|
|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
Allied Capital 10-K 2010 Documents found in this filing:
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
For The Fiscal Year Ended
December 31, 2009
OR
Commission File No.
0-22832
ALLIED CAPITAL
CORPORATION
Registrants Telephone
Number, Including Area Code: (202) 721-6100
Securities Registered Pursuant
to Section 12(g) of the Act:
NONE
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. YES o NO x
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. YES o NO x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all
reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to
file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90
days. YES x NO o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
YES
o
NO
o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein,
and will not be contained, to the best of registrants
knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any
amendment to this Form
10-K. x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act). YES o NO x
The aggregate market value of the registrants common stock
held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30,
2009, was approximately $609.4 million based upon the last
sale price for the registrants common stock on that date.
As of February 25, 2010, there were 179,940,040 shares
of the registrants common stock outstanding.
PART
I
Item 1. Business.
We are a business development company, or BDC, in the private
equity business and we are internally managed. Specifically, we
generally invest in primarily private middle market companies
with EBITDA, or earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation
and amortization, of between $5 million and
$150 million in a variety of industries through
long-term
debt and equity capital instruments. As a BDC, we were created
to be a source of capital to small and growing businesses in the
United States. We have participated in the private equity
business since we were founded in 1958. Since then through
December 31, 2009, we have invested more than
$14 billion in thousands of companies nationwide. We
primarily invest in the American entrepreneurial economy,
helping to build middle market businesses and support American
jobs. At December 31, 2009, our private finance portfolio
included investments in 77 companies that generate
aggregate annual revenues of approximately $8 billion and
employ more than 40,000 people. We generally invest in
established companies with adequate cash flow for debt service.
Our investment objective is to achieve current income and
capital gains. In order to achieve this objective, we have
primarily invested in debt and equity securities of private
companies in a variety of industries. However, from time to
time, we have invested in companies that are public but lack
access to additional public capital.
We are internally managed by our management team of senior
officers and managing directors. At December 31, 2009, we
had 107 employees. We are headquartered in Washington, DC,
with offices in New York, NY and Arlington,VA.
On October 26, 2009, we and Ares Capital Corporation, or
Ares Capital, announced a strategic business
combination in which ARCC Odyssey Corp., a wholly owned
subsidiary of Ares Capital Corporation, or Merger
Sub, would merge with and into Allied Capital and,
immediately thereafter, Allied Capital would merge with and into
Ares Capital. If the merger of Merger Sub into Allied Capital is
completed, holders of Allied Capital common stock will have a
right to receive 0.325 shares of Ares Capital common stock
for each share of Allied Capital common stock held immediately
prior to such merger. In connection with such merger, Ares
Capital expects to issue a maximum of approximately
58.3 million shares of its common stock (assuming that
holders of all
in-the-money
Allied Capital stock options elect to be cashed out), subject to
adjustment in certain limited circumstances. The closing of the
merger is subject to the receipt of shareholder approvals from
Allied Capital and Ares Capital shareholders, and other closing
conditions. Allied Capital is holding a special meeting of its
stockholders on March 26, 2010, at which Allied Capital
stockholders will be asked to vote on the approval of the merger
and the merger agreement described in the proxy statement dated
February 11, 2010. Approval of the merger and the merger
agreement requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of Allied
Capitals outstanding shares entitled to vote on the
matter. The completion of the merger with Ares Capital is
dependent on a number of conditions being satisfied or, where
legally permissible, waived. See Item IA. Risk
Factors Risks Related to the merger with Ares
Capital.
Private
Equity Investing
The United States and the global economies continue to operate
in an unprecedented economic recession, and the U.S. capital
markets continue to experience extreme volatility and a lack of
liquidity. Our strategy in these difficult economic times has
been focused on reducing costs and streamlining our
organization; building liquidity through selected asset sales;
retaining capital by limiting new investment activity and
suspending dividend payments; and working with portfolio
companies to help them position for growth when the economy
recovers.
As a private equity investor, our portfolio primarily consists
of long-term investments in the debt and equity of primarily
private middle market companies. These investments generally are
long-term in nature and privately negotiated, and no readily
available market exists for them. This makes our investments
highly illiquid and, as a result, we cannot readily trade them.
When we make an investment, we enter into a long-term
arrangement where our ultimate exit from that investment may be
three to ten years in the future.
We have focused on investments in the debt of primarily private
middle market companies because they have been structured to
provide recurring cash flow to us as the investor. In addition
to earning interest income, we may earn income from management,
consulting, diligence, structuring or other fees. We may also
enhance our total return with capital gains realized from
investments in equity instruments or from equity features, such
as nominal cost warrants.
Historically, we have competed for investments with a large
number of private equity funds and mezzanine funds, other BDCs,
hedge funds, investment banks, other equity and non-equity based
investment funds, and other sources of financing, including
specialty finance companies and traditional financial services
companies such as commercial banks. However, we have primarily
competed with other providers of long-term debt and equity
capital to middle market companies, including private equity
funds and other BDCs.
Private Finance Portfolio. Our private
finance portfolio primarily is composed of debt and equity
investments. Debt investments include senior loans, unitranche
debt (an instrument that combines both senior and subordinated
financing, generally in a first lien position), or subordinated
debt (with or without equity features). The junior debt that we
have in the portfolio is lower in repayment priority than the
senior debt and is also known as mezzanine debt. Our portfolio
contains equity investments generally for a minority equity
stake in portfolio companies, and includes equity features, such
as nominal cost warrants, received in conjunction with our debt
investments.
Senior loans carry a fixed rate of interest or a floating rate
of interest, set as a spread over prime or LIBOR, and generally
require payments of both principal and interest throughout the
life of the loan. Senior loans generally have contractual
maturities of three to six years and interest is generally paid
to us monthly or quarterly. Unitranche debt generally carries a
fixed rate of interest. Unitranche debt generally requires
payments of both principal and interest throughout the life of
the loan. Unitranche debt generally has contractual maturities
of five to six years and interest generally is paid to us
quarterly. Subordinated debt generally carries a fixed rate of
interest generally with contractual maturities of five to ten
years and generally has interest-only payments in the early
years and payments of both principal and interest in the later
years, although maturities and principal amortization schedules
may vary. Interest on subordinated debt generally is paid to us
quarterly.
From time to time, we underwrite or arrange senior loans related
to our portfolio investments, or for other companies that are
not in our portfolio. At closing, all or a portion of the
underwritten commitment may be funded by us, pending sale of the
loan to other investors at closing. We generally earn a fee on
the senior loans we underwrite or arrange whether or not we fund
the underwritten commitment. After completion of the loan sales,
we may or may not retain a position in these senior loans.
Principal collections include repayments of senior debt funded
by us that was subsequently sold by us or refinanced or repaid
by the portfolio companies. These transactions may include loan
sales to other portfolio companies controlled by us, or funds
affiliated with or managed by us.
We also have invested in the bonds and preferred shares/income
notes of collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) or
collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), where the underlying
collateral pool consists primarily of senior loans. Certain of
the CLOs and CDOs in which we have invested may be managed by us
or Callidus Capital Management, a portfolio company controlled
by us.
Our portfolio includes buyout transactions in which we hold
investments in senior debt, subordinated debt and equity
(preferred and/or voting or non-voting common) where our equity
ownership represents a significant portion of the equity, but
may or may not represent a controlling interest. If we invest in
non-voting equity in a buyout investment, we generally have an
option to acquire a controlling stake in the voting securities
of the portfolio company at fair market value. Historically, we
have structured our buyout investments such that we seek to earn
a blended current return on our total capital invested through a
combination of interest income on our loans and debt securities,
dividends on our preferred and common equity, and management,
consulting, or transaction services fees to compensate us for
the managerial assistance that we may provide to the portfolio
company.
The structure of each debt and equity security includes many
terms governing interest rate, repayment terms, prepayment
penalties, financial covenants, operating covenants, ownership
parameters, dilution parameters, liquidation preferences, voting
rights, and put or call rights. Our senior loans and unitranche
debt are generally in a first lien position, however in a
liquidation scenario, the collateral, if any, may not be
sufficient to support our outstanding investment. Our junior or
mezzanine loans are generally unsecured. Our investments may be
subject to certain restrictions on resale and generally have no
established trading market.
At December 31, 2009, 39.1% of the private finance
investments at value were in companies more than 25% owned, 8.7%
were in companies 5% to 25% owned, and 52.2% were in companies
less than 5% owned.
We monitor the portfolio to maintain diversity within the
industries in which we invest. We may or may not concentrate in
any industry or group of industries in the future. The industry
composition of the private finance portfolio at value at
December 31, 2009 and 2008, was as follows:
Commercial Real Estate Finance
Portfolio. We also have participated in
commercial real estate finance over our history. Over the past
several years, we have not actively participated in commercial
real estate finance as we believed that the market for
commercial real estate had become too aggressive and that
investment opportunities were not priced appropriately. As a
result, our commercial real estate finance portfolio totaled
$55.8 million at value, or 2.1% of our total assets, at
December 31, 2009, and contained primarily commercial
mortgage loans and real estate properties.
In addition to managing our own assets, we manage certain funds
that also invest in the debt and equity securities of primarily
private middle market companies in a variety of industries and
broadly
syndicated senior secured loans. At December 31, 2009, we
had six separate funds under our management (together, the
Managed Funds) for which we may earn management or other fees
for our services. In some cases, we may invest in the equity of
these funds, along with other third parties, from which we may
earn a current return
and/or a
future incentive allocation.
In the first quarter of 2009, we completed the acquisition of
the management contracts of three middle market senior debt CLOs
(together, the Emporia Funds) and certain other related assets
for approximately $11 million (subject to post-closing
adjustments). The acquired assets are included in other assets
in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet and are being
amortized over the life of the contracts. In October 2009, we
sold our investment, including our outstanding commitments and
the provision of management services, in the Senior Secured Loan
Fund LLC to Ares Capital, and in December 2009, we sold our
investment, including the provision of management services, in
the Allied Capital Senior Debt Fund, L.P. to Ivy Hill Asset
Management, L.P., a portfolio company of Ares Capital. We may
continue to sell additional Managed Funds to Ares Capital or
other third parties.
The assets of the Managed Funds at December 31, 2009 and
2008, and our management fees as of December 31, 2009 were
as follows:
A portion of the management fees earned by us may be deferred
under certain circumstances. Collection of the fees earned is
dependent in part on the performance of the relevant fund. We
may pay a portion of management fees we receive to Callidus
Capital Corporation, a wholly owned portfolio investment, for
services provided to the Knightsbridge CLO
2007-1 Ltd.,
Knightsbridge CLO
2008-1 Ltd.
and the Emporia Funds.
Our responsibilities to the Managed Funds may include investment
execution, underwriting, and portfolio monitoring services. Each
of the Managed Funds may separately invest in the debt or equity
of companies in our portfolio, and these investments may be
senior, pari passu or junior to the debt and equity investments
held by us. We may or may not participate in investments made by
the Managed Funds.
For additional discussion of the Managed Funds, see
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Portfolio and Investment Activity Asset
Management.
Business Development. Over the years,
we believe we have developed and maintained a strong and
extensive network of relationships. This network includes
private equity investors, investment banks, business brokers,
merger and acquisition advisors, financial services companies,
banks, law firms and accountants. We are well known in the
private equity industry, and through these relationships, we
have been able to source investment opportunities for our
portfolio and our Managed Funds.
New Deal Underwriting and Investment
Execution. In a typical transaction, we
review, analyze, and substantiate through due diligence, the
business plan and operations of the potential portfolio company.
We perform financial due diligence, perform operational due
diligence, study the industry and competitive landscape, and
conduct reference checks with company management or other
employees, customers, suppliers, and competitors, as necessary.
We may work with external consultants, including accounting
firms and industry or operational consultants, in performing due
diligence and in monitoring our portfolio investments.
Once a prospective portfolio company is determined to be
suitable for investment, we work with the management and the
other capital providers, including senior, junior, and equity
capital providers, to structure a transaction. Our investments
are tailored to the facts and circumstances of each deal. The
specific structure is designed to protect our rights and manage
our risk in the transaction. We generally structure the debt
instrument to require restrictive affirmative and negative
covenants, default penalties, or other protective provisions. In
addition, each debt investment is individually priced to achieve
a return that reflects our rights and priorities in the
portfolio companys capital structure, the structure of the
debt instrument, and our perceived risk of the investment. Our
loans and debt securities have an annual stated interest rate;
however, that interest rate is only one factor in pricing the
investment. The annual stated interest rate may include some
component of contractual payment-in-kind interest, which
represents contractual interest accrued and added to the loan
balance that generally becomes due at maturity or upon
prepayment. In addition to the interest earned on loans and debt
securities, our debt investments may include equity features,
such as nominal cost warrants or options to buy a minority
interest in the portfolio company.
In a buyout transaction where our equity investment represents a
significant portion of the equity, our equity ownership may or
may not represent a controlling interest. If non-voting equity
is invested in a buyout, we generally have an option to acquire
a controlling stake in the voting securities of the portfolio
company at fair market value.
We have a centralized, credit-based approval process for our
investments. The key steps in our investment process are:
The IFC is chaired by John Scheurer, CEO, and currently includes
William Walton, Chairman of the Board (vice chairman of the
committee), Penni Roll, CFO, Scott Binder, Managing Director and
Head of
Special Assets, Robert Monk, Managing Director, Daniel Russell,
Managing Director and Head of Private Finance, Susan Mayer,
Managing Director, Dale Lynch, Executive Vice President, John
Wellons, Chief Accounting Officer and two Principals on a
rotating basis. The composition of the committee may change from
time to time.
Portfolio Monitoring and
Development. Middle market companies often
lack the management expertise and experience found in larger
companies. As a BDC, we are required by the 1940 Act to make
available significant managerial assistance to our portfolio
companies. Our senior level professionals work with portfolio
company management teams to assist them in building their
businesses. Managerial assistance includes, but is not limited
to, management and consulting services related to corporate
finance, marketing, human resources, personnel and board member
recruiting, business operations, corporate governance, risk
management and other general business matters. Our corporate
finance assistance includes supporting our portfolio
companies efforts to structure and attract additional
capital. We believe our extensive network of industry
relationships and our internal resources help make us a
collaborative partner in the development of our portfolio
companies.
