,560 |
|
|
|
(78,176 |
)(d) |
|
|
543,384 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
13,950 |
|
|
|
(1,306 |
)(d) |
|
|
12,644 |
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
51,470 |
|
|
|
(5,594 |
)(d) |
|
|
45,876 |
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
14,412 |
|
|
|
(66 |
)(d) |
|
|
14,346 |
|
Other income, net
|
|
|
3,402 |
|
|
|
(293 |
)(d) |
|
|
3,109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations before minority interest
|
|
|
(563 |
) |
|
|
12,027 |
|
|
|
11,464 |
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
(995 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(995 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(1,558 |
) |
|
$ |
12,027 |
|
|
$ |
10,469 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
48,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (loss) income per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
48,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,674 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted (loss) income per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated financial statements
49
MASTEC, INC.
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
Adjustments | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands except per share data) | |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
$ |
(106,611 |
)(d) |
|
$ |
807,184 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation
|
|
|
828,743 |
|
|
|
(109,461 |
)(d) |
|
|
719,282 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
17,099 |
|
|
|
(2,174 |
)(d) |
|
|
14,925 |
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
74,550 |
|
|
|
(3,040 |
)(d) |
|
|
71,510 |
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
19,478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,478 |
|
Other income, net
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
410 |
(d) |
|
|
601 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before minority interest
|
|
|
(25,884 |
) |
|
|
8,474 |
|
|
|
(17,410 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
(333 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(333 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(26,217 |
) |
|
$ |
8,474 |
|
|
$ |
(17,743 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
48,382 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,382 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.54 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.37 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated financial statements
50
MASTEC, INC.
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
Adjustments | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands except per share data) | |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
(115,268 |
)(d) |
|
$ |
712,212 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation
|
|
|
744,587 |
|
|
|
(115,297 |
)(d) |
|
|
629,290 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
27,586 |
|
|
|
(2,289 |
)(d) |
|
|
25,297 |
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
70,112 |
|
|
|
(3,625 |
)(d) |
|
|
66,487 |
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
19,180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,180 |
|
Other income, net
|
|
|
1,242 |
|
|
|
(160 |
)(d) |
|
|
1,082 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
(32,743 |
) |
|
|
5,783 |
|
|
|
(26,960 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
8,303 |
|
|
|
(2,134 |
)(d) |
|
|
6,169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(24,440 |
) |
|
$ |
3,649 |
|
|
$ |
(20,791 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
48,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.51 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.43 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated financial statements
51
MASTEC, INC.
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
|
|
Historical | |
|
Adjustments | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands except per share data) | |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
(109,482 |
)(d) |
|
$ |
656,985 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation
|
|
|
683,855 |
|
|
|
(97,001 |
)(d) |
|
|
586,854 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
33,760 |
|
|
|
(3,184 |
)(d) |
|
|
30,576 |
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
107,446 |
|
|
|
(3,060 |
)(d) |
|
|
104,386 |
|
Goodwill impairment
|
|
|
79,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79,710 |
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
18,306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,306 |
|
Other expense, net
|
|
|
9,973 |
|
|
|
(150 |
)(d) |
|
|
9,823 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
(166,583 |
) |
|
|
(6,087 |
) |
|
|
(172,670 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
59,345 |
|
|
|
2,347 |
(d) |
|
|
61,692 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(107,238 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,740 |
) |
|
$ |
(110,978 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
47,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(2.24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(2.32 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated financial statements
52
NOTES TO UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Notes to Unaudited Pro Forma Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheets:
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated balance sheet was
prepared assuming the state Department of Transportation related
projects and assets were accounted for as discontinued
operations as of September 30, 2005 and included Pro
Forma Adjustments as follows:
|
|
|
(a) Adjustments to the unaudited condensed consolidated
balance sheet include the reclassification of current assets to
current assets held for sale of $71.5 million and are
comprised of the following (in thousands): |
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
$ |
44,453 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
24,669 |
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
2,423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
71,545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(b) Adjustments to the unaudited condensed consolidated
balance sheet include the reclassification of long-term assets
to long-term assets held for sale of $19.8 million and are
comprised of the following (in thousands): |
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment
|
|
$ |
4,581 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
11,497 |
|
Other long-term assets
|
|
|
3,699 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
19,777 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(c) Adjustments to the unaudited condensed consolidated
balance sheet include the reclassification of accounts payable
and accrued expenses of $32.6 million to current
liabilities related to assets held for sale and the
reclassification of long-term debt of $929,000 to long-term
liabilities related to assets held for sale. |
Notes to Unaudited Pro Forma Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations:
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated statements of
operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 have been
presented as if MasTec had accounted for the state Department of
Transportation related assets and projects as discontinued
operations as of January 1, 2002.
These statements include Pro Forma Adjustments as
follows:
|
|
|
(d) Adjustments to the unaudited condensed consolidated
statements of operations for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002 reflect only the direct costs of the
discontinued operations of the state Department of
Transportation related projects and assets as if MasTec had
accounted for the state Department of Transportation related
assets and projects as discontinued operations as of
January 1, 2002. |
At this time we have not completed our determination of the fair
value of the assets and do not have an estimate of the
write-down or other charges associated with the sale of the net
assets. The pro forma adjustments do not give effect to any
write down of the fair value of the net assets as of
September 30, 2005.
53
BUSINESS
Overview
We are a leading specialty contractor operating throughout the
United States and in Canada and across a range of industries.
Our core activities are the building, installation, maintenance
and upgrade of communications and utility infrastructure and
transportation systems. Our primary customers are in the
following industries: communications (including satellite
television and cable television), utilities and government. We
provide similar infrastructure services across the industries we
serve. Our customers rely on us to build and maintain
infrastructure and networks that are critical to their delivery
of voice, video and data communications, electricity and
transportation systems.
We, or our predecessor companies, have been in business for over
70 years. We offer all of our services under the
MasTec®
service mark and operate through a network of approximately 220
locations and 7,700 employees as of December 31, 2005. We
believe that we currently are the second largest, publicly held,
specialty infrastructure provider to communications companies
that offer voice, video and data services and the fourth
largest, publicly held, provider of infrastructure services to
the electric utility industry. In 2005, we performed projects in
the shaded states as indicated in the map below:
Our customers include some of the largest communication and
utility companies in the United States, including DirecTV,
Verizon Communications, BellSouth, Sprint Nextel and Florida
Power and Light. For fiscal year 2004 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, 63.7% and 64.6%, respectively, of our
revenues were from our largest 10 customers. We have
longstanding relationships with many customers and often provide
services under multi-year master service agreements and other
54
service agreements. For fiscal year 2004 and the nine months
ended September 30, 2005, 69.7% and 64.8%, respectively, of
our revenues were derived under multi-year master service
agreements and other service agreements.
For fiscal year 2004 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, we had revenue of $913.8 million
and $697.4 million, respectively. For fiscal year 2004,
65.0%, 19.2% and 15.8% of our revenues were from customers in
the communications, utilities and government industries,
respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2005,
63.0%, 21.2% and 15.8% of our revenues were from our
communications, utilities and government customers,
respectively. Our 18-month backlog at September 30, 2005
was $1.1 billion and we expect to realize approximately
20.8% of this backlog in the fourth quarter of 2005.
Industry Trends
Our industry is comprised of national, regional and local
companies that provide outsourced infrastructure services to
companies in the communications, utilities and government
industries. We estimate that the total amount of annual
outsourced infrastructure spending in markets that we serve was
approximately $31 billion in 2004.
We believe the following industry trends impact demand for our
services:
|
|
|
Demand for Voice, Video and Data Services. Demand
for faster and more robust voice, video and data services has
increased significantly with the proliferation of the internet,
broadband and advanced video services. To serve this developing
market, voice, video and data service providers are upgrading
the performance of their networks or deploying new networks.
Investment is facilitated by declining equipment costs and
expanded capabilities of network equipment. In addition, the
service offerings of our customers are converging as telephone
and cable providers increasingly seek to deploy networks that
allow them to provide bundled voice, video and data services to
their customers. Verizon Communications, BellSouth and SBC
Communications have each announced initiatives to upgrade their
networks from copper line to fiber optic line in order to
enhance their ability to provide full bundled service offerings.
Cable companies continue to upgrade their systems to provide for
enhanced broadband services, including voice over internet
protocol as well as improved video offerings, including digital
television, high definition television, video on demand and
digital video recording. Satellite television subscriptions and
installations have grown substantially over the last five years
as the industry has gained acceptance in part through offering
attractive programming such as NFL Sunday Ticket, as well as
high definition television and digital video recorder
capabilities. According to a 2005 study by J.D. Power and
Associates, the percentage of U.S. households with
telephones that subscribe to satellite service has grown from
12% in 2000 to 27% in 2005. |
|
|
Increased Outsourcing of Network Infrastructure Installation
and Maintenance. We provide specialized services that
are labor and equipment intensive. According to a study by
management consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton described in an
article entitled Outsourcing Trends in the North American
Telecommunications Markets, more than 75% of
telecommunications executives consider outsourcing an important
component of their business that allows them to better respond
to market challenges, and network installation and maintenance
are among functions most likely to be outsourced. We believe
that communications companies view outsourcing as an opportunity
to reduce expenses, optimize expenditures and stay competitive. |
|
|
Inadequacy of Existing Electric Power Transmission and
Distribution Networks. The United States electric
transmission and distribution infrastructure requires
significant ongoing maintenance, upgrades and extensions to
manage powerline congestion, avoid delivery failures and connect
distribution lines to new end users. According to a 2004 Edison
Electric Institute report annual transmission and distribution
spending in the U.S. has been between $12 and
$17 billion annually since 1980. Despite this significant
spending since 1980, the pace of transmission investment has |
55
|
|
|
lagged behind total electricity generation. Such underinvestment
combined with ever-increasing load demand contributed to the
rolling blackouts in California in 2001 as well as the August
2003 blackout, which left 50 million people in the midwest
and northeast United States and Canada without electricity. As a
result, we believe that that transmission and distribution
spending will continue and likely rise in the near future in
order to meet the increasing needs of customers. |
|
|
Increased Funding for Energy Projects. On
August 8, 2005, President Bush signed the Energy Policy Act
of 2005 into law. The law was passed to develop more reliable
supply chains and distribution channels for U.S. energy
resources. Among other things, the bill facilitates the siting,
construction and financing of more reliable electrical grid
components. As a result, we believe that transmission and
distribution spending will continue and likely rise in the near
future in order to meet the increasing needs of consumers and
businesses. |
|
|
Increased Funding for Highway Transportation
Projects. On August 10, 2005, President Bush
signed a six-year $244.1 billion transportation
reauthorization bill known as the Safe, Accountable, Flexible
and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users. The
new law funds federal highway, maintenance, bridge, safety and
congestion mitigation programs. Management estimates that up to
5 percent of this funding may be allocated to projects that
involve intelligent transportation systems. These projects
encompass traffic management solutions such as video
surveillance systems, variable message signs, radar detection
devices and traffic signal systems, combined with related
highway lighting, signage and construction services. |
Competitive Strengths
Our competitive strengths include:
|
|
|
|
National Capability and Brand. We, or our
predecessors, have been in business for over 70 years and
are one of the largest companies in our industry. Through our
network of approximately 220 locations and
7,700 employees as of December 31, 2005 across the
United States and in Canada, we offer comprehensive
infrastructure services to our customers. We believe our
experience, technical expertise and size are important to our
customers, which include some of the largest communications and
utility companies in the United States. Our size and national
capability allow us to allocate people, equipment and resources
when and where needed. We offer all of our services under the
MasTec service mark and maintain uniform performance standards
across projects, geographic areas and industries. |
|
|
|
Ability to Respond Quickly and Effectively. The
services we provide to the various industries we serve are
similar which allows us to utilize qualified personnel across
multiple industries. We are able to respond quickly and
effectively to industry changes and major weather events by
allocating our employees, fleet and other assets as and where
they are needed. For example, we were able to redeploy hundreds
of our employees and assets from several project teams to areas
impacted by Hurricane Katrina within days of the storm striking
Louisiana and Mississippi. |
|
|
Customer Base. Our customers include some of the
largest communication and utility companies in the United
States, including DirecTV, Verizon Communications, BellSouth,
Sprint Nextel and Florida Power and Light. These customers have
significant infrastructure needs and the financial resources
necessary to fund those needs. We provide services to many of
our significant customers under multi-year master service
agreements and other service agreements. |
|
|
Reputation for Reliable Customer Service and Technical
Expertise. We believe that over the years we have
established a reputation for quality customer service and
technical expertise. We are one of the largest private label
in-home installation and maintenance service providers for
DirecTV. A 2004 study described in an article entitled As
Satellite TV Penetration Grows, Overall Customer Satisfaction
among Satellite Subscribers Continues to Top Cable by J.D.
Power and Associates recognized DirecTV for achieving one of the
highest levels of customer satisfaction in |
56
|
|
|
its market. We believe that the training and performance of our
technicians contributed to DirecTVs high level of customer
satisfaction. We also believe our reputation for technical
expertise gives us an advantage in competing for new work. For
example, one of our communications customers has selected us as
one of their primary fiber to the home subcontractors. |
|
|
Experienced Management Team. Our management team,
which includes our chief executive officer, service group
presidents and financial officers, plays a significant role in
establishing and maintaining long-term relationships with our
customers, supporting the growth of our business and managing
the financial aspects of our operations. Our chief executive
officer, Austin J. Shanfelter, has over 24 years of
experience in the network infrastructure construction business
and is well-known in the industry. Our service group presidents
average 28 years of industry experience and have a
deep understanding of our customers and their requirements. Our
financial officers, including our service group chief financial
officers, average 22 years of experience and allow us
to operate our business effectively by reducing costs and
enhancing our control environment. |
Strategy
The key elements of our business strategy are as follows:
|
|
|
Capitalize on Favorable Industry Trends. Many of our
customers have increased spending on their network
infrastructure in order to enhance their ability to offer voice,
video and data services, deliver electric power or improve the
logistics of their transportation networks. In addition, many
companies are increasing outsourcing network installation and
maintenance work. We intend to use our national presence and
full range of services to capitalize on these trends to generate
additional revenue from existing and new customers. |
|
|
Operate More Efficiently. We have recently taken
action and instituted programs to improve our operating
efficiencies and working capital management, such as hiring
additional experienced operating and financial professionals at
the service group and corporate levels, requiring increased
accountability throughout our organization, expanding the use of
our Oracle management information systems throughout our
business, better managing customer contract bidding procedures
and increasing individual project profitability. We intend to
improve our operating effectiveness by allocating our resources
across multiple customers and projects which will continue to
increase our utilization rates. We intend to continue to capture
operating efficiencies and improve working capital management in
order to increase our operating margins and cash flows. |
|
|
Improve Our Financial Strength. With the proceeds of
this offering, we intend to reduce our debt and increase our
cash, which will significantly improve our financial condition.
We believe improvements to our financial condition will enhance
our credit rating and support our ability to reduce our
collateral for our surety bonds and insurance policies. |
|
|
Acquisitions, Strategic Alliances and
Divestitures. We intend to pursue selected acquisitions
and strategic alliances. We will focus on acquisitions and
alliances that allow us to expand our operations into targeted
geographic areas or allow us to expand our service offerings in
areas that require skill sets or equipment that we do not
currently maintain. Our strategy will include timely and
efficient integration to best fit into our internal control
environment. We may also consider sales or divestitures of
portions of our assets, operations, real estate or other
properties. |
Services
Our core services are building, installing, maintaining and
upgrading infrastructure for our communications, utility and
government customers. We provide each of these customers with
similar services that include:
Build. We build underground and overhead
distribution systems, such as trenches, tunnels, power lines and
pipelines, that are used by our customers in networks that
provide communications, power
57
delivery and traffic control. We believe our fleet of
approximately 12,000 vehicles and equipment as of
December 31, 2005 is among the largest in the United States
and Canada.
Install. We install buried and aerial fiber optic
cables, coaxial cables, copper lines, electrical distribution
systems, transmission systems and satellite dishes in a variety
of environments for our customers. In connection with our
installation work, we deploy and manage network connections that
involve our customers hardware, software and network
equipment.
Maintain and Upgrade. We offer
24-hours-a-day,
7-days-a-week,
365-days-a-year
maintenance and upgrade support to our customers. Our
comprehensive service offerings include the regular maintenance
of our customers distribution facilities and networks as
well as emergency services for accidents or storm damage. Our
upgrade work ranges from routine replacements and upgrades to
major network overhauls.
Customers
Our primary customers are in the communications, utilities and
government industries. We provide similar infrastructure
services across the industries we serve. For the nine months
ended September 30, 2005, 63.0%, 21.2% and 15.8% of our
revenues were from customers in the communications, utilities
and government industries, respectively.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2005, the
percentages of our revenues from our largest 10 customers were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
DirecTV
|
|
|
27.5 |
% |
Verizon Communications
|
|
|
10.4 |
% |
BellSouth
|
|
|
8.1 |
% |
Sprint
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
Florida Power & Light
|
|
|
3.7 |
% |
Progress Energy
|
|
|
2.5 |
% |
Oncor/ TXU
|
|
|
2.3 |
% |
Avaya
|
|
|
2.1 |
% |
Florida DOT
|
|
|
1.7 |
% |
Dominion Virginia Power
|
|
|
1.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
64.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
We have longstanding relationships with many customers and often
provide services under multi-year master service agreements and
other service agreements. For fiscal year 2004 and the nine
months ended September 30, 2005, 69.7% and 64.8%,
respectively, of our revenues were derived under master service
agreements and other service agreements. While our multi-year
master service agreements and other service agreements generally
do not guarantee a specific level of work and are generally
cancelable upon short notice, the agreements have historically
been an important contributor to our revenue and backlog.
We believe that our industry experience, technical expertise and
customer service are important to our being retained by large
communications and utility companies and governments. The
relationships developed between these customers and our senior
management and project management teams are also important to
our being retained.
Backlog
At September 30, 2005, our 18-month backlog was
approximately $1.1 billion. We expect to realize
approximately 20.8% of our backlog in the fourth quarter of
2005. Approximately 21.3% of our backlog
58
at September 30, 2005 was comprised of services to be
performed under project-specific contracts. The balance is our
estimate of work to be completed on existing master service and
other service agreements. See Risk Factors Amounts
included in our backlog may not result in actual revenue or
translate into profits.
Safety and Insurance/ Risk Management
We strive to instill safe work habits in our employees. We
require our employees to participate in internal training and
service programs relevant to their employment and to complete
any training programs required by law. We evaluate employees in
part based upon their safety records and the safety records of
the employees they supervise. We have established a company-wide
safety program to share best practices and to monitor and
improve compliance with safety procedures and regulations.
Our business involves heavy equipment and exposure to conditions
that can be dangerous. While we are committed to operating
safely and prudently, we are subject to claims by employees,
customers and third parties for property damage and personal
injuries that occur in connection with our work. See Risk
Factors Our business is subject to hazards that could
result in substantial liabilities and weaken our financial
condition.
We maintain insurance policies with respect to automobile
liability, general liability and workers compensation.
These policies cover the primary claims that are brought against
us in our business. Our policies are subject to per claim
deductibles of $2 million for workers compensation
and general liability and $3 million for automobile
liability. See Risk Factors We are self-insured
against many liabilities. We also have excess umbrella
coverages up to $100 million per claim and in the
aggregate. We also maintain an insurance policy with respect to
employee group health claims subject to per claim deductibles of
$300,000. We are required to periodically post letters of credit
and provide cash collateral to our insurance carriers and surety
provider. Such letters of credit amounted to $63.4 million
at September 30, 2005 and cash collateral posted amounted
to $19.3 million at September 30, 2005. See
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of OperationsCritical Accounting Policies and
EstimatesInsurance Reserves.
Suppliers, Materials and Working Capital
Under most of our contracts, our customers supply the necessary
materials and supplies and we are responsible for installation,
but not for material costs or material warranties. Under certain
of our contracts we acquire materials and supplies for our own
account from third-party providers. We are not dependent on any
one supplier for materials or supplies and have not experienced
any significant difficulty in obtaining an adequate supply of
materials and supplies.
We utilize independent contractors to assist on projects and to
help us manage work flow. Our independent contractors are
typically sole proprietorships or small business entities that
provide their own vehicles, tools and insurance coverage. We are
not dependent on any single independent contractor. See
Risk Factors We may choose, or be required, to pay
our subcontractors even if our customers do not pay, or delay
paying, us for the related services.
We need working capital to support seasonal variations in our
business, primarily due to the impact of weather conditions on
external construction and maintenance work, including storm
restoration work, and the corresponding spending by our clients
on their annual capital expenditure budgets. Our business is
typically slower in the first and fourth quarters of each
calendar year and stronger in the second and third quarters. We
generally experience seasonal working capital needs from
approximately April through September to support growth in
unbilled revenue and accounts receivable, and to a lesser
extent, inventory. Our billing terms are generally net 30 to
60 days, although some contracts allow our clients to
retain a portion (from 2% to 15%) of the contract amount until
the contract is completed to their satisfaction. We maintain
inventory to meet the material requirements of some of our
contracts.
59
Some of our clients pay us in advance for a portion of the
materials we purchase for their projects, or allow us to
pre-bill them for materials purchases up to a specified amount.
Competition
Our industry is highly competitive and highly fragmented. We
often compete with a number of companies in markets where we
operate, ranging from small local independent companies to large
national firms. The national or large regional firms that
compete with us include Dycom Industries, Emcor Group,
Henkles & McCoy, Infrasource Services, Pike Electric
and Quanta Services.
Relatively few significant barriers to entry exist in the
markets in which we operate and, as a result, any organization
that has adequate financial resources and access to technical
expertise may become a competitor. Some of our customers employ
personnel to perform infrastructure services of the type we
provide. We compete based upon our industry experience,
technical expertise, financial and operational resources,
nationwide presence, industry reputation and customer service.
While we believe our customers consider a number of factors when
selecting a service provider, most of their work is awarded
through a bid process. Consequently, price is often a principal
factor in determining which service provider is selected. See
Risk Factors Our industry is highly competitive
which may reduce our market share and harm our financial
performance.
Regulation
We are subject to state and federal laws that apply to
businesses generally, including laws and regulations related to
labor relations, worker safety and environmental protection.
While many of our customers operate in regulated industries (for
example, utilities regulated by the public service commission or
broadband companies regulated by franchise agreements with
various municipalities), we are not generally subject to such
regulation and oversight.
As a contractor, our operations are subject to various laws,
including:
|
|
|
|
|
regulations related to vehicle registrations, including those of
state and the United States Departments of Transportation; |
|
|
|
regulations related to worker safety and health, including those
established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; |
|
|
|
contractor licensing requirements; |
|
|
|
building and electrical codes; and |
|
|
|
permitting and inspection requirements. |
We are also subject to various environmental laws. Our failure
to comply with environmental laws could result in significant
liabilities. For example,
|
|
|
Some of the work we perform is in underground environments. If
the field location maps supplied to us are not accurate, or if
objects are present in the soil that are not indicated on the
field location maps, our underground work could strike objects
in the soil containing pollutants and result in a rupture and
discharge of pollutants. In such a case, we may be liable for
fines and damages. |
|
|
We own and lease several facilities at which we store our
equipment. Some of these facilities contain fuel storage tanks
which may be above or below ground. If these tanks were to leak,
we could be responsible for the cost of remediation as well as
potential fines. |
|
|
We sometimes perform directional drilling operations below
certain environmentally sensitive terrains and water bodies. Due
to the inconsistent nature of the terrain and water bodies, it
is possible that such directional drilling may cause a surface
fracture releasing subsurface materials. These releases may
contain contaminants in excess of amounts permitted by law,
potentially exposing us to remediation costs and fines. |
60
See Risk Factors Our failure to comply with
environmental laws could result in significant liabilities.
We believe we have all licenses and permits material to the
conduct of our operations and that we are in compliance with all
material applicable regulatory requirements. However, if we fail
to comply with any material applicable regulatory requirements,
we could incur significant liabilities. See Our failure to
comply with regulations of the U.S. Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, the U.S. Department of
Transportation and other state and local agencies that oversee
transportation and safety compliance could reduce our revenue,
profitability and liquidity.
We offer services and are branded under the MasTec service mark.
We do not have any patents that are material to our business.
Financial Information About Geographic Areas
During the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and
the nine months ended September 30, 2005 we operated in the
United States and Canada. In 2003, we became engaged in a single
project in Mexico that we completed shortly after
December 31, 2003. In 2002 and 2003, we had operations in
Brazil. In 2004, we ceased performing contractual services in
Brazil, abandoned all assets in our Brazilian subsidiary and
made a determination to exit the Brazilian market. The abandoned
subsidiary has been classified as a discontinued operation in
all periods presented. In 2004, we ceased performing new
services in our network services operations and sold the related
assets in May 2005. The related assets have been classified as a
discontinued operation in all periods presented. The following
table reflects financial information for our U.S. and foreign
operations including the reclassification of 2002 and 2003
results of operations for the Brazil operations and our network
services operations to discontinued operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine Months | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$ |
740,224 |
|
|
$ |
800,974 |
|
|
$ |
900,842 |
|
|
$ |
656,443 |
|
|
$ |
689,208 |
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
26,243 |
|
|
|
26,506 |
|
|
|
12,953 |
|
|
|
10,628 |
|
|
|
8,219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
$ |
667,071 |
|
|
$ |
697,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
At September 30, | |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Long Lived Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$ |
114,053 |
|
|
$ |
82,541 |
|
|
$ |
68,426 |
|
|
$ |
55,925 |
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
4,422 |
|
|
|
3,291 |
|
|
|
877 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
118,475 |
|
|
$ |
85,832 |
|
|
$ |
69,303 |
|
|
$ |
56,451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our business, financial condition and results of operation in
Canada may be adversely impacted by monetary and fiscal
policies, currency fluctuations, energy shortages and other
political, social and economic developments.
Employees
As of December 31, 2005, we had approximately 7,700
employees.
We hire employees from a number of sources, including from the
industry and from trade schools and colleges. Our primary
sources for employees include promotion from within, team member
referrals,
61
print and Internet advertising and direct recruiting. We attract
and retain employees by offering technical training
opportunities, bonus opportunities, stock ownership, competitive
salaries and a comprehensive benefits package.
We believe that our focus on training and career development
helps us to attract and retain employees. Our employees
participate in ongoing educational programs, many of which are
internally developed, to enhance their technical and management
skills through classroom and field training. We provide
opportunities for promotion and mobility within our organization
that we also believe helps us to retain our employees.
Properties
Our corporate headquarters is a 24,000 square foot leased
facility located in Coral Gables, Florida.
As of December 31, 2005, our operations are conducted from
approximately 220 locations. None of these facilities is
material to our operations because most of our services are
performed on customers premises or on public rights of way
and because suitable alternative locations are available in
substantially all areas where we currently conduct business.
We also own property and equipment that, at September 30,
2005, had a net book value of $56.5 million. This property
and equipment includes land, buildings, vans, trucks, tractors,
trailers, bucket trucks, backhoes, bulldozers, directional
boring machines, digger derricks, cranes, networks, computers,
office and other equipment. Our equipment is acquired from
various third-party vendors, none of which we depend upon, and
we did not experience any difficulties in obtaining desired
equipment in 2004.
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In the second quarter of 2004, complaints for a purported class
action were filed against us and certain of our officers in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida and one was filed in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York. These cases have been
consolidated by court order in the Southern District of Florida.
The complaints allege certain violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
related to prior period earnings reports. On January 25,
2005, a motion for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint was
filed by Plaintiffs which motion the Court granted. Plaintiffs
filed their Second Amended Complaint on February 22, 2005.
We filed a motion to dismiss that was denied on
September 30, 2005. Plaintiffs contend that our financial
statements during the purported class period of August 12,
2003 to May 11, 2004 were materially misleading in the
following areas: 1) the financials for the third quarter of
2003 were allegedly overstated by $5.8 million in revenue
from unapproved change orders from a variety of our projects;
and 2) the financials for the second quarter of 2003 were
overstated by approximately $1.3 million as a result of the
intentional overstatement of revenue, inventories and work in
progress at our Canadian subsidiary; all of which are related to
the restatements we announced in our annual report on
Form 10-K for the
year ended 2003. Plaintiffs seek damages, not quantified, for
the difference between the stock price Plaintiffs paid and the
stock price Plaintiffs believe they should have paid, plus
interest and attorney fees. We believe the claims are without
merit. We will vigorously defend these lawsuits but may be
unable to successfully resolve these disputes without incurring
significant expenses. Due to the early stage of these
proceedings, any potential loss cannot presently be determined
with respect to this litigation.
As is often the case, the SEC has requested that we voluntarily
produce certain documents in connection with an informal inquiry
related to the restatements of our financial statements. We have
responded to the requests for documents and are fully
cooperating.
On July 28, 2004, our board of directors received a demand
from a shareholder that the board take appropriate steps to
remedy breaches of fiduciary duty, mismanagement and corporate
waste, all arising
62
from the same factual predicate set out in the shareholder class
actions described above. On November 18, 2004, our board of
directors authorized its executive committee to establish
appropriate procedures and form a special litigation committee,
as contemplated by Florida law, to investigate these allegations
and to determine whether it is in our best interest to pursue an
action or actions based on said allegations. On
December 22, 2004, a derivative action was filed by the
shareholder. On January 10, 2005, our executive committee
formed a special litigation committee to investigate this
matter. By agreement of counsel, the derivative action has been
stayed and the special litigation committee investigation
suspended until the stay is lifted.
We contracted to construct a natural gas pipeline for Coos
County, Oregon in 2003. Construction work on the pipeline ceased
in December 2003 after the County refused payment due on regular
contract invoices of $6.3 million and refused to process
change orders submitted to the County on or after
November 29, 2003 for additional work. In February 2004, we
brought an action for breach of contract against Coos County in
Federal District Court in Oregon, seeking payment for work done,
interest and anticipated profits. In April 2004, Coos County
announced it was terminating the contract and seeking another
company to complete the project. Coos County subsequently
counterclaimed for breach of contract and other causes in the
Federal District Court action. The amount of revenue recognized
on the Coos County project that remained uncollected at
September 30, 2005 amounted to $6.3 million
representing amounts due to us on normal progress payment
invoices submitted under the contract. In addition to these
uncollected receivables, we also have additional claims for
payment and interest in excess of $6.0 million, including
all of our change order billings and retainage, which we have
not recognized as revenue but which we believe is due to us
under the terms of the contract. The matter is currently pending
court ordered mediation scheduled for the first quarter of 2006.
We were made party to a number of citizen initiated actions
arising from the Coos County project. A complaint alleging
failure to comply with prevailing wage requirements was issued
by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry. A number of
individual property owners brought claims in Oregon state courts
against us for property damages and related claims; a number of
citizens groups brought an action in federal court for
alleged violations of the Clean Water Act. The individual
property claims have been settled. In connection with the Coos
County pipeline project, the United States Army Corps of
Engineers and the Oregon Division of State Land, Department of
Environmental Quality issued cease and desist orders and notices
of non-compliance to Coos County and to us with respect to the
Countys project. A cease and desist order was issued by
the Corps on October 31, 2003 and addressed sedimentary
disturbances and the discharge of bentonite, an inert clay mud
employed for this kind of drilling, resulting from directional
boring under stream beds along a portion of the natural gas
pipeline route then under construction. The County and MasTec
received a subsequent cease and desist order from the Corps on
December 22, 2003. The order addressed additional
sedimentary discharges caused by clean up efforts along the
pipeline route. MasTec and the County were in substantial
disagreement with the United States Army Corps of Engineers and
the Oregon Division of State Land as to whether the subject
discharges were permitted pursuant to Nationwide Permit
No. 12 (utility line activities) or were otherwise
prohibited pursuant to the Clean Water Act. However, we have
cooperated with Corps of Engineers and the Oregon Division of
State Land, Department of Environmental Quality to mitigate any
adverse impact as a result of construction. Corps of Engineer
and Oregon Division of State Land notices or complaints focused
for the largest part on runoff from the construction site and
from nearby construction spoil piles which may have increased
sediment and turbidity in adjacent waterways and roadside
ditches. Runoff was the result of extremely wet and snowy
weather, which produced exceptionally high volumes of runoff
water. MasTec employed two erosion control consulting firms to
assist. As weather permitted and sites became available, MasTec
moved spoil piles to disposal sites. Silt fences, sediment
entrapping blankets and sediment barriers were employed in the
meantime to prevent sediment runoff. Ultimately, when spring
weather permitted, open areas were filled, rolled and seeded to
eliminate the runoff. Through September 30, 2005,
mitigation efforts have cost us approximately $1.4 million.
These costs were included in the costs on the project at
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004. No further
mitigation expenses are anticipated. Additional liability may
arise from
63
fines or penalties assessed, or to be assessed by the Corps of
Engineers. The County accepted a fine of $75,000 to settle this
matter with the Corp of Engineers; the County has not concluded
with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. No fines or
penalties have been assessed against the Company by the Corp of
Engineers to date. MasTec is currently involved in settlement
discussions with the Corp of Engineers but can provide no
assurance that a favorable settlement will be reached. On
August 9, 2004, the Oregon Division of State Land
Department of Environmental Quality issued a Notice of Violation
and Assessment of Civil Penalty to MasTec North America in the
amount of $126,000. MasTec North America settled this matter for
approximately $86,000.
The potential loss for all Coos Bay matters and settlements
reached described above is estimated to be $193,000 at
September 30, 2005, which has been recorded in the
consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2005,
included in this prospectus as accrued expenses.
In June 2005, we posted a $2.3 million bond in order to
pursue the appeal of a $1.7 million final judgment entered
March 31, 2005 against us for damages plus attorneys
fees resulting from a break in a Citgo pipeline. We seek a new
trial and reduction in the damages award. We will continue to
contest this matter in the appellate court, and on subsequent
retrial. The amount of the loss, if any, relating to this matter
not covered by insurance is estimated to be $100,000 to
$2.1 million, of which $100,000 is recorded in the
consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2005,
included in this prospectus as accrued expenses.
The labor union representing the workers of Sistemas e
Instalaciones de Telecomunicación S.A.
(Sintel), a former MasTec subsidiary, initiated an
investigative action with a Spanish federal court that commenced
in July 2001 alleging that five former members of the board of
directors of Sintel, including Jorge Mas, our chairman, and his
brother Juan Carlos Mas, approved a series of allegedly unlawful
transactions that led to the bankruptcy of Sintel. We are also
named as a potentially liable party. The union alleges Sintel
and its creditors were damaged in the approximate amount of
13 billion pesetas ($95.1 million at December 31,
2004). The Court has taken no action to enforce a bond order
pending since July 2001 for the amount of alleged damages. The
Court has conducted extensive discovery, including the
declarations of certain present and former executives of MasTec,
Inc. and intends to conduct additional discovery. To date, no
actions have been taken by the Court against us or any of the
named individuals. Our directors and officers
insurance carrier reimbursed us in the third quarter 2004 for
approximately $1.2 million in legal fees already incurred
and agreed to fund legal expenses for the remainder of the
litigation. The amount of loss, if any, relating to this matter
cannot presently be determined.
In 2003, our quarterly financial information was restated for
$6.1 million of previously recognized revenue related
primarily to work performed on undocumented or unapproved change
orders and other matters disputed by our customers. The revenue
restatement was related to projects performed for ABB Power, MSE
Power Systems, and the University of California, and in
connection with restated Canadian revenue. Recovery of this
revenue and related revenue from subsequent periods not restated
is now the subject of several independent collection actions. We
provided services to ABB Power, in the amount $2 million,
now subject to dispute. The parties are scheduled to arbitrate
this matter in mid-2006. An action has been brought against MSE
Power Systems in New York state court. We provided services to
MSE Power Systems on five separate projects in Pennsylvania, New
York and Georgia, with invoices in excess of $8 million now
in dispute. We have recovered $1.3 million from MSE in
settlement on three of these projects and will arbitrate the
balance of the dispute, related to two Pennsylvania projects, in
mid-2006. We experienced cost overruns in excess of
$2.7 million in completing a networking contract for the
University of California as the result of a subcontractors
refusal to complete a fixed price contract. An action has been
brought against that subcontractor to recover cost overruns.
Finally, we experienced a revenue adjustment resulting from
correction of intentionally overstated work in progress and
revenue in an amount of $1.3 million in a Canadian
subsidiary. The individuals responsible for the overstatement
were terminated and an action against them has been brought to
recover damages resulting from the overstatement.
64
We are also a party to other pending legal proceedings arising
in the normal course of business. While complete assurance
cannot be given as to the outcome of any legal claims,
management believes that any financial impact would not be
material to our results of operations, financial position or
cash flows.
DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
Overview
The following is a list of the names, ages and positions of all
of our directors and executive officers as of December 31,
2005. Our directors hold office for three years terms and until
their successors have been elected and qualified. Our executive
officers hold office for one year terms or until their
successors are elected by our Board of Directors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Age | |
|
Position |
|
|
| |
|
|
Jorge Mas
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors |
Jose R. Mas
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors and Executive Vice
President |
Carlos M. de Cespedes
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
Director |
Ernst N. Csiszar
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
Director |
Robert J. Dwyer
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
Director |
Frank E. Jaumot
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
Director |
Julia L. Johnson
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
Director |
Jose S. Sorzano
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
Director |
John Van Heuvelen
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
Director |
Austin J. Shanfelter
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
Chief Executive Officer, President and Director |
C. Robert Campbell
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
Alberto de Cardenas
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
Executive Vice President and General Counsel |
Gregory Floerke
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
Chief Operations Officer |
Jorge Mas has been Chairman of our Board of Directors
since January 1998 and a director since March 1994. From March
1994 to October 1999, Mr. Mas was our Chief Executive
Officer. Mr. Mas has been Chairman of the Board of the
Cuban American National Foundation, Inc., a not-for-profit
corporation, since July 1999. Mr. Mas is the brother of
Jose R. Mas.
Jose R. Mas has been a member of our Board of Directors
since August 2001. Mr. Mas has been our Vice Chairman and
Executive Vice President Business Development since August
2001. Mr. Mas has served in a number of capacities at the
operating level with us since 1991, most recently as President
of one of our service offerings from May 1999 to August 2001.
Mr. Mas is the brother of Jorge Mas, MasTecs Chairman
of the Board.
Carlos M. de Cespedes joined our Board of Directors in
September 2004. Mr. de Cespedes is Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer of Pharmed Group Holdings of Miami. In 1980,
Mr. de Cespedes co-founded Pharmed with his brother, Jorge,
and it has grown under their leadership to be the largest
minority-owned distributor of medical, surgical, and
rehabilitative supplies in the United States. Mr. de
Cespedes has been actively involved in numerous charitable and
community organizations, including the Board of Directors for
Florida International University. Additionally, he has served on
the boards of the University of Miami ALS Foundation, Mesa
Redonda and Alliance for Ethical Government.
65
Ernst N. Csiszar joined our Board of Directors in October
2005. Since October 2004, Mr. Csiszar has been President
and Chief Executive Officer of the Property Casualty Insurers
Association of America, the property and casualty insurance
industrys principal trade association. Mr. Csiszar
was the Director of Insurance for the State of South Carolina
from February 1999 to August 2004 and also served as president
of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.
Mr. Csiszar also served as the president and chief
executive officer of Seibels Bruce Group, Inc. of Columbia, S.C.
from 1995 to 1998. Previously, he was a visiting professor at
the School of Business at the University of South Carolina and
served as managing co-director of the European
investment-banking firm Holborn Holdings Corporation in Geneva
Switzerland. Mr. Csiszar earned a Bachelor of Arts degree
in 1971 and a Bachelor of Laws degree in 1974 from the
University of Windsor in Ontario, Canada.
Robert J. Dwyer joined our Board of Directors in October
2004. Mr. Dwyer retired in 1999. Prior to 1999,
Mr. Dwyer spent 17 years with Morgan Stanley and Dean
Witter Reynolds in various executive positions. Mr. Dwyer
currently is an advisor to Morgan Stanley and Co. and is a
private equity investor. He currently serves as a director of
the Bank of New York Ivy Multi-Strategy Hedge Fund where he
serves on the Audit Committee. Mr. Dwyer has numerous
charitable and civic interests.
Frank E. Jaumot joined our Board of Directors in
September 2004. Mr. Jaumot has been the Director of
Accounting and Auditing for the certified public accounting firm
of Ahearn, Jasco and Company, P.A since 1991. From 1979 to 1991,
Mr. Jaumot was associated with Deloitte and Touche.
Mr. Jaumot is a certified public accountant in Florida and
Ohio and is a member of the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants and the Florida Institute of Certified Public
Accountants. He also is a member of the Board of Directors for
Junior Achievement of South Florida.
Julia L. Johnson has been a member of our Board of
Directors since February 2002. From January 2001 to the present,
Ms. Johnson has been President of NetCommunications,
L.L.C., a legal analysis and strategy consulting firm
specializing in communications, energy, and information
technology. Prior to founding NetCommunications,
Ms. Johnson was Vice President of Marketing for MILCOM
Technologies, Inc., a military technology commercialization
company, from March 2000 to August 2001. From November 2001 to
the present, Ms. Johnson has also served as founder and
Chairman of the Emerging Issues Policy Forum, a public policy
organization established to promote open public policy
discussions on key market, industry and regulatory issues.
Ms. Johnson served on the Florida Public Service Commission
from January 1992 until November 1999, serving as chairwoman
from January 1997 to January 1999. Ms. Johnson also chaired
Floridas Information Service Technology Development Task
Force, which advised Florida Governor Jeb Bush on information
technology policy and related legislative issues, from November
1999 to July 2001. In June 2001, Governor Bush appointed
Ms. Johnson to the Florida Board of Education.
John Van Heuvelen has been a member of our Board of
Directors since June 2002. Mr. Van Heuvelen spent
13 years with Morgan Stanley and Dean Witter Reynolds in
various executive positions in the mutual fund, unit investment
trust and municipal bond divisions before serving as president
of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Trust Company from 1993 until
1999. Since 1999, Mr. Van Heuvelen has been a private
equity investor based in Denver, Colorado. His investment
activities have included private telecom and technology firms,
where he still remains active. Mr. Van Heuvelen is a
director of Lifeline Therapeutics, Inc., a marketer of a dietary
supplement.
Jose S. Sorzano has been a member of our Board of
Directors since October 1994. Mr. Sorzano has been Chairman
of The Austin Group, Inc., an international corporate consulting
firm, since 1989, a former director of Ultra-Scan Corp., a
privately held biometric company, and a former director for
CIPE, the Center for International Private Enterprise.
Mr. Sorzano was also Special Assistant to President Reagan
for National Security Affairs from 1987 to 1988; Associate
Professor of Government, Georgetown University, from 1969 to
1987; and Ambassador and U.S. Deputy to the United Nations
from 1983 to 1985.
66
Austin J. Shanfelter has been our Chief Executive Officer
and President and a member of our Board of Directors since
August 2001. From February 2000 until August 2001,
Mr. Shanfelter was our Chief Operating Officer. Prior to
being named Chief Operating Officer, he served as President of
one of our service operations from January 1997.
Mr. Shanfelter also served as acting Chief Accounting
Officer in connection with the filing of our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.
Mr. Shanfelter has been in the telecommunications
infrastructure industry since 1981. Mr. Shanfelter has been
a member of the Board of Directors of the Power and
Communications Contractors Association (PCCA), an industry trade
group. Since 1982, Mr. Shanfelter has also been a member of
the Society of Cable Television Engineers and was inducted into
the Cable TV Pioneers in 2003. He is an active alumnus of Lock
Haven University and serves on the Touching Tomorrow Today
Committee.
C. Robert Campbell has been our Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer since October 2004.
Mr. Campbell has over 25 years of senior financial
management experience. From 2002 to 2004 he was Executive Vice
President and CFO for TIMCO Aviation Services, Inc. From 1998 to
2000, Mr. Campbell was the President and CEO of BAX Global,
Inc. and from 1995 to 1998 Executive Vice PresidentFinance
and CFO for Advantica Restaurant Group, Inc. From 1974 until
1995, Mr. Campbell held various senior management positions
with Ryder System, Inc., including 10 years as Executive
Vice President and CFO of its Vehicle Leasing and Services
Division. He currently serves as a director of Forward Air
Corporation, a transportation company. Mr. Campbell, who is
a Certified Public Accountant, has a Bachelor of Science degree
in Industrial Relations from the University of North Carolina,
an MBA from Columbia University and a Master of Science in
Accounting from Florida International University.
Alberto de Cardenas has been our Executive Vice President
and General Counsel responsible for all of MasTecs
corporate and operational legal matters since November 2005.
From March 2003 to November 2005, Mr. de Cardenas was
Senior Vice President and General Counsel and from January
through March 2003 Vice President and Corporate General Counsel
of Perry Ellis International, Inc. From September 1996 through
December 2002, Mr. de Cardenas was a corporate and
securities attorney at Broad and Cassel. From September 1990 to
July 1993, Mr. de Cardenas was an accountant at
Deloitte & Touche LLP.
Gregory S. Floerke has been our Chief Operating Officer
since January 2005. He has been solely focused and responsible
for managing intelligent traffic services related projects for
MasTec. Mr. Floerke has almost twenty years of experience
in engineering, operations and business development. Before
joining MasTec as the Senior Vice President, Field Operations in
2003, Mr. Floerke worked for Williams Communications in
various positions from 1996 to 2002, the last of which was
Senior Vice President and General Manager Managed
Services. Mr. Floerke holds a Bachelor of Science degree in
Petroleum Engineering from the Colorado School of Mines.
Mr. Floerke also completed the Harvard Business School
Program for Management Development in 2000.
Committees of the Board of Directors and Corporate
Governance
The Board of Directors conducts its business through meetings of
the full Board and through committees of the Board, including
the Executive Committee, the Audit Committee, the Compensation
Committee, the Independent Committee and the Nominating and
Corporate Governance Committee. The Board and its committees
also act by written consent.
The Executive Committee is composed of Jorge Mas, who serves as
Chairman, Julia L. Johnson, Austin J. Shanfelter and John Van
Heuvelen. The principal function of the Executive Committee is
to act for the Board of Directors when action is required
between full Board meetings.
The Audit Committee is composed of John Van Heuvelen, who is
currently serving as its Chairman, Ernst N. Csiszar and Frank E.
Jaumot. The Audit Committee oversees MasTecs financial
reporting and the Sarbanes-Oxley compliance program on behalf of
the Board of Directors. The Audit
67
Committee also is required to approve all audit and non-audit
services provided by our independent registered public
accounting firm, including the scope of and fees paid to the
independent registered public accounting firm. MasTecs
Board of Directors has adopted a charter that sets forth the
responsibilities of the Audit Committee. The Board of Directors,
in the exercise of its reasonable business judgment, has
determined that (i)John Van Heuvelen and Frank E. Jaumot qualify
as audit committee financial expert(s),
(ii) each member of the Audit Committee is financially
literate and (iii) each member of the Audit Committee is
independent, under applicable New York Stock Exchange and
Securities and Exchange Commission rules and regulations.
The Compensation Committee is composed of Jose S. Sorzano, who
currently serves as Chairman, Carlos M. de Cespedes, Robert J.
Dwyer and John Van Heuvelen, all of whom the Board of Directors,
in the exercise of its reasonable business judgment, has
determined to be independent, under applicable New York Stock
Exchange and Securities and Exchange Commission rules and
regulations. The Compensation Committee is charged with
determining compensation for the Chief Executive Officer and the
other senior management of MasTec, establishing salaries,
bonuses and other compensation for MasTecs executive and
operating officers, administering MasTecs stock option,
stock purchase and incentive compensation plans and recommending
to the Board of Directors changes to the plans. MasTecs
Board of Directors has adopted a charter that sets forth the
responsibilities of the Compensation Committee.
The Independent Committee is composed of Frank E. Jaumot and
Robert J. Dwyer each of whom the Board of Directors, in the
exercise of its reasonable business judgment, has determined to
be independent, under applicable New York Stock Exchange and
Securities and Exchange Commission rules and regulations. This
committee was established by the Board of Directors in 2004 and
the Executive Committee appointed Mr. Jaumot and
Mr. Dwyer to the committee in 2005. The committee was
established to investigate allegations made in a derivative
action brought against MasTec; several of its former and current
directors including, Directors Jorge Mas, Jose R. Mas, Julia L.
Johnson, Jose S. Sorzano, John Van Heuvelen and Arthur B.
Laffer; and several of its former and current executive
officers, including, Austin Shanfelter, MasTecs President
and Chief Executive Officer and Donald Weinstein, MasTecs
former Chief Financial Officer. The derivative action claims
that the Board of Directors is obligated to bring an action
against corporate officers based on allegations contained in a
related shareholder action. The committee is charged with the
responsibility of determining whether it is in MasTecs
best interests to pursue an action or actions based on the
allegations.
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is composed of
Julia L. Johnson, who serves as Chairman, Carlos M. de Cespedes,
Ernst N. Csiszar and Jose S. Sorzano, all of whom, the Board of
Directors, in the exercise of its reasonable business judgment,
has determined to be independent, under applicable New York
Stock Exchange and Securities and Exchange Commission rules and
regulations. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
is responsible for developing qualifications for members of the
Board of Directors, recommending to the Board of Directors
candidates for election to the Board of Directors and evaluating
the effectiveness and performance of the Board of Directors. The
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee also develops,
implements and monitors MasTecs corporate governance
principles and its code of business conduct and ethics; monitors
and safeguards the Boards independence; and annually
undertakes performance evaluations of the Board committees and
the full Board of Directors. MasTecs Board of Directors
has adopted a charter that sets forth the responsibilities of
the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
The Qualified Legal Compliance Committee is composed of Julia L.
Johnson, who is currently serving as its Chairman, John Van
Heuvelen and Frank E. Jaumot. The Qualified Legal Compliance
Committee is responsible for reviewing any reports made to the
committee of alleged material violations of laws or material
breaches of fiduciary duties.
68
The full text of our current Audit Committee, Compensation
Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
charters and our Corporate Governance Guidelines are available
on MasTecs website located at www.mastec.com and are
available in print to any shareholder who requests it at MasTec,
Inc., Legal Department, 800 S. Douglas Road,
12th Floor, Coral Gables, Florida 33134.
Executive Compensation
|
|
|
Executive Officer Summary Compensation Table |
The following table summarizes all compensation earned by our
Chief Executive Officer and the other most highly compensated
executive officers of MasTec whose total salary and bonus
exceeded $100,000 (together, the Named Executive
Officers) for services rendered in all capacities to
MasTec and its subsidiaries for the years ended
December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003.
|
|
|
Summary Compensation Table |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Compensation | |
|
Long Term Compensation | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Other Annual | |
|
Securities | |
|
All Other | |
|
|
|
|
Salary | |
|
Bonus | |
|
Compensation | |
|
Underlying | |
|
Compensation | |
Name and Principal Position |
|
Year | |
|
($) | |
|
($) | |
|
($) | |
|
Options(11) | |
|
($) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Austin Shanfelter
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
639,231 |
(2) |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
500,061 |
(16) |
|
President & Chief |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
560,769 |
(2) |
|
|
101,971 |
(4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
500,675 |
(16) |
|
Executive Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
542,308 |
(2) |
|
|
175,000 |
(5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
500,000 |
(16) |
C. Robert Campbell
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
|
|
|
(3) |
|
|
7,200 |
(8) |
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Vice President & |
|
|
2004 |
(1) |
|
|
67,308 |
|
|
|
75,000 |
(6) |
|
|
1,385 |
(8) |
|
|
100,000 |
(12) |
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jose Ramon Mas
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
246,156 |
|
|
|
|
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
3,000 |
(17) |
|
Vice Chairman |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
242,605 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163,019 |
(9) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,350 |
(17) |
|
Executive Vice President |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
225,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,156 |
(10) |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
1,627 |
(17) |
Gregory Floerke
|
|
|
2005 |
(1) |
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
(7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,000 |
(13) |
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Operations Officer |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
244,616 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75,000 |
(14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
38,462 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Nearing
|
|
|
2005 |
(1) |
|
|
306,686 |
|
|
|
|
(3) |
|
|
7,200 |
(8) |
|
|
50,000 |
(15) |
|
|
|
|
|
General CounselLitigation |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
271,154 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,508 |
(8) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Mr. Campbell became Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer in October 2004. Mr. Floerke became Chief
Operations Officer in January 2005; prior to that he was a
Senior Vice President. Mr. Nearing served as our Executive
Vice President and General Counsel until November 2005. |
|
|
|
|
(2) |
Mr. Shanfelter elected to reduce his salary by 10% in 2003
in light of MasTecs operating results. In 2004 that
reduction continued, but the 2004 reduction, in the amount of
$39,231 was refunded to Mr. Shanfelter in 2005. |
|
|
|
|
(3) |
The amount of bonus earned in the year ended December 31,
2005 is not currently determinable. |
|
|
|
|
(4) |
Represents the fourth installment payment of $101,971 of
deferred compensation awarded in 2001 for performance in 2000. |
|
|
|
|
(5) |
Represents a $75,000 payment of deferred compensation awarded in
2001 for performance in 2000; and a bonus of $100,000 paid to
Mr. Shanfelter in 2003 in connection with his amended
employment agreement related to 2002 performance. |
|
|
|
|
(6) |
Represents a bonus paid to Mr. Campbell in 2004 in
connection with his employment agreement. |
|
|
|
|
(7) |
Represents a bonus paid to Mr. Floerke in 2005 in
connection with his employment agreement. |
|
69
|
|
|
|
|
(8) |
Represents car allowance payments paid to Messrs. Campbell
and Nearing. |
|
|
|
|
(9) |
Represents a payment of $13,019 related to a split dollar life
insurance arrangement entered in 2000 and cancelled in 2004; and
$150,000 paid in connection with a new split dollar life
insurance arrangement entered in 2004. |
|
|
|
|
(10) |
Represents payments related to a split dollar life insurance
arrangement entered in 2000. |
|
|
|
(11) |
The options were granted in the year indicated based on
performance in the previous year unless otherwise noted. |
|
|
|
(12) |
Represents options to acquire 100,000 shares of our common
stock that were granted to Mr. Campbell in connection with
his employment agreement. |
|
|
|
(13) |
Represents options to acquire 40,000 shares of our common
stock that were granted to Mr. Floerke in connection with
his employment agreement. |
|
|
|
(14) |
Represents options to acquire 35,000 and 40,000 shares of
our common stock that were granted to Mr. Floerke in
connection with his hiring and promotion, respectively. |
|
|
|
(15) |
Represents options to acquire 50,000 shares of our common stock
that were granted to Mr. Nearing in connection with his
employment agreement. |
|
|
|
(16) |
Of this amount, $500,000 represents premiums paid by MasTec for
insurance on the lives of Mr. Shanfelter and member of his
family and interest owed to Mr. Shanfelter. |
|
|
|
(17) |
Represents premiums attributed for the term portion of life
insurance on the life of Mr. Mas. In 2004, $3,300
represents income attribution. |
|
The following table provides information with respect to options
to purchase common stock granted to the Named Executive Officers
for the year ended December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual Grants | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Potential Realizable Value | |
|
|
Number of | |
|
Percent of | |
|
|
|
at Assumed Annual Rates | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
Total Options | |
|
|
|
of Stock Price Appreciation | |
|
|
Underlying | |
|
Granted to | |
|
|
|
for Option Term(3) | |
|
|
Options | |
|
Employees for | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
Expiration | |
|
| |
Name |
|
Granted | |
|
Fiscal Year(1) | |
|
($/Sh)(2) | |
|
Date | |
|
5% | |
|
10% | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Austin J. Shanfelter
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
11.60 |
% |
|
$ |
9.67 |
|
|
|
08/05/15 |
|
|
$ |
912,212 |
|
|
$ |
2,311,723 |
|
C. Robert Campbell
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
3.10 |
% |
|
$ |
10.01 |
|
|
|
11/01/15 |
|
|
$ |
251,809 |
|
|
$ |
638,134 |
|
Jose R. Mas
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
11.60 |
% |
|
$ |
9.67 |
|
|
|
08/05/15 |
|
|
$ |
912,212 |
|
|
$ |
2,311,723 |
|
Gregory S. Floerke
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
3.10 |
% |
|
$ |
9.73 |
|
|
|
01/03/15 |
|
|
$ |
244,766 |
|
|
$ |
620,285 |
|
Michael G. Nearing(4)
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
3.87 |
% |
|
$ |
10.48 |
|
|
|
11/04/15 |
|
|
$ |
329,541 |
|
|
$ |
835,121 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Based on options to purchase an aggregate of
1,293,000 shares of common stock granted to employees in
2005. |
|
|
(2) |
All options were granted at an exercise price equal to fair
market value based on the closing price of our common stock on
the New York Stock Exchange on the date of grant. |
|
|
(3) |
Amounts represent hypothetical gains assuming exercise at the
end of the option term and assuming rates of stock price
appreciation of 5% and 10% compounded annually from the date the
respective options were granted to their expiration date. The 5%
and 10% assumed rates of appreciation are mandated by the rules
of the Securities and Exchange Commission. These assumptions are
not intended to forecast future appreciation of our stock price.
The potential realizable value computation does not take into
account federal or state income tax consequences of option
exercises or sales of appreciated stock. The actual gains, if
any, on the stock option exercises will depend on the future
performance of our common stock, the optionees continued
employment through applicable vesting periods and the date on
which the options are exercised and the underlying shares are
sold. |
|
|
(4) |
Mr. Nearing served as our Executive Vice President and
General Counsel until November 2005. |
|
70
Aggregate
Option Exercises and Year-End Option Values
The following table sets forth information with respect to each
exercise of stock options during the year ended
December 31, 2005 by the Named Executive Officers and the
value at December 31, 2005 of unexercised stock options
held by the Named Executive Officers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value of Unexercised in | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
Number of Shares Underlying | |
|
the Money Options at | |
|
|
Acquired | |
|
|
|
Unexercised Options at | |
|
December 31, 2005 | |
|
|
on | |
|
Value | |
|
December 31, 2005 | |
|
Exercisable/ | |
|
|
Exercise | |
|
Realized | |
|
Exercisable/ Unexercisable | |
|
Unexercisable(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Austin J. Shanfelter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,054,929/51,000 |
|
|
|
$1,459,770/139,230 |
|
C. Robert Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,000/90,000 |
|
|
|
$99,824/142,576 |
|
Jose R. Mas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
470,429/51,000 |
|
|
|
$390,270/139,230 |
|
Gregory S. Floerke
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88,200/26,800 |
|
|
|
$99,824/142,576 |
|
Michael G. Nearing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,000/42,000 |
|
|
|
$90,090/46,410 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Market value of shares underlying in-the-money options at
December 30, 2005 based on the product of $10.47 per
share, the closing price of MasTecs common stock on the
New York Stock Exchange, less the exercise price of each option,
multiplied by the number of in-the-money options as of that date. |
Employment
and Other Agreements
In November 2005, MasTec extended its January 2002 employment
agreement with Mr. Shanfelter to serve as our President and
Chief Executive Officer through March 31, 2007. The
agreement provides that Mr. Shanfelter will be paid an
annual salary of $600,000, an initial bonus of $100,000 prior to
March 31, 2003 and deferred compensation of $2,000,000. The
agreement also provides for a bonus to be paid based upon
MasTecs performance and stock options to be granted
pursuant to MasTecs stock option plans. Following
termination of employment, the agreement provides for a two-year
consulting period at $500,000 per year. Additionally, if
there is a change of control of MasTec during the employment
term, the executive will be entitled to receive compensation in
an amount three times his base salary, the consulting fees, any
unpaid portion of the bonus and the deferred compensation amount
and immediate vesting of any previously unvested options. The
agreement also contains
gross-up for any excise
taxes, as well as confidentiality, non-competition and
non-solicitation provisions.
On January 1, 2002, MasTec entered into an employment
agreement with Donald P. Weinstein relating to his employment as
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. On
January 7, 2004 (but effective as of December 1,
2003), we entered into an amended employment agreement with
Mr. Weinstein. The agreement was for a term of three years
and provided that Mr. Weinstein would be paid an annual
base salary of $300,000 (with annual cost of living increases).
Additionally, Mr. Weinstein was entitled to receive a total
of $600,000 of deferred compensation over the term of the
contract, and was entitled to participate in our bonus plan for
senior management and would be entitled to a minimum annual
performance bonus of $50,000 per year. Mr. Weinstein
resigned effective March 11, 2004. In connection therewith,
we entered into a severance agreement with Mr. Weinstein
pursuant to which we agreed to pay him his base salary of
$300,000 through December 2004 and $30,000 which he had
voluntarily forfeited from his compensation during 2003 in
connection with MasTecs cost cutting measures, and
provided him with certain employee and insurance benefits and
agreed that his options would continue to vest in their normal
course and would expire six months after the last options vest.
The Compensation Committee approved this severance agreement on
July 16, 2004.
In July 2002, MasTec entered into an employment agreement with
Eric J. Tveter as Executive Vice President and Chief Operations
Officer with a two year term at an annual base salary of
$300,000 (with annual cost of living increases) and a grant of
50,000 stock options, a guaranteed bonus for the
71
year 2002 equal to one half of his base salary paid to him
during the year 2002 and the right to participate in
MasTecs bonus plan for Senior Management, beginning
January 1, 2003. The agreement also contained non-compete
and non-solicitation provisions for a period of two years
following the term of the agreement. Mr. Tveter resigned
his position with the company on March 22, 2004. In
connection therewith, we entered into a severance agreement with
Mr. Tveter pursuant to which we paid him severance of
$33,134 during 2004, paid his regular salary through
July 14, 2004 at an annual rate of $306,837, provided him
with certain employee benefits and provided for the extended
vesting of his stock options. The Compensation Committee
approved Mr. Tveters severance agreement on
April 15, 2004.
MasTec entered into an employment agreement with Michael G.
Nearing which provides for him to serve as our General
Counsel Litigation. The agreement expires on
December 31, 2007 unless earlier terminated, and provides
that Mr. Nearing will be paid an annual salary of $300,000.
The agreement also entitles Mr. Nearing to participate in
our bonus plan for senior management. If Mr. Nearing is
terminated without cause or good reason, he will receive his
base salary for the remainder of the term of the agreement. The
agreement also contains confidentiality, non-competition and
non-solicitation provisions.
On October 12, 2004, MasTec entered into an employment
agreement with C. Robert Campbell relating to his
employment as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer. The agreement expires on January 17, 2007 unless
earlier terminated, and provides that Mr. Campbell will be
paid an annual salary of $350,000 and an initial bonus of
$75,000 upon execution of the employment agreement. The
agreement also provides for annual performance bonuses of up to
his base salary with a minimum annual performance bonus of
$50,000 for each of 2005 and 2006 and stock options pursuant to
MasTecs stock option plans. Following termination of
employment without cause or good reason, Mr. Campbell will
receive his base salary from the date of termination for a
period of twelve months. If the agreement is terminated by
MasTec not renewing or extending the employment agreement then
Mr. Campbell shall be entitled to severance benefits for a
period of six months from the termination date. If there is a
change of control of MasTec during the employment term,
Mr. Campbell will be entitled to one and a half times the
unpaid portion of his salary for the greater of twelve months or
the remaining term of the agreement and to immediate vesting of
any previously unvested options. The agreement also contains
confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation provisions.
On January 3, 2005, MasTec entered into an employment
agreement with Gregory S. Floerke relating to his employment as
Chief Operations Officer. He has been solely focused and
responsible for managing intelligent traffic services related
projects for MasTec. The agreement expires on January 2,
2007 unless earlier terminated, and provides that
Mr. Floerke will be paid an annual salary of $300,000
during the first year of employment and $350,000 during the
second year of employment. The agreement also provides for the
grant to Mr. Floerke of stock options pursuant to
MasTecs stock option plans. Following termination of
employment without cause or good reason he will receive his base
salary for 12 months after the date of termination. If the
agreement is not renewed by the Company, the executive is
entitled to severance benefits for a period of six months from
the termination date. The agreement also contains
confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation provisions.
On November 16, 2005, MasTec entered into an employment
agreement with Alberto de Cardenas relating to his employment as
Executive Vice President and General Counsel. The agreement
expires on December 31, 2007 unless earlier terminated, and
provides that Mr. de Cardenas will be paid an annual salary
of $290,000. The agreement also provides for annual performance
bonuses of up to 50% of his base salary with a minimum annual
bonus of $50,000 for each of 2005 and 2006 and stock options
pursuant to MasTecs stock option plans. Following
termination of employment without cause or good reason, he will
receive his base salary from the date of termination for a
period of twelve months. If we fail to renew the agreement, he
is entitled to severance benefits for a period of six months
from the termination date. If there is a change of control of
MasTec during the employment term, he will be entitled to one
and a half times the unpaid portion of his salary for the
greater of twelve months or the
72
remaining term of the agreement and to immediate vesting of any
previously unvested options. The agreement also contains
confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation provisions.
See Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
for a description of split dollar agreements that MasTec has
entered into with Austin J. Shanfelter and Jose R. Mas.
|
|
|
Compensation of Directors |
During 2004, we took into consideration the adoption of a new
independent director compensation program, based upon the
greatly increased responsibilities and time demands on
independent directors. Research was conducted to ensure that the
independent directors compensation program would be
competitive with current market practice and trends in
comparable industries. We decided to provide each independent
director with an annual cash retainer, committee service
retainer, committee chairperson service retainer, formula stock
option grants for appointment/
re-election and
continued service, and restricted stock grants for appointment/
re-election to the
Board, all as governed by our Amended and Restated 2003 Stock
Incentive Plan for Non-Employees. In addition, directors are
reimbursed for their reasonable expenses in attending Board and
committee meetings.
Each of the independent directors is paid an annual retainer of
$30,000. In addition, the Audit Committee Chairperson is paid
$15,000 per year and each other audit committee member is
paid $10,000 per year for service. The Compensation
Committee Chairperson and the Nominating and Governance
Committee Chairperson are paid $5,000 per year and each of
the other members of these committees is paid $4,000 per
year for service. All other committee members and chairpersons
receive $1,000 per year. All cash compensation is paid on a
quarterly basis.
The Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for
Non-Employees governs the formula option grants of
20,000 shares of our common stock upon election or
appointment to the Board, 20,000 shares of our common stock
upon each re-election and 7,500 shares of our common stock
following each Annual Meeting of Shareholders for continued
service during the elected term. In addition to the foregoing,
the Compensation Committee, which administers the Amended and
Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for Non-Employees, may make
discretionary grants of stock options and restricted stock
awards to non-employee directors. All options expire ten years
from the date of grant and vest annually over three years. All
options are granted at an exercise price equal to the fair
market value of MasTecs common stock based on the closing
price of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on the
date of grant.
Pursuant to the Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan
for Non-Employees, Carlos M. de Cespedes, Robert J. Dwyer, Frank
E. Jaumot, Jose S. Sorzano and John Van Heuvelen each received a
formula grant of options to purchase 7,500 shares of
our common stock in June 2005 for continued service on our
Board, Julia L. Johnson received a formula grant for options to
purchase 20,000 shares of our common stock in June
2005 for her re-election to our Board. Ernst N. Csiszar received
a formula grant of options to purchase 20,000 shares
of our common stock in November 2005 upon his appointment to our
Board.
Under the Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for
Non-Employees, each director receives a grant of restricted
stock with a value equal to $50,000 upon appointment to the
Board and $50,000 of restricted stock upon re-election.
Restricted stock becomes vested and nonforfeitable on the third
anniversary of the date of grant. Upon issuance of the shares of
the restricted stock, the recipient has immediate rights of
ownership in the shares of restricted stock, including the right
to vote the shares and the right to receive dividends. Pursuant
to the Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for
Non-Employees, Ernst N. Csiszar received 4,841 shares of
restricted stock in October 2005.
On December 19, 2005, the Compensation Committee approved a
Deferred Fee Plan for the benefit of our directors and their
beneficiaries. The plan became effective on January 1,
2006. Under the terms of the plan, directors may elect to defer
the receipt of cash and stock fees for their services as
73
directors. Each director may elect the type of fees to be
deferred, the percentage of such fees to be deferred, and the
form in which the deferred fees and any earnings thereon are to
be paid. Deferred cash fees may be directed to a deferred cash
account or a deferred stock account (or both). Deferred stock
fees only may be directed to a deferred stock account. Elections
to defer fees remain in force, unless amended or revoked within
the required time periods.
The deferred cash account will be credited with interest on the
cash balance at the end of each calendar quarter. The interest
rate is equal to the rate of interest payable by us on our
senior credit facility, as determined as of the first day of
each calendar quarter. The deferred stock account will be
credited with stock dividends (or with cash dividends that are
converted to deferred stock credits pursuant to the plan).
Distribution of a directors cash and stock accounts will
begin on the January 15 of the year following the
directors termination of all services with us.
Distributions from the deferred stock account will be made in
shares of our stock while distributions from the deferred cash
account will be made in cash. Distributions will either be made
in a lump-sum payment or in up to five consecutive annual
installments as elected by the director.
See Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
for a description of split dollar agreements that MasTec has
entered into with Jorge Mas.
|
|
|
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation |
Jorge Mas and Jose R. Mas, Chairman of the Board and Vice
Chairman of the Board and Executive Vice President of MasTec,
respectively, were members of the Board of Directors of Neff
Corp. until June 2005, and Juan Carlos Mas, the brother of Jorge
and Jose R. Mas, is the CEO and a director of Neff Corp.
Messrs. Jorge, Jose R. and Juan Carlos Mas, and their
respective families, own a controlling interest in MasTec and
owned a controlling interest in Neff Corp until June 2005.
MasTec purchases, rents and leases equipment used in its
business from a number of different vendors, on a nonexclusive
basis, including Neff. See Certain Relationships and
Related Transactions below for more information.
|
|
|
Indemnification of Officers and Directors |
Our Articles of Incorporation and By-laws designate the relative
duties and responsibilities of our officers, establish
procedures for actions by directors and shareholders and other
items. Our Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws also contain
indemnification provisions that permit us to indemnify our
officers and directors to the maximum extent provided by Florida
law.
Austin J. Shanfelters employment agreement has an
indemnification provision which mirrors the provisions of our
Articles of Incorporation and is applicable to the extent that
he is required to defend actions in our shareholder litigation
described in Legal Proceedings.
|
|
|
Directors and Officers Liability Insurance |
We have obtained directors and officers liability
insurance with an aggregate liability for the policy year,
inclusive of costs of defense, in the amount of $20,000,000.
This policy expires March 21, 2006.
|
|
|
Employee Benefit and Stock Plans |
The following table sets forth information about our common
stock that may be issued under all of our existing equity
compensation plans as of December 31, 2005 which include
the 1994 Stock Incentive Plan, 1994 Stock Option Plan for
Non-Employee Directors, 1997 Annual Incentive Compensation Plan,
1997 Non-Qualified Employee Stock Purchase Plan, Non-Employee
Directors Stock Plan, 1999 Non-Qualified Employee Stock
Option Plan, 2003 Employee Stock Incentive Plan,
74
Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for Non-Employees
and individual option agreements. The 1994 Stock Incentive Plan,
1994 Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors, the 1997
Annual Incentive Compensation Plan, 2003 Employee Stock
Incentive Plan and the Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive
Plan for Non-Employees were approved by our shareholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining Available for | |
|
|
Number of Securities to | |
|
Weighted Average | |
|
Future Issuance Under | |
|
|
be Issued Upon Exercise | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
Equity Compensation | |
|
|
of Outstanding Options, | |
|
Outstanding Options, | |
|
(Excluding Securities | |
|
|
Warrants and Rights | |
|
Warrants and Rights | |
|
Reflected in Column (a) | |
Plan Category |
|
(a) | |
|
(b) | |
|
(c) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders
|
|
|
6,620,658 |
(1) |
|
$ |
11.06 |
|
|
|
7,098,468 |
(3) |
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
2,033,403 |
(2) |
|
$ |
17.39 |
|
|
|
1,148,610 |
(4) |
|
Total
|
|
|
8,654,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,247,078 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Represents 2,737,048 shares issuable under the 1994 Stock
Incentive Plan, 384,750 shares issuable under the 1994
Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors,
2,881,360 shares issuable under the 2003 Employee Stock
Incentive Plan, and 617,500 shares issuable under the
Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for Non-Employees. |
|
|
|
(2) |
Represents 1,800,203 shares issuable under the 1999
Non-Qualified Employee Stock Option Plan and 233,200 shares
issuable under the Individual Option Grants. |
|
|
|
(3) |
Under the 2003 Employee Stock Incentive Plan, the Amended and
Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for Non-Employees and the
1997 Annual Incentive Compensation Plan, 3,778,735, 1,819,733,
1,500,000 shares, respectively, remain available for future
issuance. We are no longer issuing options under the 1994 Stock
Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors and the 1994 Stock
Incentive Plan. We have never issued any shares under the 1997
Annual Incentive Compensation Plan and have no current plans to
do so. |
|
|
|
(4) |
Under the MasTec, Inc. 1997 Non-Qualified Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan, and 1999
Non-Qualified Employee Stock Option Plan, 250,511, 142,552, and
755,547 shares, respectively, remain available for future
issuance. |
|
|
|
|
Summaries of Plans Approved by Our Shareholders |
2003 Employee Stock Incentive Plan. The 2003
Employee Stock Incentive Plan is administered by the
Compensation Committee. In consideration of their services,
employees who serve as officers or employees of MasTec or a
member of our controlled group of companies and who are actively
employed at the time an award is made are eligible to receive
awards under the 2003 Employee Stock Incentive Plan. The plan
permits grants of incentive stock options, nonqualified stock
options, reload options, restricted stock, and performance
shares. The total aggregate amount of shares reserved for
issuance under the plan is 7,000,000 shares. As of
December 31, 2005, we had 3,778,735 shares available
for issuance under the plan.
Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for
Non-Employees. The Amended and Restated 2003 Stock
Incentive Plan for Non-Employees is administered by the
Compensation Committee. Any advisor (an individual
who serves as an advisor or consultant to MasTec or a member of
our controlled group of companies under a relationship other
than that of employee), and any member of MasTecs Board of
Directors who is not and never has been either an officer or
employee of MasTec, or a member of MasTecs controlled
group, is eligible to receive awards under the plan. The Amended
and Restated 2003 Non-Employee Plan provides for formula and
discretionary grants of non-qualified stock options and
restricted stock awards. The total aggregate amount of shares
reserved for issuance
75
under the plan is 2,500,000 shares. As of December 31,
2005, we had 1,819,733 shares available for issuance under
the plan.
1997 Annual Incentive Compensation Plan. The Annual
Incentive Compensation Plan is administered by the Special
Committee of the Board of Directors. The approximately 50
individuals eligible to participate in the Annual Incentive
Compensation Plan are certain executive officers and other
salaried employees of MasTec and its subsidiaries whose
performance significantly contributes to the success of MasTec.
The plan provides for the granting of awards that consist of
either cash, MasTec common stock or a combination of cash and
stock as determined by the Committee if certain performance
goals set by the Committee in its discretion are achieved in a
particular performance period. No participant may receive an
award with respect to a performance period in excess of
$4,000,000. A total of 1,500,000 shares of common stock was
reserved for issuance under the plan. No shares have ever been
granted under this plan.
1994 Stock Incentive Plan. The 1994 Stock Incentive Plan
is administered by the Compensation Committee. Key employees,
including executive officers, of MasTec and its subsidiaries are
eligible to receive awards under the plan. The 1994 Stock
Incentive Plan provides for the granting of options that qualify
as incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options,
restricted stock and bonuses payable in stock. We no longer can
make awards under this plan, but as of December 31, 2005,
options to purchase 2,737,048 shares under the plan
remained outstanding.
1994 Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee
Directors. The 1994 Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee
Directors is administered by the Board of Directors. The plan
provides for the grant of stock options to any non-employee or
outside director who is not and has not been an employee of
MasTec or any of its subsidiaries and who is not otherwise
eligible to participate in any plan of MasTec or any of its
subsidiaries which would entitle such director to acquire
securities or derivative securities of MasTec. We no longer can
make awards under this plan, but as of December 31, 2005,
options to purchase 384,750 shares under the plan remained
outstanding.
|
|
|
Summaries of Plans Not Approved by Our Shareholders |
1997 Non-Qualified Employee Stock Purchase Plan. The
MasTec, Inc. 1997 Non-Qualified Employee Stock Purchase Plan is
administered by the Compensation Committee, and permits
employees of MasTec who meet certain criteria set by the
Committee to purchase our common stock at a 15% discount to the
market price at the time of purchase. Such purchases are made
through regular payroll deductions or lump sum investments.
Employees are limited to a maximum investment of $25,000 in the
plan each year. The total amount of common stock reserved under
the plan is approximately 600,000 shares, substantially all
of which has been purchased.
Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan. The MasTec,
Inc. Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan adopted in 1999
permits non-employee directors to elect to receive all or a
specified percentage of any director fees paid for each year of
service on the board in shares of our common stock. The number
of shares issued to each non-employee director is determined by
dividing the directors fees owed to such director by the
fair-market value of a share of common stock on the date of the
issue. The shares issued are delivered to the non-employee
director and the non-employee director has all the rights and
privileges of a stockholder as to the shares. The shares are
immediately vested upon grant and are not forfeitable to us. The
maximum number of shares of common stock that may be issued
under the plan is 150,000. As of December 31, 2005,
142,552 shares remained available for issuance under
this plan.
1999 Non-Qualified Employee Stock Option Plan. The
1999 Non-Qualified Employee Stock Option Plan is administered by
the Compensation Committee of the Board and permits the
Committee to grant non-qualified options to purchase up to
2,000,000 shares of common stock to any MasTec employee.
The Compensation Committee determines the recipient of options,
the number of shares covered by each option, and the terms and
conditions of options within the parameters of the plan
(including the exercise price, vesting schedule, and the
expiration date) and may adopt rules and
76
regulations necessary to carry out the plan. Options may be
granted pursuant to the plan until January 31, 2009. The
Compensation Committee has the authority to change or
discontinue the plan or the options issued pursuant thereto at
any time without the holders consent so long as the
holders rights would not be impaired. The plan permits the
Compensation Committee to determine and accept different forms
of payment pursuant to the exercise of options.
The plan provides for the termination of all outstanding options
whether or not vested in the event of a termination of
employment, and permits the Committee to take certain actions in
the event of a change of control to ensure fair and equitable
treatment of the employees who hold options granted under the
plan, including accelerating the vesting of any outstanding
option, offering to purchase any outstanding option and making
other changes to the terms of the outstanding options.
As of December 31, 2005, 755,547 shares remained
available for issuance under this plan.
Individual Option Grants. We have entered into
various option agreements with non-employee directors, advisors
and other parties in connection with providing certain services,
acquisitions and other matters. Such options have various
vesting schedules and exercise prices and have been included in
the equity compensation plan table above.
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND
MANAGEMENT
The following table provides information concerning the
beneficial ownership of our common stock, as of
December 31, 2005 and as adjusted to reflect the 12,500,000
shares of common stock offered by this prospectus assuming the
underwriters do not exercise the over-allotment, by:
|
|
|
|
|
each person known to us to beneficially own more than 5% of our
common stock; |
|
|
|
each of our current directors and named executive
officers; and |
|
|
|
all of our current directors and executive officers as a group. |
If the number of shares of common stock sold in this offering is
greater or less than 12,500,000, then the as adjusted percentage
ownership of the persons referred to above will vary from the
percentages shown in the following table accordingly.
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules
of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Except as indicated
by footnote and subject to community property laws where
applicable, to our knowledge the persons named in the table
below have sole voting and investment power with respect to all
shares of common stock shown as beneficially owned by them. In
computing the number of shares beneficially owned by a person
and the percentage ownership of that person, shares of common
stock subject to options and warrants held by that person that
are exercisable as of December 31, 2005 or will become
exercisable within 60 days thereafter are deemed
outstanding, while such shares are not deemed outstanding for
purposes of computing percentage ownership of any other person.
Unless otherwise indicated, the mailing address of each
individual is c/o MasTec, Inc., 800 S. Douglas
Road, 12th Floor, Coral Gables, Florida 33134. The
following information is based upon information provided to us
or filed with the Commission by the shareholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate | |
|
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Shares | |
|
|
Amount and Nature | |
|
Beneficially Owned | |
|
|
of Beneficial Ownership | |
|
| |
|
|
Before and After | |
|
Before the | |
|
After the | |
|
|
the Offering | |
|
Offering | |
|
Offering | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Jorge Mas
|
|
|
19,955,096 |
(1) |
|
|
39.46 |
% |
|
|
31.64 |
% |
|
Chairman of the Board
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jose Ramon Mas
|
|
|
2,527,389 |
(2) |
|
|
5.09 |
% |
|
|
4.06 |
% |
|
Vice Chairman of the Board and Executive Vice President |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate | |
|
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Shares | |
|
|
Amount and Nature | |
|
Beneficially Owned | |
|
|
of Beneficial Ownership | |
|
| |
|
|
Before and After | |
|
Before the | |
|
After the | |
|
|
the Offering | |
|
Offering | |
|
Offering | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Carlos M. de Cespedes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
16,501 |
(3)(4) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Ernst N. Csiszar
|
|
|
4,841 |
(3) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Robert J. Dwyer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
15,074 |
(3)(4) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Frank E. Jaumot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
16,328 |
(3)(4) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Julia L. Johnson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
92,366 |
(3)(4) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Jose S. Sorzano
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
178,494 |
(3)(4) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
John Van Heuvelen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
100,616 |
(3)(4) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Austin J. Shanfelter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director, President and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
1,197,278 |
(4) |
|
|
2.38 |
% |
|
|
1.91 |
% |
C. Robert Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
50,000 |
(4) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Michael G. Nearing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General CounselLitigation |
|
|
58,000 |
(4) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Gregory S. Floerke
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Operations Officer |
|
|
88,200 |
(4) |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
Dimensional Fund Advisors Inc.
|
|
|
2,989,250 |
(5) |
|
|
6.07 |
% |
|
|
4.84 |
% |
FMR Corp.
|
|
|
3,900,090 |
(6) |
|
|
7.92 |
% |
|
|
6.32 |
% |
All current executive officers and directors as a group
(11 persons)
|
|
|
24,300,183 |
|
|
|
46.15 |
% |
|
|
37.30 |
% |
|
|
* |
Less than 1% |
|
(1) |
Includes 9,621,016 shares owned directly by the Jorge L.
Mas Canosa Holdings I Limited Partnership, a Texas limited
partnership (the Family Partnership), and indirectly
by Jorge Mas, as the president and sole director of Jorge L. Mas
Canosa Holdings Corporation, a Texas corporation, the sole
general partner of the Family Partnership; and
8,599,361 shares owned of record by Jorge Mas Holdings I
Limited Partnership, a Texas limited partnership (Jorge
Mas Holdings). The sole general partner of Jorge Mas
Holdings is Jorge Mas Holdings Corporation, a Texas corporation
that is wholly-owned by Mr. Jorge Mas. Also includes
282,670 shares owned of record by the Mas Family
Foundation, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit corporation (the
Family Foundation) of which Mr. Jorge Mas is
the president; 1,350,001 shares covered by options
exercisable within 60 days of December 31, 2005; and
102,048 shares owned of record individually. Mr. Jorge
Mas disclaims beneficial ownership of the shares held by the
Family Partnership except to the extent of his pecuniary
interest therein, and disclaims beneficial ownership of all of
the shares owned by the Family Foundation. In 2003, Mr. Mas
entered into a 10b5-1 plan with a third-party trustee providing
for the sale of shares of our common stock. On an annual basis,
Mr. Mas may authorize the trustee, in its sole discretion
but subject to certain price restrictions and monthly volume
limitations, to sell up to a maximum number of shares. In 2004,
50,500 shares were sold under the plan. For 2005, the trustee
was authorized to sell up to 360,000 shares with a per month
limit of 36,000 shares. The 2005 authorization represented less
than 2% of the shares beneficially owned by Jorge Mas. Through
October 10, 2005, the trustee had sold a total of 360,000
shares. |
|
78
|
|
|
(2) |
Includes 1,114,251 shares owned of record by Jose Ramon Mas
Holdings I Limited Partnership, a Texas limited partnership
(Jose Mas Holdings). The sole general partner of
Jose Mas Holdings is Jose Ramon Mas Holdings Corporation, a
Texas corporation that is wholly owned by Mr. Jose Mas.
Also includes 105,500 shares owned of record by Jorge Mas
Canosa Freedom Foundation, Inc., a Florida non-for-profit
corporation (Freedom Foundation) of which
Mr. Jose R. Mas is secretary; 470,429 shares covered
by options exercisable within 60 days of December 31,
2005; and 837,209 shares owned of record individually.
Mr. Jose R. Mas disclaims beneficial ownership of the
shares held by the Freedom Foundation. |
|
|
(3) |
Includes shares of restricted stock which will become vested and
nonforfeitable on the third anniversary of the effective date of
grant but as to which the owner presently has the right to vote
and the right to receive dividends, as follows: Carlos M. de
Cespedes, 9,901 shares; Ernst N. Csiszar, 4,841 shares,
Robert J. Dwyer, 8,474 shares, Frank E. Jaumot,
9,728 shares; Julia L. Johnson, 9,941 shares, Jose S.
Sorzano, 9,941 shares; and John Van Heuvelen,
9,941 shares. |
|
|
(4) |
Includes shares of common stock that may be issued upon the
exercise of stock options that are exercisable within
60 days of December 31, 2005 as follows:
Carlos M. de Cespedes, 6,600 shares; Robert J.
Dwyer, 6,600 shares; Frank E. Jaumot, 6,600 shares;
Julia L. Johnson, 82,425 shares; Jose S. Sorzano,
166,300 shares; John Van Heuvelen, 90,675 shares;
Austin J. Shanfelter, 1,054,929 shares; C. Robert Campbell,
50,000 shares; Michael G. Nearing, 58,000 shares and
Gregory S. Floerke, 88,200 shares. |
|
|
(5) |
Based on a Schedule 13G filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, dated February 9, 2005, reporting
beneficial ownership of more than 5% of MasTecs common
stock. As reported in the Schedule 13G, Dimensional
Fund Advisors, Inc. possesses sole voting and sole
dispositive power with respect to 2,989,250 shares.
Dimensional Fund Advisors, Inc.s address is
1299 Ocean Avenue, 11th Floor, Santa Monica,
California 90401. |
|
|
(6) |
Based on a Schedule 13G filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, dated February 14, 2005, reporting
beneficial ownership of more than 5% of MasTecs common
stock. As reported in the Schedule 13G, FMR possesses sole
voting power with respect to 230,400 shares. As reported in
the Schedule 13G, FMR possesses sole dispositive power with
respect to 3,900,090. FMRs address is 82 Devonshire
Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02109. |
|
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
MasTec purchases, rents and leases equipment used in its
business from a number of different vendors, on a non-exclusive
basis, including Neff Corp., in which Jorge Mas, our Chairman
and Jose Mas, our Vice-Chairman and Executive Vice President,
owned a controlling interest and of which they were directors
until June 2005. Juan Carlos Mas, the brother of Jorge and Jose
Mas, is the Chief Executive Officer and a director of Neff Corp.
During the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004,
MasTec paid Neff approximately $26,000, $1.7 million and
$1.2 million, respectively for equipment purchases, rentals
and leases. During the period from January 1, 2005 through
June 4, 2005 MasTec paid Neff $328,013. MasTec believes the
amount paid to Neff is equivalent to the payments that would
have been made between unrelated parties for similar
transactions acting at arms length.
Effective as of August 27, 2002, MasTec and Jorge Mas
entered into a split dollar agreement, as subsequently amended,
wherein MasTec agreed to pay the premiums due on two life
insurance policies with an aggregate face amount of $50,000,000.
Mr. Mas and his spouse are the insureds under the policies.
Under the terms of this agreement, MasTec is the sole owner and
beneficiary of the policies and is entitled to recover the
greater of (i) all premiums it pays on the policies plus
interest equal to four percent, compounded annually, or
(ii) the cash surrender value of the life insurance policy
upon the death of the insureds. The remainder of the
policies proceeds will be paid in accordance with
Mr. Mas designations. MasTec will make the premium
payments until the agreement is terminated, which occurs upon
any of the following events: (i) bankruptcy or dissolution
of MasTec, or (ii) a change of control of MasTec.
79
Additionally, effective as of September 13, 2002, MasTec
and Jorge Mas entered into a second split dollar agreement, as
subsequently amended, wherein MasTec agreed to pay the premiums
due on a life insurance policy with a face amount of
$80,000,000, $60,000,000 of which is subject to the agreement
and the remaining $20,000,000 is deemed to be key-man insurance
payable to MasTec and falls outside of the agreement. Jorge Mas
is the insured under this policy. Under the terms of this
agreement, MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the
policy and is entitled to recover the greater of (i) all
premiums it pays on the portion of the policy subject to the
agreement, plus interest equal to four percent, compounded
annually, or (ii) the cash surrender value of the life
insurance policy upon the death of the insured. MasTec will make
the premium payments until the agreement is terminated, which
occurs upon any of the following events: (i) bankruptcy or
dissolution of MasTec, or (ii) a change of control of
MasTec. An amount equal to $60,000,000 of the policys
proceeds will be paid in accordance with Jorge Mas
designations. Any remainder of the proceeds will be paid to
MasTec. In 2002, 2003, 2004 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2005, MasTec paid $1,340,400, $1,303,783,
$1,135,092 and $256,000, respectively, in premiums in connection
with the split dollar agreements for Jorge Mas.
On November 1, 2002, MasTec and Jorge Mas entered into a
deferred bonus agreement in which MasTec agreed to pay
Mr. Mas a bonus in the event the split dollar agreements
Mr. Mas had entered into with the MasTec were terminated
due to a change of control. The amount of the bonus is equal to
the total premium payments made by MasTec under the terms of the
split dollar agreements, plus interest of four percent,
compounded annually. The bonus is to be paid within 60 days
after termination of the split dollar agreement. The deferred
bonus agreement was subsequently amended to comply with
Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.
On November 1, 2002, MasTec and Austin Shanfelter entered
into a split dollar agreement, as subsequently amended, wherein
MasTec agreed to pay the premiums due on a life insurance policy
with an aggregate face amount of $18,000,000.
Mr. Shanfelter and his spouse are the insureds under the
policy. Under the terms of this agreement, MasTec is the sole
owner and beneficiary of the policy and is entitled, upon the
death of the insureds, to recover all premiums it pays on the
policy plus interest equal to four percent, compounded annually.
The remainder of the policys proceeds will be paid in
accordance with Mr. Shanfelters designations. MasTec
will make the premium payments for the term of the agreement or
until the agreement is terminated, which occurs upon any of the
following events: (i) bankruptcy or dissolution of MasTec,
or (ii) the six year anniversary of the agreement. In 2002,
2003, 2004 and the nine months ended September 30, 2005,
MasTec paid approximately $500,000, $500,000, $500,000 and $0,
respectively, in premiums in connection with the split dollar
agreement for Mr. Shanfelter and his family.
In 2001 and 2002, MasTec paid $75,000 per year to
Mr. Shanfelter related to a life insurance policy which was
cancelled in April 2002. MasTec was to be reimbursed by the
insurance company upon Mr. Shanfelters death.
Accordingly a receivable was recorded at the time of the
payments. During the year ended December 31, 2004 we wrote
off the receivable balance because the policy was cancelled and
all payments became taxable to Mr. Shanfelter.
On November 1, 2002, MasTec and Austin Shanfelter entered
into a deferred bonus agreement in which MasTec agreed to pay
Mr. Shanfelter a bonus in the event the split dollar agreement
described above is terminated for any reason, other than his
death. The amount of the bonus is equal to the total premium
payments made by MasTec under the terms of the split dollar
agreement, plus interest of four percent, compounded annually.
The bonus is to be paid within 60 days after termination of
the split-dollar agreement. The deferred bonus agreement was
subsequently amended to comply with Section 409A of the
Internal Revenue Code.
Effective as of August 3, 2004, MasTec and Jose Mas entered
into a split dollar agreement wherein MasTec agreed to pay
premiums on a life insurance policy with an aggregate face
amount of $10.0 million. Under the terms of the agreement,
MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the
80
policy and is entitled to recover all premiums it pays on the
policy plus interest equal to 3.5%, compounded annually, upon
the death of the insured. The remainder of the policys
proceeds will be paid in accordance with Mr. Mas
designations. MasTec has agreed to make the premium payments
until at least July 15, 2009. In 2004 and the nine months
ended September 30, 2005, MasTec paid approximately
$150,000 and $150,000 respectively, in premiums in connection
with the split dollar agreement for Mr. Jose Mas.
81
DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STOCK
Our authorized capital stock consists of 100,000,000 shares
of common stock, par value $0.10 per share, and
5,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value
$1.00 per share. As of December 31, 2005 we had
49,222,012 shares of common stock issued and outstanding
and no shares of preferred stock issued and outstanding.
Common Stock
Each share of our common stock entitles its owner to one vote on
all matters submitted to a vote of our shareholders. The holders
of our common stock are entitled to receive dividends, when, as
and if declared by our Board of Directors, in its discretion,
from funds legally available for the payment of dividends. If we
liquidate or dissolve, the owners of our common stock will be
entitled to share proportionately in our assets, if any, legally
available for distribution to shareholders, but only after we
have paid all of our debts and liabilities.
Our common stock has no preemptive rights and no subscription,
redemption or conversion privileges and it is not subject to any
further calls or assessments by us. Our common stock does not
have cumulative voting rights, which means that the holders of a
majority of the outstanding shares of our common stock voting
for the election of directors can elect all members of our Board
of Directors eligible for election in any year. See
Material Provisions of our Articles of Incorporation
and By-Laws Classified Board of Directors and Related
Provisions. A majority vote is also sufficient for other
actions that require the vote or concurrence of shareholders.
Currently, Jorge Mas, our Chairman, and other members of his
family who are employed by MasTec beneficially own approximately
44.55% of the outstanding shares of our common stock. They have
the power to control our management and affairs. Upon the
completion of this offering, Mr. Mas and his family members
who are employed by MasTec will still own more than 35.70% of
the outstanding shares of our common stock. Accordingly, they
will remain in a position to substantially influence:
|
|
|
|
|
the vote of most matters submitted to our shareholders,
including any merger, consolidation or sale of all or
substantially all of our assets; |
|
|
|
the nomination of individuals to our Board of Directors; and |
|
|
|
a change in our control. |
The Mas familys ability to exercise significant control
over us may discourage, delay or prevent a takeover attempt that
you might consider in your best interest and that might result
in you receiving a premium for your common stock. All of the
outstanding shares of our common stock are, and the shares of
our common stock which we are offering by this prospectus will
be, when issued and paid for, fully paid and nonassessable.
The transfer agent and registrar for our common stock is
Wachovia Bank N.A. of North Carolina.
Preferred Stock
Our Articles of Incorporation authorize our Board of Directors
to:
|
|
|
|
|
issue preferred stock in one or more series; |
|
|
|
establish the number of shares to be included in each such
series; and |
|
|
|
fix the designations, powers, preferences and rights of the
shares of each series and any qualifications, limitations or
restrictions on those shares. |
The Board of Directors may establish a class or series of
preferred stock with preferences, powers and rights (including
voting rights) senior to the rights of the holders of our common
stock. If we issue
82
any of our preferred stock it may have the effect of delaying,
deferring or preventing a change in our control.
Material Provisions of Our Articles of Incorporation and
By-Laws
Our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation and our
By-Laws contain material provisions that may make the
acquisition of control of us more difficult.
Business Combinations. Our Amended and Restated
Articles of Incorporation contain material provisions which may
make it more difficult for a person or entity that is the holder
of more than 10% of our outstanding voting stock to force us to
approve a business combination. For purposes of this
discussion, a business combination includes any:
|
|
|
|
|
merger or consolidation of us with or into another corporation; |
|
|
|
sale or lease of all or any substantial part of our property and
assets; or |
|
|
|
issuance of our securities in exchange for sale or lease to us
of property and assets having an aggregate fair market value of
$1 million or more. |
Our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation require at
least 80% of the voting power of all of our outstanding shares
entitled to vote in the election of directors, voting together
as a single class, to vote in favor of a business combination
proposed by any holders of more than 10% of our outstanding
voting stock in order for that transaction to be approved. This
voting requirement is not applicable to business combinations if
either:
|
|
|
|
|
our Board of Directors has approved a memorandum of
understanding with the other corporation with respect to the
transaction prior to the time that the other corporation became
a holder of more than 10% of our outstanding voting
stock; or |
|
|
|
the transaction is proposed by a corporation of which we are the
majority owner. |
Classified Board of Directors and Related
Provisions. Our By-Laws provide that the number of our
directors will be established from time to time by a majority
vote of our Board of Directors and our shareholders. Our By-Laws
also provide that our Board of Directors will be divided into
three classes of directors, with each class having a number as
nearly equal as possible and that directors will serve for
staggered three-year terms. As a result, one-third of our Board
of Directors will be elected each year. These classified board
provisions could prevent a party who acquires control of a
majority of our outstanding voting stock from obtaining control
of the Board of Directors until the second annual shareholders
meeting following the date the acquirer obtains its controlling
interest.
Our shareholders may remove any of our directors or our entire
Board of Directors if the votes in favor of removal constitute
at least a majority of all of our outstanding voting stock
entitled to vote. However, our By-Laws also provide that our
shareholders may only remove our directors for cause
and only by a vote at a meeting which is called for the purpose
of removing the director or directors. The
By-Laws define
cause as failing to substantially perform ones
duties to us (other than as a result of physical or mental
disability) or willfully engaging in gross misconduct injurious
to us. If there is a vacancy on our Board of Directors either a
majority of our remaining directors or our shareholders may fill
the vacancy.
Shareholder Action By Written Consent. Our By-Laws
provide that any actions which our shareholders may take at a
shareholders meeting can be taken by written consent in
lieu of a meeting.
In order to effect a shareholder action by written consent in
lieu of a meeting holders of our outstanding stock having at
least the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to
authorize the action at a shareholders meeting must sign a
written consent which states the action to be taken. If our
shareholders take any action by written consent in lieu of a
meeting we must notify all of our shareholders that did not
consent to the action in writing within 10 days after
receiving the written consent and describe the action
to them.
83
Indemnification. Our Articles of Incorporation and
By-Laws provide that we will indemnify each of our directors and
officers to the fullest extent permitted by law. Our By-Laws
permit us to purchase insurance on behalf of our directors,
officers, employees and agents against liabilities that they may
incur in those capacities, whether or not we would have the
power to indemnify them against such liabilities.
84
UNDERWRITERS
Under the terms and subject to the conditions in an underwriting
agreement dated the date of this prospectus, the underwriters
named below, for whom Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated and
Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co., Inc. are acting as
representatives, have severally agreed to purchase, and we have
agreed to sell to them, severally, the number of shares
indicated below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Number of Shares | |
|
|
| |
Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated
|
|
|
|
|
Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co., Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
Needham & Company, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Kaufman Bros., L.P.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total:
|
|
|
12,500,000 |
|
The underwriters and the representatives are collectively
referred to as the underwriters and the
representatives, respectively. The underwriters are
offering the shares of common stock subject to their acceptance
of the shares from us and subject to prior sale. The
underwriting agreement provides that the obligations of the
several underwriters to pay for and accept delivery of the
shares of common stock offered by this prospectus are subject to
the approval of certain legal matters by their counsel and to
certain other conditions. The underwriters are obligated to take
and pay for all of the shares of common stock offered by this
prospectus if any such shares are taken. However, the
underwriters are not required to take or pay for the shares
covered by the underwriters over-allotment option
described below.
The underwriters initially propose to offer part of the shares
of common stock directly to the public at the offering price
listed on the cover page of this prospectus and part to certain
dealers. After the initial offering of the shares of common
stock, the offering price and other selling terms may from time
to time be varied by the representatives.
We have granted to the underwriters an option, exercisable for
30 days from the date of this prospectus, to purchase up to
1,875,000 additional shares of common stock at the public
offering price listed on the cover page of this prospectus, less
underwriting discounts and commissions. The underwriters may
exercise this option solely for the purpose of covering
over-allotments, if any, made in connection with the offering of
the shares of common stock offered by this prospectus. To the
extent the option is exercised, each underwriter will become
obligated, subject to certain conditions, to purchase about the
same percentage of the additional shares of common stock as the
number listed next to the underwriters name in the
preceding table bears to the total number of shares of common
stock listed next to the names of all underwriters in the
preceding table.
The following table shows the per share and total public
offering price, underwriting discounts and commissions, and
proceeds before expenses to us. These amounts are shown assuming
both no exercise and full exercise of the underwriters
option to purchase up to an additional 1,875,000 shares of
common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
Per | |
|
| |
|
|
Share | |
|
No Exercise | |
|
Full Exercise | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Public offering price
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Underwriting discounts and commissions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds, before expenses, to us
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
The estimated offering expenses payable by us, exclusive of the
underwriting discounts and commissions, are approximately
$878,000.
The underwriters have informed us that they do not intend sales
to discretionary accounts to exceed 5% of the total number of
shares of common stock offered by them.
85
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under
the trading symbol MTZ.
We and all directors and executive officers have agreed that,
without the prior written consent of the representatives on
behalf of the underwriters, we and they will not, during the
period ending 90 days after the date of this prospectus:
|
|
|
|
|
offer, pledge, sell, contract to sell, sell any option or
contract to purchase, purchase any option or contract to sell,
grant any option, right or warrant to purchase lend or otherwise
transfer or dispose of, directly or indirectly, any shares of
common stock or any securities convertible into or exercisable
or exchangeable for shares of common stock; |
|
|
|
file any registration statement with the Securities and Exchange
Commission relating to the offering of any shares of common
stock or any securities convertible into or exercisable or
exchangeable for common stock; or |
|
|
|
enter into any swap or other arrangement that transfers to
another, in whole or in part, any of the economic consequences
of ownership of the common stock. |
whether any such transaction described above is to be settled by
delivery of common stock or such other securities, in cash or
otherwise. In addition, we and each such person agrees that,
without the prior written consent of the representatives on
behalf of the underwriters, it will not, during the period
ending 90 days after the date of this prospectus, make any
demand for, or exercise any right with respect to, the
registration of any shares of common stock or any security
convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for common stock.
The restrictions described in the immediately preceding
paragraph to do not apply to:
|
|
|
|
|
the sale of shares to the underwriters; |
|
|
|
transactions by any person other than us relating to shares of
common stock or other securities acquired in open market
transactions after the completion of the offering of the shares; |
|
|
|
the issuance of shares in connection with the DSSI Acquisition
and the filing of a registration statement in connection with
the registration of those shares; provided that these shares are
subject to the same 90 day
lock-up provisions
described above; or |
|
|
|
the issuance of shares or options to acquire shares to our
directors, officers or employees pursuant to benefit plans in
existence on the date hereof and the registration of those
shares on a
Form S-8
registration statement. |
In order to facilitate the offering of the common stock, the
underwriters may engage in transactions that stabilize, maintain
or otherwise affect the price of the common stock. Specifically,
the underwriters may sell more shares than they are obligated to
purchase under the underwriting agreement, creating a short
position. A short sale is covered if the short position is no
greater than the number of shares available for purchase by the
underwriters under the over-allotment option. The underwriters
can close out a covered short sale by exercising the
over-allotment option or purchasing shares in the open market.
In determining the source of shares to close out a covered short
sale, the underwriters will consider, among other things, the
open market price of shares compared to the price available
under the over-allotment option. The underwriters may also sell
shares in excess of the over-allotment option, creating a naked
short position. The underwriters must close out any naked short
position by purchasing shares in the open market. A naked short
position is more likely to be created if the underwriters are
concerned that there may be downward pressure on the price of
the common stock in the open market after pricing that could
adversely affect investors who purchase in this offering. As an
additional means of facilitating this offering, the underwriters
may bid for, and purchase, shares of common stock in the open
market to stabilize the price of the common stock. These
activities may raise or maintain the market price of the common
stock above independent market levels or prevent or retard a
decline in the
86
market price of the common stock. The underwriters are not
required to engage in these activities and may end any of these
activities at any time.
We and the underwriters have agreed to indemnify each other
against certain liabilities, including liabilities under the
Securities Act.
A prospectus in electronic format may be made available on
websites maintained by one or more underwriters, or selling
group members, if any, participating in this offering. The
representatives may agree to allocate a number of shares of
common stock to underwriters for sale to their online brokerage
account holders. Internet distributions will be allocated by the
representatives to underwriters that may make Internet
distributions on the same basis as other allocations.
European Economic Area
In relation to each Member State of the European Economic Area
which has implemented the Prospectus Directive, each underwriter
has represented and agreed that with effect from and including
the date on which the Prospectus Directive is implemented in
that Member State it has not made and will not make an offer of
shares of common stock to the public in that Member State,
except that it may, with effect from and including such date,
make an offer of shares of common stock to the public in that
Member State:
|
|
|
(a) at any time to legal entities which are authorised or
regulated to operate in the financial markets or, if not so
authorised or regulated, whose corporate purpose is solely to
invest in securities; |
|
|
(b) at any time to any legal entity which has two or more
of (1) an average of at least 250 employees during the last
financial year; (2) a total balance sheet of more than
43,000,000
and (3) an annual net turnover of more than
50,000,000,
as shown in its last annual or consolidated accounts; or |
|
|
(c) at any time in any other circumstances which do not
require the publication by us of a prospectus pursuant to
Article 3 of the Prospectus Directive. |
For the purposes of the above, the expression an offer of
shares of common stock to the public in relation to any
shares of common stock in any Member State means the
communication in any form and by any means of sufficient
information on the terms of the offer and the shares of common
stock to be offered so as to enable an investor to decide to
purchase or subscribe the shares of common stock, as the same
may be varied in that Member State by any measure implementing
the Prospectus Directive in that Member State and the expression
Prospectus Directive means Directive 2003/71/EC and includes any
relevant implementing measure in that Member State.
United Kingdom
Each underwriter has represented and agreed that it has only
communicated or caused to be communicated and will only
communicate or cause to be communicated an invitation or
inducement to engage in investment activity (within the meaning
of Section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act
2000) in connection with the issue or sale of the shares of
common stock in circumstances in which Section 21(1) of
such Act does not apply to us and it has complied and will
comply with all applicable provisions of such Act with respect
to anything done by it in relation to any shares of common stock
in, from or otherwise involving the United Kingdom.
Certain Relationships
Robert J. Dwyer and John Van Heuvelen, members of our board of
directors, have in the past held various executive positions
with one of the representatives of the underwriters, Morgan
Stanley & Co.
87
Incorporated, or its affiliates. Mr. Dwyer is also
currently an advisor to Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated.
For more information, please see Directors and Executive
Officers, above.
We have retained Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co., Inc.
to assist us in our disposition efforts in connection with our
decision to sell substantially all of our state Department of
Transportation related projects and assets. See Prospectus
Summary Recent Developments.
LEGAL MATTERS
The validity of the shares we are offering will be passed upon
for us by Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Miami, Florida. Certain legal
matters will be passed upon for the underwriters by
Shearman & Sterling LLP, New York, New York.
EXPERTS
The consolidated financial statements of MasTec, Inc. at
December 31, 2004 and for the year then ended and
managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004
(which is included in Managements Report on Internal
Control over Financial Reporting), appearing in this prospectus
and Registration Statement have been audited by BDO Seidman,
LLP, independent registered public accounting firm, as set forth
in its reports thereon appearing elsewhere herein, and are
included in reliance upon such reports given on the authority of
such firm as an expert in accounting and auditing.
The consolidated financial statements of MasTec, Inc. at
December 31, 2003 and for each of the two years in the
period ended December 31, 2003, appearing in this
prospectus and Registration Statement have been audited by
Ernst & Young LLP, independent registered public
accounting firm, as set forth in their respective report thereon
appearing elsewhere herein, and are included in reliance upon
such report given on the authority of such firm as experts in
accounting and auditing.
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION ABOUT MASTEC
We file annual, quarterly and special reports, proxy statements
and other information with the Securities and Exchange
Commission. We have filed a registration statement to register
with the SEC the shares of our common stock listed in this
prospectus. This prospectus does not contain all the information
contained in the registration statement and the exhibits to the
registration statement. For further information with respect to
us and our common stock, we refer you to the registration
statement and to the exhibits to the registration statement. You
may read and copy the reports, statements and other information
that we file, at the SECs Public Reference Room at
450 Fifth Street, N.W., in Washington, D.C.
20549. Please call the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330 for
further information on their Public Reference Room. Our SEC
filings are also available from the New York Stock Exchange,
from commercial document retrieval services and from the
internet site maintained by the SEC at http://www.sec.gov. In
addition, our SEC filings and other information about our
company are available on our internet website:
http://www.mastec.com. Please note that our internet address is
included in this prospectus as an inactive textual reference and
the information included on our website is not incorporated by
reference into this prospectus and should not be considered part
of this prospectus.
For information about us, you should rely only on the
information contained in this prospectus. We have not authorized
anyone else to provide you with information other than this
prospectus or to make representations as to matters not stated
in this prospectus. If anyone else has provided you with
different information, you should not rely on it.
This prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities or our
solicitation of your offer to buy these securities in any
jurisdiction where that offer or sale would not be permitted.
88
MASTEC, INC.
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page | |
|
|
| |
Condensed Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-2 |
|
|
|
|
F-3 |
|
|
|
|
F-4 |
|
|
|
|
F-5 |
|
Audited Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
|
|
|
F-22 |
|
|
|
|
F-26 |
|
|
|
|
F-28 |
|
|
|
|
F-29 |
|
|
|
|
F-30 |
|
|
|
|
F-31 |
|
|
|
|
F-32 |
|
F-1
MASTEC, INC.
CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months | |
|
For the Nine Months | |
|
|
Ended September 30, | |
|
Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts) | |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
243,548 |
|
|
$ |
246,622 |
|
|
$ |
697,427 |
|
|
$ |
667,071 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation
|
|
|
207,373 |
|
|
|
217,070 |
|
|
|
621,560 |
|
|
|
607,120 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
4,335 |
|
|
|
4,084 |
|
|
|
13,950 |
|
|
|
13,260 |
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
18,546 |
|
|
|
16,921 |
|
|
|
51,470 |
|
|
|
53,495 |
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
4,827 |
|
|
|
4,710 |
|
|
|
14,412 |
|
|
|
14,277 |
|
Other income, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(754 |
) |
|
|
(3,402 |
) |
|
|
(991 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations before minority interest
|
|
|
8,467 |
|
|
|
4,591 |
|
|
|
(563 |
) |
|
|
(20,090 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
(573 |
) |
|
|
(326 |
) |
|
|
(995 |
) |
|
|
(361 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
7,894 |
|
|
|
4,265 |
|
|
|
(1,558 |
) |
|
|
(20,451 |
) |
Discontinued operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on discontinued operations, net of tax benefit of $0 in
2005 and 2004
|
|
|
(145 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(1,008 |
) |
|
|
(2,966 |
) |
Loss on write-off of assets of discontinued operations, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(19,165 |
) |
Loss on sale of assets of discontinued operations, net of tax
benefit of $0 in 2005 and 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(583 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
7,749 |
|
|
$ |
4,223 |
|
|
$ |
(3,149 |
) |
|
$ |
(42,582 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
49,039 |
|
|
|
48,395 |
|
|
|
48,876 |
|
|
|
48,368 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$ |
.16 |
|
|
$ |
.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.03 |
) |
|
$ |
(.42 |
) |
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(.03 |
) |
|
|
(.46 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total basic net income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
.16 |
|
|
$ |
.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
50,033 |
|
|
|
48,703 |
|
|
|
48,876 |
|
|
|
48,368 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$ |
.15 |
|
|
$ |
.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.03 |
) |
|
$ |
(.42 |
) |
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(.03 |
) |
|
|
(.46 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total diluted net income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
.15 |
|
|
$ |
.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed
unaudited consolidated financial statements.
F-2
MASTEC, INC.
CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
|
(Audited) | |
|
|
(In thousands, except | |
|
|
share amounts) | |
Assets |
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
2,894 |
|
|
$ |
19,548 |
|
|
Accounts receivable, unbilled revenue and retainage, net
|
|
|
228,052 |
|
|
|
200,743 |
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
42,649 |
|
|
|
45,293 |
|
|
Income tax refund receivable
|
|
|
1,511 |
|
|
|
2,846 |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
42,689 |
|
|
|
43,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
317,795 |
|
|
|
312,258 |
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
56,451 |
|
|
|
69,303 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
138,640 |
|
|
|
138,640 |
|
Deferred taxes, net
|
|
|
52,658 |
|
|
|
50,732 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
43,845 |
|
|
|
29,590 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
609,389 |
|
|
$ |
600,523 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity |
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
$ |
112 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
|
125,790 |
|
|
|
113,333 |
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
59,917 |
|
|
|
64,363 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
185,819 |
|
|
|
177,795 |
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
37,039 |
|
|
|
35,516 |
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
196,126 |
|
|
|
196,059 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
418,984 |
|
|
|
409,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $1.00 par value; authorized
shares5,000,000; issued and outstanding sharesnone
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock $0.10 par value authorized
shares100,000,000; issued and outstanding
shares49,142,346 and 48,597,000 shares in 2005 and
2004, respectively
|
|
|
4,914 |
|
|
|
4,860 |
|
Capital surplus
|
|
|
355,469 |
|
|
|
353,033 |
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(170,433 |
) |
|
|
(167,284 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
544 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
190,405 |
|
|
|
191,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity
|
|
$ |
609,389 |
|
|
$ |
600,523 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed
unaudited consolidated financial statements.
F-3
MASTEC, INC.
CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine Months | |
|
|
Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Cash flows from operating activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(1,558 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,451 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile loss from continuing operations to net
cash used in operating activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
14,088 |
|
|
|
13,701 |
|
|
Non-cash stock and restricted stock compensation expense
|
|
|
409 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
Gain on sale of fixed assets
|
|
|
(3,467 |
) |
|
|
(945 |
) |
|
Write down of fixed assets
|
|
|
675 |
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
3,759 |
|
|
|
3,999 |
|
|
Provision for inventory obsolescence
|
|
|
881 |
|
|
|
902 |
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
995 |
|
|
|
361 |
|
Changes in assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, unbilled revenue and retainage, net
|
|
|
(34,272 |
) |
|
|
(26,992 |
) |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
2,273 |
|
|
|
(17,888 |
) |
|
Income tax refund receivable
|
|
|
1,469 |
|
|
|
1,051 |
|
|
Other assets, current and non-current portion
|
|
|
(14,040 |
) |
|
|
4,853 |
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
|
13,407 |
|
|
|
16,802 |
|
|
Other liabilities, current and non-current portion
|
|
|
(1,918 |
) |
|
|
6,291 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities of continuing operations
|
|
|
(17,299 |
) |
|
|
(17,295 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows used in investing activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(5,102 |
) |
|
|
(8,010 |
) |
|
Payments received from sub-leases
|
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
285 |
|
|
Investments in unconsolidated companies
|
|
|
(3,423 |
) |
|
|
(1,092 |
) |
|
Net proceeds from sale of assets
|
|
|
5,853 |
|
|
|
6,631 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities of continuing operations
|
|
|
(2,102 |
) |
|
|
(2,186 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows provided by financing activities of continuing
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from other borrowings, net
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
3,468 |
|
|
Payments of capital lease obligations
|
|
|
(273 |
) |
|
|
(279 |
) |
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock
|
|
|
2,490 |
|
|
|
1,079 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities of continuing
operations
|
|
|
2,297 |
|
|
|
4,268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(17,104 |
) |
|
|
(15,213 |
) |
Net effect of currency translation on cash
|
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
261 |
|
Cash and cash equivalentsbeginning of period
|
|
|
19,548 |
|
|
|
19,415 |
|
Cash provided by (used in) discontinued operations
|
|
|
540 |
|
|
|
(746 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalentsend of period
|
|
$ |
2,894 |
|
|
$ |
3,717 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
$ |
16,711 |
|
|
$ |
16,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
$ |
298 |
|
|
$ |
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash information:
During the nine months ended September 30, 2005, the
Company sold certain assets and equipment for which it recorded
a receivable of $504,000 in other current assets as of
September 30, 2005.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed
unaudited consolidated financial statements.
F-4
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
Note 1Nature of the Business
MasTec, Inc. (collectively, with its subsidiaries,
MasTec or the Company) is a leading
specialty contractor operating throughout the United States and
in Canada across a range of industries. The Companys core
activities are the building, installation, maintenance and
upgrade of communications and utility infrastructure and
transportation systems. Our primary customers are in the
following industries: communications (including satellite
television and cable television), utilities and government. The
Company provides similar infrastructure services across all
industries. The Companys customers rely on MasTec to build
and maintain infrastructures and networks that are critical to
their delivery of voice, video and data communications,
electricity and transportation systems. MasTec is organized as a
Florida corporation and its fiscal year ends December 31.
MasTec or its predecessors have been in business for over
70 years.
Note 2Basis for Presentation
The accompanying condensed unaudited consolidated financial
statements for MasTec have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
for interim financial information and with the instructions for
Form 10-Q and
Rule 10-01 of
Regulation S-X.
Accordingly, these financial statements do not include all
information and notes required by accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States for complete financial
statements and should be read in conjunction with the audited
consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in
the Companys
Form 10-K, as
amended by
Form 10-K/ A, for
the year ended December 31, 2004. In the opinion of
management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring
accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation of the
financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the
quarterly periods presented have been included. The results of
operations for the periods presented are not necessarily
indicative of results that may be expected for any other interim
period or for the full fiscal year. As discussed in Note 6,
the Company ceased doing business in Brazil in March 2004 and
the Company committed to sell its network services operations in
the fourth quarter of 2004 and sold the operations in May 2005.
The network services and Brazil operations have been classified
as discontinued operations in all periods presented.
Accordingly, the net loss for the network services operations
for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2004 has
been reclassified from the prior period presentation as a loss
from discontinued operations in the Companys condensed
unaudited consolidated statements of operations.
Note 3Significant Accounting Policies
|
|
|
(a) Principles of Consolidation |
The accompanying financial statements include MasTec, Inc. and
its subsidiaries. The Company consolidates GlobeTec
Construction, LLC. Other parties interests in this entity
is reported as minority interest in the condensed unaudited
consolidated financial statements. All intercompany accounts and
transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
|
|
|
(b) Comprehensive Income (Loss) |
Comprehensive income (loss) is a measure of net income (loss)
and all other changes in equity that result from transactions
other than with shareholders. Comprehensive income (loss)
consists of net income (loss) and foreign currency translation
adjustments.
F-5
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
Comprehensive income (loss) consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three | |
|
|
|
|
Months Ended | |
|
For the Nine Months | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
7,749 |
|
|
$ |
4,223 |
|
|
$ |
(3,149 |
) |
|
$ |
(42,582 |
) |
Less: foreign currency translation
|
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
(89 |
) |
|
|
21,354 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
$ |
7,701 |
|
|
$ |
4,463 |
|
|
$ |
(3,238 |
) |
|
$ |
(21,228 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue and related costs for master and other service
agreements billed on a time and materials basis are recognized
as the services are rendered. There are also some service
agreements that are billed on a fixed fee basis. Under the
Companys fixed fee master service and similar type service
agreements, the Company furnishes various specified units of
service for a separate fixed price per unit of service. The
Company recognizes revenue as the related unit of service is
performed. For service agreements on a fixed fee basis,
profitability will be reduced if the actual costs to complete
each unit exceed original estimates. The Company also
immediately recognizes the full amount of any estimated loss on
these fixed fee projects if estimated costs to complete the
remaining units exceed the revenue to be received from such
units.
The Company recognizes revenue on unit based
installation/construction projects using the
units-of-delivery
method. The Companys unit based contracts relate primarily
to contracts that require the installation or construction of
specified units within an infrastructure system. Under the
units-of-delivery
method, revenue is recognized at the contractually agreed price
per unit as the units are completed and delivered. Profitability
will be reduced if the actual costs to complete each unit exceed
original estimates. The Company is also required to immediately
recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on these
projects if estimated costs to complete the remaining units for
the project exceed the revenue to be earned on such units. For
certain customers with unit based installation/construction
projects, the Company recognizes revenue after the service is
performed and work orders are approved to ensure that
collectibility is probable from these customers. Revenue from
completed work orders not collected in accordance with the
payment terms established with these customers is not recognized
until collection is assured.
The Companys non-unit based, fixed price
installation/construction contracts relate primarily to
contracts that require the construction and installation of an
entire infrastructure system. The Company recognizes revenue and
related costs as work progresses on non-unit based, fixed price
contracts using the
percentage-of-completion
method, which relies on contract revenue and estimates of total
expected costs. The Company estimates total project costs and
profit to be earned on each long-term, fixed-price contract
prior to commencement of work on the contract. The Company
follows this method since reasonably dependable estimates of the
revenue and costs applicable to various stages of a contract can
be made. Under the
percentage-of-completion
method, the Company records revenue and recognizes profit or
loss as work on the contract progresses. The cumulative amount
of revenue recorded on a contract at a specified point in time
is that percentage of total estimated revenue that incurred
costs to date bear to estimated total contract costs. If, as
work progresses, the actual contract costs exceed estimates, the
profit recognized on revenue from that contract decreases. The
Company recognizes the full amount of any estimated loss on a
contract at the time the estimates indicate such a loss.
The Companys customers generally supply materials such as
cable, conduit and telephone equipment. Customer furnished
materials are not included in revenue and cost of sales as these
materials are purchased by the customer. The customer determines
the specification of the materials that are to be
F-6
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
utilized to perform installation/construction services. The
Company is only responsible for the performance of the
installation/construction services and not the materials for any
contract that includes customer furnished materials and the
Company has no risk associated with customer furnished
materials. The Companys customers retain the financial and
performance risk of all customer furnished materials.
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on
uncompleted contracts are classified as current liabilities. Any
costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings are
classified as current assets. Work in process on contracts is
based on work performed but not billed to clients as per
individual contract terms.
|
|
|
(d) Basic and Diluted Net Income (Loss) Per
Share |
Basic and diluted net income (loss) per share is computed by
dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of
common shares outstanding for each period presented. In the nine
months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004, common stock
equivalents were not considered since their effect would be
antidilutive. Common stock equivalents amounted to
797,000 shares and 579,000 shares for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Accordingly, diluted net loss per share is the same as basic net
loss per share for these periods.
In the three months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004,
diluted net income per share includes the diluted effect of
stock options and restricted stock using the treasury stock
method in the amount of 994,000 and 308,000 shares.
Differences between the weighted average shares outstanding used
to calculate basic and diluted net income per share relates to
stock options and restricted stock assumed exercised under the
treasury stock method of accounting.
|
|
|
(e) Intangibles and Other Long-Lived Assets |
Long-lived assets and goodwill are recorded at the lower of
carrying value or estimated fair value. Intangibles are
amortized on a straight-line basis over their definite useful
life. Long-lived assets are depreciated using the straight-line
method over the shorter of the useful lives (five to forty
years) or lease terms (five to seven years for leasehold
improvements) of the respective assets. Repairs and maintenance
on such items are expensed as incurred.
Management assesses the impairment of intangibles and goodwill
at least annually or whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. The
Company reviews its long-lived assets, including property and
equipment that are held and used in its operations for
impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate
that the carrying amount of the asset may not be recoverable, as
required by SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. In the three
months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004, the Company
recognized impairment losses and write-offs of long lived assets
of $348,000 and $0, respectively. In the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2004, the Company recognized
impairment losses and write-offs of long-lived assets of
$675,000 and $605,000, respectively.
The Company follows the provisions of Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets (SFAS No. 142).
Goodwill acquired in a purchase business combination and
determined to have an infinite useful life is not amortized, but
instead tested for impairment at least annually in accordance
with the provisions of SFAS No. 142. In addition,
acquired intangible assets are required to be recognized and
amortized over their useful lives if the benefit of the asset is
based on contractual or legal rights. In connection with the
abandonment of the Brazil subsidiary as discussed in
Note 6, the Company wrote off goodwill associated with this
reporting entity in the amount of $12.3 million in the nine
months ended September 30, 2004 which is included in the
loss from discontinued operations.
F-7
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
The Company maintains insurance policies subject to per claim
deductibles of $2 million for workers compensation
and general liability policies and $3 million for its
automobile liability policy. The Company has excess umbrella
coverage for losses in excess of the primary coverages of up to
$100 million per claim and in the aggregate. The Company
also maintains an insurance policy with respect to employee
group health claims subject to per claim deductibles of
$300,000. All insurance liabilities are actuarially determined
on a quarterly basis for unpaid claims and associated expenses,
including the ultimate liability for claims incurred and an
estimate of claims incurred but not reported. The accruals are
based upon known facts, historical trends and a reasonable
estimate of future expenses. However, a change in experience or
actuarial assumptions could nonetheless materially affect
results of operations in a particular period. Known amounts for
claims that are in the process of being settled, but that have
been paid in periods subsequent to those being reported, are
also booked in such reporting period.
The Company is periodically required to post letters of credit
and provide cash collateral to its insurance carriers and surety
company. As of September 30, 2005 and December 31,
2004, such letters of credit amounted to $63.4 million and
$63.3 million, respectively, and cash collateral posted
amounted to $19.3 million and $7.1 million,
respectively. Cash collateral is included in other assets. The
2005 increase in collateral for the Companys insurance
programs is related to additional collateral provided to the
insurance carrier for the 2005 plan year and the fact that the
collateral remaining for prior year insurance programs have not
decreased. Through September 30, 2005 for the 2005 plan
year, we made three quarterly cash collateral installment
payments of $4.5 million with the final installment made in
October 2005. In addition, the Company maintains collateral from
prior year insurance programs with the current and prior
insurance carriers, which amounts are generally reviewed
annually for sufficiency. The Company expects prior year
collateral requirements to be reduced at the next annual review
by the first quarter of 2006 based on fewer claims remaining
from these prior years loss payouts and the actuarial results
for the remaining claims received. The increase in collateral is
also due to other market factors including growth in the
Companys business and liquidity.
|
|
|
(g) Stock Based Compensation |
The Company accounts for its stock-based award plans in
accordance with Accounting Principle Board (APB) Opinion
No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees, and related interpretations, under which
compensation expense is recorded to the extent that the current
market price of the underlying stock exceeds the exercise price.
The Company has reflected below the net income (loss) and pro
forma net income (loss) as if compensation expense relative to
the fair value of the options granted had been recorded under
the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation (SFAS No. 123).
The fair value of each option granted was estimated using the
Black Scholes option pricing model with the following
assumptions used:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months Ended | |
|
For the Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Expected life
|
|
|
7 years |
|
|
|
7 years |
|
|
|
7 years |
|
|
|
7 years |
|
Volatility percentage
|
|
|
78.54% |
|
|
|
79.95% |
|
|
|
78.54% |
|
|
|
79.95% |
|
Interest rate
|
|
|
3.875% |
|
|
|
3.0% |
|
|
|
3.875% |
|
|
|
3.0% |
|
Dividends
|
|
|
None |
|
|
|
None |
|
|
|
None |
|
|
|
None |
|
F-8
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
The required pro forma disclosures are as follows (in thousands,
except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months | |
|
For the Nine Months | |
|
|
Ended September 30, | |
|
Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net income (loss), as reported
|
|
$ |
7,749 |
|
|
$ |
4,223 |
|
|
$ |
(3,149 |
) |
|
$ |
(42,582 |
) |
Deduct: Total stock-based employee compensation expense
determined under fair value based methods for all awards
|
|
|
(1,987 |
) |
|
|
(2,053 |
) |
|
|
(4,181 |
) |
|
|
(6,948 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
5,762 |
|
|
$ |
2,170 |
|
|
$ |
(7,330 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,530 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
$ |
.16 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma
|
|
$ |
.12 |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
(.15 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted net income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
$ |
.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(.88 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma
|
|
$ |
.12 |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
(.15 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On August 23, 2005, the Compensation Committee of the Board
of Directors of the Company approved the acceleration and
vesting of all unvested stock options having an exercise price
in excess of current market value on or before December 31,
2005 for option grants under the Companys 2003 Employee
Stock Incentive Plan (current employees, including executive
officers) and the Companys 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for
Non-Employees, as amended. Stock option awards granted in 2003
and 2004 with respect to 279,000 shares of the
Companys common stock were accelerated effective
September 2, 2005 resulting in approximately $550,000 of
pro forma compensation expense being disclosed in the above
calculation for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2005. Subsequent to September 30, 2005,
the vesting of options for 490,000 shares of the
Companys common stock were accelerated due to having
exercise prices in excess of the current market value of the
Companys common stock. This will result in the disclosure
of approximately $3.5 million of pro forma compensation
expense in the fourth quarter of 2005. These options were not
fully achieving their original objectives of incentive
compensation and employee retention. The Company expects these
accelerations to have a positive effect on employee morale,
retention and perception of option value. The acceleration also
eliminates future compensation expense the Company would
otherwise recognize in its consolidated statement of operations
with respect to these options as required by the Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123R (revised 2004)
Share-Based Payment, as discussed in Note 11.
The Company also grants restricted stock, which is valued based
on the market price of the common stock on the date of grant.
Compensation expense arising from restricted stock grants is
recognized using the straight-line method over the vesting
period. Unearned compensation for performance-based options and
restricted stock is a reduction of shareholders equity in
the consolidated balance sheets. In the three months and nine
months ended September 30, 2005, the Company issued
15,000 shares of restricted stock to a key employee. The
value of this issuance was approximately $144,900. One-third of
the shares vested immediately. The remaining two-thirds are
vesting over twenty-four months. In addition, in the nine months
ended September 30, 2005, the Company issued
75,000 shares of restricted stock to other key employees.
The value of the restricted stock is approximately $656,000 and
is being expensed over twenty-one months (the vesting period).
The Company issued 57,926 shares of restricted stock to its
board members in 2004. The value of the restricted stock related
to this issuance, which was valued at $294,000, is being
expensed over three years (the vesting period). Total unearned
compensation related to restricted
F-9
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
stock grants as of September 30, 2005 is approximately
$710,000. Restricted stock expense for the three months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2004 is $200,721 and $15,126,
respectively. Restricted stock expense for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2004 is $342,872 and $15,126,
respectively,
Certain reclassifications were made to the December 31,
2004 financial statements in order to conform to the current
year presentation. In addition, as discussed in Note 6, the
Company committed to sell its network services operations in the
fourth quarter of 2004 and sold the operations in May 2005.
Accordingly, the net loss for the network services operations
for the three months and nine months ended September 30,
2004 has been reclassified as a loss from discontinued
operations in the Companys condensed unaudited
consolidated statements of operations from the prior period
presentation.
The Company has one investment which the Company accounts for by
the equity method because the Company owns 49% of the entity and
the Company has the ability to exercise significant influence
over the financial and operational policies of the limited
liability company. The Companys share of its earnings or
losses in this investment is included as other income, net in
the condensed unaudited consolidated statements of operations.
As of September 30, 2005, the Companys investment
exceeded the net equity of such investment and accordingly the
excess is considered to be equity goodwill. The Company
periodically evaluates the equity goodwill for impairment under
Accounting Principle Board No. 18, The Equity Method
of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock, as amended.
See Note 9.
|
|
|
(j) Fair value of financial instruments |
The Company estimates the fair market value of financial
instruments through the use of public market prices, quotes from
financial institutions and other available information. Judgment
is required in interpreting data to develop estimates of market
value and, accordingly, amounts are not necessarily indicative
of the amounts that we could realize in a current market
exchange. Short-term financial instruments, including cash and
cash equivalents, accounts and notes receivable, accounts
payable and other liabilities, consist primarily of instruments
without extended maturities, the fair value of which, based on
managements estimates, equaled their carrying values. At
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the fair
value of the Companys outstanding senior subordinated
notes was $195.9 million and $184.5 million,
respectively, based on quoted market values.
The Company uses letters of credit to back certain insurance
policies, surety bonds and litigation. The letters of credit
reflect fair value as a condition of their underlying purpose
and are subject to fees competitively determined in the
marketplace.
F-10
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
|
|
Note 4 |
Other Assets and Liabilities |
Prepaid expenses and other current assets as of
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004 consisted of
the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Deferred tax assets
|
|
$ |
4,047 |
|
|
$ |
6,107 |
|
Notes receivable
|
|
|
1,735 |
|
|
|
2,511 |
|
Non-trade receivables
|
|
|
21,890 |
|
|
|
22,164 |
|
Other investments and assets held for sale
|
|
|
5,407 |
|
|
|
5,884 |
|
Prepaid expenses and deposits
|
|
|
8,093 |
|
|
|
5,931 |
|
Other
|
|
|
1,517 |
|
|
|
1,231 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
$ |
42,689 |
|
|
$ |
43,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-current assets consist of the following as of
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Long-term receivables, including retainage
|
|
$ |
1,620 |
|
|
$ |
4,694 |
|
Equity investment
|
|
|
5,568 |
|
|
|
3,780 |
|
Investment in real estate
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
Long-term portion of deferred financing costs, net
|
|
|
4,247 |
|
|
|
2,414 |
|
Cash surrender value of insurance policies
|
|
|
5,569 |
|
|
|
5,279 |
|
Non-compete agreement, net
|
|
|
945 |
|
|
|
1,080 |
|
Insurance escrow
|
|
|
19,284 |
|
|
|
7,083 |
|
Other
|
|
|
4,929 |
|
|
|
3,577 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other assets
|
|
$ |
43,845 |
|
|
$ |
29,590 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other current and non-current liabilities consist of the
following as of September 30, 2005 and December 31,
2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued compensation
|
|
$ |
13,155 |
|
|
$ |
15,090 |
|
|
Accrued insurance
|
|
|
18,270 |
|
|
|
16,691 |
|
|
Accrued interest
|
|
|
2,532 |
|
|
|
6,329 |
|
|
Accrued losses on contracts
|
|
|
1,617 |
|
|
|
2,638 |
|
|
Accrued guaranteed equity investment
|
|
|
925 |
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
Due to subcontractors
|
|
|
10,248 |
|
|
|
8,948 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
13,170 |
|
|
|
11,892 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other current liabilities
|
|
$ |
59,917 |
|
|
$ |
64,363 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-11
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Non-current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued insurance
|
|
$ |
34,576 |
|
|
$ |
33,751 |
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
1,118 |
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
1,345 |
|
|
|
1,432 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other liabilities
|
|
$ |
37,039 |
|
|
$ |
35,516 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt is comprised of the following at September 30, 2005
and December 31, 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Revolving credit facility at LIBOR plus 2.25% as of
September 30, 2005 and 3.25% as of December 31, 2004
(6.28% as of September 30, 2005 and 5.75% as of
December 31, 2004) and the banks prime rate plus
0.75% as of September 30, 2005 and 1.75% as of
December 31, 2004 (7.5% as of September 30, 2005 and
7.0% as of December 31, 2004)
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
7.75% senior subordinated notes due February 2008
|
|
|
195,936 |
|
|
|
195,915 |
|
Notes payable for equipment, at interest rates from 7.5% to 8.5%
due in installments through the year 2008
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
196,238 |
|
|
|
196,158 |
|
Less current maturities
|
|
|
(112 |
) |
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$ |
196,126 |
|
|
$ |
196,059 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revolving Credit Facility |
The Company has a secured revolving credit facility for its
operations which was amended and restated on May 10, 2005
increasing the maximum amount of availability from
$125 million to $150 million, subject to reserves of
$5.0 million, and other adjustments and restrictions (the
Credit Facility). The costs related to this
amendment were $2.6 million which are being amortized over
the life of the Credit Facility. The Credit Facility expires on
May 10, 2010. These deferred financing costs are included
in prepaid expenses and other current assets and other assets in
the condensed unaudited consolidated balance sheet.
The amount that the Company can borrow at any given time is
based upon a formula that takes into account, among other
things, eligible billed and unbilled accounts receivable and
equipment which can result in borrowing availability of less
than the full amount of the Credit Facility. As of
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, net
availability under the Credit Facility totaled
$46.9 million and $25.5 million, respectively, net of
outstanding standby letters of credit aggregating
$66.5 million and $66.8 million in each period,
respectively. At September 30, 2005, $63.4 million of
the outstanding letters of credit were issued to support the
Companys casualty and medical insurance requirements or
surety requirements. These letters of credit mature at various
dates and most have automatic renewal provisions subject to
prior notice of cancellation. The Company had no outstanding
draws under the Credit Facility at September 30, 2005 and
December 31, 2004. The Credit Facility is collateralized by
a first priority security interest in substantially all of the
Companys assets and a pledge of the stock of certain of
its operating subsidiaries. All wholly-owned subsidiaries
collateralize the Credit Facility. Interest under the
F-12
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
Credit Facility accrues at rates based, at the Companys
option, on the agent banks base rate plus a margin of
between 0.25% and 1.25% or its LIBOR rate (as defined in the
Credit Facility) plus a margin of between 1.75% and 2.75%,
depending on certain financial thresholds. The Credit Facility
includes an unused facility fee of 0.375%, which may be adjusted
to as low as 0.250%.
The Credit Facility contains customary events of default
(including cross-default) provisions and covenants related to
the Companys operations that prohibit, among other things,
making investments and acquisitions in excess of specified
amounts, incurring additional indebtedness in excess of
specified amounts, paying cash dividends, making other
distributions in excess of specified amounts, making capital
expenditures in excess of specified amounts, creating liens
against the Companys assets, prepaying other indebtedness
including the Companys 7.75% senior subordinated
notes, and engaging in certain mergers or combinations without
the prior written consent of the lenders. In addition, any
deterioration in the quality of billed and unbilled receivables,
reduction in the value of the Companys equipment or an
increase in the Companys lease expense related to real
estate, would reduce availability under the Credit Facility.
The Company is required to be in compliance with a minimum fixed
charge coverage ratio of 1.2 to 1.0 measured on a monthly basis
and certain events are triggered if the net availability under
the Credit Facility is under $20.0 million at any given
day. The Companys operations are required to comply with
this fixed charge coverage ratio if these conditions of
availability are not met. The Credit Facility further provides
that once net availability is greater than or equal to
$20.0 million for 90 consecutive days, the fixed charge
ratio will no longer apply. The fixed charge coverage ratio is
generally defined to mean the ratio of the Companys net
income before interest expense, income tax expense, depreciation
expense, and amortization expense minus net capital expenditures
and cash taxes paid to the sum of all interest expense plus
current maturities of debt for the period. The financial
covenant was not applicable as of September 30, 2005
because the net availability under the Credit Facility was
$46.9 million as of September 30, 2005 and net
availability did not reduce below $20.0 million at any
given day during the period.
Based upon the Companys projections for 2005 and 2006, the
Company believes it will be in compliance with the Credit
Facilitys terms and conditions and the minimum
availability requirements in 2005 and 2006. The Company is
dependent upon borrowings and letters of credit under this
Credit Facility to fund operations. Should the Company be unable
to comply with the terms and conditions of the Credit Facility,
it would be required to obtain further modifications of the
Credit Facility or another source of financing to continue to
operate. The Company may not be able to achieve its 2005 and
2006 projections and thus may not be in compliance with the
Credit Facilitys minimum net availability requirements and
minimum fixed charge ratio in the future.
The Companys variable rate Credit Facility exposes it to
interest rate risk. However, the Company had no borrowings
outstanding under the Credit Facility at September 30, 2005.
|
|
|
Senior Subordinated Notes |
As of September 30, 2005, the Company had outstanding
$195.9 million in principal amount of its 7.75% senior
subordinated notes due in February 2008. Interest is due
semi-annually. The notes are redeemable, at the Companys
option at 101.292% of the principal amount plus accrued but
unpaid interest until January 31, 2006, and at 100% of the
principal amount plus accrued but unpaid interest thereafter.
The notes also contain default (including cross-default)
provisions and covenants restricting many of the same
transactions restricted under the Credit Facility.
The Company had no holdings of derivative financial or commodity
instruments at September 30, 2005.
F-13
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
Note 6Discontinued Operations
In March 2004, the Company ceased performing contractual
services for customers in Brazil, abandoned all assets of its
Brazil subsidiary and made a determination to exit the Brazil
market. During the nine months ended September 30, 2004,
the Company wrote off approximately $12.3 million in
goodwill (see Note 3(e)) and the net investment in its
Brazil subsidiary of approximately $6.8 million which
consisted of the accumulated foreign currency translation loss
of $21.3 million less a net deficit in assets of
$14.5 million. The abandoned Brazil subsidiary has been
classified as a discontinued operation. The net loss from
operations for the Brazil subsidiary was approximately $98,000
and $1.1 million for the three months and nine months ended
September 30, 2004, respectively. In November 2004, the
subsidiary applied for relief and was adjudicated bankrupt by a
Brazilian bankruptcy court. The subsidiary is currently being
liquidated under court supervision. For the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2005, the Brazil subsidiary had
no activity as the entity is in the process of liquidation.
The following table summarizes the assets and liabilities for
the Brazil operations as of September 30, 2005 and
December 31, 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Current assets
|
|
$ |
290 |
|
|
$ |
290 |
|
Non-current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
(19,455 |
) |
|
|
(19,455 |
) |
Non-current liabilities
|
|
|
(2,170 |
) |
|
|
(2,170 |
) |
Accumulated foreign currency translation
|
|
|
21,335 |
|
|
|
21,335 |
|
The following table summarizes the results of operations for the
Brazil operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three | |
|
For the Nine | |
|
|
Months Ended | |
|
Months Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
Operating and other expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,047 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations before benefit for income taxes
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(98 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1,052 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(98 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1,052 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the fourth quarter of 2004, the Company committed to sell
its network services operations. These operations have been
classified as a discontinued operation in all periods presented.
Accordingly, the net income or loss for the network services
operations for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2004, has been reclassified as income or loss
from discontinued operations from the prior period presentation.
The net income for the network services operations was $56,000
in the three months ended September 30, 2004. The net loss
for the network services operations in the nine months ended
September 30, 2004 was $1.9 million. The net loss for
the network services operations was $145,000 and
$1.6 million for the three months and nine months ended
September 30, 2005, respectively.
On May 24, 2005, the Company sold certain assets of its
network services operations to a third party for $208,501
consisting of $100,000 in cash and a promissory note in the
principal amount of $108,501 due in May 2006. The promissory
note is included in other current assets in the accompanying
condensed unaudited consolidated balance sheet. The Company
recorded a loss on sale of approximately $583,000,
F-14
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
net of tax, in the nine months ended September 30, 2005.
The loss on the sale resulted from additional selling costs and
remaining obligations that were not assumed by the buyer.
The following table summarizes the assets and liabilities of the
network services operations as of September 30, 2005 and
December 31, 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Current assets
|
|
$ |
994 |
|
|
$ |
4,464 |
|
Non current assets
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
(1,281 |
) |
|
|
(2,753 |
) |
Non current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders deficit (equity)
|
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
(1,738 |
) |
The following table summarizes the results of operations of
network services (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three | |
|
|
|
|
Months Ended | |
|
For the Nine Months | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
92 |
|
|
$ |
3,308 |
|
|
$ |
3,869 |
|
|
$ |
14,159 |
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
2,447 |
|
|
|
3,859 |
|
|
|
13,231 |
|
Operating and other expenses
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
2,842 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from operations before benefit
for income taxes
|
|
$ |
(145 |
) |
|
$ |
56 |
|
|
$ |
(1,591 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,914 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$ |
(145 |
) |
|
$ |
56 |
|
|
$ |
(1,591 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,914 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 7 |
Commitments and Contingencies |
In the second quarter of 2004, complaints for a purported class
action were filed against the Company and certain of its
officers in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Florida and one was filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York. These
cases have been consolidated by court order in the Southern
District of Florida. The complaints allege certain violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, related to prior period earnings reports. On
January 25, 2005, a motion for leave to file a Second
Amended Complaint was filed by Plaintiffs which motion the Court
granted. Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint on
February 22, 2005. The Company filed a motion to dismiss
that was denied on September 30, 2005. Plaintiffs contend
that the Companys financial statements during the
purported class period of August 12, 2003 to May 11,
2004 were materially misleading in the following areas:
1) the financials for the third quarter of 2003 were
allegedly overstated by $5.8 million in revenue from
unapproved change orders from a variety of our projects; and
2) the financials for the second quarter of 2003 were
overstated by some $1.3 million as a result of the
intentional overstatement of revenue, inventories and work in
progress at our Canadian subsidiary. Plaintiffs seek damages,
not quantified, for the difference between the stock price
Plaintiffs paid and the stock price Plaintiffs believe they
should have paid, plus interest and attorney fees. MasTec
believes the claims are without merit. MasTec will vigorously
defend these lawsuits but may be unable to successfully resolve
these disputes without incurring significant expenses. Due to
the early stage of these proceedings, any potential loss cannot
presently be determined with respect to this litigation.
F-15
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
On July 28, 2004, its Board of Directors received a demand
from a shareholder that the Board take appropriate steps to
remedy breaches of fiduciary duty, mismanagement and corporate
waste, all arising from the same factual predicate set out in
the shareholder class actions described above. On
November 18, 2004, its Board of Directors authorized its
Executive Committee to establish appropriate procedures and form
a special litigation committee, as contemplated by Florida law,
to investigate these allegations and to determine whether it is
in its best interest to pursue an action or actions based on
said allegations. On December 22, 2004, a derivative action
was filed by the shareholder. On January 10, 2005, the
Executive Committee formed a special litigation committee to
investigate this matter. By agreement of counsel, the derivative
action has been stayed and the special litigation committee
suspended until the stay is lifted.
MasTec contracted to construct a natural gas pipeline for Coos
County, Oregon in 2003. Construction work on the pipeline ceased
in December 2003 after the County refused payment due on regular
contract invoices of $6.3 million and refused to process
change orders for additional work submitted to the County on or
after November 29, 2003. In February 2004, the Company
brought an action for breach of contract against Coos County in
Federal District Court in Oregon, seeking payment for work done,
interest and anticipated profits. In April 2004, Coos County
announced it was terminating the contract and seeking another
company to complete the project. Coos County subsequently
counterclaimed for breach of contract and other causes in the
Federal District Court action. The amount of revenue recognized
on the Coos County project that remained uncollected at
September 30, 2005 amounted to $6.3 million
representing amounts due to us on normal progress payment
invoices submitted under the contract. In addition to these
uncollected receivables, the Company also has additional claims
for payment and interest in excess of $6.0 million,
including all of its change order billings and retainage, which
it has not recognized as revenue but which it believes is due to
the Company under the terms of the contract.