The Special Assets
Sub-Committee
of the IFC is responsible for review and oversight of the
investment portfolio, including reviewing the performance of
selected portfolio companies, overseeing portfolio companies in
workout status, reviewing and approving certain modifications or
amendments to or certain additional investments in existing
portfolio companies, reviewing and approving certain actions by
portfolio companies whose voting securities are more than 50%
owned by us, reviewing significant investment-related litigation
matters where we are a named party, approving related activities
and reviewing and approving proxy votes with respect to our
portfolio investments.
From time to time, we will identify investments that require
closer monitoring or become workout assets. We develop a workout
strategy for workout assets and the Special Assets
Sub-Committee
of the IFC gauges our progress against the strategy. The Special
Assets
Sub-Committee
is chaired by John Scheurer, CEO, and currently includes Scott
Binder, Managing Director and Head of Special Assets (vice
chairman of the committee), William Walton, Chairman of the
Board, Penni Roll, CFO, Daniel Russell, Managing Director and
Head of Private Finance, Susan Mayer, Managing Director, and
Ralph Blasey, Executive Vice President and Corporate Counsel.
The composition of the committee may change from time to time.
For debt investments we may have board observation rights that
allow us to attend portfolio company board meetings. For buyout
investments, we generally hold a majority of the seats on the
board of directors where we own a controlling interest in the
portfolio company and we have board observation rights where we
do not own a controlling interest in the portfolio company.
We determine the value of each investment in our portfolio on a
quarterly basis, and changes in value result in unrealized
appreciation or depreciation being recognized in our statement
of operations. Value, as defined in Section 2(a)(41) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (1940 Act), is (i) the
market price for those securities for which a market quotation
is readily available and (ii) for all other securities and
assets, fair value is as determined in good faith by the Board
of Directors. Since there is typically no readily available
market value for the investments in our portfolio, we value
substantially all of our portfolio investments at fair value as
determined in good faith by the Board of Directors in accordance
with our valuation policy and the provisions of the 1940 Act and
Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 820, which
includes the codification of FASB Statement No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements and related interpretations. We
determine fair value to be the price that would be received for
an investment in a current sale, which assumes an orderly
transaction between market participants on the measurement date.
At December 31, 2009, portfolio investments recorded at
fair value using level 3 inputs (as defined under ASC
Topic 820) were approximately 80% of our total assets.
Because of the
inherent uncertainty of determining the fair value of
investments that do not have a readily available market
quotation in an active market, the fair value of our investments
determined in good faith by the Board of Directors may differ
significantly from the values that would have been used had a
ready market existed for the investments, and the differences
could be material.
There is no single approach for determining fair value in good
faith. As a result, determining fair value requires that
judgment be applied to the specific facts and circumstances of
each portfolio investment while employing a consistently applied
valuation process for the types of investments we make. Unlike
banks, we are not permitted to provide a general reserve for
anticipated loan losses. Instead, we are required to
specifically value each individual investment on a quarterly
basis. We will record unrealized depreciation on investments
when we determine that the fair value of a security is less than
its cost basis, and we will record unrealized appreciation when
we determine that the fair value is greater than its cost basis.
Changes in fair value are recorded in the statement of
operations as net change in unrealized appreciation or
depreciation. See Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Results of Operations Change
in Unrealized Appreciation or Depreciation for a
discussion of our valuation methodology.
Valuation Process. The portfolio
valuation process is managed by our Chief Valuation Officer
(CVO). The CVO works with the investment professionals
responsible for each investment. The following is an overview of
the steps we take each quarter to determine the value of our
portfolio.
In connection with our valuation process to determine the fair
value of a private finance investment, we work with third-party
consultants to obtain assistance and advice as additional
support in the preparation of our internal valuation analysis
for a portion of the portfolio each quarter. In addition, we may
receive other third-party assessments of a particular private
finance portfolio companys value in the ordinary course of
business, most often in the context of a prospective sale
transaction or in the context of a bankruptcy process.
The valuation analysis prepared by management is submitted to
our Board of Directors who is ultimately responsible for the
determination of fair value of the portfolio in good faith. We
generally receive valuation assistance from Duff &
Phelps, LLC (Duff & Phelps) for our private finance
portfolio consisting of certain limited procedures (the
Procedures) we identified and requested them to perform. Based
upon the performance of the Procedures on a selection of our
final portfolio company valuations, Duff & Phelps has
concluded that the fair value of those portfolio companies
subjected to the Procedures did not appear unreasonable. In
addition, we also received third-party valuation assistance from
other third-party consultants for certain private finance
portfolio companies.
We currently intend to continue to work with third-party
consultants to obtain valuation assistance for a portion of the
private finance portfolio each quarter. We currently anticipate
that we will generally obtain valuation assistance for all
companies in the portfolio where we own more than 50% of the
outstanding voting equity securities (excluding companies with a
cost less than $5.0 million and a value less than
$2.5 million) on a quarterly basis and that we will
generally obtain assistance for companies where we own equal to
or less than 50% of the outstanding voting equity securities
(excluding companies with a cost less than $5.0 million and
a value less than $2.5 million) at least once during the
course of the calendar year. Valuation assistance may or may not
be obtained for new companies that enter the portfolio after
June 30 of any calendar year during that year or for
investments with a cost less than $5.0 million and value
less than $2.5 million. For the quarter ended
December 31, 2009, we received valuation assistance for
59 portfolio companies, which represented 94.6% of the
private finance portfolio at value. See Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations below.
We are a Maryland corporation and a closed-end, non-diversified
management investment company that has elected to be regulated
as a BDC under the 1940 Act. We have a real estate investment
trust subsidiary, Allied Capital REIT, Inc., and several
subsidiaries that are single-member limited liability companies
established for specific purposes, including holding real estate
property. We also have a subsidiary, A.C. Corporation, that
generally provides diligence and structuring services, as well
as transaction, management, consulting, and other services,
including underwriting and arranging senior loans, to Allied
Capital and our portfolio companies. A.C. Corporation also
provides fund management services to certain Managed Funds.
Our executive offices are located at 1919 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
20006-3434
and our telephone number is
(202) 721-6100.
In addition, we have offices in New York, NY and Arlington, VA.
Our Internet address is www.alliedcapital.com. We make available
free of charge on our website our annual report on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K
and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably
practicable after we electronically file such material with, or
furnish it to, the SEC. Information contained on our website is
not incorporated by reference into this annual report on
Form 10-K
and you should not consider information contained on our website
to be part of this annual report on
Form 10-K.
On December 31, 2009, we employed 107 individuals,
including investment and portfolio management professionals,
operations professionals and administrative staff. The majority
of our employees are located in our Washington, DC office.
Certain
Government Regulations
We operate in a highly regulated environment. The following
discussion generally summarizes certain government regulations
that we are subject to.
Business Development Company. A BDC is
defined and regulated by the 1940 Act. A BDC must be organized
in the United States for the purpose of investing in or lending
to primarily private companies and making managerial assistance
available to them. A BDC may use capital provided by public
stockholders and from other sources to invest in long-term,
private investments in businesses.
As a BDC, we may not acquire any asset other than
qualifying assets unless, at the time we make the
acquisition, the value of our qualifying assets represent at
least 70% of the value of our total assets. The principal
categories of qualifying assets relevant to our business are:
An eligible portfolio company is generally a domestic company
that is not an investment company and that:
Control, as defined by the 1940 Act, is presumed to exist
where a BDC beneficially owns more than 25% of the
outstanding voting securities of the portfolio company.
We do not intend to acquire securities issued by any investment
company that exceed the limits imposed by the 1940 Act. Under
these limits, we generally cannot acquire more than 3% of the
voting stock of any investment company (as defined in the 1940
Act), invest more than 5% of the value of our total assets in
the securities of one such investment company or invest more
than 10% of the value of our total assets in the securities of
such investment companies in the aggregate. With regard to that
portion of our portfolio invested in securities issued by
investment companies, it should be noted that such investments
might subject our stockholders to additional expenses.
To include certain securities described above as qualifying
assets for the purpose of the 70% test, a BDC must make
available to the issuer of those securities significant
managerial assistance such as providing significant guidance and
counsel concerning the management, operations, or business
objectives and policies of a portfolio company. We offer to
provide significant managerial assistance to our portfolio
companies.
As a BDC, we are entitled to issue senior securities in the form
of stock or senior securities representing indebtedness,
including debt securities and preferred stock, as long as each
class of senior security has an
asset coverage of at least 200% immediately after each such
issuance. In addition, while any senior securities remain
outstanding, we must make provisions to prohibit any
distribution to our shareholders or repurchase of our common
stock unless we meet the applicable asset coverage ratio at the
time of the distribution.
We are not generally able to issue and sell our common stock at
a price below net asset value per share. We may, however, sell
our common stock, at a price below the current net asset value
of the common stock, or sell warrants, options or rights to
acquire such common stock, at a price below the current net
asset value of the common stock if our Board of Directors
determines that such sale is in the best interests of the
company and our stockholders, and our stockholders approve our
policy and practice of making such sales. In any such case, the
price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not
be less than a price which, in the determination of our Board of
Directors, closely approximates the market value of such
securities (less any distributing commission or discount).
We are also limited in the amount of stock options that may be
issued and outstanding at any point in time. The 1940 Act
provides that the amount of a BDCs voting securities that
would result from the exercise of all outstanding warrants,
options and rights at the time of issuance may not exceed 25% of
the BDCs outstanding voting securities, except that if the
amount of voting securities that would result from the exercise
of all outstanding warrants, options, and rights issued to the
BDCs directors, officers, and employees pursuant to any
executive compensation plan would exceed 15% of the BDCs
outstanding voting securities, then the amount of voting
securities that would result from the exercise of all
outstanding warrants, options, and rights at the time of
issuance shall not exceed 20% of the outstanding voting
securities of the BDC.
We may also be prohibited under the 1940 Act from knowingly
participating in certain transactions with our affiliates
without the prior approval of the members of our Board of
Directors who are not interested persons and, in some cases,
prior approval by the SEC. We have been granted an exemptive
order by the SEC permitting us to engage in certain transactions
that would be permitted if we and our subsidiaries were one
company and permitting certain transactions among our
subsidiaries, subject to certain conditions and limitations.
We have designated a chief compliance officer and established a
compliance program pursuant to the requirements of the
1940 Act. We are periodically examined by the SEC for
compliance with the 1940 Act.
As with other companies regulated by the 1940 Act, a BDC must
adhere to certain substantive regulatory requirements. A
majority of our directors must be persons who are not interested
persons, as that term is defined in the 1940 Act. Additionally,
we are required to provide and maintain a bond issued by a
reputable fidelity insurance company to protect us against
larceny and embezzlement. Furthermore, as a BDC, we are
prohibited from protecting any director or officer against any
liability to us or our stockholders arising from willful
misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard
of the duties involved in the conduct of such persons
office.
We maintain a code of ethics that establishes procedures for
personal investment and restricts certain transactions by our
personnel. Our code of ethics generally does not permit
investment by our employees in securities that have been or are
contemplated to be purchased or held by us. Our code of ethics
is posted on our website at www.alliedcapital.com and is also
filed as an exhibit to our registration statement which is on
file with the SEC. You may read and copy the code of ethics at
the SECs Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C.
You may obtain information on operations of the Public Reference
Room by calling the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
In addition, the code of ethics is available on the EDGAR
database on the SEC Internet site at http://www.sec.gov. You may
obtain copies of the code of ethics, after paying a duplicating
fee, by electronic request at the following email address:
publicinfo@sec.gov, or by writing to the SECs Public
Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, D.C.
20549.
We may not change the nature of our business so as to cease to
be, or withdraw our election as, a BDC unless authorized by vote
of a majority of the outstanding voting securities,
as defined in the 1940 Act. A majority of the outstanding voting
securities of a company is defined under the 1940 Act as the
lesser of: (i) 67% or more of such companys shares
present at a meeting if more than 50% of the outstanding shares
of such company are present and represented by proxy or
(ii) more than 50% of the outstanding shares of such
company.
Regulated Investment Company Status. We
have elected to be taxed as a regulated investment company (RIC)
under Subchapter M of the Code. In order to maintain our
status as a RIC and obtain RIC tax benefits, we must, in
general, (1) continue to qualify as a BDC; (2) derive
at least 90% of our gross income from dividends, interest,
gains from the sale of securities and other specified types of
income; (3) meet asset diversification requirements as
defined in the Code; and (4) timely distribute to
stockholders at least 90% of our annual investment company
taxable income as defined in the Code. We currently qualify as a
RIC. However, there can be no assurance that we will continue to
qualify for such treatment in future years. See Item 1A.
Risk Factors.
As long as we qualify as a RIC, we are not taxed on our
investment company taxable income or realized net capital gains,
to the extent that such taxable income or gains are distributed,
or deemed to be distributed, to stockholders on a timely basis.
Taxable income includes our taxable interest, dividend and fee
income, as well as taxable net capital gains. Taxable income
generally differs from net income for financial reporting
purposes due to temporary and permanent differences in the
recognition of income and expenses, and generally excludes net
unrealized appreciation or depreciation, as gains or losses
generally are not included in taxable income until they are
realized. In addition, gains realized for financial reporting
purposes may differ from gains included in taxable income as a
result of our election to recognize gains using installment sale
treatment, which generally results in the deferment of gains for
tax purposes until notes or other amounts, including amounts
held in escrow, received as consideration from the sale of
investments are collected in cash. Taxable income includes
non-cash income, such as
payment-in-kind
interest and dividends and the amortization of discounts and
fees. Cash collections of income resulting from contractual
payment-in-kind
interest or the amortization of discounts and fees generally
occur upon the repayment of the loans or debt securities that
include such items. Non-cash taxable income is reduced by
non-cash expenses, such as realized losses and depreciation and
amortization expense.
Taxable income available for distribution includes investment
company taxable income and, to the extent not deemed to be
distributed or retained, net long-term capital gains. To the
extent that annual taxable income available for distribution
exceeds dividends paid or deemed distributed from such taxable
income for the year, we may carry over the excess taxable income
into the next year and such excess income will be available for
distribution in the next year as permitted under the Code. Such
excess income will be treated under the Code as having been
distributed during the prior year for purposes of our
qualification for RIC tax treatment for such year. The maximum
amount of excess taxable income that we may carry over for
distribution in the next year under the Code is the total amount
of dividends paid in the following year, subject to certain
declaration and payment guidelines. Excess taxable income
carried over and paid out in the next year is generally subject
to a nondeductible 4% excise tax.
We could be subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) but any
items that are treated differently for AMT purposes may be
apportioned between us and our stockholders and this may affect
U.S. stockholders AMT liabilities. Although regulations
explaining the precise method of apportionment have not yet been
issued, such items will generally be apportioned in the same
proportion that dividends paid to each stockholder bear to our
taxable income (determined without regard to the dividends paid
deduction), unless a different method for a particular item is
warranted under the circumstances.
Compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (the Sarbanes-Oxley Act) imposes a wide variety of
regulatory requirements on publicly held companies and their
insiders. Many of these requirements apply to us, including:
We have adopted procedures to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
and the regulations promulgated thereunder. We will continue to
monitor our compliance with all future regulations that are
adopted under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and will take actions
necessary to ensure that we are in compliance therewith.
We have adopted certain policies and procedures to comply with
the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) corporate governance rules.
In accordance with the NYSE procedures, shortly after our 2009
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, we submitted the required CEO
certification to the NYSE pursuant to Section 303A.12(a) of
the listed company manual. Our common stock is also listed on
the Nasdaq Global Select Market.
Investing in Allied Capital involves a number of significant
risks relating to our business and investment objective. As a
result, there can be no assurance that we will achieve our
investment objective.
Our use of leverage magnifies the potential for gain or loss
on amounts invested and may increase the risk of investing in
us. Borrowings, also known as leverage, magnify
the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested and,
therefore, increase the risks associated with investing in our
securities. From time to time we borrow from and issue senior
debt securities to banks, insurance companies, and other lenders
or investors. Holders of these senior securities have fixed
dollar claims on our consolidated assets that are superior to
the claims of our common stockholders. In the case of the
lenders under our $250 million senior secured term loan
(the Term Loan), these claims are secured by a substantial
portion of our assets. If the value of our consolidated assets
increases, then leveraging would cause the net asset value
attributable to our common stock to increase more sharply than
it would have
had we not leveraged. Conversely, if the value of our
consolidated assets decreases, leveraging would cause net asset
value to decline more sharply than it otherwise would have had
we not leveraged. Similarly, any increase in our consolidated
income in excess of consolidated interest payable on the
borrowed funds would cause our net income to increase more than
it would without the leverage, while any decrease in our
consolidated income would cause net income to decline more
sharply than it would have had we not borrowed. Leverage is
generally considered a speculative investment technique. We and,
indirectly, our stockholders will bear the cost associated with
our leverage activity. Our Term Loan contains financial and
operating covenants that restrict certain of our business
activities, including our ability to declare dividends. Breach
of any of those covenants could cause a default under those
instruments. Such a default, if not cured or waived, could have
a material adverse effect on us.
At December 31, 2009, we had $1.5 billion of
outstanding indebtedness at par bearing a weighted average
annual interest cost of 9.8% and a debt to equity ratio of 1.19
to 1.00. If our portfolio of investments fails to produce
adequate returns, we may be unable to make interest or principal
payments on our indebtedness when they are due. In order for us
to cover annual interest payments on indebtedness, we must
achieve annual returns on our assets of at least 5.4% as of
December 31, 2009, which returns were achieved.
Regulations governing our operation as a BDC affect our
ability to, and the way in which we, raise additional debt and
equity capital. We will continue to need capital
to fund growth in our investments. Under the 1940 Act, we are
not permitted to issue indebtedness unless immediately after
such borrowing we have an asset coverage for total borrowings of
at least 200%. As of December 31, 2009, our asset coverage
was 180%. Failure to satisfy the asset coverage requirements of
the 1940 Act could have a material adverse impact on our
liquidity, financial condition, results of operations, and
ability to pay dividends.
We generally are not able to issue and sell our common stock at
a price below net asset value per share. We may, however, sell
our common stock, warrants, options, or rights to acquire our
common stock at a price below the current net asset value per
share of the common stock if our Board of Directors determines
that such sale is in our best interests and the best interests
of our stockholders and, in certain instances, our stockholders
approve such sale. In any such case, the price at which our
securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than the
price which, in the determination of our Board of Directors,
closely approximates the market value of such securities (less
any commission or discount). If our common stock continues to
trade at a discount to net asset value, this restriction could
adversely affect our ability to raise capital. Shares of many
BDCs, including shares of our common stock, have been trading at
discounts to their net asset values. As of December 31,
2009, our net asset value per share was $6.66. The closing price
of our shares on the NYSE at December 31, 2009 was $3.61.
If our common stock trades below net asset value, the higher
cost of equity capital may result in it being unattractive to
raise new equity, which may limit our ability to grow. The risk
of trading below net asset value is separate and distinct from
the risk that our net asset value per share may decline.
Our credit ratings may change and may not reflect all risks
of an investment in the debt securities. At
December 31, 2009 our long-term debt carries a
non-investment grade credit rating of B1 by Moodys
Investors Service, BB by Standard & Poors, and B+ by
FitchRatings. Our credit ratings are an assessment of our
ability to pay our obligations. Consequently, real or
anticipated changes in our credit ratings will generally affect
the market value of the publicly issued debt securities. There
can be no assurance that the long-term debt ratings will be
maintained.
As discussed elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K,
we have entered into an agreement to merge with Ares Capital.
Our ability to complete the merger is subject to risks and
uncertainties,
including, but not limited to, the risk that a condition to
closing of the transaction may not be satisfied and the risk
that we do not receive stockholder approval. Certain risk
factors associated with the merger are set forth below.
Additional risks associated with our merger with Ares Capital
are set forth under the caption Risk Factors
Risks Relating to the Merger in our proxy statement filed
with the SEC on February 12, 2010.
On October 26, 2009, we entered into an Agreement and
Plan of Merger with Ares Capital Corporation. The merger is
subject to closing conditions, including stockholder approval,
that, if not satisfied or waived, will result in the merger not
being completed, which may result in material adverse
consequences to our business and operations. The merger is
subject to closing conditions, including the approval of our
stockholders that, if not satisfied, will prevent the merger
from being completed. The closing condition that our
stockholders adopt the merger agreement may not be waived under
applicable law and must be satisfied for the merger to be
completed. If our stockholders do not adopt the merger agreement
and the merger is not completed, the resulting failure of the
merger could have a material adverse impact on our business and
operations.
Termination of the merger agreement could negatively impact
us. If the merger agreement is terminated, there
may be various consequences, including:
Under certain circumstances, we are obligated to pay a
termination fee or other amounts upon termination of the merger
agreement. The merger agreement with Ares Capital
contains certain termination rights for Ares Capital and for us
and provides that, in connection with the termination of the
merger agreement under specified circumstances, we may be
required to pay Ares Capital a termination fee of
$30 million ($15 million if our stockholders do not
approve the merger) and Ares Capital may be required to pay us a
termination fee of $30 million. There can be no assurance
that the merger will be completed, and the obligation to make
that payment may adversely affect our ability to engage in
another transaction in the event the merger is not completed and
may have an adverse impact on our financial condition.
The merger agreement severely limits our ability to pursue
alternatives to the merger. The merger agreement
contains no shop and other provisions that, subject
to limited exceptions, limit our ability to discuss, facilitate
or commit to competing third-party proposals to acquire all or a
significant part of Allied Capital. These provisions might
discourage a potential competing acquiror that might have an
interest in acquiring all or a significant part of us from
considering or proposing that acquisition even if it were
prepared to pay consideration with a higher per share market
price than that proposed in the merger. We can consider and
participate in discussions and negotiations with respect to an
alternative proposal only in very limited circumstances so long
as certain notice and other procedural requirements are
satisfied. In addition, subject to certain procedural
requirements (including the ability of Ares Capital to revise
its offer) and the payment of a $30 million termination
fee, we may terminate the merger agreement and enter into an
agreement with a third party who makes a superior proposal.
Several lawsuits have been filed against us, members of our
Board of Directors, Ares Capital and Merger Sub challenging the
merger. An adverse ruling in any such lawsuit may prevent the
merger from becoming effective within the expected timeframe or
at all. If the merger is consummated, these lawsuits and other
legal proceedings could have a material impact on the results of
operations, cash flows or financial condition of the combined
company. We and Ares Capital are aware that a number of
lawsuits have been filed by certain of our stockholders
challenging the merger. The suits are filed either as putative
stockholder class actions, shareholder derivative actions or
both. All of the actions assert similar claims against the
members of our Board of Directors alleging that the merger
agreement is the product of a flawed sales process and that our
directors breached their fiduciary duties by agreeing to a
structure that was not designed to maximize the value of our
stockholders and by failing to adequately value and obtain fair
consideration for our shares. They also claim that Ares Capital
(and, in several cases, Merger Sub, and, in several other cases,
us) aided and abetted the directors alleged breaches of
fiduciary duties. All of the actions demand, among other things,
a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining the merger and
rescinding the transaction or any part thereof that may be
implemented. Such legal proceedings could delay or prevent the
transaction from becoming effective within the agreed upon
timeframe or at all, and, if the merger is consummated, may be
material to the results of operations, cash flows or financial
condition of the combined company.
We have received unsolicited non-binding acquisition
proposals from Prospect Capital Corporation, which may
complicate or delay or prevent completion of the
merger. Prospect Capital has made unsolicited
non-binding acquisition proposals to acquire us and has begun an
aggressive campaign to stop the merger with Ares Capital. As
part of its campaign, Prospect Capital may attempt to solicit
votes against the merger with Ares Capital, which could result
in a failure of us to obtain the required stockholder approval.
In addition, Prospect Capitals campaign may result in
additional lawsuits.
Our Board of Directors and the board of directors of Ares
Capital remain committed to the merger. However, there can be no
assurance that Prospect Capitals aggressive tactics, or
any potential lawsuits related to Prospect Capitals
campaign, will not complicate or delay or prevent completion of
the merger.
We will be subject to business uncertainties and contractual
restrictions while the merger is
pending. Uncertainty about the effect of the
merger with Ares Capital may have an adverse effect on us and,
consequently, on the combined company following completion of
the merger. These uncertainties may impair our ability to retain
and motivate key personnel until the merger is consummated and
could cause those that deal with us to seek to change their
existing business relationships with us. Retention of certain
employees may be challenging during the pendency of the merger
with Ares Capital, as certain employees may experience
uncertainty about their future following completion of the
merger. If our key employees depart because of issues relating
to the uncertainty and difficulty of integration or a desire not
to remain affiliated with the combined company following
completion of the merger, the combined companys business
following the merger could be harmed. In addition, the merger
agreement restricts us from taking actions that it might
otherwise consider to be in its best interests. These
restrictions may prevent us from pursuing certain business
opportunities that may arise prior to the completion of the
merger.
The U.S. capital markets are currently in a period of
disruption and the United States and global economics are in a
severe recession and we do not expect these conditions to
improve in the near future. These market conditions have
materially and adversely affected the debt and equity capital
markets in the United States, which has had and could continue
to have a negative impact on our business and
operations. The U.S. capital markets have
been experiencing extreme volatility and disruption for more
than 12 months as evidenced by a lack of liquidity in the
debt capital markets, significant write-offs in the financial
services sector, the repricing of credit risk in the credit
market and
the failure of major financial institutions. These events have
contributed to worsening general economic conditions that are
materially and adversely impacting the broader financial and
credit markets and reducing the availability of credit and
equity capital for the markets as a whole and financial services
firms in particular. We believe these conditions may continue
for a prolonged period of time or worsen in the future. A
prolonged period of market illiquidity will continue to have an
adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results
of operations. Unfavorable economic conditions also could
increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital
markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit
to us. Equity capital may be difficult to raise because, subject
to some limited exceptions, we generally are not able to issue
and sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per
share. In addition, the debt capital that will be available, if
at all, may be at a higher cost and on less favorable terms and
conditions. These events and the inability to raise capital has
significantly limited our investment originations and our
ability to grow and negatively impacted our operating results.
Economic recessions, including the current global recession,
could impair our portfolio companies and harm our operating
results. Many of the companies in which we have
made or will make investments are susceptible to economic
slowdowns or recessions. An economic recession, including the
current and any future recessions or economic slowdowns, may
affect the ability of a company to repay our loans or engage in
a liquidity event such as a sale, recapitalization, or initial
public offering. Our nonperforming assets are likely to increase
and the value of our portfolio is likely to decrease during
these periods. Current adverse economic conditions also have
decreased the value of any collateral securing our loans, if
any, and a prolonged recession or depression may further
decrease such value. These conditions are contributing to and if
prolonged could lead to further losses of value in our portfolio
and a decrease in our revenues, net income, assets and net worth.
Declining asset values and illiquidity in the corporate debt
markets have adversely affected, and may continue to adversely
affect, the fair value of our portfolio investments, reducing
the value of our assets. As a BDC, we are
required to carry our investments at market value or, if no
market value is readily available, at fair value as determined
in good faith by the Board of Directors. Decreases in the values
of our investments are recorded as unrealized depreciation. The
unprecedented declines in asset values and liquidity in the
corporate debt markets have resulted in significant net
unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. Conditions in the debt
and equity markets may continue to deteriorate and pricing
levels may continue to decline. As a result, we have incurred
and, depending on market conditions, we may incur further
unrealized depreciation in future periods, which could have a
material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
Substantially all of our portfolio investments, which are
generally illiquid, are recorded at fair value as determined in
good faith by our Board of Directors and, as a result, there is
uncertainty regarding the value of our portfolio
investments. At December 31, 2009, portfolio
investments recorded at fair value were 80% of our total assets.
Pursuant to the requirements of the 1940 Act, we value
substantially all of our investments at fair value as determined
in good faith by our Board of Directors on a quarterly basis.
Since there is typically no market quotation in an active market
for the investments in our portfolio, our Board of Directors
determines in good faith the fair value of these investments
pursuant to a valuation policy and a consistently applied
valuation process.