MasTec was made party to a number of citizen initiated actions
arising from the Coos County project. A complaint alleging
failure to comply with prevailing wage requirements was issued
by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry. A number of
individual property owners brought claims in Oregon state courts
against the Company for property damages and related claims; a
number of citizens groups brought an action in federal
court for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act. The
individual property claims have been settled. In connection with
the Coos County pipeline project, the United States Army Corps
of Engineers and the Oregon Division of State Land, Department
of Environmental Quality issued cease and desist orders and
notices of non-compliance to Coos County and to the Company with
respect to the Countys project. A cease and desist order
was issued by the Corps on October 31, 2003 and addressed
sedimentary disturbances and the discharge of bentonite, an
inert clay mud employed for this kind of drilling, resulting
from directional boring under stream beds along a portion of the
natural gas pipeline route then under construction. The County
and MasTec received a subsequent cease and desist order from the
Corps on December 22, 2003. The order addressed additional
sedimentary discharges caused by clean up efforts along the
pipeline route. MasTec and the County were in substantial
disagreement with the United States Army Corps of Engineers and
the Oregon Division of State Land as to whether the subject
discharges were permitted pursuant to Nationwide Permit
No. 12 (utility line activities) or were otherwise
prohibited pursuant to the Clean Water Act. However, the Company
has cooperated with Corps of Engineers and the Oregon Division
of State Land, Department of Environmental Quality to mitigate
any adverse impact as a result of construction. Corps of
Engineer and Oregon Division of State Land notices or complaints
focused for the largest part on runoff from the construction
site and from nearby construction spoil piles which may have
increased sediment and turbidity in adjacent waterways and
roadside ditches. Runoff was the result of extremely wet and
snowy weather, which produced exceptionally high volumes of
runoff water. MasTec employed two erosion control consulting
firms to assist. As weather permitted and sites became
available, MasTec moved spoil piles to disposal sites. Silt
fences, sediment entrapping blankets and sediment barriers were
employed in the meantime to prevent sediment runoff. Ultimately,
when spring weather permitted, open areas were filled, rolled and
F-16
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
seeded to eliminate the runoff. Through September 30, 2005,
mitigation efforts have cost the Company approximately
$1.4 million. These costs were included in the costs on the
project at September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004.
No further mitigation expenses are anticipated. The only
additional anticipated liability arises from possible fines or
penalties assessed, or to be assessed by the Corps of Engineers
and/or Oregon Division of State Land. The County accepted a fine
of $75,000 to settle this matter with the Corp of Engineers; the
County has not concluded with the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality. No fines or penalties have been assessed
against the Company by the Corp of Engineers to date. On
August 9, 2004, the Oregon Division of State Land
Department of Environmental Quality issued a Notice of Violation
and Assessment of Civil Penalty to MasTec North America in the
amount of $126,000. MasTec North America has denied liability
for the civil penalty and is currently involved in settlement
discussions with the Division.
The potential loss for all Coos Bay matters and settlements
reached described above is estimated to be $193,000 at
September 30, 2005, which has been recorded in the
accompanying condensed unaudited consolidated balance sheet as
accrued expenses.
In June 2005, the Company posted a $2.3 million bond in
order to pursue the appeal of a $1.7 million final judgment
entered March 31, 2005 against MasTec for damages plus
attorneys fees resulting from a break in a Citgo pipeline.
MasTec seeks a new trial and reduction in the damages award. The
Company will continue to contest this matter in the appellate
court, and on subsequent retrial. The amount of the loss, if
any, relating to this matter not covered by insurance is
estimated to be $100,000 to $2.1 million of which $100,000
is recorded in the consolidated balance sheet as of
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004 as accrued
expenses.
MasTec is also a party to other pending legal proceedings
arising in the normal course of business. While complete
assurance cannot be given as to the outcome of any legal claims,
management believes that any financial impact would not be
material to our results of operations, financial position or
cash flows.
The Company is required to provide payment and performance bonds
in connection with some of its contractual commitments related
to projects in process. Such bonds amounted to
$104.1 million at September 30, 2005.
Note 8Concentrations of Risk
The Company provides services to its customers in the following
industries: communications, utilities and government.
Revenue for customers in these industries is as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months Ended | |
|
For the Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Communications
|
|
$ |
152,991 |
|
|
$ |
156,841 |
|
|
$ |
439,137 |
|
|
$ |
429,985 |
|
Utilities
|
|
|
52,622 |
|
|
|
51,934 |
|
|
|
147,753 |
|
|
|
131,084 |
|
Government
|
|
|
37,935 |
|
|
|
37,847 |
|
|
|
110,537 |
|
|
|
106,002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
243,548 |
|
|
$ |
246,622 |
|
|
$ |
697,427 |
|
|
$ |
667,071 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company grants credit, generally without collateral, to its
customers. Consequently, the Company is subject to potential
credit risk related to changes in business and economic factors.
However, the Company generally has certain lien rights on that
work and concentrations of credit risk are limited due to the
diversity of the customer base. The Company believes its billing
and collection policies are adequate to
F-17
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
minimize potential credit risk. During the three months ended
September 30, 2005, 28.4% of the Companys total
revenue was attributed to one customer. During the three months
ended September 30, 2004, two customers accounted for 31.5%
of the Companys total revenue after adjustment for
discontinued operations (see Note 6). Revenue from these
two customers accounted for 21.0% and 10.5% of the total revenue
for the three months ended September 30, 2004. During the
nine months ended September 30, 2005, 37.9% of the
Companys total revenue was attributed to two customers.
Revenue from these two customers accounted for 27.5% and 10.4%
of total revenue for the nine months ended September 30,
2005. During the nine months ended September 30, 2004,
34.9% of the Companys total revenue was attributed to two
customers after adjustment for discontinued operations. Revenue
from these two customers accounted for 19.7% and 15.2% of the
total revenue for the nine months ended September 30, 2004.
The Company maintains allowances for doubtful accounts for
estimated losses resulting from the inability of customers to
make required payments. Management analyzes historical bad debt
experience, customer concentrations, customer credit-worthiness,
the availability of mechanics and other liens, the existence of
payment bonds and other sources of payment, and current economic
trends when evaluating the adequacy of the allowance for
doubtful accounts. If judgments regarding the collectibility of
accounts receivables were incorrect, adjustments to the
allowance may be required, which would reduce profitability. In
addition, the Companys reserve mainly covers the accounts
receivable related to the unprecedented number of customers that
filed for bankruptcy protection during the year 2001 and general
economic climate of 2002. As of September 30, 2005, the
Company had remaining receivables from customers undergoing
bankruptcy reorganization totaling $14.7 million net of
$8.0 million in specific reserves. As of December 31,
2004, the Company had remaining receivables from customers
undergoing bankruptcy reorganization totaling $15.1 million
net of $9.0 million in specific reserves. Specific reserves
decreased since December 31, 2004 due to the recovery of
$1.1 million in the nine months ended September 30,
2005 related to a bankruptcy secured claim being finalized.
Based on the analytical process described above, management
believes that the Company will recover the net amounts recorded.
The Company maintains an allowance for doubtful accounts of
$20.3 million and $20.0 million as of
September 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004,
respectively, for both specific customers and as a reserve
against other past due balances. Should additional customers
file for bankruptcy or experience difficulties, or should
anticipated recoveries in existing bankruptcies and other
workout situations fail to materialize, the Company could
experience reduced cash flows and losses in excess of the
current allowance.
Note 9Equity Investment
In September 2004, MasTec purchased a 49% interest in a limited
liability company from a third party. The purchase price for
this investment was an initial amount of $3.7 million which
was paid in four quarterly installments of $925,000 through
September 30, 2005. Beginning in the first quarter of 2006,
eight additional contingent quarterly payments are expected to
be made to the third party from which the interest was
purchased. The contingent payments will be up to a maximum of
$1.3 million per quarter based on the level of unit sales
and profitability of the limited liability company in specified
preceding quarters. The first quarterly payment due on
January 10, 2006 will be $925,000. This amount is included
in accrued expenses and other assets at September 30, 2005.
In addition, the Company is responsible for 49% of the
ventures net operating capital needs until the venture is
self funded. The venture has been self funded since the
beginning of 2005 and the Company does not expect to fund the
ventures operating needs in the future based on results to
date. The venture is intended to strengthen relationships with
existing and future customers, and increase Company sales.
As of September 30, 2005, the Companys investment
exceeded the net equity of such investment and accordingly the
excess is considered to be equity goodwill.
F-18
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
The Company has accounted for this investment using the equity
method as the Company has the ability to exercise significant
influence over the financial and operational policies of this
limited liability company. As of September 30, 2005, the
Company had an investment balance of approximately
$5.6 million in relation to this investment included in
other assets in the condensed unaudited consolidated financial
statements.
Based upon the lack of significance to the financial information
of the Company, no summary financial information for this equity
investment has been provided.
Note 10Related Party Transactions
MasTec purchases, rents and leases equipment used in its
business from a number of different vendors, on a non-exclusive
basis, including Neff Corp., in which Jorge Mas, the
Companys Chairman and Jose Mas, the Companys
Vice-Chairman and Executive Vice President, were directors and
owners of a controlling interest through June 4, 2005. Juan
Carlos Mas, the brother of Jorge and Jose Mas, is Chairman,
Chief Executive Officer, a director and a shareholder of Neff
Corp. During the period from January 1, 2005 through
June 4, 2005, MasTec paid Neff $328,013. During the three
months and nine months ended September 30, 2004, MasTec
paid Neff $355,773 and $798,367, respectively. MasTec believes
the amount paid to Neff was equivalent to the payments that
would have been made between unrelated parties for similar
transactions acting at arms length.
On January 1, 2002, MasTec entered into an employment
agreement with Donald P. Weinstein relating to his employment as
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. On
January 7, 2004 (but effective as of December 1,
2003), the Company entered into an amended employment agreement
with Mr. Weinstein. The agreement was for a term of three
years and provided that Mr. Weinstein would be paid an
annual base salary of $300,000 (with annual cost of living
increases). Additionally, Mr. Weinstein was entitled to
receive a total of $600,000 of deferred compensation over the
term of the contract and was to be entitled to participate in a
bonus plan for senior management, and would be entitled to a
minimum annual performance bonus of $50,000 per year.
Mr. Weinstein resigned effective March 11, 2004. In
connection therewith, the Company entered into a severance
agreement with Mr. Weinstein pursuant to which the Company
paid him his base salary of $300,000 through December 2004,
provided him with certain employee and insurance benefits and
provided for the vesting of his stock options. The severance
agreement was approved by the Compensation Committee on
July 16, 2004. As a result of Mr. Weinsteins
severance agreement, the Company recorded $199,500 in stock
compensation expense in the nine months ended September 30,
2004 related to the extension of the exercise period on
Mr. Weinsteins stock options. In addition, severance
expense was recorded in the nine months ended September 30,
2004 in the amount of $300,000.
In July 2002, MasTec entered into an employment agreement with
Eric J. Tveter as Executive Vice President and Chief Operations
Officer with a two year term at an annual base salary of
$300,000 (with annual cost of living increases) and a grant of
50,000 stock options, a guaranteed bonus for the year 2002 equal
to one half of his base salary paid to him during the year 2002
and the right to participate in MasTecs bonus plan for
senior management beginning January 1, 2003. The agreement
also contained noncompete and nonsolicitation provisions for a
period of two years following the term of the agreement.
Mr. Tveter resigned his position with the Company on
March 22, 2004. In connection therewith, we entered into a
severance agreement with Mr. Tveter pursuant to which we
paid him severance of $33,134 during 2004, paid him regular
salary through July 14, 2004 at an annual rate of $306,837,
provided him with certain employee benefits and provided for the
vesting of his stock options. The Compensation Committee
approved Mr. Tveters severance agreement on
April 15, 2004 which was the new measurement date of his
stock options. As a result of Mr. Tveters severance
agreement, the Company recorded approximately $216,800 in stock
compensation expense in the nine months ended September 30,
F-19
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
2004 related to the extension of the exercise period on
Mr. Tveters stock options. In addition, severance
expense was recorded in the nine months ended September 30,
2004 in the amount of $173,000.
MasTec has entered into split dollar agreements with key
executives and the Chairman of the Board. During the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2005, MasTec paid
approximately $410,000 in premiums in connection with these
split dollar agreements. During the three months and nine months
ended September 30, 2004, MasTec paid approximately
$170,000 in premiums in connection with these split dollar
agreements.
In 2001 and 2002, MasTec paid $75,000 per year to
Mr. Shanfelter related to a life insurance policy which was
cancelled in April 2002. MasTec was to be reimbursed by the
insurance company upon Mr. Shanfelters death.
Accordingly, a receivable was recorded at the time of the
payments. During the nine months ended September 30, 2004,
the Company wrote off the receivable because the policy was
cancelled and all payments became taxable to Mr. Shanfelter.
In November 2005, MasTec extended its employment agreement with
Austin J. Shanfelter as the Companys President and Chief
Executive Officer. The agreement extends the term of his
original agreement through March 31, 2007. All other terms
and conditions are substantially the same as those provided in
his original employment agreement.
|
|
Note 11 |
New Accounting Pronouncements |
In November 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued SFAS No. 151,
Inventory Costs, an amendment of ARB No. 43,
Chapter 4 (SFAS 151). SFAS 151
clarifies the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility
expense, freight, handling costs and wasted materials
(spoilage). In addition, this statement requires that the
allocation of fixed production overheads to the costs of
conversion be based on normal capacity of production facilities.
SFAS 151 is effective for the first annual reporting period
beginning after June 15, 2005. The adoption of
SFAS 151 is not expected to have a material impact on the
Companys results of operations or financial condition.
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 123R,
Share-Based Payment, a revision of SFAS 123
(SFAS 123R). In March 2005, the SEC issued
Staff Bulletin No. 107 (SAB 107) regarding its
interpretation of SFAS 123R. The standard, as amended,
requires companies to expense on the grant-date the fair value
of stock options and other equity-based compensation issued to
employees. In accordance with the revised statement, the Company
will be required to recognize the expense attributable to stock
options granted or vested in financial statement periods
subsequent to December 31, 2005. The Company is currently
evaluating the effect of SFAS 123R on the Companys
results of operations. In connection with evaluating the impact
of SFAS 123R, the Company is considering the potential use
of different valuation methods to determine the fair value of
share-based compensation and reviewing all assumptions used in
those valuation methods. The Company is also accelerating the
vesting period on certain stock options having exercise prices
in excess of the current market value of the Companys
common stock. The Company expects that the acceleration will
reduce its stock option compensation expense in future periods.
See Note 3(g) for discussion of acceleration. The Company
expects the adoption of SFAS 123R will have a material
negative impact on profitability, regardless of the valuation
method used.
In March 2005, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 47,
Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement
Obligations (FIN 47), that requires an
entity to recognize a liability for a conditional asset
retirement obligation when incurred if the liability can be
reasonably estimated. FIN 47 clarifies that the term
conditional Asset Retirement Obligation refers to a legal
obligation to perform an asset retirement activity in which the
timing and/or method of settlement are conditional on a future
event that may or may not be within the control of the entity.
FIN 47 also clarifies when an entity would have sufficient
F-20
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)
information to reasonably estimate the fair value of an asset
retirement obligation. The Company does not expect FIN 47
to have a material impact on the results of operations.
In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, Accounting
Changes and Error Corrections (SFAS 154), which
supersedes APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting Changes and
SFAS No. 3, Reporting Accounting Changes in Interim
Financial Statements. SFAS 154 changes the requirements for
the accounting for and reporting of changes in accounting
principle. The statement requires the retroactive application to
prior periods financial statements of changes in
accounting principles, unless it is impracticable to determine
either the period specific effects or the cumulative effect of
the change. SFAS 154 does not change the guidance for
reporting the correction of an error in previously issued
financial statements or the change in an accounting estimate.
SFAS 154 is effective for accounting changes and
corrections or errors made in fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2005. The Company does not expect the adoption
of SFAS 154 to have a material impact on the consolidated
results of operations or financial condition.
F-21
Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term
is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f). Under the
supervision and with the participation of our management,
including our principal executive officer and principal
financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting
based on the framework in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission. The Companys
internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide
reasonable assurance to management and to the Companys
Board of Directors regarding the reliability of financial
reporting and the preparation and fair presentation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. The Companys internal
control over financial reporting includes those policies and
procedures that:
|
|
|
(i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in
reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the
transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company; |
|
|
(ii) 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 |
|
|
(iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or
timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition
of the Companys assets that could have a material effect
on the financial statements. |
As of the end of the period covered by this report, the Company
carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of the Companys management, including the
Companys Chief Executive Officer and the Companys
Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and
operation of the Companys internal control over financial
reporting. In making this assessment, management used the
criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework. The results of managements
assessment and review were reported to the Audit Committee of
the Board of Directors.
Management has assessed the effectiveness of our internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004.
In making its assessment of internal control over financial
reporting, management used the criteria set forth by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations, or COSO, of the Treadway
Commission in Internal Control-Integrated Framework.
Because of the one material weakness described below, management
believes that, as of December 31, 2004, our internal
control over financial reporting was not effective.
In the course of managements investigation, management
noted one matter involving internal control and its operation
that management considered a material weakness under standards
established by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.
Reportable conditions involve matters relating to significant
deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control that
could adversely affect our ability to record, process,
summarize, and report financial data consistent with the
assertions of management in the consolidated financial
statements. A material weakness is a reportable condition in
which the design or operation of one or more of the internal
control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the
risk that misstatements caused by errors or fraud in amounts
that would be material in relation to the consolidated financial
statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a
timely period by employees in the normal course of performing
their assigned functions.
Managements consideration of internal control would not
necessarily disclose all matters that might be reportable
conditions and, accordingly, would not necessarily disclose all
reportable conditions that are also considered to be material
weaknesses as defined above. However, management did identify
weaknesses in internal controls involving inventory practices
and policies in the ITS division, with respect to inventory
pricing on receipt and the related costs of sales, and inventory
tracking prior to sale or use. Inventory at December 31,
2004 related to ITS was approximately $27.7 million.
Management believes this constitutes
F-22
a material weakness in internal control over the financial
reporting process, including the closing process, as it relates
to this division. As a result of this weakness, a significant
adjustment to correct for this weakness was required and has
been recorded in preparing our 2004 financial statements.
Since December 31, 2004, we have continued to improve the
system of internal controls related to inventory by implementing
the inventory Oracle module into our financial system and
testing the system to ensure it is accurately capturing the
correct prices and quantities. Once this system can be relied
upon, management will no longer be required to perform manual
procedures to eliminate this risk of misstatement. An effective
internal control framework requires the commitment of management
to require competence, diligence, and integrity on the part of
its employees. Control activities include policies and
procedures adopted by management to ensure the execution of
management directives, and to help advance the successful
achievement of our objectives.
Scope of Managements Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting In our Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2004 previously filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2005,
we incorrectly noted a scope limitation in our assessment
regarding the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting due to our failure to test the internal
control over financial reporting of both our Network Services
division, which we accounted for as a discontinued operation in
2004, and Globetec, Inc., a company that is 51% owned by us. In
our Form 10-K filed on March 31, 2005, we disclosed
that this scope limitation was based on the insignificance of
these operations (within the meaning of Rule 11-01(b) of
Regulation S-X) as well as, with respect to Globetec, our
inability to dictate or modify the controls of that entity.
Since we own 51% of Globetec and have the contractual right to
appoint a majority of the managers on Globetecs Board of
Managers, we were incorrect in concluding that we are unable to
dictate or modify the controls of Globetec. In addition, while
the entities insignificance is a proper reason for
excluding such entities from our internal control over financial
reporting testing, we should not have characterized this
exclusion from our internal control over financial reporting
testing as a scope limitation.
We determined that both our Network Services divisions and
Globetecs account balances and processes should be
excluded from our internal control over financial reporting
evaluation process based on a materiality and scoping analysis
that we performed similar to that prescribed by paragraphs 22
and 23 of Auditing Standard No. 2 An Audit of
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Performed in
Conjunction with An Audit of the Financial Statement. Pursuant
to this materiality and scoping analysis, we determined that the
account balances and processes of each of our Network Services
division and Globetec were insignificant from a quantitative and
qualitative perspective. We based our conclusion on the fact
that our Network Services divisions and Globetecs
combined net assets, revenues and net loss as of and for the
year ended December 31, 2004 were $7.8 million,
$24.7 million and $1.8 million, respectively, each of
which is less than 4% of the related line items on our financial
statements, and therefore individually and in the aggregate
immaterial to our financial position and operations. We
therefore determined that the lack of testing of the internal
controls over financial reporting of our Network Services
division and Globetec would not lead to a material misstatement
of our financial statements.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial
Reporting There were no changes in our internal
control over financial reporting identified in connection with
the evaluation required by paragraph (d) of Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15 or 15d-15 that occurred during our last fiscal
quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely
to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
Our independent auditors have issued an attestation report on
managements assessment of our internal control over
financial reporting. That report appears below.
F-23
Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting
Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of
MasTec, Inc.
We have audited managements assessment, included in the
accompanying Managements Annual Report on Internal Control
over Financial Reporting, that MasTec, Inc. did not maintain
effective internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2004, because of the effect of the material
weakness identified in managements assessment, based on
the criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). MasTec,
Inc.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. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
managements assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness
of the companys 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, evaluating
managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design
and operation effectiveness of internal control, 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 companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed 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 companys
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
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
A material weakness is a control deficiency, or combination of
control deficiencies, that results in more than a remote
likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or interim
financial statements will not be prevented or detected. The
following material weakness was identified and included in
managements assessment:
|
|
|
Management identified weaknesses in internal controls involving
inventory practices and policies in the Companys ITS
division, with respect to inventory pricing on receipt and the
related cost of revenue, and inventory tracking prior to sale or
use. Management believes this constitutes a material weakness in
internal control over the financial reporting process, including
the Companys closing process, as it relates to this
division. As a result of this weakness, a significant adjustment
to correct for this weakness was required and has been recorded
by the Company in preparing the 2004 financial statements.
Management has undertaken a review of the related account and
believes that it has identified and corrected any misstatement
resulting from this material weakness. |
|
|
Since December 31, 2004, the Company has improved the
system of internal controls related to inventory by continuing
to implement the Oracle inventory module into the Companys
financial |
F-24
|
|
|
system and testing the system to ensure it is accurately
capturing the correct prices and quantities. Once this system
can be relied upon, management will not need to perform as many
manual procedures. |
This material weakness was considered in determining the nature,
timing, and extent of audit tests applied in our audit of the
2004 financial statements, and this report does not affect our
report dated March 29th, 2005 on those financial
statements, which expressed an unqualified opinion.
In our opinion, managements assessment that MasTec, Inc.
did not maintain effective internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2004, is fairly stated, in all
material respects, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by
COSO. Also, in our opinion, because of the effect of the
material weakness described above on the achievement of the
objectives of the control criteria, MasTec, Inc. has not
maintained effective internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2004, based on the criteria established
in Internal Control Integrated Framework
issued by the COSO.
Miami, FL
March 29th, 2005
F-25
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and
Shareholders of MasTec, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of
MasTec, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004, and
the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in
shareholders equity, and cash flows for the year then
ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements 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 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 audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of MasTec, Inc. as of December 31, 2004,
and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash
flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
effectiveness of MasTecs Inc. internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on
criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission (COSO) and our report dated
March 29, 2005 expressed a qualified opinion thereon.
Miami, Florida
March 29, 2005
F-26
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and
Shareholders of MasTec, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of
MasTec, Inc. as of December 31, 2003, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders
equity, and cash flows for each of the two years in the period
ended December 31, 2003 (as restated See
Note 2). These financial statements are the responsibility
of the Companys 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, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of MasTec, Inc. at December 31, 2003 and
the consolidated results of their operations and their cash
flows for each of the two years in the period ended
December 31, 2003 (as restated), in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
Miami, Florida
July 23, 2004, except for
Note 10, as to which the
date is March 30, 2005
F-27
MASTEC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
|
|
|
As Restated | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands except per share amounts) | |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation
|
|
|
683,855 |
|
|
|
744,587 |
|
|
|
828,743 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
33,760 |
|
|
|
27,586 |
|
|
|
17,099 |
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
107,446 |
|
|
|
70,112 |
|
|
|
74,550 |
|
Goodwill impairment
|
|
|
79,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net of interest income
|
|
|
18,306 |
|
|
|
19,180 |
|
|
|
19,478 |
|
Other (expense) income, net
|
|
|
(9,973 |
) |
|
|
1,242 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle, benefit for income taxes and
minority interest
|
|
|
(166,583 |
) |
|
|
(32,743 |
) |
|
|
(25,884 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
59,345 |
|
|
|
8,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
Minority Interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(333 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(107,238 |
) |
|
|
(24,440 |
) |
|
|
(26,217 |
) |
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(12,596 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss from continuing operations
|
|
|
(119,834 |
) |
|
|
(24,440 |
) |
|
|
(26,217 |
) |
Discontinued operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on write-off of assets of discontinued operations, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(19,165 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
|
(16,722 |
) |
|
|
(27,859 |
) |
|
|
(4,055 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
|
$ |
(52,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,437 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(2.50 |
) |
|
$ |
(.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(.54 |
) |
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.35 |
) |
|
|
(.58 |
) |
|
|
(.48 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total basic and diluted net loss per share
|
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
47,922 |
|
|
|
48,084 |
|
|
|
48,382 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
$ |
(2.59 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(0.26 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share
|
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
F-28
MASTEC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except shares) | |
Assets |
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
19,415 |
|
|
$ |
19,548 |
|
|
Accounts receivable, unbilled revenue and retainage, net
|
|
|
208,211 |
|
|
|
200,743 |
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
32,781 |
|
|
|
45,293 |
|
|
Income tax refund receivable
|
|
|
4,667 |
|
|
|
2,846 |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
31,801 |
|
|
|
43,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
296,875 |
|
|
|
312,258 |
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
85,832 |
|
|
|
69,303 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
150,984 |
|
|
|
138,640 |
|
Deferred taxes, net
|
|
|
55,083 |
|
|
|
50,732 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
39,489 |
|
|
|
33,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
628,263 |
|
|
$ |
604,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
$ |
4,709 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
100,698 |
|
|
|
113,333 |
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
78,108 |
|
|
|
64,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
183,515 |
|
|
|
178,128 |
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
31,974 |
|
|
|
38,678 |
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
196,956 |
|
|
|
196,059 |
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $1.00 par value; authorized shares
5,000,000; issued and outstanding shares none
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock $0.10 par value; authorized shares
100,000,000; issued and outstanding shares 48,222,000 in
2003 and 48,597,000 in 2004
|
|
|
4,822 |
|
|
|
4,860 |
|
|
Capital surplus
|
|
|
349,823 |
|
|
|
353,033 |
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(117,847 |
) |
|
|
(167,284 |
) |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income
|
|
|
(20,980 |
) |
|
|
544 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
215,818 |
|
|
|
191,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity
|
|
$ |
628,263 |
|
|
$ |
604,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
F-29
MASTEC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS
EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock | |
|
|
|
Earnings | |
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Capital | |
|
(Accumulated | |
|
Comprehensive | |
|
|
|
Comprehensive | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
Amount | |
|
Surplus | |
|
Deficit) | |
|
(Loss) Income | |
|
Total | |
|
Income (Loss) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Balance December 31, 2001, as restated
|
|
|
47,905 |
|
|
$ |
4,791 |
|
|
$ |
348,022 |
|
|
$ |
71,008 |
|
|
$ |
(20,006 |
) |
|
$ |
403,815 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Net loss, as restated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(136,556 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(136,556 |
) |
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,556 |
) |
|
|
(4,556 |
) |
|
|
(4,556 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss for period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(141,112 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock issued, primarily for stock options exercised
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
297 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2002, as restated
|
|
|
48,006 |
|
|
$ |
4,801 |
|
|
$ |
348,319 |
|
|
$ |
(65,548 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,562 |
) |
|
$ |
263,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(52,299 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(52,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(52,299 |
) |
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,582 |
|
|
|
3,582 |
|
|
|
3,582 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss for period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(48,717 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock issued, primarily for stock options exercised
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
1,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,082 |
|
|
|
|
|
Tax benefit resulting from stock option plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
443 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
443 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2003
|
|
|
48,222 |
|
|
$ |
4,822 |
|
|
$ |
349,823 |
|
|
$ |
(117,847 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,980 |
) |
|
$ |
215,818 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,437 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,437 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,437 |
) |
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,524 |
|
|
|
21,524 |
|
|
|
21,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non cash stock compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss for period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(27,913 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock issued, primarily for stock options exercised
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
1,840 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,878 |
|
|
|
|
|
Tax benefit resulting from stock option plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2004
|
|
|
48,597 |
|
|
$ |
4,860 |
|
|
$ |
353,033 |
|
|
$ |
(167,284 |
) |
|
$ |
544 |
|
|
$ |
191,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
F-30
MASTEC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
|
|
|
As Restated | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Cash flows from operating activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(119,834 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,440 |
) |
|
$ |
(26,217 |
) |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss from continuing operations to
net cash provided by operating activities of continuing
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
34,643 |
|
|
|
28,220 |
|
|
|
17,588 |
|
|
Non-cash stock and restricted stock compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
(Gain) loss on disposal of assets and investments
|
|
|
(5,441 |
) |
|
|
(5,562 |
) |
|
|
(161 |
) |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
15,088 |
|
|
|
4,278 |
|
|
|
5,086 |
|
|
Write-down of assets
|
|
|
20,375 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,020 |
|
|
Income tax refunds
|
|
|
53,414 |
|
|
|
28,121 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
Provision for inventory obsolescence
|
|
|
5,203 |
|
|
|
1,837 |
|
|
|
902 |
|
|
Cumulative change in accounting principle, net
|
|
|
12,596 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill impairment
|
|
|
79,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
Deferred income tax benefit
|
|
|
(51,844 |
) |
|
|
(5,140 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities net of effect of acquisitions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, unbilled revenue and retainage, net
|
|
|
29,568 |
|
|
|
(31,678 |
) |
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(8,484 |
) |
|
|
(11,997 |
) |
|
|
(13,786 |
) |
|
|
Other assets, current and non-current portion
|
|
|
(17,181 |
) |
|
|
(14,736 |
) |
|
|
(2,211 |
) |
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(4,951 |
) |
|
|
34,404 |
|
|
|
13,763 |
|
|
|
Other liabilities, current and non-current portion
|
|
|
11,911 |
|
|
|
3,687 |
|
|
|
7,509 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities of continuing
operations
|
|
|
54,773 |
|
|
|
6,994 |
|
|
|
5,406 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows (used in) provided by investing activities of
continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(18,925 |
) |
|
|
(10,961 |
) |
|
|
(9,310 |
) |
|
Cash paid for acquisitions and contingent consideration, net of
cash acquired
|
|
|
(17,269 |
) |
|
|
(1,861 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Investments in unconsolidated companies partner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(275 |
) |
|
|
(1,092 |
) |
|
Investment in life insurance policies
|
|
|
(1,840 |
) |
|
|
(1,803 |
) |
|
|
(1,785 |
) |
|
Net proceeds from sale of assets and investments
|
|
|
13,891 |
|
|
|
22,253 |
|
|
|
8,065 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities of
continuing operations
|
|
|
(24,143 |
) |
|
|
7,353 |
|
|
|
(4,122 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows used in financing activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments proceeds from revolving credit facilities, net
|
|
|
(70,693 |
) |
|
|
1,309 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds repayments from other borrowings, net
|
|
|
(414 |
) |
|
|
(510 |
) |
|
|
(3,283 |
) |
|
Payments of capital lease obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,068 |
) |
|
|
(363 |
) |
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
1,082 |
|
|
|
2,643 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities of continuing operations
|
|
|
(70,797 |
) |
|
|
(1,187 |
) |
|
|
(1,003 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(40,167 |
) |
|
|
13,160 |
|
|
|
281 |
|
Net effect of translation on cash
|
|
|
2,465 |
|
|
|
(1,922 |
) |
|
|
432 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents beginning of period
|
|
|
48,478 |
|
|
|
8,730 |
|
|
|
19,415 |
|
Cash used in discontinued operations
|
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
(553 |
) |
|
|
(580 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents end of period
|
|
$ |
8,730 |
|
|
$ |
19,415 |
|
|
$ |
19,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
$ |
19,576 |
|
|
$ |
15,504 |
|
|
$ |
17,643 |
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
$ |
1,555 |
|
|
$ |
155 |
|
|
$ |
68 |
|
Supplemental non-cash disclosures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in unconsolidated companies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,775 |
|
As of December 31, 2002, approximately $1.9 million
was accrued for contingent consideration earned in that year for
acquisitions consummated in prior periods. The Company
subsequently paid the $1.9 million contingent consideration
amounts during the years ended December 31, 2003.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
F-31
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 1 Nature of the Business and Summary of
Significant Accounting Policies
MasTec, Inc. (collectively, with its subsidiaries,
MasTec or the Company) serves providers
of telecommunications, broadband (including cable, satellite and
high speed Internet), energy services, traffic control and
homeland security systems throughout many parts of North
America. Although the Companys customers may contract for
a full range of services, the Companys offerings are more
typically separated into the construction, design and
installation or the maintenance and upgrade, of infrastructure.
MasTec is organized as a Florida corporation and its fiscal year
ends December 31. MasTec or its predecessors have been
active in the specialty infrastructure services industry for
over 70 years.
In connection with the filing of its Annual Report on
Form 10-K for
2003, the Company restated its 2002 financial statements as
discussed in Note 2. All 2002 amounts in the financial
statements reflect these restatements.
The following is a summary of the significant accounting
policies followed in the preparation of the accompanying
consolidated financial statements:
Management Estimates. The preparation of financial
statements in conformity with United States generally accepted
accounting principles requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets,
liabilities, revenue and expenses, and related disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities. The more significant
estimates relate to our revenue recognition, allowance for
doubtful accounts, intangible assets, accrued insurance, income
taxes, litigation and contingencies. Estimates are based on
historical experience and on various other assumptions that the
Company believes to be reasonable under the circumstances, the
results of which form the basis for judgments about results and
the carrying values of assets and liabilities. Actual results
and values may differ from these estimates.
Principles of Consolidation. The consolidated
financial statements include MasTec and its subsidiaries. The
Company entered into a joint venture with a third party at the
end of 2003 in which the Company owns a 51% interest. Other
parties interests in consolidated entities are reported as
minority interests. All intercompany accounts and transactions
have been eliminated in consolidation.
Reclassifications. Certain prior year amounts have
been reclassified to conform to the 2004 presentation. In
addition, as discussed in Note 10, the Company ceased doing
business in Brazil and in network services in 2004. Accordingly,
the net loss for these entities in 2002 and 2003 have been
reclassified to loss from discontinued operations in the
Companys consolidated statements of operations.
Comprehensive Loss. Comprehensive loss is a measure
of net loss and all other changes in equity that result from
transactions other than with shareholders. Comprehensive loss
consists of net loss and foreign currency translation
adjustments.
Revenue Recognition. Revenue and related costs for
master and other service agreements billed on a time and
materials basis are recognized as the services are rendered.
There are also some service agreements that are billed on a
fixed fee basis. Under the Companys fixed fee master
service and similar type service agreements the Company
furnishes various specified units of service for a separate
fixed price per unit of service. The Company recognizes revenue
as the related unit of service is performed. For service
agreements on a fixed fee basis, profitability will be reduced
if the actual costs to complete each unit exceed original
estimates. The Company also immediately recognizes the full
amount of any estimated loss on these fixed fee projects if
estimated costs to complete the remaining units exceed the
revenue to be received from such units.
The Company recognizes revenue on unit based
construction/installation projects using the
units-of-delivery
method. The Companys unit based contracts relate primarily
to contracts that require the installation or construction of
specified units within an infrastructure system. Under the
units-of-delivery
method revenue is recognized at the contractually agreed price
per unit as the units are completed and
F-32
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
delivered. Profitability will be reduced if the actual costs to
complete each unit exceed original estimates. The Company is
also required to immediately recognize the full amount of any
estimated loss on these projects if estimated costs to complete
the remaining units for the project exceed the revenue to be
received from such units. For certain customers with unit based
construction/installation contracts the Company recognizes
revenue after the service is performed and work orders are
approved to ensure that collectibility is probable from these
customers. Revenue from completed work orders not collected in
accordance with the payment terms established with these
customers is not recognized until collection is assured.
The Companys non-unit based, fixed price
installation/construction contracts relate primarily to
contracts that require the construction, design and installation
of an entire infrastructure system. The Company recognizes
revenue and related costs as work progresses on non-unit based,
fixed price contracts using the
percentage-of-completion
method, which relies on contract revenue and estimates of total
expected contract revenue and costs. The Company estimates total
project costs and profit to be earned on each long-term,
fixed-price contract prior to commencement of work on the
contract. The Company follows this method since reasonably
dependable estimates of the revenue and costs applicable to
various stages of a contract can be made. Under the
percentage-of-completion
method, the Company records revenue and recognizes profit or
loss as work on the contract progresses. The cumulative amount
of revenue recorded on a contract at a specified point in time
is the percentage of total estimated revenue that incurred costs
to date bear to estimated total contract costs, after adjusting
estimated total contract costs for the most recent information.
If, as work progresses, the actual contract costs exceed
estimates, the profit recognized on revenue from that contract
decreases. The Company recognizes the full amount of any
estimated loss on a contract at the time the estimates indicate
such a loss.