There is no single approach for determining fair value in good
faith. As a result, determining fair value requires that
judgment be applied to the specific facts and circumstances of
each portfolio investment while employing a consistently applied
valuation process for the types of investments we make. In
determining fair value in good faith, we generally obtain
financial and other information from portfolio companies, which
may represent unaudited, projected or pro forma financial
information. Unlike banks, we are not permitted to provide a
general reserve for anticipated loan losses; we are instead
required by the 1940 Act to specifically value each individual
investment on a quarterly basis. We will record unrealized
depreciation on investments when we determine that the fair
value of a security is less than its cost basis, and unrealized
appreciation when we determine that the fair value of a security
is greater than its cost basis. Without a market quotation in an
active market and because of the inherent uncertainty of
valuation, the fair value of our investments determined in good
faith by the Board of Directors may differ significantly from
the values that would have been used had a ready market existed
for the investments, and the differences could be material. Our
net asset value could be affected if our determination of the
fair value of our investments is materially different than the
value that we ultimately realize.
We adjust quarterly the valuation of our portfolio to reflect
the Board of Directors determination of the fair value of
each investment in our portfolio. Any changes in fair value are
recorded in our statement of operations as net change in
unrealized appreciation or depreciation. See Note 2,
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies from our
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in
Item 8.
Our portfolio of investments is illiquid. We
generally acquire our investments directly from the issuer in
privately negotiated transactions. The majority of the
investments in our portfolio are subject to certain restrictions
on resale or otherwise have no established trading market. We
typically exit our investments when the portfolio company has a
liquidity event such as a sale, recapitalization, or initial
public offering. The illiquidity of our investments may
adversely affect our ability to dispose of debt and equity
securities at times when we may need to or when it may be
otherwise advantageous for us to liquidate such investments. In
addition, if we were forced to immediately liquidate some or all
of the investments in the portfolio, the proceeds of such
liquidation could be significantly less than the current value
of such investments.
Our business of making private equity investments and
positioning them for liquidity events also may be affected by
current and future market conditions. Current economic and
capital markets conditions in the United States have
severely reduced capital availability, senior lending activity
and middle market merger and acquisition activity. The absence
of an active senior lending environment and the slowdown or
stalling in middle market merger and acquisition activity has
slowed the amount of private equity investment activity
generally. As a result, our investment activity has also
significantly slowed. In addition, significant changes in the
capital markets, including the recent extreme volatility and
disruption, has had and may continue to have a negative effect
on the valuations of our investments, and on the potential for
liquidity events involving such investments. This could affect
the timing of exit events in our portfolio, reduce the level of
net realized gains from exit events in a given year, and
negatively affect the amount of gains or losses upon exit.
Investing in private companies involves a high degree of
risk. Our portfolio primarily consists of
long-term loans to and investments in middle market private
companies. Investments in private businesses involve a high
degree of business and financial risk, which can result in
substantial losses for us in those investments and accordingly
should be considered speculative. There is generally no publicly
available information about the companies in which we invest,
and we rely significantly on the diligence of our employees and
agents to obtain information in connection with our investment
decisions. If we are unable to identify all material information
about these companies, among other factors, we may fail to
receive the expected return on our investment or lose some or
all of the money invested in these companies. In addition, these
businesses may have shorter operating histories, narrower
product lines, smaller market shares and less experienced
management than their competition and may be more vulnerable to
customer preferences, market conditions, loss of key personnel,
or economic downturns, which may adversely affect the return on,
or the recovery of, our investment in such businesses. As an
investor, we are subject to the risk that a portfolio company
may make a business decision that does not serve our interest,
which could decrease the value of our investment. Deterioration
in a portfolio companys financial condition and prospects
may be accompanied by deterioration in the collateral for a
loan, if any.
Our borrowers may default on their payments, which may have a
negative effect on our financial performance. We
make long-term loans and invest in equity securities primarily
in private middle market companies, which may involve a higher
degree of repayment risk. We primarily invest in companies that
may have limited financial resources, may be highly leveraged
and may be unable to obtain financing from traditional sources.
Numerous factors may affect a borrowers ability to repay
its loan, including the failure to meet its business plan, a
downturn in its industry, or negative economic conditions. A
portfolio companys failure to satisfy financial or
operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to
defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans or
foreclosure on its secured assets, which could trigger cross
defaults under other agreements and jeopardize our portfolio
companys ability to meet its obligations under the loans
or debt securities that we hold. In addition, our portfolio
companies may have, or may be permitted to incur, other debt
that ranks senior to or equally with our securities. This means
that payments on such senior-ranking securities may have to be
made before we receive any payments on our subordinated loans or
debt securities. Deterioration in a borrowers financial
condition and prospects may be accompanied by deterioration in
any related collateral and may have a negative effect on our
financial results.
Our private finance investments may not produce current
returns or capital gains. Our private finance
portfolio includes loans and debt securities that require the
payment of interest currently and equity securities such as
conversion rights, warrants, or options, minority equity
co-investments, or more significant equity investments in the
case of buyout transactions. Our private finance debt
investments are generally structured to generate interest income
from the time they are made and our equity investments may also
produce a realized gain. We cannot be sure that our portfolio
will generate a current return or capital gains.
Our financial results could be negatively affected if a
significant portfolio company fails to perform as
expected. Our total investment in our portfolio
companies may be significant individually or in the aggregate.
As a result, if a significant investment in one or more
portfolio companies fails to perform as expected, our financial
results could be more negatively affected and the magnitude of
the loss could be more significant than if we had made smaller
investments in more portfolio companies.
At December 31, 2009, our investment in Ciena Capital LLC
(Ciena) totaled $547.6 million at cost and
$100.1 million at value, after the effect of unrealized
depreciation of $447.5 million. Other assets includes
additional amounts receivable from or related to Ciena totaling
$112.7 million, which have a value of $1.9 million at
December 31, 2009. In addition, we have issued a
performance guarantee in connection with Cienas
non-recourse warehouse facility. On September 30, 2008,
Ciena voluntarily filed for bankruptcy.
Ciena has been a participant in the 7(a) Guaranteed Loan Program
of the Small Business Administration (SBA) and its wholly-owned
subsidiary is licensed by the SBA as a Small Business Lending
Company (SBLC). Ciena remains subject to SBA rules and
regulations. The Office of the Inspector General of the SBA
(OIG) and the United States Secret Service are conducting
ongoing investigations of allegedly fraudulently obtained
SBA-guaranteed loans issued by Ciena. Ciena is also subject to
other SBA and OIG audits, investigations, and reviews. In
addition, the Office of the Inspector General of the
U.S. Department of Agriculture is conducting an
investigation of Cienas lending practices under the
Business and Industry Loan program. The OIG and the
U.S. Department of Justice are also conducting a civil
investigation of Cienas lending practices in various
jurisdictions. These investigations, audits, and reviews are
ongoing. These investigations, audits, and reviews have had and
may continue to have a material adverse impact on Ciena and, as
a result, could negatively affect our financial results. We are
unable to predict the outcome of these inquiries and it is
possible that third parties could try to seek to impose
liability against us in connection with certain defaulted loans
in Cienas portfolio. See Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations Private Finance, Ciena
Capital LLC, and Valuation of Ciena Capital
LLC and Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
We operate in a competitive market for investment
opportunities. We compete for investments with a
large number of private equity funds and mezzanine funds, other
BDCs, investment banks, other equity and non-equity based
investment funds, and other sources of financing, including
specialty finance companies and traditional financial services
companies such as commercial banks. Some of our competitors have
greater resources than we do. Increased competition would make
it more difficult for us to purchase or originate investments at
attractive prices. As a result of this competition, sometimes we
may be precluded from making otherwise attractive investments.
Loss of RIC tax treatment could negatively impact our ability
to service our debt and pay dividends. We have
operated so as to qualify as a RIC under Subchapter M of the
Code. If we meet source of income, asset diversification, and
distribution requirements, we generally will not be subject to
corporate-level income taxation on income we timely distribute,
or deem to distribute, to our stockholders as dividends. We
would cease to qualify for such tax treatment if we were unable
to comply with these requirements. In addition, we may have
difficulty meeting the requirement to make distributions to our
stockholders because in certain cases we may recognize income
before or without receiving cash representing such income. If we
fail to qualify as a RIC, we will have to pay corporate-level
taxes on all of our income whether or not we distribute it,
which could negatively impact our ability to service our debt
and pay dividends to our stockholders. Even if we qualify as a
RIC, we generally will be subject to a corporate-level income
tax on the income we do not distribute. If we do not distribute
at least 98% of our annual taxable income (excluding net
long-term capital gains retained or deemed to be distributed) in
the year earned, we generally will be required to pay an excise
tax on amounts carried over and distributed to stockholders in
the next year equal to 4% of the amount by which 98% of our
annual taxable income available for distribution exceeds the
distributions from such income for the current year.
Failure to invest a sufficient portion of our assets in
qualifying assets could preclude us from investing in accordance
with our current business strategy. As a BDC, we
may not acquire any assets other than qualifying
assets unless, at the time of and after giving effect to
such acquisition, at least 70% of our total assets are
qualifying assets. Therefore, we may be precluded from investing
in what we believe are attractive investments if such
investments are not qualifying assets for purposes of the 1940
Act. If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in
qualifying assets, we could lose our status as a BDC, which
would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations. Similarly, these rules
could prevent us from making additional investments in existing
portfolio companies, which could result in the dilution of our
position, or could require us to dispose of investments at
inopportune times in order to comply with the 1940 Act. If we
were forced to sell nonqualifying investments in the portfolio
for compliance purposes, the proceeds from such sale could be
significantly less than the current value of such investments.
Changes in the law or regulations that govern us could have a
material impact on us or our operations. We are
regulated by the SEC. In addition, changes in the laws or
regulations that govern BDCs, RICs, asset managers, and real
estate investment trusts may significantly affect our business.
There are proposals being considered by the current
administration to change the regulation of financial
institutions that may affect, possibly adversely, investment
managers or investment funds. Any change in the laws or
regulations that govern our business could have a material
impact on us or our operations.
Laws and regulations may be changed from time to time, and the
interpretations of the relevant laws and regulations also are
subject to change, which may have a material effect on our
operations.
There is a risk that our common stockholders may not receive
dividends or distributions. We may not be able to
achieve operating results that will allow us to make
distributions at a specific level or at all. In addition, due to
the asset coverage test applicable to us as a BDC, we may be
precluded from making distributions. Also, our Term Loan limits
our ability to declare dividends.
If we do not meet the distribution requirements for RICs, we
will suffer adverse tax consequences. In addition, in accordance
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and tax
regulations, we include in income certain amounts that we have
not yet received in cash, such as contractual
payment-in-kind
interest, which represents contractual interest added to the
loan balance that becomes due at the end of the loan term, or
the accrual of original issue discount. The increases in loan
balances as a result of contractual
payment-in-kind
arrangements are included in income in advance of receiving cash
payment and are separately included in
payment-in-kind
interest and dividends, net of cash collections in our
consolidated statement of cash flows. Since we may recognize
income before or without receiving cash representing such
income, we may have difficulty meeting the requirement to
distribute at least 90% of our investment company taxable income
to obtain tax benefits as a RIC.
Changes in interest rates may affect our cost of capital and
net investment income. Because we borrow money to
make investments, our net investment income is dependent upon
the difference between the rate at which we borrow funds and the
rate at which we invest these funds. As a result, there can be
no assurance that a significant change in market interest rates
will not have a material adverse effect on our net investment
income. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds
would increase, which would reduce our net investment income. In
addition, defaults under our borrowing arrangements may result
in higher interest costs during the continuance of an event of
default. We may use interest rate risk management techniques in
an effort to limit our exposure to interest rate fluctuations.
Such techniques may include various interest rate hedging
activities to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act.
There are potential conflicts of interest between us and the
funds managed by us. Certain of our officers
serve or may serve in an investment management capacity to funds
managed by us. As a result, investment professionals may
allocate such time and attention as is deemed appropriate and
necessary to carry out the operations of the Managed Funds. In
this respect, they may experience diversions of their attention
from us and potential conflicts of interest between their work
for us and their work for the Managed Funds in the event that
the interests of the Managed Funds run counter to our interests.
Although Managed Funds may have a different primary investment
objective than we do, the Managed Funds may, from time to time,
invest in the same or similar asset classes that we target. In
addition, more than one fund managed by us may invest in the
same or similar asset classes. These investments may be made at
the direction of the same individuals acting in their capacity
on behalf of us and one or more of the Managed Funds. As a
result, there may be conflicts in the allocation of investment
opportunities between us and the Managed Funds or among the
Managed Funds. We may or may not participate in investments made
by funds managed by us or one of our affiliates. See
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis and
Results of Operations Managed Funds.
We have sold assets to certain managed funds and, as part of our
investment strategy, we may offer to sell additional assets to
Managed Funds or we may purchase assets from Managed Funds. In
addition, funds managed by us may offer assets to or may
purchase assets from one another. While assets may be sold or
purchased at prices that are consistent with those that could be
obtained from third parties in the marketplace, there is an
inherent conflict of interest in such transactions between us
and funds we manage.
Our
financial results could be negatively affected if our Managed
Funds fail to perform as expected.
In the event that any of our Managed Funds were to perform below
our expectations, our financial results could be negatively
affected as a result of a reduction in management fees, the
deferral in payment of management fees or a reduction in
incentive fees we earn. Also, if the Managed Funds perform below
expectations, investors could demand lower fees or fee
concessions, which could also cause a decline in our income. In
addition, certain of our Managed Funds are required to meet
various compliance and maintenance tests related to, among other
things, the ratings on fund assets and the ratio of collateral
to a funds outstanding debt. If a Managed Fund fails to
comply with these tests, the payment of a portion of our fees
could be deferred until a fund regains compliance with such
tests.
Moreover, because we are also an investor in certain of our
Managed Funds, we could experience losses on our investments if
such Managed Funds were to fail to perform as expected.
Our business depends on our key personnel. We
depend on the continued services of our executive officers and
other key management personnel. If we were to lose certain of
these officers or other management personnel, such a loss could
result in inefficiencies in our operations and lost business
opportunities, which could have a negative effect on our
business.
Operating results may fluctuate and may not be indicative of
future performance. Our operating results may
fluctuate and, therefore, you should not rely on current or
historical period results to be indicative of our performance in
future reporting periods. Factors that could cause operating
results to fluctuate include, but are not limited to, variations
in the investment origination volume and fee income earned,
changes in the accrual status of our loans and debt securities,
variations in timing of prepayments, variations in and the
timing of the recognition of net realized gains or losses and
changes in unrealized appreciation or depreciation, the level of
our expenses, the degree to which we encounter competition in
our markets, and general economic conditions.
Our common stock price may be volatile. The
trading price of our common stock may fluctuate substantially.
The capital and credit markets have been experiencing extreme
volatility and disruption since 2007, reaching unprecedented
levels. We have experienced significant stock price volatility.
In general, the price of the common stock may be higher or lower
than the price paid by our stockholders, depending on many
factors, some of which are beyond our control and may not be
directly related to our operating performance. These factors
include, but are not limited to, the following:
The trading market or market value of our publicly issued
debt securities may be volatile. Our publicly
issued debt securities may or may not have an established
trading market. We cannot assure that a trading market for our
publicly issued debt securities will ever develop or be
maintained if developed. In addition to our creditworthiness,
many factors may materially adversely affect the trading market
for, and market value of, our publicly issued debt securities.
These factors include, but are not limited to, the following:
There also may be a limited number of buyers for our debt
securities. This too may materially adversely affect the market
value of the debt securities or the trading market for the debt
securities.
Our common stock could be delisted from the NYSE if we trade
below $1.00 or if we fail to meet other listing
criteria. In order to maintain our listing on the
NYSE, we must continue to meet the minimum share price listing
rule, the minimum market capitalization rule and other continued
listing criteria. Under the NYSE continued listing criteria, the
average closing price of our common stock must not be below
$1.00 per share for 30 or more consecutive trading days. In the
event that the average closing price of our common stock is
below $1.00 per share over a consecutive
30-day
trading period, we would have a six-month cure period to attain
both a $1.00 share price and a $1.00 average share price
over 30 trading days.
If our common stock were delisted, it could (i) reduce the
liquidity and market price of our common stock;
(ii) negatively impact our ability to raise equity
financing and access the public capital markets; and
(iii) materially adversely impact our results of operations
and financial condition.
Not applicable.
Our principal offices are located at 1919 Pennsylvania
Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC
20006-3434.
Our lease for approximately 59,000 square feet of office
space at that location expires in December 2010 with an option
to renew until 2015. The office is equipped with an integrated
network of computers for word processing, financial analysis,
accounting and loan servicing. We believe our office space is
suitable for our needs for the foreseeable future. We also
maintain offices in New York, NY and Arlington, VA.
On June 23, 2004, we were notified by the SEC that they
were conducting an informal investigation of us. The
investigation related to the valuation of securities in our
private finance portfolio and other matters. On June 20,
2007, we announced that we entered into a settlement with the
SEC that resolved the SECs informal investigation. As part
of the settlement and without admitting or denying the
SECs allegations, we agreed to the entry of an
administrative order. In the order the SEC alleged that, between
June 30, 2001, and March 31, 2003, we did not maintain
books, records and accounts which, in reasonable detail,
supported or accurately and fairly reflected valuations of
certain securities in our private finance portfolio and, as a
result, did not meet certain recordkeeping and internal controls
provisions of the federal securities laws. In the administrative
order, the SEC ordered us to continue to maintain certain of our
current valuation-related controls. Specifically, during and
following the two-year period of the order, we have:
(1) continued to employ a Chief Valuation Officer, or a
similarly structured officer-level employee, to oversee our
quarterly valuation processes; and (2) continued to employ
third-party valuation consultants to assist in our quarterly
valuation processes.
On December 22, 2004, we received letters from the U.S.
Attorney for the District of Columbia requesting the
preservation and production of information regarding us and
Business Loan Express, LLC (currently known as Ciena Capital
LLC) in connection with a criminal investigation relating to
matters similar to those investigated by and settled with the
SEC as discussed above. We produced materials in response to the
requests from the U.S. Attorneys office and certain
current and former employees were interviewed by the U.S.
Attorneys Office. We have voluntarily cooperated with the
investigation.
In late December 2006, we received a subpoena from the U.S.
Attorney for the District of Columbia requesting, among other
things, the production of records regarding the use of private
investigators by us or our agents. The Board established a
committee, which was advised by its own counsel, to review this
matter. In the course of gathering documents responsive to the
subpoena, we became aware that an agent of Allied Capital
obtained what were represented to be telephone records of David
Einhorn and which purport to be records of calls from Greenlight
Capital during a period of time in 2005. Also, while we were
gathering documents responsive to the subpoena, allegations were
made that our management had authorized the acquisition of these
records and that management was subsequently advised that these
records had been obtained. Our management has stated that these
allegations are not true. We have cooperated fully with the
inquiry by the U.S. Attorneys Office.
On February 26, 2007, Dana Ross filed a class action
complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia in which she alleges that Allied Capital Corporation
and certain members of management violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
Rule 10b-5
thereunder. Thereafter, the court appointed new lead counsel and
approved new lead plaintiffs. On July 30, 2007, plaintiffs
served an amended complaint. Plaintiffs claim that, between
November 7, 2005, and January 22, 2007, Allied Capital
either failed to disclose or misrepresented information about
our portfolio company, Business Loan Express, LLC. Plaintiffs
sought unspecified compensatory and other damages, as well as
other relief. On September 13, 2007, we filed a motion to
dismiss the lawsuit. On November 4, 2009, the motion to
dismiss was granted.
A number of lawsuits have been filed against us, our Board of
Directors and Ares Capital Corporation. These include:
(1) In re Allied Capital Corporation Shareholder
Litigation, Case
No. 322639-V
(Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland);
(2) Sandler v. Walton, et al., Case No. 2009 CA
008123 B (Superior Court for the District of Columbia);
(3) Wienecki v. Allied Capital Corporation, et al., Case
No. 2009 CA 008541 B (Superior Court for the District
of Columbia); and (4) Ryan v. Walton, et al., Case
No. 1:10-CV-00145-RMC
(United States District Court for the District of Columbia). The
suits were filed after the announcement of the merger with Ares
Capital on October 26, 2009 either as putative stockholder
class actions, shareholder derivative actions or both. All of
the actions assert similar claims alleging that our Board of
Directors failed to discharge adequately its fiduciary duties to
shareholders by failing to adequately value our shares and
ensure that our shareholders received adequate consideration in
a proposed sale of Allied Capital to Ares Capital Corporation,
that the proposed merger between us and Ares Capital is the
product of a flawed sales process, that our directors and
officers breached their fiduciary duties by agreeing to a
structure that was not designed to maximize the value of
Allieds shares, and that Ares Capital aided and abetted
the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. The plaintiffs demand,
among other things, a preliminary and permanent injunction
enjoining the sale and rescinding the transaction or any part
thereof that has been implemented. We believe that each of the
lawsuits is without merit.
In addition to the above matters, we are party to certain
lawsuits in the normal course of business. Furthermore, third
parties may try to seek to impose liability on us in connection
with the activities of our portfolio companies. For a discussion
of civil investigations being conducted regarding the lending
practices of Ciena Capital LLC, one of our portfolio companies,
see Note 3, Portfolio Ciena Capital
LLC from our Notes to the Consolidated Financial
Statements included in Item 8.
While the outcome of any of the open legal proceedings described
above cannot at this time be predicted with certainty, we do not
expect these matters will materially affect our financial
condition or results of operations; however, there can be no
assurance whether any pending legal proceedings will have a
material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of
operations in any future reporting period or delay or prevent
the merger with Ares Capital from becoming effective within the
agreed upon timeframe or at all.
No matters were submitted to a vote of stockholders during the
fourth quarter of 2009.
Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under
the trading symbol ALD as its primary listing and is also traded
on the Nasdaq Global Select Market. As of February 22,
2010, there are approximately 3,500 shareholders of record
and approximately 118,000 beneficial shareholders of the
Company. The quarterly stock prices quoted below represent
interdealer quotations and do not include markups, markdowns, or
commissions and may not necessarily represent actual
transactions.
We have not declared any dividends since the fourth quarter of
2008. The following table summarizes our dividends declared
during 2008:
See Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Other
Matters and Dividends and Distributions and Note 10,
Dividends and Distributions and Taxes from our Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in
Item 8. For 2008, we paid $456.5 million or $2.60 per share
in dividends to stockholders. Dividends for 2008 were paid
primarily from taxable income carried forward from 2007 for
distribution in 2008.
We have elected to be taxed as a RIC under Subchapter M of the
Code. As a RIC, we are required to distribute substantially all
of our investment company taxable income to stockholders through
the payment of dividends. In certain circumstances, we are
restricted in our ability to pay dividends. Our Term Loan
contains provisions that limit our ability to declare dividends.
In addition, pursuant to the 1940 Act, we may be precluded from
declaring dividends or other distributions to our shareholders
unless our asset coverage is at least 200%.
As of December 31, 2009, we estimate that we have no
dividend distribution requirements for the 2009 tax year. We
intend to retain capital in 2010, and we would be able to carry
forward 2010 taxable income, if any, for distribution in 2011.
There can be no certainty as to future dividends. We currently
qualify as a RIC; however there can be no assurance that we will
be able to comply with the RIC requirements to distribute
income, if any, for 2010 or other future years and we may be
required to pay a corporate level income tax. See Certain
Government Regulations Regulated Investment Company
Status.
This graph compares the return on our common stock with that of
the Standard & Poors 500 Stock Index and the Dow
Jones Financial Index, for the years 2005 through 2009. The
graph assumes that, on December 31, 2004, a person invested
$100 in each of our common stock, the S&P 500 Stock Index,
and the Dow Jones Financial Index. The graph measures total
shareholder return, which takes into account both changes in
stock price and dividends. It assumes that dividends paid are
reinvested in like securities.
Five-Year Cumulative Total
Return(1)
(Through December 31, 2009)
During 2009, we did not pay any dividends to our stockholders
and, therefore, did not issue any shares of common stock
pursuant to our dividend reinvestment plan. This plan is not
registered and relies on an exemption from registration under
the Securities Act of 1933. See Note 6,
Shareholders Equity from our Notes to the
Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
Item 6. Selected
Financial Data.
SELECTED
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
You should read the condensed consolidated financial information
below with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes
thereto included herein. The financial information below has
been derived from our financial statements that were audited by
KPMG LLP.
28
Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
The information contained in this section should be read in
conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and the
Notes thereto. In addition, this annual report on
Form 10-K
contains certain forward-looking statements. These statements
include the plans and objectives of management for future
operations and financial objectives and can be identified by the
use of forward-looking terminology such as may,
will, expect, intend,
anticipate, estimate, or
continue or the negative thereof or other variations
thereon or comparable terminology. These forward-looking
statements are subject to the inherent uncertainties in
predicting future results and conditions. Certain factors that
could cause actual results and conditions to differ materially
from those projected in these forward-looking statements are set
forth above in Part I. Item 1A. Risk
Factors. Other factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially include:
Financial or other information presented for private finance
portfolio companies has been obtained from the portfolio
companies, and the financial information presented may represent
unaudited, projected or pro forma financial information, and
therefore may not be indicative of actual results. In addition,
the private equity industry uses financial measures such as
EBITDA or EBITDAM (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes,
Depreciation, Amortization and, in some instances, Management
fees) in order to assess a portfolio companys financial
performance and to value a portfolio company. EBITDA and EBITDAM
are not intended to represent cash flow from operations as
defined by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and
such information should not be considered as an alternative to
net income, cash flow from operations or any other measure of
performance prescribed by U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.
We are a business development company, or BDC, in the private
equity business and we are internally managed. Specifically, we
primarily invest in private middle market companies in a variety
of industries through long-term debt and equity capital
instruments. Our financing generally is used to fund buyouts,
acquisitions, growth, recapitalizations, note purchases, and
other types of financings. Our investment objective is to
achieve current income and capital gains.
The United States and the global economies continue to operate
in an unprecedented economic recession and the U.S. capital
markets continue to experience volatility and a lack of
liquidity. Our strategy in these difficult times has been
focused on reducing costs and streamlining our organization;
building liquidity through selected asset sales; retaining
capital by limiting new investment activity and suspending
dividend payments; and working with portfolio companies to help
them position for growth when the economy recovers.
Our portfolio composition at December 31, 2009, 2008, and
2007, was as follows:
Our earnings primarily depend on the level of interest and
dividend income, fee and other income, and net realized and
unrealized gains or losses on our investment portfolio after
deducting interest expense on borrowed capital, operating
expenses and income taxes, including excise tax. Interest income
primarily results from the stated interest rate earned on a loan
or debt security and the amortization of loan origination fees
and discounts. The level of interest income is directly related
to the balance of the interest-bearing investment portfolio
outstanding during the year multiplied by the weighted average
yield. Our ability to generate interest income is dependent on
economic, regulatory, and competitive factors that influence new
investment activity, interest rates on the types of loans we
make, the level of repayments in the portfolio, the amount of
loans and debt securities for which interest is not accruing and
our ability to secure debt and equity capital for our investment
activities. The level of fee income is primarily related to the
level of new investment activity and the level of fees earned
from portfolio companies and funds managed by us. The level of
investment activity can vary substantially from year to year
depending on many factors, including the general economic
environment, the amount of debt and equity capital available to
middle market companies, the level of merger and acquisition
activity for such companies, the competitive environment for the
types of investments we make and our ability to secure debt and
equity capital for our investment activities.
In addition to managing our own assets, we manage certain funds
that also invest in the debt and equity securities of primarily
private middle market companies in a variety of industries. At
December 31, 2009, we had six separate funds under our
management (together, the Managed Funds) for which we may earn
management or other fees for our services. In some cases, we
have invested in the equity of these funds, along with other
third parties, from which we may earn a current return and/or a
future incentive allocation. At December 31, 2009, the
funds that we manage had total assets of approximately
$2.1 billion. During the fourth quarter of 2009, we sold
our investment, including our outstanding commitments and the
provision of management services, in the Senior Secured Loan
Fund LLC to Ares Capital, and we sold our investment, including
the provision of management services, in the Allied Capital
Senior Debt Fund, L.P. to Ivy Hill Asset Management, L.P., a
portfolio company of Ares Capital. We may continue to sell
additional Managed Funds. See Managed Funds below
for further discussion.