The Companys customers generally supply materials such as
cable, conduit and telephone equipment. Customer furnished
materials are not included in revenue and cost of sales as all
materials are purchased by the customer. The customer determines
the specification of the materials that are to be utilized to
perform installation/construction services. The Company is only
responsible for the performance of the installation/construction
services and not the materials for any contract that includes
customer furnished materials and nor does the Company have any
risk associated with customer furnished materials. The
Companys customers retain the financial and performance
risk of all customer furnished materials.
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on
uncompleted contracts are classified as current liabilities. Any
costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings are
classified as current assets. Work in process on contracts is
based on work performed but not billed to customers as per
individual contract terms.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts. The Company
maintains allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses
resulting from the inability of its customers to make required
payments. Management analyzes past due balances based on invoice
date, historical bad debt experience, customer concentrations,
customer credit-worthiness, customer financial condition and
credit reports, the availability of mechanics and other
liens, the existence of payment bonds and other sources of
payment, and current economic trends when evaluating the
adequacy of the allowance for doubtful accounts. The Company
reviews the adequacy of the reserves on a quarterly basis.
Amounts are written off against the allowance when deemed
uncollectible.
Basic and Diluted Net Loss per Share. Basic net loss
per common share is computed by dividing income available to
common shareholders by the weighted average number of common
shares outstanding. Diluted net loss per common share include
the dilutive effect of stock options using the treasury stock
method. Potentially dilutive shares for the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, of approximately
74,000 shares, 479,000 shares and 593,000 shares,
respectively, were not included in the diluted per share
calculation because their effect would be anti-dilutive.
Accordingly, for the years ended
F-33
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, diluted net loss per
common share is the same as basic net loss per common share.
Cash and Cash Equivalents. All short-term
investments with maturities of three months or less when
purchased are considered to be cash equivalents. Restricted cash
related to collateral of the revolving credit facility is also
included in cash and cash equivalents.
Inventories. Inventories consist of materials and
supplies for construction projects, and are typically purchased
on a project-by-project basis. Inventories are valued using the
weighted average-cost method and are stated at the lower of cost
or market. Construction projects are completed pursuant to
customer specifications. The loss of the customer or the
cancellation of the project could result in an impairment of the
value of materials purchased for that customer or project.
Technological or market changes can also render certain
materials obsolete. Inventory reserves are determined based upon
the specific facts and circumstances for each project and market
conditions. During 2002, 2003 and 2004, the Company recorded a
provision for inventory obsolescence of $5.2 million,
$1.8 million and $900,000, respectively, in Costs of
revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Property and Equipment. Property and equipment are
recorded at cost. Depreciation is computed using the
straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the
respective assets. Leasehold improvements are depreciated over
the shorter of the term of the lease or the estimated useful
lives of the improvements. Expenditures for repairs and
maintenance are charged to expense as incurred. Expenditures for
betterments and major improvements are capitalized and
depreciated over the remaining useful life of the asset. The
carrying amounts of assets sold or retired and related
accumulated depreciation are eliminated in the year of disposal
and the resulting gains and losses are included in other income
or expense.
Deferred Financing Costs. Deferred financing costs
related to the Companys revolving credit facility and the
senior subordinated notes whose short and long-term portions are
included in other current and non-current assets in the
consolidated balance sheets are amortized over the related terms
of the debt using the effective interest method. Net deferred
financing costs were $5.1 million and $4.2 million at
December 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively.
Software Capitalization. The Company capitalizes
certain costs incurred in connection with developing or
obtaining internal use software in accordance with American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants Statement of Position
98-1, Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software Developed or
Obtained for Internal Use. These capitalized software costs are
included in Property and equipment, net in the
consolidated balance sheets and are being amortized ratably over
a period not to exceed seven years.
Intangibles and Other Long Lived Assets. Long-lived
assets and goodwill are recorded at the lower of carrying value
or estimated fair value. Intangibles are amortized on a straight
line basis over their definite useful life. Long-lived assets
are depreciated using the straight-line method over the shorter
of the useful lives (five to forty years) or lease terms (five
to seven years for leasehold improvements) of the respective
assets. Repairs and maintenance on such items are expensed as
incurred.
Management assesses the impairment of intangibles long-lived
assets and goodwill at least annually or whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may
not be recoverable.
The Company follows the provisions of Statement of Financial
Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets (SFAS No. 142). Goodwill
acquired in a purchase business combination and determined to
have an infinite useful life is not amortized, but instead
tested for impairment at least annually in accordance with the
provisions of SFAS No. 142. In addition, acquired
intangible assets are required to be recognized and amortized
over their useful lives if the benefit of the asset is based on
contractual or legal rights. Effective January 1, 2002, we
adopted SFAS No. 142 resulting in a write-down of our
goodwill, net of tax, in the amount of $25.7 million, which
is reflected in
F-34
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
the consolidated financial statements as a cumulative effect of
a change in accounting principle as discussed in Note 3.
Impairment losses subsequent to adoption are performed during
the fourth quarter of each year starting in 2002 and are
reflected in operating income or loss in the consolidated
statement of operations. During the fourth quarter of 2002, the
Company recorded an additional impairment charge of
$79.7 million which is reflected in operating losses in the
consolidated statement of operations for the year ended
December 31, 2002. No impairment charges were recorded in
2003 and 2004 in connection with the annual review. In
connection with the abandonment of the Brazil subsidiary as
discussed in Note 10, the Company wrote off goodwill
associated with this reporting entity in the year ended
December 31, 2004 in the amount of $12.3 million which
is included in the loss from discontinued operations.
The Company reviews its long-lived assets, including property
and equipment that are held and used in its operations for
impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate
that the carrying amount of the asset may not be recoverable, as
required by SFAS No. 144. If such an event or change
in circumstances is present, the Company will estimate the
undiscounted future cash flows, less the future outflows
necessary to obtain those inflows, expected to result from the
use of the asset and its eventual disposition. If the sum of the
undiscounted future cash flows is less than the carrying amount
of the related assets, the Company will recognize an impairment
loss or review its depreciation policies as may be appropriate.
The Company records impairment losses resulting from such
abandonment in operating income. Assets to be disposed of are
reclassified as assets held for sale at the lower of their
carrying amount or fair value less costs to sell. Write-downs to
fair value less costs to sell are reported above the operating
income line as other expense. See Note 6 for discussion of
impairment losses recognized in 2002, 2003 and 2004.
Accrued Insurance. The Company maintains insurance
policies subject to per claim deductibles of $2 million for
our workers compensation and general liability policies
and $3 million for our automobile liability policy. The
Company has excess umbrella coverage for losses in excess of the
primary coverages up to $100 million per claim and in the
aggregate. The liabilities are actuarially determined on a
quarterly basis for unpaid claims and associated expenses,
including the ultimate liability for claims incurred and an
estimate of claims incurred but not reported. The accruals are
based upon known facts, historical trends and our reasonable
estimate of future expenses. However, a change in experience or
actuarial assumptions could nonetheless materially affect
results of operations in a particular period. Known amounts for
claims that are in the process of being settled, but that have
been paid in periods subsequent to those being reported, are
booked in such reporting period.
On January 1, 2004, MasTec, Inc. formed a captive insurance
subsidiary, JMC Insurance Company, Inc. (JMC), a
South Carolina corporation, to write a portion of its
workers compensation, general liability and automobile
liability coverages under deductible reinsurance policies. JMC,
which is the Companys first formation and management of a
captive insurance company, was capitalized with a
$1 million letter of credit. JMC is a wholly owned
subsidiary of MasTec Inc. and is consolidated in the
Companys financial statements.
Income Taxes. Income taxes are recorded using the
liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes. Under
this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized
for the expected future tax consequence of temporary differences
between the financial statement and income tax bases of our
assets and liabilities. The Company estimates income taxes in
each of the jurisdictions in which the Company operates. This
process involves estimating tax exposure together with assessing
temporary differences resulting from differing treatment of
items, such as deferred revenue, for tax and accounting
purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and
liabilities, which are included within the consolidated balance
sheet. The recording of a net deferred tax asset assumes the
realization of such assets in the future. Otherwise a valuation
allowance must be recorded to reduce this asset to its net
realizable value. The Company considers future taxable income
and ongoing prudent and feasible tax planning strategies in
assessing the need for a valuation allowance. In the event that
the Company determines that
F-35
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
it will not be able to realize all or part of the net deferred
tax asset in the future, an adjustment to the deferred tax asset
would be charged to income in the period such determination is
made.
As a result of its 2003 and 2004 operating losses, the Company
recorded valuation allowances aggregating $8.3 million and
$32.3 million as of December 31, 2003 and 2004,
respectively, to reduce certain of its net deferred Federal,
foreign and state tax assets to their estimated net realizable
value. The Company anticipates that it will generate sufficient
pretax income in the future to realize its deferred tax assets.
In the event that the Companys future pretax operating
income is insufficient for it to use its deferred tax assets,
the Company has based its determination that the deferred tax
assets are still realizable based on a feasible tax planning
strategy that is available to the Company involving the sale of
one of its divisions.
Equity Investments. The Company has one common stock
investment which the Company accounts for by the equity method
because the Company owns between 20% and 50% of the common stock
and the Company has a non-controlling ownership interest. The
Companys share of its earnings or losses in this
investment is included in the consolidated statements of
operations. As of December 31, 2004 the Companys
investment exceeded the net equity of such investment and
accordingly the excess is considered to be equity goodwill. The
Company evaluates the equity goodwill for impairment under
Accounting Principle Board No. 18, The Equity Method
of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock, as amended.
In December 2003, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation
No. 46R (FIN 46R) which clarified some of
the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 46,
Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities.
(FIN 46) and exempted certain entities from its
requirements. FIN 46R was effective on March 31, 2004.
The Company has considered the provisions of FIN 46R for
this investment and believes it will not be necessary to include
in the consolidated financial statements any assets, liabilities
or activities of this investment.
Stock Based Compensation. The Company accounts for
its stock-based award plans in accordance with Accounting
Principle Board (APB) Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related
interpretations, under which compensation expense is recorded to
the extent that the current market price of the underlying stock
exceeds the exercise price.
The Company has reflected below the 2002, 2003 and 2004 net
loss and the pro forma net loss as if compensation expense
relative to the fair value of the options granted had been
recorded under the provisions of SFAS No. 123
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. The fair
value of each option grant was estimated using the Black-Scholes
option-pricing model with the following assumptions used for
grants in 2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively: a five, seven and
seven year expected life; volatility factors of 74%, 76% and
80%; risk-free interest rates of 3.0%, 3.0% and 3.6%; and no
dividend payments. The required pro forma disclosures are as
follows: (in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net loss, as reported
|
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
|
$ |
(52,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,437 |
) |
Deduct: Total stock-based employee compensation expense
determined under fair value based methods for all awards
|
|
|
(5,390 |
) |
|
|
(4,092 |
) |
|
|
(8,734 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net loss
|
|
$ |
(141,946 |
) |
|
$ |
(56,391 |
) |
|
$ |
(58,171 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
Pro forma
|
|
$ |
(2.96 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.17 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.20 |
) |
F-36
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
The Company also grants restricted stock, which is valued based
on the market price of the common stock on the date of grant.
Compensation expense arising from restricted stock grants is
recognized using the straight-line method over the period of the
restrictions. Unearned compensation for performance-based
options and restricted stock is shown as a reduction of
stockholders equity in the consolidated balance sheets.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments. The Company
estimates the fair market value of financial instruments through
the use of public market prices, quotes from financial
institutions and other available information. Judgment is
required in interpreting data to develop estimates of market
value and, accordingly, amounts are not necessarily indicative
of the amounts that we could realize in a current market
exchange. Short-term financial instruments, including cash and
cash equivalents, accounts and notes receivable, accounts
payable and other liabilities, consist primarily of instruments
without extended maturities, the fair value of which, based on
managements estimates, equaled their carrying values. At
December 31, 2003 and 2004, the fair value of senior
subordinated notes was $204.7 million and
$184.5 million, respectively, based on quoted market
values. The Company uses letters of credit to back certain
insurance policies. The letters of credit reflect fair value as
a condition of their underlying purpose and are subject to fees
competitively determined in the marketplace.
New Accounting Pronouncements. On December 17,
2003, the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
SEC) published Staff Accounting Bulletin 104,
Revenue Recognition, (SAB 104) to
revise or rescind portions of the interpretative guidance
included in Topic 13 of the codification of staff
accounting bulletins in order to make this interpretive guidance
consistent with current authoritative accounting and auditing
guidance and SEC rules and regulations. The principal revisions
relate to the rescission of material no longer necessary because
of private sector developments in U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles. The adoption of SAB 104 during
December 2003 did not have a material effect on the
Companys results of operations or financial position.
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 123R which requires
the measurement of all employee share-based payments to
employees, including grants of employee stock options, using a
fair-value-based method and the recording of such expense in the
consolidated statements of operations. The accounting provisions
of SFAS 123R are effective for reporting periods beginning
after June 15, 2005. The Company is required to adopt
SFAS 123R in the third quarter of fiscal 2005. The pro
forma disclosures previously permitted under SFAS 123 no
longer will be an alternative to financial statement
recognition. See Note 1 Stock Based Compensation for
the pro forma net loss and net loss per share amounts, for 2002
through 2004, as if the Company had used a fair-value-based
method similar to the methods required under SFAS 123R to
measure compensation expense for employee stock incentive
awards. Although the Company has not yet determined whether the
adoption of SFAS 123R will result in amounts that are
similar to the current pro forma disclosures under
SFAS 123, the Company is evaluating the requirements under
SFAS 123R and expect the adoption to have a significant
adverse impact on the results of operations.
In March 2004, the FASB issued EITF Issue
No. 03-1
(EITF 03-1),
The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and Its
Application to Certain Investments which provided new
guidance for assessing impairment losses on investments.
Additionally,
EITF 03-1 includes
new disclosure requirements for investments that are deemed to
be temporarily impaired. In September 2004, the FASB delayed the
accounting provisions of
EITF 03-1; however
the disclosure requirements remain effective for annual periods
ending after June 15, 2004. The Company will evaluate the
impact of
EITF 03-1 once
final guidance is issued.
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153,
Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets (SFAS 153).
This Statement amends the guidance in APB Opinion No. 29,
Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions
(APB 29). APB 29 provided an exception to
the basic measurement
F-37
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
principle (fair value) for exchanges of similar assets,
requiring that some nonmonetary exchanges be recorded on a
carryover basis. SFAS 153 eliminates the exception to fair
value for exchanges of similar productive assets and replaces it
with a general exception for exchange transactions that do not
have commercial substance, that is, transactions that are not
expected to result in significant changes in the cash flows of
the reporting entity. The provisions of SFAS 153 are
effective for exchanges of nonmonetary assets occurring in
fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2005. We believe
that SFAS 153 will have no significant effect on the
financial position, results of operations, and cash flows of the
Company.
Note 2 Restatement of Financial Statements
|
|
|
2002 Financial Statement Restatement |
In connection with the audit of the 2003 financial statements
and filing the 2003 Annual Report on
Form 10-K, the
Company identified errors in amounts previously reported in its
financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2002.
The Company made an error in determining the ability to realize
approximately $4.9 million of its net deferred tax assets
at December 31, 2002 relating to certain state income
taxes. Understatements were also identified for errors in
computing self-insurance reserves at December 31, 2000,
2001 and 2002 and insurance claims payments for 2002 made in
2003 that were not accrued as of December 31, 2002.
Insurance expense was increased for the year ended
December 31, 2002 in the amount of $4.7 million
($2.9 million, net of tax). The Company therefore decided
that it would be appropriate to restate its financial
information beginning with the year ended December 31, 2000
and including its annual financial statements for 2001 and 2002.
The following table sets forth the impact of its restatements on
certain amounts previously reported in the Consolidated
Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2002:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
As Reported | |
|
As Restated* | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Statement of Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
838,055 |
|
|
$ |
838,055 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding Depreciation
|
|
|
745,178 |
|
|
|
749,422 |
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
118,278 |
|
|
|
118,750 |
|
Loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
and benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
(168,608 |
) |
|
|
(173,324 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
65,473 |
|
|
|
62,439 |
|
Net loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting
principle
|
|
|
(103,135 |
) |
|
|
(110,885 |
) |
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(128,806 |
) |
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
Basic and diluted loss per share
|
|
$ |
(2.69 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
|
* |
Before effect of reclassifying 2002 results of operations of the
Brazil and network services Operations to loss from discontinued
operation discussed in Note 10. |
During the 2002 financial statement audit, MasTec prepared a tax
strategy to support the carrying value of its deferred tax
asset. This tax strategy did not consider the separate
components of state taxes and federal taxes. During the 2003
financial statement audit, the Company considered, for the first
time, the issue of whether the tax strategy was sufficient to
support a certain portion of the deferred tax asset related to
state taxes. Under this revised analysis considering the impact
of state taxes as well as federal taxes, MasTec determined that
its reserves for 2002 and 2003 were understated. Specifically,
the Company
F-38
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
determined that the estimated gain from the sale of certain
assets and expected revenue apportioned to each state would be
insufficient to offset losses in certain states. MasTec
therefore restated its 2002 financial statements to record a
valuation allowance against the deferred tax asset in the amount
of $4.9 million.
MasTec recalculated its self-insurance reserve requirements for
the years ended December 31, 2000, 2001 and 2002 based on a
revision in the calculation of aggregate deductible limits
provided for under its insurance policies for automobile,
workers compensation and general liability claims.
Previously, MasTecs actuarially computed self-insurance
reserves for those years were calculated based on the
understanding that the aggregate deductible amounts were
effectively fixed under the policies and would not be adjusted.
In April 2004, Reliance Insurance Corp. (Reliance),
which was MasTecs insurer through July 2000 and which was
in liquidation, asserted the position that the policies
permitted it to adjust the aggregate deductible amounts upward
based on a payroll audit. Although Reliance had never audited
payroll, MasTec reviewed its own payroll information to
determine what adjustments would be required pursuant to the
position asserted by Reliance. Although management continues to
dispute the position asserted by Reliance, the self-insurance
reserves were ultimately adjusted in the amount of
$2.7 million in 2000, $2.2 million in 2001, and
$809,000 in 2002, due to a lack of available contemporaneous
documentation supporting its original understanding of the
policy requirements.
MasTec also restated its December 31, 2002 self-insurance
reserve to account for payments made by its third-party
administrator in 2002, but not paid by MasTec until 2003. MasTec
had not adjusted its 2002 self-insurance reserve for these
payments on the mistaken understanding that the payments had
already been accounted for in the actuarially computed
self-insurance reserve. As a result, MasTec increased its 2002
self-insurance reserve by $4.7 million to accrue payments
made by its third party administrator in 2002, but not paid
until 2003.
Note 3 Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
SFAS No. 142 requires companies to stop amortizing
goodwill and certain intangible assets with an indefinite useful
life. Instead, SFAS No. 142 requires that goodwill and
intangible assets deemed to have an indefinite useful life be
reviewed for impairment upon adoption of SFAS No. 142
and annually thereafter.
The Company continues to amortize identifiable intangible assets
that have a definite useful life. These consist exclusively of
non-compete agreements that expire in 2010. Total amortization
expense related to these non-compete agreements was
$0.5 million, $0.6 million and $0.5 million in
2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively. The remaining balance of
$1.1 million at December 31, 2004 will be amortized at
a rate of $0.2 million per year.
Under SFAS No. 142, goodwill impairment is deemed to
exist if the net book value of a reporting unit exceeds its
estimated fair value as determined using a discounted cash flow
methodology applied to the particular unit. This methodology
differs from the Companys previous policy, in accordance
with accounting standards existing at that time, of using
undiscounted cash flows on an enterprise-wide basis to determine
recoverability. Upon adoption of SFAS No. 142 in the
first quarter of 2002, we recorded a one-time, non-cash charge
of approximately $25.7 million net of $13.8 million
tax benefit to reduce the carrying value of our goodwill. This
charge is reflected as a cumulative effect of an accounting
change in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations
of which $13.1 million has been reclassified to
discontinued operations. (See Note 10). The
SFAS No. 142 goodwill impairment recorded in the first
quarter is associated with goodwill resulting from the
acquisition of various inside plant infrastructure businesses
and is based on discounting our projected future cash flows for
these companies.
F-39
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
During the fourth quarter of 2002, the Company performed an
annual review of goodwill for impairment. The review resulted in
a goodwill impairment charge of approximately $79.7 million
($51.9 million, net of tax) and is based, in part, on an
overall decline in the market value of our stock and market
values of other companies that serve our industry. Impairment
adjustments recognized after adoption are required to be
recognized as operating expenses and have been presented under
Goodwill impairment in the accompanying consolidated
statements of operations. The primary factors contributing to
the impairment charge were the overall deterioration of the
business climate during 2002, the continued depression in the
Companys stock price, and the expected termination of
various operations as a result of our restructuring plan (see
Note 8).
During the fourth quarter of 2003 and 2004, the Company
performed its annual review of goodwill for impairment. No
impairment charge for 2003 and 2004 was required as a result of
this review. In connection with the abandonment of the Brazil
subsidiary as discussed in Note 10, the Company wrote off
goodwill in the year ended December 31, 2004 in the amount
of $12.3 million.
Note 4 Other Assets and Liabilities
Prepaid expenses and other current assets as of
December 31, 2003 and 2004 consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Deferred tax assets
|
|
$ |
208 |
|
|
$ |
6,107 |
|
Notes receivable
|
|
|
3,890 |
|
|
|
2,511 |
|
Non-trade receivables
|
|
|
7,374 |
|
|
|
22,164 |
|
Other investments and assets held for sale
|
|
|
7,712 |
|
|
|
5,884 |
|
Prepaid expenses and deposits
|
|
|
7,239 |
|
|
|
5,931 |
|
Other
|
|
|
5,378 |
|
|
|
1,231 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
$ |
31,801 |
|
|
$ |
43,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-current assets consist of the following as of
December 31, 2003 and 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Long-term receivables, including retainage
|
|
$ |
10,696 |
|
|
$ |
4,694 |
|
Equity investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,780 |
|
Investment in real estate
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
Long-term portion of deferred financing costs, net
|
|
|
3,639 |
|
|
|
2,414 |
|
Cash surrender value of insurance policies
|
|
|
4,691 |
|
|
|
5,279 |
|
Non-compete agreement, net
|
|
|
1,572 |
|
|
|
1,080 |
|
Insurance escrow
|
|
|
7,219 |
|
|
|
7,083 |
|
Other
|
|
|
9,989 |
|
|
|
7,072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
39,489 |
|
|
$ |
33,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-40
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
Other current and non-current liabilities consist of the
following as of December 31, 2003 and 2004
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued compensation
|
|
$ |
21,459 |
|
|
$ |
15,090 |
|
|
Accrued insurance
|
|
|
13,127 |
|
|
|
16,691 |
|
|
Accrued interest
|
|
|
6,458 |
|
|
|
6,329 |
|
|
Accrued restructuring
|
|
|
600 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
Accrued losses on contracts
|
|
|
7,482 |
|
|
|
2,638 |
|
|
Accrued guaranteed equity investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
Accrued labor claims
|
|
|
10,336 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to subcontractors
|
|
|
5,611 |
|
|
|
8,948 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
13,035 |
|
|
|
12,013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
78,108 |
|
|
$ |
64,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Non-current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued insurance
|
|
$ |
24,524 |
|
|
$ |
33,751 |
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
7,016 |
|
|
|
4,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
31,974 |
|
|
$ |
38,678 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 5 Accounts Receivable
Accounts receivable, classified as current, consist of the
following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Contract billings
|
|
$ |
188,593 |
|
|
$ |
183,873 |
|
Retainage
|
|
|
15,252 |
|
|
|
13,533 |
|
Unbilled revenue
|
|
|
33,210 |
|
|
|
23,297 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
237,055 |
|
|
|
220,703 |
|
Less allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
28,844 |
|
|
|
19,960 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
$ |
208,211 |
|
|
$ |
200,743 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retainage, which has been billed but is not due until completion
of performance and acceptance by customers, is expected to be
collected within one year. Any retainage expected to be
collected beyond a year is recorded in long-term other assets.
F-41
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
Activity for the allowance for doubtful accounts is as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Allowance for doubtful accounts at beginning of year
|
|
$ |
25,843 |
|
|
$ |
28,844 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts from continued operations
|
|
|
4,278 |
|
|
|
5,086 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts from discontinued operations
|
|
|
4,517 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts charged against the allowance
|
|
|
(5,794 |
) |
|
|
(13,970 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts at end of year
|
|
$ |
28,844 |
|
|
$ |
19,960 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 6 Property and Equipment
Property and equipment including property and equipment under
capital leases, is comprised of the following as of
December 31, 2003 and 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Useful Lives | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
(In Years) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Land
|
|
$ |
5,235 |
|
|
$ |
5,235 |
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings and leasehold improvements
|
|
|
9,642 |
|
|
|
9,736 |
|
|
|
5 - 40 |
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
212,613 |
|
|
|
176,531 |
|
|
|
2 - 15 |
|
Office furniture and equipment
|
|
|
38,415 |
|
|
|
33,224 |
|
|
|
3 - 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
265,905 |
|
|
|
224,726 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(180,073 |
) |
|
|
(155,423 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
85,832 |
|
|
$ |
69,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment under capitalized leasing arrangements
are depreciated over their estimated useful lives.
Management reviews long-lived assets for impairment whenever
events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying
amount may not be realizable. If an evaluation is required, the
estimated future undiscounted cash flows associated with the
asset are compared to the assets carrying amount to determine if
an impairment of such asset is necessary. The effect of any
impairment would be to expense the difference between the fair
value of such asset and its carrying value.
A review of the carrying value of property and equipment was
conducted during the fourth quarter of 2002 in accordance with
SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. This review was conducted in
connection with the Companys plan of exiting businesses
that did not have adequate revenue or margins to support the
desired level of profitability and consideration of changes in
the business environment which caused change in the extent and
manner in which these assets were being used. Depreciation
expense was reduced by $5.8 million and $5.9 million
for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004,
respectively, from the amount of expense which would had been
reported using the previous useful lives as a result of the
change in estimate.
An impairment loss for the years ended December 31, 2002,
2003 and 2004 of $12.8 million, $0.9 million and
$2.0 million, respectively, has been recognized and is
presented in other (expense) income in the accompanying
Consolidated Statements of Operations, for property and
equipment whose carrying value was not recoverable (carrying
value exceeded undiscounted cash flows expected to result from
the use and eventual disposition of the assets) and exceeded its
fair market value. In 2002, fair
F-42
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
market value was determined by independent valuations. In 2003
and 2004, fair market value was based on disposals of similar
assets.
Note 7 Debt
Debt is comprised of the following at December 31, 2003 and
2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Revolving credit facility at LIBOR plus 3.25% (5.25%) and the
banks prime rate plus 1.75% (7%) for 2003 and 2004,
respectively
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
7.75% senior subordinated notes due February 2008
|
|
|
195,887 |
|
|
|
195,915 |
|
Notes payable for equipment, at interest rates from 7.5% to 8.5%
due in installments through the year 2008
|
|
|
1,418 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
Other revolving debt
|
|
|
4,360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
201,665 |
|
|
|
196,158 |
|
Less current maturities
|
|
|
(4,709 |
) |
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$ |
196,956 |
|
|
$ |
196,059 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revolving Credit Facility |
The Company has a revolving credit facility for North American
operations that provides for borrowings up to an aggregate of
$125.0 million. The amount that the Company can borrow at
any given time is based upon a formula that takes into account,
among other things, eligible billed and unbilled accounts
receivable, which can result in borrowing availability of less
than the full amount of the facility. As of December 31,
2003 and 2004, net availability under the credit facility
totaled $37.9 million and $25.5 million net of
outstanding standby letters of credit aggregating
$54.5 million and $66.8 million, respectively. At
December 31, 2004, $63.3 million of the outstanding
letters of credit are issued to support the Companys
casualty insurance requirements or surety needs. These letters
of credit mature at various dates through December 31,
2005, and except for Letters of Credit totaling
$10.0 million, most have automatic renewal provisions
subject to prior notice of cancellation. The Company had no
outstanding draws under the credit facility at December 31,
2004 and 2003. The revolving credit facility matures on
January 22, 2007. The revolving credit facility is
collateralized by a first priority security interest in
substantially all of the Companys North American assets,
including $5.0 million in restricted cash which is included
in cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2004 and a
pledge of the stock of certain of the operating subsidiaries.
All wholly owned subsidiaries collateralize the facility.
Interest under the facility accrues at rates based, at the
Companys option, on the agent banks base rate plus a
margin of between 0.75% and 1.75% or its LIBOR rate (as defined
in the credit facility) plus a margin of between 2.25% and
3.25%, each margin depending on certain financial thresholds.
The facility includes an unused facility fee of 0.50%, which may
be adjusted to as low as 0.375% or as high as 0.625% depending
on the amount of the total commitment which is unused.
The revolving credit facility contains customary events of
default (including cross-default) provisions and covenants
related to the North American operations that prohibit, among
other things, making investments and acquisitions in excess of a
specified amount, incurring additional indebtedness in excess of
a specified amount, paying cash dividends, making other
distributions in excess of a specified amount, making capital
expenditures in excess of a specified amount, creating liens
against the Companys assets, prepaying other indebtedness
including the Companys 7.75% senior subordinated
notes, and engaging in certain mergers or combinations without
the prior written consent of the lenders. In addition, any
deterioration in the quality of billed and unbilled receivables
would reduce availability under the credit facility.
F-43
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
The Company is required to be in compliance with certain
financial covenants measured on a monthly basis. As a result of
the Companys net loss for the year ended December 31,
2004, the Company was not in compliance with a monthly financial
covenant, at fixed charge coverage ratio, of the credit facility
at December 31, 2004. The credit facility was amended on
March 17, 2005 modifying this covenant and other financial
covenants and the Company was in compliance with its amended
credit facilitys financial covenants at December 31,
2004. Under the amended agreement, the Companys North
American operations must maintain minimum tangible net worth
equal to:
|
|
|
|
|
$45 million at December 31, 2004; |
|
|
|
$40 million from January 31 through May 31, 2005; |
|
|
|
$45 million from June 30 through August 31, 2005; |
|
|
|
$53.5 million from September 30 through
November 30, 2005; then |
|
|
|
$53.5 million beginning December 1, 2005; plus 50% of
the consolidated net income of our operations from
December 1, 2005 through the date of determination. |
Since April 1, 2004, the Companys North American
Operations was also required to maintain a minimum fixed charge
coverage ratio, computed on a monthly basis, beginning in May
2004. The fixed charge coverage ratio is generally defined to
mean the ratio of our net income before interest expense, income
tax expense, depreciation expense, and amortization expense plus
$1.1 million to consolidated interest expense and current
maturities of debt for the period of determination. For the
purposes of determining the current maturities of long term debt
during the period from April 2004 through March 2005 used in
determining the fixed charge coverage ratio the amount of
current maturities of long term debt as of any month during this
period is multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which is
the number of cumulative months since April 2004, and the
denominator of which is 12.
|
|
|
|
|
Period |
|
Ratio | |
|
|
| |
For the 9 month period ending December 31, 2004
|
|
|
1.50 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 10 and 11 month periods ending January 31
and February 28, 2005
|
|
|
1.15 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 12 month periods ending March 31,
April 30 and May 31, 2005
|
|
|
1.20 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 12 month periods ending June 30,
July 31, and August 31, 2005
|
|
|
1.25 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 12 month periods ending on
September 30, October 31, and
November 30, 2005
|
|
|
1.50 to 1.00 |
|
For the 12 month period ending on December 31, 2005
and each 12 month period ending on the last day of each
calendar month thereafter
|
|
|
2.00 to 1.00 |
|
Based upon the Companys projections for 2005, the Company
believes they will be in compliance with the amended credit
facilitys financial covenants for 2005. The Company is
dependent upon borrowings and letters of credit under this
credit facility to fund operations. Should the Company be unable
to comply with the terms and covenants of the amended credit
facility, it would be required to obtain further modifications
of the credit facility or another source of financing to
continue to operate. The Company may not be able to achieve its
2005 projections and thus may not be in compliance with the
amended credit facilitys financial covenants in 2005.
The Companys variable rate credit facility exposes it to
interest rate risk. However, the Company had no borrowings
outstanding under the credit facility at December 31, 2004.
F-44
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
|
|
|
Senior Subordinated Notes |
The Company has a $196.0 million, 7.75% senior
subordinated notes due in February 2008, with interest due
semi-annually, of which $195.9 million, net of discount, is
outstanding as of December 31, 2004. The notes are
redeemable, at the companys option at 102.583% of the
principal amount during the twelve-month period beginning
February 1, 2004, 101.292% during the twelve-month period
beginning February 1, 2005, and 100% annually thereafter.
The notes also contain default (including cross-default)
provisions and covenants restricting many of the same
transactions as under our credit facility.
The Company had no holdings of derivative financial or commodity
instruments at December 31, 2004.
The maturities of long-term debt obligations (excluding capital
leases) as of December 31, 2004, are as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
2006
|
|
|
76 |
|
2007
|
|
|
56 |
|
2008
|
|
|
195,925 |
|
2009 and thereafter
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
196,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
Note 8 Restructuring Charges
During the second quarter of 2002, the Company initiated a study
to determine the proper balance of downsizing and cost cutting
in relation to its ability to respond to current and future work
opportunities in each of its service offerings. The review not
only evaluated the Companys current operations, but also
the growth and opportunity potential of each service offering as
well as the consolidation of back-office processes. As a result
of this review, the Company implemented a restructuring program
which included the:
|
|
|
|
|
elimination of service offerings that no longer fit into the
core business strategy. This process included reducing or
eliminating service offerings that did not fit our long-term
business plan. |
|
|
|
reduction or elimination of services that did not produce
adequate revenue or margins to support the level of
profitability, return on investment or investments in capital
resources. This included exiting contracts that did not meet
minimum rate of return requirements to improve margins and
reduce costs. |
|
|
|
analysis of businesses that provided adequate profit
contributions but needed margin improvements. |
|
|
|
review of new business opportunities in similar business lines. |
The elements of the restructuring program included involuntary
terminations of employees in affected service offerings and the
consolidation of facilities. The plan resulted in a pre-tax
charge to operations of $3.7 million in 2002. The
involuntary terminations impacted both the salaried and hourly
employee groups. The total employees impacted were approximately
1,025. As of December 31, 2004, all employees have been
terminated and virtually all severance and benefit costs have
been paid. Approximately 25 facilities were closed during
2002 as part of the program in which some of the assets were
sold, while other assets were retained and transferred to other
locations. These facility closures were not accounted for as
discontinued operations due to these facilities not representing
separate components of the Companys business for which
cash flows could be clearly defined. The Company also continues
to be involved in the
F-45
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
markets in which these 25 facilities operated. As of
December 31, 2004, remaining obligations under existing
lease agreements for closed facilities amounted to approximately
$0.2 million.
In addition to the costs noted above, the Company paid a
consulting firm approximately $4.6 million to assist in
preparing the plan, all of which was expensed in 2002 as the
plan was complete as of December 31, 2002. Valuation
allowances and impairment losses related to property and
equipment totaling $12.8 million were recorded in
connection with the restructuring plan (see Note 6).
The following is a reconciliation of the restructuring accruals
as of December 31, 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued Costs at December 31, 2003
|
|
$ |
600 |
|
Cash payments
|
|
|
(388 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Accrued costs at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
212 |
|
|
|
|
|
Note 9 Lease Commitments
The Company has operating lease agreements for premises and
equipment that expire on various dates. The operating lease
agreements are subject to escalation. Rent expense for the years
ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 was approximately
$18.5 million, $21.2 million and $18.7 million,
respectively.
The Company also has capital lease agreements for equipment that
expire on various dates.
Minimum future lease commitments under non-cancelable operating
leases and future minimum capital lease payments, including
effect of escalation clauses in effect at December 31, 2004
were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating | |
|
Capital | |
|
|
Leases | |
|
Leases | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
2005
|
|
$ |
28,707 |
|
|
$ |
497 |
|
2006
|
|
|
21,420 |
|
|
|
429 |
|
2007
|
|
|
13,180 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
2008
|
|
|
4,813 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
2009
|
|
|
2,426 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
3,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments
|
|
$ |
74,079 |
|
|
$ |
1,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less amounts representing interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
251 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,583 |
|
Less current portion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
497 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For leases with purchase options, the option to purchase
equipment is at estimated fair market value. We have
non-cancelable subleases for certain capital leases which are
recorded in other assets. Future minimum leases received from
subleases through January 2010 aggregated $3.9 million as
of December 31, 2004.