In aggregate, including the total assets on our balance sheet
and capital committed to our Managed Funds, we had
$4.6 billion in managed capital at December 31, 2009.
On October 26, 2009, we and Ares Capital Corporation, or
Ares Capital, announced a strategic business
combination in which ARCC Odyssey Corp., a wholly owned
subsidiary of Ares Capital, or Merger Sub, would
merge with and into Allied Capital and, immediately thereafter,
Allied Capital would merge with and into Ares Capital. If the
merger of Merger Sub into Allied Capital is completed, holders
of Allied Capital common stock will have a right to receive
0.325 shares of Ares Capital common stock for each share of
Allied Capital common stock held immediately prior to such
merger. In connection with such merger, Ares Capital expects to
issue a maximum of approximately 58.3 million shares of its
common stock (assuming that holders of all
in-the-money
Allied Capital stock options elect to be cashed out), subject to
adjustment in certain limited circumstances. The closing of the
merger is subject to the receipt of shareholder approvals from
Allied Capital and Ares Capital shareholders, and other closing
conditions. Allied Capital is holding a special meeting of its
stockholders on March 26, 2010, at which Allied Capital
stockholders will be asked to vote on the approval of the merger
and the merger agreement described in the proxy statement dated
February 11, 2010. Approval of the merger and the merger
agreement requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of Allied
Capitals outstanding shares entitled to vote on the
matter. The completion of the merger with Ares Capital is
dependent on a number of conditions being satisfied or, where
legally permissible, waived. See Item 1A. Risk
Factors Risks Related to the Merger with Ares
Capital.
The total portfolio at value, investment activity, and the yield
on interest-bearing investments at and for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, were as follows:
Private
Finance
The private finance portfolio at value, investment activity, and
the yield on interest-bearing investments at and for the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, were as follows:
Our private finance portfolio primarily is composed of debt and
equity investments. Debt investments include senior loans,
unitranche debt (an instrument that combines both senior and
subordinated financing, generally in a first lien position), or
subordinated debt (with or without equity features). The junior
debt that we have in the portfolio is lower in repayment
priority than senior debt and is also known as mezzanine debt.
Our portfolio contains equity investments for a minority equity
stake in portfolio companies and includes equity features such
as nominal cost warrants received in conjunction with our debt
investments. In a buyout transaction, we generally invest in
senior and/or subordinated debt and equity (preferred and/or
voting or non-voting common) where our equity ownership
represents a significant portion of the equity, but may or may
not represent a controlling interest.
Investment Activity. Investments funded
and the weighted average yield on interest-bearing investments
funded for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and
2007, consisted of the following:
For the year ended December 31, 2009, we made private
finance investments totaling $127.5 million. Investments arose
primarily from fundings under revolving line of credit
instruments and $47.4 million to fund investments made by the
Senior Secured Loan Fund LLC. Historically, our focus for
investments generally has been on higher return junior debt
capital investments. Senior loans funded by us generally were
funded with the intent to sell the loan or for the portfolio
company to refinance the loan at some point in the future as
discussed below. We have made fewer direct unitranche debt
investments since the establishment of the Senior Secured Loan
Fund LLC in the fourth quarter of 2007. Unitranche loans
sourced by us in these periods generally were referred to the
Senior Secured Loan Fund. In October 2009, we sold our
investment, including our outstanding commitments and the
provision of management services in the Senior Secured Loan Fund
LLC to Ares Capital.
We generally fund new investments using cash. In addition, we
may acquire securities in exchange for our common equity. Also,
we may acquire new securities through the reinvestment of
previously accrued interest and dividends in debt or equity
securities, or the current reinvestment of interest and dividend
income through the receipt of a debt or equity security
(payment-in-kind income). From time to time we may opt to
reinvest accrued interest receivable in a new debt or equity
security in lieu of receiving such interest in cash.
We may underwrite or arrange senior loans related to our
portfolio investments or for other companies that are not in our
portfolio. When we underwrite or arrange senior loans, we may
earn a fee for such activities. Senior loans underwritten or
arranged by us may be funded by us at closing. When these senior
loans are closed, we may fund all or a portion of the
underwritten commitment pending sale of the loan to other
investors, which may include loan sales to the Managed Funds or
funds managed by Callidus Capital Corporation (Callidus), a
wholly owned portfolio company. After completing loan sales, we
may retain a position in these senior loans. We generally earn a
fee on the senior loans we underwrite or arrange whether or not
we fund the underwritten commitment. In addition, we may fund
most or all of the debt and equity capital upon the closing of
certain buyout transactions, which may include investments in
lower-yielding senior debt. Subsequent to the closing, the
portfolio company may refinance all or a portion of the
lower-yielding senior debt, which would reduce our investment.
We have focused our efforts on selling assets in our portfolio
to generate capital. Principal collections related to private
finance investment repayments or sales were $1.1 billion
for the year ended December 31, 2009, including
$198.4 million of cash collections related to notes and
other receivables received from the sale of investments in
portfolio companies in prior periods. Principal collections
include repayments of senior debt funded by us that was
subsequently sold by us or refinanced or repaid by the portfolio
companies. We plan to continue to sell assets and re-balance our
portfolio with an emphasis on current income. However, there can
be no assurance that we will be able to achieve these objectives.
Outstanding Investment
Commitments. During 2009, our new investing
activities were sharply reduced, and our investing activities
were primarily focused on funding existing outstanding
investment commitments.
At December 31, 2009, we had outstanding private finance
investment commitments as follows:
Total commitments were $146.7 million at December 31,
2009. Commitments were reduced from $648.7 million at
December 31, 2008, primarily due to the sale of the Senior
Secured Loan Fund LLC, including our outstanding commitments and
the provision of management services in October 2009 to Ares
Capital.
In addition to these outstanding investment commitments at
December 31, 2009, we also had outstanding guarantees to
private finance portfolio companies. See Financial
Condition, Liquidity and Capital Resources below. We
intend to fund these commitments with existing cash and through
cash flows from operations before new investments, although
there can be no assurance that we will generate sufficient cash
flows to satisfy these commitments.
Net Unrealized Depreciation on Private Finance
Portfolio. At December 31, 2009, our private
finance portfolio totaled $3.6 billion at cost and
$2.1 billion at value, which included net unrealized
depreciation of $1.5 billion. $0.9 billion or 61.3% of
the total net unrealized depreciation of $1.5 billion was
related to our investments in three portfolio companies and our
investment in CLO/CDO Assets as follows: $447.5 million or
29.2% related to our investment in Ciena Capital, LLC;
$214.1 million or 14.0% related to investments in CLO/CDO
Assets; $186.8 million or 12.2% related to our investment
in EarthColor, Inc.; and $91.2 million or 5.9% related to
our investment in Hot Stuff Foods, LLC.
Investments in Collateralized Loan Obligations and
Collateralized Debt Obligations (CLO/CDO
Assets). At December 31, 2009 and 2008,
we had investments in CLO issuances and a CDO bond, which
totaled as follows:
The CLO and CDO issuances in which we have invested are
primarily invested in senior corporate loans. Certain of these
funds are managed by Callidus, and certain of these funds are
managed by us. See also Note 3, Portfolio from
our Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in
Item 8. During the first quarter of 2010, Callidus entered
into an agreement to sell the management contracts related to
the funds it manages.
The initial yields on the cost basis of the CLO preferred shares
and income notes are based on the estimated future cash flows
expected to be paid to these CLO classes from the underlying
collateral assets. As each CLO preferred share or income note
ages, the estimated future cash flows are updated based on the
estimated performance of the underlying collateral assets, and
the respective yield on the cost basis is adjusted as necessary.
As future cash flows are subject to uncertainties and
contingencies that are difficult to predict and are subject to
future events that may alter current assumptions, no assurance
can be given that the anticipated yields to maturity will be
achieved.
The CLO/CDO Assets in which we have invested are junior in
priority for payment of interest and principal to the more
senior notes issued by the CLOs and CDO. Cash flow from the
underlying collateral assets in the CLOs and CDO is generally
allocated first to the senior bonds in order of priority, then
any remaining cash flow generally is distributed to the
preferred shareholders and income note holders. To the extent
there are ratings downgrades, defaults, and unrecoverable losses
on the underlying collateral assets that result in reduced cash
flows, the preferred shares/income notes will bear this loss
first and then the subordinated bonds would bear any loss after
the preferred shares/income notes. At both December 31,
2009 and 2008, the face value of the CLO and CDO assets held by
us was subordinate to as much as 94% of the face value of the
securities outstanding in these CLOs and CDO.
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the underlying collateral
assets of these CLO and CDO issuances, consisting primarily of
senior corporate loans, were issued by 626 issuers and
658 issuers, respectively, and had balances as follows:
Market yields for investments in CLO preferred shares/income
notes increased throughout 2008 and into 2009, and, as a result,
the fair value of certain of our investments in these assets
decreased. At December 31, 2009, the market yield used to
value our preferred shares/income notes ranged from 27.5% to
31.5%. In the current economic environment, we expect ratings
downgrades, defaults and losses to continue to remain high, and
we have also considered this in our valuation analysis. Ratings
agencies have continued to downgrade the underlying collateral
in these types of structures regardless of the payment status of
the loan or debt security. Net change in unrealized appreciation
or depreciation for the years ended December 31, 2009 and
2008, included a net decrease of $103.9 million and
$94.7 million, respectively, related to our investments in
CLO/CDO Assets. We received
third-party
valuation assistance for our investments in the CLO/CDO Assets
in each quarter of 2009. See Results of
Operations Valuation Methodology Private
Finance below for further discussion of the third-party
valuation assistance we received.
As the debt capital markets show significant volatility, yield
spreads may widen further. As a result, if the market yields for
our investments in CLOs continue to increase or should the
performance of the underlying assets in the CLOs decrease or
additional ratings downgrades occur, the fair value of our
investments may decrease further.
Ciena Capital LLC. Ciena Capital LLC
(Ciena) has provided loans to commercial real estate owners and
operators. Ciena has been a participant in the Small Business
Administrations 7(a) Guaranteed Loan Program, and its
wholly-owned subsidiary is licensed by the SBA as a Small
Business Lending Company (SBLC). Ciena remains subject to SBA
rules and regulations. Ciena is headquartered in New York, NY.
On September 30, 2008, Ciena voluntarily filed for
bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of
the United States Code (the Bankruptcy Code) in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York
(the Court). Ciena continues to service and manage its assets as
a
debtor-in-possession
under the jurisdiction of the Court and in accordance with the
applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and the orders of
the Court.
As a result of Cienas decision to file for bankruptcy
protection, our unconditional guaranty of the obligations
outstanding under Cienas revolving credit facility became
due and, in lieu of paying under our guarantee, we purchased the
positions of the senior lenders under Cienas revolving
credit facility. As of December 31, 2009, the senior
secured loan to Ciena had a cost basis of $319.0 million
and a value of $100.1 million. We continue to guarantee the
remaining principal balance of $5 million, plus related
interest, fees and expenses payable to a third party bank. In
connection with our continuing guaranty of the amounts held by
this bank, we have agreed that the amounts owing to the bank
under the Ciena revolving credit facility will be paid before
any of the secured obligations of Ciena now owed to us.
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, our investment in Ciena was
as follows:
In addition to our investment in Ciena included in the
portfolio, we have amounts receivable from or related to Ciena
that are included in other assets in the accompanying
consolidated financial statements. See below.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, we funded
$97.4 million to support Cienas term securitizations
in lieu of draws under related standby letters of credit. This
was required primarily as a result of the issuer of the letters
of credit not extending maturing standby letters of credit that
were issued under our former revolving line of credit. The
amounts funded were recorded as other assets in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheet. At December 31, 2009 and 2008,
other assets includes amounts receivable from or related to
Ciena totaling $112.7 million and $15.4 million at
cost and $1.9 million and $2.1 million at value,
respectively. Net change in unrealized appreciation or
depreciation included a net decrease of $102.0 million and
$174.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2009
and 2007, respectively, related to our investment in and
receivables from Ciena. Net change in unrealized appreciation or
depreciation for the year ended December 31, 2008, included
a decrease in our investment in Ciena totaling
$296.0 million and the reversal of unrealized depreciation
of $99.0 million associated with the realized loss on the
sale of our Class A equity interests. See
Valuation of Ciena Capital LLC below.
At December 31, 2009, we had no outstanding standby letters
of credit issued under our former revolving line of credit. We
have considered the letters of credit and the funding thereof in
the valuation of Ciena at December 31, 2009.
Our investment in Ciena was on non-accrual status, therefore we
did not earn any interest and related portfolio income from our
investment in Ciena for each of the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008.
At December 31, 2009, Ciena had one non-recourse SBA loan
warehouse facility, which has reached its maturity date but
remains outstanding. Ciena is working with the providers of the
SBA loan warehouse facility with regard to the repayment of that
facility. We have issued a performance guaranty whereby we
agreed to indemnify the warehouse providers for any damages,
losses, liabilities and related costs and expenses that they may
incur as a result of Cienas failure to perform any of its
obligations as loan originator, loan seller or loan servicer
under the warehouse facility.
The Office of the Inspector General of the SBA (OIG) and
the United States Secret Service are conducting ongoing
investigations of allegedly fraudulently obtained SBA guaranteed
loans issued by Ciena.
Ciena also is subject to other SBA and OIG audits,
investigations, and reviews. In addition, the Office of the
Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is
conducting an investigation of Cienas lending practices
under the Business and Industry Loan (B&I) program. The OIG
and the U.S. Department of Justice are also conducting a
civil investigation of Cienas lending practices in various
jurisdictions. We are unable to predict the outcome of these
inquiries, and it is possible that third parties could try to
seek to impose liability against us in connection with certain
defaulted loans in Cienas portfolio. These investigations,
audits and reviews are ongoing.
These investigations, audits, reviews, and litigation have had
and may continue to have a material adverse impact on Ciena and,
as a result, could continue to negatively affect our financial
results. We have considered Cienas voluntary filing for
bankruptcy protection, the letters of credit and the finding
thereof, current regulatory issues, ongoing investigations and
litigation in performing the valuation of Ciena at
December 31, 2009 and 2008.
The commercial real estate finance portfolio at value,
investment activity, and the yield on interest-bearing
investments at and for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008, and 2007, were as follows:
At December 31, 2009, we had outstanding funding
commitments related to the commercial real estate portfolio of
$7.1 million.
In addition to managing our own assets, we manage certain funds
that also invest in the debt and equity securities of primarily
private middle market companies in a variety of industries and
broadly syndicated senior secured loans. At December 31,
2009, we had six separate funds under our management (together,
the Managed Funds) for which we may earn management or other
fees for our services. In some cases, we have invested in the
equity of these funds, along with other third parties, from
which we may earn a current return
and/or a
future incentive allocation.
In the first quarter of 2009, we completed the acquisition of
the management contracts of three middle market senior debt CLOs
(together, the Emporia Funds) and certain other related assets
for approximately $11 million (subject to post-closing
adjustments). The acquired assets are included in other assets
in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet and are being
amortized over the life of the contracts. During the fourth
quarter of 2009, we sold our investment, including our
outstanding commitments and the provision of management
services, in the Senior Secured Loan Fund LLC to Ares
Capital, and we sold our investment, including the provision of
management services, in the Allied Capital Senior Debt Fund,
L.P. to Ivy Hill Asset Management, L.P., a portfolio company of
Ares Capital. We may continue to sell additional Managed Funds
to Ares Capital or to other third parties.
The assets of the Managed Funds at December 31, 2009 and
2008, and our management fees as of December 31, 2009 were
as follows:
A portion of the management fees earned by us may be deferred
under certain circumstances. Collection of the fees earned is
dependent in part on the performance of the relevant fund. We
may pay a portion of management fees we receive to Callidus
Capital Corporation, a wholly owned portfolio investment, for
services provided to the Knightsbridge CLO
2007-1 Ltd.,
Knightsbridge CLO
2008-1 Ltd.
and the Emporia Funds.
Our responsibilities to the Managed Funds may include investment
execution, underwriting, and portfolio monitoring services. Each
of the Managed Funds may separately invest in the debt or equity
of companies in our portfolio, and these investments may be
senior, pari passu or junior to the debt and equity investments
held by us. We may or may not participate in investments made by
the Managed Funds.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, we sold assets to
certain of the Managed Funds for which we received proceeds of
$9.7 million and we recognized a net realized gain of
$6.3 million. During the year ended December 31, 2008,
we sold assets to certain of the Managed Funds, for which we
received proceeds of $383.0 million, and we recognized
realized gains of $8.3 million.
In addition to managing these funds, we hold certain investments
in the Managed Funds at December 31, 2009 and 2008 as
follows:
Loans and Debt Securities on Non-Accrual
Status. In general, interest is not accrued
on loans and debt securities if we have doubt about interest
collection or where the enterprise value of the portfolio
company may not support further accrual. In addition, interest
may not accrue on loans to portfolio companies that are more
than 50% owned by us depending on such companys capital
requirements. To the extent interest payments are received on a
loan that is not accruing interest, we may use such payments to
reduce our cost basis in the investment in lieu of recognizing
interest income.
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, loans and debt securities at
value not accruing interest for the total investment portfolio
were as follows:
Because the size of our portfolio has decreased from
$3.5 billion at December 31, 2008, to
$2.1 billion at December 31, 2009, the percentage of
loans on non-accrual has increased despite the decrease in the
value of loans and debt securities on non-accrual.
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, private finance non-accruals
included our senior secured debt in Ciena, which was
$100.1 million or 4.7% of the total portfolio at value and
$104.9 million or 3.0% of total portfolio at value,
respectively. The Ciena senior secured loan was acquired in the
third quarter of 2008, and was placed on non-accrual status upon
its purchase. See Private Finance
Ciena Capital LLC above.
Loans and Debt Securities Over 90 Days
Delinquent. Loans and debt securities greater
than 90 days delinquent at value at December 31, 2009
and 2008, were as follows:
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, loans and debt securities
over 90 days delinquent included our senior secured debt in
Ciena, which was $100.1 million or 4.7% of the total
portfolio at value and $104.9 million or 3.0% of total
portfolio at value, respectively. The Ciena senior secured loan
was acquired in the third quarter of 2008 and was placed on
non-accrual status upon its purchase. See
Private Finance Ciena Capital
LLC above.
The amount of the portfolio that is on non-accrual status or
greater than 90 days delinquent may vary from year to year.
Loans and debt securities on non-accrual status and over
90 days delinquent should not be added together as they are
two separate measures of portfolio asset quality. Loans and debt
securities that are in both categories (i.e., on non-accrual
status and over 90 days delinquent) totaled
$139.9 million and $108.0 million at December 31,
2009 and 2008, respectively.
RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
Comparison of the
Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007
The following table summarizes our operating results for the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007.
Total Interest and Related Portfolio Income. Total
interest and related portfolio income includes interest and
dividend income and fees and other income.
Interest and Dividends. Interest and dividend income for
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, was
composed of the following:
The level of interest income, which includes interest paid in
cash and in kind, is directly related to the balance of the
interest-bearing investment portfolio outstanding during the
year multiplied by the weighted average yield. The
interest-bearing investments in the portfolio at value and the
yield on the interest-bearing investments in the portfolio at
December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, were as follows:
Interest income has decreased over the 2008 period primarily as
a result of decreases in the aggregate size of the
interest-bearing portfolio due to the disposition of certain
investments as we have been selectively selling assets from our
portfolio in order to generate capital to repay our indebtedness
and de-lever our balance sheet. Because we recently have exited,
and in the future intend to exit several interest-bearing
investments in order to accumulate capital for repayment of
debt, we expect that income from our interest-bearing
investments will continue to decrease in 2010.
Dividend income results from the dividend yield on preferred
equity interests, if any, or the declaration of dividends by a
portfolio company on preferred or common equity interests.
Dividend income for the year ended December 31, 2009, was
$10.8 million as compared to $13.2 million for the
year ended December 31, 2008. Dividend income for 2009
includes a $7.7 million dividend received in
connection with the sale of Amerex Group LLC. Dividend income
for 2008 includes a $3.1 million dividend received in
connection with the recapitalization of Norwesco, Inc., and
$6.4 million of dividends received in connection with the
sale to AGILE Fund I, LLC. Dividend income will vary from
year to year depending upon the timing and amount of dividends
that are declared or paid by a portfolio company on preferred or
common equity interests.
Fees and Other Income. Fees and other income
primarily include fees related to financial structuring,
diligence, transaction services, management and consulting
services to portfolio companies, commitments, guarantees, and
other services and loan prepayment premiums. As a business
development company, we are required to make significant
managerial assistance available to the companies in our
investment portfolio. Managerial assistance includes, but is not
limited to, management and consulting services related to
corporate finance, marketing, human resources, personnel and
board member recruiting, business operations, corporate
governance, risk management and other general business matters.
Fees and other income for the years ended December 31,
2009, 2008, and 2007, included fees relating to the following:
Fees and other income generally are related to specific
transactions or services and therefore may vary substantially
from year to year depending on the level of investment activity
and the types of services provided and the level of assets in
Managed Funds for which we earn management or other fees. The
increase in fund management fees for the year ended
December 31, 2009 as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2008 was due to an increase in assets under
management related to our Managed Funds. The amount of fund
management fees is directly based on the amount of assets under
management. During the fourth quarter of 2009, we sold our
interests, including our outstanding commitments and the
provision of management services, in the Senior Secured Loan
Fund LLC to Ares Capital, and we sold our interests,
including the provision of management services, in the Allied
Capital Senior Debt Fund, L.P. to Ivy Hill Asset Management,
L.P., a portfolio company of Ares Capital. For the year ended
December 31, 2009, fee income related to the Senior Secured
Loan Fund and Allied Capital Senior Debt Fund was approximately
$4.8 million. Despite the increase in management fees for
the year ended December 31, 2009, fees and other income
were lower for the year ended December 31, 2009 than for
the year ended December 31, 2008 due to the significant
decrease in our investment activity. Loan origination fees that
represent yield enhancement on a loan are capitalized and
amortized into interest income over the life of the loan. Given
our outlook for future investment activity for our balance sheet
as well as for certain Managed Funds, we expect that fee income
in 2010 will reflect lower new investment levels and a decrease
in assets under management.
Private finance investments funded were $127.5 million for
the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared to
$1.1 billion and $1.8 billion for the years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Structuring and
diligence fees primarily relate to the level of new investment
originations, which were lower in 2009 than 2008. Structuring
and diligence fees for the year ended December 31, 2008,
included $10.4 million earned by us in connection with
investments made by the Senior Secured Loan Fund, LLC. See
Managed Funds above. Because we expect new
investment activity to continue at a low level, we expect
structuring and diligence fees to continue to be low in 2010.
Operating Expenses. Operating expenses
include interest, employee, employee stock options, and
administrative expenses.
Interest Expense. The fluctuations in interest
expense during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and
2007, primarily were attributable to changes in the level of our
borrowings under various notes payable and our revolving line of
credit as well as an increase in our weighted average cost of
debt capital. Our contractual borrowing activity and weighted
average cost of debt, including fees and debt financing costs,
at and for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and
2007, were as follows:
At the end of the fourth quarter of 2008, we amended our private
notes and revolving line of credit, which increased the stated
interest rate on those obligations by 100 basis points.
Subsequent to this amendment, events of default occurred on
these instruments. Pursuant to the terms of the revolving credit
facility, during the continuance of an event of default, the
applicable spread on any borrowings outstanding and fees on any
letters of credit outstanding under the revolving credit
facility increased by up to an additional 200 basis points.
Pursuant to the private notes, during the continuance of an
event of default, the rate of interest borne by the private
notes increased by an additional 200 basis points. During
the year ended December 31, 2009, we incurred additional
interest expense totaling $12.0 million related to the
default interest. On August 28, 2009, we completed a
restructuring of our private notes and bank facility, which
significantly increased our cost of capital. On January 29,
2010, we repaid the private notes and bank facility in full and
entered into a new $250 million senior secured term loan. See
Financial Condition, Liquidity and Capital Resources
below.
In addition, interest expense included interest paid to the
Internal Revenue Service related to installment sale gains
totaling $6.3 million, $7.7 million, and
$5.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008, and 2007, respectively. See Dividends and
Distributions below.
Employee Expense. Employee expenses for the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, were as
follows:
During the second half of 2008, we consolidated our investment
execution activities to our Washington, D.C. headquarters
and our office in New York in an effort to improve operating
efficiencies and reduced headcount by approximately
50 employees. During the third quarter of 2009, we further
reduced headcount by approximately 22 employees. For 2009,
we accrued $7.5 million in bonuses and $0.3 million in
performance awards as compared to $1.0 million in bonuses
and $11.2 million in performance awards accrued in 2008. In
order to retain key personnel through the closing date of the
merger with Ares Capital, we will pay the 2009 bonuses as
retention bonuses on the earlier of April 15, 2010 or the
closing date of the merger with Ares Capital. An employee must
be employed on the payment date in order to receive the
retention bonus. Our Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer received no performance or
retention bonus for 2009.
The IPA and IPB were part of an incentive compensation program
for certain officers in prior years and were generally
determined annually at the beginning of each year. We did not
establish an IPA or IPB for 2009 or for 2010 as part of our
efforts to reduce employee expense. In 2008, IPAs were paid in
cash in two equal installments during the year. The IPB was
distributed in cash to award recipients throughout the year.
Stock Options Expense. The stock option
expense for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007, was as follows:
In addition to employee stock option expense, administrative
expense included $0.1 million, $0.1 million and
$0.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008, and 2007, respectively, for options granted to
non-officer
directors. Options granted to non-officer directors vest on the
grant date and therefore, the full expense is recorded on the
grant date.
We estimate that the employee-related stock option expense will
be approximately $3.9 million, $3.9 million and
$0.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2010,
2011 and 2012, respectively. This estimate does not include any
expense related to stock option grants after December 31,
2009, as the fair value of those stock options will be
determined at the time of grant. This estimate may change if our
assumptions related to future option forfeitures change.
Options Cancelled in Connection with Tender
Offer. On July 18, 2007, we completed a
tender offer to our optionees who held vested
in-the-money stock options as of June 20,
2007,where optionees received an option cancellation payment
(OCP), equal to the in-the-money value of the stock
options cancelled determined using a Weighted Average Market
Price of $31.75 paid one-half in cash and one-half in
unregistered shares of our common stock. We accepted for
cancellation 10.3 million vested options held by employees
and non-officer directors, which in the aggregate had a weighted
average exercise price of $21.50. This resulted in a total
option cancellation payment of approximately
$105.6 million, of which $52.8 million was paid in
cash and $52.8 million was paid through the issuance of
1.7 million unregistered shares of the Companys
common stock. Our stockholders approved the issuance of the
shares of our common stock in exchange for the cancellation of
vested in-the-money stock options at our 2006 Annual
Meeting of Stockholders. Cash payments to employee optionees
were paid net of required payroll and income tax withholdings.
In accordance with the terms of the tender offer, the Weighted
Average Market Price represented the volume weighted average
price of our common stock over the fifteen trading days
preceding the first day of the offer period, or June 20,
2007. Because the Weighted Average Market Price at the
commencement of the tender offer on June 20, 2007, was
higher than the market price of our common stock at the close of
the offer on July 18, 2007, SFAS 123R, which has been
codified into ASC Topic 718, Compensation
Stock Compensation. required us to record a non-cash
employee-related stock option expense of $14.4 million and
administrative expense related to stock options cancelled that
were held by non-officer directors of $0.4 million. The
same amounts were recorded as an increase to additional paid-in
capital and, therefore, had no effect on our net asset value.
The portion of the OCP paid in cash of $52.8 million
reduced our additional paid-in capital and therefore reduced our
net asset value. For income tax purposes, our tax deduction
resulting from the OCP will be similar to the tax deduction that
would have resulted from an exercise of stock options in the
market. Any tax deduction resulting from the OCP or an exercise
of stock options in the market is limited by Section 162(m)
of the Code.
Administrative Expense. Administrative
expenses include legal and accounting fees, valuation assistance
fees, insurance premiums, the cost of leases for our
headquarters in Washington, DC, and our regional offices,
portfolio origination and development expenses, travel costs,
stock record expenses, directors fees and related stock
options expense, and various other expenses.