F-46
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
Note 10 Discontinued Operations
In March 2004, the Company ceased performing contractual
services for customers in Brazil, abandoned all assets in its
Brazil subsidiary and made a determination to exit the Brazil
market. During the year ended December 31, 2004, the
Company wrote off approximately $12.3 million in goodwill
see Note 3 and the net investment in the Brazil subsidiary
of approximately $6.8 million which consisted of the
accumulated foreign currency translation loss of
$21.3 million less a net deficit in assets of
$14.5 million. The abandoned Brazil subsidiary has been
classified as a discontinued operation. The results of
operations for the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2003
have been reclassified to loss from discontinued operations. The
net income for the Brazil subsidiary was $1.2 million in
the year ended December 31, 2002 and the net loss for
Brazil was $21.8 million and $20.2 million for the
years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively. In
November 2004, the subsidiary applied for relief and was
adjudicated bankrupt by a Brazilian bankruptcy court. The
subsidiary is currently being liquidated under court supervision.
The following table summarizes the assets and liabilities of our
Brazil operations as of December 31, 2003 and 2004 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Current assets
|
|
$ |
7,755 |
|
|
$ |
290 |
|
Non current assets
|
|
|
2,244 |
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
(21,886 |
) |
|
|
(19,455 |
) |
Non current liabilities
|
|
|
(1,334 |
) |
|
|
(2,170 |
) |
Accumulated foreign currency translation
|
|
|
(21,091 |
) |
|
|
(21,335 |
) |
The following table summarizes the results of operations for our
Brazil operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
41,773 |
|
|
$ |
18,761 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
|
(37,110 |
) |
|
|
(20,846 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Operating expenses
|
|
|
(3,393 |
) |
|
|
(18,877 |
) |
|
|
(1,046 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations before (provision) benefit
for income taxes and minority interest
|
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
(20,962 |
) |
|
|
(1,051 |
) |
(Provision) Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
(2,584 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
(1,708 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
1,191 |
|
|
$ |
(21,838 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,051 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the fourth quarter 2004, we ceased performing services
and committed to sell our network services division and exit
this service market. This division has been classified as a
discontinued operation. The results of operations for the years
ended December 31, 2002 and 2003 have been reclassified to
loss from discontinued operations. The net loss for the network
services division was $17.9 million, $6.0 million and
$3.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2002,
2003 and 2004, respectively.
F-47
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
The following table summarizes the assets and liabilities of our
network services as of December 31, 2003 and 2004 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Current assets
|
|
$ |
4,063 |
|
|
$ |
4,464 |
|
Non current assets
|
|
|
1,106 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
5,278 |
|
|
|
2,753 |
|
Non current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders deficit
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
1,738 |
|
The following table summarizes the results of operations for our
network services operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
29,815 |
|
|
$ |
24,006 |
|
|
$ |
17,046 |
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
|
(28,457 |
) |
|
|
(27,728 |
) |
|
|
(16,435 |
) |
Operating and other expenses
|
|
|
(9,232 |
) |
|
|
(5,821 |
) |
|
|
(3,614 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations before benefit for income taxes and
cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
$ |
(7,874 |
) |
|
$ |
(9,543 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,003 |
) |
Cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
(13,075 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
3,036 |
|
|
|
3,522 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$ |
(17,913 |
) |
|
$ |
(6,021 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,003 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 11 Retirement and Stock Option Plans
We have a 401(k) plan covering all eligible employees.
Subject to certain dollar limits, eligible employees may
contribute up to 15% of their pre-tax annual compensation to the
plan. Our matching contributions in the form of Company Common
Stock charged to earnings were approximately $806,000 for the
year ended December 31, 2002. We did not match employee
contributions in 2003 and 2004 but may, at the Board of
Directors discretion, do so in the future.
The Company has granted options to purchase its common stock to
employees and directors of the Company and its affiliates under
various stock option plans at no less than the fair market value
of the underlying stock on the date of grant. These options are
granted for a term not exceeding ten years and are forfeited in
the event the employee or director terminates his or her
employment or relationship with the Company or one of its
affiliates. All option plans contain anti-dilutive provisions
that require the adjustment of the number of shares of the
Company common stock represented by each option for any stock
splits or dividends.
We have seven stock option plans in effect as of
December 31, 2004: the 1994 Stock Incentive Plan (the
1994 Plan), the 1994 Stock Option Plan for
Non-Employee Directors (the Directors Plan),
the 1997 Annual Incentive Compensation Plan (the 1997
Incentive Plan), the 1997 Non-Qualified Employee Stock
Purchase Plan (the 1997 Plan), the Non-Employee
Directors Stock Plan, the 1999 Non-Qualified Option Plan
(the Non-Qualified Plan), the 2003 Employee Stock
Incentive Plan (the 2003 Plan) and the Amended and
Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for Non-Employees (the
2003 Non-Employee Plan) and individual option
agreements. Typically, options under these plans are granted at
fair market value at the date of grant, vest between three to
five years after grant and terminate no later than 10 years
from the date of grant.
F-48
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
The 2003 Non-Employee Plan was adopted in April 2003 and
authorized granting of restricted stock to non-employees. The
Company has reserved 1,000,000 shares of common stock for
grant under the 2003 Non-Employee Plan which covers stock
options or restricted stock awards. The Company grants
restricted stock which is valued based on the market price of
the common stock on the date of grant. Compensation expense
arising from restricted stock grants is recognized using the
straight-line method over the period of the restrictions.
Unearned compensation for the restricted stock is shown as a
reduction of stockholders equity in the consolidated
balance sheets. The Company approved the issuance of restricted
stock to the board of directors in 2005 with grant dates in
2004. Therefore, the Company recorded a non-cash stock
compensation expense and a liability in the year ended
December 31, 2004 in the amount of approximately $39,000
based on the market price at the date of grant.
Under these plans there were a total of 815,855, 7,590,793 and
7,453,209 options available for grant at December 31, 2002,
2003 and 2004, respectively. The 1994 Plan and the Directors
Plan expired in 2004. In addition, there are 241,450 options
outstanding under individual option agreements with varying
vesting schedules at exercise prices ranging from $2.56 to
$17.67 with terms up to 10 years. The 1997 Plan also allows
eligible employees to purchase common stock of the company
through payroll deductions or in a lump sum at a
15% discount from fair market value. The amount of
compensation expense related to these transactions is immaterial.
The following is a summary of all stock option transactions
during the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock | |
|
Weighted Average | |
|
|
Options | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Outstanding December 31, 2001
|
|
|
6,725,387 |
|
|
$ |
17.18 |
|
Granted
|
|
|
933,500 |
|
|
|
5.41 |
|
Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canceled
|
|
|
(622,275 |
) |
|
|
22.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding December 31, 2002
|
|
|
7,036,612 |
|
|
$ |
15.32 |
|
Granted
|
|
|
2,812,000 |
|
|
|
7.28 |
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(171,176 |
) |
|
|
4.67 |
|
Canceled
|
|
|
(393,556 |
) |
|
|
19.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding December 31, 2003
|
|
|
9,283,880 |
|
|
$ |
12.91 |
|
Granted
|
|
|
610,500 |
|
|
|
9.01 |
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(343,839 |
) |
|
|
5.38 |
|
Canceled
|
|
|
(588,511 |
) |
|
|
13.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding December 31, 2004
|
|
|
8,962,030 |
|
|
$ |
12.84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-49
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
The following tables summarize information about stock options
outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Stock Options Outstanding | |
|
Options Exercisable | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of | |
|
Remaining | |
|
Weighted Average | |
|
Number of | |
|
Weighted Average | |
Range of Exercise Prices |
|
Stock Options | |
|
Contractual Life | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
Stock Options | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
$2.0050 - $2.2150
|
|
|
376,499 |
|
|
|
5.29 |
|
|
$ |
2.0552 |
|
|
|
92,840 |
|
|
$ |
2.0550 |
|
$2.2151 - $3.3400
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
4.62 |
|
|
$ |
3.3400 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
3.3400 |
|
$3.3401 - $4.8600
|
|
|
436,667 |
|
|
|
3.09 |
|
|
$ |
4.4409 |
|
|
|
386,435 |
|
|
$ |
4.3938 |
|
$4.8601 - $7.0900
|
|
|
764,106 |
|
|
|
6.55 |
|
|
$ |
5.5908 |
|
|
|
377,065 |
|
|
$ |
5.7896 |
|
$7.0901 - $10.5600
|
|
|
2,179,816 |
|
|
|
7.06 |
|
|
$ |
8.2993 |
|
|
|
981,101 |
|
|
$ |
8.9504 |
|
$10.5601 - $15.5833
|
|
|
2,587,860 |
|
|
|
3.95 |
|
|
$ |
13.3136 |
|
|
|
2,211,260 |
|
|
$ |
13.1260 |
|
$15.5834 - $21.0417
|
|
|
1,703,901 |
|
|
|
4.53 |
|
|
$ |
19.3286 |
|
|
|
1,703,901 |
|
|
$ |
19.3286 |
|
$21.0418 - $28.5000
|
|
|
525,921 |
|
|
|
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
26.8849 |
|
|
|
517,654 |
|
|
$ |
26.8864 |
|
$28.5001 - $36.8750
|
|
|
232,010 |
|
|
|
1.48 |
|
|
$ |
33.3335 |
|
|
|
232,010 |
|
|
$ |
33.3335 |
|
$36.8751 - $45.0833
|
|
|
5,250 |
|
|
|
2.38 |
|
|
$ |
44.0120 |
|
|
|
5,250 |
|
|
$ |
44.0120 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$2.0050 - $45.0833
|
|
|
8,962,030 |
|
|
|
4.91 |
|
|
$ |
12.8396 |
|
|
|
6,607,516 |
|
|
$ |
14.6839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2004, we had 6,607,516 options which
were exercisable at a weighted average exercise price of
$14.68 per share. As of December 31, 2003, we had
5,899,561 options which were exercisable at a weighted average
exercise price of $15.78 per share.
Note 12 Equity Investment
In September 2004, MasTec purchased a 49% interest in a limited
liability corporation with an established marketing group. The
Companys payments for its interest are due quarterly over
three years beginning in September 2004. Equity payments
fluctuate based on the ventures sales. In addition, the
Company is responsible for 49% of the ventures net
operating capital needs until the venture is self sufficient.
The Company expects this venture will be able to fully fund its
own operating capital requirements by mid- to late 2005. The
venture is intended to strengthen relationships with existing
and future customers, and increase Company sales. The initial
investment of $3.7 million will be paid over four quarters
which commenced in the third quarter of 2004 with additional
contingent payments of up to $1.3 million per quarter based
upon the level of unit sales and profitability of the limited
liability company for the two years following the period after
the initial investment is fully funded.
As of December 31, 2004, the Companys investment
exceeded the net equity of such investment and accordingly the
excess is considered to be equity goodwill.
The Company has accounted for this investment using the equity
method as the Company has the ability to exercise significant
influence over the operational policies of the Company. As of
December 31, 2004, the Company had an investment balance of
approximately $3.7 million in relation to this investment
with a corresponding liability related to the outstanding
commitment which is included in other assets and other
liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.
Based upon the lack of significance to the financial information
of the Company, no summary financial information for this equity
investment has been provided.
F-50
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
Note 13 Income Taxes
The benefit for income taxes before cumulative change in
accounting principle consists of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$ |
(2,497 |
) |
|
$ |
315 |
|
|
$ |
2,312 |
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
557 |
|
|
|
(2,237 |
) |
|
|
(1,015 |
) |
|
State and local
|
|
|
(2,680 |
) |
|
|
4,858 |
|
|
|
251 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,620 |
) |
|
|
2,936 |
|
|
|
1,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
(51,258 |
) |
|
|
(8,888 |
) |
|
|
(2,267 |
) |
|
Foreign
|
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(562 |
) |
|
|
1,015 |
|
|
State and local, net of valuation provisions
|
|
|
(3,023 |
) |
|
|
(1,789 |
) |
|
|
(296 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(54,725 |
) |
|
|
(11,239 |
) |
|
|
(1,548 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
$ |
(59,345 |
) |
|
$ |
(8,303 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The tax effects of significant items comprising our net deferred
tax asset as of December 31, 2003 and 2004 are as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-compete
|
|
$ |
4,188 |
|
|
$ |
3,709 |
|
|
Bad debts
|
|
|
8,839 |
|
|
|
8,080 |
|
|
Accrued self insurance
|
|
|
8,559 |
|
|
|
19,143 |
|
|
Operating loss and tax credit carry forward
|
|
|
61,532 |
|
|
|
73,390 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
3,117 |
|
|
|
4,853 |
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
6,500 |
|
|
|
3,972 |
|
|
Valuation Allowance
|
|
|
(8,289 |
) |
|
|
(32,349 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
84,446 |
|
|
|
80,798 |
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable retainage
|
|
|
9,365 |
|
|
|
6,642 |
|
|
Property and equipment
|
|
|
12,225 |
|
|
|
10,301 |
|
|
Basis differences in acquired assets
|
|
|
418 |
|
|
|
409 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
7,147 |
|
|
|
6,607 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
29,155 |
|
|
|
23,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax asset
|
|
$ |
55,291 |
|
|
$ |
56,839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2004, the Company has approximately
$159.7 million of net operating loss carryforwards for
U.S. federal income tax purposes that expire beginning in
2022. The Company has net operating loss carryforwards for
U.S. state and local purposes that expire from 2005 to
2024. Additionally, the Company has approximately
$4.9 million of net operating loss carryforwards for
Canadian income tax purposes that expire beginning in 2010.
F-51
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
In assessing the ability to realize the deferred tax assets,
management considers whether it is more likely than not that
some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be
realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is
dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during
the periods in which these temporary differences become
deductible. Management considers the projected future taxable
income and prudent and feasible tax planning strategies in
making this assessment. As of December 31, 2003 and 2004,
valuation allowances of $8.3 million and $32.3 million
have been recorded.
A reconciliation of U.S. statutory federal income tax
expense on the loss before cumulative effect of change in
accounting principle and benefit for income taxes is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
U.S. statutory federal rate applied to pretax loss
|
|
|
(35 |
)% |
|
|
(35 |
)% |
|
|
(35 |
)% |
State and local income taxes
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Amortization and impairment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-deductible expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Effect of non U.S. operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Worthless stock deduction
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(52 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
(35 |
)% |
|
|
(25 |
)% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 14 Operations by Geographic Areas and
Segments
The Company manages its business on a project basis which have
been aggregated into one reportable segment as a specialty trade
contractor. The Company provides services in the
telecommunications, broadband (including cable, satellite and
high speed internet), energy, traffic control and homeland
security systems markets.
Revenue by customer industry group reflecting the revenue
reclassification to discontinued operations is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
|
|
|
As Restated | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Telecommunications
|
|
$ |
329,855 |
|
|
$ |
231,263 |
|
|
$ |
251,083 |
|
Broadband
|
|
|
152,104 |
|
|
|
265,383 |
|
|
|
342,553 |
|
Energy
|
|
|
162,822 |
|
|
|
198,583 |
|
|
|
175,314 |
|
Government
|
|
|
121,688 |
|
|
|
132,251 |
|
|
|
144,845 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
766,469 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, we
operated in the United States and Canada. In 2003, we became
engaged in a single project in Mexico which we completed shortly
after December 31, 2003. In 2002 and 2003, we had
operations in Brazil. In 2004, we ceased performing contractual
services in Brazil, abandoned all assets in our Brazil
subsidiary and made a determination to exit the Brazil market.
The following table reflects financial information for our U.S.
and foreign operations including the reclassification of 2002
and 2003 results of operations for the Brazil operations and our
network services division to discontinued operations. Over the
past three years, we have continued
F-52
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
to reduce capital expenditures of long-lived assets and have
placed greater reliance on operating leases to meet our
equipment needs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$ |
740,224 |
|
|
$ |
800,974 |
|
|
$ |
900,842 |
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
26,243 |
|
|
|
26,506 |
|
|
|
12,953 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Long Lived Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$ |
114,053 |
|
|
$ |
82,541 |
|
|
$ |
68,426 |
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
4,422 |
|
|
|
3,291 |
|
|
|
877 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
118,475 |
|
|
$ |
85,832 |
|
|
$ |
69,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 15 Commitments and Contingencies
In the second quarter of 2004, purported class action complaints
were filed against the Company and certain of its officers in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida and one was filed in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York. These cases have been
consolidated by court order in the Southern District of Florida.
The complaints allege certain violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
related to current and prior period earnings reports. On
January 25, 2005, a motion for leave to file a Second
Amended Complaint was filed by Plaintiffs which the Court
granted. Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint on
February 22, 2005. Plaintiffs contend that the
Companys financial statements during the purported
Class Period of August 12, 2003 to May 11, 2004
were materially misleading in the following areas: 1) the
financials for the third quarter of 2003 were allegedly
overstated by $5.8 million in revenue from unapproved
change orders from a variety of Company projects; and
2) the financials for the second quarter of 2003 were
overstated by some $1.3 million as a result of the
intentional overstatement of revenue, inventories and work in
progress at the Companys Canadian subsidiary. Plaintiffs
seek damages, not quantified, for the difference between the
stock price Plaintiffs paid and the stock price Plaintiffs
believe they should have paid, plus interest and attorney fees.
MasTec believes the claims are without merit. MasTec will
vigorously defend these lawsuits but may be unable to
successfully resolve these disputes without incurring
significant expenses. Due to the early stage of these
proceedings, any potential loss cannot presently be determined
with respect to this litigation.
On July 28, 2004, MasTec, Inc.s Board of Directors
received a demand from a shareholder that the Board take
appropriate steps to remedy breaches of fiduciary duty,
mismanagement and corporate waste, all arising from the same
factual predicate set out in the shareholder class actions
described above. On November 18, 2004, the Board of
Directors authorized its Executive Committee to establish
appropriate procedures and form a special litigation committee,
as contemplated by Florida law, to investigate these allegations
and to determine whether it is in the best interests of MasTec
to pursue an action or actions based on said allegations. On
December 22, 2004, a derivative action was filed by the
shareholder. On January 10, 2005, the Executive Committee
formed a special litigation committee to investigate this
F-53
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
matter. By agreement of counsel, the derivative action has been
stated during the pendency of any motion to dismiss in the
securities class action.
The Company contracted to construct a natural gas pipeline for
Coos County, Oregon in 2003. Construction work on the pipeline
ceased in December 2003 after the County refused payment due on
regular contract invoices of $6.3 million and refused to
process change orders for additional work submitted to the
County on or after November 29, 2003. In February 2004,
MasTec brought an action for breach of contract against Coos
County in Federal District Court in Oregon, seeking payment for
work done, interest and anticipated profits. In April 2004, Coos
County announced it was terminating the contract and seeking
another company to complete the project. Coos County
subsequently counterclaimed for breach of contract and other
causes in the Federal District Court action. The amount of
revenue recognized on the Coos County project that remained
uncollected at December 31, 2004 amounted to
$6.3 million representing amounts due MasTec on normal
progress payment invoices submitted under the contract. In
addition to these uncollected receivables, the Company also has
additional claims for payment and interest in excess of
$6.0 million, including all of its change order billings
and retainage, which the Company has not recognized as revenue
but to which the Company believes is due to the Company under
the terms of the contract. In addition, the Company was made
party to a number of citizen initiated actions arising from the
Coos County project. A complaint alleging failure to comply with
prevailing wage requirements was issued by the Oregon Bureau of
Labor and Industry. A number of individual property owners
brought claims in Oregon state courts against the Company for
property damages and related claims; a number of citizens
groups brought an action in federal court for alleged violations
of the Clean Water Act. All but one of the individual property
claims has been settled; one is set for trial in 2005. The
Company will vigorously defend these actions, but may incur
significant expense in connection with that defense.
In connection with the Coos County pipeline project, the United
States Army Corps of Engineers and the Oregon Division of State
Land, Department of Environmental Quality issued cease and
desist orders and notices of non-compliance to Coos County and
to the Company with respect to the Countys project. A
cease and desist order was issued by the Corps on
October 31, 2003 and addressed sedimentary disturbances and
the discharge of bentonite, an inert clay mud employed for this
kind of drilling, resulting from directional boring under stream
beds along a portion of the natural gas pipeline route then
under construction. The County and the Company received a
subsequent cease and desist order from the Corps on
December 22, 2003. The order addressed additional
sedimentary discharges caused by clean up efforts along the
pipeline route. MasTec and the County were in substantial
disagreement with the United States Army Corps of Engineers and
the Oregon Division of State Land as to whether the subject
discharges were permitted pursuant to Nationwide Permit
No. 12 (utility line activities) or were otherwise
prohibited pursuant to the Clean Water Act. However, the Company
has been cooperating with Corps of Engineers and the Oregon
Division of State Land, Department of Environmental Quality to
mitigate any adverse impact as a result of construction. Corps
of Engineer and Oregon Division of State Land notices or
complaints focused for the largest part on runoff from the
construction site and from nearby construction spoil piles which
may have increased sediment and turbidity in adjacent waterways
and roadside ditches. Runoff was the result of extremely wet and
snowy weather, which produced exceptionally high volumes of
runoff water. MasTec employed two erosion control consulting
firms to assist. As weather permitted and sites became
available, MasTec moved spoil piles to disposal sites. Silt
fences, sediment entrapping blankets and sediment barriers were
employed in the meantime to prevent sediment runoff. Ultimately,
when spring weather permitted, open areas were filled, rolled
and seeded to eliminate the runoff. To date, mitigation efforts
have cost the Company approximately $1.4 million. These
costs were included in the costs on the project at
December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2004. No further
mitigation expenses are anticipated. The only additional
anticipated liability arises from possible fines or penalties
assessed, or to be assessed by the Corps of Engineers and/or
Oregon Division of State Land. The County accepted a fine of
$75,000 to settle this matter with the Corp of Engineers; the
County has not concluded with the Oregon
F-54
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
Department of Environmental Quality. No fines or penalties have
been assessed against the Company by the Corp of Engineers to
date. On August 9, 2004, the Oregon Division of State Land
Department of Environmental Quality issued a Notice of Violation
and Assessment of Civil Penalty to MasTec North America in the
amount of $126,000. MasTec North America has denied liability
for the civil penalty and requested a formal contested case
hearing on the same.
The potential loss for all Coos Bay matters and settlements
reached described above is estimated to be $205,000 at
December 31, 2004, which is recorded in the consolidated
balance sheet as accrued expenses.
The labor union representing the workers of Sistemas e
Instalaciones de Telecomunicación S.A.
(Sintel), a former MasTec subsidiary, initiated an
investigative action with a Spanish federal court that commenced
in July 2001 alleging that five former members of the board of
directors of Sintel, including Jorge Mas, the Chairman of the
Board of MasTec, and his brother Juan Carlos Mas, approved a
series of allegedly unlawful transactions that led to the
bankruptcy of Sintel. The Company is also named as a potentially
liable party. The union alleges Sintel and its creditors were
damaged in the approximate amount of 13 billion pesetas
($95.1 million at December 31, 2004). The Court has
taken no action to enforce a bond order pending since July 2001
for the amount of alleged damages. The Court has conducted
extensive discovery, including the declarations of certain
present and former executives of MasTec, Inc. and intends to
conduct additional discovery. To date, no actions have been
taken by the Court against the Company or any of the named
individuals. The Companys directors and
officers insurance carrier reimbursed the Company in the
third quarter 2004 for approximately $1.2 million in legal
fees already incurred and agreed to fund legal expenses for the
remainder of the litigation. The amount of loss, if any,
relating to this matter cannot presently be determined.
In 2003, the Companys quarterly financial information was
restated for $6.1 million of previously recognized revenue
related primarily to work performed on undocumented or
unapproved change orders and other matters disputed by the
Companys customers. The revenue restatement was related to
projects performed for ABB Power (ABB), MSE Power
Systems (MSE), and the University of California, and
in connection with restated Canadian revenue. Recovery of this
revenue and related revenue from subsequent periods not restated
is now the subject of several independent collection actions.
MasTec provided services to ABB, in the amount of
$2 million is subject to dispute. The parties have
attempted arbitration, which has been unsuccessful. A legal
action was filed by the Company on February 2005. An action has
been brought against MSE in New York state court. MasTec
provided services to MSE on five separate projects in
Pennsylvania, New York and Georgia, with invoices in excess of
$8 million now in dispute. The Company experienced cost
overruns in excess of $2.7 million in completing a
networking contract for the University of California as the
result of a subcontractors refusal to complete a fixed
price contract. An action has been brought against that
subcontractor to recover cost overruns. Finally, the Company
experienced a revenue adjustment resulting from correction of
intentionally overstated work in progress and revenue in an
amount of $1.3 million in a Canadian subsidiary. The
individuals responsible for the overstatement were terminated
and an action against them has been brought to recover damages
resulting from the overstatement.
In November 2004, the Company entered into, and bonded a
conditional $2.6 million settlement of litigation brought
for subcontract work done by Hugh OKane Electric for
MasTec on a telecommunication project for Telergy in New York.
Telergy is in bankruptcy and did not pay MasTec for the Hugh
OKane work. The settlement was conditioned on the outcome
of an interlocutory appeal brought by MasTec. The appeal sought
to enforce contract terms which relieved MasTec of its
obligation to pay Hugh OKane when MasTec was not paid by
Telergy. New Yorks appellate level court upheld the
enforceability of the term of MasTecs contract, but
remanded the case to the trial court to determine whether the
Company was estopped from using this contract provision as a
defense. The Company expects
F-55
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
to recover the bond posted in connection with the appeal, and
will continue to contest this matter in the trial court. The
amount of the loss, if any, relating to this matter cannot be
determined at this time.
The Company is also a party to other pending legal proceedings
arising in the normal course of business. While complete
assurance cannot be given as to the outcome of any legal claims,
management believes that any financial impact would not be
material to the Companys results of operations, financial
position or cash flows.
The Company has commitments at December 31, 2004 to pay
life insurance premiums on policies on the life of its chairman
of the board, vice chairman and its chief executive officer
totaling $17.7 million over the next nineteen years, for
capital leases totaling $1.8 million and, for operating
lease commitments of $74.1 million. In 2004, the Company
purchased a 49% interest in a limited liability company with an
established marketing group. The initial investment of
$3.7 million will be paid over four quarters which
commenced in the third quarter of 2004 with additional
contingent payments of up to $1.3 million per quarter based
upon the level of unit sales and profitability of the limited
liability company for the two years following the period after
the initial investment is fully funded.
The Company is required to provide payment and performance bonds
in connection with some of its contractual commitments. Such
bonds amounted to $117.9 million at December 31, 2004
related to projects in process.
Note 16 Concentrations of Risk
The Company is subject to certain risk factors, including, but
not limited to risks related to economic downturns in the
telecommunications and broadband industries, collectibility of
receivables, competition within our industry, the nature of our
contracts (which do not obligate our customers to undertake any
infrastructure projects and may be canceled on short notice),
acquisition integration and financing, seasonality, availability
of qualified employees, recoverability of goodwill, and
potential exposures to environmental liabilities.
The Company has more than 500 customers throughout the United
States, and Canada, which include some of the largest and most
prominent companies in the communications, broadband and energy
fields, as well as government agencies such as departments of
transportation. The Companys customers include incumbent
local exchange carriers, broadband and satellite operators,
public and private energy providers, long distance carriers,
financial institutions and wireless service providers.
The Company grants credit, generally without collateral, to our
customers. Consequently, the Company is subject to potential
credit risk related to changes in business and economic factors.
However, the Company generally has certain lien rights on that
work and concentrations of credit risk are limited due to the
diversity of our customer base. The Company believes the billing
and collection policies are adequate to minimize potential
credit risk. No customer accounted for more than 10% of revenue
during the year ended December 31, 2002. During 2003,
Comcast and DirecTV accounted for 14.2% and 12.0%, respectively.
During 2004, DirecTV and Comcast accounted for 21.4% and 12.3%,
respectively of total revenue.
The Company maintains allowances for doubtful accounts for
estimated losses resulting from the inability of its customers
to make required payments. Management analyzes historical bad
debt experience, customer concentrations, customer
credit-worthiness, the availability of mechanics and other
liens, the existence of payment bonds and other sources of
payment, and current economic trends when evaluating the
adequacy of the allowance for doubtful accounts. If judgments
regarding the collectibility of accounts receivables are
incorrect, adjustments to the allowance may be required, which
would reduce profitability. During 2002, 2003 and 2004 bad debt
provisions of $15.4 million, $8.8 million and
$5.1 million, respectively, were recorded primarily due to
the general economic climate of 2002. As of December 31,
F-56
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
2004, remaining receivables from customers undergoing bankruptcy
reorganization totaling $15.1 million of which
$9.4 million is included in specific reserves. Based on the
analytical process described above, management believes that the
Company will recover the net amounts recorded. The Company
maintains an allowance for doubtful accounts of
$28.8 million and $20.0 million as of
December 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively for both specific
customers and as a reserve against other past due balances.
Should additional customers file for bankruptcy or experience
difficulties, or should anticipated recoveries in existing
bankruptcies and other workout situations fail to materialize,
the Company could experience reduced cash flows and losses in
excess of the current allowance.
Note 17 Quarterly Information (Unaudited)
The following table presents unaudited quarterly operating
results for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004. The
Company believes that all necessary adjustments have been
included in the amounts stated below to present fairly the
quarterly results when read in conjunction with the Consolidated
Financial Statements and Notes thereto for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2004. The quarterly information has
been adjusted for the reclassification of the net loss of Brazil
and network services operations to discontinued operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 Quarter Ended | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Mar 31 | |
|
Jun 30 | |
|
Sep 30 | |
|
|
|
2004 Quarter Ended | |
|
|
As | |
|
As | |
|
As | |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Restated | |
|
Restated | |
|
Restated | |
|
Dec 31 | |
|
Mar 31 | |
|
Jun 30 | |
|
Sep 30 | |
|
Dec 31 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) | |
|
(In thousands, except per share data) | |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
167,839 |
|
|
$ |
194,301 |
|
|
$ |
231,056 |
|
|
$ |
234,284 |
|
|
$ |
194,707 |
|
|
$ |
225,741 |
|
|
$ |
246,622 |
|
|
$ |
246,724 |
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(1,308 |
) |
|
$ |
2,850 |
|
|
$ |
4,800 |
|
|
$ |
(30,578 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,280 |
) |
|
$ |
(436 |
) |
|
$ |
4,265 |
|
|
$ |
(5,767 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
(444 |
) |
|
$ |
(830 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,490 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(21,786 |
) |
|
$ |
(304 |
) |
|
$ |
(42 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,088 |
) |
Net (loss) income
|
|
$ |
(1,752 |
) |
|
$ |
2,020 |
|
|
$ |
2,310 |
|
|
$ |
(54,877 |
) |
|
$ |
(46,066 |
) |
|
$ |
(740 |
) |
|
$ |
4,223 |
|
|
$ |
(6,855 |
) |
Basic (loss) income per share
|
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.95 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.14 |
) |
Diluted (loss) income per share
|
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.95 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.14 |
) |
Basic income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.95 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.14 |
) |
Diluted income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.95 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.14 |
) |
In connection with the filing of our 2003
Form 10-K, the
2003 quarterly information was restated for $6.1 million of
previously recognized revenue related primarily to work
performed on undocumented or unapproved change orders and other
matters which are being disputed by the Companys
customers. In addition, the quarterly information was restated
for overstatements due to irregularities in revenue recorded by
the Canadian operations in the amount of $1.3 million. As a
result, revenue was restated by $272,000 in the first quarter,
$1.3 million in the second quarter and $5.8 million in
the third quarter. In addition, the third quarter information
was restated to accrue for costs on a loss job in the amount of
$462,000 and properly reflect a bonus to an officer which was
earned in the third quarter in the amount of approximately
$246,000. As a result, cost of revenue was restated by $708,000
in the third quarter of 2003.
In the fourth quarter 2003, the Company accrued losses incurred
on construction projects in the amount of approximately
$7.4 million due to projected losses and changes in
estimates made in 2004, recorded inventory adjustments in the
amount of approximately $4.4 million as a result of
physical inventories, wrote-off an insurance receivable of
$3.2 million, and increased insurance reserves in the
F-57
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
amount of $8.3 million. As stated in Note 2, the
Company restated its results of operations for the quarters
ended March 31, 2003, June 30, 2003 and
September 30, 2003 from amounts previously reported.
In the fourth quarter 2004, the Company recorded
$1.0 million of bad debt expense based on the
Companys write off history, the Company accrued losses
incurred on construction projects in the amount of approximately
$1.1 million due to projected losses and changes in
estimates made in 2005, wrote off approximately $600,000 of
fixed assets as a result of physical inventories and recorded
approximately $2.0 million in legal settlements and legal
fees related to various litigation.
Note 18 Related Party Transactions
MasTec purchases, rents and leases equipment used in its
business from a number of different vendors, on a non-exclusive
basis, including Neff Corp., in which Jorge Mas, the
Companys Chairman and Jose Mas, the Companys
Vice-Chairman and Executive Vice President, are directors and
owners of a controlling interest. Juan Carlos Mas, the brother
of Jorge and Jose Mas, is Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, a
director and a shareholder of Neff Corp. During the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, MasTec paid Neff
approximately $26,000, $1.7 million and $1.2 million,
respectively for equipment purchases, rentals and leases. MasTec
believes the amount paid to Neff is equivalent to the payments
that would have been made between unrelated parties for similar
transactions acting at arms length.
Effective as of August 27, 2002, MasTec and Jorge Mas
entered into a split dollar agreement wherein MasTec agreed to
pay the premiums due on two life insurance policies with an
aggregate face amount of $50,000,000. Mr. Mas and his
spouse are the insureds under the policies. Under the terms of
this agreement, MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the
policies and is entitled to recover all premiums it pays on the
policies plus interest equal to four percent, compounded
annually, upon the death of the insureds. The remainder of the
policies proceeds will be paid in accordance with
Mr. Mas designations. MasTec will make the premium
payments until the agreement is terminated, which occurs upon
any of the following events: (i) total cessation of
MasTecs business, (ii) bankruptcy, receivership or
dissolution of MasTec, or (iii) a change of control of
MasTec.
Additionally, effective as of September 13, 2002, MasTec
and Jorge Mas entered into a second split dollar agreement (as
amended on December 1, 2002) wherein MasTec agreed to pay
the premiums due on a life insurance policy with a face amount
of $80,000,000, $60,000,000 of which is subject to the agreement
and the remaining $20,000,000 is deemed to be key-man insurance
payable to MasTec and falls outside of the agreement. Jorge Mas
is the insured under this policy. Under the terms of this
agreement, MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the
policy and is entitled to recover all premiums it pays on the
portion of the policy subject to the agreement, plus interest
equal to four percent, compounded annually, upon the death of
the insured. MasTec will make the premium payments until the
agreement is terminated, which occurs upon any of the following
events: (i) total cessation of MasTecs business,
(ii) bankruptcy, receivership or dissolution of MasTec, or
(iii) a change of control of MasTec. An amount equal to
$60,000,000 of the policys proceeds will be paid in
accordance with Jorge Mas designations. Any remainder of
the proceeds will be paid to MasTec. In 2002, 2003 and 2004,
MasTec paid $1,340,400, $1,303,783 and $1,135,092 in premiums in
connection with the split dollar agreements for Jorge Mas.
In 2002, MasTec paid $75,000 to Mr. Shanfelter related to a
life insurance policy which was cancelled in April 2002. MasTec
was to be reimbursed by the insurance company upon
Mr. Shanfelters death. Accordingly a receivable was
recorded at the time of the payments. During the year ended
December 31, 2004 the Company wrote off the receivable
balance because the policy was cancelled and all payments became
taxable to Mr. Shanfelter.
On November 1, 2002, MasTec and Austin Shanfelter entered
into a split dollar agreement wherein MasTec agreed to pay the
premiums due on a life insurance policy with an aggregate face
amount of $18,000,000. Mr. Shanfelter and his spouse are
the insureds under the policy. Under the terms of this
F-58
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
agreement, MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the
policy and is entitled, upon the death of the insureds, to
recover all premiums it pays on the policy plus interest equal
to four percent, compounded annually. The remainder of the
policys proceeds will be paid in accordance with
Mr. Shanfelters designations. MasTec will make the
premium payments for the term of the agreement or until the
agreement is terminated, which occurs upon any of the following
events: (i) total cessation of MasTecs business,
(ii) bankruptcy, receivership or dissolution of MasTec, or
(iii) the six year anniversary of the agreement. In 2002,
2003 and 2004, MasTec paid approximately $500,000, $500,000 and
$500,000, respectively in premiums in connection with the split
dollar agreement for Mr. Shanfelter and his family.
Effective as of July 16, 2004, MasTec and Jose Mas entered
into a split dollar agreement wherein MasTec agreed to pay
premiums on a life insurance policy with an aggregate face
amount of $5.0 million. Under the terms of the agreement,
MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the policy and is
entitled to recover all premiums it pays on the policy plus
interest equal to 3.5%, compounded annually, upon the death of
the insured. The remainder of the policys proceeds will be
paid in accordance with Mr. Mas designations. MasTec
has agreed to make the premium payments until at least
July 15, 2009. In 2004, MasTec paid approximately $150,000
in premiums in connection with the split dollar agreement for
Mr. Jose Mas.