Administrative expenses were $38.1 million,
$49.4 million and $50.6 million for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 respectively. The decrease
is primarily due to our focus on reducing costs. Administrative
expenses for the year ended December 31, 2009 include costs
of $6.0 million related to the merger with Ares Capital. We
will continue to incur costs related to the merger with Ares
Capital in 2010. In addition, if the merger with Ares Capital is
not approved by our stockholders, a termination fee of
$15 million will be due to Ares Capital.
Impairment of Long-Lived Asset. In our
efforts to reduce overall administrative expenses, we sold our
corporate aircraft during 2009. The sales price of the aircraft
was less than our carrying cost, therefore, we recorded an
impairment charge of $2.9 million during the quarter ended
March 31, 2009.
Income Tax Expense, Including Excise
Tax. Income tax expense for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, was as follows:
Our wholly-owned subsidiary, A.C. Corporation, is a
corporation subject to federal and state income taxes and
records a benefit or expense for income taxes as appropriate
based on its operating results in a given period.
As of December 31, 2009 we estimate we have no dividend
distribution requirements for the 2009 tax year, therefore, we
have not recorded an excise tax for the year ended
December 31, 2009.
Realized Gains and Losses. Net realized
gains or losses primarily result from the sale of equity
securities associated with certain private finance investments
and the realization of unamortized discount resulting from the
sale and early repayment of private finance loans and commercial
mortgage loans, offset by losses on investments. Net realized
gains (losses) for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008,
and 2007, were as follows:
When we exit an investment and realize a gain or loss, we make
an accounting entry to reverse any unrealized appreciation or
depreciation, respectively, we had previously recorded to
reflect the appreciated or
depreciated value of the investment. For the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, we reversed previously
recorded unrealized appreciation or depreciation when gains or
losses were realized as follows:
Realized gains for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008,
and 2007, were as follows:
($ in
millions)
Realized losses for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008, and 2007, were as follows:
($ in
millions)
During the year ended December 31, 2009, we focused our
efforts on selectively selling assets from our portfolio in
order to generate capital to repay indebtedness and de-lever our
balance sheet. These asset sales have been completed under
distressed conditions in a very difficult market, and
consequently we have realized net losses upon their disposition.
For the year ended December 31, 2009, had principal
repayments on portfolio investments that generated cash proceeds
of $1,069.7 million.
Realized gains and losses for the year ended December 31,
2009 and 2008, included net realized gains totaling
$6.3 million and $8.3 million (subsequent to
post-closing adjustments) from the sale of certain investments
to Managed Funds. In addition, realized losses for the year
ended December 31, 2008, include $7.0 million
(subsequent to post-closing adjustments) related to the sale of
certain venture capital and private equity limited partnership
investments to a fund managed by Goldman Sachs. For the year
ended December 31, 2008, net realized losses also include
net realized losses totaling $7.3 million resulting from
the sale of loans and debt securities totaling
$216.3 million to the Allied Capital Senior Debt Fund,
L.P., Knightsbridge CLO
2007-1 Ltd.
and Knightsbridge CLO
2008-1 Ltd.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, net realized gains
also include net realized gains totaling $1.0 million
resulting from the sale of loans and debt securities totaling
$224.2 million to the Allied Capital Senior Debt Fund, L.P.
See Managed Funds above.
Change in Unrealized Appreciation or
Depreciation. We determine the value of each
investment in our portfolio on a quarterly basis, and changes in
value result in unrealized appreciation or depreciation being
recognized in our statement of operations. Value, as defined in
Section 2(a)(41) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, is
(i) the market price for those securities for which a
market quotation is readily available and (ii) for all
other securities and assets, fair value is as determined in good
faith by the Board of Directors. Since there is typically no
readily available market value for the investments in our
portfolio, we value substantially all of our portfolio
investments at fair value as determined in good faith by the
Board of Directors in accordance with our valuation policy and
the provisions of the 1940 Act and ASC Topic 820, which includes
the codification of FASB Statement No. 157, Fair Value
Measurements and related interpretations. We determine fair
value to be the price that would be received for an investment
in a current sale, which assumes an orderly transaction between
market participants on the measurement date. At
December 31, 2009, portfolio investments recorded at fair
value using level 3 inputs (as defined under ASC
Topic 820) were approximately 80% of our total assets.
Because of the inherent uncertainty of determining the fair
value of investments that do not have a readily available market
quotation in an active market, the fair value of our investments
determined in good faith by the Board of Directors may differ
significantly from the values that would have been used had a
ready market existed for the investments, and the differences
could be material.
There is no single approach for determining fair value in good
faith. As a result, determining fair value requires that
judgment be applied to the specific facts and circumstances of
each portfolio investment while employing a consistently applied
valuation process for the types of investments we make. Unlike
banks, we are not permitted to provide a general reserve for
anticipated loan losses. Instead, we are required to
specifically value each individual investment on a quarterly
basis. We will record unrealized depreciation on investments
when we determine that the fair value of a security is less than
its cost basis, and we will record unrealized appreciation when
we determine that the fair value is greater than its cost basis.
Changes in fair value are recorded in the statement of
operations as net change in unrealized appreciation or
depreciation.
As a BDC, we invest in illiquid securities including debt and
equity securities of portfolio companies, CLO bonds and
preferred shares/income notes, CDO bonds and investment funds.
The structure of each debt and equity security is specifically
negotiated to enable us to protect our investment and maximize
our returns. We include many terms governing interest rate,
repayment terms, prepayment penalties, financial covenants,
operating covenants, ownership parameters, dilution parameters,
liquidation preferences, voting rights, and put or call rights.
Our investments may be subject to certain restrictions on resale
and generally have no established trading market.
Because of the type of investments that we make and the nature
of our business, our valuation process requires an analysis of
various factors. Our fair value methodology includes the
examination of, among other things, the underlying investment
performance, financial condition, and market changing events
that impact valuation.
Valuation Methodology. We adopted the
standards in ASC Topic 820 on a prospective basis in the
first quarter of 2008. These standards require us to assume that
the portfolio investment is to be sold in the principal market
to market participants, or in the absence of a principal market,
the most advantageous market, which may be a hypothetical
market. Market participants are defined as buyers and sellers in
the principal or most advantageous market that are independent,
knowledgeable, and willing and able to transact. In accordance
with the standards, we have considered our principal market, or
the market in which we exit our portfolio investments with the
greatest volume and level of activity.
We have determined that for our buyout investments, where we
have control or could gain control through an option or warrant
security, both the debt and equity securities of the portfolio
investment would exit in the merger and acquisition (M&A)
market as the principal market generally through a sale or
recapitalization of the portfolio company. We believe that the
in-use premise of value (as defined in ASC Topic 820),
which assumes the debt and equity securities are sold together,
is appropriate as this would provide maximum proceeds to the
seller. As a result, we use the enterprise value methodology to
determine the fair value of these investments. Enterprise value
means the entire value of the company to a market participant,
including the sum of the values of debt and equity securities
used to capitalize the enterprise at a point in time. Enterprise
value is determined using various factors, including cash flow
from operations of the portfolio company, multiples at which
private companies are bought and sold, and other pertinent
factors, such as recent offers to purchase a portfolio company,
recent transactions involving the purchase or sale of the
portfolio companys equity securities, liquidation events,
or other events. We allocate the enterprise value to these
securities in order of the legal priority of the securities.
There is no one methodology to determine enterprise value and,
in fact, for any one portfolio company, enterprise value is best
expressed as a range of fair values. However, we must derive a
single estimate of enterprise value. To determine the enterprise
value of a portfolio company, we analyze its historical and
projected financial results. This financial and other
information is generally obtained from the portfolio companies,
and may represent unaudited, projected or pro forma financial
information. We generally require portfolio companies to provide
annual audited and quarterly unaudited financial statements, as
well as annual projections for the upcoming fiscal year.
Typically in the private equity business, companies are bought
and sold based on multiples of EBITDA, cash flow, net income,
revenues or, in limited instances, book value. The private
equity industry uses financial measures such as EBITDA or
EBITDAM (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation,
Amortization and, in some instances, Management fees) in order
to assess a portfolio companys financial performance and
to value a portfolio company. EBITDA and EBITDAM are not
intended to represent cash flow from operations as defined by
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and such
information should not be considered as an alternative to net
income, cash flow from operations, or any other measure of
performance prescribed by U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles. When using EBITDA to determine enterprise value, we
may adjust EBITDA for non-recurring items. Such adjustments are
intended to normalize EBITDA to reflect the portfolio
companys earnings power. Adjustments to EBITDA may include
compensation to previous owners, acquisition, recapitalization,
or restructuring related items or one-time non-recurring income
or expense items.
In determining a multiple to use for valuation purposes, we
generally look to private merger and acquisition statistics, the
entry multiple for the transaction, discounted public trading
multiples or industry practices. In estimating a reasonable
multiple, we consider not only the fact that our portfolio
company may be a private company relative to a peer group of
public comparables, but we also consider the size and scope of
our portfolio company and its specific strengths and weaknesses.
In some cases, the best valuation methodology may be a
discounted cash flow analysis based on future projections. If a
portfolio company is distressed, a liquidation analysis may
provide the best indication of enterprise value.
While we typically exit our securities upon the sale or
recapitalization of the portfolio company in the M&A
market, for investments in portfolio companies where we do not
have control or the ability to gain control through an option or
warrant security, we cannot typically control the exit of our
investment into our principal market (the M&A market). As a
result, in accordance with ASC Topic 820, we are required
to determine the fair value of these investments assuming a sale
of the individual investment (the
in-exchange
premise of value) in a hypothetical market to a hypothetical
market participant. We continue to perform an enterprise value
analysis for investments in this category to assess the credit
risk of the loan or debt security and to determine the fair
value of our equity investment in these portfolio companies. The
determined equity values are generally discounted when we have a
minority ownership position, restrictions on resale, specific
concerns about the receptivity of the capital markets to a
specific company at a certain time, or other factors. For loan
and debt securities, we perform a yield analysis assuming a
hypothetical current sale of the investment. The yield analysis
requires us to estimate the expected repayment date of the
instrument and a market participants required yield. Our
estimate of the expected repayment date of a loan or debt
security may be shorter than the legal maturity of the
instruments as our loans historically have been repaid prior to
the maturity date. The yield analysis considers changes in
interest rates and changes in leverage levels of the loan or
debt security as compared to market interest rates and leverage
levels. Assuming the credit quality of the loan or debt security
remains stable, we will use the value determined by the yield
analysis as the fair value for that security. A change in the
assumptions that we use to estimate the fair value of our loans
and debt securities using a yield analysis could have a material
impact on the determination of fair value. If there is
deterioration in credit quality or a loan or debt security is in
workout status, we may consider other factors in determining the
fair value of a loan or debt security, including the value
attributable to the loan or debt security from the enterprise
value of the portfolio company or the proceeds that would be
received in a liquidation analysis.
Our equity investments in private debt and equity funds are
generally valued based on the amount that we believe would be
received if the investments were sold and consider the
funds net asset value, observable transactions and other
factors. The value of our equity securities in public companies
for which quoted prices in an active market are readily
available is based on the closing public market price on the
measurement date.
The fair value of our CLO/CDO Assets is generally based on a
discounted cash flow model that utilizes prepayment,
re-investment, loss and ratings assumptions based on historical
experience and projected performance, economic factors, the
characteristics of the underlying cash flow and comparable
yields for similar bonds and preferred shares/income notes, when
available. We recognize unrealized appreciation or depreciation
on our CLO/CDO Assets as comparable yields in the market change
and/or based
on changes in estimated cash flows resulting from changes in
prepayment, re-investment, loss or ratings assumptions in the
underlying collateral pool, or changes in redemption assumptions
for the CLO/CDO Assets, if applicable. We determine the fair
value of our CLO/CDO Assets on an individual
security-by-security
basis. If we were to sell a group of these CLO/CDO Assets in a
pool in one or more transactions, the total value received for
that pool may be different than the sum of the fair values of
the individual assets.
We record unrealized depreciation on investments when we
determine that the fair value of a security is less than its
cost basis, and record unrealized appreciation when we determine
that the fair value is greater than its cost basis. Because of
the inherent uncertainty of valuation, the values determined at
the measurement date may differ significantly from the values
that would have been used had a ready market existed for the
investments, and the differences could be material.
Additionally, changes in the market environment and other events
that may occur over the life of the investments may cause the
gains or losses ultimately realized on these investments to be
different than the values determined at the measurement date.
ASC Topic 820 also includes the codification of Determining
Fair Value When the Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset
or Liability Have
As a participant in the private equity business, we primarily
invest in private middle market companies for which there is
generally no publicly available information. Because of the
private nature of these businesses, there is a need to maintain
the confidentiality of the financial and other information that
we have for the private companies in our portfolio. We believe
that maintaining this confidence is important, as disclosure of
such information could disadvantage our portfolio companies and
could put us at a disadvantage in attracting new investments.
Therefore, we do not intend to disclose financial or other
information about our portfolio companies, unless required,
because we believe doing so may put them at an economic or
competitive disadvantage, regardless of our level of ownership
or control.
We work with third-party consultants to obtain assistance in
determining fair value for a portion of the private finance
portfolio each quarter. We work with these consultants to obtain
assistance as additional support in the preparation of our
internal valuation analysis. In addition, we may receive
third-party assessments of a particular private finance
portfolio companys value in the ordinary course of
business, most often in the context of a prospective sale
transaction or in the context of a bankruptcy process.
The valuation analysis prepared by management is submitted to
our Board of Directors who is ultimately responsible for the
determination of fair value of the portfolio in good faith. We
generally receive valuation assistance from Duff &
Phelps, LLC (Duff & Phelps) for our private finance
portfolio consisting of certain limited procedures (the
Procedures) we identified and requested them to perform. Based
upon the performance of the Procedures on a selection of our
final portfolio company valuations, Duff & Phelps has
concluded that the fair value of those portfolio companies
subjected to the Procedures did not appear unreasonable. In
addition, we also received third-party valuation assistance from
other third-party consultants for certain private finance
portfolio companies. For the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008, and 2007, we received third-party valuation assistance as
follows:
Professional fees for third-party valuation assistance for the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, were
$1.1 million, $1.9 million, and $1.8 million,
respectively.
Net Change in Unrealized Appreciation or
Depreciation. Net change in unrealized
appreciation or depreciation for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, consisted of the
following:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||