On January 1, 2002, MasTec entered into an employment
agreement with Austin J. Shanfelter relating to his employment
as President and Chief Executive Officer. The agreement expires
on December 31, 2005 unless earlier terminated, and
provides that Mr. Shanfelter will be paid an annual salary
of $600,000, an initial bonus of $100,000 prior to
March 31, 2003 and deferred compensation of $2,000,000. The
agreement also provides for a bonus to be paid pursuant to an
incentive performance bonus plan to be agreed upon and stock
options pursuant to MasTecs stock option plans. Following
termination of employment, the agreement provides for a two-year
consulting period at $500,000 per year. Additionally, if
there is a change of control of MasTec during the employment
term, the executive will be entitled to all of the unpaid
portion of his salary for the remaining term of the agreement,
to the consulting fees, any unpaid portion of the initial bonus
and the deferred compensation amount and to immediate vesting of
any previously unvested options. The agreement also contains
gross-up for any excise
taxes, confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation
provisions.
On January 1, 2002, MasTec entered into an employment
agreement with Donald P. Weinstein relating to his employment as
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. On
January 7, 2004 (but effective as of December 1,
2003), the Company entered into an amended employment agreement
with Mr. Weinstein. The agreement was for a term of three
years and provided that Mr. Weinstein would be paid an
annual base salary of $300,000 (with annual cost of living
increases). Additionally, Mr. Weinstein was entitled to
receive a total of $600,000 of deferred compensation over the
term of the contract and was to be entitled to participate in a
bonus plan for senior management, and would be entitled to a
minimum annual performance bonus of $50,000 per year.
Mr. Weinstein resigned effective March 11, 2004. In
connection therewith, the Company entered into a severance
agreement with Mr. Weinstein pursuant to which the Company
paid him his base salary of $300,000 through December 2004,
provide him with certain employee and insurance benefits and
provide for the vesting of his stock options. The severance
agreement was approved by the Compensation Committee on
July 16, 2004. As a result of Mr. Weinsteins
severance agreement, the Company recorded $199,500 in stock
compensation expense in the year ended December 31, 2004
related to the extension of the exercise period on
Mr. Weinsteins stock options. In addition, a
severance accrual was recorded for $300,000 as of March 11,
2004 which has been reduced as payments have been made.
In July 2002, MasTec entered into an employment agreement with
Eric J. Tveter as Executive Vice President and Chief Operations
Officer with a two year term at an annual base salary of
$300,000 (with annual cost of living increases) and a grant of
50,000 stock options, a guaranteed bonus for the year 2002 equal
to one half of his base salary paid to him during the year 2002
and the right to participate in
F-59
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS(Continued)
MasTecs bonus plan for senior management beginning
January 1, 2003. The agreement also contained noncompete
and nonsolicitation provisions for a period of two years
following the term of the agreement. Mr. Tveter resigned
his position with the company on March 22, 2004. In
connection therewith, we entered into a severance agreement with
Mr. Tveter pursuant to which the Company paid him severance
of $33,134 during 2004, paid his regular salary through
July 14, 2004 at an annual rate of $306,837, provided him
with certain employee benefits and provided for the vesting of
his stock options. The Compensation Committee approved
Mr. Tveters severance agreement on April 15,
2004 which will be the new measurement date of his stock
options. As a result of Mr. Tveters severance
agreement, the Company recorded approximately $216,800 in stock
compensation expense in the year ended December 31, 2004
related to the extension of the exercise period on
Mr. Tveters stock options. In addition, a severance
accrual was recorded as of March 22, 2004 for approximately
$173,000 which has been reduced as payments have been made.
On October 12, 2004, MasTec entered into an employment
agreement with C. Robert Campbell relating to his employment as
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. The
agreement expires on January 17, 2007 unless earlier
terminated, and provides that Mr. Campbell will be paid an
annual salary of $350,000 and an initial bonus of $75,000 upon
execution of the employment agreement. The agreement also
provides for a minimum annual performance bonus of
$50,000 per year and stock options pursuant to
MasTecs stock option plans. Following termination of
employment without cause or good reason, the executive will
receive his base salary from the date of termination for a
period of twelve months. If the agreement is terminated by the
Company not renewing or extending the employment agreement then
the executive shall be entitled to severance benefits for a
period of six months from the termination date. If there is a
change of control of MasTec during the employment term, the
executive will be entitled to one and a half times the unpaid
portion of his salary for the greater of twelve months or the
remaining term of the agreement and to immediate vesting of any
previously unvested options. The agreement also contains
confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation provisions.
On January 3, 2005, MasTec entered into an employment
agreement with Gregory S. Floerke relating to his employment as
Chief Operations Officer. The agreement expires on
January 2, 2007 unless earlier terminated, and provides
that Mr. Floerke will be paid an annual salary of $300,000
during the first year of employment and $350,000 during the
second year of employment. The agreement also provides for stock
options pursuant to MasTecs stock option plans. Following
termination of employment without cause or good reason the
executive will receive his base salary for 12 months after
the date of termination. If the agreement is not renewed by the
Company, the executive is entitled to severance benefits for a
period of six months from the termination date. The agreement
also contains confidentiality, non-competition and
non-solicitation provisions.
F-60
PART II
INFORMATION NOT REQUIRED IN PROSPECTUS
|
|
ITEM 13. |
OTHER EXPENSES OF ISSUANCE AND DISTRIBUTION |
The following statement sets forth the estimated amount of
expenses (other than underwriting discounts and commissions) to
be borne by the Registrant in connection with the offering:
|
|
|
|
|
SEC Registration Fee
|
|
$ |
18,449 |
|
Legal Fees and Expenses
|
|
|
220,000 |
|
Accounting Fees and Expenses
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
Printing and Mailing Expenses
|
|
|
120,000 |
|
Miscellaneous Expenses
|
|
|
169,551 |
|
TOTAL FEES AND EXPENSES
|
|
$ |
878,000 |
|
|
|
ITEM 14. |
INDEMNIFICATION OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS |
Section 607.0831 of the Florida Business Corporation Act
(the Florida Act) provides that a director is not
personally liable for monetary damages to the corporation or any
other person for any statement, vote, decision or failure to
act, regarding corporate management or policy, by a director,
unless: (a) the director breached or failed to perform his
duties as a director; and (b) the directors breach
of, or failure to perform, those duties constitutes: (i) a
violation of criminal law unless the director had reasonable
cause to believe his or her conduct was lawful or had no
reasonable cause to believe his or her conduct was unlawful;
(ii) a transaction from which the director derived an
improper personal benefit, either directly or indirectly;
(iii) a circumstance under which the director is liable for
an unlawful distribution; (iv) in a proceeding by, or in
the right of the corporation to procure a judgment in its favor
or by or in the right of a shareholder, conscious disregard for
the best interests of the corporation, or willful misconduct; or
(v) in a proceeding by or in the right of someone other
than the corporation or a shareholder, recklessness or an act or
omission which was committed in bad faith or with malicious
purpose or in a manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard
of human rights, safety or property.
Section 607.0850 of the Florida Act provides that a
corporation shall have the power to indemnify any person who was
or is a party to any proceeding (other than an action by, or in
the right of, the corporation), by reason of the fact that he or
she is or was a director, officer or employee or agent of the
corporation, or is serving at the request of the corporation as
a director, officer, employee, or agent of another corporation,
partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise against
liability incurred in connection with such proceeding, including
any appeal thereof, if he or she acted in good faith and in a
manner he or she reasonably believed to be in, or not opposed
to, the best interests of the corporation and, with respect to
any criminal action or proceeding, had no reasonable cause to
believe his or her conduct was unlawful. Section 607.0850
also provides that a corporation shall have the power to
indemnify any person, who was or is a party to any proceeding
by, or in the right of, the corporation to procure a judgment in
its favor by reason of the fact that he is or was a director,
officer, employee or agent of the corporation or is or was
serving at the request of the corporation as a director,
officer, employee, or agent of another corporation, partnership,
joint venture, trust, or other enterprise, against expenses and
amounts paid in settlement not exceeding, in the judgment of the
board of directors, the estimated expense of litigating the
proceeding to conclusion, actually and reasonably incurred in
connection with the defense or settlement of such proceeding,
including any appeal thereof. Section 607.0850 further
provides that such indemnification shall be authorized if such
person acted in good faith and in a manner he or she reasonably
believed to be in, or not opposed to, the best interests of the
corporation, except that no indemnification shall be made under
the subsection in respect of any claim, issue, or matter as to
which such person shall have been adjudged to be liable unless,
and only to
II-1
the extent that, the court in which such proceeding was brought,
or any other court of competent jurisdiction, shall determine
upon application that, despite the adjudication of liability,
but in view of all circumstances of the case, such person is
fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for such expenses
which such court shall deem proper. Section 607.0850
further provides that to the extent that a director, officer,
employee or agent has been successful on the merits or otherwise
in defense of any of the foregoing proceedings, or in defense of
any claim, issue or matter therein, he shall be indemnified
against expenses actually and reasonably incurred by him in
connection therewith. Under Section 607.0850, any
indemnification under the foregoing provisions, unless pursuant
to a determination by a court, shall be made by the corporation
only as authorized in the specific case upon a determination
that the indemnification of the director, officer, employee or
agent is proper in the circumstances because he or she has met
the applicable standard of conduct set forth under subsections
(1) and (2) of Section 607.0850. Notwithstanding
the failure of a corporation to provide indemnification, and
despite any contrary determination by the corporation in a
specific case, a director, officer, employee or agent of the
corporation who is or was a party to a proceeding may apply for
indemnification or advancement of expenses, or both, to the
court conducting the proceeding, to the circuit court, or
another court of competent jurisdiction and such court, after
giving any notice it considers necessary, may order
indemnification and advancement of expenses, including expenses
incurred in seeking court-ordered indemnification or advancement
of expenses, if it determines that such person is entitled to
indemnification under the applicable standard under
Section 609.0850.
Section 607.0850 also provides that a corporation shall
have the power to purchase and maintain insurance on behalf of
any person who is or was a director, officer, employee or agent
of the corporation or is or was serving at the request of the
corporation as a director, officer, employee, or agent of
another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust, or other
enterprise against any liability asserted against the person and
incurred by him or her in any such capacity or arising out of
his status as such, whether or not the corporation would have
the power to indemnify the person against such liability under
the provisions of Section 607.0850.
The Registrants Articles of Incorporation provide that the
Registrant shall indemnify to the fullest extent authorized by
the Florida Act, each person who is involved in any litigation
or other proceeding because such person is or was a director or
officer of the Registrant, against all expense, loss or
liability reasonably incurred or suffered in connection
therewith. The Registrants By-Laws provide that a director
or officer may be paid expenses incurred in defending any
proceeding in advance of its final disposition upon receipt by
the Registrant of an undertaking, by or on behalf of the
director or officer, to repay all amounts so advanced if it is
ultimately determined that such director or officer is not
entitled to indemnification.
The Registrant has obtained primary and excess insurance
policies insuring the directors and officers of the Registrant
and its subsidiaries against certain liabilities they may incur
in their capacity as directors and officers. Under such
policies, the insurer, on behalf of the Registrant, may also pay
amounts for which the Registrant has granted indemnification to
the directors or officers.
II-2
|
|
ITEM 15. |
RECENT SALES OF UNREGISTERED SECURITIES; USE OF PROCEEDS
FROM REGISTERED SECURITIES |
On December 30, 2005, MasTec entered into a definitive
agreement to purchase substantially all of the assets and assume
certain operating liabilities and contracts of DSSI for a
purchase price composed, in part, of $7.5 million of MasTec
unregistered common stock. Pursuant to the terms of the DSSI
Acquisition purchase agreement, the actual number of shares of
MasTec common stock to be issued upon closing will be determined
by dividing $7.5 million into the average closing sales
price for the MasTec common shares on the New York Stock
Exchange for the two business days preceding the closing date.
MasTec plans to issue these shares of its common stock in
reliance on the exemption from registration provided by
Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
Pursuant to the terms of the DSSI Acquisition purchase
agreement, MasTec has agreed to use its best efforts to register
for resale the MasTec common stock that is part of the purchase
price within 120 days after the closing of the DSSI
Acquisition.
The following exhibits either are filed herewith or incorporated
by reference to documents previously filed or will be filed by
amendment, as indicated below:
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibits |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
Form of Underwriting Agreement.** |
|
3 |
.1 |
|
Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation** |
|
3 |
.2 |
|
Second Amended and Restated Bylaws of MasTec, Inc. Amended and
Restated as of May 30, 2003, filed as Exhibit 3.1 to
our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 and
filed with the SEC on August 14, 2003 and incorporated by
reference herein. |
|
4 |
|
|
Indenture, dated as of February 4, 1998, between the
Registrant and First Trust National Association, as trustee,
relating to the Registrants 7.75% Senior Subordinated
Notes due 2008 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to
the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-4,
filed on February 13, 1998, Registration
No. 333-46361). |
|
5 |
.1 |
|
Opinion of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. regarding validity of the
shares of Common Stock being offered.** |
|
10 |
.1+ |
|
1994 Stock Incentive Plan.** |
|
10 |
.2+ |
|
1994 Stock Option Plan for Non-employee Directors.** |
|
10 |
.3+ |
|
1997 Non-Qualified Employee Stock Purchase Plan.** |
|
10 |
.4+ |
|
1999 Non-Qualified Employee Stock Option Plan, as amended
October 4, 1999, filed as Exhibit 10.4 to our Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 and
incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.5+ |
|
1999 Non-Qualified Employee Stock Option Plan.** |
|
10 |
.6+ |
|
Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan.** |
|
10 |
.7 |
|
Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated as of January 22,
2002 between MasTec, certain of its subsidiaries, and Fleet
Financial Corporation as agent filed as Exhibit 10.2 to our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2001, and filed with the SEC on March 28,
2002 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.8 |
|
Assumption and Amendment Agreement to Revolving Credit and
Security Agreement dated February 7, 2002 filed as
Exhibit 10.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2001, and filed with the SEC on
March 28, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.9 |
|
Amendment No. 2 to the Revolving Credit and Security
Agreement dated as of October 25, 2002 between MasTec,
Inc., certain of its subsidiaries, and Fleet Financial
Corporation as agent, filed as Exhibit 10.7 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2002 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.10 |
|
Amendment No. 3 and Consent to the Revolving Credit and
Security Agreement dated as of November 1, 2002 between
MasTec, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries, and Fleet Financial
Corporation as agent, filed as Exhibit 10-8 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2002 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.11 |
|
Amendment No. 4 to the Revolving Credit and Security
Agreement dated as of March 6, 2003 between MasTec, Inc.,
certain of its subsidiaries, and Fleet Financial Corporation as
agent, filed as Exhibit 10.9 to our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 and
incorporated by reference herein. |
II-3
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibits |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
10 |
.12+ |
|
Employment Agreement dated September 27, 2002, between
MasTec, Inc. and Austin J. Shanfelter, filed as
Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 20, 2002, and filed with the SEC on
November 14, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.13+ |
|
Severance Agreement with Jose Sariego dated as of
December 31, 2002, filed as Exhibit 10.14 to our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.14+ |
|
Split-Dollar Agreement effective August 27, 2002 between
MasTec, Inc. and Jorge Mas, filed as Exhibit 10.15 to our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.15+ |
|
Split-Dollar Agreement effective September 13, 2002 between
MasTec, Inc. and Jorge Mas, filed as Exhibit 10.16 to our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.16+ |
|
Split-Dollar Agreement effective September 13, 2002 between
MasTec, Inc. and Austin J. Shanfelter, filed as
Exhibit 10.18 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated by
reference herein. |
|
10 |
.17+ |
|
2003 Employee Stock Incentive Plan, filed as Appendix B to our
definitive proxy statement for our 2003 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders, dated April 25, 2003 and incorporated by
reference herein. |
|
10 |
.18 |
|
Amendment No. 5 to our Revolving Credit and Security
Agreement dated as of September 18, 2003 between MasTec,
Inc., certain of its subsidiaries and Fleet Financial
Corporation as agent, filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 and
incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.19+ |
|
Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for
Non-Employees, filed as Appendix A to our definitive proxy
statement for a Special Meeting of Shareholders, dated
November 17, 2003 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.20 |
|
Amendment No. 6 to the Revolving Credit and Security
Agreement dated as of December 29, 2003 between MasTec,
Inc., certain of its subsidiaries and Fleet Financial
Corporation as agent, filed as Exhibit 10.2 to our
Registration Statement on Form S-3 (file no. 333-111845)
and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.21+ |
|
Employment Agreement with Donald Weinstein entered into as of
December 1, 2003, filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the
Registration Statement on Form S-3 on January 12, 2004
and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.22 |
|
Amendment No. 7 to the Revolving Credit and Security
Agreement dated as of July 22, 2004 between MasTec, Inc.,
certain of its subsidiaries and Fleet Financial Corporation, as
agent, filed as Exhibit 10.22 to our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and
incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.23+ |
|
Separation Agreement and General Release entered into as of
March 22, 2004 between MasTec, Inc. and Eric J. Tveter, filed as
Exhibit 10.22 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated by
reference herein. |
|
10 |
.24+ |
|
Separation Agreement and General Release entered into as of
March 11, 2004 between MasTec, Inc. and Donald P. Weinstein,
filed as Exhibit 10.22 to our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and
incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.25+ |
|
Separation Agreement and General Release entered into as of
August 7, 2001 between MasTec, Inc. and Joel Citron, filed
as Exhibit 10.22 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated by
reference herein. |
|
10 |
.26 |
|
Amendment No. 8 to Revolving Credit and Security Agreement
dated October 4, 2004, filed as Appendix A to our
Form 8-K filed October 8, 2004. |
|
10 |
.27+ |
|
Employment Agreement, dated October 12, 2004 between C.
Robert Campbell and MasTec, Inc., filed as Appendix A to our
Form 8-K filed October 21, 2004. |
|
10 |
.28 |
|
Amendment No. 9 to Revolving Credit and Security Agreement
dated December 29, 2004, filed as Exhibit 10.28 to our
Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30,
2004 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.29+ |
|
Employment Agreement dated January 3, 2005 between Gregory
S. Floerke and MasTec, Inc. filed as Exhibit 10.29 to our
Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on January 7, 2005 and
incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.30+ |
|
Split-Dollar Agreement effective July 16, 2004 between
MasTec, Inc and Jose Mas, filed as Exhibit 10.30 to our
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 and
filed with the SEC on March 31, 2005 and incorporated by
reference herein. |
|
10 |
.31 |
|
Amendment No. 10 to Revolving Credit and Security Agreement
dated March 17, 2005, filed as Exhibit 10.31 to our
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 and
filed with the SEC on March 31, 2005 and incorporated by
reference herein. |
|
10 |
.32+ |
|
Employment Agreement dated February 1, 2004 between Michael
G. Nearing and MasTec, Inc. , filed as Exhibit 10.32 to our
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 and
filed with the SEC on May 10, 2005, and incorporated by
reference herein. |
II-4
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibits |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
10 |
.33 |
|
Amended and Restated Loan and Security Agreement dated as of May
10, 2005 between MasTec, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries, Bank
of America, N.A., as collateral and administrative agent and
General Electric Capital Corporation, as syndication agent,
filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the
SEC on May 12, 2005 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.33+ |
|
Amendment to Employment Agreement dated November 3, 2005
between Mastec, Inc. and Austin J. Shanfelter, filed as
Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2005, and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.34+ |
|
Employment Agreement dated November 16, 2005 between
Mastec, Inc. and Alberto de Cardenas.** |
|
10 |
.35+ |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Mastec, Inc. and Eric J.
Tveter dated July 15, 2002 filed as Exhibit 10.2 to
our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002
and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.36+ |
|
Second Amendment to Employment Agreement dated December 19,
2005 by and between Mastec, Inc. and Austin J. Shanfelter.** |
|
10 |
.37+ |
|
1997 Annual Incentive Compensation Plan.** |
|
10 |
.38+ |
|
Deferred Fee Plan for Directors dated December 19, 2005,
filed as Exhibit 10.38 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC
on December 23, 2005 and incorporated by reference herein. |
|
10 |
.39 |
|
Asset Purchase Agreement dated December 30, 2005, by and
among MasTec North America AC, LLC, MasTec, Inc., Ronald E.
Phillips, Dawn M. Phillips, Digital Satellite Services Employee
Stock Ownership Trust and Digital Satellite Services, Inc.** |
|
10 |
.40+ |
|
Deferred Bonus Agreement dated November 1, 2002 between
MasTec, Inc. and Jorge Mas.** |
|
10 |
.41+ |
|
First Amendment to Deferred Bonus Agreement dated
January 6, 2006 between MasTec Inc. and Jorge Mas.** |
|
10 |
.42+ |
|
Deferred Bonus Agreement dated November 1, 2002 between
MasTec, Inc. and Austin Shanfelter.** |
|
10 |
.43+ |
|
First Amendment to Deferred Bonus Agreement dated
January 6, 2006 between MasTec, Inc. and Austin
Shanfelter.** |
|
10 |
.44+ |
|
First Amendment to Split-Dollar Agreement between MasTec, Inc.
and Austin Shanfelter dated September 15, 2003.** |
|
10 |
.45+ |
|
Second Amendment to Split-Dollar Agreement between MasTec, Inc.
and Austin Shanfelter dated January 6, 2006.** |
|
10 |
.46+ |
|
First Amendment to Split-Dollar Agreement (dated December 2002)
between MasTec, Inc. and Jorge Mas dated May 4, 2003.** |
|
10 |
.47+ |
|
Amendment to Split-Dollar Agreement (dated December 2002)
between MasTec, Inc. and Jorge Mas dated September 15,
2003.** |
|
10 |
.48+ |
|
Third Amendment to Split-Dollar Agreement (dated December 2002)
between MasTec, Inc. and Jorge Mas dated January 6, 2006.** |
|
10 |
.49+ |
|
First Amendment to Split-Dollar Agreement (dated May 2003)
between MasTec, Inc. and Jorge Mas dated September 15,
2003.** |
|
10 |
.50+ |
|
Second Amendment to Split-Dollar Agreement (dated May 2003)
between MasTec, Inc. and Jorge Mas dated January 6, 2006.** |
|
10 |
.51+ |
|
First Amendment to Split-Dollar Agreement between MasTec, Inc.
and Jorge Mas dated January 6, 2006.** |
|
21 |
|
|
Subsidiaries of the registrant. |
|
23 |
.1 |
|
Consent of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. (included in Exhibit 5
above). |
|
23 |
.2 |
|
Consent of BDO Seidman, LLP. |
|
23 |
.3 |
|
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP. |
|
24 |
|
|
Power of Attorney.** |
|
|
* |
To be filed by amendment. |
|
|
+ |
Management contract or compensation plan arrangement. |
II-5
a. Insofar as indemnification for
liabilities arising under the Securities Act of 1933 may be
permitted to directors, officers and controlling persons of the
registrant pursuant to the foregoing provisions, or otherwise,
the registrant has been advised that in the opinion of the
Securities and Exchange Commission such indemnification is
against public policy as expressed in the Act and is, therefore,
unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification
against such liabilities (other than the payment by the
registrant of expenses incurred or paid by a director, officer
or controlling person of the registrant in the successful
defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such
director, officer or controlling person in connection with the
securities being registered, the registrant will, unless in the
opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by
controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate
jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is
against public policy as expressed in the Act and will be
governed by the final adjudication of such issue.
b. The undersigned Registrant
hereby undertakes that:
|
|
|
(1) For purposes of determining any
liability under the Securities Act of 1933, the information
omitted from the form of prospectus filed as part of this
registration statement in reliance upon Rule 430A and
contained in a form of prospectus filed by the registrant
pursuant to Rule 424(b)(1) or (4) or 497(h) under the
Securities Act shall be deemed to be part of this registration
statement as of the time it was declared effective. |
|
|
(2) For the purpose of determining
any liability under the Securities Act of 1933, each
post-effective amendment that contains a form of prospectus
shall be deemed to be a new registration statement relating to
the securities offered therein, and the offering of such
securities at that time shall be deemed to be the initial
bona fide offering thereof. |
II-6
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, the
Registrant has duly caused this Registration Statement to be
signed on its behalf by the undersigned, hereunto duly
authorized, in the City of Coral Gables, State of Florida, on
the 23rd day of January, 2006.
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Austin Shanfelter |
|
|
|
|
|
Austin Shanfelter |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer, |
|
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ C. Robert Campbell |
|
|
|
|
|
C. Robert Campbell |
|
Chief Financial Officer, (Principal |
|
Financial and Accounting Officer) |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, this
Registration Statement has been signed by the following persons
in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
Jorge Mas |
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
/s/ Austin J. Shanfelter
Austin J. Shanfelter |
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
*
Jose R. Mas |
|
Executive Vice President and Vice Chairman of the Board of
Directors |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
/s/ C. Robert Campbell
C. Robert Campbell |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal
Financial and Accounting Officer) |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
*
Carlos M. de Cespedes |
|
Director |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
*
Ernst N. Csiszar |
|
Director |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
*
Robert J. Dwyer |
|
Director |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
*
Frank E. Jaumot |
|
Director |
|
January 23, 2006 |
II-7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
Julia L. Johnson |
|
Director |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
*
Jose S. Sorzano |
|
Director |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
*
John Van Heuvelen |
|
Director |
|
January 23, 2006 |
|
*By |
|
/s/ Austin Shanfelter
Austin Shanfelter
Attorney-in-Fact |
|
|
|
|
II-8
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibits |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
Subsidiaries of the registrant |
|
23 |
.2 |
|
Consent of BDO Seidman, LLP |
|
23 |
.3 |
|
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP |
Subsidiaries
Exhibit 21
MasTec, Inc.
AFFILIATED ENTITIES
January 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NORTH AMERICA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Church & Tower, Inc.(FL) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Integral Power & Telecommunications Incorporated |
|
(100% owned by Phasecom Systems, Inc.) |
(Canadian) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec Asset Management Company, Inc. (NV) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec Contracting Company, Inc. (NV) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec Minnesota SW, LLC (NV) |
|
(100% MasTec Services Company, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec North America, Inc. (FL) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec North America AC, LLC (FL) |
|
(Sole member MasTec North America, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec Services Company, Inc. (FL) |
|
|
|
|
f/k/a Central America Construction, Inc. |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
MasTec Minnesota SW, LLC (NV)
|
|
(100%
MasTec Services Company, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phasecom Systems Inc. (Canadian) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S.S.S. Construction, Inc. (MN) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Globetec Construction, LLC (Florida) |
|
(51% owned by MasTec North America, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M & J Cable TV Contractor, Inc. (IL) |
|
(49% owned by MasTec North America, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct Star TV LLC (NC) |
|
(49% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holding Companies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec FC, Inc. (NV) |
|
(100 % owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stackhouse Real Estate Holdings, Inc. |
|
(100% owned by MasTec North America, Inc.) |
|
|
f/k/a H-W Acquisition II, Inc. (DE) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec of Texas, Inc. (TX) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec TC, Inc. (NV) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTERNATIONAL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latin America |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aidco de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (Mex.) |
|
(98% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2% owned by MasTec International Holdings, Inc.) |
MasTec Latin America, Inc. (DE) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acietel Mexicana, S.A. (Mex.) |
|
(99% owned by Dresser Acquisition Company) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1% owned by MasTec International Holdings, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec Brasil S/A (Brazil) |
|
(88% owned by MasTec Latin America, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
CIDE Engenharia, Ltda. (Brazil)
|
|
(100% owned by MasTec Brasil S/A) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mastec Participações Do Brasil LTDA |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTelecom Europe I APS (Denmark) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTelecom
Europe II BV (Netherlands) |
|
(100%
owned by MasTelecom Europe I APS) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTelecom S. DE R.L. DE C.V
|
|
(100%
owned by MasTelecom Europe II BV) |
|
|
|
|
(Mexico) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pantel Inversiones de Venezuela, CA |
|
(100% owned by MasTec Venezuela, Inc.) |
(Venezuela) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Burntel Telecommunications, C.A. |
|
(50% owned by Pantel Inversiones) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holding Companies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec Brazil, Inc. (FL) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
MasTec Brazil II, Inc. (FL) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec Venezuela, Inc. (FL) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MasTec Spain, Inc. (FL) |
|
(100% owned by MasTec, Inc.) |
Consent of BDO Siedman, LLP
EXHIBIT 23.2
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
MasTec, Inc.
Coral Gables, FL
We hereby consent to the use in the Prospectus constituting a
part of this Amendment No. 3 to the registration statement
on Form S-1/A, of
our reports dated March 29, 2005, relating to the
consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting of MasTec, Inc., which
are contained in that prospectus.
We also consent to the reference to us under the headings
Experts.
|
|
/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP |
|
BDO Seidman, LLP |
|
|
Miami, Florida |
|
|
|
January 20, 2006 |
|
|
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP
EXHIBIT 23.3
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption
Experts and to the use of our report dated
July 23, 2004 (except for Note 10 as to which the date
is March 30, 2005) with respect to the consolidated balance
sheet of Mastec, Inc. as of December 31, 2003, and the
related consolidated statements of operations,
shareholders equity and cash flows for each of the two
years in the period ended December 31, 2003 (as restated)
included in the Registration Statement
(Form S-1
No. 333-129790)
and the related Prospectus of MasTec, Inc. for the registration
of its common stock.
Miami, Florida
January 20, 2006
Response Letter to the SEC
Paul Berkowitz
Tel. (305) 579-0685
Fax. (305) 579-0717
berkowitzp@gtlaw.com
January 23, 2006
United States Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20549-0404
Attention: Brigitte Lippmann
|
|
|
Re:
|
|
MasTec, Inc. |
|
|
Amendment No. 2 to |
|
|
Registration Statement on Form S-1 |
|
|
Filed on January 10, 2006 |
|
|
File No. 333-129790 |
Ladies and Gentlemen:
On behalf of our client, MasTec, Inc., a Florida corporation (the Company), transmitted
herewith are the Companys responses to the Staffs
comments to Amendment No. 2 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-1 filed on January 10, 2006 (the S-1 which comments were set forth in
a letter dated January 17, 2006 (the Comment Letter) to Alberto de Cardenas, Executive
Vice President and General Counsel of the Company. For ease of reference, we have reproduced
comments set forth in the Comment Letter, as numbered, before each response below and have referred
to Amendment No. 3 to the S-1 (the S-1/A), which the Company has filed simultaneously
with the delivery of this letter, where applicable. We have also attached to this Letter as
Exhibit A the statement that the Commission has requested from the Company.
1. |
|
We encourage you to include a recent developments section discussing your 2005 results if
such information is available or has been publicly announced. Please also update other
information in the registration statement to December 31st. For example, in the
Security Ownership section. |
RESPONSE
Although the Company updated its 2005 guidance as a result of the Companys decision
to sell substantially all of its state departments of transportation related
projects and assets, the Companys results of operations for the year ended December
31, 2005 have not been publicly announced, are not currently available and are not
expected to be available for some time. The Company has informed us that that it
has updated the other information in the S-1/A to the extent currently available.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ALBANY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMSTERDAM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ATLANTA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BOCA RATON |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BOSTON |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CHICAGO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DALLAS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DELAWARE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DENVER |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FORT LAUDERDALE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HOUSTON |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LAS VEGAS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOS ANGELES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MIAMI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEW JERSEY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEW YORK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ORANGE COUNTY, CA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ORLANDO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SACRAMENTO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SILICON VALLEY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PHILADELPHIA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PHOENIX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TALLAHASSEE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOKYO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TYSONS CORNER |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WASHINGTON, D.C. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEST PALM BEACH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ZURICH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
www.gtlaw.com |
|
|
|
|
Greenberg Traurig, P.A. | Attorneys at Law | 1221 Brickell Avenue | Miami, Florida 33131 | Tel. 305.579.0500 | Fax 305.579.0717
2. |
|
Please disclose the number of shares issued to be issued to DSSI, or explain how this number
will be determined. If you request acceleration after the transaction closes, please update
share information throughout the filing to include those shares. For example, in the Security
Ownership section. |
RESPONSE
The Asset Purchase Agreement with respect to the DSSI transaction was filed as
exhibit 10.39 to Amendment No. 2. The calculation of the number of shares is
disclosed in Section §1.4(b) of the exhibit as $7.5 million divided by the per-share
closing price of MasTec stock on the New York Stock Exchange for the two (2)
business days preceding the closing date. Based upon the current
price of MasTec shares, the number of shares to be issued will be approximately 1.1% of the shares
to be outstanding after giving effect to the offering, which the Company believes is
not material. The Company therefore believes that repeating this calculation in the
prospectus would not materially improve the information available to prospective
purchasers. However, the Company has added this information to
Item 15.
3. |
|
We note that on December 31, 2005, the executive committee of your board of directors voted
to sell substantially all of your state Department of Transportation related projects and
assets. Please expand your disclosures to provide the following additional information. |
|
|
|
Provide pro forma financial information in the form and content required by Rule
11-02(b) of Regulation S-X. Refer to Rule 11-01(4) of Regulation S-X. In this regard,
we remind you that since you will account for this disposition as discontinued
operations, you should provide pro forma statements of operations for the three years
ended December 31, 2004 and the nine months ended September 30, 2005. Refer to Rule
11-02(c)(ii) of Regulation S-X. |
|
|
|
|
Expand your disclosures to identify the carrying value of the assets related to
these projects. |
|
|
|
|
Based on the information you have to date, discuss whether you believe you will need
to record an impairment loss related to these assets. Expand your disclosures to
clarify whether you have had any discussions with potential buyers and, if so, whether
preliminary purchase prices have been established. |
RESPONSE
The Company has updated the S-1/A with the requested information.
4. |
|
Please disclose when you expect to sell the State Department of Transportation assets. |
RESPONSE
The Company has advised us that it plans to sell or otherwise dispose of
substantially all of its state departments of transportation projects and assets
prior to December 31, 2006. The
sale process has only recently begun and there is currently no means of predicting
when the sale will occur within this time frame. Accordingly, the Company does not
believe that any additional disclosure would be appropriate or beneficial to
potential investors at this time.
5. |
|
Please add a risk factor regarding the dilution to new investors. |
RESPONSE
The Company has updated the S-1/A with the requested information.
6. |
|
We note that Exhibit A includes Tandy language for Exchange Act filings. Please file a letter
using the Securities Act Tandy language set forth at the end of this letter. |
RESPONSE
The requested Exhibit A has been attached to this letter.
7. |
|
As you now have a contract for the sale of shares to DSSI in exchange for its assets, please
provide the information required by Item 701 of Regulation S-K including the exemption from
registration that you are relying upon and the facts necessary to support the exemption. |
RESPONSE
The Company has updated the S-1/A with the requested information.
As
discussed with Pamela Long, the Company will file a Form 8-K
containing certain of the revisions made to the S-1/A
simultaneously with the filing of the S-1/A. The Company will also distribute a free
writing prospectus containing this information to potential investors
(including anyone to whom the underwriters anticipate delivering a
confirmation)
along with a hyperlink to the statutory prospectus (or in the case of
a non-electronic delivery, accompanied by the statutory
prospectus). The Company believes that as a result of compliance with
these procedures and
in light of the level of materiality of the information added to
Amendment No. 3, no recirculation of the new prospectus to all
who reviewed the original red herring is needed. In addition, since the Company currently anticipates
pricing the offering on Tuesday, January 24, 2006, the Company
respectfully requests that the Commission waive the requirement for
48-hours notice for an acceleration request. A separate request for
acceleration will be provided.
Please call the undersigned with any questions or comments you may have regarding this letter. In
addition, please send all written correspondence directly to the undersigned at Greenberg Traurig,
P.A., 1221 Brickell Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131, telecopy (305) 579-0717 with copies to Alberto de
Cardenas, the Companys Executive Vice President and General Counsel, at 800 Douglas Road,
Penthouse, Coral Gables, Florida 33134, telecopy (305) 406-1900.
Sincerely,
/s/ Paul Berkowitz
Paul Berkowitz
Enclosures
|
|
|
cc:
|
|
MasTec, Inc. |
|
|
MasTec, Inc. Audit Committee |
|
|
BDO Seidman, LLP |
|
|
Pamela A. Long |
|
|
Jeanne Baker |
PB/lck
Greenberg Traurig, PA
EXHIBIT A
I, Austin J. Shanfelter, President and Chief Executive Officer of MasTec, Inc. (the Company), do
hereby acknowledge that:
|
|
|
Should the Commission or the staff, acting pursuant to delegated authority, declare
the filing effective, it does not foreclose the Commission from taking any action with
respect to the filing; |
|
|
|
|
The action of the Commission or the staff, acting pursuant to delegated authority,
in declaring the filing effective, does not relieve the Company from its responsibility
for the adequacy and accuracy of the disclosure of the filing; and |
|
|
|
|
The Company may not assert this action as a defense in any proceeding initiated by
the Commission or any person under the federal securities laws of the United States. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: January 23, 2006 |
/s/ Austin J. Shanfelter
|
|
|
Austin J. Shanfelter |
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|